Wiktenauer logo.png

Difference between revisions of "Hugo Wittenwiler"

From Wiktenauer
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 750: Line 750:
 
|-  
 
|-  
 
|  In the year of our lord one thousand [...] three<ref>The two dots around the 'y' can demarcate the 'slot' where additive/subtractive enumeration occurs. The 'y' can be parsed as a '5' if it is an arabic numeral. This sort of mixing did occur and this would give us a value of 1503. That seems the most reasonable. There are other ways to parse it that make no sense, that give it something like 1153 or 1203. Baselards weren't a thing back then, the script wasn't in use back then either. It's technically possible that one or more of the dots are v's and that would give us something like 1408. I found some research on hunting of the period that cites this manuscript and says the hunting and falconry sections are in line with terms from the late 14 to the mid late 15th. All that being said, a late 15thC dating is quite reasonable.</ref> next day after the feast of the birth of virgin Mary<ref>The 9th of September is the day after.</ref> by the hand of Hugues, called Wittenwiller
 
|  In the year of our lord one thousand [...] three<ref>The two dots around the 'y' can demarcate the 'slot' where additive/subtractive enumeration occurs. The 'y' can be parsed as a '5' if it is an arabic numeral. This sort of mixing did occur and this would give us a value of 1503. That seems the most reasonable. There are other ways to parse it that make no sense, that give it something like 1153 or 1203. Baselards weren't a thing back then, the script wasn't in use back then either. It's technically possible that one or more of the dots are v's and that would give us something like 1408. I found some research on hunting of the period that cites this manuscript and says the hunting and falconry sections are in line with terms from the late 14 to the mid late 15th. All that being said, a late 15thC dating is quite reasonable.</ref> next day after the feast of the birth of virgin Mary<ref>The 9th of September is the day after.</ref> by the hand of Hugues, called Wittenwiller
|  '''[140v]''' Anno Dm~ m˚ .y. iij px<super>īā</super> '''[141r]''' die post festum nativitatis marie virginis per manis Hugonis dicti wittenwiller.  
+
|  '''[140v]''' Anno Dm~ m˚ .y. iij px<sup>īā</sup> '''[141r]''' die post festum nativitatis marie virginis per manis Hugonis dicti wittenwiller.  
  
  

Revision as of 17:23, 5 November 2015

Hugo Wittenwiler
Born 15th century
Died 15th century (?)
Ethnicity German
Genres
Language Allemanic
Manuscript(s) Cgm 558 (ca. 1493)
First printed
english edition
Hull, 2008
Concordance by Michael Chidester
Translations Traduction française
Signature Wittenwiller Sig.png

Hugo Wittenwiler (Hugonis dicti Wittenwiller, Hugues Wittenwiler) was a 15th century German scribe and presumed author of a fencing manual. The Wittenwiler family originated as low nobility from Wittenwil in the modern canton of Thurgau, Switzerland, but were destitute by 1339. Hugo Wittenwiler was likely a member of the Toggenburg branch of the family, living in Toggenburg, Lichtenstein, or Wil. Other than this, little can be determined about his life.

In the latter part of the 15th century, he wrote a multiweapon fencing treatise that shows little or no connection to the tradition of Johannes Liechtenauer. Though he is often credited as the author of this treatise, he was likely merely its scribe.[1] This treatise now forms part of the larger manuscript Cgm 558.

Treatise

Additional Resources

References

  1. See folio 141r.
  2. wenden will be translated as: turning the hand/body or winding the sword
  3. daraufspringen
  4. twisted, obliquely, crooked, curved
  5. In the text: `ze glich` zergleich, zugleich
  6. constrained
  7. direct, perpendicular or right(handed)
  8. direct, perpendicular or right(handed)
  9. possibly ‘to the right’, straight, perpendicular
  10. simple
  11. ansetzen: impale
  12. this is possibly a scribal error or synonym for Nachreisen
  13. angle
  14. Turnable, mutable, inconstant; fickle; Slavic
  15. alt: continually
  16. auftrechen. `trechen` is a strong class IVa verb. `Ich triche`, `Du trichest`. It means here `to pull into the air`, `to put into motion`
  17. I believe that this underlined passage is a scribal error. Read it with out the parentheticals and it makes much more sense
  18. turn
  19. also: cut open, to chop down a tree,
  20. also: oblique, curved, twisted
  21. behänden: sw. V.: nhd. berühren, betasten, einrichten, fügen, einhändigen, auferlegen
  22. grimm: unterschlagen 2
  23. surround
  24. aufschlachen? -strike upon
  25. left?
  26. in a superior position to, on the back of your neck.
  27. turn
  28. cut-off
  29. straight, perpendicular or right(handed)
  30. alt: in front of
  31. weapons
  32. possibly seek or desire
  33. possibly: legs
  34. possibly: "to the other side"
  35. The two dots around the 'y' can demarcate the 'slot' where additive/subtractive enumeration occurs. The 'y' can be parsed as a '5' if it is an arabic numeral. This sort of mixing did occur and this would give us a value of 1503. That seems the most reasonable. There are other ways to parse it that make no sense, that give it something like 1153 or 1203. Baselards weren't a thing back then, the script wasn't in use back then either. It's technically possible that one or more of the dots are v's and that would give us something like 1408. I found some research on hunting of the period that cites this manuscript and says the hunting and falconry sections are in line with terms from the late 14 to the mid late 15th. All that being said, a late 15thC dating is quite reasonable.
  36. The 9th of September is the day after.