The five words describe, in a nutshell, good fencing in the LL system. They are: Vor, Nach, Weak, Strong, and Indes.
The RDL Glosses do a good job of defining most of these, except for Indes. Joachim Meyer provides a definition of Indes some 150 years later.
Vor and Nach
Vor (before)
Ringeck: "The Vor is that you shall always come before with a strike or stab to his opening, sooner than he comes to you, so he must parry you. Then work nimbly in the parry in front of you with the sword, from one opening to the other, so he may not come to any technique before your work. Or, if he runs in, come before with the wrestling." The other Glosses are similar, although Danzig introduces the term Indes - "work nimbly Indes in the parry..."
The Vor is clearly, then, about the person who is attacking. That is its objective meaning. We can add all sorts of subjective elements on top of this, for example the person in Vor is controlling the fight, has taken the initiative, etc., however, this is subjective; someone who is swinging wildly with easily avoidable strikes is in the Vor, but their opponent may be the one in control.
Nach (after)
Ringeck writes: "If you may not come to the Vor, wait upon the Nach. Those are the counters upon all techniques which he performs upon you. When he comes before so that you must parry him, work Indes with the parry nimbly in front of you to the nearest opening so you land a hit on him sooner that he brings his technique. In this way you win back the Vor and he remains in the Nach." Danzig writes: "The Nach, those are the counters against all techniques one performs against you...".
Nach seems to be the defensive actions where the fencer tries to defend against the opponent's attacks and tries to win back the Vor. These actions do not need to be wholly defensive.
Discussion
Vor and Nach are a duality. One can either be in the Vor and thus is trying to work his/her attacking techniques upon the opponent, or they can be in the Nach and trying to counter those attacking techniques. If successfully countered, they can win back the Vor by working Indes (see below).
However, the texts suggest that Vor and Nach are not just a 'status', they are a tactical choice: if I am working in the Vor, I do these techniques, if I am working in the Nach I do a different set of techniques.
Because Vor and Nach are a duality, when one fencer is in one, the other fencer is in the other. Recognising that you are in the Vor or in the Nach seems to be important so you know which techniques to use and which not to use.
Vor and Nach can be thought of (inaccurately) as a 'right of way' system. When fencer A is in the Vor, fencer B must work in Nach. This does not mean that Nach is purely defensive, but it must incorporate an element of defence, and ideally an element of attack if possible to win back the Vor.
Weak and Strong
Another duality, weak and strong refers to the parts of the sword - the strong being the hilt to the middle of the blade, and the weak the middle of the blade to the point. Danzig writes "And how you shall work with the strength of your sword towards the weakness of his sword..." Lew writes something similar. Ringeck adds a little more detail: "You shall also note in the Vor and Nach how you shall work with the word Indes according to the weakness and strength of his sword".
So, weak and strong not only refer to the parts of the sword, but how you will use these parts against your opponent during the bind. Being a duality, one opponent is often weak in the bind while the other strong. Strong on strong usually results in the strongest fencer winning, but a fencer can defeat the opponent by winding their strong onto the weak of the opponent's blade. Likewise, an opponent who is weak can use that weakness to their advantage.
Thus, the words weak and strong are encouraging us to practice and master the techniques from the bind, to use strong against weak, and weak against strong.
Indes
The word Indes is generally translated as 'meanwhile' or 'instantly'. The RDL glosses do not give a definition of it. In modern German, Indes means that two actions are ongoing, but not exactly at the same time; rather one action has started after the last action has started, but before the other action has finished (an interuption?).
Lew uses Indes quite a lot:
"You may also, in the 'taking off' not wrench upwards up further with your sword than his point. Strike in indes again to the head." In this example, I have attacked and you have parried hard. During your parry I 'take off' over your point and hit you to the head. I don't wait for your parry to finish before doing this. In this way, I redouble my attack.
"When he takes off above and strikes to your head on your right side, wind your sword with the short edge a little upon his, and strike indes with the long edge to the head". While I am doing the 'take off' above, you follow my sword and strike with a Zwerchau or similar to my head. Again, you start your action after I start mine, but before I finish it. You interrupt my second attack.
"When you want to make a hew and a stab and a slice, do it to him like this: Strike wrathfully from the right side. Indes, wind in the point onto his left side, and stab him to the face of his left. Indes, step with your left foot onto his right, and slice him with the long edge over both of his arms." In this example, I make a strike to your left side, but before my strike lands I turn it into a thrust, and then I slice over your arms. I am making three attacks in one 'turn', with each one starting before the other has finished. In this example, I am interrupting myself, not my opponent.
"When you want to make with the Zwerchau to his left side, don't land your hit, and strike nimbly to his right side. If he then strikes to your right, slice indes strongly onto his hands...". In this example, I'm interrupting my opponent.
Common usage of the word Indes in HEMA is to 'simultaneously parry your opponent's strike and strike them at the same time'. This is by no means universal, but it is a common definition I've heard. Often Vor, Nach and Indes are grouped together to mean Vor (attack), Nach (defend only) and Indes (defend and attack at the same time). I can see how this meaning has come about, but it gives the impression that Indes is about attacking into an attack in motion, whereas it can follow our own attack and the opponent's parry. Where the Glosses want us to take an action that is simultaneously defensive and offensive, they just say so. Example: "So you catch his strike in your cross guard and land a hit to his head". Also the Secret Strikes are the quintessential examples of 'attacking while defending', and the word Indes rarely appears when they are discussed in the Glosses.
The usage of Indes in the Glosses suggests it is an action taken before the last action has finished. This can apply to an action the opponent is taking, or it can be an action we are taking. Indes is also often used when there is a bind going on. I wouldn't go so far to say that it is about binding specifically, as in the RDL Glosses Indes is discussed after Nachreisen (chasing), which is essentially interrupting your opponent's attack or quickly taking advantage of a missed attack. However, Indes is linked to Fuhlen (feeling), which happens in the bind (hard, soft), and even more specifically the Glosses say that Indes leads to Duplieren (an attack redoubled in the bind after a parry), Mutilieren (a counter bind action against an opponent winding to Ox in the bind), disengages (under or over then an opponent attempts a bind), running though (a form of wrestling), slicing, wrestling and disarming, which are all done from the bind or are bind-related.
I believe that Indes actions are an interruption of not just your or your opponent's action, but of the natural rhythm of a fight. Let me explain:
A typical fight may progress as Vor (Fencer A attacks), Nach (Fencer B defends), Vor (Fencer B ripostes), Nach (Fencer A defends). This is a classic parry-riposte sequence. The roles of each Fencer reverses so they each take it in turn to defend and then attack. They do this because the person who has just defended can attack quicker than the person who has just attacked. Fencer A can interrupt this rhythm by making two attacks: Vor, Vor. If Fencer B fails to defend against the second attack he/she will be hit.
However, there is a risk that Fencer B will defend the first attack and then make the usual riposte, ignoring Fencer A's second attack. Both Fencers will be hit, a bad outcome.
Fencer A can alleviate this risk by making the second attack in Indes. That is, make the second attack before they have finished making the first attack, and/or before Fencer B has finished making their parry. One way to do this is to interrupt their first attack just before Fencer B parries and quickly attack to the othe side. This is called a 'Fail'. Another way is to stay on Fencer B's blade with the parry and quickly turn the point in for a thrust. This is a Duplieren.
So is Indes just about being quick, then? Is it simply an interrupting action? I believe it means more than this. There are clearly times to use it, and times not to use it. Double hits happen when Fencers try to disrupt the rhythm of the fight without thinking. Therefore Indes has a judgement component to it. You only want to act Indes when your opponent cannot attack you at the same time. This could be because they are still defending, or it could be because they have just attacked.
150 years later, Joachim Meyer gives us a definition of Indes (to paraphrase):
"Many have believed that the word Indes comes from the Latin word intus, meaning inside, and indicates the inside of combat which arises from the windings and similar work [i.e. the bind]. This is not true... Indes is a good German word that embodies a serious exhortation to quick judgement, so that one should be constantly swift of mind. For example, if you first strike to the left, and secondly you see at that moment an opening to the right, then thirdly when you rush at the opening you have seen, you must pay good heed where or with what techniques he [the opponent] may come to you, so that you do not overcommit to your attack at your opponent's opening, and recieve harm from it. Thus the word Indes admonishes you to have sharp lookout, which involves seeing and heeding many things at once. Also you may learn sufficiently from your opponent's body language what kind of techniques he intends to use, and what they will entail by ways of openings and opportunities... And if you do not heed [Indes] and execute all cuts wisely and judiciously, you will easily run into your own harm, as can be seen in those combatants who are overly aggressive [ i.e. the buffalo]..."
When you are fencing with Indes, you know it. It is a feeling of being 'in the moment'. You know when your opponent is staying in the Vor and isn't going to riposte. You know if your opponent is going to make another attack and won't bother parrying your riposte. You see this 'in the moment'. It can feel as if time has slowed down - however it seems more likely to me that your opponent has simply given you the time to make the Indes action (e.g. by hesitating), and you have picked the right time to do it.
In modern language, Indes might also be equated with 'flow':
Flow in positive psychology, also known colloquially as being in the zone, is the mental state in which a person performing some activity is fully immersed in a feeling of energized focus, full involvement, and enjoyment in the process of the activity. In essence, flow is characterized by the complete absorption in what one does, and a resulting transformation in one's sense of time. Flow is the melting together of action and consciousness; the state of finding a balance between a skill and how challenging that task is. It requires a high level of concentration. (Flow (psychology) - Wikipedia)
My definition of Indes
My personal view is that Indes is used in a literal sense during the Glosses to mean something like 'quickly, before you/your opponent has finished doing what they are doing', but as a concept (as one of the 5 words) it means something broader than that. It is about using judgement to interrupt the flow of the fight in your favour, of acting 'in the moment, if the moment is right, depending in what your opponent is doing'. It lets us know when and how to switch from the Vor to the Nach, and from the Nach to Vor. It allows us to quickly use weak against strong in the bind. In short, it is about experience, quick action and quick thought, and being attentive to your opponent's actions.
The five words in practice
The five words can be used a reminders, as keywords, etc., but the way I see them is they can describe an idealised fencing exchange in three phases:
Phase 1: Fencer A attacks (Vor). Fencer B defends (Nach).
Phase 2: In the bind, Fencer B is strong, so fencer A is weak.
Phase 3: Both fencers work using Indes to take their next action (with sound judgement, if the moment is right, etc.), which will put them at an advantage or win the fight.
They can also be considered tactical options: to be in the Vor or the Nach, the strong or the weak? Indes can help us understand which tactical option to use, but also to disrupt 'in the moment' the tactical option the opponent has chosen.
Comments