I.33 Question

For those of us who wish to talk about the many styles and facets of recreating Medieval armed combat.
User avatar
SyrRhys
Archive Member
Posts: 1980
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2002 2:01 am
Location: San Bernardino, CA
Contact:

Post by SyrRhys »

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Bob Charron:
<B>Hugh,

If you choose to be offended, that is your decision. I will attempt to be more careful with my use of quotation marks (which I tend to us around jargon that doesn't come from the manuals when discussing the manuals). I see now that perhaps that is what you picked out as offensive.

I am not trying to talk about anything from SCA combat, really. I'm trying to talk about I.33.

I guess we wait for the translation to keep a lot of us from spilling endless ink over this. And, I do think we need to keep that in mind. Taking this in a direction we're unsure of before the translation can not only lead us into error, but into errors which become dogmatic practice and are hard to break even in the face of translation. We (this includes me) are still recovering from many misconceptions that were a result of trying to figure it all out using just the illuminations, and without the sequencing code of the manual or the translation.

Lest I should run into this same error, I will be less passionate about my interpretation :-)

</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Dear Bob,

Sir, I have the greatest respect for you in the world. What bothers me, occasionally, however, in our communications, is the feeling that I, and others like me, who find some validity in SCA fighting and, more importantly, in the lessons we have learned there, can simply be dismissed out of hand.

My passionate response wasn't in regards to the question of what this technique was, it was in your implicaion that I thought this was a wrap just because I was blindly wanted to find proof that wraps were used in period.

I don't know what this technique is, but my honest opinion is that it's a non-functional technique like most of the rest of this manual. Yes, looking at it, I think it certainly *could* be a wrap; I know they existed, and the mechanics look correct for that sort of technique. On the other hand, Logan's interpretation of a disarm might very well be correct, too. As I said from the beginning, what I really wanted was hard data, i.e., a translation, but reasoned discussion about it is very welcome. But I don't want to be dismissed (nor to have to be lectured to by someone with less harness time than my 12 year-old nephew, but that doesn't apply to you, obviously).

With the deepest respect,
Hugh

------------------
Hugh Knight
"Welcome to the Church of the Open Field, let us 'prey': Hunt hard, kill swiftly, waste nothing, make no apologies"
User avatar
SyrRhys
Archive Member
Posts: 1980
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2002 2:01 am
Location: San Bernardino, CA
Contact:

Post by SyrRhys »

Logan,

When this teqhnique shows up later in the manual the student's buckler is facing inwards, as if he had wrapped his arm *over* the monk's sword arm: does this in any way change your impression abut the mechanics of the disarm you suggested?

------------------
Hugh Knight
"Welcome to the Church of the Open Field, let us 'prey': Hunt hard, kill swiftly, waste nothing, make no apologies"
User avatar
Murdock
Something Different
Posts: 17705
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 2:01 am
Location: Milwaukee, Wi U S of freakin A
Contact:

Post by Murdock »

"Still, there's those damnable plates in the Manessa Codex; if it weren't for those I'd dismiss this whole book out of hand"

Which plate in Manessa? I didn't see it in my cursory look throught my copy.
User avatar
Baron Logan
Archive Member
Posts: 380
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2000 1:01 am
Location: Kalamazoo, MI USA
Contact:

Post by Baron Logan »

Rhys,

In truth, I think my draw cut disarm is the least likely of the suggestions put forth here. The way I see it, this is either a strike to the face or a strike to the back/shoulder. The head position supports the face hit, but the sword position supports the back blow. I think we just have to pray the text is somewhat illuminating.

I’m going to make or buy a buckler work with it.

Maybe a Pennsic get together is in order. (Or Gulf Wars)
User avatar
SyrRhys
Archive Member
Posts: 1980
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2002 2:01 am
Location: San Bernardino, CA
Contact:

Post by SyrRhys »

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Murdock:
<B>"Still, there's those damnable plates in the Manessa Codex; if it weren't for those I'd dismiss this whole book out of hand"

Which plate in Manessa? I didn't see it in my cursory look throught my copy.</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Go to:
http://zr13.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/cgi-bin/ebind_manessebilder?manessebilder

And look at plate #62; despite being better done, it could have come straight out of I.33. Of course, if you look at plate #68, you see a much more sensible pair of guards, but I still can't get past seeing #62.

My gut tells me to discard I.33 (unless we see something really illuminating in the translation when it comes out), but when I see this kind of synchronicity I'm forced to re-think that.

------------------
Hugh Knight
"Welcome to the Church of the Open Field, let us 'prey': Hunt hard, kill swiftly, waste nothing, make no apologies"
User avatar
SyrRhys
Archive Member
Posts: 1980
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2002 2:01 am
Location: San Bernardino, CA
Contact:

Post by SyrRhys »

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Logan of Seaforth:
<B>Rhys,

In truth, I think my draw cut disarm is the least likely of the suggestions put forth here. The way I see it, this is either a strike to the face or a strike to the back/shoulder. The head position supports the face hit, but the sword position supports the back blow. I think we just have to pray the text is somewhat illuminating.

I’m going to make or buy a buckler work with it.

Maybe a Pennsic get together is in order. (Or Gulf Wars)</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hi Logan,

I think a Pennsic get together is a great idea. I had one two years ago, and meant to have one this year, but my lady had to leave Pennsic early. I do plan to have a fechtbucher get together this year if my job situation allows me to go.

By the way, Mandrake sells *excellent* bucklers that look just like some of the ones in I.33. I'm getting one myself.

------------------
Hugh Knight
"Welcome to the Church of the Open Field, let us 'prey': Hunt hard, kill swiftly, waste nothing, make no apologies"
User avatar
Gaston de Clermont
Archive Member
Posts: 3369
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2002 2:01 am
Location: Austin, Texas USA
Contact:

Post by Gaston de Clermont »

Plates 232, and 237 of the 1467 edition (Mark Rector's translation) show essentially the same move, with translations. Talhoffer allows the sword and buckler to separate, so only the blade is trapped.

Gaston
User avatar
SyrRhys
Archive Member
Posts: 1980
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2002 2:01 am
Location: San Bernardino, CA
Contact:

Post by SyrRhys »

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Clermont:
<B>Plates 232, and 237 of the 1467 edition (Mark Rector's translation) show essentially the same move, with translations. Talhoffer allows the sword and buckler to separate, so only the blade is trapped.

Gaston</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You're right (but it's 233, not 232); although the trap he uses is the same as the second I.33 example, but not the first. I can't be sure, but I'm pretty convinced we're looking at two variations here, the first being a trap *over* the arm, and the second being under the arm, as Talhoffer's version shows. Still, neither of the Talhoffer plates shows the same sword attack.

Good catch, Gaston.


------------------
Hugh Knight
"Welcome to the Church of the Open Field, let us 'prey': Hunt hard, kill swiftly, waste nothing, make no apologies"
Post Reply