Foil I

FOIL. I. A leaf (from Lat. f olium) ; so used in heraldry and in plant names, e.g., the "trefoil" clover, and hence applied to any thing resembling a leaf. In architecture, the word appears for the small leaf-like spaces formed by the cusps of tracery in windows or panels, and known, according to the number of such spaces, as "quatrefoil," "cinquefoil," etc. The word is also found in "counterfoil," a leaf of a receipt or cheque book, containing memoranda or a duplicate of the receipt or draft kept by the re ceiver or drawer as a "counter" or check. "Foil" is particularly used of thin plates of metal, resembling a leaf, not in shape as much as in thinness. In thickness foil comes between "leaf" and "sheet" metal. In jewellery, a foil of silvered sheet copper some times known as Dutch foil, is used as a backing for paste gems, or stones of inferior lustre or colour. This is coated with a mix ture of isinglass and translucent colour, varying with the stones to be backed, or, if only brilliancy is required, left uncoloured, but highly polished. From this use of "foil," the word comes to mean, in a figurative sense, something which by contrast, or by its own brightness, served to heighten the attractive qualities of something else placed in juxtaposition. The commonest "foil" is that generally known as "tinfoil." The ordinary commercial I "tinfoil" usually consists chiefly of lead, and is used for the wrap- ' ping of sweetmeats, tobacco or cigarettes. A Japanese variegated foil gives the effect of "damaskeening." Many thin plates of vari ous metals, gold, silver, copper, together with alloys of different metals are soldered together in a particular order, a pattern is ham mered into the soldered edges, and the whole is hammered or rolled into a single thin plate, the pattern then appearing in the order in which the various metals were placed.

2. An old hunting term, used of the running back of an animal over its own tracks, to confuse the scent and baffle the hounds (from 0. Fr. foler, to tread). It is also used in wrestling, of a "throw." Thus comes the common use of the word, in a figurative sense, with reference to both these meanings, of baffling or de feating an adversary, or of parrying an attack.

3. As the name of the weapon used in fencing the word is of doubtful origin.

the art of attack and defence with the fencing foil, is essentially a conventional art, its characteristic limitation lying in the rule that no hits except those on the body shall be considered good, and not even those unless delivered in strict accordance with certain standard precepts. It requires for its perfect display a combination of artificial circumstances, such as even floors, featherweight weapons, and an unconditional acceptance of a number of traditional conventions. In duelling much of the foil-fencer's special achievement and brilliancy has to be sacrificed in the presence of the brutal fact that thrusts on the face or below the waist do count, insomuch as they may kill, that accidental hits in the arm or leg cannot be disregarded, for they may, and generally do, put a stop to the duel. The fact, however, that in these earnest encounters, all conventions that determine a hit vanish, does not in any way justify the notion, prevalent among many, that a successful hit justifies any method of planting the same, and that the mere discarding of all con vention in practical sword-play is sufficient to convert a bad fencer into a dangerous duellist.

Whether in foil-fencing or in the simpler and more cautious operation of the practised duellist the one golden rule remains, that one so quaintly expressed by M. Jourdain's maitre d'armes in Moliere's comedy "Tout le secret des armes ne consiste qu'en deux choses, a donner et a ne point recevoir." The modern motto is "Toucher et ne pas l'etre." This is the true reason for the con ventionalities of foil-play, the idea of "giving without receiving." In courteous bouts a hit has no real value when it is actually can celled by a counter or when it is delivered in such a way as to admit of a counter. The experience of ages and the careful con sideration of probabilities have given birth to the various make believes and restrictions that go to make sound foil-play. These restrictions are destined to act in the same direction as the warn ing presence of a sharp point instead of a button, and thus as far as possible to prevent those mutual hits (le coup des deux veuves) which mar the greater number of assaults.

With reference to actual duelling, it is recognized that it would be foolish to attempt the complex attacks, and the neat but somewhat weak parries of the foil and this had led some to assert that, for its ultimate practical purpose (which logically is that of duelling) the refined art of the foil is next to useless. Some even maintain that a few weeks' special work in that very re stricted play which alone can be considered safe on the field of honour will produce as good a practical swordsman as any who have walked the schools for years. Nothing can be further from the truth. The foil-fencer of standing, who can perform with ease and accuracy all the intricate movements of the assault, and has trained his hand and eye to the lightning speed of the well handled foil must logically prove more than a match for the more purely practical but less trained devotees of the epee de combat. All argument aside, foil-fencing is considered the basis, so far as practice is concerned, of all sword play, whether with foil, epee or sabre.

There are two recognized schools of foil-fencing, the French and the Italian. The French method, which is now generally adopted everywhere except in Italy, is described in this article, reference being made to the important differences between the two schools.

The Foil.

The foil, called in French "fleuret" and in Italian "fioretto" from the button on its point, consists of the "blade" and the "handle." The blade, which is of steel and has a quadran gular section, consists of two parts : the blade proper, extending from the guard to the button, and the "tongue," which runs through the handle and is joined to the pommel. The blade proper is divided into the "forte," or thicker half (next the handle), and the "foible" or thinner half. Some authorities divide the blade proper into three parts, the "forte," "middle" and "foible." The handle is comprised of the "guard," the "grip" and the "pommel." The guard is a light piece of metal shaped like the figure 8 (Fr. lunettes, spectacles) and backed with a piece of stiff leather of the same shape. The grip, which is grasped by the hand, is a hollow piece of wood, usually wound with twine, through which the tongue of the blade passes. The pommel is a piece of metal, usually pear-shaped, to which the end of the tongue is joined and which forms the extremity of the handle. The blade from guard to button is about 33in. long (No. 5), though a somewhat shorter and lighter blade is generally used by ladies. The handle is about Bin. long and slightly curved down wards.

The Italian foil differs from the French in having the blade a trifle longer and more whippy, and in the form of the handle, which consists of a thin, solid, bell-shaped guard from 4 to sin. in diameter, a straight grip and a light metal bar joining the grip with the guard, beyond the edge of which it extends slightly on each side. Of late years many Italian masters use French blades and even discard the cross-bar, retaining, however, the bell-guard.

In holding the 'foil, the thumb is placed on the top or convex surface of the grip (the sides of which are a trifle narrower than the top and bottom), while the palm and fingers grasp the other three sides. This is the position of "supination," or thumb-up. "Pronation" is the reverse position, with the knuckles up. The French lay stress upon holding the foil lightly, the necessary pressure being exerted mostly by the thumb and forefinger, the other fingers being used more to guide the direction of the exe cuted movements. This is in order to give free scope to the doigte (fingering), or the faculty of directing the point of the foil by the action of the fingers alone, and includes the possibility of changing the position of the hand on the grip. Thus, in parry ing, the end of the thumb is placed within half an inch, or even less, of the guard, while in making a lunge, the foil is held as near the pommel as possible, in order to gain additional length. It will be seen that doigte is impossible with the Italian foil, in holding which the forefinger is firmly interlaced with the cross bar, preventing any movement of the hand. The lightness of grasp inculcated by the French is illustrated by the rule of the celebrated master Laf augere : "Hold your sword as if you had a little bird in your hand, firmly enough to prevent its escape, yet not so firmly as to crush it." This lightness has for a consequence that a disarmament is not considered of any value in the French school.

Strangely enough, when masks began to be generally worn, and the "fleuret" or f oil was invented, fencing practice became gradually even more conventional than before. No one seems to have realized that with masks all conventions could be safely laid aside, and sword-practice might assume all the semblance of reality. Nevertheless it should be clearly recognized that the basis of modern foil-fencing was laid with the small sword alone, in and before the days of Angelo, of Danet and the famous cheva lier de St. George who were among the first to adopt the fleuret also. All the illustrious French professors who came after them such as La Boissiere the younger, Laf augere, Jean Louis, Cordelois, Grisier, Bertrand and Robert, were foil players pure and simple, whose reputations were gained before the modern epee-play had any recognized status.

Foil-fencing in England.

Under such masters the foil, both prior to the advent of the new school of epee play in the last quarter of the 19th century, and side by side with it afterwards, always enjoyed great popularity on the European continent. In England, by the middle of that century fencing with both foil and sabre had fallen into neglect. In the last twenty years of the cen tury a gradual revival set in but it was at that time an esoteric art. Its devotees were mainly men of leisure imbued with the tra ditions of the sword, who in their travels across Europe met the leading continental swordsmen and at home crossed blades with one another in the privacy of the fencing room : first at Angelo's, later at the old rooms of the London Fencing Club, whose mem bership was confined to those who had been presented at Court, or at Bertrand's famous rooms in Warwick Street. Curiously enough it was the introduction of the epee into England in 19oo that sowed the seeds of that popularity for fencing which has become so marked in recent years, a popularity which embraces all weapons, so that the foil may be said to owe a considerable debt of gratitude to its rival. The foundation of the Amateur Fencing Association in December 1901, with eighteen affiliated Clubs, was not only the sign, but, after its inception, the mainspring of this popular revival. Three years before this, however, in 1898, an event had occurred pregnant with consequences, welcomed by some but deplored by others, to the future of foil-fencing. This was the institution of the Amateur Foil Championship for which the Amateur Gym nastic and Fencing Association, the forerunner of the Amateur Fencing Association, was responsible. The foil was hereby recog nised as a competitive weapon. The argument as to whether so delicate an art as foil-fencing should be purely academic or should lend itself to competition is too long for an article of this nature. A bout with the foils has aptly been compared to a conversation, the attack, parry, riposte, counter-riposte etc., representing argu ments advanced and refuted one after the other. When discus sion becomes heated the niceties of dialectics take flight, and when fencers fight rather than fence with the foil, the play loses much of its charm. Many lovers of the foil regarded the institution of the championship with much disfavour. For them the manner of the hit mattered just as much as the hit itself, and they feared that the true art of foil play would be lost in the fierce heat of competition. These fears have to some extent been justified. Composed attacks which best exhibit the beauties of the foil are now rare in competi tive assaults. In these days it is the hit that counts and the manner of it not at all. It is upon the sudden lunge, with a simple double or disengage—or at the best a one-two—that the competitor relies for success. There was a time when the Association sought to encourage correct foil-fencing by awarding points for style in the championship competitions, but the rule was difficult to apply and was finally abandoned. In some of the later championships foot work has played quite as important a part as hand, a fact most distressing to some of the older school of foilists who were taught the art standing upon tea-trays from which the feet were not allowed to stray, and were blindfolded in their earlier lessons, the better to learn the feel of the opponent's blade.

Amateur British foil champions since 1922 have been:— Men Women 1922 R. Sutton Miss Millicent Hall 1923 Major Stenson Cooke Miss G. Davis 1924 Flight-Lieut. F. G. Sherriff Miss G. Daniell 1925 Flight-Lieut. F. G. Sherriff Miss G. Davis 1926 S. R. Bonsfield Miss G. Davis 1927 Major A. D. Pearce Mrs. Freeman 1928 J. Emrys Lloyd Miss M. Butler 1929 J. E. James Mrs. Freeman 1930 J. Emrys Lloyd Miss M. Butler 1931 J. Emrys Lloyd Miss M. Butler J. Emrys Lloyd Miss M. Butler J. Emrys Lloyd Miss J. Guiness H. D. H. Bartlett Miss G. Neligan 1936 C. R. Hammersley Miss G. Neligan (E. BR. ; A. R. H.)