Two weeks ago in class, I taught a lesson on actions on the blade – these are attacks which make contact with the blade to remove it from its position in line either prior to, or during the attack. For instance, a glide begins with domination of the blade and progressively forces it further out of line during the attack, while a beat strikes the opponent’s blade to the side so that it is momentarily out of control (Capoferro describes both kind of actions as dominating the opponent’s blade). Last week’s group lesson was an exploration of some of the kinds of beats that can be used in rapier. We practiced: simple beats, false-edge beats, change beats, circular beats, and grazing beats.
Last week in class, I gave an individual lesson based on the cutover (coupé). A cutover is a disengagement over the opponent’s blade, where you lift your blade and draw it back just enough to clear the opponent’s blade before extending to thrust. Done correctly, the entire action occurs in a single, continuous movement. Cutovers are relatively rare in rapier fencing (though Giganti does have a few examples), both, because the movement is much larger than a normal disengagement, as well as that drawing the blade backwards can be a good tempo for an opponent to attack. Nevertheless, they can be quite useful.
The other reason that I wanted to focus on cutovers in this lesson was because Bondi di Mazo’s “Thrust below” reminded me a lot of the cutover to the low line that I was taught in foil. The cutover to the low line is one of the larger actions in Italian foil and is executed against an engagement in fourth. The weapon is drawn back, and in a circular movement, not unlike an ascending circular cut, the blade is brought back in line for a hit to the opponent’s flank below the arm. di Mazo describes an action where you feint an imbrocatta to your opponent’s face, and as he lifts his guard to pary, you make a thrust in second via a downward cutting angle, ending with your hand in first. Looking back over this, there may be less of a connection than I’d thought – it may be a stretch to interpret the thrust as an action where you pull your weapon back for a wide circular movement, though it does end with a thrust very similar to what is shown in the text. Anyway, here’s the lesson that I taught:
Among George Silver’s many gripes about the Italian fencing masters of his day was that “Wardes and Gripes, they have none”. Even if the masters did teach grappling, Silver argues, the weapon would be wholly unsuitable for them, “a childish toy wherwith a man can do nothing but thrust, nor that neither, by reason of the length” (Silver, 32). After all, what could one possibly be expected to do with a 40+ inch rapier when one closes? Silver’s condemnation displays more of a lack of imagination on his part than an innate flaw in the rapier, however. Disarms and hilt grappling were common in Destreza and are called movements of conclusion (Curtis). While earlier authors in the Italian tradition often included wrestling and grappling actions, they are relatively sparse in late sixteenth century Italian manuals. As this paper demonstrates, we should not assume that these actions were unused or forgotten, however.
The famous Paduan fencing master, Salavtor Fabris (1544-1618), acknowledges the usefulness of grappling, but he describes it as belonging more to the realm of wrestling than to fencing. He says that he prefers to focus on “the proper defenses, the attacks, and in the advantage of the sword” than in coming to grips (Leoni, 14). Fabris’s seeming dismissal of wrestling techniques is at odds with the actual emphasis of his book, however. For someone who claims to feel his book would have been complete without a discussion of grappling and disarms, Fabris spends a considerable amount of time on them, dedicating the final section of his book to the topic (Leoni, 263). Fabris’s interest in the topic is consistent with a long, though often overlooked, tradition of grappling in Italian rapier fencing.
Surprisingly, one of the best sources that we have for grappling in Italian rapier fencing is actually from a German master. Johann Georg Paschen (1628-1678) is connected to the Italian tradition through the teachings of a noble named Heinrich von und zum Felde. According to one of Paschen’s manuscripts, one of his friends was a student of zum Felde, who was himself a student of Fabris and other Italian masters. 1 Paschen incorporated zum Felde’s teachings into lessons he’d learned from his university for his book, Kurtze iedoch Deutliche Beschreibung handlend von Fechten auff den Stosz und Hieb (Short Though Clear Description Treatment of Fencing on the Thrust and Cut) published in 1661 in Sachsen. 2 Paschen’s book consists of a series of sixteen lessons. There are eight lessons on fencing with the thrust only and eight lessons on fencing with cuts. Each lesson contains fifteen to twenty actions, and most have a theme that builds on elements introduced in previous lessons.
In a previous article, I discussed how the first four lessons can be used to form the basis of an entire rapier curriculum and I explored their connection to the Italian tradition. This article will analyze Paschen’s fifth lesson, which focuses primarily on grappling. For our purposes, I define grappling as any fencing action that takes place at extremely close distance and uses the off hand to control an opponent’s blade or arm in order to gain an advantage. Paschen’s grappling typically terminates in a thrust, a pommel strike, or a disarm, and often uses a pull forwards to throw an opponent off balance. 3 In December 2015, Maestro Kevin Murakoshi and I filmed an interpretation of each of the actions taught in lesson five. This article will use images from our video to provide insight into the use of grappling in Italian rapier fencing.
I have divided the lesson into three parts. Actions 1-6 serve well as an introduction for a lesson with a few simple actions to begin with and then exercises that introduce some of the concepts that will be revisited later in the lesson. Actions 7-10 each follow a pattern where the student uses an attack to provoke a parry and set up a secondary action. Actions 11-19 focus on using parries to set up holds, disarms and pommel strikes.
The first six actions in lesson five can be viewed either as warm up exercises or introductions to some of the actions used later in the text.
The first action in the lesson is a simple attack similar to the ‘fourth revers’ (also referred to as a flanconnade) introduced in lesson one, but combined with a blade action that expels the opponent’s blade during the attack. Like the fourth revers, it starts with an engagement in fourth. As the arm is extended, the tip is directed to the flank below the opponent’s guard. As the image shows, the blade contact is not maintained during the action. Rather than maintaining opposition to the inside as in the fourth revers, the hand is moved to the inside during the extension, palm up so that the opponent’s weapon is “thrown” to the side.
The second action in the lesson is what is usually referred to as a passata sotto. It is a counterattack against an attack to the high line where the upper body is lowered out of the path of the incoming weapon. It is usually performed with a lunge. 4 The off hand is either placed on the ground, or held forwards near the chest. In modern fencing, this is usually taught with a backwards lunge.
In actions three and four, the weapon is held in both hands in order to make a beat against an opponent’s weapon. Placing the off hand on the blade is often referred to as half-swording, and while not particularly common in rapier, both Capoferro and Giganti include examples of its use in their texts. While earlier texts tend to recommend grasping the weapon after an opponent’s attack has been parried, Paschen’s usage is unique because he initiates the attack by grabbing his own weapon and making a beat with it. In a later lesson, he introduces a guard where the weapon is held in both hands – especially useful if you are tired.
These actions also introduce a pattern for finishing an attack that is used extensively in the rest of the lesson and through the rest of the book: once an opponent has been hit and your off hand has found the weapon, step back with your front foot and keep your point aimed at your opponent. Stepping back while holding the weapon has the added benefit of throwing your opponent off balance and onto your weapon, while maintaining a stable position.
Action five uses a hanging parry of second to defend against a thrust in third to the outside high line. This parry is typically used against attacks to the low line, and its use in this context is difficult to perform. The parry is returned to later in the lesson to set up several different holds or strikes. It may help to raise the hand above the shoulder to ensure the parry is successful. The image in the text appears to show a riposte to the outside highline by detachment, rather than a riposte by glide.
This action is less straightforward than the rest as it specifies making several beats in a row – we viewed this as a more of a training exercise than something that would be used in actual fencing. Classical Italian sabre uses exercises where a student makes a parry several times in a row, working from larger to smaller movements in order to help “fix” the position of the parry. We interpreted this as a similar “fixing” exercise where the student continuously makes a beat in fourth until the instructor steps back and triggers the lunge. The exercise helps the student to both practice the correct movement and placement of a beat as well as to respond with a lunge the instant the instructor pulls distance. A similar choice is used later in the lesson where the student must correctly choose whether to initiate a hold if the distance is close, or to riposte with a lunge if the instructor attempts to recover out of measure.
Actions seven through ten each follow a similar pattern. The student attacks with a thrust to the inside line, the instructor makes a beating parry of fourth, and the student continues with a new action. It is tempting to read these as either counter-parries or renewed attacks since they are used in opposition to a parry, but the timing and distance become too tight to reliably perform the actions safely. Another option is to view the initial movement as relatively tentative initial attack meant to draw an early parry that can be defeated by immediately moving to a new action before the opponent can riposte. This interpretation is also consistent with Paschen’s earlier advice: when you want to thrust at the adversary, this must be done with half force, and you must see to it that you direct your strong straight in front of you, and that you thrust in long at the adversary in his weak. But when the adversary parries, which happens without doubt, inasmuch as he is engaged unforeseen or against his will, then pay attention whether he parries high or low, to the inside or to the outside as you retreat, thus go with your blade on the adversary’s blade, which must always be done.” (Van Noort, 6) Instead of needing to defend against the instructor’s riposte, the timing of the actions anticipates the parry and prevents the riposte from happening.
Actions eight and nine also follow the same recovery action first described in lesson four where the opponent is pulled forwards onto the fencer’s point.
In his 1671 manuscript, Paschen defines a hold as a parry followed by a half pass. The last part of the lesson introduces six holds, three holds begin with a parry of fourth, two begin with a parry of hanging second, and one begins with a parry of third. While these are flashy techniques that may impress an observer, they are difficult to use against an experienced opponent. Paschen writes they are useful “against those who have not learned fencing, or who do long, slung thrusts. But against those who can do what they want with their blade, they are somewhat unsafe.” 7
It is important that the parry and half pass are timed so that the opponent’s weapon is controlled with the off hand before passing forward, otherwise a fencer risks running into the opponent’s point. The further away the opponent is after the parry, the more risky it is to try to make the hold. An opponent’s deep, committed attack can often expose them to a hold, or a parry with a step forward can be used to close the distance as well. Paschen recommends a parry with an advance in order to set up a hold, but notes that if they opponent feints, then “you will run into it splendidly.”
Paschen’s fifth lesson provides valuable insight into an often overlooked area of the German and Italian rapier traditions. Though these techniques were considered risky and suitable for use only against untrained fencers, the depth of technique is surprisingly well developed, with six different holds and a variety of methods for closing to grappling distance, suggesting that perhaps these techniques were as fun to practice in the seventeenth century as they are today.
Curtis, Mary, and Puck Curtis. “The Destreza Glossary.”Concluir/Conclusión. Ghost Sparrow Publications. Web. 8 Jan. 2016. http://destreza.us/glossary/terms/c/concluir.html.
Leoni, Tommaso. The Art of Duelling: Salvator Fabris’ Rapier Fencing Treatise of 1606. Highland Village: Chivalry Bookshelf, 2005.
Silver, George. Paradoxes of Defense. London, 1599. Accessed from http://www.umass.edu/renaissance/lord/pdfs/Silver_1599.pdf, 8 January 2016.
Van Noort, Renier. Private correspondence. 15 November 2015.
Van Noort, Renier. Fencing on the thrust and cut: A translation of Johann Georg Paschen’s “Short though clear description treating of fencing on the thrust and cut” (1661). Bruchius.com, 8 January 2016. http://www.bruchius.com/docs/Paschen%201661%20translation%20by%20RvN.pdf.
These are notes from a class that I taught a few years ago on how to go about reading source material and translating it to practical knowledge. Learning how to fence from a book is difficult. The class was meant to give an overview of the process of reconstructing a fencing system from a historical text.
The process is divided into four parts: learning the techniques, understanding theory, training the system, and refining your interpretations.
“As the explanation of the following illustration, you (D) gain the blade of your opponent (C) to the inside. He performs a cavazione to attack you with a thrust to the chest, and you strike him with a thrust to the left eye, either with no step or with an accrescimento (as shown). A prudent opponent would act as follows. He would feint the cavazione while keeping his body somewhat back. When you come forward for your attack, he would perform an outside parry (with the false or true edge), and give you a mandritto to your face or an imbrocatta to the chest. He would then recover in a low quarta.” (Trans, Tom Leoni)
Here are some of the techniques from this plate:
|Against an attack||Against a counterattack||Against a parry and riposte|
|Simple parry in third with the true edge||Thrust to the chest||Plate 7|
|Below the sword with a low pass||Plate 11|
|To the chest by detachment while grabbing the sword hand||Plate 14||Plate 14|
|With a pass while grasping the sword in both hands||Plate 12|
|Beating parry to the outside with the false edge (falso manco)||With a cut to the face||Plate 7|
|Circular parry in third||To the chest by detachment while grabbing the sword hand||Plate 13||Plate 17|
|Simple parry in fourth||Thrust to the chest in fourth||Plate 20|
|Thrust to the chest in second with a pass while grabbing the arm||Plate 20|
|Beating parry in fourth (mezzo mandritto)||thrust to the chest||Plate 10|
|riverso to the face||Plate 10|
This is the second part of my Paschen Rapier Seminar. Read more about the seminar and part one here.
This past weekend, I had the privilege of teaching a rapier seminar at Provost Ryan Mank’s school, Red Sun Classical Fencing in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Ryan’s school focuses on traditional Italian fencing, and each of his students begin with the foil. This meant that just about every student in the seminar had a solid foundation to work from, letting us focus on broad range of rapier techniques, especially those which emphasize the distinctive elements of the Rapier. I based the curriculum on Johann Georg Pascha’s 1661 rapier text. Pascha’s (also called Paschen) manual is divided into two parts, each consisting of number of lessons. The first part focuses on fencing with thrusts and the second part covers fencing with cuts. For the seminar, we worked on selections from the first eight lessons on fencing with the thrust. I tried to follow the text fairly closely throughout the seminar, mostly condensing the material to fit within the time period, or putting several techniques together to build a sequence.
We began Saturday morning by practicing a sequence which introduces all of the primary lines of attack in rapier. While Paschen uses opposition in either third, second, or first for attacks to the outside line, we used only opposition in second for this drill. Likewise, where Paschen uses first, second, or fourth hand positions for attacks under the blade, we used only second and fourth.
We practiced this sequence again on the second day, this time added an advance with each hit instead of a lunge except for the final riposte. This could also be done by having each hit be followed with a retreat.