| Author |
Message |
|
Christopher Dell
|
 Posted: Sun 07 Sep, 2014 5:31 pm Post subject: Question on Razmafzar armoured shamshir and shield fighting |
 |
|
Hello myArmoury,
Having watched the Razmafzar videos on Youtube which show shamshir and separ being used in and against armor and having read many myArmoury discussions which indicate that mail armor was rarely to never cut through or chopped by a sword; I wondered how the Razmafzar reconstruction could be accurate. How can a shamshir, kilij, tulwar or any cut optimized sword be effective in armored combat? Is the shamshir being used as a weapon of opportunity, where, given a choice, an armored Persian style warrior would pick a mace or axe to fight a similarly armored foe?
Well, first post done! Thanks to anyone who replies.
-Kit
|
|
  |
 |
David Lewis Smith
|
| Posted: Sun 07 Sep, 2014 7:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The Person to ask would be Manouchehr Moshtagh Khorasani
David L Smith
MSG (RET)
|
|
 |
|
|
Christopher Dell
|
| Posted: Sun 07 Sep, 2014 9:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I will do what you suggest also. I would still appreciate anyone's thoughts or opinions on mail armored curved sword and shield fighting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Timo Nieminen
|
| Posted: Sun 07 Sep, 2014 10:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Aim for where the armour isn't. From artwork, the armour used was often far from complete. Also, some of the armour was soft and cuttable. It's no more unworkable to use shamshir and shield in that kind of environment than it was for Vikings to use sword and shield when opponents wore mail (not covering the whole body, and an open-faced helmet).
If they're wearing armour with more coverage, then mace or grappling/dagger. Or polearms. Or gun.
While there are tales of Persian swords cutting metal armour, those are exceptional. Why else make armour-piercing daggers, axes, and picks?
"In addition to being efficient, all pole arms were quite nice to look at." - Cherney Berg, A hideous history of weapons, Collier 1963.
|
|
 |
|
|
Christopher Dell
|
| Posted: Mon 08 Sep, 2014 8:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
Mr. Nieminen, it seems that Dr. Khorasani agrees with you. Here is his reply to my question on his most recent video:
| Quote: |
Please note that first not every fighter had such a complete armor. Most had thick gambeson with bazuband and helmet. But even in armor as you can see Persian sources stress attacking the weak zones like horizontal cuts to the neck when the avental goes up through continuous striking. Under armpit where links are weak and through continuous hits they get weaken. Behind and side of the knees and between the legs. These are preferred targets.
The Persian soiurces describe a lot of mace and axe techniques as well
|
Thanks for the reply.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a standard topic