Questions, then:
1. Does the German school in fact think in terms of simultaneous counter-attack rather than parry ?
2. If so, does it work ?
Thearos
Staff Sergeant
Posts: 178
Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2011 9:16 am
1. First of all, there is no german school.
There is Lichtenauer, i.e. his commentators like in the 3227a ms in the Nuremberg housebook, the various authors in the Peter von Danzig fencing bookk, Paulus Kal, Sigmund Ringeck etc. Even Talhofer obviously started as a Lichtenauerian but then altered the teachings to his sort of own brand.
Then we have various manuals that have a different approach - for example the Gladiatoria group.
Although german by language, a different brand in soime regards to Lichternauer's style.
But that's just on a sidenote.
To answer your question in regard of the Lichtenauer commentaries:
Lichtenauers approach is to have the initiative in the fight. Therefore he advocates to put the opponent under pressure and force him to make mistakes. The idea is that a parry is always a reaction upon an attack. Being reactive means that you will always be that glimpse of a moment late, which gives the ione in action an advantage.
Therefore he advocates the idea of maintaining or regaining the initiative of the fight. Now a simultaneous counter-attack as you called it, is one possibility. The Zwerchhau is a good example for that, as it covers a line against an incoming attack, but simultaniously threatens the opponent with your point.
BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT LICHTENAUER KEEPS ATTACKING ALL THE TIME. This is still one of the major misconceptions abouit Lichtenauer. What he says is to attack with commitment once you're attacking. BUt that doesn't mean he advocates attacking all the time for the sake of attacking.
In fact, there are several situations where it is clearly stated that those who attack by pure force only or rely on strength only, will be put to shame. This is what Lichtenauer calls a "Büffel" = a buffalo, a fnecer with pure strength, but no eye for the tempo, distance, opening, behaviour of the opponent etc.
2. Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
Have a look at what is actually described in the manuals: they describe what to do next, when your initial move fails or when you were to slow and your opponent attacks first etc.
Of course it's the ideal if your Zornhau counterstrike immediately hits your opponent while his strike misses.
BUt most of the times it doesn't work, therefore the "Zornhau with it's plays" or the "Zwerchhau with it's plays" etc. You have that all the time in the manuals: the "Zufechten" = the initial attack, delivered by an opponent, then what to do against that, than a break for that action, than a counter to the that, than you get into a close distance and start wrestling on the sword where there are locks and counters ahgainst them etc.
Lichtenauer or his interpreters back then obviously were aware of the fact they have to teach more than jsut the five hidden strikes to be prepared against all sorts of attacks.
