Pells and physical training. WAS: Re: Armor stands

[Ian]

Don't listen to me, take it from Talhoffer    The swordsman must be balanced in mind, body, and spirit.

[Aiden of Oreland]

Don't listen to me, take it from Talhoffer    The swordsman must be balanced in mind, body, and spirit.

What does it exactly mean to be balanced in "spirit"

[Ian]

Don't listen to me, take it from Talhoffer    The swordsman must be balanced in mind, body, and spirit.

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.

[Sir James A]

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.

[Don Jorge]

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

[Sir William]

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.

[Mike W.]

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.

[Ian]

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

[Mike W.]

It does remind me a bit of the Civil War reenactor who has a great kit, but doesn't bother knowing drill

[Lord Chagatai]

I use pills for training but apartment life has squashed that for awhile..


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[Lord Chagatai]

Damn autocorrect...pells


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[Sir Edward]

I use pills for training but apartment life has squashed that for awhile..

Damn autocorrect...pells

Hah! lol

[scott2978]

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.

[Ian]

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. 

[Aiden of Oreland]

Is WMA the same way as HEMA? Also is one more historical than the other?