Vom Tag;"on" the shoulder or "over"

[Shane Smith]

I was recently struck by an observation that I have made on a few occasions. I have seen that many of us seem to prefer the guard Vom Tag as performed with the sword held aloft "over" the shoulder as opposed to over the head. I prefer that as well for many reasons although I use the overhead version as circumstance dictates.

Here's where the divergence occurs(again); Some widely respected(by myself and others besides)Swordsmen actually rest the blade literally "on the shoulder" as that is their literal interpretation. It seems odd to me to assume the guard in that fashion as many strikes will now require a preparatory motion to allow the sword to clear the head and shoulders.Telegraphing is never a great thing in my experience. Allowing a weary warrior to rest while remaining more or less on-guard seems the only real advantage to this. What am I missing? Thoughts? <img src="/forum/images/icons/tongue.gif" alt="" />

[Matthew_Anderson]

Hi Shane!

I've given this some thought ever since the International Gathering when Hans and Alex from Ochs displayed their propensity for Vom Tag "on" the shoulder. I've experimented with both styles and found that generally "over" the shoulder feels like more of a ready position for a quick, powerful cut. On the other hand, I can also get the blade off my shoulder quite quickly and seems like a good starting position for some of the meisterhau, especially the schielhau and zwerchau, when I am rolling the blade over to strike with the false edge, using the "thumb grip." There is plenty of iconographic evidence for the blade being rested on the shoulder, so perhaps this version is better for some techniques while off the shoulder is more efficient for others.

[Ray Brunk]

Shane,
I have to agree. I have found that resting the sword on the shoulder was lazy, slow and telegraphed any move. I cannot fathom how any "totally rested" position can be martially sound. We found that you could not react fast enough to attacks to the lower body and lost out on speed up top most of the time. I'm no brainiac but I wonder if the illustrations are a combination of artists rendering and possibly a military position for parading or marching as modern day soldiers hold their rifles.Both the Marines and British guard have modern day "guards" with their pommel low and the blade on shoulder. I pulled that out of my rear, but do you think it's possible?
Ray

[Casper Bradak]

Yeah, it's simple body mechanics. If the sword is actually resting on the shoulder, your muscles will have to take up some slack before moving the weapon, slowing your movement and telegraphing, not to mention having that much farther to travel if you're moving it to the other side of your head.
If the weapon is over your shoulder, and not on it, the slack in your muscles will be taken up and the weapon should move more or less instantly without such tell tale muscle twitches.

[Ray Brunk]

Well said Casper. Also, with the blade resting on the shoulder, the hilt is lower on the body. This creates a lower arc, hence shorter cut, less extension, smaller range of attack and or defence. Unless of course, one really telegraphs their intensions and raises the the sword vertically before cutting. That would be a recipe for instant death.
Ray

[Jake_Norwood]

The idea of it resting on the shoulder doesn't actually bother me that much anymore, when I think of what a fight is. Fights are dynamic and violent. Anything at rest isn't that. When would you carry the weapon on your shoulder? Moving about, heading into battle, when enemies are about? Sure, absolutely. But in the middle of a violent engagement? Absolutely not! If the guards are indeed transitional positions relating to cutting motions, then an "at rest" position supported by the shoulder simply doesn't have place. I cannot imagine that anything good could come of cutting up with the short edge only to rest the moving blade upon the shoulder.

BUT I'm not saying that the position didn't exist. I believe it did, and I play around with it frequently. I think that of all "resting" positions, it's the one that can most readily become a fighting stance, or from which a person at total ease could strike out. This kind of phenomenon is not uknown in HEMA. Both Fiore and Talhoffer advocate a low, hands-in-front position (breve) for unarmed encounters and receiving a blow. This is comfortable and can be held indefinitely, which a higher, more agressive Vom Tag cannot be, just as "putting up your dukes" wears you down eventually.

It's also worth considering in light of the master strikes, since the image that is probably best known of the resting Vom Tag over the shoulder is from Von Danzig, which spends a lot of time on the Meisterhau.

Zornhau - This can very easily be thrown from the shoulder, abeit with a focal point that is a little lower, but also very direct and still quite quick. It is certainly quicker than a zornhau from over the head.

Sheitelhau - this is the primary weakness of this gaurd, IMO, and is slower than over the head or a more stout over the shoulder Vom Tag. As has been oft debated, however, a vertical cut is not usually the best opener for a battle (even Ringeck concurs), and the "resting on the shoulder" position, whether it's Danzig's Vom Tag or Meyer's Zornhut, is clearly a zufecten-only position.

Schielhau/schiller - This is *easier* to do with the blade on the shoulder and the thumb underneath than otherwise, generally.

Krump - If this is performed with the thumb-on-flat, and by jutting the hands straight out from the shoulder then crossing them, instead of trying to zornhau into a krump or passing through schrankut, then not only is the krump executed to look exactly like many manual drawings, but it makes up for the lack of ability to attack from the left effectively that an on-the-shoulder guard causes.

Zwerch - this is easier to throw from this position than any other in zufechten, and with greater range and suddeness.

In conclusion, I don't think that the on-the-shoulder guard is for someone that is currently fighting, but rather for the man that suspects a fight, or expects a fight, but has not yet commited his momentum to the battle.

Jake

[Stuart McDermid]

Hi Guys,

Given that Fiore shows the blade resting on the shoulder just as you describe, I daresay it must have worked.

I use this guard all the time myself and particularly favour the refused version whereby you can attack from a little closer with far less exposure using volta stabile.

The open fight is great for launching one handed cuts at the crown of the head and is also excellent for not telegraphing which side you will strike to.
Cheers,
Stu.

[John_Clements]

I completely agree with you Shane. I’ve looked into this and I experimented with both positions some time ago and concluded that the useful BMS (bio-mechanical simplicity) rule was in effect for this. Over the shoulder is to be preferred as both less telegraphing, quicker, and more powerful ---as well as tactically more efficient. It also facilitates a cut by properly torquing and pushing forward the hilt while throwing the sword in an arc. We were just discussing this in class again recently.

I believe when indicating the weapon’s location in stances the German source manuals instructing “over” the shoulder refer consistently to the hilt (i.e., hand) position. The majority of illustrations from fighting texts, including the more detailed ones, bear this out while a few others show what appears to be the blade edge actually resting on the shoulder --yet they must still be reconciled with the images where it is clearly held over. (In these same texts other positions are often similarly drawn in an awkward and stylized manner). Yet, such is not the case in period artwork of fighting and battlefield combat where I have had great difficulty locating images of weapons held in positions other than over the head and shoulder.

Again, I think the more intense your sparring and the more test-cutting experience with sharps you have, the more confidence you will gain techniques, and in this case with the position being over and not “on” the shoulder. After all, the texts tell us the stance of Vom Tag is held either over the head or over the shoulder---yet no one rests the blade on top of the head, do they?

As to Fiore, again, I do not believe the blade is shown literally “resting on the shoulder” anymore than I believe it is held behind the neck and pointing opposite or that the feet should be turned facing away from an opponent. This artwork is idiosyncratic and notoriously difficult to take literally as any reputable scholar of 14th &amp; 15th century Italian art history will swear. (Those who have seen my presentation on this position and its interpretation know well what I mean).

Bottom line, try whatever you think works. But if you keep losing hits and being struck by opponents doing it differently, after while it’s time to change what you are doing.

JC

[Stuart McDermid]

Hi John,

I agree 100 percent with you about the importance of pressure testing this stuff. It's all very well to make a detailed analysis of a text but if you can't make it work then you really don't have anything at all.

I disagree about Fiore not resting the blade on the shoulder. He may well keep tension in his hands but the blade is definitely out there. The real beauty of this ward is that you can swing your elbows well around out of the way.

As for the foot turning being artistic error, I disagree.
Turning the feet away as Fiore does allows you to change measure on your high line without moving the feet. The turning of the feet, (volta stabile) is absolutely essential to the entire method. It helps to manipulate distance and to make the throws and locks work via posture rather than muscle control.

Often the slightly altered position you get from turning away can help you seize the outside line. Nowhere is this more evident in Fiore's single sword where the aim of the sub-system is this capture of the outside line.

This was all brought to light for me by Bob Charron when he was over here as a guest presenter last year for our conference. Since then I have tested it and it works. Maybe you guys could host Bob sometime? The fact he has managed to specialise completely in one system makes him a very good person to showcase it. Besides, he a is really nice guy to take to the pub afterwards.
Cheers,
Stu.

[Casper Bradak]

Hey Stu, can you explain more about the use of having your feet backwards? I understand its usefulness as a transitory foot maneuver, you see the same in german artwork, but actually facing an opponent that way? Facing doesn't seem like the right word. It seems to be physiologically engaged 180 deg. from your opponent.
I know someone who advocates Fiore's stances literally, and there is not once I haven't been able to strike him before he can save himself, much less turn to attack and still find me there. How do you use this?

[John_Clements]

Hi Casp,

That's it in a nutshell, I know exactly what you mean. You can't take these images literally, you can't stand exactly as they do, as we know many Fiore enthusiast have been attempting. The images are not literal they are more mnemonic.

As to over the shoulder, when two fighters of equal reach face off, one with the weapon resting and one held above, I've yet to see the resting be able to hit first or to successfully counter hit. Give it a try at full speed, it's interesting (assuming each is skilled enough).

JC

As to the

[Stuart McDermid]

Hi Casper,

What can I say? This works for me in earnest full contact sparring that we now do with only gloves and masks with bare shinai. (Lots of fun and much nicer in 40 degree heat than putting on lots of armour)

As I said before the "refused" posture as I like to call it allows you to stay in distance but be out of measure. I find it particularly useful to creep into distance and to then launch attacks from.

As to your experience I would say one or more of four things are happening.
1. You are simply a much better athlete. (Too many fat re-enactors in historical fencing)
2. He doesn't train in a force on force manner regularly and therefore cannot access his skills when it counts.
3. Your simulators are too light and therefore speed up the time of the hand to unrealistic levels. (unlikely, we do this with Shinai and it works)
4. He is letting you get too close before either pre-empting or adjusting his distance due to faulty judgement.
5. He is not moving around the circle with his beat as Fiore suggests.

There are probably more possibilities but these are the ones that spring to mind. Do you guys attack on a full pass?

That would make a difference I'm sure. Once or twice, I have managed to use this stable turn in defence of my head by turning away from an attack and having it just miss me. This isn't something I would rely on though.

Given how important the stable turn is to the wrestling system and how everything just falls into place with it when you concentrate on guard changes along with it, I would be VERY surprised if the positions aren't intended for longsword combat too. The turn definitely gives an advantage in the single sword plays, you should try them out as they are pretty basic and there aren't many of them.

Interestingly, if we look at certain forms of animal kung fu, these postures have been independantly developed elsewhere which is always a pretty good indicator of their efficacy.....
Cheers,
Stu.

[Stuart McDermid]

Hi John,

Your theory is certainly intriguing. If this depiction of a "refused" posture is not actually representative of reality then how do you reconcile that against what is in most people's opinions a fairly well drawn manual?
If it isn't representative of the way things are supposed to look then why is it drawn this way? Some kind of movement code?
Interested to hear your thoughts. Looking at the rest of the pics, they are all pretty good with the possible exception of the "Full Nelson" hold which IMHO has a little of an Escher-like quality to it. <img src="/forum/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />
Cheers,
Stu.

[John_Clements]

Well...I have learned to keep opinions tentative in this subject and strongly suggest everyone else does too. To believe we have hit upon the exact method of a text 500 years old which we've never seen performed by those who taught it and never can see in action is not wise. Even small mistakes can adversely affect an entire understanding. Too many people have gotten even modern martial arts instruction terribly screwed up even when given photos and modern technical language descriptions. I have also over two and a half decades witnessed countless absurd postures, techniques, and actions in fighting arts that were sworn by countless adherents to be effective and worthwhile (see SCA as an example and any number of esoteric Asian styles). Once such individuals actually have someone fit who knows how to aggressively face them, their systems fall flat. Not much more to say than that. Some things work, some don’t, and sometimes we persuade ourselves they work ---even when someone else shows you in person it doesn’t excuses often are continually made (“It works elsewhere against others, I'm just not doing it right here and now" or “Well, I know someone else who can make it work!”, etc.). We've all seen it at one time or another, I'm sure.

I’ve learned long ago that in person things can be shown decisively in seconds that would take pages of dialogue to explain and still not be convincing. I’ve also learned that even some practitioners, no matter how well you beat them will not give up pet theories and favored moves they like playing with for one reason or another no matter how poorly they eventually end up serving them against skilled opponents.

There is just too much in the artwork of many texts, Fiore's editions included, that in my opinion is best not interpreted literally. Perhaps it’s just my experience, but I have well learned that when illustrating fighting moves, misinterpretation is very, very easy. The long discussions I’ve had with art historians and Renaissance scholars at several academic conferences, at university lectures, and via email, persuade me this is the case. Reconstruction of these arts after all is not about merely transcribing, translating, and then interpreting, but also about application. If we know movements and recognize effective patterns that is one thing, but to invent moves and try to fit them to illustrations because of our tentative interpretation when we don't, is perilous. It has to be done, I know, but it also has to be continually be reappraised.

Ciao,

JC

[Mike Cartier]

I've been playing with this since starting to mess with the Meyer longsword book. At first it seems illogical and perhaps even inefficient to rest the sword on the shoulder. But after trying for a while i can say its starting to make a little more sense to me.
mind you i still see right side vom dach and the Meyer Zornhut as different guards and not used for the same purpose.

It feels to me like the Zornhut lends itself to a more powerful strike with less effort, but surely more telegraphed. Its like a trade off between being sneaky and faster or being more powerful. Its definatly harder to hit someone with a Zornhau from Zornhut than it is from Right side Vom Dach, at least in my humble opinion. I find if you angle your body a bit when doing Zornhut you can mask the true range you are in which helps to trick the opponent into range of the strike. Zornhut feels a bit open for being struck in the forearms if they are fast so i use it sparingly.