A re-examination of Le Jeu de la Hache

After some thinking while walking the dog today, I've decided that there is a proper usage for Frog DNA while reconstructing Le Jeu de la Hache - to inform you insofar as stance and footwork goes. But that's it. Le Jeu, neatly enough, contains it's own discussion of tactics & strategy. Le Jeu is a self-contained system of usage for the pollaxe:

- Guards (2)
- Tactics against various blows
- Overall strategy
- Specific tactics against particular scenarios (vs. a left-hander, etc.)

Types of footwork, attacks, principles, even the guards themselves are never really spelled out, but are, in Italian fashion, experienced in the plays themselves. However, I think that as a community, we can agree on certain basics of Medieval martial arts - the stance, the passing step, the gathering step, & the triangle step.

It will be difficult, but I am going to try to re-examine my interpretation of Le Jeu while trying to pare back any influences from Armizare. I doubt that I'll ever arrive at a truly "pure" Le Jeu, but it should be a good exercise.

Hammer play in recent games

I love to play role-playing video games. As a medievalist and WMA practitioner, this has to be carefully done lest my head 'spode from all the fantasy armour and weapons. Let's not even get into the fighting styles (that much spinning around would make me dizzy as hell).
However, I've been playing Elder Scrolls: Skyrim and Kingdoms of Amular: Reckoning recently and I have to say that while there are still issues (just remember that they are fantasy games) I'm really pleased by the hammer play that appears in both.

Specifically, there are special moves where you use the queue of your hammer to set up your opponent so you can then smack them in the head.

As far as reality for the hammers, Skyrim does much better. Evidence:

Skyrim warhammers:

 

Both of those are Iron Warhammers, other models in the game to have a top spike.

Here are the hammers from Reckoning:

Obviously reality (and physics) have less concern for the designers of Reckoning - but hey, it's a game!

I'm just happy that I get to schtup someone in the face before crushing their head ;-)

Upcoming project

I have a theory about pollaxe usage with a short haft. By "short" I mean:

Average = User's Height +/- 1 foot

Shorter than average =  User's Height - 1.5 feet

The main reasoning behind my theory is actually a picture featured in Sydney Anglo's book Medieval & Renaissance Martial Arts in the polearms section (sorry but I don't have the book handy, so I don't have a page number) - but here is a low res copy from the ARMA site

It's the one on the right.

It's hard to see here, but it depicts French and Portuguese knights fighting in the lists with axes. What is intriguing is that all of the axes are Short and that the knights are gripping them with their main hand almost directly under the head of the weapon and the back hand approximately halfway down the haft.

My theory is that this grip gives you approximately the same queue space as an Average axe, while still allowing, with grip movement, similar abilities to strike with the croix. Naturally, a Short axe will change the tactical nature of your fight - more grappling and close play, possibly some lack in the ability to make throws.

As soon as I finish putting new flooring in my downstairs, and can clean out my garage (meaning I can actually get to my axes again) I will start taking measurements, etc.

I will keep you posted.

Book Review - "Armizare" by Robert Charrette

I just finished Fiore dei Liberi's Armizare: The Chivalric Martial Arts System of Il Fior di Battaglia by Robert Charrette.
First off, buy this book. Seriously. This is, by far, the best overview of Armizare yet. The organization of the book, the writing, and the photography are all clear and easy to understand. Okay, some of the photos (which are black & white) make it difficult to clearly tell relative blade position - but hey, it's hard to tell in the manuscripts too. Rather than do a page-by-page review, I will give overall opinions. For the most part, I agree with Charrette's interpretation of Armizare. What falls outside the "most part" are really just slight differences - I tend to hold Frontale more off to one side or the other, depending on which foot is forward for example. The weapons and armour shown throughout the book are gorgeous.
This may seem like a weak review, but the book, and the research within, speaks for itself. If you are just generally interested in the art of Fiore dei Liberi, buy this book. If you are a student of the German masters and are curious about what "them Eye-talians do" (I'm looking at you Teague *wink*), pick up this book. If you are already a student of Armizare, then you need this book. Need.

Lately I've been worried about something - that I do not have the necessary self-motivation to pursue HEMA to the highest degree. That is, one of my ambitions had always been to become one of "the Names" in WMA - you know, the people who seem to be on the instructor list of almost any event, the people who when you think of a specific art you think of them (example: Italian rapier = Tom Leoni). The thing is that I've always known this about myself - even as a musician during high school I really didn't like solo practice. Group practice I looked forward too but I couldn't really get up the gumption to practice the sax on my own on a regular basis, but I would practice because it was necessary for group practice/concerts to go well. While I was living in Eugene, solo practice was easy for the same reason - it made group lessons at UO or the salle go smoother (and there was the added pressure of teaching).

Part of what has put me into a non-practice rut since moving from Eugene (I think) is partially due to money issues. My wife is in her first year of teaching after finishing graduate school, I am contemplating graduate school, and so thinking about buying new armour, or enough wasters to start teaching Armizare, traveling half-way across the country for events, etc. begins to put a strain on our finances that we just can't handle right now. That is the reason I've been looking into other sword arts to study - arts that require less armour to practice, arts whose weapons are less expensive, etc. - because longswords, poleaxes, and their required bouting/safe practice armour is expensive.

Options so far have included:
-Rapier
-Sword & Buckler (of various traditions)
-Bolognese School
-Military Sabre
-Backsword/Baskethilt swords (mainly because single-sticks are cheap)

I uess I'm jsut putting this out there is the hope that others have had the same issues and maybe have some advice for me?

Axe videos

Sweet Mary it's been awhile since I posted anything!

Anyways, here are some great videos on axe play from a group from the Netherlands (I believe)

First up is a bout between two gentlemen in harness.


Second up is more of a demo video. All of it is very good, but the poleaxey goodness starts at 3:15.

In the both videos there are some moments where blows are obviously being pulled. Of course they are! These guys are using real axes and have their visors up - this is "loose play" or slower-speed sparring. They are not trying to kill each other, just show what they can do.

All in all, these are great videos (and there are more on their youtube page) and it's just great to see people training with the greatest weapon of them all

;-)

Brief Thought

It just struck me that polearms occupy both ends of the training spectrum.

More people focus on the sword, but traditionally the spear was the more common weapon throughout the Middle Ages. It can then be claimed that the spear is one of (if not the) simplest weapon to learn.

On the other end we have the pollaxe, which is viewed by myself and many others as being the "acme" weapon - the tip of the pyramid of weapons training. This is because the poleaxe combines so many aspects of the other weapons - the spear, the sword and the dagger.

Discuss.

Grand Unified Theory of Poleaxe Combat

This is an idea that has been percolating for sometime within the cavernous recesses of my mind. Oh, by the way, the title to this post is sarcastic – what this post is about is my process for finding common ground between the three poleaxe manuscripts I study. To put it simply, can I make the plays and tactics of the Anonimo Bolognese and Le Jeu de la Hache jive with the principles laid out in Armizare, which form the basis of how I approach martial endeavors? Yes I can.

But first some background information. The poleaxe (or pollaxe) developed from the large battle-axes of the Early and High Middle Ages into the form we see in many of the manuscripts around 1400. The weapon became a favorite weapon of the knightly class for foot combat, both for war and for tournaments. There are two principle forms of poleaxe; one with a straight, or crescent-shaped, axe head opposite a hammer face; the second with a hammer face opposite a curved, or straight, fluke. Both types were surmounted with a spear-like spike and were mounted on wood hafts, most often between 4.5' – 6', fitted with steel langets reinforcing the upper part of the haft. The bottom of the haft could be fitted with a spike, a steel cap, or simply left bare. While both types feature prominently in contemporary artwork and in surviving examples, it the hammer & fluke variant that is most common in the fighting manuscripts.

Arms & Armor Dane Axe

Arms & Armor Italian Pole-hammer

Arms & Armor Burgundian Axe

   Fiore dei Liberi wrote his manuscript(s) sometime around 1409 (according to the PD, which is the only one of the four to contain a date). Fiore's system of combat, hereafter referred to as Armizare, is a comprehensive martial art covering empty-hands techniques, dagger, sword, spear, poleaxe, and mounted combat. The principle weapon of Armizare is the longsword. There are currently four known manuscripts attributed to Fiore, another by a later student of his art (Vadi), with two other manuscripts known of but missing, and two other manuscripts that feature artwork and techniques from Fiore, but may not be directly a part of the lineage.

   Le Jeu de la Hache, “the Play of the Axe”, is an anonymous Burgundian manuscript that is the only known manuscript whose sole weapon is the poleaxe. Written around 1450, Le Jeu's techniques are presented in paragraph form (73 to be precise) sans illustrations. Included in those seventy-three paragraphs are advice for preparing yourself for combat, combat between right-handers and combat between a right-hander and a left-hander.

   The Anonimo Bolognese, technically the Ravenna Manuscript, is an anonymous mid-16^th century manuscript that covers the single-handed sword, alone and accompanied by numerous other implements, the large two-handed sword, and is one of the last manuscripts to devote space to poleaxe combat in full armour.

Got that? Okay, now that we're all caught up, let's get to the meat and potatoes of this business.

Guards

Fiore describes four guards for the axe – well, six in the Getty, but four in the PD, Florius and in Vadi so majority rules eh? The guards are:

• Posta Breve la Serpentina – Guard of the Short Serpent – Low guard with the head of the axe forward.
• Posta di Vera Croce – Guard of the True Cross / Strong Cross – Low guard with the tail of the axe forward.
• Posta di Donna – Guard of the Woman – High guard with the axe over the shoulder.
• Posta Dente di Cinghiaro – The Boar's Tooth – Low guard with the head of the axe low & off-line.
• *Posta di Coda Longa – (Getty only) Guard of the Long Tail – Low guard with the head of the axe back along the line of the rear leg.
• *Posta di Finestra – (Getty only; similar position is called Posta Sagitaria by Vadi) Guard of the Window / Archer -  High guard with the head of the axe forward, parallel (or greater) to the ground.

Pissani-Dossi. Clockwise from Top Left: Breve la Serpentina, Vera Croce, Dente di Cinghiaro, & Posta di Donna.

   The author of Le Jeu doesn't actually describe the guard positions; he merely mentions that “when you are on guard with the queue (tail) of the axe forward...” or  “when you are on guard with the dague/croix (head) of the axe forward...” This tends to leave quite a bit of wiggle room for practitioners to decide what the guard positions really are. My interpretation (and, I believe the common consensus) are that the guards are very similar to the two Bolognese pole-arms guards; Guardia Alta & Porta di Ferro Stretta (see below).

   The Anonimo Bolognese follows the Bolognese tradition closely in giving only two guards for pole-arms:

• Guardia Alta – High Guard – guard with right arm bent so that the axe head is held over the right shoulder & haft diagonally crossing the body, left arm held straight.
• Porta di Ferro Stretta – Narrow Iron Gate – Low guard with the axe head forward, right arm straight.

These two guards, each held on either side of the body, give a functional total of four guards.

Marozzo. From left to right: Porta di Ferro Stretta (right leg forward), Guardia Alta, Porta di Ferro Stretta (left leg forward).

   But here's the kicker with the axe – whenever you adopt a guard with the axe you are simultaneously in two guards, one for the head & one for the tail. Thus, from Guardia Alta you are both in a high guard & a low guard at the same time. From Porta di Ferro Stretta, you are in a point forward and point back position. Each one of Fiore's four (not including Finestra or Coda Longa) are in Guardia Alta and Porta di Ferro Stretta

• Guardia Alta = Posta di Donna and Dente di Cinghiaro
• Porta di Ferro Stretta = Breve la Serpentina and Vera Croce

Guardia Alta - showing simultaneous Armizare guards.

Porta di Ferro Stretta - showing simultaneous Armizare guards.

While this might seems like I'm stretching to some of you, let's look at the common defenses from Fiore's four guards:

• Breve la Serpentina – used to beat opponent's point to inside, or disengages underneath to beat to outside.
• Vera Croce – rising diagonal parry.
• Posta di Donna – defends with a fendente, either to a middle bind (Breve la Serpentina) or binding to the ground (Dente di Cinghiaro).
• Dente di Cinghiaro – rising diagonal parry.

From Guardia Alta I can: a) strike a fendente, b) make a rising diagonal parry with the tail. From Porta di Ferro Stretta I can: a) beat opponent's weapon to inside or outside, b) make a rising diagonal parry. So why does Fiore seperate each of these guards out? Because Fiore bases all of the weapons combat he teaches on the longsword. This is why the sword in armour, spear and poleaxe sections are smaller than the unarmoured longsword teachings; Fiore only needs to point out techniques that are unique to that weapon – all the principles of Armizare you learned with the longsword still apply. Go read this for a refresher on my views on that, it's okay I'll wait.

Back? Good. According to the principles of Armizare (as I understand them) you have three options when your opponent attacks. You can: Cross, Deflect or Break. I know, I know – in my previous post I had a fourth, Exchange, but an exchange is just a special crossing. So is Breaking, but that drastically changes the line so I make it it's own. Back on topic – Cross. Deflect, or Break the attack.

Let's look at a basic attack – a descending blow from the left with the head of the axe (a mandritto fendente) and see how each of the three manuscripts defend against it from the various guards using each of the three methods of defense.

Fiore:

Cross – from Posta di Donna throw your own fendente, with or without a pass. If you control the line line, thrust them in the face. If you lose the line, bring your tail up sharply underneath their axe, stabbing them in the abdomen or hip.

Deflect – from Dente di Cinghiaro or Vera Croce. From either Guard, snap your rising diagonal parry up (with whichever footwork is appropriate) and either thrust them in the face, hit them with a fendente, or throw them.

Break – from Posta di Donna (or Coda Longa) cover with a fendente and a strong pass, bearing both axes to the ground. From here either snap your point back into their face, forcibly remove their visor then thrust them in the face, or stomp on their axe then thrust them in the face.

Le Jeu:

Cross – from the high guard, strike your blow into theirs without passing, then drive your pedale up, driving their axe aside & down, the stab them in the face. Alternately, step into their blow, taking it on the haft between your hands, and while driving your axe to your right, step behind them and execute a collar throw.

Deflect – from either guard, do your rising diagonal parry with the pedale such that you drive their axe wide. Then hit them in the head.

Break – Here is where my theory runs into issues admittedly. The author of Le Jeu is adamant that you should never allow the head of your axe to stray beyond the outline of your opponent. This reason Fiore is okay with this is two-fold, in my opinion. First is that in the rompere dei punta, you have control of his weapon, lessening the risk. The other reason has to do with the fact that as poleaxes developed they got longer, and Fiore was at what we can consider the forefront of poleaxe usage, therefore it is reasonable to assume his axe is shorter, meaning it is easier to recover.

Anonimo:

Cross – The Anonimo only has two options from the crossing; either thrust your pedale underneath his haft, to the abdomen or hip, or control his axe and enter for a collar throw.

Deflect – The Anonimo features a deflection that is the same as Le Jeu's.

Break -  Again similar to Le Jeu, there are no breaks in the Anonimo.
 

Couple of videos to watch

First up is this video by a University of Oregon Journalism student about Maestro Sean Hayes and the Northwest Fencing Academy. She titled it "Maestro of Armizare" and Sean is very quick to point out (not in the video but in general) that he is a Maestro in Classical Italian fencing, not Armizare.

Second, here are six videos from the guys at Hammaborg on harness fighting from the Gladitoria manuscripts. Great techniques (some of which I am totally going to steal and try to use) and beautiful armour. In fact, I am now extremely jealous of Dierk's armour.

Speaking of armour, I've been debating recently about what type of harness I should try to compile. Basically I have worked it out to three options:

• a Coat of Plates / Brigandine over a hauberk, with some simple arms, knee cops with either quilted or brigandine cuisses. Helm will (hopefully) just be a Windrose Fiore helm with the pierced steel visor.
• a Corrazzina or Churburg type breastplate, over mail. Very 14th C transitional armour setup. Steel arms, steel legs, same helm as above.
• Early Gothic type armour: breast & back plate, full arms, full legs, sallet with bevor.

The reason I like the first two options is that they are (relatively) light, I can put a brig or corrazzina on by myself, and they are easily "modified" - I can play light, medium, and heavy armour, can play with sword, spear and axe at all levels. The only real reason the third option is there is because it looks so freaking cool! I currently own a decent Coat of Plates (which needs a little TLC - like new straps. Oh and a new base garment so the damn thing actually fits) so I guess the real question becomes Brigandine or Corrazzina?

Freelance Academy Press Reviews

It's a Two-For-One! I'll be reviewing two books available from Freelance Academy Press

In The Service of Mars: Proceedings from the Western Martial Arts Workshop 1999-2009, Volume I


As the title says, this book is a compilation of lesson-plans and handouts from past WMAWs - except that most of the entries have been substantially fleshed out, pictures added, interpretations updated, etc. The book is divided into four parts based on content, which makes quick finding of a particular article easy. I had originally planned on reading this book cover to cover, but wound up skipping from article to article based on my level of interest, which is perfectly fine :)  I wish I had the gumption to go through and give an article by article review, but that would spoil the reading too much. Instead, I'll just give a quick shout-out to my favorite / most helpful articles.

First up is Greg Mele's article on the poleaxe techniques presented in the Anonimo Bolognese. Big surprise huh? Greg gives a great succinct background on the weapon and the manuscript, then gives translation, interpretation, and pictures of each play. It's everything a poleaxe enthusiast could want about a fascinating little piece of axe combat.

Greg's other article on Fiore's Gioco Largo & Gioco Stretto, Jessica Finley's article on Ott's Ringen, Tom Leoni's article on the Spadone were some other highlights for me. However, there are four articles that I believe make this volume worth purchasing. They are Craig Johnson's "How a Sword Was Made", Tom Leoni's "The Judicial Duel in Sixteenth-Century Italy", Keith Alderson's "On the Art of Reading: An Introduction to Using the Medieval German 'Fightbooks'", and finally the article written by John Sullins, Sean Hayes, Puck Curtis, and Eric Myers on how to use Classical Italian pedagogy to develop lesson plans.

In reality, the best part of this book is that there is something for everyone.

Venetian Rapier

I actually received this book last year, but realized I had yet to do a review of it. While I'm not a rapierist (and probably never will be) if I ever do start practicing and / or teaching rapier, this book will be the foundation of my studies. An English translation of Nicoletto Giganti's 1606 rapier curriculum. BTW, it is exactly that - an east to follow, builds upon itself, curriculum for learning the rapier. As with his other translations Tom Leoni manages to create a text that reads as if it were originally written in modern English, which enables the practitioner to read through and follow the instructions without any of the choppiness that can accompany a translation.

Specialization - Good or Bad

I remember reading a blog (I forget who's) where the author was discussing whether being a swordsman equals being a martial artist. Their response was no, that it leads to being a specialist - a word which he writes with dripping scorn, much as I say "the Yankees"

It is a scientific fact.

To the author, the only way to truly practice these arts is to practice all aspects of it - he was particularly vitriolic against those who do little to no grappling.

Okay, my response to this attitude is to ask that if you consider those who only train in one weapon to not be martial artists does that mean that Ott, Leckuchner, Fabris, Capoferro, Giganti, and the anonymous authors of I.33 and Le Jeu, amongst others, are not martial artists? What about Bruce Lee? Yes he studied weapons, but he focused on unarmed, thereby "neglecting" the rest of the "systems" he studied. Is he not to be considered a martial artist?

Specialization is not a bad thing. Everyone I listed above wrote a complete martial system that was based around one weapon. Are Fiore, Marozzo, Vadi, Meyer, Mair or Liechenhauer better martial artists simply because they include more weapons? Specialization is natural and healthy because it is a simple fact that someone who trains and specializes in one aspect of an art understand that aspect better than a "Jack of All Trades" - they have a deeper understanding. Don't get me wrong, I believe in training all aspects of the art in order to put more tools in my toolbox, but it is perfectly possible for someone who only studies the longsword to be just as good a martial artist and fencer as someone who trains in wrestling, dagger, lance, poleaxe and longsword.

Two examples:

• In MMA, when a fighter wants to improve his striking he goes to a boxing trainer. When he wants to improve his ground-game, he goes to a wrestler or BJJ trainer. In other words, he goes to a specialist.
• Most of the instructors WMA events and seminars are specialists, even those who are capable of teaching a broad spectrum. There are people who study Armizare who only study the sword or the dagger and they teach accordingly.

Look, specialization is historical. So is the comprehensive approach. Personally, I take a comprehensive approach to Armizare, but you could say that I specialize in Armizare, with a further specialization in Le Jeu de la Hache. See how silly it is to rail against specialization?

Reviews, Observations, and Ramblings

Today will be a jam-packed entry featuring observations, reviews, training updates & bitch sessions!  Woo-hoo!

In case you missed it, this week the National Geographic channel aired a show called “Medieval Fight Book” all about Talhoffer's 1459 fechtbuch. The show, sadly, mostly focused on bits from the rest of the hausbuch that featured designs for war machines, etc. rather than the actual fighting plates.  The show features Terry Jones (yes, THAT Terry Jones) and Mike Loades as experts, and also features John Clements and Aron P. from ARMA. All in all, I thought that this is one of the better medieval documentary out there between the Discovery Channel, National Geographic, and the Hitler...er...History Channel. I just had a few quibbles (other than the lack of focus on the fighting techniques):

-The tone of the show was more “The DaVinci Code: Talhoffer style” rather than a serious documentary.  Descriptions of the manuscript as being “violent, secretive, spiritual and packed full of knowledge, an obscure and mysterious manuscript called the Fight Book”. Sigh.

There is a scene featuring a potential device to approach a besieged wall, and the device is made of boiled leather. Mike Loades testes this by having somebody fire a “VERY heavy 80lb draw bow”.  Now, while I could barely draw an 80lb bow , describing an 80lb bow as heavy is simply exaggeration. A 120lb or 160lb war bow is heavy.  Just saying.

-The gents from ARMA did a very nice presentation job, including Aron running, vaulting, and somersaulting in harness. They film a scene featuring an unarmoured man (JC) fighting an armoured man (Aron P). First problem, people who know a heck of a lot more about Talhoffer than I do say that that is not what the plate is actually showing – the artist simply didn't want to have to draw a bunch of harness over and over again (kind of like another Talhoffer where you have unarmoured guys fighting with the poleaxe). Second problem, Aron is using half-sword techniques. Against an unarmoured opponent. *blink* *blink* Why in God's name would you do that? The only reason to half-sword is because your opponent is wearing armour – if he isn't then hit him like normal.  Third problem, when JC throws his Murder Strokes he does so by gripping the flat of the blade and flicking the hilt toward Aron P. Seriously, it looked like something you'd see in an Olympic fencing bout. Nevertheless, it connects hard. Which brings us to the my biggest problem with the whole production – Aron gets hit so hard by the pommel that it dents his helm and makes him sick to his stomach. Ever look up the symptoms of a concussion? Yeah, nausea is right up there on the list. I accept that what we do is dangerous (it is a martial art after all) but still, national tv and someone gets a concussion. Awesome. I know that this is an over-reaction on my part, but  just worry that for as many people as were attracted to HEMA because of this show, some were turned away because of that one shot.

Here is a link to the show on youtube (it's in 4 parts) and to Clements' blog about the production. Oh, and I had forgotten about those funky poleaxes in Talhoffer with the crescent hooks on the queue end. I want one. :D

Just look at those things...brutal...and pretty.

An observation I wanted to make about the community in general is that there seem to be a lot of threads of various forums regarding how to execute moves that are “basic” to the Liecthenaur tradition – the Zornhau, Shielhau, etc. This has also led to discussions on Silver's “True Times” and simply put, what is the proper way to attack. I have mixed feelings on these posts. First, I feel that these types of questions are important to an individual's understanding of the manuscripts. I know that I have, and still do, ask serious questions regarding the basics of Armizare. The difference is that I usually pose these questions to a few folks via e-mail, not on a public forum. The reason I do this is that when I asked my first real question, I was too shy to post it online, so I e-mailed it to a few instructors. They told me that it was great that I was thinking critically about the manuscripts, but that these questions had been hashed out long ago. While I still e-mail out questions now and then, I accept that there are others who have come before me and that there is no reason to re-invent the wheel. Second, the negative reaction I have is because a lot of these issues have “accepted” answers within the majority of the community. Unless there is new, radical manuscript evidence, why re-hash how to form the guard Posta di Donna? We will never know exactly how to do it, we can only take our best shot, and I am content with that. The cool part is that we will all take slightly different shots at the same thing. This is our evolutionary mutation to HEMA, I may not do things exactly like my instructor, nor will my future students do things exactly like I do. But there is a funny thing about mutations, they can be beneficial and harmful. In thinking about writing this, I decided that in my opinion, a healthy mutation in a martial art is a change that remains within the system. An unhealthy mutation is a change that pushes outside the system. For example, if my instructor finds that he fights better out of front-weighted Posta di Donna and, perhaps unconsciously, primarily teaches front-weighted Posta di Donna to all his students (including me). Now, I find that I fight better out of rear-weighted Posta di Donna, so when I go on to teach my students I mostly teach rear-weighted Posta di Donna. That is a healthy mutation because both versions of Posta di Donna exist in the system. Instead of Posta di Donna you could use depth of stance. Both a low, deep stance and a high, narrow stance are used in Armizare (in Fiore and Vadi, respectively). If I teach a high stance that is still a healthy mutation. Now if I decide that Fiore's stances make no sense, so I will substitute a karate cat-stance for all high guards and a horse stance for all low guards, that is an unhealthy mutation. And guess what? Mutations within the tradition have historical precedent in HEMA. I've already used Vadi and Fiore as an example, so I'll use them again 'cause I'm lazy. Vadi is regarded as a student or successor of Fiore's Armizare and I use him as a source and place him firmly within the Armizare lineage. Yet some of his guards and plays are either slightly changed or entirely brand-new. Bu they still follow the rules of the system. Similarly, the German tradition evolved and changed over the 200+ years it was being practiced. Kind of like a martial version of the telephone game.

Last weekend, January 9^th, I finally got down to Eugene to train at the Academy for the first time since October. Far, far too long. To my surprise, and delight, Devon Boorman of Academie Duello was in town. During the morning session, the three of us played with a plethora of things; a poleaxe posta dance, abrazare drills, traded dagger flow drills, and Devon showed us some really, really cool fühlen exercises with dagger and sword. The second half of the day the majority of the Academy's students showed up (which was just cool to see honestly) and we played with the 1^st Remedy Master of dagger, then moved on to some zogho largo fun. All in all, it was a great day – it was great to see Devon again and it was absolutely awesome to see so many students there!

The problem, however, is the mind-numbing realization that 3 months of little to no physical training with sword in hand means one thing – I now suck. I suck hard. I feel like my understanding of the manuscripts is much better than it used to be but now my physical implementation has suffered. It is akin to not playing a musical instrument for a long time, then picking it up again. Your brain knows exactly what to do but your body is unable to keep up. It's frustrating and depressing, especially when you are holding yourself (and being held to) a standard. Oh well, time to shut up and train I guess.

Poleaxe Tactics

This is another of Tyson's requested topics, he requested that while many people talk about techniques, few give advice on tactics.

Well first off, I really don't have much experience to be talking from.  After all, I've only had 3 bouts with the axe.  That's it.  You can read about them here.

So instead of trying to bullshit ya'll with my "immense" knowledge and experience, I will simply repeat a few gems from the Anonimo Bolognese and Le Jeu de la Hache.

• Aim for the weak spots in your opponent's armour - usually the armpits, insides of elbows, palms, throat, etc.
• Use a stop-thrust to the face, throat, chest or arms whenever you can get away with it - when your opponent changes guards, telegraphs a blow, or enters into measure without covering themselves.
• Use feints.
• Use the head (hook, hammer, axe, whatever) to hook your opponent's haft, arms, legs, collar whenever you can - if you throw a blow at their head & overshoot, pull back HARD!
• Don't forget the feet! Yours or theirs.  Queue thrusts to the feet can be very sneaky.
• Keep whatever end you have facing your opponent moving, especially with thrusts to the face or feet.  This way they can't find it and put it aside
• Control your weapon - don't open up too much space between you & your axe.  Don't let your blows go too far outside your opponent's silhouette.

With all these bits of advice, the opposites hold true:

• Protect your own weak spots - don't give your opponent an easy shot to your palms or armpits.
• Do not enter into measure without covering yourself with your axe & don't telegraph your blows.
• Be careful of over-commiting yourself while parrying.
• Whenever you can, use your axe to control theirs & set it aside.

That really about sums it up.

Why I love pole-arms

Every now and again I have a weak moment.

I look at all the gear I have/want and despair.
I look at my lack of sufficient training space and despair.
I despair and wonder "Why, oh why, can't I be into I.33, rapier, English backsword, messer - basically ANY single sword system - that requires a smaller weapon and thus less gear & less room."

After all, the basic weapon of Armizare is the longsword - you need a high ceiling to practice indoors.  I live on the bottom floor of an apartment - not gonna happen.  I could practice outdoors, but it turns out that my part of the communal backyard is the low spot of the lot.  And it rains in Portland.  A lot.  Which means I often have a lake for a backyard. 

And poleaxe? Oh boy.  The needed room is greater, the needed gear is greater.  Basically, everything needed is greater.

I will sit and honestly consider seriously taking up the rapier or single-hand sword in some form.  But then I pick up my axe and all doubts cease. 

When I first started down the WMA road, I thought (and still think) that the longsword is the most versatile weapon in the HEMA arsenal.  It plays close, wide, against armour, against no armour, one handed, two-handed, etc.  But I still remember the first time I saw the axe in Fiore's MS.  Sean had brought his copy of the Getty (or maybe it was the PD) and was doing a little show-and-tell with the class.  He got to the axe section and as I listened to his description of the weapon, I knew I was hooked on this Swiss Army knife of the knightly class.  I proceeded to find out any info I could about this weapon, including looking into other manuscripts and traditions to find out more.  But I really stayed focused on the poleaxe until, honestly, I got Waldman's "Hafted Weapons of Medieval and Renaissance Europe" and read his study on halberds, bills, vogues, poleaxes, etc.  I had an epiphany - I didn't just love the poleaxe, I loved pole-arms.  All of them.  I knew this, but I didn't "know" it.

So why do I love pole-arms so much?  Their versatility.  While the longsword is the most versatile single weapon, pole-arms are the most versatile class of weapons.  From the simple staff to the spear to the halberd to the poleaxe, no single weapon type has the amount of cross-over pole-arms do.  Train with the staff and you're 70% of the way to using a poleaxe.  And it's not just me saying so - masters like George Silver and Achille Marozzo agreed that techniques learned with one pole-arm would transfer easily to others.  You only need to adapt specific techniques to specific weapons - there are three attacks that can be made with pole-arms: Strikes, Thrusts, and Hooking actions - but not all pole-arms can make all three attacks.  It's tough to hook with a staff or spear, for instance.  There is also the versatility of pole-arms in regards to armour - all pole-arms can be used with or without armour, but some are more specialized to armoured combat (the axe). 

What is the point of all this rambling?  That while the longsword is the most versatile single weapon, pole-arms are the most versatile class of weapons.  Therefore, if you want to train with the poleaxe but don't have the armour or poleaxe, then train with a staff.

Help!

Having a brain fart so I'm going to open the boards here: I am looking for suggestions for topics to write about.  Anything goes: questions, arguments we've had, more evidence to back up my interpretations, etc.

After Action Report - My Pollaxe bouts at the 600

I had the privilege of fighting in the Armoured Feat of Arms at the Fiore 600 event this September.  It was a day of two firsts for me:

1.    The first time I'd ever fought in armour outside the Academy.
2.    The first time I'd ever fought with the pollaxe.

As one of the four Challengers, along with Maestro Sean Hayes, Scott “the Earl” Wilson, and Bob Charrette, I faced three Defenders from the Chicago Swordplay Guild, Leopoldo Lastre , Jesse  Kula, and Dave “Sparky” Farrell.  Bouts could be fought with the sword, the lance, or the axe and were fought to 5 points – me being who I am, I decided to play all three bouts with the axe.  In two of the three bouts, I used my own axes – being shorter (~4.5 feet) they provided a different style of play than the other axes (~6 feet).  The short axes performed wonderfully (Thanks Mike!) but the bouts with them provided two insights:

1.    After talking to other folks, I am starting to prefer a slightly longer axe than my short axes – I'm thinking that the tip of the top spike should come just under, or at, the user's nose.
2.    The Revival rubber spear heads we used for my axes and for the lances?  Not so good.  They are too floppy – there were numerous instances of a solid blow being landed with them and the person on the receiving end not even noticing.  For pollaxes, much better to go with the Purpleheart tips.

So here is my play-by-play and analysis of my three bouts with the pollaxe:

First Bout – Me vs Leo with short axes

First pass (00:25), I feint a thrust with the queue and throw a fendente in behind Leo's parry, hitting his arm with my haft (not a point).  Leo then fends me off with one hand (Jacques de Lalaing anyone?) and gets his queue into my armpit for a point.   
Leo 1 – Alex 0

Second pass (00:46), Leo enters with either a dague thrust or a fendente and I cover with my croix, get the open line, and thrust him in the face for a point.  
Leo 1 – Alex 1

Third pass (00:56), Leo enters with a fendente which I parry with my demy hache.  We close and scuffle around until I decide to drop my axe and pull my dagger – except that I can't find my dagger! (Watching the video, and therefore seeing where my stupid dagger actually was, I wish I had hunted out my dagger a bit longer before giving up that point, but fine finger movements just do not happen in mitten gauntlets.) 
Leo 2 – Alex 1

Fourth Pass (01:30), after fixing my equipment – the tip had come off my axe – I feint a fendente and then strike again to his head after Leo's parry for what I consider my best move of my three bouts.
Leo 2 – Alex 2

Fifth Pass (01:46), after much posturing (I am proud of myself for moving my queue around and threatening thrusts – even if I was out of measure), I enter with a queue thrust to Leo's face that barely misses, we close and scuffle before I can get a minor blow to Leo's face (no power in it), then I'm able to shove Leo's arms up and get my demy hache in for a good shove, preparing, but thankfully not having to, take Leo out of the lists.   
Leo 2 – Alex 3

Second Bout – Me vs Jesse with short axes

First Pass (00:29), Jesse enters with a fendente that he change-through into a thrust (which, BTW, I think hits my unarmoured upper arm – sorry Jesse).  I “parry” the thrust with my croix, and bring the axe around to thrust with the queue, which Jesse parries by coming into a hanging guard.  In response, I  bring a fendente down on his haft, moving it, and thrust him in the shoulder, pushing him back.
Alex 1 – Jesse 0

Second Pass (00:43), Jesse, from Coda Lunga, gets a nice shot to my rear hand against my thrust.
Alex 1 – Jesse 1

Third Pass (00:55), After a fendente by Jesse and a follow-up thrust by me, we come to grips, during which I apparently fall to my knees – I have absolutely no recognition of doing so! - and Jesse gets his dagger into my collar.  It takes awhile for the Marshall and myself to notice, but Jesse gets the dagger in at ~ 01:10.   
Alex 1 – Jesse 2

Fourth Pass (01:55), I attempt to use the feint I used against Leo, except I miss!  I attempt a dague thrust and Jesse brings his axe down on my head.   
Alex 1 – Jesse 3

Fifth Pass (02:12), Jesse enters with a queue thrust which parry with my demy hache.  I attempt to hook Jesse's lead arm with my croix, fail, bring my queue around and thrust at his shoulder.  He grabs my queue (I don't know if I hit him with the queue or not) and I use the leverage to shove him towards the edge of the lists.   
Alex 2 – Jesse 3

Third Bout – Me vs Sparky with long axes

First Pass (00:25), I decide to go lefty for the first pass, Sparky throws a fendente that I take on my demy hache, bring my croix around, missing Sparky's shoulder with my fendente.  Sparky tries to knock my axe away with his queue and as he kayaks his croix around, I take advantage of the tempo to thrust him in the face. Too bad I just then realized that his first fendente had hit me in the shoulder.
Alex 0 – Sparky 1

Second Pass (00:45), Sparky attempts to feint a fendente and thrust with his queue, but I jam his axe with my demy hache and hit him with my croix.   
 Alex 1 – Sparky 1

Third Pass (00:56), Sparky attempts a change-through, but I stay just out of measure, parrying his dague thrust with my haft, then closing in with a backhanded fendente which misses.  We become locked at the demy hache and push and shove each other until I pull my dagger and stab him in the collar.   
Alex 2 – Sparky 1

Fourth Pass (01:35), This is my favorite moment in all of my bouts!  Sparky executes a picture perfect change-through (I was trying to close in for a collar-throw) and thrusts me in the chest hard enough to move me back a few feet.  That voice you hear laughing and saying “Yes!” is mine.  It was awesome.   
Alex 2 – Sparky 2

Fifth Pass (01:52), Sparky enters with a fendente which I parry with a fendente of my own, following it up with a thrust to his face (I was ready to hook the back of Sparky's neck and pull him forward, but he had already called the point to me).   
Alex 3 – Sparky 2


Conclusion

I was proud of how I performed in my first axe bouts.  Granted, at a Fiore event I mixed Fiore, Le Jeu, and the Anonimo, but hey it's all good!  I left the lists with a few more friends and some good insight into axe combat, which will help my interpretations.  My enduring thanks and regards to all those who participated in the Feat of Arms, those who ran the Feat, those who assisted the combatants during the Feat, and those who generously allowed me to stumble around like a drunken orangutan in front of them.

:p

The 600th - a Review

Got back last night from the best WMA event I've ever attended.  Okay, so I've only been to three, but my previous statement still stands!

The event, which was a celebration of the 600th (ish) anniversary of the setting down of Fiore dei Liberi's "Fior di Battaglia".  Hosted by the Chicago Swordplay Guild at the beautiful DeKoven Center in Racine, WI (home of WMAW), The 600th was designed to be a small (only about 50-60 people) event focused on Armizare, thus allowing the classes to be more in-depth than at a larger conference.  The instructors for the event included Greg Mele, Sean Hayes, Bob Charette, Guy Windsor, Mark Lancaster, & Scott Wilson.  Every class I attended was well taught and the students were respectful and attentive.

The even also included three "bonus events":

• A martial challenge between the United States, represented by Sean Hayes & Jesse Kulla, and the Commonwealth, represented by Guy Windsor, Jason Smith, and Mark Lancaster.  The challenge fights were a joy to watch and were displays of both prowess and gentlemanly conduct.  Oh yeah, the Commonwealth won  ;)
• An Unarmoured Tournament which featured three rounds, each with a different weapon - the longsword, the lance, and the arming sword.  The rounds were fought with a modified version of the Belgian rules - each bout was to 3 points, with blows to the head & sword-arm being worth 3 points, all other targets worth 1 point.  The winner remained in the lists and became the King, thus having the right to make an After-Blow (a response to a blow struck against them).  Double hits were either a) given to the higher (literally) blow or b) if there was no discernible advantage, both combatants were out and two new ones entered the lists.  That all being said, this was my first tournament of any type and I thought I fought quite well at the longsword.  The arming sword and lance rounds showed my lack of training with those weapons, but now I have a baseline from which to improve.  Just like the Martial Challenges, the Tournament contestants showed nothing but chivalry to one another and made my first tournament a happy one.
• An Armoured Feat of Arms between four Challengers; myself, Sean Hayes, Scott Wilson & Bob Charette, against three Defenders of the CSG; Jesse Kulla, Dave Farrell, and Leo Lastre.  Each Challenger fought a bout with each Defender with one of four weapons: the dagger, the longsword, the lance, and the poleaxe.  I fought all three of my bouts with the axe (go figure right?) - twice with my "short axes" and once with the "long axe".  This being only my second tournament (see above), my first time fighting someone outside the Academy in armour and my first time fighting with axes I can honestly say that this Feat of Arms was the highlight of my weekend!  My thanks go out to the Defenders for providing me with such wonderful bouts (Sparky, my best memory is of that beautiful change through you caught me with!), my fellow Challengers, Nicole and Greg for the wonderful experience, and most importantly, to all you good folk who assisted us in and out of our armour, fetched weapons, and made sure we had water after each bout - I humbly apologize that I cannot remember each of you who by name.

Besides the Armoured Feat of Arms, my other highlights include Greg's axe class and the many wonderful conversations I had over fermented beverages.

To Greg, Nicole, the CSG who helped staff the event, to the DeKoven staff, and to both my rides - my warmest thanks!

To Jason, Dan, Bernard, JF, Rachel, Theresa and many, many others - it was wonderful to finally meet you!

To all the instructors, thank you for sharing your time and knowledge!

In the end, this event has provided some of my happiest WMA moments and I can only hope that I comported myself as well as I saw those around me do so.  And of course, I hope I didn't embarrass myself or the Academy too bad :)

Hardware vs. Software

It hit me the other day just how long it's been since I went shooting - just over 2 years to be exact. This realization got me thinking about firearms and then thinking about getting my Concealed Carry permit, so I started reading all sorts of information on defensive handgun shooting I could find on the web. At this point, my regular readers (do I have regular readers? haha) will wonder why I'm talking about firearms on a sword-related blog. Well here's why: An interesting aspect of all the quality articles about defensive handgun shooting I read was their assertion that it is not about what pistol, sights, grips, gadgets, etc. you are carrying, but about the training you've received. In other words - Software, not hardware.

I realized, reading this over again, that this is what I tell customers in the cutlery shop where I work this all the time. They ask what the best survival knife or self-defense knife is and my response is always "The one you have on you when you need it". A $400 custom fixed blade survival knife does you no good when your car is broken down in the middle of nowhere and it is at home in your camping gear.

The same applies in Western Martial Arts. There has been lots of talk about gear lately on various WMA related forums - discussing sword length or what training sword is better, etc. My opinion is - it doesn't matter. I've talked about this before, but when I do solo training I use a Purpleheart armouries wooden waster. When I train at the Northwest Fencing Academy I will use a Tinker longsword, an A&A Fectherspiel or Spada da Zogho, a Purpleheart synthetic, or a Swordcrafts aluminum. In the long run, I believe I am better off because of this - by training with a variety of wasters I learn how to express my art despite the tool being used. That is the ultimate point of martial arts - to give you a series of principles that can then be adapted to whatever is at hand.

In the end, the sword, poleaxe, pistol, knife, etc. is a tool - you are the weapon.

Analysis on Armizare Armoured Combat

This week let's take a look at the four defensive methods in Armizare and just what that means for interpreting the armoured sections of the manuscripts, specifically the axe section.

The Four Ways to Defend

In Armizare there are four ways to defend against an opponent's attack:

• Cross it
• Deflect it
• Exchange it
• Break it

Let's look at these four things a little closer.

Cross It

Crossing your opponent's attack mean just that; parrying your opponent's blow such that your weapons cross to your advantage. He divides the sword in two hands section by where the cross occurs; at the point (weak), at the middle, and at the strong. The importance of crossing in Armizare is clear from the fact that what to do after the cross has been achieved encompasses the majority of Fiore's art. Vadi is even more explicit on the importance of the cross:

"The art of the sword only consists in crossing / putting both strikes and thrusts in their rightful place / bringing war to those who oppose you." - Porzio & Mele 19

Deflect It

Deflections are an interesting beast in Armizare because they appear throughout the manuscripts but only singly – never as a series of plays (like the cross does). Why is this? The first, and most obvious answer, is that if your deflection is done properly, there is no follow on other than hitting the other guy. If your deflection does not go well (either you mess it up or they bind against it) you are now in a cross. The deflections are scattered throughout the manuscripts; it appears at the beginning of the sword in one hand section, the end of the sword in two hands section and in the mounted section. In the first two instances, the master is described as using the same defense against several different attacks (cuts, thrusts, thrown swords/spears) on foot, while in the last he is shown as being on foot against horsemen. In all of these instances we are given the same tactical advice:

“I'll advance the right foot, which is in front, off the line, pass at an angle against the opponent's weapon and beat it to his left side. After making my parry I'll instantly attack” - Leoni, 64

All of the illustrations show the master in a left side guard, Dente di Cinghiaro with the two handed weapons. Fiore explicitly says that you could hold any left side posta – Posta di Donna & Finestra and that the plays would work just as well as from Dente di Cinghiaro. Why only on the left side though? Because the majority of people in the world (just as true in Fiore's time as ours) are right handed. Why does this matter? Why, gentle reader, that is a wonderful segue into...

When to Cross & Deflect

“Right-sided guards will parry and, while parrying, pass and strike with a thrust. Left-sided guards will parry and beat aside, and strike with a cut – but are not as good for answering with a thrust” - Leoni 78

The general rule as to when to cross and when to deflect is this:

If your sword is on the opposite side as your opponent's attack, cross it.
If your sword is on the same side as your opponent's attack, deflect it.

That is why Fiore shows all the deflection coming from the left side – 9 times out of 10 a right-handed person will attack from their right side, so in order to deflect properly, your sword must be on your left side.

Exchange It

The exchange and break of thrusts can be seen as subsets of crossing (they are) but because Fiore calls these out as being defenses against the thrust, I separate them as well. The especially handy thing about these two techniques is that the exchange can easily flow into a break if needed.

The exchange of thrusts is just that: an exchange of attacks. In modern fencing parlance it can be viewed as a thrust with opposition (or a parry followed by a riposte with opposition). Here is what Fiore has to say about it:

“This play, called exchange of thrusts, is done this way. As your opponent attacks you with a thrust, step out of line with your front foot, then pass obliquely also offline, crossing his sword with your arms while thrusting in his face or chest with your point high” - Leoni, 55.

Break It

The break of thrusts is another option for defending against a thrust. The footwork is the same as for the exchange, but instead of exchanging with a thrust, you cut a fendente against their blade, driving it to the ground, then executing numerous follow on plays.

While it is possible to break a cut after crossing it (for instance crossing in Frontale, then driving their blade down) it is more difficult to exchange cuts (although you could consider the 1st play of Gioco Largo as an exchange of cuts...).

Interpreting the Armoured Sections

Because the longsword is the basis for all weapons techniques in Armizare, you can find all four defense methods in the sword in two hands section. However, the armoured sections of the manuscript are arranged differently – instead of including all four methods, Fiore focuses on one option per weapon. Which method is shown is based on the nature of the weapon when fighting in armour.

• Cross it = Sword in Armour
• Deflect it = Axe
• Exchange it = Spear
• Break it = Axe

Sword in Armour – Crossin' It Up

The longsword, when used against armour, is held in the half-sword grip – one hand on the hilt the other about halfway up the blade. This grip allows the sword to be used like a very short spear and/or dagger. Because of the relatively light weight of the normal longsword (Fiore and Vadi do show specific armoured combat swords – essentially the bastard child of the longsword and poleaxe. Yes, I want one!) blows made with the sword would be ineffectual against most armour, hence the focus on the thrust to get into all the little gaps in armour.

The parries described in this section use the bit of the sword between your hands to parry an opponent's attack, leaving the point and the hilt free to attack. One effect of the half-sword grip is that your weapon is shortened, so you have to get in close. The result is that after the initial parry & thrust, all of the plays in this section are Gioco Stretto plays, including collar throws with each end of the weapon and the ligadura sottana.

Axe – I Will Break You

“I am the axe, heavy, cruel and lethal, and I deliver bigger blows than any other handheld weapon.” - Lenoi 77

The major difference between the axe and the spear and sword when used against armour is that the axe has sufficient weight to make effective blows against armour – possibly puncturing but more likely crushing it. Even if the axe blow does no external damage, the transfer of force will likely cause broken bones and/or severe trauma. As such, for the first time in the armoured sections, we have a weapon throwing blows, and guards that have to deal with that fact. As one would expect, the primary guard for blows in the axe section is Posta di Donna and so she is faced by Dente di Cinghiaro, who's forte is deflecting right-handed blows. But the axe is also a very efficient thrusting weapon, with the potential to pierce breastplates and other armour.

The primary focus, however, of the axe section is what happens when you break your opponent's attack – as often happens because the heavy heads tend to...ah...encourage a low bind :) Accordingly, we see the canonical follow up to the break, complete with stomping on your opponent's axe, as well as a thrust adaptation, a between-the-legs trip, a disarm and a ligadura.

The final two plays feature “unique” axes that, as far as I am aware, are only found in Fiore. The first has a weight attached by a rope or chain to the axe head, the play being exactly what you would expect – you wrap that thing around their legs, drag them around for a bit, then beat them senseless. The other unique axe that has a hollow head for delivering an “eye-melting powder”.

Seriously:

“This axe is hollow all around and filled with a corrosive powder that makes it impossible to open the eyes as soon as it comes into contact with them – and may even cause permanent blindness.” - Leoni 77.

How awesome is that!

Spear – The Exchange of Pain

The spear shown in Fiore is approximately 5-6 feet tall with a pointy end and a (usually) iron shod end. Like the sword in armour section, your opponent's armour limits your targets and the nature of the spear makes blows ineffective against armour. All of the techniques in this section are exchanges of thrusts – three from right side guards, three from left side guards.

From the right:
“I will pass obliquely out of line with the right foot, and crossing his lance I will beat it away to the left.” - Leoni 78

From the left:
“We pass out of lone by first stepping offline with the foot that is forward. And all of us (mandritto or riverso side) come together with a thrust after the parry, since the lance can only strike this way.” - Leoni 80

The spear section also includes Fiore's “common” polearm counter – which, in truth, is nothing more than an adaptation on the advice given in the two hand sword section – If your opponent parries such that your point is taken offline, strike him with the butt of the spear.

Putting it All Together

So, know we've reached the meat & potatoes part of the post where, if you've read this far, you're asking what the point is. Well here goes.

When I first started studying Armizare, I was intrigued as to why the sections in the Getty seemed to get shorter and shorter. The longsword section is the longest (22R – 31V); the sword in armour (32V – 35R), the axe (35V – 37V), and the spear (39R – 40R) each being shorter than the last. The reason is that the foundation for Armizare weapons combat is found in the sword in two hands section and the armoured sections simply represent sub-sets of that section. Because of the limitations of certain weapons against armour the three sections all address different aspects of the four defenses while in armoured combat.

To get a clear picture of armoured combat with the poleaxe, which combines attributes of the sword and spear, it is therefore necessary to take all three armoured sections as one. When you do so, you will naturally find techniques such as the collar throw, playing around with the butt end of the axe, etc. that you find in many of the other axe treatises out there. Much like the unarmoured longsword features all four defenses, so too can the poleaxe use all four in armoured combat.

I've talked about this before (here) but what is new is that rather than looking at them as high crossing, middle crossing, low crossing, I know look at the three armoured sections in Fiore as exemplifying one of the four defenses; cross, deflect, exchange & break.

Fiore's system, Armizare, is just that – a system, a series of principles that does not merely address the art of fighting with specific weapons, but the art of fighting.

DVD Review

Today's review will be on Christian Tobler's new DVD “German Medieval Martial Arts Vol. 1: The Poleaxe” available from Freelance Academy Press. As the title suggests, this is the first in a proposed series on German Martial Arts.

First off, the production quality is excellent! As someone who dabbled (briefly) in the video production world, I can appreciate the obvious hard work that Speaking Window Productions put into this DVD. There was only one point during the Drills section where the sound editor missed an audible “cut” - and I only caught it because I was paying very close attention. Wonderful job guys! The music adds a very nice ambiance to the video without being too distracting.

The DVD opens with a re-enacted judicial duel, which is just great fun!

Following this is the Introduction, a mini-documentary detailing just what a poleaxe is, the etymology of the word, as well as interviews with Christian Tobler, Dr. Lee Jones and Dr. Jeffery Forgeng.

This is followed by a section covering the Guards and an overview of what can be done from each guard. In this section, Tobler finds the perfect medium between being too brief and going into too much detail. The participants are in period clothing and armour (of which there is a wonderful variety!) which adds to the experience. Each guard is shown simultaneously in a side and front view, which is very helpful, and all the actions are clear and precise.

The Drills section covers handling the axe (i.e. being comfortable moving the axe around and using both hands as leads) – I would have liked a mention of the importance on practicing this while wearing gauntlets, because gauntlets do change things about how you grip (and Christian is shown wearing gauntlets during this spot). Then the DVD moves into paired drills for practice, which highlight in greater detail the actions shown earlier.

The Special Features include the trailer for this volume, as well as a video trailer for Tobler's book “In St. George's Name” (my review here) and a quick video about the Selohaar Fechtschule. Also, be sure to check out the Special Features menu very carefully ;)

This is perhaps the best instructional DVD I've ever seen – clean, concise, & informative without trying to do too much. It is a great volume for beginners and long-time WMA students. For those well-versed in the axe, don't expect any ground-breaking, brand new techniques here – a poleaxe is a poleaxe after all. That said, fighting from Nebenhut is a little different than anything in the Italian system (although you could use Vera Croce the same way).

The only negative I have about the DVD is the massive amount of “toy-envy” I developed after watching the copious amounts of beautiful arms and armour parade across the screen!