I feel this interpretation is taking a bit too much liberty. Admittedly I haven’t really practiced this particular play, but in working with Paulus Hector Mair’s material and reading through the transcription, it seems like something else is going on. Mair opens the play essentially with there’s binding going on; he doesnt specify which position only that the first actor stand with their left foot forward to initiate the play. And however the hengen and winding goes against the opponent who is hard and strong, the first actor ends up making a *strong* hew to the right side of the opponent. That’s the first cue I feel like changes a lot about the play, cause generally what I’ve seen when Mair describes strong hew, is that he implies or flat out states a step with the opposite foot, so in this case the right foot paired with a left hew (essentially driving it with the body). Additionally, I feel like the displacement is a stationary parry, especially because of the force thats coming in. After which the perspective doesn’t shift, but the second actor who parried just takes a step with their left foot after the parry to hook their arm in and execute the device. Somewhere here is where the Dresden illustration seems to come in (although I tend to value the text much more than the illustration). The rest seems fine. Just these two things which I think stick closer to the text than your interpretation which seems to want to cater to the exact setup in the Bauman fechtbuch. I could be wrong though; as I said, I haven’t practiced this specific play, but I have worked with Mair’s texts a fair amount. Any thoughts maybe?
I feel this interpretation is taking a bit too much liberty. Admittedly I haven’t really practiced this particular play, but in working with Paulus Hector Mair’s material and reading through the transcription, it seems like something else is going on.
Mair opens the play essentially with there’s binding going on; he doesnt specify which position only that the first actor stand with their left foot forward to initiate the play. And however the hengen and winding goes against the opponent who is hard and strong, the first actor ends up making a *strong* hew to the right side of the opponent.
That’s the first cue I feel like changes a lot about the play, cause generally what I’ve seen when Mair describes strong hew, is that he implies or flat out states a step with the opposite foot, so in this case the right foot paired with a left hew (essentially driving it with the body).
Additionally, I feel like the displacement is a stationary parry, especially because of the force thats coming in. After which the perspective doesn’t shift, but the second actor who parried just takes a step with their left foot after the parry to hook their arm in and execute the device. Somewhere here is where the Dresden illustration seems to come in (although I tend to value the text much more than the illustration).
The rest seems fine. Just these two things which I think stick closer to the text than your interpretation which seems to want to cater to the exact setup in the Bauman fechtbuch. I could be wrong though; as I said, I haven’t practiced this specific play, but I have worked with Mair’s texts a fair amount. Any thoughts maybe?