Principle and Concept-based Biomechanical Arts

[John Couch]

Hello. I have been fascinated by Mr. Clements work since I first saw his videos. It is nice to know that many of the concepts I learned as part of my EMA training existed in one form or another among Europeans. Until there is a man with 4 arms and 3 legs there will be only one way to fight.

That said, I am curious about the specific European presentations of the things I have learned. I have trained in Taijiquan, Xingyiquan, and Baguazhang or Internal Arts. I do NOT subscribe to chi or any mystical energies. What I do understand is that those terms come from an unscientific worldview and were used to describe phenomena that had to be felt (and still do) before they could be completely understood.

What I want to know is NOT the English, French, or other Germanic or Romance language equivalent of concepts or techniques.

I would be interested in knowing if there was a specific person or group of persons who taught fighting less as a collection of techniques and more as a holistic principle of biomechanics and kinesiology that can be translated very effectively by the right practitioner into a martial context.

Thank you.

[RayMcCullough]

I would be interested in knowing if there was a specific person or group of persons who taught fighting less as a collection of techniques and more as a holistic principle of biomechanics and kinesiology that can be translated very effectively by the right practitioner into a martial context.

That is what the Masters did, all of them in their own way presenting essentially the same Art. A collection of techniques does not alone make an art. Techniques are ways to apply the greater context of self defense and the concepts, fundamentals, and principles of defense and how to learn them.

The various European masters did this. We have a large collection of the diverse masters teachings to learn from. They seem to be presenting the same Art with variations being personal preferences of the masters(which is expected since people are of different minds). Joachim Meyer even makes mention of this in his work.

If you want to learn the principles of biomechanics and kenesiology of the science of defense then begin studying and practicing the masters teachings.

Also your full name is required per the forum rules.

[Stacy Clifford]

I think these two quotes say it very nicely:

"Further you shall also know that although I have assigned to every posture its particular devices, it is not my intention that these devices shall not be executed or take place from other postures. The chiefest reason that I have assigned some devices to one posture, others to another, is so they can be discussed in an orderly fashion. Also these devices are not so set in stone that they cannot be changed in practice-they are merely examples from which everyone may seek, derive, and learn devices according to his opportunity, and may arrange and change them as suits him. For as we are not all of a single nature, so we also cannot all have a single style in combat; yet all must nonetheless arise and be derived from a single basis."
-Joachim Meyer, 1570

"Whereupon being forced, through a certaine honest desire which I beare to helpe others, I gave my selfe wholy to the contemplation thereof: hoping that at the length, I shoulde finde out the true principles and groundes of this Arte, and reduce the confused and infinite number of blowes into a compendious summe and certaine order: The which principles being but fewe, and therefore easie to be knowen and borne away, without doubt in small time, and little travaile, will open a most large entrance to the understanding of all that which is contained in this Arte. Neither was I in this frustrate at all of my expectation: For in conclusion after much deliberation, I have found out this Arte, from the which onely dependeth the knowledge of all that which a man may performe with a weapon in his hand, and not onely with those weapons which are found out in these our dayes, but also with those that shall be invented in time to come: Considering this Arte is grounded upon Offence and Defence, both the which are practiced in the straight and circuler lynes, for that a man may not otherwise either strike or defend."
-Giacomo di Grassi, 1570 (from the 1594 English translation)

[John Couch]

Apologies. My last name is Couch. As a point of interest and genealogy, the name is originally Flemish.

Anyway, Stacy, thanks for the names of those two gentlemen. I'll look for their manuals and see what there is. As I said before, all of these principles and movements, I have already learned or experienced as a result of my Asian martial training. It gives me a greater sense of legitimacy, for lack of a better word, to know that my European ancestors had codified the same concepts that their Asian counterparts had and that having studied the one, I have basically studied the other.

Stacy, if you have more modern translation of these texts or complete electronic versions of them, I would appreciate copies, or direction in finding them for myself.

Thanks.

I think these two quotes say it very nicely:

"Further you shall also know that although I have assigned to every posture its particular devices, it is not my intention that these devices shall not be executed or take place from other postures. The chiefest reason that I have assigned some devices to one posture, others to another, is so they can be discussed in an orderly fashion. Also these devices are not so set in stone that they cannot be changed in practice-they are merely examples from which everyone may seek, derive, and learn devices according to his opportunity, and may arrange and change them as suits him. For as we are not all of a single nature, so we also cannot all have a single style in combat; yet all must nonetheless arise and be derived from a single basis."
-Joachim Meyer, 1570

"Whereupon being forced, through a certaine honest desire which I beare to helpe others, I gave my selfe wholy to the contemplation thereof: hoping that at the length, I shoulde finde out the true principles and groundes of this Arte, and reduce the confused and infinite number of blowes into a compendious summe and certaine order: The which principles being but fewe, and therefore easie to be knowen and borne away, without doubt in small time, and little travaile, will open a most large entrance to the understanding of all that which is contained in this Arte. Neither was I in this frustrate at all of my expectation: For in conclusion after much deliberation, I have found out this Arte, from the which onely dependeth the knowledge of all that which a man may performe with a weapon in his hand, and not onely with those weapons which are found out in these our dayes, but also with those that shall be invented in time to come: Considering this Arte is grounded upon Offence and Defence, both the which are practiced in the straight and circuler lynes, for that a man may not otherwise either strike or defend."
-Giacomo di Grassi, 1570 (from the 1594 English translation)

[Stacy Clifford]

Stacy, if you have more modern translation of these texts or complete electronic versions of them, I would appreciate copies, or direction in finding them for myself.

The thread you found with the link to the Raymond J. Lord collection has full copies of Di Grassi's work in both the original Italian (1570) and English (1594). There is no modern English translation from the original Italian to my knowledge, though I've heard someone suggest it as a possible future project. I've worked with the 1594 version quite a bit, and once you get used to the style of the language it's quite understandable. I also like the fact that I can work with it exactly as someone did the day after its original publication, unlike works in languages I can't read.

Joachim Meyer's work was translated and published as The Art of Combat: A German Martial Arts Treatise of 1570 by Jeffrey Forgeng a few years back. The book is excellent, but sadly it's out of print and the few copies for sale are going for hundreds of dollars. There is a movement to get the publisher to reprint it with some hopeful signs recently, but no guarantees yet.

[LafayetteCCurtis]

I would be interested in knowing if there was a specific person or group of persons who taught fighting less as a collection of techniques and more as a holistic principle of biomechanics and kinesiology that can be translated very effectively by the right practitioner into a martial context.

Don't ALL serious martial arts do this? The problem, of course, is that it's impossible to just explain and teach the principles as such -- techniques are a necessary bridge towards an understanding of the fundamental principles that form the actual core of the art, and the main problem is that many people these days don't have the patience to do the tedious drills and exercises that allow them to eventually understand and apply the principles at a practical level (as opposed to merely "knowing" them theoretically).

[Stacy Clifford]

Don't ALL serious martial arts do this? The problem, of course, is that it's impossible to just explain and teach the principles as such -- techniques are a necessary bridge towards an understanding of the fundamental principles that form the actual core of the art, and the main problem is that many people these days don't have the patience to do the tedious drills and exercises that allow them to eventually understand and apply the principles at a practical level (as opposed to merely "knowing" them theoretically).

Well said. Core principles are really the dividing line between a true martial art and a collection of tricks. And to John Couch, I should note that the two sources I quoted are far from the only ones that focus on principles, they are just two of the better ones in that they are more clearly written and organized. The Liechtenauer tradition in particular focuses a great deal on explaining the core principles before illustrating them with techniques. The Italian manuals tend to vary more in style, with some looking more like a library of categorized techniques, and others like Di Grassi focusing more on theory with fewer examples. Terms like "binding and winding" are ubiquitous in German sources and almost absent in Italian ones, and yet if you are paying attention, the same concepts are being shown. The real beauty of Renaissance martial arts is that despite the differences in culture, teaching style, and emphasis on one aspect of fighting over another, we can trace the same ideas all across the continent through the extensive documentation they left behind, if only we are willing to look beneath the surface.

[medievalweaponsluvr]

this whole thread is amazing :>