Long-sword material translated from Christian Egen

[Mike Cartier]

I rather like it, i am no expert but i know that when you study something and it stays with you and deepens your knowledge its valuable. The few things i have gleaned from it have genuinely changed my style of fighting.
I certainly would not stick with one manual though, as you say, the more the merrier.
I do agree that the Der Alten Fechter is more for Lange messer or Grosse Messer rather than a true longsword. The techniques are far better suited to a shorter lighter weapon.

I do agree thats its not the most straight forward thing to learn from, but then making you think more is good rather than bad i think.

What manuals do you guys recommend to learn the basics?
Meyer and ??

[Guest]

I noticed tht JC is out there fallowing along. so if i may venture a query to you kind sir; can you offer any insite to the first three breaks?
and on a side note are we discontinuing the study of this fight book? If so is there anybody that would be willing to answer my questions thruogh e-mail? I'm strange i really want to finish this book. It really intrests me. <img src="/forum/images/icons/crazy.gif" alt="" />

[Mike Cartier]

Hurling is a very interesting technique, has anyone gotten to that in the manual yet?
i like especailly the double layered deceptions leading to the mighty smack in the ear with the flat of the blade.

[Derek Wassom]

I am sorry to backtrack here, but I want to go back to Flugel. I interperated the "strike backwards" not as cutting to his left with the short edge, but to his right with the long. After the first strike, my sword is pointed downward with the short edge towards my opponent (Left Changer?). I then cut up along the same line using my short edge to his right side. Instead of "chambering" it over the shoulder, I keep going, bringing the hilt above my head and bringing around so the long edge strikes him on the right side of his head. (Did that make sence?)
I understand that I am then cutting from the same side of the leading foot, but I "stomp" my foot to give it power. What are your thoughts? I just find it hard to strike a powerfull blow, in real time, with the short edge in the way you described.

Mike:
I am having a hard time understanding Schlaudern. The only way I can think of, is that after he displaces your strike, you twich around and smack him with your flat against his ear. I don't see how that would be "from below" like he says, but thats all I can think of. What do you other folk think? I don't under stand why he says to "let him think that you would twich, but twich." <img src="/forum/images/icons/confused.gif" alt="" />
I guess I don't know what he means by "stay with the short edge at his ear".

[Mike Cartier]

Your right about the Flugel not being a power strike, indeed that seems to be a common theme in this manual, every technique i have interpreted seems to be half arm type of strikes. Quicker strikes that sacrifice some power for speed.

Flugel seems to me to be 3 strikes on the beat of one.
One problem i see with your interpretation of the backwards strike is this.
In Flugel it merely says strike backwards, in Kron it says strike backwards with the true edge. This would lead me to beleive the the backwards strike with no edge information given would be using the short edge, why else would they describe backwards with a true edge.

This manual is a good case study of how the meaning of one word alone can change the entire interpretation.


The hurling strike is very interesting, you strike to the opponents left ear and then make him think you would twitch (bounce your sword to the other side) but instead you come back on the same side with the short edge. Then with a little step a bring the sword around in an arc down my left side , up and under the opponents weapon almost like an Absetzen smacking him with the flat edge.
The first strike is just like on the Fehler, you place your long edge at the opponents left face, not so much to strike, although that would be nice, but you get a reaction which you use to your advantage., Fehler is just one quick deception, but Sclaudern is several layers of deception.
The first strike force him to displace to save himself, the twitch keeps the pressure up to his opposite side, drawing him up to defend on his right, but being slicker than that you come back at the left again (his left) with your short edge, he thinks he will catch that too tho and you whip your sword down and aropund his sword to give him a whack. Incidently a left to right Zornhau is perfectly natural follow up.

Aggh this manual makes my brain hurt, This is a great manual tho, more of a half arm stike kind of thing or possibly intended more for lighter or shorter two handed weapons, like the grosse messer or something.
I have been taking refuge in the semi-clarity of Meyer, though thats no joyride either.

[Derek Wassom]

Thanks Mike, that makes sense to me (in regards to both Flugel and Hurling). One thing I need clarified; When you say 3 strikes in the beat of one, do you mean 3 strikes in one step?
I find this Fechtbuch a great read. It may be difficult, but that is what makes it fun.
<img src="/forum/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />

[Guest]

hmmmm What can i say about hurling? not much at all I am afraid. I have been trying to make sence of it but just cant seem to. I get lost at the "twitch" and smoke starts rooling out of my ears <img src="/forum/images/icons/crazy.gif" alt="" /> your up on me mike you seem to understand it and i dont sorry i'll keep trying though and let you know what i find <img src="/forum/images/icons/smirk.gif" alt="" /> that is if my brain dosent give out.

[Richard Strey]

I know I might be comitting a sin here <img src="/forum/images/icons/shocked.gif" alt="" /> but... where can I have a look at the *original* flügel text (online), instead of talking about the translation of the original translation?
I just figured that there *might* be a small glitch in the translation, because "back at his head" instead of "backwards at his head" does make much more sense to me. So I'd just like to rule out that option.

[Mike Cartier]

Thats a great idea Stephen, I think keith Meyers might know where to find the original version.

Derek its 3 beats on 1, at least thats my interpretation of it.
kind of a whipping motion out to the outward right.
To practice it we sometimes have one guy stand with a waister straight up and down like a manmade pell, and flugel areound to his left strike at the bottom strong section of the waister.
I had the Flugel actually work for me today in sparring, nothing so dramatic as the Fehler which is a classic, but it has it uses. I think Flugel might work as a hand attack, its very fast and you can whip 3 strikes on the the same spot in a single beat time if you practice it.
To clarify what i mean by 3 beats on one consider this
If i stfrike at you head and you hanging guard in respone that would be 2 beats, my attack being one and you response being another. The Flugel would strive to fit inside the time of the one beat. The lighter your blade the quicker that whip will be.
One thing i am wrong about is the use of flugel on both sides, its clearly described as a right handed technique, like so much of the German stuff the use of the right or strong side is clearly better and longer in its reach. When you are fighting for inches it can make all the difference.

[Derek Wassom]

i see what you are saying, mike. I will try this out tomorow (i didn't do much today, toooooo cold!)

[Mike Cartier]

Interestingly i just found another translation of the backwards that instead says behind him.
So instead of strike backwards it would be strike behind him, something to think about.

[Hans Heim]

Hi together,

the original text of our translation is:

Flügel.

Flügel nim aus der Obern hut oder Hochort / Den Ersten streych von tach zu dem lincken ohr / Den andern von unden mit dem trit deiner lincken seiten. Den dritten streych / hinder sich auff den kopf.

We (Claus Drexler and myself) stumbled many times over the word "hindersich" (this is only one word) and thought at the first times that here in this context "behind his head". But, the technique does not worked. So we tried a medieval German dictionary an ther it was: the word "hindersich" is what in modern German is "zurück" and this is backwards.

We started learning from the manuals or historical books with this book, the Egenolph, but as soon as we had the possibility to work with something else we droped the Egenolph. This book wasn`t made to learn swordmanship, it was made to earn money it is not systematic, sometimes the book gave you only fifty percent of the technique and forgot the rest. This could be seen in the halfsword section very clear. It is like a very bad cocktail, it looks good but something is missing or one of the ingredients was bad so you get headaches at the next morning.

If you have the possibility to learn from other sources, do it.

Hans

[Guest]

Hi Hans,

> If you have the possibility to learn from other sources, do it.

I agree 100% and will restate this for the record: Leckuechner/Egenolph isn't a very good source. I look at it as the coffee table fechtbuch, pretty but not very useful.

-M

[Derek Wassom]

I agree that this fechtubuch is not the best one for research, but we can't ignore it completely.

[Richard Strey]

Hi Hans!
That was just the text I was looking for. <img src="/forum/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />
Regarding your translation: If "hintersich" means "zurück", which I'll accept (since I don't have the option of looking it up myself right now), then it could in my opinion, indeed mean "back at" and not "backwards".
This would make the technique a "3-cut combo" consisting of a right-to-left diagonal oberhau, a left-to-right diagonal unterhau followed by a scheitelhau.
Seems like a valid thing to me. What's the context of this technique within the book?