The Armour Archive

Nissan Maxima wrote:

D. Sebastian wrote:On the war banner of Aligion Sebastianus it says "everything is a weapon if you hold it correctly".

Were they ever used in noble combat within the lists?

The scythe was a tool of the peasant. The obsidian club, a weapon of the savage.

The obsidian club was the weapon of the elite warrior cast of the aborigianal americans. They had civilization when your ancestors were still wearing uncured skins.

I wonder how those obsidian swords would work against our presumed armor standards?

Probably do ok....once. Maybe twice.

Which is fine if you only have 2-4 guys in a battle.

Clinker wrote:There is an east African sword weapon, the SHOTEL, I believe, that has a long forward curve. Rather like a reverse sabre, shamshir or a large sickle. Perfect for reaching around and over shields. Thrusting tip naturally.

One can only hold one's breath waiting for this to become the new fad weapon. " We are ALL Abyssinians". At least when we aren't Scottish Samurai Vikings.

I'd like to see the look on the face of the Aztec Warrior when no one will take his hits, because"It wont hurt me in METAL armor".

Scythes (Unstraightened) are a one trick pony. Likely to get you killed pretty much immediately. Let him have, in fact MAKE him use it while he gets an impressive collection of bruises on his unarmored peasant Butt!

Fear my terrifying Google image and walking over to the bookshelf skills.

Gentlemen, I present the Shotel,

(From Stone's Glossary)

The Abyssinian sword. It has a double edged blade of diamond section curved almost in a half circle. The blade is about thirty inches in a straight line from hilt to point and about fourty inches around the curve. It has a simple wooden hilt without a guard. The scabbards are leahter and are made to fit the blade closely. The abyssinians have no idea of fencing and use this extremely awkward weapon to strike over, or around the shield of an opponent.

An image from Google images. Keyword search "Shotel"

[img]http://img178.imageshack.us/img178/6669/ph0fq2.jpg[/img]

the image is from this site.

http://www.oriental-arms.co.il/item.php?id=1162

The following text is included with this image.

The Shotel is the traditional sword of the Abyssinian (Ethiopia). It looks like a huge sickle, with a long blade deeply curved almost to half circle. The purpose of this very awkward blade is to strike over or around the shield of an opponent. This one has a blade of 26 ½ Inches long, (point to point) with a central ridge on the entire length of the blade. The hilt is made of three horn sectors. The scabbard is leather, with the original leather belt. Total length 31 inches. It is probably dated to the late 19th C. Very good condition. This is a completely original and authentic piece. No repairs or replaced or restored parts.

One small anecdote. In about 1990, a fellow in Memphis named John Bearkiller made a dagger out of a piece of a discarded rattan pappa-san chair. It was curved about like a shotel, but it was considerably shorter. I have no idea what he called it, but we called it "The sythian steak knife".

I personally feel that if we accept that Byzantium is in Europe, then we can accept an Ethiopian with a shotel in Constantinople.

I wouldn't use one, but it would work just fine for some. A Varangingan might have encountered one, and Anglo Saxon would not have.

f

I personally feel that if we accept that Byzantium is in Europe, then we can accept an Ethiopian with a shotel in Constantinople.

Why is that? I'm not familiar with any Oxum's in Bizantium other than the David Drake novels.

...and I could be wrong, but I thought the shotel was out of period (late), though there are reverse curve weapons that are period.

Nissan Maxima wrote:Ok, I admit defeat. But I still think D. Sebastian wears uncured hides. Thats gotta be what the smell is.

Smells like victory.
And I sh!t roses, but you already know that.

This is my cudgel:



Essentially, blue-foam smurf-blubber wrapped around a sword that got cut down from being pulped on the end, then added "wood knots" of rubber heater hose to make it look organic when covered with brown tape. I could see your obsidian club being made similarly, maybe with rattan clackers around the outside instead of the rubber knots, then marked as cutting edges?

If I was gonna do this. (And I am not) I would get a big ass piece of rattan and carve it thusly.

I would say Nissan is not defeated at all. While my training was NOT on Mesoamerican cultures, calling an Aztec warrior a savage is like calling a hoplite a savage. While we can see the differences on the cultural structure, the complex and sophisticated Aztec culture that produced the "Flower Wars" warriors cannot be called "savage". In fact if we follow Gordon Child's nomenclature, they are part of an empire, well above kingdom or chiefdom.

Moreover, their methods of combat were highly sophisticated and geared towards the warring needs of their society, i.e. capture as many living prisoners for sacrifices. Their weapons were designed to maim and incapacitate without killing, so that warriors a retinue of "squires" that followed them and tied up the warriors their 'knight" captured in battle, so they cold be kept alive and sacrificed to their gods. It is not their fault that they never met Alexander the Great and the concept of "Totalerkrieg" before they met the Spaniards.

Westerners fight to destroy the armies of their enemies, reach their center of government and replace it with one favorable to them. Aztecs fought to achieve political domination and capture victims for sacrifices.

Now I am as big or bigger of a fan of western culture and civilization, which, in my opinion sees the original form in a Polis and currently in modern Western democracy. But that should not blind our eyes to the fact that the Spaniards met a sophisticated, advanced and elaborate culture that was far from "savagery" in the anthropological sense.

Just adding my two flint blades to the thread.

Rowan of Needwood.

Rowan ,
You are viewing this through the eyes of the modern man.

See it through the eyes of the Spaniards, or other Europeans -- that is the discussion.

You find people living in the jungle.
They wear animal skins and bird feathers.
They paint their faces.
They weild clubs and "have not entered the bronze age".
The perform human sacrifices.
Their women's boobs hang out.

(I know, "what's not to like!?")



No one is arguing the complex culture of the early cultures of the Americas. But, look throught the eyes of a pre-17th Cent European Noble, and apply to the Lysts. I think THAT conclusion is very different than one of modern man.

But in a strictly historical sense, you would refer to any culture pre-dating your persona by more than a couple hundred years, and certainly those from well outside your locale, as "savages", right?


Again, I see this as one of those necessary "breaks" between SCA and Living History groups.



.

Why would anyone want to be pesant??

Because you can be faster and such in thier sporty-serf armor?

But in a strictly historical sense, you would refer to any culture pre-dating your persona by more than a couple hundred years, and certainly those from well outside your locale, as "savages", right?


Again, I see this as one of those necessary "breaks" between SCA and Living History groups.



.

But in a strictly historical sense, you would refer to any culture pre-dating your persona by more than a couple hundred years, and certainly those from well outside your locale, as "savages", right?


Again, I see this as one of those necessary "breaks" between SCA and Living History groups.



.

D. Sebastian.... *some* of them were living in the jungle.. but the original mission to Tenochtitlan, was a trade job, b/c of the well-deserved reputation of the Triple Alliance. Newer historiography has unearthed some details suggesting that the standard story we know was made up to cover events and provide some general-purpose sense to it.

Tenochtitlan made any European city of the time look like a fifth-rate slum.

Now, the whole human sacrifice thing would all by itself justify "savages." As an old professor once asked me (now passed), which has stayed with me for years, ~"these were the Conquistadors, whose society was shaped for war and who had cheerfully engaged in generations of one of the most intractable and savage conflicts in Europe, complete with all the good stuff that came with that... if you want an idea of why the Conquistadors reacted so violently against the Aztecs, how awful does a place have to be, when the CONQUISTADORS stumbled out of their temple pale-faced and puking, recovering only to summarily answer with cannon fire?"

Diomedes,

is THIS a jungle?

[img]http://spaceguide.hit.bg/images/Civilizations/glaven%20hram%20Tenochtitlan.jpg[/img]

Notice a first hand account by a Bernal Diaz del Castillo, a Spanish priest coming with Cortez:

when we saw so many cities and villages built
in the water and other great towns on dry land. We were amazed and said that it was like the enchantments..on account of the great towers and cues and buildings rising from the water, and all built of masonry. And some of our soldiers even asked whether the things that we saw were not a dream ? ...I do not know how to describe it, seeing things as we did that had never been heard of or seen before, not even dreamed about.
â€

Dilan wrote:But in a strictly historical sense, you would refer to any culture pre-dating your persona by more than a couple hundred years, and certainly those from well outside your locale, as "savages", right?
.

Not at all!

The Anincet Greeks and Classical Romans had far superior technology and government to several modern Countries I can think of.

Diomedes,
is THIS a jungle?

Rowan,
And the other things I listed?

The Question remains and you have not addressed it:
"Were they ever used in noble combat within the lists?".

if you want an idea of why the Conquistadors reacted so violently against the Aztecs, how awful does a place have to be, when the CONQUISTADORS stumbled out of their temple pale-faced and puking, recovering only to summarily answer with cannon fire?"

I like this a lot.
We have a "Wulfhere" up here.
We guage the awfulness of bad home-brew by how much of it he will drink.

But is that how your "persona" would beleive?

Or the average person from that time and locale?




.

As to whether you would find an Aztec in the lists -

I would be surprised if you did. But, in some of the foot tournaments in later period, did people not dress as fantastic characters?


Tecnically, you wouldn't fin ME "in the lists." While competitions between warrior existed for my portrayal, it wasn't exactly like what Vitus' portrayal would have done.

But then again, we are talking the SCA listfield - I couldn't see the Aztec in the Combat of 30, but in your everyday SCA double elim? No more historically incongruous that a Norseman, a Samurai, a Roman and a Landscheneckt on the field together....



.

Dilan wrote:But is that how your "persona" would beleive?
Or the average person from that time and locale?

My period of study is Roman, 4th - 12th Cent.
The "Borg" of the old world, often adopting from their enemies -- even the Persians and Avars whom they considered to be a vastly lesser breed of people*.



* Maurice's Strategikon: Handbook of Byzantine Military Strategy

And that is a necessary "break" that the SCA creates - regardless of the details, we all (OK many of us) strive to create a portrayal of the warrior class (if not the warrior elite) of a particular time and place. An Aztec warrior (especially a Eagle or Jaguar Warrior) certainly fits that bill.


Now a peasant / farmer with a scythe? Not so much.



.

Rowan of Needwood wrote:Diomedes,

is THIS a jungle?

[img]http://spaceguide.hit.bg/images/Civilizations/glaven%20hram%20Tenochtitlan.jpg[/img]

Notice a first hand account by a Bernal Diaz del Castillo, a Spanish priest coming with Cortez

Look! I see the Well of Aztec Souls where they keep the Crystal Skull!

DA

Rowan of Needwood wrote:—Bernal Díaz del Castillo, The Conquest of New Spain

Rowan,

You should know very well that Castillo was arguing from a point of view of a community within the Spanish, a point of view that ended up being argued in front of Philip II himself. One view claiming that they were barbaric savages, and the other that they were noble savages. Castillo's case was sympathetic, that they were noble savages. Others claimed that they were barbaric savages, and their view prevailed. Mostly for economic reasons.

Nobody denied that they were savages - the debate was simply over what kind.

Baron Alejandro wrote:

Rowan of Needwood wrote:—Bernal Díaz del Castillo, The Conquest of New Spain

Rowan,

You should know very well that Castillo was arguing from a point of view of a community within the Spanish, a point of view that ended up being argued in front of Philip II himself. One view claiming that they were barbaric savages, and the other that they were noble savages. Castillo's case was sympathetic, that they were noble savages. Others claimed that they were barbaric savages, and their view prevailed. Mostly for economic reasons.

Nobody denied that they were savages - the debate was simply over what kind.

Oy vey!

Su Excelencia, yes, however there is no denying that the Spaniards did not find a bunch of miserable hovels, but a highly advance civilization comparable to let's say Akkad, minus wheels and tool metal... That was not savagery in the anthropological sense.

(as for the Spaniards being disgusted by a bit of human butchery, gimme a break, the inquisition was no broadway show, whatever Mel brooks may claim...)

Ok let me try a different angle.

First contact with an alien civilization from space. Let's say in 100 years from now we get to travel to alpha centauri and we find a civilization at the level of mid 19th century America... are those barbaric savages or noble savages?

and better: Gulliver's audience with the "giant" king:

"His Majesty in another Audience was at the Pains to recapitulate the Sum of all I had spoken, compared the Questions he made with the Answers I had given; then taking me into his Hands, and stroaking me gently, delivered himself in these Words, which I shall never forget nor the Manner he spoke them in: My little Friend Grildrig, you have made a most admirable Panegyric upon your Country: You have clearly proved that Ignorance, Idleness, and Vice may be sometimes the only Ingredients for qualifying a Legislator: That Laws are best explained, interpreted, and applied by those whose Interest and Abilities lie in perverting, confounding, and eluding them. I observe among you some Lines of an Institution, which in its Original might have been tolerable, but these half erazed, and the rest wholly blurred and blotted by Corruptions. It doth not appear from all you have said, how any one Virtue is required towards the Procurement of any one Station among you, much less that Men are ennobled on Account of their Virtue, that Priests are advanced for their Piety or Learning, Soldiers for their Conduct or Valour, Judges for their Integrity, Senators for the Love of their Country, or Counsellors for their Wisdom. As for yourself, (continued the King,) who have spent the greatest Part of your Life in Travelling, I am well disposed to hope you may hitherto have escaped many Vices of your Country. But by what I have gathered from your own Relation, and the Answers I have with much Pain wringed and extorted from you, I cannot but conclude the Bulk of your Natives to be the most pernicious Race of little odious Vermin that Nature ever suffered to crawl upon the Surface of the Earth. "

This is England in the age of reason.....

As for the weapons used "within the lists" it assumes a western type "list". How about the Turks or the Japanese who had not chivalric tournaments, are Nihonto and scimitarrs disallowed then?


Rowan

Hay here's an idea... insted of tearing down someone's idea how about helping them to do what they want the best they can? Introduce your firend to Sir Ix...

As for the scythe the weapon is just not practial for SCA combat... if someone can construct one that would be passed by a martial...I say go for it... most likely they'll stop using the weapon once they understand how impractial it really is.

In what i have read of pesants they just seemed to have been miserable bastards somwhere between trailer trash and share croppers.


Why in the hell you'd wanna portray that is beyond me

This thread got so awesome.

Also thank you all for the ideas. Talked to my friends and we're gonna make the sword from rattan built up with foam and clackers. I really liked Nissans idea and might have to try that later when we find a big, thick piece of rattan.

As for mr Scythe, we talked it over and are just going to give the rattan a nice slight curve to simulate a scythe hammered up for war.

Æiric,

I'm all about inclusiveness - especially really well done off the beaten pathness.
(pathness?)

It's different when an experienced fighter choose to do this. 2 fighters yet to authorize heading down these paths? One wanting to be the Grim Reaper, and another wanting to get the crap beat out of them by every a-hole in a spundome because of the feathers... They will last a week -- and that is not good for anyone.

If he's just looking for a commoner's weapon a billhook or Lochanbar axe is good.

If he's English a yoeman archer portrayal would be common but not a "pesant" (serf) He could so archery or sword and buckler ect.

On the point of whether or not the weapon was used in the lists or not. I find it kind of silly, we allow all sorts of weapons from outside of Europe through Asia what difference would adding the Amercias do. We obviously dont hold true to rules with a variety of cultures we allow.

As for the Scythe aren't there rules for not allowing a weapon bend/reach over a shield to strike your opponent. Or is that just an atlantian rule?

What I am more interested in is what does the armor rig look like for the aztec, that seems to be more of a challenge in my brain.

It was pointed out to be that i DO get carried away in my anthropological approach, so I will Leopold, give my fighter's approach, tempered by barely not being a novice, and being a little bit older:

Start out with standard weapons and get good with them first. Hitting the list with a scythe or a weird weapon as you start out is like wearing a sign on your back in school that says "kick me". And there are lots of swinging boots available for that kind of kicking in the SCA.

In a Knight or an experienced fighter, using a silly or exotic weapon is a sign of open mindedness and playfulness, in a novice, it looks like a sign of hybris, even if you just think it is cool.

Fight for a year in sword and shield, learn from anyone who wants to teach you, then, with even a little experience under your belt, you may be in a better position to come up with stuff to match a persona. This has nothing to do with persona development and looking cool in the field, but cutting your teeth and getting some basics first.

Thanks to friends that keep my babbling mouth aiming in the right direction.

Respectfully,

Rowan of Needwood

(PS: I am sorry to have dumped the Aztec stuff, I simply wanted to make sure that the point was made that they were not "savages". I basically agreed with the above, more experienced posters about the wisdom of starting out with standard equipment.)

Just a side note:

For people wondering if the Macahuitl was an effective weapon I just read an account by a Spanish Conquistidor talking about how one of the natives swung one of the larger 2-handed macahuitls and decapitated a horse with a single blow.

Ouch.

Was the horse wearing mail?

Rowan of Needwood wrote:Oy vey!

Akkadians? Oy vey yourself!

Continued <a href="http://forums.armourarchive.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=91046">here.</a>

D. Sebastian wrote:Æiric,

I'm all about inclusiveness - especially really well done off the beaten pathness.
(pathness?)

It's different when an experienced fighter choose to do this. 2 fighters yet to authorize heading down these paths? One wanting to be the Grim Reaper, and another wanting to get the crap beat out of them by every a-hole in a spundome because of the feathers... They will last a week -- and that is not good for anyone.

Ok I see your point, and concede that arguement, however is someone is really into working on their persona even if it os along another pathness I hope we could all be a little more supportive.

Thanks D, as I said I see your point.

I once considered doing a one-off peasant persona for Bjornsborg's Festival of Fools Pandybat tourney. Definition of pandybat for that event was "a weapon more like to get the wielder killed than the opponent."

I was just going to throw a burlap sack/smock over my armor, maybe with a burlap hood if I was feeling adventurous, and use a peasant's pitchfork as a weapon. Unfortunately mundanity conspired to keep me from going and I never got very far into trying to construct the pitchfork out of rattan. I figured curve the end of a 6 or 7 ft. piece to mimick one tine and figure a way to add a shorter piece to the side for the other tine. Maybe gorrilla glue and then wrap the joint very tightly with hemp rope or something.