Interview with Richard Marsden

Richard Marsden is a History teacher, holds a Masters Degree in Land Warfare, courtesy AMU and is co-founder of the Phoenix Society of Historical Swordsmanship along with John Patterson. Richard has won numerous medals at Historical Fencing tournaments and so have his students as well as their students. He was President of the HEMA Alliance and holds HEMA Alliance Instructor Certification in Fiore Longsword, Giganti Rapier, and Polish Saber. He has taught classes on various historical fencing techniques at various events in North America. He is also the co-author of over fifty short stories, an RPG expansion for Savage Worlds, War of the Worlds: The Remains, and is the author of The Polish Saber: The Use of the Polish Saber on Foot in the 17th century. He has a loving wife who tolerates his many eccentricities.

The Tyrant

I normally start these interviews asking for a description of your martial arts background and how you first became interested in HEMA, but given your own writing and previous interviews this is already well known: You've said how at around age 15 you entered a group that was focused less on research and rather more on sword fighting, and in so doing you met Greg Hinchcliff, who then went on to found The Loyal Order of the Sword. You note that at that time you learned through fighting, and you didn't develop an interest in learning from the manuals until around 2006. Given all that, what would you say are the strengths/weaknesses for a fighter learning first by fighting and then later by delving into the historical texts? Were there any artifacts you realized afterward you'd have to eliminate? Were there techniques you discovered on your own and that later you confirmed as historically valid in the manuals?

My instructor is what I call a natural fighter. He’s good. Plain and simple. That doesn’t translate to everyone else though, and so while he could teach me things he knew, he could not make me a super-hero.

When I came into HEMA I had habits that didn’t hinder me, but were not historical. At this stage in my life I am trying to match the historical work and this has taken unlearning habits, not even bad ones, and replacing them with historical ones.

Many things I learned from Greg I find in side-sword material today and some of the things he did, I now have a historical name for. This wasn’t one for one, and the whole concept of fencing I learned from HEMA.

In that same vein you've previously explained that you started learning Italian longsword with Jim Barrows in around 2011. What attracted you to the Italian tradition as compared to the German? What advantages do you think a student of the Italian school has over one of the German, and vice versa?

I typed in Longsword Arizona and Jim Barrows’ name appeared first. He was really the only one practicing historical longsword anywhere near me and so, he was a Fiore guy and now I’m a Fiore guy.

The schools are different. I think Fiore’s advantage lies in his deflections and some of his techniques which to this day, really do a number on those who are unaware of those techniques. Fiore taught in secret for a reason.

The German material has much more to it and a tradition that spans time and different masters and thus you can go much deeper and by looking at Meyer see what it had become. A great German fighter has a big toolbox and some well thought out strikes that when done correctly are hard to counter.

In your 2017 book, "Historical European Martial Arts in its Context: Single-Combat, Duels, Tournaments, Self-Defense, War, Masters and their Treatises," you take the approach of understanding the paradigm of the people in the times the treatises were written.  By putting the writing of the Masters back into their proper time-place, what new appreciation and awareness did you develop regarding those writings? Did you find yourself developing a new appreciation for the Masters themselves and what it took to reach that level of ability in those days?

In a way, no. We have many more advantages than them. With the internet and schools and the ability to produce content, be it print or digital, we can learn much more than the masters of old and much faster. We have plenty of gear to work with. We can dabble and experiment. What we lack is reality. Everything we do is always going to be artificial and for them, it was not.

The romantic view of a sword-master, is perhaps an older gentleman sitting on a hill by a waterfall full of wisdom, ready to dispense it in bits and pieces to his apt pupil. The reality was, a master was selling a service and was to be used and dispensed with when that service had been fulfilled. We know the well-respected masters, but plenty were vagabonds setting up shop and looking for a quick buck. These were men in a world that was increasingly poor (the 17^th century in particular) trying to make a living in a crowded field.

I respect the masters, but I am also aware of their time and place. Many were not old men sitting on hills, but rather, old men trying to stay relevant and feed themselves.

In reference to the previous question, in what ways did you find the changing context of Europe at the various times reflected in the sword fighting of the time? Obviously over the years the styles and techniques of the single-combat, duels, tournaments, and self-defense changed a great deal, but what did you find about the changed paradigm of these events over time? How much did the why? question change over the centuries?

There is a trend of decay on the one hand. This decay goes hand in hand with the weakening of the nobility in the face of stronger government and supported by Kiernan’s book on dueling. The nobility and the swordsmen of the 1400-1700s were faced with a world that was changing and not in either of their favor. Efforts by both were made to stay relevant. The nobles wanted to exert their power and dueling was one such way, which in turn gave the swordsmaster a job.

For the nobility and swordsmen both, the military ended up being a refuge. Note, that Fiore’s work is directed at Italy’s elite, that 16^th century material, such as Meyer, is more directed at the urban classes, and the 17^th and 18^th century fencing material is geared toward gentlemen. When those gentlemen don’t duel with swords anymore or even wear them- where to go?

For nobles and swordsman alike, the military was the answer and it is interesting that as dueling treatises fade out that military fencing books arise. However, when the gun truly did away with the sword, what then? Sport it is.

However, when looking at such a broad topic I have to caution readers about my general statements. Anyone looking closely will find exceptions and faults, but by and large, the swordsman’s lot in life was not dramatically improving, but was ever-changing and guided by fashion, function, and gunpowder.

Even though you're a well-known writer of HEMA-related subjects in the community, some folks might not realize just what a prolific writer overall you are: You've been publishing short stories on a variety of subjects since 2009, and you have two fiction books written in addition to the three HEMA books you have now published. What advice would you have for HEMA practitioners who also want to begin writing historical fencing articles or books? Any advice regarding how best to research their topics, or even where to begin organizing their thoughts?

For writing history, I was trained to write and it helped. I have a Masters in Land Warfare and it was from the American Military University that I learned how historical books were written and documented. Reading other works is a good start, but having proper training helps. If you are on your own, then learn how Chicago-Turabian works for footnotes and citations. Use anecdotes to accentuate your points. Write to a general audience, not to your fictional nay-sayers. Have themes to what you write, be it by concept or chronology. 

Finally, read other historical books, especially those directed at a general audience, and see how they are structured. My Polish Saber book, for example, is divided into, history, sources, and then my interpretation. My HEMA in its Context book is divided into categories, such as dueling, tournaments, self-defense, war, the masters and so forth.

The internet has made researching easier than ever and google-books is amazing. While I purchase many books, just to have, and take gambles on if they are useful, more than a few times my anecdotes, quotes and sources come from looking at what is readily available on google-books.

Do you think there are any gaps in the current research into HEMA-related subjects, and what topics would you like to see investigated in greater detail? What are some of the vexing historical questions behind our art you'd love to see answered? Do you feel like some subjects are over-researched, whereas others don't get the attention they deserve?

There are plenty of gaps. Our largest gaps lie in early (13^th and 14^th) century material. Anything ‘new’ from there would be a great find.

The Catholic Church was teaching fencing. I have accounts of this and numerous references. What this looked like exactly is unknown and yet, I believe it will exist in some Church records somewhere. The university taught fencing, for example, and what that looked like, day by day, would be a great find. Imagine if we found lesson-books or notes on fencing.

Early French, Spanish, British, Eastern European material is missing. Either this was all done through direct instruction, and we are out of luck, or somewhere out there, there are sources.

My own Polish research has led me to believe there was a distinct Polish style of fencing in the 17^th century, known by the Poles and outsiders as ‘Polish’. While my book makes a claim as to what that is, we lack a direct 17^th century treatise on the subject.

I find no subject is over-researched. Those who translate or write about HEMA are so few that we all tend to know one another on some personal level or another. The market really is wide open and some material from 2008 should be re-written by their original authors, but also new authors as well.

Do you feel like there should ideally be more research by HEMA practitioners ourselves (since we are the ones with the hands-on experience fighting with swords) or is it best left in the hands of professional historians (who might be able to speak all the languages of Medieval Europe but don't know what the pointy end of the sword is)? Do you think people in the community are sometimes dissuaded by doing research because they feel like, as a non-historian, they have no business doing research?

It is up to us, for now. There are some professional academics interested in HEMA, but too few for everyone to throw up our hands and wait for them and too few to appoint them to being the sole dispensers of HEMA-knowledge.

The academics could and perhaps one day will, write a far better book than I on HEMA history, but I don’t know if they could do any better interpreting sources and how they can be used today. HEMA isn’t entirely history, it’s also application and you’re not always going to get a teacher-scholar-fencer-writer out there to do the work. I think, like Alfred Hutton and Egerton Castle, we need to make our own path and though it may be faulty, it will be a path none the less.

Have you been researching anything new lately? Any new books coming along in the near future?

My Science-Fiction series, the Traveling Tyrant is getting new covers, new edits and I have 5 of 6 books complete and they will be released soon.

I am working on the translation and release of the Paris version of the Flower of Battle complete with my own interpretation as well as cleaned-up artwork.

I have other projects as well, but these involve other people and until they are done, I can’t say when the product will come out. Tyrant Industries Publishing will continue to produce though!

You have explained that one of the main motivating factors for writing your 2015 book, "The Polish Saber," was that there was no one specific treatise to rely on for techniques in regard to this weapon, and certainly nothing written in English. As such, you and a team synthesized the available material to create a plausible system. When delving into any unknown territory, or when researching something for which there is not a preexisting fund of accepted common knowledge, how does one test for historical validity? Were there ever situations in which you'd worked something out that worked, but later you realized you were using historically invalid techniques?

This question can be best summarized as- how do you know you’re not making it all up and do you change your mind?

The answer is, we look at sources and link them to our techniques. Our melding together is where it gets murky, but the Polish method I’ve interpreted is derived entirely from sources. Ideal sources? No. But sources.

These days, I am given more ideas from others to try and use for the Polish saber, and often say to them ‘maybe’, and not ‘yes’ because they lack enough source material to back it up. It’s easy to see Polish in everything, but I am conservative by nature.

What I work on and adapt and still change is ‘how cross-cutting works’. While we have a good idea of what it is, we lack it in source material explicitly enough to know exactly how it is done safely. Oddly enough, we do have sources on how it is done with a disregard to safety!

The Polish saber, as a weapon itself, is certainly a unique piece of sword fighting technology: The fierce curve of the blade, the thumb ring, the ability to make deep cuts while also thrusting, etc. What was it about the Polish saber as a sword that attracted you to it?

Luck. I saw a fencing scene in the film, Potop (the Deluge) and said, “Hmm, wonder what the real stuff is like?” Years later I’m a Polish saber ‘expert’, thanks to loving people from Poland and around the world. I know quite a bit about Polish culture and can even say ‘hello’ and a few other phrases. I will always be a stranger in a strange land, but I hope I can make English-speakers get interested in how fascinating, dashing, and glorious the Poles were in the 17^th century.

Earlier we had discussed sword fighting within its historical context, but swords themselves can be put in a proper cultural context. After all, swords were never created in a vacuum and reflect the cultures from they came, the Polish saber being a fine example of that. What perspective do you have, based upon your research and knowledge of swords from different time periods, in regards to how those particular swords fit into the cultural and historical contexts in which they were used? How does that perspective inform then you about the swordsmen wielding them and the relationships they had with their swords?  

The main takeaway I have is that swords are affected by numerous things.

Function. Over time, technology improves and so things like, the length of the blade, or the complexity of the handguard improves.

Fashion. Just because we can make a single-handed sword with a complex handguard doesn’t mean we will. I have an example of a 17^th century treatise depicting simple cross-guards for their rapiers. Why? To better show off the hand? No, more likely, it is because for whatever reason that was fashionable at the time, even if it was not as functional.

Guns. Gunpowder nibbles and nibbles and nibbles away at the value of the sword. This just isn’t my opinion, it is voiced by the masters as well.

Safety. We live in safe times these days. It may not seem it, but in 1400 the murder rate in Florence was twice as high as that of Chicago today. Traveling on the roads was so dangerous, priests sometimes wore full body armor and armed themselves. Ambush and banditry and vendetta loomed large, and so, a reason to be always armed did as well. As the cities and roads became better policed there was a less need for being armed.

That safety also applies to the city defense. Early on, every citizen was armed, much like the Swiss are today, to keep the peace. When that peace-keeping was outsourced to the state, away went the need to be armed or learn the use of arms.

Culture. Nobles love their swords. However, as the nobility weakened in the face of the state, their numbers and influence declined and so to did the status symbol of the sword.

Put this all together and you can see trends and one of decline. The evidence is with us to this day. We are considered a bit ‘weird’ to be studying swordsmanship, and none of us wear a sword out in public as a part of our daily attire.

You continue to be closely involved with the HEMA Alliance, having previously served as president and now as a member on the Board of Directors. What would be your personal goals for the HEMAA specifically, and for HEMA in general? How would you like to see the HEMAA evolve over the next decade, and in what direction would you like to see HEMA go in the same time frame?

My views on HEMAA have largely stayed the same. HEMAA is not a super-club, but a service provider that will give discounts, insurance, support and encourage clubs through technological means. I do not want to see it as a governing sport body, but just as a facilitator. In the next decade I foresee growth in HEMAA and with that will come more services.

HEMA, with just one A, is going to grow. In just 5 years it has exploded and will continue to do so. More eyes will turn to it and I expect more sources to be rediscovered, more gear to come to the market, more events to go to and more clubs around the world. We won’t be unified, though some regional areas will be to some extent. I see also differing interests, ranging from sport to history to martial art.

If you could add or delete one thing in regards to the overall practice of HEMA, what would that be? What, from your perspective, do we either have entirely too much of or nowhere near enough of?

This is going to come across as egocentric, but I’d like more people like me. I teach, I volunteer in HEMAA, I research, I have advanced degrees, I have fenced and won, my students have fenced and won and my students now teach students and I produce content in terms of videos and books and encourage my club and the community to do the same. The co-founder of the Phoenix Society, John, is like me, a visionary, leader, fencer, teacher, and so forth. We need more people like us, and we often say this, not because we’re arrogant, but because we really believe that HEMA needs more good role models. Critics exist, but too many people in HEMA want to establish themselves as critics. We’re too small for that and more people need to produce content and encourage the community not try to police it.

What would you like folks to know about the charity event the Phoenix Society of Historical Swordsmanship holds to benefit Streetlight USA?

This one is John’s event and a great one. Streetlight USA is a girl’s shelter and we have a tournament that raises money for them. Check this out!

With every interview I do I like to include one question that's in good nature and just for fun, so...can you please explain the skull codpiece?!

Greg made us all codpieces with faces or skulls on it 20 years ago. I still wear mine and if you are real alert, you may notice other HEMA people around the country wearing it. Greg’s boys, now all men, have fully infiltrated HEMA from coast to coast.