If you could ask the 'founders'?

[jester]

Duke Siegfried von Hoflichskeit and Duke Fulk de Wyvern are the two men credited with being the founders of SCA armoured combat. If you could ask them any questions, what would those questions be?

Mine:

-What are the biggest changes you've seen in SCA armoured combat? Do you approve of those changes?

-What do you think about the current wave of research/experimentation with historical manuals, blunt metal blades, mounted combat, etc...?

[Mord]

What was the first rule?

When were the rules first published?

Mord.

[Jofthepeace]

Is armoured combat in the SCA today the goal/ideal you were going towards when you started this?

[Tomburr]

With respect, even though it is your creation, do you think your opinion should be the ultimate goal of what the SCA should be thiving to aspire to?

Have your expectations been met, surpassed, not yet realized?

Seeing what members are capable of achieving in this day & age, what direction would you like to see the society take? What would you like it to avoid?

[Aaron]

Thank you for creating a sport enjoyed by thousands. Was what you see what you wanted?

We could ask Duke Paul BTW.

-Aaron

[Diglach Mac Cein]

With all the politics, internet flaming, rules lawyering, the BOD, multiple Kingdoms, defining "reasonable attempt," and all the rest of it...

Are there times you just wish the party was just a BBQ on the beach, maybe with volleyball?


.

[Count Johnathan]

I would just say thank you and then I would tell Dave I am sorry that they did that to him. It was quite disturbing and unfair.

[Armand d'Alsace]

What was the initial purpose of the system, how did it develop and why?

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=115389&p=1671386#p1671386

[paulb]

Duke Henrik of Havn was at the first event, and was heavily involved in the early days of the SCA. I've called his attention to this thread.

Regards,

[Count Johnathan]

cool

[Aaron]

Thank you Duke Paul.

-Aaron

[jester]

I sent the questions on to Duke Siegfried. We'll see if he's at all interested in responding. I only have a snail-mail address for Duke Fulke, so that will take a bit longer to arrive.

[jester]

Heard back from Duke Siegfried. Turns out he's quite the pleasant gentleman and didn't express any displeasure at being spammed by me.

-What were the rules at the first tournament?

We tended to be more concerned about the general spirit of the thing and behaving in a knightly and honorable fashion rather than specific rules, which quickly evolved some specific conventions. But the first major dispute was whether we were going to run the fighting on a "letter of the law" basis or more of a honor your opponent and yourself and trust each other to be fair and honorable men basis. We were very much against judges or referees, which evolved into marshals being concerned with safety and watching out for dangers but not having any say on whether blows were good, etc. Dig a little deeper and you see that the "honorable men" and "spirit of the endeavor" attitude is recognizable as a facet of the basic nature of the SCA in evoking archetypes, and expecting archetypal behavior (or perhaps, victorian fantasies of knighthood, depending on your point of view). I think if we had gone towards the judges and referees mode, the SCA would be long gone by now.

-When were the rules first published?

April 1968. http://history.westkingdom.org/Year2/FirstRules.htm

-What are the biggest changes you've seen in SCA armoured combat? Do you approve of those changes?

Armor got better and better of course, with a parallel and to some degree possibly necessity of striking harder for your opponent to realize the blow had landed. Originally (Ken and I) were interested in trying to recreate what sword and shield combat might have been like (at least on foot) and evolving some of the moves, blocks, and so forth (he and I learned fencing and saber when we were both stationed in Germany in the early 1960s). However once we had settled on rattan as the material for swords, the evolution of fighting combat started to go towards optimizing fighting with rattan swords, not 'real' swords. In my opinion the biggest issue was never relative weight (unless you were trying to create rattan zweihanders, where not only the weight but the whippiness of the material started to be significant) but real swords "hydroplane" because the blade is a airfoil. So some techniques that started to evolve around the time of Paul of Bellatrix, while very effective, would simply not have worked with a bladed weapon - they relied upon being able to rotate the weapon around its longitudinal axis in addition while striking a blow.

-Is armoured combat in the SCA today the goal/ideal you were going towards when you started this?

Cannot comment; I don't know what it is like today really -- and I would say the goal or ideal we had when we started (to the extent we had one) wasn't so much the armored combat itself, but the broader ideal of the nature and context of the 'world' in which it took place.

-Have your expectations for the Society been met, surpassed, not yet realized?

I don't know enough right now to tell you. When I left the Board the third time in the mid 90s and slowly became inactive, I was a bit afraid it would gradually balkanize into ever more and smaller kingdoms and so forth, with a possible eventual breakdown of the mutual agreements across the Known World in things like armor and combat standards and rules and the other interkingdom bonds.

-Seeing what members are capable of achieving in this day & age, what direction would you like to see the society take? What would you like it to avoid?

I'm afraid I cannot answer the question - anything I say could well be overcome by events already.

-What do you think about the current wave of research/experimentation with historical manuals, blunt metal blades, mounted combat, etc...?

I am only vaguely aware of them, but the SCA was always about experimentation and learning by doing - that's why we built shields and swords in the first place, because the anecdotal evidence available was contradictory and not believable.

-With all the politics, internet flaming, rules lawyering, the BOD, multiple Kingdoms, defining "reasonable attempt," and all the rest of it... are there times you just wish the party was just a BBQ on the beach, maybe with volleyball?

Well, I'm not currently at the party so it would be unfair to judge.

But I will say that having been an founder of the SCA is something I am very proud of. The SCA has affected many people, and mostly for the better, and given a lot of them a perspective on being and insisting on a higher and nobler approach to life.

Maybe its biggest problem is its success -- everybody wanted to come play on our turf because we had the audience, if you will, which (I think) is how we got a lot of out of period and place things like rapier fighting, cavaliers, samurai, and so forth. Justifying them in the context of what the SCA's focus was meant legalisms "well gunpowder in period, and anyhow if they had sunglasses then they would have worn them, and besides..." The point was never whether something was tangentially justifiable but whether it was part of the main fabric, and the things that really weren't never really could get the recognition and appreciation the folks who wanted to do them felt they deserved.

I then followed up:

-You mentioned the out of period and place things: rapier fighting, samurai, cavaliers and the focus of the SCA. Would you get rid of those if it was in your power?

No, I wouldn't. But I incline to the belief that the degree to which they are encouraged should be directly proportional to how close they are to the real focus of the SCA, which I generally think of as western European medieval (although later a date range was applied, which caused some of the "but it's within the dates" discussion).

To me it's relevance to the core focus. A Mongol at an event isn't even an anachronism, they got to Europe (as we well know, and in period too). A samurai even. But I think a Japanese persona monarchy would be pushing it. If cavaliers want to play with rapiers, fine, and they can swagger around and charm each other. But that doesn't mean they get to stage their stuff within the Eric, or that a Crown Tourney should allow rapier combat. Filksongs can be okay (marginally) at Bardic circles (the late at night kind), especially the Kipling ones perhaps. But NOT at a Bardic competition. And so forth.

Again: my opinion. And I don't tend to think in all-or-nothing right or wrong, black and white.

-In that vein, the only required activity in the Society, per Corpora, is Crown Tournament. It's been argued that this is strong evidence that the SCA, despite a broader mission statement, is centered around armoured combat. Do you think that armoured combat is or should be the central activity?

The first SCA event (although we didn't have the name Berkeley Society for Creative Anachronism until the second event) was broader than the SCA mandate, and it had fighting, dancing, singing, and so forth. BUt what people remembered was the fighting, and that became central to the events that we did. Not the sole activity or even the only focus, but the center of a lot of it. Does that mean that any SCA event has to have armored combat? Absolutely not. Do Crown competitions have to be Crown Lists and armed combat? Damned right. And we call them "tournaments", which in period didn't tend to be an ambiguous term.

In other words, I strongly suspect that as long as there is an SCA that armed combat is going to remain the central focus because so many people (a) want to do it, (b) want to watch it, (c) want to be involved in a society and culture that does that kind of thing. And like it or not, the armed knight is both archetypal and thematic to the SCA.

Interesting stuff. His Grace then added, in separate e-mail:

I would also note that the SCA has hived off a number of other organizations. Sometimes people participate in both; others were cases of going somewhere that was more to their taste. People who really wanted to do authentic recreation for example. But there has also been a history of folks trying to get something going in the SCA apparently because it was a case of robbing banks "because that is where the money is" -- they wanted to do it in the SCA even if it didn't fit very well, because the organization already existed (and an audience was already available, perhaps). The SCA doesn't really have to accommodate all these different points of view, and if it tries it is in danger of diluting itself to nonexistence. I think of it as a bell curve with the central focus in the middle - the further away you are from the focus, the further out on the periphery you are. When you try to move closer to the middle with something that doesn't really "fit" you tend to be opposed even if people can't quite say why: it's because you are really trying to play a different game but on the same field.

[Count Johnathan]

Much as I expected it. If I could only hope to raise my glass in salute and share a beer with him someday. Thank you for taking the time to inquire about these things Jester.

[Henrik of Havn]

I've just read Dave's (Duke Sigfried) comments and although I don't disagree with them, I had a different perspective. The first Tournament was intended to be unique with no particular followup. It was a costume party with a theme of coming from a place where "Swords were worn". The fact that we used them ( or actually, wooden versions and a couple of steel bladed foils as well) is where I and many others attending were surprised, and very pleasantly so. It caused us to want more, and that is were the Society was germinated - in my humble opinion. Had we just stood around all day talking to each other about normal stuff, it would have ended and likely never repeated itself. How many haloween parties do you go to for other than the partying or kids sakes? Instead we fought, were chivalrous, displayed our prowess for the Ladies sakes, held a formal knighting ceremony on the spur of the moment of a display of remarkable ferocity in combat and were heros - of sorts. Then we enjoyed a dramatic reading of a scene in a periodplay and gathered to process in most medieval style down the street and up to the University of Caklifornia Berkeley campus, a dozen blocks away, protesting the 20th century while singing Greensleves. When would we ever get to do that sort of thing again? Well we decided to make it happen and it did.

If anyone is interested in much greater detail in how it all began, with names dates and textual examples ( such as the first Rules of the Lists, incorporation, customs ,etc. ) go to the West Kingdom's History pages. This is a compillation of running commentary by many of the founding members including Duke Sigfried and myself, in response to specific inquiries and dated listings of the events as they happened, in mainly chronological order. It is the closest thing to a conversational gathering of us all ( perhaps 20 or 30 contributors) being asked what happened and our thoughts on the matters being discussed. IT IS MUCH MORE COMPREHENSIVE THAN HEARING FROM JUST ONE OR TWO PEOPLE ON THIS FORUM SINCE IN THE HISTORY LIST WE PLAYED OFF EACH OTHER'S COMMENTS AND IT'S ALL ORGANISED INTO A VERY COHERENT FORMAT, BY HIRSCH VON HENFORD, A VERY TALENTED AND DEDICATED MAN.
The SCA all began here in the West Kingdom during the first years from 1966 through about 1970. After that individual Kingdoms began forming and their histories are not recorded on the History site.

For the beginnings of the SCA See: http://history.westkingdom.org/

Just select a date or subject in the righthand column beginning with " Pre History - the Origins" and then go to each year, on down through 1970 or so.
The Menu in the lefthand column may have somthing of interest as well, if you poke around there a bit.

Henrik of Havn

[Henrik of Havn]

As far as answering the priviously posed questions, again I have a somewhat different perspective than Sigfried. In many cases I tend to agree with him and in others I have a different opinion since my experiences are more recent and more varied . I still attend several Tournaments each year as well as one or more out of Kingdom Wars and events. Last year I attended Pennsic and although I didn't see much combat then, I did see some of it. Most years I go to Estrella War and occasionally Great Western and Antir West War. A few years back ( 2003?) I attended Lillies War as well. I rarely foght on foot, these days, but am quite active in the Equestrian arena (one reason being it's less tiring to be in armor while mounted than on foot). The main reason I find foot combat less appealing today is as Sigfired says, rattan swords don't behave like steel swords and so my appreciation of rattan combat has grown less as this phenominon of club fighting has grown. To be honest I'm not a fan of the new Western martial Art movement, since it feels less genuine to me than the older SCA combat form used to. Perhaps ths is due more to lack of experience in this new form on my part, but what I have seen respected instructors in that field demonstrate in a few classes I've taken or observed several years ago, the techniques sometimes seem less valid than the SCA equivalent, while others seem very valid and may have real superiority. I couldn't tell at that time. I've seen some of the Higgins Museum staff demonstrations and they too don't fill me with enthusiastic acceptance. But who am I to judge? Just an old fart who's watched a lot and done a little.

Henrik

[Henrik of Havn]

With respect, even though it is your creation, do you think your opinion should be the ultimate goal of what the SCA should be thiving to aspire to?

Have your expectations been met, surpassed, not yet realized?

Seeing what members are capable of achieving in this day & age, what direction would you like to see the society take? What would you like it to avoid?

_________________
Thomas de Bristol

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++



Thomas, thank you for asking.

You ask if the SCA should follow my ( or anyone else's ) desires. The answer is it can't, really. Likely there are nearly as many "desired directions" as there are members. So to answer. I wish it would stay on a course that is close to my desires while following one you and everyone else can find some level of comfort in as well. But in actuality it will be giuided by the best intentions of the BOD members as they try to do their duties as they see them. I don't think that the BOD is inherently Good or Bad. It just makes decisions that the current group of people sitting on the Board think need to be made. They get their information from you, me and those people they turn to or hire to advise them, then they make their best judgements and act. Sometimes we like the result and perhaps more often we don't.

The only way I can see to get around that is leave and start your own group and set it up to suit you. If you choose to stay and enjoy the benefits of the SCA ( such as a large membership, frequent activities located all over the place, with enough near you to be convenient, then you have to put up with what you don't like as well. You can volunteer to become an officer within the SCA and work to make the sort of changes you desire, but that may take a long time and may still not achieve what you may want, but that at least beats doing nothing, for many people.

regarding expectations, I can only say yes to all three aspects of your inquiry. I never dreamed things could go as far as they have, when I first started. Now they havent gaon far enough and yet they are just right, too. There's a lot left for you and others to do even more of.

personally I've become interested in more accurate research and replication and so If i could have my way, i'd like to see a part of the SCA move towards period accuracy, for those of us who enjoy that element of experience. I went and participated in the hastings 200 and the 2006 reenactments and I was amased at the degree ofaccuracy in clothing , armor and weapons that was there. In 2006 wehad over 3000 people all in the same period clothing and armor all fighting with period cprrect weapons and shields and armor, for the most part and any variances were only a few decades out of period. at worst. It would be enjoyabe for e to see something like period specific themes for major events on a regular basis in which any period is acceptable but a theme period is selected and attendees are engouraged to conform to it though it's not a mandatory requirement. Similar to the period camp sites that sometimes are set up at particular events.

I'd like to avoid the SCA failing and disapearing.

Henrik

[Henrik of Havn]

Aaron, in the sense that I wanted to do fun stuff, the SCA is exactly what I wanted. However in the sense that I don't like some things in the SCA, no it's not what I wanted.

What the SCA has always been to me is a fertile field in which I can play ( putter around) or plant seeds and try to grow new things I can enjoy such as: making chainlmail, making armor, making baskethilts to keep from breaking my hands, make wars to fight in groups using strategies as well as prowess, shoot arrows at people without huirting them, hit them with swords without hurting them, reign over people, be in ceremonies that look and sound cool, ride horses in armor and fight, wear cool looking stuff- clothing, armor, carry cool looking weapons, swords, spears axes, knives, lances, etc. use them all in competition or other activities that are fun, have friends, love, family, education, history, practical stuff , adventure, life, etc. !


Henrik

[Henrik of Havn]

Diglach , my friend,

No way ! This is the best 45 years i've had and I hope to get another 45 that are just as much fun out of the SCA. I hope you do to !

Pax !


Henrik

[Count Johnathan]

Hey Henrik, I've no need to ask you anything. We've discussed plenty in the past. I'd like to say thank you though for being a part of and encouraging the growth of this thing that has been at the core of my life since before I could remember.

Paul as well, and many others whose paths I have not yet crossed.

[Henrik of Havn]

Hi Arngrim,

The purpose of early SCA "heavy combat" was simply to fight with medieval weapons such as swords, both single handed and double handed types, maces, axes , spears and any other non gunpowder weapons we could think of in a mostly "knightly" fashion. Back in the beginning we didn't call it "heavy"
we simply considered all combat to be equivalent and after a few of us got injured in one way or another we decided to write down rules to fight by so everyone fighting would do the same sorts of things with no surprises.

I remember at an early tournament some local teenagers came up to see what we were doing and one who had taken off his tennis shoes and tee shirt and only had his jeans on (it was a hot summer day) said he wanted to fight me and use a fibreglass bow to hit me with, while I was wearing a 40 pound, knee length mail hauberk , a 14 gage thick steel spangenhelm and carrying a 4 foot tall plywood kite shield and heavy rattan broadsword. I think he thought I looked like the baddest ass there and he wanted to try to kick mine. I was 23 years old then. He was told that he couldn't fight using an unstrung fibreglass recurve bow as a club to fight with and he needed to wear a helmet or fencing mask (which was the predominant form of available head protection at that time). I don't think we had written down the rules at that time, but that incident helped show the need for rules so everyone could know them before trying a stunt like he did.

It wasn't till we began holding small group confrontations in addition to single combats, and scheduling them as seperate events that we called "Wars" that the concept of wearing armor or not came up. ( Back in the beginning the only combat requirements was to wear head protection and leather gloves. Later after the SCA became incorporated the Rules of the Lists were drafted and the head protection of the then required "three weapon fencing mask" got changed to a sturdier 16 gage steel or equivalent helmet. Other body protection requirements were added as well over time, till they reached the current heavy Combat forms we have today.)

In single combats , which were held in the lists, there was no running around in armor outside the list area . AS A RESULT, ALL LIST COMBAT WAS CONSIDERED EQUIVALENT AND RULES FOR THAT ACTIVITY WERE IN A SINGLE FORM THAT IS NOW CALLED "HEAVY COMBAT".

IN Wars, however the participants needed to move around a lot and wearing heavy armor didn't appeal to everyone interested in participating. Also wars needed numbers of participants to start making them interesting. An army of 6 people can't do as much as a group of 10. But to get 10 it needed to allow some of the extras to not be in armor, since they were often women and children who participated as scouts or early archers. The 10 person "army" could then split up into two or more smaller groups which could have at least one fighter ( a "Heavy ") and one or more " lights" who might be scouts and or archers. In this way armies could form sub groups which could have members who could move about in the field more easily and rapidly than the "heavy " armored fighters and help engage each other in strategic activities. Scouts could run errands and carry messages to recall a fighter to help in a combat scenerio. Archers could shoot at or draw heavy fighters away from their fellows, as needed.

It was only in the beginnning of Warfair in the SCA that it became important to be able to draw participants from those who otherwise had no armor and didn't fight, in order to help fill out the ranks of the very small "armies" that came to the "wars" that we held , seperate and away from "Tournaments". At first wars weren't very popular. I held the first war in July 1967 and each year after ,for about 10 years. These were "The Island Wars", because we held them on a small mile long island in my home province ( Caldarium). Attendence grew to about 30 or 40 at the most and dwindled to about 25 to 30 in the last years, with 1/4 of the people there being spectators and the rest divided up into two "armies" as described.

Wars didn't become popular till regions fielded larger armies and outcomes became competative. Inter Kingdom wars sparked the real fire that rages still today. Even so the need of lightly armored participants were still thought important, so minimum armor stayed light and combat restrictions were in place to keep heavily armored swordsmen from swinging at lightly armored archers. They were permitted to touch the lights and tag them out, but not hit them. There were some of us who fought as heavily armored archers and sometimes carried swords or other heavy weapons to use when arrows ran out or when they seemed less desirable in particular instances.

[Just to be clear, rapier fighting was not a recognised form of combat in these early days in the SCA. The heaviest blades commercially available then, were epee blades, and no schlager or wider rapier blades existed in the USA. So some of us would occasionally play with foils, sabres and shorter blades in the off hand. No one regulated this activity if it was done at SCA events and if so it had to be in out of the way locations on site,certainly not in the eric or anywhere it could interfere with normal activities such a s list combat etc. ]

Over time the reglations for combart archery became less archer friendly, 1) with the removal of the requirement of screen or small hole perferated metal coverage for heavy combat helms, which was intended to stop small diameter projectiles such as a broken wooden arrow shaft, from penetrating the larger eye openings of the helms being worn by participants 2) the complementary requirement of arrows to increase in size so they couldn't penetrate the larger uncovered eye openings of the combat helms used by participants, even is the even larger tips broke off ( this made the fast and far distance that combat arrows used to fly drop down to highly unrealistic values that made combat archery almost ineffective compared to actual historic incidences as well as SCA past historic practices ) 3) more recent requirements that all participants in warfair be heavily armored so the non archers can strike the archers hard if they want instead of just touching them for a "kill".

These changes caused many of us who used to enjoy occasionally participating in wars as archers in either light armor or heavy armor, loose interest intirely in combat archery, since the fun had been legislated out along with the historical inaccuracy the current format has instilled, supposedly in the name of safety, which screening or perforated metal sheeting could just as well have provided at no cost to arrow performance ( including dispensing with the need for bounceback knock protection - a clumbsey invention at best).

I've lost track of when each change occurred, but my recollection is that the changes began in the later 1980's and were finalised a decade or so later. Doubtless others can comment more difinitively than I.

That is how I saw it.

Henrik

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++



I am curious about the origins of SCA heavy combat.
What was the initial purpose of the system, how did it develop and why?
How has the rules changed and at which dates?

I hope that the august members of this board could enlighten me with a bit of SCA history.

I wonder partly because I have read quite a few versions of the origins and the intent of the combat systems in other threads on other boards, and partly becaise I'm, well curious.

And I like stories and history, so pray tell, enlighten me about the Societys history.

[Armand d'Alsace]

Henrik,
Thank you very much for taking the time to reply to my question, your reply was very informative

I wonder if I might badger you with a follow-up question?

If so, I wonder if the intent behind "fight with medieval weapons such as swords, both single handed and double handed types, maces, axes , spears and any other non gunpowder weapons we could think of in a mostly "knightly" fashion" was to fight as realistically as possible, or as close to a behourd as possible? Did you look for inspiration in any Manuals?

Again, my thanks for responding to the questions asked in this thread, it is much appreciated.

[Ranif]

These changes caused many of us who used to enjoy occasionally participating in wars as archers in either light armor or heavy armor, loose interest intirely in combat archery, since the fun had been legislated out along with the historical inaccuracy the current format has instilled, supposedly in the name of safety, which screening or perforated metal sheeting could just as well have provided at no cost to arrow performance ( including dispensing with the need for bounceback knock protection - a clumbsey invention at best).

I've lost track of when each change occurred, but my recollection is that the changes began in the later 1980's and were finalised a decade or so later. Doubtless others can comment more difinitively than I.

Your Grace
The Kingdom of Lochac fights its wars with meshed helms & archers loose wood shafted arrows, taped & rubber blunted, that fly fast, far & speak with authority. We have kept the faith.
Ranif

[Diglach Mac Cein]

My question was really in jest.....

The SCA has been, in many ways, part of the best moments of my life in the last 25+ years....



.

[Liutger]

These changes caused many of us who used to enjoy occasionally participating in wars as archers in either light armor or heavy armor, loose interest intirely in combat archery, since the fun had been legislated out along with the historical inaccuracy the current format has instilled, supposedly in the name of safety, which screening or perforated metal sheeting could just as well have provided at no cost to arrow performance ( including dispensing with the need for bounceback knock protection - a clumbsey invention at best).

I've lost track of when each change occurred, but my recollection is that the changes began in the later 1980's and were finalised a decade or so later. Doubtless others can comment more difinitively than I.

Your Grace
The Kingdom of Lochac fights its wars with meshed helms & archers loose wood shafted arrows, taped & rubber blunted, that fly fast, far & speak with authority. We have kept the faith.
Ranif

It's nice to see that someone has.

[Henrik of Havn]

Arngrim, I'm happy to respond.

First let me say that as far as I knew, no one had any knowledge of any fight manuals as regarded European combat styles, back in the 1960's and 1970's or even later. I don't know when they became known to martially interested people, but I'd guess it likely wasn't till the 1990's if even then. I went to the Royal Armouries in Leeds in October of 2000 and saw a little combat in armor being offered by some of the staff there, and it may have been based on one or more of the fight manuals, But my first real exposure to such was at the first Western Martial Art schola that Brian Price held here in Northern California a couple of years later. Doubtless some of the early American WMA teachers had knowledge of them a few years earlier than that. That was when I first heard of Fiore and Tallhoffer and others like I 33.

So going back to the first years of SCA combat, we generally had seen many Hollywood sword fights and always they seemed to place the shield behind and the sword in front to both attack and perry. And practically speaking this seemed intuitively rediculous. On top of that, modern fencing seemed to promote a less in your face method of perrying by delfection rather than outright cross blocking. This same style is evidenced in kendo ( the only other sword form known to a few of us by reputation and even fewer of us by practice - in my case I managed to find a local Dojo and studied it for about a year before stopping. I never got far enough along to actually don Bogu and spar with others, but at least I developed a better understanding of the sport and I believe the combat form I practiced as a result in some SCA lists, became the inspriation for our Earl Marshal to initiate an outright ban on use of a Katana style sword in the Lists.) where lateral deflecting perries are used, which if the blade were real would preserve the hard and sharp edge from destructive contact with an equally hard and sharp attacking blade edge.

I've been a collector of antique Japanese swords since 1970 and over the years have seen blades that have been used both correctly and incorrectly to perry blows from other Japanese swords and the different results are in fact just as ecpected. Flat perries leave small cuts in the flat and back edges and undamaged cutting edges on either sword. Edge perried leave massive chips like broken glass in the edge which often can't be ground away at all , ruining the sword forever.

In recent years I have become active in the non SCA reenactment community and there we fight with blunt steel swords. In these combats we strike less than with full force, yet still the blades receive edge damage from such contact. Only the best swords receive less damage and the poorer ones get deep chips and nicks that tend to wear out the cheap blades in a matter of a few combats and then they chip deeply or break in two. A close parallel are the rapier blades that eventually fatigue from repeated strikes and perries and eventually break off the front 6 to 8 or so inches of the blade.

The reality of fighting with steel swords is that damage results from using a sword to block blows and the more you do it the greater the damage becomes. So it was in history, and that usually was with inferior blades for the most part, since modern metalergy and manufacturing methods are usually way superior to ancient metals and smithing - unless by a special and expensive and rare instance , if at all.

So it follows that using anything other than a sword blade for defense makes the greatest sense and we thought so back in the early days, as well. So we began immediately putting the shield in front and the blade behind it or behind our bodies, depending on the style or position that felt best suited for us.

Please understand that no style of combat had been developed at first. Each fighter took whatever stance and approach as seemed intuitive or natural. Three of the early fighters were left handed. A few more were righthanded, as am I. Sigfried, Fulk and Richard the Short were all left handed. Richard won the first Tournament with a short sword, a small round shield and a very low to the ground and athleticly agressive style of combat. Fulk won the second Tournament with a formal upright and gracefully aggreessive style of combat. I won the third Tournament with an upright and defensive style. Richard and Fulk nearly tied , with Richard prevailing after a very long drawn out final combat, but not really winning ( at least not in Fulk's privately expressed opinion) and accepting the victory for the fourth Tournament. Fulk won the fifth tournament. I won the sixth. William the Silent - a righthanded stranger from Southern California, with an aggressive style not too dissimilar to Richard's, won the seventh Tournament, and upset the expected outcome of this Tournament.

William became the King who presided over the founding of two of the SCA's peerages - the Chivalry and the Laurel - as well as the creation of the first Dukes - Richard, Fulk and myself.

As time passed distinct styles of combat developed from those fighters who managed to win more often than others. We began developing training techniques, some of which were mentioned in historical accounts of the period. Images of pell work fostered use of telephone poles for pounding upon or other comparable devices like old tires hung from a rope or an actual pell made of a railroad tie size post stuck in a hole dug in the back yard and a scrap of carpet wrapped around it and nailed on. ( I still have such a railroad tie standing in my back yard from decades ago).

We began meeting on a regular basis for combat practices and developed techniques both good and bad for fighting. Some were successful and these became more popular and others failed and usually were abandoned. New members sometimes brought in new forms either originating in other martial arts or occasionally from other SCA groups. As the SCA grew more and more events became available to participate in and eventually cross polination began via wars between groups and finally kingdoms.

Fighters such as Duke Paul of Bellatrix and William the Lucky and others, invented new techniques and refined them and added on to them and spread knowledge of them through writing articles which got published and distributed in both SCA publications ( TI, Known World handbook , etc.) as well as private publications ( Headless House handbook, etc.), and by traveling to other regions specifically to teach others and by participating in combat activities held in far off lands, and so showing others that they existed and by then demonstrating their success.

All this, preceeded knowledge of Fighting Manuals from the Middle ages in Europe and I believe any knowledge of real Tournaments which would include such activities as Pas D' Arms or behourd style combat. We were trying to emulate an age that most of us new very little about beyond what "HGollywood" ( this was a typo, but I like the duality of it and am letting it remain as it is - for it's appropriateness to my discussion) and perhaps some Victorian recreationiosts knew.

I remember some discussion with Fulk in the very early days, of using whalebone swords in period for behourd style fighting, but Fulk dropped out of the SCA around the end of 1968 and remained an influence only with a few members with whom he was close friends out side the SCA, for several more years. He planned to attend the fifth anniversary tournament but ended up not doing so, and after that he stopped any consideration of further participation.

I think that the lion's share of fighters were interested in the competition and only a few, more historically oriented menbers, wanted greater historical accuracy to the extent of emulating historical precedents. I think that still applies today, though perhaps a greater percent may feel inclined to a more historical element now.

I think the degree of availability is germain as well, by that I mean that it is easier to stage an historically correct event today since more resources are readiloly available and so planning and execution is less difficult than it would have been 40 years ago. Off the shelf costumes, weapons and armor are all not only available but are affordable to a greater proportion of the membership. Greater quantities of knowledge of the past is also available, so planning and execution are easier to accomplish. All it would take is an autocrat to get it going and it could be done.

For some of us, recreating it as it was - at least as far as knowledge and available resources allowed, for weapons, armor and combat are concerned, was indeed the goal. But not for enough other people, I fear, since too many others don't find this desirable, while they do desire the competition instead and seem to ignore the history in the process.


Henrik

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I wonder if the intent behind "fight with medieval weapons such as swords, both single handed and double handed types, maces, axes , spears and any other non gunpowder weapons we could think of in a mostly "knightly" fashion" was to fight as realistically as possible, or as close to a behourd as possible? Did you look for inspiration

[Leo Medii]

I do have to say I am very glad to see that both of these highly esteemed elders have a keen awarness of the ideal of the bladed edge and its effects on the use of them. This is something that I have argued about since I joined the SCA.

[Henrik of Havn]

I'm glad to hear that combat archery is less distressed abroad than here in the USA -where legal liability issues are too strong an influence, unfortunately. The use of wooden arrows with rubber blunt tips , at the Hastings reenactments that I've participated in, was a strong influence that helped me decide to become more active in that form of reenactment activity. Seeing volley after volley fired by 180 archers at the Saxon shield wall was really impressive, especially when they stuck in the damp grassy soil of Senlac hill as if shod with steel.

Then too was my ability to ride a horse along with a hundred other cavalrymen and women and gallop up to the shield wall and engage in combat from horseback with those on the ground. Galloping down the length of the shield wall and striking a saxon shield held by an SCA friend who stepped out and called to me as I approached and offered his shield for me to target, with a nearly full force blow ( of the blunt steel lance tip- that left a deep gouge in the wooden shield face) to the outside edge, so it glanced off harmlessly - or being challenged by another reenactor friend to single combat in the round, after he and his levy left the shieldwall to chase after retreating Norman cavalry down the hill, where I wheeled about and met him with my lance and ran him through ( most gently), so he died in the open and alone on the hillside.

These things which today are not possible in the SCA, have drawn me away - somewhat. But jousting and mounted combat are new developments that keep me active in the SCA as well. So too are costumes of great beauty as well as historiclal accuracy. So much to still enjoy !

Henrik

[jester]

I'm glad to hear that combat archery is less distressed abroad than here in the USA -where legal liability issues are too strong an influence, unfortunately. The use of wooden arrows with rubber blunt tips , at the Hastings reenactments that I've participated in, was a strong influence that helped me decide to become more active in that form of reenactment activity. Seeing volley after volley fired by 180 archers at the Saxon shield wall was really impressive, especially when they stuck in the damp grassy soil of Senlac hill as if shod with steel.

Then too was my ability to ride a horse along with a hundred other cavalrymen and women and gallop up to the shield wall and engage in combat from horseback with those on the ground. Galloping down the length of the shield wall and striking a saxon shield held by an SCA friend who stepped out and called to me as I approached and offered his shield for me to target, with a nearly full force blow ( of the blunt steel lance tip- that left a deep gouge in the wooden shield face) to the outside edge, so it glanced off harmlessly - or being challenged by another reenactor friend to single combat in the round, after he and his levy left the shieldwall to chase after retreating Norman cavalry down the hill, where I wheeled about and met him with my lance and ran him through ( most gently), so he died in the open and alone on the hillside.

These things which today are not possible in the SCA, have drawn me away - somewhat. But jousting and mounted combat are new developments that keep me active in the SCA as well. So too are costumes of great beauty as well as historiclal accuracy. So much to still enjoy !

Henrik

Do such activites belong in the SCA, your Grace? Or are they a distraction from or threat to the core activities?

[Vitus von Atzinger]

Game over. Coolest thread ever.

[Leo Medii]

These things which today are not possible in the SCA, have drawn me away - somewhat.

Good sir, I know EXACTLY how you feel.

[Aaron]

Aaron, in the sense that I wanted to do fun stuff, the SCA is exactly what I wanted. However in the sense that I don't like some things in the SCA, no it's not what I wanted.

What the SCA has always been to me is a fertile field in which I can play ( putter around) or plant seeds and try to grow new things I can enjoy such as: making chainlmail, making armor, making baskethilts to keep from breaking my hands, make wars to fight in groups using strategies as well as prowess, shoot arrows at people without huirting them, hit them with swords without hurting them, reign over people, be in ceremonies that look and sound cool, ride horses in armor and fight, wear cool looking stuff- clothing, armor, carry cool looking weapons, swords, spears axes, knives, lances, etc. use them all in competition or other activities that are fun, have friends, love, family, education, history, practical stuff , adventure, life, etc. !


Henrik

Thank you Duke Henrik! And thank you for the kind words and help back in 2007 when I was feeling down. It is still uplifting to read your words to this day.

With thanks,

-Aaron

[Henrik of Havn]

Leo,
I first became aware of the importance of blade presentation in the nid 1980's when I organised a cutting contest at a local tournament. I thought up the idea of using 2 liter soda bottles filled with water and capped, which were hung from an overhead support, as cutting targets, for sharp bladed weapons of each contestant's choice.

The first contestant walked up to his target and swung his crescent moon shaped axe blade , with a 10 inch long razor sharp cutting edge, set on a 15 inch or so, long handle, at the target bottle. It sliced cleanly through the bottle and I thought, wow, this is easier than I had thought. How will I ever find a winner out of the dozen or so contestants waiting their turn? I probably won't have enough bottles for any run off cutting, needed to find a final winner.

Then the next contestant tried his blade - a European style sword. He failed to cut cleanly through his bottle. As did the next and the next and the next till everyone else had failed.

In each failure one of several things happened. In the best cases the cut went part way through but wasn't a clean and complete cut, as the first cut with the axe had been. In other cases the cut missed the bottle completely. In the worser cases the sword ws damaged, either due to bad quality construction or bad blade presentation.

One sword broke the tang so the pommel fell off. Another broke the blade in two and three bent sideways and developed permmanent sets, all due to bad presentation. Of these three, two of the swords were Del Tin blades and the third was made by some other maker.
Of the swords that were not damaged, they were mostly european style broadswords amd onmlu one was a Japanese Katana. It nearly cut through the target, but barely missed cutting the last half inch or so of the bottle, due to a slight error in range by it's wielder.

What became clear with this experience was that to cut successfully, the cutting edge needed to be nearly perpendicular at the point of contact and that any rotation of the plane of the blade needed to correspond to that same surface contact so the cutting forces wouldn't cause the blade to flex laterally. Otherwise the blade would bend sideways and be bent permanently or pssibly be broken off.
And this was only caused by a thin layer of plastic. If that is the case, then immagine how much more resistance a similar or thicker layer of steel would offer to being cut through by the same sword blow. Cloth, padding or heavy leather may offer a different result, but in any case the presentation of the blade is vital to how deeply and well it would impact and cut a target surface.

SCA combat technique usually doesn't pay much attention to precise blade presentation, but rather relies on impact shock and it's effect on the target surface it strikes, and minimally on rough ( + or - 3/4 of an inch - the width of a strip of electrical or other tape, down the length of the blade, deliniating the "cutting edge") presentation, if that is even decernable by one or the other party delivering or receiving a blade strike. For wrap around strikes ( a very popular form) where the recipiant can't see how the blade presents when it strikes and the wielder often can't either because the recipiant's body blocks the wielder's view of the blade as it strikes, this is even less possible for the combatants to decide if the blow in question is valid or not. Using "feel" to decide, is rather meaningless if the blade is round, as so many are, since a bad blow will feel no different than a "good" blow. If the blade is oval or flat and wide , then it can better indicate if the blow is good or bad. But even so it still can be much less accurate than a real thin blade would indicate.

I have to say, however, I've seen some video footage of someone using a sharp steel sword to cut pig carcases with and he used wrap blows which cut rather well and deep. But this was on unprotected or unarmored meat. So those results would still not proove the blows to be useful for real combat with a live armored person.

Henrik


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


I do have to say I am very glad to see that both of these highly esteemed elders have a keen awarness of the ideal of the bladed edge and its effects on the use of them. This is something that I have argued about since I joined the SCA.

[Ken Mondschein]

I've seen some of the Higgins Museum staff demonstrations and they too don't fill me with enthusiastic acceptance. But who am I to judge? Just an old fart who's watched a lot and done a little.

If you're ever out our way, please let me know. We do quite a variety of things at the Higgins now, and our activities currently run the gamut from the more stage-combat style of demonstration you saw to actually fencing with historical weapons using full safety equipment, as well as doing things that the SCA does not, such as disarmaments. My own particular focus as an instructor is traditional fencing and historical swordsmanship informed by living traditions such as European bâton and by the primary sources—that is, classical foil, épée, heavy dueling sabre, and bâton; as well as rapier, longsword, and self-defense informed by these mechanics; armored fighting; and (albeit somewhat informally) mounted combat. I would be happy to show you what we do.

The Western Martial Arts movement, I think, combines much of what you describe as your interests: "really" fighting, plus the search for authenticity and period-correctness (I'm actually writing a paper on this). However, it also runs the full range of what the SCA as a whole is about, from pure sport to neo-chivalry (on which I'm organizing a conference session for Kalamazoo for next year) to historical recreation. There will be a large WMA contingent at Pennsic this year (including myself), if you would like to meet us.

I agree with you that the SCA rattan game has indeed evolved into its own particular thing. The reasons for this include the competitive nature of the sport, the optimization of technique for the tools being used, the conventions of the combat, the feedback loop of "how things are done," the arms race between armor and power, and the self-judging. No doubt the more sportive end of the WMA spectrum will, in time, go this same route. However, that's a subject for another time.

[Henrik of Havn]

Jester,

These are questions each of us needs to answer for ourselves. The answers depend on each person's
perspective. What each of us wants to get out of our involvement in the SCA. What I enjoy may not be what you enjoy or vice versa. On the other hand you may like exactly what I like. More likely our tastes fall somewhere in between and I like some things you like and I don't like other things that you like.

So if we want to coexist in such a situation we must be tolerant of others and accept some things we don't care fore as we get other things we do want. that's life, here or elsewhere, to one degree or another.

I might just mention that the SCA's formal Mission Statement is a cnstruct of relatively recent vintage and does not reflect all of the intent and goals of the early SCA Inc. when it was first incorporated, nor it membership at that time in 1968.

So to ask if anything belongs in the SCA, is a difficult question to answer. Looking at the Mission Statement may indicate one sort of reply. However asking a long time member may garner another sort of reply . Depeding om which longtime member is queried, a myriad number of replys may come forth, each with it's own unique desire.

From an historical point of view,archery in battles and horse combat are easily in period. from a sporting point of view, they may be problematic in some way. From a safety or expense perspective, they may be too difficult to manage and so may be less desirable. For me they are fun and I like them.

Everyone's milage may vary.


Henrik

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++




Do such activites belong in the SCA, your Grace? Or are they a distraction from or threat to the core activities?