MS I.33
European Martial Arts: A Sophisticated
Tradition
By Michael Magallanes
Scholar at Bankeside Schoole of Defense
MS I.33: European Martial Arts
MS I.33
European Martial Arts: A Sophisticated Tradition
It has been the opinion of most modern medievalist is that during the Middle
Ages the art of combat was “rough untutored fighting”, and subsequently paid
little attention to the subject. During the Middle Ages personal combat had
been at the core of European life. The re-discovery of MS I.33 changes this
modern thinking of brutish medieval European combat, and transforms it into
a sophisticated European Martial Art. At nearly 700 years old, MS I.33 is the
foundation of this sophisticated system of personal combat that not only has
stood the test of time as Europe’s oldest personal combat treatise, but can be
found in more than 10 other European treatises that have been created since
the mid 14th century¹.
Unlike most treatises, we do not know who authored this manuscript. When the
manuscript was taken to the Royal Armories at Leeds in England, it was given
the catalog number of I.33. MS I.33 was first found in a Franconian monastery
during the mid 16th century possibly by Johannes Herbart while he was
involved with Hohenzollern Margrave Albrecht Alcibiades’ (1522-68) and his
campaign of violence and destruction, where monasteries were often the
targets. Herbart gave the manuscript to his fencing pupil, Frederick William,
Duke of Saxony-Weimar (1562-1602). The manuscript finally left the hands of
Frederick William’s family when it passed to his son-in-law Duke Ernst around
1672². The manuscript resurfaced several times since then including during
1860 when it was examined by martial arts historian, Karl Wassmanndorf. His
commentary is still attached to the binding. It resurfaced again in 1950 at a
Sotheby’s auction and was purchased by the Royal Armories where it rests
today.
Originally thought to be created in the 15th century³, but after much further
investigation, it is now understood to be created in the late 13th to early 14th
century. The main point defending this opinion is type of clothing worn, as well
as the hand writing and artistic styles lead directly to this much older time
period⁴. The manuscript was originally written in 3 different hand styles
(A,B,C), leading some modern historians to suspect the possibility of a
collaboration. The majority of the writing is in Latin, but there is some text in
German.
2
MS I.33: European Martial Arts
Rebuking of Pope Pius II on the monastic discipline on page 1.
Although we are uncertain of the true identity of these authors, we do know
that the majority of the 64 page manuscript was written between the A hand
and the C hand⁵. The A hand author began the manuscript and in fact
authored the majority of the first 17 pages. The C hand then took over and
authored the majority of pages 18-50, and ultimately finished the manuscripts
last 4 pages including the insertion of the woman Walpurgis⁶. It is most
interesting to this observer that most of the corrections were made in the B
hand.
There are 2 other hand writing styles (D,E) documented within MS I.33. The E
hand is the signature of Johannes Herbart, which can still be found very
prominent of page 13 of the manuscript. The reason he signed this page is
speculative. The final hand writing style in MS I.33 is the D hand and that of
Aeneas Sylvius (1405-1464) Pope Pius II. In his rebuking of the monastic
indiscipline, Pope Pius II, wrote on the first page, Non audet Stygius Pluto
tentare quod aude[t] Effrenis monachus, plenaque dolis anus “The devil of hell
does not dare attempt that which the wanton monk dares, and the old women
full of wiles.” There other markings of the manuscript as well, possibly from a
child where some of the bucklers are scribbled over and occasional doodles on
several pages on the manuscript. There are even mustaches drawn on the
figures on pages 36 and 37.
Signature of Johannes Herbart on page 13 of MS I.33.
3
MS I.33: European Martial Arts
The first reference to MS I.33 came almost from its very finding by Johannes
Herbart. A close friend to Herbart, Hierich von Gunterrodt, wrote a pamphlet
“On the True Foundations of the Art of Combat” in Wittenburg 1579, noted the
manuscript as “…a uniquely ancient source.”
“…I have chanced upon a very old book with text and pictures composed by
aristocratic monks. For just as many great emperors and dukes, toward the end
of life, would betake themselves to a monastery, where at leisure they often
recorded the battles in which they had triumphed and when they were defeated
and considered the causes why they had been able to win, so that they might
advise their posterity in writings; so also noblemen of the past, who were
generally mighty and experienced in both foot and horse combat, at length as
seasoned man ready for retirement would choose the monastic life; yet because
of their accustomed work they could not live in idleness, but periodically
engaged in this exercise to preserve their health; so it is not surprising that
they should have discovered these true foundations…”⁷
Page 36 shows coloring over original picture and mustaches drawn on the priest
and scholar.
Although there is strong evidence as to the manuscripts monastic origin, there
are also compelling arguments against the monastic theory. First and foremost,
being found in a monastery does not mean that it was created there. There is
also strong evidence that the manuscript might have been of clerical origin.
There is nowhere in the text that it mentions monks, but only priest and
4
MS I.33: European Martial Arts
student, which was much more apt for clerical vernacular. In fact, on page 4
the verse states, “Here the student counter binds and steps; he should execute a
Shield-Strike. Or with his left hand let him envelope the arms of the cleric.”⁸
Even the clothing worn is generically clerical rather than specifically monastic.
The female presence of Walpurgis is not as plausible for the time near a
monastery. There is evidence of clergy carrying swords and bucklers despite
the prohibition of the practice⁹, and violence of the time was a severe breach of
the monastic discipline¹⁰.
These Cathedrals that housed these clerics also gave rise to the German
universities. The study of personal combat could very well have been part of
this culture. With the German passion for fencing and personal combat,
Heidelburg University (1385) forbid fencing among students 4 years after its
founding, suggesting fencing was well entrenched by then¹¹. Other notable
priests known to be involved in martial arts treatises are: Hanko Döbringer
with Liechtenauer (1389) and Johannes Lecküchner (late 15th century).
Walpurgis could also be much easier to explain if created by clerics, since they
had much more contact with laypeople.
The woman Walpurgis (left) on page 63
Another possibility is that the manuscript could have very easily migrated into
a monastery over a 200 year period or by an owner who in later years entered
5
MS I.33: European Martial Arts
into monastic life. This was a very common occurrence for aging knights and
men-at-arms of the time.
How it found its way into the Franconian monastery may never truly be
known. We will never fully understand the complete text and intention of MS
I.33. The technical terms, concepts and most importantly the context can only
be inferred. Describing physical disciplines in words are difficult at best, and
translating ancient text into modern physical terms is even more difficult. We
need to bear in mind that there are verbal limitations to describing physical
motion.
For those that have viewed or read this manuscript and found it to be nonpractical, incomplete or inaccessible, they need to realize that like most
manuscripts, MS I.33, is not intended to teach a martial art, but is a by-product
of the practice. Although MS I.33 is a very complete combat system there are
many omissions and general practices that the authors of MS I.33 did not
include. The reasoning and usage of the buckler is never fully explained in the
text of the system. The buckler is never used independently of the sword and
almost always lies between the sword-hand and the opponent’s sword and never
explained. It is presumable that men-at-arms were trained in this style of
fighting, as strikes to the sword-hand are generally debilitating in combat thus
giving way to the need for an explanation. MS I.33 also never discussed sword
basics such as foot work, proper handling of the sword or buckler and body
positioning or balance.
The MS I.33 system of fighting has enjoyed a long and successful history in
German combat. MS I.33 had also bled into other styles of German sword
fighting suggesting a broader sense of MS I.33. Liechtenauer’s (1389) Longsword
combat system uses some of MS I.33 Longpoint positions (langort or High
Longpoint and alber or Low Longpoint also known as the guard of the fool). In
fact the MS I.33 system of sword and buckler is an extension of longsword
combat using the buckler to protect the sword-hand and ultimately increase the
range of the blade to that roughly of a longsword¹².
The possible collaboration of 3 authors suggests that the MS I.33 system fighting
was more widely used than just by Franconian monks. The obvious omission of
sword basics and the use of the term “ordinary combatants” on page 6 show
6
MS I.33: European Martial Arts
that there was an existing organized combat system in affect well before the
authors began scribbling this treatise. Other combat treatises, such as
Liechtenauer used some of the same verbiage as MS I.33, also proves that the
theories and techniques documented in MS I.33 were well entrenched within the
German combat system. MS I.33 may not be the backbone of European Martial
Arts, but this literary work of art shows us a much more sophisticated style of
European combat and directly contradicts the modern historian thought that
European combat in the Middle Ages was clumsy and brutish.
7
MS I.33: European Martial Arts
Notes
¹
Liechtenauer 1389; On the True Foundations of the Art of Combat;
Augsburg, Universitätsbibliothek Codex; Munich, Bayerische
Staatsbibliotek Mscr. Dresd.; Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliotek
Codex Vindob; Galdiatoria, Krakow, Bibliotek Jagiellonska; Queen Mary’s
Psalter; New Paleographic Society 1903-12; Rome, Biblioteca dell’
Academica Nazionale dei Lincei e Corsiniana; Meyer 1570; also some
likeness to Fiore’s posta di donna with Walpurgis’ initial guard
²
The manuscript was given to Frederick William’s daughter Elizabeth
Sophia who was wife to Duke Ernst the Pius of Saxony-Gotha. Duke Ernst
gained the possessions of Duke William when his family line died out.
³
Jakobs and Ükert 1838
⁴
For comparative illustrastions of the style of costume, cf. Davenport
1948: 165-241
⁵
A-hand: 1-3b, 4-17, 51-56
B-hand: 3c, 33b-34a, 35
C-hand: 18-33a, 34b, 36-50, 57-64
⁶
Walpurgis is a 13th to 14th century woman that inserted to the manuscript
on pages 63 and 64
⁷
Gunterrodt 1579: dig. C3v-C4r
⁸
Several references to the word “cleri” or cleric; and no mention of the
word “monachi” or monk
⁹
Theory taken from the “Canterbury Tales”
¹⁰
Theory taken from “On the Monastic Tradition”, Brown 1964
¹¹
“On the Later Tradition”, Emerson 1936
¹²
“Medieval Sword and Shield”, Wagner and Hand 2003: pg 65
8
MS I.33: European Martial Arts
Bibliography
Jeffrey L. Forgeng (2003). The Medieval Art of Swordsmanship: A facsimile &
translation of Europe’s Oldest Personal Combat Treatise Royal Armouries MS.
I.33, Union City, Chivalry Bookshelf
Paul Wagner and Stephen Hand (2003). Medieval Sword and Shield: The
Combat System of Royal Armouries MS I.33, Union City, Chivalry Bookshelf
9