Thibault: Side Sword or Rapier? (and finding manuals)

[James Brazas]

Hello everyone! Our group is trying to build a robust pan-European curriculum for our medieval/renaissance fencing and so we're trying to include as many of the major masters from as many traditions as possible.

One tradition we've been having difficult tracking material down for is the Iberian tradition. I've found some Figeuyredo and Godinho, so that's good. But I'm interested in learning about more.

Particularly, I'm interested in learning whether Thibault's manual is considered to be a Side Sword manual or a Rapier manual. It's hard to tell.

Is it maybe for the Espada Ropera? As I understand it, the Espada Ropera is something between the Side Sword and the Rapier.

Also, on a somewhat related topic, would anyone know where to find English versions for Joachim Meyer, Andre Paurenfendt, or Marco Docciolino?

We're also interested in incorporating whatever material we can from English and French sources as well. So far, for England we only have Swetnam, Silver, Additional Manuscript 39564, Cottonian Titus A XXV, and Harleian MS 3542. For France, we only have Le Jeu and de Sainct-Didier. Are there other known manuals from England or France?

[Vincent Le Chevalier]

Particularly, I'm interested in learning whether Thibault's manual is considered to be a Side Sword manual or a Rapier manual. It's hard to tell.

Surprisingly it depends on your definition of rapier
Thibault pictures weapons that are pretty thin, but also relatively short. Ground to navel is the explicit blade measurement. This is shorter than in the Italian tradition, which generally seems to have the overall length as ground to armpit. This is not necessarily much longer than side swords, again depending on your definition.

If you consider Fabris as rapier (and who does not ) then it would make sense to put Thibault with him, as Thibault describes counters to some Fabris moves, with both fighters using Thibault's weapon. So these should all be compatible and are contemporary...

For France, we only have Le Jeu and de Sainct-Didier. Are there other known manuals from England or France?

If you're looking for stuff translated in English I'm afraid that's about it for France. Lovino is from an Italian but written for the French king, I don't know how you count that For the early stuff, there is "Le cabinet d'escrime du capitaine Péloquin" of the late XVIth for sword (or rapier ?) and dagger, but it is only available in French as far as I know. And then you've got other works later in the XVIIth. Dancie and Desbordes come to mind.

Then there is an interesting work in French for a style that seems to be the Spanish vulgar rapier fencing, attributed to Pedro de Heredia. But I don't think it's available in English either.

Generally if you're looking for sources, this is the best place I know.

Regards,

[James Brazas]

Thanks for your help, Vincent!!!

Hm. That's interesting. So it sounds like you could treat Thibault's sword as either a skinny sidesword or a short rapier. So I guess it could work either way.

Hm. So there are other French manuals, but they're untranslated?

I'll have to remember those manuals you mentioned. Hopefully someone will translate them someday. I'm extremely curious to see how the French, Spanish, and English fencing worked.

So there's:
"...capitaine Peloquin"
Dancie
Desbordes
Pedro de Heredia

Are those all sidesword/rapier manuals? My interest is in finding as many manuals on as many weapons from French, English, and Spanish sources as possible.

I have nothing against the Germans and Italians and I've enjoyed their fencing styles a great deal, I guess it's just the allure of the unknown and my interest in approaching the Art from a holistic European perspective rather than focusing on one master, tradition, etc.

[Vincent Le Chevalier]

Hm. That's interesting. So it sounds like you could treat Thibault's sword as either a skinny sidesword or a short rapier. So I guess it could work either way.

Well for me it's squarely rapier, in the sense that it's a style that develops in opposition to older methods. But yeah, I guess it could work with sideswords too...

Are those all sidesword/rapier manuals? My interest is in finding as many manuals on as many weapons from French, English, and Spanish sources as possible.

Yes, it seems that the French start producing original works at the end of sidesword / beginning of rapier time, and they focus on the sword, not so much the rest.

Earlier you have "La noble science des joueurs d'épée" which I forgot, but this is the same as another German manual whose name escapes me. There are a few other works in French which are period translations of foreign sources, which I guess won't bring much to your table when you already look at the other traditions. If you are interested in staff, there is also a manual by Paschen quite late in the 17th century. I think it's by a German talking about the French method

A real French school with a distinctive style and consistent terminology emerges with the smallsword, and if you are interested in that there are a lot more works to consider. Before that, it's hard to find two works that share the same approach to describing swordsmanship. Most, like Sainct Didier, show an Italian influence in the terms, but may very well include old traits described with these new terms. The French were apparently quick to adopt the new methods and the fact that they were foreign did not seem to bother them much if at all, which makes the description of a French school quite difficult (if it ever really existed).

Regards,

[James Brazas]

Ah, OK. So it sounds like Thibault is more on the rapier end of the spectrum.

The reason why I thought he might be half-way between (and thus very workable for either one) is that a floor-to-navel blade length isn't that much longer than many sideswords I've seen. Plus, from what I've read, the Spanish school of la Verdadera Destreza continued to use cuts in a major way long after the Italians left cut-and-thrust fencing for a strong emphasis on the thrust.

But I readily admit that you are far more knowledgeable in the rapier arena than I am. I have yet to study any rapier manuals.

Interesting. So it seems that the French might not have had a robust national tradition during the Renaissance the same way that the Germans, Italians, and Spaniards did.

As far as the English go, it seems like they did have a true national tradition (at least George Silver strongly insists on it), but we don't have much in the way of surviving manuals. Just 2 major ones and 3 anonymous minor ones.

I'll have to look up Paschen, though. That sounds interesting.

And I'm already planning on going through Sainct Didier at some point. It'll be interesting to see how it compares with the Italian side sword.

Thanks for your help!

[Vincent Le Chevalier]

Interesting. So it seems that the French might not have had a robust national tradition during the Renaissance the same way that the Germans, Italians, and Spaniards did.

As far as the English go, it seems like they did have a true national tradition (at least George Silver strongly insists on it), but we don't have much in the way of surviving manuals. Just 2 major ones and 3 anonymous minor ones.

There'd been fencing schools everywhere, so I guess there was some sort of tradition going on. It's just that it has apparently not been documented as thoroughly as elsewhere, in either case. That's an inevitable bias of historical martial arts, we need a written source, and some traditions are more keen on writing stuff down. Or lend themselves better to being written down.

The fencing masters in Paris founded an association in 1567, and there were prize plays with sword, and demonstration of competence with several other weapons (including the form of staff Paschen writes about). So I guess this did not pop up from nowhere and there must have been some local unity of teaching...

You have a transcription and French translation of Paschen work on the (French) staff here.

[Tim Rivera]

Most, like Sainct Didier, show an Italian influence in the terms, but may very well include old traits described with these new terms.

I disagree about Sainct Didier, but I'm curious why you say that his terms have an Italian influence.

Tim

[Vincent Le Chevalier]

I disagree about Sainct Didier, but I'm curious why you say that his terms have an Italian influence.

I might be wrong, but I'm thinking of renvers, maindroit and estoc as imports from Italian. I realize that this is disputable. They could also result from similar derivations in both languages. At the very least it's explicit in the manual that he had dealings with Italians, so he must have been familiar with their styles?

Other than that the manual is quite original, but it's hard to know if it's the originality of the French school or of the author...

I've read your comparative analysis and found it interesting (read it here and here, people!), but I'm not sure it gives enough element to really trace back the technical origins of Sainct Didier. The problem here is sorting out the influences from the convergent evolutions...

Anyway, I agree that my original statement is misleading, as technically there really is not so much that can be unequivocally pointed to as Italian in the work. There was nevertheless a widespread trend for nobles to go to Italy and study fencing among other things there, so there was a definitive familiarity with Italian fencing, something that I don't remember being noted for other nations.

Regards,

[Tim Rivera]

I might be wrong, but I'm thinking of renvers, maindroit and estoc as imports from Italian. I realize that this is disputable. They could also result from similar derivations in both languages. At the very least it's explicit in the manual that he had dealings with Italians, so he must have been familiar with their styles?

I assume he was, but his inclusion of the Italian categorization of strikes in the book is an explicit rejection. To me, that lends more weight against influence.

I've read your comparative analysis and found it interesting (read it here and here, people!), but I'm not sure it gives enough element to really trace back the technical origins of Sainct Didier. The problem here is sorting out the influences from the convergent evolutions...

I certainly didn't mean to imply that technical similarities argued for influence. If that's what came across, it was unintentional. I tried to point out a few possibilities, my favorite of which is that Saint Didier's style is actually French (or at least Provençal).

Tim