Give reason written sources ?
Answers
Answered by
8
○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○
Anyone can fight with a system for which we do not have evidence, but they cannot know if what they are doing is in fact a historical European martial art or not. The only way to tell if what you are doing is in fact historically authentic or not is to study sources. If you do not study sources, then the fighting styles you practice or teach may or may not be historically authentic, although I would go so far as to say that a modern individual living in a modern context is unlikely to be able to re-create a historic system accurately without clear guidance. I would go further and say that not only must a HEMAist study sources; there are only some sources that can be studied fruitfully with the end goal being to recreate a system that is likely to be historically authentic.
Written sources are generally far superior to other kinds of sources in that they can convey information a lot more clearly, and can generally convey a greater amount of information as well. For example, if you look at my last article The Problem with the Broadsword and Targe Sources, you can see a brief overview of the differences between those sources. The Penicuik sketches are a series of drawings with no text, while Pages’ treatise contains clear written instructions on how to stand in guard, and what techniques to carry out from those guards. We could perhaps supplement our knowledge of how to fight in a Penicuik sketches inspired manner with other written sources describing how the Highlanders fought, either in one on one duels or in battles; however the end result still has less chance of being historically accurate, compared to following a written treatise with explicit instructions on how to fight.
We can say with a relatively high degree of accuracy how to fight in a historically authentic manner within the Liechtenauer tradition of longsword because we have many textual sources describing not only the guards and techniques we should use, but more importantly they tell us how we should approach a fight. For example, I can say with certainty that trying to gain the Vorschlag, or using Indes and Fuhlen, or using the Five Strikes are all important elements of how you approach a fight within the context of Liechtenauer’s longsword system. I can say why some approaches to the fight are correct within the framework of Liechtenauer’s longsword system, and why others are incorrect.
HOPE IT HELPS U.....!!❤❤❤❤
Anyone can fight with a system for which we do not have evidence, but they cannot know if what they are doing is in fact a historical European martial art or not. The only way to tell if what you are doing is in fact historically authentic or not is to study sources. If you do not study sources, then the fighting styles you practice or teach may or may not be historically authentic, although I would go so far as to say that a modern individual living in a modern context is unlikely to be able to re-create a historic system accurately without clear guidance. I would go further and say that not only must a HEMAist study sources; there are only some sources that can be studied fruitfully with the end goal being to recreate a system that is likely to be historically authentic.
Written sources are generally far superior to other kinds of sources in that they can convey information a lot more clearly, and can generally convey a greater amount of information as well. For example, if you look at my last article The Problem with the Broadsword and Targe Sources, you can see a brief overview of the differences between those sources. The Penicuik sketches are a series of drawings with no text, while Pages’ treatise contains clear written instructions on how to stand in guard, and what techniques to carry out from those guards. We could perhaps supplement our knowledge of how to fight in a Penicuik sketches inspired manner with other written sources describing how the Highlanders fought, either in one on one duels or in battles; however the end result still has less chance of being historically accurate, compared to following a written treatise with explicit instructions on how to fight.
We can say with a relatively high degree of accuracy how to fight in a historically authentic manner within the Liechtenauer tradition of longsword because we have many textual sources describing not only the guards and techniques we should use, but more importantly they tell us how we should approach a fight. For example, I can say with certainty that trying to gain the Vorschlag, or using Indes and Fuhlen, or using the Five Strikes are all important elements of how you approach a fight within the context of Liechtenauer’s longsword system. I can say why some approaches to the fight are correct within the framework of Liechtenauer’s longsword system, and why others are incorrect.
HOPE IT HELPS U.....!!❤❤❤❤
Similar questions