So what the h@ll is "Armizare"?

In response to some friends who've asked me this recently, here we go:

Armizare is a 15th century Italian martial art that encompasses unarmed grappling, knife, sword, spear, poleaxe, and all of the above on horseback.

That's it. It's a martial art - just like Karate, Aikido, Krav Maga, etc.

Abrazare as Foundation for Armizare

I’ve been focusing on grappling recently. I personally believe that his grappling (including the abrazare & dagger sections) is the foundation upon which Fiore’s armizare is built. Of the four manuscripts, two begin with abrazare (the Getty and Pissani-Dossi). The other two, the Morgan and the Paris, seem to follow the order of a judicial duel (horseback -> lance on foot -> pollaxe -> armoured sword -> sword -> dagger -> grappling). Any explanations for this difference in format are purely speculative at this point, but I believe that the format and order in which the sections appear is somewhat irrelevant. All four manuscripts are self-referential in a manner similar to a modern hyper-texting; the captions consistently include statements such as “as shown before” and “my play is that of the 3rd scholar of the 1st master of the sword in armour”. So in a system where the manual refers you to other sections, the order of the sections doesn’t necessarily matter, just that you can find the other sections.

But how is grappling the basis for the whole system of armizare?

1. All of Fiore’s poste can be seen as derivative of the four basic abrazare guards.
2. It encapsulates all of the principles of measure, proper body mechanics, and timing that are the core of armizare.


1. Fiore describes four basic grappling poste:
• Posta Longa - Lead arm well extended, with the hips turned slightly to allow further reach. The other arm is held in some fashion to help protect the body and is not as extended as the lead arm.
• Posta Dente de Zengiaro - Lead arm is extended from the shoulder with the elbow bent at a 90˚ angle. The other arm is held in some fashion to help protect the body and is not as extended as the lead arm.
• Posta Frontale - Both arms extended forward, elbows down. The body is more squared than in Posta Longa.
• Posta Porta di Ferro - Both hands held low, in front of their respective thighs.

If we examine Fiore’s 12 unarmoured sword poste (the largest set of guards in the manuscripts), we can see that they all derive from these four.

LONGSWORD GUARD -> ABRAZARE GUARD

Posta Breve -> Porta di Ferro
Posta Tutta Porta di Ferro -> Porta di Ferro
Posta Porta di Ferro Mezana -> Porta di Ferro
Posta Dente de Zengiaro -> Porta di Ferro
Posta di Coda Lunga -> Porta di Ferro
Posta Frontale -> Longa / Frontale
Posta di Donna (Left and Right) -> Dente de Zengiaro
Posta di Finestra (Left and Right) -> Dente de Zengiaro
Posta Bicornu -> Dente de Zengiaro
Posta Longa -> Longa / Frontale

So, all of the low sword poste can be seen as variations of Porta di Ferro and the high guards vary, depending on whether the leading arm is straight or bent or by the rotation of the hips. The four abrazare poste are given as basic positions to hold in the system, with variations depending on the weapon used.
In addition to the guard positions themselves, many plays and actions with weapons are derived from grappling actions. The dagger strike, the sword thrust and thrust, etc. are all examples of moving out into Posta Longa of Frontale. The basic motion of the pommel strike, from a crossing of the swords, is a transition to Dente de Zengiaro.


2. That fact the many of Fiore’s initial Remedy Masters plays have a correlation to abrazare or dagger plays is very telling. For instance, the 1st Remedy Master of Giocco Largo, as interpreted by the Northwest Fencing Academy, is a strong parry against a fendente mandritto that:
• intercepts the attacker’s blow part way through its “power arc”
• redirects it away from the defender
• simultaneously threatens the attacker
• is usually accompanied by an accressciamento to the left

Now if we look at the 1st Remedy Master in the dagger section we see a defense against a mandritto that, in terms of what it does and how it is done, is almost the same thing. After the left arm parry, and subsequent bind, redirects the attacker’s strike, while the right hand is poised to, and does, strike. Obviously, this is only one example.
Fiore lays out his seven requirements for grappling in the prologues of the Getty and Pissan-Dossi:

Also I say that wrestling requires seven things; which are strength, speed, knowledge, that is,
knowledge of binds of advantage, knowing how to fracture, that is how to break arms and legs,
knowing binds, that is how to bind arms so that the man has no defense anymore, and can not leave
freely, and knowing how to injure the most dangerous points. Also, knowing how to put someone on
the ground, without danger to himself. Also, knowing how to dislocate arms and legs in different
ways. Which things I will write and draw in this book, step by step, as the art requires.
(dei Liberi, c.1409, trans. Easton and Litta, 2003)


I list these as:
1. Strength
2. Speed
3. Knowledge of Binds
4. Knowledge of Dislocations
5. Knowledge of Striking
6. Knowledge of Breaks
7. Knowledge of Throws

While these are given before the abrazare section, we can see them echoed in the dagger section:

And I shall do these five things always. Namely I take the dagger and strike, I break the arms and I
bind them and I force him to ground. And if of these five plays one or the other I will not abandon.
(dei Liberi, c.1409, trans. Lovett et al. 2002-2005)

The five things are: Disarm, Strike, Break (Dislocate), Bind, and Throw. So in the dagger material, which is built on and combined with the abrazare material, we are given key principles that are the same as those given for grappling. The additive, disarming, makes sense; now you are dealing with a weapon as opposed to empty hands. These principles are further distilled down into the segno, where Fiore shows all seven blows of the sword (and the four dagger strikes) plus the four main virtues of a swordsman, shown as animals, surrounding a figure (in the Getty the figure is dressed in scholar’s robes - this is significant) above who’s head floats a crown. The Elephant, at the bottom of the figure, represents strength and fortitude and carries a tower on his back. The Tyger, to the left, signifies speed and quickness and holds an arrow. The Lion, to the right, represents courage and holds a heart in his paw. The final animal, the Stag-hound (or Lynx) represents Prudence and holds a compass, an instrument used for measuring distance. In this figure you can find the whole of armizare distilled - a practitioner needs strength, speed, courage, an understanding of measure and timing, and knowledge (remember that the figure is wearing scholar’s robes). The image shows all of the possible strikes that can be made as well as footwork directions. The most telling piece of symbolism in the segno, however, is the crown that floats above the figure’s head. The crown, throughout the manuscripts, is the symbol of Masters. That the figure is not actually wearing the crown has, in my opinion, a two-fold meaning:
1. The way to mastery of armizare is through assimilating all of the requirements and virtues shown here in the segno.
2. Perhaps more esoteric, it shows that true Mastery of the art is the pursuit of perfection - it will always be just out of reach.


Why is this important?
Understanding that Fiore’s grappling and dagger material forms the base for the rest of his system allows the student of armizare to from a minimum number of positions, very useful in situations where a combatant needed to switch between weapons or improvise a weapon. Knowing that all the guards (sword, spear, dagger and pollaxe) are derived from the four abrazare poste means that the armizare student can pick up a sword, baton, cudgel, spear, staff, baseball bat, katana or BiC pen and fight effectively.

Ultimately, this is all just my own humble opinion, but it is based on understanding of the system, practice and research. I could “wake up” in a month and consider this all bunk, but for now, this is my understanding of the basis of armizare. Your opinion and mine will most likely be different which is exactly what I find so cool about this art! Please leave comments as you see fit, but remember that we are all human beings. Be polite. Constructive criticism is welcome, destructive is not. Thanks *steps off soapbox*

New-ish Blog direction

So I have decided to take this blog in a new direction -sort of.

After a pseudo-epiphany I will expand my musings to cover armizare in general as well as my working through Le Jeu de la Hache and other pollaxe material.

So not really a new direction, but simply one that allows me to talk about all of my training, given that my training at the moment is 90% Fiore, 10% pollaxe. Once I receive my second axe from Purpleheart Armoury (sometime this week hopefully) I will be able to train with axes more often and then I will have more to add.

So what exactly is armizare? Simply put, it is a late medieval (14th and 15th century) Italian martial art. The particular version I study is based on the four discovered manuscripts attributed to Fiore de Liberi of Cividale, with supplements from Fillipo Vadi and Le Jeu de la Hache. It encompasses wrestling, dagger, sword (in one hand & two), armoured lance, armoured pollaxe, armoured sword, and wrestling, lance and sword work on horseback. But those are just the main sections - sub-sections include pole-arms against cavalry, cudgels, and mis-matched weapons (i.e. dagger vs sword).

The Fiore MS's are magnificent in their ability to constantly refer to themselves. For instance, in the Giocco Stretto (Close Play - wrestling with the sword) Fiore often says things along the lines of "From this crossing of the swords, do this play from this master of dagger". For me, the constant referencing of other sections within the MS is truly amazing and demonstrates that this is a complete martial art that is built on simple principles.

Systemization

So, I've been thinking of doing something very controversial in HEMA. A little background on this; having done about 5 years of longsword work, I am starting to realize that being strict about studying "Italian longsword" is a mistake. My main studies are the longsword art of Fiore dei Liberi, with supplemental studies of Vadi. I believe that I have just started to truly understand the principles beneath this art and in doing so have realized that there is nothing wrong with borrowing a technique from the German arts, so long as it fits within the "Fiorean" framework. Let me say that again, so long as it fits within the "Fiorean" framework. After all, the man himself (Fiore) tells us in the prologues that he studied with many Italian and German masters and has included in this manuscript only those techniques he found especially useful. He is not claiming that his manuscript includes all the possible techniques for the longsword, just that the ones he is including are useful as teaching tools for the deeper principles. As a training partner and fellow researcher said "Once we start doing that, [I think] we are closer to what Fiore's students would have done." Now, I am not advocating blindly combining Italian and German longsword systems. They are two different systems that developed differently because of differing social and contextual influences. However, both systems use the same (or nearly so) weapon and there are only so many ways in which the human body can move a longsword around. The key is to have a solid grounding in one style, and then add aspects of the other style(s. Sorry I tend to forget about English longsword. My bad ) that appeal to you, so long as they fit within the principles of your style.

So all of that rambling is a lead up to this; I have decided that instead of writing, teaching and (maybe) publishing my interpretation of one style of pollaxe play, I will use one text as my primary framework while using as many supplemental manuscripts as possible in order to collate what I believe to be a useful method of "medieval pollaxe combat". My main reason for doing this is realizing that there are some things that are discussed in some manuscripts but not in others. So, the only potential issue is that my source manuscripts run the gamut from early 14th century to mid 16th century, but thankfully the axe as a weapon didn't change it's basic form during that time.

In closing, while what I'm doing may be controversial, I believe that I can logically explain my thought process and reasoning to anyone who politely asks. I always love a good discussion.

One of the best explanations of Fiore dagger material

So I am sure that most of the people who will read this have already seen it, but I thought it was worth immortalizing again. In a recent discussion about Fiore's dagger material on Sword Forum Mark Lancaster posted this succinct and eloquent process for interpreting and reading Fiore's dagger material:

This is the way I tend to describe the Masters to students.

Think of each Master as being an expert in whatever Fiore is describing at the time (i.e. he is representing mastery).

So, we have several different areas of expertise:

1. The stages of a fight (from the introduction).

a. The first expert is Master Battle. He knows how to fight (distance, reaction, etc). In context this would be an expert fighter of the period and Fiore does not go into much more detail (but see below).

b. This expert, however, can be countered (Fiore calls this a Remedy) by the expert Master Remedy. This is really where Fiore's manuscript starts (he expects the reader to know the bulk/jist of Master Battle).

c. The first person (who was the expert Master Battle) could be good enough that he/she knows the technique used by the Master Remedy expert and how to counter it. Fiore calls this Contra, so we have Master Contra.

d. Finally the chap who did the Remedy knows how to counter this Master Contra and is Master Contra-Contrary. This is so rare that is it only shown once in Dagger and Fiore basically says that the fight (if it every reaches this stage) won't go any further.

The above is like a pyramid with four layers (Master Battle at the bottom and Master Contra-Contrary at the very peak). The options (techniques) reduce as the fight continues.

2. The Posta Masters

Here Fiore is basically giving good "expert" positions from which to fight and to recover into (maybe in the middle of a technique). He is saying that mastery of these posta/positions and how they can be used are core to his system. The natural place that this happens is in the first stages of the encounter - Master Battle - and when recovering out of a technique/encounter back to a Master Battle position. Knowing these postas and mastering them gives your brain basic building blocks (like lego) to find within the fight and reduces the thinking time dramatically.

3. The Dagger Requisites.

Fiore gives us four requisites of dagger - each shown as a Master (with the crown).

These show the areas of expertise that define mastery of dagger fighting in general - being able to strip the dagger from your opponent; being able to break limbs (in his view); being able to lock your oppenent and finally being able to use all of the unarmed/wresting skills shown in abrazare.

The important point here is that the illustration shows someone who is getting older (check the beard) and better dressed with each of the four illustrations and Fiore is saying that these progressively take longer to master - i.e. the easiest thing to learn is to strip the dagger and the hardest (requiring longer to master) is the full abrazare within dagger.

4. The 9 Masters of Dagger

In the entire dagger section Fiore shows 9 different "methods" with several sub/progressive techniques for countering a dagger attack. These cover attacks from above and below and can be stopped one handed (left and right) or two handed, etc.

Fiore has grouped all of these possibilities into 9 methods and he starts each one by showing the Master and the basic technique - i.e. the expertise of how to implement the defence/counter (he calls it remedy). However, he then states that he will let his students/scholars show the other techniques that spring out of these nine methods.

This has two illustrative advantages. First he is showing the arrogance of a Master by only showing the basic method and then allowing his students to do the hard work. Second it makes it easier to illustrate when a Master Contrary comes in to counter these Remedy techniques.

If you can crack this use of Master then the manuscripts suddenly make a lot of very simple sense at a quick glance. I could look at any technique, without text, and tell you what is happening by who to whom.

Don't know if that helps - but it's my contribution.

Thanks

Mark Lancaster
The Exiles

That really is one of the best descriptions of the dagger material I have ever heard. Enjoy!

Updates

So I really need to get better at this. The problem is I've set this up as a WMA blog, and my main area of study is the pollaxe, the info etc. for which I am still developing and don't feel terribly comfortable putting online yet.

My finger is healing. The good part is that the bruising is almost gone and you can just see the smallest part where my left pinky is shorter than the right. The bad part is that the internal stuff, i.e. the broken bone healing, is going slowly and still causes issues every now and again.

On April 18th the Northwest Fencing Academy did an armizare demo at the Oregon Knife Collector's Association Knife Show in Eugene. We also had a table where we sold a few Arms & Armor pieces (Thanks Craig!). The one hour demo went great! The students displayed pieces from I.33 and Fiore longsword while Maestro Hayes narrated and then answered questions. It was a wonderful opportunity to get the word about HEMA out to the public. As one of my co-workers who caught the demo said "Wow, there's a lot more to it than I thought!" Overall, the reception the Academy received was great!

I've been working on putting together lesson plans and solo exercises for pollaxe, mainly based on Le Jeu, with some bits of Fiore and the Anonimo to be added in. Eventually I'm hoping that these will form the base of own school's axe curriculum. At the moment I am 60% done with a solo form that will encompass all of the principle defensive and offensive actions. As with everything in HEMA, it will of course change and adapt over time, but I am confident that it's pretty solid for my present interpretation.

I'm planning on attending WMAW this year, where I will be assisting Maestro Hayes in two classes; one on armoured sword work and another on longsword flow drills and how they provide the bridge from basic work to sparring. I went to WMAW in 2007 and absolutely loved it and am really excited to go again, especially with a little more experience under my belt, both with the weapons and with teaching.

As always I continue to work on teaching myself French. Methinks I should stick with teaching history and martial arts! Teaching languages may not be my forte!

Wow I really suck at this blogging thing. Oh well. The finger is healing nicely, no more open wounds, but it is still slightly tender, probably due to the bone being still broken.

Other then that, life pretty much continues as it has for some time. Work, practice, eat, sleep, repeat.