Rasslin' with Fiore de' Liberi

[Jay Vail]

It is unfortunate that Fiore does not explain in the text what he is trying to do with this movement. One reason I tend to think it is a kata garuma-style over the back throw rather than a leg lift is because that is how the Codex Wallerstein describes it.

Plate 72 of the Codex gives this explanation for a substantially similar technique:

“So if someone with long arms fights you: break out with your right arm; go around with him’ push him forcefully to and fro; then suddenly pull him firmly toward you and bend yourself down forward and put your head under his right arm; with your right hand by his right foot step well under him, as depicted here; and **throw him over your back.** You have to slip through his arms. This can be done on both sides.”

[Bob Charron]

If one looks carefully at the illustration in the Pissani-Dossi manuscript, then cross-references it with the illustration in the Getty Ludwig manuscript, then reads both captions, it is plain that Fiore intends to lift the person from the ground by force, so that he lands upon his head and then his shoulders.

In looking at the Combato technique in comparison, the level of the body, the position of the hands, and the proximity of the thrower to the throwee are all imcompatible with the technique being shown in the Fior di Bataglia.

If this technique is done within the context of Fiore's art, with all the scientific principles and priorities he describes in his system, it is done easily exactly as the illustration is shown.

You can even do it slowly in practice (as I did for Stuart), but more importantly, if done ballistically it is extremely efficient, lift him completely off the ground and drives him into the ground with his head and shoulder (and it is very hard to counter).

Once again, we must do exactly as the master instructs through his words and illustrations. If it doesn't work it is our fault, not the master's - keep working on it.

By the way, why do you believe Fiore's abrazare techniques are "wimpy"? Every one of them is pretty damn brutal in my opinion. After my two days in Denver teaching jiu jitsu students, they agree

[Jay Vail]

Bob said: By the way, why do you believe Fiore's abrazare techniques are "wimpy"? Every one of them is pretty damn brutal in my opinion. After my two days in Denver teaching jiu jitsu students, they agree

Bob, are you talking to me? I don't believe I've ever said this about Fiore's wrestling. On the contrary, I have a great deal of respect for it. Indeed, his wrestling and anti-dagger plays are what first attracted me to WMA and convinced me that there was truth in the old books, because they so closely replicate what I have learned in judo and jujutsu. I have, with some exceptions, used most of what Fiore shows successfully in randori or had them used against me. I am particularly impressed with Fiore's unarmed plays against the dagger. They are among the most efficient, practical defenses I have ever seen against the knife in 30 years of playing in MA. I heartily recommend their diligent study and practice to everyone. In fact, were I to design an anti-knife cirriculum today for practical self defense, I would base it around Fiore's plays. They are as useful today as they were 600 years ago. I have been practicing them quite a lot -- more than the sword -- and I look forward to your book so I can compare interpretations.

[Guest]

Hi Bob,

For a comparison going in the other direction with the throw, Parkyns gives this in his description of the flying horse:

"Take him by the right hand with your left, your palm being upwards, as if you design'd only to shake him by the hand in a friendly manner at the beginning, and twist it outwards, and lift it upwards to make way for your head, and put your head under his right arm-pit, and hold his hand down to your left side; hold your head still backwards, to hold him out of his strength, then put your right arm up to the shoulder betwixt his grainings, and let your hand appear behind past his breech, without taking hold; but if you suspect they'll cavil at that arm, as a breeching, lay your same arm along his belly, and lift him up as high as your head, and in either hold, when so high, lean backward and thrown him over your head."

It has a different finish but the idea of taking him out of his strength by the use of the head is in both versions.

Slán
Ken

If I only had enough time to study everything I was interested in <img src="http://www.thearma.org/forum/images/icons/crazy.gif" alt="" />

[Shane Smith]

Ken said; "If I only had enough time to study everything I was interested in <img src="http://www.thearma.org/forum/images/icons/crazy.gif" alt="" /> "

I say"You and me both friend!" <img src="http://www.thearma.org/forum/images/icons/grin.gif" alt="" /> I have interests in so many different aspects of these fascinating arts that I am always at a loss for either time or money to do all that I would with each. It's an addiction I tell you!

Welcome to the forum <img src="http://www.thearma.org/forum/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />

[Bob Charron]

Jay,

I was quoting (and it appears not quite correctly [should have used "wimpy" instead of "pansy"]) David Welch from his original post:

"While trying to figure out some of the moves in Fiore unarmed I was having some trouble getting the results I wanted. Some of it worked but felt a little, well, pansy. This is the first one I am really happy with."

Ken, thanks for the technique quote from Parkyns! Yet this is again a deep low move by the shoulder, and Fiore keeps his shoulder high in the armpit of the opponent.

And yes, if there were only time for study Well back to work

[david welch]

Bob Charron said:
"By the way, why do you believe Fiore's abrazare techniques are "wimpy"? Every one of them is pretty damn brutal in my opinion. After my two days in Denver teaching jiu jitsu students, they agree

Weeeeell, I have some 'splainin' to do! <img src="http://www.thearma.org/forum/images/icons/grin.gif" alt="" />

Sorry about that, I see how you could get that from what I said.

What I meant was that I didn't like the way the techniques were feeling, they "felt pansy", therefore I didn't think they were correct Fiore interpretations.

Fiore was writing a manule intended for people going into combat. We know what works in unarmed combat (even if we choose to do something else) and I strongly think that if I am doing something out of Fiore, armed or unarmed, that is not intended to have my enemy dead, or at least rolling around (alone) on the ground making "gak! gak!" noises holding his throat in just a second and a half at the longest, it is being done wrong.

"If this technique is done within the context of Fiore's art, with all the scientific principles and priorities he describes in his system"

An audaciously violent attack with a brutal finish? That is what I am talking about. I have to look at a technique and ask "is that as brutal as I could make it?". If the answer is no, it is wrong. That overcomes a lot of flaws in technique, because you never have perfect technique on the battlefield.

"jiu jitsu students, they agree"

If they are some of the modern ones that feeeeel it's bad manners for Uke to try to screw up Tori's throw then....

If they are working on pre 1880 jiu-jitsu where the correct way to unbalance your opponent for a throw is to break his leg and then hit him, THEN we are getting on the same page! <img src="http://www.thearma.org/forum/images/icons/grin.gif" alt="" />

Again, I decided I liked the new way of doing it when I tore my practice dummy's head off with it. Could I be wrong? Damned skippy! I am betting I am not doing your technique right at all. I just don't feel any "crunch" to it.

I just want the correct technique. I don't care WHO has it. But I will always put my money on the simplest, most violence one for use in combat.

[Bob Charron]

David,

In my opinion Fiore's art was a subtle, refined art intended for educated men. There is an entire continuum of violence which must be used with discretion (avisamento) by the scholar. Moral, legal, political, and religious considerations were necessary in the application of the art.

Therefore it is not a rule that the opponent is disabled or dead at the end of the technique (although it may be one outcome).

An audacious attack (ardimento) must be constantly governed by perception of the opponent, a calm and intellectual resolve and years of learning and honing the reflexes to pressure and strikes found in abrazare.

Your obliquely abusive comments toward jiu jitsu students are not sentiments I share in the least. I greatly respect any diligent student showing respect to the teacher, and I am reminded of one student's randori session which ended in a separated shoulder when he tried to force the master in a position. It's not that they don't know their art, but it is better for all if dangerous training is done "in concordia" as Fiore himself states.

Elegant simplicity and "sprezzatura" are elements of the Italian aesthetic in the period. The techniques should simple and direct, I agree.

In this case, I agree that I don't care who interprets it correctly, as long as it is indeed Fiore's technique.

[Stuart McDermid]

Great post Bob,

Guys, if you haven't met trained and chatted over a beer with Bob, then you are seriously missing out when it comes to Italian medieval martial arts. If America has another practitioner so well versed in physical technique, history and culture pertaining to Fiore then you are very lucky indeed.

Gushing aside <img src="http://www.thearma.org/forum/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" />, There seems to be this attitude amongst some practitioners of medieval combatives that they were purely an all in method that involved techniques only to maim and kill. This is not the case at all. In Codex wallerstein there are many techniques that can be used to restrain or to kill. Fiore's Key locks, particularly what Fioreites would call the "ligadura sottana" (hammer lock in CACC terms)

This lock defintely has a number of levels of force. It can be used to ground someone without hurting them, as a come along hold, to tear the ligaments in the shoulder and also to throw the bg n his head.
Cheers,
Stu.

[Tony_Indurante]

Stewart or Bob,

I'm not well versed in Fiore, does he say that the locks are used in any way other than to maim or kill your opponent? I'm not talking extrapolation, but does Fiore actually say it? Same with Wallerstein? Do any of the HEMA Masters? The above is not to be confrontational- I'm genuinely interested. I can't recall reading this type of information in any of the manuals I have read. Just thumbing through my copy of Wallerstein I find some references to causing actual injury, but I don't see anything even remotely talking about using any less force- do you think this may be some thing that is implied but not stated? What leads you to that impression? I mean common sense tells me that you could use these wrestling moves for less than lethal intent- I just don't see that expressed in any of the manuals.

[Jay Vail]

I'm not well versed in Fiore, does he say that the locks are used in any way other than to maim or kill your opponent? I'm not talking extrapolation, but does Fiore actually say it?

The pissani-dossi version of Fiore definitely says you can break somebody's arm with the locks. By break he means destroy the intergrity of the elbow, ie, dislocate it. You don't actually kill someone with an attack to the elbow, but an elbow dislocation alone can end a fight by making the opponent incapable of further resistance. A friend of man, who was attacked by a knifer this past summer, ended his fight with an elbow break. He followed it with a front kick for good measure, but he said to me that the guy was finished after his elbow bent 45 degrees the wrong way. So they do work.

Moreover, they allow a gradation of force to be applied which can vary according to the situation, so the locks can be applied in many circumstances, including those in which your life is not in danger.

To apply them, however, you have to drop them on hard and fast, otherwise the guy will escape.

[Casper Bradak]

I think a lot of the holds in wallerstein he says to break the arm. I know that there are a couple of ringecks wrestlings that are definitely meant to mame as opposed to simply cause submission.

[Stuart McDermid]

Hi Tony,

Fiore is not my forte so I will wait for Bob but check out plate

143 of Codex Wallerstein. (all of these are Zabinsky/Walczak translation).
The text says "Then if it is necessary for you to hold and keep two captured me, hold them like this.

Also 144
"Then, a better trick: If you want to hold or drive two men.....

Also 145
So you should understand a good move and hold, as a strong man falls and how he should be held...

Also 146
So one more trick: if you want to hold someone, put him on his stomach and straddle him......

Plate 147
The a very good hold because you can hold three captured men whether they already have irons on or not.

Wallerstein is well worth the read from cover to cover.
Cheers,
Stu.

[Gene Tausk]

Guys:

This has been a good thread and a lot of valuable information discussed. However, the latest posts are starting to get snippy with ad hominem attacks beginning to raise their ugly head.

Stick with the forum rules, please. No personal attacks will be tolerated on this forum


-----------&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;gene tausk
unarmed forum moderator

[Tony_Indurante]

Stuart,

These plates are extremely different from the rest of the manual. These are all restraining moves meant to hold prisoners- there is nothing to indicate that they were used in the capturing process.

Like I said, common sense tells me that you can use any technique at less than killing/maiming intent- I'm interested in actual examples that say this from the sources.

Like I also said- this isn't confrontational, I'm genuinely interested.

Plate 146- this technique is a "good apprentice's trick"- why do you think he said that? I can't decide if its demeaning the technique or saying "hey, this is very good for beginers".