https://wiktenauer.com/api.php?action=feedcontributions&user=P+Terminiello&feedformat=atomWiktenauer - User contributions [en]2024-03-28T09:30:21ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.34.2https://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Jacopo_Monesi&diff=120712Jacopo Monesi2020-12-26T03:14:28Z<p>P Terminiello: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = [[name::Jacopo Monesi]]<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = 16th century (?)<br />
| birthplace = Florence, Italy (?)<br />
| deathdate = 17th century<br />
| deathplace = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set: occupation=Fencing master }}<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = <br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = Medici court<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| period = <br />
| movement = <br />
| influences =<br />
| influenced = <br />
<br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| notableworks = ''[[Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)| Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma]]'' (1640)<br />
| archetype = <br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= 1640<br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| signature = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
<p>'''Jacopo Monesi''' was an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing master]] during the first half of the [[century::17th century]]. </p><br />
<p>A native of Florence, he appears to have enjoyed enduring patronage and recognition in his own lifetime at the court of the Grand Duchy of Tuscany under Ferdinando II de' Medici. </p><br />
<p>A court document, dating to 1621, indicates Monesi's role included instructing the adolescent nobility at the grand ducal court (a claim supported by the title page of his own work): </p><br />
<p>''Jacopo of the Armourer, master of fencing, is one of several masters to the pages, together with the priest Albizio Vecchi, the undermaster Frediano Tinolfi, Giovanni Migliorucci master of writing, Leonardo Migliorucci, Giovanni Pieroni the arithmetist and mathematician, Remigio Cantagallina master of drawing, and Pitti Agnolo Ricci master of dance.''<ref>Archivio di Stato di Firenze, Miscellanea Medicea, 369, c.707. Cited by http://www.scrimipedia.it/mediawiki/index.php?title=Iacopo_Monesi (accessed 22 March 2017).</ref><br />
<p>In 1640 he published a short tract outlining his fencing philosophy: [[Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)| Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma]]. </p><br />
<p>Monesi's text contain little technical discussion, which he defers to a promised second volume that however is either lost or was never written. Instead, Monesi strongly critiques many theories and methodologies of his peers; behind a veil of formal language excoriating those practices he views as frivolous, or detrimental to surviving an encounter in earnest. Monesi advocates a straightforward and direct philosophy of fencing. He eschews what he sees as unnecessary embellishments, or artefacts of salle fencing, and privileges what he considers practical for surviving an unpredictable and violent confrontation with sharp weapons. </p><br />
<p>He strongly affirms the efficacy of cuts, interspersed with thrusts; and favours simple and strong natural movements, stances, and attacks. In terms of pedagogy, he forcefully promotes the primacy of practising assaults, and laments that students in his day no longer assault with the frequency and gusto of earlier times. </p><br />
<p>Among other elements he criticises: feints, elaborate postures, mathematical concepts, excessive theoretical discussion, and dagger disarms, as unhelpful and impractical for a confrontation with sharps. Without naming names Monesi appears to clearly reference, again critically, the work of [[Docciolini]], [[Fabris]], [[Marozzo]], and [[Pistofilo]]. </p><br />
<p>Alongside such direct critiques, Monesi includes less specifically targeted remonstrations. For example, he objects to the pedagogical method of masters who employ a chestplate, or a cane in place of a sword. Similarly, he leaves space for conventional discussion points of the period, such as where to look when fencing, or how to approach combat at night.</p><br />
== Treatise ==<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Introduction and dedication| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
<br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''On the Subject of Fencing'''</p><br />
<p>'''By Jacopo Monesi'''</p><br />
<p>'''Known as the Armourer'''</p><br />
<p>'''Master of Arms to the Most Serene of Tuscany, and Their Gentleman Pages'''</p><br />
<p>'''Dedicated to the Most Illustrious Sir Count'''</p><br />
<p>'''Francesco Piccolomini of Aragon'''</p><br />
<p>'''In Florence, at the New Press M.DC.XXXX'''</p><br />
<p>With Permission from the Authorities</p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Most Illustrious and Noble Sir and Patron'''</p><br />
<p>The shade of your Most Illustrious Lordship's great protection, has generated in me an uncommon yearning to bring to light that which has been hidden in the shadows of my intellect for many years. For some time I have had in mind to make public certain discourses on the most excellent profession of fencing, but the awareness of my scarce ability to articulate them, caused the heat of my enthusiasm to cool. This yearning only then emerges, through confiding in the patronage of your Most Illustrious Lordship, wishing to express these concepts in the best manner possible. </p><br />
<p>Therefore this is entrusted only to you, as has happened in the past with honour, once again I opted for your support in bringing this forth, so that anything that is deemed monstrous will nonetheless (protected by the greatness of your Most Illustrious Lordship) be embraced, and be appraised with a not less than benign eye. </p><br />
<p>Please deign therefore to protect it with benevolence, recognising it as a sign of my dutiful observance to your Most Illustrious Lordship's great merit, to which I reverently bow, praying for your every most coveted happiness. </p><br />
<p>Your devoted and most obligated servant</p><br />
<p>Jacopo Monesi, known as the Armourer. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''To the Benevolent Reader'''</p><br />
<p>It has been for a number of years that despite the weakness of my intellect I have wanted to present my thoughts on the play of fencing, which has been my particular profession. But since the world has seen others elevated, and granted them brilliant ability with which they delight and are delighted, I considered it best to keep my thoughts buried within me. </p><br />
<p>Considering however that in some printed books you find an exorbitance of guards, and other extravagances, and witnessing this noble exercise reduced more to discourse than practice, the desire I have (if successful) to demonstrate the true play, and method of combat, made me resolve first to declare my objections, then to explain the correct method. </p><br />
<p>In conformance therefore with what the Most Illustrious Sir Silvio Piccolomini of Aragon <ref>Silvio Piccolomini was a knight of the Order of Santo Stefano, and noted fencer and military commander of his age. In the dedication of his own treatise [[Federico Ghisliero]] declares himself a student of Piccolomini, while his skill at fencing is further referenced by [[Cappoferro]] in his introduction to the reader, and by the French chronicler Michel de Montaigne. </ref> (excellent in this exercise, and more so in military disciplines) taught me, after my first master Cosimo Paradisi, in the chapters that follow I will narrate as openly as I can what is recounted. </p><br />
<p>But since the greatest detriment to this exercise, in my view, comes from neglecting to struggle with the sword in hand, in practising assaults, I will deal with this first, explaining the reasons why I believe this is, as I commence. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>''Might it please Sir Canon Carlo del Vigna to see if the present work contains anything repugnant to Christian piety, and public morals, and refer back. The 30th January 1639.'' </p><br />
Vincenzio Rabatta, Vicar of Florence<br />
<p>''In the present work, having reviewed it in all diligence, I found nothing repugnant to Christian piety, or public morals. 25th February 1639.''</p><br />
<p>Carlo del Vigna, Canon of Florence<br />
<p>''Most Reverend Father Inquisitor,''</p><br />
<p>''By your order of Most Reverend Father I have reviewed this present discourse on fencing, and I have not found anything repugnant to the Religion, or to public morals, judging it worthy of publication. 26th March 1640. ''</p><br />
<p>Girolamo Rosati, Protonotary and Consultant of the Holy Office</p><br />
<p>''This can be printed. Florence 3rd April 1640. ''</p><br />
<p>Father Giovanni Angeli, Vicar of the Holy Office, by order of</p><br />
<p>Senator Alessandro Vettori, Auditor of His Most Serene Highness</p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Notes on fencing| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
<br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''Chapter One'''</p><br />
<p>Ambition, which without fail is the cause of every ill, especially in virtuous exercises, I know to be the true basis and root of a rather notable vice. </p><br />
<p>Every day we see youths of such ambition, that under the cloak of letting their virtue be known, out of all proportion, neglect the importance of possessing such virtue, and as soon as they arrive in schools to learn, having imbibed just a few lessons, allow themselves to be inflated by excessive pretension, and judge themselves to be masters. </p><br />
<p>Therefore it happens (and I speak in particular of this exercise) that in public schools, and especially in private houses, with youths of equal quality gathered to practice assaults, you find some who do not grasp the sword if not to teach, nor to learn in any other way. This outlook is so pernicious, that for this reason you no longer hear of people gathering for common benefit and practice, and to pass the time in the virtue of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Those who have distinguished themselves up until now, demonstrating their valour and knowledge, in my view did not take this route. Indeed anxious to prove their worth as gallant men at every occasion, in any place, and against any person, I believe they sought to learn. Because to understand a discipline well, you have to practise it, you cannot learn with theory alone. </p><br />
<p>It is not a good way to master a skill, to think you can attain it without effort and sacrifice. Those who think to proceed like this, infallibly discover through experience how much they have deluded themselves. </p><br />
<p>Another active and real problem I bring up, just as damaging as the first although stemming from the same ambition, is the disparity between people. </p><br />
<p>You cannot deny that an artisan (who delights in virtue as is understandable), can through his diligence and vivacity arrive at the goal of fencing well with the sword. Indeed because this exercise is extremely capable of elevating the most lowly individual, it often happens that by applying their spirit, those of base condition become more distinguished. </p><br />
<p>The damage therefore that ambition brings, is to be ashamed to practice assaults with someone of lowly hand. To not consider you could extract some fruit even from these people, throwing yourself into the profession. </p><br />
<p>This thought is erroneous, because it is essential to know that virtue levels all people; and that a virtuoso can be considered the equal not just of a simple gentleman, but of any prince or great lord. </p><br />
<p>These are the reasons I give, demonstrating why today assaults are dismissed, neglecting the chance to benefit from the luxury of living, before the waning of youthful years deprives you of every worthwhile activity. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Two – On the same subject'''</p><br />
<p>You can clearly tell from my previous discourse how much damage ambition brings, and how it is a reason for not mastering this beautiful virtue of fencing. But I will now demonstrate furthermore how discussion of this profession, which today's students engage in more than practice, causes notable harm. The truth is that lessons taken in any subject in the day are of no use if their operations are not exercised. </p><br />
<p>That which pertains to bodies of reason: such as logic, philosophy, and so forth, must be put in practice with words alone, as they are necessary to expound such virtues. However in the profession of fencing words have no place to execute well what the students have learned from the master. </p><br />
<p>Actions are needed when it comes to training your body for defence and attack. </p><br />
<p>This is not applied by today's youth, which is a further reason why assaults no longer take place, and students neglect to learn wielding a sword in hand well. It then follows that masters are judged and branded as inept in their craft, since they no longer produce students as they did in the past. </p><br />
<p>When youngsters come together, sometimes from the schools of different masters in this profession, instead of putting their studies to the test, with the cloak across their shoulders, as well as with the simple sword in hand, they begin to discuss among themselves: “If I delivered this thrust how would you parry it?”. </p><br />
<p>The other replies “I would do it in this way, or like this” to which the first responds “But if it were a cut, how would you defend yourself” again its counter is added, and they carry on ad infinitum in this manner, disregarding gainful practice. </p><br />
<p>See if this is the best way to safeguard yourself, and benefit through the profession. Then test with a sharp sword (which could happen), whether these people would have time for such a parliament. </p><br />
<p>Action is required for exercises which engage the body, words cannot grant a student resolution to confront his opponent, or courage and practice to defend himself. This is as much as I thought to say on this matter. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Three – On putting mathematics into this virtue'''<ref>This chapter might apply to Italian treatises which incorporate mathematical principles, such as [[Camillo Agrippa]], but arguably targets in particular the Iberian forms of the ''Verdadera Destreza'', exemplified by [[Jerónimo Sánchez de Carranza]] and [[Luis Pacheco de Narváez]]. </ref></p><br />
<p>I have never presumed to malign anyone who professes to teach this noble exercise, nor do I intend to now, recognising myself as the inferior to many gallant men who have practised this virtue. But we are permitted to debate upon the lessons of some, who have taught and teach through mathematics, with the addition of lines, circles, traverses and extravagant voids of the body. </p><br />
<p>For me, these are commendable for fencing in a clean salle, furnished with even tiles. Likewise it is impossible for two people not to put on a good display, when they politely retreat, then void, or advance with a neat step, putting into practice what they have learned from their masters. </p><br />
<p>But if I imagine them outside the tiled hall, that is in the streets, where confrontations most often arise, then I can't help but criticise and malign them, since it is impossible (for reasons I will explain) to put these actions into practice. </p><br />
<p>Someone who is confronted or deliberately summoned to combat, cannot I believe, as happens in large armies, bring with them people to dig; to resurface the street so they can put themselves in the right posture, and use their lines, and advances of ground, and binds of the sword in conformance with their lessons. Instead, being confronted, they are obliged to think how to stand firmly on their feet, to be vigorous in defence and attack, ready of hand, without such fine distinctions of footwork. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore those who employ the sword in this manner, can be called good and beautiful fencers, but in an open space, or street where stones, holes, and cracks can cause you to stumble, they are always in danger of defending themselves poorly from their enemy. In such cases most of the time the artifices of traverses, voids and lines are left aside, and they throw themselves into natural attacks, as is so often seen. </p><br />
<p>This itself is sufficient demonstration, although I can elaborate for greater clarity, that play founded upon natural reason is with no comparison much better than artificious play. The latter was invented for no motive other than satisfying the curiosity of youth. If it were otherwise, it would not be the case, not only in public schools but also in the presence of nobility with the intervention of great princes, that professors of play founded upon such twists of the body had been touched assault after assault, with cuts and thrusts, as is clear and manifest to a great many people. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Four – On a defined ''punto'' to attack'''<ref> The term punto to signify a defined target area of the right shoulder is particular to the treatise of [[Marco Docciolini]].</ref></p><br />
<p>This seems to me an important subject, in order to be accomplished in assaults. I will merely state my thoughts on those who, as a principal maxim, hold and practise the opinion that it is better to attack only a single part of the body, namely the right shoulder, being the said punto. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, you must consider the reason why they observe this doctrine. I believe it is for no reason other than to strike either the nearest, or the most vulnerable part of the body. </p><br />
<p>If we suppose they hold this view, because they want to strike the nearest target, I completely refute their opinion. Hands and arms notwithstanding, I know how those who lean most stand, even their knees are closer and more likely to be attacked by the enemy. </p><br />
<p>If they wish to propose the other reason, that it is the most vulnerable part of the body, I can only oppose them entirely. It seems to me that the hands and arms are subjected to danger: both of being wounded, and of the intermediate outcome of losing the ability to attack. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore experience, which instructs in all things, shows us that in a good portion of combats you see wounds to the hands and arms. This is because these can more easily encounter the enemy's weapons. If they deem the area called the punto so vulnerable, I do not know which hands and arms are not in the same danger. In them you find veins, arteries and other very vulnerable areas which evidently have shown to cause the death of those wounded there. </p><br />
This is as much as I can say on this particular. I urge everyone to take the whole of the enemy's body as the fixed punto to attack, and specifically the part that presents itself as most uncovered and furthest forward. There is much more that could be said, for example if your opponent is left-handed, or in other situations, but to avoid tedium I will omit it. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Five – On a predetermined measure'''</p><br />
<p>In addition to the other pernicious matters in the virtue of fencing noted above, I absolutely detest the opinion of those who insist on, observe, and teach a predetermined measure. Since an opinion should not be proposed without foundation, I will prove this simple truth with active reason. </p><br />
<p>I have always observed, and heard, that people who are forced to fight, whether to defend themselves, or to confront someone who has caused them some offence, never have the benefit of being able to measure swords. Nor is this a given, since anyone can wear a sword of any length they please (speaking of Tuscany). They cannot even choose a piazza well suited for coming to blows, and neither are people equal in form, either in height or in build. </p><br />
<p>Now, if this is not the case, what is the point of habituating your foot, and arm to a predetermined measure? Moreover, you can easily see from experience that often there is no time to take measure, or the opportunity is denied, for example in badly paved streets, sometimes filled with a thousand pieces of rubbish, as mentioned above. </p><br />
<p>If someone, suddenly or intentionally, is obliged to fight, even if they find themselves in a nice, clean street, it is impossible for them to observe the measure of their steps; to defend themselves and attack, against someone who is naturally at ease in well-founded play, who naturally understands how to stay strongly on their feet, and deflect the enemy's blows, while at the same time attacking him, which seems to me the real principle. </p><br />
<p>You must concede, that this measure was invented simply for the encounters they like to conduct at royal pageants, which have been held several times in various places, and furthermore in itself to demonstrate how far they can extend their normal step. However it is absolutely unfit not just for combat in earnest, but even for the simple assaults you might practice. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Six – On voids'''</p><br />
<p>There should be little difference between this chapter and the previous one, since having to discuss voids, which produce the same result as a set measure, my argument will differ little from the one adopted above. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, let us consider its effect, which is nothing more than a withdrawal of the body, either back or to the side, to defend against an enemy's attack. I say that this withdrawal is as dangerous as trusting in a set measure, and the reason is as follows: someone who by chance comes to blows with an enemy cannot know if they wield a longer sword, whereby in wishing to void they can be wounded. Nor can they know how agile the sword's wielder is. </p><br />
<p>More importantly, when someone evades a blow with a void, they must necessarily lose a tempo in having to return forward to attack. If set upon during this tempo (which the enemy may attempt) they will find it very difficult to recover. </p><br />
<p>For this reason therefore, as a rule of good fencing you should never concede voids. Besides it increases the risk of stumbling in the streets, which as noted above can happen when placing yourself in a set measure. </p><br />
<p>Seeking to avoid any mishap that can occur is the utmost of a man's prudence. The greatest threats that arise are those to life. Against these principal dangers man must apply all his judgement. </p><br />
<p>If we know that voids, traverses, and a set measure manifestly cannot save us from an enemy's attack, why not use that convenient and very useful remedy: not to be subjected to such attacks by staying well-grounded, with firm and stable strength of both body and arm. This will suffice on this topic. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Seven – On feints'''</p><br />
<p>In the profession of fencing there are many frivolities and jests, or more accurately whimsies that you can use, either in public schools or in private settings. Among others there are feints. These can often be employed when fencing for enjoyment and fun, and similarly to improve your vision, since they also serve to train your eyes to be attentive. </p><br />
<p>But I like to believe that this practice was invented for nothing more than to defend yourself, or to attack your enemy, as the situation demands. In reality they reveal themselves as good only for entertainment, or to prolong lessons, and I am forced to say that feints are extremely dangerous to those who wish to perform them. They require two tempos, and in the true exercise of wielding the sword are manifestly unsafe. </p><br />
<p>In earnest, as we know, arms are employed for only two reasons. The first is to defend, the other is to attack. How then can someone who is confronted, as we have said before, hold forth with contrivances like feinting over and under the dagger, to the outside and inside of the sword, against the speed of the enemy's blows (especially if they are strong)? Against cuts as well as thrusts, when he does not adopt any kind of posture, but advancing with such blows? </p><br />
<p>I have no doubt that those in this predicament, stirred by many motives, leave aside all feints and attend only to defending their lives as best they can. </p><br />
<p>But can you imagine others, advancing phlegmatically to confront their enemy, to vindicate a wrong or harm done to them, redeeming themselves with the frivolities and jests of feints? </p><br />
<p>I will omit many examples, but fury transports them, reason is overcome. Honour necessitates that they leave aside taught feints, and instead follow natural instinct, but since I have explained this already, I will not expound further. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eight – On ''contrattempo'', ''mezzotempo'' and more'''</p><br />
<p>To cover the present topic it is worth returning to the same discussion in the previous chapter. The various fancies and follies, along with feints, are invented by certain masters I believe, not only to retain students so they stay longer at the school, but also to confuse them. This way they unlearn the good and study the bad, and will always have to remain students. </p><br />
<p>This is the case with the invention of ''mezzotempo'' and ''contrattempo''. These are brought to light, as I mentioned, only to keep the school running. </p><br />
<p>''Mezzotempo'', and other such terms, deform the good and true rules with too many fripperies. In reality you could never have a memory sharp enough to employ them in defence in a single tempo, or in attack. </p><br />
<p>These methods should be practised not in fencing, but in the realm of dance, where the variety of steps and agility of the leaps must astound the spectators. </p><br />
<p>But in this profession a single step, a single tempo must suffice. Deployed with the requisite accuracy and mastery it will always quash any ''contrattempo'' or ''mezzotempo'' you might encounter, and I profess that this is merely the truth. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Nine – On the so misshapen published figures of this exercise'''<br />
<p>If I believed myself alone, I would not dare to criticise the infinite sets of figures presented and drawn in published books. These are invented, I believe, to no other end but to demonstrate a multiplicity of distorted postures, which almost transcend the bounds of nature, and drag people towards the ridiculous, rather than to learning from viewing such contorted actions. </p><br />
<p>I would like to have some leeway, to leave some praise, but I see no way whatsoever, if not to say that these deformations are very suitable for clowns and tavern-singers, to entertain and extract money from a crowd. This is the praise I am able to concede. </p><br />
<p>If then I were to offer some polite criticism, I could begin by saying that these positions are monstrous, and impossible to witness within our profession. When have you ever seen people, either for enjoyment or necessity, employ such extravagant contortions, with their bodies so hunched and forced, and for the sword alone with the off-hand by the left ear, to employ it like a dagger to deflect thrusts?<ref>This passage, and arguably the entire chapter, appears to be targeted at [[Salvator Fabris]], whose treatise is notable for its deep and sometimes contorted stances.</ref></p><br />
<p>This is as far removed from the natural order as truth is from a lie. You do not take a sword in hand, to wield in earnest, with such exorbitant contortions. You should stand so you can operate naturally, all the more so when you find yourself on the street. There you may find many impediments, as I have said, and confirming what I have already said above, you must stand firmly on your feet, in a balanced posture from which you can draw strength to oppose the sword against all attacks, and as upright as possible so you do not become disordered.</p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Ten – On the guards and counterguards'''</p><br />
<p>There are many guards, great in number from various masters, which you can employ in the profession of fencing. To list them all, and discuss which of them is good or bad, would require a discourse beyond this brief one, expounded with an eloquence other than my own. Nonetheless my pen will write simply and plainly, to touch upon some of my thoughts. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, to demonstrate the extravagance of the guards invented, I will cite various names authors have given them, such as: ''coda lunga e stretta'', ''cingara'', ''porta di ferro'', ''beccapossa'',<ref> These guard names are characteristic of the Bolognese school of fencing. In particular the name ''beccapossa'' is specific to [[Achille Marozzo]].</ref>''belincorno'', prima, seconda, terza and quarta, and many others which I will omit, which together with these have been represented with figures in the books published up until now.</p><br />
<p>As to whether these are good or bad, any praise should be occasioned by their use. It cannot follow, although we have seen otherwise, that they endanger those who wish to employ them. However since no guard should be maligned without a basis, I will start by saying that in my opinion the guards to be employed should not be twisted or bizarre, nor overwrought with a paintbrush, nor measured with a compass, but simple and natural. In this manner the body finds itself stronger in resisting blows, and attacking when the occasion presents itself, without the manifest danger of stumbling and thereby compromising your life. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eleven – On those who wish to debate this practice'''</p><br />
<p>To further damage this profession of fencing, in my opinion, some presume to debate over blows and postures of whichever sort, formulating and postulating in the manner of someone conducting a philosophical debate. Discussions on subjects like the one I have mentioned, should be performed with actions alone. </p><br />
<p>This occurs because upon the path of this practice it is difficult to arrive at perfection. Many who take the path, at the first resistance, by a simple act of will desist from the endeavour. Seeing themselves inadequate, they sharpen their intellect to appear the equal of professors, and with their propositions lead astray those striving to obtain a complete understanding. </p><br />
<p>This is undeniable. In the practice of fencing, to engage someone in debate and discussion as if arguing theology (in place of conducting assaults) achieves nothing but to deny opportunities to those who desire to learn, to become excellent in practice. This is the motive I ascribe for this behaviour. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Twelve – Against a set rule for combat at night'''</p><br />
<p>In this simple discourse of mine, I wished to oppose every extravagance that the meanness of my intellect has encountered in the profession of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Therefore it seemed apt to contest also the opinion of those who hold a firm rule of giving true and real method of combat at night: that putting your hands to your weapons, you should quickly use them to seek the enemy’s sword, and having found it you must liberally deliver attacks to wound him. </p><br />
<p>They add to this another rule, no better than the first, that is to keep your body hunched to create a smaller target. </p><br />
<p>I address each of these as follows. </p><br />
<p>If confronted in the dark at night, how can you find your enemy's weapon without being attacked? </p><br />
<p>Why must you remain hunched, being deprived of ability and stature in defence and attack, in place of a strong and comfortable posture, remaining upright on your feet without hunching over? </p><br />
<p>Such a false opinion I would deem unsuitable even for the daytime where you can clearly see the enemy’s posture, and even when the enemy does not step to attack. </p><br />
<p>I firmly maintain that if you must fight at night, in such circumstances in the dark, you should deliver ''dritti'' and ''roversci'' as swiftly as you can. </p><br />
<p>Anything else is futile, without proposing many additional considerations for such instances, which for the sake of brevity I will omit. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Thirteen – On those masters who in giving lessons employ either a chestplate or a rod'''</p><br />
<p>Among the other notable detriments, caused by various extravagances, are those masters, some who give lessons with a chestplate, others with a rod. </p><br />
<p>Masters who wear a chestplate during lessons leads to nothing else, in my opinion, than that students deliver blows with an exorbitant step. Since the blows do not harm these said masters, they do not realise that, although they wish to protect the student, with these thrusts they harm them. </p><br />
<p>They become habituated to committing their body so much with every blow, that it becomes unlikely they could recover when performed in earnest. </p><br />
<p>Having delivered the thrust to their master's chestplate, they find resistance, lending them force to recover back, and they adopt the habit of abandoning their whole body into the attack.</p><br />
<p>Because of this with a sharp sword, not finding the resistance of the chestplate they have with the practice sword, they remain extended so far forwards that it is difficult (as stated) to avoid their enemy's attack. It can absolutely occur that instead of wounding their enemy, they are left injured. </p><br />
<p>Something similar can occur with students who are used to taking lesson from masters who hold a rod. Since it is much lighter than a sword it creates an extremely negative effect, giving rise to great setbacks. Its weakness, not having the same form as a sword, means whichever cut the rod delivers, it cannot force the student's sword to learn, as a sword would. </p><br />
<p>We can furthermore question, being habituated to parrying cuts from the rod, if when they receive cuts from a sword, they might become confused. </p><br />
<p>Being disordered they might apply the lessons learned reluctantly, since they do not even learn resolve. So I repeat, employing either a chestplate or a rod benefits only the master, and not the students. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Fourteen – On where some wish you to look when you fight'''</p><br />
<p>The variety of opinions on where to place your eyes during actions, both during assaults and in questions of honour, leads me to include this topic in this discourse of mine. Many want you to keep your eyes fixed to your enemy's face during combat. Others assert you should always watch the point of your opponent's sword. </p><br />
<p>I contradict both of these views. I say that keeping your eye on the point is of no use in combat, since it is unlikely your enemy's point ever stays still. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore it is so fine that when it is brandished at speed, someone who trusts in this proposition greatly deceives themselves; knowing full well that sharp swords are not like swords in schools with a button, which is rather large, although some schools might not use them. Therefore I consider this proposition in my own manner. </p><br />
<p>I also criticise the other opinion, of watching your enemy's face, because while keeping your eyes there it is unlikely you can understand and clearly discern the operations he performs with the sword. Often these are away from the face, and he might feint with his eyes to attack in one place, only to move the hand to offend elsewhere. </p><br />
<p>Therefore finding fault with both of the above opinions, I hold that another area is more appropriate, necessary, and without subjecting yourself to deceits more useful, which I will relate in due time in another treatise. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Fifteen – To those who greatly criticise cuts'''</p><br />
<p>Everyone must defend their profession with the rationales available, so I will not fail to show how mistaken are those who greatly criticise cuts in the practice of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Before opposing everything they state in favour of their position, I will explain the charges levelled against those who employ cuts. </p><br />
<p>The first is that cuts are not lethal, the second is that they are much shorter than thrusts, while cuts are further derided by the claim they are for brutes. </p><br />
<p>I refute the first by supposing, since death has taken many in our times by way of cuts, that no other reason is needed to affirm this truth. </p><br />
<p>I can counter the second with great ease, demonstrating how with the hand, and the same length of step and sword (when grasped), the same person can be wounded either by a cut or a thrust. This is better proved by experience than words (which I set out to do), as I have shown and performed many times in the presence of great princes. </p><br />
<p>I should raise a further consideration for those who criticise cuts, and it is this. When someone is confronted, and puts their hand to their sword to defend themself, do they negotiate with their enemy whether to use only thrusts (speaking of Tuscan lands)? If they can wound with both thrusts and cuts, then why not employ cuts, and learn to defend against them? </p><br />
<p>I can only believe that those who criticise cuts, understanding only thrusts, either have no power in their cuts, or do not know how to teach them (if they are masters), or have no time to practise them if they are students. </p><br />
<p>In every profession, to remain ahead of others you must pursue every possible avenue, even if indirect, but all the more so the true and good path, since every day in questions of honour we see that the majority of wounds are cuts to the hands, arms and face. For this reason swords with a hollow were invented.<ref> In the original simply ''spada con l'incavo''. It remains unclear whether Monesi is referring simply to a hollow-ground blade or deep fuller, or perhaps an indentation at the grip that might conceivably aid in cutting , like on some later sabres.</ref></p><br />
<p>Having explained the usefulness of cuts, I affirm once again that those who criticise them, claiming they are no good because they are for brutes, cause harm. An example of this is not keeping hold of the sword, so it falls to the ground, which has happened to many during simple assaults. Another is not having the ability to defend against cuts. I have useful advice to give in this regard, but to avoid being tedious, and admitting to discuss only superficial matters, I will not expound further, and will end my discourse of this subject. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Sixteen – Against numerous grips with the dagger'''</p><br />
<p>Having set myself to contradict falsehood with truth, I should say a few things on this subject. This is for those who strongly promote and encourage a multiplicity of grips with or against the dagger, many with a dagger and others unarmed, as something pertaining to the art of fencing. </p><br />
<p>I refute the quantity of grips described and delineated, and their operation, knowing very well as I have said elsewhere, that you do not negotiate with your opponent. This is from the many occurrences and events that are well-known without me having to describe them. </p><br />
<p>In fact I would dare say that the dagger is worse than the pistol, which can fail or misfire. The dagger is always loaded and ready to attack, and when someone has this weapon at their side and spots the opportunity to use it, I do not believe they will use it to threaten their enemy from distance. </p><br />
<p>Assuming they are not a coward, but resolute and courageous, they will approach as close as they have to. I doubt there will be time to counter, with any of these many grips that are supposed to defend against attacks, nor therefore would I say that dagger against dagger they could be of any benefit. </p><br />
<p>I will freely admit that some of the grips work in schools, of course, but as you know these daggers are without a point or a cutting edge. Many options can be proposed since there is no manifest danger. </p><br />
<p>I return to saying, that as a short weapon they are much quicker to draw, and more ready to wound. These grips are for the entertainment, and confusion, of students. This is what I have to say for now. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Seventeen – On a pike position that defends against any sort of missile weapon, including arquebus shots'''<ref> This is a clear reference to p.114-115 in ''Oplomachia'', the 1621 pike, halberd and musket treatise of [[Bonaventura Pistofilo]]. </p><br />
<p>''When an occasion arrives where you must grasp your sword, I urge you never to abandon your pike, whether it is broken or intact. Instead employ it at least to defend. Anyone can understand for themselves from figure 79, how useful this manner of holding the pike can be for defence.'' </p><br />
<p>''It protects against cavalry, infantry, and against any type of hand weapon; even against missile weapons such as javelins, darts, arrows, and similar arms, up to and including arquebus shots. As long as by chance they do not strike directly in the centre of the shaft, so that the balls instead skid aside, the man will be saved, as I have seen from experience.'' </p><br />
<p>''You must comport yourself such that everything is covered by the pike, maintaining your arm high and firmly extended. Your stance must be sufficiently wide for greater stability, with your sword ready to attack.'' </p><br />
<p>''If you then wish to return your sword to its sheath without abandoning the pike, or piece of haft left in your hand, figure 80 clearly demonstrates how without need for further explanation.''</ref></p><br />
<p>I have seen many authors publish thoughts which objectively can barely be sustained. This prompted me to highlight one marvellous opinion, held by a master not only of fencing but of many trades. </p><br />
<p>In one of his books, he assigns a posture with the sword in the right hand and a pike in the left, profiled towards that side like a barbican. He asserts it does not merely defend against cavalry and infantry, but from any sort of polearm, and also from arrows, javelins and even arquebus or musket shots. </p><br />
<p>The only caveat is that it must not hit the centre of the shaft, where it may break, which seems likely. I leave this to be pondered by anyone who professes the practice of arms. To authenticate this he claims to have seen it. </p><br />
<p>Emboldened by such a claim, I have taken common courage and confided to the pen that which was concealed in my mind. Because if such wonders have occurred they would refute not only my weak and poorly articulated arguments, but genuine and well-founded ones. </p><br />
<p>I do not blame that pikeman, whether his pike was whole or broken, if having to wield his sword he also employed his polearm. But with apologies, I can never have it believed that his haft could keep him safe from every attack, from every sort of weapon. Supposedly even the musket against which (the author says) the pike prevails, the musket ball skidding off one side or the other to be deflected without harm. </p><br />
<p>In truth I have not passed my years in war, where I might have witnessed such incidences, but have been in service of and enjoyed the company of many veteran soldiers. Foremost of all the Most Illustrious Sir Silvio Piccolomini of Aragon, a person of such esteem as is known throughout the world, having fulfilled many offices in war, for the Most Serene Highnesses of Tuscany and for other crowns. Yet I never heard from him or anybody else that the guard described is able to achieve what is claimed. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eighteen – Some admonishments for those who wear a sword'''</p><br />
<p>Any profession should be practised with every possible convenience, and a farmer who must be present when the grain is harvested in July should not wear a garment of heavy cloth.</p><br />
<p>Those who dedicate themselves to the profession of wearing a sword, so dangerous that we could say death always walks alongside it, in various respects should not wear any ornamentation of the body or clothes, or any other items that might disadvantage them when coming to blows. </p><br />
<p>An example more perilous than any other is high-heels, which can easily lead their owner to fall over. Or else sleeves that hang down from the tunic, which can subject someone who is confronted, or who confronts, to great trouble. </p><br />
<p>Likewise long hair, which when coming to grapple grants a clear advantage to the opponent, while bringing great danger to the bearer, even more so when curly in the extravagant style of today; also more specifically hair that comes to impede vision. </p><br />
<p>Also included among such impediments are clothes with large slashes, in the French fashion or in any other. They can cause no small detriment, being dangerous by hampering the drawing of weapons with the swiftness required. </p><br />
<p>I also wanted to mention those who carry daggers with a dangling rose. </p><br />
<p>This is for the benefit of all; because from the mishaps that have occurred, I am sure the impediments I have listed most often create danger for the lives of those who struggle with arms. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Nineteen – What moved me to write this discourse'''</p><br />
<p>Everything we do in this world has an end, and every endeavour wends towards its outcome. Therefore I felt it apt to declare in this final chapter, which motives moved me to stain these few sheets of paper (so to speak) with my coarse and ill-adapted thoughts, and to expose myself voluntarily to the censure of innumerable fine intellects. </p><br />
<p>The reason is that I have found infinite authors, who by means of the presses have professed to enrich the virtue of fencing by demonstrating various sorts of guards and means of combat, and numerous uses of weapons. Knowing that all these operations were shown for the simple practice of wielding a sword, I resolved to designate the true manner of exercising this profession seriously. It consists of nothing more than the simple assaults which are conducted for pleasure. </p><br />
<p>The reason for writing this discourse was none other than a real and genuine desire for the aficionados of this art to recognise the true method of practising it, to not further maltreat it, and to employ the advice provided for the benefit of their person. This is the motivation, as I have said previously, and the intention. </p><br />
<p>May the reader appreciate the willingness of my spirit; and may those habituated to Ciceronian eloquence, and to the exquisite vivacity of extraordinary conceptions, pity my rude pen, whose lowly scribbles have aspired only to reveal the truth. </p><br />
<p>Lastly I wanted to set out how having learned the voids and traverses, I found them ill-suited to real combat with a sharp sword, and I criticise them. </p><br />
<p>Although I praise cuts in practice for their excellent defence, even more so at night where they are the quickest blow to find their target, I do not wish praise them by themselves, I commend them when mixed with a good many thrusts. A dagger can interrupt and defend against thrusts, but is comfortably negated by cuts. </p><br />
<p>And here I come to a close. If God grants me health in months and not years I hope to bring forth fruit that is useful, with the most straightforward method, apt for real combat, distinguishing the characteristics of different people: whether large, powerful, small or weak, with appropriate rules. </p><br />
<p>All in honour of our Lord God, and the most Blessed Virgin Mary. </p><br />
<p>'''THE END. ''' </p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Copyright and License Summary<br />
| width = 100%<br />
}}<br />
For further information, including transcription and translation notes, see the [[Talk:{{PAGENAME}}|discussion page]].<br />
<br />
<section begin="sourcebox"/>{{sourcebox header}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Translation<br />
| authors = [[Piermarco Terminiello]]<br />
| source link = http://sword.school/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Monesi-Translation-1.pdf<br />
| source title = Objections and Admonishments on the Subject of Fencing By Jacopo Monesi (1640)<br />
| license = educational<br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox footer}}<section end="sourcebox"/><br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
<br />
{{Regional Italian traditions}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Translation]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Rapier]]<br />
[[Category:Dagger]]<br />
<br />
{{reflist|2}}<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Monesi, Jacopo}}</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Terenziano_Ceresa&diff=120634Terenziano Ceresa2020-12-12T11:27:35Z<p>P Terminiello: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = [[name::Terenziano Ceresa]]<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = The Hermit<br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = <br />
| birthplace = Parma<br />
| deathdate = <br />
| deathplace = <br />
| resting_place = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set:occupation=Fencing master}}<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = <br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = Tommaso Palunci<br />
<br />
| period = <br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| subject = <br />
| movement = <br />
| notableworks = ''[[L'Esercizio della spada regolato con la perfetta idea della scherma (Terenziano Ceresa)]]'' (1641)<br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= <br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| partner = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| influences = {{plainlist<br />
| [[Salvator Fabris]]<br />
| [[Ridolfo Capoferro]]<br />
}}<br />
| influenced = <br />
| awards = <br />
| signature = <br />
| website = <br />
| translations = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
'''Terenziano Ceresa''' was a [[century::17th century]] [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing master]]. Little is known about his life, although he describes himself as a native of Parma, and was nicknamed “The Hermit”, apparently due to his disdain for social contact. He appears to have been active in Ancona, where his treatise was published and where his patron resided.<br />
<br />
In 1641, he published a treatise on fencing “more from the insistence of patrons than the impulse of my nature, inimical to the presses” entitled ''[[L'Esercizio della spada regolato con la perfetta idea della scherma (Terenziano Ceresa)| L'Esercizio della spada regolato con la perfetta idea della scherma]]'' ("The Practice of the Sword Governed by the Perfect Conception of Fencing"), dedicated to his patron and student Tommaso Palunci, a nobleman from Ancona.<br />
<br />
The treatise discusses the sword alone and the sword and dagger, and appears to develop the ideas presented by [[Salvator Fabris]] and [[Ridolfo Capoferro]]. Specifically: Ceresa describes a passing play from out of measure, reminiscent of the ''andare di risolutione'' from Fabris’ Book II, although Ceresa employs ''quarta'' as opposed to the ''terza'' preferred by Fabris; and Ceresa nominates a fifth and sixth guard (in addition to the usual four) which appear to correspond to these guards as presented by Capoferro.<br />
== Treatise ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Ceresa, Terenziano}}<br />
{{Early Italian masters}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Rapier]]<br />
[[Category:Rapier and Dagger]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Ridolfo_Capo_Ferro_da_Cagli&diff=120630Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli2020-12-09T21:25:14Z<p>P Terminiello: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = [[name::Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli]]<br />
| image = File:Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli portrait.png<br />
| imagesize = 250px<br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = 16th century<br />
| birthplace = <br />
| deathdate = 17th century<br />
| deathplace = <br />
| resting_place = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set: occupation=Fencing master }}<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = <br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = Federico Ubaldo della Roevere<br />
<br />
| period = <br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| subject = <br />
| movement = <br />
| notableworks = ''[[Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli)|Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della<br/>Scherma]]'' (1610)<br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= <br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=[[Michael Chidester]]<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| partner = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| influences = [[Camillo Agrippa]]<br />
| influenced = [[Sebastian Heußler]]<br />
| awards = <br />
| signature = <br />
| website = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
'''Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli''' (Ridolfo Capoferro, Rodulphus Capoferrus) was a [[century::17th century]] [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing master]]. He seems to have been born in the town of Cagli in the Province of Pesaro e Urbino, and was a resident of Siena, Tuscany. Little is known about the life of this master, though the dedication to Federico Ubaldo della Roevere, the young son of Duke Francesco Maria Feltrio della Roevere, may indicate that he was associated with the court at Urbino in some capacity. The statement at the beginning of Capo Ferro's treatise describing him as a "master of the great German nation"<ref>Capo Ferro da Cagli, Ridolfo. ''[[Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli)|Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma]]''. Siena, 1610. [[Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/10|p 1]].</ref> likely signifies that he was faculty at the University of Siena, either holding a position analogous to dean of all German students, or perhaps merely the fencing master who taught the German students.<br />
<br />
At the age of 52, Capo Ferro authored a treatise on the [[rapier]] entitled ''[[Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli)|Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma]]'' ("Great Representation of the Art and Use of Fencing"); it was published in Siena in 1610, but refers to Federico by the ducal title. Though this treatise is highly praised by modern fencing historians, it is neither comprehensive nor particularly innovative and does not seem to have been influential in its own time.<br />
<br />
== Treatise ==<br />
<br />
This concordance uses the watercolor illustrations from the 1629 edition where they are available, except for a few in which the paint obscures the actual fencing actions. You can view all of the painted illustrations on the treatise page.<br />
<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Preface<br />
| width = 120em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>Illustrations<br/>from the 1610</p><br />
! <p>{{rating|B}}<br/>by [[William Wilson]] and [[W. Jherek Swanger]]</p><br />
! <p>Transcription (1610){{edit index|Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf}}<br/>by [[Società d’Arme dell’Aquila]]</p><br />
! <p>Transcription (1632)</p><br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro Title 1610.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''Great Representation of the Art and Use of Fencing by Ridolfo Capo Ferro of Cagli,''' Maestro of the Most High German Nation, in the Famous City of Siena.</p><br />
<br />
<p>Dedicated to the Most Serene Signore Don Federigo Feltrio della Rovere, Prince of the State of Urbino.</p><br />
<br />
<p>In Siena, at the underporch of the Pontani. Printed by Salvestro Marchetti and Camillo Turi.<br/><br/></p><br />
<br />
<p>With license of the Superiors, and with Privileges. 1610.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|10|lbl=Ttl}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="2" | [[File:Capo Ferro 1629 Coat of Arms small.png|400x400px|center|link=File:Capo Ferro 1629 Coat of Arms.png]]<br />
| <p>'''To the Most Serene Signore Don Francesco Maria Feltrio della Rovere, sixth Duke of Urbino.<ref>Capo Ferro dedicated his text to Federigo della Rovere (properly Federico Ubaldo della Rovere), the son of Francesco Maria Feltrio della Rovere (i.e. Francesco Maria II), sixth Duke of Urbino. Don Federico was born May 16, 1605, and was thus not yet five years old when Capo Ferro signed his dedication on April 8, 1610. Don Federico does not appear to have lived up to the hopes of the author, nor of Duke Francesco Maria—he is said to have slid into debauchery, and withdrew from Urbino to Pesaro. Shortly after having himself proclaimed Duke, he was found dead in bed on June 28, 1623, barely 18 years of age. It has never been resolved whether his demise was a result of drunkenness or treachery. At any rate, con''tempo''rary accounts indicate that when the Bishop of Pesaro related the news to Federico’s father, Duke Francesco Maria expressed neither surprise nor regret.</ref>'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Every father (Most Serene Signor Duke), in order that his children should acquire reputation, procures for them some place in some noble court, and of some protection, to provide for them the best that he can. Thus do I, which, finding the present book on the instruction of fencing born of the better part of me, attempt to place in court, and because more dear to me than any other are the progeny of my intellect, I plead with Your Highness to grant them some place in your court, which, being a perfect compendium of the world, considered perfect, shown in and of itself of so much beauty and goodness as is found in the world, the same is dedicated to the Most Serene Don Federigo, your son, recommending it to his protection, although a lad in child’s gowns, and in jests, and gay dances, it appears nonetheless that there are enfolded in his hands triumphs and spoils, and as young Hercules<ref>Literally Alcide, which was a nickname of Hercules, from the Greek “Alkeides” meaning descendant of Alceo.</ref> with infantile hand, not yet equal to the purpose, menaces the Hydra, slays the serpents, then in the generous shining of his aspect is seen the greatness of his ancestors, the magnanimity, the valor, and the innumerable other virtues, which have exhausted the greatest and most famous historians, and which will render him above every Prince, and named and illustrious; would they not prove sufficient to confer such eminence, in truth only the virtues of Your Excellency being in number and quality so great, that it rightly could come to be called a diligent imitator of the perfection of GOD? It is not to be marveled at, therefore, by Your Highness, if I long to introduce into your Most Serene House, and place under the protection of the Most Serene Prince, your son, this book of mine; but considering the singular graciousness, very characteristic of Your Highness and of his Most Serene Blood, I cannot but strongly hope that Your Highnesses, without regarding the baseness of the subject, will favor it fully with your most powerful favor. But whereas indeed it may not be proper for Your Highnesses to receive such baseness with such grace, consent at least (as I humbly beseech you) that it can stand alone in the public hall of your Royal Palace, and in the other public places of your ample Dominion, as much glory moreover will arise merely from the authority of having a place among those who are humbly dedicated to serving and revering Your Highnesses, for whom I pray to the Lord God for complete and perpetual happiness.</p><br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|12|lbl=i|p=1}} {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/13|1|lbl=ii|p=1}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>From Siena on the 8th of April, 1610.</p><br />
<br />
<p>Your Most Serene Highness’s Most Humble Subject, and Most Devoted Servant,<br/>Ridolfo Capo Ferro of Cagli.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/13|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="2" | [[File:Capo Ferro 1629 Portrait small.png|400x400px|center|link=File:Capo Ferro 1629 Portrait.png]]<br />
| <p>'''To The Gracious Reader'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli.</p><br />
<br />
<p>It is not my intention to hold you at bay with pompous and splendid words, in the recommending to you of the profession of arms that I practice. It is extolled in the due order of its merit, for which it is greatly prized and honored, and always praised, and the greatness and valor are commended of those who worthily carry the sword at their side; among whom today shines gloriously the Most Illustrious Signor Silvio Piccolomini, Grand Prior of the Religion of the Knights of Saint Stephen in Pisa, and General of the Artillery and Master of Chamber of S.A.S. because not only is he endowed with full and marvelous advantage of that of the sword, but also of every other chivalric art, as his heroic actions by the same, to the wonder of all, clearly make manifest. But to turn to the sword, I say it is the noblest weapon above all others, in whose handling the majority of the industry of the art of fencing is honorably employed; therefore according to my judgment, the carrying of arms does not alone constitute the entire work, and that is not what makes the essential difference between a completely valorous man, and a vile and cowardly one, but as well the profession that someone practices to know how to employ them valorously in legitimate defense of himself and of his homeland, which no one truly can do with honor, if he has not first humbled himself, and placed himself under the law and rules of the discipline of fencing. Which, in the manner of sharpened flint, and honing valor, reduces him to the apex of his true perfection. The reason being that this science is laudable and so overly precious, that rather it would be a hopeless work to want to undertake the task of recounting all of its excellence; I do not believe that any rebuke must fall upon me, because I have set myself to press it into terms of undoubtedly brief, infallible, and well ordered precepts, avoiding as much as possible the blind and dark confusions, the deceitful and fallacious uncertainties, and burdensome and ambitious long-windedness. Now, even as through recognition of my weak faculties, I do not presume to have the joy of success of the full response to the fervor of my most ardent desire, so am I assured that my sincere and cordial labor has not turned out to be accomplished in vain, deferring such to comparison to those who dealt with the same topic before me. Considering that such thing relied upon the virtue of that by whose favor all graces descend unto us, I hope fervently, by these more faithful instructions of mine that may serve no less useful and delightful to you than showy ones, for a small particle of that sweet display of the true glory, that it pleases the graceful spirits always to courteously offer to one who with sincerity of heart goes perpetually laboring in their honored services.</p><br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|16|lbl=v|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|17|lbl=vi|p=1}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli, age 52.'''</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|15|lbl=iv}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| class="noline" | <br />
| class="noline" | <p>'''General Table of the Art of Fencing'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>1. First chapter, of fencing in general.</p><br />
<br />
<p>2. In the second chapter is contained the definition of fencing and its explanation.</p><br />
<br />
<p>3. In the third is embraced the division of fencing, and is treated of its first part, which is posed in the knowledge of the sword.</p><br />
<br />
<p>4. In the fourth is treated of the second part of fencing, and of measure.</p><br />
<br />
<p>5. In the fifth is discussed ''tempo''.</p><br />
<br />
<p>6. In the sixth is treated of the posture of the body, and chiefly of the head.</p><br />
<br />
<p>7. In the seventh is treated of the body.</p><br />
<br />
<p>8. In the eighth, of the arms.</p><br />
<br />
<p>9. In the ninth, is treated of the thighs, legs, feet, and of the pace.</p><br />
<br />
<p>10. In the tenth, is discussed of defense, and of the guard.</p><br />
<br />
<p>11. In the eleventh is treated of seeking the narrow measure.</p><br />
<br />
<p>12. In the twelfth is treated of striking.</p><br />
<br />
<p>13. In the thirteenth, of the dagger.</p><br />
| class="noline" | {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|14|lbl=iii}}<br />
| class="noline" | <br />
<br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = ''The Art of Fencing''<br />
| width = 120em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>Illustrations<br/>from the 1610</p><br />
! <p>{{rating|B}}<br/>by [[William Wilson]] and [[W. Jherek Swanger]]</p><br />
! <p>Transcription (1610){{edit index|Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf}}<br/>by [[Società d’Arme dell’Aquila]]</p><br />
! <p>Transcription (1632)</p><br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>'''Chapter 1:'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''Of Fencing in General.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>[1] There is nothing in the world which Nature, wise mistress and benign mother of the universe, with greater genius, and more diligent regard, provides Man for the conservation of his self (of which, more so than any other noble creature, he shows himself very dear of its safety), than the singular privilege of the hand, with which not only does he go procuring all things necessary for the sustenance of his life, but arming himself yet with the sword, noblest instrument of all, he protects and defends himself against any assault whatsoever of inimical force; following nonetheless the strict rule of true valor, and of the art of fencing.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/18|1|lbl=1}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[2] Hence one can clearly discern how necessary to man, how useful, and honorable may be the said discipline, and how it is that to everyone it may be necessary, and good, and maximally in demand to those armed with singular valor who are inclined to the noble profession of the military, to which this science is subordinate in the guise of an alternative or subservient discipline, as is the part to the whole, and the end of the middle is subject to the final end.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/18|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[3] The aim of fencing is the defense of self, from whence it derives its name; because “to fence” does not mean other than defending oneself,<ref>There is a play on words occurring in this passage. In Italian, “fencing” is ”scherma”, and “to fence” is “schermire” while “protection” is ”schermo”. “Defense”, however, while etymologically related in English, is not in Italian (the word is “difesa”).</ref> hence it is that “protection” and “defense” are words of the same meaning; whence one recognizes the value and the excellence of this discipline is such that everyone should give as much care thereunto, as they love their own life, and the security of their native land, being obligated to spend that lovingly and valorously in the service thereof.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/18|3|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[4] Thence it is also seen that defense is the principal action in fencing, and that no one must proceed to offense, if not by way of legitimate defense.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/18|4|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[5] The efficient causes of this discipline are four: reason, nature, art, and practice.<ref>I.e. reason, nature, art, and practice are causes, whose effect is the discipline of fencing. It is the causes that make the physical manifestation of fencing what it is.</ref> Reason, as director of nature. Nature, as potent virtue. Art, as regulator and moderator of nature. Practice, as minister of art.</p><br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/18|5|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/19|1|lbl=2|p=1}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[6] Reason directs nature, and the human body in fencing is its defense; within reason is considered judgment and will. Judgment discerns and understands that which must be done for its defense. Will inclines and stimulates it to its self-preservation.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/19|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[7] In the body, which in the role of servant executes the commandments of reason, will be considered in the frame, proper size; in the eyes, vitality; and in the legs, in the torso, and in the arms, agility, vigor, and quickness.</p><br />
|{{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/19|3|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[8] Nature directs and prepares matter, and the sketch, and the arrangement to some degree in order to receive the final form and perfection of the art.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/19|4|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[9] Art regulates nature, and with safer escort guides us according to the infallible truth, and by the ordinance of its precepts to the true science of our defense.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/19|5|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[10] Practice conserves, augments, and stabilizes the strength of art and of nature, and more so than does knowledge, instills in us the sage knowledge of many particular details.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/19|6|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[11] Art regards nature and sees that owing to the small capacity of matter, it cannot do all that which it intends to do, and yet considers in many details its perfections and imperfections, and in the role of architect seizes thereof and makes some beautiful model, and thus refines and sharpens the rough-hewn things of nature, rendering them little by little to the height of their perfection.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/19|7|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[12] From nature art has undertaken in defending oneself the ordinary pace; the guard of ''terza'' for resting in defense, and those of ''seconda'' and ''quarta'' for offense; the ''tempo'', or the measure; as well as the posture of the body, with the torso now placed above the left leg for self-defense, now thrown forward and carried on the right leg in order to offend.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/19|8|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[13] Because without doubt the first offenses were those of the fists, in the doing of them is seen the ordinary pace. It is also seen that many perform the ''terza'', the ''seconda'', and the ''quarta'', punching a lot in ''tempo'' and measure.</p><br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/19|9|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[14] Against this offense of the fist, of course was found the art of the stick, and this defense not yet sufficing, iron, and I believe that of this material were made little by little many diverse weapons, but always one more perfect than all others, owing to the multiplicity of its offenses, to wit that the sword was discovered to be the perfect weapon, and proportioned to the proper distance in which mortals naturally can defend themselves.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/20|1|lbl=3}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[15] The weapons which are of length exceeding the distance of natural defense and offense are ill suited and abhorrent for use in civic converse, and the excessively short ones are insidious and of danger to life; owing to which, in republics founded upon justice of good laws, and of good customs, it always was, and is, prohibited to carry arms of which can be born treacherous and heedless homicides. On the contrary, in the ancient Roman republic, the true ideal of a good government, the use of arms was entirely prohibited, and to no one, however noble and great that there was, was it licit to carry a sword or other weapon, except in war, and those who in time of peace were discovered with arms, were proceeded against as against murderers.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/20|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[16] And the Roman soldiers, immediately upon arriving home, put down their arms together with their short uniforms, and soldiery, and assumed again their long civil robes, and attended to the studies and the arts of peace, because no Roman exercised the body (as says Salustius) without the mind, each one attending, beyond the studies of war, to every office of peace, and by such longing they endured the burdens of war, and therefore immediately upon the end of war, no more was heard of captain, nor of soldier, nor of military wages.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/20|3|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[17] In these times soldiers are a greater burden to Princes and to Lords, and more so to the populace in times of peace than in war, and because they are not trained in other studies than those of war, they hate peace, and much of the time they are the authors of turbulence and wretched counsel.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/20|4|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[18] But turning to our matter, I say that the sword is the most useful and just arm, because it is proportioned to the distance at which offense is naturally performed, and all arms, to the degree that they differ from this distance of natural defense and offense, are to that extent more bestial and adverse to nature, and therefore useless to civic converse; the one is the way of virtue and of true reason, and the other burdensome and coarse, from which nature never departs, keeping company with sin and ignorance, and sliding about by many routes; one is the straight line, which none but the artful knows how to do; the oblique lines are infinite, and anyone can do them. Whence in our times we see offenses and defenses multiply themselves and the art unto infinity, human endeavor imitating nature from principles; and while it follows the traces thereof it is useful and advantageous to the human life, but as soon as it departs from the footprints of nature, it begins to degenerate from the nobility of its origin, and hurls itself into the snares of harmful fancy, and plunges human kind into the abyss of ignorance, leading it from the age of gold into the filthiness of mud.</p><br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/20|5|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/21|1|lbl=4|p=1}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[19] From the powers of nature, art, and practice, as causes effecting the defense of which we have treated up to this point, arise every advantage and disadvantage of arms, but they derive principally from the just height of body and from the length of the sword; because a man, large of frame, and that carries a sword proportioned to his body, without doubt will arrive at measure first. In consideration of this, in order to compensate for the natural imperfections of those found to be of inferior size, I believe that it is prohibited in certain lands to make the blade of one sword longer than another, because it seems unjust that one who is superior by nature should take advantage of art, it being necessary that the privilege of nature suffice him, without the manifest indignity (wanting to equalize him with those smaller, being unable to handicap him generally), of bestowing a sword of lesser length to him than to those who are small, who perchance could have other advantages of art and practice, which exceed those of nature, in which cases human judgment is insufficient to provide for such particulars.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/21|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[20] The art of fencing is most ancient, and was discovered in the times of Ninus, King of the Assyrians, who, through use of the advantage of arms, was made monarch and patron of the world; from the Assyrians the monarchy passed to the Persians; the praise of this practice, through the valor of Cyrus, from the Persians, came to the Macedonians, from these to the Greeks, from the Greeks it was fixed in the Romans, who (as testifies Vegetius) brought to the field masters of fencing, whom they named “Campi ductores, vel doctores” which is to say, guides, or masters of the field, and these taught the soldiers the strikes of the thrust and the cut against a pole. Nowadays we Italians equally carry the boast in the art of fencing, although more in the schools than in the field, or in the use of the militia, considering that in these times war is made more with artillery, and with the arquebus, than with the sword, which moreover almost does not serve except for carrying out the victory.</p><br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/21|3|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/22|1|lbl=5|p=1}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[21] This discipline is art, and is not science, taking, however, the word “science” in its strictest sense, because it does not deal with things eternal, and divine, and that surpass the powers of human judgment, but rather it is art, not wrought, nor manual, but rather active, and serves very closely the civil science; because its effects pass together with its operation, in the manner of virtue, and having passed, they do not leave behind any kind of labor or of manufacture, as is common in the performance of the plebian and mechanical arts, all of which, although some of them are celebrated with the name of nobility, it surpasses and exceeds at great length.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/22|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[22] The materials of fencing are the precepts of defending oneself well with the sword; its form and its order are the truth of its rules, always true and infallible.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/22|3|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[23] But it is time at last, that, gathering up all that we have said to this point in brief words, we come to lay the foundation of this discipline, which is its true and proper definition, following the rule from which we will guide and direct the rest of all its precepts.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/22|4|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>'''Chapter 2:'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''The Definition of Fencing, and Its Explanation.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>[24] Fencing is an art of defending oneself well with a sword.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/22|5|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[25] An art, because it is an assembly of perpetually true and well-ordained precepts, advantageous to civil converse.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/22|6|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[26] The truth is an arrangement of the precepts of fence; it must not be measured by the ignorance of some, who teach and write based upon their lengthy use of arms and not based upon knowledge; rather more often they make substance out of shadow and reason out of chance, mixing gourds with lanterns, and switching rapidly from one subject to another;<ref>John Florio in ''A Worlde of Wordes'' (1598) states that lanterns were once made from gourds—thus a gourd is metaphorically a lantern that cannot illuminate. The expression translated as “switching rapidly from one subject to another” is idiomatic in the original text, and a literal translation would have been unclear.</ref> but it must be esteemed in and of itself, and restricted to the truth of its nature.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/23|1|lbl=6}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[27] Their utility is manifest, because they teach the mode of defense that is very naturally just and honest, and that cannot be doubted to be of the greatest utility that is delivered to human life, because its effects are clearly discerned daily. For as the sword is a weapon well suited for defending oneself in the just distance in which one and the other can naturally offend, we see that the combatants, almost always resting in the defense, rarely come to the offense, which is the last remedy for saving their life, which they would not possess, if their weapons were disproportionate, that is, either greater or lesser than the natural defense requires.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/23|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[28] The aim which separates fencing from all other sciences, is to defend oneself well with, however, the sword.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/23|3|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>'''Chapter 3:'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''The Division of Fencing that is Posed in the Knowledge of the Sword.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>[29] There are two parts to fencing, the understanding of the sword, and its handling. The understanding of the sword is the first part of fencing, which teaches one to understand the sword with the purpose of handling it well.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/23|4|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[30] The sword, then, is a pointed arm of iron, and apt for defending oneself at the distance at which one and the other can naturally, and with bodily danger, offend.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/23|5|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[31] The material of the sword is the iron material of defense; without doubt it is found that it counters that of wood, which suffices little to beat aside and evade the injury that is customarily done daily by one to another.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/23|6|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[32] Its exterior form is that it is pointed; because if it were blunt, it would not serve to hold the adversary at the distance of natural offense.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/24|1|lbl=7}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[33] Its purpose is defense, which signifies chiefly to hold the adversary so distant that he cannot offend me, which sort of defense and natural limits enables it to be put into action, without injury from the one near me. And in the Latin tongue, as was already heard said with scholastic certainty, “defend” does not mean other than “avoid”, or to distance oneself from a thing that can harm, if one comes too near thereunto.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/24|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[34] Hence the words “to defend” signify “to offend”, and strike, which is the final and subsidiary remedy of defense, in case the enemy should pass beyond the boundary of the first defense, and advance himself near to such extent, that I came in danger of coming to harm from him, were I not to provide for myself; because of the fact that the enemy crosses the boundaries of defense, entering into those of offense, I am no longer obligated to carry any respect for the conservation of his life, as he comes toward me with whatever weapon suited to harm me, naturally, as I say, in the distance of being able to reach me as well.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/24|3|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[35] From the purpose of the sword, which is to defend oneself in the said distance, is its length to be measured.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/24|4|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[36] Therefore the sword has to be twice as long as the arm, and as much as my extraordinary pace, which length corresponds equally to that which is from my armpit down to the sole of my foot.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/24|5|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[37] There are two parts to the sword: the ''forte'' and the ''debole''. The ''forte'' begins from the hilt, extending as far as the middle of the blade; and the remainder is called the ''debole''. The ''forte'' is for parrying, and the ''debole'' for striking.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/24|6|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[38] The edge is false, and true. The true is that which faces downward when the hand rests in its natural position, which, turning itself out, or from inside, outwards from its natural orientation, makes the false edge. The first orientation, that is, of the true edge, is to be recognized in ''terza'', which is the position of the sword in guard, and the other, that is, of the false edge, will appear manifested in the positions of ''terza'',<ref>This seems somewhat peculiar, but “''terza''” is stated here again; perhaps “''quarta''” was intended.</ref> and ''seconda'', which are orientations of the sword, not in guard, but in striking.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/24|7|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[39] I divide only the ''debole'' into the true and false edges, and not the ''forte'', because this consideration does not happen to be made in the ''forte'', which serves no other purpose than to parry, and it would not be at all amiss were it without edge, and dull instead of sharp in the ''forte'' and the hilt, not only for gripping the sword, but also for covering oneself, and chiefly the head, while striking.</p><br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/24|8|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/25|1|lbl=8|p=1}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>'''Chapter 4:'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''On Measure.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>[40] Up until now we have discussed the first part of fencing, which consists of the understanding of the sword; now we commence to treat of the second part, which is that of its handling.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/25|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[41] The handling of the sword is the second part of fencing, which shows the way of handling the sword, and is distributed between the preparation of the defense, and defense itself; the preparation, and the first part of the handling of the sword, places the combatants in just distance, and in a convenient posture of body in order to defend themselves in ''tempo'', and it has two parts; in the first is discussed measure and ''tempo''.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/25|3|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[42] In the second is treated of the disposition of the members of the body.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/25|4|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[43] Measure is taken for a certain distance from one end to the other, as for example in the art of fencing is taken for the distance that runs from the point of my sword to the body of the adversary, which is wide or narrow. Accordingly, one takes a thing suitable for measuring the said distance, which in the use of fencing is the natural braccio,<ref>The braccio is literally the arm, but is also a unit of measure, the length of the arm.</ref> which measures all distances, and which in the exercise of this art has all the qualities and conditions that are expected of an accomplished measure.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/25|5|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[44] The measure is a just distance from the point of my sword to the body of my adversary in which I can strike him, according to which all the actions of my sword and defense are given direction.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/25|6|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[45] The narrow measure is of the foot, or of the right arm; the measure of the foot is of the fixed foot, or of the increased foot.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/25|7|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[46] The wide measure is, when with the increase of the right foot, I can strike the adversary, and this measure is the first narrow one.<ref>“…the first narrow one” i.e. “la ''prima stretta''”. This passage is problematic—“wide measure” may thus be taken as “the first narrow measure”, vis-à-vis the second narrow measure, the “fixed foot narrow measure” that is defined immediately following—see also line #112 which indicates two narrow measures, one of the fixed foot, and one of the increased pace, and also various references to the need to come to narrow measure before entering the ''tempo'' of striking. However, this conflicts with the definition of measure given in the “Definition of some terms”, #4, which identifies narrow measure as that of the fixed foot. Capo Ferro may use “''misura stretta''” in two senses, both the general sense of “in measure” and the more specific sense of “fixed foot measure”. Alternately, “la ''prima stretta''” may be taken as “the first closure” in the sense of a grasping. Regardless, this conveys that wide measure is the first distance achieved which is “in measure”.</ref></p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/26|1|lbl=9}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[47] The fixed foot narrow measure is that in which, by only pushing my body and legs forward, I can strike the adversary.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/26|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[48] The narrowest measure is when the adversary strikes at wide measure, and I can strike him in his advanced and uncovered arm, either that of the dagger or that of the sword, with my left foot back, followed by the right while striking.<ref>This appears to describe an arrest with reassemblement.</ref></p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/26|3|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[49] The first, wide, measure is of a ''tempo'' and a half; the second is of a whole ''tempo''; and the third is of a half ''tempo'', with respect to the three distances, which, according to their size, require more or less speed of ''tempo''; and this is enough to have said of measure. Now follows the doctrine of ''tempo''.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/26|4|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>'''Chapter 5:'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''Of ''tempo''.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>[50] The word “''tempo''” in fencing comes to signify three different things; chiefly it signifies a just length of motion or of stillness that I need in order to reach a definite end for some plan of mine, without considering the length or shortness of that ''tempo'', only that I finally arrive at that end. Even as in the art of fencing, in order to come to measure, I need a certain and just ''tempo'' of motion and of stillness, it doesn’t matter whether I arrive there either early or late, provided that I reach the desired place. We pose the example that I move myself to seek the measure, and that I go very slowly to find it, and that my adversary is as much fixed of body, so that I find it; although I have arrived somewhat late, nonetheless not at all can it jeopardize my plan because I have arrived in ''tempo'', considering that, as much length of time as I am myself in motion, precisely so much had my adversary fixed himself; thus my motion equals the ''tempo'' of the stillness of my adversary, and his stillness measures my motion precisely; and because, in remaining in guard and seeking the measure, only the correspondence of the ''tempo'' that the combatants mutually consume in moving and in fixing themselves is to be considered, to the end that they arrive at a certain point of measure, in light of this, in the said actions the speed of the motion and the shortness of the stillness do not come into consideration, but rather through taking the just measure, it is more useful that they go, as is often said, with a leaden sandal, with the body counterpoised, and placed over the left leg in ordinary pace, a posture of body most well-suited for coming with consideration and respect to apprehend the due measure.</p><br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/26|5|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/27|1|lbl=10|p=1}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[51] Next this word “''tempo''” is taken in the sense of quickness, in respect of the length or brevity of the motion or of the stillness. Thus in the art of fencing there are three distances, and different measures of striking, and through this again are found three distinct ''tempo''s, and here it is not wished to consider only that one comes to a certain end, but that one arrives also with a certain quickness and velocity, because the wide measure, that is, of the increased foot, requires a ''tempo'', that is, a persevering of stillness or of movement, of the swords or of the bodies of the combatants, fairly brief, but not so brief as the narrow measure of the fixed foot; and the narrowest measure requires the fastest ''tempo'', because each little bit that I move myself with the point of my sword, and each little bit that my adversary fixes himself, in the distance of narrowest measure, suffices me to effect my plan; because this ''tempo'' is briefest, therefore will we call it half a ''tempo'',<ref>“…half a ''tempo''” i.e. “''mezzo tempo''”.</ref> and consequently the ''tempo'' that is spent in striking from the less narrow measure of the fixed foot will comprise a whole ''tempo'', and the last ''tempo'', which is employed in striking from wide measure, which is of the increased foot, will be a ''tempo'' and a half.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/27|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[52] In the first ''tempo'', which is that of seeking the wide measure, the quickness of motion and of stillness are not considered, and therefore it is not necessary to measure it by half of a whole ''tempo'', which manners of ''tempo'' are only to be regarded in striking. Accordingly, the posture of the body in striking is entirely contrary to that which is observed in seeking the narrow measure, because the first posture is comfortable for going little by little to find the narrow measure, and the other is bold, and with speed one hurls oneself to strike.</p><br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/27|3|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[53] ''tempo'' is not other than the measure of the stillness and of the motion; the stillness of the point of my sword measures the motion of the body of my adversary, and the motion of my adversary with his body measures the stillness of the point of my sword. Now, so that this ''tempo'' may be just, it is necessary that for as much length of ''tempo'' as the body of my adversary is fixed, for so much is the point of my sword to be moved, and consequently, I pose this example: I find myself in wide measure, with a will to come to narrow measure; now I move the point of my sword in order to arrive at the said terminus; meanwhile as I move myself it is necessary that my adversary fix his body, and thus the stillness of body of my adversary is the measure of the movement of the point of my sword; and, however, if I moved myself to strike before my adversary finished fixing himself, because the ''tempo'' would be unequal, I would move myself in vain, or not without great danger to myself. We pose the case, that both of us move ourselves to seek measure, and the one and the other set themselves upon intending to have found it; both going to invest themselves thereof intervene so that neither one will hit, because the ''tempo'' in which they move themselves to strike won’t be just, in respect of the distance to which they must first arrive; in this example it is seen that the motion of my point measures the motion of the body of my adversary, and the motion of the point of my adversary measures the motion of my body. However in the times to come, many strike each other in contra ''tempo'', having come at the same time to narrow measure.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/28|1|lbl=11}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[54] The ''tempo'' that has to be considered in wide measure requires patience, and that of the narrow measure, quickness in striking and in exiting.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/28|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[55] The ''tempo'' of the narrow measure is lost either through shortcoming of nature, or through defect of art and of practice.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/28|3|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[56] Through shortcoming of nature, by too much slowness of the legs, of the arm, and of the body, which derives either from weakness or from too much bodily weight, as we see occur in men who are either too fat or too thin.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/28|4|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[57] Through defect of art, when one does not learn to find the narrow measure as is necessary, with the body supported by the left leg, with the ordinary pace, and with the right arm extended, because the things must move in company in order to produce one single effect, yet they have to move in a just distance; but if the point of the sword is very advanced and the leg back, or if the leg is advanced and the arm back, then the sword will never be carried with that promptness, justness, and speed, which is required; by which, those who approach to seek the narrow measure with disproportionately distanced limbs, although they arrive there, nonetheless cannot be in the ''tempo'' of striking, because they would lack the best ''tempo'' of the narrow measure, which is that of prompt justness, or quickness.</p><br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/28|5|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/29|1|lbl=12|p=1}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[58] Through lack of practice, ''tempo'' is lost for the reason that the body is not yet well limber in its limbs, or when the students acquire some wretched habit, going back to the vanities of feints, and disengages, and counter-disengages, and similar things done as such.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/29|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[59] From this, which we have said so far, everyone will easily be able to understand to be falsest that which many say, that ''tempo'' is taken solely from the movement that my adversary makes with his body and sword; but it is necessary to have equal regard for my own motion, and not only for my motion and that of my adversary, but as well to our stillnesses; because ''tempo'' is not solely a measure of motion, but of motion and stillness.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/29|3|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[60] And concluding this matter of ''tempo'', I say that every motion and every stillness of mine and of my adversary together make a ''tempo'', to such extent that one measures the other.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/29|4|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>'''Chapter 6:'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''Of the Body, and Chiefly of the Head.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>[61] The head truly is the chief thing in this practice; it lies indeed in its due place, because it is that which recognizes measures and ''tempos'', hence it is necessary that it comes to be deployed in that place where it can serve as the sentinel, and reveal the land from every side.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/29|5|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[62] The placement of the head, when lying in guard, and in seeking measure, is then just and convenient when it makes one straight line together with the sword; because in this manner the eyes will see all the stillnesses and movements of the sword and of the body of the adversary, and will recognize immediately the parts that have to be offended and defended; the head, being posted on the said parts, is therefore able to cast all the visual rays in a straight line, which they could not do if the head were borne higher or lower, so that the rays could not radiate from every side, and thus they would not be quick to seize or flee the ''tempo''.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/30|1|lbl=13}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[63] In lying in guard and in seeking measure, the head is rested upon the left shoulder, and in striking it leans upon the right shoulder.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/30|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[64] In lying in guard and in seeking measure, the head has to be withdrawn as much as is possible, and in striking one wishes to propel it forward as much as one can.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/30|3|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[65] In striking, care will be taken that the head will be somewhat more to one side than to the other, according to whether one will strike to the inside or the outside, so that it will be covered by the hilt and the sword arm.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/30|4|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[66] Other placements and movements of the head which are made in passing, in fleeing, and in moving the body out of the way in diverse sorts of guards, and in infinite means of striking, cannot be accepted as good ones, because they deviate from the straight line, which is called by me that which divides my body through the flank together with that of the adversary, as on the contrary the oblique line I name that which runs outside my body or that of my adversary,<ref>This is the only place wherein definitions are given of the straight line and the oblique line, critical technical terms employed<br />
frequently throughout the text.</ref> of one party as of the other, following the rule by which all of the play of fencing has to be that of measuring.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/30|5|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>'''Chapter 7:'''<br />
<br />
<p>'''Of the Body.'''<ref>“Of the body” (“della vita”) refers here to the trunk.</ref><br />
<br />
<p>[67] In resting in guard and in seeking measure, the body needs to be bent, and slopes to the rear, such that the angle which it makes with the right thigh is barely visible, and with the left thigh it comes to make an obtuse angle, so that the left shoulder aligns with the line of the left foot, and the right shoulder evenly divides the pace of the guard in half.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/31|1|lbl=14}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[68] In striking the body is propelled forward, so that the right thigh forms an obtuse angle with the body, and the point of the shoulder aligns with the point of the right foot, and the left thigh and calf are carried forward through an oblique line, extended to such a degree that the left shoulder divides the pace that is made through the middle.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/31|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[69] And when one goes to strike, the body needs to be pushed forward in a straight line, so that through the diversity of striking, outside and inside, leaning somewhat more to one than to the other side, it will deviate the least from the straight line.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/31|3|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[70] The objective of why the body should be thus angled, and this is of prime importance, is because in this way the parts which can be offended are more distanced, and more covered, and better guarded, and defended; because the more distant a target is, the more difficult it is to strike it; thereby in striking blows are carried longer, faster, and more vigorously, for as much further away as offenses originate, to such degree are they safer and better.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/31|4|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[71] In addition to the bending of the body and of its form which it takes in placing oneself in guard, in seeking measure, and in striking, is to be considered similarly its skew,<ref>The “skew” of the body is its profile.</ref> which diminishes its width, as the bend diminishes and contracts its height.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/31|5|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[72] The skew of the body needs to be such that no more is shown than the middle of the breast, not only in fixing oneself in guard, and in seeking measure, but also in striking, because as much less of the breast is shown, so much more does one walk and strike in a straight line, and as much more is uncovered, so much more of measure and of ''tempo'' is lost.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/32|1|lbl=15}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[73] They who like the guards, and counterguards, and ''stringer''ing here, there, above, and below, the feints, and counter-feints, the diagonal paces, the voids of the legs, and the crossings, necessarily form and move their bodies in many strange ways; which, as things done by chance and that were founded in no reasons that were sound and true, we will leave to their authors.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/32|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>'''Chapter 8:'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''Of the Arms.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>[74] In resting in guard and in seeking measure, the right arm must rest somewhat bent, so that the upper arm is extended in an oblique line, so low that the elbow meets the bend of the body, and is in line with the right knee; and the forearm, withdrawn somewhat, forms a straight line together with the sword.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/32|3|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[75] In resting in guard and in seeking measure, the left arm together with the left thigh and calf have to serve as the counterweight of the body and the right thigh and calf; and the upper arm needs to be extended, so that it is in line with the left knee, and meets the bend of the left flank; and its forearm needs to be somewhat tucked in to oneself, in order by its motion to help to propel the body forward in striking, which it would not do, if it were neglected.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/32|4|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[76] In striking, the right arm needs to be extended in a straight line, turning the hand and forearm upward, sometimes in, sometimes out, depending on the side from which one strikes.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/32|5|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[77] In striking, the left arm needs to be so extended that it makes a straight line with the right arm, turning it according to whether one strikes outside or inside; because each iota that one carries the arm forward, or that one fixes it in an oblique line, would significantly diminish the measure, and the quickness of the ''tempo''.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/33|1|lbl=16}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[78] The sword is regarded entirely as one limb with the arm, and it has to form a straight line with the forearm, which is properly aligned with the fold of the right flank, and has to divide the height and width of the body into two equal parts, because in resting in guard and seeking measure, the reason why it will have to return properly to the fold of the flank is this: that every time that it is in this location, it will be quickest to come to the aid of all the parts that can be offended, being that the upper parts, that is, those from the top of the head down to the fold of the flank, are of a measure with the parts beneath from the fold of the flank down to the knee; and it doesn’t occur that one has to regard the calf, which cannot be offended in the natural distance of the offense of the increased feet without excessively leading one’s body forward into manifest peril.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/33|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[79] The location and posture of the sword in striking is entirely one with that of its arm, turning the false edge around in striking, according to whether it strikes outside or inside.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/33|3|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[80] Take heed diligently that the point of your sword always is aimed at the uncovered parts of the enemy, which are those of the right flank and right thigh, and do not let anyone divert you from this intention by uncovering their left side, which is fallacious measure and ''tempo'', being that it may be taken away in an instant, which doesn’t occur with the parts of the right side, which necessarily are made targets.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/33|4|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[81] It is not good to rest in guard with the arm tucked in, because it does not cover the measure well in which I am found; it is equally not good for seeking measure, because the point of the sword is too far from the body of the adversary. Whence one cannot take the proper measure, lacking thereby the ability to strike in ''tempo''; in addition to this, the arm thus retired does not keep the adversary from the just distance wherein he can strike me, and thus it does not do its duty. Similarly, the sword is chiefly found thereby to not be useful in striking, because it will not be able to strike in the measure of the increased foot, as resting with its point so far from the adversary it cannot properly take the said measure, which is as much more excellent than the narrower measures, as it is to strike the enemy from afar than from nearby. Furthermore it is not good for launching the blow, which together with the arm is discharged by the pressure that makes the body advance, and it is not true that the extension of the arm increases the measure, but rather by the extension of the body, and of the forward pace, because the forward leg and the body, while extending the arm with the sword, is poised over the left leg, on which is supported the entire body and right leg;<ref>I.e. the weight of the body and right leg are carried on the left leg while in guard.</ref> which left leg during the launching throws the body and the thigh forward onto the right leg, which in exchange forms a pillar and buttress, sustaining all of the weight of the body, pushed forward to launch the blow.<ref>In the lunge, the weight is on the right leg.</ref></p><br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/33|5|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/34|1|lbl=17|p=1}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[82] I cannot approve of having the arm fully extended in guard and seeking measure, because it forces the sword out of its place which is proper and well suited to defend one’s own life, and to offend that of the adversary; and in striking it does not aid the body in launching the blow, and carries it with less vigor; other locations, and movements of the arm, are not desired in the play of striking in the straight line.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/34|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>'''Chapter 9:'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''Of the Thighs, Calves, of the Feet, and of the Pace.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>[83] In resting in guard and in seeking the narrow measure, the right calf with the thigh and its foot point directly forward, and lean back in an oblique line, in the manner of a slope; and the left calf with the thigh and its foot point straight toward your left side, with the knee bent as far as possible, so that the inner side of the heel directly aligns with the point of the right heel.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/34|3|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[84] In striking, the knee of the right leg is bent as far as it can be, so that the calf and the thigh come to make the most acute angle; and on the contrary, the left calf with its thigh is extended forward in an oblique line in the manner of a slope.</p><br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/34|4|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/35|1|lbl=18|p=1}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[85] The pace is a just distance between the legs, as much in fixing as in moving oneself, well suited for placing oneself in guard to seek measure, and to strike; in regard of distance, the pace is either entirely narrow, or a half pace, or a just pace, or extraordinary.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/35|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[86] In the use of fencing, I know of no other pace so good as the ordinary, in which the body rests comfortably and carried well in guard, for seeking the narrow measure with a little increase of pace; wanting to seek it with smaller paces, the foundation would be overly narrow and weak; it would not support the weight of the body, and one would become disconcerted, if, not little by little, but rather with paces and half paces one sought the measure, and losing the ''tempo'', would not discharge the blow with so much speed; and if they are indeed the said good paces, they will serve outside of the measure for walking, and placing oneself in guard, and for returning into it.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/35|3|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[87] The pace of fencing, we will, for better understanding, name “military”, or “soldierly”, dividing it into the ordinary and the extraordinary. The ordinary is that in which one rests in guard and seeks the narrow measure. And the extraordinary is that into which one moves, lengthening the pace forward to strike.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/35|4|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[88] The pace, regarding its position, can be considered in several ways, forward, back, sideways, and diagonally, and this with the legs crossed or not, equally whether a single leg is moved or both, and whether the legs are moved to make an entire pace, either to diminish it or to change its position in order to allow the body to retreat or void.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/35|5|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[89] It appears to me, that there are not but two main ways of fixing and moving oneself with respect to the legs. The first way is that in which one appears in guard, and seeking the narrow measure, or avoiding it; the other serves for striking.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/35|6|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[90] I do not know that stepping sideways serves other than to make a good show,<ref>I.e. to pretend, to perform a pretense or feint</ref> and display animosity, and to scout out the strength of the adversary; when somebody goes to put himself in guard in this fashion of stepping, you will be able to avail yourself of all the narrow and just paces, although in my judgment in this the ordinary pace still carries the boast.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/35|7|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[91] Nonetheless there are those that avail themselves of this stepping to the side when the adversary is poised on an oblique line with the sword in order to ''stringer'' him on the outside, but to me it seems that a more expeditious way would be to seek the narrow measure immediately by the straight line, rather than to follow a play outside of the rule. As well, there are those who avail themselves thereof through fading back of the body, while their adversary comes to strike them encountering him in ''quarta'' or in ''seconda'', either outside or inside, according to the occasion, but they would be equally able to encounter him, having in consideration the ''tempo'' and the measure of ''quarta'' and of ''seconda'' in the straight line, without traversing their legs.</p><br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/35|8|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/36|1|lbl=19|p=1}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[92] The crossing of the left foot toward the right side in performing an ''inquartata'' is worthless; it can make of itself a shortcoming, because it hinders the body and shortens the motion of the right arm in striking, with loss of ''tempo''; the void of the right leg toward the left side of the adversary in order to perform an ''inquartata'' is equally a thing done by chance, and sooner serves for an amicable assault than for the trial or dispute.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/36|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[93] The ''passata''s are not good, because they lose measure and ''tempo'', because while one is moving the left leg, at the same time the torso, and the right leg, and the sword arm, cannot move to strike with due speed, nor without danger of response.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/36|3|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[94] Retreats are necessary principally in striking, because in the act of striking I necessarily uncover my body, and yet if I fixed myself too much it could easily occur that my adversary could make a response to me.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/36|4|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>'''Chapter 10:'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''Of Defense, of the Guard.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>[95] Up until now we have dealt with the first part of the handling of the sword, which has taught us the just distance, and the true position of all the members of the body, which are required for defense; now we will speak of that very same defense.</p><br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/36|5|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/37|1|lbl=20|p=1}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[96] Defense is the second part of handling of the sword, which trains us to employ the sword for our defense, and has two parts, of which the first is the defensive, or guard, as we wish to call it, and the other is the offensive.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/37|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[97] The guard is a position of the arm and of the sword extended in a straight line in the middle of the offendable parts, with the body well accommodated in its ordinary pace in order to hold the enemy at a distance, from any offense, and in order to offend him in case he approaches to endanger you.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/37|3|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[98] ''terza'' then is exclusively a guard, not indeed posed with the hilt outside the knee, but so that it properly divides the body though the middle, neither high nor low, but properly in the middle of the parts that cannot be covered, in order to be equally prompt and near to all of their offenses and defenses.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/37|4|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[99] ''prima'' and ''seconda'' are not guards, because they are not well suited for seeking measure, and uncover too much of the body, and are not equally near to all the parts of the body that can be offended and defended; ''quarta'' equally shows too much of the body; it is a way of striking, and not of guarding oneself.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/37|5|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[100] There are three reasons which make it difficult to hit the mark, namely: the distance to the target; because it is concealed, so that one is at pains to see through the impediment of the things that veil it; and even if it is uncovered, as the danger of the blow approaches, in an instant it can be covered.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/37|6|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[101] All of these virtues are contained in our guard; because it greatly distances the target and removes as much of it as can be, by means of the fold and skew of the body; moreover, it excellently covers the parts that cannot be placed out of the way, and if some remain yet uncovered, one is quick to succor them if need be, being in equal distance; and thus one walks safely to take well the ''tempo'' and measure, which thing is the ultimate perfection of the guard.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/37|7|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[102] To me it is not legitimate to speak of changing from guard to guard, one not making a good guard, if not a single one.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/37|8|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[103] Offense is a defense in which I seek measure and strike my adversary.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/37|9|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>'''Chapter 11:'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''On the Way of Seeking the Measure.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>[104] There are two parts to offense: seeking measure, and striking.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/38|1|lbl=21}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[105] Seeking measure is an offense in which, in the said guard, I seek the narrow measure in order to strike.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/38|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[106] There are three ways of seeking measure; because I seek it either while I move and the adversary fixes himself, or when I fix myself and the adversary moves, or when I move and the adversary moves.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/38|3|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[107] The ''tempo'' of these actions needs to be just, and equal to the outer boundaries of the wide measure, upon which the ''tempo'' of seeking measure expires, and gives rise to the ''tempo'' of another action, which is that of striking.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/38|4|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[108] In order that this ''tempo'' may be just, it is necessary that you have patience up until you arrive at the said distance, and not move yourself earlier to strike.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/38|5|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[109] For example: I fix myself in guard to seek measure, my adversary already being entered into the boundaries of offense; meanwhile, as he walks with his sword, either seeking the measure or pretending to strike me, it is necessary that I fix myself as much with the point of my sword, so that he arrives at the edge of the wide measure, and I not move myself to strike earlier. Because in this action his motion has to measure my stillness, and my stillness his motion, and if I had moved myself from my stillness before he had come to the edge of the wide measure, the ''tempo'' would not be just, and therefore I would not have sought the measure well; and in conclusion this motion and stillness are equal; as it takes one ''tempo'' to arrive at the beginning of the narrow measure, and it does not matter how quick it may be, only that it be equal and equivalent to the outer boundary of the wide measure, and thus the end of the ''tempo'' of wide measure is of seeking the narrow measure, and the beginning of the ''tempo'' of striking.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/38|6|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[110] Many in seeking the narrow measure disengage and counter-disengage, perform feints and counter-feints, ''stringer'' a ''palmo''<ref>A unit of measure variously from a palm’s width up to 10 inches.</ref> and more of the sword, and step from every side, and twist their bodies and stretch them, and retreat in many whimsical fashions, which are things done outside of true reason, and found to deceive the foolish, and make the play difficult; nonetheless ''stringer''ing of the sword, when I cannot do otherwise, seeking measure in my guard, it is only necessary that I ''stringer'' the ''debole'' of my enemy’s sword in a straight line, with the ''forte'' of mine, and this straddling it without touching,<ref>The phrase “straddling it without touching” is, in the original, “''cavalcandola senza toccare''”. To select a single English equivalent may obscure Capo Ferro’s meaning. The verb “''cavalcare''” means to ride (a horse), to straddle, or to span (e.g. as a bridge spans a stream). This phrase may thus be understood to imply that, in ''stringer''ing, my sword extends past the point of "intersection" with my enemy’s (i.e. spans, or straddles it) while staying close to and exerting (or more properly, enabling) control over it (i.e. riding it), but without touching (''toccare'') it until the moment of attack.</ref> but only in striking to hit the ''debole'' of the enemy’s sword with my ''forte'', on the inside or the outside according to the circumstances of the striking.</p><br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/38|7|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/39|1|lbl=22|p=1}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[111] Disengaging, if it is to be good, is good in the situation in which the adversary has me ''stringer''ed and removed from the straight line; it would be licit then, indeed necessary, to retreat, disengaging with a little ceding of my body or feet, replacing myself immediately into the straight line in order to seek measure; because disengaging is done against ''stringer''ing, and even as ''stringer''ing is done while moving the sword forward, thus must the disengage be done while withdrawing it.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/39|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>'''Chapter 12:'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''Of Striking.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>[112] Striking is the final offensive action of fencing, in which, having arrived at narrow measure, I move myself, with my body, with my legs, and with my arms, thrown forward all in one ''tempo'' to be better able to strike my adversary, and this is done with the feet fixed or with the increase of the pace, according to the magnitude of the narrow measure, according to whether it comes to be better suited for me to take more of one than of the other measure; because if through my tardiness, or through the fury of my adversary, the first measure vanishes, then I will be able to avail myself of the second, striking with fixed feet, so in this case it doesn’t happen that I greatly hurry the pace, as with only bending my right knee, it does not behoove me to seek a narrower measure, whence I would have had to increase the pace.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/39|3|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[113] Striking is done in three ways; because I can strike my adversary while I am fixed and he moves to seek measure or to strike me; or while he is fixed and I move in order to seek measure; or because both of us move ourselves to seek measure and to strike; only this is the difference: that when he moves to strike me, I strike him with fixed feet, because when he moves in order to enact the said effect, I can poorly take the just measure to strike him with the increase of pace; on the contrary it is necessary that I cling to the narrower measure; and when he moves to seek measure I strike him with the increase of pace.</p><br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/39|4|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/40|1|lbl=23|p=1}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[114] In consideration of the parts of the body with respect to the sword, I strike either from the inside or outside; from inside from ''quarta'', and from outside from ''seconda'', high or low according to the exposed parts of the body of the adversary, that give me measure, with respect to the point of my sword.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/40|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[115] While I strike, I necessarily parry together, inasmuch as I strike in the straight line, and with my body in its due disposition, because when I strike in this manner, in ''tempo'', and at measure, the adversary will never hit me, neither with thrust nor cut, because the ''forte'' of my sword goes in a straight line, and comes to cover all of my body.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/40|3|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[116] The edge is of little moment, because I cannot strike with the edge in the said distance of the narrow measure without entirely uncovering myself and giving the measure and ''tempo'' to my adversary to strike me, because of the compass of the arm and of the sword which I make, and although some usefulness is found in the cut, nonetheless at the same measure in the very same ''tempo'' more can be shown in the thrust.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/40|4|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[117] But without a trace of doubt, on horseback it is better to strike with the cut than the thrust, because my legs are carried by another’s, and thus I am not well suited to seek measure and ''tempo'', which befit propelling the body and the arm forward, but it is indeed true that I can wheel my arm about to my satisfaction, which is a proper motion to strike with the edge.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/40|5|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| class="noline" | <br />
| class="noline" | <p>'''Chapter 13:'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''Of the Dagger.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>[118] Of the dagger it will suffice us in this brief chapter to record only that it has been found better for saving oneself, in case, while I throw a blow without attending to parrying, my adversary threw one at me where it seemed to him best suited, than for one to be unable to employ the dagger in order to avert the response. And even as all advantages deliver and carry some disadvantage, so did it happen in the play of the dagger, which one cannot employ without uncovering somewhat more of the body, and shortening the line a little while striking. This is the end of the dagger, but the art was deviated thence from its chief goal given to it, even as it did as well to the sword in various techniques that would be better put into effect with the unaccompanied sword, without following such lengths.</p><br />
| class="noline" | {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|41|lbl=24}}<br />
| class="noline" | <br />
<br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = ''The Use of Fencing''<br />
| width = 120em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>Illustrations<br/>from the 1610</p><br />
! <p>{{rating|B}}<br/>by [[William Wilson]] and [[W. Jherek Swanger]]</p><br />
! <p>Transcription (1610){{edit index|Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf}}<br/>by [[Società d’Arme dell’Aquila]]</p><br />
! <p>Transcription (1632)</p><br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>'''Now Follows the Great Representation of the Use of Fencing.'''</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/42|1|lbl=25}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>'''And First the Difference that is Found Between the Art and the Use is Explained.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>There is the greatest difference between the art and the use, and perchance not less than between reason and luck, between confusion and good order, between knowledge and opinion. Which thing, in order that it be more plainly understood, it is necessary that we will briefly consider and explain the definitions of the art, which, as I remember having already heard treated of by several people of intelligence, is not other than a multitude of precepts, useful and well-ordered for civil converse. Because one flower does not make Spring, nor a single precept suffice to make the art, likewise with whatsoever number of precepts, is it so with the art; but these former finally confirm themselves to be useful, and not useless; and they are not those that are submerged in the abyss of the dark shadows of falsities and witless opinions. For the art is not governed according to its own whim, but directs all of its precepts in accordance with the rule that the law of truth gives to it. Truth commands the art, that it does not build on air, nor teach, if not of those things which are infallible and of perpetual truth. And those precepts that do not stand as paragons of their laws are not recognized as theirs. The use of the art encompasses much more, and considers not only the true things, but cautions us also of the false and of the many other particular details that variously occur;<ref>The distinction between the art and the use is explained here. The art is, in a sense, the ideal of fencing, derived solely from its guiding precepts, and was discussed up until this point. The use, however, which follows, includes a variety of effects (body evasions, ''passata''s, feints, the use of the dagger, and so on) that may deviate from the pure art of the straight line. Thus apparent contradictions between advice given by Capo Ferro up to this point regarding tactics to be eschewed, and the same tactics that he subsequently demonstrates, are better understood as being not contradictory per se, but rather to pertain to the use but not the art.</ref> and in order to show its effects, takes advantage of the aid of many disciplines. For inasmuch as we see occur daily in civil converse, that a man is insufficient to put into practice the office or the art that he does, if help does not come from those in whom civility resides, likewise are all the arts, all the sciences, and all the professions among each other conjoined and connected, so that one has need of the mutual aid of the other, wishing to put his training into execution; nonetheless, even as in the civil practice each man has his own office, his separate dwelling, and his good partitions, likewise the arts and the sciences have their distinct boundaries and their own precepts, which it is illicit for them to trespass. Because some who teach do not observe this difference between the art and the use, it makes them fall into many very grave errors. Thence it occurs that when teaching, likewise with the pen as with the sword in hand, they are long-winded and so confused and self-contradictory most of the time. And because they do not first lay the stable foundation of the infallible and well-ordered precepts of the art, with very great ease and in the briefest time would they <attempt to> lead their scholars to that degree of perfection which one can desire in this science. In consideration of this, in order to facilitate the art of fencing, I have managed to break down all the difficulty, and to extract it from the dark shadows of confusion, condensing it in the fewest demonstrations, separated from its use, and now to you I offer and put forward to your eyes a very few figures, the greater part of which explain our art, leaving to others the care of devoting their studies to the uncertainty and infinity of particular things, which without fixing oneself in one same state, we see occur daily in the use of arms, and if they have indeed to teach this instability and variety of things, it seems much better to me, in the school of “hand to hand”, that they remember that they do not teach with knowledge. But it is time at last that we come to the explanation of some admonitions and advice, as well as some terms of fencing, which pertain to the use, and to our figures as well.</p><br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/42|2|lbl=-|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|43|lbl=26|p=1}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[1] '''Some Admonitions, or Advice, of Fencing.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>First, if one finds himself at blows with his adversary, he must always have his eye on the other’s sword hand, more so than on any other place, all others being fallacious; because paying attention to the hand, he sees the stillness and all of the movements that it makes, and from this (according to his judgment) he will be able to resolve how much he will have to do.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/44|1|lbl=27}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[2] '''Of Parrying and Striking, and Voiding the Body.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>The good player, when he plays, must never parry without responding with striking; neither less must he go to strike if he is not secure to parry the response; nor fail to void his body if he does not strike; and if it occurs to him to parry with the dagger, when the dagger goes out to parry, the sword must go out to strike.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/44|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[3] '''The Virtue of the Unaccompanied Sword.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>You must know that the unaccompanied sword is the queen and foundation of all other weapons, yea, that to delight therein is as, and more useful than to do so in others; because more securely does one learn to parry, strike, and void the body, disengage the sword, counter-disengage, gain the sword of the adversary in all the guards; and during all the aforesaid effects, you will be careful to hold your arm well extended, because you will come to deflect all your adversary’s blows at a distance from your body.</p><br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/44|3|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/45|1|lbl=28|p=1}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[4] '''Method that One Must Employ Against a Bestial Man.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>If you have an encounter with a bestial man, that is, one without measure and ''tempo'', who throws many blows at you with great impetus, there are two things that you can do: first, adopting the play of ''mezzo tempo'', as I teach you in its place, you will strike him during his throwing of a thrust or a cut, in his sword-hand or arm; alternately allow him to go into empty space, evading somewhat backwards with your body, then immediately give him a thrust in the face or chest.<ref>These recommendations appear to be taken from [[Antonio Manciolino]]’s ''[[Opera Nova (Antonio Manciolino)|Opera Nova]]'', [[Page:Opera Nova (Antonio Manciolino) 1531.pdf/15|p. 3 recto]].</ref></p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/45|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[5] '''Way of Becoming a Perfect Player.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>To one who would become a perfect player, it does not suffice only to take lessons from the master, but it is necessary that he seek daily to play with diverse players, and being able to do so, he must always practice with those who know more than he, because the player with such practiced wits will become most perfect in this virtue.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/45|3|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[6] '''Of the Most Secure Guard.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>You know that in my book on the art, that I do not hold to be good other than one single guard, which is the low guard called ''terza'', with the sword level in a straight line that divides the right flank through the middle; and the point thereof must always point towards the middle of the adversary’s body, that is, of the nearer side; and it is more secure than other, high, guards, because in the said high guards one can more easily be struck with a thrust or cut to the leg than in the low ones; as I say, this danger is not there, and its virtue is that only the throwing of the thrust is the natural strike.</p><br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/45|4|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/46|1|lbl=29|p=1}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[7] '''Of the Vanity of the Feints.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>The feints are not good, because they lose ''tempo'' and measure; in addition it is so that the feint will be done either in measure or out of measure; if it will be done out of measure, I do not happen to move myself, but if it will be done to me in measure, while he feints, I will strike.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/46|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[8] '''From Whom One Must Learn.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>You have to know that there are some who, immediately after they have learned a little, and having as well a bit of practice, put themselves to teach others, and they teach without the foundation of the rule which is true, not knowing that knowing is quite different from teaching, and this method of teaching is acquired with length of time, because even as much time is required in order to recognize measure and ''tempo'', thus is it so that he who does not well understand measure nor ''tempo'', and does not have a method of teaching, can be called an imperfect player, and one must be wary of learning from these.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/46|3|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[9] '''Of Gaining the Sword.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>It is of no small profit nor of little beauty to know how to gain the sword of the adversary in all the guards, and it is as well of no small importance, should the adversary have gained yours, to know how to recover it; so that in this occasion, in case he gained it, there are three things that you can do: first, you must never disengage in order to throw a completed blow;<ref>The term "completed blow" ("colpo finito" in the original") refers to a full cut, as opposed to a half cut, e.g. a full ''mandritto'' as opposed to a mezzo ''mandritto''.<br/>The term "colpo finito" is clearly used in this fashion by [[Giovanni dall'Agocchie|dall'Agocchie]] in his ''[[Dell'Arte di Scrima Libri Tre (Giovanni dall'Agocchie)|Opera Necessaria]]'', pg. [[Page:Dell'Arte di Scrima Libri Tre (Giovanni dall'Agocchie) 1572.pdf/57|28 recto]]: "You know that the ''mandritto'' sgualimbro begins at the left shoulder, and finishes at the right knee of the enemy, and for this was named ‘colpo finito’. The mezzo ''mandritto'' is of the same nature; nonetheless through not being a ‘colpo finito’, and also through being of less ''tempo'', it comes to be called 'mezzo ''mandritto'''." The term is used by Manciolino as well, on pg. 4 verso: "If one finds himself close to the enemy, he must never throw a ‘colpo finito’, because the sword must not distance itself from the presence for the safety of him who holds it, and this throwing of an imperfect blow is called ‘''mezzo tempo''’”. The term is thus equivalent to Angelo Viggiani’s “colpo intiero” (“full blow”), as he describes it in similar terms to Manciolino’s (i.e. a perfect blow of a full ''tempo'', vis-à-vis the imperfect half blow that requires a half ''tempo''; see Viggiani's Lo Schermo, pg. 64 recto: “Thus a full ''tempo'' is a full perfect blow, because that would be a perfect motion and ''tempo''; and a mezo ''tempo'' would then be (as you said) a mezo rovescio, a mezo ''mandritto''.”<br/>A completed blow is thrown so as to cut the full length of the opponent's body, while a half blow is thrown so as to stop short of this. The completed blow therefore takes longer (a full ''tempo''), and leaves one more open, both at the beginning (because of the windup to generate power) and at the end (because the sword finishes in a location that is outside a good guard). These reasons are probably why Capo Ferro advises against disengaging to throw a completed blow when the enemy has gained your sword—to willing give up both ''tempo'' and defensive positioning when one has already lost the sword is foolhardy in the extreme.</ref> nor disengage in order to parry and then strike; another, retreating back, with somewhat of a ceding of the body, and lowering your sword, and your adversary wanting to follow you, in the same ''tempo'' in which he comes forward to approach and gain the sword anew, you will be able to strike him during the movement of his right foot, either below or above his sword as it happens to be more convenient; and furthermore, it must be advised that by “to stringer” the sword, we mean as much as “to gain it”.</p><br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/46|4|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/47|1|lbl=30|p=1}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[10] '''Of Striking in ''Contratempo''.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>In more manners can one strike in ''contratempo'', but I do not approve of other than two, which will be: finding yourself with your sword in ''quarta'', with its point facing toward your right side, and your adversary coming to gain it, in the same ''tempo'' in which he moves his right foot in order to lay his sword upon yours, you will push a thrust from the said ''quarta'', passing forward with your left foot, or with your right instead; alternately, finding yourself in ''terza'', and he coming to gain it from the outside, you will thrust him in ''seconda'' while passing as above.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/47|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[11] '''Of Walking.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Many and varied are the opinions of masters regarding this action of walking with weapons in hand; I say (following my judgment) that walking from the right side, as from the left of the adversary, chiefly one must take care to always move the left foot accompanied by the right, and having to walk in a straight line, one foot must follow the other, forward as back; but the true walking will be stepping naturally, always doing so, so that the point of your right shoulder will face forward, and carrying your left foot crosswise, so that its point will point toward your left side.</p><br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/47|3|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/48|1|lbl=31|p=1}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[12] '''Method of Striking the Hand.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>You must know that every time that your adversary has the point of his sword outside your presence, either high or low, or that it faces outside your left or right side, you will put the point of your sword opposite his hand in a straight line; leaning your body somewhat to the rear, you will approach to measure, and, having arrived, you will push a thrust in ''mezzo tempo'' into the said hand; just by propelling the body forward and bending the right knee will one strike; but you will take care that in such striking you must carry the left foot back, accompanied by the right; and furthermore, the enemy having his dagger arm advanced forward, you, wanting to strike it in the hand, will follow the same directions as above.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/48|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[13] '''Method of Recovering Oneself, Having Struck.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Having struck your adversary with the extraordinary pace, with the right foot forward, likewise in single sword as with sword and dagger or sword and cape, you will retire an ordinary pace, according however to the space that you have behind you; because if you have little space, you will carry back only your right leg, following your enemy’s sword with your sword; but if you have room, you will retire two ordinary paces, so that finally you will carry yourself in guard, and this is the true retiring, although in the schools they practice otherwise.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/48|3|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[14] '''Explanation of Some Terms of Fencing, which Pertain to the Use.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Because it is necessary to the scholars to understand the terms that the Masters of fence use in teaching, we have proposed to explain them in the following briefest words.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/49|1|lbl=32}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[15] '''Of the Sword.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>In the sword are to be considered the ''forte'', the ''debole'', the false edge, and the true edge; some like to make three equal divisions of the sword, namely the ''debole'', and the ''forte'', which are its extreme parts, and that of the middle; since one and the other participates and is well suited to parry and to strike; it is also found that four parts are made of it, yet without any evident utility. The said terms are easy, and intelligible in and of themselves.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/49|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[16] '''Of the Guards.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>“Guard” we call a certain orientation of the hilt of the sword, which each time that it comes to be posted over the shoulder, forms ''prima''; when it descends to be even with the shoulder, makes ''seconda''; when it is further lowered to outside the knee, on the right side, it comes to form ''terza''; ''quarta'' is made when the hilt is inside the thigh; it is agreed; and these four guards are called principal, and up to this point all are in accord;<ref>Capo Ferro appears to be defining “guard” here in the restricted sense of the rotational orientation of the sword, that is, the degree to which the wrist of the sword hand is turned.<br/>These definitions are almost certainly taken directly from [[Camillo Agrippa]]’s ''[[Trattato di Scientia d'Arme, con vn Dialogo di Filosofia (Camillo Agrippa)|Trattato di Scientia d’Arme]]'', Part I, Ch. I, pp. [[Page:Trattato di Scientia d'Arme, con vn Dialogo di Filosofia (Camillo Agrippa) 1553.pdf/14|1 verso]] to [[Page:Trattato di Scientia d'Arme, con vn Dialogo di Filosofia (Camillo Agrippa) 1553.pdf/15|2 recto]]. Clearly the positions of the hand with respect to the body (e.g. "even with the shoulder") are not to be taken literally, at least not in all cases, in Capo Ferro's system. Note moreover that the plates often show, and biomechanics dictate, that his ''terza'' at times partakes of second in third, and similarly his ''quarta'' at times partakes of third in fourth; there is a certain amount of play in the hand positions actually employed.</ref> as for the pace, the arm, the body, the legs, and the line of the sword, they are of diverse opinions; because some praise the narrow pace, and some the wide, some the mediocre; some extend the arm, others restrain it more or less; some bend the body, some keep it erect; others form the guard putting forward the right leg, or now the left; there are those who hold the sword in a straight line, some high, and some low, and now on one, now on the other side, now forward, now back, in as many lines as are found in the world; others according to the diverse circumstances indifferently avail themselves of all the previously mentioned manners of guards, which according to their differences are named high, and low, narrow, and wide, and other names acquired according to the caprices of masters. ''terza'' and ''quarta'' are called “counter-guards”, that<ref>I.e. ''terza''.</ref> for ''stringer''ing on the outside, and this<ref>I.e. ''quarta''.</ref> for ''stringer''ing on<br />
the inside, although all the guards are counterguards, which are chosen according to the diversity of the lines of the sword.</p><br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/49|3|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/50|1|lbl=33|p=1}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[17] '''Of ''tempo''.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Four sorts of ''tempo''s are heard named in the schools: the primo, the dui tempi, the mezzo, and the contra ''tempo''; the primo ''tempo'' is that when, finding myself at measure, either narrow or wide, I can strike the adversary with just one movement of my sword; from which one equally recognizes that striking of dui tempi requires at least two movements of the sword. ''mezzo tempo'' is when at wide measure I strike the adversary in his advanced and uncovered arm, either that of the dagger or of the sword, with a thrust or cut, or alternately when I strike the adversary at narrow measure, as he moves himself to strike me or perform some other action; redoubling of blows is usually done in ''mezzo tempo''. Contra ''tempo'' is when at the very same time that the adversary wants to strike me, I encounter him in shorter ''tempo'' and measure; and one needs to know that all the movements and all the reposes of the adversary are ''tempo''s, although at measure.<ref>Only when in measure are all the movements and reposes to be regarded as ''tempo''s, since the entirety of coming to measure is a single ''tempo'', regardless of length.</ref></p><br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/50|2|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/51|1|lbl=34|p=1}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[18] '''Of Measure.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>The measure is wide or narrow; wide, when the adversary can be struck only through the extraordinary pace; the narrow is when I can strike the adversary in just pace with fixed foot.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/51|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[19] '''In How Many ''Tempo''s One Knows to Strike.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>The first is when the enemy is fixed in guard, and he lifts or moves his foot that he has forward, that is one ''tempo'' in which to accost him; another is when you have parried a blow, then there is a ''tempo''; the third, as he moves himself without judgment from one guard in order to go into another, before he has fixed himself in it, it is a ''tempo'' to offend him; and moreover it is ''tempo'' when he raises his sword, as he raises his hand, that is a ''tempo'' to strike him; and the last is that, when a blow will have traveled past your body, that is a ''tempo'' to follow it with a response.<ref>These five ''tempo''s in which to strike are almost identical to those listed by [[Giovanni dall'Agocchie]], pg. [[Page:Dell'Arte di Scrima Libri Tre (Giovanni dall'Agocchie) 1572.pdf/59|29 recto]].</ref></p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/51|3|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[20] '''Of the Pace and of Walking.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>The pace is called ordinary, extraordinary, just, half pace, narrow, and wide; it increases or diminishes itself in accordance with the diversity of these paces; one steps now forward and now back, now to the side, now on the diagonal with one leg or with both; there are those as well who, retiring the forward leg in order to void a blow, hold it suspended in the air in order to respond with greater speed.</p><br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/51|4|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/52|1|lbl=35|p=1}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[21] '''Of the Parries.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>One parries with the true edge, and, although rarely, with the false edge, in a straight line as in an oblique line; now with the point high, now low, now up, now down; depending on whether one is struck with a thrust or a cut, it is with one or the other of the weapons, or with both; taking care that all the parries require an extended arm, and need to be accompanied with the right leg, followed by the left, and when it occurs to parry with dui tempi, during the ''tempo'' in which one parries, one will draw the left foot near to the right, and then while striking, will pass forward with the right.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/52|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[22] '''Of the Feints and of Covering the Sword.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>“Feints” we call those deceitful gestures of the sword that are made as much of the cut as the thrust, outside and inside of the sword, up and down, forward and back, and circularly as well as in a straight or oblique line, with the one and the other weapon, and these feints strike directly at the opposite of that at which they gesture; the counter-feints are done as the counter to the feints. “Covering the sword” is a kind of feint, and it is done by covering the point of the adversary’s sword with the ''debole'' of your sword, when one happens to be in low ''quarta'', and needs to be done in a straight line.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/52|3|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[23] '''Of Changing from Guard to Guard.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Changing from guard to guard can be done in three ways: directly, in reverse, or in exchange; for the direct, when from ''prima'' I change myself into ''seconda'', and from ''seconda'' into ''terza'', or from ''terza'' into ''quarta''; in reverse, when I go from ''quarta'' into ''terza'', from ''terza'' into ''seconda'', and from ''seconda'' into ''prima''; in exchange, when I change myself from ''prima'' into ''quarta'', or from ''quarta'' into ''prima'', and from ''prima'' into ''terza'', or from ''terza'' into ''prima'', or from ''seconda'' into ''quarta'', or from ''quarta'' into ''seconda''. Taking care nonetheless that changing yourself from one guard to another, being at measure, you will go back with the left leg, accompanied by the right; thus will you be safe from the adversary.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/53|1|lbl=36}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[24] '''Against Those Who Circle.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Because your adversary could easily succeed in gaining the sword against you from the inside by circling, in such case you will immediately disengage your sword through to the outside, carrying your left leg diagonally accompanied by your right, toward the right side of your adversary, putting the point of your sword in a straight line which is pointed at the enemy’s right shoulder, and he coming from outside in order to gain it anew, in that coming you will disengage under his blade, and will strike him with a thrust in ''quarta'', advancing your right leg forward into extraordinary pace.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/53|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[25] '''Against the Guard of the Left Foot.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Finding the adversary in low ''terza'' with his left leg forward, you will put yourself against him similarly in ''terza'', but with your right leg forward, and with the point of your sword crossing toward your left side, and this in order to achieve two effects: the first of which is that he will be unable to dominate your sword, which he will go seeking with his dagger; the other is that thereby uncovering more of your body, you invite him to pass, and as he passes you will parry with your sword, and with the same ''terza'', with the point high, and passing, you will give him a stab in the chest. Moreover, if you wish to be the first to strike against the said guard of the left foot, you will put yourself to him in the encounter similarly in ''terza'' with the sword in a straight line, making your point aim at your enemy’s dagger hand, in order to enable you at your ease to give him a ''stoccata'' in ''mezzo tempo'' in the said hand; alternately you can make a feint over his dagger, and he wanting to parry, you will disengage your sword under his dagger, passing forward with your left foot, and finding your enemy’s sword with your dagger in the same ''tempo'', you will strike him with a thrust under the arm; furthermore one can feint under the dagger, and he wanting again to parry, you will disengage and will strike him in ''seconda'' over his dagger, passing and parrying as above; taking note that one can also feint and strike without passing, but by only waiting for the adversary, in response to you having feinted, to pass to strike, and then you, only with ceding your body back during his passing, and parrying the enemy’s sword with your dagger, will strike him above or below his dagger, according to the opportunity that will come to you. Moreover, you must be careful that, having to deal with a left handed person, and he standing with his right foot forward, you will have to put yourself to him at the encounter with your left foot forward with your sword low and refused withdrawn, weapons on the same side, so that doing such, you will put it into your adversary’s mind that he will be unable to throw any blow which will not give itself to be defended.</p><br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|54|lbl=37|p=1}} {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/55|1|lbl=38|p=1}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[26] '''Of ''Stringer''ing the Sword.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>The sword is ''stringer''ed for the purpose of coming to measure, or to uncover the adversary from outside and from inside, high and low, but always in a straight line, while the adversary is fixed or moves himself, and most often it is done in dui tempi; in the first the ''debole'' of the enemy’s sword is acquired with a ''palmo'' of the ''debole'' of yours; in the second ''tempo'' the beginning of the adversary’s ''forte'' is acquired; as much as he disengages, you counter-disengage or not, but you will take care to do so in a straight line, and that your ''forte'' always accompanies your ''debole'', together with the motion of your leg.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/55|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[27] '''Most Useful Admonition Regarding Dominating the Sword.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>One dominates the sword in two manners: in the first, when having acquired the adversary’s sword, I never quit the domination while striking. In the second, having beaten the sword in whatever manner, so that he exits outside of my presence, in that ''tempo'' in which it travels by force, it is understood to be in my domination, in which I have to strike before he redeems himself. The domination of the unaccompanied sword is either of stillness or of motion, the one of the thrust, and the other of the cut. One dominates with the ''forte'' during parrying, or one beats with the ''debole'' in order to seek the ''tempo'' and the measure. With the unaccompanied sword, having dominated the enemy’s sword with the ''forte'', you must never respond with a cut, but indeed with a thrust; the one and the other you will be able to do, having dominated the enemy’s sword with your sword and dagger together, the dagger remaining in the guard of domination; nonetheless I exhort you to always strike with a thrust because it is more mortal, and thereby the sword is not removed from the presence, the opposite of which is done by the cut.</p><br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/55|3|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/56|1|lbl=39|p=1}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[28] '''Of the Disengage and Counter-disengage.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>The disengage, as well as the counter-disengage, is done in order to exit the measure in ''tempo'', or in order to acquire it, and they are done either forward or back, according to the said goals; the necessary way of counter-disengaging is to follow the adversary’s sword, replacing your sword back into its previous site, and this one can do on one or the other side. One must know as well that in disengaging the sword one can disengage over as well as under the enemy’s sword in order to gain it, but the difference between the one and the other in disengaging is this, that disengaging under in order to ''stringer'' is done with the arm extended, and with a small increase of the foot; and the disengage over is done with a ceding of the body with the arm, and with the sword in an oblique line to the rear, so that your sword will have cleared the point of the enemy’s sword and then replacing immediately the ''forte'' of your sword so as to be over his, and this method of disengaging must be done in order to strike as well as in order to stringer.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/56|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[29] '''Of Striking.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Striking is of two sorts: of the cut and of the thrust, but each of these are of more types, according to their blows, because the ''mandritto'' will be either ordinary, or ''fendente'', or tondo, or ''montante'', or ''stramazzone'', or ''ridoppio''; and from the reversed side, they will be as above; and the thrusts are converted into four types. The ''mandritto'' is that which begins from the right side; and that is named ordinary which crosses through an oblique line, namely from the left shoulder to the right knee of the enemy. But the ''fendente'' is named that which goes to strike in a straight line from up to down; the tondo is called that which turns crosswise. And the ''montante'' is that which departs with the true edge of the sword from beneath and goes to strike to the point of the adversary’s right shoulder. ''stramazzone'' is that which is done in the manner of a wheel using the wrist; ''ridoppio'' they call it when with a mezzo ''mandritto'' which knocked down the enemy’s sword, you will go returning to him another ordinary ''mandritto''. The ''falso'', then, is designated in two manners, namely ''dritto'' and ''manco''; you can avail yourself of the ''falso dritto'' in order to hit the enemy’s sword to the outside, that is, toward his right side; and with the ''falso manco'' you will hit toward his left side; however it seems to me, if it occurs to you to parry with a ''falso dritto'', I say that it will be far better to turn well your wrist and parry with the true edge for more safety, and the true edge will turn more quickly; but when you will hit the blow with the ''falso manco'', you will be able to strike them with a thrust as well as a cut, taking care that when you parry with the falso, you parry from the middle of your sword up to the point, and when you parry with the true edge, you must parry with the ''forte'', from the middle of your sword down to the hilt; remember that the ''mandritti'' and ''riversi'' are done with the motion of the elbow, and in such cases when the measure and ''tempo'' support it, with the upper part of the arm.</p><br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/56|3|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/57|1|lbl=40|p=1}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[30] '''Of the Cut.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>The cuts need to be done as if slicing, because in this manner one comes to strike with all of the ''debole'', indeed also because little by little one comes to cut with the sharpest part of the edge, and for this reason the cuts that descend are more vigorous than those that stop above the waist, to such extent that the said upper and lower parts are found to be more or less at apt measure to be offended by slicing.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf/57|2|lbl=-}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[31] '''Of the Thrust.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>In the thrust are noted the ''stoccata'', the ''imbroccata'', and the ''punta riversa''; the ''imbroccata'' is sent from the guard of ''prima'', and goes to strike from the adversary’s left shoulder down to his right knee, with the false edge down, so that one does not turn the hand until the point of the attack arrives, and needs to fall. The ''stoccata'' needs to be sent from the guard of ''terza'', and goes to strike the adversary toward his right shoulder; the ''punta riversa'' is sent from ''quarta'', and goes to strike from outside the enemy’s shoulder, reversing well your hand to the inside, somewhat joining the point in falsehood, in that it comes from low, upwards, toward the adversary’s breast, you finding your sword in low guard.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|58|lbl=41}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 1629 01.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>[32] '''Method of Laying Hand on the Sword.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Because customs are not the same in all lands, and often times enmities are expressed with little sincerity, in order to be provided against all occasions, it will not, perhaps, be out of place to teach the way of laying the hand on the sword, before we come to deal with its handling. Therefore, if by chance you have your right leg forward when laying your hand on the sword, as one of these figures shows, you will draw back the said leg, extending your right arm at the same time into high ''prima''; and if perchance you find yourself with the left leg forward, as the other figure shows, it will not happen if you do not draw your sword in the aforesaid manner, without changing your pace; and if you should wish to avail yourself of the sword and cape, or sword and dagger, as well as the single sword, the true way is, that first you will take a step forward with your right foot in order to present yourself in ''quarta'', or alternately, the adversary being near you, you will draw your left foot back, presenting yourself as above, and then at your ease you will be able to wind your cape or extend your hand to your dagger with more safety, being that the point of your sword will make it such that your adversary remains distant while you accommodate yourself to your weapons; and this is as much as it occurs to me to say about this particular topic.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|59|lbl=42}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 02.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| rowspan="3" | <p>[33] '''Of the Guards.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Even as one cannot make some composition of beautiful and judicious writings without employing the letters of the alphabet, so does it occur in this, our art of fencing, that without the following guards, and some voids and retreats of the body which come to be the foundation of this practice, one could not in any way demonstrate this, our use; therefore the following six figures are designated alphabetically. “A” demonstrates ''prima'' to you, and ''seconda'' is presented to you as “B”, and ''terza'' as “C”. ''quarta'' is named as “D”, ''quinta'' as “E”, and ''sesta'' as “F”.<ref>Note that in the plates that follow, figures continue to be labeled as A through F, generally representing the starting position of each figure. ''quinta'' and ''sesta'' are not otherwise explained as ''prima'' through ''quarta'' were, but as judged by these plates and the occurrences of these two guards in the sections on dagger and rotella, they apparently describe guards involving an auxiliary arm, where the sword is low, usually in ''terza'' or less often in ''quarta'', while the left hand is held either low for ''quinta'', or high for ''sesta''.</ref></p><br />
| rowspan="3" | {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|61|lbl=44}}<br />
| rowspan="3" | <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 03.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 04.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 1629 05 small.png|400x400px|center|link=File:Capo Ferro 1629 05.png]]<br />
| <p>[33] '''Figure Explained by Way of the Alphabet.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Figure that demonstrates resting in guard, as is shown in our art, and the incredible increase of the long blow, in regard of the members which are all moved to strike.<ref>A through G indicate the positions of bodily members while in guard, as, for example, while seeking measure. H through M indicate the positions of bodily members upon the completion of the lunge.</ref></p><br />
<br />
A. The left shoulder in guard<br />
<br />
B. The leg of the left knee in guard<br />
<br />
C. The planting of the left foot in guard<br />
<br />
D. The ordinary pace in guard<br />
<br />
E. The placement of the right foot in guard<br />
<br />
F. The thigh and the calf at a slope in guard<br />
<br />
G. The hand of the right arm in guard<br />
<br />
H. The increase of the right arm, of the same length<br />
<br />
I. The increase of the right knee, almost a pace<br />
<br />
K. The increase of the pace, a little more than a foot<br />
<br />
L. The increase of the left foot with its turn<br />
<br />
M. The increase of the left knee of a half pace<br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|65|lbl=48}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 1652 06.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>[34] '''Method of Gaining the Sword on the Inside in the Straight Line and Striking According to the Point that the Enemy Will Give.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>There are two reasons (it seems to me) for which it is necessary to draw close to the adversary:<ref>Note that the term “stringere” is used in this passage for both drawing close to the body of the enemy (“stringere la vita”), and in the sense of ''stringer''ing of the sword (“stringere la spada”). This has made the translation somewhat awkward; I have translated “stringere” as “draw close” or “stringer”, and rendered “stringimenti” as “closings” in this passage, to reflect these different meanings, although the verb is identical in the original.</ref> the first is to ''stringer'' the sword in order to seek measure and ''tempo''; the other is to draw close to the body of the adversary in order to seek only measure; which closings are best considered in the straight line; and because there are two causes of closing there must also be two occasions: the first occasion, of ''stringer''ing the sword in order to seek measure and ''tempo'', is when the said adversary lies in an oblique line, because the adversary lying with the sword in ''quarta'' which is aimed on an oblique line at your left side, you lying with your sword on the outside, will disengage with an increase of pace in order to ''stringer'' it on the inside with the said straight line, as the figures show you; nor must this cause you any sort of difficulty, seeing as how only the said straight line suffices to ''stringer'' the sword when finding the adversary's sword lying in an oblique line. The second occasion, that of drawing close to the body in order to seek only measure, is when the adversary lies in the straight line, or with his body uncovered; then without ''stringer''ing the sword in order to seek the ''tempo'', it will suffice to only draw close to the body with the straight line in order to find the measure, and then to strike according to the point; although the use of the art requires that one ''stringer'' the sword in all the lines without any utility. Striking according to the point, one must understand, that every time that the point of the opposing sword is in your presence then you will be able to strike in the straight line where the height of the point of the enemy's sword will give its direction, taking a ''palmo'' from the point of your enemy's sword, however, with the ''forte'' of your sword, and you will strike safely, taking heed that if it is as high as the middle of your head you will strike him in the face, and were it even with the middle of your body you will be able to strike him in the face or the chest. This is called "to strike according to the point that the enemy's sword will give"; moreover in this way you will be able to safely disengage the sword from all sides in order to attack; however, when disengaging you will carry the ''forte'' of your sword in primo ''tempo'' to the point of the adversary's sword, and do not do as some masters do, who disengage, and do so in order to strike in primo ''tempo'', arriving with the point of their sword on the ''forte'' of the enemy's sword, not perceiving that they give the point to the enemy, and most of the time they are offended, as is seen in our figures.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|67|lbl=50}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 1629 07.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>[35] '''The Present and Subsequent Figures Demonstrate Diverse Manners of Striking on the Outside, Always Presupposing a ''Stringer''ing on the Inside and a Disengage of the Point by Your Adversary in Order to Strike.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>By way of clarification of the following figures, I say that D having the figure marked C ''stringer''ed on the inside, the same C disengages in order to give a thrust to the chest of figure D. D strikes him with a thrust in the left eye with a fixed foot or an increase of pace as the figure shows. But yet I say that if C had been a shrewd person, when he disengaged he would have disengaged by way of a feint, with his body somewhat held back, and D approaching confidently in order to attack C, C would have parried the enemy's sword to the outside with the false or the true edge, giving him a ''mandritto'' to the face or an ''imbroccata'' to the chest, and in such a conclusion would retire into a low ''quarta''.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|69|lbl=52}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 1629 08 small.png|400x400px|center|link=File:Capo Ferro 1629 08.png]]<br />
| <p>[36] '''Figures that Demonstrate How Much Measure is Lost by Attacking the Legs.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>The sword of the figure C being gained by the figure D, this same figure C turns a ''riverso'' to the leg of the figure marked as D. D is able to strike him during the turning of the ''riverso'', with a ''stramazzone'' to the arm or a thrust to the face, as a consequence of his leaning too far forward; as the figure shows, the said figure D moreover draws his right leg back during the attack. Always, I say, that when D was ''stringer''ing the sword of C, had C been a shrewd person, he would have given a ''riverso'' to the face followed by a ''mandritto fendente'' to the head and thus he would have been safer.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|71|lbl=54}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 09.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>[37] '''A Figure that Strikes in a ''passata'' while the Adversary Disengages in Order to Strike.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Figure D having gained the sword on the inside of the figure marked as C, the same C disengages to give a stocatta to the face of D. D strikes him in the face in ''seconda'' with a ''passata'', giving a grip with the left hand to the hilt of the enemy's sword. I will never fail to say that if C had been a shrewd person, he would have disengaged the sword as a feint with his body held back somewhat to the rear, and D approaching confidently to pass, C falsing underneath the enemy’s sword and turning an ''inquartata'' with a void of the body, passing his leg crossed behind, would strike him in the chest.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|73|lbl=56}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 10.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>[38] '''A Figure that Strikes in ''quarta'' Under the Right Arm to the Pectoral<ref>“Pectoral” i.e. “poccia”— properly, a breast or nipple. I use “pectoral” to distinguish between “a breast” (one side of the chest) and “the breast” (the chest in general), on the assumption that Capo Ferro is not being so specific as to recommend aiming precisely for the nipple.</ref> while the Adversary Disengages in Order to Strike.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>The sword of the figure C being gained by the figure D, the same C turns a ''riverso'' to the face of the figure marked as D. D strikes him in ''quarta'' in the chest under the sword arm during the turning of the ''riverso'', raising his arm and the hilt of his sword well, increasing his pace well, as you see. However, I say that if C, instead of turning the ''riverso'', had drawn back his sword while retiring back somewhat, and lifted his sword in an oblique line so that its point faced toward the adversary's left side, and D had wanted to enter in ''quarta'', C, parrying with a mezzo ''mandritto'', would have given him a ''riverso'' to the face or a thrust to the chest.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|75|lbl=58}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 11.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>[39] '''The Manner of Striking by Diverse Actions Under the Enemy's Sword.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Beginning in ''terza'', you will put yourself in a high transverse ''quarta'' so that the point of your sword is aimed at the left shoulder of your adversary, and he coming to cover yours in an oblique line, you turning your hand into ''seconda'' during his approach, with a bending and lowering of your body, will strike him in contra ''tempo'' in the body under his sword as the figure shows. Second, if your adversary had you ''stringer''ed on the outside, disengage a feinted thrust in ''quarta'' to the face, and he wishing to parry, turning your hand with the same bending, you will strike him under the sword, as above. Third, if you had been ''stringer''ed on the inside, you will be able to disengage with a feinted thrust in ''terza'' to the face, and he raising his sword to parry you will strike him under the sword turning your hand into ''seconda'' in the manner as above. Fourth, your adversary being ''stringer''ed on the inside of you, and he disengaging in order to strike you in the face with a thrust, you will be able to strike him in two manners: first, you will be able to strike him in contra ''tempo'' during his approach, lowering, however your body, and your sword in ''terza''; and also you will be able to strike him by parrying in ''terza'' with the point high, turning your hand into ''seconda'' during striking in the fashion as above. Fifth, and last, if your adversary were ''stringer''ed on the outside of you and he disengaged in order to ''stringer'' your sword on the inside, at the same time turning your hand with a lowering and bending of your body you will strike him in ''terza'' under his sword in the same manner as above.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|77|lbl=60}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 12.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>[40] '''Figure that Parries with the Sword with Both Hands and Strikes with a Thrust to the Throat with a ''passata'' while the Adversary Disengages the Sword.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Figure D having gained the sword of the figure marked as C on the inside in low guard, and the said C disengaging to give a ''stoccata'' to the chest of figure D, D passes with the left leg and at the same time, pressing the enemy’s sword down with both hands, strikes him in the chest in ''terza''. But without any doubt, if C had been an intelligent person, when he disengaged the point to attack he would have disengaged somewhat retired, and D, parrying and passing with both hands to strike C, C only with a lowering of the point of the sword toward the earth and turning his hand to ''seconda'', somewhat voiding his body toward the left side of the adversary and disengaging the edge over the enemy's sword, will strike him on the inside with a ''riverso'' to the face, retiring into ''terza''; or having parried,<ref>This final maneuver is difficult to interpret; the subjects of the actions are not specified. It is possible that the meaning is that once D has parried, then C (being somewhat retired) may pass to the right with his left leg while holding his own sword in two hands, thereby turning his body somewhat and consequently freeing his sword out from under D’s, and then strike D in the chest.</ref> he will pass to the inside with the left leg; turning the body to the right, and holding his sword with both hands, while turning he will give him a thrust to the chest, going to him so that D cannot be saved.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|79|lbl=62}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 1629 13 small.png|400x400px|center|link=File:Capo Ferro 1629 13.png]]<br />
| <p>[41] '''Figure that Strikes with a ''Scannatura'' by a Thrust to the Right Flank with a ''Passata'' while the Adversary Disengages to Strike.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>This manner of attack is called the ''scannatura'',<ref>“''Scannatura''”: literally, “butchering”.</ref> which is done in the following manner, the figure designated as C having the sword of the figure marked as D ''stringer''ed on the outside. The same figure D disengages a thrust at the face of C, and the same C, meeting the enemy’s sword on the outside,<ref>While it is not explicitly stated, C must disengage in some fashion in order to parry D’s attempted thrust to C’s face on the outside. It is likely that C disengages under to parry the high thrust with his own point high, then abandons the engagement by lowering his point in ''seconda'' to strike the flank. A less likely possibility given the order in which events are described is that he disengages over and parries outward and low by lowering his point in ''seconda'', essentially as a transport.</ref> lowering the point to ''seconda'', and passing with the left leg in one same ''tempo'' strikes him in the flank, lowering the hilt with the body and seizing his hand as you see.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|81|lbl=64}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 1652 14.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>[42] '''Figure that Strikes Under the Sword of the Enemy in Contra ''tempo'' without Parrying, Only with a Lowering of the Body as the Figure Demonstrates.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Figure D having gained the sword of the figure C on the inside, and the same figure C disengaging to give a ''stoccata'' to the face of figure D, D lowering his body and stepping forward with his right leg in one same ''tempo'' strikes him in ''seconda'' below the enemy's sword in contra ''tempo'' without parrying as the picture shows. And moreover he could succeed were the said thrust done differently, that is, that C disengaging to give a ''stoccata'' to figure D in the face, D parries in ''terza'' with the point high and in the same ''tempo'' lowering the point and turning the sword to ''seconda'' he could strike him in the chest with a ''passata'' while also giving him a grip on his sword hand. But if C was an experienced person he could have only withdrawn his right foot to the rear and in his<ref>“In his approach” refers to D’s approach with a ''passata''; C’s counter is to slip measure by withdrawing the leg, then execute the parry and ''scannatura'' described.</ref> approach, meeting the enemy's sword on the outside and in the same ''tempo'' lowering the point and turning the hand to ''seconda'' he would strike him with a ''scannatura'' below the enemy's sword; alternately, in his withdrawing, he will parry with his left hand from above downwards under his arm and will strike D with a high ''seconda'' to the chest or to the face.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|83|lbl=66}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 15.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>[43] '''The Present and Subsequent Figures Demonstrate Diverse Ways of Striking to the Inside, Always Presupposing a ''Stringer''ing on the Outside and a Disengagement of the Point by Your Adversary in Order to Strike.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>The following figures demonstrate diverse ways of striking on the inside, always presupposing on your side a ''stringer''ing on the outside, and on that of your adversary, a disengage in order to strike you. D disengaging as above, C will strike him in ''quarta'' with a fixed foot, or with an increase of pace, in the throat or face. But if D had been an intelligent person, when he disengaged he would have disengaged with a beating of his enemy's sword with his edge, giving him a thrust to the face or a ''riverso'' to the arm of the figure designated as C, withdrawing into ''terza'' in ordinary pace.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|85|lbl=68}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 16.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>[44] '''Double Method of Gaining the Enemy's Sword on the Inside and the Outside.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Knowing through experience how useful it is to know how to gain the enemy's sword, I have not wanted to fail to describe the manner which one must adopt in going to ''stringer'' and gain the same, and first, wanting to go to ''stringer'' the adversary's sword, on the inside as on the outside, according to the occasion, you will first have to ''stringer'' the same at a distance of about one ''palmo'' from the point; if it occurs that you have to ''stringer'' on the inside, you will make the point of the sword aim at the adversary’s right shoulder; and if on the outside, at the left shoulder. Having done so, you will go walking towards the adversary’s sword; if it occurs that he disengages, in that instant you will counter-disengage with a return of your sword to its place, or with the same counter-disengage you will strike him in the ''tempo'' of his disengage. Moreover, if it occurs that the adversary approaches in order to ''stringer'' your sword, on the inside as well as the outside, which is lying level in the straight line with your arm extended, in that instant you will disengage and stringer, walking forward; and if it occurs that you have to disengage in order to ''stringer'' on the inside, you will carry your right foot forward during the disengage, bending your body toward your right side, holding your left hand near your right, and then passing with your left foot, you will strike him with a thrust in the breast in ''quarta''; and if you have to disengage in order to ''stringer'' on the outside, you will in a similar manner carry your right foot forward with a bending of your body to your left side, and passing with the left foot, strike the chest in ''seconda''. Moreover, be aware that the following figures demonstrate ''stringer''ing the sword on the outside in ''terza''; however you must follow the rule of gaining the sword of the adversary as stated above.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|87|lbl=70}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 17.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>[45] '''Figure that Strikes Near the Ear with a Void of the Right Foot.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>The figure designated as C having the figure marked as B ''stringer''ed on the outside, and this figure disengaging to strike the figure designated as C in ''quarta'', the same figure marked as C strikes him in the face near the ear outside of his sword with a void of the traversed right foot. I will never fail to say that if B had been an experienced person he would have disengaged the sword by way of a feint with his body held back somewhat to the rear, and C approaching confidently in order to strike figure B with the void of the traversed right foot, B, meeting the enemy's sword on the outside, lowering his point in ''seconda'' and passing with the left leg in one same ''tempo'', would strike him in the flank, giving him a grip to his sword hand.<ref>This final counter by B appears simply to be the ''scannatura'' once more.</ref></p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|89|lbl=72}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 18.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>[46] '''Figure that Strikes the Throat in ''Quarta'' on a ''Passata'' of the Left Foot.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>The figure designated as C having the sword of the figure B ''stringer''ed on the outside, and the same figure B disengaging to give a ''stoccata'' to the face of figure C, C strikes him in ''quarta'' in the throat or the face during the disengage on a pass as the picture shows.</p><br />
<br />
<p>But if B had been an experienced person he would have disengaged his sword by way of a feint, with his body held back somewhat to the rear, and C approaching confidently to pass with the ''quarta'', B executing an ''inquartata'' with a void of his body, passing with his left leg behind his right, would strike him in the chest.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|91|lbl=74}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 19.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>[47] '''Figure that Strikes in ''Quarta'' with a Void of the Body, Carrying the Left Leg Crossed Behind the Right.'''<br/><br/></p><br />
<br />
<p>The sword of figure D being gained on the outside by figure C, and D disengaging in order to give a thrust to the face of figure C, C strikes him in ''quarta'' with a void of the body, stepping with the left leg crossing behind the right as the figure demonstrates. But if D had been an experienced person he would have disengaged in order to gain the sword of figure C on the inside, with a bending of his body toward his right side, and having gained it, would have passed forward immediately with his left foot, giving him a thrust in ''quarta'' to the chest; alternately he would have disengaged with a mezzo ''mandritto'', beating the enemy's sword, giving C a ''riverso'' to the face, withdrawing into ''terza'', and thus he would have been secure.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|93|lbl=76}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 20.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>[48] '''Figure that Strikes the Face in ''Seconda'' on a ''Passata'' while Giving a Grip to the Sword Arm of the Enemy with the Left Hand.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>By clarification of the following figures, C, having his adversary, that is, the figure D, ''stringer''ed to the outside, and the same D disengaging to give a ''stoccata'' to figure C, the same C parries the enemy’s sword in ''quarta'' with a beat of the right foot, and all in one ''tempo'', passing and turning the body well, he will strike him in ''seconda'' in the face, although this can also be done without passing, striking him in ''quarta'' although in dui tempi.<ref>For clarification of the footwork accompanying primo ''tempo'' vis-à-vis dui tempi parries, see “Explanation of some terms of fencing” #7, “Of the parries”.</ref> But if D had been a person experienced in swordplay, when C disengaged to parry figure D in ''quarta''<ref>This passage presents some difficulty—C is not described as disengaging in the beginning of this plate, only as having parried in fourth (which would not require a disengage since D was described as having begun on the outside and then disengaged to attack). It is possible that the subsequent “counter-disengage” by D is D’s own return to outside ''stringimento'' following an initial disengage to the inside by way of a feint.</ref> with a beating of his right foot, D would have counter-disengaged his sword to the outside and would have struck him in the face in ''seconda'', withdrawing to the rear into ''terza'', following the enemy’s sword with his sword in said withdrawing, and thus would C be struck.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|95|lbl=78}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 1652 21.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>[49] '''Figures of the Sword and Dagger which Demonstrate the Manner of ''Stringer''ing the Adversary's Sword, He Being Found in a High ''Prima'' on the Inside, Noting that if the Point of the Enemy's Sword is Aimed at Your Right Shoulder then it Must Be Found on the Outside; and You Will Adopt the Same Manner in Gaining the Low Guards.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>The following figures demonstrate the play of sword and dagger, and principally is taught the manner of ''stringer''ing the sword of the adversary, he being found in a high ''prima'', noting that it is not possible in one figure to demonstrate all of the manners of ''stringer''ing on the outside and on the inside, from low and from high, deferring in this to the discretion of the reader, noting only that if the point of the enemy's sword is aimed towards your right side you will find him on the outside, and moreover that if it occurs to you to ''stringer'' the low guards, you will ''stringer'' with the sword in the sloping line,<ref>“Sloping line” i.e. “linea pendiculare”—a downwardly angled, that is hanging or sloping line. Thus when the adversary’s sword is high, one must point one’s sword upwards, and similarly when the adversary’s sword is low, one must point one’s sword downwards in order to ''stringer'' it. In these cases it is apparently necessary to depart from the straight line in order to ''stringer''.</ref> with the ''terza'' as with the ''quarta''.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|97|lbl=80}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 1629 22 small.png|400x400px|center|link=File:Capo Ferro 1629 22.png]]<br />
| <p>[50] '''Figures that Demonstrate how with a Single Parry with the Dagger It is Possible to Strike in Three Places with a Thrust, Namely in the Face, in the Chest, or in the Thigh.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>These following figures demonstrate an artful manner of striking in three different ways with a thrust with a single parry of the dagger, which are done thus: that, in ''quarta'', having the adversary ''stringer''ed on the inside in whatsoever guard apt for ''stringer''ing on the inside, he will be able to disengage to give you a thrust in two ways: to the face or chest; however, he having disengaged to strike you, you will parry his sword to the inside with your dagger over your right arm, and in the first occasion you will be able to strike him high or low, that is, to the face, or under the arm in the chest or in the thigh; and in the second only to the face or thigh.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|99|lbl=82}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 1629 23 small.png|400x400px|center|link=File:Capo Ferro 1629 23.png]]<br />
| <p>[51] '''A Figure that Strikes on ''seconda'' in the Chest Between the Weapons by a Pretense, Disengaging Over the Dagger, and Also in the Same Manner Could Have Struck in ''quarta''.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>The adversary lying in a low ''terza'' with the arm withdrawn, and with the dagger forward and united with the sword, you will place yourself opposite him in a high ''terza'', making a feint outside of the dagger to the face in a high ''quarta'' or a similar ''terza'', and while he raises his dagger to parry and attack you in ''quarta'', you will disengage over his dagger and, in the same ''tempo'', parrying to the inside you will strike him in ''seconda'' in the chest.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|101|lbl=84}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 1629 24 small.png|400x400px|center|link=File:Capo Ferro 1629 24.png]]<br />
| <p>[52] '''A Figure that Strikes Above the Right Arm to the Chest and Makes the Sword Fall with the Unfastening<ref>I.e. “schiodatura”, from “schiodare”, “to loosen or unnail”. A prying action may be implied by the name.</ref> of the Sword and the Dagger.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>From this figure you will easily be able to comprehend and learn the manner of casting down the sword from the hand and giving as well in the same ''tempo'' a thrust to the chest; that is, finding yourself in ''terza'' with your arm withdrawn and uniting your dagger with your sword, the adversary being in the same guard, or in ''quarta'', you will commence to ''stringer'' his sword on the inside in ''quarta'', and you will lower your dagger to the middle of your right arm in an oblique line; and your adversary disengaging to strike you in the chest in ''quarta'', you will strike him from the outside with a ''punta riversa'' to the body, raising the hilt of your sword somewhat and in the same ''tempo'' parrying downward with the flat of your dagger to the outside you will force him to abandon his weapon.<ref>In practice, actually disarming the enemy has proven difficult unless some forward motion (toward the opponent) with the flat of the dagger accompanies the parry to the outside.</ref></p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|103|lbl=86}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 1629 25 small.png|400x400px|center|link=File:Capo Ferro 1629 25.png]]<br />
| <p>[53] '''A Figure that Parries with the Dagger High to the Inside and Strikes with a ''Riverso'' to the Thigh, and in ''Quarta'' to the Chest as the Figure Demonstrates.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Finding yourself in ''quarta'' with the dagger high and your adversary in whatsoever guard apt for ''stringer''ing on the inside, with the right leg forward, you will commence to ''stringer'' him on the inside in ''quarta'', and he disengaging to strike you in the face in ''quarta'', you, parrying to the inside with your dagger, over your right arm, will be able to strike him either with a ''riverso'' to the thigh or with a ''quarta'' below the arm.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|105|lbl=88}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 1629 26.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>[54] '''A Figure that Parries with the Sword in ''Quarta'' Accompanied with the Dagger and Strikes in ''Quarta'' to the Face or with a ''Riverso'' to the Arm as the Figure Shows.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>If it so happens that you find yourself in an extended ''terza'' with the dagger at your wrist, your adversary being in whatsoever guard apt for ''stringer''ing on the outside, you will commence to ''stringer'' him with the same ''terza'', now high, now low, according to the occasion, however without moving the dagger from its place, and your adversary disengaging to strike you in ''quarta'' or ''seconda'', parrying in ''quarta'' with your sword accompanied with your dagger you will be able to strike him, as you see, either with a ''riverso'' to the arm or a ''quarta'' to the face.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|107|lbl=90}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 1629 27 small.png|400x400px|center|link=File:Capo Ferro 1629 27.png]]<br />
| <p>[55] '''A Figure that Makes a Feint Above the Dagger, and, the Adversary Raising to Parry the Same, Strikes Him in the Chest in ''Quarta'', Disengaging the Sword Under.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Finding yourself in an extended ''terza'' with the dagger at the wrist, and the adversary being in a low ''Quarta'' with his sword withdrawn and his dagger high and extended, you will commence to make a feint above his dagger in ''terza''; maintaining your dagger in its place, he parrying upwards with his dagger, wanting to strike you in the same ''tempo'' in ''Quarta'' or ''Seconda'', you will disengage under, and parrying his attack therewith<ref>“Parrying his attack therewith” i.e. at the same time. Note that the picture shows the parry being accomplished with the dagger.</ref> you will strike him in ''Quarta'' in the chest.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|109|lbl=92}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 28.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>[56] '''Figure that Parries Under His Right Arm with the Dagger, and Strikes in ''Seconda'' into the Face or with a ''Stramazzone Riverso'' in the Sword Arm.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Lying in a low or high ''terza'', with your dagger at your wrist, your adversary being in whatsoever guard convenient to ''stringer'' on the outside, you will begin to ''stringer'' on the outside in high or low ''terza'', according to the occasion, elevating your dagger, and he wanting to disengage to the inside, and throw in ''quarta'' or ''seconda'', you, parrying down with the dagger under your sword arm, will throw at him a ''stramazzone'' to his arm or you will strike him in ''seconda'' in the face, as is shown.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|111|lbl=94}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 29.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>[57] '''Figure that Strikes Over the Dagger in ''Seconda'' into the Left Shoulder while the Adversary Seeks to Gain the Sword Against Him on the Outside.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>If you lie in extended ''terza'' with your dagger in an oblique line over the beginning of the ''forte'' of your sword, your adversary being in the same guard, he coming to ''stringer'' on the outside also in ''terza'', you will disengage and beat his sword with yours in ''quarta'' all in one ''tempo'', and immediately parrying his already pressed sword with your dagger, you will strike him in the same ''tempo'' over his dagger in the left shoulder.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|113|lbl=96}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 1629 30.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>[58] '''Figure that Strikes in ''Seconda'' Over the Dagger into the Left Shoulder from a Feint, Parrying with His Dagger from Above to Below Under His Right Arm.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>You being in ''terza'' or ''quarta'' with your arm withdrawn, with your dagger at your wrist, your adversary being in ''quarta'' with his sword withdrawn and dagger high and extended, you will make a feint at him from under his dagger, raising yours, and he parrying down with his dagger toward his left side, you will disengage in the same ''tempo'' over his dagger, parrying the enemy’s sword to the inside under your right arm, and you will strike him in ''seconda'' over his dagger.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|115|lbl=98}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 31.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>[59] '''Figure that Strikes on a ''Passata'' with a Thrust in ''Falso'' From Beneath Upwards, Between the Weapons into the Chest, Parrying over His Right Arm with His Dagger, Pressing the Weapons Together Well.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>The adversary lying in ''terza'' with both weapons extended in an oblique line, so that the point of the enemy’s sword is aimed at your right shoulder and that of his dagger at your left, you will put yourself opposite him in ''terza'' with the point of your sword low and with your dagger high, with your body bent as much as possible toward your left side; and he wanting to approach in order to ''stringer'' you, or for some other aim of his, you will pass with your left foot in the same ''tempo'' toward his right side, and parrying with your dagger toward the inside over your right arm you will extend to him a thrust in falso from beneath upwards between his weapons, or alternately, disengaging over with the sword you will press his sword with both weapons, striking him in ''terza'' in the very same ''tempo''.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|117|lbl=100}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 32.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>[60] '''Figure that Strikes in ''Quarta'' into the Throat Only with Falsing the Sword and Lowering the Dagger in Order to Parry while the Adversary Disengages from the Sword and Seeks to Parry with the Dagger.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>The adversary lying in high ''terza'' with his dagger crossed and joined at the beginning of the ''forte'' of his sword, somewhat oblique, you will ''stringer'' it in ''terza'' on the outside, with the dagger high, and he disengaging under, assisting himself by parrying with his dagger in order to strike you in ''quarta'', you will parry with your dagger from high downwards, toward your left side, and in one ''tempo'' disengaging under his dagger, you will strike him in ''quarta'' in the face, or wherever it happens to be more convenient.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|119|lbl=102}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 33.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>[61] '''Figure that Strikes in ''Quarta'' Under the Dagger into the Chest, Carrying the Right Leg Back and Parrying High with the Dagger, while the Adversary Passes Forward with His Leg in Order to Strike in ''Seconda'' over the Dagger.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>The adversary lying in low ''terza'', you will place yourself opposite him in high ''terza'' with your dagger joined crossed over your ''forte'', and he approaching by a ''passata'' to strike you in ''seconda'' over your dagger, and parrying wide with his, you only drawing back your right leg, and he raising his dagger to parry, you will disengage under his, carrying your body well forward, as the figure shows, and you will strike him in ''quarta''.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|121|lbl=104}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 1652 34.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>[62] '''Figure that Strikes in ''Seconda'' over the Dagger into the Chest while the Adversary Passes with His Left Foot in Order to Strike, only with Drawing Back the Right Leg During His Approach, and Parrying with the Dagger Under His Right Arm.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Although the adversary lies in ''quarta'' with his sword withdrawn and low, and with his dagger extended high and wide, you will put yourself opposite him in ''quarta'' with your arm extended and dagger high, and he moving by a ''passata'' to parry your sword downward from high in order to strike you in ''seconda'', drawing your right leg back, you will parry him downward with your dagger toward your right side, and you will disengage your sword over his dagger, and will strike him in ''seconda''.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|123|lbl=106}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 35.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>[63] '''Figure that Strikes with a Thrust Between the Weapons into the Chest, Disengaging it Over the Dagger While the Adversary Was Lying in Wide Guard, and Lets the Enemy Arrive to Measure.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>The adversary lying in ''quarta'' with his arm withdrawn, and with his dagger straight high and wide and with his arm extended, you will oppose him in extended ''terza'' with your dagger crossed in front of your breast, and you will approach his dagger from the outside, he still remaining in his guard; and once arrived, you will make the point of your sword even with his dagger, and will disengage over in ''quarta'', delivering to him a long ''stoccata'' into his chest.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|125|lbl=108}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 1629 36 small.png|400x400px|center|link=File:Capo Ferro 1629 36.png]]<br />
| <p>[64] '''Method of Employing the Sword and Cape.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>To the end that this matter of the cape be better understood, it will perhaps not be out of place to explain some terms that must be used therewith. I tell you therefore that having the cape thereabout, it will be allowed to fall down off the right shoulder, to as far as the middle of the left arm, and then wrapping the left hand to the outside, enveloping the arm in the said cape, putting oneself with it into ''terza'', or in some other guard as you like. So much, then, when stepping, will that order be obtained as is held with the sword and dagger, as to be an identical progress, except that in parrying there is a difference. In that then, the cape can be cut, and punctured, which cannot occur to the dagger. And finding yourself in ''terza'', as above, at the encounter with your adversary, and he throws a ''mandritto'' at your head, you at the same time will step forward with your left foot, parrying against the ''forte'' of the enemy’s sword with your cape, extending to him a thrust into his chest; one can also parry the said blow in ''prima'' with the sword in guardia di testa<ref>In guardia di testa (“head guard”), the sword is held high with the point forward and somewhat to the left, hand usually in ''seconda''. See [[Antonio Manciolino|Manciolino]] pg. [[Page:Opera Nova (Antonio Manciolino) 1531.pdf/24|7 verso]], or [[Achille Marozzo|Marozzo]] Ch. [[Page:Opera Nova (Achille Marozzo) 1536.pdf/106|143]], which includes illustration.</ref> accompanied by the cape, gathering in that ''tempo'' your left foot near to your right, and immediately advance with the right, and turn a ''mandritto'' to his head or leg; but when he throws either a ''mandritto'' or ''riverso'' to your leg, you will draw back your right foot somewhat, and if it be a ''mandritto'', then give him a ''riverso'' to his sword arm; and if it be a ''riverso'', then give him a ''dritto'' likewise in the said arm; but the true parry will be to parry with the sword and then in the striking to go to accompany the sword with the cape, therewith hitting the enemy’s sword, and thus one will strike safely. Moreover I say that the following figures show the manner that one must employ to gain the sword of the adversary on the inside with sword and cape.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|127|lbl=110}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 37.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>[65] '''Figure that Strikes with a Counter-disengage from ''Quarta'' into the Face, Parrying the Enemy’s Sword to the Outside with the Cape Arm, as the Adversary Disengaged His Sword in Order to Strike with a Thrust.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Your adversary being in ''quarta'' with his sword extended and high, you will commit yourself to ''stringer'' it in ''quarta'' on the inside, with your cape arm under your ''forte''; he wanting to disengage in order to strike you with a thrust in whatsoever manner, parrying upwards with your cape, to the outside of your left side, and counter-disengaging in ''quarta'', you will strike him in the face or wherever it will happen to be more convenient for you.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|129|lbl=112}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 38.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>[66] '''Figure that Strikes with a ''Strammazone Riverso'' in the Face of a Left-Hander and Will also Be Able to Strike in Second into the Chest; or Alternately in ''Quarta'' from the Outside of the Enemy’s Sword During the Disengage that His Point Makes in Order to Strike.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>The adversary, who will be left handed, lying in ''quarta'' with his arm extended, you will begin to ''stringer'' his sword on the inside<ref>Note that the plate clarifies that this is the adversary’s inside, i.e. your outside.</ref> in ''terza'', with your dagger high, and he disengaging in order to strike you in ''seconda'' in the face, you will be able to strike him in three manners: first, only lowering your dagger and parrying his sword you will strike him with a strammazone ''riverso'' in the face; alternately, in ''seconda'' in the chest; taking note, nonetheless, that during his disengage it could be better to strike him in ''quarta'' with your sword alone on the outside.<ref>Presumably the adversary’s outside, so most likely an attack in ''quarta'' with opposition using your true edge.</ref></p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|131|lbl=114}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 39.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>[67] '''Figure that Parries the Head<ref>I.e. a blow to the head.</ref> with the Point of the Sword High and with the Dagger Crossed with His Sword on the Inside at the ''Forte'', so that the Same Will Be Able to Strike in Two Manners: First with a Thrust to the Face; or Alternately with a ''Riverso'' to the Leg.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>I would certainly have wronged myself if I had not revealed to you this noble parry, or defense, which defends, and saves such a noble part of the body; accordingly on this occasion I put forth to you the present figures, of whom one lies in ''prima'', and the other in ''quinta''; and from ''quinta'', only by raising his arm and turning his hand into ''quarta'', increasing the pace, he will have come to gain the sword of the adversary on the inside, and the enemy<sub>A</sub><ref>The agents are poorly delineated in this section. Figure A is the actor subscripted in the text as A; figure E is that subscripted as E.</ref> disengaging by turning under his enemy’s<sub>E</sub> sword, he<sub>A</sub> will have thrown a ''dritto fendente'' at the same<sub>E</sub>, but the same<sub>E</sub> only by turning his hand into ''seconda'' with the point high, putting the dagger to the rear on the ''forte'' of his sword, will be able to strike the adversary safely in two places: with a thrust in the face, or a cut to the leg, as the two lines descending from the point of the sword demonstrate well, the one falling to the head, and the other to the thigh.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|133|lbl=116}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 40.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>[68] '''Figure that Strikes with a Thrust in ''Terza'' into the Thigh and with the Dagger into the Body while the Adversary Disengages a ''Riverso'' to the Leg in Order to Strike.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Because to some, seeing this following figure struck with the sword and also with the dagger, it will perhaps appear difficult, nevertheless putting the same technique to the test, it will turn out to be easy considering the representation; hence I say, that the adversaries, finding each other in ''quarta'', with the true edges of their swords such that they were touching each other and the points of the same each aimed at their adversary’s face, the same was forced, the enemy’s sword pressing his sword, so that feeling his adversary press, he resolves to turn a ''riverso'' to the leg, but the same lowering his sword in an instant, and turning his hand into ''terza'', passing forward with his left leg, strikes him, parrying, with his sword, and also with his dagger, as the figure shows.<ref>“…they were touching each other” i.e. “si toccavano”. Actual engagement and use of sentiment is uniquely specified in this plate. The agent applies pressure through the sword, provoking the patient to cut with a ''riverso'', to which the agent responds with a thrust with the sword that serves to block said cut, and simultaneously thrusts with the dagger.</ref></p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|135|lbl=118}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 41.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>[69] '''Figure that Parries the ''Stramazzone Riverso'' with the Sword and Passes Forward in an Instant with the Left Foot, Giving a Stab Under the Right Arm into the Pectoral.'''<br/><br/></p><br />
<br />
<p>Because it is of great account when the adversary throws a thrust to parry it with the dagger, to the inside as to the outside, and to turn a ''stramazzone riverso'' to the enemy’s sword arm, thus when you have thrown a thrust at your adversary, and he has parried it to the inside, toward your left side, and throws at you the said ''stramazzone'', you will parry with your sword in ''terza'' to the outside, and passing forward with your left leg instantly, putting your dagger over the enemy’s sword you will strike him in ''seconda'' with a thrust to the chest. But by presentation of the following figures, I say that the adversary lying in ''terza'' with his dagger upon the ''forte'' of his sword, and the other in the guard of ''sesta'', with the dagger arm extended forward, and the sword somewhat low and withdrawn toward himself, the same being at measure will throw a thrust at him over his dagger, and the enemy parrying to the outside, toward his left side, responds with a ''stramazzone riverso'', but the same in that instant parrying in ''quarta'' and passing forward with the left foot, strikes him with the dagger, as the figure shows, and wanting to return to the rear, will withdraw the said left leg, turning in the same ''tempo'' a ''riverso'' to the sword arm of the adversary, returning into the same guard.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|137|lbl=120}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 42.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>[70] '''Way of Knowing How to Avail Oneself of the Rotella, Finding Oneself Confronted with Another Rotella.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>As it often happens that one’s own weapons wage war against one who does not know how to avail himself well thereof, accordingly I have judged it to not be out of place to give an inkling of some details of the rotella, as a weapon most dangerous to those who have not had some practice with the same; and in consideration of such, it is to be advised that the rotella must be embraced with the left arm somewhat curved, in a way such that it faces somewhat toward your left side, but not so curved that it impedes the vision so that one could not discern any part of the enemy whatsoever; and having done thus, wanting to go to strike, the enemy lying with his sword extended forward in ''guardia stretta'',<ref>“''Guardia stretta''”—i.e. narrow guard, generally a guard in which the hilt is low and the point forward.</ref> it will be necessary first to ''stringer'' the enemy’s sword on the inside or the outside according to the occasion, and then advancing with the left foot, to hit his already gained sword with your rotella, and strike him vigorously in ''terza'' with a rising thrust. But if it occurred that the enemy lay in ''guardia larga'',<ref>“''Guardia larga''”—i.e. wide guard, generally a guard in which the hilt is low and the point is not aimed at the enemy.</ref> and that he threw a ''dritto'' or ''riverso'' to your leg, you would have to parry it with the ''falso'',<ref>“Falso”—a defense using a rising false edge cut under the enemy’s attack to displace it out and up.</ref> the ''dritto'' as well as the ''riverso'', and then respond with a cut to the adversary in the leg; but if perchance he threw a thrust or a cut toward your face or head you could parry with the rotella when the cut or the thrust came not as a feint. But in order to protect yourself from the feint, being that the rotella is heavy so that it could not be of such quickness to parry as could be done with a ''targa''<ref>“''Targa''”—a handheld rectangular buckler, usually corrugated; familiar to English readers of di Grassi as a “square target”.</ref> or ''brocchiero'',<ref>“''Brocchiero''”—a small handheld round buckler.</ref> accordingly you will be careful not to parry in such a case with the rotella; then, the same figure wanting to parry a thrust which the adversary has thrown to the outside of his rotella, the same wishing to parry it will of course necessarily block his vision, and thus impeded, in that instant the enemy will have convenient opportunity to pass forward with his left foot and strike, without the motion of his sword being seen, into the breast or to the base of the body, as the figures show. But the same is to be parried in ''seconda'' or ''quarta'' with the sword, according to the occasion, and then advancing with the left foot, hitting the enemy’s sword with the rotella, one will strike with a rising thrust in ''terza'', and thus will be safer.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|139|lbl=122}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:Capo Ferro 43.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>[71] '''Figure that Strikes Under the Rotella, while the Adversary Seeks to Parry with the Same Rotella, in Order to Strike with a Thrust in the Chest.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Considering the deceptions and feints that are found in arms, it is necessary to pay great attention when one comes to blows with his enemy, so through presentation of the following figures I show to you how parrying is most often harmful when one parries and does not respond in the same ''tempo''; so I will demonstrate it to you in this action of the rotella, being that one of them lies in ''quinta'' with his arm sloping and with the point of his sword low, with the rotella forward of his breast, and the enemy lies in ''sesta'' with his rotella arm extended forward, and with his sword somewhat back, so that the same<sub>E</sub>,<ref>Again, the agents are poorly delineated; superscript E refers to figure E, while superscript F refers to figure F.</ref> if he will be accosted at measure, will throw a thrust outside the rotella to the face; and he<sub>F</sub> raising his rotella to parry, the view will be obscured, and the same<sub>E</sub>, falsing his sword under the rotella, strikes him in ''quarta'' in the way that the figure shows. But if he had been an experienced person, when the adversary threw a thrust at his face, he would have parried, stretching out his rotella arm, and passing forward with his left foot, instantly bending his body and head toward his right side, giving him a thrust in the chest; alternately, when the adversary threw the thrust, he could have parried with the sword in ''quarta'', and passing forward in an instant with his left foot, and hitting the enemy’s sword with his rotella, he would strike him in ''terza'' with a rising thrust to the body, and thus he would have been safe.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|141|lbl=124}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[72] '''Of Some Terms of the Cut.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>I had resolved myself to present to you some figures that would have shown you the way of using a cutting weapon, of parrying as well as striking, and in these actions to show you many effects, but considering this, that could have been done with figures, I can also do with these few pieces of advice, that I put to you, thus: the adversary lying in ''terza'' or in ''quarta'', so that the point of his sword is aimed at the middle of your body, you will place yourself opposite him in ''quarta'' with the point of your sword somewhat high, and crossed toward your right side, and approaching somewhat toward the adversary’s sword, you will throw a ''dritto'' at his sword followed by a rising ''riverso'' to his face; on the contrary, when your enemy will turn a ''riverso'' to your face, you will pass, parrying with your dagger in ''guardia di faccia''<ref>“''Guardia di faccia''”—i.e. face guard, a guard in which arm is extended at shoulder height and the point is forward with the hand in ''quarta''. See [[Antonio Manciolino|Manciolino]] pg. [[Page:Opera Nova (Antonio Manciolino) 1531.pdf/25|8 recto]], or [[Achille Marozzo|Marozzo]] Ch. [[Page:Opera Nova (Achille Marozzo) 1536.pdf/106|143]], which includes illustration.</ref> over your right arm, giving him a thrust in ''terza'' in his chest; alternately, having parried, and passing as above, you will be able to give him a ''dritto'' to his leg, and moreover you will be able to parry the said ''riverso'' with your sword in ''quarta'', as that figure shows, which strikes with the dagger under the arm of the adversary, and passing and parrying with the dagger, one will strike with a ''riverso'' to the leg, or with the dagger in the same way into the pectoral; moreover, you will also be able to put yourself in ''quarta'' with the point of your sword low, showing him your body somewhat, and he coming from the outside to throw a thrust at you, you will parry upwards with the false edge of your sword, giving him a ''dritto'' to the face, or a thrust to the chest, but if the adversary approaches you to beat your sword, to the inside as to the outside, you will do such: if he throws a ''dritto'' to your sword, in the same ''tempo'' you will turn a ''riverso'' to his face; and if he throws a ''riverso'' to the outer side in order to beat your sword, in the same ''tempo'' you will turn a ''dritto'' to his face. Be advised that the parry of the ''dritto'', as well as the ''riverso'', to the head, will be parried in the same way, as that figure shows that parries with the sword crossed with the dagger at the rear upon the ''forte'' of the sword, which has two lines, one falling to the face, and the other to the thigh; and upon the occasion that the adversary throws at you either a ''dritto'' or ''riverso'' to the lower parts, you will parry in ''seconda'' with the point of your sword low, and if it will be a ''dritto'', you will parry and disengage with the edge, over the enemy’s sword, putting your dagger upon the said sword, giving him a ''riverso'' to the arm; and if it will be a ''riverso'', you will parry to the outside in the same way, giving him a thrust in the chest, putting however your dagger upon the adversary’s sword in the same ''tempo''; and this is as much concerning thereof that occurs to me to say.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|143|lbl=126}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>[73] '''Secure Method of Defending Oneself from Every Sort of Blow with a Parry of a ''Riverso'' and Striking Always with an ''Imbroccata''.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Wanting to put an end to this, my work, it does not seem to be to be out of place to seal it with this brief discourse of mine, which consists only of demonstrating the virtue and the action of the guards of ''prima'' and ''quarta'', discovering in ''prima'' the offense, and in ''quarta'' the defense, the beginning and end of whatsoever honored scheme; considering that ''quarta'' defends against any blow, resolute or irresolute, and ''prima'' offends the adversary, accordingly it is necessary to say (for the two to be faithful companions) that the beginning of the one is the end of the other, and thus, without beginning and end they evade beginning and ending, since the ''prima'' begins from high and finishes in a somewhat low ''quarta'', and this is for two reasons. First, because if the adversary throws a thrust or a cut, passing somewhat with the left foot, in parrying with a ''riverso'' toward the right side of the adversary, advancing the right foot, one can strike with an ''imbroccata'' in the chest, and by such an end, one returns into the guard of ''quarta''. Second, because the adversary cannot offend if not to the right side, which can easily be defended with an ''ascendente'' from the said ''quarta'', demonstrating nonetheless in these actions boldness in the face, the eye quick to recognize the uncovered and covered parts of the adversary, strength and speed in the legs, arms, and hands, quickness in parrying and striking, and agility in the body; and this is the nature of the guards of ''prima'' and ''quarta''.<ref>This section resembles the advice given by [[Giovanni dall'Agocchie|dall’Agocchie]] on pg. [[Page:Dell'Arte di Scrima Libri Tre (Giovanni dall'Agocchie) 1572.pdf/66|32 verso]] as the method to learn when one has only one month to prepare for a duel, as well as the heart of [[Angelo Viggiani dal Montone|Viggiani]]’s entire ''schermo''. I find it tempting to speculate that the alternation of an attack from ''prima'' with a parry of a ''riverso'' may have been a commonplace in the didactic repertoire of Italian maestri of the time, perhaps reserved for the paying customer who wanted quick results.</ref></p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|144|lbl=127}}<br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| class="noline" | <br />
| class="noline" | <p>[74] [Ecclesiastical endorsement]</p><br />
| class="noline" | {{pagetb|Page:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|145|lbl=128}}<br />
| class="noline" |<br />
<br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Copyright and License Summary<br />
| width = 100%<br />
}}<br />
For further information, including transcription and translation notes, see the [[Talk:{{PAGENAME}}|discussion page]].<br />
<br />
<section begin="sourcebox"/>{{sourcebox header}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Illustrations (1610)<br />
| authors = [[Rafael Schiamirossi]]<br />
| source link = http://www.internetculturale.it/jmms/iccuviewer/iccu.jsp?id=oai%3Awww.internetculturale.sbn.it%2FTeca%3A20%3ANT0000%3ACFIE004763&mode=all&teca=MagTeca+-+ICCU<br />
| source title= Internet Culturale<br />
| license = public domain<br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Illustrations (1629)<br />
| authors = <br />
| source link = <br />
| source title= Biblioteca Oliveriana<br />
| license = public domain<br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Translation<br />
| authors = [[William Wilson]], [[W. Jherek Swanger]]<br />
| source link = http://mac9.ucc.nau.edu/manuscripts/CapoFerro-GRAUF.pdf<br />
| source title= Elizabethan Fencing and the Art of Defence<br />
| license = copyrighted<br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Transcription<br />
| authors = [[Società d’Arme dell’Aquila]]<br />
| source link = <br />
| source title= {{nowrap|[[Index:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli) 1610.pdf|Index:Gran Simulacro dell'Arte e dell'Uso della Scherma (Ridolfo Capo Ferro da Cagli)]]}}<br />
| license = orphan<br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox footer}}<section end="sourcebox"/><br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
* Capo Ferro, Ridolfo. ''Italian Rapier Combat: Ridolfo Capo Ferro's 'Gran Simulacro'''. Ed. Jared Kirby. London: Greenhill Books, 2004. ISBN 978-1853675805<br />
* Capo Ferro, Ridolfo. ''Rapier: The Art and Use of Fencing by Ridolfo Capo Ferro''. Trans. Nick S. Thomas. SwordWorks, 2007. ISBN 978-1906512279<br />
* Leoni, Tom. ''Ridolfo Capoferro's The Art and Practice of Fencing: A Practical Translation for the Modern Swordsman''. Wheaton, IL: [[Freelance Academy Press]], 2011. ISBN 978-0-9825911-9-2<br />
* Garcia-Salmones, Eugenio. ''Ridolfo Capoferro, "Gran simulacro del arte y del uso de la esgrima"'', Traduccion al castellano. [[Editorial Sacauntos]], 2009. ISBN 978-84-937207-0-4<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist|1}}<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Capo Ferro da Cagli, Ridolfo}}<br />
{{Early Italian masters}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Rapier]]<br />
[[Category:Rapier and Cloak]]<br />
[[Category:Rapier and Dagger]]<br />
[[Category:Rapier and Shield]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:New format]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Terenziano_Ceresa&diff=120629Terenziano Ceresa2020-12-09T20:11:20Z<p>P Terminiello: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = [[name::Terenziano Ceresa]]<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = The Hermit<br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = <br />
| birthplace = Parma<br />
| deathdate = <br />
| deathplace = <br />
| resting_place = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set:occupation=Fencing master}}<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = <br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = Tommaso Palunci<br />
<br />
| period = <br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| subject = <br />
| movement = <br />
| notableworks = ''[[L'Esercizio della spada regolato con la perfetta idea della scherma (Terenziano Ceresa)]]'' (1641)<br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= <br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| partner = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| influences = {{plainlist<br />
| [[Salvator Fabris]]<br />
| [[Ridolfo Capoferro]]<br />
}}<br />
| influenced = <br />
| awards = <br />
| signature = <br />
| website = <br />
| translations = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
'''Terenziano Ceresa''' was a [[century::17th century]] [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing master]]. Little is known about his life, although he describes himself as a native of Parma, and was nicknamed “The Hermit”, apparently due to his disdain for social contact. He appears to have been active in Ancona, where his treatise was published and where his patron resided.<br />
<br />
In 1641, he published a treatise on fencing “more from the insistence of patrons than the impulse of my nature, inimical to the presses” entitled ''[[L'Esercizio della spada regolato con la perfetta idea della scherma (Terenziano Ceresa)| L'Esercizio della spada regolato con la perfetta idea della scherma]]'' ("The Practice of the Sword Governed by the Perfect Conception of Fencing"), dedicated to his patron and student Tommaso Palunci, a nobleman from Ancona.<br />
<br />
The treatise discusses the sword alone and the sword and dagger, and appears to develop the ideas presented by [[Salvatore Fabris]] and [[Ridolfo Capoferro]]. Specifically: Ceresa describes a passing play from out of measure, reminiscent of the ''andare di risolutione'' from Fabris’ Book II, although Ceresa employs ''quarta'' as opposed to the ''terza'' preferred by Fabris; and Ceresa nominates a fifth and sixth guard (in addition to the usual four) which appear to correspond to these guards as presented by Capoferro.<br />
== Treatise ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Ceresa, Terenziano}}<br />
{{Early Italian masters}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Rapier]]<br />
[[Category:Rapier and Dagger]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Discorso_sopra_l%27arte_della_scherma_(MS_14.10)&diff=120628Discorso sopra l'arte della scherma (MS 14.10)2020-12-09T20:09:24Z<p>P Terminiello: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox manuscript<br />
<!----------Name----------><br />
| name = [[name::Discorso sopra l'arte della scherma]]<br />
| location = [[inventory::MS 14/10]], [[museum::Wallace Collection]]<br/>London, United Kingdom<br />
<!----------Image----------><br />
| image = File:MS 14.10.png<br />
| width = 300px<br />
| caption = <br />
<!----------General----------><br />
| Index number = [[WI::—]]<br />
| Wierschin's catalog = [[WC::—]]<br />
| Hils' catalog = [[HK::—]]<br />
| Beck catalog = [[BC::—]]<br />
| Also known as = ''Discorso di Camillo Palladini Bolognese <br/>sopra l'arte della scherma come l'arte <br/>della scherma è necessaria à chi si <br/>diletta d'arme''<br />
| Type = [[type::Fencing manual]]<br />
| Date = ca. [[year::1600]]<br />
| Place of origin = Bologna, Italy (?)<br />
| Language(s) = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| Scribe(s) = <br />
| Author(s) = [[author::Camillo Palladini]]<br />
| Compiled by = <br />
| Illuminated by = <br />
| Patron = <br />
| Dedicated to = <br />
<!----------Form and content----------><br />
| Material = <br />
| Size = 118 [[folia]] (220 mm x 330 mm)<br />
| Format = <br />
| Condition = <br />
| Script = <br />
| Contents = <br />
| Illumination(s) = <br />
| Additions = <br />
| Exemplar(s) = <br />
| Previously kept = <br />
| Discovered = <br />
| Website = [http://catalogue.libraries.london.ac.uk/record{{=}}b3382844~S15 Library catalog entry]<br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
{{dablink | The correct signature of this manuscript is 14/10, but has been rendered 14.10 in a few places due to technical restrictions. }}<br />
'''''Discorso di Camillo Palladini Bolognese sopra l'arte della scherma come l'arte della scherma è necessaria à chi si diletta d'arme''''' ("Discourse by Camillo Palladini of Bologna on the art of fencing, as the art of fencing is necessary to whoever is delighted by arms"; MS 14/10) is an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing manual]] created by [[Camillo Palladini]] in ca. 1600.{{cn}} The original currently rests in the Howard de Walden Library of the [[Wallace Collection]] in London, United Kingdom. Palladini’s method of fencing demonstrates commonalities with a number of contemporary and near-contemporary treatises, presaging the methods of later Italian rapier masters, while conserving some elements of the earlier Bolognese school (for example cuts or beats with the false edge of the sword, and mentions of the older Bolognese guard names).<br />
<br />
The treatise covers the sword alone, sword and dagger, sword and cloak, double swords, spadone, pike and halberd.<br />
<br />
== Provenance ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Contents ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Gallery ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
* [[Piermarco Terminiello|Terminiello, Piermarco]] and Pendragon, Joshua. ''The Art of Fencing - The Forgotten Discourse of Camillo Palladini''. Royal Armouries Museum, 2019. ISBN 9780948092961<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
<br />
== Copyright and License Summary ==<br />
<br />
For further information, including transcription and translation notes, see the [[Talk:{{PAGENAME}}|discussion page]].<br />
<br />
<section begin="sourcebox"/>{{sourcebox header}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Images<br />
| authors = <br />
| source link = <br />
| source title= <br />
| license = public domain<br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Transcription<br />
| authors = <br />
| source link = <br />
| source title= [[Index:Discorso sopra l'arte della scherma (MS 14.10)]]<br />
| license = <br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox footer}}<section end="sourcebox"/><br />
<br />
[[Category:Treatises]]<br />
[[Category:Manuscripts]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Research/Background Information]]<br />
[[Category:Scanning]]<br />
[[Category:Digital Scanning]]<br />
[[Category:Image Processing]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Camillo_Palladini&diff=120627Camillo Palladini2020-12-09T20:05:54Z<p>P Terminiello: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = [[name::Camillo Palladini]]<br />
| image = File:Camillo Palladini.png<br />
| imagesize = 200px<br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = <br />
| birthplace = <br />
| deathdate = <br />
| deathplace = <br />
| resting_place = <br />
| occupation = [[occupation::Fencing master]]<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = <br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = <br />
<br />
| period = <br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| subject = <br />
| movement = <br />
| notableworks = <br />
| manuscript(s) = [[Discorso sopra l'arte della scherma (MS 14.10)|MS 14/10]] (ca. 1600)<br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| partner = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| influences = [[Camillo Agrippa]]<br />
| influenced = [[André des Bordes]]<br />
| awards = <br />
| signature = <br />
| website = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
'''Camillo Palladini''' was a 16th or [[century::17th century]] [[nationality::Italian]] fencing master. He seems to have been a professional fencing master, and to have written his [[Discorso sopra l'arte della scherma (MS 14.10)|treatise]] (MS 14/10), around the turn of the 17th century.<br />
<br />
In the title to his work Palladini declares himself a native of Bologna: ''Camillo Palladini Bolognese'', although he seems to have been active in Rome, [[Torquato D'Alessandri]], naming a ''Camillo Paladino'' from Bologna among the masters teaching in Rome as of 1609.<br />
<br />
''...the good and honoured masters of Rome, such as Messrs. Oratio and Cesare Cavalcabo, Camillo Paladino [sic], most excellent men, known as the Bolognese; Messers. Francesco and Vincenzo Marcelli, most exquisite men, known as the Abruzzese; and Messrs. Appio Castelli, Gio[vanni]. Angelo Paternostraro and Antonio Rinaldi, most fine and famous men, known as the Romans.''<ref>D’Alessandri, Torquato. ''Il cavaliere compito''. Viterbo, 1609. p.109.</ref><br />
<br />
Palladini mentions a number of earlier fencing masters in his work, including ''Tapa di Milano'', presumably the “great Tappé of Milan” mentioned by the French chronicler Brantôme, and [[Camillo Agrippa]], whom he cites in order to disagree with, explicitly rejecting overwrought geometrical explanations of fencing.<br />
<br />
Palladini’s own method of fencing demonstrates commonalities with a number of contemporary and near-contemporary treatises, presaging the methods of later Italian rapier masters, while conserving some elements of the earlier Bolognese school (for example cuts or beats with the false edge of the sword, and mentions of the older Bolognese guard names).<br />
<br />
The treatise covers the sword alone, sword and dagger, sword and cloak, double swords, spadone, pike and halberd.<br />
<br />
Palladini’s manuscript was not published in his own lifetime, and bears no dedication, however the 1610 treatise of [[André des Bordes]] appears in large part to be a plagiarism in French translation (without illustrations) of sections of Palladini’s work.<br />
<br />
<br />
== Treatises ==<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
* [[Piermarco Terminiello|Terminiello, Piermarco]] and Pendragon, Joshua. ''The Art of Fencing - The Forgotten Discourse of Camillo Palladini''. Royal Armouries Museum, 2019. ISBN 9780948092961<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Palladini, Camillo}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
{{early Italian masters}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Double Side Swords]]<br />
[[Category:Double Rapiers]]<br />
[[Category:Rapier]]<br />
[[Category:Side Sword]]<br />
[[Category:Sword and Dagger]]<br />
[[Category:Rapier and Dagger]]<br />
[[Category:Rapier and Cloak]]<br />
[[Category:Sword and Cloak]]<br />
[[Category:Dagger]]<br />
[[Category:Greatsword]]<br />
[[Category:Staff Weapons]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=L%27Esercizio_della_spada_regolato_con_la_perfetta_idea_della_scherma_(Terenziano_Ceresa)&diff=120626L'Esercizio della spada regolato con la perfetta idea della scherma (Terenziano Ceresa)2020-12-09T20:03:16Z<p>P Terminiello: Created page with "{{Infobox book <!----------Name----------> | name = L'Esercizio della spada regolato con la perfetta idea della scherma | subtitle = "t..."</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox book<br />
<!----------Name----------><br />
| name = L'Esercizio della spada regolato con la perfetta idea della scherma<br />
| subtitle = "[[title::The Practice of the Sword Governed by the Perfect Conception of Fencing]]"<br />
<!----------Image----------><br />
| image = <br />
| width = <br />
| caption = <br />
<!----------Information----------><br />
| full title = L'Esercizio della spada regolato con la perfetta idea della scherma, et insegnato dalla maestra mano di Terenziano Ceresa<br />
| also known as = <br />
| author(s) = [[author::Terenziano Ceresa]]<br />
| ascribed to = <br />
| compiled by = <br />
| illustrated by = <br />
| translator(s) = <br />
| patron = <br />
| dedicated to = Tommaso Palunci<br />
| place of origin = Ancona, Italy<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| subject = <br />
| genre = [[type::Fencing manual]]<br />
| sources = <br />
| publisher = [[publisher:: Marco Salvioni]]<br />
| pub_date = [[year::1641]]<br />
| first English edition = <br />
| pages = 124<br />
| extant copies = <br />
| wiktenauer compilation by = <br />
| images = {{plainlist<br />
| [https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k3111284 Digital scans]<br />
}}<br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
'''''L'Esercizio della spada regolato con la perfetta idea della scherma''''' ("The Practice of the Sword Governed by the Perfect Conception of Fencing") is an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing manual]] written by [[Terenziano Ceresa]] and published in 1641. It covers the use of the [[rapier]] and [[rapier and dagger]]. <br />
<br />
== Publication History ==<br />
<br />
''L'Esercizio della spada regolato con la perfetta idea della scherma'' was published in Ancona, Italy in 1641 by [[Marco Salvioni]].<br />
<br />
== Contents ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Gallery ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
<br />
== Copyright and License Summary ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Treatises]]<br />
[[Category:Books]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Research/Background Information]]<br />
[[Category:Digital Scanning]]<br />
[[Category:Transcription]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Terenziano_Ceresa&diff=120625Terenziano Ceresa2020-12-09T19:42:47Z<p>P Terminiello: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = [[name::Terenziano Ceresa]]<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = The Hermit<br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = <br />
| birthplace = Parma<br />
| deathdate = <br />
| deathplace = <br />
| resting_place = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set:occupation=Fencing master}}<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = <br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = Tommaso Palunci<br />
<br />
| period = <br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| subject = <br />
| movement = <br />
| notableworks = ''[[L'Esercizio della spada regolato con la perfetta idea della scherma]]'' (1641)<br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= <br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| partner = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| influences = {{plainlist<br />
| [[Salvator Fabris]]<br />
| [[Ridolfo Capoferro]]<br />
}}<br />
| influenced = <br />
| awards = <br />
| signature = <br />
| website = <br />
| translations = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
'''Terenziano Ceresa''' was a [[century::17th century]] [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing master]]. Little is known about his life, although he describes himself as a native of Parma, and was nicknamed “The Hermit”, apparently due to his disdain for social contact. He appears to have been active in Ancona, where his treatise was published and where his patron resided.<br />
<br />
In 1641, he published a treatise on fencing “more from the insistence of patrons than the impulse of my nature, inimical to the presses” entitled ''[[L'Esercizio della spada regolato con la perfetta idea della scherma (Terenziano Ceresa)| L'Esercizio della spada regolato con la perfetta idea della scherma]]'' ("The Practice of the Sword Governed by the Perfect Conception of Fencing"), dedicated to his patron and student Tommaso Palunci, a nobleman from Ancona.<br />
<br />
The treatise discusses the sword alone and the sword and dagger, and appears to develop the ideas presented by [[Salvatore Fabris]] and [[Ridolfo Capoferro]]. Specifically: Ceresa describes a passing play from out of measure, reminiscent of the ''andare di risolutione'' from Fabris’ Book II, although Ceresa employs ''quarta'' as opposed to the ''terza'' preferred by Fabris; and Ceresa nominates a fifth and sixth guard (in addition to the usual four) which appear to correspond to these guards as presented by Capoferro.<br />
== Treatise ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Ceresa, Terenziano}}<br />
{{Early Italian masters}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Rapier]]<br />
[[Category:Rapier and Dagger]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Template:Early_Italian_masters&diff=120624Template:Early Italian masters2020-12-09T19:38:04Z<p>P Terminiello: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Navbox<br />
| name = Early Italian masters<br />
| title = Early Italian masters<br />
| state = uncollapsed<br />
| listclass = hlist<br />
| width = 100%<br />
<br />
| titlestyle = background: #acbce0;<br />
| groupstyle = background: #d4d7de; color: #000000;<br />
| belowstyle = background: #d4d7de;<br />
| image = [[File:Agrippa 1553 01.jpg|175px]]<br />
<br />
| group1 = Imperial Tradition<br />
| list1 = <br />
* [[Nicholai de Toblem]]<br />
* [[Johannes Suvenus]]<br />
* [[Fiore de'i Liberi]] (1400s)<br />
* [[Wolfenbüttel Sketchbook (Cod.Guelf.78.2 Aug.2º)|Wolfenbüttel Sketchbook]] (1465-80)<br />
* [[Philippo di Vadi]] (1482-87)<br />
* [[Ludwig VI von Eyb]] (1500)<br />
* ''[[Die Blume des Kampfes]]'' (1420s, 1500, 1623)<br />
<br />
| group2 = Bolognese Tradition<br />
| list2 = <br />
* [[Filippo Dardi]]<br />
* [[Guido Antonio di Luca]]<br />
* [[Anonimo Bolognese (MSS Ravenna M-345/M-346)|Anonimo Bolognese]] (1510s)<br />
* [[Antonio Manciolino]] (1531)<br />
* [[Achille Marozzo]] (1536)<br />
* [[Giovanni dall'Agocchie]] (1572)<br />
* [[Angelo Viggiani dal Montone]] (1575)<br />
* [[Mercurio Spezioli]] (1577)<br />
* [[Girolamo Cavalcabo]] (1580s)<br />
* [[Camillo Palladini]] (ca. 1600)<br />
* [[Torquato d'Alessandri]] (1609)<br />
* [[Alessandro Senese]] (1660)<br />
* [[Carlo Giuseppe Colombani]] (1711)<br />
<br />
| group3 = Florentine Tradition<br />
| list3 = <br />
* [[Anonimo Riccardiano (MS Ricc.2541)|Anonimo Riccardiano]] (1500s)<br />
* [[Francesco di Sandro Altoni]] (1539-69)<br />
* [[Additional MS 23223|Add MS 23223]] (ca. 1600)<br />
* [[Marco Docciolini]] (1601)<br />
<br />
| group4 = Neopolitan Tradition<br />
| list4 = <br />
* [[Marc'Antonio Pagano]] (1553)<br />
* [[Cesare Pagano]] (1592)<br />
<br />
| group5 = Venetian Tradition<br />
| list5 = <br />
* [[Nicoletto Giganti]] (1606)<br />
* [[Bondì di Mazo]] (1696)<br />
<br />
| group6 = Agrippa Style<br />
| list6 = <br />
* [[Camillo Agrippa]] (1553)<br />
* [[Alfonso Falloppia]] (1584)<br />
* [[Federico Ghisliero]] (1587)<br />
* [[Girolamo Lucino]] (1589)<br />
* [[Camillo Palladini]] (ca. 1600)<br />
* [[André des Bordes]] (1610)<br />
<br />
| group7 = Marcelli Style<br />
| list7 = <br />
* [[Giuseppe Morsicato Pallavicini]]<br />
* [[Giuseppe Villardita]]<br />
* [[Francesco Antonio Mattei]]<br />
* [[Francesco Marcelli]]<br />
<br />
| group8 = Other Masters<br />
| list8 = <br />
* [[Giacomo di Grassi]] (1570)<br />
* [[Giovan Antonio Lovino]] (1580)<br />
* [[Vincentio Saviolo]] (1595)<br />
* [[Salvator Fabris]] (1606)<br />
* [[Ridolfo Capoferro]] (1610)<br />
* [[Bonaventura Pistofilo]] (1621)<br />
* [[Francesco Alfieri]] (1640)<br />
* [[Jacopo Monesi]] (1640)<br />
* [[Terenziano Ceresa]] (1641)<br />
* [[Paternostraro]]<br />
<br />
}}<noinclude>[[Category:Tradition navbox templates]]</noinclude></div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Terenziano_Ceresa&diff=120623Terenziano Ceresa2020-12-09T19:35:50Z<p>P Terminiello: Created page with "{{Infobox writer | name = name::Terenziano Ceresa | image = | imagesize = | caption = | pseudonym = T..."</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = [[name::Terenziano Ceresa]]<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = The Hermit<br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = <br />
| birthplace = Parma<br />
| deathdate = <br />
| deathplace = <br />
| resting_place = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set:occupation=Fencing master}}<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = <br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = Tommaso Palunci<br />
<br />
| period = <br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| subject = <br />
| movement = <br />
| notableworks = ''[[L'Esercizio della spada regolato con la perfetta idea della scherma]]'' (1641)<br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= <br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| partner = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| influences = {{plainlist<br />
| [[Salvator Fabris]]<br />
| [[Ridolfo Capoferro]]<br />
}}<br />
| influenced = <br />
| awards = <br />
| signature = <br />
| website = <br />
| translations = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
'''Terenziano Ceresa''' was a [[century::17th century]] [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing master]]. Little is known about his life, although he describes himself as a native of Parma, and was nicknamed “The Hermit”, apparently due to his disdain for social contact. He appears to have been active in Ancona, where his treatise was published and where his patron resided.<br />
<br />
In 1641, he published a treatise on fencing “more from the insistence of patrons than the impulse of my nature, inimical to the presses” entitled ''[[L'Esercizio della spada regolato con la perfetta idea della scherma (Terenziano Ceresa)| L'Esercizio della spada regolato con la perfetta idea della scherma]]'' ("The Practice of the Sword Governed by the Perfect Conception of Fencing"), dedicated to his patron and student Tommaso Palunci, a nobleman from Ancona.<br />
<br />
The treatise discusses the sword alone and the sword and dagger, and appears to develop the ideas presented by [[Salvatore Fabris]] and [[Ridolfo Capoferro]]. Specifically: Ceresa describes a passing play from out of measure, reminiscent of the ''andare di risolutione'' from Fabris’ Book II, although Ceresa employs ''quarta'' as opposed to the ''terza'' preferred by Fabris; and Ceresa nominates a fifth and sixth guard (in addition to the usual four) which appear to correspond to these guards as described by Capoferro.<br />
== Treatise ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Ceresa, Terenziano}}<br />
{{Early Italian masters}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Rapier]]<br />
[[Category:Rapier and Dagger]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Nuovo_et_brieve_modo_di_schermire_(Alfonso_Falloppia)&diff=120598Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire (Alfonso Falloppia)2020-12-03T16:18:27Z<p>P Terminiello: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox book<br />
<!----------Name----------><br />
| name = Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire<br />
| subtitle = "[[title::New and Brief Method of Fencing]]"<br />
<!----------Image----------><br />
| image = File:Falloppia Title.png<br />
| width = 150px<br />
| caption = Title page<br />
<!----------Information----------><br />
| full title = <br />
| also known as = <br />
| author(s) = [[author::Alfonso Falloppia]]<br />
| ascribed to = <br />
| compiled by = <br />
| illustrated by = <br />
| translator(s) = <br />
| patron = <br />
| dedicated to = Ranuccio Farnese<br />
| place of origin = Comin Ventura, Italy<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| subject = <br />
| genre = [[type::Fencing manual]]<br />
| sources = <br />
| publisher = <br />
| pub_date = [[year::1584]]<br />
| first English edition = <br />
| pages = 37<br />
| extant copies = <br />
| wiktenauer compilation by = <br />
| images = [https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k322065k Digital scans] (1584)<br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
'''''Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire''''' ("New and Brief Method of Fencing") is an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing manual]] written by [[Alfonso Falloppia]] and published in 1584. <br />
<br />
== Publication History ==<br />
<br />
''Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire'' was published in Comin Ventura in 1584.<br />
<br />
== Contents ==<br />
{| class="treatise"<br />
<br />
|- <br />
! [[Alfonso Falloppia|1 - 4]]<br />
| Title page and introduction by Alfonso Falloppia<br />
<br />
|- <br />
! [[Alfonso Falloppia|5 - 21]]<br />
| [[Rapier]] by Alfonso Falloppia<br />
<br />
|- <br />
! [[Alfonso Falloppia|22 - 24]]<br />
| [[Rapier and Cloak]] by Alfonso Falloppia<br />
<br />
|- <br />
! [[Alfonso Falloppia|25 - 37]]<br />
| [[Rapier and Dagger]] by Alfonso Falloppia<br />
<br />
|}<br />
<br />
<br />
== Gallery ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
<br />
== Copyright and License Summary ==<br />
<br />
For further information, including transcription and translation notes, see the [[Talk:{{PAGENAME}}|discussion page]].<br />
<br />
<section begin="sourcebox"/>{{sourcebox header}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Images<br />
| authors = <br />
| source link = https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k322065k<br />
| source title= Bibliothèque nationale de France<br />
| license = public domain<br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Transcription<br />
| authors = <br />
| source link = <br />
| source title= [[Index:Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire (Alfonso Falloppia) 1584.pdf|Index:Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire (Alfonso Falloppia)]]<br />
| license = <br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox footer}}<section end="sourcebox"/><br />
<br />
[[Category:Treatises]]<br />
[[Category:Books]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Research/Background Information]]<br />
[[Category:Transcription]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Nuovo_et_brieve_modo_di_schermire_(Alfonso_Falloppia)&diff=120597Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire (Alfonso Falloppia)2020-12-03T16:11:31Z<p>P Terminiello: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox book<br />
<!----------Name----------><br />
| name = Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire<br />
| subtitle = "[[title::New and Brief Method of Fencing]]"<br />
<!----------Image----------><br />
| image = File:Falloppia Title.png<br />
| width = 150px<br />
| caption = Title page<br />
<!----------Information----------><br />
| full title = <br />
| also known as = <br />
| author(s) = [[author::Alfonso Falloppia]]<br />
| ascribed to = <br />
| compiled by = <br />
| illustrated by = <br />
| translator(s) = <br />
| patron = <br />
| dedicated to = Ranuccio Farnese<br />
| place of origin = Comin Ventura, Italy<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| subject = <br />
| genre = [[type::Fencing manual]]<br />
| sources = <br />
| publisher = <br />
| pub_date = [[year::1584]]<br />
| first English edition = <br />
| pages = 37<br />
| extant copies = <br />
| wiktenauer compilation by = <br />
| images = [https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k322065k Digital scans] (1584)<br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
'''''Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire''''' ("New and Brief Method of Fencing") is an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing manual]] written by [[Alfonso Falloppia]] and published in 1584. <br />
<br />
== Publication History ==<br />
<br />
''Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire'' was published in Comin Ventura in 1584.<br />
<br />
== Contents ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Gallery ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
<br />
== Copyright and License Summary ==<br />
<br />
For further information, including transcription and translation notes, see the [[Talk:{{PAGENAME}}|discussion page]].<br />
<br />
<section begin="sourcebox"/>{{sourcebox header}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Images<br />
| authors = <br />
| source link = https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k322065k<br />
| source title= Bibliothèque nationale de France<br />
| license = public domain<br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Transcription<br />
| authors = <br />
| source link = <br />
| source title= [[Index:Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire (Alfonso Falloppia) 1584.pdf|Index:Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire (Alfonso Falloppia)]]<br />
| license = <br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox footer}}<section end="sourcebox"/><br />
<br />
[[Category:Treatises]]<br />
[[Category:Books]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Research/Background Information]]<br />
[[Category:Transcription]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Alfonso_Falloppia&diff=120596Alfonso Falloppia2020-12-03T16:05:15Z<p>P Terminiello: /* References */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = [[name::Alfonso Falloppia]]<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = <br />
| birthplace = Lucca<br />
| deathdate = <br />
| deathplace = <br />
| resting_place = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set:occupation=Fencing master}}<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = <br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = Ranuccio Farnese<br />
<br />
| period = <br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| subject = <br />
| movement = <br />
| notableworks = ''[[Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire (Alfonso Falloppia)|Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire]]'' (1584)<br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= <br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| partner = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| influences = <br />
| influenced = <br />
| awards = <br />
| signature = <br />
| website = <br />
| translations = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
'''Alfonso Falloppia''' was a [[century::16th century]] [[nationality::Italian]] soldier and [[fencing master]]. Little is known about his life, but he identifies himself as a native of Lucca, and describes himself as "Ensign of the Fortress of Bergamo".<br />
<br />
In 1584, he published a treatise on the use of the rapier entitled ''[[Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire (Alfonso Falloppia)|Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire]]'' ("New and Brief Method of Fencing"). It was dedicated to Ranuccio Farnese, who was 15 years old at the time of publication and would become Duke of Parma, Piacenza, and Castro.<br />
<br />
It has been suggested the Falloppia may be the student of Silvio Piccolomini in Brescia mentioned in 1580 by the French diarist Michel De Montaigne during his tour of Italy.<br />
<br />
''On Monday I dined at the house of Sir Silvio Piccolomini, very well known for his virtue, and in particular for the science of fencing. Many topics were put forward, and we were in the company of other gentlemen. He disdains completely the art of fencing of the Italian masters, of the Venetian, of Bologna, Patinostraro (sic), and others. In this he praises only a student of his, who is in Brescia where he teaches certain gentlemen this art.''<br />
<br />
''He says there is no rule or art in the common teaching, he particularly denounces the practice of pushing your sword forward, putting it in the power of the enemy; then the passing attack; or repeating another assault and stopping, because he says this is completely different to what you see by experience from combatants.''<ref>de Montaigne, Michel. ''Journal du voyage de Michel de Montaigne en Italie, par la Suisse & l'Allemagne en 1580 & 1581, Volume 1''. Paris, 1774.p.284.</ref><br />
<br />
While the timeframe is plausible there is no further evidence to corroborate this theory, and it remains speculation. Furthermore there are no marked similarities between the treatises of Falloppia and [[Federico Ghisliero]] (a self-declared student of Piccolomini) although curiously they both dedicate their respective treatises to the same patron, Ranuccio Farnese, within three years of each other.<br />
<br />
== Treatise ==<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Introduction and dedication| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''NEW'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''AND BRIEF METHOD'''</p><br />
<p>'''OF FENCING'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''OF ALFONSO FALLOPPIA OF LUCCA,'''</p><br />
<p>Ensign in the Fortress of Bergamo.</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''TO THE MOST ILLUSTRIOUS, ETC. '''</p><br />
<p>'''HIS MASTER, '''</p><br />
<p>'''THE SIR RAINUCCIO FARNESE'''</p><br />
<p>Prince of Parma. </p><br />
<br />
<p>With Permission from the authorities</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''IN BERGAMO MDLXXXIIII. '''</p><br />
<p>Printed by Comin Ventura. </p> <br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>To my most illustrious and excellent sir. Wishing to make myself known to the world as a most devoted servant of Your Excellency; and to find myself respected wherever I go, as any young doe would be who heralds no longer the name of Caesar, but that of Rainuccio Farnese, I could think of no better means, than by dedicating this slight work on gentlemanly arts. It is composed for the universal benefit of all gallant men, and to confound those fencers who do not know, or who wish to teach naught but certain things that nature teaches by itself, and furthermore whose prices are set, much like the mechanics they use. </p> <br />
<br />
<p>I say gentlemanly, in contrast to those who teach tricks and abuses. They are not ashamed to suggest arms that are never seen except in premeditated cases and blatant murders, such as rotellas, targas, bucklers, balls of iron, spadones, and polearms of whichever name or type. These are all distant from me, because by the term arms I include only those that are proper, both in defence and attack, that every day and by all are commonly carried. These are the sword, and dagger, chain shirt, and cape (since for now we are allowed to call the cape a defensive arm). </p><br />
<br />
<p>Of these alone I intend to write, as those appropriate to a gentleman, one who must undertake the profession of a soldier, and to a gentleman of honour. And I shall be succinct, condensing everything into seven guards, or rules, however you wish to call them. Of which three shall relate to the sword alone, one to the sword and cape, with the other three to the sword and dagger. Nonetheless I shall not overlook anything, because these seven guards shall encompass the substance of any others. It shall also be straightforward, such that it can be understood without figures. </p><br />
<br />
<p>As for the usefulness of this art, as she regards the preservation of honour and of life, there is no one who is not aware of it. May Your Excellency enjoy it, not because it is useful to princes of your rank, who are defended by their own authority, but because it stands in eternal testimony of my devotion and servitude towards your most joyous and sublime house. </p> <br />
<br />
<br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Sword Alone| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>I will start by briefly discussing the sword alone, being the foremost among all the other arms, in the manner that follows. Firstly, a man who wishes to employ this sort of weapon should settle his body with this method: with his right foot forward, standing in profile, somewhat bending his left knee, in a half-pace. His sword arm should be extended, with his hand a ''palmo''<ref>The ''palmo'' (plural ''palmi'') is an antique unit of measurement. Its precise length varied by location, but was typical around 25cm.</ref> above his head, and his point perpendicular towards the chest of his enemy. He can perform thrusts and cuts as he sees fit, in tempo, taking care to deliver the blows quickly, and to return quickly into his starting posture, ensuring the blows are long, stretching out his body, and extending his step as far as he can. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Having acquired this habit with much practice, he will do the same in anger, no differently than when in his natural state. From this guard he can practice beats with the hand, voids of the body – either backwards, or to the sides, as the tempo takes him; and this first form can serve in many instances in the play of the sword. </p> <br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>There is also a second, lower form, which demands the centre line, which it governs, keeping your arm extended in line with your shoulder, such that your hilt faces your enemy’s shoulder, while your face is covered by the hilt. </p><br />
<br />
<p>By leaning your head towards your sword-shoulder, while standing in this fashion, if your enemy delivers a ''mandritto'' cut to your head, you can parry it inside, meeting him to the face in that same tempo. If he attacks you with a ''roverso'' to the head you can parry to the outside and meet him to the face. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If he attacks your legs while you are in this said posture, you can meet him to the face, or lower, pulling your leg back toward the other. Reason dictates that with the sword alone, if someone attacks the legs, they will run onto the point of your sword with their face, without you having to parry; which many do, parrying at their legs with the sword. If two play with the sword alone, maintaining the centre line, and one drops to the legs, he always brings his head forward, and if he meets his enemy’s sword (which is easily done), he will find that his own sword does not reach. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>While I do not approve of attacks to the legs while the sword is in presence, because it carries great risk, you can quite well wound to the leg with the sword alone, but look for the tempo where enemy’s sword moves out of presence, or else parry a cut with cover, and quickly respond to the legs, quickly jumping back to avoid clashing, which can happen with the sword in your face, when you drop to the legs. </p><br />
<br />
<p>You can attack to the legs with a void to the sides, but note carefully the position of your enemy’s sword, because with a void of the body to the side, if you are not quick to defend well, you can be struck on the head by a ''mandritto'', or ''roverscio'' depending on which side you move to. </p><br />
<br />
<p>However, I say that attacking the legs with the sword alone is highly dangerous. If you do not have a great tempo, or great quickness of body, it is not beneficial. If you parry a cut to the legs with your sword, it carries great risk, that by a turn of the wrist you are struck to the head. Therefore, you should not parry in this manner. It is better to extend your point in a straight line, pulling your leg a little towards yourself, turning your body, thereby striking your enemy with ease. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>While two play with the sword alone, you should also be advised that when one delivers a thrust, you can meet it with your sword and wound in the same tempo, and do so easily. This is because it is greatly advantageous to wait for the other to strike. Because in attacking you first he brings his ''debole'' onto your ''forte''. While you hold the centre line, however the attacks, either inside or outside, you can easily meet him, turning your hand to the side where your enemy moves to strike. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If he strikes to the inside, you can meet it with your ''forte'', turning your hand somewhat, such that the enemy’s sword remains out of presence, while yours wounds first, in that tempo. If he strikes to the outside, towards your sword-shoulder, you can meet it with the ''forte'' of your sword, bringing your body slightly to the outside, towards his face. I advise that the ''forte'' of your sword is from the hilt to within one ''braccio''<ref>The ''braccio'' is another antique unite of measurement, whose length varied by location. A Milanese ''braccio'' for example was 59.49cm, or approximately 23.4 inches.</ref> of the point. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy wishes to gain your sword, keep watch, so that when he moves his sword, before he has an advantage over yours, you do not disengage with a wide tempo, but to free your sword and enter in one tempo. While he takes two tempos, one to gain your sword and another to attack, you only perform the motion of not letting your sword be found and wounding in that same tempo. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If it happens that you cannot execute this with diligence and speed, and he gains your sword, do not try and force it free. This would have no effect whatsoever, you can however free it in this manner: by retreating back somewhat, with a void of your body, which will free your sword. You can then follow-up by attacking, or finding your enemy’s sword, or waiting in guard – to enter when the tempo arises. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy delivers a great cut, meet it with your ''forte'' and enter in that same tempo, since you will easily parry and wound in one tempo. If he delivers a thrust, and you have the sword alone, you must watch his sword, to understand where his point may land, and how close you are. Because if you are close to the enemy, you must be aware of where his sword moves. If the point arrives low, you must meet it with your ''forte'', fleeing with a small void to the side, that is to say dodging the point. Take care however not to void such that your point leaves the centre line, and your enemy’s presence, because you can easily attack in that same tempo, applying this skill. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy delivers a thrust, and you are not very close, you must judge the distance, and void your body back, not shifting your sword from the centre line or from your enemy’s presence, since you can easily meet his sword with your ''forte'' and attack. Because by voiding backwards you bring the enemy’s ''debole'' onto your ''forte'', and he cannot wound you without first gathering his step, taking another longer tempo, as follows. Having delivered the thrust, which fell short, the enemy can recover in this way: keeping his arm on the centre line, with a quick eye to recover his sword which finds itself at your ''forte'', he then gathers his left foot towards his right, with either a long or short step, depending on how you moved. </p><br />
<br />
<p>However, you must be quick with your eyes and legs, and have resolve in your play, and not act as many do, who having delivered their blow, which the enemy defended, remain disordered, not knowing how to take further actions, not considering that the other has hands with which to defend and attack. For this reason take great care not to rush into hands of the enemy, consider also what he might do, you will find many various approaches: one who waits for the enemy to attack first, one who circles to find the tempo, one who plays short, one who plays long, however I wish to advise you on all of these circumstances. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy circles around you, I do not want you to walk similarly, encircling, as many do, but to stay firmly in your stance. As he takes three or four steps to gain an advantage, to one side or the other, and as he moves his body, ensure that the point of your sword is always watching him. When you know that your body is thereby encircled, and that you are not in presence of the point of his sword, take only one step in the circle, small or large, depending on the tempo you find, that is whether the enemy circles you quickly, or slowly. When the enemy wishes to take advantage of you to steal the tempo, he will take three or four steps, however you will only move the foot that you find in front, in the manner I described above, therefore with this rule no one will be able to steal the tempo from you. </p><br />
<br />
<p>You also have another advantage: while the enemy wishes to encircle you, you can attack him advantageously in that tempo, because he thinks to steal the tempo from you, but in that instant you can attack and steal it from him, and furthermore wound in just that single tempo, where you please, depending on the area that is uncovered. Be quick in delivering your attack, and in recovering your body. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>You must take note of the tempo I describe below, which is very advantageous, governing yourself in the manner that follows. Every time you hold the centre line, and your enemy wishes to initiate an attack in the form of a cut, I want you to push your sword directly forward, while he raises his arm to attack you. Before his blow comes down you will be able to wound him, with great advantage. If you consider carefully, your eye watching his sword in this action, you will find that when your enemy brings down his sword, he brings it onto your ''forte''. </p><br />
<br />
<p>The same occurs when the enemy commences, wishing to deliver certain wrist-cuts to your head, I want you to meet him to his face, and you will easily land in one single tempo. Pay attention to whether your enemy attacks to the inside or the outside, because you can meet him and parry and wound either to the inside or the outside, depending on where he attacks. </p><br />
<br />
<p>But if it happens that your enemy cannot make headway with his plays of the wrist, he might easily retreat in guard. In this case you must push your thrust forward down the centre line, and be quick, before he takes the tempo to settle into guard. The reason is because when your enemy is in presence, and wishes to change guard, you can attack in that tempo, and can hit him easily. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Now let us suppose he retreats such that you cannot wound him, take care to be quick with your legs moving forward, always keeping your sword in presence against your enemy. If he performs a feint to the outside, or the inside, take care not to move with your sword, in the belief you will parry. If you do, he can easily disengage to the other side and wound you in that tempo. Observe instead this rule: every time someone performs a feint against you, meet him in that first tempo. Because your enemy employs two tempos, one to feint and the other to wound, while you need only one tempo to wound. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>I praise feints in this manner: while you are on the centre line, I want you to motion an entry to the face, whereby it is likely your enemy will move to parry. You should watch where he moves his sword, which will be near the area you motioned, or rather feinted towards; without disengaging your sword you will then find a tempo in which to enter. Meaning, by managing your ''forte'', you shall save yourself from his sword if he attacks in that tempo, which will be as follows. As you make the motion, and your sword begins to travel, clearly your enemy will move his sword to parry and wound. With an attentive eye, you will enter on the line where your enemy extends to parry your blow, and you can enter with a single tempo, without certain disengages, as many do when performing feints. These instructions are called ''contra tempi'', and are so subtle they are not considered by everyone. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Similarly, if you make the motion to enter, and your enemy does not move in belief, feel free to follow through, entering with the same motion. When you perform the action, take care always to target the area that is most uncovered. This forces the enemy to parry, and you will make him take two tempos, while you only take one; however check with your eyes, taking note of whether he stands firm, or else moves in belief of your feint. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>I now wish to inform you how to gain advantage over your enemy’s sword, and its benefits. When you wish to find the sword, clearly your ''forte'' is superior to his ''debole''. However, you must have a good awareness of how your enemy holds his body and sword, to know the tempo in which to move your body, and begin to dominate his ''debole'' with your ''forte'', executing the action, and moving slowly till you reach the ''debole'' of his sword. Because if you move quickly, he can disengage and wound you as I described above, and you will not be able to find his sword, but if you go slowly you will find it easily. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Take care, however you found it: either to the inside or the outside, not to let him recover; because he will be forced to disengage. As he disengages, you should find him again, or attack in that single tempo. If you apply reason to the sword, as you found him once, you can do so again, such that he can no longer recover. Having found the sword, with your enemy unable to disengage, wound him in the same tempo of finding, always using your ''forte'', so he cannot recover. </p><br />
<br />
<p>When you have found his sword, you can employ your left-hand glove to grab it, with a grapple, that is by grasping it, which you will accomplish easily. Take care not to act as many do, who having delivered a thrust wish to grab his sword with their left hand in that same tempo. This is difficult to perform, therefore those who employ this approach often miss the sword, that is they cannot grasp it, and are often struck either in the chest or face. The reason is that the fencer with the sword alone switches, by putting his left side forward. Since you can vary the sword, you can easily wound one who stands like this, in several ways. I judge a bold cut towards that side as the best of these, which cannot fail to hit and disorder him. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>There is also a rushing play, which most Frenchmen employ. When confronted by this, I want you always to hold the centre line. Your enemy therefore comes running to wound you, open, and you stop him by setting yourself in a strong posture, such that he crashes into your sword. Watch the distance, meaning when he gets close to effect his crash, and at the same time keep your eyes on his sword. Note that in wishing to crash into you he will take a long tempo, whereupon you can meet him with your sword where he is most open, and with a void of the body, avoiding his sword, you will surely hit him. </p><br />
<br />
<p>The crash could be in this form: he arrives with the false-edge of his sword to disorder you. In that instant you can meet him, meaning when he is close, and you can reach him, you can easily free your own sword to anticipate his. Because he arrives with impetus, persuading himself that in one tempo he can impede your sword, which you show in presence, and either deliver a cut to your leg and retreat back, or unleash a thrust and step to the side.<ref>''Contrapassare''.</ref> However observe the rule I described, wounding him when he arrives to find the tempo, and note that you will easily hit him in that single tempo, standing with your body firm and nimble. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Although you see someone come at you with impetus, you should not fear, because when afraid you make a thousand wrong movements, whereby the enemy can easily enact what he intended. If you stand in the form I described above, keeping your sword in presence, he will be disordered on his approach, your sword in presence watching him; and if by chance he runs without consideration, he could also easily meet it, and you will stop him in his tracks. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Now if your enemy does not rush, but sets himself in a low posture, enter on the centre line, but over his ''debole'' such that when attacking you in that same tempo, as I discussed, he cannot injure you. His blow will come to nothing, as it will necessarily meet your ''forte'', as you previously ensured. In this manner he will not anticipate you, and hereby reason staunches those in haste. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Although many say that reason does not matter with the sword, as is beaten by rage, I do not agree, and I defer to the judgement of knowledgeable men. It is true that reason with arms, this is to say play, does not count for those who allow themselves to lose heart, to not do their duty, whereupon they lose to those who know and those who do not. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>There is also much else to say over this centre line, which for the sake of brevity I will leave to the judgement of the prudent reader, it being very advantageous. However, I wish to discuss it no further, having spoken of useful and necessary matters, we will now speak of the third guard, and how it is formed. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>The third guard is as follows: you must extend your right arm towards your right knee, keeping your hand approximately half a ''braccio'' from your knee, and your point up towards your enemy’s face. Lean your body slightly, but not so you fall, that is make yourself somewhat small, with your right heel facing the middle of your left foot, in a half-pace stance; or more, or less depending on what you find comfortable and strong. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Standing in this posture, if the enemy thrusts a point at your face, be sure to catch it with your sword’s ''forte'', either to the inside or the outside, depending on which side he attacks. Thrust all in one tempo, raising your back, and you will easily parry and wound in that tempo. If he delivers a cut, whether a ''dritto'' or a ''roverscio'', parry with your ''forte'', and enter to his face; meaning whether he aims at your head, or if he strikes lower, in either case respond in that direction. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If he feints towards your face, or to another part of your body, do not move in belief to parry, instead push your sword forward in that tempo, catching his ''debole'' with your ''forte''. If he aims at your leg, pull it back a little, and meet him by raising the hilt of your sword and lowering the point. Be quick, and in this manner you can defend yourself again such blows. If you deliver the attack I described, and when he attacks your legs you remove your body, he will not be able to harm that part of you, if having attacked the legs he then wished to deliver a thrust. Judgement also matters, which teaches you to take decisions as required, when observing this and similar forms, permitting you to defend against many attacks. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Now I wish to discuss passing steps, and to demonstrate how dangerous they are, and when they are useful. You should understand that passing steps require feints, and be aware that they pose great risk to those who do not employ them with great tempos, agility, and quickness of body. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If you find yourself in the first form of the sword alone, and someone wishes to pass at you, seeing your sword high, it is probable he will move to find you, in order to perform it. Note carefully that if the enemy feints to your face in order to pass, as reason dictates, I do not want you to respond to the feint except as follows. Lean your body somewhat to void, where you see fit to avoid the point of his feint, then all in one same tempo beat with your hand, and deliver a thrust down perpendicular with his body. You will easily meet him if he bends down well with his stomach towards the ground, and you will stop him, since he will not be able to pass. The reason is as follows: you do not move in belief of the impetus his feint. You have time to beat the point of his sword with your hand, and employ the methods I described above, breaking his designs, because he arrives at great speed to perform the feint and passing step in that tempo. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If you find yourself on the centre line in the second form, and the enemy comes at you with a feint to execute a passing step, void with your body to the side, evading his sword’s point. While he passes you can catch him to the head, by voiding, playing somewhat with your body, equally you can thrust him to the face. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>When your enemy performs the feint, and all in one tempo wishes to pass, void from the left side.<ref>In other words, towards the right.</ref> That is, if he feints to the inside, and you reverse your point towards his face, you will stop him easily. You can also meet him lower on the body, because in keeping your point low, it is difficult for him to pass. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If he feints to the outside, bring your left foot forward, opening yourself with a half circle, your right food following the left to meet it, and you will easily exit from presence, and you can deliver a thrust, or else a ''roverso'' cut. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If you wish to perform a passing step, observe the following: when you wish to pass, execute the feint, and the movement of passing, but do not run. It is likely that your enemy, seeing the movement, that is carrying your body out of your sword’s presence, will turn his sword’s point to side on which you perform the action of passing. In that tempo, you can cover his ''debole'' with your ''forte'', and enter to the face without performing another pass. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If you wish to pass freely, observe this rule: first find his sword, then enter to the face. He will be forced to parry, and thereby will remove his sword, such that you can pass without danger; equally if he does not parry, you will catch him to the face. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If you are in the third guard, and someone feints at you to pass to the body with their sword low, I want you to void your body, pushing your thrust with the point perpendicular, closely watching your enemy’s sword, so that you can void your body to one side or the other. However, you must pay great attention to your enemy’s body, see the manner in which he moves, understand the tempo, and most of all be aware of his sword; that is consider with your eye, and judgement, where his sword might land. </p><br />
<br />
<p>This will suffice on this subject matter. Although there are many other things, these are very useful, and very natural, such that you can employ them. Furthermore there are many who suggest other sorts of guards beyond these, which I in fact do not esteem, condensing them all to mine here. </p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Sword and Cape| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
|<p>I will now discuss the sword and cape, or cloak, as quickly and briefly as possible. You can employ the cape in two circumstances. One is when you cannot carry a dagger. The other when you are attacked by surprise, and it is easier to wrap your cape than put your hand to your dagger, that is when you have your dagger at the back and not at your side. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Because most people without quarrels carry them almost always, then when the time comes to reach for their swords, cannot find them, because they cannot reach with their left hand. You should therefore wear it on your right side, to have full control over it. However, I will speak no more of the dagger now, being enough merely to have indicated to carry the weapon at your side. </p> <br />
<br />
<p>Finding yourself therefore in a place where you cannot carry daggers, it is likely that employing the cape or cloak will be useful. I say that wishing to wrap the cape or cloak, you should let the part of the cape over your right shoulder drop behind you, then turn your left hand (that is the palm) upwards, grabbing the hem with your hand half a ''braccio'' under the shoulder, or less, depending on what you find comfortable. When you let the cape or cloak fall from your left shoulder onto your left arm, which will remain completely covered, you will perform one turn only, to the right towards your hand, letting the other part of the cape fall low towards your leg. You will execute this wrap very quickly, and not act as many do, who wrap all of it around their arm, because by letting it hang low brings you have many advantages, which I will describe. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Having wrapped the cape, as I discussed, I want you to bring your left side a half-pace forward, keeping your sword to the outside, below your hand. Standing in this manner, if your enemy delivers a cut to your head, either a ''dritto'' or ''roverso'', I want you to parry with your sword’s ''forte'', meeting him to the face in that tempo, bringing your right foot forward with a long and resolute pass forward. </p><br />
<br />
<p>However, if he cuts to your leg with a ''roverso'', while you are in the above position, raise your sword-hand a little and deliver a perpendicular ''imbroccata'', bringing your right leg forward with your arm extended. Take care to void somewhat, but not by much, to enter with less danger. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If he cuts a ''mandritto'' to your legs, I want you to defend immediately with the hanging portion of your cape, in the meantime turning your hand with a thrust in the centre of his chest, where you find him most uncovered. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Take note never to cover your face with your cape-arm, because your enemy could deliver a point to your body, or cut to your leg while you cover your face. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Even if he cuts to your head with a ''dritto'' o ''roverscio'', I do not wish you to move to parry with your cape, but to meet him to the face, controlling with the ''forte'' of your sword as I described above. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If the enemy attempts these tempos, you can respond, making decisions step by step, depending on the tempo that arises, taking note of what your enemy can accomplish. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Here I will end the rule of the sword and cape, it suffices that you know how to wrap it, and how you conduct yourself. We will now speak of the sword and dagger, on the advantages of a gauntlet, and also on using it without a gauntlet with as little danger as possible. </p><br />
<br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Sword and Dagger| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>You will understand how play with the sword and dagger is governed best and with the least risk possible, conducting yourself in the manner that I will explain in this discussion. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Firstly, you must take care to carry your body well. I want to observe only three forms to place yourself in, although there are many guards which many have written of, and which I will discuss somewhat, however I do not observe them, since everything can be accomplished with three guards. </p><br />
<br />
<p>It is very true, that at times in play or combat you find yourself performing many things in many forms, but if you consider carefully you will find that it is all the same, comprising of the three guards I will describe. Even if they seem to be different things. When concluding, that is in wounding, you will find that the three forms I observe contain every blow you can perform. Furthermore those I describe, I hold to be the most expedient and least dangerous, from which you can wound in just one tempo the most, also without disordering your body. </p><br />
<br />
<p>For this reason, there are no movements that are contrived or forced – which arise only for entertainment, but only very natural ones, which are not lost to the force of rage. Those who teach should be take careful note of this, since confrontations do not occur if not in anger. </p><br />
<br />
<p>It is true that you should train your body in every way, since agility counts for much in this art, but recognising the tempo is much more important, as you have already seen, and as you will see, you cannot act rashly. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>The first form is very useful and is observed in this manner: place yourself with your sword-arm extended in a straight line, with your dagger-arm long, covering your face with it, keeping it somewhat extended, with the point up. Stand sideways in line with your right side, keeping your weapons close together. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Standing in this form, if the enemy delivers a cut to your head, I do not want you to parry with your dagger, but to meet it with the ''forte'' of your sword, as you would with the sword alone, towards the face. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If in this instant he wishes to parry with his dagger, beating your sword, disengage underneath and wound him to the face along the centre line; or else raise your hand, landing the point perpendicular over the dagger, freeing your sword as he moves to beat it. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Standing in this form, equally if he wishes to deliver a ''dritto'' cut to your head, you can parry with the ''forte'' of your sword and in the same tempo put your dagger to his sword, allowing the point of your sword to land under the enemy’s right flank, in that same tempo pushing the thrust forward by stepping your right foot forward. If the enemy disengages underneath, towards your left flank, be alert, beating his sword away with your dagger, from the wrist, wounding him to the face, then withdrawing into the same posture. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If your enemy thrusts at you during the withdrawal, void your body a little, and catch your enemy’s sword between your sword and dagger, that is with your dagger above and your sword below, and attack him to the face.</p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy delivers a ''roverso'' to your head, meet it with your weapons accompanied together, taking care to parry with your sword’s ''forte'' quickly accompanied by your dagger. Since your enemy attacks with a great blow to your head, parry with your sword as he has the advantage, and if you parried with your dagger you would come off worse. Many incidents have shown that the dagger wielded poorly is the death of a man. It is extremely hard to parry a great cut with the dagger, because if it does not catch the sword with its ''forte'', it can easily become dislodged from your hand, or you are struck on the hand. Therefore, those without great tempos with the help of voids of the body, should not move to parry the cut with their dagger, but with the ''forte'' of their sword. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy wants to catch your sword with his dagger, to attack your legs, note that you must execute the following action. With his body low he will cover himself under his dagger. Given that he wants to find your sword with his dagger, be quick to free it with a small void of the body back, while all in the same tempo wounding him under his dagger. If you free your sword quickly, you will find a very large tempo in which to enter, with his blow remaining half-finished. In other words, he cannot reach your legs, because he brings his head forward, such that he cannot land, while you maintain your sword unhindered. I have explained the reason why previously, when discussing the sword alone. </p> <br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>It is true that even in this clash you can wound him to the leg, but in this manner: you must pressure your enemy such that he cannot disengage underneath, if not to the outside where your dagger could not impede him. Having pressed him in this manner, you can attack with little danger. However, for a greater advantage, I want you to follow a different rule: that is having pressured your enemy, to enter strongly with a thrust. You will move with little risk of being wounded, and you will wound quickly. But as I said I do not observe these methods, as they are very dangerous. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Let us return to our subject matter, the centre line, in the first guard. Suppose someone is in a well-covered guard, in whatever form he wishes. Move to press him, and note carefully how he holds his sword: whether high or low. Then in tempo move to press him (as I said), and look to wound him where he is most uncovered. Be quick in attack, and quick in recovering back; so if by chance you enter and he follows up, the quick withdrawal will defend you, taking care as you attack to meet his ''debole'' with your ''forte''. </p><br />
<br />
<p>In executing this, you have time to defend and attack within the same tempo, as you see fit, which you will perform as follows. That is, if while the enemy attacks you find your step forward, having delivered your attack, the tempo will permit you to gather and defend simultaneously; if you are gathered, I want you to defend and enter in that same tempo. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy keeps his sword low, I want you to press him, with one foot gathering behind the other, and as you find yourself in distance to land, to enter covering his ''debole'' with your ''forte'' without touching his sword. If during this action he beats your sword from high to low, disengage with your wrist, and wound him to the face over his dagger. If he beats your sword with his dagger to the outside, return inside with your sword and wound him underneath. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Note that you must have a quick eye, to see where your enemy brings his dagger, and that many will give you a large tempo in which to enter. They disorder themselves with the dagger, and make a thousand movements, which are harmful, whereas you can always enter on the centre line. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>In this first form you do not have to use your dagger to beat your enemy’s sword, except in cases where you have delivered a blow and you sword remains out of presence, then your enemy attacks so quickly that you cannot reset your sword; whereupon I want you to beat with your dagger, gathering your step to recover your sword. But avoid reducing yourself to these conditions, which are dangerous. It suffices that I teach you this solution, so that in such cases not all is lost, and in some manner you can take decisions in combat. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Standing in this form, you can perform feints in the following manner: if you feint to the face, your enemy must bring up his dagger to parry. If he does not go for the feint, enter in that tempo. If he does go for the feint disengage to the other side. If while you perform the feint your enemy wishes to parry and enter, employ your dagger, beating his sword, and enter with a disengage, not letting your sword become impeded, understanding your advantages. This is as much as I want to say on this first form. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Here is the second form, in which you place yourself with your sword high, and your arm extended, keeping your sword’s point high, so that your enemy cannot discern where your sword will fall. Here beating with the dagger is beneficial, and I would keep it with the arm extended, a gauntlet being very useful in this instance. </p><br />
<br />
<p>While you are in this form, always try to stay with your step as narrow as possible, meaning in the form you find most strong and comfortable, keeping your right shoulder forward as much as you can, positioning yourself somewhat to your left on the side of your dagger, that is over your left leg. Keep your dagger extended, covering your face. Positioned over your left side, you will deliver thrusts with less effort, and recover more quickly. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>In this second form I encourage you to deliver a long thrust, extending your arm well, and keeping your body in profile. While you are in this form, watch how your enemy sets himself, because how he sets himself will determine how to conduct yourself from the rules I will describe. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Firstly, if your enemy delivers a thrust, I want you to beat with your dagger, and in that same tempo enter where he is most uncovered, noting whether the thrust arrives low and perpendicular, or if it comes along the centre line. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If the thrust arrives perpendicular, I want you to beat it to the outside with your dagger towards the right side, because it is quickest and easiest, and in that same tempo bring down your sword, likewise delivering a thrust, quickly returning back with your step. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If the enemy thrust along the centre line, you can defend in three ways. The first is from high to low, when he thrusts at the middle of your chest, entering in that same tempo, voiding your body as much as you can, passing, and always keeping your dagger over his sword to stop him raising his sword. If he does so, it will easily return to your dagger, or else he will be forced to disengage to one side or the other. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>You can parry in the second way when his sword falls towards your left side, beating it to the outside to the left side;<ref>This seems to refer to the outside of the dagger arm, not the sword arm.</ref> and if he delivers his thrust to your right side, beat his sword to the outside towards your right flank. Here beat with your wrist, always entering in that tempo, both beating and delivering the blow. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>You can also beat in this third way. When your enemy delivers his thrust, bring your left side somewhat out of the presence of your enemy, gathering your right step, so that with any minimal help from the dagger you will parry his thrust and can wound him. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Now I wish to talk about pressing the enemy in this same guard. Take careful note of how the enemy positions himself, because it is very useful for recognising this tempo, which is as follows. If the enemy keeps his sword long, press it in this manner: move forward with a half-step, until you arrive with your dagger two ''palmi'' above your enemy’s sword. Be alert, if he attacks in this tempo, beat it, and enter. If he does not attack you can enter likewise by beating, or rather finding his sword with your dagger. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy keeps his sword short, move to press him in this manner. Advance enough so you know you can reach him without budging your foot, keeping your body in guard. When you are at the tempo where you can reach him, deliver a thrust freely, quickly returning into guard. You need not worry if you are well covered by the enemy’s dagger, just that his sword is withdrawn. Standing in this posture the enemy can easily deliver a free thrust, which you can defend returning the attack in that single tempo. Take care not to leave your body too far forward, such that you lack time to quickly withdraw. You must be aware of all of these matters, so as not to disorder yourself, so you are in control recovering quickly. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>There is another tempo from this guard, which is certainly difficult, but resolute. It is by pressing your enemy so much that your sword is a ''palmo'' from his body, keeping your dagger-arm as extended as possible, voiding your body, keeping your sword (meaning your point) in the enemy’s presence. In that tempo you will beat, and enter with a thrust. </p><br />
<br />
<p>As I say this is difficult, but resolute and good where you can secure yourself, wearing a mail shirt, and you must deal with those who set themselves in guard, waiting for the other to attack first. It takes great judgement to know the distance, and also to see if you enemy will attack in that tempo, while standing in this form. If your enemy attacks with a cut, either a ''dritto'' or ''roverso'', you can parry with your dagger, entering in that same tempo. If he attacks the legs you can meet him to the face, since you will have a great advantage, as I described above. Here I will end on the second guard. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>I will now discuss the third guard, or rather posture, and how you govern yourself with the sword and dagger, with all the advantages that it brings. The third guard is in this form: you should put your left foot forward, in a moderate pace,<ref>In the original: ''passo giusto''.</ref> with your left arm extended, ensuring your hand is in line with the face, with the dagger-point high, keeping your right-arm somewhat bent, and your sword-hand away from your body somewhat. Your sword point should be level with your dagger-hand about one ''palmo'' apart. In this form you will be very well-covered, and you can conduct yourself depending on the tempo and motion of your enemy. </p><br />
<br />
<p>For example if your enemy attacks you with a ''dritto'' to the head, I want you to simply beat it with your dagger. But meet it with your dagger’s ''forte'', and in that tempo enter with a thrust, putting your right foot forward, as feels natural, then quickly bring it back behind. However keep your dagger-arm in place, so if your enemy then redoubles his blow you can defend it, which will be in the following manner. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy delivers a ''mandritto'', parry and enter in that tempo. If in stepping you abandon your dagger-arm, and the enemy redoubles his attack with a ''roverso'' or ''dritto'', he could easily hit you. But if you hold firm with your dagger you can parry the second blow, and return an attack in the same tempo. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If he delivers a ''roverso'' cut to your head, I want you to parry with your dagger, performing a slight void of the body, and bringing your right foot back a little; also delivering your attack in that tempo, and quickly retreating into guard. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If he attacks your legs with a ''dritto'' or ''roverso'', you can defend in one of two ways. </p><br />
<br />
<p>One is, as he attacks you, to gather your left leg next to your right. When your enemy’s sword passes you can enter with a thrust, or cut, as you desire. In truth, in this defence of withdrawing the leg you must carefully watch the distance of the enemy’s sword. If the middle of it approaches when attacking your leg, you will not be able to withdraw it enough to avoid being hit; and I do not wish you to use it if it arrives rapidly. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>The second method is this. If the enemy attacks your leg, you can parry with the dagger and enter in that same tempo, resolutely before the enemy can recover. Note however that this entry is only for one who is armoured, and would be very difficult and dangerous if you are not armoured, and I do not recommend you use it. But when armoured it is excellent, because it has the advantage of the step, delivering a longer and more powerful blow. </p><br />
<br />
<p>In this form you can also press your enemy so much that you come to dominate his sword with your dagger. Observe, once you have begun to gain it, not to abandon it, but to follow it always forward, since possessing it is beneficial. Having executed this, your sword will always be free, to strike liberally where you please. However if you allow him to recover it, he will have a great advantage over you. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Here I find that I have satisfied my promise, and what I have judged necessary for this profession. Nor should anyone object, saying I have not written anything in particular for those who are left-handed or sinister as it is commonly called. Because having taught how to attack and parry, depending on the guards, the art can be adapted to the left-handed as much as the right. There is no difference between them except in relation. </p><br />
<br />
<p>May everyone understand me well, and practice well, because I am sure of the benefits to those who praise my efforts, and perhaps one day I will give them something more. </p><br />
<br />
<p>'''THE END. '''</p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Copyright and License Summary<br />
| width = 100%<br />
}}<br />
<br />
<section begin="sourcebox"/>{{sourcebox header}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Translation<br />
| authors = [[Piermarco Terminiello]]<br />
| source link = <br />
| source title = Private communication<br />
| license = <br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox footer}}<section end="sourcebox"/><br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Falloppia, Alfonso}}<br />
{{Early Italian masters}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Translation]]<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Rapier]]<br />
[[Category:Rapier and Cloak]]<br />
[[Category:Rapier and Dagger]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Alfonso_Falloppia&diff=120595Alfonso Falloppia2020-12-03T16:02:52Z<p>P Terminiello: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = [[name::Alfonso Falloppia]]<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = <br />
| birthplace = Lucca<br />
| deathdate = <br />
| deathplace = <br />
| resting_place = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set:occupation=Fencing master}}<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = <br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = Ranuccio Farnese<br />
<br />
| period = <br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| subject = <br />
| movement = <br />
| notableworks = ''[[Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire (Alfonso Falloppia)|Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire]]'' (1584)<br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= <br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| partner = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| influences = <br />
| influenced = <br />
| awards = <br />
| signature = <br />
| website = <br />
| translations = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
'''Alfonso Falloppia''' was a [[century::16th century]] [[nationality::Italian]] soldier and [[fencing master]]. Little is known about his life, but he identifies himself as a native of Lucca, and describes himself as "Ensign of the Fortress of Bergamo".<br />
<br />
In 1584, he published a treatise on the use of the rapier entitled ''[[Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire (Alfonso Falloppia)|Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire]]'' ("New and Brief Method of Fencing"). It was dedicated to Ranuccio Farnese, who was 15 years old at the time of publication and would become Duke of Parma, Piacenza, and Castro.<br />
<br />
It has been suggested the Falloppia may be the student of Silvio Piccolomini in Brescia mentioned in 1580 by the French diarist Michel De Montaigne during his tour of Italy.<br />
<br />
''On Monday I dined at the house of Sir Silvio Piccolomini, very well known for his virtue, and in particular for the science of fencing. Many topics were put forward, and we were in the company of other gentlemen. He disdains completely the art of fencing of the Italian masters, of the Venetian, of Bologna, Patinostraro (sic), and others. In this he praises only a student of his, who is in Brescia where he teaches certain gentlemen this art.''<br />
<br />
''He says there is no rule or art in the common teaching, he particularly denounces the practice of pushing your sword forward, putting it in the power of the enemy; then the passing attack; or repeating another assault and stopping, because he says this is completely different to what you see by experience from combatants.''<ref>de Montaigne, Michel. ''Journal du voyage de Michel de Montaigne en Italie, par la Suisse & l'Allemagne en 1580 & 1581, Volume 1''. Paris, 1774.p.284.</ref><br />
<br />
While the timeframe is plausible there is no further evidence to corroborate this theory, and it remains speculation. Furthermore there are no marked similarities between the treatises of Falloppia and [[Federico Ghisliero]] (a self-declared student of Piccolomini) although curiously they both dedicate their respective treatises to the same patron, Ranuccio Farnese, within three years of each other.<br />
<br />
== Treatise ==<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Introduction and dedication| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''NEW'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''AND BRIEF METHOD'''</p><br />
<p>'''OF FENCING'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''OF ALFONSO FALLOPPIA OF LUCCA,'''</p><br />
<p>Ensign in the Fortress of Bergamo.</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''TO THE MOST ILLUSTRIOUS, ETC. '''</p><br />
<p>'''HIS MASTER, '''</p><br />
<p>'''THE SIR RAINUCCIO FARNESE'''</p><br />
<p>Prince of Parma. </p><br />
<br />
<p>With Permission from the authorities</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''IN BERGAMO MDLXXXIIII. '''</p><br />
<p>Printed by Comin Ventura. </p> <br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>To my most illustrious and excellent sir. Wishing to make myself known to the world as a most devoted servant of Your Excellency; and to find myself respected wherever I go, as any young doe would be who heralds no longer the name of Caesar, but that of Rainuccio Farnese, I could think of no better means, than by dedicating this slight work on gentlemanly arts. It is composed for the universal benefit of all gallant men, and to confound those fencers who do not know, or who wish to teach naught but certain things that nature teaches by itself, and furthermore whose prices are set, much like the mechanics they use. </p> <br />
<br />
<p>I say gentlemanly, in contrast to those who teach tricks and abuses. They are not ashamed to suggest arms that are never seen except in premeditated cases and blatant murders, such as rotellas, targas, bucklers, balls of iron, spadones, and polearms of whichever name or type. These are all distant from me, because by the term arms I include only those that are proper, both in defence and attack, that every day and by all are commonly carried. These are the sword, and dagger, chain shirt, and cape (since for now we are allowed to call the cape a defensive arm). </p><br />
<br />
<p>Of these alone I intend to write, as those appropriate to a gentleman, one who must undertake the profession of a soldier, and to a gentleman of honour. And I shall be succinct, condensing everything into seven guards, or rules, however you wish to call them. Of which three shall relate to the sword alone, one to the sword and cape, with the other three to the sword and dagger. Nonetheless I shall not overlook anything, because these seven guards shall encompass the substance of any others. It shall also be straightforward, such that it can be understood without figures. </p><br />
<br />
<p>As for the usefulness of this art, as she regards the preservation of honour and of life, there is no one who is not aware of it. May Your Excellency enjoy it, not because it is useful to princes of your rank, who are defended by their own authority, but because it stands in eternal testimony of my devotion and servitude towards your most joyous and sublime house. </p> <br />
<br />
<br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Sword Alone| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>I will start by briefly discussing the sword alone, being the foremost among all the other arms, in the manner that follows. Firstly, a man who wishes to employ this sort of weapon should settle his body with this method: with his right foot forward, standing in profile, somewhat bending his left knee, in a half-pace. His sword arm should be extended, with his hand a ''palmo''<ref>The ''palmo'' (plural ''palmi'') is an antique unit of measurement. Its precise length varied by location, but was typical around 25cm.</ref> above his head, and his point perpendicular towards the chest of his enemy. He can perform thrusts and cuts as he sees fit, in tempo, taking care to deliver the blows quickly, and to return quickly into his starting posture, ensuring the blows are long, stretching out his body, and extending his step as far as he can. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Having acquired this habit with much practice, he will do the same in anger, no differently than when in his natural state. From this guard he can practice beats with the hand, voids of the body – either backwards, or to the sides, as the tempo takes him; and this first form can serve in many instances in the play of the sword. </p> <br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>There is also a second, lower form, which demands the centre line, which it governs, keeping your arm extended in line with your shoulder, such that your hilt faces your enemy’s shoulder, while your face is covered by the hilt. </p><br />
<br />
<p>By leaning your head towards your sword-shoulder, while standing in this fashion, if your enemy delivers a ''mandritto'' cut to your head, you can parry it inside, meeting him to the face in that same tempo. If he attacks you with a ''roverso'' to the head you can parry to the outside and meet him to the face. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If he attacks your legs while you are in this said posture, you can meet him to the face, or lower, pulling your leg back toward the other. Reason dictates that with the sword alone, if someone attacks the legs, they will run onto the point of your sword with their face, without you having to parry; which many do, parrying at their legs with the sword. If two play with the sword alone, maintaining the centre line, and one drops to the legs, he always brings his head forward, and if he meets his enemy’s sword (which is easily done), he will find that his own sword does not reach. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>While I do not approve of attacks to the legs while the sword is in presence, because it carries great risk, you can quite well wound to the leg with the sword alone, but look for the tempo where enemy’s sword moves out of presence, or else parry a cut with cover, and quickly respond to the legs, quickly jumping back to avoid clashing, which can happen with the sword in your face, when you drop to the legs. </p><br />
<br />
<p>You can attack to the legs with a void to the sides, but note carefully the position of your enemy’s sword, because with a void of the body to the side, if you are not quick to defend well, you can be struck on the head by a ''mandritto'', or ''roverscio'' depending on which side you move to. </p><br />
<br />
<p>However, I say that attacking the legs with the sword alone is highly dangerous. If you do not have a great tempo, or great quickness of body, it is not beneficial. If you parry a cut to the legs with your sword, it carries great risk, that by a turn of the wrist you are struck to the head. Therefore, you should not parry in this manner. It is better to extend your point in a straight line, pulling your leg a little towards yourself, turning your body, thereby striking your enemy with ease. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>While two play with the sword alone, you should also be advised that when one delivers a thrust, you can meet it with your sword and wound in the same tempo, and do so easily. This is because it is greatly advantageous to wait for the other to strike. Because in attacking you first he brings his ''debole'' onto your ''forte''. While you hold the centre line, however the attacks, either inside or outside, you can easily meet him, turning your hand to the side where your enemy moves to strike. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If he strikes to the inside, you can meet it with your ''forte'', turning your hand somewhat, such that the enemy’s sword remains out of presence, while yours wounds first, in that tempo. If he strikes to the outside, towards your sword-shoulder, you can meet it with the ''forte'' of your sword, bringing your body slightly to the outside, towards his face. I advise that the ''forte'' of your sword is from the hilt to within one ''braccio''<ref>The ''braccio'' is another antique unite of measurement, whose length varied by location. A Milanese ''braccio'' for example was 59.49cm, or approximately 23.4 inches.</ref> of the point. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy wishes to gain your sword, keep watch, so that when he moves his sword, before he has an advantage over yours, you do not disengage with a wide tempo, but to free your sword and enter in one tempo. While he takes two tempos, one to gain your sword and another to attack, you only perform the motion of not letting your sword be found and wounding in that same tempo. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If it happens that you cannot execute this with diligence and speed, and he gains your sword, do not try and force it free. This would have no effect whatsoever, you can however free it in this manner: by retreating back somewhat, with a void of your body, which will free your sword. You can then follow-up by attacking, or finding your enemy’s sword, or waiting in guard – to enter when the tempo arises. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy delivers a great cut, meet it with your ''forte'' and enter in that same tempo, since you will easily parry and wound in one tempo. If he delivers a thrust, and you have the sword alone, you must watch his sword, to understand where his point may land, and how close you are. Because if you are close to the enemy, you must be aware of where his sword moves. If the point arrives low, you must meet it with your ''forte'', fleeing with a small void to the side, that is to say dodging the point. Take care however not to void such that your point leaves the centre line, and your enemy’s presence, because you can easily attack in that same tempo, applying this skill. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy delivers a thrust, and you are not very close, you must judge the distance, and void your body back, not shifting your sword from the centre line or from your enemy’s presence, since you can easily meet his sword with your ''forte'' and attack. Because by voiding backwards you bring the enemy’s ''debole'' onto your ''forte'', and he cannot wound you without first gathering his step, taking another longer tempo, as follows. Having delivered the thrust, which fell short, the enemy can recover in this way: keeping his arm on the centre line, with a quick eye to recover his sword which finds itself at your ''forte'', he then gathers his left foot towards his right, with either a long or short step, depending on how you moved. </p><br />
<br />
<p>However, you must be quick with your eyes and legs, and have resolve in your play, and not act as many do, who having delivered their blow, which the enemy defended, remain disordered, not knowing how to take further actions, not considering that the other has hands with which to defend and attack. For this reason take great care not to rush into hands of the enemy, consider also what he might do, you will find many various approaches: one who waits for the enemy to attack first, one who circles to find the tempo, one who plays short, one who plays long, however I wish to advise you on all of these circumstances. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy circles around you, I do not want you to walk similarly, encircling, as many do, but to stay firmly in your stance. As he takes three or four steps to gain an advantage, to one side or the other, and as he moves his body, ensure that the point of your sword is always watching him. When you know that your body is thereby encircled, and that you are not in presence of the point of his sword, take only one step in the circle, small or large, depending on the tempo you find, that is whether the enemy circles you quickly, or slowly. When the enemy wishes to take advantage of you to steal the tempo, he will take three or four steps, however you will only move the foot that you find in front, in the manner I described above, therefore with this rule no one will be able to steal the tempo from you. </p><br />
<br />
<p>You also have another advantage: while the enemy wishes to encircle you, you can attack him advantageously in that tempo, because he thinks to steal the tempo from you, but in that instant you can attack and steal it from him, and furthermore wound in just that single tempo, where you please, depending on the area that is uncovered. Be quick in delivering your attack, and in recovering your body. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>You must take note of the tempo I describe below, which is very advantageous, governing yourself in the manner that follows. Every time you hold the centre line, and your enemy wishes to initiate an attack in the form of a cut, I want you to push your sword directly forward, while he raises his arm to attack you. Before his blow comes down you will be able to wound him, with great advantage. If you consider carefully, your eye watching his sword in this action, you will find that when your enemy brings down his sword, he brings it onto your ''forte''. </p><br />
<br />
<p>The same occurs when the enemy commences, wishing to deliver certain wrist-cuts to your head, I want you to meet him to his face, and you will easily land in one single tempo. Pay attention to whether your enemy attacks to the inside or the outside, because you can meet him and parry and wound either to the inside or the outside, depending on where he attacks. </p><br />
<br />
<p>But if it happens that your enemy cannot make headway with his plays of the wrist, he might easily retreat in guard. In this case you must push your thrust forward down the centre line, and be quick, before he takes the tempo to settle into guard. The reason is because when your enemy is in presence, and wishes to change guard, you can attack in that tempo, and can hit him easily. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Now let us suppose he retreats such that you cannot wound him, take care to be quick with your legs moving forward, always keeping your sword in presence against your enemy. If he performs a feint to the outside, or the inside, take care not to move with your sword, in the belief you will parry. If you do, he can easily disengage to the other side and wound you in that tempo. Observe instead this rule: every time someone performs a feint against you, meet him in that first tempo. Because your enemy employs two tempos, one to feint and the other to wound, while you need only one tempo to wound. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>I praise feints in this manner: while you are on the centre line, I want you to motion an entry to the face, whereby it is likely your enemy will move to parry. You should watch where he moves his sword, which will be near the area you motioned, or rather feinted towards; without disengaging your sword you will then find a tempo in which to enter. Meaning, by managing your ''forte'', you shall save yourself from his sword if he attacks in that tempo, which will be as follows. As you make the motion, and your sword begins to travel, clearly your enemy will move his sword to parry and wound. With an attentive eye, you will enter on the line where your enemy extends to parry your blow, and you can enter with a single tempo, without certain disengages, as many do when performing feints. These instructions are called ''contra tempi'', and are so subtle they are not considered by everyone. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Similarly, if you make the motion to enter, and your enemy does not move in belief, feel free to follow through, entering with the same motion. When you perform the action, take care always to target the area that is most uncovered. This forces the enemy to parry, and you will make him take two tempos, while you only take one; however check with your eyes, taking note of whether he stands firm, or else moves in belief of your feint. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>I now wish to inform you how to gain advantage over your enemy’s sword, and its benefits. When you wish to find the sword, clearly your ''forte'' is superior to his ''debole''. However, you must have a good awareness of how your enemy holds his body and sword, to know the tempo in which to move your body, and begin to dominate his ''debole'' with your ''forte'', executing the action, and moving slowly till you reach the ''debole'' of his sword. Because if you move quickly, he can disengage and wound you as I described above, and you will not be able to find his sword, but if you go slowly you will find it easily. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Take care, however you found it: either to the inside or the outside, not to let him recover; because he will be forced to disengage. As he disengages, you should find him again, or attack in that single tempo. If you apply reason to the sword, as you found him once, you can do so again, such that he can no longer recover. Having found the sword, with your enemy unable to disengage, wound him in the same tempo of finding, always using your ''forte'', so he cannot recover. </p><br />
<br />
<p>When you have found his sword, you can employ your left-hand glove to grab it, with a grapple, that is by grasping it, which you will accomplish easily. Take care not to act as many do, who having delivered a thrust wish to grab his sword with their left hand in that same tempo. This is difficult to perform, therefore those who employ this approach often miss the sword, that is they cannot grasp it, and are often struck either in the chest or face. The reason is that the fencer with the sword alone switches, by putting his left side forward. Since you can vary the sword, you can easily wound one who stands like this, in several ways. I judge a bold cut towards that side as the best of these, which cannot fail to hit and disorder him. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>There is also a rushing play, which most Frenchmen employ. When confronted by this, I want you always to hold the centre line. Your enemy therefore comes running to wound you, open, and you stop him by setting yourself in a strong posture, such that he crashes into your sword. Watch the distance, meaning when he gets close to effect his crash, and at the same time keep your eyes on his sword. Note that in wishing to crash into you he will take a long tempo, whereupon you can meet him with your sword where he is most open, and with a void of the body, avoiding his sword, you will surely hit him. </p><br />
<br />
<p>The crash could be in this form: he arrives with the false-edge of his sword to disorder you. In that instant you can meet him, meaning when he is close, and you can reach him, you can easily free your own sword to anticipate his. Because he arrives with impetus, persuading himself that in one tempo he can impede your sword, which you show in presence, and either deliver a cut to your leg and retreat back, or unleash a thrust and step to the side.<ref>''Contrapassare''.</ref> However observe the rule I described, wounding him when he arrives to find the tempo, and note that you will easily hit him in that single tempo, standing with your body firm and nimble. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Although you see someone come at you with impetus, you should not fear, because when afraid you make a thousand wrong movements, whereby the enemy can easily enact what he intended. If you stand in the form I described above, keeping your sword in presence, he will be disordered on his approach, your sword in presence watching him; and if by chance he runs without consideration, he could also easily meet it, and you will stop him in his tracks. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Now if your enemy does not rush, but sets himself in a low posture, enter on the centre line, but over his ''debole'' such that when attacking you in that same tempo, as I discussed, he cannot injure you. His blow will come to nothing, as it will necessarily meet your ''forte'', as you previously ensured. In this manner he will not anticipate you, and hereby reason staunches those in haste. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Although many say that reason does not matter with the sword, as is beaten by rage, I do not agree, and I defer to the judgement of knowledgeable men. It is true that reason with arms, this is to say play, does not count for those who allow themselves to lose heart, to not do their duty, whereupon they lose to those who know and those who do not. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>There is also much else to say over this centre line, which for the sake of brevity I will leave to the judgement of the prudent reader, it being very advantageous. However, I wish to discuss it no further, having spoken of useful and necessary matters, we will now speak of the third guard, and how it is formed. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>The third guard is as follows: you must extend your right arm towards your right knee, keeping your hand approximately half a ''braccio'' from your knee, and your point up towards your enemy’s face. Lean your body slightly, but not so you fall, that is make yourself somewhat small, with your right heel facing the middle of your left foot, in a half-pace stance; or more, or less depending on what you find comfortable and strong. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Standing in this posture, if the enemy thrusts a point at your face, be sure to catch it with your sword’s ''forte'', either to the inside or the outside, depending on which side he attacks. Thrust all in one tempo, raising your back, and you will easily parry and wound in that tempo. If he delivers a cut, whether a ''dritto'' or a ''roverscio'', parry with your ''forte'', and enter to his face; meaning whether he aims at your head, or if he strikes lower, in either case respond in that direction. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If he feints towards your face, or to another part of your body, do not move in belief to parry, instead push your sword forward in that tempo, catching his ''debole'' with your ''forte''. If he aims at your leg, pull it back a little, and meet him by raising the hilt of your sword and lowering the point. Be quick, and in this manner you can defend yourself again such blows. If you deliver the attack I described, and when he attacks your legs you remove your body, he will not be able to harm that part of you, if having attacked the legs he then wished to deliver a thrust. Judgement also matters, which teaches you to take decisions as required, when observing this and similar forms, permitting you to defend against many attacks. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Now I wish to discuss passing steps, and to demonstrate how dangerous they are, and when they are useful. You should understand that passing steps require feints, and be aware that they pose great risk to those who do not employ them with great tempos, agility, and quickness of body. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If you find yourself in the first form of the sword alone, and someone wishes to pass at you, seeing your sword high, it is probable he will move to find you, in order to perform it. Note carefully that if the enemy feints to your face in order to pass, as reason dictates, I do not want you to respond to the feint except as follows. Lean your body somewhat to void, where you see fit to avoid the point of his feint, then all in one same tempo beat with your hand, and deliver a thrust down perpendicular with his body. You will easily meet him if he bends down well with his stomach towards the ground, and you will stop him, since he will not be able to pass. The reason is as follows: you do not move in belief of the impetus his feint. You have time to beat the point of his sword with your hand, and employ the methods I described above, breaking his designs, because he arrives at great speed to perform the feint and passing step in that tempo. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If you find yourself on the centre line in the second form, and the enemy comes at you with a feint to execute a passing step, void with your body to the side, evading his sword’s point. While he passes you can catch him to the head, by voiding, playing somewhat with your body, equally you can thrust him to the face. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>When your enemy performs the feint, and all in one tempo wishes to pass, void from the left side.<ref>In other words, towards the right.</ref> That is, if he feints to the inside, and you reverse your point towards his face, you will stop him easily. You can also meet him lower on the body, because in keeping your point low, it is difficult for him to pass. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If he feints to the outside, bring your left foot forward, opening yourself with a half circle, your right food following the left to meet it, and you will easily exit from presence, and you can deliver a thrust, or else a ''roverso'' cut. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If you wish to perform a passing step, observe the following: when you wish to pass, execute the feint, and the movement of passing, but do not run. It is likely that your enemy, seeing the movement, that is carrying your body out of your sword’s presence, will turn his sword’s point to side on which you perform the action of passing. In that tempo, you can cover his ''debole'' with your ''forte'', and enter to the face without performing another pass. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If you wish to pass freely, observe this rule: first find his sword, then enter to the face. He will be forced to parry, and thereby will remove his sword, such that you can pass without danger; equally if he does not parry, you will catch him to the face. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If you are in the third guard, and someone feints at you to pass to the body with their sword low, I want you to void your body, pushing your thrust with the point perpendicular, closely watching your enemy’s sword, so that you can void your body to one side or the other. However, you must pay great attention to your enemy’s body, see the manner in which he moves, understand the tempo, and most of all be aware of his sword; that is consider with your eye, and judgement, where his sword might land. </p><br />
<br />
<p>This will suffice on this subject matter. Although there are many other things, these are very useful, and very natural, such that you can employ them. Furthermore there are many who suggest other sorts of guards beyond these, which I in fact do not esteem, condensing them all to mine here. </p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Sword and Cape| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
|<p>I will now discuss the sword and cape, or cloak, as quickly and briefly as possible. You can employ the cape in two circumstances. One is when you cannot carry a dagger. The other when you are attacked by surprise, and it is easier to wrap your cape than put your hand to your dagger, that is when you have your dagger at the back and not at your side. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Because most people without quarrels carry them almost always, then when the time comes to reach for their swords, cannot find them, because they cannot reach with their left hand. You should therefore wear it on your right side, to have full control over it. However, I will speak no more of the dagger now, being enough merely to have indicated to carry the weapon at your side. </p> <br />
<br />
<p>Finding yourself therefore in a place where you cannot carry daggers, it is likely that employing the cape or cloak will be useful. I say that wishing to wrap the cape or cloak, you should let the part of the cape over your right shoulder drop behind you, then turn your left hand (that is the palm) upwards, grabbing the hem with your hand half a ''braccio'' under the shoulder, or less, depending on what you find comfortable. When you let the cape or cloak fall from your left shoulder onto your left arm, which will remain completely covered, you will perform one turn only, to the right towards your hand, letting the other part of the cape fall low towards your leg. You will execute this wrap very quickly, and not act as many do, who wrap all of it around their arm, because by letting it hang low brings you have many advantages, which I will describe. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Having wrapped the cape, as I discussed, I want you to bring your left side a half-pace forward, keeping your sword to the outside, below your hand. Standing in this manner, if your enemy delivers a cut to your head, either a ''dritto'' or ''roverso'', I want you to parry with your sword’s ''forte'', meeting him to the face in that tempo, bringing your right foot forward with a long and resolute pass forward. </p><br />
<br />
<p>However, if he cuts to your leg with a ''roverso'', while you are in the above position, raise your sword-hand a little and deliver a perpendicular ''imbroccata'', bringing your right leg forward with your arm extended. Take care to void somewhat, but not by much, to enter with less danger. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If he cuts a ''mandritto'' to your legs, I want you to defend immediately with the hanging portion of your cape, in the meantime turning your hand with a thrust in the centre of his chest, where you find him most uncovered. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Take note never to cover your face with your cape-arm, because your enemy could deliver a point to your body, or cut to your leg while you cover your face. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Even if he cuts to your head with a ''dritto'' o ''roverscio'', I do not wish you to move to parry with your cape, but to meet him to the face, controlling with the ''forte'' of your sword as I described above. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If the enemy attempts these tempos, you can respond, making decisions step by step, depending on the tempo that arises, taking note of what your enemy can accomplish. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Here I will end the rule of the sword and cape, it suffices that you know how to wrap it, and how you conduct yourself. We will now speak of the sword and dagger, on the advantages of a gauntlet, and also on using it without a gauntlet with as little danger as possible. </p><br />
<br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Sword and Dagger| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>You will understand how play with the sword and dagger is governed best and with the least risk possible, conducting yourself in the manner that I will explain in this discussion. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Firstly, you must take care to carry your body well. I want to observe only three forms to place yourself in, although there are many guards which many have written of, and which I will discuss somewhat, however I do not observe them, since everything can be accomplished with three guards. </p><br />
<br />
<p>It is very true, that at times in play or combat you find yourself performing many things in many forms, but if you consider carefully you will find that it is all the same, comprising of the three guards I will describe. Even if they seem to be different things. When concluding, that is in wounding, you will find that the three forms I observe contain every blow you can perform. Furthermore those I describe, I hold to be the most expedient and least dangerous, from which you can wound in just one tempo the most, also without disordering your body. </p><br />
<br />
<p>For this reason, there are no movements that are contrived or forced – which arise only for entertainment, but only very natural ones, which are not lost to the force of rage. Those who teach should be take careful note of this, since confrontations do not occur if not in anger. </p><br />
<br />
<p>It is true that you should train your body in every way, since agility counts for much in this art, but recognising the tempo is much more important, as you have already seen, and as you will see, you cannot act rashly. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>The first form is very useful and is observed in this manner: place yourself with your sword-arm extended in a straight line, with your dagger-arm long, covering your face with it, keeping it somewhat extended, with the point up. Stand sideways in line with your right side, keeping your weapons close together. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Standing in this form, if the enemy delivers a cut to your head, I do not want you to parry with your dagger, but to meet it with the ''forte'' of your sword, as you would with the sword alone, towards the face. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If in this instant he wishes to parry with his dagger, beating your sword, disengage underneath and wound him to the face along the centre line; or else raise your hand, landing the point perpendicular over the dagger, freeing your sword as he moves to beat it. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Standing in this form, equally if he wishes to deliver a ''dritto'' cut to your head, you can parry with the ''forte'' of your sword and in the same tempo put your dagger to his sword, allowing the point of your sword to land under the enemy’s right flank, in that same tempo pushing the thrust forward by stepping your right foot forward. If the enemy disengages underneath, towards your left flank, be alert, beating his sword away with your dagger, from the wrist, wounding him to the face, then withdrawing into the same posture. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If your enemy thrusts at you during the withdrawal, void your body a little, and catch your enemy’s sword between your sword and dagger, that is with your dagger above and your sword below, and attack him to the face.</p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy delivers a ''roverso'' to your head, meet it with your weapons accompanied together, taking care to parry with your sword’s ''forte'' quickly accompanied by your dagger. Since your enemy attacks with a great blow to your head, parry with your sword as he has the advantage, and if you parried with your dagger you would come off worse. Many incidents have shown that the dagger wielded poorly is the death of a man. It is extremely hard to parry a great cut with the dagger, because if it does not catch the sword with its ''forte'', it can easily become dislodged from your hand, or you are struck on the hand. Therefore, those without great tempos with the help of voids of the body, should not move to parry the cut with their dagger, but with the ''forte'' of their sword. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy wants to catch your sword with his dagger, to attack your legs, note that you must execute the following action. With his body low he will cover himself under his dagger. Given that he wants to find your sword with his dagger, be quick to free it with a small void of the body back, while all in the same tempo wounding him under his dagger. If you free your sword quickly, you will find a very large tempo in which to enter, with his blow remaining half-finished. In other words, he cannot reach your legs, because he brings his head forward, such that he cannot land, while you maintain your sword unhindered. I have explained the reason why previously, when discussing the sword alone. </p> <br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>It is true that even in this clash you can wound him to the leg, but in this manner: you must pressure your enemy such that he cannot disengage underneath, if not to the outside where your dagger could not impede him. Having pressed him in this manner, you can attack with little danger. However, for a greater advantage, I want you to follow a different rule: that is having pressured your enemy, to enter strongly with a thrust. You will move with little risk of being wounded, and you will wound quickly. But as I said I do not observe these methods, as they are very dangerous. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Let us return to our subject matter, the centre line, in the first guard. Suppose someone is in a well-covered guard, in whatever form he wishes. Move to press him, and note carefully how he holds his sword: whether high or low. Then in tempo move to press him (as I said), and look to wound him where he is most uncovered. Be quick in attack, and quick in recovering back; so if by chance you enter and he follows up, the quick withdrawal will defend you, taking care as you attack to meet his ''debole'' with your ''forte''. </p><br />
<br />
<p>In executing this, you have time to defend and attack within the same tempo, as you see fit, which you will perform as follows. That is, if while the enemy attacks you find your step forward, having delivered your attack, the tempo will permit you to gather and defend simultaneously; if you are gathered, I want you to defend and enter in that same tempo. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy keeps his sword low, I want you to press him, with one foot gathering behind the other, and as you find yourself in distance to land, to enter covering his ''debole'' with your ''forte'' without touching his sword. If during this action he beats your sword from high to low, disengage with your wrist, and wound him to the face over his dagger. If he beats your sword with his dagger to the outside, return inside with your sword and wound him underneath. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Note that you must have a quick eye, to see where your enemy brings his dagger, and that many will give you a large tempo in which to enter. They disorder themselves with the dagger, and make a thousand movements, which are harmful, whereas you can always enter on the centre line. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>In this first form you do not have to use your dagger to beat your enemy’s sword, except in cases where you have delivered a blow and you sword remains out of presence, then your enemy attacks so quickly that you cannot reset your sword; whereupon I want you to beat with your dagger, gathering your step to recover your sword. But avoid reducing yourself to these conditions, which are dangerous. It suffices that I teach you this solution, so that in such cases not all is lost, and in some manner you can take decisions in combat. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Standing in this form, you can perform feints in the following manner: if you feint to the face, your enemy must bring up his dagger to parry. If he does not go for the feint, enter in that tempo. If he does go for the feint disengage to the other side. If while you perform the feint your enemy wishes to parry and enter, employ your dagger, beating his sword, and enter with a disengage, not letting your sword become impeded, understanding your advantages. This is as much as I want to say on this first form. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Here is the second form, in which you place yourself with your sword high, and your arm extended, keeping your sword’s point high, so that your enemy cannot discern where your sword will fall. Here beating with the dagger is beneficial, and I would keep it with the arm extended, a gauntlet being very useful in this instance. </p><br />
<br />
<p>While you are in this form, always try to stay with your step as narrow as possible, meaning in the form you find most strong and comfortable, keeping your right shoulder forward as much as you can, positioning yourself somewhat to your left on the side of your dagger, that is over your left leg. Keep your dagger extended, covering your face. Positioned over your left side, you will deliver thrusts with less effort, and recover more quickly. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>In this second form I encourage you to deliver a long thrust, extending your arm well, and keeping your body in profile. While you are in this form, watch how your enemy sets himself, because how he sets himself will determine how to conduct yourself from the rules I will describe. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Firstly, if your enemy delivers a thrust, I want you to beat with your dagger, and in that same tempo enter where he is most uncovered, noting whether the thrust arrives low and perpendicular, or if it comes along the centre line. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If the thrust arrives perpendicular, I want you to beat it to the outside with your dagger towards the right side, because it is quickest and easiest, and in that same tempo bring down your sword, likewise delivering a thrust, quickly returning back with your step. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If the enemy thrust along the centre line, you can defend in three ways. The first is from high to low, when he thrusts at the middle of your chest, entering in that same tempo, voiding your body as much as you can, passing, and always keeping your dagger over his sword to stop him raising his sword. If he does so, it will easily return to your dagger, or else he will be forced to disengage to one side or the other. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>You can parry in the second way when his sword falls towards your left side, beating it to the outside to the left side;<ref>This seems to refer to the outside of the dagger arm, not the sword arm.</ref> and if he delivers his thrust to your right side, beat his sword to the outside towards your right flank. Here beat with your wrist, always entering in that tempo, both beating and delivering the blow. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>You can also beat in this third way. When your enemy delivers his thrust, bring your left side somewhat out of the presence of your enemy, gathering your right step, so that with any minimal help from the dagger you will parry his thrust and can wound him. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Now I wish to talk about pressing the enemy in this same guard. Take careful note of how the enemy positions himself, because it is very useful for recognising this tempo, which is as follows. If the enemy keeps his sword long, press it in this manner: move forward with a half-step, until you arrive with your dagger two ''palmi'' above your enemy’s sword. Be alert, if he attacks in this tempo, beat it, and enter. If he does not attack you can enter likewise by beating, or rather finding his sword with your dagger. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy keeps his sword short, move to press him in this manner. Advance enough so you know you can reach him without budging your foot, keeping your body in guard. When you are at the tempo where you can reach him, deliver a thrust freely, quickly returning into guard. You need not worry if you are well covered by the enemy’s dagger, just that his sword is withdrawn. Standing in this posture the enemy can easily deliver a free thrust, which you can defend returning the attack in that single tempo. Take care not to leave your body too far forward, such that you lack time to quickly withdraw. You must be aware of all of these matters, so as not to disorder yourself, so you are in control recovering quickly. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>There is another tempo from this guard, which is certainly difficult, but resolute. It is by pressing your enemy so much that your sword is a ''palmo'' from his body, keeping your dagger-arm as extended as possible, voiding your body, keeping your sword (meaning your point) in the enemy’s presence. In that tempo you will beat, and enter with a thrust. </p><br />
<br />
<p>As I say this is difficult, but resolute and good where you can secure yourself, wearing a mail shirt, and you must deal with those who set themselves in guard, waiting for the other to attack first. It takes great judgement to know the distance, and also to see if you enemy will attack in that tempo, while standing in this form. If your enemy attacks with a cut, either a ''dritto'' or ''roverso'', you can parry with your dagger, entering in that same tempo. If he attacks the legs you can meet him to the face, since you will have a great advantage, as I described above. Here I will end on the second guard. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>I will now discuss the third guard, or rather posture, and how you govern yourself with the sword and dagger, with all the advantages that it brings. The third guard is in this form: you should put your left foot forward, in a moderate pace,<ref>In the original: ''passo giusto''.</ref> with your left arm extended, ensuring your hand is in line with the face, with the dagger-point high, keeping your right-arm somewhat bent, and your sword-hand away from your body somewhat. Your sword point should be level with your dagger-hand about one ''palmo'' apart. In this form you will be very well-covered, and you can conduct yourself depending on the tempo and motion of your enemy. </p><br />
<br />
<p>For example if your enemy attacks you with a ''dritto'' to the head, I want you to simply beat it with your dagger. But meet it with your dagger’s ''forte'', and in that tempo enter with a thrust, putting your right foot forward, as feels natural, then quickly bring it back behind. However keep your dagger-arm in place, so if your enemy then redoubles his blow you can defend it, which will be in the following manner. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy delivers a ''mandritto'', parry and enter in that tempo. If in stepping you abandon your dagger-arm, and the enemy redoubles his attack with a ''roverso'' or ''dritto'', he could easily hit you. But if you hold firm with your dagger you can parry the second blow, and return an attack in the same tempo. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If he delivers a ''roverso'' cut to your head, I want you to parry with your dagger, performing a slight void of the body, and bringing your right foot back a little; also delivering your attack in that tempo, and quickly retreating into guard. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If he attacks your legs with a ''dritto'' or ''roverso'', you can defend in one of two ways. </p><br />
<br />
<p>One is, as he attacks you, to gather your left leg next to your right. When your enemy’s sword passes you can enter with a thrust, or cut, as you desire. In truth, in this defence of withdrawing the leg you must carefully watch the distance of the enemy’s sword. If the middle of it approaches when attacking your leg, you will not be able to withdraw it enough to avoid being hit; and I do not wish you to use it if it arrives rapidly. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>The second method is this. If the enemy attacks your leg, you can parry with the dagger and enter in that same tempo, resolutely before the enemy can recover. Note however that this entry is only for one who is armoured, and would be very difficult and dangerous if you are not armoured, and I do not recommend you use it. But when armoured it is excellent, because it has the advantage of the step, delivering a longer and more powerful blow. </p><br />
<br />
<p>In this form you can also press your enemy so much that you come to dominate his sword with your dagger. Observe, once you have begun to gain it, not to abandon it, but to follow it always forward, since possessing it is beneficial. Having executed this, your sword will always be free, to strike liberally where you please. However if you allow him to recover it, he will have a great advantage over you. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Here I find that I have satisfied my promise, and what I have judged necessary for this profession. Nor should anyone object, saying I have not written anything in particular for those who are left-handed or sinister as it is commonly called. Because having taught how to attack and parry, depending on the guards, the art can be adapted to the left-handed as much as the right. There is no difference between them except in relation. </p><br />
<br />
<p>May everyone understand me well, and practice well, because I am sure of the benefits to those who praise my efforts, and perhaps one day I will give them something more. </p><br />
<br />
<p>'''THE END. '''</p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Copyright and License Summary<br />
| width = 100%<br />
}}<br />
<br />
<section begin="sourcebox"/>{{sourcebox header}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Translation<br />
| authors = [[Piermarco Terminiello]]<br />
| source link = <br />
| source title = Private communication<br />
| license = <br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox footer}}<section end="sourcebox"/><br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Falloppia, Alfonso}}<br />
{{Early Italian masters}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Translation]]<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
[[Category:Rapier]]<br />
[[Category:Rapier and Cloak]]<br />
[[Category:Rapier and Dagger]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Jacopo_Monesi&diff=120594Jacopo Monesi2020-12-03T16:00:05Z<p>P Terminiello: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = [[name::Jacopo Monesi]]<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = 16th century (?)<br />
| birthplace = Florence, Italy (?)<br />
| deathdate = 17th century<br />
| deathplace = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set: occupation=Fencing master }}<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = <br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = Medici court<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| period = <br />
| movement = <br />
| influences =<br />
| influenced = <br />
<br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| notableworks = ''[[Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)| Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma]]'' (1640)<br />
| archetype = <br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= 1640<br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| signature = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
<p>'''Jacopo Monesi''' was an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing master]] during the first half of the [[century::17th century]]. </p><br />
<p>A native of Florence, he appears to have enjoyed enduring patronage and recognition in his own lifetime at the court of the Grand Duchy of Tuscany under Ferdinando II de' Medici. </p><br />
<p>A court document, dating to 1621, indicates Monesi's role included instructing the adolescent nobility at the grand ducal court (a claim supported by the title page of his own work): </p><br />
<p>''Jacopo of the Armourer, master of fencing, is one of several masters to the pages, together with the priest Albizio Vecchi, the undermaster Frediano Tinolfi, Giovanni Migliorucci master of writing, Leonardo Migliorucci, Giovanni Pieroni the arithmetist and mathematician, Remigio Cantagallina master of drawing, and Pitti Agnolo Ricci master of dance.''<ref>Archivio di Stato di Firenze, Miscellanea Medicea, 369, c.707. Cited by http://www.scrimipedia.it/mediawiki/index.php?title=Iacopo_Monesi (accessed 22 March 2017).</ref><br />
<p>In 1640 he published a short tract outlining his fencing philosophy: [[Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)| Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma]]. </p><br />
<p>Monesi's text contain little technical discussion, which he defers to a promised second volume that however is either lost or was never written. Instead, Monesi strongly critiques many theories and methodologies of his peers; behind a veil of formal language excoriating those practices he views as frivolous, or detrimental to surviving an encounter in earnest. Monesi advocates a straightforward and direct philosophy of fencing. He eschews what he sees as unnecessary embellishments, or artefacts of salle fencing, and privileges what he considers practical for surviving an unpredictable and violent confrontation with sharp weapons. </p><br />
<p>He strongly affirms the efficacy of cuts, interspersed with thrusts; and favours simple and strong natural movements, stances, and attacks. In terms of pedagogy, he forcefully promotes the primacy of practising assaults, and laments that students in his day no longer assault with the frequency and gusto of earlier times. </p><br />
<p>Among other elements he criticises: feints, elaborate postures, mathematical concepts, excessive theoretical discussion, and dagger disarms, as unhelpful and impractical for a confrontation with sharps. Without naming names Monesi appears to clearly reference, again critically, the work of [[Docciolini]], [[Fabris]], [[Marozzo]], and [[Pistofilo]]. </p><br />
<p>Alongside such direct critiques, Monesi includes less specifically targeted remonstrations. For example, he objects to the pedagogical method of masters who employ a chestplate, or a cane in place of a sword. Similarly, he leaves space for conventional discussion points of the period, such as where to look when fencing, or how to approach combat at night.</p><br />
== Treatise ==<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Introduction and dedication| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
<br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''On the Subject of Fencing'''</p><br />
<p>'''By Jacopo Monesi'''</p><br />
<p>'''Known as the Armourer'''</p><br />
<p>'''Master of Arms to the Most Serene of Tuscany, and Their Gentleman Pages'''</p><br />
<p>'''Dedicated to the Most Illustrious Sir Count'''</p><br />
<p>'''Francesco Piccolomini of Aragon'''</p><br />
<p>'''In Florence, at the New Press M.DC.XXXX'''</p><br />
<p>With Permission from the Authorities</p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Most Illustrious and Noble Sir and Patron'''</p><br />
<p>The shade of your Most Illustrious Lordship's great protection, has generated in me an uncommon yearning to bring to light that which has been hidden in the shadows of my intellect for many years. For some time I have had in mind to make public certain discourses on the most excellent profession of fencing, but the awareness of my scarce ability to articulate them, caused the heat of my enthusiasm to cool. This yearning only then emerges, through confiding in the patronage of your Most Illustrious Lordship, wishing to express these concepts in the best manner possible. </p><br />
<p>Therefore this is entrusted only to you, as has happened in the past with honour, once again I opted for your support in bringing this forth, so that anything that is deemed monstrous will nonetheless (protected by the greatness of your Most Illustrious Lordship) be embraced, and be appraised with a not less than benign eye. </p><br />
<p>Please deign therefore to protect it with benevolence, recognising it as a sign of my dutiful observance to your Most Illustrious Lordship's great merit, to which I reverently bow, praying for your every most coveted happiness. </p><br />
<p>Your devoted and most obligated servant</p><br />
<p>Jacopo Monesi, known as the Armourer. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''To the Benevolent Reader'''</p><br />
<p>It has been for a number of years that despite the weakness of my intellect I have wanted to present my thoughts on the play of fencing, which has been my particular profession. But since the world has seen others elevated, and granted them brilliant ability with which they delight and are delighted, I considered it best to keep my thoughts buried within me. </p><br />
<p>Considering however that in some printed books you find an exorbitance of guards, and other extravagances, and witnessing this noble exercise reduced more to discourse than practice, the desire I have (if successful) to demonstrate the true play, and method of combat, made me resolve first to declare my objections, then to explain the correct method. </p><br />
<p>In conformance therefore with what the Most Illustrious Sir Silvio Piccolomini of Aragon <ref>Silvio Piccolomini was a knight of the Order of Santo Stefano, and noted fencer and military commander of his age. In the dedication of his own treatise [[Federico Ghisliero]] declares himself a student of Piccolomini, while his skill at fencing is further referenced by [[Cappoferro]] in his introduction to the reader, and by the French chronicler Michel de Montaigne. </ref> (excellent in this exercise, and more so in military disciplines) taught me, after my first master Cosimo Paradisi, in the chapters that follow I will narrate as openly as I can what is recounted. </p><br />
<p>But since the greatest detriment to this exercise, in my view, comes from neglecting to struggle with the sword in hand, in practising assaults, I will deal with this first, explaining the reasons why I believe this is, as I commence. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>''Might it please Sir Canon Carlo del Vigna to see if the present work contains anything repugnant to Christian piety, and public morals, and refer back. The 30th January 1639.'' </p><br />
Vincenzio Rabatta, Vicar of Florence<br />
<p>''In the present work, having reviewed it in all diligence, I found nothing repugnant to Christian piety, or public morals. 25th February 1639.''</p><br />
<p>Carlo del Vigna, Canon of Florence<br />
<p>''Most Reverend Father Inquisitor,''</p><br />
<p>''By your order of Most Reverend Father I have reviewed this present discourse on fencing, and I have not found anything repugnant to the Religion, or to public morals, judging it worthy of publication. 26th March 1640. ''</p><br />
<p>Girolamo Rosati, Protonotary and Consultant of the Holy Office</p><br />
<p>''This can be printed. Florence 3rd April 1640. ''</p><br />
<p>Father Giovanni Angeli, Vicar of the Holy Office, by order of</p><br />
<p>Senator Alessandro Vettori, Auditor of His Most Serene Highness</p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Notes on fencing| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
<br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''Chapter One'''</p><br />
<p>Ambition, which without fail is the cause of every ill, especially in virtuous exercises, I know to be the true basis and root of a rather notable vice. </p><br />
<p>Every day we see youths of such ambition, that under the cloak of letting their virtue be known, out of all proportion, neglect the importance of possessing such virtue, and as soon as they arrive in schools to learn, having imbibed just a few lessons, allow themselves to be inflated by excessive pretension, and judge themselves to be masters. </p><br />
<p>Therefore it happens (and I speak in particular of this exercise) that in public schools, and especially in private houses, with youths of equal quality gathered to practice assaults, you find some who do not grasp the sword if not to teach, nor to learn in any other way. This outlook is so pernicious, that for this reason you no longer hear of people gathering for common benefit and practice, and to pass the time in the virtue of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Those who have distinguished themselves up until now, demonstrating their valour and knowledge, in my view did not take this route. Indeed anxious to prove their worth as gallant men at every occasion, in any place, and against any person, I believe they sought to learn. Because to understand a discipline well, you have to practise it, you cannot learn with theory alone. </p><br />
<p>It is not a good way to master a skill, to think you can attain it without effort and sacrifice. Those who think to proceed like this, infallibly discover through experience how much they have deluded themselves. </p><br />
<p>Another active and real problem I bring up, just as damaging as the first although stemming from the same ambition, is the disparity between people. </p><br />
<p>You cannot deny that an artisan (who delights in virtue as is understandable), can through his diligence and vivacity arrive at the goal of fencing well with the sword. Indeed because this exercise is extremely capable of elevating the most lowly individual, it often happens that by applying their spirit, those of base condition become more distinguished. </p><br />
<p>The damage therefore that ambition brings, is to be ashamed to practice assaults with someone of lowly hand. To not consider you could extract some fruit even from these people, throwing yourself into the profession. </p><br />
<p>This thought is erroneous, because it is essential to know that virtue levels all people; and that a virtuoso can be considered the equal not just of a simple gentleman, but of any prince or great lord. </p><br />
<p>These are the reasons I give, demonstrating why today assaults are dismissed, neglecting the chance to benefit from the luxury of living, before the waning of youthful years deprives you of every worthwhile activity. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Two – On the same subject'''</p><br />
<p>You can clearly tell from my previous discourse how much damage ambition brings, and how it is a reason for not mastering this beautiful virtue of fencing. But I will now demonstrate furthermore how discussion of this profession, which today's students engage in more than practice, causes notable harm. The truth is that lessons taken in any subject in the day are of no use if their operations are not exercised. </p><br />
<p>That which pertains to bodies of reason: such as logic, philosophy, and so forth, must be put in practice with words alone, as they are necessary to expound such virtues. However in the profession of fencing words have no place to execute well what the students have learned from the master. </p><br />
<p>Actions are needed when it comes to training your body for defence and attack. </p><br />
<p>This is not applied by today's youth, which is a further reason why assaults no longer take place, and students neglect to learn wielding a sword in hand well. It then follows that masters are judged and branded as inept in their craft, since they no longer produce students as they did in the past. </p><br />
<p>When youngsters come together, sometimes from the schools of different masters in this profession, instead of putting their studies to the test, with the cloak across their shoulders, as well as with the simple sword in hand, they begin to discuss among themselves: “If I delivered this thrust how would you parry it?”. </p><br />
<p>The other replies “I would do it in this way, or like this” to which the first responds “But if it were a cut, how would you defend yourself” again its counter is added, and they carry on ad infinitum in this manner, disregarding gainful practice. </p><br />
<p>See if this is the best way to safeguard yourself, and benefit through the profession. Then test with a sharp sword (which could happen), whether these people would have time for such a parliament. </p><br />
<p>Action is required for exercises which engage the body, words cannot grant a student resolution to confront his opponent, or courage and practice to defend himself. This is as much as I thought to say on this matter. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Three – On putting mathematics into this virtue'''<ref>This chapter might apply to Italian treatises which incorporate mathematical principles, such as [[Camillo Agrippa]], but arguably targets in particular the Iberian forms of the ''Verdadera Destreza'', exemplified by [[Jerónimo Sánchez de Carranza]] and [[Luis Pacheco de Narváez]]. </ref></p><br />
<p>I have never presumed to malign anyone who professes to teach this noble exercise, nor do I intend to now, recognising myself as the inferior to many gallant men who have practised this virtue. But we are permitted to debate upon the lessons of some, who have taught and teach through mathematics, with the addition of lines, circles, traverses and extravagant voids of the body. </p><br />
<p>For me, these are commendable for fencing in a clean salle, furnished with even tiles. Likewise it is impossible for two people not to put on a good display, when they politely retreat, then void, or advance with a neat step, putting into practice what they have learned from their masters. </p><br />
<p>But if I imagine them outside the tiled hall, that is in the streets, where confrontations most often arise, then I can't help but criticise and malign them, since it is impossible (for reasons I will explain) to put these actions into practice. </p><br />
<p>Someone who is confronted or deliberately summoned to combat, cannot I believe, as happens in large armies, bring with them people to dig; to resurface the street so they can put themselves in the right posture, and use their lines, and advances of ground, and binds of the sword in conformance with their lessons. Instead, being confronted, they are obliged to think how to stand firmly on their feet, to be vigorous in defence and attack, ready of hand, without such fine distinctions of footwork. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore those who employ the sword in this manner, can be called good and beautiful fencers, but in an open space, or street where stones, holes, and cracks can cause you to stumble, they are always in danger of defending themselves poorly from their enemy. In such cases most of the time the artifices of traverses, voids and lines are left aside, and they throw themselves into natural attacks, as is so often seen. </p><br />
<p>This itself is sufficient demonstration, although I can elaborate for greater clarity, that play founded upon natural reason is with no comparison much better than artificious play. The latter was invented for no motive other than satisfying the curiosity of youth. If it were otherwise, it would not be the case, not only in public schools but also in the presence of nobility with the intervention of great princes, that professors of play founded upon such twists of the body had been touched assault after assault, with cuts and thrusts, as is clear and manifest to a great many people. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Four – On a defined ''punto'' to attack'''<ref> The term punto to signify a defined target area of the right shoulder is particular to the treatise of [[Marco Docciolini]].</ref></p><br />
<p>This seems to me an important subject, in order to be accomplished in assaults. I will merely state my thoughts on those who, as a principal maxim, hold and practise the opinion that it is better to attack only a single part of the body, namely the right shoulder, being the said punto. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, you must consider the reason why they observe this doctrine. I believe it is for no reason other than to strike either the nearest, or the most vulnerable part of the body. </p><br />
<p>If we suppose they hold this view, because they want to strike the nearest target, I completely refute their opinion. Hands and arms notwithstanding, I know how those who lean most stand, even their knees are closer and more likely to be attacked by the enemy. </p><br />
<p>If they wish to propose the other reason, that it is the most vulnerable part of the body, I can only oppose them entirely. It seems to me that the hands and arms are subjected to danger: both of being wounded, and of the intermediate outcome of losing the ability to attack. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore experience, which instructs in all things, shows us that in a good portion of combats you see wounds to the hands and arms. This is because these can more easily encounter the enemy's weapons. If they deem the area called the punto so vulnerable, I do not know which hands and arms are not in the same danger. In them you find veins, arteries and other very vulnerable areas which evidently have shown to cause the death of those wounded there. </p><br />
This is as much as I can say on this particular. I urge everyone to take the whole of the enemy's body as the fixed punto to attack, and specifically the part that presents itself as most uncovered and furthest forward. There is much more that could be said, for example if your opponent is left-handed, or in other situations, but to avoid tedium I will omit it. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Five – On a predetermined measure'''</p><br />
<p>In addition to the other pernicious matters in the virtue of fencing noted above, I absolutely detest the opinion of those who insist on, observe, and teach a predetermined measure. Since an opinion should not be proposed without foundation, I will prove this simple truth with active reason. </p><br />
<p>I have always observed, and heard, that people who are forced to fight, whether to defend themselves, or to confront someone who has caused them some offence, never have the benefit of being able to measure swords. Nor is this a given, since anyone can wear a sword of any length they please (speaking of Tuscany). They cannot even choose a piazza well suited for coming to blows, and neither are people equal in form, either in height or in build. </p><br />
<p>Now, if this is not the case, what is the point of habituating your foot, and arm to a predetermined measure? Moreover, you can easily see from experience that often there is no time to take measure, or the opportunity is denied, for example in badly paved streets, sometimes filled with a thousand pieces of rubbish, as mentioned above. </p><br />
<p>If someone, suddenly or intentionally, is obliged to fight, even if they find themselves in a nice, clean street, it is impossible for them to observe the measure of their steps; to defend themselves and attack, against someone who is naturally at ease in well-founded play, who naturally understands how to stay strongly on their feet, and deflect the enemy's blows, while at the same time attacking him, which seems to me the real principle. </p><br />
<p>You must concede, that this measure was invented simply for the encounters they like to conduct at royal pageants, which have been held several times in various places, and furthermore in itself to demonstrate how far they can extend their normal step. However it is absolutely unfit not just for combat in earnest, but even for the simple assaults you might practice. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Six – On voids'''</p><br />
<p>There should be little difference between this chapter and the previous one, since having to discuss voids, which produce the same result as a set measure, my argument will differ little from the one adopted above. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, let us consider its effect, which is nothing more than a withdrawal of the body, either back or to the side, to defend against an enemy's attack. I say that this withdrawal is as dangerous as trusting in a set measure, and the reason is as follows: someone who by chance comes to blows with an enemy cannot know if they wield a longer sword, whereby in wishing to void they can be wounded. Nor can they know how agile the sword's wielder is. </p><br />
<p>More importantly, when someone evades a blow with a void, they must necessarily lose a tempo in having to return forward to attack. If set upon during this tempo (which the enemy may attempt) they will find it very difficult to recover. </p><br />
<p>For this reason therefore, as a rule of good fencing you should never concede voids. Besides it increases the risk of stumbling in the streets, which as noted above can happen when placing yourself in a set measure. </p><br />
<p>Seeking to avoid any mishap that can occur is the utmost of a man's prudence. The greatest threats that arise are those to life. Against these principal dangers man must apply all his judgement. </p><br />
<p>If we know that voids, traverses, and a set measure manifestly cannot save us from an enemy's attack, why not use that convenient and very useful remedy: not to be subjected to such attacks by staying well-grounded, with firm and stable strength of both body and arm. This will suffice on this topic. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Seven – On feints'''</p><br />
<p>In the profession of fencing there are many frivolities and jests, or more accurately whimsies that you can use, either in public schools or in private settings. Among others there are feints. These can often be employed when fencing for enjoyment and fun, and similarly to improve your vision, since they also serve to train your eyes to be attentive. </p><br />
<p>But I like to believe that this practice was invented for nothing more than to defend yourself, or to attack your enemy, as the situation demands. In reality they reveal themselves as good only for entertainment, or to prolong lessons, and I am forced to say that feints are extremely dangerous to those who wish to perform them. They require two tempos, and in the true exercise of wielding the sword are manifestly unsafe. </p><br />
<p>In earnest, as we know, arms are employed for only two reasons. The first is to defend, the other is to attack. How then can someone who is confronted, as we have said before, hold forth with contrivances like feinting over and under the dagger, to the outside and inside of the sword, against the speed of the enemy's blows (especially if they are strong)? Against cuts as well as thrusts, when he does not adopt any kind of posture, but advancing with such blows? </p><br />
<p>I have no doubt that those in this predicament, stirred by many motives, leave aside all feints and attend only to defending their lives as best they can. </p><br />
<p>But can you imagine others, advancing phlegmatically to confront their enemy, to vindicate a wrong or harm done to them, redeeming themselves with the frivolities and jests of feints? </p><br />
<p>I will omit many examples, but fury transports them, reason is overcome. Honour necessitates that they leave aside taught feints, and instead follow natural instinct, but since I have explained this already, I will not expound further. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eight – On ''contrattempo'', ''mezzotempo'' and more'''</p><br />
<p>To cover the present topic it is worth returning to the same discussion in the previous chapter. The various fancies and follies, along with feints, are invented by certain masters I believe, not only to retain students so they stay longer at the school, but also to confuse them. This way they unlearn the good and study the bad, and will always have to remain students. </p><br />
<p>This is the case with the invention of ''mezzotempo'' and ''contrattempo''. These are brought to light, as I mentioned, only to keep the school running. </p><br />
<p>''Mezzotempo'', and other such terms, deform the good and true rules with too many fripperies. In reality you could never have a memory sharp enough to employ them in defence in a single tempo, or in attack. </p><br />
<p>These methods should be practised not in fencing, but in the realm of dance, where the variety of steps and agility of the leaps must astound the spectators. </p><br />
<p>But in this profession a single step, a single tempo must suffice. Deployed with the requisite accuracy and mastery it will always quash any ''contrattempo'' or ''mezzotempo'' you might encounter, and I profess that this is merely the truth. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Nine – On the so misshapen published figures of this exercise'''<br />
<p>If I believed myself alone, I would not dare to criticise the infinite sets of figures presented and drawn in published books. These are invented, I believe, to no other end but to demonstrate a multiplicity of distorted postures, which almost transcend the bounds of nature, and drag people towards the ridiculous, rather than to learning from viewing such contorted actions. </p><br />
<p>I would like to have some leeway, to leave some praise, but I see no way whatsoever, if not to say that these deformations are very suitable for clowns and tavern-singers, to entertain and extract money from a crowd. This is the praise I am able to concede. </p><br />
<p>If then I were to offer some polite criticism, I could begin by saying that these positions are monstrous, and impossible to witness within our profession. When have you ever seen people, either for enjoyment or necessity, employ such extravagant contortions, with their bodies so hunched and forced, and for the sword alone with the off-hand by the left ear, to employ it like a dagger to deflect thrusts?<ref>This passage, and arguably the entire chapter, appears to be targeted at [[Salvator Fabris]], whose treatise is notable for its deep and sometimes contorted stances.</ref></p><br />
<p>This is as far removed from the natural order as truth is from a lie. You do not take a sword in hand, to wield in earnest, with such exorbitant contortions. You should stand so you can operate naturally, all the more so when you find yourself on the street. There you may find many impediments, as I have said, and confirming what I have already said above, you must stand firmly on your feet, in a balanced posture from which you can draw strength to oppose the sword against all attacks, and as upright as possible so you do not become disordered.</p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Ten – On the guards and counterguards'''</p><br />
<p>There are many guards, great in number from various masters, which you can employ in the profession of fencing. To list them all, and discuss which of them is good or bad, would require a discourse beyond this brief one, expounded with an eloquence other than my own. Nonetheless my pen will write simply and plainly, to touch upon some of my thoughts. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, to demonstrate the extravagance of the guards invented, I will cite various names authors have given them, such as: ''coda lunga e stretta'', ''cingara'', ''porta di ferro'', ''beccapossa'',<ref> These guard names are characteristic of the Bolognese school of fencing. In particular the name ''beccapossa'' is specific to [[Achille Marozzo]].</ref>''belincorno'', prima, seconda, terza and quarta, and many others which I will omit, which together with these have been represented with figures in the books published up until now.</p><br />
<p>As to whether these are good or bad, any praise should be occasioned by their use. It cannot follow, although we have seen otherwise, that they endanger those who wish to employ them. However since no guard should be maligned without a basis, I will start by saying that in my opinion the guards to be employed should not be twisted or bizarre, nor overwrought with a paintbrush, nor measured with a compass, but simple and natural. In this manner the body finds itself stronger in resisting blows, and attacking when the occasion presents itself, without the manifest danger of stumbling and thereby compromising your life. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eleven – On those who wish to debate this practice'''</p><br />
<p>To further damage this profession of fencing, in my opinion, some presume to debate over blows and postures of whichever sort, formulating and postulating in the manner of someone conducting a philosophical debate. Discussions on subjects like the one I have mentioned, should be performed with actions alone. </p><br />
<p>This occurs because upon the path of this practice it is difficult to arrive at perfection. Many who take the path, at the first resistance, by a simple act of will desist from the endeavour. Seeing themselves inadequate, they sharpen their intellect to appear the equal of professors, and with their propositions lead astray those striving to obtain a complete understanding. </p><br />
<p>This is undeniable. In the practice of fencing, to engage someone in debate and discussion as if arguing theology (in place of conducting assaults) achieves nothing but to deny opportunities to those who desire to learn, to become excellent in practice. This is the motive I ascribe for this behaviour. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Twelve – Against a set rule for combat at night'''</p><br />
<p>In this simple discourse of mine, I wished to oppose every extravagance that the meanness of my intellect has encountered in the profession of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Therefore it seemed apt to contest also the opinion of those who hold a firm rule of giving true and real method of combat at night: that putting your hands to your weapons, you should quickly use them to seek the enemy’s sword, and having found it you must liberally deliver attacks to wound him. </p><br />
<p>They add to this another rule, no better than the first, that is to keep your body hunched to create a smaller target. </p><br />
<p>I address each of these as follows. </p><br />
<p>If confronted in the dark at night, how can you find your enemy's weapon without being attacked? </p><br />
<p>Why must you remain hunched, being deprived of ability and stature in defence and attack, in place of a strong and comfortable posture, remaining upright on your feet without hunching over? </p><br />
<p>Such a false opinion I would deem unsuitable even for the daytime where you can clearly see the enemy’s posture, and even when the enemy does not step to attack. </p><br />
<p>I firmly maintain that if you must fight at night, in such circumstances in the dark, you should deliver ''dritti'' and ''roversci'' as swiftly as you can. </p><br />
<p>Anything else is futile, without proposing many additional considerations for such instances, which for the sake of brevity I will omit. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Thirteen – On those masters who in giving lessons employ either a chestplate or a rod'''</p><br />
<p>Among the other notable detriments, caused by various extravagances, are those masters, some who give lessons with a chestplate, others with a rod. </p><br />
<p>Masters who wear a chestplate during lessons leads to nothing else, in my opinion, than that students deliver blows with an exorbitant step. Since the blows do not harm these said masters, they do not realise that, although they wish to protect the student, with these thrusts they harm them. </p><br />
<p>They become habituated to committing their body so much with every blow, that it becomes unlikely they could recover when performed in earnest. </p><br />
<p>Having delivered the thrust to their master's chestplate, they find resistance, lending them force to recover back, and they adopt the habit of abandoning their whole body into the attack.</p><br />
<p>Because of this with a sharp sword, not finding the resistance of the chestplate they have with the practice sword, they remain extended so far forwards that it is difficult (as stated) to avoid their enemy's attack. It can absolutely occur that instead of wounding their enemy, they are left injured. </p><br />
<p>Something similar can occur with students who are used to taking lesson from masters who hold a rod. Since it is much lighter than a sword it creates an extremely negative effect, giving rise to great setbacks. Its weakness, not having the same form as a sword, means whichever cut the rod delivers, it cannot force the student's sword to learn, as a sword would. </p><br />
<p>We can furthermore question, being habituated to parrying cuts from the rod, if when they receive cuts from a sword, they might become confused. </p><br />
<p>Being disordered they might apply the lessons learned reluctantly, since they do not even learn resolve. So I repeat, employing either a chestplate or a rod benefits only the master, and not the students. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Fourteen – On where some wish you to look when you fight'''</p><br />
<p>The variety of opinions on where to place your eyes during actions, both during assaults and in questions of honour, leads me to include this topic in this discourse of mine. Many want you to keep your eyes fixed to your enemy's face during combat. Others assert you should always watch the point of your opponent's sword. </p><br />
<p>I contradict both of these views. I say that keeping your eye on the point is of no use in combat, since it is unlikely your enemy's point ever stays still. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore it is so fine that when it is brandished at speed, someone who trusts in this proposition greatly deceives themselves; knowing full well that sharp swords are not like swords in schools with a button, which is rather large, although some schools might not use them. Therefore I consider this proposition in my own manner. </p><br />
<p>I also criticise the other opinion, of watching your enemy's face, because while keeping your eyes there it is unlikely you can understand and clearly discern the operations he performs with the sword. Often these are away from the face, and he might feint with his eyes to attack in one place, only to move the hand to offend elsewhere. </p><br />
<p>Therefore finding fault with both of the above opinions, I hold that another area is more appropriate, necessary, and without subjecting yourself to deceits more useful, which I will relate in due time in another treatise. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Fifteen – To those who greatly criticise cuts'''</p><br />
<p>Everyone must defend their profession with the rationales available, so I will not fail to show how mistaken are those who greatly criticise cuts in the practice of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Before opposing everything they state in favour of their position, I will explain the charges levelled against those who employ cuts. </p><br />
<p>The first is that cuts are not lethal, the second is that they are much shorter than thrusts, while cuts are further derided by the claim they are for brutes. </p><br />
<p>I refute the first by supposing, since death has taken many in our times by way of cuts, that no other reason is needed to affirm this truth. </p><br />
<p>I can counter the second with great ease, demonstrating how with the hand, and the same length of step and sword (when grasped), the same person can be wounded either by a cut or a thrust. This is better proved by experience than words (which I set out to do), as I have shown and performed many times in the presence of great princes. </p><br />
<p>I should raise a further consideration for those who criticise cuts, and it is this. When someone is confronted, and puts their hand to their sword to defend themself, do they negotiate with their enemy whether to use only thrusts (speaking of Tuscan lands)? If they can wound with both thrusts and cuts, then why not employ cuts, and learn to defend against them? </p><br />
<p>I can only believe that those who criticise cuts, understanding only thrusts, either have no power in their cuts, or do not know how to teach them (if they are masters), or have no time to practise them if they are students. </p><br />
<p>In every profession, to remain ahead of others you must pursue every possible avenue, even if indirect, but all the more so the true and good path, since every day in questions of honour we see that the majority of wounds are cuts to the hands, arms and face. For this reason swords with a hollow were invented.<ref> In the original simply ''spada con l'incavo''. It remains unclear whether Monesi is referring simply to a hollow-ground blade or deep fuller, or perhaps an indentation at the grip that might conceivably aid in cutting , like on some later sabres.</ref></p><br />
<p>Having explained the usefulness of cuts, I affirm once again that those who criticise them, claiming they are no good because they are for brutes, cause harm. An example of this is not keeping hold of the sword, so it falls to the ground, which has happened to many during simple assaults. Another is not having the ability to defend against cuts. I have useful advice to give in this regard, but to avoid being tedious, and admitting to discuss only superficial matters, I will not expound further, and will end my discourse of this subject. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Sixteen – Against numerous grips with the dagger'''</p><br />
<p>Having set myself to contradict falsehood with truth, I should say a few things on this subject. This is for those who strongly promote and encourage a multiplicity of grips with or against the dagger, many with a dagger and others unarmed, as something pertaining to the art of fencing. </p><br />
<p>I refute the quantity of grips described and delineated, and their operation, knowing very well as I have said elsewhere, that you do not negotiate with your opponent. This is from the many occurrences and events that are well-known without me having to describe them. </p><br />
<p>In fact I would dare say that the dagger is worse than the pistol, which can fail or misfire. The dagger is always loaded and ready to attack, and when someone has this weapon at their side and spots the opportunity to use it, I do not believe they will use it to threaten their enemy from distance. </p><br />
<p>Assuming they are not a coward, but resolute and courageous, they will approach as close as they have to. I doubt there will be time to counter, with any of these many grips that are supposed to defend against attacks, nor therefore would I say that dagger against dagger they could be of any benefit. </p><br />
<p>I will freely admit that some of the grips work in schools, of course, but as you know these daggers are without a point or a cutting edge. Many options can be proposed since there is no manifest danger. </p><br />
<p>I return to saying, that as a short weapon they are much quicker to draw, and more ready to wound. These grips are for the entertainment, and confusion, of students. This is what I have to say for now. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Seventeen – On a pike position that defends against any sort of missile weapon, including arquebus shots'''<ref> This is a clear reference to p.114-115 in ''Oplomachia'', the 1621 pike, halberd and musket treatise of [[Bonaventura Pistofilo]]. </p><br />
<p>''When an occasion arrives where you must grasp your sword, I urge you never to abandon your pike, whether it is broken or intact. Instead employ it at least to defend. Anyone can understand for themselves from figure 79, how useful this manner of holding the pike can be for defence.'' </p><br />
<p>''It protects against cavalry, infantry, and against any type of hand weapon; even against missile weapons such as javelins, darts, arrows, and similar arms, up to and including arquebus shots. As long as by chance they do not strike directly in the centre of the shaft, so that the balls instead skid aside, the man will be saved, as I have seen from experience.'' </p><br />
<p>''You must comport yourself such that everything is covered by the pike, maintaining your arm high and firmly extended. Your stance must be sufficiently wide for greater stability, with your sword ready to attack.'' </p><br />
<p>''If you then wish to return your sword to its sheath without abandoning the pike, or piece of haft left in your hand, figure 80 clearly demonstrates how without need for further explanation.''</ref></p><br />
<p>I have seen many authors publish thoughts which objectively can barely be sustained. This prompted me to highlight one marvellous opinion, held by a master not only of fencing but of many trades. </p><br />
<p>In one of his books, he assigns a posture with the sword in the right hand and a pike in the left, profiled towards that side like a barbican. He asserts it does not merely defend against cavalry and infantry, but from any sort of polearm, and also from arrows, javelins and even arquebus or musket shots. </p><br />
<p>The only caveat is that it must not hit the centre of the shaft, where it may break, which seems likely. I leave this to be pondered by anyone who professes the practice of arms. To authenticate this he claims to have seen it. </p><br />
<p>Emboldened by such a claim, I have taken common courage and confided to the pen that which was concealed in my mind. Because if such wonders have occurred they would refute not only my weak and poorly articulated arguments, but genuine and well-founded ones. </p><br />
<p>I do not blame that pikeman, whether his pike was whole or broken, if having to wield his sword he also employed his polearm. But with apologies, I can never have it believed that his haft could keep him safe from every attack, from every sort of weapon. Supposedly even the musket against which (the author says) the pike prevails, the musket ball skidding off one side or the other to be deflected without harm. </p><br />
<p>In truth I have not passed my years in war, where I might have witnessed such incidences, but have been in service of and enjoyed the company of many veteran soldiers. Foremost of all the Most Illustrious Sir Silvio Piccolomini of Aragon, a person of such esteem as is known throughout the world, having fulfilled many offices in war, for the Most Serene Highnesses of Tuscany and for other crowns. Yet I never heard from him or anybody else that the guard described is able to achieve what is claimed. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eighteen – Some admonishments for those who wear a sword'''</p><br />
<p>Any profession should be practised with every possible convenience, and a farmer who must be present when the grain is harvested in July should not wear a garment of heavy cloth.</p><br />
<p>Those who dedicate themselves to the profession of wearing a sword, so dangerous that we could say death always walks alongside it, in various respects should not wear any ornamentation of the body or clothes, or any other items that might disadvantage them when coming to blows. </p><br />
<p>An example more perilous than any other is high-heels, which can easily lead their owner to fall over. Or else sleeves that hang down from the tunic, which can subject someone who is confronted, or who confronts, to great trouble. </p><br />
<p>Likewise long hair, which when coming to grapple grants a clear advantage to the opponent, while bringing great danger to the bearer, even more so when curly in the extravagant style of today; also more specifically hair that comes to impede vision. </p><br />
<p>Also included among such impediments are clothes with large slashes, in the French fashion or in any other. They can cause no small detriment, being dangerous by hampering the drawing of weapons with the swiftness required. </p><br />
<p>I also wanted to mention those who carry daggers with a dangling rose. </p><br />
<p>This is for the benefit of all; because from the mishaps that have occurred, I am sure the impediments I have listed most often create danger for the lives of those who struggle with arms. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Nineteen – What moved me to write this discourse'''</p><br />
<p>Everything we do in this world has an end, and every endeavour wends towards its outcome. Therefore I felt it apt to declare in this final chapter, which motives moved me to stain these few sheets of paper (so to speak) with my coarse and ill-adapted thoughts, and to expose myself voluntarily to the censure of innumerable fine intellects. </p><br />
<p>The reason is that I have found infinite authors, who by means of the presses have professed to enrich the virtue of fencing by demonstrating various sorts of guards and means of combat, and numerous uses of weapons. Knowing that all these operations were shown for the simple practice of wielding a sword, I resolved to designate the true manner of exercising this profession seriously. It consists of nothing more than the simple assaults which are conducted for pleasure. </p><br />
<p>The reason for writing this discourse was none other than a real and genuine desire for the aficionados of this art to recognise the true method of practising it, to not further maltreat it, and to employ the advice provided for the benefit of their person. This is the motivation, as I have said previously, and the intention. </p><br />
<p>May the reader appreciate the willingness of my spirit; and may those habituated to Ciceronian eloquence, and to the exquisite vivacity of extraordinary conceptions, pity my rude pen, whose lowly scribbles have aspired only to reveal the truth. </p><br />
<p>Lastly I wanted to set out how having learned the voids and traverses, I found them ill-suited to real combat with a sharp sword, and I criticise them. </p><br />
<p>Although I praise cuts in practice for their excellent defence, even more so at night where they are the quickest blow to find their target, I do not wish praise them by themselves, I commend them when mixed with a good many thrusts. A dagger can interrupt and defend against thrusts, but is comfortably negated by cuts. </p><br />
<p>And here I come to a close. If God grants me health in months and not years I hope to bring forth fruit that is useful, with the most straightforward method, apt for real combat, distinguishing the characteristics of different people: whether large, powerful, small or weak, with appropriate rules. </p><br />
<p>All in honour of our Lord God, and the most Blessed Virgin Mary. </p><br />
<p>'''THE END. ''' </p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Copyright and License Summary<br />
| width = 100%<br />
}}<br />
For further information, including transcription and translation notes, see the [[Talk:{{PAGENAME}}|discussion page]].<br />
<br />
<section begin="sourcebox"/>{{sourcebox header}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Translation<br />
| authors = [[Piermarco Terminiello]]<br />
| source link = http://sword.school/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Monesi-Translation-1.pdf<br />
| source title = Objections and Admonishments on the Subject of Fencing By Jacopo Monesi (1640)<br />
| license = educational<br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox footer}}<section end="sourcebox"/><br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
<br />
{{Regional Italian traditions}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Translation]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Rapier]]<br />
[[Category:Dagger]]<br />
<br />
{{reflist|2}}<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Monesi, Jacopo}}<br />
{{Early Italian masters}}</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Marco_Docciolini&diff=120593Marco Docciolini2020-12-03T15:55:37Z<p>P Terminiello: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = [[name::Marco Docciolini]]<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = 16th century<br />
| birthplace = <br />
| deathdate = 23 Sep 1610<br />
| deathplace = <br />
| resting_place = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set: occupation=Fencing master }}<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = Florentine<br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = <br />
<br />
| period = <br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| subject = <br />
| movement = Florentine school<br />
| notableworks = ''[[Trattato in Materia di Scherma (Marco Docciolini)|Trattato in Materia di Scherma]]'' (1601)<br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= <br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| partner = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| influences = [[Francesco di Sandro Altoni]]<br />
| influenced = <br />
| awards = <br />
| signature = <br />
| website = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
'''Marco Docciolini''' was an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing master]] at the turn of the [[century::17th century]]. He seems to have been an initiate of the Florentine fencing tradition of [[Francesco di Sandro Altoni]]. Docciolini wrote and published a fencing manual in 1601 entitled ''[[Trattato in Materia di Scherma (Marco Docciolini)|Trattato in Materia di Scherma]]'' ("Treatise on Matters of Defense"), which he dedicated to the great Florentine general Don Giovanni de' Medici (1563-1621).<br />
<br />
His dedication describes fifty-two years of professional experience by 1601, suggesting a probable date of birth in the early 1530s. His family appears to have moved to Florence in 1586 (possibly from Pistoia), when his elder brother Giovanfrancesco is first recorded as a Florentine citizen. A Marco di Bernardo Docciolini is listed as having died on the 23rd September 1610; buried in the Church of San Niccolò Oltrarno in Florence, together with his brother Giovanfrancesco di Bernardo di Marco Docciolini (who died in 1587) and other family members.<ref> Docciolini, Marco. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003. p.76.</ref><br />
<br />
Evidence suggests that until the nineteenth century, this church contained a plaque of the Docciolini family arms: a red lion rampant on a gold field, holding an olive branch. The precise origin and status of these arms and the Docciolini family is unclear. Neither the arms themselves nor the Docciolini name appear in any recognized heraldic register.<ref> Docciolini, Marco. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003. p.79.</ref><br />
<br />
There is evidence that Docciolini enjoyed some wealth and status in his day. A now lost portrait of “Docciolini the fencer” (''Docciolini Schermitore''), by eminent Florentine painter Santi di Tito, is recorded in an inventory of the Doni household as of 1677.<ref> Cinelli, Giovanni. ''Bellezze della città di Firenze. Dove a pieno di pittura di scultura di sacri templi, di palazzi, i più notabili artifizi, è più preziosi si contengono''. Florence, 1677. p.565.</ref><br />
<br />
There are no records of Marco Docciolini marrying or having legitimate children, though he was survived by two nephews, Bernardo and Costanzo, the sons of Giovanfrancesco. A letter from 1627 between Bernardo and the noted Florentine musicologist Giovanni Battista Doni, suggests a professional relationship between the two. This provides a plausible explanation as to how Docciolini's portrait might have been passed to the Doni family.<ref> Docciolini, Marco. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003. p.77.</ref><br />
<br />
Despite claiming fifty two years professional experience, and alluding to influential patrons, Docciolini does not appear to be enrolled in the ''Speziali'', The Guild of Doctors and Apothecaries (''Arte dei Medici e Speziali''), as would have been required for a Master of Arms in Florence, which may suggest he had a small circle of private clients.<br />
<br />
Silvio Longhi speculates that his late arrival in Florence, unmarried status, and lack of formal guild affiliation together suggest a long military career, possibly under the command of Don Giovanni de' Medici, to whom his treatise is dedicated.<ref> Docciolini, Marco. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003. p.78.</ref><br />
<br />
<br />
== Treatise ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
* [[Marco Docciolini|Docciolini, Marco]]. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003.<br />
* [[Marco Docciolini|Docciolini, Marco]] and [[Steven Reich|Reich, Steven]]. ''[http://www.lulu.com/us/en/shop/steven-reich/marco-docciolini/paperback/product-12190678.html Marco Docciolini's 1601 Fencing Treatise]''. Lulu, 2010.<br />
* [[Marco Docciolini|Docciolini, Marco]]. ''Treatise on the Subject of Fencing: Marco Docciolini's 1601 Fencing Treatise''. Trans. [[Piermarco Terminiello]] and [[Steven Reich]]. Vulpes, 2017. ISBN 978-1910462010.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Docciolini, Marco}}<br />
{{Florentine tradition}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Research/Background Information]]<br />
[[Category:Copy/Pasting]]<br />
[[Category:Translation]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Double Side Swords]]<br />
[[Category:Side Sword]]<br />
[[Category:Sword and Buckler]]<br />
[[Category:Sword and Dagger]]<br />
[[Category:Sword and Shield]]<br />
[[Category:Sword and Cloak]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Marco_Docciolini&diff=120592Marco Docciolini2020-12-03T15:53:37Z<p>P Terminiello: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = [[name::Marco Docciolini]]<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = 16th century<br />
| birthplace = <br />
| deathdate = 1610<br />
| deathplace = <br />
| resting_place = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set: occupation=Fencing master }}<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = Florentine<br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = <br />
<br />
| period = <br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| subject = <br />
| movement = Florentine school<br />
| notableworks = ''[[Trattato in Materia di Scherma (Marco Docciolini)|Trattato in Materia di Scherma]]'' (1601)<br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= <br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| partner = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| influences = [[Francesco di Sandro Altoni]]<br />
| influenced = <br />
| awards = <br />
| signature = <br />
| website = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
'''Marco Docciolini''' was an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing master]] at the turn of the [[century::17th century]]. He seems to have been an initiate of the Florentine fencing tradition of [[Francesco di Sandro Altoni]]. Docciolini wrote and published a fencing manual in 1601 entitled ''[[Trattato in Materia di Scherma (Marco Docciolini)|Trattato in Materia di Scherma]]'' ("Treatise on Matters of Defense"), which he dedicated to the great Florentine general Don Giovanni de' Medici (1563-1621).<br />
<br />
His dedication describes fifty-two years of professional experience by 1601, suggesting a probable date of birth in the early 1530s. His family appears to have moved to Florence in 1586 (possibly from Pistoia), when his elder brother Giovanfrancesco is first recorded as a Florentine citizen. A Marco di Bernardo Docciolini is listed as having died on the 23rd September 1610; buried in the Church of San Niccolò Oltrarno in Florence, together with his brother Giovanfrancesco di Bernardo di Marco Docciolini (who died in 1587) and other family members.<ref> Docciolini, Marco. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003. p.76.</ref><br />
<br />
Evidence suggests that until the nineteenth century, this church contained a plaque of the Docciolini family arms: a red lion rampant on a gold field, holding an olive branch. The precise origin and status of these arms and the Docciolini family is unclear. Neither the arms themselves nor the Docciolini name appear in any recognized heraldic register.<ref> Docciolini, Marco. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003. p.79.</ref><br />
<br />
There is evidence that Docciolini enjoyed some wealth and status in his day. A now lost portrait of “Docciolini the fencer” (''Docciolini Schermitore''), by eminent Florentine painter Santi di Tito, is recorded in an inventory of the Doni household as of 1677.<ref> Cinelli, Giovanni. ''Bellezze della città di Firenze. Dove a pieno di pittura di scultura di sacri templi, di palazzi, i più notabili artifizi, è più preziosi si contengono''. Florence, 1677. p.565.</ref><br />
<br />
There are no records of Marco Docciolini marrying or having legitimate children, though he was survived by two nephews, Bernardo and Costanzo, the sons of Giovanfrancesco. A letter from 1627 between Bernardo and the noted Florentine musicologist Giovanni Battista Doni, suggests a professional relationship between the two. This provides a plausible explanation as to how Docciolini's portrait might have been passed to the Doni family.<ref> Docciolini, Marco. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003. p.77.</ref><br />
<br />
Despite claiming fifty two years professional experience, and alluding to influential patrons, Docciolini does not appear to be enrolled in the ''Speziali'', The Guild of Doctors and Apothecaries (''Arte dei Medici e Speziali''), as would have been required for a Master of Arms in Florence, which may suggest he had a small circle of private clients.<br />
<br />
Silvio Longhi speculates that his late arrival in Florence, unmarried status, and lack of formal guild affiliation together suggest a long military career, possibly under the command of Don Giovanni de' Medici, to whom his treatise is dedicated.<ref> Docciolini, Marco. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003. p.78.</ref><br />
<br />
<br />
== Treatise ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
* [[Marco Docciolini|Docciolini, Marco]]. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003.<br />
* [[Marco Docciolini|Docciolini, Marco]] and [[Steven Reich|Reich, Steven]]. ''[http://www.lulu.com/us/en/shop/steven-reich/marco-docciolini/paperback/product-12190678.html Marco Docciolini's 1601 Fencing Treatise]''. Lulu, 2010.<br />
* [[Marco Docciolini|Docciolini, Marco]]. ''Treatise on the Subject of Fencing: Marco Docciolini's 1601 Fencing Treatise''. Trans. [[Piermarco Terminiello]] and [[Steven Reich]]. Vulpes, 2017. ISBN 978-1910462010.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Docciolini, Marco}}<br />
{{Florentine tradition}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Research/Background Information]]<br />
[[Category:Copy/Pasting]]<br />
[[Category:Translation]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Double Side Swords]]<br />
[[Category:Side Sword]]<br />
[[Category:Sword and Buckler]]<br />
[[Category:Sword and Dagger]]<br />
[[Category:Sword and Shield]]<br />
[[Category:Sword and Cloak]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Alfonso_Falloppia&diff=120591Alfonso Falloppia2020-12-03T15:51:44Z<p>P Terminiello: /* Treatise */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = [[name::Alfonso Falloppia]]<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = <br />
| birthplace = Lucca<br />
| deathdate = <br />
| deathplace = <br />
| resting_place = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set:occupation=Fencing master}}<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = <br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = Ranuccio Farnese<br />
<br />
| period = <br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| subject = <br />
| movement = <br />
| notableworks = ''[[Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire (Alfonso Falloppia)|Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire]]'' (1584)<br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= <br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| partner = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| influences = <br />
| influenced = <br />
| awards = <br />
| signature = <br />
| website = <br />
| translations = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
'''Alfonso Falloppia''' was a [[century::16th century]] [[nationality::Italian]] soldier and [[fencing master]]. Little is known about his life, but he identifies himself as a native of Lucca, and describes himself as "Ensign of the Fortress of Bergamo".<br />
<br />
In 1584, he published a treatise on the use of the rapier entitled ''[[Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire (Alfonso Falloppia)|Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire]]'' ("New and Brief Method of Fencing"). It was dedicated to Ranuccio Farnese, who was 15 years old at the time of publication and would become Duke of Parma, Piacenza, and Castro.<br />
<br />
It has been suggested the Falloppia may be the student of Silvio Piccolomini in Brescia mentioned in 1580 by the French diarist Michel De Montaigne during his tour of Italy.<br />
<br />
''On Monday I dined at the house of Sir Silvio Piccolomini, very well known for his virtue, and in particular for the science of fencing. Many topics were put forward, and we were in the company of other gentlemen. He disdains completely the art of fencing of the Italian masters, of the Venetian, of Bologna, Patinostraro (sic), and others. In this he praises only a student of his, who is in Brescia where he teaches certain gentlemen this art.''<br />
<br />
''He says there is no rule or art in the common teaching, he particularly denounces the practice of pushing your sword forward, putting it in the power of the enemy; then the passing attack; or repeating another assault and stopping, because he says this is completely different to what you see by experience from combatants.''<ref>de Montaigne, Michel. ''Journal du voyage de Michel de Montaigne en Italie, par la Suisse & l'Allemagne en 1580 & 1581, Volume 1''. Paris, 1774.p.284.</ref><br />
<br />
While the timeframe is plausible there is no further evidence to corroborate this theory, and it remains speculation. Furthermore there are no marked similarities between the treatises of Falloppia and [[Federico Ghisliero]] (a self-declared student of Piccolomini) although curiously they both dedicate their respective treatises to the same patron, Ranuccio Farnese, within three years of each other.<br />
<br />
== Treatise ==<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Introduction and dedication| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''NEW'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''AND BRIEF METHOD'''</p><br />
<p>'''OF FENCING'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''OF ALFONSO FALLOPPIA OF LUCCA,'''</p><br />
<p>Ensign in the Fortress of Bergamo.</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''TO THE MOST ILLUSTRIOUS, ETC. '''</p><br />
<p>'''HIS MASTER, '''</p><br />
<p>'''THE SIR RAINUCCIO FARNESE'''</p><br />
<p>Prince of Parma. </p><br />
<br />
<p>With Permission from the authorities</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''IN BERGAMO MDLXXXIIII. '''</p><br />
<p>Printed by Comin Ventura. </p> <br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>To my most illustrious and excellent sir. Wishing to make myself known to the world as a most devoted servant of Your Excellency; and to find myself respected wherever I go, as any young doe would be who heralds no longer the name of Caesar, but that of Rainuccio Farnese, I could think of no better means, than by dedicating this slight work on gentlemanly arts. It is composed for the universal benefit of all gallant men, and to confound those fencers who do not know, or who wish to teach naught but certain things that nature teaches by itself, and furthermore whose prices are set, much like the mechanics they use. </p> <br />
<br />
<p>I say gentlemanly, in contrast to those who teach tricks and abuses. They are not ashamed to suggest arms that are never seen except in premeditated cases and blatant murders, such as rotellas, targas, bucklers, balls of iron, spadones, and polearms of whichever name or type. These are all distant from me, because by the term arms I include only those that are proper, both in defence and attack, that every day and by all are commonly carried. These are the sword, and dagger, chain shirt, and cape (since for now we are allowed to call the cape a defensive arm). </p><br />
<br />
<p>Of these alone I intend to write, as those appropriate to a gentleman, one who must undertake the profession of a soldier, and to a gentleman of honour. And I shall be succinct, condensing everything into seven guards, or rules, however you wish to call them. Of which three shall relate to the sword alone, one to the sword and cape, with the other three to the sword and dagger. Nonetheless I shall not overlook anything, because these seven guards shall encompass the substance of any others. It shall also be straightforward, such that it can be understood without figures. </p><br />
<br />
<p>As for the usefulness of this art, as she regards the preservation of honour and of life, there is no one who is not aware of it. May Your Excellency enjoy it, not because it is useful to princes of your rank, who are defended by their own authority, but because it stands in eternal testimony of my devotion and servitude towards your most joyous and sublime house. </p> <br />
<br />
<br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Sword Alone| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>I will start by briefly discussing the sword alone, being the foremost among all the other arms, in the manner that follows. Firstly, a man who wishes to employ this sort of weapon should settle his body with this method: with his right foot forward, standing in profile, somewhat bending his left knee, in a half-pace. His sword arm should be extended, with his hand a ''palmo''<ref>The ''palmo'' (plural ''palmi'') is an antique unit of measurement. Its precise length varied by location, but was typical around 25cm.</ref> above his head, and his point perpendicular towards the chest of his enemy. He can perform thrusts and cuts as he sees fit, in tempo, taking care to deliver the blows quickly, and to return quickly into his starting posture, ensuring the blows are long, stretching out his body, and extending his step as far as he can. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Having acquired this habit with much practice, he will do the same in anger, no differently than when in his natural state. From this guard he can practice beats with the hand, voids of the body – either backwards, or to the sides, as the tempo takes him; and this first form can serve in many instances in the play of the sword. </p> <br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>There is also a second, lower form, which demands the centre line, which it governs, keeping your arm extended in line with your shoulder, such that your hilt faces your enemy’s shoulder, while your face is covered by the hilt. </p><br />
<br />
<p>By leaning your head towards your sword-shoulder, while standing in this fashion, if your enemy delivers a ''mandritto'' cut to your head, you can parry it inside, meeting him to the face in that same tempo. If he attacks you with a ''roverso'' to the head you can parry to the outside and meet him to the face. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If he attacks your legs while you are in this said posture, you can meet him to the face, or lower, pulling your leg back toward the other. Reason dictates that with the sword alone, if someone attacks the legs, they will run onto the point of your sword with their face, without you having to parry; which many do, parrying at their legs with the sword. If two play with the sword alone, maintaining the centre line, and one drops to the legs, he always brings his head forward, and if he meets his enemy’s sword (which is easily done), he will find that his own sword does not reach. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>While I do not approve of attacks to the legs while the sword is in presence, because it carries great risk, you can quite well wound to the leg with the sword alone, but look for the tempo where enemy’s sword moves out of presence, or else parry a cut with cover, and quickly respond to the legs, quickly jumping back to avoid clashing, which can happen with the sword in your face, when you drop to the legs. </p><br />
<br />
<p>You can attack to the legs with a void to the sides, but note carefully the position of your enemy’s sword, because with a void of the body to the side, if you are not quick to defend well, you can be struck on the head by a ''mandritto'', or ''roverscio'' depending on which side you move to. </p><br />
<br />
<p>However, I say that attacking the legs with the sword alone is highly dangerous. If you do not have a great tempo, or great quickness of body, it is not beneficial. If you parry a cut to the legs with your sword, it carries great risk, that by a turn of the wrist you are struck to the head. Therefore, you should not parry in this manner. It is better to extend your point in a straight line, pulling your leg a little towards yourself, turning your body, thereby striking your enemy with ease. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>While two play with the sword alone, you should also be advised that when one delivers a thrust, you can meet it with your sword and wound in the same tempo, and do so easily. This is because it is greatly advantageous to wait for the other to strike. Because in attacking you first he brings his ''debole'' onto your ''forte''. While you hold the centre line, however the attacks, either inside or outside, you can easily meet him, turning your hand to the side where your enemy moves to strike. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If he strikes to the inside, you can meet it with your ''forte'', turning your hand somewhat, such that the enemy’s sword remains out of presence, while yours wounds first, in that tempo. If he strikes to the outside, towards your sword-shoulder, you can meet it with the ''forte'' of your sword, bringing your body slightly to the outside, towards his face. I advise that the ''forte'' of your sword is from the hilt to within one ''braccio''<ref>The ''braccio'' is another antique unite of measurement, whose length varied by location. A Milanese ''braccio'' for example was 59.49cm, or approximately 23.4 inches.</ref> of the point. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy wishes to gain your sword, keep watch, so that when he moves his sword, before he has an advantage over yours, you do not disengage with a wide tempo, but to free your sword and enter in one tempo. While he takes two tempos, one to gain your sword and another to attack, you only perform the motion of not letting your sword be found and wounding in that same tempo. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If it happens that you cannot execute this with diligence and speed, and he gains your sword, do not try and force it free. This would have no effect whatsoever, you can however free it in this manner: by retreating back somewhat, with a void of your body, which will free your sword. You can then follow-up by attacking, or finding your enemy’s sword, or waiting in guard – to enter when the tempo arises. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy delivers a great cut, meet it with your ''forte'' and enter in that same tempo, since you will easily parry and wound in one tempo. If he delivers a thrust, and you have the sword alone, you must watch his sword, to understand where his point may land, and how close you are. Because if you are close to the enemy, you must be aware of where his sword moves. If the point arrives low, you must meet it with your ''forte'', fleeing with a small void to the side, that is to say dodging the point. Take care however not to void such that your point leaves the centre line, and your enemy’s presence, because you can easily attack in that same tempo, applying this skill. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy delivers a thrust, and you are not very close, you must judge the distance, and void your body back, not shifting your sword from the centre line or from your enemy’s presence, since you can easily meet his sword with your ''forte'' and attack. Because by voiding backwards you bring the enemy’s ''debole'' onto your ''forte'', and he cannot wound you without first gathering his step, taking another longer tempo, as follows. Having delivered the thrust, which fell short, the enemy can recover in this way: keeping his arm on the centre line, with a quick eye to recover his sword which finds itself at your ''forte'', he then gathers his left foot towards his right, with either a long or short step, depending on how you moved. </p><br />
<br />
<p>However, you must be quick with your eyes and legs, and have resolve in your play, and not act as many do, who having delivered their blow, which the enemy defended, remain disordered, not knowing how to take further actions, not considering that the other has hands with which to defend and attack. For this reason take great care not to rush into hands of the enemy, consider also what he might do, you will find many various approaches: one who waits for the enemy to attack first, one who circles to find the tempo, one who plays short, one who plays long, however I wish to advise you on all of these circumstances. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy circles around you, I do not want you to walk similarly, encircling, as many do, but to stay firmly in your stance. As he takes three or four steps to gain an advantage, to one side or the other, and as he moves his body, ensure that the point of your sword is always watching him. When you know that your body is thereby encircled, and that you are not in presence of the point of his sword, take only one step in the circle, small or large, depending on the tempo you find, that is whether the enemy circles you quickly, or slowly. When the enemy wishes to take advantage of you to steal the tempo, he will take three or four steps, however you will only move the foot that you find in front, in the manner I described above, therefore with this rule no one will be able to steal the tempo from you. </p><br />
<br />
<p>You also have another advantage: while the enemy wishes to encircle you, you can attack him advantageously in that tempo, because he thinks to steal the tempo from you, but in that instant you can attack and steal it from him, and furthermore wound in just that single tempo, where you please, depending on the area that is uncovered. Be quick in delivering your attack, and in recovering your body. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>You must take note of the tempo I describe below, which is very advantageous, governing yourself in the manner that follows. Every time you hold the centre line, and your enemy wishes to initiate an attack in the form of a cut, I want you to push your sword directly forward, while he raises his arm to attack you. Before his blow comes down you will be able to wound him, with great advantage. If you consider carefully, your eye watching his sword in this action, you will find that when your enemy brings down his sword, he brings it onto your ''forte''. </p><br />
<br />
<p>The same occurs when the enemy commences, wishing to deliver certain wrist-cuts to your head, I want you to meet him to his face, and you will easily land in one single tempo. Pay attention to whether your enemy attacks to the inside or the outside, because you can meet him and parry and wound either to the inside or the outside, depending on where he attacks. </p><br />
<br />
<p>But if it happens that your enemy cannot make headway with his plays of the wrist, he might easily retreat in guard. In this case you must push your thrust forward down the centre line, and be quick, before he takes the tempo to settle into guard. The reason is because when your enemy is in presence, and wishes to change guard, you can attack in that tempo, and can hit him easily. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Now let us suppose he retreats such that you cannot wound him, take care to be quick with your legs moving forward, always keeping your sword in presence against your enemy. If he performs a feint to the outside, or the inside, take care not to move with your sword, in the belief you will parry. If you do, he can easily disengage to the other side and wound you in that tempo. Observe instead this rule: every time someone performs a feint against you, meet him in that first tempo. Because your enemy employs two tempos, one to feint and the other to wound, while you need only one tempo to wound. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>I praise feints in this manner: while you are on the centre line, I want you to motion an entry to the face, whereby it is likely your enemy will move to parry. You should watch where he moves his sword, which will be near the area you motioned, or rather feinted towards; without disengaging your sword you will then find a tempo in which to enter. Meaning, by managing your ''forte'', you shall save yourself from his sword if he attacks in that tempo, which will be as follows. As you make the motion, and your sword begins to travel, clearly your enemy will move his sword to parry and wound. With an attentive eye, you will enter on the line where your enemy extends to parry your blow, and you can enter with a single tempo, without certain disengages, as many do when performing feints. These instructions are called ''contra tempi'', and are so subtle they are not considered by everyone. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Similarly, if you make the motion to enter, and your enemy does not move in belief, feel free to follow through, entering with the same motion. When you perform the action, take care always to target the area that is most uncovered. This forces the enemy to parry, and you will make him take two tempos, while you only take one; however check with your eyes, taking note of whether he stands firm, or else moves in belief of your feint. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>I now wish to inform you how to gain advantage over your enemy’s sword, and its benefits. When you wish to find the sword, clearly your ''forte'' is superior to his ''debole''. However, you must have a good awareness of how your enemy holds his body and sword, to know the tempo in which to move your body, and begin to dominate his ''debole'' with your ''forte'', executing the action, and moving slowly till you reach the ''debole'' of his sword. Because if you move quickly, he can disengage and wound you as I described above, and you will not be able to find his sword, but if you go slowly you will find it easily. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Take care, however you found it: either to the inside or the outside, not to let him recover; because he will be forced to disengage. As he disengages, you should find him again, or attack in that single tempo. If you apply reason to the sword, as you found him once, you can do so again, such that he can no longer recover. Having found the sword, with your enemy unable to disengage, wound him in the same tempo of finding, always using your ''forte'', so he cannot recover. </p><br />
<br />
<p>When you have found his sword, you can employ your left-hand glove to grab it, with a grapple, that is by grasping it, which you will accomplish easily. Take care not to act as many do, who having delivered a thrust wish to grab his sword with their left hand in that same tempo. This is difficult to perform, therefore those who employ this approach often miss the sword, that is they cannot grasp it, and are often struck either in the chest or face. The reason is that the fencer with the sword alone switches, by putting his left side forward. Since you can vary the sword, you can easily wound one who stands like this, in several ways. I judge a bold cut towards that side as the best of these, which cannot fail to hit and disorder him. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>There is also a rushing play, which most Frenchmen employ. When confronted by this, I want you always to hold the centre line. Your enemy therefore comes running to wound you, open, and you stop him by setting yourself in a strong posture, such that he crashes into your sword. Watch the distance, meaning when he gets close to effect his crash, and at the same time keep your eyes on his sword. Note that in wishing to crash into you he will take a long tempo, whereupon you can meet him with your sword where he is most open, and with a void of the body, avoiding his sword, you will surely hit him. </p><br />
<br />
<p>The crash could be in this form: he arrives with the false-edge of his sword to disorder you. In that instant you can meet him, meaning when he is close, and you can reach him, you can easily free your own sword to anticipate his. Because he arrives with impetus, persuading himself that in one tempo he can impede your sword, which you show in presence, and either deliver a cut to your leg and retreat back, or unleash a thrust and step to the side.<ref>''Contrapassare''.</ref> However observe the rule I described, wounding him when he arrives to find the tempo, and note that you will easily hit him in that single tempo, standing with your body firm and nimble. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Although you see someone come at you with impetus, you should not fear, because when afraid you make a thousand wrong movements, whereby the enemy can easily enact what he intended. If you stand in the form I described above, keeping your sword in presence, he will be disordered on his approach, your sword in presence watching him; and if by chance he runs without consideration, he could also easily meet it, and you will stop him in his tracks. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Now if your enemy does not rush, but sets himself in a low posture, enter on the centre line, but over his ''debole'' such that when attacking you in that same tempo, as I discussed, he cannot injure you. His blow will come to nothing, as it will necessarily meet your ''forte'', as you previously ensured. In this manner he will not anticipate you, and hereby reason staunches those in haste. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Although many say that reason does not matter with the sword, as is beaten by rage, I do not agree, and I defer to the judgement of knowledgeable men. It is true that reason with arms, this is to say play, does not count for those who allow themselves to lose heart, to not do their duty, whereupon they lose to those who know and those who do not. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>There is also much else to say over this centre line, which for the sake of brevity I will leave to the judgement of the prudent reader, it being very advantageous. However, I wish to discuss it no further, having spoken of useful and necessary matters, we will now speak of the third guard, and how it is formed. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>The third guard is as follows: you must extend your right arm towards your right knee, keeping your hand approximately half a ''braccio'' from your knee, and your point up towards your enemy’s face. Lean your body slightly, but not so you fall, that is make yourself somewhat small, with your right heel facing the middle of your left foot, in a half-pace stance; or more, or less depending on what you find comfortable and strong. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Standing in this posture, if the enemy thrusts a point at your face, be sure to catch it with your sword’s ''forte'', either to the inside or the outside, depending on which side he attacks. Thrust all in one tempo, raising your back, and you will easily parry and wound in that tempo. If he delivers a cut, whether a ''dritto'' or a ''roverscio'', parry with your ''forte'', and enter to his face; meaning whether he aims at your head, or if he strikes lower, in either case respond in that direction. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If he feints towards your face, or to another part of your body, do not move in belief to parry, instead push your sword forward in that tempo, catching his ''debole'' with your ''forte''. If he aims at your leg, pull it back a little, and meet him by raising the hilt of your sword and lowering the point. Be quick, and in this manner you can defend yourself again such blows. If you deliver the attack I described, and when he attacks your legs you remove your body, he will not be able to harm that part of you, if having attacked the legs he then wished to deliver a thrust. Judgement also matters, which teaches you to take decisions as required, when observing this and similar forms, permitting you to defend against many attacks. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Now I wish to discuss passing steps, and to demonstrate how dangerous they are, and when they are useful. You should understand that passing steps require feints, and be aware that they pose great risk to those who do not employ them with great tempos, agility, and quickness of body. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If you find yourself in the first form of the sword alone, and someone wishes to pass at you, seeing your sword high, it is probable he will move to find you, in order to perform it. Note carefully that if the enemy feints to your face in order to pass, as reason dictates, I do not want you to respond to the feint except as follows. Lean your body somewhat to void, where you see fit to avoid the point of his feint, then all in one same tempo beat with your hand, and deliver a thrust down perpendicular with his body. You will easily meet him if he bends down well with his stomach towards the ground, and you will stop him, since he will not be able to pass. The reason is as follows: you do not move in belief of the impetus his feint. You have time to beat the point of his sword with your hand, and employ the methods I described above, breaking his designs, because he arrives at great speed to perform the feint and passing step in that tempo. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If you find yourself on the centre line in the second form, and the enemy comes at you with a feint to execute a passing step, void with your body to the side, evading his sword’s point. While he passes you can catch him to the head, by voiding, playing somewhat with your body, equally you can thrust him to the face. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>When your enemy performs the feint, and all in one tempo wishes to pass, void from the left side.<ref>In other words, towards the right.</ref> That is, if he feints to the inside, and you reverse your point towards his face, you will stop him easily. You can also meet him lower on the body, because in keeping your point low, it is difficult for him to pass. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If he feints to the outside, bring your left foot forward, opening yourself with a half circle, your right food following the left to meet it, and you will easily exit from presence, and you can deliver a thrust, or else a ''roverso'' cut. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If you wish to perform a passing step, observe the following: when you wish to pass, execute the feint, and the movement of passing, but do not run. It is likely that your enemy, seeing the movement, that is carrying your body out of your sword’s presence, will turn his sword’s point to side on which you perform the action of passing. In that tempo, you can cover his ''debole'' with your ''forte'', and enter to the face without performing another pass. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If you wish to pass freely, observe this rule: first find his sword, then enter to the face. He will be forced to parry, and thereby will remove his sword, such that you can pass without danger; equally if he does not parry, you will catch him to the face. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If you are in the third guard, and someone feints at you to pass to the body with their sword low, I want you to void your body, pushing your thrust with the point perpendicular, closely watching your enemy’s sword, so that you can void your body to one side or the other. However, you must pay great attention to your enemy’s body, see the manner in which he moves, understand the tempo, and most of all be aware of his sword; that is consider with your eye, and judgement, where his sword might land. </p><br />
<br />
<p>This will suffice on this subject matter. Although there are many other things, these are very useful, and very natural, such that you can employ them. Furthermore there are many who suggest other sorts of guards beyond these, which I in fact do not esteem, condensing them all to mine here. </p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Sword and Cape| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
|<p>I will now discuss the sword and cape, or cloak, as quickly and briefly as possible. You can employ the cape in two circumstances. One is when you cannot carry a dagger. The other when you are attacked by surprise, and it is easier to wrap your cape than put your hand to your dagger, that is when you have your dagger at the back and not at your side. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Because most people without quarrels carry them almost always, then when the time comes to reach for their swords, cannot find them, because they cannot reach with their left hand. You should therefore wear it on your right side, to have full control over it. However, I will speak no more of the dagger now, being enough merely to have indicated to carry the weapon at your side. </p> <br />
<br />
<p>Finding yourself therefore in a place where you cannot carry daggers, it is likely that employing the cape or cloak will be useful. I say that wishing to wrap the cape or cloak, you should let the part of the cape over your right shoulder drop behind you, then turn your left hand (that is the palm) upwards, grabbing the hem with your hand half a ''braccio'' under the shoulder, or less, depending on what you find comfortable. When you let the cape or cloak fall from your left shoulder onto your left arm, which will remain completely covered, you will perform one turn only, to the right towards your hand, letting the other part of the cape fall low towards your leg. You will execute this wrap very quickly, and not act as many do, who wrap all of it around their arm, because by letting it hang low brings you have many advantages, which I will describe. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Having wrapped the cape, as I discussed, I want you to bring your left side a half-pace forward, keeping your sword to the outside, below your hand. Standing in this manner, if your enemy delivers a cut to your head, either a ''dritto'' or ''roverso'', I want you to parry with your sword’s ''forte'', meeting him to the face in that tempo, bringing your right foot forward with a long and resolute pass forward. </p><br />
<br />
<p>However, if he cuts to your leg with a ''roverso'', while you are in the above position, raise your sword-hand a little and deliver a perpendicular ''imbroccata'', bringing your right leg forward with your arm extended. Take care to void somewhat, but not by much, to enter with less danger. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If he cuts a ''mandritto'' to your legs, I want you to defend immediately with the hanging portion of your cape, in the meantime turning your hand with a thrust in the centre of his chest, where you find him most uncovered. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Take note never to cover your face with your cape-arm, because your enemy could deliver a point to your body, or cut to your leg while you cover your face. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Even if he cuts to your head with a ''dritto'' o ''roverscio'', I do not wish you to move to parry with your cape, but to meet him to the face, controlling with the ''forte'' of your sword as I described above. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If the enemy attempts these tempos, you can respond, making decisions step by step, depending on the tempo that arises, taking note of what your enemy can accomplish. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Here I will end the rule of the sword and cape, it suffices that you know how to wrap it, and how you conduct yourself. We will now speak of the sword and dagger, on the advantages of a gauntlet, and also on using it without a gauntlet with as little danger as possible. </p><br />
<br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Sword and Dagger| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>You will understand how play with the sword and dagger is governed best and with the least risk possible, conducting yourself in the manner that I will explain in this discussion. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Firstly, you must take care to carry your body well. I want to observe only three forms to place yourself in, although there are many guards which many have written of, and which I will discuss somewhat, however I do not observe them, since everything can be accomplished with three guards. </p><br />
<br />
<p>It is very true, that at times in play or combat you find yourself performing many things in many forms, but if you consider carefully you will find that it is all the same, comprising of the three guards I will describe. Even if they seem to be different things. When concluding, that is in wounding, you will find that the three forms I observe contain every blow you can perform. Furthermore those I describe, I hold to be the most expedient and least dangerous, from which you can wound in just one tempo the most, also without disordering your body. </p><br />
<br />
<p>For this reason, there are no movements that are contrived or forced – which arise only for entertainment, but only very natural ones, which are not lost to the force of rage. Those who teach should be take careful note of this, since confrontations do not occur if not in anger. </p><br />
<br />
<p>It is true that you should train your body in every way, since agility counts for much in this art, but recognising the tempo is much more important, as you have already seen, and as you will see, you cannot act rashly. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>The first form is very useful and is observed in this manner: place yourself with your sword-arm extended in a straight line, with your dagger-arm long, covering your face with it, keeping it somewhat extended, with the point up. Stand sideways in line with your right side, keeping your weapons close together. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Standing in this form, if the enemy delivers a cut to your head, I do not want you to parry with your dagger, but to meet it with the ''forte'' of your sword, as you would with the sword alone, towards the face. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If in this instant he wishes to parry with his dagger, beating your sword, disengage underneath and wound him to the face along the centre line; or else raise your hand, landing the point perpendicular over the dagger, freeing your sword as he moves to beat it. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Standing in this form, equally if he wishes to deliver a ''dritto'' cut to your head, you can parry with the ''forte'' of your sword and in the same tempo put your dagger to his sword, allowing the point of your sword to land under the enemy’s right flank, in that same tempo pushing the thrust forward by stepping your right foot forward. If the enemy disengages underneath, towards your left flank, be alert, beating his sword away with your dagger, from the wrist, wounding him to the face, then withdrawing into the same posture. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If your enemy thrusts at you during the withdrawal, void your body a little, and catch your enemy’s sword between your sword and dagger, that is with your dagger above and your sword below, and attack him to the face.</p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy delivers a ''roverso'' to your head, meet it with your weapons accompanied together, taking care to parry with your sword’s ''forte'' quickly accompanied by your dagger. Since your enemy attacks with a great blow to your head, parry with your sword as he has the advantage, and if you parried with your dagger you would come off worse. Many incidents have shown that the dagger wielded poorly is the death of a man. It is extremely hard to parry a great cut with the dagger, because if it does not catch the sword with its ''forte'', it can easily become dislodged from your hand, or you are struck on the hand. Therefore, those without great tempos with the help of voids of the body, should not move to parry the cut with their dagger, but with the ''forte'' of their sword. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy wants to catch your sword with his dagger, to attack your legs, note that you must execute the following action. With his body low he will cover himself under his dagger. Given that he wants to find your sword with his dagger, be quick to free it with a small void of the body back, while all in the same tempo wounding him under his dagger. If you free your sword quickly, you will find a very large tempo in which to enter, with his blow remaining half-finished. In other words, he cannot reach your legs, because he brings his head forward, such that he cannot land, while you maintain your sword unhindered. I have explained the reason why previously, when discussing the sword alone. </p> <br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>It is true that even in this clash you can wound him to the leg, but in this manner: you must pressure your enemy such that he cannot disengage underneath, if not to the outside where your dagger could not impede him. Having pressed him in this manner, you can attack with little danger. However, for a greater advantage, I want you to follow a different rule: that is having pressured your enemy, to enter strongly with a thrust. You will move with little risk of being wounded, and you will wound quickly. But as I said I do not observe these methods, as they are very dangerous. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Let us return to our subject matter, the centre line, in the first guard. Suppose someone is in a well-covered guard, in whatever form he wishes. Move to press him, and note carefully how he holds his sword: whether high or low. Then in tempo move to press him (as I said), and look to wound him where he is most uncovered. Be quick in attack, and quick in recovering back; so if by chance you enter and he follows up, the quick withdrawal will defend you, taking care as you attack to meet his ''debole'' with your ''forte''. </p><br />
<br />
<p>In executing this, you have time to defend and attack within the same tempo, as you see fit, which you will perform as follows. That is, if while the enemy attacks you find your step forward, having delivered your attack, the tempo will permit you to gather and defend simultaneously; if you are gathered, I want you to defend and enter in that same tempo. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy keeps his sword low, I want you to press him, with one foot gathering behind the other, and as you find yourself in distance to land, to enter covering his ''debole'' with your ''forte'' without touching his sword. If during this action he beats your sword from high to low, disengage with your wrist, and wound him to the face over his dagger. If he beats your sword with his dagger to the outside, return inside with your sword and wound him underneath. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Note that you must have a quick eye, to see where your enemy brings his dagger, and that many will give you a large tempo in which to enter. They disorder themselves with the dagger, and make a thousand movements, which are harmful, whereas you can always enter on the centre line. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>In this first form you do not have to use your dagger to beat your enemy’s sword, except in cases where you have delivered a blow and you sword remains out of presence, then your enemy attacks so quickly that you cannot reset your sword; whereupon I want you to beat with your dagger, gathering your step to recover your sword. But avoid reducing yourself to these conditions, which are dangerous. It suffices that I teach you this solution, so that in such cases not all is lost, and in some manner you can take decisions in combat. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Standing in this form, you can perform feints in the following manner: if you feint to the face, your enemy must bring up his dagger to parry. If he does not go for the feint, enter in that tempo. If he does go for the feint disengage to the other side. If while you perform the feint your enemy wishes to parry and enter, employ your dagger, beating his sword, and enter with a disengage, not letting your sword become impeded, understanding your advantages. This is as much as I want to say on this first form. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Here is the second form, in which you place yourself with your sword high, and your arm extended, keeping your sword’s point high, so that your enemy cannot discern where your sword will fall. Here beating with the dagger is beneficial, and I would keep it with the arm extended, a gauntlet being very useful in this instance. </p><br />
<br />
<p>While you are in this form, always try to stay with your step as narrow as possible, meaning in the form you find most strong and comfortable, keeping your right shoulder forward as much as you can, positioning yourself somewhat to your left on the side of your dagger, that is over your left leg. Keep your dagger extended, covering your face. Positioned over your left side, you will deliver thrusts with less effort, and recover more quickly. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>In this second form I encourage you to deliver a long thrust, extending your arm well, and keeping your body in profile. While you are in this form, watch how your enemy sets himself, because how he sets himself will determine how to conduct yourself from the rules I will describe. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Firstly, if your enemy delivers a thrust, I want you to beat with your dagger, and in that same tempo enter where he is most uncovered, noting whether the thrust arrives low and perpendicular, or if it comes along the centre line. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If the thrust arrives perpendicular, I want you to beat it to the outside with your dagger towards the right side, because it is quickest and easiest, and in that same tempo bring down your sword, likewise delivering a thrust, quickly returning back with your step. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If the enemy thrust along the centre line, you can defend in three ways. The first is from high to low, when he thrusts at the middle of your chest, entering in that same tempo, voiding your body as much as you can, passing, and always keeping your dagger over his sword to stop him raising his sword. If he does so, it will easily return to your dagger, or else he will be forced to disengage to one side or the other. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>You can parry in the second way when his sword falls towards your left side, beating it to the outside to the left side;<ref>This seems to refer to the outside of the dagger arm, not the sword arm.</ref> and if he delivers his thrust to your right side, beat his sword to the outside towards your right flank. Here beat with your wrist, always entering in that tempo, both beating and delivering the blow. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>You can also beat in this third way. When your enemy delivers his thrust, bring your left side somewhat out of the presence of your enemy, gathering your right step, so that with any minimal help from the dagger you will parry his thrust and can wound him. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Now I wish to talk about pressing the enemy in this same guard. Take careful note of how the enemy positions himself, because it is very useful for recognising this tempo, which is as follows. If the enemy keeps his sword long, press it in this manner: move forward with a half-step, until you arrive with your dagger two ''palmi'' above your enemy’s sword. Be alert, if he attacks in this tempo, beat it, and enter. If he does not attack you can enter likewise by beating, or rather finding his sword with your dagger. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy keeps his sword short, move to press him in this manner. Advance enough so you know you can reach him without budging your foot, keeping your body in guard. When you are at the tempo where you can reach him, deliver a thrust freely, quickly returning into guard. You need not worry if you are well covered by the enemy’s dagger, just that his sword is withdrawn. Standing in this posture the enemy can easily deliver a free thrust, which you can defend returning the attack in that single tempo. Take care not to leave your body too far forward, such that you lack time to quickly withdraw. You must be aware of all of these matters, so as not to disorder yourself, so you are in control recovering quickly. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>There is another tempo from this guard, which is certainly difficult, but resolute. It is by pressing your enemy so much that your sword is a ''palmo'' from his body, keeping your dagger-arm as extended as possible, voiding your body, keeping your sword (meaning your point) in the enemy’s presence. In that tempo you will beat, and enter with a thrust. </p><br />
<br />
<p>As I say this is difficult, but resolute and good where you can secure yourself, wearing a mail shirt, and you must deal with those who set themselves in guard, waiting for the other to attack first. It takes great judgement to know the distance, and also to see if you enemy will attack in that tempo, while standing in this form. If your enemy attacks with a cut, either a ''dritto'' or ''roverso'', you can parry with your dagger, entering in that same tempo. If he attacks the legs you can meet him to the face, since you will have a great advantage, as I described above. Here I will end on the second guard. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>I will now discuss the third guard, or rather posture, and how you govern yourself with the sword and dagger, with all the advantages that it brings. The third guard is in this form: you should put your left foot forward, in a moderate pace,<ref>In the original: ''passo giusto''.</ref> with your left arm extended, ensuring your hand is in line with the face, with the dagger-point high, keeping your right-arm somewhat bent, and your sword-hand away from your body somewhat. Your sword point should be level with your dagger-hand about one ''palmo'' apart. In this form you will be very well-covered, and you can conduct yourself depending on the tempo and motion of your enemy. </p><br />
<br />
<p>For example if your enemy attacks you with a ''dritto'' to the head, I want you to simply beat it with your dagger. But meet it with your dagger’s ''forte'', and in that tempo enter with a thrust, putting your right foot forward, as feels natural, then quickly bring it back behind. However keep your dagger-arm in place, so if your enemy then redoubles his blow you can defend it, which will be in the following manner. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy delivers a ''mandritto'', parry and enter in that tempo. If in stepping you abandon your dagger-arm, and the enemy redoubles his attack with a ''roverso'' or ''dritto'', he could easily hit you. But if you hold firm with your dagger you can parry the second blow, and return an attack in the same tempo. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If he delivers a ''roverso'' cut to your head, I want you to parry with your dagger, performing a slight void of the body, and bringing your right foot back a little; also delivering your attack in that tempo, and quickly retreating into guard. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If he attacks your legs with a ''dritto'' or ''roverso'', you can defend in one of two ways. </p><br />
<br />
<p>One is, as he attacks you, to gather your left leg next to your right. When your enemy’s sword passes you can enter with a thrust, or cut, as you desire. In truth, in this defence of withdrawing the leg you must carefully watch the distance of the enemy’s sword. If the middle of it approaches when attacking your leg, you will not be able to withdraw it enough to avoid being hit; and I do not wish you to use it if it arrives rapidly. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>The second method is this. If the enemy attacks your leg, you can parry with the dagger and enter in that same tempo, resolutely before the enemy can recover. Note however that this entry is only for one who is armoured, and would be very difficult and dangerous if you are not armoured, and I do not recommend you use it. But when armoured it is excellent, because it has the advantage of the step, delivering a longer and more powerful blow. </p><br />
<br />
<p>In this form you can also press your enemy so much that you come to dominate his sword with your dagger. Observe, once you have begun to gain it, not to abandon it, but to follow it always forward, since possessing it is beneficial. Having executed this, your sword will always be free, to strike liberally where you please. However if you allow him to recover it, he will have a great advantage over you. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Here I find that I have satisfied my promise, and what I have judged necessary for this profession. Nor should anyone object, saying I have not written anything in particular for those who are left-handed or sinister as it is commonly called. Because having taught how to attack and parry, depending on the guards, the art can be adapted to the left-handed as much as the right. There is no difference between them except in relation. </p><br />
<br />
<p>May everyone understand me well, and practice well, because I am sure of the benefits to those who praise my efforts, and perhaps one day I will give them something more. </p><br />
<br />
<p>'''THE END. '''</p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Copyright and License Summary<br />
| width = 100%<br />
}}<br />
<br />
<section begin="sourcebox"/>{{sourcebox header}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Translation<br />
| authors = [[Piermarco Terminiello]]<br />
| source link = <br />
| source title = Private communication<br />
| license = <br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox footer}}<section end="sourcebox"/><br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Falloppia, Alfonso}}<br />
{{Early Italian masters}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Translation]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Rapier]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Alfonso_Falloppia&diff=120590Alfonso Falloppia2020-12-03T15:50:01Z<p>P Terminiello: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = [[name::Alfonso Falloppia]]<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = <br />
| birthplace = Lucca<br />
| deathdate = <br />
| deathplace = <br />
| resting_place = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set:occupation=Fencing master}}<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = <br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = Ranuccio Farnese<br />
<br />
| period = <br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| subject = <br />
| movement = <br />
| notableworks = ''[[Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire (Alfonso Falloppia)|Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire]]'' (1584)<br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= <br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| partner = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| influences = <br />
| influenced = <br />
| awards = <br />
| signature = <br />
| website = <br />
| translations = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
'''Alfonso Falloppia''' was a [[century::16th century]] [[nationality::Italian]] soldier and [[fencing master]]. Little is known about his life, but he identifies himself as a native of Lucca, and describes himself as "Ensign of the Fortress of Bergamo".<br />
<br />
In 1584, he published a treatise on the use of the rapier entitled ''[[Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire (Alfonso Falloppia)|Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire]]'' ("New and Brief Method of Fencing"). It was dedicated to Ranuccio Farnese, who was 15 years old at the time of publication and would become Duke of Parma, Piacenza, and Castro.<br />
<br />
It has been suggested the Falloppia may be the student of Silvio Piccolomini in Brescia mentioned in 1580 by the French diarist Michel De Montaigne during his tour of Italy.<br />
<br />
''On Monday I dined at the house of Sir Silvio Piccolomini, very well known for his virtue, and in particular for the science of fencing. Many topics were put forward, and we were in the company of other gentlemen. He disdains completely the art of fencing of the Italian masters, of the Venetian, of Bologna, Patinostraro (sic), and others. In this he praises only a student of his, who is in Brescia where he teaches certain gentlemen this art.''<br />
<br />
''He says there is no rule or art in the common teaching, he particularly denounces the practice of pushing your sword forward, putting it in the power of the enemy; then the passing attack; or repeating another assault and stopping, because he says this is completely different to what you see by experience from combatants.''<ref>de Montaigne, Michel. ''Journal du voyage de Michel de Montaigne en Italie, par la Suisse & l'Allemagne en 1580 & 1581, Volume 1''. Paris, 1774.p.284.</ref><br />
<br />
While the timeframe is plausible there is no further evidence to corroborate this theory, and it remains speculation. Furthermore there are no marked similarities between the treatises of Falloppia and [[Federico Ghisliero]] (a self-declared student of Piccolomini) although curiously they both dedicate their respective treatises to the same patron, Ranuccio Farnese, within three years of each other.<br />
<br />
== Treatise ==<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Introduction and dedication| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''NEW'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''AND BRIEF METHOD'''</p><br />
<p>'''OF FENCING'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''OF ALFONSO FALLOPPIA OF LUCCA,'''</p><br />
<p>Ensign in the Fortress of Bergamo.</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''TO THE MOST ILLUSTRIOUS, ETC. '''</p><br />
<p>'''HIS MASTER, '''</p><br />
<p>'''THE SIR RAINUCCIO FARNESE'''</p><br />
<p>Prince of Parma. </p><br />
<br />
<p>With Permission from the authorities</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''IN BERGAMO MDLXXXIIII. '''</p><br />
<p>Printed by Comin Ventura. </p> <br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>To my most illustrious and excellent sir. Wishing to make myself known to the world as a most devoted servant of Your Excellency; and to find myself respected wherever I go, as any young doe would be who heralds no longer the name of Caesar, but that of Rainuccio Farnese, I could think of no better means, than by dedicating this slight work on gentlemanly arts. It is composed for the universal benefit of all gallant men, and to confound those fencers who do not know, or who wish to teach naught but certain things that nature teaches by itself, and furthermore whose prices are set, much like the mechanics they use. </p> <br />
<br />
<p>I say gentlemanly, in contrast to those who teach tricks and abuses. They are not ashamed to suggest arms that are never seen except in premeditated cases and blatant murders, such as rotellas, targas, bucklers, balls of iron, spadones, and polearms of whichever name or type. These are all distant from me, because by the term arms I include only those that are proper, both in defence and attack, that every day and by all are commonly carried. These are the sword, and dagger, chain shirt, and cape (since for now we are allowed to call the cape a defensive arm). </p><br />
<br />
<p>Of these alone I intend to write, as those appropriate to a gentleman, one who must undertake the profession of a soldier, and to a gentleman of honour. And I shall be succinct, condensing everything into seven guards, or rules, however you wish to call them. Of which three shall relate to the sword alone, one to the sword and cape, with the other three to the sword and dagger. Nonetheless I shall not overlook anything, because these seven guards shall encompass the substance of any others. It shall also be straightforward, such that it can be understood without figures. </p><br />
<br />
<p>As for the usefulness of this art, as she regards the preservation of honour and of life, there is no one who is not aware of it. May Your Excellency enjoy it, not because it is useful to princes of your rank, who are defended by their own authority, but because it stands in eternal testimony of my devotion and servitude towards your most joyous and sublime house. </p> <br />
<br />
<br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Sword Alone| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>I will start by briefly discussing the sword alone, being the foremost among all the other arms, in the manner that follows. Firstly, a man who wishes to employ this sort of weapon should settle his body with this method: with his right foot forward, standing in profile, somewhat bending his left knee, in a half-pace. His sword arm should be extended, with his hand a ''palmo''<ref>The ''palmo'' (plural ''palmi'') is an antique unit of measurement. Its precise length varied by location, but was typical around 25cm.</ref> above his head, and his point perpendicular towards the chest of his enemy. He can perform thrusts and cuts as he sees fit, in tempo, taking care to deliver the blows quickly, and to return quickly into his starting posture, ensuring the blows are long, stretching out his body, and extending his step as far as he can. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Having acquired this habit with much practice, he will do the same in anger, no differently than when in his natural state. From this guard he can practice beats with the hand, voids of the body – either backwards, or to the sides, as the tempo takes him; and this first form can serve in many instances in the play of the sword. </p> <br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>There is also a second, lower form, which demands the centre line, which it governs, keeping your arm extended in line with your shoulder, such that your hilt faces your enemy’s shoulder, while your face is covered by the hilt. </p><br />
<br />
<p>By leaning your head towards your sword-shoulder, while standing in this fashion, if your enemy delivers a ''mandritto'' cut to your head, you can parry it inside, meeting him to the face in that same tempo. If he attacks you with a ''roverso'' to the head you can parry to the outside and meet him to the face. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If he attacks your legs while you are in this said posture, you can meet him to the face, or lower, pulling your leg back toward the other. Reason dictates that with the sword alone, if someone attacks the legs, they will run onto the point of your sword with their face, without you having to parry; which many do, parrying at their legs with the sword. If two play with the sword alone, maintaining the centre line, and one drops to the legs, he always brings his head forward, and if he meets his enemy’s sword (which is easily done), he will find that his own sword does not reach. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>While I do not approve of attacks to the legs while the sword is in presence, because it carries great risk, you can quite well wound to the leg with the sword alone, but look for the tempo where enemy’s sword moves out of presence, or else parry a cut with cover, and quickly respond to the legs, quickly jumping back to avoid clashing, which can happen with the sword in your face, when you drop to the legs. </p><br />
<br />
<p>You can attack to the legs with a void to the sides, but note carefully the position of your enemy’s sword, because with a void of the body to the side, if you are not quick to defend well, you can be struck on the head by a ''mandritto'', or ''roverscio'' depending on which side you move to. </p><br />
<br />
<p>However, I say that attacking the legs with the sword alone is highly dangerous. If you do not have a great tempo, or great quickness of body, it is not beneficial. If you parry a cut to the legs with your sword, it carries great risk, that by a turn of the wrist you are struck to the head. Therefore, you should not parry in this manner. It is better to extend your point in a straight line, pulling your leg a little towards yourself, turning your body, thereby striking your enemy with ease. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>While two play with the sword alone, you should also be advised that when one delivers a thrust, you can meet it with your sword and wound in the same tempo, and do so easily. This is because it is greatly advantageous to wait for the other to strike. Because in attacking you first he brings his ''debole'' onto your ''forte''. While you hold the centre line, however the attacks, either inside or outside, you can easily meet him, turning your hand to the side where your enemy moves to strike. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If he strikes to the inside, you can meet it with your ''forte'', turning your hand somewhat, such that the enemy’s sword remains out of presence, while yours wounds first, in that tempo. If he strikes to the outside, towards your sword-shoulder, you can meet it with the ''forte'' of your sword, bringing your body slightly to the outside, towards his face. I advise that the ''forte'' of your sword is from the hilt to within one ''braccio''<ref>The ''braccio'' is another antique unite of measurement, whose length varied by location. A Milanese ''braccio'' for example was 59.49cm, or approximately 23.4 inches.</ref> of the point. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy wishes to gain your sword, keep watch, so that when he moves his sword, before he has an advantage over yours, you do not disengage with a wide tempo, but to free your sword and enter in one tempo. While he takes two tempos, one to gain your sword and another to attack, you only perform the motion of not letting your sword be found and wounding in that same tempo. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If it happens that you cannot execute this with diligence and speed, and he gains your sword, do not try and force it free. This would have no effect whatsoever, you can however free it in this manner: by retreating back somewhat, with a void of your body, which will free your sword. You can then follow-up by attacking, or finding your enemy’s sword, or waiting in guard – to enter when the tempo arises. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy delivers a great cut, meet it with your ''forte'' and enter in that same tempo, since you will easily parry and wound in one tempo. If he delivers a thrust, and you have the sword alone, you must watch his sword, to understand where his point may land, and how close you are. Because if you are close to the enemy, you must be aware of where his sword moves. If the point arrives low, you must meet it with your ''forte'', fleeing with a small void to the side, that is to say dodging the point. Take care however not to void such that your point leaves the centre line, and your enemy’s presence, because you can easily attack in that same tempo, applying this skill. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy delivers a thrust, and you are not very close, you must judge the distance, and void your body back, not shifting your sword from the centre line or from your enemy’s presence, since you can easily meet his sword with your ''forte'' and attack. Because by voiding backwards you bring the enemy’s ''debole'' onto your ''forte'', and he cannot wound you without first gathering his step, taking another longer tempo, as follows. Having delivered the thrust, which fell short, the enemy can recover in this way: keeping his arm on the centre line, with a quick eye to recover his sword which finds itself at your ''forte'', he then gathers his left foot towards his right, with either a long or short step, depending on how you moved. </p><br />
<br />
<p>However, you must be quick with your eyes and legs, and have resolve in your play, and not act as many do, who having delivered their blow, which the enemy defended, remain disordered, not knowing how to take further actions, not considering that the other has hands with which to defend and attack. For this reason take great care not to rush into hands of the enemy, consider also what he might do, you will find many various approaches: one who waits for the enemy to attack first, one who circles to find the tempo, one who plays short, one who plays long, however I wish to advise you on all of these circumstances. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy circles around you, I do not want you to walk similarly, encircling, as many do, but to stay firmly in your stance. As he takes three or four steps to gain an advantage, to one side or the other, and as he moves his body, ensure that the point of your sword is always watching him. When you know that your body is thereby encircled, and that you are not in presence of the point of his sword, take only one step in the circle, small or large, depending on the tempo you find, that is whether the enemy circles you quickly, or slowly. When the enemy wishes to take advantage of you to steal the tempo, he will take three or four steps, however you will only move the foot that you find in front, in the manner I described above, therefore with this rule no one will be able to steal the tempo from you. </p><br />
<br />
<p>You also have another advantage: while the enemy wishes to encircle you, you can attack him advantageously in that tempo, because he thinks to steal the tempo from you, but in that instant you can attack and steal it from him, and furthermore wound in just that single tempo, where you please, depending on the area that is uncovered. Be quick in delivering your attack, and in recovering your body. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>You must take note of the tempo I describe below, which is very advantageous, governing yourself in the manner that follows. Every time you hold the centre line, and your enemy wishes to initiate an attack in the form of a cut, I want you to push your sword directly forward, while he raises his arm to attack you. Before his blow comes down you will be able to wound him, with great advantage. If you consider carefully, your eye watching his sword in this action, you will find that when your enemy brings down his sword, he brings it onto your ''forte''. </p><br />
<br />
<p>The same occurs when the enemy commences, wishing to deliver certain wrist-cuts to your head, I want you to meet him to his face, and you will easily land in one single tempo. Pay attention to whether your enemy attacks to the inside or the outside, because you can meet him and parry and wound either to the inside or the outside, depending on where he attacks. </p><br />
<br />
<p>But if it happens that your enemy cannot make headway with his plays of the wrist, he might easily retreat in guard. In this case you must push your thrust forward down the centre line, and be quick, before he takes the tempo to settle into guard. The reason is because when your enemy is in presence, and wishes to change guard, you can attack in that tempo, and can hit him easily. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Now let us suppose he retreats such that you cannot wound him, take care to be quick with your legs moving forward, always keeping your sword in presence against your enemy. If he performs a feint to the outside, or the inside, take care not to move with your sword, in the belief you will parry. If you do, he can easily disengage to the other side and wound you in that tempo. Observe instead this rule: every time someone performs a feint against you, meet him in that first tempo. Because your enemy employs two tempos, one to feint and the other to wound, while you need only one tempo to wound. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>I praise feints in this manner: while you are on the centre line, I want you to motion an entry to the face, whereby it is likely your enemy will move to parry. You should watch where he moves his sword, which will be near the area you motioned, or rather feinted towards; without disengaging your sword you will then find a tempo in which to enter. Meaning, by managing your ''forte'', you shall save yourself from his sword if he attacks in that tempo, which will be as follows. As you make the motion, and your sword begins to travel, clearly your enemy will move his sword to parry and wound. With an attentive eye, you will enter on the line where your enemy extends to parry your blow, and you can enter with a single tempo, without certain disengages, as many do when performing feints. These instructions are called ''contra tempi'', and are so subtle they are not considered by everyone. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Similarly, if you make the motion to enter, and your enemy does not move in belief, feel free to follow through, entering with the same motion. When you perform the action, take care always to target the area that is most uncovered. This forces the enemy to parry, and you will make him take two tempos, while you only take one; however check with your eyes, taking note of whether he stands firm, or else moves in belief of your feint. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>I now wish to inform you how to gain advantage over your enemy’s sword, and its benefits. When you wish to find the sword, clearly your ''forte'' is superior to his ''debole''. However, you must have a good awareness of how your enemy holds his body and sword, to know the tempo in which to move your body, and begin to dominate his ''debole'' with your ''forte'', executing the action, and moving slowly till you reach the ''debole'' of his sword. Because if you move quickly, he can disengage and wound you as I described above, and you will not be able to find his sword, but if you go slowly you will find it easily. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Take care, however you found it: either to the inside or the outside, not to let him recover; because he will be forced to disengage. As he disengages, you should find him again, or attack in that single tempo. If you apply reason to the sword, as you found him once, you can do so again, such that he can no longer recover. Having found the sword, with your enemy unable to disengage, wound him in the same tempo of finding, always using your ''forte'', so he cannot recover. </p><br />
<br />
<p>When you have found his sword, you can employ your left-hand glove to grab it, with a grapple, that is by grasping it, which you will accomplish easily. Take care not to act as many do, who having delivered a thrust wish to grab his sword with their left hand in that same tempo. This is difficult to perform, therefore those who employ this approach often miss the sword, that is they cannot grasp it, and are often struck either in the chest or face. The reason is that the fencer with the sword alone switches, by putting his left side forward. Since you can vary the sword, you can easily wound one who stands like this, in several ways. I judge a bold cut towards that side as the best of these, which cannot fail to hit and disorder him. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>There is also a rushing play, which most Frenchmen employ. When confronted by this, I want you always to hold the centre line. Your enemy therefore comes running to wound you, open, and you stop him by setting yourself in a strong posture, such that he crashes into your sword. Watch the distance, meaning when he gets close to effect his crash, and at the same time keep your eyes on his sword. Note that in wishing to crash into you he will take a long tempo, whereupon you can meet him with your sword where he is most open, and with a void of the body, avoiding his sword, you will surely hit him. </p><br />
<br />
<p>The crash could be in this form: he arrives with the false-edge of his sword to disorder you. In that instant you can meet him, meaning when he is close, and you can reach him, you can easily free your own sword to anticipate his. Because he arrives with impetus, persuading himself that in one tempo he can impede your sword, which you show in presence, and either deliver a cut to your leg and retreat back, or unleash a thrust and step to the side.<ref>''Contrapassare''.</ref> However observe the rule I described, wounding him when he arrives to find the tempo, and note that you will easily hit him in that single tempo, standing with your body firm and nimble. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Although you see someone come at you with impetus, you should not fear, because when afraid you make a thousand wrong movements, whereby the enemy can easily enact what he intended. If you stand in the form I described above, keeping your sword in presence, he will be disordered on his approach, your sword in presence watching him; and if by chance he runs without consideration, he could also easily meet it, and you will stop him in his tracks. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Now if your enemy does not rush, but sets himself in a low posture, enter on the centre line, but over his ''debole'' such that when attacking you in that same tempo, as I discussed, he cannot injure you. His blow will come to nothing, as it will necessarily meet your ''forte'', as you previously ensured. In this manner he will not anticipate you, and hereby reason staunches those in haste. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Although many say that reason does not matter with the sword, as is beaten by rage, I do not agree, and I defer to the judgement of knowledgeable men. It is true that reason with arms, this is to say play, does not count for those who allow themselves to lose heart, to not do their duty, whereupon they lose to those who know and those who do not. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>There is also much else to say over this centre line, which for the sake of brevity I will leave to the judgement of the prudent reader, it being very advantageous. However, I wish to discuss it no further, having spoken of useful and necessary matters, we will now speak of the third guard, and how it is formed. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>The third guard is as follows: you must extend your right arm towards your right knee, keeping your hand approximately half a ''braccio'' from your knee, and your point up towards your enemy’s face. Lean your body slightly, but not so you fall, that is make yourself somewhat small, with your right heel facing the middle of your left foot, in a half-pace stance; or more, or less depending on what you find comfortable and strong. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Standing in this posture, if the enemy thrusts a point at your face, be sure to catch it with your sword’s ''forte'', either to the inside or the outside, depending on which side he attacks. Thrust all in one tempo, raising your back, and you will easily parry and wound in that tempo. If he delivers a cut, whether a ''dritto'' or a ''roverscio'', parry with your ''forte'', and enter to his face; meaning whether he aims at your head, or if he strikes lower, in either case respond in that direction. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If he feints towards your face, or to another part of your body, do not move in belief to parry, instead push your sword forward in that tempo, catching his ''debole'' with your ''forte''. If he aims at your leg, pull it back a little, and meet him by raising the hilt of your sword and lowering the point. Be quick, and in this manner you can defend yourself again such blows. If you deliver the attack I described, and when he attacks your legs you remove your body, he will not be able to harm that part of you, if having attacked the legs he then wished to deliver a thrust. Judgement also matters, which teaches you to take decisions as required, when observing this and similar forms, permitting you to defend against many attacks. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Now I wish to discuss passing steps, and to demonstrate how dangerous they are, and when they are useful. You should understand that passing steps require feints, and be aware that they pose great risk to those who do not employ them with great tempos, agility, and quickness of body. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If you find yourself in the first form of the sword alone, and someone wishes to pass at you, seeing your sword high, it is probable he will move to find you, in order to perform it. Note carefully that if the enemy feints to your face in order to pass, as reason dictates, I do not want you to respond to the feint except as follows. Lean your body somewhat to void, where you see fit to avoid the point of his feint, then all in one same tempo beat with your hand, and deliver a thrust down perpendicular with his body. You will easily meet him if he bends down well with his stomach towards the ground, and you will stop him, since he will not be able to pass. The reason is as follows: you do not move in belief of the impetus his feint. You have time to beat the point of his sword with your hand, and employ the methods I described above, breaking his designs, because he arrives at great speed to perform the feint and passing step in that tempo. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If you find yourself on the centre line in the second form, and the enemy comes at you with a feint to execute a passing step, void with your body to the side, evading his sword’s point. While he passes you can catch him to the head, by voiding, playing somewhat with your body, equally you can thrust him to the face. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>When your enemy performs the feint, and all in one tempo wishes to pass, void from the left side.<ref>In other words, towards the right.</ref> That is, if he feints to the inside, and you reverse your point towards his face, you will stop him easily. You can also meet him lower on the body, because in keeping your point low, it is difficult for him to pass. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If he feints to the outside, bring your left foot forward, opening yourself with a half circle, your right food following the left to meet it, and you will easily exit from presence, and you can deliver a thrust, or else a ''roverso'' cut. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If you wish to perform a passing step, observe the following: when you wish to pass, execute the feint, and the movement of passing, but do not run. It is likely that your enemy, seeing the movement, that is carrying your body out of your sword’s presence, will turn his sword’s point to side on which you perform the action of passing. In that tempo, you can cover his ''debole'' with your ''forte'', and enter to the face without performing another pass. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If you wish to pass freely, observe this rule: first find his sword, then enter to the face. He will be forced to parry, and thereby will remove his sword, such that you can pass without danger; equally if he does not parry, you will catch him to the face. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If you are in the third guard, and someone feints at you to pass to the body with their sword low, I want you to void your body, pushing your thrust with the point perpendicular, closely watching your enemy’s sword, so that you can void your body to one side or the other. However, you must pay great attention to your enemy’s body, see the manner in which he moves, understand the tempo, and most of all be aware of his sword; that is consider with your eye, and judgement, where his sword might land. </p><br />
<br />
<p>This will suffice on this subject matter. Although there are many other things, these are very useful, and very natural, such that you can employ them. Furthermore there are many who suggest other sorts of guards beyond these, which I in fact do not esteem, condensing them all to mine here. </p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Sword and Cape| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
|<p>I will now discuss the sword and cape, or cloak, as quickly and briefly as possible. You can employ the cape in two circumstances. One is when you cannot carry a dagger. The other when you are attacked by surprise, and it is easier to wrap your cape than put your hand to your dagger, that is when you have your dagger at the back and not at your side. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Because most people without quarrels carry them almost always, then when the time comes to reach for their swords, cannot find them, because they cannot reach with their left hand. You should therefore wear it on your right side, to have full control over it. However, I will speak no more of the dagger now, being enough merely to have indicated to carry the weapon at your side. </p> <br />
<br />
<p>Finding yourself therefore in a place where you cannot carry daggers, it is likely that employing the cape or cloak will be useful. I say that wishing to wrap the cape or cloak, you should let the part of the cape over your right shoulder drop behind you, then turn your left hand (that is the palm) upwards, grabbing the hem with your hand half a ''braccio'' under the shoulder, or less, depending on what you find comfortable. When you let the cape or cloak fall from your left shoulder onto your left arm, which will remain completely covered, you will perform one turn only, to the right towards your hand, letting the other part of the cape fall low towards your leg. You will execute this wrap very quickly, and not act as many do, who wrap all of it around their arm, because by letting it hang low brings you have many advantages, which I will describe. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Having wrapped the cape, as I discussed, I want you to bring your left side a half-pace forward, keeping your sword to the outside, below your hand. Standing in this manner, if your enemy delivers a cut to your head, either a ''dritto'' or ''roverso'', I want you to parry with your sword’s ''forte'', meeting him to the face in that tempo, bringing your right foot forward with a long and resolute pass forward. </p><br />
<br />
<p>However, if he cuts to your leg with a ''roverso'', while you are in the above position, raise your sword-hand a little and deliver a perpendicular ''imbroccata'', bringing your right leg forward with your arm extended. Take care to void somewhat, but not by much, to enter with less danger. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If he cuts a ''mandritto'' to your legs, I want you to defend immediately with the hanging portion of your cape, in the meantime turning your hand with a thrust in the centre of his chest, where you find him most uncovered. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Take note never to cover your face with your cape-arm, because your enemy could deliver a point to your body, or cut to your leg while you cover your face. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Even if he cuts to your head with a ''dritto'' o ''roverscio'', I do not wish you to move to parry with your cape, but to meet him to the face, controlling with the ''forte'' of your sword as I described above. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If the enemy attempts these tempos, you can respond, making decisions step by step, depending on the tempo that arises, taking note of what your enemy can accomplish. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Here I will end the rule of the sword and cape, it suffices that you know how to wrap it, and how you conduct yourself. We will now speak of the sword and dagger, on the advantages of a gauntlet, and also on using it without a gauntlet with as little danger as possible. </p><br />
<br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Sword and Dagger| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>You will understand how play with the sword and dagger is governed best and with the least risk possible, conducting yourself in the manner that I will explain in this discussion. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Firstly, you must take care to carry your body well. I want to observe only three forms to place yourself in, although there are many guards which many have written of, and which I will discuss somewhat, however I do not observe them, since everything can be accomplished with three guards. </p><br />
<br />
<p>It is very true, that at times in play or combat you find yourself performing many things in many forms, but if you consider carefully you will find that it is all the same, comprising of the three guards I will describe. Even if they seem to be different things. When concluding, that is in wounding, you will find that the three forms I observe contain every blow you can perform. Furthermore those I describe, I hold to be the most expedient and least dangerous, from which you can wound in just one tempo the most, also without disordering your body. </p><br />
<br />
<p>For this reason, there are no movements that are contrived or forced – which arise only for entertainment, but only very natural ones, which are not lost to the force of rage. Those who teach should be take careful note of this, since confrontations do not occur if not in anger. </p><br />
<br />
<p>It is true that you should train your body in every way, since agility counts for much in this art, but recognising the tempo is much more important, as you have already seen, and as you will see, you cannot act rashly. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>The first form is very useful and is observed in this manner: place yourself with your sword-arm extended in a straight line, with your dagger-arm long, covering your face with it, keeping it somewhat extended, with the point up. Stand sideways in line with your right side, keeping your weapons close together. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Standing in this form, if the enemy delivers a cut to your head, I do not want you to parry with your dagger, but to meet it with the ''forte'' of your sword, as you would with the sword alone, towards the face. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If in this instant he wishes to parry with his dagger, beating your sword, disengage underneath and wound him to the face along the centre line; or else raise your hand, landing the point perpendicular over the dagger, freeing your sword as he moves to beat it. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Standing in this form, equally if he wishes to deliver a ''dritto'' cut to your head, you can parry with the ''forte'' of your sword and in the same tempo put your dagger to his sword, allowing the point of your sword to land under the enemy’s right flank, in that same tempo pushing the thrust forward by stepping your right foot forward. If the enemy disengages underneath, towards your left flank, be alert, beating his sword away with your dagger, from the wrist, wounding him to the face, then withdrawing into the same posture. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If your enemy thrusts at you during the withdrawal, void your body a little, and catch your enemy’s sword between your sword and dagger, that is with your dagger above and your sword below, and attack him to the face.</p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy delivers a ''roverso'' to your head, meet it with your weapons accompanied together, taking care to parry with your sword’s ''forte'' quickly accompanied by your dagger. Since your enemy attacks with a great blow to your head, parry with your sword as he has the advantage, and if you parried with your dagger you would come off worse. Many incidents have shown that the dagger wielded poorly is the death of a man. It is extremely hard to parry a great cut with the dagger, because if it does not catch the sword with its ''forte'', it can easily become dislodged from your hand, or you are struck on the hand. Therefore, those without great tempos with the help of voids of the body, should not move to parry the cut with their dagger, but with the ''forte'' of their sword. </p>| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy wants to catch your sword with his dagger, to attack your legs, note that you must execute the following action. With his body low he will cover himself under his dagger. Given that he wants to find your sword with his dagger, be quick to free it with a small void of the body back, while all in the same tempo wounding him under his dagger. If you free your sword quickly, you will find a very large tempo in which to enter, with his blow remaining half-finished. In other words, he cannot reach your legs, because he brings his head forward, such that he cannot land, while you maintain your sword unhindered. I have explained the reason why previously, when discussing the sword alone. </p> <br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>It is true that even in this clash you can wound him to the leg, but in this manner: you must pressure your enemy such that he cannot disengage underneath, if not to the outside where your dagger could not impede him. Having pressed him in this manner, you can attack with little danger. However, for a greater advantage, I want you to follow a different rule: that is having pressured your enemy, to enter strongly with a thrust. You will move with little risk of being wounded, and you will wound quickly. But as I said I do not observe these methods, as they are very dangerous. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Let us return to our subject matter, the centre line, in the first guard. Suppose someone is in a well-covered guard, in whatever form he wishes. Move to press him, and note carefully how he holds his sword: whether high or low. Then in tempo move to press him (as I said), and look to wound him where he is most uncovered. Be quick in attack, and quick in recovering back; so if by chance you enter and he follows up, the quick withdrawal will defend you, taking care as you attack to meet his ''debole'' with your ''forte''. </p><br />
<br />
<p>In executing this, you have time to defend and attack within the same tempo, as you see fit, which you will perform as follows. That is, if while the enemy attacks you find your step forward, having delivered your attack, the tempo will permit you to gather and defend simultaneously; if you are gathered, I want you to defend and enter in that same tempo. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy keeps his sword low, I want you to press him, with one foot gathering behind the other, and as you find yourself in distance to land, to enter covering his ''debole'' with your ''forte'' without touching his sword. If during this action he beats your sword from high to low, disengage with your wrist, and wound him to the face over his dagger. If he beats your sword with his dagger to the outside, return inside with your sword and wound him underneath. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Note that you must have a quick eye, to see where your enemy brings his dagger, and that many will give you a large tempo in which to enter. They disorder themselves with the dagger, and make a thousand movements, which are harmful, whereas you can always enter on the centre line. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>In this first form you do not have to use your dagger to beat your enemy’s sword, except in cases where you have delivered a blow and you sword remains out of presence, then your enemy attacks so quickly that you cannot reset your sword; whereupon I want you to beat with your dagger, gathering your step to recover your sword. But avoid reducing yourself to these conditions, which are dangerous. It suffices that I teach you this solution, so that in such cases not all is lost, and in some manner you can take decisions in combat. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Standing in this form, you can perform feints in the following manner: if you feint to the face, your enemy must bring up his dagger to parry. If he does not go for the feint, enter in that tempo. If he does go for the feint disengage to the other side. If while you perform the feint your enemy wishes to parry and enter, employ your dagger, beating his sword, and enter with a disengage, not letting your sword become impeded, understanding your advantages. This is as much as I want to say on this first form. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Here is the second form, in which you place yourself with your sword high, and your arm extended, keeping your sword’s point high, so that your enemy cannot discern where your sword will fall. Here beating with the dagger is beneficial, and I would keep it with the arm extended, a gauntlet being very useful in this instance. </p><br />
<br />
<p>While you are in this form, always try to stay with your step as narrow as possible, meaning in the form you find most strong and comfortable, keeping your right shoulder forward as much as you can, positioning yourself somewhat to your left on the side of your dagger, that is over your left leg. Keep your dagger extended, covering your face. Positioned over your left side, you will deliver thrusts with less effort, and recover more quickly. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>In this second form I encourage you to deliver a long thrust, extending your arm well, and keeping your body in profile. While you are in this form, watch how your enemy sets himself, because how he sets himself will determine how to conduct yourself from the rules I will describe. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Firstly, if your enemy delivers a thrust, I want you to beat with your dagger, and in that same tempo enter where he is most uncovered, noting whether the thrust arrives low and perpendicular, or if it comes along the centre line. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If the thrust arrives perpendicular, I want you to beat it to the outside with your dagger towards the right side, because it is quickest and easiest, and in that same tempo bring down your sword, likewise delivering a thrust, quickly returning back with your step. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If the enemy thrust along the centre line, you can defend in three ways. The first is from high to low, when he thrusts at the middle of your chest, entering in that same tempo, voiding your body as much as you can, passing, and always keeping your dagger over his sword to stop him raising his sword. If he does so, it will easily return to your dagger, or else he will be forced to disengage to one side or the other. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>You can parry in the second way when his sword falls towards your left side, beating it to the outside to the left side;<ref>This seems to refer to the outside of the dagger arm, not the sword arm.</ref> and if he delivers his thrust to your right side, beat his sword to the outside towards your right flank. Here beat with your wrist, always entering in that tempo, both beating and delivering the blow. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>You can also beat in this third way. When your enemy delivers his thrust, bring your left side somewhat out of the presence of your enemy, gathering your right step, so that with any minimal help from the dagger you will parry his thrust and can wound him. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Now I wish to talk about pressing the enemy in this same guard. Take careful note of how the enemy positions himself, because it is very useful for recognising this tempo, which is as follows. If the enemy keeps his sword long, press it in this manner: move forward with a half-step, until you arrive with your dagger two ''palmi'' above your enemy’s sword. Be alert, if he attacks in this tempo, beat it, and enter. If he does not attack you can enter likewise by beating, or rather finding his sword with your dagger. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy keeps his sword short, move to press him in this manner. Advance enough so you know you can reach him without budging your foot, keeping your body in guard. When you are at the tempo where you can reach him, deliver a thrust freely, quickly returning into guard. You need not worry if you are well covered by the enemy’s dagger, just that his sword is withdrawn. Standing in this posture the enemy can easily deliver a free thrust, which you can defend returning the attack in that single tempo. Take care not to leave your body too far forward, such that you lack time to quickly withdraw. You must be aware of all of these matters, so as not to disorder yourself, so you are in control recovering quickly. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>There is another tempo from this guard, which is certainly difficult, but resolute. It is by pressing your enemy so much that your sword is a ''palmo'' from his body, keeping your dagger-arm as extended as possible, voiding your body, keeping your sword (meaning your point) in the enemy’s presence. In that tempo you will beat, and enter with a thrust. </p><br />
<br />
<p>As I say this is difficult, but resolute and good where you can secure yourself, wearing a mail shirt, and you must deal with those who set themselves in guard, waiting for the other to attack first. It takes great judgement to know the distance, and also to see if you enemy will attack in that tempo, while standing in this form. If your enemy attacks with a cut, either a ''dritto'' or ''roverso'', you can parry with your dagger, entering in that same tempo. If he attacks the legs you can meet him to the face, since you will have a great advantage, as I described above. Here I will end on the second guard. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>I will now discuss the third guard, or rather posture, and how you govern yourself with the sword and dagger, with all the advantages that it brings. The third guard is in this form: you should put your left foot forward, in a moderate pace,<ref>In the original: ''passo giusto''.</ref> with your left arm extended, ensuring your hand is in line with the face, with the dagger-point high, keeping your right-arm somewhat bent, and your sword-hand away from your body somewhat. Your sword point should be level with your dagger-hand about one ''palmo'' apart. In this form you will be very well-covered, and you can conduct yourself depending on the tempo and motion of your enemy. </p><br />
<br />
<p>For example if your enemy attacks you with a ''dritto'' to the head, I want you to simply beat it with your dagger. But meet it with your dagger’s ''forte'', and in that tempo enter with a thrust, putting your right foot forward, as feels natural, then quickly bring it back behind. However keep your dagger-arm in place, so if your enemy then redoubles his blow you can defend it, which will be in the following manner. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy delivers a ''mandritto'', parry and enter in that tempo. If in stepping you abandon your dagger-arm, and the enemy redoubles his attack with a ''roverso'' or ''dritto'', he could easily hit you. But if you hold firm with your dagger you can parry the second blow, and return an attack in the same tempo. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If he delivers a ''roverso'' cut to your head, I want you to parry with your dagger, performing a slight void of the body, and bringing your right foot back a little; also delivering your attack in that tempo, and quickly retreating into guard. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If he attacks your legs with a ''dritto'' or ''roverso'', you can defend in one of two ways. </p><br />
<br />
<p>One is, as he attacks you, to gather your left leg next to your right. When your enemy’s sword passes you can enter with a thrust, or cut, as you desire. In truth, in this defence of withdrawing the leg you must carefully watch the distance of the enemy’s sword. If the middle of it approaches when attacking your leg, you will not be able to withdraw it enough to avoid being hit; and I do not wish you to use it if it arrives rapidly. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>The second method is this. If the enemy attacks your leg, you can parry with the dagger and enter in that same tempo, resolutely before the enemy can recover. Note however that this entry is only for one who is armoured, and would be very difficult and dangerous if you are not armoured, and I do not recommend you use it. But when armoured it is excellent, because it has the advantage of the step, delivering a longer and more powerful blow. </p><br />
<br />
<p>In this form you can also press your enemy so much that you come to dominate his sword with your dagger. Observe, once you have begun to gain it, not to abandon it, but to follow it always forward, since possessing it is beneficial. Having executed this, your sword will always be free, to strike liberally where you please. However if you allow him to recover it, he will have a great advantage over you. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Here I find that I have satisfied my promise, and what I have judged necessary for this profession. Nor should anyone object, saying I have not written anything in particular for those who are left-handed or sinister as it is commonly called. Because having taught how to attack and parry, depending on the guards, the art can be adapted to the left-handed as much as the right. There is no difference between them except in relation. </p><br />
<br />
<p>May everyone understand me well, and practice well, because I am sure of the benefits to those who praise my efforts, and perhaps one day I will give them something more. </p><br />
<br />
<p>'''THE END. '''</p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Copyright and License Summary<br />
| width = 100%<br />
}}<br />
<br />
<section begin="sourcebox"/>{{sourcebox header}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Translation<br />
| authors = [[Piermarco Terminiello]]<br />
| source link = <br />
| source title = Private communication<br />
| license = <br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox footer}}<section end="sourcebox"/><br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Falloppia, Alfonso}}<br />
{{Early Italian masters}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Translation]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Rapier]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Alfonso_Falloppia&diff=120589Alfonso Falloppia2020-12-03T15:49:12Z<p>P Terminiello: /* Treatise */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = [[name::Alfonso Falloppia]]<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = <br />
| birthplace = <br />
| deathdate = <br />
| deathplace = <br />
| resting_place = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set:occupation=Fencing master}}<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = <br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = Ranuccio Farnese<br />
<br />
| period = <br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| subject = <br />
| movement = <br />
| notableworks = ''[[Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire (Alfonso Falloppia)|Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire]]'' (1584)<br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= <br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| partner = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| influences = <br />
| influenced = <br />
| awards = <br />
| signature = <br />
| website = <br />
| translations = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
'''Alfonso Falloppia''' was a [[century::16th century]] [[nationality::Italian]] soldier and [[fencing master]]. Little is known about his life, but he identifies himself as a native of Lucca, and describes himself as "Ensign of the Fortress of Bergamo".<br />
<br />
In 1584, he published a treatise on the use of the rapier entitled ''[[Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire (Alfonso Falloppia)|Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire]]'' ("New and Brief Method of Fencing"). It was dedicated to Ranuccio Farnese, who was 15 years old at the time of publication and would become Duke of Parma, Piacenza, and Castro.<br />
<br />
It has been suggested the Falloppia may be the student of Silvio Piccolomini in Brescia mentioned in 1580 by the French diarist Michel De Montaigne during his tour of Italy.<br />
<br />
''On Monday I dined at the house of Sir Silvio Piccolomini, very well known for his virtue, and in particular for the science of fencing. Many topics were put forward, and we were in the company of other gentlemen. He disdains completely the art of fencing of the Italian masters, of the Venetian, of Bologna, Patinostraro (sic), and others. In this he praises only a student of his, who is in Brescia where he teaches certain gentlemen this art.''<br />
<br />
''He says there is no rule or art in the common teaching, he particularly denounces the practice of pushing your sword forward, putting it in the power of the enemy; then the passing attack; or repeating another assault and stopping, because he says this is completely different to what you see by experience from combatants.''<ref>de Montaigne, Michel. ''Journal du voyage de Michel de Montaigne en Italie, par la Suisse & l'Allemagne en 1580 & 1581, Volume 1''. Paris, 1774.p.284.</ref><br />
<br />
While the timeframe is plausible there is no further evidence to corroborate this theory, and it remains speculation. Furthermore there are no marked similarities between the treatises of Falloppia and [[Federico Ghisliero]] (a self-declared student of Piccolomini) although curiously they both dedicate their respective treatises to the same patron, Ranuccio Farnese, within three years of each other.<br />
<br />
== Treatise ==<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Introduction and dedication| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''NEW'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''AND BRIEF METHOD'''</p><br />
<p>'''OF FENCING'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''OF ALFONSO FALLOPPIA OF LUCCA,'''</p><br />
<p>Ensign in the Fortress of Bergamo.</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''TO THE MOST ILLUSTRIOUS, ETC. '''</p><br />
<p>'''HIS MASTER, '''</p><br />
<p>'''THE SIR RAINUCCIO FARNESE'''</p><br />
<p>Prince of Parma. </p><br />
<br />
<p>With Permission from the authorities</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''IN BERGAMO MDLXXXIIII. '''</p><br />
<p>Printed by Comin Ventura. </p> <br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>To my most illustrious and excellent sir. Wishing to make myself known to the world as a most devoted servant of Your Excellency; and to find myself respected wherever I go, as any young doe would be who heralds no longer the name of Caesar, but that of Rainuccio Farnese, I could think of no better means, than by dedicating this slight work on gentlemanly arts. It is composed for the universal benefit of all gallant men, and to confound those fencers who do not know, or who wish to teach naught but certain things that nature teaches by itself, and furthermore whose prices are set, much like the mechanics they use. </p> <br />
<br />
<p>I say gentlemanly, in contrast to those who teach tricks and abuses. They are not ashamed to suggest arms that are never seen except in premeditated cases and blatant murders, such as rotellas, targas, bucklers, balls of iron, spadones, and polearms of whichever name or type. These are all distant from me, because by the term arms I include only those that are proper, both in defence and attack, that every day and by all are commonly carried. These are the sword, and dagger, chain shirt, and cape (since for now we are allowed to call the cape a defensive arm). </p><br />
<br />
<p>Of these alone I intend to write, as those appropriate to a gentleman, one who must undertake the profession of a soldier, and to a gentleman of honour. And I shall be succinct, condensing everything into seven guards, or rules, however you wish to call them. Of which three shall relate to the sword alone, one to the sword and cape, with the other three to the sword and dagger. Nonetheless I shall not overlook anything, because these seven guards shall encompass the substance of any others. It shall also be straightforward, such that it can be understood without figures. </p><br />
<br />
<p>As for the usefulness of this art, as she regards the preservation of honour and of life, there is no one who is not aware of it. May Your Excellency enjoy it, not because it is useful to princes of your rank, who are defended by their own authority, but because it stands in eternal testimony of my devotion and servitude towards your most joyous and sublime house. </p> <br />
<br />
<br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Sword Alone| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>I will start by briefly discussing the sword alone, being the foremost among all the other arms, in the manner that follows. Firstly, a man who wishes to employ this sort of weapon should settle his body with this method: with his right foot forward, standing in profile, somewhat bending his left knee, in a half-pace. His sword arm should be extended, with his hand a ''palmo''<ref>The ''palmo'' (plural ''palmi'') is an antique unit of measurement. Its precise length varied by location, but was typical around 25cm.</ref> above his head, and his point perpendicular towards the chest of his enemy. He can perform thrusts and cuts as he sees fit, in tempo, taking care to deliver the blows quickly, and to return quickly into his starting posture, ensuring the blows are long, stretching out his body, and extending his step as far as he can. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Having acquired this habit with much practice, he will do the same in anger, no differently than when in his natural state. From this guard he can practice beats with the hand, voids of the body – either backwards, or to the sides, as the tempo takes him; and this first form can serve in many instances in the play of the sword. </p> <br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>There is also a second, lower form, which demands the centre line, which it governs, keeping your arm extended in line with your shoulder, such that your hilt faces your enemy’s shoulder, while your face is covered by the hilt. </p><br />
<br />
<p>By leaning your head towards your sword-shoulder, while standing in this fashion, if your enemy delivers a ''mandritto'' cut to your head, you can parry it inside, meeting him to the face in that same tempo. If he attacks you with a ''roverso'' to the head you can parry to the outside and meet him to the face. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If he attacks your legs while you are in this said posture, you can meet him to the face, or lower, pulling your leg back toward the other. Reason dictates that with the sword alone, if someone attacks the legs, they will run onto the point of your sword with their face, without you having to parry; which many do, parrying at their legs with the sword. If two play with the sword alone, maintaining the centre line, and one drops to the legs, he always brings his head forward, and if he meets his enemy’s sword (which is easily done), he will find that his own sword does not reach. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>While I do not approve of attacks to the legs while the sword is in presence, because it carries great risk, you can quite well wound to the leg with the sword alone, but look for the tempo where enemy’s sword moves out of presence, or else parry a cut with cover, and quickly respond to the legs, quickly jumping back to avoid clashing, which can happen with the sword in your face, when you drop to the legs. </p><br />
<br />
<p>You can attack to the legs with a void to the sides, but note carefully the position of your enemy’s sword, because with a void of the body to the side, if you are not quick to defend well, you can be struck on the head by a ''mandritto'', or ''roverscio'' depending on which side you move to. </p><br />
<br />
<p>However, I say that attacking the legs with the sword alone is highly dangerous. If you do not have a great tempo, or great quickness of body, it is not beneficial. If you parry a cut to the legs with your sword, it carries great risk, that by a turn of the wrist you are struck to the head. Therefore, you should not parry in this manner. It is better to extend your point in a straight line, pulling your leg a little towards yourself, turning your body, thereby striking your enemy with ease. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>While two play with the sword alone, you should also be advised that when one delivers a thrust, you can meet it with your sword and wound in the same tempo, and do so easily. This is because it is greatly advantageous to wait for the other to strike. Because in attacking you first he brings his ''debole'' onto your ''forte''. While you hold the centre line, however the attacks, either inside or outside, you can easily meet him, turning your hand to the side where your enemy moves to strike. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If he strikes to the inside, you can meet it with your ''forte'', turning your hand somewhat, such that the enemy’s sword remains out of presence, while yours wounds first, in that tempo. If he strikes to the outside, towards your sword-shoulder, you can meet it with the ''forte'' of your sword, bringing your body slightly to the outside, towards his face. I advise that the ''forte'' of your sword is from the hilt to within one ''braccio''<ref>The ''braccio'' is another antique unite of measurement, whose length varied by location. A Milanese ''braccio'' for example was 59.49cm, or approximately 23.4 inches.</ref> of the point. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy wishes to gain your sword, keep watch, so that when he moves his sword, before he has an advantage over yours, you do not disengage with a wide tempo, but to free your sword and enter in one tempo. While he takes two tempos, one to gain your sword and another to attack, you only perform the motion of not letting your sword be found and wounding in that same tempo. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If it happens that you cannot execute this with diligence and speed, and he gains your sword, do not try and force it free. This would have no effect whatsoever, you can however free it in this manner: by retreating back somewhat, with a void of your body, which will free your sword. You can then follow-up by attacking, or finding your enemy’s sword, or waiting in guard – to enter when the tempo arises. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy delivers a great cut, meet it with your ''forte'' and enter in that same tempo, since you will easily parry and wound in one tempo. If he delivers a thrust, and you have the sword alone, you must watch his sword, to understand where his point may land, and how close you are. Because if you are close to the enemy, you must be aware of where his sword moves. If the point arrives low, you must meet it with your ''forte'', fleeing with a small void to the side, that is to say dodging the point. Take care however not to void such that your point leaves the centre line, and your enemy’s presence, because you can easily attack in that same tempo, applying this skill. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy delivers a thrust, and you are not very close, you must judge the distance, and void your body back, not shifting your sword from the centre line or from your enemy’s presence, since you can easily meet his sword with your ''forte'' and attack. Because by voiding backwards you bring the enemy’s ''debole'' onto your ''forte'', and he cannot wound you without first gathering his step, taking another longer tempo, as follows. Having delivered the thrust, which fell short, the enemy can recover in this way: keeping his arm on the centre line, with a quick eye to recover his sword which finds itself at your ''forte'', he then gathers his left foot towards his right, with either a long or short step, depending on how you moved. </p><br />
<br />
<p>However, you must be quick with your eyes and legs, and have resolve in your play, and not act as many do, who having delivered their blow, which the enemy defended, remain disordered, not knowing how to take further actions, not considering that the other has hands with which to defend and attack. For this reason take great care not to rush into hands of the enemy, consider also what he might do, you will find many various approaches: one who waits for the enemy to attack first, one who circles to find the tempo, one who plays short, one who plays long, however I wish to advise you on all of these circumstances. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy circles around you, I do not want you to walk similarly, encircling, as many do, but to stay firmly in your stance. As he takes three or four steps to gain an advantage, to one side or the other, and as he moves his body, ensure that the point of your sword is always watching him. When you know that your body is thereby encircled, and that you are not in presence of the point of his sword, take only one step in the circle, small or large, depending on the tempo you find, that is whether the enemy circles you quickly, or slowly. When the enemy wishes to take advantage of you to steal the tempo, he will take three or four steps, however you will only move the foot that you find in front, in the manner I described above, therefore with this rule no one will be able to steal the tempo from you. </p><br />
<br />
<p>You also have another advantage: while the enemy wishes to encircle you, you can attack him advantageously in that tempo, because he thinks to steal the tempo from you, but in that instant you can attack and steal it from him, and furthermore wound in just that single tempo, where you please, depending on the area that is uncovered. Be quick in delivering your attack, and in recovering your body. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>You must take note of the tempo I describe below, which is very advantageous, governing yourself in the manner that follows. Every time you hold the centre line, and your enemy wishes to initiate an attack in the form of a cut, I want you to push your sword directly forward, while he raises his arm to attack you. Before his blow comes down you will be able to wound him, with great advantage. If you consider carefully, your eye watching his sword in this action, you will find that when your enemy brings down his sword, he brings it onto your ''forte''. </p><br />
<br />
<p>The same occurs when the enemy commences, wishing to deliver certain wrist-cuts to your head, I want you to meet him to his face, and you will easily land in one single tempo. Pay attention to whether your enemy attacks to the inside or the outside, because you can meet him and parry and wound either to the inside or the outside, depending on where he attacks. </p><br />
<br />
<p>But if it happens that your enemy cannot make headway with his plays of the wrist, he might easily retreat in guard. In this case you must push your thrust forward down the centre line, and be quick, before he takes the tempo to settle into guard. The reason is because when your enemy is in presence, and wishes to change guard, you can attack in that tempo, and can hit him easily. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Now let us suppose he retreats such that you cannot wound him, take care to be quick with your legs moving forward, always keeping your sword in presence against your enemy. If he performs a feint to the outside, or the inside, take care not to move with your sword, in the belief you will parry. If you do, he can easily disengage to the other side and wound you in that tempo. Observe instead this rule: every time someone performs a feint against you, meet him in that first tempo. Because your enemy employs two tempos, one to feint and the other to wound, while you need only one tempo to wound. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>I praise feints in this manner: while you are on the centre line, I want you to motion an entry to the face, whereby it is likely your enemy will move to parry. You should watch where he moves his sword, which will be near the area you motioned, or rather feinted towards; without disengaging your sword you will then find a tempo in which to enter. Meaning, by managing your ''forte'', you shall save yourself from his sword if he attacks in that tempo, which will be as follows. As you make the motion, and your sword begins to travel, clearly your enemy will move his sword to parry and wound. With an attentive eye, you will enter on the line where your enemy extends to parry your blow, and you can enter with a single tempo, without certain disengages, as many do when performing feints. These instructions are called ''contra tempi'', and are so subtle they are not considered by everyone. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Similarly, if you make the motion to enter, and your enemy does not move in belief, feel free to follow through, entering with the same motion. When you perform the action, take care always to target the area that is most uncovered. This forces the enemy to parry, and you will make him take two tempos, while you only take one; however check with your eyes, taking note of whether he stands firm, or else moves in belief of your feint. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>I now wish to inform you how to gain advantage over your enemy’s sword, and its benefits. When you wish to find the sword, clearly your ''forte'' is superior to his ''debole''. However, you must have a good awareness of how your enemy holds his body and sword, to know the tempo in which to move your body, and begin to dominate his ''debole'' with your ''forte'', executing the action, and moving slowly till you reach the ''debole'' of his sword. Because if you move quickly, he can disengage and wound you as I described above, and you will not be able to find his sword, but if you go slowly you will find it easily. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Take care, however you found it: either to the inside or the outside, not to let him recover; because he will be forced to disengage. As he disengages, you should find him again, or attack in that single tempo. If you apply reason to the sword, as you found him once, you can do so again, such that he can no longer recover. Having found the sword, with your enemy unable to disengage, wound him in the same tempo of finding, always using your ''forte'', so he cannot recover. </p><br />
<br />
<p>When you have found his sword, you can employ your left-hand glove to grab it, with a grapple, that is by grasping it, which you will accomplish easily. Take care not to act as many do, who having delivered a thrust wish to grab his sword with their left hand in that same tempo. This is difficult to perform, therefore those who employ this approach often miss the sword, that is they cannot grasp it, and are often struck either in the chest or face. The reason is that the fencer with the sword alone switches, by putting his left side forward. Since you can vary the sword, you can easily wound one who stands like this, in several ways. I judge a bold cut towards that side as the best of these, which cannot fail to hit and disorder him. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>There is also a rushing play, which most Frenchmen employ. When confronted by this, I want you always to hold the centre line. Your enemy therefore comes running to wound you, open, and you stop him by setting yourself in a strong posture, such that he crashes into your sword. Watch the distance, meaning when he gets close to effect his crash, and at the same time keep your eyes on his sword. Note that in wishing to crash into you he will take a long tempo, whereupon you can meet him with your sword where he is most open, and with a void of the body, avoiding his sword, you will surely hit him. </p><br />
<br />
<p>The crash could be in this form: he arrives with the false-edge of his sword to disorder you. In that instant you can meet him, meaning when he is close, and you can reach him, you can easily free your own sword to anticipate his. Because he arrives with impetus, persuading himself that in one tempo he can impede your sword, which you show in presence, and either deliver a cut to your leg and retreat back, or unleash a thrust and step to the side.<ref>''Contrapassare''.</ref> However observe the rule I described, wounding him when he arrives to find the tempo, and note that you will easily hit him in that single tempo, standing with your body firm and nimble. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Although you see someone come at you with impetus, you should not fear, because when afraid you make a thousand wrong movements, whereby the enemy can easily enact what he intended. If you stand in the form I described above, keeping your sword in presence, he will be disordered on his approach, your sword in presence watching him; and if by chance he runs without consideration, he could also easily meet it, and you will stop him in his tracks. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Now if your enemy does not rush, but sets himself in a low posture, enter on the centre line, but over his ''debole'' such that when attacking you in that same tempo, as I discussed, he cannot injure you. His blow will come to nothing, as it will necessarily meet your ''forte'', as you previously ensured. In this manner he will not anticipate you, and hereby reason staunches those in haste. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Although many say that reason does not matter with the sword, as is beaten by rage, I do not agree, and I defer to the judgement of knowledgeable men. It is true that reason with arms, this is to say play, does not count for those who allow themselves to lose heart, to not do their duty, whereupon they lose to those who know and those who do not. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>There is also much else to say over this centre line, which for the sake of brevity I will leave to the judgement of the prudent reader, it being very advantageous. However, I wish to discuss it no further, having spoken of useful and necessary matters, we will now speak of the third guard, and how it is formed. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>The third guard is as follows: you must extend your right arm towards your right knee, keeping your hand approximately half a ''braccio'' from your knee, and your point up towards your enemy’s face. Lean your body slightly, but not so you fall, that is make yourself somewhat small, with your right heel facing the middle of your left foot, in a half-pace stance; or more, or less depending on what you find comfortable and strong. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Standing in this posture, if the enemy thrusts a point at your face, be sure to catch it with your sword’s ''forte'', either to the inside or the outside, depending on which side he attacks. Thrust all in one tempo, raising your back, and you will easily parry and wound in that tempo. If he delivers a cut, whether a ''dritto'' or a ''roverscio'', parry with your ''forte'', and enter to his face; meaning whether he aims at your head, or if he strikes lower, in either case respond in that direction. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If he feints towards your face, or to another part of your body, do not move in belief to parry, instead push your sword forward in that tempo, catching his ''debole'' with your ''forte''. If he aims at your leg, pull it back a little, and meet him by raising the hilt of your sword and lowering the point. Be quick, and in this manner you can defend yourself again such blows. If you deliver the attack I described, and when he attacks your legs you remove your body, he will not be able to harm that part of you, if having attacked the legs he then wished to deliver a thrust. Judgement also matters, which teaches you to take decisions as required, when observing this and similar forms, permitting you to defend against many attacks. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Now I wish to discuss passing steps, and to demonstrate how dangerous they are, and when they are useful. You should understand that passing steps require feints, and be aware that they pose great risk to those who do not employ them with great tempos, agility, and quickness of body. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If you find yourself in the first form of the sword alone, and someone wishes to pass at you, seeing your sword high, it is probable he will move to find you, in order to perform it. Note carefully that if the enemy feints to your face in order to pass, as reason dictates, I do not want you to respond to the feint except as follows. Lean your body somewhat to void, where you see fit to avoid the point of his feint, then all in one same tempo beat with your hand, and deliver a thrust down perpendicular with his body. You will easily meet him if he bends down well with his stomach towards the ground, and you will stop him, since he will not be able to pass. The reason is as follows: you do not move in belief of the impetus his feint. You have time to beat the point of his sword with your hand, and employ the methods I described above, breaking his designs, because he arrives at great speed to perform the feint and passing step in that tempo. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If you find yourself on the centre line in the second form, and the enemy comes at you with a feint to execute a passing step, void with your body to the side, evading his sword’s point. While he passes you can catch him to the head, by voiding, playing somewhat with your body, equally you can thrust him to the face. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>When your enemy performs the feint, and all in one tempo wishes to pass, void from the left side.<ref>In other words, towards the right.</ref> That is, if he feints to the inside, and you reverse your point towards his face, you will stop him easily. You can also meet him lower on the body, because in keeping your point low, it is difficult for him to pass. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If he feints to the outside, bring your left foot forward, opening yourself with a half circle, your right food following the left to meet it, and you will easily exit from presence, and you can deliver a thrust, or else a ''roverso'' cut. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If you wish to perform a passing step, observe the following: when you wish to pass, execute the feint, and the movement of passing, but do not run. It is likely that your enemy, seeing the movement, that is carrying your body out of your sword’s presence, will turn his sword’s point to side on which you perform the action of passing. In that tempo, you can cover his ''debole'' with your ''forte'', and enter to the face without performing another pass. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If you wish to pass freely, observe this rule: first find his sword, then enter to the face. He will be forced to parry, and thereby will remove his sword, such that you can pass without danger; equally if he does not parry, you will catch him to the face. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If you are in the third guard, and someone feints at you to pass to the body with their sword low, I want you to void your body, pushing your thrust with the point perpendicular, closely watching your enemy’s sword, so that you can void your body to one side or the other. However, you must pay great attention to your enemy’s body, see the manner in which he moves, understand the tempo, and most of all be aware of his sword; that is consider with your eye, and judgement, where his sword might land. </p><br />
<br />
<p>This will suffice on this subject matter. Although there are many other things, these are very useful, and very natural, such that you can employ them. Furthermore there are many who suggest other sorts of guards beyond these, which I in fact do not esteem, condensing them all to mine here. </p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Sword and Cape| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
|<p>I will now discuss the sword and cape, or cloak, as quickly and briefly as possible. You can employ the cape in two circumstances. One is when you cannot carry a dagger. The other when you are attacked by surprise, and it is easier to wrap your cape than put your hand to your dagger, that is when you have your dagger at the back and not at your side. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Because most people without quarrels carry them almost always, then when the time comes to reach for their swords, cannot find them, because they cannot reach with their left hand. You should therefore wear it on your right side, to have full control over it. However, I will speak no more of the dagger now, being enough merely to have indicated to carry the weapon at your side. </p> <br />
<br />
<p>Finding yourself therefore in a place where you cannot carry daggers, it is likely that employing the cape or cloak will be useful. I say that wishing to wrap the cape or cloak, you should let the part of the cape over your right shoulder drop behind you, then turn your left hand (that is the palm) upwards, grabbing the hem with your hand half a ''braccio'' under the shoulder, or less, depending on what you find comfortable. When you let the cape or cloak fall from your left shoulder onto your left arm, which will remain completely covered, you will perform one turn only, to the right towards your hand, letting the other part of the cape fall low towards your leg. You will execute this wrap very quickly, and not act as many do, who wrap all of it around their arm, because by letting it hang low brings you have many advantages, which I will describe. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Having wrapped the cape, as I discussed, I want you to bring your left side a half-pace forward, keeping your sword to the outside, below your hand. Standing in this manner, if your enemy delivers a cut to your head, either a ''dritto'' or ''roverso'', I want you to parry with your sword’s ''forte'', meeting him to the face in that tempo, bringing your right foot forward with a long and resolute pass forward. </p><br />
<br />
<p>However, if he cuts to your leg with a ''roverso'', while you are in the above position, raise your sword-hand a little and deliver a perpendicular ''imbroccata'', bringing your right leg forward with your arm extended. Take care to void somewhat, but not by much, to enter with less danger. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If he cuts a ''mandritto'' to your legs, I want you to defend immediately with the hanging portion of your cape, in the meantime turning your hand with a thrust in the centre of his chest, where you find him most uncovered. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Take note never to cover your face with your cape-arm, because your enemy could deliver a point to your body, or cut to your leg while you cover your face. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Even if he cuts to your head with a ''dritto'' o ''roverscio'', I do not wish you to move to parry with your cape, but to meet him to the face, controlling with the ''forte'' of your sword as I described above. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If the enemy attempts these tempos, you can respond, making decisions step by step, depending on the tempo that arises, taking note of what your enemy can accomplish. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Here I will end the rule of the sword and cape, it suffices that you know how to wrap it, and how you conduct yourself. We will now speak of the sword and dagger, on the advantages of a gauntlet, and also on using it without a gauntlet with as little danger as possible. </p><br />
<br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Sword and Dagger| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>You will understand how play with the sword and dagger is governed best and with the least risk possible, conducting yourself in the manner that I will explain in this discussion. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Firstly, you must take care to carry your body well. I want to observe only three forms to place yourself in, although there are many guards which many have written of, and which I will discuss somewhat, however I do not observe them, since everything can be accomplished with three guards. </p><br />
<br />
<p>It is very true, that at times in play or combat you find yourself performing many things in many forms, but if you consider carefully you will find that it is all the same, comprising of the three guards I will describe. Even if they seem to be different things. When concluding, that is in wounding, you will find that the three forms I observe contain every blow you can perform. Furthermore those I describe, I hold to be the most expedient and least dangerous, from which you can wound in just one tempo the most, also without disordering your body. </p><br />
<br />
<p>For this reason, there are no movements that are contrived or forced – which arise only for entertainment, but only very natural ones, which are not lost to the force of rage. Those who teach should be take careful note of this, since confrontations do not occur if not in anger. </p><br />
<br />
<p>It is true that you should train your body in every way, since agility counts for much in this art, but recognising the tempo is much more important, as you have already seen, and as you will see, you cannot act rashly. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>The first form is very useful and is observed in this manner: place yourself with your sword-arm extended in a straight line, with your dagger-arm long, covering your face with it, keeping it somewhat extended, with the point up. Stand sideways in line with your right side, keeping your weapons close together. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Standing in this form, if the enemy delivers a cut to your head, I do not want you to parry with your dagger, but to meet it with the ''forte'' of your sword, as you would with the sword alone, towards the face. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If in this instant he wishes to parry with his dagger, beating your sword, disengage underneath and wound him to the face along the centre line; or else raise your hand, landing the point perpendicular over the dagger, freeing your sword as he moves to beat it. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Standing in this form, equally if he wishes to deliver a ''dritto'' cut to your head, you can parry with the ''forte'' of your sword and in the same tempo put your dagger to his sword, allowing the point of your sword to land under the enemy’s right flank, in that same tempo pushing the thrust forward by stepping your right foot forward. If the enemy disengages underneath, towards your left flank, be alert, beating his sword away with your dagger, from the wrist, wounding him to the face, then withdrawing into the same posture. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If your enemy thrusts at you during the withdrawal, void your body a little, and catch your enemy’s sword between your sword and dagger, that is with your dagger above and your sword below, and attack him to the face.</p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy delivers a ''roverso'' to your head, meet it with your weapons accompanied together, taking care to parry with your sword’s ''forte'' quickly accompanied by your dagger. Since your enemy attacks with a great blow to your head, parry with your sword as he has the advantage, and if you parried with your dagger you would come off worse. Many incidents have shown that the dagger wielded poorly is the death of a man. It is extremely hard to parry a great cut with the dagger, because if it does not catch the sword with its ''forte'', it can easily become dislodged from your hand, or you are struck on the hand. Therefore, those without great tempos with the help of voids of the body, should not move to parry the cut with their dagger, but with the ''forte'' of their sword. </p>| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy wants to catch your sword with his dagger, to attack your legs, note that you must execute the following action. With his body low he will cover himself under his dagger. Given that he wants to find your sword with his dagger, be quick to free it with a small void of the body back, while all in the same tempo wounding him under his dagger. If you free your sword quickly, you will find a very large tempo in which to enter, with his blow remaining half-finished. In other words, he cannot reach your legs, because he brings his head forward, such that he cannot land, while you maintain your sword unhindered. I have explained the reason why previously, when discussing the sword alone. </p> <br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>It is true that even in this clash you can wound him to the leg, but in this manner: you must pressure your enemy such that he cannot disengage underneath, if not to the outside where your dagger could not impede him. Having pressed him in this manner, you can attack with little danger. However, for a greater advantage, I want you to follow a different rule: that is having pressured your enemy, to enter strongly with a thrust. You will move with little risk of being wounded, and you will wound quickly. But as I said I do not observe these methods, as they are very dangerous. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Let us return to our subject matter, the centre line, in the first guard. Suppose someone is in a well-covered guard, in whatever form he wishes. Move to press him, and note carefully how he holds his sword: whether high or low. Then in tempo move to press him (as I said), and look to wound him where he is most uncovered. Be quick in attack, and quick in recovering back; so if by chance you enter and he follows up, the quick withdrawal will defend you, taking care as you attack to meet his ''debole'' with your ''forte''. </p><br />
<br />
<p>In executing this, you have time to defend and attack within the same tempo, as you see fit, which you will perform as follows. That is, if while the enemy attacks you find your step forward, having delivered your attack, the tempo will permit you to gather and defend simultaneously; if you are gathered, I want you to defend and enter in that same tempo. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy keeps his sword low, I want you to press him, with one foot gathering behind the other, and as you find yourself in distance to land, to enter covering his ''debole'' with your ''forte'' without touching his sword. If during this action he beats your sword from high to low, disengage with your wrist, and wound him to the face over his dagger. If he beats your sword with his dagger to the outside, return inside with your sword and wound him underneath. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Note that you must have a quick eye, to see where your enemy brings his dagger, and that many will give you a large tempo in which to enter. They disorder themselves with the dagger, and make a thousand movements, which are harmful, whereas you can always enter on the centre line. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>In this first form you do not have to use your dagger to beat your enemy’s sword, except in cases where you have delivered a blow and you sword remains out of presence, then your enemy attacks so quickly that you cannot reset your sword; whereupon I want you to beat with your dagger, gathering your step to recover your sword. But avoid reducing yourself to these conditions, which are dangerous. It suffices that I teach you this solution, so that in such cases not all is lost, and in some manner you can take decisions in combat. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Standing in this form, you can perform feints in the following manner: if you feint to the face, your enemy must bring up his dagger to parry. If he does not go for the feint, enter in that tempo. If he does go for the feint disengage to the other side. If while you perform the feint your enemy wishes to parry and enter, employ your dagger, beating his sword, and enter with a disengage, not letting your sword become impeded, understanding your advantages. This is as much as I want to say on this first form. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Here is the second form, in which you place yourself with your sword high, and your arm extended, keeping your sword’s point high, so that your enemy cannot discern where your sword will fall. Here beating with the dagger is beneficial, and I would keep it with the arm extended, a gauntlet being very useful in this instance. </p><br />
<br />
<p>While you are in this form, always try to stay with your step as narrow as possible, meaning in the form you find most strong and comfortable, keeping your right shoulder forward as much as you can, positioning yourself somewhat to your left on the side of your dagger, that is over your left leg. Keep your dagger extended, covering your face. Positioned over your left side, you will deliver thrusts with less effort, and recover more quickly. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>In this second form I encourage you to deliver a long thrust, extending your arm well, and keeping your body in profile. While you are in this form, watch how your enemy sets himself, because how he sets himself will determine how to conduct yourself from the rules I will describe. </p><br />
<br />
<p>Firstly, if your enemy delivers a thrust, I want you to beat with your dagger, and in that same tempo enter where he is most uncovered, noting whether the thrust arrives low and perpendicular, or if it comes along the centre line. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If the thrust arrives perpendicular, I want you to beat it to the outside with your dagger towards the right side, because it is quickest and easiest, and in that same tempo bring down your sword, likewise delivering a thrust, quickly returning back with your step. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If the enemy thrust along the centre line, you can defend in three ways. The first is from high to low, when he thrusts at the middle of your chest, entering in that same tempo, voiding your body as much as you can, passing, and always keeping your dagger over his sword to stop him raising his sword. If he does so, it will easily return to your dagger, or else he will be forced to disengage to one side or the other. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>You can parry in the second way when his sword falls towards your left side, beating it to the outside to the left side;<ref>This seems to refer to the outside of the dagger arm, not the sword arm.</ref> and if he delivers his thrust to your right side, beat his sword to the outside towards your right flank. Here beat with your wrist, always entering in that tempo, both beating and delivering the blow. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>You can also beat in this third way. When your enemy delivers his thrust, bring your left side somewhat out of the presence of your enemy, gathering your right step, so that with any minimal help from the dagger you will parry his thrust and can wound him. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Now I wish to talk about pressing the enemy in this same guard. Take careful note of how the enemy positions himself, because it is very useful for recognising this tempo, which is as follows. If the enemy keeps his sword long, press it in this manner: move forward with a half-step, until you arrive with your dagger two ''palmi'' above your enemy’s sword. Be alert, if he attacks in this tempo, beat it, and enter. If he does not attack you can enter likewise by beating, or rather finding his sword with your dagger. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy keeps his sword short, move to press him in this manner. Advance enough so you know you can reach him without budging your foot, keeping your body in guard. When you are at the tempo where you can reach him, deliver a thrust freely, quickly returning into guard. You need not worry if you are well covered by the enemy’s dagger, just that his sword is withdrawn. Standing in this posture the enemy can easily deliver a free thrust, which you can defend returning the attack in that single tempo. Take care not to leave your body too far forward, such that you lack time to quickly withdraw. You must be aware of all of these matters, so as not to disorder yourself, so you are in control recovering quickly. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>There is another tempo from this guard, which is certainly difficult, but resolute. It is by pressing your enemy so much that your sword is a ''palmo'' from his body, keeping your dagger-arm as extended as possible, voiding your body, keeping your sword (meaning your point) in the enemy’s presence. In that tempo you will beat, and enter with a thrust. </p><br />
<br />
<p>As I say this is difficult, but resolute and good where you can secure yourself, wearing a mail shirt, and you must deal with those who set themselves in guard, waiting for the other to attack first. It takes great judgement to know the distance, and also to see if you enemy will attack in that tempo, while standing in this form. If your enemy attacks with a cut, either a ''dritto'' or ''roverso'', you can parry with your dagger, entering in that same tempo. If he attacks the legs you can meet him to the face, since you will have a great advantage, as I described above. Here I will end on the second guard. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>I will now discuss the third guard, or rather posture, and how you govern yourself with the sword and dagger, with all the advantages that it brings. The third guard is in this form: you should put your left foot forward, in a moderate pace,<ref>In the original: ''passo giusto''.</ref> with your left arm extended, ensuring your hand is in line with the face, with the dagger-point high, keeping your right-arm somewhat bent, and your sword-hand away from your body somewhat. Your sword point should be level with your dagger-hand about one ''palmo'' apart. In this form you will be very well-covered, and you can conduct yourself depending on the tempo and motion of your enemy. </p><br />
<br />
<p>For example if your enemy attacks you with a ''dritto'' to the head, I want you to simply beat it with your dagger. But meet it with your dagger’s ''forte'', and in that tempo enter with a thrust, putting your right foot forward, as feels natural, then quickly bring it back behind. However keep your dagger-arm in place, so if your enemy then redoubles his blow you can defend it, which will be in the following manner. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If your enemy delivers a ''mandritto'', parry and enter in that tempo. If in stepping you abandon your dagger-arm, and the enemy redoubles his attack with a ''roverso'' or ''dritto'', he could easily hit you. But if you hold firm with your dagger you can parry the second blow, and return an attack in the same tempo. </p><br />
<br />
<p>If he delivers a ''roverso'' cut to your head, I want you to parry with your dagger, performing a slight void of the body, and bringing your right foot back a little; also delivering your attack in that tempo, and quickly retreating into guard. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>If he attacks your legs with a ''dritto'' or ''roverso'', you can defend in one of two ways. </p><br />
<br />
<p>One is, as he attacks you, to gather your left leg next to your right. When your enemy’s sword passes you can enter with a thrust, or cut, as you desire. In truth, in this defence of withdrawing the leg you must carefully watch the distance of the enemy’s sword. If the middle of it approaches when attacking your leg, you will not be able to withdraw it enough to avoid being hit; and I do not wish you to use it if it arrives rapidly. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>The second method is this. If the enemy attacks your leg, you can parry with the dagger and enter in that same tempo, resolutely before the enemy can recover. Note however that this entry is only for one who is armoured, and would be very difficult and dangerous if you are not armoured, and I do not recommend you use it. But when armoured it is excellent, because it has the advantage of the step, delivering a longer and more powerful blow. </p><br />
<br />
<p>In this form you can also press your enemy so much that you come to dominate his sword with your dagger. Observe, once you have begun to gain it, not to abandon it, but to follow it always forward, since possessing it is beneficial. Having executed this, your sword will always be free, to strike liberally where you please. However if you allow him to recover it, he will have a great advantage over you. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<p>Here I find that I have satisfied my promise, and what I have judged necessary for this profession. Nor should anyone object, saying I have not written anything in particular for those who are left-handed or sinister as it is commonly called. Because having taught how to attack and parry, depending on the guards, the art can be adapted to the left-handed as much as the right. There is no difference between them except in relation. </p><br />
<br />
<p>May everyone understand me well, and practice well, because I am sure of the benefits to those who praise my efforts, and perhaps one day I will give them something more. </p><br />
<br />
<p>'''THE END. '''</p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Copyright and License Summary<br />
| width = 100%<br />
}}<br />
<br />
<section begin="sourcebox"/>{{sourcebox header}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Translation<br />
| authors = [[Piermarco Terminiello]]<br />
| source link = <br />
| source title = Private communication<br />
| license = <br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox footer}}<section end="sourcebox"/><br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Falloppia, Alfonso}}<br />
{{Early Italian masters}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Translation]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Rapier]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Jacopo_Monesi&diff=120588Jacopo Monesi2020-12-03T14:45:23Z<p>P Terminiello: /* Treatise */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = [[name::Jacopo Monesi]]<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = 16th century (?)<br />
| birthplace = Florence, Italy (?)<br />
| deathdate = 17th century<br />
| deathplace = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set: occupation=Fencing master }}<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = <br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = Medici court<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| period = <br />
| movement = <br />
| influences =<br />
| influenced = <br />
<br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| notableworks = ''[[Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)| Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma]]'' (1640)<br />
| archetype = <br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= 1640<br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| signature = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
<p>'''Jacopo Monesi''' was an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing master]] during the first half of the [[century::17th century]]. </p><br />
<p>A native of Florence, he appears to have enjoyed enduring patronage and recognition in his own lifetime at the court of the Grand Duchy of Tuscany under Ferdinando II de' Medici. </p><br />
<p>A court document, dating to 1621, indicates Monesi's role included instructing the adolescent nobility at the grand ducal court (a claim supported by the title page of his own work): </p><br />
<p>''Jacopo of the Armourer, master of fencing, is one of several masters to the pages, together with the priest Albizio Vecchi, the undermaster Frediano Tinolfi, Giovanni Migliorucci master of writing, Leonardo Migliorucci, Giovanni Pieroni the arithmetist and mathematician, Remigio Cantagallina master of drawing, and Pitti Agnolo Ricci master of dance.''<ref>Archivio di Stato di Firenze, Miscellanea Medicea, 369, c.707. Cited by http://www.scrimipedia.it/mediawiki/index.php?title=Iacopo_Monesi (accessed 22 March 2017).</ref><br />
<p>In 1640 he published a short tract outlining his fencing philosophy: [[Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)| Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma]]. </p><br />
<p>Monesi's text contain little technical discussion, which he defers to a promised second volume that however is either lost or was never written. Instead, Monesi strongly critiques many theories and methodologies of his peers; behind a veil of formal language excoriating those practices he views as frivolous, or detrimental to surviving an encounter in earnest. Monesi advocates a straightforward and direct philosophy of fencing. He eschews what he sees as unnecessary embellishments, or artefacts of salle fencing, and privileges what he considers practical for surviving an unpredictable and violent confrontation with sharp weapons. </p><br />
<p>He strongly affirms the efficacy of cuts, interspersed with thrusts; and favours simple and strong natural movements, stances, and attacks. In terms of pedagogy, he forcefully promotes the primacy of practising assaults, and laments that students in his day no longer assault with the frequency and gusto of earlier times. </p><br />
<p>Among other elements he criticises: feints, elaborate postures, mathematical concepts, excessive theoretical discussion, and dagger disarms, as unhelpful and impractical for a confrontation with sharps. Without naming names Monesi appears to clearly reference, again critically, the work of [[Docciolini]], [[Fabris]], [[Marozzo]], and [[Pistofilo]]. </p><br />
<p>Alongside such direct critiques, Monesi includes less specifically targeted remonstrations. For example, he objects to the pedagogical method of masters who employ a chestplate, or a cane in place of a sword. Similarly, he leaves space for conventional discussion points of the period, such as where to look when fencing, or how to approach combat at night.</p><br />
== Treatise ==<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Introduction and dedication| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
<br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''On the Subject of Fencing'''</p><br />
<p>'''By Jacopo Monesi'''</p><br />
<p>'''Known as the Armourer'''</p><br />
<p>'''Master of Arms to the Most Serene of Tuscany, and Their Gentleman Pages'''</p><br />
<p>'''Dedicated to the Most Illustrious Sir Count'''</p><br />
<p>'''Francesco Piccolomini of Aragon'''</p><br />
<p>'''In Florence, at the New Press M.DC.XXXX'''</p><br />
<p>With Permission from the Authorities</p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Most Illustrious and Noble Sir and Patron'''</p><br />
<p>The shade of your Most Illustrious Lordship's great protection, has generated in me an uncommon yearning to bring to light that which has been hidden in the shadows of my intellect for many years. For some time I have had in mind to make public certain discourses on the most excellent profession of fencing, but the awareness of my scarce ability to articulate them, caused the heat of my enthusiasm to cool. This yearning only then emerges, through confiding in the patronage of your Most Illustrious Lordship, wishing to express these concepts in the best manner possible. </p><br />
<p>Therefore this is entrusted only to you, as has happened in the past with honour, once again I opted for your support in bringing this forth, so that anything that is deemed monstrous will nonetheless (protected by the greatness of your Most Illustrious Lordship) be embraced, and be appraised with a not less than benign eye. </p><br />
<p>Please deign therefore to protect it with benevolence, recognising it as a sign of my dutiful observance to your Most Illustrious Lordship's great merit, to which I reverently bow, praying for your every most coveted happiness. </p><br />
<p>Your devoted and most obligated servant</p><br />
<p>Jacopo Monesi, known as the Armourer. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''To the Benevolent Reader'''</p><br />
<p>It has been for a number of years that despite the weakness of my intellect I have wanted to present my thoughts on the play of fencing, which has been my particular profession. But since the world has seen others elevated, and granted them brilliant ability with which they delight and are delighted, I considered it best to keep my thoughts buried within me. </p><br />
<p>Considering however that in some printed books you find an exorbitance of guards, and other extravagances, and witnessing this noble exercise reduced more to discourse than practice, the desire I have (if successful) to demonstrate the true play, and method of combat, made me resolve first to declare my objections, then to explain the correct method. </p><br />
<p>In conformance therefore with what the Most Illustrious Sir Silvio Piccolomini of Aragon <ref>Silvio Piccolomini was a knight of the Order of Santo Stefano, and noted fencer and military commander of his age. In the dedication of his own treatise [[Federico Ghisliero]] declares himself a student of Piccolomini, while his skill at fencing is further referenced by [[Cappoferro]] in his introduction to the reader, and by the French chronicler Michel de Montaigne. </ref> (excellent in this exercise, and more so in military disciplines) taught me, after my first master Cosimo Paradisi, in the chapters that follow I will narrate as openly as I can what is recounted. </p><br />
<p>But since the greatest detriment to this exercise, in my view, comes from neglecting to struggle with the sword in hand, in practising assaults, I will deal with this first, explaining the reasons why I believe this is, as I commence. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>''Might it please Sir Canon Carlo del Vigna to see if the present work contains anything repugnant to Christian piety, and public morals, and refer back. The 30th January 1639.'' </p><br />
Vincenzio Rabatta, Vicar of Florence<br />
<p>''In the present work, having reviewed it in all diligence, I found nothing repugnant to Christian piety, or public morals. 25th February 1639.''</p><br />
<p>Carlo del Vigna, Canon of Florence<br />
<p>''Most Reverend Father Inquisitor,''</p><br />
<p>''By your order of Most Reverend Father I have reviewed this present discourse on fencing, and I have not found anything repugnant to the Religion, or to public morals, judging it worthy of publication. 26th March 1640. ''</p><br />
<p>Girolamo Rosati, Protonotary and Consultant of the Holy Office</p><br />
<p>''This can be printed. Florence 3rd April 1640. ''</p><br />
<p>Father Giovanni Angeli, Vicar of the Holy Office, by order of</p><br />
<p>Senator Alessandro Vettori, Auditor of His Most Serene Highness</p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Notes on fencing| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
<br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''Chapter One'''</p><br />
<p>Ambition, which without fail is the cause of every ill, especially in virtuous exercises, I know to be the true basis and root of a rather notable vice. </p><br />
<p>Every day we see youths of such ambition, that under the cloak of letting their virtue be known, out of all proportion, neglect the importance of possessing such virtue, and as soon as they arrive in schools to learn, having imbibed just a few lessons, allow themselves to be inflated by excessive pretension, and judge themselves to be masters. </p><br />
<p>Therefore it happens (and I speak in particular of this exercise) that in public schools, and especially in private houses, with youths of equal quality gathered to practice assaults, you find some who do not grasp the sword if not to teach, nor to learn in any other way. This outlook is so pernicious, that for this reason you no longer hear of people gathering for common benefit and practice, and to pass the time in the virtue of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Those who have distinguished themselves up until now, demonstrating their valour and knowledge, in my view did not take this route. Indeed anxious to prove their worth as gallant men at every occasion, in any place, and against any person, I believe they sought to learn. Because to understand a discipline well, you have to practise it, you cannot learn with theory alone. </p><br />
<p>It is not a good way to master a skill, to think you can attain it without effort and sacrifice. Those who think to proceed like this, infallibly discover through experience how much they have deluded themselves. </p><br />
<p>Another active and real problem I bring up, just as damaging as the first although stemming from the same ambition, is the disparity between people. </p><br />
<p>You cannot deny that an artisan (who delights in virtue as is understandable), can through his diligence and vivacity arrive at the goal of fencing well with the sword. Indeed because this exercise is extremely capable of elevating the most lowly individual, it often happens that by applying their spirit, those of base condition become more distinguished. </p><br />
<p>The damage therefore that ambition brings, is to be ashamed to practice assaults with someone of lowly hand. To not consider you could extract some fruit even from these people, throwing yourself into the profession. </p><br />
<p>This thought is erroneous, because it is essential to know that virtue levels all people; and that a virtuoso can be considered the equal not just of a simple gentleman, but of any prince or great lord. </p><br />
<p>These are the reasons I give, demonstrating why today assaults are dismissed, neglecting the chance to benefit from the luxury of living, before the waning of youthful years deprives you of every worthwhile activity. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Two – On the same subject'''</p><br />
<p>You can clearly tell from my previous discourse how much damage ambition brings, and how it is a reason for not mastering this beautiful virtue of fencing. But I will now demonstrate furthermore how discussion of this profession, which today's students engage in more than practice, causes notable harm. The truth is that lessons taken in any subject in the day are of no use if their operations are not exercised. </p><br />
<p>That which pertains to bodies of reason: such as logic, philosophy, and so forth, must be put in practice with words alone, as they are necessary to expound such virtues. However in the profession of fencing words have no place to execute well what the students have learned from the master. </p><br />
<p>Actions are needed when it comes to training your body for defence and attack. </p><br />
<p>This is not applied by today's youth, which is a further reason why assaults no longer take place, and students neglect to learn wielding a sword in hand well. It then follows that masters are judged and branded as inept in their craft, since they no longer produce students as they did in the past. </p><br />
<p>When youngsters come together, sometimes from the schools of different masters in this profession, instead of putting their studies to the test, with the cloak across their shoulders, as well as with the simple sword in hand, they begin to discuss among themselves: “If I delivered this thrust how would you parry it?”. </p><br />
<p>The other replies “I would do it in this way, or like this” to which the first responds “But if it were a cut, how would you defend yourself” again its counter is added, and they carry on ad infinitum in this manner, disregarding gainful practice. </p><br />
<p>See if this is the best way to safeguard yourself, and benefit through the profession. Then test with a sharp sword (which could happen), whether these people would have time for such a parliament. </p><br />
<p>Action is required for exercises which engage the body, words cannot grant a student resolution to confront his opponent, or courage and practice to defend himself. This is as much as I thought to say on this matter. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Three – On putting mathematics into this virtue'''<ref>This chapter might apply to Italian treatises which incorporate mathematical principles, such as [[Camillo Agrippa]], but arguably targets in particular the Iberian forms of the ''Verdadera Destreza'', exemplified by [[Jerónimo Sánchez de Carranza]] and [[Luis Pacheco de Narváez]]. </ref></p><br />
<p>I have never presumed to malign anyone who professes to teach this noble exercise, nor do I intend to now, recognising myself as the inferior to many gallant men who have practised this virtue. But we are permitted to debate upon the lessons of some, who have taught and teach through mathematics, with the addition of lines, circles, traverses and extravagant voids of the body. </p><br />
<p>For me, these are commendable for fencing in a clean salle, furnished with even tiles. Likewise it is impossible for two people not to put on a good display, when they politely retreat, then void, or advance with a neat step, putting into practice what they have learned from their masters. </p><br />
<p>But if I imagine them outside the tiled hall, that is in the streets, where confrontations most often arise, then I can't help but criticise and malign them, since it is impossible (for reasons I will explain) to put these actions into practice. </p><br />
<p>Someone who is confronted or deliberately summoned to combat, cannot I believe, as happens in large armies, bring with them people to dig; to resurface the street so they can put themselves in the right posture, and use their lines, and advances of ground, and binds of the sword in conformance with their lessons. Instead, being confronted, they are obliged to think how to stand firmly on their feet, to be vigorous in defence and attack, ready of hand, without such fine distinctions of footwork. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore those who employ the sword in this manner, can be called good and beautiful fencers, but in an open space, or street where stones, holes, and cracks can cause you to stumble, they are always in danger of defending themselves poorly from their enemy. In such cases most of the time the artifices of traverses, voids and lines are left aside, and they throw themselves into natural attacks, as is so often seen. </p><br />
<p>This itself is sufficient demonstration, although I can elaborate for greater clarity, that play founded upon natural reason is with no comparison much better than artificious play. The latter was invented for no motive other than satisfying the curiosity of youth. If it were otherwise, it would not be the case, not only in public schools but also in the presence of nobility with the intervention of great princes, that professors of play founded upon such twists of the body had been touched assault after assault, with cuts and thrusts, as is clear and manifest to a great many people. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Four – On a defined ''punto'' to attack'''<ref> The term punto to signify a defined target area of the right shoulder is particular to the treatise of [[Marco Docciolini]].</ref></p><br />
<p>This seems to me an important subject, in order to be accomplished in assaults. I will merely state my thoughts on those who, as a principal maxim, hold and practise the opinion that it is better to attack only a single part of the body, namely the right shoulder, being the said punto. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, you must consider the reason why they observe this doctrine. I believe it is for no reason other than to strike either the nearest, or the most vulnerable part of the body. </p><br />
<p>If we suppose they hold this view, because they want to strike the nearest target, I completely refute their opinion. Hands and arms notwithstanding, I know how those who lean most stand, even their knees are closer and more likely to be attacked by the enemy. </p><br />
<p>If they wish to propose the other reason, that it is the most vulnerable part of the body, I can only oppose them entirely. It seems to me that the hands and arms are subjected to danger: both of being wounded, and of the intermediate outcome of losing the ability to attack. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore experience, which instructs in all things, shows us that in a good portion of combats you see wounds to the hands and arms. This is because these can more easily encounter the enemy's weapons. If they deem the area called the punto so vulnerable, I do not know which hands and arms are not in the same danger. In them you find veins, arteries and other very vulnerable areas which evidently have shown to cause the death of those wounded there. </p><br />
This is as much as I can say on this particular. I urge everyone to take the whole of the enemy's body as the fixed punto to attack, and specifically the part that presents itself as most uncovered and furthest forward. There is much more that could be said, for example if your opponent is left-handed, or in other situations, but to avoid tedium I will omit it. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Five – On a predetermined measure'''</p><br />
<p>In addition to the other pernicious matters in the virtue of fencing noted above, I absolutely detest the opinion of those who insist on, observe, and teach a predetermined measure. Since an opinion should not be proposed without foundation, I will prove this simple truth with active reason. </p><br />
<p>I have always observed, and heard, that people who are forced to fight, whether to defend themselves, or to confront someone who has caused them some offence, never have the benefit of being able to measure swords. Nor is this a given, since anyone can wear a sword of any length they please (speaking of Tuscany). They cannot even choose a piazza well suited for coming to blows, and neither are people equal in form, either in height or in build. </p><br />
<p>Now, if this is not the case, what is the point of habituating your foot, and arm to a predetermined measure? Moreover, you can easily see from experience that often there is no time to take measure, or the opportunity is denied, for example in badly paved streets, sometimes filled with a thousand pieces of rubbish, as mentioned above. </p><br />
<p>If someone, suddenly or intentionally, is obliged to fight, even if they find themselves in a nice, clean street, it is impossible for them to observe the measure of their steps; to defend themselves and attack, against someone who is naturally at ease in well-founded play, who naturally understands how to stay strongly on their feet, and deflect the enemy's blows, while at the same time attacking him, which seems to me the real principle. </p><br />
<p>You must concede, that this measure was invented simply for the encounters they like to conduct at royal pageants, which have been held several times in various places, and furthermore in itself to demonstrate how far they can extend their normal step. However it is absolutely unfit not just for combat in earnest, but even for the simple assaults you might practice. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Six – On voids'''</p><br />
<p>There should be little difference between this chapter and the previous one, since having to discuss voids, which produce the same result as a set measure, my argument will differ little from the one adopted above. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, let us consider its effect, which is nothing more than a withdrawal of the body, either back or to the side, to defend against an enemy's attack. I say that this withdrawal is as dangerous as trusting in a set measure, and the reason is as follows: someone who by chance comes to blows with an enemy cannot know if they wield a longer sword, whereby in wishing to void they can be wounded. Nor can they know how agile the sword's wielder is. </p><br />
<p>More importantly, when someone evades a blow with a void, they must necessarily lose a tempo in having to return forward to attack. If set upon during this tempo (which the enemy may attempt) they will find it very difficult to recover. </p><br />
<p>For this reason therefore, as a rule of good fencing you should never concede voids. Besides it increases the risk of stumbling in the streets, which as noted above can happen when placing yourself in a set measure. </p><br />
<p>Seeking to avoid any mishap that can occur is the utmost of a man's prudence. The greatest threats that arise are those to life. Against these principal dangers man must apply all his judgement. </p><br />
<p>If we know that voids, traverses, and a set measure manifestly cannot save us from an enemy's attack, why not use that convenient and very useful remedy: not to be subjected to such attacks by staying well-grounded, with firm and stable strength of both body and arm. This will suffice on this topic. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Seven – On feints'''</p><br />
<p>In the profession of fencing there are many frivolities and jests, or more accurately whimsies that you can use, either in public schools or in private settings. Among others there are feints. These can often be employed when fencing for enjoyment and fun, and similarly to improve your vision, since they also serve to train your eyes to be attentive. </p><br />
<p>But I like to believe that this practice was invented for nothing more than to defend yourself, or to attack your enemy, as the situation demands. In reality they reveal themselves as good only for entertainment, or to prolong lessons, and I am forced to say that feints are extremely dangerous to those who wish to perform them. They require two tempos, and in the true exercise of wielding the sword are manifestly unsafe. </p><br />
<p>In earnest, as we know, arms are employed for only two reasons. The first is to defend, the other is to attack. How then can someone who is confronted, as we have said before, hold forth with contrivances like feinting over and under the dagger, to the outside and inside of the sword, against the speed of the enemy's blows (especially if they are strong)? Against cuts as well as thrusts, when he does not adopt any kind of posture, but advancing with such blows? </p><br />
<p>I have no doubt that those in this predicament, stirred by many motives, leave aside all feints and attend only to defending their lives as best they can. </p><br />
<p>But can you imagine others, advancing phlegmatically to confront their enemy, to vindicate a wrong or harm done to them, redeeming themselves with the frivolities and jests of feints? </p><br />
<p>I will omit many examples, but fury transports them, reason is overcome. Honour necessitates that they leave aside taught feints, and instead follow natural instinct, but since I have explained this already, I will not expound further. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eight – On ''contrattempo'', ''mezzotempo'' and more'''</p><br />
<p>To cover the present topic it is worth returning to the same discussion in the previous chapter. The various fancies and follies, along with feints, are invented by certain masters I believe, not only to retain students so they stay longer at the school, but also to confuse them. This way they unlearn the good and study the bad, and will always have to remain students. </p><br />
<p>This is the case with the invention of ''mezzotempo'' and ''contrattempo''. These are brought to light, as I mentioned, only to keep the school running. </p><br />
<p>''Mezzotempo'', and other such terms, deform the good and true rules with too many fripperies. In reality you could never have a memory sharp enough to employ them in defence in a single tempo, or in attack. </p><br />
<p>These methods should be practised not in fencing, but in the realm of dance, where the variety of steps and agility of the leaps must astound the spectators. </p><br />
<p>But in this profession a single step, a single tempo must suffice. Deployed with the requisite accuracy and mastery it will always quash any ''contrattempo'' or ''mezzotempo'' you might encounter, and I profess that this is merely the truth. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Nine – On the so misshapen published figures of this exercise'''<br />
<p>If I believed myself alone, I would not dare to criticise the infinite sets of figures presented and drawn in published books. These are invented, I believe, to no other end but to demonstrate a multiplicity of distorted postures, which almost transcend the bounds of nature, and drag people towards the ridiculous, rather than to learning from viewing such contorted actions. </p><br />
<p>I would like to have some leeway, to leave some praise, but I see no way whatsoever, if not to say that these deformations are very suitable for clowns and tavern-singers, to entertain and extract money from a crowd. This is the praise I am able to concede. </p><br />
<p>If then I were to offer some polite criticism, I could begin by saying that these positions are monstrous, and impossible to witness within our profession. When have you ever seen people, either for enjoyment or necessity, employ such extravagant contortions, with their bodies so hunched and forced, and for the sword alone with the off-hand by the left ear, to employ it like a dagger to deflect thrusts?<ref>This passage, and arguably the entire chapter, appears to be targeted at [[Salvator Fabris]], whose treatise is notable for its deep and sometimes contorted stances.</ref></p><br />
<p>This is as far removed from the natural order as truth is from a lie. You do not take a sword in hand, to wield in earnest, with such exorbitant contortions. You should stand so you can operate naturally, all the more so when you find yourself on the street. There you may find many impediments, as I have said, and confirming what I have already said above, you must stand firmly on your feet, in a balanced posture from which you can draw strength to oppose the sword against all attacks, and as upright as possible so you do not become disordered.</p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Ten – On the guards and counterguards'''</p><br />
<p>There are many guards, great in number from various masters, which you can employ in the profession of fencing. To list them all, and discuss which of them is good or bad, would require a discourse beyond this brief one, expounded with an eloquence other than my own. Nonetheless my pen will write simply and plainly, to touch upon some of my thoughts. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, to demonstrate the extravagance of the guards invented, I will cite various names authors have given them, such as: ''coda lunga e stretta'', ''cingara'', ''porta di ferro'', ''beccapossa'',<ref> These guard names are characteristic of the Bolognese school of fencing. In particular the name ''beccapossa'' is specific to [[Achille Marozzo]].</ref>''belincorno'', prima, seconda, terza and quarta, and many others which I will omit, which together with these have been represented with figures in the books published up until now.</p><br />
<p>As to whether these are good or bad, any praise should be occasioned by their use. It cannot follow, although we have seen otherwise, that they endanger those who wish to employ them. However since no guard should be maligned without a basis, I will start by saying that in my opinion the guards to be employed should not be twisted or bizarre, nor overwrought with a paintbrush, nor measured with a compass, but simple and natural. In this manner the body finds itself stronger in resisting blows, and attacking when the occasion presents itself, without the manifest danger of stumbling and thereby compromising your life. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eleven – On those who wish to debate this practice'''</p><br />
<p>To further damage this profession of fencing, in my opinion, some presume to debate over blows and postures of whichever sort, formulating and postulating in the manner of someone conducting a philosophical debate. Discussions on subjects like the one I have mentioned, should be performed with actions alone. </p><br />
<p>This occurs because upon the path of this practice it is difficult to arrive at perfection. Many who take the path, at the first resistance, by a simple act of will desist from the endeavour. Seeing themselves inadequate, they sharpen their intellect to appear the equal of professors, and with their propositions lead astray those striving to obtain a complete understanding. </p><br />
<p>This is undeniable. In the practice of fencing, to engage someone in debate and discussion as if arguing theology (in place of conducting assaults) achieves nothing but to deny opportunities to those who desire to learn, to become excellent in practice. This is the motive I ascribe for this behaviour. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Twelve – Against a set rule for combat at night'''</p><br />
<p>In this simple discourse of mine, I wished to oppose every extravagance that the meanness of my intellect has encountered in the profession of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Therefore it seemed apt to contest also the opinion of those who hold a firm rule of giving true and real method of combat at night: that putting your hands to your weapons, you should quickly use them to seek the enemy’s sword, and having found it you must liberally deliver attacks to wound him. </p><br />
<p>They add to this another rule, no better than the first, that is to keep your body hunched to create a smaller target. </p><br />
<p>I address each of these as follows. </p><br />
<p>If confronted in the dark at night, how can you find your enemy's weapon without being attacked? </p><br />
<p>Why must you remain hunched, being deprived of ability and stature in defence and attack, in place of a strong and comfortable posture, remaining upright on your feet without hunching over? </p><br />
<p>Such a false opinion I would deem unsuitable even for the daytime where you can clearly see the enemy’s posture, and even when the enemy does not step to attack. </p><br />
<p>I firmly maintain that if you must fight at night, in such circumstances in the dark, you should deliver ''dritti'' and ''roversci'' as swiftly as you can. </p><br />
<p>Anything else is futile, without proposing many additional considerations for such instances, which for the sake of brevity I will omit. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Thirteen – On those masters who in giving lessons employ either a chestplate or a rod'''</p><br />
<p>Among the other notable detriments, caused by various extravagances, are those masters, some who give lessons with a chestplate, others with a rod. </p><br />
<p>Masters who wear a chestplate during lessons leads to nothing else, in my opinion, than that students deliver blows with an exorbitant step. Since the blows do not harm these said masters, they do not realise that, although they wish to protect the student, with these thrusts they harm them. </p><br />
<p>They become habituated to committing their body so much with every blow, that it becomes unlikely they could recover when performed in earnest. </p><br />
<p>Having delivered the thrust to their master's chestplate, they find resistance, lending them force to recover back, and they adopt the habit of abandoning their whole body into the attack.</p><br />
<p>Because of this with a sharp sword, not finding the resistance of the chestplate they have with the practice sword, they remain extended so far forwards that it is difficult (as stated) to avoid their enemy's attack. It can absolutely occur that instead of wounding their enemy, they are left injured. </p><br />
<p>Something similar can occur with students who are used to taking lesson from masters who hold a rod. Since it is much lighter than a sword it creates an extremely negative effect, giving rise to great setbacks. Its weakness, not having the same form as a sword, means whichever cut the rod delivers, it cannot force the student's sword to learn, as a sword would. </p><br />
<p>We can furthermore question, being habituated to parrying cuts from the rod, if when they receive cuts from a sword, they might become confused. </p><br />
<p>Being disordered they might apply the lessons learned reluctantly, since they do not even learn resolve. So I repeat, employing either a chestplate or a rod benefits only the master, and not the students. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Fourteen – On where some wish you to look when you fight'''</p><br />
<p>The variety of opinions on where to place your eyes during actions, both during assaults and in questions of honour, leads me to include this topic in this discourse of mine. Many want you to keep your eyes fixed to your enemy's face during combat. Others assert you should always watch the point of your opponent's sword. </p><br />
<p>I contradict both of these views. I say that keeping your eye on the point is of no use in combat, since it is unlikely your enemy's point ever stays still. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore it is so fine that when it is brandished at speed, someone who trusts in this proposition greatly deceives themselves; knowing full well that sharp swords are not like swords in schools with a button, which is rather large, although some schools might not use them. Therefore I consider this proposition in my own manner. </p><br />
<p>I also criticise the other opinion, of watching your enemy's face, because while keeping your eyes there it is unlikely you can understand and clearly discern the operations he performs with the sword. Often these are away from the face, and he might feint with his eyes to attack in one place, only to move the hand to offend elsewhere. </p><br />
<p>Therefore finding fault with both of the above opinions, I hold that another area is more appropriate, necessary, and without subjecting yourself to deceits more useful, which I will relate in due time in another treatise. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Fifteen – To those who greatly criticise cuts'''</p><br />
<p>Everyone must defend their profession with the rationales available, so I will not fail to show how mistaken are those who greatly criticise cuts in the practice of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Before opposing everything they state in favour of their position, I will explain the charges levelled against those who employ cuts. </p><br />
<p>The first is that cuts are not lethal, the second is that they are much shorter than thrusts, while cuts are further derided by the claim they are for brutes. </p><br />
<p>I refute the first by supposing, since death has taken many in our times by way of cuts, that no other reason is needed to affirm this truth. </p><br />
<p>I can counter the second with great ease, demonstrating how with the hand, and the same length of step and sword (when grasped), the same person can be wounded either by a cut or a thrust. This is better proved by experience than words (which I set out to do), as I have shown and performed many times in the presence of great princes. </p><br />
<p>I should raise a further consideration for those who criticise cuts, and it is this. When someone is confronted, and puts their hand to their sword to defend themself, do they negotiate with their enemy whether to use only thrusts (speaking of Tuscan lands)? If they can wound with both thrusts and cuts, then why not employ cuts, and learn to defend against them? </p><br />
<p>I can only believe that those who criticise cuts, understanding only thrusts, either have no power in their cuts, or do not know how to teach them (if they are masters), or have no time to practise them if they are students. </p><br />
<p>In every profession, to remain ahead of others you must pursue every possible avenue, even if indirect, but all the more so the true and good path, since every day in questions of honour we see that the majority of wounds are cuts to the hands, arms and face. For this reason swords with a hollow were invented.<ref> In the original simply ''spada con l'incavo''. It remains unclear whether Monesi is referring simply to a hollow-ground blade or deep fuller, or perhaps an indentation at the grip that might conceivably aid in cutting , like on some later sabres.</ref></p><br />
<p>Having explained the usefulness of cuts, I affirm once again that those who criticise them, claiming they are no good because they are for brutes, cause harm. An example of this is not keeping hold of the sword, so it falls to the ground, which has happened to many during simple assaults. Another is not having the ability to defend against cuts. I have useful advice to give in this regard, but to avoid being tedious, and admitting to discuss only superficial matters, I will not expound further, and will end my discourse of this subject. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Sixteen – Against numerous grips with the dagger'''</p><br />
<p>Having set myself to contradict falsehood with truth, I should say a few things on this subject. This is for those who strongly promote and encourage a multiplicity of grips with or against the dagger, many with a dagger and others unarmed, as something pertaining to the art of fencing. </p><br />
<p>I refute the quantity of grips described and delineated, and their operation, knowing very well as I have said elsewhere, that you do not negotiate with your opponent. This is from the many occurrences and events that are well-known without me having to describe them. </p><br />
<p>In fact I would dare say that the dagger is worse than the pistol, which can fail or misfire. The dagger is always loaded and ready to attack, and when someone has this weapon at their side and spots the opportunity to use it, I do not believe they will use it to threaten their enemy from distance. </p><br />
<p>Assuming they are not a coward, but resolute and courageous, they will approach as close as they have to. I doubt there will be time to counter, with any of these many grips that are supposed to defend against attacks, nor therefore would I say that dagger against dagger they could be of any benefit. </p><br />
<p>I will freely admit that some of the grips work in schools, of course, but as you know these daggers are without a point or a cutting edge. Many options can be proposed since there is no manifest danger. </p><br />
<p>I return to saying, that as a short weapon they are much quicker to draw, and more ready to wound. These grips are for the entertainment, and confusion, of students. This is what I have to say for now. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Seventeen – On a pike position that defends against any sort of missile weapon, including arquebus shots'''<ref> This is a clear reference to p.114-115 in ''Oplomachia'', the 1621 pike, halberd and musket treatise of [[Bonaventura Pistofilo]]. </p><br />
<p>''When an occasion arrives where you must grasp your sword, I urge you never to abandon your pike, whether it is broken or intact. Instead employ it at least to defend. Anyone can understand for themselves from figure 79, how useful this manner of holding the pike can be for defence.'' </p><br />
<p>''It protects against cavalry, infantry, and against any type of hand weapon; even against missile weapons such as javelins, darts, arrows, and similar arms, up to and including arquebus shots. As long as by chance they do not strike directly in the centre of the shaft, so that the balls instead skid aside, the man will be saved, as I have seen from experience.'' </p><br />
<p>''You must comport yourself such that everything is covered by the pike, maintaining your arm high and firmly extended. Your stance must be sufficiently wide for greater stability, with your sword ready to attack.'' </p><br />
<p>''If you then wish to return your sword to its sheath without abandoning the pike, or piece of haft left in your hand, figure 80 clearly demonstrates how without need for further explanation.''</ref></p><br />
<p>I have seen many authors publish thoughts which objectively can barely be sustained. This prompted me to highlight one marvellous opinion, held by a master not only of fencing but of many trades. </p><br />
<p>In one of his books, he assigns a posture with the sword in the right hand and a pike in the left, profiled towards that side like a barbican. He asserts it does not merely defend against cavalry and infantry, but from any sort of polearm, and also from arrows, javelins and even arquebus or musket shots. </p><br />
<p>The only caveat is that it must not hit the centre of the shaft, where it may break, which seems likely. I leave this to be pondered by anyone who professes the practice of arms. To authenticate this he claims to have seen it. </p><br />
<p>Emboldened by such a claim, I have taken common courage and confided to the pen that which was concealed in my mind. Because if such wonders have occurred they would refute not only my weak and poorly articulated arguments, but genuine and well-founded ones. </p><br />
<p>I do not blame that pikeman, whether his pike was whole or broken, if having to wield his sword he also employed his polearm. But with apologies, I can never have it believed that his haft could keep him safe from every attack, from every sort of weapon. Supposedly even the musket against which (the author says) the pike prevails, the musket ball skidding off one side or the other to be deflected without harm. </p><br />
<p>In truth I have not passed my years in war, where I might have witnessed such incidences, but have been in service of and enjoyed the company of many veteran soldiers. Foremost of all the Most Illustrious Sir Silvio Piccolomini of Aragon, a person of such esteem as is known throughout the world, having fulfilled many offices in war, for the Most Serene Highnesses of Tuscany and for other crowns. Yet I never heard from him or anybody else that the guard described is able to achieve what is claimed. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eighteen – Some admonishments for those who wear a sword'''</p><br />
<p>Any profession should be practised with every possible convenience, and a farmer who must be present when the grain is harvested in July should not wear a garment of heavy cloth.</p><br />
<p>Those who dedicate themselves to the profession of wearing a sword, so dangerous that we could say death always walks alongside it, in various respects should not wear any ornamentation of the body or clothes, or any other items that might disadvantage them when coming to blows. </p><br />
<p>An example more perilous than any other is high-heels, which can easily lead their owner to fall over. Or else sleeves that hang down from the tunic, which can subject someone who is confronted, or who confronts, to great trouble. </p><br />
<p>Likewise long hair, which when coming to grapple grants a clear advantage to the opponent, while bringing great danger to the bearer, even more so when curly in the extravagant style of today; also more specifically hair that comes to impede vision. </p><br />
<p>Also included among such impediments are clothes with large slashes, in the French fashion or in any other. They can cause no small detriment, being dangerous by hampering the drawing of weapons with the swiftness required. </p><br />
<p>I also wanted to mention those who carry daggers with a dangling rose. </p><br />
<p>This is for the benefit of all; because from the mishaps that have occurred, I am sure the impediments I have listed most often create danger for the lives of those who struggle with arms. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Nineteen – What moved me to write this discourse'''</p><br />
<p>Everything we do in this world has an end, and every endeavour wends towards its outcome. Therefore I felt it apt to declare in this final chapter, which motives moved me to stain these few sheets of paper (so to speak) with my coarse and ill-adapted thoughts, and to expose myself voluntarily to the censure of innumerable fine intellects. </p><br />
<p>The reason is that I have found infinite authors, who by means of the presses have professed to enrich the virtue of fencing by demonstrating various sorts of guards and means of combat, and numerous uses of weapons. Knowing that all these operations were shown for the simple practice of wielding a sword, I resolved to designate the true manner of exercising this profession seriously. It consists of nothing more than the simple assaults which are conducted for pleasure. </p><br />
<p>The reason for writing this discourse was none other than a real and genuine desire for the aficionados of this art to recognise the true method of practising it, to not further maltreat it, and to employ the advice provided for the benefit of their person. This is the motivation, as I have said previously, and the intention. </p><br />
<p>May the reader appreciate the willingness of my spirit; and may those habituated to Ciceronian eloquence, and to the exquisite vivacity of extraordinary conceptions, pity my rude pen, whose lowly scribbles have aspired only to reveal the truth. </p><br />
<p>Lastly I wanted to set out how having learned the voids and traverses, I found them ill-suited to real combat with a sharp sword, and I criticise them. </p><br />
<p>Although I praise cuts in practice for their excellent defence, even more so at night where they are the quickest blow to find their target, I do not wish praise them by themselves, I commend them when mixed with a good many thrusts. A dagger can interrupt and defend against thrusts, but is comfortably negated by cuts. </p><br />
<p>And here I come to a close. If God grants me health in months and not years I hope to bring forth fruit that is useful, with the most straightforward method, apt for real combat, distinguishing the characteristics of different people: whether large, powerful, small or weak, with appropriate rules. </p><br />
<p>All in honour of our Lord God, and the most Blessed Virgin Mary. </p><br />
<p>'''THE END. ''' </p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Copyright and License Summary<br />
| width = 100%<br />
}}<br />
For further information, including transcription and translation notes, see the [[Talk:{{PAGENAME}}|discussion page]].<br />
<br />
<section begin="sourcebox"/>{{sourcebox header}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Translation<br />
| authors = [[Piermarco Terminiello]]<br />
| source link = http://sword.school/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Monesi-Translation-1.pdf<br />
| source title = Objections and Admonishments on the Subject of Fencing By Jacopo Monesi (1640)<br />
| license = educational<br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox footer}}<section end="sourcebox"/><br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
<br />
{{Regional Italian traditions}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Translation]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Rapier]]<br />
[[Category:Dagger]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Alfonso_Falloppia&diff=120587Alfonso Falloppia2020-12-03T02:42:43Z<p>P Terminiello: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = [[name::Alfonso Falloppia]]<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = <br />
| birthplace = <br />
| deathdate = <br />
| deathplace = <br />
| resting_place = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set:occupation=Fencing master}}<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = <br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = Ranuccio Farnese<br />
<br />
| period = <br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| subject = <br />
| movement = <br />
| notableworks = ''[[Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire (Alfonso Falloppia)|Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire]]'' (1584)<br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= <br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| partner = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| influences = <br />
| influenced = <br />
| awards = <br />
| signature = <br />
| website = <br />
| translations = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
'''Alfonso Falloppia''' was a [[century::16th century]] [[nationality::Italian]] soldier and [[fencing master]]. Little is known about his life, but he identifies himself as a native of Lucca, and describes himself as "Ensign of the Fortress of Bergamo".<br />
<br />
In 1584, he published a treatise on the use of the rapier entitled ''[[Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire (Alfonso Falloppia)|Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire]]'' ("New and Brief Method of Fencing"). It was dedicated to Ranuccio Farnese, who was 15 years old at the time of publication and would become Duke of Parma, Piacenza, and Castro.<br />
<br />
It has been suggested the Falloppia may be the student of Silvio Piccolomini in Brescia mentioned in 1580 by the French diarist Michel De Montaigne during his tour of Italy.<br />
<br />
''On Monday I dined at the house of Sir Silvio Piccolomini, very well known for his virtue, and in particular for the science of fencing. Many topics were put forward, and we were in the company of other gentlemen. He disdains completely the art of fencing of the Italian masters, of the Venetian, of Bologna, Patinostraro (sic), and others. In this he praises only a student of his, who is in Brescia where he teaches certain gentlemen this art.''<br />
<br />
''He says there is no rule or art in the common teaching, he particularly denounces the practice of pushing your sword forward, putting it in the power of the enemy; then the passing attack; or repeating another assault and stopping, because he says this is completely different to what you see by experience from combatants.''<ref>de Montaigne, Michel. ''Journal du voyage de Michel de Montaigne en Italie, par la Suisse & l'Allemagne en 1580 & 1581, Volume 1''. Paris, 1774.p.284.</ref><br />
<br />
While the timeframe is plausible there is no further evidence to corroborate this theory, and it remains speculation. Furthermore there are no marked similarities between the treatises of Falloppia and [[Federico Ghisliero]] (a self-declared student of Piccolomini) although curiously they both dedicate their respective treatises to the same patron, Ranuccio Farnese, within three years of each other.<br />
<br />
== Treatise ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Falloppia, Alfonso}}<br />
{{Early Italian masters}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Translation]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Rapier]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Alfonso_Falloppia&diff=120586Alfonso Falloppia2020-12-03T02:41:14Z<p>P Terminiello: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = [[name::Alfonso Falloppia]]<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = <br />
| birthplace = <br />
| deathdate = <br />
| deathplace = <br />
| resting_place = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set:occupation=Fencing master}}<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = <br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = Ranuccio Farnese<br />
<br />
| period = <br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| subject = <br />
| movement = <br />
| notableworks = ''[[Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire (Alfonso Falloppia)|Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire]]'' (1584)<br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= <br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| partner = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| influences = <br />
| influenced = <br />
| awards = <br />
| signature = <br />
| website = <br />
| translations = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
'''Alfonso Falloppia''' was a [[century::16th century]] [[nationality::Italian]] soldier and [[fencing master]]. Little is known about his life, but he identifies himself as a native of Lucca, and describes himself as "Ensign of the Fortress of Bergamo".<br />
<br />
In 1584, he published a treatise on the use of the rapier entitled ''[[Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire (Alfonso Falloppia)|Nuovo et brieve modo di schermire]]'' ("New and Brief Method of Fencing"). It was dedicated to Ranuccio Farnese, who was 15 years old at the time of publication and would become Duke of Parma, Piacenza, and Castro.<br />
<br />
It has been suggested the Falloppia may be the student of Silvio Piccolomini in Brescia mentioned in 1580 by the French diarist Michel De Montaigne during his tour of Italy.<br />
<br />
''On Monday I dined at the house of Sir Silvio Piccolomini, very well known for his virtue, and in particular for the science of fencing. Many topics were put forward, and we were in the company of other gentlemen. He disdains completely the art of fencing of the Italian masters, of the Venetian, of Bologna, Patinostraro (sic), and others. In this he praises only a student of his, who is in Brescia where he teaches certain gentlemen this art. He says there is no rule or art in the common teaching, he particularly denounces the practice of pushing your sword forward, putting it in the power of the enemy; then the passing attack; or repeating another assault and stopping, because he says this is completely different to what you see by experience from combatants.''<ref>de Montaigne, Michel. ''Journal du voyage de Michel de Montaigne en Italie, par la Suisse & l'Allemagne en 1580 & 1581, Volume 1''. Paris, 1774.p.284.</ref><br />
<br />
While the timeframe is plausible there is no further evidence to corroborate this theory, and it remains speculation. Furthermore there are no marked similarities between the treatises of Falloppia and [[Federico Ghisliero]] (a self-declared student of Piccolomini) although curiously they both dedicate their respective treatises to the same patron, Ranuccio Farnese, within three years of each other.<br />
<br />
== Treatise ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Falloppia, Alfonso}}<br />
{{Early Italian masters}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Translation]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Rapier]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Trattato_in_Materia_di_Scherma_(Marco_Docciolini)&diff=120575Trattato in Materia di Scherma (Marco Docciolini)2020-12-01T13:27:16Z<p>P Terminiello: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox book<br />
<!----------Name----------><br />
| name = Trattato in Materia di Scherma<br />
| subtitle = [[title::Treatise on Matters of Defense]]<br />
<!----------Image----------><br />
| image = File:Trattato in Materia di Scherma.png<br />
| width = <br />
| caption = Title page of the 1601 edition<br />
<!----------Information----------><br />
| full title = <br />
| also known as = <br />
| author(s) = [[author::Marco Docciolini]]<br />
| ascribed to = <br />
| compiled by = <br />
| illustrated by = <br />
| translator(s) = <br />
| patron = <br />
| dedicated to = Don Giovanni de' Medici<br />
| place of origin = Florence, Italy<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| subject = <br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| sources = <br />
| publisher = [[publisher::Michelagnolo Sermartelli]]<br />
| pub_date = [[year::1601]]<br />
| first English edition = <br />
| pages = 116<br />
| extant copies = <br />
| wiktenauer compilation by = <br />
| images = {{plainlist | [http://books.google.com/books?id{{=}}09JBAAAAcAAJ Digital scans] (1601) | [http://books.google.com/books?id{{=}}-NwTz8ic6YoC Digital scans] (1601) | [http://www.mdz-nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn{{=}}urn:nbn:de:bvb:12-bsb10359313-7 B&W photocopy] (1601) }}<br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
'''''Trattato in Materia di Scherma''''' ("Treatise on Matters of Defense") is an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing manual]] written by [[Marco Docciolini]] and printed in 1601. It treats the use of the [[side sword]], both alone and with secondary weapons, and is similar enough to the 15th century writings of [[Francesco di Sandro Altoni]] to suggest the existence of a distinct Florentine fencing style.<br />
<br />
== Publication History ==<br />
<br />
''Trattato in Materia di Scherma'' was first published in Florence, Italy, in 1601 by Michelagnolo Sermartelli.<br />
<br />
== Contents ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Gallery ==<br />
<br />
[Images available for import.]<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
* [[Marco Docciolini|Docciolini, Marco]]. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003.<br />
* [[Marco Docciolini|Docciolini, Marco]] and [[Steven Reich|Reich, Steven]]. ''[http://www.lulu.com/us/en/shop/steven-reich/marco-docciolini/paperback/product-12190678.html Marco Docciolini's 1601 Fencing Treatise]''. Lulu, 2010.<br />
* [[Marco Docciolini|Docciolini, Marco]]. ''Treatise on the Subject of Fencing: Marco Docciolini's 1601 Fencing Treatise''. Trans. [[Piermarco Terminiello]] and [[Steven Reich]]. Vulpes, 2017. ISBN 978-1910462010.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
<br />
== Copyright and License Summary ==<br />
<br />
For further information, including transcription and translation notes, see the [[Talk:{{PAGENAME}}|discussion page]].<br />
<br />
<section begin="sourcebox"/>{{sourcebox header}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Images<br />
| authors = <br />
| source link = http://books.google.com/books?id{{=}}09JBAAAAcAAJ<br />
| source title= Google Books<br />
| license = public domain<br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Transcription<br />
| authors = <br />
| source link = <br />
| source title= <br />
| license = <br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox footer}}<section end="sourcebox"/><br />
<br />
[[Category:Treatises]]<br />
[[Category:Books]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Research/Background Information]]<br />
[[Category:Image Processing]]<br />
[[Category:Transcription]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Marco_Docciolini&diff=120574Marco Docciolini2020-12-01T13:15:14Z<p>P Terminiello: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = [[name::Marco Docciolini]]<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = 16th century<br />
| birthplace = <br />
| deathdate = 17th century<br />
| deathplace = <br />
| resting_place = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set: occupation=Fencing master }}<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = Florentine<br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = <br />
<br />
| period = <br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| subject = <br />
| movement = Florentine school<br />
| notableworks = ''[[Trattato in Materia di Scherma (Marco Docciolini)|Trattato in Materia di Scherma]]'' (1601)<br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= <br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| partner = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| influences = [[Francesco di Sandro Altoni]]<br />
| influenced = <br />
| awards = <br />
| signature = <br />
| website = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
'''Marco Docciolini''' was an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing master]] at the turn of the [[century::17th century]]. He seems to have been an initiate of the Florentine fencing tradition of [[Francesco di Sandro Altoni]]. Docciolini wrote and published a fencing manual in 1601 entitled ''[[Trattato in Materia di Scherma (Marco Docciolini)|Trattato in Materia di Scherma]]'' ("Treatise on Matters of Defense"), which he dedicated to the great Florentine general Don Giovanni de' Medici (1563-1621).<br />
<br />
His dedication describes fifty-two years of professional experience by 1601, suggesting a probable date of birth in the early 1530s. His family appears to have moved to Florence in 1586 (possibly from Pistoia), when his elder brother Giovanfrancesco is first recorded as a Florentine citizen. A Marco di Bernardo Docciolini is listed as having died on the 23rd September 1610; buried in the Church of San Niccolò Oltrarno in Florence, together with his brother Giovanfrancesco di Bernardo di Marco Docciolini (who died in 1587) and other family members.<ref> Docciolini, Marco. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003. p.76.</ref><br />
<br />
Evidence suggests that until the nineteenth century, this church contained a plaque of the Docciolini family arms: a red lion rampant on a gold field, holding an olive branch. The precise origin and status of these arms and the Docciolini family is unclear. Neither the arms themselves nor the Docciolini name appear in any recognized heraldic register.<ref> Docciolini, Marco. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003. p.79.</ref><br />
<br />
There is evidence that Docciolini enjoyed some wealth and status in his day. A now lost portrait of “Docciolini the fencer” (''Docciolini Schermitore''), by eminent Florentine painter Santi di Tito, is recorded in an inventory of the Doni household as of 1677.<ref> Cinelli, Giovanni. ''Bellezze della città di Firenze. Dove a pieno di pittura di scultura di sacri templi, di palazzi, i più notabili artifizi, è più preziosi si contengono''. Florence, 1677. p.565.</ref><br />
<br />
There are no records of Marco Docciolini marrying or having legitimate children, though he was survived by two nephews, Bernardo and Costanzo, the sons of Giovanfrancesco. A letter from 1627 between Bernardo and the noted Florentine musicologist Giovanni Battista Doni, suggests a professional relationship between the two. This provides a plausible explanation as to how Docciolini's portrait might have been passed to the Doni family.<ref> Docciolini, Marco. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003. p.77.</ref><br />
<br />
Despite claiming fifty two years professional experience, and alluding to influential patrons, Docciolini does not appear to be enrolled in the ''Speziali'', The Guild of Doctors and Apothecaries (''Arte dei Medici e Speziali''), as would have been required for a Master of Arms in Florence, which may suggest he had a small circle of private clients.<br />
<br />
Silvio Longhi speculates that his late arrival in Florence, unmarried status, and lack of formal guild affiliation together suggest a long military career, possibly under the command of Don Giovanni de' Medici, to whom his treatise is dedicated.<ref> Docciolini, Marco. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003. p.78.</ref><br />
<br />
<br />
== Treatise ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
* [[Marco Docciolini|Docciolini, Marco]]. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003.<br />
* [[Marco Docciolini|Docciolini, Marco]] and [[Steven Reich|Reich, Steven]]. ''[http://www.lulu.com/us/en/shop/steven-reich/marco-docciolini/paperback/product-12190678.html Marco Docciolini's 1601 Fencing Treatise]''. Lulu, 2010.<br />
* [[Marco Docciolini|Docciolini, Marco]]. ''Treatise on the Subject of Fencing: Marco Docciolini's 1601 Fencing Treatise''. Trans. [[Piermarco Terminiello]] and [[Steven Reich]]. Vulpes, 2017. ISBN 978-1910462010.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Docciolini, Marco}}<br />
{{Florentine tradition}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Research/Background Information]]<br />
[[Category:Copy/Pasting]]<br />
[[Category:Translation]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Double Side Swords]]<br />
[[Category:Side Sword]]<br />
[[Category:Sword and Buckler]]<br />
[[Category:Sword and Dagger]]<br />
[[Category:Sword and Shield]]<br />
[[Category:Sword and Cloak]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Marco_Docciolini&diff=120573Marco Docciolini2020-12-01T13:14:24Z<p>P Terminiello: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = [[name::Marco Docciolini]]<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = 16th century<br />
| birthplace = <br />
| deathdate = 17th century<br />
| deathplace = <br />
| resting_place = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set: occupation=Fencing master }}<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = Florentine<br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = <br />
<br />
| period = <br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| subject = <br />
| movement = Florentine school<br />
| notableworks = ''[[Trattato in Materia di Scherma (Marco Docciolini)|Trattato in Materia di Scherma]]'' (1601)<br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= <br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| partner = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| influences = [[Francesco di Sandro Altoni]]<br />
| influenced = <br />
| awards = <br />
| signature = <br />
| website = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
'''Marco Docciolini''' was an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing master]] at the turn of the [[century::17th century]]. Little is known about this master's life; he seems to have been an initiate of the Florentine fencing tradition of [[Francesco di Sandro Altoni]]. Docciolini wrote and published a fencing manual in 1601 entitled ''[[Trattato in Materia di Scherma (Marco Docciolini)|Trattato in Materia di Scherma]]'' ("Treatise on Matters of Defense"), which he dedicated to the great Florentine general Don Giovanni de' Medici (1563-1621).<br />
<br />
His dedication describes fifty-two years of professional experience by 1601, suggesting a probable date of birth in the early 1530s. His family appears to have moved to Florence in 1586 (possibly from Pistoia), when his elder brother Giovanfrancesco is first recorded as a Florentine citizen. A Marco di Bernardo Docciolini is listed as having died on the 23rd September 1610; buried in the Church of San Niccolò Oltrarno in Florence, together with his brother Giovanfrancesco di Bernardo di Marco Docciolini (who died in 1587) and other family members.<ref> Docciolini, Marco. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003. p.76.</ref><br />
<br />
Evidence suggests that until the nineteenth century, this church contained a plaque of the Docciolini family arms: a red lion rampant on a gold field, holding an olive branch. The precise origin and status of these arms and the Docciolini family is unclear. Neither the arms themselves nor the Docciolini name appear in any recognized heraldic register.<ref> Docciolini, Marco. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003. p.79.</ref><br />
<br />
There is evidence that Docciolini enjoyed some wealth and status in his day. A now lost portrait of “Docciolini the fencer” (''Docciolini Schermitore''), by eminent Florentine painter Santi di Tito, is recorded in an inventory of the Doni household as of 1677.<ref> Cinelli, Giovanni. ''Bellezze della città di Firenze. Dove a pieno di pittura di scultura di sacri templi, di palazzi, i più notabili artifizi, è più preziosi si contengono''. Florence, 1677. p.565.</ref><br />
<br />
There are no records of Marco Docciolini marrying or having legitimate children, though he was survived by two nephews, Bernardo and Costanzo, the sons of Giovanfrancesco. A letter from 1627 between Bernardo and the noted Florentine musicologist Giovanni Battista Doni, suggests a professional relationship between the two. This provides a plausible explanation as to how Docciolini's portrait might have been passed to the Doni family.<ref> Docciolini, Marco. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003. p.77.</ref><br />
<br />
Despite claiming fifty two years professional experience, and alluding to influential patrons, Docciolini does not appear to be enrolled in the ''Speziali'', The Guild of Doctors and Apothecaries (''Arte dei Medici e Speziali''), as would have been required for a Master of Arms in Florence, which may suggest he had a small circle of private clients.<br />
<br />
Silvio Longhi speculates that his late arrival in Florence, unmarried status, and lack of formal guild affiliation together suggest a long military career, possibly under the command of Don Giovanni de' Medici, to whom his treatise is dedicated.<ref> Docciolini, Marco. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003. p.78.</ref><br />
<br />
<br />
== Treatise ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
* [[Marco Docciolini|Docciolini, Marco]]. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003.<br />
* [[Marco Docciolini|Docciolini, Marco]] and [[Steven Reich|Reich, Steven]]. ''[http://www.lulu.com/us/en/shop/steven-reich/marco-docciolini/paperback/product-12190678.html Marco Docciolini's 1601 Fencing Treatise]''. Lulu, 2010.<br />
* [[Marco Docciolini|Docciolini, Marco]]. ''Treatise on the Subject of Fencing: Marco Docciolini's 1601 Fencing Treatise''. Trans. [[Piermarco Terminiello]] and [[Steven Reich]]. Vulpes, 2017. ISBN 978-1910462010.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Docciolini, Marco}}<br />
{{Florentine tradition}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Research/Background Information]]<br />
[[Category:Copy/Pasting]]<br />
[[Category:Translation]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Double Side Swords]]<br />
[[Category:Side Sword]]<br />
[[Category:Sword and Buckler]]<br />
[[Category:Sword and Dagger]]<br />
[[Category:Sword and Shield]]<br />
[[Category:Sword and Cloak]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Marco_Docciolini&diff=120572Marco Docciolini2020-12-01T13:12:04Z<p>P Terminiello: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = [[name::Marco Docciolini]]<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = 16th century<br />
| birthplace = <br />
| deathdate = 17th century<br />
| deathplace = <br />
| resting_place = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set: occupation=Fencing master }}<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = Florentine<br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = <br />
<br />
| period = <br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| subject = <br />
| movement = Florentine school<br />
| notableworks = ''[[Trattato in Materia di Scherma (Marco Docciolini)|Trattato in Materia di Scherma]]'' (1601)<br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= <br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| partner = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| influences = [[Francesco di Sandro Altoni]]<br />
| influenced = <br />
| awards = <br />
| signature = <br />
| website = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
'''Marco Docciolini''' was an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing master]] at the turn of the [[century::17th century]]. Little is known about this master's life; he seems to have been an initiate of the Florentine fencing tradition of [[Francesco di Sandro Altoni]]. Docciolini wrote and published a fencing manual in 1601 entitled ''[[Trattato in Materia di Scherma (Marco Docciolini)|Trattato in Materia di Scherma]]'' ("Treatise on Matters of Defense"), which he dedicated to the great Florentine general Don Giovanni de' Medici (1563-1621).<br />
<br />
His dedication describes fifty-two years of professional experience by 1601, suggesting a probable date of birth in the early 1530s. His family appears to have moved to Florence in 1586 (possibly from Pistoia), when his elder brother Giovanfrancesco is first recorded as a Florentine citizen. A Marco di Bernardo Docciolini is listed as having died on the 23rd September 1610; buried in the Church of San Niccolò Oltrarno in Florence, together with his brother Giovanfrancesco di Bernardo di Marco Docciolini (who died in 1587) and other family members.<ref> Docciolini, Marco. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003. p.76.</ref><br />
<br />
Evidence suggests that until the nineteenth century, this church contained a plaque of the Docciolini family arms: a red lion rampant on a gold field, holding an olive branch. The precise origin and status of these arms and the Docciolini family is unclear. Neither the arms themselves nor the Docciolini name appear in any recognized heraldic register.<ref> Docciolini, Marco. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003. p.79.</ref><br />
<br />
There is evidence that Docciolini enjoyed some wealth and status in his day. A now lost portrait of “Docciolini the fencer” (''Docciolini Schermitore''), by eminent Florentine painter Santi di Tito, is recorded in an inventory of the Doni household as of 1677.<ref> Cinelli, Giovanni. ''Bellezze della città di Firenze. Dove a pieno di pittura di scultura di sacri templi, di palazzi, i più notabili artifizi, è più preziosi si contengono''. Florence, 1677. p.565.</ref><br />
<br />
There are no records of Marco Docciolini marrying or having legitimate children, though he was survived by two nephews, Bernardo and Costanzo, the sons of Giovanfrancesco. A letter from 1627 between Bernardo and the noted Florentine musicologist Giovanni Battista Doni, suggests a professional relationship between the two. This provides a plausible explanation as to how Docciolini's portrait might have been passed to the Doni family.<ref> Docciolini, Marco. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003. p.77.</ref><br />
<br />
Despite claiming fifty two years professional experience, and alluding to influential patrons, Docciolini does not appear to be enrolled in the ''Speziali'', The Guild of Doctors and Apothecaries (''Arte dei Medici e Speziali''), as would have been required for a Master of Arms in Florence, which may suggest he had a small circle of private clients.<br />
<br />
Silvio Longhi speculates that his late arrival in Florence, unmarried status, and lack of formal guild affiliation together suggest a long military career, possibly under the command of Don Giovanni de' Medici, to whom his treatise is dedicated.<ref> Docciolini, Marco. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003. p.78.</ref><br />
<br />
<br />
== Treatise ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
* [[Marco Docciolini|Docciolini, Marco]] and [[Steven Reich|Reich, Steven]]. ''[http://www.lulu.com/us/en/shop/steven-reich/marco-docciolini/paperback/product-12190678.html Marco Docciolini's 1601 Fencing Treatise]''. Lulu, 2010.<br />
* [[Marco Docciolini|Docciolini, Marco]]. ''Treatise on the Subject of Fencing: Marco Docciolini's 1601 Fencing Treatise''. Trans. [[Piermarco Terminiello]] and [[Steven Reich]]. Vulpes, 2017. ISBN 978-1910462010.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Docciolini, Marco}}<br />
{{Florentine tradition}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Research/Background Information]]<br />
[[Category:Copy/Pasting]]<br />
[[Category:Translation]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Double Side Swords]]<br />
[[Category:Side Sword]]<br />
[[Category:Sword and Buckler]]<br />
[[Category:Sword and Dagger]]<br />
[[Category:Sword and Shield]]<br />
[[Category:Sword and Cloak]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Marco_Docciolini&diff=120571Marco Docciolini2020-12-01T13:11:01Z<p>P Terminiello: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = [[name::Marco Docciolini]]<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = 16th century<br />
| birthplace = <br />
| deathdate = 17th century<br />
| deathplace = <br />
| resting_place = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set: occupation=Fencing master }}<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = Florentine<br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = <br />
<br />
| period = <br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| subject = <br />
| movement = Florentine school<br />
| notableworks = ''[[Trattato in Materia di Scherma (Marco Docciolini)|Trattato in Materia di Scherma]]'' (1601)<br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= <br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| partner = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| influences = [[Francesco di Sandro Altoni]]<br />
| influenced = <br />
| awards = <br />
| signature = <br />
| website = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
'''Marco Docciolini''' was an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing master]] at the turn of the [[century::17th century]]. Little is known about this master's life; he seems to have been an initiate of the Florentine fencing tradition of [[Francesco di Sandro Altoni]]. Docciolini wrote and published a fencing manual in 1601 entitled ''[[Trattato in Materia di Scherma (Marco Docciolini)|Trattato in Materia di Scherma]]'' ("Treatise on Matters of Defense"), which he dedicated to the great Florentine general Don Giovanni de' Medici (1563-1621).<br />
<br />
His dedication describes fifty-two years of professional experience by 1601, suggesting a probable date of birth in the early 1530s. His family appears to have moved to Florence in 1586 (possibly from Pistoia), when his elder brother Giovanfrancesco is first recorded as a Florentine citizen. A Marco di Bernardo Docciolini is listed as having died on the 23rd September 1610; buried in the Church of San Niccolò Oltrarno in Florence, together with his brother Giovanfrancesco di Bernardo di Marco Docciolini (who died in 1587) and other family members.<ref> Docciolini, Marco. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003. p.76.</ref><br />
<br />
Evidence suggests that until the nineteenth century, this church contained a plaque of the Docciolini family arms: a red lion rampant on a gold field, holding an olive branch. The precise origin and status of these arms and the Docciolini family is unclear. Neither the arms themselves nor the Docciolini name appear in any recognized heraldic register. <ref> Docciolini, Marco. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003. p.79.</ref><br />
<br />
There is evidence that Docciolini enjoyed some wealth and status in his day. A now lost portrait of “Docciolini the fencer” (''Docciolini Schermitore''), by eminent Florentine painter Santi di Tito, is recorded in an inventory of the Doni household as of 1677. <ref> Cinelli, Giovanni. ''Bellezze della città di Firenze. Dove a pieno di pittura di scultura di sacri templi, di palazzi, i più notabili artifizi, è più preziosi si contengono''. Florence, 1677. p.565.</ref><br />
<br />
There are no records of Marco Docciolini marrying or having legitimate children, though he was survived by two nephews, Bernardo and Costanzo, the sons of Giovanfrancesco. A letter from 1627 between Bernardo and the noted Florentine musicologist Giovanni Battista Doni, suggests a professional relationship between the two. This provides a plausible explanation as to how Docciolini's portrait might have been passed to the Doni family. <ref> Docciolini, Marco. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003. p.77.</ref><br />
<br />
Despite claiming fifty two years professional experience, and alluding to influential patrons, Docciolini does not appear to be enrolled in the ''Speziali'', The Guild of Doctors and Apothecaries (''Arte dei Medici e Speziali''), as would have been required for a Master of Arms in Florence, which may suggest he had a small circle of private clients.<br />
<br />
Silvio Longhi speculates that his late arrival in Florence, unmarried status, and lack of formal guild affiliation together suggest a long military career, possibly under the command of Don Giovanni de' Medici, to whom his treatise is dedicated. <ref> Docciolini, Marco. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003. p.78.</ref><br />
<br />
<br />
== Treatise ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
* [[Marco Docciolini|Docciolini, Marco]] and [[Steven Reich|Reich, Steven]]. ''[http://www.lulu.com/us/en/shop/steven-reich/marco-docciolini/paperback/product-12190678.html Marco Docciolini's 1601 Fencing Treatise]''. Lulu, 2010.<br />
* [[Marco Docciolini|Docciolini, Marco]]. ''Treatise on the Subject of Fencing: Marco Docciolini's 1601 Fencing Treatise''. Trans. [[Piermarco Terminiello]] and [[Steven Reich]]. Vulpes, 2017. ISBN 978-1910462010.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Docciolini, Marco}}<br />
{{Florentine tradition}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Research/Background Information]]<br />
[[Category:Copy/Pasting]]<br />
[[Category:Translation]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Double Side Swords]]<br />
[[Category:Side Sword]]<br />
[[Category:Sword and Buckler]]<br />
[[Category:Sword and Dagger]]<br />
[[Category:Sword and Shield]]<br />
[[Category:Sword and Cloak]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Marco_Docciolini&diff=120570Marco Docciolini2020-12-01T13:10:14Z<p>P Terminiello: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = [[name::Marco Docciolini]]<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = 16th century<br />
| birthplace = <br />
| deathdate = 17th century<br />
| deathplace = <br />
| resting_place = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set: occupation=Fencing master }}<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = Florentine<br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = <br />
<br />
| period = <br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| subject = <br />
| movement = Florentine school<br />
| notableworks = ''[[Trattato in Materia di Scherma (Marco Docciolini)|Trattato in Materia di Scherma]]'' (1601)<br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= <br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| partner = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| influences = [[Francesco di Sandro Altoni]]<br />
| influenced = <br />
| awards = <br />
| signature = <br />
| website = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
'''Marco Docciolini''' was an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing master]] at the turn of the [[century::17th century]]. Little is known about this master's life; he seems to have been an initiate of the Florentine fencing tradition of [[Francesco di Sandro Altoni]]. Docciolini wrote and published a fencing manual in 1601 entitled ''[[Trattato in Materia di Scherma (Marco Docciolini)|Trattato in Materia di Scherma]]'' ("Treatise on Matters of Defense"), which he dedicated to the great Florentine general Don Giovanni de' Medici (1563-1621).<br />
<br />
His dedication describes fifty-two years of professional experience by 1601, suggesting a probable date of birth in the early 1530s. His family appears to have moved to Florence in 1586 (possibly from Pistoia), when his elder brother Giovanfrancesco is first recorded as a Florentine citizen. A Marco di Bernardo Docciolini is listed as having died on the 23rd September 1610; buried in the Church of San Niccolò Oltrarno in Florence, together with his brother Giovanfrancesco di Bernardo di Marco Docciolini (who died in 1587) and other family members. <ref> Docciolini, Marco. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003. p.76.</ref><br />
<br />
Evidence suggests that until the nineteenth century, this church contained a plaque of the Docciolini family arms: a red lion rampant on a gold field, holding an olive branch. The precise origin and status of these arms and the Docciolini family is unclear. Neither the arms themselves nor the Docciolini name appear in any recognized heraldic register. <ref> Docciolini, Marco. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003. p.79.</ref><br />
<br />
There is evidence that Docciolini enjoyed some wealth and status in his day. A now lost portrait of “Docciolini the fencer” (''Docciolini Schermitore''), by eminent Florentine painter Santi di Tito, is recorded in an inventory of the Doni household as of 1677. <ref> Cinelli, Giovanni. ''Bellezze della città di Firenze. Dove a pieno di pittura di scultura di sacri templi, di palazzi, i più notabili artifizi, è più preziosi si contengono''. Florence, 1677. p.565.</ref><br />
<br />
There are no records of Marco Docciolini marrying or having legitimate children, though he was survived by two nephews, Bernardo and Costanzo, the sons of Giovanfrancesco. A letter from 1627 between Bernardo and the noted Florentine musicologist Giovanni Battista Doni, suggests a professional relationship between the two. This provides a plausible explanation as to how Docciolini's portrait might have been passed to the Doni family. <ref> Docciolini, Marco. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003. p.77.</ref><br />
<br />
Despite claiming fifty two years professional experience, and alluding to influential patrons, Docciolini does not appear to be enrolled in the ''Speziali'', The Guild of Doctors and Apothecaries (''Arte dei Medici e Speziali''), as would have been required for a Master of Arms in Florence, which may suggest he had a small circle of private clients.<br />
<br />
Silvio Longhi speculates that his late arrival in Florence, unmarried status, and lack of formal guild affiliation together suggest a long military career, possibly under the command of Don Giovanni de' Medici, to whom his treatise is dedicated. <ref> Docciolini, Marco. ''Trattato di scherma'' Edited by Silvio Longhi. AIMS, 2003. p.78.</ref><br />
<br />
<br />
== Treatise ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
* [[Marco Docciolini|Docciolini, Marco]] and [[Steven Reich|Reich, Steven]]. ''[http://www.lulu.com/us/en/shop/steven-reich/marco-docciolini/paperback/product-12190678.html Marco Docciolini's 1601 Fencing Treatise]''. Lulu, 2010.<br />
* [[Marco Docciolini|Docciolini, Marco]]. ''Treatise on the Subject of Fencing: Marco Docciolini's 1601 Fencing Treatise''. Trans. [[Piermarco Terminiello]] and [[Steven Reich]]. Vulpes, 2017. ISBN 978-1910462010.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Docciolini, Marco}}<br />
{{Florentine tradition}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Research/Background Information]]<br />
[[Category:Copy/Pasting]]<br />
[[Category:Translation]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Double Side Swords]]<br />
[[Category:Side Sword]]<br />
[[Category:Sword and Buckler]]<br />
[[Category:Sword and Dagger]]<br />
[[Category:Sword and Shield]]<br />
[[Category:Sword and Cloak]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Jacopo_Monesi&diff=120514Jacopo Monesi2020-11-19T12:09:37Z<p>P Terminiello: /* Treatise */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = [[name::Jacopo Monesi]]<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = 16th century (?)<br />
| birthplace = Florence, Italy (?)<br />
| deathdate = 17th century<br />
| deathplace = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set: occupation=Fencing master }}<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = <br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = Medici court<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| period = <br />
| movement = <br />
| influences =<br />
| influenced = <br />
<br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| notableworks = ''[[Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)| Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma]]'' (1640)<br />
| archetype = <br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= 1640<br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| signature = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
<p>'''Jacopo Monesi''' was an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing master]] during the first half of the [[century::17th century]]. </p><br />
<p>A native of Florence, he appears to have enjoyed enduring patronage and recognition in his own lifetime at the court of the Grand Duchy of Tuscany under Ferdinando II de' Medici. </p><br />
<p>A court document, dating to 1621, indicates Monesi's role included instructing the adolescent nobility at the grand ducal court (a claim supported by the title page of his own work): </p><br />
<p>''Jacopo of the Armourer, master of fencing, is one of several masters to the pages, together with the priest Albizio Vecchi, the undermaster Frediano Tinolfi, Giovanni Migliorucci master of writing, Leonardo Migliorucci, Giovanni Pieroni the arithmetist and mathematician, Remigio Cantagallina master of drawing, and Pitti Agnolo Ricci master of dance.''<ref>Archivio di Stato di Firenze, Miscellanea Medicea, 369, c.707. Cited by http://www.scrimipedia.it/mediawiki/index.php?title=Iacopo_Monesi (accessed 22 March 2017).</ref><br />
<p>In 1640 he published a short tract outlining his fencing philosophy: [[Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)| Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma]]. </p><br />
<p>Monesi's text contain little technical discussion, which he defers to a promised second volume that however is either lost or was never written. Instead, Monesi strongly critiques many theories and methodologies of his peers; behind a veil of formal language excoriating those practices he views as frivolous, or detrimental to surviving an encounter in earnest. Monesi advocates a straightforward and direct philosophy of fencing. He eschews what he sees as unnecessary embellishments, or artefacts of salle fencing, and privileges what he considers practical for surviving an unpredictable and violent confrontation with sharp weapons. </p><br />
<p>He strongly affirms the efficacy of cuts, interspersed with thrusts; and favours simple and strong natural movements, stances, and attacks. In terms of pedagogy, he forcefully promotes the primacy of practising assaults, and laments that students in his day no longer assault with the frequency and gusto of earlier times. </p><br />
<p>Among other elements he criticises: feints, elaborate postures, mathematical concepts, excessive theoretical discussion, and dagger disarms, as unhelpful and impractical for a confrontation with sharps. Without naming names Monesi appears to clearly reference, again critically, the work of [[Docciolini]], [[Fabris]], [[Marozzo]], and [[Pistofilo]]. </p><br />
<p>Alongside such direct critiques, Monesi includes less specifically targeted remonstrations. For example, he objects to the pedagogical method of masters who employ a chestplate, or a cane in place of a sword. Similarly, he leaves space for conventional discussion points of the period, such as where to look when fencing, or how to approach combat at night.</p><br />
== Treatise ==<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Introduction and dedication| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
! <p>Translation</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''On the Subject of Fencing'''</p><br />
<p>'''By Jacopo Monesi'''</p><br />
<p>'''Known as the Armourer'''</p><br />
<p>'''Master of Arms to the Most Serene of Tuscany, and Their Gentleman Pages'''</p><br />
<p>'''Dedicated to the Most Illustrious Sir Count'''</p><br />
<p>'''Francesco Piccolomini of Aragon'''</p><br />
<p>'''In Florence, at the New Press M.DC.XXXX'''</p><br />
<p>With Permission from the Authorities</p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Most Illustrious and Noble Sir and Patron'''</p><br />
<p>The shade of your Most Illustrious Lordship's great protection, has generated in me an uncommon yearning to bring to light that which has been hidden in the shadows of my intellect for many years. For some time I have had in mind to make public certain discourses on the most excellent profession of fencing, but the awareness of my scarce ability to articulate them, caused the heat of my enthusiasm to cool. This yearning only then emerges, through confiding in the patronage of your Most Illustrious Lordship, wishing to express these concepts in the best manner possible. </p><br />
<p>Therefore this is entrusted only to you, as has happened in the past with honour, once again I opted for your support in bringing this forth, so that anything that is deemed monstrous will nonetheless (protected by the greatness of your Most Illustrious Lordship) be embraced, and be appraised with a not less than benign eye. </p><br />
<p>Please deign therefore to protect it with benevolence, recognising it as a sign of my dutiful observance to your Most Illustrious Lordship's great merit, to which I reverently bow, praying for your every most coveted happiness. </p><br />
<p>Your devoted and most obligated servant</p><br />
<p>Jacopo Monesi, known as the Armourer. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''To the Benevolent Reader'''</p><br />
<p>It has been for a number of years that despite the weakness of my intellect I have wanted to present my thoughts on the play of fencing, which has been my particular profession. But since the world has seen others elevated, and granted them brilliant ability with which they delight and are delighted, I considered it best to keep my thoughts buried within me. </p><br />
<p>Considering however that in some printed books you find an exorbitance of guards, and other extravagances, and witnessing this noble exercise reduced more to discourse than practice, the desire I have (if successful) to demonstrate the true play, and method of combat, made me resolve first to declare my objections, then to explain the correct method. </p><br />
<p>In conformance therefore with what the Most Illustrious Sir Silvio Piccolomini of Aragon <ref>Silvio Piccolomini was a knight of the Order of Santo Stefano, and noted fencer and military commander of his age. In the dedication of his own treatise [[Federico Ghisliero]] declares himself a student of Piccolomini, while his skill at fencing is further referenced by [[Cappoferro]] in his introduction to the reader, and by the French chronicler Michel de Montaigne. </ref> (excellent in this exercise, and more so in military disciplines) taught me, after my first master Cosimo Paradisi, in the chapters that follow I will narrate as openly as I can what is recounted. </p><br />
<p>But since the greatest detriment to this exercise, in my view, comes from neglecting to struggle with the sword in hand, in practising assaults, I will deal with this first, explaining the reasons why I believe this is, as I commence. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>''Might it please Sir Canon Carlo del Vigna to see if the present work contains anything repugnant to Christian piety, and public morals, and refer back. The 30th January 1639.'' </p><br />
Vincenzio Rabatta, Vicar of Florence<br />
<p>''In the present work, having reviewed it in all diligence, I found nothing repugnant to Christian piety, or public morals. 25th February 1639.''</p><br />
<p>Carlo del Vigna, Canon of Florence<br />
<p>''Most Reverend Father Inquisitor,''</p><br />
<p>''By your order of Most Reverend Father I have reviewed this present discourse on fencing, and I have not found anything repugnant to the Religion, or to public morals, judging it worthy of publication. 26th March 1640. ''</p><br />
<p>Girolamo Rosati, Protonotary and Consultant of the Holy Office</p><br />
<p>''This can be printed. Florence 3rd April 1640. ''</p><br />
<p>Father Giovanni Angeli, Vicar of the Holy Office, by order of</p><br />
<p>Senator Alessandro Vettori, Auditor of His Most Serene Highness</p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Notes on fencing| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
! <p>Translation</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''Chapter One'''</p><br />
<p>Ambition, which without fail is the cause of every ill, especially in virtuous exercises, I know to be the true basis and root of a rather notable vice. </p><br />
<p>Every day we see youths of such ambition, that under the cloak of letting their virtue be known, out of all proportion, neglect the importance of possessing such virtue, and as soon as they arrive in schools to learn, having imbibed just a few lessons, allow themselves to be inflated by excessive pretension, and judge themselves to be masters. </p><br />
<p>Therefore it happens (and I speak in particular of this exercise) that in public schools, and especially in private houses, with youths of equal quality gathered to practice assaults, you find some who do not grasp the sword if not to teach, nor to learn in any other way. This outlook is so pernicious, that for this reason you no longer hear of people gathering for common benefit and practice, and to pass the time in the virtue of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Those who have distinguished themselves up until now, demonstrating their valour and knowledge, in my view did not take this route. Indeed anxious to prove their worth as gallant men at every occasion, in any place, and against any person, I believe they sought to learn. Because to understand a discipline well, you have to practise it, you cannot learn with theory alone. </p><br />
<p>It is not a good way to master a skill, to think you can attain it without effort and sacrifice. Those who think to proceed like this, infallibly discover through experience how much they have deluded themselves. </p><br />
<p>Another active and real problem I bring up, just as damaging as the first although stemming from the same ambition, is the disparity between people. </p><br />
<p>You cannot deny that an artisan (who delights in virtue as is understandable), can through his diligence and vivacity arrive at the goal of fencing well with the sword. Indeed because this exercise is extremely capable of elevating the most lowly individual, it often happens that by applying their spirit, those of base condition become more distinguished. </p><br />
<p>The damage therefore that ambition brings, is to be ashamed to practice assaults with someone of lowly hand. To not consider you could extract some fruit even from these people, throwing yourself into the profession. </p><br />
<p>This thought is erroneous, because it is essential to know that virtue levels all people; and that a virtuoso can be considered the equal not just of a simple gentleman, but of any prince or great lord. </p><br />
<p>These are the reasons I give, demonstrating why today assaults are dismissed, neglecting the chance to benefit from the luxury of living, before the waning of youthful years deprives you of every worthwhile activity. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Two – On the same subject'''</p><br />
<p>You can clearly tell from my previous discourse how much damage ambition brings, and how it is a reason for not mastering this beautiful virtue of fencing. But I will now demonstrate furthermore how discussion of this profession, which today's students engage in more than practice, causes notable harm. The truth is that lessons taken in any subject in the day are of no use if their operations are not exercised. </p><br />
<p>That which pertains to bodies of reason: such as logic, philosophy, and so forth, must be put in practice with words alone, as they are necessary to expound such virtues. However in the profession of fencing words have no place to execute well what the students have learned from the master. </p><br />
<p>Actions are needed when it comes to training your body for defence and attack. </p><br />
<p>This is not applied by today's youth, which is a further reason why assaults no longer take place, and students neglect to learn wielding a sword in hand well. It then follows that masters are judged and branded as inept in their craft, since they no longer produce students as they did in the past. </p><br />
<p>When youngsters come together, sometimes from the schools of different masters in this profession, instead of putting their studies to the test, with the cloak across their shoulders, as well as with the simple sword in hand, they begin to discuss among themselves: “If I delivered this thrust how would you parry it?”. </p><br />
<p>The other replies “I would do it in this way, or like this” to which the first responds “But if it were a cut, how would you defend yourself” again its counter is added, and they carry on ad infinitum in this manner, disregarding gainful practice. </p><br />
<p>See if this is the best way to safeguard yourself, and benefit through the profession. Then test with a sharp sword (which could happen), whether these people would have time for such a parliament. </p><br />
<p>Action is required for exercises which engage the body, words cannot grant a student resolution to confront his opponent, or courage and practice to defend himself. This is as much as I thought to say on this matter. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Three – On putting mathematics into this virtue'''<ref>This chapter might apply to Italian treatises which incorporate mathematical principles, such as [[Camillo Agrippa]], but arguably targets in particular the Iberian forms of the ''Verdadera Destreza'', exemplified by [[Jerónimo Sánchez de Carranza]] and [[Luis Pacheco de Narváez]]. </ref></p><br />
<p>I have never presumed to malign anyone who professes to teach this noble exercise, nor do I intend to now, recognising myself as the inferior to many gallant men who have practised this virtue. But we are permitted to debate upon the lessons of some, who have taught and teach through mathematics, with the addition of lines, circles, traverses and extravagant voids of the body. </p><br />
<p>For me, these are commendable for fencing in a clean salle, furnished with even tiles. Likewise it is impossible for two people not to put on a good display, when they politely retreat, then void, or advance with a neat step, putting into practice what they have learned from their masters. </p><br />
<p>But if I imagine them outside the tiled hall, that is in the streets, where confrontations most often arise, then I can't help but criticise and malign them, since it is impossible (for reasons I will explain) to put these actions into practice. </p><br />
<p>Someone who is confronted or deliberately summoned to combat, cannot I believe, as happens in large armies, bring with them people to dig; to resurface the street so they can put themselves in the right posture, and use their lines, and advances of ground, and binds of the sword in conformance with their lessons. Instead, being confronted, they are obliged to think how to stand firmly on their feet, to be vigorous in defence and attack, ready of hand, without such fine distinctions of footwork. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore those who employ the sword in this manner, can be called good and beautiful fencers, but in an open space, or street where stones, holes, and cracks can cause you to stumble, they are always in danger of defending themselves poorly from their enemy. In such cases most of the time the artifices of traverses, voids and lines are left aside, and they throw themselves into natural attacks, as is so often seen. </p><br />
<p>This itself is sufficient demonstration, although I can elaborate for greater clarity, that play founded upon natural reason is with no comparison much better than artificious play. The latter was invented for no motive other than satisfying the curiosity of youth. If it were otherwise, it would not be the case, not only in public schools but also in the presence of nobility with the intervention of great princes, that professors of play founded upon such twists of the body had been touched assault after assault, with cuts and thrusts, as is clear and manifest to a great many people. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Four – On a defined ''punto'' to attack'''<ref> The term punto to signify a defined target area of the right shoulder is particular to the treatise of [[Marco Docciolini]].</ref></p><br />
<p>This seems to me an important subject, in order to be accomplished in assaults. I will merely state my thoughts on those who, as a principal maxim, hold and practise the opinion that it is better to attack only a single part of the body, namely the right shoulder, being the said punto. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, you must consider the reason why they observe this doctrine. I believe it is for no reason other than to strike either the nearest, or the most vulnerable part of the body. </p><br />
<p>If we suppose they hold this view, because they want to strike the nearest target, I completely refute their opinion. Hands and arms notwithstanding, I know how those who lean most stand, even their knees are closer and more likely to be attacked by the enemy. </p><br />
<p>If they wish to propose the other reason, that it is the most vulnerable part of the body, I can only oppose them entirely. It seems to me that the hands and arms are subjected to danger: both of being wounded, and of the intermediate outcome of losing the ability to attack. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore experience, which instructs in all things, shows us that in a good portion of combats you see wounds to the hands and arms. This is because these can more easily encounter the enemy's weapons. If they deem the area called the punto so vulnerable, I do not know which hands and arms are not in the same danger. In them you find veins, arteries and other very vulnerable areas which evidently have shown to cause the death of those wounded there. </p><br />
This is as much as I can say on this particular. I urge everyone to take the whole of the enemy's body as the fixed punto to attack, and specifically the part that presents itself as most uncovered and furthest forward. There is much more that could be said, for example if your opponent is left-handed, or in other situations, but to avoid tedium I will omit it. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Five – On a predetermined measure'''</p><br />
<p>In addition to the other pernicious matters in the virtue of fencing noted above, I absolutely detest the opinion of those who insist on, observe, and teach a predetermined measure. Since an opinion should not be proposed without foundation, I will prove this simple truth with active reason. </p><br />
<p>I have always observed, and heard, that people who are forced to fight, whether to defend themselves, or to confront someone who has caused them some offence, never have the benefit of being able to measure swords. Nor is this a given, since anyone can wear a sword of any length they please (speaking of Tuscany). They cannot even choose a piazza well suited for coming to blows, and neither are people equal in form, either in height or in build. </p><br />
<p>Now, if this is not the case, what is the point of habituating your foot, and arm to a predetermined measure? Moreover, you can easily see from experience that often there is no time to take measure, or the opportunity is denied, for example in badly paved streets, sometimes filled with a thousand pieces of rubbish, as mentioned above. </p><br />
<p>If someone, suddenly or intentionally, is obliged to fight, even if they find themselves in a nice, clean street, it is impossible for them to observe the measure of their steps; to defend themselves and attack, against someone who is naturally at ease in well-founded play, who naturally understands how to stay strongly on their feet, and deflect the enemy's blows, while at the same time attacking him, which seems to me the real principle. </p><br />
<p>You must concede, that this measure was invented simply for the encounters they like to conduct at royal pageants, which have been held several times in various places, and furthermore in itself to demonstrate how far they can extend their normal step. However it is absolutely unfit not just for combat in earnest, but even for the simple assaults you might practice. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Six – On voids'''</p><br />
<p>There should be little difference between this chapter and the previous one, since having to discuss voids, which produce the same result as a set measure, my argument will differ little from the one adopted above. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, let us consider its effect, which is nothing more than a withdrawal of the body, either back or to the side, to defend against an enemy's attack. I say that this withdrawal is as dangerous as trusting in a set measure, and the reason is as follows: someone who by chance comes to blows with an enemy cannot know if they wield a longer sword, whereby in wishing to void they can be wounded. Nor can they know how agile the sword's wielder is. </p><br />
<p>More importantly, when someone evades a blow with a void, they must necessarily lose a tempo in having to return forward to attack. If set upon during this tempo (which the enemy may attempt) they will find it very difficult to recover. </p><br />
<p>For this reason therefore, as a rule of good fencing you should never concede voids. Besides it increases the risk of stumbling in the streets, which as noted above can happen when placing yourself in a set measure. </p><br />
<p>Seeking to avoid any mishap that can occur is the utmost of a man's prudence. The greatest threats that arise are those to life. Against these principal dangers man must apply all his judgement. </p><br />
<p>If we know that voids, traverses, and a set measure manifestly cannot save us from an enemy's attack, why not use that convenient and very useful remedy: not to be subjected to such attacks by staying well-grounded, with firm and stable strength of both body and arm. This will suffice on this topic. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Seven – On feints'''</p><br />
<p>In the profession of fencing there are many frivolities and jests, or more accurately whimsies that you can use, either in public schools or in private settings. Among others there are feints. These can often be employed when fencing for enjoyment and fun, and similarly to improve your vision, since they also serve to train your eyes to be attentive. </p><br />
<p>But I like to believe that this practice was invented for nothing more than to defend yourself, or to attack your enemy, as the situation demands. In reality they reveal themselves as good only for entertainment, or to prolong lessons, and I am forced to say that feints are extremely dangerous to those who wish to perform them. They require two tempos, and in the true exercise of wielding the sword are manifestly unsafe. </p><br />
<p>In earnest, as we know, arms are employed for only two reasons. The first is to defend, the other is to attack. How then can someone who is confronted, as we have said before, hold forth with contrivances like feinting over and under the dagger, to the outside and inside of the sword, against the speed of the enemy's blows (especially if they are strong)? Against cuts as well as thrusts, when he does not adopt any kind of posture, but advancing with such blows? </p><br />
<p>I have no doubt that those in this predicament, stirred by many motives, leave aside all feints and attend only to defending their lives as best they can. </p><br />
<p>But can you imagine others, advancing phlegmatically to confront their enemy, to vindicate a wrong or harm done to them, redeeming themselves with the frivolities and jests of feints? </p><br />
<p>I will omit many examples, but fury transports them, reason is overcome. Honour necessitates that they leave aside taught feints, and instead follow natural instinct, but since I have explained this already, I will not expound further. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eight – On ''contrattempo'', ''mezzotempo'' and more'''</p><br />
<p>To cover the present topic it is worth returning to the same discussion in the previous chapter. The various fancies and follies, along with feints, are invented by certain masters I believe, not only to retain students so they stay longer at the school, but also to confuse them. This way they unlearn the good and study the bad, and will always have to remain students. </p><br />
<p>This is the case with the invention of ''mezzotempo'' and ''contrattempo''. These are brought to light, as I mentioned, only to keep the school running. </p><br />
<p>''Mezzotempo'', and other such terms, deform the good and true rules with too many fripperies. In reality you could never have a memory sharp enough to employ them in defence in a single tempo, or in attack. </p><br />
<p>These methods should be practised not in fencing, but in the realm of dance, where the variety of steps and agility of the leaps must astound the spectators. </p><br />
<p>But in this profession a single step, a single tempo must suffice. Deployed with the requisite accuracy and mastery it will always quash any ''contrattempo'' or ''mezzotempo'' you might encounter, and I profess that this is merely the truth. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Nine – On the so misshapen published figures of this exercise'''<br />
<p>If I believed myself alone, I would not dare to criticise the infinite sets of figures presented and drawn in published books. These are invented, I believe, to no other end but to demonstrate a multiplicity of distorted postures, which almost transcend the bounds of nature, and drag people towards the ridiculous, rather than to learning from viewing such contorted actions. </p><br />
<p>I would like to have some leeway, to leave some praise, but I see no way whatsoever, if not to say that these deformations are very suitable for clowns and tavern-singers, to entertain and extract money from a crowd. This is the praise I am able to concede. </p><br />
<p>If then I were to offer some polite criticism, I could begin by saying that these positions are monstrous, and impossible to witness within our profession. When have you ever seen people, either for enjoyment or necessity, employ such extravagant contortions, with their bodies so hunched and forced, and for the sword alone with the off-hand by the left ear, to employ it like a dagger to deflect thrusts?<ref>This passage, and arguably the entire chapter, appears to be targeted at [[Salvator Fabris]], whose treatise is notable for its deep and sometimes contorted stances.</ref></p><br />
<p>This is as far removed from the natural order as truth is from a lie. You do not take a sword in hand, to wield in earnest, with such exorbitant contortions. You should stand so you can operate naturally, all the more so when you find yourself on the street. There you may find many impediments, as I have said, and confirming what I have already said above, you must stand firmly on your feet, in a balanced posture from which you can draw strength to oppose the sword against all attacks, and as upright as possible so you do not become disordered.</p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Ten – On the guards and counterguards'''</p><br />
<p>There are many guards, great in number from various masters, which you can employ in the profession of fencing. To list them all, and discuss which of them is good or bad, would require a discourse beyond this brief one, expounded with an eloquence other than my own. Nonetheless my pen will write simply and plainly, to touch upon some of my thoughts. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, to demonstrate the extravagance of the guards invented, I will cite various names authors have given them, such as: ''coda lunga e stretta'', ''cingara'', ''porta di ferro'', ''beccapossa'',<ref> These guard names are characteristic of the Bolognese school of fencing. In particular the name ''beccapossa'' is specific to [[Achille Marozzo]].</ref>''belincorno'', prima, seconda, terza and quarta, and many others which I will omit, which together with these have been represented with figures in the books published up until now.</p><br />
<p>As to whether these are good or bad, any praise should be occasioned by their use. It cannot follow, although we have seen otherwise, that they endanger those who wish to employ them. However since no guard should be maligned without a basis, I will start by saying that in my opinion the guards to be employed should not be twisted or bizarre, nor overwrought with a paintbrush, nor measured with a compass, but simple and natural. In this manner the body finds itself stronger in resisting blows, and attacking when the occasion presents itself, without the manifest danger of stumbling and thereby compromising your life. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eleven – On those who wish to debate this practice'''</p><br />
<p>To further damage this profession of fencing, in my opinion, some presume to debate over blows and postures of whichever sort, formulating and postulating in the manner of someone conducting a philosophical debate. Discussions on subjects like the one I have mentioned, should be performed with actions alone. </p><br />
<p>This occurs because upon the path of this practice it is difficult to arrive at perfection. Many who take the path, at the first resistance, by a simple act of will desist from the endeavour. Seeing themselves inadequate, they sharpen their intellect to appear the equal of professors, and with their propositions lead astray those striving to obtain a complete understanding. </p><br />
<p>This is undeniable. In the practice of fencing, to engage someone in debate and discussion as if arguing theology (in place of conducting assaults) achieves nothing but to deny opportunities to those who desire to learn, to become excellent in practice. This is the motive I ascribe for this behaviour. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Twelve – Against a set rule for combat at night'''</p><br />
<p>In this simple discourse of mine, I wished to oppose every extravagance that the meanness of my intellect has encountered in the profession of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Therefore it seemed apt to contest also the opinion of those who hold a firm rule of giving true and real method of combat at night: that putting your hands to your weapons, you should quickly use them to seek the enemy’s sword, and having found it you must liberally deliver attacks to wound him. </p><br />
<p>They add to this another rule, no better than the first, that is to keep your body hunched to create a smaller target. </p><br />
<p>I address each of these as follows. </p><br />
<p>If confronted in the dark at night, how can you find your enemy's weapon without being attacked? </p><br />
<p>Why must you remain hunched, being deprived of ability and stature in defence and attack, in place of a strong and comfortable posture, remaining upright on your feet without hunching over? </p><br />
<p>Such a false opinion I would deem unsuitable even for the daytime where you can clearly see the enemy’s posture, and even when the enemy does not step to attack. </p><br />
<p>I firmly maintain that if you must fight at night, in such circumstances in the dark, you should deliver ''dritti'' and ''roversci'' as swiftly as you can. </p><br />
<p>Anything else is futile, without proposing many additional considerations for such instances, which for the sake of brevity I will omit. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Thirteen – On those masters who in giving lessons employ either a chestplate or a rod'''</p><br />
<p>Among the other notable detriments, caused by various extravagances, are those masters, some who give lessons with a chestplate, others with a rod. </p><br />
<p>Masters who wear a chestplate during lessons leads to nothing else, in my opinion, than that students deliver blows with an exorbitant step. Since the blows do not harm these said masters, they do not realise that, although they wish to protect the student, with these thrusts they harm them. </p><br />
<p>They become habituated to committing their body so much with every blow, that it becomes unlikely they could recover when performed in earnest. </p><br />
<p>Having delivered the thrust to their master's chestplate, they find resistance, lending them force to recover back, and they adopt the habit of abandoning their whole body into the attack.</p><br />
<p>Because of this with a sharp sword, not finding the resistance of the chestplate they have with the practice sword, they remain extended so far forwards that it is difficult (as stated) to avoid their enemy's attack. It can absolutely occur that instead of wounding their enemy, they are left injured. </p><br />
<p>Something similar can occur with students who are used to taking lesson from masters who hold a rod. Since it is much lighter than a sword it creates an extremely negative effect, giving rise to great setbacks. Its weakness, not having the same form as a sword, means whichever cut the rod delivers, it cannot force the student's sword to learn, as a sword would. </p><br />
<p>We can furthermore question, being habituated to parrying cuts from the rod, if when they receive cuts from a sword, they might become confused. </p><br />
<p>Being disordered they might apply the lessons learned reluctantly, since they do not even learn resolve. So I repeat, employing either a chestplate or a rod benefits only the master, and not the students. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Fourteen – On where some wish you to look when you fight'''</p><br />
<p>The variety of opinions on where to place your eyes during actions, both during assaults and in questions of honour, leads me to include this topic in this discourse of mine. Many want you to keep your eyes fixed to your enemy's face during combat. Others assert you should always watch the point of your opponent's sword. </p><br />
<p>I contradict both of these views. I say that keeping your eye on the point is of no use in combat, since it is unlikely your enemy's point ever stays still. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore it is so fine that when it is brandished at speed, someone who trusts in this proposition greatly deceives themselves; knowing full well that sharp swords are not like swords in schools with a button, which is rather large, although some schools might not use them. Therefore I consider this proposition in my own manner. </p><br />
<p>I also criticise the other opinion, of watching your enemy's face, because while keeping your eyes there it is unlikely you can understand and clearly discern the operations he performs with the sword. Often these are away from the face, and he might feint with his eyes to attack in one place, only to move the hand to offend elsewhere. </p><br />
<p>Therefore finding fault with both of the above opinions, I hold that another area is more appropriate, necessary, and without subjecting yourself to deceits more useful, which I will relate in due time in another treatise. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Fifteen – To those who greatly criticise cuts'''</p><br />
<p>Everyone must defend their profession with the rationales available, so I will not fail to show how mistaken are those who greatly criticise cuts in the practice of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Before opposing everything they state in favour of their position, I will explain the charges levelled against those who employ cuts. </p><br />
<p>The first is that cuts are not lethal, the second is that they are much shorter than thrusts, while cuts are further derided by the claim they are for brutes. </p><br />
<p>I refute the first by supposing, since death has taken many in our times by way of cuts, that no other reason is needed to affirm this truth. </p><br />
<p>I can counter the second with great ease, demonstrating how with the hand, and the same length of step and sword (when grasped), the same person can be wounded either by a cut or a thrust. This is better proved by experience than words (which I set out to do), as I have shown and performed many times in the presence of great princes. </p><br />
<p>I should raise a further consideration for those who criticise cuts, and it is this. When someone is confronted, and puts their hand to their sword to defend themself, do they negotiate with their enemy whether to use only thrusts (speaking of Tuscan lands)? If they can wound with both thrusts and cuts, then why not employ cuts, and learn to defend against them? </p><br />
<p>I can only believe that those who criticise cuts, understanding only thrusts, either have no power in their cuts, or do not know how to teach them (if they are masters), or have no time to practise them if they are students. </p><br />
<p>In every profession, to remain ahead of others you must pursue every possible avenue, even if indirect, but all the more so the true and good path, since every day in questions of honour we see that the majority of wounds are cuts to the hands, arms and face. For this reason swords with a hollow were invented.<ref> In the original simply ''spada con l'incavo''. It remains unclear whether Monesi is referring simply to a hollow-ground blade or deep fuller, or perhaps an indentation at the grip that might conceivably aid in cutting , like on some later sabres.</ref></p><br />
<p>Having explained the usefulness of cuts, I affirm once again that those who criticise them, claiming they are no good because they are for brutes, cause harm. An example of this is not keeping hold of the sword, so it falls to the ground, which has happened to many during simple assaults. Another is not having the ability to defend against cuts. I have useful advice to give in this regard, but to avoid being tedious, and admitting to discuss only superficial matters, I will not expound further, and will end my discourse of this subject. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Sixteen – Against numerous grips with the dagger'''</p><br />
<p>Having set myself to contradict falsehood with truth, I should say a few things on this subject. This is for those who strongly promote and encourage a multiplicity of grips with or against the dagger, many with a dagger and others unarmed, as something pertaining to the art of fencing. </p><br />
<p>I refute the quantity of grips described and delineated, and their operation, knowing very well as I have said elsewhere, that you do not negotiate with your opponent. This is from the many occurrences and events that are well-known without me having to describe them. </p><br />
<p>In fact I would dare say that the dagger is worse than the pistol, which can fail or misfire. The dagger is always loaded and ready to attack, and when someone has this weapon at their side and spots the opportunity to use it, I do not believe they will use it to threaten their enemy from distance. </p><br />
<p>Assuming they are not a coward, but resolute and courageous, they will approach as close as they have to. I doubt there will be time to counter, with any of these many grips that are supposed to defend against attacks, nor therefore would I say that dagger against dagger they could be of any benefit. </p><br />
<p>I will freely admit that some of the grips work in schools, of course, but as you know these daggers are without a point or a cutting edge. Many options can be proposed since there is no manifest danger. </p><br />
<p>I return to saying, that as a short weapon they are much quicker to draw, and more ready to wound. These grips are for the entertainment, and confusion, of students. This is what I have to say for now. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Seventeen – On a pike position that defends against any sort of missile weapon, including arquebus shots'''<ref> This is a clear reference to p.114-115 in ''Oplomachia'', the 1621 pike, halberd and musket treatise of [[Bonaventura Pistofilo]]. </p><br />
<p>''When an occasion arrives where you must grasp your sword, I urge you never to abandon your pike, whether it is broken or intact. Instead employ it at least to defend. Anyone can understand for themselves from figure 79, how useful this manner of holding the pike can be for defence.'' </p><br />
<p>''It protects against cavalry, infantry, and against any type of hand weapon; even against missile weapons such as javelins, darts, arrows, and similar arms, up to and including arquebus shots. As long as by chance they do not strike directly in the centre of the shaft, so that the balls instead skid aside, the man will be saved, as I have seen from experience.'' </p><br />
<p>''You must comport yourself such that everything is covered by the pike, maintaining your arm high and firmly extended. Your stance must be sufficiently wide for greater stability, with your sword ready to attack.'' </p><br />
<p>''If you then wish to return your sword to its sheath without abandoning the pike, or piece of haft left in your hand, figure 80 clearly demonstrates how without need for further explanation.''</ref></p><br />
<p>I have seen many authors publish thoughts which objectively can barely be sustained. This prompted me to highlight one marvellous opinion, held by a master not only of fencing but of many trades. </p><br />
<p>In one of his books, he assigns a posture with the sword in the right hand and a pike in the left, profiled towards that side like a barbican. He asserts it does not merely defend against cavalry and infantry, but from any sort of polearm, and also from arrows, javelins and even arquebus or musket shots. </p><br />
<p>The only caveat is that it must not hit the centre of the shaft, where it may break, which seems likely. I leave this to be pondered by anyone who professes the practice of arms. To authenticate this he claims to have seen it. </p><br />
<p>Emboldened by such a claim, I have taken common courage and confided to the pen that which was concealed in my mind. Because if such wonders have occurred they would refute not only my weak and poorly articulated arguments, but genuine and well-founded ones. </p><br />
<p>I do not blame that pikeman, whether his pike was whole or broken, if having to wield his sword he also employed his polearm. But with apologies, I can never have it believed that his haft could keep him safe from every attack, from every sort of weapon. Supposedly even the musket against which (the author says) the pike prevails, the musket ball skidding off one side or the other to be deflected without harm. </p><br />
<p>In truth I have not passed my years in war, where I might have witnessed such incidences, but have been in service of and enjoyed the company of many veteran soldiers. Foremost of all the Most Illustrious Sir Silvio Piccolomini of Aragon, a person of such esteem as is known throughout the world, having fulfilled many offices in war, for the Most Serene Highnesses of Tuscany and for other crowns. Yet I never heard from him or anybody else that the guard described is able to achieve what is claimed. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eighteen – Some admonishments for those who wear a sword'''</p><br />
<p>Any profession should be practised with every possible convenience, and a farmer who must be present when the grain is harvested in July should not wear a garment of heavy cloth.</p><br />
<p>Those who dedicate themselves to the profession of wearing a sword, so dangerous that we could say death always walks alongside it, in various respects should not wear any ornamentation of the body or clothes, or any other items that might disadvantage them when coming to blows. </p><br />
<p>An example more perilous than any other is high-heels, which can easily lead their owner to fall over. Or else sleeves that hang down from the tunic, which can subject someone who is confronted, or who confronts, to great trouble. </p><br />
<p>Likewise long hair, which when coming to grapple grants a clear advantage to the opponent, while bringing great danger to the bearer, even more so when curly in the extravagant style of today; also more specifically hair that comes to impede vision. </p><br />
<p>Also included among such impediments are clothes with large slashes, in the French fashion or in any other. They can cause no small detriment, being dangerous by hampering the drawing of weapons with the swiftness required. </p><br />
<p>I also wanted to mention those who carry daggers with a dangling rose. </p><br />
<p>This is for the benefit of all; because from the mishaps that have occurred, I am sure the impediments I have listed most often create danger for the lives of those who struggle with arms. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Nineteen – What moved me to write this discourse'''</p><br />
<p>Everything we do in this world has an end, and every endeavour wends towards its outcome. Therefore I felt it apt to declare in this final chapter, which motives moved me to stain these few sheets of paper (so to speak) with my coarse and ill-adapted thoughts, and to expose myself voluntarily to the censure of innumerable fine intellects. </p><br />
<p>The reason is that I have found infinite authors, who by means of the presses have professed to enrich the virtue of fencing by demonstrating various sorts of guards and means of combat, and numerous uses of weapons. Knowing that all these operations were shown for the simple practice of wielding a sword, I resolved to designate the true manner of exercising this profession seriously. It consists of nothing more than the simple assaults which are conducted for pleasure. </p><br />
<p>The reason for writing this discourse was none other than a real and genuine desire for the aficionados of this art to recognise the true method of practising it, to not further maltreat it, and to employ the advice provided for the benefit of their person. This is the motivation, as I have said previously, and the intention. </p><br />
<p>May the reader appreciate the willingness of my spirit; and may those habituated to Ciceronian eloquence, and to the exquisite vivacity of extraordinary conceptions, pity my rude pen, whose lowly scribbles have aspired only to reveal the truth. </p><br />
<p>Lastly I wanted to set out how having learned the voids and traverses, I found them ill-suited to real combat with a sharp sword, and I criticise them. </p><br />
<p>Although I praise cuts in practice for their excellent defence, even more so at night where they are the quickest blow to find their target, I do not wish praise them by themselves, I commend them when mixed with a good many thrusts. A dagger can interrupt and defend against thrusts, but is comfortably negated by cuts. </p><br />
<p>And here I come to a close. If God grants me health in months and not years I hope to bring forth fruit that is useful, with the most straightforward method, apt for real combat, distinguishing the characteristics of different people: whether large, powerful, small or weak, with appropriate rules. </p><br />
<p>All in honour of our Lord God, and the most Blessed Virgin Mary. </p><br />
<p>'''THE END. ''' </p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Copyright and License Summary<br />
| width = 100%<br />
}}<br />
For further information, including transcription and translation notes, see the [[Talk:{{PAGENAME}}|discussion page]].<br />
<br />
<section begin="sourcebox"/>{{sourcebox header}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Translation<br />
| authors = [[Piermarco Terminiello]]<br />
| source link = http://sword.school/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Monesi-Translation-1.pdf<br />
| source title = Objections and Admonishments on the Subject of Fencing By Jacopo Monesi (1640)<br />
| license = educational<br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox footer}}<section end="sourcebox"/><br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
<br />
{{Regional Italian traditions}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Translation]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Rapier]]<br />
[[Category:Dagger]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Opposizioni_et_Avvertimenti_sopra_la_Scherma_(Jacopo_Monesi)&diff=120513Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)2020-11-18T20:18:32Z<p>P Terminiello: /* Copyright and License Summary */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox book<br />
<!----------Name----------><br />
| name = Opposizioni et avvertimenti sopra la scherma<br />
| subtitle = [[title:: Objections and Admonishments on the Subject of Fencing]]<br />
<!----------Image----------><br />
| image = <br />
| width = <br />
| caption = <br />
<!----------Information----------><br />
| full title = Opposizioni et avvertimenti sopra la scherma <br/>Di Iacopo Monesi detto <br/> l’armaiolo<br />
| also known as = <br />
| author(s) = [[author::Jacopo Monesi]]<br />
| ascribed to = <br />
| compiled by = <br />
| illustrated by = <br />
| translator(s) = <br />
| patron = <br />
| dedicated to = Francesco Piccolomini of Aragon<br />
| place of origin = Florence, Italy<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| subject = <br />
| genre = [[type::Fencing manual]]<br />
| sources = <br />
| publisher = <br />
| pub_date = [[year::1640]]<br />
| first English edition = <br />
| pages = 32<br />
| extant copies = <br />
| wiktenauer compilation by = <br />
| images = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
''''' Opposizioni et avvertimenti sopra la scherma ''''' ("Objections and Admonishments on the Subject of Fencing ") is an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing manual]] written by [[Jacopo Monesi]] and published in 1640. Largely devoid of technical detail, however it contains useful insights into the fencing culture of the time, and a lively commentary on the practices of the author’s peers.<br />
<br />
== Publication History ==<br />
<br />
'' Opposizioni et avvertimenti sopra la scherma '' was published in Florence in 1640<br />
<br />
== Contents ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Gallery ==<br />
<br />
[Images available for import.]<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
<br />
== Copyright and License Summary ==<br />
<br />
For further information, including transcription and translation notes, see the [[Talk:{{PAGENAME}}|discussion page]].<br />
<br />
<section begin="sourcebox"/>{{sourcebox header}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Translation<br />
| authors = [[Piermarco Terminiello]]<br />
| source link = http://sword.school/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Monesi-Translation-1.pdf<br />
| source title = Objections and Admonishments on the Subject of Fencing By Jacopo Monesi (1640)<br />
| license = educational<br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox footer}}<section end="sourcebox"/><br />
<br />
[[Category:Treatises]]<br />
[[Category:Books]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Research/Background Information]]<br />
[[Category:Image Processing]]<br />
[[Category:Digital Scanning]]<br />
[[Category:Transcription]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Opposizioni_et_Avvertimenti_sopra_la_Scherma_(Jacopo_Monesi)&diff=120512Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)2020-11-18T20:17:02Z<p>P Terminiello: /* Copyright and License Summary */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox book<br />
<!----------Name----------><br />
| name = Opposizioni et avvertimenti sopra la scherma<br />
| subtitle = [[title:: Objections and Admonishments on the Subject of Fencing]]<br />
<!----------Image----------><br />
| image = <br />
| width = <br />
| caption = <br />
<!----------Information----------><br />
| full title = Opposizioni et avvertimenti sopra la scherma <br/>Di Iacopo Monesi detto <br/> l’armaiolo<br />
| also known as = <br />
| author(s) = [[author::Jacopo Monesi]]<br />
| ascribed to = <br />
| compiled by = <br />
| illustrated by = <br />
| translator(s) = <br />
| patron = <br />
| dedicated to = Francesco Piccolomini of Aragon<br />
| place of origin = Florence, Italy<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| subject = <br />
| genre = [[type::Fencing manual]]<br />
| sources = <br />
| publisher = <br />
| pub_date = [[year::1640]]<br />
| first English edition = <br />
| pages = 32<br />
| extant copies = <br />
| wiktenauer compilation by = <br />
| images = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
''''' Opposizioni et avvertimenti sopra la scherma ''''' ("Objections and Admonishments on the Subject of Fencing ") is an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing manual]] written by [[Jacopo Monesi]] and published in 1640. Largely devoid of technical detail, however it contains useful insights into the fencing culture of the time, and a lively commentary on the practices of the author’s peers.<br />
<br />
== Publication History ==<br />
<br />
'' Opposizioni et avvertimenti sopra la scherma '' was published in Florence in 1640<br />
<br />
== Contents ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Gallery ==<br />
<br />
[Images available for import.]<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
<br />
== Copyright and License Summary ==<br />
<br />
For further information, including transcription and translation notes, see the [[Talk:{{PAGENAME}}|discussion page]].<br />
<br />
<section begin="sourcebox"/>{{sourcebox header}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Translation<br />
| authors = <br />
| source link = <br />
| source title= <br />
| license = Educational<br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox footer}}<section end="sourcebox"/><br />
<br />
[[Category:Treatises]]<br />
[[Category:Books]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Research/Background Information]]<br />
[[Category:Image Processing]]<br />
[[Category:Digital Scanning]]<br />
[[Category:Transcription]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Jacopo_Monesi&diff=120511Jacopo Monesi2020-11-18T20:05:19Z<p>P Terminiello: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = [[name::Jacopo Monesi]]<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = 16th century (?)<br />
| birthplace = Florence, Italy (?)<br />
| deathdate = 17th century<br />
| deathplace = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set: occupation=Fencing master }}<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = <br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = Medici court<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| period = <br />
| movement = <br />
| influences =<br />
| influenced = <br />
<br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| notableworks = ''[[Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)| Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma]]'' (1640)<br />
| archetype = <br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= 1640<br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| signature = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
<p>'''Jacopo Monesi''' was an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing master]] during the first half of the [[century::17th century]]. </p><br />
<p>A native of Florence, he appears to have enjoyed enduring patronage and recognition in his own lifetime at the court of the Grand Duchy of Tuscany under Ferdinando II de' Medici. </p><br />
<p>A court document, dating to 1621, indicates Monesi's role included instructing the adolescent nobility at the grand ducal court (a claim supported by the title page of his own work): </p><br />
<p>''Jacopo of the Armourer, master of fencing, is one of several masters to the pages, together with the priest Albizio Vecchi, the undermaster Frediano Tinolfi, Giovanni Migliorucci master of writing, Leonardo Migliorucci, Giovanni Pieroni the arithmetist and mathematician, Remigio Cantagallina master of drawing, and Pitti Agnolo Ricci master of dance.''<ref>Archivio di Stato di Firenze, Miscellanea Medicea, 369, c.707. Cited by http://www.scrimipedia.it/mediawiki/index.php?title=Iacopo_Monesi (accessed 22 March 2017).</ref><br />
<p>In 1640 he published a short tract outlining his fencing philosophy: [[Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)| Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma]]. </p><br />
<p>Monesi's text contain little technical discussion, which he defers to a promised second volume that however is either lost or was never written. Instead, Monesi strongly critiques many theories and methodologies of his peers; behind a veil of formal language excoriating those practices he views as frivolous, or detrimental to surviving an encounter in earnest. Monesi advocates a straightforward and direct philosophy of fencing. He eschews what he sees as unnecessary embellishments, or artefacts of salle fencing, and privileges what he considers practical for surviving an unpredictable and violent confrontation with sharp weapons. </p><br />
<p>He strongly affirms the efficacy of cuts, interspersed with thrusts; and favours simple and strong natural movements, stances, and attacks. In terms of pedagogy, he forcefully promotes the primacy of practising assaults, and laments that students in his day no longer assault with the frequency and gusto of earlier times. </p><br />
<p>Among other elements he criticises: feints, elaborate postures, mathematical concepts, excessive theoretical discussion, and dagger disarms, as unhelpful and impractical for a confrontation with sharps. Without naming names Monesi appears to clearly reference, again critically, the work of [[Docciolini]], [[Fabris]], [[Marozzo]], and [[Pistofilo]]. </p><br />
<p>Alongside such direct critiques, Monesi includes less specifically targeted remonstrations. For example, he objects to the pedagogical method of masters who employ a chestplate, or a cane in place of a sword. Similarly, he leaves space for conventional discussion points of the period, such as where to look when fencing, or how to approach combat at night.</p><br />
== Treatise ==<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Introduction and dedication| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
! <p>Translation</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''On the Subject of Fencing'''</p><br />
<p>'''By Jacopo Monesi'''</p><br />
<p>'''Known as the Armourer'''</p><br />
<p>'''Master of Arms to the Most Serene of Tuscany, and Their Gentleman Pages'''</p><br />
<p>'''Dedicated to the Most Illustrious Sir Count'''</p><br />
<p>'''Francesco Piccolomini of Aragon'''</p><br />
<p>'''In Florence, at the New Press M.DC.XXXX'''</p><br />
<p>With Permission from the Authorities</p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Most Illustrious and Noble Sir and Patron'''</p><br />
<p>The shade of your Most Illustrious Lordship's great protection, has generated in me an uncommon yearning to bring to light that which has been hidden in the shadows of my intellect for many years. For some time I have had in mind to make public certain discourses on the most excellent profession of fencing, but the awareness of my scarce ability to articulate them, caused the heat of my enthusiasm to cool. This yearning only then emerges, through confiding in the patronage of your Most Illustrious Lordship, wishing to express these concepts in the best manner possible. </p><br />
<p>Therefore this is entrusted only to you, as has happened in the past with honour, once again I opted for your support in bringing this forth, so that anything that is deemed monstrous will nonetheless (protected by the greatness of your Most Illustrious Lordship) be embraced, and be appraised with a not less than benign eye. </p><br />
<p>Please deign therefore to protect it with benevolence, recognising it as a sign of my dutiful observance to your Most Illustrious Lordship's great merit, to which I reverently bow, praying for your every most coveted happiness. </p><br />
<p>Your devoted and most obligated servant</p><br />
<p>Jacopo Monesi, known as the Armourer. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''To the Benevolent Reader'''</p><br />
<p>It has been for a number of years that despite the weakness of my intellect I have wanted to present my thoughts on the play of fencing, which has been my particular profession. But since the world has seen others elevated, and granted them brilliant ability with which they delight and are delighted, I considered it best to keep my thoughts buried within me. </p><br />
<p>Considering however that in some printed books you find an exorbitance of guards, and other extravagances, and witnessing this noble exercise reduced more to discourse than practice, the desire I have (if successful) to demonstrate the true play, and method of combat, made me resolve first to declare my objections, then to explain the correct method. </p><br />
<p>In conformance therefore with what the Most Illustrious Sir Silvio Piccolomini of Aragon <ref>Silvio Piccolomini was a knight of the Order of Santo Stefano, and noted fencer and military commander of his age. In the dedication of his own treatise [[Federico Ghisliero]] declares himself a student of Piccolomini, while his skill at fencing is further referenced by [[Cappoferro]] in his introduction to the reader, and by the French chronicler Michel de Montaigne. </ref> (excellent in this exercise, and more so in military disciplines) taught me, after my first master Cosimo Paradisi, in the chapters that follow I will narrate as openly as I can what is recounted. </p><br />
<p>But since the greatest detriment to this exercise, in my view, comes from neglecting to struggle with the sword in hand, in practising assaults, I will deal with this first, explaining the reasons why I believe this is, as I commence. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>''Might it please Sir Canon Carlo del Vigna to see if the present work contains anything repugnant to Christian piety, and public morals, and refer back. The 30th January 1639.'' </p><br />
Vincenzio Rabatta, Vicar of Florence<br />
<p>''In the present work, having reviewed it in all diligence, I found nothing repugnant to Christian piety, or public morals. 25th February 1639.''</p><br />
<p>Carlo del Vigna, Canon of Florence<br />
<p>''Most Reverend Father Inquisitor,''</p><br />
<p>''By your order of Most Reverend Father I have reviewed this present discourse on fencing, and I have not found anything repugnant to the Religion, orto public morals, judging it worthy of publication. 26th March 1640. ''</p><br />
<p>Girolamo Rosati, Protonotary and Consultant of the Holy Office</p><br />
<p>''This can be printed. Florence 3rd April 1640. ''</p><br />
<p>Father Giovanni Angeli, Vicar of the Holy Office, by order of</p><br />
<p>Senator Alessandro Vettori, Auditor of His Most Serene Highness</p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Notes on fencing| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
! <p>Translation</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''Chapter One'''</p><br />
<p>Ambition, which without fail is the cause of every ill, especially in virtuous exercises, I know to be the true basis and root of a rather notable vice. </p><br />
<p>Every day we see youths of such ambition, that under the cloak of letting their virtue be known, out of all proportion, neglect the importance of possessing such virtue, and as soon as they arrive in schools to learn, having imbibed just a few lessons, allow themselves to be inflated by excessive pretension, and judge themselves to be masters. </p><br />
<p>Therefore it happens (and I speak in particular of this exercise) that in public schools, and especially in private houses, with youths of equal quality gathered to practice assaults, you find some who do not grasp the sword if not to teach, nor to learn in any other way. This outlook is so pernicious, that for this reason you no longer hear of people gathering for common benefit and practice, and to pass the time in the virtue of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Those who have distinguished themselves up until now, demonstrating their valour and knowledge, in my view did not take this route. Indeed anxious to prove their worth as gallant men at every occasion, in any place, and against any person, I believe they sought to learn. Because to understand a discipline well, you have to practise it, you cannot learn with theory alone. </p><br />
<p>It is not a good way to master a skill, to think you can attain it without effort and sacrifice. Those who think to proceed like this, infallibly discover through experience how much they have deluded themselves. </p><br />
<p>Another active and real problem I bring up, just as damaging as the first although stemming from the same ambition, is the disparity between people. </p><br />
<p>You cannot deny that an artisan (who delights in virtue as is understandable), can through his diligence and vivacity arrive at the goal of fencing well with the sword. Indeed because this exercise is extremely capable of elevating the most lowly individual, it often happens that by applying their spirit, those of base condition become more distinguished. </p><br />
<p>The damage therefore that ambition brings, is to be ashamed to practice assaults with someone of lowly hand. To not consider you could extract some fruit even from these people, throwing yourself into the profession. </p><br />
<p>This thought is erroneous, because it is essential to know that virtue levels all people; and that a virtuoso can be considered the equal not just of a simple gentleman, but of any prince or great lord. </p><br />
<p>These are the reasons I give, demonstrating why today assaults are dismissed, neglecting the chance to benefit from the luxury of living, before the waning of youthful years deprives you of every worthwhile activity. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Two – On the same subject'''</p><br />
<p>You can clearly tell from my previous discourse how much damage ambition brings, and how it is a reason for not mastering this beautiful virtue of fencing. But I will now demonstrate furthermore how discussion of this profession, which today's students engage in more than practice, causes notable harm. The truth is that lessons taken in any subject in the day are of no use if their operations are not exercised. </p><br />
<p>That which pertains to bodies of reason: such as logic, philosophy, and so forth, must be put in practice with words alone, as they are necessary to expound such virtues. However in the profession of fencing words have no place to execute well what the students have learned from the master. </p><br />
<p>Actions are needed when it comes to training your body for defence and attack. </p><br />
<p>This is not applied by today's youth, which is a further reason why assaults no longer take place, and students neglect to learn wielding a sword in hand well. It then follows that masters are judged and branded as inept in their craft, since they no longer produce students as they did in the past. </p><br />
<p>When youngsters come together, sometimes from the schools of different masters in this profession, instead of putting their studies to the test, with the cloak across their shoulders, as well as with the simple sword in hand, they begin to discuss among themselves: “If I delivered this thrust how would you parry it?”. </p><br />
<p>The other replies “I would do it in this way, or like this” to which the first responds “But if it were a cut, how would you defend yourself” again its counter is added, and they carry on ad infinitum in this manner, disregarding gainful practice. </p><br />
<p>See if this is the best way to safeguard yourself, and benefit through the profession. Then test with a sharp sword (which could happen), whether these people would have time for such a parliament. </p><br />
<p>Action is required for exercises which engage the body, words cannot grant a student resolution to confront his opponent, or courage and practice to defend himself. This is as much as I thought to say on this matter. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Three – On putting mathematics into this virtue'''<ref>This chapter might apply to Italian treatises which incorporate mathematical principles, such as [[Camillo Agrippa]], but arguably targets in particular the Iberian forms of the ''Verdadera Destreza'', exemplified by [[Jerónimo Sánchez de Carranza]] and [[Luis Pacheco de Narváez]]. </ref></p><br />
<p>I have never presumed to malign anyone who professes to teach this noble exercise, nor do I intend to now, recognising myself as the inferior to many gallant men who have practised this virtue. But we are permitted to debate upon the lessons of some, who have taught and teach through mathematics, with the addition of lines, circles, traverses and extravagant voids of the body. </p><br />
<p>For me, these are commendable for fencing in a clean salle, furnished with even tiles. Likewise it is impossible for two people not to put on a good display, when they politely retreat, then void, or advance with a neat step, putting into practice what they have learned from their masters. </p><br />
<p>But if I imagine them outside the tiled hall, that is in the streets, where confrontations most often arise, then I can't help but criticise and malign them, since it is impossible (for reasons I will explain) to put these actions into practice. </p><br />
<p>Someone who is confronted or deliberately summoned to combat, cannot I believe, as happens in large armies, bring with them people to dig; to resurface the street so they can put themselves in the right posture, and use their lines, and advances of ground, and binds of the sword in conformance with their lessons. Instead, being confronted, they are obliged to think how to stand firmly on their feet, to be vigorous in defence and attack, ready of hand, without such fine distinctions of footwork. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore those who employ the sword in this manner, can be called good and beautiful fencers, but in an open space, or street where stones, holes, and cracks can cause you to stumble, they are always in danger of defending themselves poorly from their enemy. In such cases most of the time the artifices of traverses, voids and lines are left aside, and they throw themselves into natural attacks, as is so often seen. </p><br />
<p>This itself is sufficient demonstration, although I can elaborate for greater clarity, that play founded upon natural reason is with no comparison much better than artificious play. The latter was invented for no motive other than satisfying the curiosity of youth. If it were otherwise, it would not be the case, not only in public schools but also in the presence of nobility with the intervention of great princes, that professors of play founded upon such twists of the body had been touched assault after assault, with cuts and thrusts, as is clear and manifest to a great many people. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Four – On a defined ''punto'' to attack'''<ref> The term punto to signify a defined target area of the right shoulder is particular to the treatise of [[Marco Docciolini]].</ref></p><br />
<p>This seems to me an important subject, in order to be accomplished in assaults. I will merely state my thoughts on those who, as a principal maxim, hold and practise the opinion that it is better to attack only a single part of the body, namely the right shoulder, being the said punto. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, you must consider the reason why they observe this doctrine. I believe it is for no reason other than to strike either the nearest, or the most vulnerable part of the body. </p><br />
<p>If we suppose they hold this view, because they want to strike the nearest target, I completely refute their opinion. Hands and arms notwithstanding, I know how those who lean most stand, even their knees are closer and more likely to be attacked by the enemy. </p><br />
<p>If they wish to propose the other reason, that it is the most vulnerable part of the body, I can only oppose them entirely. It seems to me that the hands and arms are subjected to danger: both of being wounded, and of the intermediate outcome of losing the ability to attack. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore experience, which instructs in all things, shows us that in a good portion of combats you see wounds to the hands and arms. This is because these can more easily encounter the enemy's weapons. If they deem the area called the punto so vulnerable, I do not know which hands and arms are not in the same danger. In them you find veins, arteries and other very vulnerable areas which evidently have shown to cause the death of those wounded there. </p><br />
This is as much as I can say on this particular. I urge everyone to take the whole of the enemy's body as the fixed punto to attack, and specifically the part that presents itself as most uncovered and furthest forward. There is much more that could be said, for example if your opponent is left-handed, or in other situations, but to avoid tedium I will omit it. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Five – On a predetermined measure'''</p><br />
<p>In addition to the other pernicious matters in the virtue of fencing noted above, I absolutely detest the opinion of those who insist on, observe, and teach a predetermined measure. Since an opinion should not be proposed without foundation, I will prove this simple truth with active reason. </p><br />
<p>I have always observed, and heard, that people who are forced to fight, whether to defend themselves, or to confront someone who has caused them some offence, never have the benefit of being able to measure swords. Nor is this a given, since anyone can wear a sword of any length they please (speaking of Tuscany). They cannot even choose a piazza well suited for coming to blows, and neither are people equal in form, either in height or in build. </p><br />
<p>Now, if this is not the case, what is the point of habituating your foot, and arm to a predetermined measure? Moreover, you can easily see from experience that often there is no time to take measure, or the opportunity is denied, for example in badly paved streets, sometimes filled with a thousand pieces of rubbish, as mentioned above. </p><br />
<p>If someone, suddenly or intentionally, is obliged to fight, even if they find themselves in a nice, clean street, it is impossible for them to observe the measure of their steps; to defend themselves and attack, against someone who is naturally at ease in well-founded play, who naturally understands how to stay strongly on their feet, and deflect the enemy's blows, while at the same time attacking him, which seems to me the real principle. </p><br />
<p>You must concede, that this measure was invented simply for the encounters they like to conduct at royal pageants, which have been held several times in various places, and furthermore in itself to demonstrate how far they can extend their normal step. However it is absolutely unfit not just for combat in earnest, but even for the simple assaults you might practice. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Six – On voids'''</p><br />
<p>There should be little difference between this chapter and the previous one, since having to discuss voids, which produce the same result as a set measure, my argument will differ little from the one adopted above. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, let us consider its effect, which is nothing more than a withdrawal of the body, either back or to the side, to defend against an enemy's attack. I say that this withdrawal is as dangerous as trusting in a set measure, and the reason is as follows: someone who by chance comes to blows with an enemy cannot know if they wield a longer sword, whereby in wishing to void they can be wounded. Nor can they know how agile the sword's wielder is. </p><br />
<p>More importantly, when someone evades a blow with a void, they must necessarily lose a tempo in having to return forward to attack. If set upon during this tempo (which the enemy may attempt) they will find it very difficult to recover. </p><br />
<p>For this reason therefore, as a rule of good fencing you should never concede voids. Besides it increases the risk of stumbling in the streets, which as noted above can happen when placing yourself in a set measure. </p><br />
<p>Seeking to avoid any mishap that can occur is the utmost of a man's prudence. The greatest threats that arise are those to life. Against these principal dangers man must apply all his judgement. </p><br />
<p>If we know that voids, traverses, and a set measure manifestly cannot save us from an enemy's attack, why not use that convenient and very useful remedy: not to be subjected to such attacks by staying well-grounded, with firm and stable strength of both body and arm. This will suffice on this topic. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Seven – On feints'''</p><br />
<p>In the profession of fencing there are many frivolities and jests, or more accurately whimsies that you can use, either in public schools or in private settings. Among others there are feints. These can often be employed when fencing for enjoyment and fun, and similarly to improve your vision, since they also serve to train your eyes to be attentive. </p><br />
<p>But I like to believe that this practice was invented for nothing more than to defend yourself, or to attack your enemy, as the situation demands. In reality they reveal themselves as good only for entertainment, or to prolong lessons, and I am forced to say that feints are extremely dangerous to those who wish to perform them. They require two tempos, and in the true exercise of wielding the sword are manifestly unsafe. </p><br />
<p>In earnest, as we know, arms are employed for only two reasons. The first is to defend, the other is to attack. How then can someone who is confronted, as we have said before, hold forth with contrivances like feinting over and under the dagger, to the outside and inside of the sword, against the speed of the enemy's blows (especially if they are strong)? Against cuts as well as thrusts, when he does not adopt any kind of posture, but advancing with such blows? </p><br />
<p>I have no doubt that those in this predicament, stirred by many motives, leave aside all feints and attend only to defending their lives as best they can. </p><br />
<p>But can you imagine others, advancing phlegmatically to confront their enemy, to vindicate a wrong or harm done to them, redeeming themselves with the frivolities and jests of feints? </p><br />
<p>I will omit many examples, but fury transports them, reason is overcome. Honour necessitates that they leave aside taught feints, and instead follow natural instinct, but since I have explained this already, I will not expound further. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eight – On ''contrattempo'', ''mezzotempo'' and more'''</p><br />
<p>To cover the present topic it is worth returning to the same discussion in the previous chapter. The various fancies and follies, along with feints, are invented by certain masters I believe, not only to retain students so they stay longer at the school, but also to confuse them. This way they unlearn the good and study the bad, and will always have to remain students. </p><br />
<p>This is the case with the invention of ''mezzotempo'' and ''contrattempo''. These are brought to light, as I mentioned, only to keep the school running. </p><br />
<p>''Mezzotempo'', and other such terms, deform the good and true rules with too many fripperies. In reality you could never have a memory sharp enough to employ them in defence in a single tempo, or in attack. </p><br />
<p>These methods should be practised not in fencing, but in the realm of dance, where the variety of steps and agility of the leaps must astound the spectators. </p><br />
<p>But in this profession a single step, a single tempo must suffice. Deployed with the requisite accuracy and mastery it will always quash any ''contrattempo'' or ''mezzotempo'' you might encounter, and I profess that this is merely the truth. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Nine – On the so misshapen published figures of this exercise'''<br />
<p>If I believed myself alone, I would not dare to criticise the infinite sets of figures presented and drawn in published books. These are invented, I believe, to no other end but to demonstrate a multiplicity of distorted postures, which almost transcend the bounds of nature, and drag people towards the ridiculous, rather than to learning from viewing such contorted actions. </p><br />
<p>I would like to have some leeway, to leave some praise, but I see no way whatsoever, if not to say that these deformations are very suitable for clowns and tavern-singers, to entertain and extract money from a crowd. This is the praise I am able to concede. </p><br />
<p>If then I were to offer some polite criticism, I could begin by saying that these positions are monstrous, and impossible to witness within our profession. When have you ever seen people, either for enjoyment or necessity, employ such extravagant contortions, with their bodies so hunched and forced, and for the sword alone with the off-hand by the left ear, to employ it like a dagger to deflect thrusts?<ref>This passage, and arguably the entire chapter, appears to be targeted at [[Salvator Fabris]], whose treatise is notable for its deep and sometimes contorted stances.</ref></p><br />
<p>This is as far removed from the natural order as truth is from a lie. You do not take a sword in hand, to wield in earnest, with such exorbitant contortions. You should stand so you can operate naturally, all the more so when you find yourself on the street. There you may find many impediments, as I have said, and confirming what I have already said above, you must stand firmly on your feet, in a balanced posture from which you can draw strength to oppose the sword against all attacks, and as upright as possible so you do not become disordered.</p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Ten – On the guards and counterguards'''</p><br />
<p>There are many guards, great in number from various masters, which you can employ in the profession of fencing. To list them all, and discuss which of them is good or bad, would require a discourse beyond this brief one, expounded with an eloquence other than my own. Nonetheless my pen will write simply and plainly, to touch upon some of my thoughts. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, to demonstrate the extravagance of the guards invented, I will cite various names authors have given them, such as: ''coda lunga e stretta'', ''cingara'', ''porta di ferro'', ''beccapossa'',<ref> These guard names are characteristic of the Bolognese school of fencing. In particular the name ''beccapossa'' is specific to [[Achille Marozzo]].</ref>''belincorno'', prima, seconda, terza and quarta, and many others which I will omit, which together with these have been represented with figures in the books published up until now.</p><br />
<p>As to whether these are good or bad, any praise should be occasioned by their use. It cannot follow, although we have seen otherwise, that they endanger those who wish to employ them. However since no guard should be maligned without a basis, I will start by saying that in my opinion the guards to be employed should not be twisted or bizarre, nor overwrought with a paintbrush, nor measured with a compass, but simple and natural. In this manner the body finds itself stronger in resisting blows, and attacking when the occasion presents itself, without the manifest danger of stumbling and thereby compromising your life. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eleven – On those who wish to debate this practice'''</p><br />
<p>To further damage this profession of fencing, in my opinion, some presume to debate over blows and postures of whichever sort, formulating and postulating in the manner of someone conducting a philosophical debate. Discussions on subjects like the one I have mentioned, should be performed with actions alone. </p><br />
<p>This occurs because upon the path of this practice it is difficult to arrive at perfection. Many who take the path, at the first resistance, by a simple act of will desist from the endeavour. Seeing themselves inadequate, they sharpen their intellect to appear the equal of professors, and with their propositions lead astray those striving to obtain a complete understanding. </p><br />
<p>This is undeniable. In the practice of fencing, to engage someone in debate and discussion as if arguing theology (in place of conducting assaults) achieves nothing but to deny opportunities to those who desire to learn, to become excellent in practice. This is the motive I ascribe for this behaviour. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Twelve – Against a set rule for combat at night'''</p><br />
<p>In this simple discourse of mine, I wished to oppose every extravagance that the meanness of my intellect has encountered in the profession of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Therefore it seemed apt to contest also the opinion of those who hold a firm rule of giving true and real method of combat at night: that putting your hands to your weapons, you should quickly use them to seek the enemy’s sword, and having found it you must liberally deliver attacks to wound him. </p><br />
<p>They add to this another rule, no better than the first, that is to keep your body hunched to create a smaller target. </p><br />
<p>I address each of these as follows. </p><br />
<p>If confronted in the dark at night, how can you find your enemy's weapon without being attacked? </p><br />
<p>Why must you remain hunched, being deprived of ability and stature in defence and attack, in place of a strong and comfortable posture, remaining upright on your feet without hunching over? </p><br />
<p>Such a false opinion I would deem unsuitable even for the daytime where you can clearly see the enemy’s posture, and even when the enemy does not step to attack. </p><br />
<p>I firmly maintain that if you must fight at night, in such circumstances in the dark, you should deliver ''dritti'' and ''roversci'' as swiftly as you can. </p><br />
<p>Anything else is futile, without proposing many additional considerations for such instances, which for the sake of brevity I will omit. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Thirteen – On those masters who in giving lessons employ either a chestplate or a rod'''</p><br />
<p>Among the other notable detriments, caused by various extravagances, are those masters, some who give lessons with a chestplate, others with a rod. </p><br />
<p>Masters who wear a chestplate during lessons leads to nothing else, in my opinion, than that students deliver blows with an exorbitant step. Since the blows do not harm these said masters, they do not realise that, although they wish to protect the student, with these thrusts they harm them. </p><br />
<p>They become habituated to committing their body so much with every blow, that it becomes unlikely they could recover when performed in earnest. </p><br />
<p>Having delivered the thrust to their master's chestplate, they find resistance, lending them force to recover back, and they adopt the habit of abandoning their whole body into the attack.</p><br />
<p>Because of this with a sharp sword, not finding the resistance of the chestplate they have with the practice sword, they remain extended so far forwards that it is difficult (as stated) to avoid their enemy's attack. It can absolutely occur that instead of wounding their enemy, they are left injured. </p><br />
<p>Something similar can occur with students who are used to taking lesson from masters who hold a rod. Since it is much lighter than a sword it creates an extremely negative effect, giving rise to great setbacks. Its weakness, not having the same form as a sword, means whichever cut the rod delivers, it cannot force the student's sword to learn, as a sword would. </p><br />
<p>We can furthermore question, being habituated to parrying cuts from the rod, if when they receive cuts from a sword, they might become confused. </p><br />
<p>Being disordered they might apply the lessons learned reluctantly, since they do not even learn resolve. So I repeat, employing either a chestplate or a rod benefits only the master, and not the students. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Fourteen – On where some wish you to look when you fight'''</p><br />
<p>The variety of opinions on where to place your eyes during actions, both during assaults and in questions of honour, leads me to include this topic in this discourse of mine. Many want you to keep your eyes fixed to your enemy's face during combat. Others assert you should always watch the point of your opponent's sword. </p><br />
<p>I contradict both of these views. I say that keeping your eye on the point is of no use in combat, since it is unlikely your enemy's point ever stays still. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore it is so fine that when it is brandished at speed, someone who trusts in this proposition greatly deceives themselves; knowing full well that sharp swords are not like swords in schools with a button, which is rather large, although some schools might not use them. Therefore I consider this proposition in my own manner. </p><br />
<p>I also criticise the other opinion, of watching your enemy's face, because while keeping your eyes there it is unlikely you can understand and clearly discern the operations he performs with the sword. Often these are away from the face, and he might feint with his eyes to attack in one place, only to move the hand to offend elsewhere. </p><br />
<p>Therefore finding fault with both of the above opinions, I hold that another area is more appropriate, necessary, and without subjecting yourself to deceits more useful, which I will relate in due time in another treatise. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Fifteen – To those who greatly criticise cuts'''</p><br />
<p>Everyone must defend their profession with the rationales available, so I will not fail to show how mistaken are those who greatly criticise cuts in the practice of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Before opposing everything they state in favour of their position, I will explain the charges levelled against those who employ cuts. </p><br />
<p>The first is that cuts are not lethal, the second is that they are much shorter than thrusts, while cuts are further derided by the claim they are for brutes. </p><br />
<p>I refute the first by supposing, since death has taken many in our times by way of cuts, that no other reason is needed to affirm this truth. </p><br />
<p>I can counter the second with great ease, demonstrating how with the hand, and the same length of step and sword (when grasped), the same person can be wounded either by a cut or a thrust. This is better proved by experience than words (which I set out to do), as I have shown and performed many times in the presence of great princes. </p><br />
<p>I should raise a further consideration for those who criticise cuts, and it is this. When someone is confronted, and puts their hand to their sword to defend themself, do they negotiate with their enemy whether to use only thrusts (speaking of Tuscan lands)? If they can wound with both thrusts and cuts, then why not employ cuts, and learn to defend against them? </p><br />
<p>I can only believe that those who criticise cuts, understanding only thrusts, either have no power in their cuts, or do not know how to teach them (if they are masters), or have no time to practise them if they are students. </p><br />
<p>In every profession, to remain ahead of others you must pursue every possible avenue, even if indirect, but all the more so the true and good path, since every day in questions of honour we see that the majority of wounds are cuts to the hands, arms and face. For this reason swords with a hollow were invented.<ref> In the original simply ''spada con l'incavo''. It remains unclear whether Monesi is referring simply to a hollow-ground blade or deep fuller, or perhaps an indentation at the grip that might conceivably aid in cutting , like on some later sabres.</ref></p><br />
<p>Having explained the usefulness of cuts, I affirm once again that those who criticise them, claiming they are no good because they are for brutes, cause harm. An example of this is not keeping hold of the sword, so it falls to the ground, which has happened to many during simple assaults. Another is not having the ability to defend against cuts. I have useful advice to give in this regard, but to avoid being tedious, and admitting to discuss only superficial matters, I will not expound further, and will end my discourse of this subject. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Sixteen – Against numerous grips with the dagger'''</p><br />
<p>Having set myself to contradict falsehood with truth, I should say a few things on this subject. This is for those who strongly promote and encourage a multiplicity of grips with or against the dagger, many with a dagger and others unarmed, as something pertaining to the art of fencing. </p><br />
<p>I refute the quantity of grips described and delineated, and their operation, knowing very well as I have said elsewhere, that you do not negotiate with your opponent. This is from the many occurrences and events that are well-known without me having to describe them. </p><br />
<p>In fact I would dare say that the dagger is worse than the pistol, which can fail or misfire. The dagger is always loaded and ready to attack, and when someone has this weapon at their side and spots the opportunity to use it, I do not believe they will use it to threaten their enemy from distance. </p><br />
<p>Assuming they are not a coward, but resolute and courageous, they will approach as close as they have to. I doubt there will be time to counter, with any of these many grips that are supposed to defend against attacks, nor therefore would I say that dagger against dagger they could be of any benefit. </p><br />
<p>I will freely admit that some of the grips work in schools, of course, but as you know these daggers are without a point or a cutting edge. Many options can be proposed since there is no manifest danger. </p><br />
<p>I return to saying, that as a short weapon they are much quicker to draw, and more ready to wound. These grips are for the entertainment, and confusion, of students. This is what I have to say for now. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Seventeen – On a pike position that defends against any sort of missile weapon, including arquebus shots'''<ref> This is a clear reference to p.114-115 in ''Oplomachia'', the 1621 pike, halberd and musket treatise of [[Bonaventura Pistofilo]]. </p><br />
<p>''When an occasion arrives where you must grasp your sword, I urge you never to abandon your pike, whether it is broken or intact. Instead employ it at least to defend. Anyone can understand for themselves from figure 79, how useful this manner of holding the pike can be for defence.'' </p><br />
<p>''It protects against cavalry, infantry, and against any type of hand weapon; even against missile weapons such as javelins, darts, arrows, and similar arms, up to and including arquebus shots. As long as by chance they do not strike directly in the centre of the shaft, so that the balls instead skid aside, the man will be saved, as I have seen from experience.'' </p><br />
<p>''You must comport yourself such that everything is covered by the pike, maintaining your arm high and firmly extended. Your stance must be sufficiently wide for greater stability, with your sword ready to attack.'' </p><br />
<p>''If you then wish to return your sword to its sheath without abandoning the pike, or piece of haft left in your hand, figure 80 clearly demonstrates how without need for further explanation.''</ref></p><br />
<p>I have seen many authors publish thoughts which objectively can barely be sustained. This prompted me to highlight one marvellous opinion, held by a master not only of fencing but of many trades. </p><br />
<p>In one of his books, he assigns a posture with the sword in the right hand and a pike in the left, profiled towards that side like a barbican. He asserts it does not merely defend against cavalry and infantry, but from any sort of polearm, and also from arrows, javelins and even arquebus or musket shots. </p><br />
<p>The only caveat is that it must not hit the centre of the shaft, where it may break, which seems likely. I leave this to be pondered by anyone who professes the practice of arms. To authenticate this he claims to have seen it. </p><br />
<p>Emboldened by such a claim, I have taken common courage and confided to the pen that which was concealed in my mind. Because if such wonders have occurred they would refute not only my weak and poorly articulated arguments, but genuine and well-founded ones. </p><br />
<p>I do not blame that pikeman, whether his pike was whole or broken, if having to wield his sword he also employed his polearm. But with apologies, I can never have it believed that his haft could keep him safe from every attack, from every sort of weapon. Supposedly even the musket against which (the author says) the pike prevails, the musket ball skidding off one side or the other to be deflected without harm. </p><br />
<p>In truth I have not passed my years in war, where I might have witnessed such incidences, but have been in service of and enjoyed the company of many veteran soldiers. Foremost of all the Most Illustrious Sir Silvio Piccolomini of Aragon, a person of such esteem as is known throughout the world, having fulfilled many offices in war, for the Most Serene Highnesses of Tuscany and for other crowns. Yet I never heard from him or anybody else that the guard described is able to achieve what is claimed. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eighteen – Some admonishments for those who wear a sword'''</p><br />
<p>Any profession should be practised with every possible convenience, and a farmer who must be present when the grain is harvested in July should not wear a garment of heavy cloth.</p><br />
<p>Those who dedicate themselves to the profession of wearing a sword, so dangerous that we could say death always walks alongside it, in various respects should not wear any ornamentation of the body or clothes, or any other items that might disadvantage them when coming to blows. </p><br />
<p>An example more perilous than any other is high-heels, which can easily lead their owner to fall over. Or else sleeves that hang down from the tunic, which can subject someone who is confronted, or who confronts, to great trouble. </p><br />
<p>Likewise long hair, which when coming to grapple grants a clear advantage to the opponent, while bringing great danger to the bearer, even more so when curly in the extravagant style of today; also more specifically hair that comes to impede vision. </p><br />
<p>Also included among such impediments are clothes with large slashes, in the French fashion or in any other. They can cause no small detriment, being dangerous by hampering the drawing of weapons with the swiftness required. </p><br />
<p>I also wanted to mention those who carry daggers with a dangling rose. </p><br />
<p>This is for the benefit of all; because from the mishaps that have occurred, I am sure the impediments I have listed most often create danger for the lives of those who struggle with arms. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Nineteen – What moved me to write this discourse'''</p><br />
<p>Everything we do in this world has an end, and every endeavour wends towards its outcome. Therefore I felt it apt to declare in this final chapter, which motives moved me to stain these few sheets of paper (so to speak) with my coarse and ill-adapted thoughts, and to expose myself voluntarily to the censure of innumerable fine intellects. </p><br />
<p>The reason is that I have found infinite authors, who by means of the presses have professed to enrich the virtue of fencing by demonstrating various sorts of guards and means of combat, and numerous uses of weapons. Knowing that all these operations were shown for the simple practice of wielding a sword, I resolved to designate the true manner of exercising this profession seriously. It consists of nothing more than the simple assaults which are conducted for pleasure. </p><br />
<p>The reason for writing this discourse was none other than a real and genuine desire for the aficionados of this art to recognise the true method of practising it, to not further maltreat it, and to employ the advice provided for the benefit of their person. This is the motivation, as I have said previously, and the intention. </p><br />
<p>May the reader appreciate the willingness of my spirit; and may those habituated to Ciceronian eloquence, and to the exquisite vivacity of extraordinary conceptions, pity my rude pen, whose lowly scribbles have aspired only to reveal the truth. </p><br />
<p>Lastly I wanted to set out how having learned the voids and traverses, I found them ill-suited to real combat with a sharp sword, and I criticise them. </p><br />
<p>Although I praise cuts in practice for their excellent defence, even more so at night where they are the quickest blow to find their target, I do not wish praise them by themselves, I commend them when mixed with a good many thrusts. A dagger can interrupt and defend against thrusts, but is comfortably negated by cuts. </p><br />
<p>And here I come to a close. If God grants me health in months and not years I hope to bring forth fruit that is useful, with the most straightforward method, apt for real combat, distinguishing the characteristics of different people: whether large, powerful, small or weak, with appropriate rules. </p><br />
<p>All in honour of our Lord God, and the most Blessed Virgin Mary. </p><br />
<p>'''THE END. ''' </p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Copyright and License Summary<br />
| width = 100%<br />
}}<br />
For further information, including transcription and translation notes, see the [[Talk:{{PAGENAME}}|discussion page]].<br />
<br />
<section begin="sourcebox"/>{{sourcebox header}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Translation<br />
| authors = [[Piermarco Terminiello]]<br />
| source link = http://sword.school/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Monesi-Translation-1.pdf<br />
| source title = Objections and Admonishments on the Subject of Fencing By Jacopo Monesi (1640)<br />
| license = educational<br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox footer}}<section end="sourcebox"/><br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
<br />
{{Regional Italian traditions}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Translation]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Rapier]]<br />
[[Category:Dagger]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Jacopo_Monesi&diff=120510Jacopo Monesi2020-11-18T19:48:58Z<p>P Terminiello: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = Jacopo Monesi<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = 16th century (?)<br />
| birthplace = Florence, Italy (?)<br />
| deathdate = 17th century<br />
| deathplace = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set: occupation=Fencing master }}<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = <br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = Medici court<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| period = <br />
| movement = <br />
| influences =<br />
| influenced = <br />
<br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| notableworks = ''[[Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)| Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma]]'' (1640)<br />
| archetype = <br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= 1640<br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| signature = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
<p>'''Jacopo Monesi''' was an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing master]] during the first half of the [[century::17th century]]. </p><br />
<p>A native of Florence, he appears to have enjoyed enduring patronage and recognition in his own lifetime at the court of the Grand Duchy of Tuscany under Ferdinando II de' Medici. </p><br />
<p>A court document, dating to 1621, indicates Monesi's role included instructing the adolescent nobility at the grand ducal court (a claim supported by the title page of his own work): </p><br />
<p>''Jacopo of the Armourer, master of fencing, is one of several masters to the pages, together with the priest Albizio Vecchi, the undermaster Frediano Tinolfi, Giovanni Migliorucci master of writing, Leonardo Migliorucci, Giovanni Pieroni the arithmetist and mathematician, Remigio Cantagallina master of drawing, and Pitti Agnolo Ricci master of dance.''<ref>Archivio di Stato di Firenze, Miscellanea Medicea, 369, c.707. Cited by http://www.scrimipedia.it/mediawiki/index.php?title=Iacopo_Monesi (accessed 22 March 2017).</ref><br />
<p>In 1640 he published a short tract outlining his fencing philosophy: [[Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)| Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma]]. </p><br />
<p>Monesi's text contain little technical discussion, which he defers to a promised second volume that however is either lost or was never written. Instead, Monesi strongly critiques many theories and methodologies of his peers; behind a veil of formal language excoriating those practices he views as frivolous, or detrimental to surviving an encounter in earnest. Monesi advocates a straightforward and direct philosophy of fencing. He eschews what he sees as unnecessary embellishments, or artefacts of salle fencing, and privileges what he considers practical for surviving an unpredictable and violent confrontation with sharp weapons. </p><br />
<p>He strongly affirms the efficacy of cuts, interspersed with thrusts; and favours simple and strong natural movements, stances, and attacks. In terms of pedagogy, he forcefully promotes the primacy of practising assaults, and laments that students in his day no longer assault with the frequency and gusto of earlier times. </p><br />
<p>Among other elements he criticises: feints, elaborate postures, mathematical concepts, excessive theoretical discussion, and dagger disarms, as unhelpful and impractical for a confrontation with sharps. Without naming names Monesi appears to clearly reference, again critically, the work of [[Docciolini]], [[Fabris]], [[Marozzo]], and [[Pistofilo]]. </p><br />
<p>Alongside such direct critiques, Monesi includes less specifically targeted remonstrations. For example, he objects to the pedagogical method of masters who employ a chestplate, or a cane in place of a sword. Similarly, he leaves space for conventional discussion points of the period, such as where to look when fencing, or how to approach combat at night.</p><br />
== Treatise ==<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Introduction and dedication| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
! <p>Translation</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''On the Subject of Fencing'''</p><br />
<p>'''By Jacopo Monesi'''</p><br />
<p>'''Known as the Armourer'''</p><br />
<p>'''Master of Arms to the Most Serene of Tuscany, and Their Gentleman Pages'''</p><br />
<p>'''Dedicated to the Most Illustrious Sir Count'''</p><br />
<p>'''Francesco Piccolomini of Aragon'''</p><br />
<p>'''In Florence, at the New Press M.DC.XXXX'''</p><br />
<p>With Permission from the Authorities</p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Most Illustrious and Noble Sir and Patron'''</p><br />
<p>The shade of your Most Illustrious Lordship's great protection, has generated in me an uncommon yearning to bring to light that which has been hidden in the shadows of my intellect for many years. For some time I have had in mind to make public certain discourses on the most excellent profession of fencing, but the awareness of my scarce ability to articulate them, caused the heat of my enthusiasm to cool. This yearning only then emerges, through confiding in the patronage of your Most Illustrious Lordship, wishing to express these concepts in the best manner possible. </p><br />
<p>Therefore this is entrusted only to you, as has happened in the past with honour, once again I opted for your support in bringing this forth, so that anything that is deemed monstrous will nonetheless (protected by the greatness of your Most Illustrious Lordship) be embraced, and be appraised with a not less than benign eye. </p><br />
<p>Please deign therefore to protect it with benevolence, recognising it as a sign of my dutiful observance to your Most Illustrious Lordship's great merit, to which I reverently bow, praying for your every most coveted happiness. </p><br />
<p>Your devoted and most obligated servant</p><br />
<p>Jacopo Monesi, known as the Armourer. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''To the Benevolent Reader'''</p><br />
<p>It has been for a number of years that despite the weakness of my intellect I have wanted to present my thoughts on the play of fencing, which has been my particular profession. But since the world has seen others elevated, and granted them brilliant ability with which they delight and are delighted, I considered it best to keep my thoughts buried within me. </p><br />
<p>Considering however that in some printed books you find an exorbitance of guards, and other extravagances, and witnessing this noble exercise reduced more to discourse than practice, the desire I have (if successful) to demonstrate the true play, and method of combat, made me resolve first to declare my objections, then to explain the correct method. </p><br />
<p>In conformance therefore with what the Most Illustrious Sir Silvio Piccolomini of Aragon <ref>Silvio Piccolomini was a knight of the Order of Santo Stefano, and noted fencer and military commander of his age. In the dedication of his own treatise [[Federico Ghisliero]] declares himself a student of Piccolomini, while his skill at fencing is further referenced by [[Cappoferro]] in his introduction to the reader, and by the French chronicler Michel de Montaigne. </ref> (excellent in this exercise, and more so in military disciplines) taught me, after my first master Cosimo Paradisi, in the chapters that follow I will narrate as openly as I can what is recounted. </p><br />
<p>But since the greatest detriment to this exercise, in my view, comes from neglecting to struggle with the sword in hand, in practising assaults, I will deal with this first, explaining the reasons why I believe this is, as I commence. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>''Might it please Sir Canon Carlo del Vigna to see if the present work contains anything repugnant to Christian piety, and public morals, and refer back. The 30th January 1639.'' </p><br />
Vincenzio Rabatta, Vicar of Florence<br />
<p>''In the present work, having reviewed it in all diligence, I found nothing repugnant to Christian piety, or public morals. 25th February 1639.''</p><br />
<p>Carlo del Vigna, Canon of Florence<br />
<p>''Most Reverend Father Inquisitor,''</p><br />
<p>''By your order of Most Reverend Father I have reviewed this present discourse on fencing, and I have not found anything repugnant to the Religion, orto public morals, judging it worthy of publication. 26th March 1640. ''</p><br />
<p>Girolamo Rosati, Protonotary and Consultant of the Holy Office</p><br />
<p>''This can be printed. Florence 3rd April 1640. ''</p><br />
<p>Father Giovanni Angeli, Vicar of the Holy Office, by order of</p><br />
<p>Senator Alessandro Vettori, Auditor of His Most Serene Highness</p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Notes on fencing| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
! <p>Translation</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''Chapter One'''</p><br />
<p>Ambition, which without fail is the cause of every ill, especially in virtuous exercises, I know to be the true basis and root of a rather notable vice. </p><br />
<p>Every day we see youths of such ambition, that under the cloak of letting their virtue be known, out of all proportion, neglect the importance of possessing such virtue, and as soon as they arrive in schools to learn, having imbibed just a few lessons, allow themselves to be inflated by excessive pretension, and judge themselves to be masters. </p><br />
<p>Therefore it happens (and I speak in particular of this exercise) that in public schools, and especially in private houses, with youths of equal quality gathered to practice assaults, you find some who do not grasp the sword if not to teach, nor to learn in any other way. This outlook is so pernicious, that for this reason you no longer hear of people gathering for common benefit and practice, and to pass the time in the virtue of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Those who have distinguished themselves up until now, demonstrating their valour and knowledge, in my view did not take this route. Indeed anxious to prove their worth as gallant men at every occasion, in any place, and against any person, I believe they sought to learn. Because to understand a discipline well, you have to practise it, you cannot learn with theory alone. </p><br />
<p>It is not a good way to master a skill, to think you can attain it without effort and sacrifice. Those who think to proceed like this, infallibly discover through experience how much they have deluded themselves. </p><br />
<p>Another active and real problem I bring up, just as damaging as the first although stemming from the same ambition, is the disparity between people. </p><br />
<p>You cannot deny that an artisan (who delights in virtue as is understandable), can through his diligence and vivacity arrive at the goal of fencing well with the sword. Indeed because this exercise is extremely capable of elevating the most lowly individual, it often happens that by applying their spirit, those of base condition become more distinguished. </p><br />
<p>The damage therefore that ambition brings, is to be ashamed to practice assaults with someone of lowly hand. To not consider you could extract some fruit even from these people, throwing yourself into the profession. </p><br />
<p>This thought is erroneous, because it is essential to know that virtue levels all people; and that a virtuoso can be considered the equal not just of a simple gentleman, but of any prince or great lord. </p><br />
<p>These are the reasons I give, demonstrating why today assaults are dismissed, neglecting the chance to benefit from the luxury of living, before the waning of youthful years deprives you of every worthwhile activity. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Two – On the same subject'''</p><br />
<p>You can clearly tell from my previous discourse how much damage ambition brings, and how it is a reason for not mastering this beautiful virtue of fencing. But I will now demonstrate furthermore how discussion of this profession, which today's students engage in more than practice, causes notable harm. The truth is that lessons taken in any subject in the day are of no use if their operations are not exercised. </p><br />
<p>That which pertains to bodies of reason: such as logic, philosophy, and so forth, must be put in practice with words alone, as they are necessary to expound such virtues. However in the profession of fencing words have no place to execute well what the students have learned from the master. </p><br />
<p>Actions are needed when it comes to training your body for defence and attack. </p><br />
<p>This is not applied by today's youth, which is a further reason why assaults no longer take place, and students neglect to learn wielding a sword in hand well. It then follows that masters are judged and branded as inept in their craft, since they no longer produce students as they did in the past. </p><br />
<p>When youngsters come together, sometimes from the schools of different masters in this profession, instead of putting their studies to the test, with the cloak across their shoulders, as well as with the simple sword in hand, they begin to discuss among themselves: “If I delivered this thrust how would you parry it?”. </p><br />
<p>The other replies “I would do it in this way, or like this” to which the first responds “But if it were a cut, how would you defend yourself” again its counter is added, and they carry on ad infinitum in this manner, disregarding gainful practice. </p><br />
<p>See if this is the best way to safeguard yourself, and benefit through the profession. Then test with a sharp sword (which could happen), whether these people would have time for such a parliament. </p><br />
<p>Action is required for exercises which engage the body, words cannot grant a student resolution to confront his opponent, or courage and practice to defend himself. This is as much as I thought to say on this matter. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Three – On putting mathematics into this virtue'''<ref>This chapter might apply to Italian treatises which incorporate mathematical principles, such as [[Camillo Agrippa]], but arguably targets in particular the Iberian forms of the ''Verdadera Destreza'', exemplified by [[Jerónimo Sánchez de Carranza]] and [[Luis Pacheco de Narváez]]. </ref></p><br />
<p>I have never presumed to malign anyone who professes to teach this noble exercise, nor do I intend to now, recognising myself as the inferior to many gallant men who have practised this virtue. But we are permitted to debate upon the lessons of some, who have taught and teach through mathematics, with the addition of lines, circles, traverses and extravagant voids of the body. </p><br />
<p>For me, these are commendable for fencing in a clean salle, furnished with even tiles. Likewise it is impossible for two people not to put on a good display, when they politely retreat, then void, or advance with a neat step, putting into practice what they have learned from their masters. </p><br />
<p>But if I imagine them outside the tiled hall, that is in the streets, where confrontations most often arise, then I can't help but criticise and malign them, since it is impossible (for reasons I will explain) to put these actions into practice. </p><br />
<p>Someone who is confronted or deliberately summoned to combat, cannot I believe, as happens in large armies, bring with them people to dig; to resurface the street so they can put themselves in the right posture, and use their lines, and advances of ground, and binds of the sword in conformance with their lessons. Instead, being confronted, they are obliged to think how to stand firmly on their feet, to be vigorous in defence and attack, ready of hand, without such fine distinctions of footwork. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore those who employ the sword in this manner, can be called good and beautiful fencers, but in an open space, or street where stones, holes, and cracks can cause you to stumble, they are always in danger of defending themselves poorly from their enemy. In such cases most of the time the artifices of traverses, voids and lines are left aside, and they throw themselves into natural attacks, as is so often seen. </p><br />
<p>This itself is sufficient demonstration, although I can elaborate for greater clarity, that play founded upon natural reason is with no comparison much better than artificious play. The latter was invented for no motive other than satisfying the curiosity of youth. If it were otherwise, it would not be the case, not only in public schools but also in the presence of nobility with the intervention of great princes, that professors of play founded upon such twists of the body had been touched assault after assault, with cuts and thrusts, as is clear and manifest to a great many people. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Four – On a defined ''punto'' to attack'''<ref> The term punto to signify a defined target area of the right shoulder is particular to the treatise of [[Marco Docciolini]].</ref></p><br />
<p>This seems to me an important subject, in order to be accomplished in assaults. I will merely state my thoughts on those who, as a principal maxim, hold and practise the opinion that it is better to attack only a single part of the body, namely the right shoulder, being the said punto. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, you must consider the reason why they observe this doctrine. I believe it is for no reason other than to strike either the nearest, or the most vulnerable part of the body. </p><br />
<p>If we suppose they hold this view, because they want to strike the nearest target, I completely refute their opinion. Hands and arms notwithstanding, I know how those who lean most stand, even their knees are closer and more likely to be attacked by the enemy. </p><br />
<p>If they wish to propose the other reason, that it is the most vulnerable part of the body, I can only oppose them entirely. It seems to me that the hands and arms are subjected to danger: both of being wounded, and of the intermediate outcome of losing the ability to attack. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore experience, which instructs in all things, shows us that in a good portion of combats you see wounds to the hands and arms. This is because these can more easily encounter the enemy's weapons. If they deem the area called the punto so vulnerable, I do not know which hands and arms are not in the same danger. In them you find veins, arteries and other very vulnerable areas which evidently have shown to cause the death of those wounded there. </p><br />
This is as much as I can say on this particular. I urge everyone to take the whole of the enemy's body as the fixed punto to attack, and specifically the part that presents itself as most uncovered and furthest forward. There is much more that could be said, for example if your opponent is left-handed, or in other situations, but to avoid tedium I will omit it. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Five – On a predetermined measure'''</p><br />
<p>In addition to the other pernicious matters in the virtue of fencing noted above, I absolutely detest the opinion of those who insist on, observe, and teach a predetermined measure. Since an opinion should not be proposed without foundation, I will prove this simple truth with active reason. </p><br />
<p>I have always observed, and heard, that people who are forced to fight, whether to defend themselves, or to confront someone who has caused them some offence, never have the benefit of being able to measure swords. Nor is this a given, since anyone can wear a sword of any length they please (speaking of Tuscany). They cannot even choose a piazza well suited for coming to blows, and neither are people equal in form, either in height or in build. </p><br />
<p>Now, if this is not the case, what is the point of habituating your foot, and arm to a predetermined measure? Moreover, you can easily see from experience that often there is no time to take measure, or the opportunity is denied, for example in badly paved streets, sometimes filled with a thousand pieces of rubbish, as mentioned above. </p><br />
<p>If someone, suddenly or intentionally, is obliged to fight, even if they find themselves in a nice, clean street, it is impossible for them to observe the measure of their steps; to defend themselves and attack, against someone who is naturally at ease in well-founded play, who naturally understands how to stay strongly on their feet, and deflect the enemy's blows, while at the same time attacking him, which seems to me the real principle. </p><br />
<p>You must concede, that this measure was invented simply for the encounters they like to conduct at royal pageants, which have been held several times in various places, and furthermore in itself to demonstrate how far they can extend their normal step. However it is absolutely unfit not just for combat in earnest, but even for the simple assaults you might practice. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Six – On voids'''</p><br />
<p>There should be little difference between this chapter and the previous one, since having to discuss voids, which produce the same result as a set measure, my argument will differ little from the one adopted above. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, let us consider its effect, which is nothing more than a withdrawal of the body, either back or to the side, to defend against an enemy's attack. I say that this withdrawal is as dangerous as trusting in a set measure, and the reason is as follows: someone who by chance comes to blows with an enemy cannot know if they wield a longer sword, whereby in wishing to void they can be wounded. Nor can they know how agile the sword's wielder is. </p><br />
<p>More importantly, when someone evades a blow with a void, they must necessarily lose a tempo in having to return forward to attack. If set upon during this tempo (which the enemy may attempt) they will find it very difficult to recover. </p><br />
<p>For this reason therefore, as a rule of good fencing you should never concede voids. Besides it increases the risk of stumbling in the streets, which as noted above can happen when placing yourself in a set measure. </p><br />
<p>Seeking to avoid any mishap that can occur is the utmost of a man's prudence. The greatest threats that arise are those to life. Against these principal dangers man must apply all his judgement. </p><br />
<p>If we know that voids, traverses, and a set measure manifestly cannot save us from an enemy's attack, why not use that convenient and very useful remedy: not to be subjected to such attacks by staying well-grounded, with firm and stable strength of both body and arm. This will suffice on this topic. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Seven – On feints'''</p><br />
<p>In the profession of fencing there are many frivolities and jests, or more accurately whimsies that you can use, either in public schools or in private settings. Among others there are feints. These can often be employed when fencing for enjoyment and fun, and similarly to improve your vision, since they also serve to train your eyes to be attentive. </p><br />
<p>But I like to believe that this practice was invented for nothing more than to defend yourself, or to attack your enemy, as the situation demands. In reality they reveal themselves as good only for entertainment, or to prolong lessons, and I am forced to say that feints are extremely dangerous to those who wish to perform them. They require two tempos, and in the true exercise of wielding the sword are manifestly unsafe. </p><br />
<p>In earnest, as we know, arms are employed for only two reasons. The first is to defend, the other is to attack. How then can someone who is confronted, as we have said before, hold forth with contrivances like feinting over and under the dagger, to the outside and inside of the sword, against the speed of the enemy's blows (especially if they are strong)? Against cuts as well as thrusts, when he does not adopt any kind of posture, but advancing with such blows? </p><br />
<p>I have no doubt that those in this predicament, stirred by many motives, leave aside all feints and attend only to defending their lives as best they can. </p><br />
<p>But can you imagine others, advancing phlegmatically to confront their enemy, to vindicate a wrong or harm done to them, redeeming themselves with the frivolities and jests of feints? </p><br />
<p>I will omit many examples, but fury transports them, reason is overcome. Honour necessitates that they leave aside taught feints, and instead follow natural instinct, but since I have explained this already, I will not expound further. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eight – On ''contrattempo'', ''mezzotempo'' and more'''</p><br />
<p>To cover the present topic it is worth returning to the same discussion in the previous chapter. The various fancies and follies, along with feints, are invented by certain masters I believe, not only to retain students so they stay longer at the school, but also to confuse them. This way they unlearn the good and study the bad, and will always have to remain students. </p><br />
<p>This is the case with the invention of ''mezzotempo'' and ''contrattempo''. These are brought to light, as I mentioned, only to keep the school running. </p><br />
<p>''Mezzotempo'', and other such terms, deform the good and true rules with too many fripperies. In reality you could never have a memory sharp enough to employ them in defence in a single tempo, or in attack. </p><br />
<p>These methods should be practised not in fencing, but in the realm of dance, where the variety of steps and agility of the leaps must astound the spectators. </p><br />
<p>But in this profession a single step, a single tempo must suffice. Deployed with the requisite accuracy and mastery it will always quash any ''contrattempo'' or ''mezzotempo'' you might encounter, and I profess that this is merely the truth. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Nine – On the so misshapen published figures of this exercise'''<br />
<p>If I believed myself alone, I would not dare to criticise the infinite sets of figures presented and drawn in published books. These are invented, I believe, to no other end but to demonstrate a multiplicity of distorted postures, which almost transcend the bounds of nature, and drag people towards the ridiculous, rather than to learning from viewing such contorted actions. </p><br />
<p>I would like to have some leeway, to leave some praise, but I see no way whatsoever, if not to say that these deformations are very suitable for clowns and tavern-singers, to entertain and extract money from a crowd. This is the praise I am able to concede. </p><br />
<p>If then I were to offer some polite criticism, I could begin by saying that these positions are monstrous, and impossible to witness within our profession. When have you ever seen people, either for enjoyment or necessity, employ such extravagant contortions, with their bodies so hunched and forced, and for the sword alone with the off-hand by the left ear, to employ it like a dagger to deflect thrusts?<ref>This passage, and arguably the entire chapter, appears to be targeted at [[Salvator Fabris]], whose treatise is notable for its deep and sometimes contorted stances.</ref></p><br />
<p>This is as far removed from the natural order as truth is from a lie. You do not take a sword in hand, to wield in earnest, with such exorbitant contortions. You should stand so you can operate naturally, all the more so when you find yourself on the street. There you may find many impediments, as I have said, and confirming what I have already said above, you must stand firmly on your feet, in a balanced posture from which you can draw strength to oppose the sword against all attacks, and as upright as possible so you do not become disordered.</p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Ten – On the guards and counterguards'''</p><br />
<p>There are many guards, great in number from various masters, which you can employ in the profession of fencing. To list them all, and discuss which of them is good or bad, would require a discourse beyond this brief one, expounded with an eloquence other than my own. Nonetheless my pen will write simply and plainly, to touch upon some of my thoughts. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, to demonstrate the extravagance of the guards invented, I will cite various names authors have given them, such as: ''coda lunga e stretta'', ''cingara'', ''porta di ferro'', ''beccapossa'',<ref> These guard names are characteristic of the Bolognese school of fencing. In particular the name ''beccapossa'' is specific to [[Achille Marozzo]].</ref>''belincorno'', prima, seconda, terza and quarta, and many others which I will omit, which together with these have been represented with figures in the books published up until now.</p><br />
<p>As to whether these are good or bad, any praise should be occasioned by their use. It cannot follow, although we have seen otherwise, that they endanger those who wish to employ them. However since no guard should be maligned without a basis, I will start by saying that in my opinion the guards to be employed should not be twisted or bizarre, nor overwrought with a paintbrush, nor measured with a compass, but simple and natural. In this manner the body finds itself stronger in resisting blows, and attacking when the occasion presents itself, without the manifest danger of stumbling and thereby compromising your life. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eleven – On those who wish to debate this practice'''</p><br />
<p>To further damage this profession of fencing, in my opinion, some presume to debate over blows and postures of whichever sort, formulating and postulating in the manner of someone conducting a philosophical debate. Discussions on subjects like the one I have mentioned, should be performed with actions alone. </p><br />
<p>This occurs because upon the path of this practice it is difficult to arrive at perfection. Many who take the path, at the first resistance, by a simple act of will desist from the endeavour. Seeing themselves inadequate, they sharpen their intellect to appear the equal of professors, and with their propositions lead astray those striving to obtain a complete understanding. </p><br />
<p>This is undeniable. In the practice of fencing, to engage someone in debate and discussion as if arguing theology (in place of conducting assaults) achieves nothing but to deny opportunities to those who desire to learn, to become excellent in practice. This is the motive I ascribe for this behaviour. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Twelve – Against a set rule for combat at night'''</p><br />
<p>In this simple discourse of mine, I wished to oppose every extravagance that the meanness of my intellect has encountered in the profession of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Therefore it seemed apt to contest also the opinion of those who hold a firm rule of giving true and real method of combat at night: that putting your hands to your weapons, you should quickly use them to seek the enemy’s sword, and having found it you must liberally deliver attacks to wound him. </p><br />
<p>They add to this another rule, no better than the first, that is to keep your body hunched to create a smaller target. </p><br />
<p>I address each of these as follows. </p><br />
<p>If confronted in the dark at night, how can you find your enemy's weapon without being attacked? </p><br />
<p>Why must you remain hunched, being deprived of ability and stature in defence and attack, in place of a strong and comfortable posture, remaining upright on your feet without hunching over? </p><br />
<p>Such a false opinion I would deem unsuitable even for the daytime where you can clearly see the enemy’s posture, and even when the enemy does not step to attack. </p><br />
<p>I firmly maintain that if you must fight at night, in such circumstances in the dark, you should deliver ''dritti'' and ''roversci'' as swiftly as you can. </p><br />
<p>Anything else is futile, without proposing many additional considerations for such instances, which for the sake of brevity I will omit. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Thirteen – On those masters who in giving lessons employ either a chestplate or a rod'''</p><br />
<p>Among the other notable detriments, caused by various extravagances, are those masters, some who give lessons with a chestplate, others with a rod. </p><br />
<p>Masters who wear a chestplate during lessons leads to nothing else, in my opinion, than that students deliver blows with an exorbitant step. Since the blows do not harm these said masters, they do not realise that, although they wish to protect the student, with these thrusts they harm them. </p><br />
<p>They become habituated to committing their body so much with every blow, that it becomes unlikely they could recover when performed in earnest. </p><br />
<p>Having delivered the thrust to their master's chestplate, they find resistance, lending them force to recover back, and they adopt the habit of abandoning their whole body into the attack.</p><br />
<p>Because of this with a sharp sword, not finding the resistance of the chestplate they have with the practice sword, they remain extended so far forwards that it is difficult (as stated) to avoid their enemy's attack. It can absolutely occur that instead of wounding their enemy, they are left injured. </p><br />
<p>Something similar can occur with students who are used to taking lesson from masters who hold a rod. Since it is much lighter than a sword it creates an extremely negative effect, giving rise to great setbacks. Its weakness, not having the same form as a sword, means whichever cut the rod delivers, it cannot force the student's sword to learn, as a sword would. </p><br />
<p>We can furthermore question, being habituated to parrying cuts from the rod, if when they receive cuts from a sword, they might become confused. </p><br />
<p>Being disordered they might apply the lessons learned reluctantly, since they do not even learn resolve. So I repeat, employing either a chestplate or a rod benefits only the master, and not the students. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Fourteen – On where some wish you to look when you fight'''</p><br />
<p>The variety of opinions on where to place your eyes during actions, both during assaults and in questions of honour, leads me to include this topic in this discourse of mine. Many want you to keep your eyes fixed to your enemy's face during combat. Others assert you should always watch the point of your opponent's sword. </p><br />
<p>I contradict both of these views. I say that keeping your eye on the point is of no use in combat, since it is unlikely your enemy's point ever stays still. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore it is so fine that when it is brandished at speed, someone who trusts in this proposition greatly deceives themselves; knowing full well that sharp swords are not like swords in schools with a button, which is rather large, although some schools might not use them. Therefore I consider this proposition in my own manner. </p><br />
<p>I also criticise the other opinion, of watching your enemy's face, because while keeping your eyes there it is unlikely you can understand and clearly discern the operations he performs with the sword. Often these are away from the face, and he might feint with his eyes to attack in one place, only to move the hand to offend elsewhere. </p><br />
<p>Therefore finding fault with both of the above opinions, I hold that another area is more appropriate, necessary, and without subjecting yourself to deceits more useful, which I will relate in due time in another treatise. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Fifteen – To those who greatly criticise cuts'''</p><br />
<p>Everyone must defend their profession with the rationales available, so I will not fail to show how mistaken are those who greatly criticise cuts in the practice of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Before opposing everything they state in favour of their position, I will explain the charges levelled against those who employ cuts. </p><br />
<p>The first is that cuts are not lethal, the second is that they are much shorter than thrusts, while cuts are further derided by the claim they are for brutes. </p><br />
<p>I refute the first by supposing, since death has taken many in our times by way of cuts, that no other reason is needed to affirm this truth. </p><br />
<p>I can counter the second with great ease, demonstrating how with the hand, and the same length of step and sword (when grasped), the same person can be wounded either by a cut or a thrust. This is better proved by experience than words (which I set out to do), as I have shown and performed many times in the presence of great princes. </p><br />
<p>I should raise a further consideration for those who criticise cuts, and it is this. When someone is confronted, and puts their hand to their sword to defend themself, do they negotiate with their enemy whether to use only thrusts (speaking of Tuscan lands)? If they can wound with both thrusts and cuts, then why not employ cuts, and learn to defend against them? </p><br />
<p>I can only believe that those who criticise cuts, understanding only thrusts, either have no power in their cuts, or do not know how to teach them (if they are masters), or have no time to practise them if they are students. </p><br />
<p>In every profession, to remain ahead of others you must pursue every possible avenue, even if indirect, but all the more so the true and good path, since every day in questions of honour we see that the majority of wounds are cuts to the hands, arms and face. For this reason swords with a hollow were invented.<ref> In the original simply ''spada con l'incavo''. It remains unclear whether Monesi is referring simply to a hollow-ground blade or deep fuller, or perhaps an indentation at the grip that might conceivably aid in cutting , like on some later sabres.</ref></p><br />
<p>Having explained the usefulness of cuts, I affirm once again that those who criticise them, claiming they are no good because they are for brutes, cause harm. An example of this is not keeping hold of the sword, so it falls to the ground, which has happened to many during simple assaults. Another is not having the ability to defend against cuts. I have useful advice to give in this regard, but to avoid being tedious, and admitting to discuss only superficial matters, I will not expound further, and will end my discourse of this subject. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Sixteen – Against numerous grips with the dagger'''</p><br />
<p>Having set myself to contradict falsehood with truth, I should say a few things on this subject. This is for those who strongly promote and encourage a multiplicity of grips with or against the dagger, many with a dagger and others unarmed, as something pertaining to the art of fencing. </p><br />
<p>I refute the quantity of grips described and delineated, and their operation, knowing very well as I have said elsewhere, that you do not negotiate with your opponent. This is from the many occurrences and events that are well-known without me having to describe them. </p><br />
<p>In fact I would dare say that the dagger is worse than the pistol, which can fail or misfire. The dagger is always loaded and ready to attack, and when someone has this weapon at their side and spots the opportunity to use it, I do not believe they will use it to threaten their enemy from distance. </p><br />
<p>Assuming they are not a coward, but resolute and courageous, they will approach as close as they have to. I doubt there will be time to counter, with any of these many grips that are supposed to defend against attacks, nor therefore would I say that dagger against dagger they could be of any benefit. </p><br />
<p>I will freely admit that some of the grips work in schools, of course, but as you know these daggers are without a point or a cutting edge. Many options can be proposed since there is no manifest danger. </p><br />
<p>I return to saying, that as a short weapon they are much quicker to draw, and more ready to wound. These grips are for the entertainment, and confusion, of students. This is what I have to say for now. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Seventeen – On a pike position that defends against any sort of missile weapon, including arquebus shots'''<ref> This is a clear reference to p.114-115 in ''Oplomachia'', the 1621 pike, halberd and musket treatise of [[Bonaventura Pistofilo]]. </p><br />
<p>''When an occasion arrives where you must grasp your sword, I urge you never to abandon your pike, whether it is broken or intact. Instead employ it at least to defend. Anyone can understand for themselves from figure 79, how useful this manner of holding the pike can be for defence.'' </p><br />
<p>''It protects against cavalry, infantry, and against any type of hand weapon; even against missile weapons such as javelins, darts, arrows, and similar arms, up to and including arquebus shots. As long as by chance they do not strike directly in the centre of the shaft, so that the balls instead skid aside, the man will be saved, as I have seen from experience.'' </p><br />
<p>''You must comport yourself such that everything is covered by the pike, maintaining your arm high and firmly extended. Your stance must be sufficiently wide for greater stability, with your sword ready to attack.'' </p><br />
<p>''If you then wish to return your sword to its sheath without abandoning the pike, or piece of haft left in your hand, figure 80 clearly demonstrates how without need for further explanation.''</ref></p><br />
<p>I have seen many authors publish thoughts which objectively can barely be sustained. This prompted me to highlight one marvellous opinion, held by a master not only of fencing but of many trades. </p><br />
<p>In one of his books, he assigns a posture with the sword in the right hand and a pike in the left, profiled towards that side like a barbican. He asserts it does not merely defend against cavalry and infantry, but from any sort of polearm, and also from arrows, javelins and even arquebus or musket shots. </p><br />
<p>The only caveat is that it must not hit the centre of the shaft, where it may break, which seems likely. I leave this to be pondered by anyone who professes the practice of arms. To authenticate this he claims to have seen it. </p><br />
<p>Emboldened by such a claim, I have taken common courage and confided to the pen that which was concealed in my mind. Because if such wonders have occurred they would refute not only my weak and poorly articulated arguments, but genuine and well-founded ones. </p><br />
<p>I do not blame that pikeman, whether his pike was whole or broken, if having to wield his sword he also employed his polearm. But with apologies, I can never have it believed that his haft could keep him safe from every attack, from every sort of weapon. Supposedly even the musket against which (the author says) the pike prevails, the musket ball skidding off one side or the other to be deflected without harm. </p><br />
<p>In truth I have not passed my years in war, where I might have witnessed such incidences, but have been in service of and enjoyed the company of many veteran soldiers. Foremost of all the Most Illustrious Sir Silvio Piccolomini of Aragon, a person of such esteem as is known throughout the world, having fulfilled many offices in war, for the Most Serene Highnesses of Tuscany and for other crowns. Yet I never heard from him or anybody else that the guard described is able to achieve what is claimed. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eighteen – Some admonishments for those who wear a sword'''</p><br />
<p>Any profession should be practised with every possible convenience, and a farmer who must be present when the grain is harvested in July should not wear a garment of heavy cloth.</p><br />
<p>Those who dedicate themselves to the profession of wearing a sword, so dangerous that we could say death always walks alongside it, in various respects should not wear any ornamentation of the body or clothes, or any other items that might disadvantage them when coming to blows. </p><br />
<p>An example more perilous than any other is high-heels, which can easily lead their owner to fall over. Or else sleeves that hang down from the tunic, which can subject someone who is confronted, or who confronts, to great trouble. </p><br />
<p>Likewise long hair, which when coming to grapple grants a clear advantage to the opponent, while bringing great danger to the bearer, even more so when curly in the extravagant style of today; also more specifically hair that comes to impede vision. </p><br />
<p>Also included among such impediments are clothes with large slashes, in the French fashion or in any other. They can cause no small detriment, being dangerous by hampering the drawing of weapons with the swiftness required. </p><br />
<p>I also wanted to mention those who carry daggers with a dangling rose. </p><br />
<p>This is for the benefit of all; because from the mishaps that have occurred, I am sure the impediments I have listed most often create danger for the lives of those who struggle with arms. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Nineteen – What moved me to write this discourse'''</p><br />
<p>Everything we do in this world has an end, and every endeavour wends towards its outcome. Therefore I felt it apt to declare in this final chapter, which motives moved me to stain these few sheets of paper (so to speak) with my coarse and ill-adapted thoughts, and to expose myself voluntarily to the censure of innumerable fine intellects. </p><br />
<p>The reason is that I have found infinite authors, who by means of the presses have professed to enrich the virtue of fencing by demonstrating various sorts of guards and means of combat, and numerous uses of weapons. Knowing that all these operations were shown for the simple practice of wielding a sword, I resolved to designate the true manner of exercising this profession seriously. It consists of nothing more than the simple assaults which are conducted for pleasure. </p><br />
<p>The reason for writing this discourse was none other than a real and genuine desire for the aficionados of this art to recognise the true method of practising it, to not further maltreat it, and to employ the advice provided for the benefit of their person. This is the motivation, as I have said previously, and the intention. </p><br />
<p>May the reader appreciate the willingness of my spirit; and may those habituated to Ciceronian eloquence, and to the exquisite vivacity of extraordinary conceptions, pity my rude pen, whose lowly scribbles have aspired only to reveal the truth. </p><br />
<p>Lastly I wanted to set out how having learned the voids and traverses, I found them ill-suited to real combat with a sharp sword, and I criticise them. </p><br />
<p>Although I praise cuts in practice for their excellent defence, even more so at night where they are the quickest blow to find their target, I do not wish praise them by themselves, I commend them when mixed with a good many thrusts. A dagger can interrupt and defend against thrusts, but is comfortably negated by cuts. </p><br />
<p>And here I come to a close. If God grants me health in months and not years I hope to bring forth fruit that is useful, with the most straightforward method, apt for real combat, distinguishing the characteristics of different people: whether large, powerful, small or weak, with appropriate rules. </p><br />
<p>All in honour of our Lord God, and the most Blessed Virgin Mary. </p><br />
<p>'''THE END. ''' </p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Copyright and License Summary<br />
| width = 100%<br />
}}<br />
For further information, including transcription and translation notes, see the [[Talk:{{PAGENAME}}|discussion page]].<br />
<br />
<section begin="sourcebox"/>{{sourcebox header}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Translation<br />
| authors = [[Piermarco Terminiello]]<br />
| source link = http://sword.school/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Monesi-Translation-1.pdf<br />
| source title = Objections and Admonishments on the Subject of Fencing By Jacopo Monesi (1640)<br />
| license = educational<br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox footer}}<section end="sourcebox"/><br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
<br />
{{Regional Italian traditions}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Translation]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Rapier]]<br />
[[Category:Dagger]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Compendio_e_discorso_di_tutto_quello_(Cod.10784)&diff=120509Compendio e discorso di tutto quello (Cod.10784)2020-11-18T19:42:55Z<p>P Terminiello: /* Additional Resources */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox manuscript<br />
<!----------Name----------><br />
| name = [[name::Compendio e discorso di tutto quello, in che consiste la virtù delle spada]]<br />
| location = [[inventory::Cod.10784]], [[museum::Österreichische Nationalbibliothek]]<br/>Vienna, Austria<br />
<!----------Image----------><br />
| image = <br />
| imageleft = File:Cod.10784 IVv.png<br />
| imageright = File:Cod.10784 Vr.png<br />
| width = x200px<br />
| caption = folio IVv - Vr<br />
<!----------General----------><br />
| Index number = [[WI::—]]<br />
| Wierschin's catalog= [[WC::—]]<br />
| Hils' catalog = [[HK::—]]<br />
| Beck catalog = [[BC::—]]<br />
| Also known as = <br />
| Type = [[type::Fencing manual]]<br />
| Date = [[year::1629]]<br />
| Place of origin = <br />
| Language(s) = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| Scribe(s) = <br />
| Author(s) = [[author::Giovanni Battista Maffani]]<br />
| Compiled by = <br />
| Illuminated by = Unknown<br />
| Patron = <br />
| Dedicated to = <br />
<!----------Form and content----------><br />
| Material = Paper<br />
| Size = 152 [[folia]]<br />
| Format = Double-sided<br />
| Condition = <br />
| Script = <br />
| Contents = <br />
| Illumination(s) = <br />
| Additions = <br />
| Exemplar(s) = <br />
| Previously kept = <br />
| Discovered = <br />
| Other = <br />
| Website = [http://data.onb.ac.at/rec/AL00163250 Library catalog entry]<br />
| Images = [http://data.onb.ac.at/dtl/3276124 Digital scans] (1900x2300)<br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
'''''Compendio e discorso di tutto quello, in che consiste la virtù delle spada''''' ("Compendium and Discourse on All Things, in Which Consists the Virtue of the Sword", Codex 10784) is a 17th century [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing manual]] written by [[Giovanni Battista Maffani]] in 1629. It resides in the holdings of the [[Österreichische Nationalbibliothek]] in Vienna, Austria. This largely theoretical treatise covers both the single [[rapier]] and the rapier and [[dagger]].<br />
<br />
== Provenance ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Contents ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Gallery ==<br />
<br />
[[http://data.onb.ac.at/dtl/3276124 Digital images] available for import.]<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
Transcription http://www.rapier.at/download/283/<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
<br />
== Copyright and License Summary ==<br />
<br />
For further information, including transcription and translation notes, see the [[Talk:{{PAGENAME}}|discussion page]].<br />
<br />
<section begin="sourcebox"/>{{sourcebox header}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Images<br />
| authors = [[Österreichische Nationalbibliothek]]<br />
| source link = http://data.onb.ac.at/rec/AL00163250<br />
| source title= Österreichische Nationalbibliothek<br />
| license = public domain<br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Transcription<br />
| authors = <br />
| source link = <br />
| source title= [[Index:Compendio e discorso di tutto quello (Cod.10784)]]<br />
| license = <br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox footer}}<section end="sourcebox"/><br />
<br />
[[Category:Treatises]]<br />
[[Category:Manuscripts]]<br />
[[Category:Content]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Research/Background Information]]<br />
[[Category:Image Processing]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Jacopo_Monesi&diff=120508Jacopo Monesi2020-11-18T19:31:35Z<p>P Terminiello: /* Treatise */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = Jacopo Monesi<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = 16th century (?)<br />
| birthplace = Florence, Italy (?)<br />
| deathdate = 17th century<br />
| deathplace = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set: occupation=Fencing master }}<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = <br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = Medici court<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| period = <br />
| movement = <br />
| influences =<br />
| influenced = <br />
<br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| notableworks = ''[[Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)| Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma]]'' (1640)<br />
| archetype = <br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= 1640<br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| signature = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
<p>'''Jacopo Monesi''' was an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing master]] during the first half of the [[century::17th century]]. </p><br />
<p>A native of Florence, he appears to have enjoyed enduring patronage and recognition in his own lifetime at the court of the Grand Duchy of Tuscany under Ferdinando II de' Medici. </p><br />
<p>A court document, dating to 1621, indicates Monesi's role included instructing the adolescent nobility at the grand ducal court (a claim supported by the title page of his own work): </p><br />
<p>''Jacopo of the Armourer, master of fencing, is one of several masters to the pages, together with the priest Albizio Vecchi, the undermaster Frediano Tinolfi, Giovanni Migliorucci master of writing, Leonardo Migliorucci, Giovanni Pieroni the arithmetist and mathematician, Remigio Cantagallina master of drawing, and Pitti Agnolo Ricci master of dance.''<ref>Archivio di Stato di Firenze, Miscellanea Medicea, 369, c.707. Cited by http://www.scrimipedia.it/mediawiki/index.php?title=Iacopo_Monesi (accessed 22 March 2017).</ref><br />
<p>In 1640 he published a short tract outlining his fencing philosophy: [[Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)| Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma]]. </p><br />
<p>Monesi's text contain little technical discussion, which he defers to a promised second volume that however is either lost or was never written. Instead, Monesi strongly critiques many theories and methodologies of his peers. Behind a veil of formal language excoriating those practices he views as frivolous, or detrimental to surviving an encounter in earnest. Monesi advocates a straightforward and direct philosophy of fencing. He eschews what he sees as unnecessary embellishments, or artefacts of salle fencing, and privileges what he considers practical for surviving an unpredictable and violent confrontation with sharp weapons. </p><br />
<p>He strongly affirms the efficacy of cuts, interspersed with thrusts; and favours simple and strong natural movements, stances, and attacks. In terms of pedagogy, he forcefully promotes the primacy of practising assaults, and laments that students in his day no longer assault with the frequency and gusto of earlier times. </p><br />
<p>Among other elements he criticises: feints, elaborate postures, mathematical concepts, excessive theoretical discussion, and dagger disarms, as unhelpful and impractical for a confrontation with sharps. Without naming names Monesi appears to clearly reference, again critically, the work of [[Docciolini]], [[Fabris]], [[Marozzo]], and [[Pistofilo]]. </p><br />
<p>Alongside such direct critiques, Monesi includes less specifically targeted remonstrations. For example, he objects to the pedagogical method of masters who employ a chestplate, or a cane in place of a sword. Similarly, he leaves space for conventional discussion points of the period, such as where to look when fencing, or how to approach combat at night.</p><br />
== Treatise ==<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Introduction and dedication| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
! <p>Translation</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''On the Subject of Fencing'''</p><br />
<p>'''By Jacopo Monesi'''</p><br />
<p>'''Known as the Armourer'''</p><br />
<p>'''Master of Arms to the Most Serene of Tuscany, and Their Gentleman Pages'''</p><br />
<p>'''Dedicated to the Most Illustrious Sir Count'''</p><br />
<p>'''Francesco Piccolomini of Aragon'''</p><br />
<p>'''In Florence, at the New Press M.DC.XXXX'''</p><br />
<p>With Permission from the Authorities</p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Most Illustrious and Noble Sir and Patron'''</p><br />
<p>The shade of your Most Illustrious Lordship's great protection, has generated in me an uncommon yearning to bring to light that which has been hidden in the shadows of my intellect for many years. For some time I have had in mind to make public certain discourses on the most excellent profession of fencing, but the awareness of my scarce ability to articulate them, caused the heat of my enthusiasm to cool. This yearning only then emerges, through confiding in the patronage of your Most Illustrious Lordship, wishing to express these concepts in the best manner possible. </p><br />
<p>Therefore this is entrusted only to you, as has happened in the past with honour, once again I opted for your support in bringing this forth, so that anything that is deemed monstrous will nonetheless (protected by the greatness of your Most Illustrious Lordship) be embraced, and be appraised with a not less than benign eye. </p><br />
<p>Please deign therefore to protect it with benevolence, recognising it as a sign of my dutiful observance to your Most Illustrious Lordship's great merit, to which I reverently bow, praying for your every most coveted happiness. </p><br />
<p>Your devoted and most obligated servant</p><br />
<p>Jacopo Monesi, known as the Armourer. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''To the Benevolent Reader'''</p><br />
<p>It has been for a number of years that despite the weakness of my intellect I have wanted to present my thoughts on the play of fencing, which has been my particular profession. But since the world has seen others elevated, and granted them brilliant ability with which they delight and are delighted, I considered it best to keep my thoughts buried within me. </p><br />
<p>Considering however that in some printed books you find an exorbitance of guards, and other extravagances, and witnessing this noble exercise reduced more to discourse than practice, the desire I have (if successful) to demonstrate the true play, and method of combat, made me resolve first to declare my objections, then to explain the correct method. </p><br />
<p>In conformance therefore with what the Most Illustrious Sir Silvio Piccolomini of Aragon <ref>Silvio Piccolomini was a knight of the Order of Santo Stefano, and noted fencer and military commander of his age. In the dedication of his own treatise [[Federico Ghisliero]] declares himself a student of Piccolomini, while his skill at fencing is further referenced by [[Cappoferro]] in his introduction to the reader, and by the French chronicler Michel de Montaigne. </ref> (excellent in this exercise, and more so in military disciplines) taught me, after my first master Cosimo Paradisi, in the chapters that follow I will narrate as openly as I can what is recounted. </p><br />
<p>But since the greatest detriment to this exercise, in my view, comes from neglecting to struggle with the sword in hand, in practising assaults, I will deal with this first, explaining the reasons why I believe this is, as I commence. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>''Might it please Sir Canon Carlo del Vigna to see if the present work contains anything repugnant to Christian piety, and public morals, and refer back. The 30th January 1639.'' </p><br />
Vincenzio Rabatta, Vicar of Florence<br />
<p>''In the present work, having reviewed it in all diligence, I found nothing repugnant to Christian piety, or public morals. 25th February 1639.''</p><br />
<p>Carlo del Vigna, Canon of Florence<br />
<p>''Most Reverend Father Inquisitor,''</p><br />
<p>''By your order of Most Reverend Father I have reviewed this present discourse on fencing, and I have not found anything repugnant to the Religion, orto public morals, judging it worthy of publication. 26th March 1640. ''</p><br />
<p>Girolamo Rosati, Protonotary and Consultant of the Holy Office</p><br />
<p>''This can be printed. Florence 3rd April 1640. ''</p><br />
<p>Father Giovanni Angeli, Vicar of the Holy Office, by order of</p><br />
<p>Senator Alessandro Vettori, Auditor of His Most Serene Highness</p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Notes on fencing| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
! <p>Translation</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''Chapter One'''</p><br />
<p>Ambition, which without fail is the cause of every ill, especially in virtuous exercises, I know to be the true basis and root of a rather notable vice. </p><br />
<p>Every day we see youths of such ambition, that under the cloak of letting their virtue be known, out of all proportion, neglect the importance of possessing such virtue, and as soon as they arrive in schools to learn, having imbibed just a few lessons, allow themselves to be inflated by excessive pretension, and judge themselves to be masters. </p><br />
<p>Therefore it happens (and I speak in particular of this exercise) that in public schools, and especially in private houses, with youths of equal quality gathered to practice assaults, you find some who do not grasp the sword if not to teach, nor to learn in any other way. This outlook is so pernicious, that for this reason you no longer hear of people gathering for common benefit and practice, and to pass the time in the virtue of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Those who have distinguished themselves up until now, demonstrating their valour and knowledge, in my view did not take this route. Indeed anxious to prove their worth as gallant men at every occasion, in any place, and against any person, I believe they sought to learn. Because to understand a discipline well, you have to practise it, you cannot learn with theory alone. </p><br />
<p>It is not a good way to master a skill, to think you can attain it without effort and sacrifice. Those who think to proceed like this, infallibly discover through experience how much they have deluded themselves. </p><br />
<p>Another active and real problem I bring up, just as damaging as the first although stemming from the same ambition, is the disparity between people. </p><br />
<p>You cannot deny that an artisan (who delights in virtue as is understandable), can through his diligence and vivacity arrive at the goal of fencing well with the sword. Indeed because this exercise is extremely capable of elevating the most lowly individual, it often happens that by applying their spirit, those of base condition become more distinguished. </p><br />
<p>The damage therefore that ambition brings, is to be ashamed to practice assaults with someone of lowly hand. To not consider you could extract some fruit even from these people, throwing yourself into the profession. </p><br />
<p>This thought is erroneous, because it is essential to know that virtue levels all people; and that a virtuoso can be considered the equal not just of a simple gentleman, but of any prince or great lord. </p><br />
<p>These are the reasons I give, demonstrating why today assaults are dismissed, neglecting the chance to benefit from the luxury of living, before the waning of youthful years deprives you of every worthwhile activity. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Two – On the same subject'''</p><br />
<p>You can clearly tell from my previous discourse how much damage ambition brings, and how it is a reason for not mastering this beautiful virtue of fencing. But I will now demonstrate furthermore how discussion of this profession, which today's students engage in more than practice, causes notable harm. The truth is that lessons taken in any subject in the day are of no use if their operations are not exercised. </p><br />
<p>That which pertains to bodies of reason: such as logic, philosophy, and so forth, must be put in practice with words alone, as they are necessary to expound such virtues. However in the profession of fencing words have no place to execute well what the students have learned from the master. </p><br />
<p>Actions are needed when it comes to training your body for defence and attack. </p><br />
<p>This is not applied by today's youth, which is a further reason why assaults no longer take place, and students neglect to learn wielding a sword in hand well. It then follows that masters are judged and branded as inept in their craft, since they no longer produce students as they did in the past. </p><br />
<p>When youngsters come together, sometimes from the schools of different masters in this profession, instead of putting their studies to the test, with the cloak across their shoulders, as well as with the simple sword in hand, they begin to discuss among themselves: “If I delivered this thrust how would you parry it?”. </p><br />
<p>The other replies “I would do it in this way, or like this” to which the first responds “But if it were a cut, how would you defend yourself” again its counter is added, and they carry on ad infinitum in this manner, disregarding gainful practice. </p><br />
<p>See if this is the best way to safeguard yourself, and benefit through the profession. Then test with a sharp sword (which could happen), whether these people would have time for such a parliament. </p><br />
<p>Action is required for exercises which engage the body, words cannot grant a student resolution to confront his opponent, or courage and practice to defend himself. This is as much as I thought to say on this matter. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Three – On putting mathematics into this virtue'''<ref>This chapter might apply to Italian treatises which incorporate mathematical principles, such as [[Camillo Agrippa]], but arguably targets in particular the Iberian forms of the ''Verdadera Destreza'', exemplified by [[Jerónimo Sánchez de Carranza]] and [[Luis Pacheco de Narváez]]. </ref></p><br />
<p>I have never presumed to malign anyone who professes to teach this noble exercise, nor do I intend to now, recognising myself as the inferior to many gallant men who have practised this virtue. But we are permitted to debate upon the lessons of some, who have taught and teach through mathematics, with the addition of lines, circles, traverses and extravagant voids of the body. </p><br />
<p>For me, these are commendable for fencing in a clean salle, furnished with even tiles. Likewise it is impossible for two people not to put on a good display, when they politely retreat, then void, or advance with a neat step, putting into practice what they have learned from their masters. </p><br />
<p>But if I imagine them outside the tiled hall, that is in the streets, where confrontations most often arise, then I can't help but criticise and malign them, since it is impossible (for reasons I will explain) to put these actions into practice. </p><br />
<p>Someone who is confronted or deliberately summoned to combat, cannot I believe, as happens in large armies, bring with them people to dig; to resurface the street so they can put themselves in the right posture, and use their lines, and advances of ground, and binds of the sword in conformance with their lessons. Instead, being confronted, they are obliged to think how to stand firmly on their feet, to be vigorous in defence and attack, ready of hand, without such fine distinctions of footwork. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore those who employ the sword in this manner, can be called good and beautiful fencers, but in an open space, or street where stones, holes, and cracks can cause you to stumble, they are always in danger of defending themselves poorly from their enemy. In such cases most of the time the artifices of traverses, voids and lines are left aside, and they throw themselves into natural attacks, as is so often seen. </p><br />
<p>This itself is sufficient demonstration, although I can elaborate for greater clarity, that play founded upon natural reason is with no comparison much better than artificious play. The latter was invented for no motive other than satisfying the curiosity of youth. If it were otherwise, it would not be the case, not only in public schools but also in the presence of nobility with the intervention of great princes, that professors of play founded upon such twists of the body had been touched assault after assault, with cuts and thrusts, as is clear and manifest to a great many people. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Four – On a defined ''punto'' to attack'''<ref> The term punto to signify a defined target area of the right shoulder is particular to the treatise of [[Marco Docciolini]].</ref></p><br />
<p>This seems to me an important subject, in order to be accomplished in assaults. I will merely state my thoughts on those who, as a principal maxim, hold and practise the opinion that it is better to attack only a single part of the body, namely the right shoulder, being the said punto. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, you must consider the reason why they observe this doctrine. I believe it is for no reason other than to strike either the nearest, or the most vulnerable part of the body. </p><br />
<p>If we suppose they hold this view, because they want to strike the nearest target, I completely refute their opinion. Hands and arms notwithstanding, I know how those who lean most stand, even their knees are closer and more likely to be attacked by the enemy. </p><br />
<p>If they wish to propose the other reason, that it is the most vulnerable part of the body, I can only oppose them entirely. It seems to me that the hands and arms are subjected to danger: both of being wounded, and of the intermediate outcome of losing the ability to attack. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore experience, which instructs in all things, shows us that in a good portion of combats you see wounds to the hands and arms. This is because these can more easily encounter the enemy's weapons. If they deem the area called the punto so vulnerable, I do not know which hands and arms are not in the same danger. In them you find veins, arteries and other very vulnerable areas which evidently have shown to cause the death of those wounded there. </p><br />
This is as much as I can say on this particular. I urge everyone to take the whole of the enemy's body as the fixed punto to attack, and specifically the part that presents itself as most uncovered and furthest forward. There is much more that could be said, for example if your opponent is left-handed, or in other situations, but to avoid tedium I will omit it. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Five – On a predetermined measure'''</p><br />
<p>In addition to the other pernicious matters in the virtue of fencing noted above, I absolutely detest the opinion of those who insist on, observe, and teach a predetermined measure. Since an opinion should not be proposed without foundation, I will prove this simple truth with active reason. </p><br />
<p>I have always observed, and heard, that people who are forced to fight, whether to defend themselves, or to confront someone who has caused them some offence, never have the benefit of being able to measure swords. Nor is this a given, since anyone can wear a sword of any length they please (speaking of Tuscany). They cannot even choose a piazza well suited for coming to blows, and neither are people equal in form, either in height or in build. </p><br />
<p>Now, if this is not the case, what is the point of habituating your foot, and arm to a predetermined measure? Moreover, you can easily see from experience that often there is no time to take measure, or the opportunity is denied, for example in badly paved streets, sometimes filled with a thousand pieces of rubbish, as mentioned above. </p><br />
<p>If someone, suddenly or intentionally, is obliged to fight, even if they find themselves in a nice, clean street, it is impossible for them to observe the measure of their steps; to defend themselves and attack, against someone who is naturally at ease in well-founded play, who naturally understands how to stay strongly on their feet, and deflect the enemy's blows, while at the same time attacking him, which seems to me the real principle. </p><br />
<p>You must concede, that this measure was invented simply for the encounters they like to conduct at royal pageants, which have been held several times in various places, and furthermore in itself to demonstrate how far they can extend their normal step. However it is absolutely unfit not just for combat in earnest, but even for the simple assaults you might practice. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Six – On voids'''</p><br />
<p>There should be little difference between this chapter and the previous one, since having to discuss voids, which produce the same result as a set measure, my argument will differ little from the one adopted above. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, let us consider its effect, which is nothing more than a withdrawal of the body, either back or to the side, to defend against an enemy's attack. I say that this withdrawal is as dangerous as trusting in a set measure, and the reason is as follows: someone who by chance comes to blows with an enemy cannot know if they wield a longer sword, whereby in wishing to void they can be wounded. Nor can they know how agile the sword's wielder is. </p><br />
<p>More importantly, when someone evades a blow with a void, they must necessarily lose a tempo in having to return forward to attack. If set upon during this tempo (which the enemy may attempt) they will find it very difficult to recover. </p><br />
<p>For this reason therefore, as a rule of good fencing you should never concede voids. Besides it increases the risk of stumbling in the streets, which as noted above can happen when placing yourself in a set measure. </p><br />
<p>Seeking to avoid any mishap that can occur is the utmost of a man's prudence. The greatest threats that arise are those to life. Against these principal dangers man must apply all his judgement. </p><br />
<p>If we know that voids, traverses, and a set measure manifestly cannot save us from an enemy's attack, why not use that convenient and very useful remedy: not to be subjected to such attacks by staying well-grounded, with firm and stable strength of both body and arm. This will suffice on this topic. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Seven – On feints'''</p><br />
<p>In the profession of fencing there are many frivolities and jests, or more accurately whimsies that you can use, either in public schools or in private settings. Among others there are feints. These can often be employed when fencing for enjoyment and fun, and similarly to improve your vision, since they also serve to train your eyes to be attentive. </p><br />
<p>But I like to believe that this practice was invented for nothing more than to defend yourself, or to attack your enemy, as the situation demands. In reality they reveal themselves as good only for entertainment, or to prolong lessons, and I am forced to say that feints are extremely dangerous to those who wish to perform them. They require two tempos, and in the true exercise of wielding the sword are manifestly unsafe. </p><br />
<p>In earnest, as we know, arms are employed for only two reasons. The first is to defend, the other is to attack. How then can someone who is confronted, as we have said before, hold forth with contrivances like feinting over and under the dagger, to the outside and inside of the sword, against the speed of the enemy's blows (especially if they are strong)? Against cuts as well as thrusts, when he does not adopt any kind of posture, but advancing with such blows? </p><br />
<p>I have no doubt that those in this predicament, stirred by many motives, leave aside all feints and attend only to defending their lives as best they can. </p><br />
<p>But can you imagine others, advancing phlegmatically to confront their enemy, to vindicate a wrong or harm done to them, redeeming themselves with the frivolities and jests of feints? </p><br />
<p>I will omit many examples, but fury transports them, reason is overcome. Honour necessitates that they leave aside taught feints, and instead follow natural instinct, but since I have explained this already, I will not expound further. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eight – On ''contrattempo'', ''mezzotempo'' and more'''</p><br />
<p>To cover the present topic it is worth returning to the same discussion in the previous chapter. The various fancies and follies, along with feints, are invented by certain masters I believe, not only to retain students so they stay longer at the school, but also to confuse them. This way they unlearn the good and study the bad, and will always have to remain students. </p><br />
<p>This is the case with the invention of ''mezzotempo'' and ''contrattempo''. These are brought to light, as I mentioned, only to keep the school running. </p><br />
<p>''Mezzotempo'', and other such terms, deform the good and true rules with too many fripperies. In reality you could never have a memory sharp enough to employ them in defence in a single tempo, or in attack. </p><br />
<p>These methods should be practised not in fencing, but in the realm of dance, where the variety of steps and agility of the leaps must astound the spectators. </p><br />
<p>But in this profession a single step, a single tempo must suffice. Deployed with the requisite accuracy and mastery it will always quash any ''contrattempo'' or ''mezzotempo'' you might encounter, and I profess that this is merely the truth. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Nine – On the so misshapen published figures of this exercise'''<br />
<p>If I believed myself alone, I would not dare to criticise the infinite sets of figures presented and drawn in published books. These are invented, I believe, to no other end but to demonstrate a multiplicity of distorted postures, which almost transcend the bounds of nature, and drag people towards the ridiculous, rather than to learning from viewing such contorted actions. </p><br />
<p>I would like to have some leeway, to leave some praise, but I see no way whatsoever, if not to say that these deformations are very suitable for clowns and tavern-singers, to entertain and extract money from a crowd. This is the praise I am able to concede. </p><br />
<p>If then I were to offer some polite criticism, I could begin by saying that these positions are monstrous, and impossible to witness within our profession. When have you ever seen people, either for enjoyment or necessity, employ such extravagant contortions, with their bodies so hunched and forced, and for the sword alone with the off-hand by the left ear, to employ it like a dagger to deflect thrusts?<ref>This passage, and arguably the entire chapter, appears to be targeted at [[Salvator Fabris]], whose treatise is notable for its deep and sometimes contorted stances.</ref></p><br />
<p>This is as far removed from the natural order as truth is from a lie. You do not take a sword in hand, to wield in earnest, with such exorbitant contortions. You should stand so you can operate naturally, all the more so when you find yourself on the street. There you may find many impediments, as I have said, and confirming what I have already said above, you must stand firmly on your feet, in a balanced posture from which you can draw strength to oppose the sword against all attacks, and as upright as possible so you do not become disordered.</p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Ten – On the guards and counterguards'''</p><br />
<p>There are many guards, great in number from various masters, which you can employ in the profession of fencing. To list them all, and discuss which of them is good or bad, would require a discourse beyond this brief one, expounded with an eloquence other than my own. Nonetheless my pen will write simply and plainly, to touch upon some of my thoughts. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, to demonstrate the extravagance of the guards invented, I will cite various names authors have given them, such as: ''coda lunga e stretta'', ''cingara'', ''porta di ferro'', ''beccapossa'',<ref> These guard names are characteristic of the Bolognese school of fencing. In particular the name ''beccapossa'' is specific to [[Achille Marozzo]].</ref>''belincorno'', prima, seconda, terza and quarta, and many others which I will omit, which together with these have been represented with figures in the books published up until now.</p><br />
<p>As to whether these are good or bad, any praise should be occasioned by their use. It cannot follow, although we have seen otherwise, that they endanger those who wish to employ them. However since no guard should be maligned without a basis, I will start by saying that in my opinion the guards to be employed should not be twisted or bizarre, nor overwrought with a paintbrush, nor measured with a compass, but simple and natural. In this manner the body finds itself stronger in resisting blows, and attacking when the occasion presents itself, without the manifest danger of stumbling and thereby compromising your life. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eleven – On those who wish to debate this practice'''</p><br />
<p>To further damage this profession of fencing, in my opinion, some presume to debate over blows and postures of whichever sort, formulating and postulating in the manner of someone conducting a philosophical debate. Discussions on subjects like the one I have mentioned, should be performed with actions alone. </p><br />
<p>This occurs because upon the path of this practice it is difficult to arrive at perfection. Many who take the path, at the first resistance, by a simple act of will desist from the endeavour. Seeing themselves inadequate, they sharpen their intellect to appear the equal of professors, and with their propositions lead astray those striving to obtain a complete understanding. </p><br />
<p>This is undeniable. In the practice of fencing, to engage someone in debate and discussion as if arguing theology (in place of conducting assaults) achieves nothing but to deny opportunities to those who desire to learn, to become excellent in practice. This is the motive I ascribe for this behaviour. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Twelve – Against a set rule for combat at night'''</p><br />
<p>In this simple discourse of mine, I wished to oppose every extravagance that the meanness of my intellect has encountered in the profession of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Therefore it seemed apt to contest also the opinion of those who hold a firm rule of giving true and real method of combat at night: that putting your hands to your weapons, you should quickly use them to seek the enemy’s sword, and having found it you must liberally deliver attacks to wound him. </p><br />
<p>They add to this another rule, no better than the first, that is to keep your body hunched to create a smaller target. </p><br />
<p>I address each of these as follows. </p><br />
<p>If confronted in the dark at night, how can you find your enemy's weapon without being attacked? </p><br />
<p>Why must you remain hunched, being deprived of ability and stature in defence and attack, in place of a strong and comfortable posture, remaining upright on your feet without hunching over? </p><br />
<p>Such a false opinion I would deem unsuitable even for the daytime where you can clearly see the enemy’s posture, and even when the enemy does not step to attack. </p><br />
<p>I firmly maintain that if you must fight at night, in such circumstances in the dark, you should deliver ''dritti'' and ''roversci'' as swiftly as you can. </p><br />
<p>Anything else is futile, without proposing many additional considerations for such instances, which for the sake of brevity I will omit. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Thirteen – On those masters who in giving lessons employ either a chestplate or a rod'''</p><br />
<p>Among the other notable detriments, caused by various extravagances, are those masters, some who give lessons with a chestplate, others with a rod. </p><br />
<p>Masters who wear a chestplate during lessons leads to nothing else, in my opinion, than that students deliver blows with an exorbitant step. Since the blows do not harm these said masters, they do not realise that, although they wish to protect the student, with these thrusts they harm them. </p><br />
<p>They become habituated to committing their body so much with every blow, that it becomes unlikely they could recover when performed in earnest. </p><br />
<p>Having delivered the thrust to their master's chestplate, they find resistance, lending them force to recover back, and they adopt the habit of abandoning their whole body into the attack.</p><br />
<p>Because of this with a sharp sword, not finding the resistance of the chestplate they have with the practice sword, they remain extended so far forwards that it is difficult (as stated) to avoid their enemy's attack. It can absolutely occur that instead of wounding their enemy, they are left injured. </p><br />
<p>Something similar can occur with students who are used to taking lesson from masters who hold a rod. Since it is much lighter than a sword it creates an extremely negative effect, giving rise to great setbacks. Its weakness, not having the same form as a sword, means whichever cut the rod delivers, it cannot force the student's sword to learn, as a sword would. </p><br />
<p>We can furthermore question, being habituated to parrying cuts from the rod, if when they receive cuts from a sword, they might become confused. </p><br />
<p>Being disordered they might apply the lessons learned reluctantly, since they do not even learn resolve. So I repeat, employing either a chestplate or a rod benefits only the master, and not the students. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Fourteen – On where some wish you to look when you fight'''</p><br />
<p>The variety of opinions on where to place your eyes during actions, both during assaults and in questions of honour, leads me to include this topic in this discourse of mine. Many want you to keep your eyes fixed to your enemy's face during combat. Others assert you should always watch the point of your opponent's sword. </p><br />
<p>I contradict both of these views. I say that keeping your eye on the point is of no use in combat, since it is unlikely your enemy's point ever stays still. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore it is so fine that when it is brandished at speed, someone who trusts in this proposition greatly deceives themselves; knowing full well that sharp swords are not like swords in schools with a button, which is rather large, although some schools might not use them. Therefore I consider this proposition in my own manner. </p><br />
<p>I also criticise the other opinion, of watching your enemy's face, because while keeping your eyes there it is unlikely you can understand and clearly discern the operations he performs with the sword. Often these are away from the face, and he might feint with his eyes to attack in one place, only to move the hand to offend elsewhere. </p><br />
<p>Therefore finding fault with both of the above opinions, I hold that another area is more appropriate, necessary, and without subjecting yourself to deceits more useful, which I will relate in due time in another treatise. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Fifteen – To those who greatly criticise cuts'''</p><br />
<p>Everyone must defend their profession with the rationales available, so I will not fail to show how mistaken are those who greatly criticise cuts in the practice of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Before opposing everything they state in favour of their position, I will explain the charges levelled against those who employ cuts. </p><br />
<p>The first is that cuts are not lethal, the second is that they are much shorter than thrusts, while cuts are further derided by the claim they are for brutes. </p><br />
<p>I refute the first by supposing, since death has taken many in our times by way of cuts, that no other reason is needed to affirm this truth. </p><br />
<p>I can counter the second with great ease, demonstrating how with the hand, and the same length of step and sword (when grasped), the same person can be wounded either by a cut or a thrust. This is better proved by experience than words (which I set out to do), as I have shown and performed many times in the presence of great princes. </p><br />
<p>I should raise a further consideration for those who criticise cuts, and it is this. When someone is confronted, and puts their hand to their sword to defend themself, do they negotiate with their enemy whether to use only thrusts (speaking of Tuscan lands)? If they can wound with both thrusts and cuts, then why not employ cuts, and learn to defend against them? </p><br />
<p>I can only believe that those who criticise cuts, understanding only thrusts, either have no power in their cuts, or do not know how to teach them (if they are masters), or have no time to practise them if they are students. </p><br />
<p>In every profession, to remain ahead of others you must pursue every possible avenue, even if indirect, but all the more so the true and good path, since every day in questions of honour we see that the majority of wounds are cuts to the hands, arms and face. For this reason swords with a hollow were invented.<ref> In the original simply ''spada con l'incavo''. It remains unclear whether Monesi is referring simply to a hollow-ground blade or deep fuller, or perhaps an indentation at the grip that might conceivably aid in cutting , like on some later sabres.</ref></p><br />
<p>Having explained the usefulness of cuts, I affirm once again that those who criticise them, claiming they are no good because they are for brutes, cause harm. An example of this is not keeping hold of the sword, so it falls to the ground, which has happened to many during simple assaults. Another is not having the ability to defend against cuts. I have useful advice to give in this regard, but to avoid being tedious, and admitting to discuss only superficial matters, I will not expound further, and will end my discourse of this subject. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Sixteen – Against numerous grips with the dagger'''</p><br />
<p>Having set myself to contradict falsehood with truth, I should say a few things on this subject. This is for those who strongly promote and encourage a multiplicity of grips with or against the dagger, many with a dagger and others unarmed, as something pertaining to the art of fencing. </p><br />
<p>I refute the quantity of grips described and delineated, and their operation, knowing very well as I have said elsewhere, that you do not negotiate with your opponent. This is from the many occurrences and events that are well-known without me having to describe them. </p><br />
<p>In fact I would dare say that the dagger is worse than the pistol, which can fail or misfire. The dagger is always loaded and ready to attack, and when someone has this weapon at their side and spots the opportunity to use it, I do not believe they will use it to threaten their enemy from distance. </p><br />
<p>Assuming they are not a coward, but resolute and courageous, they will approach as close as they have to. I doubt there will be time to counter, with any of these many grips that are supposed to defend against attacks, nor therefore would I say that dagger against dagger they could be of any benefit. </p><br />
<p>I will freely admit that some of the grips work in schools, of course, but as you know these daggers are without a point or a cutting edge. Many options can be proposed since there is no manifest danger. </p><br />
<p>I return to saying, that as a short weapon they are much quicker to draw, and more ready to wound. These grips are for the entertainment, and confusion, of students. This is what I have to say for now. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Seventeen – On a pike position that defends against any sort of missile weapon, including arquebus shots'''<ref> This is a clear reference to p.114-115 in ''Oplomachia'', the 1621 pike, halberd and musket treatise of [[Bonaventura Pistofilo]]. </p><br />
<p>''When an occasion arrives where you must grasp your sword, I urge you never to abandon your pike, whether it is broken or intact. Instead employ it at least to defend. Anyone can understand for themselves from figure 79, how useful this manner of holding the pike can be for defence.'' </p><br />
<p>''It protects against cavalry, infantry, and against any type of hand weapon; even against missile weapons such as javelins, darts, arrows, and similar arms, up to and including arquebus shots. As long as by chance they do not strike directly in the centre of the shaft, so that the balls instead skid aside, the man will be saved, as I have seen from experience.'' </p><br />
<p>''You must comport yourself such that everything is covered by the pike, maintaining your arm high and firmly extended. Your stance must be sufficiently wide for greater stability, with your sword ready to attack.'' </p><br />
<p>''If you then wish to return your sword to its sheath without abandoning the pike, or piece of haft left in your hand, figure 80 clearly demonstrates how without need for further explanation.''</ref></p><br />
<p>I have seen many authors publish thoughts which objectively can barely be sustained. This prompted me to highlight one marvellous opinion, held by a master not only of fencing but of many trades. </p><br />
<p>In one of his books, he assigns a posture with the sword in the right hand and a pike in the left, profiled towards that side like a barbican. He asserts it does not merely defend against cavalry and infantry, but from any sort of polearm, and also from arrows, javelins and even arquebus or musket shots. </p><br />
<p>The only caveat is that it must not hit the centre of the shaft, where it may break, which seems likely. I leave this to be pondered by anyone who professes the practice of arms. To authenticate this he claims to have seen it. </p><br />
<p>Emboldened by such a claim, I have taken common courage and confided to the pen that which was concealed in my mind. Because if such wonders have occurred they would refute not only my weak and poorly articulated arguments, but genuine and well-founded ones. </p><br />
<p>I do not blame that pikeman, whether his pike was whole or broken, if having to wield his sword he also employed his polearm. But with apologies, I can never have it believed that his haft could keep him safe from every attack, from every sort of weapon. Supposedly even the musket against which (the author says) the pike prevails, the musket ball skidding off one side or the other to be deflected without harm. </p><br />
<p>In truth I have not passed my years in war, where I might have witnessed such incidences, but have been in service of and enjoyed the company of many veteran soldiers. Foremost of all the Most Illustrious Sir Silvio Piccolomini of Aragon, a person of such esteem as is known throughout the world, having fulfilled many offices in war, for the Most Serene Highnesses of Tuscany and for other crowns. Yet I never heard from him or anybody else that the guard described is able to achieve what is claimed. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eighteen – Some admonishments for those who wear a sword'''</p><br />
<p>Any profession should be practised with every possible convenience, and a farmer who must be present when the grain is harvested in July should not wear a garment of heavy cloth.</p><br />
<p>Those who dedicate themselves to the profession of wearing a sword, so dangerous that we could say death always walks alongside it, in various respects should not wear any ornamentation of the body or clothes, or any other items that might disadvantage them when coming to blows. </p><br />
<p>An example more perilous than any other is high-heels, which can easily lead their owner to fall over. Or else sleeves that hang down from the tunic, which can subject someone who is confronted, or who confronts, to great trouble. </p><br />
<p>Likewise long hair, which when coming to grapple grants a clear advantage to the opponent, while bringing great danger to the bearer, even more so when curly in the extravagant style of today; also more specifically hair that comes to impede vision. </p><br />
<p>Also included among such impediments are clothes with large slashes, in the French fashion or in any other. They can cause no small detriment, being dangerous by hampering the drawing of weapons with the swiftness required. </p><br />
<p>I also wanted to mention those who carry daggers with a dangling rose. </p><br />
<p>This is for the benefit of all; because from the mishaps that have occurred, I am sure the impediments I have listed most often create danger for the lives of those who struggle with arms. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Nineteen – What moved me to write this discourse'''</p><br />
<p>Everything we do in this world has an end, and every endeavour wends towards its outcome. Therefore I felt it apt to declare in this final chapter, which motives moved me to stain these few sheets of paper (so to speak) with my coarse and ill-adapted thoughts, and to expose myself voluntarily to the censure of innumerable fine intellects. </p><br />
<p>The reason is that I have found infinite authors, who by means of the presses have professed to enrich the virtue of fencing by demonstrating various sorts of guards and means of combat, and numerous uses of weapons. Knowing that all these operations were shown for the simple practice of wielding a sword, I resolved to designate the true manner of exercising this profession seriously. It consists of nothing more than the simple assaults which are conducted for pleasure. </p><br />
<p>The reason for writing this discourse was none other than a real and genuine desire for the aficionados of this art to recognise the true method of practising it, to not further maltreat it, and to employ the advice provided for the benefit of their person. This is the motivation, as I have said previously, and the intention. </p><br />
<p>May the reader appreciate the willingness of my spirit; and may those habituated to Ciceronian eloquence, and to the exquisite vivacity of extraordinary conceptions, pity my rude pen, whose lowly scribbles have aspired only to reveal the truth. </p><br />
<p>Lastly I wanted to set out how having learned the voids and traverses, I found them ill-suited to real combat with a sharp sword, and I criticise them. </p><br />
<p>Although I praise cuts in practice for their excellent defence, even more so at night where they are the quickest blow to find their target, I do not wish praise them by themselves, I commend them when mixed with a good many thrusts. A dagger can interrupt and defend against thrusts, but is comfortably negated by cuts. </p><br />
<p>And here I come to a close. If God grants me health in months and not years I hope to bring forth fruit that is useful, with the most straightforward method, apt for real combat, distinguishing the characteristics of different people: whether large, powerful, small or weak, with appropriate rules. </p><br />
<p>All in honour of our Lord God, and the most Blessed Virgin Mary. </p><br />
<p>'''THE END. ''' </p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Copyright and License Summary<br />
| width = 100%<br />
}}<br />
For further information, including transcription and translation notes, see the [[Talk:{{PAGENAME}}|discussion page]].<br />
<br />
<section begin="sourcebox"/>{{sourcebox header}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Translation<br />
| authors = [[Piermarco Terminiello]]<br />
| source link = http://sword.school/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Monesi-Translation-1.pdf<br />
| source title = Objections and Admonishments on the Subject of Fencing By Jacopo Monesi (1640)<br />
| license = educational<br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox footer}}<section end="sourcebox"/><br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
<br />
{{Regional Italian traditions}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Translation]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Rapier]]<br />
[[Category:Dagger]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Jacopo_Monesi&diff=120507Jacopo Monesi2020-11-18T19:29:11Z<p>P Terminiello: /* Treatise */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = Jacopo Monesi<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = 16th century (?)<br />
| birthplace = Florence, Italy (?)<br />
| deathdate = 17th century<br />
| deathplace = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set: occupation=Fencing master }}<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = <br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = Medici court<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| period = <br />
| movement = <br />
| influences =<br />
| influenced = <br />
<br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| notableworks = ''[[Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)| Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma]]'' (1640)<br />
| archetype = <br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= 1640<br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| signature = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
<p>'''Jacopo Monesi''' was an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing master]] during the first half of the [[century::17th century]]. </p><br />
<p>A native of Florence, he appears to have enjoyed enduring patronage and recognition in his own lifetime at the court of the Grand Duchy of Tuscany under Ferdinando II de' Medici. </p><br />
<p>A court document, dating to 1621, indicates Monesi's role included instructing the adolescent nobility at the grand ducal court (a claim supported by the title page of his own work): </p><br />
<p>''Jacopo of the Armourer, master of fencing, is one of several masters to the pages, together with the priest Albizio Vecchi, the undermaster Frediano Tinolfi, Giovanni Migliorucci master of writing, Leonardo Migliorucci, Giovanni Pieroni the arithmetist and mathematician, Remigio Cantagallina master of drawing, and Pitti Agnolo Ricci master of dance.''<ref>Archivio di Stato di Firenze, Miscellanea Medicea, 369, c.707. Cited by http://www.scrimipedia.it/mediawiki/index.php?title=Iacopo_Monesi (accessed 22 March 2017).</ref><br />
<p>In 1640 he published a short tract outlining his fencing philosophy: [[Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)| Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma]]. </p><br />
<p>Monesi's text contain little technical discussion, which he defers to a promised second volume that however is either lost or was never written. Instead, Monesi strongly critiques many theories and methodologies of his peers. Behind a veil of formal language excoriating those practices he views as frivolous, or detrimental to surviving an encounter in earnest. Monesi advocates a straightforward and direct philosophy of fencing. He eschews what he sees as unnecessary embellishments, or artefacts of salle fencing, and privileges what he considers practical for surviving an unpredictable and violent confrontation with sharp weapons. </p><br />
<p>He strongly affirms the efficacy of cuts, interspersed with thrusts; and favours simple and strong natural movements, stances, and attacks. In terms of pedagogy, he forcefully promotes the primacy of practising assaults, and laments that students in his day no longer assault with the frequency and gusto of earlier times. </p><br />
<p>Among other elements he criticises: feints, elaborate postures, mathematical concepts, excessive theoretical discussion, and dagger disarms, as unhelpful and impractical for a confrontation with sharps. Without naming names Monesi appears to clearly reference, again critically, the work of [[Docciolini]], [[Fabris]], [[Marozzo]], and [[Pistofilo]]. </p><br />
<p>Alongside such direct critiques, Monesi includes less specifically targeted remonstrations. For example, he objects to the pedagogical method of masters who employ a chestplate, or a cane in place of a sword. Similarly, he leaves space for conventional discussion points of the period, such as where to look when fencing, or how to approach combat at night.</p><br />
== Treatise ==<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Introduction and dedication| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
! <p>Translation</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''On the Subject of Fencing'''</p><br />
<p>'''By Jacopo Monesi'''</p><br />
<p>'''Known as the Armourer'''</p><br />
<p>'''Master of Arms to the Most Serene of Tuscany, and Their Gentleman Pages'''</p><br />
<p>'''Dedicated to the Most Illustrious Sir Count'''</p><br />
<p>'''Francesco Piccolomini of Aragon'''</p><br />
<p>'''In Florence, at the New Press M.DC.XXXX'''</p><br />
<p>With Permission from the Authorities</p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Most Illustrious and Noble Sir and Patron'''</p><br />
<p>The shade of your Most Illustrious Lordship's great protection, has generated in me an uncommon yearning to bring to light that which has been hidden in the shadows of my intellect for many years. For some time I have had in mind to make public certain discourses on the most excellent profession of fencing, but the awareness of my scarce ability to articulate them, caused the heat of my enthusiasm to cool. This yearning only then emerges, through confiding in the patronage of your Most Illustrious Lordship, wishing to express these concepts in the best manner possible. </p><br />
<p>Therefore this is entrusted only to you, as has happened in the past with honour, once again I opted for your support in bringing this forth, so that anything that is deemed monstrous will nonetheless (protected by the greatness of your Most Illustrious Lordship) be embraced, and be appraised with a not less than benign eye. </p><br />
<p>Please deign therefore to protect it with benevolence, recognising it as a sign of my dutiful observance to your Most Illustrious Lordship's great merit, to which I reverently bow, praying for your every most coveted happiness. </p><br />
<p>Your devoted and most obligated servant</p><br />
<p>Jacopo Monesi, known as the Armourer. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''To the Benevolent Reader'''</p><br />
<p>It has been for a number of years that despite the weakness of my intellect I have wanted to present my thoughts on the play of fencing, which has been my particular profession. But since the world has seen others elevated, and granted them brilliant ability with which they delight and are delighted, I considered it best to keep my thoughts buried within me. </p><br />
<p>Considering however that in some printed books you find an exorbitance of guards, and other extravagances, and witnessing this noble exercise reduced more to discourse than practice, the desire I have (if successful) to demonstrate the true play, and method of combat, made me resolve first to declare my objections, then to explain the correct method. </p><br />
<p>In conformance therefore with what the Most Illustrious Sir Silvio Piccolomini of Aragon <ref>Silvio Piccolomini was a knight of the Order of Santo Stefano, and noted fencer and military commander of his age. In the dedication of his own treatise [[Federico Ghisliero]] declares himself a student of Piccolomini, while his skill at fencing is further referenced by [[Cappoferro]] in his introduction to the reader, and by the French chronicler Michel de Montaigne. </ref> (excellent in this exercise, and more so in military disciplines) taught me, after my first master Cosimo Paradisi, in the chapters that follow I will narrate as openly as I can what is recounted. </p><br />
<p>But since the greatest detriment to this exercise, in my view, comes from neglecting to struggle with the sword in hand, in practising assaults, I will deal with this first, explaining the reasons why I believe this is, as I commence. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>''Might it please Sir Canon Carlo del Vigna to see if the present work contains anything repugnant to Christian piety, and public morals, and refer back. The 30th January 1639.'' </p><br />
Vincenzio Rabatta, Vicar of Florence<br />
<p>''In the present work, having reviewed it in all diligence, I found nothing repugnant to Christian piety, or public morals. 25th February 1639.''</p><br />
<p>Carlo del Vigna, Canon of Florence<br />
<p>''Most Reverend Father Inquisitor,''</p><br />
<p>''By your order of Most Reverend Father I have reviewed this present discourse on fencing, and I have not found anything repugnant to the Religion, orto public morals, judging it worthy of publication. 26th March 1640. ''</p><br />
<p>Girolamo Rosati, Protonotary and Consultant of the Holy Office</p><br />
<p>''This can be printed. Florence 3rd April 1640. ''</p><br />
<p>Father Giovanni Angeli, Vicar of the Holy Office, by order of</p><br />
<p>Senator Alessandro Vettori, Auditor of His Most Serene Highness</p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Notes on fencing| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
! <p>Transcription</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''Chapter One'''</p><br />
<p>Ambition, which without fail is the cause of every ill, especially in virtuous exercises, I know to be the true basis and root of a rather notable vice. </p><br />
<p>Every day we see youths of such ambition, that under the cloak of letting their virtue be known, out of all proportion, neglect the importance of possessing such virtue, and as soon as they arrive in schools to learn, having imbibed just a few lessons, allow themselves to be inflated by excessive pretension, and judge themselves to be masters. </p><br />
<p>Therefore it happens (and I speak in particular of this exercise) that in public schools, and especially in private houses, with youths of equal quality gathered to practice assaults, you find some who do not grasp the sword if not to teach, nor to learn in any other way. This outlook is so pernicious, that for this reason you no longer hear of people gathering for common benefit and practice, and to pass the time in the virtue of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Those who have distinguished themselves up until now, demonstrating their valour and knowledge, in my view did not take this route. Indeed anxious to prove their worth as gallant men at every occasion, in any place, and against any person, I believe they sought to learn. Because to understand a discipline well, you have to practise it, you cannot learn with theory alone. </p><br />
<p>It is not a good way to master a skill, to think you can attain it without effort and sacrifice. Those who think to proceed like this, infallibly discover through experience how much they have deluded themselves. </p><br />
<p>Another active and real problem I bring up, just as damaging as the first although stemming from the same ambition, is the disparity between people. </p><br />
<p>You cannot deny that an artisan (who delights in virtue as is understandable), can through his diligence and vivacity arrive at the goal of fencing well with the sword. Indeed because this exercise is extremely capable of elevating the most lowly individual, it often happens that by applying their spirit, those of base condition become more distinguished. </p><br />
<p>The damage therefore that ambition brings, is to be ashamed to practice assaults with someone of lowly hand. To not consider you could extract some fruit even from these people, throwing yourself into the profession. </p><br />
<p>This thought is erroneous, because it is essential to know that virtue levels all people; and that a virtuoso can be considered the equal not just of a simple gentleman, but of any prince or great lord. </p><br />
<p>These are the reasons I give, demonstrating why today assaults are dismissed, neglecting the chance to benefit from the luxury of living, before the waning of youthful years deprives you of every worthwhile activity. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Two – On the same subject'''</p><br />
<p>You can clearly tell from my previous discourse how much damage ambition brings, and how it is a reason for not mastering this beautiful virtue of fencing. But I will now demonstrate furthermore how discussion of this profession, which today's students engage in more than practice, causes notable harm. The truth is that lessons taken in any subject in the day are of no use if their operations are not exercised. </p><br />
<p>That which pertains to bodies of reason: such as logic, philosophy, and so forth, must be put in practice with words alone, as they are necessary to expound such virtues. However in the profession of fencing words have no place to execute well what the students have learned from the master. </p><br />
<p>Actions are needed when it comes to training your body for defence and attack. </p><br />
<p>This is not applied by today's youth, which is a further reason why assaults no longer take place, and students neglect to learn wielding a sword in hand well. It then follows that masters are judged and branded as inept in their craft, since they no longer produce students as they did in the past. </p><br />
<p>When youngsters come together, sometimes from the schools of different masters in this profession, instead of putting their studies to the test, with the cloak across their shoulders, as well as with the simple sword in hand, they begin to discuss among themselves: “If I delivered this thrust how would you parry it?”. </p><br />
<p>The other replies “I would do it in this way, or like this” to which the first responds “But if it were a cut, how would you defend yourself” again its counter is added, and they carry on ad infinitum in this manner, disregarding gainful practice. </p><br />
<p>See if this is the best way to safeguard yourself, and benefit through the profession. Then test with a sharp sword (which could happen), whether these people would have time for such a parliament. </p><br />
<p>Action is required for exercises which engage the body, words cannot grant a student resolution to confront his opponent, or courage and practice to defend himself. This is as much as I thought to say on this matter. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Three – On putting mathematics into this virtue'''<ref>This chapter might apply to Italian treatises which incorporate mathematical principles, such as [[Camillo Agrippa]], but arguably targets in particular the Iberian forms of the ''Verdadera Destreza'', exemplified by [[Jerónimo Sánchez de Carranza]] and [[Luis Pacheco de Narváez]]. </ref></p><br />
<p>I have never presumed to malign anyone who professes to teach this noble exercise, nor do I intend to now, recognising myself as the inferior to many gallant men who have practised this virtue. But we are permitted to debate upon the lessons of some, who have taught and teach through mathematics, with the addition of lines, circles, traverses and extravagant voids of the body. </p><br />
<p>For me, these are commendable for fencing in a clean salle, furnished with even tiles. Likewise it is impossible for two people not to put on a good display, when they politely retreat, then void, or advance with a neat step, putting into practice what they have learned from their masters. </p><br />
<p>But if I imagine them outside the tiled hall, that is in the streets, where confrontations most often arise, then I can't help but criticise and malign them, since it is impossible (for reasons I will explain) to put these actions into practice. </p><br />
<p>Someone who is confronted or deliberately summoned to combat, cannot I believe, as happens in large armies, bring with them people to dig; to resurface the street so they can put themselves in the right posture, and use their lines, and advances of ground, and binds of the sword in conformance with their lessons. Instead, being confronted, they are obliged to think how to stand firmly on their feet, to be vigorous in defence and attack, ready of hand, without such fine distinctions of footwork. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore those who employ the sword in this manner, can be called good and beautiful fencers, but in an open space, or street where stones, holes, and cracks can cause you to stumble, they are always in danger of defending themselves poorly from their enemy. In such cases most of the time the artifices of traverses, voids and lines are left aside, and they throw themselves into natural attacks, as is so often seen. </p><br />
<p>This itself is sufficient demonstration, although I can elaborate for greater clarity, that play founded upon natural reason is with no comparison much better than artificious play. The latter was invented for no motive other than satisfying the curiosity of youth. If it were otherwise, it would not be the case, not only in public schools but also in the presence of nobility with the intervention of great princes, that professors of play founded upon such twists of the body had been touched assault after assault, with cuts and thrusts, as is clear and manifest to a great many people. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Four – On a defined ''punto'' to attack'''<ref> The term punto to signify a defined target area of the right shoulder is particular to the treatise of [[Marco Docciolini]].</ref></p><br />
<p>This seems to me an important subject, in order to be accomplished in assaults. I will merely state my thoughts on those who, as a principal maxim, hold and practise the opinion that it is better to attack only a single part of the body, namely the right shoulder, being the said punto. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, you must consider the reason why they observe this doctrine. I believe it is for no reason other than to strike either the nearest, or the most vulnerable part of the body. </p><br />
<p>If we suppose they hold this view, because they want to strike the nearest target, I completely refute their opinion. Hands and arms notwithstanding, I know how those who lean most stand, even their knees are closer and more likely to be attacked by the enemy. </p><br />
<p>If they wish to propose the other reason, that it is the most vulnerable part of the body, I can only oppose them entirely. It seems to me that the hands and arms are subjected to danger: both of being wounded, and of the intermediate outcome of losing the ability to attack. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore experience, which instructs in all things, shows us that in a good portion of combats you see wounds to the hands and arms. This is because these can more easily encounter the enemy's weapons. If they deem the area called the punto so vulnerable, I do not know which hands and arms are not in the same danger. In them you find veins, arteries and other very vulnerable areas which evidently have shown to cause the death of those wounded there. </p><br />
This is as much as I can say on this particular. I urge everyone to take the whole of the enemy's body as the fixed punto to attack, and specifically the part that presents itself as most uncovered and furthest forward. There is much more that could be said, for example if your opponent is left-handed, or in other situations, but to avoid tedium I will omit it. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Five – On a predetermined measure'''</p><br />
<p>In addition to the other pernicious matters in the virtue of fencing noted above, I absolutely detest the opinion of those who insist on, observe, and teach a predetermined measure. Since an opinion should not be proposed without foundation, I will prove this simple truth with active reason. </p><br />
<p>I have always observed, and heard, that people who are forced to fight, whether to defend themselves, or to confront someone who has caused them some offence, never have the benefit of being able to measure swords. Nor is this a given, since anyone can wear a sword of any length they please (speaking of Tuscany). They cannot even choose a piazza well suited for coming to blows, and neither are people equal in form, either in height or in build. </p><br />
<p>Now, if this is not the case, what is the point of habituating your foot, and arm to a predetermined measure? Moreover, you can easily see from experience that often there is no time to take measure, or the opportunity is denied, for example in badly paved streets, sometimes filled with a thousand pieces of rubbish, as mentioned above. </p><br />
<p>If someone, suddenly or intentionally, is obliged to fight, even if they find themselves in a nice, clean street, it is impossible for them to observe the measure of their steps; to defend themselves and attack, against someone who is naturally at ease in well-founded play, who naturally understands how to stay strongly on their feet, and deflect the enemy's blows, while at the same time attacking him, which seems to me the real principle. </p><br />
<p>You must concede, that this measure was invented simply for the encounters they like to conduct at royal pageants, which have been held several times in various places, and furthermore in itself to demonstrate how far they can extend their normal step. However it is absolutely unfit not just for combat in earnest, but even for the simple assaults you might practice. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Six – On voids'''</p><br />
<p>There should be little difference between this chapter and the previous one, since having to discuss voids, which produce the same result as a set measure, my argument will differ little from the one adopted above. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, let us consider its effect, which is nothing more than a withdrawal of the body, either back or to the side, to defend against an enemy's attack. I say that this withdrawal is as dangerous as trusting in a set measure, and the reason is as follows: someone who by chance comes to blows with an enemy cannot know if they wield a longer sword, whereby in wishing to void they can be wounded. Nor can they know how agile the sword's wielder is. </p><br />
<p>More importantly, when someone evades a blow with a void, they must necessarily lose a tempo in having to return forward to attack. If set upon during this tempo (which the enemy may attempt) they will find it very difficult to recover. </p><br />
<p>For this reason therefore, as a rule of good fencing you should never concede voids. Besides it increases the risk of stumbling in the streets, which as noted above can happen when placing yourself in a set measure. </p><br />
<p>Seeking to avoid any mishap that can occur is the utmost of a man's prudence. The greatest threats that arise are those to life. Against these principal dangers man must apply all his judgement. </p><br />
<p>If we know that voids, traverses, and a set measure manifestly cannot save us from an enemy's attack, why not use that convenient and very useful remedy: not to be subjected to such attacks by staying well-grounded, with firm and stable strength of both body and arm. This will suffice on this topic. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Seven – On feints'''</p><br />
<p>In the profession of fencing there are many frivolities and jests, or more accurately whimsies that you can use, either in public schools or in private settings. Among others there are feints. These can often be employed when fencing for enjoyment and fun, and similarly to improve your vision, since they also serve to train your eyes to be attentive. </p><br />
<p>But I like to believe that this practice was invented for nothing more than to defend yourself, or to attack your enemy, as the situation demands. In reality they reveal themselves as good only for entertainment, or to prolong lessons, and I am forced to say that feints are extremely dangerous to those who wish to perform them. They require two tempos, and in the true exercise of wielding the sword are manifestly unsafe. </p><br />
<p>In earnest, as we know, arms are employed for only two reasons. The first is to defend, the other is to attack. How then can someone who is confronted, as we have said before, hold forth with contrivances like feinting over and under the dagger, to the outside and inside of the sword, against the speed of the enemy's blows (especially if they are strong)? Against cuts as well as thrusts, when he does not adopt any kind of posture, but advancing with such blows? </p><br />
<p>I have no doubt that those in this predicament, stirred by many motives, leave aside all feints and attend only to defending their lives as best they can. </p><br />
<p>But can you imagine others, advancing phlegmatically to confront their enemy, to vindicate a wrong or harm done to them, redeeming themselves with the frivolities and jests of feints? </p><br />
<p>I will omit many examples, but fury transports them, reason is overcome. Honour necessitates that they leave aside taught feints, and instead follow natural instinct, but since I have explained this already, I will not expound further. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eight – On ''contrattempo'', ''mezzotempo'' and more'''</p><br />
<p>To cover the present topic it is worth returning to the same discussion in the previous chapter. The various fancies and follies, along with feints, are invented by certain masters I believe, not only to retain students so they stay longer at the school, but also to confuse them. This way they unlearn the good and study the bad, and will always have to remain students. </p><br />
<p>This is the case with the invention of ''mezzotempo'' and ''contrattempo''. These are brought to light, as I mentioned, only to keep the school running. </p><br />
<p>''Mezzotempo'', and other such terms, deform the good and true rules with too many fripperies. In reality you could never have a memory sharp enough to employ them in defence in a single tempo, or in attack. </p><br />
<p>These methods should be practised not in fencing, but in the realm of dance, where the variety of steps and agility of the leaps must astound the spectators. </p><br />
<p>But in this profession a single step, a single tempo must suffice. Deployed with the requisite accuracy and mastery it will always quash any ''contrattempo'' or ''mezzotempo'' you might encounter, and I profess that this is merely the truth. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Nine – On the so misshapen published figures of this exercise'''<br />
<p>If I believed myself alone, I would not dare to criticise the infinite sets of figures presented and drawn in published books. These are invented, I believe, to no other end but to demonstrate a multiplicity of distorted postures, which almost transcend the bounds of nature, and drag people towards the ridiculous, rather than to learning from viewing such contorted actions. </p><br />
<p>I would like to have some leeway, to leave some praise, but I see no way whatsoever, if not to say that these deformations are very suitable for clowns and tavern-singers, to entertain and extract money from a crowd. This is the praise I am able to concede. </p><br />
<p>If then I were to offer some polite criticism, I could begin by saying that these positions are monstrous, and impossible to witness within our profession. When have you ever seen people, either for enjoyment or necessity, employ such extravagant contortions, with their bodies so hunched and forced, and for the sword alone with the off-hand by the left ear, to employ it like a dagger to deflect thrusts?<ref>This passage, and arguably the entire chapter, appears to be targeted at [[Salvator Fabris]], whose treatise is notable for its deep and sometimes contorted stances.</ref></p><br />
<p>This is as far removed from the natural order as truth is from a lie. You do not take a sword in hand, to wield in earnest, with such exorbitant contortions. You should stand so you can operate naturally, all the more so when you find yourself on the street. There you may find many impediments, as I have said, and confirming what I have already said above, you must stand firmly on your feet, in a balanced posture from which you can draw strength to oppose the sword against all attacks, and as upright as possible so you do not become disordered.</p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Ten – On the guards and counterguards'''</p><br />
<p>There are many guards, great in number from various masters, which you can employ in the profession of fencing. To list them all, and discuss which of them is good or bad, would require a discourse beyond this brief one, expounded with an eloquence other than my own. Nonetheless my pen will write simply and plainly, to touch upon some of my thoughts. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, to demonstrate the extravagance of the guards invented, I will cite various names authors have given them, such as: ''coda lunga e stretta'', ''cingara'', ''porta di ferro'', ''beccapossa'',<ref> These guard names are characteristic of the Bolognese school of fencing. In particular the name ''beccapossa'' is specific to [[Achille Marozzo]].</ref>''belincorno'', prima, seconda, terza and quarta, and many others which I will omit, which together with these have been represented with figures in the books published up until now.</p><br />
<p>As to whether these are good or bad, any praise should be occasioned by their use. It cannot follow, although we have seen otherwise, that they endanger those who wish to employ them. However since no guard should be maligned without a basis, I will start by saying that in my opinion the guards to be employed should not be twisted or bizarre, nor overwrought with a paintbrush, nor measured with a compass, but simple and natural. In this manner the body finds itself stronger in resisting blows, and attacking when the occasion presents itself, without the manifest danger of stumbling and thereby compromising your life. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eleven – On those who wish to debate this practice'''</p><br />
<p>To further damage this profession of fencing, in my opinion, some presume to debate over blows and postures of whichever sort, formulating and postulating in the manner of someone conducting a philosophical debate. Discussions on subjects like the one I have mentioned, should be performed with actions alone. </p><br />
<p>This occurs because upon the path of this practice it is difficult to arrive at perfection. Many who take the path, at the first resistance, by a simple act of will desist from the endeavour. Seeing themselves inadequate, they sharpen their intellect to appear the equal of professors, and with their propositions lead astray those striving to obtain a complete understanding. </p><br />
<p>This is undeniable. In the practice of fencing, to engage someone in debate and discussion as if arguing theology (in place of conducting assaults) achieves nothing but to deny opportunities to those who desire to learn, to become excellent in practice. This is the motive I ascribe for this behaviour. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Twelve – Against a set rule for combat at night'''</p><br />
<p>In this simple discourse of mine, I wished to oppose every extravagance that the meanness of my intellect has encountered in the profession of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Therefore it seemed apt to contest also the opinion of those who hold a firm rule of giving true and real method of combat at night: that putting your hands to your weapons, you should quickly use them to seek the enemy’s sword, and having found it you must liberally deliver attacks to wound him. </p><br />
<p>They add to this another rule, no better than the first, that is to keep your body hunched to create a smaller target. </p><br />
<p>I address each of these as follows. </p><br />
<p>If confronted in the dark at night, how can you find your enemy's weapon without being attacked? </p><br />
<p>Why must you remain hunched, being deprived of ability and stature in defence and attack, in place of a strong and comfortable posture, remaining upright on your feet without hunching over? </p><br />
<p>Such a false opinion I would deem unsuitable even for the daytime where you can clearly see the enemy’s posture, and even when the enemy does not step to attack. </p><br />
<p>I firmly maintain that if you must fight at night, in such circumstances in the dark, you should deliver ''dritti'' and ''roversci'' as swiftly as you can. </p><br />
<p>Anything else is futile, without proposing many additional considerations for such instances, which for the sake of brevity I will omit. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Thirteen – On those masters who in giving lessons employ either a chestplate or a rod'''</p><br />
<p>Among the other notable detriments, caused by various extravagances, are those masters, some who give lessons with a chestplate, others with a rod. </p><br />
<p>Masters who wear a chestplate during lessons leads to nothing else, in my opinion, than that students deliver blows with an exorbitant step. Since the blows do not harm these said masters, they do not realise that, although they wish to protect the student, with these thrusts they harm them. </p><br />
<p>They become habituated to committing their body so much with every blow, that it becomes unlikely they could recover when performed in earnest. </p><br />
<p>Having delivered the thrust to their master's chestplate, they find resistance, lending them force to recover back, and they adopt the habit of abandoning their whole body into the attack.</p><br />
<p>Because of this with a sharp sword, not finding the resistance of the chestplate they have with the practice sword, they remain extended so far forwards that it is difficult (as stated) to avoid their enemy's attack. It can absolutely occur that instead of wounding their enemy, they are left injured. </p><br />
<p>Something similar can occur with students who are used to taking lesson from masters who hold a rod. Since it is much lighter than a sword it creates an extremely negative effect, giving rise to great setbacks. Its weakness, not having the same form as a sword, means whichever cut the rod delivers, it cannot force the student's sword to learn, as a sword would. </p><br />
<p>We can furthermore question, being habituated to parrying cuts from the rod, if when they receive cuts from a sword, they might become confused. </p><br />
<p>Being disordered they might apply the lessons learned reluctantly, since they do not even learn resolve. So I repeat, employing either a chestplate or a rod benefits only the master, and not the students. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Fourteen – On where some wish you to look when you fight'''</p><br />
<p>The variety of opinions on where to place your eyes during actions, both during assaults and in questions of honour, leads me to include this topic in this discourse of mine. Many want you to keep your eyes fixed to your enemy's face during combat. Others assert you should always watch the point of your opponent's sword. </p><br />
<p>I contradict both of these views. I say that keeping your eye on the point is of no use in combat, since it is unlikely your enemy's point ever stays still. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore it is so fine that when it is brandished at speed, someone who trusts in this proposition greatly deceives themselves; knowing full well that sharp swords are not like swords in schools with a button, which is rather large, although some schools might not use them. Therefore I consider this proposition in my own manner. </p><br />
<p>I also criticise the other opinion, of watching your enemy's face, because while keeping your eyes there it is unlikely you can understand and clearly discern the operations he performs with the sword. Often these are away from the face, and he might feint with his eyes to attack in one place, only to move the hand to offend elsewhere. </p><br />
<p>Therefore finding fault with both of the above opinions, I hold that another area is more appropriate, necessary, and without subjecting yourself to deceits more useful, which I will relate in due time in another treatise. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Fifteen – To those who greatly criticise cuts'''</p><br />
<p>Everyone must defend their profession with the rationales available, so I will not fail to show how mistaken are those who greatly criticise cuts in the practice of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Before opposing everything they state in favour of their position, I will explain the charges levelled against those who employ cuts. </p><br />
<p>The first is that cuts are not lethal, the second is that they are much shorter than thrusts, while cuts are further derided by the claim they are for brutes. </p><br />
<p>I refute the first by supposing, since death has taken many in our times by way of cuts, that no other reason is needed to affirm this truth. </p><br />
<p>I can counter the second with great ease, demonstrating how with the hand, and the same length of step and sword (when grasped), the same person can be wounded either by a cut or a thrust. This is better proved by experience than words (which I set out to do), as I have shown and performed many times in the presence of great princes. </p><br />
<p>I should raise a further consideration for those who criticise cuts, and it is this. When someone is confronted, and puts their hand to their sword to defend themself, do they negotiate with their enemy whether to use only thrusts (speaking of Tuscan lands)? If they can wound with both thrusts and cuts, then why not employ cuts, and learn to defend against them? </p><br />
<p>I can only believe that those who criticise cuts, understanding only thrusts, either have no power in their cuts, or do not know how to teach them (if they are masters), or have no time to practise them if they are students. </p><br />
<p>In every profession, to remain ahead of others you must pursue every possible avenue, even if indirect, but all the more so the true and good path, since every day in questions of honour we see that the majority of wounds are cuts to the hands, arms and face. For this reason swords with a hollow were invented.<ref> In the original simply ''spada con l'incavo''. It remains unclear whether Monesi is referring simply to a hollow-ground blade or deep fuller, or perhaps an indentation at the grip that might conceivably aid in cutting , like on some later sabres.</ref></p><br />
<p>Having explained the usefulness of cuts, I affirm once again that those who criticise them, claiming they are no good because they are for brutes, cause harm. An example of this is not keeping hold of the sword, so it falls to the ground, which has happened to many during simple assaults. Another is not having the ability to defend against cuts. I have useful advice to give in this regard, but to avoid being tedious, and admitting to discuss only superficial matters, I will not expound further, and will end my discourse of this subject. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Sixteen – Against numerous grips with the dagger'''</p><br />
<p>Having set myself to contradict falsehood with truth, I should say a few things on this subject. This is for those who strongly promote and encourage a multiplicity of grips with or against the dagger, many with a dagger and others unarmed, as something pertaining to the art of fencing. </p><br />
<p>I refute the quantity of grips described and delineated, and their operation, knowing very well as I have said elsewhere, that you do not negotiate with your opponent. This is from the many occurrences and events that are well-known without me having to describe them. </p><br />
<p>In fact I would dare say that the dagger is worse than the pistol, which can fail or misfire. The dagger is always loaded and ready to attack, and when someone has this weapon at their side and spots the opportunity to use it, I do not believe they will use it to threaten their enemy from distance. </p><br />
<p>Assuming they are not a coward, but resolute and courageous, they will approach as close as they have to. I doubt there will be time to counter, with any of these many grips that are supposed to defend against attacks, nor therefore would I say that dagger against dagger they could be of any benefit. </p><br />
<p>I will freely admit that some of the grips work in schools, of course, but as you know these daggers are without a point or a cutting edge. Many options can be proposed since there is no manifest danger. </p><br />
<p>I return to saying, that as a short weapon they are much quicker to draw, and more ready to wound. These grips are for the entertainment, and confusion, of students. This is what I have to say for now. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Seventeen – On a pike position that defends against any sort of missile weapon, including arquebus shots'''<ref> This is a clear reference to p.114-115 in ''Oplomachia'', the 1621 pike, halberd and musket treatise of [[Bonaventura Pistofilo]]. </p><br />
<p>''When an occasion arrives where you must grasp your sword, I urge you never to abandon your pike, whether it is broken or intact. Instead employ it at least to defend. Anyone can understand for themselves from figure 79, how useful this manner of holding the pike can be for defence.'' </p><br />
<p>''It protects against cavalry, infantry, and against any type of hand weapon; even against missile weapons such as javelins, darts, arrows, and similar arms, up to and including arquebus shots. As long as by chance they do not strike directly in the centre of the shaft, so that the balls instead skid aside, the man will be saved, as I have seen from experience.'' </p><br />
<p>''You must comport yourself such that everything is covered by the pike, maintaining your arm high and firmly extended. Your stance must be sufficiently wide for greater stability, with your sword ready to attack.'' </p><br />
<p>''If you then wish to return your sword to its sheath without abandoning the pike, or piece of haft left in your hand, figure 80 clearly demonstrates how without need for further explanation.''</ref></p><br />
<p>I have seen many authors publish thoughts which objectively can barely be sustained. This prompted me to highlight one marvellous opinion, held by a master not only of fencing but of many trades. </p><br />
<p>In one of his books, he assigns a posture with the sword in the right hand and a pike in the left, profiled towards that side like a barbican. He asserts it does not merely defend against cavalry and infantry, but from any sort of polearm, and also from arrows, javelins and even arquebus or musket shots. </p><br />
<p>The only caveat is that it must not hit the centre of the shaft, where it may break, which seems likely. I leave this to be pondered by anyone who professes the practice of arms. To authenticate this he claims to have seen it. </p><br />
<p>Emboldened by such a claim, I have taken common courage and confided to the pen that which was concealed in my mind. Because if such wonders have occurred they would refute not only my weak and poorly articulated arguments, but genuine and well-founded ones. </p><br />
<p>I do not blame that pikeman, whether his pike was whole or broken, if having to wield his sword he also employed his polearm. But with apologies, I can never have it believed that his haft could keep him safe from every attack, from every sort of weapon. Supposedly even the musket against which (the author says) the pike prevails, the musket ball skidding off one side or the other to be deflected without harm. </p><br />
<p>In truth I have not passed my years in war, where I might have witnessed such incidences, but have been in service of and enjoyed the company of many veteran soldiers. Foremost of all the Most Illustrious Sir Silvio Piccolomini of Aragon, a person of such esteem as is known throughout the world, having fulfilled many offices in war, for the Most Serene Highnesses of Tuscany and for other crowns. Yet I never heard from him or anybody else that the guard described is able to achieve what is claimed. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eighteen – Some admonishments for those who wear a sword'''</p><br />
<p>Any profession should be practised with every possible convenience, and a farmer who must be present when the grain is harvested in July should not wear a garment of heavy cloth.</p><br />
<p>Those who dedicate themselves to the profession of wearing a sword, so dangerous that we could say death always walks alongside it, in various respects should not wear any ornamentation of the body or clothes, or any other items that might disadvantage them when coming to blows. </p><br />
<p>An example more perilous than any other is high-heels, which can easily lead their owner to fall over. Or else sleeves that hang down from the tunic, which can subject someone who is confronted, or who confronts, to great trouble. </p><br />
<p>Likewise long hair, which when coming to grapple grants a clear advantage to the opponent, while bringing great danger to the bearer, even more so when curly in the extravagant style of today; also more specifically hair that comes to impede vision. </p><br />
<p>Also included among such impediments are clothes with large slashes, in the French fashion or in any other. They can cause no small detriment, being dangerous by hampering the drawing of weapons with the swiftness required. </p><br />
<p>I also wanted to mention those who carry daggers with a dangling rose. </p><br />
<p>This is for the benefit of all; because from the mishaps that have occurred, I am sure the impediments I have listed most often create danger for the lives of those who struggle with arms. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Nineteen – What moved me to write this discourse'''</p><br />
<p>Everything we do in this world has an end, and every endeavour wends towards its outcome. Therefore I felt it apt to declare in this final chapter, which motives moved me to stain these few sheets of paper (so to speak) with my coarse and ill-adapted thoughts, and to expose myself voluntarily to the censure of innumerable fine intellects. </p><br />
<p>The reason is that I have found infinite authors, who by means of the presses have professed to enrich the virtue of fencing by demonstrating various sorts of guards and means of combat, and numerous uses of weapons. Knowing that all these operations were shown for the simple practice of wielding a sword, I resolved to designate the true manner of exercising this profession seriously. It consists of nothing more than the simple assaults which are conducted for pleasure. </p><br />
<p>The reason for writing this discourse was none other than a real and genuine desire for the aficionados of this art to recognise the true method of practising it, to not further maltreat it, and to employ the advice provided for the benefit of their person. This is the motivation, as I have said previously, and the intention. </p><br />
<p>May the reader appreciate the willingness of my spirit; and may those habituated to Ciceronian eloquence, and to the exquisite vivacity of extraordinary conceptions, pity my rude pen, whose lowly scribbles have aspired only to reveal the truth. </p><br />
<p>Lastly I wanted to set out how having learned the voids and traverses, I found them ill-suited to real combat with a sharp sword, and I criticise them. </p><br />
<p>Although I praise cuts in practice for their excellent defence, even more so at night where they are the quickest blow to find their target, I do not wish praise them by themselves, I commend them when mixed with a good many thrusts. A dagger can interrupt and defend against thrusts, but is comfortably negated by cuts. </p><br />
<p>And here I come to a close. If God grants me health in months and not years I hope to bring forth fruit that is useful, with the most straightforward method, apt for real combat, distinguishing the characteristics of different people: whether large, powerful, small or weak, with appropriate rules. </p><br />
<p>All in honour of our Lord God, and the most Blessed Virgin Mary. </p><br />
<p>'''THE END. ''' </p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Copyright and License Summary<br />
| width = 100%<br />
}}<br />
For further information, including transcription and translation notes, see the [[Talk:{{PAGENAME}}|discussion page]].<br />
<br />
<section begin="sourcebox"/>{{sourcebox header}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Translation<br />
| authors = [[Piermarco Terminiello]]<br />
| source link = http://sword.school/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Monesi-Translation-1.pdf<br />
| source title = Objections and Admonishments on the Subject of Fencing By Jacopo Monesi (1640)<br />
| license = educational<br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox footer}}<section end="sourcebox"/><br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
<br />
{{Regional Italian traditions}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Translation]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Rapier]]<br />
[[Category:Dagger]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Jacopo_Monesi&diff=120506Jacopo Monesi2020-11-18T19:22:03Z<p>P Terminiello: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = Jacopo Monesi<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = 16th century (?)<br />
| birthplace = Florence, Italy (?)<br />
| deathdate = 17th century<br />
| deathplace = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set: occupation=Fencing master }}<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = <br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = Medici court<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| period = <br />
| movement = <br />
| influences =<br />
| influenced = <br />
<br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| notableworks = ''[[Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)| Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma]]'' (1640)<br />
| archetype = <br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= 1640<br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| signature = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
<p>'''Jacopo Monesi''' was an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing master]] during the first half of the [[century::17th century]]. </p><br />
<p>A native of Florence, he appears to have enjoyed enduring patronage and recognition in his own lifetime at the court of the Grand Duchy of Tuscany under Ferdinando II de' Medici. </p><br />
<p>A court document, dating to 1621, indicates Monesi's role included instructing the adolescent nobility at the grand ducal court (a claim supported by the title page of his own work): </p><br />
<p>''Jacopo of the Armourer, master of fencing, is one of several masters to the pages, together with the priest Albizio Vecchi, the undermaster Frediano Tinolfi, Giovanni Migliorucci master of writing, Leonardo Migliorucci, Giovanni Pieroni the arithmetist and mathematician, Remigio Cantagallina master of drawing, and Pitti Agnolo Ricci master of dance.''<ref>Archivio di Stato di Firenze, Miscellanea Medicea, 369, c.707. Cited by http://www.scrimipedia.it/mediawiki/index.php?title=Iacopo_Monesi (accessed 22 March 2017).</ref><br />
<p>In 1640 he published a short tract outlining his fencing philosophy: [[Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)| Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma]]. </p><br />
<p>Monesi's text contain little technical discussion, which he defers to a promised second volume that however is either lost or was never written. Instead, Monesi strongly critiques many theories and methodologies of his peers. Behind a veil of formal language excoriating those practices he views as frivolous, or detrimental to surviving an encounter in earnest. Monesi advocates a straightforward and direct philosophy of fencing. He eschews what he sees as unnecessary embellishments, or artefacts of salle fencing, and privileges what he considers practical for surviving an unpredictable and violent confrontation with sharp weapons. </p><br />
<p>He strongly affirms the efficacy of cuts, interspersed with thrusts; and favours simple and strong natural movements, stances, and attacks. In terms of pedagogy, he forcefully promotes the primacy of practising assaults, and laments that students in his day no longer assault with the frequency and gusto of earlier times. </p><br />
<p>Among other elements he criticises: feints, elaborate postures, mathematical concepts, excessive theoretical discussion, and dagger disarms, as unhelpful and impractical for a confrontation with sharps. Without naming names Monesi appears to clearly reference, again critically, the work of [[Docciolini]], [[Fabris]], [[Marozzo]], and [[Pistofilo]]. </p><br />
<p>Alongside such direct critiques, Monesi includes less specifically targeted remonstrations. For example, he objects to the pedagogical method of masters who employ a chestplate, or a cane in place of a sword. Similarly, he leaves space for conventional discussion points of the period, such as where to look when fencing, or how to approach combat at night.</p><br />
== Treatise ==<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Introduction and dedication| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
! <p>Transcription</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''On the Subject of Fencing'''</p><br />
<p>'''By Jacopo Monesi'''</p><br />
<p>'''Known as the Armourer'''</p><br />
<p>'''Master of Arms to the Most Serene of Tuscany, and Their Gentleman Pages'''</p><br />
<p>'''Dedicated to the Most Illustrious Sir Count'''</p><br />
<p>'''Francesco Piccolomini of Aragon'''</p><br />
<p>'''In Florence, at the New Press M.DC.XXXX'''</p><br />
<p>With Permission from the Authorities</p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Most Illustrious and Noble Sir and Patron'''</p><br />
<p>The shade of your Most Illustrious Lordship's great protection, has generated in me an uncommon yearning to bring to light that which has been hidden in the shadows of my intellect for many years. For some time I have had in mind to make public certain discourses on the most excellent profession of fencing, but the awareness of my scarce ability to articulate them, caused the heat of my enthusiasm to cool. This yearning only then emerges, through confiding in the patronage of your Most Illustrious Lordship, wishing to express these concepts in the best manner possible. </p><br />
<p>Therefore this is entrusted only to you, as has happened in the past with honour, once again I opted for your support in bringing this forth, so that anything that is deemed monstrous will nonetheless (protected by the greatness of your Most Illustrious Lordship) be embraced, and be appraised with a not less than benign eye. </p><br />
<p>Please deign therefore to protect it with benevolence, recognising it as a sign of my dutiful observance to your Most Illustrious Lordship's great merit, to which I reverently bow, praying for your every most coveted happiness. </p><br />
<p>Your devoted and most obligated servant</p><br />
<p>Jacopo Monesi, known as the Armourer. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''To the Benevolent Reader'''</p><br />
<p>It has been for a number of years that despite the weakness of my intellect I have wanted to present my thoughts on the play of fencing, which has been my particular profession. But since the world has seen others elevated, and granted them brilliant ability with which they delight and are delighted, I considered it best to keep my thoughts buried within me. </p><br />
<p>Considering however that in some printed books you find an exorbitance of guards, and other extravagances, and witnessing this noble exercise reduced more to discourse than practice, the desire I have (if successful) to demonstrate the true play, and method of combat, made me resolve first to declare my objections, then to explain the correct method. </p><br />
<p>In conformance therefore with what the Most Illustrious Sir Silvio Piccolomini of Aragon <ref>Silvio Piccolomini was a knight of the Order of Santo Stefano, and noted fencer and military commander of his age. In the dedication of his own treatise [[Federico Ghisliero]] declares himself a student of Piccolomini, while his skill at fencing is further referenced by [[Cappoferro]] in his introduction to the reader, and by the French chronicler Michel de Montaigne. </ref> (excellent in this exercise, and more so in military disciplines) taught me, after my first master Cosimo Paradisi, in the chapters that follow I will narrate as openly as I can what is recounted. </p><br />
<p>But since the greatest detriment to this exercise, in my view, comes from neglecting to struggle with the sword in hand, in practising assaults, I will deal with this first, explaining the reasons why I believe this is, as I commence. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>''Might it please Sir Canon Carlo del Vigna to see if the present work contains anything repugnant to Christian piety, and public morals, and refer back. The 30th January 1639.'' </p><br />
Vincenzio Rabatta, Vicar of Florence<br />
<p>''In the present work, having reviewed it in all diligence, I found nothing repugnant to Christian piety, or public morals. 25th February 1639.''</p><br />
<p>Carlo del Vigna, Canon of Florence<br />
<p>''Most Reverend Father Inquisitor,''</p><br />
<p>''By your order of Most Reverend Father I have reviewed this present discourse on fencing, and I have not found anything repugnant to the Religion, orto public morals, judging it worthy of publication. 26th March 1640. ''</p><br />
<p>Girolamo Rosati, Protonotary and Consultant of the Holy Office</p><br />
<p>''This can be printed. Florence 3rd April 1640. ''</p><br />
<p>Father Giovanni Angeli, Vicar of the Holy Office, by order of</p><br />
<p>Senator Alessandro Vettori, Auditor of His Most Serene Highness</p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Notes on fencing| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
! <p>Transcription</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''Chapter One'''</p><br />
<p>Ambition, which without fail is the cause of every ill, especially in virtuous exercises, I know to be the true basis and root of a rather notable vice. </p><br />
<p>Every day we see youths of such ambition, that under the cloak of letting their virtue be known, out of all proportion, neglect the importance of possessing such virtue, and as soon as they arrive in schools to learn, having imbibed just a few lessons, allow themselves to be inflated by excessive pretension, and judge themselves to be masters. </p><br />
<p>Therefore it happens (and I speak in particular of this exercise) that in public schools, and especially in private houses, with youths of equal quality gathered to practice assaults, you find some who do not grasp the sword if not to teach, nor to learn in any other way. This outlook is so pernicious, that for this reason you no longer hear of people gathering for common benefit and practice, and to pass the time in the virtue of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Those who have distinguished themselves up until now, demonstrating their valour and knowledge, in my view did not take this route. Indeed anxious to prove their worth as gallant men at every occasion, in any place, and against any person, I believe they sought to learn. Because to understand a discipline well, you have to practise it, you cannot learn with theory alone. </p><br />
<p>It is not a good way to master a skill, to think you can attain it without effort and sacrifice. Those who think to proceed like this, infallibly discover through experience how much they have deluded themselves. </p><br />
<p>Another active and real problem I bring up, just as damaging as the first although stemming from the same ambition, is the disparity between people. </p><br />
<p>You cannot deny that an artisan (who delights in virtue as is understandable), can through his diligence and vivacity arrive at the goal of fencing well with the sword. Indeed because this exercise is extremely capable of elevating the most lowly individual, it often happens that by applying their spirit, those of base condition become more distinguished. </p><br />
<p>The damage therefore that ambition brings, is to be ashamed to practice assaults with someone of lowly hand. To not consider you could extract some fruit even from these people, throwing yourself into the profession. </p><br />
<p>This thought is erroneous, because it is essential to know that virtue levels all people; and that a virtuoso can be considered the equal not just of a simple gentleman, but of any prince or great lord. </p><br />
<p>These are the reasons I give, demonstrating why today assaults are dismissed, neglecting the chance to benefit from the luxury of living, before the waning of youthful years deprives you of every worthwhile activity. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Two – On the same subject'''</p><br />
<p>You can clearly tell from my previous discourse how much damage ambition brings, and how it is a reason for not mastering this beautiful virtue of fencing. But I will now demonstrate furthermore how discussion of this profession, which today's students engage in more than practice, causes notable harm. The truth is that lessons taken in any subject in the day are of no use if their operations are not exercised. </p><br />
<p>That which pertains to bodies of reason: such as logic, philosophy, and so forth, must be put in practice with words alone, as they are necessary to expound such virtues. However in the profession of fencing words have no place to execute well what the students have learned from the master. </p><br />
<p>Actions are needed when it comes to training your body for defence and attack. </p><br />
<p>This is not applied by today's youth, which is a further reason why assaults no longer take place, and students neglect to learn wielding a sword in hand well. It then follows that masters are judged and branded as inept in their craft, since they no longer produce students as they did in the past. </p><br />
<p>When youngsters come together, sometimes from the schools of different masters in this profession, instead of putting their studies to the test, with the cloak across their shoulders, as well as with the simple sword in hand, they begin to discuss among themselves: “If I delivered this thrust how would you parry it?”. </p><br />
<p>The other replies “I would do it in this way, or like this” to which the first responds “But if it were a cut, how would you defend yourself” again its counter is added, and they carry on ad infinitum in this manner, disregarding gainful practice. </p><br />
<p>See if this is the best way to safeguard yourself, and benefit through the profession. Then test with a sharp sword (which could happen), whether these people would have time for such a parliament. </p><br />
<p>Action is required for exercises which engage the body, words cannot grant a student resolution to confront his opponent, or courage and practice to defend himself. This is as much as I thought to say on this matter. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Three – On putting mathematics into this virtue'''<ref>This chapter might apply to Italian treatises which incorporate mathematical principles, such as [[Camillo Agrippa]], but arguably targets in particular the Iberian forms of the ''Verdadera Destreza'', exemplified by [[Jerónimo Sánchez de Carranza]] and [[Luis Pacheco de Narváez]]. </ref></p><br />
<p>I have never presumed to malign anyone who professes to teach this noble exercise, nor do I intend to now, recognising myself as the inferior to many gallant men who have practised this virtue. But we are permitted to debate upon the lessons of some, who have taught and teach through mathematics, with the addition of lines, circles, traverses and extravagant voids of the body. </p><br />
<p>For me, these are commendable for fencing in a clean salle, furnished with even tiles. Likewise it is impossible for two people not to put on a good display, when they politely retreat, then void, or advance with a neat step, putting into practice what they have learned from their masters. </p><br />
<p>But if I imagine them outside the tiled hall, that is in the streets, where confrontations most often arise, then I can't help but criticise and malign them, since it is impossible (for reasons I will explain) to put these actions into practice. </p><br />
<p>Someone who is confronted or deliberately summoned to combat, cannot I believe, as happens in large armies, bring with them people to dig; to resurface the street so they can put themselves in the right posture, and use their lines, and advances of ground, and binds of the sword in conformance with their lessons. Instead, being confronted, they are obliged to think how to stand firmly on their feet, to be vigorous in defence and attack, ready of hand, without such fine distinctions of footwork. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore those who employ the sword in this manner, can be called good and beautiful fencers, but in an open space, or street where stones, holes, and cracks can cause you to stumble, they are always in danger of defending themselves poorly from their enemy. In such cases most of the time the artifices of traverses, voids and lines are left aside, and they throw themselves into natural attacks, as is so often seen. </p><br />
<p>This itself is sufficient demonstration, although I can elaborate for greater clarity, that play founded upon natural reason is with no comparison much better than artificious play. The latter was invented for no motive other than satisfying the curiosity of youth. If it were otherwise, it would not be the case, not only in public schools but also in the presence of nobility with the intervention of great princes, that professors of play founded upon such twists of the body had been touched assault after assault, with cuts and thrusts, as is clear and manifest to a great many people. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Four – On a defined ''punto'' to attack'''<ref> The term punto to signify a defined target area of the right shoulder is particular to the treatise of [[Marco Docciolini]].</ref></p><br />
<p>This seems to me an important subject, in order to be accomplished in assaults. I will merely state my thoughts on those who, as a principal maxim, hold and practise the opinion that it is better to attack only a single part of the body, namely the right shoulder, being the said punto. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, you must consider the reason why they observe this doctrine. I believe it is for no reason other than to strike either the nearest, or the most vulnerable part of the body. </p><br />
<p>If we suppose they hold this view, because they want to strike the nearest target, I completely refute their opinion. Hands and arms notwithstanding, I know how those who lean most stand, even their knees are closer and more likely to be attacked by the enemy. </p><br />
<p>If they wish to propose the other reason, that it is the most vulnerable part of the body, I can only oppose them entirely. It seems to me that the hands and arms are subjected to danger: both of being wounded, and of the intermediate outcome of losing the ability to attack. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore experience, which instructs in all things, shows us that in a good portion of combats you see wounds to the hands and arms. This is because these can more easily encounter the enemy's weapons. If they deem the area called the punto so vulnerable, I do not know which hands and arms are not in the same danger. In them you find veins, arteries and other very vulnerable areas which evidently have shown to cause the death of those wounded there. </p><br />
This is as much as I can say on this particular. I urge everyone to take the whole of the enemy's body as the fixed punto to attack, and specifically the part that presents itself as most uncovered and furthest forward. There is much more that could be said, for example if your opponent is left-handed, or in other situations, but to avoid tedium I will omit it. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Five – On a predetermined measure'''</p><br />
<p>In addition to the other pernicious matters in the virtue of fencing noted above, I absolutely detest the opinion of those who insist on, observe, and teach a predetermined measure. Since an opinion should not be proposed without foundation, I will prove this simple truth with active reason. </p><br />
<p>I have always observed, and heard, that people who are forced to fight, whether to defend themselves, or to confront someone who has caused them some offence, never have the benefit of being able to measure swords. Nor is this a given, since anyone can wear a sword of any length they please (speaking of Tuscany). They cannot even choose a piazza well suited for coming to blows, and neither are people equal in form, either in height or in build. </p><br />
<p>Now, if this is not the case, what is the point of habituating your foot, and arm to a predetermined measure? Moreover, you can easily see from experience that often there is no time to take measure, or the opportunity is denied, for example in badly paved streets, sometimes filled with a thousand pieces of rubbish, as mentioned above. </p><br />
<p>If someone, suddenly or intentionally, is obliged to fight, even if they find themselves in a nice, clean street, it is impossible for them to observe the measure of their steps; to defend themselves and attack, against someone who is naturally at ease in well-founded play, who naturally understands how to stay strongly on their feet, and deflect the enemy's blows, while at the same time attacking him, which seems to me the real principle. </p><br />
<p>You must concede, that this measure was invented simply for the encounters they like to conduct at royal pageants, which have been held several times in various places, and furthermore in itself to demonstrate how far they can extend their normal step. However it is absolutely unfit not just for combat in earnest, but even for the simple assaults you might practice. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Six – On voids'''</p><br />
<p>There should be little difference between this chapter and the previous one, since having to discuss voids, which produce the same result as a set measure, my argument will differ little from the one adopted above. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, let us consider its effect, which is nothing more than a withdrawal of the body, either back or to the side, to defend against an enemy's attack. I say that this withdrawal is as dangerous as trusting in a set measure, and the reason is as follows: someone who by chance comes to blows with an enemy cannot know if they wield a longer sword, whereby in wishing to void they can be wounded. Nor can they know how agile the sword's wielder is. </p><br />
<p>More importantly, when someone evades a blow with a void, they must necessarily lose a tempo in having to return forward to attack. If set upon during this tempo (which the enemy may attempt) they will find it very difficult to recover. </p><br />
<p>For this reason therefore, as a rule of good fencing you should never concede voids. Besides it increases the risk of stumbling in the streets, which as noted above can happen when placing yourself in a set measure. </p><br />
<p>Seeking to avoid any mishap that can occur is the utmost of a man's prudence. The greatest threats that arise are those to life. Against these principal dangers man must apply all his judgement. </p><br />
<p>If we know that voids, traverses, and a set measure manifestly cannot save us from an enemy's attack, why not use that convenient and very useful remedy: not to be subjected to such attacks by staying well-grounded, with firm and stable strength of both body and arm. This will suffice on this topic. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Seven – On feints'''</p><br />
<p>In the profession of fencing there are many frivolities and jests, or more accurately whimsies that you can use, either in public schools or in private settings. Among others there are feints. These can often be employed when fencing for enjoyment and fun, and similarly to improve your vision, since they also serve to train your eyes to be attentive. </p><br />
<p>But I like to believe that this practice was invented for nothing more than to defend yourself, or to attack your enemy, as the situation demands. In reality they reveal themselves as good only for entertainment, or to prolong lessons, and I am forced to say that feints are extremely dangerous to those who wish to perform them. They require two tempos, and in the true exercise of wielding the sword are manifestly unsafe. </p><br />
<p>In earnest, as we know, arms are employed for only two reasons. The first is to defend, the other is to attack. How then can someone who is confronted, as we have said before, hold forth with contrivances like feinting over and under the dagger, to the outside and inside of the sword, against the speed of the enemy's blows (especially if they are strong)? Against cuts as well as thrusts, when he does not adopt any kind of posture, but advancing with such blows? </p><br />
<p>I have no doubt that those in this predicament, stirred by many motives, leave aside all feints and attend only to defending their lives as best they can. </p><br />
<p>But can you imagine others, advancing phlegmatically to confront their enemy, to vindicate a wrong or harm done to them, redeeming themselves with the frivolities and jests of feints? </p><br />
<p>I will omit many examples, but fury transports them, reason is overcome. Honour necessitates that they leave aside taught feints, and instead follow natural instinct, but since I have explained this already, I will not expound further. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eight – On ''contrattempo'', ''mezzotempo'' and more'''</p><br />
<p>To cover the present topic it is worth returning to the same discussion in the previous chapter. The various fancies and follies, along with feints, are invented by certain masters I believe, not only to retain students so they stay longer at the school, but also to confuse them. This way they unlearn the good and study the bad, and will always have to remain students. </p><br />
<p>This is the case with the invention of ''mezzotempo'' and ''contrattempo''. These are brought to light, as I mentioned, only to keep the school running. </p><br />
<p>''Mezzotempo'', and other such terms, deform the good and true rules with too many fripperies. In reality you could never have a memory sharp enough to employ them in defence in a single tempo, or in attack. </p><br />
<p>These methods should be practised not in fencing, but in the realm of dance, where the variety of steps and agility of the leaps must astound the spectators. </p><br />
<p>But in this profession a single step, a single tempo must suffice. Deployed with the requisite accuracy and mastery it will always quash any ''contrattempo'' or ''mezzotempo'' you might encounter, and I profess that this is merely the truth. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Nine – On the so misshapen published figures of this exercise'''<br />
<p>If I believed myself alone, I would not dare to criticise the infinite sets of figures presented and drawn in published books. These are invented, I believe, to no other end but to demonstrate a multiplicity of distorted postures, which almost transcend the bounds of nature, and drag people towards the ridiculous, rather than to learning from viewing such contorted actions. </p><br />
<p>I would like to have some leeway, to leave some praise, but I see no way whatsoever, if not to say that these deformations are very suitable for clowns and tavern-singers, to entertain and extract money from a crowd. This is the praise I am able to concede. </p><br />
<p>If then I were to offer some polite criticism, I could begin by saying that these positions are monstrous, and impossible to witness within our profession. When have you ever seen people, either for enjoyment or necessity, employ such extravagant contortions, with their bodies so hunched and forced, and for the sword alone with the off-hand by the left ear, to employ it like a dagger to deflect thrusts?<ref>This passage, and arguably the entire chapter, appears to be targeted at [[Salvator Fabris]], whose treatise is notable for its deep and sometimes contorted stances.</ref></p><br />
<p>This is as far removed from the natural order as truth is from a lie. You do not take a sword in hand, to wield in earnest, with such exorbitant contortions. You should stand so you can operate naturally, all the more so when you find yourself on the street. There you may find many impediments, as I have said, and confirming what I have already said above, you must stand firmly on your feet, in a balanced posture from which you can draw strength to oppose the sword against all attacks, and as upright as possible so you do not become disordered.</p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Ten – On the guards and counterguards'''</p><br />
<p>There are many guards, great in number from various masters, which you can employ in the profession of fencing. To list them all, and discuss which of them is good or bad, would require a discourse beyond this brief one, expounded with an eloquence other than my own. Nonetheless my pen will write simply and plainly, to touch upon some of my thoughts. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, to demonstrate the extravagance of the guards invented, I will cite various names authors have given them, such as: ''coda lunga e stretta'', ''cingara'', ''porta di ferro'', ''beccapossa'',<ref> These guard names are characteristic of the Bolognese school of fencing. In particular the name ''beccapossa'' is specific to [[Achille Marozzo]].</ref>''belincorno'', prima, seconda, terza and quarta, and many others which I will omit, which together with these have been represented with figures in the books published up until now.</p><br />
<p>As to whether these are good or bad, any praise should be occasioned by their use. It cannot follow, although we have seen otherwise, that they endanger those who wish to employ them. However since no guard should be maligned without a basis, I will start by saying that in my opinion the guards to be employed should not be twisted or bizarre, nor overwrought with a paintbrush, nor measured with a compass, but simple and natural. In this manner the body finds itself stronger in resisting blows, and attacking when the occasion presents itself, without the manifest danger of stumbling and thereby compromising your life. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eleven – On those who wish to debate this practice'''</p><br />
<p>To further damage this profession of fencing, in my opinion, some presume to debate over blows and postures of whichever sort, formulating and postulating in the manner of someone conducting a philosophical debate. Discussions on subjects like the one I have mentioned, should be performed with actions alone. </p><br />
<p>This occurs because upon the path of this practice it is difficult to arrive at perfection. Many who take the path, at the first resistance, by a simple act of will desist from the endeavour. Seeing themselves inadequate, they sharpen their intellect to appear the equal of professors, and with their propositions lead astray those striving to obtain a complete understanding. </p><br />
<p>This is undeniable. In the practice of fencing, to engage someone in debate and discussion as if arguing theology (in place of conducting assaults) achieves nothing but to deny opportunities to those who desire to learn, to become excellent in practice. This is the motive I ascribe for this behaviour. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Twelve – Against a set rule for combat at night'''</p><br />
<p>In this simple discourse of mine, I wished to oppose every extravagance that the meanness of my intellect has encountered in the profession of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Therefore it seemed apt to contest also the opinion of those who hold a firm rule of giving true and real method of combat at night: that putting your hands to your weapons, you should quickly use them to seek the enemy’s sword, and having found it you must liberally deliver attacks to wound him. </p><br />
<p>They add to this another rule, no better than the first, that is to keep your body hunched to create a smaller target. </p><br />
<p>I address each of these as follows. </p><br />
<p>If confronted in the dark at night, how can you find your enemy's weapon without being attacked? </p><br />
<p>Why must you remain hunched, being deprived of ability and stature in defence and attack, in place of a strong and comfortable posture, remaining upright on your feet without hunching over? </p><br />
<p>Such a false opinion I would deem unsuitable even for the daytime where you can clearly see the enemy’s posture, and even when the enemy does not step to attack. </p><br />
<p>I firmly maintain that if you must fight at night, in such circumstances in the dark, you should deliver ''dritti'' and ''roversci'' as swiftly as you can. </p><br />
<p>Anything else is futile, without proposing many additional considerations for such instances, which for the sake of brevity I will omit. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Thirteen – On those masters who in giving lessons employ either a chestplate or a rod'''</p><br />
<p>Among the other notable detriments, caused by various extravagances, are those masters, some who give lessons with a chestplate, others with a rod. </p><br />
<p>Masters who wear a chestplate during lessons leads to nothing else, in my opinion, than that students deliver blows with an exorbitant step. Since the blows do not harm these said masters, they do not realise that, although they wish to protect the student, with these thrusts they harm them. </p><br />
<p>They become habituated to committing their body so much with every blow, that it becomes unlikely they could recover when performed in earnest. </p><br />
<p>Having delivered the thrust to their master's chestplate, they find resistance, lending them force to recover back, and they adopt the habit of abandoning their whole body into the attack.</p><br />
<p>Because of this with a sharp sword, not finding the resistance of the chestplate they have with the practice sword, they remain extended so far forwards that it is difficult (as stated) to avoid their enemy's attack. It can absolutely occur that instead of wounding their enemy, they are left injured. </p><br />
<p>Something similar can occur with students who are used to taking lesson from masters who hold a rod. Since it is much lighter than a sword it creates an extremely negative effect, giving rise to great setbacks. Its weakness, not having the same form as a sword, means whichever cut the rod delivers, it cannot force the student's sword to learn, as a sword would. </p><br />
<p>We can furthermore question, being habituated to parrying cuts from the rod, if when they receive cuts from a sword, they might become confused. </p><br />
<p>Being disordered they might apply the lessons learned reluctantly, since they do not even learn resolve. So I repeat, employing either a chestplate or a rod benefits only the master, and not the students. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Fourteen – On where some wish you to look when you fight'''</p><br />
<p>The variety of opinions on where to place your eyes during actions, both during assaults and in questions of honour, leads me to include this topic in this discourse of mine. Many want you to keep your eyes fixed to your enemy's face during combat. Others assert you should always watch the point of your opponent's sword. </p><br />
<p>I contradict both of these views. I say that keeping your eye on the point is of no use in combat, since it is unlikely your enemy's point ever stays still. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore it is so fine that when it is brandished at speed, someone who trusts in this proposition greatly deceives themselves; knowing full well that sharp swords are not like swords in schools with a button, which is rather large, although some schools might not use them. Therefore I consider this proposition in my own manner. </p><br />
<p>I also criticise the other opinion, of watching your enemy's face, because while keeping your eyes there it is unlikely you can understand and clearly discern the operations he performs with the sword. Often these are away from the face, and he might feint with his eyes to attack in one place, only to move the hand to offend elsewhere. </p><br />
<p>Therefore finding fault with both of the above opinions, I hold that another area is more appropriate, necessary, and without subjecting yourself to deceits more useful, which I will relate in due time in another treatise. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Fifteen – To those who greatly criticise cuts'''</p><br />
<p>Everyone must defend their profession with the rationales available, so I will not fail to show how mistaken are those who greatly criticise cuts in the practice of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Before opposing everything they state in favour of their position, I will explain the charges levelled against those who employ cuts. </p><br />
<p>The first is that cuts are not lethal, the second is that they are much shorter than thrusts, while cuts are further derided by the claim they are for brutes. </p><br />
<p>I refute the first by supposing, since death has taken many in our times by way of cuts, that no other reason is needed to affirm this truth. </p><br />
<p>I can counter the second with great ease, demonstrating how with the hand, and the same length of step and sword (when grasped), the same person can be wounded either by a cut or a thrust. This is better proved by experience than words (which I set out to do), as I have shown and performed many times in the presence of great princes. </p><br />
<p>I should raise a further consideration for those who criticise cuts, and it is this. When someone is confronted, and puts their hand to their sword to defend themself, do they negotiate with their enemy whether to use only thrusts (speaking of Tuscan lands)? If they can wound with both thrusts and cuts, then why not employ cuts, and learn to defend against them? </p><br />
<p>I can only believe that those who criticise cuts, understanding only thrusts, either have no power in their cuts, or do not know how to teach them (if they are masters), or have no time to practise them if they are students. </p><br />
<p>In every profession, to remain ahead of others you must pursue every possible avenue, even if indirect, but all the more so the true and good path, since every day in questions of honour we see that the majority of wounds are cuts to the hands, arms and face. For this reason swords with a hollow were invented.<ref> In the original simply ''spada con l'incavo''. It remains unclear whether Monesi is referring simply to a hollow-ground blade or deep fuller, or perhaps an indentation at the grip that might conceivably aid in cutting , like on some later sabres.</ref></p><br />
<p>Having explained the usefulness of cuts, I affirm once again that those who criticise them, claiming they are no good because they are for brutes, cause harm. An example of this is not keeping hold of the sword, so it falls to the ground, which has happened to many during simple assaults. Another is not having the ability to defend against cuts. I have useful advice to give in this regard, but to avoid being tedious, and admitting to discuss only superficial matters, I will not expound further, and will end my discourse of this subject. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Sixteen – Against numerous grips with the dagger'''</p><br />
<p>Having set myself to contradict falsehood with truth, I should say a few things on this subject. This is for those who strongly promote and encourage a multiplicity of grips with or against the dagger, many with a dagger and others unarmed, as something pertaining to the art of fencing. </p><br />
<p>I refute the quantity of grips described and delineated, and their operation, knowing very well as I have said elsewhere, that you do not negotiate with your opponent. This is from the many occurrences and events that are well-known without me having to describe them. </p><br />
<p>In fact I would dare say that the dagger is worse than the pistol, which can fail or misfire. The dagger is always loaded and ready to attack, and when someone has this weapon at their side and spots the opportunity to use it, I do not believe they will use it to threaten their enemy from distance. </p><br />
<p>Assuming they are not a coward, but resolute and courageous, they will approach as close as they have to. I doubt there will be time to counter, with any of these many grips that are supposed to defend against attacks, nor therefore would I say that dagger against dagger they could be of any benefit. </p><br />
<p>I will freely admit that some of the grips work in schools, of course, but as you know these daggers are without a point or a cutting edge. Many options can be proposed since there is no manifest danger. </p><br />
<p>I return to saying, that as a short weapon they are much quicker to draw, and more ready to wound. These grips are for the entertainment, and confusion, of students. This is what I have to say for now. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Seventeen – On a pike position that defends against any sort of missile weapon, including arquebus shots'''<ref> This is a clear reference to p.114-115 in ''Oplomachia'', the 1621 pike, halberd and musket treatise of [[Bonaventura Pistofilo]]. </p><br />
<p>''When an occasion arrives where you must grasp your sword, I urge you never to abandon your pike, whether it is broken or intact. Instead employ it at least to defend. Anyone can understand for themselves from figure 79, how useful this manner of holding the pike can be for defence.'' </p><br />
<p>''It protects against cavalry, infantry, and against any type of hand weapon; even against missile weapons such as javelins, darts, arrows, and similar arms, up to and including arquebus shots. As long as by chance they do not strike directly in the centre of the shaft, so that the balls instead skid aside, the man will be saved, as I have seen from experience.'' </p><br />
<p>''You must comport yourself such that everything is covered by the pike, maintaining your arm high and firmly extended. Your stance must be sufficiently wide for greater stability, with your sword ready to attack.'' </p><br />
<p>''If you then wish to return your sword to its sheath without abandoning the pike, or piece of haft left in your hand, figure 80 clearly demonstrates how without need for further explanation.''</ref></p><br />
<p>I have seen many authors publish thoughts which objectively can barely be sustained. This prompted me to highlight one marvellous opinion, held by a master not only of fencing but of many trades. </p><br />
<p>In one of his books, he assigns a posture with the sword in the right hand and a pike in the left, profiled towards that side like a barbican. He asserts it does not merely defend against cavalry and infantry, but from any sort of polearm, and also from arrows, javelins and even arquebus or musket shots. </p><br />
<p>The only caveat is that it must not hit the centre of the shaft, where it may break, which seems likely. I leave this to be pondered by anyone who professes the practice of arms. To authenticate this he claims to have seen it. </p><br />
<p>Emboldened by such a claim, I have taken common courage and confided to the pen that which was concealed in my mind. Because if such wonders have occurred they would refute not only my weak and poorly articulated arguments, but genuine and well-founded ones. </p><br />
<p>I do not blame that pikeman, whether his pike was whole or broken, if having to wield his sword he also employed his polearm. But with apologies, I can never have it believed that his haft could keep him safe from every attack, from every sort of weapon. Supposedly even the musket against which (the author says) the pike prevails, the musket ball skidding off one side or the other to be deflected without harm. </p><br />
<p>In truth I have not passed my years in war, where I might have witnessed such incidences, but have been in service of and enjoyed the company of many veteran soldiers. Foremost of all the Most Illustrious Sir Silvio Piccolomini of Aragon, a person of such esteem as is known throughout the world, having fulfilled many offices in war, for the Most Serene Highnesses of Tuscany and for other crowns. Yet I never heard from him or anybody else that the guard described is able to achieve what is claimed. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eighteen – Some admonishments for those who wear a sword'''</p><br />
<p>Any profession should be practised with every possible convenience, and a farmer who must be present when the grain is harvested in July should not wear a garment of heavy cloth.</p><br />
<p>Those who dedicate themselves to the profession of wearing a sword, so dangerous that we could say death always walks alongside it, in various respects should not wear any ornamentation of the body or clothes, or any other items that might disadvantage them when coming to blows. </p><br />
<p>An example more perilous than any other is high-heels, which can easily lead their owner to fall over. Or else sleeves that hang down from the tunic, which can subject someone who is confronted, or who confronts, to great trouble. </p><br />
<p>Likewise long hair, which when coming to grapple grants a clear advantage to the opponent, while bringing great danger to the bearer, even more so when curly in the extravagant style of today; also more specifically hair that comes to impede vision. </p><br />
<p>Also included among such impediments are clothes with large slashes, in the French fashion or in any other. They can cause no small detriment, being dangerous by hampering the drawing of weapons with the swiftness required. </p><br />
<p>I also wanted to mention those who carry daggers with a dangling rose. </p><br />
<p>This is for the benefit of all; because from the mishaps that have occurred, I am sure the impediments I have listed most often create danger for the lives of those who struggle with arms. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Nineteen – What moved me to write this discourse'''</p><br />
<p>Everything we do in this world has an end, and every endeavour wends towards its outcome. Therefore I felt it apt to declare in this final chapter, which motives moved me to stain these few sheets of paper (so to speak) with my coarse and ill-adapted thoughts, and to expose myself voluntarily to the censure of innumerable fine intellects. </p><br />
<p>The reason is that I have found infinite authors, who by means of the presses have professed to enrich the virtue of fencing by demonstrating various sorts of guards and means of combat, and numerous uses of weapons. Knowing that all these operations were shown for the simple practice of wielding a sword, I resolved to designate the true manner of exercising this profession seriously. It consists of nothing more than the simple assaults which are conducted for pleasure. </p><br />
<p>The reason for writing this discourse was none other than a real and genuine desire for the aficionados of this art to recognise the true method of practising it, to not further maltreat it, and to employ the advice provided for the benefit of their person. This is the motivation, as I have said previously, and the intention. </p><br />
<p>May the reader appreciate the willingness of my spirit; and may those habituated to Ciceronian eloquence, and to the exquisite vivacity of extraordinary conceptions, pity my rude pen, whose lowly scribbles have aspired only to reveal the truth. </p><br />
<p>Lastly I wanted to set out how having learned the voids and traverses, I found them ill-suited to real combat with a sharp sword, and I criticise them. </p><br />
<p>Although I praise cuts in practice for their excellent defence, even more so at night where they are the quickest blow to find their target, I do not wish praise them by themselves, I commend them when mixed with a good many thrusts. A dagger can interrupt and defend against thrusts, but is comfortably negated by cuts. </p><br />
<p>And here I come to a close. If God grants me health in months and not years I hope to bring forth fruit that is useful, with the most straightforward method, apt for real combat, distinguishing the characteristics of different people: whether large, powerful, small or weak, with appropriate rules. </p><br />
<p>All in honour of our Lord God, and the most Blessed Virgin Mary. </p><br />
<p>'''THE END. ''' </p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Copyright and License Summary<br />
| width = 100%<br />
}}<br />
For further information, including transcription and translation notes, see the [[Talk:{{PAGENAME}}|discussion page]].<br />
<br />
<section begin="sourcebox"/>{{sourcebox header}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Translation<br />
| authors = [[Piermarco Terminiello]]<br />
| source link = http://sword.school/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Monesi-Translation-1.pdf<br />
| source title = Objections and Admonishments on the Subject of Fencing By Jacopo Monesi (1640)<br />
| license = educational<br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox footer}}<section end="sourcebox"/><br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
<br />
{{Regional Italian traditions}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Translation]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Rapier]]<br />
[[Category:Dagger]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Jacopo_Monesi&diff=120505Jacopo Monesi2020-11-18T19:19:41Z<p>P Terminiello: /* Treatise */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = Jacopo Monesi<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = 16th century (?)<br />
| birthplace = Florence, Italy (?)<br />
| deathdate = 17th century<br />
| deathplace = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set: occupation=Fencing master }}<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = <br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = Medici court<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| period = <br />
| movement = <br />
| influences =<br />
| influenced = <br />
<br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| notableworks = ''[[Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)| Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma]]'' (1640)<br />
| archetype = <br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= 1640<br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| signature = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
<p>'''Jacopo Monesi''' was an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing master]] during the first half of the [[century::17th century]]. </p><br />
<p>A native of Florence, he appears to have enjoyed enduring patronage and recognition in his own lifetime at the court of the Grand Duchy of Tuscany under Ferdinando II de' Medici. </p><br />
<p>A court document, dating to 1621, indicates Monesi's role included instructing the adolescent nobility at the grand ducal court (a claim supported by the title page of his own work): </p><br />
<p>''Jacopo of the Armourer, master of fencing, is one of several masters to the pages, together with the priest Albizio Vecchi, the undermaster Frediano Tinolfi, Giovanni Migliorucci master of writing, Leonardo Migliorucci, Giovanni Pieroni the arithmetist and mathematician, Remigio Cantagallina master of drawing, and Pitti Agnolo Ricci master of dance.''<ref>Archivio di Stato di Firenze, Miscellanea Medicea, 369, c.707. Cited by http://www.scrimipedia.it/mediawiki/index.php?title=Iacopo_Monesi (accessed 22 March 2017).</ref><br />
<p>In 1640 he published a short tract outlining his fencing philosophy: [[Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)| Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma]]. </p><br />
<p>Monesi's text contain little technical discussion, which he defers to a promised second volume that however is either lost or was never written. Instead, Monesi strongly critiques many theories and methodologies of his peers. Behind a veil of formal language excoriating those practices he views as frivolous, or detrimental to surviving an encounter in earnest. Monesi advocates a straightforward and direct philosophy of fencing. He eschews what he sees as unnecessary embellishments, or artefacts of salle fencing, and privileges what he considers practical for surviving an unpredictable and violent confrontation with sharp weapons. </p><br />
<p>He strongly affirms the efficacy of cuts, interspersed with thrusts; and favours simple and strong natural movements, stances, and attacks. In terms of pedagogy, he forcefully promotes the primacy of practising assaults, and laments that students in his day no longer assault with the frequency and gusto of earlier times. </p><br />
<p>Among other elements he criticises: feints, elaborate postures, mathematical concepts, excessive theoretical discussion, and dagger disarms, as unhelpful and impractical for a confrontation with sharps. Without naming names Monesi appears to clearly reference, again critically, the work of [[Docciolini]], [[Fabris]], [[Marozzo]], and [[Pistofilo]]. </p><br />
<p>Alongside such direct critiques, Monesi includes less specifically targeted remonstrations. For example, he objects to the pedagogical method of masters who employ a chestplate, or a cane in place of a sword. Similarly, he leaves space for conventional discussion points of the period, such as where to look when fencing, or how to approach combat at night.</p><br />
== Treatise ==<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Introduction and dedication| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
! <p>Transcription</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''On the Subject of Fencing'''</p><br />
<p>'''By Jacopo Monesi'''</p><br />
<p>'''Known as the Armourer'''</p><br />
<p>'''Master of Arms to the Most Serene of Tuscany, and Their Gentleman Pages'''</p><br />
<p>'''Dedicated to the Most Illustrious Sir Count'''</p><br />
<p>'''Francesco Piccolomini of Aragon'''</p><br />
<p>'''In Florence, at the New Press M.DC.XXXX'''</p><br />
<p>With Permission from the Authorities</p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Most Illustrious and Noble Sir and Patron'''</p><br />
<p>The shade of your Most Illustrious Lordship's great protection, has generated in me an uncommon yearning to bring to light that which has been hidden in the shadows of my intellect for many years. For some time I have had in mind to make public certain discourses on the most excellent profession of fencing, but the awareness of my scarce ability to articulate them, caused the heat of my enthusiasm to cool. This yearning only then emerges, through confiding in the patronage of your Most Illustrious Lordship, wishing to express these concepts in the best manner possible. </p><br />
<p>Therefore this is entrusted only to you, as has happened in the past with honour, once again I opted for your support in bringing this forth, so that anything that is deemed monstrous will nonetheless (protected by the greatness of your Most Illustrious Lordship) be embraced, and be appraised with a not less than benign eye. </p><br />
<p>Please deign therefore to protect it with benevolence, recognising it as a sign of my dutiful observance to your Most Illustrious Lordship's great merit, to which I reverently bow, praying for your every most coveted happiness. </p><br />
<p>Your devoted and most obligated servant</p><br />
<p>Jacopo Monesi, known as the Armourer. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''To the Benevolent Reader'''</p><br />
<p>It has been for a number of years that despite the weakness of my intellect I have wanted to present my thoughts on the play of fencing, which has been my particular profession. But since the world has seen others elevated, and granted them brilliant ability with which they delight and are delighted, I considered it best to keep my thoughts buried within me. </p><br />
<p>Considering however that in some printed books you find an exorbitance of guards, and other extravagances, and witnessing this noble exercise reduced more to discourse than practice, the desire I have (if successful) to demonstrate the true play, and method of combat, made me resolve first to declare my objections, then to explain the correct method. </p><br />
<p>In conformance therefore with what the Most Illustrious Sir Silvio Piccolomini of Aragon <ref>Silvio Piccolomini was a knight of the Order of Santo Stefano, and noted fencer and military commander of his age. In the dedication of his own treatise [[Federico Ghisliero]] declares himself a student of Piccolomini, while his skill at fencing is further referenced by [[Cappoferro]] in his introduction to the reader, and by the French chronicler Michel de Montaigne. </ref> (excellent in this exercise, and more so in military disciplines) taught me, after my first master Cosimo Paradisi, in the chapters that follow I will narrate as openly as I can what is recounted. </p><br />
<p>But since the greatest detriment to this exercise, in my view, comes from neglecting to struggle with the sword in hand, in practising assaults, I will deal with this first, explaining the reasons why I believe this is, as I commence. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>''Might it please Sir Canon Carlo del Vigna to see if the present work contains anything repugnant to Christian piety, and public morals, and refer back. The 30th January 1639.'' </p><br />
Vincenzio Rabatta, Vicar of Florence<br />
<p>''In the present work, having reviewed it in all diligence, I found nothing repugnant to Christian piety, or public morals. 25th February 1639.''</p><br />
<p>Carlo del Vigna, Canon of Florence<br />
<p>''Most Reverend Father Inquisitor,''</p><br />
<p>''By your order of Most Reverend Father I have reviewed this present discourse on fencing, and I have not found anything repugnant to the Religion, orto public morals, judging it worthy of publication. 26th March 1640. ''</p><br />
<p>Girolamo Rosati, Protonotary and Consultant of the Holy Office</p><br />
<p>''This can be printed. Florence 3rd April 1640. ''</p><br />
<p>Father Giovanni Angeli, Vicar of the Holy Office, by order of</p><br />
<p>Senator Alessandro Vettori, Auditor of His Most Serene Highness</p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Notes on fencing| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
! <p>Transcription</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''Chapter One'''</p><br />
<p>Ambition, which without fail is the cause of every ill, especially in virtuous exercises, I know to be the true basis and root of a rather notable vice. </p><br />
<p>Every day we see youths of such ambition, that under the cloak of letting their virtue be known, out of all proportion, neglect the importance of possessing such virtue, and as soon as they arrive in schools to learn, having imbibed just a few lessons, allow themselves to be inflated by excessive pretension, and judge themselves to be masters. </p><br />
<p>Therefore it happens (and I speak in particular of this exercise) that in public schools, and especially in private houses, with youths of equal quality gathered to practice assaults, you find some who do not grasp the sword if not to teach, nor to learn in any other way. This outlook is so pernicious, that for this reason you no longer hear of people gathering for common benefit and practice, and to pass the time in the virtue of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Those who have distinguished themselves up until now, demonstrating their valour and knowledge, in my view did not take this route. Indeed anxious to prove their worth as gallant men at every occasion, in any place, and against any person, I believe they sought to learn. Because to understand a discipline well, you have to practise it, you cannot learn with theory alone. </p><br />
<p>It is not a good way to master a skill, to think you can attain it without effort and sacrifice. Those who think to proceed like this, infallibly discover through experience how much they have deluded themselves. </p><br />
<p>Another active and real problem I bring up, just as damaging as the first although stemming from the same ambition, is the disparity between people. </p><br />
<p>You cannot deny that an artisan (who delights in virtue as is understandable), can through his diligence and vivacity arrive at the goal of fencing well with the sword. Indeed because this exercise is extremely capable of elevating the most lowly individual, it often happens that by applying their spirit, those of base condition become more distinguished. </p><br />
<p>The damage therefore that ambition brings, is to be ashamed to practice assaults with someone of lowly hand. To not consider you could extract some fruit even from these people, throwing yourself into the profession. </p><br />
<p>This thought is erroneous, because it is essential to know that virtue levels all people; and that a virtuoso can be considered the equal not just of a simple gentleman, but of any prince or great lord. </p><br />
<p>These are the reasons I give, demonstrating why today assaults are dismissed, neglecting the chance to benefit from the luxury of living, before the waning of youthful years deprives you of every worthwhile activity. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Two – On the same subject'''</p><br />
<p>You can clearly tell from my previous discourse how much damage ambition brings, and how it is a reason for not mastering this beautiful virtue of fencing. But I will now demonstrate furthermore how discussion of this profession, which today's students engage in more than practice, causes notable harm. The truth is that lessons taken in any subject in the day are of no use if their operations are not exercised. </p><br />
<p>That which pertains to bodies of reason: such as logic, philosophy, and so forth, must be put in practice with words alone, as they are necessary to expound such virtues. However in the profession of fencing words have no place to execute well what the students have learned from the master. </p><br />
<p>Actions are needed when it comes to training your body for defence and attack. </p><br />
<p>This is not applied by today's youth, which is a further reason why assaults no longer take place, and students neglect to learn wielding a sword in hand well. It then follows that masters are judged and branded as inept in their craft, since they no longer produce students as they did in the past. </p><br />
<p>When youngsters come together, sometimes from the schools of different masters in this profession, instead of putting their studies to the test, with the cloak across their shoulders, as well as with the simple sword in hand, they begin to discuss among themselves: “If I delivered this thrust how would you parry it?”. </p><br />
<p>The other replies “I would do it in this way, or like this” to which the first responds “But if it were a cut, how would you defend yourself” again its counter is added, and they carry on ad infinitum in this manner, disregarding gainful practice. </p><br />
<p>See if this is the best way to safeguard yourself, and benefit through the profession. Then test with a sharp sword (which could happen), whether these people would have time for such a parliament. </p><br />
<p>Action is required for exercises which engage the body, words cannot grant a student resolution to confront his opponent, or courage and practice to defend himself. This is as much as I thought to say on this matter. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Three – On putting mathematics into this virtue'''<ref>This chapter might apply to Italian treatises which incorporate mathematical principles, such as [[Camillo Agrippa]], but arguably targets in particular the Iberian forms of the ''Verdadera Destreza'', exemplified by [[Jerónimo Sánchez de Carranza]] and [[Luis Pacheco de Narváez]]. </ref></p><br />
<p>I have never presumed to malign anyone who professes to teach this noble exercise, nor do I intend to now, recognising myself as the inferior to many gallant men who have practised this virtue. But we are permitted to debate upon the lessons of some, who have taught and teach through mathematics, with the addition of lines, circles, traverses and extravagant voids of the body. </p><br />
<p>For me, these are commendable for fencing in a clean salle, furnished with even tiles. Likewise it is impossible for two people not to put on a good display, when they politely retreat, then void, or advance with a neat step, putting into practice what they have learned from their masters. </p><br />
<p>But if I imagine them outside the tiled hall, that is in the streets, where confrontations most often arise, then I can't help but criticise and malign them, since it is impossible (for reasons I will explain) to put these actions into practice. </p><br />
<p>Someone who is confronted or deliberately summoned to combat, cannot I believe, as happens in large armies, bring with them people to dig; to resurface the street so they can put themselves in the right posture, and use their lines, and advances of ground, and binds of the sword in conformance with their lessons. Instead, being confronted, they are obliged to think how to stand firmly on their feet, to be vigorous in defence and attack, ready of hand, without such fine distinctions of footwork. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore those who employ the sword in this manner, can be called good and beautiful fencers, but in an open space, or street where stones, holes, and cracks can cause you to stumble, they are always in danger of defending themselves poorly from their enemy. In such cases most of the time the artifices of traverses, voids and lines are left aside, and they throw themselves into natural attacks, as is so often seen. </p><br />
<p>This itself is sufficient demonstration, although I can elaborate for greater clarity, that play founded upon natural reason is with no comparison much better than artificious play. The latter was invented for no motive other than satisfying the curiosity of youth. If it were otherwise, it would not be the case, not only in public schools but also in the presence of nobility with the intervention of great princes, that professors of play founded upon such twists of the body had been touched assault after assault, with cuts and thrusts, as is clear and manifest to a great many people. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Four – On a defined ''punto'' to attack'''<ref> The term punto to signify a defined target area of the right shoulder is particular to the treatise of [[Marco Docciolini]].</ref></p><br />
<p>This seems to me an important subject, in order to be accomplished in assaults. I will merely state my thoughts on those who, as a principal maxim, hold and practise the opinion that it is better to attack only a single part of the body, namely the right shoulder, being the said punto. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, you must consider the reason why they observe this doctrine. I believe it is for no reason other than to strike either the nearest, or the most vulnerable part of the body. </p><br />
<p>If we suppose they hold this view, because they want to strike the nearest target, I completely refute their opinion. Hands and arms notwithstanding, I know how those who lean most stand, even their knees are closer and more likely to be attacked by the enemy. </p><br />
<p>If they wish to propose the other reason, that it is the most vulnerable part of the body, I can only oppose them entirely. It seems to me that the hands and arms are subjected to danger: both of being wounded, and of the intermediate outcome of losing the ability to attack. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore experience, which instructs in all things, shows us that in a good portion of combats you see wounds to the hands and arms. This is because these can more easily encounter the enemy's weapons. If they deem the area called the punto so vulnerable, I do not know which hands and arms are not in the same danger. In them you find veins, arteries and other very vulnerable areas which evidently have shown to cause the death of those wounded there. </p><br />
This is as much as I can say on this particular. I urge everyone to take the whole of the enemy's body as the fixed punto to attack, and specifically the part that presents itself as most uncovered and furthest forward. There is much more that could be said, for example if your opponent is left-handed, or in other situations, but to avoid tedium I will omit it. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Five – On a predetermined measure'''</p><br />
<p>In addition to the other pernicious matters in the virtue of fencing noted above, I absolutely detest the opinion of those who insist on, observe, and teach a predetermined measure. Since an opinion should not be proposed without foundation, I will prove this simple truth with active reason. </p><br />
<p>I have always observed, and heard, that people who are forced to fight, whether to defend themselves, or to confront someone who has caused them some offence, never have the benefit of being able to measure swords. Nor is this a given, since anyone can wear a sword of any length they please (speaking of Tuscany). They cannot even choose a piazza well suited for coming to blows, and neither are people equal in form, either in height or in build. </p><br />
<p>Now, if this is not the case, what is the point of habituating your foot, and arm to a predetermined measure? Moreover, you can easily see from experience that often there is no time to take measure, or the opportunity is denied, for example in badly paved streets, sometimes filled with a thousand pieces of rubbish, as mentioned above. </p><br />
<p>If someone, suddenly or intentionally, is obliged to fight, even if they find themselves in a nice, clean street, it is impossible for them to observe the measure of their steps; to defend themselves and attack, against someone who is naturally at ease in well-founded play, who naturally understands how to stay strongly on their feet, and deflect the enemy's blows, while at the same time attacking him, which seems to me the real principle. </p><br />
<p>You must concede, that this measure was invented simply for the encounters they like to conduct at royal pageants, which have been held several times in various places, and furthermore in itself to demonstrate how far they can extend their normal step. However it is absolutely unfit not just for combat in earnest, but even for the simple assaults you might practice. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Six – On voids'''</p><br />
<p>There should be little difference between this chapter and the previous one, since having to discuss voids, which produce the same result as a set measure, my argument will differ little from the one adopted above. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, let us consider its effect, which is nothing more than a withdrawal of the body, either back or to the side, to defend against an enemy's attack. I say that this withdrawal is as dangerous as trusting in a set measure, and the reason is as follows: someone who by chance comes to blows with an enemy cannot know if they wield a longer sword, whereby in wishing to void they can be wounded. Nor can they know how agile the sword's wielder is. </p><br />
<p>More importantly, when someone evades a blow with a void, they must necessarily lose a tempo in having to return forward to attack. If set upon during this tempo (which the enemy may attempt) they will find it very difficult to recover. </p><br />
<p>For this reason therefore, as a rule of good fencing you should never concede voids. Besides it increases the risk of stumbling in the streets, which as noted above can happen when placing yourself in a set measure. </p><br />
<p>Seeking to avoid any mishap that can occur is the utmost of a man's prudence. The greatest threats that arise are those to life. Against these principal dangers man must apply all his judgement. </p><br />
<p>If we know that voids, traverses, and a set measure manifestly cannot save us from an enemy's attack, why not use that convenient and very useful remedy: not to be subjected to such attacks by staying well-grounded, with firm and stable strength of both body and arm. This will suffice on this topic. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Seven – On feints'''</p><br />
<p>In the profession of fencing there are many frivolities and jests, or more accurately whimsies that you can use, either in public schools or in private settings. Among others there are feints. These can often be employed when fencing for enjoyment and fun, and similarly to improve your vision, since they also serve to train your eyes to be attentive. </p><br />
<p>But I like to believe that this practice was invented for nothing more than to defend yourself, or to attack your enemy, as the situation demands. In reality they reveal themselves as good only for entertainment, or to prolong lessons, and I am forced to say that feints are extremely dangerous to those who wish to perform them. They require two tempos, and in the true exercise of wielding the sword are manifestly unsafe. </p><br />
<p>In earnest, as we know, arms are employed for only two reasons. The first is to defend, the other is to attack. How then can someone who is confronted, as we have said before, hold forth with contrivances like feinting over and under the dagger, to the outside and inside of the sword, against the speed of the enemy's blows (especially if they are strong)? Against cuts as well as thrusts, when he does not adopt any kind of posture, but advancing with such blows? </p><br />
<p>I have no doubt that those in this predicament, stirred by many motives, leave aside all feints and attend only to defending their lives as best they can. </p><br />
<p>But can you imagine others, advancing phlegmatically to confront their enemy, to vindicate a wrong or harm done to them, redeeming themselves with the frivolities and jests of feints? </p><br />
<p>I will omit many examples, but fury transports them, reason is overcome. Honour necessitates that they leave aside taught feints, and instead follow natural instinct, but since I have explained this already, I will not expound further. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eight – On ''contrattempo'', ''mezzotempo'' and more'''</p><br />
<p>To cover the present topic it is worth returning to the same discussion in the previous chapter. The various fancies and follies, along with feints, are invented by certain masters I believe, not only to retain students so they stay longer at the school, but also to confuse them. This way they unlearn the good and study the bad, and will always have to remain students. </p><br />
<p>This is the case with the invention of ''mezzotempo'' and ''contrattempo''. These are brought to light, as I mentioned, only to keep the school running. </p><br />
<p>''Mezzotempo'', and other such terms, deform the good and true rules with too many fripperies. In reality you could never have a memory sharp enough to employ them in defence in a single tempo, or in attack. </p><br />
<p>These methods should be practised not in fencing, but in the realm of dance, where the variety of steps and agility of the leaps must astound the spectators. </p><br />
<p>But in this profession a single step, a single tempo must suffice. Deployed with the requisite accuracy and mastery it will always quash any ''contrattempo'' or ''mezzotempo'' you might encounter, and I profess that this is merely the truth. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Nine – On the so misshapen published figures of this exercise'''<br />
<p>If I believed myself alone, I would not dare to criticise the infinite sets of figures presented and drawn in published books. These are invented, I believe, to no other end but to demonstrate a multiplicity of distorted postures, which almost transcend the bounds of nature, and drag people towards the ridiculous, rather than to learning from viewing such contorted actions. </p><br />
<p>I would like to have some leeway, to leave some praise, but I see no way whatsoever, if not to say that these deformations are very suitable for clowns and tavern-singers, to entertain and extract money from a crowd. This is the praise I am able to concede. </p><br />
<p>If then I were to offer some polite criticism, I could begin by saying that these positions are monstrous, and impossible to witness within our profession. When have you ever seen people, either for enjoyment or necessity, employ such extravagant contortions, with their bodies so hunched and forced, and for the sword alone with the off-hand by the left ear, to employ it like a dagger to deflect thrusts?<ref>This passage, and arguably the entire chapter, appears to be targeted at [[Salvator Fabris]], whose treatise is notable for its deep and sometimes contorted stances.</ref></p><br />
<p>This is as far removed from the natural order as truth is from a lie. You do not take a sword in hand, to wield in earnest, with such exorbitant contortions. You should stand so you can operate naturally, all the more so when you find yourself on the street. There you may find many impediments, as I have said, and confirming what I have already said above, you must stand firmly on your feet, in a balanced posture from which you can draw strength to oppose the sword against all attacks, and as upright as possible so you do not become disordered.</p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Ten – On the guards and counterguards'''</p><br />
<p>There are many guards, great in number from various masters, which you can employ in the profession of fencing. To list them all, and discuss which of them is good or bad, would require a discourse beyond this brief one, expounded with an eloquence other than my own. Nonetheless my pen will write simply and plainly, to touch upon some of my thoughts. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, to demonstrate the extravagance of the guards invented, I will cite various names authors have given them, such as: ''coda lunga e stretta'', ''cingara'', ''porta di ferro'', ''beccapossa'',<ref> These guard names are characteristic of the Bolognese school of fencing. In particular the name ''beccapossa'' is specific to [[Achille Marozzo]].</ref>''belincorno'', prima, seconda, terza and quarta, and many others which I will omit, which together with these have been represented with figures in the books published up until now.</p><br />
<p>As to whether these are good or bad, any praise should be occasioned by their use. It cannot follow, although we have seen otherwise, that they endanger those who wish to employ them. However since no guard should be maligned without a basis, I will start by saying that in my opinion the guards to be employed should not be twisted or bizarre, nor overwrought with a paintbrush, nor measured with a compass, but simple and natural. In this manner the body finds itself stronger in resisting blows, and attacking when the occasion presents itself, without the manifest danger of stumbling and thereby compromising your life. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eleven – On those who wish to debate this practice'''</p><br />
<p>To further damage this profession of fencing, in my opinion, some presume to debate over blows and postures of whichever sort, formulating and postulating in the manner of someone conducting a philosophical debate. Discussions on subjects like the one I have mentioned, should be performed with actions alone. </p><br />
<p>This occurs because upon the path of this practice it is difficult to arrive at perfection. Many who take the path, at the first resistance, by a simple act of will desist from the endeavour. Seeing themselves inadequate, they sharpen their intellect to appear the equal of professors, and with their propositions lead astray those striving to obtain a complete understanding. </p><br />
<p>This is undeniable. In the practice of fencing, to engage someone in debate and discussion as if arguing theology (in place of conducting assaults) achieves nothing but to deny opportunities to those who desire to learn, to become excellent in practice. This is the motive I ascribe for this behaviour. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Twelve – Against a set rule for combat at night'''</p><br />
<p>In this simple discourse of mine, I wished to oppose every extravagance that the meanness of my intellect has encountered in the profession of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Therefore it seemed apt to contest also the opinion of those who hold a firm rule of giving true and real method of combat at night: that putting your hands to your weapons, you should quickly use them to seek the enemy’s sword, and having found it you must liberally deliver attacks to wound him. </p><br />
<p>They add to this another rule, no better than the first, that is to keep your body hunched to create a smaller target. </p><br />
<p>I address each of these as follows. </p><br />
<p>If confronted in the dark at night, how can you find your enemy's weapon without being attacked? </p><br />
<p>Why must you remain hunched, being deprived of ability and stature in defence and attack, in place of a strong and comfortable posture, remaining upright on your feet without hunching over? </p><br />
<p>Such a false opinion I would deem unsuitable even for the daytime where you can clearly see the enemy’s posture, and even when the enemy does not step to attack. </p><br />
<p>I firmly maintain that if you must fight at night, in such circumstances in the dark, you should deliver ''dritti'' and ''roversci'' as swiftly as you can. </p><br />
<p>Anything else is futile, without proposing many additional considerations for such instances, which for the sake of brevity I will omit. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Thirteen – On those masters who in giving lessons employ either a chestplate or a rod'''</p><br />
<p>Among the other notable detriments, caused by various extravagances, are those masters, some who give lessons with a chestplate, others with a rod. </p><br />
<p>Masters who wear a chestplate during lessons leads to nothing else, in my opinion, than that students deliver blows with an exorbitant step. Since the blows do not harm these said masters, they do not realise that, although they wish to protect the student, with these thrusts they harm them. </p><br />
<p>They become habituated to committing their body so much with every blow, that it becomes unlikely they could recover when performed in earnest. </p><br />
<p>Having delivered the thrust to their master's chestplate, they find resistance, lending them force to recover back, and they adopt the habit of abandoning their whole body into the attack.</p><br />
<p>Because of this with a sharp sword, not finding the resistance of the chestplate they have with the practice sword, they remain extended so far forwards that it is difficult (as stated) to avoid their enemy's attack. It can absolutely occur that instead of wounding their enemy, they are left injured. </p><br />
<p>Something similar can occur with students who are used to taking lesson from masters who hold a rod. Since it is much lighter than a sword it creates an extremely negative effect, giving rise to great setbacks. Its weakness, not having the same form as a sword, means whichever cut the rod delivers, it cannot force the student's sword to learn, as a sword would. </p><br />
<p>We can furthermore question, being habituated to parrying cuts from the rod, if when they receive cuts from a sword, they might become confused. </p><br />
<p>Being disordered they might apply the lessons learned reluctantly, since they do not even learn resolve. So I repeat, employing either a chestplate or a rod benefits only the master, and not the students. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Fourteen – On where some wish you to look when you fight'''</p><br />
<p>The variety of opinions on where to place your eyes during actions, both during assaults and in questions of honour, leads me to include this topic in this discourse of mine. Many want you to keep your eyes fixed to your enemy's face during combat. Others assert you should always watch the point of your opponent's sword. </p><br />
<p>I contradict both of these views. I say that keeping your eye on the point is of no use in combat, since it is unlikely your enemy's point ever stays still. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore it is so fine that when it is brandished at speed, someone who trusts in this proposition greatly deceives themselves; knowing full well that sharp swords are not like swords in schools with a button, which is rather large, although some schools might not use them. Therefore I consider this proposition in my own manner. </p><br />
<p>I also criticise the other opinion, of watching your enemy's face, because while keeping your eyes there it is unlikely you can understand and clearly discern the operations he performs with the sword. Often these are away from the face, and he might feint with his eyes to attack in one place, only to move the hand to offend elsewhere. </p><br />
<p>Therefore finding fault with both of the above opinions, I hold that another area is more appropriate, necessary, and without subjecting yourself to deceits more useful, which I will relate in due time in another treatise. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Fifteen – To those who greatly criticise cuts'''</p><br />
<p>Everyone must defend their profession with the rationales available, so I will not fail to show how mistaken are those who greatly criticise cuts in the practice of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Before opposing everything they state in favour of their position, I will explain the charges levelled against those who employ cuts. </p><br />
<p>The first is that cuts are not lethal, the second is that they are much shorter than thrusts, while cuts are further derided by the claim they are for brutes. </p><br />
<p>I refute the first by supposing, since death has taken many in our times by way of cuts, that no other reason is needed to affirm this truth. </p><br />
<p>I can counter the second with great ease, demonstrating how with the hand, and the same length of step and sword (when grasped), the same person can be wounded either by a cut or a thrust. This is better proved by experience than words (which I set out to do), as I have shown and performed many times in the presence of great princes. </p><br />
<p>I should raise a further consideration for those who criticise cuts, and it is this. When someone is confronted, and puts their hand to their sword to defend themself, do they negotiate with their enemy whether to use only thrusts (speaking of Tuscan lands)? If they can wound with both thrusts and cuts, then why not employ cuts, and learn to defend against them? </p><br />
<p>I can only believe that those who criticise cuts, understanding only thrusts, either have no power in their cuts, or do not know how to teach them (if they are masters), or have no time to practise them if they are students. </p><br />
<p>In every profession, to remain ahead of others you must pursue every possible avenue, even if indirect, but all the more so the true and good path, since every day in questions of honour we see that the majority of wounds are cuts to the hands, arms and face. For this reason swords with a hollow were invented.<ref> In the original simply ''spada con l'incavo''. It remains unclear whether Monesi is referring simply to a hollow-ground blade or deep fuller, or perhaps an indentation at the grip that might conceivably aid in cutting , like on some later sabres.</ref></p><br />
<p>Having explained the usefulness of cuts, I affirm once again that those who criticise them, claiming they are no good because they are for brutes, cause harm. An example of this is not keeping hold of the sword, so it falls to the ground, which has happened to many during simple assaults. Another is not having the ability to defend against cuts. I have useful advice to give in this regard, but to avoid being tedious, and admitting to discuss only superficial matters, I will not expound further, and will end my discourse of this subject. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Sixteen – Against numerous grips with the dagger'''</p><br />
<p>Having set myself to contradict falsehood with truth, I should say a few things on this subject. This is for those who strongly promote and encourage a multiplicity of grips with or against the dagger, many with a dagger and others unarmed, as something pertaining to the art of fencing. </p><br />
<p>I refute the quantity of grips described and delineated, and their operation, knowing very well as I have said elsewhere, that you do not negotiate with your opponent. This is from the many occurrences and events that are well-known without me having to describe them. </p><br />
<p>In fact I would dare say that the dagger is worse than the pistol, which can fail or misfire. The dagger is always loaded and ready to attack, and when someone has this weapon at their side and spots the opportunity to use it, I do not believe they will use it to threaten their enemy from distance. </p><br />
<p>Assuming they are not a coward, but resolute and courageous, they will approach as close as they have to. I doubt there will be time to counter, with any of these many grips that are supposed to defend against attacks, nor therefore would I say that dagger against dagger they could be of any benefit. </p><br />
<p>I will freely admit that some of the grips work in schools, of course, but as you know these daggers are without a point or a cutting edge. Many options can be proposed since there is no manifest danger. </p><br />
<p>I return to saying, that as a short weapon they are much quicker to draw, and more ready to wound. These grips are for the entertainment, and confusion, of students. This is what I have to say for now. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Seventeen – On a pike position that defends against any sort of missile weapon, including arquebus shots'''<ref> This is a clear reference to p.114-115 in ''Oplomachia'', the 1621 pike, halberd and musket treatise of [[Bonaventura Pistofilo]]. </p><br />
<p>''When an occasion arrives where you must grasp your sword, I urge you never to abandon your pike, whether it is broken or intact. Instead employ it at least to defend. Anyone can understand for themselves from figure 79, how useful this manner of holding the pike can be for defence.'' </p><br />
<p>''It protects against cavalry, infantry, and against any type of hand weapon; even against missile weapons such as javelins, darts, arrows, and similar arms, up to and including arquebus shots. As long as by chance they do not strike directly in the centre of the shaft, so that the balls instead skid aside, the man will be saved, as I have seen from experience.'' </p><br />
<p>''You must comport yourself such that everything is covered by the pike, maintaining your arm high and firmly extended. Your stance must be sufficiently wide for greater stability, with your sword ready to attack.'' </p><br />
<p>''If you then wish to return your sword to its sheath without abandoning the pike, or piece of haft left in your hand, figure 80 clearly demonstrates how without need for further explanation.''</ref></p><br />
<p>I have seen many authors publish thoughts which objectively can barely be sustained. This prompted me to highlight one marvellous opinion, held by a master not only of fencing but of many trades. </p><br />
<p>In one of his books, he assigns a posture with the sword in the right hand and a pike in the left, profiled towards that side like a barbican. He asserts it does not merely defend against cavalry and infantry, but from any sort of polearm, and also from arrows, javelins and even arquebus or musket shots. </p><br />
<p>The only caveat is that it must not hit the centre of the shaft, where it may break, which seems likely. I leave this to be pondered by anyone who professes the practice of arms. To authenticate this he claims to have seen it. </p><br />
<p>Emboldened by such a claim, I have taken common courage and confided to the pen that which was concealed in my mind. Because if such wonders have occurred they would refute not only my weak and poorly articulated arguments, but genuine and well-founded ones. </p><br />
<p>I do not blame that pikeman, whether his pike was whole or broken, if having to wield his sword he also employed his polearm. But with apologies, I can never have it believed that his haft could keep him safe from every attack, from every sort of weapon. Supposedly even the musket against which (the author says) the pike prevails, the musket ball skidding off one side or the other to be deflected without harm. </p><br />
<p>In truth I have not passed my years in war, where I might have witnessed such incidences, but have been in service of and enjoyed the company of many veteran soldiers. Foremost of all the Most Illustrious Sir Silvio Piccolomini of Aragon, a person of such esteem as is known throughout the world, having fulfilled many offices in war, for the Most Serene Highnesses of Tuscany and for other crowns. Yet I never heard from him or anybody else that the guard described is able to achieve what is claimed. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eighteen – Some admonishments for those who wear a sword'''</p><br />
<p>Any profession should be practised with every possible convenience, and a farmer who must be present when the grain is harvested in July should not wear a garment of heavy cloth.</p><br />
<p>Those who dedicate themselves to the profession of wearing a sword, so dangerous that we could say death always walks alongside it, in various respects should not wear any ornamentation of the body or clothes, or any other items that might disadvantage them when coming to blows. </p><br />
<p>An example more perilous than any other is high-heels, which can easily lead their owner to fall over. Or else sleeves that hang down from the tunic, which can subject someone who is confronted, or who confronts, to great trouble. </p><br />
<p>Likewise long hair, which when coming to grapple grants a clear advantage to the opponent, while bringing great danger to the bearer, even more so when curly in the extravagant style of today; also more specifically hair that comes to impede vision. </p><br />
<p>Also included among such impediments are clothes with large slashes, in the French fashion or in any other. They can cause no small detriment, being dangerous by hampering the drawing of weapons with the swiftness required. </p><br />
<p>I also wanted to mention those who carry daggers with a dangling rose. </p><br />
<p>This is for the benefit of all; because from the mishaps that have occurred, I am sure the impediments I have listed most often create danger for the lives of those who struggle with arms. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Nineteen – What moved me to write this discourse'''</p><br />
<p>Everything we do in this world has an end, and every endeavour wends towards its outcome. Therefore I felt it apt to declare in this final chapter, which motives moved me to stain these few sheets of paper (so to speak) with my coarse and ill-adapted thoughts, and to expose myself voluntarily to the censure of innumerable fine intellects. </p><br />
<p>The reason is that I have found infinite authors, who by means of the presses have professed to enrich the virtue of fencing by demonstrating various sorts of guards and means of combat, and numerous uses of weapons. Knowing that all these operations were shown for the simple practice of wielding a sword, I resolved to designate the true manner of exercising this profession seriously. It consists of nothing more than the simple assaults which are conducted for pleasure. </p><br />
<p>The reason for writing this discourse was none other than a real and genuine desire for the aficionados of this art to recognise the true method of practising it, to not further maltreat it, and to employ the advice provided for the benefit of their person. This is the motivation, as I have said previously, and the intention. </p><br />
<p>May the reader appreciate the willingness of my spirit; and may those habituated to Ciceronian eloquence, and to the exquisite vivacity of extraordinary conceptions, pity my rude pen, whose lowly scribbles have aspired only to reveal the truth. </p><br />
<p>Lastly I wanted to set out how having learned the voids and traverses, I found them ill-suited to real combat with a sharp sword, and I criticise them. </p><br />
<p>Although I praise cuts in practice for their excellent defence, even more so at night where they are the quickest blow to find their target, I do not wish praise them by themselves, I commend them when mixed with a good many thrusts. A dagger can interrupt and defend against thrusts, but is comfortably negated by cuts. </p><br />
<p>And here I come to a close. If God grants me health in months and not years I hope to bring forth fruit that is useful, with the most straightforward method, apt for real combat, distinguishing the characteristics of different people: whether large, powerful, small or weak, with appropriate rules. </p><br />
<p>All in honour of our Lord God, and the most Blessed Virgin Mary. </p><br />
<p>'''THE END. ''' </p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Copyright and License Summary<br />
| width = 100%<br />
}}<br />
For further information, including transcription and translation notes, see the [[Talk:{{PAGENAME}}|discussion page]].<br />
<br />
<section begin="sourcebox"/>{{sourcebox header}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Translation<br />
| authors = [[Piermarco Terminiello]]<br />
| source link = http://sword.school/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Monesi-Translation-1.pdf<br />
| source title = Objections and Admonishments on the Subject of Fencing By Jacopo Monesi (1640)<br />
| license = educational<br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox footer}}<section end="sourcebox"/><br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
<br />
{{Regional Italian traditions}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Copy/Pasting]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Rapier]]<br />
[[Category:Dagger]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Jacopo_Monesi&diff=120504Jacopo Monesi2020-11-18T19:10:29Z<p>P Terminiello: /* Treatise */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = Jacopo Monesi<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = 16th century (?)<br />
| birthplace = Florence, Italy (?)<br />
| deathdate = 17th century<br />
| deathplace = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set: occupation=Fencing master }}<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = <br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = Medici court<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| period = <br />
| movement = <br />
| influences =<br />
| influenced = <br />
<br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| notableworks = ''[[Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)| Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma]]'' (1640)<br />
| archetype = <br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= 1640<br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| signature = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
<p>'''Jacopo Monesi''' was an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing master]] during the first half of the [[century::17th century]]. </p><br />
<p>A native of Florence, he appears to have enjoyed enduring patronage and recognition in his own lifetime at the court of the Grand Duchy of Tuscany under Ferdinando II de' Medici. </p><br />
<p>A court document, dating to 1621, indicates Monesi's role included instructing the adolescent nobility at the grand ducal court (a claim supported by the title page of his own work): </p><br />
<p>''Jacopo of the Armourer, master of fencing, is one of several masters to the pages, together with the priest Albizio Vecchi, the undermaster Frediano Tinolfi, Giovanni Migliorucci master of writing, Leonardo Migliorucci, Giovanni Pieroni the arithmetist and mathematician, Remigio Cantagallina master of drawing, and Pitti Agnolo Ricci master of dance.''<ref>Archivio di Stato di Firenze, Miscellanea Medicea, 369, c.707. Cited by http://www.scrimipedia.it/mediawiki/index.php?title=Iacopo_Monesi (accessed 22 March 2017).</ref><br />
<p>In 1640 he published a short tract outlining his fencing philosophy: [[Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)| Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma]]. </p><br />
<p>Monesi's text contain little technical discussion, which he defers to a promised second volume that however is either lost or was never written. Instead, Monesi strongly critiques many theories and methodologies of his peers. Behind a veil of formal language excoriating those practices he views as frivolous, or detrimental to surviving an encounter in earnest. Monesi advocates a straightforward and direct philosophy of fencing. He eschews what he sees as unnecessary embellishments, or artefacts of salle fencing, and privileges what he considers practical for surviving an unpredictable and violent confrontation with sharp weapons. </p><br />
<p>He strongly affirms the efficacy of cuts, interspersed with thrusts; and favours simple and strong natural movements, stances, and attacks. In terms of pedagogy, he forcefully promotes the primacy of practising assaults, and laments that students in his day no longer assault with the frequency and gusto of earlier times. </p><br />
<p>Among other elements he criticises: feints, elaborate postures, mathematical concepts, excessive theoretical discussion, and dagger disarms, as unhelpful and impractical for a confrontation with sharps. Without naming names Monesi appears to clearly reference, again critically, the work of [[Docciolini]], [[Fabris]], [[Marozzo]], and [[Pistofilo]]. </p><br />
<p>Alongside such direct critiques, Monesi includes less specifically targeted remonstrations. For example, he objects to the pedagogical method of masters who employ a chestplate, or a cane in place of a sword. Similarly, he leaves space for conventional discussion points of the period, such as where to look when fencing, or how to approach combat at night.</p><br />
== Treatise ==<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Introduction and dedication| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
! <p>Transcription</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''On the Subject of Fencing'''</p><br />
<p>'''By Jacopo Monesi'''</p><br />
<p>'''Known as the Armourer'''</p><br />
<p>'''Master of Arms to the Most Serene of Tuscany, and Their Gentleman Pages'''</p><br />
<p>'''Dedicated to the Most Illustrious Sir Count'''</p><br />
<p>'''Francesco Piccolomini of Aragon'''</p><br />
<p>'''In Florence, at the New Press M.DC.XXXX'''</p><br />
<p>With Permission from the Authorities</p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Most Illustrious and Noble Sir and Patron'''</p><br />
<p>The shade of your Most Illustrious Lordship's great protection, has generated in me an uncommon yearning to bring to light that which has been hidden in the shadows of my intellect for many years. For some time I have had in mind to make public certain discourses on the most excellent profession of fencing, but the awareness of my scarce ability to articulate them, caused the heat of my enthusiasm to cool. This yearning only then emerges, through confiding in the patronage of your Most Illustrious Lordship, wishing to express these concepts in the best manner possible. </p><br />
<p>Therefore this is entrusted only to you, as has happened in the past with honour, once again I opted for your support in bringing this forth, so that anything that is deemed monstrous will nonetheless (protected by the greatness of your Most Illustrious Lordship) be embraced, and be appraised with a not less than benign eye. </p><br />
<p>Please deign therefore to protect it with benevolence, recognising it as a sign of my dutiful observance to your Most Illustrious Lordship's great merit, to which I reverently bow, praying for your every most coveted happiness. </p><br />
<p>Your devoted and most obligated servant</p><br />
<p>Jacopo Monesi, known as the Armourer. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''To the Benevolent Reader'''</p><br />
<p>It has been for a number of years that despite the weakness of my intellect I have wanted to present my thoughts on the play of fencing, which has been my particular profession. But since the world has seen others elevated, and granted them brilliant ability with which they delight and are delighted, I considered it best to keep my thoughts buried within me. </p><br />
<p>Considering however that in some printed books you find an exorbitance of guards, and other extravagances, and witnessing this noble exercise reduced more to discourse than practice, the desire I have (if successful) to demonstrate the true play, and method of combat, made me resolve first to declare my objections, then to explain the correct method. </p><br />
<p>In conformance therefore with what the Most Illustrious Sir Silvio Piccolomini of Aragon <ref>Silvio Piccolomini was a knight of the Order of Santo Stefano, and noted fencer and military commander of his age. In the dedication of his own treatise [[Federico Ghisliero]] declares himself a student of Piccolomini, while his skill at fencing is further referenced by [[Cappoferro]] in his introduction to the reader, and by the French chronicler Michel de Montaigne. </ref> (excellent in this exercise, and more so in military disciplines) taught me, after my first master Cosimo Paradisi, in the chapters that follow I will narrate as openly as I can what is recounted. </p><br />
<p>But since the greatest detriment to this exercise, in my view, comes from neglecting to struggle with the sword in hand, in practising assaults, I will deal with this first, explaining the reasons why I believe this is, as I commence. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>''Might it please Sir Canon Carlo del Vigna to see if the present work contains anything repugnant to Christian piety, and public morals, and refer back. The 30th January 1639.'' </p><br />
Vincenzio Rabatta, Vicar of Florence<br />
<p>''In the present work, having reviewed it in all diligence, I found nothing repugnant to Christian piety, or public morals. 25th February 1639.''</p><br />
<p>Carlo del Vigna, Canon of Florence<br />
<p>''Most Reverend Father Inquisitor,''</p><br />
<p>''By your order of Most Reverend Father I have reviewed this present discourse on fencing, and I have not found anything repugnant to the Religion, orto public morals, judging it worthy of publication. 26th March 1640. ''</p><br />
<p>Girolamo Rosati, Protonotary and Consultant of the Holy Office</p><br />
<p>''This can be printed. Florence 3rd April 1640. ''</p><br />
<p>Father Giovanni Angeli, Vicar of the Holy Office, by order of</p><br />
<p>Senator Alessandro Vettori, Auditor of His Most Serene Highness</p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Notes on fencing| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
! <p>Transcription</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''Chapter One'''</p><br />
<p>Ambition, which without fail is the cause of every ill, especially in virtuous exercises, I know to be the true basis and root of a rather notable vice. </p><br />
<p>Every day we see youths of such ambition, that under the cloak of letting their virtue be known, out of all proportion, neglect the importance of possessing such virtue, and as soon as they arrive in schools to learn, having imbibed just a few lessons, allow themselves to be inflated by excessive pretension, and judge themselves to be masters. </p><br />
<p>Therefore it happens (and I speak in particular of this exercise) that in public schools, and especially in private houses, with youths of equal quality gathered to practice assaults, you find some who do not grasp the sword if not to teach, nor to learn in any other way. This outlook is so pernicious, that for this reason you no longer hear of people gathering for common benefit and practice, and to pass the time in the virtue of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Those who have distinguished themselves up until now, demonstrating their valour and knowledge, in my view did not take this route. Indeed anxious to prove their worth as gallant men at every occasion, in any place, and against any person, I believe they sought to learn. Because to understand a discipline well, you have to practise it, you cannot learn with theory alone. </p><br />
<p>It is not a good way to master a skill, to think you can attain it without effort and sacrifice. Those who think to proceed like this, infallibly discover through experience how much they have deluded themselves. </p><br />
<p>Another active and real problem I bring up, just as damaging as the first although stemming from the same ambition, is the disparity between people. </p><br />
<p>You cannot deny that an artisan (who delights in virtue as is understandable), can through his diligence and vivacity arrive at the goal of fencing well with the sword. Indeed because this exercise is extremely capable of elevating the most lowly individual, it often happens that by applying their spirit, those of base condition become more distinguished. </p><br />
<p>The damage therefore that ambition brings, is to be ashamed to practice assaults with someone of lowly hand. To not consider you could extract some fruit even from these people, throwing yourself into the profession. </p><br />
<p>This thought is erroneous, because it is essential to know that virtue levels all people; and that a virtuoso can be considered the equal not just of a simple gentleman, but of any prince or great lord. </p><br />
<p>These are the reasons I give, demonstrating why today assaults are dismissed, neglecting the chance to benefit from the luxury of living, before the waning of youthful years deprives you of every worthwhile activity. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Two – On the same subject'''</p><br />
<p>You can clearly tell from my previous discourse how much damage ambition brings, and how it is a reason for not mastering this beautiful virtue of fencing. But I will now demonstrate furthermore how discussion of this profession, which today's students engage in more than practice, causes notable harm. The truth is that lessons taken in any subject in the day are of no use if their operations are not exercised. </p><br />
<p>That which pertains to bodies of reason: such as logic, philosophy, and so forth, must be put in practice with words alone, as they are necessary to expound such virtues. However in the profession of fencing words have no place to execute well what the students have learned from the master. </p><br />
<p>Actions are needed when it comes to training your body for defence and attack. </p><br />
<p>This is not applied by today's youth, which is a further reason why assaults no longer take place, and students neglect to learn wielding a sword in hand well. It then follows that masters are judged and branded as inept in their craft, since they no longer produce students as they did in the past. </p><br />
<p>When youngsters come together, sometimes from the schools of different masters in this profession, instead of putting their studies to the test, with the cloak across their shoulders, as well as with the simple sword in hand, they begin to discuss among themselves: “If I delivered this thrust how would you parry it?”. </p><br />
<p>The other replies “I would do it in this way, or like this” to which the first responds “But if it were a cut, how would you defend yourself” again its counter is added, and they carry on ad infinitum in this manner, disregarding gainful practice. </p><br />
<p>See if this is the best way to safeguard yourself, and benefit through the profession. Then test with a sharp sword (which could happen), whether these people would have time for such a parliament. </p><br />
<p>Action is required for exercises which engage the body, words cannot grant a student resolution to confront his opponent, or courage and practice to defend himself. This is as much as I thought to say on this matter. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Three – On putting mathematics into this virtue'''<ref>This chapter might apply to Italian treatises which incorporate mathematical principles, such as [[Camillo Agrippa]], but arguably targets in particular the Iberian forms of the ''Verdadera Destreza'', exemplified by [[Jerónimo Sánchez de Carranza]] and [[Luis Pacheco de Narváez]]. </ref></p><br />
<p>I have never presumed to malign anyone who professes to teach this noble exercise, nor do I intend to now, recognising myself as the inferior to many gallant men who have practised this virtue. But we are permitted to debate upon the lessons of some, who have taught and teach through mathematics, with the addition of lines, circles, traverses and extravagant voids of the body. </p><br />
<p>For me, these are commendable for fencing in a clean salle, furnished with even tiles. Likewise it is impossible for two people not to put on a good display, when they politely retreat, then void, or advance with a neat step, putting into practice what they have learned from their masters. </p><br />
<p>But if I imagine them outside the tiled hall, that is in the streets, where confrontations most often arise, then I can't help but criticise and malign them, since it is impossible (for reasons I will explain) to put these actions into practice. </p><br />
<p>Someone who is confronted or deliberately summoned to combat, cannot I believe, as happens in large armies, bring with them people to dig; to resurface the street so they can put themselves in the right posture, and use their lines, and advances of ground, and binds of the sword in conformance with their lessons. Instead, being confronted, they are obliged to think how to stand firmly on their feet, to be vigorous in defence and attack, ready of hand, without such fine distinctions of footwork. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore those who employ the sword in this manner, can be called good and beautiful fencers, but in an open space, or street where stones, holes, and cracks can cause you to stumble, they are always in danger of defending themselves poorly from their enemy. In such cases most of the time the artifices of traverses, voids and lines are left aside, and they throw themselves into natural attacks, as is so often seen. </p><br />
<p>This itself is sufficient demonstration, although I can elaborate for greater clarity, that play founded upon natural reason is with no comparison much better than artificious play. The latter was invented for no motive other than satisfying the curiosity of youth. If it were otherwise, it would not be the case, not only in public schools but also in the presence of nobility with the intervention of great princes, that professors of play founded upon such twists of the body had been touched assault after assault, with cuts and thrusts, as is clear and manifest to a great many people. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Four – On a defined ''punto'' to attack'''<ref> The term punto to signify a defined target area of the right shoulder is particular to the treatise of [[Marco Docciolini]].</ref></p><br />
<p>This seems to me an important subject, in order to be accomplished in assaults. I will merely state my thoughts on those who, as a principal maxim, hold and practise the opinion that it is better to attack only a single part of the body, namely the right shoulder, being the said punto. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, you must consider the reason why they observe this doctrine. I believe it is for no reason other than to strike either the nearest, or the most vulnerable part of the body. </p><br />
<p>If we suppose they hold this view, because they want to strike the nearest target, I completely refute their opinion. Hands and arms notwithstanding, I know how those who lean most stand, even their knees are closer and more likely to be attacked by the enemy. </p><br />
<p>If they wish to propose the other reason, that it is the most vulnerable part of the body, I can only oppose them entirely. It seems to me that the hands and arms are subjected to danger: both of being wounded, and of the intermediate outcome of losing the ability to attack. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore experience, which instructs in all things, shows us that in a good portion of combats you see wounds to the hands and arms. This is because these can more easily encounter the enemy's weapons. If they deem the area called the punto so vulnerable, I do not know which hands and arms are not in the same danger. In them you find veins, arteries and other very vulnerable areas which evidently have shown to cause the death of those wounded there. </p><br />
This is as much as I can say on this particular. I urge everyone to take the whole of the enemy's body as the fixed punto to attack, and specifically the part that presents itself as most uncovered and furthest forward. There is much more that could be said, for example if your opponent is left-handed, or in other situations, but to avoid tedium I will omit it. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Five – On a predetermined measure'''</p><br />
<p>In addition to the other pernicious matters in the virtue of fencing noted above, I absolutely detest the opinion of those who insist on, observe, and teach a predetermined measure. Since an opinion should not be proposed without foundation, I will prove this simple truth with active reason. </p><br />
<p>I have always observed, and heard, that people who are forced to fight, whether to defend themselves, or to confront someone who has caused them some offence, never have the benefit of being able to measure swords. Nor is this a given, since anyone can wear a sword of any length they please (speaking of Tuscany). They cannot even choose a piazza well suited for coming to blows, and neither are people equal in form, either in height or in build. </p><br />
<p>Now, if this is not the case, what is the point of habituating your foot, and arm to a predetermined measure? Moreover, you can easily see from experience that often there is no time to take measure, or the opportunity is denied, for example in badly paved streets, sometimes filled with a thousand pieces of rubbish, as mentioned above. </p><br />
<p>If someone, suddenly or intentionally, is obliged to fight, even if they find themselves in a nice, clean street, it is impossible for them to observe the measure of their steps; to defend themselves and attack, against someone who is naturally at ease in well-founded play, who naturally understands how to stay strongly on their feet, and deflect the enemy's blows, while at the same time attacking him, which seems to me the real principle. </p><br />
<p>You must concede, that this measure was invented simply for the encounters they like to conduct at royal pageants, which have been held several times in various places, and furthermore in itself to demonstrate how far they can extend their normal step. However it is absolutely unfit not just for combat in earnest, but even for the simple assaults you might practice. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Six – On voids'''</p><br />
<p>There should be little difference between this chapter and the previous one, since having to discuss voids, which produce the same result as a set measure, my argument will differ little from the one adopted above. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, let us consider its effect, which is nothing more than a withdrawal of the body, either back or to the side, to defend against an enemy's attack. I say that this withdrawal is as dangerous as trusting in a set measure, and the reason is as follows: someone who by chance comes to blows with an enemy cannot know if they wield a longer sword, whereby in wishing to void they can be wounded. Nor can they know how agile the sword's wielder is. </p><br />
<p>More importantly, when someone evades a blow with a void, they must necessarily lose a tempo in having to return forward to attack. If set upon during this tempo (which the enemy may attempt) they will find it very difficult to recover. </p><br />
<p>For this reason therefore, as a rule of good fencing you should never concede voids. Besides it increases the risk of stumbling in the streets, which as noted above can happen when placing yourself in a set measure. </p><br />
<p>Seeking to avoid any mishap that can occur is the utmost of a man's prudence. The greatest threats that arise are those to life. Against these principal dangers man must apply all his judgement. </p><br />
<p>If we know that voids, traverses, and a set measure manifestly cannot save us from an enemy's attack, why not use that convenient and very useful remedy: not to be subjected to such attacks by staying well-grounded, with firm and stable strength of both body and arm. This will suffice on this topic. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Seven – On feints'''</p><br />
<p>In the profession of fencing there are many frivolities and jests, or more accurately whimsies that you can use, either in public schools or in private settings. Among others there are feints. These can often be employed when fencing for enjoyment and fun, and similarly to improve your vision, since they also serve to train your eyes to be attentive. </p><br />
<p>But I like to believe that this practice was invented for nothing more than to defend yourself, or to attack your enemy, as the situation demands. In reality they reveal themselves as good only for entertainment, or to prolong lessons, and I am forced to say that feints are extremely dangerous to those who wish to perform them. They require two tempos, and in the true exercise of wielding the sword are manifestly unsafe. </p><br />
<p>In earnest, as we know, arms are employed for only two reasons. The first is to defend, the other is to attack. How then can someone who is confronted, as we have said before, hold forth with contrivances like feinting over and under the dagger, to the outside and inside of the sword, against the speed of the enemy's blows (especially if they are strong)? Against cuts as well as thrusts, when he does not adopt any kind of posture, but advancing with such blows? </p><br />
<p>I have no doubt that those in this predicament, stirred by many motives, leave aside all feints and attend only to defending their lives as best they can. </p><br />
<p>But can you imagine others, advancing phlegmatically to confront their enemy, to vindicate a wrong or harm done to them, redeeming themselves with the frivolities and jests of feints? </p><br />
<p>I will omit many examples, but fury transports them, reason is overcome. Honour necessitates that they leave aside taught feints, and instead follow natural instinct, but since I have explained this already, I will not expound further. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eight – On ''contrattempo'', ''mezzotempo'' and more'''</p><br />
<p>To cover the present topic it is worth returning to the same discussion in the previous chapter. The various fancies and follies, along with feints, are invented by certain masters I believe, not only to retain students so they stay longer at the school, but also to confuse them. This way they unlearn the good and study the bad, and will always have to remain students. </p><br />
<p>This is the case with the invention of ''mezzotempo'' and ''contrattempo''. These are brought to light, as I mentioned, only to keep the school running. </p><br />
<p>''Mezzotempo'', and other such terms, deform the good and true rules with too many fripperies. In reality you could never have a memory sharp enough to employ them in defence in a single tempo, or in attack. </p><br />
<p>These methods should be practised not in fencing, but in the realm of dance, where the variety of steps and agility of the leaps must astound the spectators. </p><br />
<p>But in this profession a single step, a single tempo must suffice. Deployed with the requisite accuracy and mastery it will always quash any ''contrattempo'' or ''mezzotempo'' you might encounter, and I profess that this is merely the truth. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Nine – On the so misshapen published figures of this exercise'''<br />
<p>If I believed myself alone, I would not dare to criticise the infinite sets of figures presented and drawn in published books. These are invented, I believe, to no other end but to demonstrate a multiplicity of distorted postures, which almost transcend the bounds of nature, and drag people towards the ridiculous, rather than to learning from viewing such contorted actions. </p><br />
<p>I would like to have some leeway, to leave some praise, but I see no way whatsoever, if not to say that these deformations are very suitable for clowns and tavern-singers, to entertain and extract money from a crowd. This is the praise I am able to concede. </p><br />
<p>If then I were to offer some polite criticism, I could begin by saying that these positions are monstrous, and impossible to witness within our profession. When have you ever seen people, either for enjoyment or necessity, employ such extravagant contortions, with their bodies so hunched and forced, and for the sword alone with the off-hand by the left ear, to employ it like a dagger to deflect thrusts?<ref>This passage, and arguably the entire chapter, appears to be targeted at [[Salvator Fabris]], whose treatise is notable for its deep and sometimes contorted stances.</ref></p><br />
<p>This is as far removed from the natural order as truth is from a lie. You do not take a sword in hand, to wield in earnest, with such exorbitant contortions. You should stand so you can operate naturally, all the more so when you find yourself on the street. There you may find many impediments, as I have said, and confirming what I have already said above, you must stand firmly on your feet, in a balanced posture from which you can draw strength to oppose the sword against all attacks, and as upright as possible so you do not become disordered.</p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Ten – On the guards and counterguards'''</p><br />
<p>There are many guards, great in number from various masters, which you can employ in the profession of fencing. To list them all, and discuss which of them is good or bad, would require a discourse beyond this brief one, expounded with an eloquence other than my own. Nonetheless my pen will write simply and plainly, to touch upon some of my thoughts. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, to demonstrate the extravagance of the guards invented, I will cite various names authors have given them, such as: ''coda lunga e stretta'', ''cingara'', ''porta di ferro'', ''beccapossa'',<ref> These guard names are characteristic of the Bolognese school of fencing. In particular the name ''beccapossa'' is specific to [[Achille Marozzo]].</ref>''belincorno'', prima, seconda, terza and quarta, and many others which I will omit, which together with these have been represented with figures in the books published up until now.</p><br />
<p>As to whether these are good or bad, any praise should be occasioned by their use. It cannot follow, although we have seen otherwise, that they endanger those who wish to employ them. However since no guard should be maligned without a basis, I will start by saying that in my opinion the guards to be employed should not be twisted or bizarre, nor overwrought with a paintbrush, nor measured with a compass, but simple and natural. In this manner the body finds itself stronger in resisting blows, and attacking when the occasion presents itself, without the manifest danger of stumbling and thereby compromising your life. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eleven – On those who wish to debate this practice'''</p><br />
<p>To further damage this profession of fencing, in my opinion, some presume to debate over blows and postures of whichever sort, formulating and postulating in the manner of someone conducting a philosophical debate. Discussions on subjects like the one I have mentioned, should be performed with actions alone. </p><br />
<p>This occurs because upon the path of this practice it is difficult to arrive at perfection. Many who take the path, at the first resistance, by a simple act of will desist from the endeavour. Seeing themselves inadequate, they sharpen their intellect to appear the equal of professors, and with their propositions lead astray those striving to obtain a complete understanding. </p><br />
<p>This is undeniable. In the practice of fencing, to engage someone in debate and discussion as if arguing theology (in place of conducting assaults) achieves nothing but to deny opportunities to those who desire to learn, to become excellent in practice. This is the motive I ascribe for this behaviour. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Twelve – Against a set rule for combat at night'''</p><br />
<p>In this simple discourse of mine, I wished to oppose every extravagance that the meanness of my intellect has encountered in the profession of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Therefore it seemed apt to contest also the opinion of those who hold a firm rule of giving true and real method of combat at night: that putting your hands to your weapons, you should quickly use them to seek the enemy’s sword, and having found it you must liberally deliver attacks to wound him. </p><br />
<p>They add to this another rule, no better than the first, that is to keep your body hunched to create a smaller target. </p><br />
<p>I address each of these as follows. </p><br />
<p>If confronted in the dark at night, how can you find your enemy's weapon without being attacked? </p><br />
<p>Why must you remain hunched, being deprived of ability and stature in defence and attack, in place of a strong and comfortable posture, remaining upright on your feet without hunching over? </p><br />
<p>Such a false opinion I would deem unsuitable even for the daytime where you can clearly see the enemy’s posture, and even when the enemy does not step to attack. </p><br />
<p>I firmly maintain that if you must fight at night, in such circumstances in the dark, you should deliver ''dritti'' and ''roversci'' as swiftly as you can. </p><br />
<p>Anything else is futile, without proposing many additional considerations for such instances, which for the sake of brevity I will omit. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Thirteen – On those masters who in giving lessons employ either a chestplate or a rod'''</p><br />
<p>Among the other notable detriments, caused by various extravagances, are those masters, some who give lessons with a chestplate, others with a rod. </p><br />
<p>Masters who wear a chestplate during lessons leads to nothing else, in my opinion, than that students deliver blows with an exorbitant step. Since the blows do not harm these said masters, they do not realise that, although they wish to protect the student, with these thrusts they harm them. </p><br />
<p>They become habituated to committing their body so much with every blow, that it becomes unlikely they could recover when performed in earnest. </p><br />
<p>Having delivered the thrust to their master's chestplate, they find resistance, lending them force to recover back, and they adopt the habit of abandoning their whole body into the attack.</p><br />
<p>Because of this with a sharp sword, not finding the resistance of the chestplate they have with the practice sword, they remain extended so far forwards that it is difficult (as stated) to avoid their enemy's attack. It can absolutely occur that instead of wounding their enemy, they are left injured. </p><br />
<p>Something similar can occur with students who are used to taking lesson from masters who hold a rod. Since it is much lighter than a sword it creates an extremely negative effect, giving rise to great setbacks. Its weakness, not having the same form as a sword, means whichever cut the rod delivers, it cannot force the student's sword to learn, as a sword would. </p><br />
<p>We can furthermore question, being habituated to parrying cuts from the rod, if when they receive cuts from a sword, they might become confused. </p><br />
<p>Being disordered they might apply the lessons learned reluctantly, since they do not even learn resolve. So I repeat, employing either a chestplate or a rod benefits only the master, and not the students. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Fourteen – On where some wish you to look when you fight'''</p><br />
<p>The variety of opinions on where to place your eyes during actions, both during assaults and in questions of honour, leads me to include this topic in this discourse of mine. Many want you to keep your eyes fixed to your enemy's face during combat. Others assert you should always watch the point of your opponent's sword. </p><br />
<p>I contradict both of these views. I say that keeping your eye on the point is of no use in combat, since it is unlikely your enemy's point ever stays still. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore it is so fine that when it is brandished at speed, someone who trusts in this proposition greatly deceives themselves; knowing full well that sharp swords are not like swords in schools with a button, which is rather large, although some schools might not use them. Therefore I consider this proposition in my own manner. </p><br />
<p>I also criticise the other opinion, of watching your enemy's face, because while keeping your eyes there it is unlikely you can understand and clearly discern the operations he performs with the sword. Often these are away from the face, and he might feint with his eyes to attack in one place, only to move the hand to offend elsewhere. </p><br />
<p>Therefore finding fault with both of the above opinions, I hold that another area is more appropriate, necessary, and without subjecting yourself to deceits more useful, which I will relate in due time in another treatise. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Fifteen – To those who greatly criticise cuts'''</p><br />
<p>Everyone must defend their profession with the rationales available, so I will not fail to show how mistaken are those who greatly criticise cuts in the practice of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Before opposing everything they state in favour of their position, I will explain the charges levelled against those who employ cuts. </p><br />
<p>The first is that cuts are not lethal, the second is that they are much shorter than thrusts, while cuts are further derided by the claim they are for brutes. </p><br />
<p>I refute the first by supposing, since death has taken many in our times by way of cuts, that no other reason is needed to affirm this truth. </p><br />
<p>I can counter the second with great ease, demonstrating how with the hand, and the same length of step and sword (when grasped), the same person can be wounded either by a cut or a thrust. This is better proved by experience than words (which I set out to do), as I have shown and performed many times in the presence of great princes. </p><br />
<p>I should raise a further consideration for those who criticise cuts, and it is this. When someone is confronted, and puts their hand to their sword to defend themself, do they negotiate with their enemy whether to use only thrusts (speaking of Tuscan lands)? If they can wound with both thrusts and cuts, then why not employ cuts, and learn to defend against them? </p><br />
<p>I can only believe that those who criticise cuts, understanding only thrusts, either have no power in their cuts, or do not know how to teach them (if they are masters), or have no time to practise them if they are students. </p><br />
<p>In every profession, to remain ahead of others you must pursue every possible avenue, even if indirect, but all the more so the true and good path, since every day in questions of honour we see that the majority of wounds are cuts to the hands, arms and face. For this reason swords with a hollow were invented.<ref> In the original simply ''spada con l'incavo''. It remains unclear whether Monesi is referring simply to a hollow-ground blade or deep fuller, or perhaps an indentation at the grip that might conceivably aid in cutting , like on some later sabres.</ref></p><br />
<p>Having explained the usefulness of cuts, I affirm once again that those who criticise them, claiming they are no good because they are for brutes, cause harm. An example of this is not keeping hold of the sword, so it falls to the ground, which has happened to many during simple assaults. Another is not having the ability to defend against cuts. I have useful advice to give in this regard, but to avoid being tedious, and admitting to discuss only superficial matters, I will not expound further, and will end my discourse of this subject. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Sixteen – Against numerous grips with the dagger'''</p><br />
<p>Having set myself to contradict falsehood with truth, I should say a few things on this subject. This is for those who strongly promote and encourage a multiplicity of grips with or against the dagger, many with a dagger and others unarmed, as something pertaining to the art of fencing. </p><br />
<p>I refute the quantity of grips described and delineated, and their operation, knowing very well as I have said elsewhere, that you do not negotiate with your opponent. This is from the many occurrences and events that are well-known without me having to describe them. </p><br />
<p>In fact I would dare say that the dagger is worse than the pistol, which can fail or misfire. The dagger is always loaded and ready to attack, and when someone has this weapon at their side and spots the opportunity to use it, I do not believe they will use it to threaten their enemy from distance. </p><br />
<p>Assuming they are not a coward, but resolute and courageous, they will approach as close as they have to. I doubt there will be time to counter, with any of these many grips that are supposed to defend against attacks, nor therefore would I say that dagger against dagger they could be of any benefit. </p><br />
<p>I will freely admit that some of the grips work in schools, of course, but as you know these daggers are without a point or a cutting edge. Many options can be proposed since there is no manifest danger. </p><br />
<p>I return to saying, that as a short weapon they are much quicker to draw, and more ready to wound. These grips are for the entertainment, and confusion, of students. This is what I have to say for now. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Seventeen – On a pike position that defends against any sort of missile weapon, including arquebus shots'''<ref> This is a clear reference to p.114-115 in ''Oplomachia'', the 1621 pike, halberd and musket treatise of [[Bonaventura Pistofilo]]. </p><br />
<p>''When an occasion arrives where you must grasp your sword, I urge you never to abandon your pike, whether it is broken or intact. Instead employ it at least to defend. Anyone can understand for themselves from figure 79, how useful this manner of holding the pike can be for defence.'' </p><br />
<p>''It protects against cavalry, infantry, and against any type of hand weapon; even against missile weapons such as javelins, darts, arrows, and similar arms, up to and including arquebus shots. As long as by chance they do not strike directly in the centre of the shaft, so that the balls instead skid aside, the man will be saved, as I have seen from experience.'' </p><br />
<p>''You must comport yourself such that everything is covered by the pike, maintaining your arm high and firmly extended. Your stance must be sufficiently wide for greater stability, with your sword ready to attack.'' </p><br />
<p>''If you then wish to return your sword to its sheath without abandoning the pike, or piece of haft left in your hand, figure 80 clearly demonstrates how without need for further explanation.''</ref></p><br />
<p>I have seen many authors publish thoughts which objectively can barely be sustained. This prompted me to highlight one marvellous opinion, held by a master not only of fencing but of many trades. </p><br />
<p>In one of his books, he assigns a posture with the sword in the right hand and a pike in the left, profiled towards that side like a barbican. He asserts it does not merely defend against cavalry and infantry, but from any sort of polearm, and also from arrows, javelins and even arquebus or musket shots. </p><br />
<p>The only caveat is that it must not hit the centre of the shaft, where it may break, which seems likely. I leave this to be pondered by anyone who professes the practice of arms. To authenticate this he claims to have seen it. </p><br />
<p>Emboldened by such a claim, I have taken common courage and confided to the pen that which was concealed in my mind. Because if such wonders have occurred they would refute not only my weak and poorly articulated arguments, but genuine and well-founded ones. </p><br />
<p>I do not blame that pikeman, whether his pike was whole or broken, if having to wield his sword he also employed his polearm. But with apologies, I can never have it believed that his haft could keep him safe from every attack, from every sort of weapon. Supposedly even the musket against which (the author says) the pike prevails, the musket ball skidding off one side or the other to be deflected without harm. </p><br />
<p>In truth I have not passed my years in war, where I might have witnessed such incidences, but have been in service of and enjoyed the company of many veteran soldiers. Foremost of all the Most Illustrious Sir Silvio Piccolomini of Aragon, a person of such esteem as is known throughout the world, having fulfilled many offices in war, for the Most Serene Highnesses of Tuscany and for other crowns. Yet I never heard from him or anybody else that the guard described is able to achieve what is claimed. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eighteen – Some admonishments for those who wear a sword'''</p><br />
<p>Any profession should be practised with every possible convenience, and a farmer who must be present when the grain is harvested in July should not wear a garment of heavy cloth.</p><br />
<p>Those who dedicate themselves to the profession of wearing a sword, so dangerous that we could say death always walks alongside it, in various respects should not wear any ornamentation of the body or clothes, or any other items that might disadvantage them when coming to blows. </p><br />
<p>An example more perilous than any other is high-heels, which can easily lead their owner to fall over. Or else sleeves that hang down from the tunic, which can subject someone who is confronted, or who confronts, to great trouble. </p><br />
<p>Likewise long hair, which when coming to grapple grants a clear advantage to the opponent, while bringing great danger to the bearer, even more so when curly in the extravagant style of today; also more specifically hair that comes to impede vision. </p><br />
<p>Also included among such impediments are clothes with large slashes, in the French fashion or in any other. They can cause no small detriment, being dangerous by hampering the drawing of weapons with the swiftness required. </p><br />
<p>I also wanted to mention those who carry daggers with a dangling rose. </p><br />
<p>This is for the benefit of all; because from the mishaps that have occurred, I am sure the impediments I have listed most often create danger for the lives of those who struggle with arms. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Nineteen – What moved me to write this discourse'''</p><br />
<p>Everything we do in this world has an end, and every endeavour wends towards its outcome. Therefore I felt it apt to declare in this final chapter, which motives moved me to stain these few sheets of paper (so to speak) with my coarse and ill-adapted thoughts, and to expose myself voluntarily to the censure of innumerable fine intellects. </p><br />
<p>The reason is that I have found infinite authors, who by means of the presses have professed to enrich the virtue of fencing by demonstrating various sorts of guards and means of combat, and numerous uses of weapons. Knowing that all these operations were shown for the simple practice of wielding a sword, I resolved to designate the true manner of exercising this profession seriously. It consists of nothing more than the simple assaults which are conducted for pleasure. </p><br />
<p>The reason for writing this discourse was none other than a real and genuine desire for the aficionados of this art to recognise the true method of practising it, to not further maltreat it, and to employ the advice provided for the benefit of their person. This is the motivation, as I have said previously, and the intention. </p><br />
<p>May the reader appreciate the willingness of my spirit; and may those habituated to Ciceronian eloquence, and to the exquisite vivacity of extraordinary conceptions, pity my rude pen, whose lowly scribbles have aspired only to reveal the truth. </p><br />
<p>Lastly I wanted to set out how having learned the voids and traverses, I found them ill-suited to real combat with a sharp sword, and I criticise them. </p><br />
<p>Although I praise cuts in practice for their excellent defence, even more so at night where they are the quickest blow to find their target, I do not wish praise them by themselves, I commend them when mixed with a good many thrusts. A dagger can interrupt and defend against thrusts, but is comfortably negated by cuts. </p><br />
<p>And here I come to a close. If God grants me health in months and not years I hope to bring forth fruit that is useful, with the most straightforward method, apt for real combat, distinguishing the characteristics of different people: whether large, powerful, small or weak, with appropriate rules. </p><br />
<p>All in honour of our Lord God, and the most Blessed Virgin Mary. </p><br />
<p>'''THE END. ''' </p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
<br />
{{Regional Italian traditions}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Copy/Pasting]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Rapier]]<br />
[[Category:Dagger]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Jacopo_Monesi&diff=120503Jacopo Monesi2020-11-18T19:08:42Z<p>P Terminiello: /* Treatise */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = Jacopo Monesi<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = 16th century (?)<br />
| birthplace = Florence, Italy (?)<br />
| deathdate = 17th century<br />
| deathplace = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set: occupation=Fencing master }}<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = <br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = Medici court<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| period = <br />
| movement = <br />
| influences =<br />
| influenced = <br />
<br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| notableworks = ''[[Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)| Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma]]'' (1640)<br />
| archetype = <br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= 1640<br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| signature = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
<p>'''Jacopo Monesi''' was an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing master]] during the first half of the [[century::17th century]]. </p><br />
<p>A native of Florence, he appears to have enjoyed enduring patronage and recognition in his own lifetime at the court of the Grand Duchy of Tuscany under Ferdinando II de' Medici. </p><br />
<p>A court document, dating to 1621, indicates Monesi's role included instructing the adolescent nobility at the grand ducal court (a claim supported by the title page of his own work): </p><br />
<p>''Jacopo of the Armourer, master of fencing, is one of several masters to the pages, together with the priest Albizio Vecchi, the undermaster Frediano Tinolfi, Giovanni Migliorucci master of writing, Leonardo Migliorucci, Giovanni Pieroni the arithmetist and mathematician, Remigio Cantagallina master of drawing, and Pitti Agnolo Ricci master of dance.''<ref>Archivio di Stato di Firenze, Miscellanea Medicea, 369, c.707. Cited by http://www.scrimipedia.it/mediawiki/index.php?title=Iacopo_Monesi (accessed 22 March 2017).</ref><br />
<p>In 1640 he published a short tract outlining his fencing philosophy: [[Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)| Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma]]. </p><br />
<p>Monesi's text contain little technical discussion, which he defers to a promised second volume that however is either lost or was never written. Instead, Monesi strongly critiques many theories and methodologies of his peers. Behind a veil of formal language excoriating those practices he views as frivolous, or detrimental to surviving an encounter in earnest. Monesi advocates a straightforward and direct philosophy of fencing. He eschews what he sees as unnecessary embellishments, or artefacts of salle fencing, and privileges what he considers practical for surviving an unpredictable and violent confrontation with sharp weapons. </p><br />
<p>He strongly affirms the efficacy of cuts, interspersed with thrusts; and favours simple and strong natural movements, stances, and attacks. In terms of pedagogy, he forcefully promotes the primacy of practising assaults, and laments that students in his day no longer assault with the frequency and gusto of earlier times. </p><br />
<p>Among other elements he criticises: feints, elaborate postures, mathematical concepts, excessive theoretical discussion, and dagger disarms, as unhelpful and impractical for a confrontation with sharps. Without naming names Monesi appears to clearly reference, again critically, the work of [[Docciolini]], [[Fabris]], [[Marozzo]], and [[Pistofilo]]. </p><br />
<p>Alongside such direct critiques, Monesi includes less specifically targeted remonstrations. For example, he objects to the pedagogical method of masters who employ a chestplate, or a cane in place of a sword. Similarly, he leaves space for conventional discussion points of the period, such as where to look when fencing, or how to approach combat at night.</p><br />
== Treatise ==<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Introduction and dedication| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
! <p>Transcription</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''On the Subject of Fencing'''</p><br />
<p>'''By Jacopo Monesi'''</p><br />
<p>'''Known as the Armourer'''</p><br />
<p>'''Master of Arms to the Most Serene of Tuscany, and Their Gentleman Pages'''</p><br />
<p>'''Dedicated to the Most Illustrious Sir Count'''</p><br />
<p>'''Francesco Piccolomini of Aragon'''</p><br />
<p>'''In Florence, at the New Press M.DC.XXXX'''</p><br />
<p>With Permission from the Authorities</p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Most Illustrious and Noble Sir and Patron'''</p><br />
<p>The shade of your Most Illustrious Lordship's great protection, has generated in me an uncommon yearning to bring to light that which has been hidden in the shadows of my intellect for many years. For some time I have had in mind to make public certain discourses on the most excellent profession of fencing, but the awareness of my scarce ability to articulate them, caused the heat of my enthusiasm to cool. This yearning only then emerges, through confiding in the patronage of your Most Illustrious Lordship, wishing to express these concepts in the best manner possible. </p><br />
<p>Therefore this is entrusted only to you, as has happened in the past with honour, once again I opted for your support in bringing this forth, so that anything that is deemed monstrous will nonetheless (protected by the greatness of your Most Illustrious Lordship) be embraced, and be appraised with a not less than benign eye. </p><br />
<p>Please deign therefore to protect it with benevolence, recognising it as a sign of my dutiful observance to your Most Illustrious Lordship's great merit, to which I reverently bow, praying for your every most coveted happiness. </p><br />
<p>Your devoted and most obligated servant</p><br />
<p>Jacopo Monesi, known as the Armourer. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''To the Benevolent Reader'''</p><br />
<p>It has been for a number of years that despite the weakness of my intellect I have wanted to present my thoughts on the play of fencing, which has been my particular profession. But since the world has seen others elevated, and granted them brilliant ability with which they delight and are delighted, I considered it best to keep my thoughts buried within me. </p><br />
<p>Considering however that in some printed books you find an exorbitance of guards, and other extravagances, and witnessing this noble exercise reduced more to discourse than practice, the desire I have (if successful) to demonstrate the true play, and method of combat, made me resolve first to declare my objections, then to explain the correct method. </p><br />
<p>In conformance therefore with what the Most Illustrious Sir Silvio Piccolomini of Aragon <ref>Silvio Piccolomini was a knight of the Order of Santo Stefano, and noted fencer and military commander of his age. In the dedication of his own treatise [[Federico Ghisliero]] declares himself a student of Piccolomini, while his skill at fencing is further referenced by [[Cappoferro]] in his introduction to the reader, and by the French chronicler Michel de Montaigne. </ref> (excellent in this exercise, and more so in military disciplines) taught me, after my first master Cosimo Paradisi, in the chapters that follow I will narrate as openly as I can what is recounted. </p><br />
<p>But since the greatest detriment to this exercise, in my view, comes from neglecting to struggle with the sword in hand, in practising assaults, I will deal with this first, explaining the reasons why I believe this is, as I commence. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>''Might it please Sir Canon Carlo del Vigna to see if the present work contains anything repugnant to Christian piety, and public morals, and refer back. The 30th January 1639.'' </p><br />
Vincenzio Rabatta, Vicar of Florence<br />
<p>''In the present work, having reviewed it in all diligence, I found nothing repugnant to Christian piety, or public morals. 25th February 1639.''</p><br />
<p>Carlo del Vigna, Canon of Florence<br />
<p>''Most Reverend Father Inquisitor,''</p><br />
<p>''By your order of Most Reverend Father I have reviewed this present discourse on fencing, and I have not found anything repugnant to the Religion, orto public morals, judging it worthy of publication. 26th March 1640. ''</p><br />
<p>Girolamo Rosati, Protonotary and Consultant of the Holy Office</p><br />
<p>''This can be printed. Florence 3rd April 1640. ''</p><br />
<p>Father Giovanni Angeli, Vicar of the Holy Office, by order of</p><br />
<p>Senator Alessandro Vettori, Auditor of His Most Serene Highness</p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Notes on fencing| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
! <p>Transcription</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''Chapter One'''</p><br />
<p>Ambition, which without fail is the cause of every ill, especially in virtuous exercises, I know to be the true basis and root of a rather notable vice. </p><br />
<p>Every day we see youths of such ambition, that under the cloak of letting their virtue be known, out of all proportion, neglect the importance of possessing such virtue, and as soon as they arrive in schools to learn, having imbibed just a few lessons, allow themselves to be inflated by excessive pretension, and judge themselves to be masters. </p><br />
<p>Therefore it happens (and I speak in particular of this exercise) that in public schools, and especially in private houses, with youths of equal quality gathered to practice assaults, you find some who do not grasp the sword if not to teach, nor to learn in any other way. This outlook is so pernicious, that for this reason you no longer hear of people gathering for common benefit and practice, and to pass the time in the virtue of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Those who have distinguished themselves up until now, demonstrating their valour and knowledge, in my view did not take this route. Indeed anxious to prove their worth as gallant men at every occasion, in any place, and against any person, I believe they sought to learn. Because to understand a discipline well, you have to practise it, you cannot learn with theory alone. </p><br />
<p>It is not a good way to master a skill, to think you can attain it without effort and sacrifice. Those who think to proceed like this, infallibly discover through experience how much they have deluded themselves. </p><br />
<p>Another active and real problem I bring up, just as damaging as the first although stemming from the same ambition, is the disparity between people. </p><br />
<p>You cannot deny that an artisan (who delights in virtue as is understandable), can through his diligence and vivacity arrive at the goal of fencing well with the sword. Indeed because this exercise is extremely capable of elevating the most lowly individual, it often happens that by applying their spirit, those of base condition become more distinguished. </p><br />
<p>The damage therefore that ambition brings, is to be ashamed to practice assaults with someone of lowly hand. To not consider you could extract some fruit even from these people, throwing yourself into the profession. </p><br />
<p>This thought is erroneous, because it is essential to know that virtue levels all people; and that a virtuoso can be considered the equal not just of a simple gentleman, but of any prince or great lord. </p><br />
<p>These are the reasons I give, demonstrating why today assaults are dismissed, neglecting the chance to benefit from the luxury of living, before the waning of youthful years deprives you of every worthwhile activity. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Two – On the same subject'''</p><br />
<p>You can clearly tell from my previous discourse how much damage ambition brings, and how it is a reason for not mastering this beautiful virtue of fencing. But I will now demonstrate furthermore how discussion of this profession, which today's students engage in more than practice, causes notable harm. The truth is that lessons taken in any subject in the day are of no use if their operations are not exercised. </p><br />
<p>That which pertains to bodies of reason: such as logic, philosophy, and so forth, must be put in practice with words alone, as they are necessary to expound such virtues. However in the profession of fencing words have no place to execute well what the students have learned from the master. </p><br />
<p>Actions are needed when it comes to training your body for defence and attack. </p><br />
<p>This is not applied by today's youth, which is a further reason why assaults no longer take place, and students neglect to learn wielding a sword in hand well. It then follows that masters are judged and branded as inept in their craft, since they no longer produce students as they did in the past. </p><br />
<p>When youngsters come together, sometimes from the schools of different masters in this profession, instead of putting their studies to the test, with the cloak across their shoulders, as well as with the simple sword in hand, they begin to discuss among themselves: “If I delivered this thrust how would you parry it?”. </p><br />
<p>The other replies “I would do it in this way, or like this” to which the first responds “But if it were a cut, how would you defend yourself” again its counter is added, and they carry on ad infinitum in this manner, disregarding gainful practice. </p><br />
<p>See if this is the best way to safeguard yourself, and benefit through the profession. Then test with a sharp sword (which could happen), whether these people would have time for such a parliament. </p><br />
<p>Action is required for exercises which engage the body, words cannot grant a student resolution to confront his opponent, or courage and practice to defend himself. This is as much as I thought to say on this matter. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Three – On putting mathematics into this virtue'''<ref>This chapter might apply to Italian treatises which incorporate mathematical principles, such as [[Camillo Agrippa]], but arguably targets in particular the Iberian forms of the ''Verdadera Destreza'', exemplified by [[Jerónimo Sánchez de Carranza]] and [[Luis Pacheco de Narváez]]. </ref></p><br />
<p>I have never presumed to malign anyone who professes to teach this noble exercise, nor do I intend to now, recognising myself as the inferior to many gallant men who have practised this virtue. But we are permitted to debate upon the lessons of some, who have taught and teach through mathematics, with the addition of lines, circles, traverses and extravagant voids of the body. </p><br />
<p>For me, these are commendable for fencing in a clean salle, furnished with even tiles. Likewise it is impossible for two people not to put on a good display, when they politely retreat, then void, or advance with a neat step, putting into practice what they have learned from their masters. </p><br />
<p>But if I imagine them outside the tiled hall, that is in the streets, where confrontations most often arise, then I can't help but criticise and malign them, since it is impossible (for reasons I will explain) to put these actions into practice. </p><br />
<p>Someone who is confronted or deliberately summoned to combat, cannot I believe, as happens in large armies, bring with them people to dig; to resurface the street so they can put themselves in the right posture, and use their lines, and advances of ground, and binds of the sword in conformance with their lessons. Instead, being confronted, they are obliged to think how to stand firmly on their feet, to be vigorous in defence and attack, ready of hand, without such fine distinctions of footwork. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore those who employ the sword in this manner, can be called good and beautiful fencers, but in an open space, or street where stones, holes, and cracks can cause you to stumble, they are always in danger of defending themselves poorly from their enemy. In such cases most of the time the artifices of traverses, voids and lines are left aside, and they throw themselves into natural attacks, as is so often seen. </p><br />
<p>This itself is sufficient demonstration, although I can elaborate for greater clarity, that play founded upon natural reason is with no comparison much better than artificious play. The latter was invented for no motive other than satisfying the curiosity of youth. If it were otherwise, it would not be the case, not only in public schools but also in the presence of nobility with the intervention of great princes, that professors of play founded upon such twists of the body had been touched assault after assault, with cuts and thrusts, as is clear and manifest to a great many people. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Four – On a defined ''punto'' to attack'''<ref> The term punto to signify a defined target area of the right shoulder is particular to the treatise of [[Marco Docciolini]].</ref></p><br />
<p>This seems to me an important subject, in order to be accomplished in assaults. I will merely state my thoughts on those who, as a principal maxim, hold and practise the opinion that it is better to attack only a single part of the body, namely the right shoulder, being the said punto. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, you must consider the reason why they observe this doctrine. I believe it is for no reason other than to strike either the nearest, or the most vulnerable part of the body. </p><br />
<p>If we suppose they hold this view, because they want to strike the nearest target, I completely refute their opinion. Hands and arms notwithstanding, I know how those who lean most stand, even their knees are closer and more likely to be attacked by the enemy. </p><br />
<p>If they wish to propose the other reason, that it is the most vulnerable part of the body, I can only oppose them entirely. It seems to me that the hands and arms are subjected to danger: both of being wounded, and of the intermediate outcome of losing the ability to attack. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore experience, which instructs in all things, shows us that in a good portion of combats you see wounds to the hands and arms. This is because these can more easily encounter the enemy's weapons. If they deem the area called the punto so vulnerable, I do not know which hands and arms are not in the same danger. In them you find veins, arteries and other very vulnerable areas which evidently have shown to cause the death of those wounded there. </p><br />
This is as much as I can say on this particular. I urge everyone to take the whole of the enemy's body as the fixed punto to attack, and specifically the part that presents itself as most uncovered and furthest forward. There is much more that could be said, for example if your opponent is left-handed, or in other situations, but to avoid tedium I will omit it. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Five – On a predetermined measure'''</p><br />
<p>In addition to the other pernicious matters in the virtue of fencing noted above, I absolutely detest the opinion of those who insist on, observe, and teach a predetermined measure. Since an opinion should not be proposed without foundation, I will prove this simple truth with active reason. </p><br />
<p>I have always observed, and heard, that people who are forced to fight, whether to defend themselves, or to confront someone who has caused them some offence, never have the benefit of being able to measure swords. Nor is this a given, since anyone can wear a sword of any length they please (speaking of Tuscany). They cannot even choose a piazza well suited for coming to blows, and neither are people equal in form, either in height or in build. </p><br />
<p>Now, if this is not the case, what is the point of habituating your foot, and arm to a predetermined measure? Moreover, you can easily see from experience that often there is no time to take measure, or the opportunity is denied, for example in badly paved streets, sometimes filled with a thousand pieces of rubbish, as mentioned above. </p><br />
<p>If someone, suddenly or intentionally, is obliged to fight, even if they find themselves in a nice, clean street, it is impossible for them to observe the measure of their steps; to defend themselves and attack, against someone who is naturally at ease in well-founded play, who naturally understands how to stay strongly on their feet, and deflect the enemy's blows, while at the same time attacking him, which seems to me the real principle. </p><br />
<p>You must concede, that this measure was invented simply for the encounters they like to conduct at royal pageants, which have been held several times in various places, and furthermore in itself to demonstrate how far they can extend their normal step. However it is absolutely unfit not just for combat in earnest, but even for the simple assaults you might practice. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Six – On voids'''</p><br />
<p>There should be little difference between this chapter and the previous one, since having to discuss voids, which produce the same result as a set measure, my argument will differ little from the one adopted above. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, let us consider its effect, which is nothing more than a withdrawal of the body, either back or to the side, to defend against an enemy's attack. I say that this withdrawal is as dangerous as trusting in a set measure, and the reason is as follows: someone who by chance comes to blows with an enemy cannot know if they wield a longer sword, whereby in wishing to void they can be wounded. Nor can they know how agile the sword's wielder is. </p><br />
<p>More importantly, when someone evades a blow with a void, they must necessarily lose a tempo in having to return forward to attack. If set upon during this tempo (which the enemy may attempt) they will find it very difficult to recover. </p><br />
<p>For this reason therefore, as a rule of good fencing you should never concede voids. Besides it increases the risk of stumbling in the streets, which as noted above can happen when placing yourself in a set measure. </p><br />
<p>Seeking to avoid any mishap that can occur is the utmost of a man's prudence. The greatest threats that arise are those to life. Against these principal dangers man must apply all his judgement. </p><br />
<p>If we know that voids, traverses, and a set measure manifestly cannot save us from an enemy's attack, why not use that convenient and very useful remedy: not to be subjected to such attacks by staying well-grounded, with firm and stable strength of both body and arm. This will suffice on this topic. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Seven – On feints'''</p><br />
<p>In the profession of fencing there are many frivolities and jests, or more accurately whimsies that you can use, either in public schools or in private settings. Among others there are feints. These can often be employed when fencing for enjoyment and fun, and similarly to improve your vision, since they also serve to train your eyes to be attentive. </p><br />
<p>But I like to believe that this practice was invented for nothing more than to defend yourself, or to attack your enemy, as the situation demands. In reality they reveal themselves as good only for entertainment, or to prolong lessons, and I am forced to say that feints are extremely dangerous to those who wish to perform them. They require two tempos, and in the true exercise of wielding the sword are manifestly unsafe. </p><br />
<p>In earnest, as we know, arms are employed for only two reasons. The first is to defend, the other is to attack. How then can someone who is confronted, as we have said before, hold forth with contrivances like feinting over and under the dagger, to the outside and inside of the sword, against the speed of the enemy's blows (especially if they are strong)? Against cuts as well as thrusts, when he does not adopt any kind of posture, but advancing with such blows? </p><br />
<p>I have no doubt that those in this predicament, stirred by many motives, leave aside all feints and attend only to defending their lives as best they can. </p><br />
<p>But can you imagine others, advancing phlegmatically to confront their enemy, to vindicate a wrong or harm done to them, redeeming themselves with the frivolities and jests of feints? </p><br />
<p>I will omit many examples, but fury transports them, reason is overcome. Honour necessitates that they leave aside taught feints, and instead follow natural instinct, but since I have explained this already, I will not expound further. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eight – On ''contrattempo'', ''mezzotempo'' and more'''</p><br />
<p>To cover the present topic it is worth returning to the same discussion in the previous chapter. The various fancies and follies, along with feints, are invented by certain masters I believe, not only to retain students so they stay longer at the school, but also to confuse them. This way they unlearn the good and study the bad, and will always have to remain students. </p><br />
<p>This is the case with the invention of ''mezzotempo'' and ''contrattempo''. These are brought to light, as I mentioned, only to keep the school running. </p><br />
<p>''Mezzotempo'', and other such terms, deform the good and true rules with too many fripperies. In reality you could never have a memory sharp enough to employ them in defence in a single tempo, or in attack. </p><br />
<p>These methods should be practised not in fencing, but in the realm of dance, where the variety of steps and agility of the leaps must astound the spectators. </p><br />
<p>But in this profession a single step, a single tempo must suffice. Deployed with the requisite accuracy and mastery it will always quash any ''contrattempo'' or ''mezzotempo'' you might encounter, and I profess that this is merely the truth. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Nine – On the so misshapen published figures of this exercise'''<br />
<p>If I believed myself alone, I would not dare to criticise the infinite sets of figures presented and drawn in published books. These are invented, I believe, to no other end but to demonstrate a multiplicity of distorted postures, which almost transcend the bounds of nature, and drag people towards the ridiculous, rather than to learning from viewing such contorted actions. </p><br />
<p>I would like to have some leeway, to leave some praise, but I see no way whatsoever, if not to say that these deformations are very suitable for clowns and tavern-singers, to entertain and extract money from a crowd. This is the praise I am able to concede. </p><br />
<p>If then I were to offer some polite criticism, I could begin by saying that these positions are monstrous, and impossible to witness within our profession. When have you ever seen people, either for enjoyment or necessity, employ such extravagant contortions, with their bodies so hunched and forced, and for the sword alone with the off-hand by the left ear, to employ it like a dagger to deflect thrusts?<ref>This passage, and arguably the entire chapter, appears to be targeted at [[Salvator Fabris]], whose treatise is notable for its deep and sometimes contorted stances.</ref></p><br />
<p>This is as far removed from the natural order as truth is from a lie. You do not take a sword in hand, to wield in earnest, with such exorbitant contortions. You should stand so you can operate naturally, all the more so when you find yourself on the street. There you may find many impediments, as I have said, and confirming what I have already said above, you must stand firmly on your feet, in a balanced posture from which you can draw strength to oppose the sword against all attacks, and as upright as possible so you do not become disordered.</p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Ten – On the guards and counterguards'''</p><br />
<p>There are many guards, great in number from various masters, which you can employ in the profession of fencing. To list them all, and discuss which of them is good or bad, would require a discourse beyond this brief one, expounded with an eloquence other than my own. Nonetheless my pen will write simply and plainly, to touch upon some of my thoughts. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, to demonstrate the extravagance of the guards invented, I will cite various names authors have given them, such as: ''coda lunga e stretta'', ''cingara'', ''porta di ferro'', ''beccapossa'',<ref> These guard names are characteristic of the Bolognese school of fencing. In particular the name ''beccapossa'' is specific to [[Achille Marozzo]].</ref>''belincorno'', prima, seconda, terza and quarta, and many others which I will omit, which together with these have been represented with figures in the books published up until now.</p><br />
<p>As to whether these are good or bad, any praise should be occasioned by their use. It cannot follow, although we have seen otherwise, that they endanger those who wish to employ them. However since no guard should be maligned without a basis, I will start by saying that in my opinion the guards to be employed should not be twisted or bizarre, nor overwrought with a paintbrush, nor measured with a compass, but simple and natural. In this manner the body finds itself stronger in resisting blows, and attacking when the occasion presents itself, without the manifest danger of stumbling and thereby compromising your life. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eleven – On those who wish to debate this practice'''</p><br />
<p>To further damage this profession of fencing, in my opinion, some presume to debate over blows and postures of whichever sort, formulating and postulating in the manner of someone conducting a philosophical debate. Discussions on subjects like the one I have mentioned, should be performed with actions alone. </p><br />
<p>This occurs because upon the path of this practice it is difficult to arrive at perfection. Many who take the path, at the first resistance, by a simple act of will desist from the endeavour. Seeing themselves inadequate, they sharpen their intellect to appear the equal of professors, and with their propositions lead astray those striving to obtain a complete understanding. </p><br />
<p>This is undeniable. In the practice of fencing, to engage someone in debate and discussion as if arguing theology (in place of conducting assaults) achieves nothing but to deny opportunities to those who desire to learn, to become excellent in practice. This is the motive I ascribe for this behaviour. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Twelve – Against a set rule for combat at night'''</p><br />
<p>In this simple discourse of mine, I wished to oppose every extravagance that the meanness of my intellect has encountered in the profession of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Therefore it seemed apt to contest also the opinion of those who hold a firm rule of giving true and real method of combat at night: that putting your hands to your weapons, you should quickly use them to seek the enemy’s sword, and having found it you must liberally deliver attacks to wound him. </p><br />
<p>They add to this another rule, no better than the first, that is to keep your body hunched to create a smaller target. </p><br />
<p>I address each of these as follows. </p><br />
<p>If confronted in the dark at night, how can you find your enemy's weapon without being attacked? </p><br />
<p>Why must you remain hunched, being deprived of ability and stature in defence and attack, in place of a strong and comfortable posture, remaining upright on your feet without hunching over? </p><br />
<p>Such a false opinion I would deem unsuitable even for the daytime where you can clearly see the enemy’s posture, and even when the enemy does not step to attack. </p><br />
<p>I firmly maintain that if you must fight at night, in such circumstances in the dark, you should deliver ''dritti'' and ''roversci'' as swiftly as you can. </p><br />
<p>Anything else is futile, without proposing many additional considerations for such instances, which for the sake of brevity I will omit. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Thirteen – On those masters who in giving lessons employ either a chestplate or a rod'''</p><br />
<p>Among the other notable detriments, caused by various extravagances, are those masters, some who give lessons with a chestplate, others with a rod. </p><br />
<p>Masters who wear a chestplate during lessons leads to nothing else, in my opinion, than that students deliver blows with an exorbitant step. Since the blows do not harm these said masters, they do not realise that, although they wish to protect the student, with these thrusts they harm them. </p><br />
<p>They become habituated to committing their body so much with every blow, that it becomes unlikely they could recover when performed in earnest. </p><br />
<p>Having delivered the thrust to their master's chestplate, they find resistance, lending them force to recover back, and they adopt the habit of abandoning their whole body into the attack.</p><br />
<p>Because of this with a sharp sword, not finding the resistance of the chestplate they have with the practice sword, they remain extended so far forwards that it is difficult (as stated) to avoid their enemy's attack. It can absolutely occur that instead of wounding their enemy, they are left injured. </p><br />
<p>Something similar can occur with students who are used to taking lesson from masters who hold a rod. Since it is much lighter than a sword it creates an extremely negative effect, giving rise to great setbacks. Its weakness, not having the same form as a sword, means whichever cut the rod delivers, it cannot force the student's sword to learn, as a sword would. </p><br />
<p>We can furthermore question, being habituated to parrying cuts from the rod, if when they receive cuts from a sword, they might become confused. </p><br />
<p>Being disordered they might apply the lessons learned reluctantly, since they do not even learn resolve. So I repeat, employing either a chestplate or a rod benefits only the master, and not the students. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Fourteen – On where some wish you to look when you fight'''</p><br />
<p>The variety of opinions on where to place your eyes during actions, both during assaults and in questions of honour, leads me to include this topic in this discourse of mine. Many want you to keep your eyes fixed to your enemy's face during combat. Others assert you should always watch the point of your opponent's sword. </p><br />
<p>I contradict both of these views. I say that keeping your eye on the point is of no use in combat, since it is unlikely your enemy's point ever stays still. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore it is so fine that when it is brandished at speed, someone who trusts in this proposition greatly deceives themselves; knowing full well that sharp swords are not like swords in schools with a button, which is rather large, although some schools might not use them. Therefore I consider this proposition in my own manner. </p><br />
<p>I also criticise the other opinion, of watching your enemy's face, because while keeping your eyes there it is unlikely you can understand and clearly discern the operations he performs with the sword. Often these are away from the face, and he might feint with his eyes to attack in one place, only to move the hand to offend elsewhere. </p><br />
<p>Therefore finding fault with both of the above opinions, I hold that another area is more appropriate, necessary, and without subjecting yourself to deceits more useful, which I will relate in due time in another treatise. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Fifteen – To those who greatly criticise cuts'''</p><br />
<p>Everyone must defend their profession with the rationales available, so I will not fail to show how mistaken are those who greatly criticise cuts in the practice of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Before opposing everything they state in favour of their position, I will explain the charges levelled against those who employ cuts. </p><br />
<p>The first is that cuts are not lethal, the second is that they are much shorter than thrusts, while cuts are further derided by the claim they are for brutes. </p><br />
<p>I refute the first by supposing, since death has taken many in our times by way of cuts, that no other reason is needed to affirm this truth. </p><br />
<p>I can counter the second with great ease, demonstrating how with the hand, and the same length of step and sword (when grasped), the same person can be wounded either by a cut or a thrust. This is better proved by experience than words (which I set out to do), as I have shown and performed many times in the presence of great princes. </p><br />
<p>I should raise a further consideration for those who criticise cuts, and it is this. When someone is confronted, and puts their hand to their sword to defend themself, do they negotiate with their enemy whether to use only thrusts (speaking of Tuscan lands)? If they can wound with both thrusts and cuts, then why not employ cuts, and learn to defend against them? </p><br />
<p>I can only believe that those who criticise cuts, understanding only thrusts, either have no power in their cuts, or do not know how to teach them (if they are masters), or have no time to practise them if they are students. </p><br />
<p>In every profession, to remain ahead of others you must pursue every possible avenue, even if indirect, but all the more so the true and good path, since every day in questions of honour we see that the majority of wounds are cuts to the hands, arms and face. For this reason swords with a hollow were invented.<ref> In the original simply ''spada con l'incavo''. It remains unclear whether Monesi is referring simply to a hollow-ground blade or deep fuller, or perhaps an indentation at the grip that might conceivably aid in cutting , like on some later sabres.</ref></p><br />
<p>Having explained the usefulness of cuts, I affirm once again that those who criticise them, claiming they are no good because they are for brutes, cause harm. An example of this is not keeping hold of the sword, so it falls to the ground, which has happened to many during simple assaults. Another is not having the ability to defend against cuts. I have useful advice to give in this regard, but to avoid being tedious, and admitting to discuss only superficial matters, I will not expound further, and will end my discourse of this subject. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Sixteen – Against numerous grips with the dagger'''</p><br />
<p>Having set myself to contradict falsehood with truth, I should say a few things on this subject. This is for those who strongly promote and encourage a multiplicity of grips with or against the dagger, many with a dagger and others unarmed, as something pertaining to the art of fencing. </p><br />
<p>I refute the quantity of grips described and delineated, and their operation, knowing very well as I have said elsewhere, that you do not negotiate with your opponent. This is from the many occurrences and events that are well-known without me having to describe them. </p><br />
<p>In fact I would dare say that the dagger is worse than the pistol, which can fail or misfire. The dagger is always loaded and ready to attack, and when someone has this weapon at their side and spots the opportunity to use it, I do not believe they will use it to threaten their enemy from distance. </p><br />
<p>Assuming they are not a coward, but resolute and courageous, they will approach as close as they have to. I doubt there will be time to counter, with any of these many grips that are supposed to defend against attacks, nor therefore would I say that dagger against dagger they could be of any benefit. </p><br />
<p>I will freely admit that some of the grips work in schools, of course, but as you know these daggers are without a point or a cutting edge. Many options can be proposed since there is no manifest danger. </p><br />
<p>I return to saying, that as a short weapon they are much quicker to draw, and more ready to wound. These grips are for the entertainment, and confusion, of students. This is what I have to say for now. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Seventeen – On a pike position that defends against any sort of missile weapon, including arquebus shots'''<ref> This is a clear reference to p.114-115 in ''Oplomachia'', the 1621 pike, halberd and musket treatise of [[Bonaventura Pistofilo]]. </p><br />
<p>''When an occasion arrives where you must grasp your sword, I urge you never to abandon your pike, whether it is broken or intact. Instead employ it at least to defend. Anyone can understand for themselves from figure 79, how useful this manner of holding the pike can be for defence. </p><br />
<p>It protects against cavalry, infantry, and against any type of hand weapon; even against missile weapons such as javelins, darts, arrows, and similar arms, up to and including arquebus shots. As long as by chance they do not strike directly in the centre of the shaft, so that the balls instead skid aside, the man will be saved, as I have seen from experience. </p><br />
<p>You must comport yourself such that everything is covered by the pike, maintaining your arm high and firmly extended. Your stance must be sufficiently wide for greater stability, with your sword ready to attack. </p><br />
<p>If you then wish to return your sword to its sheath without abandoning the pike, or piece of haft left in your hand, figure 80 clearly demonstrates how without need for further explanation.''</ref></p><br />
<p>I have seen many authors publish thoughts which objectively can barely be sustained. This prompted me to highlight one marvellous opinion, held by a master not only of fencing but of many trades. </p><br />
<p>In one of his books, he assigns a posture with the sword in the right hand and a pike in the left, profiled towards that side like a barbican. He asserts it does not merely defend against cavalry and infantry, but from any sort of polearm, and also from arrows, javelins and even arquebus or musket shots. </p><br />
<p>The only caveat is that it must not hit the centre of the shaft, where it may break, which seems likely. I leave this to be pondered by anyone who professes the practice of arms. To authenticate this he claims to have seen it. </p><br />
<p>Emboldened by such a claim, I have taken common courage and confided to the pen that which was concealed in my mind. Because if such wonders have occurred they would refute not only my weak and poorly articulated arguments, but genuine and well-founded ones. </p><br />
<p>I do not blame that pikeman, whether his pike was whole or broken, if having to wield his sword he also employed his polearm. But with apologies, I can never have it believed that his haft could keep him safe from every attack, from every sort of weapon. Supposedly even the musket against which (the author says) the pike prevails, the musket ball skidding off one side or the other to be deflected without harm. </p><br />
<p>In truth I have not passed my years in war, where I might have witnessed such incidences, but have been in service of and enjoyed the company of many veteran soldiers. Foremost of all the Most Illustrious Sir Silvio Piccolomini of Aragon, a person of such esteem as is known throughout the world, having fulfilled many offices in war, for the Most Serene Highnesses of Tuscany and for other crowns. Yet I never heard from him or anybody else that the guard described is able to achieve what is claimed. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Eighteen – Some admonishments for those who wear a sword'''</p><br />
<p>Any profession should be practised with every possible convenience, and a farmer who must be present when the grain is harvested in July should not wear a garment of heavy cloth.</p><br />
<p>Those who dedicate themselves to the profession of wearing a sword, so dangerous that we could say death always walks alongside it, in various respects should not wear any ornamentation of the body or clothes, or any other items that might disadvantage them when coming to blows. </p><br />
<p>An example more perilous than any other is high-heels, which can easily lead their owner to fall over. Or else sleeves that hang down from the tunic, which can subject someone who is confronted, or who confronts, to great trouble. </p><br />
<p>Likewise long hair, which when coming to grapple grants a clear advantage to the opponent, while bringing great danger to the bearer, even more so when curly in the extravagant style of today; also more specifically hair that comes to impede vision. </p><br />
<p>Also included among such impediments are clothes with large slashes, in the French fashion or in any other. They can cause no small detriment, being dangerous by hampering the drawing of weapons with the swiftness required. </p><br />
<p>I also wanted to mention those who carry daggers with a dangling rose. </p><br />
<p>This is for the benefit of all; because from the mishaps that have occurred, I am sure the impediments I have listed most often create danger for the lives of those who struggle with arms. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Nineteen – What moved me to write this discourse'''</p><br />
<p>Everything we do in this world has an end, and every endeavour wends towards its outcome. Therefore I felt it apt to declare in this final chapter, which motives moved me to stain these few sheets of paper (so to speak) with my coarse and ill-adapted thoughts, and to expose myself voluntarily to the censure of innumerable fine intellects. </p><br />
<p>The reason is that I have found infinite authors, who by means of the presses have professed to enrich the virtue of fencing by demonstrating various sorts of guards and means of combat, and numerous uses of weapons. Knowing that all these operations were shown for the simple practice of wielding a sword, I resolved to designate the true manner of exercising this profession seriously. It consists of nothing more than the simple assaults which are conducted for pleasure. </p><br />
<p>The reason for writing this discourse was none other than a real and genuine desire for the aficionados of this art to recognise the true method of practising it, to not further maltreat it, and to employ the advice provided for the benefit of their person. This is the motivation, as I have said previously, and the intention. </p><br />
<p>May the reader appreciate the willingness of my spirit; and may those habituated to Ciceronian eloquence, and to the exquisite vivacity of extraordinary conceptions, pity my rude pen, whose lowly scribbles have aspired only to reveal the truth. </p><br />
<p>Lastly I wanted to set out how having learned the voids and traverses, I found them ill-suited to real combat with a sharp sword, and I criticise them. </p><br />
<p>Although I praise cuts in practice for their excellent defence, even more so at night where they are the quickest blow to find their target, I do not wish praise them by themselves, I commend them when mixed with a good many thrusts. A dagger can interrupt and defend against thrusts, but is comfortably negated by cuts. </p><br />
<p>And here I come to a close. If God grants me health in months and not years I hope to bring forth fruit that is useful, with the most straightforward method, apt for real combat, distinguishing the characteristics of different people: whether large, powerful, small or weak, with appropriate rules. </p><br />
<p>All in honour of our Lord God, and the most Blessed Virgin Mary. </p><br />
<p>'''THE END. ''' </p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
<br />
{{Regional Italian traditions}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Copy/Pasting]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Rapier]]<br />
[[Category:Dagger]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Jacopo_Monesi&diff=120502Jacopo Monesi2020-11-18T18:15:40Z<p>P Terminiello: /* Treatise */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = Jacopo Monesi<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = 16th century (?)<br />
| birthplace = Florence, Italy (?)<br />
| deathdate = 17th century<br />
| deathplace = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set: occupation=Fencing master }}<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = <br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = Medici court<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| period = <br />
| movement = <br />
| influences =<br />
| influenced = <br />
<br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| notableworks = ''[[Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)| Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma]]'' (1640)<br />
| archetype = <br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= 1640<br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| signature = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
<p>'''Jacopo Monesi''' was an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing master]] during the first half of the [[century::17th century]]. </p><br />
<p>A native of Florence, he appears to have enjoyed enduring patronage and recognition in his own lifetime at the court of the Grand Duchy of Tuscany under Ferdinando II de' Medici. </p><br />
<p>A court document, dating to 1621, indicates Monesi's role included instructing the adolescent nobility at the grand ducal court (a claim supported by the title page of his own work): </p><br />
<p>''Jacopo of the Armourer, master of fencing, is one of several masters to the pages, together with the priest Albizio Vecchi, the undermaster Frediano Tinolfi, Giovanni Migliorucci master of writing, Leonardo Migliorucci, Giovanni Pieroni the arithmetist and mathematician, Remigio Cantagallina master of drawing, and Pitti Agnolo Ricci master of dance.''<ref>Archivio di Stato di Firenze, Miscellanea Medicea, 369, c.707. Cited by http://www.scrimipedia.it/mediawiki/index.php?title=Iacopo_Monesi (accessed 22 March 2017).</ref><br />
<p>In 1640 he published a short tract outlining his fencing philosophy: [[Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)| Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma]]. </p><br />
<p>Monesi's text contain little technical discussion, which he defers to a promised second volume that however is either lost or was never written. Instead, Monesi strongly critiques many theories and methodologies of his peers. Behind a veil of formal language excoriating those practices he views as frivolous, or detrimental to surviving an encounter in earnest. Monesi advocates a straightforward and direct philosophy of fencing. He eschews what he sees as unnecessary embellishments, or artefacts of salle fencing, and privileges what he considers practical for surviving an unpredictable and violent confrontation with sharp weapons. </p><br />
<p>He strongly affirms the efficacy of cuts, interspersed with thrusts; and favours simple and strong natural movements, stances, and attacks. In terms of pedagogy, he forcefully promotes the primacy of practising assaults, and laments that students in his day no longer assault with the frequency and gusto of earlier times. </p><br />
<p>Among other elements he criticises: feints, elaborate postures, mathematical concepts, excessive theoretical discussion, and dagger disarms, as unhelpful and impractical for a confrontation with sharps. Without naming names Monesi appears to clearly reference, again critically, the work of [[Docciolini]], [[Fabris]], [[Marozzo]], and [[Pistofilo]]. </p><br />
<p>Alongside such direct critiques, Monesi includes less specifically targeted remonstrations. For example, he objects to the pedagogical method of masters who employ a chestplate, or a cane in place of a sword. Similarly, he leaves space for conventional discussion points of the period, such as where to look when fencing, or how to approach combat at night.</p><br />
== Treatise ==<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Introduction and dedication| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
! <p>Transcription</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''On the Subject of Fencing'''</p><br />
<p>'''By Jacopo Monesi'''</p><br />
<p>'''Known as the Armourer'''</p><br />
<p>'''Master of Arms to the Most Serene of Tuscany, and Their Gentleman Pages'''</p><br />
<p>'''Dedicated to the Most Illustrious Sir Count'''</p><br />
<p>'''Francesco Piccolomini of Aragon'''</p><br />
<p>'''In Florence, at the New Press M.DC.XXXX'''</p><br />
<p>With Permission from the Authorities</p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Most Illustrious and Noble Sir and Patron'''</p><br />
<p>The shade of your Most Illustrious Lordship's great protection, has generated in me an uncommon yearning to bring to light that which has been hidden in the shadows of my intellect for many years. For some time I have had in mind to make public certain discourses on the most excellent profession of fencing, but the awareness of my scarce ability to articulate them, caused the heat of my enthusiasm to cool. This yearning only then emerges, through confiding in the patronage of your Most Illustrious Lordship, wishing to express these concepts in the best manner possible. </p><br />
<p>Therefore this is entrusted only to you, as has happened in the past with honour, once again I opted for your support in bringing this forth, so that anything that is deemed monstrous will nonetheless (protected by the greatness of your Most Illustrious Lordship) be embraced, and be appraised with a not less than benign eye. </p><br />
<p>Please deign therefore to protect it with benevolence, recognising it as a sign of my dutiful observance to your Most Illustrious Lordship's great merit, to which I reverently bow, praying for your every most coveted happiness. </p><br />
<p>Your devoted and most obligated servant</p><br />
<p>Jacopo Monesi, known as the Armourer. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''To the Benevolent Reader'''</p><br />
<p>It has been for a number of years that despite the weakness of my intellect I have wanted to present my thoughts on the play of fencing, which has been my particular profession. But since the world has seen others elevated, and granted them brilliant ability with which they delight and are delighted, I considered it best to keep my thoughts buried within me. </p><br />
<p>Considering however that in some printed books you find an exorbitance of guards, and other extravagances, and witnessing this noble exercise reduced more to discourse than practice, the desire I have (if successful) to demonstrate the true play, and method of combat, made me resolve first to declare my objections, then to explain the correct method. </p><br />
<p>In conformance therefore with what the Most Illustrious Sir Silvio Piccolomini of Aragon <ref>Silvio Piccolomini was a knight of the Order of Santo Stefano, and noted fencer and military commander of his age. In the dedication of his own treatise [[Federico Ghisliero]] declares himself a student of Piccolomini, while his skill at fencing is further referenced by [[Cappoferro]] in his introduction to the reader, and by the French chronicler Michel de Montaigne. </ref> (excellent in this exercise, and more so in military disciplines) taught me, after my first master Cosimo Paradisi, in the chapters that follow I will narrate as openly as I can what is recounted. </p><br />
<p>But since the greatest detriment to this exercise, in my view, comes from neglecting to struggle with the sword in hand, in practising assaults, I will deal with this first, explaining the reasons why I believe this is, as I commence. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>''Might it please Sir Canon Carlo del Vigna to see if the present work contains anything repugnant to Christian piety, and public morals, and refer back. The 30th January 1639.'' </p><br />
Vincenzio Rabatta, Vicar of Florence<br />
<p>''In the present work, having reviewed it in all diligence, I found nothing repugnant to Christian piety, or public morals. 25th February 1639.''</p><br />
<p>Carlo del Vigna, Canon of Florence<br />
<p>''Most Reverend Father Inquisitor,''</p><br />
<p>''By your order of Most Reverend Father I have reviewed this present discourse on fencing, and I have not found anything repugnant to the Religion, orto public morals, judging it worthy of publication. 26th March 1640. ''</p><br />
<p>Girolamo Rosati, Protonotary and Consultant of the Holy Office</p><br />
<p>''This can be printed. Florence 3rd April 1640. ''</p><br />
<p>Father Giovanni Angeli, Vicar of the Holy Office, by order of</p><br />
<p>Senator Alessandro Vettori, Auditor of His Most Serene Highness</p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Notes on fencing| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
! <p>Transcription</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''Chapter One'''</p><br />
<p>Ambition, which without fail is the cause of every ill, especially in virtuous exercises, I know to be the true basis and root of a rather notable vice. </p><br />
<p>Every day we see youths of such ambition, that under the cloak of letting their virtue be known, out of all proportion, neglect the importance of possessing such virtue, and as soon as they arrive in schools to learn, having imbibed just a few lessons, allow themselves to be inflated by excessive pretension, and judge themselves to be masters. </p><br />
<p>Therefore it happens (and I speak in particular of this exercise) that in public schools, and especially in private houses, with youths of equal quality gathered to practice assaults, you find some who do not grasp the sword if not to teach, nor to learn in any other way. This outlook is so pernicious, that for this reason you no longer hear of people gathering for common benefit and practice, and to pass the time in the virtue of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Those who have distinguished themselves up until now, demonstrating their valour and knowledge, in my view did not take this route. Indeed anxious to prove their worth as gallant men at every occasion, in any place, and against any person, I believe they sought to learn. Because to understand a discipline well, you have to practise it, you cannot learn with theory alone. </p><br />
<p>It is not a good way to master a skill, to think you can attain it without effort and sacrifice. Those who think to proceed like this, infallibly discover through experience how much they have deluded themselves. </p><br />
<p>Another active and real problem I bring up, just as damaging as the first although stemming from the same ambition, is the disparity between people. </p><br />
<p>You cannot deny that an artisan (who delights in virtue as is understandable), can through his diligence and vivacity arrive at the goal of fencing well with the sword. Indeed because this exercise is extremely capable of elevating the most lowly individual, it often happens that by applying their spirit, those of base condition become more distinguished. </p><br />
<p>The damage therefore that ambition brings, is to be ashamed to practice assaults with someone of lowly hand. To not consider you could extract some fruit even from these people, throwing yourself into the profession. </p><br />
<p>This thought is erroneous, because it is essential to know that virtue levels all people; and that a virtuoso can be considered the equal not just of a simple gentleman, but of any prince or great lord. </p><br />
<p>These are the reasons I give, demonstrating why today assaults are dismissed, neglecting the chance to benefit from the luxury of living, before the waning of youthful years deprives you of every worthwhile activity. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Two – On the same subject'''</p><br />
<p>You can clearly tell from my previous discourse how much damage ambition brings, and how it is a reason for not mastering this beautiful virtue of fencing. But I will now demonstrate furthermore how discussion of this profession, which today's students engage in more than practice, causes notable harm. The truth is that lessons taken in any subject in the day are of no use if their operations are not exercised. </p><br />
<p>That which pertains to bodies of reason: such as logic, philosophy, and so forth, must be put in practice with words alone, as they are necessary to expound such virtues. However in the profession of fencing words have no place to execute well what the students have learned from the master. </p><br />
<p>Actions are needed when it comes to training your body for defence and attack. </p><br />
<p>This is not applied by today's youth, which is a further reason why assaults no longer take place, and students neglect to learn wielding a sword in hand well. It then follows that masters are judged and branded as inept in their craft, since they no longer produce students as they did in the past. </p><br />
<p>When youngsters come together, sometimes from the schools of different masters in this profession, instead of putting their studies to the test, with the cloak across their shoulders, as well as with the simple sword in hand, they begin to discuss among themselves: “If I delivered this thrust how would you parry it?”. </p><br />
<p>The other replies “I would do it in this way, or like this” to which the first responds “But if it were a cut, how would you defend yourself” again its counter is added, and they carry on ad infinitum in this manner, disregarding gainful practice. </p><br />
<p>See if this is the best way to safeguard yourself, and benefit through the profession. Then test with a sharp sword (which could happen), whether these people would have time for such a parliament. </p><br />
<p>Action is required for exercises which engage the body, words cannot grant a student resolution to confront his opponent, or courage and practice to defend himself. This is as much as I thought to say on this matter. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Three – On putting mathematics into this virtue'''<ref>This chapter might apply to Italian treatises which incorporate mathematical principles, such as [[Camillo Agrippa]], but arguably targets in particular the Iberian forms of the ''Verdadera Destreza'', exemplified by [[Jerónimo Sánchez de Carranza]] and [[Luis Pacheco de Narváez]]. </ref></p><br />
<p>I have never presumed to malign anyone who professes to teach this noble exercise, nor do I intend to now, recognising myself as the inferior to many gallant men who have practised this virtue. But we are permitted to debate upon the lessons of some, who have taught and teach through mathematics, with the addition of lines, circles, traverses and extravagant voids of the body. </p><br />
<p>For me, these are commendable for fencing in a clean salle, furnished with even tiles. Likewise it is impossible for two people not to put on a good display, when they politely retreat, then void, or advance with a neat step, putting into practice what they have learned from their masters. </p><br />
<p>But if I imagine them outside the tiled hall, that is in the streets, where confrontations most often arise, then I can't help but criticise and malign them, since it is impossible (for reasons I will explain) to put these actions into practice. </p><br />
<p>Someone who is confronted or deliberately summoned to combat, cannot I believe, as happens in large armies, bring with them people to dig; to resurface the street so they can put themselves in the right posture, and use their lines, and advances of ground, and binds of the sword in conformance with their lessons. Instead, being confronted, they are obliged to think how to stand firmly on their feet, to be vigorous in defence and attack, ready of hand, without such fine distinctions of footwork. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore those who employ the sword in this manner, can be called good and beautiful fencers, but in an open space, or street where stones, holes, and cracks can cause you to stumble, they are always in danger of defending themselves poorly from their enemy. In such cases most of the time the artifices of traverses, voids and lines are left aside, and they throw themselves into natural attacks, as is so often seen. </p><br />
<p>This itself is sufficient demonstration, although I can elaborate for greater clarity, that play founded upon natural reason is with no comparison much better than artificious play. The latter was invented for no motive other than satisfying the curiosity of youth. If it were otherwise, it would not be the case, not only in public schools but also in the presence of nobility with the intervention of great princes, that professors of play founded upon such twists of the body had been touched assault after assault, with cuts and thrusts, as is clear and manifest to a great many people. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Four – On a defined punto to attack'''<ref> The term punto to signify a defined target area of the right shoulder is particular to the treatise of [[Marco Docciolini]].</ref></p><br />
<p>This seems to me an important subject, in order to be accomplished in assaults. I will merely state my thoughts on those who, as a principal maxim, hold and practise the opinion that it is better to attack only a single part of the body, namely the right shoulder, being the said punto. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, you must consider the reason why they observe this doctrine. I believe it is for no reason other than to strike either the nearest, or the most vulnerable part of the body. </p><br />
<p>If we suppose they hold this view, because they want to strike the nearest target, I completely refute their opinion. Hands and arms notwithstanding, I know how those who lean most stand, even their knees are closer and more likely to be attacked by the enemy. </p><br />
<p>If they wish to propose the other reason, that it is the most vulnerable part of the body, I can only oppose them entirely. It seems to me that the hands and arms are subjected to danger: both of being wounded, and of the intermediate outcome of losing the ability to attack. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore experience, which instructs in all things, shows us that in a good portion of combats you see wounds to the hands and arms. This is because these can more easily encounter the enemy's weapons. If they deem the area called the punto so vulnerable, I do not know which hands and arms are not in the same danger. In them you find veins, arteries and other very vulnerable areas which evidently have shown to cause the death of those wounded there. </p><br />
This is as much as I can say on this particular. I urge everyone to take the whole of the enemy's body as the fixed punto to attack, and specifically the part that presents itself as most uncovered and furthest forward. There is much more that could be said, for example if your opponent is left-handed, or in other situations, but to avoid tedium I will omit it. </p><br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
<br />
{{Regional Italian traditions}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Copy/Pasting]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Rapier]]<br />
[[Category:Dagger]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Jacopo_Monesi&diff=120501Jacopo Monesi2020-11-18T18:13:33Z<p>P Terminiello: /* Treatise */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = Jacopo Monesi<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = 16th century (?)<br />
| birthplace = Florence, Italy (?)<br />
| deathdate = 17th century<br />
| deathplace = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set: occupation=Fencing master }}<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = <br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = Medici court<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| period = <br />
| movement = <br />
| influences =<br />
| influenced = <br />
<br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| notableworks = ''[[Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)| Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma]]'' (1640)<br />
| archetype = <br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= 1640<br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| signature = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
<p>'''Jacopo Monesi''' was an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing master]] during the first half of the [[century::17th century]]. </p><br />
<p>A native of Florence, he appears to have enjoyed enduring patronage and recognition in his own lifetime at the court of the Grand Duchy of Tuscany under Ferdinando II de' Medici. </p><br />
<p>A court document, dating to 1621, indicates Monesi's role included instructing the adolescent nobility at the grand ducal court (a claim supported by the title page of his own work): </p><br />
<p>''Jacopo of the Armourer, master of fencing, is one of several masters to the pages, together with the priest Albizio Vecchi, the undermaster Frediano Tinolfi, Giovanni Migliorucci master of writing, Leonardo Migliorucci, Giovanni Pieroni the arithmetist and mathematician, Remigio Cantagallina master of drawing, and Pitti Agnolo Ricci master of dance.''<ref>Archivio di Stato di Firenze, Miscellanea Medicea, 369, c.707. Cited by http://www.scrimipedia.it/mediawiki/index.php?title=Iacopo_Monesi (accessed 22 March 2017).</ref><br />
<p>In 1640 he published a short tract outlining his fencing philosophy: [[Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)| Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma]]. </p><br />
<p>Monesi's text contain little technical discussion, which he defers to a promised second volume that however is either lost or was never written. Instead, Monesi strongly critiques many theories and methodologies of his peers. Behind a veil of formal language excoriating those practices he views as frivolous, or detrimental to surviving an encounter in earnest. Monesi advocates a straightforward and direct philosophy of fencing. He eschews what he sees as unnecessary embellishments, or artefacts of salle fencing, and privileges what he considers practical for surviving an unpredictable and violent confrontation with sharp weapons. </p><br />
<p>He strongly affirms the efficacy of cuts, interspersed with thrusts; and favours simple and strong natural movements, stances, and attacks. In terms of pedagogy, he forcefully promotes the primacy of practising assaults, and laments that students in his day no longer assault with the frequency and gusto of earlier times. </p><br />
<p>Among other elements he criticises: feints, elaborate postures, mathematical concepts, excessive theoretical discussion, and dagger disarms, as unhelpful and impractical for a confrontation with sharps. Without naming names Monesi appears to clearly reference, again critically, the work of [[Docciolini]], [[Fabris]], [[Marozzo]], and [[Pistofilo]]. </p><br />
<p>Alongside such direct critiques, Monesi includes less specifically targeted remonstrations. For example, he objects to the pedagogical method of masters who employ a chestplate, or a cane in place of a sword. Similarly, he leaves space for conventional discussion points of the period, such as where to look when fencing, or how to approach combat at night.</p><br />
== Treatise ==<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Introduction and dedication| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
! <p>Transcription</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''On the Subject of Fencing'''</p><br />
<p>'''By Jacopo Monesi'''</p><br />
<p>'''Known as the Armourer'''</p><br />
<p>'''Master of Arms to the Most Serene of Tuscany, and Their Gentleman Pages'''</p><br />
<p>'''Dedicated to the Most Illustrious Sir Count'''</p><br />
<p>'''Francesco Piccolomini of Aragon'''</p><br />
<p>'''In Florence, at the New Press M.DC.XXXX'''</p><br />
<p>With Permission from the Authorities</p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Most Illustrious and Noble Sir and Patron'''</p><br />
<p>The shade of your Most Illustrious Lordship's great protection, has generated in me an uncommon yearning to bring to light that which has been hidden in the shadows of my intellect for many years. For some time I have had in mind to make public certain discourses on the most excellent profession of fencing, but the awareness of my scarce ability to articulate them, caused the heat of my enthusiasm to cool. This yearning only then emerges, through confiding in the patronage of your Most Illustrious Lordship, wishing to express these concepts in the best manner possible. </p><br />
<p>Therefore this is entrusted only to you, as has happened in the past with honour, once again I opted for your support in bringing this forth, so that anything that is deemed monstrous will nonetheless (protected by the greatness of your Most Illustrious Lordship) be embraced, and be appraised with a not less than benign eye. </p><br />
<p>Please deign therefore to protect it with benevolence, recognising it as a sign of my dutiful observance to your Most Illustrious Lordship's great merit, to which I reverently bow, praying for your every most coveted happiness. </p><br />
<p>Your devoted and most obligated servant</p><br />
<p>Jacopo Monesi, known as the Armourer. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''To the Benevolent Reader'''</p><br />
<p>It has been for a number of years that despite the weakness of my intellect I have wanted to present my thoughts on the play of fencing, which has been my particular profession. But since the world has seen others elevated, and granted them brilliant ability with which they delight and are delighted, I considered it best to keep my thoughts buried within me. </p><br />
<p>Considering however that in some printed books you find an exorbitance of guards, and other extravagances, and witnessing this noble exercise reduced more to discourse than practice, the desire I have (if successful) to demonstrate the true play, and method of combat, made me resolve first to declare my objections, then to explain the correct method. </p><br />
<p>In conformance therefore with what the Most Illustrious Sir Silvio Piccolomini of Aragon <ref>Silvio Piccolomini was a knight of the Order of Santo Stefano, and noted fencer and military commander of his age. In the dedication of his own treatise [[Federico Ghisliero]] declares himself a student of Piccolomini, while his skill at fencing is further referenced by [[Cappoferro]] in his introduction to the reader, and by the French chronicler Michel de Montaigne. </ref> (excellent in this exercise, and more so in military disciplines) taught me, after my first master Cosimo Paradisi, in the chapters that follow I will narrate as openly as I can what is recounted. </p><br />
<p>But since the greatest detriment to this exercise, in my view, comes from neglecting to struggle with the sword in hand, in practising assaults, I will deal with this first, explaining the reasons why I believe this is, as I commence. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>''Might it please Sir Canon Carlo del Vigna to see if the present work contains anything repugnant to Christian piety, and public morals, and refer back. The 30th January 1639.'' </p><br />
Vincenzio Rabatta, Vicar of Florence<br />
<p>''In the present work, having reviewed it in all diligence, I found nothing repugnant to Christian piety, or public morals. 25th February 1639.''</p><br />
<p>Carlo del Vigna, Canon of Florence<br />
<p>''Most Reverend Father Inquisitor,''</p><br />
<p>''By your order of Most Reverend Father I have reviewed this present discourse on fencing, and I have not found anything repugnant to the Religion, orto public morals, judging it worthy of publication. 26th March 1640. ''</p><br />
<p>Girolamo Rosati, Protonotary and Consultant of the Holy Office</p><br />
<p>''This can be printed. Florence 3rd April 1640. ''</p><br />
<p>Father Giovanni Angeli, Vicar of the Holy Office, by order of</p><br />
<p>Senator Alessandro Vettori, Auditor of His Most Serene Highness</p><br />
| <br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Notes on fencing| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''Chapter One'''</p><br />
<p>Ambition, which without fail is the cause of every ill, especially in virtuous exercises, I know to be the true basis and root of a rather notable vice. </p><br />
<p>Every day we see youths of such ambition, that under the cloak of letting their virtue be known, out of all proportion, neglect the importance of possessing such virtue, and as soon as they arrive in schools to learn, having imbibed just a few lessons, allow themselves to be inflated by excessive pretension, and judge themselves to be masters. </p><br />
<p>Therefore it happens (and I speak in particular of this exercise) that in public schools, and especially in private houses, with youths of equal quality gathered to practice assaults, you find some who do not grasp the sword if not to teach, nor to learn in any other way. This outlook is so pernicious, that for this reason you no longer hear of people gathering for common benefit and practice, and to pass the time in the virtue of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Those who have distinguished themselves up until now, demonstrating their valour and knowledge, in my view did not take this route. Indeed anxious to prove their worth as gallant men at every occasion, in any place, and against any person, I believe they sought to learn. Because to understand a discipline well, you have to practise it, you cannot learn with theory alone. </p><br />
<p>It is not a good way to master a skill, to think you can attain it without effort and sacrifice. Those who think to proceed like this, infallibly discover through experience how much they have deluded themselves. </p><br />
<p>Another active and real problem I bring up, just as damaging as the first although stemming from the same ambition, is the disparity between people. </p><br />
<p>You cannot deny that an artisan (who delights in virtue as is understandable), can through his diligence and vivacity arrive at the goal of fencing well with the sword. Indeed because this exercise is extremely capable of elevating the most lowly individual, it often happens that by applying their spirit, those of base condition become more distinguished. </p><br />
<p>The damage therefore that ambition brings, is to be ashamed to practice assaults with someone of lowly hand. To not consider you could extract some fruit even from these people, throwing yourself into the profession. </p><br />
<p>This thought is erroneous, because it is essential to know that virtue levels all people; and that a virtuoso can be considered the equal not just of a simple gentleman, but of any prince or great lord. </p><br />
<p>These are the reasons I give, demonstrating why today assaults are dismissed, neglecting the chance to benefit from the luxury of living, before the waning of youthful years deprives you of every worthwhile activity. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Two – On the same subject'''</p><br />
<p>You can clearly tell from my previous discourse how much damage ambition brings, and how it is a reason for not mastering this beautiful virtue of fencing. But I will now demonstrate furthermore how discussion of this profession, which today's students engage in more than practice, causes notable harm. The truth is that lessons taken in any subject in the day are of no use if their operations are not exercised. </p><br />
<p>That which pertains to bodies of reason: such as logic, philosophy, and so forth, must be put in practice with words alone, as they are necessary to expound such virtues. However in the profession of fencing words have no place to execute well what the students have learned from the master. </p><br />
<p>Actions are needed when it comes to training your body for defence and attack. </p><br />
<p>This is not applied by today's youth, which is a further reason why assaults no longer take place, and students neglect to learn wielding a sword in hand well. It then follows that masters are judged and branded as inept in their craft, since they no longer produce students as they did in the past. </p><br />
<p>When youngsters come together, sometimes from the schools of different masters in this profession, instead of putting their studies to the test, with the cloak across their shoulders, as well as with the simple sword in hand, they begin to discuss among themselves: “If I delivered this thrust how would you parry it?”. </p><br />
<p>The other replies “I would do it in this way, or like this” to which the first responds “But if it were a cut, how would you defend yourself” again its counter is added, and they carry on ad infinitum in this manner, disregarding gainful practice. </p><br />
<p>See if this is the best way to safeguard yourself, and benefit through the profession. Then test with a sharp sword (which could happen), whether these people would have time for such a parliament. </p><br />
<p>Action is required for exercises which engage the body, words cannot grant a student resolution to confront his opponent, or courage and practice to defend himself. This is as much as I thought to say on this matter. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Three – On putting mathematics into this virtue'''<ref>This chapter might apply to Italian treatises which incorporate mathematical principles, such as [[Camillo Agrippa]], but arguably targets in particular the Iberian forms of the ''Verdadera Destreza'', exemplified by [[Jerónimo Sánchez de Carranza]] and [[Luis Pacheco de Narváez]]. </ref></p><br />
<p>I have never presumed to malign anyone who professes to teach this noble exercise, nor do I intend to now, recognising myself as the inferior to many gallant men who have practised this virtue. But we are permitted to debate upon the lessons of some, who have taught and teach through mathematics, with the addition of lines, circles, traverses and extravagant voids of the body. </p><br />
<p>For me, these are commendable for fencing in a clean salle, furnished with even tiles. Likewise it is impossible for two people not to put on a good display, when they politely retreat, then void, or advance with a neat step, putting into practice what they have learned from their masters. </p><br />
<p>But if I imagine them outside the tiled hall, that is in the streets, where confrontations most often arise, then I can't help but criticise and malign them, since it is impossible (for reasons I will explain) to put these actions into practice. </p><br />
<p>Someone who is confronted or deliberately summoned to combat, cannot I believe, as happens in large armies, bring with them people to dig; to resurface the street so they can put themselves in the right posture, and use their lines, and advances of ground, and binds of the sword in conformance with their lessons. Instead, being confronted, they are obliged to think how to stand firmly on their feet, to be vigorous in defence and attack, ready of hand, without such fine distinctions of footwork. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore those who employ the sword in this manner, can be called good and beautiful fencers, but in an open space, or street where stones, holes, and cracks can cause you to stumble, they are always in danger of defending themselves poorly from their enemy. In such cases most of the time the artifices of traverses, voids and lines are left aside, and they throw themselves into natural attacks, as is so often seen. </p><br />
<p>This itself is sufficient demonstration, although I can elaborate for greater clarity, that play founded upon natural reason is with no comparison much better than artificious play. The latter was invented for no motive other than satisfying the curiosity of youth. If it were otherwise, it would not be the case, not only in public schools but also in the presence of nobility with the intervention of great princes, that professors of play founded upon such twists of the body had been touched assault after assault, with cuts and thrusts, as is clear and manifest to a great many people. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Four – On a defined punto to attack'''<ref> The term punto to signify a defined target area of the right shoulder is particular to the treatise of [[Marco Docciolini]].</ref></p><br />
<p>This seems to me an important subject, in order to be accomplished in assaults. I will merely state my thoughts on those who, as a principal maxim, hold and practise the opinion that it is better to attack only a single part of the body, namely the right shoulder, being the said punto. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, you must consider the reason why they observe this doctrine. I believe it is for no reason other than to strike either the nearest, or the most vulnerable part of the body. </p><br />
<p>If we suppose they hold this view, because they want to strike the nearest target, I completely refute their opinion. Hands and arms notwithstanding, I know how those who lean most stand, even their knees are closer and more likely to be attacked by the enemy. </p><br />
<p>If they wish to propose the other reason, that it is the most vulnerable part of the body, I can only oppose them entirely. It seems to me that the hands and arms are subjected to danger: both of being wounded, and of the intermediate outcome of losing the ability to attack. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore experience, which instructs in all things, shows us that in a good portion of combats you see wounds to the hands and arms. This is because these can more easily encounter the enemy's weapons. If they deem the area called the punto so vulnerable, I do not know which hands and arms are not in the same danger. In them you find veins, arteries and other very vulnerable areas which evidently have shown to cause the death of those wounded there. </p><br />
This is as much as I can say on this particular. I urge everyone to take the whole of the enemy's body as the fixed punto to attack, and specifically the part that presents itself as most uncovered and furthest forward. There is much more that could be said, for example if your opponent is left-handed, or in other situations, but to avoid tedium I will omit it. </p><br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
<br />
{{Regional Italian traditions}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Copy/Pasting]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Rapier]]<br />
[[Category:Dagger]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Jacopo_Monesi&diff=120499Jacopo Monesi2020-11-18T18:02:39Z<p>P Terminiello: /* Treatise */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = Jacopo Monesi<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = 16th century (?)<br />
| birthplace = Florence, Italy (?)<br />
| deathdate = 17th century<br />
| deathplace = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set: occupation=Fencing master }}<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = <br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = Medici court<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| period = <br />
| movement = <br />
| influences =<br />
| influenced = <br />
<br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| notableworks = ''[[Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)| Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma]]'' (1640)<br />
| archetype = <br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= 1640<br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| signature = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
<p>'''Jacopo Monesi''' was an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing master]] during the first half of the [[century::17th century]]. </p><br />
<p>A native of Florence, he appears to have enjoyed enduring patronage and recognition in his own lifetime at the court of the Grand Duchy of Tuscany under Ferdinando II de' Medici. </p><br />
<p>A court document, dating to 1621, indicates Monesi's role included instructing the adolescent nobility at the grand ducal court (a claim supported by the title page of his own work): </p><br />
<p>''Jacopo of the Armourer, master of fencing, is one of several masters to the pages, together with the priest Albizio Vecchi, the undermaster Frediano Tinolfi, Giovanni Migliorucci master of writing, Leonardo Migliorucci, Giovanni Pieroni the arithmetist and mathematician, Remigio Cantagallina master of drawing, and Pitti Agnolo Ricci master of dance.''<ref>Archivio di Stato di Firenze, Miscellanea Medicea, 369, c.707. Cited by http://www.scrimipedia.it/mediawiki/index.php?title=Iacopo_Monesi (accessed 22 March 2017).</ref><br />
<p>In 1640 he published a short tract outlining his fencing philosophy: [[Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)| Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma]]. </p><br />
<p>Monesi's text contain little technical discussion, which he defers to a promised second volume that however is either lost or was never written. Instead, Monesi strongly critiques many theories and methodologies of his peers. Behind a veil of formal language excoriating those practices he views as frivolous, or detrimental to surviving an encounter in earnest. Monesi advocates a straightforward and direct philosophy of fencing. He eschews what he sees as unnecessary embellishments, or artefacts of salle fencing, and privileges what he considers practical for surviving an unpredictable and violent confrontation with sharp weapons. </p><br />
<p>He strongly affirms the efficacy of cuts, interspersed with thrusts; and favours simple and strong natural movements, stances, and attacks. In terms of pedagogy, he forcefully promotes the primacy of practising assaults, and laments that students in his day no longer assault with the frequency and gusto of earlier times. </p><br />
<p>Among other elements he criticises: feints, elaborate postures, mathematical concepts, excessive theoretical discussion, and dagger disarms, as unhelpful and impractical for a confrontation with sharps. Without naming names Monesi appears to clearly reference, again critically, the work of [[Docciolini]], [[Fabris]], [[Marozzo]], and [[Pistofilo]]. </p><br />
<p>Alongside such direct critiques, Monesi includes less specifically targeted remonstrations. For example, he objects to the pedagogical method of masters who employ a chestplate, or a cane in place of a sword. Similarly, he leaves space for conventional discussion points of the period, such as where to look when fencing, or how to approach combat at night.</p><br />
== Treatise ==<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Introduction| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]</p><br />
! <p>Transcription</p><br />
<br />
|-<br />
| <p>'''On the Subject of Fencing'''</p><br />
<p>'''By Jacopo Monesi'''</p><br />
<p>'''Known as the Armourer'''</p><br />
<p>'''Master of Arms to the Most Serene of Tuscany, and Their Gentleman Pages'''</p><br />
<p>'''Dedicated to the Most Illustrious Sir Count'''</p><br />
<p>'''Francesco Piccolomini of Aragon'''</p><br />
<p>'''In Florence, at the New Press M.DC.XXXX'''</p><br />
<p>With Permission from the Authorities</p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Most Illustrious and Noble Sir and Patron'''</p><br />
<p>The shade of your Most Illustrious Lordship's great protection, has generated in me an uncommon yearning to bring to light that which has been hidden in the shadows of my intellect for many years. For some time I have had in mind to make public certain discourses on the most excellent profession of fencing, but the awareness of my scarce ability to articulate them, caused the heat of my enthusiasm to cool. This yearning only then emerges, through confiding in the patronage of your Most Illustrious Lordship, wishing to express these concepts in the best manner possible. </p><br />
<p>Therefore this is entrusted only to you, as has happened in the past with honour, once again I opted for your support in bringing this forth, so that anything that is deemed monstrous will nonetheless (protected by the greatness of your Most Illustrious Lordship) be embraced, and be appraised with a not less than benign eye. </p><br />
<p>Please deign therefore to protect it with benevolence, recognising it as a sign of my dutiful observance to your Most Illustrious Lordship's great merit, to which I reverently bow, praying for your every most coveted happiness. </p><br />
<p>Your devoted and most obligated servant</p><br />
<p>Jacopo Monesi, known as the Armourer. </p><br />
| <br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''To the Benevolent Reader'''</p><br />
<p>It has been for a number of years that despite the weakness of my intellect I have wanted to present my thoughts on the play of fencing, which has been my particular profession. But since the world has seen others elevated, and granted them brilliant ability with which they delight and are delighted, I considered it best to keep my thoughts buried within me. </p><br />
<p>Considering however that in some printed books you find an exorbitance of guards, and other extravagances, and witnessing this noble exercise reduced more to discourse than practice, the desire I have (if successful) to demonstrate the true play, and method of combat, made me resolve first to declare my objections, then to explain the correct method. </p><br />
<p>In conformance therefore with what the Most Illustrious Sir Silvio Piccolomini of Aragon <ref>Silvio Piccolomini was a knight of the Order of Santo Stefano, and noted fencer and military commander of his age. In the dedication of his own treatise [[Federico Ghisliero]] declares himself a student of Piccolomini, while his skill at fencing is further referenced by [[Cappoferro]] in his introduction to the reader, and by the French chronicler Michel de Montaigne. </ref> (excellent in this exercise, and more so in military disciplines) taught me, after my first master Cosimo Paradisi, in the chapters that follow I will narrate as openly as I can what is recounted. </p><br />
<p>But since the greatest detriment to this exercise, in my view, comes from neglecting to struggle with the sword in hand, in practising assaults, I will deal with this first, explaining the reasons why I believe this is, as I commence. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>''Might it please Sir Canon Carlo del Vigna to see if the present work contains anything repugnant to Christian piety, and public morals, and refer back. The 30th January 1639.'' </p><br />
Vincenzio Rabatta, Vicar of Florence<br />
<p>''In the present work, having reviewed it in all diligence, I found nothing repugnant to Christian piety, or public morals. 25th February 1639.''</p><br />
<p>Carlo del Vigna, Canon of Florence<br />
<p>''Most Reverend Father Inquisitor,''</p><br />
<p>''By your order of Most Reverend Father I have reviewed this present discourse on fencing, and I have not found anything repugnant to the Religion, orto public morals, judging it worthy of publication. 26th March 1640. ''</p><br />
<p>Girolamo Rosati, Protonotary and Consultant of the Holy Office</p><br />
<p>''This can be printed. Florence 3rd April 1640. ''</p><br />
<p>Father Giovanni Angeli, Vicar of the Holy Office, by order of</p><br />
<p>Senator Alessandro Vettori, Auditor of His Most Serene Highness</p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter One'''</p><br />
<p>Ambition, which without fail is the cause of every ill, especially in virtuous exercises, I know to be the true basis and root of a rather notable vice. </p><br />
<p>Every day we see youths of such ambition, that under the cloak of letting their virtue be known, out of all proportion, neglect the importance of possessing such virtue, and as soon as they arrive in schools to learn, having imbibed just a few lessons, allow themselves to be inflated by excessive pretension, and judge themselves to be masters. </p><br />
<p>Therefore it happens (and I speak in particular of this exercise) that in public schools, and especially in private houses, with youths of equal quality gathered to practice assaults, you find some who do not grasp the sword if not to teach, nor to learn in any other way. This outlook is so pernicious, that for this reason you no longer hear of people gathering for common benefit and practice, and to pass the time in the virtue of fencing. </p><br />
<p>Those who have distinguished themselves up until now, demonstrating their valour and knowledge, in my view did not take this route. Indeed anxious to prove their worth as gallant men at every occasion, in any place, and against any person, I believe they sought to learn. Because to understand a discipline well, you have to practise it, you cannot learn with theory alone. </p><br />
<p>It is not a good way to master a skill, to think you can attain it without effort and sacrifice. Those who think to proceed like this, infallibly discover through experience how much they have deluded themselves. </p><br />
<p>Another active and real problem I bring up, just as damaging as the first although stemming from the same ambition, is the disparity between people. </p><br />
<p>You cannot deny that an artisan (who delights in virtue as is understandable), can through his diligence and vivacity arrive at the goal of fencing well with the sword. Indeed because this exercise is extremely capable of elevating the most lowly individual, it often happens that by applying their spirit, those of base condition become more distinguished. </p><br />
<p>The damage therefore that ambition brings, is to be ashamed to practice assaults with someone of lowly hand. To not consider you could extract some fruit even from these people, throwing yourself into the profession. </p><br />
<p>This thought is erroneous, because it is essential to know that virtue levels all people; and that a virtuoso can be considered the equal not just of a simple gentleman, but of any prince or great lord. </p><br />
<p>These are the reasons I give, demonstrating why today assaults are dismissed, neglecting the chance to benefit from the luxury of living, before the waning of youthful years deprives you of every worthwhile activity. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Two – On the same subject'''</p><br />
<p>You can clearly tell from my previous discourse how much damage ambition brings, and how it is a reason for not mastering this beautiful virtue of fencing. But I will now demonstrate furthermore how discussion of this profession, which today's students engage in more than practice, causes notable harm. The truth is that lessons taken in any subject in the day are of no use if their operations are not exercised. </p><br />
<p>That which pertains to bodies of reason: such as logic, philosophy, and so forth, must be put in practice with words alone, as they are necessary to expound such virtues. However in the profession of fencing words have no place to execute well what the students have learned from the master. </p><br />
<p>Actions are needed when it comes to training your body for defence and attack. </p><br />
<p>This is not applied by today's youth, which is a further reason why assaults no longer take place, and students neglect to learn wielding a sword in hand well. It then follows that masters are judged and branded as inept in their craft, since they no longer produce students as they did in the past. </p><br />
<p>When youngsters come together, sometimes from the schools of different masters in this profession, instead of putting their studies to the test, with the cloak across their shoulders, as well as with the simple sword in hand, they begin to discuss among themselves: “If I delivered this thrust how would you parry it?”. </p><br />
<p>The other replies “I would do it in this way, or like this” to which the first responds “But if it were a cut, how would you defend yourself” again its counter is added, and they carry on ad infinitum in this manner, disregarding gainful practice. </p><br />
<p>See if this is the best way to safeguard yourself, and benefit through the profession. Then test with a sharp sword (which could happen), whether these people would have time for such a parliament. </p><br />
<p>Action is required for exercises which engage the body, words cannot grant a student resolution to confront his opponent, or courage and practice to defend himself. This is as much as I thought to say on this matter. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Three – On putting mathematics into this virtue'''<ref>This chapter might apply to Italian treatises which incorporate mathematical principles, such as [[Camillo Agrippa]], but arguably targets in particular the Iberian forms of the ''Verdadera Destreza'', exemplified by [[Jerónimo Sánchez de Carranza]] and [[Luis Pacheco de Narváez]]. </ref></p><br />
<p>I have never presumed to malign anyone who professes to teach this noble exercise, nor do I intend to now, recognising myself as the inferior to many gallant men who have practised this virtue. But we are permitted to debate upon the lessons of some, who have taught and teach through mathematics, with the addition of lines, circles, traverses and extravagant voids of the body. </p><br />
<p>For me, these are commendable for fencing in a clean salle, furnished with even tiles. Likewise it is impossible for two people not to put on a good display, when they politely retreat, then void, or advance with a neat step, putting into practice what they have learned from their masters. </p><br />
<p>But if I imagine them outside the tiled hall, that is in the streets, where confrontations most often arise, then I can't help but criticise and malign them, since it is impossible (for reasons I will explain) to put these actions into practice. </p><br />
<p>Someone who is confronted or deliberately summoned to combat, cannot I believe, as happens in large armies, bring with them people to dig; to resurface the street so they can put themselves in the right posture, and use their lines, and advances of ground, and binds of the sword in conformance with their lessons. Instead, being confronted, they are obliged to think how to stand firmly on their feet, to be vigorous in defence and attack, ready of hand, without such fine distinctions of footwork. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore those who employ the sword in this manner, can be called good and beautiful fencers, but in an open space, or street where stones, holes, and cracks can cause you to stumble, they are always in danger of defending themselves poorly from their enemy. In such cases most of the time the artifices of traverses, voids and lines are left aside, and they throw themselves into natural attacks, as is so often seen. </p><br />
<p>This itself is sufficient demonstration, although I can elaborate for greater clarity, that play founded upon natural reason is with no comparison much better than artificious play. The latter was invented for no motive other than satisfying the curiosity of youth. If it were otherwise, it would not be the case, not only in public schools but also in the presence of nobility with the intervention of great princes, that professors of play founded upon such twists of the body had been touched assault after assault, with cuts and thrusts, as is clear and manifest to a great many people. </p><br />
| <br />
|- <br />
| <p>'''Chapter Four – On a defined punto to attack'''<ref> The term punto to signify a defined target area of the right shoulder is particular to the treatise of [[Marco Docciolini]].</ref></p><br />
<p>This seems to me an important subject, in order to be accomplished in assaults. I will merely state my thoughts on those who, as a principal maxim, hold and practise the opinion that it is better to attack only a single part of the body, namely the right shoulder, being the said punto. </p><br />
<p>Firstly, you must consider the reason why they observe this doctrine. I believe it is for no reason other than to strike either the nearest, or the most vulnerable part of the body. </p><br />
<p>If we suppose they hold this view, because they want to strike the nearest target, I completely refute their opinion. Hands and arms notwithstanding, I know how those who lean most stand, even their knees are closer and more likely to be attacked by the enemy. </p><br />
<p>If they wish to propose the other reason, that it is the most vulnerable part of the body, I can only oppose them entirely. It seems to me that the hands and arms are subjected to danger: both of being wounded, and of the intermediate outcome of losing the ability to attack. </p><br />
<p>Furthermore experience, which instructs in all things, shows us that in a good portion of combats you see wounds to the hands and arms. This is because these can more easily encounter the enemy's weapons. If they deem the area called the punto so vulnerable, I do not know which hands and arms are not in the same danger. In them you find veins, arteries and other very vulnerable areas which evidently have shown to cause the death of those wounded there. </p><br />
This is as much as I can say on this particular. I urge everyone to take the whole of the enemy's body as the fixed punto to attack, and specifically the part that presents itself as most uncovered and furthest forward. There is much more that could be said, for example if your opponent is left-handed, or in other situations, but to avoid tedium I will omit it. </p><br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
<br />
{{Regional Italian traditions}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Copy/Pasting]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Rapier]]<br />
[[Category:Dagger]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Template:Early_Italian_masters&diff=120497Template:Early Italian masters2020-11-18T17:07:11Z<p>P Terminiello: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Navbox<br />
| name = Early Italian masters<br />
| title = Early Italian masters<br />
| state = uncollapsed<br />
| listclass = hlist<br />
| width = 100%<br />
<br />
| titlestyle = background: #acbce0;<br />
| groupstyle = background: #d4d7de; color: #000000;<br />
| belowstyle = background: #d4d7de;<br />
| image = [[File:Agrippa 1553 01.jpg|175px]]<br />
<br />
| group1 = Imperial Tradition<br />
| list1 = <br />
* [[Nicholai de Toblem]]<br />
* [[Johannes Suvenus]]<br />
* [[Fiore de'i Liberi]] (1400s)<br />
* [[Wolfenbüttel Sketchbook (Cod.Guelf.78.2 Aug.2º)|Wolfenbüttel Sketchbook]] (1465-80)<br />
* [[Philippo di Vadi]] (1482-87)<br />
* [[Ludwig VI von Eyb]] (1500)<br />
* ''[[Die Blume des Kampfes]]'' (1420s, 1500, 1623)<br />
<br />
| group2 = Bolognese Tradition<br />
| list2 = <br />
* [[Filippo Dardi]]<br />
* [[Guido Antonio di Luca]]<br />
* [[Anonimo Bolognese (MSS Ravenna M-345/M-346)|Anonimo Bolognese]] (1510s)<br />
* [[Antonio Manciolino]] (1531)<br />
* [[Achille Marozzo]] (1536)<br />
* [[Giovanni dall'Agocchie]] (1572)<br />
* [[Angelo Viggiani dal Montone]] (1575)<br />
* [[Mercurio Spezioli]] (1577)<br />
* [[Girolamo Cavalcabo]] (1580s)<br />
* [[Camillo Palladini]] (ca. 1600)<br />
* [[Torquato d'Alessandri]] (1609)<br />
* [[Alessandro Senese]] (1660)<br />
* [[Carlo Giuseppe Colombani]] (1711)<br />
<br />
| group3 = Florentine Tradition<br />
| list3 = <br />
* [[Anonimo Riccardiano (MS Ricc.2541)|Anonimo Riccardiano]] (1500s)<br />
* [[Francesco di Sandro Altoni]] (1539-69)<br />
* [[Additional MS 23223|Add MS 23223]] (ca. 1600)<br />
* [[Marco Docciolini]] (1601)<br />
<br />
| group4 = Neopolitan Tradition<br />
| list4 = <br />
* [[Marc'Antonio Pagano]] (1553)<br />
* [[Cesare Pagano]] (1592)<br />
<br />
| group5 = Venetian Tradition<br />
| list5 = <br />
* [[Nicoletto Giganti]] (1606)<br />
* [[Bondì di Mazo]] (1696)<br />
<br />
| group6 = Agrippa Style<br />
| list6 = <br />
* [[Camillo Agrippa]] (1553)<br />
* [[Alfonso Falloppia]] (1584)<br />
* [[Federico Ghisliero]] (1587)<br />
* [[Girolamo Lucino]] (1589)<br />
* [[Camillo Palladini]] (ca. 1600)<br />
* [[André des Bordes]] (1610)<br />
<br />
| group7 = Marcelli Style<br />
| list7 = <br />
* [[Giuseppe Morsicato Pallavicini]]<br />
* [[Giuseppe Villardita]]<br />
* [[Francesco Antonio Mattei]]<br />
* [[Francesco Marcelli]]<br />
<br />
| group8 = Other Masters<br />
| list8 = <br />
* [[Giacomo di Grassi]] (1570)<br />
* [[Giovan Antonio Lovino]] (1580)<br />
* [[Vincentio Saviolo]] (1595)<br />
* [[Salvator Fabris]] (1606)<br />
* [[Ridolfo Capoferro]] (1610)<br />
* [[Bonaventura Pistofilo]] (1621)<br />
* [[Francesco Alfieri]] (1640)<br />
* [[Jacopo Monesi]] (1640)<br />
* [[Paternostraro]]<br />
<br />
}}<noinclude>[[Category:Tradition navbox templates]]</noinclude></div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Opposizioni_et_Avvertimenti_sopra_la_Scherma_(Jacopo_Monesi)&diff=120496Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)2020-11-18T17:03:18Z<p>P Terminiello: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox book<br />
<!----------Name----------><br />
| name = Opposizioni et avvertimenti sopra la scherma<br />
| subtitle = [[title:: Objections and Admonishments on the Subject of Fencing]]<br />
<!----------Image----------><br />
| image = <br />
| width = <br />
| caption = <br />
<!----------Information----------><br />
| full title = Opposizioni et avvertimenti sopra la scherma <br/>Di Iacopo Monesi detto <br/> l’armaiolo<br />
| also known as = <br />
| author(s) = [[author::Jacopo Monesi]]<br />
| ascribed to = <br />
| compiled by = <br />
| illustrated by = <br />
| translator(s) = <br />
| patron = <br />
| dedicated to = Francesco Piccolomini of Aragon<br />
| place of origin = Florence, Italy<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| subject = <br />
| genre = [[type::Fencing manual]]<br />
| sources = <br />
| publisher = <br />
| pub_date = [[year::1640]]<br />
| first English edition = <br />
| pages = 32<br />
| extant copies = <br />
| wiktenauer compilation by = <br />
| images = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
''''' Opposizioni et avvertimenti sopra la scherma ''''' ("Objections and Admonishments on the Subject of Fencing ") is an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing manual]] written by [[Jacopo Monesi]] and published in 1640. Largely devoid of technical detail, however it contains useful insights into the fencing culture of the time, and a lively commentary on the practices of the author’s peers.<br />
<br />
== Publication History ==<br />
<br />
'' Opposizioni et avvertimenti sopra la scherma '' was published in Florence in 1640<br />
<br />
== Contents ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Gallery ==<br />
<br />
[Images available for import.]<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
<br />
== Copyright and License Summary ==<br />
<br />
For further information, including transcription and translation notes, see the [[Talk:{{PAGENAME}}|discussion page]].<br />
<br />
<section begin="sourcebox"/>{{sourcebox header}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Images<br />
| authors = <br />
| source link = <br />
| source title= <br />
| license = public domain<br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Transcription<br />
| authors = <br />
| source link = <br />
| source title= <br />
| license = <br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox footer}}<section end="sourcebox"/><br />
<br />
[[Category:Treatises]]<br />
[[Category:Books]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Research/Background Information]]<br />
[[Category:Image Processing]]<br />
[[Category:Digital Scanning]]<br />
[[Category:Transcription]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Opposizioni_et_Avvertimenti_sopra_la_Scherma_(Jacopo_Monesi)&diff=120495Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)2020-11-18T17:02:49Z<p>P Terminiello: Created page with "{{Infobox book <!----------Name----------> | name = Opposizioni et avvertimenti sopra la scherma | subtitle = title:: Objections and Ad..."</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox book<br />
<!----------Name----------><br />
| name = Opposizioni et avvertimenti sopra la scherma<br />
| subtitle = [[title:: Objections and Admonishments on the Subject of Fencing]]<br />
<!----------Image----------><br />
| image = <br />
| width = <br />
| caption = <br />
<!----------Information----------><br />
| full title = Opposizioni et avvertimenti sopra la scherma <br/>Di Iacopo Monesi detto <br/> l’armaiolo<br />
| also known as = <br />
| author(s) = [[author::Jacopo Monesi]]<br />
| ascribed to = <br />
| compiled by = <br />
| illustrated by = <br />
| translator(s) = <br />
| patron = <br />
| dedicated to = Francesco Piccolomini of Aragon<br />
| place of origin = Florence, Italy<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| subject = <br />
| genre = [[type::Fencing manual]]<br />
| sources = <br />
| publisher = [[Giralomo Discepolo]]<br />
| pub_date = [[year::1640]]<br />
| first English edition = <br />
| pages = 32<br />
| extant copies = <br />
| wiktenauer compilation by = <br />
| images = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
''''' Opposizioni et avvertimenti sopra la scherma ''''' ("Objections and Admonishments on the Subject of Fencing ") is an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing manual]] written by [[Jacopo Monesi]] and published in 1640. Largely devoid of technical detail, however it contains useful insights into the fencing culture of the time, and a lively commentary on the practices of the author’s peers.<br />
<br />
== Publication History ==<br />
<br />
'' Opposizioni et avvertimenti sopra la scherma '' was published in Florence in 1640<br />
<br />
== Contents ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Gallery ==<br />
<br />
[Images available for import.]<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
<br />
== Copyright and License Summary ==<br />
<br />
For further information, including transcription and translation notes, see the [[Talk:{{PAGENAME}}|discussion page]].<br />
<br />
<section begin="sourcebox"/>{{sourcebox header}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Images<br />
| authors = <br />
| source link = <br />
| source title= <br />
| license = public domain<br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Transcription<br />
| authors = <br />
| source link = <br />
| source title= <br />
| license = <br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox footer}}<section end="sourcebox"/><br />
<br />
[[Category:Treatises]]<br />
[[Category:Books]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Research/Background Information]]<br />
[[Category:Image Processing]]<br />
[[Category:Digital Scanning]]<br />
[[Category:Transcription]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Jacopo_Monesi&diff=120494Jacopo Monesi2020-11-18T16:47:17Z<p>P Terminiello: Created page with "{{Infobox writer | name = Jacopo Monesi | image = | imagesize = | caption = | pseudonym = | birthname..."</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox writer<br />
| name = Jacopo Monesi<br />
| image = <br />
| imagesize = <br />
| caption = <br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = 16th century (?)<br />
| birthplace = Florence, Italy (?)<br />
| deathdate = 17th century<br />
| deathplace = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set: occupation=Fencing master }}<br />
| nationality = <br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = <br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = Medici court<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| period = <br />
| movement = <br />
| influences =<br />
| influenced = <br />
<br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| notableworks = ''[[Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)| Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma]]'' (1640)<br />
| archetype = <br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= 1640<br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| signature = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
<p>'''Jacopo Monesi''' was an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing master]] during the first half of the [[century::17th century]]. </p><br />
<p>A native of Florence, he appears to have enjoyed enduring patronage and recognition in his own lifetime at the court of the Grand Duchy of Tuscany under Ferdinando II de' Medici. </p><br />
<p>A court document, dating to 1621, indicates Monesi's role included instructing the adolescent nobility at the grand ducal court (a claim supported by the title page of his own work): </p><br />
<p>''Jacopo of the Armourer, master of fencing, is one of several masters to the pages, together with the priest Albizio Vecchi, the undermaster Frediano Tinolfi, Giovanni Migliorucci master of writing, Leonardo Migliorucci, Giovanni Pieroni the arithmetist and mathematician, Remigio Cantagallina master of drawing, and Pitti Agnolo Ricci master of dance.''<ref>Archivio di Stato di Firenze, Miscellanea Medicea, 369, c.707. Cited by http://www.scrimipedia.it/mediawiki/index.php?title=Iacopo_Monesi (accessed 22 March 2017).</ref><br />
<p>In 1640 he published a short tract outlining his fencing philosophy: [[Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma (Jacopo Monesi)| Opposizioni et Avvertimenti sopra la Scherma]]. </p><br />
<p>Monesi's text contain little technical discussion, which he defers to a promised second volume that however is either lost or was never written. Instead, Monesi strongly critiques many theories and methodologies of his peers. Behind a veil of formal language excoriating those practices he views as frivolous, or detrimental to surviving an encounter in earnest. Monesi advocates a straightforward and direct philosophy of fencing. He eschews what he sees as unnecessary embellishments, or artefacts of salle fencing, and privileges what he considers practical for surviving an unpredictable and violent confrontation with sharp weapons. </p><br />
<p>He strongly affirms the efficacy of cuts, interspersed with thrusts; and favours simple and strong natural movements, stances, and attacks. In terms of pedagogy, he forcefully promotes the primacy of practising assaults, and laments that students in his day no longer assault with the frequency and gusto of earlier times. </p><br />
<p>Among other elements he criticises: feints, elaborate postures, mathematical concepts, excessive theoretical discussion, and dagger disarms, as unhelpful and impractical for a confrontation with sharps. Without naming names Monesi appears to clearly reference, again critically, the work of [[Docciolini]], [[Fabris]], [[Marozzo]], and [[Pistofilo]]. </p><br />
<p>Alongside such direct critiques, Monesi includes less specifically targeted remonstrations. For example, he objects to the pedagogical method of masters who employ a chestplate, or a cane in place of a sword. Similarly, he leaves space for conventional discussion points of the period, such as where to look when fencing, or how to approach combat at night.</p><br />
== Treatise ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
<br />
{{Regional Italian traditions}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Copy/Pasting]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Rapier]]<br />
[[Category:Dagger]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Francesco_Fernando_Alfieri&diff=120493Francesco Fernando Alfieri2020-11-18T16:20:26Z<p>P Terminiello: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{infobox writer<br />
| name = [[name::Francesco Fernando Alfieri]]<br />
| image = File:Francesco Fernando Alfieri.png<br />
| imagesize = 200px<br />
| caption = Portrait from 1640<br />
<br />
| pseudonym = <br />
| birthname = <br />
| birthdate = 16th century (?)<br />
| birthplace = <br />
| deathdate = 17th century<br />
| deathplace = <br />
| resting_place = <br />
| occupation = [[Fencing master]]{{#set:occupation=Fencing master}}<br />
| language = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| nationality = [[Italian]]<br />
| ethnicity = <br />
| citizenship = <br />
| education = <br />
| alma_mater = <br />
| patron = Lodovico Vidman<br />
<br />
| period = <br />
| genre = [[Fencing manual]]<br />
| subject = <br />
| movement = <br />
| notableworks = {{plainlist<br />
| ''[[La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri)|La Bandiera]]'' (1638)<br />
| ''[[La Scherma (Francesco Fernando Alfieri)|La Scherma]]'' (1640)<br />
| ''[[La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri)|La Picca]]'' (1641)<br />
| ''[[L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri)|L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada]]'' (1653)<br />
}}<br />
| manuscript(s) = <br />
| principal manuscript(s)=<br />
| first printed edition= <br />
| wiktenauer compilation by=<br />
<br />
| spouse = <br />
| partner = <br />
| children = <br />
| relatives = <br />
| influences = <br />
| influenced = <br />
| awards = <br />
| signature = <br />
| website = <br />
| translations = <br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
'''Francesco Fernando Alfieri''' was a [[century::17th century]] [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing master]]. He was Master of Arms of the Accademia Delia in his native Padua, most likely from 1632 until some point in the mid 1650s,<ref>Del Negro, Piero. ''L’Accademia Delia e gli esercizi cavallereschi della nobilità padovana nel Seicento e Settecento'' in ''Il gioco e la guerra nel secondo millennio''. Edited by Piero Del Negro and Gherardo Ortalli. Treviso: Fondazione Benetton Studi Ricerche, 2008.</ref> his predecessors being fellow Paudans: Bartolomeo Tagliaferro and Gaspare Magnanino. While not the first military academy in the Italian peninsula, it is recorded as the first state academy, with generous support from the city's coffers. The academy appointed Masters in only three disciplines: fencing, equitation, and mathematics, famously turning down Galileo Galilei for the position of professor of mathematics in 1610.<br />
<br />
Founded in 1608, the Accademia Delia served as an elite finishing school for the sons of Paduan nobility, a military academy for future cavalry officers, continuing in this form until 1801. The academy's statutes provided for a maximum of sixty students, but in practice there were often fewer. 1632, the year Alfieri began his tenure, bore witness to a difficult period in Padua. In 1631 the city had suffered a terrible epidemic, bringing its population from 30,000 to a mere 13,000, with many of the academy's students losing their lives.<br />
<br />
Nevertheless the academy occupied a position of considerable prestige in Paduan society, and in the entire Veneto region. For example on 18 April 1638, in the year Alfieri published La Bandiera, the academy hosted an extravagant festival, with contests and displays of fencing and jousting. This was watched by thousands of spectators, and concluded with a mass in the church of Santa Giustina, with a musical score composed for the occasion by Claudio Monteverdi.<br />
<br />
In 1638, Alfieri published a treatise on flag drill entitled ''[[La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri)|La Bandiera]]'' ("The Banner"). This was followed in 1640 by ''[[La Scherma (Francesco Fernando Alfieri)|La Scherma]]'' ("On Fencing"), in which he treats the use of the [[rapier]]. Not content with these works, in 1641 he released ''[[La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri)|La Picca]]'' ("The Pike"), which not only covers [[pike]] drill, but also includes a complete reprint of ''La Bandiera'' (complete with title page dated 1638). His treatise on rapier seems to have been especially popular, as it was reprinted in 1646 and then received a new edition in 1653 titled ''[[L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri)|L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada]]'' ("The Art of Handling the Sword Well"), which not only includes the entirety of the 1640 edition, but also adds a concluding section on the [[spadone]].<br />
<br />
Alfieri dedicates his ''La Bandiera'' and ''La Picca'' to Lodovico Vidman, whom he indicates was his former student and patron, with ''L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada'' dedicated to Lodovico's brother Martino (''La Scherma'' being dedicated to the students at the Accademia Delia in general). The Vidman (or Widmann) family were an extremely wealthy merchant family, originally from Carinthia in present-day Austria, but settled in Venice. Generous patrons of the arts, in the course of the first half of the seventeenth century they were ennobled first by the Holy Roman Emperor, then by the Venetian Senate.<br />
<br />
{{TOC limit|3}}<br />
== Treatise ==<br />
<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = ''La Bandiera'' ("The Banner")<br />
| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>Illustrations<br/></p><br />
! <p>{{rating|c}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]] and [[Caroline Stewart]]</p><br />
! <p>[[La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri)|Transcription]] (1638){{edit index|La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf}}<br/>by [[Andrea Conti]]</p><br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:La Bandiera (Alfieri) 01.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''The Flag by Francesco Ferdinando Alfieri''', Master of Arms at the Illustrious Academy Delia of Padua</p><br />
<br />
<p>''In which it is demonstrated by way of figures an easy and new method, its handling, and its use with the defence of the sword.''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Dedicated to the Most Illustrious Sir, Sir '''Lodovico di Vidman'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''Free Baron of San Paterniano, and Sommeregg, etc.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''In Padua,''' printed by Sebastiano Sardi. MDCXXXIIX.</p><br />
----<br />
<p>''With Permission from the Authorities''</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|5|lbl=i}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="2" | [[File:La Bandiera (Alfieri) 02.png|2250x250px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''To the Most Illustrious Sir''' Most Excellent and Honourable Sir and Patron '''Lodovico Conte di Vidman'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>The benevolences I receive from Your Excellency daily are so frequent, and so generous, that considering what gratitude could be expected from my feeble, but above all devoted, service, I conceived to illustrate my obligations succinctly in these sheets of paper.</p><br />
<br />
<p>Here, Your Excellency, is the fruit of my labours, dedicated in every respect to your generous name; such that under your protection it might acquire the esteem, that the little acumen of the author would be unable to grant it.</p><br />
<br />
<p>You will see, Your Most Illustrious Excellency, the art that you deigned to learn, honouring my discipline. I have effortlessly persuaded myself that it would not displease you, to see printed this pastime which you occasionally enjoyed to practice. Nonetheless I am aware of the scarce value of my gift, but your magnanimous brilliance has emboldened me.</p><br />
<br />
<p>My soul is overflowing with obeisant reverence, and Your Most Illustrious Excellency of benignity, to you I most humbly bow.</p><br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf|49|lbl=iii|p=1}} {{section|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf/50|1|lbl=iv|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>In Padua the 6 th day of September M.DC.XXXIIX.</p><br />
<br />
<p>Your Most Illustrious Excellency</p><br />
<br />
<p>Your Most Humble and Most Obliged Servant,</p><br />
<br />
<p>Francesco Ferdinando Alfieri.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf/50|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>'''To the reader'''<br />
<br />
<p>Reader I present to you my flag. If it is not handled according to your spirit, blame the fact that the task was beyond my abilities.</p><br />
<br />
<p>The condition of this century brings such liberty, that everybody burdens the printing presses, and I too have allowed myself to be taken by this custom.</p><br />
<br />
<p>I am sure you will tell me I have not dusted off many bookshelves, and I will reply that my books have been experience and practice, which I leave you the image thereof. That which I have in my mind to show you, if it does not seem completely new to you, neither is it trivial.</p><br />
<br />
<p>Every master of arms professes some knowledge of it, few have written treatises and nobody up until now has condensed this art into the form that you see.</p><br />
<br />
<p>I desire nothing more than to please you, and to benefit you. If I achieve this goal, and you also learn that which you seek, I nonetheless seek your pardon; and perhaps in short I will bring out a new treatise on all aspects of fencing, which will please you even more.</p><br />
<br />
<p>Finally it is just to admit that he who labours for others is always worthy of being commended.</p><br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|9|lbl=v|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|10|lbl=vi|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf/11|1|lbl=vii-viii}}<br />
{{section|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf/12|1|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>'''The Flag by Francesco Ferdinando Alfieri'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>From what I have been able to learn, from those few books that have come to my hands, from the discourses of great men, and from a long and uncommon experience, there is nothing in my judgement either more honourable or more necessary to a person of noble birth, than keeping their youth engaged in the practices that are useful to, and which help and adorn, the virtues of the soul.</p><br />
<br />
<p>The antique and famous republics which will always serve as examples, and as stimuli to set on the path towards civic happiness, also prized virtue, skill, and agility, reputing as blessed those who were solemnly considered stronger and faster than others.<ref>This passage is later self-plagiarised by Alfieri in the introduction to his treatise on the spadone of 1653.</ref></p><br />
<br />
<p>They were seen in the piazzas competing, some at wrestling, some launching the pole, they challenged themselves in races, they battered one another with the cestus, and at times by hurling discs or balls of wood, they put on show the gifts they had received from nature, enhanced through their art.</p><br />
<br />
<p>These exercises were common into the early centuries of the Italic nation, and if they are never expressed with the pomp in which the inhabitants of the Peloponnese and Phrygia excelled, they have nonetheless been largely conserved up to the present age, as you can see every day principally in Tuscany, while other arts that were not practised in antiquity have been discovered.</p><br />
<br />
<p>The practice of the flag will always be among the most commended, since it readies the foot, it renders the waist pliable; the hand becomes strong, the arm flexible. If we look to its origins, and to who was the first to unfurl it in an army we find in the holy scriptures that it was the great captain Moses,<ref>Although taken somewhat out of context, Alfieri appears to be referring to Numbers 21:8: “And the LORD said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole” (King James Bible).</ref> he was followed first of all by the Assyrians, then the Egyptians followed the same example both with representations of bulls and other animals they held in veneration, and with numerous hieroglyphics alluding to victory, the pretexts and reasons for war, and to the strength and valour of their soldiers. Finally there is no people so barbaric, that it does not see its armies ordered and distinct under a particular standard.</p><br />
<br />
<p>If we then turn to consider how useful and of what consequence it is in the management of war, although such a treatise would belong to a captain rather than to me, even I am clearly aware that the fortune and glory of war depends in large part on the flag, and that in truth via this instrument military discipline forms troops and centuriae, permits them to understand and execute commands, maintains them in order, and allows the parts of the army needed for victory to be deployed quickly and without confusion.</p><br />
<br />
<p>Efforts should not be directed elsewhere, other than to seize flag. If it is lost it seems you must no longer fear resistance, there remains a confused and armed multitude without a guide, oppressed more by disorder than by iron. Thus we see that standards are the real trophies which render a warrior's valour immortal, and they are suspended in perpetual remembrance not only in private homes but also in public buildings and churches. Therefore the subject of the art I have chosen to demonstrate is itself a worthy one and perhaps inferior to no other.</p><br />
<br />
<p>Some might wish to object, stating that the flag is employed in war, but not its art, to these I would reply with a question: is the ensign needed to defend the flag? One who would deny this hints at having a rare talent, and of being a few eggs short of a dozen.<ref>Here Alfieri employs a practically untranslatable idiom “''tenero di sale''”, which refers to a dish lacking in salt but also ironically to a foolish, naïve or credulous person. The translator has replaced this with an approximately equivalent English idiom.</ref></p><br />
<br />
<p>If this is undeniable then, who is better able to defend the flag than one who knows how to handle it perfectly? Why is the pole armed if not intended to injure? To know how to wound it is necessary to practice the art, otherwise the flag serves only to entangle and envelop the hands, while it is horribly lost, holding it up being in vain. This does not occur in the hands of someone experienced, who when reduced to such extremes will have a ready solution appropriate to the situation. Emboldened by virtue one such as this will either rescue the flag from the enemy or will pursue it through vendetta.</p><br />
<br />
<p>Therefore for those who understand this virtue, without need for further exposition, it will be a simple task to arrive at the mastery desired, observing the following figures which make clear the particulars that are difficult to express with words alone.</p><br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|13|lbl=1|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|14|lbl=2|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|15|lbl=3|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|16|lbl=4|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|17|lbl=5|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:La Bandiera (Alfieri) 03.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''How the ensign or other person should present themselves with the standard'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Chapter I</p><br />
<br />
<p>Wishing to proceed in an appropriate order, to arrive at a perfect understanding of this art, we must begin with its principles, since all of its perfections derive from these.</p><br />
<br />
<p>In truth I confess that skill, strength and gracefulness are gifts dispensed by nature. Nonetheless with exercise and good discipline they can be acquired and developed. Therefore the movement of the ensign, or other person who wishes to handle the standard for pleasure, should be free, smooth, but also ordered and martial. You should take it with your right hand, as more noble, and passing it to your left you should gather the edges, and grasp them together with the haft, which resting on the arm, situates the flag at the breast as the figure shows. In this manner, without having to change hands and take two tempi, you can quickly unsheath the sword, and employ it as the occasion demands.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|18|lbl=6}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:La Bandiera (Alfieri) 04.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''On hoisting the standard'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Chapter II</p><br />
<br />
<p>To hoist the standard you take it with your right, lifting it so it unfolds, and assuming that the wind and location allow it, you find yourself in the posture seen in the picture. With your right foot, pole hand, and your waist gracefully in unison, you may salute the spectators before commencing your play, noting that for an army passing before a prince, general or other great personage it is an act of reverence to lower it to the ground waving it with a ''riverso''.<ref>Note the use of fencing terminology to describe actions with the flag, which continues throughout the treatise.</ref></p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|20|lbl=8}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:La Bandiera (Alfieri) 05.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''On the first method of beginning to handle the standard'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Chapter III</p><br />
<br />
<p>This is the first lesson, in which we begin to walk. To attain the honour that is desired, the body should be somewhat bent and braced to take its force. The arm should be extended, strong and raised above the head. Passing with an ample but natural step, at the same time you will judiciously catch the wind with a ''mandritto'', which unfurls and does not entangle the standard.</p><br />
<br />
<p>This is followed by a ''riverso'' on the second pass, continuing in this manner as desired. You can also change hands, and the greatest skill is to throw the flag and take it in the air, which by its nature changes hands.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|22|lbl=10}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:La Bandiera (Alfieri) 06.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''On thrusting with the standard'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Chapter IV</p><br />
<br />
<p>All the lessons are arranged so that one is linked to the next. Here we learn how to deliver a thrust with the standard. This serves not only to demonstrate the skill and ability of the player, but could also be necessary to employ in war.</p><br />
<br />
<p>The arm should be stretched out, and having flourished a circular ''mandritto'' with your right hand over your head, you should quickly push the flag forwards without wasting time, thrusting in ''quarta''. After you should turn your arm and hand into ''seconda'', and in unison with your left foot extend the blow, always taking into account the wind, and correct footing, to avoid misadventures, which detract from the merit of what you wish to accomplish.</p><br />
<br />
<p>The same exercise can be done with the left hand which is all the more commendable, as by nature this member is usually weaker and less practised.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|24|lbl=12}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:La Bandiera (Alfieri) 07.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''How to handle the flag with the hand reversed'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Chapter V</p><br />
<br />
<p>This lesson is difficult but beautiful, and truly novel. You grip the shaft with the hand reversed, as it appears in the figure opposite, the arm must be somewhat gathered to help the wrist, which is encumbered by the weight. By taking smaller steps, with the movement of the hand rising from one flank to the other, the undulating volume of the flag is made to wave from one side to the other without confusion, while you interpose two or three passes under the leg or circle it behind the lower back, changing hands, however you prefer.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|26|lbl=14}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:La Bandiera (Alfieri) 08.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''On passing the flag under the legs'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Chapter VI</p><br />
<br />
<p>With the standard in motion, and wishing to perform the current lesson, the flag is launched into the air and caught with the hand reversed. Then with the arm turned and the body bent it is passed under the left leg towards the right. In the same motion it is then passed behind the lower back and taken with the left hand, and passed again under the right leg to the left. This can be repeated with either hand as your skill and vigour dictates.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|28|lbl=16}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:La Bandiera (Alfieri) 09.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''On launching the standard'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Chapter VII</p><br />
<br />
<p>I know very well that the unusual always delights, and for this reason I have applied myself to collect and create the lessons you now see. To narrate this figure, you wave a circular flourish with a mandritto, then throw the flag in the air, retrieving it with your other hand. This same play is continued, always keeping your arm in time with your foot, skilfully catching the wind. Other passes can be interposed, under the leg or other variations, serving to embellish the lessons and demonstrate the bravura of the practitioner.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|30|lbl=18}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:La Bandiera (Alfieri) 10.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''How to perform a ''molinello'''''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Chapter VIII</p><br />
<br />
<p>The ''molinello'' is delightful. To perform it comfortably, you should have the standard in your right hand. You complete a full turn above the head, then throw it up in the air, catching it around the middle of the standard as the figure shows. The ''molinello'' is then turned towards the rear foot. After several rotations, as your the hand becomes fatigued, you should grip the butt of the flag with your other hand and repeat the same lesson, again throwing it in the air as described above.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|32|lbl=20}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:La Bandiera (Alfieri) 11.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''How to manage the standard behind your lower back'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Chapter IX</p><br />
<br />
<p>This figure presents a wonderful innovation in this art. In order that everybody may understand it, I will briefly describe it. The flag should start in your right hand. Having performed a full flourish above your head, it is pulled backwards and with a reverse turn it is carried behind your back on the left side, where it can be fluttered several times, as desired, with your left hand.</p><br />
<br />
<p>This can be performed while walking, or standing without walking. However it is always necessary to watch the length of your stride, and the wind, since it is dangerous to err while both hands are occupied, and you cannot view the motion of the flag, because in order to display your mastery we advise not to stare at it. Everyone can perform this same lesson with the left hand, loosening the arm and bringing it into presence, observing the order prescribed above.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|34|lbl=22}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:La Bandiera (Alfieri) 12.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''On waving the flag behind your back'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Chapter X</p><br />
<br />
<p>In this figure the arm is kept extended, and very prominent, and after turning it behind your back, the standard is played from one side to the other, stepping proportionately so it does not get entangled. After a few waves you can repeat with your left hand, which I will omit to avoid being bothersome by lengthening my discourse.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|36|lbl=24}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:La Bandiera (Alfieri) 13.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''On how the standard is passed under the legs'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Chapter XI</p><br />
<br />
<p>Having completed several steps, with both ''mandritti'' and ''riversi'', you should raise the flag as required, adjusting for the ripples which form in various places, and finally bend your waist in the manner depicted. Having circled it above your head, you should lower your arm, passing the standard under your right leg, and by taking it with your left hand, the lesson you have followed has been performed.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|38|lbl=26}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:La Bandiera (Alfieri) 14.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''On passing the standard around your neck'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Chapter XII</p><br />
<br />
<p>I propose passing the flag around your neck. For this innovation your arm should tend to be high and extended. Having completed a few waves, you should judge the tempo so that the flag rests on your right shoulder. By pushing it, while catching a little wind from the left, you should let go of the shaft, turning your waist to retake the flag in the middle of the shaft, as the image indicates, entering into ''molinelli'', and after the usual waves this lesson can be repeated with your left hand.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|40|lbl=28}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:La Bandiera (Alfieri) 15.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''How to throw the standard while walking, changing hands'''<br/><br/></p><br />
<br />
<p>Chapter XIII</p><br />
<br />
<p>I hope to avoid being tedious by repeating the same things, or to become unclear by neglecting them. The standard is always in motion once the lessons begin, and the principal motions are the ''mandritti'' and ''riversi'', which form the waves of the flag and are performed above your head. I am therefore forced to repeat this for the figure presented here, as we must connect them to what I wish to describe.</p><br />
<br />
<p>Having circled with a ''riverso'' you should throw the flag high, and taking it with your left hand you should perform the same towards your right side. This can be repeated many times from one side to the other before beginning a new play, the entertainment and delight that lovers of this exercise feel deriving from its novelty. This assumes as always that the timing, step, and wind are duly observed, without which every effort loses merit and earns nothing but reproach.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|42|lbl=30}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:La Bandiera (Alfieri) 16.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''On handling the standard under your legs'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Chapter XIV</p><br />
<br />
<p>Having performed the rotations above, and with the standard in your left hand, it should be lowered, and by circling a ''mandritto'' it should be carried and helped along under your leg, forming waves as shown by the figure. Having retrieved it either on the side it was put in on, or from under your left leg, you should change hands, with equal mastery executing again what has been described.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|44|lbl=32}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:La Bandiera (Alfieri) 17.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''On thrusts with the standard in the form of a cross'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Chapter XV</p><br />
<br />
<p>The flag should be kept hoisted, and having circled a ''riverso'' in the usual way above your head, you should perform a thrust to your left side accompanied by your foot. Turning the flag towards your right side, you should then perform a thrust with the same mastery. The cross is completed by another two attacks. Your front foot should always be followed by your rear foot, and although everything is in itself quite straightforward, it is nonetheless difficult to put into practice without a maestro.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|46|lbl=34}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:La Bandiera (Alfieri) 18.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''On throwing the flag high behind your back'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Chapter XVI</p><br />
<br />
<p>This lesson is difficult and requires the usual waves as a prelude. After these, it is performed with a ''riverso'', passing the flag behind your back and raising it, although it rests on your lower back, throwing it high in the air with the force of your hand and in particular with your index finger. It is made to pass over your left shoulder, where it is grabbed by your left hand, before the play is repeated. Once completed the flag returns to your the right hand, although it is also possible to recover the pole without passing it from one hand into the other.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|48|lbl=36}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:La Bandiera (Alfieri) 19.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''On passing the standard under the legs starting from the right'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Chapter XVII</p><br />
<br />
<p>To perform the lesson shown here, having finished to circle a riverso, you should turn a ''mandritto'' while bending your body and lowering the standard, bringing it under both your legs starting from the right. All of this is performed in just one tempo, and what can be performed with one hand can always be performed with the other.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|50|lbl=38}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:La Bandiera (Alfieri) 20.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''On ''montanti''<ref>''Montanti'' (singular ''montante'') in fencing terminology refers to rising blows.</ref> with the right hand'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Chapter XVIII</p><br />
<br />
<p>We have arrived at the manner of forming ''montanti''. There is no guard or blow in fencing that cannot be adapted to the art of the flag.</p><br />
<br />
<p>To perform what I wish to teach with this figure, the flag starts in your right hand, in motion above your head. Having finished to circle, the ''montanti'' begin first from your left side, and then from your right, redoubling them as you desire. You can also swap hands and repeat the same lesson, as we have described many many times in the other chapters.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|52|lbl=40}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:La Bandiera (Alfieri) 21.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''On throwing and recovering the standard with the same hand'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Chapter XIX</p><br />
<br />
<p>In the handling of the flag it seems that dexterity and agility matter more than strength, but at times these attributes must be equal to one another and are of utmost importance. The truth of this is manifestly demonstrated by this figure. After several steps and flourishes of the flag you should firmly plant your feet, then turn a ''mandritto'' over your head and extend a half-thrust, launching the standard into the air with all the force of your lower back and your hand so that it rotates a turn and a half and drops as illustrated by the figure, retrieving it with the same hand. You then return to normal play, which is the usual prelude to a new lesson.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|54|lbl=42}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:La Bandiera (Alfieri) 22.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''On the standard with the hand reversed'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Chapter XX</p><br />
<br />
<p>Having performed the last flourish to enter into this lesson, the standard is thrown into the air and gathered with the hand reversed. Your arm should be extended, and the tip of the staff must be pointed towards the ground. With judicious use of timing, and the wind, you will be able to perform waves, flourishes, passes under the leg, turns of the flag behind your lower back, and all that you have been able to learn from the faithfulness and merit of your maestro.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|56|lbl=44}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:La Bandiera (Alfieri) 23.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''On gathering the standard'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Chapter XXI</p><br />
<br />
<p>All the things that bring us delight, if they pass beyond a certain point, become bothersome. The end is the completion of the work undertaken. Having therefore to gather the standard, you should hold it with your right hand over your shoulder, and catching a bit of wind, the edge should be grasped with your left hand. Thereby holding it in the posture shown you may end your labours with high praise.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|58|lbl=46}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:La Bandiera (Alfieri) 24.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''On putting your hand to the sword'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Chapter XXII</p><br />
<br />
<p>The sword is a weapon that is used in various ways, the effeminate use it to ornament their perfumed finery, and to strong men it is minister of wrath, in defence of duty. But refraining from speaking too long on the subject, I will continue with as much as I propose to say on this topic for now.</p><br />
<br />
<p>Wishing therefore to unsheath your sword, if the flag is in your right hand, you can throw it in the air and catch it with your left, or without this action you can pass it naturally into the other hand.</p><br />
<br />
<p>Raising the flag so that you have more room at your flank, the sword can be drawn as clearly demonstrated by the figure. Putting yourself in a firm stance, all that remains is to show yourself as experienced in this noble practice. If you wish to change hands, the sword should be placed under your arm, and having grasped the standard, your left will be armed, and you can perform whichever passages or lessons of the art you have learned.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|60|lbl=48}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:La Bandiera (Alfieri) 25.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''On walking with sword and flag'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Chapter XXIII</p><br />
<br />
<p>The first admonishment we must give to explain this figure, is that the sword and the flag must be held firmly and solidly. You are free to play according to your inclination, and the hand can be changed in one tempo by throwing the standard forwards into the air, grabbing the sword as it falls. This can be performed several times, because it is a beautiful lesson, and truly worthy of being observed.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|62|lbl=50}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:La Bandiera (Alfieri) 26.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''On managing the standard with your right, while your left is armed'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Chapter XXIV</p><br />
<br />
<p>It is a fixed rule that the standard should never be idle. While your left hand holds the sword your right nevertheless remains free, but when it is somehow hindered, as I have said elsewhere, it is all the more praiseworthy. Performing this lesson with your hand behind your back, your left hand should be raised as per the figure, and with the usual waves of the flag, you can loosen your arm and enter into another lesson, changing hands, catching the wind and taking the tempo as required.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|64|lbl=52}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:La Bandiera (Alfieri) 27.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''On sheathing your sword'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Chapter XXV</p><br />
<br />
<p>The present figure speaks for itself. To return your sword you should gather up the standard, holding it very firmly with your left so it does not touch the ground. This is performed after the lesson we proposed above. You can also raise the flag with the same hand while leaving it unfurled.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|66|lbl=54}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:La Bandiera (Alfieri) 28.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''On unsheathing the sword for defence'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Chapter XXVI</p><br />
<br />
<p>Dangers arise when you least expect them, bravery allows us to fight, but victory depends on skill, to defend yourself in incidents both in war and peace. First your should quickly gather the standard, drawing your sword over your left arm, and turning the shaft towards your enemy, you should set yourself into a strong guard to resist against any offensive.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|68|lbl=56}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:La Bandiera (Alfieri) 29.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''On the guard of sword and flag'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Chapter XXVII</p><br />
<br />
<p>Defending yourself is so natural that the law still allows it against those who attack us in vendetta. If the ensign or other person is placed in this situation he should quickly gather and set the standard so that it does not block his view, but rather protects with its sheer volume.<p><br />
<br />
<p>The arm should be somewhat bent, with the hand held in ''terza'', keeping his body in profile so it is better covered and presents a smaller target. The body should be balanced over his left leg, the nearby right foot remaining free and unencumbered, thereby able to press his enemy. He should set his stride, not too forced, and move to gain ground, the sword denying tempo and measure by anticipating his enemy's actions. The response should be faster than the call. Cuts should be parried from ''tutta coperta''<ref>Literally “totally covered”, this describes a guard or posture in which your opponent has no direct line of attack, as demonstrated for example in chapters XXV and XXXIV of Alfieri's 1640 treatise on rapier fencing.</ref> or defended with voids of the body, while wounding with the point. If the enemy waits then he should be pressured, put into obedience and deceived; teaching the enemy, the threatener of life, that he is not worthy of the pleasure of living.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|70|lbl=58}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:La Bandiera (Alfieri) 03.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''On gathering the flag'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Chapter XXVIII</p><br />
<br />
<p>Having finished the lessons the flag is gathered and carried in your left hand, keeping the edges wrapped over, with your arm supporting the shaft.</p><br />
<br />
<p>These plates, made by a good engraver, if they are followed by whomever delights in such exercises, will credit my work, and have often relieved me of toil.<ref>Note that this final plate is simply reused from chapter I.</ref></p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|72|lbl=60}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>'''Conclusion'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>I have arrived at the end of what I proposed. I confess my shortcomings, but nonetheless I will serve as a stimulus to others who understand more, to discover what I have not known, and demonstrate it in a style beyond the capacity of my intellect.</p><br />
<br />
<p>In this apathetic century it is difficult to please. Those who look at my soul will see what it yearns for. Meanwhile I console myself that a wise man is always understated.<ref>Again this passage is later self-plagiarised in the conclusion to Alfieri's 1653 treatise on the spadone.</ref></p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|74|lbl=62}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| class="noline" | <br />
| class="noline" | <p>'''For Printing in Padua.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Brother Antonius Lendenaria, Inquisitor General of Padua, seen and approved.</p><br />
<br />
<p>On the 6th September 1638.<br/>Commissioner General of the Holy Office of Venice, seen and approved.<br/>''Brother Fulgentio de Servi.''</p><br />
<br />
<p>On the 21st day of October 1638.<br/>Registered with the Most Excellent Magistrature against Blasphemy on page 125.<br/>''Angelo Battisti.''</p><br />
<br />
<p>{ Battisti Nani, Magistrate.<br/>{ Gierolimo Trivisan, Magistrate.<br/>{ Pietro Foscarini, Magistrate.</p><br />
<br />
<p>''Alvise Querini Secretary.''</p><br />
| class="noline" | {{pagetb|Page:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|75|lbl=63}}<br />
<br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = ''La Picca'' ("The Pike")<br />
| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>Illustrations<br/></p><br />
! <p>{{rating|c}}<br/>by [[Piermarco Terminiello]]<br />
! <p>[[La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri)|Transcription]] (1641){{edit index|La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf}}<br/>by [[Andrea Conti]]</p><br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[file:La Picca (Alfieri) 01.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''The Pike by Francesco Alfieri'''</p><br />
<p>Master of Arms of the most illustrious Accademia Delia in Padua. </p><br />
<br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf|1|lbl=i}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[file:La Picca (Alfieri) 03.png|2250x250px|center]]<br />
<br/><br />
[[file:La Picca (Alfieri) 02.png|2250x250px|center]]<br />
| | <p>'''Most Illustrious Sir and Honourable Patron'''</p><br />
<p>The acquisition by your most illustrious house of the domain of Ortenburg, a most noble county in the Empire in Carinthia, was to me - as your most devoted servant, so joyful that I could not comprehend it in my heart. I was obliged to communicate it to the world with this present book, which as a living testimony of my infinite obligations I dedicate to the immortality of your most illustrious name. </p><br />
<p>The gift is small, and greatly disproportionate compared to the greatness of your merits, while in comparison my talents are also meagre. However, they are not without esteem, when they have the fortune to be accompanied by your favour. </p><br />
<p>I dedicated my treatise on the flag to Your Most Illustrious Excellency, which you were pleased to enjoy. Although all that can be acknowledged as singular in it is my veneration, my spirit - ever in a tone of respect, gives me hope that you will equally enjoy this brief treatise on the pike. </p><br />
<p>The laudable labours of intellect should by every right be offered to Your Most Illustrious Excellency, who for the splendour of the sublime virtues all around you, will at all times be beyond all compare. </p> <br />
<p>In which gentlemanly art shall you not prevail? Which science, that in arms or civilian life can render one respected, in you does not merit to be admired? I think not to speak at length of your qualities, which is not a weight for my shoulders, I speak with the tongue of all, which is moved only by the truth. May Your Most Illustrious Excellency enjoy, with every peace, the possession of many goods, and be it my glory to be named among those who in perpetuity depend upon your gestures. To Your Most Illustrious Excellency I bow. </p> <br />
<p>From Padua the 28th March 1641. </p><br />
<br />
<p>To Your Most Illustrious Excellency</p><br />
<br />
<p>Your most humble servant</p><br />
<br />
<p>Francesco Alfieri. </p><br />
<br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf|3|lbl=iii|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf|4|lbl=iv|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[file:La Picca (Alfieri) 04.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>'''TO THE READER. ''' </p><br />
<p>It was not long ago that you saw my ''La Scherma'' come off the presses. The first essay of my labours was ''La Bandiera''. Now I add ''La Picca''. The book is not long, but it is complete. These days brevity is prized, especially if not due to omission of elements necessary, for the work not to be deficient.</p><br />
<p>I have condensed all of the art into a few figures, or at least the true foundations of the art. Subtle and practised intellects may find various innovations which are not here within, but one who has well grasped what I demonstrate will know that they are superfluous, or without difficulty. It has always been my aim to guide students to perfection through clear streets, approved by the good, and not confuse them with contrivances and fantasies, which only serve to waste time. </p><br />
<p>I wish to satisfy the desires of all, and if the style or the material is not valid for this aim, I should be pitied all the more, because the intention I had to please the public made me wish for more than I could have. </p><br />
<br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf|9|lbl=03}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>'''TABLE OF CHAPTERS: ''' </p><br />
<br />
<p>On the pike Chapter I</p><br />
<p>One the use of the pike Chapter II</p><br />
<p>On the difference between the pike in play and in war Chapter III</p><br />
<p>On picking up the pike Chapter IV</p><br />
<p>On grasping the pike Chapter V</p><br />
<p>On marching with the pike at your shoulder Chapter VI</p><br />
<p>On arming the pike Chapter VII</p><br />
<p>On the raised pike Chapter VIII</p><br />
<p>How the captain bears the pike in formation Chapter IX</p><br />
<p>On the pike in places where in cannot be raised Chapter X</p><br />
<p>On carrying the pike when retreating, etc. Chapter XI</p><br />
<p>On sliding the pike, and on the sword Chapter XII</p><br />
<p>On the pike and sword in battle Chapter XIII</p><br />
<p>On raising the pike to your shoulder while holding your sword in hand Chapter XIV</p><br />
<p>On putting the sword in its sheath Chapter XV</p><br />
<p>Conclusion of the work Chapter XVI</p><br />
<br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf|10|lbl=04}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>'''On the Pike by Francesco Ferdinando Alfieri'''</p><br />
<p>Chapter I</p><br />
<p>Man is by nature difficult to content. To take away the opportunity for conflict, the lands were divided, and domains introduced. Each began by recognising their own, and almost all at once, either to protect theirs or to occupy that of their neighbour, they came to war. For war they discovered weapons, and among the first was the pike. All things, at the beginning are rough, and bit by bit are improved. In this manner the pike was initially used without the refinement to which it has been distilled. Before iron was discovered, the shaft was armed with sharp stones, bones, and similar materials apt to harm, and in this way they fought. </p><br />
<p>Having discovered iron, it was placed at one and by many peoples at both extremities, in the form that was believed most piercing, and strongest in attack. Its length and width varied depending on how more or less robust were the nations who used it. The Assyrians were the first, who in the opinion of many serious authors carried them in war, this province having had the first kingdoms and lordships. The Jews, whose armies blossomed because the great prophet Moses had learned from God, ordered their units armed with the pike, as clearly seen several times in the Bible. The battles they fought in Palestine, against those condemned by divine justice to be defeated by the chosen people, were conducted by armies who fought with polearms. The Persians also used it, and honed their skill in wielding it, as the great commander Cyrus, alongside military discipline, introduced the art of training. </p> <br />
<p>After the Persians, the glory of arms flourished in Greece. They too held it in esteem, as you see from the lives of Palamedes, Philopomenes, Miltiades, Themistocles, and other warriors of great renown: Athenians, Lacedaemonians, and Thebans. Philip of Macedon, who learned expertise at arms from Lysis, <ref> According to tradition Lysis of Taras was both a student of Pythagoras and teacher to Epaminondas, although since this would make him impossibly old perhaps two historical figures were conflated. Epaminondas was a renowned Theban general from whom Philip learned in his youth, as a hostage in Thebes. </ref> formed his phalanx armed with polearms, with which his son Alexander the Great subjugated little less than the world. The Republic of Rome, in all of its virtues superior, including in the power it held on earth, had its "hastati", and with this weapon the name of its legions inspired terror. </p> <br />
<p>But to approach our times, omitting to recall Uguccione dalla Faggiola, and in particular the famous Castruccio Castracani, who propelled the military disciplines forward having been long neglected, the Swiss will always be immortal for their pikes, with their skill in using them, having been the arbiters of victory in Italy. Everyone knows the level they rose to, when the wars became more merciless for the state of Milan; which was stripped from Ludovico il Moro, his son Maximillian, Luis XII the King of France, and Francis I. Because the Emperor took every effort to return the Sforzas to the duchy, there followed the celebrated feats of arms at Novara, Bicocca and elsewhere, which will stand as eternal testimony to the valour of that free nation of thirteen cantons. Therefore, none can doubt the antiquity, nobility, and marvellous effect of the pike; and it is very certain that as such should be considered this art, and that worthy always of praise shall be those, who wishing to follow the fortunes of war, undertake with every care to learn it. </p><br />
<br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf|11|lbl=05|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf|12|lbl=06|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf|13|lbl=07|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf|14|lbl=08|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>On the use of the pike</p><br />
<p>Chapter II</p><br />
<p>To make good use of the pike it is necessary to know its length and nature. Regarding its length, ordinarily it is nine ''braccia'',<ref> The ''braccio'' (plural: ''braccia'') was an Italian pre-metric unit of measurement. Its length varied by region, although the Venetian and Paduan braccio appear to have been approximately 68.3cm. This was would make Alfieri’s pike approximately 6.12 meters (or 20 foot) long.</ref> as to its nature it should be made of smooth ash, the wood well-seasoned. </p><br />
<p>In earlier times it was carried without defensive arms, to be wielded with more agility, and because people had not become so ingenious in attack. However, since in this manner it wounded only at a distance, and if the enemy closed it was not possible to resist his impetus, every hope having been placed in the polearm, through experience it became clear that used in this way it was of little consequence. For this reason, soldiers were further equipped with a rather short and broad sword, to be quick and apt for cutting, and also a dagger, a much-esteemed weapon at close quarters. </p><br />
<p>Also, since pikemen serve to form the body of the troops, and to absorb the clash and impetus of horses, in order not to be scattered they nowadays cover themselves with their tassets, <ref> Plate armour designed to protect the upper thighs.</ref> bracers, gauntlets, gorgets, and morions, <ref> A type of helmet, first used by the Spanish, usually with a flat brim and a crest from front to back.</ref> such that half of their body is well-armoured. Because of this they can easily thwart attempts and efforts of the enemy, all the more so if the garrison stretches out on the sides of the battlefield, being lines of as many musketeers as the pikes can cover. </p><br />
<p>The pike should therefore be of a determined size, in proportion to the stature and strength of the men, bearing their defensive arms, which without impeding the soldiers increases their confidence and disposes them to fortitude. </p><br />
<br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf|15|lbl=09|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf|16|lbl=10|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>On the difference between the pike in play and in war</p><br />
<p>Chapter III</p><br />
<p>Since many only enjoy criticising, some will say right at the beginning that there is pike for combat, and pike for play. I know very well that in the field, in front of the enemy you do not think of pomp, or to show your dexterity, nor your grace, nor do you arrive at certain actions that serve to delight more than to wound. </p><br />
<p>But we are permitted to ask these people whether such knowledge of handling the pike is advantageous; whether the art of thrusting without entangling and confusing yourself facilitates superiority. Knowing the tempo and when to exploit it, being ready to use the haft in different ways, and putting your hand to the sword are essential elements in war, and these are learned primarily in the academies, where they demonstrate the methods that you practise in play. It is impossible to know how important and useful it is to a soldier, to grasp all that can be done with the weapon, that by its election must be the instrument of his honour, and of his fortunes. </p><br />
<p>If someone completely new is deployed, and it is necessary to fight somewhere narrow, you cannot see anything more ridiculous and useless; if he wishes to put his hand to his sword and his pike falls, or if he must change face he will crash into and harm either his line or those close by. In the end it will not be good either for him or his captain. This does not happen to one who is practised in the art, because one who possesses what is most difficult also possesses what is most straightforward in the same art. </p><br />
<p>However, one who knows who to make the pike fly, how to make it slide and run in every direction will not tangle himself up, nor give occasion through his harm to be mocked. They are therefore different, but in play you encompass everything that is necessary in war, where only those who know make progress. Because as the saying goes, nobody has doubts in something they know to have learned well. To attain this knowledge, you must practise, and you must commend that which makes you familiar with those precepts that conduct you to your aims. Sweat in the more difficult things, to delight in them, so they turn out more to your liking, malleable to your thoughts. </p><br />
<br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf|17|lbl=11|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf|18|lbl=12|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf|19|lbl=13|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="4" | [[file:La Picca (Alfieri) 05.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>On picking up the pike</p><br />
<p>Chapter IV</p><br />
<p>I arrive at the demonstrations, and at the figures, which teach much more effectively than discourses, because seeing the designs of the postures, and the methods that you must observe to imitate them, lifts all doubts that could emerge from weakness in learning. </p><br />
<p>Here, we must firstly learn how to lift the pike from the ground. This can be achieved equally with the forehand as with the backhand, as is universally observed. However, you must ensure to grasp the pike firmly, and raising it in the air should be accomplished in a single indivisible tempo, holding your body straight, without twists, and having lifted it, with your hand in place, it should slide close to your right thigh. </p><br />
<p>If the pike is resting against a wall, in order for it not to tumble, or to avoid grasping it with two hands with no little inconvenience, it can be picked up in two ways. Either you place your left foot at the base so that it stays still, as the French do, or with your right foot to the same effect, as is customary for the Spanish. </p><br />
<p>Remember to be graceful with every motion, ensuring to grasp the pike by keeping your thumb extended under the haft, with your right hand situated level with your sword. </p><br />
| {{section|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf/20|1|lbl=14}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf/20|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf/20|3|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf/22|1|lbl=15|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
<br />
| {{section|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf/22|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="3" | [[file:La Picca (Alfieri) 06.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>On grasping the pike in order to march</p><br />
<p>Chapter V</p><br />
<p>In wishing to march with the pike raised, as shown by the figure, three tempi are necessary in order to raise it. </p><br />
<p>The first is to lift the pike enough that it is a little higher than your head, holding the pike with your left hand in line with your flank. </p><br />
<p>The second is performed by hoisting the pike up to the given level, quickly bringing your right hand to the butt. </p><br />
<p>The third consists in bearing the pike entirely with your right hand, with it resting between your arm and shoulder, as is clear from the design. </p><br />
<br />
| {{section|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf/22|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf/22|4|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf/22|5|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="2" | [[file:La Picca (Alfieri) 07.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>On marching with the pike at your shoulder</p><br />
<p>Chapter VI</p><br />
<p>To carry the pike at your shoulder, the following rules hold true. Your elbow should not be forced, therefore being neither too high, nor bent towards the ground, because one is weak, the other is not very graceful. Your hand should be held quiet far from your shoulder, with your left bent into your flank. In this manner you can change face, and move the pike while turning your body, without disordering yourself. </p><br />
<p>If you must pass before some prince, or minister and official of war, you show your respects in the following manner. First you shift your view, and when you are before them you lower your gaze, turning your body somewhat towards them, pulling your right leg behind, and bending your knee, while maintaining the gravitas required by the military. </p><br />
<br />
| {{section|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf/24|1|lbl=18}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf/24|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="2" | [[file:La Picca (Alfieri) 08.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>On arming the pike, or placing yourself in guard</p><br />
<p>Chapter VII</p><br />
<p>After having demonstrated how you pick up, and raise the pike, and how you march with it, we arrive at the action used to wound. </p><br />
<p>To keep your body well-structured, you should keep your left foot forward. Your right hand holds the haft at the butt, and with your other hand level with your chest your arm is bent in an arc, your elbow having to support the pike. You can also extend your step, and having extended your strike you should always withdraw your left arm to the given position, returning to the same guard in which, whether the enemy is pressing or retreating, you step. </p><br />
<p>If you must change face, you move your right foot forward, and having lowered the butt to the ground, you raise the point in a straight line, thereby coming to a stop in this posture. If you wish to change face without changing your step, while performing the same motion with the pike, you switch hands, such that in place of your right you find your left. </p><br />
<br />
| {{section|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf/26|1|lbl=20}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf/26|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="2" | [[file:La Picca (Alfieri) 09.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>On the raised pike, for staying in formation, or else on parade, and stepping</p><br />
<p>Chapter VIII</p><br />
<p>How the pike must be held while in formation, or on parade, is evident from the figure, and without uncertainties. However, how you walk with the pike is not observed in the same manner everywhere. The Spanish use a wide step, which is the custom of the ancients, the French use a much smaller step, which is followed in modern times. Either method can be defended as good, but a moderate step, which is neither wide nor narrow, is far superior to both. </p><br />
<p>In employing this method, the soldier must be advised to keep his body straight, his arm bent, and for the pike to anticipate his right foot. It accompanies it in every way, such that in beginning to step, the right arm is extended, and in bringing forward the left foot it comes back, without raising the haft too far from the ground, with your hand always adjusted to your shoulder. Without exceptions this method is comfortable, and very natural, as you can understand from the figure. </p><br />
<p>If it happens that you must revere a prince or general, in this case, having stopped, you will pull back your left leg (as the most free), and slightly bend your knee, with military gravitas. During this entire action keep the pike fixed and immobile, and having finished return to your step. </p><br />
<br />
| {{section|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf/28|1|lbl=22}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf/28|2|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf/30|1|lbl=24|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[file:La Picca (Alfieri) 10.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>How the captain bears the pike in formation</p><br />
<p>Chapter IX</p><br />
<p>We should learn from the figure opposite the proper manner for a captain to bear the pike in formation, which is ordinarily practised in one of two ways. The first is to carry it on the shoulder, which makes it very heavy. The second is the hold it the middle of the haft, and this is new, practised by the guard of the King of France, to be comfortable, useful, and prompt in attack; and to display various skills by bring your hand to the butt, then to the point, making the pike slide from one to the other, depending on the inclination of its wielder. Such curiosities accrue credit, and love towards the solider, and are very useful by serving as testimony that you are proficient in the use of your weapons. </p><br />
| {{section|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf/30|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[file:La Picca (Alfieri) 11.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>On the pike in places where in cannot be raised</p><br />
<p>Chapter X</p><br />
<p>The sites where arms are used are not always of the same nature: combat may occur in the open countryside, or sometimes in the woods. If in guarding a location you are forced to drag the pike, your options for holding it are reduced to only two. The first is with your right hand close to the point. The second is with both hands, seeking to keep your thumbs extended along the length of the haft, this is useful for operating it with grace, which is the soul of everything we do in this profession. It is carried short in this way, and in line with your flank, the circumstance not allowing you to stand in the act of attacking. </p><br />
<p>If you must stay inside a gateway or another site, in order to wait for others to pass and demand their names, an office for those on sentry duty, you can still win and take control of your enemy’s weapons; a thought worthy of any honourable soldier; who deserves to be preferred to others insofar as he exceeds them in the use of such arms in which the hopes of progress are placed. However, it is always necessary to practise, and to train in academies, so you can readily employ them as the need requires. To know how to wield them in any location, and to extract from the art that defence which is acquired through play. </p><br />
<br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf|32|lbl=26|p=1}} {{section|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf/34|1|lbl=28|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[file:La Picca (Alfieri) 12.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>On carrying the pike when retreating, and changing face during the retreat</p><br />
<p>Chapter XI</p><br />
<p>Battles are uncertain, some are won and some are lost, and it often happens that you must flee. Arriving at this juncture, standing in guard to fight, you abandon the pike with your left hand. Keeping it in your right, with the same grip, you merely have to turn your back, leaving behind your arm as you see in the design. </p><br />
<p>If you wish to stand firm, and change face, you turn your body, and quickly bring back your right foot, and in rotating your arm you raise the pike in the air. By meeting it as it falls with your left, you come to be in guard. These actions are possible with many embellishments: sliding, throwing, half-throws, and other contrivances, which are typical in academies. </p><br />
<br />
| {{section|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf/34|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[file:La Picca (Alfieri) 13.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>On sliding the pike, and on the sword</p><br />
<p>Chapter XII</p><br />
<p>In this design we see the method for sliding the pike back, until it rests on your left hand near the head. The soldier finds his left flank forward, and wishing to avail himself of his arms, and not abandon them, flips over his left hand, which he must use to pass the pike over his head. With this motion he returns to his natural posture, holding the pike, and after can easily put his hand to his sword, without disordering himself by drawing it over his left arm, without moving his feet. </p><br />
<p>In this way he can easily employ both of them together, to better resist, and fight with the advantage of two weapons, which is obvious to those who know how important this is, and who dedicate themselves to the military arts. However, the prudent never have their fill of practising and learning: demonstrating their strength and agility by throwing the pike in different ways, letting it slide from the point down to the butt, and extracting a thousand new discoveries, all contributing to the completeness of this art. </p><br />
<br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf|36|lbl=30}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[file:La Picca (Alfieri) 14.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>On the pike and sword in battle</p><br />
<p>Chapter XIII</p><br />
<p>Here we demonstrate the use of the pike with the sword. It takes great skill to slide the pike as needed, back and forth with your left hand, a member which itself is weak and poorly disposed, rendered able only through practice. In switching arms, you perform various slides of the pike, always staying in good order, the weapons ready to defend and attack; whether advancing and pressing the enemy, or retreating. Nor will they impede you changing face, and executing what is suggested by good judgement and necessity, when the solider does not have to change course in these two extremes.</p><br />
<br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf|38|lbl=32}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[file:La Picca (Alfieri) 15.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>On raising the pike to your shoulder while holding your sword in hand</p><br />
<p>Chapter XIV</p><br />
<p>The material in this chapter reveals many new discoveries, such as simultaneously changing face and switching hands, sliding, launching the pike, and everything that constitutes the art.</p> <br />
<p>The present method is very proper, quick, and the surest of all. The solider finds himself as shown in the design. Wishing to raise the haft he must lift his elbow level with his shoulder. With it firmly in place he will quickly pass his hand under his neck, and he will grasp the pike by turning his palm. Then he extends his arm, and the haft falls to the ground with ostentatious grace.</p><br />
<br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf|40|lbl=34}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| class="noline" | [[file:La Picca (Alfieri) 16.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <p>On raising the pike to your shoulder while holding your sword in hand</p><br />
<p>Chapter XV</p><br />
<p>All professors labour to develop what has been discovered, or to refine it. We have demonstrated the progress of the art, without too many subtle niceties, which are difficult to represent without being verbose, and which can only be learned under the discipline of someone teaching. </p><br />
<p>We are at the last lesson, and this one in itself is very clear, even though it has its particularities, in many regards not very common. I know that in any place where you find the pike, that without abandoning it you can sheath your sword. However, having it raised, resting straight on your shoulder, keeping the butt by the point of your foot, as presented by the figure, staying nicely firm and tight, is a method with much grace and great facility. </p><br />
<p>Afterwards you are free to take the pole depending upon on your intention and the occasion, and with the sword at your side you can adopt a regular stance, and with a gravity that does not show affectation, you can make peace with your labours. </p><br />
<br />
| class="noline" | <br />
{{pagetb|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf|42|lbl=36|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf|44|lbl=38|p=1}}<br />
|- <br />
|<br />
| <p>Conclusion of this work</p><br />
<p>Chapter XVI</p><br />
<p>There were the brief lessons that I promised, and here is the summary to which I alluded at the start. I did not speak at length in my explanations, to avoid repeating the same things many times, and because in a sense the figures speak for themselves. My spirit is great, but my strength betrays me. Nonetheless I wish to show you in another book the "spadone", the use of hafted weapons at the barriers, the use of the poleaxe, and of sabres. <ref> Alfieri published his treatise on the spadone in 1653, unfortunately there is no evidence the other works suggested here were ever produced.<br />
<br />
The reference to the sabre is noteworthy, since the earliest technical coverage of the sabre in an Italian treatise by Marcelli in 1686, over forty years later. Alfieri refers to the sabre in the plural as sable, the singular of which would be sabla. This is much closer to the Spanish word sable, or the Polish word szabla for example than to the modern Italian term sciabola, or the term Marcelli uses (sciabla), which arguably suggests connections outside the Italian peninsula.</ref> In the meantime, receive this sign of my affection, and if I was not able to delight you much with words, perhaps you will find me more practised in action. </p><br />
<br />
|<br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = ''La Scherma'' ("On Fencing")<br />
| width = 100%<br />
}}<br />
<br />
{{master subsection begin<br />
| title = Introduction<br />
| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>Illustrations<br/></p><br />
! <p>{{rating}}<br/></p><br />
! <p>[[La Scherma (Francesco Fernando Alfieri)|Transcription]] (1653){{edit index|L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf}}<br/>by [[Andrea Conti]]</p><br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[file:La Scherma (Alfieri) 01.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Scherma (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1640.pdf|7|lbl=i}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[file:La Scherma (Alfieri) 02.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| {{pagetb|Page:La Scherma (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1640.pdf|9|lbl=iii}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Alfieri) 01.png|400x400px|center|border]]<br />
| <br />
| {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|1|lbl=i}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Alfieri) 02.png|400x400px|center|border]]<br />
| <br />
| {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|2|lbl=ii}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Alfieri) 04.png|400x400px|center|border]]<br />
<br/><br />
[[File:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Alfieri) 03.png|400x400px|center|border]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|5|lbl=v|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|6|lbl=vi|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Alfieri) 05.png|400x400px|center|border]]<br />
| <br />
| {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|8|lbl=viii}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|9|lbl=ix}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|10|lbl=x}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| class="noline" | <br />
| class="noline" | <br />
| class="noline" | <br />
{{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|11|lbl=xi|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|12|lbl=xii|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|}<br />
{{master subsection end}}<br />
<br />
{{master subsection begin<br />
| title = First Part<br />
| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>Illustrations<br/></p><br />
! <p>{{rating}}<br/></p><br />
! <p>[[La Scherma (Francesco Fernando Alfieri)|Transcription]] (1653){{edit index|L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf}}<br/>by [[Andrea Conti]]</p><br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/13|1|lbl=xiii-iv}}<br />
{{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/14|1|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Alfieri) 05'.png|400x400px|center|border]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|15|lbl=01|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|16|lbl=02|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|17|lbl=03|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|18|lbl=04|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|19|lbl=05|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|20|lbl=06|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|21|lbl=07|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|22|lbl=08|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|23|lbl=09|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|24|lbl=10|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|25|lbl=11|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|26|lbl=12|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|27|lbl=13|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|28|lbl=14|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|29|lbl=15|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|30|lbl=16|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|31|lbl=17|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|32|lbl=18|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|33|lbl=19|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|34|lbl=20|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|35|lbl=21|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|36|lbl=22|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|37|lbl=23|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|38|lbl=24|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|39|lbl=25|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|40|lbl=26|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|41|lbl=27|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|42|lbl=28|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|43|lbl=29|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|44|lbl=30|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|45|lbl=31|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|46|lbl=32|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|47|lbl=33|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|48|lbl=34|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|49|lbl=35|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|50|lbl=36|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|51|lbl=37|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|52|lbl=38|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|53|lbl=39|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|54|lbl=40|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|55|lbl=41|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|56|lbl=42|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|57|lbl=43|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|58|lbl=44|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|59|lbl=45|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|60|lbl=46|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|61|lbl=47|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|62|lbl=48|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|63|lbl=49|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|64|lbl=50|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|65|lbl=51|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|66|lbl=52|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|67|lbl=53|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|68|lbl=54|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|69|lbl=55|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|70|lbl=56|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|71|lbl=57|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|72|lbl=58|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|73|lbl=59|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|74|lbl=60|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|75|lbl=61|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|76|lbl=62|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|77|lbl=63|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|78|lbl=64|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|79|lbl=65|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|80|lbl=66|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|81|lbl=67|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|82|lbl=68|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|83|lbl=69|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|84|lbl=70|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|85|lbl=71|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|86|lbl=72|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|87|lbl=73|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|88|lbl=74|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|89|lbl=75|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|90|lbl=76|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| class="noline" | <br />
| class="noline" | <br />
| class="noline" | <br />
{{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|91|lbl=77|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|92|lbl=78|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|}<br />
{{master subsection end}}<br />
<br />
{{master subsection begin<br />
| title = Second Part<br />
| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>Illustrations<br/></p><br />
! <p>{{rating}}<br/></p><br />
! <p>[[La Scherma (Francesco Fernando Alfieri)|Transcription]] (1653){{edit index|L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf}}<br/>by [[Andrea Conti]]</p><br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Alfieri) 06.png|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|93|lbl=79}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/95|1|lbl=81-83}} {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/96|1|lbl=-}} {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/97|1|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="5" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 03.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/98|1|lbl=84}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/98|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/98|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/98|4|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/98|5|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="3" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 04.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/100|1|lbl=86}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/100|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/100|3|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/102|1|lbl=88|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="5" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 05.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/102|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/102|3|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/104|1|lbl=90|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/104|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/104|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/104|4|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="3" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 06.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/104|5|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/106|1|lbl=92|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/106|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/106|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="6" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 07.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/106|4|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/108|1|lbl=94|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/108|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/108|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/108|4|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/109|1|lbl=95}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/109|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="6" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 08.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/110|1|lbl=96}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/110|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/110|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/110|4|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/110|5|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/112|1|lbl=98}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="6" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 09.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/112|2|lbl=-|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/112|3|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/114|1|lbl=100|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/114|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/114|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/114|4|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/114|5|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="3" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 10.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/114|6|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/116|1|lbl=102|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/116|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/116|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="5" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 11.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/116|4|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/118|1|lbl=104}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/118|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/118|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/118|4|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="5" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 12.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/118|5|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/120|1|lbl=106|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/120|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/120|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/120|4|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/120|5|lbl=-|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|121|lbl=107|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="5" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 13.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/122|1|lbl=108}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/122|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/124|1|lbl=110}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/124|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/124|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="4" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 14.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/124|4|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/126|1|lbl=112}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/126|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/126|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="4" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 15.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/126|4|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/128|1|lbl=114}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/128|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/128|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="4" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 16.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/128|4|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/128|5|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/130|1|lbl=116|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/130|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/130|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="6" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 17.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/130|4|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/132|1|lbl=118}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/132|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/132|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/132|4|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/132|5|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="4" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 18.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/132|6|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/134|1|lbl=120}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/134|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/134|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="4" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 19.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/134|4|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/136|1|lbl=122|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/136|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/136|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/136|4|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="4" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 20.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/136|5|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/138|1|lbl=124|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/138|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/138|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/138|4|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="9" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 21.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/138|5|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/140|1|lbl=126}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/140|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/140|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/140|4|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/140|5|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/140|6|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/141|1|lbl=127}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/141|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="2" | <br />
<div style="margin:150px auto 0 auto; text-align:center;"><br />
[Unillustrated chapter]<br />
</div><br />
| <br />
| {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|142|lbl=128}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|143|lbl=129}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="3" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 22.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/144|1|lbl=130}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/144|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/144|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="5" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 23.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/146|1|lbl=132}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/146|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/146|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/146|4|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/146|5|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="4" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 24.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/148|1|lbl=134}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/148|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/148|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/148|4|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="3" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 25.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/150|1|lbl=136}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/150|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/150|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="6" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 26.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/152|1|lbl=138}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/152|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/152|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/152|4|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/152|5|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/152|6|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="6" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 27.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/154|1|lbl=140}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/154|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/154|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/154|4|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/154|5|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/154|6|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="4" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 28.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/156|1|lbl=142}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/156|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/156|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/156|4|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="4" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 29.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/158|1|lbl=144}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/158|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/158|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/158|4|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="3" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 30.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/160|1|lbl=146}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/160|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/160|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="5" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 31.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/162|1|lbl=148}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/162|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/162|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/162|4|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/162|5|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="5" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 32.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/164|1|lbl=150}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/164|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/164|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/164|4|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/164|5|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
<div style="margin:150px auto 0 auto; text-align:center;"><br />
[Unillustrated chapter]<br />
</div><br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|166|lbl=152|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|167|lbl=153|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="6" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 33.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/168|1|lbl=154}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/168|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/168|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/168|4|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/168|5|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/168|6|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="6" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 34.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/170|1|lbl=156}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/170|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/170|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/170|4|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/170|5|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/170|6|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="3" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 35.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/172|1|lbl=158}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/172|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/172|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="4" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 36.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/174|1|lbl=160}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/174|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/174|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/174|4|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="2" | [[File:La Scherma (Alfieri) 37.jpg|400x400px|center]]<br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/176|1|lbl=162}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/176|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/178|1|lbl=164}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/178|2|lbl=-|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|179|lbl=165|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|180|lbl=166}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/181|1|lbl=167}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| class="noline" | <br />
| class="noline" | <br />
| class="noline" | <br />
{{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/181|2|lbl=-|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|182|lbl=168|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|}<br />
{{master subsection end}}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = ''Lo Spadone'' ("The Greatsword")<br />
| width = 90em<br />
}}<br />
{| class="master"<br />
|- <br />
! <p>Illustrations<br/></p><br />
! <p>{{rating|C}}<br/>by [[James Clark]]</p><br />
! <p>[[L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri)|Transcription]] (1653){{edit index|L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf}}<br/>by [[Andrea Conti]]</p><br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Alfieri) Spadone 1.png|400x400px|center|border]]<br />
| <br />
| {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|185|lbl=xvii}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/187|1|lbl=xix-x}}<br />
{{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/188|1|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>'''Of the Spadone, by Francesco Fernando Alfieri'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>'''Chapter 1'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>It is certain, that between all these exercises and humanly arts, no practice is any more excellent nor illustrious, nor utilitarian than the martial arts. That with this, one will defend the region, expand the religion, vindicate the injustices, stabilize the peace, and facilitate the people. The ancient and famous republic, which we serve by example, and stimulates us to set out to the road that we conduct to civil happiness, they have in the meantime esteemed the art and agility that deems those which were in their solemnity judged with more force, and more velocity, than the others. We do display those gifts that we have received from nature and aggrandized with the art; these exercises were common place yet from the first centuries to the Italian nation, the exercise of the spadone is commended in as much in that the foot knows to be ready, one makes the body flexible, the hand acquires force, and one loosens the arm; we remember your origin, and who was the first, that placed it in use and aggrandized said salute, which was in the reign of Ninus, then in the Asian Cyrus, in Greece and Sparta and the Athenians, and themselves passed to Rome. Understood of possessing public academies, in which venues professors trained the youth so that not being of doubt of the ancient and marvelous effects of the Spadone, and who perfectly expect good handling and the necessary exercises in the art that otherwise has no use than to tangle and envelope the hands, which does not happen to one tested, that coming against the enemy, having readied the terms that will be appropriate to the case, making vigorous the virtue and accompanied with the vendetta. To this therefore, that without other speeches I know this virtue will easily venture to arrive at perfection that he desires, observing however the lessons of the following figures, which make clear this particularity: that hardly one can declare with words & both end this discourse of this weapon.</p><br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|189|lbl=xxi|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|190|lbl=xxii|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>'''Of the art Around the Operations with the Spadone'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>''Chapter 2''</p><br />
<br />
<p>In this art one will consider the theory, and the practice; The theory is the method, how we must work with the weapon in hand against the enemy, an how one must walk with the feet, and bring the arm, and yet know to pull the body, which we learn in various and diverse manners, which serves to offend, and to defend, as one does with forehand and backhand horizontal cuts, and scalpers, montanti, strammazone, diagonals, make beats, and wheels, molinelli, bending the body and pulling the point and cuts in various and diverse guise. And as one brings, hurling, circling from one part, and hurling through the other, going forth, and you will return, in many methods that the art demonstrates, and with this exercise and study you will increase the ardor, by stretching from the people brimming with sanguine humor, brought to make injury, and who well know themselves worth this artificious weapon of the spadone, are able to go against all opposing weapons, by having it very advantageously, and in all places the man himself is able to defend, as in a large and narrow street, as in the plaza, and in the field, that he will assail the enemies before him and behind him. This noble exercise is much frequented in my school by Italian, Polish, French, and German men, and other regarded subjects of diverse nations and whom do acquire the speed and fortification with the body, and make the agility, and rouse the intelligence adorned by nature. But all studious armigers in the need can themselves be worthy of the excellence of the art, by defense of the life, and of the honor, as demonstration and discourse, and with the figure, clearly demonstrate.</p><br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|191|lbl=xxiii|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|192|lbl=xxiv|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>'''Of the Use, Length, and of the Strong and Weak of the Spadone'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>''Chapter 3''</p><br />
<br />
<p>With all my power I strive, that in this little volume you do not find those things that are not appropriate for experience nor experimentation, that neither accompany from reason, for many the studious gentleman will see the following figure the variety of sites and positions of the body, feet, and spadone, and to his whole will discourse about the nature of each, and the effect that from each they are able to bare, & one will discuss these happenings that easily brings one to understand where both tempo is used and has one and other reasons, and with that advantage, and method one should go against the enemy, even that man that has science can go as he pleases; because he finds in any method the creation of good results through the understanding of the art, which is the mistress of many offenses and defenses, bringing however the spadone in due method, and later the changes and occasions given by the adversary, one has from differently performing, because this, what is good in one place is not worthy in another. It’s blade is divided in two parts, the first near the hand is of much strength, and with which you are more to defend and resist any grand blow; the second that follows somewhat more weakly, but in the offense is the principle over many, not only the point, but the cut, such that the spadone comes to be sectioned half in defense, and half in offense, and its length must be very long, as long as a proportionate man, neither tall nor short, it must have two edges and must be very light to observe of this art, pulling the blows with cuts and point with great velocity and little fatigue; yet must have great hilt-fittings to ensure the hand orchestrates the principles of operation following the nature and rules of the art.</p><br />
| <br />
{{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|193|lbl=01|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|194|lbl=02|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>'''How you will Carry the Body and Feet to Meet Against the Enemy with the Spadone'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>''Chapter 4''</p><br />
<br />
<p>The body must bring good disposition, and simple without forcing, and upright with a cheerful expression, the method that after taking the hand to the spadone is able to go against the enemy, by taking any advantage, and free himself without any danger of the enemy injuring him.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/195|1|lbl=03}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>Wanting to move himself, the gentleman, to go against the adversary, must commence and carry the feet with ordinary steps, as appropriately brought forth in the stride, if well with somewhat more alacrity of motion, & the steps more brief, one will not ever enlarge their step, if not while the person is to make resistance against the enemy, than when he comes to offend, so alone as accompanied, and immediately with alacrity that is often the mother of fortune, closes the way that they are not able to come first to wound; Many have the opinion that when fighting one should look for the eyes, which I don’t understand on what it is based, seeing that never I have seen, nor understood, nor read that men are basilisks; I say that we should look at the length of the person that we intend to offend, and not just the eyes; the observation of this art can go against all sorts of honest weapons, and to resist against all kinds of adversaries, do from mastery of assisting the body and the spadone in such a way that one has more strength than the opposing weapons; however it is necessary to be abounding in starting out, to go to wound the enemy without stopping, as we shall say in their places in the following figures.</p><br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/195|2|lbl=-|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|196|lbl=04|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Alfieri) Spadone 2.png|400x400px|center|border]]<br />
| <p>'''The Method the Spadone must be Held Walking'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>''Chapter 5''</p><br />
<br />
<p>It has come time to deal with the way of carrying the spadone, which is a weapon of much utility, holds the enemy back, is not subject to any prohibition, and common in every province and of every Prince and authority. Many carry it as they like, and without rule: but because there are different ways, among which we’ll show only one is best; in which one considers the walking of the feet, the motion of the stride, and disposition of the body. The time wanting it carried without tedium, without any hindrance, so at night as by day, as alone as accompanied by friends.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/197|1|lbl=05}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>You must seize it with the right hand, as it is nobler, and with that you will place it in the left hand, and with it you will hold it resting on the same arm, as taught by the present figure, the gentleman remaining in this posture can travel, and being assaulted one to one, or by many men, can expediently without more time grasp with the right hand, unsheathe the spadone, and rely thereon to use it as the occasion requires.</p><br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/197|2|lbl=-|p=1}} {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|198|lbl=06|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Alfieri) Spadone 3.png|400x400px|center|border]]<br />
| <p>'''Of Gripping the Spadone: and Forming Yourself in Posture to Assail the Enemy.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>''Chapter 6''</p><br />
<br />
<p>In this discourse one will show that it is much more effective to teach the figure: they don’t make speeches, because seeing the drawn posture and manner that one must observe by imitating them, raising all doubts that could be born from the weakness of the oppressive. The following figure represents how you must in one indivisible time stop in the posture, keeping yourself free to be able to wait or assault according to his good pleasure.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/200|1|lbl=08}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>Wanting the gentleman to do the first lesson, it must begin with the two principle cuts, that is a forehand and backhand, and they are brought and at the same time accompanied from the right and left hand, lengthening the step, and the body, pulling the blow either down, or up, according to the place, and the time, these two cuts are pulled indifferently, and replicated more times. The forehand are pulled from the right part, and the backhand are pulled from the left hand, and whoever will well go examining and arguing with intellect will easily find the reasons for going against every one, as we reason in a place of one, and time in another, of the other following lesson.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/200|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Alfieri) Spadone 4.png|400x400px|center|border]]<br />
| <p>'''The First Method to Commence Handling the Spadone'''<br/><br/></p><br />
<br />
<p>''Chapter 7''</p><br />
<br />
<p>This lesson one will make three cuts that are worthy of being observed. One will by the subtlety and mastery of the blow seek to consider the impression of the present figure, with which he will commence the passage. And to attain the honor that one will desire, must the body be somewhat bent and disposed to the force; the arm has to be united, and take strength with both hands in gripping the spadone, and moving the natural yet generous step you will form from one time the first forehand strike, and the backhand second, and one will replicate many times such cuts, turning the body and the spadone with the hands turning over the head, and so one will go in this continuous way, both in going forward as in the return backwards, as is more effectively shown by the posture.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|202|lbl=10}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Alfieri) Spadone 5.png|400x400px|center|border]]<br />
| <p>'''The Head Guard of the Spadone: For Defending Yourself in an Ordinary Street.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>''Chapter 8''</p><br />
<br />
<p>The present figure serves to awaken the chance memory, which by the length of time and little use of my recollection given to living voice became out of mind. Now you are shown that all lessons are so ordered that one is linked with the other. Here we learn how you will pull the three cuts, making the head guard with the spadone. This not only serves to show the disposition and skill of those who exercise, but may be given the case that paragons of mastery practice it in combat. Therefore hold the arm outstretched, and give a round of three forehand cuts over the head, and the same is done with backhand cuts. You must at once spring forward without losing time. You will turn the hands together afterward, as seen in the demonstrated drawing. With the union of the right and left foot you will extend the strike, so forward as backward, having always regard for the exactness of the step so avoiding the disgrace which removes merit.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|204|lbl=12}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Alfieri) Spadone 4.png|400x400px|center|border]]<br />
| <p>'''How You Must in a Wide Space do the Three Crosses of the Spadone'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>''Chapter 9''</p><br />
<br />
<p>The present lessons are all taken from the real occasions of the matter, which for most happen hot-blooded, we have come to the method of doing the three crosses. By using it in the time that you are assaulted in a plaza or a large street by several people, and to do this you all know requires much judgement, but accompanied with resolution and skill as shown in the prefixed figure.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/206|1|lbl=14}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>The first cross will be split with two cuts from the forehand, accompanying it with the right foot, rotating the body and spadone around, and every single strike causes its motion, having the left foot firmly grounded, and the other which walks with the cuts two times. And then stopping the right foot, and commence with the left foot the same with two backhand cuts, and finish the two blows you will start as before with the right foot, and if it will from here pass to the right side, pull the same two forehand cuts, and stop the right foot when finished. And the left you will put to the left side and pull its two backhand cuts, and you will return then into the same place where you had started.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/206|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>The second cross you will do with three cuts of the forehand, and with three backhand cuts. The forehand cuts will be accompanied with the right foot, and the backhand with the left foot, turning the body three times with the spadone. You will however keep the said order.</p><br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/206|3|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/208|1|lbl=16|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>The third cross you will do four cuts, likewise of backhand cuts, replicating four turns per part, one forward, the other to behind, and the same will be done to the right flank, and left. Observing the rule which we have established with aforesaid discourse.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/208|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Alfieri) Spadone 3.png|400x400px|center|border]]<br />
| <p>'''Of the Handling of the Point and Cut with the Spadone'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>''Chapter 10''</p><br />
<br />
<p>There are many ways in which you can go resolutely against the enemy without stopping, and wanting to do this does by trade has great amusement. In this place we’ll show the lesson of point and cut, the principle motions are the forehand and backhand cuts, with these formed over the head, and you understand its turns with the union of the body, and of the feet, as the proposed figure shows. It begins first with the forehand cut and in the passage of the cut you will accompany the blow of the thrust, and extend it forward with the step, and the same is done from backhand cuts, so from one and the other side, replicating more times the passing with the cut and point together, and according to the occasion you will commence a new play, he could from the novelty take to this celebration, and that delight which feels the love of the virtue.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/208|3|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Alfieri) Spadone 4.png|400x400px|center|border]]<br />
| <p>'''Of the Three Crosses from the Spadone’s Point and Cut'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>''Chapter 11''</p><br />
<br />
<p>I fear not being tedious in repeating the same things, than becoming obscured in leaving something out. Now come consider the figure to the practice of what you reason. But take however great marvel that in the drawing one will resemble another, this doesn’t make the art be however different to the display of its actions, although they are similar in posture. The present figure demonstrates a wonderful invention for doing the three crosses with the point and cut, and for everyone I can briefly interweave the declaration.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/210|1|lbl=18}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>The first cross you will do with two cuts, and a thrust together. You will start, such that the left foot is placed grounded. You will begin with the right foot pulling forehand cuts, and with this you will go around to return, and you will run until you have finished the two cuts, and immediately you will chain the thrust rounding the spadone behind the back, and you will put forward the strike united with the quickness of the step. So you must do with the two backhand cuts, and with the thrust together accompanied with the left foot. The same will be done from the right band, and left.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/210|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>The second cross is of three cuts, and a thrust around, and you will observe the same circumstances of foot, body, and celerity as above. First you will pull three cuts with the right foot, and a thrust, and finishing with that one you will start with the left foot, and you will do the same. This will be done forward, and back, and the right side, and left, divided into three tempos, which you will do with the right foot, and with the left.</p><br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/210|3|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/212|1|lbl=20|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <p>The third cross you will do four cuts and a thrust likewise around, which you will do forward, and behind, and to the right flank, and left. There with one foot firm, and the other turning, finishing with the right that will stop, and you will move the left, and continue until the end of the four changes, supposing always that the tempo, the step, both proportionate, without which all effort and merit is lost, and nothing more is acquired than blame.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/212|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Alfieri) Spadone 6.png|400x400px|center|border]]<br />
| <p>'''Of the Molinello You will do with the Spadone in the Crosses'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>''Chapter 12''</p><br />
<br />
<p>All lessons are ordered, here we must learn to do the molinello in the cross. This is not only to show the disposition, but skill of whoever plays, so you must keep your arm relaxed, as shown in the following figure shown. With three montanti one knows to pass forward, and with the molinello the spadone and body will turn together, and you will return to the same position. And similar are the montanti to the right part, continue from the left side, and then the right side, doubling at your pleasure. And although the whole thing appears very clear, nonetheless, hardly anything can be put into practice without an instructor.</p><br />
| <br />
{{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/212|3|lbl=-|p=1}} {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/214|1|lbl=22|p=1}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Alfieri) Spadone 4.png|400x400px|center|border]]<br />
| <p>'''How You Will Handle the Spadone to Sweep the Land'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>''Chapter 13''</p><br />
<br />
<p>To do the lesson of Sweeping the Land, after you have done more steps of the forehand and backhand cuts, beginning from the right side you will make the turns of three steps with forehand arcs, and with equal skill you will return to produce the backhand cuts to the left part, and more times you will redouble according to the crowd of people, needing continually to remain in motion turning the body and the spadone there in one space, and there in another as the figure shows. And in encountering the enemy we must govern ourselves with form wanted by the occasion and the space, because in many manners you will pass to drive on, and pass from one to the other side, placing in one step good moderation, and you will not keep from becoming distinguished, experimenting in this noble exercise.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/214|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Alfieri) Spadone 5.png|400x400px|center|border]]<br />
| <p>'''How You Will Feint Cuts from the Spadone to Deceive the Enemy'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>''Chapter 14''</p><br />
<br />
<p>And of great advantage this device is added, as is the rule of the art, to feint and to wound from cuts. The figure does not need many words, demonstrating giving a backhand cut and injuring with a forehand cut. Completing wounding with a forehand cut and striking the backhand cut, you will be able to do those steps in this lesson which you will learn from the mastery, the person can go forward, and in pulling back the blow you will stretch the crux of the hands and the force of the arms, with the step well adjusted. The feint is no different than a deception, which by itself is odious. This deception of which I speak offends neither justice nor faith, but is a rule of the art simply to beat the enemy, and is named “Feint”.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|216|lbl=24}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| rowspan="2" | [[File:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Alfieri) Spadone 3.png|400x400px|center|border]]<br />
| <p>'''Of the Step and Sidestep With the Spadone'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>''Chapter 15''</p><br />
<br />
<p>In this Figure you will have the arm collected with the spadone to do the step and sidestep. You will make to play the body from one and the other sides, making three forehand cuts and three backhand cuts, walking the feet in the tempo which you will make the cuts, bringing them around, and extending the blow forward, obtaining with all guidance you will utilize from the speed, without confusion, and so remain forestalling the adversary.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/218|1|lbl=26}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <p>The fundamental principle in this lesson is to know your advantage. Traversing there from one side, and now from the other, pulling forehand and backhand cuts. Many are the enemies of truth, and they love most the new things, even such extravagance. This they make to be of great spirit, and almost reforming of this art, and don’t know that these findings have all of the ridicule, and are pernicious. And those who do not know to escape, easily remain deceived. This which I’ve taught you is always approved by those that know.</p><br />
| {{section|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf/218|2|lbl=-}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Alfieri) Spadone 4.png|400x400px|center|border]]<br />
| <p>'''How You Must Handle the Spadone in a Large Street'''<br/><br/></p><br />
<br />
<p>''Chapter 16''</p><br />
<br />
<p>Danger arises from what you least believe; Boldness ends combat, but the victory is his own from virtù by protecting himself from accidents both in war and peace; turning the spadone towards the enemy, himself arranged in good guard to resist every offense. Through clarity of this lesson I show that you will begin with the natural step, and you will move three steps to the right side to assail the adversary, and with three forehand cuts you will walk forth, and three other times you will go to the left with three backhand cuts, harassing the enemy around to gain some advantage over him, and then make doing more steps, and from forehand and backhand cuts, according to the need, and in addition to this you are able to do many whims; turns, half-turns, and other artifices that are proper ornaments of the art.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|220|lbl=28}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Alfieri) Spadone 5.png|400x400px|center|border]]<br />
| <p>'''Of the Method of Doing the Snake, of Forehand and Backhand Cuts with the Spadone'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>''Chapter 17''</p><br />
<br />
<p>This following figure shows the passage of the lesson, the Snake, beginning with forehand cut, and concluding the forehand cut with five steps. The same will be followed for backhand cuts, and finishing the backhand cuts, the forehand will be done with the right foot, and backhand cut with the left foot. This you will replicate more times according to the occasion, and the man will be able to defend from the many people he’s found himself against, or in a narrow street, or else in a wide street, and only with extending the arm, and bending from the body you may reach the adversary: Never wanting movements to be very fast, of body, spadone, and feet, that without any doubt this is the most secure and certain rule that in tests of such esteem, in which you will draw for life, a person can defend themselves in all places.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|222|lbl=30}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Alfieri) Spadone 6.png|400x400px|center|border]]<br />
| <p>'''The Manner you must Keep with the Spadone to Make the Simple and Double Molinelli in a Narrow Street'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>''Chapter 18''</p><br />
<br />
<p>We have come to the method of how one should form the molinello with the montanti, and the non-guarding sottomani. There is no blow in fencing that cannot also be adapted to the art of the spadone, wanting to do this, which I have thought to show in the present figure, the pupil will find himself in the passage of the right flank, or left, and with montanti or sottomani turn the spadone, and make the simple molinello, walking always forward following the adversary, and pulling back if you have yourself a throng of enemies. In the double molinello you will walk with the same rule, but more times the body turns around accompanied with the same montanti and sottomani, thus in going forewards as in backwards; and I hold fast that it is a great advantage in the assault. We release the long discourse to the learned persons, because our profession constitutes more in the work than in the words; in this method, with the spadone you can advance against a shafted weapon, pike, or halberd, and win it, as I myself have done, beholding the effect in actual practice more times at different occasions to the presence of gentlemen and grand princes.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|224|lbl=32}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Alfieri) Spadone 3.png|400x400px|center|border]]<br />
| <p>'''How You Must Operate the Spadone with Forehand and Backhand Cuts to Defend Yourself from Enemies on a Bridge.'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>''Chapter 19''</p><br />
<br />
<p>In handling the spadone, it seems that skill and agility prevail over force, which is manifestly understood through our figure of defending yourself on a bridge; with forehand and backhand cuts, starting with your right foot, and following with your left, turning your body and your step three times in rotation, walking forward, returning back, often depending on the situation created by the enemy, from either one side or another of the bridge, always accompanying the blows with your arm and foot, with artifice. You can also intersperse some feints or other variations, which serve to ornament the lessons, and demonstrate the spirit of the practitioner.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|226|lbl=34}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [[File:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Alfieri) Spadone 7.png|400x400px|center|border]]<br />
| <p>'''Of the Method that you must Keep Body to Body to Defend Yourself with the Spadone'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>''Chapter 20''</p><br />
<br />
<p>The art consists to own everything which researches the mastery of the student for using the spadone well against another that has the same weapon; against the other one must use the observations of the measure and the tempo, and yet investigate the nature and quality of the enemy’s play, and of this observation more than any depends loss and victory. Wanting the man to commence combat against the other, first he must form himself in presence of the enemy, and secondly there he moves with hostile movement, as backwards as forwards, or to the right or left flank, and like one like the other little by little, he will advance. If one pulls a forehand cut, do a forehand cut and wound with a backhand cut; and if one pulls a backhand cut, crack a backhand cut and strike a forehand cut. And observe the same for the montanto and sottomano, and as such one continues until one or the other sides leave satisfied. I do not extend to repeat this that I have more times said in advance; the principle method is taught in the present figure, leaving out nothing that has been known more for ostentation than to teach the youth.</p><br />
| {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|228|lbl=36}}<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| class="noline" | [[File:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Alfieri) Spadone 2.png|400x400px|center|border]]<br />
| class="noline" | <p>'''The End of the Present Work'''</p><br />
<br />
<p>''Chapter 21''</p><br />
<br />
<p>One collects the spadone, bringing it in the left hand, as the following figure demonstrates; the drawing done by a good carver. If one were accompanied by anyone delighting of such exercise, my works would have more credit, and I would quite often be without trouble. Here is a short lesson of my promise, the summary, that to me it was in the approved principle; I am not spread out in the declarations, by not having to repeat many times the same thing, (I admit, my failing) I serve nothing less stimulating to another so intendent on discovering that which I have not known and demonstrated with this style. Whom is incapable of my genius is difficult to please in this listless century; some will regard my discovered nature that others yearn, and I am well aware that a wise man is always fair.</p><br />
| class="noline" | {{pagetb|Page:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|230|lbl=38}}<br />
<br />
|}<br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
{{master begin<br />
| title = Copyright and License Summary<br />
| width = 100%<br />
}}<br />
For further information, including transcription and translation notes, see the [[Talk:{{PAGENAME}}|discussion page]].<br />
<br />
<section begin="sourcebox"/>{{sourcebox header}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Illustrations<br />
| authors = <br />
| source link = <br />
| source title= <br />
| license = public domain<br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Translation (Flag)<br />
| authors = [[Piermarco Terminiello]] and [[Caroline Stewart]]<br />
| source link = https://sword.school/articles/la-bandiera/<br />
| source title= The School of the Sword<br />
| license = noncommercial<br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Translation (Pike)<br />
| authors = [[Piermarco Terminiello]]<br />
| source link = <br />
| source title= Private communication<br />
| license = noncommercial<br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Translation (Greatsword)<br />
| authors = [[James Clark]]<br />
| source link = <br />
| source title= Private communication<br />
| license = noncommercial<br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Transcription (Flag)<br />
| authors = [[Andrea Conti]]<br />
| source link = <br />
| source title= [[Index:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1638.pdf|Index:La Bandiera (Francesco Fernando Alfieri)]]<br />
| license = <br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Transcription (Pike)<br />
| authors = [[Andrea Conti]]<br />
| source link = <br />
| source title= [[Index:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1641.pdf|Index:La Picca (Francesco Fernando Alfieri)]]<br />
| license = <br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Transcription (Rapier, Greatsword)<br />
| authors = [[Andrea Conti]]<br />
| source link = <br />
| source title= [[Index:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri) 1653.pdf|Index:L’arte di ben maneggiare la spada (Francesco Fernando Alfieri)]]<br />
| license = <br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox footer}}<section end="sourcebox"/><br />
{{master end}}<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
* [[Francesco Fernando Alfieri|Alfieri, Francesco Ferdinando]]. ''La Scherma: The Art of Fencing Paperback''. Trans. Caroline Stewart, Phil Marshall, and [[Piermarco Terminiello]]. [[Pike & Shot Society]], 2012. ISBN 978-1902768427<br />
* Leoni, Tom. ''[http://www.lulu.com/shop/tom-leoni/alfieri/paperback/product-23567599.html La Scherma. On Fencing, 1640 Rapier Treatise]''. Lulu, 2018. <br />
* Mondschein, Ken. ''The Art of the Two-Handed Sword''. [[SKA SwordPlay Books]], 2012. ISBN 978-0978902285<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist|2}}<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Alfieri, Francesco Fernando}}<br />
{{Early Italian masters}}<br />
__FORCETOC__<br />
<br />
[[Category:Masters]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Italian]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Translation]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Flag]]<br />
[[Category:Greatsword]]<br />
[[Category:Pike]]<br />
[[Category:Rapier]]<br />
[[Category:Rapier and Cloak]]<br />
[[Category:Rapier and Dagger]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:New format]]</div>P Terminiellohttps://wiktenauer.com/index.php?title=Discorso_sopra_l%27arte_della_scherma_(MS_14.10)&diff=120492Discorso sopra l'arte della scherma (MS 14.10)2020-11-18T16:14:42Z<p>P Terminiello: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox manuscript<br />
<!----------Name----------><br />
| name = [[name::Discorso sopra l'arte della scherma]]<br />
| location = [[inventory::MS 14/10]], [[museum::Wallace Collection]]<br/>London, United Kingdom<br />
<!----------Image----------><br />
| image = File:MS 14.10.png<br />
| width = 300px<br />
| caption = <br />
<!----------General----------><br />
| Index number = [[WI::—]]<br />
| Wierschin's catalog = [[WC::—]]<br />
| Hils' catalog = [[HK::—]]<br />
| Beck catalog = [[BC::—]]<br />
| Also known as = ''Discorso di Camillo Palladini Bolognese <br/>sopra l'arte della scherma come l'arte <br/>della scherma è necessaria à chi si <br/>diletta d'arme''<br />
| Type = [[type::Fencing manual]]<br />
| Date = ca. [[year::1600]]<br />
| Place of origin = Bologna, Italy (?)<br />
| Language(s) = [[language::Italian]]<br />
| Scribe(s) = <br />
| Author(s) = [[author::Camillo Palladini]]<br />
| Compiled by = <br />
| Illuminated by = <br />
| Patron = <br />
| Dedicated to = <br />
<!----------Form and content----------><br />
| Material = <br />
| Size = 118 [[folia]] (220 mm x 330 mm)<br />
| Format = <br />
| Condition = <br />
| Script = <br />
| Contents = <br />
| Illumination(s) = <br />
| Additions = <br />
| Exemplar(s) = <br />
| Previously kept = <br />
| Discovered = <br />
| Website = [http://catalogue.libraries.london.ac.uk/record{{=}}b3382844~S15 Library catalog entry]<br />
| below = <br />
}}<br />
{{dablink | The correct signature of this manuscript is 14/10, but has been rendered 14.10 in a few places due to technical restrictions. }}<br />
'''''Discorso di Camillo Palladini Bolognese sopra l'arte della scherma come l'arte della scherma è necessaria à chi si diletta d'arme''''' ("Discourse by Camillo Palladini of Bologna on the art of fencing, as the art of fencing is necessary to whoever is delighted by arms"; MS 14/10) is an [[nationality::Italian]] [[fencing manual]] created by [[Camillo Palladini]] in ca. 1600.{{cn}} The original currently rests in the Howard de Walden Library of the [[Wallace Collection]] in London, United Kingdom. Palladini's work seems to be a direct response to the treatise of [[Camillo Agrippa]] published in 1553, correcting what he saw as shortcomings and errors in Agrippa's system.<br />
<br />
== Provenance ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Contents ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Gallery ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Additional Resources ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
<br />
== Copyright and License Summary ==<br />
<br />
For further information, including transcription and translation notes, see the [[Talk:{{PAGENAME}}|discussion page]].<br />
<br />
<section begin="sourcebox"/>{{sourcebox header}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Images<br />
| authors = <br />
| source link = <br />
| source title= <br />
| license = public domain<br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox<br />
| work = Transcription<br />
| authors = <br />
| source link = <br />
| source title= [[Index:Discorso sopra l'arte della scherma (MS 14.10)]]<br />
| license = <br />
}}<br />
{{sourcebox footer}}<section end="sourcebox"/><br />
<br />
[[Category:Treatises]]<br />
[[Category:Manuscripts]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Research/Background Information]]<br />
[[Category:Scanning]]<br />
[[Category:Digital Scanning]]<br />
[[Category:Image Processing]]</div>P Terminiello