[GueseVekdet]

Isn't that interesting?! The sword was either ineffective, for many reasons, or the bow was favoured as a weapon in battle. I wonder if they threw the rocks or battered each other with them?

rocks were likely hand thrown or used in slings. The general idea is the majority of casualties are from ranged weapons, they weren't romantically engaging in sword duels on the battlefield, there were lobbing rocks and shooting arrows, then poking anyone who got too close with a spear.

[dselectronics]

rocks were likely hand thrown or used in slings. The general idea is the majority of casualties are from ranged weapons, they weren't romantically engaging in sword duels on the battlefield, there were lobbing rocks and shooting arrows, then poking anyone who got too close with a spear.

That's general age of empires knowledge haha

[Madjostok]

http://www.flight-toys.com/slings.htm

Isn't that interesting?! The sword was either ineffective, for many reasons, or the bow was favoured as a weapon in battle. I wonder if they threw the rocks or battered each other with them?

[Rinkeliacasse]

Warhammers and maces were developed for use against armored knights, not swords.

[sabbixsweraco]

Warhammers and maces were developed for use against armored knights, not swords.

Really, watch reclaiming the blade...

[Breevereurl]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxYvwEnKRjA

You clearly see that the european broad sword is much slower than the Katana!

[RerRibreLok]

... then poking anyone who got too close with a spear.

Which is where the zweihander came in ... uh ... handy ... and . .. such.

[valiumcheepval]

You clearly see that the european broad sword is much slower than the Katana!

It's only "slower" because the guy in the video decided to pause for a little bit between his first and second cut. How could it be "slower?" They're both weighted pieces of steel.

Also, that's not a broadsword, it's an arming sword. They were used from 1000 - 1350, while the katana (from what I understand) came into use around 1350. So why are these swords being compared? If a samurai went over to Europe or a knight went to Japan, these two swords would likely never cross.

Also, why is the arming sword more "blunt?" Did they just not sharpen it that much? That's their own damn fault, not the fault of the sword.

[j2Y6Ysmb]

Also, why is the arming sword more "blunt?" Did they just not sharpen it that much? That's their own damn fault, not the fault of the sword.

In my understanding it didn't need to cut as well... the handle wasn't the only way to hold those swords, knight often grabbed the blade itself to put more power into their stabs, have more power while pushing (maybe the sword was just too long at times?) or even grab it with two hands to use the cruciform guard as a hammer-like weapon.

see link for example: http://ejmas.com/jwma/articles/2003/..._talhoffer.jpg

[PlanTaleks]

In my understanding it didn't need to cut as well... the handle wasn't the only way to hold those swords, knight often grabbed the blade itself to put more power into their stabs, have more power while pushing (maybe the sword was just too long at times?) or even grab it with two hands to use the cruciform guard as a hammer-like weapon.

see link for example: http://ejmas.com/jwma/articles/2003/..._talhoffer.jpg

They did this for longswords, but not arming swords. Longswords were only sharp on the last few inches of their blade. They were used almost exclusively for thrusting, but they could cut with the sharpened tip.

Arming swords, like the one in the video, were too short for half swording (holding the blade with the off hand) to be effective. They were wielded with one and a half hands and used for cutting and thrusting. That is why the whole blade was sharp.

[dHXaE2h9]

See, that's another problem I have with this. There were so many swords in European history used for so many purposes, including curved cutting blades. To just pick one to represent all of European combat history seems kind of arbitrary to me.

[kathy]

Really, watch reclaiming the blade... No thanks, I much prefer my own brain and experiences, and the thoughts and musings of those that study European swords and swordsmanship. All of those that I have talked with have agreed that swords were generally not used against armored opponents. European plate mail was the reason for the invention of the warhammer because swords were mostly ineffective.
You clearly see that the european broad sword is much slower than the Katana! I see that the person swinging it is slower. Since swords don't swing themselves, it's impossible to say that a sword is slower. Personally, I can cut much better with a European bastard sword than I can with a katana because I can cut in both directions without having to turn the sword over first. Fun stuff!

You really should learn more about a subject in order to argue intelligently about it.

[Caluabdum]

European plate mail was the reason for the invention of the warhammer because swords were mostly ineffective.

May be so but I also have my reasons to believe there were techniques developed against those armors and as some said before, the range of weapons used is so large, we can't really say they only used this a
or that...

You really should learn more about a subject in order to argue intelligently about it.

I only discuss with the knowledge I have from reading texts and watching documentary's if what I say , is incorrect, blame the source ^^

[Eromereorybig]

May be so but I also have my reasons to believe there were techniques developed against those armors and as some said before, the range of weapons used is so large, we can't really say they only used this a
or that...

While swords were predominantly used in unarmored combat, there are some techniques that were used against armored foes. They were all from longsword and not arming sword, since plate armor had not been in wide use when the arming sword was.

My local library happened to have a copy of a combat manual written by Hans Talhoffer, so I borrowed it out of curiosity. I obviously didn't understand the intricacies of the techniques, but I could see the pictures of two swordsman with armor or without armor. A lot more of the armored guards involved half swording.

Also, I have no idea if this was used for battlefield combat or for personal duels. Full plate armor seems kind of extravagant for a personal duel to me, but I don't know.

[onelovemp]

I only discuss with the knowledge I have from reading texts and watching documentary's if what I say , is incorrect, blame the source Ah, you must be young! "It's not my fault!" is extremely popular with those that have grown up in the internet age. Not trying to single you out in particular, but it seems to me that there are many young people on the internet today that read lots about whatever interests them, yet never bother to do real research to figure out if what they are reading (or watching) is true, or simply done for entertainment of the masses. To loudly proclaim your views and wait for others to disprove them seems to be a pretty common occurence. Then, if they are proven wrong, the usual answer is along the lines of "How was I supposed to know that Wikipedia isn't the ultimate source of information for that?"

There you go, that's my 'old and persnickity' rant for the day. (look it up!)

[aceriscoolon]

Don't think my source is very wikipedia-like, most of what I know is from this site: www.thearma.org
go see for yourself

[Emapymosy]

Hmmm John Clements eh? You do realize he is the Stephen K. Hayes of the HES world right? I suppose you could go to Stephen Hayes' website and learn all about Japanese sword arts. However, I don't think the ninja gang would give you a very realistic outlook on it. However, to each their own. You're more than welcome to believe whatever you wish.

[nmnrIjGB]

I really do enjoy your newsletter Paul, its a shame I cant give you rep again.

[elalmhicabalp]

Hehe ... Sometimes I just get on a ranting roll.

[gettoblaster]

you could always watch that rather annoying show... 'ultimate warrior'... that would kick off a thread all by itself...it could be so much better... sigh....
Maybe I should make one on 'best armies' rather than 'best mass weapon used individually'..
I am dreading them putting up a 18 foot pike as an individual fighting weapon... If they did 'best sword vs flesh' or 'best sword vs armour' it would be far more interesting...