On Thursday evening my 8:00 PM dussack class was dominated by the guard known as the Boar (Eber), and the use of low guards in Joachim Meyer’s dussack system. Meyer describes the Boar in chapter 13 of the dussack as follows:

“You have heard something about the high postures along with their devices; now follow the postures by which the high guards are countered; for when your opponent fights you from above, then you shall fight him from below. The guard of the Boar is used only on the right side, as shown by the figure on the left in image M.”

There are a few details to mention here. Note that the lead foot, quite unlike most of Meyer’s guards, is not turned outward. My current hypothesis is that this is usually done to provide a “gateway” for the rear foot to move through during passing steps, but I will address this in another post. The lead foot seems parallel to the floor line right beside it, while the rear foot is almost perfectly perpendicular. If one uses the line between the folds in the figure’s doublet to represent the centerline, it seems this stance is somewhat forward weighted, though not tremendously so. Unlike most postures in Meyer’s system, we can see the non-weapon arm forward of the body, with the hand by the side of the fencer’s face. The weapon hand is pulled back and away with a noticeable bend in the elbow, while the dussack itself has the point facing slightly downward (I jokingly refer to this position as the “prison shank” stance, as it resembles the “on-guard” position seen in many videos of prison shiv fights).

Before moving forward with the use of the Boar (Eber), it is important to address a point that Meyer makes in his description of the guard:

“… when your opponent fights you from above, then you shall fight him from below.”

This makes good intuitive sense, as it benefits neither party for both fencers to take the same guard during a fight. The purpose of any guard is not only self-protection, but also to constrain the abilities of your opponent. A good example of this would be that if one fencer takes the position of the Bow (Bogen), a guard which protects the head and upper body quite well against high cuts, it makes little sense for the other fencer to use those cuts. Just by virtue of using a particular guard, you alter what your opponent is likely to do and what they can hope to succeed at. It stands to reason, then, that if your opponent has a high guard you might want to take a low guard, one that is well positioned to receive a cut and also threaten the opponent’s lower body (which he has left open simply by drawing up into his high guard).

Meyer gives several good example Devices (Stucke) for the Boar, many of which are very similar to previous Devices for other guards. For example:

“The first device tells how you shall let his stroke slide off on [your] dusack, and countercut long

When an opponent encounters you in one of the high postures on the right, then position yourself in the Boar; as soon as he cuts at you from above, then step well out from his stroke with your right foot toward his left, and at the same time as this step go up with hanging dusack so that you let his stroke slide off on your Bow. And quickly cut long after through his left with two strokes, one after the other.”

Meyer also gives fantastic advice for single-time thrusting counters:

“If he cuts from above, then step with your right toward his right, and thrust the point of the dusack straight at his face, and with this thrusting forth, catch his cut on your long edge.”

Another example:

“Or after you have caught his cut from the Boar with the Bow, then quickly step with your left foot well around his right, and thrust outside over his right arm at his face.”

So it seems from looking through his example Devices that Meyer sticks to his normal formula for parrying; the Bow (Bogen) for parrying high cuts and the Straight Parrying (gerade Versatzung) for low cuts, but he does also mix it up with the use of several thrusts in his examples.

What we discovered while doing parrying drills for this guard (where one fencer attacks on each of the angles and the other responds from said guard) was that the Boar lends itself to slicing cuts using the gerade Versatzung, and that these slicing cuts do particularly well with an angular offline step. For example, working against a #2 cut (downward diagonal from the left) one can easily just raise the dussack to cover that line, and do a slight angular increase with the lead foot and the opponent will essentially fall onto the blade with their arm. This also proved true when defending against an angle #4 or #5 cut using the gerade Versatzung (Straight Parrying), as well as 3 and 6 (for obvious reasons). For Meyer’s oberhau (cut #7), it was quite easy to fall into Meyer’s example device using the stop-thrust at the face. Usually if the thrust missed its mark it was of no major concern, as the edge was so near the opponent’s face it was easy to do a quick slice to the ear or cheek.

Meyer concludes his chapter on the Boar (Eber) by saying:

“The Roarer and the Waker both counter the Boar.”

What Meyer is referring to here are the Roaring cut (Brummerhau) and the Waker cut (Weckerhau). These two cuts are addressed in chapter 4, where the author describes the secondary cuts of his dussack system. Their description follows:

“Roarer Cut [Brummerhauw]

The Roarer Cut has this name because it goes so swiftly in its course that it sends forth a kind of bellowing wind; do it thus:

See that you drive your opponent high with his parrying; with this, turn your grip around so that you have your dusack crooked; pull your hilt around your head with hanging dusack, and cut beside your right from below across with the crooked edge under his dusack at the radius-bone of his forearm, or inside at the tendon, depending on how high he has gone, with a step out on your right foot toward his right; but let your dusack shoot back before your face for parrying.

Waker Cut [Weckerhauw]

Execute the Waker Cut thus in the Onset:

Deliver a powerful High Cut in at him; if he parries the cut, then note as soon as it clashes or hits on his parrying, and turn the cut into a thrust; thrust your dusack around on his, in at his face, as shown by the two figures on the right in this image [P]. If he goes up, then cut upward with the crooked edge through his arm, as you can see in the large figures.”

As a side note, my hypothesis is that his response to the Waker being parried is essentially to do a Brummerhauw (Roarer Cut), as the figures seem to attest:

Notice the smaller figures on the right; this is the Waker (Weckerhauw), and the larger figure on the right seems to be doing the counter to the opponent parrying the Waker, which bears a striking resemblance to the description of the Roaring Cut (Brummerhauw).

When Meyer says that the Waker and the Roarer counter the Boar, he seems to be specifically referring to what cuts adequately draw the other fencer out of that guard, rather than what cuts naturally hit the person in that guard. Note that both the Weckerhauw and the Brummerhauw begin as high cuts (Oberhau), and only after the parrying do those artful secondary cuts manifest themselves. The goal is that if you are in a high guard (such as the Bow, the Wrath, or others) you will use your naturally descending strike to draw the opponent into a high guard, negating the advantage they had by monitoring your unprotected midsection, and then working from there. In many ways, I think this is what Meyer (and other German fencers) meant when they talk about “breaking” a guard.

In next week’s class we’ll be using these cuts to counter the Boar, and we’ll see what we discover.