Hey All:
My recent research has led me to revise a couple oversights and some translation & commentary, in two of my Talhoffer articles. I like to correct my mistakes when I can do so, make a work better. Thus below is the new text, which you should read in context of those articles:
*****
for Talhoffer Longsword: Armoured and Unarmoured
Fechtmeister Hans Talhoffer is known to any genuine student of European swordsmanship for six originals and eight copies of his German fight-books, notably three editions from 1443, 1459 and 1467 AD.
Talhoffer calls various techniques done by this method:
brentshiren; gewauppet ort; kurtzen Schwert
*****
for Talhoffer and Causes for Fighting
wie wol er doch mit recht wol von Im kem ob
[that "mit" instead of "nit" makes a big difference]
Yet firstly this – Nobody is happy when one of his comrades cuts up his honour with loud words. He who would have at dueling with such a comrade, indeed he is within his rights and may well-fight him if he would. Thus dueling is wantonness ~
Thus is one man challenged to fight by another man. The man said to be not as good by the other – he may with right meet that other, if he will. Or if a man would be said or become spurious, then he may instead disregard the duel. Thus indeed the noble challenge the craven to dueling – so may the craven not well disregard that ~
First however, Talhoffer prefaces by stating the obvious – that nobody is glad to endure public calumny against his honour from a comrade, and so a man has the right to fight such a comrade for the transgression, if he wills. Yet in one of the most honest asides in all marital arts literature, Talhoffer then says flatly and grimly that dueling is wantonness.
Such disregard bespeaks contempt for the noblest ways of his society, and as Talhoffer states ominously, the craven may not easily disregard the challenge of the noble.
*****
Enjoy,
Jeffrey Hull
 |
||||||||
|
|
||||||||