Wiktenauer logo.png

Difference between revisions of "Salvator Fabris"

From Wiktenauer
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 331: Line 331:
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
|  
+
| <p>[11] ''What is "disengagement, counter-disengagement,'' double disengagement, half disengagement, re-engagement, and how and when they should be used.</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>When your adversary attempts to engage your sword or to beat it, and you change from one line to another, before he can beat or engage, you are said to make a disengagement in ''time''. If, while your adversary is disengaging, you follow his movement, which he has begun in order to get the superiority, and let your sword go after his, so that you engage him in the same line as before, that is called a counter-disengagement. If you have disengaged and your adversary has also disengaged and you then deceive his engagement, that is a double disengagement. If, without completing the change from one line to another, you leave your sword under the adversary's, you make a half disengagement. If you disengage and, when your adversary moves to engage or to make a hit, you engage again where you were before, you are said to re-engage - - -.To make a successful disengagement you must bend forward — so that, when the disengagement is completed, the lunge is completed, if you wish to hit, otherwise you will not be in time. If you follow this principle, your adversary will not be able to parry, if you have taken the ''time'', though he may counter-disengage, if that was his intention in seeking to engage. If he had meant simply to get the superiority or to beat he would certainly be hit. If in seeking to engage your sword, the adversary remains steady, then you must disengage in order to free your sword. This gives him an opportunity for a counter-disengagement, for he has moved at the same time as you disengaged. Then to protect yourself you must make a double disengagement and thrust in the same ''time'', in which he has meant to hit you with a counter-disengagement. Some remain steady in seeking to engage in order to make the adversary disengage and so hit him in the straight line, before he has completed the disengagement. In such a case if the adversary, who has begun to disengage, returns to the same line as before, carrying his ''forte'' to your ''faible'' and thrusting on to the body, he will save himself and certainly hit at the moment you meant to hit. The half disengagement is used when you are in doubt that the adversary may pass to your body, before you have completed,[!] the disengagement, since your point would be out of presence and could not hit. Therefore you make a half disengagement to save time, and remain below the adversary's sword in order to hit, removing your body out of presence, as we shall explain in its place. Such a half disengagement is not always used in the first passes, but more often in the second and third movements, as the distance is shortened. The effects produced by these disengagements will be seen in the plates.</p>
 +
 
 
|  
 
|  
 
| {{pagetb|Page:Scienza d’Arme (Salvator Fabris) 1606.pdf|23|lbl=15}}
 
| {{pagetb|Page:Scienza d’Arme (Salvator Fabris) 1606.pdf|23|lbl=15}}
Line 341: Line 344:
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
|  
+
| <p>[12] '''On the feint,''' and why it is so called; in what manner and at what time it should be used.</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>When you feign to hit in one line, and while the adversary is defending himself, hit in another, you are said to make a feint. You must understand, which feints are good, and which not. For some make their feints with the feet rather than with the sword, beating the ground as hard as possible, so as to frighten the adversary, and while he is intimidated hit him. This method might sometimes succeed in the hall, particularly if the floor is of wood, so as to re-echo. This might sometimes cause the adversary to waver. But on ground which does not ring, it would not have the same effect. It is of little or no value in either place against those who understand the art. For if this stamping is done out of distance, there is no need to waver, since his sword cannot reach. If it is done within distance, it gives you a chance to hit in the exposed part at that very moment, or to make a feint of hitting in that part and hit in the other part, which he exposes in his attempt to defend himself; for he can never defend one part without uncovering another. Thus one who stamps with his foot will be deceived through not observing that in seeking to provoke his adversary to offer a ''time'', he has himself offered a ''time''. The adversary, being steady, can better judge the movements than the one who has moved. Thus feints more often succees[!] if made when the adversary is moving than when he is steady.</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>Others make the faint with the body and the sword, but do not extend the sword much, so that the adversary may not engage it in his parry, and they may then hit him when his weapons have dropped, or when he raises them again violently after failing to engage. This method may succeed with a timid or ill-trained adversary. But as the sword does not come forward, you know that it cannot hit; therefore you should not move, except to attack at the moment of his feint; or you should make a feint of hitting, so that in his doubt that you have taken the ''time'' he will rush to the defence, when you will have ample opportunity to hit. This will be a hit with a counter-feint, and he who made the first feint will he deceived.</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>There are others who in feinting carry the sword forward, and, when the adversary tries to parry, draw it back to return it with a rush. Neither is this method good, but rather worse than the other; for when you should make only one movement with the sword you make three contrary ones, one in carrying it forward, the second in withdrawing it and the third, greater than all, in thrusting with violence. You fall to grasp that your movement is so slow, that, if your adversary moves at the first movement of the feint, he will hit before your sword has completed the withdrawal, and will easily save himself before you can proceed to hit.</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>To make a successful feint you must advance your sword in this way. When your adversary allows your sword to penetrate so far that you know the ''forte'' is far enough advanced to resist his weapon, before he is in a position to parry, you must continue the thrust, as he cannot push the sword away. Then you will certainly hit. If, as you make the feint, the adversary moves in time to parry, you must then change your line and thrust the point on to his body in order to arrive, before he has completed the motion of the parry. This is the true method of making a feint. When you make a feint you must remember that your adversary may hit at that moment. For if you were persuaded that he must first parry, you would generally be deceived; but, if you judged that he might attack, you would be more ready on the defence, and if he does not hit, no harm is done, and your movements will be made easier.</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>You should know too that feints should be made against the nearest exposed parts, for the sword cannot reach the distant ones, nor hit those which are unexposed. You must not fruitlessly put yourself in danger, but if you realise the distance and what part is exposed you will obtain good results. If you work in this manner the feint cannot so easily be recognised by the adversary, so that, if he does not parry, he will be hit; while, if he parries, you can change line and hit. It is still better to wait for the adversary to offer some ''time'' or uncover some part, since he would be sure to conclude that you had taken the ''time'' from his movement and would rush to the defence more precipitately, and you could hit him the more easily; nor could he himself hit in that ''time'', so that your security is greater.</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>If when within distance you uncover some part in order to give your adversary a chance to hit, you are said to make an ''appel''. You must consider the distance and be careful that his sword is not so near that it might arrive before you had finished the movement of the ''appel''. You must decide whether it is better to advance while he is moving, or to retire in order to have time to parry and hit. Therefore in making the ''appel'' it is not good to move the feet, because you could bring them neither forward nor backword[!] in time; besides the danger of being hit through the slowness of the movement. But the ''appel'' can very well be made in withdrawing or approaching the body according to the nature of the distance, because the movement of the body is very quick, and if properly made does not prevent your raising the feet in time. An ''appel'' should be made when you see that your adversary is about to lunge in order to encourage him to stick to his purpose. Such an ''ap-pel'' is made to deceive him; but if he perceived it he might deceive you, as we noted in treating of the deception of ''time'' and ''counter-time''. An ''appel'' is simply giving time in order to invite the adversary to hit, with the object of hitting him. When your adversary desires to do something, it is better to encourage his desire rather than prevent it, so that his action will be more hurried. It is much better to know what he means to do and to let him do it, than to wait for him to do something unforeseen. It often happens that you are hit without knowing how or why. Therefore you must know your adversary's intentions in order to resist him better. Attack him in ''time'' and protect yourself.</p>
 +
 
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
Line 352: Line 368:
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
|  
+
| <p>[13] '''On lunging and passing'''.</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>To lunge is to hit by carrying the right foot forward towards the adversary and withdrawing it immediately after hitting, or to hit by a movement of the body, keeping the foot firm. To pass is to carry both the feet on right to the adversary's body. It is necessary to understand the lunge, as it is in the most common use, and therefore must be the first thing to practise, in order that you may learn how to advance the point accurately and to the full extent. The hand is fallible and may hit in a spot different from the one intended, according to the amount of the distance. This depends on the changed position of the wrist as it is extended more or less, causing the sword to fall short or go too far, in accordance with the angle of its direction, in order to learn how to drive the sword sufficiently far you must accompany it by bending the body forward and recovering it quickly after hitting, in order to save yourself from danger. Practice is required to learn how to carry yourself, and when you can do this well you will find it very profitable, for it will make the body agile, the feet quick, and give you judgment of dis-tances. You will then certainly make a lunge longer than before practice.</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>To make this kind of hit well you must stand with your feet not too far apart, so that you can advance further in hitting, or according to circumstances withdraw by bringing back the foot, leaning the weight of the body on the foot which is to remain steady, so that the other may be more agile and easy to lift, for these reasons it is not good to be on guard with the left foot forward, because you cannot make a long lunge without passing; whilst if you tried to pass with the rear foot and to return you would find the movement too long; besides you would go too far to be able to return in time. For these reasons and many others which we omit it is not good to be on guard with the left foot forward, unless you are waiting for your adversary to try a hit, so that you may at that moment withdraw your left foot, parry, and hit him at the same instant. This method may succeed, because the body changes its front and withdraws, the right side remaining in front for the attack. But if your adversary does not come on, you should not attack him, since it is better to have the right side in front; you can hit in shorter time and save yourself more promptly, as the foot and the body make smaller movements. After hitting it is good to carry the right foot behind the left and to continue with the left behind the right in order to rest on the right foot, for in this way you will withdraw so far that your adversary cannot hit, unless he has hit in ''counter-time''. This guard of the left foot will be more useful with the sword and dagger than with the sword alone. But it is better to stand with the right foot forward, and immediately after hitting draw it back close to the left, for in this case if your adversary follows you can advance it again, and also you can step backwards with the left, as you see an opportunity, hitting at the same time as the adversary follows.</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>After these rules it is well to understand the pass, a thing very profitable and advantageous, because you thereby disturb and frighten your adversary, hit with more force and show your superiority. The body, the sword and the feet are more in union, and that union generates strength and vivacity of movement. In the course of passing you can readily change from one line to another, so that your adversary has difficulty in defending himself and has no chance to do much, since the opportunity quick1y passes, nor has he time to consider much, and as his point is penetrated he cannot hit. In lunging it often happens that you find you have gone so far, either by carrying the foot too far, or because your adversary has himself advanced, that you cannot move out of distance and are hit in withdrawing. In such a case it is good to continue to the adversary's body, for the greatest danger is in getting within distance; but when you have passed his point and follow on to the body, you arrive before he can withdraw his sword. Still one often sees the adversary, though his point is passed and he hit, withdraw his sword and make a hit. This is due to the mistake of the one who passed, who has not gone right on to the body nor taken the ''time'' well. For if he passes at the moment when his adversary advances his sword, or when his sword is occupied in the defence, or out of line, the adversary cannot withdraw his sword at the time of the pass.</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>We might add that, although you pass, you should still follow your adversary's sword gliding along his blade, wherever it is, so as to be continually defended. If he withdraws his sword, so much the better, as he uncovers more parts, and his ''forte'' is drawn back and cannot resist. There are some men, who, although you have passed, do withdraw and make a hit; this is easier with short swords than with long. As to this we say that, whether the sword be long or short, if in passing you go close up to the adversary's body, you will be safe. For in passing you can do various things, throw the adversary into disorder by jostling him, seize the hilt of his sword, and pass so far beyond his flank that he cannot bring his sword, however short, so far back without himself withdrawing, which he cannot do in time. In passing you can grapple with your adversary and throw him to the ground, which would be good when your sword has not hit; for it may be held for certain, that if in passing you hit, your sword would penetrate to the hilt, which would shake and disorder your adversary, and the wound would be inflicted in a part of such importance that he would be at least prevented from withdrawing his sword. Moreover the one who passes is in all cases the readier to seize a chance, than the other who is occupied with the defence and confused by the danger in which he is.</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>In addition to these advantages there are many other things to be done after a pass, which cannot be done when you remain steady. You can often in passing use the method of avoiding and turning the body; whereas if you do not pass or your adversary does not pass, you cannot do this so well. For if you wish to move your body out of the line of hit point, either on the one side or the other, you can only do so by advancing; for two reasons, the first, that you may be able to hit at the same time, the second, in order that his point may pass before he can change its line again. When he has penetrated so far, it is better to pass right on than to turn back and be hit by a second thrust before you are in safety. It is true that with the sword and the dagger it is more difficult to pass, and you must be more careful, since after passing the point of the sword there is the point of the dagger, and thus the danger lasts longer. Nevertheless there are rules for passing with safety, as will be shown when we deal with those strokes.</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>He who can pass well, is more sure with his sword, restricts his adversary more and is more certain of himself. Much judgment is needed in carrying the body and the feet correctly, so that the sword may perform its office. You must take care in passing with the left foot forward not to carry the left side forward, especially with the sword alone, as in that case you could not use the ''forte'' of the sword, which would be too far back. Therefore even though the left foot goes first, the right side must accompany it. In this way you will be able to carry the body out of line, your sword will be stronger, and the point be as far extended as if the right foot had advanced, for the body can bend further forward.</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>To understand the lunge is one thing, to understand the pass another. With the knowledge of the two you can adopt whichever seems best according to your opponent and the circumstances. For sometimes you can lunge and cannot pass owing to the shortness of the ''time''. This applies when you are in presence. For there is another kind of passing, which may be made in the least possible ''time''. Its principles are different and will be treated of in another place.</p>
 +
 
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  

Revision as of 22:49, 29 April 2022

Salvator Fabris
200px
Born 1544
Padua, Italy
Died 11 Nov 1618 (aged 74)
Padua, Italy
Occupation
Nationality Italian
Alma mater University of Padua (?)
Patron
  • Christianus IV of Denmark
  • Johan Frederik of Schleswig-
    Holstein-Gottorp
Influenced
Genres Fencing manual
Language Italian
Notable work(s) Scienza d’Arme (1606)
Manuscript(s)
Translations

Salvator Fabris (Salvador Fabbri, Salvator Fabriz, Fabrice; 1544-1618) was a 16th – 17th century Italian knight and fencing master. He was born in or around Padua, Italy in 1544, and although little is known about his early years, he seems to have studied fencing from a young age and possibly attended the prestigious University of Padua.[citation needed] The French master Henry de Sainct Didier recounts a meeting with an Italian fencer named "Fabrice" during the course of preparing his treatise (completed in 1573) in which they debated fencing theory, potentially placing Fabris in France in the early 1570s.[1] In the 1580s, Fabris corresponded with Christian Barnekow, a Danish nobleman with ties to the royal court as well as an alumnus of the university.[2] It seems likely that Fabris traveled a great deal during the 1570s and 80s, spending time in France, Germany, Spain, and possibly other regions before returning to teach at his alma mater.[citation needed]

It is unclear if Fabris himself was of noble birth, but at some point he seems to have earned a knighthood. In fact, he is described in his treatise as Supremus Eques ("Supreme Knight") of the Order of the Seven Hearts. In Johann Joachim Hynitzsch's introduction to the 1676 edition, he identifies Fabris as a Colonel of the Order.[3] It seems therefore that he was not only a knight of the Order of the Seven Hearts, but rose to a high rank and perhaps even overall leadership.

Fabris' whereabouts in the 1590s are uncertain, but there are rumors. In 1594, he may have been hired by King Sigismund of Poland to assassinate his uncle Karl, a Swedish duke and competitor for the Swedish crown. According to the story, Fabris participated in a sword dance (or possibly a dramatic play) with a sharp sword and was to slay Karl during the performance when the audience was distracted. (The duke was warned and avoided the event, saving his life.)[4] In ca. 1599, Fabris may have been invited to England by noted playwright William Shakespeare to choreograph the fight scenes in his premier of Hamlet.[5][2] He also presumably spent considerable time in the 1590s developing the fencing manual that would guarantee his lasting fame.

What is certain is that by 1598, Fabris had left his position at the University of Padua and was attached to the court of Johan Frederik, the young duke of Schleswig-Holstein-Gottorp. He continued in the duke's service until 1601, and as a parting gift prepared a lavishly-illustrated, three-volume manuscript of his treatise entitled Scientia e Prattica dell'Arme (GI.kgl.Saml.1868 4040).[2]

In 1601, Fabris was hired as chief rapier instructor to the court of Christianus IV, King of Denmark and Duke Johan Frederik's cousin. He ultimately served in the royal court for five years; toward the end of his tenure and at the king's insistence, he published his opus under the title Sienza e Pratica d’Arme ("Science and Practice of Arms") or De lo Schermo, overo Scienza d’Arme ("On Defense, or the Science of Arms"). Christianus funded this first edition and placed his court artist, Jan van Halbeeck, at Fabris' disposal to illustrate it; it was ultimately published in Copenhagen on 25 September 1606.[2]

Soon after the text was published, and perhaps feeling his 62 years, Fabris asked to be released from his six-year contract with the king so that he might return home. He traveled through northern Germany and was in Paris, France, in 1608. Ultimately, he received a position at the University of Padua and there passed his final years. He died of a fever on 11 November 1618 at the age of 74, and the town of Padua declared an official day of mourning in his honor. In 1676, the town of Padua erected a statue of the master in the Chiesa del Santo.

The importance of Fabris' work can hardly be overstated. Versions of his treatise were reprinted for over a hundred years, and translated into German at least four times as well as French and Latin. He is almost universally praised by later masters and fencing historians, and through the influence of his students and their students (most notably Hans Wilhelm Schöffer), he became the dominant figure in German fencing throughout the 17th century and into the 18th.

Treatise

Additional Resources

References

  1. Didier, Henry de Sainct. Les secrets du premier livre sur l'espée seule. Paris, 1573. pp 5-8.
  2. 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 Fabris, Salvator and Leoni, Tom. Art of Dueling: Salvator Fabris' Rapier Fencing Treatise of 1606. Highland Village, TX: Chivalry Bookshelf, 2005. pp XVIII-XIX.
  3. Fabris, Salvator and Leoni, Tom. Art of Dueling: Salvator Fabris' Rapier Fencing Treatise of 1606. Highland Village, TX: Chivalry Bookshelf, 2005. p XXIX.
  4. Andersson, Henrik. Salvator Fabris as a Hired Assassin in Sweden. Association for Renaissance Martial Arts. Retrieved 2011-12-18.
  5. Barbasetti, Luigi. Fencing Through the Ages.[Full citation needed]
  6. Originally "asseruatore", but corrected in the errata.
  7. Originally "richeide", but corrected in the errata.
  8. Originally "dirarsi", but corrected in the errata.
  9. Originally "longuezza", but corrected in the errata.
  10. Originally "mettre", but corrected in the errata.
  11. Originally "volto", but corrected in the errata.
  12. There's no conclusion of this word on the next page, just a new sentence.
  13. Originally "occcsione", but corrected in the errata.
  14. Originally "albassare", but corrected in the errata.
  15. Originally "& migliore", but corrected in the errata.
  16. Originally "temerariemente", but corrected in the errata.
  17. Originally "bisogna", but corrected in the errata.
  18. The letter 'F' was omitted in the print and hand-corrected in all copies.
  19. Originally "guardia", but corrected in the errata.
  20. Originally "equali", but corrected in the errata.
  21. Originally "poco", but corrected in the errata.
  22. Originally "poco", but corrected in the errata.
  23. Originally "non buoni", but corrected in the errata.
  24. Originally "queui", but corrected in the errata.
  25. Originally "che spada", but corrected in the errata.
  26. Originally "accorgendosi", but corrected in the errata.
  27. Originally "con pugnale", but corrected in the errata.
  28. Originally "mouendolo", but corrected in the errata.
  29. Originally "diuersi", but corrected in the errata.
  30. Originally "dentro la spada", but corrected in the errata.
  31. Originally "andere", but corrected in the errata.
  32. Originally "richede", but corrected in the errata.
  33. Originally "in suoi", but corrected in the errata.
  34. Originally "della", but corrected in the errata.
  35. Originally "la dette", but corrected in the errata.
  36. Originally "è passare", but corrected in the errata.
  37. The errata adds "l’".
  38. Originally "farmarsi", but corrected in the errata. The errata says it should be on page 232, but this is the only instance of the word in the book.
  39. Originally "sforza", but corrected in the errata. The errata says it should be on page 241, but this is the only instance of the word on the correct line.
  40. Should be 183.
  41. Originally "ineguale", but corrected in the errata.