|
Post by feral on Oct 27, 2013 18:05:17 GMT
I'd love to attend one of their seminars, but I'm in the southeast so that's not happening any time soon. I did get a couple of their dvd's and the drills seem pretty reminiscent of drills I used for MMA stuff and combatives when I was in the army. I read their training philosophy and how they got where they are and everything seems to be on the level to me, but I was wondering if anyone here had relevant experience or opinions on this.
|
|
|
Post by Student of Sword on Oct 28, 2013 0:04:22 GMT
While I like their stuffs; it is still highly speculative since their is no manual or manuscript from that period. I would suggest you try to find a training partner who is interested in Viking combat; order their training materials and train together. It's going to be a whole lot of trials and errors; but it will be less frustrating with a training partner.
|
|
|
Post by freq on Oct 28, 2013 12:46:55 GMT
only so many ways one can swing a sword or move a body, humans havent changed shape dramatically over the past few hundred years so not surprised you see cross over
|
|
|
Post by williamrshort on Oct 28, 2013 15:37:59 GMT
Thanks for your interest in Hurstwic and in the Hurstwic Viking Combat Training system. I'm one of the people who developed the system and created the DVDs. While our work is speculative, we believe (based on our research) that we have some reasonably solid sources on which to base our speculation. Like Student of Sword, I encourage you to find a training partner, but I disagree that the training will require a whole lot of trial and error. We hope the material on the DVDs will give you clear picture of our training and our approach to training. Additionally, we encourage you to seek out a Hurstwic study group or affiliate group. The program is in its formative stages, so if there is no group near you, so please consider forming your own group. Information about the affiliate and study group programs is here: www.hurstwic.com/affiliates/index.htmInformation about our approach to training is here: www.hurstwic.com/training/methodology/index.htmThe story of our journey to where we are today is here: www.hurstwic.com/training/saga/index.htmInformation about our training DVDs is here: www.hurstwic.com/shop/index.htmBest regards, William Short www.hurstwic.com/
|
|
|
Post by feral on Oct 28, 2013 17:03:28 GMT
Thanks so much William! I love the dvd's so far. I've only watched the first, and I haven't purchased the third yet, but I imagine I will. As for affiliates, I already checked and it doesn't look like you have any near Asheville NC.
|
|
|
Post by Kataphractos on Nov 23, 2013 0:56:29 GMT
One thing I've seen Hurstwic teach is holding a second weapon by hiding it behind your shield (as in, holding the shield's handle and the weapon's haft at the same time). I've tried this myself, but I found it an awkward grip and I felt I wasn't as quick with my shield. Is this normal or would this setup have been just situational, negating the need to really get used to it over time? I tried to find a pic of what I mean (I know it's on the site somewhere), but then I found this pic. How does one go about learning this?
|
|
|
Post by williamrshort on May 15, 2014 17:15:38 GMT
I just saw this comment, so I apologize for the delay in responding. I'm not sure why it seems awkward to you, since I have not seen how you hold the secondary weapon alongside your shield handle. But, if I may, I'll offer a few guesses why it might be awkward. The guesses might be on target, or they might be far off the mark. The way Hurstwic teaches holding the shield differs from the way that many other Viking groups teach holding the shield. We're often asked about it, and why we use that position. The simple answer is that our research led us there. A few of the reason for using that position are here, in the Hurstwic shield article. So the awkwardness might be related to how you hold the shield. Or, it might be lack of conditioning in holding a reserve weapon there. Everything feels awkward at first - ask any bicyclist how riding a bike was the first time. Another reason might be the details of how your weapon was made, or how your shield handle was made. There are many reasons it might seem awkward, but I am unable to say much more through the forum. I haven't seen how you perform the move, and describing moves through written text is difficult. You are probably thinking of this photo, in the shield article: On the question how does one go about learning this as is shown in the picture: I got a note from the person in the picture explaining his experience when it was shot. He wrote that it was very easy. The spear wasn't very heavy so he just lifted it up easily in a defensive position and waited. Not much training was involved, he said. It might be that he's just natural at it. More seriously. The picture is just a moment in time. I have no idea how it happened. Reynir (on the left) positioned the spear for an attack and Matt (on the right) jumped high to make an attack and I pressed the shutter release on the camera. I have no idea how it happened. We were shooting pictures of many things and video of many things that day for our training DVD. This is one of them. I'm not sure how it came about. Jumping over an attack is mentioned in the sagas, and it's a move that seems useful in our sparring. The drills we use to exercise the move are taught in our second Viking combat training DVD, and photos of the drill are shown on the Hurstwic website and in Facebook photo albums, for example: It's an example of the kinds of Viking fighting moves we research and train in at Hurstwic. Still they are not always as grand as in the photograph.
|
|
|
Post by Cosmoline on Sept 18, 2014 20:44:14 GMT
From what I've seen in the DVD's and on line, Mr. Short is approaching the lost art through the Sagas and what might be called a naturalistic practice. This is distinct in some ways from the critical, analytical approach taken by late Medieval and Renaissance sword masters. So instead of freeze-framing precise motions in time and naming each position, the focus is on athletic ability and guided instinct, at least from what I can tell. Something youngsters might learn from years of play fighting on the farmstead, rather than what a traveling sword instructor would teach German noblemen to earn his pay. It's the fighting style typical of a people before modern thought and the modern use of language came into play. I know they had writing, but I don't believe they used it to rip apart ideas or refashion them in the sense of *analysis*. It's interesting to compare the work he's doing with the Roland's efforts at recreating the early Medieval sword and shield methods. And, interestingly, with some of the recent efforts to recreate classical Chinese martial sword fighting (as opposed to sword dancing). It's just a shame more literature didn't survive from those days.
|
|
|
Post by MrTripleD on Dec 9, 2014 18:28:33 GMT
I'm not going to pretend I'm an expert on the subject, but for a people that ate a lot of fish and cattle, had little farming space, and so carbohydrates were more scarce, and were very possibly some of the tallest people around at the time, wouldn't jumping while wearing armour, carrying a shield and axe, and already having been likely travelling for hours or days be a horrible idea?
|
|
|
Post by MOK on Dec 9, 2014 19:53:46 GMT
The Nordic lands were (and are) quite variable in regards to natural resources and such. The west coast of Scandinavia (modern day Norway) is rocky, sure, but the east (Sweden) is mostly fertile plains and Denmark is essentially flat all over. This diversity of local resources would be one reason why the Norse were such active traders, of course - one place is rich in fish, another in crops and cattle, a third in furs and timber - just add trade, and all profit (and all can enjoy a healthy, balanced diet ). PS. For that matter, raising cattle requires significantly more space than farming...
|
|
|
Post by MrTripleD on Dec 9, 2014 20:06:21 GMT
My only issue with that is that they were limited to what they could bring with them, as well as what they could take back with them. And a lot of what they would trade for might consist of trinkets or treasures. I'm not going to say you're wrong, it just seems unlikely that it might have worked out so perfectly.
This also doesn't take into account the sheer size of the people, and the distances they would have crossed before meeting an opponent.
|
|
|
Post by MOK on Dec 9, 2014 20:26:21 GMT
But really, are you honestly suggesting that people capable of sailing, rowing and carrying longships from Greenland to Constantinople were too frail or weak to jump once in a while? Besides, you don't grow large on malnutrition. The Norse were tall for their day because they ate well.
|
|
|
Post by MrTripleD on Dec 9, 2014 20:36:44 GMT
Well, genetics plays a huge part, and humans can obviously grow large on meat and dairy. Not to mention sailing from Greenland to Constantinople requires a lot of sitting. There's a reason modern soldiers do much more cardio than heavy lifting. I just can't see any combat effectiveness to this technique.
|
|
|
Post by MOK on Dec 9, 2014 21:15:12 GMT
Which contain a lot of proteins, calcium and other such things needed for a strong musculoskeletal system. So what's the problem? Actually, it requires a whole lot of rowing up rivers and walking (with the ship!) past rapids and from river to river. And even at sea the crew of a small sailing ship are pretty much never just sitting around like passengers of a cruise liner, even on the most leisurely of journeys. Well, I can actually see it being advantageous when you're attacked with a long weapon, like a spear, and need to not only avoid the attack but also to close the distance quickly (to hinder the opponent with his long weapon and simultaneously put yourself in a position to strike back). Jumping over a low thrust, aimed under your shield, and towards the enemy seems like a pretty effective and unpredictable way to accomplish that, if you can pull it off. Even better if you land on the spear - let's see him hold on to it with your weight suddenly dropping onto the haft. PS. Yes, legs are generally seen as a suboptimal target because attacking them exposes your upper body and if you can reach their legs, they can reach your head... but since combat at the time was mostly conducted with large shields that could easily cover your head against such retaliation but would necessarily leave the lower legs far more exposed (unless you squat down), I think leg attacks were somewhat more common in this period than in the later age of longswords and fechtbucher.
|
|
|
Post by MrTripleD on Dec 9, 2014 22:19:50 GMT
1. Carbs are needed for to create useful energy.
2. Portaging would be another drain on energy, but would definitely help create muscular endurance in the legs. That much I'm willing to concede.
3. I can see where you're coming from, but that's very situational, and would be something that wouldn't be on the top of the docket if I was someone trying to learn a combat art.
4. Definitely. But I'd think that footwork would be optimized for that task in a real combat situation. Maybe moving and trapping a spear in the legs to disarm a man might have been a more useful option, but maybe they had to jump in some instances.
|
|
|
Post by KaOsBlaKbLaDe on Dec 10, 2014 19:42:13 GMT
trapping a spear with your legs? if i'm armored, why not,......but in unarmored combat such as "vikings" were accustomed to, i see jumping the spear as a better alternative to trapping a sharp blade so close to the femoral artery. Besides, how do you trap a spear and then counter without letting it go?
|
|
|
Post by MOK on Dec 10, 2014 20:22:23 GMT
Yeah, it's highly situational, absolutely. Very much a sort of "it just seemed like a good idea at the time" thing. But if you're up against a guy with a spear, he's out of your reach, you have good footing, and he thrusts low at your legs... well, sometimes you might want to surprise him with an odd trick like this.
|
|
|
Post by Draven on Dec 10, 2014 22:22:07 GMT
I haven't seen the DVDs and I live too far away to view the system in person, but I've watched the website for quite a while. Given the lack of manuscripts, I think that combat based on descriptions in the Sagas is a great place to start. Even if they are not factual descriptions of what occurred in a specific fight, I find it unlikely that they were not based on the combat of the day. Regarding jumping over a weapon rather than trapping it or retreating, situation dictates. You do what you have to do in a given situation to survive. It is worth noting that when someone attacks, they expect you to either move, parry or be injured - to find that your weapon has missed the mark (ie hit nothing at all) and your opponent was standing basically in the same spot they were before would probably be quite surprising. Unrelated to Hurstwic but in the vein as reconstructed Viking combat, Roland Warzecha has also shown a theoretical recreation of Viking age combat that I think is particularly interesting: ... e=youtu.beIt features the shield as a dynamic primary weapon and the sword/axe being more of a secondary weapon of opportunity - openings are created with the shield and exploited with the edged weapon. This is based on later treatises and body-mechanics, and IMO poses a likely, effective way for Viking-age combat to work, at the very least with one-on-one combat. It also provides a very good reason as to why Viking age shields are not strapped to the arm, but allowed to rotate and move freely in the hand. ThegnThrand uses it in this video also, and he cites Roland Warzecha specifically as influencing it: Just my 0.02
|
|
|
Post by MrTripleD on Dec 11, 2014 13:11:39 GMT
Well the idea would be to trap it momentarily to cover the distance. If you're letting it go to counter, it wouldn't matter much anyways.
|
|
|
Post by MrTripleD on Dec 11, 2014 13:13:44 GMT
You have a point! Same reason the spinning backfist made a resurgence in MMA.
Guys, I'm loving the discussion. Learning lots. Keep it coming!
|
|