#michael chidester

[mindhost]

History of the current HEMA movement

Posted by Michael Chidester on the HEMAA forum in 2014 (source):

I chart the current HEMA movement as going back to Ewart Oakeshott's "The Archaeology of Weapons" (1961) and "The Sword in the Age of Chivalry" (1964), Martin Wierschin's publication of "Meister Johann Liechtenauers Kunst des Fechtens" in 1965, and the formation of the Society for Creative Anachronism in 1966. HEMA exploration at the Royal Armouries begins in this time frame as well. In the 1970s, the HEMA torch was largely carried forward by reenactors, stage combat guys, and classical fencers (as far as I know), and the only primary sources reasonably available were a handful of editions from the turn of the century (Talhoffer, Fiore, Silver, etc.), Martin Wierschin's edition of Ringeck, and James Louis Jackson's "Three Elizabethan Fencing Manuals". (Does Aylward have any actual treatises in it?) The SCA developed their own rapier program in this decade, finally formalizing it in 1979. Then in the 80s Hils offers "Master Johann Liechtenauer's Kunst des Langen Schwertes", basically an update and expansion of Wierschin that gives Talhoffer more attention than he deserves, and Studer wrote a little booklet on the Solothurner Fechtbuch. These were both in German, so I don't know how much they influenced the English-speaking community. By the late 80s, Patri Pugliese was active photocopying 16th and 17th century treatises from local libraries in Massachusetts and mailing them to all takers for the price of postage. There were proper HEMA groups in this period (groups entirely focused on HEMA, rather than groups that included HEMA in their activities), but I'm not sure which, if any, of them persist to the present. In the 90s we have the early, steam-powered internet beginning to connect people together through bulletin boards and list servers, as well as offering early online resources like William Wilson's site. Hank Reinhardt founded HACA in 93 (which John Clements took over in 94) and that website became a useful source of online material for a while. Patri was still acting as a distributor and finding more and more print treatises to copy. Christoph Amberger operated the Hammertz Forum magazine from 94 to 99, a major source for new research. A scattering of dubious books on HEMA-related topics were published by guys like Gaugler and Clements, and Chivalry Bookshelf became the first dedicated HEMA publisher in 99; Purpleheart Armories became the first dedicated HEMA gear distributor in the same timeframe. And, of course, the number of new clubs started to multiply and the first large HEMA events were organized (including WMAW). And the 2000s were characterized by HEMAC (founded in 2001 by Matt Easton) fostering cooperation and growth in Europe, and ARMA (HACA rebranded in 2001) and SFI fostering divisiveness and stagnation in America. It was the era when online forums and email lists tied far flung groups together into a dysfunctional community. The number of groups exploded, and with it the number of big regional and international events began to multiply; this decade also saw the first proper full-time HEMA instructors and schools appear, and the number of HEMA publishers and gear manufacturers multiply. Too many books came out to name (though I do have a bibliography tracking them all), including a variety of quite decent translations and a like number of interpretive works (books and videos) that seemed innovative at the time but were obsolete almost as soon as they hit shelves. And, most importantly of all, Wiktenauer was founded in 2009 and the world was changed forever.  This decade also saw a slow shift in weapon technology from wooden wasters to nylon wasters, and the appearance of proper foils (aka feders). Which brings us to the 2010s, whose overall shape is still hard to see. Lots more groups popping up each year, more small regional and large international events, more diversity in weapons and traditions being studied. The decline of message boards and the rise of social networks in their place has affected HEMA as much as any other online community. HEMAC is still going strong, and the HEMA Alliance and WMAC have both popped up in America attempting to foster the same sort of cooperation over here (through very different methods). National HEMA federations are beginning to organize all over Europe (there was a long lag between the creation of the first federation in UK in 1999 and the creation of any others), and the first international federation was organized in 2014. A proper tournament circuit has begun coalescing, and with it an explosion in dedicated gear manufacturers of all sorts, and a consequent reduction in cost for that gear. And there have been some interesting developments in sharp play, including an increased emphasis on developing effective striking mechanics through test-cutting (pushed by Michael Edelson) and a rise in the still-controversial practice of using sharps in partner activities (advocated by Roland Warzecha, Guy Windsor, and others). This is all mostly an American-centric history, though. Europeans who've been around for a while would need to chime in to fill in the gaps in the HEMA timeline over there, including what FISAS contributed. And I was never close to the SFI scene, so they may have done things I forgot to mention.

[mindhost]

The Recital of the Chivalric Art of Fencing of the Grand Master Johannes Liechtenauer

By Michael Chidester

This book represents the most complete picture possible of the Liechtenauer tradition of foot combat as it was recorded in the mid 15th century.

>> PDF download link hosted on HROARR <<

The first section contains introductory materials: an overview of what we know and what we don’t know about Johannes Liechtenauer, his students, and their writings. This section is adapted from the relevant Wiktenauer articles, revised and updated over the course of this project.

The second section contains the complete Recital of Johannes Liechtenauer, as it is given in the Rome version (Cod. 44. A. 8). This contains all of Liechtenauer’s verses, including those on mounted fencing for completeness. It includes Christian Henry Tobler’s translation of the Rome, and Dierk Hagedorn’s transcription.

The third section is the longest and, for most readers, the most important. It includes all of the major 15th century glosses of Liechtenauer’s verse on fencing with the long sword. Each page contains uses precisely the same layout so that you’ll always know what you’re looking at (the pages also include watermarks to serve as visual reminders). There are many pages that are mostly blank because only one of the three glosses has applicable text.

(Excerpts above taken from the preface, published on HROARR)

This ‘ultimate edition’ of The Recital of the Chivalric Art of Fencing of the Grand Master Johannes Liechtenauer has now been made publicly available, but it used to be available for contributors to the Wiktenauer Indiegogo fundraising campaign last year, and prior to that, an earlier version was available as an eBook on Lulu and even a downloadable PDF on Wiktenauer at some point.

If you practice and study German longsword this is an absolutely essential reference document.

[mindhost]

Reconstructing Kunst des Fechtens

Whenever someone describes one of the Hidden Strikes using Tempo, the statue of Johannes Liechtenauer in the Vatican sheds a single tear. By Michael Chidester

There's a wealth of physical wisdom, for lack of a better term, that a living martial art possesses. In Kunst des Fechtens, we have very little of this physical wisdom passed on in our manuals. The goal of the "HEMA Project", if we may speak of such a thing, is to determine whether there are enough clues packaged with the technical syllabus of a given art that we can recover this vital piece and thus fully revive a dead tradition.

[mindhost]

Anyone can call their event a "world championship", but the de facto world championships will once again be held in Sweden at the beginning of November at an event that *doesn't* claim to be such, Swordfish. See, one of the nice things about our community is that it's still small enough that reputation and status are generally based on merit, and unlike events that merely appoint themselves "world championship", Swordfish has *earned* that position through a decade of consistent improvement and excellence.

Michael Chidester, reactions to the IIC

[mindhost]

Five years ago it was rare to see even top-level fencers pull off complex historical techniques in a tournament setting and the winners were generally natural gifted athletes, whereas these days not only is it common to see good technique at all levels of a tournament, but people lacking in technical expertise (or athleticism, you need both) generally don't even make it into the bracket of a large tournament. A lot of semifinal and final matches end up looking almost like exhibition matches, the level of technique is so high. Top fencers five years ago would be considered average at best by today's standards. The human instinct to excel in competition has caused people to train harder, the opportunity to pressure-test against people outside their club has resulted in stronger and more mechanically-sound interpretations, and the constant criticism from the anti-tournament crowd has made top competitors feel they have to constantly prove that they're martial artists as well as sportsmen, which has resulted in a lot of impressive discoveries and advancement.

Michael Chidester (x)

[mindhost]

Judicial Duels; Trial by Combat

In 1455 Valenciennes, Jacotin Plouvier and Mahiot Coquel fought one of the last judicial duels recorded in the region now called France, and to train Coquel in fighting they contracted a certain "Meister Hans" (no last name), who was noted as one of the greatest fencing masters in Europe. (Unfortunately, his guy lost pretty badly--not a great thing to have on the resume.) I don't have the citation identifying the master, but here's a summary of the duel:

(from Ariella Elema's 2012 dissertation, "Trial by Battle in France and England", pp 2-3)

In the town of Valenciennes, in the duchy of Hainault, two men had fought a judicial duel in the centre of the marketplace.  Neither of them was a knight.  Jacotin Plouvier was a commoner from the town, while Mahiot Coquel was a tailor from Tournai.  In the street one day, Plouvier had accused Coquel of murdering his kinsman in an ambush, a particularly heinous form of homicide.  He warned the tailor to watch himself, for vengeance would surely follow.  Coquel, for his part, sought protection from the provost and justices of the town.  He did not deny the killing, but insisted that it had been committed in self-defence.  This argument posed a quandary for the court, for the town had by long tradition possessed the privilege of providing sanctuary to those who had killed someone, as long as their cases had since been ruled to be self-defence or at least settled with the victim’s immediate kin.

The provost warned Plouvier that, according to the customs of the city, he must either withdraw so serious an accusation or prove it by his body: that is, he must challenge Coquel to a duel.  Plouvier coldly chose the second option and Coquel accepted the challenge.

The two men were placed in separate prisons, where they waited ten months for their day in the lists because the Duke of Burgundy, in whose principality the town lay, wished to witness their battle in person.  On May 20, 1455, they faced one another at last.  Each man was armed not with a sword, but with a baton of medlar wood and a shield carried upside-down to indicate that he was not noble.  They were dressed in identical suits of tight-fitting leather, with their feet left bare and their hair clipped short.  Over their clothes they applied a layer of grease to foil attempts at grappling, but they dipped their hands in basins of ashes to ensure that they could still grip their weapons.

They fought before a curious multitude, in lists specially constructed for the occasion.  Although Mahiot Coquel was the smaller and weaker of the two men, he gained an early advantage by throwing sand in Plouvier’s face.  This tactic allowed him time to land a blow that caused Plouvier to bleed from the forehead.  His opponent was not so easily defeated, however.  Jacotin Plouvier seized him about his body and threw him to the ground.   Kneeling on his chest, he gouged out Coquel’s eyes.  Then, before the horrified audience, he hurled his opponent from the lists, thereby winning the duel.  Mahiot Coquel was dragged away and hanged.

“In truth, it is an abominable thing to record,” wrote Escouchy, “and it seemed to many present that it was contrary to our faith.”  La Marche concurred: “The whole combat seemed too base a matter for the court of Burgundy.”

Posted on the the HEMA alliance FB page by Michael Chidester

Source: Trial by battle in France and England by Ariella Elema

[mindhost]

No steel gauntlets in bloßfechten

In response to a question to Michael Chidester on the Alliance facebook group about whether the treatises portray unarmored fencing in steel gauntlets.

"Now behold, that thine hope be not in vain and that all might know that I am the Wiktenauer, I will speak unto thee as one man speaketh unto another, yeah, even as it were face to face, and I will explain unto thee this mystery. ¶ For behold, it is not correct, as some men have said, that the Manuscripts containing the words which masters taught in elder days, which were written by men like as one crying from the dead, yea, even as one speaking out of the dust, sought to teach or portray that naked fencing included the wearing of gauntlets. ¶ Nay, it was rather Jörg Breu the Younger who, seeing a certain Manuscript containing drawings of fencers with the sword and also with the buckler, even one like unto the Ms. I.33, though it were not the selfsame Ms. I.33, sought to create unto himself paintings in the semblance of that Manuscript. And these he did deliver unto my servant Paulus Hector Mair, who loved Manuscripts even as much as I myself do love them, and Paulus Hector did fashion an Interpretation of the paintings, and did cause that they should be made again and included in his Manuscripts, which were greatest of all the works of elder days. ¶ But thou shouldest not believe that these paintings remained unchanged in the semblance of the said Manuscript that was like unto the I.33, for that same Jörg Breu the Younger did embellish and change the figures with each recopying, such that the simple gloves of the first Manuscript did become gauntlets of Maile in his paintings, and thereafter gauntlets of Steel Plates in the Manuscripts of my servant Paulus Hector. ¶ Therefore, notwithstanding the paintings of Jörg Breu the Younger or even the Manuscripts of my servant Paulus Hector, thou shouldest know that naked fencing means not fencing without helmet or breastplate only, but also without gauntlets or any armor of metal. ¶ Even so, Amen."

Source: Wiktenauer

[mindhost]

The 6 Liechtenauer tradition lineages

"(...) There are basically six major groups of Liechtenauer manuals/masters:

Ps-Doebringer (MS 3227a) stands out as being largely disconnected from all other surviving works--unique terminology, different conceptual understanding in places, and a distinct presentation of Liechtenauer's verse.

The Society of Liechtenauer, as listed by Paulus Kal, consists mostly of masters with a pretty direct connection to either Liechtenauer or to each other--their manuals tended to travel together, mixed and matched into a variety of anthologies in the 1400s. This group also includes Sigmund Ringeck, the only glossator of Liechtenauer's verse who isn't anonymous today, and Paulus Kal, the first major illustrator of Liechtenauer's teachings. And with only half of the society firmly identified with known manuals, it's entirely possible that many or even most of the anonymous manuscript fencing manuals originated with one or another of the unknown masters.

The Nuremberg complex consists of a number of derivative works of a lost original, including Codex Wallerstein, one section of the Glasgow Fechtbuch, the sketches of Albrecht Durer, the writings of the Marxbruder Antonius Rast, and a few others. (Codex Wallerstein may actually be the original manual here, but if that's the case it's missing a lot of content that it once contained.) This seems to be associated with Nuremberg largely because of the Durer and Rast connections, but both were well-traveled men so that's not certain--regardless of its city of origin, all of these manuals describe a coherent body of techniques with are not found in the same form elsewhere. These generally don't show any direct connection to Liechtenauer's work, but they are included a few different times alongside Liechtenauer's direct teachings, so I assume that the compilers had some reason for doing so and follow suit.

The Augsburg complex consists of a short treatise by Miralaus, the illustrated works of Joerg Wilhalm Hutter, the sketches of Gregor Erhart, and finally the compilation of Paulus Hector Mair. Mair also included Nuremberg content (and many other manuals) in his giant manuscripts, and it may be that the Nuremberg and Augsburg complexes actually originate from the same region and are merely different pieces of a single syllabus taught by the guilds of one or both cities.

The Marxbrüder didn't leave enough writings to discern what they were teaching, but they definitely possessed the teachings of Liechtenauer and jealously guarded their status as the premier fencing guild.

The Freyfechter were responsible for most of the printed German manuals, including Paurenfeyndt (and the reprinting by Egenolff), Meyer, Sutor, Heussler, and Verolini. Meyer also produced the latest surviving manuscript anthology, mostly copied from Codex Lew but including a few treatises of unknown origin (and his own musings on how to adapt dussack fencing to the side sword).

Other than these, there are various lesser texts that sometimes contain a garbled fragment of the verse and sometimes not. The most elaborate of these is the Gladiatoria, but there are many others. Many of these may also have been written by members of the Society of Liechtenauer, but without names attached there is no way of knowing. Now, if we're talking about real technical differences and not differences of presentation, the waters get murkier. Within the unarmored longsword, there are basically six strands of teachings: ps-Doebringer's gloss, Ringeck/ps-Danzig's gloss (which mostly agrees with Kal's illustrations), Martin Syber's verse, the Nuremberg techniques, the Augsburg techniques, and the Freyfechter school (exemplified by Paurnfeyndt); Joachim Meyer and his followers made a strong attempt to unify Ringeck, Syber, and Paurnfeyndt into one system, but people seem to either love his work or hate it. Sword and buckler I know less about, but it seems to boil down to the MS I.33 on one hand and Andre Liegniczer on the other (plus the brief treatments by Talhoffer and Kal, which are fairly similar to Liegniczer). Messer I also know little about, but the dominant teaching is Lecküchner, and his material is repeated all over the place, as well as being cribbed in verse form by Peter Falkner and extremely abridged by Egenolff's people. There are only a few other messer manuals, all of them very brief, until we get to Mair--and God only knows where he got those plays from."

Michael Chidester (source)