Talk:Western martial arts

Merge suggestion

We have already been through this. The articles are quite different. HEMA is about the HISTORY, and WMA is about the RECONSTRUCTION. Drop it. Master at Arms 16:03, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SCA

I have asked for citation on the statement "The Society for Creative Anachronism has made its own reconstruction of medieval armored foot combat,using real (modern-made) armor and weapons made largely of rattan, and regulated by a series of strict safety rules." The SCA's main web-site does not specifically say that their rattan sparring is intended to be a "reconstruction of medieval armored foot combat". Also all of the SCA's rattan sparring rules are not for the purpose of safety as implied by the article.Midiman Alex (talk) 00:05, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, but it does say, "Armored combat in the SCA resembles medieval foot tournaments." (http://www.sca.org/sca-intro.html); I trust you are not looking for a verbatim statement from the SCA to match a Wikipedia entry. The same page goes on to describe making armor. I'm not sure I completely understand your last sentence, but it appears you feel there are more reasons for using rattan than just safety -- am I reading that right? Along those lines, there is a paragraph which begins, "Since we prefer that no one gets hurt, SCA combatants...." Please read that and see if I am missing something in your statement above. CsikosLo (talk) 16:05, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the comments about the SCA should be completely removed. The SCA created their own fighting game and it is not in any sense of the term a "martial art". The SCA, as an organization, has done absolutely nothing in regard to the recreation of historical martial arts.Ranp (talk) 15:24, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

18th century?

don't a number of WMA organizations and individuals prefer to look to 19th century arts like Bartitsu, or even 20th century ones like Combato? Whateley23 11:20, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As far as WMA goes, not that I am aware. The introduction of the wheellock firearm was arguably the beginning of the end of the continued tradition of masters training students in hand to hand and edged weaponry combat. Perhaps the organizations to which you refer would be in the realm of MMA (Mixed martial arts) ? Master at Arms 20:17, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

no. MMA may use some of the later combatives (though they seem to prefer Brazilian jujitsu), but the combatives themselves are studied, as far as i can tell, as part of the larger umbrella of WMA. as i understand it, "WMA" was invented, by Pete Kautz, as a very broad term, to cover far more than just medieval combatives. coincidentally, there's a discussion on the topic going on at Swordforum, as part of this thread. Combato/Defendo, Bartitsu, and the like are unified arts in themselves, which would hardly make them "mixed". Whateley23 09:38, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you can cite where Pete coined the term, then it would be most appropriate to include that in this article, as well as how the term has evolved. When this article was first introduced there was much discussion as to the timeframe that WMA should refer to. Regardless of where the term orignates, what is germane here is it's current usage. Note that if you attend the yearly (WMAW) Western Martial Arts Workshop you will not find anything much after the 17th century. In several personal email discussions I've had, the cut off point has been as I stated above. Perhaps the evolution of the term WMA is proceeding faster than some expect, but not according to this Wikipedia page Wma . Modern day combatives all have other terms that cover them and are specific to the technique. See the Martial arts article. ARMA as well as other such organizations / guilds etc. as listed in the schools section of this article are where the information for this article are derived, and none go past the 18th century. Master at Arms 20:54, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

however, the Western Martial Arts email list (to choose one example) considers a much wider view of WMA. my understanding has always been that the limited category the article currently describes is usually termed "HEMA", for "Historical European Martial Arts", and is considered a subset of WMA. just because that era happens to be the currently fashionable era (and the workshop you mention is run by the AEMMA, or "Association of European Medieval Martial Arts", so the limits of period they choose seem dictated more by that particular group's mandate, not a general description of all WMA) doesn't mean that the term shouldn't be applied to, say, Irish Stickfighting, La Savate, Pugilism, Bowie Knife Fighting, or any of the other martial systems which originate in the West, as opposed to martial systems which originate in the East. Whateley23 08:42, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My information says that the term was derived during a discussion between Pete Kautz, Gregory Mele and a third gentelman, Dwight McLemore. Until someone can cite their works, the article stands as is. WMA is beginning to encompass a broader set of martial arts than they originally intended, but I will not speak for them. Master at Arms 19:38, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Origin of the term "WMA" and Time Period

New to doing this, so if I placed this in the wrong place, please move it as needed. Much as I would like to take credit for coining the term "WMA" it was Pete Kautz of Alliance Martial Arts who coined that term in perhaps '97, on the old HACA forum. Being a long-time arnis practitioner, Pete was riffing off of the term "FMA" used for "Filipino Martial Arts". The term really stuck, however, after he, Dwight McLemore and I discussed and created the "Western Martial Arts Workshop", which was held in October of '99. He always meant it to mean any art of European or European-American heritage prior to 1900 - so as to exclude modern eclectic, or MMA type arts, which already have their own adherents, forums, etc. Greg MeleGregorovius 04:05, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of Schools and eternal links

The Wikipedia is not a link farm and the list of schools needs to be cleaned up. Please see the discussion on the HEMA Discussion page about "Notability Concerns" for guidelines wrt what is appropriate. Basicly, no school created after the year 2000 qualifies.

This is a mess

I am going to chop a bunch of stuff. Things like Silver/Swetnam belong in HEMA and their own articles, not here, unless we want to do a detailed list of historical masters etc; but why not just link to HEMA for that? Megalophias (talk) 04:24, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]