The Half-Lunge appears in a small number of sources during the classical period. The name suggests that it is half of a lunge … but which half? Is it half the distance of a normal lunge, does it only use half of the parts of the normal lunge, or does it use most of the parts but only to half of their normal range of motion? And what is the purpose?
A convenience sample of available English language texts or texts translated into English reveals three examples and one interesting parallel.
The first example is found in Sergeant Fencing Master Christiaan Siebenhaar's Hollandsche Methode, perhaps as early as 1858, but certainly by 1861. The Dutch Method was an attempt to create a different and nationalistic school of fencing. To modern eyes the Dutch Methode is a strange, even bizarre, approach to fencing. However, it is an interesting example in the European nationalistic development of fencing and of a branch of the evolution of modern fencing. The Method did not long survive Siebenhaar's death in 1885. Siebenhaar described a half-lunge as bringing the body forward with:
(1) an extension of the rear leg,
(2) a full extension of the weapon arm with the point of the foil lowered a little, and
(3) the rear arm dropped with the palm facing outward.
In Siebenhaar's syllabus (assuming that the succession of sections represents the relative order in which the techniques are to be taught) the half-lunge preceded the lunge.
The second is provided by T. Griffiths, Professor of Fencing and Gymnastics. Professor Griffiths appears to have taught in the manner of the French School of his day. Writing in 1868 he described the "Half-Longe" as occurring with three specific movements:
(1) a full extension of the foil and weapon arm, the hand as high as the face, point aimed at the opponent's chest, all without any movement of the body.
(2) the rear arm thrown backward ending with the palm of the hand to the front approximately 4 inches from the thigh; the rear shoulder pressed well back.
(3) the knee of the rear leg is straightend and the body inclined forward on the forward leg, all with both feet remaining in place.
Griffith's syllabus is similar to Siebenhaar's with the half-lunge preceding the lunge.
The interesting example is not a half-lunge, but rather a description of the sequence of the development of the lunge taught by the Portugese Mestre d'armas Antonio Domingos Pinto Martins. Martins described his work as based on the French School but described in greater detail to meet the need for complete instructions in his country. His 1895 text described the lunge as a four step sequential process. In this process:
(1) in the first step the torso the weapon arm is extended.
(2) in the second step the fencer's torso is leaned forward and towards the outside line.
(3) in the third step the fencer extends the rear leg fully moving the torso forward over the front foot. The rear arm remains raised, as in the guard position.
The fourth step is to complete the lunge. The important point is that Martins's steps (1) through (3) are virtually the same as the steps described by Siebenhaar and Griffiths in their half-lunges. Did Martins use the half-lunge as the basis for his full lunge? Today, absent other sources, it is probably impossible to answer this question. It is important to note that the 1877 French Ministry of War fencing manual described the mechanics of the lunge in a way significantly different from Martins.
The final example is found at the end of the classical period in R. A. Lidstone's 1952 study. At this point the half-lunge was no longer a unique technique, but rather a method of shortening the lunge. When the distance no longer admitted of shortening the lunge by holding the torso upright (as opposed to leaning forward) the fencer could half-lunge using the regular technique of the lunge but only moving forward by half the length of the front foot.
DISCUSSION
Neither Siebenharr nor Griffiths provided a rationale for the tactical employment of the rear leg driven half-lunge in their texts. The drills described in detail by Siebenhaar were command based drills, ending in approximately half the cases with the command "Lunge." The command "Half-Lunge" does not appear. A modern interpretation of the intent of the technique becomes that it could have been employed to either (1) hit targets slightly outside short distance or to (2) increase the speed of the attack at short distance.
Martins did not describe a half-lunge, but his lunge technique appears to incorporate the same sequence of steps as Siebenhaar or Griffiths (except for when the rear arm was lowered). At the least this is an interesting coincidence and may suggest that his description of the lunge was based on the half-lunge.
This leads to the interesting question; from whence did the half-lunge come and why was it so infrequently described? We do not know, but we can surmise. It is interesting that all of the Masters who describe the half lunge or employ it as part of the lunge had a French connection. Based on his illustrations, Griffiths clearly taught in the tradition of the French School. Siebenhaar was probably trained in the French School (and fencing in the Netherlands returned to the French School after his death). Martins incorporates the movement pattern in the lunge suggesting that he may have learned it at some point in the period 1870 to 1890. This suggests that this is an early French School technique which survived into the early years of the classical period.
The obvious problem with the half-lunge is the weight shift to the front foot. As long as the opponent stays in place this is not an issue. However as fencing became more mobile, weight on the front foot resulted in a slower conversion to a full lunge if the opponent started to retreat. This may be why it was effectively abandoned or converted to a shortened lunge executed mechanically in the same way as the regular lunge.
France. Ministry of War; Fencing Manual; translation by Chris Slee; [fencing manual];
reprint by Long Edge Press, no place; 1877 reprinted 2017.
Griffiths, T.; The Modern
Fencer with the Most Recent Means of Attack and Defence when Engaged with an
Adversary; [fencing manual]; Frederick Warne and Company, London United Kingdom;
1868.
Lidstone,
R. A.; Fencing: A Practical Treatise on
Foil, Epee, Sabre; [fencing manual]; H. F. and G. Witherby, Ltd., London,
United Kingdom; 1952.
Martins, Antonio Domingos Pinto Martins; Manual of Fencing for Use of the Army; translation by Rui Carlos Pinto Ferreira; [fencing manual]; Livraria de Antonio Maria Pereira, Lisbon, Portugal; 1895.
Copyright 2020 by Walter G. Green III
The Half-Lunge by Walter G. Green III is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
