opinions on a different perspective

[Dan Sellars]

Miguel,

Thank you very much for coming here and writing your detailed response, I hope you stick around

I personally find your approach very intriguing.

Best Regards,
Dan.

[Jeremiah Smith]

Many thanks for the replies and explanations Miguel,

Like I have mentioned in this thread your approach gives much food for thought.
BTW

That might be seen at odds with the sources, which seems to convey the idea of the "meisterhau" as a "fight-ender", but if one reads Döbringer carefuly, he seems to work with the notion of a succesful meisterhau that doesn't hit the opponent, that in turn leads me to think that a meisterhau might be a risky way to try to strike a skilled opponent, but may be safer if taken (and executed) as a way to step into binding distance.

I don't think this is at odds at all since nearly every Source has many, many counters to the miesterhau. so clearly the authors of those sources didn't feel they were necessarily fight enders.

I do hope you stay around this forum to discuss this and other topics
welcome

[Mike Edelson]

That change came around when we realized, on one hand, that a complete
practical longsword fencing system cannot be reconstructed from the sources (that is, all interpretations of nowadays are, by definition, modern systems, no matter how much they try to adhere to the letter -or to the spirit- of the sources); and on the other, when we understood that fencing, no matter the sword typology, can be analized in biomechanical and geometrical
terms.

Hi Miguel,

Welcome to the HEMAA forums. While we have very different approaches to the arts, it makes me happy that more and more people are starting to recognize the above. I look forward to seeing more of your work.

[Mike Cartier]

I liked it even though it lacked some elements I would have added, but that's my opinion.

One thing I must add to this thread however is just how many people Seem to think they know exactly how German martial arts should look like. I think we are being a bit presumptuous to lay down judgement at this stage.

Too many people have a pre-defined idea of HEMA and then judge everything based upon that view, whether it's more binding or more cutting or more footwork Or whatever we need to all be a bit more receptive to different approaches. I tire very much of people who look at stuff and proclaim it as rubbish simply because it does not fit into their view of HEMA.

[Jeremiah Smith]

One thing I must add to this thread however is just how many people Seem to think they know exactly how German martial arts should look like. I think we are being a bit presumptuous to lay down judgement at this stage.

Too many people have a pre-defined idea of HEMA and then judge everything based upon that view, whether it's more binding or more cutting or more footwork Or whatever we need to all be a bit more receptive to different approaches. I tire very much of people who look at stuff and proclaim it as rubbish simply because it does not fit into their view of HEMA.

couldn't of said it better myself

[Mike Edelson]

I liked it even though it lacked some elements I would have added, but that's my opinion.

One thing I must add to this thread however is just how many people Seem to think they know exactly how German martial arts should look like. I think we are being a bit presumptuous to lay down judgement at this stage.

Too many people have a pre-defined idea of HEMA and then judge everything based upon that view, whether it's more binding or more cutting or more footwork Or whatever we need to all be a bit more receptive to different approaches. I tire very much of people who look at stuff and proclaim it as rubbish simply because it does not fit into their view of HEMA.

I'm very open to the idea that I have no clue what German martial arts should look like. Or rather, I have my theories, but I'm very comfortable with the idea that I am completely wrong, as that would lead to the joy of discovery that I have missed for many years.

However, since you mentioned cutting...when it comes to cutting, there are two possibilities. Either you believe the Europeans knew how to use their edges as well as the people of other cultures or you believe they didn't, for whatever reason (maybe they were clods?).

Assuming the former, it only takes one attempt to cut through period clothing (a couple of layers of linen and wool) to show you exactly how well you need to be able to cut if you claim to practice ernstfechten. So to respond to your statement, it's not more cutting or less cutting, it's can you use a real sword or can't you, and if not, would you like to learn.

In general I agree with you completely, even about cutting. People can approach it however they want and do it as little or as much as they want, only results count. But they do count.

[Jeffrey Hull]

I took it to mean the idea or advocacy of "more cutting [than thrusting]" - but no big deal either way - obviously Mike C. meant something helpful by it.

[Mike Edelson]

I took it to mean the idea or advocacy of "more cutting [than thrusting]" - but no big deal either way - obviously Mike C. meant something helpful by it.

Somehow I don't think anyone has ever been criticized for thrusting too much in our community, but there is a first time for everything.

[W.T.Heinz]

Way too much to +1 in this thread. It goes to 11.

[Andreas Engström]

Clearly many, if not all of the masters felt like the Krieg is the most important part of the fight, in fact the section of the ringeck gloss that says no one should learn to fence if they frighten easily is speaking specifically about the krieg.

Um. I would be very interested in how you could possibly say this. That part of the gloss doesn't say anything about Krieg at all. Krieg isn't mentioned even near it, in fact.

This is the Zettel on the Krieg (Dresden Ringeck):

dein krieg sich nicht gäch
Weß der krieg riempt
oben nÿder wirt er beschämpt

And this is the gloss
(Dresden Ringeck) Aber du solt dir mitt dem an hurten nicht zu° gauch laussen sÿn mitt dem krieg wenn der krieg ist nicht anders dann die winden am schwert
(Hans Medel's Ringeck) Aber dw sollt mit dem anhurten des kriegs nit zegach sein Wann der krieg ist nichtz anderst dann die winden in dem swert die sindt mislich zetreibenn wer die nit wol kan oder versteet

So. Both the Zettel and the glosses tell us that the first and foremost important thing about Krieg, the thing that everyone should know about it, is that you shouldn't be too hasty engaging in it (since it's extremely dangerous unless you know it extremely well).

You're absolutely right that the masters thought Krieg was very important, but my view is that it's seen as so important since it's the most dangerous and easily screwed up part of fighting, the one that you really need to train A LOT to do with any amount of safety.

The spaniards certainly train Krieg a lot and are probably quite awesome at it. But I do think that they have gone too far in that direction by now. Krieg isn't the whole of the fight, and shouldn't be sought deliberately.

-Andreas