Modern Fechtmeister

[Mike Cartier]

We don't know what made a master, we will forever be in the dark in many respects with the reconstruction of historical martial arts because we are outside the motivation of actual life and death use that our ancestors had.

I think it behooves us to make the word master something we don't use to clearly mark the divide between reconstruction and actual living battleifeld martial art.

Any use of that word is only for marketing purposes anyways.

[Shane Smith]

ARMA recognizes no modern Master of WMA because there are none to be found. There is no direct living tradition as there is in the AMA. Some of our guys are better Swordsmen than others and that is how we establish respect within our own ranks in my experience . We are all students and all teachers in some capacity in my opinion at different times of a given training day in a sense. If you are an ARMA member and are not adhering to the ARMA method, there is a very real problem to be addressed. I have corrected many after silly questions from "Are you a Knight?" to "Are you a Master" with;" No, I am a Swordsman and a martial artist only". They understand and appreciate that, and even if they don't, I and my fellow Scholars can.

[Jay Vail]

I don't think a title means nothing. I have been practicing almost every day and hopefully my hard work will pay off and I'll go up in rank sometime, cause that would be cool IMO

Zach, clearly you have not been in the martial arts long. Rank is nothing. Knowledge is everything. But even then it is sometimes not enough. Even when you have been training for years and years, a new guy can still beat your a**. Dobringer has much to say about this. It is an old, old truth.

[Casper Bradak]

I have a few questions for opinions and clarification, so you know I'm not arguing against these ideas. The discussion has kind of gone on related tangents.
I do think that point of view and definition of the terms for "historical fencing master", whatever its guise, has so much to with it that I can personally stay rather neutral on the discussion, depending on how it's put across by individuals. Alright, well maybe not. But anyway, how about some more clarification?

1) Nowadays there is no living school, noble or army which has the right to assign said title by virtue of unbroken tradition and/or current demonstration of martial validity upon a battlefield or judicial yard.

Agreed. Should we make one? On another note though, we know Masters, the teachers of fencing schools, did not earn their titles in judicial duels or battlefields (though they did give those masters a context and basis for their skills, and gave some of them the experience). Those titles were given by other martial artists.
On another note, I wonder if those titles were given by anyone to many of the masters who wrote their own manuals that now survive, such as contracted teachers to nobles, such as Fiore, among others.

2) None of these persons can claim any right to entitle himself as such by virtue of experience at actual and earnest Medieval or Renaissance combat to the death

Not by earnest combat, but see my above point. On the other hand, what makes their fencing school experience so much different from that of 600 years ago? We have no living lineage, and no earnest combat in the world to keep us honest, but we have the manuals, damn fine ones, that we can adhere to, so we can keep from making things up, and have at least a partial recorded lineage.

3) To do so notwithstanding the previous two reasons is an insult to the real Fechtmeister of the past and a fraud to modern beginners looking for an authority to guide them

Hehe yeah, probably, but like I said, it can really depend on the intent of the term and point of view. And, we need to start again sometime, don't we? If not people proclaiming themselves, how about democratically within our individual organisations (or guilds, if you will)?

Anyway, like I said, I'm of your opinion more or less, I don't believe in any "masters" now. But, I'd like to hear the opinions on my arguments.

On study groups...
It's a study group if everyone studies, strives, contributes, researches, and teaches to some degree, together.
It's a class, which invariably has a teacher (qualified or not), if one person teaches and the "students" are passive learners. So a "study group" could effectively be a class, with a teacher. Hopefully none of us in the ARMA at least have a class, but I'm sure there are some even in our organization.

[Randall Pleasant]

David Craig wrote:
Well, if it's your group then it's your rules. If your group felt that people should be kicked out for using the term fechtmeister inappropriately, then that would be your option. But it would still be my option to consider that an extreme overreaction.

David

I was not commenting on the conditions that could lead to members losing their membership, that is the turf of the director. I was simply saying that a study group leader, or any member of that study group for that matter, should make it clear to all other members that jokes that are hurmful to the orgainization and/or to its members are inappropriate. Friendship is <u>not</u> a consideration in this matter.

With the friendly intent of being helpful to my fellow ARMA members I also suggest that if a member is going to lead a study group then they need to LEAD it. A study group leader is responsible for keeping the study group on the ARMA course. I have often heard lawyers talk about not just following the law but also following the spirit of the law. Likewise, ARMA members should not just follow the ARMA method of training, we should also follow the unwritten spirit of ARMA training that we have learned over the years from our director and from each other. Calling anyone "master" at any ARMA event is outside of that spirit. When we wear the red shirt we should behave like ARMA members and we should behave like martial artists. Again, this has been said with friendly intent and pride in being associated with this organization and all of its members.

[Zach Palfreyman]

Zach, clearly you have not been in the martial arts long. Rank is nothing. Knowledge is everything. But even then it is sometimes not enough. Even when you have been training for years and years, a new guy can still beat your a**. Dobringer has much to say about this. It is an old, old truth.

I would still have to disagree. If they were worthless, then why do people use them or why were they ever developed in the first place? And why are people here arguing over the validity of someone claiming title of Master? So they obviously mean something.

If a "new guy" beats someone with years of experience, then the new guy was either really good to begin with, or the person with years of experience wasn't very good despite it. Or he just got unlucky. Sure it can happen, but under normal circumstances all that training should give you the edge. If it didn't, you'd have to question the whole point of practicing at all, because it wouldn't be to get better at something. Sure its all pretty subjective, but it does clearly have some meaning, IMO. But thanks for the words of encouragement, now I know to never even bother trying for Senior Free Scholar or anything like that. <img src="/forum/images/icons/tongue.gif" alt="" />

[Mike Cartier]

Rank does indeed mean nothing, except of course where martial skill is the sole determining criteria for the rank.

In renaissance Germany when a fechtmeister wished to start a school he presented himself before the city authorities and showed his lineage/qualifications and requested space and the right to post up a basic announcment of his new school and which basically challenged all freifechter or existing fight guild members in the area to come and test his skill. The master was expected to display this elevated level of skill before the town in a public setting so merely rank and letters of lineage alone were not enough, one was expected to cut the mustard.

[Jay Vail]

Zach,

I agree, rank has some value. It is usually used to motivate to student to master the material. But it is a social concept that has no value itself in actual combat. Rank does not innoculate you from defeat. Knowledge may. But not necessarily.

As you correctly point out, training has value, but it only gives you an edge, an advantage over a lesser trained opponent. But it is an edge that can be overcome by many factors -- poor judgment being the primary one, simple bad luck being another. It does not necessarily mean that the untrained victor was somehow the better fighter, although that is always a possibility. As I said, the possibility of this occurring is well known to the experienced. Hanko Dobringer, writing in 1389, covered this topic in swordplay. Citing Master Lichtenauer’s teaching that winning the first strike is crucial to victory, he said, “Therefore in all swordplay someone who strikes will often defeat a Master if he is bold and gain the first strike according to this teaching.” Lindholm trans. p. 17. Dobringer repeats this point on p. 47: “So with this art of advantage it often happens that a peasant will beat up a good master if the peasant does the [vorschlag] and boldly pushes forward.”

My post was intended to warn you not to get “black belt disease,” a condition in which people think that because of their rank they are entitled to win all their encounters. Martial arts, like life itself, does not guarantee anything.

Train hard, fight hard. Trust in [the deity of your choice], as the ancient masters would say.

Best wishes and in hopes you continue to grow and progress,

JV

[Shane Smith]

Not by earnest combat, but see my above point. On the other hand, what makes their fencing school experience so much different from that of 600 years ago? We have no living lineage, and no earnest combat in the world to keep us honest, but we have the manuals, damn fine ones, that we can adhere to, so we can keep from making things up, and have at least a partial recorded lineage

Thought provoking!

I think that we can never truly call ourselves Masters of WMA because we are not neccesarily practicing the Arts as they were practiced and understood centuries ago. We are simply interpreting the manuals in the context of our own knowledge(which is somewhat limited I think) and understanding. With that in mind, we can never achieve Mastery of anything save our own bodies and minds as they contribute to our interpretations and those of others that we choose to accept. That is my opinion.Others will disagree I'm sure.

[David Craig]

Gene,

That last statement makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Let me get this straight: this particular ARMA study group puts on a demonstration. The leader of the study group is referred to as "fechtmeister" by the other study group members. Audience members, hearing this, go up to the leader and start calling him "fechtmeister" based on what the other study group members were calling him. Now, in response, the leader states, "oh no, I'm not really a fechtmeister. That's just what the other study group members call me. I'm just an experienced student."

As I already pointed out in another post, hopefully the members would refrain from using that term in a public situation. But again, since the average person doesn't have the slightest idea what a fechtmeister is, they are going to have to ask if they even care. At that point the person could explain that it's a German term meaning fight/fencing master. I fail to see how it would be difficult to understand an explanation that no living masters actually exist, and the group is merely using that term as a sign of respect for their leader.

Either way, it makes a poor impression. What is the point of being addressed by a certain title unless that person has earned that title? In the military, do you think that, even as a joke, a captain will allow himself to be referred to as a general? SNIP If he does not deserve the title, then why call him that in the first place?

First, this isn't the military and there is no comparison between the two situations. But second, I am not advocating the use of false titles. Would it be better that they just stop calling him fechtmeister? Yes. But what I'm taking issue with is the idea that this is somehow a serious problem. In my view, it is a minor, internal problem in a study group that is basically harmless. Is it mportant enough to expel members or take other drastic action, as some seem to be advocating? In my view, no, not even close.

Are you suggesting that throughout class every time the person is referred to as "fechtmeister" by his fellow study group participants he retorts by saying, "but remember, I'm not really a fechtmeister."

No, of course not. I'm suggesting that he basically ignore it since he has already pointed out that he isn't any kind of master and asked them to stop. It need only come up again if a new person that could get the wrong idea shows up, or if there is some sort of public demonstration.

If his fellow group members are affixing a title to him that he does not want or deserve, and they will not stop affixing this title, then at the very least he can do is leave the group.

This, right here, is what I've been arguing against. In my view, that is totally uncalled for and counterproductive. Because people are calling him fechtmeister he should leave the group?
Sorry, but we'll have to agree to disagree on that. To me that would be an example of him responding to the childish behavior of his group by upping the ante with an even more childish action.

David

[David Craig]

I was simply saying that a study group leader, or any member of that study group for that matter, should make it clear to all other members that jokes that are hurmful to the orgainization and/or to its members are inappropriate. Friendship is not a consideration in this matter.

Randall,

I have no problem with a study group leader setting ground rules for members of the group. But I also make a distinction between serious and minor issues. Someone who refuses to take proper safety precautions and risks injury to other members is a serious problem. Someone who is disruptive and can't get along with other members is a serious problem. But in my view, someone who makes inappropriate jokes, or uses a title inappropriately within the group, is a minor problem. In that case, friendship would certainly be a consideration for me. If the person is otherwise a good member I fail to see how it would be useful or appropriate to get rid of them for something that is, in my opinion, insignificant.

As for harming the organization... sorry, but I'm not seeing it. If a member posted a website giving himself an underserved title then yes, that would harm the credibility of the organization. If he himself went around saying that he was an ARMA Fechtmeister then yes, that would undermine ARMA's credibility with others. But in this case what harm is being done? No one would have even known about it if Justin didn't mention it in his post.

David

[Mike Chidester]

You raise some very good points, Casper. We like to emphasize to ourselves the fact that we're recreating this art and we don't have a complete understanding of it. This is good--it keeps us humble (or at least, less arrogant than we could be <img src="/forum/images/icons/smirk.gif" alt="" /> ). But we also accept the fact that we'll never fully understand the arts we practice. So at some point we'll have to be satisfied with what we know.

Really, the days when we discovered things like triangle steps, that revolutionized the way we fight, have given way to prolonged debate about things like the precise nature of the krumphau--which one of the cuts we're already doing could properly use that name.

We're never going to uncover all ofthe secrets of the ancient masters. But in the pursuit of such, we've developed and refined a very advanced system of our own. So while no one can properly claim to be a master of the ancient arts, it is certainly possible to master this modern discipline we all study. We've got seven (or is it eight now?) Senior Free Scholars. All of them have successfully Played their Prizes, the traditional test of mastery, and demonstrated advanced knowledge and aptitude. Some of these are preparing to Play Prizes again with additional weapons, and thus demonstrate an even greater mastery in the martial arts.

Really, at this time, most (if not all) of the greatest swordsmen in the world are ARMA members of advanced rank. In any other organization they'd have "black belts" many times over. They don't know everything, but I'd be willing to bet that every master who ever lived continued learning until his death. They don't have battlefield experience, but I ask myself how much battlefield experience masters like Meyer had, when these weapons were no longer even used in battle.

At what point does our refusal to claim mastery become mere foolishness on our part, a form of hubris in itself?

[GaryGrzybek]

"Really, at this time, most (if not all) of the greatest swordsmen in the world are ARMA members of advanced rank."

Mike, comments like this is what often turns people off. We have some of the most advanced students yes, but there will always be someone better that you or I. A humble approach will often get more respect I beleive. It's certainly fine to toot our own horn but in a more tactful way.

Just my opinion

[GaryGrzybek]

Keep in mind Dave that if this false claim, joking or not is heard by the wrong people it can lead to more unessasary contraversey. You know how sensative some people can get. <img src="/forum/images/icons/crazy.gif" alt="" />

There's certainly more importaint issues to deal with.

[Mike Chidester]

Mike, comments like this is what often turns people off. We have some of the most advanced students yes, but there will always be someone better that you or I. A humble approach will often get more respect I beleive. It's certainly fine to toot our own horn but in a more tactful way.

I don't consider myself in that number. But while I acknowledge the possiblity that somewhere, in Asia perhaps, there's a better swordsman that John Clements, I highly doubt it. Of course, if you had someone in particular in mind, by all means point out my error.

The fact is, Asian martial arts long ago lost their martial soundness, and no other European martial arts group compares with the ARMA, in efficiency or knowledge-base.