![]() |
You are not currently logged in. Are you accessing the unsecure (http) portal? Click here to switch to the secure portal. |
Difference between revisions of "Talk:Johannes Liechtenauer"
(Replaced content with "{{TOC right}} {{#lst:{{BASEPAGENAME}}|sourcebox}}") |
Tag: Replaced |
||
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{TOC right}} | {{TOC right}} | ||
{{#lst:{{BASEPAGENAME}}|sourcebox}} | {{#lst:{{BASEPAGENAME}}|sourcebox}} | ||
+ | |||
+ | == Translation Notes == | ||
+ | |||
+ | <h3> Michael Chidester (2025) </h3> | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{#lst: Johannes Liechtenauer/Michael Chidester LS 2025 | notes }} | ||
+ | |||
+ | <h3> Christian Henry Tobler (2021) </h3> | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{#lst: Johannes Liechtenauer/Christian Tobler LS 2021 | notes }} | ||
+ | |||
+ | <h3> Rebecca L. R. Garber </h3> | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{#lst: Johannes Liechtenauer/Rebecca L. R. Garber LS 2020 | notes }} |
Latest revision as of 14:10, 2 July 2025
Additional translation notes: The Peter von Danzig Fight Book ©2021 Freelance Academy Press, Inc.
Translation Notes
Michael Chidester (2025)
Download this translation as a PDF here.
Eight years ago (in 2017), Harry R. posted something remarkable: a free, complete translation of Hans Liechtenauer’s famous poem called the Zettel (or “Record”)—but one which rhymed like the original.
When a 15th century reader looked at a gloss of the Zettel, what they saw was a poem (crude in some places, elegant in others) accompanied by explanations of its meaning, all written in their own language using fairly simple, straightforward words and grammar.
Sadly, this is a reading experience that we often fail to capture in our English translations for a number of reasons (attachments to certain German words is one of them, but a reluctance to try to write poetry is definitely another). Indeed, I’ve heard more than one student of Kunst des Fechtens express surprise upon learning that the Zettel rhymed in German and was a real poem, not just some funny little sentence fragments.
Harry’s translation was groundbreaking to me, and I’ve used versions of it (with permission) in most of my Liechtenauer-centric projects since then, including my Medieval Gloss and a book I published with Dierk Hagedorn titled The Long Sword Gloss of GMN Manuscript 3227a. Harry likewise published it in 2019 in a book called Peter von Danzig.
However, as I’ve done more Liechtenauer translations of my own, my ideas of what the Zettel is and what it means have diverged more and more from Harry’s and his poem was less and less a good fit for my work (even with all the changes in wording I’d made to it by that point). When Dierk’s and my newest book, Pieces of Ringeck, was coming together in 2024, I initially approached Harry about using his work again, but in the end I used a non-rhyming translation that lined up with the rest of the text.
A month ago, I decided it was time to try to create my own rhyming translation from scratch, to better reflect my ideas of what it means and also play with the text in ways that aren’t really available when striving for a ‘literal’ translation (ignoring for a moment the fact that no translation can ever be truly literal in the way many readers imagine). This document is the result.
Liechtenauer’s poem is written in free Knittelvers, a poetic form popular in the German Middle Ages. Rather than try to replicate that, I chose a loose iambic tetrameter (a common English form) for my version. This means four vocal stresses per line with one unstressed syllable in between—i.e., da DUM da DUM da DUM da DUM, where the first da can be left out and/or a final da added if need be. Among other things, this gave me extra space to unpack ideas that are a single word in German but not English.
Within this structure, I tried to stick close to the German text, preserving as much of the explicit meaning as possible while also exploring the subtext and underlying themes in ways that a literal translation doesn’t always allow. I also tried to make sure that when multiple verses were phrased similarly in the German, they were likewise phrased similarly in English so that the parallels remained obvious.
During this project, I looked at every English translation I could find which had no obvious dependence on others, mostly looking for unusual readings that could make the poem better—I’m thus deeply indebted both to Dierk for all the transcription and translation work he has done over the years and to Stephen P. Cheney, Falko Fritz, Rebecca L. R. Garber, Per Magnus Haaland, Jeffrey Hull, Jens-Peter Kleinau, David Lindholm, Thomas Stoeppler, Christian Henry Tobler, Christian Trosclair, Cory Winslow, and Grzegorz Żabiński for their translation efforts.
My initial pass was focused on the versions of the Zettel included in nine Ainring manuscripts that were the topic of Pieces of Ringeck, though I consulted other versions to look for interesting variations. After I finished with Ainring, I then attacked the variations and “extra” verses in ms. 3227a. The nature of the translation meant that minor differences in wording rarely had an impact, but all significant differences in meaning resulted in changes to the translation. In the document linked above, you’ll find both translations side-by-side for easier comparison. The couplets of the Zettel are numbered in the usual way, with 3227a’s unique verses having Roman numerals; other non-Zettel poems are lettered A–F to distinguish them. No German text is offered because the Ainring text is a combination of several. These translations will eventually make their way into my books as new editions are released, but since it was a free translation that got me started on this path, it seems fitting that I give back and put this out into the wild to hopefully start others on new paths as well.
For the Wiktenauer version, I tweaked the translation further to align with the Rome Version so there would be a single German transcription to compare it to (as well as Tobler’s great non-rhyming translation). I’ve also annotated this version with a number of footnotes containing my thoughts on the language, the structure, and the meaning.
These poems are all licensed for free use under the Creative Commons Attribution–NonCommercial–ShareAlike 4.0 License. Feel free to use them, quote them, post them, and share them around, but don’t try to make money off them without permission or fail to credit me as the author. (Limited quotations in commercial products are, of course, often protected by Fair Use.)
If you have suggestions for how these poems could be better, please let me know! And if you’d like to support me in working on projects like this, please consider supporting my patreon.
Christian Henry Tobler (2021)
This translation has been evolving over some time. My first pass through the process was completed in early 2003. It has seen considerable revision since then, first by Dr. Jeffrey Forgeng of the Higgins Armory Museum and much more recently by Mr. Dierk Hagedorn of Hammaborg – Historischer Schwertkampf, the historical combat association headquartered in Hamburg, Germany. Their efforts improved the translation immeasurably. This latest iteration, from 2020, includes some minor changes over the version appearing in my earlier title In Saint George’s Name (2010).
I have included the original terminology in many parts of the translation, particularly for the names of blows and guards. My philosophy has always been that any translation of such terms fails to convey all the nuances of its original meaning and that the practitioner is best served by their proper names.
Rebecca L. R. Garber
This manuscript exists at the liminal period when Middle High German (MHG) was becoming Early New High German (ENHG). Some terms appear only in the MHG dictionaries, are sometimes mentioned in the ENHG dictionaries as “obsolete”, or appear with a similar meaning in ENHG, while other concepts exist only in ENHG. Those concepts that appear in only one language period are easy to deal with. The problem arises with those that appear in both, but with different meanings. This is the natural result of changing literary patterns, cultures, and tastes, which directly impact the types of texts that the dictionary researchers can mine. However, it does call for a great deal of interpretation to tease out the meaning, particularly as the manuscript includes different types of texts, with highly varying levels of punctuation. This translation is thus one interpretation, based on my extensive knowledge of a language that was changing rapidly at the time these texts were composed. Others may find a different interpretation based on the same words, and I look forward to discussing their conclusions.