Passchen's Vollstandiges Ring-Buch

[G.MatthewWebb]

I've started looking at this 17th century Dutch book again and the descriptions and illustrations don't seem to match. I suspect I'm not the first to be puzzled. I'm using Steenput's translation available here:

http://www.truefork.org/DragonPreservat ... schen1.php

and here on the Arma website:

http://www.thearma.org/Manuals/Passchen/Passchen.htm

I can't seem to copy the illustrations into this message; maybe someone can tell me how to, so, in the meantime, those interested in this thread will need to use either site to refer to the illustrations.

First off. The division of the legs is not what I'd make it.

"First it is necessary to know, that the human arm can be divided in three parts, the Strong, the Half-Strong, and the Weak, as shown on figure 1."

The illustration has a line through the armpit as "C" (or strong), one through the hips as "D" or (half-strong), and another through the knees as "E" (weak) leaving the ankles unmarked. When you look at the arms, the corresponding lines bisect the ankles, elbows and shoulders. I would have thought that the ankles as the wrists as the knees are to the elbows as the hips are to the shoulders.

Illustration2. "When Adversarius grasps your right arm, you free it outwards, as in No 2." The illustration shows the demonstator or actor of the technique with his elbow and upper forearm pressed against the adveraries wrist on the outside implying an inward force. What direction is it, inwards or outwards? And is the implied pressure meant to push the adversaries hand off the grasped right arm or just unbalance the opponent. (Of course, both are options are possible but which do you think is intended?).

Ditto for illustration 3, which shows the demonstrator's left arm on the outside of the adversaries right wrist, implying inward pressure, but the text has "When Adversarius grasps your left arm, you free it outwards, as in N° 3."

Illustration 4:

"When Adversarius grasps your right arm, so strike Adversarium strongly on his arm-joint as in N° 4. " The illustration shows the demonstrator striking with his left fist on the elbow from the outside and not from the inside which is also possible. Any possible reasons for showing one way over the other?

Enough for now.

Matthew Webb

[/b]

[JeffGentry]

Mat

First it is necessary to know, that the human arm can be divided in three parts, the Strong, the Half-Strong, and the Weak, as shown on figure 1."

The illustration has a line through the armpit as "C" (or strong), one through the hips as "D" or (half-strong), and another through the knees as "E" (weak) leaving the ankles unmarked. When you look at the arms, the corresponding lines bisect the ankles, elbows and shoulders. I would have thought that the ankles as the wrists as the knees are to the elbows as the hips are to the shoulders.

If you re-read the first sentance it say's the human arm indicating only the hand, forearm and bicep, so the hand is the weakest part of the arm, then the forearm then the bicep being the strongest, so his division make's perfect sense for the frist sentance.

Then he has the picture and the next 2 sentance should make thing's clear they are "The head has two parts, the Strong and the Weak. On top of the head (A) is the Weak, and below (B) the Strong.

The body and feet have three parts, the Strong, Half-Strong and Weak, marked C, D and E in figure 1."

Notice he say the body and feet have three part's indicating to me he is including the foot and shin as one part all being weak E, the lower part of the leg and foot does not have much strength hence the large thigh or half strong D, and the torso from the shoulder's down being the strong in his division C, to me it make's perfect sense.

Illustration2. "When Adversarius grasps your right arm, you free it outwards, as in No 2." The illustration shows the demonstator or actor of the technique with his elbow and upper forearm pressed against the adveraries wrist on the outside implying an inward force. What direction is it, inwards or outwards? And is the implied pressure meant to push the adversaries hand off the grasped right arm or just unbalance the opponent. (Of course, both are options are possible but which do you think is intended?).

Ditto for illustration 3, which shows the demonstrator's left arm on the outside of the adversaries right wrist, implying inward pressure, but the text has "When Adversarius grasps your left arm, you free it outwards, as in N° 3."

I would say to look at the sentance before "When you try to break free from a hold, you must usually apply the Half-Strong of your arm to the Weak of your Adversarii"

I wonder if it is not push down and rotate your forearm toward the outside lifting the elbow using the "half strong" of your arm on the weak of his as he state's to do.

Illustration 4:

"When Adversarius grasps your right arm, so strike Adversarium strongly on his arm-joint as in N° 4. " The illustration shows the demonstrator striking with his left fist on the elbow from the outside and not from the inside which is also possible. Any possible reasons for showing one way over the other?

I think this is simply looking at the illustration wrong the guy on the right of the illustration is being grasp by the right arm, notice the rumpled sleeve, and he is striking the elbow of the guy on the left of the illustration with his right hand.

although i could be wrong, it make's sense in my brain.


Jeff

[G.MatthewWebb]

Thanks for the detailed response, Jeff,

I understand your reasoning about illustration 1 and I imagine it is what Passchen intended, but his schema runs counter to the frank similarity between the parts of the arm and the leg. The foot is like the hand, the lower leg is like the forearm, and the upper leg is like the upper arm. Some Chinese martial arts call coordinating the ankle to the wrist,the knee to the elbow, and the hip to the shoulder the three external harmonies. These joints are control points, sometimes known as "gates." Passchen obvously decides to ingnore the ankle and includes the foot and lower leg as one piece. I don't see that it offers an advantage over the schema I've mentioned.

You're right about illustration 4. I confused the attacker with the defender. The guy on the right is being grasped. Deciding who is the attacker or the defender is often confusing in these illustrations because the attacker is sometimes the person on the right and sometimes the person on the left. There doesn't seem to be any obvious discernable features distinguishing the attacker from the defender. Crappy illustrator!

I'm still confused when the text says to free outwards and the illustration shows the defender with his arm on the outside in what appears to be the position at the start of the technique. Is it possible the illustrator got the directions wrong?

Has anyone actively worked with this manual, that is, tried it out on a resisting opponent?

Matthew Webb

[JeffGentry]

Matt

Passchen obvously decides to ingnore the ankle and includes the foot and lower leg as one piece. I don't see that it offers an advantage over the schema I've mentioned.

I can actualy see his reasoning, the torso and thigh's make up a very strong unit, i think stronger than thigh and hip, and the foot and ankle are a very weak, so in my warped brain it made sense to me.

Crappy illustrator!

Well his illustrator may not have been the best I would have been using stick figure's though so who am i to judge. lol

I'm still confused when the text says to free outwards and the illustration shows the defender with his arm on the outside in what appears to be the position at the start of the technique. Is it possible the illustrator got the directions wrong?

well i am thinking that it is a push down and out, I am not certain i have not tried it against anyone, from that illustration it is all i can figure at the moment.


Jeff