This is my current translation of the comparison treatise by a Master Andreas, a copy of which is contained within the Codex Speyer.
It is quite an interesting and short source, but it is written somewhat ambiguously in places, and I suspect that it is a copy rather than the original version of the treatise, since there are many “errors” that would be quite easy for a copyist to make but that one might reasonably expect the original author to avoid. In my translation, I have taken the liberty of rearranging the tables a little and also “correcting” the “errors” that I perceived, so that the translation I offer here is what I believe the original author was trying to convey even if the copyist introduced some errors into the script.
This is not an approach I normally take with my translations, but I think it is warranted in this case, and I think the end result is improved by this choice. In case anyone would like to follow my rationale for the various “corrections”, I discuss them in the footnotes.
I worked from Dierk Hagedorn’s transcription of the treatise from the Codex Speyer:
- Andreas (c.1491), Codex Speyer, MS M.Ⅰ.29, Universitätsbibliothek Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria, ff. 5r-7r
I would like to thank Ross Bailey for his help in proofreading my translation and giving me the benefit of his experience with studying the messer, to ensure that I was not talking nonsense about the half of this treatise that I am less familiar with myself!
Please note that this translation is released under copyright, and that while I am more than happy for people to use it for their own training and study, you must contact me to request permission to use it in any publication or for any commercial use.
I have chosen to leave technical terms untranslated, to avoid imposing any unwanted interpretation or baggage on the terms. However, I realise that some people do prefer to see everything translated, including technical terms, so I have offered suggestions in the footnotes.
If you find this translation and its footnotes interesting and useful in your studies, please send me a small donation to help keep the website online and to fund my work and research efforts. I will appreciate it immensely.
Translation
With the sword[1]
Item. Do the Ochs[2] like this: stand with the left foot forward and hold your sword on your right side with the hilt in front of your head, with the short edge facing you,[3] and hold the point towards your opponent’s face.
Item. Do the Ochs on the left side like this: stand with the right foot forward and hold your sword on your left side with the hilt in front of your head, with the long edge facing you,[4] and hold the point towards your opponent’s face.
This is the Ochs on both sides.
Item. These two Hutten[5] or Leger[6] are broken[7] by the Krump haw[8]. You will find in the Zedel[9] how you should do this.
With the messer
Item. You also do these two Hutten with the messer. You do them as with the sword, but one-handed, and with the other hand on your back. This Hutt or Leger is called the Stier[10] with the messer and the Ochs with the sword.
Item. These two Hutten or Leger are broken by the Wecker haw[11]. You will find in the Zedel how you should do this.
With the sword
Item. The second Hutt is called the Pflug[12]. Do it like this: again, set your left foot forward and hold your sword with crossed hands down to your right, with the pommel near your right hip, so that the short edge is above and the point is in front and toward your opponent’s face.
Item. On the left side, do it like this: set your right foot forward and hold your sword down by your left side near your left hip, so that the long edge is turned above and the point is upward and to your opponent’s face.
Item. These two Leger or Hutten are broken by the Schiller haw[13]. You will find in the Zedel how you should do this.
With the messer
Item. With the messer, the two Leger or Hutten are called the Eber[14]. Do them like this: set your left foot forward and hold your messer by your right leg at your right side, with the hilt near your hip, so that the blunt edge[15] is above and the point is in front and to the opponent’s face.
Item. These two Leger or Hutten are broken by the Zwinger[16]. You will find in the Zedel how you should do this.
With the sword
Item. The third Hutt or Leger is Vom Tag[17]. Do it like this: again, set the left foot forward and hold the sword high above the head with arms outstretched, with the long edge forward. Let the point be angled a little behind you, and thus you stand in the Hutt.
Item. This Hutt or Leger is broken by the Zwer haw[18]. You will find in the Zedel how you should do this.
With the messer
Item. With the messer, this Hutt or Leger is called Luginsland[19]. Do it like this: set your left foot forward and hold your messer high in front of the head with outstretched arm, with the long or sharp edge forward. And thus you stand in the Hutt.
Item. This Hutt or Leger is broken by the cut that, with the messer, is called the Entrüst haw[20].
With the sword
Item. The fourth Hutt or Leger with the sword is called the Alber[21]. Do it like this: set your left foot forward and hold your sword with outstretched arms in front of you with the point to the ground, with the short edge above.
Item. Many masters say that this Leger is called the Ysen Pfortt[22], but it is just the same Leger.
Item. This Hutt or Leger is broken by the Schaitler haw[23]. You will find in the Zedel how you should do this.
With the messer
Item. The fourth Hutt or Leger with the messer is called the Bastei[24]. Do it like this: set your left foot forward and hold your messer with outstretched arm in front of you with the point to the ground, with the short edge above.
Item. This Hutt or Leger with the messer is broken by the Schaitler haw. You will find in the Zedel how you should do the stucke[25] of the four cuts. With these you can protect yourself.
Master Andreas
Strikes[26]
| With the sword | With the messer |
| Zorn (Wrath) | Zorn (Wrath) |
| Zwer (Crossing) | Entrüst (Anger) |
| Krump (Crooked) | Wecker[27] (Waker) |
| Schiller[28] (Squinter) | Zwinger[29], Wincker[30] (Constrainer, Winker) |
| Schaitler (Parter) | Schaitler, Gefer[31] (Parter, Threat) |
Guards or positions
| With the sword | With the messer |
| Ochs (Ox) | Stier (Little Bull) |
| Pflug (Plough) | Eber (Boar) |
| Alber or Ysen Pfortt (Fool or Iron Gate) | Bastei (Bastion) |
| Vom Tag (From the Roof) | Luginsland (Watchtower) |
Item. Find it written above how you should do the four strikes against the four Hutten or Leger. With these you can protect yourself.
Freely to me and you.[32]
Footnotes
[1] The sword in question seems to be a longsword; or, perhaps more correctly, any sword being held as a langes schwert (long sword) with two hands on the hilt. The next section about the sword describes the Pflug with “crossed hands”, which suggests that both hands are being used on the sword hilt, meaning that the sword is question is probably not being used in a single-handed fashion.
[2] Ochs could be translated as “ox”.
[3] I.e., with the long edge turned outward.
[4] I.e., with the short edge turned outward.
[5] Hutt could be translated as “guard” as it has the sense of a fortified location.
[6] Leger could be translated as “position” as it has the sense of a temporary encampment or stopping place while on the move.
[7] The original source says bricht, which would normally mean “breaks” and not “is broken by”, which would be gebrochen. However, in the final paragraph of instruction, the source suggests quite clearly that the four strikes are to be done against the four Leger, so that the four strikes break the four Leger rather than the Leger breaking the strikes. Both Liechtenauer (for longsword) and Leckuchner (for messer) talk about the strikes breaking the Leger. Therefore, I have chosen to render what I believe was intended, which is that the strikes break the Leger.
[8] Krump haw could be translated as “crooked strike”.
[9] Zedel could be translated as “schedule” in the sense of a legal document outlining the requirements or details of a piece of work. Several sources contain their own Zedel for fencing, although the most well-known of these was written by Liechtenauer. Which Zedel is being referenced here? It seems most likely that for the sword, the relevant Zedel is that written by Liechtenauer, while for the messer, the relevant Zedel is that written by Leckuchner.
[10] Stier could be translated as “steer” or “little bull”, making it the little version of the Ochs!
[11] Wecker haw could be translated as “rousing strike” or “waking strike”. Leckuchner describes the Wecker with the messer in a manner that is very similar to Liechtenauer’s Krumphaw with the longsword.
[12] Pflug could be translated as “plough”.
[13] Schiller haw could be translated as “squinting strike”.
[14] Eber could be translated as “boar”.
[15] Messers might sometimes only have one main cutting edge, with the back edge being blunt for most of its length (although still perhaps with a short length of false edge near the point) and more like a solid spine to the blade.
[16] Zwinger haw could be translated as “constraining strike”.
[17] Vom Tag could be translated as “from the day” or as “from the roof” since Tag and Dach could be pronounced quite similarly at times.
[18] Zwer haw could be translated as “crossing strike”.
[19] Luginsland could be translated as “watchtower”, a place from which you could look out and survey the land.
[20] Entrüst haw could be translated as the “anger strike” or “outrage strike”.
[21] Alber could be translated as “fool” or “jester”, or as “foolish” or “silly” or “irresponsible”; or alternatively as “poplar tree”.
[22] Ysen Pfortt could be translated as “iron gate”.
[23] Schaitler haw could be translated as “parting strike” or “scalp strike”.
[24] Bastei could be translated as “bastion” or “fortification”, which has a very different sense from Alber, but is more similar to the sense of Ysen Pfortt.
[25] Stucke could be translated as “pieces” or “parts” or “elements”, or as “lessons” or “examples”.
[26] In the original source, these two comparison sections are presented as two tables of data with inconsistent contextual markers, not as two textual sections with headers. For this document, I have changed the formatting and presentation of the information, and I think this now makes it easier to read and compare the strikes and Leger between the longsword and the messer.
[27] I have removed the Zwinger and Wincker from this line, because in the text above, it is the Wecker that is equated to the Krump haw.
[28] The table in the original source misses the Schiller for the sword, so I believe it matches the intent of the original source to add it here.
[29] And with the Schiller added, as per the previous footnote, it makes most sense to move the Zwinger and Wincker to this line, because the text above equates the Zwinger to the Schiller. The Wincker is not mentioned in the main text above discussing the Leger and the strikes that break them; however, as a motion, it seems to be the equivalent of the Zwinger but performed on the dominant side instead of across the body.
[30] Wincker haw could be translated as “winker strike”. It is also one of Leckuchner’s six cuts, most reminiscent of a Sturtz haw (“plunging strike”) in longsword terms.
However, when discussing this translation with Ross Bailey, he noted that the Wincker might not fit here, because while it can be used to break a Leger, it does not close off any lines while doing so unlike the other items mentioned, and is not something you can really use to protect yourself (as you can with the other items mentioned) and is more of a thing you might do against people “who defend freely”.
I think that the best way to reconcile the matter is that if the table was supposed to compare the 5 strikes of Liechtenauer’s longsword with the 6 strikes of Leckuchner’s messer, then the Wincker is worth mentioning here; but if the table was supposed to compare the longsword strikes and messer strikes used to break the Leger, then the Wincker maybe does not need to be in the table. With the inclusion above, and the footnote here, any reader can now think about the matter and come to your own conclusions!
[31] Gefer haw could be translated as “threat strike”, “danger strike”, or “risk strike”.
[32] Maybe a sort of salutation, offering freely the information contained within to the writer and reader together, as we might end a letter with “yours sincerely” or “with best regards”? Or it could be an admonition that the four strikes and four Leger can work effectively for both people, and can be done by each fencer and to each fencer. Or it could easily be something else that is not obvious to me as I prepare the translation!
Version history
This is currently version 1 of the work, translated into English in 2023 and released on this website in 2023.
Please support my work.
A little donation can help to keep the website online, can buy me a book I need for research, or can simply provide me with enough coffee to get through the day!