Question about training manuals

For Historical European Fighting Arts, Weaponry, & Armor

Moderators: Webmaster, Stacy Clifford

User avatar
SzabolcsWaldmann
Posts: 179
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 8:28 am
Location: Hungary
Contact:

Re: Question about training manuals

Postby SzabolcsWaldmann » Wed Oct 12, 2005 3:19 am

Hundfeldt does dagger (94r-97v) and halfsword (87r-93r) in Danzig, halfsword (137r-141r) in Speyer.

And here comes the interesting part.

Danzig is from 1449 and Speyer from 1491. That makes 42 years difference. Which means, that if Grandmaster Hundfeldt was alive in 1491, and dictated / wrote his own part in Speyer, and was, say, 18 years old when the Danzig book was written, then he must have lived at least 60 years. If he already was dead in 1491, which is more likelly, then Hans von Speyer must have had a source for the writing, which was NOT the Danzig, for the two texts are different; this source is not know at the moment.
This indicates that there was a lost book between 91 and 49 in the 15th century, with a teaching of Hundfeldt.

There were seemingly a lot more fechtbuchs that we have today. It's only natural, that in 600 years some are lost, but still. Who knows if Hundfeldt was alive when Danzig wrote his book in the first place! Master Hundfeldt could have been living in the 14th century (and we think I33 is our oldest source).

Szabolcs

PS:Mr Strey, I don't know what you mean. My signature means Order of the Sword, which is our group, and if you mean my name, it means a whole lot different. <img src="/forum/images/icons/confused.gif" alt="" />
Order of the Sword Hungary

User avatar
Richard Strey
Posts: 122
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2002 8:59 am
Location: Cologne, Germany

Re: Question about training manuals

Postby Richard Strey » Wed Oct 12, 2005 4:20 am

Well, looks like I've perfectly succeeded in making myself look like an idiot. Please accept my sincere appology, I mixed you up with Derek Gulas (from the Leichmeister thread). The two of you had posted right after another and the "in response to" window does not show the signature, so I responded to your post and erroneously thought his sig was yours.

Thank you for those quotes, I'll look them up. When I dabbled in dagger fencing last year, I only transscribed Hundfeld's and Lignitzer's degen pages and not the half-swording stuff. I'll have to open some boxes. <img src="/forum/images/icons/grin.gif" alt="" />

User avatar
Jeffrey Hull
Posts: 678
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2002 3:40 pm
Location: USA

Re: Question about training manuals

Postby Jeffrey Hull » Thu Oct 13, 2005 1:47 pm

No problem guys, I have made similar mistake before.

And to confuse us further:
Sometimes of course, *shortened sword* means literally that: Some guys broke/bent his sword in battle, so he has a smith reshape (&amp; maybe retemper) it into a short-sword. <img src="/forum/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" />

So, that is another reason I shun the literal translation of *kurz schwert* and translate it as *half-swording*, at least in the case of when Hundfeldt and others describe such techniques for longsword.
JLH

*Wehrlos ist ehrlos*


Return to “Research and Training Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 34 guests

 
 

Note: ARMA - The Association for Renaissance Martial Arts and the ARMA logo are federally registered trademarks, copyright 2001. All rights reserved. No use of the ARMA name or emblem is permitted without authorization. Reproduction of material from this site without written permission of the authors is strictly prohibited. HACA and The Historical Armed Combat Association copyright 1999 by John Clements. All rights reserved. Contents of this site 1999 by ARMA.