11 minutes video that takes 30 minutes to watch for the 1st time. 1st attempt - you watch it whole. 2nd attempt you watch without audio, 3rd attempt you only listen to audio. And than there's digesting, which requires you to lock yourself for 3 hours in a quiet room. I don't know how you managed to squeeze in so much info, but it's both highly educational and fun to watch. Excellent work.
@@Sprechfenster nah, I'm just fully apprecing the amount of work put into this video. There's layers of info in it and one has to spend some time to do justice to this project. Also, having been practicing HEMA for over 4 years I constantly realize how much more I have to learn. Thanks!
I watch this like fifth time, and probably going to watch it some more :D (edit one year after - after reading Hammer's translation of the codex I appreciate amount of work you put here even more)
I really like your videos and analysis of matters. This content is more than just a light watch. You actually need to focus while watching and listening. And to get it one already must have good theoretical and practical understanding of matters being discussed. Which is awesome. Thank you for making these and keep going.
Thank you, Simas! This is exactly what I hoped for the videos to be like, so your words really 'make my heart soar like an eagle', to quote a classic ;) Also, great thanks for supporting me on Patreon!
Great video and amazing timing , we have just finished zorn and schiel and we’re about to start winden This will be useful as the schiessen videos were
Thanks a lot! If you ever have time and feel like sharing what exactly this vid helped you with, then don't hesitate to describe it in the comment. I am genuinely curious!
While reading your article and seeing your interpretation of "hängen" as "anhängen", my mind took a little leap. Anhängen also once had the meaning of "getting caught on". In high german this meaning is not really in use anymore, but thesauruses still seem to list "Festhängen" (which means exactly "being caught on") as a possible synonym. I came to the connection because in my native dialect (swiss german) is is still commonly used with this meaning. From there my mind went further to this experiment: www.hemacutting.com/home/2016/5/22/we-fought-with-sharps-so-you-dont-have-to, where one conclusion was that to get a strong edge-on-edge bind, where the edges bite and "get caught" on each other, the blades have to be near-perpendicular to each other. Which is a position that assuming a Hängen seems to frequently result in. Might it be possible that the Hängen also served the purpose of getting this strong bind (getting the opponents blade to get "caught on" ones own) in order to better control it during the following Winden, and this was where the name is derived from?
Thanks a lot for this remark! One question - how did exactly "anhängen" function in sentences? Did it (does it?) mean something like "to get caught on a spider's web"? Or something different?
@@Sprechfenster Not really for spider webs, because that is an adhesive effect, which is usually described differently (even in english I think you'd rather say "caught *in* a spiders web). But it is used for something like "my jacket got caught on the doorknob", which would be "mini jagge het a de türfalle aghänkt" in swiss german. Or things like "I jumped over the fence, but my foot got caught on the wire", "I was dismounting my bike when my shoelace got caught on the pedal", etc.
@@Sprechfenster Basically yes. Now, *hooking* specifically would be "einhängen" oder "einhaken", which are both valid translations for hooking in high german. The swiss use of "anhängen" has a lot of the connotations of hooking, except that there don't have to be any hook-analogous shapes involved, which "einhängen" kind of does imply.
Nicely done. ms3227a was always a tricky manuscript to understand and this is going to be useful. Though, I have some questions. First, Peter von Danzig says that the lower hanging is pflug(not the alber like ms3227a style, but the one usually called 'the plow' pointing the opponent from below), and the upper hanging is ochs itself. Do you think, that notions of hanging might have changed through decades? Second, Joachim Meyer says that 'winden' is also called 'wenden'. Wich implies that he made no distinction between those two notions. What do you think about this? I know that this research video only took ms3227a as a reference, but in the larger context, both masters I've mentioned and Hans Doebringer, writer of ms3227a, follow Liechtenauer's teachings so I think they shouldn't be so much deference in notions. Any thoughts?
Hi, thanks for the encouragement and the questions. I'll try to answer them in the order you used: 1) Yes, I believe that particular concepts and interpretations within the Liechtenauerian tradition may have evolved or changed over time, differing between time periods and/or between different masters of the school. 2) I didn't know that and it's really interesting. Hs3227a makes it completely clear that 'winden' and 'wenden' are two distinct things, perhaps because its author already saw that they were mistaken for one another. At the same time, later Liechtenauerian fight books, such as Pseudo-Danzig, Ringeck, or Lew, don't use 'wenden' at all. So its reappearance in Meyer but as a mere synonym to 'winden' is very intriguing and actually answers your first question - the notions did indeed change over time. 3) First of all, Hanko Doebringer wasn't the author of Hs3227a. He was just one of the "other masters" mentioned in the book whose was added in the margin, because the scribe forgot about him initially. We don't know who authored Hs3227a. And as for differences, Hs3227a shows that there were, sometimes very profound, dissimilarities between different commentators of Liechtenauer's verses, suggesting that his teachings were not a rigid, very well-defined body of knowledge, but rather a set of guidelines open to interpretation. Perhaps, and this is my personal best bet, none of the masters writing the fight books surviving today were taught directly by Liechtenauer or his immediate students. Perhaps they were all reconstructing Liechtenauerian system based on their own knowledge of fighting and the versified text of the Zettel?
@@Sprechfenster Thank you for your detailed opinions! Your contents are always really interesting since my stubborn ARMA colleagues are usually too absorbed to J.C's opinion, mostly old or flawed theory, which I often disagree. Please don't stop making these useful research contents!
stupid question, but is there a filter ontop of your videos that deletes comments with swearwords? Cause I wrote two comments that have swearwords in them and they don't appear. The weren't mean either- One was a compliment as in "fu*king awesome" and the other one was confused me trying to figure something out. So it wouldn't make sense to delete them. Maybe for the second one, because I wrote lots (and I mean a lot) of strange stuff.
Hello Petriczek, it is a strange situation, since I got a notification about one of your earlier comments (with a detailed and insightful argument), but I could not see it here. So I assumed that you must have deleted the comment for some reason and forgot about the whole thing. Fortunately I can see this one :) So, if you want, try posting your original comment once more or, if you prefer, simply drop me a PM. Bests! P.S. I never block or delete comments unless they violate basic human decency ;)
@@Sprechfenster I think the comment is so long it belongs under spam. Can you see it in the spam folder? I tried to seperate it, but it just doesn't get sent, or just half of it.
At 2:53 isn't that a Scheitelhaw instead? (also, the guy is bending his wrists too much and using the joints to stop the strike - instead of the body structure. this can cause health issues in a few years. keep safe!)
Well, 'a few years' have passed quite some time ago in my case and I don't complain so far ;) But jokes aside, thank you for taking the time to point to some important questions. 1) Schietelhaw vs Zornhaw My knowledge of the Schietelhaw is almost non-existent (3227a lacks the glossa to this strike), but the action presented in the video meets all the requirements of the Zornhaw as laid out in the Nuremberg Codex, which is the only fight book I investigate (also, you may want to check this interpretation by Anton Kuhutovic and his crew: ua-cam.com/video/sMVNKpHTY5A/v-deo.html). 2) wrists & structure If you take time to watch the fragment in question carefully, you will notice that the striking part of the movement, that is until when the sword would meet the opponent's weapon, has a neutral wrist position and thus what we may call 'structure'. The rest is just a thrust - again, this execution is in line with the Nuremberg Codex, but not with, say, Codex Danzig, where the action is clearly separated into a parry and a riposte. In consequence, in the presented execution the wrists are not loaded too much. Note that the force of this strike is not directed downwards, which would put great pressure on the wrists, as you pointed out rightly. Instead, the force is directed forward, by extending the point, and thus the wrists do not have to stop the sword - the weapon stops effortlessly when it reaches the full extension (because it has nowhere else to go). Of course, it is much easier to show this in person, than to convey in writing. Nevertheless, I agree that structure is extremely important and I, to my best ability, pay much attention to it. At the same time, it is worth remembering that the structure does not preclude nor replace proper joint conditioning.
Very interesting, though very dense...I think videos with less info and more time on examples would help a lot. Vey good work non the less, thanks a lot.
We are still discussing different formats, but at the moment we feel that 'dense' vids are the way to go for us as they remain rather rare in HEMA. But your comment is appreciated a lot. Thank you!
@@Sprechfenster I think you'd be teaching/helping more people by not compacting so much information into such a short amount of time. It kind of defeats the purpose if most people have to go back and rewatch it a dozen times just to retain the information. Unless you're just trying to get as many views as possible, cause I guess that's a way to do it, though it's offputting. Regardless, very informative and fun to watch.
@@gwynbleidd1917 Farming views has never been my goal (I don't monetise this channel). These Project Hausbuch videos are meant as companions to equally dense articles (links in the description) which document my progress in the research work I am conducting on the Nuremberg Codex. Having said that, I really intended this video to be shorter, but in the course of research I had to expand it, as described in the article. I'll try to make the next one more approachable. Thanks for the comment!
Winden seems to denote the offensive component there - the move which brings the sword in a position where it can directly hurt the opponent, be it by cutting, thrusting or slicing. In modern Olympic fencing terms it could be translated as a 'transport' (when you move the opponent's blade to a different hanging , e.g. 7:49) or an 'attack on the blade/attaque au fer' (when you attack while still binding the opponent's blade, e.g. 7:57). The second type of Winden may also include attack with angulation (e.g. 10:15).
![Akademia Szermierzy - Countering the Direct Attack [ENG SUB]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/gTCuZlThAGs/mqdefault.jpg)
This is what HEMA is all about. Sword in one hand, book in the other. Thanks so much for making these videos.
Thank you, if it helps with your journey, then I am happy and motivated :)
11 minutes video that takes 30 minutes to watch for the 1st time. 1st attempt - you watch it whole. 2nd attempt you watch without audio, 3rd attempt you only listen to audio. And than there's digesting, which requires you to lock yourself for 3 hours in a quiet room. I don't know how you managed to squeeze in so much info, but it's both highly educational and fun to watch. Excellent work.
Gosh, what *you* do sounds like a lot of work! Glad you enjoy it ;)
@@Sprechfenster nah, I'm just fully apprecing the amount of work put into this video. There's layers of info in it and one has to spend some time to do justice to this project. Also, having been practicing HEMA for over 4 years I constantly realize how much more I have to learn. Thanks!
@@TheGeorgianOne Thank you!
I watch this like fifth time, and probably going to watch it some more :D
(edit one year after - after reading Hammer's translation of the codex I appreciate amount of work you put here even more)
I really like your videos and analysis of matters.
This content is more than just a light watch. You actually need to focus while watching and listening.
And to get it one already must have good theoretical and practical understanding of matters being discussed. Which is awesome.
Thank you for making these and keep going.
Thank you, Simas! This is exactly what I hoped for the videos to be like, so your words really 'make my heart soar like an eagle', to quote a classic ;) Also, great thanks for supporting me on Patreon!
This is a hell of a lot to take in all at once, but nice to look at. I hope one day to be this good.
Great video and amazing timing , we have just finished zorn and schiel and we’re about to start winden
This will be useful as the schiessen videos were
I hope so, then! And looking forward to vids from your classes and experiments - the ones you produced about schiessen were very interesting!
Thank you, this cleared up a lot!
Thanks a lot! If you ever have time and feel like sharing what exactly this vid helped you with, then don't hesitate to describe it in the comment. I am genuinely curious!
While reading your article and seeing your interpretation of "hängen" as "anhängen", my mind took a little leap. Anhängen also once had the meaning of "getting caught on". In high german this meaning is not really in use anymore, but thesauruses still seem to list "Festhängen" (which means exactly "being caught on") as a possible synonym. I came to the connection because in my native dialect (swiss german) is is still commonly used with this meaning.
From there my mind went further to this experiment: www.hemacutting.com/home/2016/5/22/we-fought-with-sharps-so-you-dont-have-to, where one conclusion was that to get a strong edge-on-edge bind, where the edges bite and "get caught" on each other, the blades have to be near-perpendicular to each other. Which is a position that assuming a Hängen seems to frequently result in. Might it be possible that the Hängen also served the purpose of getting this strong bind (getting the opponents blade to get "caught on" ones own) in order to better control it during the following Winden, and this was where the name is derived from?
Thanks a lot for this remark! One question - how did exactly "anhängen" function in sentences? Did it (does it?) mean something like "to get caught on a spider's web"? Or something different?
@@Sprechfenster Not really for spider webs, because that is an adhesive effect, which is usually described differently (even in english I think you'd rather say "caught *in* a spiders web). But it is used for something like "my jacket got caught on the doorknob", which would be "mini jagge het a de türfalle aghänkt" in swiss german. Or things like "I jumped over the fence, but my foot got caught on the wire", "I was dismounting my bike when my shoelace got caught on the pedal", etc.
@@temporaryvisitor1285 Oh, I see. So there is a 'hooking aspect' into it, right? Very interesting, thank you!
@@Sprechfenster Basically yes. Now, *hooking* specifically would be "einhängen" oder "einhaken", which are both valid translations for hooking in high german. The swiss use of "anhängen" has a lot of the connotations of hooking, except that there don't have to be any hook-analogous shapes involved, which "einhängen" kind of does imply.
@@temporaryvisitor1285 Got it, thank you again!
Nicely done. ms3227a was always a tricky manuscript to understand and this is going to be useful. Though, I have some questions.
First, Peter von Danzig says that the lower hanging is pflug(not the alber like ms3227a style, but the one usually called 'the plow' pointing the opponent from below), and the upper hanging is ochs itself. Do you think, that notions of hanging might have changed through decades?
Second, Joachim Meyer says that 'winden' is also called 'wenden'. Wich implies that he made no distinction between those two notions. What do you think about this?
I know that this research video only took ms3227a as a reference, but in the larger context, both masters I've mentioned and Hans Doebringer, writer of ms3227a, follow Liechtenauer's teachings so I think they shouldn't be so much deference in notions. Any thoughts?
Hi,
thanks for the encouragement and the questions. I'll try to answer them in the order you used:
1) Yes, I believe that particular concepts and interpretations within the Liechtenauerian tradition may have evolved or changed over time, differing between time periods and/or between different masters of the school.
2) I didn't know that and it's really interesting. Hs3227a makes it completely clear that 'winden' and 'wenden' are two distinct things, perhaps because its author already saw that they were mistaken for one another. At the same time, later Liechtenauerian fight books, such as Pseudo-Danzig, Ringeck, or Lew, don't use 'wenden' at all. So its reappearance in Meyer but as a mere synonym to 'winden' is very intriguing and actually answers your first question - the notions did indeed change over time.
3) First of all, Hanko Doebringer wasn't the author of Hs3227a. He was just one of the "other masters" mentioned in the book whose was added in the margin, because the scribe forgot about him initially. We don't know who authored Hs3227a. And as for differences, Hs3227a shows that there were, sometimes very profound, dissimilarities between different commentators of Liechtenauer's verses, suggesting that his teachings were not a rigid, very well-defined body of knowledge, but rather a set of guidelines open to interpretation. Perhaps, and this is my personal best bet, none of the masters writing the fight books surviving today were taught directly by Liechtenauer or his immediate students. Perhaps they were all reconstructing Liechtenauerian system based on their own knowledge of fighting and the versified text of the Zettel?
@@Sprechfenster Thank you for your detailed opinions! Your contents are always really interesting since my stubborn ARMA colleagues are usually too absorbed to J.C's opinion, mostly old or flawed theory, which I often disagree. Please don't stop making these useful research contents!
@@тача́нка-з4ф I am not stopping anytime soon! :) Thank you again!
Tell me please, add subtitles in English to the video, as to the previous one?
Will do, but I need to spend Easter time with my family first.
stupid question, but is there a filter ontop of your videos that deletes comments with swearwords?
Cause I wrote two comments that have swearwords in them and they don't appear.
The weren't mean either- One was a compliment as in "fu*king awesome" and the other one was confused me trying to figure something out.
So it wouldn't make sense to delete them. Maybe for the second one, because I wrote lots (and I mean a lot) of strange stuff.
Hello Petriczek,
it is a strange situation, since I got a notification about one of your earlier comments (with a detailed and insightful argument), but I could not see it here. So I assumed that you must have deleted the comment for some reason and forgot about the whole thing. Fortunately I can see this one :)
So, if you want, try posting your original comment once more or, if you prefer, simply drop me a PM.
Bests!
P.S. I never block or delete comments unless they violate basic human decency ;)
@@Sprechfenster I think the comment is so long it belongs under spam. Can you see it in the spam folder?
I tried to seperate it, but it just doesn't get sent, or just half of it.
@@petritzky Frankly, I am not sure if I know where to look for spam on YT... :/
At 2:53 isn't that a Scheitelhaw instead? (also, the guy is bending his wrists too much and using the joints to stop the strike - instead of the body structure. this can cause health issues in a few years. keep safe!)
Well, 'a few years' have passed quite some time ago in my case and I don't complain so far ;)
But jokes aside, thank you for taking the time to point to some important questions.
1) Schietelhaw vs Zornhaw
My knowledge of the Schietelhaw is almost non-existent (3227a lacks the glossa to this strike), but the action presented in the video meets all the requirements of the Zornhaw as laid out in the Nuremberg Codex, which is the only fight book I investigate (also, you may want to check this interpretation by Anton Kuhutovic and his crew: ua-cam.com/video/sMVNKpHTY5A/v-deo.html).
2) wrists & structure
If you take time to watch the fragment in question carefully, you will notice that the striking part of the movement, that is until when the sword would meet the opponent's weapon, has a neutral wrist position and thus what we may call 'structure'. The rest is just a thrust - again, this execution is in line with the Nuremberg Codex, but not with, say, Codex Danzig, where the action is clearly separated into a parry and a riposte.
In consequence, in the presented execution the wrists are not loaded too much. Note that the force of this strike is not directed downwards, which would put great pressure on the wrists, as you pointed out rightly. Instead, the force is directed forward, by extending the point, and thus the wrists do not have to stop the sword - the weapon stops effortlessly when it reaches the full extension (because it has nowhere else to go). Of course, it is much easier to show this in person, than to convey in writing.
Nevertheless, I agree that structure is extremely important and I, to my best ability, pay much attention to it. At the same time, it is worth remembering that the structure does not preclude nor replace proper joint conditioning.
Very interesting, though very dense...I think videos with less info and more time on examples would help a lot. Vey good work non the less, thanks a lot.
We are still discussing different formats, but at the moment we feel that 'dense' vids are the way to go for us as they remain rather rare in HEMA. But your comment is appreciated a lot. Thank you!
@@Sprechfenster I think you'd be teaching/helping more people by not compacting so much information into such a short amount of time. It kind of defeats the purpose if most people have to go back and rewatch it a dozen times just to retain the information. Unless you're just trying to get as many views as possible, cause I guess that's a way to do it, though it's offputting. Regardless, very informative and fun to watch.
@@gwynbleidd1917 Farming views has never been my goal (I don't monetise this channel). These Project Hausbuch videos are meant as companions to equally dense articles (links in the description) which document my progress in the research work I am conducting on the Nuremberg Codex. Having said that, I really intended this video to be shorter, but in the course of research I had to expand it, as described in the article. I'll try to make the next one more approachable.
Thanks for the comment!
Mistrz końcówka😁
Dzięki, tylko nie mów tego Piotrkowi, bo już mu tak zostanie!
So wenden is turning the true edge to opponent’s blade, but I don’t get what winden is.
Winden seems to denote the offensive component there - the move which brings the sword in a position where it can directly hurt the opponent, be it by cutting, thrusting or slicing. In modern Olympic fencing terms it could be translated as a 'transport' (when you move the opponent's blade to a different hanging , e.g. 7:49) or an 'attack on the blade/attaque au fer' (when you attack while still binding the opponent's blade, e.g. 7:57). The second type of Winden may also include attack with angulation (e.g. 10:15).
wushu ending? )))
Not quite sure what we were doing there, so might just as well be wushu ;P