Re-Reading the Broad Ward. (and thinking out loud)

So my idea of moving from guard to guard caused me to wonder if my interpretation of the broad ward is correct... Well, gave me more reason to wonder, considering my idea of it feels clunky and horrible and the "3rd on both sides" interpretation feels like it makes more sense and exists in other systems.  As you can see by the text, the nicer feeling interpretation is the wrong one. (Although, I'm not saying my original understanding is right)

The original text (spelt correctly with added punctuation)

Bear out both your arms right out from your body, stiff at the arms end and a foot from the left asunder and turn both the rapier and dagger hilts as high as your breast or higher. Leaving all your body open or unguarded to seem to.

And when your enemy charges you with a thrust, strike it with your dagger towards your right side and answer him with an overhand thrust into his dagger shoulder. But you must keep your thumb on the blade of your rapier for then shall you put in your thrust the more steadier and the more stronger

That's all he writes to cover the broad ward.  One play to help you work out the mechanics of the position, one paragraph to describe how you're framing the guard.  It appears to be a symmetrical guard (with the gap to the left created by the shortness of the dagger)

Turning your hilts? True Guard has you in third, with knuckles pointing vaguely floorish, so knuckles up?





As high as your breast or higher?  Could be Thibault's default extension or even prime.

Breaking with the dagger and return with an overhand thrust? Gives more weight to the Prime in both hands. Sounds quite like his montanto without moving the rapier. The thumb on the blade improves point control and allows your opponent to impale himself (rather than driving it home with your bodyweight)

The fact that he calls it a ward instead of a guard is intriguing. This suggests it has a different function to the guards- to prevent attack by presenting a threat/making it harder to strike/enforcing distance rather than to deflect an incoming attack/close lines. Again this doesn't really help to differentiate between Thibault's extended second and prime.

Both prime and extended second could work, but feel far too wasteful for my liking.   Of course, this may be the reason that it's only got a brief mention in the book and it's best used if you're still under pressure after a stop thrust. And the lack of footwork/belief in a 12 foot thrust (he defines one thrust- annoyingly, a reverse- as being from the back foot) means that there is more of a question about foot placement here.

Anyway, that's my thought processes when looking at this kind of stuff.

TL;DR  version. Buggered if I know, but I am leaning towards a stop thrust with dagger extended and ready to parry a further attack.