Wiktenauer logo.png

Difference between revisions of "Pseudo-Peter von Danzig"

From Wiktenauer
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 47: Line 47:
 
| below                =  
 
| below                =  
 
}}
 
}}
{{under construction | section=yes | comment='''For the present, article content is mirrored on the [[Jud Lew]] page.''' }}
+
{{under construction | nosection=yes | comment='''For the present, article content is mirrored on the [[Jud Lew]] page.''' }}
 
'''"Pseudo-Peter von Danzig"''' is the name given to an anonymous late 14th or early [[century::15th century]] [[nationality::German]] [[fencing master]].<ref>This name stems from the false assumption of many 20th century writers identifying him with [[Peter von Danzig zum Ingolstadt]].</ref> Some time before the creation of the [[Codex Danzig (Cod.44.A.8)|Codex 44.A.8]] in 1452, he authored a [[gloss]] of [[Johannes Liechtenauer]]'s [[Recital]] (''Zettel'') which would go on to become the most widespread in the tradition. While his identity remains unknown, it is possible that he was in fact [[Jud Lew]] or [[Sigmund Schining ein Ringeck]], both of whose glosses show strong similarities to the work. On the other hand, the introduction to the Rome version of the text—the oldest currently extant—might be construed as attributing it to Liechtenauer himself.
 
'''"Pseudo-Peter von Danzig"''' is the name given to an anonymous late 14th or early [[century::15th century]] [[nationality::German]] [[fencing master]].<ref>This name stems from the false assumption of many 20th century writers identifying him with [[Peter von Danzig zum Ingolstadt]].</ref> Some time before the creation of the [[Codex Danzig (Cod.44.A.8)|Codex 44.A.8]] in 1452, he authored a [[gloss]] of [[Johannes Liechtenauer]]'s [[Recital]] (''Zettel'') which would go on to become the most widespread in the tradition. While his identity remains unknown, it is possible that he was in fact [[Jud Lew]] or [[Sigmund Schining ein Ringeck]], both of whose glosses show strong similarities to the work. On the other hand, the introduction to the Rome version of the text—the oldest currently extant—might be construed as attributing it to Liechtenauer himself.
  

Revision as of 17:40, 12 May 2016

Gloss and Interpretation of
the Recital on the Long Sword
die gloss und die auslegung der zettel
des langen schwert
Author(s) Unknown
Ascribed to Pseudo-Peter von Danzig
Illustrated by Unknown
Date before 1452
Genre
Language Early New High German
Archetype(s) Hypothetical
Principal
Manuscript(s)
Manuscript(s)
First Printed
English Edition
Tobler, 2010
Concordance by Michael Chidester
Translations

"Pseudo-Peter von Danzig" is the name given to an anonymous late 14th or early 15th century German fencing master.[1] Some time before the creation of the Codex 44.A.8 in 1452, he authored a gloss of Johannes Liechtenauer's Recital (Zettel) which would go on to become the most widespread in the tradition. While his identity remains unknown, it is possible that he was in fact Jud Lew or Sigmund Schining ein Ringeck, both of whose glosses show strong similarities to the work. On the other hand, the introduction to the Rome version of the text—the oldest currently extant—might be construed as attributing it to Liechtenauer himself.

Treatise

Early on in its history, this text seems to have split into two primary branches. The first branch, found in the Rome (1452), Krakow (1510-20), and Augsburg II (1564) versions, has slightly longer descriptions for many devices and is always accompanied by illustrations. The second branch, appearing first in the Augsburg I (1450s) and used in all extant versions except the three listed above, has shorter descriptions but a number of additional devices.

In order to achieve a greater degree of organization and readability, Liechtenauer's verse has been separated into its proper couplets in this presentation. The verse is laid out this way in the Augsburg I and Salzburg versions, but in most of the other manuscripts it is included inline.

Additional Resources

References

  1. This name stems from the false assumption of many 20th century writers identifying him with Peter von Danzig zum Ingolstadt.