What are the differences between the Radaellian treatises?

A uniquely fortunate benefit of studying Radaellian sabre lies in the amount of written material available to historians, the most significant of which being the treatises published by the students who attended Radaelli's fencing school from 1868 to the early 1880s. For the purposes of this article, in this category we can define eight bodies of work written by nine former students over the course of almost 50 years. The authors and their years of publication are:

• Settimo Del Frate, 1868 and 1876
• Antonio Tinti, c. 1880
• Giordano Rossi, 1885
• Ferdinando Masiello, 1887 (2nd edition in 1893, 3rd in 1902)
• Nicolò Bruno, 1891
• Luigi Barbasetti, 1899
• Salvatore Pecoraro & Carlo Pessina, 1910 (revised and republished in 1912)
• Poggio Vannucchi, 1915

On learning about the variety of reading material available, the question which commonly arises is: how do they differ, and what makes each of them special? This article aims to answer that question. To do this, each treatise will be dealt with individually (aside from Tinti's, for reasons that will be explained later) and I will explain the context under which it was published, provide a summary of the work's structure and technical content with regard to sabre fencing, and propose what each master's main focus was with their treatise. In order to find my answers here satisfactory, it is recommended that the reader has some degree of familiarity with at least one of the above treatises before continuing this article (translations for several are linked below and in the sidebar).

Throughout the article I will be referring to the aforementioned authors as 'the Radaellian authors'; this is not to say that they are the only people to have written about sabre fencing who would have considered themselves Radaellians, but the texts under examination here are all people who were either students of Radaelli or who attended his school before it closed in 1884. To include other authors aside from these 'first-generation' Radaellians would cause an excessive increase to the scope and length of this article. Similarly, although many of these authors also wrote about sword or foil fencing, the (significant) differences in how the Radaellians taught this weapon deserve their own treatment and will not be covered here.

Before delving into the nuances, it must first be made clear that it is hard to overstate how similar these treatises are in comparison to other works on sabre fencing published up to the late 19th century both in and outside of Italy. There is far more that the authors do agree on than what they do not; they are all Radaellians, after all. Here are the main technical aspects which the Radaellian authors all share:

1. The sabre is wielded primarily through the use of the elbow and forearm;
2. The sabre is gripped close to the hilt to bring the hand close to the sabre's centre of gravity;
3. The six exercise molinelli (cutting exercises) are the foundation of practical instruction;
4. The guard position has the sabre and point well extended towards the opponent, with guard of 2nd being the preferred bouting guard; and
5. The primary parries are 1st, 2nd, and 5th.

With the following discussion, it will hopefully be apparent how each individual author puts these points into practice in their own way, and what other emphases they bring to the table that their fellow Radaellians may not.

Settimo Del Frate

(1868) Original | Translation --- (1876/1885) Original

Written on behalf of Giuseppe Radaelli, the 1868 treatise Instruction for handling and fencing with the sabre by Settimo Del Frate is the earliest exposition of the method and theories that would eventually spread throughout the Western world, and it provides us with a baseline through which to compare the later iterations of the Radaellian method.

Rather helpfully for our mission, in the introduction the reader is treated to a detailed explanation of how, when, and why Radaelli's system came into being and what its foundations are. Del Frate explains that Radaelli developed this new system in response to what he saw as fundamental flaws in the sabre instruction taught in the Italian cavalry up to that point, as well as the lack of motivation among soldiers to practise using the weapon which they may one day need to use to defend their own lives. Del Frate defines the two main aims of sabre fencing as:

1. Strike the opponent with force to produce a serious wound.
2. Move the sabre from one position to another in the shortest time possible in order to reach the parry before the opponent's sabre touches us, or to touch the opponent before they arrive at the parry.

To this end Radaelli's system prescribes the practice of six swinging exercises called the molinelli, which involve moving the sabre through wide arcs, with the primary pivot point being the elbow instead of the wrist, accompanied by exaggerated body movements in order to build strength, confidence, and precise control of the sabre and thus produce both confident cavalry soldiers and competent fencers. These blade and body movements are then refined into practical actions, with the body movement serving to give the maximum reach to each blow.

Molinello to the head from the left (1868 edition)
(Note: step 3 incorrectly depicts the fencer as centre-weighted instead of rear-weighted as stated in the text)

In the exercise molinelli students are taught to begin from a position similar to a fully extended lunge, but without ever moving their feet from the guard position. From here they turn the edge of the sabre and draw it back in close to their body, shifting their body weight from the front leg to the back leg, and then finally they complete the swing and transfer their weight onto the front leg once more, fully extending both the arm and body. This extreme body lean is then carried over into the lunges, which can often be one of the more striking aspects of the illustrations one's first viewing.

Top: Parry of 1st against a cut to the face
Bottom: Parry of 2nd against a cut to the flank

As proper fencing actions, the size of the molinelli arcs are reduced as necessary. Aside from the direct thrust given with a pronated hand (no further elaboration on thrusts is given), the only other type of attack Del Frate describes is the coupé, which is a cut to the head or face, given in the manner of a hammer blow following a semicircular arc.

Nine different parries are described: 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, low 3rd, and low 4th. The reader is told to prioritise the parries of 1st, 2nd, and 5th, as these are richer in ripostes and the blade does not have to travel far between them or from the primary bouting guard of 2nd; the latter is held with the arm and blade well-extended, the hand at chin height (although the illustrations show this as closer to shoulder height). The guards of 3rd and 4th are also utilised, but only during the exercises.

In contrast to the guard position, the parries are much more retracted, with the arm and forearm generally at around a 90° angle. These chambered positions likely had the intention of promoting good power generation in the ripostes and allowing the student to transition between parries primarily by moving the forearm alone. Two of the parries which stand out are those of low 3rd and low 4th, which are accompanied by a slipping-back of the front leg, although no explanation is given as to why this is done for only these two parries.

After also describing basic footwork and ripostes, the rest of the book is designated as material which is taught in a 'regular sabre fencing course', i.e. material which cavalry soldiers do not need to know in order to be effective as cavalry soldiers. This includes regular fencing actions such as feints and as well as basic bouting advice.

In addition to simple parries, Del Frate also mentions 'compound' parries, which are subdivided into 'yielding' and 'counter'. A yielding parry is done like a standard circular parry, while the counter parries are described as being performed through an 'opposing rotation' to the opponent's blade, in effect performing a molinello in the reverse direction, passing the blade behind the body before carrying it into the desired parry position. However, the reader is not given any more detail than this, making their practical interpretation quite difficult without consulting later sources. This is similarly the case when Del Frate describes the more complex versions of the blade expulsions (sforzi) done with the spine of the blade, known as 'change-sforzi'.

At the back of the book are two interesting novelties that would subsequently become more common in Italian fencing treatises. The first is a set of specifications for a new model of cavalry sabre (something which Del Frate was officially involved in redesigning at the time), and specifications for a fencing sabre which resembles the type that will soon be known as the 'Radaelli model'. The other novelty is a single 'synoptic table', which lists 'all the blows and parries which can be done from each attacking and parrying position', but in reality only describes simple cuts and thrusts to the body, thus omitting things like disengagements or cuts to the arm.

Although I have been using the word 'treatise' to describe both of Del Frate's short books (with the 1868 book and the sabre portion of the 1876 each having less than 60 pages of technical material), in the introductions he is insistent that they are anything but that, preferring to call them a 'recollection' of Radaelli's system, which at the time of the 1868 book's publication was still in an experimental phase and largely intended for cavalry troopers. Many of these early Radaellian features therefore make more sense in light of the original cavalry application, such as the exaggerated body lean allowing greater reach for a soldier on horseback, unable to use their own legs to enter measure, and the attention given to power generation through wide cuts so as to incapacitate the opponent on the very first blow.

Engagement in 2nd (1876 edition)

By the time of Del Frate's second publication in 1876 though, the Italian Ministry of War had requested Del Frate to provide a more up-to-date textbook, as Radaelli's method had by then become regulation for the whole army, and thus the resulting text caters more to a general fencing audience and also includes a rudimentary foil treatise. Aside from having higher-quality illustrations, the sabre section in the 1876 book is generally more concise than the 1868, now lacking Del Frate's long introduction justifying the method's development, and various concepts were clarified. The exercise molinelli now only require the fencer to shift their weight onto both legs evenly during the rearward swing, as opposed to bringing the weight fully onto the back leg, likely indicating a growing focus on the application of the system for fencing on foot. Also removed from this later book are the sabre specifications given in the 1868.

To increase its usefulness as a fencing textbook, the 1876 book elaborates more on bouting morale and influencing the opponent's mental state to one's advantage during the bout, as well as giving brief descriptions of some additional technical concepts such as counter-time. Del Frate defines counter-time as a feint performed during an opponent's action in order to interrupt or intimidate them, unlike the typical definition of a action done against the opponent's counterattack. Radaelli's method has several instances of terminology that differed from the norm, and this is one aspect of the theory that later Radaellian authors were often eager to rectify in their own works.

Although brief and at times insufficiently detailed, Del Frate's 1876 book was generally well-regarded by Radaelli's students, who primarily used it during their studies at the Milan Master's School. Much of the criticism it received, at least regarding its sabre material, was based on fundamental misunderstandings of Radaelli's system from people who never learnt it themselves. However, this could be considered a demonstration of its inadequacy if consulted by those without access to a trained Radaellian. Thankfully, such shortcomings are harder to say of the publications by Radaelli's successors, which can in turn help to enrich our understanding of Del Frate's work.

As mentioned above, an overview of Antonio Tinti's book will not be given here, as its content is largely a summary of Del Frate's 1868 text, sometimes word-for-word, with nearly identical illustrations. It is still worth reading for Radaellian enthusiasts due to some interesting remarks and subtle changes made (such as the recommendation to remove the leg slip in the parries of low 3rd and 4th in later lessons), but it is not significant in the greater body of Radaellian works. A translation is available here.

Giordano Rossi

Original | Translation

The first Radaellian treatise to be published after the death of the system's founder was not intended to be a radical reform or novel application of its precepts, instead Giordano Rossi's 1885 book Theoretical-practical manual for sword and sabre fencing should be considered more of an elaboration on Del Frate's work. It is also important to note that Rossi's treatise was published only a year after Radaelli's school had been closed and replaced with one in Rome under the direction of Neapolitan master Masaniello Parise, a rival of the Radaellian school. This was the result of a highly contentious state-sponsored fencing treatise competition, to which Rossi likely submitted his work, as the competition is explicitly mentioned in the preface. The structure of his treatise thus matches the conditions for the competition outlined by the Ministry of War, and so in the book we find a historical summary of Italian fencing, rules for the duel, and the technical material on the sword placed before the sabre material.

The sabre section of the book is structured very similarly to Del Frate's 1876 text, with the exercise molinelli being interspersed with the individual parries before progressing to proper blows with lunges, then the more advanced actions such as compound parries, sforzi, and actions in tempo. As an improvement to Del Frate's treatise, however, Rossi gives more detailed explanations of all these complex actions, most notably the enigmatic counter parries. He also expands Del Frate's single synoptic table to 48 pages worth of actions, including blows to the arm, feints, and counter-time actions, making Rossi's sabre section alone amount to over 110 pages of material. Other additions are a list of 21 conventional exercises, to be performed between students, as well as the dimensions for a training piste with marked lines to help students visualise the basic concepts of measure and the plane of engagement. Rossi does not include specifications for a fencing sabre, but he does state that the ideal point-of-balance is four fingers from the guard; that is, if the little finger is placed under the blade against the guard with the other fingers alongside it, the sabre should balance perfectly on the index finger.

As for the technical aspects, aside from Rossi's slight modification to the guard of 2nd, now held with the hand slightly lower, we see the first example of a feature which will be very common among subsequent Radaellian authors, which is the removal of the back and forth weight shifting in the exercise molinelli, keeping only a slight torso lean forwards; the full torso lean is still retained in the lunge, however. Complementing the descriptions of the molinelli are a few helpful illustrations demonstrating how the molinelli may be reduced in size as required, contrasting the wide motions of the exercise molinelli.

Most parries remain the same in name and execution aside from 3rd and 4th, which Rossi performs with a more extended arm, while low 3rd and low 4th are no longer done with the leg slip seen in Del Frate's books—this latter change is also found in all other Radaellian treatises. Like Del Frate, the cuts are only defined as being either by molinello or by coupé; however, while on the surface Rossi's definition of the coupé is very similar to Del Frate's, in his synoptic tables Rossi lists various ripostes as coupés even if they are to the flank or the abdomen, seemingly broadening the term's meaning. Rossi also gives much more attention to the use of the point, adding descriptions and exercises for the disengagement and the glide, all still done with the hand pronated.

Parry of 1st

Like the detailed descriptions of the counter parries, Rossi gives a similar treatment for the distinctive change-sforzi, which he has simplified somewhat in that they are now all done with the true edge of the blade instead of the spine (another change made by almost all other Radaellians), and adds a few more simple sforzi from other positions. Rossi's preservation of the terminology and pedagogy seen in the earlier Del Frate books, coupled with his simple writing style, make this manual the most complementary resource for early Radaellian fencing.

Ferdinando Masiello

Original | Partial Translation

The colossal treatise Italian sword and sabre fencing by Ferdinando Masiello, published in 1887, was considered by many to be the pinnacle of Radaellian fencing theory and the only true contender to Parise's government-sanctioned treatise released three years earlier. The treatise won several awards in competitions for fencing publications, and it was consistently used as the standard reference text for theoretical discussions around Radaellian fencing.

With over 200 pages of sabre material alone (out of a total of 593 pages), Masiello's book was presented as a comprehensive and 'scientific' exposition of the improved and refined Radaellian school. The opposing Neapolitan tradition often referred to the scientific proofs given by Rosaroll-Scorza and Grisetti's 1804 treatise The science of fencing as justification for their method's superiority (mainly with regard to the sword), and it was this angle that Masiello was partially trying to emulate with his own work. While most of this scientific-mechanical discussion is dedicated to sword fencing, these elements highlight Masiello's desire for a new, intellectual approach for promoting the Radaellian cause. The later editions of his treatise also add a detailed demonstration of the merits of Radaellian cutting mechanics to the sabre section in a similar manner to his proofs for sword fencing.

As opposed to Rossi's short and relatively uncontroversial historical summary, in 140 pages Masiello firmly places himself in opposition to Parise's method and maintains this criticism throughout the sword section with a mechanical discussion at the beginning and then with footnotes throughout the rest of the text; in contrast to the sword, there is only a single fleeting mention of Parise's sabre method which is found in the introduction, where Masiello states that it is 'absolutely and frankly a return to old and fruitless theories, and thus long since abandoned,' showing that he does not even deem it worth criticising.

To start with, Masiello gives the most detailed description of his fencing sabre design out of any author, giving both the dimensions and weight for each component part. The total weight works out to be 610 g, and the ideal point of balance should be 4 cm from the hilt, which is much closer than other authors of the time recommended. The style of guard he depicts, known subsequently as the 'Masiello model', was very popular in Italy as well as abroad. Along with the illustration of the new sabre model, we are also provided with the first close-up view of one of the most characteristic and lasting influences of Radaellian sabre fencing: the grip. In the subsequent textual description, Masiello says to place the hand close to the guard and grip the handle with the fingers, resting the hypothenar eminence on top of the backstrap rather than thenar eminence as was more common. It is unclear whether Del Frate and Rossi are also describing this specific grip, but through various other writings it is apparent that the gripping method was advocated by Radaelli himself, and all Radaellian authors following Masiello describe it in similar terms.

After introducing the hand positions, he gives a unique rule-of-thumb for the guard position, saying that the distance between the legs should be 'four tenths' of a fencer's height. The blade positions in the guard are the familiar 3rd and 2nd, with the former having the edge turned slightly up and the latter with the hand at breast height, like Rossi. From here we see what will become a common departure from Del Frate and Rossi with regard to the pedagogical progression. Following the footwork Masiello describes each individual invitation, engagement, and parry position before moving on to the molinelli, thus deviating from the earlier method of interspersing the parries throughout the instruction of the molinelli. Also in contrast to the earlier authors, most of these blade positions are to be performed with the arm fully extended (noting that the arm should be more bent the closer the opponent is), and Masiello advises to move between them predominantly through shoulder movement with assistance from the elbow.

Parry of 1st against a cut to the chest

This preference for the shoulder also carries over into how Masiello prescribes disengagements to be performed. In a significant departure from any of the methods Masiello had been trained in, his most unique change is his advocacy for disengagements to be done entirely with the shoulder. The main justification of this is explained by visualising the movement of the sword in the disengagement as a cone. If the apex of the cone is at the wrist, then the radius of the cone's base will be larger than if the apex were at the shoulder, thus with the shorter distance travelled in the latter case the disengagement should theoretically be faster. This focus on shoulder movement was contentious even among the Radaellians, and it was not universally adopted by them despite their high regard for Masiello's treatise overall.

Molinello to the flank from the left

Masiello's exercise molinelli are a slightly simplified version of those seen in Del Frate and Rossi in that they no longer contain an intermediate position that resembles a parry; instead, each molinello involves bringing the sabre behind the body in one tempo, and then forward to finish the movement in the second tempo. The back-and-forth weight shifting is also removed, retaining only a slight torso lean like Rossi. The molinelli are therefore less of an all-encompassing exercise, and more focused on the blade action. The full lean is still retained in his lunge, but the prescribed distance of this lunge is only half that given by Del Frate and Rossi.

One addition to the Radaellian syllabus from Masiello is the inclusion of direct cuts, separate from the cuts by molinello and coupé. However, this should not necessarily be taken to mean that direct cuts were not being done before that point, merely that Masiello saw fit to define them. Furthermore, his direct cuts involved a slight preparatory bending of the arm before the cut, which is contrasted with today's common definition that say the movement should have no rearward component in order to be considered 'direct'.

All techniques treated by Masiello have more in-depth mechanical explanations than Del Frate and often also Rossi. Most are then accompanied by specific exercises to show how the technique can be done from each position, and all these are further supplemented by 90 pages of elaborate synoptic tables, but no conventional exercises. This is not to say Masiello did not omit any techniques; Masiello is the only Radaelli to not include parry of 7th (or an equivalent), nor are any of the Radaellian 'counter parries' described, while the techniques given under that name are what Del Frate and Rossi call 'yielding' parries and today commonly called 'circular' parries. Furthermore, with respect to terminology, Masiello departs from these two authors by relying on more traditional terms and definitions, as seen in his terminology for engagements and invitations and his definition of counter-time actions. 

The great popularity of Masiello's work inspired various fencing publications across the western world. Although he never quite achieved the same level of international fame as Barbasetti, Masiello's method was adapted and translated to English, German, Dutch, and Spanish within his lifetime. His method was at various points adopted by the militaries of several nations, most famously the British through the publication of the 1895 Infantry Sword Exercise.

The sabre treatise was republished twice in Italy, in separate volumes from the sword material, first in 1893 and again in 1902, and Masiello also released a cavalry adaptation of his method in 1891. A comprehensive comparison of the 1887 and 1902 editions can be found here, but for the purposes of this article only a few of the major changes will be noted. The first is Masiello's reintroduction of the back-and-forth weight shifting to the exercise molinelli, making them more closely resemble those originally described by Del Frate in 1868. Secondly, the meticulous specifications for the fencing sabre were removed entirely and the illustrations depict a new and more protective guard than that seen in the first edition. The last change of note is the addition of dozens more pages, some of which were copied from his sword treatise, but also some material entirely new to the later editions, such as his mechanical justifications for percussive cuts and an expanded explanation of the lunge and recovery. Many of these revised and expanded explanations were in direct response to some of the criticism he received from his peers following the publication of the first edition, demonstrating how deeply committed Masiello was to ensuring that his theories were properly understood and, above all, 'scientifically' justified.

Nicolò Bruno

Original

Masiello's imposing tome is a hard act to follow, but Nicolò Bruno's 1891 Sabre fencing: Revival of true Italian sabre fencing based on the oscillation of the pendulum was certainly not originally intended to be competing with the other Radaellians. This is hinted at first by the preface, in which Bruno outlines the issues he has with Radaelli's method as he originally learnt it and maligns the fact that nobody 'more versed in the material' had yet come forward to improve on it. In fact, a few years later Bruno would respond to a critic's reaction to this exact remark by claiming that he wrote down his method before 1885, i.e. before the publication of Rossi and Masiello's treatises. Even with this in mind though, Bruno's treatise does stand well on its own merits, and presents a take on the Radaellian method unlike any of the authors discussed here.

Bruno explains that his main issue with Radaelli's original method is how it was taught; he believes that the exaggerated and tiring movements of the exercise molinelli were introduced to students too early in their training, and students should instead learn how to manoeuvre the sabre through a more gradual progression, focusing purely on the 'pendulum' motion of the arm and sabre initially and only later adding in moderated body movement to the attacks. To this aim, Bruno prescribes some new exercises in the early stages of instruction.

Left: Flexion exercise in parry of 2nd
Right: Flexion exercise in parry of 5th

The most basic of these exercises is known as 'forearm flexions', involving repetitive arm bending motions while holding the sabre which accustom the student to using the elbow as the main pivot point in both cuts and parries. The flexions for cuts are essentially repeated, relaxed coupés in various planes, while the parry flexions have the student carry the sabre between two different parries by bringing the hand in towards the chest before moving to the parry. Very similar exercises would later be found in Italo-Hungarian sabre texts starting with Károly Leszák's in 1906, and similar cutting exercises would be popularised in Italy through Pecoraro and Pessina's treatise (see below), but it is Bruno who can rightfully lay claim to describing them first.

Bruno's focus on breaking down techniques into their component motions means that readers are able to get a very accurate idea of how he wants each technique to be performed. One of the most valuable descriptions he provides is his distinction between the different types of molinelli that can be performed, categorising the motion as either a 'maximum', 'regular' or 'minimum' circle. One of the illustrations he provides to demonstrate this distinction is extremely similar to those first seen in Rossi's treatise, which gives modern practitioners useful corroboration for a concept that Rossi barely mentions in the text. In keeping with Bruno's desire to isolate the movements in the early stages, he is the first Radaellian author to recommend doing these molinelli initially from an upright position with the legs extended, instead of in the guard position. The upper body remains 'firm' but not stiff, which keeps the student's focus on perfecting the blade actions alone, and only after that point are the molinelli done in the guard position, still with only slight torso lean and never shifting the body weight back and forth.

Following the introduction of the molinelli, Bruno's unique method continues to show itself in how he then integrates these blows with forearm flexions and the Radaellian counter parries. This early introduction and application of the counter parries is quite unique in Radaellian literature, and through these exercises students are given a clear demonstration of how the exercise molinelli contain other useful movements aside from the more obvious blows.

From this point on the exercises for the 'true lesson' begin, and the molinelli become proper blows with a lunge and variable torso movement. Unlike his Radaellian colleagues, who prescribe a consistent amount of torso lean in the lunge (or none), Bruno ties the amount of lean to the specific blow being performed, ranging from no lean in a head blow to moderate lean in rising cuts, traversoni, and thrusts. Raising or lowering of the torso is also used to make feints more convincing, which is an interesting elaboration on Del Frate's repeated insistence on accompanying all blade movements with appropriate movement of the body. Bruno continues with exercises for each major technique, describing all the possible starting positions and attacks except until towards the end, where the more advanced techniques such as counterattacks are only given general descriptions. The treatise finishes with a collection of conventional exercises and 50 pages of synoptical tables, resulting in a treatise of 295 pages in total, fully dedicated to sabre fencing, which actually makes it the longest of the Radaellian treatises aside from Masiello's 1887 book (much of which is dedicated to the sword).

Bruno's terminology and technical execution generally align with what was seen in Del Frate's works, including the false edge change-sforzi, and even his definition of counter-time. Only cuts by molinello and coupé are explicitly defined; however, like Rossi, Bruno's use of the term coupé encompasses a variety of different motions, sometimes resembling Masiello's direct cuts. Aside from the aforementioned exercises at the beginning of the treatise, another useful addition to the Radaellian repertoire is Bruno's distinction between 'angled' and 'in line' parries for the positions of 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 5th. The former are so-called because they are held with a bent arm, and are used as parries and invitations; the latter are formed with an extended arm, similar to what Masiello describes, and are used for engaging.

Parry of 3rd, showing both the in line and angled variations

Small details such as these are where Bruno's writing really shines, and when coupled with his unique drills and exercises, his treatise is a valuable resource both for modern Radaellian instructors looking for useful drills and for practitioners wishing to understand the system on a deeper level.

Luigi Barbasetti

Original (German) | Translation

Luigi Barbasetti's 1899 treatise Sabre fencing may not have been the first Radaellian treatise published outside of Italy, but it was certainly the most popular of the lot. This popularity is not owed to any extraordinary merits the treatise has in comparison to the others, but largely because of when, where, and how it was published. Unlike the other authors discussed here, Barbasetti's treatise was the only one never published in Italian. Barbasetti's original manuscript was written in Italian, but when its publication in 1899 came in the form of a German translation of said manuscript carried out by two of his students, Rudolf Brosch and Heinrich Tenner, both fencing masters in the Austrian army.

While the other treatises discussed here were intended to bring a new perspective on the Radaellian method or restate its virtues to an Italian audience, Barbasetti's treatise is unique in being written for an entirely new, non-Italian audience. By the time of its publication Barbasetti had already had great success in spreading his teachings to central Europe, so his treatise only had to put those teachings in writing. Nevertheless, Barbasetti's method does show some distinguishing features, both with regard to format and technique, which are worth looking at.

The format of the treatise is fairly typical, with multiple examples for most techniques and concepts, but not to quite the same degree as Masiello or Bruno. The book does lack synoptic tables, so some readers may not find this book as useful a reference textbook as those of Masiello, Bruno, or Pecoraro and Pessina. In the end though, most material is explained sufficiently well in the more modern terminology reminiscent of Masiello, and at a total of 170 pages it is not the shortest of the lot. The text is complemented by 30 high-quality photographs of the master himself in basic positions, the first Italian-authored fencing treatise to contain photographs.

Taking a closer look at the material, the recommended fencing sabre given at the beginning is very typical for the Italians by this point, with a blade 88 cm long and a centre of gravity 5 cm from the guard. The 1936 English translation makes an additional remark that the total weight of the sabre should be no less than 500 g; this would be an unremarkable statement to make when the treatise was originally published, but by 1936 such a weight would have been considered excessive by most competitive sabre fencers.

Left: Guard of 3rd
Right: Guard of 2nd

Only a few other distinguishing features are to be found in Barbasetti's book, and most are fairly minor. The progression of the material has been reordered slightly, with the lunge coming before the molinelli, and the parries not until after the molinelli and the other attacks are described, the only Radaellian book to do so. The most visible differences are seen in Barbasetti's body carriage, such as his recommendation to keep more weight on the rear leg in the guard position, as opposed to the typical Radaellian 50-50 split, and to give a subtle forward lean to the upper body, which is more noticeable in his guard of 2nd. The resulting body carriage bears some resemblance to that of Masaniello Parise, at whose school Barbasetti taught for roughly 6 years. The hand is held at shoulder height in Barbasetti's guard of 2nd, but he prefers a slightly lower hand for the guard of 3rd.

For the molinelli Barbasetti recommends that students initially perform them with heels together, standing upright, in order to focus better on the blade movement. We saw this same logic in Bruno, who wished to remove 'unnatural' body movement from early instruction; yet unlike Bruno, Barbasetti never introduces any torso movement into the molinelli later on, with the most being a slight lean in the lunge. Together with his guard position, on the whole Barbasetti appears to be more reserved than previous authors with respect to how much of a part the body should play in wielding the sabre.

Following on from there we see that Barbasetti categorises the cuts similarly to Masiello, with direct cuts (with a preparatory arm bend), cuts by molinello, and cuts by coupé, although the latter are included under the molinelli. Barbasetti prefers his parries more extended than Del Frate or Rossi, but less extended than Masiello. Also echoing Masiello is his advice that the shoulder joint should form 'the tip of a cone' as the arm and sabre move from one parry to another. Note that this movement does not carry over to the disengagements, for which Barbasetti prefers the traditional wrist movement.

Parry of 1st

Of the compound parries Barbasetti includes circular and yielding parries as well as two of the Radaellian counter parries, those of 1st and 5th, which are described as the most appropriate to use when parrying in the lunge position (note that in the English translation this subsection is erroneously titled 'Counter-Prime after your opponent's lunge'). The third section of the treatise provides some useful advice for both the student and instructor on concepts such as second intention, silent lessons, general bouting, and the tactical applications of various techniques. Additionally, Barbasetti provides some helpful advice on how to fence against 'naturists', i.e. those who rely primarily on raw speed and power to overcome their opponent.

Aside from the popularity the original edition gained from its large German audience as well as translations and adaptations of this work into other languages such as French, Czech, and Russian, since it was translated into English in 1936 Barbasetti's book has often been the go-to reference for Italian sabre fencing in the Anglophone world for a large portion of the 20th century.

Salvatore Pecoraro & Carlo Pessina

(1912) Original | Translation

After more than 25 years of Radaelli's method being suppressed at the Italian Military Fencing Master's School, the 1910 publication of Salvatore Pecoraro and Carlo Pessina's Sabre fencing was seen by many as the great redemption of Radaellian fencing. With decades of combined experience teaching Masaniello Parise's method, the two authors aimed to not only reinstate the Radaelli method, but to update the theory and bring it in line with how they observed the method being applied in reality by most fencers, i.e. through a combination of the best features of Radaelli and Parise's methods.

However, this goal was not stated in the first edition, and so the authors received some pushback from certain elements of the Radaellian old guard, most notably from Ferdinando Masiello, and this was also not helped by some minor wording problems throughout the book. But the text eventually revised and republished in 1912, which made explicit the authors' intentions and influences, which was that their method combines the elbow-focused blade handling of Radaelli's method with the 'body carriage' of Parise's, which was supposedly common at the time.

Parry of 1st against a cut to the face

Their preferred fencing sabre is described as having a slightly curved blade 88 cm long, a width of around 12 mm near the guard, and a centre of gravity 'two fingers' (around 4–5 cm) from the guard, all typical by that time. Also typical is the evenly-weighted posture for the guard position, and the guards of 3rd and 2nd are very similar to Masiello's, with the hand perhaps slightly higher in the latter guard. The parries too are described in a similar manner to Masiello, with the arm fully extended in most of them. Unlike Masiello, they do include a parry of 7th but under the name 'yielding 6th', which is the name given to it Parise's treatise. This demonstrates one of several instances in which Pecoraro and Pessina favour Parise's or their own terminology rather than the terms used by Del Frate or Masiello. Another example of this is when they describe the Radaellian counter parries of 1st and 5th, which they call 'counter parries in the opposite direction' in order to differentiate them from their proper counter (i.e. circular) parries.

Perhaps the most prominent technical additions in Pecoraro and Pessina's treatise are the six 'preparatory exercises'. These consist of simple arm motions which are done with heels together, standing upright, and are rather reminiscent of Bruno's 'flexion' exercises. Two of these preparatory motions called the 'diagonal exercises' bear close resemblance to the molinelli fendenti in the 1904 edition of Parise's treatise, in that they combine a typical Radaellian coupé with a follow-through swing to return back to the starting position. Altogether these exercises have the same aim as Bruno's flexions in that they lay the foundation for the more demanding molinelli by divorcing each motion from a true fencing action. Arriving at last at the exercise molinelli, we see the same standard motions that we have become accustomed to. The authors prescribe no weight shifting, but they do encourage a slight upper body lean to accompany the final motion.

Molinello to the face from the right

Moving on to the application of the molinelli and blows we find the typical direct thrusts, glides, and disengagements, the cuts by molinelli, coupés (now given a more Italian term of fendente), and direct cuts. Unlike Masiello and Barbasetti, the direct cut described by Pecoraro and Pessina has no preparatory bend of the arm prior to extension, and thus is the first instance of a 'true' direct cut among the Radaellian authors. Plenty of example exercises are given for the subsequent techniques, of which there are many, including a few other firsts in Radaellian sabre literature such as passing beats and even the inquartata, the former being imported from Parise's treatise.

In the lunge, readers are told to advance the front foot by little more than one foot length, as Parise also prescribes, and to keep the body upright or with only a slight forward lean. While the photos do depict an upright body posture, the length of the lunge often seems closer to two foot lengths. Coupled with their unremarkable guard position mentioned earlier, there seems little to Pecoraro and Pessina's body carriage that can clearly be attributed to Parise. The upright lunge certainly deviates from the Radaellians of the 1870s and 80s, but the same could also be said of Bruno and Barbasetti in particular, with his forward-inclined, rear-weighted guard. Thus when taken as a whole, despite what the authors state in the introduction, the treatise has far more in common with its Radaellian predecessors with regard to technique and structure.

At almost 250 pages, 52 of which being the now familiar synoptic tables, the work is quite comprehensive technically and very useful as a reference book even for more advanced fencers, although it does not contain quite as much tactical advice as we find in Barbasetti. This treatise would serve as the sabre textbook for the Military Fencing Master's School until it closed at the outbreak of the First World War, and then again once the school was reopened in the 1920s. The book never quite reached the level of popularity among the civilian fencing crowd as Masiello's treatise did, but it was still cited often by foreign authors as the most representative work on Italian sabre fencing in the first half of the 20th century.

Poggio Vannucchi

Original | Translation

The final treatise in this article is also in my view the strangest, and the most distinctive in its tone. Published in 1915 under the title The fundamentals of Italian fencing, Poggio Vannucchi's entire book is just 65 pages long, with just over 20 of those pages being devoted to sabre. To call this a treatise is perhaps charitable on my part, but given that the structure of the work imitates a fencing treatise, it deserves at least an honorary mention among the other works summarised here.

After a dedication to Giuseppe Radaelli, the 'master and renewer of the art of fencing', the book opens with a preface that is largely a polemic against the current state of fencing in Italy. In Vannucchi's view, Italian fencing has been in a long period of decline, and when he refers to the fencing method 'officially professed by us', Vannucchi is no doubt attributing part of this decline to the method of Pecoraro and Pessina, further reinforced through his condemnation of 'the laziness of Neapolitan lunge', i.e. with an upright body. The only way to reassert Italian fencing superiority, Vannucchi says, is to 'exhume our old, true fencing', by which he of course means Radaellian fencing.

It should not be surprising then that this is precisely what follows in the rest of the book. Vannucchi's sabre method has more similarities with the treatises published 20 years earlier than it has with Pecoraro and Pessina's. This work is by no means a detailed textbook, but as the title suggests, a summary of techniques and foundational principles that Vannucchi believes embody 'true' fencing. One recurring theme throughout is his insistence on ensuring 'precedence of the blade' over that of the body; that is, always starting actions with the blade first so as to not expose the body. This is reinforced in other ways throughout the book: firstly, in his philosophy in assigning touches in a bout, where the first person to touch is in the right regardless of how the touches happened; secondly, by the fact that Vannucchi's target area includes the legs, but which only have a third the value of the rest of the body.

Vannucchi's technique reintroduces an emphasis on upper body movement that harkens back to Del Frate and Masiello. Back-and-forth leaning and weight-shifting similar to Del Frate's exercise molinelli are given as isolated preparatory exercises, which is then applied to Vannucchi's molinelli, and the full forward lean also accompanies the lunge. While the familiar thrusts of direct, glide, and by disengagement are mentioned, only cuts by molinello and coupé receive their own descriptions, with no mention of direct cuts.

For thrusts by disengagement, Vannucchi recommends that the movement be done with the elbow or shoulder, but also that the blade should follow a wide path around the opponent's arm, specifically because there is less chance of encountering the opponent's blade along the way. This is in contrast to Masiello's reasoning for using the shoulder, which is so that the point travels in as tight a motion as possible. The typical nine Radaellian parries mostly resemble those seen in Rossi with a semi-extended arm, but with an added variation for parry of 1st known as '1st in line', whose description matches the extended version seen in Masiello and others.

Aside from the target area mentioned above, two other small outliers present in Vannucchi's work are worth mentioning here. The first is that the illustration of the fencing sabre at the beginning of the sabre section shows a straight blade 92 cm long, giving a total sabre length of 110 cm, which is well above the typical lengths of Italian sabres at the time, which never exceeded 88 cm for the blade and around 105 cm for the whole sabre. The second outlier is the numbering of the hand positions. Vannucchi chose to deviate from the predominant traditional Italian/Neapolitan numbered positions of 1st (edge up), 2nd (edge to the right), 3rd (edge down), and 4th (edge to the left), instead giving each parrying position its own corresponding hand position, i.e. parry of 1st has the hand in what he calls '1st' and parry of 6th has the hand in '6th'. While Del Frate and Rossi also did not follow the traditional numbering of hand positions, Vannucchi's choice to deviate from this could be seen as another act of rebellion against Neapolitan influence on Radaellian fencing.

Being quite a short book, Vannucchi's treatise is of limited use as a fencing textbook, but through its reactionary nature it does serve as an important glimpse into the internal debates among Radaellians at the time, and Vannucchi's method may tell us more about Radaellian fencing of late 19th century rather than how it was being practised in the 1910s.

Conclusion

Although the material has been presented here in order of publication, we should be cautious before making conclusions about how the method as a whole developed over time; to put it bluntly, just because one author's treatise was published later than another, that does not mean their method is necessarily more 'modernised' or developed than the earlier one. With this in mind, it is possible to identify various broad trends across the Radaellian corpus.

The first trend across the treatises is a gradual de-emphasis of body movement, particularly with regard to the molinelli but also in the lunge. The long, forward-leaning lunge is shortened either by reducing the distance between the legs or prescribing less torso lean (Vannucchi being a notable exception in this regard). The exercise molinelli never lose their prominence, but some authors decide to add in complementary exercises which isolate specific parts of the molinelli in order to create a more gradual progression. Parries are often performed with a more extended arm, blade actions are given more attention beyond the sforzi, and synoptic tables become a prominent feature. Lastly, much of the unique terminology introduced by Del Frate falls out of favour as the Radaellians merge their theory with pre-existing Italian traditions.

Covering a span of almost half a century, the relative uniformity of the Radaellian treatises allow the modern reader to develop a level of understanding of the foundational principles and practical application of Radaelli's fencing system that is perhaps unrivalled by any other system. Simultaneously, a close analysis of the material demonstrates that even within this uniformity it is possible for an individual author to meaningfully differentiate themselves, giving insight into how the Radaellians reacted to innovations both within their own ideological circle as well outside of it.