Classic rapier play: Illustration of a 17th century duel. The swordsman on the right delivers a thrust while simultaneously deviating his adversary's blade away from his face with the guard of his own weapon.
Originally, the discipline known as "fencing" arose out of the necessity to protect one's self with a sword. In particular, the widespread practice of dueling with the rapier, dueling sword and saber gave rise to systematized methods of swordplay. Over the centuries these systems changed very little because swords remained essentially the same in design and function. All featured a sharp blade of steel used on the offense to either cut or pierce an adversary's body, and on the defense to deflect or deviate an adversary's incoming blade.
Classical Swordplay: The fencer on the left desperately parries the blade of his opponent who,
with outstretched sword arm, lunges deeply from a considerable distance.
Upon watching a fencing bout between classical fencers, the uninitiated typically assume that the object of fencing is to score points by hitting one's adversary with a thrust or a cut. It is a natural conclusion drawn from the observation that both fencers appear to be trying desperately to do exactly that. But looks can be deceiving. In actuality, what each fencer is attempting to do is conclude the encounter without being hit. In a manner of speaking the hit itself is incidental; its only purpose is to prevent one's adversary from successfully delivering a thrust or cut. The overriding principle of classical fencing is the same for fencers wielding blunt weapons in the fencing hall as it was for duelists fighting with "sharps" on the dueling ground — to conclude the encounter without being hit.
Having ventured too near his adversary, the fencer on the left is suddenly struck with a straight thrust. Note that like the examples above, this photo demonstrates an exchange ending with one fencer delivering a thrust as the other attempts to protect himself by parrying the incoming steel. This reciprocating trade of thrust and parry is characteristic of fencing in its classical form and reflects efforts on the part of both combatants to avoid being hit.
Unfortunately, most fencing one sees today is played by rules that favor athletic prowess at sprinting and gymnastics over skill with the blade. Known as "Olympic" or "sport" fencing, this discipline is driven by a completely different objective — to acrue points without regard for the opponent's blade. A vastly simplified version of classical fencing, the sport is so lacking in sophistication that it is rarely televised during the Olympic Games. Indeed, consideration has been given by the International Olympic Committee to eliminate this version of fencing from the Games.
Olympic Fencing: Taught by "athletics coaches" to hurl themselves at one other at break-neck speed, neither of these "épée athletes" is concerned in the least about being hit. Each simply hopes to win his point by closing a circuit with his electric épée a few miliseconds before being hit himself.
The "Flick": Although blades used in fencing are made supple for safety concerns, this airborne "foil athlete" hopes to take advantage of his weapon's flexibility for an altogether different purpose. Leaping high into the air, he snaps his foil like a buggy whip in an attempt to bend his blade over his opponent's shoulder and "flick" him on the back with the electric switch attached to the end of his blade. While athletic feats such as this are indeed impressive, they have nothing whatever to do with fencing as a discipline devoted to the use of arms.
Painfully Boring: Audiences expecting to see demonstrations of expert swordsmanship at sport fencing events are quickly disappointed by the mind-numbing spectacle of opponents recklessly charging toward one another over, and over . . . again . . . and again . . . and again. It should come as no surprise that "fencing" like this is poorly attended by spectators.
Pointless Fencing: Taking advantage of modern "interpretations" of fencing rules, two Olympic "foil athletes" avoid each other's parries by attacking with arms severely bent and their foil blades directed skyward. This all-too-common practice disregards the most logical and inviolable precept of swordsmanship (not to mention common sense): to attack with the swordarm fully extended, with the weapon directed AT the adversary.
Fencing or Flagellating? Note the anatomically inappropriate position of the right arm of the "épée athlete" who, colliding with her adversary, flogs her buttocks with the flat of her blade. Many sport fencers view action such as this with great enthusiasm and admiration. From the classical fencer's point of view this sort of thing is seen as undisciplined, out-of-control, savage, and potentially dangerous.
Over the centuries fencing has been viewed as an art, a science, a game, and a sport. While these points of view may be debated, one feature of serious fencing remains immutable and axiomatic. Fencing, serious fencing, is about swordplay. Whether it is simulated combat in the fencing hall or fighting in earnest on the dueling ground, serious fencing is about the use of deadly weapons. While central to fencing in its classical form, this axiom is entirely irrelevant to the practice of "Olympic," or "sport" fencing. Consequently, it should be understood that these two disciplines are vastly different. Sharing almost nothing in common, they are entirely different disciplines.
In defending "sport fencing," today's "fencing athletes" insist that athough they have not been trained in classical swordsmanship, they are nevertheless fully capable of fighting a duel. While no one debates this assertion, examples like this one justify doubts as to whether they would be able to survive one.
La Spada Nimica is a classical fencing school. Its instructor is a professionally trained
fully certified fencing master, and is a member of the Italian Fencing Masters Association.