Who's the Fool in Fool's Guard?
The image above describes the guard of the Fool (known as Alber in Liechentauer's traditional martial art). It's an easily recognizable guard for anyone who has studied the art of the longsword. It could also associated with the guard named Iron Door which is another well known lower guard across martial arts traditions from Germany to Italy. Many plays have been designed featuring the employment of this guard however the texts hardly explain the reasoning behind the guard's condescending name.
"The third guard is called the fool; arrange yourself thusly: Stand with the right foot forward and hold your sword with outstretched arms with the point upon the ground" -Master Sigmund Ringeck
Master Ringeck describes the positioning of Fool's and includes several plays that can be made from it in his manuscript. However Ringeck does not contexualize why the guard is named Fool's explicitly. As far as I am aware none of the old sword masters give reasoning behind the guard's name. Therefore I wish to speculate and offer different reasonings in this post.
The typical explaination I hear from my mentors and online is that this position is a foolish arrangement in a real sword duel. Fool's does not offer any inherent protection from your sword. On the contrary the guard exposes your upper half entirely and more importantly your head. This isn't the only concern with Fool's as you blade is also pointed toward the ground thus offering zero offensive capability as well.
There are plently of fighters who disregard all lower guards entirely for that reason and will only train and use upper guards as they are much more protective. I find that reasoning to be mostly valid however I wonder why the masters would write so extensively about the guard if it was truly useless. As I said earlier there are whole manuscripts written specifically for this guard (see 'Fencing from the Sweeps'). This leads me to believe that the guard is more important than what is seen first hand.
Some say that Fool's is a manifestation of the fighter's ignorance of sword play, as any well-trained fighter would favor a guard that is more useful. If your opponent takes this stance you might as well rush their head as they have no way of stopping you in the onset. I chewed on this understanding in my early training days but as I continued to read the manuscripts I learned more and more plays that can be made from fools. I decided to try the plays' techniques myself and was surprised by the results.
A direct attack from Fool's will hardly win a fight- that much is certain. The most direct attacks from Fool's is a false edge cut underneath the arms or a thrust to the body. Any other attack would take too much action-time and would certainly be slower than your opponent's oncoming strike. I didn't find myself satisfied with the cut under the arms. My approach to sword play is within the context of Blossfechten ('open fencing' in German). The main protection worn in Blossfechten is a heavily padded jacket. The jackets were made with several layers of linen specifically tailored to protect its wearer from cuts. The short edge cut from Fool's has less-than-average power and would certainly be blocked by the opponent's jacket.
The thrust to the body is underwhelming too. The jackets were not protective against powered thrusting attacks and are thought to be avoided in sparring to preserve their fighters. The thrusting attack- while a valid strike still has a major problem shared with the cutting attack- my head is completely open for the taking. Even if my strike were to land, the opponent still has a clear angle for my head and would certainly mark my end in a fight.
Does this mean Fool's is useless? The old masters didn't think so. The manuscript "Fencing from the Sweeps" addresses this issue. The manuscript tells you that the true way to move in the onset from Fool's is to parry your opponent's strike with your short edge whilst stepping off-line. This technique is named the "sweep", and all plays in the manuscript follow after this movement.
I brought these plays to my local fencing guilds to try them out and the results were enlightening! The most direct movement after the sweep is to cut towards the opponent's head with your long edge once their point has been cleared away from you. This worked remarkably well! Upon reflection, that play is a technique I would see performed by a reenactment fighter I train with from time to time. He trains and spars with half of the protective equipment I do, thus he needed to find ways to protect his head other than his fencing mask (a grace that can be lost when training with modern fencing equipment).
The second path to take after a sweep is winding your sword into a wrath thrust (pictured above). By turning your edge you can gain better control over your opponent's sword and strike them with a squinting cut to the head or a thrust to the head or body from above. This places your opponent in check and forces them to seek a disengsge from the bind. After testing these moves in sparring I understood the capability of Fool's within Blossfechten and how a seemingly weak guard can be turned into something deadly in the second intention.
Now I see Fool's completley differently. It is a strategy more than a simple guard. By making the most desireable target the most vulnerable (the head), your opponent is much more likely to strike it. If you are prepared to receive the cut with your sweep, you can quickly turn the tide of the battle into something your opponent wasn't prepared for. So is the fool the one who leaves their head open, or the one who takes their bait? I will leave that answer for you to discover on your own journey.
