Guy Windsor

Consulting Swordsman. Writer.

  • Books
  • Training
    • Learn Online!
    • The School
    • Seminars
  • Games
  • Blog
  • Resources
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Sources
    • Errata
  • About
  • Contact
  • T-Shirts!

Archives for December 2018

Merry Christmas! Fiore translation project #3: the sword in one hand plays 3-4

December 25, 2018 By Guy Windsor Leave a Comment

Merry Christmas! In an unprecedented fit of organisation, this post was actually uploaded about two weeks ago, so don’t worry, I’m not working today, I’m opening presents, cooking an unfeasibly large amount of food, and probably already stuck into a bottle of wine. I hope you’re having a great day. But I decided on posting these every Tuesday when the first one happened to be ready on, you guessed it, a Tuesday.

Continuing on from Tuesday… If you’re coming late to the party, you should start here (where I explain what this project is all about, describe my decision making in the transcription and translation, and so on.)

Folio 20v, plays 3 and 4.

These plays are relatively straightforward, after the master’s cover, which has not blown the player’s sword far enough aside that you can just cut the head as in the second play, you enter, into either of these two situations. I’ll address why you would end up in one or the other after we’ve looked at the text.

De taglo e de punta ben te posso ferire. Anchora se acresco lo pe ch’e denanzi io ti posso ligare in ligadura mezana ch’e denanzi dipenta al terzo zogo del primo magistro rimedio di daga. Anchora questo zogo ch’e me dredo ti posso fare. E per tal modo ti posso ferire, e anchora ligare.

I can strike you well with cuts and thrusts. Also if I advance the foot that is in front I can bind you in the middle lock, that is shown at the third play of the first remedy master of the dagger. Also I can do this play that is after me. And in this way I can strike, and also bind.

Anchora is a popular word, isn’t it? It literally means “again”, but is often used as “um”, “er”, “so”, “also” etc. Ligare, and it’s noun form ligadura are also common, and bear some expansion. You may recall from Royal Armouries Ms I.33 the expression in Latin “ligans ligati contrari sunt et irati: fugit at partes laterum, peto sequi”, “The binder and the bound are contrary and irate: he flees to the side, I seek to follow”. In this case, ligans/ligati denotes binding sword to sword, but it survives into Italian as to bind, to tie, etc. (In modern Italian, legare). It’s important to note that throughout the book Fiore only uses it to describe grappling of one sort or another, never binds between blades (it would actually be really useful to be proven wrong on this, so if I’ve missed something, do let me know!).

Because we tend to call these grappling techniques where you hold the person still in order to hit them ‘locks’, I have translated ligadura mezana as the middle lock. It’s interesting to note that the ligadura sottana, the lower lock, is also called the ‘strong key’, the chiave forte. Key implies lock, of course.

While we’re here, let’s look at those two dagger plays:

The third play of the first master from f10v:

In la mezana ligadura t’o serato ‘l brazo, per si fatto modo che tu non mi poi fare alchun impazo. E se ti voglo sbatter in terra a mi e pocha briga. E de fuzirme non ti daro fadiga.

I have locked your arm in the middle lock, in such a way that you can’t be of any inconvenience. And if I want to smash you to the ground, that’s no trouble. And don’t bother escaping from me.

Notice that Fiore uses ‘serare’, ‘to lock’, not ‘ligare’, ‘to bind’, in the first sentence, further justification for translating ligadura as lock. And the text where ligadura sottana is equated with chiave forte is on 14r, third illustration (this is the 6th play of the third master):

Questa e chiamada ligadura di sotto e la chiave forte. Che cum tal ligadura armado e disarmado se po dar la morte, che in tutti loghi piculosi po ferire, E di si fatta ligadura no po essire e chi gli entra gli sta cum briga a cum stenta/sienta/fienta segondo che si vedi ne la figura dipenta.

This is called the low lock and the strong key. With this lock one can give death, armoured or unarmoured, because one can strike in all the dangerous places. And the one to whom the lock is done cannot escape, and whoever enters it will be in trouble and in pain, as you see in the depicted figure.

Here’s how I do the third play:

The fourth play of the sword in one hand is the lock that one could also do (as stated in the text of the third play). The text reads:

La tua spada el tuo brazo e ben impresonado e no ten poy fuzare che non ti fiera a mio modo, per che tu mostra saver pocho di questo zogho.

Your sword is well imprisoned and you cannot escape without being struck in the way that I do (lit. my way), because you show that you know little of this play.

This is how I do it:

The primary difference I see between the first and the third play is the player’s feet; in the third play he appears to have passed back, as he is now right foot forwards. This suggests that the scholar is chasing him. In the fourth play, the player is still left foot forwards, and the scholar appears to have extended himself forwards.

The first, third, and fourth plays, taken together, suggest that the scholar does one thing: parry. Depending on what happens when he does so, he’ll either enter, or strike.  Not seeing an opening to strike, he enters in with his left hand. He may grip the player’s sword hilt, wrist, or envelop the elbow, depending on the measure, which is a factor of the player’s movement, and the scholar’s intentions. If the opening is there, he strikes directly.

These videos are excerpted from my Medieval Longsword Complete Course, which you should totally go and buy. Here’s a 50% discount

Alternatively, feel free to drop some change in the tip jar. I really appreciate all donations: they are a tangible proof that this work has value to someone other than myself, and it makes it much easier to justify the time spent doing it.

Next week we’ll have a look at the fifth play, and detour through the four other sword disarms. See you then!

Share this:

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Email
  • Reddit
  • Telegram
  • More
  • Pocket
  • Skype
  • WhatsApp
  • Print
  • Tumblr
  • Pinterest
  • LinkedIn

Filed Under: Fiore Translation Project

The Fiore Translation Project: sidetrack #1, the manuscripts

December 20, 2018 By Guy Windsor 2 Comments

One very good question that has come up in the comments on my Fiore Translation project, is why focus on the Getty MS? It’s the manuscript that’s had the most attention, the most work done on it. Why not focus on the Pisani Dossi, the Morgan, or the Florius?

In case you are new to this, let me explain what those things are…

To quote from The Medieval Longsword, pages 5-6:

The four surviving copies of Fiore’s manuscripts are:

Il Fior di Battaglia (MS Ludwig XV13), held in the J. P. Getty museum in Los Angeles. “The Getty”, as it is generally known, covers wrestling, dagger, dagger against sword, longsword, sword in armour, pollax, spear, lance on horseback, sword on horseback and wrestling on horseback. The text includes detailed instructions for the plays. Regarding dating, in this manuscript Fiore mentions a duel between Galeazzo da Mantoa and Jean le Maingre (Boucicault), which we know took place in 1395. He does not mention Galeazzo’s death, which occurred in 1406 (a crossbow bolt in the eye at Medolago). So it seems likely that the manuscript was written between 1395 and 1406. The treatise was published in facsimile by Massimo Malipiero in 2006, and a full translation into English was published by Tom Leoni in 2009.

Flos Duellatorum, in private hands in Italy, but published in facsimile in 1902 by Francesco Novati. “The Novati” or “the Pisani-Dossi” follows more or less the same order and has more or less the same content as the Getty. The main differences are that the spear section comes between the dagger and the sword, and the dagger against sword material is at the end. The text is generally far less specific than in the Getty, but it is the only version that is dated by the author, who states that he is writing on February 10th 1409 (1410 by modern reckoning). He also states that he has been studying for 50 years, which would put his date of birth around 1350, assuming he began training at the usual age of 10 or 12.

Il Fior di Battaglia (Morgan MS M 383), “The Morgan”, held in the Pierpont Morgan museum in New York, proceeds more like a passage of arms: first comes mounted combat with lance, sword, and unarmed; then on foot, spear, sword in armour, sword out of armour, and sword against dagger. There is no wrestling or dagger combat shown except against a sword, though they are mentioned in the introduction. I conclude that the manuscript is incomplete. Most of the specific plays shown here are also in the Getty, and these have almost identical texts.

Florius de Arte Luctandi (MSS LATIN 11269), recently discovered in the Bibliotheque Nationale Francaise in Paris, is probably a later copy. “Florius” has Latin text and is beautifully coloured. It follows the approximate order of the Morgan, though is more complete, containing all the sections seen in the Getty and the Novati.

It is much easier when dealing with multiple versions of the same source to pick one as your main focus and refer to the others when necessary. Most scholars working on Fiore agree that the Getty is the most useful source, since it is as complete as any other, and has the fuller, more explanatory, text.

The Medieval Longsword came out in 2014, so unsurprisingly it doesn’t refer to the most recent major Fiore publication. 

My goal in studying Fiore is primarily to understand how sword fights work. I am a martial artist first, historian second. From that perspective, it makes sense to focus on the most complete version of the book (which would rule out the Morgan), with the best illustrations and the most complete, explanatory, text. The Getty is the only sensible choice. 

But, and this is a very large but, it would be very foolish not to take advantage of the other sources. Here’s how I see them:

The Morgan 

You can download a copy here. Morgan MS.M.383 copy

The first thing to note is that the Morgan starts with the lance on horseback, and proceeds in the reverse order to the Getty. This means the book is following the order of a passage of arms, rather than the (probably) best pedagogical order. 

It is also sadly incomplete. Though the introduction mentions dagger, for example, the book ends at the play of the sword in one hand.

The ms has been rebound out of order. I would order it like so: Folia 1-14 are correct. There’s a page missing after 14, then the order should go: 16, 15, 18, 17, [page missing], 19, [rest of ms missing if it ever existed].

Where we have the same plays and actions, the text for the Morgan is remarkably similar to the Getty. This is uncontroversial; you can check the transcriptions on Wiktenauer here.

To my mind the Morgan is principally useful for the one key theoretical insight it offers: the play of the sword on horseback showing the crossing of the swords:

Top right image from f6r.

Quisti doi magistri sono aqui incrosadi a tuta spada. E zoche po far uno por far l’altro, zoe che po fare tuti zoghi de spada cum lo incrosar. Ma lo incrosar sie de tre rafone, zoe a tuta spada e punta de spada. E chi e incrosado a tuta spada pocho gle po stare. E chi’e incrosado a meza spada meno gle po stare. E chi a punta de spada niente gle po stare. Si che la spada si ha in si tre cose, zoe, pocho, meno, e niente.

These two masters are here crossed a tutta spada (“at the whole sword”). And what one can do the other can do, thus [they] can do all the plays of the sword with the crossing. But the crossing is of three kinds, thus a tuta spada (at the whole sword) and a punta de spada (“at the point of the sword”). [Note the inconsistency here: he says ‘of three kinds’, but mentions only two at this point.] And he who is crossed a tuta spada, little can he stand. And he who is crossed a meza spada (at the middle of the sword), less can he stand. And he who is crossed a punta de spada, nothing can he stand. So the sword has three things in it, thus: little, less, and nothing.

This is of course a matter of leverage: when the crossing is near the hilt (a tutta spada), you have some strength, you can stand, withstand, support, or hold, a little. At the middle, less, and at the point, nothing. Please note, fencers with a more modern background (shall we say, from 1550 onwards), will be leaping up and down in excitement because in more modern systems, generally featuring swords with more complex, hand-protecting, hilts, parries are done with what Fiore would call the tuta spada against the punta di spada. Or what rapierists would call the forte against the debole, and smallswordists the fort against the feeble (or foible). But, please note, in every single case where Fiore describes the blade relationship at the parry, he specifies middle to middle. This is, I think, for two reasons. Firstly, with an open-hilted sword, you cannot afford to put your hand so close to the enemy blade, you must parry further down the sword. Secondly, parries are not done as a gentle but firm closings of the line; they are rebattimenti, beating actions. The tuta spada is not moving fast enough to hit with enough force to beat the opponent’s weapon aside.

Other than that, while it’s an interesting source, it doesn’t add anything to our understanding of the Art. I’d love to be proved wrong on that, so if I’ve missed something, let me know.

The Florius

You can see scans of the MS on this wiktenauer page.

Ken Mondschein has published a paper on it here. This is one of those “Fiore scholars, you have no choice, you have to read this” moments. It’s basically everything we know about Fiore, his life, and a lot of fascinating insights into his patrons and milieu. Plus, it’s even free. Go.

As I see it, this is a very pretty, but not very useful, version of the book. I paid the BnF about a thousand euros for the scans (which I’m not allowed to share, because they are a tight-fisted lot at that institution, but they’ve now put them online, see above), and while I don’t regret that, it didn’t actually change a single thing I was doing in class. No new techniques or concepts. The artwork is stylised to the point where it’s not a usable reference source, and the text is as short and even less helpful than the Pisani-Dossi. As Ken wrote “the Paris manuscript changes the source material so considerably, and in a manner so consistent with it originating in the court of Leonello d’Este, Marquis of Ferrara, that we must consider it almost a separate work.” Scholars need to know about it, and study it to some degree, but martial artists can move swiftly on. Again, if I’ve missed something, let me know!

The Pisani-Dossi

You can download a good pdf of the book here: Flos_Dvellatorvm_in_Armis,_sine_Armis,_Eqvester,_Pedester_(Novati) copy

There is a cadre of Fiore scholars that remember the bad old days when a very poor photocopy of the Pisani-Dossi ms, with extremely bad English translations pasted over the original text, was the ONLY version of Il Fior di Battaglia that we had. 

Seriously. That was all we had to go on. No wonder we struggled. I first saw the photocopy in 1994, and felt totally justified in keeping smallsword as my main focus. By the early 2000s, we had heard of the Getty, but it was almost impossible to see a copy. I blagged some not-very-clear scans in 2002, and better ones in 2005. In 2006 we saw full-res scans for the first time, when Brian Stokes gave a lecture on them at the WMAW event in Dallas. Oh my, did we get excited. We saw the first micro-filmed scans of the Morgan in about 2002, and better images became available by about 2010. As for the Pisani-Dossi, a decent quality un-messed-about-with pdf became available in about 2002. Halleluliah. 

Now do you understand me when I say you don’t know how lucky you are?

To be clear, the version we are all working from is the facsimile made by Francesco Novati and published in 1902. The original is in the Pisani-Dossi family vault, and to date has been seen only by Brian Stokes, because it is basically impossible to arrange a viewing: it requires all the heirs of the family (who do not get on) to be present for the vault to be opened. However, as far as we know, the facsimile is accurate (according to Brian).

This ms is as complete as the Getty, but as we saw in the discussion of the sword in one hand master, the text is much less useful, generally. However, as we also saw here, it does include some illustrations and plays that add significant depth to our understanding. Especially noteworthy is the crossing of the sword in zogho stretto from the roverso side, shown here:

Questa e coverta de la riverssa mano

Per far zoghi de fortissimo ingano

This is a cover from the backhand side,

To make plays of the greatest trickery.

Per la coverta de la riverssa mano acqui to afato

De zogho streto e de ferire non fera guardito

By the cover of the backhand side I have got you here

You can’t defend yourself against the close plays or the strikes.

I am also jolly fond of the third master of the dagger from this ms; it has a gloriously fun disarm:

Qui comenca zoghi de mi riverssa zoghi forti

Per tali zoghi non savez asay ne sono morti

E li zoghi li mie scholari seguizano

E pur de parte riverssa comenzazano.

Here begin the plays of my strong backhand plays

By these plays you don’t know how many have died,

And the plays of my scholars that follow

And only of the backhand side, they begin.

Per lo zogho del magistro la daga o guadagnada

E de ferirte te fazo grande derada.

By the play of the master I have gained the dagger

And by striking you I’ll cause you great discombobulation.

Sorry, I couldn’t resist. The non-technical smack-talk cries out for non-technical language play. Derada is not discombobulation, but the sense is the same.

One of the principal reasons I include this play in my Dagger Disarm Flowdrill, part of my basic syllabus for Armizare, is to specifically refer to the Pisani-Dossi, to make sure all of my students are aware that there is more than one copy of the source.

Let me just make the point about the text very clear. Here is the Pisani-Dossi version of the Exchange of the thrust:

Aquesto e de punta un crudelle schanbiar

In l’arte piu falsa punta de questa non se po far.

Tu me trasisti de punta e questa io to dada

E piu seguro se po far schivando la strada.

Here is a cruel exchange of the thrust,

In the art you cannot do a more false [deceptive] thrust than this,

You came to strike me with at thrust and I did this to you,

And [to be] more secure you can go avoiding [out of] the way.

And now the same play from the Getty ms:

Questo zogho si chiama scambiar de punta e se fa per tal modo zoe. Quando uno te tra una punta subito acresse lo tuo pe ch’e denanci fora de strada e cum l’altro pe passa ala traversa anchora fora di strada traversando la sua spada cum cum gli toi brazzi bassi e cum la punta de la tua spada erta in lo volto o in lo petto com’e depento.

This play is called the exchange of thrust, and it is done like this, thus. When one strikes a thrust at you immediately advance your foot that is in front out of the way and with the other foot pass also out of the way, crossing his sword with with your arms low and with the point of your sword up in the face or in the chest as is pictured.

You can see then that one is general, and the other very specific. If you want to know which foot to move where, there’s only one ms that will tell you, and is also complete.

So, for anyone wanting to recreate Fiore’s art, there is only one sensible choice of source to focus on. But, and it’s a big but, you should also be intimately familiar with the Pisani-Dossi, and the Morgan, and at least aware of the existence of the Florius. Now that we have established why I’m focussing on the Getty, let’s briefly look at the overall structure of the Ms.

If you don’t already have it, you can download a pdf of the ms here:

FiorDiBattaglia_MS_LUDWIG_XV_13_sRGB_150dpi copy

This is (again) taken from The Medieval Longsword, pages 8-13:

The Structure of il Fior di Battaglia

Il Fior di Battaglia is a vast and complex treatise, covering an enormous range of weapons combinations, techniques, counters, and fundamental concepts. As it was written around 1410, it comes from a different cultural and educational background from ours, one in which memory training was fundamental. As a result, the lack of theoretical discussion in the work, and the way the information is presented, can present stumbling blocks to the modern reader. The sheer amount of information is daunting, and as it is spread over some 90-odd sides of vellum (conventionally numbered 1 to 47 recto and verso)*

 

keeping the structure clear in your head as you read can be difficult, so I’ll lay it out for you. The first three written sides (p. 3 recto and verso, p. 4 recto) are taken up with a text-only introduction. This covers the following points:

• A brief autobiography of Fiore himself

• A list of his more famous students and some of their feats of arms

• A brief discussion of the secret nature of the art, and Fiore’s opinions about different modes of combat (fighting armoured in the lists versus fighting in arming doublets with sharp swords)

• A further description of Fiore’s training, and his opinions regarding the necessity of books in general for mastering the art

• A connection of Fiore himself and the book with a higher authority (Nicolo, Marquis of Este) who commissioned the work

• An overview of the book and its didactic conventions, begin- ning with some background information on wrestling, and advice to the student on what is required

• Discussion of poste (the guard positions used in this art)

• A description of a crown and garter convention by which one can tell at a glance who is winning the fight in any given image.

This last is critically important to following what is going on in the treatise, so I’ll expand on it here. The figures that begin each section are shown standing in guard, and wear a crown to indicate their masterly status. They are the “first masters”. Following them are one or more “remedy masters” (also called the “second masters”), who illustrate a defence against an attack. Following each of them in turn are their scholars, who are identified by a garter, who execute the techniques that follow the previous master’s remedy. After a scholar or master may come a “counter-remedy master” (the “third master”), wearing a crown and a garter, who illustrates the counter to that remedy, or to a specific scholar. Occasionally, there is a fourth master, who may be called the “counter-counter-remedy master”, who wears the crown and garter too. Fiore specifies that most sequences don’t get beyond the third master (i.e. the attack is met by the remedy, which the attacker counters), and it is perilous (perhaps because it is insecure) to go beyond three or four. This visual convention is unique to Fiore as far as we know, and makes it easy to be sure who is supposed to win from any illustrated position, and what stage of the fight (principle or guard; defence; counter to the defence; counter to the counter) is being shown. When reading the treatise, you can immediately identify who is winning in a given picture by his bling—the most bling wins!

The finish to the introduction is particularly interesting: “The coloured letters, the illustrations and the plays will show you all the art clearly enough for you to understand it.” In other words, this book should be enough to transmit the art completely. A bold claim, and one that is borne out I think, once the conventions are understood.

Weapon by Weapon: the Sections of the Manuscript

The manuscript is divided into sections, which are linked together. The primary divisions (mentioned in the title of the Pisani-Dossi) are on foot, on horseback, in armour and out of armour. The secondary divisions are by weapon. We begin on foot, out of armour:

• Abrazare: wrestling. This has one remedy master, and a total of twenty plays. The first sixteen are unarmed, then come two with a short stick (bastoncello), and two with the stick against the dagger, connecting us to

• Dagger: this is a huge section, with 76 plays, divided upbamongst nine remedy masters. This is followed by defence of the dagger against the sword, and hence

• Sword in one hand: this contains one remedy master followed by eleven plays, which will be detailed later in this book. They lead us to

• The sword in two hands: this starts with a description of footwork, then six different ways to hold and use the sword, then twelve guards. The plays are divided into

• Zogho largo, wide play: 20 plays, including two remedy masters

• Zogho stretto, close play: 23 plays deriving from a single remedy master, which is followed by

• Defence from sword guards on the left side—a single remedy master, with no scholars, who is followed by

• Staff and dagger against spear, and two clubs and a dagger against spear. This seems to finish the unarmoured material (though some of the dagger plays required armour). 

There follows:

• The segno page, or “seven swords”; a memory map for the system as a whole, and illustrating the four virtues required for success in the Art.

From here on, we are mostly in armour:

• Sword in armour—six guard positions, one remedy master, one counter-remedy master, and a total of sixteen plays.

• Pollax—again six guard positions, eight plays with no specific remedy master, and two more showing variations on the axe: one with a weight on a rope, the other with a box of poison dust on the end. This is followed by the:

• Spear—first we see three guards on the right, one play and one counter-remedy, then three guards on the left, and one play.

And finally, mounted combat:

• Lance—five plays, each with their own master, including one counter-remedy,

• Lance against sword—five plays, including three counter- remedies.

• Sword—one guard position, shown against two attacks, with nine plays.

• Abrazare—seven plays including three counter-remedies.

• On foot with ghiaverina, a type of spear, against mounted opponents, one master followed by two plays.

• Lance and rope—a last play of lance against lance, showing a specific trick for dismounting an opponent.

• Sword against sword—a last, probably allegorical, play, in which you chase your opponent back to his castle, in which his villanous friends are waiting.

In this book we shall confine ourselves mostly to the three sections of the sword on foot, unarmoured. This does not suggest that these sections are somehow a standalone treatise; on the contrary, under- standing them has required many readings of the entire manuscript, and exhaustive recreation of the entire system on foot. The sections complement and reinforce each other: when a longsword pommel strike comes in, treat it like a dagger attack: when you end up too close to use your pollax, use the wrestling plays. There is much to learn about the spear from the plays of the sword, and so on. I have left out the plays in armour simply because most readers will not have access to a complete harness, and there is no point doing armoured plays without it. Likewise, we should not imagine that the work is done: there remain (in other sections) plays that have not yet been convincingly interpreted by anyone, and the mounted combat material is beyond the scope of any but the very best riders, with highly trained horses.

In any given section there will usually be one or more “remedy masters” wearing a crown, illustrating the defence against a partic- ular attack. These are followed by scholars, wearing a garter, who complete the play of the previous master. There are often also counter-remedy masters, wearing a crown and a garter, which counter either the scholar that comes before them, or the master himself. In other words their action may be specific to one scholar, or more generally applicable to the remedy itself.

The plays are the illustrations of the techniques, so a picture of a player (wearing no crown or garter) getting beaten by a master, scholar, or counter-remedy master. One technical sequence, such as a parry and strike, might take up one, two or three such illustrations, each of which is a play. As the term implies, there is often a lot of “play” in the execution of these techniques, and several different ways to enter into a given play. Fiore scholars tend to keep the key plays in memory, in the order that they appear in the Getty MS. It has become the norm to refer to the plays by their number—such as “the third play of the second master of zogho largo”. This is more useful than saying “p. 25 verso, bottom left illustration”, because it puts the play into its context. It is also how Fiore himself refers to the plays. In this numbering system, the illustration showing the master is the first play, and all the images that follow him, up to the next master, are numbered two, three, etc. This makes it very easy to find the play referred to—simply find the right master (wearing a crown and no garter), and count from there. So when reading this book, if you keep a copy of the treatise handy, you should be able to find the source for every technique I describe.

*Footnote: These Latin terms are the technical names for the front and back surfaces of a page: the recto is the right-hand (usually odd- numbered) page in an open book, and the back of that page (which, when the page is turned, becomes the left-hand page, usually even- numbered) is the verso. Definition from The Columbia Guide to Standard American English. Also it is worth noting that the pagination in general use and which I am using here is different to that employed by the Getty museum; because the first page has a “3” written into the corner, we number the treatise from page three onwards; the Getty numbers the pages from the first extant page. Malipiero gives both uses, the Getty’s version in brackets.

I hope that’s made it clear where I’m coming from, and given you some insight into the currently known copies of the book. The next instalment of the Fiore Translation Project will be coming out on Tuesday, which happens to be Christmas Day. Merry Christmas everyone!

Share this:

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Email
  • Reddit
  • Telegram
  • More
  • Pocket
  • Skype
  • WhatsApp
  • Print
  • Tumblr
  • Pinterest
  • LinkedIn

Filed Under: Fiore Translation Project

Fiore Translation Project #2: Sword in One Hand, plays 1-2

December 18, 2018 By Guy Windsor 3 Comments

Continuing on from last week with the Sword in One Hand:

Folio 20v, first two plays:

This is where the rubber meets the road: the first sword on sword action of the book! Personally I love the dagger stuff too, but pretty much everyone comes to class for the SWORDS!

Recall the situation: the Master (that’s you) is about to be attacked with a cut, a thrust, or a thrown sword. In this illustration it’s pretty clear that the player (no garter) is attacking the master’s scholar (with garter), with a cut to the head. Good start.

Quello che a detto lo magistro io lo ben fatto, zoe chio passar fora de strada facendo bona coverta. E lo zugadore trovo discoverto. Si che una punta gli voglio metter in lo volto per certo. E cum la man stancha voglo pigliare. E la tua spada posso in terra far andare.

That which the master said I have done well, thus, I have passed out of the way making a good cover. And I find the player uncovered. Such that if I want to I can place a point in his face for certain. And with my left hand I want to grab. And I can make your sword go to the ground.

Notice that opponent starts out as “the player” (lo zugadore) and then becomes ‘you’ (as in la tua spada, your sword), as if the scholar was speaking to him. This sort of inconsistency is not important for reconstructing the techniques, but should be noted, because it tells us something about the level of care taken with the text. Also, as I wrote in The Art of Sword Fighting in Earnest, page 32: “I should also note that it is normal Italian usage to write ‘the arm’, ‘the sword’, where in English we would use ‘your arm’, or ‘his sword’. Where it is clear from the context whose body part or weapon is being referred to, I say so. Readers should note that, strictly speaking, this is interpretation.”

Given the starting point, with the master’s sword chambered to his left, and the player cutting from his right, and the way all the plays continue, the blades must at this point be arranged such that the master’s is closer to us in the picture. Have a look at the crossing in close-up: you can see that the lines don’t quite work. 

Now look at the feet. The player has his left foot forwards, which is odd given that he is striking from his right. It may suggest that the attack was done with an accrescere forwards, not a pass.

Hold that thought while we look at the next play.

In tutto tu trovando discoverto, e in la testa to ferido per certo. E se io cum lo mio pe di dredo voglio inanci passare, Assay zoghi stretti poria contra te fare, zoe in ligadure, rotture, e abbrazare.

Finding you completely uncovered, I struck you in the head for sure. And if I, with my back foot pass forwards, I can do some close plays against you, such as binds, breaks, and wrestling.

Notice that the scholar doing the play has his right foot forwards. The question is, what about the pass mentioned in the master’s text? Has the player already done two passes, and is about to do at third? Clearly not, as that would be absurd in practice. So, can we omit the pass, and do the parry and strike without one?

Let’s have a look at the Pisani-Dossi, carta 13A:

Cum passo o fata coverta cum mia spada

E aquella in lo peto subito te intrada.

With [a] pass I have made [a] cover with my sword

And that has immediately entered your chest.

This play on the next page (carta 14a) looks very much like the second play in the Getty above. The text reads:

Anchora la testa to ferida senza passare

Per la bona coverta ch’io sapuda fare.

Again I have struck the head, without passing,

With the good cover that I knew how to do.

So it would seem that we have textual authority to interpret the Getty play as making the cover with just the accrescere, and then striking immediately, no pass required. This makes abundant practical sense anyway, but it’s nice to have the confirmation from the Pisani-Dossi.

So these two plays may be summarised as ‘parry, pass in, and grab’, and ‘parry and strike without passing’. This begs the question of when and why to do which?

Many years ago, one of my senior students, Topi Mikkola, was doing the second play with a much less experienced person. Despite Topi being co-operative and helpful, his internal structure was just too stable for the beginner to be able to move the sword out of the way for the second play to work- there was no opening. So I told him to enter with the first play… and boom! It made sense in my head. 

When you are attacked, parry. You can’t predict exactly what will happen when you do, but so long as you’re not hit (ie the parry worked), then either: 

A) the line to the head is not open for your cut, so do the first play (this is the most likely outcome), or

B) the line is open, so strike with the second play. 

This is how I do them:

The Parry: the mechanics of this are important, so it’s worth spending some time getting it fluent.

First Play:

Second Play:

These videos are excerpted from my Medieval Longsword Complete Course, which you should totally go and buy. Here’s a 50% discount

Alternatively, feel free to drop some change in the tip jar. I really appreciate all donations: they are a tangible proof that this work has value to someone other than myself, and it makes it much easier to justify the time spent doing it.

Next week we’ll have a look plays 3 and 4. See you then!

Share this:

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Email
  • Reddit
  • Telegram
  • More
  • Pocket
  • Skype
  • WhatsApp
  • Print
  • Tumblr
  • Pinterest
  • LinkedIn

Filed Under: Fiore Translation Project

A new project: a free translation and commentary on Fiore, with video.

December 11, 2018 By Guy Windsor 6 Comments

It’s that take-stock time of year, and 2018 has been a monster.

I’ve spent a lot of time this year producing finished products, starting with: 

  • The Theory and Practice of Historical Martial Arts
  • The Art of Sword Fighting in Earnest

I started both of these books in 2015, so I didn’t write them this year, but I got them out into the world.

  • The Essential Rapier Course
  • The Rapier: Part One: Beginners Workbook
  • The Rapier, Part Two: Completing the Basics Workbook

These three rapier projects were all conceived and completed from June this year.

  • I completed my PhD and graduated in July.
  • And taught seminars in Helsinki (twice), the USA (three times), Germany, Hungary, and Ireland.

I also have the first draft of The Rapier, Part Three: Developing Skills complete. Part Four, Rapier and Dagger, is ready in my head, and I have similar workbook series planned for Longsword (the sections of the sword out of armour from Fiore), Armizare (Longsword focussed, but interleaved with abrazare and dagger training, the way I teach in class), and even the provisionally-titled Jumppa series (which is Finnish for ‘exercise done to get fit’), which will cover the breathing, flexibility, strength, power, and stamina exercises I use. That’s a LOT of stuff to have in your head, so I imagine 2019 will involve a lot of publishing!

The problem with all this rampant productivity is that a lot of the work done to get these projects finished, published, and into your waiting hands has nothing to do with researching swordsmanship and getting better at fencing and teaching. So it feels like I haven’t really done much this year, because I haven’t learned much new about my art. I’ve clarified my thinking on how to train quite a bit, in the writing of Developing Skills, but other than that, I can’t think of a single research breakthrough or magical new insight into the Art of Arms.

This is unacceptable.

So I have had a thought. While I was in Seattle, I had a conversation with the excellent Michael Chidester, of Wiktenauer fame, and we agreed that the world needs a new, free, translation of Fiore’s Getty Ms. There is nothing wrong with the current published translation by Tom Leoni  but it a) isn’t free and b) in the interests of making the translation very clear, Tom tends towards over-simplifying the text. 

I’ve never written my own translation of Fiore before, though I have the book clear in my head, partly because it’s a monster of a project. I know if I start at the beginning (the introduction), and work my way steadily through the whole book, I’ll get stuck, lose interest, and the project will fail. It’s too big. So my intention is to go through the bits I’m most interested in first, and transcribe, translate, and comment on them as I go. I have no idea how long it will take to get through the whole book- especially as I fully intend to transcribe and translate the related sections of the other Fiorean manuscripts at the same time, as the whimsy takes me. This will hopefully generate a lot of useful material for scholars of the Art, and so I’ll be posting the material here as I go, under a Creative Commons Attribution licence- in other words you can use it for any purpose whatsoever, including commercial projects, free, so long as you say where you got it from.

My process is simple: I pick a section, and transcribe one paragraph of Fiore’s text straight from the ms, translate it, make whatever comments seem interesting to me, provide a video of how I do it in practice (at least in its basic form) then move on to the next. At the end of a section I’ll comment on the section as a whole, and how I think it fits into the rest of the book, the other mss, and any related texts and systems. It would be both academically unsound, and foolish, not to make use of the existing translations and transcriptions, so when I get stuck, I’ll check the wiktenauer transcriptions and translation (by Colin Hatcher), and Tom’s, to see how they have solved the problem. I don’t always agree, of course! Please note I will not be doing a comparative translation- this is not a response to their work, it’s a separate project. If there is interest, I might pick a paragraph and compare my, Tom’s, and Colin’s versions, so you can see where we differ, but that would be a one-off. Be that as it may, you should be aware that this project owes a debt to their work.

So without further ado: I thought I’d start with the sword in one hand. You’ll notice that this is clearly first-draft work, and I am allowing my curiosity free rein. Enjoy.

Folio 20r 

This folio has the last of the sword against dagger plays (top left), a blank space where the second illustration would normally go, and then the first two pieces of the sword in one hand section. I’ll start there:

Noy semo tre zugadori che volemo alcider questo magistro. Uno gli de trare di punta. L’altro di taglio, l’altro vole batt lancare la sua spada contra lo ditto magistro. Si che ben sara grande fatto ch’ello non sia morto, che dio lo faza ben tristo.

We are three players that want to kill this master. One by striking with a thrust. The other with a cut, the other wants to hit throw his sword against the said master. It will be a great feat if he is not killed, that God makes very sad.

This is quite clear, I think. Three players, each representing the thrust, cut, or thrown sword. The last sentence is basically smack-talk. 

Voy seti cativi e di quest’arte savete pocho. Fate gli fatti che parole non ano loco. Vegna a uno a uno chi sa fare e po. Che se voi fossi cento tutti vi guastero per questa guardia ch’e chossi bona e forte. Io acresco lo pe che’e denanci un pocho fora de strada e cum lo stancho io passo ala traversa. E in quello passare mi crovo rebattendo le spade ve trovo discoverti. E de ferire vi faro certi. E si lanza o spada me ven alanzada, tutte le rebatto chome to ditto passonda fuora di strada. Segondo che vedreti li miei zochi qui dreto. De guardagli che vin prego. E pur cum spada a una mano faro mia arte como vedrete in queste carte.

I’ll just re-arrange the layout of the text so the versification is clear (this is rough- better literature scholars feel free to make corrections! I’ve paid more attention to rhymes than syllable count, because Fiore seems to: I don’t see the common eleven syllable (endecasillabo) or seven (settenario) lines. If poetry forms aren’t you’re thing, this may be useful: 

“The hendecasyllable (Italian: endecasillabo) is the principal metre in Italian poetry. Its defining feature is a constant stress on the tenth syllable, so that the number of syllables in the verse may vary, equaling eleven in the usual case where the final word is stressed on the penultimate syllable. The verse also has a stress preceding the caesura, on either the fourth or sixth syllable. The first case is called endecasillabo a minore, or lesser hendecasyllable, and has the first hemistich equivalent to a quinario; the second is called endecasillabo a maiore, or greater hendecasyllable, and has a settenario as the first hemistich” from Wikipedia, here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hendecasyllable

 

Voy seti cativi e di quest’arte savete pocho.

Fate gli fatti che parole non ano loco.

Vegna a uno a uno chi sa fare e po. 

Che se voi fossi cento tutti vi guastero 

per questa guardia ch’e chossi bona e forte. 

Io acresco lo pe che’e denanci 

un pocho fora de strada 

e cum lo stancho io passo ala traversa. 

E in quello passare mi crovo rebattendo 

le spade ve trovo discoverti. [This has been corrected in the ms, from discoverte]

E de ferire vi faro certi. 

E si lanza o spada me ven alanzada, 

tutte le rebatto chome t’o 

ditto passando fuora di strada. 

Segondo che vedreti li miei zochi qui dreto. 

De guardagli che vin prego. 

E pur cum spada a una mano faro mia arte 

como vedrete in queste carte.

It’s worth bearing in mind that Fiore is writing in verse. For a whimsical take on this, see my Armizare Vade Mecum, a collection of mnemonic verses for learning Fiore’s art.

Now the translation:

You are thugs and of this art you know little. Do your deeds, words have no place. Come one by one, those who can, and even if you were 100, I’d smash you with this guard that is so good and strong. I advance the foot that is in front a little out of the way, and with the left I pass across. And in that pass I cross beating the swords, I’ll find you uncovered, and will make certain to strike. And if a lance or sword is thrown at me, I’ll beat them all away as I said, passing out of the way. Just as you see in my plays that follow. Take a look at them, if you please. And still with the sword in one hand I make my art, as you see in these pages.

A few things to note here. Firstly, I find chi sa fare e po tricky; the meaning of the whole phrase (from vegno to guastero) is obvious enough: come and have a go, even if there were 100 of you, I’d still f*ck you up. If anyone has a clear idea of this element, do let me know.

The meaning of cativi is clear- Leoni has “two-bit poltroons”; it could also be villains, thugs, low bad fellows. Also naughty people (“sei una ragazza cattiva?” is “are you a naughty girl?” (don’t ask me how I know that)). I’ve used ‘thugs’ because it fits the meaning, and the sense of ‘untrained’, and ‘rough’.

Let’s just compare this to the Pisani-Dossi, carta 13a:

First up, it’s worth noting that this is only one play; the thugs don’t get their own spot on the page. It’s also worth noting that this occurs after the blows of the sword in the Pisani-Dossi, but before them in the Getty.

 

Per lancare de spada e trare tayo e punta

Per la guardia che io ho niente me monta

Vegno auno auno chi contra mi vole far

Che cum tuti io voio contrastar

E chi vole vedere coverte e ferire

Tor de spada e ligadure senza falire

Guardi gli mie scolari come fan fare

Se elli non trovari contrario non ano pare

By throws of the sword and striking cut and thrust

By this guard that I have nothing overcomes me

Come one by one, whoever wants to oppose me

And with all I wish to stand against

And whoever wishes to see covers and strikes,

Disarms, and locks without fail,

Watch my scholars how they do them,

If you do not find a counter they have no equal.

The overall meaning is the same, but it is missing the specific instructions regarding the footwork. 

Readers of Advanced Longsword (pages 84-86) will know how I view this section; it’s kind of a ‘if you’ve only got a couple of days to teach someone how to survive a duel, do this’. I do not think that the sword itself is any different to the longsword used elsewhere; this is not a separate weapon, it’s a distinct use of a weapon. There is no suggestion otherwise in the text itself, and the images clearly show a longsword, just as in the other sword sections. I will reserve commenting on the section as a whole for when I have completed the transcription and translation of it here. 

Note that we haven’t got to a movement yet, so there’s no point posting a video. Don’t worry, they’re coming next week.

Just this one post has taken most of a morning. This is going to be a very time-consuming project, but useful for me as a scholar, and hopefully for you too. It is easier to justify the time spent on this sort of thing if it provides some kind of revenue, so if you think this is a great idea, let me know by donating some cash towards it. I have set up a tip jar in the sidebar, and will very much appreciate any donations you can spare. If there’s a part of the ms you’d like me to prioritise, feel free to ask- I work for you, after all. I thought about doing this through a crowd-funding service, or Patreon, but their terms of service aren’t optimal, and the commissions they take seem excessive to me, so I thought this would be more efficient. I promise to spend it all on books, swords, wine, and feeding and housing my children. Maybe not in that order.

The comments section under each post on the topic is the place to put your disagreements, views, responses etc. I won’t be discussing the material on social media at all, because it’s a time-suck, and those platforms generate lots of money for very rich people who don’t need it. If you want me to see and respond to your thoughts, please post them here.

Next Tuesday I’ll post the translation and interpretation of the first two plays… see you then!

Share this:

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Email
  • Reddit
  • Telegram
  • More
  • Pocket
  • Skype
  • WhatsApp
  • Print
  • Tumblr
  • Pinterest
  • LinkedIn

Filed Under: Fiore Translation Project Tagged With: Fiore Translation Project

How to Sharpen Pencils: an Appreciation

December 5, 2018 By Guy Windsor Leave a Comment

Approximately every 365 days there falls a date celebrated for many things, but in my household principally as the anniversary of my birth. Yes, you have anticipated me: it was my birthday.
As is delightfully customary, I was showered with gifts, chief among them a tome that has, quite simply, changed my life.
How to Sharpen Pencils, by David Rees (henceforth referred to as “The Master”) sets out in clear and pellucid prose the principles and practices of that once-exalted, now sadly under-appreciated craft, the sharpening of pencils. He includes a complete theoretical underpinning, and much sage and practical advice to the novice, not omitting (which gladdened my swordsmanly heart) a thorough warm-up. Because, let us face this truth unstintingly, pencil sharpening is primarily a physical craft, to be mastered before approaching the metaphysical sharpening of graphite encased in fragrant cedar.
The Master is clearly a man of surpassing patience and precision, but he does not neglect the aesthetics of his art: interleaved throughout this meisterwerk are “Reveries”, miniature photographic essays of appreciation for early mechanical pencil sharpening devices. These are included, I think, to raise the reader to a state of consciousness better suited to a deeper appreciation of the perfection that is tantalisingly visible in the crafting of a pencil point, yet will ever elude us.
Just as perfection must ever elude the author of any book. I might point out that The Master, whose veneration of accuracy verges on (but never quite o’ersteps the bounds of) pedantry, would under no circumstances have written “site” for “sight”, as appears on page 96. I suspect some publisher’s minion, jealous of an attainment that will forever be beyond their grasp, of deliberately inserting this homophonous error. Perhaps the same saboteur that misleadingly and entirely erroneously placed this book in the “Humor” category. (I apologise most profusely to my readership for the appalling lack of a ‘u’ in Humor, here. I am quoting directly from the back cover of the book and cannot be held responsible.)
Yet there remains one baffling omission: nowhere does The Master address the pressing issue of pocket-sharpener maintenance, other than simple cleaning of the egress slot. It is surely necessary to, as occasion demands, remove the blade with a small screwdriver (of a type common to jewellers and electricians), and polish the flat of it on a suitable whetstone, re-shape the bevel on same, and return it to the sharpener body, being careful to replace the screw snugly to prevent it falling out, thus freeing the blade with potentially serious consequences, but not so snugly as to render future removal for re-sharpening unnecessarily laborious. This simple process can in many cases transform a lacklustre sharpener.
Here, I also must point out that in my time as a cabinet-maker, I was wont to sharpen pencils with a very sharp chisel, and for the finest point, a small hand plane. This is, I admit perhaps beyond the scope of the specialist pencil sharpening professional, but I would, if pressed, be willing to demonstrate these techniques for the edification and delight of fellow enthusiasts.
Neither of these lacunae are sufficiently serious to detract from the overwhelming excellence of this book; I mention them in the spirit of the ambitious pursuit of perfection that so imbues this work.
This book is not just for Christmas: it is, like puppies, for life.

Share this:

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Email
  • Reddit
  • Telegram
  • More
  • Pocket
  • Skype
  • WhatsApp
  • Print
  • Tumblr
  • Pinterest
  • LinkedIn

Filed Under: Books and Writing, Fun

Be a Patron!

Be a Patron

$
Select Payment Method
Personal Info

Donation Total: $10.00

Most Popular Posts

  • How I lost 10kg (22lb) in three weeks without effort…
  • The Princess Bride: how does Thibault cancel out Capoferro?
  • Fascists are poisoning HEMA. Here’s one small…
  • A swordsman’s thoughts on some Game of Thrones fights
  • This belongs to you. Fabris’s Sienza…
  • Size Matters: how long should your rapier be?
  • How to start a HEMA club: 3 principles and 7 steps.

Sample video

A sample class, on the Famous Farfalla!

Recent Posts

  • The Fiore Translation Project #12 The Guards (part 2 of 3)
  • What have Bohemian Rhapsody and Mary Poppins got to do with recreating historical martial arts?
  • The Fiore Translation Project #10 The Seven Blows of the Sword
  • Syllabus Design: Using Forms
  • Fiore Translation Project #9 The Six Grips, or, How to Hold a Longsword

Archives

  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012

Copyright © 2019 Guy Windsor · Privacy Policy · Cookie Policy

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.OkRead more