You are not currently logged in. Are you accessing the unsecure (http) portal? Click here to switch to the secure portal. |
Lew
Jud Lew | |
---|---|
Born | before ca. 1440s |
Died | date of death unknown |
Occupation | Fencing master |
Ethnicity | Jewish |
Movement | Liechtenauer Tradition |
Genres | |
Language | Early New High German |
Principal manuscript(s) |
|
Manuscript(s) |
MS Dresd.C.94 (1542)
|
Concordance by | Michael Chidester |
Translations | Traducción castellano |
Caution: Scribes at Work This article is in the process of updates, expansion, or major restructuring. Please forgive any broken features or formatting errors while these changes are underway. To help avoid edit conflicts, please do not edit this page while this message is displayed. Stay tuned for the announcement of the revised content! This article was last edited by Michael Chidester (talk| contribs) at 12:02, 20 June 2016 (UTC). (Update) |
Jud Lew was a 15th century German fencing master. His name signifies that he was Jewish, and some sources state that he was baptized Christian. He seems to have stood in the tradition of Johannes Liechtenauer, though he was not included in Paulus Kal's ca. 1470 list of the members of the Fellowship of Liechtenauer.[1]
Lew is often erroneously credited with authoring the Cod.I.6.4º.3, a compilation of various fencing treatises created in the 1450s. In fact, his name is only associated with a single section of that book, a gloss of Johannes Liechtenauer's Recital on mounted fencing that is a branch of the so-called Pseudo-Peter von Danzig gloss. Though some versions of Martin Huntfeltz's treatise on armored fencing are also attributed to Lew, but this seems to be an error.
Contents
Treatises
Early on in its history, the Pseudo-Peter von Danzig gloss seems to have split into two primary branches, and no definite copies of the unaltered original are known to survive. The gloss of Sigmund Schining ain Ringeck also seems to be related to this work, due to the considerable overlap in text and contents, but the exact nature of this relationship is currently unclear.
Branch A, first attested in the Augsburg version (1450s) and comprising the majority of extant copies, has more devices overall than the other branch (particularly in the extensive Salzburg version of 1491) but generally shorter descriptions in areas of overlap. It also includes glosses of Liechtenauer's Recital on long sword and mounted fencing only, and in lieu of a gloss of Liechtenauer's short sword it is generally accompanied by the short sword teachings of Andre Liegniczer and Martin Huntfeltz. Apart from containing the most content, the Salzburg version is notable for including nine paragraphs of text that are not found in any other version of Pseudo-Peter von Danzig, but do appear in Ringeck (and constitute almost 10% of that gloss); this predates all known copies of Ringeck's text, but is another indicator of some connection between the works. Branch A was later used by Johannes Lecküchner as a source when he compiled his own gloss of a Recital on the Messer in the late 1470s.
Branch B, attested first in the Rome version (1452), is found in only four manuscripts; it tends to feature slightly longer descriptions than Branch A, but includes fewer devices overall. Branch B glosses Liechtenauer's entire Recital, including the short sword section, and may therefore be considered more complete than Branch A; it also different from Branch A in that three of the four known copies are illustrated to some extent, where none in the other branch are. The Krakow version (1510-20) seems to be an incomplete (though extensively illustrated) copy taken directly from the Rome,[2] while Augsburg II (1564) is taken from the Krakow but only includes the six illustrated devices of wrestling and their respective captions. Even more anomalous is the Glasgow version, consisting solely of a sizeable fragment of the short sword gloss (hence its assignation to Branch B) which is appended to the opening paragraphs of Ringeck's gloss of the same section; since it accompanies Ringeck's long sword and mounted fencing glosses, a possible explanation is that the scribe lacked a complete copy of Ringeck and tried to fill in the deficit with another similar text.
There is one version of the Pseudo-Peter von Danzig gloss that defies categorization into either branch, namely the Vienna version (included in a 1480 manuscript along with Paulus Kal's work, though Kal's personal level of involvement is unknown). The text of this copy is more consistent with the generally shorter descriptions of Branch A, but the overall contents much more closely align with Branch B, lacking most of the unique devices of Branch A and including the gloss of the short sword. The Vienna version may therefore be a copy of the original gloss before it split into these branches (or it may merely be an odd attempt by a scribe to synthesize the two branches into a single, shorter work).
While Branches A and B were originally presented in a single concordance on the Pseudo-Peter von Danzig page, the differences between them were revealed thereby to be extensive enough that they merit separate consideration. Thus Branch A has been moved here to Jud Lew's page, to whom is seemingly attributed the gloss on mounted fencing, while Branch B has been retained on the page of Pseudo-Danzig. As the Vienna version cannot be cleanly assigned to one branch or the other, it will appear in both concordances for comparative purposes.
Images |
Augsburg Version I (1450s) |
Vienna Version I (1480s) |
Salzburg Version (1491) |
Vienna Version II (1512) |
Graz Version (1538) |
Dresden Version (Mair) (1542) |
Vienna Version (Mair German) (1540s) |
Vienna Version (Mair Latin) (1540s) |
Munich Version (Mair) (1550s) |
Augsburg Version II (1553) |
Munich Version (1556) |
Rostock Version (1570) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
[1r] Maister liechtennawers kunst Jůnck ritter lern |
|||||||||||||
[1v] Hie hebt sich an ein gut gemein lere des langen swertz Doch so ist vil gutter verporgener kůnst darinnen beschlossen ~•••~ Wiltu kůnst schawen DIe ersten lere des langenn swerts ist Das du vor allen dingen die hew recht solt lernen hawen Ist es anders das du starck vechten wilt Vnde das vernÿme also wenn du mit dem lincken fuß vor steest vnd [2r] hewest von der rechten seittenn So ist der hawe falsch vnd vngerecht wann die recht seitten pleibt da hinden Darumb wirt der hawe zu kurtz vnd mag seinen rechten ganck zu der rechten seitten nit gehaben etc. |
[10r] Hie hebt sich an ein güt genyne ler des langen schwertz / doch ist vil gütter verborgen künst dar in beschlossenn ~ Wiltu künst schaulben Die erst lere des langen schwertz dz du vor alen dingen die haulb recht solt leren haulben Ist es anders daß du starck vechten wilt vnd dz vernym also wan du mit dem lincken fus fur stest vnd haulbest von der rechten siten so ist der haulb valß vnd vngerecht wan die rechte siten blybett do hynden darümb so württ zu kurtz vnd mag sinen rechten ganck zu der rechten siten nit gehaben |
||||||||||||
[2r] Oder steestu mit dem rechten fus vor vnd hewest von der lincken seitten volgstu dann mit dem lincken fuß nit nach so ist der hawe aber falsch Darümb so mercke wann du hewest von der rechten seitten daz du albeg mit dem rechten fusß dem hawe nachuolgest Desselben gleichen tue auch wann du hawest von der lincken seitten so gibt sich dein leip mit Inn die rechten wege vnd also werden die hewe langk vnd recht gehawen etc. |
Oder stestu mit dem rechten fus fur vnd haulbst von der lincken siten volgestu dan mit dem lincken [10v] fus nit noch so ist der haulb aber valsch darümb so merck wen du haulbest von der rechten siten das du alwegen mit dem rechten siten fus dem haulb noch volgest des glichen thun auch wan du haulbest von der lincken siten So gib sich dein lip mit im die rechten weg vnd also werden die haulb langck vnd recht gew gehaulben ~~ |
||||||||||||
[2v] Wer nach get hewen Das ist wenn du mit dem zufechten zum manne kompst So soltu nit still steen mit deinem swert vnd seinen hawen nach wartten pis er dir zu hewet. Wisß das alle vechter die da sehen auf eins andern hewe vnd wöllen nicht anders tun dann versetzen Die dörffen sich kůnst gar wenig freuen Wann sie werden sere dapej geslagen etc. |
Wer nach geth haulben Daß ist wan du mit dem zuvechten zu dem man kümbst so soltu nicht stell sten mit dinenn schwertt vnd sinem haulb nocht warten biß er dir ze haulbett wiß dz alle vechter die do sehen vff eynes andern haulb vnd wollent nit anders thun dan versetzenn die diff dirffen sich künst wenig freulben wan sie werden sere do bÿ geschlagen ~ |
Images |
Augsburg Version I (1450s) |
Vienna Version I (1480s) |
Salzburg Version (1491) |
Vienna Version II (1512) |
Graz Version (1538) |
Dresden Version (Mair) (1542) |
Vienna Version (Mair German) (1540s) |
Vienna Version (Mair Latin) (1540s) |
Munich Version (Mair) (1550s) |
Augsburg Version II (1553) |
Munich Version (1556) |
Rostock Version (1570) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Transcription | Transcription | Transcription |
For further information, including transcription and translation notes, see the discussion page.
Additional Resources
- Bergner, U. and Giessauf, J. Würgegriff und Mordschlag. Die Fecht- und Ringlehre des Hans Czynner (1538). ADEVA Graz, 2006. ISBN 978-3-201-01855-5
- Tobler, Christian Henry. In Saint George's Name: An Anthology of Medieval German Fighting Arts. Wheaton, IL: Freelance Academy Press, 2010. ISBN 978-0-9825911-1-6
References