FENCING is the proper use of a small-sword or foil. The small-sword is a light court-dress sword, made to taper gradually from the hilt to the point, and of a size regulated by the judgment of the wearer, if he understand the use of the weapon. The foil with which the art of fencing is practised is a small quadrangular blade, about the length of a small-sword, and mounted in nearly the same manner; but, for the convenience of the exercise, it is made lighter, blunted, and covered with leather at the point, to prevent accidents in practice.
The first weapon in use among mankind, whether for offensive or defensive purposes, appears to have been the sword. The most ancient records make frequent mention of it. The early swords were probably made of wood, like those used by the natives of Mexico when first visited by the Spaniards; but after the discovery of metals, bronze swords were introduced, of which kind many have at different times been found. As soon, however, as the art of tempering steel had been discovered, that metal superseded all other substances in the fabrication of arms; nor is it probable that any change in this respect will take place, or that any further improvement is attainable. The form of sword, however, has varied at different times and in different countries. Those used by the Roman legions were short and strong, with a blade seldom exceeding nineteen inches in length, but two-edged, and calculated both for the cut and the thrust. The British swords, called spathoe, were large, long, and heavy; and the Saxon and the Norman partook of the same character. The ancient practice of the weapon was probably carried to its greatest perfection amongst the Romans, whose partiality for gladiatorial exhibitions formed a remarkable feature of their character. The various and complicated methods of combat in which that people took delight are either alluded to or described by most of their writers, particularly by Livy, Juvenal, Seneca, and Suetonius.
The history of the modern small-sword or rapier is involved in some obscurity. The latter term, though now considered as synonymous with the former, probably denotes a long, ordinary, old-fashioned cutting sword. But by a rapier is now always meant a sword for the thrust, in contradistinction to one adapted for cutting. The smallsword or rapier is undoubtedly very ancient, although there is reason to believe that it was not brought into general use until armour for protecting the body began to go out of fashion. Since that time the art of fencing has always been considered as a gentlemanly accomplishment, and in many parts of the Continent it is cultivated with the greatest zeal and assiduity. Some have maintained that the weapon was not used in England before the reign of Elizabeth; and Darcie {Annals of Elizabeth) informs us that one Rowland York, who appears to have betrayed Deventer to the Spaniards in the year 1587, was the first who brought into England “that wicked, pernicious fashion to fight in the fields in duels with a rapier called a tucke only for the thrust.” Stowe also mentions that long tucks and long rapiers began about the twelfth or thirteenth year of Elizabeth, and that “he was held the greatest gallant that had the deepest ruffe and largest rapier. The offence,” he adds, “to the eye of the one, and the hurt unto the life of the subject that came by the other, caused her Majesty to make proclamation against them both, and to place selected grave citizens at every gate to cut the ruffes and break the rapiers’ points of all passengers that exceeded a yard in length of their rapiers, and a nayle of a yard in depth of their ruffes.”
But at whatever time the small-sword came into use in this country, it is not surprising that, when once introduced, it should have been cultivated as the most equitable instrument of duelling. Before this period meetings for the purpose of single combat were utterly revolting to all notions of fairness. No regard was paid to equality of arms or numbers; advantages, however unfair, were seized whenever an opportunity offered; and the ferocious passions, instead of being curbed, had fuller scope given for their gratification. “The duellist of former times,” says Sir Walter Scott, in a note to The Lady of the Lake, “did not always stand upon those punctilios respecting equality of arms which are now judged essential to fair combat. It is true that in formal combats in the lists, parties were, by the judges of the field, put as nearly as possible in the same circumstances. But in private duels it was often otherwise.” The practice of deciding duels with the sword may be considered as now extinct in England. When the rapier was looked upon as an indispensable part of a gentleman’s dress, the facility of immediate rencounter which it offered gave occasion to frequent and dangerous brawls, by which the public tranquility was disturbed, and the lives of peaceable citizens sometimes sacrificed. Since arms have ceased to be worn, such an objection can no longer be urged against the art of defence; and it may perhaps be questioned whether it ever had much weight.
The practice of the foil is here considered as applied to the most laudable purposes, namely, the enjoyment of salutary recreation and the acquisition of a graceful and unconstrained deportment. The beneficial effects of moderate fencing to persons of weak constitutions, or of studious and sedentary habits, have been attested by medical practitioners of the first eminence. To the public speaker, the practice of the fencing-room has been found to impart an ease and freedom of gesture attainable by no other exercise. For while the use of the foil and the broadsword diffuses ease, elegance, and grace all over the body, and imparts to the look and gesture an appearance of intellectual vigour, it teaches invaluable lessons of patience and selfcommand, and contributes to discipline the temper. “Perhaps there is no exercise whatever,” says Mr Roland {Theory and Practice of Fencing), “more calculated for these purposes (developing and cultivating bodily strength and activity) than fencing. Riding, walking, sparring, wrestling, running, and pitching the bar are all of them certainly highly beneficial; but, beyond all question, there is no single exercise which combines so many advantages as fencing. By it the muscles of every part of the body are brought into play; it expands the chest, and occasions an equal distribution of the blood and other circulating fluids through the whole system. More than one case has fallen under the author’s own observation, in which affections of the lungs, and a tendency to consumption, have been entirely removed by occasional practice with the foil.”
We now proceed to give such definitions as appear to be requisite for conveying a general idea of the science of fencing, referring the reader for the necessary details to the numerous manuals published on the subject.
Attacks and Parades.— After the first positions have been acquired, the modes of attack come to be considered. Attacks are made in three ways :—first, by a quick thrust proceeding merely from the wrist, the arm at the same time being elevated and advanced, with the point directed towards the adversary’s breast; secondly, by what is technically called an extension; and lastly, by longeing and recovering. The parades, in which consists the defensive part of the art, naturally follow the attack. A parade is a defence of the body, made by an opposition of one’s blade to that of an adversary, in such a situation as upon his attack to prevent the point of his sword hitting. The parades are eight in number, viz., six simple, called quarte, tierce, circle, octave, prime, quinte, and two round or counter parades in quarte and tierce.
Thrusts, &c.— The next division of the subject includes straight thrusts, simple disengagements, and bindings of the blade. A straight thrust is used as an attack, when an antagonist, from his position on guard, leaves sufficient opening to enable him to be touched upon that side of the body on which blades are joined. When such an opportunity offers, the wrist must be suddenly raised, so as to bring the “forte” of one’s sword to the “foible” of the adversary’s; after which longe immediately on the same line to his breast, observing, however, to preserve a correct opposition. In fencing, “opposition” signifies the art of covering the body at the time of delivering a thrust, on that side where the foils happen to cross, in order to prevent an antagonist exchanging hits. The disengagement is made either as an attack, or as a return after defending one’s self from a thrust, and is executed both under and over the wrist or foils. A disengagement over the arm may be parried with tierce or prime, and, if made low, by the parade of circle; from the position of octave by quarte or, if the thrust be delivered low, by circle; from the position of quinte by prime as the readiest defence, but quarte and tierce are also correct parades against this thrust. There are three different ways of binding the blade. Of these, “flanconnade” is the principal, as it is sometimes a safe attack when any other mode would be attended with considerable danger; it is also made as a “riposte.” The attack of flanconnade is commenced when the blades are joined in quarte, and it is parried either by octave or quinte, or by the parade of quarte. The return over the arm, after the parade of circle, is parried by prime or tierce, or by changing quickly to the counter in quarte. The return over the arm, after the parade of prime, is parried by prime or tierce, or, if made at a considerable distance, by the counter in quarte.
Feints.— In fencing there are a great variety of feints, which it is not easy to describe intelligibly without figures. A feint is an intentional movement made to deceive an adversary. All thrusts, therefore, may, strictly speaking, come under the definition of feints, as the fencer’s object, in all his attacks, is to deceive his antagonist. For the sake of convenience, however, straight thrusts and simple disengagements have been arranged under a separate head. In executing the feint called one two, inside of the arm, supposing the adversary’s body to be cohered in quarte, the parade of tierce is deceived; commencing from the outside, that of quarte is deceived; from the position of the circle the octave, and from that of the octave the circle is deceived. This feint, if made inside the arm, is parried by the parade of quarte, or by the counter in tierce, made upon an opponent’s second disengagement; upon the outside of the arm, by tierce, prime, or the counter in quarte; and from the position of the octave, by octave or quinte. The feint one two is likewise made as a return after the parade of quarte or tierce, or sometimes after that of circle or octave. The cut and disengage is a species of one two, in making which from the position of quarte an adversary’s parade of tierce is deceived, and from the position of tierce his parade of quarte. Cut and disengage, if made inside of the arm, is parried by quarte, or the counter in tierce; if outside, by tierce or counter in quarte. Feint seconde is another feint very nearly resembling one two, and is generally made as a return after the parades of tierce, prime, or quinte. In this feint the octave or quinte is deceived; and it is parried by tierce, prime, or quarte, the two former being the readiest where quinte is the parade deceived, but if the feint has been answered with octave, the thrust must then be parried with quarte. The feint one tιvo three is made on either side of the blade, upon precisely the same principles as one two,— the only difference between them consisting in making one disengagement more in the latter than in the former movement. The met and one two is a species of one two three. These feints, if made over the arm, are parried with the simple parade of tierce; if on the inside, with simple quarte. The other feints are— doubling, which, mutcttis mutandis, is executed upon precisely the same principles; one two and deceive the circle, executed from the inside position of quarte; one two and deceive the counter, which may be made from either side of the blade, but most frequently commences from the position of tierce; feint fianconnade, which can be commenced only from the engagement of quarte; feint seconde and deceive quarte, which is always commenced from the outside engagement, whether made as an attack or a return; feint seconde and deceive tierce, which differs from the preceding only in the last disengagement; one two and deceive quarte from the position of the circle, when the first disengagement is made over the adversary’s wrist towards the body under the arm, and the second over the wrist towards the inside of the body; and doubling on both sides of the arm, which is too complicated a feint to be frequently used in actual fencing, because it is difficult to follow the adversary’s sword with certainty through many different parades, and there is much danger of “time thrusts” upon feinte which consist of so many disengagements.
Time thrusts are so called because the success of these movements depends entirely upon their being executed at the exa - ct moment of time employed by the adversary in planning or in executing his attack; and, when made correctly, they are by far the most scientific movements in fencing. There are two sort of time thrusts, in the execution of one of which it is necessary that the blades should cross each other, but for the completion of the other it is not absolutely necessary that the blades should even meet. Those time thrusts in the execution of which the blades cross are more scientific, and expose the fencer less to exchanged hits. There are two time thrusts ί?» opposition— one the time over the arm, and the other the time in octave. The former is applicable to all thrusts, however simple or complex the feint may be, provided the longe is made upon the outside; whereas all longes directed to the inside of the body, or under the arm, are exposed to the time in octave; and thus almost every thrust made in fencing affords an opportunity for one or other of these two movements. Those time thrusts in which the opposition is not essential are made upon incorrect movements of the adversary, when he exposes himself by the wideness of his attacks, or by quitting the blade in a dangerous position, or by making too many disengagements in his feints, or by giving a variety of openings which the judgment of the fencer must determine how he is to take advantage of. This thrust is practised almost entirely upon irregular attacks, and requires great caution to be observed. It has been already stated that time thrusts in opposition, when correctly made upon good attacks, are perhaps the finest movements in fencing; but young fencers should nevertheless attempt them very seldom, from the danger of misjudging the attack, and thus exposing themselves to the certainty of being hit. And the time out of opposition is attended with still greater hazard, as its success depends rather upon the wideness and irregularity of an adversary’s movements than on the security of one’s own situation afforded by the opposition in the former species of time thrust.
When fencing was comparatively little known, it was thought necessary that there should be some intermediate practice for the pupil between the lesson of the master and his making the assault; for which purpose, it appears, he was taught to longe, at a proper distance, at the wall. This was called by the French tirer au mur, and was considered as useful for planting the learner well upon his legs, accustoming him to measure distance correctly, and causing his motions, in making his extension and longe, to follow one another in the proper succession. But as the art became better understood, observation induced masters to place pupils together for their mutual advantage, the one to attack by simple disengagements, the other to parry by quarte and tierce alternately; and this practice, from its origin, was long called tirer au mur. It is now, however, generally known as quarte and tierce, and, in its improved state, is not merely intended as an exercise for the scholar, but also as a graceful display of the principal motions of fencing; for which reason it should be invariably practised before commencing the assault, and in fencing before company it is never dispensed with. Quarte and tierce appears very simple in its execution, yet it is exceedingly useful to fencers in all stages of their progress, and difficult to acquire with such correctness that all its movements shall take place in their proper succession, and be made with the grace and precision characteristic of a good fencer. The counters is also a practice of importance to young fencers.
In the language of the fencing-room, making the assauU and playing loose are synonymous, signifying the practice of attack and defence, or, in other words, a just application of the lessons received, which, in fact, ought to be done as correctly as if with sword in hand. In the assault, the mere movements should be almost mechanical; for the mind being wholly employed in discovering and counteracting the designs of the adversary, as well as in concealing its own, the hand should, on the proper opportunity beiDg given, instantly execute that which the mind conceives without any consideration of the manner in which the particular motion is to be made.
The rules to be observed are few and distinct. The first thing which the attention of a young fencer should naturally be directed to is the most secure manner in which he can come into the position of the guard, when opposed to an adversary ready to take every advantage of his inexperience. Whilst advancing into distance, it is also an object of importance to have one side of the body secured by the position, particalarly that side to which the antagonist’s blade is opposed; so that, if he commence an attack during this movement, he must quit the blade in order to direct his thrust or feint at any opening afforded him by the position of his opponent; and the opportunities of attack being few, his designs will thus be the more easily discovered. Tn short, the commanding an opponent’s blade almost obliges him to effect some change in the relative situations of the contending parties, before he advances into distance; and as the necessity of such previous movement must be foreseen, any attempt of this kind is favourable for making an attack on him. And, generally, whilst standing in the position of the guard, it is an advantage to have one side of the body covered, and to command the foible of the adversary’s blade. Straight thrusts and simple disengagements, executed with quickness and vigour, should frequently be attempted, even though they do not succeed in hitting; and this should be particularly attended to in fencing with a stranger. Quick simple thrusts are almost the only certain way of ascertaining his favourite parades, and consequently of knowing by what feints to attack him with a probability of success. The suddenness and rapidity of the attack will inevitably extort from him the secret of his favourite defence.
Many masters of the old school, and some, too, of the present day, have treated disarming as of importance in the art; but from its inutility, not to mention danger, in the field, it is now considered incompatible with good fencing, and indeed no better than a trick. The only advantage of disarming is that of annoying the person disarmed; for, sword in hand, it is rendered nugatory by the use of a sword-knot, with which, it may be presumed, every person at all acquainted with the weapon will take especial care to fasten it to his wrist in a serious affair. As the manoeuvre may therefore be defeated by the most ordinary precaution, attempting it can serve no other purpose than to cause heavy and unpleasant play; whilst the strength it requires for its execution is a drawback, and affords an adversary favourable moments of attack during the time an attempt is being made to bind his blade.
As far back as 1692 a very curious book on the subject of fencing was published by Sir William Hope; it is now very scarce. In 1780 a Lieutenant M‘Arthur published a work on fencing, which he dedicated to the duke of Argyll. Several modern works of merit have appeared on this subject; one of the most valuable and complete is Roland’s Treatise on the Theory and, Practice of the Art of Fencing.
