Classical fencing
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Classical fencing is the term used to describe one particular style of fencing in which one fences in a martially accurate manner with the weapons used. Emphasis is placed on training as if for a real encounter with sharp blades—with the goal being "to hit and not be hit". There is also a strong esthetic sensibility concerning ideal technique.
A sense of the "ideal" classical fencer is provided by 19th century fencing master Louis Rondelle:
- "A classical fencer is supposed to be one who observes a fine position, whose attacks are fully developed, whose hits are marvelously accurate, his parries firm and his ripostes executed with precision. One must not forget that this regularity is not possible unless the adversary is a party to it. It is a conventional bout, which consists of parries, attacks, and returns, all rhyming together."
Contents |
[edit] History
- Note: The study of the weapons and techniques of fencing prior to the 19th century is properly termed historical fencing.
As it is commonly understood today, classical fencing is best represented by the 19th and early-20th century national fencing schools, especially the Italian and the French schools, although other pre-World War II styles such as the Russian and the Hungarian are also considered classical. Masters and legendary fencing figures such as Giuseppe Radaelli, Louis Rondelle, Masaniello Parise, the Greco brothers, Aldo Nadi and his rival Lucien Gaudin are considered examples of this period, although Nadi was explicit in his belief that fencing should evolve and change.
Classical fencing weapons included the standard foil, épée (with a variety of different tips, including pointes d'arret), and sabre (including both blunted dueling sabres and, beginning in the early 20th century, modern sporting sabres).
During the classical period, fencing was used both for sport and the duel. Fencing was one of the original events in the Olympic Games and widely practiced at schools and domestic competitions. Additionally, there were professional fencers competing for prize money. Fencing tournaments were extremely popular events, with spectators flocking to see the most celebrated swordsmen battle it out on the strip. In many cases, fencers of the period trained for sport fencing the same way they trained for duels — indeed, many fought highly-celebrated duels.
Duelling went into sharp decline after World War I, following the wartime deaths of many members of the classes that practiced it, and the social changes following the war's mass carnage. After World War II, duelling went out of use in Europe except for rare exceptions. Training for a duel, once almost mandatory for males of aristocratic backgrounds, all but disappeared, along with the classes themselves. Fencing continued as a martial sport like boxing or karate, with tournaments and championships. However, the need to prepare for a duel with "sharps" vanished, changing the emphasis in training and technique.
Scoring was done by means of four judges who determined if a hit was made. Two side judges stood behind and to the side of each fencer, and watched for hits made by that fencer on the opponent's target. A director followed the fencing from a point several feet away from the center of the action. At the end of each action, after calling "Halt!", the director (or, formally, the president of the jury) would describe the action ("Attack is from my left. Parry and riposte from my right."), and then poll the judges in turn ("Does the attack land?"). The judges would answer "Yes", "Yes, but off-target", "No", or "Abstain". If the judges differed or abstained, the director could overrule them with his vote.
This method was universally used, but had limitations. As described in an article in the London newspaper, The Daily Courier, on June 25, 1896: "Every one who has watched a bout with the foils knows that the task of judging the hits is with a pair of amateurs difficult enough, and with a well-matched pair of maîtres d’escrime well-nigh impossible." There also were problems with bias: well-known fencers were often given the benefit of mistakes (so-called "reputation touches"), and in some cases there was outright cheating. Aldo Nadi complained about this in his autobiography The Living Sword in regard to his famous match with Lucien Gaudin.
The article in the Daily Courier described a new invention, the electrical scoring machine, that would revolutionize fencing. Starting with epee in the 1930s (foil was electrified in 1950s, sabre in 1980s), side judges were replaced by an electrical scoring apparatus, with an audible tone and a red or green light indicating when a touch landed. The scoring box eliminated the bias in judging that fencers complained of, and also permitted more accurate scoring of faster actions, lighter touches, and more touches to the back and flank than were possible with human side judges.
The advent of the electrical scoring apparatus had far-reaching consequences. The electrical scoring apparatus and the 20th century's overall modernization of athletic activities increased the emphasis on athletic and offensive (rather than defensive) aspects of fencing, and affected the nature of how a touch could be made and recognised. The result was a parting the ways for Olympic and classical fencing, both stylistically and philosophically. The divergence, or more specifically, emergence of self-identified 'classical fencers', solidified circa 1990. Previously the overwhelming view was that there simply was fencing, rather than sport and classical variants.
The vast majority of fencing masters and fencers accepted the changes described above as a great improvement over visual judging. All fencers were "classically trained", but there were differences in accepting 20th century changes in fencing practice. The fencing masters who rejected these changes either preserved their tradition, abandoned it in favor of employment as fencing masters in Olympic fencing, or, as time passed, simply retired. However, enough classically oriented fencers remained to keep traditionally-oriented classical fencing alive in pockets throughout the world. Many of these people self-identify as classical fencers, but do not share the concept of classical fencing described in this article, preferring the early to mid-20th century style of competitive fencing (which, in the United States, is formalized and governed by the American Fencing League, or AFL). This should not be confused with the Amateur Fencers League of America (AFLA), which was renamed to the current United States Fencing Association (USFA) in 1981.
In the United States (and elsewhere), renewed interest in Western martial arts (beginning in the 1990s) has led some groups—often peer-led—to attempt to study classical fencing (e.g. from books or instructional videos) without the guidance of a classically trained instructor, creating further variation in the classical fencing community. These groups, in an effort to become more historically authentic, sometimes shift their focus to older, pre-19th-century weapons and techniques — i.e. historical fencing.
[edit] Contemporary classical fencing
 |
This section is a stub. You can help by expanding it. |
Today, classical fencing clubs (and classical fencing instructors and masters) can be found in Europe, the United States, Canada, and Australia. Because there is no agreement as to the exact rules of classical fencing and because competition is de-emphasized, what competitions there are generally local or regional in nature, with the rules depending upon where the tournament is held.
However, there are a number of generalizations that unify contemporary classical fencing.
[edit] Object
Classical fencing is a frank encounter between two opponents. The object is to touch the other fencer without being touched. Even though the "weapons" are blunt, the fencers treat them as though they were in fact sharp.
[edit] Weapons
Classical fencing still uses the same weapons that have been used in fencing since the early 19th century—namely, the standard foil, standard épée (with a rubber or plastic tip or equipped with a pointe d'arret), and sabre (including both blunted dueling sabres and modern standard sporting sabres).
[edit] Safety equipment
Fencing, classical or otherwise, is an extremely safe activity, with considerable attention to ensuring safe equipment and practices. The weapons themselves are blunt, although they can have sharp edges when they break.
Safety equipment for classical fencing is essentially the same as used in Olympic fencing. It includes:
- A fencing mask, typically made of a wire mesh;
- A white fencing jacket, which may be canvas duck, stretch nylon, Kevlar, or some other puncture-resistant material; and
- A fencing glove, which protects the hand and overlaps the sleeve of the jacket.
Fencers also usually wear specially designed fencing knickers, knee-high white socks, and athletic shoes. Depending on the formality of the setting and local custom, sweatpants may substitute for knickers and bare calves may be seen, although this removes the protection provided by the material of the knickers.
In addition, female fencers wear rigid breast protection in the form of cups or a chestplate (as do some male fencers, albeit a flat chestplate in that case). Male fencers often wear an athletic cup. Fencers of both genders wear an underarm protector as additional protection (on the side of the fencer facing the opponent) in the event of a broken blade penetrating the fencing jacket.
[edit] Right of way
The concept of right of way (often abbreviated as "ROW") determines which fencer alone should be considered touched if both fencers land a touch at about the same time. The main purpose of ROW is to penalize fencers for making actions that would get them wounded if the weapons were sharp, in particular, if they respond to an attack by making a counter-attack of their own without defending themselves. Sabre and foil are called "conventional weapons" because these right of way conventions are applied to double touches.
In simplified form, ROW gives priority to the fencer who first commences an attack, until the attack is parried, avoided, or misses. Classical right of way requires a fully extended weapon arm that continuously threatens the defender's target area in order for an action to be considered a valid attack. Any withdrawal of the weapon arm during the attack jeopardizes the fencer's claim to right of way. If both fencers attack at the same time, it is called a "double touch" or "simultaneous attack", and no touch is scored for either fencer.
In contrast, epee fencing, which attempts to simulate the conditions of a duel, considers both fencers to be touched if both are hit at the same time, regardless of who initiated the attack first. The reason is that both duellists would be hit and wounded in a simultaneous touch. Hence, the concept of right of way per se does not exist in epee fencing.
This concept of right of way is one of the most difficult aspects of foil and sabre fencing for newcomers to understand. It is also the source of much of the controversy between Olympic fencers and classical fencers (see Controversy below), as the two styles have differing concepts of ROW, especially regarding what constitutes a valid attack.
[edit] Field of play
The field of play varies widely, but is generally linear. Contests may be conducted indoors or outdoors on a variety of surfaces. The fencing strip may be as narrow as three feet or as wide as 1.5 meters, with lengths ranging from 20 to 40 feet.
[edit] Methods of judging
Classical fencing is always visually judged by a human jury. The number of judges and the criteria used to award points vary.
[edit] Pedagogy
Classical fencing is generally taught slowly, with basic mastery of simple skills demanded before more complex skills are taught. A well-trained classical fencer will have a very diverse repertoire of actions upon which to draw.
[edit] Controversy
Classical fencing does not enjoy easy relations with the world of Olympic fencing. Proponents of each style of fencing accuse the other of various flaws in logic, history, pedagogy, and personality. The debate hinges on the fact that classical fencers feel they approach fencing as a serious martial art with strong ties to actual combat while maintaining strict rules on style, while Olympic fencers approach fencing as a martial sport, much like boxing or karate, with the object being to score the most points by any means permitted by the rules. At the same time, each style claims aspects associated with the other — i.e. classical fencers apply sport rules to competitions and Olympic fencers insist that their style is more results-oriented, realistic and more like actual combat.
In reality, both styles have evolved into quite different pursuits—despite using essentially identical equipment. The goals of each style differ from one another in many ways, from right-of-way to pedagogy to scoring systems. Additionally, classical fencing has no central authority, and there are several different styles of classical fencing with somewhat incompatible rules and methodology.
While Olympic fencing dwarfs classical fencing in numbers of participants, classical fencing continues to grow steadily, albeit slowly. Despite this growth, it is unlikely that contemporary classical fencing will ever have more than a minor influence on Olympic fencing. Likewise, classical fencing has a large enough base that enjoys classical fencing for its own sake, so that it is unlikely that Olympic fencing will have much effect upon classical fencing.
Classical fencing also has an uneasy relationship with historical fencing. Historical fencing includes use of older weapon types such as rapier and smallsword as well as contemporary weapons, and can include grappling (wrestling), use of the unarmed hand, and other techniques forbidden in both sport and classical fencing, but frequently used when the sword was part of personal defense. Some historical fencing advocates consider classical fencing (as typically defined, including in this article) as no more realistic than Olympic style fencing, and that both are sport activities using unrealistic "weapons" with techniques and conventions that were not used with sharp weapons.
[edit] External links
- Association for Historical Fencing, the national organization for classical and historical fencing in the United States
- International Masters at Arms Federation, an international organization of professional teachers of Western martial arts, including classical fencing
- Why study classical fencing?, an essay by classical fencing master A.A. Crown
- Art or sport?, an essay by A.A. Crown comparing fencing as a martial art and fencing as a sport
