[Andrew Maxwell]

This thread was suggested in the SCA thread; no-one else has done it so I thought I would. Hopefully we can iron out which parts of the art are actually in dispute and which are just miscommunication

Of course, my motives aren't entirely altruistic here- I want to know all your moves in case I have to fight you for supplies after the zombie apocalypse

Anyway, my first question: Which primary cutting mechanic are you using and why? There are two that I know of being used at the moment- the "standard" arcing cut and the right-cross-with-bottom-hand-torque straight cut- which have you found better in freeplay/test cutting? How great do you find the difference?

Any and all answers appreciated- the more disparate answers the better

cheers
Andy

[Jesse Eaton]

[Hopefully we can iron out which parts of the art are actually in dispute and which are just miscommunication]

Okay, lets start here what do you mean by 'the "standard" arcing cut' and "the right-cross-with-bottom-hand-torque straight cut"

I think you are reffering to ober hau and zorn hau? Ober hau is strait down from vom tag and zorn hau is angled from vom tag. Is that what you mean though?

First things first when discussing anything technical is defining your terms. The discussion will be a whole lot more productive if you start there. I'm interested in the question, so please do define your terms, I'd love to be part of the discussion

[Andrew Maxwell]

Well, I guess this is the first misunderstanding right there

I'm not actually talking about a different (named) cut per se, but actually a different mechanic for all cuts (all the Meisterhau etc.)

The first type of cut is the one I've seen used the most, If we take vom tag as the starting point and use zornhau as an example: the arms straighten and the hands describe a smooth elongated curve from vertical to horizontal, the tip of the sword describes a continuous arc and travels through langen ort to alber/nebenhut etc. Arms, hands and sword are describing an arc, this is what I refer to as the "standard" cut.

The second cutting mechanic is one that AFAIK has been used only much more recently (in the HEMA reconstruction world): From vom tag again, the right hand moves straight forward from the shoulder (as though throwing a right cross) with the tip of the blade describing a straight line as it moves, angling forward throughout the movement but not arcing; towards the end of the cut the bottom hand is lifted to torque the sword around it's COG, with the tip of the sword only describing an arc during this last part of the movement.

The second is (or seems to be) faster and within a tighter frame; it is imo harder to read as all of the meisterhau look the same until the last part of the movement. OTOH, it only has power to langen ort, not through a full cut. There has been some disagreement as to whether it is effective and in what situations and whether it was historical- that is what I was asking for opinions on

edit: Sorry if that explanation isn't terribly clear, if I get time I'll knock up a diagram to show what I mean

[Max W.]

It's about the pulled hew with angled arms VS a pushed lashing hew ending in Langort with arms stretched out.

We call it gezogener Hau/gedrückter Hau over here: pulled/pushed hew since performing the former one your hands travel the target line earlier than your blade, as though pulling it through the cut. While doing the latter one hands and point are linear to the target after you pushed the point forward in a snapping motion.

The question if and when the slicing motion of the pulled one or the sharp impact of the pushed one is to be preferred, i'll leave to others
Since they both have tactical ad- and disadvantages the discussion might get fuzzy.

But thats actually a thing i want to try on tatami someday. I never saw anyone -snapping- it through yet, respectively showing off it's damaging potential.

[Andrew Maxwell]

[David Teague]

[Michael Edelson]

[Michael Edelson]

Oh, and since we in HEMA are in the habit of backing up our assumptions with textual evidence, note the Talhoffer plate I used in the opening of the video, where the fencer on the left severs the head of the fencer on the right.

Note how his hands are low. This is not the terminus of a point first push pull percussive strike. That is an "arcing" cut, clear as day.

I am referring to the 1459 Talhoffer, plate 158, which you can also see here on page 156 (first plate on left):


http://www.kb.dk/da/nb/materialer/haandskrift...2_290.html

[David Teague]

And here I thought we worked this out on the phone...

Let me edit this from "To me the Three Wounders ( Drei Wunder) are simply Hacking (Hauen), Thrusting (Stechen) and Cutting (Abschneiden).

A blow can be delivered with a percussive strike as a Hauen, or in a slicing motion as Abschneiden. While Hauen would not cut a man in half like a good draw cut, I'm still certain that it will do damage..."

To: To me the Three Wounders ( Drei Wunder) are simply Hacking (Hauen), Thrusting (Stechen) and Cutting (Abschneiden).

A blow can be delivered with a percussive strike as a Hauen, or with a slicing motion. While Hauen would not cut a man in half like a good draw cut, I'm still certain that it will do damage...

Happy Now?

[Michael Edelson]

[Mark Millman]

Dear Mr. Grandy,

[Andrew Maxwell]

[Michael Edelson]

[Hugh Knight]

[Michael Edelson]

Hi Hugh,

For why I think krumphau is not specific to an arcing cut, see my explanation in the post above. I will only add that we practice both mechanics in NYHFA and I have an easier time krumping someone who is coming at me with a point first push pull cut than I do someone coming in hilt first. Even so, which type one finds it easier to krump will likely vary with the individual, reinforcing the point that it really doesn't matter.

The discussion about full cuts vs. cuts to langeort has been ongoing in the SCA thread and I have no wish to repeat the details provided by myself and Bill Grandy, but sufice it to say every two handed sword system uses full cuts some of the time (ie cuts to lower wards such as wechselhut, alber or even nebenhut). The evidence for these cuts is plentiful, and some of it was provided in the SCA thread. You can search for it if you wish. To semi-quote Bill Grandy, if you say that full cuts are wrong, you are saying that every two handed sword system in the world is wrong.

I am not disputing that you should strike to langenort when appropriate, and it can be done with a push pull or an arcing cut. I can do so with either mechanic with equal ease. But there are also times when a full cut is appropriate, and there is, as I said above, a lot of textual and pictorial evidence for this.

Your suggestion that you do not need to cut, in my opinion, limits your choice of targets. If you strike the head, you can aim for langenort, because you do not need to cut the head to take someone down. But if you can't cut, you are limited to the head and exposed fleash, which on a medieval man is only his hands and neck. You say you have no evidence for whether the push pull can cut through a linen lined doublet and linen undershirt and perhaps a linen lined wool coat, well, it's not hard to get some. Get the fabrics, put them over a target and cut them. I have done this, and I know exactly what happens when you hit such a target, which is why I cut the way I do.

Also,respectfully, I find your analysis of our cutting to be inaccurate. When it is necessary to cut, you must cut past your target, or you will not cut. My full cuts end in the same place, hit or miss. There is nothing "wildly around" about them. Furthermore, you have to understand the context of what I am simulating in those videos. If I was simulating a vorschlaag to the head, I could do so with a blunt sword and a watermellon.

I'd also like to suggest, again respectfully, that you try cutting. Cutting teaches you many things. If you do not cut, you cannot truly understand how swords work, leaving you with blunt swords and other simulators on which to base your body mechanics.

P.S. Hilt first or point first? Which does this look like? (oberhau on left, unterhau on right, both shown in progress)

[Hugh Knight]

[David Teague]

[William Carew]

[Michael Edelson]

[Vincent Le Chevalier]

OK, I'm not coming at it from a specifically German longsword perspective, however there are a few things I'd like to highlight.

First, I don't remember having seen the push-pull straight cut in any other bladed arts. It seems pretty much limited to German longsword. Japanese kenjutsu does not show it as far as I know, in Chinese swordsmanship I haven't seen it either but I'd like to know if someone has seen it used elsewhere... The closest I've seen is in stick-based arts, for example la canne has an attack called the "brisé" which also has an arm motion looking like a straight punch, ending very straight forward. However there is a significant difference, in that the stick rotates around the hand, not its Center of gravity. Also, in the page I link to it is pointed out that when the strike ends with the hand lower and the arm and weapon misaligned, it is called a "sabré" (=sabered), which I take to mean that that should be the method practiced with a blade, though it is not the right one with the stick.

The other kind of cut, which does not need as much torque in the hilt, is more common. I'd call it a whipping mechanic, more than arching. Arching would be extending the arms up and swinging from the shoulder, but you can cut with a far more refined arch too, one that does not open you up so badly. You'll find example of it in nearly every bladed art. It is also easier to perform one-handed, because it's the force imparted on the hilt and not the torque that mainly contributes to the motion. A point of note is that the arc can be made really tight with the hands, even in a line, but in that case the blade lags a bit. Of course nothing prevents you from stopping in long point either, it's a separate problem. With the "whipping" mechanic you have the choice, whereas with the push-pull mechanic it doesn't make much sense to cut through to another guard, since the cutting power is sacrificed anyway.

Making the sword rotate around its CoG in the push-pull cut is robing the cut of some of its power, because in that case the mass of the sword does not really impact the target. Of course it is easier to make the sword pivot around the CoG, and thus quicker too, but the energy transfer to the target is not optimal, and I suspect the power transfer into the sword is not optimal either because the hilt is so fast aligned and the CoG just thrown forward. The attack is fast, that's sure, perhaps even too fast relative to a stepping motion, meaning it converts naturally into a thrust.

Actually, I think that the push-pull cut can be adequately described as a thrust from a point back position. It's pretty much optimal to make this job as no power is wasted taking the CoG off-line. I'll have to try but I think a beginner instructed to thrust from vom tag, for example, would naturally switch to the push-pull mechanic. The cut is a bonus side effect

As for cutting through or stopping in long point, I think both must be practiced since both are obviously described. I would add that a one-handed weapon makes it even harder to cut with significant power and stop dead at longpoint, so if the cutting mechanics must be shared across the weapons of the system, better be prepared to cutting through...

Regards,