| myArmoury.com is now completely member-supported. Please contribute to our efforts with a donation. Your donations will go towards updating our site, modernizing it, and keeping it viable long-term.
Last 10 Donors: Anonymous, Daniel Sullivan, Chad Arnow, Jonathan Dean, M. Oroszlany, Sam Arwas, Barry C. Hutchins, Dan Kary, Oskar Gessler, Dave Tonge (View All Donors) |
| Author |
Message |
|
Peter Griffith
Location: Suffolk Virginia Joined: 15 Jul 2006
Posts: 8
|
 Posted: Mon 07 Aug, 2006 9:10 am Post subject: Middle eastern sword fighting |
 |
|
I have long been interested in the Middle Eastern middle age knights. Is there a manual out there that shows the art of the ME sword fighting. Also who make Middle Eastern helmets such as Saracens, Turks and so forth.
Peter
Peter Griffith
Dutch Pond Historical Reproductions
"Norman, Saxon and Viking shiled maker"
Custom orders also
|
|
   |
 |
|
Jonathan Hopkins
|
| Posted: Mon 07 Aug, 2006 9:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Have you tried searching the Edged Weapons from the Middle East at SFI? Here is a link: http://forums.swordforum.com/forumdisplay.php...forumid=13 I know I have seen threads regarding Middle Eastern martial arts in the past. Good luck.
Jonathan[/url]
|
|
|
|
|
Bill Grandy
myArmoury Team
|
| Posted: Mon 07 Aug, 2006 9:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
While I don't know anything about it, supposedly there is a martial art known as Gatka, I believe, that practices traditional middle eastern weapons.
HistoricalHandcrafts.com
-Inspired by History, Crafted by Hand
"For practice is better than artfulness. Your exercise can do well without artfulness, but artfulness is not much good without the exercise.” -anonymous 15th century fencing master, MS 3227a
|
|
 |
|
|
R Smith
|
| Posted: Wed 09 Aug, 2006 1:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Bill,
Gatka is Indian not middle eastern.
Peter,
Knights were Christian. You can not be one without the other. Other than the Crusader Kingdoms knighthood and chivalry were not practiced even by Christians in the middle east. It was a very western Europe thing.
Are you looking for the fighting styles of the Crusaders?
The oldest manual (known to exist) for sword fighting is MS I.33 (also called Tower manuscript) which dates to the late 1200's or early 1300's, depends upon who you are talking to, and comes from what is now called Germany.
There may be some later middle eastern fighting manuals but this falls way outside any interest of mine so I can not answer or give any advice.
"Those with wisdom loathe the one forced to defend." - Liechtenauer
Ars Gladii
Detroit, MI
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carl Goff
|
| Posted: Wed 09 Aug, 2006 3:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Smith, he may be meaning "knight" in the general sense of heavy cavalry, not in the sense of chivalry and all its trappings.
Oh, East of sands and sunlit gulf, your blood is thin, your gods are few;
You could not break the Northern wolf and now the wolf has turned on you.
The fires that light the coasts of Spain fling shadows on the Eastern strand.
Master, your slave has come again with torch and axe in his right hand!
-Robert E. Howard
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Griffith
Location: Suffolk Virginia Joined: 15 Jul 2006
Posts: 8
|
| Posted: Wed 09 Aug, 2006 3:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Carl that is what I meant. Thank you! I really dont have an interest in Europeon swordmanship. Most of my studies has been with kendo and Iaido. I now want to move to the way the Islamic forces where taught swordmanship of the crusader era from the time of the the Iberian wars to the third crusade.
Peter
Peter Griffith
Dutch Pond Historical Reproductions
"Norman, Saxon and Viking shiled maker"
Custom orders also
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Wed 09 Aug, 2006 4:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Carl Goff wrote: | | Smith, he may be meaning "knight" in the general sense of heavy cavalry, not in the sense of chivalry and all its trappings. |
And Saladin was reputed to have shown more chivalry than many knights on many occasions although he might have been ruthless at other times if not feeling " generous ".
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
Last edited by Jean Thibodeau on Wed 09 Aug, 2006 11:32 pm; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Al-Anizi
|
| Posted: Wed 09 Aug, 2006 10:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| R Smith wrote: | Bill,
Gatka is Indian not middle eastern.
Peter,
Knights were Christian. You can not be one without the other. Other than the Crusader Kingdoms knighthood and chivalry were not practiced even by Christians in the middle east. It was a very western Europe thing.
Are you looking for the fighting styles of the Crusaders?
The oldest manual (known to exist) for sword fighting is MS I.33 (also called Tower manuscript) which dates to the late 1200's or early 1300's, depends upon who you are talking to, and comes from what is now called Germany.
There may be some later middle eastern fighting manuals but this falls way outside any interest of mine so I can not answer or give any advice. |
Mr.Smith,
Knighthood and chivalry were not a purely western invention and social class. Chivalry, in a sense, has been prevalent in the arabian peninsula since pre-islam, and its ethics were first mentioned in poetry dating to the 2nd century AD. It is interesting to note that 'Cheval', the root word of chivalry, has the same meaning of 'faras', the root word for 'furusiyya', the arabic word for chivalry. Arabian knights did have the social restrictions western knights did too, they also had to be of noble blood, they had to provide troops to the local emir, sultan, caliph or whatever, which may be his own tribesmen, or less commonly, freed slaves put into service. They also had to have their estates, to buy the equipment they needed, and foremost, they did have to descend from a bloodline of knights. Their reputation was also an important thing, public opinion about a knight must have held the idea that he was charitable, generous, courageous, and above all, knightly.
Eastern knights also had their fair share of martial training, just like their western counterparts, a 'faris' had to be skilled in the use of the lance, sword, and bow, all on horseback. There are a few manuscripts and treatises that explain the training in detail, dating to the 12th century, although these martial requirments to knighthood must have dated much earlier.
In conclusion, chivalry did exist in arabian society, pretty much the same as western society, with similar notions and aspects, and 'knights', as a social and military class, also existed, although very few people know of that fact apparently.
|
|
|
|
|
Bill Grandy
myArmoury Team
|
| Posted: Wed 09 Aug, 2006 11:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| R Smith wrote: | Bill,
Gatka is Indian not middle eastern. |
Ah, my mistake. Thanks!
HistoricalHandcrafts.com
-Inspired by History, Crafted by Hand
"For practice is better than artfulness. Your exercise can do well without artfulness, but artfulness is not much good without the exercise.” -anonymous 15th century fencing master, MS 3227a
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carl Goff
|
| Posted: Thu 10 Aug, 2006 1:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jean Thibodeau wrote: |
And Saladin was reputed to have shown more chivalry than many knights on many occasions although he might have been ruthless at other times if not feeling " generous ". |
That actually occured to me...at least the famous example where he gave...hell, I can't remember the name 100%, I want to say King John of Jerusalem. *curses misplacement of book on Crusades and Knights Templar*
Anyway, the famous example where Saladin gives John snow-cooled water after he's been captured by the Muslims at Hattin, then cuts off Reynard de Chatillion's arm (while aiming for his head) about five minutes later.
"Tell the king that it is he, not I, who gives drink to this man." There's a very good reason for that, too.
Oh, East of sands and sunlit gulf, your blood is thin, your gods are few;
You could not break the Northern wolf and now the wolf has turned on you.
The fires that light the coasts of Spain fling shadows on the Eastern strand.
Master, your slave has come again with torch and axe in his right hand!
-Robert E. Howard
|
|
|
|
|
Randall Moffett
|
| Posted: Thu 10 Aug, 2006 2:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
guy is the king's name I believe, defeated after his defeat at the Horns of Hattin.
I remember seeing medieval fighting treatises from the NEar east but nothing comes to mind as to where one would find them as I know of none published. I might be able to get some pictures as one of my old teachers is a specialist in the crusades and lived in Jordan a while doing such things as one would do....
RPM
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jonathan Hopkins
|
| Posted: Thu 10 Aug, 2006 5:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
I came across ths link while searching through some threads on SFI: http://www.zulfakr.com/index.htm
Hey, there is even some mention of Chivalry!
|
|
|
|
|
|
R Smith
|
| Posted: Thu 10 Aug, 2006 5:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| S. Al-Anizi wrote: | | R Smith wrote: | Bill,
Gatka is Indian not middle eastern.
Peter,
Knights were Christian. You can not be one without the other. Other than the Crusader Kingdoms knighthood and chivalry were not practiced even by Christians in the middle east. It was a very western Europe thing.
Are you looking for the fighting styles of the Crusaders?
The oldest manual (known to exist) for sword fighting is MS I.33 (also called Tower manuscript) which dates to the late 1200's or early 1300's, depends upon who you are talking to, and comes from what is now called Germany.
There may be some later middle eastern fighting manuals but this falls way outside any interest of mine so I can not answer or give any advice. |
Mr.Smith,
Knighthood and chivalry were not a purely western invention and social class. Chivalry, in a sense, has been prevalent in the arabian peninsula since pre-islam, and its ethics were first mentioned in poetry dating to the 2nd century AD. It is interesting to note that 'Cheval', the root word of chivalry, has the same meaning of 'faras', the root word for 'furusiyya', the arabic word for chivalry. Arabian knights did have the social restrictions western knights did too, they also had to be of noble blood, they had to provide troops to the local emir, sultan, caliph or whatever, which may be his own tribesmen, or less commonly, freed slaves put into service. They also had to have their estates, to buy the equipment they needed, and foremost, they did have to descend from a bloodline of knights. Their reputation was also an important thing, public opinion about a knight must have held the idea that he was charitable, generous, courageous, and above all, knightly.
Eastern knights also had their fair share of martial training, just like their western counterparts, a 'faris' had to be skilled in the use of the lance, sword, and bow, all on horseback. There are a few manuscripts and treatises that explain the training in detail, dating to the 12th century, although these martial requirments to knighthood must have dated much earlier.
In conclusion, chivalry did exist in arabian society, pretty much the same as western society, with similar notions and aspects, and 'knights', as a social and military class, also existed, although very few people know of that fact apparently. |
My point is that the terms "knighthood" and "chivalry" as ideals are based upon Christian principles. Of course there were terms for a similar, but not the same, sort of behavior in the middle east. Just as in Japan this was known as bushido. Does this mean that we should refer to samurai as knights? Or how about knights as samurai or furusiyya or whatever term we feel like.
Referring to someone outside of the context of Christendom as a knight is offensive to me. I am sure that you would feel the same if I referred to someone outside of Islam as furusiyya.
"Those with wisdom loathe the one forced to defend." - Liechtenauer
Ars Gladii
Detroit, MI
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Al-Anizi
|
| Posted: Thu 10 Aug, 2006 7:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | My point is that the terms "knighthood" and "chivalry" as ideals are based upon Christian principles. Of course there were terms for a similar, but not the same, sort of behavior in the middle east. Just as in Japan this was known as bushido. Does this mean that we should refer to samurai as knights? Or how about knights as samurai or furusiyya or whatever term we feel like.
Referring to someone outside of the context of Christendom as a knight is offensive to me. I am sure that you would feel the same if I referred to someone outside of Islam as furusiyya. |
I see, although one cannot deny that the ideals of both chivalry and furussiya are almost carbon copies, as a result of frequent contact between between mid-easterners and europeans. The main difference, as you note it, is religion. Furusiyya does not emphasize on religion, but on social order and military status and profession mainly, unlike chivalry. Similarily, religious chivalric orders were set up in the mid-east, like their christian counterparts, the futuwwa, an islamic knightly order that originated in damascus somewhere in the 11th century, was very similar in purpose to that of the templars and hospitallers, and played a huge part in defending damascus during its siege by the 2nd crusade. As to bushido, i would consider it different than the ideals of chivalry and furusiyya. Arab historians of the 11th and 12th centuries used the word 'fursan' to describe crusader knights.[/quote]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R Smith
|
| Posted: Thu 10 Aug, 2006 8:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| S. Al-Anizi wrote: | | Quote: | My point is that the terms "knighthood" and "chivalry" as ideals are based upon Christian principles. Of course there were terms for a similar, but not the same, sort of behavior in the middle east. Just as in Japan this was known as bushido. Does this mean that we should refer to samurai as knights? Or how about knights as samurai or furusiyya or whatever term we feel like.
Referring to someone outside of the context of Christendom as a knight is offensive to me. I am sure that you would feel the same if I referred to someone outside of Islam as furusiyya. |
I see, although one cannot deny that the ideals of both chivalry and furussiya are almost carbon copies, as a result of frequent contact between between mid-easterners and europeans. The main difference, as you note it, is religion. Furusiyya does not emphasize on religion, but on social order and military status and profession mainly, unlike chivalry. Similarily, religious chivalric orders were set up in the mid-east, like their christian counterparts, the futuwwa, an islamic knightly order that originated in damascus somewhere in the 11th century, was very similar in purpose to that of the templars and hospitallers, and played a huge part in defending damascus during its siege by the 2nd crusade. As to bushido, i would consider it different than the ideals of chivalry and furusiyya. Arab historians of the 11th and 12th centuries used the word 'fursan' to describe crusader knights. |
[/quote]
Interesting points and I thank you for this information on a subject I have not delved deeply into. Of course, the lineage of Christian and Islamic thought is very similar and trade between the two groups certainly predates the advent of either religon. However at the time of the crusades and after, religon is central to the difference between the cultures and the crux of these conflicts. It, more then anything, was (and continues to be) the dividing line regardless of modern western thought's inability to see or refusal to acknowledge it. This is not meant as any sort of political statement but rather just to point out that thought patterns/driving forces were different at this time in history then they are now.
Is Aristotelian thought of any influence in the middle east? I assume that Greek philosophy had an effect but I have no basis for this assumption. The reason I include this is because of its great influence within the code of chivalry prior to Saint Thomas Aquinas and to a lesser extent after.
I mentioned bushido in the discussion due to the fact that it is a moral, spiritual and martial code to which warriors of a certain station held themselves (or were supposed to.) This makes it similar it similar in application to both chivalry and faras.
"Those with wisdom loathe the one forced to defend." - Liechtenauer
Ars Gladii
Detroit, MI
|
|
|
|
|
Phill Lappin
Location: Melbourne, Australia Joined: 11 Apr 2005
Posts: 44
|
| Posted: Thu 10 Aug, 2006 5:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| R Smith wrote: | | S. Al-Anizi wrote: | | Quote: | My point is that the terms "knighthood" and "chivalry" as ideals are based upon Christian principles. Of course there were terms for a similar, but not the same, sort of behavior in the middle east. Just as in Japan this was known as bushido. Does this mean that we should refer to samurai as knights? Or how about knights as samurai or furusiyya or whatever term we feel like.
Referring to someone outside of the context of Christendom as a knight is offensive to me. I am sure that you would feel the same if I referred to someone outside of Islam as furusiyya. |
I see, although one cannot deny that the ideals of both chivalry and furussiya are almost carbon copies, as a result of frequent contact between between mid-easterners and europeans. The main difference, as you note it, is religion. Furusiyya does not emphasize on religion, but on social order and military status and profession mainly, unlike chivalry. Similarily, religious chivalric orders were set up in the mid-east, like their christian counterparts, the futuwwa, an islamic knightly order that originated in damascus somewhere in the 11th century, was very similar in purpose to that of the templars and hospitallers, and played a huge part in defending damascus during its siege by the 2nd crusade. As to bushido, i would consider it different than the ideals of chivalry and furusiyya. Arab historians of the 11th and 12th centuries used the word 'fursan' to describe crusader knights. |
Interesting points and I thank you for this information on a subject I have not delved deeply into. Of course, the lineage of Christian and Islamic thought is very similar and trade between the two groups certainly predates the advent of either religon. However at the time of the crusades and after, religon is central to the difference between the cultures and the crux of these conflicts. It, more then anything, was (and continues to be) the dividing line regardless of modern western thought's inability to see or refusal to acknowledge it. This is not meant as any sort of political statement but rather just to point out that thought patterns/driving forces were different at this time in history then they are now.
Is Aristotelian thought of any influence in the middle east? I assume that Greek philosophy had an effect but I have no basis for this assumption. The reason I include this is because of its great influence within the code of chivalry prior to Saint Thomas Aquinas and to a lesser extent after.
I mentioned bushido in the discussion due to the fact that it is a moral, spiritual and martial code to which warriors of a certain station held themselves (or were supposed to.) This makes it similar it similar in application to both chivalry and faras. |
What we think of as Chivalry was most probably decended from Islamic influences after the Crusades.
You are correct in regards to the influence of Gree culture, in fact most of the Greek classics that were "rediscovered" during the Renaissance were actually the arabic translations, which were then retranslated back into latin.
IN NOMINE DOMINE
IN NOMINE CONVIVOR
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Al-Anizi
|
| Posted: Thu 10 Aug, 2006 9:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| R Smith wrote: | | S. Al-Anizi wrote: | | Quote: | My point is that the terms "knighthood" and "chivalry" as ideals are based upon Christian principles. Of course there were terms for a similar, but not the same, sort of behavior in the middle east. Just as in Japan this was known as bushido. Does this mean that we should refer to samurai as knights? Or how about knights as samurai or furusiyya or whatever term we feel like.
Referring to someone outside of the context of Christendom as a knight is offensive to me. I am sure that you would feel the same if I referred to someone outside of Islam as furusiyya. |
I see, although one cannot deny that the ideals of both chivalry and furussiya are almost carbon copies, as a result of frequent contact between between mid-easterners and europeans. The main difference, as you note it, is religion. Furusiyya does not emphasize on religion, but on social order and military status and profession mainly, unlike chivalry. Similarily, religious chivalric orders were set up in the mid-east, like their christian counterparts, the futuwwa, an islamic knightly order that originated in damascus somewhere in the 11th century, was very similar in purpose to that of the templars and hospitallers, and played a huge part in defending damascus during its siege by the 2nd crusade. As to bushido, i would consider it different than the ideals of chivalry and furusiyya. Arab historians of the 11th and 12th centuries used the word 'fursan' to describe crusader knights. |
|
Is Aristotelian thought of any influence in the middle east? I assume that Greek philosophy had an effect but I have no basis for this assumption. The reason I include this is because of its great influence within the code of chivalry prior to Saint Thomas Aquinas and to a lesser extent after.
I mentioned bushido in the discussion due to the fact that it is a moral, spiritual and martial code to which warriors of a certain station held themselves (or were supposed to.) This makes it similar it similar in application to both chivalry and faras.[/quote]
Greek philosophy hugely impacted islamic culture and religion, and every way of thinking. The dar-ul-hikma "house of wisdom" set up in baghdad collected every greek manuscript and book they could find, and took great care in translating them into arabic, and teaching them. This was happening as early as the 9th century AD.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carl Goff
|
| Posted: Fri 11 Aug, 2006 11:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Randall Moffett wrote: | | guy is the king's name I believe, defeated after his defeat at the Horns of Hattin. |
Thank you, Randall. You've jogged my memory-and you're 100% correct. I've got to find that book.
Oh, East of sands and sunlit gulf, your blood is thin, your gods are few;
You could not break the Northern wolf and now the wolf has turned on you.
The fires that light the coasts of Spain fling shadows on the Eastern strand.
Master, your slave has come again with torch and axe in his right hand!
-Robert E. Howard
|
|
|
|
|
Randall Moffett
|
| Posted: Sat 12 Aug, 2006 12:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think in abook I own but it is back in the States called Crsades: An Islamic Perspective, it has a section on these military treatises that maybe useful. The Author is I think Caroline Hildenbrant of University of Edinburgh.
Carl,
No problem. Took some courses on crusades and still have some stuff lodged in my brain somewhere. Pretty good as it was 3 years ago,
RPM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
All contents © Copyright 2003-2024 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum
|
This is a standard topic