Schielhau: The most difficult of the meisterhau´s

[JeffGentry]

Hey Guy's

I was over complicating the Shielhau, John covered it this weekend in his class, it is simple in physical mechanic's/theory, the execution in combat may be prove more difficult.

I can be a real Bone head at time's as John and Jake can attest too. lol

Jeff

[Brian Hunt]

Just a quick note, in my above translation from Mair, I said that schiller=shimmer, and while technically correct from a dictionary point of view, it bothered me. After going through as many german sword glossaries that I could get my hands on, I have found that the shielhaw and the schillerhaw are always lumped together as the same strike, so please ignore that portion of my post. They are apparently one and the same strike.

Brian Hunt
GFS.

[Casper Bradak]

I agree that the masters may mean more than what they depict (the Schiller, according to Meyer and Mair, frex) can be done from both sides. Presumably the sturzhau can too (though I'm fuzzy on how it might work). Is that what you're saying? If so, sure.

Yeah, that's pretty much it.

OTOH, we don't (yet) have the sturzhau described as being something that works from both sides...or at least somehting that is called that.

Yeah, it certainly seems to work easily enough in practice though. Consider it a possibility, educated guess, extrapolation.

But I do think that the schiller and the sturz are different in form not just function, and I think that the images and text supports this

Fair enough, and likely enough I'm sure, I just can't get myself to see it that way. I'm not trying to convince anyone either, just trying to get my interpretation across.

[M Wallgren]

I haven´t yet understood your interpretation of the Shiller and the sturzhau!

Could you describe how you do them?

Cheers...

Martin

[ChrisThies]

I think that the text of the Goliath manuscript covers the Schielhau quite extensively (pages 64-72, 32 Verso-36 Verso) in case anyone reading this thread hasn't already checked it out:
http://www/schielhau.org/goliath.p61-80html

[Tobias Hartranft]

I generally look to Goliath for the Schielhau, and interpret it as thus: As they come to strike you you raise your arms into a sort of Kron, sliding your blade into theirs, rather than striking it, so you retain contact with it. THEN, upon realizing you have successfully connected with the opponent's blade, you take a passing step, twisting your arms into an ochs as you do so, striking down on their head.* Your thereby push their blade away from you and place your blade, in control, between it and you.

*This always seemed rather weak to me. Doesn't it make sense more to come down into ochs before stepping in, then making the passing step and thrusting? It leaves your body in an awkward sort of twist but it's only for a splitsecond before finishing the job...

[Jake_Norwood]

Hi Tobias.

I was reading Goliath's Shiller today, and I didn't get that from it. I see that technique in Meyer's Kronhauw, however.

What's interesting about Goliath's Schiller is that the Short edge is implied, not directly stated, and most of the illustrations feature the *long* edge...or so it seems. In fact, I'm beginning to suspect that Goliath's version of the Schiller is more like Talhoffer's Sturtzhau, although that's pretty tentative, still.

After all, according to Dobringer and Ringeck (?), you strike to your opponent's right shoulder. Goliath says "with a turn of the blade." This is usually thought to mean the short edge, but could it not refer to a crossing of the arms? The thrust that follows, performed by another "turn of the blade," could be accomplished by an uncrossing and extension of the arms. That fits the descriptions and the illustrations in Goliath (but less so other manuals).

Just an idea...a theory worth testing at this point.

Jake

[Tobias Hartranft]

Right, sorry, not the top of the head, I just checked that, the shoulder, like you said.

Yes, I also agree with you on the subject of the crossing of the arms as opposed to the false edge strike, but it seems then the left fist would obstruct the right arm, making the strike all the weaker... sorry if I can't convey this well in words.

[Jaron Bernstein]

Well, here is what we got from the seminar and 1.1 (John C., please feel free to correct me if I am descibing it wrong):

He throws an oberhau to your upper left. From a right side vom tag, step right and drop your blade down with a vertically dropping short edge cut on his head on your left side (so you end up something like left ochs looking like the Meyer Schiller dude).

This:
1. Closes off the line of attack from his cut and
2. Hits him at the same time

Thus as I understand it, these 2 things fit the criteria for a meisterhau.

Any thoughts? <img src="/forum/images/icons/tongue.gif" alt="" />

[Jake_Norwood]

Yes, that is *a* Schiller, but the schiller is one of those cuts that clearly has a lot of personal interpretation on the part of the masters, from master to master. For example, Meyer doesn't get into the need to strike to the opponent's right shoulder...but Ringeck and Dobringer do. Goliath's presentation of the schiller doesn't look like Meyer's nor is it described quite like Ringecks or Dobringers...it's more complicated than that.

The second item is the definition of the Meisterhau:

1. Closes off the line of attack from his cut and
2. Hits him at the same time

This, I'm almost positive, is a modern definition only. Meyer's the only guy that calls them Meisterhau. Before him, they're just "the five strikes," or sometimes "the five hidden (or secret) strikes."

As we begin to identify our own modern constructs (which are, after a fashion, core assumptions), we can get around the mistakes that they *might* be causing.

Meyer's Schiller is still my favorite--it's the only one that I'm fairly confident that we're doing it the way that the author intended. It's Goliath and Ringeck, etc., that vex me at the moment.

Jake