Wiktenauer logo.png

Difference between revisions of "Salvator Fabris"

From Wiktenauer
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 272: Line 272:
 
| <p>[9] '''Engaging the sword'''. How it is done and when completed.</p>
 
| <p>[9] '''Engaging the sword'''. How it is done and when completed.</p>
  
<p>To engage the sword is to gain an advantage over it; it is a kind of counter-position with some difference, because often you have engaged, the adversary's sword without completely closing the line from his, point to your body. But it has this advantage, that your adversary cannot hit without passing your ''forte'', which is so near his point, that you can find the point while he is moving to make the lunge. The counter-position is not considered well formed except when the line from his point to your body is fully defended. But the same advantage may be obtained by relative strength, so that you are considered to have engaged, when you are sure that your sword is stronger than the adversary's and cannot be pushed aside, but can push his aside. When on guard and wishing to engage the adversary's sword, you must carry your point towards his, with the fourth part of the blade against his fourth, but rather more of your fourth part than of his, for that little more, though little, will be enough to give you the advantage, when you have engaged his sword at the weaker part. You must bear in mind that the sword is always stronger in the line in which the point is directed, and in order to advance in that line ---------- you must know how to carry your body and sword in such a way that their strength is in the same direc-<ref name="hyphen">There's no conclusion of this word on the next page, just a new sentence.</ref> This depends to a great extent on the wrist, as will be seen in the plate illustrating the guard on the inside, which is the most difficult. You must also take care, in trying to engage the fourth part, to keep your point at such a distance from the adversary's sword, that he will not have time to push forward the third or even the second part, with the result that while meaning to engage his ''faible'' you would have engaged his ''forte''. This might happen owing to the distance between the two swords, for the amount you can push your sword forward before engaging is the same as the distance. You must move at the same time as he moves, otherwise you might be hit. Moreover, although the space between the two points were small, while you were advancing to engage, the adversary might perceive this and make an angle, which would strengthen him and bring him away from your advance. If you should push on in order to hit when within distance, his ''forte'' would have penetrated so far, that if you had moved in order to engage his sword, you would be unable to defend yourself, and would be hit. Further, if while you are trying to engage, he moved his body away from your point, he could pass right on to your body, before your sword had returned into line. To prevent your adversary's doing this you must first consider the distance between your bodies, and then move forward to engage his sword, carrying your sword without constraint so as to be free to abandon your first plan, when your adversary seizes the opportunity, and drives the point on to his body, bringing the ''forte'' where you intended to put the point. In this way you will hit the adversary at the moment when he is pushing forward. You must remember that this rule applies to the guard on the inside, for, if on the outside, you must abandon your first movement and drop the point under the adversary's sword to the right side, carrying the ''forte'' where you meant to put the point. On this line too the present method is very successful if you similarly do not touch the sword in seeking to engage. The nearer the adversary is, the better and safer the method is. The advantage is in having brought your ''forte'' against his ''faible''.</p>
+
<p>To engage the sword is to gain an advantage over it; it is a kind of counter-position with some difference, because often you have engaged, the adversary's sword without completely closing the line from his point to your body. But it has this advantage, that your adversary cannot hit without passing your ''forte'', which is so near his point, that you can find the point while he is moving to make the lunge. The counter-position is not considered well formed except when the line from his point to your body is fully defended. But the same advantage may be obtained by relative strength, so that you are considered to have engaged, when you are sure that your sword is stronger than the adversary's and cannot be pushed aside, but can push his aside. When on guard and wishing to engage the adversary's sword, you must carry your point towards his, with the fourth part of the blade against his fourth, but rather more of your fourth part than of his, for that little more, though little, will be enough to give you the advantage, when you have engaged his sword at the weaker part. You must bear in mind that the sword is always stronger in the line in which the point is directed, and in order to advance in that line ---------- you must know how to carry your body and sword in such a way that their strength is in the same direc-<ref name="hyphen">There's no conclusion of this word on the next page, just a new sentence.</ref> This depends to a great extent on the wrist, as will be seen in the plate illustrating the guard on the inside, which is the most difficult. You must also take care, in trying to engage the fourth part, to keep your point at such a distance from the adversary's sword, that he will not have time to push forward the third or even the second part, with the result that while meaning to engage his ''faible'' you would have engaged his ''forte''. This might happen owing to the distance between the two swords, for the amount you can push your sword forward before engaging is the same as the distance. You must move at the same time as he moves, otherwise you might be hit. Moreover, although the space between the two points were small, while you were advancing to engage, the adversary might perceive this and make an angle, which would strengthen him and bring him away from your advance. If you should push on in order to hit when within distance, his ''forte'' would have penetrated so far, that if you had moved in order to engage his sword, you would be unable to defend yourself, and would be hit. Further, if while you are trying to engage, he moved his body away from your point, he could pass right on to your body, before your sword had returned into line. To prevent your adversary's doing this you must first consider the distance between your bodies, and then move forward to engage his sword, carrying your sword without constraint so as to be free to abandon your first plan, when your adversary seizes the opportunity, and drives the point on to his body, bringing the ''forte'' where you intended to put the point. In this way you will hit the adversary at the moment when he is pushing forward. You must remember that this rule applies to the guard on the inside, for, if on the outside, you must abandon your first movement and drop the point under the adversary's sword to the right side, carrying the ''forte'' where you meant to put the point. On this line too the present method is very successful if you similarly do not touch the sword in seeking to engage. The nearer the adversary is, the better and safer the method is. The advantage is in having brought your ''forte'' against his ''faible''.</p>
  
 
<p>It often happens that the adversary, finding his sword is not molested is not aware that you have already gained the advantage, whereas if you touch his sword he more easily realises the fact, and can disengage or retreat or change his guard, in order to free himself, so that you lose your first advantage. Moreover if you touch the sword, you impede and disconcert yourself, so that if a ''time'' comes to hit, you cannot take it because of the resistance of your adversary's sword. Even when there is no resistance and the adversary disengages, you cannot prevent your point dropping a little, so that the ''time'' is lost. But if you keep your sword suspended, it is the more ready for every opportunity, there is more use made of ''time'', and there is no necessity to force his sword, which often leads to scuffling. If you do not touch swords, that cannot happen. When then you advance to engage your adversary's sword and he moves to meet you at the same time, the one who first yields with the sword and drives on to the body, can hit before the other touches swords, or in the same instant. If you do not wish to try a hit, you can lower your point towards the ground to prevent the adversary's engaging, and if he follows it you can thrust while his sword is falling. There are many other ways of preventing your adversary from engaging your sword, except when the point hits, especially if you have won the advantage of the ''forte'' against the ''faible'' and the swords are in position. In endeavouring to acquire the advantage over the adversary's sword you must take care not to advance the point so far in your desire to be the stronger, that he can pass in one line or another, before you can direct your point. If you observe these rules you will without doubt gain the control of your adversary's sword, which is the first part of victory. Though your adversary takes advantage of the ''time'' he will still be hit. To prevent your getting this advantage he will have to retreat, changing the position of his body and sword and to adopt new devices, which are countless. The one who is more subtle in his movements will maintain his sword the freer.</p>
 
<p>It often happens that the adversary, finding his sword is not molested is not aware that you have already gained the advantage, whereas if you touch his sword he more easily realises the fact, and can disengage or retreat or change his guard, in order to free himself, so that you lose your first advantage. Moreover if you touch the sword, you impede and disconcert yourself, so that if a ''time'' comes to hit, you cannot take it because of the resistance of your adversary's sword. Even when there is no resistance and the adversary disengages, you cannot prevent your point dropping a little, so that the ''time'' is lost. But if you keep your sword suspended, it is the more ready for every opportunity, there is more use made of ''time'', and there is no necessity to force his sword, which often leads to scuffling. If you do not touch swords, that cannot happen. When then you advance to engage your adversary's sword and he moves to meet you at the same time, the one who first yields with the sword and drives on to the body, can hit before the other touches swords, or in the same instant. If you do not wish to try a hit, you can lower your point towards the ground to prevent the adversary's engaging, and if he follows it you can thrust while his sword is falling. There are many other ways of preventing your adversary from engaging your sword, except when the point hits, especially if you have won the advantage of the ''forte'' against the ''faible'' and the swords are in position. In endeavouring to acquire the advantage over the adversary's sword you must take care not to advance the point so far in your desire to be the stronger, that he can pass in one line or another, before you can direct your point. If you observe these rules you will without doubt gain the control of your adversary's sword, which is the first part of victory. Though your adversary takes advantage of the ''time'' he will still be hit. To prevent your getting this advantage he will have to retreat, changing the position of his body and sword and to adopt new devices, which are countless. The one who is more subtle in his movements will maintain his sword the freer.</p>

Revision as of 01:13, 6 June 2022

Salvator Fabris
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 (1601-06)
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

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 "break measure" or withdraw. ~ 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. This word can't be read on the photos I have. It's a 6-letter word that seems to end in "s?ed". The Italian word means to move or advance, and Tom Leoni translates it as "fling". ~ Michael Chidester
  36. Originally "della", but corrected in the errata.
  37. Originally "la dette", but corrected in the errata.
  38. Originally "è passare", but corrected in the errata.
  39. The errata adds "l’".
  40. 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.
  41. This large blank space was probably meant to be filled in later with a suitable translation for brezza, which means "breeze" though that's obviously not the intended meaning here. It might be a spelling of brecca, meaning "breach". Tom Leoni translates it "rampart". ~ Michael Chidester
  42. 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.
  43. Should be 183.
  44. Originally "ineguale", but corrected in the errata.