ModernChivalry.org
Main => The Armoury => Topic started by: Sir Nate on 2014-04-14, 15:51:23
-
I've looked at and for armor stands a few years now, and I don't remember ever seeing a historical one. I saw a few mentions that it would traditionally be in a chest, either for storage or transportation.
but they did have dummies to practice on. Or is that a myth? maybe those would have been the start of armor stands.
-
Its called a pell. pretty much a stick in the ground that you swing a sword at.
-
Its called a pell. pretty much a stick in the ground that you swing a sword at.
I know of pells, I mean more in the lines of hear is a dummy with a bucket head, wooden shield, and wooden sword. Go Tear it apart.
-
Its called a pell. pretty much a stick in the ground that you swing a sword at.
I know of pells, I mean more in the lines of hear is a dummy with a bucket head, wooden shield, and wooden sword. Go Tear it apart.
The only thing I've seen remotely similar is a jousting quintain. As Baron said, most things I've seen refer to a pell that isn't human shaped in any way.
-
Roman accounts actually mention recruits attacking the pell with leaden core wooden swords that weighed twice as much as steel gladii
-
Roman accounts actually mention recruits attacking the pell with leaden core wooden swords that weighed twice as much as steel gladii
I did read watch something, probably Mike Loades, that said people would train with a wooden sword that was heavier than a real one so when they got to use the real one it would feel light and easy to use.
-
I did read watch something, probably Mike Loades, that said people would train with a wooden sword that was heavier than a real one so when they got to use the real one it would feel light and easy to use.
If I recall, there are several accounts of training with "double weight" swords. It makes a lot of sense. Switching to your real sword afterward would make it feel exceedingly light.
-
I did read watch something, probably Mike Loades, that said people would train with a wooden sword that was heavier than a real one so when they got to use the real one it would feel light and easy to use.
If I recall, there are several accounts of training with "double weight" swords. It makes a lot of sense. Switching to your real sword afterward would make it feel exceedingly light.
I can see it working in the long term just because your muscles will be stronger and will fatigue a lot slower...but I can also see it failing miserably.
There was an episode of sports science where they tested someone who put weights on their bat to warm up and see if it increased bat speed at all...it ended up slowing you down due to fatigue. Note this is warming up on the on deck circle rather than training with a weighted bat and then freshly using a lighter bat so it doesnt apply perfectly.
But in the end using a weapon is about accuracy as much as it is about strength. I imagine training with a heavy sword will mess with all of the mechanics and muscle memory. I actually am being told to train with a whiffle bat when doing pell work or air "kata" practice. It has is more likely to avoid repetitive stress injuries and easier to control while still giving you the muscle memory.
-
I don't think double-weight swords would be used exclusively. The context I'm familiar with is using them on the pell for building strength and endurance, but not against an opponent when practicing skill.
-
Makes perfect sense. Virtually all professional athletes today incorporate heavy resistance training in to their routines. Gymnasts need to lift to manipulate their body weight, but they lift heavy when they're in the gym and routinely incorporate weight well beyond what they will encounter on the rings or pommel horse. A football player doesn't need to generate 405 lbs of force with with his chest on the field, but certainly does in the gym on the bench press. Swimmers do heavy rows to strengthen their lats, and real delts to improve performance in the pool.
The example of a baseball player warming up with a weighted bat is acute fatigue. I'm not suggesting repping out 5 sets of 225 on the bench 5 minutes before a duel, but it would certainly improve your performance if it was something you did as part of your training regimen. Lifting heavy does not make one slow either, that's a convenient myth for people who are afraid to do so. Go tell a crossfit athlete who raw deadlifts 515 that they're slow, or a pro running back who squats 405 that they're not nimble anymore...
One of the failures of HEMA in my opinion is the community's aversion and resistance to incorporating standard athletic strength building in to their training. They seem to be of the mind that just doing the activity more and more is the key to success, but every other sport on the planet seems to realize that you have to go well beyond the specific movements associated with the sport itself to improve overall athletic performance. I think you'd see much more powerful and skilled athletes if they stopped being squeamish about more traditional training incorporation in to their routines.
-
Makes perfect sense. Virtually all professional athletes today incorporate heavy resistance training in to their routines. Gymnasts need to lift to manipulate their body weight, but they lift heavy when they're in the gym and routinely incorporate weight well beyond what they will encounter on the rings or pommel horse. A football player doesn't need to generate 405 lbs of force with with his chest on the field, but certainly does in the gym on the bench press. Swimmers do heavy rows to strengthen their lats, and real delts to improve performance in the pool.
The example of a baseball player warming up with a weighted bat is acute fatigue. I'm not suggesting repping out 5 sets of 225 on the bench 5 minutes before a duel, but it would certainly improve your performance if it was something you did as part of your training regimen. Lifting heavy does not make one slow either, that's a convenient myth for people who are afraid to do so. Go tell a crossfit athlete who raw deadlifts 515 that they're slow, or a pro running back who squats 405 that they're not nimble anymore...
One of the failures of HEMA in my opinion is the community's aversion and resistance to incorporating standard athletic strength building in to their training. They seem to be of the mind that just doing the activity more and more is the key to success, but every other sport on the planet seems to realize that you have to go well beyond the specific movements associated with the sport itself to improve overall athletic performance. I think you'd see much more powerful and skilled athletes if they stopped being squeamish about more traditional training incorporation in to their routines.
Works for super saiyans.
-
One of the failures of HEMA in my opinion is the community's aversion and resistance to incorporating standard athletic strength building in to their training. They seem to be of the mind that just doing the activity more and more is the key to success, but every other sport on the planet seems to realize that you have to go well beyond the specific movements associated with the sport itself to improve overall athletic performance. I think you'd see much more powerful and skilled athletes if they stopped being squeamish about more traditional training incorporation in to their routines.
I generally agree with that, with maybe a slightly different "why" of the training / competitions. I think we're a bit of a specialty in WMA/HEMA, as we have a few different groups of intent: athletes, the scholars, and the system-gamers.
The athletes are a small set; they train hard, they compete, and they want to win. It's about winning by being at the top of your physical conditioning. The historical side isn't as important as winning.
The scholars seem to be a large part of the WMA/HEMA group. We are re-interpreting a long lost art of combat, and in pursuit of historical context. They are in pursuit of the techniques, the experience, the practicality of "does this interpretation actually work?". It's about the history and knowledge, not physical conditioning. Sometimes it's even less about a win or loss than it is trying to apply proper historical technique in context of an actual duel. Additional variety in tournaments like cutting and tournaments really stress the scholarly aspect.
The system-gamers will eschew any concept of historical technique just to win. They compete to win, not by skill or conditioning, but by playing the system. Wild single-handed swing aimed at the knees with no technique or control for every single point? Eh, point is a point, "cheap shot" or not. Luckily this is going away substantially with Longpoint style rules, but, the mentality of "how do I work this system to my advantage so I can win?" is still different as compared to the athletes and the scholars, just as tournament karate is compared to actual battlefield martial arts.
That doesn't apply with regular/mainstream modern sports. Almost nobody cares about the historical context of football (baseball, soccer, etc). There isn't much gaming of the system in football because everyone is doing exactly the same thing for the same reason. There's no "cheap 2 pointer" and "historically accurate 2 pointer". The only things you have are physical conditioning, skill and luck; the rest just doesn't apply.
We have overlaps; scholars in good physical shape, athletes with an interest in the scholarly aspect. I'm no athlete, and I have a health issue with somewhat reduced lung capacity and blood flow, compounded with previous injuries (my knees suck). Doesn't matter. I do it because I love the experience, I love seeing the excited kids (and sometimes adults) watching two knights in full armor dueling it out, and I love the historical aspect of it all.
On top of that, extreme physical conditioning would take away my time from working on armor, furniture, my car, my house, reading, etc, and is just a lower priority item for me. I hit the treadmill or weights when I can, but it's inconsistent. I don't diet like I should, either. To those who can and do, I respect the amount of time and effort it takes!
(Sir Edward, can we split this topic?)
-
I just find it amusing that people want to revive a long lost martial art and ignore the physical requirements to do it. The men who practiced this art in history were not lazy schlubs. Being in shape is critical to the understanding of any sport or martial art. Being out of shape restricts the performance of the art, and so reviving its technique only gets you so far if you can't do it. If you truly want to revive historical swordsmanship from a point of understanding, you must be willing to revive all of it, and a huge part of that historical art is the physical condition required to perform it in its historical context. A martial artist cannot somehow be de-coupled from physical condition. WMA is unique, you're right, but it's unique in that many of its practitioners think that being in D&D shape somehow qualifies them to be a master swordsman. :)
Too many people view fitness and cunning as mutually exclusive. This is of course a false dichotomy. A skilled practitioner will always beat a strong one, but a skilled practitioner who is also in superior physical shape, in essence, is really more skilled, because he can perform his technique with greater physical proficiency, stamina, and power.
-
this thread is useless without pictures........ lol
-
I plan to take WMA, it's a good thing I have been buffing up with tree work and planet fitness haha. Lifting logs and cutting down trees, the old fashion way to work out.
-
Don't listen to me, take it from Talhoffer ;) The swordsman must be balanced in mind, body, and spirit.
prepare for judicial duel (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pwHK2n44OA#)
-
Don't listen to me, take it from Talhoffer ;) The swordsman must be balanced in mind, body, and spirit.
prepare for judicial duel (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pwHK2n44OA#)
What does it exactly mean to be balanced in "spirit"
-
Don't listen to me, take it from Talhoffer ;) The swordsman must be balanced in mind, body, and spirit.
prepare for judicial duel (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pwHK2n44OA#)
What does it exactly mean to be balanced in "spirit"
Most would say spirit refers to your morality, emotional well-being or religious sense of self. Whatever version of spirituality that you subscribe to, be it organized religion or a more secular form of spirituality.
I think it's fair to say that 'spirit' is the most often neglected part of ourselves in modern society.
-
I just find it amusing that people want to revive a long lost martial art and ignore the physical requirements to do it. The men who practiced this art in history were not lazy schlubs. Being in shape is critical to the understanding of any sport or martial art. Being out of shape restricts the performance of the art, and so reviving its technique only gets you so far if you can't do it. If you truly want to revive historical swordsmanship from a point of understanding, you must be willing to revive all of it, and a huge part of that historical art is the physical condition required to perform it in its historical context. A martial artist cannot somehow be de-coupled from physical condition. WMA is unique, you're right, but it's unique in that many of its practitioners think that being in D&D shape somehow qualifies them to be a master swordsman. :)
Too many people view fitness and cunning as mutually exclusive. This is of course a false dichotomy. A skilled practitioner will always beat a strong one, but a skilled practitioner who is also in superior physical shape, in essence, is really more skilled, because he can perform his technique with greater physical proficiency, stamina, and power.
Absolutely agreed, only caveat being that the men who practiced this art often lived and died by the sword, and it was their primary job - or they at least did physical labor of some sort, and not a desk jockey like I am. I don't even consider myself a competitor, just a participant. But I'm in good enough shape to attack the darkness! ;)
Good example, too. If both are equally skilled, physical conditioning and luck are the only real separating factors; and you only have control over one of those.
-
I loved that video...if I had a sparring partner I would wake up at dawn and put on my turn shoes and go out and practice :)
-
What I wouldn't give to be able to armor up and run at quintains and swing at pells and do drills all day as they did before- I'd love it, but no one's gonna pay me to do it, so I have to do it on my own if/when I can afford to. All this means is I'll never be in the shape that a swordsman/man-at-arms/knight would have been because my life simply does not depend on those skills...a good thing, probably. ;)
But what Ian and others have said is sound advice- increasing strength and muscle stamina is going to go a long way towards helping your body accept and retain what its being trained for. There is a reason why all athletes work out and most incorporate lifting into their regimens. Working with bodyweight only will get you but so far.
-
I take a historical approach to HEMA, which in turn requires that I also take an athletic approach. I believe that we can never truly understand a topic unless we fully experienced it (and I believe its safe to say none of us experienced the Medieval era). However, we can at least try to get as close a reasonably possible; that is what we do in historical re-creation. Additionally, I believe that if you're going to re-create, do it right or not at all. To understand fully, we must experience fully. To experience fully, we must examine the entire context. Not examining something in its proper and full context is a gross error in historical research.
The subject in this scenario is the knight and his fighting techniques. We must consider the whole context in studying it and in recreating it. The knight trained constantly from the age of 7 and through his knighthood at 21. The knight was an ideal specimen of human physicality; he was a professional soldier. Not only did he learn the techniques of the sword, he honed his body to make it more efficient and better with that sword. If we are to re-create medieval martial arts, we must do this with this full context in mind.
None of us grew up in the hard life of a knight-to-be, and thus we are robbed of truly understanding that experience. Yet there remains many ways that we can get close to understanding to some degree. I can sign up for HEMA lessons and I can exercise. Either one alone does not give me an understanding of medieval martial arts. I can become as strong and fit as a knight through exercise and nutrition, but if I don't know how to swing a sword, I have gained little in terms of understanding the life of a knight. I could master the techniques of Talhoffer, but without being physically fit, I can be overpowered by sheer force and likewise, I have gained little historical understanding. To understand the life of a knight, I must both know the fighting style as well as be physically fit. Just as a knight was fiercely competitive about winning, so too must I be if I wish to recreate and understand the life of a knight.
Justice Charles Gray laid out 7 principles for historians. The 3rd principle is this:
"The historian must be even-handed in treatment of evidence and eschew 'cherry-picking'"
In other words, a true historian covers everything on a topic, not just that which is convenient. To disregard fitness and study on technique is a crime agains historical scholarship and it robs the historian of vital understanding.
-
I take a historical approach to HEMA, which in turn requires that I also take an athletic approach. I believe that we can never truly understand a topic unless we fully experienced it (and I believe its safe to say none of us experienced the Medieval era). However, we can at least try to get as close a reasonably possible; that is what we do in historical re-creation. Additionally, I believe that if you're going to re-create, do it right or not at all. To understand fully, we must experience fully. To experience fully, we must examine the entire context. Not examining something in its proper and full context is a gross error in historical research.
The subject in this scenario is the knight and his fighting techniques. We must consider the whole context in studying it and in recreating it. The knight trained constantly from the age of 7 and through his knighthood at 21. The knight was an ideal specimen of human physicality; he was a professional soldier. Not only did he learn the techniques of the sword, he honed his body to make it more efficient and better with that sword. If we are to re-create medieval martial arts, we must do this with this full context in mind.
None of us grew up in the hard life of a knight-to-be, and thus we are robbed of truly understanding that experience. Yet there remains many ways that we can get close to understanding to some degree. I can sign up for HEMA lessons and I can exercise. Either one alone does not give me an understanding of medieval martial arts. I can become as strong and fit as a knight through exercise and nutrition, but if I don't know how to swing a sword, I have gained little in terms of understanding the life of a knight. I could master the techniques of Talhoffer, but without being physically fit, I can be overpowered by sheer force and likewise, I have gained little historical understanding. To understand the life of a knight, I must both know the fighting style as well as be physically fit. Just as a knight was fiercely competitive about winning, so too must I be if I wish to recreate and understand the life of a knight.
Justice Charles Gray laid out 7 principles for historians. The 3rd principle is this:
"The historian must be even-handed in treatment of evidence and eschew 'cherry-picking'"
In other words, a true historian covers everything on a topic, not just that which is convenient. To disregard fitness and study on technique is a crime agains historical scholarship and it robs the historian of vital understanding.
+1000
-
It does remind me a bit of the Civil War reenactor who has a great kit, but doesn't bother knowing drill
-
I use pills for training but apartment life has squashed that for awhile..
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
-
Damn autocorrect...pells
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
-
I use pills for training but apartment life has squashed that for awhile..
Damn autocorrect...pells
Hah! lol :)
-
When any of the people who profess to be getting a better experience than their counterparts because of this or that reason don their armor and fight to the death on a muddy field in France then I'll be impressed.
Meanwhile, I'll just practice when it's convenient for no better reason than to avoid boredom and feel perfectly justified.
-
You're missing the point Scott. It's not about living or dying by the sword, or having a better experience than someone else. It's about athleticism being integral to ANY sport.
It's about HEMA being the only martial art that doesn't seem to universally accept that traditional conditioning and strength training are vitally important to a martial art. MMA, Kung Fu, Tae Kwon Do, and Brazilian Jiu Jitsu practitioners don't live or die by their art. But they certainly don't eschew the ideals of physical fitness and conditioning as an integral part of their sport. It's just an observation. It's just less emphasized in HEMA than I've seen in any other martial art at the competitive level. The source documents address it and depict lots of scenes of men lifting heavy rocks and conditioning themselves, but these are the images that never seem to get reproduced by modern scholars for some reason, whether literally, or in the weight room. I don't get it. And yes, there are of course counterexamples of people who do take it very seriously as the athletic endeavor that it is, but it seems to be the exception. I think it would go a long way in getting the sport taken seriously in the mainstream as more than just a scholarly endeavor.
Sure, the guy just doing a martial art purely for fun is a different story, but that's not what I'm talking about here. This isn't a case of trying to tell people how to have their fun.
-
Is WMA the same way as HEMA? Also is one more historical than the other?
-
Is WMA the same way as HEMA? Also is one more historical than the other?
same thing
-
Is WMA the same way as HEMA? Also is one more historical than the other?
same thing
Right, basically the same thing, with just a minor distinction:
WMA - Western Martial Arts, which is more encompassing, because it can include modern martial arts, such as modern knife throwing, or boxing (the term "Martial Art" often includes associated sports here).
HEMA - Historical European Martial Arts, which is more specific to historical Europe.
-
Is WMA the same way as HEMA? Also is one more historical than the other?
same thing
Right, basically the same thing, with just a minor distinction:
WMA - Western Martial Arts, which is more encompassing, because it can include modern martial arts, such as modern knife throwing, or boxing (the term "Martial Art" often includes associated sports here).
HEMA - Historical European Martial Arts, which is more specific to historical Europe.
HEMA only teaches you how to use a two handed sword right? I want to take WMA because it offers sword and shield, but if HEMA offers that too then I would gladly take that instead.
-
HEMA only teaches you how to use a two handed sword right? I want to take WMA because it offers sword and shield, but if HEMA offers that too then I would gladly take that instead.
No, you're being way too specific. :)
WMA/HEMA are both very broad categories. For instance, both encompass German, French, Italian, English, Spanish martial arts, ranging from unarmed, through all sorts of weapons. They're just a descriptive term for where/when these arts came from.
Getting more specific than that, for instance with the German Liechtenauer system that we do locally, it still covers unarmed, dagger, messer, single-hand sword, sword and buckler, longsword, staff, poleaxe, spear, mounted combat, and more.
For sword and buckler, both the German and Italian schools cover those a great deal. The German arts focus a lot on the longsword as a teaching weapon, but they don't stop there.
-
WMA is a little broader in that it can include bowie knife, knife and tomahawk, etc.
A splinter group which trains with MASHS using the same venue and timeslot, offer some of those more fringe weapon systems. It makes for some interesting 'King of the Hill' matchups on our free-play Sundays when they chose to participate. :)
-
HEMA only teaches you how to use a two handed sword right? I want to take WMA because it offers sword and shield, but if HEMA offers that too then I would gladly take that instead.
No, you're being way too specific. :)
WMA/HEMA are both very broad categories. For instance, both encompass German, French, Italian, English, Spanish martial arts, ranging from unarmed, through all sorts of weapons. They're just a descriptive term for where/when these arts came from.
Getting more specific than that, for instance with the German Liechtenauer system that we do locally, it still covers unarmed, dagger, messer, single-hand sword, sword and buckler, longsword, staff, poleaxe, spear, mounted combat, and more.
For sword and buckler, both the German and Italian schools cover those a great deal. The German arts focus a lot on the longsword as a teaching weapon, but they don't stop there.
Hmm... Well then, I might take HEMA, for I am not interested in learning about those modern combat skills, unless airsofting allowed for hand to hand lol. I am affraid I don't know how the school systems work. Do you go there and they progressively teach you all of this, or do you sign up for a coarse?
Now I understand that for all the equipment together (long sword and wears) it is about $1000. But will I need to purchase all the other stuff as I progress through the coarses?
By schools, do you mean multiple buildings or under one roof a HEMA group will teach you these schools of fighting techniques.
-
Lol it really isn't that structured...yet! ;)
Basically most 'schools' are a few people with a similar interest who purchase some of the available reference material that has been translated by other individuals and they 'rediscover' how it is all applied. Since the resurrection of these lost martial arts are far from complete it is very much an ongoing process. As classic students of fencing become involved there is more of a modernized sport flavor to it but essentially it is still a few folks trying to make heads and tails of interpreted and reinterpreted medieval and renaissance period manuscripts. The more established or renowned 'schools' are the ones whose primary instructor(s) were involved at the very beginning of resurrecting the arts. However when you get right down to it, both you and Nate could start your own 'school', all you need is some good resource material.
As for equipment you don't have to drop $1,000 to get started. Basic wooden wasters, a basic fencing mask and lacrosse gloves would be sufficient protection for drills and very light and slow duels. Decent and serviceable steel blades can be had for a low as $300 but you'll also have to increase your protection with elbow and forearm padding (lacrosse is typical), a decent padded fencing jacket or gambeson if you want to go at speed and hit with intent. ;)
-
You're missing the point Scott. It's not about living or dying by the sword, or having a better experience than someone else. It's about athleticism being integral to ANY sport.
It's about HEMA being the only martial art that doesn't seem to universally accept that traditional conditioning and strength training are vitally important to a martial art. MMA, Kung Fu, Tae Kwon Do, and Brazilian Jiu Jitsu practitioners don't live or die by their art. But they certainly don't eschew the ideals of physical fitness and conditioning as an integral part of their sport. It's just an observation. It's just less emphasized in HEMA than I've seen in any other martial art at the competitive level. The source documents address it and depict lots of scenes of men lifting heavy rocks and conditioning themselves, but these are the images that never seem to get reproduced by modern scholars for some reason, whether literally, or in the weight room. I don't get it. And yes, there are of course counterexamples of people who do take it very seriously as the athletic endeavor that it is, but it seems to be the exception. I think it would go a long way in getting the sport taken seriously in the mainstream as more than just a scholarly endeavor.
Sure, the guy just doing a martial art purely for fun is a different story, but that's not what I'm talking about here. This isn't a case of trying to tell people how to have their fun.
I understand, the point of athleticism being integral to achievement in any martial art is valid. Which is not to say that a couch vegetable type person can't participate, but rather that to reach the pinacle of the art one's body must be in proper shape. I certainly concede the point.
What I was referring to is more the tendancy of some practitioners to go too far in their assessment, comparing their training styles and their experiences to that of a real medieval warrior. In reality the two are as far removed as a friendly paintball match and the Battle of Mogadishu. Perhaps ironically, most people will not be able to comprehend the totality of that difference either.
As always I hold you opinions in high regard Sir Ian,
Scott
-
Lol it really isn't that structured...yet! ;)
Basically most 'schools' are a few people with a similar interest who purchase some of the available reference material that has been translated by other individuals and they 'rediscover' how it is all applied. Since the resurrection of these lost martial arts are far from complete it is very much an ongoing process. As classic students of fencing become involved there is more of a modernized sport flavor to it but essentially it is still a few folks trying to make heads and tails of interpreted and reinterpreted medieval and renaissance period manuscripts. The more established or renowned 'schools' are the ones whose primary instructor(s) were involved at the very beginning of resurrecting the arts. However when you get right down to it, both you and Nate could start your own 'school', all you need is some good resource material.
As for equipment you don't have to drop $1,000 to get started. Basic wooden wasters, a basic fencing mask and lacrosse gloves would be sufficient protection for drills and very light and slow duels. Decent and serviceable steel blades can be had for a low as $300 but you'll also have to increase your protection with elbow and forearm padding (lacrosse is typical), a decent padded fencing jacket or gambeson if you want to go at speed and hit with intent. ;)
Do you think it wise to go to the school first, learn the requirements, then purchase? The reason I said $1000 was because the a HEMA site showed the swords I needed and the equipment. I forget the site, the top of the page showed two men fighting in this gear. Oh, I thought HEMA had schools like fencing schools ??? Make my own school you, I don't know about schools, but I'm pushing for a chivalry club if that counts lol
-
(replying to two conversations in the thread)
To be fair, the competition scene is really only getting started in the WMA/HEMA world. Only in the last two years, I'd say, has it started to pick up, and we're seeing some fairly athletic people involved in it.
But I'd say a much larger proportion of practitioners are just hobbyists, or are coming at it from a more scholastic angle, where they want to do enough of it to know how it works, but don't plan to ever be "good" at it.
Over at VAF, while I was still taking classes there, most of my classmates were taking their fitness very seriously. Some of them made an arrangement to work together to be able to work up to doing 100 burpees daily, for instance.
Personally, I fall into the more casual hobbyist category most of the time, and then try to do a mad dash to build up endurance before large events like WMAW. :)
Do you think it wise to go to the school first, learn the requirements, then purchase? The reason I said $1000 was because the a HEMA site showed the swords I needed and the equipment. I forget the site, the top of the page showed two men fighting in this gear. Oh, I thought HEMA had schools like fencing schools ??? Make my own school you, I don't know about schools, but I'm pushing for a chivalry club if that counts lol
Yes, most "schools" start out as study-groups, or sword clubs, or something along those lines. There are very few paid, professional schools teaching this, but they do exist. A great example is VAF, where I took formal classes for Liechtenauer arts for about 8 or 9 years.
Almost everyone else starts small, with a couple of friends and a few books, and work through the material. It helps to interact with people who are already doing it, to correct some of the mistakes and bad habits you might pick up, but if you're doing the bulk of the learning yourself, then those interactions can be quick and effective.
And yes, for most activities in general, it's best to see what your local group recommends for equipment, before buying anything. This is harder to do if you're starting the group yourself, of course, but there's a wide range of gear that's usually acceptable in most places.
For starting out as a pure beginner, as Sir Brian mentioned, you'll do really well to start with lacrosse gloves, a 3-weapon fencing mask (they're the tougher version), and some sort of training sword. This will be enough for doing paired drills, and the like. The trainer can be a wooden waster (more period), or perhaps one of the synthetics from Purple Heart, which cost about the same, but are safer for hitting each other. Or you can go super cheap and even more safe, and start with a shinai. However, they're not as good of a teaching weapon in that they lack the weight and feel of a longsword, and don't have a proper crossguard (which is important for certain techniques).
The nice thing is that you can start cheap that way, and then pick out the more expensive gambesons and steel trainers after you start to get a feel for what you're doing.
-
Hmm... Well then, I might take HEMA, for I am not interested in learning about those modern combat skills, unless airsofting allowed for hand to hand lol.
Also, I should point out that HEMA is a subset of WMA. If you're doing HEMA, you're also doing WMA, but the reverse isn't always true. :)
-
Hmm... Well then, I might take HEMA, for I am not interested in learning about those modern combat skills, unless airsofting allowed for hand to hand lol.
Just saying... Modern combat skills do come in handy when someone tries to knife you. Then again, I'm sure dagger combat skills could work well too.
-
Do you think it wise to go to the school first, learn the requirements, then purchase? The reason I said $1000 was because the a HEMA site showed the swords I needed and the equipment. I forget the site, the top of the page showed two men fighting in this gear. Oh, I thought HEMA had schools like fencing schools ??? Make my own school you, I don't know about schools, but I'm pushing for a chivalry club if that counts lol
Yes, most "schools" start out as study-groups, or sword clubs, or something along those lines. There are very few paid, professional schools teaching this, but they do exist. A great example is VAF, where I took formal classes for Liechtenauer arts for about 8 or 9 years.
Almost everyone else starts small, with a couple of friends and a few books, and work through the material. It helps to interact with people who are already doing it, to correct some of the mistakes and bad habits you might pick up, but if you're doing the bulk of the learning yourself, then those interactions can be quick and effective.
And yes, for most activities in general, it's best to see what your local group recommends for equipment, before buying anything. This is harder to do if you're starting the group yourself, of course, but there's a wide range of gear that's usually acceptable in most places.
For starting out as a pure beginner, as Sir Brian mentioned, you'll do really well to start with lacrosse gloves, a 3-weapon fencing mask (they're the tougher version), and some sort of training sword. This will be enough for doing paired drills, and the like. The trainer can be a wooden waster (more period), or perhaps one of the synthetics from Purple Heart, which cost about the same, but are safer for hitting each other. Or you can go super cheap and even more safe, and start with a shinai. However, they're not as good of a teaching weapon in that they lack the weight and feel of a longsword, and don't have a proper crossguard (which is important for certain techniques).
The nice thing is that you can start cheap that way, and then pick out the more expensive gambesons and steel trainers after you start to get a feel for what you're doing.
Makes sense, hopefully this summer I'll meet with one of the local HEMA schools in Philly.
Hmm... Well then, I might take HEMA, for I am not interested in learning about those modern combat skills, unless airsofting allowed for hand to hand lol.
Just saying... Modern combat skills do come in handy when someone tries to knife you. Then again, I'm sure dagger combat skills could work well too.
I'll just have my third degree black belt father teach me that, he has taught me a thing or two about knife defense.
On the main subject (I must apologize for throwing an off subject topic in here) I personally would do SCA as a sport and a hobby. I would prepare myself physically to be a better combatant and to resemble a true knight on the battle field. I would partake in it as if it were a sport like football or soccer. At the same time I would do it for the scholar/hobby approach. I recognize its not completely necessary, but I take matters like these very seriously. Like how I would choose wool clothes and fabrics over cotton.