Battara,
I can't say I'm truly surprised that the double weapon wielder defeated the shield wielder. It's the artist, not the art, I always say. But think about this: if you were taught from boyhood (say 8-10 years old) to use double weapons, wouldn't you think you'd be pretty good by the time you were 18? If you've got villagers practically trained from birth, it doesn't matter that two weapons is harder than one and a shield. Firing a bow from horseback isn't easy either (to understate the matter), but both the Mongals and the Japanese do it, even now. Heck, the Mongols did in en masse!
If you want to raise a large army to defend a nation, spear and shield is the way to go, really. It's cheap and fast. However, that context doesn't match every situation. For instance, a small village.
That's why I believe somewhere there is evidence of this type of warfare clashing with armor and shield.
Mark Bowditch,
That is freakin' excellent, man. Thanks. I wasn't actually expecting pictures with citations. That's above and beyond.
This is essentially what I've been looking for, but I have to ask a question about the "war coat." Do you think that constitutes padded armor, or just a uniform? It looks extremely thin for protective use. However, that could just be because it's really old.
Another question: I know the Chinese used armor fairly extensively. Did their double weapon techniques develop in a "field of war" sort of context, or was it more a personal type of combative form?
|