The Historic Fencing Guilds

[Keith P. Myers]

Matt Galas's lecture on his research into the historical fencing guilds was great at FA 2012. He went for about 2 hours and showed us translations he was working on from historical documents in both French and Dutch. I didn't write down notes, so here is what I can remember off the top of my head. Maybe some of the other guys that were there can chime in with what they remember as well.

First, the guilds were far more common and widespread than I realized. Matt commented the he lives just aside of a town of about 20,000 in Belgium. This town was even smaller in the past, but it had its own fencing guild with a whole archive of historical documents. He has found extensive records of fencing guilds from France, Belgium, and Holland and there is no reason to believe they weren't just as common in Germany and Bohemia. Longsword tournaments were being held as late as 1791! Matt attributes the spread of the French revolution throughout Europe as the end of the guilds. Damn French!!! The guilds supported the towns. The towns were generally run by patrician families. So even though they weren't directly associated with the nobility, the revolutionaries saw them as a threat and disbanded them. In Germany Napolean put an end to the Holy Roman Empire, which had given official status to the guilds. So they went into decline as well.

The guilds had lots of rules! Matt had pages upon pages of translated guild rules. They had to pay fines every time they violated a rule. Here are some that I can remember off the top of my head:

1. No farting or burping in the training hall….or you pay a fine!!!
2. You must greet the Master and your fellow students every time you enter the training hall.
3. You cannot walk between two fencers about to engage.
4. You cannot pick your weapon up off the ground while wearing gauntlets, or place it back onto the ground when you are finished without first removing your gauntlets.
5. If you willfully hurt a training partner, you pay a fine.
6. You must salute the equipment/weapons upon entering the training hall. Matt pointed out that this was a direct equivalent of the bowing and respect shown in traditional Japanese dojos.
7. You cannot step on or over weapons lying on the floor.
8. If you do not attend scheduled events, you pay a fine.
9. If you handle a weapon that you have not “sworn” for, you pay a fine.

A guild member “took the oath” for one weapon at a time. For example, you paid the required fee and then swore the oath for the Longsword. The swords were layed out crossed on the ground and you were required to kneel and touch the swords as you swore the oath. Then you had an intensive 6 week training program in the Longsword basics. At the end of that time if the Master thought you were ready, he would allow you to play for your prize. The prize was assigned a specific value and you had to either provide that in money, or purchase something of the same value. This was then placed in a prominent position on the wall in the training hall for all to see. Matt says there are illustrations of things hanging on the wall in some manuscripts that were likely a prize to be played for. This was often a tin plate or other utensil. One of the guilds in Belgium has been resurrected and has a small museum with a display case full of items that had been prizes in the past. It wasn’t clear what “successfully playing the prize” consisted of. A tournament was held, but he didn’t say whether the candidate had to win, or just give a good showing. But once you had your first prize play, you were “in.” Obviously training continued on past 6 weeks of basics, but Matt didn’t go into further ranking or prize plays.

So a guild member had to go through the same process for each weapon. Longsword was always on the list. Matt also mentioned staff, dagger, sword & buckler, Messer, and a little later in history…rapier and then smallsword.

Officers in the guild included the fencing Master and his provost or assistant. The bailiff was responsible for collecting the fines. He also got a small cut, so even though he was likely unpopular, this was a desired position to have! The King had the most status and seemed to be in charge more than the fencing Master. The Emperor was like a retired King that everyone respected. There were “olderman” or elders that where part of the governing council. These were guys that had been around forever but where maybe now too old to do much training or fighting anymore. They were often past Kings and Emperors. There was another role…I forget the title…that was essentially assigned by the city leaders. This was the guy responsible for making sure that the guild as a whole was not doing anything that the city disapproved of.

There was a big Fechtschule event every year. The prior King was responsible for putting up a portion of the funds to put it on. There was lots of food and entertainment involved and it was a public event. The tournament used what Matt refers to as the “Franco-Belgium” rules. The fighters wore black and used Feders with chalked blades. Thrusts were forbidden and they could strike only with the flat. Strikes to the hands and forearms were forbidden. The previous year’s King took the floor and each fighter had one pass. If the King won the pass, he stayed. If the champion won the pass, he took the King’s place. An after-blow was in the King’s favor, so you had to land a convincing blow to displace the King. The strike moved up each time a hit was scored. In other words, if the previous hit was scored on the arm just above the elbow, all subsequent hits had to be higher. If someone scored on the shoulder, then the only hits that scored after that were ones to the head! All the fighters in the tournament lined up and took turns at the King. Each fighter had multiple “lives” depending upon their rank in the guild. A newbie may have only one “life”, meaning he had only one pass or one chance at the King. A long-time guild member may have three “lives”, meaning he had multiple passes or chances at the King. The “last man standing” was the King for the next year. If a fighter won the Kingship three years in a row, then he was dubbed “Emperor” and held that title for life. He was given permanent status and never required to compete in the tournaments again. The winning “King” was expected to throw a big party and feast and provide gifts for all the guys that fought against him. Guild life wasn’t cheap!

The city leaders welcomed the guilds. The guilds provided a pool of trained fighters to help defend the city in times of conflict. They also provided something equivalent to a police force or riot control element that would help keep things from getting out of hand. They also helped keep fighting and conflict to a minimum within the city, since any “dueling” or other fighting was so closely regulated. Note that dueling in Europe only really became a problem with many deaths after the decline of the fencing guilds. There were guilds for crossbowmen, longbowmen, and cannoniers as well. So any decent sized city wanted multiple guilds because this essentially made up their own small army for defense.

The guilds likely started with an emphasis on the fencing Master and as a way for him to train and certify fellow fencing Masters. They would have been somewhat small. But then the emphasis shifted to the membership and it became more like a fraternity and closer to what we would consider a typical martial arts school.

Matt said that there are reams and reams of historical documents on the fencing guilds. The vast majority of it is boring stuff like records of minutes of meetings, inventories of weapons and equipment, and accounting records. But he notes that everyone once in awhile he comes across a “jewel” that talks about rules or stories of disputes that gives some insights into what they were doing. But none of them contain technique instruction like we have in Meyer and the other Fechtbucher.

Anyway…that’s what I can remember for now. Keep in mind that this is Matt Galas’s research, not mine. I’m only repeating what he told us as best I can remember. So I could certainly have screwed something up! But fascinating stuff nonetheless!

[Keith P. Myers]

Here's some more things that Matt told me during our conversations. I asked him about a Landsknecht connection to the Fechtbuch authors. He said that some of them may have been involved, but what we were seeing as Landsknecht imagery is actually associated with the bodyguard troupes….damn…can’t remember the German word he used for them. Hiring on as a bodyguard for some dignitary was a respectable occupation. It usually consisted of the main guy/master and a group of up to 50 fighters. The imagery was the same or similar to that surrounding the Landsknecht because it was the same period of history and the clothing and weapon styles were pretty widespread. A Fechtbuch was a perfect way to advertise your skills. We know that Andre Pauernfeindt was a bodyguard for a Cardinal. Joachim Meyer may have been the same for the Duke of Mecklinberg. It would be interesting to know if there was any note of an entourage traveling with Meyer when he left Straussberg before his death. If there was, this may have been his “hand picked” group of fellow fencers that would have served as the bodyguard troupe.

Matt said he thought that “Freifechter” was the title for a certified fencer. It didn’t seem to necessarily imply “Master”, but was at least someone with skills enough to teach. Kind of like being a “certified instructor of the Longsword.” If you think about it, the “Master” was the head instructor for a given fencing guild. There could be only one! So if a guild was producing good knowledgeable fighters, they couldn’t all be licensed or credentialed as a “Master” regardless of their knowledge and skill level unless they held this position within the guild. So Freifechter may have been a title used by those that were technically “Masters” but who were not in charge of the teaching.

I asked Matt if he had any theories about why the Sword & Buckler disappeared from the German corpus of material as time went on. He pointed out that many of the non-martial manuscripts from the medieval and renn periods picture S & B images in the marginalia and it seems that S & B was likely the most commonly practiced weapon prior to Liechtenaur and the Longsword and would have continued to be very popular. Just because it wasn’t in the manuals doesn’t mean it wasn’t being practiced. He pointed out that Longsword was obviously still being practiced up until at least 1791, but the guys writing rapier manuals didn’t bother to mention it or feature it. The same probably happened with the S & B.

Prior to Matt’s lecture, he and Brian Stokes talked about the new manuscript that Brian had discovered. It was in Latin and only 1 page long. Best dating puts it to around 1450 with origins in Italy. It was a list of guards and counter guards. A buckler is never mentioned, but the phrasing and positions that could be identified strongly suggest it is Sword & Buckler. Many of the guards sound very similar to I.33 and the arrangement of one guard as the best to oppose someone in a different guard matches the advice in I.33. This, along with the S & B guards illustrated in the manuscript marginalia, suggests that the “I.33 style” was likely pretty common and widespread. The theory is that if the “I.33 style” was being taught to priests, who better to spread it around since the Catholic Church had a presence all over Europe. Of course why priests would be training with S & B isn’t exactly clear!

[KeithFarrell]

Fascinating, thanks for writing up these notes!

[RJ McKeehan]

Yes, thank you very much for posting this. This is part of the history of what we do that I'm very interested in!

[maxime chouinard]

He pointed out that Longsword was obviously still being practiced up until at least 1791, but the guys writing rapier manuals didn’t bother to mention it or feature it.

I remember reading in croiser le fer, a research done on fencing from the late 16th up to the 19th century, that weapons such as longsword, halberd or staff remained in the corpus of the French guilds mostly to stop foreign masters (mostly from Italy) to apply as masters in France, as those foreign fencers would not have been trained in those weapons. So it is possible that the Italian authors only discussing rapier didn't knew that much outside of this weapon. There seems to be documented instances where Italian masters would be given special clearance by the king or some nobility to still be able to teach in France.

[Mike Ruhala]

Interesting, parts of that seem to have the ring of truth to me. I don't fully understand the subject but I've read several historical references to some kind of conceptual link between Italian saber and Italian rapier. For a while now I've been noticing a lot of overlap between Meyer's KDF and French foil, yeah I know that will offend some people but it ends up there really is a connection between the two schools that was made at the right moment in history for it to be more than a coincidence.

[Keith P. Myers]

He pointed out that Longsword was obviously still being practiced up until at least 1791, but the guys writing rapier manuals didn’t bother to mention it or feature it.

I remember reading in croiser le fer, a research done on fencing from the late 16th up to the 19th century, that weapons such as longsword, halberd or staff remained in the corpus of the French guilds mostly to stop foreign masters (mostly from Italy) to apply as masters in France, as those foreign fencers would not have been trained in those weapons. So it is possible that the Italian authors only discussing rapier didn't knew that much outside of this weapon. There seems to be documented instances where Italian masters would be given special clearance by the king or some nobility to still be able to teach in France.

Hi Max!

Yes. I noticed that Italy never came up in Matt's lecture about the fencing guilds, so what you say has the ring truth to it. I also remember reading somewhere....was it something that Jeanry posted?....that Italy was often the exception to the way the world was organized through-out Europe during the Renaissance. Fencers had much more prestige there than in the rest of Europe and may not have been organized into fencing guilds. They certainly had schools or traditions of instruction...like the Bolognese school. But whether these functioned like a fencing guild is unclear. The Bolognese tradition taught the Spadone, Halberd, and staff in the 16th century, but these weapons may have been dropped as the true rapier gained favor. Alfieri seems to have been doing the Spadone rather late. But who knows how widespread it was? The fencing guild structure preserved the older weapons. Without that structure their teaching and preservation may have been somewhat sporadic.

[maxime chouinard]

Here is an incomplete version of the book: http://books.google.ca/books?ei=ZjRvT_m ... &q&f=false

You have a couple of those situations on p.91. The masters wishing to be recognized in France had to submit to the Expérience, which included a demonstration of ability using the espadon (two handed sword), halberd and the bâton à deux bouts. The Italians teaching at court received mastery letters given by the King, but it became complicated when they wished to teach outside, and the guilds would ask them to complete the rule of Expérience. Some judgements would allow the Italian masters to complete only a "light" Expérience. In 1633 they'll even go as far as to close the title of prévost to anyone who wasn't born French and of Catholic faith, and even those wishing to receive royal mastery letters had to submit to the Expérience.

[Jeremiah Smith]

Other things I remember
Upon swearing your oath to the guild and after passing the defenses test in your first weapon of choice you entered, into a legal contract with the guild by which you would be required to perform acts of service when called for (defense of the city, participate in funerary proceedings and such) also you would be asked at least in the early days to provide a longsword, or the monetary equivalent there of to the guild at your death. In turn the guild would make sure that you were taken care of, your guild brothers would provide you with room and board in times of need, help smuggle you out of the country if you accidentally killed someone and help in the plea to have you pardoned. they would also make sure that you had a grand funeral yourself if you were to die and would have the rest of your guild brothers pray on your behalf to get you out of purgatory and into heaven.

In the yearly kings feast tournament (the tournament that decided the king for that year) the longsword was always (or at least as near always as has been researched) the weapon used. Like Keith mentioned, there were longsword tournaments being held in France until the French revolution (strange to think our martial heritage, lasted way longer then is popularly given credence)

the The Company of Maisters of the Science of Defence, in England was founded by Henry the VIII. After he had conquered a city in Belgium. He saw the positive effects of preserving the martial arts he loved and, feeling that the way the fencing guilds were structured would help bring about order to his own cities, he brought back the tradition to England.

It was an incredible lecture

[Nicholas Moore]

A lot of this info makes sense when you consider what Jean Chandler and other researchers have written on guilds in general and their relationships with city and government. Also the artisan and craft guilds relationship to the combat guilds makes a lot more sense to me now.