[kai]

Hello Timo,

In the old days, if you went out to fight in battle, you would take your shield.

Yes, definitely. After having spent your arrows, a spear would usually be the primary weapon before closing in (or in an ambush situation).

For when you have no shield with you, then what do you do with the off-hand?

Grab a backup weapon when already close in. For barung it seems to have been common to hold the scabbard along the forearm as an impromptu security measure.

All this is possible, important, and/or essential because of the body-to-body distance when in weapon range. It's even more important with knife. It's this short range that makes European-style parry-riposte fencing non-optimal - the opponent can trap and move in to very close range; using the weapon this way also exposes the forearm a lot. This kind of stuff with the off-hand starts to get harder to do when you exceed about 24" of blade, but can work for longer weapons as an occasional technique.

Yup. Long story short, the Moro kris is not meant for fencing. And it worked well enough to keep the Spanish at bay.

Escrima/arnis/kali of the northern Philippines is big on two-weapons, either sword and knife or two short swords, or sticks originally acting as substitutes for such. But one of its roots is Spanish rapier and dagger, so it doesn't tell us that much about the use of the off-hand with kris.

I believe it's fair to assume that quite a bit of what we see in traditional Visayan styles has specifically been developed to counter Moro raiders.

A lot of Chinese martial arts are big on two weapons. There, it's mostly as an equaliser for short weapons against spear (in my opinion, the spear still has a large advantage, ceteris paribus, but two short weapons against spear is much better than one; against a naive spearman, it can work very well).

With so many Chinese styles obviously based on the spear, having to face a naive spearman would be akin to a lottery win though. In the old days that is...

Regards,
Kai