Proper Measure for a Sword

This post is a response to this thread on SFI where the majority of the discussion is now on the proper length a sword should be, with quite a few people asserting that a “proper” blade needs to be longer than we typically see because we are taller (on average) than our medieval counterparts. I'm responding here rather than on SFI because most of those involved over there are Liechtenauer-ists where I am a Fiorist – so my comments are aimed more at the Italian tradition than the German.

First, to get this out of the way – folks in the Middle Ages were not as short as people think. To the average person (including most of those I talk to in my store), “medieval man” was tiny – a good 10-12” shorter than we are today. However, the evidence shows that the difference is more like 2-3”, still a significant variance, but not as crazy as people seem to believe. Here's a good article on the subject.

The first thing we have to do is ask what we are really trying to accomplish. Are we trying to discover what the “Medieval Masters” believed to be the proper measure of a sword? Or are we trying to discover what we believe to be the proper measure of a sword? These may seem like the same question – after all, if we base our beliefs on sword length on our interpretations, then aren't we doing both? Yes and no. Why? Because even the masters can't agree.

Silver describes his ideal one-handed sword as being a yard in length (assuming a modern yard = 36”) plus or minus an inch or two, depending on the person. He then says that his ideal longsword will have the same blade (34-38”) but with a longer handle. It's interesting that these are the dimensions seen on the majority of modern training longswords.

Vadi describes the ideal sword as being proportional to the user, extending from the ground to the armpit and with a hilt as long as your forearm. For myself, at 6', that means a length of 54” and a 14” hilt, which isn't a longsword, it's a true two-hander (spadone, montante, etc.). Indeed, if you look at Vadi's illustrations versus Fiore's, taking into account the somewhat questionable reliability of the illustrations, it is obvious that Vadi's sword is bigger than Fiore's. It is also telling then that Vadi does not include any one-handed or mounted plays whereas Fiore does.

Here is a listing of some modern training swords with their blade and handle lengths:

Arms & Armour

• Spada di Zogho Blade: 35.75” Handle: 10.75”
• Fechtbuch Blade: 37.75” Handle: 10.75”
• Fechterspiel Blade: 37.75” Handle: 10.75”
• Spadone Blade: 47” Handle: 16”
• Montante Blade: 45” Handle: 14”

Albion

• Liechtenauer Blade: 36.5” Handle: 11”
• The Meyer Blade: 36.5” Handle: 11.25”

CAS Hanwei

• Practical Hand & a Half Blade: 34” Handle: 9.75”
• Practical Bastard Blade:38” Handle: 11.5”
• Federschwert Blade: 37” Handle: 14.5”
• Tinker Longsword Blade: 35” Handle: 12”
• Tinker Bastard Blade: 33.38” Handle: 9.38”

The key (and on this many of the folks at SFI agree) is that the sword is proportional to the user, the argument is what that proportion should be. And that is where personal preference comes in. As we've seen, not even the master's could agree on what the ideal sword is. And neither should we!

So, does it really matter? Does it really matter if I use a sword with a 38” blade or one with a 36.75” blade? It depends. Yes it is an issue because you want to make sure that you are using an accurate tool for your art (i.e. using a Viking style sword to do Fiore longsword – yeah, not so much). That being said, I think far too many people get caught up in the importance of the tool – that is all a sword is – over the importance of the art. During large classes at Northwest Fencing Academy, it is not unusual for me to use 2 or 3 different swords – we like to match swords (Tinkers to Tinkers, A&A's to A&A's, aluminum to aluminum, etc). In addition, my primary solo trainer is a Purpleheart Armories waster. So while training my sword length varies between 35-38”, with different length handles and different balances. But this is a very good thing because it teaches me to adapt – I do not get caught up in getting a tool to fit my art but in making my art fit the tool. But trust me, even though I firmly believe this, that doesn't stop me from pining away for a beautiful custom longsword trainer to call my own!

A great example of this is a pair of modified shinai that the Academy used to use for free-play. One shinai had about a 36” blade and the other a 34” blade – and boy did it make a difference! We would use the disparate lengths to, in my opinion, our advantage – constantly training with, and against, a shorter or longer sword gave me some of the best free-play lessons I've ever received. Nothing teaches you to work on gauging distance and following your strikes like deceiving your opponent's parry and snapping out a beautiful thrust – that falls 1” too short!

To sum up, whatever sword you want to use for your practice is okay by me, so long as it fits within the parameters of your art (no I.33 with a spadone). Many medieval masters, including Vadi, tell you that, in a judicial duel type situation, you should make sure that the swords used are equal (“sisters”), but I think that in order to be well-rounded students of Armizare (or KdF or whatever) we need to practice with, and against, a variety of weapons. No, excuse me, with and against a variety of tools.

LINK TO PART II

Analysis on Armizare Armoured Combat

This week let's take a look at the four defensive methods in Armizare and just what that means for interpreting the armoured sections of the manuscripts, specifically the axe section.

The Four Ways to Defend

In Armizare there are four ways to defend against an opponent's attack:

• Cross it
• Deflect it
• Exchange it
• Break it

Let's look at these four things a little closer.

Cross It

Crossing your opponent's attack mean just that; parrying your opponent's blow such that your weapons cross to your advantage. He divides the sword in two hands section by where the cross occurs; at the point (weak), at the middle, and at the strong. The importance of crossing in Armizare is clear from the fact that what to do after the cross has been achieved encompasses the majority of Fiore's art. Vadi is even more explicit on the importance of the cross:

"The art of the sword only consists in crossing / putting both strikes and thrusts in their rightful place / bringing war to those who oppose you." - Porzio & Mele 19

Deflect It

Deflections are an interesting beast in Armizare because they appear throughout the manuscripts but only singly – never as a series of plays (like the cross does). Why is this? The first, and most obvious answer, is that if your deflection is done properly, there is no follow on other than hitting the other guy. If your deflection does not go well (either you mess it up or they bind against it) you are now in a cross. The deflections are scattered throughout the manuscripts; it appears at the beginning of the sword in one hand section, the end of the sword in two hands section and in the mounted section. In the first two instances, the master is described as using the same defense against several different attacks (cuts, thrusts, thrown swords/spears) on foot, while in the last he is shown as being on foot against horsemen. In all of these instances we are given the same tactical advice:

“I'll advance the right foot, which is in front, off the line, pass at an angle against the opponent's weapon and beat it to his left side. After making my parry I'll instantly attack” - Leoni, 64

All of the illustrations show the master in a left side guard, Dente di Cinghiaro with the two handed weapons. Fiore explicitly says that you could hold any left side posta – Posta di Donna & Finestra and that the plays would work just as well as from Dente di Cinghiaro. Why only on the left side though? Because the majority of people in the world (just as true in Fiore's time as ours) are right handed. Why does this matter? Why, gentle reader, that is a wonderful segue into...

When to Cross & Deflect

“Right-sided guards will parry and, while parrying, pass and strike with a thrust. Left-sided guards will parry and beat aside, and strike with a cut – but are not as good for answering with a thrust” - Leoni 78

The general rule as to when to cross and when to deflect is this:

If your sword is on the opposite side as your opponent's attack, cross it.
If your sword is on the same side as your opponent's attack, deflect it.

That is why Fiore shows all the deflection coming from the left side – 9 times out of 10 a right-handed person will attack from their right side, so in order to deflect properly, your sword must be on your left side.

Exchange It

The exchange and break of thrusts can be seen as subsets of crossing (they are) but because Fiore calls these out as being defenses against the thrust, I separate them as well. The especially handy thing about these two techniques is that the exchange can easily flow into a break if needed.

The exchange of thrusts is just that: an exchange of attacks. In modern fencing parlance it can be viewed as a thrust with opposition (or a parry followed by a riposte with opposition). Here is what Fiore has to say about it:

“This play, called exchange of thrusts, is done this way. As your opponent attacks you with a thrust, step out of line with your front foot, then pass obliquely also offline, crossing his sword with your arms while thrusting in his face or chest with your point high” - Leoni, 55.

Break It

The break of thrusts is another option for defending against a thrust. The footwork is the same as for the exchange, but instead of exchanging with a thrust, you cut a fendente against their blade, driving it to the ground, then executing numerous follow on plays.

While it is possible to break a cut after crossing it (for instance crossing in Frontale, then driving their blade down) it is more difficult to exchange cuts (although you could consider the 1st play of Gioco Largo as an exchange of cuts...).

Interpreting the Armoured Sections

Because the longsword is the basis for all weapons techniques in Armizare, you can find all four defense methods in the sword in two hands section. However, the armoured sections of the manuscript are arranged differently – instead of including all four methods, Fiore focuses on one option per weapon. Which method is shown is based on the nature of the weapon when fighting in armour.

• Cross it = Sword in Armour
• Deflect it = Axe
• Exchange it = Spear
• Break it = Axe

Sword in Armour – Crossin' It Up

The longsword, when used against armour, is held in the half-sword grip – one hand on the hilt the other about halfway up the blade. This grip allows the sword to be used like a very short spear and/or dagger. Because of the relatively light weight of the normal longsword (Fiore and Vadi do show specific armoured combat swords – essentially the bastard child of the longsword and poleaxe. Yes, I want one!) blows made with the sword would be ineffectual against most armour, hence the focus on the thrust to get into all the little gaps in armour.

The parries described in this section use the bit of the sword between your hands to parry an opponent's attack, leaving the point and the hilt free to attack. One effect of the half-sword grip is that your weapon is shortened, so you have to get in close. The result is that after the initial parry & thrust, all of the plays in this section are Gioco Stretto plays, including collar throws with each end of the weapon and the ligadura sottana.

Axe – I Will Break You

“I am the axe, heavy, cruel and lethal, and I deliver bigger blows than any other handheld weapon.” - Lenoi 77

The major difference between the axe and the spear and sword when used against armour is that the axe has sufficient weight to make effective blows against armour – possibly puncturing but more likely crushing it. Even if the axe blow does no external damage, the transfer of force will likely cause broken bones and/or severe trauma. As such, for the first time in the armoured sections, we have a weapon throwing blows, and guards that have to deal with that fact. As one would expect, the primary guard for blows in the axe section is Posta di Donna and so she is faced by Dente di Cinghiaro, who's forte is deflecting right-handed blows. But the axe is also a very efficient thrusting weapon, with the potential to pierce breastplates and other armour.

The primary focus, however, of the axe section is what happens when you break your opponent's attack – as often happens because the heavy heads tend to...ah...encourage a low bind :) Accordingly, we see the canonical follow up to the break, complete with stomping on your opponent's axe, as well as a thrust adaptation, a between-the-legs trip, a disarm and a ligadura.

The final two plays feature “unique” axes that, as far as I am aware, are only found in Fiore. The first has a weight attached by a rope or chain to the axe head, the play being exactly what you would expect – you wrap that thing around their legs, drag them around for a bit, then beat them senseless. The other unique axe that has a hollow head for delivering an “eye-melting powder”.

Seriously:

“This axe is hollow all around and filled with a corrosive powder that makes it impossible to open the eyes as soon as it comes into contact with them – and may even cause permanent blindness.” - Leoni 77.

How awesome is that!

Spear – The Exchange of Pain

The spear shown in Fiore is approximately 5-6 feet tall with a pointy end and a (usually) iron shod end. Like the sword in armour section, your opponent's armour limits your targets and the nature of the spear makes blows ineffective against armour. All of the techniques in this section are exchanges of thrusts – three from right side guards, three from left side guards.

From the right:
“I will pass obliquely out of line with the right foot, and crossing his lance I will beat it away to the left.” - Leoni 78

From the left:
“We pass out of lone by first stepping offline with the foot that is forward. And all of us (mandritto or riverso side) come together with a thrust after the parry, since the lance can only strike this way.” - Leoni 80

The spear section also includes Fiore's “common” polearm counter – which, in truth, is nothing more than an adaptation on the advice given in the two hand sword section – If your opponent parries such that your point is taken offline, strike him with the butt of the spear.

Putting it All Together

So, know we've reached the meat & potatoes part of the post where, if you've read this far, you're asking what the point is. Well here goes.

When I first started studying Armizare, I was intrigued as to why the sections in the Getty seemed to get shorter and shorter. The longsword section is the longest (22R – 31V); the sword in armour (32V – 35R), the axe (35V – 37V), and the spear (39R – 40R) each being shorter than the last. The reason is that the foundation for Armizare weapons combat is found in the sword in two hands section and the armoured sections simply represent sub-sets of that section. Because of the limitations of certain weapons against armour the three sections all address different aspects of the four defenses while in armoured combat.

To get a clear picture of armoured combat with the poleaxe, which combines attributes of the sword and spear, it is therefore necessary to take all three armoured sections as one. When you do so, you will naturally find techniques such as the collar throw, playing around with the butt end of the axe, etc. that you find in many of the other axe treatises out there. Much like the unarmoured longsword features all four defenses, so too can the poleaxe use all four in armoured combat.

I've talked about this before (here) but what is new is that rather than looking at them as high crossing, middle crossing, low crossing, I know look at the three armoured sections in Fiore as exemplifying one of the four defenses; cross, deflect, exchange & break.

Fiore's system, Armizare, is just that – a system, a series of principles that does not merely address the art of fighting with specific weapons, but the art of fighting.

DVD Review

Today's review will be on Christian Tobler's new DVD “German Medieval Martial Arts Vol. 1: The Poleaxe” available from Freelance Academy Press. As the title suggests, this is the first in a proposed series on German Martial Arts.

First off, the production quality is excellent! As someone who dabbled (briefly) in the video production world, I can appreciate the obvious hard work that Speaking Window Productions put into this DVD. There was only one point during the Drills section where the sound editor missed an audible “cut” - and I only caught it because I was paying very close attention. Wonderful job guys! The music adds a very nice ambiance to the video without being too distracting.

The DVD opens with a re-enacted judicial duel, which is just great fun!

Following this is the Introduction, a mini-documentary detailing just what a poleaxe is, the etymology of the word, as well as interviews with Christian Tobler, Dr. Lee Jones and Dr. Jeffery Forgeng.

This is followed by a section covering the Guards and an overview of what can be done from each guard. In this section, Tobler finds the perfect medium between being too brief and going into too much detail. The participants are in period clothing and armour (of which there is a wonderful variety!) which adds to the experience. Each guard is shown simultaneously in a side and front view, which is very helpful, and all the actions are clear and precise.

The Drills section covers handling the axe (i.e. being comfortable moving the axe around and using both hands as leads) – I would have liked a mention of the importance on practicing this while wearing gauntlets, because gauntlets do change things about how you grip (and Christian is shown wearing gauntlets during this spot). Then the DVD moves into paired drills for practice, which highlight in greater detail the actions shown earlier.

The Special Features include the trailer for this volume, as well as a video trailer for Tobler's book “In St. George's Name” (my review here) and a quick video about the Selohaar Fechtschule. Also, be sure to check out the Special Features menu very carefully ;)

This is perhaps the best instructional DVD I've ever seen – clean, concise, & informative without trying to do too much. It is a great volume for beginners and long-time WMA students. For those well-versed in the axe, don't expect any ground-breaking, brand new techniques here – a poleaxe is a poleaxe after all. That said, fighting from Nebenhut is a little different than anything in the Italian system (although you could use Vera Croce the same way).

The only negative I have about the DVD is the massive amount of “toy-envy” I developed after watching the copious amounts of beautiful arms and armour parade across the screen!

Updates

It's been a while and it's been an absolute pain in the ass for me to try to come up with something worthwhile to write about here. It's been an interesting couple of weeks: Celebrating accomplishments with one friend, mourning the loss of another, my work schedule being jimmied around, and battling my inner... well “inner demons” is rather cliched but it fits here.

On the WMA front I've been:

- Attempting to decide whether or not to pick up a steel waster. Scratch that. I want to pick up a steel waster, but am deciding how much I am willing to spend at the moment (not exactly Scrooge McDuck here).

My preference would be for the Arms & Armor Fechterspiel, which is what I use(d) training with Maestro Hayes. However, monetary concerns mean that I have my eye on the A-Trim I-beam trainer, which is considerably less money but still has what I'm looking for: Thick edges ( I really like the Tinker longswords, but the edges are too thin compared to A&A's and the I-beam). My goal here is to pick up a waster that can travel with me to various events & face various swords without too much worry on my part. I got to handle a couple of the I-beam trainers at 4W and liked the feel of them, not as much as the Fechterspiel's but hey. :p And A&A's are kinda like Subaru's; damn hard to find cheap used because they don't depreciate in value :)

- Still trying to get classes set up or at least to find a training partner here in Portland. My somewhat-erratic work schedule makes this difficult, but I am also really good at making excuses (see, inner demons).

- Had a great training session with Sean at his in-law's vineyard, Winter's Hill Vineyard, near Dundee, OR. Swords followed by wine = A really good day! It was more of a theoretical workout; we started by going through each of the twelve poste & figuring out the “easy” defences against attacks from all the other poste. When faced with an attack you only have four choices: Cross it, Deflect it, Exchange it, or Break it. In fact, Exchanging & Breaking can be seen as sub-options after you've crossed their blade. But that's it. Those are the four things that get you to the bind, from whence the majority of Fiore's plays take off. Sean then showed me an abrazare flow-drill based the 1^st play & the ligadura mezzana and sottana – it's pretty cool. The drill works (and has been used I guess) to introduce students to abrazare (touching & being touched in close quarters) as well as learning body mechanics. Then Sean & I (oh, and his son. Can't forget Patrick.) got out the axes and I ran Sean through some things I'd worked out, for instance, what Fiore means in the Getty description of Posta Finestra:

“They call me the left Posta di Finestra, and I keep the right arm withdrawn. We have no stability. Each seeks deception: you think I'll attack with a fendente, but I pass back instead and change guards. So, while I started to the left, I will enter to the right, and I can quickly perform the plays we will now see." (Leoni, 2009).

I know that that's a teaser, but I will try to take some video and do a full write-up on this, along with some video of how to approach some of Fiore's plays – the hint is K.I.S.S. (Keep It Simple Scholar) :p

- Along those same lines, I have some axe projects I've been working on, at least one of which will be put up here after I make it look all pretty. The other project is big. Very big. I don't know if it will be useful or if the community in general needs it, but I want to do it. But because of my lack of easy-to-get-to training partners (see above) it will be rather slow going – at the moment I can work up a bunch of theory stuff that I feel very confident about, but haven't really tested. Oh well, updates on those projects as I can.

- Finally, is anyone else freaking excited for Christian Tobler's new poleaxe DVD? I know I am!

What it means to be a Warrior

“A warrior is still a warrior, even if they're naked.”

I honestly can't remember what the title of the book that statement comes from. I do remember that it was a rather unremarkable piece of alternate history fiction where a guy, who happens to be an engineer & ex-military, goes back to Middle Ages Poland & “sets them straight”. The scene in which the above phrase is utters is a gem – the Hero beats up a bunch of knights because....(drum-roll please)...he disarmed them & they couldn't fight without their weapons! Like I said, an unremarkable piece of fiction. But for some reason that phrase stuck in my mind and the more I study Western Martial Arts, the more I realize that it's true. The treatises are full of principles and demonstrations on how to apply those principles across various setups & with various weapons.

The impetus for this installment comes from far too many discussions with customers at the knife shop I work in about what type of sword/knife/gun/[insert weapon here] is better and why. I'm sure you are all familiar with the Knight vs. Samurai threads that pop up on various forums about once a year. The point that I always try to get across is that weapon type does not play that big a role in a fight. Instead, it is the mindset, the intention, that defines someone as a warrior, not their weapon. I'm more afraid of someone with a 2” blade who knows what they're doing than an untrained person with a machete. Yes, the untrained can be trouble for the trained (for instance the panicked thrust that has no martial quality whatsoever & so takes the accomplished duellist by surprise), but I'm not talking about training per se, but mindset. It's about the warrior, not the weapon.

So what is a “warrior”?

A warrior is defined as “1. One who is engaged in or experienced in battle. 2. One who is engaged aggressively or energetically in an activity, cause, or conflict”.

But it can be difficult in our society today to be at ease with the idea of being a warrior, simply because too many people focus on the combative definition of the word. But being a warrior can have very little to do with fighting or combat. In fact, the term I use for myself is "Peaceful Warrior". What the heck is a Peaceful Warrior? Well, the phrase was coined by the author Dan Millman and refers to his philosophy of living. According to Mr. Millman, "I call myself a peaceful warrior because the battles we fight are inside". Another way he phrases this is "Peaceful heart, warrior spirit". Personally, I really like this approach and I feel that it fits the needs of the "modern warrior"; of whom there are far too few.

A warrior needs to cultivate a good "Warrior Mindset". This mindset involves knowing that diplomacy is usually a better tactic than force, but if force is necessary, they can apply it as needed. There is a world of difference between just knowing how to fight and knowing when to fight. One makes you a fighter, the other a warrior. Think of Teddy Roosevelt's famous quote "Speak softly, but carry a big stick". Or from the Boy Scout Law: "A Scout is Brave. A Scout can face danger even if he is afraid. He has the courage to stand for what he thinks is right even if others laugh at him or threaten him". While the Boy Scouts no longer feature "violent" sports among their activites (much to the detriment of the program in my opinion) in both it's original English form and the American version, the BSA featured a Master at Arms merit badge that included Singesticking, Fencing, Quarterstaff play, Boxing, Wrestling, & Jujitsu.

Fiore dei Liberi discuses these aspects as well. Well, I think he does :D Fiore's segno features four animals (which I won't go into detail about here - see my previous post ) which exemplify the virtues Strength, Quickness, Courage and Judgment. If I may permitted to go a bit esoteric for a moment:

Strength means the physical strength needed for successful fighting, but also the mental and moral strength needed to make NOT fight. Likewise, Judgment refers to all the details of physical combat; observing your opponent, understanding distance & time, etc. but it also means knowing when to use less-than-lethal force or just not fight at all. And courage is... well, courage!



What it means to be a warrior changes in accordance to societal norms, but one thing that remains is that a warrior is willing to fight (physically & verbally) for what they believe is right. If it comes to the need to defend themselves, it doesn't matter whether they are armed with a longsword, katana, messer, folding knife, or a BiC pen - a warrior will always strive to prevail.

Fiore's Spear - Dente di Cinghiaro

This one has been bugging me for awhile. The one real outlier as far as guard position correlation in the Fior di Battaglia are the spear guards. Of the six spear poste, only the two Posta Finestra (right & left side) resemble their sword equivalents.

Tutta Porta di Ferro is held with the left foot forward, spear held on the right side of the body. I suppose this has a passing familiarity to the sword guard, but really the spear Mezza Porta di Ferro looks closer to the sword Porta di Ferro.

As for the left side guards, the Vera Croce looks like the sword in armour and poleaxe Vera Croce.

So we come back to the Dente di Cinghiaro, which is held rear-weighted, right foot forward, spear held to the left side of the body. This looks completely different to any other Dente di Cinghiaro shown in the MS.

Every other Dente di Cinghiaro is shown right foot forward with the point of the weapon held forward at an angle, to facilitate the "standard" play from Dente di Cinghiaro - a rising deflection to the right with a step offline of the front foot. Now the play described for the spear Dente di Cinghiaro sounds very similar -

"[I] pass out of line by first stepping offline with the foot that is forward." -Leoni 2009

Now, the fancy thing about the spear section is that the play from all six poste is the same - step offline with the front foot as you parry opponent's spear, then pass forward and thrust. From the right side this results in a rather low crossing of the spears. From the left the crossing is high - this follows Fiore's advice about parrying thrusts; from the right parry & thrust (exchange), from the left parry & strike.

The only conclusion I can draw is that Fiore calls this position Dente di Cinghiaro, even though it does not follow the form for that guard, simply because it is the left-side equivalent of the Tutta Porta di Ferro position. It might just be as simple as that.

That will teach me to ant f#$k the problem :-D

Impressions of Anonymous German Pollaxe treatise (MS KK 5126)

In Christian Tobler's new book “In Saint George's Name: An Anthology of Medieval German Fighting Arts” the author includes a translation/interpretation of an anonymous pollaxe treatise from the late 15th Century. The treatise is found in a series of text-only treatises at the back of the Paulus Kal Fechtbuch, MS KK 5126, held in Vienna's Kunsthistorisches Museum. It features two guards and seven techniques.

So what? Why add these seven techniques to a study that, from an Italio-centric point-of-view, has Fiore's, Vadi's and the Anonimo Bolognese's axe sections? Not to mention the entirety of Le Jeu de la Hache?

Because it's there.

The poleaxe is, arguably, the acme of knightly weapons – it combines the spear, dagger & sword into one weapon. As with all pole-weapons, there is an apparent set of “universal” techniques/principles that I find intriguing. By studying various axe treatises you can learn, not new principles of axe-play, but new ways in which those principles can be expressed. What are the “universal” principles of axe-play? Well, as soon as I figure them all out, I'll let you know :-)

While reading this “new” axe treatise I was struck by what I can only call a “flipped similarity” - there are plays that are extremely similar to those that appear in Fiore, Le Jeu, & the Anonimo but with the axe flipped. That is, whereas the latter three manuscripts have the cross-parry (you parry the incoming blow with the part of the axe that is opposite it – i.e. your opponent throws a blow from their right shoulder, you parry with the part of your axe that is to your right. Clear as mud?) done with the head (business-end) of the axe, this German text does it with the other end, the foot/butt/queue/tail. This is accomplished from the guard Nebenhut (held on the left side) – stand right foot forward with your left hand near the head & with the head down, near your left leg. While at first my Italian trained mind went “Huh?” I realized that this position is akin to Fiore's Vera Croce.

Now, in Fiore, Le Jeu, & the Anonimo there are three basic options from a crossing at the head of the axe:
-Strike to the head with the tail of the axe (with or without clearing their axe first)
-Stab to the foot or abdomen.
-Execute a Collar Throw

With the reversed position of the crossing in KK 5126, tail to head, we can add another option that is impossible in a head-to-head crossing:
-the Knee Hook

But this guard position and it's added technique are only two cool things you'll find in KK 5126.

There are two interesting techniques from vom Tag vs vom Tag. One is essentially an axe version of the Colpo di Villano (for you Fiorists out there) but instead of striking in the opposite line as your parry (parry from your right, strike from your left) – because that is extremely difficult, if not impossible, with a pole-weapon, you strike along the same line as your parry.
The second vom Tag technique is a kind of counter-thrust. After a hard counter-bind, your opponent attempts to thrust you in the armpit, but you are able to place your point into their armpit & use the angles to your benefit such that you can hit them but they can't hit you.

The other nice thing in this treatise is the advice that to learn to fight with the axe, you should learn to fight with the staff, which echoes Peter Falkner & George Silver (amongst others) in regards to training pole-weapons. My own feelings are that since the pollaxe combines the dagger, spear, and longsword, it is extremely helpful to know these weapons (plus wrestling, all in your given tradition) before taking up the poleaxe.

So, why add KK 5126 to your axe studies, either German or Italian? Because, it is another source document on this awesome weapon and studying it will provide you with more tools for your toolbox. Would I teach these techniques in a class entitled “Italian Pollaxe Combat”? No, but if the class were titled “Medieval Pollaxe Combat” I would.