As someone that runs Virtus Martialis, I feel obligated to chip in on "Martialness". :)
Martial is simply of Mars. So I start with the mythology of Mars in mind. And you know I have my own rant if I need to split this into two parts.
=== Part A ===
Mars is foremost a god of men, and secondary a god of war. Bellona, the personification of war, is one of the consorts of Mars, but not the only one.
At the core, martial is doing what needs to be done to come on top as a man. I am sure this started as showing enough vis for a woman (i.e. manly power in all its aspects, as bestowed by the consort Nerio). Then, conquering the savagery of nature and building an agricultural community, a family, was a priority at some point (i.e. Mars is the patron god of mills via his consort Molae; not a patrol of the fertility of land, but of the organisation around the fertility of the land). Only when these aspects are satisfied, do we move Mars into the domain of war.
Mars is not Ares, or he is not just Ares. Mars is also the patron god of defensive wars, and taking military action to protect what's built and one's family is at the core of what's expected of a man. From this aspect, martial is leaving the luxuries of life and taking to arms as a need.
In passing, and to emphasise that Mars is not just war, I also want to mention his consort, Anna Perenna. She oversees the changing of years as celebrated in the Roman tradition with 1st of March (the month of Mars), a celebration that still survived in parts of the old empire. And let's not forget his consort Rhea Silvia, who birth the founders of Rome itself. Again, Mars is more of men and their organisation, where war is one of the aspects, than just a god of war.
And yes, while the word martial is associated with war, it is not at an individual level, but in its organisation. So martial training is part of that, not relating to individual feats of glory. A martial sport is a sport that conveys benefits in case of war, not an act that can be directly used in war (e.g. "drop and give me 20" will condition your body, that condition will help you in war, but it's not what will cause the lethality). I think this confusion is what makes some people think that martial sports have or had direct application in combat.
=== Part B ===
HEMA, can be seen as maintaining old martial traditions. But aside from that and the overall veneration of the fighting spirit, it's not something to be used in current warfare. The ideas of discipline, being goal-oriented, bettering oneself, or learning control in dangerous situations, are more connected now to the nature of being a man than to something to be used in war (not that these aspects would hurt in a state of war). And for all the women practicing HEMA who think that all these exclude them, I can say: man up, woman! ;)
Regarding the past use of (H)EMA. My understanding is that some later manuals for military sabre were just instructional books, while some manuscripts from the 1500s and 1600s were sports manuals more than anything else. In other words, we had the sport and the instructional part of using a sword intertwined from the start. It's fine if people decide to focus on one aspect or the other, but they can pretend that the other side doesn't exist. I think this is a case of communicating what one wants and making sure the other party agrees.
On judicial duels, I find these to be more interesting in their entirety, as episodes of micro-history, rather than focusing on the duels themselves. And while I can respect the efforts to reenact historical episodes to better understand the subtleties, and I think there's room for some theatricals, I have little respect for pure LARPing (i.e. devoid of all other meaning).
Now, on the boastfulness of people that what they do is more martial than otherwise, I have a different perspective. I am accepting of this aspect, since I consider this boastfulness to be itself historical. I mean, have you read Viggiani! People bragging that their art is the true art is as old as the art itself. :)
I published my thoughts on the matter back in December. It largely agrees with yours, I think.
https://open.substack.com/pub/davidbiggs/p/blowcalling-in-historical-martial?r=c9te7&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false
As someone that runs Virtus Martialis, I feel obligated to chip in on "Martialness". :)
Martial is simply of Mars. So I start with the mythology of Mars in mind. And you know I have my own rant if I need to split this into two parts.
=== Part A ===
Mars is foremost a god of men, and secondary a god of war. Bellona, the personification of war, is one of the consorts of Mars, but not the only one.
At the core, martial is doing what needs to be done to come on top as a man. I am sure this started as showing enough vis for a woman (i.e. manly power in all its aspects, as bestowed by the consort Nerio). Then, conquering the savagery of nature and building an agricultural community, a family, was a priority at some point (i.e. Mars is the patron god of mills via his consort Molae; not a patrol of the fertility of land, but of the organisation around the fertility of the land). Only when these aspects are satisfied, do we move Mars into the domain of war.
Mars is not Ares, or he is not just Ares. Mars is also the patron god of defensive wars, and taking military action to protect what's built and one's family is at the core of what's expected of a man. From this aspect, martial is leaving the luxuries of life and taking to arms as a need.
In passing, and to emphasise that Mars is not just war, I also want to mention his consort, Anna Perenna. She oversees the changing of years as celebrated in the Roman tradition with 1st of March (the month of Mars), a celebration that still survived in parts of the old empire. And let's not forget his consort Rhea Silvia, who birth the founders of Rome itself. Again, Mars is more of men and their organisation, where war is one of the aspects, than just a god of war.
And yes, while the word martial is associated with war, it is not at an individual level, but in its organisation. So martial training is part of that, not relating to individual feats of glory. A martial sport is a sport that conveys benefits in case of war, not an act that can be directly used in war (e.g. "drop and give me 20" will condition your body, that condition will help you in war, but it's not what will cause the lethality). I think this confusion is what makes some people think that martial sports have or had direct application in combat.
=== Part B ===
HEMA, can be seen as maintaining old martial traditions. But aside from that and the overall veneration of the fighting spirit, it's not something to be used in current warfare. The ideas of discipline, being goal-oriented, bettering oneself, or learning control in dangerous situations, are more connected now to the nature of being a man than to something to be used in war (not that these aspects would hurt in a state of war). And for all the women practicing HEMA who think that all these exclude them, I can say: man up, woman! ;)
Regarding the past use of (H)EMA. My understanding is that some later manuals for military sabre were just instructional books, while some manuscripts from the 1500s and 1600s were sports manuals more than anything else. In other words, we had the sport and the instructional part of using a sword intertwined from the start. It's fine if people decide to focus on one aspect or the other, but they can pretend that the other side doesn't exist. I think this is a case of communicating what one wants and making sure the other party agrees.
On judicial duels, I find these to be more interesting in their entirety, as episodes of micro-history, rather than focusing on the duels themselves. And while I can respect the efforts to reenact historical episodes to better understand the subtleties, and I think there's room for some theatricals, I have little respect for pure LARPing (i.e. devoid of all other meaning).
Now, on the boastfulness of people that what they do is more martial than otherwise, I have a different perspective. I am accepting of this aspect, since I consider this boastfulness to be itself historical. I mean, have you read Viggiani! People bragging that their art is the true art is as old as the art itself. :)