None actually...if the ancient armies of the past would benefit more by having 2 weapons instead of one weapon and a shield, don't anyone here think that they would dual wield then? Not to mention add all armor on top that they'd wear and dual wielding will soon look really suicidal...
Dual wielding is fantasy/roleplaying creation mainly...in real life no sane person would go for dual wielding...oh..unless we're talking about lightsabers that actaully have next to no weight which in that case would make dual wielding somewhat meaningful...
Oh, and a samurai MIGHT have wielded dual weapons...if he didn't have any armor on him...with the war-armor on, they'd most definately be using dai-katanas...
The only cultures to have dual wielded are the Samurai and isolated groups of Arabs. This is because to use two swords they needed to be made out of Damascus Steel so as to be light enoughand strong enough. This technology was only discovered by those cultures. It was quite beneficial to those groups, and the reason why other cultures didn't go for it is simply becaude they didn't know how to make Damascus Steel.
It is so rare, that it just wouldn't fit nicely into the culture and gameplay of Warband (except maybe Sarranid Sultanate)
Maybe for a Samurai mod...?
None actually...if the ancient armies of the past would benefit more by having 2 weapons instead of one weapon and a shield, don't anyone here think that they would dual wield then? Not to mention add all armor on top that they'd wear and dual wielding will soon look really suicidal...
Dual wielding is fantasy/roleplaying creation mainly...in real life no sane person would go for dual wielding...oh..unless we're talking about lightsabers that actaully have next to no weight which in that case would make dual wielding somewhat meaningful...
Oh, and a samurai MIGHT have wielded dual weapons...if he didn't have any armor on him...with the war-armor on, they'd most definately be using dai-katanas...
The only cultures to have dual wielded are the Samurai and isolated groups of Arabs. This is because to use two swords they needed to be made out of Damascus Steel so as to be light enoughand strong enough. This technology was only discovered by those cultures. It was quite beneficial to those groups, and the reason why other cultures didn't go for it is simply becaude they didn't know how to make Damascus Steel.
It is so rare, that it just wouldn't fit nicely into the culture and gameplay of Warband (except maybe Sarranid Sultanate)
Maybe for a Samurai mod...?
There are accounts of them using it, but it is in the same vein of European usage, it was used by commanders and officers during times of extreme duress, and probably embellished to hell once they got back into camp by the people who do the recording. South east Asian and probably Native Americans as well also dual wielded, though the style of combat popular in their areas isn't exactly the ones where professional soldiers train all year round with an abundance of quality armor and massed numbers. If you take those you might as well throw in Renaissance civilian combat as well.
This is because to use two swords they needed to be made out of Damascus Steel so as to be light enoughand strong enough.
Pattern welded steel isn't all that much lighter than crucible steel, at least it isn't light enough for someone to swing a long sword around at a significantly better rate. Swords didn't weigh all that much, not that you'd want to swing two of them around in any case.
This technology was only discovered by those cultures. It was quite beneficial to those groups, and the reason why other cultures didn't go for it is simply becaude they didn't know how to make Damascus Steel.
Well no, it wasn't a matter of technology that held them back, otherwise you'd see people dual wielding zweihanders when the technology came around that made them lighter and stronger. It's just not practical given the limit you can push the sword's weight given even today's steel manufacturing techniques. You're far better served with a dagger, buckler, or shield.
It is so rare, that it just wouldn't fit nicely into the culture and gameplay of Warband (except maybe Sarranid Sultanate)
Maybe for a Samurai mod...?
Thank you Swadius I stand corrected on a number of points in particular that of Damascus Steel.
In terms of the Arabs, I was referring to isolated groups, I must have been misinformed, for I did not realise it was quite as isolated as you made clear. Thank you for enlightening me.
I am of course corrected on the technology front, thank you I was wrong.
However on the Samurai front, there were several Samurai who developed the technique of dual wielding, but it was once again very uncommon. (See Musashi and "Niten Ichi-ryu")
Also I believe the Thai dual wielded too. This site seems to support such a claim. http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2944
But I entirely concede your point as to the rarity of such an art, and its impracticality in Western Warfare.
Thank you again for correcting my erroneous post.
Well seeing as I'm late to the party, I'm just going to throw this out:
"The original Damascus steel, which came from the Damascus area (hence the name), was the strongest steel of much of the middle ages. However this was less to do with the way the steel was made and more to do with the ore used for the steel being of very high quality - certainly higher quality than was available elsewhere in the known world at the time.
The patterning on the blades produced was little more than a nice finish with which to impress people. It certainly didn't make the steel the strongest ever - something that was apparent by the mid 1700's as Damascus steel gun-barrels would fail under lower pressures than other types of steel. Certainly by the mid 1800's when cap-locks were invented Damascus steel barrels were not strong enough to handle the pressures of the newer powders.
The slightly later Damascus steel originated in Spain - several of the Damascus swordsmiths having moved to Spain in the 1500's. The initial Spanish Damascus steel wasn't as good as the 'pure' Damascus type, since the Spanish didn't have access to ore of the same quality. However by the mid to late 1600's techniques had been developed that allowed high quality steels from low quality ore, and the Spanish steel equalled, then bettered the pure Damascus steel. This was around the same time as Damascus ore started to run out, and by the mid 1700's 'Damascus steel' was produced only in Spain - the name more correctly by this stage being Damascus type steel or Damascus patterning.
Folding metal in creating blades was not limited to Japan or Damascus. Viking swords were produced using a folding method, and since a large number of their swords came from the rest of Europe it can safely be said that such techniques were well known.
Folding is a easy, if time consuming, way to produce both good quality steel from poor quality ore and a nice finish to the blade. In Europe this technique didn't need to be taken to the extent it was in Japan. European smiths had access to better quality ores than in Japan - either locally or through trade. This left the folding method simply as a way to produce a blade with an attractive pattern. Since swords were (and still are to some degree) signs of wealth and nobility, producing swords that looked attractive was a way to differentiate relative social status against others who were technically in the same social rank. This is much the same as businessmen today driving expensive cars with all the extras - you could get to business meetings just as easily in a cheap compact...it just doesn't look as good.
Damascus steels were better and stronger than other steels for several centuries, and as such commanded a high price. However by the 1700's stronger (and cheaper) steels were available, and by 1800 Damascus steel was little more than a status symbol. If such blades got a second reputation for strength around this time it was because the nature of the process meant that more time had been spent in producing the blade - so it was less likely to fail in combat compared to the mass-produced blades in use. However a good swordsmith could produce a much stronger blade than a Damascus one, if you had the money to pay for it.".
I don't know about how credible the claims are, but the writer seems to know what he's talking about. So meh.
Actually, I don't think he dual wielded whenever he was in a live fight. He advocated dual wielding only in the training sense as far as I know, the main reason being if one arm is out of order your other arm still has some practice.
If you're going to give an example, be sure to check it out first. A source wouldn't be too bad either.
The dude said to "train with a longsword in each hand", and also was explicitly reported as using two swords when fighting off the ambush from the famed sword school.
The dude said to "train with a longsword in each hand", and also was explicitly reported as using two swords when fighting off the ambush from the famed sword school.
However, Musashi states within the volume that one should train with a long sword in each hand, thereby training the body and improving one's ability to use two blades simultaneously, though the aim of this was only for training purposes and wasn't meant to be a viable fighting style.1
The dude said to "train with a longsword in each hand", and also was explicitly reported as using two swords when fighting off the ambush from the famed sword school.
While he did say to train with a long sword in each hand, it doesn't mean he advocated using it in battle. As for the reference to the ambush, the source you've brought up doesn't seem to mention it.
Having ALSO read the Book of Five Rings (and using it as a source earlier in the thread, advocating dual wielding,) I can say that, one, in that ambush he did NOT use two swords.
Two, that wiki article is crap. It's half truth at best.
The dude said to "train with a longsword in each hand", and also was explicitly reported as using two swords when fighting off the ambush from the famed sword school.
Having ALSO read the Book of Five Rings (and using it as a source earlier in the thread, advocating dual wielding,) I can say that, one, in that ambush he did NOT use two swords.
Two, that wiki article is crap. It's half truth at best.
However, Musashi states within the volume that one should train with a long sword in each hand, thereby training the body and improving one's ability to use two blades simultaneously, though the aim of this was only for training purposes and wasn't meant to be a viable fighting style.1
The dude said to "train with a longsword in each hand", and also was explicitly reported as using two swords when fighting off the ambush from the famed sword school.
While he did say to train with a long sword in each hand, it doesn't mean he advocated using it in battle. As for the reference to the ambush, the source you've brought up doesn't seem to mention it.
Well, I assume him making some crazy epic sounding technique I can't even pronounce is just for training purposes and he never actually used it, he just created and perfected techniques pertaining to the style. You're the fat nerd here, you should be right when it comes to these things, it pains me to have to correct you about dead Japanse duelists' combat techniques over the internet. I feel like I need to be eating some cheetoes or something. It totally makes your point of it "not being a viable fighting style" when the guy was well known and renown for his "(二天一, "two heavens as one") or nitōichi (二刀一, "two swords as one")" style, a dual wielding style he "perfected". Your "grandmaster knight" title and phallic symbol underneath your name does not scare me, sir.
Musashi created and perfected a two-sword kenjutsu technique called niten'ichi (二天一, "two heavens as one") or nitōichi (二刀一, "two swords as one") or "Ni-Ten Ichi Ryu" (A Kongen Buddhist Sutra refers to the two heavens as the two guardians of Buddha). In this technique, the swordsman uses both a large sword, and a "companion sword" at the same time, such as a katana with a wakizashi.
The dude said to "train with a longsword in each hand", and also was explicitly reported as using two swords when fighting off the ambush from the famed sword school.
I know you think I'm cute, Coy, I would hope so since we're e-married.
I'll PM you my skype info so we can do something about addressing the sexual tension between us A****ingSAP.
Just kidding, I don't have skype. Sorry to get your hopes up.
After a long night of debating with nerds on the internet about
stupid **** no one cares about
, I think it's time to get some sleep.
Coy, I'll call you in the morning.
I do actually have a phone, though.
Edit:
Fighting zergs 1v5 on the forums is actually harder than in-game.
Also, they should change this subforum from "The King's Court" to "Rhade's Court," I mean, it's practically the same thing and it's a bit shorter.
Go read it again. Musashi uses dual-weapon training to improve his fencing. It's more of a technical exercise, really. What you're doing is equivalent to stating that boxers punch the air a lot in an actual fight because they do shadowboxing in training.
In my opinion the main point of Musashi's "train with a longsword in each hand" approach is to overcome the favourism of the strong arm over the weak one, being able to use the weak one effeciently incase the other gets injured or is inoperative. I think this shows one of the main points of his philosophy, which was not to develop any preferences in order to stay unpredictable for one's opponents. At some point he also states that one should generally not prefer a troop type (like archers, infantry or horseman) over the other.
imo we should have quadruple wielding like that robot in star wars episodewhatever that'd be kool as **** men pew pew D "lightsabers ftw boiii" -- sun tzu
imo we should have quadruple wielding like that robot in star wars episodewhatever that'd be kool as **** men pew pew D "lightsabers ftw boiii" -- sun tzu
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
