Why So Small?

[shenyingwu]

Why is it that fencing is done in a six feet by 40 feet strip? Why not a larger circular or square area? I would think it would make things more interesting. I guess i can't get passed the idea that you can't side step or evade very much from side to side as commonly done in unarmed combat(like in IKF, Sabaki, tourneys). Who created this idea of such a small strip. In olden days when men fought or dueled with swords(to the death) i'm sure complete freedom of movement was allowed. Or did they follow similar rules.

[MikeHarm]

I heard it came from when they used to train in the hallways of castles. Sounds as good as any other story to me.

[Duelist]

Even in the old dueling traditions limits were set upon the area the combat could take place in. In fencing a narrow strip is good because it rewards proper footwork such as advancing and retreating, opposed to two people ducking, side-stepping and circling eachother. Besides if they did it that way the wires would get so tangled.

[axelbcorlu]

well, of course, if one goes back to the 17th century or earlier, most italian rapier manuals talk about moves and tactics that could be loosely defined as "circular." this has a lot to do with the nature of the weapon; while its main function was centered around the thrust, it was still quite capable of effective cuts. the "ideal percentage" of cut/thrust changes according to which manual you read, but they're almost always there together. the spanish, with their destreza, which according to m. martinez, has been misunderstood and misrepresented as an occult, irrational, "mysterious circle," certainly seem to have a lot of circular elements.

...that is, until the long, rather cumbersome rapier (comparatively, of course. on the other hand, i've read what the 18-19th century fiction makes of them, lightning fast, etc. but that is simply not the case, especially with early rapiers) was replaced with the smallsword. of course, in italy (or spain, for that matter), the rapier was not truly abandoned until much later, not in the way it was in france and england, at least. anyway, to come back to the point, once the weapon changes, so do its tactics.

when you exclusively use the point, rather than a combination approach, circular footwork/bladework loses most of its meaning, although i would not say becomes obsolete. in classical fencing, there are several moves that utilize removing the target or counterattacking while using not-so-linear footwork, but in the end, the blade is made for the linear thrust, no matter where it comes from...

i'd also say that probably not all is explained through the function of the weapon; conventions and regulations have other sources too, and in this case one can come up with several. a linear, strip based approach is certainly more manageable than a circular and larger area. actually, when you look at pictures from the early 20th century, some of them show crowds pressing in from all sides, so that the fencers don't have half the room there is on a strip. i'm sure it made for interesting bladework...

[Aoife]

I heard it was something about when weapons changed to rapiers you needed to get power behind a thrust to penitrate your oppantant, rather than power to swing at them to lop off a limb. This means that a forwards/backwards motion would aid the movement you needed to jab your rapier or whatever into somebody.

*shurg*

But it's just something I read somewhere.

[KBayDog]

It is so you can fit as many strips as possible in one gymnasium, leaving no room for scoring boxes, director tables, etc., and ensuring that you have FIVE opponents - the one across from you, and four from the bouts going on to your left and right...

[earlie]

It is a narrow one, and if it is a square one, is like the BOXing ring it can have a ropes around then it is so safer for the watchers who it is watching at the fencer fencers. Blow hard and go against the ropes, have at thee at the corner. Keep at the FIE defending the narrow strip? So? WHy do they doing it. For why they do on doing it? Is so oiled fashioned. But it is an effective. Doe can keep it! Can it ... tell us ?

[d0gz|song]

I don't think fencing should be changed. Plus, spinning around in circles all day long could be quite dizzifying...

[angriff]

I'm hazarding a guess that the pistes we fence on now are descendants of the back alleys from 18 - 19th century Europe.. Somewhere around that time (I can't recall when and can't be bothered to check it up in my books..), duels were outlawed and the logical place to fight a duel would be a back alley, away from the eyes of the lawkeepers.

My ha'penny's worth

[oiuyt]

Funny, I'd have guessed that out in a field/woods away from town would be the logical place.

What type of a field of play was used in early-century events such as Nadi describes? I read his book but don't recall whether a mention was made either way.

-B :)

[Inquartata]

I'm with KBayDog, though I would take it back well before electric strips and so forth. A salle would only have so much room, and with a lot of students practicing and taking lessons you need to limit space somehow. Big circles would not be an efficient way of doing that.

As to alleys, duels were fought in every imaginable place. Read Brantome sometime. Fields, roads, cemetaries, back yards, bridges, roofs, rooms in inns, carriages, even the baskets of hot-air balloons! And after duels were outlawed, and the ban began to be enforced, you had what was called the rencontre: a "chance meeting", actually prearranged but conducted in such a way that it coulld be convincingly passed off as the two principals ( and their seconds and thirds, etc ) "bumping into" each other somewhere....

[rvergara]

with the actual strip there r passivity penalties, imagine what would happen in a bigger one?

[Jupiter]

more! more! bring me meade barmaid

~/-------

[Inquartata]

Sounds like you've had enough already!