Changed in translation: modifications to the Parise sabre method

The controversial yet highly influential treatise by Masaniello Parise entitled Trattato teorico-pratico della scherma di spada e sciabola, first published in 1884, was considered by many both in and outside of Italy to be the bible of Italian fencing. His work was translated at least twice in his lifetime, the first one being a Spanish translation in 1896 published in Argentina in 1896;¹ the second was an abbreviated German translation of the 1904 version (5th edition) of Parise's treatise, carried out by Arturo Gazzera and Jacob Erckrath de Bary and published in 1905.²

While the Spanish publication was a full and faithful translation of the 1884 edition, including the original illustrations, on close inspection the German translation is seen to deviate in certain areas from the 1904 edition it claims to be translating, most significantly with regard to the sabre instruction. This article is a discussion of the most noteworthy of these modifications and what they mean for the historical practice of the Parise method.

While there are some substantial differences between the 1904 and 1884 editions of Parise's treatise, the most significant of which being the change from wrist-based to full-arm molinelli as a concession to the Radaellians, an analysis of the differences between these two editions is outside the scope of this article. What follows here then is strictly a comparison of select passages in the original 1904 Parise treatise with its German translation by Gazzera and Erckrath de Bary.

Arturo Gazzera, c. 1902

Before we examine the treatise, however, it is important to consider who the translators were so that we may have a greater understanding of where these changes may have originated from in the first place. Unlike the translator of the Spanish version, Arturo Gazzera was a graduate of Parise's military fencing masters school in Rome, where he was a student of the celebrated Radaellian master Carlo Guasti. After graduating at the top of his class, Gazzera taught in the 3rd Alpini regiment as well as spending a short time as a bouting master at the Master's School before eventually leaving the army in 1896. He spent a few months teaching alongside Barbasetti in Vienna, then taught sabre at Károly Fodor's fencing hall in Budapest for three years until moving to Offenbach am Main, Germany. It is here that Gazzera would remain for the rest of his life, quickly becoming one of the most prominent fencing masters in Germany.³

Among Gazzera's earliest students was the prominent sportsman Jacob Erckrath de Bary. Having spent time in Milan in the late 1880s, Erckrath de Bary became enamoured with Italian fencing, and remained an avid promoter of which on his return to Germany. Here Erckrath de Bary served for several years as president of the Offenbach Fencing Club, and was instrumental in the club's decision to hire Gazzera to teach there. Erckrath de Bary later claimed it was his idea to translate Parise's great work into German, with the help of his new master, Gazzera. He was also a talented competitor in his own right, winning a gold medal as captain of the German sabre team at the 1906 Intercalated Olympic Games.⁴ Erckrath de Bary was one of the greatest advocates for the growth of fencing in Germany in the early 20th century, serving as the first president of the Deutscher Fechter-Bund (Germany's national fencing organisation) and representing Germany in the International Fencing Federation (FIE) for over 20 years.⁵

Jacob Erckrath de Bary

In the beginning of Gazzera and Erckrath de Bary's translation, aside from omitting Parise's dedication to his uncle and master Raffaele Parise and greatly shortening the historical summary, the translators also omit the Fambri report for the government's treatise commission; this was a report which largely gave a flawed and biased indictment of the Radaelli sabre method and justified the selection of Parise's treatise as the new regulation fencing text for the Italian army.⁶ Many smaller omissions and abbreviations of the original text can be found throughout the translation (the original is 420 pages long, whilst the translation is only 160), such as most insignificant footnotes and some longer paragraphs, but this report is by far the largest section of the original to not be included. On its own this particular omission may seem of little significance, but as we shall see, the changes later on in the translation give an indication of a deliberate attempt to alter the reader's perception of Parise's system, particularly in comparison to the Radaelli system.

The foil (/sword) section is largely unmodified, although a few differences are worth mentioning. The first minor technical divergence can be seen in the guard position. While the Parise illustrations show the front knee slightly further back towards the heel of the foot, thereby producing a subtly rear-weighted guard, the photos from the German translation depict a typical even-weighted guard, with the front leg more perpendicular to the foot. We also see a slight forward lean in the torso of the Parise illustrations which is not present in the German version. This torso lean is something that Parise only explicitly mentions in the sabre section,⁷ but not in foil, despite being noticeable in the illustrations for both weapons.

Left: Parise (1904)
Right: Gazzera & Erckrath de Bary

The descriptions of the lunge, advance, and retreat correspond closely with the 1904 Parise text, but the German version also adds in the balestra:

To be able to perform an advance and lunge together in two movements, a short jump forward is done with both feet at the same time, after which the legs must be found in the guard position and then the lunge immediately follows. Note: The movement must be carried out as quickly as possible without any pause between the jump and the lunge. To achieve this the jump must be short.⁸

The last alteration to the foil section worth mentioning (although insignificant) is in the notes on binding the weapon to the hand. In the original text Parise details three different methods of binding the weapon using a 1.5 m long ribbon or cord, while the German translation omits each of these descriptions and merely says that while the 1.5 m cord methods are still used in Italy, the practice is gradually being replaced with the use of a simple wrist strap which the pommel is inserted into.⁹ It is these wrist straps which soon become ubiquitous in Italian foil fencing until the widespread adoption of anatomic grips later in the 20th century, although they are still popular among some classical fencing traditions today. The wrist strap can be seen in the video at the end of this article.

As we reach the sabre section, it is here that we see the differences becoming more significant and indicative of Radaellian influence. To begin with, let us compare the descriptions of the method of gripping the sabre:

Italian

German

The sabre is gripped in the full hand, but with the thumb based along the knurled part of the grip a centimetre away from the guard, and the four fingers closed around, with the little finger resting against the end of the guard, so that the upper extremity of the grip protrudes somewhat underneath the little finger. To grip the sabre well with minimal use of force, and without it sliding in the hand, it is necessary for the handle to perfectly match the concavities formed by the position of the hand, and that the thumb does not impact the guard, and that the upper part of the grip is slightly curved, so that the little finger can easily lean against the guard. In this manner the grip will not turn in the hand, the fingers will be able to rest, and the rotations which follow the cuts will be facilitated. With the sabre gripped like so, the normal position of the wrist will as a result make a noticeable angle with the outside of the forearm.

The sabre is gripped with the full hand, the thumb lying on the roughened part of the backstrap, and the four fingers enclose the grip in such a way that the little finger lies on the curved part of the grip. The thumb should not collide with the guard.

Demonstration of the sabre grip, added to the German translation

While the text of the German edition resembles a summary of the original, the accompanying photo (which was not included in the original Italian edition) shows a grip more akin to the Radaellian method, with the little finger not resting against the bottom of the guard as Parise describes, although the hand does appear to be slightly further down the grip than what Radaellians such as Masiello and Barbasetti depict. Nevertheless, the grip shown in the photo is more similar to the Radaellian method than the Parise method, as it clearly shows the hypothenar eminence resting on top of the backstrap.

In the guard position, the same difference in body weight positioning noted in the foil section is also apparent here, as well as the German version showing a more extended sword arm, the elbow not resting against the flank.

Top: Parise (1904)
Bottom: Gazzera & Erckrath de Bary

The German version also removes the mention of a slight forward inclination of the torso in the guard position:

Italian	German
Whether in guard of third, or of first, the body will naturally come to be slightly forward, but perfectly balanced, so as to be exactly centred between the two heels.	Whether one is in the first or third guard, the body's centre of gravity must always be in the middle between the two heels.

Yet somewhat unsurprisingly it is in the descriptions for the molinelli that we find the strongest indications of Radaellian influence. Only the first sentence of the definition changes, with a small but significant change of word order (emphasis added):

Italian	German
Molinelli are those rotational movements which are performed with the sabre, and which are based principally on the wrist, with assistance from the elbow, in giving blows with the edge in all directions.	Molinelli are those movements performed with the sabre, which are based principally on the operation of the elbow and the slightest assistance of the wrist. They can be performed in all directions.

Although the subsequent descriptions for the individual molinelli (discussed in some detail here) are the same in the German translation, this small edit on the part of the translators does actually make the definition match more closely with the practical execution of the molinelli than the original Italian does, as the actions involve the full range of motion of the elbow and very little wrist movement. Nor could this be interpreted as a mistake on the part of the translators, as they also add the following to the note at the end of section 21:

Note: The teacher will make sure that when performing these molinelli, the thumb never leaves the back of the grip, the rotation of the blade itself is performed with proper use of the elbow and the least possible assistance of the wrist, completely excluding involvement of the shoulders.¹⁰

While the translated descriptions of the exercise molinelli correspond closely with Parise's text, the descriptions of the practical cuts in the subsequent sections remove the sole defining feature of Parise's cutting mechanics, that being the 'recovery swing'. Let us look at the descriptions for the cut to the head as an example:

Italian

German

The cut to the head is performed with a single movement; that is, from guard of third, by extending the arm forward, the hand in third position at shoulder height and the point of the blade above the opponent's head, so as to form an obtuse angle with the arm, with the edge towards the ground; the sabre is lowered decisively in a vertical direction until at the height of the flank, at the same time extending the left leg, without moving the sole of the foot from the ground, and driving the right foot forward, gliding along the ground for one foot length but without dragging it, so that the knee ends up perpendicular to the heel. After which one returns to guard, describing a circular arc, making the sabre go back up with the point hugging the left shoulder, at the same time the left leg is bent, bringing the weight of the body onto it and immediately placing the right foot in its starting position, accentuating the movement with a light beat of the foot.

The head cut is performed in one movement and from guard of third. One cuts out to the right side and strikes with a quick movement, extending the arm, edge down towards the opponent's head, lunging at the same time. One then takes the shortest path to guard of third.

Unlike Parise's original text, the cuts in the German translation do not prescribe any angle between the sabre and forearm, and the recovery to guard is not accompanied by the follow-through swing as practised in the exercise molinelli, but instead it advises to take 'the shortest path' back to the guard position. These same changes are reflected in the other cuts aside from the cuts to the chest and abdomen, where the reader is told to make a slicing motion back to guard, as per the molinello to the inside face.

This is the last significant change apparent in the German translation, with the rest of the sabre material corresponding more or less closely, if abbreviated, to the original text. The sabre method detailed in the book is still clearly Parise's despite the modifications to the cutting mechanics, but the fact that said deliberate changes exist at all (in what one would expect to be a simple translation from the Italian version) is likely indicative of a difference between the theory of Parise's method versus its practical application among the students of the Military Master's School. Indeed the renowned Radaellian masters Pecoraro, Pessina, Guasti, and Barbasetti were all teachers at the school during Gazzera's time there, with not all being as equally devoted to teaching the official method.¹¹

It is unclear if the changes seen in this translation reflect what was actually being taught at the Master's School in Rome or rather Gazzera's own personal method, but regardless of their origin they are nevertheless part of a noticeable trend among the graduates of the military school, which many contemporary commentators attributed to the influence of the aforementioned Radaellian masters. A discussion of these divergences on a broader scale will be the topic for a future article.

I will leave readers with a wonderful video of Arturo Gazzera's most famous student, Helene Mayer, giving a demonstration of Italian foil fencing. Things to note are the nails-up parries of 3rd and 2nd (given as 6th and 8th), the addition of the French parry of 7th, and her use of coupés, all of which show how Gazzera's system naturally continued to diverge from Parise's as time progressed and as the needs of modern fencing required.

Post last updated: 10 August 2024

1 Masaniello Parise, Tratado de esgrima teórico-praticó, trans. Sócrates Pelanda Ponce (Buenos Aires: Julio Ghio, 1896).^↩
2 Masaniello Parise, Das Fechten mit Degen und Säbel, trans. Arturo Gazzera and Jacob Erckrath-de Bary (Offenbach am Main: self-pub., [1905]). The original does not give a year of publication, but the news of its publication in the Austrian magazine Allgemeine Sport-Zeitung, 9 April 1905, p. 363, gives a likely candidate of 1905. For clarity, further citations of this work will use only the translators' names.^↩
3 "Tre Campioni della Scherma Italiana," Stampa Sportiva, 2 November 1902, 11.^↩
4 "La Confession d'un Escrimeur," Le Rappel, 22 July 1908, 3.^↩
5 Max Schröder, Deutsche Fechtkunst (Berlin: Georg Koenig, 1938).^↩
6 Radaellian commentary on this report may be found here and here.^↩
7 Masaniello Parise, Trattato teorico pratico della scherma di spada e sciabola: preceduto da un cenno storico sulla scherma e sul duello, 5th ed. (Turin: Casa Editrice Nazionale Roux e Viarengo, 1904), 270.^↩
8 Gazzera and Erckrath-de Bary, Fechten mit Degen und Säbel, 12.^↩
9 Gazzera and Erckrath-de Bary, 98–99.^↩
10 Gazzera and Erckrath-de Bary, 111.^↩
11 Barbasetti left the school in 1892, Guasti in 1893.^↩