honour

The concept of honour has been featuring quite strongly in my life of late, and I thought perhaps I might address a topic that seems to be fairly contentious: that of the role of honour in the sport of full contact medieval combat.

We will begin as all good discussions begin, not with "once upon a time", but with "the dictionary definition of" honour as a noun, and in the context of our usage, it would be the second definition in the Oxford English 
dictionary, "The quality of knowing and doing what is morally right".

Now, when we apply that to the sport of medieval combat, we look at aspects of the sport like not intentionally breaking the rules in order to win or to gain an advantage over one's opponent, not being dishonest or misleading. There are many ways in which the principle can be applied within the lists.

Even outside of the lists, in every day life, the concept of honour should touch the warrior who fights with honour. If you fight with honour, then living with honour should come as naturally as breathing. Of course, the reverse can also be true: if you do not live with honour, then it may be difficult to fight with honour. You will also note that there are different permutations of this statement that can be formed and used as a good topic for debate. But let's leave that for another time.

I have heard many opinions about the role of honour in the present day medieval combat sport. Some have said that it is the fundamental principle on which all tournament fighting should be based, and others have declared that there is no place for honour in medieval combat as a sport.

When I first started fighting, we (steel fighters in South Africa) used the honour system of points scoring, whereby a combatant receiving a clean blow would acknowledge the hit, and his opponent would then be awarded the point. No acknowledgement, no hit; no hit, no point. The purpose of the Marshall in this case was simply to keep count of acknowledged blows and to watch for broken things (rules, arrmour, bones and tempers). It was a system that quite literally relied on the honour of the fighters for validity and efficacy.

So, (as I experienced at one event), if you wanted to win, (or you just couldn't face being beaten by a girl), and your armour was strong, you just kept fighting and ignored the blows. This was considered dishonourable, and you would be reprimanded by the Marshall for such behaviour. But if you did it in such a way that the Marshall did not or could not see for certain, then you could win. We call this "rhino-hiding".

 As an opponent of a fighter who was rhino-hiding, your options were either to object after the bout (which would effectively turn you into a whining sore loser), or you could suck it up and deal, or you could just hit harder and harder until your opponent either fell down or took the hit. Head shots are best for that.

At that point in our sport in South Africa, we weren't scoring on time. We were usually fighting to three hits. With the notable exception of one renaissance tournament, where Richard and I were first in the list on a fairly warm day, and were cheerfully told by the Marshall, "okay guys, first to nine hits!"
Richard, who was at that point approaching 60, nearly passed out. We finished the bout, but it was decided thereafter that the Marshall should stick to the accepted format of first to three and not try to kill the combatants. Ah, good times!

The point, though, is that those three points were worth working for. Each bout was only one round, resetting after each point, so you had to be very careful not to give them away.

Then we discovered Battle of the Nations, and when I saw buhurt, it blew my mind. My heart started speeding up and I could imagine myself IN THERE! It had to happen! We needed to go and do that!

At this point, we as fighters actively discouraged the public viewing what we did as re-enactment or entertainment, but (and I say this coming from a "rugby country") it was kind of difficult to convince people that what we were doing was actually a sport, when we walked around in suits of full plate, moving like we were underwater and constantly seeking the shade. I think that the people we drew to the sport at that time were attracted to what we were doing, then.

Once we adjusted our training and gear to be more in line with the HMB and IMCF rulesets, there was no longer any need for the honour system to continue. We had people to count points, and so the fighters just went balls to the wall at each other for three rounds of a minute or 90 seconds. The question of loss of skill is also something that we can talk about another day, because that is also a whole discussion on its own. But there was definitely, in my opinion at least, a loss of honour with which the sport had previously been invested.

It also became apparent in the kind of people we drew to the sport. Because the armour we were wearing was lighter and we could move faster, combat was faster and looked more "sport-like", and so instead of drawing the older, more historically-oriented recruit, we drew the younger, more Counterstrike-oriented recruit. I'm not sure if first person shoooter games foster the concept of honour in their code, but I know that where there was an intrinsic grasp of the notion before, there is less so in the fighters we see today.

And this is where I hedge my statements: it is not about the quality of the fighters that we have in South Africa, or their quality of character, for that matter. I'm saying that we don't focus on honour as a principle in fighting as we used to, and I think it is a bi-directional effect: the newer people have not been exposed to the concept, and the older fighters don't often expose them to the concept. It is largely regarded as redundant, I think.

A number of historians such as Ashmole have claimed that the chivalric code (which includes honour as a primary element) was based in military discipline, derived from the conduct of Charlemagne and his horse soldiers. Thus developed the rules for tournaments and knightly conduct on and off the field, because "they" believed, as do I, that if you want to fight with honour, you should live with honour.

But honour in combat and in daily life was not invented by the knights. Snorri Sturluson explained that honour in ancient Norse society played a crucial role in how a person was viewed. A drengr was a person of integrity and honour, whose actions offered an example of how people should conduct themselves. The name is also found in the word for honour, drengskapr.

Since our modern day tournaments are based in the same historical rulesets as those of Medieval times (and I am admittedly being very broad in terms of period), surely some of the abstract principles, such as honour, which informed those rulesets should come to the fore in our sport today? Is there still a place for honour in a combat sport? Does FCMC as a sport today focus on winning to the exclusion of all else?

I am interested to know from those of you who read this blog, what role does the concept of honour play in your combat training, your club ethos; how the sport is presented and conducted in your country or area; is honour acknowledged as a principle in your club or team; and how does it feature in your everyday life? Are you conscious of how you conduct yourself with honour?

For myself, having had my honour questioned a couple of times this year, it has become an aspect of my life of which I have become acutely aware. I wrote this entry not looking for sympathy, but to get an idea of how other people view the concept, in and out of the lists, and to discover whether my notion of honour is antiquated and rigid, or not rigid enough, in relation to others.

defending the cavewoman

A few days ago, I announced on Facebook that we had assisted in the formation of our first black South African youth development initiative, which is spearheaded by Khule Ndlovu. The announcement drew a number of congratulations and well wishes, but you know how it goes, right? There's always one.

This Facebook "friend" (he only remained such for as long as it took me to find his page and unfriend him) just had to go and spout a load of nonsense, which I will quote below. This is not for the purpose of legitimising the comment, but so that we can have it on hand to reference while I prove how thoroughly uneducated this person really is.

My friend and fellow writer, Matthias Kainz, actually reposted this comment in disgust and disbelief. He had the decency and kindness to blank out the guy's name and profile picture. Me? I think that if you want to post crap on the internet, you should have the balls to do it with your name attached. And this is where the "defending the cavewoman" title comes in: I am quite happy to drag this sad little fish up onto the bank and into the light where we can all beat the crap out of him with clubs, because that is what I would have done, IF he had made his comments in person. In this case, I think it's quite appropriate to let the cavewoman out to have some fun. So here goes:

Raymond L Dupuis:

Blacks are forbidden to duel or challenge a European knight. I say rubbish and poppy cock to allow non Europeans to challenge and take part in European culture and traditions. Do not lie and lead them on. They have country, their own jungle traditions. I do not condone mixing our traditions in the name sports or profit. Gladiators to death okay, knights of Europe, no. Is nothing sacred anymore. A black will never be my equal. Never

So, there were a number of replies, some of which made me squint and then giggle a bit (thanks, Jade!), and others which made me feel like I really need to brush up on my history in general. Like, all of it (thanks, Adrian and Laurent!) And they were pretty much all in the same vein, ie. "you're an idiot who knows bugger-all about the real world, etc. etc." and that was very good, because to be honest, when I saw this, I got that reaction. You know, the cavewoman reaction? Where your heart starts beating as if it's going to burst out of your chest like a baby alien and squeal at you, and you get those flickers of black around your vision, and all of your muscles start tensing, especially those ones involved in making people hurt?
NOW, I can calmly write about this, but at that point, I had to take a number of deep breaths and remind myself that arguing over the internet is like competing in the Special Olympics, and so I just made a very short reply and got rid of the dude.
I also sent another friend a message asking if this was indeed the standpoint of the European sword community, which, of course, it isn't. Once I had verified that, I had chilled a bit and was able to think logically.
NOW, let's examine what this individual (no doubt after announcing this opinion to close on 500 other fighters, he is indeed an individual, as in alone) had to say.
Blacks are forbidden to challenge Europeans in combat? Hmmm... The Arthurian legends say otherwise. In fact, Sir Morien was a black warrior whose mother was a Moorish princess, and thus as nobilty, he was a knight. He is also known in Christianised Europe as Saint Maurice, Knight of the Holy Lance and patron saint of the Holy Roman Empire. Here is an effigy of him: http://medievalpoc.tumblr.com/post/55426449653/sir-morien-black-knight-of-the-round-table-the
It was considered quite acceptable for those of differently-hued skin to assume places of honour in Europe, and so that claim of Raymond's is, as he says, "poppycock".

Apparently they have "their own jungle traditions". Now, as someone who was born in Africa, has lived in Africa for all of her life, and who considers herself to be, at least African, if not somewhat Zulu, I can totally testify to the fact that we have no jungles in this part of the continent. We do have some indigenous forests, coastal and inland, but nothing that can be classified as "jungle" by our local botanists.

Also, as someone who has a Bachelor's degree cum laude with a major in IsiZulu Studies, I can also confirm that nothing in my studies of traditional Nguni practices, nor in my personal, face-to-face, up-close-and-personal, having actually been there experience has led me to believe that any of the Nguni traditions are based in jungles.

Lastly, the issue of "mixing traditions" is an interesting claim because we come across it so often in South Africa, when those opposing racial and cultural integration will mark something as "white" or "back" or "unAfrican" in an effort to discourage people from practising aspects of another culture that they themselves disapprove of. Our hardly-esteemed president Jacob Zuma, for example, cited walking one's dog on a leash as a "white" activity. Of course, we all laughed and made a circle with our fingers next to our heads because that's what politicians do when they're about to be bust for something (oh let's say like stealing taxpayers' money for their own ends) and they want to create a distraction. In this case, though, the guy is not really a politician. So I ask, why is he so desperate to create a distraction? Is he scared of facing off against a black opponent? Maybe (and I do surmise here) his overly inflated opinion of himself doesn't allow for the possibility of being beaten by those whom he believes are below him in status.
Well, to that I say, it's a new world, buddy. Best learn to live in it.
But as a rule, and to back up my claim that the issue of "mixing traditions" is a redundant exercise, firstly, let us remember that we had SAMURAI at this year's IMCF. Genuine Japanese warriors. How's that for mixing traditions? No-one died, right? Even though it was medieval combat. And also, "There has never been a time when Europeans were exclusively white people. " (Kimberley Smithbower Roseblade)

As a sidenote about the "for profit" comment, I think that any real swordfighter will know that in terms of the sport and support, there is never any profit to be considered, let alone involved, in fighting at this level. Maybe when swordfighting becomes as popular as soccer or rugby, then we can revisit that bit of comedy.

Now, on that last comment of Raymond's... "a black will never be my equal"?
Well, now, that's just far too plain to argue. I'm afraid in that respect, I must agree with the Monsieur Depuis on that point. A black will never be his equal. That would be an insult to my black brothers, in my country and everywhere else in the world.
But on a complete tangent, that statement did bring back a quote from one of my favourite movies, Empire Records: when they arrest that kid who calls himself Warren Beatty, and as they forcibly remove him from the shop, he squeaks in this high, adolescent my-voice-hasn't-yet-broken whine, "I'll be back and you'll be sorry!" And Joe, the manager replies sarcastically, "I'm already sorry."
My tricksy, fun-loving mind insists that Raymond would look and sound just like Warren. If Raymond has the stones to post an actual photo of himself, that is.

As far as I'm concerned, the moment that I earned that bronze medal in Women's Polearm at IMCF, medieval combat became part of my country's sporting heritage. Not just for white people, but for all South Africans, as a nation, to share in, and no-one - especially not Raymond L Depuis - will dissuade me from inviting people of all ages, ethnicities, cultures or economic backgrounds to come and join us as we beat the crap out of each other with swords, maces, polearms, shields, and the odd cavewoman club.