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 "Salvator Fabris"

From Wiktenauer
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 2,254: Line 2,254:
 
<p>Thus far we have spoken of the principles with which every professor of arms must be acquainted, though few understand them well or practise them with due exactness. Now we shall treat of some theories, which are not only no longer expounded by other professors, but which they have never considered, or if they have considered have not grasped or understood; they have been put aside as too subtle by the most acute exponents of this art. Desiring perhaps to cover their lack of capacity they have been forced to reject them, basing their reasons on that common maxim, that the student must remain steady in presence and wait a ''time'' in order to hit, and that he who attacks without a ''time'' will be hit. We allow that is well to know how to await a ''time'' and an opportunity to hit, because from that waiting <sup>follows</sup> the understanding of distances, ''times'', ''counter-time'', and all the tricks which an adversary may employ. Still we maintain that between two opponents steady on their guard there is no advantage, because both are awaiting the same thing, so that the opportunity may come to either; both are awaiting with equal danger, and and[!] if sometimes one is seen to have obtained an advantage, it is because he has engaged the other's sword and prevented him from hitting in his present line; but still the one who has obtained the advantage waits for a ''time'', thinking he cannot hit before his adversary moves. By such delay it often happens that one who has won an advantage not only loses it, but his adversary obtains an advantage over him, a truly inexcusable error that a man should allow himself to be robbed of what he has won with such danger. It appears to us that it would have been better, having the advantage to proceed without waiting, secure that your adversary's sword cannot hit in its present line, and not to give him time to consider his danger and form a new plan.</p>
 
<p>Thus far we have spoken of the principles with which every professor of arms must be acquainted, though few understand them well or practise them with due exactness. Now we shall treat of some theories, which are not only no longer expounded by other professors, but which they have never considered, or if they have considered have not grasped or understood; they have been put aside as too subtle by the most acute exponents of this art. Desiring perhaps to cover their lack of capacity they have been forced to reject them, basing their reasons on that common maxim, that the student must remain steady in presence and wait a ''time'' in order to hit, and that he who attacks without a ''time'' will be hit. We allow that is well to know how to await a ''time'' and an opportunity to hit, because from that waiting <sup>follows</sup> the understanding of distances, ''times'', ''counter-time'', and all the tricks which an adversary may employ. Still we maintain that between two opponents steady on their guard there is no advantage, because both are awaiting the same thing, so that the opportunity may come to either; both are awaiting with equal danger, and and[!] if sometimes one is seen to have obtained an advantage, it is because he has engaged the other's sword and prevented him from hitting in his present line; but still the one who has obtained the advantage waits for a ''time'', thinking he cannot hit before his adversary moves. By such delay it often happens that one who has won an advantage not only loses it, but his adversary obtains an advantage over him, a truly inexcusable error that a man should allow himself to be robbed of what he has won with such danger. It appears to us that it would have been better, having the advantage to proceed without waiting, secure that your adversary's sword cannot hit in its present line, and not to give him time to consider his danger and form a new plan.</p>
  
−
<p>There are others who, when within distance, seek to gain no advantage, but, seeing that their adversary does not move, try to make him move by giving him an opening or offering a ''time'' or by an ''appel'' or a feint in order to take the ''time'' of his moving; such methods may succeed against men ill-instructed, but are fatally dangerous against one who understands the art; for if you consider such a proceeding, it is clear that the one who offers a ''time'' in order to make his adversary move forgets that his is the first danger, and, although his intention is to offer so small a ''time'' that his adversary cannot hit, still it cannot be so small that the adversary has no chance of seizing some advantage, from which the first man cannot free himself without great danger of being hit, moreover he could be deceived by feints. We do not condemn these theories and stratagems nor any of the principles already put forward; it is well to understand them, but they are useless and in-applicable in our case, when we have to find a way of proceeding in order to be able to hit the adversary immediately after grasping the sword and without remaining steady, in whatever position or guard the adversary may be, whether he offers a ''time'' or not, parries or hits, advances or retires; the object is to hit him inevitably, whatever method he adopts. If our method is followed with all its conditions, you will be incomparably safer than when waiting. It is true that much skill and art are needed so to control your adversary that you may be confident of hitting, whatever he does or however much he knows, and when he has the same weapons as you, even though he is ignorant of these principles; if your adversary understands these same principles, matters would be equal. But if your adversary follows the old rules even to perfection, he will always be defeated if you follow our principles, because you will be able to put him into subjection and free him to do what you want, whether he desires to attack or defend; this will make your proceedings easy, since you will foresee your adversary's intention. In order to explain this truth better we shall treat first of the advantage of attacking with resolution, and then of the method of attacking.</p>
+
<p>There are others who, when within distance, seek to gain no advantage, but, seeing that their adversary does not move, try to make him move by giving him an opening or offering a ''time'' or by an ''appel'' or a feint in order to take the ''time'' of his moving; such methods may succeed against men ill-instructed, but are fatally dangerous against one who understands the art; for if you consider such a proceeding, it is clear that the one who offers a ''time'' in order to make his adversary move forgets that his is the first danger, and, although his intention is to offer so small a ''time'' that his adversary cannot hit, still it cannot be so small that the adversary has no chance of seizing some advantage, from which the first man cannot free himself without great danger of being hit, moreover he could be deceived by feints. We do not condemn these theories and stratagems nor any of the principles already put forward; it is well to understand them, but they are useless and inapplicable in our case, when we have to find a way of proceeding in order to be able to hit the adversary immediately after grasping the sword and without remaining steady, in whatever position or guard the adversary may be, whether he offers a ''time'' or not, parries or hits, advances or retires; the object is to hit him inevitably, whatever method he adopts. If our method is followed with all its conditions, you will be incomparably safer than when waiting. It is true that much skill and art are needed so to control your adversary that you may be confident of hitting, whatever he does or however much he knows, and when he has the same weapons as you, even though he is ignorant of these principles; if your adversary understands these same principles, matters would be equal. But if your adversary follows the old rules even to perfection, he will always be defeated if you follow our principles, because you will be able to put him into subjection and free him to do what you want, whether he desires to attack or defend; this will make your proceedings easy, since you will foresee your adversary's intention. In order to explain this truth better we shall treat first of the advantage of attacking with resolution, and then of the method of attacking.</p>
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
Line 2,326: Line 2,326:
 
|  
 
|  
 
| [[file:Scienza d’Arme (Fabris) 109.jpg|400px|center]]
 
| [[file:Scienza d’Arme (Fabris) 109.jpg|400px|center]]
−
| <p>[6] </p>
+
| <p>[6] In this plate we show the method of taking the first advantage in advancing with resolution against your adversary without waiting for a time. If on your approach the adversary offers a ''time'', you should take it or any other opportunity that is presented, following on to the body without stopping. The advantage of this position consists in the fact, that your sword is held above, for two reasons: the first, because it is better to be above than below, the second because the man whose sword is above is quicker to move and form a plan. In this superior position you should continue to the adversary's body, running along his blade, and in advancing bring the hilt of your sword to the spot where your point was first, without moving your point away from his blade, until you hit. If his sword had chanced to be in ''tierce'' at an angle or in ''quarte'', you should have begun in this way, but without running along his blade; you should attack with your blade in a straight line from its point to your body and hit in gap made by that angle both on the inside and on the outside. Other plates will follow, which will show what may arise from this advantage, but they will not be very many for the sake of brevity; the principle and most necessary ones will be included, from which the remainder may be understood. Also, some remarks will be added in the texts.</p>
 
|  
 
|  
 
| {{section|Page:Scienza d’Arme (Salvator Fabris) 1606.pdf/167|2|lbl=-}}
 
| {{section|Page:Scienza d’Arme (Salvator Fabris) 1606.pdf/167|2|lbl=-}}
Line 2,339: Line 2,339:
 
|  
 
|  
 
| [[file:Scienza d’Arme (Fabris) 110.jpg|400px|center]]
 
| [[file:Scienza d’Arme (Fabris) 110.jpg|400px|center]]
−
| <p>[7] </p>
+
| <p>[7] The hit in ''quarte'' here represented has followed from this first advantage. You have run along the adversary's blade, bringing your hilt to the spot where your point began, and reached the part shown, because your adversary was too slow in moving and unable to defend himself or do anything but draw back his body, without success. After getting control over his point, with the right foot forward, you have passed with the left foot and then with the right, and so pursued your victory right to his body. You would have done the same, if you had begun on the outside, the only difference being that your sword would have been in ''tierce'' instead of ''quarte'', while your adversary's sword, instead of being driven upwards by the force of your sword, as in the plate, would have been driven downwards by the ''tierce'', and your point would have hit below your own hilt; in that position it would have been stronger and would have given more protection to your lower parts.</p>
 
|  
 
|  
 
| {{pagetb|Page:Scienza d’Arme (Salvator Fabris) 1606.pdf|168|lbl=158}}
 
| {{pagetb|Page:Scienza d’Arme (Salvator Fabris) 1606.pdf|168|lbl=158}}
Line 2,350: Line 2,350:
 
|  
 
|  
 
| [[file:Scienza d’Arme (Fabris) 111.jpg|400px|center]]
 
| [[file:Scienza d’Arme (Fabris) 111.jpg|400px|center]]
−
| <p>[8] </p>
+
| <p>[8] The next hit has also arisen from the same initial advantage, and in this manner: in advancing you were running along your adversary's blade, having already brought the left foot in front; he has tried to parry by forcing your sword and drawing back his body; feeling the pressure, you have changed your hand to ''seconde'' and given way to his sword, which has gone to the outside through meeting no resistance, and all the further out of line because you have lowered your body. You have kept the hilt of your sword at the same height against his ''faible''. The angle formed by the ''seconde'' has carried your point to a hit. If you had attacked on the outside in ''tierce'' the result would have been the same. After bringing the left foot forward, if the adversary had tried to parry, you would have again changed your hand to ''seconde'', put the point under his right arm, keeping the hilt at the same height, lowered your body, followed on with the right foot and thus made the same hit. But if you had begun on the inside and the adversary had begun to parry by breaking ground, as he could you should then have disengaged with the wrist on the outside in ''tierce'', and gone on until you reached his body. If again he had proceeded to parry, as he might, without breaking ground, you should hit in ''seconde'' below. But if he parried at the point of your sword, if you had begun on the outside, you should disengage in ''quarte'' on the inside, and if he again parried and drew back, you should turn the hand again and hit in ''seconde''. If at the beginning the adversary disengaged in order to hit, you should simply go on in the straight line in ''tierce'' or in ''quarte'', according to whether you were on the outside or the inside, and you would hit in the ''time'' of his disengage. When the adversary disengaged, if he had not advanced but defended himself by breaking ground whether on the inside or the outside, you would have been sure of hitting in that second ''time''. It might happen that at the beginning of the movement he disengaged and broke ground with the idea of engaging your ''faible''; in that case you should counter-disengage, before he touched your point, and follow on in the straight line, so that if he makes a double disengagement, as he might, you could defend with little movement without disorder. If after his first disengagement he returns to the parry, you should hit above, as we have explained since all he could do would be to use his left hand, which would cause only slight disturbance or might even give you an advantage. All these rules apply against a ''tierce'' or a low ''quarte'', whether straight or at an angle. Afterwards we shall treat of the ''prime'' and ''seconde'', but we have put these first, as being more usual.</p>
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
Line 2,362: Line 2,362:
 
|  
 
|  
 
| [[file:Scienza d’Arme (Fabris) 112.jpg|400px|center]]
 
| [[file:Scienza d’Arme (Fabris) 112.jpg|400px|center]]
−
| <p>[9] </p>
+
| <p>[9] The next plate shows how to take advantage of an opponent, who stands with a low guard and with his upper parts held back in order to protect them, since they are more exposed. You have the advantage of the higher position, and let your point run along the adversary's blade, keeping it above his blade and gradually raising it; as the point is raised so the hilt is lowered, so that when your hilt reaches his point it is in the position of the point, as seen at present; thus you run along the blade until you reach his body. If the adversary disengages, you will make no change, nor even bring your hilt any lower, but hit without any other defensive movement, realising that his point is excluded by reason of the shortness of his sword and the length of time of his disengagement, since he is below, and wishes to reach the upper line. Finally the point of your sword achieves the same result, as if he did not disengage. In order that the position may be better understood, in the next plate we shall show the hit which follows from this advantage, from which you will understand another result which may arise.</p>
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
Line 2,374: Line 2,374:
 
|  
 
|  
 
| [[file:Scienza d’Arme (Fabris) 113.jpg|400px|center]]
 
| [[file:Scienza d’Arme (Fabris) 113.jpg|400px|center]]
−
| <p>[10] </p>
+
| <p>[10] Here then is the hit in ''tierce'' against another ''tierce'', which has followed from the advantage seen in the preceeding[!] plate. Both combatants had their points low and you were above; you have followed on, running along the adversary's blade, and raising your point and lowering your hilt as you advanced, have made the present hit and continued right to his body. The other result which we said would be illustrated is this; you may have found your hilt inside his sword, and as you advanced he may have disengaged in order to free his sword; but you would have prevented him by keeping his sword below, because your point was in line; all he could do was to try to push your point out of line, and in that he would have failed. If he had again tried to disengage, he would have effected nothing, because you would have made the same hit by a mere change of the hand towards ''quarte''.</p>
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
Line 2,386: Line 2,386:
 
|  
 
|  
 
| [[file:Scienza d’Arme (Fabris) 114.jpg|400px|center]]
 
| [[file:Scienza d’Arme (Fabris) 114.jpg|400px|center]]
−
| <p>[11] </p>
+
| <p>[11] The next position is also a ''tierce'', but differing from the preceeding[!] one in that the advantage has been acquired against a ''seconde''. You have begun at a distance to hold your sword in the manner shown so that on reaching the adversary's point you have acquired the advantage without any movement of the hand or point. With this slight advantage in ''tierce'' you can go on, following his blade, without however touching it, and bringing your hilt to the present position of your point; as you advance, you should turn your hand in such a way that you are in a guard of ''quarte'' when your point makes the hit. As the point is now higher than the hand, it will then be lower; you will hit in the chest, keeping your hilt in the defensive position.</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>In the next plate we shall illustrate the hit which you may make in this position in ''tierce'' against an adversary who makes no change.</p>
 
|  
 
|  
 
| {{section|Page:Scienza d’Arme (Salvator Fabris) 1606.pdf/172|2|lbl=-|p=1}}
 
| {{section|Page:Scienza d’Arme (Salvator Fabris) 1606.pdf/172|2|lbl=-|p=1}}
Line 2,397: Line 2,399:
 
|  
 
|  
 
| [[file:Scienza d’Arme (Fabris) 115.jpg|400px|center]]
 
| [[file:Scienza d’Arme (Fabris) 115.jpg|400px|center]]
−
| <p>[12] </p>
+
| <p>[12] Here follows the hit referred to at the end of the last discourse, made by a ''quarte'', originally a ''tierce'', against a ''seconde'' and perhaps following from the advantage described. You have continued along the adversary’s blade as explained, until you have reached this position; by bringing forward the left foot and then the right, maintaining your defence with the hilt, which has approached his sword, without stopping you will go right on to his body for greater security. Or it may be that you have acquired the advantage on getting within distance, and the adversary has disengaged in order to free his sword, and withdrawn for his protection. You, being already on the move, have arrived so quickly with a counter-disengage, that he has been able to form no plans, and all because of the advantage of the continued advance. If you had been slower and not advanced in the ''time'' of his disengage, you would not have reached, and thus would have given him opportunity to parry and hit, before you arrived.</p>
 
|  
 
|  
 
| {{pagetb|Page:Scienza d’Arme (Salvator Fabris) 1606.pdf|173|lbl=163}}
 
| {{pagetb|Page:Scienza d’Arme (Salvator Fabris) 1606.pdf|173|lbl=163}}
Line 2,408: Line 2,410:
 
|  
 
|  
 
| [[file:Scienza d’Arme (Fabris) 116.jpg|400px|center]]
 
| [[file:Scienza d’Arme (Fabris) 116.jpg|400px|center]]
−
| <p>[13] </p>
+
| <p>[13] The next plate shows a hit in a guard of ''prime'' on the outside under the sword against another ''seconde''. You have begun with your sword extended and have advanced to engage, holding your point against his sword on the inside; you have reached his point with the right foot and followed with the left. The adversary has tried to disengage in order to hit in that ''time'' over your sword on the outside, but by bringing forward the right foot in the same ''time'' and bending your body you have carried your point under his sword arm and hit by turning the hand from ''tierce'', into a guard of ''prime''. In this way you have guarded against the danger of his making of[!] feint of disengaging, and have excluded his sword in such a way that he could not bring his point into presence. The result is due to the fact that the adversary has allowed your sword to advance too far before disengaging; if he had disengaged on your first approaching his point, you could only have counter-disengaged and hit in ''quarte''.</p>
 
|  
 
|  
 
| {{pagetb|Page:Scienza d’Arme (Salvator Fabris) 1606.pdf|174|lbl=164}}
 
| {{pagetb|Page:Scienza d’Arme (Salvator Fabris) 1606.pdf|174|lbl=164}}
Line 2,419: Line 2,421:
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
−
| <p>[14] </p>
+
| <p>[14] '''''The second method of attacking the adversary without a pause.'''''</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>The most necessary guard in this method is a high guard of ''tierce'', formed with the whole chest facing the front, the points of both feet towards the adversary, the body bent forward, the sword hand near the face, and the point of the sword suspended in the air and advanced, but not so far advanced that it may be engaged by the adversary before he is within close distance. With this method and this guard you must advance against your adversary with natural steps and towards the outside, until your body is so far outside his sword, that your sword too is in that part without any movement of the hand. The sword must be kept motionless, and as you approach the body lowered, so that the point also will be brought lower, and so far that when your hilt has reached his point your point will be in line. On moving to hit you should not lunge but approach your body to the adversary's. If he changes his front or moves his point to prevent its being left out of line, you should take that ''time'', place your sword on the inside, without extending the arm and keeping both sides equally advanced, and bend the body so far forward that your point comes into presence. You must avoid dropping the arm or hand, since the hand must face his point until the whole body has passed, whether on the inside or on the outside. You should always begin on the outside, whatever your adversary's guard. Although when within distance you should be prevented from passing outside by your adversary's changing his line or front, you should still, having reached his sword, go on, resolutely straight to the body. Even if your adversary's point is low and pointed towards the ground, you must still lower yourself until the ''forte'' of your sword excludes his sword on the one side or the other, but without moving the arm. But if his sword is low and on the inside, as you lower the body to reach your position you must carry the right side back in order to bring the body out of line, so that if the adversary disengages he could not reach your body while you are lowering it, and in order that you may go straight on to hit without defending.</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>With this guard we must warn you against disengaging, except when the adversary raises his sword in order to engage yours, when it would be convenient; but it should be done without movement of the sword or arm, and with a slight turn of the body only, keeping back the right side; in this way your sword hand will be drawn back, so that the adversary will not reach. At the same time you should carry your left foot across, so that your sword will be brought outside without being moved, and your body will be protected from the adversary's hit, whilst making this turn. If on the other hand you changed your front and did not move to the outside, you would  expose yourself on the inside. Moreover as you move to the outside, your adversary might raise his sword to parry, which would be an opportune moment to dash under his sword, turning your hand and keeping it at the same height.</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>When this guard is well formed, the only weak points are the inside and the face, but as the hilt is close to the face, it can readily be defended. Also, as the lower parts with this guard are distant, they are in no danger, except from feints which the adversary may make; if he feints on the inside, in the ''time'' of your swords dropping to parry, he may lower himself and hit below by passing. But if you are careful not to move your arm in parrying feints, but rather to bring the body down to that part, your hilt will parry of itself without moving the sword; if your adversary tries to pass, he will be hit, because your point can reach any part down to the ground, before he has passed. On the other hand if your arm falls or is extended, you will then certainly be hit. As to cuts, with this guard they can do little harm, for they can attack only half the head, and your hilt is very near that part. Cuts cannot reach below, nor can they strike the sword in order to disorder it. Therefore this method is very good in attacking without a pause, and so much the better as the sword is secure from being engaged by the adversary. But if you pause it is not so good, since you may easily be you changed your front and did not move to the outside, you expose yourself on the inside. Moreover as you move to the outside, your adversary might raise his sword to parry, which would be an opportune moment to dash under his sword, turning your hand and keeping it at the same height.</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>When this guard is well formed, the only weak points are the inside and the face, but as the hilt is close to the face, it can readily be defended. Also, as the lower parts with this guard are distant, they are in no danger, except from feints which the adversary may make; if he feints on the inside, in the ''time'' of your swords[!] dropping to parry, he may lower himself and hit below by passing. But if you are careful not to move your arm in parrying feints, but rather to bring the body down to that part, your hilt will parry of itself without moving the sword; if your adversary tries to pass, he will be hit, because your point can reach any part down to the ground, before he has passed. On the other hand if your arm falls or is extended, you will then certainly be hit. As to cuts, with this guard they can do little harm, for they can attack only half the head, and your hilt is very near that part. Cuts cannot reach below, nor can they strike the sword in order to disorder it. Therefore this method is very good in attacking without a pause, and so much the better as the sword is secure from being engaged by the adversary. But if you pause it is not so good, since you may easily be thrown into disorder by the adversary, unless you resolve to see your left hand.</p>
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
Line 2,431: Line 2,441:
 
|  
 
|  
 
| [[file:Scienza d’Arme (Fabris) 117.jpg|400px|center]]
 
| [[file:Scienza d’Arme (Fabris) 117.jpg|400px|center]]
−
| <p>[15] </p>
+
| <p>[15] This plate represents the guard in ''tierce'' discussed above, and is to be used with this second method. it is formed high, out of line, with the hilt close to the face, the body bent and the feet close together, all with the object of keeping the sword free from being engaged except with certain danger to the adversary of being hit. Since the chest is facing the adversary, the guard can be disturbed only on the inside; in order to facilitate the defence you advance against the adversary by moving in a circle towards the outside, so that when within distance your sword and body are outside his sword; if they were not outside it would be due to some change made by the adversary. The lowering of the body with this guard varies more or less according to the relative height of the adversary’s sword. The head is near the hilt for greater security and strength, and for greater speed in advancing.</p>
 
|  
 
|  
 
| {{section|Page:Scienza d’Arme (Salvator Fabris) 1606.pdf/177|1|lbl=167|p=1}}
 
| {{section|Page:Scienza d’Arme (Salvator Fabris) 1606.pdf/177|1|lbl=167|p=1}}

Revision as of 01:04, 4 May 2022

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 01:04, 4 May 2022 (UTC). (Update)
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.
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=Salvator_Fabris&oldid=134225"