Krumphau: Edges and body mechanics

For Historical European Fighting Arts, Weaponry, & Armor

Moderators: Webmaster, Stacy Clifford

User avatar
Jake_Norwood
Posts: 913
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2002 11:46 am
Location: Clarksville, TN

Re: Hengen with short sword

Postby Jake_Norwood » Thu Feb 13, 2003 1:33 pm

Hi Hans,
>>>Could be and please do not misunderstand me, I do not say that the technique “Verhengen 1.-2.-3” is a bad one, or that the ARMA should not use it.
What is only perplexing for me is:

It is a good technique for us, but in the early books it was not important enough for them to write it down. Why?


Well, admit it or not what we do more resembles Meyer than Talhoffer, regardless of what we want to believe. We're not going to kill anyone with this...that's part of why I'm enjoying Meyer so much right now.

As to "why don't we see it "back then?" I'm not sure. It's possible that the thrust from Hengen is simply more lethal and more worth training in than the 1-2-3 Verhengen, which is a by-product of instinctive movements. In other words, the masters would have said "why do this when you can do this!" Not that we have any real proof of that, either...

Okay, so we know that they knew the Verhengen 1-2-3 in Talhoffer's time, because he uses it with a single-sword. Why wouldn't he (or his contemporaries) show it with a longsword?

(I guess that was the question, huh...)

Jake
Sen. Free Scholar
ARMA Deputy Director

User avatar
Hans Heim
Posts: 37
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2002 3:08 am
Location: Germany, Bavaria, Munich
Contact:

Re: Hengen with short sword

Postby Hans Heim » Fri Feb 14, 2003 1:33 am

Hi Jake,

Why wouldn't he (or his contemporaries) show it with a longsword?

>>>Yes, this was the question. <img src="/forum/images/icons/grin.gif" alt="" />

And I think that you gave already the answer. The technique "hengen" is not so potentialy deadly as the technique "absetzen". In the early times the goal was to kill, in J.Meyer times (with the longsword) to train, to learn, to give the first bloody rose at the head.
Talhoffer uses his "hengen" with sword and buckler or with the Langes Messer, mostly for one purpose: "uebergreiffen", for gripping over the swordarm of the enemy, catch it and then kill.

Hans
Wer do leit der ist tot. Wer sich rueret der lebt noch.

User avatar
Randall Pleasant
Posts: 872
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2002 3:35 pm
Location: Flower Mound, Texas, USA

No Hengen? What about the Schranckhut?

Postby Randall Pleasant » Fri Feb 14, 2003 11:07 pm

...in the older manuals there is no evidence of a hanging parry or a hanging guard, there is even not an indication of it.


Hans

I disagree. I think the answer is right in front of us in the quote I provided from Ringeck in my initial post. The body movements involved in performing an absetzen against an oberhau in which you do a Krumphau into the Schranckhut guard are basically the same as doing a hanging parry. The body movements from the Pflug guard into a hanging parry are basically that of a Krump. In either case, the absetzen is easily followed up with a Zornhau. I think that what Meyer later call the Hengen was just considered a Schranckhut by Ringeck and others of his day.

Respectfully
Ran Pleasant

User avatar
Fabrice Cognot
Posts: 19
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2002 4:10 pm
Location: Mâcon, France. and Dijon, Capital of the Duchy of Burgundy.

Re: No Hengen? What about the Schranckhut?

Postby Fabrice Cognot » Sun Feb 16, 2003 5:25 pm

Hi all

I'd rather seconf Hans' view ; I'm far from being an expert in the German manuals, and unfortunately I can't express myself any better than how Hans did - but I don't think that the body movements of what you call a 'hanging guard' and the Krumphau are totally similar (mainly beacuse IMO one of the most important things in the Krumphau is the lateral 'jump'). and I don't think the sword ends in the same position : trying to cut with the true or false edge (depending on the side you're making your Krumphau) implies a different hands, wrists, torso and feet position than Meyer's Hengen

but that's just my 2 Eurocents..

Fab
HEMAC Member.

User avatar
Hans Heim
Posts: 37
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2002 3:08 am
Location: Germany, Bavaria, Munich
Contact:

Re: No Hengen? What about the Schranckhut?

Postby Hans Heim » Mon Feb 17, 2003 2:47 am

Hi Randall,

now I have to disagree, sorry. This technique from Ringeck is different from the "Verhengen". Here you cut a Krumphau from your right (with the true edge) over his sword and you displace (versetzt) his sword from above towards below. Your sword is above the blade of your enemy. Your true edge stands at the flat of his sword. From here you could snap with the false edge at his head or do something else. But what you do it to cut a Krumphau from above.

With the "Verhengen" like J.Meyer gave us, you displace from below with the flat of your blade the cut of your enemy from above. You are now under the blade of your enemy. His true edge stands at your flat of your blade.

Like Fab wrote this is an other situation. The edge alignment of your sword is different. The quickest cut after the Ringeck technique is the snap with the short edge or a underhau from your left. I personally prefer the snap, because I here control his sword too.

Respectfully

Hans

P.S.: I am realy looking forward to meet you all. <img src="/forum/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />
Wer do leit der ist tot. Wer sich rueret der lebt noch.

User avatar
Randall Pleasant
Posts: 872
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2002 3:35 pm
Location: Flower Mound, Texas, USA

Re: No Hengen? What about the Schranckhut?

Postby Randall Pleasant » Mon Feb 17, 2003 2:14 pm

Most distinguished scholars

I must again respectfully disagree.

Fabrice Cognot:

...I don't think that the body movements of what you call a 'hanging guard' and the Krumphau are totally similar (mainly beacuse IMO one of the most important things in the Krumphau is the lateral 'jump'). and I don't think the sword ends in the same position : trying to cut with the true or false edge (depending on the side you're making your Krumphau) implies a different hands, wrists, torso and feet position than Meyer's Hengen

Meyer does not state that one should stay flat footed. Thus, when I perform a Hengen parry I do make an explosive step/jump to one side just as I do when performing a Krumphau. In an idea situation, the step/jump results in the Hengen being a complete voiding of the adversary's blow rather than a parry of the blow. This leaves my sword completely free for a counter cut or thrust.


Hans Heim

This technique from Ringeck is different from the "Verhengen". Here you cut a Krumphau from your right (with the true edge) over his sword and you displace (versetzt) his sword from above towards below. Your sword is above the blade of your enemy. Your true edge stands at the flat of his sword. From here you could snap with the false edge at his head or do something else. But what you do it to cut a Krumphau from above.

With the "Verhengen" like J.Meyer gave us, you displace from below with the flat of your blade the cut of your enemy from above. You are now under the blade of your enemy. His true edge stands at your flat of your blade.

I do agree with your that Ringeck describes an Abwenden (warding off) with the Krumphau, which your blade strikes the flat of the adversary's blade and ends above it.

Ringneck states:
If you want to weaken a master, then while he strikes an Oberhau from his right counter with a Krumphau using crossed hands against his sword (Tobler's translation).

However, Ringeck also discribes an Absetzen (setting aside) with the Krumphau.

Ringneck states:
This is how you can Absetzen -- set aside -- the cuts from above with the Krumphau: If he attacks your opening from his right side with an Oberhau, step towards his left side with your right foot and put your point against his sword into the Schranckhut. Practice this from both sides. From the Absetzeb you can strike him on the head (Tobler's translation).

The purpose of the Krumphau in this technique is to move your blade into the Schranckhut so that your blade is between you and the adversary's blade. Thus, your blade is somewhat under and to the inside of the adversary's blade, resulting in his strike being deflected away from you leaving you free to perform the snap around cut that you like or some other cut/thrust. Now do this same technique against a Zornhau to your shoulder. But instead of taking your sword high and then performing the Krumhau, perform the Krumhau <u>as</u> you take you hilt high - in other words, as Meyers says "drive your grip above you so that the blade hangs somewhat toward the ground". In both cases the body and blade mechanics as very similar. If they do not represent the same technique then at the very least they demonstrate a possible evolution of Ringeck's technique into Meyer's Hengen technique.


Hans Heim

Like Fab wrote this is another situation. The edge alignment of your sword is different. The quickest cut after the Ringeck technique is the snap with the short edge or a underhau from your left. I personally prefer the snap, because I here control his sword too.

The whole point of my original post was choosing the hand and blade position during these tecnhiques. When I perform a Krumphau low I do use the long edge so that I end in the Schranckhut. However, if you perform a Krumphau with the long edge and your hilt about head high then you are left with you right wrist bent forward, which is a very weak position. Therefore, when I perform a high Krumphau, hilt around the height of my head, I use the short edge so that my wrist is bent back, which is a stronger position.

Hans and Fabrice, my fellow swordsmen and scholars, I too am really looking forward to meeting and training with you all. Most of all I look forward to leaning from you. At the international event we should have plenty of subjects on which to test our theories. <img src="/forum/images/icons/laugh.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/forum/images/icons/tongue.gif" alt="" />
Ran Pleasant

User avatar
Hans Heim
Posts: 37
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2002 3:08 am
Location: Germany, Bavaria, Munich
Contact:

Re: No Hengen? What about the Schranckhut?

Postby Hans Heim » Tue Feb 18, 2003 1:45 am

Hello Randall,

I have to make an apology: I should read your posts better before I start to answer. Just now I realised what the problem is. It is the interpretation of this technique in the book of Christian Tobler.
O.K.: I own one of the dissertations of Martin Wierschin about Lichtenauer with the original text of Ringeck, it is right now in front of me and here is the original text:

"Aber ein stuck vß dem krumphaw.
Krump wer wol setzet mitt schrytten, er vil hew letzt.

Glosa.

Das ist, wie du mitt dem krump haw die obern häw absetzen solt. Daß stuck tryb also: wann er dir von siner rechten sytten oben ein hawet zu der blosß, so schryt mitt dem rechten fuß vff syn linke syten vber sin schwert mitt dem ort vff die erden jn die schrankhüte. Das tryb zu bayden sytten. Och magstu jn vß dem absetzen vff das haupt schlagen."


This is how you should set aside with the krumphaw the cuts from above. This technique do in this way; if he cuts from his right side at your upper opening, so step with your right foot towards his left side over (across) his sword with the point at the ground into the schrankhut. Practice this from both sides. Also you could hit him out of the set aside at his head.

Our interpretation of this technique is totally different of the interpre-tation of Tobler, so I did not realised what your question was, sorry.

We do it in this way:

1. He cuts at my upper left side.
2. I step out of the cut at his left side with my right foot.
3. I cut from above over (or perhaps better across) his sword.
4. I move my sword into the schrankhut. I push his sword downwards, increase his motion downwards and let his sword cut into the ground.
5. My sword is now above his sword, now I can snap at his head, if I hold my handy low I have at the same time control over his sword. With this mo-tion I snap to the left pflug (true edge up) and I am ready for a thrust if he is still alive.

I personally think that our interpretation is more valid.
The text says very clear: "vber sin schwert mitt dem ort vff die erden jn die schrankhüte": over (across) his sword with the point at the ground into the schrankhut.

It says not: Move from one guard at the schrankhut, catch his cut at the flat of your blade, let it run down and then cut him at his head.

Hans
Wer do leit der ist tot. Wer sich rueret der lebt noch.

User avatar
Randall Pleasant
Posts: 872
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2002 3:35 pm
Location: Flower Mound, Texas, USA

Re: No Hengen? What about the Schranckhut?

Postby Randall Pleasant » Tue Feb 18, 2003 12:32 pm

Hans

Way cool! Great research! Thanks for enlightening me to the correct translation of this technique.

Greed has set in. <img src="/forum/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" /> If there are any other techniques in which you disagree with Tobler's translation I would love to see them (begging on knees). Again, thanks!

Respectfully,
Ran Pleasant

User avatar
Fabrice Cognot
Posts: 19
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2002 4:10 pm
Location: Mâcon, France. and Dijon, Capital of the Duchy of Burgundy.

Re: No Hengen? What about the Schranckhut?

Postby Fabrice Cognot » Tue Feb 18, 2003 10:18 pm

hmm..to be honest I didn't know Mr Tobler's version of the Krumphau <img src="/forum/images/icons/frown.gif" alt="" /> .

My own idea of the Krumphau comes from the various translations (mainly the French translation by Didier de Grenier of Arts d'Armes) I could get and what I learned from various European Scholars... <img src="/forum/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />

Fab
HEMAC Member.

User avatar
Randall Pleasant
Posts: 872
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2002 3:35 pm
Location: Flower Mound, Texas, USA

Re: No Hengen? What about the Schranckhut?

Postby Randall Pleasant » Tue Feb 18, 2003 10:54 pm

Fab

Please do share your translations. I hunger for the knowledge you have... I have lost all shame, I am in full greed mode and am begging with speed and intent! <img src="/forum/images/icons/crazy.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/forum/images/icons/tongue.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/forum/images/icons/grin.gif" alt="" />
Ran Pleasant

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

Re: Krumphau: Edges and body mechanics

Postby Jeffrey Hull » Thu Sep 18, 2003 7:44 pm

Over time I have finally come to agree with RP about the Krumphau. I think that we confuse ourselves about which edge, when it is really about to which side the strike goes compared to the fighter and foe involved. This goes for some of the others which all tend also to be Meisterhauen. JH.
JLH

*Wehrlos ist ehrlos*

User avatar
Craig Peters
Posts: 230
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 5:08 pm

Re: Krumphau: Edges and body mechanics

Postby Craig Peters » Thu Sep 18, 2003 8:03 pm

It's a bit off topic, but has anyone ever considered putting together a number of translations of different swordsmasters into one work?

For instance, a book outlining the German school, with the works of Liechtenauer, Dobringer, Talhoffer, von Danzig etc. would be interesting. Each section could be set up similar to that webpage, with examinations and possible interpretations of the same sword technique as taught by the different masters. Such a book would be immensely valuable, as different swordsman prefer different techniques, which could easily be cross-referenced in one book.

Craig

User avatar
Randall Pleasant
Posts: 872
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2002 3:35 pm
Location: Flower Mound, Texas, USA

Re: Krumphau: Edges and body mechanics

Postby Randall Pleasant » Fri Sep 19, 2003 8:55 am

...has anyone ever considered putting together a number of translations of different swordsmasters into one work?

Craig

I agree that such a work would be very useful. Currently I most often work with a printout of Mike Rasmusson’s translation of <a href="http://www.schielhau.org/">Goliath</a> and David Lindholm translation of Ringeck. Sometimes I also use Christian Tobler's translations of Ringeck. I have side notes by the text and images of Goliath indicating the correlating text and pictures in both Lindholm and Tobler. I find that I get a lot more insight by reading both Golaith and Ringeck together than I do reading just one. While reading I frequently reference the Goliath images and to a lesser extent the pictures from Lindholm’s book.
Ran Pleasant

steve hick
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2002 4:04 pm

Re: Krumphau: Edges and body mechanics

Postby steve hick » Fri Sep 19, 2003 9:42 am

Goliath is derived from the 'von Danzig'.

User avatar
Randall Pleasant
Posts: 872
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2002 3:35 pm
Location: Flower Mound, Texas, USA

Re: Krumphau: Edges and body mechanics

Postby Randall Pleasant » Fri Sep 19, 2003 11:16 am

Steve

By "derived" are you saying that Goliath is a 2nd edition of Von Danzig or are you saying that Von Danzig served as a source for Goliath?

By the way, the recent discussions between you and others on the relationship between Von Danzig and Ringeck on the "Meyer Longsword" Yahoo group was really interestings.
Ran Pleasant


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.