No one will ever know what it was like...

...to be a bull-jumper in the court of King Minos.



 I have decided that every once in a while I am going to recycle a past blog entry.

 I occasionally run across really good posts from the past that I myself have forgotten. I don't think there is any large group combing through this blog to see what's in it. So if I like it enough, I will put in a link.

Here's the first: Spectacular, transient art.

SCA -- The Dream

An amazing evocation of the SCA at its best.

Another review of my book, Deeds of Arms

I just ran across this review on the website of Academie Duello in Vancouver.

Book Review: “Deeds of Arms” by S. Muhlberger

Wes von Papineäu JUNE 19, 2015

CATEGORIES: ADULT SWORDPLAY, PROGRAMS, SWORD NEWS

TAGS: BOOK REVIEW DEEDS OF ARMS HUNDRED YEARS' WAR JOUSTING MEDIEVAL MUHLBERGER

“They are stories about stories.” [1]

It does my heart good when I hear competent people say that they’ve recreated the essence of some medieval martial art event to the best of their ability, because they followed the descriptions of medieval combat “exactly” from period texts.

It’s a good … start.

But what if the reference book is not completely correct about the event it describes? What if the author had written a version of the event he witnessed that was “flavoured” by a political or social leaning? What if he wrote of an event based on his interview of someone who had (allegedly) witnessed the event? And even if the author penned a totally neutral recollection of an event, did he truly understand the nuances of the combat that he was witnessing? (Think of when you as sword scholars see swordplay on television, and your “recollection” of what went on compared to that of your swordless peers).

This is the conundrum that the eminently qualified and respected medieval historian Muhlberger brings to our attention in well-documented and easy-to-read detail.

A Broad Overview

In the first half of the book, Muhlberger focusses on the period of the Hundred Years’ War following the battles of Crécy and Poitiers (1350-1400). Using period recollections of “deeds of arms” (conflicts fought by prearrangement and within agreed upon limits), Muhlberger explains how tales of combat came to be so important for 14th century French literature … and for the medieval man-at-arms’ “sense of self”. [2] More importantly for us, he goes on to describe just how period writings concerning these events were influenced by a great variety of political, social or personal influences on the writers during this period. (Apparently, even back then, authors expected to be paid for their original work. Who knew?) With the aid of this information, Muhlberger guides us to a more careful consideration of how we interpret what really happened in any particular mêlée within the context of medieval politics and culture.

This is not a “fight book”, and it is not a history of historical duels; but it is a description of how period authors wrote about “deeds of arms”, and why the styles they used were fashionable.

The book is divided into sequentially supporting chapters, each of which I found could stand alone as independent studies in their own right.

Chapter-by-Chapter

First we learn of the risks undertaken by men-at-arms when one actually engages in physical combat, both in duels and war. (We do get a nod to select fight books here.) [3] The reader is introduced to the concept of “formal duels”, and extant variations on the theme.

Next, Muhlberger gets into the meat of his proposal with his examination of writings featuring the combat of “Thirty against Thirty” in 1351, examining in detail the confusion and discrepancies in recollection caused by passing time and the use of second hand accounts — and how sometimes the story of an event became more important that the actual event.

The chapter entitled “Will a Frenchman fight?” is most illuminating, demonstrating unequivocally that while the French Royal Army of 1380 was not famous for seeking battle, there were lots of French men-at-arms throughout the land ready to remind Englishmen that (to paraphrase a great film) “[their] mothers were hamsters and [their] fathers smelt of elderberries” … and were willing to back that challenge with one-on-one cold steel.

“Deeds of and Careers in Arms” describes how our protagonists built wealth and reputations during deeds of arms, and how the chroniclers of those deeds became our first “spin doctors”, worthy of employment in any modern PR company.

To finish, we are presented with period impressions of the four royal jousts conducted between the years of 1389 and 1390 during the “good peace” … though the intensity of combat during one tournament appeared to be equal to the combat seen in any war.

In Conclusion

A reading of Deeds of Arms would serve well anyone trying to recreate historical events in modern times. Any historical reference that a modern scholar may wish to use as “canon” is apt to be slanted in its representation of any past event — even if written with the very best of “neutral” intent and desire for accuracy. Read the old manuscripts, yes. But remember that when we are looking for guidance on how things happened in medieval times, a manuscript only tells us of one person’s recollection of “historical truth” and that any manuscript — regardless of its detail and “accuracy” — must be interpreted as part of a greater regional and situational historical record.

Read. Consider. Validate.

Sources

1. Muhlberger, Steven. Deeds of Arms – Formal Combats in the Late Fourteeth Century. (Highland Village Texas: Chivalry Bookshelf, 2005) 4.

2. Muhlberger. Deeds of Arms. 3.

3. Muhlberger. Deeds of Arms. 23.

The evolution of the Canadian character

The Sesquicentennial of Canadian Confederation is being celebrated by the Globe and Mail with a number of special features. The first one is a long thought-piece by Doug Saunders, who was born on the Centennial year. He's got a lot to say about the many changes that took place before 1967 and emerged into public consciousness in the year of his birth.

Highly recommended even if you don't find the argument persuasive.

Me, I am very interested in how Canada stopped being British, so this was an excellent read for me.

Excerpts:

Eight hours after I was born, the directors of the Canadian National Exhibition filed into a banquet hall for their annual luncheon. The exhibition’s president, W.H. Evans, asked them to remain standing to sing the national anthem – and then chaos ensued, as half the audience broke into God Save the Queen before the pianist had struck the first note of O Canada. A debate over Canada’s true national anthem, begun in 1964, had been winding its way through a special House of Commons-Senate joint committee all year and filling the media with debate. It wouldn’t fully be resolved until a law was passed in 1980, and many people (especially in Toronto) still considered the British national anthem “official.”

In that light, 1967 can only be seen as the apex of Canada’s postcolonial moment. The wars over symbols were one small manifestation of a larger shift. It’s worth remembering how new this all was. We still remained, in important ways, a colony. In 1967, Canadian citizenship had only existed for 20 years – before January 1, 1947, everyone in Canada was a British subject and had to travel with a United Kingdom passport. But it still didn’t quite exist: That 1947 law creating Canadian citizenship declared in its main clause that “a Canadian citizen is a British subject” (this would remain in place until 1977). That idea was still hotly defended by many in the Ottawa of 1967: The Progressive Conservative leadership still opposed Canadian citizenship, and the flag, and the anthem. There was still a sizable political faction in Canada who supported the idea that all Canadians were simply a slightly different, less important flavour of British people. But the great majority of Canadians had moved on – or moved in – and you could see the centennial struggling to catch up with them.

Back in the 1980s, I told my history class that the disappearance of "the Romans" from Britain was less like an invasion and more like the elimination of "a Canadian citizen is a British subject" from the passport. This passed right over their heads, since they'd never seen such a passport.

More Yes lyrics for the new year

Sad preacher nailed upon the coloured door of time

Insane teacher be there reminded of the rhyme

There'll be no mutant enemy we shall certify

Political ends as sad remains will die

Reach out as forward tastes begin to enter you.

I listened hard but could not see

Life tempo change out and inside me

The preacher trained in all to lose his name

The teacher travels, asking to be shown the same

In the end we'll agree, we'll accept, we'll immortalize

That the truth of man maturing in his eyes

All complete in the sight of seeds of life with you.

Some lyrics from Yes for the new year

Speak to me of summer Long winters longer than time can remember Setting up of other roads To travel on in old accustomed ways I still remember the talks by the water The proud sons and daughters That knew the knowledge of the land And spoke to me in sweet accustomed ways

Superintellligence

This talk, by Maciej Cegłowski, which reached me through a number of links, is one of the most interesting things I've seen on the web in a long time. I warn you that it's long, but it's not boring. The topic is superintelligence, the idea that computer-based intelligence is growing so fast that it will soon be dominant in our society. The proponents of this idea think this is a wonderful thing. Our author is not so sure.

Here are some short excerpts:

AI Cosplay
The most harmful social effect of AI anxiety is something I call AI cosplay. People who are genuinely persuaded that AI is real and imminent begin behaving like their fantasy of what a hyperintelligent AI would do.
In his book, Bostrom lists six things an AI would have to master to take over the world:

• Intelligence Amplification

• Strategizing

• Social manipulation

• Hacking

• Technology research

• Economic productivity

If you look at AI believers in Silicon Valley, this is the quasi-sociopathic checklist they themselves seem to be working from.
Sam Altman, the man who runs YCombinator, is my favorite example of this archetype. He seems entranced by the idea of reinventing the world from scratch, maximizing impact and personal productivity. He has assigned teams to work on reinventing cities, and is doing secret behind-the-scenes political work to swing the election.
Such skull-and-dagger behavior by the tech elite is going to provoke a backlash by non-technical people who don't like to be manipulated. You can't tug on the levers of power indefinitely before it starts to annoy other people in your democratic society.
I've even seen people in the so-called rationalist community refer to people who they don't think are effective as ‘Non Player Characters’, or NPCs, a term borrowed from video games. This is a horrible way to look at the world.
So I work in an industry where the self-professed rationalists are the craziest ones of all. It's getting me down.,

Incentivizing Crazy This whole field of "study" incentivizes crazy. One of the hallmarks of deep thinking in AI risk is that the more outlandish your ideas, the more credibility it gives you among other enthusiasts. It shows that you have the courage to follow these trains of thought all the way to the last station. Ray Kurzweil, who believes he will never die, has been a Google employee for several years now and is presumably working on that problem. There are a lot of people in Silicon Valley working on truly crazy projects under the cover of money.

Religion 2.0
What it really is is a form of religion. People have called a belief in a technological Singularity the "nerd Apocalypse", and it's true.

It's a clever hack, because instead of believing in God at the outset, you imagine yourself building an entity that is functionally identical with God. This way even committed atheists can rationalize their way into the comforts of faith.
The AI has all the attributes of God: it's omnipotent, omniscient, and either benevolent (if you did your array bounds-checking right), or it is the Devil and you are at its mercy.

Like in any religion, there's even a feeling of urgency. You have to act now! The fate of the world is in the balance!

And of course, they need money!

Because these arguments appeal to religious instincts, once they take hold they are hard to uproot.