SchermaOnline.com - FROM DUELLING TO FENCING

When was duelling transformed into fencing as an ath1etic game, and how do these two forms of swordplay relate to one another? To attempt to answer these questions we must examine both iconographic and written evidence. To date, our earliest known example of fencing as a sport or game, rather than as swordplay in mortal combat, as in a duel or war, is...

... the sculptured low-re1ief representation of fencers at the Temple of Medinet Habu built by Ramses III (circa 1160 B.C.). It depicts fencers armed with what appear to be sticks with hand and knuckle guards, as on sabers. Clearly, the combatants are engaging in mock battle, using practice weapons, perhaps of wood with leather hand guards. And much later in history we know of practice swords used by Roman soldiers and gladiators. In fact, gladiatorial schools flourished in Rome from the Republican Period onward. Suetonius (Divus lulius l. 26.3) tells us that Caesar had novices trained, not in gladiatorial schools by professionals, but by Roman knights and senators skilled in the use of arms. Schooling in arms suggests a body of knowledge taught in an organized fashion with drills involving practice weapons.
Presumably, practice swords were used in the Middle Ages during fencing exercises such as those depicted in the Tower Fechtbuch (1-33). This fencing manual, written in Latin with some German words, defines combat as the ordering of different blows. So it represents some of our earliest medieval evidence of an organized program of study for developing skill in swordplay. Interestingly, the German term langort in the Tower Fechtbuch can still be found in the early seventeenth century fencing text by Jakob Sutor (1612). Indeed, fencing terms remain in use for centuries, as is the case with the Italian words fendente and stoccata.

Moreover, it should be observed that the close ties between Italian and German fencing have a long history that goes back at least to the period of Frederick II of Hohenstaufen in the thirteenth century, when German troops roamed the Italian peninsula and Sici1y, fighting and practicing skills in horsemanship and swordplay. But actua1 documentation providing evidence for these connections only appears in the early fifteenth century when Fiore de' Liberi tell us that he studied with expert Italian and German masters, in particular, magistro Johane dicto suveno, who was the student of Nicholai de Toblem.

However, by the sixteenth century there is abundant literary proof that Italian fencing masters organized and classified fencing actions with the rapier, and that they developed a logical sequential order for instruction, moving from simple to complex actions, and provided appropriate counteractions that is to say, parries and ripostes, or counterattacks. Achille Marozzo (1536), tells the master how he should begin instruction, advising him to demonstrate with a lettered target (segno) all the principal thrusts and cuts (tutte botte principali), and from these, he states, all other movements are derived. And to help the reader better comprehend classification of offensive actions and defensive positions, Angelo Viggiani, Lo schermo (1575) lists principal cuts and thrusts, as well as guards, on illustrations of trees, in other words, organizing them in branches or families. On the tree of principal cuts are thrusts, cuts are shown on the left branch, and point thrusts on the right. And mention of blunted weapons designed for rapier instruction appears first in Camillo Palladini's manuscript (circa 1560), in which he refers to a practice sword as a spada da gioco, and in Viggiani's text, where ho speaks of practice swords ca11ed spade da marra, as opposed to real or sharp-edged swords, which he designates spade da filo.
Late in the seventeenth century Francesco Marcelli (1686) mentions both the practice rapier or smarra and the foil or fioretto. And by the nineteenth century the term smarra came to mean a heavy foil, rather than a practice rapier. Rosaroll Scorza and Pietro Grisetti (1803) recommend continuous practice in the assault to bridge the gap between the lesson and combat, and they describe public fencing demonstrations or accademie, and state that the president who presides over the encounters is ceremoniously given the heavy practice foil or smarra, presumably as the symbol of his office. Blasco Florio (1844) also refers to accademie and the heavier foil or smarra, which he states the student should employ during the lesson and the lighter foil in the assault. The master, Florio concludes, should use on1y the light foil or fioretto in the lesson because the smarra is too heavy and tiring for a succession of lessons. And Masaniello Parise (1884), in his discussion of the accademia, which he calls an "artistic show” (mostra artistìca) , tells us that the director of the encounters is given the smarra. And Parise then explains in a footnote that unti1 recently it was customary to take the lesson with a foil (fioretto) that was heavier than the one habitually used in the assault, and that this was desìgnated a smarra.

Judging by the fencing treatises that have survived, nothing differentiated the method of instruction for swordplay in duelling from that of swordplay in fencing demonstrations and competitions. The same technical foundation was established for both. But duelling practice determined what was sound and what was not: unsuccessful actions disappeared along with their unfortunate inventors. The underlying principle governing swordplay remained constant: to hit without being hit (colpire senza essere colpito).

The Italian influence on swordplay from the sixteenth century to the eighteenth century was paramount, and Italian fencing masters taught use of the rapier throughout Europe, while foreign fencing masters, such as the German Joachim Meyer, came to Italy for instruction. Although German teachers skilled in employment of the long two-handed sword (lange Zwiehander), the rapier required special knowledge and practice, and Meyer published in 1570 what he had learned in Italy. In the illustrations to his book there is a print which shows a fencing school and lessons being given, with a student delivering a rapier thrust with a lunge. The thrust is directed to the center of a target, which includes lines to indicate the various directions of cuts, like the one Marozzo mentions in his book, and the floor is marked with footprints to guide movement or the leading foot in executing the lunge. Another illustration in Meyer’s volume depicts pairs of fencers engaged in practice encounters using blunted rapiers.

The fascination among European intellectuals with all thing Italian during the Renaissance from art and architecture to music very likely contributed to the spread of Italian fencing methods and fencing terminology as well. Italian fencing masters were highly sought after. In France Pompee and Sivie taught in the Court of Charles IX, and in England Giacomo di Grassi's treatise was translated into English (1594), and Vincentio Saviolo taught in London, where he published his manual in 1595. The fo1lowing year William Shakespeare, along with four partners, acquired the lease on a fencing school, which they used as part of the Blackfriars Theatre. That Shakespeare had some acquaintance with Italian fencing language, and more than a superficial knowledge of Italian rapier play is clearly evident in two of his dramas, Romeo and Juliet and Hamlet. In Romeo and Juliet, Mercutio, on hearing his friend Romeo inexplicably accept Tybalt's insults, says, “O calm, dishonourable, vile submission! Alla stoccata carries it away." And then Romeo tries to stop the fight, and steps between Mercutio and Tybalt, and inadvertendly allows Tybalt to deliver a fatal thrust to his adversary. Mercutio, as he is dying, calls Tybalt: "...a braggart, a rogue, a villain, that fights by the book of arithmetic!" This is an unmistakable reference to the scientific nature of Italian swordplay, for Camillo Agrippa (1553) writes that the profession of fencing is governed only with points, lines, times, measures, and the like, and that these are born of mathematica1 or geometric considerations. And in Hamlet Shakespeare even provides us with a fencing match between Hamlet and Laertes, which is to be fought with practice weapons, "Rapier and dagger" are stipulated as the arms for this encounter. And when the contestants select weapons Laertes finds the first he is given too heavy, but Hamlet likes his arm and then ask, "These foils have as a length?” So both weight and uniformity of length, critical in duelling and competitive fencing, are of interest to Laertes and Hamlet, and the term Shakespeare used for these practice arms is "foils." This is an early use of the word "foils" in English. During the bout hits are counted, and when Hamlet scores a touch. Osric, who acts as the director, is asked to judge its validity, and he replies, "A hit, a very palpable hit."

Some or the most illustrious names of Italian fencing masters appear in the seventeenth century: Marco Docciolini, Salvator Fabris, Nicoletto Giganti, Ridolfo Capo Ferro, Francesco Alfieri, and Francesco Marcelli. Their treatises on use of the rapier establish the foundation for modern fencing. Emphasis is on the rapier alone (spada sola), and with preference for the point, rather than the cut, While arms typical of the previous century, fall into disuse, like the two-handed sword (spadone) , bill (roncha) , partesan (pertesanone) , holbert (allabarda), iavelin (spiedo) , and Pike (pica).

For information concerning fencing matches in Paris during the eighteenth century we can turn to the life of Domenico Angelo Malevolti Tremamondo. He was born in 1716 in Livorno into a wealthy merchant family and studied fencing first with Andrea Gianfalconi in Livorno, and later with Teillagory in Paris. His method of swordplay was a blend of Italian and French elements. While in Paris, Angelo, at the urging of the Duc de Nivernois, participated in a series of fencing matches against several masters. Prior to the fencing competition, Angelo attended a party where he met the beautiful English actress, Margaret Woffington, who followed him to the fencing matches, and before the swordplay commenced, and in front of the entire audience, presented him with a small bouquet of roses. He accepted the gift in a gallant manner, pinned it to his left breast, and announced to his adversaries that he would protect the roses against all opponents. And he kept this promise, for throughout the succeeding encounters not one of his adversaries managed to disturb even a leaf of the bouquet.

In retrospect the eighteenth century was the French century of fencing, if judged by the number or treatises published. There were, or course, prominent Italian masters working throughout this time period, such as Francesco Scorza and Tommaso Bosco e Fucile, but the French became the leading exponents in use of the small sword, the courtly side arm, more often than not, carried as a gentleman's ornament. The light practice arm, the foil (fleuret) , and the relatively light small sword employed in duels, permitted rapid actions, such as multiple feints, and an almost excessive use of the cut-over (coupe). It eventually led in France to a sharp distinction between the duel and fencing as an exercise or mock combat. Fencing in the French schools became increasingly divorced from duelling practice. In contrast, in Italy the system of instruction for the duel and fencing competition remained identical, with emphasis placed on simplicity of action.

Duelling continued throughout the nineteenth century. Stories abound of the feats or fencing masters, such as those accomplished by Jean-Louis Michel, the gifted mulatto from the island of Hispaniola. This remarkable swordsman and soldier in the service of Napoleon Bonaparte was provoked into a duel by a mocker who stated publicly on a number of occasions that fencers like Jean-Louis would be far less brilliant if they substituted edged weapons for their foils. After this had been repeated ad nauseam, and with his patience gone, Jean-Louis confronted his antagonist and proposed a duel with one condition, that while his adversary was to be armed with a sword, he himself would employ only a foil. The mocker readily agreed to this unusual condition. And on the day of the encounter Jean-Louis calmly parried every one of his assailant's violent attacks until his opponent was exhausted, and then Jean-Louis parried and riposted with a cutover of such force that his antagonist was sent to the ground writhing in pain. And, naturally, he was never heard from again.

But Jean-Louis’ finest achievement, which became legendary, was accomplished in the famous combat of the thirty in 1814 when the French army was in Spain. For when quarrels broke out between soldiers of the Thirty-second Regiment composed of French troops, and the First Regiment, consisting of Italian soldiers, senior officers determined to settle the matter with a series of duels fought before the entire army outside Madrid by fifteen masters of these regiment, Jean-Louis and Giacomo Ferrari. The victor was to continue fighting until he was either wounded or killed. And in the encounters that followed, Jean-Louis, in about forty minutes, with twenty-seven thrusts from his weapon, killed three swordsmen and wounded ten. But when his colleagues attempted to dissuade the tired Jean-Louis from continuing to fight the remaining two opponents, the mulatto master, in his excitement, accidentally wounded one of his own comrades. This was taken by all present to be a sign from Heaven that enough blood had been shed. The military commission, after consultation, called a halt to the duels, and announced that honor bad been satisfied. And the soldiers of the two regiments embraced another in a gesture of reconciliation.

Fencing matches were common in Paris during the nineteenth century. The most famous of these was the encounter in 1816 between the fencing master Louis-Justin Lafaugère and the Comte de Bondy, Prefect of the Department of the Seine. Jean-Louis Michel was summoned to preside over the encounter, and virtually all the notables of Paris attended this affair. De Bondy, an arrogant individual, insulted Lafaugère by appearing on the fencing strip in white satin and lace street attire. And when asked polite1y by Lafaugère if his costume was not a little delicate for the occasion, the Comte replied that it was appropriate for fencing a person like Lafaugère. But when the fencing match concluded, de Bondy's fine lace was scattered all over the floor, having been systematically removed by Lafaugère’s hits, and the Comte was humiliatingly defeated fifty touches to three. De Bondy, without a word, f1ed to his home and remained there in seclusion for some time.

The complexity of foil fencing in France, and its distance from duelling practice, eventually led to the development of épée fencing, which at first was condemned by a number of French masters as the prostitution of their art. The treatise on foil technique by A.J.J. Posselier called Gomard (1845), typical of the rich and colorful variety of foil actions employed in Parisian fencing schools, lists fourteen compound attacks with feints, and says that from these it is possible to execute 168 different thrusts. But Cordelois (1862), who began his career already in 1817, wisely notes that actions consisting of multiple feints are dangerous because they invite counterattacks.

Military fencing schools in both Italy and France played important roles in Standardizing instructional methods, which were intended to provide preparation both for duelling and competitive fencing. During the Reign of the Two Sicilies military fencing schools existed in Palermo and Messina and two more were added by a royal ordinance of 1852 at Capua and Caserta under the directorship of the Marchese di Chiuppeto, Mario del Tufo. Each school had a faculty of five masters chosen by the director. Then in 1856 another ordinance increased the number to include schools at Naples and Gaeta. And by 1868 military fencing schools were also established at Modena, Parma and Milan under the direction, respectively, or Cesare Enrichetti, Alessandrino Gioberti, and Giuseppe Radaelli. Finally, in 1884, after bitter rivalry between north and south produced by nationalism and distaste for foreign influence, a unified system of military fencing instruction was created, using the southern method of teaching and textbook of the young fencing master of the Accademia Nazionale di Scherma in Naples, Masaniello Parise. The northern military fencing schools were closed and Parise was named director of the new Scuola Magistrale Militare di Scherma in Rome.

In France the Military Fencing Academy at Joinville-le-Pont was established in 1872. Its textbook of 1877 and successor, the Reglement d’escrime, 1908, became standard instruments of instruction for both the military and civilians. Virtually every book on fencing published in France during the twentieth century was based on the military manual of 1908.

For Italian fencing masters of the nineteenth century the term “sword" was used to denote instruction in foil technique, since the foil was a practice sword. For instance, Masaniello Parise's book is titled Trattato teorico pratico della scherma di spada e sciabola (1884), and Ferdinando Masiello’s volume is designated La scherma italiana di spada e di sciabola (1887). Yet in a 1ater edition containing the same material on the Spada, but without the sabre, Masiello's book title is La scherma di fioretto (1902). So the Italians, unlike the French, simply treated the foil as a practice sword. And this was observed by the French fencing master, Laurent, who reported to the Société d’Encourangement de l’Escrime, that in the salles d’armes or in the duel the Italian fencer uses an identical arm, with the same grip and guard, only the blade differs, since it is somewhat stronger in the duelling sword. Accustomed to handling a similar weapon in both cases, the Italian fencer has nothing more to learn than he already ha s in regular foil practice in the salles d’armes.
Just how popular duelling was in nineteenth-century Italy can be ascertained from statistics cited in the Pall Mall Gazette of 6 October 1890. We learn that between 1879 and 1889 there were 2,759 duels, of which ninety-three percent were fought with swords, and the remaining seven percent with pistols. No less than 3,901 wounds, 1,066 were considered serious, and fifty proved fatal.

Aurelio Greco (1907) exp1ained the difference between épée fencing and foil fencing. He said that foil fencing was completely conventional, with a limited target, and that it was comprised of complicated actions only possible with that weapon, actions that require long years of study while épée fencing excluded all that was superfluous, inefficacious, and not absolutely necessary.

Jean Joseph-Renaud (1911), one of the early French advocates for use of the épée, and a duellist, still includes among his favourite actions one that although well suited to foil fencing is risky in the extreme when employed with the èpèe, the double feint by disengagement and cut-over (doppia finta di cavazione e cavazione angolata). He advises drawing the arm back for the cut-over until the point is lifted and behind the band before dropping it down and directing it toward the adversary. Recommending such elaborate foil actions, it is not surprising that in Joseph-Renaud's famous épèe match with Agesilao Greco in 1911 at the Nouveau Cirque in Paris, the French épéeist was soundly defeated by his more practical Italian opponent. The basic tactical approach to épée of Agesilao and Aurelio Greco was to place the blade in line with a fully extended arm, constantly threatening the adversary with the point, thus creating an the encounter to a close.

In summary, fencing theory and practice are the same for both the duel and fencing as an athletic game. Aldo Nadi (1943), the most successful fencing competitor of the twentieth century, and himself a duellist, writes: “The duellist's objective is to injure his adversary as soon as possible...the fencer’s, to defeat his opponent with no particular hurry, as long as he scores at least a fraction of a second before he may be touched himself. In a duel, the fencer is compelled to execute an ultra-careful form of fencing which, indeed, is almost an unworthy expression of the vast science he knows.”

William M. Gaugler
Professor Emeritus of Classical Art and Archaeology
San José State University, and
Maestro di Scherma, Accademia Nazionale di Scherma, Naples

Nota: The catalogue of the exhibition "Dal duello allo sport - Il Tocco della Spada" (From Duelling to Fencing - The Sword's Touch) which took place in Torino during the Fencing World Championships includes beautiful pictures and three interesting introductory articles to the main theme of the show. Today we are pleased to propose "From Duelling to Fencing" a historical journey of the duel with rare anecdotes of its protagonists. The author is William Gaugler, Professor Emeritus of Classical Art and Archaeology at San Jose State University, and Maestro di Scherma, Accademia Nazionale di Scherma, Naples, Italy