There are many references to the Rose e.g. 1. Middle Guard play and several Longpoint plays. See more in the Video :) Learn Sword Fighting - Martial Arts of the 16. century with Meyer Class Hammaborg
Very nice video, i always watch your videos. I wanna ask, in some meyer classes they teach this techniques, mean handwork against oponent who attack or parry very actively or aggresively sometimes. Do you think you could make a video where handwork is included in a whole action? Meant like, zufechten, handwork maybe a counter if its posible, and abtzug? Thanks. P.S. your interpretation of rose and kurzhau is the one that i was searching for for maybe a year. Your Czech republic big fan. Martin
Beautiful! Thank you very much for sharing. May I ask you a question? Why do you leave the bind in the Langort Stücke? I still haven't reached a conclusion on my interpretation yet, so any help us appreciated. But so far, personally, I've gotten a sore wrist and open myself up if I leave the bind and loop underneath as you did.
7 лет назад
Hey Mat, thanks! It is always nice to see that you´re watching my channel :) A legitimate question by the way. Of course it is the most dangerous technique variation of Meyers Rose. The fencer needs a good feeling for the bind. But the answer is simple: The opponents intention is to parry our strike because we want to hit with our initial cut. In the moment of clashing there is a little time-frame to leave the bind without danger. Sure, an afterblow can happen. If you see this cut coming, counter it with the "Ausnehmen". It is like a "Durchwechseln" or "Oben Abnehmen" [like in the Liechtenauer Tradition], you need the pressure or the parry to your blade. I dont think that we have to keep the bind. There is no annotation about winding etc. And yes, there is also no annotation about the right pressure, but Meyer writes that our strike is parried into "Gerade Versatzung". So the opponents blade is directed to our blade, not to our opening. Thats the window into the "breaking under the sword" part. At least only our interpretation :)
Oh, I see. So essentially, you are saying that we are encountering a defensive opponent who doesn't want to hit us just yet, but just take control of our sword? So that's how moving under through the rose works, in this case.
Hello, and thank you for your great videos! I'd like to ask a question about your interpretation in the first variation. In fact, I'd rather like to know your opinion on Mittelhut interpretation. As far as I know Meyer never described Mittelhut for Longsword, and it is only mentioned in Longsword section in the regard of the Rose. People take Mittelhut interpretation from Dussak section, but this makes little sense in the context of the Rose description because you're not actually circling around opponents' blade when doing it in your way, you're rather circling your own head. I've seen another interpretations where fencer is trying to literally circle aroung opponent's blade, but he can't finish his move in the Mittelhut the way everybody see it. But there's another Mittelhut variant in the Staff section of Meyer where he says: "The Middle Guard is the straight defence in front of the opponent, from which most fence." He says about Straight Parrying, as far as I understand. And if you use Straight Parrying instead of the Dussac version of Mittelhut everything works quite obvious - you can encircle opponent's sword and return your blade into the initial position.
A great video as usual! Thank you very much for all these videointerpretations! I am waiting each one a lot any time.) May I ask about first play trougth the Rose? What the intentoin in the round cutting in first Play? It does not remove danger of extended opponent's point, but asks more time for cutting in Zufechten. To cut at once in first time without of round seems more logical thing. Thanks.
7 лет назад
Hi there and thank you so much :) Ist just a feint. Instead of striking directly we cutting around in order to indicate a side change to mislead her alignment. It is to confuse our opponent because she expects a direct blow. And you are right, it could give time to react. In that case we have our "Ausnehmen" in repertoire and always time enough for it. Thats the basic idea :)
Thank you for answer. I have interpreted this by bit another way. First strike comes under sword of opponent, then the blade is returned to almost initial place, thus the blade of opponent is setted off central line to my right, and I am ready to cut. If he cut from above in the moment of my Rose, I dicplace this by reverse motion of my blade and charging to for stroke by this movement. In any case, after this I have his blade right of my blade, have control of his blade and can strike. But it's just a vary. Thanks for your videos again. It was luck to find it in Inet.)))
hi,bjorn,I am confused with the schielhau and zwerchhau, I feel they are similar, what is their difference in details or in principal? Thank you!
7 лет назад
They are very equal. Both are shortened strikes, working with "indes" principal and are very good counter cuts. The main difference is that a Schieler is diagonal and a Zwirch is horizontal aligned.
Hi there Björn May I ask how you got to the interpretation of the horizontal rosecuts. My interpretations leaned more to the diagonal rosecuts you used in your last plays. I think I get where you are going with the horizontal cuts. It fits the text, although it seems to me you cut more into a right zornhut instead of the initial mittelhut. Also when you use the initial cut as a feint to her left side, isn't it very unmeyeresque to cut to the same left side. Normally if one deceives the opponent into a feint to the left a follow up to the right seems like the sensible bloss to attack. Thx for your interpretations, love your videos Krist
7 лет назад
Hey Krist, the horizontal rosecuts follows our basic idea of the rose: going around an occupied center (in this case longpoint and later also Gerade Versatzung). If you can see the point goes under her sword, just to indicate a side change to mislead her alignment. And it is right we are not going into the exact initial guard. It is more a blow from our axle. But the text reads that we have to go close to the initial guard (gar nahet wieder zu der ersten Mittelhut), so we are fine with it. I also know your interpretation of the Rose in the Longpoint Plays. Was a good help for our interpretation work :)
I am more in line with how Krist does it (from what I have seen). I prefer doing the diagonal also. I do see your side as well though Bjorn. Thank you for your fine videos.
Es tut mir leid, mein Deutsch ist nicht sehr gut. Ich lieben eure Videos, jedoch! Ich bin eine Frau und neu im HEMA eingetreten. Grüße vom Florida, USA
7 лет назад
Hallo, nein Dein deutsch ist super :D Danke für die schönen Worte und viel spass mit einem grossartigen Sport! Gruss, Björn
