| Author |
Message |
|
Hugh Knight
|
 Posted: Thu 31 Dec, 2009 9:34 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Jean Thibodeau wrote: | Well, I really like the Liechtenauer book and I find it a very good quick reference and look forward to the more complete and up to date version. For someone with a few years of training in this book is really ireally useful.
I just got the books yesterday ( 6 out of 8, 2 are back ordered and will ship next week I think ), and the shear volume of reading material means that I have only skimmed the content of each book, but I have to say I like what I have read so far: The photographs are clear enough and the action(s) well described in the text taking care to explain the sequences of actions not shown or when things have to happen in sequence(s) or in one fluid move since it's mostly a pic showing the starting position, a pic showing an important point in the action and a pic showing the ending position. ( Books all have this limitation and DVDs give a more complete idea of actions, beginners may need DVDs plus instruction in class but an experienced trainer can get a lot more out of just text and limited pics ).
Anyway, I find the supporting text well written and in " CLEAR LANGUAGE " as well as using the German terminology.
Bottom line I'm very pleased with all the books and the spiral binding is much better for constant use as reference during or before/after training as ordinary bindings get a beating when one is forced to bend back the spine of a book to get it to lie flat. |
Merci, Jean!
I'm glad you like the books, and I appreciate your kind words about them. I hope you find them useful. As I said before, if you have any questions or comments about the books I do hope you'll write me.
Regards,
Hugh
www.schlachtschule.org
|
|
    |
 |
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Thu 31 Dec, 2009 5:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hugh Knight wrote: | [
Merci, Jean!
I'm glad you like the books, and I appreciate your kind words about them. I hope you find them useful. As I said before, if you have any questions or comments about the books I do hope you'll write me. |
I'll certainly ask questions either privately or on the Forums here when I have specific ones and I might try get you and my instructors to have discussions also after they have a chance to look at the books.
One question or observation off the top of my head is about the approach to sword and buckler that is different than the 1:33 style that seems to be the one most people know about.
From quick skimming it seems like there is less of an emphasis on the guards and fewer of them and more of the sword used in ways reminiscent of Liechtenauer style of longsword with the added elements of the buckler creating opportunities for the sword to be used unopposed by the other's sword. ( way oversimplifying things ).
I have taken 1:33 for a couple of training seasons and I must admit that I found it more complex or confusing than longsword and more dependant, at least initially, in opposing specific attacks by specific wards but with a less clear emphasis on basic principles i.e I had less of an intuitive feel for the tactical or less of and idea of what I was trying to accomplish and had to concentrate more on a rigid pattern of responses to specifics !? A lot of this because with longsword I have a few years of training behind me but also because the many guards/wards create a certain information overload ?
Anyway, at a first quick read of the basic principles of your book it would seem to me that my " skills" learned with longsword would help me perform better quicker and have a " plan " rather than being somewhat confused by the complexities of 1:33 ?
I'm sure with enough practice 1:33 is a viable and effective system but other styles may be simpler, use fewer guards and more intuitive. ? As well, this alternate system of sword and buckler might " surprise " someone only trained in the 1:33 style ? Anyway, let me know if these early observations are accurate.   
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
|
|
|
Felix R.
|
| Posted: Fri 01 Jan, 2010 3:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
There definately are basic principles behind I:33, but when focussing on the "play by play" setup of the manuscript, they are nt so obvious on first glance.
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Fri 01 Jan, 2010 5:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Felix R. wrote: | | There definately are basic principles behind I:33, but when focussing on the "play by play" setup of the manuscript, they are nt so obvious on first glance. |
Yeah, you said it very well in much fewer words. 
It just takes much more time to see a pattern or rather get the tactile feel of what is going on: I think that having some longsword experience helped in a way with the feel ( hard, soft, firm in the bind and windings etc ..... ) but at the same time initially the abundance of guards focuses one's attention on details rather than overall principles or flow !?
Well this is also an effect of feeling like a beginner again.
I'm not saying that 1:33 isn't a very good system but at just a very superficial reading of Hugh's approach it seems more direct and would ( might ) be faster to learn when one already has some longsword training.
At the end of the last session ( took 2 sessions: Not two days but two 15 day blocks of sessions ) I was just starting to get it I think and it seemed that once one got into bouting I would use some of what I learned with 1:33 but using my longsword skills basic principle. Haven't done 1:33 for a long enough time for it to become a "system " as much as a series of plays or exercises.
Lately I have been practising staff and with staff much of the feel of longsword could be used from the very first sessions and in bouting and duels the integration of skills seemed easier i.e skill transfer from one to the other.
I still concentrate more on longsword and mostly the other " arts " I'm sampling in turn but it's difficult to do justice to all the different weapon types in terms of time and effort put in just because of how many times a week one can train and not " POOP OUT " from exhaustion. ( Currently I'm training 2 to 3 time a week with longsword and staff in total, not 2 or 3 time each ...... ).
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hugh Knight
|
| Posted: Fri 01 Jan, 2010 10:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jean Thibodeau wrote: | | Felix R. wrote: | | There definately are basic principles behind I:33, but when focussing on the "play by play" setup of the manuscript, they are nt so obvious on first glance. |
Yeah, you said it very well in much fewer words.
It just takes much more time to see a pattern or rather get the tactile feel of what is going on: I think that having some longsword experience helped in a way with the feel ( hard, soft, firm in the bind and windings etc ..... ) but at the same time initially the abundance of guards focuses one's attention on details rather than overall principles or flow !?
Well this is also an effect of feeling like a beginner again.
I'm not saying that 1:33 isn't a very good system but at just a very superficial reading of Hugh's approach it seems more direct and would ( might ) be faster to learn when one already has some longsword training.
At the end of the last session ( took 2 sessions: Not two days but two 15 day blocks of sessions ) I was just starting to get it I think and it seemed that once one got into bouting I would use some of what I learned with 1:33 but using my longsword skills basic principle. Haven't done 1:33 for a long enough time for it to become a "system " as much as a series of plays or exercises.
Lately I have been practising staff and with staff much of the feel of longsword could be used from the very first sessions and in bouting and duels the integration of skills seemed easier i.e skill transfer from one to the other.
I still concentrate more on longsword and mostly the other " arts " I'm sampling in turn but it's difficult to do justice to all the different weapon types in terms of time and effort put in just because of how many times a week one can train and not " POOP OUT " from exhaustion. ( Currently I'm training 2 to 3 time a week with longsword and staff in total, not 2 or 3 time each ...... ). |
Hello Jean,
I wouldn't call it *my* approach: All I did was connect the material from the Liechtenauer Society masters (well, plus Talhoffer if we don't want to give him that association) and merge them together.
Nor is it surprising that such a system would be more comfortable to someone who’d spent a lot of time working with the longsword: After all, the backbone of the material I presented comes from Andreas Lignitzer, whose instruction was bundled into both the Ringeck and von Danzig Fechtbücher (among others), and which was probably developed directly from Liechtenauer’s longsword.
Consider Lignitzer’s first play. What’s in it? A bind from the Zornhau, the Zornhau Ort and the First Winden, plus a technique somewhat like the Zucken shown with a step in the later part of his material (not the one shown in the plays of the Zornhau). Yes, these techniques have been modified for use with a shorter sword and a buckler, but even the sequence is the same as it is presented in Ringeck. The same kind of comparison can be made for most of his other plays; even Lignitzer’s Wechselhau is in Ringeck, as part of the plays of the Nebenhut.
I.33, in addition to being open to broader interpretation than other S&B sources, is clearly of a different line of study than the Liechtenauer school, regardless of some superficial lexicological similarities. Thus, it obviously represents a different set of root concepts from that you’ve learned with the longsword. This is why we don’t study that system in my Schule, and why it isn’t discussed in my book.
As for guards, well, I don't want to get into that too deeply for fear of causing yet *another* set of vitriolic responses on this list, but let's just say I agree with Liechtenauer that fewer is better.
Regards,
Hugh
www.schlachtschule.org
|
|
|
|
|
Christopher VaughnStrever
|
| Posted: Mon 04 Jan, 2010 12:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have recieved this new book in my hands entitled "The Play of the Axe: Medieval Pollaxe Combat" by Hugh T. Knight.
Also I recieved the book on grappling and dagger.
I have read through the first 17 pages thus far and am enthusied with joy of the material I am reading. All the information is presented in a non-bias way; Of which is from a collective work of several original sources. One issue that I absolutly love about this book is that the original german and english words are provided of key words and their original meanings are presented along with how the words are used with a different meaning today.
The spiral binding makes this book feel cmfortable to use, rather than a stiff hard cover, or a soft paper back cover; this book can be held so as to view a single page and cradled to read with one arm, while you sip on a beverage with your other hand.
I also love the appendix, that is very helpful for refernce. I bought a pollaxe from A&A and this book within the first 17 pages has taught me more than I could have imagined. I am truly happy with this product and would encourage anyone to buy this book. I have a couple of questions, though without the book in front of me there is only one question to present at this moment. . .
Dear Mr. Hugh Knight,
I was wondering if you could some-how help me to pronounce the words properly. I will be speaking to people that know nothing of medieval history (other than the history channel, nothing more be said there) I want to be able to pronounce these words properly, such as...
Fecht, Fechten, Fechtmeister, Fechtbuch, Le Jeu De La Hache, Johanes Leichtenauer (sorry if I mis-spell'd that one) Kunst Des, croix, and a few others I cannot call to mind.
Experience and learning from such defines maturity, not a number of age
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Mon 04 Jan, 2010 2:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hugh Knight wrote: |
Hello Jean,
I wouldn't call it *my* approach: All I did was connect the material from the Liechtenauer Society masters (well, plus Talhoffer if we don't want to give him that association) and merge them together.
I.33, in addition to being open to broader interpretation than other S&B sources, is clearly of a different line of study than the Liechtenauer school, regardless of some superficial lexicological similarities. Thus, it obviously represents a different set of root concepts from that you’ve learned with the longsword. This is why we don’t study that system in my Schule, and why it isn’t discussed in my book.
As for guards, well, I don't want to get into that too deeply for fear of causing yet *another* set of vitriolic responses on this list, but let's just say I agree with Liechtenauer that fewer is better. |
( NOTE: Shortened to not clutter up the post and read the full post by Hugh )
Well, it is a " different " approach and I find it useful to have a different approach to compare with 1:33.
I also don't want this Topic to get into which is better but it is useful to see that there is more than one way to use a sword and buckler. To what degree someone very used to 1:33 would want to also add from a different system and see if they can be integrated into a personal style ? When preserving the original teaching one may well prefer to keep the instruction to the best current interpretations of 1:33 so as to not change it's nature but for one's personal growth one can try a different system and see what they have that would be compatible and what would be very different.
Honestly I'm not advanced enough to have a very technical discussion about it but I do want to show your book to my instructor and see what he thinks of it.
Again, very happy with all the books.
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hugh Knight
|
| Posted: Mon 04 Jan, 2010 3:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Christopher VaughnStrever wrote: | I have recieved this new book in my hands entitled "The Play of the Axe: Medieval Pollaxe Combat" by Hugh T. Knight.
Also I recieved the book on grappling and dagger.
I have read through the first 17 pages thus far and am enthusied with joy of the material I am reading. All the information is presented in a non-bias way; Of which is from a collective work of several original sources. One issue that I absolutly love about this book is that the original german and english words are provided of key words and their original meanings are presented along with how the words are used with a different meaning today.
The spiral binding makes this book feel cmfortable to use, rather than a stiff hard cover, or a soft paper back cover; this book can be held so as to view a single page and cradled to read with one arm, while you sip on a beverage with your other hand.
I also love the appendix, that is very helpful for refernce. I bought a pollaxe from A&A and this book within the first 17 pages has taught me more than I could have imagined. I am truly happy with this product and would encourage anyone to buy this book. I have a couple of questions, though without the book in front of me there is only one question to present at this moment. . . |
Thank you very much for your kind compliments. I am very pleased that the book is so interesting for you.
| Quote: | | I was wondering if you could some-how help me to pronounce the words properly. I will be speaking to people that know nothing of medieval history (other than the history channel, nothing more be said there) I want to be able to pronounce these words properly, such as... |
Unfortunately, while I can pronounce these words, I'm not sure how to reproduce them phonetically. For example, Fecht isn't just "fekt" as I write it below, it has a gutteral sound with the "k" sound, but English has no similar sound I can point to as an example. As a result, the examples below aren't very accurate--they come out sounding like an American would say them without any attempt at a real German pronunciation. I'm sorry, you'll have to find a German speaker and ask him to say them for you. Also, be aware that there are several different dialects of German, and they say the same words somewhat differently. For example, one pronunciation I've heard for Liechtenauer sounds something like "leeshtenhour."
Fecht = "Fekt"
Fechten = "Fekten"
Fechtmeister = "Fektmyster"
Fechtbuch = "Fektbook
Le Jeu De La Hache = "Leh jew de la hosh"
Johanes Leichtenauer = "Yohanness Leecktenhour"
Kunst Des = "Koonst dehs"
croix = "Qua"
I hope this helps, but it's really pretty bad. Again, I can say it, but I'm just not sure how to write it phonetically.
Regards,
Hugh
www.schlachtschule.org
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hugh Knight
|
| Posted: Mon 04 Jan, 2010 3:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jean Thibodeau wrote: | | I also don't want this Topic to get into which is better but it is useful to see that there is more than one way to use a sword and buckler. To what degree someone very used to 1:33 would want to also add from a different system and see if they can be integrated into a personal style ? When preserving the original teaching one may well prefer to keep the instruction to the best current interpretations of 1:33 so as to not change it's nature but for one's personal growth one can try a different system and see what they have that would be compatible and what would be very different. |
Thank you very much for the compliment.
As for mixing the systems, I am very strongly opposed to that. We study these arts to resurrect lost *historical* arts, not to make up new ones so we can be better swordsmen. We have no need for skill at swordsmanship today, so such "improvement" is unjustified; our only justification is in bringing back something that was lost. Call it experimental archeology.
The sources I combined in my book are all connected--quite literally. There are techniques in Lignitzer that are in Paulus Kal, and techniques in Paulus Kal that are in Talhoffer. All are, arguably, teachers of the Liechtenauer tradition; I'll admit Talhoffer is out at the edge, but there's just too much overlap with Kal (a *definite* Liechtenauer Society master) to leave him out.
I.33, on the other hand, represents a completely different system, and one that should not be combined with Liechtenauer's system because doing so creates a modern system rather than recreating an historical one.
Regards,
Hugh
www.schlachtschule.org
|
|
|
|
|
Christopher VaughnStrever
|
| Posted: Mon 04 Jan, 2010 6:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I do understand and can pronounce the german dialect through the phonetics, for example... as you mention'd about the "k" sound.
I know I am mis reading some words. What you provided is perfect for me to get that "correct pronounciation" Thank you
Experience and learning from such defines maturity, not a number of age
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Mon 04 Jan, 2010 7:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hugh Knight wrote: |
I.33, on the other hand, represents a completely different system, and one that should not be combined with Liechtenauer's system because doing so creates a modern system rather than recreating an historical one. |
I can understand the value of keeping the systems separate and in re-creating the original systems: This is a way of keeping in check a certain style " drift " that would change the original arts instead of preserving them.
At the same time I wouldn't completely exclude exploring a modern style or a combination of various styles but then the goal is different: It's would be more a personal goal of understanding/mastering the skills independently of historical context.
I can see where this could be a problem if one can't keep these two very different reasons for training distinct and separate.
Since 1:33 is a 14th century system and the Liechtenauer system is more 15th century I wonder if the " pure " 1:33 system was still in general use or known at the same time that the techniques based on the Liechtenauer system where also in use ?
A later practitioner of 1:33 might also be competent in the Liechtenauer system and some mixed use might have been possible ? I could compare it to the German longsword style versus the Italian longsword styles existing at the same time period, although a German style practitioner might want to keep his style " pure " he would have to be aware of the Italian system should he have to fight someone of that style ..... would he thus incorporate some of the Italian style ? Maybe rivalries between styles would generally keep the styles distinct among the sword masters teaching the various styles but some individual fighters might just learn and use whatever worked and not over worry about keeping styles " pure " ?
Anyway, probably too many unanswerable questions here.
Oh, one could say that our plate is full just trying to figure out the historical systems without the added complexities of mixing and matching historical styles or inventing new stuff.
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hugh Knight
|
| Posted: Mon 04 Jan, 2010 8:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jean Thibodeau wrote: | | Oh, one could say that our plate is full just trying to figure out the historical systems without the added complexities of mixing and matching historical styles or inventing new stuff. |
I would shout that. Loudly.
Regards,
Hugh
www.schlachtschule.org
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Marechal
|
| Posted: Tue 05 Jan, 2010 12:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Quote: | | I was wondering if you could some-how help me to pronounce the words properly. I will be speaking to people that know nothing of medieval history (other than the history channel, nothing more be said there) I want to be able to pronounce these words properly, such as... |
Unfortunately, while I can pronounce these words, I'm not sure how to reproduce them phonetically. For example, Fecht isn't just "fekt" as I write it below, it has a gutteral sound with the "k" sound, but English has no similar sound I can point to as an example.
Fecht = "Fekt"
|
Wikipedia to the rescue! It's not a k sound, it's a hard g sound, something not known in English (except certain dialects like Scottish). The proper term is voiceless velar fricative and it's phonetic symbol is [x]. The Wikipedia article I linked has some sound samples.
I'm Dutch so the hard g is native to me. Let me know if you want me to record some sound samples. My German pronunciation will have some Dutch accent of course but it's bound to be better than what a native English speaker can try to figure out from reading phonetics. Or perhaps some native German speaker here can record some samples?
|
|
 |
|
M. Eversberg II
|
| Posted: Tue 05 Jan, 2010 1:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hm, I've been saying it wrong for ages! I'd always heard it as fecht, with a CH as from chair. Sounds like feched, kind of.
M.
This space for rent or lease.
|
|
   |
|
Steven Reich
Location: Arlington, VA Joined: 28 Oct 2003
Posts: 237
|
| Posted: Tue 05 Jan, 2010 5:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| M. Eversberg II wrote: | | Hm, I've been saying it wrong for ages! I'd always heard it as fecht, with a CH as from chair. Sounds like feched, kind of. |
The easiest way to hear the 'ch' sound (for this word, as there are actually two in German) is to listen to a beginning German learning tape and listen for the word 'ich' (English 'I'), such as 'Ich bin ein Berliner'. We have nothing like it in English, so it will probably sound like someone with a slight speech impediment saying 'ish'.
Note that the two sounds are similar and are generally determined by the preceding vowel.
If it is a front vowel ('i', 'e', any vowel with an umlaut, etc.), it will sound as detailed above.
If it is a back vowel ('a', 'o', 'u', etc.), it will sound like the 'ch' in the Scottish 'loch' or German 'acht' ('eight').
Of course, 'ch' can be pronounced differently in loanwords, but we won't worry about that.
Steve
Founder of NoVA-Assalto, an affiliate of the HEMA Alliance
|
|
|
|
|
Christopher VaughnStrever
|
| Posted: Tue 05 Jan, 2010 5:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | Sander Marechal
I'm Dutch so the hard g is native to me. Let me know if you want me to record some sound samples. My German pronunciation will have some Dutch accent of course but it's bound to be better than what a native English speaker can try to figure out from reading phonetics. |
If that would not be too much trouble to make a small recording, I would greatly appreciate that. The mention of the hard G helps me to be more accurate in speech. the link helps only to a degree, though with the purchase of previous books on how to learn another language, when I heard the real spoken language; there was a large difference from reading about it and hearing it.
I guess a recording through a video on youtube or something of the sort? or a sound file through e-mail?
On a side note...
I would take on learning the german language and buy some audio tapes if that was my intent, however I am only interested in the medieval terms and words (some of which are french and other languages then German) and a beginners audio tape to the german language is not the exact route I wish to take.
P.S. This degree of the topic could take on to a seperate thread, however since I am focusing on the words in the book of the Author at hand. Then I'll keep it here until advised to do other-wise.
Experience and learning from such defines maturity, not a number of age
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Marechal
|
| Posted: Tue 05 Jan, 2010 6:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Christopher VaughnStrever wrote: | | Quote: | Sander Marechal
I'm Dutch so the hard g is native to me. Let me know if you want me to record some sound samples. My German pronunciation will have some Dutch accent of course but it's bound to be better than what a native English speaker can try to figure out from reading phonetics. |
If that would not be too much trouble to make a small recording, I would greatly appreciate that. |
Here you go. I hope it's audible. I recorded this with my netbook's built-in microphone. Let me know if the quality isn't good enough or if you would like me to pronounce some other words/sentences as well (e.g. the names of the guards and strikes).
|
|
|
|
|
Vincent Le Chevalier
|
| Posted: Tue 05 Jan, 2010 7:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Hugh Knight wrote: | Le Jeu De La Hache = "Leh jew de la hosh"
croix = "Qua" |
Perhaps I can give some details about these...
'Le' and 'de' have the same vowel which is pronounced pretty much in the same way you'd pronounce the 'u' in 'butter'. The vowel in 'Jeu' is very close to that too, only the lips are more tight, not quite as much as when you do the vowel in 'you' but in that direction, if you see what I mean. 'Hache' is pronounced very similarly to the English 'ash'. I wouldn't transcribe it with an 'o' (but this might be due to my own misconceptions about the pronunciation of English words ).
'Croix' is actually closer to 'croa' sound wise with a very short 'o'... There is a definite 'r' in there that is not silent, rather it is an intermediate between the English 'r' and a more guttural variant as can be heard in Spanish (the 'j' for them). I'm not quite up to date on the pronunciation of ancient French but it might even have been a rolling 'r' like you also have in Spanish and Italian.
Regards,
--
Vincent
Ensis Sub Caelo
|
|
|
|
|
Christopher VaughnStrever
|
| Posted: Tue 05 Jan, 2010 8:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
Vincent, thank you for those tips, those will be valuable in my understanding a little more on those words/letter sounds.
Sander, Oh my goodness thank you, that was perfect, My pronounciation was very close to your audible bits, so I am very happy to know that I am on the right track. Not exactly today (Rather, in a couple of days) but do you think I could put a list of about 10~15 words that you could record like that? Again, Thank you so much for those bits!
Experience and learning from such defines maturity, not a number of age
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Marechal
|
| Posted: Tue 05 Jan, 2010 3:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Christopher VaughnStrever wrote: | | Do you think I could put a list of about 10~15 words that you could record like that? Again, Thank you so much for those bits! |
Sure, no problem. Just post them here and I will record them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
This is a standard topic