This week we will be taking advantage of one of the greatest benefits from reading somewhat later masters, like Joachim Meyer and George Silver, by looking closer at a subject that most early treatises speak little of; tactics. We will here only focus on the former master though, and take a look at what tactical advice he gives on combat. However, before we actually do that, we should perhaps look at the definition of that very word; tactics, as it is often confused with strategy. Here is one definition of the two:
Tactics are the actual means used to gain an objective, while strategy is the overall campaign plan.
So, strategy is the long-term plan that uses different shorter-term tactics to achieve the objective. In combat the objective is commonly to hit the opponent, although it can also be to dominate the opponent or just flee unscathed. To do this, different strategies are used, like e.g. confusing and overwhelming the opponent, which can be done using different tactics, like moving constantly, taking the initiative first, provoking, fenting etc. Looking to the strategies Meyer is close to the earlier masters, but tactically he expands on the older art by also using for the time modern concepts from many sources, not least the Bolognese tradition.
Holistic reading and general or particular advice?
To understand Meyer’s Art of combat one needs to consider his full teachings on all weapons as they are all linked together and in many aspects build on each other and share the same concepts and ideas, even some near identical examples of techniques and stances.
This is expressed explicitly in many places as can be seen e.g. in these two quotes, and it returns in several other places as well.
Now that I have laid the groundwork with sword combat, next comes the dusack, which takes its basis from the sword, as the true source of all combat that is carried out both with one and two hands. Since it is, after the sword, not only the weapon most used by us Germans, but also an origin and basis of all weapons that are used with one hand… (1)
Now since the dusack is so nearly related to the sword that the greater part of the techniques that are used in the sword with both hands, are executed with very little variation in the dusack with one hand… (2)
A Systematic Description and Teaching of Combat with the Dusack, in which many manly and shrewd devices are discussed in good order, and presented one after another, through which prospective students may be better trained to skill in this, and then in combat with the rapier. (3)
Noteworthy in the second quote is that Meyer here says that the longsword is the most commonly used weapon of his time, but after that comes the dusack, not the rappier as one might expect. About the dusack Meyer also later says that:
I have discussed this weapon so extensively because commonly youths are led to skill in it… (4)
Which is quite interesting. It appears as if the dusack was considered a fun and reasonably safe weapon to learn some basics with, thus popular for teaching youths with, perhaps further indicated by certain fechtschule anecdotes describing young men fighting with dussacken, but none having any success in causing their opponents to bleed so the dusack fights had to be halted.
There are also certain structures in the book that I believe have their roots in several things, things which might further help us understand the book and the concepts and tactics described therein. Primarily they are three in number:
1. One or two earlier treatises authored by Meyer himself.
This is clear with the shared material from his earlier manuscript dedicated to Duke Otto von Solms, examplified for instance by the second half on the longsword in the 1570 treatise.
2. Guild material, possibly from the Marxbrüder guild.
Meyer’s longsword section too includes a similar poem and both these possibly point to an older, oral tradition of teaching similar to the Liechtenauer Zettel. It may even be traces of a Marxbrüder Zettel, where in particular the moral aspects appear to fit well in with the ways of a guild and highly reminiscent of the oaths of such guilds, more so perhaps than with Meyer himself trying to infuse more moral into the reader.
When Grass and Greenery did grow up
so fast as hate and envy
Thus had the sheep and cattle
every year a good winter (5)
Now this particular poem appears to be a proverb of Austrian origin as described in Lexikon der Sprichwörter und Redensarten Band 28, Volym 28, but it seems too much of a coincidence for it to appear in both treatises and it seems more likely that the two are connected through the Marxbrüder.
3. The guild hiearchy for teaching and advancing.
The guilds both in England and the Holy Roman Empire appear to have had the following temporal structure for teaching students at different levels:
- Longsword (Scholar)
- One hand swords: dussack, backsword, rappier (Scholar)
- Great Two-hand sword, Polearms (Free Scholar/Provost/Master)
There are likely several different reasons for this progression, but I believe much of it relates to a concern for risk and security, as the polearms (the Schlachtschwert was also counted as such) are the most dangerous and were thus only trained after a strong foundation was in place after some 6-7 years of guild training under a personal master. It is also my belief that this explains why the book has a rare few examples of thrusting with the longsword, while there are plenty with all other weapons; a concern for the young fencers’ safety when starting working with the book.
However, again, for a deeper understanding of the fuller Art of Meyer, we need to consider all of his concepts and tactics spread out throughout the treatise. This should not be taken to mean that there aren’t advice and concepts unique and particular for each individual weapon though.
Mentality, strategy and tactics
Single hand weapons or forward heavy weapons generally involve a tactic which at its core means that you normally don’t attack twice without having a clear opening, or creating one, that you feel very confident in exploiting. This naturally leads to a fencing that has a core pattern of attack-parry, attack-parry, with both fighters constantly taking turns in attacking and defending. However, this should not be read as a suggestion for mostly attacking and parrying statically – in turn – but rather be read as a focus on only every second cut being intended to hit, generally speaking.
This I suspect is the core for the two-handed swords as well and that we in our fighting often display a too aggressive and suicidal style of fencing that would cause ourselves great injury if done without protection.
Now when two people meet with these cuts, the two chief elements, that is cuts and parries, produce a wonderful struggle, since everyone will be more inclined to strike than parry, so that now the one strikes, now the other; now the one parries, now the other; thus they both struggle over the Before with their simultaneous devices, and strive for mastery. (6)
For if you want to fight soundly with one-handed weapons, then you shall accustom yourself always to send three cuts quickly one after another; nor should it be just a single kind of cut, but always vary and change between the High, Middle, and Low, in such a manner that always one of the three hits, either the first, the second, or the third. (7)
… so too it is no use to be overly aggressive with striking, or to cut in at the same time against his strokes recklessly as if with closed eyes, for this resembles not combat but rather a mindless peasants’ brawl. (8)
This type of fencing is heavily reliant on staying at a distinct distance though, constantly adapting to maintain this reasonably controllable distance, a distance where your bind is near the middle of the blade or just outside of it. If we end up closer, then other measures need to be taken.
Of course there are techniques that change this, as we simply are too close for this to work, but at the correct distance, the “single-hand” mentality can be used.
Some advice on character types and associated tactics
Meyer is very interesting in that he not only talks about tactics and strategy, but also about the related topic of psychology as this is very important to the former two topics. He brings it up already in the foreword where he says:
Now since everyone thinks differently from everyone else, so he behaves differently in combat (9)
However, he is the most explicit on this topic in the following passages:
Therefore I should also say something here about the qualities of people, who in this art of combat can naturally be divided in to four categories, and thus four kinds of combatants are to be found based on diligent observation. Now so that you may have an introduction to reflect usefully about these, I will firstly ennumerate them to you, and then offer a short lesson and precept how you shall conduct yourself against each of them.
And the first are those who, as soon as they can reach the opponent in the Onset, at once cut and thrust in with violence.
The second are somewhat more moderate, and do not attack too crudely, but when an opponent has fully extended with a cut, fallen low with his weapon, or else has bungled in changing, they chase and pursue rapidly toward the nearest offered opening.
The third will only cut to the opening when they not only have it for certain, but have also taken heed whether they can also recover from the extension of the cut back into a secure parrying, or to the Defence Strokes [Wehrstreich]; I also mostly hold with these, although it depends on what my opponent is like.
Now the fourth position themselves in a guard and wait thus for their opponent’s device; they must be either fools or especially sharp, for whoever will wait for another person’s device must be very adept and also trained and experienced, or else he will not accomplish much.
Now as the first ones are violent and somewhat stupid, and as they say, cultivate frenzy; the second artful and sharp; the third judicious and deceitful; the fourth like fools; so you must assume and adopt all four of them, so that you can deceive the opponent sometimes with violence, sometimes with cunning, sometimes with judicious observation, or else use foolish comportment to incite him, deceive him, and thus not only betray him concerning his intended device, but also make yourself room and space for the opening, so that you can hit him that much more surely. (10)
For as we are not all of a single nature, so we also cannot all have a single style in combat; yet all must nonetheless arise and be derived from a single basis. (11)
Particularly noteworthy here is that he recognizes that we are all different and need to fight in different ways because of that, but that ideally we should also be able to adapt different styles according to what suits best with the nature of our opponent’s character and fighting style.
So what are Meyer’s general advice that can be applied to all combat? In my opinion, the most important tactics described and examplified are the following:
Don’t stand still in guard!
Now as regards the postures, I would not have you remain long in any of them, since they are not invented or devised for this purpose, but so that when you draw up your sword for a stroke, and it is time for you to cut in the middle of pulling up as you gather your joints, you will know how to send your sword at once quickly back against him when you reach the furthermost point in drawing up your sword.
However, this is the reason that even experienced fighters sometimes linger in a guard, namely that you not only should undertake no cut or stroke thoughtlessly, but also that after you have pulled up and gathered yourself for this stroke, and at that moment shall send the stroke forth, you shall linger in that furthermost point for just a bit, almost only for the blink of an eye, to reconsider whether it is worth completing your intended stroke, or whether in the meantime a better opportunity has arisen for you, so that you should change it at the furthermost point to another cut, and complete the High cut, for which you have pulled up, with a Thwart.
This is the chief cause of the invention of the postures, and therefore he who sometimes lies in a posture should see what the intention of the other one is, so that he may know better how to catch him in his own devices. (12)
And you shall well note here (as I have also said previously) that the postures must be understood not merely as a position in which to wait for the opponent’s fighting, but much more as a beginning or end of the cuts and parrying.
– – –
Now this is the chiefest reason for the invention of these postures, that when you pull up into a posture for a cut, you can change it while you are still in the air, and turn or send it to another opening; also when you pull up for a cut, that at the furthermost point into which you come with pulling up, you can tarry an instant to see whether he will cut at your opening as you cut, so that you may perceive in the air whether you can reach him over his incoming cut by cutting simultaneously over it. Nonetheless you shall tarry no longer in any posture than as long as it takes to gather for the stroke, but always change off from one posture into another, until you perceive opportunity to cut. (13)
A couple of things here are particularly important. First of all the stances derive from the movements, not vice versa. It is where you end up in cutting, parrying and failing your attacks as they are broken by the opponent’s parries. Knowing them well and recognizing them makes you quicker in recovering and continuing in a flow as well as better defended against the opponent’s actions. Also knowing how to mask them will confuse your opponent, which can be used to your advantage.
Furthermore, we shouldn’t plan our next action when we are in stance, but when we are on our way into a stance, ie while still attacking or parrying, or while shifting stances. This is a very important advice and one of the bigger differences to what many of us do today, trusting in the “guards” to protect us.
And firstly, I do not want you to wait in the postures for the opponent’s attack, but as soon as you can rush upon and reach him, you shall lay on against him with your devices according to your opportunity, and fully execute them. (14)
This is of course also identical to the advice given by Liechtenauer and the masters who followed him, so Meyer is well in line with the older tradition here. However, interestingly Meyer also notes that this tactic doesn’t always work since the opponent may be better, stronger, more fit etc than you. In short, sooner or later you will fuck up. Consequently he advises the following.
… nonetheIess it often happens that you cannot begin your device in the Before, much less carry it out usefully, without same harm befalling you as a result. Therefore it necessarily follows that you should position yourself judiciously with fine yet serious comportment in a posture in which he cannot readily cut at you without incurring his own harm and disadvantage, so that being safe in this posture you can look to lay on against him according to your opportunity, or are prepared to wait for his cuts. (14)
This however, should not be interpreted as standing still waiting in a single guard for extended periods of time, as already described in the previous advice.
Thrust from the bind!
And that is the true summary and final intent of all counters, namely whenever two cuts connect or bind, that just as they knock in the bind, you thrust in before you on his dusack, regardless of where his dusack goes from yours. (15)
Extending this advice to the longsword can appear a bit controversial, but note that Meyer has several instances of thrusting with the longsword, although they are used for provoking the opponent to act since otherwise the thrust will hit his face. It really can’t be any clearer than that. However the frequency of thrusting is lower than in the older treatises and with a longsword they aren’t described as actual hits, which has caused quite a bit of confusion. For this I ask you to consider both the suggestions given earlier about the nature of the treatise, its roots and purpose with a defined progressive teaching structure, as well as Meyer’s way of extending principles over all weapons, even picking techniques from one weapon and applying it with another of which there are plenty examples of in the text.
This shouldn’t be taken to mean that Meyer is a great advocate of thrusting with the longsword though. He appears to use them as is suitable, but generally promote the cutting over thrusting, for various reasons tied to contexts of culture, societal practices and more, that all emphasize the virtues of such a priority.
If he tends to cut wide: Void and counterattack with quick cuts or thrusts!
… when you wish to fight with an opponent, then take heed if he lays on quickly with his devices, and sends his cuts wide around; if so, then arrange all your devices such that if he should stray too far, you will rush to the opening with countercutting while he is overextended into his cut. Yet do not be too eager, so that you do not lose any advantage. (16)
– – –
if your opponent cuts with his weapon either too far up or down, or too far out to the side, then you rush after him at his opening and thus prevent his cut coming to completion; for this may properly be used against those who fight with their cuts sweeping wide around them. (17)
– – –
Also note that chasing is when an opponent goes too high upward, and you chase him below either with cutting or slicing as he draws up for the stroke; likewise if he strays too wide to the side, and you chase his weapon to the opening from above. And in all chasing, if he escapes you, be sure to turn your long edge against his weapon (18)
This is the concept of Nachreissen, ie attacking after the opponent acts either by voiding his attack by stepping back or to the side and then counter-attacking or by cutting in quickly as the opponent moves between stances usually when pulling up for a strike from above, or by slicing to the arms before he can cut. By nature such strikes are quick but less powerful. This tactic is used against people who strike with more power than they can control either due to an over-eager personality, lack of physical strength/mechanics or bad footwork/balance, thus over-extending in the strikes.
Also quite importantly, he suggests to always use the long edge when acting in Nachreissen, to quickly bind the sword after your attack so you are well defended as he attempts to recover. This concept we return to below.
If he tends to void and counterattack: Provoke and feint!
Now if your opponent will not cut at you, and positions himself before you such that you cannot blithely cut in at his opening, you will need to know how to counter all postures, and how to drive him out of them, namely thus: if your opponent positions himself in whatever guard he will, then thrust straight from the Longpoint in his face; from whichever side he then strikes out your thrust, cut in at him on the same side. (19)
Secondly if your opponent will not cut first, but busies himself to parry and countercut, then make use of deceiving: send your cuts to his parrying, pull it back before it is completed, and cut to another opening. Also you shall pay heed to his posture, and do not cut at his opening to hit, but to bring him out of his advantage, so that you can hit him that much more certainly with the second cut, depending on whether he strays high or low. (20)
Now there are two types of deceiving: the first is executed with the weapon, the second with body language. (21)
And here is the tactic for facing people who follow the previous advice, ie people who tend to always cut after. Consequently your tactics should be to fool them into thinking you are attacking, so they will try to void and countercut or to bind and counterattack, thus opening them up in a way that you can exploit. Meyer as well as Musashi basically both give the same advice here: Cut to the opening you just created, but also be prepared to defend the one you leave open while doing so.
Consciously use your cuts and thrusts with 3 different intents: Provoking – Displacing – Hitting.
As discussed in earlier articles there are different ways of defining cuts and thrusts. Meyer here gives us three distinctions according to the intent of our action, ie if we wish to hit, to displace his sword in his guard or attack, of just make a feint to make him vulnerable and create a new opening to attack. Most exchanges include at least two of these types, and they can be arranged in any order.
I will distinguish the cuts into three uses: that is, firstly they are used to provoke; secondly to take or parry; thirdly to hit. The Provoking Stroke is what I call the cut with which I goad and provoke the opponent to go out of his advantage and to cut. The Taker is what I call the cut with which I cut away and take out the cuts to which I have stirred and goaded him. The Hitter is what I call the cut when, after I have first goaded him to strike, and secondly taken out the stroke to which I provoked him, then thirdly I cut quickly to the nearest opening before he recovers from his parried stroke. (22)
Further you shall also know and note that one always changes off with the three cuts, such that sometimes the first, sometimes the second, sometimes the third will be a Provoker, Taker, or Hitter. Therefore when you can hit with the first, you shall use the second for parrying; but if you hit with the second, then parry with the third. For if you want to fight soundly with one-handed weapons, then you shall accustom yourself always to send three cuts quickly one after another; nor should it be just a single kind of cut, but always vary and change between the High, Middle, and Low, in such a manner that always one of the three hits, either the first, the second, or the third. And I will remind you of this as examples arise later in the devices. (23)
This tactics is used with all weapons regardless of length and one of the most important in Meyer’s teachings. It is hugely important to understand the different natures of cuts and how to apply them well in any exchange. Here Meyer doesn’t disregard the older teachings with the Maisterhäuwe (Master Cuts), but rather adds to it and expands the older concepts by incorporating ideas from other fencing traditions like e.g. Bolognese fencing. Still, the Meisterhäuwe are hugely important and included in both the Displacing and the Hitting cuts as a key feature. However, Meyer is unusual here in that he also advices us on which of the Meisterhäuwe that are the best for displacing:
Now the other parrying is when you simultaneously parry and hit; it happens with the reversed cuts, such as the Squinting Cut, Clashing, Crown, and Thwart Cut. (24)
So the examples of the best “displacers” we have here are thus: Zwerchhauw (Across Cut), Schielhauw (Squinting Cut), Kronhauw (Crown Cut) and Glützhauw (Clashing Cut).
Zwerching is half the fight
Yes, in Meyer’s opinion half your cuts should be a Zwerch. It is the most important cut to master and a core component of Meyer’s cutting art. He explains it quite explicitly himself with the following words:
The Thwart is one of the chief master techniques [Meisterstuck] with the sword; for you shall know, if the Thwart did not exist in modern combat [‘fighting of today’], then fully half of it would go out the window, particularly when you are under the opponent’s sword, where you can no longer attack with long cuts through the Cross (25)
Always cut from the sword to the body and the body to the sword!
Thus you shall now go in all devices from the sword to the body, and from the body to the sword. (26)
… draw the cuts correctly from the bind to the body, and from the body to the Bind, that is to the dusack. (27)
The implication of this is that you should never do just one strike, but always several in sequence (although using cuts with different purposes, as described above) before retreating. On this Meyer also says the following:
For if you want to fight soundly with one-handed weapons, then you shall accustom yourself always to send three cuts quickly one after another; nor should it be just a single kind of cut, but always vary and change between the High, Middle, and Low, in such a manner that always one of the three hits, either the first, the second, or the third. (28)
Therefore I particularly wish to advise you, if you want to make this book useful for yourself, that you will above all things learn to deliver the cuts fluidly, long, and well… (29)
It is also very closely related to the next general advice:
Withdraw with a threat! (Abzug/Ab zucken)
So, we are told to cut from the body and to the sword and vice versa, but why? Well it has to do with controlling the opponent’s blade to stay safe while finding openings. This is important both for attacking, but also for retreating permanently or temporarily, a concept further explained with the term Abzug (or in Ringeck’s words Abzuck).
Although, as they say, to have begun well may in all things practically half acquit you, yet equally on the other hand a poor finish may ruin and bring to nothing everything that was weIl and properly done up to that point, as may daily be seen.
– – –
Now it is particularly to be noted that after every device has been executed, you must always withdraw in one of these three ways: either first, before your opponent; or last, after him; or else at the same time as him. (30)
Again, this is closely connected to the tactics advised by both Meyer and Musashi, where the latter advices you to always return your sword in the same path of your cut, to protect yourself and the former advices you to exploit the opponent’s actions against him and cut into the openings they leave open as they cut. They are both saying the same thing from slightly different angles.
And then the final advice:
Don’t do things you can’t do!
Some things will not work for your body type, and like Meyer in his foreword mentions that everyone thinks differently and thus fights differently, we are also all physically different. This can well mean that you will never be able to do certain things, even things that an instructor is trying to teach you. Meyer says it with the following words:
If your body will not allow you to do this, then you should not execute the lower Cross, for it is not for everyone, etc. (31)
By all means attempt to learn everything, but do not use things you haven’t mastered in a situation where you need to depend on your greatest skill and knowledge. That will cause you trouble. And by extension; if you master nothing, then don’t get into a fight at all.
With that I conclude this week’s article and I sincerely hope you found it interesting and useful. Next time we will begin to cover the topic of Stances.
1. The stages of a fight and distance (Published)
2. Vor, Nach & Nachreissen (Published)
3. The Schweche, the Mittel and the Stercke (Published)
4. Fuhlen, Indes, Hard and Soft, Weak and Strong and if you like; just fuck it all. (Published)
5. Kinetic energy, leverage, Versetzen and distance (Published)
6. Types of cuts (Published)
7. Mentality and tactics (Published)
8. Mess with the mind, then with the body (Published)
9. The point of stances (Published)
10. Shifting Grips (Published)
12. The Line and protecting the hands
15. The Zwerchhauw, the Wechselhauw and the Verfliegen
16. Flow and Combat application
17. Solo Exercises
18. Partner Exercises
Until next time, thank you for taking the time to read this and feel free to comment and share your ideas! Have a great weekend everyone!
1. Meyer Joachim (1570): Gründliche Beschreibung der Freyen Ritterlichen und Adeligen Kunst des Fechtens (2.1R-2.2R) Translation by Dr. Jeffrey L. Forgeng
2. Meyer Joachim (1570): Gründliche Beschreibung der Freyen Ritterlichen und Adeligen Kunst des Fechtens (2.49 v.2) Translation by Dr. Jeffrey L. Forgeng
3. Meyer Joachim (1570): Gründliche Beschreibung der Freyen Ritterlichen und Adeligen Kunst des Fechtens (Title page for the dusack section) Translation by Dr. Jeffrey L. Forgeng
4. Meyer Joachim (1570): Gründliche Beschreibung der Freyen Ritterlichen und Adeligen Kunst des Fechtens (2.49 v.2) Translation by Dr. Jeffrey L. Forgeng
5. Andre Paurñfeyndt (1516): Ergrundung Ritterlicher Kunst der Fechterey. Translation by Kevin Maurer, available at <http://www.wiktenauer.com/wiki/Andre_Paur%C3%B1feyndt>
6. Meyer Joachim (1570): Gründliche Beschreibung der Freyen Ritterlichen und Adeligen Kunst des Fechtens (B4R) Translation by Dr. Jeffrey L. Forgeng
7. Meyer Joachim (1570): Gründliche Beschreibung der Freyen Ritterlichen und Adeligen Kunst des Fechtens (2.18r2) Translation by Dr. Jeffrey L. Forgeng
8. Meyer Joachim (1570): Gründliche Beschreibung der Freyen Ritterlichen und Adeligen Kunst des Fechtens (1.15R) Translation by Dr. Jeffrey L. Forgeng
9. Meyer Joachim (1570): Gründliche Beschreibung der Freyen Ritterlichen und Adeligen Kunst des Fechtens (B4R) Translation by Dr. Jeffrey L. Forgeng
10. Meyer Joachim (1570): Gründliche Beschreibung der Freyen Ritterlichen und Adeligen Kunst des Fechtens (2.99R-2.99V) Translation by Dr. Jeffrey L. Forgeng
11. Meyer Joachim (1570): Gründliche Beschreibung der Freyen Ritterlichen und Adeligen Kunst des Fechtens (2.18R-2.20R) Translation by Dr. Jeffrey L. Forgeng
12. Meyer Joachim (1570): Gründliche Beschreibung der Freyen Ritterlichen und Adeligen Kunst des Fechtens (1.31R) Translation by Dr. Jeffrey L. Forgeng
13. Meyer Joachim (1570): Gründliche Beschreibung der Freyen Ritterlichen und Adeligen Kunst des Fechtens (2.18R-2.20R) Translation by Dr. Jeffrey L. Forgeng
14. Meyer Joachim (1570): Gründliche Beschreibung der Freyen Ritterlichen und Adeligen Kunst des Fechtens (2.1R-2.2R3) Translation by Dr. Jeffrey L. Forgeng
15. Meyer Joachim (1570): Gründliche Beschreibung der Freyen Ritterlichen und Adeligen Kunst des Fechtens (2.28R) Translation by Dr. Jeffrey L. Forgeng
16. Meyer Joachim (1570): Gründliche Beschreibung der Freyen Ritterlichen und Adeligen Kunst des Fechtens (2.49r.2-2.49r.v1) Translation by Dr. Jeffrey L. Forgeng
17. Meyer Joachim (1570): Gründliche Beschreibung der Freyen Ritterlichen und Adeligen Kunst des Fechtens (1.17V) Translation by Dr. Jeffrey L. Forgeng
18. Meyer Joachim (1570): Gründliche Beschreibung der Freyen Ritterlichen und Adeligen Kunst des Fechtens (1.59v.3) Translation by Dr. Jeffrey L. Forgeng
19. Meyer Joachim (1570): Gründliche Beschreibung der Freyen Ritterlichen und Adeligen Kunst des Fechtens (2.28V) Translation by Dr. Jeffrey L. Forgeng
20. Meyer Joachim (1570): Gründliche Beschreibung der Freyen Ritterlichen und Adeligen Kunst des Fechtens (2.49V) Translation by Dr. Jeffrey L. Forgeng
21. Meyer Joachim (1570): Gründliche Beschreibung der Freyen Ritterlichen und Adeligen Kunst des Fechtens (2.65V) Translation by Dr. Jeffrey L. Forgeng
22. Meyer Joachim (1570): Gründliche Beschreibung der Freyen Ritterlichen und Adeligen Kunst des Fechtens (2.18R) Translation by Dr. Jeffrey L. Forgeng
23. Meyer Joachim (1570): Gründliche Beschreibung der Freyen Ritterlichen und Adeligen Kunst des Fechtens (2.18r.2-218V) Translation by Dr. Jeffrey L. Forgeng
24. Meyer Joachim (1570): Gründliche Beschreibung der Freyen Ritterlichen und Adeligen Kunst des Fechtens (1.16R) Translation by Dr. Jeffrey L. Forgeng
25. Meyer Joachim (1570): Gründliche Beschreibung der Freyen Ritterlichen und Adeligen Kunst des Fechtens. (1.55R). Translation by Dr. Jeffrey L. Forgeng
26. Meyer Joachim (1570): Gründliche Beschreibung der Freyen Ritterlichen und Adeligen Kunst des Fechtens (1.34v.1) Translation by Dr. Jeffrey L. Forgeng
27. Meyer Joachim (1570): Gründliche Beschreibung der Freyen Ritterlichen und Adeligen Kunst des Fechtens (2.39R) Translation by Dr. Jeffrey L. Forgeng
28. Meyer Joachim (1570): Gründliche Beschreibung der Freyen Ritterlichen und Adeligen Kunst des Fechtens (2.18r.2-2.18V) Translation by Dr. Jeffrey L. Forgeng
29. Meyer Joachim (1570): Gründliche Beschreibung der Freyen Ritterlichen und Adeligen Kunst des Fechtens (2.14V) Translation by Dr. Jeffrey L. Forgeng
30. Meyer Joachim (1570): Gründliche Beschreibung der Freyen Ritterlichen und Adeligen Kunst des Fechtens (1.23R) Translation by Dr. Jeffrey L. Forgeng
31. Meyer Joachim (1570): Gründliche Beschreibung der Freyen Ritterlichen und Adeligen Kunst des Fechtens (2.58v3) Translation by Dr. Jeffrey L. Forgeng