Sports fencing federations and HEMA

[admin]

It seems that in a few parts of the world sports fencing federations are deciding that they should be in charge of certifying HEMA instructors and in other ways regulation/controlling European martial arts.

It's fairly obvious what their motivation for this is - money. I can't see any possible philanthropic or charitable motivations.

It is also fairly obvious that sports fencing has very little in common with many forms of HEMA and that sports fencing federations are themselves not qualified to talk about HEMA, any more than they are to talk about jujitsu, escrima, MMA, boxing, kung fu or kendo.

To be honest it looks weak to me - it makes me think that sports fencing is threatened by HEMA's growth and worried that it is going to lose students and be eclipsed (which frankly I think it probably will be, in time).

It seems to me that a simple first step to oppose such moves by national sports fencing federations is to make sure that you are already part of a national HEMA organisation. If you can present a united front then that is useful (for all sorts of things, from getting better insurance policies to dealing with proposed government legislation changes). It shows to everyone that there is already a functioning and (to some degree) regulated national community of HEMA practitioners. It is a shield.

My question, and the one I would like you to focus on in this thread is - Are these moves by sport federations necessarily bad for HEMA?

What are the potential bad outcomes?
What are the potential good outcomes?

I suppose at first glance it may lead to sport fencing coaches misrepresenting HEMA. What else?

I don't see how sport fencing federations could limit or change the activities of existing HEMA groups - they don't have the legal ability to do so. Presumably, even if a national sport federation claimed to be regulating HEMA, they could do nothing to control the many and varied HEMA organisations already running classes and events on a regular basis.

Sports fencing federations could say (as it seems in France or Spain they tried?) to say that nobody can teach 'fencing' unless they certify them. But that is easily got around by saying that what you teach is 'martial arts', not 'fencing'. I don't see how sports fencing federations could enforce any control on HEMA when they are not able to do so on kendo or escrima, for example (or reenactment for that matter).

They could perhaps start running 'historical fencing' competitions, which used more historical weapons but something like sport fencing rules. But so what? HEMA as we know it would still continue and probably the sports fencers would just end up wanting to do 'the real thing' with us.

So I am struggling to see clear points that would result in really bad outcomes for HEMA.

Now possible good outcomes for HEMA -
- More widespread recognition of HEMA
- Introducing more sports fencers to HEMA
- Making sport fencing seem less legitimate and implying HEMA is better/more real
- Greater investment in advertising and equipment
- Easier access to insurance and venues

It seems to me that sports fencing federations are playing a dangerous game in trying to get involved with HEMA. I think it would be a Trojan Horse for them. As I see it they stand to gain very little and stand to lose an awful lot - in an extreme scenario I think that they stand to undermine the entire existance of sports fencing as well know it.

Thoughts?
In particular I'd like to know what other potential bad and good outcomes you see from sports fencing federations trying to get involved with HEMA. I know the knee-jerk reaction of most of us is to oppose their moves, because we have built HEMA up to this point from almost nothing and they have not helped, and many of us used to be sport fencers but saw the light. But when I look at what they stand to lose and gain I wonder whether it is them who should be worried, not us.

[Phil C]

The one advantage I see is access to a vast body of teaching experience and pedagogy.

While what they teach may not be relevant, how they teach is definitely a very useful thing to observe and adopt in many cases in order to turn a historic system into an effective curriculum and enable the effective development of fencing studdents.

Access to sports fitness and physio reasearch and development (through Loughborough University, for example) would also be a secondary benefit.

However these are very minor things when compared with the disadvantages of coming under Olympic Fencing's umbrella.

[Stevie T]

Might there be a problem with them trying to separate the 'fencing' and the other aspects of our arts, particularly the wrestling side of things?

I can see it starting with the unarmed stuff, but then trying to prevent grappling with the sword etc.

[KeithFarrell]

There is currently a thread over on the HEMA Alliance forum discussing this very issue with regard to the USFCA beginning to offer certification for HEMA instructors: http://hemaalliance.com/discussion/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1871

[The Salmon Lord]

I have to say applying better constructed teaching processes to Historical Swordsmanship is a good idea. Any help i can get for that is greatly appreciated. Seeing Simon McGrory teach certainly has opened my eyes to the benefits of learning from a well funded sport.

Beyond that it gets difficult as my experience of sports fencing instructors is they dont "get" the difference between their sport and my martial art.

[admin]

Might there be a problem with them trying to separate the 'fencing' and the other aspects of our arts, particularly the wrestling side of things?

I can see it starting with the unarmed stuff, but then trying to prevent grappling with the sword etc.

This is quite a common reaction, but misses my main point.
They could do whatever they liked with their own practice and teaching, but they do not have the ability to change what WE do.
So what do WE stand to lose? Or gain?

[admin]

Beyond that it gets difficult as my experience of sports fencing instructors is they dont "get" the difference between their sport and my martial art.

But do they need to? What are the bad consequences of them not "getting" HEMA?

[The Salmon Lord]

If they "govern" it. i.e. they are in control of all groups and especially competitions.

Fencing is a sport so everything it does is based around the assumption that competition is the primary aim. Its also an Olympic sport so subject to Olympic Committee rules.

When the BFHS looked into the possibility of becoming a governing body one of the things that came up was drugs testing policy. So suddenly Glorianna Cup, or the Swordfish Longsword competition, competitors might be subject to drugs tests. I know it sounds mental but at its extremes being linked to an Olympic sport does lead one down some paths we simply dont consider.

[admin]

Sure, I get all that. But they can only govern those who choose to be governed, n'est-ce pas?

If the British fencing federation decided to start 'doing' HEMA and certifying instructors, it wouldn't actually affect any of the many HEMA clubs or the BFHS, if they chose not to engage with them. All it would achieve would be to send out a message saying "HEMA is awesome" and "we want a piece of that action". Those of us actually running HEMA clubs wouldn't be remotely affected by them, unless we chose to be.

So I find it hard to see how we would be negatively affected, and easy to see how HEMA might benefit greatly from sports fencing trying to get involved.

[KeithFarrell]

The one advantage I see is access to a vast body of teaching experience and pedagogy.

Agreed!

However these are very minor things when compared with the disadvantages of coming under Olympic Fencing's umbrella.

What do you think these disadvantages might be? Not that I'm for the idea, I'm just interested in what you believe the problems would be

I have to say applying better constructed teaching processes to Historical Swordsmanship is a good idea. Any help i can get for that is greatly appreciated. Seeing Simon McGrory teach certainly has opened my eyes to the benefits of learning from a well funded sport.

This is certainly something from which many HEMA instructors could benefit greatly. That being said, many instructors in other martial arts could also benefit from such tuition - I have participated in some otherwise excellent classes in various disciplines under several teachers where the lessons were spoiled by poor teaching ability, which was always a great shame. Lack of understanding of *how* to teach is not a problem localised to our hobby but in fact is present even in other organisation that do have such a federation or governing body that can supposedly provide this sort of knowledge.

They could do whatever they liked with their own practice and teaching, but they do not have the ability to change what WE do. So what do WE stand to lose? Or gain?

We stand to gain "respectability" or "credibility" in the eyes of these organisations. While that may not be a huge issue, at least it will reduce the amount of negative press that our hobby receives from people who dismiss us as LARPers or re-enactors. It may also serve as a stepping stone for sports fencers to move into historical fencing, which would be good for our numbers and class sizes and market strength.

What do we stand to lose? Perhaps some of the identity that this community has managed to carve for itself; perhaps one of the conditions of approval by such a body would be adherence to their existing safety standards (that were not designed for everything that we can practice within the remit of historical fencing or HEMA). By handing over permission to certify instructors to sports fencing authorities, it establishes precedence for them to take further permissions and to do more and more "overbody" sort of work until eventually they subsume the hobby. Of course, that might not happen, but it is a possibility.

[Dave B]

Again I'd like to agree with the 'teaching methods' point. I've done a bit of sport fencing, and their coach development program is quite impressive, and very focused on how you teach, rather than the specifics of what you teach.

That said I don't think that HEMA has to let the BAF take control in order to have those benefits. My fencing coach's partner is the president to the BAF at the moment, and mentioned the he had been dealing with Guy Windsor (School of European Swordsmanship, Helsinki). Apparently Guy has been in the UK doing his BFA coaching exams, and senior UK coaches have been over in finland doing 'coach development training' with historical fencers. I

It's worth noting that the BAF, British Academy of fencing (which regulates the teaching of modern fencing in the UK and represents coaches) and the BFA, the Britich Fencing Association, (which regulates modern fencing competition and represents competitive fencers) are quite seperate organisations. They have quite different objectives too. I can't really see any great benefit in HEMA clubs getting involved with the BFA, as thier focus is too different. I can see some point in HEMA coaches getting involved with the BAF though, and I suspect that the BAF would not feel the need to 'take over' in order to have some closer links.

One other benefit that closer links to modern fencing (or at least learning from them) might bring is better insurance. Member insurance from the BFA not only gives public liability insurance, it gives some member to member cover which pays out if you are indjured either in competition or training, and protects you if you indjure someone else. Its part of your membership, which costs (IIRC) £40 if you do national competition, £20 if you only fence in your own club and local competitions. I'd certainly be interested if the BFHS was able to offer something similar.

[KeithFarrell]

It's worth noting that the BAF, British Academy of fencing (which regulates the teaching of modern fencing in the UK and represents coaches) and the BFA, the Britich Fencing Association, (which regulates modern fencing competition and represents competitive fencers) are quite seperate organisations. They have quite different objectives too. I can't really see any great benefit in HEMA clubs getting involved with the BFA, as thier focus is too different. I can see some point in HEMA coaches getting involved with the BAF though, and I suspect that the BAF would not feel the need to 'take over' in order to have some closer links.

Very interesting, thank you for that note. I need to go and have a look at their website now!

[Joeli]

The good thing is, that quite a big chunk of what we do is anchored to various treatises. One can only screw about with HEMA so much before one would have to start calling it something else. Also, Hema is too vast for one sport fencing organization to take under its wings in any official capacity. But in a smaller scale, some HEMA schools in USA and Germany have utilized the local sport fencing clubs for trainer's training. I see no harm in that. A friend of mine teaches kendo, and he mentioned that his kendo circles had marked how we apparently judge our interpretations according to which of the possible ways seems most effective in our training environment, and that HEMA in Europe seems to take what works and adapt it in the context of the historical stuff. I understood he was referencing to the habit of hemaists cross training, or having previous background in various martial arts. Maybe the coaching stuff is not that different to this phenomenon.

I'd say any coaching training is dependent on who's giving the training. Sports fencing is pretty big, and there seems to be different schools of thought within the discipline. Hearing that some organization wants to branch off to giving us teaching licenses doesn't get my unreserved sympathy. But with enough work, I can see that something useful might come out of it, if the sport fencing coaching is successfully adapted to various forms of HEMA. As an anecdote, I went to fencing course about coaching training by British academy of fencing. It certainly gave me many ideas on how to teach one on one lessons, especially the part where progression is built in a way that builds up the skill in question in a well rounded way. However, many underlying assumptions were such that they would be difficult to incorporate to HEMA. The danger is that if I'd try to device a long running individual lesson plan according to these principles for longsword, I'd risk teaching completely useless aspects of different defenses and attacks and trying to force them in the context of different distances, footwork and so on. After five years of longsword stuff, couldn't yet make the required assumptions to build up the required hierarchy of techniques and their variations to serve as the basis for a lesson plan. To further add to the confusion, most of our teaching is (unhistorically?) teaching in class, to many at the same time. So ultimately, one on one coaching training as I got wasn't fully useful for HEMA as it tends to be practised around here. With these in mind, I wouldn't say that the coaching stuff could serve as a core of trainer's training, and so being no HEMA teaching certifications could be given solely from that kind of fencing coach program (or at least according to the one weekend snippet I got from the training). But as an cross training opportunity, it was great, as I could see how it could be adapted to HEMA in an useful way. But trying to forcibly fit that theory into longsword training would be very questionable. At least for me. I would be a bit hesitant to get influenced by sports fencing, out of the fear of creating home-cooked bullshit. That said, the methodology I was shown and the sweet amount of repetitions, desired success rate of the technique in the various stages of training and so on, has given me really useful perspective that I utilize for one on one teaching, and especially for figuring out stuff on my own.

[admin]

Thanks for all the input chaps. Keep it coming - in particular I'm interested in more thoughts on how you think HEMA may be adversely affected by sports fencing teaching 'historical fencing'.

BAF, British Academy of fencing (which regulates the teaching of modern fencing in the UK and represents coaches) and the BFA, the Britich Fencing Association, (which regulates modern fencing competition and represents competitive fencers) are quite seperate organisations.

Dave, out of interest, with what authority do they regulate those things? Presumably there is nothing preventing another organisation establishing themselves and 'regulating' the exact same things? Is there anything preventing Joe Bloggs from opening up a foil fencing school and running foil fencing competitions with no qualification or membership of either?

[Joeli]

That said I don't think that HEMA has to let the BAF take control in order to have those benefits. My fencing coach's partner is the president to the BAF at the moment, and mentioned the he had been dealing with Guy Windsor (School of European Swordsmanship, Helsinki). Apparently Guy has been in the UK doing his BFA coaching exams, and senior UK coaches have been over in finland doing 'coach development training' with historical fencers.

Hey, it's a small world. Maybe I should add that for the coach training to happen, Guy rounded up the head coaches from many Finnish sports fencing clubs for the training. This was really an one-off event. I was running the association at the time and decided to jump in, so I went on a half a year gun-ho foil course aimed towards the weekend course, where the historicals were really in the minority. No official HEMA connection in the event, it was more about coaching in general. But I heard the few HEMAists did really well according to the BAF teachers.

[Reinier]

You say that Fencing federations giving out HEMA-certificates won't influence your activities. I say it very well might. Not right away, but eventually. If you have such a certificate, you have already been influenced, and if you don't, you risk coming across as an uncertified hillbilly HEMA-teacher that does not hold a certificate. It will you your word against those of the certificate-holders that you are actually one of the proper HEMAists. There is no way for a rooky to distinguish you from somebody who does not hold a certificate because he is shit.
Even if they are completely wrong.

[Michael Chidester]

Meh, just as easily those with the certificate could themselves become stigmatized as sellouts and not "pure HEMA".

[admin]

Within a UK context the BFHS has already tested and insured me as an instructor. It would be rather pointless for either of the British sports fencing federations to say that this was invalid. They could say that, but I don't see what good it would do them. If they want to make money out of us and our students then they would do better to work with us rather than against us.

[Axel]

I think Reinier is right, in the long term its bound to affect us, good or bad, and that simple fact should be enought for us to react in some way. National bodies of our own as Matt says is agood way forward IMO, with instructors certificates of their own. If we have our own certificates, given by our own bodies, we wont look so "hillbilly". We simply have to be seen, or we are in dire straits.

If sport fencers also claim historical fencing (in whatever way), since they are official and well known and huge compared to us, they might be the ones contacted by olympic commitees, governments, other martial arts, media, the movie industry etc etc, rather than us, as we are simply not visibly around. All of a sudden the guys wo recreated HEMA as a modern movement (us, in a broad sense, from ARMA to HEMAC to BHFS to WMAC and HEMAA and all the others) have lost control over it.

As for the sport fencing pedagogy, I have heard Joeli speak very higly of it and I like to watch sport fencing instruction videos on YT, I usually learn alot. That said, i would probably learn tons from a kendo instructor, a FMA instructor and so on, and if I wanted to "get" their method in order to help me in HEMA, I could simply go train with them (like Joeli did) instead of asking them to certify me in my own art.

[Axel]

Meh, just as easily those with the certificate could themselves become stigmatized as sellouts and not "pure HEMA".

it is entirely possible that would be true in our circles. On the other hand, when HEMA is starting to be taught in sport fencing salles, sport fencing circles will very soon also organize their own events and tournaments. As the organizer of Swordfish, I can positively say that an event run by a sport fencing organization probably would trumph ours pretty easily in terms of how much money and time and marketing they could put in (we are all non profit in GHFS), and after that they have all the spotlight. As a consequence, for all the new people coming to HEMA, there wont be much incentive to dismiss them and join us, as they will eventually be considered the mainstream and we the out group, having more funds to back their activities. This is based on the assumption that coaching certificates will lead to more and more organized HEMA by the sport fencing milieu (thats usually how it goes).