myArmoury.com - Mortshlag

Quote

Posts: 510

Sun 10 Apr, 2005 9:36 am

Aaron Schnatterly wrote:

Nothing to pardon, Steve! Here's a picture to add to Joachim's description. Brutal, actually... takes a bit of getting used to on the giving end... doubt the receiving end ever does. :p

[ Linked Image ]

Aaaah, there's one of the wonderful pictures from the afore menitioned 1467 Fechtbuch. I love that manual! In fact: it's rapidly becomming my favorite manual. Talhoffer definately knew what he was doing. A lot of the Blossfechten halfswording in that one can actually be found in the Harnischfechten sections of his earlier manuals. There is also some plates in his Alte Armatur und Ringkunst from 1459 that further clarifies some of the Blossfechten halfswording techniques in the 1467 edition.

Quote:

As Joachim said, it turns it into a pseudo-footman's pick, 2-handed mace, or shepherd's staff. It's also useful for beating up duffel bags, right, Joachim? ;) All joking aside, it's a totally different application of the sword's anatomy. Gave me a totally different respect for the hilt. Pommel strikes alone are nasty, but this is doubly so.

I can't think of a better tool for beating up pesky duffel bags. :lol: I totally agree with you on the enhanced respect for the hilt. This is part of why I love the longsword so much: It's so versatile. The entire weapon is utilized. It's a well rounded weapon that allows for fightning against differently armoured opponants and at various distances. Offensive and defensive capabilities all rolle dup into one fine weapon.

Profile

Quote

Posts: 1,244 Location: New Glarus, WI

Sun 10 Apr, 2005 9:46 am

Joachim Nilsson wrote:

Goodie gumdrops. It's a "date" then. :D

Pick you up at 6? :eek: :D Looking forward to all future discussions, my friend!

Joachim Nilsson wrote:

When talking about the Duke -do you mean with it's current hilt or if it would feature a hilt similar to that of the Svante?

As it is... the Baron, too, for that matter. Mostly as an exercise in what these different types are good for/at. Strengths and weaknesses of the different swords is something else I really want to understand, and firsthand experience is the best way I learn.

Joachim Nilsson wrote:

He he, I know all about freaky reactions from neighbors. You should have seen the look on one of my neighbor's face when he met me, decked out in training uniform and carrying a renaissance twohander, a pole-axe and a longsword blunt. He was like: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf:

Someday, I'll have to share the story of when 10 of us straight from a Viking reenactment stomped through the door of a local grocery store still in full garb (complete with swords)... talk about odd looks. :cool: They didn't know WHAT to do. No arrests were made, and no animals were harmed during the production... Actually, when the crew got off, they brought a couple of cases of decent beer out to the camp and we partied pretty hard.

Joachim Nilsson wrote:

But, back on track now: How did it go when you tried the Mortschlag? Did you do it bare handed or with gloves?

It was awesome. I did the same general thing you did - took a laundry bag and stuffed it with a couple of utility blankets and hung it from a limb. Strikes from above, side, and hooks and strikes from below were all effective. I did these with fencing gauntlets on - more to avoid all the skin oils on the blade than out of concern for the grip on the blade.

Profile PM Website

Quote

Posts: 510

Sun 10 Apr, 2005 10:08 am

Aaron Schnatterly wrote:

Pick you up at 6? :eek: :D Looking forward to all future discussions, my friend!

:D

Quote:

As it is... the Baron, too, for that matter. Mostly as an exercise in what these different types are good for/at. Strengths and weaknesses of the different swords is something else I really want to understand, and firsthand experience is the best way I learn.

Then I might be able to enlighten you somewhat. *owns a Duke* :D Right of the bat I have to say that the disc pommel does not lend itself too well to Mastercuts etc. Or perhaps I should rather say: Since I'm more used to scent stoppers and type T's the disc complicates the handling in some manuevers somewhat. But there's a multitude of things to consider here. The first being personal preference. One who have exclusively trained with disc pommels would probably disagree with me concerning the "does not lend itself too well to Mastercuts" etc. I think it all essentially boils down to adapt, overcome and improvise :) Halfswording and doing Mortschlag and whatnot with the Duke is totally out of the question though.

The other thing is: The mastercuts may not even have been around when a sword like the Duke was in its prime. There's always exceptions from the rule of course, such as certain types of sword coming back into style at a later date and so forth. But that's pure specualition and my part and, as such, better suited for beer or coffee-related convcersations.

The hilt on the Duke is not entirely without its merits though. The disc pommel lends itself well to "palming" and if one sticks with the basic cuts its truly becomes a terryfying and agile weapon. One can also finger the uhm... "tang nut" (exp?) with the pinky finger to get a better "feel" for the sword and its edge alignment and what to do with it. I personally prefer just to palm the pommel though. As it pertains to the mastercuts and what I've said about them so far: The Duke is a battlefield weapon after all, and on the battlefield there perhaps wasn't too much room for doing "fancy" zwerchhaus and the like.

Quote:

It was awesome. I did the same general thing you did - took a laundry bag and stuffed it with a couple of utility blankets and hung it from a limb. Strikes from above, side, and hooks and strikes from below were all effective. I did these with fencing gauntlets on - more to avoid all the skin oils on the blade than out of concern for the grip on the blade.

Excellent! Worked well didn't it? :) The Landgraf Martin used wasn't ours and the owner weren't very picky. :p :D

Profile

Quote

Posts: 4,194 Location: Northern VA,USA

Sun 10 Apr, 2005 11:41 am

Joachim Nilsson wrote:

But the advice Doebringer gives: is it for a special occasion (such as Zufechten) or is it to be used in any and all distances, techniques and cuts? Winden would be clumpsy -to say the least- with both hands close together.

There is not mention of the distance or any other occassion, Doebringer seems to be talking about it in general. When I owned the Landgraf, I had no problems performing winden actions, nor any of the circular types of cuts such as the zwerchau or schielhau once I got used to it. It did take some practice using it, though, and didn't seem totally natural at first... but I can say the same thing about the viking sword "handshake" grip as well.

Quote:

Although I fear we are digressing from the original subject somewhat, I still have to ask: why did the latter Doebringer quote made you come to the conlusion that he is refering to friendly combat? To me it sounds more like he is giving advice on balance and, to a lesser extent, balance in footwork. I'm just being curious and inquisitive. :)

Well, that's a good question: It's because that's not the quote I meant to use. :) Whoops. I don't have time at the moment, but I'll search for it and get back to you.

Quote:

I personally agree with you on gripping the pommel. It's more versatile and allows for a more fluid grip which also makes Mastercuts and a host of techniques easier to employ. That's why I'm looking forward to the NextGen Talhoffer.

Ditto! (Although I do think Albion's choice of the name "Talhoffer" is strange... the sword, while fitting for the fencing style, does not actually look like the swords in Talhoffer. *shrug*)[/i]

Profile PM Website

Quote

Posts: 4,194 Location: Northern VA,USA

Sun 10 Apr, 2005 11:44 am

Aaron Schnatterly wrote:

Thanks for the snippet, Bill! I was hoping to get a hold of the entire document - can you guide me? I'd like to see the work in it's entirety to get the full contextual picture of what Doebringer is talking about.

Certainly. Courtesy of David Lindholm:

http://www.slipad.se/ghfs/files/dobringer.pdf

Profile PM Website

Quote

Posts: 4,194 Location: Northern VA,USA

Sun 10 Apr, 2005 11:57 am

Since the subject line is "mortschlag", it's not off topic to talk about it, right? ;)

I personally think the mortschlag is somewhat overly focused on by modern eyes because it looks so out of place. Granted, it's got it's uses, and can be one hell of a surprise if used correctly. It's definately a valid technique when used in the right time. But outside of Talhoffer and a few times in Codex Wallerstein, you really don't see manuals that depict it, and I think there's a good reason for it.

Joachim Nilsson wrote:

I love that manual! In fact: it's rapidly becomming my favorite manual. Talhoffer definately knew what he was doing.

Heh, that's funny, because I actually am not a fan of that manuscript. In fact, I don't consider it an actual manual at all. I think it's a great resource for filling in some gaps, but personally it reads more like an advertisement in my mind: "See this crazy technique? Come to my school and I'll show you how to do a dozen other secret tricks like it." I think there's some great stuff in there, IF you already have a foundation in the system.

My opinion (emphasis on "opinion") is that's why you see the mortschlag so much in the blossfechten section of Talhoffer, but not in any of the more comprehensive manuals. Ringeck's commentaries, which really outline the entire system quite well, never once teaches how to use the manuever: In fact, the only time it is mentioned is in the harnisfechten portion, and it's specifically detailing how to defeat a person who uses it. (although Ringeck calls it the schlachenden ort, or "battering point". I like Talhoffer's name so much more. Somehow mortschlag just rolls off the tongue. :) )

This is a fun discussion. :)

Profile PM Website

Quote

Posts: 510

Sun 10 Apr, 2005 1:13 pm

Bill Grandy wrote:

There is not mention of the distance or any other occassion, Doebringer seems to be talking about it in general. When I owned the Landgraf, I had no problems performing winden actions, nor any of the circular types of cuts such as the zwerchau or schielhau once I got used to it. It did take some practice using it, though, and didn't seem totally natural at first... but I can say the same thing about the viking sword "handshake" grip as well.

We'll have to write that off to what I mentioned earlier then: personal preference. I feel much more "at home" using a pommel that does not... hm, annoy me when I handle it. Intriguing though if he talks about the narrow grip in a general sense. Not many other masters seem to favor that kind of grip.

Quote:

Ditto! (Although I do think Albion's choice of the name "Talhoffer" is strange... the sword, while fitting for the fencing style, does not actually look like the swords in Talhoffer. *shrug*)[/i]

Really? Look at the sword wielded by the swordsman on the left: http://www.thearma.org/talhoffer/t4.htm :p Knobbed ends on the cross and a type T pommel. The Talhoffer is named as it is because PJ drew some of his inspiriation for the NG sword from those kind of pics.

Profile

Quote

Posts: 4,194 Location: Northern VA,USA

Sun 10 Apr, 2005 1:26 pm

Joachim Nilsson wrote:

Really? Look at the sword wielded by the swordsman on the left: http://www.thearma.org/talhoffer/t4.htm :p Knobbed ends on the cross and a type T pommel. The Talhoffer is named as it is because PJ drew some of his inspiriation for the NG sword from those kind of pics.

I'll accept it. ;) Nonetheless, most of the swords don't really look quite like the new NG sword. That's not intended to be a slight against Peter Johnson nor Albion, just that while the Talhoffer sword may capture the feel of the swords from the Talhoffer manuscript, I don't feel like it really looks like any of the swords in it. Many of the pommels tend to be more elongated, the guards sometimes are clubbed and sometimes look more like they are tipped with cubes, the grips seem to be shaped differently, the guards tend to have more of an ecusson, there is usually a large ball at the pommel block where it's peened etc. The profiles of the swords tend to have less drastic tapers (though they differ from plate to plate). Heck, some of them have flared ricassos like fencing longswords. Personally, I like the look of the Albion sword more than the swords in Talhoffer, so I'm not at all complaining! :cool:

Profile PM Website

Quote

Posts: 510

Sun 10 Apr, 2005 1:38 pm

Bill Grandy wrote:

Since the subject line is "mortschlag", it's not off topic to talk about it, right? ;)

I personally think the mortschlag is somewhat overly focused on by modern eyes because it looks so out of place. Granted, it's got it's uses, and can be one hell of a surprise if used correctly. It's definately a valid technique when used in the right time. But outside of Talhoffer and a few times in Codex Wallerstein, you really don't see manuals that depict it, and I think there's a good reason for it.

Yes, Talhoffer have recieved modern day critisism for being somewhat overly eager to use the Mortschlag. I have no problems with his useage of the Mortschlag though. In my personal opinion, I think it more boils down to problems with modern practitioners seeing the Mortschlag the wrong way and applying it in a faulty way, mostly by signaling it too much before throwing it. I think the best use in halvswording for the Mortschalg is to, all of a sudden, throw it either between guard transitions or right after a thrusting attack.

A colleague of me and Martin have a short video-clip where Martin and I do some halfsword sparring. In that session we threw a Mortschlag or two and, unbeknownst to us at the time, impressed some of our onlookers due to the fact that we didn't signal the Mortschlag -just threw them. And then directly reverted to a guard or another attack. I'll have a look and see if I can dig up that video-clip if you're interested.

Quote:

Heh, that's funny, because I actually am not a fan of that manuscript. In fact, I don't consider it an actual manual at all. I think it's a great resource for filling in some gaps, but personally it reads more like an advertisement in my mind: "See this crazy technique? Come to my school and I'll show you how to do a dozen other secret tricks like it." I think there's some great stuff in there, IF you already have a foundation in the system.

Okay, maybe I should have used the word "fechtbuch" instead. I agree that you have to have a foundation in the system before trying your hand at Talhoffer though. The Rector translation of the 1467 edition was actually the first fechbuch I bought back when I first started out. Needless to say, I just sat there scratching me head before shelving the volume for a couple of years. But a few years down the line, with studies of other Masters under my belt, Talhoffer all of a sudden started to make a lot of sense. I don't really agree with the "advertisment theory" on Talhoffer though. Not entirely at least. Martin and I have a few theories on the subject, but intend to present them in an article or something like that a bit further down the line, so I'd rather not say too much at present. I'll say this though: We think the fechtbuch is more intended for personal use by von Königsegg and his retinue when Master T. isn't around to teach himself. But, we'll present our outrageous, speculative theories in a more elaborate way in the future. :D :p

But your closing statement in the paragraph above actually outlines some of the things that makes Talhoffer so interesting to me. It's not a complete "how to" nor anything for the beginner, rather "Master Talhoffers Patented Tricks For Beating Fencers Who Rely On The Usual Stuff". :) I'm also someone who likes things up close and personal while fencing so his indulgence in Blossfechten halvswording is a big part of the fun.

Quote:

My opinion (emphasis on "opinion") is that's why you see the mortschlag so much in the blossfechten section of Talhoffer, but not in any of the more comprehensive manuals. Ringeck's commentaries, which really outline the entire system quite well, never once teaches how to use the manuever: In fact, the only time it is mentioned is in the harnisfechten portion, and it's specifically detailing how to defeat a person who uses it. (although Ringeck calls it the schlachenden ort, or "battering point". I like Talhoffer's name so much more. Somehow mortschlag just rolls off the tongue. :) )

This is a fun discussion. :)

This is a fun discussion indeed. :) The more Martin and I study Talhoffer, the more we realize his views on Blossfechten halfswording, and the more we understand why he likes the Mortschlag so much. It's a technique that opens up for a multitude of quick follow up techniques and attacks. I really wish I could demonstrate what I mean in person. It's kinda hard sometimes to properly convey one's opinions regarding different techniques in text only. :confused:

Regarding Ringeck: if I'm not mistaken, he only have one or two halfswording techniques in Blossfechten. The difference between the two masters could also be a case of personal preference.

Best regards,

Profile

Quote

Posts: 510

Sun 10 Apr, 2005 1:43 pm

Bill Grandy wrote:

I'll accept it. ;) Nonetheless, most of the swords don't really look quite like the new NG sword. That's not intended to be a slight against Peter Johnson nor Albion, just that while the Talhoffer sword may capture the feel of the swords from the Talhoffer manuscript, I don't feel like it really looks like any of the swords in it. Many of the pommels tend to be more elongated, the guards sometimes are clubbed and sometimes look more like they are tipped with cubes, the grips seem to be shaped differently, the guards tend to have more of an ecusson, there is usually a large ball at the pommel block where it's peened etc. The profiles of the swords tend to have less drastic tapers (though they differ from plate to plate). Heck, some of them have flared ricassos like fencing longswords. Personally, I like the look of the Albion sword more than the swords in Talhoffer, so I'm not at all complaining! :cool:

Hm, well PJ had to make a distinction at some point and choose characteristics that, while not exactly copying the Talhoffer swords, would make for the best representation of a Talhofferesque sword. And if he had included all the different aesthetics -that would have resulted in a sword that... Hm, well, I'd rather not think about how that would look. :D Also, I think it's pretty safe to assume that the NG sword is named the Talhoffer to honour H. Talhoffer a little bit too. Either way: Me like sword. :cool: :)

Profile

Quote

Posts: 1,244 Location: New Glarus, WI

Sun 10 Apr, 2005 6:03 pm

Wow, has this thread been busy while I was slaving away today! Lots to digest… sorry I missed it as it developed. I tried to pool some comments together after distilling it all down…

Thanks, guys!

Joachim Nilsson wrote:

Aaron Schnatterly wrote:

As it is... the Baron, too, for that matter. Mostly as an exercise in what these different types are good for/at. Strengths and weaknesses of the different swords is something else I really want to understand, and firsthand experience is the best way I learn.

Then I might be able to enlighten you somewhat. *owns a Duke* :D Right of the bat I have to say that the disc pommel does not lend itself too well to Mastercuts etc. Or perhaps I should rather say: Since I'm more used to scent stoppers and type T's the disc complicates the handling in some maneuvers somewhat. But there's a multitude of things to consider here. The first being personal preference. One who have exclusively trained with disc pommels would probably disagree with me concerning the "does not lend itself too well to Mastercuts" etc. I think it all essentially boils down to adapt, overcome and improvise :) Halfswording and doing Mortschlag and whatnot with the Duke is totally out of the question though.

I was really trying to put this sword (my concept of it, anyway) through it’s paces in my mind. Although I haven’t handled it, I’ve heard so much about it, I’ve got some clue. Sounds like I wasn’t too far off. I’m still looking forward to ordering these two (Duke and Baron) and will still try, just to know by feel. I figured the blade geometry and intended application would really not lend them to the Halfswording and Mortschlag techniques. I do, however, expect them to be horrifying in the cuts if I can deal with the pommel.

Joachim Nilsson wrote:

The other thing is: The mastercuts may not even have been around when a sword like the Duke was in its prime. There's always exceptions from the rule of course, such as certain types of sword coming back into style at a later date and so forth. But that's pure specualition and my part and, as such, better suited for beer or coffee-related convcersations.

The hilt on the Duke is not entirely without its merits though. The disc pommel lends itself well to "palming" and if one sticks with the basic cuts its truly becomes a terryfying and agile weapon. One can also finger the uhm... "tang nut" (exp?) with the pinky finger to get a better "feel" for the sword and its edge alignment and what to do with it. I personally prefer just to palm the pommel though. As it pertains to the mastercuts and what I've said about them so far: The Duke is a battlefield weapon after all, and on the battlefield there perhaps wasn't too much room for doing "fancy" zwerchhaus and the like.

"Tang nut?" How’s "peen block" work? Yeah, great place to put the pinky to determine blade alignment. I noticed this with the Landgraf, too. The reason I was interested in this is that, though blades fell out of favor as new ones came in, they didn’t simply disappear, and were still in use indefinitely on the field of battle. Sometimes I like to see if the odd duck piece will still perform with the style of the times. I’ll agree with your thoughts on the differences between mass combat on the field of battle and single combat in a judicial manner or at tournament. Still, though… if polearms were on the battlefield, there had to be some quarter for broader motions.

Bill Grandy wrote:

I owned the Landgraf, I had no problems performing winden actions, nor any of the circular types of cuts such as the zwerchau or schielhau once I got used to it. It did take some practice using it, though, and didn't seem totally natural at first... but I can say the same thing about the viking sword "handshake" grip as well.

I’m getting used to the Landgraf, and am having an easier time, so I suppose I’m going through the learning curve you experienced. It’s working. Same deal with palming the pommel on the lobed Viking-era swords… now, it’s second nature to slip between a hammer grip and a handshake grip. Loaded up on noodles, so, weather permitting, time will be split between “yardwork” (see if I can elicit more odd looks from the neighbors) and working on a scabbard for the Knight.

Bill Grandy wrote:

Aaron Schnatterly wrote:

Thanks for the snippet, Bill! I was hoping to get a hold of the entire document - can you guide me? I'd like to see the work in it's entirety to get the full contextual picture of what Doebringer is talking about.

Certainly. Courtesy of David Lindholm:

http://www.slipad.se/ghfs/files/dobringer.pdf

Thanks tons, Bill! I’ll digest this document tomorrow.

Joachim Nilsson wrote:

A colleague of me and Martin have a short video-clip where Martin and I do some halfsword sparring. In that session we threw a Mortschlag or two and, unbeknownst to us at the time, impressed some of our onlookers due to the fact that we didn't signal the Mortschlag -just threw them. And then directly reverted to a guard or another attack. I'll have a look and see if I can dig up that video-clip if you're interested.

I’d definitely be interested – in this particular video or any others you have.

Joachim Nilsson wrote:

Bill Grandy wrote:

This is a fun discussion. :)

This is a fun discussion indeed. :)

Yes, yes it is. And enlightening.

Profile PM Website

Quote

Posts: 4,194 Location: Northern VA,USA

Mon 11 Apr, 2005 5:37 am

Joachim Nilsson wrote:

Yes, Talhoffer have recieved modern day critisism for being somewhat overly eager to use the Mortschlag. I have no problems with his useage of the Mortschlag though. In my personal opinion, I think it more boils down to problems with modern practitioners seeing the Mortschlag the wrong way and applying it in a faulty way, mostly by signaling it too much before throwing it. I think the best use in halvswording for the Mortschalg is to, all of a sudden, throw it either between guard transitions or right after a thrusting attack.

I can't say if Talhoffer was Mortschlag crazy or not, and technically no one today knows. His manuscript shows it a lot, and this could be a product of his fondness of it, or it could be a product of it's rarity and "wow factor" that Talhoffer chose to demonstrate it the most. Personally I tend to think that latter. I do agree with you that modern practitioners see it the wrong way and apply it incorrectly, though. I just find it interesting that Talhoffer's manuscript is such an outlyer when it comes to this technique compared to other manuscripts.

Quote:

A colleague of me and Martin have a short video-clip where Martin and I do some halfsword sparring. In that session we threw a Mortschlag or two and, unbeknownst to us at the time, impressed some of our onlookers due to the fact that we didn't signal the Mortschlag -just threw them. And then directly reverted to a guard or another attack. I'll have a look and see if I can dig up that video-clip if you're interested.

I'd love to see the video clip! I've seen the mortschlag used quite effectively as a transition between guards, as you seem to be saying, and I do think it works. My favorite use of the technique is from Ringeck, where he has you start in the first half-sword guard (the high guard, i.e. "ochs") and you feint to the face. As your opponent reacts to the displace your point, you suddenly reverse the sword and strike with the other end.

Quote:

The Rector translation of the 1467 edition was actually the first fechbuch I bought back when I first started out. Needless to say, I just sat there scratching me head before shelving the volume for a couple of years. But a few years down the line, with studies of other Masters under my belt, Talhoffer all of a sudden started to make a lot of sense. I don't really agree with the "advertisment theory" on Talhoffer though. Not entirely at least. Martin and I have a few theories on the subject, but intend to present them in an article or something like that a bit further down the line, so I'd rather not say too much at present. I'll say this though: We think the fechtbuch is more intended for personal use by von Königsegg and his retinue when Master T. isn't around to teach himself. But, we'll present our outrageous, speculative theories in a more elaborate way in the future. :D :p

Oooo, sounds intresting! I can't wait to read it! I actually started out with Talhoffer years ago as well. Back in my stage combat days, which were loosely based on historical fighting techniques, Talhoffer was referenced a lot because of the pictures. When I started moving more into focusing on historical combat, Talhoffer was our primary source, but we got a lot of things very wrong. It wasn't until I started working with the Joerg Bellighausen translation of Ringeck that the synapses started firing up the connections, and then later Christian Tobler's fantastic work with Ringeck opened my eyes. I hear many people trying to start out with Talhoffer these days, and I always try to steer them away from him until they've studied something more concrete first, as I really feel that's the only way to understand half of Talhoffer's techniques.

Quote:

But your closing statement in the paragraph above actually outlines some of the things that makes Talhoffer so interesting to me. It's not a complete "how to" nor anything for the beginner, rather "Master Talhoffers Patented Tricks For Beating Fencers Who Rely On The Usual Stuff". :)

Agreed, that where the real allure of Talhoffer lies. I've always been partial to the "throw the hat in the guys face before throwing the dagger at him" technique from the 1459 manuscript. :D But this is why I don't like the manuscript for a solid background, but rather as toppings on a sundae.

Quote:

The more Martin and I study Talhoffer, the more we realize his views on Blossfechten halfswording, and the more we understand why he likes the Mortschlag so much. It's a technique that opens up for a multitude of quick follow up techniques and attacks. I really wish I could demonstrate what I mean in person. It's kinda hard sometimes to properly convey one's opinions regarding different techniques in text only. :confused:

I think I may have a good idea of what you're doing, though, based on your descriptions. I've seen people use the mortschlag quite effectively, and I've used it myself, I just think people get a little too focused on it sometimes.

Quote:

Regarding Ringeck: if I'm not mistaken, he only have one or two halfswording techniques in Blossfechten. The difference between the two masters could also be a case of personal preference.

It's definately very few in comparison to Talhoffer. I don't have the text in front of me, but I know there's one case in the zwerchau section where you've stepped in too close and have to grasp the blade, and one in the vier versetzen section that is almost the same. There's a disarm in there, too, based on grasping both blades at the center (the same is illustrated in Talhoffer). I personally prefer Ringeck's style with less half-swording, as I find that if my opponent rushes in to half sword, I usually am able to use distance to turn it against them. But it could very well be personal preference between historical masters, as you say.

Profile PM Website

Martin Wallgren

Quote

Posts: 620 Location: Bjästa, Sweden

Mon 11 Apr, 2005 6:03 am

I´m very happy I could inspire to this exellent discusion. Hope it continues, and for the sake of arguments from me I refer to my friend Joachim, I agree with him. Most of the argumets he bring forward has been duscussed and tried by us toghether and I have nothing to add or contradict.

Thanks again, all!

Please go on!!!

Profile PM Website MSN

Quote

Posts: 510

Mon 11 Apr, 2005 12:27 pm

Aaron Schnatterly wrote:

I was really trying to put this sword (my concept of it, anyway) through it’s paces in my mind. Although I haven’t handled it, I’ve heard so much about it, I’ve got some clue. Sounds like I wasn’t too far off. I’m still looking forward to ordering these two (Duke and Baron) and will still try, just to know by feel. I figured the blade geometry and intended application would really not lend them to the Halfswording and Mortschlag techniques. I do, however, expect them to be horrifying in the cuts if I can deal with the pommel.

I think the pommel can be dealt with. It's just matter of getting used to it. I'm certainly getting more and more used to the disc pommel on the Duke each time I use it. Still prefer the type T's though. :p :D I have no doubt that you'll like the Duke or the Baron. They are very impressive swords, and quite outstanding cutters.

Quote:

"Tang nut?" How’s "peen block" work?

That's the expression I was looking for. Thanks!

Quote:

Yeah, great place to put the pinky to determine blade alignment. I noticed this with the Landgraf, too. The reason I was interested in this is that, though blades fell out of favor as new ones came in, they didn’t simply disappear, and were still in use indefinitely on the field of battle. Sometimes I like to see if the odd duck piece will still perform with the style of the times. I’ll agree with your thoughts on the differences between mass combat on the field of battle and single combat in a judicial manner or at tournament. Still, though… if polearms were on the battlefield, there had to be some quarter for broader motions.

Yes, the physical quarter was definately there. I was more refering to soldiers perhaps reverting to the basics during the prolonged stress and preassure of battle. But then again, it would be quite foolish of my to straight out claim that no-one ever used the Mastercuts on the battlefield, so I think it's best if we leave that option open nonetheless. :) Big, broad blades certainly did come back in fashion towards the early 15th Century. Some scholars have stated that this was due to the increase in mixed armour -which in turn depended on when the full plate reaches its technical peak, it also reaches an all time high in price, and thus actually reducing the number of armours that saw battle. I'm not stating this as fact though, and you might already be aware of it either way. I just wanted to bring it into the discussion. Yes, I am a blabbermouth, I know. :p

Quote:

I’m getting used to the Landgraf, and am having an easier time, so I suppose I’m going through the learning curve you experienced. It’s working. Same deal with palming the pommel on the lobed Viking-era swords… now, it’s second nature to slip between a hammer grip and a handshake grip. Loaded up on noodles, so, weather permitting, time will be split between “yardwork” (see if I can elicit more odd looks from the neighbors) and working on a scabbard for the Knight.

Yep. I think the nail on its head there: Most things can be pulled of with most swords -it's just a matter of training. "Getting used to the tools you work with" so to speak. I've started getting these crazy ideas that, to fully cover medieval and renaissance swordsmanship (experience-wise), I should by one longsword of each Oakeshott type. Martin flat out calle dme nuts when I told him that. Well, a guy can dream, can't he? :) It would still be nice to be able to put each and every one of them swords through their paces though.

Bill Grandy wrote:

Aaron Schnatterly wrote:

Thanks for the snippet, Bill! I was hoping to get a hold of the entire document - can you guide me? I'd like to see the work in it's entirety to get the full contextual picture of what Doebringer is talking about.

Certainly. Courtesy of David Lindholm:

http://www.slipad.se/ghfs/files/dobringer.pdf

Yes, thanks Bill. I think I'll have a go at that one too. Have been lacking good Doebringer documents.

Best regards,

Last edited by Joachim Nilsson on Mon 11 Apr, 2005 1:27 pm; edited 3 times in total

Profile

Quote

Posts: 510

Mon 11 Apr, 2005 1:22 pm

Bill Grandy wrote:

I can't say if Talhoffer was Mortschlag crazy or not, and technically no one today knows. His manuscript shows it a lot, and this could be a product of his fondness of it, or it could be a product of it's rarity and "wow factor" that Talhoffer chose to demonstrate it the most. Personally I tend to think that latter. I do agree with you that modern practitioners see it the wrong way and apply it incorrectly, though. I just find it interesting that Talhoffer's manuscript is such an outlyer when it comes to this technique compared to other manuscripts.

Nor can I really. I was just rehashing what I've encountered from time to time. :) We jokingly state every now and again that he must have had some kind of "Mortschlag fetisch" seeing as to how common the technique is in his manuals. But yes, it could be a PR-trick on his part too.

Quote:

I'd love to see the video clip! I've seen the mortschlag used quite effectively as a transition between guards, as you seem to be saying, and I do think it works. My favorite use of the technique is from Ringeck, where he has you start in the first half-sword guard (the high guard, i.e. "ochs") and you feint to the face. As your opponent reacts to the displace your point, you suddenly reverse the sword and strike with the other end.

I'll see what we can do. :D A friend and fellow colleague of us has a very expensive digital video cam that I intend to put to good use this summer. One of the things I'm really itching to do is to have someone film me doing a full speed halfsword flourish with a sharp NG Talhoffer. Not sure at present if it's doable or not. Time will tell.

Yes! You took the words right out of my mouth (from trhe tips of my fingers??). With Ringeck in mind, I find it quite... frustrating that a lot of modern day praticioners fail to employ the Mortschlag the right way. He's got advice in somewhere in there (can't remember where now :confused: ) on how to properly launch the Mortschlag. Ochs, perhaps feint a thrust and WHAM! Quick, efficient, nasty and utterly loveable.

Quote:

Oooo, sounds intresting! I can't wait to read it! I actually started out with Talhoffer years ago as well. Back in my stage combat days, which were loosely based on historical fighting techniques, Talhoffer was referenced a lot because of the pictures. When I started moving more into focusing on historical combat, Talhoffer was our primary source, but we got a lot of things very wrong. It wasn't until I started working with the Joerg Bellighausen translation of Ringeck that the synapses started firing up the connections, and then later Christian Tobler's fantastic work with Ringeck opened my eyes. I hear many people trying to start out with Talhoffer these days, and I always try to steer them away from him until they've studied something more concrete first, as I really feel that's the only way to understand half of Talhoffer's techniques.

I'm gonna go out on a limb here... I've actually suffered some heavy personal setbacks the past few months, and still suffer them now, but one of the things that kept me going lately is the thought of presenting our interpretations and impressions of Talhoffer to a wider audience (than the local study group). The only problem is that the more I think of the project, the more it grows. Last time I thought about it it was at the level of a "multimedia" presentation (i.e burned CD with the material presented in HTML) with plates from the manual side to side with photos of techniques and videoclips with the same techniques exercised at both full as well as half speed. Along with this there would be text explaining our interpretations of the techniques and ideas concerning Talhoffer as well as a videoclip showing how to properly employ the Mortschlag. I think Martin was right when he called me nuts... :D We'll see what we'll be able to churn out towards the end of the summer. ;)

One of my first pieces of advice for beginners these days is to stay well clear of Talhoffer until they accumulated some more experience. So I totally agree with your sentiment there.

Quote:

Agreed, that where the real allure of Talhoffer lies. I've always been partial to the "throw the hat in the guys face before throwing the dagger at him" technique from the 1459 manuscript. :D But this is why I don't like the manuscript for a solid background, but rather as toppings on a sundae.

I wholeheartedly agree. I think Martin put it best: "Talhoffer? That's the advanced class." :D I like that "toppings on a sundae" too. One of the things we've discovered about Talhoffer's fechtbücher though is, despite them being "Master T's Collection of Nifty Tricks", is that there's more to Talhoffer than meets the eye. And that's part of the attraction for me. That and the already discussed points. Aside of being "accused" of being overly fond of the Mortschlag, he also been accused of being too cryptic. Something I don't entirely disagree with. The reasons for Talhoffer being cryptic can be almost legion though. It could be deliberate on his part as a try to protect his secrets from "unauthorized personell". I've also read somewhere that the 1467 edition actually have been reprinted so many times through the ages that the plates have become mixed up and whatnot. I'd like to think that it might be "a little bit from cloumn A and a little bit from column B." But, I'm digressing and speculating once again. But perhaps you gentlemen are okay with that? :) So: Yes, the allure of Talhoffer definately lies within the collection of tricks.

Aaaaaaaaah! :D :D That's one of my favorite plates from the 1459 manuscript. Hilarious! I particularly like the nonchalant expression in the face of the man throwing the hat. Somehow he makes me think of Black Adder. On a more serious note: What that plate does show is that in combat -anything goes. I have to try that technique on Martin some day. :p But my love affair with the 1459 doesn't end there. There are a whole bunch of plates in there that nicely corroborates some of mine and Martin's interpretations of the halfswording techniques from the 1467 edition. These will, of course, be included in whatever presentation/article we decide to make.

Quote:

I think I may have a good idea of what you're doing, though, based on your descriptions. I've seen people use the mortschlag quite effectively, and I've used it myself, I just think people get a little too focused on it sometimes.

Well, yes. I agree. The trick, or rather: the crux of the matter is to not over-use the techniques. Use them sparingly and wisely. It is an effective technique, but don't go overboard with it. Use it at the right time and in the right quantity. I think that goes for almost every technique. But it's still interesting to discuss it as we're doing here. Especially since it's such a misunderstood technique. Of course, one could always argue that getting so worked up over one single technique might be a bit... contrived, but I won't let that bother me. :D

Quote:

It's definately very few in comparison to Talhoffer. I don't have the text in front of me, but I know there's one case in the zwerchau section where you've stepped in too close and have to grasp the blade, and one in the vier versetzen section that is almost the same. There's a disarm in there, too, based on grasping both blades at the center (the same is illustrated in Talhoffer). I personally prefer Ringeck's style with less half-swording, as I find that if my opponent rushes in to half sword, I usually am able to use distance to turn it against them. But it could very well be personal preference between historical masters, as you say.

I think you'll find a friend in Martin with that. He's all for the exploiting of distances and whatnot. Consequently, even though being a "close up and personal kinda guy", I am too. When it comes to teaching I actually split up class time so that half the session we focused on regular longsword and the other half we focused on halfswording. Just so people can get used to working at different distances. Well, and also to make sure that they won't have their behinds handed to them once the opponant closes the distance.

Regarding Ringeck: Yes, he's definately seems to harbora personal preference for working a bit more with distance. He does employ some interesting Ringen am Schwert techniques though. And I agree that his disarms are interesting. Since we've already touched upon the subject: Martin and I also have plans to include a little something about our thoughts on Talhoffer's fencing techniques and how they relate to other Masters of the time.

Feel free to stop me at any time if you feel I'm getting too long winded. Just enjoyed the discussion so much so I couldn't help myself. I always get like that when discussiong things I have a passion for. Just ask martin. :D

Best regards,

Profile

Quote

Posts: 1,244 Location: New Glarus, WI

Mon 11 Apr, 2005 1:56 pm

Joachim Nilsson wrote:

I think the pommel can be dealt with. It's just matter of getting used to it. I'm certainly getting more and more used to the disc pommel on the Duke each time I use it. Still prefer the type T's though. :p :D I have no doubt that you'll like the Duke or the Baron. They are very impressive swords, and quite outstanding cutters.

Looking forward to them both, someday (hopefully soon).

Joachim Nilsson wrote:

Yes, the physical quarter was definately there. I was more refering to soldiers perhaps reverting to the basics during the prolonged stress and preassure of battle...

... Big, broad blades certainly did come back in fashion towards the early 15th Century. Some scholars have stated that this was due to the increase in mixed armour -which in turn depended on when the full plate reaches its technical peak, it also reaches an all time high in price, and thus actually reducing the number of armours that saw battle.

Though the carnage would be awful to actually witness, I'd be amazed to be able to watch mass combat (single, too, for that matter) through some time-warped crystal ball... As with most anything we ever seem to learn anything about, the more I learn, the less I seem to know. Though history and archaeology give us some really good clues, and I feel we have a good general idea, there are so, so many questions. Having done a lot of living history camps regarding Vikings and many day-long reenactment events of Stamford and Hastings in period garb and armour, I know I was EXHAUSTED at the end of the day. Of course, this wasn't my daily life, but it was a regular thing. I wasn't acclimated to it as one whose life I was trying to approximate, but I was in better shape then. Still whipped.

In working through later period work, close combat conditions were very different than when things opened up a bit or during single combat, so I feel you are correct in saying conditions also definitely played a major part in what was appropriate or even possible.

Given the continual evolution of both arms and armour, it's interesting to see when things came back into use. Also, why abandon something that does work, or, if that's all that was available, something would be better than nothing. Armour wasn't the only thing that was expensive. One who discarded a serviceable "outdated" or "out of vogue" weapon would make someone else extremely happy. A matchlock is still lethal today. I'd prefer my .40 cal semi-auto, of course, but I'd take the matchlock over throwing rocks.

Joachim Nilsson wrote:

I've started getting these crazy ideas that, to fully cover medieval and renaissance swordsmanship (experience-wise), I should by one longsword of each Oakeshott type. Martin flat out called me nuts when I told him that. Well, a guy can dream, can't he? :) It would still be nice to be able to put each and every one of them swords through their paces though.

I knew I had an evil twin out there somewhere! :p I'm actually working toward that goal myself, but not just the longswords. One issue, of course, is in regards to the XIIIa's that are in Albion's lineup. The Duke, Count, and Chieftain are all examples of this particular typology, but I'd bet they all have noticeably different handling aspects. They each may exhibit the handling typical of that typology well enough, however, with respect to the other typologies, to give enough of an understanding. Good thing, though... I'll have some different pieces in my collection than you will (as well as a good bit of overlap, too). You're more than welcome to handle them all, any time.

Profile PM Website

Quote

Posts: 1,244 Location: New Glarus, WI

Mon 11 Apr, 2005 2:09 pm

Joachim Nilsson wrote:

I'll see what we can do. :D A friend and fellow colleague of us has a very expensive digital video cam that I intend to put to good use this summer. One of the things I'm really itching to do is to have someone film me doing a full speed halfsword flourish with a sharp NG Talhoffer. Not sure at present if it's doable or not. Time will tell...

... I'm gonna go out on a limb here... I've actually suffered some heavy personal setbacks the past few months, and still suffer them now, but one of the things that kept me going lately is the thought of presenting our interpretations and impressions of Talhoffer to a wider audience (than the local study group). The only problem is that the more I think of the project, the more it grows. Last time I thought about it it was at the level of a "multimedia" presentation (i.e burned CD with the material presented in HTML) with plates from the manual side to side with photos of techniques and videoclips with the same techniques exercised at both full as well as half speed. Along with this there would be text explaining our interpretations of the techniques and ideas concerning Talhoffer as well as a videoclip showing how to properly employ the Mortschlag. I think Martin was right when he called me nuts... :D We'll see what we'll be able to churn out towards the end of the summer. ;)

This is a very aggressive project, but one I would LOVE to see done. It isn't terrible, however, to produce - it's getting the material together and deciding on a format. If I can be of any assistance in this endeavor, please let me know. Even just seeing video clips of some of these techniques would be wonderfully helpful to a lot of people, me included. If only Sweden wasn't so far away... This may be a discussion to take offline, however...

Joachim Nilsson wrote:

Feel free to stop me at any time if you feel I'm getting too long winded. Just enjoyed the discussion so much so I couldn't help myself. I always get like that when discussiong things I have a passion for. Just ask Martin. :D

Please, DON'T stop. I'm learning a lot here, and putting a lot into perspective. It's great to get good dialog like this! Thanks to everyone involved!

Profile PM Website

Allen W

Quote

Posts: 285

Mon 11 Apr, 2005 7:12 pm

Perhaps I'm mistaken but I thought the the master cuts were pretty basic and would necessarily form the bulk of any long sword/greatsword fight both on and off of the battlefield (with the possible exception of the "squinter"). After all these form the bulk of kenjutsu and there are only so many ways to swing a a sword with both hands.

Profile PM