Wiktenauer logo.png

Difference between revisions of "Salvator Fabris"

From Wiktenauer
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 2,287: Line 2,287:
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
| <p>[4] </p>
+
| <p>[4] '''On the manner of working with the feet, sword and body in attacking the adversary without a pause.'''</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>If you wish to advance against your adversary you must begin by carrying the feet with ordinary steps, as in walking, though with somewhat quicker and shorter steps; you must never lengthen your step except when the point of your sword reaches his body; your steps must not be violent, for as you must continue until you have reached the adversary's body, any violence would so disorder you, that you would be unable to lift the rear foot with the necessary swiftness, and thus by your slowness you would lose your union. Further you should bend the body forward and make yourself small, so that on approaching the adversary you can take all the opportunities of defence and attack with little movement. Your body must not be bent to the inside nor the outside, except when you are within distance, when it must be bent to the one side or the other or go straight according to the movements of your adversary. You must try to use your sword in such a way, that it is so near your adversary's sword that it appears to be bound to it when it moves, and so it cannot move without being followed, in brief so that the swords are always united. When the swords are far apart it is a sign that a ''time'' has been lost; to approach then would be dangerous, and if you continued you would be hit; in such a case it is better to retire swiftly and return again to the position of advantage. As there are several methods of advancing, some more subtle than others, we shall begin with the one which is first practised, and treat of each one separately in order according to the different principles involved in then.</p>
 
|  
 
|  
 
| {{section|Page:Scienza d’Arme (Salvator Fabris) 1606.pdf/165|1|lbl=155}}
 
| {{section|Page:Scienza d’Arme (Salvator Fabris) 1606.pdf/165|1|lbl=155}}
Line 2,302: Line 2,304:
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
| <p>[5] </p>
+
| <p>[5] '''''THE FIRST METHOD IN ATTACKING WITHOUT A PAUSE.'''''</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>In advancing against an adversary in whatever guard, you must realise his weak and his strong part, the part covered and the part uncovered; you should place your sword in the line which is weaker and more uncovered, beginning with the arm extended and the sword straight in such a way that on reaching his point your point is somewhat higher and stronger, but without moving your point; the nearer you are to his blade the better, taking care not to touch it. Keeping your arm steady you should glide along his blade to his body, without ever leaving the blade, and bring your hilt to the place where your point had begun to penetrate his; you must try to keep his point always underneath, which may be done with little difficulty if you are in ''tierce'' or ''quarte'' directed towards the adversary's body; if you are in ''prime'' or ''seconde'', although you cannot control his point above, you can still do so on one side or the other according as his point is more to the inside or the outside; in this case you should run along his blade, as explained in such a way that as you advance your hilt must approach the spot where your point was before. This running along his blade with your hilt must be accompanied by a continued advance, without withdrawing the arm, thrusting with violence or rushing, whatever may happen. In brief the method of proceeding is to be secure that, while your adversary's point is in prime, you are always stronger, and if he tries to thrust your sword away, his point will be lifted out of line; when it is lifted your body, which is in motion, will always pass on before his sword can return.</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>If your adversary tries to retire and break ground, you will not be able to penetrate his point; then it will be convenient to take the ''time'' of his withdrawing in order to force your sword, and to disengage with the wrist only, without stopping or moving your arm and making only a small circle with the point; by continuing your advance you will in this way exclude his sword without bringing your own out of line, and if he returns to force your sword, you will be so far advanced that there will be no need to disengage, if on the inside, since by simply changing the hand to ''seconde'' and lowering the body you could go on to hit, and would do so before he could push your sword away; if on the outside, you could hit by changing to ''seconde'', lowering the body and disengaging your point below, without dropping the hand; this would lead to a hit in the adversary's right side at the moment when he expected to push your sword away. In this manner your body would have passed on the outside without any danger.</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>This method serves equally when your adversary lets your ''forte'' penetrate and then tries to push it away in order to defend himself. It sometimes happens that the adversary tries to push your point away, when it is beginning to penetrate; then it is well to disengage, for, as we have often said, there is no strength in the point. Also it may happen that the adversary disengages, and attacks your point on the other side, leaving the body, and in order to do so before your ''forte'' penetrates, he advances his body; in that case, seeing his intention, you should counter-disengage before his sword touches your point, for all disengagements made after the adversary has touched your sword are always more dangerous, since they are made in a bad ''time''; the greatest difficulty in the present method consists in this, that you must always be near the adversary's sword and disengage before your sword is found by his; nor must you hold your sword rigidly thinking in that way to offer greater resistance, because it will be found before you disengage. The strength of the sword must be based on your position and not on the force of the arm or wrist. If you follow our method, you will always be prompted to take the opportunity of disengaging or not according to the occasion.</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>We must consider another case which often arises, that is when the adversary changes his guard and breaks ground, so that you cannot hit in that ''time''. Still you must not stop, although there would be no danger in doing so and then returning with the method best suited to meet his change. Yet it is far more expedient that your point, which has already begun to penetrate should follow his point, but only by a movement of the wrist, the arm being kept steady; you should push on and run along his blade to the body. Thus you will deprive your adversary of the power of doing anything; if he tries to make any other change he will be hit during the change, and all because you will be so close to him that he cannot break ground; it follows naturally that you, who are advancing, move more quickly than he, who is retiring. If you wish to stop when your adversary retires and changes his guard, he can always change and break ground, whenever he wishes, so that your proceedings will come to nothing. Therefore you should never stop, if you understand the true method; but if by chance you lose the advantage, then it would be necessary to stop and form a new plan.</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>This method of working with the arm extended and the sword straight, as explained and as will be illustrated in a plate in its place, against some guards formed on the same principles requires subtlety of judgment and an understanding of the relative heights of the hand and the point and of the weakness and strength of the method. Since with this method you begin to seek your adversary's sword when out of distance by extending your arm, in order to approach within distance with greater security, it appears to help the adversary by giving him time for consideration and forming his plans. In this respect other forms will be found more expeditious. Still this method is necessary and helps greatly to the understanding of weak and strong parts, the difference between large and small movements, the exactness of the position of the arm, the preservation of an advantage, and of the defence, which should be observed even when hitting. Therefore as a method so important and necessary we have placed it first. But subsequently we shall treat of a guard formed high, with which you may attack your adversary resolutely and hit whatever he does or whatever his capacity.</p>
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  

Revision as of 20:33, 3 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

Temp

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.