You are not currently logged in. Are you accessing the unsecure (http) portal? Click here to switch to the secure portal.
Wiktenauer logo.png

Joachim Meyer

From Wiktenauer
Jump to navigation Jump to search
MS Thott.290.2º 011r.jpg

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 22:31, 3 April 2024 (UTC). (Update)
Joachim Meyer
Born ca. 1537
Basel, Germany
Died 24 February 1571 (aged 34)
Schwerin, Germany
Spouse(s) Appolonia Ruhlman
Occupation
Citizenship Strasbourg
Patron
  • Georg Johann Ⅰ
  • Otto von Solms
  • Johann Casimir
  • Johann Albrecht
Movement Freifechter
Influences
Influenced
Genres Fencing manual
Language Early New High German
Notable work(s) Gründtliche Beschreibung der... Kunst des
Fechtens (1570)
Manuscript(s)
First printed
english edition		 Forgeng, 2006
Concordance by Michael Chidester
Translations
Signature Joachim Meyer sig.jpg

Joachim Meyer (ca. 1537 - 1571)[1] was a 16th century German cutler, Freifechter, and fencing master. He was the last major figure in the tradition of the German grand master Johannes Liechtenauer, and in the later years of his life he devised at least four distinct and quite extensive fencing manuals. Meyer's writings incorporate both the traditional Germanic technical syllabus and contemporary systems that he encountered in his travels, including Italian rapier fencing. In addition to his fencing practice, Meyer was a Burgher and a master cutler.[2]

Meyer was born in Basel,[3] where he presumably apprenticed as a cutler. He writes in his books that he traveled widely in his youth, most likely a reference to the traditional Walz that journeyman craftsmen were required to take before being eligible for mastery and membership in a guild. Journeymen were often sent to stand watch and participate in town and city militias (a responsibility that would have been amplified for the warlike cutlers' guild), and Meyer learned a great deal about foreign fencing systems during his travels. It's been speculated by some fencing historians that he trained specifically in the Bolognese school of fencing, but this doesn't stand up to closer analysis.[4]

Records show that by 4 June 1560 he had settled in Strasbourg, where he married Appolonia Ruhlman (Ruelman)[1] and was granted the rank of master cutler. His interests had already moved beyond smithing, however, and in 1561, Meyer's petition to the City Council of Strasbourg for the right to hold a Fechtschule was granted. He would repeat this in 1563, 1566, 1567 and 1568;[5] the 1568 petition is the first extant record in which he identifies himself as a fencing master.

Meyer probably wrote his first manuscript (MS Bibl. 2465) in 1561 for Georg Johann Ⅰ, Count Palatine of Veldenz,[6] and his second (MS A.4º.2) in 1568 for Otto (later Count of Solms-Sonnewalde).[7] Both of these manuscripts contain a series of lessons on training with long sword, dusack, and rapier; the 1561 also covers dagger, polearms, and armored fencing. His third manuscript (MS Var.82), written between 1563 and 1571 and containing a dedication at the end to Heinrich, Count of Eberstein, is of a decidedly different nature. Like many fencing manuscripts from the previous century, it is an anthology of treatises by a number of prominent German masters including Sigmund ain Ringeck, pseudo-Peter von Danzig, and Martin Syber, and also includes a brief outline by Meyer himself on a system of rapier fencing based on German Messer teachings.

Finally, on 24 February 1570, Meyer completed an enormous treatise entitled Gründtliche Beschreibung, der freyen Ritterlichen unnd Adelichen kunst des Fechtens, in allerley gebreuchlichen Wehren, mit vil schönen und nützlichen Figuren gezieret und fürgestellet ("A Thorough Description of the Free, Chivalric, and Noble Art of Fencing, Showing Various Customary Defenses, Affected and Put Forth with Many Handsome and Useful Drawings"); it was dedicated to Johann Casimir, Count Palatine of Simmern,[6] and illustrated at the workshop of Tobias Stimmer.[8] It contains all of the weapons of the 1561 and '68 manuscripts apart from fencing in armor, and dramatically expands his teachings on each.

Unfortunately, Meyer's writing and publication efforts incurred significant debts (about 300 crowns), which Meyer pledged to repay by Christmas of 1571.[1] Late in 1570, Meyer accepted the position of Fechtmeister to Duke Johann Albrecht of Mecklenburg at his court in Schwerin. There Meyer hoped to sell his book for a better price than was offered locally (30 florins). Meyer sent his books ahead to Schwerin, and left from Strasbourg on 4 January 1571 after receiving his pay. He traveled the 800 miles to Schwerin in the middle of a harsh winter, arriving at the court on 10 February 1571. Two weeks later, on 24 February, Joachim Meyer died. The cause of his death is unknown, possibly disease or pneumonia.[5]

Antoni Rulman, Appolonia’s brother, became her legal guardian after Joachim’s death. On 15 May 1571, he had a letter written by the secretary of the Strasbourg city chamber and sent to the Duke of Mecklenburg stating that Antoni was now the widow Meyer’s guardian; it politely reminded the Duke who Joachim Meyer was, Meyer’s publishing efforts and considerable debt, requested that the Duke send Meyer’s personal affects and his books to Appolonia, and attempted to sell some (if not all) of the books to the Duke.[1]

Appolonia remarried in April 1572 to another cutler named Hans Kuele, bestowing upon him the status of Burgher and Meyer's substantial debts. Joachim Meyer and Hans Kuele are both mentioned in the minutes of Cutlers' Guild archives; Kuele may have made an impression if we can judge that fact by the number of times he is mentioned. It is believed that Appolonia and either her husband or her brother were involved with the second printing of his book in 1600. According to other sources, it was reprinted yet again in 1610 and in 1660.[9][10]

Contents

Treatises

Joachim Meyer's writings are preserved in three manuscripts prepared in the 1560s: the 1561 MS Bibl. 2465 (Munich), dedicated to Georg Johannes von Veldenz; the 1563-68 MS A.4º.2 (Lund), dedicated to Otto von Solms; and the MS Var. 82 (Rostock), including notes on teachings from Stephan Heinrich von Eberstein and which Meyer may have still been working at the time of his death in 1571. Dwarfing these works is the massive book he published in 1570 entitled Gründtliche Beschreibung der ...Kunst des Fechtens ("A Thorough Description of the... Art of Fencing"), dedicated to Johann Kasimir von Pfalz-Simmern. Meyer's writings purport to teach the entire art of fencing, something that he claimed had never been done before, and encompass a wide variety of teachings from disparate sources and traditions. To achieve this goal, Meyer seems to have constructed his treatises as a series of progressive lessons, describing a process for learning to fence rather than merely outlining the underlying theory or listing the techniques. In keeping with this, he illustrates his techniques with depictions of fencers in courtyards using training weapons such as two-handed foils, wooden dusacks, and rapiers with ball tips.

The first section of Meyer's treatise is devoted to the long sword (the sword in two hands), which he describes as the foundational weapon of his system, and this section devotes the most space to fundamentals like stance and footwork. His long sword system draws upon the teachings of Freifechter Andre Paurenfeyndt (via Christian Egenolff's reprint) and Liechtenauer glossators Sigmund ain Ringeck and Lew, as well as using terminology otherwise unique to the brief Recital of Martin Syber. Not content merely to compile these teachings as his contemporary Paulus Hector Mair was doing, Meyer sought to update—even reinvent—them in various ways to fit the martial climate of the late sixteenth century, including adapting many techniques to accommodate the increased momentum of a greatsword and modifying others to use beats with the flat and winding slices in place of thrusts to comply with street-fighting laws in German cities (and the rules of the Fechtschule).

The second section of Meyer's treatises is designed to address new weapons gaining traction in German lands, the dusack and the rapier, and thereby find places for them in the German tradition. His early Lund manuscript presents a more summarized syllabus of techniques for these weapons, while his printed book goes into greater depth and is structured more in the fashion of lesson plans.[11] Meyer's dusack system, designed for the broad proto-sabers that spread into German lands from Eastern Europe in the 16th century,[12] combines the old Messer teachings of Johannes Lecküchner and the dusack teachings of Andre Paurenfeyndt with other unknown systems (some have speculated that they might include early Polish or Hungarian saber systems). His rapier system, designed for the lighter single-hand swords spreading north from Iberian and Italian lands, seems again to be a hybrid creation, integrating both the core teachings of the 15th century Liechtenauer tradition as well as components that are characteristic of the various regional Mediterranean fencing systems (including, perhaps, teachings derived from the treatise of Achille Marozzo). Interestingly, Meyer's rapier teachings in the Rostock seem to represent an attempt to unify these two weapon system, outlining a method for rapier fencing that includes key elements of his dusack teachings; it is unclear why this method did not appear in his book, but given the dates it may be that they represent his last musings on the weapon, written in the time between the completion of his book in 1570 and his death a year later.

The third section of Meyer's treatise is omitted in the Lund manuscript but present in the Munich and the 1570, and covers dagger, wrestling, and various pole weapons; to this, the Munich adds several plays of armored fencing. His dagger teachings, designed primarily for urban self-defense, seem to be based in part on the writings of Bolognese master Achille Marozzo,[13] but also include much unique content of unknown origin (perhaps the anonymous dagger teachings in his Rostock manuscript). His staff material makes up the bulk of this section, beginning with the short staff, which, like Paurenfeyndt, he uses as a training tool for various pole weapons (and possibly also the greatsword), and then moving on to the halberd before ending with the long staff (representing the pike). As with the dagger, the sources Meyer based his staff teachings on are largely unknown.

Temporary section break

Temporary section break

Additional Resources

The following is a list of publications containing scans, transcriptions, and translations relevant to this article, as well as published peer-reviewed research.

References

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 Dupuis, Olivier. Joachim Meyer, escrimeur libre, bourgeois de Strasbourg (1537 ? - 1571). In Maîtres et techniques de combat. Dijon: AEDEH, 2006.
  2. ↑ Naumann, Robert. Serapeum. Vol. 5. T.O. Weigel, 1844. pp 53-59.
  3. ↑ According to his wedding certificate.
  4. ↑ The influence of Achilles Marozzo's printed treatise is, however, apparent in the rapier illustrations of his 1561 manuscript and the dagger plays in his book.
  5. ↑ 5.0 5.1 Van Slambrouck, Christopher. "The Life and Work of Joachim Meyer". Meyer Frei Fechter Guild, 2010. Retrieved 29 January 2010.
  6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 Though as a prince of the Wittelsbach dynasty, he was addressed by the loftiest titles held by the family: Count Palatine of the Rhine and Duke of Bavaria.
  7. ↑ Norling, Roger. "The history of Joachim Meyer’s fencing treatise to Otto von Solms". Hroarr.com, 2012. Retrieved 14 February 2015.
  8. ↑ Whose members included Christoph Maurer and Hans Christoffel Stimmer.
  9. ↑ Schaer, Alfred. Die altdeutschen fechter und spielleute: Ein beitrag zur deutschen culturgeschichte. K.J. Trübner, 1901. p 76.
  10. ↑ Pollock, W. H., Grove, F. C., and Prévost, C. Fencing. London and Bombay: Longmans, Green, and co, 1897. pp 267-268.
  11. ↑ Roberts, James. "System vs Syllabus: Meyer’s 1560 and 1570 sidesword texts". Hroarr.com, 2014. Retrieved 14 February 2015.
  12. ↑ Roger Norling. "The Dussack - a weapon of war". Hroarr.com, 2012. Retrieved 6 October 2015.
  13. ↑ Norling, Roger. "Meyer and Marozzo dagger comparison". Hroarr.com, 2012. Retrieved 15 February 2015.
  14. ↑ Up to this point, the text matches the Lund manuscript, folia 6r to 7r.
  15. ↑ Note: this translation could be interpreted to mean “so that your half edge slides downward [presumably on his blade], hitting his right shoulder”. Meyer used the words mit Glitschen = to slither, to slide, to glide, to move with sliding.
  16. ↑ A number in the margin refers to the illustration in page number 13.
  17. ↑ The text starts matching the Lund manuscript again here (beginning on folio 7v), continuing until the Figures.
  18. ↑ Note: The Lund also mentions “the figure above” yet that figure does not appear in the Lund! Here it does, and it could be a representation of Meyer himself?
  19. ↑ The "l" appears to be written over another letter, perhaps a "b".
  20. ↑ Note: here I have included this line for clarity from Dr. Forgeng’s 1568 Lund translation: “Therefore every fighter shall know as has been said above, for when two good fighters come together, whoever thinks quicker triumphs quicker.”
  21. ↑ Note: the image shows the opponent on the left in Barrier Guard with point to the ground, hence Meyer’s advice to “take his blade away from the ground”.
  22. ↑ 22.0 22.1 22.2 22.3 Torn page on left.
  23. ↑ 23.0 23.1 Torn page on right.
  24. ↑ To help illuminate the connections to Liechtenauer's teachings, I've added the verse numbers used in the Johannes Liechtenauer article and the various glosses to Kevin's translation. I've also added a few footnotes, and included my initials to distinguish them from Kevin's notes. Note all the verses in this section are found in Christian Egenolff's 1531 edition of Andre Paurenfeyndt's treatise—except the "First Rhyme", verses 17-20. ~Michael Chidester
  25. ↑ Note: the interpretation here is a generalized summary found in the 1570 at Ⅰ.45v—46r
  26. ↑ These two lines are a paraphrase of verse 77 of Liechtenauer's Zedel. ~MCC
  27. ↑ This rhyming section is reminiscent of the eight-line Indes poem found in several of the 15th century glosses (despite not being part of Liechtenauer's Zedel), but only the last two lines are the same. ~MCC
  28. ↑ This rhyme found in Egenolph's 1531 Frankfurt edition of Pauernfeindt, page 4v.
  29. ↑ Unclear.
  30. ↑ This rhyme found in Egenolph's 1531 Frankfurt edition of Pauernfeindt, page 7r.
  31. ↑ Note: gesechen = may be gesehen ENHG
  32. ↑ Unclear.
  33. ↑ This is a reference to Liechtenauer verses 56 and 79. ~MCC
  34. ↑ Liechtenauer verse 57. ~MCC
  35. ↑ This is the fourth of Paurnfeyndt's Twelve Rules for the Beginner Fencer, found on page 4r of Egenolff 1531. This is particularly odd because the first line comes from Egenolff, but the second line seems to be from Liechtenauer verse 11, which the rule was based on. The version in the fourth rule is Der darff sich kunst nit frewen. ~MCC
  36. ↑ The above text appears somewhat synonymous with pages 44-45 of the Lund Dussack section, except that in the Lund Meyer says there are 12 cuts and yet here he says there are 16.
  37. ↑ This text also appears in the Lund pg 45, yet there Meyer gave an alternate name to the Watch guard as Luginslandt, here he does not mention Luginslandt. Additionally, Meyer does not include the Blind Cut in the Lund, yet here he does and it also appears in 1570 Dussack. In addition, here Meyer names the Slice and the Bow as guards. Yet in the 1560 he lists them with the guards but says they are the two parrys. Here he gives a separate paragraph about these two.
  38. ↑ Above text also appears in Lund 47v.1.
  39. ↑ The translation for this paragraph is incomplete. The missing part says something like "thus trap his hand as is drawn here, step behind him, and". ~MCC
  40. ↑ Lund 57v.1 Zornhau.
  41. ↑ The first paragraph “A good attack from the Steer” is synonymous in the 1560 57v.2. Last two paragraphs here are not found there.
  42. ↑ Unclear.
  43. ↑ Found in Lund 60v.1.
  44. ↑ Abrauschen = to shoot off.
  45. ↑ The second rule omits this sentence found in the Lund, “so that your Dussack comes onto your left shoulder”, and rather Meyer says here, “lift simultaneously your body together with the Dussack to your left side”. Then the Lund synonymously says “turn your body well after your Dussack upon your left side”.
  46. ↑ These two paragraphs found in Lund 61v.1 and 62r.1; with above noted differences.
  47. ↑ The 4th rule and other paragraph synonymous with Lund 62r.2, 62r.3
  48. ↑ The Counter to the Bow is synonymous with Lund 62v.1, except that here Meyer added the target of striking besides his parry to the face, ad also changed last line to read: “This technique often works as has been shown previously in the Bow”, while in the Lund he says “This technique often works as has been shown previously in the Bow and Change.” So he omitted the word Wechsel or Changer here.
  49. ↑ It refers to the picture set at the page with the number 31.
  50. ↑ Found in Lund 63r.1 63r.2 63r.3.
  51. ↑ Above paragraph “Breaking in over the Bow” is found in Lund 63v.1. Here Meyer added schenkel (thigh), also he added another line to the next; “zum gesicht das dein versatzung hoch pleibt” The third paragraph here is not found in the Lund.
  52. ↑ First paragraph here found as last and separate para in 63v.1 Lund. Meyer changed words here on the last line of the second paragraph from hand to haft, “so that your haft remains high”.
  53. ↑ Durcken Zug = this may mean Turkish Cut. A slice using a drawing motion, usually with a curved blade.
  54. ↑ Kniebugen = crook of knee, bend of knee.
  55. ↑ These descriptions differ in wording from the Lund.
  56. ↑ Apicem id from Latin: Apex Cut or a Scalp Cut; as also used in the Lund.
  57. ↑ Possible translation of anckell: “back of head”, as the image clearly shows a strike there.
  58. ↑ Curious typographical sign.
  59. ↑ Unclear.
  60. ↑ Note: The first paragraph of Two Constrainers appears in Lund 55v.1, but it does not include second paragraph found here from left steer.
  61. ↑ This paragraph is from Lund 56r.1, but is titled there: "a Good Stuck from the Constrainer"; here Meyer calls it an “Example”.
  62. ↑ The Rose Cut's first paragraph above is found in the Lund 56r.2, but the 2nd paragraph here is not found in Lund.
  63. ↑ Feler hau description here is mostly synonymous with the Lund 50r.1, but here Meyer ends with “how it is reported in the Boch hau”, which is not found in the Lund.
  64. ↑ Synonymous with Lund 56v.3.
  65. ↑ Synonymous with Lund 57r.1.
  66. ↑ Synonymous with Lund 57r.2.
  67. ↑ Unclear.
  68. ↑ Arbeit im einlauffen from Lund 60r.2; last 3 lines do not appear in Lund. Item etc.
  69. ↑ The isolated “s” seems a mistake and not the beginning of an unfinished word.
  70. ↑ The Drivings also appear in Lund 64v.1 – 65r.1.
  71. ↑ Note this line is missing from 6th driving here, but found in Lund 65r.1: sonderlich einem starcken zum schlachtschwert, "particularly for someone who is strong with a Battlesword".
  72. ↑ Note: The handwriting appears closer together with less spacing between sentences and words, so that maybe the author had a lot to share and yet was bound to limit the page space used? Appears Crammed together more.
  73. ↑ Unclear.
  74. ↑ Unclear.
  75. ↑ Unclear.
  76. ↑ Unclear.
  77. ↑ Unclear.
  78. ↑ 78.0 78.1 78.2 orig. dolchen; all instances of "dagger" in this document are dolchen excepy when footnoted.
  79. ↑ orig. ararmschirleinn
  80. ↑ orig. stichen, "thrust"/"stab" (context dependent); instances of stabbing that use other verbs will be footnoted.
  81. ↑ orig. Armschiene - seemingly a part of the armour
  82. ↑ orig. geordinirtt
  83. ↑ orig. schießen; see here
  84. ↑ orig. findt
  85. ↑ orig. spis
  86. ↑ orig. schwertt
  87. ↑ orig. sebell
  88. ↑ 88.0 88.1 orig. kempff degen; it can mean either “combat sword” or “combat dagger” (Source 1, Source 2). See here for a painting with kempffdegen in its caption
  89. ↑ 89.0 89.1 orig. Anngreiffen; "attacking" or "grappling"; cf. angreifen
  90. ↑ orig. zimlich
  91. ↑ alt. "endure"
  92. ↑ Ittem has many potential meanings: "further", "likewise", "the same as", and also simply as a means of 'bullet-pointing' numerous items. I've found that "likewise" works as an apt translation most of the time, but for clarity I will leave it untranslated. See this article.
  93. ↑ orig. noch eines Idenn woll gefalen
  94. ↑ orig. Reren; cf. Rohre/Röhre
  95. ↑ orig. lest
  96. ↑ orig. Schranckenn
  97. ↑ orig. dringen/thringen; refers to pressing one's point into an opponent['s armour/mail], cf. modern sense of "pushing through a crowd". See this glossary for more information
  98. ↑ orig. donerschlag; a strike with the hilt of the longsword while holding the blade
  99. ↑ orig. vnnd las Inn vorverthobenn; messy ink makes it difficult to transcribe; possible alt. "and read above beforehand"
  100. ↑ A blunt strike, as opposed to a cut or slice. See here.
  101. ↑ orig. versezen; alt. "parrying"
  102. ↑ Unclear.
  103. ↑ orig. ansezen; most likely means "pinned", "planted" (in the sense of placing your weapon or hand against an opponent, in a grappling sense); alt. "attacking" (cf. modern ansetzen). See this glossary for more information
  104. ↑ orig. erlang
  105. ↑ see nachreissen
  106. ↑ 106.0 106.1 106.2 106.3 106.4 106.5 106.6 orig. stehenn; often coupled with ansezen in this section; alt. "stand against"
  107. ↑ orig. uchsen
  108. ↑ orig. Gelenck. Refers to joints in armour, but also body parts - in the context of armoured fencing, it is most likely referring to the joints in the armour
  109. ↑ orig. greifest
  110. ↑ 110.0 110.1 110.2 110.3 orig. brich
  111. ↑ orig. anbrichen
  112. ↑ 112.00 112.01 112.02 112.03 112.04 112.05 112.06 112.07 112.08 112.09 112.10 112.11 orig. stos
  113. ↑ orig. goch
  114. ↑ 114.0 114.1 114.2 114.3 114.4 114.5 114.6 orig. schlag
  115. ↑ 115.0 115.1 115.2 see absetzen
  116. ↑ orig. drissel; cf. thrissel
  117. ↑ orig. schlag dein beidt vnder dein Recht achsell. From interpretation, the word schlag here doesn't make much sense: it's possible that beidt was intended to be said or written as bindt, as in "put your grip under your right shoulder".
  118. ↑ orig. Achsell
  119. ↑ 119.0 119.1 see Ringen
  120. ↑ 120.0 120.1 see arbeiten
  121. ↑ 121.0 121.1 121.2 121.3 121.4 121.5 orig. streich, cf. schlag
  122. ↑ 122.0 122.1 122.2 122.3 122.4 122.5 122.6 122.7 orig. inndes
  123. ↑ alt. "attacks"
  124. ↑ orig. last Er dür die seitten
  125. ↑ 125.0 125.1 orig. Ring; alt. lists
  126. ↑ orig. vergesezsten
  127. ↑ 127.0 127.1 127.2 see abzucken
  128. ↑ orig. fies
  129. ↑ 129.0 129.1 see gleich
  130. ↑ unclear transcription; possibly nim, ergo "take the weight"
  131. ↑ Unclear.
  132. ↑ orig. zwerchs
  133. ↑ 133.0 133.1 orig. degen; see kempffdegen
  134. ↑ orig. hawen. A cut or slice, as opposed to a blunt strike. See see here.
  135. ↑ 135.0 135.1 135.2 orig. bickell; most likely referring to the artificial, "mason's hammer", pickaxe shape of the crossguard in armoured fencing
  136. ↑ orig. klos
  137. ↑ orig. Stuck
  138. ↑ orig. knefftiglich, interpreted as krefftiglich
  139. ↑ orig. verfelen - described earlier in 1561 as a feint whereby you wait for your opponent to react to a strike, then change the direction of the strike
  140. ↑ orig. entgehenn
  141. ↑ orig. faren/auffaren; cf. fahren
  142. ↑ originally transcribed as knefftiglich, but krefftiglich (lit. "powerfully") seems more likely, in my opinion
  143. ↑ orig. gerecht; possible mistranscription/misspelling of gemecht, lit. "groin" or "genitals"
  144. ↑ 144.0 144.1 144.2 orig. las dein bindt fahren, lit. "let your grip drive"; alt. "release your grip and drive"
  145. ↑ Possibly "hauberk"(?).
  146. ↑ 146.0 146.1 orig. ausnemen; alt. "take out [the blade with a parry]"; "deflect"(?)
  147. ↑ orig. verzoblen; cf. verzögern
  148. ↑ lit. oben hutt; contrast Oberhutt
  149. ↑ orig. heutt; possible verb form of hutt
  150. ↑ orig. überwegest
  151. ↑ 151.0 151.1 orig. schlagen. Probably means "place" in this context.
  152. ↑ orig. sez; no accompanying adposition but I assume he means ansezen
  153. ↑ listen
  154. ↑ orig. Bundtschlag, lit. "grip strike"
  155. ↑ orig. fertt
  156. ↑ orig. wie nechst
  157. ↑ orig. oder Aber fus gesicht, lit. or but foot face, possible alt. "or his foot or face"
  158. ↑ orig. wendt
  159. ↑ orig. Reüb
  160. ↑ orig. geschmidt, lit. smithed. Possibly misspelling of Geschmeidt, which means "jewellery" - perhaps slang for gemecht ("genitals)".
  161. ↑ orig. steßen
  162. ↑ orig. abgewünnen
  163. ↑ Note that he uses the word degen but seems to refer to the aforementioned "threefold" dagger, which he referred to using the word dolchen.
  164. ↑ orig. feder
  165. ↑ orig. spietzen
  166. ↑ Reference in the left margin to picture on page 61.
  167. ↑ orig. auf dz schlos am Rucken; alt. "clasp of the back"
  168. ↑ orig. Wappenrock
  169. ↑ Unclear whether die refers to the dagger or the heart, here
  170. ↑ orig. kurz halbenn; alt. "short edge"
  171. ↑ orig. concordiren
  172. ↑ This word overwrites an initial die.
  173. ↑ The first 10 lines of this paragraph are shorter of 30% than the last four, as if there is a left place here for a picture or a diagram.
  174. ↑ The second letter looks a bit like a “b” but it is nonsense. It can be also considered like a small capital “e”.
  175. ↑ The first letter corrected from “w” by cancelling the first bow of the letter.
  176. ↑ The first letter could also read as an “l", but “b” seems more probable here.
  177. ↑ The first letter corrected from “b” by overwriting.
  178. ↑ The ink is a bit blurred, particularly in the beginning of the word which results in an ambiguous reading; stucken would be more plausible in this context but does not fit with the appearance of the first couple of letters at all.
  179. ↑ The writer first wrote hawst but the “s” has been cancelled afterwards.
  180. ↑ Recte: und.
  181. ↑ The writer first wrote arms but the final “s” has been cancelled afterwards.
  182. ↑ The letter “s” has ben cancelled just before the word den.
  183. ↑ Above the letter “i” a large circle is drawn as it is used to mark the letter “u”.
  184. ↑ Doubling of the word seitten, considered as a mistake and corrected here as the first finished a line.
  185. ↑ Setzen has been written afterwards just under ver- and looks like a catchword; however, the following page does not start with the same word. It could be a mistake of the scribe.
  186. ↑ An abbreviation sign at the end of the word tends to signify that it should be expanded to hawen, but it has been cancelled.
  187. ↑ The “h” is writen above a “e”.
  188. ↑ Unclear reading. The word has been corrected, possibly from zu, which, however, cannot be definitely affirmed.
  189. ↑ The words und oder after this word are cancelled.
  190. ↑ At this place is a sign that commonly indicates a line break or an end of a paragraph. Here, however, the following text continues in the same line.
  191. ↑ The first letter appears to be a cancelled “t”; however the reading remains ambiguous.
  192. ↑ The end of this word, sicht is inserted below the line at the right, like a catchword. However, the following written page, fol. 23r, does not start with the same word. Could be a mistake by the scribe or a clue for a missing page.
  193. ↑ After this word a large circle is drawn and its only meaning seems to complete the line to the right and avoid a big default in the right alignment.
  194. ↑ The letter “d” is cancelled just before the “b” of this word.
  195. ↑ The initial letter “b” is written above another letter, maybe a “g”.
  196. ↑ This first two letters are written above the letter “k”.
  197. ↑ A letter “b” or “l” has been written after this word but has ben cancelled.
  198. ↑ The first letter seems to superscribe an initial “I”.
  199. ↑ The writer firstly wrote an “m” as a final letter and subsequently cancelled the last leg to get an “n”.
  200. ↑ The final letter “t” is written above the line, in replacement for a previously cancelled letter.
  201. ↑ This word is written above a previous one, which is unreadable now.
  202. ↑ The first letters are difficult to make out due to a (water?) damage.
  203. ↑ The first letter of this word has been written above another, now illegible one.
  204. ↑ A letter “h” was written in the second position to begin with but cancelled afterwards.
  205. ↑ The first letter is curiously composed, but seems to have been readen as a "v".
  206. ↑ The second letter has been canceled and corrected by "o" above the line.
  207. ↑ The original text is derholhalben derhalben, which seems to be an unnecessary repetition.
  208. ↑ Doubling of the word handt, a probable mistake as the first is written a the end of the line. Same mistake as 17r.
  209. ↑ Doubling of the words den andern, probable mistake, only it is conserved here.
  210. ↑ A lone letter "h" is writen here, perhaps a beginning for “hew”, which was finally written after the digit “4”. Corrected in this edition.
  211. ↑ This sentence can be found in the printed book: « und merck wann du zur rechten undern Blöß schlechst, es sey flech, lang oder kurtz » (plate XXIXv from the 1570 edition)
  212. ↑ The third letter “h” was cancelled by overwriting it with an “l”.
  213. ↑ The letter “a” is crossed out in the beginning of the word.
  214. ↑ The first letter was first written in lower case but was corrected with an upper-case letter.
  215. ↑ Unclear reading. It appears as if the scribe first intended to write “halber” but noticed his error in the middle of the word. The reverse may be true also.
  216. ↑ The "R." has been inserted at the end of the line afterwards.
  217. ↑ Right of this place a large blank space remains until the end of the line.
  218. ↑ The written put a "n" between sch and enckel and canceled it.
  219. ↑ Linck and seitten are reversed in the manuscript but superscribed with “1” and “2” respectively in order to indicate the correct order.
  220. ↑ Corrected from Im, the first stroke of the “m” has been cancelled.
  221. ↑ Spitz uber- is clearly copied twice, this is probably an eye-skip.
  222. ↑ Correction done on sticht by canceling the last letter.
  223. ↑ This entire paragraph is justified on the right by a vertical line, unique in the manuscript.
  224. ↑ Corrected on Ⅲ.47v.
  225. ↑ Corrected on Ⅲ.47v.
  226. ↑ The "st" ligature is inverted.
  227. ↑ Typo, should be "wolt, könne".
  228. ↑ Originally printed "abzutzest", but corrected on Ⅲ.47v.
  229. ↑ Originally printed "verhauren", but corrected on Ⅲ.47v.
  230. ↑ The "t" is inverted.
  231. ↑ Ⅲ.47v indicates that this was printed "erbangen" and needed to be corrected to "erlangen", but that's not true in any copy available for consult.
  232. ↑ Originally printed "mim", but corrected on Ⅲ.47v.
  233. ↑ Originally printed "Higur", but corrected on Ⅲ.47v.
  234. ↑ Originally printed "Fellen", but corrected on Ⅲ.47v.
  235. ↑ Originally printed "gem" (with an inverted g), but corrected on Ⅲ.47v.
  236. ↑ Originally printed "allo", but corrected on Ⅲ.47v.
  237. ↑ Originally printed "Atm", but corrected on Ⅲ.47v.
  238. ↑ The first 't' is inverted.
  239. ↑ Terminal 'e' is inverted.
  240. ↑ Originally printed "bleiden", but corrected on Ⅲ.47v.
  241. ↑ Originally printed "klnie", but corrected on Ⅲ.47v.
  242. ↑ Originally printed "duch", but corrected on Ⅲ.47v.
  243. ↑ The second "e" is inverted.
  244. ↑ Originally printed "fein", but corrected on Ⅲ.47v.
  245. ↑ Originally printed "behendig ich", but corrected on Ⅲ.47v.
  246. ↑ Misnumbered 87r.
  247. ↑ 247.00 247.01 247.02 247.03 247.04 247.05 247.06 247.07 247.08 247.09 247.10 247.11 247.12 247.13 247.14 247.15 247.16 247.17 247.18 247.19 247.20 247.21 247.22 247.23 247.24 247.25 247.26 247.27 247.28 247.29 247.30 247.31 indes
  248. ↑ palm up
  249. ↑ Illegible deletion.
  250. ↑ oberhauw
  251. ↑ ‘right’ is originally written, ‘left’ is written above it
  252. ↑ short edge
  253. ↑ “Degen”, lit. dagger, could either refer to a sword or dagger.
  254. ↑ short edge
  255. ↑ Unleserliche Streichung. Illegible deletion.
  256. ↑ Unleserliche gestrichen Einfügung oberhalb der Zeile. Crossed out illegible insertion above the line.
  257. ↑ Die Schlaufe des »h« trägt ein Diärese. The loop of the “h” carries a diaeresis.
  258. ↑ Korrigiert aus »mitelhauw«. Corrected from “mitelhauw”.
  259. ↑ Leicht unleserlich. Slightly illegible.
  260. ↑ Überschriebens »vom«. Overwritten “vom”.
  261. ↑ Inserted by means of a special mark.
  262. ↑ Word inserted next to the text.
  263. ↑ Inserted nest to the text.
  264. ↑ Zwei Worte am Seitenrand nachgetragen. Two words inserted at the margin.
  265. ↑ Wort am Seitenrand nachgetragen. Word inserted at the margin.
Early Germanic Traditions
Common Fencing Johannes Liechtenauer reversed.jpg
Wrestling
Liechtenauer
Tradition
Beringer Verse
Augsburg Tradition
Other Works
Fabris Tradition
Retrieved from "https://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Joachim_Meyer&oldid=150701"