SpadaEtCappa.pdf

Spada e Cappa: Cape Technique of the Italian Masters (1531-1653)

I) History of use (where, when, why)

Formal instruction in the combative use of the cape, or cloak, appears to be a predominantly Italian phenomenon, if

we regard as indicative its proportional representation among surviving fencing texts. In the surviving Italian

literature, techniques thereof are first described in Antonio Manciolino’s Opera Nova , from 1531 (or possibly

slightly earlier, as this may not be the first edition). Manciolino only describes using it to beat away cuts. In Achille

Marozzo’s work of 1536, which discusses the use of the cape with either dagger or sword (Figure 1) , the cape is

used to beat away both cuts and thrusts. It is included along other auxiliary arms (such as buckler, shield, dagger,

and so on) in the majority of Italian fencing texts through the mid-17 th century.

It may probably be safely assumed that “sword and cape” was not generally regarded as a preferred combination, but

rather that it was better than sword alone (lacking a buckler, dagger, etc.). Giacomo di Grassi in 1570 asserts that

the use thereof was first discovered by chance, it being commonly worn, and then rendered into Art; nonetheless, the

cloak is not of the True Art (although he instructs on its use at great length). An additional factor favoring its

technical development may be that in parts of Italy, the carrying of the dagger was apparently illegal. This is a

motivation provided by both Salvatore Fabris (1606 ) and Francesco Alfieri (1653) for understanding the use of the

cape.

The cape was also taught outside Italy. A manuscript in Perpignan dating to 1509 attests that Spanish students were

required to learn the sword and cape to achieve the rank of “lanista”. Moreover, Heinrich Gunterrodt (1579) claims

that the sword and cape was favored by the Spanish. However, in Spain the cape seems to have fallen out of favor as

the school of La Verdadera Destreza developed through the century. The Spanish maestros Jeronimo de Carranza

(1569) and Luis Pacheco de Narvaez (1600) briefly mention the use of the cape, although with relatively little

description of technique; both masters state that the dagger is the superior weapon. A century later, Manuel Cruzado

y Peralta (1702) presents counters, drawn from Pacheco de Narvaez’s texts, to certain cape techniques. However

these counters are given so that the reader can deal with said techniques if employed by the "vulgo", that is, the

unskilled or foreign fencer; the use of the cape is not advocated by Cruzado. Outside Spain, the German

fechtmeister Joachim Meyer (1570) also devotes two pages to perfunctory instruction in the cape in combination

with the sword. (Figure 2)

It is clear that the cape was used in formal combat even where documentation of formal instruction is lacking. In

England, the Sloane Manuscript 2530 (records of the London Masters of Defence) records a challenge including

rapier and cloak played before the king, almost certainly Edward VI (reigned 1547-1553). However, I know of no

English text describing the technique of cape usage prior to the 18 th century. In Portugal, numerous duels with the

sword and cape in the 16 th and 17 th century are attested to by Sousa Viterbo (1899).

In addition, abundant evidence exists of the use of a cape on the left arm being used in a fight, in a variety of other

countries and throughout the centuries, quite probably in an ad hoc fashion. These preceding citations are, however,

the main examples that I have found suggesting the use and/or instruction of combative cape in a formal setting.

Thus, the practice should be considered neither unusual, nor uniquely Italian. It is, however, a commonplace in

Italian fencing texts in the period addressed, and it is this literature that provides us the greatest theoretical and

practical detail thereof.

Finally, it is worth noting that the cloak continued to be regarded as a valid auxiliary arm even as late as 1763, when

its use (as well as that of the lantern) was described as a companion to the small sword by Domenico Angelo.

II) The nature of the cape itself (structure, substance, weight)

“They have clokes… some of cloth, silk, velvet, taffetie, and such like… Some short, scarsely reachinge to the

girdlestead, or waist, some to the knee, and othersome traylinge uppon the ground (almost) liker gownes, than

clokes. These clokes must be garded, laced, and thorowly faced: and sometimes so lyned, as the inner side standeth

almost in as much as the outside: some have sleeves, othersome have none, some have hoodes to pull over the head,

some have none, some are hanged with points and tassels of gold, silver, or silk, some without all this.” -- Phillip

Stubbes, The Anatomie of Abuses, 1583.

The quote above (admittedly, referring to English cloaks) should serve to convey several points. The first is that the

cloak, or cape, was in no way standardized. Investigating several visual sources, of period portraiture, tapestries,

and illustrations from fencing manuals; extant museum pieces; and photographs and patterns of period pieces reveals

both an enormous variety of construction, and a few generalities.

The cape could be a half, three quarter, or full circle (or oval). Collars seem to have been quite common, and

sleeves were not unknown. It was usually at least waist-length, and could, as the quote above states, be full-length.

Antonio Quintino (1614), who discusses combat with cape gives the advice: “Therefore to whom would go armed at

night, it behooves him to be careful… Take care as well to grip your cape well, and in such a way as to not tangle it

around your feet.” Mid-thigh seems to have been most common. It was therefore, as fencing manuals show and

describe, generally of ample area.

As for closures, it was sometimes tied, or had a sliding clasp, or a standing buttoned collar. In some sources, such as

the Valois tapestries, it is shown simply jauntily draped over the left shoulder. It is tempting to speculate that, at

least when in the street and expecting trouble, one would “grip the cape well” or otherwise have it untied, should

one have need to remove it in a hurry. At any rate, no source that I have read discusses releasing any fastenings in

transferring the cape from off the shoulder onto the arm.

As for material, the capes described by Janet Arnold are often velvet, lined with linen or satin, with embroidery

common (again, in accord with the quote from Stubbes), although there must have been many plainer ones used by

commoners, which have not survived. Fur, heavy trim, and fringe are all known. It must be recalled that in the time

period in question, Europe was experiencing a “Little Ice Age” with temperatures lower than is current, and that

capes could have to serve effectively as the winter jackets of their day. They were, therefore, often of significant

weight, a fact backed up by the mention in period fencing manuals of the fatigue of the arm incurred by holding

them outstretched.

There is no evidence that I know of for the inclusion of weights, chain, ropes, or any other item in the hem of a cape

to turn it into a “fighting cape”. Simply put, there was no need, nor would there be any desire, for extra weight, as

that of the cape itself would suffice.

III) Theory of function (how can it resist a blade)

The authors who best describe why a cape can stop a blow are di Grassi and Fabris. Their explanations, in

summary, follow.

A) di Grassi

“Air strengthens it.” The cape doesn’t withstand cuts if something rigid (like an arm or leg) is behind it, but it does

if air is behind it. We would explain this by saying that the slight yielding of the cape distributes force throughout it.

Ergo, di Grassi recommends parrying only low cuts (the flank and lower) with the hanging portion so as not to get

your arm cut, and to stand right leg forward, so as to prevent your left leg from getting cut. Thrusts, however, can

be beaten with either the hanging cloak or the hand protected by the cloak.

B) Fabris

If you block a cut with the cape arm, the cape may be cut, and the arm wounded, even if you wind the entire cape

around your arm (which would expose your lower body, anyway). The lower body can be defended with the cape

alone because it yields to impact, has length, and has width. All three are vital. Length without width doesn’t

defend, because width makes it strong. This is because one parries with the edge of the cape, not the face (ergo

width of cape translates to depth of material resisting a blade). The yielding part needs to be aided by the motion of

the feet and body in order to make the defense secure against cuts as well as thrusts.

IV) Winding (taking the cape from the shoulders to the arm)

There are some minor differences among the methods of winding the cape about the left arm espoused by different

authors. Universally, the recommendation by text and/or illustration is to wind the cape to the outside, i.e. to rotate

the left hand in a counter-clockwise direction, so that the dangling end of the cape is outside the forearm. Most

authors recommend winding no more than twice, in part to leave enough length hanging, and in part to leave the

cape free in case you choose to throw it. Some recommend winding to cover up to the middle of the forearm, but

most recommend covering the arm as far as the elbow-- this protects the hand and forearm to some degree from cuts

incurred from incidental contact with the edge (as when parrying a thrust, or displacing the blade). There are also

specialized manners of winding to be used when intending to throw the cape, or when one must wind it in a

particular hurry. Additionally, Agrippa’s winding, and one of Docciolini’s represent the unusual and interesting

approach of combining the cape with the dagger in the same hand. Docciolini describes his winding with the

greatest clarity. A passage from his description, and brief summaries of the methods of winding given by seven

other authors follow (in chronological order of publication), including the process of removing the cape from its

initial position (i.e. worn as a garment).

A) Manciolino-- Let it fall from your right shoulder as far as the middle of your left arm. Wind your left hand to the

outside, coiling the draped cape over your arm. Adopt a stance with the sword outside your right knee.

B) Agrippa-- Extend your right arm so that the cape falls off of the shoulder, and draw the sword and dagger, going

into terza. Then use the dagger hand to grab the outer face of the collar so that the cape falls to the outside. Lean

your body back and a little to the left and extend your left arm, rotating the dagger hand to the outside, far enough

from your thigh so as not to stab yourself. Wind the cape almost completely about the forearm. In this way it

protects the arm, head and leg (perhaps by using the arm as a shield). In order to make an opening by beating with

the cloak, unwind it somewhat. "And this embrace I hold to be better than to have the dagger alone or the cape

alone, because some would sooner have the dagger than the cape, others the cape than the dagger, regarding each of

these as good by themselves alone; therefore it reasonably must be better to have them both." (Figure 3)

C) di Grassi-- If you can, hold it at the collar and wind it one or two times to the elbow. If you do not have the time

to grab it by the collar, take it by the edge, let it fall from the shoulders, and wind it once or twice, being mindful

that it hangs lower this way. (Figure 4)

D) Docciolini—“The first way is done like this: having your cape on, in whatever way it may be, the right hem

might be either under your left arm or over your right shoulder. Alternately, it may be stretched down so that you

will not have to make if fall from atop your shoulder or under your arm. Well then, be it in whatever fashion, if it is

in one of the first two manners, you’ll have to make it fall toward your right side. At the same time put your left

hand up toward your left shoulder, and grasp the cape so that your fingers go toward your left shoulder, and grasp

the cape so that your fingers go toward the inner face of the cape, and toward your chest, as if they had to pierce the

said cape. And your thumb will go on the outside, and grasping the cape, you will bunch it up with your hand, and

at the same time perform an action upon the cape with your right shoulder to make it fall from the rear of your flank

onto said arm, and in this falling you will keep your left arm distant from your body, and then you will give your

arm a bit of a turn, sending said arm toward the rear of your flank, because thereby you will end up winding it about

yourself with great facility and dexterity and with more speed than in any other way whatsoever, and with less

danger of hindering yourself. But in this method, you will be unable to lay your hand upon your dagger. However

your hand will be well covered by your cape, and at the same time you will put your hand to your sword with ease.

The second way, with the accompaniment of the dagger, will be this: letting the cape go will differ from the

previous ways only in the grasping of the cape, because in this way of grasping it, you will do so the opposite of

how it was done before. Namely, your thumb will go on the inside, where the fingers had been before, while the

fingers will be on the outside, where the thumb had been before. So, performing the same action with your

shoulder, you will wind it about your arm, and in this way your hand will remain free to be placed upon your dagger

at any time that the opportunity occurs for you to do so. And at the same time you will place your hand upon your

sword.”

E) Fabris-- No description of removing the cape from the shoulder. Hold it with the arm extended, wrapped about

the forearm as far as the elbow, with most of it hanging. If you intend to throw it, do not wrap it more than twice,

and if you intend to throw it without entirely releasing it, hold the lower edge. (Figure 5)

F) Capo Ferro-- Let it fall off the right shoulder to the middle of the left arm, wrap the hand through to the outside,

enveloping the arm to the elbow. (Figure 6)

G) Quintino-- If you do not intend to throw it, let it all fall over your left shoulder, then drop it over your left arm

and make an embrace. If you intend to throw it, wrap it no more than twice, or alternately take it in a bundle apt for

throwing. (Figure 7)

H) Alfieri-- Let it fall onto and somewhat behind your left shoulder, and with your thumb facing forward, wind it

about the arm, leaving it hanging and spreading out. (Figure 8)

V) Practical application (combative tactics / techniques)

Fabris gives a number of general pieces of advice regarding the use of the cloak, which are worth presenting here:

1) He advises that in many cases one defends with the sword, while aiding the defense with the cape, especially

against cuts to the head. As stated above, the cape can parry lower body blows by itself.

2) One parries with the edge of the cape that hangs from the hand, not with the face of the cape, because the face can

be easily penetrated, but the edge will yield just a little before it displaces the enemy’s point. Therefore hold the

cape with the edge, not the face, toward the enemy.

3) Hold the arm extended so as to parry at a distance. Hold your hand high, level with the head (just low enough so

as not to impede your line of sight). This also helps prevent tripping. However, be sure that you have wound it

enough that you won’t trip even if your hand lowers from fatigue.

4) Keep your hand near your sword point. This keeps your body better covered, and protects your cape hand. In

case of fatigue, bring your hand near your sword hilt so that your enemy can’t come between your hands.

5) Note that disengaging over is better than under so that you don’t hit your own cloak. This is not an issue if

disengaging to the enemy’s inside in order to attack.

Before turning to specific techniques, I feel obligated to state clearly a simple fact regarding the use of the cape.

Modern practice of choreographers and reenactors notwithstanding, there is little to no evidence that the cape was

used to beat a sword away by snapping, flaring, or twirling it. Quite simply, manuals almost uniformly describe

parrying with the cape pendant from the arm (or with the cape-covered arm or hand, vs. a thrust). The only case I

have found which could even possibly be interpreted as a twirling action is that of Agrippa, who describes

unwinding the cape from the arm in order to beat a blade away; but it is also clear that unwinding is necessary to

avail oneself of a draping portion, given his starting position, i.e. fully wound about the forearm. Like the alleged

“fighting cloak”, the “bullfighting” school of cape parrying is best regarded as a modern misconception.

The techniques that follow are almost entirely taken from period manuals. The sole exception is of attacks to the

low left, i.e. at the cape-covered area. Apparently that was considered to be such a poor choice of target, or merely

the responses are so obvious, that period authors didn’t spend much time addressing the possibility. Therefore I

have felt at my liberty to list a few likely defenses. Note that the descriptions below taken from period sources are,

in some cases, one of several actions described in the given citation, and, especially for those from Fabris, may be

somewhat simplified.

A) Response versus thrusts

Beat away the sword using either the cape-covered hand, or the hanging forward edge of the cape. Make contact at

the debole, about one palmo (10 inches) from the point.

Some, like di Grassi, advise only parrying low thrusts (from the flank downwards) with the cape; others, like Fabris,

say you can parry any thrust with the cape.

A general tip from Fabris: In attacks to the head, raise the hand by bending at the elbow; do not move the shoulder.

Thus your forearm aids in the defense by coming into vertical, and you retain a line of sight to the enemy’s sword

hand.

1) Futility of attacking low to the left (thrust to left flank)

Both start in low terza; patient parries by moving cape slightly to left, using the hanging edge:

a) with lunge to right and stoccata in terza to chest

b) with intagliata and stoccata in quarta to chest (better opposition of cape to forte)

c) with inquartata and thrust in quarta to face.

2) Versus high outside, two hand parry (separated hands) and replacement

(from di Grassi defence at High ward)

Patient in Low ward, agent attacks to outside in high prima. Patient passes forward and parries with his sword in

terza and simultaneously puts his cape hand against agent’s forte. Then patient draws his sword back but leaves his

cape in place, and delivers a stoccata with a second pass forward. Using the cape alone is “less certain”.

3) Versus high outside (high to the right), with cross body cape parry to the left (Figure 9)

(from Capo Ferro plate 37)

Both begin in quarta on the inside (with angulation, i.e. aim at right shoulder). Patient has gained agent’s sword.

Patient keeps his cape slightly under his forte (chevron of defense). Agent disengages to attack to right side of chest

from outside; patient counterdisengages and parries up and to the left with his cape (circle under enemy’s debole),

and counterattacks in terza to the head.

4) Vs. high inside, (high to the right), with cross body cape parry to the right (Figure 10)

(from Fabris plate 103)

Both begin in terza on the outside. As agent begins to gain the sword, patient disengages below in terza. Agent uses

this tempo to attack between patient’s arms in quarta to head, while lowering his own cape to protect his lower body.

Patient parries with cape to his own right by raising his cape hand but lowering his elbow, so as to avoid blinding

himself. Simultaneously, patient counterattacks by disengaging with an angulated terza (or 2 nd in 3 rd ) so as to avoid

agent’s cape, and strike him in the throat over his cape.

5) Vs. high inside (high to the left) (Figure 11)

(from Fabris plate 102)

Both in terza. Patient lowers his cape hand as an invitation. Agent lunges with a seconda, simultaneously using his

own cape to try to displace patient’s sword to the outside. Patient parries high to the outside with cape by raising his

hand, and evades agent’s cape by going from terza into quarta, thereby hitting him high on the right (in the armpit or

chest).

6) Vs. low inside, (low to the right) (Figure 12)

(from Fabris plate 104)

Both in low terza. Patient moves his own sword point slightly to the outside as an invitation. Agent attacks in low

terza between patient’s weapons, moving his right side forward (into profile) thus disuniting his own weapons.

Patient parries with the cape hand low and to the right, stepping forward with his right foot, and counterattacks

between agent’s weapons in 2 nd in 3 rd to agent’s armpit.

7) Left leg forward stance; vs. any attack, emphasis on high to right (Figure 13)

(from Fabris plate 100)

Stance is very low, with left leg forward. Cape hand is at head level. Hand is in low, withdrawn, terza, with point

angled up, so media/debole rests on left hand (it is thus “fortified”).

If agent attacks left, cape parry left. If he attacks between, cape parry right. If to the low outside, parry with forte.

Only reasonable target is over the sword, to the head; if so, parry with the sword, with the left hand supporting the

debole (i.e. two handed parry, tutta coperta) and immediately riposte in terza.

“This is in summary the best guard of all others of the sword and cape.” According to Fabris, the left leg forward is

better with cape than any other weapon, because the cape hangs and covers the whole left side.

Plik z chomika:

Inne pliki z tego folderu:

Inne foldery tego chomika: