Having kicked our opponent in the groin, we turn the page to see this spread:

[Note, this image is not a photograph of the manuscript opened up; I have just put the scan of each page next to each other.]  The story is the same though; having dealt with a whole lot of cuts, including (if you’ll indulge me a moment) too hard, too low, and the regular kind, we now deal with thrusts. The first, and probably ideal, response is to exchange the thrust. We have seen this play before in my discussion of the eighth play of the sword in one hand. 

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.

Note the repeated ‘cum’, ‘with’. A common scribal error. Not secret messages from beyond the grave, ok? The instructions couldn’t be clearer, could they?

Rapier fencers will of course be delighted to see the classic thrust in opposition done with longswords, though one should take care to make the crossing thoroughly, and not race to get the point in. At the end of the zogho largo section, on folio 27v, Fiore wrote:

Qui finisse zogho largo dela spada a doy mani, che sono zoghi uniti gli quali ano zoghi, zoe rimedii e contrarie da parte dritta e de parte riversa. E contrapunte e contratagli de zaschuna rasone cum roture coverte ferire e ligadure, che tutte queste chose lizerissimamente se porio intendere.

Here ends the wide play of the sword in two hands, that are plays together, which plays are: remedies, and counters from the forehand and the backhand side, and counterthrusts and countercuts of ever type, with breaks, covers, strikes and binds, that all these things can be very easily understood.

I’ll discuss this translation in more depth in the post after next (there is a lot to discuss), but for now, just notice the ‘contrapunte’, counterthrust. As I see it, this refers to the exchange of thrusts. That Fiore also mentions (but as far as I can see does not show) countercuts, suggests that the lesson of this play can legitimately be applied to countering a cut with a cut.

At this stage we should remember that Fiore loves us and wants us to be happy. He understands that sometimes one might miss a stroke, and that’s okay. Because this action continues in the tenth play:

De questo scambiar de punta ch’e me denanzi, essi questo zogho, che subito che lo scholar ch’e me denanzi non mettesse la punta in lo volto del zugadore, e lassasela si che non la metesse ne in lo volto ne in lo petto, e per che fosse lo zugadore armado, subito debia lo scolaro cum lo pe stancho inanci passare, e per questo modo lo debia piglare. E la sua spada metter a bon ferire poy che lo zugador apresa sua spada e non po fuzire.

From this exchange of thrust that is before me, comes this play, that immediately that the scholar that is before me does not place the thrust in the player’s face, and leaves it such that he doesn’t place it neither in the face nor the chest, and because perhaps the player was in armour, the scholar must immediately pass forwards with the left foot, and in this way must grab. And put his sword to work with good strikes, because the player’s sword has been grabbed and he cannot get away.

So having missed our thrust, perhaps because the opponent is in armour, we pass again, grabbing the sword and striking. In practice I always teach these plays together, and you should continue with the grab whether you hit the face with the exchange or not. That way if you do miss, you’ll continue without pause.

Here are the plays in action:

https://youtu.be/JEsKnhBm_PU

Next week: breaking the thrust!

This project is being published in stages. You can get part one, The Sword in One Hand, as a free PDF by subscribing to my mailing list below, or buy it in ebook format from Amazon or Gumroad. You can get Part two, Longsword Mechanics, from Amazon or Gumroad too!

We in the historical swordsmanship community are often asked about drawing the sword. I wrote a short chapter on it in my book Swordfighting. The chapter was short because there isn’t much information in the sources! I think this is because most sources are concerned with swordsmanship for the duel in a European culture, which for some unknown reason has always begun with the swords already drawn. There’s no tradition of the quick-draw (unlike in Japan, for instance, or the Wild West, for another instance).

Let us begin with Fiore’s sword drawing plays, and then have a look at what other masters have to say on the subject. Fiore gives us five plays of the sword in the scabbard against the dagger, but in each of them, the scabbarded sword is being carried in the hands, either point up or point down. This was actually a quite common way to carry your sword, much as we might carry an umbrella today. This is from folio 19v:

Questo e un partido de daga contra spada. Quello che a daga e tene quello della Spada per lo cavezo dise io te feriro cum mia daga inanci che tu cavi la spada dela guagina. E quello de la spada dise tra puro che son aparechiado. E come quello dela daga vol trare, quello de la spada fa segondo che depento qui dredo.

This is a situation of the dagger against the sword. The one with the dagger has the one with the sword by the collar [and] says: “I will strike you with my dagger before you can draw the sword from its scabbard”. And the one with the sword says “strike as you will for I am prepared”. And as the one with the dagger wants to strike, the one with the sword does the action as it is shown after this.

Note: I translate partido here as “situation” rather than “technique” as it fits better, because a ‘technique of the dagger against the sword’ would imply that the dagger is doing the technique (and will therefore win), which is not the case here. You’ve got to love the smack-talk, which is actually rendered as dialogue. Also note how careful Fiore is to let us know who is doing what: ‘the one with the sword’ or ‘the one with the dagger’. 

Also note: Alberto Dainese spotted an error and kindly emailed me to correct it. Thanks Alberto!

The action that follows is lovely: drop the point of the scabbarded sword onto the attacker’s elbow, controlling their weapon; then draw the sword and run them through. Like so:

Quando costuy leva lo brazo per darme de la daga subito glo posta la guagina apozada al suo brazo de la daga per modo che non mi po far impazo. E subito sguagino la mia spada e si lo posso ferire inanci che’ello mi possa tochare cum sua daga. Anchora poria torgli la daga dela mano per lo modo che fa lo primo magistro de daga. Anchora porave ligarlo in ligadura mezana ch’e lo terzo zogo d’la daga del primo magistro ch’e rimedio.

When this man lifts his arm to give me [a strike] of the dagger, I immediately put the scabbard on his dagger arm in such a way that he cannot cause me any trouble. And immediately I unsheathe my sword and can strike him before he can touch me with his dagger. Also I could take the dagger out of his hand in the way that the first master of the dagger does. Also I could have bound him in the middle lock, that is the third play of the dagger, of the first master that is a remedy [master].

This is quite straightforward, and you can see how I do it here:

https://youtu.be/yWp9dx9cdgI

Yes, I include the trash-talking dialogue!

There are some interesting depths to this. Firstly, you have to love the idea of using your scabbarded sword to constrain the opponent. We tend to think of the scabbard being always attached to a belt, but in fact it was quite common for swords to be carried, especially in town. They would often be handed over to the servants with your cloak and hat when you entered a home. It’s interesting to note that Fiore specifies that you constrain ‘the dagger arm’, rather than ‘his right arm’. This allows for the possibility of left-handed attackers (as are explicitly mentioned on f43v in the context of mounted combat), and echoes the sixth play of abrazare.

Okay, I’ll briefly digress into the abrazare…

The abrazare section begins with the master, shown controlling the player’s arms. The next play shows his scholar breaking the player’s left arm, the one that was extended to the master’s collar. The third play shows what you should do if the player removes their arm from your collar while or before you are trying to break it. The fourth play shows what to do if the original grip is the same, but the player has the right foot forwards. This foot placement prevents both the arm break, and the throw, and requires you to throw them in the other diagonal. The fifth play shows the counter to a situation where the player has grabbed you round the waist (but their feet are as they were in the first-third plays). The sixth play is the first counter-remedy master shown in the entire book, so pay attention:

Io son contrario del Vto zogo denanci apresso. Esi digo che se cum la mia mane dritta levo lo suo brazo de la sua mane che al volto mi fa impazo, faro gli dar volta per modo ch’io lo metero in terra, per modo che vedeti qui depento, overo che guadagnaro presa o ligadura, e de tuo abrazar faro pocha cura.

I am the counter of the fifth play immediately before me. And so I say that with my right hand I lift his arm, of the hand that offends my face, I make him turn in such a way that I put him on the ground, in the way that you see shown here, or I can gain a grip or a lock, and I’ll make your wrestling [skills] useless.

The point I’m interested in here is this: he specifies that you should push the arm that belongs to the hand that is at your face. And you can see that while doing the fifth play exactly as shown has the scholar’s right arm at the face, in the sixth play the counter-remedy master is pushing his opponent’s left arm. This is not a mistake, as such. It’s a general principle, showing what it would look like if the scholar used the other hand.

This is a handy illustration of a) the need to read the text- just following the pictures exactly would be impossible, and b) the fact that these are plays not just techniques. The play will often embody a principle that can be applied in other situations. Returning to the sword against the dagger: it may be obvious that you should constrain the dagger arm, not the other…. Except, in the fifth master of the dagger, you can do either. The master himself, on f38r (which has been bound in the middle of the mounted combat section; this folio belongs between f14 and f15), shows how to deal with an attacker who grabs you by the collar with one hand, and has a dagger in the other.

Io son Quinto Re Magistro per lo cavezzo tenudo di questo zugadore. Inanzi ch’ello mi traga cum sua daga, per questo modo gli guasto lo brazo, per che lo tenir ch’ello mi tene a mi e grande avantazo. Che io posso far tutte coverte, prese e ligadure degl’altri magistri rimedii, e di lor scolari che sono dinanzi. Lo proverbio parla per exempio. Io voglio che ognun ch’ascolaro in quest’arte sazza, che presa di chavezo nissuna deffesa no impaza.

I am the fifth king master held by the collar by this player. Before he strikes me with his dagger, in this way I destroy his arm, because the hold he has on me is a great advantage to me, so I can make all the covers, grips, and locks of the other remedy masters, and of their scholar that are before [me]. The proverb speaks by example. I want that everyone who is a scholar in this art to know that the grip on the collar does not hinder any defence.

The master and his first five scholars all deal with the extended arm, as do scholars eight and nine; the others (six, seven, ten and eleven) deal with the dagger arm. I interpret this as a matter of threat assessment: if the dagger is within reach, or coming towards you, deal with it; otherwise, destroy the extended arm. This clearly relates to the second and third plays of wrestling: if the extended arm is available, break it; if not, then throw. Here in the play of the sword against the dagger, Fiore is explicitly telling us to deal with the dagger arm- perhaps because even if it is held back as a threat, we can reach it with the scabbarded sword, when we couldn’t with just a hand.

This is quite straightforward, and you can see how I do it here:

https://youtu.be/yWp9dx9cdgI

Yes, I include the trash-talking dialogue!

This page continues with two other ways to do the same defence, starting with the sword held point down.

Questo sie un altro partito de spada e daga. Quello chi tene la spada cum la punta in terra per modo che vedete, dise aquello de la daga che lo tene per lo cavezo, Tra pur cum la daga a tua posta che in quello che tu vora trare cum la daga, io sbatero la mia spada soprano lo tuo brazzo, e in quello sguaginero la mia spada tornando cum lo pe dritto in dredo, e per tal modo ti poro ferire inanci cum mia spada che tu mi fieri cum tua daga.

This is another technique of the sword and the dagger. The one that has the sword with the point down in the way that you see, says to the one with the dagger that has him by the collar “Just strike with the dagger, with your guard in which you want to strike with the dagger, I will beat my sword over your arm, and in that [motion] draw my sword, passing the right foot back, in such a way that I can strike you with my sword before you strike me with your dagger.”

This is basically the same play, just done from a different starting point. You can see how I do it here:

https://youtu.be/o3Qfo3KGXAY

Finally we have the scabbarded sword being swung up to defend against the dagger attack (a presaging of the plays of the sword in one hand, do you think?). Looking closely at the images, we see that the sword is being held differently: in the first image, where we whip the sword down onto the arm, the sword hand is thumb down; in the second, where we swing it up, it’s thumb up.

Does it make a difference? He doesn’t mention it in the text, but try it both ways and you tell me…

Questo e simile partito a questo qui dinanzi. Ben che non si faca per tal modo ch’e ditto e qui dinanzi. Questo zogo se fa per tal modo ch’e ditto qui dinanzi, che quando questo cum la daga levera lo brazo per ferirme, io subito levero la mia spada in erto sotto la tua daga, metendote la punta de la mia guagina dela spada in lo volto, tornando lo pe ch’e dinanzi in dredo. E chossi te posso ferire segondo ch’e depinto dredo a me.

This is a similar technique to the one that’s here before. But it isn’t done in the same way as is said in the one before. This play is done in in the way that is said here before, that when the one with the dagger raises his arm to strike me, I immediately raise my sword up under your dagger, putting the point of my sword’s scabbard in your face, passing back with the front foot. And so I can strike you in the way that is shown after me.

Then on the next page, f20r, we have the conclusion to this play. Note the way the sword is held like a very long dagger, which accords with the grip illustrated.

Questo zogo sie del magistro che fa lo partito qui dinanzi. Che segondo chello ha ditto per tal modo io fazo. Che tu vedi bene che tua daga tu no mi poy fare nissuno impazo.

This play is of the master that does the technique before this one. I do it in the way that he has said. You can well see that your dagger cannot cause me any trouble.

The text is a little confusing here- is it the same as the play before it, or not? As I read it, it’s similar, but not the same. The action is quite clear though. Here’s how I do it:

https://youtu.be/7TiHYphEbsM

You can also see my take on how to do these plays in The Medieval Dagger, pp. 148-154.

Note that when the sword is high, you strike down, but when the sword is down, you can strike both downwards, and upwards. I find that the same general rule applies with the longsword guards; I don’t usually strike upwards from a high guard (though of course Fiore says that donna does all seven blows of the sword, so there are exceptions). 

When not carried in the hand, swords were generally suspended from a waist belt in a scabbard, on the non-dominant side (so, on the left for right handers). Daggers, and very short swords, are usually worn the same side as the hand that will use them. The reason for this is blade length. If you snag a tape measure by your right hip and see how far you can pull it out with your right hand, then snag it by your left hip and try the same thing (with your right hand), you will find that drawing across your body allows you to draw a much longer weapon. On me the difference is 90cm (35”) to 130cm (51”). 

Some seventy years after Fiore, Vadi shows this play (in his De Arte Gladiatoria Dimicandi, folio 40r, from about 1485. See my The Art of Sword Fighting in Earnest for a complete translation and commentary):

Unlike Fiore’s actions, this can be done with the scabbard attached to the belt, as one would expect, but is not shown that way here. The text reads only “Dagger technique” and “Finish of the technique”.

Capoferro

In his Gran Simulacro (from 1610), Capoferro does include a brief mention of drawing the sword, in the text regarding this plate:

Under the title “Way to Place the Hand on the Sword” (as I would translate it) he simply tells us to step back with the right foot, and extend your arm (presumably with the sword attached) in prima (above the shoulder), unless you have your left foot forwards, in which case you can unsheathe the sword without moving your feet. And if you have other weapons (cape or dagger), then draw your left foot back while presenting the sword in quarta (on your left) to keep the opponent away while you sort out your weapons. 

That’s it. Nothing at all on how exactly to pull it out of the scabbard, to hold it, or anything like that.

Thibault

The most detailed discussion of drawing the sword that I can find is in Girard Thibault’s glorious Academie de l’espee (1630, translated by John Michael Greer in 2006, published by Chivalry Bookshelf) He devotes chapter 3 to “The Correct Way of Drawing the Sword and Entering Into Measure”. Most interesting to me is his instruction to advance on the enemy while drawing, “meeting him with a spirited resolve”.

In Tabula III, up in the top left, you see four images, labelled A to D.

I will paraphrase the instructions for the sake of brevity:

A: After a few paces forwards, grab your hanger and scabbard with your left hand; step with your left foot, and as it lands, grip your sword with your right hand, with your forefinger over the outside arm of the hilt.

B: Keep stepping forwards; as your right foot lifts, grip the scabbard hard; lift your right foot higher than usual, draw the sword while opening your right hand [yes, he really says that]; pause your right foot in the air.

C: Close your right hand; turn the wrist; pick up your point in a half-circle until level with your shoulder, with your point back. Keep your arm slightly bent.

D: Bring the sword down in an overhand blow as you place your right foot; step with your left foot, and while it is moving, let the sword carry on down to your hip, while you turn the sword in your hand and put your thumb on the inside arm of the hilt. [Thibault has a very non-standard way to hold a sword.] 

This goes on for another paragraph, and even with all these steps, you are still not yet in measure!

He also includes instruction on drawing while retreating, captured in images E, F, G and H, also on Tabula III.

 

Angelo

Domenico Angelo covers the draw briefly, in his definitive l’Ecole des Armes (1763). I use “definitive” advisedly: in Diderot’s Encyclopedie, the first true Encyclopedia ever compiled (between 1750 and 1772), the entry on fencing is simply a complete reproduction of Angelo’s book. Malcolm Fare (owner of the copy of Thibault photographed above, and proprietor of the National Fencing Museum) notes that “Diderot’s Escrime section, although undated, is believed to have been published in 1765 (see the University of Michigan’s translation project, which identifies the section as being included in vol. 4, 1765), 2 years after the first appearance of L’Ecole des Armes.” (Private correspondence, June 7th 2016.)

This is from the English translation, The School of Fencing, produced by his son Harry in 1787, pages 4-5.

The First Position to Draw a Sword

You must stand straight on you legs, with your body sideways; keep your head upright and easy, look your adversary in the face, let your riht arm hang down your right thigh, and your left arm bend towards your left hip; your left heel should be near the point of your right foot, the point of your right foot in a line with your knee, and directed towards your adversary; and, holding your sword towards the dook of your scabbard, you must present yourself in order to draw.

In this position, fixing your eyes on your adversary, bend your right arm and raise it to the height of your shoulder, and carrying your hand the to the grip of your sword, which hold tight and firm, turning your nails toward the belt, draw your sword, raising your hand in a line with your left shoulder, and make a half circle, with vivacity, over your head, presenting the point in a line to your adversary, but no higher than his face, nor lower than the last rib, holding your arm straight, without stiffness in the elbow, or the wrist; in presenting thus the point, you must raise the left arm in a semi -circle, to the height of your ear, and single your left shoulder well, that the whole body may be in a profile; which instruction cannot be too closely attended to.

This is clearly not a quick-draw method! He is describing the formal draw at the beginning of an academy bout, perhaps, or a real duel, in which all the punctilios are being observed.

Note that in all these examples the draw is always done while out of measure; there are no sources I can find to tell us how to draw quickly when surprised. Perhaps because there is nothing to it; you just pull the damn thing out as fast as you can. As I said before, I think this is also because fast-draw techniques were not traditionally part of the fight; you draw out of measure, and then the duel begins. It was thought cowardly to strike while your opponent’s weapon is still in its scabbard.

Returning to Fiore (as ever), the plays of the sword in one hand begin (as we saw) with the sword held in the same position that it would be if it were in a scabbard attached to the waist. You certainly can do these plays incorporating a draw, and it's no coincidence that the sword in one hand plays follow on from this section on drawing the sword against the dagger. But, I am enough of a purist that because Fiore chose not to show the sword in a scabbard at the beginning of the sword in one hand section, I cannot see these plays as sword draws. If they were intended as such, it would be mentioned in the text (it isn't), or shown in the pictures (it isn't). You are of course entitled to your own opinion, which you're welcome to share in the comments!

This project is being published in stages. You can get part one, The Sword in One Hand, as a free PDF by subscribing to my mailing list below, or buy it in ebook format from Amazon or Gumroad. You can get Part two, Longsword Mechanics, from Amazon or Gumroad too! This post will be edited into part one when I put the four sections (Sword in One Hand, Mechanics, Largo, and Stretto) together into one volume for print.

If you have been following The Fiore Translation Project from the beginning, you may recall that I gave myself permission to skip about in the treatise as the whimsy takes me. I had a nagging feeling that I ought to include the plays of the dagger against the sword, and the sword in the scabbard against the dagger, and so here we are.

One of the things that was stopping me getting to these plays earlier was that I realised I didn’t have them on video anywhere, so on my last trip to Seattle, when the topic came up in class, I asked the students present if they’d be happy with my videoing the demonstrations. It’s a firm principle with me that the students who show up to my classes get priority over those that don’t (for whatever reason- this is not a value judgement on those who can’t afford to fly from Thailand to America every time I teach a class there. Or are even in Seattle but have other commitments). This means that though I’m always happy having my classes videoed, I’m never going to inconvenience my class for the sake of people not present.

But they’re a nice bunch of people at Lonin, so the videos were shot and you get to watch them. Try to contain your excitement.

This section begins on folio 19r, and it immediately follows the final plays of the ninth master of the dagger. As such, it forms a beautiful segue between the dagger plays and the sword plays. First the dagger beats the sword, then the sword beats the dagger, and then we’re into the plays of the sword in one hand.

So, without further ado:

Qui cominza Spada e daga a zugare. La vantazo e grande a chi lo sa fare. Lo magistro spetta in questa guardia. E la guardia se chiama dente di zenghiaro. Vegna tagli e punte che di quelle mi so guardare. Lo pe dritto cum rebatter in dredo lu faro tornare. Lo zogo stretto so a mente e non lu posso fallare. A uno a uno vegna chi contra me vol fare. Che se ello non me fuzi io lo guastaro in un voltare.

Here begin the sword and dagger to play. The advantage is great to the one who knows how to do it. The master waits in this guard. And the guard is called the Boar’s Tooth. Come cut and thrust, I am ready for them. The right foot with the parry I will pass back. The close play I have in mind, and it cannot fail. One by one come those who wish to act against me. If they do not get away from me, I will destroy them in one turn.

Lo mio magistro contra la punta fa tal coverta e subito fieri in lo volto overo in lo petto. E cum daga contra spada sempre vole zogo stretto. Qui son stretto e ti posso ben ferire, o vogli o non tu lo conven sofrire.

My master makes this cover against the thrust, and immediately strikes in the face or in the chest. And with the dagger against the sword [you] always want close play. Here I am close and I can well strike you. Whether you want it or not, I’ll make you suffer.

The next play is the counter to the dagger’s defence:

Si lo zugadore ch’e denanzi avesse sapuda fare tal deffesa, se ello avesse la mane stancha al scolaro posta a questo modo dredo lo suo cubito voltando per tal manera che qui si mostra, a me non bisognava far contrario del magistro che sta cum la daga in posta.

If the player that is before me had known to make this defence, he would have put his left hand on the scholar in this way behind his elbow, turning [him] in the way that is shown here. To me it would not have been necessary to make the counter of the master that stands with the dagger in guard.

This play and its counter are quite straightforward: here’s how I do them.

https://youtu.be/Oq4FtCBSSFM

The phrasing of the counter-remedy master’s explanation is interesting though. It reads like “if I’d known the counter to the remedy, there would have been simply no point in you doing the remedy. What a great big waste of my time.”

I should point out here that if you are starting out of measure, weapons drawn, the sword has a huge advantage over the dagger. In close, not so much. So the general advice here is sound (of course! It’s Fiore!) but I think he overstates the case regarding how easy it is to defend against the sword armed only with a dagger.

The next play is the defence against a sword cut.

Si a lo magistro che sta in posta cum la daga contra spada gli vene tratto de fendente per la testa, ello passa inanci e questa coverta ello fa presta, e dagli volta penzando lu cubito. E quello po ferir ben subito. Anchora la spada cum lo so brazo gli po ligare per quello modo che lo quarto zogo di spada d’una mane sa fare. E anchora in la daga allo terzo zogo troverai quella ligadura mezana che apresso lo volto sta serada ad una spana.

If one had come with a fendente to the head against the master that stands in guard with the dagger against the sword, he [the master] would pass forwards and make this cover quickly, and give him [the attacker] a turn, pushing his elbow. And this must be done absolutely immediately. Also, the sword with the [attacker’s] arm can be bound in that way that the fourth play of the sword in one hand does. And also in the dagger [section] at the third play you will find that middle lock, that stands closed up within a span of the face.

This is the defence against a cut to the head. You pass in with the cover, and either push the elbow, turning the attacker so you can strike them in the back, or you wrap the sword arm with a ligadura mezana. Fiore helpfully tells us that we can find that lock shown in the fourth play of the sword in one hand, shown here on the right:

The text reads (on f20v):

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.

And also in the third play of the dagger (he doesn’t specify which master, but it’s clearly the first). This is 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.

He reminds us that when doing the lock, your hand should come within a span (the measurement from the tip of your thumb to the tip of your little finger when your hand is completely open) of your face. Comparing that to the image, clearly the lock isn't fully on yet.

Here's how I do these in practice:

https://youtu.be/54nkWXyJMGQ

Looking at this page as a whole, it’s clear that one of the foundational skills when dealing with the sword is to distinguish between cut and thrust. They are dealt with completely differently. The dagger only thrusts: it’s a murder spike for getting through medieval clothing and even armour. There are no cuts or slashes shown or mentioned in the entirety of the dagger section. So working through the treatise from the beginning, the sword cut on this page is the very first cut we have seen.

Against the thrust, you pass back, clear the weapon out of your way, and move in.

Against the cut, you move in, parrying closer to the centre of rotation, and so are able to actually control the blow. You then must be able to distinguish between inside and outside, which is determined by the mechanics of the sword blow you are facing, and how that interacts with your parry.

These skills will be vitally important in the rest of the sword plays.

So that’s how the dagger defeats the sword (in theory anyway). Next week we’ll have a look at how the sword in the scabbard defeats the dagger. Drawing the sword is very rarely covered in medieval sources (or indeed later ones), so it’s a special treat to be able to see some techniques that are based entirely on the draw. See you then!

This project is being published in stages. You can get part one, The Sword in One Hand, as a free PDF by subscribing to my mailing list below, or buy it in ebook format from Amazon or Gumroad. You can get Part two, Longsword Mechanics, from Amazon or Gumroad too! This post will be edited into part one when I put the four sections (Sword in One Hand, Mechanics, Largo, and Stretto) together into one volume for print.

As we saw in the 10^th play of the Sword in One Hand, the solution to overwhelming force is to let it go by, while preventing it from following you. The “Peasant’s Blow”, or colpo di villano, does this by meeting the incoming sword and yielding to it, while stepping out of the way.

This is the fifth and sixth play of the master of the zogho largo crossed at the middle of the swords, on f26r.

Questo zogho sie chiamado colpo di villano, e sta in tal modo, zoe, che si de aspettare lo villano che lo traga cum sua spada, e quello che lo colpo aspetta de stare in picolo passo cum lo pe stancho denanzi. E subito che lo villano ti tra per ferire acresse lo pe stancho fora de strada inverso la parte dritta. E cum lo dritto passa ala traversa fora di strada piglando lo suo colpo a meza la tua spada. E lassa discorrer la sua spada a terra e subito responde gli cum lo fendente per la testa o vero per gli brazi, overo cum la punta in lo petto com'e depento. Anchora e questo zogho bon cum la spada contra la azza, e contra un bastone grave o liziero.

This play is called the peasant’s blow, and it’s like this, thus: one awaits the peasant to attack one with his sword, and the one who waits should be in a narrow stance [piccolo passo: lit. Small pace, I.e. With the feet not too far apart] with the left foot forwards. And immediately that the peasant comes to strike, advance the left foot out of the way towards the right side [of the peasant]. And with the right pass across out of the way, grabbing his blow in the middle of your sword. And let it run off to the ground and immediately reply with the fendente to the head, or to the arms, or with the thrust in the chest as is pictured. Also this play is good with the sword against the axe, and against a staff, heavy or light.

Qui denanzi sie lo colpo del villano che ben glo posta la punta in lo petto. E cossi gli posseva un colpo per la testa fare e per gli brazzi cum lo fendente com’e ditto denanzi. Anchora s’el zogadore volesse contra de mi fare volendo mi ferire cum lo riverso sotto gli miei brazzi io subito acresso lo pe stancho e metto la mia spada sopra la sua. E non mi po far niente.

Here before is the peasant’s blow, that can well put the thrust in the chest. And thus one could do a strike to the head and to the arms with the fendente as is said above. Also, if the player might want to act against me wishing to strike me with the riverso under my arms, I immediately advance the left foot and put my sword over his. And he can do nothing to me.

I do it like so:

https://youtu.be/wi6-b0dH1EU

This play punishes an overly-hard telegraphed blow. As such it is sub-optimal to train, because one partner is repeating incorrect actions for the other to identify and exploit. That is really the domain of a paid coach, who can (and indeed is often required to) sacrifice their own training for their student’s. So when setting this up, please be careful not to incorporate peasantly striking into your system!

This project is being published in stages. You can get part one, The Sword in One Hand, as a free PDF by subscribing to my mailing list below, or buy it in ebook format from Amazon or Gumroad. You can get Part two, Longsword Mechanics, from Amazon or Gumroad too!

Back in the saddle again…

It might be more accurate to say, ensconced in the new study and actually getting some work done instead of unpacking boxes… Sadly, no horses involved.

Let's continue where we left off, with the next two plays of the master of the zogho largo crossed at the middle of the swords. This is from folio 25v.

The text above the first of these two plays (so, the third play of this master) reads:

El mio magistro ch’e denanzi m’a insegnado che quando a meza spada io son cum uno incrosado che subito mi debia acresser inanci, e piglar la sua spada a questo partido per ferirlo taglo o punta. Anchora gli posso guastar la gamba per lo modo che possi vedere qui depento a ferirlo cum lo pe sopra la schena dela gamba overo sotto lo zinochio.

My master that is before [me] has taught me that when, at half sword, I am crossed with someone, that I must immediately step forwards, and grab his sword in this way, to strike him with cut or thrust. Also, I can destroy his leg in the way that you can see drawn here, by striking him with my foot in the shin, or below the knee.

And the text above the second of these plays (fourth of the master of zogho largo crossed at the middle of the swords) reads:

Lo scolaro ch’e me denanzi dise del suo magistro e mio ch’ello gli ha insegnado questo zogho, e per vizuda io lo fazo. A farlo senza dubio, ello me pocho impazo.

The scholar that is before me says that his master and mine has taught him this play, and [per vizuda– any ideas what this means?] I do it. To do it, without doubt, it is little trouble for me.

As you can see, I don’t know what per vizuda means. It seems that the translators at the Wiktenauer https://wiktenauer.com/wiki/Fiore_de%27i_Liberi#Sword_in_Two_Hands are also stuck on it, and Tom Leoni renders the paragraph in its entirety as: “the student before me cited what his and my Master taught us, which I am now doing with little trouble”, which follows the sense perfectly, but doesn’t help with the vizuda issue.

It may be related to vizio (vice): as in, I do this ‘viciously’. Thoughts?

I love demonstrating these plays with sharp swords. For those that don’t know, it’s a heart-stopping moment, as they are sure my finger are about to get sliced off. But grabbing a sharp blade is easy and safe, if you do it right, and if your opponent doesn’t twist or slice it out of your hand.

In any case, the play is quite straightforward. Here’s how I do it:

https://youtu.be/R8yrqw6tvQ0

I recommend training this without the kick, unless you are sure you can control your kicks. I cover kicking practice on the Footwork Course, or you can get a sneak peak here:

https://youtu.be/cpdHQPUNNXU

Enjoy!

This project is being published in stages. You can get part one, The Sword in One Hand, as a free PDF by subscribing to my mailing list below, or buy it in ebook format from Amazon or Gumroad. You can get Part two, Longsword Mechanics, from Amazon or Gumroad too!

Catchy post title, huh?

Let us continue our examination of the plays of the sword in two hands in zogho largo. 

The text reads:

Anchora me incroso qui per zogho largo a meza spada. E subito che son incrosado io lasso discorrer la mia spada sopra le soi mane, e se voglio passare cum lo pe dritta fuora de strada, io gli posso metter una punta in lo petto, come qui dredo e depento.

Again, I am crossed here in the wide play at middle sword. And immediately that I am crossed I let my sword run off over the arms, and if I wish to pass with my right foot out of the way, I can place a thrust in the chest, as here below is depicted.

And above the play on the right, it reads: 

Lo zogho del mio magistro io lo complido, cho io ofatta la sua coverta, e subito o fatto lo suo ditto, che io oferido primo gli brazzi, e poy glo posta la punta in petto. 

The play of my master I have completed, so I have made his cover, and immediately done what he said, so I have struck first the arms, and then I put the thrust in the chest.

As you can see, the Master is crossed at the middle of the swords with the player, and then steps out of the way to strike. You can start in any guard on the right, I would say, but the easiest to start with are probably posta di donna destra, or tutta porta di ferro. 

Here’s how I do it in its basic form:

https://youtu.be/4k_Hl14fNGo

This action forms the basis of our ‘First Drill’, which looks like this:

https://youtu.be/1Dc9s21EDkI

Let’s have a look at all of the decisions that went into creating the first two actions of this drill (and the basic form of my interpretation of this play.) You may have come across this material before in my article One Play, One Drill, Many Questions:

One play, One Drill, Many Questions

In first drill, we do this play like so:

Attacker ready in right side posta di donna; you wait in tutta porta di ferro

1. Attacker strikes with mandritto fendente, aiming at your head
2. Parry with frontale, meeting the middle of the attacker’s sword with the middle of your own, edge to flat
3. The attacker’s sword is beaten wide to your left, so pass away from it (to your right), striking with a mandritto fendente to the attacker’s left arm, and thrusting to the chest.

The answer to the question “why do you do it like that” must include answers to at least the following questions, and I’m sure you can think of more:

1. Why is there an attacker and defender?
2. Why would you wait in any guard?
3. Why would you wait in tutta porta di ferro?
4. Why is the attack coming from posta di donna?
5. Why is the attack a mandritto fendente?
6. Why is the defence a parry?
7. Why do you stand still to parry?
8. Why is the blade contact middle to middle?
9. Why is the blade contact edge-to-flat?
10. Why frontale?
11. Why is the attacker’s blade beaten away?
12. Why is the riposte a strike to the arm followed by a thrust to the chest?
13. Why is the passo fora di strada done to the right?

These are all fair questions, and to answer them, I will use direct quotes from the treatise wherever possible, and note any points where I have to rely on experience or other treatises. All page references are to the Getty manuscript unless otherwise noted.

Let’s start with the text on f25v: above the crowned master on the left, it says:

Anchora me incroso qui per zogho largo a meza spada. E subito che son incrosado io lasso discorrer la mia spada sopra le soi mane, e se voglio passare cum lo pe dritta fuora de strada, io gli posso metter una punta in lo petto, come qui dredo e depento.

Again, I am crossed here in the wide play at middle sword. And immediately that I am crossed I let my sword run off over the arms, and if I wish to pass with my right foot out of the way, I can place a thrust in the chest, as here below is depicted.

And above the play on the right, it reads: 

Lo zogho del mio magistro io lo complido, cho io ofatta la sua coverta, e subito o fatto lo suo ditto, che io oferido primo gli brazzi, e poy glo posta la punta in petto. 

The play of my master I have completed, so I have made his cover, and immediately done what he said, so I have struck first the arms, and then I put the thrust in the chest.

This begs the question, which one of the drawn figures is the “master”? We know it is the one wearing a crown because Fiore says as much in the  introduction (f2r). It is worth quoting this at some length, as we will be coming back to this section later:

The guards, or “position,” are easy to recognize. Some guards will be set against one another and will not touch one another, studying each other to see what the opponent may do. These are called poste, or guards, or First Masters of the fight. They will be wearing a crown, meaning that the position in which they wait is optimal for defense. These guards are also the foundation for carrying arms while in guard. A posta is the same as a guard. A guard (or posta) is what you use to defend or ‘guard' yourself against the opponent's attacks. A posta (or guard) is a ‘posture' against the opponent, which you use to injure him without danger to yourself.

The other Master following these four guards shows the plays that come from these guards and defends against an opponent who uses the actions deriving from the four guards. This Master, who also wears a crown, we call the Second Master or Remedy Master, since (by the rules of the art) he thwarts the attacks deriving from the poste or guards shown before,

This Second (or Remedy) Master has some students under him: these show the plays the Master or Remedy may perform after he executes the defense or grapple shown by the Remedy. These students wear an insignia below the knee. They execute all the plays of the Remedy until another Master appears who performs the counter to the Remedy and all of his students. And because he performs the counter to the Remedy and his students, this Master weans the uniform of the Remedy Master and that of his students, i.e. both the crown and the insignia below the knee. This king bears the name of Third Master or Counter, because he counters the other Masters and their plays. 

 (Leoni, Tom. Fiore de’ Liberi Fior di Battaglia Second English Edition, p 5)

So, given that the scholar in our second pair of figures (“play”) is wearing a garter (an “insignia below the knee”), it is clear that the crowned figure is a remedy master, who is defending against the player. Thus, while it is obvious from the second play who is hitting whom, we can be equally sure that the crowned figure is the one defending in the first play. 

It is also stated in the introduction that guards may be “positions in which [the masters] wait [that are] optimal for defense.”

1. Why is there an attacker and defender? and 2. Why would you wait in any guard?

So our first question, why is there an attacker and defender, can be answered along the lines of: because that is how the play is presented in the book. It seems that this is a defence done from a stationary guard, against an awaited attack.

Note that I am not suggesting that this is the only possible, useful, or common, set-up: we do all of these drills also from a moving starting point, but we can state with confidence that it is part of Fiore’s Art to wait in guard for the attack. This also answers question 2, why would you wait in any guard: because Fiore says to. So, why tutta porta di ferro?

3. Why would you wait in tutta porta di ferro?

We know that the master has “covered”, which term is used elsewhere quite explicitly to mean “parry”, such as in the plays of the master of the sword in one hand. The text above that master reads (f20r): “E in quello passare mi crovo rebattendo le spade” “And in that pass I cross, beating the swords”. On the next page, the text above his first scholar includes “Quello che a ditto lo magistro io l’o ben fatto, zoe, ch’io passai fora de strada facendo bona coverta” “That which the master has said I have done well, thus, I have passed out of the way making a good cover.” Cover = parry seems reasonable. 

We also know that the cover has been done from the right side, because of the way the swords are drawn. It is highly impractical to parry as shown, if you chamber the sword on your left. So we are looking for a guard with the sword chambered on the right, which would imply a left foot forwards stance, and one which can parry, and in which it is good to wait.

The text above tutta porta di ferro (f23v) reads:

Qui comminzano le guardie di spada a doy man. E sono xii guardie. La prima sie tutta porta di ferro che sta in grande forteza. Esi e bona daspetar ognarma manuale longa e curta. E pur chel habia bona spada non cura di troppa longeza. Ella passa cum coverta e va ale strette. E la scambi le punte e le soy ella mette. Anchora rebatte le punte a terra e sempre va cum passo e de ogni colpo ella fa coverta. E chi in quella gli da briga grand’ deffese fa senza fadiga.

Here begin the guards of the sword in two hands. There are 12 guards. The first is the whole iron gate, that stands in great strength. And she is good to await every manual weapon, long and short, and for which it has a good sword, that is not too long. And she passes with a cover and goes to the close [plays]. She exchanges the thrust and places her own. She also beats the thrusts to the ground and always goes with a pass and against all blows she makes a cover. And standing in this guard, one may easily make a defense against anyone who bothers him.

So, left foot forwards, “good to await every manual weapon”, “passes with the cover”, “against all blows she makes a cover” and “one may easily make defence”: this guard seems like a reasonable choice.

4. Why is the attack coming from posta di donna?

It appears to me from the image of the player that the attack is a descending blow from the right (mandritto fendente), done with a pass forwards, because the player is right foot forwards. Though Fiore never says so, it is generally accepted that longsword blows are usually struck with a passing step, from the side the blow comes. Experience shows that when cutting from the right, you can strike more easily if your right foot is forwards; and it is necessary to initiate the attack with the motion of the sword to prevent exposing yourself as you step forwards; this results in most mandritto attacks from one step out of measure being executed with the pass of the right foot. (This could use better supporting evidence; indeed a full and detailed academic study of cutting mechanics is long overdue. My next article project, perhaps.)

Whatever guard we chose should therefore be left foot forwards, to allow the passing step, and with the sword chambered on the right. Posta di donna destra is one such. The text above it reads:

Questa sie posta di donna che po fare tutti gli setti colpi de la spada. E de tutti colpi ella se po crovrire. E rompe le altre guardie per grandi colpi che po fare. E per scambiar una punta ella e sempre presta. Lo pe che denanzi acresse fora di strada e quello di driedo passa ala traversa. E lo compagno fa remagner discoverto, e quello fe ferir subito per certo.

This is the woman's guard, that can make all seven blows of the sword. And she can cover against all blows. And she breaks the other guards with the great blows she can make. And she is always quick to exchange a thrust. The foot which is in front advances out of the way, and that which is behind passes across. And she makes the companion remain uncovered and can immediately strike him for certain.

So there is nothing there to suggest it would be a bad choice. And if we refer back to the introduction, “Some guards will be set against one another and will not touch one another, studying each other to see what the opponent may do.” It seems fitting to me to begin the paired longsword drills in our syllabus with one such pair: the first two guards of the sword in two hands. 

5. Why is the attack a mandritto fendente?

Firstly, it is a very common and natural blow; an instinctive strike. Secondly, the image of the player has the sword approximately where it would be when a mandritto fendente is parried. He is right foot forwards, the swords are crossed clearly on the each others’ left, and his point is high.

6. Why is the defence a parry?

As we have seen: because the text above the scholar says it was (“coverta”). And because parrying is what most people naturally do when attacked.

7. Why do you stand still to parry?

In the first place, Fiore does not specify any footwork to be done during the parry. This is in contrast to other plays where footwork (such as an accrescere fora di strada and passo ala traversa) is specified during the defence, as it is in the colpo di villano (f26r), exchange of thrust and breaking the thrust (f26v), the plays of the sword in one hand (f20r-f21v), and the play of the sword from dente di zenghiaro or any other left side guard (f31r). Standing still fits with the “waiting” associated with our chosen guard and is academically supportable in the absence of any other data. However, there may be good reason to step back (and offline) while parrying, especially if put under time pressure by the attacker (stepping away buys more time to act). I discard the possibility of passing in with the left foot here because it makes no mechanical sense given the parry that is clearly shown from the right, and the measure as illustrated does not support it. As this drill is taught to beginners, it makes sense to start at least with the simplest possible set-up.

8. Why is the blade contact middle to middle?

The blade contact is middle to middle because the text explicitly refers to “meza spada”, which we understand to mean about half way down the blade. This is in context with the previous master, crossed at the punta di spada, here: 

The text states “Questo magistro che qui incrosado cum questo zugadore in punta de spada” “This master that is here crossed with this player at the point of the sword.”

Furthermore, we can refer to the Morgan MS, which describes three crossings of the sword:

Quista doi magista sono aq incrosadi a tuta spada. Ezoche po far uno po far l'altro zoe che po fare tuti zoghi de spada cham lo incrosar. Ma lo incrosar sia de tre rasone, Zoe a tuta spada e punta de spada. Echi e incrosado a tuta spada pocho gle po starre. Echie mezo ?sado? a meza spada meno gle po stare. Echi 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 tuta spada. And what one can do the other can do, thus they can do all the plays of the sword from the crossing. But the crossing is of three types, thus a tuta spada and at punta de spada. And the crossing a tuta spada little can it withstand. And meza spada less can it withstand. And a punta de spada nothing can it withstand. And so the sword has in it three things, thus: little, less and nothing.

Comparing these three images, it is incontrovertible that the reference “meza spada” here means “at the middle of the blades”. 

In practical terms, we also find that with an open-hilted sword like a longsword, it is dangerous to parry close to the hands (for extra leverage), and to make the beating parry that Fiore describes (rebattando) the optimum balance between power and leverage, and the optimum place to aim for on the opponent’s weapon, is indeed the middle of each.

9. Why is the blade contact edge-to-flat?

It is obvious from the description that this parry is a blow of some sort, and it is clear from the illustration that it is done from the right, which means it can only reasonably be done with the true edge of the sword. The illustration clearly shows this, in my view. When striking at the opponent’s sword, it makes mechanical and practical sense to aim at his flat. This is because a) it is the weakest line of the sword itself b) it is unlikely to be supported by the opponent (see Finding Bicorno for details on this) and c) it reduces damage to your sword by spreading the contact over a larger surface than an edge-to-edge parry.

10. Why frontale?

When parrying up from a low guard, the blow you use is effectively a mandritto sottano. (A rising forehand blow.)This could be done with either edge, but for mechanical reasons I prefer the true edge. The natural ending point of a true-edge sottano aimed at the sword (as opposed to the opponent) is either a fenestra or frontale type position. For the argument regarding blows beginning and ending in guards, see both Angelo Viggiani’s Lo Schermo, and also Fiore’s statements on f23r regarding fendenti “E ogni guardia che si fa terrena, Duna guardia in laltra andamo senza pena” “And all guards that are made low, from one guard to the other we go easily”. Likewise, sottani can “remanemo in posta longa” “remain [i.e. end] in posta longa”. That Fiore provides us with the guard frontale, and says that “per la incrosar ella e bona” “she is good for crossing”, is a bonus. 

Of course, if you are parrying from a high guard, then you would be parrying with a fendente, and will not arrive in frontale, so the instruction would change.

11. Why is the attacker’s blade beaten away?

The instruction that immediately follows the parry is to let your sword run off over the opponent’s arms. If his sword is still coming towards you, or indeed is stationary but close to your face, you just can’t do that without getting hit. One of the functions of the parry, as we see from the text, is to leave the opponent “uncovered”. If his sword is in the way, he is clearly covered. The treatise abounds with alternative actions after the parry, which deal with other contexts (such as the opponent’s sword being grabbed); it seems clear that in this case, the sword has simply been beaten away by the parry as the defender intended. You see a similar situation in the second play of the sword in one hand, f20v.

This also goes to the definition of “zogho largo” as I understand the terms; for this please refer here: Freedom to Strike: a lengthy discussion of largo and stretto

12. Why is the riposte a strike to the arm followed by a thrust to the chest?

Let’s start with the text, which I’ll repeat here to save you scanning back for it:

Above the crowned master it says:

Anchora me incroso qui per zogho largo a meza spada. E subito che son incrosado io lasso discorrer la mia spada sopra le soi mane, e se voglio passare cum lo pe dritta fuora de strada, io gli posso metter una punta in lo petto, come qui dredo e depento.

Again, I am crossed here in the wide play at middle sword. And immediately that I am crossed I let my sword run off over the arms, and if I wish to pass with my right foot out of the way, I can place a thrust in the chest, as here below is depicted.

And above the play on the right, it reads: 

Lo zogho del mio magistro io lo complido, cho io ofatta la sua coverta, e subito o fatto lo suo ditto, che io oferido primo gli brazzi, e poy glo posta la punta in petto.

Which I translate as: “The play of my master I have completed, so I have made his cover, and immediately done what he said, so I have struck first the arms, and then I put the thrust in the chest.”

This makes the issue of where to riposte to pretty clear, I think. Timing it with the pass offline is less easy to justify according to the text, which clearly implies that the cut to the arms is done first, without stepping, and the thrust to the chest is done afterwards, with the pass offline. The reason I do it together is a matter of both mechanics and practice. The pass of the right foot diagonally to the right (for why I do it to the right please see the next section) aligns me away from the opponent; it is the shift of the left foot behind me that brings me around to face him, as you can see from these images borrowed and adapted from The Swordsman’s Companion (p. 64  in the first edition; p. 92 in the second).

The solid arrow indicates the original line of direction. In practice, this first foot motion opens the line nicely for the blow to the arms, and the second aligns me for the thrust. It is arguably more correct to strike first, then time the thrust to the shift of the right foot, but it is much harder to teach that way to beginners.  

13. Why is the passo fora di strada done to the right?

The pass out of the way can in theory be done in any direction. I do it to the right because it a) makes sense given the motion of the opponents sword to the left as I see it; b) it fits with the instruction to pass “out of the way” because I am literally getting out of the way of the attacker; c) I am also getting out of the way of the sword; d) it takes me to a place where I can reach with a strike, but my opponent has to step to strike; and e) by doing it this way I end up looking like the illustration.

The image could support the idea of a step done diagonally to the left, instead of to the right as I do it; but in my experience that would put me much closer to the opponent than is shown here.

And in Conclusion:

So, there we have it. Over 4,000 words written to support the interpretation that lies behind the basic execution of one drill. I hope it’s clear from this blog post series that I can do the same for any play, any drill. Feel free to ask me to do so. I stand by my interpretation and will back it up with evidence from the text at any time. If something seems off to you, ask for the supporting evidence!

And please also bear in mind, that even with all this evidence, I may still be doing it wrong. That’s historical swordsmanship for you.

In other news: I'm travelling a lot at the moment (Helsinki, Ipswich, Boston, Providence, Madison, Seattle, Ipswich, Helsinki), and we are moving house (there are a lot of books to pack), so I'm taking a break from the Fiore Translation Project. Expect the next instalment at the end of April- and feel free to bug me then if you don't get it.

This project is being published in stages. You can get part one, The Sword in One Hand, as a free PDF by subscribing to my mailing list below, or buy it in ebook format from Amazon or Gumroad. You can get Part two, Longsword Mechanics, from Amazon or Gumroad too!

Despite the fact that we’ve just had the sword in one hand, the grips, the blows, and the guards, this seems like the true beginning of the longsword section, because Fiore begins with these words, which appear over a blank space:

Spada son contra ogni arma mortale, ne lanza ne azza ni daga contra mi vale. Longae curta me posso fare e me strengho e vegno alo zogho stretto, e vegno allo tor d’spada, e allo abrazare. Mia arte sie roture e ligadure so ben fare de coverte e ferire sempre in quelle voglio finire. Chi contra me fara ben lo faro languire. Eson Reale e mantegno la justicia, la bonta acresco e destruzo la malicia. Chi me guardera fazendo in me crose, de fatto d’armizare gli faro fama e vose.

I am the sword, against all lethal weapons, no lance nor axe nor dagger is worth anything against me. I can make myself long or short, and I constrain and come to the close play, and come to the disarms, and to the wrestling. My art is breaking and binding, I can do covers and strikes very well, I always wish to finish in those. Whoever stands against me I will make them suffer. And I am Royal and maintain justice, I increase the good, and destroy malice. Who regards me, making in me a cross, I will make famous and renowned in the deeds of arms.

That’s a pretty good start to a weapons section, wouldn’t you say? You may be less overwhelmed when you compare it to a similar paragraph in the dagger section, on f9v. 

 

While I was writing The Medieval Dagger, I wanted to point out to the reader that Il Fior di Battaglia was written in verse, as just about anything besides a shopping list would have been in that period. Not high-flung perfectly crafted poetry, but organised with simple rhymes, and intended to be read aloud. I took this passage from the top left of f9v. And rearranged it as you see, to look like a poem, and sure enough, the rhyme scheme (simple couplets) is clear on the page.

Io son la nobele arma chiamada daga 

Che d’zogho stretto molto so vaga. 

Echi cognosce mie malicie e mia arte 

Dogni sotile armizare avera bona parte. 

E por finir subito mia crudel bataglia, 

Non e homo che contra me vaglia.

Echi mi vedera in fatto d’armizare,

Coverte e punte faro cum lo abrazare.

E torogli la daga cum roture e ligadure,

E contra me non valera arme ne armadure.

It’s not Dante, but it rhymes and scans occasionally and not very well, and the whole book is like this. Speak it aloud and the rhythms and pace of the language come alive. 

So when I translated it, I turned it into a sonnet.

The dagger am I, a noble arm, 

Knowing my malice, knowing my art, 

Playing close to do you harm, 

None can stand if I take part. 

I make my noble feats of arms: 

Who can hold against me? 

No armour made resists my charms, 

No arm either, you will see.

Cover, thrust, and grapple too,

I take your dagger, break and bind 

Strike me? I will make you rue 

The day, as you will find.

The cruel fight I’ll finish faster: 

Of the art of arms, I am master.

My point is that a) you should have read the Armizare Vade Mecum by now, and b) that every weapon claims to be the best. So take the trash-talking longsword with a grain of salt, okay?

Now we’ve got that out of the way, let’s have another look at what that longsword paragraph says. As I see it it contains seven key parts:

1. “I am the sword, against all lethal weapons, no lance nor axe nor dagger is worth anything against me.” So, you can use the sword against any of Fiore’s weapons. 

2. “I can make myself long or short”. This means you can hold it ‘short’ as in withdrawn, or ‘long’ as in extended, but also you can grip it to make it a shorter or longer weapon (see the post on grips of the sword for details).

3. “and I constrain and come to the close play”. Stregnire– to constrain. Past participle: stretto. This can be read as ‘I approach and come to the close play”, or “I constrain the opponent’s actions and come to the close play.” See here for a full discussion of the meaning of ‘stretto’.

4. “and come to the disarms, and to the wrestling”. In the close plays we will indeed find four disarms, and lots of plays that are based on wrestling.

5. “My art is breaking and binding”. Breaking and binding what? From the evidence of the plays, I’d say breaking arms, and thrusts (though the verb there is rompere not roture, though there meanings are very close); binding swords, and arms. This is a trope we’ve seen before in the dagger section, applied to breaking and binding arms, but I think it’s fair to extend that to binds done sword against sword.

6. “I can do covers and strikes very well, I always wish to finish in those”. That’s good to know. After pages and pages of covers (sword in one hand) and strikes (f23r), it’s nice to be reminded that you can cover and strike… but actually it is good to be reminded that all actions should finish in a strike. Many times I’ve seen students freeze after a parry, or after getting control of their partner’s arm or weapon. I think that happened back in the day, too.

7. “Whoever stands against me I will make them suffer. And I am Royal and maintain justice, I increase the good, and destroy malice. Who regards me, making in me a cross, I will make famous and renowned in the deeds of arms.” Most of this is trash-talk, of course. But it’s worth noting that ‘making in me a cross’ is (I think) deliberately ambiguous. ‘Making a cross’ is how we parry; but it also means to view the sword as a Christian cross (because recall this is 1300s Italy, a deeply Christian culture).

The space on the page under this paragraph is odd. One assumes that there ought to be some kind of illustration, but what that may be is anyone’s guess. I have some thoughts about that, so watch this space!

The page continues with this:

Qui cominza zogho di spada a doy man zogho largo. Questo magistro che qui incrosado cum questo zugadore in punta de spada, dise quando io son incrosado in punta de spada subito io do volta ala mia spada e filo fiero dalaltra parte cum lo fendente zo per la testa e per gli brazzi, overo che gli metto una punta in lo volto, come vederi qui dredo depinto.

Here begins the play of the sword in two hands, wide play. This Master that is here crossed with this player in the point of the sword, says “when I am crossed at the point of the sword, immediately I make a turn of my sword and strike with a cut from the other side with a fendente, thus to the head and to the arms; or I place a thrust in his face, as you will see depicted next.

While I was at the Armizare 2015 event, I had a discussion about Fiore’s first play of the first master of zogho largo with Francesco Baselice. Let me summarise our interpretations, with reference to the text.

The key point for our discussion was regarding on the other side of what? I read the line “I make a turn of my sword and strike with a cut from the other side [of the player’s sword].” Which lead to the interpretation you can see on pages 170-171 of The Medieval Longsword. Or indeed, here:

https://youtu.be/Y1DkxYqwYTc

But Francesco read it as “I make a turn of my sword and strike with a cut from the other side [of my body].” So instead of striking on the other side of the opponent’s sword, he was striking to the head with a roverso fendente.

I have shot a quick video of the two versions and uploaded it here for reference. Sorry for the crap quality.

Clearly, on the evidence above, it is impossible to choose one interpretation over the other. Both follow the text, and picture (the fendente isn’t shown), and similar actions to both can be found elsewhere in the manuscript. The first two plays of the sword in one hand show striking on one side of the player’s sword, or the other, after a parry; the first two plays of the second master of the zogho largo describe a cut followed by a thrust, on the same side.

The text of the second play, showing the thrust, was the next place to look for more data.

In the Getty MS, it reads:

Io to posta una punta in lo volto come lo magistro che denanci dise. Anchora poria aver fatto zo chello dise zoe aver tratto de mia spada subito quando io era apresso lo incrosare dela parte dritta. De l’altra parte zoe de la stancha io debeva voltare la mia spada in lo fendente per la testa e per gli brazzi, como a ditto lo mio magistro che denanzi.

I have placed a thrust in the face as the master before me says. Also I could have done what he says, so, have struck with my sword immediately when I was near the crossing from the right side. From the other side, thus from the left, I would have to turn my sword in the fendente to the head and to the arms, as my master that is before me said.

Hmmm. That is inconclusive, but it appears that the strike should be done very early; as you get close to the crossing, or immediately that the crossing is made. And he mentions that the blow is done from the left side. Stanca in modern Italian means ‘tired’, and in this period, means ‘left hand side’. Two pages on from here, in the play of the colpo di villano, Fiore tells us to “await the peasant’s blow in a narrow stance with the left foot forwards”, with lo pe stancho for ‘the left foot’. (You definitely do not want to put your tired foot forwards!) So perhaps stancha here is more likely to refer to the body than the sword, but it’s hard to say. After all, posta di donna on the left, is posta di donna la sinestra.

In the Morgan the text in both paragraphs is identical except for a few variant spellings, so that’s no help. In the Pisani Dossi ms we see:

 

Over the master, the lines are:

Per incrosar cum ti a punta de spada/ De l’altra parte la punta in lo peto to fermada.

By crossing with you at the point of the sword, from the other side I’ll strike you with a thrust in the chest.

The differences are obvious, I trust. No mention of the cut, and the thrust is to the chest, not face. But it’s still de l’altra parte, from the other side.

And the next play, the strike itself:

Per lo ferir che dise el magistro che denanci posto/ in la golla to posta la punta de la spada tosto.

With the strike that the master before me said/ I have quickly put the point in your throat.

[Note, again not face, or chest!]

And the image is basically identical to the strike shown in the Getty ms, as you can see.

So here is the critical point for this discussion; ‘from the other side’ is not being used here to mean the other side of the player’s sword. It is quite clearly describing a thrust that remains on the same side of the sword, so it is probably being used to refer to the way you make the blow. You got into the crossing with a blow from the right, and you leave it with a blow from the left (as all Audatia players should already know).

So it seems that Francesco is probably right: at the very least, his interpretation is supported by the text and the pictures, and makes sense.

Perhaps a more challenging question is how on earth did you end up in the crossing shown? 

I think there are basically two options:

1. You were in frontale, your opponent came and engaged your blade in the same guard. This could be with you both moving, or one of you standing still. Unlikely, but possible.

2. You were attacked with a fendente, you parried from your right side, and as you went for your middle-to-middle parry, they turned their blade to intercept yours. This sort of thing happens a lot in free fencing.

However you got there, it seems there is no clear advantage on either side, so whoever moves first will get the play.

Here’s how I do the plays:

https://youtu.be/Y1DkxYqwYTc

What does that remind me of?

Oh yes. Does this look familiar?

The priest waits with the sword on his right shoulder, and the scholar besets with schutzen. The priest goes to bind the scholar’s sword, and literally “whoever is the first one ready for it” gets the play.

We could create a longsword version of this:

• you wait in donna destra, 
• your partner approaches in frontale, closing off the line of your most natural blow (a mandritto fendente)
• you go to bind their sword
• and one or other of you gets the play.

I’m sure you can think of many other ways to get there. And this by itself is an interesting development. For the entirety of the treatise up to this point, it’s always been clear how you get to the position of the master; all nine dagger masters are responding to a specific attack from the player, and in the sword in one hand plays too, there is a clear attack, specified in the text and pictures. 

But now we are just presented with the crossing, and play from there. 

Next week we’ll see what to do from a different crossing, and go into depth regarding why I do the play the way I do it. See you then!

This project is being published in stages. You can get part one, The Sword in One Hand, as a free PDF by subscribing to my mailing list below, or buy it in ebook format from Amazon or Gumroad. You can get Part two, Longsword Mechanics, from Amazon or Gumroad too!