In my study of I.33, I have found that there are a handful of techniques that, rather than being one specific action, are rather a concept or several variants of a technique. It is important to recognize this distinction, otherwise you will be stuck trying to fit one single specific action into multiple plays and situations where it might not fit. This is something that is blatantly obvious to people who study Fiore, or Liechtenauer, etc. and people have no trouble distinguishing between say, the broader concept of a Zucken, which can comprise of many individual variations, and the more specific applications of what exactly a “Schielhau” is*.

In I.33, there are some specific actions or techniques. Falling Under Sword and Shield is a specific technique. It is always described the same way, illustrated pretty much the same way, and used in the same way. Doing the Schutzen against 2nd Ward is a specific action or technique*. This is relatively simple to interpret (no more complicated than anything else). The problem arises with techniques that seem like broader concepts rather than specific actions. If this is forgotten, and you treat them like they are specific techniques, it will lead to getting yourself stuck with interpretations that fit with one specific variant or the other, and not the others.

One example of this in I.33 is the “Durchtreten”. Basically translated as “tread-through”, the two main instances of the Durchtreten in I.33 are found on Folio 2v, during the first play of Halfshield vs 1st Ward, and then on Folio 9r and 9v, during the play of Schutzen vs 2nd Ward. In the play from 1st Ward, we are told that when we Fall Under Sword and Shield, and our opponent overbinds and enters, that one of our options is to do the Durchtreten. Unfortunately, it doesn’t ever illustrate this option, while it does illustrate the other two options, Mutate and Grasping the Arms. If we continue reading, we then get the play after you’ve done Schutzen against 2nd Ward. Once 2nd Ward binds against you, it says we can then press their sword down and “Durchtreten”, and this time, we are given an illustration. What we are shown is that from this bind, we would push their sword down and to our left, and then cut behind their sword to their face while closing distance and making buckler contact. But here’s the issue. This is clearly not an option from the left underbind that occurs in the 1st Ward play. We are under their sword, and so we obviously can’t press their sword down and cut behind it to their face. So what’s the solution?

Durchtreten means “tread-through”. The term “treten” or “tritt” (tread) seems to consistently refer to some kind of footwork in other german fencing traditions. This implies that the technique of Durchtreten gets its identifying feature from its footwork, not its blade action. So let’s look at the example that we have illustrated for us in I.33:

————— ——————–stupid———-format————————-We see the Student doing Schutzen, then the Priest binds against it. Then we see the distance close, and the Student is striking behind the sword while pressing his buckler in. It would seem to me that this technique is done by “stepping through” and almost walking past your opponent. You push sword sword down and to the left, and then you “tread through” to the right, walking past him as you strike. The strike itself is not the Durchtreten, but rather it is the act of moving past your opponent.

Applying this to the play from 1st Ward being besieged by Halfshield, we see that you end up in a left underbind, with your sword to the left, underneath your opponent’s sword as he overbinds you. It then tells us that one of our options is to do the Durchtreten. In this case, the strike is different, but we should apply the same principle. If we step past our opponent to the right and strike behind the bind, it would be the Durchtreten. Same action of stepping past the opponent, of “treading through” past the bind, and striking behind, although in this case the strike will be underneath the opponent’s sword and arms rather than above. Or perhaps it could be done as a thrust, although in keeping with the idea of “treading through, I would prefer the cut so the sword is not getting stuck in your opponent as you close distance and move past them.

So we see that while both are named “Durchtreten”, they are both different specific actions that both fall under the same “broader concept” of stepping or treading through, no matter what strike you are doing or exactly what bind you are in.

Another example of a “technique” which is actually a broader concept is with the “Separation of Sword and Shield”. It is found on Folios 3v, 11r, 24r, 27v, and 28r. It is not explicitly illustrated in the plays on Folio 3v, 27v, and 28r.

We have two illustrations of this “technique”. On Folio 11r, we are told that if you besiege 2nd Ward with Halfshield, he may attempt to strike to separate your sword and shield. It is noted that it is something that “common fencers” will be tempted to use, and that it only works if the one doing Halfshield tarries or hesitates. On Folio 27v, and 28r, we are told about the same “strike to separate sword and shield” done from 5th Ward against Halfshield, and we are told that it is the same as what occurs with 2nd Ward. It tells us that when we use Halfshield against 5th Ward or 2nd Ward, we should expect a strike to separate sword and shield, and to enter and stab “without mercy” to prevent it. This action seems pretty clear and simple at first glance. From 2nd Ward or 5th Ward, it will seem tempting that a strong vertical strike that glances off of the opponent’s strong/forte can separate his sword and shield, either striking his hands and arms, or opening up an easy path to stab him in the chest. Illustrated on 11r, it seems to fit.

Folio 3v is the play from 1st Ward against Halfshield, where after we do the Mutate and get a left overbind, we do the Nucken (a strike/feint up to the head that draws his buckler upwards), and then follows the separation of sword and shield. In this instance, the “Separation of Sword and Shield” seems to be a strike downward onto the arm/arms of the opponent. It is somewhat similar to the strike done from 2nd or 5th Ward, but it is different in that it is not a direct vertical strike from a Ward, but rather it is a shorter cut done after feinting to draw his buckler away from his sword, opening up his arms for a strike. Of course, this strike can also be directed at the opponent’s body between his sword and buckler. This entire action is noted as being Priestly, particularly the Nucken (which must logically be followed by a strike between the now-separate sword and buckler).

Folio 24r is different (or so it seems). Here we are shown how from the right overbind, we can do a strike to separate sword and shield, and that it is a “useful” strike. It seems that this action is a rising strike with the short edge, probably resulting in a thrust to the chest. From the right overbind, it hooks from underneath and goes with the point in between the opponent’s arms to thrust to the chest or face. This is rather different from the other uses. First of all, it is done from below, going underneath the opponent’s arms. Second, it doesn’t really directly strike at the gap between sword and shield, but rather goes past them and goes between the arms.

Again we see that the “technique” that is called “Separation of Sword and Shield” is really more of a broader concept, where we attempt to strike or thrust between the opponent’s sword and shield. Indeed it’s interesting that the two times it is called useful or priestly, it is being done from a bind, whereas the time it is done as a strike directly from a Ward it is called common.

While this seems like the most direct action from the right overbind would be to do a short edge rising strike that aims to thrust from underneath and between the arms to the chest, and it seems to work in practice, I also question whether this action is maybe more similar to the other instances of separating sword and shield, or perhaps if those other actions are similar to this one. For example, it is possible that from the right overbind, maybe we are supposed to, after having pressed his sword down and to the right, flip the sword back to the center to strike vertically between sword and shield. Both versions would fit the illustration. Although in practice, it seems like trying to do this vertical strike from a right overbind would not work well as your opponent’s buckler will be in a better position to block it. As for the other instances of the technique, it is also possible that from 2nd or 5th Ward, we are being told to strike short and let our point go below his buckler in order to then thrust behind it between the arms. Again, this seems to work in practice, and would still fit the illustration. However, the text uses the consistent terminology of calling it a strike (plagam), which pretty much always refers to an actual strike or cutting action, not a thrust. Meanwhile the text on 24r (from the right overbind) interestingly mentions that it is a useful strike which separates sword and shield, and then “enters”, a term which is used in I.33 to refer to a thrust. So while it is tempting to try and interpret all 3 versions of the “Separation” as being the same action (either all three as a vertical strike, or as a thrust from below), and indeed all versions might work in practice, I see no reason or solid evidence that would make me conclude that they are the same, and it seems easier to just consider all the versions as “Separating Sword and Shield”, and that it is a broader concept rather than one specific sword action.

Separation of Sword and Shield can be achieved by feinting to draw his buckler upwards and then striking down between his arms (which is Priestly), it can be achieved by striking between his extended sword and buckler in halfshield (which is Common), or it can be achieved by overbinding and hooking the sword up under his arms to thrust between them (a “useful” strike which allows this thrust).

*note that I am not counting slight variations in the exact way you do a technique, or slight variations in position, height, angle, etc. of the sword and/or buckler. I am talking about distinct variations in how the technique is done, yet still called the same technique. In the case of Durchtreten, it is a variation of doing a strike from above or a strike from below as you step through past the bind. In the case of Separating Sword and Shield, it is the difference between a vertical strike from above and a rising strike/thrust with the short edge from below.