What is the cause that wisemen in learning or practicing their weapons, are deceived with Italian Fencers.
There are four causes,[1]
I.
Firstly, their instructors are far from proficient.[2]
II.
Secondly, whatever they impart is a blend of both truth and falsehood. It holds true in their demonstrations, which align with the appropriate strength and timing in friendly encounters, but falters in their actions, failing to correspond with the force and timing during more intense skirmishes or actual fights.[3] This discrepancy exemplifies the stark contrast between these two types of combat, much like the distinction between a depiction of Sir Bevis of Southampton and of Sir Bevis himself if he were alive.[4]
III.
The third reason emerges from the understanding that only those engaged in the craft can accurately assess its mastery. Individuals lacking expertise, no matter how astute, cannot accurately evaluate their instructors of the skill they're learning, primarily because they themselves lack proficiency.[5]
IV.
Lastly, to validate any errors not only in this esteemed field of defense but in any other complex domain, falsehood often disguises itself as convincingly as the truth itself.[6]
___________________________
[1] George Silver is detailing how students are deceived by the Italian masters. This is a bit harsh of a criticism in my estimation. The Italian Masters were not teaching a "new weapon" as the rapier had been in use in England since at least the 1570's. Silver's contemporary George Hale wrote his treatise (The Private School of Defense, 1614) on the correct use of the rapier and not long after Joseph Swetnam released his own instruction for rapier fencing (The School of the Noble and Worthy Science of Defense, 1617). The rapier was particularly disliked by Silver, although he challenged Saviolo to a duel that included rapiers, meaning Silver must have trained with a rapier. In this chapter Silver is disparaging the Bolognese Masters and their system which we shall see is rooted in the Italians system of a lack of defense (see Opera Nova) and in their lack of true times and uncrossing oof blades (see Camillo Agrippa). The Italian Masters came to England during its Renaissance when everything Italian was in vogue. They knew that they could charge a premium for their skills in Italian fencing and were there for the economic opportunity. This doesn't make them deceivers just opportunists.
[2] The Italian Masters were no doubt skilled in their art but from George Silver's criticisms we know that he challenged them to fights and they refused and avoided Silver. This annoyed Silver and the English martial culture was not to back down from a challenge. The very act of backing away from a challenge would have been seen as cowardice and proof that they were ineffectual as fighters. It is odd that Saviolo avoided Silver's challenges and even hid away in his Salle to avoid fighting Silver because Saviolo made time to insult Englishman and to issue challenges to the London Masters of Defense.
[3] This is a reasonable criticism and a truth that holds valid to the present day. Martial arts that preoccupy themselves with demonstrations and controlled bouts without ever engaging in uncoordinated and uncooperative fighting more often fail when presented in such a context. Such martial expressions cannot ever exercise the right to claim authenticity or effectual combat training when they haven't proven their ability to hold up under duress.
[4] Sir Bevis of Southampton was a premier legend of the son of an Earl who whose father was betrayed by his wife and subsequently Bevis was sold into slavery by his mother to Muslims. The whole story of Bevis is how he defeated and conquered every single foe that came before him, and his story is akin to an Anglo version of the biblical story of Sampson. Bevis was undefeatable and the stories of his victories were unimaginably exaggerated. George Silver is drawing a parallel of the unbelievability of the legend of Sir Bevis to the unbelievability of the efficacy of the Italian Masters fighting system.
[5] George Silver is simply stating that the Italian Masters attract students of those who are unaware of or have mastery of fencing themselves. Therefore, these types of students are easily duped into believing the exaggerations and the controlled demonstrations of the Italian Masters due to their lack of discernment.
[6] Lastly, Silver summarizes by stating that the Italian system is a mixture of truth and falsehood and therefore its masters are essentially "wolves in sheep's clothing."
Comments