I’m currently reading Ken Mondschein‘s most excellent translation of Camillo Agrippa’s Treatise On The Science Of Arms, and the introduction full of details giving lots of background information got me thinking about a few things. In it, there is a description of the social context in which those who took up the sword lived which gives an insight on why they were doing so. And while we can try to comprehend what motivates a man to learn a weapon in order to both give himself a place on the social ladder as well as giving himself the means to preserve his own life, those are motivations which no longer apply to our modern world, and yet are crucial to the approach in which fencing masters were expecting their students to learn the art.
So how do we reconcile a need for self-defense and social recognition with the friendly activity that fencing has become today? Note that I use the word “friendly” in a genuine meaning, regardless of the amount of social or political conflict that might exist within or between groups today.
One way, which can help base our approach is to recognise that even in the 16th and 17th century when fencing schools were sprouting across Western Europe, people would still partly fence for the fun of it without risking their partners’ lives. But the dichotomy is there when trying to reconstruct a system of fencing which is obviously designed for both entertainment and for defense. We can take an academic approach to the latter but no matter how much we try to come close to applying certain principles, some actions can never be applied fully as intended in the book. The obvious example is, if you take any rapier system as is my main area of interest, a thrust can never really be given as it would be to truly kill someone. And this is an important aspect of learning historical fencing, finding the fine line between too soft actions and really hurting someone. The answer is of course to be found within our own intention when engaged in a bout with someone. Understanding the consequences of our actions often means understanding ourselves that much more, and when doubt is removed, our ability to fence fluently increases.
One thing I’ve learnt in the few short years I’ve been practicing is that you can rarely rely on your opponent to give you the response to an action the way you want it to respond. In practical terms that means that were you to be as vigorous to place an attack as the system you learn expects you to, there are chances that someone may end up being hurt. Of course we have safeguards against that, our primary line of defence is to be well protected, and to ensure that our protective equipment meets our standards to ensure a bout won’t end in a disaster. But again, there is a balance to be found between too flimsy clothing that won’t absorb a shock and too bulky a piece of protective equipment that will hinder our movements. Only experience and caution can truly answer this dilemma (oh and funds too but it’s a different matter of course 😉 ).
So we come to the question I first asked, if we don’t fence for defense or status, why do it at all? I appreciate if you’re in the same social circles as I do, the motivation for status might not be quite so irrelevant. Indeed, there are some so dedicated to the art that they have earned quite a great deal of respect among their peers (if you read this, you probably know who you are 😉 ), especially in the greater community. Whether it brings them the ladies as it did back in the day remains to be seen (it didn’t for me, though it seems my ability to dance was a quality my wife recognised, that’s almost like fencing right? 😉 ).
Now I must apologise for the blasphemous question of why fence at all. We all have our motivations, mine stems from a love of the sword as a work of art that belongs not on walls or museums but in the hand, crossing another of its type. Other people have different motivations of course and should this most reach the eyes of my fencing friends, I would be glad to read about it.
One thing is for sure, whatever our motivation, it is a non-negligible element that we must bring to our practice of the art, because to me, something that was once made for killing, which can now bring people together as friends to duel and compete peacefully is truly an art.