5./6./7./9. Grave and Multiple Tempo Compound Attacks

The Classical Fencing Actions Project's Catalog of Classical Fencing Actions lists a large number of three and even four tempo compound attacks.  As early as Parise (1884), the idea of actions with three feints, termed Disordinata, was consider to be inadvisable due to the potential for successful counterattacks. When we get to the end of the classical period, Lidstone (1952) suggests that one should not use a compound attack when a simple one would suffice to hit, and that, if a compound attack is used, it should be made with as few feints as possible.  Deladrier (1948) advises that one and two blade tempo attacks should be used in the bout, and that three and four tempo actions were really only useful for developing judgement and the suppleness of the fingers, wrist, and forearm.  So what were Fencing Masters in the 1920s and 1930s teaching in foil?

One possible answer lies in Fencing Comprehensive (1934), written by Maitre Felix Grave.  Grave held two diplomas, Maitre d'Armes of the Academy of Arms of Paris and Maitre d'Armes of the Academy of the Epee of Paris.  Given the time to write and publish a manual, it seems likely that his volume reflects French practice of the 1920s.

Grave catalogs not only two tempo actions such as the One-Two and Double, but also three and four part actions.  His list includes:

Three Part Actions. There is nothing really uncommon in this selection, but it provides a full range of attacks capable of being used to defeat most combinations of high-line parries:

• One-Two-Three - a disengage added to the One-Two (two disengages in opposite directions with the additional disengage in the same direction as the first one) to deal with successive lateral parries.
• Double and Disengage - a Double (two successive disengages in the same direction to deceive a circular parry - we tend to describe this as a disengage followed by a counterdisengage) followed by a Disengage in the opposite direction.
• One-Two and Deceive the Counter - a One-Two (2 disengages, with the second being opposite in direction to the first) followed by a third disengage in the same direction as the second one to deceive the circular parry at the end.  This can also be termed a One and a Double.
• Cut-Over (Coupe) and One-Two - a coupe followed by a one-two, the second and third actions being in the opposite direction to the previous ones to deceive successive lateral parries.
• Cut-Over (Coupe) and Double -  a coupe followed by two disengages in the opposite direction to deceive the circular parry at the end.
• Treble - three disengages in the same direction to defeat two circular parries.
• Double Cut-Over (Coupe) and Disengage - two coupes in opposite directions followed by a disengage in the same direction as the first coupe to deal with a series of lateral parries.

Four Part Actions.  Grave describes only two four tempo actions with the notation that these are "rather complicated attacks, only taught to very advanced pupils …":

• One-Two-Three-Four - a series of disengages, the second, third, and fourth of which are executed in sequentially opposite directions to the preceding disengage to deceive a series of lateral parries.
• Double and Redouble - two doubles in opposite directions to defeat a parrying combination of circular-lateral-circular.

Today, given the rapid changes in modern fencing technique to exploit equally rapid changes in the rules and developments in modern physical and psychological training, it may seem quaint that three and four tempo actions survived, even if only as a training tool, during the entire classical period.  However, the fundamental nature of the sport and of technique remained relatively stable, especially as fencing as a whole became more organized and with the introduction of standard rules.

Copyright 2019 by Walter G. Green III


Grave and Multiple Tempo Compund Attacks by Walter G. Green III is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.