New Article on late 16th century German Fencing

[John_Clements]

See
Codex Guelf 83

[Jake_Norwood]

There are some truly great lines here, many of which apply to other threads on this forum and SFI, as well as some hot-spots in our community.

"...they have barely laid both hands on the handles of the mighty swords, and already they attack each other. There is no exchange of greetings, nor did the one opponent wait until the other had taken his position. The boys do not even wear masks! That is daring! … Let's settle ourselves! The weapons are blunt, and the boys withstand a hearty blow. They must get used to that, if they are not already, for they will have to endure altogether different blows on the battlefield or during prize- and showfighting, which will have to be parried with sharp weapons."

Yikes! Vindication, anyone?

"His furious opponent was finally able to beat the opposing sword with such force, that it was flung to the side. Quickly he threw down his weapon, closed on his adversary in one leap and bent in a flash, grabbed him behind the knees and threw him backwards to the ground."

Grappling in free-sparring? Enough force to displace a blade so widely. Awwww yeah.

"There is no position taken, no greeting exchanged - such formalities were completely unheard of until the middle of the 17th century - there are no overly lively or unnecessary movements made."

Again, the gravity with which they practiced, and the lack of pagentry is admirable, IMO.

And then, though I won't quote it, I love the last paragraph where the author of the article calls for a return of these martial arts. It's here, man, it's here!

This article also brings up some interesting questions. It appears that they fighters continued fighting after blows had been dealt, as if they ignored them. I see a lot of good reasons for this, especially for those that intend to fight "for real" out on the battlefield; you don't want to stop just 'cause you got hit out there! It makes me think that a similar excercist could/should be added to the armatura...a sort of sparring or free-play where you fight for a given period of time and ignore hits, or have someone on the side count hits for later. This would be supplemental to normal sparring, and only for more advanced students (I can see novices really getting carried away and not recognizing certain limits of safety.

Good job finally getting that translation out, Eli!

Jake

[Stuart McDermid]

Excellent stuff John!!

Occasionally you read something that really revolutionises the way you think about something or helps to reinforce a theory. This article has done both.....

and incidentally supports a few theories of mine......

Firstly, the first picture. <img src="/forum/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" /> The fencer on the left has cut in with a Zornhau type blow and has MOVED to the LEFT NOT to the RIGHT as most folks reconstructing German Medieval Swordplay seem to. Wonderful! I have always contended the Ringeck only desribes footwork for the Zwerchau and Krumphau Meisterhauen because the blows are the ONLY ones where you move to the right. Most folks do every Meisterhau trying to move to the right and I don't find this to work all that well. In fact, even if we look at the other fencer in pic 1 we can see that he hasn't stepped of the line to the right whilst striking either despite the fact that he is also striking from the right.....

If someone swings a down right blow at you and you answer with a Zornhau and move right then the most likely outcome is that you will end up in a relatively even bind with both points very close to being able to threaten the face.

If you move to the left then you steepen the angle of attack, engage the enemy on his weak, capture the centreline and increase the chance of a single time hit. (and incidentally, save your edge)

What this means:
This means that I think that the German System isn't so vastly different from the other major systems as perhaps we thought.
Against a down right blow both Silver and Vadi say to move in and left if you intend to stay in distance. If the Germans were doing this too..........
Cheers,
Stu.
P.S. Is this Eli chappie intending to publish the rest of his translation? I'd buy a copy and I am certain that a publisher like Chivalry would at least consider publishing it.

[Jake_Norwood]

Re: Moving left on a zornhau from the right.

What an interesting idea...I like it. I need to practice it. Question--how do you envision the footwork? I ask because there is a danger of crossing the feet in front of the opponent, which is bad, or of cutting from the right and stepping to the left with the left foot, which means that you cut towards your lead leg, leaving you unbalanced in most situations.

Jake

[Ray Brunk]

Jake,
How about stepping with the left foot to the left and back. Like a passing step back but to the left. Leaves right foot slightly forward for balance.
Ray

[John_Clements]

Four more plates have been added.

We will not offer a translation of this material until we can consult at length with our German colleagues on their opinions. Publication is the eventual goal.
The work seems to be a general fighting guide rather than any one master's method. It does appear to present hard free play as well as killing techniques.

[Mike Cartier]

There is a technqiue called "fehler" in Der Alten fechter which is described as moving one way and striking another, but mostly to bring out a response and twitch your sword around his obstruction to strike with your power side.
meyer also mentions the "Fehlen" or missed strike.

This is one of my favorite little tricks, its quite deceptive.

[steve hick]

Codex Guelf 83

Again this bears a close resemblence to the Alamanche of a student in the University of Tuebingen mentioned by Barbasetti. I wonder if there is any provinance that was provided when you got the copy of the original.
Steve

[Derek Wassom]

Hi Stuart. It looks to me that in the first picture the fencer on the left DID move to the right. Isn't that his bum facing us?

[Shane Smith]

The only thing that looks odd to me is the orientation of the two Swordsmen in relation to one-another.When I look at the image,it strikes me that the move left is obviously being used to stifle the opponent before his attack is fully executed.I think the odd foot placement may be more situational than typical of the historical performance of the zornhau .That said, this does warrant further study in my opinion.

[Stuart McDermid]

Hi Guys,

Shane, you could well be right. Here is a tip though, whip out your copy of Talhoffer 1467 and look at the footwork.

Derek, have a look at the orientation of his feet. They are pretty much in line. The only reason why you would adopt a posture with so little lateral stability with a longsword is if you were attempting to move to the left. I sincerely doubt this was a movement done with the back foot.

As for movement theories, check out the footwork in Talhoffer. 1467. Often the fighters move offline with the foot pointing perpendicular to their opponent. I believe this may be a Fiore type cross step. Perhaps come counter cuts were done from right pflug? Who knows? I really don't believe that moving right with a Zornhau against someone who has done the same can be correct. Why fight for an even bind when you can dominate the centreline and counter in single time as the chap in the picture has.
Cheers,
Stu.

[Derek Wassom]

Oh, now I see what you are saying. <img src="/forum/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" /> I only glanced at the pic and saw that his right foot was forward.