You are not currently logged in. Are you accessing the unsecure (http) portal? Click here to switch to the secure portal.
Wiktenauer logo.png

Difference between revisions of "Giovanni dall'Agocchie"

From Wiktenauer
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 1,357: Line 1,357:
 
}}
 
}}
 
{{master subsection begin
 
{{master subsection begin
−
  | title = Day 6
+
  | title = Day 6 - Jousting
 
  | width = 60em
 
  | width = 60em
 
}}
 
}}
Line 1,366: Line 1,366:
  
 
|-  
 
|-  
 +
| <p>The Second Book, And The Sixth Day Of Dialogues </p>
 +
 +
<p>By Mr. Giovanni dall’Agocchie, Bolognese: Wherein is discussed the art of the joust. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>INTERLOCUTORS: Mr. Giovanni dall’Agocchie & Mr. Lepido Ranieri. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>I never enter into this garden, Mr. Lepido, without rejoicing, so much does this beautiful greenery delight me. Whence you’ve judiciously this place for our discussions, because you couldn’t have chosen a more beautiful nor more comfortable one, nor one wherein I would more willingly speak than this. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: You see that I was thinking of both your enjoyment and of the delight and utility that I derive from your discussion, having chosen a place conducive to the one and the other. Accordingly, let’s sit in our places, and please begin discussing tilting with the lance, so that I may attend you with the hope of being satisfied by you in this matter, as you’ve made me with respect to arms. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: I’ll do everything in my power to recall to my memory all the observations and advice that must be employed in the art of the joust, so that you may be as satisfied by me as I can make you. So question me at your pleasure, and interrupt me whenever you wish, so that I can always reply to you with a glad spirit. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: Since you permit me to ask you, I’d like you to explain to me the reason why the ring wasn’t placed reasonably. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: Didn’t you see how low it was? And positioned almost in the middle of the course? </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: I saw it, although I thought that it was fine like that, since I’ve seen it positioned that way in many other places. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: I believe you, but those who positioned it like that didn’t have knowledge of jousting, because if they had, then they would have placed it reasonably. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: How should it be placed in order to be reasonable? </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>''How the ring must be placed when jousting.''</p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: Outside the course, at least three feet of measure toward the left side of the one who is tilting, because just as the adversary always approaches on a rider’s left side when jousting in the encounter, so should the ring be placed on the same side as well, if one wants it to be placed reasonably. Regarding the height, it should be six feet of measure above the ground, as it’s a more reasonable and beautiful thing to accustom oneself to tilt with the lance high than low, because coming to tilt, either on the course or the open field, one will be able to strike the head more surely and with greater ease, this being the most notable blow that one may face. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: I understand, but tell me the reason why tilting at the ring like so was invented. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: It was invented in order to make it entertaining, and encourage youths who are still learning to tilt with the lance, as this is the easiest way that’s employed. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: Yet it seems difficult to me to get it in that ring. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: It’s true that it’s difficult, but it doesn’t consist so much of getting it in the ring as much as it does in seeing a rider carry his lance well, and tilting it reasonably. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: What does tilting with the lance reasonably consist of? </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>''What tilting with the lance reasonably consists of.''</p>
 +
|
 +
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: Of six chief headings. The first is in understanding how to be on horseback well. The second is in holding and carrying the lance on the thigh. The third is in knowing how to lift it from the thigh. The fourth is in placing it on the lance-rest. The fifth is in knowing how to couch it. The sixth and last is in knowing how to recover it. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: For my satisfaction, I’d like you to explain these six headings to me better, so that I can achieve understanding of this art as well with great ease. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: I’ll be glad to explain them to you. Beginning with the first one, I’ll say that since the art of riding belongs to riding masters, I won’t exert myself upon it at much length. I’ll only give you three necessary recommendations, of which the first is that being on horseback, a rider shouldn’t be seated much, because in addition to the discomfort that one receives thereby in tilting with the lance, it makes an ugly sight. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: Perhaps you want him to stand up straight in the stirrups? </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: I didn’t say that, but I want to imply that one can arrange himself in sitting in the saddle in such a manner that he comes to be somewhat straighter than usual, so that doing so, he’ll be more beautiful on horseback, and also more comfortable and safer in tilting with the lance, and especially when tilting at the encounter. The second recommendation is, that in beginning on the course, he shouldn’t apply the spurs to the horse furiously, but send him slowly, so that he comes to the course more willingly. And it’s also done because by moving the horse with great impetus one can easily lose his lance, as has been seen many times. The third and last being that on the course, not to press him much with the left spur, because that way the horses won’t have a reason to flee the course, if they’re found to be among those that flee it too eagerly, either for fear of the blow, or through hearing the impact of the other horse as it comes to encounter them; and for this reason putting belled collars on them was devised, so that they wouldn’t hear the other’s impact. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: Now that I’ve heard these recommendations, continue to discuss the other headings. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: In the second heading there are three ways for you to hold and carry the lance on the thigh, that is, between the thigh and the saddle. The first one is to hold it inclined somewhat outward toward his right side. The second is to make it hang somewhat toward the left side. The third and last is holding the lance so that it hangs neither there nor there, but so that it remains fixed in the middle. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: For what reason do you want it that way, so that it’s held between the thigh and the saddle? </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: Because when the jouster is armored, the harness would get in the way so that the butt of the lance couldn’t be fixed upon it except with difficulty, and given this, it’s held in the aforementioned fashion out of necessity. Lep: That’s a good reason. But tell me, among these three ways of holding and carrying the lance on the thigh, which is the loveliest? </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: To hold and carry it fixed in the middle, because in addition to avoiding extremes, one also makes a lovely sight, keeping, however, the point of the lance neither too high nor too low, but reasonably; and similarly one needs to keep the right elbow in such a manner that it doesn’t point either too far up nor down; but it has to have a lovely grace. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: But if the lance has to hang to one of the two sides, which one would be better for it to decline toward? </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: Toward the left side, but not much, because some have been seen who, in order to display their bravery, carried it so slanted that they made those who saw them laugh; but letting it hang it toward the right side is something I don’t praise in any way; on the contrary, I condemn it utterly, because beyond being very ugly to behold, many mistakes can occur to you that arise when lifting it from the thigh and placing it in the lance-rest; but in the other two ways this danger isn’t present. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: Why do many fall into this error? </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: Because they don’t have a rational understanding of jousting. But to continue with the discussion of the third heading, there are also three ways in it of lifting the lance from the thigh. One is, when lifting it from it while on the course, to immediately put it in the lance-rest. The next is, while you are placing yourself on the course, to lift it, and hold it outside the thigh with the wrist, with the arm extended downward. The third and last is, as one is sent to the course, to lift it upward from the thigh somewhat, holding it again with the wrist, but the arm must be a bit bent, making the point of the lance aim toward the adversary; and above all, one must be advised not to lean the lance upon oneself, because it looks too ugly; and these are the ways that are currently in use. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: Which of these ways do you hold to be the best? </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: All three are good, however I hold the last one to be the best and surest, because when the jouster holds his arm somewhat bent he supports the lance more easily, beyond which, there’s more surety when placing it in the lance-rest, owing to the hand being closer to it; and moreover holding it and carrying it by the wrist is useful in war, given that all things are more lovely and praiseworthy the nearer they come to the semblance of truth. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: So it is, but tell me, why is carrying the lance in the pouch <borsetta> almost never done anymore? </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: Because the lances that are made these days are lighter and more maneuverable, and the saddlebows on the front of the saddles are smaller; and it’s also not done in order to avoid two errors which could arise from tilting if the lances were held in the pouch: of which the first is, that when tilting, the lance would be shaking; and the other is that it could break on the course, as has been seen many times among those who had wanted to tilt with light lances, holding them in the pouch. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: Then why was carrying the lance in the pouch invented? </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>''Why the lance was carried in the pouch.''</p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: Because the lances that were in use then were so large and heavy that only awkwardly could they be carried by the wrist, and also the saddlebows on the front of the saddles that were in use were so wide that they impeded the gripping of it, and the carrying of it reasonably upon the thigh. And considering this, the pouch was invented. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: How did it come to pass that such heavy lances are no longer used? </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: Because riders are no longer interested in knocking each other from horseback, as they were then, given that this truly is a thing more likely to displease than to please, but today they care only to carry the lance well and to break it judiciously; because in truth, when doing it for entertainment, extremes should always be avoided. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: I understand that it’s as you say. Therefore, continue with the fourth heading. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>''In how many ways the lance can be placed in the lance-rest.''</p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: Note then, that there are also three ways to place the lance in the lance-rest. The first one is, at the beginning of the course. The second one is when the horse has been dispatched. The third is when one draws near to his adversary. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: Which of these three ways do you hold to be the best and safest? </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: The second one, that is, when he’s sent down the course. The reason is that if you want to place the lance in the lance-rest at the beginning of the course, it might go shaking up and down, which makes it very ugly to watch; and this arises sometimes not due to the rider, but due to the horse, who when setting off disturbs him in such a fashion that he can’t keep his lance steady. And then, wishing to steady it when he nears his adversary, one who hasn’t had a great deal of practice can easily give him the lance to the head, or pass him without hitting, or in lowering it too quickly could hit his lance into the barrier, as has been experienced many times. But by placing it in the lance-rest once the course is under way, these dangers are avoided, and so as well carrying the lance in the lance-rest somewhat fixed and with good judgment makes a very lovely sight. And for these reasons I hold that carrying the lance in the lance-rest when the course is under way is better and safer. But most of all, when arresting the lance, it’s necessary to put the hand forward, turning the hand inward in that ''tempo'' in such a fashion that the last joints of the fingers face upwards, so that by doing so the lance comes to be placed in the lance-rest more safely and with greater ease. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: Do you wish, then, that the grapper should be immediately drawn near to the lance-rest? </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: Not this, because one could upset the lance. Nonetheless, if the rider wanted to draw the grapper near the lance-rest for his satisfaction, it would be far better and safer for him to draw it there bit by bit while he was on the course; but take note of the fifth heading. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: Wait, please, because first I’d like you to clear up a doubt for me, which is that many people say that one shouldn’t hold the fist tight when the lance is in the lance-rest; they say that keeping the hand open instead is much better. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: Rather, it is entirely the opposite, because when one delivers the blow, the grapper hits into the lance-rest; and if the hand were open, the impact would make it slide over, where it might hit into the bulk of the lance, which is over the grip. And in consideration of this many have gauntleted their hands. But holding it somewhat tight, this danger doesn’t exist. And moreover, when the lances strike together, holding it in the said fashion easily causes the adversary’s (if he’s holding his hand open) not to hit, but the other one can hit more surely. And these are the reasons why it’s much better and surer to hold the hand as I’ve said above. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: I understand. Continue on to discuss the fifth heading. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>''In how many ways the lance is couched.''</p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: In the fifth heading there are three ways to couch the lance. One is to lower it immediately upon placing it in the lance-rest. The next is to keep it high at the beginning of the course, and to lower it a little when one begins to draw near to the enemy. The third and last one is to lower it all in one ''tempo'' when one wishes to hit. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: Which of these three ways is the surest? </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: Holding it high, and then lowering it a bit as I’ve said, because if a jouster wishes to couch his lance at the very beginning of the course, when he wishes to deliver the blow he is often forced either to raise his point or to hit the shoulder, and over all both of these ways are ugly to watch. As for wanting to lower it and immediately strike, beyond being difficult, this is not very sure. But by putting the lance high, and with advantage, and then lowering it a bit when one begins to near the enemy, that is, raising the elbow a bit, one can deliver the blow easily, and moreover this makes a very lovely sight. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: What do you mean by this “advantage”? </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: I mean that in placing the lance in the lance-rest, it should be placed firmly and in such a manner that its point goes toward the left side, so much so that the outside of the adversary’s lance can be uncovered, always keeping the eyes fixed at the target of the eyeslit of the helm, so that by doing so it is almost impossible to pass the course without striking. And this is the surest method that can be employed. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: I like this very much, so continue with the other parts. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>''In what fashion the lance is recovered.''</p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: Now, coming to discuss the sixth, and final heading, I tell you that there are two ways to recover the lance. The first is to return it onto the thigh once past the enemy. The second is to cast the butt of the lance behind the right thigh, making its point face backward, and then once the horse has stopped, to return it onto the thigh. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: Which of these two ways is the better one? </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: The latter is better, because wanting to put the lance back on the thigh immediately is somewhat difficult when in armor, because the harness (as I’ve said) very often impedes one. But putting it behind the thigh, since it isn’t any impediment to you, is much surer. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: Why is it that many, as soon as they’ve passed the adversary, cast their lance to the ground or place it upon their shoulder? </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: Because they don’t know how to recover the lance. If they did know the true way to do so, they wouldn’t place it upon their shoulder, since it truly is a very ugly thing to behold, nor should any such fashion be employed. And with this I’ll put an end to these headings, of which I’ve told you all the ways that must be observed when wishing to tilt the lance reasonably. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: I rest very satisfied by you thus far, nonetheless, I would also hold it very dear if you would tell me if there is anything else to know pertinent to jousting. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: There remains to understand the rule that must be held in acquiring experience, because what was contained in the five headings was the theory of jousting, which indicates the true way that has to be observed when wishing to tilt with the lance reasonably. Experience, then, is that which is acquired by a great deal of practice. There remains, then, for you to understand how the lance-rest must be, and where it should be placed; and also how all the body armor goes; and similarly how long the lance should be together with all of its armaments; and finally there remains for you to understand the measure with which the barrier is made, and with what rule the counterlist is placed, which are all things pertinent and very necessary to the jouster. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: I’d like for you to explain this to me as well, so that I can wholly fulfill my wishes. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: Because I take great care to satisfy your noble desire, and in order to complete our discussion, I’ll tell you everything. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>''In what fashion the jouster must practice.''</p>
 +
 +
<p>And commencing, I say that when a jouster wishes to practice in order to acquire experience, he must first armor himself only with a cuirass, and then tilt either on foot or horse, according to which he prefers, in order to accustom himself to carrying the lance by the wrist, and also placing it surely upon the lance-rest without ever looking. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: Why don’t you want him to look at the lance-rest? </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: Because in any case he wouldn’t be able to avail himself of it when at the task, given that the lance-rest can’t be seen when one has the buffe and helm on one’s head; and even if there weren’t this reason, it isn’t good in any fashion, but is rather a hideous defect in those who practice it. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: Then why did those who practice it come up with it? </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: There are many who do so, and especially among those who make their livings on horseback. And this occurs because they don’t have an understanding of tilting with the lance, and they care less to learn it, like those who convince themselves so much that it seems to them that they understand a great deal. But if they considered well, and with clear judgment, how important it is to understand things with reason, they would take an example from artisans, who, when they want to begin to learn their arts, seek first to understand how they have to apply their instruments to their requirements. Then how much more should these, who make a trade of arms, seek with every study to understand how to tilt with the lance reasonably, given that this is their principal profession? But if I wanted to go on discussing this, it would take too long. Indeed, it would be necessary to spend an entire day on this subject. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: I believe you easily, because I too have known many who made a great profession of having the understanding of arms both afoot and on horseback, and then when they were put to the test, they knew very little of it. But I want to leave these to their opinions, and continue our discussion, because I’m sure that I will be very happy to understand why it is that you want a rider at the beginning of learning to tilt with the lance to do so on foot. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: This is because he’ll be able to learn how to carry the lance by the wrist more freely, and to accustom himself to doing so, and placing it in the lance-rest, and couching it with reason, without the horse impeding him, considering that once he’s had some practice in this exercise, he can then mount his horse with greater safety and tilt at a glove, or at another target, as he likes best, and once he’s had good practice in this, he can then begin to break lances. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: What would you like him to break these lances on? </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: On a quintain, as is used, or he can use another method, much lovelier, and of greater utility in order to protect himself excellently, which is this: he can make himself a wooden man and armor it with a cuirass and a helmet on its head, and then put it on a horse, also made of wood, like those that are employed for vaulting; which horse then has to be put on a carriage made with four wheels beneath it, one foot above ground, although the two that are in front will be a bit lower than the other two, accommodating the said horse together with the wooden man, in such a fashion that it can’t fall, this being made with a double cord about six braccia in length attached to the front of the carriage. Then it will be drawn by someone running as fast as he can along the length of the course, which will have to be done in such a fashion that the wheels can turn easily, and thus by jousting at the said man, the rider will come to make himself sure, and acquire excellent practice, given that this is a method almost like tilting at the encounter. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: Could lances be broken on this armored man without the use of a lance-rest? </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: They could, but as for me, I don’t praise it at all, because if a rider wants to break one without a lance-rest, it’s likely that he will tighten up on the lance when he wants to strike, and in that action the lance would become disturbed, and make an ugly sight. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: You’ve always satisfied me in every matter, and in this above all. But tell me, please, do you want there to be a barrier on the course? </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: To whomever can afford it, it would be better, and even if it weren’t of boards it wouldn’t matter much, because they can be made in a variety of ways that don’t cost too much, all of which will serve for this purpose. And one can also make a lance in two pieces, which will be good for practicing, because in truth when a jouster wants to assure himself well and acquire excellent experience, before he tilts at the encounter he needs to break a lot of lances. Otherwise it could happen to him as occurs to many, who through excessive self-confidence have wanted to tilt at the encounter without practicing, and have then done themselves little honor. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: There are a lot of such people, but to return to our discussion, I’d like you to tell me how these lances in two pieces are made. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>''Lance in two pieces.''</p>
 +
 +
<p>Gio: One constructs the lance’s trunk, that is, the part from the middle downward, four feet of measure in length (which measure of a foot, and of an inch, will be shown by me in a diagram at the end of this discussion of ours), then on the end of said trunk is affixed a pipe made of good plate, welded well, at least nine inches long, which needs to be projected forward of the trunk by more than half, and the other part will be fixed on the tip of the said trunk. Then some pieces can be made that furnish the length of the lance, and are arranged so that they are attached inside the pipe, so that when the lance is entirely together, it really seems to be whole. And by painting the pipe the color of the wood, it almost won’t be recognized as a lance in two pieces; and this trunk will serve for breaking a lot of them, which is the most useful way, and of as little cost as can be had. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: These pieces, how long should they be? </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: Six feet, because the lance is ordinarily ten feet long. But you need to be aware that from the butt to the grip shouldn’t be more than one and a quarter feet, that is, fifteen inches, because if it were longer it would prove a great inconvenience both in holding the lance and in lifting it from the thigh. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: What size should the butt of the lance be? </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: It has to avoid extremes, nonetheless if its circumference near the grip were six and a half inches, it would seem good to me, and very comfortable. But since we’ve come to discussing the lance, I want to tell you how its armaments need to be, which are of no small importance. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>''Armaments of the lance.''</p>
 +
 +
<p>And beginning with the grapper, it should be placed about an inch from the grip; and that part of it that has to hit into the lance-rest shouldn’t be wider than two fifths of an inch, because if it were wider, when couching the lance it could easily touch the cuirass, whereby it would impede the blow. But being narrow, this danger wouldn’t occur. Now, coming to the coronel that goes on the head of the lance, it should be made of excellent steel, with six teeth on the tip which need to open well outwards, because by doing so it’ll break on the helm more safely; and it should be one inch long, not counting the teeth, or a bit longer, covered over in such a fashion that it can’t break through during the impact, and above all it should be well tempered so that it will bite into helms, which ordinarily are always very hard. And so that you understand, good coronels made with an excellent temper have very often won the prize of the joust. Then there is the vamplate which goes at least four inches above the grip of the lance, because if it were high <i.e. too distal> it would fail to armor the right shoulder and could easily be damaged by the adversary’s lance, the said vamplate being that which defends the entire right arm. And therefore it should be arranged in a manner that is steady and placed with good judgment, because if it were too low instead, its edge could touch the cuirass when wishing to deliver the blow, whereby it would impede the breaking of the lance. But if it were positioned in the way that I’ve said, these perils would be avoided. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: What size should this vamplate be? </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: There should be about three inches of bell, not counting the throat, and the diameter of its mouth should be eight and a half inches, and it should be neither too heavy nor too light, but if it’s two and a half pounds it would be good, and safe. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>''Body armor.''</p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Now, coming to speak of the armaments of the body, there are three pieces to be particularly considered out of all others. One is the helm, the next is the buffe, and the third is the lance-rest. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>''Helm.''</p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>The helm shouldn’t have a very wide eyeslit; in any case, it will suffice only that one be able to see the adversary, because all the rest is done through practice anyway, since one can see neither the lance-rest, nor the horse’s left ear, nor the point of the lance once it’s been placed in the lance-rest, as many claim, all of which are thought to be visible, but rather it’s entirely the opposite, since upon placing the lance in the lance-rest the vamplate comes to occupy one’s view, nor is the adversary visible until such a point as the lance begins to be lowered. For this reason I’m of the opinion that the inside half, that is, the left side, of the helm’s eyeslit should be sealed, since by dong so the jouster’s life would be well protected, because the experience of many has been witnessed who have been wounded or killed in the joust by the lance’s entry into the same part. And therefore, if the said part were sealed, this danger would be avoided. And especially when one is tilting for fun or the enjoyment of others. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: I like this opinion of yours a lot, and may God will that it be put into use for the benefit of jousters. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>''Buffe.''</p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: May it be as you say. But coming to discuss the buffe, it should properly be like the eyeslit of the helm, and as much as if faces outward and keeps the rider straighter, so much safer will it be. And above all else, the edge of the said buffe should be restrained in such a fashion that it doesn’t face toward the right side, so that it doesn’t result in making a target of the left temple. Because too many are seen who, when they tilt, immediately upon placing their lances in their lance-rests, turn their left sides toward the enemy, which, beyond making a very ugly sight, results in two errors: one is that they create a target, as I’ve said, and the other is that by misfortune the point of the lance may go wide toward the outside, so that if they want to deliver the blow they have to bump with the shoulder so that the lance will strike. And from this it arises that many times either they don’t break, or go on the diagonal, or the two make contact, as has been seen many times through experience. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: What you say is true. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>''Lance-rest.''</p>
 +
 +
<p>Gio: Now as for the jousting rest, it should be three inches long at most, because if it were longer it wouldn’t be reliable for putting the lance on, considering that your hand could easily go on the inside of it, or when lowering the lance your arm could bump into the lance-rest from it being too long, in consequence whereof you could only deliver the blow with great effort. On also has to be advised that the said lance-rest should be arched upward <i.e. so that the concavity is upward> somewhat so that the lance goes on top of it with greater surety, and finally it’s necessary to recommend that in attaching it to the cuirass, it’s better to be higher than low, namely, on the right breast. But above all, arrange it in such a fashion that the forward edge of the said lance-rest faces somewhat upward, so that the butt of the lance is placed upon it when wanting to deliver the blow, because if it were placed on the rear edge, the lance would not be as sure to break, as it could slip out of it. And these are the things relevant to the lance-rest. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: I understand. Continue, and I’ll pay attention to you. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>''How the jousting barrier should be.''</p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: Now, coming to discuss the barrier, it should be at least two hundred feet long, because if it were shorter, the jousters would meet each other too soon to be able to do anything good. Regarding the height, it should rise five feet above the ground for greater safety. The counterlist should be one hundred fifty feet long and two and a half feet high, but it needs to lean toward the barrier a bit, that is the distance between the one and the other should be three and a half feet at the top, and four feet at the bottom, and this is the true measure that must be used. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: Why do you want the counterlist to lean toward the barrier? </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: So that there is no reason for the jouster to bump his feet into the poles that support the counterlist when he spurs the horse. And here I put the end, because this is over all as much as I have to tell you about this. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: Now I’ve understood all your advice that pertains to the art of the joust, whereby I am wholly satisfied, and will always be infinitely obliged to you. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: Let these words not be used between us, Mr. Lepido, because you know well how much I love you. So let’s go, and if there’s anything else in which you know that I can be of good service to you, command me happily, and I will always be very swift to please you. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: Since you give me the courage to command you (thanks to your kindness) I would also like, if it please you, for us to return here tomorrow in order to discuss some things relevant to the art of war, which I desire very much to understand. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: I’d be happy to return, and won’t fail to make plain to you what I know, as usual. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: I have faith that you will. But I recall that you’d promised to show me a diagram of the measures of a foot and of an inch. Therefore don’t refrain from fulfilling this promise to me. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Gio: I have at once drawn from my pocket this card, whereon is the diagram, at the time to show it to you. So have a look at it. This measure is only half a foot, that is, six inches, which as you see are divided evenly, and can be doubled in order to make a whole foot. <The diagram is reproduced along the right edge of the page of the original, labeled “This is the measure of the half foot, that is, six inches.”> </p>
 
|  
 
|  
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>Lep: Now I’ve seen it, and liked it. So thank you for it, as for all your other courtesies. Let’s go. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| <p>The End of the Second Book. </p>
 +
|
 +
 +
|-
 +
| class="noline" |
 +
| class="noline" |
 +
 +
|}
 +
{{master subsection end}}
 +
{{master end}}
 +
 +
{{master begin
 +
| title = Third Book - The Art of Battle
 +
| width = 60em
 +
}}
 +
{{master subsection begin
 +
| title = Day 7
 +
| width = 60em
 +
}}
 +
{| class="master"
 +
|-
 +
! <p>{{rating}}<br/></p>
 +
! <p>Transcription{{edit index|Dell'Arte di Scrima Libri Tre (Giovanni dall'Agocchie) 1572.pdf}}<br/></p>
 +
 +
|-
 
|  
 
|  
 +
|
  
 
|}
 
|}

Revision as of 02:02, 10 November 2023

MS Thott.290.2º 011r.jpg

Caution: Scribes at Work

This article is in the process of updates, expansion, or major restructuring. Please forgive any broken features or formatting errors while these changes are underway. To help avoid edit conflicts, please do not edit this page while this message is displayed. Stay tuned for the announcement of the revised content!

This article was last edited by Michael Chidester (talk| contribs) at 02:02, 10 November 2023 (UTC). (Update)
Giovanni dall'Agocchie
Born March 9, 1547
Bologna, Italy
Died 16th century (?)
Occupation Fencing master
Patron Fabio Pepoli, Count of Castiglione (?)
Movement Dardi tradition
Influences
Genres Fencing manual
Language Italian
Notable work(s) Dell'Arte di Scrima Libri Tre (1572)
Translations Traduction française

Giovanni dall'Agocchie di Bologna (dalle Agocchie, Agucchi, Agocchia; b. March 9, 1547) was a 16th century Italian fencing master. Little is known about this master's life apart from that he was a citizen of Bologna. In 1572, dall'Agocchie wrote and published a treatise on warfare, including fencing with the side sword, titled Dell'Arte di Scrima Libri Tre ("Three Books on the Art of Defense"). He dedicated it to Fabio Pepoli, Count of Castiglione, but it's unclear if he was ever attached to the comital court.

Treatise

This article includes a very early (2007) draft of Jherek Swanger's translation. An extensively-revised version of the translation was released in print in 2018 as The Art of Defense: on Fencing, the Joust, and Battle Formation, by Giovanni dall’Agocchie. It can be purchased at the following links in hardcover and softcover.

Temp

Additional Resources

The following is a list of publications containing scans, transcriptions, and translations relevant to this article, as well as published peer-reviewed research.

References

  1. ↑ NdT – Cette image de l’ange associé aux initiales F.P renvoie au Vénitien Francesco Portonari - Voir Giuseppina Zappella, p89, Le marche dei tipografi e degli editori italiani del Cinquecento. Repertorio di figure, simboli e soggetti e dei relativi motti. Milano, Editrice Bibliografica, 1986, 2 v. "Grandi Opere, 1”.
  2. ↑ I.e. “mezzo tempo”.
Early Italian masters
Germanic Masters
Agrippa 1553 01.jpg
Bolognese Masters
Florentine Masters
Neopolitan Masters
Venetian Masters
Agrippa Style
Marcelli Style
Other Masters
Retrieved from "https://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Giovanni_dall%27Agocchie&oldid=145239"