Classical Fencing: The Varieties of Second in Sabre

Fencing watchmen and repels in the traditional period (1880-1939) were progressively various and fluctuated in understanding on the topic than in current fencing. No place was this more genuine than the assortment of watchmen utilized in Saber, the cut and push weapon. Since the motivation behind a monitor is to give a beginning stage to both hostile and protective activity, watches are combined with repels which actuate the monitor to hinder an assault into the line which the watch hypothetically closes. One of the gatekeepers generally portrayed in period writings is Second, securing the outside line flank (the segment of the objective under the fencer’s arm on the correct side for the right-gave fencer and on the left side for the left-gave fencer) and the underside of the arm. These are low line focuses as they are uncovered beneath the monitor of the Saber.

The determination of Second protects in contemporary writings falls into three classifications:

1. Gatekeepers with the arm just incompletely stretched out at midriff level and the cutting edge parallel to the ground.

2. Watchmen with the arm stretched out in the high line and the cutting edge inclining descending.

3. Watchmen with the arm expanded just somewhat and the cutting edge vertical.

We can portray these in view of edge point from the flat, the edge introduction with respect to covering the objective, the hand position, and the arm expansion. These depictions are from the content and outlines in an example of fencing manuals by noted Fencing Masters accessible in English.

Among the watchmen and repels with the cutting edge parallel to the ground and the arm just mostly stretched out at midsection level are the accompanying:

Repel of Flank (Louis Rondelle 1892) – the hand and elbow are at belt level with the hand a little to the outside of the objective, the submit pronation, the sharp edge forefront to the outside slanted descending and internal toward the adversary’s knee.

Flat Second (Antonio Domingos Pinto Martins 1895) – the weapon lower arm is level parallel to the ground at the fencer’s midriff, the submit pronation, the point a few crawls beneath the level of the protect with the sharp edge turned front edge to the outside.

Second (Julio Martinez Castello) – the weapon lower arm is mostly stretched out forward parallel to the ground at bring down chest level, the submit pronation marginally to the outside of the objective, the edge turned front edge to the outside and parallel to the fencing line, the point a few crawls underneath the level of the monitor.

Second (Clovis Deladrier in 1948) – the weapon arm is level parallel to the ground at the fencer’s midsection, the deliver pronation, the point a few crawls beneath the level of the protect with the sharp edge turned front edge to the outside, and the arm is at the outside furthest reaches of the objective.

The accompanying watchmen are taken with the arm reached out in high line and the cutting edge inclining descending:

Second Engagement and Second Parry (L. J. M. P. Van Humbeek 1895) – the arm stretched out marginally to the outside with the hand at bear tallness, the pronated hand and watch situated 45 degrees over the level to the outside, the edge inclined descending toward the adversary’s thigh, and the forefront corner to corner upward to the outside.

Second (Salvatore Pecoraro and Carlo Pessina 1912) – the weapon arm is completely expanded, hand at bear tallness, the pronated hand and monitor situated 45 degrees over the even to the outside, the sharp edge inclined descending toward the rival’s flank, and the front line corner to corner upward to the outside.

Second (Leon Bertrand 1927) – the weapon arm is completely broadened, hand at bear tallness, the pronated hand and protect arranged 45 degrees over the level to the outside, the sharp edge inclined descending toward the rival’s hip, and the front line corner to corner upward to the outside.

Second (Luigi Barbasetti 1935) – the weapon arm is completely broadened, hand at bear stature, the pronated hand and watch situated 45 degrees over the even to the outside, the sharp edge inclined descending toward the rival’s hip, and the forefront corner to corner upward to the outside.

Second (Joseph Vince 1938) – the weapon arm is completely stretched out, with the turn in pronation somewhat to the outside of the outside shoulder at chest stature, the forefront to the outside, and the purpose of the sharp edge coordinated toward the rival forward knee.

Right Flank (Clovis Deladrier in 1948) – the weapon arm is 75% expanded and at the outside furthest reaches of the objective, the hand is at the level of the outside shoulder, the turn in pronation with the wrist twisted down to guide the point to the least piece of the rival’s crotch, the forefront to the outside.

Just a single source depicts a protect with the arm broadened just halfway and the cutting edge vertical:

Vertical Seconde (Antonio Domingos Pinto Martins 1895) – the arm is in the high line, twisted, the hand is before the outside shoulder, the sharp edge is held vertically with the forefront to the outside.

Except for Maestro Pinto Martins’ Vertical Second, every one of the gatekeepers depicted are either a level sharp edge with a halfway expansion at the midsection level or a descending inclined cutting edge with a full augmentation of the arm at bear level. When we consider the schools in which these Fencing Masters educated, the arm stretched out in the high line is plainly Italian in application. Pecoraro, Pessina, Barbasetti are Italian prepared and Bertrand held the Diploma of the Accademia Nazionale di Scherma of Naples; Van Humbeek’s relationship with the Italian School isn’t said in his content and the wellspring of his preparation is unverifiable.

R. A. Lidstone depicts the midriff level watch as a Short Second Guard and ascribes it to the Italian school, and Castello distinguished his saber techniques as Italian in root. Be that as it may, Rondelle and Deladrier were Maitres d’Armes prepared in the French school. The wellspring of the midsection level monitor in this way requires more research.

Either way to deal with second is utilitarian, and my standard counsel, to utilize the procedure portrayed by the Fencing Master whose work you are examining, is pertinent. When I began to fence in the 1960s, I took in the watch as one with the arm stretched out in the high line to ensure the flank as a component of the First, Fifth, Second triangle of pronated positions. Today I show present day fencing understudies Second as a repel executed with the twisted arm parallel to the ground only to ensure the underside of the arm.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *