History can be fun 3: Women in the European Renaissance -fighting

[Drifter Bob]

Just to point out how different our perception is from reality on this issue, here is a little historical tidbit many people in Western Martial Arts know about: the depiction in the Tallhoffer fechtbuch of judicial combat between a husband and wife.

In the good old days, a much simpler legal system prevailed. If you had a dispute with someone, you fought each other before a magistrate, often using special equipment and rules dictated by the nature of the dispute. Whoever won the fight, won the suit. Simple!

http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Pagoda/8187/talhoffer15.jpg

Well, it was apparently not uncommon for a husband and wife to have just such a dispute. Don't want her mother coming to live with you? Well, if she's an uppity woman, she might just take it to the magistrate, and you know what that means.

Evidently this happened enough that it was deemed wise to put instructions on how best to win such an encounter in what was probably the most prominent fencing manual of the day, written by the most prominent fencing master.

http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Pagoda/8187/talhoffer24.jpg

As you can see from the image, in such situations, the woman got to fight on foot, with a sort of a flail consisting of a rock inside a leather sock, while the man was compelled to fight from inside a hole in the ground, armed with a club. They both have to wear these wierd leather jumpsuits and skullcaps, which I think I read somewhere they were actually sewn into. This illustration was scanned from the original 1467 edition.

Tallhoffer goes into detail on how to win such duels, as you can read here in this translation.

http://www.thearma.org/talhoffer/talhoffer14.htm

"She has him in a hold by the throat and by his equipment and means to pull him from the pit."

I wonder what he means by 'equipment'?

Imagine going home after being beaten up by your wife and having to concede to let her mom come live with you... oh the shame!

DB

 

[Dogbrain]

In the good old days, a much simpler legal system prevailed. If you had a dispute with someone, you fought each other before a magistrate, often using special equipment and rules dictated by the nature of the dispute. Whoever won the fight, won the suit. Simple!

Not nearly so simple. Judicial duels were not the normal order of business. They were only permitted under certain circumstances.

Well, it was apparently not uncommon for a husband and wife to have just such a dispute.

Buildings full of legal records refute your claim. Judicial duels between spouses were not common at all.

Evidently this happened enough that it was deemed wise to put instructions on how best to win such an encounter in what was probably the most prominent fencing manual of the day, written by the most prominent fencing master.

He could have been illustrating some "spicy stuff" just to encourage sales, for all we know.

 

[WmRAllen67]

Random, Useless Historical Facts and unsupported Rumors

IIRC, the judicial duel is still legal in Maryland, of all places. The story goes something like this: Maryland's original constitution, charter, or whatever, contains a line saying that the laws of the state will be "the same as the laws of England in 16**". However, in England, the right to judicial combat was not removed from the books until sometime in the late 1800's.

So, next time you need to challenge a speeding ticket in Baltimore...

(Don't quote me on this, I couldn't find the reference on the net... but it's a neat idea, anyway...)

 

[Drifter Bob]

Buildings full of legal records refute your claim. Judicial duels between spouses were not common at all.

I never claimed it was a daily occurance, but it was obviously hardly unheard of, and this Tallhoffer book isn't the only reference to it. If you insist otherwise, why don't you present some evidence.

He could have been illustrating some "spicy stuff" just to encourage sales, for all we know.

Do you know anything about Tallhoffer? Not exactly the most frivolous person. He's also not the only fechtbuch writer to include the husband-wife duel. The fact that this training material is in the book means it was taught by the Master himself. Those books were written for students to practice what they learned. A book was still a rare and precious thing, this isn't a cheap paperback or a tabloid newspaper...

DB

 

[Drifter Bob]

So, next time you need to challenge a speeding ticket in Baltimore...

(Don't quote me on this, I couldn't find the reference on the net... but it's a neat idea, anyway...)

I find that a weak correlation. Judicial combat was quite common until the mid 16th century when the infamous Jarnac combat basically brought about it's replacement by private dueling.

You can read more about that famous fight here:

http://www.thearma.org/essays/DOTC.htm

DB

P.S. is the title of your post supposed to be some kind of insult to me?

 

[WmRAllen67]

I find that a weak correlation. Judicial combat was quite common until the mid 16th century when the infamous Jarnac combat basically brought about it's replacement by private dueling.

You can read more about that famous fight here:

http://www.thearma.org/essays/DOTC.htm

DB

P.S. is the title of your post supposed to be some kind of insult to me?

No, not at all-- my facts are the useless ones...

Sorry about any confusion...

 

[Drifter Bob]

No, not at all-- my facts are the useless ones...

Sorry about any confusion...

Oh, I'm sorry, I guess I'm a little bit oversensitive! All this harsh reaction!

DB