FENCERS QUARTERLY MAGAZINE - ONLINE
Articles | Reviews | Subscribe | The Print Store | Writer’s Guidelines
				Epic Encounters - Part III by Maestro William Gaugler
			© (2000), Professor Emeritus of Classical Archeology Director, Fencing Masters Program, San Jose State University, CA Maestro di Scherma, Accademia Nazionale di Scherma, Naples, Italy (photo of Dr. Gaugler from the backcover of THE HISTORY OF FENCING, Laureate Press, 1998) Epic Encounters Between Italian and French Fencing Masters 1881-1911
	Troubled by the difficulties encountered in fencing the Italians, the writer, Victor Maurel, under the pseudonym, “An Old Fencer”, wrote in Le Figaro; “Above all, the purpose of fencing to Italian fencers is combat; their aim is to hit and not be hit. We, instead, admire, above all, aesthetic bouts. Here is the habitual expression, and we hear this heresy daily; ‘one beautiful hit equals ten bad ones’. With this attitude one can obtain only a conventional art that is no longer combat, and that places on in a position of inferiority when faced with men who fence seriously.... My own conviction is that our present academic school.... is recent; my own first master, Bertrand, as far as I know.... did not sacrifice everything to aesthetics. He possessed a supreme comprehension of fencing time and of counterattacks, which made him a terrifying adversary. His game was simple; he engaged the opposing steel often... his weapon was immobile in the steel grip of his fingers, and his fencing intelligence provided him with an extraordinary superiority.” In this first contact with fencers of the Scuola Magistrale the French masters found themselves at a disadvantage because they were confronted with opponents who employed a system of swordplay based largely on dueling practice. Their Italian adversaries were highly mobile; they advanced with the arm almost fully extended, and point in line; they continually sought the opposing blade; they counterattacked at every opportunity; and they did not hesitate to avoid hits by removing the target with an inquartata or passata sotto. The Parisian tour ended in a series of encounters in the salle d’armes of Louis Merignac. Antonino Tarsia in Curia in his book, Lotte e vittorie d’armi di Agesilao Greco (Naples 1936), reported, “Guasti was the first to fence Merignac, and although he fenced well, he was unable to oppose the simple but effective game of the French master; it was a complete triumph for Merignac. Next came Pessina. Having observed the previous bout, Pessina closed in quickly and executed in a series of cut-overs and replacements which neutralized his powerful adversary, so that he could leave the piste honorably. Parise had established the order of the assaults, deliberately saving Greco for the end. The young Sicilian master opened the encounter with a series of probing actions. Then, suddenly, he executed a sharp beat on the opposing steel, deflecting it to one side and scoring a powerful hit, with his blade forming a graceful arc on his opponent’s chest. This was followed by two more hits, and then Merignac called a halt. The French champion politely requested that his Italian opponent change from a black to a white jacket, presumably to make the hits more visible. When fencing was resumed, the speed of the actions increased. Greco pressed Merignac constantly, so that he could not set his formidable compound attacks in motion. And while Greco scored repeatedly, his adversary was unable to develop his attacks. At the conclusion of the counter the Sicilian clearly had the advantage.” Greco was 23 years of age and Merignac was 43. Speaking of the Greco-Merignac bout, the noted French critic, Aurelian Scholl, said of Greco: “Here is the fencer of the future: arm of steel, legs of rubber,” while Victor Maurel observed: “In this assault I did not see Merignac, I saw only Greco.” Greco’s brilliant performance brought him a return invitation to Paris in 1892. On the 20th of March, in the fencing club Contre de Quarte, Greco defeated the young and exceptionally talented master Adolph Rouleau, 16-3. Then, on the 22nd, in the Cercle d’Escrime, in a series of four consecutive bouts, he defeated Pesseau 22- 2, Vavasseur 10-4, Dacoust 7-2 and Maurice Bernhardt, the son of the famous French actress, 8-1. But his most important encounter on this visit to France was with the famous Parisian master Camille Prevost. On the 27 of March, before a crowd of more than 2000 spectators, Greco, according to Antonino Tarsia in Curia, defeated Prevost 20-4. In contrast, The Graphic reported: “M. Prevost is a fencer of the greatest skill and science, whose movements are characterized by grace and delicacy, whereas Signor Greco trusted more to his bodily strength, and endeavored to make his points by main force. His style, too, was strange and puzzling to the French professors; but, in spite of this, it was adjudged that, though Signor Greco proved the equal of M. Prevost, he was unable to conquer him.” Eugenio Pini was Greco’s chief rival in Italy. The master from Livorno was not an elegant fencer, but he was highly effective. The Graphic of 2 July 1892 described Pini’s style in his encounter with the French master Rue: “The position taken up by the Cav. Pini is a very curious one. He leans forward with his head low, his right foot well in front of him, and his left hand hanging loosely near his shoulder. On guard, he holds his foil nearly upright, and his attack is marvellously rapid and dashing. He is at all points at once, his blade flashes round his adversaries and threaten in every position, so that the artist has endeavored to give some idea of the rapidity of his play by marking in dotted lines the quivering of his foil. Rue, the Parisian fencer, is a left-handed man, who fences with much steadiness and calm, and many of Pini’s favorite attacks were rendered useless owing to this peculiarity of left-handedness. It is generally admitted that the Cav. Pini is superior to any French fencer, though some Parisian amateurs hold that Pini and Rue are about equal in the art.” When Greco and Pini fought French champions they were certain to draw large crowds. For example, on 3 September 1903 Greco fenced Lucien Merignac, the son of Louis, in Buenos Ayres before an audience of more than 4000 spectators. Antonio Tarsia in Curia tells us that the President of Argentina attended the match, as well as the principal members of his government. The crowd was restless and inattentive during the preliminary assaults; but when the final match of the evening was announced the spectators broke into a storm of applause and shouted, “Viva Greco”, “Viva Merignac”. Standing on the piste, awaiting the signal to begin, the facial expressions of the two men were in sharp contrast: Greco smiled; Merignac looked stern. When the command to fence was given the champions moved cautiously toward each other. Merignac attacked, but fell short; Greco parried, but did not riposte. This was followed by increasingly complex fencing phrases; suddenly the Italian beat his opponent’s blade aside and drove the point home. Indignant, the Frenchman retaliated by scoring with a hit with flanconnade. Greco’s next hit was off target. Merinac became more and more aggressive, Greco defended himself with a shield of circular parries. Action and counteraction followed in swift succession. The French master disengaged off target, and then drew a stop hit. In the final action of the first half of the assault, Greco parried high septime and riposted along the steel, so that his blade formed a beautiful arc on his opponent’s chest. The first portion of the bout lasted 15 minutes; now the fencers were given a five-minute rest. During the interval groups of spectators argued over the probable outcome. Would the left-handed French champion’s explosive and long lunges prove decisive, or would the Italian master’s powerful defense and counter-offense prevail? When fencing was resumed, both men closed quickly, each scoring a number of hits off target. Now each man’s full repertoire of actions was brought into play; nothing was withheld. And finally, after a total of 25 minutes of fencing time had elapsed, the President concluded the match, declaring Greco the winner, 3 hits to 1. The fencers received a huge ovation; and Greco’s friends and admirers accompanied him back to his hotel for a victory celebration. The Franco-Italian rivalry led to yet another encounter in Buenos Ayres. On 12 September 1904, Greco met the powerful French master, Alphonse Kirchoffer. Many regarded Kirchoffer as the most effective French fencer of his generation. Although small in stature, and less classical than Merignac, he was, nonetheless, an extremely difficult opponent. According to the contemporary accounts, Kirchoffer managed to upset Greco. The French fencer attacked violently and then closed distance so that his Italian adversary was unable to respond. Greco protested twice to the jury, and then, when nothing was done to prevent the rough behavior of his antagonist, countered by pushing his bell guard forcefully against Kirchoffer’s mask and hurling him backwards. The Italian language publication, La Patria degli Italiani, stated: “The first part of the assault between Greco and Kirchoffer was not beautiful to watch... Kirchoffer constantly closed distance... so that the encounter lost its artistic character... During the second half of the bout some brilliant actions were executed by both fencers. Two beautiful counter- disengagements, with an advance, were performed by Kirchoffer, of which one hit low. The quality of Greco’s hits was superior; among the most noteworthy of these was the final action in countertime... In summary, it can be said that there were six hits that were valid and artistic, four that Kirchoffer received, and two that Greco received.” There seems, however, to have been some question about which fencer suffered the greater number of hits. The spectators were divided into two camps, with each side seeing its man as the victor. In January 1911 the fencing world was shocked to learn that Kirchoffer was seriously ill, and that his entire right foot and half of his left foot would have to be amputated. To provide financial help, a benefit fencing exhibition, under the auspices of Le Figaro was organized for the 12 of February in Paris. On learning of his colleague's condition, Greco promptly sent a telegram to Bruneau de Laborie, head of the organizing committee, asking that his name be added to the list of champions participating in the benefit fencing exhibition. The exhibition took place before a crowd of over 8000 spectators in the Nouveau Cirque. Present among viewers was the head of the French government, Ariste Briand. The Italian fencers participating in the benefit exhibition included Greco and the young Italian master from Livorno, Nedo Nadi. Greco was paired with renowned French epee champion, Jean Joseph-Renaud, and Nadi with the brilliant young French amateur, Lucien Gaudin. Like Joseph-Renaud, Greco had become a convert to epee fencing. It was a long program and the audience eagerly awaited the final assault between Greco and Joseph-Renaud. The Italian fencing master, Carletti, who was present, wrote: “At the command to fence, Agesilao Greco sank into his guard position , weapon in line, perfectly correct posture, with the intention of fencing a beautiful bout to honor the art of fencing... His adversary took a very low position of invitation, which negated the possibly of effecting beautiful fencing phrases in perfect style. Greco initiated the assault by advancing with probing actions and penetration of the point. In opposition, Joseph-Renaud was forced to the limits of the piste, where Greco scored with a powerful hit to the chest. In the last phrase, the Frenchman attempted a stop hit to the mask. Greco parried and placed the final hit of the bout on his opponent’s chest. The crowd rose to its feet and warmly applauded Greco’s magnificent hit. In this last assault of the evening, Agesilao Greco, the elegant foilist and epeeist of the traditional school, and Jean Joseph-Renaud, the exponent of modern competitive epee fencing, brought the great era of professional fencing to a close. End of Part One
		The remainder of this article, Epic Encounters Part Two -- covering 1911 to 1940 is available in the December 1999, Vol 4, No. 3 of Fencers Quarterly Magazine, for $3.50 (postpaid) from FQM, 848 S. Kimbrough, Springfield, MO 65806. Dr. Gaugler's many authoritative and comprehensive books on the sport and history of fencing are available at Amazon.com. Thanks to The Sword and Malcolm Fare for allowing VFQ (now FQM) to reprint this article.
Articles | Reviews | Subscribe | The Print Store | Writer’s Guidelines
Copyright © VFQ/FQM Founded by Bruce Darling in 1996-2007  All rights reserved. Web design by Turning Records Online – 1999-2007