Wiktenauer logo.png

Lew

From Wiktenauer
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Jud Lew
Occupation Fencing master
Ethnicity Jewish (?)
Movement Liechtenauer Tradition
Genres
Language Early New High German
Principal
manuscript(s)
Manuscript(s)
Concordance by Michael Chidester
Translations Traducción castellano

Jud Lew is the name (or possibly pseudonym) of a 15th century German fencing master. The appellation "Jude" seems to signify that he was Jewish, though Jude was also a surname of some non-Jewish families, and he seems to have stood in the tradition of Johannes Liechtenauer, though he was not included in Paulus Kal's ca. 1470 list of the members of the Fellowship of Liechtenauer.[1]

Lew is often erroneously credited with authoring the Cod. I.6.4º.3, an anonymous compilation of various fencing treatises created in the 1460s. In fact, his name is only associated with a single section of that book,[2] a gloss of Johannes Liechtenauer's Recital on mounted fencing that is one branch of the so-called Pseudo-Peter von Danzig gloss (see below). Though some versions of Martin Huntfeltz's treatise on armored fencing are also attributed to Lew, this is almost certainly an error.[3] By convention, the gloss of Liechtenauer's Recital on long sword fencing that generally accompanies this mounted gloss is also attributed to Lew.

Stemma

Early on in its history, the Pseudo-Peter von Danzig gloss seems to have split into at least three branches, and no definite copies of the unaltered original are known to survive. The gloss of Sigmund ain Ringeck also seems to be related to this work, due to the considerable overlap in text and contents, but it is currently unclear if Ringeck's gloss is based on that of pseudo-Danzig or if they both derive from an even earlier original gloss (or even if Ringeck and pseudo-Danzig are the same author and the "Ringeck" gloss should be considered a fourth branch).

Branch A, first attested in the Augsburg version (1450s) and comprising the majority of extant copies, has more plays overall than Branch B but generally shorter descriptions in areas of overlap. It also glosses only Liechtenauer's Recital on long sword and mounted fencing; in lieu of a gloss of Liechtenauer's short sword, it is generally accompanied by the short sword teachings of Andre Liegniczer and Martin Huntfeltz (or, in the case of the 1512 Vienna II, Ringeck's short sword gloss). Branch A is sometimes called the Jud Lew gloss, based on a potential attribution at the end of the mounted gloss in a few copies. Apart from the Augsburg, the other principal text in Branch A is the Salzburg version (1491), which was copied independently[4] and also incorporates twelve paragraphs from Ringeck's gloss and nineteen paragraphs from an unidentified third source. Branch A was redacted by Paulus Hector Mair (three mss., 1540s), Lienhart Sollinger (1556), and Joachim Meyer (1570), which despite being the latest is the cleanest extant version and was likely either copied directly from the original or created by comparing multiple versions to correct their errors. It was also one of the bases for Johannes Lecküchner's gloss on the Messer in the late 1470s.

Branch B, attested first in the Rome version (1452), is found in only four manuscripts; it tends to feature slightly longer descriptions than Branch A, but includes fewer plays overall. Branch B glosses Liechtenauer's entire Recital, including the short sword section, and may therefore be considered more complete than Branch A; it also differs from Branch A in that three of the four known copies are illustrated to some extent, where none in the other branch are. The Krakow version (1535-40) seems to be an incomplete (though extensively illustrated) copy taken from the Rome,[5] while Augsburg II (1564) collects only the six illustrated wrestling plays from the Krakow. Even more anomalous is the Glasgow version (1508), consisting solely of a nearly complete redaction of the short sword gloss (assigning it to Branch B), which is appended to the opening paragraphs of Ringeck's gloss of the same section; since it accompanies Ringeck's long sword and mounted fencing glosses, a possible explanation is that the scribe lacked a complete copy of Ringeck and tried to fill in the deficit with another similar text.

Branch C is first attested in the Vienna version (1480s). It is unclear whether it was derived independently from the original, represents an intermediate evolutionary step between Branches A and B, or was created by simply merging copies of the other branches together. The structure and contents of this branch very closely align with Branch B, lacking most of the unique plays of Branch A and including the gloss of the short sword, but the actual text is more consistent with that of Branch A (though not identical). The other substantial copy of Branch C is the Augsburg version II (1553), which was created by Paulus Hector Mair based on the writings of Antonius Rast, and which segues into the text of Ringeck's gloss for the final eighteen paragraphs. A substantial fragment of Branch C is present in five additional 16th century manuscripts alongside the illustrated treatise of Jörg Wilhalm Hutter; one of these, Glasgow II (1533) assigns the text a much earlier origin, stating that it was devised by one Nicolaüs in 1489. This branch has received the least attention and is currently the least understood.

(A final text of interest is the 1539 treatise of Hans Medel von Salzburg,[6] which was acquired by Mair and bound into the Cod. I.6.2º.5 after 1566.[7] Medel demonstrates familiarity with the teachings of a variety of 15th century Liechtenauer masters, and his text often takes the form of a revision and expansion of the long sword glosses of Ringeck and Nicolaüs. Because of the extent of the original and mixed content, Medel's versions are not included in any of these pages.)

Treatises

While all branches were originally presented in a single concordance in the pseudo-Peter von Danzig article, the differences between them are extensive enough that they merit separate consideration. Thus, Branch A has been placed here on the page of Jud Lew, Branch B has been retained on the main pseudo-Danzig page, and branch C is now on the Nicolaüs Augsburger page.

Additional Resources

References

  1. The Fellowship of Liechtenauer is recorded in three versions of Paulus Kal's treatise: MS 1825 (1460s), Cgm 1570 (ca. 1470), and MS KK5126 (1480s).
  2. See folio 123r.
  3. Jaquet, Daniel; Walczak, Bartłomiej. "Liegnitzer, Hundsfeld or Lew? The question of authorship of popular Medieval fighting teachings". Acta Periodica Duellatorum 2(1): 105-148. 2014. doi:10.1515/apd-2015-0015.
  4. Both Augsburg and Salzburg contain significant scribal errors of omission that allow us to identify manuscripts copied from them.
  5. Zabinski, pp 82-83
  6. Medel's section of the Cod. I.6.2º.5 is internally dated on folio 21r.
  7. The record of the Marxbrüder in the manuscript ends on folio 20r with the year 1566, so Mair couldn't have acquired it before then.
  8. "thereby the hew" omitted from the Salzburg.
  9. S. "right-side foot".
  10. sic : nahent
  11. Liechtenauer's verse has in der rechten, "on the right", here, but it has been changed in all copies except the Salzburg and the Rostock.
  12. sic : rechten
  13. sic : lonen
  14. S. "peasant hew".
  15. 15.00 15.01 15.02 15.03 15.04 15.05 15.06 15.07 15.08 15.09 15.10 15.11 15.12 15.13 15.14 15.15 15.16 15.17 15.18 15.19 15.20 15.21 15.22 15.23 15.24 15.25 15.26 15.27 15.28 15.29 15.30 15.31 15.32 15.33 15.34 15.35 Word omitted from the Salzburg.
  16. Could be read as “schlichter”.
  17. "And you shall... with the other" omitted from the Augsburg. This omission is probably a scribal error, jumping to the second instance of also soltu.
  18. Couplet 104, part of the group 102-109.
  19. 19.00 19.01 19.02 19.03 19.04 19.05 19.06 19.07 19.08 19.09 19.10 19.11 19.12 19.13 19.14 19.15 19.16 19.17 19.18 Word omitted from the Augsburg.
  20. "of the man… of the girdle" omitted from the Salzburg. This omission is probably a scribal error, jumping to the second instance of der gürttell.
  21. 21.0 21.1 21.2 21.3 The subsequent play in Salzburg is taken from the gloss of Sigmund ain Ringeck, and is therefore omitted here.
  22. "To you truthfully" omitted from the Augsburg.
  23. "of the sword" omitted from the Salzburg.
  24. Fehlstelle im Manuskript
  25. "and you bind with… standing on the sword" omitted from the Augsburg.
  26. "And wind yet… and stab him" omitted from the Augsburg.
  27. Here Salzburg segues into Sigmund ain Ringeck's gloss of the same verse describing how the Crooked hew is used as a counter-cut: "This is how you shall cut crooked to the hands, and execute the play thus: When he cuts from your[sic: his] right side with the over- or under-cut, spring away from the cut with the right foot against him well to his left side, and strike him with outstretched arms with the [point] upon his hands."
  28. A. "him"
  29. "with the short edge" omitted from the Salzburg.
  30. S. "bind of the sword hews".
  31. A. "him".
  32. sic : schwerts
  33. Augsburg just has "protect".
  34. A. "your"
  35. Lit. "his".
  36. Salzburg doubles "schlag".
  37. "and to the body" omitted from the Salzburg.
  38. A. treffen, S. griffen.
  39. A. "him"
  40. "and every" omitted from the Salzburg.
  41. S. "or"
  42. A. "on"
  43. Couplet 91.
  44. S. "to his"
  45. A. "to the"
  46. "and slice" omitted from the Salzburg.
  47. "if that is what you wish" omitted from the Salzburg.
  48. sic : deinem
  49. A. "the"
  50. A. aber: "yet".
  51. "and all Windings... are all short" omitted from the Salzburg.
  52. A. anwind: "wind on".
  53. A. "him".
  54. S. "your"
  55. Korrigiert aus »Hautt«.
  56. These verses are glossed previously, as the Rostock indicates (see the next note), but with a significantly different play.
  57. Rostock ends here with the statement (written in Latin) "Previously in the chapter Vom Feler", which is odd because this is the exact point when the text ceases to bear any resemblance to the earlier version in that chapter.
  58. "in the arms with the edge" omitted from Dresden and Vienna.
  59. Disappears into the margin.
  60. S. "he then".
  61. S. "the one hilt".
  62. S. "thrusts your point up".
  63. Clause omitted from the Augsburg.
  64. Augsburg doubles the phrase "and hold your sword on your right side with the hilt in front". This is probably a scribal error.
  65. The subsequent play in Salzburg, which repeats couplet 71 and glosses it, is taken from the gloss of Sigmund ain Ringeck, and is therefore omitted here.
  66. The subsequent two plays in Salzburg are taken from the gloss of Sigmund ain Ringeck, and are therefore omitted here.
  67. Mittels Einfügezeichen korrigiert aus »siten rechten«
  68. A. "quickly there".
  69. "that fence from free long hews" omitted from the Salzburg.
  70. "do not hold" omitted from the Salzburg.
  71. "to him" omitted from the Salzburg.
  72. A. zwer: "thwart".
  73. "on his neck... on his right side" omitted from the Salzburg.
  74. S. "ere when you come up"
  75. S. "to"
  76. A. "in"
  77. Salzburg doubles "the feeling".
  78. "Feel and cannot undertake" omitted from the Salzburg. This is probably a scribal error, jumping from one instance of nicht to the next.
  79. S. "work".
  80. S. entphindest: "perceive".
  81. S. "ere when".
  82. Word doubled in the Salzburg.
  83. S. "word".
  84. S. "right or left side".
  85. S. bindest gebünde~.
  86. 86.0 86.1 Disappears into the binding.
  87. S. "after".
  88. S. "wind".
  89. S. "Technique".
  90. A. "Item".
  91. Word doubled in the Augsburg.
  92. "down a little" omitted from the Salzburg.
  93. "before you" omitted from the Salzburg.
  94. S. dring.
  95. "at the sword" omitted from the Salzburg.
  96. "and thrust... the right" omitted from the Augsburg. This omission is probably a scribal error, jumping to the second instance of siner rechte~.
  97. sic : sein rechten bis repetita
  98. S. "Another wrestling".
  99. A. "him".
  100. A. "his".
  101. S. "weapon".
  102. S. "your".
  103. A. "with".
  104. S. "his".
  105. "and from each single Winding" omitted from the Salzburg.
  106. S. "be it an Over-/Under-hew".
  107. ”einwindẽ durchwindẽ“ written in another hand above the line.
  108. Illegible word from another hand written above the line.
  109. A. "noblest"
  110. Rest der Zeile verschwindet im Bund
  111. A. "him".
  112. S. "against".
  113. A. "his".
  114. S. "your".
  115. "in the techniques" omitted from the Salzburg.
  116. korrigiert aus »schnudt«
  117. Germ. And the eyes
  118. illegible deletion
  119. S corrected from D
  120. Germ. ”the sharp grip”
  121. Unleserlich. Gemeint ist die 20. Figur. Illegible. Refers to the 20th figure.
  122. Marginalie von anderer Hand. Marginal note from a different hand.
  123. German. How you use the bag strike at your opponent.
  124. Auf beiden Seiten neben dem Text, oberhalb einer Linie. On either side of the text, above a line.
  125. Marginalie. Marginal note.
  126. Marginalie neben einer Linie. Marginal note next to a line.
  127. Germ. If you have caught the opponent by the reins you can pursue his openings.
  128. Unleserliche Streichung
  129. Germ. Do not!
  130. Marginalie. Maginal note.
  131. Illegible deletion
  132. Die Wörter »so« und »Spricht« sind im Manuskript vertauscht, was durch entsprechende, oberen Anführungen gleichenden, Einfügezeichen kenntlcih gemacht wird.
  133. Marginalie. Marginal note.
  134. Über der Streichung eingefügt.
  135. Germ. The left
  136. Der Text läuft in den Bund.
  137. Marginalie. Marginal note.
  138. Germ. sword, messer, or dagger
  139. Der Text läuft oben aus der Seite heraus (beschnittenes Buchformat?).