Chapter One
Ambition, which without fail is the cause of every ill, especially in virtuous exercises, I know to be the true basis and root of a rather notable vice.
Every day we see youths of such ambition, that under the cloak of letting their virtue be known, out of all proportion, neglect the importance of possessing such virtue, and as soon as they arrive in schools to learn, having imbibed just a few lessons, allow themselves to be inflated by excessive pretension, and judge themselves to be masters.
Therefore it happens (and I speak in particular of this exercise) that in public schools, and especially in private houses, with youths of equal quality gathered to practice assaults, you find some who do not grasp the sword if not to teach, nor to learn in any other way. This outlook is so pernicious, that for this reason you no longer hear of people gathering for common benefit and practice, and to pass the time in the virtue of fencing.
Those who have distinguished themselves up until now, demonstrating their valour and knowledge, in my view did not take this route. Indeed anxious to prove their worth as gallant men at every occasion, in any place, and against any person, I believe they sought to learn. Because to understand a discipline well, you have to practise it, you cannot learn with theory alone.
It is not a good way to master a skill, to think you can attain it without effort and sacrifice. Those who think to proceed like this, infallibly discover through experience how much they have deluded themselves.
Another active and real problem I bring up, just as damaging as the first although stemming from the same ambition, is the disparity between people.
You cannot deny that an artisan (who delights in virtue as is understandable), can through his diligence and vivacity arrive at the goal of fencing well with the sword. Indeed because this exercise is extremely capable of elevating the most lowly individual, it often happens that by applying their spirit, those of base condition become more distinguished.
The damage therefore that ambition brings, is to be ashamed to practice assaults with someone of lowly hand. To not consider you could extract some fruit even from these people, throwing yourself into the profession.
This thought is erroneous, because it is essential to know that virtue levels all people; and that a virtuoso can be considered the equal not just of a simple gentleman, but of any prince or great lord.
These are the reasons I give, demonstrating why today assaults are dismissed, neglecting the chance to benefit from the luxury of living, before the waning of youthful years deprives you of every worthwhile activity.
|
|
Chapter Two – On the same subject
You can clearly tell from my previous discourse how much damage ambition brings, and how it is a reason for not mastering this beautiful virtue of fencing. But I will now demonstrate furthermore how discussion of this profession, which today's students engage in more than practice, causes notable harm. The truth is that lessons taken in any subject in the day are of no use if their operations are not exercised.
That which pertains to bodies of reason: such as logic, philosophy, and so forth, must be put in practice with words alone, as they are necessary to expound such virtues. However in the profession of fencing words have no place to execute well what the students have learned from the master.
Actions are needed when it comes to training your body for defence and attack.
This is not applied by today's youth, which is a further reason why assaults no longer take place, and students neglect to learn wielding a sword in hand well. It then follows that masters are judged and branded as inept in their craft, since they no longer produce students as they did in the past.
When youngsters come together, sometimes from the schools of different masters in this profession, instead of putting their studies to the test, with the cloak across their shoulders, as well as with the simple sword in hand, they begin to discuss among themselves: “If I delivered this thrust how would you parry it?”.
The other replies “I would do it in this way, or like this” to which the first responds “But if it were a cut, how would you defend yourself” again its counter is added, and they carry on ad infinitum in this manner, disregarding gainful practice.
See if this is the best way to safeguard yourself, and benefit through the profession. Then test with a sharp sword (which could happen), whether these people would have time for such a parliament.
Action is required for exercises which engage the body, words cannot grant a student resolution to confront his opponent, or courage and practice to defend himself. This is as much as I thought to say on this matter.
|
|
Chapter Three – On putting mathematics into this virtue[3]
I have never presumed to malign anyone who professes to teach this noble exercise, nor do I intend to now, recognising myself as the inferior to many gallant men who have practised this virtue. But we are permitted to debate upon the lessons of some, who have taught and teach through mathematics, with the addition of lines, circles, traverses and extravagant voids of the body.
For me, these are commendable for fencing in a clean salle, furnished with even tiles. Likewise it is impossible for two people not to put on a good display, when they politely retreat, then void, or advance with a neat step, putting into practice what they have learned from their masters.
But if I imagine them outside the tiled hall, that is in the streets, where confrontations most often arise, then I can't help but criticise and malign them, since it is impossible (for reasons I will explain) to put these actions into practice.
Someone who is confronted or deliberately summoned to combat, cannot I believe, as happens in large armies, bring with them people to dig; to resurface the street so they can put themselves in the right posture, and use their lines, and advances of ground, and binds of the sword in conformance with their lessons. Instead, being confronted, they are obliged to think how to stand firmly on their feet, to be vigorous in defence and attack, ready of hand, without such fine distinctions of footwork.
Furthermore those who employ the sword in this manner, can be called good and beautiful fencers, but in an open space, or street where stones, holes, and cracks can cause you to stumble, they are always in danger of defending themselves poorly from their enemy. In such cases most of the time the artifices of traverses, voids and lines are left aside, and they throw themselves into natural attacks, as is so often seen.
This itself is sufficient demonstration, although I can elaborate for greater clarity, that play founded upon natural reason is with no comparison much better than artificious play. The latter was invented for no motive other than satisfying the curiosity of youth. If it were otherwise, it would not be the case, not only in public schools but also in the presence of nobility with the intervention of great princes, that professors of play founded upon such twists of the body had been touched assault after assault, with cuts and thrusts, as is clear and manifest to a great many people.
|
|
Chapter Four – On a defined punto to attack[4]
This seems to me an important subject, in order to be accomplished in assaults. I will merely state my thoughts on those who, as a principal maxim, hold and practise the opinion that it is better to attack only a single part of the body, namely the right shoulder, being the said punto.
Firstly, you must consider the reason why they observe this doctrine. I believe it is for no reason other than to strike either the nearest, or the most vulnerable part of the body.
If we suppose they hold this view, because they want to strike the nearest target, I completely refute their opinion. Hands and arms notwithstanding, I know how those who lean most stand, even their knees are closer and more likely to be attacked by the enemy.
If they wish to propose the other reason, that it is the most vulnerable part of the body, I can only oppose them entirely. It seems to me that the hands and arms are subjected to danger: both of being wounded, and of the intermediate outcome of losing the ability to attack.
Furthermore experience, which instructs in all things, shows us that in a good portion of combats you see wounds to the hands and arms. This is because these can more easily encounter the enemy's weapons. If they deem the area called the punto so vulnerable, I do not know which hands and arms are not in the same danger. In them you find veins, arteries and other very vulnerable areas which evidently have shown to cause the death of those wounded there.
This is as much as I can say on this particular. I urge everyone to take the whole of the enemy's body as the fixed punto to attack, and specifically the part that presents itself as most uncovered and furthest forward. There is much more that could be said, for example if your opponent is left-handed, or in other situations, but to avoid tedium I will omit it.
Additional Resources
References
- ↑ Archivio di Stato di Firenze, Miscellanea Medicea, 369, c.707. Cited by http://www.scrimipedia.it/mediawiki/index.php?title=Iacopo_Monesi (accessed 22 March 2017).
- ↑ Silvio Piccolomini was a knight of the Order of Santo Stefano, and noted fencer and military commander of his age. In the dedication of his own treatise Federico Ghisliero declares himself a student of Piccolomini, while his skill at fencing is further referenced by Cappoferro in his introduction to the reader, and by the French chronicler Michel de Montaigne.
- ↑ This chapter might apply to Italian treatises which incorporate mathematical principles, such as Camillo Agrippa, but arguably targets in particular the Iberian forms of the Verdadera Destreza, exemplified by Jerónimo Sánchez de Carranza and Luis Pacheco de Narváez.
- ↑ The term punto to signify a defined target area of the right shoulder is particular to the treatise of Marco Docciolini.
Early Italian masters |
|---|
| | Germanic Masters | | |
|---|
| | Bolognese Masters | |
|---|
| | Florentine Masters | |
|---|
| | Neopolitan Masters | |
|---|
| | Venetian Masters | |
|---|
| | Agrippa Style | |
|---|
| | Marcelli Style | |
|---|
| | Other Masters | |
|---|
|
|
