CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · History & Society

Columbia Lions fencing

fencing team for Columbia University

Layered newspapers, civic records and oral-history reels arranged as chronological evidence
History and societyInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionMar 25, 2026
Entity authorityQ5149757 ↗
Source-derived summary

The Columbia Lions fencing team is the intercollegiate fencing team for Columbia University located in Manhattan, New York City. The team competes in the Ivy League within Division I of the NCAA. The university first fielded a team in 1898, under the leadership of coach James Murray. The team is currently coached by Michael Aufrichtig.

The Blue Gym (or University Gym) is home to the Columbia Lion fencing team, located within the Dodge Physical Fitness Center on campus.

History

The team was founded in 1898, and won the Intercollegiate Fencing Association national championship six times, in 1898, 1913, 1914, 1918, 1919, and 1934.

It has captured the NCAA fencing championship 16 times, most recently in 2019. This is tied with the University of Notre Dame for the most NCAA fencing titles.

The team has also won 55 Ivy League Championships, last capturing both the Men's and Women's titles outright in the same year in 2019.

The team has produced a number of Olympians, including five in 2012.

Notable former fencers

Norman C. Armitage (born Norman Cohn; 1907-1972), 6-time Olympic fencer

Robert Blum (born 1928), 2-time Olympic fencer

Bob Cottingham (born 1966), Olympic fencer

Jacqueline Dubrovich (born 1994), Olympic fencer

Sherif Farrag (born 1987), Olympic fencer

Joel Glucksman (born 1949), Olympic fencer

Asher Grodman (born 1987), actor

Alen Hadzic was named as an alternate to the 2021 Olympic team, but was suspended by the United States Center for SafeSport (SafeSport) due to findings of an investigation following allegations of rape and other sexual misconduct; an arbitrator later reduced his sanction, allowing him to go to Tokyo, though he did not fence.

Editorial summary

The public source identifies “Columbia Lions fencing” as fencing team for Columbia University. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Columbia, Lions and fencing.

Editorial reviewA useful synthesis for locating the documentary relationships between formal authority, participants and affected communities. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1898, 1913, 1914, 1918—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its value is orientation rather than verdict, with Columbia, Lions and fencing providing the first useful test.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Columbia Lions fencing”, the useful work is to connect “fencing team for Columbia University” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.

Evidence profile

The record creator and administrative purpose are central evidence, because official documentation reflects both action and institutional priorities. The source revision retrieved here is dated Mar 25, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q5149757. 1 of 1 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 1898, 1913, 1914 and 1918.

Critical limits

Official terminology may obscure informal participation, dissent or communities documented only indirectly. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Compare institutional narratives with records created by participants and affected communities. Dates and formal titles are useful anchors, but not substitutes for context.

Best used for
  • Event chronology
  • Institutional context
  • Locating named record creators
Verify next

Contemporary correspondence, government or organizational records, oral histories and cited historical scholarship.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Columbia Lions fencing”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Columbia Lions fencing primary sources, Columbia Lions fencing archive and Columbia research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Columbia Lions fencing”?
  2. What chronology connects this entry to wider political or social change?
  3. Which voices are present, absent or mediated by the institution?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Columbia Lions fencing” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.