Wiktenauer logo.png

Difference between revisions of "Salvator Fabris"

From Wiktenauer
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 118: Line 118:
 
|  
 
|  
 
| [[File:Scienza d’Arme (Fabris) Heraldry.jpg|400px|center]]
 
| [[File:Scienza d’Arme (Fabris) Heraldry.jpg|400px|center]]
| <p>[4] To His Serene Majesty, the most Powerful Christian IV., King of Denmark, Norway, Gothland and Vandalia, Duke of Schleswig Holstein, Stormarn and Ditmarsch, Count of Oldenburg and Delmenhorst, &c.<br/><br/></p>
+
| <p>[4] To His Serene Majesty, the most Powerful Christian IV., King of Denmark, Norway, Gothland and Vandalia, Duke of Schleswig Holstein, Stormarn and Ditmarsch, Count of Oldenburg and Delmenhorst, &c.</p>
  
<p>I am confident that all who read this work of mine will recognise that the many benefits received from your Serene Highness are the cause, which has urged and impelled me to publish to the world these my labours. I have wished also to help professors of the science of arms by showing them those instructions and rules, which after long use and continual practice and from observing the errors of others I have found to be good. I hope then that a work based on such principles will find merit, especially as it is under the protection of your Serene Highness - a work as worthy by reason of the excellence of its subject as it is glorious through the approval of your high judgment. To you, therefore, my benefactor, my king and a prince of incomparable valour as much in civil government as in the practice of arms, a true hero of our times, I have dared to dedicate my work; for since its inception is due to you, I am bringing it forth to the sight of men under the same protection. I know moreover how useful to the world and necessary to good men this art is, bringing honour to anyone who practises it aright either in the defence of his prince, his country, the laws, his life or his honour. Will your Serene Majesty therefore deign to receive into your favour not only the work, but the devotion with which, your humble and obedient servant, dedicate it. Meantime I will pray the Divine grace that long life may be granted you for the well-being of your blessed subjects and the good of the world, and that by grace you may obtain salvation in the world to come.<br/><br/><br/></p>
+
<p>I am confident that all who read this work of mine will recognise that the many benefits received from your Serene Highness are the cause, which has urged and impelled me to publish to the world these my labours. I have wished also to help professors of the science of arms by showing them those instructions and rules, which after long use and continual practice and from observing the errors of others I have found to be good. I hope then that a work based on such principles will find merit, especially as it is under the protection of your Serene Highness - a work as worthy by reason of the excellence of its subject as it is glorious through the approval of your high judgment. To you, therefore, my benefactor, my king and a prince of incomparable valour as much in civil government as in the practice of arms, a true hero of our times, I have dared to dedicate my work; for since its inception is due to you, I am bringing it forth to the sight of men under the same protection. I know moreover how useful to the world and necessary to good men this art is, bringing honour to anyone who practises it aright either in the defence of his prince, his country, the laws, his life or his honour. Will your Serene Majesty therefore deign to receive into your favour not only the work, but the devotion with which, your humble and obedient servant, dedicate it. Meantime I will pray the Divine grace that long life may be granted you for the well-being of your blessed subjects and the good of the world, and that by grace you may obtain salvation in the world to come.</p>
  
 
<p>Your Serene Majesty's</p>
 
<p>Your Serene Majesty's</p>
Line 196: Line 196:
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
| <p>[4] '''Method of forming the counter-positions,''' showing '''The position of the arms and the body, and when they are to be formed.'''</p>
+
| <p>[4] '''Method of forming the counter-positions,''' showing '''The position of the arms and the body, and when they are to be formed.'''<br/><br/></p>
  
 
<p>If you wish to form a sound counter-position, the position of the body and arms must be such that without touching the adversary's sword you are defended in the straight line from the point of his sword to your body, so that without making any movement of the body or the sword you are sure that your adversary cannot hit you in that line, but that if he wishes to attack he must move his sword elsewhere, with the result that his ''time'' is so long, that there is every opportunity to parry. But in forming this position care must be taken that your sword is held in such a way as to be stronger than your adversary's, so that it may offer resistance in defence. This rule can be observed against all positions and changes of your adversary, whether accompanied by the dagger or any other defensive weapon, or when you use the sword alone. He who can most subtly maintain this guard will have a great advantage over his adversary.</p>
 
<p>If you wish to form a sound counter-position, the position of the body and arms must be such that without touching the adversary's sword you are defended in the straight line from the point of his sword to your body, so that without making any movement of the body or the sword you are sure that your adversary cannot hit you in that line, but that if he wishes to attack he must move his sword elsewhere, with the result that his ''time'' is so long, that there is every opportunity to parry. But in forming this position care must be taken that your sword is held in such a way as to be stronger than your adversary's, so that it may offer resistance in defence. This rule can be observed against all positions and changes of your adversary, whether accompanied by the dagger or any other defensive weapon, or when you use the sword alone. He who can most subtly maintain this guard will have a great advantage over his adversary.</p>
Line 208: Line 208:
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
 
|  
| <p>[5] '''Explanation of the two distances, wide and close, and how to acquire the one or the other with least danger.'''</p>
+
| <p>[5] '''Explanation of the two distances, wide and close, and how to acquire the one or the other with least danger.'''<br/><br/></p>
  
 
<p>You are within wide distance when by advancing the rear foot to the front you can make a hit. After forming the counter-position a little out of distance, you must begin to advance the foot in order to get within the required distance. But you must be on your guard, lest your adversary, being steady, at the moment when you move your foot to advance it, should advance his too and hit at the same time. Therefore, you must move it very carefully, remembering that your adversary may effect something during the movement. After forming the counter-position you must endeavour to throw him into disorder, or at least make some feint in order to have an opportunity to hit. Thus prepared for what may happen you are more guarded and can better resist attack. When you are within wide distance and your adversary makes some movement of his foot, provided he does not break ground, you can hit him in the nearest exposed part, even if he has not moved his weapons. This could not be done if he moved his weapons and stood firm on his feet, the reason being that a movement of the foot is slower than that of the weapons, and therefore he could parry before your sword arrived, while he remained steady; if there were no other way he could protect himself by breaking ground, so that your sword could not reach. Being thrown into disorder you would then be in danger of being hit before you had recovered. Therefore whenever he gives an opportunity without moving his feet, it would be better to approach within close distance in that time. In that distance you can reach with the sword by merely bending the body, without moving the feet, and the adversary is forced to retire to get out of such danger. If he does not move you could hit him even though he retained the advantage of the counter-position. If your adversary does not move, you can sometimes make a hit by judging the distance from the point of your sword to your adversary's body and the distance from the ''forte'' of his sword. If you consider both how much you must advance the point and how far you must move it from the adversary's ''forte'', and understand that the time required for him to parry is the same as for you to hit, the sword will arrive before he has parried by the advantage of having moved first. If you see that his body is little exposed, as may happen, since one guard covers more than another, you can then attempt to hit in the exposed part, and as he moves to the defence change your line and hit in the second exposed part.</p>
 
<p>You are within wide distance when by advancing the rear foot to the front you can make a hit. After forming the counter-position a little out of distance, you must begin to advance the foot in order to get within the required distance. But you must be on your guard, lest your adversary, being steady, at the moment when you move your foot to advance it, should advance his too and hit at the same time. Therefore, you must move it very carefully, remembering that your adversary may effect something during the movement. After forming the counter-position you must endeavour to throw him into disorder, or at least make some feint in order to have an opportunity to hit. Thus prepared for what may happen you are more guarded and can better resist attack. When you are within wide distance and your adversary makes some movement of his foot, provided he does not break ground, you can hit him in the nearest exposed part, even if he has not moved his weapons. This could not be done if he moved his weapons and stood firm on his feet, the reason being that a movement of the foot is slower than that of the weapons, and therefore he could parry before your sword arrived, while he remained steady; if there were no other way he could protect himself by breaking ground, so that your sword could not reach. Being thrown into disorder you would then be in danger of being hit before you had recovered. Therefore whenever he gives an opportunity without moving his feet, it would be better to approach within close distance in that time. In that distance you can reach with the sword by merely bending the body, without moving the feet, and the adversary is forced to retire to get out of such danger. If he does not move you could hit him even though he retained the advantage of the counter-position. If your adversary does not move, you can sometimes make a hit by judging the distance from the point of your sword to your adversary's body and the distance from the ''forte'' of his sword. If you consider both how much you must advance the point and how far you must move it from the adversary's ''forte'', and understand that the time required for him to parry is the same as for you to hit, the sword will arrive before he has parried by the advantage of having moved first. If you see that his body is little exposed, as may happen, since one guard covers more than another, you can then attempt to hit in the exposed part, and as he moves to the defence change your line and hit in the second exposed part.</p>
Line 412: Line 412:
 
|  
 
|  
 
| <p>[17] '''General discourse on the guards.'''</p>
 
| <p>[17] '''General discourse on the guards.'''</p>
 +
 +
<p><br/></p>
  
 
<p>We have now reached the point when we must treat of the formation of the principal guards, and movements and the results obtained in arms. We must first warn the reader not to wonder if he sees two figures illustrating one result. This is done to represent the right and the left side of the body. On the other hand we have thought it unimportant and idle to treat of many other guards of which some authors have written; for instance a guard with the dagger extended and the sword thrown behind, now on one foot and now on the other, now high, now low, which seems to us to defend the rear rather than the front. Others with the sword alone have kept it so far back and low, that the point was near the point of their feet, and also they held the sword across the legs and with the point almost on the ground, and all this that the sword might not be engaged. Sometimes on guard they take the blade in the left hand to give it strength, in order to beat the adversary's sword and hit. All these things we have omitted as inappropriate and, more often harmful than useful, and in any case tedious to the reader. Perhaps it had been better to have passed them in silence, but some might have thought we had not seen or considered such things; - therefore we have made some mention of them, as of the practice of throwing the sword at the adversary, when fighting with the sword alone; some think this an essential movement, but we deem it of little value; it may succeed against those who leave the sword free or hold their own too stiff, but against those who engage their adversary's sword and can disengage, it effects nothing, rather he who adopts this method will always be beaten. Therefore we shall not treat of it further in the present work, but shall try to give such discourses, as when well considered can bring you such counsel and judgment, that, when you see your adversary approaching sword in hand in whatever manner, you will recognise the principles he is following as well as he himself. These results are illustrated by plates, from which you may expect great benefit. To these are added the discourses not only as an explanation of the results, but also in order that you may discover the intention of one who uses them and so anticipate your adversary's thoughts and prepare yourself before the result follows.</p>
 
<p>We have now reached the point when we must treat of the formation of the principal guards, and movements and the results obtained in arms. We must first warn the reader not to wonder if he sees two figures illustrating one result. This is done to represent the right and the left side of the body. On the other hand we have thought it unimportant and idle to treat of many other guards of which some authors have written; for instance a guard with the dagger extended and the sword thrown behind, now on one foot and now on the other, now high, now low, which seems to us to defend the rear rather than the front. Others with the sword alone have kept it so far back and low, that the point was near the point of their feet, and also they held the sword across the legs and with the point almost on the ground, and all this that the sword might not be engaged. Sometimes on guard they take the blade in the left hand to give it strength, in order to beat the adversary's sword and hit. All these things we have omitted as inappropriate and, more often harmful than useful, and in any case tedious to the reader. Perhaps it had been better to have passed them in silence, but some might have thought we had not seen or considered such things; - therefore we have made some mention of them, as of the practice of throwing the sword at the adversary, when fighting with the sword alone; some think this an essential movement, but we deem it of little value; it may succeed against those who leave the sword free or hold their own too stiff, but against those who engage their adversary's sword and can disengage, it effects nothing, rather he who adopts this method will always be beaten. Therefore we shall not treat of it further in the present work, but shall try to give such discourses, as when well considered can bring you such counsel and judgment, that, when you see your adversary approaching sword in hand in whatever manner, you will recognise the principles he is following as well as he himself. These results are illustrated by plates, from which you may expect great benefit. To these are added the discourses not only as an explanation of the results, but also in order that you may discover the intention of one who uses them and so anticipate your adversary's thoughts and prepare yourself before the result follows.</p>
Line 436: Line 438:
 
<p>This plate shows the nature of all the cuts, which a hand can make. The names are placed against them so that you may see where each of them naturally hits, although they may hit higher or lower according to whether they are made with the hand or the arm. At least their path is seen, and from a knowledge of that follows a knowledge of the second point, what sort of defence can he made in order to parry them and hit at the same time. Therefore the names on the plate are placed not in the part from which the cuts are delivered, but where they hit; for the cut of ''mandiritto'' is delivered from the right and hits the adversary's left shoulder, and the cut of ''riverso'' is delivered from the left and hits somewhere on the right side, as may be seen. Whoever examines and ponders on these cuts, will easily discover the principles of proceeding against each one of them, bearing in mind that even if all the cuts are made by the same arm they may not have the same strength, and therefore against the stronger it is necessary to find a stronger defence in order to resist and hit. Although it might appear that we should here treat of the differences in the cuts, still we think we have treated of them sufficiently in speaking of the defence and the attack, and of thrusting and cutting. It is our intention to base our instruction, not on these, but on more subtle and profitable principles.</p>
 
<p>This plate shows the nature of all the cuts, which a hand can make. The names are placed against them so that you may see where each of them naturally hits, although they may hit higher or lower according to whether they are made with the hand or the arm. At least their path is seen, and from a knowledge of that follows a knowledge of the second point, what sort of defence can he made in order to parry them and hit at the same time. Therefore the names on the plate are placed not in the part from which the cuts are delivered, but where they hit; for the cut of ''mandiritto'' is delivered from the right and hits the adversary's left shoulder, and the cut of ''riverso'' is delivered from the left and hits somewhere on the right side, as may be seen. Whoever examines and ponders on these cuts, will easily discover the principles of proceeding against each one of them, bearing in mind that even if all the cuts are made by the same arm they may not have the same strength, and therefore against the stronger it is necessary to find a stronger defence in order to resist and hit. Although it might appear that we should here treat of the differences in the cuts, still we think we have treated of them sufficiently in speaking of the defence and the attack, and of thrusting and cutting. It is our intention to base our instruction, not on these, but on more subtle and profitable principles.</p>
 
|  
 
|  
| {{section|Page:Scienza d’Arme (Salvator Fabris) 1606.pdf/34|2|lbl=27}}
+
| {{section|Page:Scienza d’Arme (Salvator Fabris) 1606.pdf/34|2|lbl=-}}
  
{{section|Page:Scienza d’Arme (Salvator Fabris) 1606.pdf/35|1|lbl=-}}
+
{{section|Page:Scienza d’Arme (Salvator Fabris) 1606.pdf/35|1|lbl=27}}
 
|  
 
|  
 
{{section|Page:Sienza e pratica d’arme (Johann Joachim Hynitzsch) 1677.pdf/79|3|lbl=62|p=1}} {{section|Page:Sienza e pratica d’arme (Johann Joachim Hynitzsch) 1677.pdf/80|4|lbl=63|p=1}}
 
{{section|Page:Sienza e pratica d’arme (Johann Joachim Hynitzsch) 1677.pdf/79|3|lbl=62|p=1}} {{section|Page:Sienza e pratica d’arme (Johann Joachim Hynitzsch) 1677.pdf/80|4|lbl=63|p=1}}
Line 524: Line 526:
 
| [[file:GKS 1868 1 detail 13.jpg|400px|center]]
 
| [[file:GKS 1868 1 detail 13.jpg|400px|center]]
 
| [[file:Scienza d’Arme (Fabris) 006.jpg|400px|center]]
 
| [[file:Scienza d’Arme (Fabris) 006.jpg|400px|center]]
| <p>[24] <br/><br/><br/></p>
+
| <p>[24] <br/><br/></p>
  
 
<p>In this plate the sword is shown foreshortened, and the left side as far forward as the right. You have formed a guard in ''tierce'' and changed into ''seconde''. The sword is turned so far to the left as to be quite fore-shortened, and therefore only the cross or hilt is seen. This movement has been made in order to let the adversary approach. The body is bent forward so that it may not be hit save on the head and chest, and if the adversary attempts to hit you can parry with the left hand, which is held before the face, hitting with the same movement of the body and extending your sword into ''seconde''. If you have completed the position when your adverysary[!] advances, you can change to ''quarte'' and hit below or above his sword, according as he comes low or high, and can carry the body out of line without parrying, though you may parry and hit with this ''seconde''. If your adversary does not respond to this ''appel'', you must not remain in this position, but change your line, remaining steady on your feet, so that he may not take the ''time'' on that change; for if your feet were being brought together you could not parry, but if you were withdrawing it would be well to parry, since your adversary could be sure of making a hit. If when he took the ''time'', you were steady, you could advance or retreat according to the distance and intention of the adversary, because you would have adapted yourself for attack or defence at the same time.</p>
 
<p>In this plate the sword is shown foreshortened, and the left side as far forward as the right. You have formed a guard in ''tierce'' and changed into ''seconde''. The sword is turned so far to the left as to be quite fore-shortened, and therefore only the cross or hilt is seen. This movement has been made in order to let the adversary approach. The body is bent forward so that it may not be hit save on the head and chest, and if the adversary attempts to hit you can parry with the left hand, which is held before the face, hitting with the same movement of the body and extending your sword into ''seconde''. If you have completed the position when your adverysary[!] advances, you can change to ''quarte'' and hit below or above his sword, according as he comes low or high, and can carry the body out of line without parrying, though you may parry and hit with this ''seconde''. If your adversary does not respond to this ''appel'', you must not remain in this position, but change your line, remaining steady on your feet, so that he may not take the ''time'' on that change; for if your feet were being brought together you could not parry, but if you were withdrawing it would be well to parry, since your adversary could be sure of making a hit. If when he took the ''time'', you were steady, you could advance or retreat according to the distance and intention of the adversary, because you would have adapted yourself for attack or defence at the same time.</p>
Line 1,097: Line 1,099:
 
| [[file:GKS 1868 1 detail 41.jpg|400px|center]]
 
| [[file:GKS 1868 1 detail 41.jpg|400px|center]]
 
| [[file:Scienza d’Arme (Fabris) 041.jpg|400px|center]]
 
| [[file:Scienza d’Arme (Fabris) 041.jpg|400px|center]]
| <p>[59] <br/><br/></p>
+
| <p>[59] </p>
  
 
<p>Here is another hit in ''seconde'' also against a ''quarte''. Both were in ''tierce'' on the inside. You were in a stronger position than your adversary and have made a feint of hitting in ''quarte'' through his ''faible''. He, thinking the thrust was coming, has made a turn of his body with his right foot and a thrust in ''quarte'' through your ''faible'', in order to meet you in the ''time'' of your approach. Seeing his plan, you have suddenly changed to ''seconde'', lowering your point and body and bringing the left foot forward; thus you have made the hit by continuing on to his body, before he could recover, for he has not passed, but turned, and his left foot has remained steady. Or it may be that you have tried to engage your adversary's sword on the outside. He has disengaged in ''tierce'' on the inside, but in that ''time'' you have made a feint in ''quarte''. He has tried a counter ''quarte'' through your ''faible'' turning his body out of line, in order to meet your approach. Seeing the danger you have changed from ''quarte'' to ''seconde'' and made the hit shown, while his sword has passed over in vain.</p>
 
<p>Here is another hit in ''seconde'' also against a ''quarte''. Both were in ''tierce'' on the inside. You were in a stronger position than your adversary and have made a feint of hitting in ''quarte'' through his ''faible''. He, thinking the thrust was coming, has made a turn of his body with his right foot and a thrust in ''quarte'' through your ''faible'', in order to meet you in the ''time'' of your approach. Seeing his plan, you have suddenly changed to ''seconde'', lowering your point and body and bringing the left foot forward; thus you have made the hit by continuing on to his body, before he could recover, for he has not passed, but turned, and his left foot has remained steady. Or it may be that you have tried to engage your adversary's sword on the outside. He has disengaged in ''tierce'' on the inside, but in that ''time'' you have made a feint in ''quarte''. He has tried a counter ''quarte'' through your ''faible'' turning his body out of line, in order to meet your approach. Seeing the danger you have changed from ''quarte'' to ''seconde'' and made the hit shown, while his sword has passed over in vain.</p>
 
|  
 
|  
| <p><br/><br/></p>
+
| <p><br/></p>
  
 
{{section|Page:Scienza d’Arme (Salvator Fabris) 1606.pdf/76|2|lbl=-}}
 
{{section|Page:Scienza d’Arme (Salvator Fabris) 1606.pdf/76|2|lbl=-}}

Revision as of 23:00, 18 July 2022

Salvator Fabris
Born 1544
Padua, Italy
Died 11 Nov 1618 (aged 74)
Padua, Italy
Occupation
Nationality Italian
Alma mater University of Padua (?)
Patron
  • Christianus Ⅳ of Denmark
  • Johan Frederik of Schleswig-Holstein-
    Gottorp
Influenced
Genres Fencing manual
Language Italian
Notable work(s) Scienza d’Arme (1601-06)
Manuscript(s)
Translations

Salvator Fabris (Salvador Fabbri, Salvator Fabriz, Fabrice; 1544-1618) was a 16th – 17th century Italian knight and fencing master. He was born in or around Padua, Italy in 1544, and although little is known about his early years, he seems to have studied fencing from a young age and possibly attended the prestigious University of Padua.[citation needed] The French master Henry de Sainct Didier recounts a meeting with an Italian fencer named "Fabrice" during the course of preparing his treatise (completed in 1573) in which they debated fencing theory, potentially placing Fabris in France in the early 1570s.[1] In the 1580s, Fabris corresponded with Christian Barnekow, a Danish nobleman with ties to the royal court as well as an alumnus of the university.[2] It seems likely that Fabris traveled a great deal during the 1570s and 80s, spending time in France, Germany, Spain, and possibly other regions before returning to teach at his alma mater.[citation needed]

It is unclear if Fabris himself was of noble birth, but at some point he seems to have earned a knighthood. In fact, he is described in his treatise as Supremus Eques ("Supreme Knight") of the Order of the Seven Hearts. In Johann Joachim Hynitzsch's introduction to the 1676 edition, he identifies Fabris as a Colonel of the Order.[3] It seems therefore that he was not only a knight of the Order of the Seven Hearts, but rose to a high rank and perhaps even overall leadership.

Fabris' whereabouts in the 1590s are uncertain, but there are rumors. In 1594, he may have been hired by King Sigismund of Poland to assassinate his uncle Karl, a Swedish duke and competitor for the Swedish crown. According to the story, Fabris participated in a sword dance (or possibly a dramatic play) with a sharp sword and was to slay Karl during the performance when the audience was distracted. (The duke was warned and avoided the event, saving his life.)[4] In ca. 1599, Fabris may have been invited to England by noted playwright William Shakespeare to choreograph the fight scenes in his premier of Hamlet.[5][2] He also presumably spent considerable time in the 1590s developing the fencing manual that would guarantee his lasting fame.

What is certain is that by 1598, Fabris had left his position at the University of Padua and was attached to the court of Johan Frederik, the young duke of Schleswig-Holstein-Gottorp. He continued in the duke's service until 1601, and as a parting gift prepared a lavishly-illustrated, three-volume manuscript of his treatise entitled Scientia e Prattica dell'Arme (GI.kgl.Saml.1868 4040).[2]

In 1601, Fabris was hired as chief rapier instructor to the court of Christianus Ⅳ, King of Denmark and Duke Johan Frederik's cousin. He ultimately served in the royal court for five years; toward the end of his tenure and at the king's insistence, he published his opus under the title Sienza e Pratica d’Arme ("Science and Practice of Arms") or De lo Schermo, overo Scienza d’Arme ("On Defense, or the Science of Arms"). Christianus funded this first edition and placed his court artist, Jan van Halbeeck, at Fabris' disposal to illustrate it; it was ultimately published in Copenhagen on 25 September 1606.[2]

Soon after the text was published, and perhaps feeling his 62 years, Fabris asked to be released from his six-year contract with the king so that he might return home. He traveled through northern Germany and was in Paris, France, in 1608. Ultimately, he received a position at the University of Padua and there passed his final years. He died of a fever on 11 November 1618 at the age of 74, and the town of Padua declared an official day of mourning in his honor. In 1676, the town of Padua erected a statue of the master in the Chiesa del Santo.

The importance of Fabris' work can hardly be overstated. Versions of his treatise were reprinted for over a hundred years, and translated into German at least four times as well as French and Latin. He is almost universally praised by later masters and fencing historians, and through the influence of his students and their students (most notably Hans Wilhelm Schöffer), he became the dominant figure in German fencing throughout the 17th century and into the 18th.

Treatise

Additional Resources

References

  1. Didier, Henry de Sainct. Les secrets du premier livre sur l'espée seule. Paris, 1573. pp 5-8.
  2. 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 Fabris, Salvator and Leoni, Tom. Art of Dueling: Salvator Fabris' Rapier Fencing Treatise of 1606. Highland Village, TX: Chivalry Bookshelf, 2005. pp XVIII-XIX.
  3. Fabris, Salvator and Leoni, Tom. Art of Dueling: Salvator Fabris' Rapier Fencing Treatise of 1606. Highland Village, TX: Chivalry Bookshelf, 2005. p XXIX.
  4. Andersson, Henrik. Salvator Fabris as a Hired Assassin in Sweden. Association for Renaissance Martial Arts. Retrieved 2011-12-18.
  5. Barbasetti, Luigi. Fencing Through the Ages.[Full citation needed]
  6. Originally "asseruatore", but corrected in the errata.
  7. This seems like a mistranslation of rompere di misura at first blush, but according to Kevin Murakoshi, this is an archaic piece of fencing jargon that was still current in the early 20th century. It means to "break measure" or withdraw. ~ Michael Chidester
  8. Originally "richeide", but corrected in the errata.
  9. Originally "dirarsi", but corrected in the errata.
  10. Originally "longuezza", but corrected in the errata.
  11. Originally "mettre", but corrected in the errata.
  12. Originally "volto", but corrected in the errata.
  13. 13.0 13.1 13.2 There's no conclusion of this word on the next page, just a new sentence.
  14. Originally "occcsione", but corrected in the errata.
  15. Originally "albassare", but corrected in the errata.
  16. Originally "& migliore", but corrected in the errata.
  17. Originally "temerariemente", but corrected in the errata.
  18. Originally "bisogna", but corrected in the errata.
  19. The letter 'F' was omitted in the print and hand-corrected in all copies.
  20. Originally "guardia", but corrected in the errata.
  21. Originally "equali", but corrected in the errata.
  22. Originally "poco", but corrected in the errata.
  23. Originally "poco", but corrected in the errata.
  24. Originally "non buoni", but corrected in the errata.
  25. Originally "queui", but corrected in the errata.
  26. Originally "che spada", but corrected in the errata.
  27. Originally "accorgendosi", but corrected in the errata.
  28. Originally "con pugnale", but corrected in the errata.
  29. Originally "mouendolo", but corrected in the errata.
  30. Originally "diuersi", but corrected in the errata.
  31. Originally "dentro la spada", but corrected in the errata.
  32. Originally "andere", but corrected in the errata.
  33. Originally "richede", but corrected in the errata.
  34. Originally "in suoi", but corrected in the errata.
  35. This word can't be read on the photos I have. It's a 6-letter word that seems to end in "s?ed". The Italian word means to move or advance, and Tom Leoni translates it as "fling". ~ Michael Chidester
  36. Originally "della", but corrected in the errata.
  37. Originally "la dette", but corrected in the errata.
  38. Originally "è passare", but corrected in the errata.
  39. The errata adds "l’".
  40. Originally "farmarsi", but corrected in the errata. The errata says it should be on page 232, but this is the only instance of the word in the book.
  41. This large blank space was probably meant to be filled in later with a suitable translation for brezza, which means "breeze" though that's obviously not the intended meaning here. It might be a spelling of brecca, meaning "breach". Tom Leoni translates it "rampart". ~ Michael Chidester
  42. Originally "sforza", but corrected in the errata. The errata says it should be on page 241, but this is the only instance of the word on the correct line.
  43. Should be 183.
  44. Originally "ineguale", but corrected in the errata.