Caveat: This is meant to be a practical guide on fighting with the sword and buckler 'inspired' by i33. It is my own interpretation and will be updated over time.
1.1 A note on this interpretation
1.1.1 Introduction to i33
I33, or the Walpurgis Fechtbuch, is a fencing 'manual' from the turn of the 14th century from southern Germany, or what would have then been the Holy Roman Empire. It uses illustrations and text to depict a Priest (a fencing master) teaching a Scholar (a student) to fight with the sword and buckler. The sword is some sort of arming sword (one handed sword) with a simple cross hilt and likely a disk pommel, and the buckler is a small round shield of some size, likely 9 – 12 inches in diameter. The sword is held in the right hand and the buckler in the left hand, as is most common. The book is available to buy from the Royal Armouries: The Medieval Art of Swordsmanship: Royal Armouries MS I.33 - Royal Armouries Publications - Royal Armouries Museum Shop
I33 uses the illustrations and text to teach a fairly large number of techniques, and it splits these into a series of 'plays'. Each sequence in the play builds on the previous sequence, and together they illustrate various positions in which you can hold the sword and buckler, ways to attack those positions, ways to counter the attack, and ways to counter the counter.
Many people have attempted to create an interpretation of I33 as – let us be clear – the illustrations and the text are cryptic, and so interpretation is needed to try to understand what is going on. Noteable interpretations include those of Guy Windsor (Home | Swordschool) and Andrew Kenner (I33: Fencing in the Style of the Walpurgis Manuscript : Kenner, Andrew: Amazon.co.uk: Books), but also Federico Malagutti, Roland Warzecha, and many others have also documented interpretations of various elements on the web and on video steaming websites such as YouTube. I myself developed a more or less complete interpretation, based in large part on Guy Windsor and Andrew Kenner, but incorporating others' interpretations as well. I have made this available here as a download for posterity, but note this is now out of date:
However, after watching a video by Petr Kavan (Core terminology, tactics of attack - MS I.33 Interpretation), which seemed to challenge some common interpretations of i33, I was inspired to create this updated interpretation.
1.1.2 Interpretation problems
The problem with i33 is that it is cryptic and missing information that we would expect to see in a fencing instruction book. Firstly, it introduces us to wards (or guards), which are clearly positions from which we can make attacks (and we are basically told this), yet the book shows no attacks being made from these positions. The book seems to show counter wards or 'siege' positions being used to attack the ward positions (or are they?). The images are clearly (or not so clearly!) stylised in some way as it is often difficult to understand from the images alone exactly how the counter ward is formed, where and how it is held, and how it opposes the ward – especially since we have not been told what attack is made from the ward in first place. We are then shown a bind made against this counter ward and then a bunch of 'handworks' and grapples (i.e. follow-up attacks made from the bind), making us question whether i33 is a book about showing us how counter wards defeat wards, or whether it is actually a book showing us how wards defeat counter wards.
Past interpretations have led to a number of myths (or misinterpretations) about what i33 is telling us:
Myth: I33 contains no cuts
Myth: I33 is all about the thrust
Myth: Never make a direct attack from your ward
Myth: Always close distance first using a counter ward
Myth: Always attack from a counter ward
Myth: Only 'common fencers' (used in some negative sense) use wards
Myth: I33 is all about fighting from the bind
Myth: Never attack the legs
Myth: I33 is impractical
I believe these myths are wrong and detrimental to the understanding and practice of i33. They represent very limited interpretations of i33, or particular tactical choices at best.
The result is that you may see i33 practitioners forming strange looking counter wards like Krucke at the wrong time and in the wrong way that seem to do little. Or they will use a limited set of techniques and tactical approaches: I have spoken with several people who claim to be long-time i33 practitioners but it turns out they only use the counter ward of halfshield (halpschilt) and have a limited understanding of the rest of i33. Lastly, practitioners will follow the plays of i33 as written and then are surprised when they do not work in sparring. This is because the plays (or how they practice them) do not reflect how a trained or even untrained person typically fights with a sword and buckler, and so – if your system of fighting is not good against someone who is untrained – then i33 must be trash or 'bullshido'. Or is it?
1.1.3 Where are the attacks at?
The key myth to bust is that i33 doesn't show us attacks made from wards. While this is mostly true in a literal sense, it is self evidently nonsense to assume that the system of fighting i33 is teaching contains no attacks; we are told many times that the fencer who is in a ward will attack, and we are shown many parries and counter wards to defend against these attacks.
So where are they?
As I developed my first interpretation, I noticed several things in practice:
People will make direct attacks at you and these can be quite effective.
When you make a direct attack you pass through a 'counter ward' position (such as halpschilt). This can be used as an attack in opposition.
The counter wards can be formed in response to an attack by 'cutting' into them to form a parry.
Therefore, if the counter wards in i33 are parries, this tells us what attacks can be made from the wards that oppose them. Furthermore, if the attacks pass through counter wards, the counter wards can be considered to be depicting attacks as well. This is the interpretation that Petr Kavan talks about in his video where he assumes that i33 does tell us how to attack from the wards, and that this information is hidden in plain sight, codified in the counter wards themselves. For example, halpschilt represents an oberhau, and other positions represent mittelhaus and unterhaus. While I don't know whether this was the intention of the authors, the plays of i33 seem to work equally well regardless of which fencer is attacking. When you look at the plays in i33 with this in mind, with the assumption that the fencers can and will perform the basic cuts found in any fencing system - oberhaus, mittelhaus and unterhaus - the plays make a lot of sense.
1.1.4 Why are attacks so important?
Apart from the obvious reason that you can't win a sword fight without making attacks or defending against them, we simply cannot describe i33 as a complete system of fencing without attacks. Ward positions, attacks, counter wards and parries are all linked in most fencing systems. For example, the four guards (or wards) in Liechtenaur's longsword are derived from the cut (oberhaus, unterahaus and mittelhaus), and these form the parries and counter thrusts and counter guard positions. In rapier, we have the four hand positions which are derived from the three thrusts, and these create the four guard positions. I33 is no different:
We have seven wards
These generate seven cuts and four thrusts (the attacks).
We can use the same attacking motions to act as parries, which we make in response to incoming attacks
When we form these parries pre-emptively (i.e. before we are attacked) these give us defensive counter ward positions
When an attack and a parry or counter ward meet this forms a bind
From the bind we make secondary actions called handworks and grapples
In short, basic attacks form the building blocks of i33 and allow us to describe a holistic system that has its own internal logic. We can illustrate this in the following image:
Figure 1 visualises the relationship between these different types of action. It simply shows how the wards are the foundation, and that we use the same basic 'attack' actions to make attacks, parries and counter wards. It also shows how, in a fighting context, certain actions counter other actions.
This is really helpful, because if you can learn the wards and learn the attacks, you have already learned the parries and the counter wards – it is just a matter of understanding which one to use and when. This is good because it makes i33 easier to understand and to teach, and opens up the tactical possibilities in i33 far beyond previous interpretations.
But is this interpretation supported by i33 itself?
1.1.5 Three interpretations
In preparation for this new interpretation, I have written an article comparing three generic interpretations of i33, which I call 'Obsesseo first', 'Direct attack' and 'Demonstration purposes only':
The basic idea is that the Obsesseo first interpretation supposes that the i33 plays teach us a specific method of attack, which is to not to attack from wards. Instead, you approach the opponent in a counter ward and attack from there, or (if your opponent attacks your counter ward) you counter their attack. This leads to the opponent being able to counter your counter and so on. This is based on a very literal reading of i33 and supposes that the order of actions in i33 are martially valid. It also assigns the term 'Obsesseo' or 'Siege' to mean specific types of counter wards that should be used, and often takes other bits of text (such as not attacking below) to be sweeping statements about fencing in general.
The Direct attack interpretation suggests that i33 is depicting attacks and that these are codified in the counter wards (e.g. positions like halpschilt). We only believe they are counter wards because of a quirk in how the manuscript teaches these things. Because direct attacks pass through counter wards, this interpretation allows for the use of counter wards as both defensive actions as well as offensive actions - i.e. a counter ward is just a half-completed cut in opposition.
The Demonstration purposes interpretation basically suggests that the actions the fencers are performing are not always meant to be martial. The book depicts a priest teaching a student, and so the priest asks the student to form certain positions which could represent parries or attack, which the priest binds, and then the student counters. The actions are not presented in the order in which they would be made, e.g. parries are formed before attacks (or binds) are made, and this is simply the pedadogical style. I33 really presents us with general lessons on what sort of binds will occur if you attack and they parry (or vice versa) and how you can then respond.
In short, there is evidence for and against each interpretation, but I believe the 'Direct attack' and the 'Demonstration purposes only' interpretations are more correct, better supported by the text, and offer us the best hope of creating a practical guide that allows us to use the i33 techniques in a competitive sparring environment. They also allow for a far larger array of tactical options than the 'Obsesseo first' interpretation.
All fencing systems include multiple tactical approaches to winning a fight. This is nicely summarised by the 'fencers' tactical wheel' in modern fencing. This is shows that, when fencing, we can make:
simple attacks – direct attacks to the opponent;
this is countered by a parry and then a riposte (a block and then a returned attack);
the parry and riposte can be countered with a compound attack – i.e. several attacking actions, such as feinted attack to one side to draw the parry followed by a real attack to the other side;
we can counter these with counter attacks – attacks into the feint, or attacks that simultaneously parry the attack and hit the opponent; and
lastly we can perform a 'feint in time' – that is, we feint an attack to draw out the opponent's potential counter attack, which we then parry and then deliver a riposte.
All of these tactical approaches are viable if done at the right time and from the right distance, and you cannot have an effective fencing system that is based on only one tactical approach. I believe the same is self-evidently true for i33.
1.1.6 How this interpretation is organised
This interpretation is organised around the framework (flow diagram) above. Whereas my first interpretation involved exploring every play in i33, this resulted in a lot of repetition. Also, because of the lack of a framework, my first interpretation got many things incorrect and lacked an internal logic.
Rather than teaching i33 through the plays themselves, this guide covers the basics of the system - the wards, the attacks, the parries, counter wards, tactics for attacking, timing - bit by bit, and then covers the binds and the handworks and grapples performed from the bind (which is where the bulk of the techniques in i33 are covered). I will then re-create my own versions of the i33 plays from the ground up using the techniques and principles described in the guide.
I cannot say how closely this interpretation matches what the authors of i33 had in mind. I expect that the framework, the theory, the tactical approaches etc. will be very different. I expect that the techniques will be similar but performed differently (I don't give a lot of guidance on body mechanics etc. in this guide, you will need to figure that out). Is it i33? No. Is it close to i33? Probably. Is it something inspired by i33? Definately! (You can judge for yourself how closely my interpretation matches your own view of what i33 is and isn't about.)
An important caveat is that I don't currently practice sword and buckler, so I have not yet had a chance to try out or perfect every technique in this guide. At this point it is safe to say that the interpretation is somewhat academic meaning that it describes the techniques in i33 as I believe they are meant to work, but I do not and cannot describe the exact biomechanics of how they should be performed, e.g. which leg is forward, how high is the sword, etc. this guide should demistify i33 enough so that you can figure out how to perform the techniques yourself. That is not to say it is untested, this isn't true. This interpretation draws upon my own experience and experience of others. It simply means that I am not a 'master' of i33 (far from it), and few others are. I have not personally tried all the techniques (such as the grapples), but others have. Like we've being doing in HEMA for years, without someone to personally teach us, we need to figure out how to perform the techniques efficiently and effectively ourselves and update our interpretations accordingly.
I hope that you enjoy reading this guide and that you find the system of i33 as I've described it to be intuitive and effective (this remains to be seen...), and remember that this interpretation is only possible because 'I am standing on the shoulders of giants', i.e. those who have put the work in over the years to interpret i33.
I have called this 'Sword and buckler 102' as it is my second interpretation.
1.2 Equipment
You will need a buckler, such as the Cold Steel synthetic buckler or a steel one of 9 – 12 inches diameter. You will also need some sort of arming sword – synthetic or steel – with a simple cross guard with fairly short quillons, no knuckle bow and a short grip length. An overly long grip length and overly long quillons make some of the actions in I.33 difficult to do.
You will need gloves: padded leather gloves for light training, as there is a tendency to bump the sword or buckler into your opposite hand, and for sparring you will want the least-bulky yet most protective gloves you can find, appropriate to the type of weapon you are using and the intensity of your sparring.
Other normal HEMA equipment is also needed, including a mask, fencing jacket and padded trousers, hard protection for knees and elbows, throat protector, etc. In sword and buckler, the legs are often a target (despite what I.33 might suggest).
1.3 Basic fencing concepts and terminology
In this interpretation I use a variety of fencing terminology, some of which is based on classical or modern fencing terms, some on i33 terms in Latin or German, some are translated terms, and some are just invented by me. One of the problems with i33 is that it does not explain its terminology and it does not explicitly name every position or technique that it uses, so we have to invent terms to communicate what is going on.
As you read through this interpretation, you may decide that you disagree with a term I've used. My goal is not to recreate the i33 system exactly as it was practiced, discussed and thought about in 1300 AD, as that is impossible. Instead, I am trying to codify the dregs of the system that have been written down for us into a simple and cohesive framework that modern people can understand and use.
The below are the basic terms that will be used throughout this interpretation. It is not a complete list of terms, but it should allow you to follow the interpretation more easily. The terms are not in alphabetical order because each term flows into the next one. Lastly, these are my definitions.
Table 1: Terms
Term | Definition |
Ward | A resting position held with the sword ready to attack |
Attack | An attack made with a cut or a thrust |
Cut | An attack with the edge of the blade, made as a strike or a blow |
Thrust | A stabbing attack with the point of the sword |
Buckler | A small round shield |
Sword | An arming sword with a blade of around 33 inches in length |
Hilt | The portion of the sword that you hold, including a cross guard with quillons, a grip and a pommel |
Quillons | The protruding bars that form the cross guard |
Pommel | The weight on the bottom end of the sword |
Blade | The long part of the sword above the cross guard |
Point | The top of the blade that is sharp, used for stabbing. Also called the tip. |
Edge | The sharp sides of the blade used for cutting |
True edge | The edge that is facing in the same direction as your knuckles |
False edge | The edge that is facing towards your forearm |
Strong | The half of the blade closest to the hilt |
Weak | The half of the blade closest to the point of the blade |
Parry | A defensive action made with the sword or the buckler (or both together), made in response to an attack. |
Counter ward | A half-completed attack that provides cover |
Cover | A 'passive parry'. Counter wards provide cover |
Siege | The act of attacking someone who is in a ward through or from a counter ward. Can be, but is not necessarily, a direct attack, but is always made in opposition |
Opposition | The act of using your attack to provide cover and so defend against an opponent's counter attack |
Counter attack | An attack made into an attack. The counter attack should provide opposition to avoid a double hit |
Double hit | Where you hit your opponent at the same time they hit you |
Counter siege | A counter attack used to try to defeat a Siege, usually consisting of a bind followed by an attack |
Bind | The act of touching the opponent's sword with your own |
Time | A unit of measurement in fencing denoting a single action being taken without that action halting or new action being made. Actions can be made together, such as a step and an attack, and this would be a single time action. However, a step and then an attack would be a two time action, and likewise an attack that is halted or feinted followed by a real attack would be a two time action. |
Feint | A started but not completed attack, used to encourage the opponent to act, such as to make a parry |
1.4 Goals of this interpretation (back to basics)
The ultimate goal of this interpretation is to produce a simple to follow, practical guide for fencing with sword and buckler that is effective in competitive sparring against a resisting opponent.
It should describe a cohesive system of fencing that is in the spirit of i33 yet does not require the practitioner to learn too much additional jargon.
Importantly, the system must be in line with the principles of fencing. I can use concepts from later time periods to provide a theoretical framework. I'm not trying to get into the minds of the i33 authors, at least not fully. The system should be explainable using universal concepts.
However, the system must be able to reproduce the plays of i33, and be consistent with the text in i33, to a reasonable degree. I accept that there may be some vagaries and, given that i33 missing images and contains sparse text and confusing images, a certain level of incompleteness will be accepted.
Good fencing principles must be used to derive the plays of i33. The plays of i33 cannot be used to determine how we fence. The plays help us determine the building blocks of the system, and these building blocks, together with good fencing principles, must be able to recreate the plays. Actions or interpretations of actions that are ambiguous or not in line with good fencing principles will be ignored until a satisfactory interpretation is determined.
The interpretation will not be based on literal readings of the images or the text in i33. Good fencing principles will be applied, and where those principles lead to actions that match the images in spirit, this will be assumed to be correct. The images will be used to guide us, but we will not try to copy the actions exactly as seen, since these are drawn in 2D in a fairly crude style.
Other people's interpretations will be used where they meet these requirements, and conventional or unconventional interpretations that don't will be thrown out. Deferring to authority is not my goal, but I will listen to criticism and consider alternative options.
Ultimately, the system I describe should provide an easily applied framework to help us know how to proceed in a fencing bout when faced with an action from our opponent. The plays should flow from the fundamentals and principles of the system. Every action or option in any given scenario should be obvious once we know the building blocks and the principles.
Lastly, the system cannot only work if the opponent fences in a certain way with limitations that are unreasonable. For example, we can't require our opponent to always hold their sword and buckler together or always hold them apart. It must work naturally.
1.4.1 Good fencing principles
I will cover some fencing principles throughout this guide, however here are the basic principles that I think i33 needs to adhere if it is truly a usable fencing system. This of course assumes it is a usable fencing system and wasn't developed for some esoteric purpose, such as stage fencing or the like. The following are some key principles that need to be applied:
Vor (before) and Nach (after): in short, the actions of one fencer must drive the actions of the other. If your action does not lead to the expected action in the play then the action must be wrong.
Timing: actions take time, and that is equated to the distance the action needs to travel. There needs to be time (and distance) to carry out an action. Also, fencers will have timing advantages.
Strong and weak: Binds will result in fencers either being neutral, strong or weak, and this will determine what each fencer can do.
Lines: Attacks rarely come from directly above, but often from the left or right. Fencers need to be able to cover the inside (left) and outside) lines.
1.5 Contents
This guide is split into 10 parts:
Part 2: Wards
Part 3: Attacks and footwork
Part 4: Parries and counter wards
Part 5: Counter wards vs wards
Part 6: Sieges
Part 7: Counter-sieges and what they tell us about timing
Part 8: Binds
Part 9: Handworks and grapples
Part 10: The plays of i33
Annexes
What's the correct interpretation of i33?
The lessons of i33 - my notes
Heyo, I've been using the first version as my primary reference for interpreting I.33 since I found this site. I'm super stoked to see this reworking and your thoughts on 'completing' the system. Any plans on releasing a pdf, ebook, or print version of your work? It's really fantastic!