Increased knowledge of the materials used in the construction of the weapon itself, coupled with the technique of forging instead of casting, lead to  the production of somewhat lighter, but considerably stronger  weapons.  It meant not only that weapons could take a relatively sharp point and edge, but that point and edge would be much more durable.  Brass and bronze amour, which had  previously been able to withstand blows from bronze weapons, would cease to give the same protection in future.   Since iron is a stronger metal, less was needed to keep the swords from bending and breaking.  swords became lighter, slightly more refined and more maneuverable than their bronze predecessors.  The production of iron indeed produced a revolution.  At the dawn of history, two fundamental principles of fencing and personal combat prevailed:  

i.   The principle of Attack, either by stabbing, cutting or crushing, and

ii.  The principle of Defence, either by interposing some object between the attacker's weapon and one's own body, such as body armour or shield, or by dodging the attacker's weapon.   Google search Fencing Queensland Qld Sunshine Coast swords epee sabre epee sport fencing dogpile

During mediaeval Christendom duelling was considered as the practical basis of the judicial system.  A system that would put acceptable restrictions on the otherwise socially dangerous activities of the warrior - a religious belief that would harness the violent aggression out of which they rose.  A system that would allow an exponent to engage in martial exercise, approved the use of arms, gave opportunities for displays of personal courage and skill, and justified those activities in the name of Christendom, honour, justice, king and country. The system we know as chivalry.  It was purely a Christian system, presided over by the Christian God.  The principle behind such combat was logical enough, since God was believed to approve the just use of arms, the outcome of a trail by combat must be just.  God granted strength to the righteous and saw to it that it triumphed.  In consequence, the victor would benefit by gaining possession of all belongings of the defeated.  This included  personal wealth, properties and servants. In certain cases, a champion, or stand-in was appointed. This was a professional fighter, trained in swordsmanship. 

The tournament in the sixteenth century - 1500's

Vikings were primarily sword warriors.  From observation of their swords, they appear to be neither particularly too heavy, nor in practiced hands, particularly cumbersome.  The average weight was no more than two and a half pounds and a heavy pommel gave them a certain balance.  They were blade heavy, but that was an advantage to a heavier blade cutting weapon. There was no particular attention given to the production of a sharp point, or to its use.  

This is logical enough, when we remember that the enemy that the sword was designed to quell was usually clad in an over garment of mail.  A cutting blow with such a sword would attempt to cleave its way through such protection, or at least attempt to smash the limb beneath it, whereas penetration with the pointed end would be more difficult.  The fundamental fencing principles of Attack and Defence may be clearly apparent but principles of Distance and Timing are still quite obscure.

Smaller, lighter swords used at close distance would glance off suits of armor.  So, in order to compete against this defense, the swords were made stronger, heavier and subsequently were made longer.  During the middle ages, swords often reached great lengths and thus significantly increased weight.   To utilize this increased length and weight, the swordsman would need to use two hands to sweep the blade in relatively large arcs that, when contact was made, would smash and crash into the armor to get at the enemy encased within.  With such lengths and weight limiting the control over the use of these weapons, tactical fencing principles, such as feints, beats, pressures and their respective  deceptions, counter-time and even the parry-riposte, counter-riposte done with second-intension, were undiscovered.   

A major development during the earlier part of the Middle Ages was the improvement in body armor.  The mail byrnie of the Vikings had been sufficient to give reasonable protection to the fighting man at close quarters from the sword-blows of his adversary, whilst leaving him with a certain freedom of movement.  But the byrnie could not withstand solid blows with the axe, nor the impact of the arrow.  The logical answer to the improvement of weapons was to increase body armor.  Mail was replaced by plate, and thin plate by thicker.  The eventual result was the fully armored man, carrying some sixty pounds of sheet metal on the surface of his body.   When he fought mounted, he had a certain amount of mobility, but when he fought on foot that mobility was considerably restricted.    Increased defense has always produced new weapons designed to overcome it.  The period of heavy personal armor was accompanied by the development of weapons that would crack (axe, morning star, war hammer and mace) it or slip through its gaps (misericorde dagger), to penetrate the body inside.   It was this concept of personal defense by heavy armor that the firearm shattered.  

The rough and basic fighting tactics of mounted knights in heavy armor, hacking at each other in medieval Europe with two-handed swords reflected the reign of "brute" force in the life of that time.  The strongest arm and sword won the day, as did the strongest baron or the most warlike king.  Those were the days of crushing blows, when a knight's superiority depended on his power of wearing stronger armor and delivering heavier, more powerful blows, when strength was considered a skill.  

The metal-construction technology of that time was to a stage where they could make strong but relatively heavy blades, which were unable to hold a particularly sharp point or cutting edge.   They would basically still bludgeon each other to death.   It was primarily Offensive in nature with Simple, fencing Attacks (cuts) in composition.  Defence was either to place something between the blow/cut and the body, i.e.. armor, sometimes assisted with a shield, or to dodge the attacking movement.   Due to the heavy weight of both the sword and the protective armor,  fencing-type controlled  movement over the sword, along with the mobility of the body was near impossible. 

With the advent of gunpowder during the 13th century, the six-foot, two handed sword and heavy armor was discarded, and interest in lighter weapons and increased body movement was addressed.  No armor of that time could stop a propulsive missile discharged at such speed.  The technology was probably there, it was more of a change of direction towards increased mobility and maneuverability.  Up until this point almost all swords were heavy and required more strength than skill to maneuver. The controlled bio-mechanical finger-manipulation of the point as required in modern fencing would be impossible given these restrictions.

The noblemen who once relied on the safety of armor now needed education in the use of the sword. This pressure produced a new class of sword master. Fencing masters initially were regarded as shady characters, who specialized in secret tricks which they would sell for a hefty price, and some would even personally duel on one's behalf, in an attempt to ensure a satisfactory result. In England during the middle of the 15th century it was probably safe to admit to running a school of fence, though legislation of the 13th and 14th centuries forbidding such schools was still in force.  The professional fencing master was classed with the rogues and vagabonds, and with such a stigma didn't encourage lively, analytical and discriminating minds into the profession.  In Italy, Germany and Spain the situation was much better.  The Master-of-Arms had a special place in society.  He could teach his art and was regarded as an authority in matters of honor. The German fencing masters as early as the 14th century formed the association of Marxbruder, which gave them the monopoly over the teaching of the use of arms.  

Henry VIII of England was the first royal patron of fencing. In 1540 he granted Letters Patent to the London Masters of Defence, giving them virtually a monopoly on the teaching of fencing and the profession a new respectability, although it was not until around the mid-sixteenth century that such an occupation was officially recognized. The London Masters taught the traditional English weapons, in particular the sword and buckler.   

It was considered important at that time, for a gentleman to visit Italy as part of his education.  He would inevitably 

return to England acquainted not only with the rapier and it's use, but also with the theories of Agrippa and Grassi concerning the superiority of the thrust over the cut.   It was around 1576 that the Italian Master Rocco Bonetti, opened a school in Blackfriars, for the teaching of the newly introduced rapier.  Shakespeare would have been about twelve years old at the time.  The tragedy of Romeo and Juliet was first produced in 1595, and contains some of the most spectacular fighting scenes of any Elizabethan play.  The audiences of the day would make the highest demands regarding the execution of the theatrical fights, since they would have specialist experience of combat between the most skilled exponents in the country.

James 1, in 1605 issued a Royal Warrant giving the Masters of Defence the highest status they ever had. This warrant granted them the power to legally control the teaching of fencing.   The qualification of Scholar, Free Scholar, Provost or Master in the guild of Masters of the Noble Science of Defence was bestowed by playing a prize, or demonstrating in public one's skill with a wide range of weapons.  These prize-fights were very popular, accompanied by processions and music, and a good deal of showmanship.    These exhibitions shared the same stage with theatre actors.   Shakespeare's knowledge of swordsmanship, and his use of the various weapons throughout his plays, would have undoubtedly been sparked from these exhibitions. British Royal patronage continues even today, with Queen Elizabeth II the Royal Patron of the British Amateur Fencing Association and her Representatives throughout the Commonwealth acting as Patrons to the various National Federations and Provincial/State Associations. In France, the Academie d'Armes de Paris was established in 1656 during the reign of Louis 14th.

During this time cutting and slashing actions were more prevalent and the use of the point of the weapon was more accidental than common until the Italians began to purposely develop techniques using the point.  They found that the use of the point, as opposed to the edge of the blade, afforded them more distance from their opponent, and that they could often deceive their opponent with subtle movements of the point and thrust forward to a portion of their opponent's body where an attack was not expected, i.e. feints of attack, deceptions of parries (disengages and counter-disengages) and second-intention opportunities.  At this time, during the late 14th and early 15th centuries, skill began to dominate over brute strength in the use of the sword, and its result was the development of the rapier.   The first rapiers were often close to five feet long, but the blade was quite narrow and ended in a very sharp point.   Since cutting and slashing were no longer the predominant actions, it was not necessary to make the blades strong enough to withstand the continual blows, and a fine point and thin blade could penetrate a body much more easily than a blunter, thicker weapon.

As the use of the rapier became more dominant, and the craftsmanship and use of the weapon more refined, the  blades reduced in length in favour of maneuverability.  Even though these rapiers were quicker, they were not light enough to be used as a defensive weapon, so most often a dagger would also be carried and used in the other hand (left hand / main gauche)  to deflect their opponent's blade, while attacking with their rapier. Agility and cunning made up for the scantier protection of cloak, dagger and hand-buckler.  

The prevailing idea was the search for the discovery of the secret thrust and the universal parry .  The secret thrust was a mythical attack guaranteed of absolute success every time.  The universal parry was the parry that could defend against all attacks.  There is of course no secret thrust and universal parry but the possibility existed in the mind of the renaissance man of that time. Mystery and secrecy was associated with the profession.  The fencing master would show you his secret thrust and universal parry for a substantial fee.    You would pay dearly for these tricks.

During the 16th century it appeared that almost every master advocated a different system, consisting of his own favourite tricks. It was only when a sufficient number of schools had been formed, substantiated by a sufficient number of treatises that any basis to the art and science of swordsmanship became recognized.

The founding principles of fencing related to the rapier.  These principles were laid hundreds of years ago, primarily by the Italian masters: Marozzo, Agrippa, Grassi, Viggiani, Fabris, Giganti and  Capo Ferro.  

The French developed their principles more in relation to the court sword, but directly from the Italian masters as  shown in the Traicte contenant les secrets du premier livre sur l'espee seule, mere do toutes les armes, par Henri de Sainct Didier, gentilhomme Provencal in 1573.  However, because the practice of duelling was so predominant in France, they considered themselves to be the principle exponents of swordsmanship.

Prior to the 16th century the German swordsman was probably more efficient in handling the two-handed sword than any other in Europe. The Germans however originated little or nothing in rapier play and it appears that most of their treatise in this regards, were either translations or imitations of French or Italian books. The Spanish developed a preoccupation with the beauty and mastery of plays, involving difficult combinations and brilliant sequences, and to this complicated and isolated form of fencing eventually disappearing into obscurity.

The oldest work on fencing was written in 1531 by Antonio Manciolino, of Bologna, this was followed five years later by Achille Marozzo, also of Bologna.   The number of guards mentioned by these authors was infinite and their names ranging from the merely curious to the bizarre.    Everything applied to a broad bladed, straight, two edged sword of about 40 inches (1mtr. 16cm) in length, sharpened at the point for thrusting as well. Marozzo mentions that his master in the Art was the famous Guido Antonio of Lucca, "from whose school," he quaintly adds, "have issued more warriors than ever came out of the Trojan Horse".  

Achille Marozzo is generally looked upon as the first writer of note on the art of fencing.  He inspired a careful study on the cultivated skill of the sword quite distinct from the rough and undisciplined violent swordsmanship of the day. 

Five of his works were published between 1536 and 1615, however his third edition of "Opera Nova" in 1568 was dedicated to him, after his death.

Marozzo describes how to hold the weapon (a double edged blade) and then proceeds to explain the different uses of the "false" and "right" edges.  The sword was primarily for cutting or slicing and the safest way of fighting was to try and anticipate the adversary's attack.  He illustrates all the cuts made from the left and right sides and delivered in a circular motion horizontally, vertically upwards and downwards, or obliquely downwards.

Although the word "parry" was used in books of the 16th century, it referred to the practice of warding off the attack with either buckler, cloak, dagger, counter-attack or displacing the body with a side step.  Marozzo's "guards" were a simple collection of attitudes preceding one or two attacks.  All the guards and cuts were done with passes, one foot passing in front of the other, either forwards or backwards.  The attacks were delivered with passes either forwards or sideways and the "parry" or counter-attacks were done with either a step backwards or sideways. Movement was initiated with either foot first.

Camillo Agrippa of Rome, was an educated man, an architect, mathematician and engineer, and a personal friend of Michelangelo. Many of the plates in Agrippa's original text have been attributed to Michelangelo.  Agrippa approached swordsmanship theoretically in his "Treatise on the Science of Arms with a philosophical dialogue"  (1536) revealing fundamental errors with the existing methods of fencing, professing superiority of the thrust over the cut and simplifying the system.   He reduced the number of useful guards to four and named them, "prima, seconda, terza and quarta" corresponding somewhat to our modern prime, second, tierce and quarte.  The thrust was delivered by fully extending the arm, bringing the shoulder forward, and slipping the left foot back.  From such an analytical mind it's a wonder that he was unable to formulate the development of the lunge.  Agrippa taught this form of shoulder thrust along with the common use of the pass.  In most cases however, he favoured maintaining the right foot forward.  He was the first to mention that you should fix your eye on the adversary's hand, and not his face. (quite incorrect for today's fencing, but probably the first indication of "focused" and "directed" thought used with "central" (focused) and  "peripheral" vision).  

Giacomo di Grassi's work, "Ragioni di adoprar sicuramente l'arme" appeared in 1570, obtaining a great reputation and was attributed to forming the basis of the work of Henri de Sainct Didier, and of being imitated in Germany by Meyer and Sutor.  In 1573 the four guards of Agrippa were reduced by Henri de Sainct Didier to three, as were the thrusts which he recognized. Grassi appears to be the first to define the different parts of the blade used for offence and defence.  He divided the blade into four parts, the first two nearer the guard for defence, the third part for cutting and the part nearest the point for thrusting.  (The principle of defence, being the opposition of forte to foible, is still applicable today.) Grassi strenuously insists on the superiority of the point over the cut for direct attacks.  He does however describe in detail the ways of delivering the various cuts using shoulder, elbow and wrist, and in what situations, primarily in relation to distance, where a cut should be used in place of a thrust. A thrust requiring a greater distance than a cut.  This point Grassi carefully defines, the length and direction of paces.  Grassi was the first to define "lines" as inside, outside, high and low.  This allowed the way for closing and defending a line, engagement in a particular line and disengagement into another line.  Quite a contibution.

Angelo Viggiani's book, Lo Schermo d'Angelo Viggiani  published by his brother at Venise in 1575, fifteen years after his death, primarily reiterates the theories of Marozzo and Agrippa however he indicates, for the first time, the development of the  lunge from his "punta sopramano". "When thou shalt have a mind to deliver a punta sopramano, see that the right foot advance one great step, and immediately let thy left arm fall, and let the right shoulder at the same time press the arm forwards, dropping the point slightly downwards from above, and aiming the while at my  chest, without in any way turning the hand.  Push thy point as far as ever thou canst." Viggiani had seven guards, all of which became obsolete, except perhaps the fifth and seventh, which somewhat resemble modern quarte and tierce.

Viggiani only insisted on the right foot forward prior to his punta sopramano and maintained the common practice of teaching passes from both the right and left foot.  

Salvator Fabris' "Schermo" (around 1590) defines two measures of distance, an advancing distance, and a close distance that can be achieved by extending the arm.   From 'distance' Fabris then considers the question of 'time'.     A 'time' is a movement that one of the fencers makes within distance, thus a time is an opportunity, either for striking or assuming an advantage over your enemy". Fabris is the first master to clearly define the word "guard", "opposition", the engagement of blades, and the various deceptions on the attempt to engage by disengagement, counter-disengagement and double. Fabris refers to feints as "threatening" that oblige the adversary to take notice, and of directing such feints to "uncovered" parts.  He explains that the change from the false to the real attack should only take place when the adversary begins to parry.  By 1606 Fabris reduced the guards and passes to four and also introduced the use of the left hand in guarding, and the "volte", or turning round with one's back to the adversary, so as to avoid the thrust.  

Fabris used the left hand to deflect the opponent's blade and at the same time counter-attack to deliver the thrust

Nicoletto Giganti was the first to clearly explain the "lunge" and to apply it to most attacks.  A plate in his "Teatro" (1606) shows a man performing a "tirare una stoccata longha" which is very similar to a correct lunge of today. "To deliver the stoccata lunga, place thyself in a firm attitude, rather collected than otherwise, so as to be capable of further extension. Being thus on guard, extend thy arm and advance the body at the same time, and bend the right knee as much as possible, so that thy opponent may be hit before he can parry............in order to retire, begin the movement with the head, and the body will naturally follow on, then likewise draw back the foot" . Giganti had seven guards, but only really employed two, corresponding to the modern quarte and tierce.  He spoke of the action of "engaging" and "covering" one's self, and he gave an indication of the parry as we now use the word.  Giganti also referred to "outside" and "inside", and employed feints in thrusts with the point.

In 1626, Girard Thibault published his "Academy of the Sword" in Paris, that being the second book on the subject published in France.  

Girard Thibaust, d'Anvers

The result of not stepping correctly across the mysterious circle

Thibaust's mysterious Circle

Circles Number 1 and 2

Ridolfo Capo Ferro, is acknowledged for his "Great Simulacrum of the Use of the Sword" (1610), being the most complete book written defining and fixing the principles of the science of that time. For the first time, Capo Ferro  clearly defines the advance, as we know it today, with the right foot forward followed by the left.  He strongly favours fencing along a straight line, disapproving of "volting", crossing the legs, and all the tricks which were favoured with the ancients.  He considers "passing" as a loss of "time", which could be avoided by advancing before lunging, and the recovery as one of the most important points in fencing.  Capo Ferro goes further than any of his predecessors in his definition of defence and strongly states that the sword alone is sufficient in this regard   He defines two measures, "misura larga" as lunging distance, and "misura stretta" as close distance.   He refers to "time" as a period occupied by any single action, either by sword or foot. And talks of training as such "Anyone who wishes to become an accomplished swordsman must, beyond taking lessons from a master, strive to play every day, and with different antagonists, and when possible he must select better fencers than himself, so that by playing with so many practical men, he may see wherein dwells perfect merit."

By 1653 Charles Bisnard, a Frenchman, was the first to explain the turn of the wrist, as from carte to tierce, and the salute, which he mentions under the name of "reverence".  His book did much to advance the Art of Fencing in France that it was considered by the French and English to take first place as a school for the science, a position formerly held by Italy.  No doubt the Italians felt that the "title" had never changed hands.

The first principle of fencing to emerge was to keep the proper "measure" or "distance", that is to keep out of reach when on the defensive, and never to deliver an attack without being in striking distance.   Ironically, the perfected method of lunging and recovery, and preserving the same relative position of the feet and body in the on-guard when maintaining distance, advancing and retreating, was the last points to be finalized by masters.

The next principle was to keep proper "time", that is to keep the actions of weapons and body to a minimal so as to employ the least possible time in attack and defence, and to balance those actions carefully with the adversary, in  order to seize opportunity for attack and reduce the chances of being hit to a minimal.   This principle was one of the first to be "discovered" and understood by the masters of fence.

Finally, being "on-guard" is a notion which has greatly changed its meaning over the years.    The term "fence" a contraction of "defence" yet the idea of defence was completely merged in offence towards the adversary.  It was not until about two hundred years ago that parries began to be considered as different from attacks.  The word "guard" initially applied to preliminary positions of attack and there were as many set guards as there were ways of delivering hits.   With the developing definition of guard/s came questions of lines of engagement and disengagement.

During the 16th century, the Italians were the first to discover the effectiveness of a dexterous use of the point, rather than relying on the edge of the sword.   This was know throughout Europe as "rapier fencing". 

The increased knowledge of metal construction at this time allowed for strong and reasonable light swords.  Initially, logic suggested that rapiers used in formal personal combat should be as long as possible.   That is, to reach an opponent with the least risk to oneself.  Being able to defend with long weapons was awkward.  The solution was two weapons, a long one for attack and a short one for defence.  A dagger was often held in the left hand (main gauche ) for defence and in-fighting.  Other secondary devices were also used - a cloak or even a lantern to flash in the eyes of an opponent.  Due to the use of both hands, movement remained primarily circular, with a combination of passes and/or lunges.

Originally, it was a play of "attack"  and "counter-attack".   The attacks were simple cuts and/or thrusts and this was countered with simple offensive counter-thrusts - a first-intention strategy based on timing and simple actions. Movement was initially in a circular pattern, in an attempt to better prepare opportunities to attack.  Moving towards what would be termed, the "inside" target.  Right handers moving in a clockwise direction.  

The attacks would have been "straight thrust /cut , simple attacks " done on the "pass". This is where the rear foot passes through to become the front foot.   The development of the "lunge" came later.   The new "lunge" which developed simply from the extension of the shoulder, allowed for quick thrusts and a recovery out of "distance".  The "invention" of the lunge is attributed to Viggiani around 1575 who took Agrippa's thrust from the shoulder (1536) 

and added the front foot movement.  By 1653, according to Bisnard, the lunge was established as the main method of attack. 

While the weapon in fashion was still relatively heavy and therefore still somewhat restricted to cutting, the numerical order of precedence (1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc.) so far as concerns prime, seconde, tierce and quarte, would have corresponded fairly accurately to their relative usefulness.   Prime (1st) being the first parry that would naturally be drawn from the scabbard in an attempt to quickly take defence.  Seconde (2nd) would follow as the next most logical parry to take in that scenario and tierce (3rd) and quarte (4th) would again naturally follow.  Fencing would have most probably been taught to these set sequences of defence.

As the superiority in neatness and quickness of point over edge was recognized, this gradually lead not only to a  change in weapons but also in style of play.   The position of the hand in prime, is that which is assumed in the act of drawing the blade from the scabbard, as in a sudden quarrel, the chief object was to assume some defensive attitude as speedily as possible, such position would naturally be termed the first, which was so in point of fact.   The parry of prime which was effectual enough when a heavy cut was to be stopped was too slow and cumbrous to keep pace with the nimbler thrust.  What was originally first, literally became last.

The Italians "invented" the pronated parries which developed, based on the principles of rapier play, as being more appropriate to use against cuts.  The French are accredited with "inventing" the supinated parries, based on the principles of the court sword, and being better suited as defence against thrusts.

These principles developed as the foundation "principles of play"  of modern day fencing.    They developed from a strategy, that was originally:  

i.

simple  attack --->

ii.

simple attack --->

iii.

simple attack --->

This strategy formed the basis of the first defence principles which have led to the "conversation of the blades"  found in modern fencing.  

Small Sword of 1781

During the 17th Century a change of dress produced a revolution in swords and swordsmanship.   At the French court of Louis 14th, fashion decreed the wearing of silks and satins.  A sword was considered as an important  part of a gentleman's dress, to be ready to defend his honour at the drop of a hat.  Fashion consequently decreed the wearing of a light, short "court" sword.  This weapon served well for both offence and defence making secondary weapons dispensable. One hand duelling has predominated ever since.  Movement became linear, backwards and forwards and the lunge now dominated attacks. 

The Italians were the first scientists of rapier swordplay all through the 16th Century.  By the 17th Century the French had started to document the science of the small sword.  

The occurrence of duels, particularly in France, became staggering, and nonetheless they were often fatal.   European monarchies became more and more scared of financial ruin as wealth and properties changed hands, and there was also an ever increasing opinion developing concerning moral ethics of life and death. 

The School of Fencing by Domenico Angelo London 1787 was the first fencing manual to emphatically insist on the value of fencing as an exercise and sport of skill to be practiced for the improvement of health, poise and grace. Domenico Angelo founded the most famous school of fencing in Europe which flourished for 150 years. It was established in the heart of London in the middle of the 18th century, when the pistol was replacing the sword in duelling.

Initially the practice of duelling was legally restricted and eventually outlawed. However old practices die hard, and it was during this period that duels would still occur, but at dawn, and in secluded places.  

Duelling in the late nineteenth century

As fencing gained in social acceptance, codes of ethics developed.   A protective head and face mask was "invented"   by the French Master - de La Boessiere in around 1780.   Yet wearing of masks was resisted until the late 18th Century as it was assumed that "polite" fencers would always aim for the body.  La Boessiere's book of 1818 attempted to naturally fix the number of passes (thrusts) after positions (parries) and to put the parries "en rapport" with the thrusts.   Fencing was then considered as an essential part of a gentleman's education.  The physical body control and the discipline of character being considered inherent in sword play.  

Strictly speaking, fencing refers not to duelling, but to the practice of the sword that has developed from the non-lethal practice in the techniques and skills required to attack and defend with a blade.  

Duelling as an art and deportment with lightweight weapons and padded protective clothing became a popular past-time for the privileged wealthy.   The non-damaging weapons could easily be used for multi-touch "bouts" and "rounds".   A sophisticated game developed using the foil, which evolved from the short court sword of the 17th and 18th centuries.  The practice weapon had been the actual weapon of combat, with the edges and point "foiled".    

Although considered the "practice" weapon, the foil has existed far longer than the other two weapons.   Originally the foil had a blade about twice as thick as what it is today, with a protective tip approximating the size of a tennis ball.  The tang was simply hammered at the end of the pommel, quite distinct from the technological methods employed in the sport today. The target was limited to where one would do the most damage and the more easily reached parts of the body were declared off target.  Penetration to the trunk with annulment of any but direct hits complicated the game and added mental challenge.  The