Some Considerations on the Use of Feints Against Skilled Swordsmen

We have been taught that feints are a powerful tool in a fighter’s toolbox that allow us to create openings in our opponents’ defense through which we can attack. In truth, feints can be highly effective at doing that, which is why the masters gave us feints to use.  Here is an excellent example:  “The Veler: All fighters who rely on displacing are deceived and defeated with the Veler.  When you close with him, feint any Oberhau to his left side. From there, when he wants to displace it, you can easily hit another opening.”  (Ringeck fol. 29v.)  Von Danzig is even more explicit about the Veler, saying: “The Veler is a piece which can be used against many fighters who rely on fighting to the sword and not to the openings.” (Von Danzig fol. 22r.)

What is true for a common fighter, however, is not necessarily true for a student of Master Liechtenauer’s art, and that is certainly the case with feints.  In actuality, no feint should ever work on a fighter who understands and applies Master Liechtenauer’s art correctly.  Let’s examine why that is so.

Ringeck and von Danzig say fighters who rely on displacing or cutting to the sword are defeated by the Veler, and we are told:  “For he who defends against strikes is always in greater danger than the one who strikes, since he must either defend or allow himself to be hit if he is to have a chance to strike a blow himself. That is why Liechtenauer says: ‘I say truthfully, no man can defend without danger.’” (Hs 3227a fol. 20v.)  We are also told:  “Do not strike at the sword, but always to the openings, to the head or the body, if you wish to remain unharmed.”  (Ib. fol. 23r.)  In other words, we are taught to never strike to the enemy’s sword, but to his openings, instead.  We are also told that displacing attacks will get you killed because you can’t hit him while you’re displacing and so are always on the defensive (that’s not true with single-time techniques, but let’s keep this simple for this discussion).

Consider the Veler in light of that instruction.  If you cut at your opponent’s sword to displace his cut, then when he suddenly pulls his sword around to strike with his real attack, you will hit only empty air and will be hit yourself.  But if you cut at your opponent, only letting his sword get in the way to displace it, then when he pulls his sword away for his real cut, yours will continue on into your opponent.  And since your cut started before your opponent pulled his sword around for his real cut, your cut will land first.  Your opponent must either accept getting hit, or convert his cut into a displacement, which puts him on the defensive—in the Nach— and gives you control.

This doesn’t mean we don’t displace attacks—we most certainly do, and we need to.  But it means that when you displace you must do so either with a cut that will hit your opponent if he pulls away, or which leaves your point ready to strike him if he does so.  “You are not to displace the way other fighters do. When they displace, they hold their point up or to the side. This means that they cannot attack the four openings in the displacement with the point.” (Von Danzig fol. 26v.)

But what if we have to cut at the enemy’s sword?  When we displace a Zwerchhau with an Unterhengen (e.g., Ringeck fol. 53r), we are taught to cut into the middle of the attacking sword, which means we can’t hit into the enemy directly if he moves his sword.  We are also taught to go directly into a thrust from the bind, however, and so that thrust should hit before the enemy can cut to our other side if  the enemy leaves the bind.  We have to learn not to think of the counter to the Zwerchhau as a cut and then thrust, but as one action—cut-and-thrust.  That way, if the enemy leaves the bind without doing something to stop our attack he will be hit before he can hit us.  This is yet another reason for not cutting down to the ground with the huge over-done strikes poorly taught people use; doing so makes you vulnerable to feints.  An empty displacement is one which simply stops an attack, but has no action performed Indes from that bind.  A correct displacement is just the first part of an action which attacks our opponent.

This video demonstrates this concept:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfJ9svJnN9U&t=1s

Thus, it should be plain why it is so important that we attack the man, not the sword, and why we must never use empty displacements.  Feints are intended to make it easy to beat people who are ignorant of Master Liechtenauer’s art and do those things.  You see this constantly when watching sword taggers play.