Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [E_Rapier] Hand Parries to the Wrist and Upper Arm

Expand Messages
  • argh@cogeco.ca
    That doesn t mean the class couldn t be run under the A&S catagory that permits the non sparring demonstrations of period martial arts. ... Aaron Miedema
    Message 1 of 5 , May 26 9:13 PM
      That doesn't mean the class couldn't be run under the A&S catagory that permits the non sparring demonstrations of
      period martial arts.
      > Darn.
      > There goes a whole bunch of close work with longsword...
      > And I was so looking forward to the class with the description:
      > Description: Codex Wallerstein is a
      > comprehensive and essential source for understanding medieval German unarmed combat. In this class we will explore
      > just one section of this manual: the counters to strikes with the hand. These counters include throws, arm-breaks and
      > counter-strikes, among others.
      > Trust me Albrecht, it's all "fleeting" contact, none of it intentional...
      > :o)
      > Hoskuld
      > ________________________________
      > From: Eve Harris & David Stamper <evedave1@...>
      > To: E_Rapier@yahoogroups.com; RapierMarshals@yahoogroups.com
      > Sent: Wed, May 26, 2010 4:43:16 PM
      > Subject: [E_Rapier] Hand Parries to the Wrist and Upper Arm
      > Greetings!
      > There has been some discussion recently on the KRM List regarding parries
      > with the hand to hand, wrist or upper arm of an opponent. The rule in
      > Ealdormere reads thusly:
      > G. Parries may be performed with weapons, parrying devices, the gloved
      > hand, or any other part of the body. Though the gloved hand may be used to
      > parry, it shall not be used to grasp or strike an opponent. Fleeting
      > contact between opponents is allowed, as long as no grabbling, deliberate
      > striking, or other unsafe behaviour occurs.
      > This is the same as what is written in the SCA Rapier Handbook. According to
      > the person who wrote the rule, it was worded as such to allow the kind of
      > parries described above and these have been used historically in various
      > Kingdoms since the first set of rapier rules were written (c. 1984). IIRC
      > previous KRM's have been ok with this but I don't think it's something
      > that's been practiced a lot in our Kingdom.
      > Apparently the discussion on the KRM list has attracted the attention of the
      > Society Earl Marshal. Below is part of the discussion from the list, with
      > the statement from the SEM at the top:
      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: "siro@..." <siro@...>
      > To: krms@...
      > Sent: Sunday, May 23, 2010 12:17:56 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
      > Subject: Re: [krms] Fwd: Application to conduct an experiment
      > I'm not Thomas but I think I can answer this for him.
      > NO.
      > As a "less reasonable Society Earl Marshal" I agree that intentional
      > contact is grappling as defined by our sports.
      > "Incidental contact" or "fleeting" contact is allowed to stop whiners
      > from complaining every time they get bumped into.
      > And just so you know, this question has come up from the fighting
      > community as well.
      > The answer there was
      > NO.
      > I hope that this is clear and easily understood.
      > Anyone seen practicing intentional contact should be warned, then if
      > behavior continues, sanctioned and given time off from our sport to
      > relect upon the great privilege it is to participate at all.
      > Omarad the Wary, KSCA, OP, etc...
      > -"less reasonable" Society Earl Marshal
      > On 5/23/2010 12:45 PM, Chris Zakes wrote:
      > > At 11:31 PM 5/22/2010, you wrote:
      > >> Sir Thomas - I suspect that my earlier email to you disappeared into
      > >> a spam filter somewhere, hence I'm forwarding this onto the KRMs list.
      > >>
      > >> If anyone else has an opinion on this as well, I'd be interested.
      > >>
      > >> Thanks,
      > >> William
      > >>
      > >> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
      > >> Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 19:53:18 +1200
      > >> From: David Robb <ender@...>
      > >> To: rapier@...
      > >> Subject: Fwd: Application to conduct an experiment
      > >>
      > >> Greetings Sir Thomas,
      > >>
      > >> One of my deputies here in Lochac has proposed the following
      > >> experiment, which I seek your approval for (subject to your answer to
      > >> a question below). I support this application as written below, as I
      > >> believe this serves two purposes.
      > >>
      > >> Firstly, I believe this expands the available options for combatants
      > >> in a manner which is consistent with period technique. Secondly, I
      > >> believe this could clarify the grey area that I believe exists at
      > >> present when parrying an opponents blade (using the off-hand) when
      > >> the opponent is using a simple cross-hilted sword and where contact
      > >> with the sword hand is reasonably likely.
      > >>
      > >> However, it has also been asked by my predecessor on our internal
      > >> list, whether the current rules would already permit such an action.
      > >> In particular, the clause saying "Fleeting contact between opponents
      > >> is allowed, as long as no grappling, deliberate striking or other
      > >> unsafe behaviour occurs." I personally believe that the action of
      > >> pressing against an opponents arm sufficiently to move it would count
      > >> as more than fleeting contact, but I do not consider that it would
      > >> constitute grappling or deliberate striking (I use striking here in
      > >> the context of a blow whose impact is the intent rather than the
      > >> following push). What is your interpretation of the existing rule and
      > >> its applicability to this situation?
      > >>
      > >> Depending on your answer to the above, the successful conclusion to
      > >> this experiment may give rise to the need for a change to the society
      > >> level rules, or it may be that such an action is already permissable
      > >> and merely requires clarification.
      > >>
      > >> Thank you, William de Cameron KRM, Lochac.
      > >
      > >
      > > I'm not Thomas, but I think I can answer this question anyway...
      > >
      > > Story time, children!
      > >
      > > Back in the earliest days of SCA rapier, open-hand parries to the
      > > wrist werea common practice, and were specifically allowed in the
      > > first edition of the Corporate Rapier Rules. (See section III.A.9
      > > here: http://moondragon.info/wiki/Original_SCA_Rapier_Rules)
      > >
      > > Over the next couple of rewrites, that rule was dropped in the
      > > interest of keeping the rules as concise as possible and because
      > > "everybody knows that." About seven years ago, however, the Society
      > > Earl Marshal arbitrarily decided that the hand-on-wrist parries we'd
      > > been using safely for over 25 years at that point constitued
      > > "grappling" and therefore weren't allowed.
      > >
      > > Four years ago, when we got a more reasonable Society Earl Marshal,
      > > the rules were re-written to include "fleeting contact" with the
      > > specific intention of re-allowing hand-on wrist parries.
      > >
      > > So at most, you'd need an in-kingdom experiment and training period,
      > > to make sure people know the difference between parrying the wrist and
      > > grabbing the wrist (this shouldn't be difficult, since, presumably,
      > > they already know the difference between parrying a blade and grabbing
      > > it) but you shouldn't need specific Corporate approval to do so.
      > >
      > > -Tivar Moondragon
      > > Ansteorra
      > > fossil-in-residence
      > >
      > SO, apparently, right now, based on the above decision we are not allowed to
      > parry the hand or arm of our opponent with our hand. I do not agree with
      > this decision as it seems to fly in the face of 20 years+ of safe usage but
      > I am bound by that decision. An open handed parry does not, to my mind,
      > represent anything like grappling. The decision doesn't affect us greatly as
      > I don't think it is a common practice here, but I know it's been discussed
      > in the past and was generally felt to be "ok". If anything does change I
      > will let these lists know right away. Hopefully the SEM can be convinced to
      > change his mind about this. I would ask that if you know anyone not on these
      > lists who fences, please let them know about the decision.
      > Yours in Service
      > Albrecht
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

      Aaron Miedema
      Lentus autem non celer sum.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.