Heavily Edited

Fiore dei Liberi and his treatises Fior di Battaglia/Flos Duellatorum c.1410.
Open to public view.

Heavily Edited

Postby Brian Stokes » 10 Apr 2014 22:47

For those interested I would like to point out that the Getty manuscript is heavily edited. Many of the drawings were partially scraped and redrawn. I noted this in prior visits with the manuscript but during my last reading of the work a week or so ago I found that many of the pages therein contained such corrections. This is true even to the smallest detail, such as the hand of the player in the third play of the first remedy master of the dagger. I detected at least thirty such redraws throughout the work.

Brian
Brian Stokes
Corporal
 
Posts: 51
Joined: 24 Jan 2007 05:22

Re: Heavily Edited

Postby admin » 11 Apr 2014 11:02

That's fascinating!
The assumption being that these were done within a short period of time during the creation of the manuscript?
http://www.antique-swords.co.uk/

I like swords more than you.
User avatar
admin
Emperor
 
Posts: 35036
Joined: 13 Mar 2006 17:28
Location: Guildford, Surrey, England.

Re: Heavily Edited

Postby Michael Chidester » 11 Apr 2014 12:09

Yes, I noticed this when perusing the newer scans for the first time. The artists sure did make a lot of mistakes.
User avatar
Michael Chidester
Colonel
 
Posts: 1425
Joined: 28 Sep 2008 00:20
Location: Brighton, MA

Re: Heavily Edited

Postby Brian Stokes » 11 Apr 2014 14:18

All of the evidence suggests that the corrections were completed during the construction of the manuscript. With as many edits as there are in the manuscript I now view all of the drawings as precise representations of that which Fior meant to convey. Whether I can perform the play as shown is an entirely different matter.

I should also mention that I did a very close inspection of my copy of the PD (an original thereof) due to the above and found hints of changes being made in some of its drawings as well. The only way to really confirm that would be, of course, to see the original which as we know will not be happening anytime soon.

Brian
Last edited by Brian Stokes on 11 Apr 2014 14:24, edited 1 time in total.
Brian Stokes
Corporal
 
Posts: 51
Joined: 24 Jan 2007 05:22

Re: Heavily Edited

Postby Michael Chidester » 11 Apr 2014 14:20

Could be. Or he may not have been involved at all.
User avatar
Michael Chidester
Colonel
 
Posts: 1425
Joined: 28 Sep 2008 00:20
Location: Brighton, MA

Re: Heavily Edited

Postby Brian Stokes » 11 Apr 2014 14:28

Mike, do whatever you want with the info ....
Brian Stokes
Corporal
 
Posts: 51
Joined: 24 Jan 2007 05:22

Re: Heavily Edited

Postby Bulot » 11 Apr 2014 16:42

I now view all of the drawings as precise representations of that which Fior meant to convey


So, you DO need three arms to complete the dagger play on folio 14v ? :mrgreen:
User avatar
Bulot
Captain
 
Posts: 677
Joined: 17 Dec 2007 14:15
Location: Montreal, QC, Canada

Re: Heavily Edited

Postby Brian Stokes » 11 Apr 2014 16:59

I will post a video of the "three-handed" play on the Schola San Marco's website tomorrow after class. It is drawn correctly.
Brian Stokes
Corporal
 
Posts: 51
Joined: 24 Jan 2007 05:22

Re: Heavily Edited

Postby Bulot » 11 Apr 2014 17:05

The play itself is pretty clear, but I would challenge the idea that the Getty illustration is flawless, especially since the same play is correctly depicted in both the Paris and the PD versions. I'm looking forward to hear a different opinion.
User avatar
Bulot
Captain
 
Posts: 677
Joined: 17 Dec 2007 14:15
Location: Montreal, QC, Canada

Re: Heavily Edited

Postby Sean M » 12 Apr 2014 21:15

Thanks Brian.

Michael Chidester wrote:Yes, I noticed this when perusing the newer scans for the first time. The artists sure did make a lot of mistakes.

Making technical drawings is difficult, especially when you are not used to making them and won't be able to cover your mistakes in paint. I should go back and read Cennini's book again, although he was trained in Florence not Venice or Milan.

Edit: For what it's worth, the books on manuscript production which I have read say that decorated manuscripts usually contained notes and sketches which were meant to be rubbed out, cut away, or covered before the book was delivered to its new owner.
how could anyone resist becoming
part of what I thought you were?
Sean M
2nd Lieutenant
 
Posts: 341
Joined: 26 Feb 2009 13:14

Re: Heavily Edited

Postby Michael Chidester » 13 Apr 2014 03:13

Brian Stokes wrote:Mike, do whatever you want with the info ....

I'm just messing with you, Brian. :) But as you know, I don't believe that Fiore was personally involved in any of the four extant copies, and they should all be treated merely as approximations of his intentions.
User avatar
Michael Chidester
Colonel
 
Posts: 1425
Joined: 28 Sep 2008 00:20
Location: Brighton, MA

Re: Heavily Edited

Postby CPenney » 13 Apr 2014 04:23

Has anyone detected evidence of corrections in the text? That, to me, would go significantly towards demonstrating that the corrections were made in order to improve the accuracy and technical quality of the manuscript, rather than simply enhancing its aesthetic value.
Chris Penney
Ottawa Medieval Sword Guild
User avatar
CPenney
Staff Sergeant
 
Posts: 157
Joined: 01 Jan 2007 22:00
Location: Ottawa

Re: Heavily Edited

Postby Brian Stokes » 13 Apr 2014 05:38

Brian Stokes
Corporal
 
Posts: 51
Joined: 24 Jan 2007 05:22

Re: Heavily Edited

Postby Bulot » 13 Apr 2014 18:24

I see what you mean. It's clever, but it creates new problems :

-It would make this play a counter to the fourth master remedy. The text does not say so, and the scholar does not wear a crown.
-The contrafattori are usually placed after all the scholars have done their plays, not in the middle of other scholars.
-This section is very consistent throughout the three Ms with a dagger section. The play on Getty 14v bears a strong resemblance with PD 9v and Paris 32v. In both instances, the scholars don't show any sign of supernumerary limbs (although, one of their opponents has a pink tentacle stuck in the back, so... Aliens, right ?).
-The play you show in the video is not what I think Fiore describes as a ligadura soprana. It is a wrist lock, closer to the counter of the third remedy master (the one who plays a man riversa).
User avatar
Bulot
Captain
 
Posts: 677
Joined: 17 Dec 2007 14:15
Location: Montreal, QC, Canada

Re: Heavily Edited

Postby Brian Stokes » 13 Apr 2014 19:15

I believe it to be the counter described for 4/3. That said the point of the video was to demonstrate the play as drawn in the Getty does not reflect an extra hand.

I am presently working on an iPhone and apologize for the terse response.

Brian
Brian Stokes
Corporal
 
Posts: 51
Joined: 24 Jan 2007 05:22

Re: Heavily Edited

Postby Brian Stokes » 22 Apr 2014 17:47

The play depicted in 4/3 is the counter to the play described in the first section of the adjoining paragraph. The reason why there is no crown on the scholar's head is that such a device could confuse the reader for it would suggest that the action drawn at 4/3 is the counter to 4/2 and not to the action described in the first part of the descriptive paragraph. A crown alone would not work as it would suggest a new master which this play is not. Ergo, the garter.

The second section in the paragraph begins, "Lo contrario mio sie," or "This is my counter." Perhaps 'This' refers to the drawing. As stated in the second part of the descriptive paragraph the scholar's left arm grabs his right and breaks the player's grasp as is seen in the drawing. In our experience in performing this play it has without fail, if performed in proper tempo, at the very least forced the player to release his or her bind.

Brian
Brian Stokes
Corporal
 
Posts: 51
Joined: 24 Jan 2007 05:22


Return to Fiore dei Liberi

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests