Postby Justin Lompado » Sat Feb 11, 2006 8:23 pm
Well said Patrick. Since I started researching WMA and historically accurate weapons, I've been amazed by how many fallacies are out there. On television, unfortunatley, we can expect some exaggeration, fallicy and embellishment for effect, even from the History Channel and others with like programs, because eafter all they need to make shows people will watch. For example, I recently viewed a show on ancient siege weapons, which focused on a huge trebuchet used by Edward I against the Scots, known as War-Wolf. The Scottish battles of Edward Longshanks occured in the late 13th and early 14th centuries, and in the show they showed knights riding near a castle in 16th century jousting equipment and dress! They were even carrying modern wooden lances that you would see at any Renn fair.
The problem, unfortunatley, extends beyond television. As I said before, television can be expected to contain some fallicies. However, I happen to own history books that also contain gross misconceptions. In my studies of martial arts from around the world, as well as their accompanying military histories and culture, it seems that either books/articles detail martial soundess or military correctness, but rarely are the two found accuratley combined. When that happens, you get a good book on battle history and armies but the same common misconceptions about weaponry. Some examples will highlight this. In one of my books there is a section on the Vikings. Covering the bottom of two pages is an illustration of a Viking raid on the English coast, and in the forefront there is a Viking warrior with a typical sword and shield. Then, right next to the picture is a small paragraph, which states "A viking sword was heavy and was swung in a wide arc." On top of that, the artist's rendering of the weapon is surprisingly accurate, and yet they still assume the sword to be unwieldly! It makes you realize that so many historians have not even bothered to examine such subjects to any real degree. Another book I have, which chronicles major battles over the last 5,000 years, shows pictures of some antique weapons in a section on the Franks. The Frankish sword they show is in excavated condition, severley indented by wear. The book has a little caption above the sword, which reads "Paralell edges gave the sword power but made it heavy." As if a single-handed Frankish sword was a ponderous weapon. I also possess a great book on the martial culture and history of Japan, which makes like comments about swords and especially armor: "In general, the materials eployed in the manufacture of armor reflected the characteristic preoccupation of Japanese armorers with speed and functionality, especially when compared with the massive suits of armor worn by European feudal knights and lords." Also, regarding knights: "His lances were frequently broken upon contact, forcing him to resort to axes, maces, or cumbersome swords when battling an armored foe or those cohorts of lightly armed serfs employed as infantry during the early feudal era in Europe. In the East (and this is inserted in this book from another) 'All of the weapons used were much lighter and more manageable; the lances were shorter, lighter and better balanced, the swords were of better quality and better adapted for use at close quarters.'" Honestly, this sort of thing is really getting old. How long does it have to be before a good book on a subject other than WMA or Western military history comes out that doesn't suffer from the same basic and overdone misconceptions? What's more, in this case, the book is incredibly unbiased in other areas regarding the realtionship of Eastern and Western warrior philosophies, so it was extremely dissapointing when I learned how unenlightened they were about European weapons. It also continues to dissapoint me when, as Mr. Clements has noted many times, I think how many people in the West today (including the authors of the books I've quoted here) are far more ignorant of their own martial traditions than those of Asia. Hopefully this is a problem that will be rectified in the near future, for it is a serious injustice to the people who died in the past to continue to, in essence, degrade them in the embellishment and praise of others.
Una mente tranquillo da vita alla carne, ma passione fa i ossi decomposizione
