| Michael Edelson wrote: |
| You're right...the more period texts I read the more I encounter a very strong desire to make the reader understand that only the head and body should be attacked. |
I disagree with this. I think that the head and torso are largely the important targets, but there are numerous examples of the limbs being important targets as well, including the examples in my post above of the slices to the hands or the Talhoffer messer cut to the arm. That said, most attacks to the limbs seem to be more along the lines of counterattacks rather than initial attacks (i.e. you need to stop the person's weapon arm). Though the krump against ochs certainly is an example of initially attacking the hands.
An interesting note, though, is that the later Italian sword arts seem to have almost purely no cuts to body, only to the extremities (limbs and head). Every attack to the body is a thrust. This is true across the board from rapiers to the full sized two-handers.
| Quote: |
| In fact I have to wonder why there are so few references to thrusts in the period texts. I have been of the opinion lately that a simple offensive thrust is a very bad idea, as it does little to protect you from your opponent's sword. |
I very much disagree with this. Thrusts are incredibly prevalent in the manuscripts. At least a third of the techniques described in the Liechtenauer tradition describe a thrust, or they describe a different type of attack but make mention of the thrust as an option. And you certainly can close the line off with a thrust: All the stuff about the 8 windings is essentially that, except it's described as what to do after the person has already entered the bind with you. That does not mean in the least that you can't control the person's weapon and close off lines before the bind.
| Quote: |
| In other words, if I thust against a cutting guard, I might imape you, but you will not die instantly, and you will not be slowed or stopped. You will simply strike me in the head and kill me, then die. When you're dealing with a thrusting guard, the chances of that are lower. This is why, in my opinion, thrusts are mostly described as attacks you use from the bind, where you have control of your opponent's sword and can protect yourself at the same time. |
What of the schielhau against the buffel? Here the opponent strikes down, and you "take the throat" with a thrust that counters that very powerful, but slow, strike. This is little more than the concept of winding into ochs, but it is done before the blades make contact.
What of a zwerchau to break Vom Tag when you're already in Ochs? It makes no sense to bring your sword all the way around if you're already protected from the opponent's potential oberhau, so thrust in this case. The line is already closed.
What about if your opponent is in pflug, and you wind your sword into pflug as you thrust to prevent the attack (i.e. the 5th winding)? What of the sprechfenster, when you're in langen ort?
I'm not at all trying to come down on you, of course, and I agree with much of what you've said. There's just much more of the art than what is on the surface. Liechtenauer, and the masters that followed his tradition, were clear that all three of the wounders were to be utilized: The strike, the slice and the thrust. The vast majority of the techniques work with all three wounders, depending on the situation.