Period manual plates/pic question

[sarnac]

We were talking about the period manuals tonight at practice and one of our people brought up the fact that he was convinced that the wood cuts and prints of the different positions were not meant to be rigid, on the contrary they were where the sword ended up during the deflection and/or counter....
It made a great deal of sense and worked quite well once we moved to play with it some....

What is the opinion of the more learned memebers of this collective?

Anyone know if the positions on the different prints were meant to be rigid or just a different part of a whole series of movements that were just captured in time to make a point and show specific techniques?

[SyrRhys]

Yes, your interpretation is dead on; those plates are only meant to show specific points of time in a technique. Remember that these manuals were often meant as memory aids rather than as a "how to" book.

Take, for example, this plate:
http://www.thehaca.com/talhoffer/t3.htm
In this technique both fighters were probably standing in a stance called "vom tag" (lit. "from the roof"; basically a high guard) with their left feet forward. Then the fencer on the right stepped forward and swung a powerful blow from above (an "oberhau"), and the fencer on the left stepped forward and assumed a stance called "ochs" (lit. "ox") which both parried the oberhau and made a thrust to his chest at the same time.

Another interpretation of this techniques is that the fencer on the left stepped forward to thrust and the fencer on the right cut into the thrust to parry. This is the interpretation that the translator seems to have made, but I disagree for three reasons: First, the thrust is shown as actually landing, not the cut. Second, the German schools of swordsmanship aren't big on simply stopping a blow; the typical techniques they show involve a parry and counter all in one attack (which is what my interpretation does) in order to instantly regain the initiative. Third, the German text doesn't seem to say anything about "against it"; it seems to me to just say "a cut from above" (however I should point out that I don't speak German, well, Swabian, actually, enough to know that's true, and I'd love to see a more literal translation).

Anyway, without knowing how German swordsmanship worked, it would be difficult to see all of this in this plate (either interpretation) since it captures only one moment of time.

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

[Russ Mitchell]

Yes. There's a gentleman named Steve Hick who posted this in a bunch of places last year under the title "steal this idea."

Taking it one step further, if you want to actually begin to move in, as opposed to merely through, the guards, think about moulinets (moving the weapon in a circular or elliptical arc to cut again)... any time you do a horizontal moulinet, you come close to being in a window guard... every time you're in the "back half" of a vertical or diagonal moulinet, you're essentially in a "tail guard..." if you can learn to be sufficiently dynamic that you can apply all of these while remaining on the move... well, frankly, you'll kick the crap out of most of us "western martial arts" types I've seen (I'm a wma guy myself, and I can critique my own community, so hold the flames, please).

[Russ Mitchell]

On the other hand: lest Evil Bob come smack me upside the head for missing something obvious, it is quite clear from Fiore's text, and the others I'm not clear on, that some of these guards at least are meant to be "dynamic rest" positions that you can hang out in between the more frenetic moments as you attempt to control the distance of the encounter. But not rigid except for the "rigidity of good form."