Dual-wielding plus shields

[Zach Palfreyman]

Hi, this my first post. A friend pointed out this place to me, 'cause I like swords. Especially real swords and how they were used, etc.

Okay, my question is about dual-wielding. I've been looking through the website and older posts and such, and noticed some stuff about using like say rapier and dagger, or sword and buckler. But I am wondering more about a larger off-hand weapon, like two swords, or sword and mace, or two battle-axes or such. I didn't see much in the way of this in the historical manuals (there was a few pics of guys fighting with shields, or swords and spears). Anyone tried out much of this, and if so what are your thoughts?

I was also wondering if anyone had thoughts on the practicality of using a buckler on the sword-arm. Not like a buckler in the left and sword in the right, and then putting them close for hand-defense, but actually wearing the buckler on the sword hand (with the thought of using the other hand for something else, like a larger shield or off-hand weapon).

Interested in anyone's thoughts or experience. Thanks in advance.

[Jake_Norwood]

Hi Zach.

While common in movies and games of all sorts, I am not personally aware of *any* historical manual that shows any of the things you referenced (cool as they might sound). In addition, I've sparred many people who want to try, and they always end up in worse shape than if they'd stuck with a normal weapon configuration--it was that way for a reason.


That being said...try it.

Jake

[Craig Peters]

Zach,

Because the buckler is properly held with the hand gripped like a fist, and not strapped onto the arm like a shield is, one cannot use a buckler and a sword on the same arm together. Besides, most of the skilled people will tell you that sword and buckler work better when you can use them paired together or seperately in combat. Having a buckler strapped to one's arm would prevent using the two independently. In effect, the buckler would be little more than an awkward piece of armour for one's arm.

[Matthew_Anderson]

To quote a very experienced practitioner of armed combat who most of us know:

"If you suck with one weapon, you'll suck twice as much with two"

-John Clements

[Zach Palfreyman]

I think sticking to the basics, especially with sub-par or little training/pratice, is going to prove the most effective on the large. Every fighting style will have its strenghts and weaknesses, and I suppose that in practice the styles where the weaknesses outweighed the strengths just died off. Which might be the case why there isn't much of this around in real combat.

The most obvious problem I think would be having to train your off-hand for ambidexterity. Plus without many examples, it would get pretty impromptu (until you started to actually invent some moves, but doing that would likely take years of serious dedication before you built up a worthwhile catalogue).

I'll probably try it out, but not having much in the way of a practice partner, it would end up mostly just some shadowfighting.

[Craig Peters]

The other thing to keep in mind Zach is that not only do you have to coordinate two weapons simaltaneously at the same time, which is tough to do, but there's also the issue that some of the styles you described are just not feasible. If you had, for example, two historically built battle axes and tried wielding them, you'd quickly discover that it's an unfeasible combination; a battle axe requires two hands in order to use it effectively. My guess is that two swords or a sword and a mace would likewise prove ineffective, not because it's impossible to wield them, but because any person skilled with a single weapon or a sword and shield will probably exploit the fact that you are trying to use two fairly large weapons at the same time. Since there is a lack of these weapon combinations appearing in the fechtbucher and the other literature of the middle ages and Renaissance, I would say this is a pretty good indication that they weren't feasible on the battlefield.

[Brian Hunt]

Hi Zach,

where you are in Springville, you are just a short ways from BYU. There is a large study group that meets at the Y on Tuesday and thursday nights from 6 to 8 and on saturday morings from 11 to 1. You should contact Stewart Feil for more info, and meeting places, they have been having to move around a little due to BYU scheduling problems for practice space.

hope this helps.

Brian Hunt.
GFS.

[ChrisThies]

Per Sydney Anglo, "The Martial Arts of Renaissance Europe", Camillo Agrippa's 1553 treatise devoted one chapter to the use of fighting with two swords (a.k.a. 'case of rapiers'). Those particular images can be observed in the 'Historical Manuals' section of this ARMA site:
http://www.thehaca.com/Manuals/NewManuals/Agrippa/agrippa.htm

[Mike Chidester]

where you are in Springville, you are just a short ways from BYU. There is a large study group that meets at the Y on Tuesday and thursday nights from 6 to 8 and on saturday morings from 11 to 1.

Indeed. Come and practice with ARMA Provo, and we can answer all of your questions. It is one of the largest study groups and our members have a wide range of experience and expertise. We meet Tuesday nights from 6 to 8 and Saturdays from 11 to 1 or 2, on the field next to the Wilkinson Student Center at BYU. A large group of people in red shirts and black pants--you can't miss us. <img src="/forum/images/icons/grin.gif" alt="" />

In particular, our study group leader is one of the most knowledgeable people in the field of sword and buckler in all of ARMA--he can answer your questions about the viablitity of alternate arangements as well as anyone alive.

I've played a bit with the idea of two swords myself, and the conclusion I've drawn is that a sword and dagger is in every way a superior arrangement. The length of the other sword offers no advantage, since you can only cut with one weapon at a time anyway, and proves a huge liability since it's more difficult to defend with than a dagger.

A good rule of thumb would be that if you train to the point that you can fight at all with two swords, you'd be very good with one, and if you train to the point that you can fight competently with two swords, you'd be amazing with one. It's an inferior style plain and simple.

[Allen Johnson]

Like it was stated before, the only place where we see dual weilding of equal (or near equal legnth) weapons is the case of rapiers. Even then it is mentioned only a few times in the manuals and not very throughly. That leads me to believe it just wasnt that common. Why? Probably because it just was not that effective. I really feel that any advantage that you would have with two rapiers, you would have with rapier and dagger. If not more of an advantage with rapier and dagger.
Heres Di Grassis section on it:
http://www.thearma.org/Manuals/NewManuals/DiGrassi/03001092.jpg

For me, I feel that if wasnt effective enough for them to do it back in the day- theres no way we can do it being the fledgling learners we all are.

[DavidEvans]

The only example of this I can think of is Highlander gentry with Targe, dirk, broadsword and pistol. There are pictures, both paintings and black line drawings depicting this. The targe is strapped to the left arm and the left hand holds a dirk that is long enough to stick out from the side of the dirk. Upon the approach to the enemy the right plucks a dag (pistol) from the belt and fires a shot at the enemy. This dag is thrown at the enemy and, if rich enough, the second dag is plucked, fired and thrown. Then the sword is drawn and the gent steams in, broadsword raised, targe tilted to stab at the face and body with the dirk.

[SzabolcsWaldmann]

There is one evidence I can think of for double-swords use, and that is Musashi's Go Rin No Sho. Yet, he uses not two equal swords but a smaller and a longer one, plus, he usually fought duells or against more opponents. There, in those situations, it might be useful, but definetelly not in battle, where you would hack into your friends <img src="/forum/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" />

Like said before, something familiar existed with rapier and a left-hand dagger.

But you know what I was thinking about? I have a very good sword, a quite accurate copy, wich is around 1.2 - 1.5 kg light. That I can almost handle single-handedly. I can think of circumstances, where I would pull my dagger and use them both for a few seconds. Thoughts?


byez,

Szabolcs

[Zach Palfreyman]

From what I'm gathering, its been done but only on a small scale. Which could mean that people tried it and decided/discovered that either it was only effective under specific circumstances, or it just required too much skill and practice to be worth the effort.