Interpreting the Gaps: Marozzo’s Third Play from the Second Assalto

I have just added Marozzo’s third play from the second assalto with sword and small buckler to Patreon.

One of the most challenging aspects of translating and interpreting the assaltos is that the masters are often quite sparse with the details regarding the partner’s role within the exercise.

My approach to this is twofold, with the general objective being that the interpretations must be both logical and applicable. Firstly, the primary method for making the plays work is to fill the gaps with familiar solutions from the masters found in other contexts. Secondly, the interpretations must remain logically coherent; that is, similar situations should produce similar responses.

There are almost endless ways to construct the partner’s actions within these exercises. The important thing is that the solutions are workable and consistent with the system. It may well be that the next time I revisit the same plays, I arrive at different conclusions. My interpretations continue to evolve all the time – the results of the current interpretations are not static and written in stone. They will most probably evolve again, sometimes more, sometimes less.

But the point is not to find some absolute “real” answer. The point is to use what the masters provide us to construct a functional and logical language of fencing according to the methods and principles of the Bolognese tradition.