Our study group is not unwilling to study anything with authentic source material. But, we do tend to emphasize Meyer. It is interesting to see many new HEMA groups take an indifference to Meyer. I have heard Meyer’s material become labeled as overly fancy, experimental, and too stylistic as opposed to the other German longsword sources.
Is Meyer overly stylized and fancy? Maybe. But it is astoundingly clear and complete compared to other Liechtenauer based sources. When we talk about “texts” and “sources” it is not always clear that there are big differences from one to the other. Some “texts” are just study aids or incomplete snippets of advice while some go further to document a fully martial art system. Meyer is a rare gem that attempted to document a full art. Meyers material:
- Describes the basics of combat from the guards, to footwork, to the cuts.
- Defines and explains the language of Liechtenauer’s art.
- Breaks down Liechtenauer’s verses with commentary and instruction.
- Describes a detailed strategy for longsword fighting; commenting on how to apply footwork, techniques, attacks, deceptions, initiative, timing, and a wealth of fighting principles.
- Categorizes a number of tricks called “handworks” that are defined, described, and taught at length.
- Describes specific methods of practicing and training, telling practitioners what to practice and how.
- Teaches full lessons through Stucke, sequences of described actions between two fencers with commentary.
- Illustrates a significant amount of the text through plates containing fighters drawn in 100 different positions (I just counted myself, this is just the longsword section too). These positions are cleverly re-referenced in different parts of the text so that one picture depicts multiple different actions.
What amazes me about Meyer is that it goes deep. There is a lot there to study. You can spend years studying it intently, drawing more and more revelations month after month.
Look at that right index finger. See it? No, really, do you see it? Only in Meyer.
Now, it is true that Meyer does not teach thrusting integrated into his longsword section (he teaches it, but saves it for the third section of his book.) That is annoying to me and a product of his culture’s tournament context (very different tournaments than we have today BTW). So I do understand people who stylistically prefer the way Ringeck or others might teach combat. By all means, study the earlier texts. But I wager that a good Meyer foundation is a huge advantage in studying earlier texts.
No other Liechtenauer based text has the deep and clear detail that Meyer’s two manuals have. Why would anyone ignore or overlook Meyer? Even if the style of it is not for you; there is a lot in there that is. I swear by it.