後人對於Silver銀老師手稿的讀後感

Paradoxes of Defence and Brief Instructions.

防禦魔盒與簡要說明

Manuscripts by George Silver

George Silver的手稿

A review by Bill McConnell (1995)

Bill McConnell (1995)的評論

At the end of the sixteenth century an English Gentleman and Teacher of defence Mr. George Silver was concerned with the rising popularity of the Rapier, and the subsequent rapier based combat that was occurring at the time. A traditionalist, Mr. Silver believed that the rapier was a flawed weapon and so the combat, also being flawed, was responsible for the deaths of many gallant Englishmen. He truly believed that many men who had died in such rapier duels may have lived if they had adhered to the use of more conventional weapons, and used established combat techniques. Because of his firm beliefs, Mr Silver wrote his manuscript "Paradoxes of Defence" in which he challenged the use of the rapier and put forward a number of points (his paradoxes) to support his argument. This was published by Edward Blount in 1599. He also wrote "Brief Instructions on my Paradoxes of Defence" in which he actually details combat philosophy and techniques.

在十六世紀末期，一名英國紳士以及防禦大師 Mr. George Silver對於迅捷劍的流行以及隨後發生的以迅捷劍基礎的戰鬥表示密切關注。作為一名傳統主義者， Mr. Silver 相信迅捷劍是一種有缺陷的武器，同時基於迅捷劍的戰鬥也是如此，而他們需要對許多英勇的大英男兒的死負責。他堅定地相信這些在迅捷劍決鬥中死亡的人如果可以了解更多關於常規武器的用法，並且使用那些已經確定的戰鬥技巧是可以生換下來的。由於他這種堅定的信念，Mr Silver寫了他的手稿《防禦魔盒》在其中挑戰了關於迅捷劍的使用，並提出了一些論據來支持他的論點。這被Edward Blount 在1599年發表。他還在《關於我的防禦魔盒的簡要說明》中詳細描述了戰鬥的哲學和技術。

I first heard of Paradoxes of Defence while watching the video "Masters of Defence" by the Tower armouries. This is a wonderful video on the development of the civilian sword and in it they misquote Mr Silver and casually discard his opinions; primarily I think because he did nothing to alter the adoption of rapiers by English swordsmen. At the time while I was watching the video, I remembered thinking how interesting it would be to read Mr Silvers work and listen to his arguments. Early this year (1995) I was lucky enough to be given a copy that was taken from off the Internet (posted by a USA member of the SCA). After reading and re-reading "Paradoxes" I must say I was impressed by his arguments and he makes a number of very good points. A few months back the same SCA chap (Greg Lindahl)?posted the companion volume "Brief Instructions" which in my opinion is even better and an absolute must read for all serious students of swordsmanship.

我第一次聽說防禦魔盒是在看Tower armouries的《防禦大師》視頻的時候。這是一個關於民間武器發展的極為精彩的視頻，在這個視頻中他們對Mr Silver產生了誤解並且隨意放棄了他的觀點；我主要認為是因為他(Sliver)沒有改變英國劍客使用迅捷劍的現狀。當我正在看視頻的時候，我就在想要是能閱讀 Mr Silvers 的作品並聆聽他的觀點那回事何等的有趣啊。 今年初（1995），我很幸運能夠從互聯網上獲得一份副本（美國SCA成員發布）。在不斷的閱讀「魔盒」之後，我必須說他的觀點令我印象深刻，他提出了很多很好的觀點。幾個月前，同一個SCA的專家（Greg Lindahl）發布了的它姊妹篇「簡要說明（Brief Instructions）」，在我看來它是更好的，所有認真學習劍術的學生都必須閱讀它。

Greg Lindahl has told me that the credit for typing out these documents goes to a chap called Steve Hick (thanks Steve and Greg).

Greg Lindahl告訴我，處理這些文件的功勞歸功於Steve Hick（感謝Steve和Greg）

It would be difficult to summarise all of Mr Silvers points in both manuscripts so I will briefly discuss some of his major points (as I see them). The rapier is not a sword developed from any martial concern or pressure. In fact this kind of sword, as a civilian weapon, developed as an article of fashion; a costume accessory. Techniques of rapier combat evolved to suit the new style of word but since the weapon itself has dubious character (in combat at least) the swordsmanship is likewise flawed.

想要在這兩篇手稿中總結Mr Silver的所有觀點是非常困難的，所以我將將要討論他的一些主要觀點（我能看出來的）。迅捷劍不是一種基於任何軍事角度發展出來的劍。事實上這種作為民間武器的劍是作為一種時尚風格而發展起來的；一個服裝配件。迅捷劍作戰的技巧已經發展到了適應其本身的風格上，但是因為武器本身就具有缺陷（至少在戰鬥中），基於其發展的劍術同樣具有缺陷。

Mr Silver points out that most rapiers are too long. Once your opponent is past your point, it is too difficult to clear your weapon and bring the point to bear again. The long blades drag in the hand and even though they are made lightweight they exert a leverage that make them slow to respond to the hand. Also, he dislikes the dismissal of the cutting blow and subsequent reliance on thrusting only. He points out that a thrust is rarely a killing or incapacitating blow (especially from a rapier) and so a wounded opponent is still a threat; possibly a greater threat. Mr Silver disregards the view that the thrust is a faster blow by pointing out that when delivering a thrust or cut a swordsmans hand moves the same distance. He also points out that a thrust may be turned aside with little effort whereas a blow (cut) must be warded with manly strength.

Mr Silver明確地指出大多數迅捷劍都太長了。一旦對手越過了你的劍尖，你就很難控制你的劍並重新指向對手（存疑，求批判）。它的刃太長了，就算是做的很輕盈，它仍會發揮槓桿作用並使它對你手的響應程度變慢。此外，他也不喜歡沒法砍爆對面，僅僅是依靠刺。Mr Silver明確地指出刺是很難殺死敵人或者讓敵人失去戰鬥能力的（特別是用迅捷劍），而受傷的敵人仍然是一種威脅，甚至敵人的威脅程度可能會上升。Mr Silver對於刺擊是一種更快的打擊方式這一觀點標識蔑視，並指出刺擊很容易被偏移，而斬擊卻必須用男兒的力量來抵抗。

Mr Silver is also highly critical of attitudes to duelling being taught in England by Foreign Masters. A major criticism is that they teach a man to seek duels readily for any real or imagined offence. Mr Silver points out that words should be answered with words, and that if things are more serious, England is a lawful country and there are courts wherein to seek satisfaction. A Gentleman must use a sword to defend himself, his property or his Prince and not for any kind of murder. By seeking satisfaction by violence when other courses are available, and by inciting friends to indulge in such violence, we become brutish men, no better than beasts.

Mr Silver對於那些外國大師在大英教導決鬥也持一種批判的態度。一個主要的批判點就是他們教導一個男人尋求為任何真實或者想像的進攻進行決鬥。Mr Silver明確地指出應該用語言來回應語言，如果情況變得嚴重，大英是一個法治國家，應該去法庭尋求滿意的結果。一名紳士應該用他的劍來保護他自己、他的財產、和他的君主，而不是為了去實行謀殺。在有其他方式可以使用的時候，通過暴力來讓自己得到滿足，並且煽動朋友沉迷這種暴力，我們就成為了蠻夷，甚至比不上野獸。

Mr Silver is also critical of duelling technique where the various foreign schools teach offence not defence. In these schools the swordsmen concentrate too much on killing their opponent that they fail to defend themselves properly and so perish. He makes mention of several cases where the outcome of a rapier duel was the death of both men. Mr. Silver also points out that with this new technique of swordplay a Master cannot fight a duel and guarantee his safety; even against an untrained but valiant man. Basically, he believes the high mortality of men in rapier duels is due to the use of a flawed weapon and an overly aggressive style with poor defence and so regardless of skill and training, a swordsman is always at great risk.

Mr Silver 同時也批判了各種外國學校教導進攻而不是防守的決鬥技巧。在這些學校里，劍客們過於專註在如何殺死對手上，以至於他們無法妥善的保護自己並且很輕易的就招致死亡。他提到幾起案例，其中一場迅捷劍決鬥的結果是雙方互死。Mr Silver同時指出，使用這種全新的劍術技巧，即便是一名大師也不能在決鬥中保證自己的安全；哪怕對面僅僅是一個英勇的新人。他認為，基本上迅捷劍決鬥中的高死亡率是來自於使用了具有缺陷的武器以及過於具有侵略性的進攻方式，所以不論他的技藝如何，他的訓練如何，他總是處於極大的風險之中。

Also in condemnation of rapiers and such duelling Mr. Silver points out that these weapons are useless against armour and so have no place in the training of a man to defend his country and Prince. Silver also notes that men armed and trained in rapier fighting could be easily thrashed by common ploughmen or other ruffians and so such swordsmanship is questionable defence for a gentleman.

在譴責這種武器和決鬥方式的同時，Mr Silver同時指出這些武器對於甲胄毫無作用，因此在訓練一名男兒保衛國家和君王的角度上沒有任何作用。Mr Silver同時指出，使用迅捷劍進行戰鬥的男兒很容易被稍有組織的農夫們或者流氓們幹掉，因此這樣的劍術對於紳士來說是值得懷疑的。

In the manuscripts Mr Silver points out that the traditional "short sword" is a superior weapon. It should be pointed out that this "short sword" has a blade of about 90-100 cm and this is based on your stature. Being this length, it is possible to draw the weapon back to ward or attack when your opponent has closed to within arms reach (and this without stepping back). He also indicates the superior nature of this sword in that it may wound a man through armour. Also, such a sword with a single blow may so wound an opponent that they are no longer a danger; and in fact a death may not be necessary to decide a fight.

在Mr Silver的手稿中指出傳統的「短劍」是一種優秀的武器。應該指出這種「短劍「有90-100cm的刃長（咋感覺和打刀差不多了呢？），這個長度是基於你的身材。作為這個長度，你可以在對手在你手臂距離內可以很輕鬆的進攻或者防守（而且不需要後退）。他同時也指出了這種劍的優越性，可以傷害到著甲男兒。而且，這種武器一擊就可以讓對手受到傷害，使他們不再是威脅；事實上，決定一場戰鬥可能不再需要死亡。

The manuscripts mention many other weapons to be used in combat with comments on their advantages and failings and these are well worth a look.

這些手稿提到了許多在戰鬥中使用的武器，並對它們的優點和缺點進行了評述，這些都值得一看。

Discussion:

As a swordsman I can hardly claim that I am a real expert. I have trained and fought with swords of various kinds regularly for the past 12 years or so but I have never fought a real battle and I have never killed anyone. I dont believe I am any great authority but I think I know as much about swords and sword combat as the next re-enactor (swordsman). I personally found myself agreeing with Mr Silvers point of view and though I did not really enjoy his arrogant (writing) style I can accept that as a function of the time the work was written in. Some would think the author is just a raving bigot who hates all foreigners and their damned new ideas. However, Mr Silver has a number of valid arguments that I think most swordsmen would have to agree with. There are many who would defend the Rapier and Rapier combat (duelling). However, few could not agree that the development and success of the civilian weapon was more a function of fashion and social pressure than the superior nature of the weapon itself. That scholarly men were able to develop techniques for the use of these weapons (and partially influence their evolution), should be counted as a bonus but no proof as to the supremacy of such weapons.

作為一名劍客，我很難說我是一名真正的專家。過去的12年里，我經常訓練和使用各種各樣的劍來進行戰鬥，但是我從來沒有真正的戰鬥過，也沒有殺過任何人。我不相信我是一個很厲害的權威，但是我對劍斗的只是和下一名劍客是一樣的。我發現我個人是同意Mr Silver的觀點的，儘管我不是很喜歡他那傲慢的寫作風格，但我還是可以接受這一點。有人會認為Mr Silver是一個偏執狂，仇恨外國人和外國人那該死的新想法。不過，Mr Silver有一些有效的觀點，我認為大多數劍士會同意。有很多人會為迅捷劍和迅捷劍決鬥而辯護。然而，很少有人不同意民用武器的發展和成功更多是因為時尚和社會壓力，而不是作為其作為武器本身的優越性質。這些學者能夠開發使用這些武器的技術（並部分影響它們的演變），應該算作是獎勵，但沒有證據表明這種武器至高無上。

Conclusion:

I firmly believe that anyone interested in studying swordsmanship should take the time to read both of Mr Silvers manuscripts. Even if you do not agree with his point of view, the manuscripts do contain valuable information on 16th century weapons and combat. I was very interested in the authors views on the philosophy of combat; not just how to fight but why to fight. It is definitely worth taking the time out to read these works. I am also sure that like scholars reading Shakespeare, different swordsmen will find their own interpretations and meanings in Mr Silvers words.

我堅信任何有興趣學習劍術的人都應該花時間閱讀Mr Silver的手稿，即使你不同意他的觀點，手稿中也包含有關16世紀武器和作戰的有價值的信息。我對作者的戰鬥哲學十分感興趣，不只是如何戰鬥，而實為什麼而戰鬥。閱讀這些作品絕對值得花在上邊的時間。我也確信和學者們閱讀莎士比亞一樣，不同的劍客會在Mr Silver的話中找到他們自己的解釋和意義。

In closing let me repeat three of Mr. Silvers points that are heavily emphasised.

最後，讓我重複Mr Silvers先生強調的三點。

A swordsman should use a weapon with a length that suits his stature.

Both the cut and thrust are needed in sword combat.

A swordsman should be not so interested in the destruction of his opponent that he disregards his own defence. A Master of defence is he who can take to the field and know that (unless God is against him) he shall not come to any harm.

一名劍士應該使用適合身材長度的武器

實戰中需要刺擊和斬擊

一個劍士不應該對他對手的滅亡感興趣到以至於都無視他自己的防守。一個防守大師就是他在場上知道（除非上帝和他作對）他不會受到任何傷害。