Radaelli's Low Parries

*** EDIT: New information has caused me to tweak my interpretation of the parry of low 3rd. Please refer to my amendment for this updated interpretation. ***

Whilst my previous post contained a discussion of an interpretation based almost entirely off its illustration in the plates, in this post I shall go in the opposite direction and even contradict the plates somewhat. Here I will outline my interpretations of Radaelli's parries of low 3rd and 4th and attempt to demonstrate some instances where I feel the illustrations fail to accurately portray the techniques as described in the text.

The two parries in question are illustrated in Del Frate's 1876 manual like so (images from Holzman's translation):

The plates in the '68 manual are also very similar:

Position of the Parry of Low 3rd

Position of the Parry of Low 4th

The only real noticeable difference between these plates is the seemingly more retracted arm in the parry of 4th low in the 1868 plate as opposed to the corresponding 1876 plate. Apart from that, the consistency that these plates show would normally be indicator to me that the depictions show are accurate. However, this does not seem to be the case when they are compared to Del Frate's textual descriptions of the parries. Here's the excerpt from Holzman's translation of the 1876 text:

Parry of Low 4th

From the parry of 5th - Low Forth!
Carry the right foot backward one good pace to the rear of the left with the heel raised from the ground, bending the knee. Incline the body over the left leg, and at the same time, move the sabre nearly across the body with the grip at the height and direction of the right hip, about eight inches [20 cm] away from it. The blade tip should be shoulder high and in line with the left shoulder, with the edge turned toward the ground.

Parry of Low 3rd

From the parry of 6th - Low Third!
Assume the body position described in the parry of low 4th, and without changing the position of the sabre, lower the arm so that it is nearly in front of the body diagonally, with the point shoulder high and to the right of the right shoulder, with the edge turned toward the ground. The grip should be hip high and in the direction of the flank approximately eight inches [20 cm] ahead of it. The arm should be bent and supported by the flank, with the elbow somewhat behind the body.

And here's the descriptions of the parries from the 1868 text (my translation):

For the execution of the parries of low 3rd and 4th and 2nd, the student is placed in parry of 6th, since that is the position from which one passes more naturally and easily to these different parries, and then at the command:
Low-third - The right foot is brought a good pace behind the left with the heel lifted off the ground, both knees bent, the weight of the body on the left leg, the sabre with the grip at the height of the left flank about one palm away, the point turned outside, the edge turned towards the ground, the elbow supported by the flank, the sabre, in other words, is almost across the body.

For the parry of low 4th, the student will resume the position of parry of 6th, then at the command:
Low-fourth - After having brought the right foot behind the left as described for the parry of low 3rd, the sabre is carried almost across in front of the body so that the grip is in the direction and at the height of the right flank about a palm away, the point of the blade at the height of the head, slightly to the left, the edge towards the ground.

Apart from the slightly cleaner sentence structure in the 1876 version, the two texts describe these parries very similarly. If one is to perform these parries as described, the differences between the text and the illustrations start to become quite obvious.

The illustration of the parry of low 4th in the 1868 manual appears to be the only one that abides by its respective description. In the others, we can observe that:

• The point is too high
• The grip is too far forward
• The grip is sometimes held too high

If we are to then attempt to perform these parries as the text describes, as opposed to what the plates show, we perhaps end up in positions similar to these:

 Parry of Low 3rd

Parry of Low 4th

As our handsome model shows, the hilt is much closer to the body than what the plates show, providing better coverage to the whole body. You may also notice that with the hilt being on the opposite side of the body as the direction in which the strike is coming, the body and arm are protected if the strike ends comes in vertically upwards as opposed to at an oblique angle. An interesting note about this parry of low 3rd is that it is the only parry in the Radaellian system that involves extension of the wrist (also observed by Jacopo Gelli in Resurrectio).

An analysis of Radaelli's engagement and invitation

When I was recently looking through the beautiful plates in Del Frate's 1876 manual (a common pastime of mine), I noticed something that doesn't seem to have been discussed before (at least on the internet) in regard to Radaelli's system. While initially thinking it was merely an imperfection on the part of the illustrator, I soon realised that it cannot be a mistake due to its appearance in multiple instances, including Del Frate's '68 manual. What I am referring to here is the slight forward lean of the fencer on the left in the image below:

Engagement in 2nd (1876 version)

Although not obvious at first, the fencer's rear leg appears to be somewhat extended, and the front leg is bent past where it would normally be when on guard.

To remove the doubt that it was not just a mistake of the illustrator, the same phenomenon can be observed in Del Frate's earlier manual:

Engagement in 2nd (1868 version)

Nor is it a matter of the image's perspective, as the '68 plates also show it on the opposite side:

Engagement in 4th (1868 version)

Perhaps, then, Radaelli advocated for the fencer engaging the blade to shift their weight forward slightly. This could serve to increase the pressure on the opponent's blade (making the blade easier to deviate off line), but perhaps to also act as a "pre-lunge"; that is, committing some of your weight forward to make the proceeding lunge faster, but not committing so much as to make it too hard to react should the opponent act first.

What I find even more interesting than this is that this lean can also be seen in the one doing the invitation in both manuals:

Invitation in 2nd (1876 version)

Invitation in 2nd (1868 version)

This slight forward inclination of the body is supported by the description of the invitation in the '76 manual (translation Holzman):

"An invitation is made with the sword and body without blade contact and seeks to cause your adversary to commit to an action so that you can be ready with a riposte."

With this description and the measure at which the two fencers in the plates are placed, I am inclined to believe that Radaelli intended the invitation to be a discrete action similar to the engagement, as opposed to a state that you lie in to provoke the opponent to approach and attack you. Instead of opening a line with the sabre and waiting for the opponent to come in and attack, perhaps Radaelli intended the invitation to be a somewhat aggressive action, quickly coming into lunge distance while leaving a line open. The lean here would probably serve to imitate the body position taken for the engagement, thereby increasing the threat felt by the opponent and their likelihood of attacking. However, this is evidently not meant to be as aggressive as the engagement, as Del Frate goes on to say:

"The invitation also differs from the engagement in that the movement is executed with less speed and energy."

That is, enough speed to pressure the opponent into acting, but still retaining the ability to give a timely and appropriate response to their action.

Whether or not this subtle aspect of the engagement and the invitation will give any advantage to the one who utilises it, I am in no position to say. Now that I have begun changing how I perform these actions to match my interpretation, perhaps I may be able to present my findings some time in the future.

There may be much of this that is not new to other aficionados of the Radaellian method, but I thought it would at least be good to get my ideas out in public so that they have the opportunity to be scrutinised.

1873 Italian Cavalry Regulations

***NOTE: A full translation of this text is now available here, courtesy of Chris Holzman.***

Below you will find a link to scans of the first volume of a military cavalry manual entitled Regolamento di esercizi e di evoluzioni per la cavalleria (basically "Regulation exercises and movements for the cavalry"), published by the Ministry of War in 1873.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B90B1IqWDLowNUhYTFU1MHVoejg

This manual contains various exercises for cavalry troopers training in the Italian army. Most importantly, at least in relation to this blog, are the exercises related to the handling of the cavalry sabre both on foot and on horseback. Although the manual is only attributed to the Ministry of War, the sabre method shown on foot is distinctly Radaellian. Furthermore, the section detailing the use of the sabre on horseback shows great resemblance to Masiello's cavalry system (See Holzman's Sabre Fencing on Horseback, 2015), which he supposedly based off Radaelli's cavalry method. Therefore I do not think it unreasonable to assume that this manual does indeed contain the direct application of Radaelli's method for the cavalry.

For those of you who have read Jacopo Gelli's Resurrectio (translation provided in here), you may remember Angelini citing an "1873 Regulation Exercise" to claim that Radaelli advocated the prioritisation of offending over parrying when on horseback. What I have published today is indeed the manual Angelini was referring to (the passage he references is on page 81), and while it is highly unlikely that Radaelli wrote this manual himself, Angelini's belief that he did supports the assumption that Radaelli at least had something to do with the system presented.

In addition to these sabre exercises, the manual also contains gymnastic exercises, exercises for handling the lance, troop movements on foot, methods of judging distances, and sheet music for bugle calls.

Special thanks to Bibliotecha Statale di Cremona for providing the scans.

Translation - Resurrectio by Jacopo Gelli

In the link below you will find my first draft of the translation of Jacopo Gelli's 1888 short book Resurrectio: Critica alle osservazioni sul maneggio della sciabola secondo il metodo Radaelli del Generale Achille Angelini, or in English, 'Critique of the observations on the handling of the sabre according to the Radaelli method by General Achille Angelini'.

Click here to read

This book by Gelli is a response to General Achille Angelini's 1877 book Osservazioni sul maneggio della sciabola secondo il metodo Radaelli ("Observations of the handling of the sabre according to the Radaelli method"). It also contains a response to another article of Angelini's, Ultima parola sulla risorta questione Angelini-masiello intorno alla scherma della sciabola del defunto Maestro Radaelli ('Final word on the revived Angelini-Masiello matter regarding the sabre fencing system of the late Maestro Radaelli'), written in 1888. For those of you who may find some of Gelli's references in this book confusing, I will now provide some context to this text, so that it may be better understood.

In 1884, after over a decade of Radaelli's sabre system being taught at the Scuola Magistrale in Milan, a commission was formed with the purpose of adopting a new fencing system for the spada and the sabre (both infantry and cavalry). At the head of this commission was Achille Angelini, a decorated general of the Royal Army and a keen fencer. Greater detail on this commission can be found in the report published in Parise's 1884 manual (see Holzman's The Roman-Neapolitan School of Fencing, 2015), but suffice it to say that Masaniello Parise's system replaced that of Radaelli in 1884, and the Scuola Magistrale was moved to Rome. Radaelli had died by that point, so the only people that were left to get outraged over this decision were Radaelli's loyal students and admirers, Jacopo Gelli being one of them.

Rewinding back to the year 1877, General Angelini studied Del Frate's 1868 manual (translation here) and wrote a book entitled Osservazioni sul maneggio della sciabola secondo il metodo Radaelli, which consisted of 47 pages of poor interpretations of Radaelli's system. It seems this text may have been referred to by the 1884 commission to help form their opinion on Radaelli's system (which, as you may have guessed, was less than favourable), no doubt through the strong influence of Angelini, who presided over said commission.

Returning to the year 1888, we find that many shots had been fired back and forth between Radaelli's supporters and his opponents in the meantime, most notably between Ferdinando Masiello and General Angelini. In an attempt to do be done with the debate, General Angelini published Ultima parola sulla risorta questione Angelini-masiello intorno alla scherma della sciabola del defunto Maestro Radaelli, which showed that Angelini had not changed his views on Radaelli's system, and that he still believed that which he wrote in his 1877 book to be true. Masiello published a short response to this, which Gelli included in a footnote in this text.

Radaelli's Guard of 2nd

Today we shall be looking at Radaelli's Guard of 2nd, and some pieces of information that might provoke some thoughts on how we interpret it.

The illustration of the guard of 2nd provided in Del Frate's 1876 text Istruzione per la scherma di sciabola e di spada del professore Giuseppe Radaelli is the following:

Del Frate does not provide a written description of the guard in this text, but the illustration is quite clear in showing the hand at about shoulder height, with the point around chest height (which may be lower towards the opponent's flank depending on the curve of the sabre).

Del Frate's 1868 text Istruzione per maneggio e scherma della sciabola also shows a similar position for this guard, albeit with the point at the height of the flank:

However, Del Frate does actually provide a description of the guard in this text:

In this guard the hand should be placed at the height and in the direction of the chin, the point at the height of the flank, with the blade across the body so that the point extends about one palm beyond the left flank, and the edge slanted to the right.

This description would bring the hand higher than what is shown in both these plates, and perhaps further to the left than what one would assume. Thus the recurring question of whether the description or the illustrations are more accurate in describing the position arises.

There are other examples of differences between description and illustration in Del Frate's works, but the other example that will be shown here is that of his guard position in the sword section of the 1876 text:

Compared to his description of this position:

… right arm semi-extended forward, the sword forming a straight line with the forearm; the point at around head height; the hand at the height of the chin; point, hand, and shoulder in the same direction.

Note that he again states that the hand should be at chin height, yet the illustration shows it at what appears to be shoulder height. The detailed nature of this description leads me to believe that he did not simply mean 'shoulder' when he said 'chin', as the hand would no longer follow the straight line he describes with the point and shoulder, which also cannot be seen in the illustration.

As for Radaelli's students, it seems that some opted to hold the sabre lower for their 2nd guards, like Giordano Rossi (1885):

The right arm is extended, at the same time turning the edge of the sabre diagonally up and to the right, with the grip at the height and in the direction of the right breast; point at the height of the knees, the arm naturally outstretched.

Ferdinando Masiello (1887):

In the assault, however, the guard of second is more useful, which entails holding the hand at the height of the breast and the point directed at the opponent’s flank.

Whereas Luigi Barbasetti (1936) held the guard at shoulder height, albeit with a slight forward lean:

For the guard of Seconde, direct the point toward your opponent's hip, the sabre in line as an extension of the arm, the cutting edge of the blade in a diagonal line to the right.

With Salvatore Pecoraro and Carlo Pessina (1912) we see a similar case to that of Del Frate, with the photo showing the hand at around shoulder height, but the description instead stating for it to be at the height of the breast:

The guard of second differs from that of third in the position of the hand, which is held at the height of the breast with the point of the sabre directed at the opponent's flank, the edge diagonally up and to the right.

The fact that this is an actual photo instead of an illustration most likely removes the possibility that the depiction doesn't match up due to the fault of an illustrator. Therefore it may be that the images are more accurate than the descriptions in this case.

If we look at an example of a contemporary system outside of Italy, for example John Musgrave Waite (1880), his depiction seems to match Del Frate's, and the description he gives matches his own image well:

Move the sword-arm to the front until the hand is directly opposite the hollow of the right shoulder, bend the elbow slightly and raise it, sink the wrist, and turn up the middle knuckles and edge of the sword. Advance, and lower the point until it is nearly opposite and level with the left hip. [...] When this guard is properly formed, the upper knuckles and elbow are level and in line with the shoulder.

Assuming the fencer has a good, upright posture when on guard, Waite's description of the right hand being 'opposite the hollow of the right shoulder' seems analogous to Del Frate's 1868 description of being in the direction of the chin. I will leave it up to the reader to decide how they believe Radaelli intended the guard to be held, but from comparing all these examples, my personal conclusion is that Radaelli's guard of 2nd most likely had the hand around the height of the shoulder and opposite or slightly to the left of it, with the point opposite or just outside of the opponent's flank.

Bibliography

Barbasetti, Luigi. The Art of the Sabre and the Épée. New York: E. P. Dutton, 1936.

Del Frate, Settimo. Istruzione per maneggio e scherma della sciabola. Florence: Tip. lit. e calcografia La Venezia, 1868.

Del Frate, Settimo. Istruzione per la scherma di sciabola e di spada del professore Giuseppe Radaelli scritta d’ordine del Ministero della Guerra. Milan: Litografia Gaetano Baroffio, 1876.

Masiello, Ferdinando. La scherma italiana di spada e di sciabola. Florence: G. Civelli, 1887.

Pecoraro, Salvatore, and Carlo Pessina. La Scherma di Sciabola. Viterbo: G. Agnesotti, 1912.

Rossi, Giordano. Manuale Teorico-Pratico per la Scherma di Spada e Sciabola. Milan: Fratelli Dumolard Editori, 1885.

Waite, John Musgrave. Lessons in Sabre, Singlestick, Sabre & Bayonet, and Sword Feats. London: Weldon, 1880.

Translation - Istruzione per maneggio e scherma della sciabola del Capitano Settimo Del Frate

In the link below you will find my complete translation for Settimo Del Frate's 1868 book Istruzione per maneggio e scherma della sciabola ('Instruction for handling and fencing with the sabre'), the first treatise published on Radaelli's sabre method. As Del Frate states in the treatise, the book was written on the request of his regiment's commander, Colonel Gerolamo Avogadro di Collobiano, who had been implementing Radaelli's cavalry sabre method in his regiment, the Monferrato light cavalry.

Translation: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1G2EKG6PVrhyGZN950aar3JepAoS8vEs6/view?usp=sharing


The scans that were used to make this translation may be found here.

Who is Settimo Del Frate?

An avid student and friend of Radaelli, Settimo Del Frate was the man who assumed the role of scribe for Giuseppe Radaelli, publishing the works that outlined his fencing system. Below you will find my translation of Jacopo Gelli's biography of Del Frate, taken from his 1890 tome Bibliografia Generale della Scherma.

As an interesting side note, Gelli mentions an 1881 text written by Del Frate called Istruzione per la scherma a cavallo ('Instruction for fencing on horseback'), which Gelli could not find, nor has it been found since to my knowledge. Perhaps it lies in a dusty archive in Italy, waiting to be identified.

Nevertheless, here is what Gelli had to say about Del Frate:

[Translation updated 2022/05/19]

The work of Cav.¹ Settimo Del Frate, inspired by excellent technical and practical principles, is above any praise. The minor problems that were found in the first editions were amended in the subsequent editions.
Settimo Del Frate, having previously graduated in law at the University of Pavia in 1856, volunteered in the Monferrato Cavalry regiment in 1859, with whom he campaigned against Austria.
After the war he remained in the army, in the hope that Italy would soon take up its arms again for its own independence.
In fact, in 1866 with the same regiment he campaigned with the rank of first lieutenant, then with that of captain.
In 1872 he was called to the post of captain-secretary with the committee of the cavalry arm. Promoted to major, he returned to the regiment; currently he is the commanding colonel of the Saluzzo cavalry regiment.
During his voluntary service and the 1859 campaign with the Monferrato cavalry, the now Colonel Del Frate became acquainted with the volunteer Giuseppe Radaelli, a Milanese fencing master. The ordinary life of the field and a passion for arms brought the lawyer-soldier and the soldier-fencer together, and so Colonel Del Frate, excited by Radaelli's theories, became a very dear friend and active student of his and then an intelligent interpreter of the ideas of the new system, created by Radaelli, which he committed to the presses.

In 1869 Cav. Del Frate published the first monograph on Radaelli's fencing system on the invitation of Colonel Avogadro, a passionate fencer and a friend and student of Radaelli.
A second monograph was written by the Captain Del Frate by order of the Ministry of War, to serve as the textbook at the Fencing Master's School, founded in Milan in 1871. This new recollection saw the light in 1876 and was later reprinted.
H.M. King Vittorio Emanuele, accepting the homage of the first monograph, to demonstrate to Captain Del Frate his royal approval and the merit in which he held the work, he gave the author a beautiful gold watch with the royal cypher.
In turn, the Ministry of War submitted Captain Del Frate to become a Knight of the Crown of Italy.
Captain Del Frate's second monograph on Radaelli's fencing system was awarded with a 1st class certificate and silver medal by the Congress of the Italian Gymnastics Federation, held in Rome in 1873.

On the merits of these treatises and of this fencing method came the publications of Pilla, Besenzanica, Arista, and Gelli, cited in this bibliography.

1 Cav., short for Cavaliere, is essentially the Italian equivalent of the title 'Sir'. ^↩