Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search
Forum Index > Off-topic Talk > Zornhaw Counters Reply to topic
This is a standard topic Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next 
Author Message
Steven H




Location: Boston
Joined: 10 May 2006

Posts: 545

PostPosted: Wed 30 May, 2007 1:51 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Craig-
I still haven't actually seen the video. My computer says that a 'compressor' is needed and the Quicktime site doesn't have it. Any possibility of making it available in another format.

Thanks.

Hugh-

The Zornhau is not just a pedagogical tool for teaching the bind. It is variously described as a serious strike, a secret strike and a master strike. Claiming that a serious, secret, master strike is just a teaching aid simply doesn't make sense. Especially given the large number of useful plays built off of the strike. Clearly not just something you use in the schule to learn with and then don't use in combat.

Zornhau is not described as just a teaching aid. There is no evidence that I am aware of to support this assertion.

The fechtbuchs had as their target audience people who generally already knew what they were doing and were constructed to enhance and refine the learning. The result being that all sorts of basics are left out. Like footwork. The entire corpus of 15th century German tradition contains little more than one sentence on how to do footwork. All sorts of basics are left out.

This is why Meyer is such a great resource. Meyer clearly explains just about everything including all sorts of details that had been glossed over or omitted in the previous 180 years. So Meyer tells us what any reasonably competent fencer doesn't need to be told . . . like the Zornhau can attack the opponents head.

Alternately, that you should try and hit their head even though you are unlikely to succeed because even most untrained people have the reflexes necessary to keep it from happening most of the time. However, the attempt helps the action succeed because the opponent must react to your strike and it sets up the next action.

Attacking the head is consistent with the interpretation currently in use at the Higgins as shown to me by Mark Millman this year. It's not the only thing you can do with a Zornhau but it is the first objective.

Tobler provides a different translation of your 'peasant quote'. He shows it as, "Note, the Strike of Wrath breaks with the point all strokes from above and yet is but what a poor peasant strikes." (emphasis and underline mine) The meaning of the quote changes when placed in it's context and poor has a very different meaning than bad. If the zornhau is merely bad and ignorant then why does it get shown and elaborated upon so much?

Kunstbruder - Boston area Historical Combat Study
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Hugh Knight




Location: San Bernardino, CA
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Reading list: 34 books

Posts: 739

PostPosted: Wed 30 May, 2007 3:16 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Steven H wrote:
Alternately, that you should try and hit their head even though you are unlikely to succeed because even most untrained people have the reflexes necessary to keep it from happening most of the time. However, the attempt helps the action succeed because the opponent must react to your strike and it sets up the next action.


Sorry, but as I showed, that's not what the texts say. the texts say you use the Zornhau in reaction to what someone else does and *then* go on to counter his next actions (or just kill him with a Zornort or Duplieren--depending on the nature of the bind--if he doesn't react).

Quote:
Tobler provides a different translation of your 'peasant quote'. He shows it as, "Note, the Strike of Wrath breaks with the point all strokes from above and yet is but what a poor peasant strikes." (emphasis and underline mine) The meaning of the quote changes when placed in it's context and poor has a very different meaning than bad. If the zornhau is merely bad and ignorant then why does it get shown and elaborated upon so much?


I see no difference in the two statements whatsoever. The text means this technique is nothing but what a peasant uses. That's perfectly clear. Poor vs. bad isn't the issue; the issue is that it's an untrained fencer (a peasant, and I know I don't have to show the quotes that show that to be the case on here!) doing a simple cut from the shoulder. Nothing special, nothing sophisticated. It's just a way to show the actions from the bind.

Regards,
Hugh
www.schlachtschule.org
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Craig Peters




PostPosted: Wed 30 May, 2007 3:17 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Quote:
Craig-
I still haven't actually seen the video. My computer says that a 'compressor' is needed and the Quicktime site doesn't have it. Any possibility of making it available in another format.


Sorry, but I didn't actually have anything to do with making the video or putting it online, so there's not much I can do. I'm not sure how badly they want to redo the video in another format so that more people can watch it. My suggestion is that you check around and see if there's anything you can update Quicktime with. Maybe try downloading the newest version if you don't have it. The video plays just fine on my computer and I'm not particularly "tech-savvy" so whatever you need mustn't be too difficult to find.
View user's profile Send private message
Craig Peters




PostPosted: Wed 30 May, 2007 3:22 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Hugh,

By the sounds of it then, your objection to this sequence isn't based upon its martial efficacy, but rather whether or not it matches the description of the zornhaw. So here's my next question: if it's not a zornhaw, then what is it? It must have a name. It stretches credibility beyond belief to suggest that the historical masters never figured out a technique that's this basic and yet effective as well. If they could come up with strikes like the krumphaw or schiller, surely they would have figured out this one on their own. And if so, it would have undoubtedly been given a name if it wasn't the same as the zornhaw or a basic oberhaw in their minds. So what is it called then?
View user's profile Send private message
Adam Sharp




Location: Fresno
Joined: 16 Feb 2007

Posts: 7

PostPosted: Wed 30 May, 2007 3:51 pm    Post subject: Zornhau         Reply with quote

Realistically, they wouldn't included an unsophisticated strike among a set of only 5 that are specifically named to be 'secret' or 'master' strikes.

I think when they say that a zornhau is 'a poor peasant's strike' they're referring to it's mechanical properties. How many times has an unskilled, untrained person moved in a way that could be applied successfully in a martial situation? Quite a few. What I think theyr'e trying to teach is that being conscious of the potential advantage inherent in the strike, one can take a very simple movement - a strong blow from the shoulder - and turn it into something far more through proper application of mechanics.

So yes, a zonhau is mechanically the same as a 'bad peasant blow', but it becomes so much more when properly applied.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
Hugh Knight




Location: San Bernardino, CA
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Reading list: 34 books

Posts: 739

PostPosted: Wed 30 May, 2007 3:58 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Craig Peters wrote:
By the sounds of it then, your objection to this sequence isn't based upon its martial efficacy, but rather whether or not it matches the description of the zornhaw. So here's my next question: if it's not a zornhaw, then what is it? It must have a name. It stretches credibility beyond belief to suggest that the historical masters never figured out a technique that's this basic and yet effective as well. If they could come up with strikes like the krumphaw or schiller, surely they would have figured out this one on their own. And if so, it would have undoubtedly been given a name if it wasn't the same as the zornhaw or a basic oberhaw in their minds. So what is it called then?


Craig,

Your assumption is that because you found a technique that works really well for you they must have used it in period. I see no evidence to support that.

Regards,
Hugh
www.schlachtschule.org
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Steven H




Location: Boston
Joined: 10 May 2006

Posts: 545

PostPosted: Wed 30 May, 2007 4:00 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Hugh Knight wrote:
It's just a way to show the actions from the bind.


You have provided no references, quotes or citations to prove this point. Please do so if you wish to be believed.

Otherwise the clear assertions by the masters that the Zornhau is a serious, secret, master strike stands.

Kunstbruder - Boston area Historical Combat Study
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Joe Fults




Location: Midwest
Joined: 02 Sep 2003

Posts: 3,646

PostPosted: Wed 30 May, 2007 4:38 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Punctuation alone does not make something a quotation.

Unfortunately I see far too many instances of people trying to pass off what is clearly paraphrase and interpretation as direct quotation in threads like this one. While there is nothing wrong with stating an expert opinion, it should be qualified for what it is. Failing to do this is essentially an unfair appeal to higher authority (widely used in sales). This can be effective trap in a debate, but it seriously erodes claims of scholarly activity and integrity (I consider it a cheap trick).

I wish that the protagonists involved in these debates (here and other places) could agree to use a standard means of citation; it would eliminate much confusion (for me).

Here are some helpful links on using citation in text correctly:

http://library.osu.edu/sites/guides/cbegd.php
http://www.liunet.edu/cwis/cwp/library/workshop/citation.htm
http://www.library.ualberta.ca/guides/citation/index.cfm
http://www.apastyle.org/elecref.html

"The goal shouldn’t be to avoid being evil; it should be to actively do good." - Danah Boyd


Last edited by Joe Fults on Wed 30 May, 2007 8:39 pm; edited 3 times in total
View user's profile Send private message
Hugh Knight




Location: San Bernardino, CA
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Reading list: 34 books

Posts: 739

PostPosted: Wed 30 May, 2007 5:32 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Steven H wrote:
Hugh Knight wrote:
It's just a way to show the actions from the bind.


You have provided no references, quotes or citations to prove this point. Please do so if you wish to be believed.

Otherwise the clear assertions by the masters that the Zornhau is a serious, secret, master strike stands.


Wow, I'm going to have to bow out of this debate. I did show citations for my points, and to have you ignore them and then use such an unduly dismissive tone in both of your rather scanty posts shows you won't be convinced.

It's amazing to me how my most polite posts get criticized for harshness and then someone who writes something like the ones you've written gets no comment.

Regards,
Hugh
www.schlachtschule.org
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Craig Peters




PostPosted: Wed 30 May, 2007 6:38 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Hugh Knight wrote:


Craig,

Your assumption is that because you found a technique that works really well for you they must have used it in period. I see no evidence to support that.


So you're asserting that this technique did not exist during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance?
View user's profile Send private message
Bill Grandy
myArmoury Team


myArmoury Team

Location: Northern VA,USA
Joined: 25 Aug 2003
Reading list: 43 books

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 4,194

PostPosted: Thu 31 May, 2007 2:41 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Whew, I’m jumping into this pretty late! I just watched the video. I presume it is interpreting the first play of the zornhau, yes? Let me first explain how I’m interpreting this play, then I’ll come back to the video.

Multiple texts explicitly say that when faced with a strike from above, spring out to your right as you strike the zornhau *at the opponent’s strike*, and to strike your opponent with your point. I think it’s very clear in the texts that the first play is not ideally done with the edge, but primarily with the tip of the sword.

Liechtenauer: “Who strikes at you from above, the Wrath Stroke [Zornhau] threatens him with the point.

Von Danzig: “Note, the Wrath Stroke breaks with the point all Oberhaue”

and

“When you come to him in the Zufechten and he strikes from his right side above to your head, then strike also from your right side from above without any parrying, on his sword, wrathfully at the same time as him. Then if he is soft at the sword, then shoot the point straight in forward and long, and thrust to his face or breast. Thus plant upon him.”

To me it is very clear that a zornhau is used to defend against the initial strike with a thrust to the face as part of the counterattack. This, however, does not have to be a two-time “parry, riposte” action: Rather, extend while doing the zornhau, and it happens in one seamless movement. So I interpret this as:

-Opponent strikes from above.

-You strike downwards as you spring out to the right side, keeping the strong half of the blade in the way of the opponent’s sword

-As your blade come downward, extend the point towards the opponent’s face in a seamless action. Depending on the distance, you will either thrust to the opponent’s face, or the last couple of inches of the sword will strike at the opponent’s face as you thrust.

This interpretation, by the way, will finish looking exactly like the Paulus Kal plate that Craig mentioned. In fact, when I first saw that plate a couple years ago, that was when I first started thinking of how a thrust could be done in single time rather than in two separate motions.

Does that mean you cannot cut at your opponent? Of course it doesn’t. It all depends on the distance. If your opponent really rushes forward and has closed in too far, yes, your sword will hit the head with the edge, as the above video shows. That’s not what the texts say to do, but if your opponent charges in like that, then I feel it’s perfectly acceptable within the confines of the overall art.

So, no, I don’t perform the first play of the zornhau quite like the video, but I don’t think doing a countercut like this is out of the question, either. More on the video in another post.

HistoricalHandcrafts.com
-Inspired by History, Crafted by Hand


"For practice is better than artfulness. Your exercise can do well without artfulness, but artfulness is not much good without the exercise.” -anonymous 15th century fencing master, MS 3227a
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Bill Grandy
myArmoury Team


myArmoury Team

Location: Northern VA,USA
Joined: 25 Aug 2003
Reading list: 43 books

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 4,194

PostPosted: Thu 31 May, 2007 2:48 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Part 2: Onto the video itself. First, I like that the actions are clean and performed with athleticism. I do feel, though, that there are some subtle, but very fundamental mistakes which effect the interpretation. Before I touch on them, let me be clear that I’m saying this for the sake of discussion, not to attack the video or the participants. Let me also be clear that I catch myself being guilty of the same mistakes from time to time, so I can't say I'm perfect and they aren't.

The initial attacker is making a huge telegraph. He is moving his feet first rather than moving the weapon, which should allow the person on the left (Is that John Clements?) to be able to strike with the nachreisen. (Heck, I’d use a schielhau in this particular case, but that’s not necessary.) This would not really be a big deal for the person's counter, if not for a couple mistakes that he is making.

The person on the left, in countering, has a tendency to lift the sword and his body first before striking. To use Silver’s terminology, he moves in a false time. The first time he performs the technique he doesn’t even step out to the side, as the text says to do, because he is too late: He has lifted his sword, taking too long, in which case he has to simply bring his sword in the way as fast as possible.

Furthermore, in most cases he does not have his knees, hips, shoulders and arms in proper alignment upon finishing the play. When he finishes the strike, he is usually in a very awkward position, with his elbows tucked in close and his shoulders tense, while his feet are not in a proper stance. Once he is even leaning over to the side. The last time he does it is probably the worst one: He not only does a small jump (tying into what I was saying above), but his weight rolls slightly backwards onto his heels and loses his balance. He steps back and pretends it was fine, but had he missed, he would have been in a world of trouble. The only time when I feel he is does not end awkwardly is on the third and fourth time he executes the move, and those I would not consider fantastic, either.

Again, I want to point out that I’m sometimes guilty of doing the same things myself, so I’m not trying to pull the “holier than thou” type of argument. But these are very fundamental mistakes, and they are mistakes that affect the execution of the technique.

If anyone gets a chance to practice with Jorg Bellinghausen or Thomas Stoeppler of Ochs, I would highly recommend it. They have some excellent training methods to erase these problems and make the first play of the zornhau work far more effectively than this, and to do it exactly as the text says to do it.

I am out of town at the moment, and it is doubtful I will be able to respond to this anytime before next week. Feel free to respond to me, but please don’t feel I’m ignoring the discussion if you don’t hear from me for a while.

HistoricalHandcrafts.com
-Inspired by History, Crafted by Hand


"For practice is better than artfulness. Your exercise can do well without artfulness, but artfulness is not much good without the exercise.” -anonymous 15th century fencing master, MS 3227a
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Craig Peters




PostPosted: Thu 31 May, 2007 3:12 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Bill,

You must have much sharper eyes than I do, because I don't see false times in either case. To me it looks like Aaron's sword is moving at pretty much the same time as his feet, or if it isn't, the time difference between the two is so negligible that it makes almost no difference. Likewise, I see John's sword completing the cuts all in one motion; I don't see indication of a slight adjustment, then the cut.

I agree though that John's body placement is probably less than optimal at the end of the technique. I don't know if that's because there wasn't enough room, or if because Aaron was stepping closer than John expected or what. Normally, John's very good about finishing a motion smoothly.
View user's profile Send private message
Craig Peters




PostPosted: Thu 31 May, 2007 3:37 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Also, when both fencers are fencing with strength, reaching with the strikes using full arm extensions, and the person countering steps out and to the right, it's been my experience that the zornhaw frequently results in a strike to the opponent's head.
View user's profile Send private message
Jason G. Smith




Location: Quebec
Joined: 24 Aug 2006
Likes: 1 page

Posts: 130

PostPosted: Thu 31 May, 2007 7:13 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I've read through this whole thread (took some doing!) and have but a few things to add from my own experience.

Regardless of whether a master specifically says or not to do something, there are some very basic principles involved in all fencing. One of these principles is defending in one time. Add to this the admonishment by Dobringer to always attack the man, and not the sword, and you have the makings of a one-time parry with a Zornhau. If you're attacking the sword, you're setting yourself up to be deceived. After having practiced this very thing just last night, and now watching the video, there are some things I'd like to add to this.

Firstly, the defender on the left (in the video) is not attacking the opponent, but the sword. It is very clear he is making a high swooping cut to catch the blade before landing the strike (I don't want to get into a "how to cut" debate here). To remain in the vein of an earlier poster, I'm not being holier than thou about this, I'll do it if it saves my neck too, but it is not proper technique, partticularly if one takes Ringeck's advice to "nevermind what your opponent does, get in with your own techniques" (paraphrasing is mine.) Taking this together with Dobringer, it seems fairly obvious to me that I simply cut to my adversary's head, and the trajectory of the blade will interpose it between myself and my opponent's blade. Timing is everything. Moving right is optional, but preferred (Liberi has some plates where he does it in place - remember, if your opponent is in distance, so are you, so you can easily parry without taking a step) Big Grin

From here, several things can happen - I may be short, so I thrust (Zornort) to him. If I'm well timed, I cut to his head - game over. If I catch his strong (oops!) or he displaces - move on to something else (duplieren, winden, etc.) as the situation commands.

From experience with my sparring partner and in teaching this technique - we usually fence hard at the sword - again we follow the masters' advice to always be hard at the sword. When this happens (rather than when fighting a poor or bad peasant), we are usually caught in the bind and have to work from there, which invariably leads to a winding contest. Big Grin However, this requires him to adjust the angle of his cut slightly to catch my blade, which means I won the initiative because I forced him to defend and I stay in the vor.

Now to launch an entirely different debate that happens to be a pet peeve of mine. Posta di Donna (or all of the so-called italian school of fencing) is just that - longsword fencing. Fiore even learned from a number of German masters. The same cuts and guards are used, and dare I say the master strikes, although Fiore doesn't specifically name them, he does say that you can do all strikes with either the true or false edge. A mezzani mandritto with the falso filo? Zwerchau. A fendente with the false edge? Scheitelhau. Posta di Donna? Zornhut. Now I suggest we kill this in the egg right now - I just needed to get that off my chest. Razz

Anyways, that's my $.02 Take it or leave it, I don't want it back Big Grin

Les Maîtres d'Armes
Member of the
Chivalric Fighting Arts Association

... above all, you should feel in your conscience that your quarrel is good and just. - Le Jeu de la Hache
View user's profile Send private message
Marton Pap




Location: Hungary
Joined: 16 Jan 2006

Posts: 47

PostPosted: Fri 01 Jun, 2007 3:31 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Hi!
I just thought that cutting or thrusting comes from what type of vom Tag do you use. I was thinking about this, when I was wondering about how an effective blow can be made from a really low vom Tag, like the one that can be seen in the Danzig manuscript. If you keep your crossguard low (like the level of the pecs) and the blade on your shoulder, your cut is quite short, but if you just extend your arms forward, you will get a cutting-thrusting motion. Imagine doing a zornhau like this : you keep your hilt low, and you have a strong rubber band from your point to the opponents nose. The band pulls the point forward, the sword pulls your arm forward, and your arm pulls you forward. The only difference is that you are actively putting your hilt to the left and stepping to the right. This way the oberhau will be parried and the opponent will be stabbed at the nose single time. So from a low vom Tag a thrust will be a really natural movement and you aim at he opening, not the sword. From a higher guard like zornhut or from above the head, cutting the enemy is more natural.
View user's profile Send private message
Randall Pleasant




Location: Flower Mound, Texas
Joined: 24 Aug 2003

Posts: 333

PostPosted: Fri 01 Jun, 2007 9:07 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Bill Grandy wrote:
To me it is very clear that a zornhau is used to defend against the initial strike with a thrust to the face as part of the counterattack. This, however, does not have to be a two-time “parry, riposte” action: Rather, extend while doing the zornhau, and it happens in one seamless movement. So I interpret this as:

-Opponent strikes from above.

-You strike downwards as you spring out to the right side, keeping the strong half of the blade in the way of the opponent’s sword

-As your blade come downward, extend the point towards the opponent’s face in a seamless action. Depending on the distance, you will either thrust to the opponent’s face, or the last couple of inches of the sword will strike at the opponent’s face as you thrust.

Bill

The actions described in your statements sound more like an absetzen type of action rather than as cut. It appears that in a Zorn-to-Zorn counter you don't see your Zornhau as a counter cut that displaces the on-coming cut. Rather it appears that in one fluid motion you pull you hilt down so that your sword in just in the way of the on-coming blade and then you thrust. Is my understanding of your interpretation correct? If this is correct, can you provide more detail as to why you don't see this master cut as an actual cut?

All the best,

Ran Pleasant
ARMA DFW
View user's profile Send private message
Bill Grandy
myArmoury Team


myArmoury Team

Location: Northern VA,USA
Joined: 25 Aug 2003
Reading list: 43 books

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 4,194

PostPosted: Fri 01 Jun, 2007 9:31 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Randall Pleasant wrote:

Bill

The actions described in your statements sound more like an absetzen type of action rather than as cut.


Well, honestly, I consider it both. Because the text does specifically say to use the zornhau against the strike and hit the face or chest with the point.

Quote:
It appears that in a Zorn-to-Zorn counter you don't see your Zornhau as a counter cut that displaces the on-coming cut. Rather it appears that in one fluid motion you pull you hilt down so that your sword in just in the way of the on-coming blade and then you thrust. Is my understanding of your interpretation correct?


Kind of. It's definately a single time counter attack. But it's more that you're closing the line as you bring the point to your opponent's face in one fluid motion.

Quote:
If this is correct, can you provide more detail as to why you don't see this master cut as an actual cut?


Let me reiterate what I said earlier: I don't think it's wrong to do this as a cut to the head if the distance dictates it. I'm not arguing that at all. What I am saying, though, is that we can't ignore that the very first play of the zornhau is repeatedly described as striking the zornhau at the oncoming attack and hitting the opponent with the point of your sword. Liectenauer himself said it, as do many of the masters within his tradition. Yet no master described it as the cut seen in the video. Should we ignore their words just because we like to do something else?

HistoricalHandcrafts.com
-Inspired by History, Crafted by Hand


"For practice is better than artfulness. Your exercise can do well without artfulness, but artfulness is not much good without the exercise.” -anonymous 15th century fencing master, MS 3227a
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Bill Grandy
myArmoury Team


myArmoury Team

Location: Northern VA,USA
Joined: 25 Aug 2003
Reading list: 43 books

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 4,194

PostPosted: Fri 01 Jun, 2007 9:41 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Craig Peters wrote:
Bill,

You must have much sharper eyes than I do, because I don't see false times in either case.


It's not a matter of having sharp eyes. They simply telegraphing. They are moving in ways that would be unnacceptable for most classical sword arts, from Kendo to Kung Fu. A classical epeeist would tell you immediately how open the person on the right is and how an attack in contratempo with opposition would not be difficult.

If you showed this video to some of the serioius German practitioners (the ones in Germany, I mean), I'm quite certain they'd say the same thing.

I'm not trying to say that I'm perfect. I video myself a lot and catch myself doing the exact same things. *shrug* That's all part of the learning process.

Quote:
To me it looks like Aaron's sword is moving at pretty much the same time as his feet,


That's a false time. And even so, he is moving his body before his feet. Again, I'm not saying I'm perfect, but that doesn't change the fact that it's there.

HistoricalHandcrafts.com
-Inspired by History, Crafted by Hand


"For practice is better than artfulness. Your exercise can do well without artfulness, but artfulness is not much good without the exercise.” -anonymous 15th century fencing master, MS 3227a
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Christian Henry Tobler




Location: Oxford, CT
Joined: 25 Aug 2003

Posts: 704

PostPosted: Fri 01 Jun, 2007 11:43 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Greetings all,

I'm coming to this discussion late, but I'd like to add a couple of thoughts.

Zornhau

We shouldn't decry this blow as a mere teaching exercise. In fact, there's an important reason it is treated first: if you can do it well, you'll need little else against most opponents. The commentary, from von Danzig, reads: "Note, the Wrath Stroke breaks with the point all strokes from above and yet is nothing but what a poor peasant strikes." There seems to be a bit of irony there, pointing to the fact that it *is* just a poor peasant blow, provided you don't know how to use its more sophisticated application.

The Zornhau is not just a countercut in time, it "breaks all strokes from above with the point". It makes use of not just the idea of a single time response, but specifically what Aristotle calls a 'single imperfect time"; that is, the opposing force of the incoming blow actually facilitates the countercut's tranmutation into the point shooting forward.

As Bill Grandy has pointed out, one need seek no further than the excellent illustration in Paulus Kal to see how this should look (including the slight back foot weighting - that makes a HUGE difference). At the risk of appearing to be advertising, here's the plate in question, from the preview images for my book on Kal on the Chivalry Bookshelf:



Do this play *exactly* as Master Kal shows it and the results are astonishing. The Zornhau-Ort play that Liechtenauer first verses is the fundamental play of the system, and the key to the kinesthetics of everything else that follows in the Zettel.

Telegraphing in the Video

Unless I miss my guess, that's Jeff Basham in the video; given that he left ARMA some time ago, I'm therefore assuming that this video may or may not be an accurate reflection of how Mr. Clements now performs this technique.

That said, as Bill has already noted, the video is rife with false times. The bodies of both combatants noticeably lean forward before the point of the sword does, and the combatant on the right throws his elbows forward before committing the weapon. As Bill further notes, it's all too easy to make these mistakes. And, going further, it's another reason why the commentaries state that vom Tag is framed on the shoulder, not over it. The proper position quiets the elbows, prevents any unnecessary movement of the sword, and conceals much of your intent.

All the best,

Christian

Christian Henry Tobler
Order of Selohaar

Freelance Academy Press: Books on Western Martial Arts and Historical Swordsmanship

Author, In Saint George's Name: An Anthology of Medieval German Fighting Arts
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Off-topic Talk > Zornhaw Counters
Page 2 of 3 Reply to topic
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next All times are GMT - 8 Hours

View previous topic :: View next topic
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum






All contents © Copyright 2003-2024 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum