From before the invention of editors.

Swetnam needs an editor- someone to highlight inconsistencies and then send the manuscript back to him to explain things. Also maybe a few footnotes, possibly forcing him to write a brief précis of the idea when he first introduces it. Nothing big (Rule of the backesword could just have carrying the blow over your left shoulder or something that could give a clue to a reader... Just in case he didn't write a second book)

One of my complaints about Swetnam is that he is all over the place. There is actually quite a lot of information, but you have to keep on reading to make sure you've not missed any important pieces. He also presents some things as being guard specific when they're not. A clearer transition from True Guard to a bit of a discussion on principles would have been nice. I can't quite remember where it is, but I think it's a line hidden in a paragraph that just says "True Guard is not a perfect ward, but it is a good way for the novice to learn these principles of defence" and then he goes on to explain things which are universal.

Reading around the book (instead of jumping to the description of the guards and plays from those guards) Swetnam shows himself to be a principles based fighter. Something I can assume comes from being in London. I know that can sound arrogant, but at the time London was thriving, it was full of immigrants and foreign traders. This variation of cultures still remains and it is something I love about the city. Some vagueness is needed because everyone was there, claiming that their methods were the best- you would have absolutely no idea what style you would face. In a less diverse culture you could probably take a good guess.

This principles based approach falls apart a little with the layout of the book. Arguably the rapier and dagger section should proceed the sword and dagger section- since they're both the same kinds of weapons (more or less. One is a thrust and cut weapon, the other a cut and thrust weapon) and there is a lot of cross-pollination. The layout he's chosen is to put single rapier and quarterstaff in between the two chapters. I can see why he's done that, a kind of "these are your basic weapons, learn them and I'll build from there" but all the cross referencing and "I'll explain later" bits means that you're constantly flicking between pages and he forgets to put things down.

Index cards have helped a little, being able to juggle the ideas like that means that I've seen patterns forming. So it looks like I may have to recompile the PDF and put it into sections based on his classifications (basic principles, sword and dagger, big stick, single sword) and see if that gives me a more complete foundation for instruction.

The Rule of the Backe Sword.

It looks like Swetnam was already planning a sequel while writing his book... Who knows, it might be hidden in a drawer somewhere, waiting to be found. I hope so because I'm a little vexed.

The bugger keeps on mentioning "by the rule of the backe sword (which I shall cover later)" and either I'm skipping over it when he goes off on one. Or he left it out and has put it in his second book, along with a bunch of guards. The rule of the Backe Sword is supposed to be effective against left handers and it turns up once in a while. (sorry, my notes are all over the place at the moment otherwise I'd be a bit more specific).

Brief digression- At some point, I will be working on collecting techniques against left handers. It makes sense considering how many of the sinister gits have infiltrated HEMA, and it's a different set of thoughts to use and your lines are completely different. Actually, now I think about it. Inigo Montoya was not being generous when fighting with his left hand. All the books say that a left handed man has the advantage because he meets many right handed men, whereas a right handed man is unlikely to meet or train against a left handed man.

Anyway. I suspect (with no ready references or practice to back me up) that this rule of the backe sword/backe sword fashion is some kind of hanging guard. I doubt it's Silver's hanging guard- point retracted with a stabby weapon is silly. False-edge work is a possibility, but I think a remote one.

Although... I've just walked through the Silver True Guard with the rapier and... it could work if you step in and thrust at the half-sword (he likes that in another situation). I'm not convinced, but it's best to put the idea down. Just in case that's right.

Subsidary training.

I have a problem. I find running tedious and I don't actually have much of an exercise regime. I walk a lot and that's about it.

This is not good, especially if I'm going to be presenting myself as an example and leading a club. So I will need something to improve certain core skills and maybe provide me with things I can do in warm up/give advice as subsidiary health/flexibility work.

The most obvious one is yoga/pilates. Stuff like that helps with core strength, balance, flexibility and so on. But it's not particularly dynamic. Besides, I'd look bloody silly in a leotard.

But the one that I'm entertaining a bit more seriously is Parkour. You see, it works on things like balance and the flow of movement, improves agility, distance estimation and awareness of surroundings. I assume it also covers things like breakfalls and quick recovery (something terribly useful if I want to dedicate some time to the ninjitsu and wrestling aspects of Bartitsu).

I'll probably lay off the flips and the more preposterous acrobatics. I don't really want to become a parody swashbuckler.

However, the more I think about it, the more Parkour becomes an interesting bedfellow for HEMA.

Fighting is for girls. Part II.

There's a particularly offensive feminist statement: "Women have to be twice as good to be considered equal". I hate this because it tells me that I cannot recognise skill, dedication and ability just because of the shape of their naughty bits.



Kristine Konsmo is not twice as good, she is better than that. I may be wrong, but it looks like she's using I.33, the oldest known European manuscript on fencing and one which has a fighting woman in the illustrations.



http://youtu.be/k7bh9RHfOnI



I could go on about gender stereotyping and use words like grace, agility and so on. But...



I want to fight like a girl.

The Enormity of it all.

I chose Swetnam because of a few reasons. The fact that it's in English is one of them- I can't speak or read any other languages, so having something in a dialect that I grew up reading (Family and local history... I'm a goth, not a vampire) means I can work on it without breaking my head.

Translations are difficult. The skills required are a peculiar mix of pedantry and bloody mindedness and the words you choose will be dependent on if you want a literal translation or a working interpretation. Some bits may be in slang, which means you're pretty much stuffed when looking at translations unless that slang becomes an enduring part of the common language. So, fortunately, Swetnam is "just" a matter of interpretation.

Don't get me wrong, interpretation is still a pain in the arse and you're shouting at the author for his poor choice of words or vagueness. Wondering what the hell he meant by a phrase.. but it's not wondering if you're trying to understand the technical connotations of a totally different word. The differences can be very subtle at translation level, but the errors can become compounded- especially when some bits can only really be proven by putting it into movement, so when you're struggling with a point, you'd have to go back to the original text, check the exact wording and see what other meanings it could have.

Now, apart from the ease of understanding, I chose Swetnam for his local history and the fact that nobody really looks at his work... This actually puts quite a lot of responsibility upon my shoulders. Even with my current knowledge, it's likely that I'm the expert on Swetnam in a HEMA context and one of the first practitioners in London since he wrote the book.

The long term idea to look at the 3 17th century London renaissance books has the potential to make this even bigger- putting me on a strong footing for being one of the best in the world for a very specific aspect of historical martial arts. I'm going to be open about this and say that it worries me.

I don't feel as if I know enough to legitimately say that I'm amongst the best, especially when there's a REALLY big drop off between me and the likes of Dave Rawlings. But I can't actually find anyone between me and that level of knowledge.

In all, I really love the hobby and respect the effort that goes into bringing these dead arts back to life. Which means I've got a duty to be bloody good with what I'm working on. Especially because I'm doing this on the same streets that Swetnam once walked.

Look the goodyear blimp.

I remember a tale as I heard out of Germany. Thus it was, the master and usher of a school had upon occasion oppointed the field, and their weapon was each of them a two handed sword, and meeting at the place appointed, said the master that you are not so good as your word. The usher asked him why; marry said he, thou promised to bring no body with thee. And yet look behind you...."

And then the Master smote off his head.

This is one of Swetnam's lessons. Now it is different for us because doing something like this is dangerous, so has no place in sparring or competition. It just opens the door to some serious harm- especially if the back of their mask is not closed.

But it does apply in some ways. You can use body language to suggest you're unready. The Lazy guard with added slouching is a good way to feign that kind of idea, allowing you to break their attack with a bit of surprise. The golden rule is, if you're in wide measure (or thereabouts) then frame a guard, if your opponent appears unprepared, he's probably lying. And don't let yourself get distracted.

I mentioned something like this quite a while ago- when we were first practising in the park. It is very easy to be distracted by pretty, scantily clad women, and that is a guaranteed hit for your opponent.

Sword fighting is for girls.

I'm sure I have talked about this before, but I can't be bothered to go back and check...

Women make good fighters. The differences in height and strength are overcome by technique and traditionally female characteristics like grace and agility. 3 feet of sharpened metal is a great equaliser. And, like it or not, women tend to have an ability for cold-blooded calculated violence. (Rather than the hot blooded moronic type that is characteristically male)?

There is some social conditioning to overcome. Girls aren't supposed to enjoy rough housing and good girls don't hit people... which is, generally, utter bollocks. And although I'm not a poster child for the health and fitness benefits of rapier, I can say that it is a great way to tone up. (I am actually thinking about doing some yoga so I'm flexible enough.. lead by masochistic and slightly absurd example)

Besides. What better way is there to prevent trivial household arguments from escalating than kitting up and duelling to see who gets their way? The physical effects of stress are dissipated through the fight, there is a winner (hopefully unarguable, since you want a fair fight)

So, in short. Women shouldn't dismiss HEMA as a boys activity- besides, learning Swetnam would make the misogynist turn in his grave.