[Pg i]

SWORD PLAY

[Pg ii]

[Pg iii]

SWORD PLAY

Based upon

THE FRENCH SCHOOL
OF THE FOIL

By SCOTT D. BRECKINRIDGE

and

SCOTT D. BRECKINRIDGE, Jr.

A. S. BARNES & COMPANY, NEW YORK

[Pg iv]

COPYRIGHT, 1941, BY A. S. BARNES AND COMPANY, INCORPORATED

This book is fully protected by copyright and nothing that appears in it may be reprinted or reproduced in any manner, either wholly or in part, for any use whatever, without special written permission of the copyright owner.

PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

The accompanying brief text originated in the failure, when called upon to coach the fencing team at the University of Kentucky several years ago, to find any book on the subject that seemed to sufficiently emphasize some of the basic principles of French Foil play. With books adequately presenting both the Italian and compromise schools, we felt that a brief presentation of the theory of the French school would not be amiss.

It has seemed to us that this tendency to follow a compromise school without any effort to explain or insist upon the basic theory and practice of either French or Italian method, will develop a group of sword fighters whose progress is limited by their personal ability and originality along irregular lines rather than by the almost limitless possibilities of either of the classical schools. Certainly a fencer thoroughly grounded in the basic philosophy and technique of either of these schools is better prepared for a long course of steady improvement than the individual who has a rather vague conception of the purpose and performance of offense and defense with the sword.

Therefore, we have endeavored to present accurately and with reasonable thoroughness the basic principles of the French school. We have tried to indicate the practical application of these principles to competition fencing and to point out a number of the pit falls that await the unwary.

There are four groups to whom it is hoped that this little [Pg viii]book will prove of special value: (1) the amateur fencer whose past interest has been in the practice rather than in the theory of the art, but who has been drafted as coach in one of the colleges that has no available professional; (2) the instructor in the Department of Physical Education who, with only a minimum of personal knowledge, is called upon for class instruction; (3) the amateur fencer who has become somewhat vague in his memory of theory, rules, and conventions, but finds that he is to be called upon to act as an official in local fencing matches; and (4) the young fencer who must either give up fencing or find his way as best he may without the advantages of personal instruction.

“SHALL WE FENCE?”

Man was never as fleet of foot and certainly never as strong of fang and claw as the larger animals with which he had to contend as he fought his way up the ladder of physical and social evolution. However, he was superior in cunning, and, later, in pure intellect. Early, he sought means of equalizing the physical balance—first employing such crude clubs as could be broken from the forest trees, later improving these by the addition of a grass or skin bound lump of stone, and yet later discovering that blood-letting was superior to tissue crushing. This last discovery, which led to the development of the stone knife, was the first step in the evolution and perfection of the sword. First, the dagger was fastened to a staff to make a spear and, eventually, the sword appeared, although this probably did not come in its true form until the bronze age. Whatever its exact date, since the earliest historical records and monuments of man, the sword has been his companion and principal weapon of offence and defence. In fact, it was not until after the French Revolution that it disappeared as part of the formal dress of the gentleman, and not until after World War I that it ceased to be an important part of the equipment of the cavalryman.

And the sword was by no means a strictly utilitarian product. Not only was it frequently the object of the most [Pg xii]painstaking and loving attention of both swordsmith and silversmith, but it was endowed with personality, in some of the most romantic songs and stories of the ages. King Arthur, at the head of his knights of the Round Table, did not wear just a sword. At his side rested Excalibur. When Roland died in the Vale of Roncesvalles, surrounded by the bodies of his Moorish foes, in his right hand was the good sword, Durandal. The Cid Campeador carried into battle the sword Tizona. Siegfried bore no nameless weapon. And so, in the romances of England, of France, of Spain, and of Germany, we find the swords of the heroes endowed with personalities. Therefore, we may proudly claim that our weapon has a history and a romance both as old as those of man. Also, it is interesting to realize that the sword has progressed with its bearer, varying in weight, in shape, and in general characteristics as he has visualized the uses to which it was to be put. In the so-called days of chivalry, the problem of the swordsman was not graceful play of sword against sword, but the cracking of a shell of armor so that he could reach the kernel of humanity within. With the passing of armor, the sword was lightened to the rapier—and, with the progressive lightening of the sword, its uses became more and more delicate and complicated, until, by the time of the appearance of the colichemarde and small sword, most of the refinements that we know today had been recognized and developed.

Today, there remains to us a game which employs the three weapons that have been derived from the rapier—the duelling sword which, except for larger guard and slightly larger blade, is an exact replica of the small sword; the foil, which was developed as a practice weapon for the small sword; and the saber which retains the use of both point and edge, as did the rapier, but is much lightened to permit greater speed and versatility of play. This game [Pg xiii]calls upon the physical forces as does any of our more severe athletic games. It requires the meticulous attention to technique that characterizes golf; the explosive energy of the sprint runner; the split-second decisions of the tennis player and boxer; and, above all and before all, it requires for its fullest achievement a power of analysis that is not equalled by any other game in the athletic group—much more nearly resembling chess in this characteristic. And it is this final attribute that charms and holds its devotees. After the passing of the super-abundant physical energy of youth which requires some outlet, even after the passing of that period when hard training will bring back speed and endurance, there remains the fascination of the game, where cunning of head and skill of hand may still more than balance the physical superiority of younger, but less skilled, heads. It is a game that can be followed for four or five decades, with the aging devotee still a dangerous competitor at the end of this time. It is a game where the 220 pounder has no advantage over the man half his size, and where the six footer possesses no insuperable advantage over the man a half foot shorter. It is a game of speed and coordination, of technical finesse and intellectual acuity, and offers full reward, both physical and mental, to those who will pursue its intricacies.

THE POSITION OF GUARD, WITHOUT THE SWORD

The feet are at right angles—the front foot in the long axis of the fencing strip and pointing directly towards the opponent, with the heel in line with the heel of the rear foot and about two foot-lengths from it. The distance between the feet cannot be set arbitrarily, but must be such as to give a steady position without sacrificing agility, or tending to fixation. Both knee- and hip-joints are well flexed, so that the individual is almost “sitting on air.” The front thigh should form an angle of less than forty-five degrees with the horizontal and the knee should be directly above the instep. The rear knee is “cocked” slightly in front of a vertical line above the foot—so as to lend more force and assurance to the forward kick in the lunge. The weight is equally distributed on both feet, so that movement to the front or rear may be executed with equal ease. The body is erect, with rear shoulder forced somewhat backward so as to minimize the target offered to the opponent, but without sufficient restraint to hamper activity. The rear arm is elevated, with upper arm horizontal, forearm vertical and hand horizontal, the shoulder, elbow and wrist forming right angles. The position of this arm should be maintained without rigidity or tightness. The forward, or sword, arm is about two-thirds extended, the forearm being almost horizontal with elbow and hand slightly below the level of the breast. This [Pgs 2-3]level should be approximately midway between the top of the collar and the fork of the crotch. The elbow of the sword arm should be maintained definitely inside of the outer line of the body.

Early effort should be made: (1) to accustom the muscles of the rear shoulder to maintaining its backward position for the effacement of the target; (2) to accustom the thigh muscles to the strain of maintaining the semi-sitting position; and (3) to accustom the muscles of the shoulder of the sword arm to the inside position of that elbow. These are the only positions in fencing that carry with them a sense of constraint to the beginner, and, as each makes a very appreciable contribution to the future efficiency of the swordsman, they should be practised with assiduity from the beginning. The well flexed legs are the very basis of the attack; the withdrawal of the rear shoulder minimizes the apparent target; and the “inside” elbow of the sword arm is a fixed pivot from which all parries are controlled and all ripostes launched.

THE ADVANCE AND RETREAT

Fencing is a game of constant, sudden, and rapid movement. The necessity of closing distance to facilitate the delivery of a successful attack and of increasing distance to reinforce the execution of a planned defence results in almost incessant advancing and retreating. The advance is executed by carrying the front foot forward approximately its own length, planting it, and quickly bringing the rear foot up to its previous relative position. The retreat is merely a reversal of this procedure, first carrying the rear foot backward approximately its own length, and then following with the front foot. The necessity for quickness in these movements cannot be over-emphasized. A certain [Pg 4]amount of imbalance and unreadiness is bound to exist while one foot is in the air. The opponent may await this brief moment and seize it for launching his attack.

The jump advance is just what the name would indicate, a short jump forward—both feet leaving the ground at the same time. In the Italian school, this is called the “balestra.” It has the advantage of being executed in a single movement, thus being quicker. However, being in a single movement, it is irretrievable and, once started, must be completed. Probably, its greatest field of usefulness is against the individual who invariably sways backward on his rear leg with his parry against any attack.

THE THRUST

The thrust is entirely a movement of the sword arm and is the initial movement in every attack. As the right of way in the attack depends upon the sword arm being extended, with the point threatening the target, any movement preceding the thrust, such as an advance or retreat, is merely by way of preparation, constitutes no threat, and, consequently, has no rights. The movement, in its simplest form, is merely a quick extension of the arm, with point in line. The quickness should be without initial tension or terminal jerk. If the point is not in line, it does not threaten the target; does not constitute an effective feint; and, therefore, does not command the right of way. Occasion will be taken, from time to time, as this work progresses, to return to this point for it is upon it and the various departures from it that the entire theory of the right of way in foil fencing is based. To recapitulate: No movement is a legal threat, or possesses any inherent rights, unless preceded, initiated, or accompanied by an extension of the arm, with the point in line; nor do these rights become activated until this [Pg 5]movement has been completed; nor do these rights persist after either the extension of the arm, or the threat of the point, is withdrawn.

THE LUNGE

The lunge is the forward movement of the body by a powerful extension of the rear leg. With the kick of the rear leg, the front foot is raised an inch or two clear of the floor and travels forward one and a half or two times its own length, the heel landing almost imperceptibly ahead of the planting of the ball of the foot. When the front foot lands, the rear foot should remain in its original position; the rear leg should be extended; the thigh of the front leg should be horizontal, the lower leg vertical, and the body inclined very slightly forward. With the kick, the rear arm is straightened smartly to the rear. This is the concluding movement of each properly executed attack, carrying the point from its position at the end of the thrust to the target. It should be catlike in the speed of its execution as well as in the accuracy and coordination of its movements. It is executed in a single time. There is no intermediate stage. There is the kick of the rear leg, followed by the arrival in the full extension of the lunge. There is no gentle settling to, or gradual assumption of the lunge. The movement is explosive in its sudden completeness. If the legs are insufficiently flexed, the forward movement becomes a fall and is infinitely slow in the split-second terms of fencing time. If the rear knee is not cocked slightly forward, as prescribed, the impetus is apt to be in an upward, rather than forward direction, and both time and distance are sacrificed. If, in the anxiety to reach out toward the opponent, the body is allowed more than a very slight forward inclination, the balance will be disturbed and the recovery [Pg 6]slowed. This may leave one at the mercy of a skilful opponent who has successfully parried the original attack. The recovery from the lunge is almost entirely dependent upon a strong kick-back with the front leg. It is aided by a simultaneous flexion of the rear leg and swinging of the rear arm up to the position of guard. This recovery must be executed as quickly and smoothly as was the lunge. It must be so perfectly coordinated and free from conscious effort that it permits the careful execution of defensive movements with the sword during its performance. This presupposes long, hard practice, so that perfectly seasoned muscles perform their function almost without conscious direction.

Great emphasis is being placed in these preliminary remarks upon the development of fencing legs. This is necessary for at least two sufficient reasons. In the first place, fencing is a war of movement—not one of fixed positions. In the second place, the muscles involved are used in a way for which no other sport is more than a partial training. While the fencing lunge may well be compared with the quick start in the dash races, one is not allowed to prepare his stance for a single start but must be continually in position to make it at any moment and repeatedly, with every muscle under the tension that exists at the precise moment that the gun fires for the start. The sudden movements of the advance and retreat must be made from this position. The strain upon untrained thigh muscles is extreme. The fencer who has not fully mastered these movements and trained these muscles starts handicapped and must look for his victories among those who are inferior to himself in other branches of the game, or who are equally inferior in this branch. Perfect performance and perfect coordination of head, hand, and legs are necessary for the finished fencer. The neglect of proper foot-work is one of [Pg 7]the commonest failings in young fencers—but is almost never seen among the finalists in major competitions. Bad and slovenly habits, formed early, are frequently fatal to later success. School the hand and the legs, while waiting for observation and experience to develop the head.

A good exercise for the development of fencing legs consists in taking the position of guard at one end of a forty-foot fencing strip and advancing rapidly to the other end, interspersing a lunge and recovery after every third or fourth advance. Never relax the flexed position of guard. When too fatigued to continue properly, stop and rest. The same exercise may be taken in reverse, doing several quick retreats followed by lunge and recovery. Remember that the average foil bout lasts about five minutes and that, against anything like even competition, you may have to make innumerable advances and retreats with as many as fifteen lunges to gain your five touches. And you may have to do this three, six, or nine times in a single afternoon, with the added fatigue of high nervous strain. Few sights are more depressing than a young man, with the legs of an octogenarian, having to flex them before each attack and trying to step back, with knees straight, from a swiftly executed attack.

Hitherto, we have discussed the position of body and arm without the sword. From now on, we discuss these positions with the sword in hand.

THE SWORD

The sword is made up of four components: the blade; the guard; the grip (or handle); and the pommel. The blade is further subdivided into the blade proper and the tang. The tang is of much softer temper than the blade proper, meets it at a sharp shoulder and serves for the attachment [Pg 8]of guard, grip, and pommel. The guard is usually made of polished, or plated, steel or aluminum and is most commonly shaped in a double loop, called “figure 8,” or as a segment of a spherical surface, called “bell.” Occasionally, rectangles or ovals of solid metal are seen. The guard has a square aperture at its center for the passage of the tang. The “figure 8” guard must be faced, on the blade side, with heavy leather or other material to prevent the passage and trapping of the opponent’s point. The bell guard is usually padded on the inner face with a light, circular, cloth cushion. The grip is usually made of wood, with a tunnel through its center for the passage of the tang. It is slightly curved to better fit the hand and is usually wrapped with cord. The pommel is usually of steel in the shape of a truncated cone, of such length and weight as to properly balance the sword. It may be in one or two pieces and is usually threaded to fit the end of the tang.

The French blade most commonly used is the #5, which is about thirty-five inches long; rectangular in cross section; much heavier near the guard than at the point; and resilient and highly tempered, so that its tendency is to resume its straightness after a touch. This blade terminates at the point in a flattened button, which, in practice, is wound with waxed cord or friction tape. The blade proper is divided into three theoretical portions: the forte, which is the heavier part near the guard; the faible, which is the light portion near the point; and the middle section. In the French theory, all parries are made against the faible of the attacking sword, either by a pressure of forte to faible or of a sharp blow of forte to faible, faible to faible, or mid-section to faible.

The balance of the French foil, to lend itself ideally to the finger play that is the perfection of French fencing, should be immediately in front of the guard, so that the [Pgs 9-10]sword is very slightly point heavy. This balance can be obtained by mounting a standard #5 blade and guard, with a grip measuring six and one half inches in length, and a steel pommel measuring two inches in length and weighing about five ounces. Many of the French foils offered on the market are so short in the grip and light in the pommel as to create a heaviness of point that is almost prohibitive to any delicacy of finger work.

THE GRASP (GRIP, OR HOLD) OF THE SWORD

The manner in which the sword is held largely governs its proper use, but is frequently neglected in the basic instruction in sword-play. In the French school, proper sword-play is grounded upon finger work and, for the successful employment of this technique, two distinct grips are employed—the one for defence, the other for offence. In both grips, the position of the thumb is the same, resting upon the broader surface of the handle close to the guard. However, the finger grip varies. In the defence grip, the grip of the sword passes across the palm in such a manner as to permit the fingers to curl snugly around the handle, the index finger resting its distal joint (articulation, not phalanx) on the broad surface opposite the thumb and only partially encircling the handle. This grip permits the use of the full strength of the fingers in making parries and attacks on the sword. In the attack position, the handle of the sword runs slightly obliquely along the palm of the hand, instead of across it, and is in direct prolongation of the extended arm. The thumb and index finger retain their firm grip near the guard, but the terminal phalanges of the other fingers now rest lightly along the narrow face opposite the palm for direction and control, rather than force. The finger work (doigté) is one of the most valuable and [Pg 11]delicate and, at the same time, one of the most difficult and neglected features of French sword-play, and this shifting grip is quite necessary for its proper performance.

POSITIONS OF SWORD-HAND IN GUARDS

The general position of the body and extremities in the position of guard has been discussed in earlier paragraphs. The various guards with the sword are designed to close the various lines of attack to the opponent’s sword. The valid target in foil play includes the entire trunk and the neck to the top of the collar. The head, arms, and legs are excluded. For purposes of description and of defence, this target is divided by an imaginary horizontal line into a high and a low line. This horizontal line is drawn at slightly below the level of the breast and equally divides the distance from the top of the collar to the fork of the crotch. Frequent reference is also made to an inside and an outside line, dependent upon its vertical area inside, or outside, the sword arm. The high and low lines are fixed and constant, but the inside and outside lines are variable, for reasons that will be given later. The various areas of the body are protected by a series of guards which, by their position, prevent the attacking sword from reaching the body in this particular area. This division gives two areas to be covered in the high and two in the low line. This gives us guards in both high and low lines that deviate the attacking point from the target either to the outer side or to the inner side of the sword arm. Not only are there the four general lines of deviation of the attacking point, but in each of these lines there is a distinction based upon whether the guard is closed with the fingers of the sword hand up (hand in supination) or with the fingers down (hand in pronation). This gives us eight guards in all. [Pg 12]In all of these guards, the hand is maintained in the horizontal line dividing high and low lines, the point being at eye level in the high line and at knee level in the low line guards.

If, as stated above, these guards prevent the attacking sword from reaching the body in the particular area which each is designed to protect, it becomes obvious that, when an outside guard is taken, no outside line for attack exists, except one which is outside the body, and, consequently, no line at all. The same holds true of the inside line, either high or low. Therefore, the outside and inside lines are variables, existing only one at a time for purposes of attack and, when they do exist, including the entire target. This distinction will become more clear with the detailed description of the various guards and their use in combat.

Although one would probably be quite justified in stating that there can be no arbitrary system of attack and defence with the sword, yet the four and a half centuries of accumulated experience that measure the development of modern sword play must have taught certain lessons as to greater, or lesser, desirability of method. The foil, being essentially a weapon of practice, has further been surrounded with certain conventions which carry a direct, or indirect, penalty for doing things that would result in a wound to the offender in actual combat with sharp weapons.

The convention of the “right of way” is probably the most important single convention in foil play and has evolved from certain very logical assumptions regarding conduct in actual combat. It is assumed that there is no attack until there is a threat and that there can be no threat unless the point is directed toward the valid target. It is further assumed that any individual threatened with a sharp weapon would make some movement of defence. In order that the attacker should somewhat more definitely indicate his intention than by the simple direction of his point in order to be able to claim the benefit of the convention, it is further assumed that the first movement of a real attack will consist in the extension of the arm, as the forward precipitation of the body with arm withdrawn might result in impaling oneself upon the extended sword of one’s opponent. Thus, the convention declares that the individual [Pg 15]who extends his arm towards his opponent, with his point in line (that is threatening the valid target), shall have the right of way. This convention (right of way) requires that his opponent shall deviate the attacking point from its threatening position by parry, or attack on the sword, or by evasion through bodily movement before initiating any type of counter-offensive. If the effort to deviate, or to evade, the threatening point is unsuccessful and the one threatened precipitates himself upon it in making a counter-attack, the touch counts against him, even though he scores what would otherwise have been a valid touch. The logic of this convention is clear. The defender has taken a chance with practice weapons that would never have been accepted in actual combat and is penalized for the transgression. This convention leads to the rule: The man attacked must parry. Of course, this rule does not mean that every attack, no matter how ill-conceived as to time and distance or how poorly executed, must be honored by a parry. However, it does mean that, in the face of a properly executed attack, the defender has no offensive rights until he has found the attacking sword with his own and carried its point away from his torso.

This discussion of one of the fundamental conventions of foil play and its accompanying rule brings us to a detailed consideration of the guards, parries, and attacks. The general character of the guards has already been mentioned. Experience has shown that the entire target can be covered and the different lines of possible attack closed by four guards. To all intents and purposes, in the French school, there are but four guards, but, as it is sometimes advantageous to take them with the hand in pronation or in supination, each position has been given a separate designation. These positions are designated by number and the first (prime) is the position guarding the low line on the [Pg 16]inside with the hand in pronation, to which the sword naturally goes upon being drawn from a scabbard at hip level on the inside, or side opposite the sword hand. If this guard was deceived by the opponent, the hand was carried directly across the body, to meet the deceive and to cover the outside line, the hand still pronated and slightly below breast level, the point still at the level of the knee if the deceive was in the low line, but raised to the level of the eye if the deceive was in the high line. These two positions give us the second and third guards (seconde and tierce). These were the early days of the rapier. The weapon was very long (a sixty inch blade being not unknown and a length from ground to navel being considered the perfection of individual fitting) and relatively heavy, being still suitable for cutting as well as thrusting. There was no light play of the point in attack, or light tapping of the opponent’s blade in defence. The guard, or parry, must carry authority. This was perhaps accomplished best by what today might be called a rolling parry. So, on the deceive of the third guard, the hand was carried across the body, rolling from pronation to supination, developing the first guard of the high line on the inside and the fourth guard of our series (quarte). Although this position proved the handiest for the high inside guard with the heavy rapier, the other guards being with the hand in pronation, it was only natural that a similar guard should be developed for this line—so we have the fifth guard (quinte) which covers the high inside line with the hand in pronation. The development of the rolling guard from quinte to cover the high outside line led naturally to the sixth guard (sixte), with hand in supination. We can readily visualize the duellist, rolling his guard from tierce to quarte to meet his opponent’s blade, suddenly realizing that the threatening point has shifted to the low line. Just as quickly, he drops [Pgs 17-18]his point to cover the threatened area, and the seventh guard (septime), is born, with hand in supination to cover the low inside line. The eighth guard (octave), probably had a similar birth during a rolling guard from quinte to sixte, which had to be quickly modified to cover the low line. And so we have the eight guards of the French school—all with the hand at the same level, slightly below the breast; four (prime, seconde, tierce, and quinte) with the hand in pronation; four (quarte, sixte, septime, and octave) with the hand in supination; four (tierce, quarte, quinte, and sixte) with the point at eye level; four (prime, seconde, septime, and octave) with the point at knee level; four (prime, quarte, quinte, and septime) with the hand in the same vertical plane as the front of the inside (rear) shoulder; four (seconde, tierce, sixte, and octave) with the hand in the same vertical plane as the back of the outside (front) shoulder; and all with the elbow carried inside the outer line of the body.

In this discussion, no distinction has been made between guard and parry. However, in modern fencing, there is a definite, though slight, difference. The guards are positions which close certain lines to attack, whereas the parries are movements which are designed to close threatened lines to attack and, at the same time, to carry the threatening point definitely out of line. In the guard position, the point is toward, or at, the center line of the body at the approximate height of the eye in the high line, and of the knee in the low line. In the parry position, the point is in the vertical plane of the shoulder on the side threatened. The defending point is carried to this position by a sharp loosening and contraction of the fingers, as the hand moves from one guard position to another.

The parries accomplished by this movement of hand and point from one line to another are called simple parries [Pg 19]and are indeed the simplest and most natural method of meeting a threat in any of the unclosed lines.

Distance. As usually employed in fencing, the word “distance” applies to the extreme limit from which an attack can be successfully launched. In other words, it is the additional distance added to an attack by the extension of the arm and the lunge, without moving the rear foot closer to your opponent. This automatically creates the conception of a double distance, one for each fencer, as physical conformation, position, and correctness of performance are seldom identical in any two opponents. This is a matter of major importance in competition, as what is out of distance for one fencer may be well within for another.

The engagement. When two opponents face each other within distance, they have the choice of fencing either in, or out of, engagement. The engagement consists in the holding of the faibles of the two swords in light contact, the line in which the contact occurs usually being closed by both opponents. Of course, either of the guards closing a particular line may be employed by either fencer. Thus, one may be engaged in tierce and the other in sixte—both closing the high line to the outside of the arm.

Where one fencer is left-handed, they engage in opposite guards—quarte, or quinte, opposing tierce, or sixte. When fencing out of engagement, there is no contact of swords and no prescribed line is closed. Fencing out of engagement is usually not employed within distance.

Counter parries. Each position of guard, in addition to its simply parry, also has what is called a counter parry of the same name. In contrast to the natural, or instinctive, character of the simple parries, the counter parries are definitely planned parries. Instead of meeting the threatening point in the line attacked and deviating it from the target in that line, the counter parry picks up the attacking [Pg 20]blade by a somewhat encircling movement, carries it back to the original line and deviates the point in that line. On account of this encircling movement, the counter parries are often called circular parries. Literally, this is inaccurate, but it has been widely accepted by both teachers and authors on account of the difficulty of either describing or illustrating what should occur. If one can visualize the simplest threatening movement by the opponent in the open line, it will consist of simply passing the point under (in the high line) the defending sword and extending the arm, with the point threatening the target. Of course, as a terminal movement, this extension will be followed by a lunge. But, at the completion of the thrust, it places the attacking sword relatively close to the defending one, in a horizontal line at the height of the shoulder, with the point in approximately the same transverse vertical plane with and about six inches above the defending guard (or point of intersection of guard and blade). However, the defending blade is sloping upward from slightly below breast level to about eye level and toward the mid-line from the shoulder line. This places the defending hand about six inches below and the defending point about eight inches above the attacking sword. Also, if the attacking sword is very close to the defending, the defending point may occupy a position further in the open line than does the attacking point. This means that, before the start of the encircling movement, the defending point must assume a position below and to the closed side of the attacking blade. It must then pass back under to the open side and, as a third movement, strike the opposing blade and deviate its point while carrying the defending point past its original position of guard to that of parry. In theory, this would form a triangle with its sides continued beyond the apex. Figure 1 (page 21) roughly illustrates this theory, A being the starting position [Pg 21]of the defending point and ABCD its line of travel about the attacking blade O. However, in practice, this is a continuous movement, so that the base angles are rounded and the enclosed area becomes more a raindrop than a triangle. Figure 2 illustrates the rounding of the base angles. These figures illustrate the movement of the point from the guards of quarte, or quinte, as you face the attacker. The movement is counter-clockwise to the observer. From the guards of tierce, or sixte, the movement by the defender would be clockwise. In the low lines, the loop would be inverted, as the defending point passes over, instead of under, the attacking blade. These analyses and figures only apply to the counter as an initial parry; i.e., when taken from the position of guard. When it is a later parry against a compound attack, i.e. taken from the position of parry instead of guard, the movement of the point is somewhat different. Being already in the position of parry, the point need only be lowered vertically to be in position for its encircling sweep and need only return to its starting point, [Pg 22]so that the theoretical figure becomes a right-angle triangle with apex uncrossed, and the practical figure becomes only one-half of our raindrop.

The attack. As the object of all sword play is to touch without being touched, an efficient attack must be of the very greatest importance. Any detailed reference to the technique of the attack has been delayed in the present work on account of the obvious fact that the character is almost wholly dependent upon the system of defence employed and the efficiency of its execution. As this makes it true that no adequate appreciation of the objectives, logic, and technique of certain attacks can be attained without a thorough understanding of the various parries, the endeavor has been made to impart this understanding before proceeding to a detailed consideration of the attack.

When considered according to motive, attacks may be divided into frank, false, and concealed attacks. The present discussion is concerned with frank attacks, which are just what the name implies—frank efforts to gain a valid touch by the offensive penetration of the opponent’s guard. According to the complexity of the manoeuvers with the sword in their execution, frank attacks are classified as simple attacks and compound attacks.

The simple attacks are called:

1. The straight lunge.
2. The disengage and lunge.
3. The cut-over (coupé) and lunge.

The compound attacks are composed of any series, or combination, of the simple attacks used as feints, with the thrust accompanying the first and the lunge the final movement.

The straight lunge. The straight lunge is executed by extending the sword arm toward the target and lunging without any effort to evade the defending sword. Its efficacy [Pg 23]must depend entirely upon speed and timing. Therefore, it is almost never used against an opponent who fences in engagement, with the line of engagement properly closed.

The disengage and lunge. The disengage and lunge is executed by passing the point under the defending sword, as the arm is extended, and lunging upon the completion of the thrust. This is our first practical example of the delicacy of the French finger play. In the position of guard, in engagement, the hand is already on the open side of the defending blade, and the point is on the closed side. To make this disengage, the guard grip of the fingers is relaxed sufficiently to permit the point to drop below the level of the defending sword; the fingers are tightened in the attack grip as the thrust is executed; and the lunge follows immediately. All of this is accomplished without any conscious lateral movement of the attacking point, the mere shifting of the finger grip accomplishing this first disengage.

To avoid confusion, it is probably well to mention at this point that the guards of pronation do not lend themselves readily to finger play in offensive work, although some of them are particularly strong for defensive purposes. For this reason, the guards of quarte and sixte in the high line and septime and octave in the low line are frequently favored by fencers of the French school.

The disengage from one low line to the other must pass over, instead of under, the defending blade and, consequently, requires more wrist play, but in other ways is essentially as described.

The cut-over (coupé) and lunge.

The cut-over is executed with the fingers by elevating the point just enough to clear the point of the defending sword and dropping it into line on the other side as the arm is extended. The lunge follows the thrust immediately.

Although there is little difficulty, or danger, in executing [Pg 24]the coupé from the position of guard, as an original simple attack, there may be both difficulty and danger in its use from the conventional position as a second, or later movement in a compound attack. With the arm extended in a full feint, there is some difficulty in clearing the defending point without bending the elbow. As the cut-over withdraws the point from its threat of the opposing target, the accompanying bending of the elbow would result in a complete surrender of the conventional right of way obtained by the extension of the arm with the point threatening the target. For this reason, the cut-over carries an inherent danger, or weakness, to the attacker, in any case. Therefore, it is advised that a slight departure from the conventional position of the hand be employed with the coupé. This would consist of a slight turning of the hand toward a mid-position, with the thumb up. This permits a much greater withdrawal of the point by finger action alone, without any bending of the elbow.

As already stated, the compound attacks may consist of any series, or combinations, of simple attacks. They are all based upon the successive execution of one or more parries by the defence and are planned so that the second, third, or later movement will, through superiority of execution in speed or timing penetrate the defensive guard. They must be adapted in both character and timing to the defence, as failure in either will result in contact of the swords and a breaking of the rhythm of the attack. Indeed, this accidental contact of the swords may be considered a technical parry and deprive the attacker of any further rights. In other words, more than one disengage will not deceive a counter parry and the type of attack that will deceive a counter parry will not deceive simple parries.

The Feint. In any attack, a movement that is designed to draw a defending parry but not, by its direct continuation, [Pg 25]to reach the defending target is called a feint. In a frank attack, this would carry with it the further intention of evading this parry and completing the attack on a subsequent movement in a different line. One of the simplest examples of this would be to execute a disengage, without a lunge, and, as the defending sword makes a simple parry to deviate the point from the threatened line, to make a second disengage, with lunge, back into the line of original engagement. All threatening movements in a compound attack, prior to the final one which is accompanied by a lunge, are feints. Thus, a compound attack consists of one or more feints followed by the actual attack. To be legal, that is to retain the conventional right of way, the arm must be extended and the point threatening the target at all times. To be effective, a feint must so closely simulate a real attack as to draw a defending parry. Thus, it will be seen that a feint may be legal without being effective—the slowness of the execution failing to convince the adversary that he is being attacked. On the other hand, a feint may be effective without being legal, as almost any sudden movement may draw a parry from a nervous, or shaken, opponent.

One of the simplest and most widely used of the compound attacks has already been mentioned as an example in the above definition of feint. This is the feint disengage and deceive of the simple parry. This is called

The One-Two. The One-Two is frequently, and erroneously, described as a lateral movement of the attacking point under the defending blade into the open line, followed, when that line is closed by a defending simple parry, by a second lateral movement under the defending blade back into the original line, with a terminal lunge. This is the natural, unconsidered technique, and is the way not to do it. We have already described how the first disengage is [Pg 26]executed, without conscious effort at lateral movement of the point, how the finger relaxation in the grip of guard permits the point to fall below the defending blade, and how the tightening of the fingers in the grip of attack brings the point in line on the other side of the defending sword. If this movement, with its accompanying thrust, is executed smartly, it will be an effective feint and will draw a parry. If this is a simple parry, the attacking point is already in the line which it wishes to hold, threatening the opposing target, and should not be deviated in a lateral direction. How evade the parry? Drop the point, by a simple relaxation of the fingers, and allow the parry to pass above it. Tighten the finger grip to bring the point back to its original level, as you lunge. More doigté. The lateral movement is all made by the defending parry. The down-and-up movement of the attacking point is the sole evasion. Whether one, or seven, simple parries are taken, the evasion is a repetition of the same relaxation and tightening of the fingers, down-and-up of the point until the psychological moment for the launching of the lunge. Exactly the same technique is employed that would be necessary to avoid the successive swings of a pendulum.

But, suppose a One-Two has already proved successful or that for other reasons the defender does not respond with a simple parry. Instead, to the feint of disengage, he responds with the counter parry—that somewhat asymmetrical raindrop that has already been described. Does one, as so often taught, try to deceive this parry by following it around the circle? He does not! Again, we avoid the natural, unconsidered course and follow the efficient, considered course. As the defending blade describes its encompassing arc, the attacking blade is carried obliquely downward in the same direction as the concluding sweep of the parry and, as this passes, is brought back along the [Pg 27]same line to its original position as the lunge is executed. This deceive of the counter parry is called

The Double. The Double is sometimes described as two disengages into the same line. While this definition describes the intention, it gives an erroneous impression of the technique, as the vertical down-and-up of the successive disengages is quite different from the oblique down and back of the successive doubles.

Although an infinite number of compound attacks might easily be imagined to deceive an equal number of mixed parries, in practice the compound attack seldom tries, or needs, to deceive more than two or three parries. During instruction, more complicated series may be practised for their value as exercises in control and coordination.

It is important to realize that attack and defence are interdependent. No attack can be more intricate than the defence that it seeks to penetrate. Similarly, although to a lesser degree, the defence may be restricted in its versatility by an attack that depends primarily upon speed and timing combined with the simplest movements.

In another section of this work certain exercises, or lessons, are given, by which two fencers may practise the interplay of the various attacks and parries. The performance of these, or similar exercises, is vital to the development of the accuracy and coordination that go to make the finished swordsman.

So far, the subject of attack and defence has been treated as though one fencer attacked and the other defended and then started over. However, nothing is farther from the actual method of procedure. It is true that, when one fencer seizes the initiative by extending the arm with point threatening the target, the right of way remains with him until he surrenders it by bending the arm or removing the threat of his point from the opposing target or until his [Pg 28]opponent deprives him of it by forcibly deviating his point from the target. With this surrender or destruction of the right of way, the initiative passes to the other fencer. If this termination of the right of way is by means of a successful parry, not only does the initiative pass to the defender but also the right of way for an immediate counter-stroke, even though the arm is not extended and the point is not in line at the moment of completion of the successful parry. This is the only condition under which the right of way exists without the extension of the arm with the point threatening the target, and this is only momentary. The right of way ceases automatically, if not immediately used for delivering a counter-stroke. This counter-stroke is called a riposte. It may be a direct thrust in the line of the original attack, which has been opened by the force of the parry, or may be a compound movement with one or more feints or deceives. As in all thrusts, the grip shifts from that of guard to that of attack. In spite of the dependence of the right of way upon the immediacy of the return, it is at times of definite advantage to delay the riposte until the attacker starts to resume the guard. If this delay should occur, without a resumption of the guard, all right of way ceases and any subsequent touch by either must be judged upon the basis of priority alone.

When an attack has been successfully parried and the defendant delays his riposte, but does not keep the original line of attack closed, the attacker may renew the attack in the original line without returning to the position of guard. This attack is called a remise. The remise is only valid when the defender delays or misses his riposte.

Under similar conditions of a delayed riposte, with the defender keeping the original line of attack closed, the attacker may immediately renew the attack in another line, [Pg 29]usually by a partial return to the position of guard. This is called a redoublement d’attaque.

When, upon the completion of an attack, or an attack, parry, riposte, and counter-parry, or any other sequence originating in an attack but not terminating in a touch, the attacker resumes the position of guard and immediately launches another attack; this is termed a reprise d’attaque.

It will be gathered from the preceding remarks that the original attack may lead into a quite complicated series of movements by both fencers. The rule is that such a series of attacks and counter-attacks terminates only with the command of the Director of the Jury to halt. The Director should halt the action (1) upon the indication of a fair or foul touch by one of the judges; (2) upon the loss or breaking of his weapon by one of the contestants; and (3) upon the transgression of the rules by a competitor. Such a series of attacks and ripostes, finally terminating in a touch or a halt by the Director for other reason, is called a phrase d’armes. Neither contestant has the privilege of discontinuing the phrase of his own volition and his action in doing so leaves him open to a fair touch by his opponent.

Counter-Attacks. In general, there are two types of aggressive action employed to interfere with the formulation and execution of attacks. These are designated counter-attacks and, according to the time of occurrence, are classified as attacks on the preparation and attacks on the execution. If the proper moment, during the making of preliminary movements but before the establishment of the right of way, is seized, the attack on the preparation may take the form of any of the frank attacks, its only difference lying in the fact that it seizes for its execution the exact moment when the opponent is mentally committed to the attack rather than prepared for defence. One of the best examples of this is where one fencer advances, making [Pg 30]a simultaneous attack on the sword, with the idea of closing distance and shaking his opponent’s defence preparatory to launching his attack within distance. If his opponent evades the attack on his sword, he can extend his arm and lunge, having seized the right of way on the preparation of his adversary, or may even touch by a simple extension if the attacker precipitates himself upon the point. Possibly, a more usual example would be found in a quick extension against the “short arm” fighter, who rushes to close quarters with multiple feints with the sword, but no proper extension of the arm.

The attacks on the execution are neither so simple nor so safe as the attacks on the preparation. There are three such attacks and all are executed against an adversary who has established the conventional right of way. They are designated the tension, the stop thrust (coup d’arrêt), and the time thrust (coup de temps). The tension is the simple, frequently instinctive, extension of arm and point toward the attacker in the hope that the point may strike the attacker and that the unexpected counter-attack may cause his blow to miss. It is frequently devoid of planned objective and always without any conventional rights. It can only score if the attacker completely misses the target. It is bad form, poor fencing, and the recourse of excited or inadequately trained fencers. The stop thrust, although frequently confused with the tension, is quite different. Although employed against an opponent who has established the conventional right of way, it is used only when that right of way has been technically (even though only momentarily) abandoned. An example of this would be an attack initiated by a feint of disengage, which gains the right of way, and followed by a cut-over, which technically abandons it by removing the point from a position of threat and, possibly, slightly bending the elbow. If, upon the first [Pg 31]elevation of the point from the target, the defender extends his arm with point in line and touches either with the thrust or an accompanying lunge, he has executed a valid stop thrust. The sole condition controlling the validity of a properly executed stop thrust is that it must precede by an appreciable measure of fencing time any touch made by the original attacker in the continuation of his attack. Another common example of a properly executed stop thrust is found when the attacker, after having properly taken the conventional right of way with his initial feint, proceeds in a compound attack with subsequent feints wide of the target and the defender takes advantage of the first of these withdrawals of the point to extend and score. These examples and distinctions are given in detail and emphasized on account of the confusion that seems to exist among both fencers and judges regarding the difference between the tension and the stop thrust. Instead of the existing tendency to penalize a properly executed stop thrust, on account of its superficial resemblance to the tension, there should rather exist a reluctance to concede any rights to a fencer who deliberately, or through carelessness or ineptitude, abandons his right of way and then tries to recover it on a technicality that should not exist.

However, there is one form of stop thrust against which technicalities should exist and be enforced. This is the stop thrust by evasion. Here, an endeavor is made to “side step” or dodge under a properly executed attack and make a point from the side, or below, after evading the attacking point. The rules have an added penalty by awarding a fair touch for a touch made on any part of the person that may be substituted for the valid target in such an evasion.

The time thrust, when properly executed, is the perfection of analysis of your opponent’s offensive play. It consists in closing the line of the final movement of your [Pg 32]opponent’s attack with a simple opposition parry, at the same time extending arm and point toward his target. To be valid, this manoeuver must fully deviate the attacking point from the target. Therefore, its proper performance requires perfect analysis, perfect coordination and perfect timing. As there can be no more exacting requirement, so there can be no higher attainment.

While the preceding paragraphs cover the theory of the counter attack, it is well to give warning as to the practical application in a number of these cases. The Rules Committee of The Amateur Fencer’s League of America, in order to avoid hair-splitting definitions, has covered the subject of the stop thrust in one broad statement which reads as follows:

The stop thrust is a simple counter attack, against the opponent’s attack. It is successful against a faulty attack, simple or composite; or against attacks advancing (“on the march”) and delayed attacks, when the attacker exposes an open line and enables the defender to obtain the advantage of a sufficient interval of fencing time.

It will be seen from this definition that the final decision in most of these instances will rest with the director, who alone decides the validity of touches. If the director happens to be ill informed, or unsympathetic regarding this type of counter attack, a perfectly timed attack on the preparation or stop thrust may be declared a stop thrust without sufficient interval of fencing time. Unfortunately, in this, as in many other instances, knowing your officials or their prejudices is almost more important than knowing your fencing.

Attacks on the sword. Sometimes there comes to an aggressive fencer the feeling that his opponent is a little too sure of himself; that his position of guard is too assured; [Pg 33]that his confidence in his defence is too unshaken; that his response to feints is too deliberate, too unhurried. There is no reaction to the preliminary movements of a compound attack, and the response to the final movement is so delayed and so sure as to carry with it exceptional danger of a successful riposte. Something must be done to shake this confidence, to make the defender a little less sure of his position, a little less certain of the line in which the developing attack is to come. What shall it be? One possibility is an attack on the defending sword, as a preliminary to the actual attack. Such an attack on the sword may be suggested, or real. Also, it may be single, or multiple. The suggested attacks are: (1) the press—a light, sharp pressure, faible to faible, in the position of guard; (2) the glide (coulé)—a light, prolonged pressure from the position of guard as the arm is extended to a feint in line; and (3) the light beat—a light tap, faible to faible, in the position of guard. None of these suggested attacks on the defending blade forces it from the position of guard. In fact, its intention is quite the opposite, being to suggest a forcible entry in the closed line so as to delay response to an actual attack in the open line. All of these attacks should be performed by mere finger play. The real attacks on the sword are executed with much more force and authority than the suggested attacks and are planned to actually force the defending blade aside so that an opening will exist in the closed line, whether or not penetration is intended. The real attacks on the sword are: (1) the heavy beat—performed much more strongly but in the same way as the light beat in the suggested attack; (2) the force (froisé)—performed in much the same way as the glide in the suggested attacks, but with a force that almost throws the defending blade out of line and not infrequently results in a disarmament against a lightly held blade; (3) the [Pg 34]cross (croisé); (4) the bind (liement); and (5) the envelopment. The last three of these have no corresponding movements in the suggested attacks and will have to be treated separately.

As mentioned above, the heavy beat is much heavier than in the suggested attack. However, it is executed entirely with the fingers in the lines of seconde, tierce, quarte, and septime and with minimum wrist play in quinte, sixte, and octave. The beat from prime is not mentioned because of the very infrequent use of the guard of prime in modern fencing and because of the extreme difficulty of executing a successful beat from that guard.

The cross is executed by closing distance enough to permit engaging the faible of the defending sword with either the forte or middle section of the attacking blade. This closing of distance may be accomplished by a short advance, or may be unnecessary against an adversary who extends the arm with point in line. In the latter case, great care must be exercised in the execution of the movement, as the defender’s extension is a recognized invitation to an attack on the sword, and it must be assumed that he is especially prepared for such a manoeuver. As such preparation probably means that he plans to evade the attacking blade and permit the attacker to precipitate himself upon an extended point, which has taken the conventional right of way, care must be taken that his blade is found and his point deviated before the attack is pursued. When the adversary’s arm is not extended, it is necessary to raise the hand slightly in order to obtain the necessary control of the defending sword. Control of the opposing blade having been established, the faible is forced laterally toward the open line and depressed, while the attacking sword crosses over to the open line—the extension and lunge following immediately. In this movement, great care must be [Pg 35]exercised to maintain contact of the blades until the thrust is completed. When made upon a blade with right of way, additional care must be exercised to sufficiently deviate the threatening point to effectually and obviously destroy the right of way.

The bind is executed under the same conditions and in the same manner as the cross, except that it retains control of the opposing faible and carries it through an encircling movement to the low line of the high line in which the original engagement occurred. The converse is true from low to high. The same restrictions and precautions must be observed as with the cross.

The envelopment is the third of this series of attacks on the sword and is merely a further development of the bind, as the bind was of the cross. In this instance, the defending sword is carried through a complete circle, ending in the guard in which it started. The thrust and lunge of the attack follow immediately upon the completion of the envelopment. It is probably unnecessary to point out the need of increasing caution and exactness as these movements become more extensive and complicated. The addition of each succeeding quadrant to the encircling movement detracts from the element of surprise, adds to the chance of evasion, and increases the probability of wide play.

With the exception of the beat in the inside high line, greater authority in the execution of the various attacks on the sword is obtained from the guards with the hand in pronation. However, as all of these manoeuvers are in preparation for the final lunge of the attack, it is well to remember that what is gained in force is ordinarily sacrificed in control and accuracy. Therefore, the cross, the bind, and the envelopment will usually be used most effectively from the guards with the hand in supination.

Reference has already been made to the progressive [Pg 36]development of the cross, the bind, and the envelopment. This same comparison could quite properly include the simpler attacks on the sword which use force and are designed to create an opening for the attacking point. In other words, we have a progressive series of forceful attacks on the sword, which have as their objective the opening of a line of attack by the deviation of the defending blade. These are, in their progressive intricacy or extent: (1) the strong beat, or strong press; (2) the force (froisé); (3) the cross (croisé); (4) the bind (liement); and (5) the envelopment. Where these attacks are to be employed, the fencer should carefully master the details of each one and accustom himself to its use. When the adversary can anticipate a fairly definite and dependable reaction under given circumstances, the advantages attendant upon initiative and surprise are largely lost. It is of utmost importance that the play should be very close and controlled, as the temptation to put elbow and even shoulder movement into these attacks is great. There are few occasions more disconcerting than the termination of a powerful and uncontrolled attack on the sword—which has been evaded. At this moment, the attacker, has widely opened his own target and, instead of an attack on the sword, may have executed a precipitation on the point.

Defence against attacks on the sword. The first step in preparing an adequate defence against attacks on the sword is the inclusion of these manoeuvers in all practice and lesson work. This will permit one to school himself against response by instinctive movements. In other words, there must be no instinctive response to such attacks. The tendency to hold the guard in which a light beat or press has been made just a moment too long may result in a successful disengage to the open line. But, on the other hand, the careful training of oneself to always make a simple parry [Pg 37]in the open line upon such an attack will be just as fatal with an observant adversary, as he will make the attack on the sword and lunge in line as the parry is executed. Therefore, so accustom yourself to the attacks that you neither allow them to hold you in the original guard position nor draw you into an habitual parry. This advice applies not only to suggested but also to real attacks on the sword. But, in the latter group, something more is necessary. The forceful attack on the sword is bound to shake the position of guard and to derange the plan of defence. Also, it opens a line of attack and must be met by some form of defence.

All of these attacks are best met with some form of evasion. The simplest form of this consists in a quick retreat, executed as soon as the heavy blow or pressure characteristic of such attacks is felt on the blade. However, the simplest is not always the best, and the retreat should be the defence of desperation rather than of routine. As soon as the retreat becomes a regular part of every defence, allowance is made for it in every attack. The better form of evasion is with the blade. This requires the maximum of readiness, almost to the extent of anticipation. Of course, where the arm has been extended with point in line, this constitutes an invitation to the attack on the sword and readiness for any eventuality may be assumed. In such case, the relative success of attack or evasion is governed by the superior timing, coordination, and speed of attacker or defender. The evasion consists of the simple, finger-controlled disengage, one-two, or double required by the form of attack made—always treating and considering the attack on the sword as a parry to be deceived. However, when the contact of swords is established and control of the blade gained, and resistance is of no value, as the attacker has an advantage of leverage that cannot be counteracted [Pg 38]by any amount of force, the defence must consist of some form of parry of either a releasing or a yielding character. Even the releasing parries in these cases are partly yielding in character. For instance, with engagement in the line of sixte, a strong press or beat, or a froisé, is executed by one fencer. The defender allows his hand to follow his point into the guard of quarte, executing a counter of quarte as he does so. In doing this, he has been forced to yield with the point; has voluntarily yielded with the hand; and has released his point and covered both high lines with the counter of quarte. Against the more controlled attacks on the sword (the cross, the bind, and the envelopment), a more pronounced yielding and following of the attacking sword is required. Both point and hand yield, but there is little hope of release against a properly executed attack, so the hand must be allowed to slip into a defending parry while appearing to yield continuously. The bind is the simplest and the cross the most difficult of these “slipping” oppositions to execute. Taking the bind from quarte as an example, it would start by taking control of the defending faible in the guard of quarte and delivering its touch in the line of septime. However, as the carrying of the defending blade into septime is completed, and the attacking point is advanced, the defender is able to oppose forte to faible. This is accomplished by allowing the deviation of the point from quarte to septime and at the same time carrying the hand across the target from quarte to octave (or seconde) and, as the point is released from opposing control, carrying it by a strong movement of the fingers to the parry occupied by the hand. If taken too much by surprise, the movement of hand and point must be synchronous. A less usual, but very effective, reply to the bind is accomplished by yielding to the pressure of the attacking sword, turning the hand into pronation, dropping it to hip level with point [Pg 39]high, and offering strong opposition in the attacked line. If the attack is the envelopment, again from quarte, the point again travels freely to the end of the movement, but the hand has travelled to the outside line and, with the final finger play of the parry, sixte (or tierce) is opposed to the attacking point. Also, it is possible to allow this attack to proceed to its completion and to execute a counter of quarte parry at that time, which is a return to the yielding and releasing manoeuver. While the reply to the cross may offer no greater intrinsic difficulties than these attacks, it does require a radical departure from fundamental positions. Here, the blade is forced downward as well as in a lateral direction, and the proper defence of the high line must be by a high line parry. To assume that point and hand can be returned to the attacked line in time for its closure is to assume too great a margin of superiority in speed and technique on the part of the defence. Here, the yielding “slip” parry must use a low line parry in irregular position to cover a high line. So, the point is allowed to remain in the slightly low position to which it has been forced, and the hand is raised to chin level, the parry of septime (or prime) being taken from this position, if the attack was made from sixte. Probably the only time that the parry of prime will be recommended in this work will be where the cross is employed from sixte with sufficient force to thoroughly shake the guard and to make it more natural to roll this hand into the parry of prime than to carry it across into septime. When the attack is made from quarte, the high octave is the parry of choice.

It may be well, at this time, to emphasize a mental attitude toward all parries. In making a parry, unless very sure of the analysis of the opponent’s play, it should never be considered as a terminal movement. In other words, a fencer never says to himself, “Upon such and such an [Pg 40]attack, I shall take the parry of so and so.” He says, “Upon such and such an attack, I shall take the parry of so and so—and—.” The “and” may be left open, as merely indicating a state of mind. In other words, if the attacker deceives the planned parry, the defender is mentally prepared to take another parry and awaits the contact of the blades before closing his mind on that particular defence. This is especially true of the encircling attacks on the sword, which are very hard to analyze until the style of play of a particular opponent is known.

The Attacks Advancing. Although there is no fundamental difference between the execution of the attacks from position (de pied ferme), which already have been described, and the attacks advancing (en marchant), there are certain points that are worthy of special attention. Where the fencing is out of engagement and out of distance, or where one of the fencers accompanies every parry with a retreat, or a pronounced backward swaying of the body, the attacker must take cognizance of these circumstances each time he prepares to attack. How is he to so adjust the distance at which his lunge is executed as to be sure that he is within distance? The first requirement is a knowledge of his adversary’s reaction under given conditions. If the defender is a “pendulum” fencer, swaying back with each parry and forward immediately afterward, the distance is fixed. When he sways backward, his weight is carried to his rear foot and further retreat is awkward, slow, or impossible. Therefore, having once determined the limit of rearward travel that this sway permits, it is only necessary to add the gain of that distance to any other that may have to be covered in reaching the target. If the fencing is in engagement and within distance, the sway is the total amount to be gained. If possible, this should be done without warning. Generally, this is best accomplished by the [Pg 41]employment of a movement designated “the gain” (gagnant). This is simply a contraction of the foot position of the guard to the front. In other words, without moving the front foot and without attracting the attention of the defender, the rear foot is brought forward either the needed distance or all of the way to the front foot. In order to distract the attention of the defender, it is well to execute some feint with the sword at the same time that this movement is executed. With the completion of the “gain” and the return of the hand to the position of guard from the accompanying feint, the previously planned attack is immediately executed, before the defender has time to appreciate the change in foot position. This simple movement will diminish the distance to be covered by more than eighteen inches with the average position of guard. Where the fencing is out of distance and the defender employs the sway, but knows that a single advance will not close both the extra distance and his sway, the single advance, with gain, may be employed. Here, the advance which is inadequate to close the total distance is completed by bringing the rear foot up to the front foot, and the attack is completed immediately. In this instance, it is well to accompany the advance with an attack on the sword to cover the changed foot-work. Either the simple advance, or the gain, will cover similar distance made by the adversary and any combination of the two will match him move for move. However, trying to follow a retreating opponent is likely to disturb the accuracy of any accompanying attack. In order to avoid this, it is well to time the consecutive movements of the attack to the successive gains in distance, so far as this is possible. For instance, assuming that the distance to be gained requires two advances and that the parries to be deceived are a counter of quarte and sixte, the first advance is made with the feint of disengage, the [Pg 42]second advance with the deceive of the counter parry, and the deceive of the simple parry and lunge are made from this position. As this method establishes a certain coordination and rhythm between foot and hand, it offers a minimum likelihood of deranging the attack and should be employed whenever possible. Against the consistent multiple retreater, the rabbit of sword play who has come into his own with the extension of the fencing limits, there is no recourse but to gain all of the distance possible and hold what is gained. After all, with a forty-foot strip, each fencer has only about fifteen feet behind him in the original position of guard. If he uses this distance for running exercises, and his adversary takes and holds the distance surrendered, the time soon arrives when there is no further room for retreating within the limits of the strip. He must then stand and take the attack or run off the strip. If he does the latter with both feet, a touch is scored against him, and it is just as good a touch as any other. In fact, psychologically, it is better. If a fencer who depends upon the retreat for his defence is once driven off the strip for a declared touch, subsequent to that time his mind will be divided between what he is trying to do and how much distance he has behind him. However, it is well to give warning against the following of such a fencer with over-confidence. There is always the possibility that this exaggerated retreating is planned to lure the attacker into an ill-considered, rushing attack which will be met with a parry and riposte from position. Never assume that you are a better or a smarter fencer than your adversary, until the final decision of the jury justifies that conclusion—and, then, don’t assume that the condition is more than temporary. Who knows what will happen tomorrow, particularly if you presume on the basis of what happened today.

There is one method of closing, or extending, distance in [Pg 43]large measure and quickly that we mention with trepidation. Before the discovery of the lunge, which was an advanced development of fencing, there was need of some method of quickly arriving within striking distance of one’s adversary. An ingenious movement was evolved which was based upon the “gain” and was called the “passado.” This movement was executed by bringing the rear foot not only up to, but past, the front foot and planting it, and, then, bringing the front foot forward to the position of guard. By this movement, three feet or more could be swiftly covered in one forward movement. Although long omitted from the formal instruction in the classical French school of the foil, it was retained in the school of the bayonet under the designation of “front pass” and “rear pass.” The principal objections to the “passes” are: (1) that they commit one almost irrevocably to an extensive, sometimes excessive, gain or surrender of distance; (2) that, at the mid-point of the “pass,” they have a tendency to do away with the effacement of the rear shoulder and broaden the visible target; and (3) that in both attack and defence, they have a tendency to disturb the steadiness of the hand. However, there are very rare occasions when they may be advisable. The most definite of these is to supplement a “parry of desperation.” Another, but more questionable, use would be when pursuing a badly shaken and rapidly retreating opponent. It will occasionally, though rarely, happen that such a pursuit will carry the opponent to the limit of his available space and that a following lunge may drive him off the strip.

Opposition in Attacks. The giving of opposition in attacks is that deviation of the hand slightly away from the direct line of attack and toward the defending sword that endeavors to keep that line closed against a stop or time thrust, or succeeding simple riposte. Against the stop thrust [Pg 44](really “tension” under these circumstances), it is unnecessary, as the attack has the right of way. Against the time thrust, it is inadequate as that manoeuver will force it aside. Against the anticipated riposte, it is foolish because the parry has not yet been made and may prove unsuccessful. However, immediately following a successful parry of your attack, it is an excellent procedure and should always be employed, unless you have something better planned.

The group of attacks and counter-attacks described prior to this have all been in the class of frank attacks. As will be recalled, two other classes of attacks were mentioned at the beginning of this section—false attacks and concealed attacks. The false attacks are just what the name would indicate, movements simulating the characteristics of attacks but lacking the intent of gaining a touch by their execution. They are usually employed with one of three purposes—to gain distance, to gain information, or to discompose the adversary. Their employment to gain distance is against the running defence already described. Here, there is neither hope nor intention of touching. The false attack is delivered with the usual precautions against a parry and riposte, but is used with the idea of closing forward to the guard position upon its completion and making a permanent gain of distance of any ground gained by both the lunge and any advance that may have preceded it. Its use for gaining information is in the process of feeling out an opponent’s defence, in order to discover whether he has favorite parries, or sequences of parries. Against some fencers, a quick feint, or series of feints, will serve this purpose. Against a stronger and more confident fencer, the actual lunge may be needed to draw the parry. The feint does not differ from that of the frank attack, but the lunge is usually a little “tied-in,” being delivered with the same initial impetus to give the impression of a real attack, but [Pg 45]only going to one-half or two-thirds the distance of a full lunge. Its use to discompose the adversary is most useful against the fencer who is constantly edging in rather than making a frank attack advancing. This edging-in process is frequently accompanied with attacks on the sword, or with multiple feints, but usually does not lead to a frank attack until the desired distance is attained or a moment of unreadiness seized. If not prepared to deliver an attack on the preparation but still unwilling to permit the persistent gain of ground, an unexpected deceive of the attack on the sword and false attack will frequently cause a hurried withdrawal that will surrender any ground gained.

A concealed attack is one which originates in a false attack but is immediately followed by a true attack which was part of the original plan. A good example of this is the planned remise against a fencer who slightly delays his riposte, with the idea of delivering it during the resumption of the guard. A false attack is delivered with two-thirds lunge and the remise follows immediately, without attempting to regain the guard. However, a more generally useful employment of the concealed attacks is in a group of secondary attacks that are called counter-ripostes. The counter-ripostes are most useful against a strong defence, where the parries are held to the last possible moment, are both authoritative and carefully controlled, and are followed by immediate ripostes. Such a defence is extremely hard to penetrate. By making quick, apparently hard false attacks which will draw the parry and riposte, the riposte may be parried and an opening found for the counter-riposte. Few fencers, no matter how strong their defences, are as well prepared against a counter-riposte as against an original attack. This play should be practised assiduously in all lines and mastered by every fencer who hopes [Pg 46]to attain a rank that will expose him to difficult and versatile competition.

The original attack of the planned counter-riposte generally employs only a two-thirds lunge and the parries preceding the counter-ripostes are frequently made in an almost fully extended position of the arm.

The earlier discussion of the defence treated only what might be described as the regular parries and their use in a regular way. In the choice of the word “regular,” it is not intended to indicate that other parries or a different use of the usual parries may not be perfectly legal as well as an accepted procedure. However, the most finished technique is to meet a certain attack with the parry that will deviate its final movement from the target as an act of deftness and skill rather than force. There is an application of the regular parries and a certain group of compound parries that aim at defence by breaking up the attack at its inception or at some predetermined point in its development by a “breaking of the line.” This breaking of the line is the application of force in a direction opposite to that of the attacking blade. It rather tends to minimize the necessity of a complete analysis of the attack and plans to break it by force before its full development. Also, there is a use of certain of the regular parries in irregular ways to meet attacks of force, or frank attacks executed in an irregular manner.

One of the most frequently seen examples of the use of a regular parry to break the line is the opposing of the parry of septime to a disengage from quarte into sixte. The closing of the line of sixte by the parry of sixte, or the returning of the attacking point into quarte by the counter of quarte would be the regular method of meeting this [Pg 48]attack. But, if the attacking faible is met by a sharp parry of septime as it drops to pass under the defending blade, the attack is immediately terminated in an entirely new and unexpected line before the completion of its first movement. A similar defence with octave, or seconde, may be employed from the line of sixte. Also, it is obvious that any plan for a compound attack has been shattered by this initial breaking of the line. Of course, if the attacker anticipates the play, he merely starts the disengage and immediately returns to the high line that has been opened. As already stated, there are certain combination parries used for this same purpose of breaking the line. Two of the best known and most widely used of these are the parries of septime and octave enveloppé. These parries are started from the high line guards of quarte or of sixte, drop to the corresponding low lines of septime or of octave and are carried back by an encircling (enveloping) movement to the opposite high line of sixte or of quarte. The parry is supposed to be so executed that the low line parry meets the initial movement of the first feint of the attacking blade and that the subsequent envelopment carries it upward and outward to the opposite high line. Both of these parries are extremely efficient against inexperienced fencers and, if only used very occasionally, against experienced swordsmen. However when anticipated, there is no parry more easily deceived. With the wide sweep from quarte to septime to sixte, such a parry must be relatively slow and requires only the start of the disengage to draw the septime parry and an immediate disengage over the septime to deceive the following sweep from septime to sixte. One of the pleasantest to use of these combination parries is the combination of counter of sixte—octave against the double from sixte. This, after showing the counter to the feint, only suggests it to the attack, starting as though to take the [Pg 49]counter-parry but really going directly to octave. The riposte, which is almost continuous with the parry, is best taken in seconde, by simply turning the hand into pronation as the thrust is made. Again, if anticipated, this parry is very easily deceived, but, if successfully executed, has all of the beauty of a time thrust. The high line that would have been closed by the counter parry is left wide open by its abandonment, and the attack need only continue in the line of the original feint, after making a slight movement to suggest the deceive of the counter parry. As has been suggested in each instance, this group of parries may be most disconcerting when resorted to only occasionally as surprise measures. As has also been suggested, when used habitually, they are much more easily deceived than the simpler regular parries for which they are substituted. The Italian school has a favored parry designated “half-circle,” which is similar to the French parry of septime but is used in the high line. This is not infrequently employed by fencers of the French school and called “high septime.” When taken from the guard of quarte, it sweeps all lines except the high outside (sixte, or tierce). When properly timed, it is very inclusive. The best deceive is a disengage over the blade into the low outside line (octave, or seconde). Similarly, “high octave” is best deceived with a disengage over the blade into septime, or prime.

There is an irregular type of attack designated as a cavation, or cavé, which is executed by endeavoring to bend around the defending parry. The effort is to evade a properly executed parry by forming such an angle between the sword and the sword arm that the point remains on the target, although the hand is carried well out of line. While quite irregular, this attack is neither illegal nor uncommon. It calls for a different parry from the one that would ordinarily close the line attacked. For instance, a straight [Pg 50]attack in sixte would be parried by the simple parry of sixte. But a cavé attack into sixte would carry the hand so far outside that the point would come in from the side and there would be no deviation of the attacking point by a parry of sixte. However, a counter parry into the opposite line will always pick up a lateral cavé. Notice the emphasis upon the word “lateral.” The cavé from above is practically never employed, and no regular parry will pick up the cavé from below. It is too low to be met with a regular high line parry and the blade takes a direction parallel to that of the low line parries, so that contact of the blades is a matter of chance. This should make it the ideal attack. But there are two weaknesses inherent to its use. The angulation at the hand shortens the line of attack, while the dropping of the hand uncovers the entire target—an invitation to a successful stop thrust. This is first and the second is even more stringent. A slight dropping in the semi-sitting position of guard and a lowering of the hand to slightly below the waist level, while maintaining the hand and sword position of a high line guard, makes the high line parries a perfect defence against the cavé from below, whereas the attacker has only his faible to offer in defence against the riposte which follows a successful parry. To summarize our conclusions, we may say that there are certain irregular parries and irregular uses of regular parries, as well as certain irregular attacks, that offer a temporary advantage when used sparingly as surprise measures. But each and every one of these puts its user at a greater disadvantage when its use is expected, either through its excessive employment or the unusual preparedness of the adversary. There is no attack that cannot be parried. There is no parry that cannot be deceived. On the whole, close, careful, regular play is the surest play.

There is a certain use of parries that for lack of a better [Pg 51]term, we designate “parries of desperation.” These are employed when some very unexpected manoeuver of the opponent has quite destroyed the sequence of your play and left you, however temporarily, completely at his mercy, without formulated plan of defence. These occasions should be so rare that your reaction to them could never be employed by your opponent in his analysis of your play. If you allow such an occasion to arise twice against the same team, much less against the same individual, you will have earned the defeat that will almost surely be your portion. These “parries of desperation” are generally as inclusive as you can make them, breaking one or more lines. Here is the occasion for the “universal parry” of the old masters. But, probably, the best that we have available is the “high septime,” the “high octave,” the septime enveloppée, or the octave enveloppée. An occasional fencer still insists upon a high prime, seconde alternation as the answer to this dénouement. And whichever of these is employed should always be accompanied by a breaking of distance. The direction of the break will be governed by the action of your adversary. If he is pursuing rapidly and tenaciously, to exploit his advantage close to the front, it will be more disconcerting. It may destroy his estimate of the situation. If he stands fast, awaiting his opportunity, break rapidly to the rear, regaining your position of guard and, perhaps, aplomb out of distance.

All of the discussion of the theory of fencing that has gone before leads up to meeting an adversary in competition. This single match of man against man is called a bout. In addition to the rules and conventions that govern the bout itself, there are certain courtesies that are not prescribed by rule, but that are customary and an integral part of the refinements of the game. The preliminary formalities are the process of coming on guard and the salute to the jury and to your adversary. As these are not prescribed by rule, they may be omitted, may be very abbreviated, or may be quite slovenly in their execution without any penalty—except in the minds of any observers. The procedure that is recommended and described is of the more formal kind.

When called to the fencing strip, the fencer steps to his preliminary position and half faces his adversary. The heels are together, the front toe pointing directly at the adversary and the rear foot at right angles to this. The mask is grasped in the rear hand, the thumb holding the head spring near the body of the mask, the arm curled around the circumference of the mask and the chin of the mask in the arm-pit. The sword is held in direct prolongation of the arm, with the point a few inches above the ground and from a foot and a half to two feet in front of the front toe. The fingers are to the front. The first movement is to raise the hand to the level of the forehead, [Pg 54]keeping the arm straight and the sword in direct prolongation of it. As the jury and audience are placed on both sides of the fencing strip, it is courteous to salute both groups before saluting your adversary and proceeding with the bout. The salute to the inside is performed by turning the hand over, with knuckles up, and turning the sword in a horizontal plane towards the inside through a complete circle and an eighth, using only the fingers and the wrist, until the sword stops with the hand in supination, fingers up, pointing diagonally to the inside front, with the arm bent in the position of the guard and the head turned towards those saluted. The salute to the outside starts from the position of termination of the salute to the inside and the sword is turned back through a horizontal circle and a quarter, point starting toward the outside, and ending pointing to the outside front with the hand in pronation, knuckles up, and arm in the position of guard. From this position, the arm is straightened toward the adversary, with hand at height of forehead and fingers up, and the adversary saluted. This salute is rendered by bending the elbow and bringing the hand back, until the guard is about four inches in front of the mouth and the point has a slight forward slope. The point is then lowered smartly to the original position taken facing the adversary by a simple straightening of the elbow and wrist. The mask is then adjusted and the fencer comes on guard. Even this action is best performed in a regular and formal manner. The sword is turned back to a horizontal position, with the arm extended, so that the hands are almost together—the right hand grasping the sword and the fingers of the left hand, back down, running along the blade and touching the guard at approximately crotch level. From this position, the hands are raised over the head, without changing their relative positions, with arms bowed to form almost a circle and [Pg 55]blade horizontal, with point to the rear. From this position, the knees are bent, the front foot is advanced the proper distance and the hands are separated and lowered to the position of guard. If anyone feels that all of these preliminaries are quite unnecessary, it is only fair to consent. But, the experience of the race has prescribed certain courtesies by which one is judged almost more severely than by his morals, and sword-play has developed its little courtesies over some four hundred years. As a practical and, possibly, materialistic hint, let us suggest that some members of the jury are prejudiced in favor of the courtesies. Old fogies, if you please! But don’t violate their sense of the decencies in the opening and expect them to credit you with good intentions when you violate rules later on. It is sometimes difficult for one trained in the “old school” to believe that bad manners and good intentions can go hand in hand. For this, if no other reason, cultivate good “fencing manners.”

The coming on guard has taken place near the center of a strip which is forty feet long and six feet wide. According to the rules, there must be a line marking the center of this strip. The contestants fall on guard sufficiently to their own sides of this line to be out of engagement. When the director starts the bout by the command of “Play,” or “Fight,” each contestant is left to pursue his own judgment, within the limits of the rules, as to the subsequent action. If one desires to fence “in engagement,” he advances slightly, always on the alert against offensive action, and endeavors to cross swords, faible to faible. If he does not desire to fence “in engagement,” he may either retain his position of guard, awaiting the preliminary movements of his adversary, or attempt to close distance, remaining out of engagement. There is an old “catch phrase” for the objective from this point. It has been said that fencing is the [Pg 56]height of altruism. Its persistent objective is to give and to receive nothing in return. The action of each fencer is governed by two factors—his personal temperament and his schooling. A fencer may be aggressive because he is not temperamentally suited to the waiting game, or because he has not developed confidence in his defence. If you are going to be aggressive, do not let it be for the latter reason. So develop your defence during the schooling period that you are not driven to the attack of desperation. Let your attacks be planned and based upon calm observation and study of your opponent’s play. A touch by parry and riposte is just as valuable as one by attack and may be more valuable if it shakes the faith of an aggressive adversary in his attack. Do not let your attacks be unconsidered. A quick feint may tell you whether your adversary prefers simple, or counter, parries. A false attack may be necessary to get the same information. If he prefers simple parries, there is no use planning doubles. If he holds his parry to the last possible fraction of a second, don’t forget your counter-ripostes, against immediate ripostes, and don’t forget the remise and the redoublement against the delayed riposte. All of the various methods that have been suggested under the theory are necessary, and then a fund of “fighting sense” that only comes with experience.

It is not possible to over-emphasize certain suggestions that were made very early in regard to position. The well flexed position of the legs, with feet not too close together for steadiness and not too far apart for agility, must be maintained at all times. The reduction of the target by the effacement of the rear shoulder should become a matter of subconscious practice. And the maintenance of the elbow of the sword arm, definitely inside the line of the body, is of great importance. With this elbow held well inside and serving as a fixed pivot for all parries, in the parries with [Pg 57]the hand held in supination, it is almost impossible to carry the parry of sixte too far to the outside and very difficult to execute those wide parries of quarte in which the point beats the floor. It is important to bear in mind that every parry is the natural precursor of a riposte and that it should stop in a position from which the riposte can be made easily and accurately. The parry that is held to the last possible moment, that goes just far enough to cover the target and that is promptly followed by a quick, accurate riposte, either simple or compound, soon becomes a matter of dread to the attacker.

Frequent reference has been made to the analysis of attacks and parries and to the withholding of the parry to the last possible moment. Like most other details of fencing technique, this is simple and is not a matter of inspiration but of long, patient practice. First, as to the movements of the blade, whether in attack or defence. In close sword play, with the fingers or even the wrist controlling the point, the movements of the blade originate at the hand and become progressively larger as they approach the point. Even in wide play, with the movement coming even from the shoulder, the movement at the point is wider than at the hand. Therefore, watch the intersection of the blade with the guard for information regarding the point. The movement of the point always follows and exaggerates the movement of this intersection. The slightest of movements here tells you that the point is going to right or left, up or down. That indication directs your parry, or deceive, as the case may be. But there is another advantage in making this intersection the focal point of your observation. It includes in the lower limit of the field of vision the front foot of your adversary. This is important. If your judgment of distance is accurate and you have not allowed your adversary to come closer than lunging distance, he cannot [Pg 58]hope to hit you without lunging. He cannot lunge without raising the front foot from the ground. It is extremely difficult to change the direction of an attack in the middle of a lunge. Therefore, you may safely ignore all feints made before the starting of the lunge. Only an infinitesimally accurate judgment of the speed of your adversary’s lunge can tell you just how long you can wait after that foot comes off the ground before starting your parry. But, you never need to parry before the foot leaves the ground and the longer you can safely wait afterwards the less is the chance of your parry being deceived.

A considerable number of factors has been mentioned that will contribute to successful competition fencing. Our recommendation is that every effort be made to master all of these factors. However, it is always interesting to try to arrange such factors in their order of relative importance. Probably no two individuals would agree as to the entire list. But we shall give our idea and endeavor to support it by reason. We give first importance to the position of the elbow of the sword arm. Upon this depends the building of an impregnable defence, and the fencer with an impregnable defence cannot lose. Upon this foundation, and for the same reason, we advocate a complete mastery of the various parries. Although we advise it, we do not insist upon a mastery of all eight parries. But a complete mastery of one parry for each of the four lines (inside and outside high and inside and outside low) is essential. If only four parries are to be mastered, we advocate quarte and sixte in the high lines, septime and either seconde or octave for the low lines. Third in our order of importance would come the effacement of the rear shoulder, because this also contributes to the defence by minimizing the effective target. Fourth, we would master the various ripostes from our parries, because the groundwork has already been laid for [Pg 59]getting touches by this method. Fifth, we should master our leg work, partly because the ability to extend and close distance adds to the efficiency of the defence, and partly because fully developed leg work is a necessary preliminary to any study of the offense. Next, sixth, we would study the concealed attacks (counter-ripostes), because we have already mastered the parries and ripostes and the concealed attacks would be utilized to tease an over-cautious opponent into playing our game. Finally, we would master the frank attacks, including the attacks on the sword and the counter-attacks. Throughout all of this progress, we should be constantly studying both time and distance, as well as endeavoring to analyze and anticipate the play of our opponent’s weapon and trying to learn how to hold our parries to the last possible moment.

Even if the average instructor agreed with the preceding outline, it would not be practicable for him to follow it. Try to visualize the fencing master of a large club giving ten, or fifteen, or twenty lessons in an afternoon and giving all of them in the defence. Even with the labor-saving methods that he has learned of stepping forward instead of making a hard lunge, he would soon be exhausted. Also, he would find a certain proportion of his pupils of a combative temperament complaining because they were not being taught to attack. Further, he would find that certain other of his pupils, not having mastered leg work in the beginning when their enthusiasm was high, would never after go through the drudgery of adequately practising it. And, of course, the best reason of all would be that he considered the whole thing foolishness—that lesson five should come before lesson fifteen and that no one could convince him to the contrary.

It is well to remember that there is no such thing as an advance plan for conducting any bout. Even if you think [Pg 60]that you are thoroughly familiar with your adversary’s play, he may have changed it to meet certain peculiarities observed in yours. He may have found in his last bout with you that there are certain parries or attacks that he had best avoid. Or his coach may have been studying your play from the side-lines and advising him as to the best methods to employ against you. Therefore, enter each bout with an open mind. Do not presume too far upon what you know about your adversary’s former play. Remember it and be prepared to profit by it, but do not presume upon it. Comment has already been made upon the necessity of gaining and holding distance with a constantly retreating opponent. Do not forget that he may do the same to you. At the beginning of the bout, you have equal distances behind you. Do not become unconscious of this margin of safety to the rear. There is a warning line ten feet from the end of the strip, which is all of the warning the fencer receives under the present rules. However, this should be of no interest to you. Your guide as to distance to the rear should be the line in the middle of the strip. If your adversary has crossed it, the fighting is being pursued in your territory and a sudden unconsidered, extensive retreat may carry you off the strip. Do not permit yourself to be driven far enough back so that this reduced distance to the rear becomes a fear that distracts your attention from other details of the combat. When the crowding of your opponent becomes obvious, which should be immediately after its inception, drive him back with false attack, concealed attack, or frank attack, regaining your lost ground by resuming the guard forward instead of to the rear. Remember that, as you have some control over your opponent’s play, so he is not without influence over yours. Do not obstinately persist in preferred movements that do not fit in with his style. If you like cut-over attacks and he is adept at the stop [Pg 61]thrust, mind your step. If you favor counter parries and he makes wide feints with a slight tendency to cavé, go back to the simple parries. The counter parry against a wide feint tries to pick up his blade with the faible, which is risky at best. On the other hand, these same resources are yours. Against an adversary who employs “elbow” cutovers, the well executed stop thrust is a wonderful deterrent. However, this is an occasion where you must study your judges and Director, as well as your opponent. A beautiful stop thrust before a jury that treats it as a tension is a pearl before swine. Again, with an adversary who is not too well effaced and who favors counter parries, somewhat wide feints with a firmer grip than usual may cause his parries to fail and may eventually cause him to fall back upon the simple parries, which may be his weakness.

Against a fencer of the classic school, who fences with light hand and without too many attacks on the sword, it is pleasant to fence in engagement. Against a heavy-handed fencer, who is constantly trying to force your blade out of line and who is reinforcing this play with constant attacks on the sword, it is well to fence out of engagement. There is no use in exposing your hand to the constant pounding of a mauler. When fencing out of engagement, the outside guard in the high line is usually preferable. A right-handed fencer has to come across his own body to make an attack on your sword. Thus, it follows that the high guard on the inside may be preferable against a left-hander.

There are other things to remember about a left-handed fencer. The guard of sixte is relatively weak from the point of view of offering opposition to force of any sort. It places leverage against the weaker side of the hand. So, when fencing in engagement against a left-handed fencer, it is well to remember that his strong guard of quarte is naturally opposed to your weak guard of sixte. For this [Pg 62]reason, many left handers prefer to fence in quarte and will make considerable effort to maintain that guard. It is also well to remember that such slight bend as has developed at the point of your sword, to prevent breakage, is away from the thumb side. This slight bend has a tendency to throw the point toward the target of a right-handed fencer, lessening the tendency to slip off the target, when the hand is in suppination (fingers up). Conversely, with hand in supination, this same bend has the tendency to throw the point away from the target of the left-handed fencer. Turning the hand into pronation (fingers down) corrects this tendency. Finally, it is of psychological value to recall that there is no inherent advantage in fencing with either left or right hand. The advantage of the left hander rests in the fact that he is accustomed to fencing against right-handed fencers, while they are less used to left handers. Unfortunately, this adventitious advantage leads many left-handed fencers to neglect thorough grounding in all departments of play. If your opponent is such a one, look for the phase that he has neglected. Welcome every opportunity to meet the “gauchers” and try to have one in your own circle of fencers. All of this advice is equally applicable to left hander meeting left hander. But the best advice to him, after all, is to avoid the pitfall of accepting his advantage as a special gift that justifies neglect of that mastery of all departments of the game that is necessary to the well rounded fencer.

In any discussion of this sort, some reference must be made to the special problems presented by competition with a fencer of the Italian school. The basic theory behind the Italian and French schools differs in many ways. There is no desire to aggrandize or to disparage either school in the present discourse. We are basing our discussion and instruction upon the French school, because it was the one in [Pg 63]which we were first instructed and to which we afterwards adhered, either through preference or prejudice. That this preference is not based entirely upon ignorance is evinced by the fact that one of us fenced for two years on a team with a pupil of the great Italian master Greco and later spent one season under the instruction of another Italian master. It is felt that the swords of the two schools are the outward evidence of the essential underlying difference in theory. The French school uses a sword with a light blade that is almost perfectly balanced by a relatively long grip and heavy pommel. The grip depends entirely upon the fingers as does the control of the sword. On the other hand, the Italian sword has a slightly heavier blade, a cross bar at the upper limits of the guard about which the fingers curl for greater power, a relatively short grip and light pommel, and a strap for securing the pommel to the wrist. This assembly does not lend itself to light finger play, but presupposes the control of movements by the wrist and arm, some movements including the shoulder. With such a weapon, we should expect more dependence upon force, numerous attacks on the sword, powerful parries that break the line and a general tendency to break through rather than slip through. It seems to us that this is the fundamental difference—force rather than evasion. And the fencer whose training and weapon both lend themselves to evasion must learn to avoid exposing himself to the full effects of a force for which he is neither armed nor prepared. It is not necessary to warn one to fence out of distance and out of engagement, for that is the usual choice of the Italian fencer. The well trained fencers of this school are keen judges of both time and distance and are very highly trained in foot work. From a position well out of distance, they are prepared to close distance very rapidly by one or a series of advances, possibly including an attack on the [Pg 64]sword, before launching the final lunge. In regard to the closing of distance, remember that there are three ways of meeting this. The first is by being thoroughly prepared and receiving the attack with a sure defence. The second is by increasing the distance at the final, or earlier, movement of your opponent’s attack. The third and frequently the most disconcerting is to close distance yourself at your adversary’s first movement. When the aggressor has decided that two advances are necessary to close distance before the lunge, to suddenly find that one of those advances has put him within reach of a parry and lunge riposte may greatly shake his confidence. Remember also that the principle of properly applied leverage in parries eliminates all advantages of heavier weapons. Also, remember the earlier “rolling” parries that were evolved for use against heavy weapons. An unexpected “rolling” parry, executed with force and forte to faible, from sixte to quinte, or from quarte to tierce, and accompanied by froisé or croisé, may shake the wrist of your adversary as much as his heavier, strapped-on sword was expected to shake your hand. And never lose sight of the fact that the second defensive movement of the Italian fencer is most likely to break the line. That is, if a double into sixte has deceived his counter quarte, his next parry is apt to be the high septime. The deceive of this must be over the blade.

There are certain combinations in the way of parries and ripostes or attacks that may be advantageously practised as a part of your repertoire. The combination parry of counter sixte—octave, with riposte of tierce, against a double, from sixte, has already been mentioned. An occasional octave enveloppée, with straight riposte, against a disengage or planned double from sixte, may prove disconcerting. The septime enveloppée is equally successful but, somehow, seems easier to recognize and anticipate. The cut-over [Pg 65]riposte may be helpful against an adversary who bears down with heavy opposition after a parried attack. On the offensive, similar variations may be found. A properly timed cut-over disengage (the tour de l’épée) may be very effective. A drop to the low line on the deceive of the counter in the high line sometimes finds an unexpected opening. A disengage from quarte, with strong attack on the sword with high septime at the first movement of a counter parry, may break a way through. These are merely hints at the various ways in which elementary attacks, parries, and ripostes may be combined in combat.

In general, fencers conform to one of three mental types. There is the rote fencer. He has certain movements—a certain technique—possibly several tricks, which he employs persistently, without regard for the play of his opponent. Next, there is the inductive fencer, who strives by feints and suggested parries to lead his adversary into the defence or attack that he desires. Finally, there is the analyst, who studies his opponent’s play, who has no favorite method, but will adopt the one best calculated to overcome his opponent. The first is an opportunist, the second an artist, the third artist and scientist combined.

As a final suggestion regarding competition fencing, let us emphasize the courtesies. The acknowledgment of touches is not required. With well qualified juries of five, this is no longer considered either necessary or desirable. The claiming of touches is not permitted. The contestant is not supposed to endeavor to influence the decision of the judges by either word or action. In team competitions, the team captain may protest decisions either at the time of their occurrence to the Director, or later to the Bout Committee. In individual competition, it would probably be permissible to request permission of the Director to register an immediate protest, or to inform him that a later protest would be [Pg 66]registered with the Bout Committee. Beyond such very unusual occurrences, the contestant should offer no comment and should certainly refrain from theatrical gestures that are planned to influence the judges or to appeal to the audience. These actions are bad from at least three points of view. They are against the rules. They are unwise. They are bad manners. When the final touch is announced, close to the rear, bringing your heels together, assuming the upright position, with arm and sword extended as in the position preceding the assumption of guard, and salute your adversary. Then, remove your mask and step forward to shake hands with your adversary. Remember that, while there is little excuse for being a poor loser, there is absolutely no excuse for being an ungracious winner. Thank your adversary for the bout. If he won, tell him what a corking exhibition of strong fencing he gave. If he lost, pick something that he did well as an excuse for congratulation and assign his loss to bad luck. And mean it. If you can once reach that point where you can fully appreciate a beautiful touch made by your opponent at your expense, you have become a real fencer, regardless of the score.

The foil costume. The foil fencing costume is designed for utility and safety, not for beauty. The black velvet jacket and the red heart of the calendar girls is not seen elsewhere. The suit is white or nearly so and should be made of a fairly heavy canvas. The material in the jacket should be doubled over the front and sword side of the body, the collar, and the upper sword arm. This is important. A broken foil blade is a truly deadly weapon. The jacket is form-fitting, closes along the side opposite the sword arm and has a short tail piece, called a cuissard which is carried between the legs and fastened in back. This protects the extreme low line.

The pants may be either trousers, or knee breeches, [Pg 67]should be of the same material as the jacket, and should have the fly arranged opposite to the sword arm. If trousers, the lower portion should be somewhat shaped to the leg. Such a suit is equally useful for foil, duelling sword, or saber work, although some fencers like a little padding in the saber jacket.

The shoes may be any light, flexible type of athletic shoe. If a linoleum strip is used, an elk sole and resin are best. If a rubber strip is used, the rubber sole, as used in basketball, is satisfactory. For duelling sword play, the shoes must be white.

The mask is of wire mesh: (1) of close enough weave to prevent the passage of a broken blade; and (2) strong enough to resist a heavy blow with lunge and body weight behind it, from the stump of a broken blade. The mask must have a bib to protect the neck. For épée, all trim must be white.

The glove should be of soft leather, lightly padded over the back of the hand and fingers and should be one full size larger than the street glove. In major competitions, it must be of light color. The type with soft gauntlet is probably most desirable.

The sword has already been described, except for one accessory—the martingale. This is a string, or strap, which may be wrapped around the fingers or wrist, or otherwise secured, to prevent a released sword from flying into the audience or jury. At least two foils, preferably of demountable type, and also spare blades, should be available for every match, if more than one bout is to be fought.

The jury is charged with the obligation of seeing that equipment conforms to the rules and that it does not endanger adversary, onlookers, or self. If they consider that a fencer’s costume offers inadequate protection, they may disqualify him.

While there is always doubt as to the acceptability of formal exercises, to be voluntarily pursued, in any sport, there are always a few enthusiasts who are hunting for methods of improving their play. In an earlier section, we have suggested exercises for the development of the legs. As will be recalled, these consist in the lonely travel up and back the fencing strip, with the advance and lunge and, later, the retreat and lunge. Possibly it is absurd to suggest, but the fencer who will assume the leg position of guard during the morning shave, will get in an extra ten minutes on those legs. Again, if the man who sits over a book, will start an open sheet of newspaper at the corner with the fingers of his sword hand (or both hands, if he desires symmetry of exercise and development) and gradually, by finger action alone, crumple that sheet of paper until it is a compact ball within his hand, he will eventually develop almost tireless fingers. Of course, these exercises are quite outside of swordplay and may not interest one who just wants to fence.

There are other formal exercises, with the sword, that are planned to help develop one or another of the phases of the technique of the sword. One series of these is planned to help perfect finger work in the parries. Two fencers face each other well within distance in what might be called engagement for the simple parries and reverse engagement for the counter parries. The first term is self-explanatory. [Pg 69]Here, the fencers engage in sixte, or quarte, or whatever guard they may choose. They then alternate, taking the sharp, tapping parry of that position with the fingers alone, or with a minimal amount of wrist play. It is recommended that the parry of prime be omitted from this exercise. Of the other parries, seconde, tierce, quarte, and septime are practised very easily with the fingers alone. The parries of sixte and octave require some degree of wrist play. But constant practice will reduce this to a minimum. These exercises, when properly executed, help in four elements—the developing of the leg position of guard, the holding of the elbow of the sword arm well inside the line of the body, the effacement of the rear shoulder, and the practice of doigté in the simple parries. They may prove of some interest, as well as of great value, to the practical fencer. As stated, with the counter parries, a reverse engagement is employed. By this, it is meant that instead of opposing quarte to quarte, or sixte to sixte, as would be the usual practice if only closing the line were desired, quarte is opposed by sixte, and similarly throughout the series of guards, so that the various counter parries can be used. In fact, no true engagement exists. In the stated position, first one fencer takes the counter of quarte, whereupon the other takes the counter of sixte. Any time spent in these exercises will amply repay the fencers in the development of perfection in the execution of these movements.

Another series of formal exercises that permits an almost infinite variety opposes a known parry to attack and introduces the lunge into the exercise. For example, two fencers come on guard in quarte. It is agreed that the defence must be by no parry or the counter of quarte. The reason that “no parry” is introduced is in order to prevent the fencer with the attack from starting a “spinning” double on the agreement of a counter parry. With the privilege of “no [Pg 70]parry” the defender may stand fast, whereupon the “spinning” double runs into the motionless defending sword and loses the attack. This is fine practice in timing the attack to the defence and vice versa. In addition to the practice in the various elements of the guard and parries of the previous exercises it introduces: (1) the analysis of the attack and the defence; (2) the timing of attack to defence and defence to attack; (3) practice in holding the parry until the front foot leaves the ground; and (4) the launching of the lunge in perfect synchronization with the other elements of the attack. As this exercise can be practised from all guards and with all parries, either simple or counter, it may well command almost continuous interest for the perfection of weak spots in attack or defence between the periods of formal instruction. If the fencers are equally advanced, observant and mutually critical and helpful, they may make such exercises of enormous value.

Although we have already put ourselves on record as believing that nothing can take the place of individual instruction by a competent professional, this does not mean that one who cannot fence under ideal conditions should not fence at all. Throughout the country, teams are being instructed by amateurs who are giving their time and such knowledge as they possess from pure love of the game. In other institutions, members of the Departments of Physical Education are replying to the demand for instruction by obtaining such textbooks as are available and making a very sporting effort to teach as they learn. It is principally for these individuals and, to a somewhat lesser degree, for those small groups that must go a step further and indulge in self-instruction that the following exercises are prepared. An effort has been made to prepare a series of fifteen lessons, or formal exercises, that will carry a class or small group through the field of foil fencing in a logical progression. Of course, the most that can be hoped for from such a course is the attainment of basic instruction and the avoidance of the formation of bad habits during the formative period. The instructor will want to devote two or more class periods to some of the lessons. He will be wise to devote the opening minutes of each period to a physical review of what has gone before. The various procedures will be mastered only by constant repetition with meticulous attention to correct performance. A spirit of friendly [Pg 72]cooperation on the part of members of the class will be of incalculable help in making adequate progress. If each member will try to correct the mistakes that his particular fencing partner makes during the exercises with the sword and to welcome similar corrections from his partner, the efforts of the instructor will be multiplied to an extent that will permit him to concentrate on the obvious serious errors of individuals. Where a small group is working without an instructor, it is of great importance that each member become thoroughly familiar with the discussions in the section on theory before the corresponding lesson is practised. In class work, this study will probably be imposed on the instructor.

LESSON I

Position of guard.

To be especially emphasized:

1. Semi-sitting position.

2. Effacement of rear shoulder.

3. Inside position of front elbow.

4. Slight forward “cock” of rear knee.

The Advance.

The Retreat.

The Lunge.

To be especially emphasized:

1. The single time, “explosive” character.

2. Horizontal position of front thigh and vertical position of front leg.

3. Extended position of front and rear arms and rear leg.

4. Very slight forward inclination of trunk.

The points to be emphasized in this lesson will be found illustrated by Figures 1, 2, 4 and 18 (on pages 3 and 18).

[Pg 73]

Exercises. Class in line, two feet distance between individuals. Describe “Position of guard.” At command “On guard,” (1) right handers face half to left, feet at right angles, toe of front foot pointing directly to original front; (2) arms are raised to position of guard and knees simultaneously bent to semi-sitting position; (3) front foot is advanced twice its length. Left handers face half to the right, otherwise following same directions. At this point, individual criticism of position should be made. At first, position of guard should not be maintained for more than two minutes. At the end of this time, command “To the rear—Close,” whereupon individuals carry front heel back to rear, straighten knees and drop arms simultaneously and half-face back to original position. Allow class to stand at ease while explaining that these short periods are for the gradual hardening of untrained muscles to somewhat constrained positions. During this period, the more obvious errors of position may be criticized. After a short rest, have the class resume the position of guard and proceed with individual criticism for the two-minute period and during the succeeding rest. The first third of the instruction period can well be devoted to these successive periods of position and rest.

After the completion of this exercise, explain the execution of the advance and the retreat, emphasizing the speed with which these exercises must be performed. Form the habit from the very beginning of speed and snap in all footwork. Then continue the periods of two minutes of work and of rest, insisting upon the maintenance of the semi-sitting position throughout these short periods and continually criticizing the general position as well as the performance of the actual exercise under consideration. As this double criticism is being maintained, another third of the period can well be devoted to these exercises.

[Pg 74]

The final instruction in the first period is devoted to the execution of the lunge. Explain this execution with great care. Emphasize the “explosive” character of the movement. Warn against rising up in the air with the kick and a gradual settling-to position at the end. Warn against the turning forward of the rear shoulder from its position of effacement and against the excessive leaning forward of the trunk. After this explanation, proceed with the actual exercise. Do not keep the class in the extended position while making individual criticisms. This is a hard position for the beginner. Intersperse the lunges with an occasional advance or retreat to emphasize the need for maintaining the semi-sitting position. Continue to criticize all elements of the various positions as well as the actual execution of the lunge. Make the rest periods a little longer for this exercise and do most of the individual criticisms during the rest periods. The successive commands are “Lunge” and “On guard.”

At the end of the period, explain to the class that these exercises, if properly performed, will result in considerable crippling of the thigh muscles.

LESSON II

This lesson will be with sword and glove. The mask and jacket may be omitted, as there will be no opposed exercises. After the beginning of opposed exercises with the sword, the class should never be allowed to assemble without masks and properly constructed jackets.

The Description of the Sword.

The Grasp of the Sword.

To be especially emphasized:

Difference between grasp of guard and grasp of attack.

Coming on guard with the sword.

[Pg 75]

Do not teach the salutes at this time. Practise the various movements included in the assumption of the guard with the sword. It is well at this time to teach a single position of guard. The position of quarte is recommended.

The Thrust. Describe the execution of the thrust, emphasizing the change from the grip of guard to the grip of attack during the execution. Emphasize the fact that it definitely precedes the lunge.

From this point, proceed with the exercises very much as in the first lesson, practising the advance, retreat and lunge with the sword. Divide the execution of the lunge into two movements, commanding (1) Thrust; (2) Lunge. The alternating periods of two minutes of exercise and two minutes of rest should be persisted in during this lesson. After each thrust emphasize and check the change of grip from guard to attack. Occasionally, after the command “Thrust,” follow with the command “On guard,” to check not only the correct resumption of the position of the guard of quarte, but also the correct resumption of the grip of guard. It is well to remember that each lesson is the occasion for insisting upon the fundamental positions of the legs, the rear shoulder and the front elbow, as well as any later movements that may be taught. It is also well to remember that this exercise of the thrust is the first occasion to teach any fingerplay, which is going to be of great importance.

LESSON III

Preliminary unopposed exercise. It is recommended that a short period at the opening of each instruction period be devoted to practice in the positions and movements of the first two lessons. These lessons contain important fundamental instruction that is often neglected and their content [Pg 76]may well be emphasized for a short period at each session.

Evolution of the Guards.

To be especially emphasized:

(1) The high and low lines.

(2) The constant level of the hand for both lines.

(3) Point at eye level for high line and knee level for low line.

(4) Lateral limits for hand in inside and outside guards.

Difference between guards and parries.

Simple high line parries—quarte and sixte.

Distance.

The engagement.

The simple attacks—high line

(1) The straight lunge in engagements of quarte and of sixte.

(2) The disengage and lunge from engagements of quarte and of sixte.

To be especially emphasized:

(1) Change to grip of attack.

(2) Absence of deliberate lateral movement of point.

(3) The cut-over and lunge from engagements of quarte and of sixte.

To be especially emphasized:

(1) Movement with fingers alone.

(2) Thumb turned slightly up.

This is the first occasion of opposed practice. Let class count twos and have numbers two step forward three steps and turn about. Let them alternate the exercises, first with the parry succeeding and then the attack. Limit exercise periods.

[Pg 77]

LESSON IV

Preliminary unopposed exercise.

The Feint—Definition.

The Compound Attacks.

(1) The One-Two.

To be especially emphasized:

The down and up movement of second disengage.

Description of the counter parries.

The counter of quarte and the counter of sixte.

The Compound Attacks.

(2) The Double.

To be especially emphasized:

The absence of any circular movement of the point. This lesson is the opportunity to lay once and for all the ghost of the “circular” attack and the “circular” parry. Some members of the class may have had some previous instruction and some may have done a little reading on the subject. These are going to have to be convinced first and reeducated afterwards. Few things are more difficult. But, if the beginners can master the earlier positions and the simple movements of these fundamental attacks and parries, they will have made a real start toward correct fencing. There will be very little difficulty in building the later and more complicated manoeuvers into their game. On the other hand, bad habits learned at this time may never be eradicated. Any time spent in mastering the material in these first four lessons will more than repay both instructor and class.

LESSON V

Preliminary unopposed exercise.

Short review exercise of the parries of quarte and sixte [Pg 78]and their counters and of the One-Two and Double from these lines.

The simple low line parries—septime and octave.

The deceive of the simple low line parries, disengage over the sword into octave and septime.

The compound deceive of the simple low line parries—One-Two over the sword.

The counters of septime and of octave.

The deceive of the low line counters by doubles of septime and octave.

This lesson is a simple progression from Lesson IV. The same alternation of attack and defence by fencing partners may be practised, with first the attack, and then the defence succeeding. The leg muscles should be getting a little toughened by now, so that the exercise periods may be extended to five minutes while the rest periods are held at two minutes.

LESSON VI

Preliminary unopposed exercise.

This lesson should be devoted to a continuation and extension of the exercises in the parries of quarte, sixte, septime, and octave, their counters and the necessary deceives. The simple parries may be extended to two successful parries, which require a One-Two-Three for their deceive. Two counter parries may be taken, requiring two doubles for their deceive. One counter parry and a simple parry may be taken, requiring a double and disengage to deceive. These more complicated parries and attacks are excellent training for the hand and some of them are very practical for competition work. A double and disengage or two doubles will be frequently used, the one-two-three less frequently but occasionally. This will also be an opportunity [Pg 79]to use the cut-over as the second movement of an attack, when the temptation to bend the arm is much greater. Some experience with the cut-over is valuable for both attack and defence.

LESSON VII

Preliminary unopposed exercises.

Attacks with change of line.

This lesson should be devoted to further practice with the attacks and parries used in Lessons V and VI and should add to them certain attacks where the final movement shifts from high line to low, or from low line to high. For example, a disengage may be made from quarte into sixte; as the parry of sixte replies, a second disengage may be made into septime. A similar movement may be practised from sixte to quarte to octave. Similarly a disengage may be made from quarte to octave and on the parry of octave a second may return to quarte. Or a disengage may be made from sixte into quarte and on the counter of sixte a double may be made into septime.

All of these changes from one parry to another and from one line to another should be accompanied by a constant insistence upon the sword hand clinging to the horizontal line slightly below breast level, upon the point being at eye level in the high line and knee level in the low line parries and upon the parry never carrying the attacking sword unnecessarily wide of the target.

LESSON VIII

Preliminary unopposed exercises.

The Ripostes. By this time, the class is presumed to have a reasonable knowledge of the usual attacks and parries. [Pg 80]However, up to this time, each exercise has had to stop with the successful attack or with the successful parry. It is now time to take up the ripostes after the successful parry. First practise the straight riposte following the simple parries and the counter parries. Do this in both high and low lines. See whether the parries stop sharply in proper position, with the point ready to follow through immediately. There is a very strong tendency to carry the point out too wide in the counter parries and the same may be true of the simple parries if the elbow is not carried well inside the body line. Watch this and emphasize it.

LESSON IX

Preliminary unopposed exercise.

Period of exercise in straight ripostes.

This period should be devoted to a continuation of the instruction in the ripostes, proceeding to the riposte with disengage, riposte with one-two, riposte with double, and riposte with cut-over. Of course, the riposte with cut-over can be practised only against high line parries.

The value of the parry and riposte should be explained to the class. The fact that its proper use may be a decisive factor in any match should be emphasized. The fact should be explained that its mastery may be the basis in more advanced work, through the concealed attack of the counter-riposte, of penetrating what seems an impregnable defence. Controlled parries and accurate ripostes may more than counter-balance some weakness in the offensive.

LESSON X

Preliminary unopposed exercise.

Attacks advancing.

[Pg 81]

In the section on theory, the use of attacks on the advance has been extensively discussed. This lesson should be employed for their explanation to the class. In class instruction, only the attack with “gain” should be employed with a simple attack. The advance, the gain advance, and the double advance should be used with compound attacks and care should be taken to try to synchronize them with the successive movements of the attack. In the class instruction, some of the attacks should be made against a sway, some against a single retreat, and some against a multiple retreat. This exercise will be valuable for the fencing partner, as it will train him in executing the various actions without deranging the accuracy of his own defence.

LESSON XI

Preliminary unopposed exercise.

Concealed Attacks—Counter Ripostes.

These exercises should start with the simpler attacks and counter-parries. The effective execution and control of the two-thirds lunge after considerable practice with the full lunge is a distinct problem in itself.

It is suggested that the lesson should open with the lunge, parry and remise, starting with the straight lunge, simple parry, and remise from each of the high line guards of quarte and sixte. After this procedure has been mastered, the remise against the counter parries may be practised, to be followed by the low line simple parries and the low line counters. The remise is practised because it is the natural predecessor to the counter-ripostes. Its use and abuse should be most carefully explained, or we may develop a sewing machine instead of a swordsman. It is recommended that no effort be made to include the redoublement d’attaque in this basic instruction.

[Pg 82]

After the remise, the counter riposte may be developed, first against simple parry and riposte with simple parry and riposte; then against compound riposte; and finally against counter and compound parries. As the concealed attacks are such a very important aid in penetrating exceptionally strong defences, it is felt that some additional time and practice could be advantageously given to them.

LESSON XII

Preliminary unopposed exercise.

Review of counter-ripostes.

Counter-Attacks.

1. The stop thrust.

Practice this movement first against an opponent using an “elbow” cut-over and then against an opponent who makes the second feint wide of the target.

2. The time thrust.

Practice against disengage, one-two, double, double and disengage, and two doubles.

LESSON XIII

Preliminary unopposed exercise.

Attacks on the sword.

Suggested attacks.

The press, the glide, and the light beat.

Real attacks.

The heavy beat, the force, the cross, the bind, and the envelopment.

The use of the fingers in all of these exercises and the greater accuracy from positions of supination should be emphasized. The proper execution of bind and envelopment will be found much more difficult than the simpler attacks.

[Pg 83]

LESSON XIV

Preliminary unopposed exercise.

Defence against attacks on the sword.

LESSON XV

The Courtesies—Salute to jury and opponent.

Formal exercises.

It may be that the preceding outline of fifteen instruction periods may be considered as more noticeable for what is omitted than for what is included. Immediately, it becomes evident that no instruction in the parries of prime, seconde, tierce, and quinte has been included. It is admitted that, except for the parry of prime, this is a matter of personal preference. Prime is omitted because of the difficulty attending its mastery and the very awkward position in which it leaves the hand for either riposte or further defence. Tierce, and quinte in the high line, and seconde in the low line are omitted because the parries with the hand in pronation are somewhat more difficult to perform with accuracy, to control as to extent and to follow with a riposte against a right-handed fencer. The enumeration of the omissions with reasons for the choice might be continued but the basic fact remains that no man ever mastered fencing in fifteen lessons. The old prescribed period of instruction by the French master of the classical school was a minimum of three years. It still takes three years to make a good college fencer. A conscientious adherence to and practice of the exercises outlined in these lessons will, however, give the beginner a sound foundation upon which to build, bring him to the point where he may appreciate the beauties and intricacies of the game, qualify him to pass this knowledge on to other beginners and, above all and [Pg 84]before all, will save him from the early formation of those bad or slovenly habits of performance that have ruined the future of more fencers than any other one factor.

From time to time, as opportunity offers, the instructor may refer to some of the omitted sections and emphasize the fact that the class instruction is after all only basic. He may encourage the members of the class to study the other parries. He may mention their advantages and disadvantages in special combinations and under specified conditions. He should continuously impress upon the class the limitations as well as the advantages of such a brief course.

As stated on the title page, the purpose of this book is to present sword play, as based upon the French school of the foil. With this purpose clearly before us, it will be appreciated that any comments on the duelling sword must be incidental as well as brief.

In duelling sword play, the weapon, the rules, and the target present certain differences from the foil that exercise a continuous influence on the play of the weapon.

The sword blade is of the same length as that of the foil but is approximately triangular in cross section, with grooves on each face, and is both heavier and stiffer than the foil blade. The guard is always of the bell type, being both wider and deeper than that on the foil, and is planned to actually cover the hand. The orifice for the passage of the blade is frequently placed in a somewhat eccentric position. The grip is very similar to that of the foil as is the pommel, except that the latter is somewhat heavier to balance the heavier blade. As an aid to the judging of touches, a small, sharp, three-pointed button, called a point d’arrêt, is ordinarily fastened to the point of the sword with waxed thread. The points catch in the material of the adversary’s clothing, emphasizing the touch. A drop of some easily removed dye is frequently placed between the points as a further aid. In important competitions, an electric recording device may be used. The rules are chiefly concerned with the limitation of the field of operations, [Pg 86]the delimitation of the target, the prevention of dangerously rough play and the doing away with rules. The target includes the entire person of the fencer, a touch on any part of the head, trunk, or extremities being fair, so long as it is made with the point of the weapon.

There are practically no conventions. The man attacked does not need to parry if he prefers not. There is no conventional right of way. There is no requirement of an extended arm. This sounds extremely simple, but is not.

The bout is usually for three touches. Practically the only governing element in connection with these touches is the question of time. The touch that arrives appreciably ahead of the other scores. This emphasizes play for the nearer parts of the target—principally the hand and arm, although some play is directed at the front foot and leg. This play for “les avancés” generally results in the play being out of engagement and out of distance. The lack of any conventional right of way and the prime importance of priority makes attacks on the sword, particularly the controlling, or locking, or binding attacks highly favored. If you can seize control of your opponent’s sword and maintain it until your point has quite, or almost, arrived, your danger from a foil “tension” which becomes a duelling sword “stop thrust” is minimized.

The same group of parries that serves in the foil persists in the épée, but there are qualifying conditions. The parries to the inside (prime, quarte, quinte, and septime) carry the attacking point across the target, even bringing the rear hand and the rear leg into the field of attack, and also uncover the sword arm. Therefore, they are much more dangerous parries for any but exceptional use. “Rolling” parries from high to low line (sixte to seconde) and from low to high line (seconde to sixte) are very inclusive and very powerful. The counter parries to the outside, including [Pg 87]these “rolling” parries as a variable, make a very successful defence.

The custom of fencing both out of distance and out of engagement makes the duelling sword even more a war of rapid movement than the foil. There is constant “edging” in, interspersed with short, quick advances and jump advances. The half, or two-thirds, lunge is common, the full lunge rare. The latter brings hand, arm, head, and trunk all within easy hitting distance.

Evasions of attacks on the sword must be executed with small movements at the point extremely close to the attacking blade, with a two-fold purpose. In the first place, a wide evasion will open the defending arm to the attacking point. Secondly, the successful evasion should be the precursor of a stop thrust and this should be directed at the hand, or arm. Where the attack on the sword has been successful so far as establishing contact and control of blades is concerned, the various methods of defence described in the foil section carry special dangers which must be anticipated and guarded against. A releasing parry exposes the outer or inner side of the forearm, depending upon whether it has originated from the outside or inside guard. The slip parry exposes one or the other side of the forearm in its yielding movement around the successive quadrants of the circle—always with uncertainty as to when the attacking sword is going to release its control and try for a touch. The very short distance from attacking point to defending forearm makes this danger somewhat more acute than when the body is the target. This brings us to the decision that all first parries against attacks on the sword should be accompanied by a retreat. This does not mean all parries. If the attacker is convinced by the retreat accompanying the first parry that he is pursuing a retreating, or shaken antagonist, it is quite possible that the second parry should [Pg 88]be made while standing firm, or even that it should be accompanied by an advance. Either one gives the opportunity to break the rhythm of the attack and either one may completely destroy the attacker’s conception of distance. As always, the prevention of an accurate analysis or forecast of your reaction is vital.

There are certain other basic facts that it is well to remember. If your sword is in prolongation of your forearm and your point is directed towards the hand or guard of your opponent and your guard is in the same horizontal plane with his, the opening to attack showing on your opponent’s arm also appears on yours. Conversely, if he is covered, you are covered. Therefore, one of the most desirable standard positions of guard with the épée would be an adaptation of the foil guards of sixte, tierce, or seconde—with blade in direct prolongation of the forearm, point at approximately hand level, and forearm concealed by guard of sword. Of course, if the position of seconde is chosen, the point would be below the level of the hand. It follows that successful parries from these positions will require a raising or lowering, as well as lateral deviation of the point, so that the defendant blade will cross instead of remain parallel to the line of attack. Also, if he leaves his position to attack your arm, he offers an opening on the same or opposite side of his hand or arm to the one that he is attacking on yours. In continuation of the same reasoning, as you take the point-to-point, guard-to-guard position, you inevitably expose certain areas to attack. This is not necessarily undesirable, so long as you remember the fact, know just what the exposed area is and have decided just what you are going to do in case of attack on that area. It is even sometimes desirable to leave a definite opening as an invitation to attack, provided that you have an adequate answer ready. For instance, your position of guard [Pg 89]may deliberately expose the tip of your elbow to attack from below. The assumption is that, when your adversary attacks this elbow, you will counter-attack at his hand or wrist. The extension of your arm in the counter-attack removes your elbow further from his point, places it in an unexpected position, and gives you a target that is the full length of the forearm closer to your point than his target to his point. Attacks on the front leg or foot are easily evaded when the balance is equally distributed on both feet. The simple withdrawal of the foot is sufficient. But the mask, hand, or arm of the attacker may be very vulnerable to counter-attack. Never parry an attack on the front foot or leg—but, likewise, never permit a feint at the front foot or leg to cause such a withdrawal of the foot and simultaneous leaning forward of the head and body and extension of the arm that a successful attack on the sword becomes too easy.

It is obvious that there is one detail in which preliminary foil training will be of little benefit to the duelling sword fencer. This is in the quick recognition of a sudden, small target and the accurate “throwing” of a point to that target. Concentrated practice in this one pursuit is a very necessary preliminary to serious work with this weapon. An improvised target game may be very helpful in this connection, as well as of interest to a small group of fencers. A small rubber ball, not over one inch in diameter, is threaded on a string and suspended from the ceiling at the approximate height of the hand of a fencer in the position of guard. The various members of the practising group then arrange themselves in a circle about the ball at a distance of about four inches less than their respective thrusting ranges. The ball is then started swinging and the members of the squad are allowed one thrust each, the only rules being that the thrusts shall be taken only one at [Pg 90]a time, that the opportunity to thrust shall travel in regular rotation around the group, and that no individual shall allow the ball to come to a dead rest before taking his thrust. Ordinarily, there is no wish to keep accurate scores, but this may be done if it seems to add to the interest. It is well to insist that the various men assume the actual position of guard during the exercise. If the exercise appears to become more easy, the fencers may be required to take position out of distance and practise simple advance or jump advance before the thrust.

Equipment.

The sword has already been described. A martingale is required.

The uniform is similar to that for foil.

The shoes are similar to those for foil, but must be white.

The mask is similar to that for foil, but the trim must be white.

The glove is of special type. It is not padded, has soft leather palm while back of fingers and hand and entire gauntlet are of strong canvas. This should be little larger than street glove and glove and gauntlet should fit snugly.

The comments on the saber will be equally as brief as those upon the duelling sword. In the first place, there is no recognized play of the saber that is based upon the French school of the foil. Thirty-five, or forty, years ago, there was a definite French school of the saber. The Italian saber play was so superior to that of the French school that the latter was gradually abandoned as a distinct entity. Today, it is probable that the most finished fencers with the saber belong to the Hungarian school which is an adaptation and perfection of the Italian school.

The saber is a weapon to itself and its play is a school to itself. The modern fencing saber is light, weighing only an ounce or two more than the foil. The blade is about one inch shorter than those of foil and duelling sword. It is assumed to have a point, a sharp edge extending the full length of the front edge of the blade and a sharp false edge, extending for the distal third of the back of the blade. Fair touches may be made with any of these portions of the blade. The target includes head, arms, and the trunk down to the break of the hips in the position of guard.

Probably the most favored position of guard with the saber corresponds to the French foil guard of tierce. The parries across the body tend to assume the characteristics of the “rolling” guards mentioned under foil play. Thus the four parries for the arms and trunk would be very similar to the foil parries of tierce, quarte, septime, and [Pg 92]seconde. The parry of prime, or an alternating prime-seconde is also employed, although it exposes the arm. The parries against cuts at the sides of the head may be made by simply raising the parries of the corresponding high lines of the body. A downward cut at the head may be met by a blade sloping slightly upward and pointing from right to left, or left to right. As attacks with both point and edges are permissible and the hand and forearm are included in the target, precautions similar to those observed in the duelling sword are necessary, with certain obvious additions. As cuts with the edge are good, the fact that the point has been successfully deviated is not a final and sufficient defence. What is a feint of a point attack may end as an attack with the edge at some other portion of the target. It may even end with a withdrawing cut with the false edge during the return to the position of guard.

As in the duelling sword, with the inclusion of the hand and arm in the valid target, it is customary to fence out of engagement and out of distance. This makes the game of the saber one of extremely active and accurate foot-work.

Also, there is a very marked difference in the theory of the handling of the sword from that which has been prescribed for foil play under the French school. There is a definite, intended, prescribed departure from finger- or wrist-play. Here, the emphasis is placed upon the elbow. The sword is carried in direct prolongation of the sword arm and parries, feints, attacks, and counter-attacks are executed from the elbow.

Anyone who is seriously following the foil may obtain considerable pleasure from saber play by treating it largely as has been advised for the duelling sword. The point may be used to great advantage. The false edge may be used to occasional advantage, following a feinted point attack. Beyond this the foil or duelling sword fencer had better not [Pg 93]venture. If he wishes to make a serious study of the saber, which it thoroughly well deserves, let him seek a competent master of the Italian or Hungarian school, or, if such is not available, obtain a book from the pen of such a master.

To somewhat amplify the preceding remarks, in adapting our basic knowledge of French foil and duelling sword play to the saber, we assume the regular position of guard so far as body and legs are concerned. The rear arm, instead of being carried high as in foil play, is carried behind the back—the back of the hand resting in the small of the back, with the fingers inside of and grasping the belt. The sword arm and sword are carried in the guard of tierce. However, in this position of guard, the blade is carried in a practically horizontal position instead of carrying the point at the level of the eye. Although fencing out of engagement, the point is directed towards the opponent’s sword hand. This position of guard accomplishes three things: first, the straight line formed by forearm and sword places the hand and forearm directly behind the protection of the guard of the sword; second, the horizontal position of the sword, with point relatively low, renders the blade less accessible to an attack on the sword; and, third, the constantly threatening point must be displaced or evaded before the opponent can safely launch any attack.

The sword arm is maintained in a position two-thirds extended with hand at approximately the same level as in foil work. Although this low position of the hand does not adequately cover the head, or even the upper portion of the trunk, it places the hand and forearm under the cover of the bell and removes the blade from ready accessibility to attack. Against point attacks, the parries are executed much as in foil play—except that the simple parries with the true edge are favored—necessitating a rolling parry to meet a change of line. Thus the normal high line parries [Pg 94]are quarte and tierce, the low line septime and seconde. When the attack is at the head, high quarte and high tierce are used—thus giving really a high, a mid, and a low line. Also, as previously mentioned, the parries are controlled more from shoulder or elbow and little from the fingers or from the wrist.

Against cuts, there is some further departure from the technique of foil parries. In the latter, both hand and point stop just beyond the line of the body, as the deviation of the attacking point requires little force if faible is met with forte. However, with the saber, a cut may well force through to the target if it is met by simple opposition. Therefore, the point of the parrying sword is carried diagonally beyond the direct zone of the target so as to cause the attacking blade to glide down the parrying blade to the guard.

As the fencing is out of engagement, practically all attacks must be initiated with a closing of distance. As in foil play, this closing of distance may be accompanied by the first feint of a compound attack or by an attack on the sword. At all times, it must be remembered that the sword hand and arm are a part of the target and that they must not be uncovered during the preliminary movements of the attack.

A very good practice for both attacker and defender is the making of compound attacks and the parries against them in three lines—accompanying the first two feints by advances and the third cut by a lunge. Such an attack would be: (1) feint seconde cut, with advance; (2) feint quarte cut, with advance; and (3) high tierce cut, with lunge. The first of these feints would bring the attacker within distance; the second would be met by a retreat of the defender; and the third would touch the mark—or give the defender the opportunity to parry and riposte—according [Pg 95]to previous agreement. These exercises could be alternated between fencers—first one and then the other attacking—and first the attacker touching and then the defendant making a successful parry and riposte. The same variation should be made in the origin and direction of the attacks, changing the first feint from one side to the other and from the low line to the high line. This is excellent practice for both foot and hand.

The attacker should never forget that certain feints and attacks automatically carry exposure of certain portions of the target to stop cuts or thrusts. When made in the low line, the upper side of the arm is exposed and when to the inside or the outside, the inside or the outside of the arm is exposed. While the same general rules as to right of way pertain to saber as to foil play, the fact that cuts with the saber are nearly always preceded by some withdrawal of the sword makes many more stop cuts valid. The tendency of directors is to grant the right of way to a simple attack but to judge between successful compound attacks and stop cuts on the basis of time. This is particularly true where the defender makes a successful stop cut on the first feint of a compound attack en marchant and succeeds in executing a retreat before the attacker overtakes him and touches with the final movement of his compound attack.

It is well to remember that many saber fencers have never been trained in the school of the foil and have sadly neglected practice in point work. Against such, a straight lunge, a disengage, or a one-two and lunge may prove very efficacious.

The saber riposte is frequently less complicated than with the foil. The successful parry of a cut leaves the defender’s sword between that of the attacker and the target. A straight riposte may frequently be achieved by simply turning the hand over and making a gliding cut at the [Pg 96]exposed area. Other ripostes follow the general rules laid down for foil and épée.

The hand and arm are frequently vulnerable to either direct attack or to stop cut or thrust against fencers who indulge excessively in compound attacks or who have peculiarities of execution.

With the saber as with the épée, the occasional individual who fences with fully extended arm and sword is particularly susceptible to attacks on the sword. But, it must not be forgotten that he has schooled himself against these attacks and that the attacker must be versatile in their use and not over-confident of success. Probably the most commonly used attack on the sword is the bind (liement). However, in both saber and épée, the croisé may be both safer and more efficacious. The inclusion of the mask in the target of these weapons makes it particularly difficult to carry off the croisé—and, if it is carried off, it must be at the expense of a complete exposure of the flank.

The rule regarding the right of way of the riposte following a successful parry is the same for saber as for foil. However, the much greater frequency of attacks on the sword with the saber makes it very important for the defender to be sure that he is parrying a frank attack or a feint, rather than an attack on the sword. Otherwise, he may be surprised to find that what he considered a good riposte is being judged a stop cut and what he considers his opponent’s remise, or redoublement, is being declared a good touch on the attack, following an attack on the sword. Such decisions are extremely difficult and, adopting baseball terminology, may be called a “director’s choice.” Frequently, he can reach a decision only through a knowledge of the habitual play of the individual fencers.

For the guard and type of play here advocated, the saber guard, which is designated “Olympic,” should be [Pg 97]employed, as the Hungarian guard leaves the top of arm exposed in the low position.

Costume and equipment.

With the exception of the weapon, there is no fundamental difference between the equipment for saber and for foil. The mask may be of somewhat heavier wire and somewhat more heavily padded. Some fencers prefer light padding in the jacket. Some like a leather or padded cap for the elbow of the sword arm. Some like a glove with some padding in the gauntlet. All of these differences are matters of personal preference—are permissible but not mandatory.

• Advance, 2
• Attack, 22
• compound, 25
• concealed, 45
• false, 44
• frank, 22
• simple, 22
• Attack, advancing or en marchant, 40
• Attack and Defence, relation of, 27
• Attack from position or de pied ferme, 40
• Attack on Execution, 30
• Attack on Preparation, 30
• Attacks on Sword, 32
• suggestive or suggested, 33
• real, 33
• Balestra; see Jump Advance
• Beat, light and heavy, 33, 36
• Bind, 34, 35, 36
• Body Evasion, 31
• Bout, 53
• Breaking the Line, 47
• Cavé (cavation), 50
• Compound Attacks, 25
• Coulé, 33
• Counter Attack, 15, 29
• Counter Parry, 19
• Coupé, 23
• Coup d’Arret; see Stop Thrust
• Coup de Temps; see Time Thrust
• Croisé (cross), 34, 36
• Cut-over; see Coupé
• Deceive; see Evasion of Parry
• Defense of Desperation, 37
• Derober; see Evasion of Attack
• Disengage, 23
• Doigté, 9, 17, 21, 23, 24, 26, 37
• Double, 27
• Engagement, 19
• Envelopée, septime and octave, 48, 65
• Envelopment, 34
• Épée, 87
• Evasion of Parry, 25
• Evasion of Attack, 37
• also see Body Evasion
• Feint, 4, 24
• Feint, effective, 25
• Feint, legal, 4, 25
• Finger Work; see Doigté
• Fleche; see Passado
• Froisé, 33, 36
• Gain (gagnant), 41
• Gauchers; see Left Handed Fencers
• Glide; see Coulé
• Grasp (Grip or Hold) of Sword, 9
• Guard, assumption of, 54
• Guard, stance, 1
• Guard, distinguished from parry, 17
• Guards with sword, 15, 16, 17
• Half Circle, 49
• Hand, grip, 9
• position in guards, 11
• High Line, 17
• see also Lines of Defense or Attack
• High Octave, 51
• High Prime, 51
• High Septime, 49
• Inside Line; see Lines of Defense or Attack
• Invitation, 37
• Irregular Position, 39
• Italian School, 63
• Jump Advance, 4
• Left Handed Fencer, 19, 61
• Les Avancés, 86
• Liement; see Bind
• [Pg 100]Lines of Defense or Attack, 11, 12
• Low Line, 17
• see also Lines of Defense or Attack
• Lunge, 5
• disengage and-, 23
• half and two thirds, 87
• straight, 24
• Octave, 17
• One-Two, 25
• Opposition in Attacks, 43
• Opposition; see Parry, slipping and yielding
• Outside Line; see Lines of Defense or Attack
• Parry, in reference to contact with sword, 8
• counter, 19
• distinguished from guard, 17
• releasing, 38
• rolling, 16, 17, 86
• yielding, 38, 39
• Passado, 43
• Phrase d’Armes, 29
• Point d’Arret, 85
• Press, 33, 36
• Pronation of Hand, 11
• Quarte, 16
• Quinte, 16
• Redoublement d’Attaque, 29
• Remise, 28
• Reprise d’Attaque, 29
• Retreat, 2, 37, 42, 87
• Right of Way, 4, 13, 15, 24, 27
• Riposte, 28
• Saber, 91
• Salute, 53, 54
• Seconde, 16
• Septime, 17
• Simple Parry, 17
• Sixte, 16
• Slipping Parry; see Parry, releasing and yielding
• Stop Thrust, 30
• distinguished from Tension
• Supination of Hand, 11
• Sword, 7
• Target, in foil, 11
• Tension, 30
• Threat; see Feint, effective
• Thrust, 4
• Tierce, 16
• Time Thrust, 30
• Tour de l’Épée, 65