21.2.4 The Fleche at the End of the Classical Period

The fleche appears in the second half of the classical period.  At the end of the classical period there are two distinct versions of the fleche to be found in the literature.  The older appears to be the forward pass to lunge.  The younger version appears to be a run at the opponent.  The exact chronology of when the fleche emerged and when it transitioned from one version to the other is difficult to establish.  However, it appears that the forward pass to lunge model was well established in the 1920s, and that the running model was in use by the early 1930s.

Note that in these descriptions the front foot remains the front foot through the pass and ends again as the front foot at the completion of the lunge.  For right handed fencers the front foot is the right foot and the rear foot is the left foot throughout; for left handed fencers the front foot is the left foot and the rear foot is the right foot throughout.  This eliminates the need for descriptions such as "the rear foot comes forward becoming the front foot, while the front foot becomes the rear foot."

Afred E. Finckh in Academic Fencing (1946, but largely written prior to 1928) in large part in the 1920s) described the fleche in one blade and two footwork tempos:

1. The extension of the thrust,
2. While bringing the rear foot forward to land at an angle 90 degrees to the inside off the directing line, 
3. The lunge is then executed by pushing off the front foot.

G. V. Hett in Fencing (1939) described the fleche in two parts:

1. The fencer unobtrusively as possible brings the rear foot forward of the front foot, and
2. Brings the front foot back around in the lunge.

It is hard to see how the forward pass could be unobtrusive (Hett's choice of words), although this may suggest a slow balanced movement that could be mistaken for a normal advance.

Maestro Julio Martinez Castello's The Theory and Practice of Fencing (1933) contributes to both versions of the fleche.  His depiction of the fleche (which is nor described in the text) shows a three step process:

1. The right handed fencer is on guard, 
2. The rear (left) foot passes forward in a step as the blade is extended, 
3. Followed by the right foot swinging forward into a lunge. 

The last clear example of the fleche as forward pass-lunge appears in John Kardoss's 1955 Sabre Fencing (although published outside the classical period, evidence in the text suggests this is clearly based on the author's training in the Royal Hungarian Army in the classical period):

1. From the half-lunge position (Kardoss terms this the French method) or guard position,
2. The majority of the fencer's weight is transferred as stealthily as possible to the forward foot,
3. The rear foot swings forward as far as possible landing flat,
4. End with a half-lunge.

A common comment among the authors who describe the forward pass-lunge model of the fleche is the need for control to avoid over-balancing converting the movement into an uncontrolled rush forward.  Finckh condemns the run at the opponent as being unsafe, noting that it had contributed to a fatal accident.  He cites a Federation Internationale d'Escrime suggestion that at the completion of the pass, the fencer should be able to immediately retreat in the case of a counterattack into the poreparation, and that at no time should the fencer fail to have one foot on the ground. Hett suggests that the fencer fleching often will break into a quick rush through a loss of balance or in response to the opponent retreating.  He observed that some fencers have completely abandoned the initial pass and simply sprint at the opponent. Kardoss describes this as a "desperate type of attack."

R. A. Lidstone in Fencing (1952) describes an unusual leaping version of the fleche which may be an intermediate step between the forward pass to lunge and the running models:

1. The fencer, out-of-distance, swings the body forward,
2. With or without a half-lunge,
3. Until the body's weight is completely over the front foot,
4. Then overbalancing forward and jumping as far forward as possible landing on the rear foot in the pass, with the front foot extended out behind, 
5. While extending the final attack, and finally bringing the front foot back forward to reestablish balance.

In this version the pass is an unbalanced  forward leap with the attack, but it is not followed by the lunge.

Castello's description of the running version emphasizes that this is a surprise move to be done against an opponent who maintains a position slightly out of distance or whose ability to retreat is faster than the fencer's ability to lunge.  It is executed in two parts:

1. The fencer imperceptibly shifts weight onto the forward foot,
2. When the opportunity to attack appears, the fencer hurls himself at the opponent. 

Joseph Vince, in his 1940 text Fencing, describes the running form of fleche as being executed by:

1. The rear foot is placed ahead of the front foot,
2. Followed by one or more running steps,
3. Ending in a run past the opponent on his inside line. 

Maitre Clovis Deladrier's 1948 text Modern Fencing describes the fleche as a five part action: 

1. The Arm is extended threatening target,
2. Weight is shifted from the rear to the forward leg,
3. The rear foot is placed slightly in front of the front foot,
4. The distance is closed with a rush, and
5. The fencer may rush directly at the opponent (stopping before corps a corps), passing to the outside line, or passing to the inside line (preferred).

Lidstone also describes the running fleche as a separate action distinct from his regular fleche:

1. The fencer executes the fleche by leap, and
2. Rather than landing with both feet, converts the movement into a run past the opponent.  

This allows the fencer to use the momentum generated by the leap.  The steps in the run should be as short as possible to allow the fencer to stop forward movement and regain control when needed.  

Many of the authors emphasizes that the fleche is a risky action that should be:

• employed as a surprise and/or infrequently (Castello, Deladrier, Hett, Lidstone),
• used in epee (Castello, Hett, Vince), in foil (Finckh), in foil or epee (Lidstone) or all three weapons (Deladrier) 
• used to close distance against an opponent out of distance (Lidstone) who cannot be hit by a coordinated lunge or advance lunge (Castello, Vince), although Deladrier emphasizes it's use from as close a distance as possible,
• accompanied with an attack on the blade (Vince) or taking of the blade (Castello - glide, Deladrier - opposition), although can be done as a direct action at the moment the opening appears (Deladrier), 
• has the advantage of closing the distance so that an opponent cannot effectively riposte (Lidstone),
• most valuable when employed as the opponent is recovering to guard (Deladrier), and
• understood as vulnerable to the riposte (Castello) or stop hit (Vince).

The fleche represents part of the transition from historical fencing to modern fencing that occurs during the classical period.  The version executed by forward pass and lunge is relatively safe, graceful, accelerating attack which can correctly belong in the toolbox of fencers studying systems or Masters from the 1920s forward.  The run at the opponent model (which extends from the 1930s well into the 1980s) can only be excluded by convention in your Salle.

Copyright 2019 by Walter G. Green III

The Fleche at the End of the Classical Period by Walter G. Green III is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.