Analysis of Italian Partisani

This paper can also be viewed (with citations) at Academia.edu

1. Introduction

In the early stages of what is hopefully the proliferation of training in the partisan, the thought should go to ensuring that our safe training equipment also conforms to historical originals as best as possible. In order to achieve this, a data analysis must be conducted in order to ensure that our training and interpretations will match with what is read in the texts.

2. History

The partisan developed out of short spears in the early 15^th century and were popular in Italy, likely among the guards of princes called partigiani. These spears were initially used on the battlefield in a phalanx-style formation, or by sergeants within pike blocks in a way similar to the use of the montante or spadone. The partisan was used alone or paired with a shield.

A partisan is defined by its blade, becoming a true partisan when the blade exceeds 45cm. In the early 16^th century, the addition of “wings” became commonplace, likely for the deflection of opposing swords. These wings may have served a similar secondary purpose to the wings on winged spears, to prevent over penetration. Early partisans were affixed to the haft with a simple socket, but later models have the addition of langets to the socket. The broad blade can be used to cut, but the texts do not contain cuts. 

The earliest mention of the partisan in fencing treatises in Italy is from Pietro Monti’s text, Collectanea, published in 1509. Manciolino wrote about partisan paired with the rotella next in 1531. Marozzo seems to be the first author to separate out the partisan alone from normal spear or other polearms. By the time of di Grassi ca. 1570 the partisan seems to be exclusively taught the same as other pole arms alone. The Bolognese masters applied their techniques from other weapons to the partisan, by using invitations and offline steps in order to gain mechanical advantage over the opponent. 

3. Methodology

A search of The Met art gallery for “partisan” with a geographic filter for “Italy” returned 29 results. These results were each opened and the following data were recorded: accession number, total length, head length, width, weight, year, and whether it was ceremonial or not. A second search at the Musei di Civici di Vinezia for “partigiana” returned 36 results. Each item was opened, and the following data were recorded: height, height of head, era, and practical. A third search at the Cleveland Museum of Art was done for “partisan” and the results included only two Italian examples. The following data were recorded from each item: length, head length, weight, ceremonial, and era. All measures are recorded in metric.

These data were recorded in a spreadsheet and the averages were taken of the non-ceremonial labeled weapons. This examination excluded ceremonial weapons as the focus is on the practical use and how extant examples might inform modern interpretations of how the partisan was used. Further, the head lengths for the two examples from the Cleveland Museum of Art were excluded as the results given (17.1cm and 7.6cm) are so small, there must be some error on their end. 

The ceremonial moniker is applied to weapons having piercings in the blades, excessively gilt and engraved. This unfortunately was a personal choice in each instance. While even the most ceremonial of partsani still has an edge and a point and could be used, but as in #32.75.204 was most certainly made for a house guard to stand around with; whereas #14.25.366 while still gilt and engraved, appears to be more likely to be used in combat of some kind, if only in duels.

While collecting this data, I contacted Dr. Iason Tzouriadis at the Royal Armouries about the  museum’s collection. Dr. Tzouriadis stated the total lengths of partisani should largely be ignored as most have been re-hafted in modern times. Dr. Tzouriadis also cited Pietro Monte (a renaissance fencing master) who stated:

[The] pollaxe’s length should be long enough that when a person extends their arm, they can barely touch the top tip of weapon’s spike if not longer, and comparatively that a partizan should be as long as a pollaxe and slightly longer. 

This gives us a solid measurement, and so far, the only hard measurement of the total length of the partisan. Therefore, I will be omitting the total length from the data as that should be calculated by each individual. Further, while the Royal Armouries has an impressive collection of Italian partisani, there will be none in this paper as Dr. Tzouriadis does not know when they will be fully cataloged.

4. Data Collected

The Met has 15 partisani which fit the criteria in the study: with the following data:

Minimum:		Averages:		Maximum
Head Length	55.7	Head Length	78.57	Head Length	101
Width	6.4	Width	13.04	Width	22.2
Year	1475	Year	1537	Year	1600

Of the museums researched, The Met has the most data points, including width of the head at the wings. This dataset has one notable outlier in the head, #14.25.209 represents the longest head, and the heaviest partisan overall. This partisan was excluded from the averages above in order to maintain a more reasonable average.

As we can see from the average partisan in this collection, the width of the blade is 16% of the length of the blade. The changes between the late 15^th century in the earliest example and the average example in 1537 are far greater than the differences between that example and the latest example in 1600.

The Musei di Civici di Venezia has a total of 36 partisani fitting the case study with the following data:

	Minimums	Average	Maximum
Head Height	35	48.53	57
Year	1500	1503	1550

In this data set, the Musei does not give good year estimates, just a century the item came from, so that can easily be ignored, there are five outliers, but they easily cancel each other out in the averages so they have been left in the data set (the variance was 14mm). 

The heads in the Musei’s collection are all of later period design with fully developed wings on the blade and most having langets down the haft. 

The Cleveland Museum has two Italian partisani in their collection:

	Head length	Era
#1	17.1	1575
#2	7.6	1610

This data does pose some problems. First, the head length of 17.1cm makes no sense, unless this is the width, which it could be, this is further compounded by the 7.6cm measurement. Also, the era of partisan #2 makes no sense as there are no other examples in any of the collections which have this style blade from post-circa 1530. The museum was contacted about my questions, but no response was received. Even though these two partisani were excluded from the total data, I felt the information should still be presented here.

Below is the table with all the collected data averaged out:

	Minimum	Average	Maximum
Head Height	35	63.55	101
Era	1475	1544	1610

5. Comparison to modern heads

There are three synthetic partisan heads I could find; the Purple Heart Armory, the Black Armoury and Black Fencer, as well as one steel from Kvetun Armory we find these to find the following data:

	Black Fencer	Purple Heart	Kvetun	Black Armoury
Head Length	77	47.6	85.5	87

Comparing these four, they are all longer than the historical average, except the Purple heart, however, they are not unreasonable lengths. Further, a longer blade allows for greater flex in these cases for the synthetics. If you are looking for a good replica of the length and wing shape of an Italian partisan, the Black Fencer fits the bill. The length is good, and importantly, the wings are typical, as opposed to the Black Armoury and the Kvetun (unless you are wanting an early-period partisan).

6. Full Data Set:
   1. The Met:

Accession Number:	Head length	Width	Year (taken to the middle of the range)
14.25.293	79.04	12.07	1517
08.261.2	76.2	17.8	1525
14.25.209	101	6.4	1480
14.25.110	37.4	11.4	1620
14.25.112	37.8	11.7	1620
04.3.76	81.3	6.4	1475
39.146.1	62.9	22.1	1610
14.25.351	92.7	15.6	1525
14.25.223	36.4	12.4	1650
29.156.7	85.1	10.2	1580
14.25.279	42.9	7.3	1700
14.25.329	70.2	14.6	1590
14.25.366	59.1	11.7	1550
14.25.372	49.5	14	1620
14.25.144	62	12.7	1600
14.25.192	92	14.6	1550
14.25.94	97.2	22.2	1540
32.75.204	27	14.6	1650
08.261.4	66.7	11.5	1550
04.3.81	74.3	15.9	1550
14.25.266	74	19.2	1570
96.5.7	92.7	17.9	1550
14.25.119	55.7	10.2	1500
14.25.389	67.6	11.8	1530

2. Musei di Civici Venezia

Numero inventario museo	Height of head	Era
Cl. XIV n. 1027	35	1500
Cl. XIV n. 1029	40	1500
Cl. XIV n. 1012	43	1500
Cl. XIV n. 0996	45	1500
Cl. XIV n. 1030	45	1500
Cl. XIV n. 0956	45	1500
Cl. XIV n. 1033	45	1500
Cl. XIV n. 1028	45	1500
Cl. XIV n. 1035	45	1500
Cl. XIV n. 1032	45	1500
Cl. XIV n. 1045	45	1500
Cl. XIV n. 1046	45	1500
Cl. XIV n. 1047	45	1500
Cl. XIV n. 1048	45	1500
Cl. XIV n. 1049	45	1500
Cl. XIV n. 1042	48	1500
Cl. XIV n. 1034	49	1500
Cl. XIV n. 0998	50	1500
Cl. XIV n. 1024	50	1500
Cl. XIV n. 1505	50	1500
Cl. XIV n. 0999	50	1500
Cl. XIV n. 1007	51	1500
Cl. XIV n. 1023	52	1550
Cl. XIV n. 1025	52	1550
Cl. XIV n. 1000	52	1500
Cl. XIV n. 1017	52	1500
Cl. XIV n. 1043	52	1500
Cl. XIV n. 0991	52	1500
Cl. XIV n. 0992	52	1500
Cl. XIV n. 0995	52	1500
Cl. XIV n. 0990	52	1500
Cl. XIV n. 0993	52	1500
Cl. XIV n. 0994	52	1500
Cl. XIV n. 1504	55	1500
Cl. XIV n. 1010	57	1500
Cl. XIV n. 1010	57	1500

3. Cleveland Museum of Art

	Head length	Era
#1	17.1	1575
#2	7.6	1610