Wiktenauer logo.png

Difference between revisions of "Salvator Fabris"

From Wiktenauer
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 1,449: Line 1,449:
 
<p>Engaging the sword with the sword and dagger is very different from engaging with the sword alone, for it is done at one time with the dagger, at another with the sword, and more often with both sword and dagger. You engage with the sword when your adversary keeps his sword so far withdrawn that you cannot reach it with the dagger; sometimes your sword cannot penetrate because of the danger of his dagger. In this case you should hold your sword in such a way as to close the path in which the adversary's point is directed and with the forte in such a position that his point cannot approach your body without his ''faible'' meeting your ''forte'', which generally prevents him and drives his point out of line. You can also, as he approaches, raise the sword from that defence and make a hit, putting the dagger where the sword was before, which will be a good defence and will delude your adversary, who will probably think that you are going to parry with the sword; thus his plan will be foiled. This is a good method to follow, when your adversary's sword is withdrawn, since you should not advance too far with the sword, lest you lose it, nor should you advance the dagger, for there are some who, seeing the dagger advance, beat it with their dagger and hit. Therefore to advance too far is very dangerous. Besides when you push on so far, the dagger is easily deceived by the feints and movements of the adversary's sword, which throw it into disorder. But if your adversary's sword la advanced, there will be no such danger. You can then readily try to engage with the dagger, if you understand the correct method. For you must not carry the dagger so high that on reaching his sword you have to lower it, or so low that you have to raise it; nor on reaching his point must you make any movement for, however slight, it would give him an opportunity to hit, or at least to disturb the dagger; thus you would not be free from danger. You must hold the dagger with the point in the same line as your adversary’s sword, so that on reaching his point the dagger engages without other movement. If the line of his sword is rather low you must begin with the dagger equally low. To make safe, the body should be lowered in proportion and in such a manner that you know that if your adversary disengages, you can easily parry without raising the arm, for if you raise it, he might deceive you with a feint of disengaging and return, when you would be hit without a defence. But holding the dagger arm steady, you would easily defend, on either side. Thus, if you know how to apply the exact rule, you can engage your adversary's sword, wherever it is, provided it is far enough advanced beyond his dagger. But if it is withdrawn behind the dagger, it would be an error to engage; for besides the reasons given you would be in danger of getting within too close distance before finding his point, when you would be hit, as you would also if his point were too low towards the ground. In that case it would be better to cover it with your sword, so that your adversary could not disengage on the side of the dagger, or if he wished to disengage would be forced to disengage on the side of the sword in order to free his point.</p>
 
<p>Engaging the sword with the sword and dagger is very different from engaging with the sword alone, for it is done at one time with the dagger, at another with the sword, and more often with both sword and dagger. You engage with the sword when your adversary keeps his sword so far withdrawn that you cannot reach it with the dagger; sometimes your sword cannot penetrate because of the danger of his dagger. In this case you should hold your sword in such a way as to close the path in which the adversary's point is directed and with the forte in such a position that his point cannot approach your body without his ''faible'' meeting your ''forte'', which generally prevents him and drives his point out of line. You can also, as he approaches, raise the sword from that defence and make a hit, putting the dagger where the sword was before, which will be a good defence and will delude your adversary, who will probably think that you are going to parry with the sword; thus his plan will be foiled. This is a good method to follow, when your adversary's sword is withdrawn, since you should not advance too far with the sword, lest you lose it, nor should you advance the dagger, for there are some who, seeing the dagger advance, beat it with their dagger and hit. Therefore to advance too far is very dangerous. Besides when you push on so far, the dagger is easily deceived by the feints and movements of the adversary's sword, which throw it into disorder. But if your adversary's sword la advanced, there will be no such danger. You can then readily try to engage with the dagger, if you understand the correct method. For you must not carry the dagger so high that on reaching his sword you have to lower it, or so low that you have to raise it; nor on reaching his point must you make any movement for, however slight, it would give him an opportunity to hit, or at least to disturb the dagger; thus you would not be free from danger. You must hold the dagger with the point in the same line as your adversary’s sword, so that on reaching his point the dagger engages without other movement. If the line of his sword is rather low you must begin with the dagger equally low. To make safe, the body should be lowered in proportion and in such a manner that you know that if your adversary disengages, you can easily parry without raising the arm, for if you raise it, he might deceive you with a feint of disengaging and return, when you would be hit without a defence. But holding the dagger arm steady, you would easily defend, on either side. Thus, if you know how to apply the exact rule, you can engage your adversary's sword, wherever it is, provided it is far enough advanced beyond his dagger. But if it is withdrawn behind the dagger, it would be an error to engage; for besides the reasons given you would be in danger of getting within too close distance before finding his point, when you would be hit, as you would also if his point were too low towards the ground. In that case it would be better to cover it with your sword, so that your adversary could not disengage on the side of the dagger, or if he wished to disengage would be forced to disengage on the side of the sword in order to free his point.</p>
  
<p>But if you wished to hit, it would be necessary in forming this defence, to hold the dagger steady; thus you could turn the sword from ''tierce'' to ''seconde'' and close the path be-tween the two weapons in such a manner that, if your adversary advanced, his sword would always encounter your dagger, which had made no other movement. But if his sword were low and on the outside on the side of the dagger, you could not cover the path, and it would be ill-judged to advance the point of your sword because of the danger, lest in that time he should disengage above the sword and hit between the two hands where the path was open; although you might parry with the dagger, yet the movement would be so large, that, if your adversary had made a feint of hitting in that part he could hit in the new opening and attack. Also he could disengage the point of the sword, thrust between the two hands, gliding along your blade, and thus hit on the side of the dagger, so that you would be in the same danger. Therefore in such a case it would be better to push his sword out with the hand as low as the right knee and turn to ''quarte'', in order to be on the inside and cover that part more; at the same time you should incline your point upwards towards the dagger, which would defend all that part of the body up to the head, and all the more if dagger and sword were in conjunction. In this manner you would not only push away his sword, but would form a good counter-position. You would have left the adversary only one path of attack, that is over the sword, and your sword being at an angle with the left arm forward, you could easily parry this attack with one of the two weapons or both together and with little movement, since there would be no room to hit between the two weapons. Whether your adversary's sword were in ''seconde'' or in ''prime'', and if his point was in that same line but separated from the dagger, which would mean danger below and between the weapons, it would still be better to use this method, and to put the point of your sword against his, which would lead to the same result. But if his point were in another line and high, in that case it would be well to adopt a guard in ''tierce'' at an angle, and put your point on your adversary's, holding the dagger extended near the sword; in order to prevent his hitting anywhere but above the dagger. For if he were on the outside of the sword and should thrust over the dagger, he would make such a large circle that he would give you a good chance to parry, if you remembered to keep the lower part of the body so far withdrawn that your adversary could not reach it. In any case you must when parrying hit where there is a part uncovered according to the movement and position of your adversary's body and weapons in making his hit. As he[!] have many times said in this way the parry is always safer and cannot be deceived.</p>
+
<p>But if you wished to hit, it would be necessary in forming this defence, to hold the dagger steady; thus you could turn the sword from ''tierce'' to ''seconde'' and close the path between the two weapons in such a manner that, if your adversary advanced, his sword would always encounter your dagger, which had made no other movement. But if his sword were low and on the outside on the side of the dagger, you could not cover the path, and it would be ill-judged to advance the point of your sword because of the danger, lest in that time he should disengage above the sword and hit between the two hands where the path was open; although you might parry with the dagger, yet the movement would be so large, that, if your adversary had made a feint of hitting in that part he could hit in the new opening and attack. Also he could disengage the point of the sword, thrust between the two hands, gliding along your blade, and thus hit on the side of the dagger, so that you would be in the same danger. Therefore in such a case it would be better to push his sword out with the hand as low as the right knee and turn to ''quarte'', in order to be on the inside and cover that part more; at the same time you should incline your point upwards towards the dagger, which would defend all that part of the body up to the head, and all the more if dagger and sword were in conjunction. In this manner you would not only push away his sword, but would form a good counter-position. You would have left the adversary only one path of attack, that is over the sword, and your sword being at an angle with the left arm forward, you could easily parry this attack with one of the two weapons or both together and with little movement, since there would be no room to hit between the two weapons. Whether your adversary's sword were in ''seconde'' or in ''prime'', and if his point was in that same line but separated from the dagger, which would mean danger below and between the weapons, it would still be better to use this method, and to put the point of your sword against his, which would lead to the same result. But if his point were in another line and high, in that case it would be well to adopt a guard in ''tierce'' at an angle, and put your point on your adversary's, holding the dagger extended near the sword; in order to prevent his hitting anywhere but above the dagger. For if he were on the outside of the sword and should thrust over the dagger, he would make such a large circle that he would give you a good chance to parry, if you remembered to keep the lower part of the body so far withdrawn that your adversary could not reach it. In any case you must when parrying hit where there is a part uncovered according to the movement and position of your adversary's body and weapons in making his hit. As he[!] have many times said in this way the parry is always safer and cannot be deceived.</p>
  
 
<p>You must know that the principle of using the dagger alone in engaging the adversary's sword applies more against the guards in ''tierce'' and ''quarte'', than against those of ''prime'' and ''seconde'', where it is not so strong. For if when you move with the dagger against your adversary, he should make a feint in the upper lines, which are the feints most to be feared, he would force you to parry and then would hit by a rush in the parts uncovered by your movement of parrying. Besides the fact that they are more successful with the sword and dagger than with the sword alone, the guards in ''prime'' and ''seconde'' naturally lend themselves to the rush. For being in ''tierce'' or ''quarte'', in order that the rush may have force, you must change the hand to ''seconde''. Therefore when your adversary is already in a position to rush without further change of the hand, he is much more to be feared.</p>
 
<p>You must know that the principle of using the dagger alone in engaging the adversary's sword applies more against the guards in ''tierce'' and ''quarte'', than against those of ''prime'' and ''seconde'', where it is not so strong. For if when you move with the dagger against your adversary, he should make a feint in the upper lines, which are the feints most to be feared, he would force you to parry and then would hit by a rush in the parts uncovered by your movement of parrying. Besides the fact that they are more successful with the sword and dagger than with the sword alone, the guards in ''prime'' and ''seconde'' naturally lend themselves to the rush. For being in ''tierce'' or ''quarte'', in order that the rush may have force, you must change the hand to ''seconde''. Therefore when your adversary is already in a position to rush without further change of the hand, he is much more to be feared.</p>
Line 1,455: Line 1,455:
 
<p>If then you wish to guard against your adversary's attack, it is better on his advance to use the sword and dagger together and for greater precaution to exclude his point on the outside, if possible. This method is good against a guard of ''prime'' or ''seconde'', though you must take care if you wish to advance with safety, that you have excluded his point entirely in such a way, that you are certain he cannot hit there, but without touching his sword. If you have done this, you may close the distance as much as you wish. You must also be careful not to approach the point of your sword so near to his dagger, that he can engage it and hit before you have freed it. You must always keep your point at such distance and position that are assured of its freedom to hit in ''time''. Nor by freedom do we mean keeping it far out of line for in that case it would be pushed away before you could return it. But holding it in the proper manner you will keep it in line or very little out of it, and always free, so that your adversary cannot prevent your returning.</p>
 
<p>If then you wish to guard against your adversary's attack, it is better on his advance to use the sword and dagger together and for greater precaution to exclude his point on the outside, if possible. This method is good against a guard of ''prime'' or ''seconde'', though you must take care if you wish to advance with safety, that you have excluded his point entirely in such a way, that you are certain he cannot hit there, but without touching his sword. If you have done this, you may close the distance as much as you wish. You must also be careful not to approach the point of your sword so near to his dagger, that he can engage it and hit before you have freed it. You must always keep your point at such distance and position that are assured of its freedom to hit in ''time''. Nor by freedom do we mean keeping it far out of line for in that case it would be pushed away before you could return it. But holding it in the proper manner you will keep it in line or very little out of it, and always free, so that your adversary cannot prevent your returning.</p>
  
<p>We must add that you can engage your adversary's point in any position with the sword alone, provided that you hold the dagger in such a manner that it has little movement to make in order to defend the part where the adversary might hit. This is an excellent method though some deny it. They will not allow that you should ever engage with both the weapons at one time, but they say that one at least should be free, in order to be able to parry and hit if the need arises, that one weapon should be reserved for defence, and one for attack and that there being two pieces they should serve two purposes, whereas if both are used for the defence they are serving one only. We admit this, but say that this united defence is not only stronger, but also better protects the other line, where the adversary might approach. He finds little exposed there, it is harder for him to hit and easier for you to parry. Further if you defend with one weapon only, there is more danger not only of being disordered, but also of being overcome. Thus it often happens, that where you are defending with one weapon and your adversary changes his line in hitting, you are so disunited and weak that both your weapons are forced into subjection, so that what you would not do willingly, you are forced to do, when your adversary has moved. Thus you are so disordered and confused that you have been unable to hit because of the trouble you were in in the defence. On the other hand when you defend with both weapons and your adversary changes his line in order to hit or do anything else, you can on that change sep-arate the two weapons, the one to parry and the other to hit because they were in union. Sometimes also you can defend with both weapons and hit in the same ''time'' because of the strength of your first defence due to the union of the weapons. You have more completely covered the body and work of your own accord and not driven by necessity. Therefore you may well understand, that he who engages with both his weapons will dispose of them with greater judgment and security and in such a manner that he will not be prevented from hitting in ''time'', when the occasion offers; but he who is compelled to engage will usually be prevented from making anything but the simple defence, and however good that is it can easily be deceived.</p>
+
<p>We must add that you can engage your adversary's point in any position with the sword alone, provided that you hold the dagger in such a manner that it has little movement to make in order to defend the part where the adversary might hit. This is an excellent method though some deny it. They will not allow that you should ever engage with both the weapons at one time, but they say that one at least should be free, in order to be able to parry and hit if the need arises, that one weapon should be reserved for defence, and one for attack and that there being two pieces they should serve two purposes, whereas if both are used for the defence they are serving one only. We admit this, but say that this united defence is not only stronger, but also better protects the other line, where the adversary might approach. He finds little exposed there, it is harder for him to hit and easier for you to parry. Further if you defend with one weapon only, there is more danger not only of being disordered, but also of being overcome. Thus it often happens, that where you are defending with one weapon and your adversary changes his line in hitting, you are so disunited and weak that both your weapons are forced into subjection, so that what you would not do willingly, you are forced to do, when your adversary has moved. Thus you are so disordered and confused that you have been unable to hit because of the trouble you were in in the defence. On the other hand when you defend with both weapons and your adversary changes his line in order to hit or do anything else, you can on that change separate the two weapons, the one to parry and the other to hit because they were in union. Sometimes also you can defend with both weapons and hit in the same ''time'' because of the strength of your first defence due to the union of the weapons. You have more completely covered the body and work of your own accord and not driven by necessity. Therefore you may well understand, that he who engages with both his weapons will dispose of them with greater judgment and security and in such a manner that he will not be prevented from hitting in ''time'', when the occasion offers; but he who is compelled to engage will usually be prevented from making anything but the simple defence, and however good that is it can easily be deceived.</p>
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
Line 1,538: Line 1,538:
 
| [[file:GKS 1868 2 detail 19.jpg|400px|center]]
 
| [[file:GKS 1868 2 detail 19.jpg|400px|center]]
 
| [[file:Scienza d’Arme (Fabris) 051.jpg|400px|center]]
 
| [[file:Scienza d’Arme (Fabris) 051.jpg|400px|center]]
| <p>[10] This plate represents an extension made from the guard in ''prime'' with the sword and dagger. This guard would naturally hit over the adversary's weapons, for if you try to hit below with this extension your adversary would easily knock your sword to the ground. The plate shows the dagger extended and the body bent in order to parry the blow which the adversary might make; for in hitting you must never withdraw the dagger or let it fall-back[!], since it is clear that in the ''time'' of withdrawing or abandoning it you cannot parry. With this guard you increase your danger by the large part uncovered by the angle formed with the sword hand, so that if you could not parry you would be hit, and still more easily as the thrust with this guard is shorter than with the other guards. After hitting with this thrust you must recover the right foot to the other foot and wait for a new op-portunity; if your adversary does nothing, you can make a feint of a thrust on the inside of the dagger, but if he should design to hit in ''tierce'', as he may easily do, you should then make a cut of ''mandiritto tondo'' under his dagger, which will hit him in the sword arm at the moment of his thrust in ''tierce''; you must carry the right foot forward a very little way according to his distance, parrying his point at the same moment with your dagger by pushing it out to the left side and bringing the right side forward in order to facilitate the defence and lengthen your sword; this will have a good effect when you recover on guard.</p>
+
| <p>[10] This plate represents an extension made from the guard in ''prime'' with the sword and dagger. This guard would naturally hit over the adversary's weapons, for if you try to hit below with this extension your adversary would easily knock your sword to the ground. The plate shows the dagger extended and the body bent in order to parry the blow which the adversary might make; for in hitting you must never withdraw the dagger or let it fall-back[!], since it is clear that in the ''time'' of withdrawing or abandoning it you cannot parry. With this guard you increase your danger by the large part uncovered by the angle formed with the sword hand, so that if you could not parry you would be hit, and still more easily as the thrust with this guard is shorter than with the other guards. After hitting with this thrust you must recover the right foot to the other foot and wait for a new opportunity; if your adversary does nothing, you can make a feint of a thrust on the inside of the dagger, but if he should design to hit in ''tierce'', as he may easily do, you should then make a cut of ''mandiritto tondo'' under his dagger, which will hit him in the sword arm at the moment of his thrust in ''tierce''; you must carry the right foot forward a very little way according to his distance, parrying his point at the same moment with your dagger by pushing it out to the left side and bringing the right side forward in order to facilitate the defence and lengthen your sword; this will have a good effect when you recover on guard.</p>
 
|  
 
|  
 
| {{pagetb|Page:Scienza d’Arme (Salvator Fabris) 1606.pdf|97|lbl=87}}
 
| {{pagetb|Page:Scienza d’Arme (Salvator Fabris) 1606.pdf|97|lbl=87}}
Line 1,548: Line 1,548:
 
| [[file:GKS 1868 2 detail 02.jpg|400px|center]]
 
| [[file:GKS 1868 2 detail 02.jpg|400px|center]]
 
| [[file:Scienza d’Arme (Fabris) 052.jpg|400px|center]]
 
| [[file:Scienza d’Arme (Fabris) 052.jpg|400px|center]]
| <p>[11] The next is a guard in ''seconde'' with the sword dagger, better and more convenient than the guard in ''prime'', because the arm is not so strained, and safer, because the sword covers the lower part and keeps the adversary at a distance. Further cuts the head can be parried with this guard, but with the weapons in conjunction for greater strength, and in the same ''time'' you may hit. Thrusts are parried with the dagger alone. This guard will be most successful if you are careful to hit with the right foot, raising the left foot and carrying it somewhat back, but in a circle, and recovering the right foot close to it. In hit-ting the right side should go forward. Carrying away the foot must be done with great care, so that the body in recovering may describe a circle and get out of the line of the adversary's point, while you are covered from the line of the dagger, without movement and the distance is enlarged. In closing distance also you should move in a circle towards the adversary's right side and with short steps, in order not to close except on hitting; also you should keep the body out of distance while continuing to move in a circle. When you hit, advance in a straight line and recover in a circle. With this caution you will be very secure in this guard in comparison with some others. With the same steps as in approaching you can also withdraw, preserving the guard without any disadvantage, or you can proceed according to the occasion by advancing more or less without any change of line.</p>
+
| <p>[11] The next is a guard in ''seconde'' with the sword dagger, better and more convenient than the guard in ''prime'', because the arm is not so strained, and safer, because the sword covers the lower part and keeps the adversary at a distance. Further cuts the head can be parried with this guard, but with the weapons in conjunction for greater strength, and in the same ''time'' you may hit. Thrusts are parried with the dagger alone. This guard will be most successful if you are careful to hit with the right foot, raising the left foot and carrying it somewhat back, but in a circle, and recovering the right foot close to it. In hitting the right side should go forward. Carrying away the foot must be done with great care, so that the body in recovering may describe a circle and get out of the line of the adversary's point, while you are covered from the line of the dagger, without movement and the distance is enlarged. In closing distance also you should move in a circle towards the adversary's right side and with short steps, in order not to close except on hitting; also you should keep the body out of distance while continuing to move in a circle. When you hit, advance in a straight line and recover in a circle. With this caution you will be very secure in this guard in comparison with some others. With the same steps as in approaching you can also withdraw, preserving the guard without any disadvantage, or you can proceed according to the occasion by advancing more or less without any change of line.</p>
 
|  
 
|  
 
| {{pagetb|Page:Scienza d’Arme (Salvator Fabris) 1606.pdf|98|lbl=88}}
 
| {{pagetb|Page:Scienza d’Arme (Salvator Fabris) 1606.pdf|98|lbl=88}}
Line 1,568: Line 1,568:
 
| [[file:GKS 1868 2 detail 13.jpg|400px|center]]
 
| [[file:GKS 1868 2 detail 13.jpg|400px|center]]
 
| [[file:Scienza d’Arme (Fabris) 054.jpg|400px|center]]
 
| [[file:Scienza d’Arme (Fabris) 054.jpg|400px|center]]
| <p>[13] Now follows a guard in ''seconde'' formed with the left foot, much better than the first one formed on that foot, because the body is more ready for every event, and more protected by its low position so that you can both hit and parry with less movement. With this guard you can close distance on the outside of the adversary's sword, while engaging his sword with your dagger. With this guard too you can hit by advancing the right foot, always leaving your dagger on his sword without beating it. You can pass right on to the adversary's body; but if you wish to recover you must meet his sword with yours and dis-order it, so that he cannot hit while you are recovering, since you will actually have passed so far forward that you cannot break ground in one step. If your adversary's sword is on the outside of the dagger and he offers a ''time'' to hit, then you must change from ''seconde'' to ''quarte'' with the sword and dagger in conjunction, so that you may be defended above and below the dagger, and turn the body in order to lengthen your thrust and be better defended; in order to recover safely you must let your sword fall on the adversary's in a guard of ''tierce'', after hitting. As to engaging his sword without being deceived by a disengagement, you must remember when within reach of his sword with your dagger to put him into subjection at that moment, by showing that you intend to hit, so that by that fear he may be prevented from freeing his sword, except by fleeing from the danger and retiring. In that case you should not advance nor do anything but try to engage his sword again without beating it, so that he cannot hit in any lime, you must then take care not to let your dagger fall in order to avoid the danger of being hit on the outside over the dagger.</p>
+
| <p>[13] Now follows a guard in ''seconde'' formed with the left foot, much better than the first one formed on that foot, because the body is more ready for every event, and more protected by its low position so that you can both hit and parry with less movement. With this guard you can close distance on the outside of the adversary's sword, while engaging his sword with your dagger. With this guard too you can hit by advancing the right foot, always leaving your dagger on his sword without beating it. You can pass right on to the adversary's body; but if you wish to recover you must meet his sword with yours and disorder it, so that he cannot hit while you are recovering, since you will actually have passed so far forward that you cannot break ground in one step. If your adversary's sword is on the outside of the dagger and he offers a ''time'' to hit, then you must change from ''seconde'' to ''quarte'' with the sword and dagger in conjunction, so that you may be defended above and below the dagger, and turn the body in order to lengthen your thrust and be better defended; in order to recover safely you must let your sword fall on the adversary's in a guard of ''tierce'', after hitting. As to engaging his sword without being deceived by a disengagement, you must remember when within reach of his sword with your dagger to put him into subjection at that moment, by showing that you intend to hit, so that by that fear he may be prevented from freeing his sword, except by fleeing from the danger and retiring. In that case you should not advance nor do anything but try to engage his sword again without beating it, so that he cannot hit in any lime, you must then take care not to let your dagger fall in order to avoid the danger of being hit on the outside over the dagger.</p>
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  

Revision as of 01:07, 2 May 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. This seems like a mistranslation of rompere di misura at first blush, but according to Kevin Murakoshi, this is an archaic piece of fencing jargon that was still current in the early 20th century. It means to withdraw/"break measure". ~Michael Chidester
  8. Originally "richeide", but corrected in the errata.
  9. Originally "dirarsi", but corrected in the errata.
  10. Originally "longuezza", but corrected in the errata.
  11. Originally "mettre", but corrected in the errata.
  12. Originally "volto", but corrected in the errata.
  13. 13.0 13.1 13.2 There's no conclusion of this word on the next page, just a new sentence.
  14. Originally "occcsione", but corrected in the errata.
  15. Originally "albassare", but corrected in the errata.
  16. Originally "& migliore", but corrected in the errata.
  17. Originally "temerariemente", but corrected in the errata.
  18. Originally "bisogna", but corrected in the errata.
  19. The letter 'F' was omitted in the print and hand-corrected in all copies.
  20. Originally "guardia", but corrected in the errata.
  21. Originally "equali", but corrected in the errata.
  22. Originally "poco", but corrected in the errata.
  23. Originally "poco", but corrected in the errata.
  24. Originally "non buoni", but corrected in the errata.
  25. Originally "queui", but corrected in the errata.
  26. Originally "che spada", but corrected in the errata.
  27. Originally "accorgendosi", but corrected in the errata.
  28. Originally "con pugnale", but corrected in the errata.
  29. Originally "mouendolo", but corrected in the errata.
  30. Originally "diuersi", but corrected in the errata.
  31. Originally "dentro la spada", but corrected in the errata.
  32. Originally "andere", but corrected in the errata.
  33. Originally "richede", but corrected in the errata.
  34. Originally "in suoi", but corrected in the errata.
  35. Originally "della", but corrected in the errata.
  36. Originally "la dette", but corrected in the errata.
  37. Originally "è passare", but corrected in the errata.
  38. The errata adds "l’".
  39. 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.
  40. 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.
  41. Should be 183.
  42. Originally "ineguale", but corrected in the errata.