Heinz Hilbrecht is a keen historian of the European Martial arts and a member of the PMA discussion list.

Introduction

Did European Kung Fu exist? There is no doubt about it. Historic sources and rare relicts can shed light on our western fighting traditions before firearms became important on the battlefields. Here I will concentrate on aspects of the military applications. Civil combat styles are still alive in many areas of Europe with their local character and weapons such as various sticks and poles. There are probably several dozen of these styles in Europe that are practiced in small communities. Many of them could be lost in the very near future. They are handed down in the training hall and hardly any detailed literature exists about them. This is different for the military arts.

The military martial arts were always attractive political and economic merchandise. During the late Middle Ages martial arts masters, officers and military consultants started to produce publications as training manuals and as a means to spread their reputation and advertise their services to potential customers. The Middle Ages end by definition with the European discovery of the Americas in 1492, so basically at the turn of the 15th to the 16th century. In Europe, this time was a period of major change in the economic and social structure of the societies. The free cities gained increasingly more power, mainly through wealth produced by their craftsmen, long-distance trade, and occupation (legal and illegal) of neighboring territories. The growth of economic power on one side lead to decline on the other. The gentry became less important, their economic sources - the peasants - could not cope with the economic growth through technical innovation and trade in the towns and consequently prices were rising. Many knights were as poor and desperate as the peasants they owned and whom they exploited.

The economic conflict of the time lead to frequent armed struggle in numerous local and international battles. The ability to fight became a matter of survival and often the only means to defend legal rights. The law was weak. Military power - often equivalent with economic power - was the decisive force that replaced legal regulations and negotiations when violent confrontation became the more promising means to increase on power and economy. The famous robber-knights were basically bankrupt knights, often close to starvation, who took what they could get, mostly from the rich traders. It was not uncommon for citizens (commoners) to unite (usually into a band of 20-30 men) and to plunder farming villages. At school in history classes we hear much about the robber-knights who plagued the people. We hear little about the same activities by the founders of our industrial society: craftsmen and traders. Fairytales have often replaced the truth when propaganda was needed for social and economical goals.

Fighting and defence were a normal part of life in late medieval and subsequent times for several hundred years. The ultimate culmination in this development was the 30 years long war from 1618-1648 when at least 50% of the inhabitants of Germany and neighboring countries in central Europe were killed. Considering the loss of lives and devastation of cities and rural areas, the effects were larger than those of World War II in this area.

Books and other sources can provide evidence for the fighting traditions and the people who applied the martial arts. History deals with people and is not only the history of kings and emperors. The history of the martial arts is incomplete without information about the social, economic, and spiritual situation of the martial artists themselves. As in the Asian defensive traditions the thinking of the people, as well as social and economic circumstances determined much in their fighting.

Solidarity and democracy bring about the demise of the knights

The knights disappeared at the turn of the 15th/16th century. This was a time when firearms were ineffective, primitive and dangerous. No knight would have ever been afraid of them on the battlefield. However, they suffered from extreme losses in this time. Their new powerful opponent was able to bring an end to a combat tradition and its proponents who had ruled over Europe for centuries. At school we learn that firearms were the ultimate invention that made the lives of knights dangerous and their prominent equipment - the armor - counterproductive. Nice story, and certainly the right story in the view of later monarchs and governments. No, the knights disappeared because the people learned to organize themselves in a revolutionary way. Simple people were acting as responsible and courageous individuals in a military unit of thousands, with a position derived from democratic votes and a law that made them equal. Can you think of this idea taught at school under a feudal or undemocratic European government? Today's teachers should abandon the old fairytales and teach how the evolution of democratic structures annihilated the armies of the knights in medieval Europe.

Technologically speaking, a knight resembles a modern tank. The tank driver is heavily armored, and the weapon and the tank itself are very mobile. The same was true for the armored knight on his horse. He used a lance that had a devastating effect in a forward direction. In close combat he had a sword that was very dangerous because on the horse the knight fought always from an elevated position, with great force and mobility. The secret of their success is found in their horses. Now, when you hinder the knight by removing access to his enemy with his lance and kill the horse, you have the strategy to that will defeat this previously unbeatable force.

At this time the most effective and still mobile tool to build a barrier for knights and horses was a very long lance - a pike - and even better if there were many pikes that protected the combat unit from all sides. The fight was against mobile armored forces that could simply circle around the defenders on the field. You didn't want any gaps in your rows - this excludes horses - and you had to expect losses. So take a number of infantry men, place them in several rows behind each other, and equip them with 4-5 m (12-15 ft.) long pikes. Even if the knights are lucky and manage to kill some your comrades in the first row they will still have to fight with a forest of pikes against them and they'll not be able to do so for very long. In the 14th century Scottish troops had used poles with a sharpened point mainly to stop the horses. However, against armour these are ineffective tools, the Scottish troops were not mobile enough and their flanks remained weak. The Swiss pikes killed the knights far more efficiently at this time.

However, the introduction of a weapon is still not the secret. We need the economic and the social factor on the battlefield.

There could never be many knights. Their armor and weapons cost about as much as the taxes raised from a whole medieval village for a whole year, if not more. If you killed one knight the loss of ten infantrymen was still tolerable. That's the economy of war. There were thousands of peasants for one knight in the medieval society.

During battle the infantry men must be protected from all sides: horses are fast and they can come from every direction. To create a line of defence in all directions means to arrange the men in a square. In German these military units were called "Schlachthaufen" (battle crowd) or "Gevierthaufen" (crowd in a square). This new strategy was first evolved in Switzerland, during the 14th and 15th century. Swiss "Schlachthaufen" consisted of a square of 80 by 80 men (all in all 6400 men).

In 1476 two of these units faced the most modern army of Europe, that of Burgundy, with their latest artillery technology, abundant material and numerous troops. Under heavy artillery bombardment, two Schlachthaufen marched against the enemies. Fighters from inside the Schlachthaufen closed gaps in the front lines rapidly. When the enemies got inside the rows of pikes, the halbardeers with their famous Swiss halberds rushed forward and dealt the situation. These men had cultivated the fight "with combined weapons", as we call it today. The knights fought for their individual honor - the Schlachthaufen assembled the common people under a common goal. They depended on each other and the individual man could only survive if he could trust the others. A single gap in the rows could be the gate through which the whole unit could be torn apart, the order destroyed, and the battle won for the enemies. Until the 15th century the Swiss fought with firm believe in their rights and for their families against an arrogant gentry. Their rules were hard. Cowards were killed immediately by their own comrades. Injuries were no excuse to leave the battle. When the order broke down everybody would lose his life - if not on the battlefield, then on the gallows of the aristocratic enemy. At the end of the battle the Swiss troops had killed between 15000-20000 men on the side of Burgundy and had lost 700 men on their side.

The idea of a Schlachthaufen reminds of a crowd of ants, who hardly know what happens and just rush forward. Many historians still think that the fighting skills and training of these men were simple and of poor quality. In the 1970s experiments with modern Swiss soldiers, however, revealed that operations in a square of over 6000 people were a difficult task. With a space of 80 cm (less than 2 ft.) between the men the handling of the long pikes required discipline and skills. The "Schlachthaufen" had to act like one big organism with the individuals always aware of the situation. Imagine how thousands of people keep this order in all this shouting and clashing of weapons, in an artillery bombardment, while they march over hundreds of dead bodies and broken weapons, the grass and shoes slippery from blood. I don't want to describe the horror, or create the view of heroes. When we practice with these old weapons today, however, we should remember from time to time that the fencing rule meant to cut the arm first, to make sure that the enemy could be safely killed.

The devastating victories of the Swiss changed the face of Europe. The strategy of the Swiss "Schlachthaufen" was rapidly adopted and evolved in Germany. The famous German "Landsknechts" were organized according to this scheme by the emperor Maximilian I. who ruled between 1493-1519. He was called "the last knight" and "the first Landsknecht". Maximilian I. introduced a social revolution when he took the pike and fought with commoners in the first row of a "Schlachthaufen". Before this time this would have been unthinkable. He motivated the former knights to give up their arrogant code of honor and social prejudices and to build their military careers on their performance on the battlefield, rather than on their aristocratic title.

At this time nearly no regular troops existed in the European states. When somebody somewhere decided to have war (and there was at least one big battle and uncounted smaller battles each year) they hired troops. Men came from areas where they faced poverty and starvation. In central Europe these were Switzerland, southwestern Germany, parts of Austria, and numerous smaller areas. At this time the typical military forces consisted of up to 20,000 men. Remember that major cities like Paris (France) had about 20,000 inhabitants at that time. The men were free peasants who had the right to carry weapons and to leave home. They were numerous and the military could be selective. A mediocre fighter in the first rows could be lethal for the whole crowd. These people depended on each other and this established a democratic scheme in those military troops of the 16th century. Each man who wanted to become a Landsknecht had to be accepted by all others, or their elected representatives. He had to be older than 16 years and, if his ability was in doubt, he had to pass a public examination. This law did not discriminate between men and officers, peasants and the gentry (unthinkable in the civil society of this time). Commoners could become military leaders but everybody started at the lowest level, with the pike in his hands. Even today, when Germans wish to express that somebody had learned his skills from the very basics to the top, we say "he learned it from the pike upwards" ("von der Pike auf gelernt"). Abilities and skills promoted a Landsknecht. And they could make money. The regular soldiers received about one Gilder (Gulden) each week. They had to bring their equipment, weapons, supplies and everything else they needed. The price of a pike was about a Gilder, so the salary was not much. But they plundered the beaten enemies and this brought the money in. This kind of benefit made permanent war affordable for the warlords.

Martial arts training and spiritual values

The Landsknecht had to learn martial skills on a private basis. Units were established only for a short time of weeks or a few months and there was nearly no regular training until the early 17th century. The men lived in small villages, as poor peasants. At about 12 years old the boys learned the martial arts from the older men at their villages. They had a full scheme, including empty hand techniques (a form of grappling that resembles Jiu Jutsu), and fencing with the short sword, the pike and the halberd.

The halberd was the other most important military weapon. It was applied against other infantry and in close-range combat against fallen horsemen. The training happened when there was time, in the evenings and on Sundays after church. It consisted of sports to build general fitness, and fencing lessons (the term "fencing" was used much like "Kung Fu" (Gongfu) in China and included empty-hand and weapons techniques). The elder taught the younger and some elders became respected and famous masters. The relation of masters, elder, and younger students was very similar to that in China and it was the regular scheme in all arts. The knights had their scheme of honor and deep roots in Christian traditions and thinking. The new forces derived their rules from craftsmanship. Even today German craftsmen (carpenters, butchers, etc.) are divided into students ("Lehrlinge"), junior advanced craftsmen after 3-4 years of education ("Junggesellen"), senior advanced craftsmen ("Altgesellen"), and masters ("Meister"). It is expected that a junior will learn with different masters at different places in order to expand his practical experience and to become a senior. Only the master is allowed to teach students and to open his own business. Remarkable, if compared to the social structure in the Asian defensive traditions. Starting in the late 16th century, German Landsknechts had to provide evidence for an education from a noted master. Like in Asia, the martial arts lineage of a fighter became important for both quality control and his reputation.

The above picture shows a scene from a 16th century fencing school in Germany. On the right side the students practice with poles (foreground) and halberds (background). Also note the flails on the floor, which are farming tools but were used frequently as weapons. Students on the left side practice with long poles, probably to prepare for fencing with the long pike. Two groups practice with various swords in the background. These schools existed in the cities and prepared the citizens for their martial duties. The tuition was often paid by the city as an investmentfor defence, protection of the trade, and occasional war for economic benefits. Yes, war was a source of income and growth at this time.

The Landknechts regarded themselves as craftsmen. This included a deep root in religious traditions (as for everybody in medieval Europe), and demands for quality, controlled skills, rules about career tracks, working permissions after examinations, and a strong attitude toward responsibility in the interest of the members of the guild and their customers. These values were regarded as indispensable and they were set by democratic votes in the guild. Rules of craftsmanship excluded the competition of one guild with another guild and reserved rigorous punishment for craftsmen who did not obey these rules. Blacksmiths would not be allowed to do work claimed for carpenters, for example. Their identity was largely derived from the tools they used. On the battlefield this determined that fighters with different weapons would avoid a confrontation until the Landsknechts with their different tasks and weapons and this developed the spirit of a unified guild. This identity and the widely accepted rules of the guild system lead to a dramatic situation in the early 16th century when Landsknechts killed tens of thousands of peasants during the "war of the peasants" ("Bauernkriege") in southern Germany. Landsknechts (most of them born as peasants in the same areas) were hired to subjugate the riot of the peasants who had united in large armed crowds. In the eyes of the Landsknechts this was a serious offense because peasants were not the guild responsible for war craftsmanship. The extreme violence, killing and bloodshed is still one of the most widely remembered parts of this time's history.

The martial art of the Landsknechts was remarkably similar to Asian fighting traditions. Most of the knowledge is lost but what we learn from rare ancient books that have been handed down to our time is a surprise. The empty-hand techniques resembled what we know as Jiu Jutsu and included additional techniques that we commonly see in modern grappling. European fighters would have matched well against Asian opponents. Remember that most boxing styles (karate, most Gongfu) were not really applied on the military battlefields. In armed combat empty hand techniques are needed when the opponent had already bridged the gap to close quarters. A man had lost his weapon and had to continue the defence, kill the enemy and grab the weapon again. He may have got stuck in armed fighting, given up the weapon and ended the fight with a lethal throw. Throwing an opponent means to let him fall on the head, break the spine or bring him to the ground where you could kill him fast with the knife that every man had on his side. Battles were fast and there was not much time for long duels. It could take only three hours until 20,000 men on the other side were killed.

These arts were no sports. But martial arts were also applied for sports and entertainment at any time. Sport was seen as a necessary preparation for fighting and included running and jumping as well. Wrestling was certainly more popular than today but broken bones were not uncommon in these sport applications. Boxing styles are useful for fights between unarmed individuals. Do not believe that medieval Europeans didn't know boxing. The Pankration of the ancient Greek was known about 2000 years before the time of the Landsknechts. Some people believe that Pankration was more effective than the well-known Monk Fist Boxing of the Shaolin. At the very least it was more brutal.

The training happened on the "Spielwiese" (playground) that was close to every village. It was a village right to have this sports and training ground, and in some cases they even went to court to defend this right.

Fencing with the pole introduced the more sophisticated fencing with the long pike and the halberd. Figures in the ancient books show the horse stance, the cat stance, footwork, blocking techniques and strikes that were very similar to Asian styles. Famous masters attracted students from great distances and were hired by cities for the martial education of its citizens.

There are only rare hints as to the actual training procedures. No source suggests the application of forms (katas, quan) in the study of martial arts. It seems, like in modern western combat sports, the training consisted of individual techniques. They were later linked for actual application in sensitivity training, flow drills and finally in controlled sparring. We think we can make an analogy from the training of other traditional craftsmen which is best described with "learning by doing under advice". The advantage of this teaching style is the rapid growth of experience for practical applications. The disadvantage is the lack or loss of information when an art was not completely handed down. This meant that the techniques had to be developed from scratch because they were not preserved encoded in forms. In our research, we are using old fencing books to derive hints on the techniques and develop their practical application in analytical sparring situations.

Geometric concepts of fencing with pole arms

The defensive concept with poles, pole arms, but also with long swords was based on two basic geometries: the upright cone with the head of the fighter below the peak of the cone, and the horizontal circle.

The concept of the horizontal circle is important for long weapons. When you hold a pole approximately in the middle, and horizontally (the ends are at the same height at both sides of the body) you can define a space in which you could attack or block every point within the shortest possible distance. Life for your opponent is most dangerous in this zone when they cannot predict the direction of an attack. This is the case on a battlefield where numerous men fight with little space between them. The decision for an attack on a certain individual is made within fractions of a second and you need to be prepared for attacks from all sides. This is different from the fight between individuals when European techniques were similar to the Asian traditions we know from our training today. Circular movements allow for cuts from the side and stabs when the weapon is protruded during the circular movement.

At the same time it is possible to keep the weapon in touch with the other weapon or to block a potential attack. It is possible to deliver simultaneous blocks against the weapon and strikes against the opponent, e.g. with the halberd. Much time of the training was invested in techniques that taught how to stab from any position and any situation. Stabbing with a heavy pole arm (e.g. long pike or halberd) requires sophisticated footwork. The weapon becomes fast when the blade is not directed with the arms. It is faster and safer when the fighter moves to the sides and stabs from the new position. In the case of a long pike it is nearly impossible to fix a target when the weapon is only directed with the arms. With proper footwork, however, a trained fighter can defend against any person who wants to step in the range of the weapon. In our experiments we used a 5.50 m (9 ft.) long pike and allowed the unarmed partner to apply any dummies and speed he wanted. The pike hit in 8 of 10 cases. When he was able to pass by the point (which was safely covered for these experiments) it was easy to withdraw the pike and to deliver a second attack. With similar techniques it is possible to use the long pike for fencing and to deliver heavy blows to the side, even at its maximum range.

The concept of the cone was also applied to pole weapons with length of 2 - 2.70 m (7-9 ft.), e.g. the halberd, or the partisan. The cone produces an invisible area of protection, shaped like a half-opened umbrella around the fighter. The German expression for "umbrella" is "Schirm". "Schirmen" is a second expression for "fencing", and the masters ("Meister") of fencing were often called "Schirmmeister". "Schirmen" is also used for "to protect". The cone can be produced if a long weapon (bastard sword, two-handed sword, and polearm) is held above the head with one hand and stabilized with the other hand at a lower level. This defensive technique is well known from all Asian and European systems. An effective defence is built by simple rotation of the body, which block the attacking weapon and move the body away from the opponent's strike. Simultaneously the weapon can be protruded to deliver downward strikes (the potential targets are largely determined by the length of the weapon), or heavy blows when force is generated through rotation of the weapon toward a horizontal orientation.

There is a general idea among researchers to compare the European martial arts with the "hard" styles of the Asian traditions. Basically this assigns the block of attacks and external sources of force (muscle power). This may be true for the English fighting tradition. Our experiments with halberds and long poles suggest serious doubts on this assumption for the central European martial arts. In many situations simple blocking of an attack creates dangerous situations and the delivery of strong counter attacks becomes difficult and weak if the fighter relies on muscle power without appropriate training. Speed and force, however, can be generated by footwork, body rotations, and effective defences by soft resistance, contact with the opponent's weapon, sensitivity for incoming forces and subsequent evasive techniques. We are convinced that central European fencing with pole arms was a mixture of hard and soft techniques. The well known word from Asian martial arts "the hard overcomes the soft, and the soft overcomes the hard" was certainly well known and applied in Europe. Illustrations in old fencing books and descriptions of techniques support our experimental findings.

European pole arms

The prototypes of the European pole weapons were the halberd and the partisan. The poles were basically rectangular with broken corners, leading to an octagonal cross section. When you see a pole of an old central European halberd, for example, with a round cross section you know it's a fake that has been mounted on a broomstick. The cross section of the halberd's pole communicated the orientation of the blade to the fighter. My first experiments with original historic weapons at the Swiss National Museum ("Schweizerisches Landesmuseum", Zürich, Switzerland) were an inspiration. From the first minute the pole allowed me to handle the weapon precisely and with closed eyes. I am sure, if I had to choose a weapon from the European arsenal to study a Way like in Kendo, Kyudo, or Iaido, I would choose the early halberd.

The halberd is the heavier weapon (compared with the pike) but it is still remarkably light for weapons of the 14th-16th century when they were used by infantry troops on the battlefield. The picture shows the earliest form of the halberd that was replaced by the well-known types at the turn of the 15th/16th century. In the 17th century combined firearms and pikes replaced the halberds on the battlefield. The later halberds used at this time were heavier because they became officers weapons which were used against enemies who managed to come through the lines of defence. They were well suited for multiple opponents who were kept at a distance with heavy circular blows.

Partisans are basically lances with two additional iron blades facing towards the sides. The partisan is lighter than the halberd and behaves like a heavy pole in the hands of a trained fighter. In its early versions it was popular among the Landsknechts wives who accompanied their husbands frequently. The Landsknechts were professional soldiers who did not separate from their wives and children during their work for one of the European warlords. The wives knew well why the ability to handle an effective military weapon was good for them, when they had to defend themselves against other Landsknechts, or when fortune was unkind during the battle. By commonly accepted law the losers of a battle became physical property of the winners. Consequently there was some kind of a slave market at this time in Europe, no matter what the Christian religion and Rome said about Christian slaves captured and traded by their fellow Christian brothers.

In most Swiss military forces of this time it was even forbidden to take living prisoners of war. They only consumed food, reduced the speed of the military forces, and the expected killing spread fear among the enemies. Historic documents are full of reports on Swiss medieval troops in a blood rush and contrast with the popularity of International Red Cross activities in modern Switzerland.

Many historians consider the pike a lame duck. They think this weapon was only useful in a row of fighters for simple stabbing. Probably they never received a practical introduction to the pike to appreciate how agile and skilled our ancestors could use it in the battle. Long pikes had round poles. I can only praise the poles of these ancient weapons. Specialized craftsmen carved those poles carefully to achieve a well-balanced weapon with the center of gravity near the fighter. This facilitates the fencing with this up to 5.5 m (9 ft.) long weapon a lot. But handling and stabbing with a long pike requires training. They were made from ash-wood with a small iron blade or iron thorn at the tip. Ash-wood is the European equivalent to bamboo in my eyes. It is flexible and doesn't break easily. At the length of 5.50 m (9 ft.) the pikes vibrate and bend while they are held forward against a target. Imagine how you hit a target with such a pole. I enjoyed archery for a couple of years. With an original long pike in my hands, I felt very much reminded of my days with bows and arrows.

The historic picture above shows a well-known exercise in the martial arts schools that developed speed and sensitivity for the long pike. One student held the weapon horizontal at the height of his throat, the point facing forward, the left hand supported the pike close to the face, the right hand was spread straight back and the pole held at the end. The other student had his pike on the floor (point facing to the partner), and held its very end in the right hand. The students had to stab each other, the first with a step forward, the second while swinging his pike up from the floor. The faster student won the game and hit the slower student with the small leather ball that was used instead of a sharp iron point for such exercises. My guess is that it was still not very comfortable to be hit by these training weapons. Much of the motivation for intense training was probably derived from the expected pain when the attack of the training partner was not properly defended against. I have tried this exercise and was amazed how fast a pike could be brought up from the floor and used against the opponent. The weapon becomes very fast when the flexibility of the pole and the body combined with proper footwork are applied. The use of muscle power alone, in contrast, made the weapon slow and unreliable.

Why did they become Landsknechts?

To become a Landsknecht was the only possible way to break out of the rigorous social hierarchy of their time. Landsknechts accepted service for any warlord who paid for their skills. Consequently the exchange of martial arts skills increased dramatically during this time. All military forces were recruited from international personnel, often with a core of experienced Swiss and German troops who had the reputation to be the most experienced fighters. I am not proud of this tradition. Landsknechts became Landsknechts because they were desperate. They were detached and often homeless people, or simply driven by poverty and starvation. Historical evidence suggests that economically more lucky regions did not provide many Landsknechts. The reason was simple. In the case of victory a "Schlachthaufen" suffered from about 10% losses. At a lost battle the losing party had to expect 50-100 % losses. Since nobody is always on the winning side Landsknechts died at a young age. Their minimum age was 16 years before they could be hired and many tried to be recruited at a younger age. Historic research presented evidence that 30-60 % of the Swiss people were killed in war serving the European warlords during the 15th and 16th century. A natural death was an exception for these people.

Skills and intense training of the martial arts were essential for medieval Europeans and led to a European fighting tradition that was comparable to the traditions of Asia. It is nonsense to ask which one was better, or more advanced. It is also nonsense to ask for deeper spiritual roots, or similar questions. Looking at Christian humanity and mysticism in medieval times and until the early 20th century reveals impressing similarities with Asian spiritual techniques. The Landsknechts, however, were craftsmen who adopted more of the values we know from sports, with an attitude toward fairness, honor, brotherhood, responsibility and team spirit. From this thinking the transformation of the European martial arts to sports was probably much less difficult than in Asia. However, much knowledge was lost during this transformation. This development will be subject of a later publication. We should be aware of this experiment when we develop an attitude towards the Asian fighting traditions and their modern sports applications.

Problems of modern research

Many researchers consider written documents the most informative and most reliable sources. Historic sciences, however, know that written texts do not necessarily mirror reality and truths. Fencing books, like modern educational books in the martial arts, did not exist until a very short time ago. They were more like notebooks for students and they often assumed background knowledge that has been lost through time. We could always apply modern principles, or principles from living martial arts to old weapons - but how much do we learn about our ancestors with this approach? Swords are a good example for the problems that may arise during such experiments. Swords are generally thought of as weapons with sharp blades, so basically long knives. This is a prejudice that derives from young swords and sabers that were not used against armored enemies. Medieval swords often did not possess a sharp blade. They were designed more for stabbing and heavy smashing blows against armors and bodies. However, a sword that is not designed for cutting is available for applications that are substantially different from those of a sharp sword.

The picture shows how a medieval bastard sword can be applied like a short pole. Because it can not deliver cuts (because it has no sharp blade) the techniques of defence need to be designed very differently than those against a modern saber, or a Japanese sword. It is usual for those involved in the research of old weapons and their applications to become trapped in prejudices through lack of knowledge. It is very important to study the original weapons, the purpose for which they have been made, and to use exact copies of historical weapons for experiments. Nearly everything that is sold as copies of medieval weapons today is useless for relevant experiments. Many of these replicas mirror the original shape. Most of them, however, are not properly balanced, the handle or poles are made of the wrong materials or shapes, the length is not correct, or other important features have been sacrificed to the taste of the modern customers, or simply in order to reduce costs.

Often our view on ancient weapons is blurred by the representative specimens that found their way to the exhibition halls of the museums. They were often made for parades, and most of them have never even seen a training session. Weapons for the battlefield were not pretty and often they were destroyed when technology advanced and their application became obsolete (or they are simply hidden in the back rooms of the museums because they don't attract the visitors). But in most times weapons marked the cutting edge of contemporaneous technology - a fact that is widely disregarded in historic sciences. A simple halberd was a mass product. It consisted of seven sorts of steel welded to a single blade, with a shape and thickness of the blade that had to meet narrow criteria. The blades in modern replicas are equally thick in all parts. This was not the case in historic weapons and provided the halberdier with remarkable comfort in handling and stability in fencing. For proper balance the blade and the pole had to be a unit. They were both made by different craftsmen: one was a metal worker, the other was a wood worker. If you are lucky and can try an original halberd from a collection after a while you may wish to improve on the balance of this tool. Well, you may have got a weapon that has lost the iron thorn that was often attached to the butt end of the pole. Halberds were used with both sides and were, therefore, armed on both ends. With the iron thorn attached the weapon will be properly balanced. These tools speak a very fine language indeed. With their views on mostly the blades, however, many museum curators and visitors will not appreciate such subtle differences.

The other problem calls for assistance by experienced martial artists. The following figure exemplifies a fighting style that is most common in all martial arts, except in their sports applications.

In a duel with short swords (with sharp blades in this case) one fighter applies a wrestling technique to counter an attack. In combat styles this is common and even trivial. The boundaries between fights with and without weapons are gradual and often they don't even exist. The same technique would lead to immediate disqualification in a sports application. This means the incomplete knowledge of modern sports fencing can contribute only rudimentary skills to understand the combat styles of our ancestors. This knowledge can be even misleading. At this point martial artists have to become involved with their knowledge from traditional styles that do not erect rules in their defensive traditions. Styles that could still be applied on the battlefield in a fight without rules for life and death.

Often scientists and common people have a negative view of these arts because they consider them cruel and violent. This I consider to be the psychological barrier in our kind of research. In the martial arts we know that violent techniques do not necessarily reflect violent and cruel people. On the other hand we know that violence has an ugly face and leads to injury and death. We do not need to accept violence as a positive attitude if we wish to learn how our ancestors reacted against physical violence and how social, economic, and historic change is reflected in their fighting traditions.

Hints on other sources on the web

There are two groups who do active research on European martial arts and freely distribute valuable information on the web including historic documents and large collections of links to other sites. I wish to address my thanks to these people for their valuable and open minded work.

Academy of European Medieval Martial Arts (A.E.M.M.A.): http://www.aemma.org

The Historical Armed Combat Association (HACA): http://www.thehaca.com

There are a few reenactment groups who go a step further. These folks live the Middle Ages. I got in touch with

1476 Städtisches Aufgebot : http://webuser.main-rheiner.de/homepage/ingo.ratsdorf/

They are friendly German speaking people but their homepage is available in English and German language. The group is associated with the Company of St. George which is the bigger European association. They have numerous links to web sites of other groups, museums, research institutions, craftsmen and craftswomen, literature lists ….

Acknowledgements

I address my sincere thanks to 1476 Städtisches Aufgebot for permission to take photographs during their exercises and training: the pictures of the medieval fighters with sword and halberds show some of these amazing people. My wife Karin took the pictures.

Gerd Böhler is my training partner in Wing Tsun and the medieval martial arts. He comes from Aikido and opened my eyes for the many similarities between Japanese and European defense systems. Kyoshi Patrick McCarthy gave the final push in this direction and implanted the question for principles and goals of martial arts in my thinking. Roy Rasmussen ("Badger") is a permanent e-mail discussion partner and wonderfull friend who shares the interest in the social, economic and historic backgrounds of the Eurasian martial arts.

Matt Sylvester pushed me toward this article, supplied information and discussion about English martial arts, bugged me when it was necessary, edited the manuscript carefully, and was a very motivating friend. Thanks a lot Matt!

Author:

Dr. Heinz Hilbrecht
Le Croisic Str. 21/2
D-79725 Laufenburg
Germany
E-mail: hilbrecht@erdw.ethz.ch
WWW: http://www.erdw.ethz.ch/~heinz.htm

Disclaimer

This article can be freely used for non-commercial educational puposes at schools and elsewhere if the source (Practical Martial Arts™) is properly cited. The copyright remains with the author.