Militia Miconceptions

I came across an interesting article that described the misconceptions people have of martial arts and formal fighting in Western Europe through history. It seems that combat was more articulated then many people now a days seem to think. Here, is a list of common mistakes people make about combat in earlier centuries.  

1. There were no "martial arts" in Western European civilization. 

 This is false, Europe had a very advanced and sophisticated fighting system, begining at the time of ancient Greece and stretching to the 19th century. Techniques that were used were recorded and passed down through the decades. Techniques were altered to suit the needs of the time, but what didnt change was the effectivness of the tactics. 

 2. Medival and Renaissance fencing had no real technique, it was improvised; with tricks and wrestling added in. 

 This is incorrect. In fact, fencing was highly systematic, and incorperated a number of diffeent combat skills and weaponary techniques; strangely even more then fencig during the 18 and 1900's. 

 3. Medieval and Renaissance unarmed fighting methods were less developed and less sophisticated than elsewhere in the world. 

 There were actually a variety of different fighting styles circulatig around Europe since ancient times. Through guides and books that had been passed down through generations, new fighters could learn the tricks of the trade conveniantly. 

4. Knights in full-plate armour were slow and clumsy.

Plate armour was actually well balanced and cleverly designed for ample maneuvering and agility. Although, the armour did restrict breathing, expulsion of body heat, hearing, and sight. 

5. Medival swords were heavy and weighed tons of pounds.

Fighting swords during the middle ages and Renaissance were actually very light, well balanced, and masterfully designed, well made, and well proportioned (swords weighed 1.8 kg on average).

6. Only Knights were permitted to use swords in the Middle Ages.

This is false, the sword is only associated with knights, and knighthood; but not restricted to. Any foot solider or fighting man could use a sword, and he was expected to know how to handle it. There commoners who were sword fighting teachers, tradesmen and salesmen who sold swords. There were many attempts to ban commoners from owning swords; but of course, the attempts were constantly violated and became impossible to control.

7. Medival and Renaissance Europe did not know of curved swords.

This is incorrect, in fact, curved swords were native to Western Europe and were known since the times of Ancient Greece. 

8. Some swords could cut through plate armour.

This is false, there was never record of any sword being able to penetrate the strong plate armour that soldiers buried themselves in. They could however, cut through straps and tear off peices of armour. If the popular "thrusting" method was used, sword-plate contact could create bruises and wounds. 

9. European fighting systems never adressed any spiritual or ethical components. 

This is not true, as one could rarely find any martial arts teachings that didn't address ethical behaviour. Teachings also gave tips on how to avoid fights and when it was appropriate to use violence. This was the start of the idea that officers should also be gentlemen.

10. Historical European Martial Arts were copied from Asian Martial Arts.

They were actually stolen from Amazonian Martian Cyborgs who are in fact the real ancestors of ancient Africans (through Atlantis)