Wiktenauer logo.png

Difference between revisions of "Pseudo-Peter von Danzig"

From Wiktenauer
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 52: Line 52:
 
== Treatise ==
 
== Treatise ==
  
Early on in its history, this text seems to have split into two primary branches. The first branch, found in the [[Codex Danzig (Cod.44.A.8)|Rome]] (1452), [[Goliath (MS Germ.Quart.2020)|Krakow]] (1510-20), and [[Hutter/Sollinger Fechtbuch (Cod.I.6.2º.2)|Augsburg II]] (1564) versions, has slightly longer descriptions for many devices and is always accompanied by illustrations. The second branch, appearing first in the [[Codex Lew (Cod.I.6.4º.3)|Augsburg I]] (1450s) and used in all extant versions except the three listed above, has shorter descriptions but a number of additional devices.
+
Early on in its history, this text seems to have split into two primary branches, and no definite copies of the unaltered original are known to survive. The gloss of [[Sigmund Schining ain Ringeck]] also seems to be related to this work, due to the considerable overlap in text and contents, but the exact nature of this relationship is currently unclear.
  
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 [[Codex Speyer (MS M.I.29)|Salzburg versions]], but in most of the other manuscripts it is included inline.
+
Branch A, appearing first in the [[Codex Lew (Cod.I.6.4º.3)|Augsburg version]] (1450s) and comprising the majority of extant copies, has more devices overall than the other branch (particularly in the extensive [[Codex Speyer (MS M.I.29)|Salzburg version]] of 1491) but generally shorter descriptions in areas of overlap. It also includes glosses of Liechtenauer's Recital on long sword and mounted fencing only, and in lieu of a gloss of Liechtenauer's short sword it is generally accompanied by the short sword teachings of [[Andre Liegniczer]] and [[Martin Huntfeltz]]. Branch A was later used by [[Johannes Lecküchner]] as a source when he compiled his own gloss of a Recital on the [[Messer]].
 +
 
 +
Branch B, only found in the [[Codex Danzig (Cod.44.A.8)|Rome]] (1452), [[Goliath (MS Germ.Quart.2020)|Krakow]] (1510-20), and [[Hutter/Sollinger Fechtbuch (Cod.I.6.2º.2)|Augsburg II]] (1564) versions, has slightly longer descriptions than Branch A, but fewer devices overall. It glosses Liechtenauer's entire Recital, including the Short Sword, and may therefore be considered more complete than Branch A; it also different from Branch A in that all three known copies are illustrated to some extent where none in the other branch are.
 +
 
 +
There is one version of the text that defies categorization into one branch or the other, that included in the [[Paulus Kal Fechtbuch (MS KK5126)|Vienna manuscript]] (ca. 1480) along with [[Paulus Kal]]'s work (thought Kal's level of involvement is unknown). The text of this version is more consistent with the generally shorter descriptions of Branch A, but the contents are more consistent with Branch B, lacking most of the unique devices of Branch A and including the gloss of the Short Sword. The Vienna version may thus be a copy of the original gloss before it split into these branches (or it may merely be an odd attempt by a scribe to synthesize the two branches into a single work).
 +
 
 +
While Branches A and B were formerly presented in a single combined document on this page, the differences between them are extensive enough that they merit separate consideration. Thus Branch A has been moved to the page of [[Jud Lew]], to whom may be attributed the gloss on mounted fencing, while Branch B has been retained here. As the Vienna version cannot be cleanly assigned to one branch or the other, it will appear in both concordances for comparative purposes.
  
 
{{master begin
 
{{master begin
Line 1,686: Line 1,692:
 
! <p>[[Codex Danzig (Cod.44.A.8)|Rome Version]] (1452){{edit index|Codex Danzig (Cod.44.A.8)}}<br/>by [[Dierk Hagedorn]]</p>
 
! <p>[[Codex Danzig (Cod.44.A.8)|Rome Version]] (1452){{edit index|Codex Danzig (Cod.44.A.8)}}<br/>by [[Dierk Hagedorn]]</p>
 
! <p>[[Paulus Kal Fechtbuch (MS KK5126)|Vienna Version]] (1480s){{edit index|Paulus Kal Fechtbuch (MS KK5126)}}<br/>by [[Carsten&nbsp;Lorbeer]], [[Julia&nbsp;Lorbeer]],<br/>[[Andreas&nbsp;Meier]], [[Marita&nbsp;Wiedner]]</p>
 
! <p>[[Paulus Kal Fechtbuch (MS KK5126)|Vienna Version]] (1480s){{edit index|Paulus Kal Fechtbuch (MS KK5126)}}<br/>by [[Carsten&nbsp;Lorbeer]], [[Julia&nbsp;Lorbeer]],<br/>[[Andreas&nbsp;Meier]], [[Marita&nbsp;Wiedner]]</p>
! <p>[[Goliath (MS Germ.Quart.2020)|Krakow Version]] (1510-20){{edit index|Goliath (MS Germ.Quart.2020)}}<br/>by [[Grzegorz Żabiński]]</p>
+
! <p>[[Goliath (MS Germ.Quart.2020)|Krakow Version]] (1510-20){{edit index|Goliath (MS Germ.Quart.2020)}}</p>
 
! <p></p>
 
! <p></p>
  
Line 2,362: Line 2,368:
 
! <p>[[Codex Danzig (Cod.44.A.8)|Rome Version]] (1452){{edit index|Codex Danzig (Cod.44.A.8)}}<br/>by [[Dierk Hagedorn]]</p>
 
! <p>[[Codex Danzig (Cod.44.A.8)|Rome Version]] (1452){{edit index|Codex Danzig (Cod.44.A.8)}}<br/>by [[Dierk Hagedorn]]</p>
 
! <p>[[Paulus Kal Fechtbuch (MS KK5126)|Vienna Version]] (1480s){{edit index|Paulus Kal Fechtbuch (MS KK5126)}}<br/>by [[Carsten&nbsp;Lorbeer]], [[Julia&nbsp;Lorbeer]],<br/>[[Andreas&nbsp;Meier]], [[Marita&nbsp;Wiedner]]</p>
 
! <p>[[Paulus Kal Fechtbuch (MS KK5126)|Vienna Version]] (1480s){{edit index|Paulus Kal Fechtbuch (MS KK5126)}}<br/>by [[Carsten&nbsp;Lorbeer]], [[Julia&nbsp;Lorbeer]],<br/>[[Andreas&nbsp;Meier]], [[Marita&nbsp;Wiedner]]</p>
! <p>[[Goliath (MS Germ.Quart.2020)|Krakow Version]] (1510-20){{edit index|Goliath (MS Germ.Quart.2020)}}<br/>by [[Grzegorz Żabiński]]</p>
+
! <p>[[Goliath (MS Germ.Quart.2020)|Krakow Version]] (1510-20){{edit index|Goliath (MS Germ.Quart.2020)}}</p>
 
! <p>[[Glasgow Fechtbuch (MS E.1939.65.341)|Glasgow Version]] (1508){{edit index|Glasgow Fechtbuch (MS E.1939.65.341)}}<br/>by [[Dierk Hagedorn]]</p>
 
! <p>[[Glasgow Fechtbuch (MS E.1939.65.341)|Glasgow Version]] (1508){{edit index|Glasgow Fechtbuch (MS E.1939.65.341)}}<br/>by [[Dierk Hagedorn]]</p>
  

Revision as of 21:47, 15 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, and no definite copies of the unaltered original are known to survive. The gloss of Sigmund Schining ain Ringeck also seems to be related to this work, due to the considerable overlap in text and contents, but the exact nature of this relationship is currently unclear.

Branch A, appearing first in the Augsburg version (1450s) and comprising the majority of extant copies, has more devices overall than the other branch (particularly in the extensive Salzburg version of 1491) but generally shorter descriptions in areas of overlap. It also includes glosses of Liechtenauer's Recital on long sword and mounted fencing only, and in lieu of a gloss of Liechtenauer's short sword it is generally accompanied by the short sword teachings of Andre Liegniczer and Martin Huntfeltz. Branch A was later used by Johannes Lecküchner as a source when he compiled his own gloss of a Recital on the Messer.

Branch B, only found in the Rome (1452), Krakow (1510-20), and Augsburg II (1564) versions, has slightly longer descriptions than Branch A, but fewer devices overall. It glosses Liechtenauer's entire Recital, including the Short Sword, and may therefore be considered more complete than Branch A; it also different from Branch A in that all three known copies are illustrated to some extent where none in the other branch are.

There is one version of the text that defies categorization into one branch or the other, that included in the Vienna manuscript (ca. 1480) along with Paulus Kal's work (thought Kal's level of involvement is unknown). The text of this version is more consistent with the generally shorter descriptions of Branch A, but the contents are more consistent with Branch B, lacking most of the unique devices of Branch A and including the gloss of the Short Sword. The Vienna version may thus be a copy of the original gloss before it split into these branches (or it may merely be an odd attempt by a scribe to synthesize the two branches into a single work).

While Branches A and B were formerly presented in a single combined document on this page, the differences between them are extensive enough that they merit separate consideration. Thus Branch A has been moved to the page of Jud Lew, to whom may be attributed the gloss on mounted fencing, while Branch B has been retained here. As the Vienna version cannot be cleanly assigned to one branch or the other, it will appear in both concordances for comparative purposes.

Additional Resources

References

  1. This name stems from the false assumption of many 20th century writers identifying him with Peter von Danzig zum Ingolstadt.
  2. Squint here means "an askew glance", referring to both the sword's direction of travel and also the use of deception with the eyes with this hew.
  3. Letter erased and overwritten.
  4. This text is a repetition of the first paragraph on folio 68r, but this is the illustration that corresponds to the text in Goliath (folio 54v).
  5. 5.0 5.1 Indecipherable due to an ink blotch.