Originally posted by Dum Dum Duganmore effective in what sense?
I never heard of them before. So i could careless. I never denied chainmail defensive capabilities, simply that samurai swords are more effect then iron swords of the middle ages, even against chain mail wearing combatant of that era.
they may be easier to wield but they may also be weaker and have less penetrating power
Originally posted by Dum Dum Dugan
Yes an iron bastard sword is less effective then a steel samurai blade. Not sure what is so hard to grasp about that.
your arrogant attitude really doesn't do much to convince me you are right. I'm asking you questions because you claim to have the answer, and then treat me like an idiot when I recognize your authority on the issue and try to figure out why I am wrong.
you could be a major in anything, your attitude is clearly not that of an academic. knowledge isn't a crudgle, don't try to beat people over the head with it, they will respect you for it.
Originally posted by Dum Dum Dugan
Except for the fact the rapier came after the middle ages............
ok, the gladus or [insert any short sword with single piece hilt and blade]
Originally posted by Dum Dum Dugan
Because they were only more effective because they lacked steel...honestly wtf dont you get?
well, sort of that point specifically. expand this for me, as we have already seen videos where steel katanas are incapable of piercing mail, let alone being more effective than western weapons at doing so
Originally posted by Dum Dum Dugan
No, I have no desire to waste my time education you on the entire events which led to the regression into the dark ages.
I doubt you would provide me with any new insights, tbh
Originally posted by Mindset
YouTube video
interesting.
Originally posted by Trackz
the show makes estimates about who would win in a fight based on the efficiency of what the typical warrior being discussed would carry according to experts.their opinion>ours
No it not at all. There opinions are not better then ares. The show is just like animal face off which also was terriably inaccurate. The show had a lion beating a tiger the majority of the time. This is completely contradicts numerous historical documents as well as numerous videos and leading experts opinions.
Just becuase it on TV does not make it true.
Originally posted by Dum Dum Dugan
I never heard of them before. So i could careless. I never denied chainmail defensive capabilities, simply that samurai swords are more effect then iron swords of the middle ages, even against chain mail wearing combatant of that era.
For most of the middle ages longswords were made from steel.
Originally posted by Dum Dum Dugan
I pretty sure it is. It the most effective offensively and one of the best defensively. Though the best defensively is another blade the samurai keep on them which for the life of me I am forgetting at this moment.
You couldn't be more wrong. The samurai sword is hard and brittle, it wasn't designed to trade blows with other swords or anything of significant hardness. I suppose one could make a misguided argument that it is offensively one of the best swords, but defensively it is hands down one of the worst. If you tried to block or parry a blow from a long sword with a Katana, there is good chance the blade would break. Most European swords were forged of much higher quality steel, where actually lighter than the Katana while at the same time more durable, and cut as well or better. If you find yourself in a sword fight and you have a Katana and the other guy has an arming sword, you better hope you are in a movie because if you aren't then you are about to get your ass kicked.
Originally posted by inimalist
your arrogant attitude really doesn't do much to convince me you are right. I'm asking you questions because you claim to have the answer, and then treat me like an idiot when I recognize your authority on the issue and try to figure out why I am wrong.
It not arrogance it annoyance at having to repeat my self over and over.
Originally posted by inimalist
you could be a major in anything, your attitude is clearly not that of an academic. knowledge isn't a crudgle, don't try to beat people over the head with it, they will respect you for it.
Originally posted by inimalist
ok, the gladus or [insert any short sword with single piece hilt and blade]
Originally posted by inimalist
well, sort of that point specifically. expand this for me, as we have already seen videos where steel katanas are incapable of piercing mail, let alone being more effective than western weapons at doing so
Originally posted by inimalist
I doubt you would provide me with any new insights, tbh
You know Richard the lion heart? He was king of England which I assume you know, but did you also know he lived his entire life in france and on crusades. He also only was in england twice, he was born there and was brought there upon his death. He had sexual relations with his rival Philip of france.
I just always find that tid bit of info interesting.
Originally posted by Dum Dum Dugan
You shown video of people syaing there wielding samurai swords. To try and pass you tube videos as evidence is laughable. They could be model swords and likely are, and there ahuge difference between a real samurai sword and a model.
well, in the absence of any other evidence...
the exact same criticisms could be made of the european swords in the video, or the mail itself. do you have proof that contradicts what is being said?
Originally posted by Dum Dum Dugan
you be very wrong on that matter.You know Richard the lion heart? He was king of England which I assume you know, but did you also know he lived his entire life in france and on crusades. He also only was in england twice, he was born there and was brought there upon his death. He had sexual relations with his rival Philip of france.
I just always find that tid bit of info interesting.
why are you more willing to share knowledge when I am being hostile with you?
Originally posted by Dum Dum DuganExactly, so early Middle Ages, it seems like you were only using this time period in your example of knights.
technically I should not have reffered to it as the dark age, becuase it frowned upon by lots of historians.However it is the early 5th to the late 8th century. reffered to commonly as the early middle ages.
And even then the Dark Ages aren't as bad as it was depicted years ago. The lack of culture did not even encompass the entirety of Europe.