The Right Tool for the Job

We interrupt your regular broadcast to announce that an article of mine has just been published here on the Melbourne Fencing Society's website. The article takes a look at what various authors of sabre treatises said with regard to what kind of sabres should be used for fencing, collating all the preferences, specifications, and opinions I have been able to find so far.

I hope you enjoy.

The republication of Marchionni's 1847 treatise

Alberto Marchionni's Trattato di scherma was the first work to be published explicitly discussing the 'mixed' school of fencing, and was highly regarded by many of those in the north of Italy who were themselves also considered proponents of the mixed school. Although it is of great significance within the context of Radaelli and his contemporaries, I will not be discussing the technical matter contained in the treatise here today. Instead, I wish to provide a clarification for the publication of this important work which may not be immediately obvious upon first reading it.

The title page of this book gives a publication date of 1847, however, I wish to point out a few parts of the book which indicate that the majority of copies which can now be found online (and presumably those found in libraries) were published almost 20 years later.

Our first clue of this is contained at the end of part 1, where one finds the following note to the reader from the publisher:

In 1847 the author undertook the printing of this treatise, but due to the political events that took place in 1848, he had to suspend its publication in order to take part in the war of independence as a volunteer, and then due to various circumstances having to continue his military career, where he still finds himself with the rank of major on leave of absence.
Encouraged by several of his old associates, and urged on again by various masters of this art who would like to see this treatise completed, he took to continuing it.
Hence we are more than certain that this book will receive universal approval, due to the useful considerations demonstrated by the author, and due to it truly being a complete treatise on this most noble art.¹

Thus we already see that this edition must have been published some time after the First Italian War of Independence. At the end of the book, Marchionni includes various acknowledgements to his friends and colleagues for their support in continuing the publication of his treatise. Among others, he lists Enrichetti at the Royal Military College in Florence as having bought one copy of the book, Maestro Pini in Livorno as buying 4, a Maestro Radaelli in Milan buying 5, and Maestro Lambertini buying 2.²

Further on he gives praise to Carlo Tambornini and Cesare Alberto Blengini for their treatises, calling the former the best sabre treatise written to-date, and commending the latter for his methodology for group fencing instruction.³ Given that Blengini's treatise was published in 1864, the republication of Marchionni's treatise cannot have occurred earlier than this.

By searching outside Marchionni's text, we find an issue of a short-lived newspaper from 8 August 1864 by the name of l'Esercito Illustrato. In this issue, we find an article by an unnamed writer giving a review of Marchionni's treatise, which he says was in fact republished twice in that year:

The first instalment of this important work was published in 1847, the second and the third date from 1864.⁴

So with a republication date of 1864 (or better yet, two republication dates), we can fairly safely assume that the masters cited by Marchionni would have been Giuseppe Pini (father of the famous Eugenio Pini), Bonaventura Radaelli (older brother of Giuseppe Radaelli, who at this time was following Avogadro and the Monferrato cavalry in their various postings in Italy⁵), and Clemente Lambertini (father of Vittorio Lambertini).


1 Alberto Marchionni, Trattato di scherma sopra un nuovo sistema di giuoco misto di scuola italiana e francese, [2nd ed.] (Florence: Federigo Bendici, 1847 [1864]), 206.^↩
2 ibid., 373.^↩
3 ibid., 373–4.^↩
4 Bibliografia, L'esercito illustrato: giornale militare, 6 August 1864, 445.^↩
5 Jacopo Gelli, Bibliografia generale della scherma con note critiche, biografiche, e storiche (Florence: Tipografia Editrice di Luigi Niccolai, 1890), 167.^↩

Translation - Sinossi della scherma di sciabola by Antonio Tinti

In the period of history focused on in this blog, it is not often that one encounters a text without a named author or date of publication. The curious text Sinossi della scherma di sciabola is rather unique in this sense, if not for its content. The text and illustrations (aside from a few small additions) are largely identical to Del Frate's 1868 treatise on Radaelli's sabre method Istruzione per maneggio e scherma della sciabola¹, albeit shorter and more concise. Despite this, the small differences in the text may prove interesting for those interested in the Radaellian method at a deeper level. The Biblioteca Fondazione Collegio San Carlo has kindly allowed me to share the excellent quality scans of this text.

Translation (without illustrations)

Transcription

Scans (includes illustrations)

Although this copy does not list an author, in Gelli's 1890 fencing bibliography he states that some copies bear the name 'A. Tinti' in the top right-hand corner of the title page. As Gelli suggests, this is most likely Antonio Tinti, a fencing master at the Military School of Modena. He also gives an estimated date of publication of around 1880, which I would also agree with.²

One piece of evidence that gives a strong indication of it being published before 1884 is the presence in this copy of the following hand-written note at the end of the book, most likely written by the original owner of this copy:

The modifications recently introduced in the Fencing system included in the treatise adopted as the Text for the Army and approved by the Ministers of the Navy and Public Education are based specifically on the teaching of the Sword (Foil).
The sabre fencing is therefore only the continuation of the same artistic principles announced in the sword text, namely: tempo, speed, and measure.
The difference between the sabre method now adopted and that of this booklet is in the method of performing the blows, which are struck with the pivot point in the articulation of the wrist instead of the elbow.
The modifications introduced in the form of the sabres can be seen from the new sabre models; and the theories, pictures, and prints of the swords and sabres for the aforementioned new method are fully explained and highlighted in other sword and sabre synopses.

It is clear that they are referring to Parise's treatise, which became the regulation fencing treatise for the army in 1884³, thus indicating that Tinti's book was published earlier than this.

The book includes 21 illustrations, which mostly appear to have been copied from Del Frate's aforementioned 1868 book, but with a few additions such as the diagram labelling the parts of the sabre, plus a close-up illustration showing how to grip the sabre.

As for the method described, the main notable differences to Del Frate is Tinti's explicit recommendation that in the student's later lessons, the half cross-step back in the parries of low 3rd and low 4th may be omitted. He is also the only Radaellian author to state that the change sforzi (sforzi di cambiamento) are only intended as exercises:

With the exception of the sforzo of half-circle and various other simple sforzi done with the edge, the sforzi are only done as exercises in the lesson, while the first ones are also performed in the bout.

There are other minor differences here-and-there, which I leave to the reader to discover for themselves.

Thanks to Biblioteca Fondazione Collegio San Carlo for providing these scans and for allowing me to share them with you all.

1 Settimo Del Frate, Istruzione per maneggio e scherma della sciabola (Florence: Tipografia, lit. e calc. la Venezia, 1868).

2 Jacopo Gelli, Bibliografia generale della scherma con note critiche, biografiche, e storiche (Florence: Tipografia Editrice di Luigi Niccolai, 1890).

3 Cesare Francesco Ricotti-Magnani, "N. 107. - Pubblicazione del trattato di scherma di spada e sciabola compilato dal signor Masaniello Parise. - (Segretariato generale). - 11 agosto," Giornale Militare 1884: parte seconda, no. 33 (16 August 1884): 653–4.

La Scherma di Fioretto by Ferdinando Masiello

Considered by many to be the leader of the Radaellian school of fencing in the decades following the death of its founder, Ferdinando Masiello was without doubt a giant in the Italian fencing scene of the late 19th century. He first published his method of fencing in 1887 under the title La scherma italiana di spada e di sciabola ('Italian sword and sabre fencing'). His sword method was a combination of all the principles he considered best among those systems he studied, the main influence being Cesare Enrichetti, along with dozens of footnotes criticising and refuting Masaniello Parise's method. Masiello's sabre method, however, was based only on Radaelli's method, with a few of his own modifications.

Fifteen years later, he separately released a second edition of his sword treatise (third edition for sabre). His treatise on the sword (now using the name fioretto to differentiate it from the recently popularised épée du combat) entitled La scherma di fioretto is what I wish to share with readers today.

Scans: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1y2cb5sUZqx_mFQPsRQVNgCFtn43uDIiY

The second edition removes much of the fluff in the introduction of the 1887 edition, and is far less scathing of Parise, having none of the footnotes picking apart his method. Short of doing a detailed side-by-side comparison, the method itself is much the same, still retaining his unique preference of wielding the sword predominantly through the shoulder, both for disengagements and parries. The most obvious change is the illustrations, which replace the clothed clones of the 1887 edition with ripped Adonises in budgie smugglers.

Translation - Lezioni collettive di spada e sciabola by Eugenio Pini

Eugenio Pini is one of the most famous names in modern Italian fencing history, perhaps second only to Aldo Nadi. He was undoubtedly the first modern Italian fencing celebrity, with his name being known across Europe thanks to his high-profile fencing exhibitions, duels, feuds, and not least his renowned fencing club in Livorno, which produced many champions, the most prominent of whom being Giuseppe 'Beppe' Nadi, father of Aldo and Nedo Nadi.

Before he was quite so famous, while employed at the Royal Naval Academy in Livorno, Pini wrote a short book detailing his method of group instruction for fencing, according to the regulation method of the time (see Parise's 1884 treatise Trattato teorico-pratico della scherma di spada e sciabola). It is this valuable and interesting work which I wish to share with you all today, which is entitled Lezioni collettive di spada e sciabola ('Group sword and sabre lessons'), published in 1891 in Milan.

Translation | Transcription | Scans

With very little in the way of technical notes, this booklet is more of a pedagogical guide for trained fencing instructors. Although individual lessons were the more popular method at the time for imparting technical skills (at least in the initial phases of learning), Pini's text provides a valuable insight into how skilled fencing masters would impart lessons to groups without compromising the quality of their teaching in doing so.

With reference to Parise's regulation treatise, Pini divides his curriculum into 5 years (the same length as an officer's course at the Royal Naval Academy), with the first four years of which being devoted almost entirely to sword fencing. Here is a summary of each year of the curriculum:

1st year

Instruction begins with sword fencing only. Students learn basic footwork, simple attacks, simple parries, circular parries, disengagements and counter-disengagements, and feints.

2nd year

The instructor transitions to doing individual lessons with the students, who practise among themselves when not taking a lesson.

3rd year

The instructor continues in the same manner as in the second year, but also begins slowly transitioning only the most capable students into bouting, which they will be allowed to do in the last months of the year.

4th year

The instructor will continue perfecting the students' fencing individually, still only allowing the best students to bout between themselves and with the instructor. In the last months of the year, students will begin learning the fundamentals of sabre fencing through group exercises

5th year

Students will receive individual sabre lessons, whilst the rest practise among themselves through exercises and bouting. All the while, the instructor will keep a watchful eye on the students, correcting and guiding them to becoming skilled and courteous fencers.

La Scherma della Sciabola e del Bastone a Due Mani by Alberto Falciani

Seeing as it has been a while since I have made public any original fencing treatises, I thought I should get around to completing a transcription of Alberto Falciani's La scherma della sciabola e del bastone a due mani ('Fencing with the sabre and two-handed stick'), published in Pisa in 1870.

Transcription: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1okZkYb02Xpuky_KnIUfZ6BbATDv_Bx9L

As the name implies, this treatise is devoted to both sabre and bastone, the latter being the practice of fencing with two-handed sticks, which was quite popular in the middle of the 19th century, before going out of fashion around the time this treatise was published.

Although it contains no illustrations, the language is clear and simple enough for them to not be required, such as the description for the typical northern Italian lunge ('... the right breast is almost directly above the right knee').

In an article from Corriere dell'Arno, published 31 October 1886, the writer states that Falciani was a volunteer in the 2nd and 3rd Italian Wars of Independence, and he is now a 'master of fencing, gymnastics, and military exercises' in Pisa.

Thanks to Biblioteca Universitaria di Pisa for providing the scans for this transcription.

The 1892 Genoa Fencing Tournament

In this first post of 2020, I bring a translation of another detailed fencing tournament report, this time from 1892 Genoa. Published with the title Torneo Internazionale di Scherma, Genova 16-24 Giugno 1892, this report was written by the tournament jury's speaker, Giuseppe Nini, a well-regarded lawyer and amateur fencer from Rome. Below you will find links to my full translation of this text and a transcription of the original Italian. In addition, I have also provided a translation of a second report on the same tournament from the magazine Baiardo (more on that below).

Translation: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1PRi61LwjNpUlzzi-4cGekS8MrmOwMbPF

Transcription: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1dZa0KbzaqH-rX-s-TsV3S5bQUpmS8Ntc

Baiardo Report: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1yDNSmoifwbifal9jrE9dZdzdo0AJwBTG

The rules and format of the Genoa Tournament are very similar to previous tournaments discussed on this blog (see Milan 1881 and Bologna 1891), with the variation here that the classification of the fencers was conducted at the same times as the 'pool' competition, the intent of which being to both prevent the artistic degradation generally observed in the pools and to prevent the overly 'conventional' fencing associated with classification bouts.

The most interesting aspects of the report are contained in the jury's observations of the fencing, which show many parallels to lamentations within the historical fencing community today, such as recklessness, frequent double touches, and lack of control of the weapon.

The report from Baiardo (scans available through Europeana.eu here) was published over three issues (1892/06/20, 1892/07/08, and 1892/07/20) and written by Giovanni Battista Marazzo. This report gives more of an outsider's perspective as opposed to Nini's report, which was compiled by the members of the Jury.

As is fairly usual for this period, commentators didn't shy at the opportunity to bring fencing politics into the discussion of the tournament. Most notably here, in both the Nini and Baiardo reports, were feelings of dissatisfaction with the quality of many of the fencers. The following short article entitled 'Impressions on the Genoa Tournament' published in Baiardo on the 20th August 1892 places the blame squarely on the Scuola Magistrale and Masaniello Parise, its director:

From the progress of the aforementioned tournament, I have once again brought back the conviction that our youth show a high aptitude for the noble art of fencing, and it is with true regret that I came to realise that a sufficient benefit cannot be drawn from these aptitudes, the official system being the main cause.
This is not the first time that I am obliged to note how this system satisfies neither the reasons of the art, nor its traditions, nor even the nature of Italian youth, of which the Army is the prime champion.
It is a strong conviction, as I have already stated a thousand times, that the talents of agility and strength which nature has endowed the Italian people with cannot be usefully cultivated with the regulation method.
This opinion of mine, which, even if it is wrong—which I do not believe to be the case—certainly comes only from artistic and scientific considerations.
Let us hope that Parise, the one in charge of directing the Army’s fencing, may one day change his mind and bring our art back to its ancient splendour.

Bruto II

Bias against fencers from the Scuola Magistrale had been predicted by some when it was revealed who was elected to the tournament's jury, with an article from Baiardo published on the 8th June 1892 (prior to the tournament taking place) stating '... just as the Turin Tournament was said to be Enrichettian, that of Bologna Radaellian, that of Rome Neapolitan, that of Palermo Cipollian, thus the formation of the Jury for the Genoa Tournament was called anti-Parise.' The same article also claims some fencers from the Scuola Magistrale intended to boycott the tournament for this reason, but did not expect many to actually do so.

Special thanks to Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale di Firenze for providing the scans of Nini's tournament report.