[Lafayette C Curtis]

[Bill Grandy]

[Jean Thibodeau]

[Thomas Jason]

[Michael Edelson]

Is the SCA a martial art? What is a martial art?

Let's agree that a martial art is a fighting art intended to be used in earnest, either in war, duels or self defence, or an art that prepares you for such fighting.

Let's also divide the discussion into two aspects...armored fighting and unarmored fighting.

Armored
-----------

You have to ask yourself a basic quesiton...who knows more about armored combat, the SCA or Johanes Liechtenauer, Fiori di Liberi, Sigmund Ringeck, Hans Talhoffer, Paulus Kal, etc. etc. etc.?

I don't think anyone here would say "the SCA does". If they would, this discussion must end immediately for no good can ever come of it.

Taking for granted that the ancient masters knew more, we must ask ourselves why "bash him into submission" is not described as a technique for fighting in armor in a single period maual? There is in fact no shortage of techniques for fighting in armor described in treatises, and none of them say "hit him to break his bone or dent the articulation of his armor so he can't move".

Considering the fact that SCA style armor combat is not described in any treatise whatsoever, we can safely assume that SCA armored fighting has nothing in common with period combat and is therefore not a martial art.

Arguments can be made that fighting in mail is different than fighting in plate, and that there are no period manuals from the age of mail that describe armored combat. This is all true, and largely negates what I wrote above, for the despite the fact that the SCA fights largely in plate armor, they are supposed to be simulating combat in mail.

However, look the unarmored section to see why it still falls short as a martial art.

Unarmored
---------------

Rather than look directly at the SCA, let's instead look at fencing. Fencing is not a martial art, it is a sport. It is not a martial art because it does not prepare you to fight in earnest, and in fact does the opposite by all buy guaranteeing you would die in an earnest swordfight, as does the SCA. This is because the idea of fencing is to score first. So if I touch you, and then half a second later you touch me, I get the point. In SCA heavy combat, we can hit each other at the same time, but if I hit you harder, I win (if you admit it). Or more accurately, if I don't think you hit me hard enough, I don't have to count the blow.

In fecning, this means that the winning techniques, the ones that will stick and be passed down, will all be colored by the fact that they don't need to address the fact that you are being attacked, so long as they let you score first. In SCA heavy combat, the same principle applies, for slightly different reasons.

Why is that not a martial art?

The slightest contact by a razor sharp sword can put you down for good. Nor does it take much for such a sword to slice through several layers of clothing and lay open your flesh.

Therefore, every period fencing manual clearly instructs you to NEVER get hit with a sword. A martial art designed for fighting in earnest must address this as its first concern. EVERY hit with a sword can kill you, so you must NOT get hit. This does not mean being defensive (necessarily), it can mean attacking in such a way that protects you as you attack, or countering in such a way that neutralizes the threat of the sword. What it does not include, ever, is to hit no matter what, to be first to hit, or to hit harder at the expense of defense against the lethal threat of your opponent's weapon.

Double kills are rampant in not only SCA combat, but a lot of HES bouting. This is because people simply don't understand this. When someone swings a sword at you, you do NOT also swing a sword at him (unless that swing is a counter and neutralizes his attack)....your first priority is to make sure that the sword doesn't hit you.

In several german fechtbucher, it is stated that if you attack someone, then they must defend, and so you are safe. However, in modern day bouting, there is no such guarantee. Again, while this is much more common in SCA, it is also all too common in HES. For too many people, the response to being attacked is to attack back (not to counter, but to attack back, resulting in double kills). This has led to another all too common artifact of bouting...constant retreats. Since there is no safety in the attack, people tend to play measure games where they snipe from barely within measure, hoping to score, not willing to enter measure becuase they would get hit by someone who is not afraid of being struck with foam or wood or blunt steel.

So if this exists in both HES and SCA, why is HES a martial art and SCA is not?

Because in HES, this behavior is wrong. Someone who fights int his fashion is a bad fencer by HES standards. In the SCA and in fencing, it's okay, as long as you get the point.

That's the difference, and that's why neither fencing nor SCA heavy combat are a martial art. It is also the reason why "things that work" should never be allowed to polute (yes, polute) HES, because they work under completely unrealistic circumstances, and so long as those circumstances are in effect, nothing that "works" can ever be trusted.

That said, both fencing and SCA heavy combat are fine combat sports, and both can teach you things about fighting in earnest...timing, measure, etc., provided you understand the limitations of the sport. However, if you do not undrestand the distinction between a combat sport and a true martial art, you are, at best, a double kill waiting to happen.

[Christian Henry Tobler]

Hey Mike,

Your post is on the mark regarding armoured combat where the judicial duel is concerned.

We do need to remember though that what survives in German manuscripts is intended for just that - and that they specifically say so: it's Kampffechten ("duel fighting"). We actually have little reason to believe that half-swording was a prominent feature of tournaments, or even battles: most 15th c. illustrations of armoured combat on the battlefield shows swords being swung with both hands on the grip.

Really, and I know you know this, the half-sword techniques are used for killing armoured men, something you might not want to do in most battles, given the ramifications regarding ransom and feud. And certainly, where the tournament is concerned, we hear of agreements to deliver "10 strokes of the sword" and the like.

None of which is to say that SCA fighting is some sort of touchstone for these scenarios. Given what we know of fechtschule contests, it seems that the same art was used, only constrained by rules appropriate to the venue.

All the best,

Christian

[Michael Edelson]

Hi Christian,

Thank you for the clarification and yes, I am aware of the general facts of the matter though not as well versed on the particulars as I'd like. That's your job.

The "10 blows of the sword" scenario is illustrative of a martial sport, which may seem to make it akin to SCA fighting. However, I'd bet the farm that the people engaging in such tournaments knew full well the difference between it and fighting in earnest to the death, and that was my point...

So long as you don't understand the difference between martial sports like fencing and SCA heavy combat and an actual martial art, then you cannot benefit from them in a martial sense.

[Christian Henry Tobler]

Just so Mike.

The fechtschule example tells us how this likely happened. You *trained* the whole system, but then when you went to compete, certain things were disallowed.

We can extrapolate how the system might work on the field of battle too. You use essentially Blossfechten techniques against a fellow knight, battering him into submission while defensively preventing him from doing the same. If won't yield, and there is danger of your serious injury in the encounter, we likely would see the more injurious techniques come into play: thrusts to the eyes, groin, armpit, etc. that we find in the armoured dueling material.

As I alluded to earlier, the process of devising and training a lethal art and then adjusting it down as appropriate is a vastly different thing from devising something entirely for a relatively safe sporting context.

All the best,

Christian

[Bill Tsafa]

In most SCA Tornaments a double kill is just that... a double kill. Both people walk out of the list. In others they are allowed to re-fight the match once. If it results in a double kill again then both people are out of the list. In practice you get to fight again, in tournament you are dead. Tournaments are usually double elimination. You lose two matches and you go home.

In the case where you have a person that losses a limb as he attacks the other person to gain a kill... well how do you fairly treat that? Can you put both people out of the list...? That is not fair because in a real life and death duel one might live. So this is not just an SCA issue but a tournament issue. WMA would have to deal with the same problem if they had formal tournaments.

The training that most people would get in the SCA from knights, and that I have gotten, is never give up anything. Their focus is defense. Stay alive and find (or create) the opportunity to make a clean kill. Most knights in the East Kingdom use heater shields. This is playing as defensively as possible at the cost of offense. To be more clear, when you use a large heater you give up some range or motion for the added defense. Your offense must be that much better to get around your own defense.


Back on topic now.... this topic is not about SCA rules. This topic explores the question of... can you take the skills that you learn in the SCA and apply them to a historic setting without any rules. Would SCA training be effective in such a setting and give you a fighting chance to live??? If that is the case then then SCA fighting is a martial art.. You can consider the ruleset and tournaments as a form of drilling if they can prepare a person for unrestricted combat.

[Chris Arrington]

Now, I don't claim to be as knowledgable as most here. Not even close. But lets throw a gallon of gasoline on the fire here.

If your discussing the "age of plate" armored combat, as was mentioned earlier in this thread since there are no surviving treatises from the "age of mail", isn't any arguement of "my sword system is more real" from either side somewhat misleading?

During most of that period (yes there are always exceptions) If you were mounted, the Lance was the most common weapon. If you were a foot, the pike, the poleaxe or other polearms? Precisely because the sword was mostly ineffective in those cases.

Discussing fighting systems in plate armor with swords, is about as real as in a thousand years discussing the "Battle of Bagdad" and arguing over who's pistol techniques were superior and more lethal.

Just razzing you guys

[Allen W]

I made a comment earlier about sincerity, by which I meant that if you undertake any practice with an honest martial intent you can train effectively with just about anyone. You may loose to someone else's goofy rules and they may not be training a martial art at all. But of of course you can't single source or expect someone else's past time, fechtbuch, or dojo to actually train you. It is all ultimately a matter of intellectual honesty.

[Allen W]

Vassilis, regarding tournament scenario, crippled=dead. For all intents and purposes a limb shot must be considered the same as fatal from the standpoint of martial effectiveness if are genuinely trying to derive martial arts value from such an enterprise.

[Michael Edelson]

[Gavin Kisebach]

[Michael Edelson]

[Allen W]

We don't know how many or which of the fechtbuch authors could really fight and which ones could just sell themselves through sport demos that were interpreted by their peers as simulated fighting. Those truly accomplished warriors that we know of didn't write manuals. This does not relieve the responsibility of our judgement. Personally Silver and Ringeck strike me as fighters. Dobringer and Talhoffer do not. Irrespective I trust my hand more than I trust ink and no martial artist can do otherwise.

[Michael Edelson]

[Steven Reich]

[Marc Pengryffyn]

[Michael Edelson]