Joachim Meyer's Longsword: The Circle (Zirckel)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 6 сен 2024
- Being stuck at home with nobody to stab is difficult, but it does give us time to reflect on our approach to fencing and see how the different techniques are related.
In this video disassemble one of the most characteristically Meyer movements - the Circle (Zirckel).
The Circle derives from the Krumphauw, and as always we're looking at the practical aspects of how the technique fits together and can be adapted to work in a contemporary 'live' fencing context.
this isnt just a clear explanation of this, this should be the gold standard of how to teach hema on youtube
Thanks :)
This is one of the clearest explanations of a zirckel i've seen, great work!
This is a great explanation, Its so rare to see good explanations of the handworks
EXTREMELY informative and demonstrative!! the greatest, most detailed explanation there is - thanks a lot, Daniel!
Needed this to sort of where I was going after the first short edged circle. Could not for the life of me parse out "step well out to his right side". Out and then away, not out and into him. Thank you thank you.
Excellent presentation Daniel.
Thanks from South Korea
This is fantastic, one of the best videos I have seen in HEMA
Thanks a lot 😊
great instruction
Awesome
I´m currious what will you do if that picture start moving
As in against an opponent who is moving? It is a movement which happens pretty often while fencing so …
Thanks for the nicely presented video. One thing questions me though. The final oberhau after the false edge cut. From what I read from the manuscript I get impression its done from outsideline line (over opponents sword) after slipping under opponents sword with false edge cut. In video you do it using inside line (under opponents sword). Is It just video editing thingy or did I get it wrong?
You're completely right - it's just an editing issue; the figure is an overlay and I didn't have a solid background to pull a chromakey from so I couldn't put the opponent image "under" my image.
The cut should be performed on the outside line, despite the technical limitations of this video :)
@@DanielPopeScholarVictoria Thanks for clearing this out...
I like this version, unfortunately the translation of the last part in terms of footwork is wrong. In the original it says "step beside with your *right* foot to his right side." Since we are working on our interpretation of this part right now, I would like to know if you have any idea how exactly to perform that. Because all versions we came up with allways feel awkward, especially because he specifies that you do a Scheitelhau in the end.
The wording of the original text for the section being used here is: " so trit mit deinem Lincken fuß wol auff sein rechte seiten auß" -' so step/tread with your left foot to his right side'
I know there is a follow up play with a step through between you and the opponent with the right leg, cutting with a Zwerch through the face, which makes sense, maybe that's the one you're thinking of?
@@DanielPopeScholarVictoria are there maybe different manuscripts and transcription we are talking about? The manuscript we are using is, I think, the same as the one used in wiktenauer as well. There it says "so trit mit dem Rechten fuß wol beseits auff sein Rechte seiten oder hindersich zu ruck". That would translate somewhat to "step with your right foot besides on his right or behind yourself/take a step back"
Strange, I don't know where this difference comes from. Like I said, your version makes more sense to me... Maybe we use different manuscripts and "my" one just made a mistake during writing.
@@1Aldreth Okay. Now I see where you’re working from. The description in the video is (as referenced) 1.47v.2. Your description is from much earlier In the handwork’s section which is a little more vague.
There are usually two ways I see this interpreted. First it’s an either/or statement - either step through with the right OR step back and cut a scheitel to the head
The alternative is that the right foot step is a triangle step with your right foot to his right side - in other areas we see this used (step further to his left with your left foot etc), which makes a lot of sense in this case.
@@DanielPopeScholarVictoria Ah now I see where the difference is coming from. 🙂
It is clearly stated that it is either the step to his right or a step back. The step back with a Scheitelhau is absolutely clear to us. Where it gets tricky is when trying to do the Scheitelhau after stepping right. What I considered was that in that case you would not do a Scheitelhau, but maybe a Twerhau, but that isn't stated in the manual and during those passages he is pretty specific about every attack, bodypositioning and footwork so I am hesitant to just do something else. It's just that the Scheitelhau after stepping to his right is really awkward and doesn't feel comfortable at all.
@@1Aldreth check the passage immediately after 1.47v.2 It explicitly used a zwerch with the step through with the right leg, which solves the problem nicely.
If you’re set on the scheitelhau then isn’t a practical way of using the scheitelhau with the step through unless you completely sacrifice form and structure, as you say. the only other way it works is to take the step to his right as a broad triangle step with the rear (right) leg out to his right.
Is this the Meyer's first squinter too?
Absolutely - functionally the opening movement it's exactly that. Meyer describes the crooked cuts, then says the squinte is one of those cuts, then immediately goes on to describe the circle. In that respect the circle can be understood to be just a follow-on movement for the squinter on the right.
@@DanielPopeScholarVictoria Follow-up question: Hans Medel says to stand "in the squinter" which he says is the changer and to throw the squinter from there to displace with the false edge. If we assume he means the same thing as this action, then what is the changer? Is it the same as Meyer's changer? (Medel switches the names for 3/4 of the primary guards, but seems aware that other people call them different.)
@@KwizzyDaAwesome Interesting question; which section are you referring to when he describes the squinter as the changer? I know he says stand in the squinter or changer when you mean to change through, though am not sure if his "or" here is saying "otherwise called", or literally "or this other one instead".
That said, in response to your main question - yes, I feel like it's a very similar series of actions.
As to the squinter/changer dichotomy - I feel like Medel's changer is probably similar to the regular change type positions, but with Medel who knows! :-)
Again a great video, thanks.
Have you thought about taking a real person as partner? It's hard to see where the blades closs and the video lacks visual depth with a two demensional adversary. Bur the explanations are great...
I have - I've been doing these videos in Melbourne's (still going) Covid lockdowns, so it's difficult to get a partner - in the later videos I made sure to focus on overlays showing which side of the blade to be on, and included the front views to try and make it clearer.
I want to thumbs up but its at 420 so I can't.
🤣🤣