I imagine it takes a lot of personal skill to do that. That much could be applied to any weapon, and frankly its a fairly useless skill at that as far a battlefield weapon. And that is what is important, not that it was a fancy execution tool.
As I understand it, when carrying out the art of ritual suicide, the second would ideally judge his blow so that the head was only partially severed, leaving a connected strip of skin to prevent the head rolling away.
It's a unique cultural thing, so unlikely to be found outside of Japan. However any sword with a sharp edge could carry out the same feat, it's a product of the skill of the wielder rather than the blade itself.
Although as a boast, it's poorly thought out...
"Look, my sword almost cut all the way through!"
Grey Templar wrote: I imagine it takes a lot of personal skill to do that. That much could be applied to any weapon, and frankly its a fairly useless skill at that as far a battlefield weapon. And that is what is important, not that it was a fancy execution tool.
But that is the point of MY DEBATE. I choose to my the claim that it has the best cutting power and control. You disagree with me and I keep making my points on this key Cutting and Control.
Every time I finally proof a point, you brush my proof aside with ... well it is useless in battlefield weapon. The point which was never part of the discussion is battlefield weapon. Katana was not a battle field weapon, why use a Katana when Odachi is longer and also two handed?
I mentioned that it is like a scalpel and you dismiss it. At least I hope you can just accept it as the best scalpel sword with control ability.
Yes, all sword can do this with the right luck and skill.. but we are picking the best tool for the job right? I can use a baseball bat to play golf, but why?
Except it has been shown that there are indeed swords that cut better than the katana, and this BS control argument you have is all about the person and not the weapon.
Grey Templar wrote: Except it has been shown that there are indeed swords that cut better than the katana, and this BS control argument you have is all about the person and not the weapon.
No it is not. The sword that show contender are Kilijs as an example.
A Katana is a scalpel sword. As sharp and clean cut with great control if trained right.
A KILIJ is design to cut but lack this great control. I think the Kilijs is as good or better than Katana in cutting because of the extra weighted head. Not the razor sharp. Yes very sharp, but not the razor. Anyway.... it is a one handed weapon and you can never have a beheading execution weapon of one blow one handed. You need perfect aiming and you need two hand for that. All execution weapon must have the one hit and done job. This one hit must be on target and all execution weapons are two handed. Hence control. Next you need to make stoppage during your hit and let the blade do the slicing just right so the head don't roll. You need a razor edge for that. Kilijs just want be as good.
BTW - some weapons that are one handed can have more force than two handed. Two handed is best for control. A kilijs is a perfect example of one handed that is better than two handed Kilijs. You swing it and let the force goes with it and not hold back as two handed. Kind of hard to explain. Some weapon like a Tomahawk is better as one hand than two handed for maximum impact hit.
You know... I thik your "control" is pretty much just about the point of balance of a blade. Closer to the hilt=> a more "nimble" blade, that is, its easier to move the tip. Its just a matter of inertia. However, a POB thats close to your hand makes it worse as a pure cuter, since theres less mass behind the cut. Thus, POB close to the hilt is great for thrusting, POB far from the hilt is great for chopping.
Ergo, your "control" is common for any sword with a similar point of balance.
I will grant you that a curved sword is slightly better for cutting, at least when it comes to large targets like a torso. A straight edge hitting a straight plane (more or less) will dissipate lots of energy across the length of the contact area. A curved sword has a smaller, single point of impact, which would allow you to cut slightly deeper. Barring draw cuts, of course.
That said, the amount of edges a sword has is irrelevant. Its just less common for a curved sword to have an edge on the back, though its not actually unheard of.
If you would have ask me to explain this... it would have been easy for you to understand.
The Katana control is this... Most weapon are design as maximum on impact. You want to be able to cut as far as it can cut right?
A katana is two handed so you can swing and stop at the right speed and slice enough with that it can cut only so much and not all the way. This weapon is optimal for you to be able to do this. A long Sword is almost impossible to do this control cutting.
Actuially no, you can do a very lethal head wound and not cut all the way with a cheap Chinese made imported machete. Ask the Hutus.
So the test of how you can make this control cut is to behead people and leave the front skin of the head left so the heads don't roll. A master Katana or Shogun executioner or other specialist executioner can do this and only with a Katana. You can I guess, in theory with long sword, but it will just be almost impossible and why do that, when you can just train with a Katana and get the more optimal cut.
Debatable. I suspect katanas were used as a the iconic samurai weapon, The kaishaku -nin you are describing wants to honour the principal of seppuku and gains honour himself with a correct cut.
As for why would you want to make this kind of execution? I think you heard of seppuku killing right? When a person gut his own guts as punishment. Well some high ranking samurai or lords who must commit seppuku in front of other high ranking lords or shogun would do this... and they usually have a executioner standing ready with a Katana ready to behead them after they have commit the act of seppuku. This is to show a bit of mercy because gutting is very painful. Now for a normal seppuku the beheading is cut and the head rolls is not a big deal. When a specialist like Shogun executioner is requested for the important death like a high ranking lords that must commit seppuku in front of many important guest like shogun, the rolling of the head is not very nice and polite at their present and also to let the dead have his head still part of his body. So this control is a must in the weapon... to cut the head and leave the skin on. Note, this is not a myth.
There were a lot of customs regarding correct seppuku, women would ask for their knees to be bound so that in death would not expose their modesty. The decision of when the kasishaku-nin was to strike and how deep was given by either the principle or sometimes their lord. Sometimes the assistant would make the mercy cut as the principal moved to grab the knife, or at the first second or third cuts. a Principal might ask for the assistant to strike at any cut and this could be overruled if the seppuku was drawn out so as to save honour of the principal.
If anyone was to be part decapitated then its just a skill move on the part of the kaishaku-nin and a point of honour.
All this is deeply ceremonial and has ceremonial meaning and not due to the katana alone being able to perform the job.
That said, the amount of edges a sword has is irrelevant. Its just less common for a curved sword to have an edge on the back, though its not actually unheard of.
For later sword designs having a double edge for the bottom quarter of the weapon was common. Its like a 'toolbox' edge, because you never know when you need it.
Tyr13 wrote: You know... I thik your "control" is pretty much just about the point of balance of a blade. Closer to the hilt=> a more "nimble" blade, that is, its easier to move the tip. Its just a matter of inertia. However, a POB thats close to your hand makes it worse as a pure cuter, since theres less mass behind the cut. Thus, POB close to the hilt is great for thrusting, POB far from the hilt is great for chopping.
Ergo, your "control" is common for any sword with a similar point of balance.
I will grant you that a curved sword is slightly better for cutting, at least when it comes to large targets like a torso. A straight edge hitting a straight plane (more or less) will dissipate lots of energy across the length of the contact area. A curved sword has a smaller, single point of impact, which would allow you to cut slightly deeper. Barring draw cuts, of course.
That said, the amount of edges a sword has is irrelevant. Its just less common for a curved sword to have an edge on the back, though its not actually unheard of.
No not POB of the blade. Must be with in the context of cutting power. Katana is actually very not balance blade at all. It has no pommel to counter balance. The blade is heavy. All the force goes with the cut. The key to control of Katana is the razor sharp, two handed. If you need to do that great control choice cut you want, you don't have to go all out and swing just right and let the razor do the work. I keep pointing this out. If you have a razor edge, you can control your cut. If you need force to make the slice more effective like a Claymore or long Sword, it is harder to control the cut.
Now the POB for control for fancy fencing will be long sword. You can spin around a long sword and do all kinds of cool tricks with it. Do you every see a Katana do this? No. You can't. It is a One hit with control kind of thing. You can't be fancy with it. I hope you understand what control cut is now.
The debate of single vs. double is that as mentioned before....you can not have a functional razor double edge blade or it will be a weak blade and break. You can have a single razor edge and have it as a functional weapon with out breakage.
Think about this if all the advantage is in the double edge, why make single edge? What good is a single edge? You are telling me that the blacksmith can sharpen the other side of the Katana or a Scimitar? They don't want to break the blade and take the draw back as a single edge but with the extra sharpness.
The rule of thumb is single can have the sharper vs. the double.
The rule of thumb of curve has the cutting advantage v.s straight.
The rule of thumb of Straight is thrust and control of the thrust.
This crap is all give or take mini or maxi stuff.
You want full power of cuts.. SINGLE AND CURVE.
You want full power of thrust w/ control... you go STRAIT AND DOUBLE. Hence why rapier is built this way.
I understand this gak and ... this has nothing to do with Katana or long sword.. it is basic weapon design.
Two handed is best for control. A kilijs is a perfect example of one handed that is better than two handed Kilijs. You swing it and let the force goes with it and not hold back as two handed. Kind of hard to explain. Some weapon like a Tomahawk is better as one hand than two handed for maximum impact hit.
Actually I disagree, shorter is best for control. You can have shorter blades two handed swords.
In fact control with a slashing weapon is more about making sure the blade isnt stuck, executions are different as you have a prepared stance and a still target.
If you really want to see control in action then you are picking the wrong weapon.
The gladius was specifically designed for control of the wound in mind. A typical gladius wound was delivered to the abdomen, in a single thrust and only penetrated two or three inches. This would be immediately debilitating and excruciatingly painful, and the recipient of the wound would take a long time to die. The roman sculpture above highlights this, but does so politically giving the Gaul some dignity and is sanitised in a way. In actuality the line of soon to be corpses writhing and screaming in front of the line of roman soldiers were a physical barrier to the opponent and a psychological incentive not to close. Gut wounds are not the type you quietly die from, especially a minimum gut wound like this which ode just enough to kill eventually but no more than that.
When facing irregular forces this type of warfare had its advantages. If facing say other romans a quicker kill would be preferred, the gladius can kill very quickly and easily also.
If you want to talk about control in a meaningful way you need a thrusting sword. Even a spear didn't have that sort of control.
Grey Templar wrote: I imagine it takes a lot of personal skill to do that. That much could be applied to any weapon, and frankly its a fairly useless skill at that as far a battlefield weapon. And that is what is important, not that it was a fancy execution tool.
But that is the point of MY DEBATE. I choose to my the claim that it has the best cutting power and control. You disagree with me and I keep making my points on this key Cutting and Control.
Every time I finally proof a point, you brush my proof aside with ... well it is useless in battlefield weapon. The point which was never part of the discussion is battlefield weapon. Katana was not a battle field weapon, why use a Katana when Odachi is longer and also two handed?
I mentioned that it is like a scalpel and you dismiss it. At least I hope you can just accept it as the best scalpel sword with control ability.
Yes, all sword can do this with the right luck and skill.. but we are picking the best tool for the job right? I can use a baseball bat to play golf, but why?
Ultimately, YOU yourself said to the effect of "I dont want this to be a fanboy vs. haters argument" and yet YOU have personally turned it into exactly that. EVERY. SINGLE. POST. You have made comes across as a fanboy under siege.
You originally asked if there were any other edged weapons that had a "quick draw attack" like the Katana, we replied in kind that, yes, there are other swords that can do that.
Sure, the Katana was best in it's "niche".... in the vacuum that was feudal Japan. Yes, it's a cutting weapon. Yes, it's "razor sharp" which, as has been pointed out numerous times, is actually a BAD thing on a BATTLEFIELD. That little video with R. Lee Ermey a few pages back was laughably funny because, as I personally pointed out, there is archeological/historical record of soldiers being hit with an overhand blow to the head wherein a European Longsword punctured through the steel plate helm, through the padding, through the skull, and the cut was finally stopped by the victim's top row of teeth.
You want to talk about accuracy and control? Fine... during a typical fight in which knights were wearing a full suit of plate armor, if they were both wielding swords, they knew their best chance of winning was to exploit the small gaps in the armor. Strike in a gap, and you are cutting flesh. Cut the flesh and you are going to eliminate that limb (cutting tendons, etc) or you are going to significantly alter that opponents' fighting style (he's most likely going to go on the defensive, and protect what's already been hit)... And we have tons of records of THAT sort of thing happening.
Every weapon, whether it's a sword, mace, axe, polearm, etc. has a set of attributes, strengths and weaknesses in them. In Europe, near constant warfare meant constant innovation and improvement, which is why we see variations to basic designs based on successes and failures:
Spoiler:
Scottish claymore vs. Swiss/German Zweihander
Each had it's "prefered" uses, but you can see the similarities in the basic design.... Each ended up in vastly different places though
You should know, I am a historian..... Im not a katana "hater", I find their blades, when properly made to be among the most beautiful in the world.... But, I'm not a fanboy either, the katana does have some rather glaring weaknesses, and it seems that in post after post, you are more than willing to look past those weaknesses to say, "LOOK!!! I told you, you're ALL haterrrrzz!!!" Many of the points made here have been spot on... Viking swords made in Scandinavia were incredibly expensive to make, and weren't of as good a quality as an Ulfberht sword. In fact, the Elfberht sword/blade was so prized and so incredibly valuable, that it was the de facto most counterfeited item in all of scandinavia... The fact that we still have many of these "forgeries" should tell you the length that the forgers went to creating a quality blade to attempt to rival and Ulfberht.
As to your bit about "luck and skill"... well, that's a bunch of BS, because the best swordsmen, regardless of where they're from aren't going to have "luck" to rely on... William Marshall didn't survive and serve under 5 English kings because he was lucky. He did so because he was good and proved his value as a living weapon.
Tyr13 wrote: You know... I thik your "control" is pretty much just about the point of balance of a blade. Closer to the hilt=> a more "nimble" blade, that is, its easier to move the tip. Its just a matter of inertia. However, a POB thats close to your hand makes it worse as a pure cuter, since theres less mass behind the cut. Thus, POB close to the hilt is great for thrusting, POB far from the hilt is great for chopping.
Ergo, your "control" is common for any sword with a similar point of balance.
I will grant you that a curved sword is slightly better for cutting, at least when it comes to large targets like a torso. A straight edge hitting a straight plane (more or less) will dissipate lots of energy across the length of the contact area. A curved sword has a smaller, single point of impact, which would allow you to cut slightly deeper. Barring draw cuts, of course.
That said, the amount of edges a sword has is irrelevant. Its just less common for a curved sword to have an edge on the back, though its not actually unheard of.
No not POB of the blade. Must be with in the context of cutting power. Katana is actually very not balance blade at all. It has no pommel to counter balance. The blade is heavy. All the force goes with the cut. The key to control of Katana is the razor sharp, two handed. If you need to do that great control choice cut you want, you don't have to go all out and swing just right and let the razor do the work. I keep pointing this out. If you have a razor edge, you can control your cut. If you need force to make the slice more effective like a Claymore or long Sword, it is harder to control the cut.
Now the POB for control for fancy fencing will be long sword. You can spin around a long sword and do all kinds of cool tricks with it. Do you ever see a Katana do this? No. You can't. It is a One hit with control kind of thing. You can't be fancy with it. I hope you understand what control cut is now.
The debate of single vs. double is that as mentioned before....you can not have a functional razor double edge blade or it will be a weak blade and break. You can have a single razor edge and have it as a functional weapon with out breakage.
Think about this if all the advantage is in the double edge, why make single edge? What good is a single edge? You are telling me that the blacksmith can't sharpen the other side of the Katana or a Scimitar? They don't want to break the blade and take the draw back as a single edge but with the extra sharpness.
The rule of thumb is single can have the sharper vs. the double.
The rule of thumb of curve has the cutting advantage v.s straight.
The rule of thumb of Straight is thrust and control of the thrust.
This crap is all give or take mini or maxi stuff.
You want full power of cuts.. SINGLE AND CURVE.
You want full power of thrust w/ control... you go STRAIT AND DOUBLE. Hence why rapier is built this way.
I understand this gak and ... this has nothing to do with Katana or long sword.. it is basic weapon design.
Two handed is best for control. A kilijs is a perfect example of one handed that is better than two handed Kilijs. You swing it and let the force goes with it and not hold back as two handed. Kind of hard to explain. Some weapon like a Tomahawk is better as one hand than two handed for maximum impact hit.
Actually I disagree, shorter is best for control. You can have shorter blades two handed swords.
In fact control with a slashing weapon is more about making sure the blade isnt stuck, executions are different as you have a prepared stance and a still target.
If you really want to see control in action then you are picking the wrong weapon.
The gladius was specifically designed for control of the wound in mind. A typical gladius wound was delivered to the abdomen, in a single thrust and only penetrated two or three inches. This would be immediately debilitating and excruciatingly painful, and the recipient of the wound would take a long time to die. The roman sculpture above highlights this, but does so politically giving the Gaul some dignity and is sanitised in a way. In actuality the line of soon to be corpses writhing and screaming in front of the line of roman soldiers were a physical barrier to the opponent and a psychological incentive not to close. Gut wounds are not the type you quietly die from, especially a minimum gut wound like this which ode just enough to kill eventually but no more than that.
When facing irregular forces this type of warfare had its advantages. If facing say other romans a quicker kill would be preferred, the gladius can kill very quickly and easily also.
If you want to talk about control in a meaningful way you need a thrusting sword. Even a spear didn't have that sort of control.
You are making my point with out even knowing it. A Katana by european standard is a short sword using two hands.
The blade of a Katana is only about 2.5 feet long and using two had of this short sword is why I keep saying it has great cutting control. You want a short two-handed sword, it is a Katana. The Katana blade is heavy for such as short weapon. The blade is thick and cause more impact cut hit. The saber is a thinner blade and much lighter than a Katana.
You keep bring other weapons that outshine katana in one aspect but lack other aspect. This is why I keep stating that Katana has it's niche and is the king of blades at that niche.
Kilijis is a contender, but lack the two handed control.
Gladius is not even comparable weapon. Not saying it is bad. The cutting power of Gladius is a joke compare to Katana. Which agin, the KING of Best Cutting Blade with control I keep claiming.
What? The American education system is even worse than I thought? So you are a native English speaker and for some reason your spelling and grammar (not to mention your style) are even worse than that of 15yo Russian kid who only learned it as a third language?
david choe wrote: and some how I am embarrassed that I have this long discussion with you....
Well, the reason you are having this long discussion with him is because your arguments are unconvincing because they show little logic and are not backed by any sort of credible evidence, yet you still refuse to accept the credible, evidence-backed positions proposed by others in this thread. We all love arguments here, but they need to be logical and backed by credible evidence. Reserve the appeals to emotion for political arguments.
Also, I feel this (very interesting btw) discussion is being drawn out because it has become clear what exactly is being argued over... Also, people mess up cutting with slashing (they are not the same) Swords are for slashing, axes and machetes for cutting.
Also, the best weapons for slashing are large two-handed weapons such as the Zweihander.
A Katana by european standard is a short sword using two hands.
No. Just, no... not even fething close.
The blade of a Katana is only about 2.5 feet long and using two had of this short sword is why I keep saying it has great cutting control. You want a short two-handed sword, it is a Katana. The Katana blade is heavy for such as short weapon. The blade is thick and cause more impact cut hit. The saber is a thinner blade and much lighter than a Katana.
No, the Katana having a thicker profile on the back end means that if the wielder misjudges his strike/cut, the weapon can get lodged in the target, creating a situation where he leaves himself vulnerable while removing it, or he needs to get rid of the blade and go to another weapon. The saber, by virtue of being thinner, and again, a cavalry weapon, means that there's much less risk of that happening. But then, when you're discussing 18th and 19th century cavalry sabers, you are talking about men whose "armor" is a wool jacket. This means the force of the strike doesn't need to be as great, and so long as the blade makes contact and the "drawing" motion happens, there's going to be some significant damage happening.
You keep bring other weapons that outshine katana in one aspect but lack other aspect. This is why I keep stating that Katana has it's niche and is the king of blades at that niche.
No... people keep bringing up weapons that outshine the Katana in all the aspects that YOU say make it the "king".... the Katana's "niche" exists purely in a vacuum... Feudal Japan did not have much contact with outside peoples, and they were quite content to just kill each other for a long time.... This basically created a situation where warfare became "ritualized" and as such, you see little to no development in weapons and armor, until European people showed up.
Kilijis is a contender, but lack the two handed control.
Gladius is not even comparable weapon. Not saying it is bad. The cutting power of Gladius is a joke compare to Katana. Which agin, the KING of Best Cutting Blade with control I keep claiming.
Control. control... you keep using this word, but I don't think it means what you think it does. Again, keep up your fanboy-ism here.
Also, the best weapons for slashing are large two-handed weapons such as the Zweihander.
Yes and no.... The Zweihander in particular was designed to counter the pike formations popular in 16th-17th century warfare. The Swiss mercenaries would use the Zweihander not so much against the infantry block, but rather to behead the enemy pike, leaving him with basically a quarterstaff or big stick.
Grey Templar wrote: I imagine it takes a lot of personal skill to do that. That much could be applied to any weapon, and frankly its a fairly useless skill at that as far a battlefield weapon. And that is what is important, not that it was a fancy execution tool.
But that is the point of MY DEBATE. I choose to my the claim that it has the best cutting power and control. You disagree with me and I keep making my points on this key Cutting and Control.
Every time I finally proof a point, you brush my proof aside with ... well it is useless in battlefield weapon. The point which was never part of the discussion is battlefield weapon. Katana was not a battle field weapon, why use a Katana when Odachi is longer and also two handed?
I mentioned that it is like a scalpel and you dismiss it. At least I hope you can just accept it as the best scalpel sword with control ability.
Yes, all sword can do this with the right luck and skill.. but we are picking the best tool for the job right? I can use a baseball bat to play golf, but why?
Ultimately, YOU yourself said to the effect of "I dont want this to be a fanboy vs. haters argument" and yet YOU have personally turned it into exactly that. EVERY. SINGLE. POST. You have made comes across as a fanboy under siege.
You originally asked if there were any other edged weapons that had a "quick draw attack" like the Katana, we replied in kind that, yes, there are other swords that can do that.
Sure, the Katana was best in it's "niche".... in the vacuum that was feudal Japan. Yes, it's a cutting weapon. Yes, it's "razor sharp" which, as has been pointed out numerous times, is actually a BAD thing on a BATTLEFIELD. That little video with R. Lee Ermey a few pages back was laughably funny because, as I personally pointed out, there is archeological/historical record of soldiers being hit with an overhand blow to the head wherein a European Longsword punctured through the steel plate helm, through the padding, through the skull, and the cut was finally stopped by the victim's top row of teeth.
You want to talk about accuracy and control? Fine... during a typical fight in which knights were wearing a full suit of plate armor, if they were both wielding swords, they knew their best chance of winning was to exploit the small gaps in the armor. Strike in a gap, and you are cutting flesh. Cut the flesh and you are going to eliminate that limb (cutting tendons, etc) or you are going to significantly alter that opponents' fighting style (he's most likely going to go on the defensive, and protect what's already been hit)... And we have tons of records of THAT sort of thing happening.
Every weapon, whether it's a sword, mace, axe, polearm, etc. has a set of attributes, strengths and weaknesses in them. In Europe, near constant warfare meant constant innovation and improvement, which is why we see variations to basic designs based on successes and failures:
Spoiler:
Scottish claymore vs. Swiss/German Zweihander
Each had it's "prefered" uses, but you can see the similarities in the basic design.... Each ended up in vastly different places though
You should know, I am a historian..... Im not a katana "hater", I find their blades, when properly made to be among the most beautiful in the world.... But, I'm not a fanboy either, the katana does have some rather glaring weaknesses, and it seems that in post after post, you are more than willing to look past those weaknesses to say, "LOOK!!! I told you, you're ALL haterrrrzz!!!" Many of the points made here have been spot on... Viking swords made in Scandinavia were incredibly expensive to make, and weren't of as good a quality as an Ulfberht sword. In fact, the Elfberht sword/blade was so prized and so incredibly valuable, that it was the de facto most counterfeited item in all of scandinavia... The fact that we still have many of these "forgeries" should tell you the length that the forgers went to creating a quality blade to attempt to rival and Ulfberht.
As to your bit about "luck and skill"... well, that's a bunch of BS, because the best swordsmen, regardless of where they're from aren't going to have "luck" to rely on... William Marshall didn't survive and serve under 5 English kings because he was lucky. He did so because he was good and proved his value as a living weapon.
I am going to politely say to you that you kind of join in late in this discussion. You are bringing straw man argument against me again.
I wish we all can just do a point by point update here ... but since it is just me against the 20 of you, I am too lazy.
I feel like many just can't except the facts that i've stated.
I never disagree on any facts. I agree with somebody who mentioned that some Indian and Kilijs were a contender of the cutting power. However, those weapons lack control cuts ability of a Katana.
The disagreement of my statements is that Katana can't be as control cut as I make the claim. Then I put a challenge that well design me a weapon that can have the best control cutting power. Almost all the weapons are not being narrow down to many single edge curve blade. The long sword finally disappear from this argument.
Many of you think that I'm some fanboi so you guys comes at me from that perspective and keep missing the topic of my claims. How many post have I have to deflect and defend about that Katana is not a battle field weapon. Yet, you are bringing this up again.
I'll say it again. My claim is ...
KATANA IS THE BEST CUTTING BLADE WITH CONTROL... now the control is more define as the control of the cut. Basically I am declaring that we are having a discussion on what would be the best sword (side arm category sword) that can have the strong cutting power and with control? If this measurement is by the numbers of Pigs then so be it. What this means is if we stack 5 pigs. Get your sword out and with one stroke cut, how many pigs can be cut.
The control cut test is if a Katana can cut 3 pigs, can a master Katana cut with the sword on the stack test.. but only cut 1.5 pig?
The great control of Katana is not just skill of the user. It is also the design of the weapon that allows the user to show this ability.
So far in this contest that i have been making ... have pretty much eliminated all strait double edge blade.
Go back to page 2 or 3 mate... I've been here since basically the beginning
I don't think you're some kind of fanboi... but you sure as heck are coming across as one.
Automatically Appended Next Post: And again... control is down to the user, not the damn weapon... it's such a ridiculous argument for you to be taking.
And if you really, reeeaaaallly want to turn this into a contest here goes...
The Crusades, The Hundred Years' War, The Battle of Hastings, The Viking incursions/battles. The Roman Empire.... I can keep on going here. ALL of these wars, and battles prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt that European weapons are superior at killing an armored foe. No, not everyone died by sword in those wars and battles, but the death tolls were much, much higher than much of what has existed in Japan.
We have also pointed out to you that the razor sharpness of a Katana, is actually a detriment because it will become dull in fewer cuts/slices than most other weapons.
What? The American education system is even worse than I thought? So you are a native English speaker and for some reason your spelling and grammar (not to mention your style) are even worse than that of 15yo Russian kid who only learned it as a third language?
david choe wrote: and some how I am embarrassed that I have this long discussion with you....
Well, the reason you are having this long discussion with him is because your arguments are unconvincing because they show little logic and are not backed by any sort of credible evidence, yet you still refuse to accept the credible, evidence-backed positions proposed by others in this thread. We all love arguments here, but they need to be logical and backed by credible evidence. Reserve the appeals to emotion for political arguments.
Also, I feel this (very interesting btw) discussion is being drawn out because it has become clear what exactly is being argued over...
Also, people mess up cutting with slashing (they are not the same) Swords are for slashing, axes and machetes for cutting.
Also, the best weapons for slashing are large two-handed weapons such as the Zweihander.
ok commie.. you want to get racist here? I have to type fast and crazy... you know.. each post is like with in 5 mins. Give me a break dude.
It has been drawn out because people want to debate with me and they don't know what the premise is. The premise is clear and I've stated multiple times, I don't know if some are trolling or ignorance or just didn't read enough of the post and decide to chime in because they think that I am a Katana fanboi and keep bring this straw man argument of this X weapon is beat Katana or Katana can't cut armor.
Basically I am declaring that we are having a discussion on what would be the best sword
No... THIS is your OP:
david choe wrote: I was wondering if there are any western swords that can do a quick draw attack like the Katana.
I can't think of any.
And THAT is what we're discussing... If you wanted a discussion on best sword, which many, many of us have pointed out better swords, you should have put it in the OP.
And the hubris of declaring what we are discussing.
The Katana is a decent weapon, made of inferior materials. AGAIN, it is good within the vacuum that was feudal Japan.... If the Samurai had had to face the armies of the HRE, or Swiss Mercenaries, they would have been soundly defeated. Period. End of. The reason for that is the combined arms and armor of Europeans.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: Go back to page 2 or 3 mate... I've been here since basically the beginning
I don't think you're some kind of fanboi... but you sure as heck are coming across as one.
Automatically Appended Next Post: And again... control is down to the user, not the damn weapon... it's such a ridiculous argument for you to be taking.
And if you really, reeeaaaallly want to turn this into a contest here goes...
The Crusades, The Hundred Years' War, The Battle of Hastings, The Viking incursions/battles. The Roman Empire.... I can keep on going here. ALL of these wars, and battles prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt that European weapons are superior at killing an armored foe. No, not everyone died by sword in those wars and battles, but the death tolls were much, much higher than much of what has existed in Japan.
We have also pointed out to you that the razor sharpness of a Katana, is actually a detriment because it will become dull in fewer cuts/slices than most other weapons.
so what do you think my claim is? Tell me, because your point is not within the discussion. I would rather debate with people who disagree on the statement that I am claiming and not put words in my mouth. If you can't tell what I am claiming, then how are you going to know that you are raising a straw man argument.
Factors that matter that are never made clear by Deadliest Warrior;
Weight of the carcass (they didn't even use a full carcass on their episode with the Katana, just a pig leg, many later episodes like the Kilij used a full carcass).
Type of pig (because for all I know it matters )
Level of prepardness for the blade prior to cutting, materials in its construction, the authenticity of manufacture
Factors that the show just entirely ignores
The person swinging the sword (size, muscle strength, skill)
It's not a reliable test. It's not even scientific. It's "how cool would it be if we got a bunch of old weapons and wacked stuff with them?"
Going back to this comment by Lord of Hats, I thimnk there is much to be added from observation.
Take a look at these two videos of 'pig tests':
Pig is tied taut at the hind legs
the second blow has less power than the first, it severs but not as cleanly.
The blow was also wide open using all the force of the body, an execution blow. Ih combat this person might not have lived to strike.
Pig is tied loosely at the hind legs
The stance is more reasonable and starts from a guarded position but is still open.
So not all pig tests are the same, and if they are not performed in similar conditions the same the evidence gained is unscientific.
I am trying to find a video earlier of a 'pig test' that included the katana and didn't cut through the animal, admittedly the european sword didnt either, but in the video the user slashed at the pig carcass which was on a table, and from a fighting stance rather than with a wide open executioners cut. I found that particular video far more useful as it would show morel likely battlefield wounds. The video makers were impressed the swords broke through to the bone in an army rather than bisected the animal.
Basically I am declaring that we are having a discussion on what would be the best sword
No... THIS is your OP:
david choe wrote: I was wondering if there are any western swords that can do a quick draw attack like the Katana.
I can't think of any.
And THAT is what we're discussing... If you wanted a discussion on best sword, which many, many of us have pointed out better swords, you should have put it in the OP.
And the hubris of declaring what we are discussing.
The Katana is a decent weapon, made of inferior materials. AGAIN, it is good within the vacuum that was feudal Japan.... If the Samurai had had to face the armies of the HRE, or Swiss Mercenaries, they would have been soundly defeated. Period. End of. The reason for that is the combined arms and armor of Europeans.
Well then.. you made a bit of mistake.
The OP was best sword for the quick draw. Then it came to past and the conclusion that I believe were none exist except for a Katana as a quick draw strike. Some suggested daggers and try to tell me that quick draw were useless because that hate Katanas. I mean... then that topic was done. Conclusion were no quick draw attack exist as a method of attacking using that weapon. Only Katana has this method of attack as a signature move.
Then to topic switch to the discussion of the Katana.
And I made a bold statement that Katana was the best cutting (with control) sword in the sword side arm category. This debate is still going on. Many attempt to give me a straw man argument such as Katana can't cut armor... can any side arm sword do that, i pointed right back. Then Katana will break vs. plate armor... again.. why would you choose a Katana to cut armor? Derail the discussion into what I never claim the Katana is.
Your claim is that Katanas are the uber-most-precisest weapon evar!!!
What I am saying, is that in all the things that I listed, armor is generally involved... As such, when using a sword Europeans absolutely MUST be more precise than you seem to think possible for them.
The Katana, as a weapon of Japanese warriors, who, were by and large extremely isolationist until Europeans arrived on their island, never had to progress or change. A sword is meant to kill. Plain and simple. And I think many of us have shown, and proven time and again, that there are other blades that are better at it.
Again, that the Japanese craftsmen could get the kind of quality they did out of the materials they had is amazing, and some of the antique pieces you can see in museums are quite beautiful to look at. But to claim that it's the BEST is simply wrong.
But then so are anime samurai with magic katanas emitting elemental forces.
Neither advance the case.
Hear, hear.
Katanas, nowadays, are mostly used for flashy stuff. There are a lot of gimmicky uses for them, such as e.g. splitting a full water bottle in half, splitting cards in half in mid-air, Haidong Gumbo and similar stuff. Katanas are excellent tools for this as their top-notch sharpness and thin edge allows for sharp and precise cuts; with a skilled user, of course. I couldn't do stuff like this with a regular sword, let alone axe. Vs. a water bottle, for example, most of the time, if not all the time, you would end up just smacking the water bottle around, brutally destroying it in the process. That's what a katana is good for. As stated before, however, as a weapon, it sucks and stinks off vs. actual comparable weapons.
I think a true test is to have Pig or dummy and have a none bias guy swing the weapon and see the impact hit right?
I understand we have to keep it as scientific as possible. But test can be done and I am sure has been done.
If you guys seen the youtube video or know about Katana is general and understand other weapons in the same category...
You know that Katana is one of the best in the Cutting category. Lets not make an argument in the details. You can keep trying to proof to this "fanboi" that I am wrong about Katana.. but the proof will be nit picking at most. Katana is one of the best if not the best for cutting. Enough of this Pig testing. The tatami bamboo chopping test has been done to death too.
Scalpel or control detail of this cut, again.. it is in the user. But Katana give the user a optimal tool for this task much better than most other sword.
I think I have made a very strong case about this two claims. Even if you disagree with me, can you give me your answer of what side arm sword can out class Katana in this two category? The Kilijs is close, but I think lost to the control issue.
If you do not like my claim and disagree that my claim is useless... then WTF? I didn't say Katana beat Rapier in duels, but I am saying that a Katana can cut better than rapier. That was just an example.
So lets end this debate, pick a weapon(side arm sword) that you think can out cut a Katana in the same test of cutting for both weapons.
Then see which weapons can make the control cut better? Example, if a X blade can cut 3 pigs... then can the cutter choose to just cut one or two and not go all out to cut 3?
Put up or shut up kind of thing you know? Stop with the my test is useless and this proof nothing as a battle sword.
This proof that I was correct that it is the best cutting blade with control. You want to disagree with my proof, then show me. Don't change the disagreement and turn this into a Katana vs. X sword of your choice.
I have also stated that I am a purest....I would love to see a better sword than Katana in this Test. I would love to tell other that Katana is not the best at cutting with control anymore ..... it is this X sword from Spain that I have never heard of. Man I hate being type cast as Katana fanboi.
Your claim is that Katanas are the uber-most-precisest weapon evar!!!
What I am saying, is that in all the things that I listed, armor is generally involved... As such, when using a sword Europeans absolutely MUST be more precise than you seem to think possible for them.
The Katana, as a weapon of Japanese warriors, who, were by and large extremely isolationist until Europeans arrived on their island, never had to progress or change. A sword is meant to kill. Plain and simple. And I think many of us have shown, and proven time and again, that there are other blades that are better at it.
Again, that the Japanese craftsmen could get the kind of quality they did out of the materials they had is amazing, and some of the antique pieces you can see in museums are quite beautiful to look at. But to claim that it's the BEST is simply wrong.
See, you do not know what my claim is...
I said that Katana is the best side arm sword in the control cutting category.
Control is down to the user. Done. I have done exactly ZERO training with a Katana, but I have done some with European style swords (my only "battle ready" sword that I own is a true Hand and a Half Sword/ aka, Bastard Sword). As such, if it were me personally being the "guinea pig" in a pig cutting, card cutting, etc. type "test" the results would probably favor the European sword.
If we're demonstrating how different swords cut through, say, a flattened cardboard box, the one thing the Katana will do, is cut through cleaner than many other straight blades.
IIRC, many of the 18th and 19th century cavalry sabers were designed off of examples taken from Japan, the ME, India, etc. and refined in ways that "only" Europe can do. As such, I think that a saber from that period COULD give the Katana a run for the money.
But, all of these lab tests are only so useful. Swords, with few exceptions are designed for killing. And we've pointed out there are plenty that do it better than a Katana. Sure, you can butcher a million pigs, or bamboo rolls to prove how sharp a blade is, but that doesn't mean it's effective anywhere else.
And if we want to be technical, ALL of this is completely OT. As I reposted your own OP earlier in this page.. you asked a question "are there other swords that have the quick draw ability" To which, we answered you. THAT should have been the end of discussion. It was you who turned this into a "katana vs X" debate.
david choe wrote: I was wondering if there are any western swords that can do a quick draw attack like the Katana.
I can't think of any.
Well then.. you made a bit of mistake.
The OP was best sword for the quick draw.
I left your OP quoted there... No where in that does it say "best". you say, and I'll quote again: "I was wondering if there are any western swords that can do a quick draw attack like that Katana"
There's not even a hint of a "best at" discussion here. If that is really what you wanted, you should have put that in the OP.
Frazzie gave the first reponse and quickly noted that it was about technique not sword that was important, then left the thread.
When Frazzie is the one being wise around here something is wrong.
I think I have had my say.
Yes Japanese had specific quick draw techniques which are a result of the societal conditions of the Tokugawa shogunate.
Other swords can be drawn very quickly but few had any specific quick draw technique developed as it was not necessary.
This is not due to the 'superiroity' of the katana, had the Japanese cultural weapon been different a quick draw style for that would have been required.
Again exceptions, like Roman short sword quick draw drills existed, and some weapons were designed as secondary weaponsd and ease of access was an important factor in their design without going as far as 'knives'. The scramseax and epee are two such examples from different periods of history.
But then so are anime samurai with magic katanas emitting elemental forces.
Neither advance the case.
Hear, hear.
Katanas, nowadays, are mostly used for flashy stuff. There are a lot of gimmicky uses for them, such as e.g. splitting a full water bottle in half, splitting cards in half in mid-air, Haidong Gumbo and similar stuff. Katanas are excellent tools for this as their top-notch sharpness and thin edge allows for sharp and precise cuts; with a skilled user, of course. I couldn't do stuff like this with a regular sword, let alone axe. Vs. a water bottle, for example, most of the time, if not all the time, you would end up just smacking the water bottle around, brutally destroying it in the process. That's what a katana is good for. As stated before, however, as a weapon, it sucks and stinks off vs. actual comparable weapons.
see... this comment is a bit full of bias right?
Yeah you just mentioned that this Katana is great at cutting.
Then as a weapon it sucks ....vs. comparable weapon. That is a powerful statement. It sucks?
What are you going to compare a Katana against? Whatever comparable weapon you compare against, it won't suck. It will have advantages and disadvantages...
All side arm swords will be just about the same in a side arm combat... usually meaning fighting with no armor. You have your main weapon decide for the foes you are facing right? Side arm is that, your last choice because something you don't want to happen has happened like you lost your main weapon and such.
Give me a side arm sword that can fight vs. heavy armor. Long Sword is better at heavy armor than a Katana... but you know that long sword is gak compare to a Kanabo war club in cracking armor. The advantages for the Katana than long sword will be against armor less opponents like standard farmers. In a lets slaughters the farmers, the kill rate will be the Katana than long sword right... the idea of Katana going after none combatant will kill quicker than Long sword. Not much more ... but lets not nit pick. A sword is a freaking sword. All swords has advantages and disadvantages. You pick and choose why you want that advantages in that weapon and accept the disadvantages of that weapon. A rapier might be better than a Katana, but I would rather choose a sword that has the cutting power of a Katana... sometime you don't want a sword to kill people as your side arm... sometime you want a sword to have to cutting power. Example, how do you quickly execute a prisoner faster than a Katana with a rapier? Best kill with a rapier would be a stab at the heart right?
What I am saying is that all sword has functions and niche... but for you guys ... it is just unacceptable that a Katana can have it's niche and excel at it too.
However, I am here to claim that Katana out shine other swords in its cutting ability.
A pair of scissors is great for cutting paper. A knife can cut paper, but is far worse at doing so. But if I want to whittle something out of a piece of wood, Ill always choose the knife. I could use the scissors of course, but it being great at cutting doesnt make it useful for whittling. See what I mean?
What I am saying is that all sword has functions and niche... but for you guys ... it is just unacceptable that a Katana can have it's niche and excel at it too.
However, I am here to claim that Katana out shine other swords in its cutting ability.
Excelling and being the Best are two different things.
How about this as a test, since you love them so much... Let's line up 60 pigs. Take one man. For 30 pigs, he gets a sharpened, expertly crafted Katana. For the other 30, he gets an expertly crafted, sharpened "European Sword" (longsword, hand/half sword, claymore, whatever). He then takes one swing at each pig, without any sharpening whatsoever in between. See how long that Katana holds up. You are correct in that most straight bladed European swords aren't AS sharp as a Katana, but the quality of steel that goes into them means they hold what edge they do have longer than something like the Katana with it's razor thin blade.
It's the same reason why you're supposed to sharpen you kitchen knives before or after each use: the blade/cutting edge is so thin for greater sharpness, but the trade off is that the cutting edge gets dull quicker.
Control is down to the user. Done. I have done exactly ZERO training with a Katana, but I have done some with European style swords (my only "battle ready" sword that I own is a true Hand and a Half Sword/ aka, Bastard Sword). As such, if it were me personally being the "guinea pig" in a pig cutting, card cutting, etc. type "test" the results would probably favor the European sword.
If we're demonstrating how different swords cut through, say, a flattened cardboard box, the one thing the Katana will do, is cut through cleaner than many other straight blades.
IIRC, many of the 18th and 19th century cavalry sabers were designed off of examples taken from Japan, the ME, India, etc. and refined in ways that "only" Europe can do. As such, I think that a saber from that period COULD give the Katana a run for the money.
But, all of these lab tests are only so useful. Swords, with few exceptions are designed for killing. And we've pointed out there are plenty that do it better than a Katana. Sure, you can butcher a million pigs, or bamboo rolls to prove how sharp a blade is, but that doesn't mean it's effective anywhere else.
And if we want to be technical, ALL of this is completely OT. As I reposted your own OP earlier in this page.. you asked a question "are there other swords that have the quick draw ability" To which, we answered you. THAT should have been the end of discussion. It was you who turned this into a "katana vs X" debate.
david choe wrote: I was wondering if there are any western swords that can do a quick draw attack like the Katana.
I can't think of any.
Well then.. you made a bit of mistake.
The OP was best sword for the quick draw.
I left your OP quoted there... No where in that does it say "best". you say, and I'll quote again: "I was wondering if there are any western swords that can do a quick draw attack like that Katana"
There's not even a hint of a "best at" discussion here. If that is really what you wanted, you should have put that in the OP.
Sorry one of my post was deleted.
The quick draw attack weapon, what weapon can do this beside a Katana? I mean a real training method for this to be effective.
I don't think there was ever an example that can be given. So I think Katana stands alone in this category.
I think the thread was derail because people turn this into a Katana vs. X. I didn't start that. I still am not starting this, see the minor problem here. You keep suggesting that I turn this into Katana vs. X.
But lets move on.
Control cutting comment. You are a train Bastard swordsmen, can you choose to make your bastard sword cut like hacking an arm just enough where the arm will still hang? I know this is weird, but the design of Bastard sword is not design for control slice , it is design as a tool to what ever it hit.. cut in half or enough to kill it.
A Katana is design to have control of your cut. That is the control that I am talking about. It is not a "clumsy" weapon. Yes control cut comes with training, but if you must and you want to ... can you design a Bastard Sword with control cutting?
The question is not why would you want control cutting, the question is because Japanese wanted to create a weapon that can achieve that. Back to 40K... A slannish champion would choose a Katana because they want the perfect cuts for it's beauty. You just want your bastard sword to be Korne style and kill you.
I think it is a great human achievement that we have created a sword that has the ability to be a scalpel in cutting. Look at a Katana for what it is. I mean.. I like to drink beer to get a buzz, but sometime I enjoy a glass of wine because I like the taste.
A katana is a fine weapon, a scalpel like sword. It would be foolish to consider all weapons must be chain axe like in damages and control slices is not important.
Anyone else find it kinda weird that only four of his post aren't in ot?And all of them are about a guys miniatures being stolen?No "I collect (insert army here" or modelling or anything related to miniatures HE owns. Im not saying david is a troll but I aint saying he isn't.
Tyr13 wrote: A pair of scissors is great for cutting paper. A knife can cut paper, but is far worse at doing so. But if I want to whittle something out of a piece of wood, Ill always choose the knife. I could use the scissors of course, but it being great at cutting doesnt make it useful for whittling. See what I mean?
See what I mean? You are proofing my point.
A Katana can behead people and a Rapier can not, so what is your point? Every weapons is design to do a function. You think that function is fighting to win at all times.... what is fighting at all times? Why have a sword as your side arm if a hand crossbow will be better right? just accept it that all weapons has pros and cons.
What about the function of a sword being a sword? A sword is a cutting too first and the ability to cut things is where we use it to kill things. So by that logic a very sharp cutting power is an important feature.
Your analogy of the scissor vs. knife is the same as katana vs. war hammer. They design for different things.
So lets pretend that all weapons in this world were only swords. Then somebody invented armor. Then the next guy invented a mace... but they call it Heavy sword. It is a heavy stick with very heavy steel ball. And you down grade the "HEAVY sword" as stupid would be incorrect.
Katana serve it purpose as a side arm and in fighting against non armor is rightfully a scary weapon.
What I am saying is that all sword has functions and niche... but for you guys ... it is just unacceptable that a Katana can have it's niche and excel at it too.
However, I am here to claim that Katana out shine other swords in its cutting ability.
Excelling and being the Best are two different things.
How about this as a test, since you love them so much... Let's line up 60 pigs. Take one man. For 30 pigs, he gets a sharpened, expertly crafted Katana. For the other 30, he gets an expertly crafted, sharpened "European Sword" (longsword, hand/half sword, claymore, whatever). He then takes one swing at each pig, without any sharpening whatsoever in between. See how long that Katana holds up. You are correct in that most straight bladed European swords aren't AS sharp as a Katana, but the quality of steel that goes into them means they hold what edge they do have longer than something like the Katana with it's razor thin blade.
It's the same reason why you're supposed to sharpen you kitchen knives before or after each use: the blade/cutting edge is so thin for greater sharpness, but the trade off is that the cutting edge gets dull quicker.
OK, lets just say you are correct... my point is still proven right?
Lets just pretend that first 10 pigs Katana cuts are cleans and European sword from the first pig is messy and not clean. But cut 10 pigs none the less. A pig 11, Katana cuts starts to look like European sword cuts. and by Cut 25 Katana won't even cut anymore .... yet European cut all 30 pigs...
Lets just assume this test were true... We have two different functions and we all know what advantages and disadvantages are right? So if you are a rich person who can afford 5 Katanas and want to slice pigs... at 50 pigs a day... would you pick a European sword or Katana? The smart and rich person who wants clean cuts.. would just rotate the Katanas. The niche is establish that Katana can cut better, but if you want a longer lasting blade that can't not be exchange.. .would be the european sword. Most important of all in this pig example. If you need the best cut for the job.. meaning just 1 pig that day... you know Katana will be better.
this concept is not difficult to understand and I have been expressing this concept...
What is wrong with that? Why can you just accept the Katana as that special and very useful niche? You get my point? I understand the durability of european sword. Do you not understand the niche of Katana and usefulness of that niche?
The quick draw attack weapon, what weapon can do this beside a Katana? I mean a real training method for this to be effective.
I don't think there was ever an example that can be given. So I think Katana stands alone in this category.
It was pointed out by another user that you CAN do this with things like a Cavalry saber, however you are correct in that there was little to no "formal training" for such a move among Western Swordsmen wielding a saber. This is because the danger presented that would necessitate a quick draw type of strike wasn't present in Europe, while it was in Japan.
This is neither a bad thing nor a good thing. It's just a thing. Basically, just because there's no "textbook maneuver" that is practiced with a saber for a quick draw strike doesn't mean it can't do it. It simply means that there wasn't a use for such a maneuver among Europeans and as such, such techniques were lost to history.
Control cutting comment. You are a train Bastard swordsmen, can you choose to make your bastard sword cut like hacking an arm just enough where the arm will still hang? I know this is weird, but the design of Bastard sword is not design for control slice , it is design as a tool to what ever it hit.. cut in half or enough to kill it.
A Katana is design to have control of your cut. That is the control that I am talking about. It is not a "clumsy" weapon. Yes control cut comes with training, but if you must and you want to ... can you design a Bastard Sword with control cutting?
I think there is some fault in your premise here... I think, and I could be wrong on this, that you are coming from a false notion that longswords, hand/half swords, etc. are "hacking" weapons. Thing is, they are slicing weapons very similar in line with the Katana. The "perfect" strike with a longsword isn't the same motion as a butcher's knife, it's using the arc of the swing combined with the straight edge of the blade to create the cut... Most videos I've seen on the Katana techniques are the opposite, ie, using the curve of the blade along with a more "straight" swing to use the curve of the blade to create the cutting motion. the cutting motion, or target of the cut, in an ideal situation, the longsword should make contact with the target closer to the hand guards, with the blade drawing along it's length until the complete strike ends with the point of the sword leaving the target.
Now, the techniques for claymores and other very large swords will differ, but then their uses and purpose were often different from the "standard" longsword.
A katana is a fine weapon, a scalpel like sword.
Katanas are fine weapons indeed. I wouldn't go so far as to compare them to scalpels. Yes, they have very precise techniques, and in the little reading I've done on the subject, the true test of the swordsman in Japan, particularly in a duel, was in reading his opponent's technique and being able to react quicker. Miyamoto Musashi comes to mind here, as he is widely regarded as the absolute best duelist in all of Japan in his age. He realized that most of the duel was not in the metal, it was between the ears of the combatants.
I think that the processes used to make Katanas are fascinating, but to downplay the quality of European weapons, IMO, severely discredits the masters who made them, whether you're talking damascus steel or Toledo steel, creating a good sword took months or even years.
Da krimson barun wrote: Anyone else find it kinda weird that only four of his post aren't in ot?And all of them are about a guys miniatures being stolen?No "I collect (insert army here" or modelling or anything related to miniatures HE owns. Im not saying david is a troll but I aint saying he isn't.
What the heck are you talking about?
You want to talk about miniatures all day? Dude, I have been around since 2ed 40k and 5th edition WHFB. At the moment I am sick and bored of talking about army list and miniatures. The only thing that never change about this hobby are that people will always talk about the same topic for the different edition. What I find more interesting at this moment are gammers perspective about other subject.
I don't want to talk to you which is better, a power axe or power sword or should I high light my Orcs green skin with yellows...shhh...
The quick draw attack weapon, what weapon can do this beside a Katana? I mean a real training method for this to be effective.
I don't think there was ever an example that can be given. So I think Katana stands alone in this category.
It was pointed out by another user that you CAN do this with things like a Cavalry saber, however you are correct in that there was little to no "formal training" for such a move among Western Swordsmen wielding a saber. This is because the danger presented that would necessitate a quick draw type of strike wasn't present in Europe, while it was in Japan.
This is neither a bad thing nor a good thing. It's just a thing. Basically, just because there's no "textbook maneuver" that is practiced with a saber for a quick draw strike doesn't mean it can't do it. It simply means that there wasn't a use for such a maneuver among Europeans and as such, such techniques were lost to history.
Control cutting comment. You are a train Bastard swordsmen, can you choose to make your bastard sword cut like hacking an arm just enough where the arm will still hang? I know this is weird, but the design of Bastard sword is not design for control slice , it is design as a tool to what ever it hit.. cut in half or enough to kill it.
A Katana is design to have control of your cut. That is the control that I am talking about. It is not a "clumsy" weapon. Yes control cut comes with training, but if you must and you want to ... can you design a Bastard Sword with control cutting?
I think there is some fault in your premise here... I think, and I could be wrong on this, that you are coming from a false notion that longswords, hand/half swords, etc. are "hacking" weapons. Thing is, they are slicing weapons very similar in line with the Katana. The "perfect" strike with a longsword isn't the same motion as a butcher's knife, it's using the arc of the swing combined with the straight edge of the blade to create the cut... Most videos I've seen on the Katana techniques are the opposite, ie, using the curve of the blade along with a more "straight" swing to use the curve of the blade to create the cutting motion. the cutting motion, or target of the cut, in an ideal situation, the longsword should make contact with the target closer to the hand guards, with the blade drawing along it's length until the complete strike ends with the point of the sword leaving the target.
Now, the techniques for claymores and other very large swords will differ, but then their uses and purpose were often different from the "standard" longsword.
A katana is a fine weapon, a scalpel like sword.
Katanas are fine weapons indeed. I wouldn't go so far as to compare them to scalpels. Yes, they have very precise techniques, and in the little reading I've done on the subject, the true test of the swordsman in Japan, particularly in a duel, was in reading his opponent's technique and being able to react quicker. Miyamoto Musashi comes to mind here, as he is widely regarded as the absolute best duelist in all of Japan in his age. He realized that most of the duel was not in the metal, it was between the ears of the combatants.
I think that the processes used to make Katanas are fascinating, but to downplay the quality of European weapons, IMO, severely discredits the masters who made them, whether you're talking damascus steel or Toledo steel, creating a good sword took months or even years.
Yeah and I agree that any weapon can be train for quick draw... but a Katana is very optimal for this technique... so a techniques was perfected. My intention was to to put Katana on the mantel for this achievement. It is interesting right to see if other people who know about weapons can give you new information. I was wonder if there were other weapons.. but from the responds here .. there were none and I got bashed as Katanas fanboi... fight starts...haha.
I understand about the strait blade cutting ability. I know it is not a hacking blade. As I stated in my control cuts. Would it be possible for a well train expert X sword to use that X sword to behead people with the skin on as I have mentioned that about Katana. So in your study.. are there method that allows you to not curt something in half but stop at mid point. Example is the human head cut...
Can a master Bastard swords train and achieve this using a Bastard Sword? I have swing both Katana and Bastard sword. I just can not see myself ever being able to control my cuts with a Bastard Sword. But with a Katana and I am way below novice with the weapon, I can cut damn good with a Katana and can sometime even stop slicing the water bottle test.. like cutting it half way in and still leave the bottle not all the way cut off. This is why I say that the Katana is very easy for anybody to pick up and start cutting away because the blade is very sharp and easy to control compare to most blades. This niche is one hell of an amazing niche. As weapons collector and hobbyist in this "geek" weapons.. I do fine this amazing niche very very unique and not many weapons out there can do.
The quick draw attack weapon, what weapon can do this beside a Katana? I mean a real training method for this to be effective.
I don't think there was ever an example that can be given. So I think Katana stands alone in this category.
It was pointed out by another user that you CAN do this with things like a Cavalry saber, however you are correct in that there was little to no "formal training" for such a move among Western Swordsmen wielding a saber. This is because the danger presented that would necessitate a quick draw type of strike wasn't present in Europe, while it was in Japan.
This is neither a bad thing nor a good thing. It's just a thing. Basically, just because there's no "textbook maneuver" that is practiced with a saber for a quick draw strike doesn't mean it can't do it. It simply means that there wasn't a use for such a maneuver among Europeans and as such, such techniques were lost to history.
Control cutting comment. You are a train Bastard swordsmen, can you choose to make your bastard sword cut like hacking an arm just enough where the arm will still hang? I know this is weird, but the design of Bastard sword is not design for control slice , it is design as a tool to what ever it hit.. cut in half or enough to kill it.
A Katana is design to have control of your cut. That is the control that I am talking about. It is not a "clumsy" weapon. Yes control cut comes with training, but if you must and you want to ... can you design a Bastard Sword with control cutting?
I think there is some fault in your premise here... I think, and I could be wrong on this, that you are coming from a false notion that longswords, hand/half swords, etc. are "hacking" weapons. Thing is, they are slicing weapons very similar in line with the Katana. The "perfect" strike with a longsword isn't the same motion as a butcher's knife, it's using the arc of the swing combined with the straight edge of the blade to create the cut... Most videos I've seen on the Katana techniques are the opposite, ie, using the curve of the blade along with a more "straight" swing to use the curve of the blade to create the cutting motion. the cutting motion, or target of the cut, in an ideal situation, the longsword should make contact with the target closer to the hand guards, with the blade drawing along it's length until the complete strike ends with the point of the sword leaving the target.
Now, the techniques for claymores and other very large swords will differ, but then their uses and purpose were often different from the "standard" longsword.
A katana is a fine weapon, a scalpel like sword.
Katanas are fine weapons indeed. I wouldn't go so far as to compare them to scalpels. Yes, they have very precise techniques, and in the little reading I've done on the subject, the true test of the swordsman in Japan, particularly in a duel, was in reading his opponent's technique and being able to react quicker. Miyamoto Musashi comes to mind here, as he is widely regarded as the absolute best duelist in all of Japan in his age. He realized that most of the duel was not in the metal, it was between the ears of the combatants.
I think that the processes used to make Katanas are fascinating, but to downplay the quality of European weapons, IMO, severely discredits the masters who made them, whether you're talking damascus steel or Toledo steel, creating a good sword took months or even years.
Yeah and I agree that any weapon can be train for quick draw... but a Katana is very optimal for this technique... so a techniques was perfected. My intention was NOT to put Katana on the mantel for this achievement. It is interesting right to see if other people who know about weapons can give you new information. I was wonder if there were other weapons.. but from the responds here .. there were none and I got bashed as Katanas fanboi... fight starts...haha.
I understand about the strait blade cutting ability. I know it is not a hacking blade. As I stated in my control cuts. Would it be possible for a well train expert X sword to use that X sword to behead people with the skin on as I have mentioned that about Katana. So in your study.. are there method that allows you to not curt something in half but stop at mid point. Example is the human head cut...
Can a master Bastard swords train and achieve this using a Bastard Sword? I have swing both Katana and Bastard sword. I just can not see myself ever being able to control my cuts with a Bastard Sword. But with a Katana and I am way below novice with the weapon, I can cut damn good with a Katana and can sometime even stop slicing the water bottle test.. like cutting it half way in and still leave the bottle not all the way cut off. This is why I say that the Katana is very easy for anybody to pick up and start cutting away because the blade is very sharp and easy to control compare to most blades. This niche is one hell of an amazing niche. As weapons collector and hobbyist in this "geek" weapons.. I do fine this amazing niche very very unique and not many weapons out there can do.
Speaking of quick draw attacks, the shashka can do that. It is even a common technique used by Cossacks. I think a shashka would work just as well as a katana for a quick draw attack.
Da krimson barun wrote: Anyone else find it kinda weird that only four of his post aren't in ot?And all of them are about a guys miniatures being stolen?No "I collect (insert army here" or modelling or anything related to miniatures HE owns. Im not saying david is a troll but I aint saying he isn't.
What the heck are you talking about?
You want to talk about miniatures all day? Dude, I have been around since 2ed 40k and 5th edition WHFB. At the moment I am sick and bored of talking about army list and miniatures. The only thing that never change about this hobby are that people will always talk about the same topic for the different edition. What I find more interesting at this moment are gammers perspective about other subject.
I don't want to talk to you which is better, a power axe or power sword or should I high light my Orcs green skin with yellows...shhh...
Whats the point in joining a miniatures forum if all you do is talk about katanas?What are these "gammers?" I assume gammers are normal people who have lives outside of gammering?Why not go to a forum about weapons to talk about weapons?You don't see me joining a star wars forum to talk about ww2 tanks do you?
If you use the sword in the style it was designed for a bastard sword is equally if not far more dangerous than a katana. They were supposed to be used in their entirity. You would use the blade, the hilt and the pommel in a fight and you'd use the weight of the blade to your advantage, crushing limbs and torsos if you couldn't cut them apart.
Katanas are much lighter so yeah you'd probably have much better control of it but in reality if you're using them correctly it probably doesn't matter. Even more so it's a weapon designed to be a slashing weapon and it's too light to do much against heavy armour which given its origin I don't think it came up against much.
Iron_Captain wrote: Speaking of quick draw attacks, the shashka can do that. It is even a common technique used by Cossacks.
I think a shashka would work just as well as a katana for a quick draw attack.
Well- I'm speechless. That looks absolutely amazing.
Iron_Captain wrote: Speaking of quick draw attacks, the shashka can do that. It is even a common technique used by Cossacks.
I think a shashka would work just as well as a katana for a quick draw attack.
Interesting, can you provide proof of this?
To make sure that you understand this. A quick draw is not the speed of drawing out your weapon quick and start fighting.
A quick draw is to unshed your blade and strike to kill all with one stroke. There are reasons why other short swords can do this but very stupid to do because it mess you up at your fight stance and risk getting kill in return.
Yes, a Gladius is possible to do this, but because of the strait blade, your strike is to hope that this short weapon will poke your enemy... chances are your enemy will step one step back you you missed. It is better to just draw out your short sword and start to fight.
I have never heard that any saber can do this and does it as a form of attack.. just because in theory it can.. doesn't mean it should. You might get counter attack and die for this clumsy attempt. No doubt Samurai who actually would do, has been trained and choose to do this because it is a form of attack.
Iron_Captain wrote: Speaking of quick draw attacks, the shashka can do that. It is even a common technique used by Cossacks.
I think a shashka would work just as well as a katana for a quick draw attack.
Interesting, can you provide proof of this?
To make sure that you understand this. A quick draw is not the speed of drawing out your weapon quick and start fighting.
A quick draw is to unshed your blade and strike to kill all with one stroke. There are reasons why other short swords can do this but very stupid to do because it mess you up at your fight stance and risk getting kill in return.
Yes, a Gladius is possible to do this, but because of the strait blade, your strike is to hope that this short weapon will poke your enemy... chances are your enemy will step one step back you you missed. It is better to just draw out your short sword and start to fight.
I have never heard that any saber can do this and does it as a form of attack.. just because in theory it can.. doesn't mean it should. You might get counter attack and die for this clumsy attempt. No doubt Samurai who actually would do, has been trained and choose to do this because it is a form of attack.
Cold Steel guy does it in this video: (at 0:40, and again more fluidly at 0:50)
Da krimson barun wrote: Anyone else find it kinda weird that only four of his post aren't in ot?And all of them are about a guys miniatures being stolen?No "I collect (insert army here" or modelling or anything related to miniatures HE owns. Im not saying david is a troll but I aint saying he isn't.
What the heck are you talking about?
You want to talk about miniatures all day? Dude, I have been around since 2ed 40k and 5th edition WHFB. At the moment I am sick and bored of talking about army list and miniatures. The only thing that never change about this hobby are that people will always talk about the same topic for the different edition. What I find more interesting at this moment are gammers perspective about other subject.
I don't want to talk to you which is better, a power axe or power sword or should I high light my Orcs green skin with yellows...shhh...
Whats the point in joining a miniatures forum if all you do is talk about katanas?What are these "gammers?" I assume gammers are normal people who have lives outside of gammering?Why not go to a forum about weapons to talk about weapons?You don't see me joining a star wars forum to talk about ww2 tanks do you?
Really that is your comment? This is a not an off topic forum? Why are you in this thread if you want to talk about toys? At least my is about weapons which I know most of us are interested in it because we play with toys that use weapons. You seen other threads that talk about movies and some even about real life issue like ISIS!
The questions is why are you following my thread history and actually did the research to track my post like a little groupie?
Iron_Captain wrote: Speaking of quick draw attacks, the shashka can do that. It is even a common technique used by Cossacks.
I think a shashka would work just as well as a katana for a quick draw attack.
Interesting, can you provide proof of this?
It was carried blade up, like a katana, and that allowed for several ways to draw the weapon and strike
Down:
Spoiler:
To the side:
Spoiler:
Or the most popular way, up:
Spoiler:
The side and up draws make it very easy to do a quick draw attack, and Cossacks aren't fans of being taken by suprised, so it is more then likely something they do train in, though I couldn't find and video's of it (hardly surprising honestly)
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh snap, ninja'd by the Captain
Iron_Captain wrote: Speaking of quick draw attacks, the shashka can do that. It is even a common technique used by Cossacks.
I think a shashka would work just as well as a katana for a quick draw attack.
Interesting, can you provide proof of this?
To make sure that you understand this. A quick draw is not the speed of drawing out your weapon quick and start fighting.
A quick draw is to unshed your blade and strike to kill all with one stroke. There are reasons why other short swords can do this but very stupid to do because it mess you up at your fight stance and risk getting kill in return.
Yes, a Gladius is possible to do this, but because of the strait blade, your strike is to hope that this short weapon will poke your enemy... chances are your enemy will step one step back you you missed. It is better to just draw out your short sword and start to fight.
I have never heard that any saber can do this and does it as a form of attack.. just because in theory it can.. doesn't mean it should. You might get counter attack and die for this clumsy attempt. No doubt Samurai who actually would do, has been trained and choose to do this because it is a form of attack.
Cold Steel guy does it in this video: (at 0:40, and again more fluidly at 0:50)
Wow nice find. Good to know. I have to say that I am so happy that out of all this debate and after 12pages .. I finally got a respond and OT. Total respect to this weapon. I will have to study more about this weapon. thank you.
Katana .schmatana..yeah its pretty and sharp..blah blah blah..
but if we want to talk a sword sucess story..as a primary weapon...that kicked butts and took names..that adapted, and was never a subject of obsession or angst if broke or lost...it was tool of empire..and likely was one if not the most widespread and widely used sword in history (not sure but it did get around)
I give you the Gladius...
A little sword with big sandles for all the ones that followed it to fill.
you pick up a katana and it feels nice and artistic and is pretty in your hand...but a gladius feels like a tool..a tool, like a hammer..built to do one thing, kill your enemy, practical useful in almost any situation when paired with its scutum buddy..with a combat record to match.
The trick is to come to a foe unarmed and while he draws his sword/laughs in your face you punch him in the face and proceed to beat him to death relentlessly.
And if you are wearing plate by chance, then use spiked gauntlets
No other company has slaughtered as many hollow pigs, cardboard tubes, bamboo sticks or cardboard Spartans. They scare me....
Also I feel kinda stupid since I train with this type of sword. I know its purely an English weapon but why do they call it a "bastard" sword?
The video is not a bastard sword. The bastard sword is the very long and heavy sword. I think (I might be mistaken here) the nick name is bastard sword because the user were usually hard ass warriors and they are just bunch of "bastards".
The trick is to come to a foe unarmed and while he draws his sword/laughs in your face you punch him in the face and proceed to beat him to death relentlessly.
And if you are wearing plate by chance, then use spiked gauntlets
No other company has slaughtered as many hollow pigs, cardboard tubes, bamboo sticks or cardboard Spartans. They scare me....
Also I feel kinda stupid since I train with this type of sword. I know its purely an English weapon but why do they call it a "bastard" sword?
The video is not a bastard sword. The bastard sword is the very long and heavy sword. I think (I might be mistaken here) the nick name is bastard sword because the user were usually hard ass warriors and they are just bunch of "bastards".
a "bastard" sword is just another name for a hand and a half sword...between a single handed broad sword etc and a full two hander (claymore..greatsword etc)..the name bastard may be a joke about the design not actually being fully derived from one handed or 2..
thats why I call it a hand and half..or long sword, european sword design had so many branches and schools of thought that one persons twohander could be another persons hand and half...
No other company has slaughtered as many hollow pigs, cardboard tubes, bamboo sticks or cardboard Spartans. They scare me....
Also I feel kinda stupid since I train with this type of sword. I know its purely an English weapon but why do they call it a "bastard" sword?
The video is not a bastard sword. The bastard sword is the very long and heavy sword. I think (I might be mistaken here) the nick name is bastard sword because the user were usually hard ass warriors and they are just bunch of "bastards".
I think its because of the fact that a hand and a half sword bridged the gap between longsword and a claymore, and is the "bastard child" of the two.
Makes sense to me at least
Automatically Appended Next Post: Ninja'd again...
Soo'Vah'Cha wrote: Katana .schmatana..yeah its pretty and sharp..blah blah blah..
but if we want to talk a sword sucess story..as a primary weapon...that kicked butts and took names..that adapted, and was never a subject of obsession or angst if broke or lost...it was tool of empire..and likely was one if not the most widespread and widely used sword in history (not sure but it did get around)
I give you the Gladius...
A little sword with big sandles for all the ones that followed it to fill.
you pick up a katana and it feels nice and artistic and is pretty in your hand...but a gladius feels like a tool..a tool, like a hammer..built to do one thing, kill your enemy, practical useful in almost any situation when paired with its scutum buddy..with a combat record to match.
OK ... this is so geeky. But sometime I play fantasy Zombie apocalypse situation in my head and what blade weapon will I choose. Gladius was my choice. I like the one handed and short blade to get close and can still fight... especially inside fighting like in houses. I hate Machete and I think Gladius is the best zombie killer. Not to mention if you have to kill human... this beats machete. Gladius in one hand and pistol in my other hand.
David I wasn't reffering to the video. And I know what a bastard sword is. I've used one for more than two years. And also, it isn't that long and heavy compared to some - take any Great sword except for the Scottish claymore which is surprisingly lighter
Also I feel kinda stupid since I train with this type of sword. I know its purely an English weapon but why do they call it a "bastard" sword?
Firstly, because it's quicker to say than "hand and a half sword"
But also, and more importantly, because of it's properties. It wasn't as large as a claymore, nor was it as small/light as a longsword. Many had blades that, from the guard were as long as a single-handed long sword. But, the grips/pommel were lengthened to allow for a two-handed grip. So, it's kind of a "bastard" between a single hand, and two hand weapon.
David I wasn't reffering to the video. And I know what a bastard sword is. I've used one for more than two years. And also, it isn't that long and heavy compared to some - take any Great sword except for the Scottish claymore which is surprisingly lighter
No other company has slaughtered as many hollow pigs, cardboard tubes, bamboo sticks or cardboard Spartans. They scare me....
Also I feel kinda stupid since I train with this type of sword. I know its purely an English weapon but why do they call it a "bastard" sword?
The video is not a bastard sword. The bastard sword is the very long and heavy sword. I think (I might be mistaken here) the nick name is bastard sword because the user were usually hard ass warriors and they are just bunch of "bastards".
I think its because of the fact that a hand and a half sword bridged the gap between longsword and a claymore, and is the "bastard child" of the two.
Makes sense to me at least
Automatically Appended Next Post: Ninja'd again...
Whatever weapon, whatever warrior, nothing beats a group of Roman legionaires in a testudo/phalanx formation. It's like walking through an oversized food processor.
Artorias the Abysswalker wrote: Whatever weapon, whatever warrior, nothing beats a group of Roman legionaires in a testudo/phalanx formation. It's like walking through an oversized food processor.
Artorias the Abysswalker wrote: Whatever weapon, whatever warrior, nothing beats a group of Roman legionaires in a testudo/phalanx formation. It's like walking through an oversized food processor.
Except the Scots... there's a reason the Romans built a wall, and put a sign up that read "You shall not pass" on the Roman side of it
Whatever weapon, whatever warrior, nothing beats a group of Roman legionaires in a testudo/phalanx formation. It's like walking through an oversized food processor.
Artorias the Abysswalker wrote: Whatever weapon, whatever warrior, nothing beats a group of Roman legionaires in a testudo/phalanx formation. It's like walking through an oversized food processor.
Except the Scots... there's a reason the Romans built a wall, and put a sign up that read "You shall not pass" on the Roman side of it
to be fair it was mainly to keep their sheep safe....
okay, but one has to admit, they were a formidable fighting force, the Roman Legions. I always have that image in my head, after a battle and you see this centurion covered in gore with blood dripping from the horsehair plume on his helm.
Also, what do you thing is the coolest looking real-life helm of any time? My votes go to the crusader greathelm or centurion helm with sideways crest.
Artorias the Abysswalker wrote: okay, but one has to admit, they were a formidable fighting force, the Roman Legions. I always have that image in my head, after a battle and you see this centurion covered in gore with blood dripping from the horsehair plume on his helm.
Also, what do you thing is the coolest looking real-life helm of any time? My votes go to the crusader greathelm or centurion helm with sideways crest.
Artorias the Abysswalker wrote: okay, but one has to admit, they were a formidable fighting force, the Roman Legions. I always have that image in my head, after a battle and you see this centurion covered in gore with blood dripping from the horsehair plume on his helm.
Also, what do you thing is the coolest looking real-life helm of any time? My votes go to the crusader greathelm or centurion helm with sideways crest.
Yes, the Romans were fierce, when they were prepared. Look up the Battle of Teutoburg Forest for what I'm talking about
As for helmets, there's too many for me to choose from... I love the looks of the Corinthian helm with transverse crest (many actual Spartans wore this, particularly those in leadership roles)
winged hussar..hell everything about them was awesome..
but I have worn kubato, great helms...bucket helms..sallet, viking goggle helm..and roman..and I will say I prefer the roman..you can hear..see and most importantly breath in it, it is open faced but thats why you have a nice big shield.
the hussar helm has alot in common with a roman legionaire helmet.
The Kukri is among the nastiest weapons there are. Not only does it have pretty good abilities, its form also confuses people not familiar with it, it can even stab and it's easy to hide. Worse, if that thing gets a hit on you, you're dead as crap. The sheer amount of techniques to turn and twist with this thing properly is insane. Due to its shape, it also is very easy to cut arteries, sever muscles etc.
but I have worn kubato, great helms...bucket helms..sallet, viking goggle helm..and roman..and I will say I prefer the roman..you can hear..see and most importantly breath in it, it is open faced but thats why you have a nice big shield.
the hussar helm has alot in common with a roman legionaire helmet.
Im sure you know, but I should point out, that most Viking helms were actually quite open, and quite breathable.. For instance with this one:
Spoiler:
I'd be more worried getting my beard caught in the chain mail
Ohh... and this is totally not historical, but I thought it was too awesome not to share:
I'd never settle for anything but a Viking Helmet. Anyone who ever wore a closed helmet can understand. Vision? Barely any. Hearing stuff? Nigh impossible. Weight? My poor neck. Viking Helmets, to me, are a good compromise between confortable and protective.
As Soo perfectly pointed out: peripheral vision is the absolutey key to winning a battle.
Artorias the Abysswalker wrote: Whatever weapon, whatever warrior, nothing beats a group of Roman legionaires in a testudo/phalanx formation. It's like walking through an oversized food processor.
As Soo perfectly pointed out: peripheral vision is the absolutey key to winning a battle.
Depends. Things like the Froghelm or Sallet would certainly see battle, (less the froghelm, and more the Sallet), but they would be used exclusively by mounted knights. As such, the damage they do on the charge is important, and they don't "need" as much peripheral vision as someone who started on foot. Of course, if that knight gets unhorsed, then its a different ball game....
Frogmouth helms were primarily for jousting tournys..to minimize the chance a sliver of wood could get stuck in your eyes...
and helms used by mounted troops could afford to be more restricted in vision, foot troops needed less obstructed fields of view.
and when unhorsed...well the reason that some knights wore a helm under a great helm is the likely reason for that...pitch the bucket and get your view back.
Artorias the Abysswalker wrote: Whatever weapon, whatever warrior, nothing beats a group of Roman legionaires in a testudo/phalanx formation. It's like walking through an oversized food processor.
Except the Scots... there's a reason the Romans built a wall, and put a sign up that read "You shall not pass" on the Roman side of it
to be fair it was mainly to keep their sheep safe....
And they werent worth conquering properly.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sigvatr wrote: The Kukri is among the nastiest weapons there are. Not only does it have pretty good abilities, its form also confuses people not familiar with it, it can even stab and it's easy to hide. Worse, if that thing gets a hit on you, you're dead as crap. The sheer amount of techniques to turn and twist with this thing properly is insane. Due to its shape, it also is very easy to cut arteries, sever muscles etc.
Very, very, very nasty gak.
Its ok I guess. The real lesson is don't feth with a Gurkha.
Soo'Vah'Cha wrote: Frogmouth helms were primarily for jousting tournys..to minimize the chance a sliver of wood could get stuck in your eyes...
Yes, though it wasn't unheard of for them to be used in battle... I would say that ANY helm that was fastened to the shoulders in a fixed manner was primarily a jousting/parade/tourney piece and not really designed for battle use.
purplefood wrote: The Gurkhas are scary people and not because of their weapons.
Agreed, but a weapon designed to disembowel on the first thrust is still scary.
Most short swords will do that. You can easily make a messy cut with a gladius, you just need to twist before you draw. I don't know kukri is designed fro the precision slow cut of a gladius though, I suspect not as its a hacking weapon.
The main feature of the kukri is that its very good for cutting jungle plants and combat both, and is lightweight. that and it is still feared, for good reason, in the age of the assault rifle.
Da krimson barun wrote: Anyone else find it kinda weird that only four of his post aren't in ot?And all of them are about a guys miniatures being stolen?No "I collect (insert army here" or modelling or anything related to miniatures HE owns. Im not saying david is a troll but I aint saying he isn't.
What the heck are you talking about?
You want to talk about miniatures all day? Dude, I have been around since 2ed 40k and 5th edition WHFB. At the moment I am sick and bored of talking about army list and miniatures. The only thing that never change about this hobby are that people will always talk about the same topic for the different edition. What I find more interesting at this moment are gammers perspective about other subject.
I don't want to talk to you which is better, a power axe or power sword or should I high light my Orcs green skin with yellows...shhh...
Whats the point in joining a miniatures forum if all you do is talk about katanas?What are these "gammers?" I assume gammers are normal people who have lives outside of gammering?Why not go to a forum about weapons to talk about weapons?You don't see me joining a star wars forum to talk about ww2 tanks do you?
I don't think your posts are helping at all. Who cares if he doesn't talk about miniature's here, neither do I, I havnt touched a miniature in months does that mean I can't talk in the OFF TOPIC section either? And don't make fun of his spelling, 1 it just make you look like the troll and rather poor at debate, and 2 clearly English is not his first language so cut him some slack.
There's a reason the Ghurka's were feared, this blade is one of those reasons.
I'll have to agree, those are not only incredibly versatile, but my god do they lob like an Axe! You're a knife khukri stop pretending you're a friging sword
Seeing how the guy at about 5:30 slice the pig. I have to say that I withdraw my comment on the "control" of the Katana cuts. Seems like with practice and master of the weapon, a person can control the great sword and behead with the skin on.
I still stands by the power of Katana cuts.
With modern technology... any sword can be just as hard or sharp. All things being equal now. You can make a Egyptian bronze sword in steel or Gladius(I think roman only had iron, I could be wrong) in steel. You can make a long sword with razor edge as a Katana. Everything is equal now. It comes down to the design of the weapon.
I stand by the logic and physic of impact and resistance of science in the cutting test.
Single edge and curve blade will cut better.
Weighted single edge curve blade will cut even better.
So if you want to design anything as a cutting tool, you better have it curved and single edge.
To be more specific about the single edge. Yes, you can make the Katana as double edge, but why single edge is better at cutting? Because of the Wedge of the single edge blade. A thick blade like Katana Back side to the front form a long large wedge. No double edge sword can have a large wedge like this. A standard long sword can not have a wedge this size or the sword will be too heavy to use (double from a 4lb to 8lb sword).
Somebody was arguing with me about how double edge can be as good cutting power and it is not true.
I give a example of Long Sword. Standard Long Sword vs. a Modify single edge Long Sword that has a fat back on one side and form a wedge on the cutting side. That modify single edge long sword will cut better than the standard long sword. This is apples to apples.
I guess you can even modify a Katana to have a few spikes on the back edge of the blade. Not long spike, just a bit like 1/4 inches razor sharp triangle points (like a shark tooth) , about 10 spaced out on the back blade.... and I think it would be cool (looks cool) and can be useful (in theory). The spikes are not fat, and when you slice something , the spikes will just follow the flow of the swing behind the blade as normal. The scaber will be a bit wider. This can change the whole fighting style and can add more attacking position.
Modify your weapon man... this is the modern time, Cold Steel can make it for you. Those of you who practice your swords, you guys ever want to modify it using modern technology? What modification would you do that is practical and useful?
There's a reason the Ghurka's were feared, this blade is one of those reasons.
Spoiler:
Ghurka's are feared because they are ghurka's. The kukri is feared because it is in a ghurka's hand. Not the other way round. A ghurka does the disemboweling, the kukri just helps
Helmets, in terms of most impressive it has to be one of the suits of Greenwich armor. Either that or mid saxon. Like the swords of japan that started this whole thing, they raised the production of tools of war to high art. The ones that were the most beautiful may not have been the most effective (Although a suit of Greenwich armor was certainly some of the highest quality smithing ever done) the shear work that went in to them was stunning.
Greenwich armor was so perfectly suited to the combat of the day, with each one being a one off, suited to a particular form of combat. Saxon helmets raised the dress of war to high art. The likes of the work to come out of sutton hoo, and other hordes, not just helmets but shield boss's, swords, jewelery, is just amazing. Mid saxon metalworking reached a peak not seen until the late Tudor era, and gold-smithing never equaled. Even now, with modern tools and machinery, it is difficult to replicate the look and quality of some Saxon work.
n0t_u wrote: I found some historical evidence that clearly shows how the katana is the most superior weapon ever invented.
Excellent historical evidence of katana awesomeness.
The resonance caused by two or more properly made katanas parrying one another is what allows the participants to slow time when they gyrate.
Too bad only modern samurai really understand that, back in the old days they rarely drew out the combats long enough to discover the resonant parrying and unlock the true wonders of katana technology. Thats too bad.
Actually there is a design of sword that far outmatches the Katana in slicing.
The Greek Kopis.
Thought to be the sword that would later become the Khukri, used by the armies of Alexander of Macedon.
The recurved blade shape and edge geometry are better at slicing than a plain curved blade.
Here is a video from the ever popular Lynn Thompson with tCold Steel's interpretation.
marv335 wrote: Actually there is a design of sword that far outmatches the Katana in slicing.
The Greek Kopis.
Thought to be the sword that would later become the Khukri, used by the armies of Alexander of Macedon.
The recurved blade shape and edge geometry are better at slicing than a plain curved blade.
Here is a video from the ever popular Lynn Thompson with tCold Steel's interpretation.
too bad it is one handed.. so no. But this weapon beats claymore in jungle fighting and city fighting from house to house and room to room in tight quarter.
There are a number of lethal points when a shallow stab can do serious harm, best example is back of neck. 1/2 inch deep stab is not only mortal but instantly fatal. Major artieries will give a reasonably quick death and are acceable with shallow stabs.
Groin and eyeball stabs don't have to be deep to be horribly effective, but they aren't fatal.
To give a modern example.
Someone bled out silently in re-enactment from shallow cut to the upper inner thigh with a blunted steel re-enactors sword. From eye witnesses the victim took a hit from a steel weapon and lay down and died as per the custom for the show, he didnt collapse accurately, most reenactors (including myself) arentv actors, we just lie on the ground when we take our hit. Trouble is after he got down and played dead, no one realised he wasn't acting anymore. The victim likely didnt even know he was bleeding out,, some wounds for odd reasons dont hurt and it was only when blood seepage was noticed did anyone realise a serious accident had occurred. He bled out before the ambulance arrived.
Okay people, sick and tired of everybody suddenly being a sword expert, kendo practiotioner and whatelse.
The technique is very effective in Japanese culture-in lightning fast duels, seiza postion surprise attacks and generally dirty swordplay. After all, the japanese history is a bloody one.
As for the technique-I absolutely melon-fething GUARANTEE that 99.99% of you dont even know what cutting is. Because I am practicing the movement for several years and sometimes it`s still no good. Most of the times really. When you dumb melon-fethers compare it to a european sword I am left speechless, because european sword isn`t a sword really, it acts more like an axe, it doesnt cut, it crushes with a sharp and thin edge.
And at the end of the day, in the olden times you needed to get out your sword of the sheath as fast as possible in a way that would suit the situation, hence the techniques.
P.S. When some dumb melon-fethers actually try to unsheath a real sword in a quick motion it cuts through the sheath and the next thing you know guy has 4 missing fingers on his left arm. Experts.
There are a number of lethal points when a shallow stab can do serious harm, best example is back of neck. 1/2 inch deep stab is not only mortal but instantly fatal. Major artieries will give a reasonably quick death and are acceable with shallow stabs.
Groin and eyeball stabs don't have to be deep to be horribly effective, but they aren't fatal.
To give a modern example.
Someone bled out silently in re-enactment from shallow cut to the upper inner thigh with a blunted steel re-enactors sword. From eye witnesses the victim took a hit from a steel weapon and lay down and died as per the custom for the show, he didnt collapse accurately, most reenactors (including myself) arentv actors, we just lie on the ground when we take our hit. Trouble is after he got down and played dead, no one realised he wasn't acting anymore. The victim likely didnt even know he was bleeding out,, some wounds for odd reasons dont hurt and it was only when blood seepage was noticed did anyone realise a serious accident had occurred. He bled out before the ambulance arrived.
Sucks man.. In my foil fencing class. We had an accident kind of like this. We fence our foil with rubber T shape tip head. His style of attack was usually fast crazy stab and not really aiming... just quantity over quality method. Anyway.. some how the blade hit the Gym hard wood floor and snap about 1 inch off and then the guy stab again and this time went right threw the front thigh... I mean it went threw! That is about 10" ... it was so fast too. The guy who was stabbed was lucky (kind of) that the attack was low and not in the torso area. He would be dead.
After that incident, we kicked the crazy stabber guy out of the club.
vWreN wrote: Okay people, sick and tired of everybody suddenly being a sword expert, kendo practiotioner and whatelse.
The technique is very effective in Japanese culture-in lightning fast duels, seiza postion surprise attacks and generally dirty swordplay. After all, the japanese history is a bloody one.
As for the technique-I absolutely melon-fething GUARANTEE that 99.99% of you dont even know what cutting is. Because I am practicing the movement for several years and sometimes it`s still no good. Most of the times really. When you dumb melon-fethers compare it to a european sword I am left speechless, because european sword isn`t a sword really, it acts more like an axe, it doesnt cut, it crushes with a sharp and thin edge.
And at the end of the day, in the olden times you needed to get out your sword of the sheath as fast as possible in a way that would suit the situation, hence the techniques.
P.S. When some dumb melon-fethers actually try to unsheath a real sword in a quick motion it cuts through the sheath and the next thing you know guy has 4 missing fingers on his left arm. Experts.
I like how you call out many posters on the thread for being internetz experts, then you proceed to be an internetz expert yourself. All I know is that after watching American Ninja and Matrix Reloaded, I can safely say that Katanas can stop bullets, all forms of metal, and cars, and probably Martians. In fact thats why the Martians haven't attacked, because we have katanas, and cigarettes. And haggis.
vWreN wrote: Okay people, sick and tired of everybody suddenly being a sword expert, kendo practiotioner and whatelse.
The technique is very effective in Japanese culture-in lightning fast duels, seiza postion surprise attacks and generally dirty swordplay. After all, the japanese history is a bloody one.
As for the technique-I absolutely melon-fething GUARANTEE that 99.99% of you dont even know what cutting is. Because I am practicing the movement for several years and sometimes it`s still no good. Most of the times really. When you dumb melon-fethers compare it to a european sword I am left speechless, because european sword isn`t a sword really, it acts more like an axe, it doesnt cut, it crushes with a sharp and thin edge.
And at the end of the day, in the olden times you needed to get out your sword of the sheath as fast as possible in a way that would suit the situation, hence the techniques.
P.S. When some dumb melon-fethers actually try to unsheath a real sword in a quick motion it cuts through the sheath and the next thing you know guy has 4 missing fingers on his left arm. Experts.
I like how you call out many posters on the thread for being internetz experts, then you proceed to be an internetz expert yourself.
All I know is that after watching American Ninja and Matrix Reloaded, I can safely say that Katanas can stop bullets, all forms of metal, and cars, and probably Martians. In fact thats why the Martians haven't attacked, because we have katanas, and cigarettes. And haggis.
I disagree... they fear the legendary Excalibur and the heavy plate mail that can stop laser and can fly to the moon.
vWreN wrote: Okay people, sick and tired of everybody suddenly being a sword expert, kendo practiotioner and whatelse.
The technique is very effective in Japanese culture-in lightning fast duels, seiza postion surprise attacks and generally dirty swordplay. After all, the japanese history is a bloody one.
As for the technique-I absolutely melon-fething GUARANTEE that 99.99% of you dont even know what cutting is. Because I am practicing the movement for several years and sometimes it`s still no good. Most of the times really. When you dumb melon-fethers compare it to a european sword I am left speechless, because european sword isn`t a sword really, it acts more like an axe, it doesnt cut, it crushes with a sharp and thin edge.
And at the end of the day, in the olden times you needed to get out your sword of the sheath as fast as possible in a way that would suit the situation, hence the techniques.
P.S. When some dumb melon-fethers actually try to unsheath a real sword in a quick motion it cuts through the sheath and the next thing you know guy has 4 missing fingers on his left arm. Experts.
I like how you call out many posters on the thread for being internetz experts, then you proceed to be an internetz expert yourself.
All I know is that after watching American Ninja and Matrix Reloaded, I can safely say that Katanas can stop bullets, all forms of metal, and cars, and probably Martians. In fact thats why the Martians haven't attacked, because we have katanas, and cigarettes. And haggis.
vWreN wrote: Okay people, sick and tired of everybody suddenly being a sword expert, kendo practiotioner and whatelse.
The technique is very effective in Japanese culture-in lightning fast duels, seiza postion surprise attacks and generally dirty swordplay. After all, the japanese history is a bloody one.
As for the technique-I absolutely melon-fething GUARANTEE that 99.99% of you dont even know what cutting is. Because I am practicing the movement for several years and sometimes it`s still no good. Most of the times really. When you dumb melon-fethers compare it to a european sword I am left speechless, because european sword isn`t a sword really, it acts more like an axe, it doesnt cut, it crushes with a sharp and thin edge.
And at the end of the day, in the olden times you needed to get out your sword of the sheath as fast as possible in a way that would suit the situation, hence the techniques.
P.S. When some dumb melon-fethers actually try to unsheath a real sword in a quick motion it cuts through the sheath and the next thing you know guy has 4 missing fingers on his left arm. Experts.
I like how you call out many posters on the thread for being internetz experts, then you proceed to be an internetz expert yourself.
All I know is that after watching American Ninja and Matrix Reloaded, I can safely say that Katanas can stop bullets, all forms of metal, and cars, and probably Martians. In fact thats why the Martians haven't attacked, because we have katanas, and cigarettes. And haggis.
I disagree... they fear the legendary Excalibur and the heavy plate mail that can stop laser and can fly to the moon.
Pfft everyone knows heavy plate can only make low orbit. However cavalry armor circa Cromwell could indeed reach Mars. with swords. and haggis.
I don't think your posts are helping at all. Who cares if he doesn't talk about miniature's here, neither do I, I havnt touched a miniature in months does that mean I can't talk in the OFF TOPIC section either? And don't make fun of his spelling, 1 it just make you look like the troll and rather poor at debate, and 2 clearly English is not his first language so cut him some slack
According to him he's American.And As I have said before:why join a miniatures forum just to talk about Anything but miniatures?Talking in off topic is ok but if all you do is talk in off topic why not just join a forum dedicated to whatever you want to scream "but control and sharpness!Niche!" about?And poor at debate? Look at:"Niche!sharpness!control!" if you want to see bad at debate.He even says this isn't a debate.Its just everyone else trying to explain to him that the katana is pretty but not very good.I like star wars. I like ww2 tanks.I did not join the jedi council forums to talk about panzers.When I feel like talking about tanks I will join a ww2 forum.I do not assume that because star wars fans like space battles they will have a different brain to other people. These "gammers"(is that the american term?) Dont automatically know more about swords them people on a sword forum because they like the grim darkness of the far future.
vWreN wrote: Okay people, sick and tired of everybody suddenly being a sword expert, kendo practiotioner and whatelse.
The technique is very effective in Japanese culture-in lightning fast duels, seiza postion surprise attacks and generally dirty swordplay. After all, the japanese history is a bloody one.
As for the technique-I absolutely melon-fething GUARANTEE that 99.99% of you dont even know what cutting is. Because I am practicing the movement for several years and sometimes it`s still no good. Most of the times really. When you dumb melon-fethers compare it to a european sword I am left speechless, because european sword isn`t a sword really, it acts more like an axe, it doesnt cut, it crushes with a sharp and thin edge.
And at the end of the day, in the olden times you needed to get out your sword of the sheath as fast as possible in a way that would suit the situation, hence the techniques.
We don't have to be William Marshal or Miyamoto Musashi to post in the thread, we have historical documentation to go by. a lot of people on this thread have revealed that they have a informed historical understanding of swordcraft. We also know from previous threads that many here collect swords, or have sword wielding experience, or both, of which I am one. Though many more have put far more hours in than I, and I claim to be no expert swordsman, far from it in fact.
Besides the swords I collect 19th century field rapiers and the swords I trained with (anglo-saxon) are radically different, and I was more the axe and shield guy anyway. That doesn't stop me from knowing a bit about a katana, or samurai culture without being Japanese, or a anime fan or a Kendo master. Nor does any time spent swinging around a saxon sword give me special internet expertise over someone who read about it in a well acredited book.
With some very notable and oft highlighted exceptions, and a fair few joke posts to break the tension there has been good knowledgeable content here. This thread isn't internet commando country.
P.S. When some dumb melon-fethers actually try to unsheath a real sword in a quick motion it cuts through the sheath and the next thing you know guy has 4 missing fingers on his left arm. Experts.
I like how you call out many posters on the thread for being internetz experts, then you proceed to be an internetz expert yourself.
All I know is that after watching American Ninja and Matrix Reloaded, I can safely say that Katanas can stop bullets, all forms of metal, and cars, and probably Martians. In fact thats why the Martians haven't attacked, because we have katanas, and cigarettes. And haggis.
Haggis?
Oh.... right.
In your pique you have done it now, and your secret is finally revealed. The true power of the dachshund legions: feed them haggis. That brutal mix of Germanic and Highland culture in small ankle devouring packets. Fear incarnate..
Haggis?
Oh.... right.
In your pique you have done it now. Your secret is finally revealed. The true power of the dachshund legions, feed them haggis. That brutal mix of Germanic and Highland culture in small ankle devouring packets. Fear incarnate..
Exactly. Plus Rodney puked up part of a dead bird while I was at a competition yesterday.
I skipped a few pages because it became kind of ragey on the thread (why????). Has the Kilij been discussed yet? The Europeanized version appears really really vicious and an en excellent er counterpoint to a katana.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilij
I would think, that many of the fighting techniques for the straight blades would be similar to actual European techniques (hitting near the guard, drawing the blade along the target, using the rotation of the swing to create a greater cutting surface)
But then again, it's China, so Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon could very well be a documentary for all we know
But then again, it's China, so Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon could very well be a documentary for all we know
How do you hide a dragon? Give it a camo paint job, angle its scales to deflect radar away from the emitter?
These Chinese people are very sneaky sneak. Should we be worried.
purplefood wrote: The Gurkhas are scary people and not because of their weapons.
Agreed, but a weapon designed to disembowel on the first thrust is still scary.
Most short swords will do that. You can easily make a messy cut with a gladius, you just need to twist before you draw. I don't know kukri is designed fro the precision slow cut of a gladius though, I suspect not as its a hacking weapon.
The main feature of the kukri is that its very good for cutting jungle plants and combat both, and is lightweight. that and it is still feared, for good reason, in the age of the assault rifle.
Actually, it was documented by a British officer that the first blow Ghurka's often used when in battle using the Kukri was to go for a thrust to the belly and pulling it out in a drawing cut to the side. Also, they weren't just chopping weapons, the shape also makes them good at drawing cuts in general. That all said though, yeah, Ghurka's are terrifying.
Frazzled wrote: Pfft everyone knows heavy plate can only make low orbit. However cavalry armor circa Cromwell could indeed reach Mars. with swords. and haggis.
So that is how the Martians went extinct... Damn that Cromwell. And haggis.
Actually, it was documented by a British officer that the first blow Ghurka's often used when in battle using the Kukri was to go for a thrust to the belly and pulling it out in a drawing cut to the side. Also, they weren't just chopping weapons, the shape also makes them good at drawing cuts in general. That all said though, yeah, Ghurka's are terrifying.
Yup. Ideally, you want to thrust in, turrn by roughly 45° before going fully in, then pulling out with a side movement at a 45° - 90° angle. You have zero chances to survive such an attack (unless you got a katana of course). As I said, that thing is extremely nasty.
purplefood wrote: The Gurkhas are scary people and not because of their weapons.
Agreed, but a weapon designed to disembowel on the first thrust is still scary.
Most short swords will do that. You can easily make a messy cut with a gladius, you just need to twist before you draw. I don't know kukri is designed fro the precision slow cut of a gladius though, I suspect not as its a hacking weapon.
The main feature of the kukri is that its very good for cutting jungle plants and combat both, and is lightweight. that and it is still feared, for good reason, in the age of the assault rifle.
Actually, it was documented by a British officer that the first blow Ghurka's often used when in battle using the Kukri was to go for a thrust to the belly and pulling it out in a drawing cut to the side. Also, they weren't just chopping weapons, the shape also makes them good at drawing cuts in general. That all said though, yeah, Ghurka's are terrifying.
I can see this now, thank you for the bit of knowledge. So its not that kukri are unique in this category, its just the angle and technique make is easier to do a visibly grizzly wound that will quickly demoralise everyone else around.
Grey Templar wrote: Because the troops the spanish had were Rodeleros. A very specific type of soldier who used a rapier and a buckler. They were used in conjunction with pikemen as well, their purpose being protecting against troops who closed to within the pikes effective range.
I'd be skeptical of that. Rodeleros were phased out of the Spanish military by the mid 16th century. The primary Spanish infantry formation in 1582 (and the one that the linked Wiki article seems to describe) is the Tercio. While there were swordsmen in the Tercio, there weren't many. The primary power of the formation came from a organized and disciplined pike wall protecting a block of musketeers.
Bit of a late reply but I live on the other side of the world so cut me some slack
Tercios used sword and buckler men to protect the pikes right up until the 17th century, by which time firearm technology had progressed to the point when that was irrelevant. In addition while the spanish in the colonies certainly used tercio like tactics I doubt they were real tercio soldiers. The men in the tercios were considered an elite fighting force used for fighting wars usually on mainland Europe. I don't think many tercio units went out to the colonies.
purplefood wrote: The Gurkhas are scary people and not because of their weapons.
Agreed, but a weapon designed to disembowel on the first thrust is still scary.
Most short swords will do that. You can easily make a messy cut with a gladius, you just need to twist before you draw. I don't know kukri is designed fro the precision slow cut of a gladius though, I suspect not as its a hacking weapon.
The main feature of the kukri is that its very good for cutting jungle plants and combat both, and is lightweight. that and it is still feared, for good reason, in the age of the assault rifle.
Actually, it was documented by a British officer that the first blow Ghurka's often used when in battle using the Kukri was to go for a thrust to the belly and pulling it out in a drawing cut to the side. Also, they weren't just chopping weapons, the shape also makes them good at drawing cuts in general. That all said though, yeah, Ghurka's are terrifying.
I can see this now, thank you for the bit of knowledge. So its not that kukri are unique in this category, its just the angle and technique make is easier to do a visibly grizzly wound that will quickly demoralise everyone else around.
I suspect that a big part of the demoralising effect is not so much the kukri but the Ghurka attached to it. I have met a couple of ex-Ghurkas in my time (one of was a friend of my dad, and two were security guards where I worked) and they were all loverly guys, but I would not mess with them. Very very brave guys and incredibly passionate and proud of what they had done. I wouldn't want to face them on the battlefield.
When you dumb melon-fethers compare it to a european sword I am left speechless, because european sword isn`t a sword really, it acts more like an axe, it doesnt cut, it crushes with a sharp and thin edge.
And at the end of the day, in the olden times you needed to get out your sword of the sheath as fast as possible in a way that would suit the situation, hence the techniques.
It amazes me in the day of the Internet how many myths like the myth of the katana, the myth of the ninja and so on still persist. People still hold the idea that european swords were not sharp, or even that the history of warfare over 4000 years in a whole continent can be reduced to such a broad phrase.
It also amazes me that people can take a discussion about a sword so personaly and start swaring and name calling. It's a sword, not the honor of your first born!
EmilCrane wrote: In addition while the spanish in the colonies certainly used tercio like tactics I doubt they were real tercio soldiers. The men in the tercios were considered an elite fighting force used for fighting wars usually on mainland Europe. I don't think many tercio units went out to the colonies.
I'd definitely agree with that. My guess (as I don't study colonial Spanish stuff) is that the force described in the wikiarticle may have been an adhoc Tercio some military governor threw together to fight the pirates rather than a proper one. The governor likely had military experience (or someone on staff who did) who knew how the formation functioned and could get something similar going in the lack of a trained or experienced force.
It's a difficult weapon to talk about, because so many examples of the Flamberge that remain, are purely ceremonial weapons. Quite often, You'll see them with a squiggly central ridge, which isn't as strong as a straight central ridge. Most of those are going to be your ceremonial types. I have seen some examples were the "waves" are more pronounced, and the blade almost looks more like a sword breaker than it does a sword.
I actually don't think they look "silly" I think that, when properly made, they are absolutely gorgeous weapons. I'm saving up for a pair to hang on the walls of my "living room" (the floor plan calls it that, but it's where my pool table is)
Nice! It just didn't look practical to me at first.
Speaking of practical weapons - morning star flail - cool looking. Practical? Maybe on horseback, but definitely not on foot. Also, did knights use their lances in open combat, or were they used mostly used for jousting? I think they were too prone to breaking to be used as a serious combat option....unless, of course I forgot, they charged in their first wave with lances then they unsheathed their swords
Speaking of practical weapons - morning star flail - cool looking. Practical? Maybe on horseback, but definitely not on foot. Also, did knights use their lances in open combat, or were they mostly used for jousting?
I just imagine a dude with a flail accidentally nailing his steed in middle of combat. I would say better on foot.
Speaking of practical weapons - morning star flail - cool looking. Practical? Maybe on horseback, but definitely not on foot. Also, did knights use their lances in open combat, or were they mostly used for jousting?
Flails CAN be practical, but they do have downsides... 1. you have to use it's momentum. 2. it's only really good use is as a "disarming weapon", which leads to 3. You still need other weapons to fight.
The lance and heavy cavalry charge was definitely an "in vogue" thing for a long long time after 1066... It largely fell out of use with the rise of gun powder, however IIRC, the "last" lance wielding cav charge was in the Franco-Prussian war? (or it was in the 1800s with Napoleon's armies... sometimes things get jumbled in my brain)
Now, as discussed earlier, certain forms of armor were definitely a "mostly for tournaments" item, such as the frogmouth helmet.
We have several times. A flamberge is just a zweihander/zwerch, the classic 'two handed sword'. The specifics are for style rather than function, the wavy blade is not practical and only accounts for the lower portion of th blade, the business ends are the same as a straight zwerch as fro a flamberge.
If you read Hans Talhoffer the plays for the zwerch do not specify type, to the contemporary practitioner they were all the same in terms of usage and classification.
I must agree they are very nice looking sword though, and a personal favourite. Exceptionallty versatile too, they were used in ways a modern observer might not expect.
This excellent and characterful video tells you a lot about ghe versatility of this fantastic weapon.
Its a fairly good long spear also.
...and a saw, a cleaver, quarterstaff and of course a slashing sword. The zwerch is a lost art.
Lances were used in combat, but they weren't the oversized ones used in jousts. They would be smaller. Metal tips and wooden shafts. The shafts would inevitably break on first contact with the enemy, the knight would then discard the lance and draw his secondary weapon. If the opportunity for multiple lance charges presented itself, Knights would have their squires carry some extras. After a battle the broken tips would be recovered to reuse the tips.
Speaking of practical weapons - morning star flail - cool looking. Practical? Maybe on horseback, but definitely not on foot. Also, did knights use their lances in open combat, or were they mostly used for jousting?
Flails CAN be practical, but they do have downsides... 1. you have to use it's momentum. 2. it's only really good use is as a "disarming weapon", which leads to 3. You still need other weapons to fight.
Posted as you were typing also, the video posted just now of exotic weapon plays includes flail plays. Enjoy.
You aint lying there.. Lol, in modern times we tend to be "surprised" that people are beaten to death by Baseball bats, or pipes... Back then the guys at the pub would be sayin, "amateurs.. pfft. I once kill't a man with me sheep shears"
And the fact that they have manuscripts and fighting styles for ANYTHING that could be held in the hand shows this. I've often been fascinated by the various Italian "duelling" styles... Rapier and dagger, or rapier and cloak, etc.
Interesting, I was thinking about this, does anyone have knightly roots, or is descended from a medieval order?
I've done extensive research of my family history, and one of my forbearers on my mother's side, fought in Maximillian I's army and was knighted after a skirmish. We even have our own coat of arms for House Grama - a golden sun on a purple field, and our motto is "We stand fast".
Sadly, at my current state I would mayhaps be equivalent to a merchant's son and might have a glimmer of hope, that I might be a squire and not go to battle with a pitchfork
I'm wondering what was the oldest sword ever used in combat again? In 1798 a Irish rebel used a 2'500 year old bronze age sword. Anyone got anything older?bronze age sword vs ISIS perhaps?
Sadly, at my current state I would mayhaps be equivalent to a merchant's son and might have a glimmer of hope, that I might be a squire and not go to battle with a pitchfork
You'd actually be fairly lucky even if you weren't a squire. Merchants had to fight too, but as they had money(often more than some knights) they could afford decent equipment on par with the nobility.
Artorias the Abysswalker wrote: Interesting, I was thinking about this, does anyone have knightly roots, or is descended from a medieval order?
As I've found my family arms, I KNOW there's some nebulous form of "nobility" in my lineage... But I can't make any claims like some folks do, that I'm related to some Emperor from the HRE or King Richard III or anything like that....
My family arms are: Argent, two bendlets sinister sable, of the first, a cross patee double (something unreadable) sable, bordered argent....
In layman's terms: It's a white shield with two black stripes going "sinister" (from top right to bottom left), with a "fancy" iron cross within the top stripe (its a white iron cross, with four triangles outlining a "second" cross in the middle)
From further research the "sinister" bends tend to mean either that there was a bastard in the family line (who was knighted), but in everything I've read, bastards tend to only get a single line/mark. The other use was for a knight who hadn't been granted arms yet who showed himself particularly awesome in a defensive situation, and in this case, multiple "bends" or multiple marks tends to mean that a knight in this family, or of that arms, had made many defensive actions.
Sadly, at my current state I would mayhaps be equivalent to a merchant's son and might have a glimmer of hope, that I might be a squire and not go to battle with a pitchfork
You'd actually be fairly lucky even if you weren't a squire. Merchants had to fight too, but as they had money(often more than some knights) they could afford decent equipment on par with the nobility.
Indeed... It was part of a knight's "duty" to arm and armor himself. If he couldn't afford to, he would enter the service of his liege and become a "house knight"... In this way he went into battle wearing his liege's arms until such a time as he could afford his own, then he was allowed his own "decorations"
Then I Shan't despair. Hmm, how would you equip yourselves for battle, given your respective place in the medieval world?
For me I think:
Bastard Sword, Mace, Dagger
Chainmail overalls, plate for arms and legs (vambraces, gauntlets, greaves, etc), padded coif +Sugarloaf greathelm
Surcoat , displaying family heraldry, of course
As a merchant, I would probably have the following, assuming late/mid middle ages.
Weapons
1) Polearm of some kind as my primary weapon
2) Warhammer, axe, or pick as a backup weapon(swords are expensive)
3) Crossbow
Armor
Chainmail leggings and sleeves, padded doublet, cheap breastplate, metal greaves, and a simple metal helm. Along with a shield, likely reinforced hardwood.
If I'm richer than average I might be able to afford a horse and better armor. And after any battles I've got my eye open for any better equipment off the dead.
Artorias the Abysswalker wrote: Then I Shan't despair. Hmm, how would you equip yourselves for battle, given your respective place in the medieval world?
Depending on timeframe... and given that my "family line" comes from areas where Landsknechts were typically from, I'd probably have:
Half-plate mail
Zweihander or Pike
a silly hat,
codpiece (it's seriously important!)
like this:
Spoiler:
Although, I would love to be kitted out like this:
Speaking of practical weapons - morning star flail - cool looking. Practical? Maybe on horseback, but definitely not on foot. Also, did knights use their lances in open combat, or were they mostly used for jousting?
Flails CAN be practical, but they do have downsides... 1. you have to use it's momentum. 2. it's only really good use is as a "disarming weapon", which leads to 3. You still need other weapons to fight.
Historically, the main advantage of the flail was its easy availability. Every medieval grain farmer would have had one and known how to use it. Flails were thus mostly a weapon for peasants, rather than knights. Knights used 'noble' weapons, mostly swords, maces and lances.
The lance was a knight's most important weapon, because the main use of cavalry is the charge. The lance is extremely deadly in a charge. After the charge, the lance would be dropped in favour for a close combat weapon.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: The lance and heavy cavalry charge was definitely an "in vogue" thing for a long long time after 1066... It largely fell out of use with the rise of gun powder, however IIRC, the "last" lance wielding cav charge was in the Franco-Prussian war? (or it was in the 1800s with Napoleon's armies... sometimes things get jumbled in my brain.
The Polish cavalry used lances in WW2, and achieved a number of notable successes with it. The very last cavalry charge using lances was during the battle of Schönfeld on 1 March 1945. Cavalry existed alongside gun powder weapons for a very long time, it is only with machine guns that the cavalry charge became obsolete.
Iron_Captain wrote: Historically, the main advantage of the flail was its easy availability. Every medieval grain farmer would have had one and known how to use it. Flails were thus mostly a weapon for peasants, rather than knights. Knights used 'noble' weapons, mostly swords, maces and lances.
The lance was a knight's most important weapon, because the main use of cavalry is the charge. The lance is extremely deadly in a charge. After the charge, the lance would be dropped in favour for a close combat weapon.
One point of contention for me there IC... In all my reading, the ONLY "noble" weapons were the lance and the sword/shield. Maces started off as basically clubs found through necessity during fighting. Eventually, enough guys had experienced the weapons and so they began to hire smiths to make "better" and fancier maces. It's kind of the same thing with hammers. Often times, the peasants would be armed with a bow (either a crossbow or "regular" type bow, depending on locale) and whatever else they were carrying. And it was from the peasant fighters that the hammers and maces came until, again, the nobility began to have them made.
I think it goes without saying that "chivalry" goes out the window when your own survival depends on it
Ensis Ferrae wrote: The lance and heavy cavalry charge was definitely an "in vogue" thing for a long long time after 1066... It largely fell out of use with the rise of gun powder, however IIRC, the "last" lance wielding cav charge was in the Franco-Prussian war? (or it was in the 1800s with Napoleon's armies... sometimes things get jumbled in my brain.
The Polish cavalry used lances in WW2, and achieved a number of notable successes with it. The very last cavalry charge using lances was during the battle of Schönfeld on 1 March 1945.
That sounds like the one I was thinking of. I knew I had heard of it before, I just couldn't remember the name of the battle, etc.
I wonder why in post apocalyptic film when fire arms and bullets are rare, they don't make their own guns? In Thailand, many criminals have homemade firearm. I guess there must be some black market work shop in Thailand that make these firearm and sell them.
I think if Gun control were ever to take place in USA, these type of guns will start coming out. I think that control will never work when there are human desire and technology that has already been discover... people will get what they want.
Likely because the people who post-apocalyptic movies are unaware that guns and bullets are fairly easy to make. Although a real limiting factor is the casing itself. While reusable, new ones could likely only be made in limited quantities. So bullets would become a valuable commodity.
And yes, this is yet another reason why gun control simply isn't feasible.
Grey Templar wrote: Likely because the people who post-apocalyptic movies are unaware that guns and bullets are fairly easy to make. Although a real limiting factor is the casing itself. While reusable, new ones could likely only be made in limited quantities. So bullets would become a valuable commodity.
And yes, this is yet another reason why gun control simply isn't feasible.
The one shot scatter gun rod would be good. You just carry a few rods as a weapon, like old Pirates with his musket. Easy to make and almost endless supply of ammo as long as you have gun powder. Short effective in 10 yard range and beat hand to hand all day.
Speaking of practical weapons - morning star flail - cool looking. Practical? Maybe on horseback, but definitely not on foot. Also, did knights use their lances in open combat, or were they mostly used for jousting?
Flails CAN be practical, but they do have downsides... 1. you have to use it's momentum. 2. it's only really good use is as a "disarming weapon", which leads to 3. You still need other weapons to fight.
Posted as you were typing also, the video posted just now of exotic weapon plays includes flail plays. Enjoy.
The farm tool scythe as a weapon is a myth. That freaking thing is almost impossible to use in combat. You have better chance at wining combat with a iron pan.
But plenty of other farm implements were useful on the battlefield. The billhook is an example of a proper weapon of war developed from a farming tool. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_%28weapon%29
It was basically an axe with a grabbing hook on the tip. useful for chopping or snagging stuff around a farmstead. It proved equally adept at hacking through armor or dragging an armored knight off his horse.
Artorias the Abysswalker wrote: Interesting, I was thinking about this, does anyone have knightly roots, or is descended from a medieval order?
I've done extensive research of my family history, and one of my forbearers on my mother's side, fought in Maximillian I's army and was knighted after a skirmish. We even have our own coat of arms for House Grama - a golden sun on a purple field, and our motto is "We stand fast".
Sadly, at my current state I would mayhaps be equivalent to a merchant's son and might have a glimmer of hope, that I might be a squire and not go to battle with a pitchfork
I think I am related to Genghis Khan because of a documentary I saw. I think it was something like Sex in the middle ages. It turned out that Genghis Khan is one of the guy who "spawn" the most offspring in the world.
If I remember correctly, he had something like over 1,000 children by rape, concubine, etc... The decedents would have this "long ear lob" and they tested the DNA and genes of this trait. It was something like 1 in 500 Asians were Genghis Khan decedents. My uncle have this trait, so may be my great great times x grand mother was rape by Genghis Khan... don't know if that is something to be proud or ashamed off.
I think also, if you are european decedent.. you have something like 1 in 2,000 chances of be Julius Caesar. Same show about Sex and decedent.
It's also not true that the farm tool scythe is a myth. Scythes were converted into make shift pole arms. Take the blade off the scythe and use it as a spear tip. Not ideal, but it's still pointy and it saves you the time of having to make spear tips from scratch.
The Japanese Kama is a similar such weapon, though due to it's smaller hand held size, it didn't need much conversion to be made useable.
Swords likely had their start way back when being developed from the sickle or other bladed farming tools.
LordofHats wrote: It's also not true that the farm tool scythe is a myth. Scythes were converted into make shift pole arms. Take the blade off the scythe and use it as a spear tip. Not ideal, but it's still pointy and it saves you the time of having to make spear tips from scratch.
The Japanese Kama is a similar such weapon, though due to it's smaller hand held size, it didn't need much conversion to be made useable.
Swords likely had their start way back when being developed from the sickle or other bladed farming tools.
There's nothing to debunk. Some farmers took the blades off their farm scythes and stuck them onto some sticks to make a spear (later purpose built weapons of a similar design were later made). It's rather simple Peasant uprisings have to arm themselves you know (in a similar manner, Tridents and Partisans were likely developed from various kinds of farming forks and hoes).
It was basically an axe with a grabbing hook on the tip. useful for chopping or snagging stuff around a farmstead. It proved equally adept at hacking through armor or dragging an armored knight off his horse.
And hey, a scythe is better than nothing.
You understand right that just because the name has scythe in it doesn't mean they took the farm scythe head and stick it to a stick. It was a totally different weapon made from scratch. Watch my debunk videos.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
LordofHats wrote: There's nothing to debunk. Some farmers took the blades off their farm scythes and stuck them onto some sticks to make a spear (later purpose built weapons of a similar design were later made). It's rather simple Peasant uprisings have to arm themselves you know (in a similar manner, Tridents and Partisans were likely developed from various kinds of farming forks and hoes).
Did you not watch the video? The farm tool were too thin. and War scythe were a weapons of its own design.
It is like I were to say that the Chinese use the Chop Stick as a weapon because they can poke you in the eye.
Stop it. The guy in the video debunk the same book, the same picture, the theory ... everything you pulled from the net was debunk by this guy.
I don't subscribe to the YouTube school of history. I went to real school for that
The farm tool were too thin.
Yeah which is probably why someone decided to make a fully weaponized version of an improvised weapon Improvised weapons are rarely perfect. It's why they're called 'improvised.' You know. Like Molotov Cocktails, Kamas, the Monk's Spade, Axes, and Bo staffs
The guy in the video debunk
If by debunked you mean misrepresented then yes. I've seen that video before and I've had this argument before. The War Scythe was originally developed as an improvised weapon by peasant farmers in Denmark and the Netherlands. That's not really an aspect of history up for contention.
I don't subscribe to the YouTube school of history. I went to real school for that
The farm tool were too thin.
Yeah which is probably why someone decided to make a fully weaponized version of an improvised weapon Improvised weapons are rarely perfect. It's why they're called 'improvised.' You know. Like Molotov Cocktails, Kamas, the Monk's Spade, Axes, and Bo staffs
The guy in the video debunk
If by debunked you mean misrepresented then yes.
Have fun dude, I think everybody who read your post and saw the video clips are laughing at this comical belief of farmer using scythe as a weapon. It is a popular myth... but a myth none the less.....
Sorry to destroyed your myth... don't watch the clip. Just keep think there are Santa and farmers upraising who went to their farm house and decide to pick up a scythe instead a wood chopping axe or a kitchen knife type and tie to a stick to make a better spear (if he wanted a spear).... nope lets get his weird stick and a thin grass cutting blade and use as a weapon! That farmer was the first guy to die in the battle.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Akragth wrote: I think someone's confused about just what an improvised weapon means.
Again, watch the video. You can improvised with a can of tin beads as a weapon. Please watch the video.
You aren't comprehending what he's saying about IMPROVISED weapons.
No farmer, if he was part of a revolt/uprising would take his scythe into battle without some alterations.
Also, having manuscripts for a fighting style doesn't prove nor disprove that scythes or other weapons saw actual combat.... It shows that someone somewhere along the line thought about how such a weapon would be used, if the need arose and developed a fighting style based on it.
david choe wrote: Sorry to destroyed your myth... don't watch the clip.
I find it more comical that you're still throwing around youtube videos.
That you seem to miss the distinction I drew between the farming implemented and how it was converted into a weapon (despite my use of plain English) is just icing
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ensis Ferrae wrote: No farmer, if he was part of a revolt/uprising would take his scythe into battle without some alterations.
They were actually pretty smart. Cavalry were a dominate force at the time, and axes and knives weren't going to help you get a trained soldier off his horse. If I was a farmer, I'd grab any sharp object I could find and put it on the end of a stick
Ensis Ferrae wrote: You aren't comprehending what he's saying about IMPROVISED weapons.
No farmer, if he was part of a revolt/uprising would take his scythe into battle without some alterations.
Also, having manuscripts for a fighting style doesn't prove nor disprove that scythes or other weapons saw actual combat.... It shows that someone somewhere along the line thought about how such a weapon would be used, if the need arose and developed a fighting style based on it.
I understand the word improvised, but did you not watch the video. The guy even said that the improvised is BS. It was all a myth.
The improvised is about as much as somebody who use a scissor and tie it to a stick to make a battle Pike axe. I'm sure some farmer might done that, but very very very very few.. about the same chance as scissor tie to a stick to make a murder weapon. there are other weapons to improvise that would make better weapon. NO body would improvised a farm scythe. The only reason I can think of, is the farmer was hold a scythe in hand and was attacked...that is the improvised part.
This debate should be over by now about this scythe myth.
1 - the blade is very thin and too thin to fight with
2 - the damn thing is hard to hold as a battle weapon
3 - a normal wood staff would be much more effective.
This is classic hollywood and Grime reaper image that makes this myth alive and well.
Show me a real history proof of this improvised. Just give me the logical why? You are a farmer and you are PREPARING , it is not like you are being attack right now. You would pick that worst weapon as a weapon? You have better tools to choose to take...
Akragth wrote: I think someone's confused about just what an improvised weapon means.
Again, watch the video. You can improvised with a can of tin beads as a weapon. Please watch the video.
And? We're talking about peasants, in medieval times. You'd use whatever you could to defend your home; a pitchfork, a thick tree branch, whatever was within reach--including a scythe if needs must. That's what an improvised weapon is. Nothing you've shown debunks that. ''It's bad for fighting with'' is simply not the same as ''it was never used to fight with and the idea of that is entirely a myth.''
Akragth wrote: I think someone's confused about just what an improvised weapon means.
Again, watch the video. You can improvised with a can of tin beads as a weapon. Please watch the video.
And? We're talking about peasants, in medieval times. You'd use whatever you could to defend your home; a pitchfork, a thick tree branch, whatever was within reach--including a scythe if needs must. That's what an improvised weapon is. Nothing you've shown debunks that. ''It's bad for fighting with'' is simply not the same as ''it was never used to fight with and the idea of that is entirely a myth.''
LOL. yeah what about the part that pitch fork is better, why take a scythe. A kitchen knife and a stick would be better.
You understand about myth in this topic right. Just because one or two farmer who was attacked by a bandit while he have a scythe in his had and use it... it doesn't mean that this tool should ever enter the topic of Farmer use scythe as a weapon.
Just stop it and let this part of scythe as a weapon be done with it. The video touch every base of discussion of "WHAT IF"...DONE Lets move on....
david choe wrote: LOL. yeah what about the part that pitch fork is better, why take a scythe. A kitchen knife and a stick would be better.
You understand about myth in this topic right. Just because one or two farmer who was attacked by a bandit while he have a scythe in his had and use it... it doesn't mean that this tool should ever enter the topic of Farmer use scythe as a weapon.
Just stop it and let this part of scythe as a weapon be done with it. The video touch every base of discussion of "WHAT IF"...DONE Lets move on....
improvised
ˈɪmprəvʌɪzd/
adjective
created and performed spontaneously or without preparation; impromptu.
"an improvised short speech"
done or made using whatever is available; makeshift.
"we slept on improvised beds"
You're acting as if this is someone taking pick from a wide variety of weapons, with time to prepare. That's literally the opposite of what improvised means.
david choe wrote: Sorry to destroyed your myth... don't watch the clip.
I find it more comical that you're still throwing around youtube videos.
That you seem to miss the distinction I drew between the farming implemented and how it was converted into a weapon (despite my use of plain English) is just icing
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ensis Ferrae wrote: No farmer, if he was part of a revolt/uprising would take his scythe into battle without some alterations.
They were actually pretty smart. Cavalry were a dominate force at the time, and axes and knives weren't going to help you get a trained soldier off his horse. If I was a farmer, I'd grab any sharp object I could find and put it on the end of a stick
Listen... do you know that the farm scythe blade is freaking paper thin? It won't do gak in battle. It is not a battle axe head or a wood axe head. That scythe is a really bad farm tool. I know you already saw the video and feel silly ... but keep going with this is just being childish and silly don't you think?
I mean we are men right, lets just accepted that you made an error and you don't know about this part of the history and stand corrected.
david choe wrote: LOL. yeah what about the part that pitch fork is better, why take a scythe. A kitchen knife and a stick would be better.
You understand about myth in this topic right. Just because one or two farmer who was attacked by a bandit while he have a scythe in his had and use it... it doesn't mean that this tool should ever enter the topic of Farmer use scythe as a weapon.
Just stop it and let this part of scythe as a weapon be done with it. The video touch every base of discussion of "WHAT IF"...DONE Lets move on....
improvised
ˈɪmprəvʌɪzd/
adjective
created and performed spontaneously or without preparation; impromptu.
"an improvised short speech"
done or made using whatever is available; makeshift.
"we slept on improvised beds"
You're acting as if this is someone taking pick from a wide variety of weapons, with time to prepare. That's literally the opposite of what improvised means.
Listen.. improvise have two meaning.
On the spot or not on the spot.
If on the spot, anything can be a weapon. This is not what we are talking about. If you suggested this...they you fail in this debate because everything from can of beads and my shoe can be an improvise on the spot weapon.
We all know that the improvise is not on the spot and you have time to "create" a weapon. They guy in the video explains that if you have the time to improvise... you have time to pick other tools to improvise from. Things like wood axe, pitch fork, kitchen sharp object, and at worst ... get a wooden club or stick.
NOBODY intentionally improvise a scythe. This is the myth that is being debunk.
I mean we are men right, lets just accepted that you made an error and you don't know about this part of the history and stand corrected.
Your lazy, half-arsed researched youtube video doesn't "prove" anything though. Having looked at a couple of his videos, he really REALLY comes across as someone who doesn't know gak about what he's talking about... case in point, watch the "mace" video. I'm sorry, but "spiky bit" is NOT an actual name for part of a mace or hammer.
I never said the scythe was an outstanding weapon. I agreed with others, that in a real pinch, it would do.
Let's put together a scenario... We're all a group of rather disgruntled peasants, and we band together to revolt against our "lawful" lord. So we all grab what implements we have; Pitchforks, hammers, scythes and the like.... The local lord rounds up his couple dozen knights to meet us on the battle field... He's going to pummel us into the dirt.... Well, thing is, we have a sizeable numbers advantage, so we're going to "clump" up and swarm knights, get them on the ground via hitting them, kill them and... holy crap!!!! now a couple of us can drop our pitchforks or scythes, or whatever, and get a real fething weapon, like a sword!
Given that it's been in use for thousands of years, I think it's a pretty good farming tool
I mean we are men right,
Damn straight.
And men love bacon. Literally, and figuratively
you don't know about this part of the history and stand corrected.
It isn't even one part of history. Ancient Greek sources describe the Hittites as forcibly conscripting farmers into the armies who carried nothing but farming implements (including scythes) into battle. Granted the 'scythe' the Greeks described was basically this thing;
And it probably wasn't much longer than a short sword but the Hittites didn't really care if their slave army was properly equipped. They were just there to die anyway
david choe wrote: LOL. yeah what about the part that pitch fork is better, why take a scythe. A kitchen knife and a stick would be better.
You understand about myth in this topic right. Just because one or two farmer who was attacked by a bandit while he have a scythe in his had and use it... it doesn't mean that this tool should ever enter the topic of Farmer use scythe as a weapon.
Just stop it and let this part of scythe as a weapon be done with it. The video touch every base of discussion of "WHAT IF"...DONE Lets move on....
improvised
ˈɪmprəvʌɪzd/
adjective
created and performed spontaneously or without preparation; impromptu.
"an improvised short speech"
done or made using whatever is available; makeshift.
"we slept on improvised beds"
You're acting as if this is someone taking pick from a wide variety of weapons, with time to prepare. That's literally the opposite of what improvised means.
Listen.. improvise have two meaning.
On the spot or not on the spot.
If on the spot, anything can be a weapon. This is not what we are talking about. If you suggested this...they you fail in this debate because everything from can of beads and my shoe can be an improvise on the spot weapon.
We all know that the improvise is not on the spot and you have time to "create" a weapon. They guy in the video explains that if you have the time to improvise... you have time to pick other tools to improvise from. Things like wood axe, pitch fork, kitchen sharp object, and at worst ... get a wooden club or stick.
NOBODY intentionally improvise a scythe. This is the myth that is being debunk.
Quite frankly I can't tell if it's a language barrier at play here, or not. I know what improvised means. I literally just posted what it means. Literally. In the very post you quoted.
You are confusing ''it'd be a rubbish weapon'' with ''it was never, ever used as a weapon''. Lots of things are used as improvised weapons. It's literally what the term means. Sure, it'd be a shockingly poor weapon, but if it's all you had, then it's all you had.
Also imagine; You're a "lawful lord" who wields complete authority over the local peasants. Your brother in law over in the next manor recently had to put down some unruly peasants who tried to overthrow him with their axes and knives. Well the obvious solution is to take away their axes and knives! Then they can't revolt! *looks out window at angry mob with pitch forks, scythes, some axes I probably missed, hoes, and anything else they could throw together in a couple of hours (including sticks with nails in them!)*
Nah, unless I am friends with a fairly competent smith who has time to work, I would rather take a fire hardened wooden stick into battle than some incompetently hammered wheat cutting implement. Because in the time it takes to make one of those I could make like nine replacements, and maybe a solid cudgel too.
Of course I would also make some caltrops since I have a superior modern brain and then I would wait for some lord to come after me and I would very rapidly get some decent gear off his corpse.
david choe wrote: LOL. yeah what about the part that pitch fork is better, why take a scythe. A kitchen knife and a stick would be better.
You understand about myth in this topic right. Just because one or two farmer who was attacked by a bandit while he have a scythe in his had and use it... it doesn't mean that this tool should ever enter the topic of Farmer use scythe as a weapon.
Just stop it and let this part of scythe as a weapon be done with it. The video touch every base of discussion of "WHAT IF"...DONE Lets move on....
improvised
ˈɪmprəvʌɪzd/
adjective
created and performed spontaneously or without preparation; impromptu.
"an improvised short speech"
done or made using whatever is available; makeshift.
"we slept on improvised beds"
You're acting as if this is someone taking pick from a wide variety of weapons, with time to prepare. That's literally the opposite of what improvised means.
Listen.. improvise have two meaning.
On the spot or not on the spot.
If on the spot, anything can be a weapon. This is not what we are talking about. If you suggested this...they you fail in this debate because everything from can of beads and my shoe can be an improvise on the spot weapon.
We all know that the improvise is not on the spot and you have time to "create" a weapon. They guy in the video explains that if you have the time to improvise... you have time to pick other tools to improvise from. Things like wood axe, pitch fork, kitchen sharp object, and at worst ... get a wooden club or stick.
NOBODY intentionally improvise a scythe. This is the myth that is being debunk.
Quite frankly I can't tell if it's a language barrier at play here, or not. I know what improvised means. I literally just posted what it means. Literally. In the very post you quoted.
You are confusing ''it'd be a rubbish weapon'' with ''it was never, ever used as a weapon''. Lots of things are used as improvised weapons. It's literally what the term means. Sure, it'd be a shockingly poor weapon, but if it's all you had, then it's all you had.
So what does all this mean... the world of farm scythe as weapon keeps getting smaller and smaller for you.
First - Farmer use it or modified it.
Then - well I mean... if they had too, it was their last choice of weapon in the barn because the uncle took the pitch fork, and the brother took the axe. He had only the scythe or bare fist... ok
OR
The get a black smith to reforge the blade on the stick to make a spear or just twist the blade from the scythe on the scythe handle to cut better like in all the movies. The blade is not even set like in the movies and the blade is thin. Too thin as a weapon. If you have to reforging ability and to remove all this crap.... it is better to get a long stick and sharpen the point. Come on man...
It is a hollywood myth and comic book of grime reaper that make this soooo cool and scary weapon what it is today.
I suppose but I imagine a cynical mob kind of just sits around and acts depressed I mean what's the fun in being in a mob if there aren't at least some torches involved (and maybe a trampling death or two?)
I suppose but I imagine a cynical mob kind of just sits around and acts depressed I mean what's the fun in being in a mob if there aren't at least some torches involved (and maybe a trampling death or two?)
Well, the whole mob doesn't have to be cynical. I just see myself hanging around the back doubting that our momentary fervor will be enough to change the overarching socioeconomic conditions that create and enforce serfdom whilst my co-mobsters are slaughtered by a couple of guardsmen and overfed nobles in decent armor until I throw some improvised caltrops in an opportune moment and abscond with some quality gear so as to pretend to be a hedge knight or something until I can slease my way into a position of relative comfort somewhere, say as armsmaster to some down at the heels but wealthy in comparison to my former means noble household. Then I simply disappear into the night with whatever loot I can manage after a few years and set myself up in Outremer in reasonable comfort for however many years until some plague or another carries me off.
I suppose but I imagine a cynical mob kind of just sits around and acts depressed I mean what's the fun in being in a mob if there aren't at least some torches involved (and maybe a trampling death or two?)
Well, the whole mob doesn't have to be cynical. I just see myself hanging around the back doubting that our momentary fervor will be enough to change the overarching socioeconomic conditions that create and enforce serfdom whilst my co-mobsters are slaughtered by a couple of guardsmen and overfed nobles in decent armor until I throw some improvised caltrops in an opportune moment and abscond with some quality gear so as to pretend to be a hedge knight or something until I can slease my way into a position of relative comfort somewhere, say as armsmaster to some down at the heels but wealthy in comparison to my former means noble household. Then I simply disappear into the night with whatever loot I can manage after a few years and set myself up in Outremer in reasonable comfort for however many years until some plague or another carries me off.
I mean we are men right, lets just accepted that you made an error and you don't know about this part of the history and stand corrected.
Your lazy, half-arsed researched youtube video doesn't "prove" anything though. Having looked at a couple of his videos, he really REALLY comes across as someone who doesn't know gak about what he's talking about... case in point, watch the "mace" video. I'm sorry, but "spiky bit" is NOT an actual name for part of a mace or hammer.
I never said the scythe was an outstanding weapon. I agreed with others, that in a real pinch, it would do.
Let's put together a scenario... We're all a group of rather disgruntled peasants, and we band together to revolt against our "lawful" lord. So we all grab what implements we have; Pitchforks, hammers, scythes and the like.... The local lord rounds up his couple dozen knights to meet us on the battle field... He's going to pummel us into the dirt.... Well, thing is, we have a sizeable numbers advantage, so we're going to "clump" up and swarm knights, get them on the ground via hitting them, kill them and... holy crap!!!! now a couple of us can drop our pitchforks or scythes, or whatever, and get a real fething weapon, like a sword!
Look I know what you are saying.. but it is an hollywood depiction of this image of farmer scythe. Nobody would ever choose this weapon in the barn if they have other option like axes, pitch fork, or common sticks. You are buying into the myth of farmer scythe. If enough movies and images of people in the days pick up cast iron pan as a weapon or a rolling pen..it is just a movie.. not real. Cooks don't use iron pan or rolling pen as weapon.
So if they have no option but the scythe... in the mob of 100 farmers... 3 guys have farm scythe and you all are defending and upholding this as true? Those 3 idiots farmers never make it back after the battle.
Lastly, why is it important that this myth must be true? I mean..... none of you guys sell scythe right?
david choe wrote: OR
The get a black smith to reforge the blade on the stick to make a spear or just twist the blade from the scythe on the scythe handle to cut better like in all the movies. The blade is not even set like in the movies and the blade is thin. Too thin as a weapon. If you have to reforging ability and to remove all this crap.... it is better to get a long stick and sharpen the point. Come on man...
Lol. You're ignoring the ''improvised'' part of improvised weapon, again. You're talking on the subject as if they lived in some sort of ideal world where every attack came with warning, where every peasant had the means to reforge weapons, had access to a range of tools or could afford/had access to better weaponry. They didn't. That's the ideal world, but reality is something else entirely.
You are taking the fact it would be a poor weapon and, without any real evidence to support it, conferring that the idea of it ever being used as a weapon is a myth. Before you say ''watch the video'' again, no. Not only does your video not disprove the notion that it was ever used as a weapon, the bloke who made it wasn't around in medieval times, so it's only his speculation to begin with. You cannot, and have not, proved anything on the matter.
Indeed, mere common sense would suggest that if needs must, you'd use whatever was at your disposal to defend yourself, whether that's taking one item you own and using it to create another, or just using the item itself. Would it be an ideal weapon? No. Improvised weapons rarely are. But would you go bare knuckle because your brother took the pitchfork, and you're left with just the scythe? Nope. Poor weapon or not, it is better than punching an armed opponent. At the very least it can keep them at arm's length.
It is a hollywood myth and comic book of grime reaper that make this soooo cool and scary weapon what it is today.
Seriously, your comprehension is sorely lacking if you believe anyone here is arguing that farmers were armed with the weapon that the grim reaper uses.
david choe wrote: OR
The get a black smith to reforge the blade on the stick to make a spear or just twist the blade from the scythe on the scythe handle to cut better like in all the movies. The blade is not even set like in the movies and the blade is thin. Too thin as a weapon. If you have to reforging ability and to remove all this crap.... it is better to get a long stick and sharpen the point. Come on man...
Lol. You're ignoring the ''improvised'' part of improvised weapon, again. You're talking on the subject as if they lived in some sort of ideal world where every attack came with warning, where every peasant had the means to reforge weapons, had access to a range of tools or could afford/had access to better weaponry. They didn't. That's the ideal world, but reality is something else entirely.
You are taking the fact it would be a poor weapon and, without any real evidence to support it, conferring that the idea of it ever being used as a weapon is a myth. Before you say ''watch the video'' again, no. Not only does your video not disprove the notion that it was ever used as a weapon, the bloke who made it wasn't around in medieval times, so it's only his speculation to begin with. You cannot, and have not, proved anything on the matter.
Indeed, mere common sense would suggest that if needs must, you'd use whatever was at your disposal to defend yourself, whether that's taking one item you own and using it to create another, or just using the item itself. Would it be an ideal weapon? No. Improvised weapons rarely are. But would you go bare knuckle because your brother took the pitchfork, and you're left with just the scythe? Nope. Poor weapon or not, it is better than punching an armed opponent. At the very least it can keep them at arm's length.
It is a hollywood myth and comic book of grime reaper that make this soooo cool and scary weapon what it is today.
Seriously, your comprehension is sorely lacking if you believe anyone here is arguing that farmers were armed with the weapon that the grim reaper uses.
LOL.. ok this is getting silly and childish and a bit juvenile. I feel you are being defensive because you feel your pride is at stake or something. Like I stated before you are not a scythe manufacture... who cares..???
Your belief is based on hollywood and Grim reaper and because this myth has been around for so long that you even assume as fact because of the grim reaper and hollywood. It is ok man... I thought so too. Up until 10 years ago... when I saw a scythe in a farm and I pick it up... I was like WTF... I can not swing this as a weapon at all. The blade is thin. Real Thin! Next, the blade is not even parallel to the handle. It is set on the other side. What this means is for it to murder somebody, the blade would have to be remove and set as a spear or parallel to the stick. This modification is what hollywood and internet like you assume was the WAR SCYTHE. you even show me the BS picture of the Polish troops with War scythe, which was debunk by the video. IN other words... there were never a modification for war at all. This again is a myth of farmer modifying their scythe to be a pole weapon. The debunk stated that if you can modified that much, you might as well just modified other sharper thicker blade to the pole. You might as well go get the same stick that you are about to modified and sharpen the point and is easier to use and deadly than that paper thin blade for cutting Wheat! You understand right that the blade is very thin and light. You think a farmer has the strength to use that Wheat cutting instrument blade if it were as heavy as an axe head? They use the scythe all day long to cut freaking wheat. The blade is paper thin and light.
Think about it... what evidence do you have? You only have the common sense assumption that farmer would use it and that is it. NO historical ever mention that farmers use them. It would mention that in history somewhere.... Example... The Khmer rouge used farming equipment such as sickle and tools such as Sledge hammer to execute their prisoner because it is cheap and use no bullets. It was documented. Sickle is useful in a fight, a farmer scythe is impossible to use in a fight at all. It has the same usefulness in battle as taking a wood chair from their house as a weapon. You can't swing with a scythe other than sweeping side to side to cut wheat.
The evidence of that manuscript was debunk by the guy also. Use your common sense to decide the evidence for yourself and get your pride out of the way.
In short, show your self the poof of this. Ask yourself why do I belief that farmer use them as weapon. Guarantee because of Grim Reaper and hollywood.
BTW - The grim reaper scythe doesn't exist in real life. Real scythe blade is not parallel like the reaper. Real scythe blade is paper thin and design to cut wheat! The depiction of grim reaper is a thick solid blade that can cut.
War Scythe has the same name as scythe. Anybody who ever mentioned that War scythe was a farming scythe that was modified do not know anything of that pole weapon. The war scythe was a pole weapon with real war blade and that blade was never a farm tool stuck on. War Scythe is like War hammer or War Axe. None of those weapons were farming tools that was modify to become a weapon. It was made as weapon from scratch.....
Don't be embarrass because most of us felt for the hollywood and grim reaper too.
Go see a real farm scythe.
Pick up a farm scythe.
Look around the farm that you got the farm scythe. I guarantee that there are more useful murdering tools you can use from.
The so called "war scythes" used by Polish peasants were in fact converted farm tools. Being peasants chased by the government, they did not have the raw resources to make weapons from scratch and thus reforged their existing scythe blades into improvised spears. It is a rather simple operation: you just need to straighten out the tang so it is attached with the point up rather than sideways. Also, provide more evidence than uncredible youtube videos of guys that speculate without producing evidence. If you want to gain some real knowledge about the use of scythes in war, I suggest you get of youtube and start reading literature about peasant uprisings, particularly those in Poland.
david choe wrote: Your belief is based on hollywood and Grim reaper and because this myth has been around for so long that you even assume as fact because of the grim reaper and hollywood.
Firstly, what? Secondly...what?
My belief is based on the fact that you'd use whatever means you could obtain to defend yourself. What you wrote is conjecture, and it's a rather juvenile attempt to put words in my mouth.
It is ok man... I thought so too. Up until 10 years ago... when I saw a scythe in a farm and I pick it up... I was like WTF... I can not swing this as a weapon at all. The blade is thin. Real Thin! Next, the blade is not even parallel to the handle. It is set on the other side. What this means is for it to murder somebody, the blade would have to be remove and set as a spear or parallel to the stick. This modification is what hollywood and internet like you assume was the WAR SCYTHE. you even show me the BS picture of the Polish troops with War scythe, which was debunk by the video. IN other words... there were never a modification for war at all. This again is a myth of farmer modifying their scythe to be a pole weapon. The debunk stated that if you can modified that much, you might as well just modified other sharper thicker blade to the pole. You might as well go get the same stick that you are about to modified and sharpen the point and is easier to use and deadly than that paper thin blade for cutting Wheat! You understand right that the blade is very thin and light. You think a farmer has the strength to use that Wheat cutting instrument blade if it were as heavy as an axe head? They use the scythe all day long to cut freaking wheat. The blade is paper thin and light.
I didn't post any picture of anything. So...
And you didn't debunk anything. There was speculation, talk of how poor it's be as a weapon and nothing much else. Proof that the idea they were ever used as weapons is a myth? Nope. Not even vaguely.
Think about it... what evidence do you have? You only have the common sense assumption that farmer would use it and that is it. NO historical ever mention that farmers use them. It would mention that in history somewhere.... Example... The Khmer rouge used farming equipment such as sickle and tools such as Sledge hammer to execute their prisoner because it is cheap and use no bullets. It was documented. Sickle is useful in a fight, a farmer scythe is impossible to use in a fight at all. It has the same usefulness in battle as taking a wood chair from their house as a weapon. You can't swing with a scythe other than sweeping side to side to cut wheat.
Evidence? It's your claim that the whole thing is a myth, the onus is on you to prove it never happened. You haven't. You instead focus on how it'd be a last resort, a fact that literally nobody has argued against. But a last resort isn't the same as a myth, so...
The evidence of that manuscript was debunk by the guy also. Use your common sense to decide the evidence for yourself and get your pride out of the way.
What manuscript? I don't even...
And common sense? Common sense says that peasants would use whatever they could. Lol. Pride? I mean, I gave you the benefit of the doubt with it being a language issue, but it's starting to look like something else. Stop trying to distract from the point with obscure conjecture.
In short, show your self the poof of this. Ask yourself why do I belief that farmer use them as weapon. Guarantee because of Grim Reaper and hollywood.
Uh, because if it's scythe or nothing, then it's scythe. same as I said how many times?
Don't be embarrass because most of us felt for the hollywood and grim reaper too.
Again, nobody is talking about a reaper scythe, or hollywood. Just, well...you. It's another juvenile attempt to belittle others, frankly based on nothing but your own imagination.
Go see a real farm scythe.
Pick up a farm scythe.
Look around the farm that you got the farm scythe. I guarantee that there are more useful murdering tools you can use from.
I already explained this. Re-read what has already been said.
Clearly your arguments hinge on the fact that you ignore (repeatedly) what is said, hide behind a video you found and then cover up your shortcomings by putting words in people's mouths, whilst simultaenously accusing them of being childish. Long story short? Believe what you want. You're clearly happy with your version of history. But stop acting like you're some authority who can dispell widely accepted facts, because you're not.
Think about it... what evidence do you have? You only have the common sense assumption that farmer would use it and that is it. NO historical ever mention that farmers use them. It would mention that in history somewhere.... Example... The Khmer rouge used farming equipment such as sickle and tools such as Sledge hammer to execute their prisoner because it is cheap and use no bullets. It was documented. Sickle is useful in a fight, a farmer scythe is impossible to use in a fight at all. It has the same usefulness in battle as taking a wood chair from their house as a weapon. You can't swing with a scythe other than sweeping side to side to cut wheat.
Evidence? It's your claim, that the whole thing is a myth. The onus is on you to prove it never happened. You haven't. So...
It's impossible to prove a negative. I think he's right on this one, that if you think it was used as a weapon you would need to provide evidence.
Steve steveson wrote: It's impossible to prove a negative. I think he's right on this one, that if you think it was used as a weapon you would need to provide evidence.
No, I don't, because I haven't said with certainty they were. I'm not going to try and state what happened across hundreds of years of history without a weight of evidence to back it up. Infact, on the contrary my objection is to stating--stating, not speculating--that they weren't used like that, that they were a myth, when nothing shown so far has actually proven that.
I said they may have been, and gave some scenarios where it may have happened. In my opinion, like any improvised weapon, odds are it probably happened at some point.
Now, because he stated that it's a myth the onus was on him to prove it as a fact, but that simply hasn't been shown. All he's proven so far was that they'd be poor weapons, but to stretch that to ''they were never used, and that's a myth'' is to stretch it a tad too far.
I think if a peasant had no choice, they could get one good swing in with a scythe, then take the weapon from his attacker. Would it be able to be used in a whole battle? No, but in a pinch its better then your fists. And no, I don't own one, but I have been around them. Wouldn't be my first choice unless it was already handy.
Artorias the Abysswalker wrote: Interesting, I was thinking about this, does anyone have knightly roots, or is descended from a medieval order?
I've done extensive research of my family history, and one of my forbearers on my mother's side, fought in Maximillian I's army and was knighted after a skirmish. We even have our own coat of arms for House Grama - a golden sun on a purple field, and our motto is "We stand fast".
Sadly, at my current state I would mayhaps be equivalent to a merchant's son and might have a glimmer of hope, that I might be a squire and not go to battle with a pitchfork
My oldest brother did some research and found our family tree can go back into the Saxon era of Briton. But that was about all he could find, nothing in top of that. So it's possible as our family is old, but nothing showed up to say other wise.
david choe wrote: LOL.. ok this is getting silly and childish and a bit juvenile.
Only for the last 17 or so pages.
We are a silly bunch. Come on man.. arguing about weapons from 100s years back and playing with toys .... it seems normal that is out come exist.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Inquisitor Lord Bane wrote: I think if a peasant had no choice, they could get one good swing in with a scythe, then take the weapon from his attacker. Would it be able to be used in a whole battle? No, but in a pinch its better then your fists. And no, I don't own one, but I have been around them. Wouldn't be my first choice unless it was already handy.
Yes, that is my point.... if it was in my hand and here comes trouble...ok
But this improvise myth..... is that trouble is coming or we are going to go look for trouble... go grab a handy tools to fight....
OK... lets see my farm handy tools to fight... axe... nah... pitch fork...nah....Kitchen knife..nah.
Hey look at that scythe.. Grim reaper and death uses it... I'm going to pick that up because it is freaking scary looking and the blade is very long I can only sweep it side to side but.. what the heck. The guy might not see me coming and I sweep at this legs.. yeah.. then kill him and take his weapon.
Steve steveson wrote: It's impossible to prove a negative. I think he's right on this one, that if you think it was used as a weapon you would need to provide evidence.
No, I don't, because I haven't said with certainty they were. I'm not going to try and state what happened across hundreds of years of history without a weight of evidence to back it up. Infact, on the contrary my objection is to stating--stating, not speculating--that they weren't used like that, that they were a myth, when nothing shown so far has actually proven that.
I said they may have been, and gave some scenarios where it may have happened. In my opinion, like any improvised weapon, odds are it probably happened at some point.
Now, because he stated that it's a myth the onus was on him to prove it as a fact, but that simply hasn't been shown. All he's proven so far was that they'd be poor weapons, but to stretch that to ''they were never used, and that's a myth'' is to stretch it a tad too far.
That is why I said you're thinking this because of movies and drawing of fantasy art and the Reaper.
Anything and everything has been use as a murdering tools in the history. I wouldn't group scythe, brass candle holder, or a stone bust of venus as a weapon.
david choe wrote: LOL.. ok this is getting silly and childish and a bit juvenile.
Only for the last 17 or so pages.
We are a silly bunch. Come on man.. arguing about weapons from 100s years back and playing with toys .... it seems normal that is out come exist.
Don't call me man and I was referring to the clear bias earlier. But there's not really an overall superior sword anyway and to think a farmer wouldn't toss together a weapon or use some more sinister looking tools.
As for the scythe, doesn't mean no one used a scythe as a weapon, just it's not a very good weapon. There is the possibility the blade may have been a bit better than it is now, but the issue was the blade's position in the first place.
However how many farmers are going to be aware that their scythe is not a good weapon? They were stupid and untrained.
david choe wrote: That is why I said you're thinking this because of movies and drawing of fantasy art and the Reaper.
Nobody except you talked about that. I, for one, was definitely talking about the farming tool.
Anything and everything has been use as a murdering tools in the history. I wouldn't group scythe, brass candle holder, or a stone bust of venus as a weapon.
So what this boils down to is you not understanding what an improvised weapon is. They're items which aren't designed as weapons, but which can be used as weapons--usually in desperation, which is what I have stated. You cannot definitively say they were never used as improvised weapons. You can say they'd be a poor one, you can say you'd be an idiot to use it, you can even speculate that they probably weren't often used as a weapon, but the point I was making is that that's not the same thing as them being used as a weapon being a myth. To call it a myth, by its very definition, is to say that it's false, that it never happened. You cannot state that with certainty, and that's my objection.
david choe wrote: That is why I said you're thinking this because of movies and drawing of fantasy art and the Reaper.
Nobody except you talked about that. I, for one, was definitely talking about the farming tool.
Anything and everything has been use as a murdering tools in the history. I wouldn't group scythe, brass candle holder, or a stone bust of venus as a weapon.
So what this boils down to is you not understanding what an improvised weapon is. They're items which aren't designed as weapons, but which can be used as weapons--usually in desperation, which is what I have stated. You cannot definitively say they were never used as improvised weapons. You can say they'd be a poor one, you can say you'd be an idiot to use it, you can even speculate that they probably weren't often used as a weapon, but the point I was making is that that's not the same thing as them being used as a weapon being a myth. To call it a myth, by its very definition, is to say that it's false, that it never happened. You cannot state that with certainty, and that's my objection.
I think we all know that you are backtracking here... but whatever.
Anything can be an improvised weapon in that case but how come we are not talking about chairs, iron pans, or a pencil?
I am here to debunk the scythe as a myth. I didn't believe this after 10 years ago when I pick one up and try it. I researched it. Today somebody here mentioned the scythe and war scythe again, ... I pointed out it was a myth. I show 2 videos of this guy proofing a very valid point.
You are the one who is disagreeing with me. Now you are backtracking. If the rarity of scythe was use as a murdering tools.... then there should not ever be a discussion about scythe as a weapon. It is as stupid as talking about "I heard that a guy was killed by a stone statue bust of Venus" and talk about it as a weapon.
No doubt that many of you thought it was a common farm weapon in history because of Grim Reaper and hollywood and just hated the fact that I debunk it. LOL
Okay..... This has gotten weird over the last few pages.
Firstly: I am a Blacksmith. I am also trained with a number of weapons, including the Bastard Sword and the Glaive. I am also trained to fight in armour.
Ill start with the first part: The Katana is inferior to other blades. No question. I am planning to craft swords for myself and my friends based upon our fighting styles: I am making myself a Bastard Sword and a Short sword, my first best friend has requested a Norse hand axe and a sword made specifically to a set of specifications that is difficult to provide here, my second best friend has requested a paired set of Long/Broad swords - he is naturally ambidextrous and is learning how to dual wield. He intends to have his primary sword slightly longer, and he can also use it with a shield. Now, one of my friends has no formal or informal training. All his experience comes from watching films, youtube videos and playing games. he is the only one whom has said he would take the katana as his first choice. Hell, even my ex preferred the Norse hand axe. This should tell you something.
As for control: With my Bastard sword I can vary the blow from a devastating hit that will rip you open, unless you are wearing plate armour, to a delicate sweep that just catches your throat with the very tip of the blade and rips it out. I can aim a hit at a specific weakpoint on full plate and expect to hit it.
Curved blade or no, my Bastard sword still has superior cutting power to the Katana.
Now, as for these Warscythes, well, they did exist. They where, as others here have cited, a viable peasant weapon that could be used in a time of war. The blade of the scythe was taken and rotated through 90 degrees and re-mounted on the shaft. This allowed the scythe to be used as a primitive form of halberd and if I remember rightly the halberd actually evolved from the warscythe. Either that or another polearm did.
Firstly: I am a Blacksmith. I am also trained with a number of weapons, including the Bastard Sword and the Glaive. I am also trained to fight in armour.
Ill start with the first part: The Katana is inferior to other blades. No question. I am planning to craft swords for myself and my friends based upon our fighting styles: I am making myself a Bastard Sword and a Short sword, my first best friend has requested a Norse hand axe and a sword made specifically to a set of specifications that is difficult to provide here, my second best friend has requested a paired set of Long/Broad swords - he is naturally ambidextrous and is learning how to dual wield. He intends to have his primary sword slightly longer, and he can also use it with a shield. Now, one of my friends has no formal or informal training. All his experience comes from watching films, youtube videos and playing games. he is the only one whom has said he would take the katana as his first choice. Hell, even my ex preferred the Norse hand axe. This should tell you something.
As for control: With my Bastard sword I can vary the blow from a devastating hit that will rip you open, unless you are wearing plate armour, to a delicate sweep that just catches your throat with the very tip of the blade and rips it out. I can aim a hit at a specific weakpoint on full plate and expect to hit it.
Curved blade or no, my Bastard sword still has superior cutting power to the Katana.
Now, as for these Warscythes, well, they did exist. They where, as others here have cited, a viable peasant weapon that could be used in a time of war. The blade of the scythe was taken and rotated through 90 degrees and re-mounted on the shaft. This allowed the scythe to be used as a primitive form of halberd and if I remember rightly the halberd actually evolved from the warscythe. Either that or another polearm did.
Look at this video and tell me how he is not debunking this myth of scythe. I 'm tire of explaining to the same people that always disagreeing with me... so I rather have you list the disagreement of the video... I don't want to list all of his valid points
david choe wrote: I think we all know that you are backtracking here... but whatever.
Well, I started off saying they were a possible improvised weapon, and I'm still saying that they were a possible improvised weapon, so unless backtracking means something else to you then...no.
Anything can be an improvised weapon in that case but how come we are not talking about chairs, iron pans, or a pencil?
Because nobody said they've never been used as a weapon (because nobody is stupid enough to make such a claim, I daresay)? And because, if they did, examples can be given of them being used as an improvised weapon. Almost anything can be used to injure, or kill. Which by no small coincidence, is what the word weapon means:
weapon
noun
: something (such as a gun, knife, club, or bomb) that is used for fighting or attacking someone or for defending yourself when someone is attacking you.
The scythe can be used to injure, and it can be used to kill. Which means, that by the very definition of the word, it can be used as a weapon.
Now whether it ever was or not? You cannot prove it wasn't with certainty. Therefore you can only speculate. That's not debunking anything, that's giving your opinion. The very same thing the rest of us are doing (despite you trying to look down on us for doing so).
Scythe fanbois??????
Aaaand back to the depths of pettiness you plunge. I can see your mentality here, and to be honest it's not reflecting well on you. Since this isn't going anywhere, because you're convinced your opinion should be seen as fact, I'll not bother responding further unless something new comes up. I'd rather suggest you do the same, though in truth I doubt you will.
david choe wrote: I think we all know that you are backtracking here... but whatever.
Well, I started off saying they were a possible improvised weapon, and I'm still saying that they were a possible improvised weapon, so unless backtracking means something else to you then...no.
Anything can be an improvised weapon in that case but how come we are not talking about chairs, iron pans, or a pencil?
Because nobody said they've never been used as a weapon (because nobody is stupid enough to make such a claim, I daresay)? And because, if they did, examples can be given of them being used as an improvised weapon. Almost anything can be used to injure, or kill. Which by no small coincidence, is what the word weapon means:
weapon
noun
: something (such as a gun, knife, club, or bomb) that is used for fighting or attacking someone or for defending yourself when someone is attacking you.
The scythe can be used to injure, and it can be used to kill. Which means, that by the very definition of the word, it can be used as a weapon.
Now whether it ever was or not? You cannot prove it wasn't with certainty. Therefore you can only speculate. That's not debunking anything, that's giving your opinion.
Scythe fanbois??????
Aaaand back to the depths of pettiness you plunge.
Oh... I understand now....
I heard that in a parallel universe, some guy name Mortarion was famous for using Scythe.
Another famous entity name Grim Reaper carry one too. Oh Father time too. Lets see who els....oh yeah in the 6th planes of hell... the Bones Devil use them often too.
I am sorry that I was wrong to forget those entity used scythe. Oh yeah, and a farmer name Steve and Jack killed a english solider in the 15th century... so I must retrack that Scythe were used as a killing weapon.
What is the matter... when everybody was so anti Katana and try to make a comedy out of it... was ok.. now you can't take it? It was all fun and games until the joke is on you right?
Firstly: I am a Blacksmith. I am also trained with a number of weapons, including the Bastard Sword and the Glaive. I am also trained to fight in armour.
Ill start with the first part: The Katana is inferior to other blades. No question. I am planning to craft swords for myself and my friends based upon our fighting styles: I am making myself a Bastard Sword and a Short sword, my first best friend has requested a Norse hand axe and a sword made specifically to a set of specifications that is difficult to provide here, my second best friend has requested a paired set of Long/Broad swords - he is naturally ambidextrous and is learning how to dual wield. He intends to have his primary sword slightly longer, and he can also use it with a shield. Now, one of my friends has no formal or informal training. All his experience comes from watching films, youtube videos and playing games. he is the only one whom has said he would take the katana as his first choice. Hell, even my ex preferred the Norse hand axe. This should tell you something.
As for control: With my Bastard sword I can vary the blow from a devastating hit that will rip you open, unless you are wearing plate armour, to a delicate sweep that just catches your throat with the very tip of the blade and rips it out. I can aim a hit at a specific weakpoint on full plate and expect to hit it. Curved blade or no, my Bastard sword still has superior cutting power to the Katana.
Now, as for these Warscythes, well, they did exist. They where, as others here have cited, a viable peasant weapon that could be used in a time of war. The blade of the scythe was taken and rotated through 90 degrees and re-mounted on the shaft. This allowed the scythe to be used as a primitive form of halberd and if I remember rightly the halberd actually evolved from the warscythe. Either that or another polearm did.
Look at this video and tell me how he is not debunking this myth of scythe. I 'm tire of explaining to the same people that always disagreeing with me... so I rather have you list the disagreement of the video... I don't want to list all of his valid points
Stop posting that video, it does not prove anything, as that guy presents about just as much evidence as you do. None. On the other hand, the use of scythes in war is a commonly known fact that is well documented by both historical and contemporary literature and backed up by artwork from the period and even photographs for later periods. Get og Youtube, as you will never find any knowledge there. Go read some proper literature and if you find anything out there that proves that scythes were never reforged into improvised weapons, come back and let us know.
And a second thing for which you have been ridiculed: that Grim Reaper you keep bringing up. The use of a scythe by the Grim Reaper is symbolic, he harvests souls like a farmer harvests grain. It has nothing to do with the use of a scythe as a weapon. The Grim Reaper does not need a weapon, he is Death. Death does not need to reforge his scythe into a shabby improvised spear to stop a cavalry charge, he has nothing to do with the use of scythes in combat.
Grey Templar wrote: As a merchant, I would probably have the following, assuming late/mid middle ages.
Weapons
1) Polearm of some kind as my primary weapon
2) Warhammer, axe, or pick as a backup weapon(swords are expensive)
3) Crossbow
Armor
Chainmail leggings and sleeves, padded doublet, cheap breastplate, metal greaves, and a simple metal helm. Along with a shield, likely reinforced hardwood.
If I'm richer than average I might be able to afford a horse and better armor. And after any battles I've got my eye open for any better equipment off the dead.
Wussies. I want a wagon full of cross bows and wiener dogs with tiny schiltrons. We'll form our own tercio of biting/shooting goodness!
Artorias the Abysswalker wrote: Interesting, I was thinking about this, does anyone have knightly roots, or is descended from a medieval order?
I wouldn't need to murder too many people to be a Silesian count with roots going back to the Teutonic order. Though this is a maternal lineage from my fathers mothers kin in Germany. The rest of me is English, and if you go back a very long way Welsh and very likely through genetic markers Roman. It is not a stretch tom imagine some of my ancestors were 'Arthurian' but as ancestry is an ever widening shotgun effect, especially for the trader and nobility classes and others who moved about that geneology is anything but special.
My father also has a worn brass ring passed along one of our maternal lines which is a bastard ring of the Duke of Montroses get. It's so worn it has no identifying stamp anymore, it was important to the generations of bastard ancestors who wore it sometime in the 18th century though. I have legitimate noble connections by marriage, but not ancestry also from my mothers side.
My paternal ancestry, in fact from father to eldest son goes back to some important people in English history, at the time of the Commonwealth and the family then had a lot of clout, but weren't nobles and ultimately were on the wrong side of history after the Restoration. My direct ancestor was a trusted companion of Oliver Cromwell.
The Romans were particularly nervous of the two handed falx which could go through their armor without difficulty. Apparently they made special armor for it.
Speaking of practical weapons - morning star flail - cool looking. Practical? Maybe on horseback, but definitely not on foot. Also, did knights use their lances in open combat, or were they mostly used for jousting?
Flails CAN be practical, but they do have downsides... 1. you have to use it's momentum. 2. it's only really good use is as a "disarming weapon", which leads to 3. You still need other weapons to fight.
Posted as you were typing also, the video posted just now of exotic weapon plays includes flail plays. Enjoy.
The farm tool scythe as a weapon is a myth. That freaking thing is almost impossible to use in combat. You have better chance at wining combat with a iron pan.
david choe, not to call you out as someone on the wrong side of the evidence AGAIN but... The link given was for 16th century handbook of fighting techniques, not stills from a fantasy RPG. i.e you are flatly going against historical evidence right in front of your face.
Now if the guys in the later medieval are have a how to guide for fighting with the sickle and the scythe, it meant there was a fighting style for fighting with those weapons. As the plays are very simple its likely to be a primer on improvised weaponry, along the grounds that sickles and scythes are sharp and available from every village, so how would I use one? The Japanese developed a similar set of skills, many of the ninja weapons were actually farm tools.
Please note that all fighters has identical weapons, this isn't to match scythe vs scythe, but to show how a scythe attacks and how it is used to defend and is supposed to be read from a trained eye. It tell the reader as much about how to stop someone coming at you with a scythe (which angry peasants might well do) as well as how to pick up a scythe and use it.
At this point if we ignore him he might go away. "Debating" with him is pointless. He's clearly right with all of the super qualified youtube dewds he keeps posting videos from, and we all have no knowlege or ability to research.
Firstly: I am a Blacksmith. I am also trained with a number of weapons, including the Bastard Sword and the Glaive. I am also trained to fight in armour.
Ill start with the first part: The Katana is inferior to other blades. No question. I am planning to craft swords for myself and my friends based upon our fighting styles: I am making myself a Bastard Sword and a Short sword, my first best friend has requested a Norse hand axe and a sword made specifically to a set of specifications that is difficult to provide here, my second best friend has requested a paired set of Long/Broad swords - he is naturally ambidextrous and is learning how to dual wield. He intends to have his primary sword slightly longer, and he can also use it with a shield. Now, one of my friends has no formal or informal training. All his experience comes from watching films, youtube videos and playing games. he is the only one whom has said he would take the katana as his first choice. Hell, even my ex preferred the Norse hand axe. This should tell you something.
As for control: With my Bastard sword I can vary the blow from a devastating hit that will rip you open, unless you are wearing plate armour, to a delicate sweep that just catches your throat with the very tip of the blade and rips it out. I can aim a hit at a specific weakpoint on full plate and expect to hit it.
Curved blade or no, my Bastard sword still has superior cutting power to the Katana.
Now, as for these Warscythes, well, they did exist. They where, as others here have cited, a viable peasant weapon that could be used in a time of war. The blade of the scythe was taken and rotated through 90 degrees and re-mounted on the shaft. This allowed the scythe to be used as a primitive form of halberd and if I remember rightly the halberd actually evolved from the warscythe. Either that or another polearm did.
Look at this video and tell me how he is not debunking this myth of scythe. I 'm tire of explaining to the same people that always disagreeing with me... so I rather have you list the disagreement of the video... I don't want to list all of his valid points
Stop posting that video, it does not prove anything, as that guy presents about just as much evidence as you do. None.
On the other hand, the use of scythes in war is a commonly known fact that is well documented by both historical and contemporary literature and backed up by artwork from the period and even photographs for later periods. Get og Youtube, as you will never find any knowledge there. Go read some proper literature and if you find anything out there that proves that scythes were never reforged into improvised weapons, come back and let us know.
And a second thing for which you have been ridiculed: that Grim Reaper you keep bringing up. The use of a scythe by the Grim Reaper is symbolic, he harvests souls like a farmer harvests grain. It has nothing to do with the use of a scythe as a weapon. The Grim Reaper does not need a weapon, he is Death. Death does not need to reforge his scythe into a shabby improvised spear to stop a cavalry charge, he has nothing to do with the use of scythes in combat.
Another victim of this famous myth. If you actually read and do more research.. you will see that the scythe myth has been around since 16century.
This famous guy Paulus Hector Mair con many many people to think that scythe was a weapon because of his martial art. This one guy in the 15century started it all and many often sited his books as the bible proof of Scythe martial art. Which is the silliest thing ever.
The Polish War scythe or farming scythe from Poland "MIGHT" be the only exception. Which I'm not really sure if it were true. However, even if it were true... Hollywood really screw with most of your perception. This is also part of the "scythe fanbois" bible proof of scythe as weapon. Maybe Poland Scythe were super thick or something, I don't know.
However, time and time again... people keep thinking that a normal farming scythe were common for farmer upraising or revolt weapons... because in almost every hollywood film when there is a lynch mob... they have to show the cook with a rolling pin and some farmer with a scythe... because how els are we going to know they wear farmers right?
Again, a scythe is harder to use than any Japanese exotic weapons like Nunchaku or Sai.. and normal farmer can scythe his enemy with a farm scythe is beyond believable.
Nobody can use a farm scythe as a weapon unless he actually train with it as a weapon. Which would be an oxymoron because nobody train to fight with a iron pan or a rolling pin or a freaking farm tool.
The Romans were particularly nervous of the two handed falx which could go through their armor without difficulty. Apparently they made special armor for it.
well lets join the party.
We all know that those tools are more of a sickle than a european scythe that is depicted in our conversation. Don't even mention the Japanese ninja scythe. Again, just because the english name has the word scythe in it.
We are talking here about the typical English Farm Scythe as depicted in many fiction hollywood. You want to bring in Greek sickle or scythe just because 500BC they use it to cut wheat and now you want to compare as Farmer scythe ... OK you win.
Painting of a farmer with a scythe from around 1250.
Looks like it could be swung like a pick, not terribly difficult. Probably not very effective, but not impossible like you've been trying to tell us. A farmer takes a swing at a militia member wearing chainmail, one of e things happen:
1. The scythe blade breaks on the chainmail, and the guard runs him through.
2. The scythe breaks but pierces the chain, wounding and allowing him to grab the guards weapon.
3. Clean hit, scythe is fine after going through the chain. Most likely a lucky hit, probably shouldn't try it again.
Speaking of practical weapons - morning star flail - cool looking. Practical? Maybe on horseback, but definitely not on foot. Also, did knights use their lances in open combat, or were they mostly used for jousting?
Flails CAN be practical, but they do have downsides... 1. you have to use it's momentum. 2. it's only really good use is as a "disarming weapon", which leads to 3. You still need other weapons to fight.
Posted as you were typing also, the video posted just now of exotic weapon plays includes flail plays. Enjoy.
The farm tool scythe as a weapon is a myth. That freaking thing is almost impossible to use in combat. You have better chance at wining combat with a iron pan.
david choe, not to call you out as someone on the wrong side of the evidence AGAIN but... The link given was for 16th century handbook of fighting techniques, not stills from a fantasy RPG. i.e you are flatly going against historical evidence right in front of your face.
Now if the guys in the later medieval are have a how to guide for fighting with the sickle and the scythe, it meant there was a fighting style for fighting with those weapons. As the plays are very simple its likely to be a primer on improvised weaponry, along the grounds that sickles and scythes are sharp and available from every village, so how would I use one? The Japanese developed a similar set of skills, many of the ninja weapons were actually farm tools.
Please note that all fighters has identical weapons, this isn't to match scythe vs scythe, but to show how a scythe attacks and how it is used to defend and is supposed to be read from a trained eye. It tell the reader as much about how to stop someone coming at you with a scythe (which angry peasants might well do) as well as how to pick up a scythe and use it.
LOL. you were the guy who posted Paulus Hector Mair the famous con artist "martial artist" book of his time right? This guy was full of crap and got hanged for it in the end. His farming "martial art" combat was one the the reason why we have "scythe fanbois" and the creation of scythe myth.
I am starting to remembers avatar of people full of crap here. I mean anybody who is a fanbois of farm tools as real weapons....come on.
You actually believe that this book really show how to fight with farm tools? He made like 3 books. Just 3. Who would ever try to learn how to use a farm tools as weapon? And those drawing really show how to fight. It is pure BS. Fighting with Chaos Lord spike shield? Or lets stick the sickle up a guy butt? This book is the joke of all european martial artist book. People who train in european fighting always joke about this book and laugh at all the stupid drawing. It is the famous funny book of every fighting club man....Dude..this says a lot about you.
Looks like it could be swung like a pick, not terribly difficult. Probably not very effective, but not impossible like you've been trying to tell us. A farmer takes a swing at a militia member wearing chainmail, one of e things happen:
1. The scythe blade breaks on the chainmail, and the guard runs him through.
2. The scythe breaks but pierces the chain, wounding and allowing him to grab the guards weapon.
3. Clean hit, scythe is fine after going through the chain. Most likely a lucky hit, probably shouldn't try it again.
The thing is... the blade are very thin and that drawing is false. True scythe blade will be position the other way. Again, I don't want to debate about things that the video debunked. Please look at the video and you will see why this drawing is wrong.
We all know that those tools are more of a sickle than a european scythe that is depicted in our conversation. Don't even mention the Japanese ninja scythe. Again, just because the english name has the word scythe in it.
We are talking here about the typical English Farm Scythe as depicted in many fiction hollywood. You want to bring in Greek sickle or scythe just because 500BC they use it to cut wheat and now you want to compare as Farmer scythe ... OK you win.
My you do get in a tizzy don't you. I wasn't addressing your sickle controversyr, just the topic of scythes in combat itself. Me likey the Dacians. They are the classic victim of the gigantic biker gang that was the Romans, except they made them bleed for it. When you realize ROme was just a big biker gang, stealing other people's stuff, most of the respect you have for them goes out the window. Scythes have been used throughout Europe and Asia since well forever. I'm not saying the semicircular sickle is a good weapon. I'm saying a modified scythe can be a terrifying weapon, effectively a two handed falchion. That will feth you up big time.
We all know that those tools are more of a sickle than a european scythe that is depicted in our conversation. Don't even mention the Japanese ninja scythe. Again, just because the english name has the word scythe in it.
We are talking here about the typical English Farm Scythe as depicted in many fiction hollywood. You want to bring in Greek sickle or scythe just because 500BC they use it to cut wheat and now you want to compare as Farmer scythe ... OK you win.
My you do get in a tizzy don't you.
Scythes have been used throughout Europe and Asia since well forever.
I'm not saying the semicircular sickle is a good weapon. I'm saying a modified scythe can be a terrifying weapon, effectively a two handed falchion. That will feth you up big time.
lol, sorry haha.
I know scythes are used every where as farming tool, some are built different and can be use as a weapon. But we are talking about they kind that was in the video and what I told that guy was a myth.
If you just join the conversation ( I don't know), you have to start from page 15 where somebody post a video of two drawing of rich men dueling with english farm scythe. I told them that it was a myth. Then I show the video of a very valid points and my personal experience of the farm tool.
Then people started trying to proof me wrong by showing freaking greek scythe, war scythe, Japanese ninja scythe.... and every wheat cutting instruments .... of course some of them can be use as killing weapon.
The debunk is the English Farm scythe that is depicted by movies, Grim reaper, and Father time. Those scythes.
Looks like it could be swung like a pick, not terribly difficult. Probably not very effective, but not impossible like you've been trying to tell us. A farmer takes a swing at a militia member wearing chainmail, one of e things happen:
1. The scythe blade breaks on the chainmail, and the guard runs him through.
2. The scythe breaks but pierces the chain, wounding and allowing him to grab the guards weapon.
3. Clean hit, scythe is fine after going through the chain. Most likely a lucky hit, probably shouldn't try it again.
The thing is... the blade are very thin and that drawing is false. True scythe blade will be position the other way. Again, I don't want to debate about things that the video debunked. Please look at the video and you will see why this drawing is wrong.
Waah! An actual historical depiction of a medieval scythe does not correspond with what some random dude on Youtube told me! History is so wrong lol, the video says it. YOUTUBE IS TRUTH!!!
I can assure you death is most certainly real. The Grim Reaper is just a personification of death so people can show an abstract concept in paintings etc. Also, as a personification of death, the Grim Reaper has only been around since the 16th century or so.
We are talking here about the typical English Farm Scythe as depicted in many fiction hollywood. You want to bring in Greek sickle or scythe just because 500BC they use it to cut wheat and now you want to compare as Farmer scythe ... OK you win.
Moving the goalposts are we? First it was scythes in general, now it is just the "English Farm Scythe™"? If you dont mind me asking, what exactly constitutes an "English Farm Scythe™"? Are you sure you did not just invent that one? I am pretty sure the medieval English used a variety of scythe designs.
I choose to check a reference source and yep, scythe is a weapon. Right here *points at page* It says that scythes are piercing and slicing, get x4 damage on critical hits, and they can make trip attacks! It also says hardness five but I'm not sure what that means so I'm ignoring it.
It comes in a few sizes but I'd go colossal cause 6d6 damage sounds like a lot!
Yeah.... ALL of the books that I have MUST be wrong. All those PhDs and Masters of History don't know what the feth they are talking about when they say..
"In the middle ages the scythe was frequently used as a weapon, the blade being mounted in ling with a long, straight shaft. It does not appear to have given rise to any important modification, especially adapted for fighting. It was used as an improvised weapon by peasants as late as the end of the 18th century."
-A Glossary of the Construction, Decoration and Use of Arms and Armor in all countries and in all times. (together with some closely related subjects) by, George Cameron Stone
And that's just the first, most available book that I have on my shelf.
I am not talking hollywood. I am not saying that the scythe is a great, or even good weapon. I am merely stating that Historical Record and facts show that there is no myth that they were in fact, used in battle.
There really is nothing to debate here. None of us is saying that a scythe is any sort of great weapon, just that it has been used in the past.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also... when did Iron_Captain move to the UK?? (as im looking at the screen his flag is the union jack )
We are talking here about the typical English Farm Scythe as depicted in many fiction hollywood. You want to bring in Greek sickle or scythe just because 500BC they use it to cut wheat and now you want to compare as Farmer scythe ... OK you win.
Moving the goalposts are we? First it was scythes in general, now it is just the "English Farm Scythe™"? If you dont mind me asking, what exactly constitutes an "English Farm Scythe™"? Are you sure you did not just invent that one? I am pretty sure the medieval English used a variety of scythe designs.
1 - old drawing is some of the worst documents. The objective of this painting is not to look at the position of the scythe blade position. This is really simple... why don't you go google farm scythe and see what picture pops up. Look at the blade position, it was NEVER in 90degree to the stick. If I have to explain this to you ... you are dismiss in this discussion. You have never held a scythe or even look at and study a real one. Only in fantasy and the MYTH like the Grim Reaper scythe.
2 - "moving goal post" ... this is also a silly comment. How would I have know that there are greek or may be even Aztec that have wheat cutting instrument and we will call them scythe and they use them as weapons. Again... I told people that the Scythe weapon based on the picture that Orlanth Naively consider it a weapon as a myth. Goto page 15 of this debate. So yes, the picture shows the standard "english" style farming scythe. That is it. Now you guys are trying to make a straw man argument buy bringing up anything that has the word scythe or is a wheat cutting instrument that has been use as a weapon. Don't be silly and I'm being nice.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also... when did Iron_Captain move to the UK?? (as im looking at the screen his flag is the union jack )
The Revolution knows no borders I moved out of the UK a few years ago, so the only reason I can think of is this: I wrote that comment while in the train, that train was an Arriva train, Arriva is a British company, so when you use their wi-fi Dakka thinks you are British? I wonder if I show up as American if I use the wi-fi at McDonalds...
That, or the UK has just secretly annexed the Netherlands while I wasn't looking...
Ensis Ferrae wrote: Yeah.... ALL of the books that I have MUST be wrong. All those PhDs and Masters of History don't know what the feth they are talking about when they say..
"In the middle ages the scythe was frequently used as a weapon, the blade being mounted in ling with a long, straight shaft. It does not appear to have given rise to any important modification, especially adapted for fighting. It was used as an improvised weapon by peasants as late as the end of the 18th century."
-A Glossary of the Construction, Decoration and Use of Arms and Armor in all countries and in all times. (together with some closely related subjects) by, George Cameron Stone
And that's just the first, most available book that I have on my shelf.
I am not talking hollywood. I am not saying that the scythe is a great, or even good weapon. I am merely stating that Historical Record and facts show that there is no myth that they were in fact, used in battle.
There really is nothing to debate here. None of us is saying that a scythe is any sort of great weapon, just that it has been used in the past.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also... when did Iron_Captain move to the UK?? (as im looking at the screen his flag is the union jack )
Look at a real picture and look at the video that I have posted as debunk evidence. That is a real scythe. How can that blade be inline with the shaft. Again... the video is not showing some drawing or anything. It is an MOVING VIDEO SEEING THE SCYTHE FROM ALL ANGLE. You tell me how it would be possible.
I will post this video again. You watch it . You debate me using this video and say something like at 3:12 mark.. it is not true because...so and so. Don't dismiss the video as a Youtube crap. It is valid evidence.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4rzQwzg5_mo
So many myth of book have created this myth.... I already mentioned that 16 century INFAMOUS european martial book that show people fighting with farm scythe as been debunk many times and it is a laughing JOKE among many European Fencing and fight club.
Please look at all 3 videos and use your own logic of why would you ever try to use this as a combat tools when all farmer who have access to Scythe will have axes and pitch fork. FARMERRRRR they are not warriors or martial artist... you think they can use this weapon to fight? It is freaking difficult to handle.
1 - old drawing is some of the worst documents. The objective of this painting is not to look at the position of the scythe blade position. This is really simple... why don't you go google farm scythe and see what picture pops up. Look at the blade position, it was NEVER in 90degree to the stick. If I have to explain this to you ... you are dismiss in this discussion. You have never held a scythe or even look at and study a real one. Only in fantasy and the MYTH like the Grim Reaper scythe.
Let me ask you. If you, as a medieval farmer are up against a bunch of "noble" knights on horseback, what kind of weapon would you want to have? A little woodcutting hatchet? A blunt pitchfork? No. You want something sharp, long and pointy to deter those haughty knights from charging and crushing you under their horse's hooves. What is the most easily available long, sharp and pointy thing? A scythe of course. You only need to get it to point upwards and make sure it is attached to a straight pole, which is simple to do.
A scythe is not a great weapon, but as long as you can use it to stab at a horse's head or chest it will make do.
1 - old drawing is some of the worst documents. The objective of this painting is not to look at the position of the scythe blade position. This is really simple... why don't you go google farm scythe and see what picture pops up. Look at the blade position, it was NEVER in 90degree to the stick. If I have to explain this to you ... you are dismiss in this discussion. You have never held a scythe or even look at and study a real one. Only in fantasy and the MYTH like the Grim Reaper scythe.
Dude, you have pretty much broken Dakka rule #1 on almost every page with your rude behavior, how has your face not been introduced to the modhammer?
Also, try your own suggestion and Google medieval scythe. You will see at least 10 different types of scythes. And try using something other than youtube as a source of information.
Automatically Appended Next Post: And I'm on my phone and Frazz's link worked just fine, try again
1 - old drawing is some of the worst documents. The objective of this painting is not to look at the position of the scythe blade position. This is really simple... why don't you go google farm scythe and see what picture pops up. Look at the blade position, it was NEVER in 90degree to the stick. If I have to explain this to you ... you are dismiss in this discussion. You have never held a scythe or even look at and study a real one. Only in fantasy and the MYTH like the Grim Reaper scythe.
DO you even know what you're arguing about now, or are you just arguing?
sorry, but the link is dead.
OMG... just look at the video and debate that. all my points are in the video.
Videos (like the wheel, and California) are for chumps. Try reading something called...a book. What are you even arguing at this point? Are you saying a scythe is a bad form to use? Thats provably false. Again. Look at the Dacians. Are you saying semi circular sickles are a bad form to use? I'll go with that.
Inquisitor Lord Bane wrote: Dude, you have pretty much broken Dakka rule #1 on almost every page with your rude behavior, how has your face not been introduced to the modhammer?
Also, try your own suggestion and Google medieval scythe. You will see at least 10 different types of scythes. And try using something other than youtube as a source of information.
Automatically Appended Next Post: And I'm on my phone and Frazz's link worked just fine, try again
I didn't break any rules... people just hated when I'm right. For the past 17 pages, I have become Dakka number one hated guy. Just because I pointed out something that is not popular belief and seriously... it is freaking comical that so many people are in the closet scythe fanbois.
When I tell my fencing buddies next Monday at the fencing club about all the BS warriors from the internet buying into Paulus Hector Mair book...The famous CON artist fighting books from 500 years ago....when Paulus pull the greatest con and got hanged for it... the cons is still going on....and a new modern day "warriors" still trying to study his 4 books that are left.... .... they all will have a big laugh.
I can't belief you guys are actually think that people practice this crap of using farmer scythe as a form of martial fighting tool.
The books written by the "PHD" that used the scythe were based from the Paulus. Almost every modern true warriors knows that the Paulus Hector was a freaking idiot who scams so many lords and rich nobles to make this book. He died for it. When you guys go google and research this story.. search it with care. Many many are still following his teaching as "true". Example, this Dakka site tells all about the scythe myth.
I think this thread has outlived it's usefulness. In the future, if you want threads like this to remain open please try to focus on the issue being discussed and not other posters... once a discussion becomes about whether someone did or did not break the rules, with them defending themselves, the thread has gone too far off-topic.
)
Peasant uprisings have to arm themselves you know 
Oh... I understand now....
Painting of a farmer with a scythe from around 1250.
