| myArmoury.com is now completely member-supported. Please contribute to our efforts with a donation. Your donations will go towards updating our site, modernizing it, and keeping it viable long-term.
Last 10 Donors: Daniel Sullivan, Anonymous, Chad Arnow, Jonathan Dean, M. Oroszlany, Sam Arwas, Barry C. Hutchins, Dan Kary, Oskar Gessler, Dave Tonge (View All Donors) |
| Author |
Message |
Eric S
|
 Posted: Tue 19 Jul, 2011 3:46 am Post subject: |
 |
|
A few more prints of samurai with weapons that some people say were not used by samurai.
Samurai with a otsuchi (war mallet)
Samurai with various weapons, otsuchi, kanabo, and ono.
Samurai with kanabo.
Samurai with a ostsuchi
|
|
   |
 |
Dan Howard
|
| Posted: Tue 19 Jul, 2011 4:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
It is irrelevant to the outcome of a battle if one or two samurai used unusual weapons. It is also not helpful to trawl through the sources to find exceptions that make this discussion even harder to follow. The only way this topic can make any sense at all is to analyse typical warriors from both cultures.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Riki K
|
| Posted: Tue 19 Jul, 2011 5:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Moses Jones wrote: | | I think the 5'10" 180 lb average spartan would have a significant advantage over a 5'3" 130 lb average samurai. But personal skill and luck is what will determine the real winner. |
5' 10" 180 lbs Spartan? Am I missing a joke?
|
|
|
|
|
|
William P
|
| Posted: Tue 19 Jul, 2011 6:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
well the kanabo,being used by deadliest warrior even isnt as uncommon as some others so i amend my thinking about that.
the ostuchi i know of thanks to scottbaioisdead and his shop korisuya.com where he sells one,
though for the samurai another well known SAMURAI weapon was the kusari gama
and the kusari fundo, which is essentially a chain with a weight on each end
according to wikipedia :
"There are several chain and weight weapons with one type known as a konpi being mentioned in manuscripts as far back as the Nanbokucho period (1336-1392).
The founder of the Masaki ryū Masaki Tarodayu Dannoshin Toshiyoshi (1689-1776) is said to have developed a version of the kusari-fundo[7] while serving Lord Toda as a bloodless weapon that could be used to defend the grounds of Edo castle.[8] "
they wernt usuallythat long, but they could be used on the battlefield.
that said id arm my samurai with tanegashima matchlock, katekama yari, katana (or tachi im not too fussed i guess) anf a kabutowari OR a yoroi toshi. which were japans answer to the misericorde or the ballox/ rondel style daggers. the yoroi -toshi was a tanto with a much thicker spine. essentially
Hachiwara were usually around 350mm long, some larger versions are around 450mm long. There were two types of hachiwara:
One type of hachiwara was forged with a sharp dirk like point[2], to parry an opponent's sword, to hook the cords of an armor or helmet, or like a can opener to separate armor plates. The sharp point could pierce unprotected or weak areas of an opponents armor like the armpit area.[3] The blade of this type of hachiwara was a curved tapered square[4] iron or steel bar with a hook on its back edge. [5]In combat one could parry and catch a blade with that hook, as with a jutte. Some hachiwara of this type were mounted in the style of a tanto with a koshirae.[6]
The other type of hachiwara was a blunt cast iron truncheon like weapon resembling a tekkan or a jutte.
dan, were not discussing these odd weapons like artillery and ono in regards to the discussed matchup but a side topic discussing the simple idea that the japanese were wierd in their fighting style compared to other nations of the same time period, who from china to italy shared some weapons unique to their geography but they pretty much all used battle axes with reasonable frequency.
halberds maces, shields, a combination of sword typs on any particlar battlefield. for example theeuropeans have the armingsword andlongsword and the falchion, messer and grossemesser, likewise china has jian big 2 handed jian and various types of dao and you see similar trends in the middle east and india
japan just stayed in its own little bubble pretty much, id say the only thing after about 1100 ad they took from other nations with much enthusiasm in the way of weapons was the matchlock which they were shown one or two.. then they go crazy and make as many as youd see in the english civil war (ok maybe im exaggerating but you get the idea)
they never introduced shields after facing the mongols OR the koreans. or the ming chinese nor did they start adopting complex or different hilt styles on their swords, or thin stabbing swords dring the edo period which are far more effective at urban duelling. especially considering the japanese didnt wear the numerous layersof clothing worn by north europeans due to their hotter climate and thrustingweapons likerapiers are as ive heard better for fencing, since a slicing swords neds room to swing it, wheras a thrusting weapon only needs enough room to standwith reasonable comfort.
the only ones who used shields were the native okinawans who likely adopted timbe rochin style from chinese sword and rattan shield. not to mention
they didnt even take to the idea of riveting maille and using it to protect gaps in the armour. thanks to my 20/20 21st C hindsight this looks like an unthinkablystupid idea., but i get the feeling they had their rreasons..
|
|
 |
|
Eric S
|
| Posted: Tue 19 Jul, 2011 7:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Dan Howard wrote: | | It is irrelevant to the outcome of a battle if one or two samurai used unusual weapons. It is also not helpful to trawl through the sources to find exceptions that make this discussion even harder to follow. The only way this topic can make any sense at all is to analyse typical warriors from both cultures. |
Not irrelevant if its one on one and you get to pick the weapons, this is fantasy after all..
And....there was a time very recently when people said that the Japanese did not make and use riveted mail but that has been proved wrong, and in fact just a few years ago you could not find pictures online of manchira, wakibiki, manju no wa, and you could not find any pictures of full kusari armor or even any close up pictures of kusari, or even kusari katabira which are now known to have been very common indeed, did it mean they were not very common because there were not many pictures for us to see and the few that were available to look at were exceptions? ......apparently not, they were just not well researched, the very fact that these weapons are shown at all says that they were not that uncommon, the artist certainly knew what they were and what they looked like
Here is an example of what I mean, this statement is from a popular article on this site called "The Evolution of Japanese Armour". This article has many flaws in it, because when this was written this information was a commonly held believe, now we know that this is not a true statement
| Quote: | | Kusari almost never existed alone. Rather, it was used to fill all the gaps between the scales on the kote and suneate, or to connect them. Usually, it was sewn to the foundation fabrics or leather, or placed between two layers. Only in few cases was the kusari used as a basic protection—such as the secondary areas of the armour or as a shikoro in some mass-produced helmets6, etc |
.
look at these 2 statements...... "kusari almost never existed alone" ...... This statement could not be more wrong, and there are many examples of various kusari armors now to prove that this statement is wrong, but a few years ago based on the evidence available this SEEMED true.
and this statement......"only in a few cases was the kusari used as a basic protection_such as the shikoro in some massed-produced helmets".....we know that this statement is wrong but again a few years ago based on the evidence available at the time this SEEMED true. People have researched the most popular Japanese weapons and or armor and some things got over looked, plus to really research Japanese weapons and armor you need to speak Japanese and be able to do your research in Japan, and most western authors on the subject did not really research the subject very well.
It was only recently that some samurai armor was actually tested to see if the Japanese used steel or just iron in making their armor. Try finding that information in any of the old standard western reference books, you wont because it was not proven until very recently that the Japanese did use steel along with iron plates in their armor......but now in a new book on samurai armor by Trevor Absolon that just came out there is actual a chapter called "Iron or Steel" were the subject of steel in samurai armor is throughly discussed including the conclusive 2005 test at the Royal Armouries of Leeds. Here is a link to page 16.
"The Watanabe Art Musuem Samurai Armour CollectionVolume I ~ Kabuto & Mengu, author Trevor Absolon"
http://books.google.com/books?id=8APyY3eIONcC...amp;f=true
|
|
|
|
|
Eric S
|
| Posted: Tue 19 Jul, 2011 8:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| William P wrote: |
they didnt even take to the idea of riveting maille and using it to protect gaps in the armour. thanks to my 20/20 21st C hindsight this looks like an unthinkablystupid idea., but i get the feeling they had their rreasons.. |
| Quote: | Riveted kusari was known and used in Japan. In the book Japanese Arms & Armor Introduction By Robinson, H Russell NA on page 58 there is a picture of Japanese riveted kusari,[12] and according to this translated reference from Sakakibara Kozan's 1800 book, The Manufacture of Armour and Helmets in Sixteenth Century Japan, the Japanese not only knew of and used riveted kusari they manufactured it as well.
karakuri-namban (riveted namban), with stout links each closed by a rivet. Its invention is credited to Fukushima Dembei Kunitaka, pupil, of Hojo Awa no Kami Ujifusa, but it is also said to be derived directly from foreign models. It is heavy because the links are tinned (biakuro-nagashi) and these are also sharp edged because they are punched out of iron plate. |
George stone in his book also mentions riveted kusari.
The Japanese did use and make riveted mail, you saw the pictures I posted didnt you, they used riveted mail along with several other types of mail that they had at their disposal depending on what they were defending against. Do you know how many people looked in the same book were the one picture of riveted kusari came from, Robinsons book, and no one of any importance took any notice of it? When Anthony Bryant the noted samurai expert and author saw that picture recently he was shocked, he stated that he had looked at that book many times and never saw the riveted kusari.
Until a few months ago there were absolutely no known riveted kusari pictures online, there were references to it and it should have been there but up until a few months ago there were no pictures that you could find, once it became know that there was a picture of riveted kusari online I got a message from someone who knew of my interest in the subject that told me he had a picture of a different whole suit of samurai armor which had riveted kusari on all the individual pieces, he sent me a picture of one piece and I edited it down so that the individual links could be seen. I put that picture online and now there are two pictures of riveted kusari online when a few months ago there were no pictures, I am sure that more pictures of riveted kusari will eventually be published.
Here is a picture of a type of kusari not often seen, take a close look, its very unusual. Six double wound links connecting to a round center link.
A close up picture of riveted kusari from a full suit of samurai armor, just published for the first time a few months ago.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gary Teuscher
|
| Posted: Tue 19 Jul, 2011 9:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
These type of comparisons can be almost silly sometimes. We are talking technologically a difference of about 2,000 years - may as well ask who would win, a Special forces platoon ro a group of Aztec warriors.
| Quote: | | Training a hoplite concentrated on formation drills, whereas training a samurai included a huge amount of single combat work. |
I must say though that this paints Spartan Hoplites in a bad light, and I disagree. Maybe Hoplites getting rudimentary training get this - but with the training we know Spartans had, I'm sure they were not only adept in formation fighting but also in more one-on-one. I look at a Spartan more like a middle ages knight - as the warrior-elite of the culture, they spent much of their time training, and not just for large scale formation battles.
From what we know they were also effective in small unit actions and raiding as well.
The technology would favor the Japanese though of course.
The 5'10" 180 lb Spartan comment seemed a bit off also.
But from what I have researched, a Spartan was probably a hair taller than the 5'5" Roman, most estimates put average height in the 5'7" range. Perhaps better nutrition for being a warrior-elite helped, and Spartans DID do some selective breeding, though it was more weeding out the unfit, not breeding for size, and it was in plave for only a short period of time when you look at it in a geneological time frame.
|
|
|
|
|
Michael Curl
Location: Northern California, US Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Posts: 487
|
| Posted: Tue 19 Jul, 2011 9:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Isn't the riveted clearly a European borrow? Its called nanban after all isn't it? So wouldn't that mean that their was no riveted mail until after European arrival?
E Pluribus Unum
|
|
 |
|
|
William P
|
| Posted: Tue 19 Jul, 2011 10:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Michael Curl wrote: | | Isn't the riveted clearly a European borrow? Its called nanban after all isn't it? So wouldn't that mean that their was no riveted mail until after European arrival? |
not only that but most sources that mention nanban gusari note that they still kept it butted OR like keychain rings,
then again someone on a thread about antique axes showed me an example of a antique battleaxe
|
|
|
|
|
|
Riki K
|
| Posted: Tue 19 Jul, 2011 10:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gary Teuscher wrote: | The 5'10" 180 lb Spartan comment seemed a bit off also.
But from what I have researched, a Spartan was probably a hair taller than the 5'5" Roman, most estimates put average height in the 5'7" range. Perhaps better nutrition for being a warrior-elite helped, and Spartans DID do some selective breeding, though it was more weeding out the unfit, not breeding for size, and it was in plave for only a short period of time when you look at it in a geneological time frame. |
The most common figure I've seen for the height of the average Roman Imperial legionnaire is 5'4". I've seen estimates for historical heights all around the same range.
I see 5'7" bandied about as the height of the average Greek but that's not right, either. That would have made the Greeks more or less the tallest people on earth at the time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gary Teuscher
|
| Posted: Tue 19 Jul, 2011 11:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | I see 5'7" bandied about as the height of the average Greek but that's not right, either. That would have made the Greeks more or less the tallest people on earth at the time. |
A few things on this - using the Roman era Gaul's as a for instance. The average height of the "warrior" Gauls were a few inches taller than the average Gaul. Forgot the specifics, but it's not at all unusual for the warrior caste to be taller than the non-warrior caste.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jojo Zerach
|
| Posted: Tue 19 Jul, 2011 12:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Riki K wrote: | | Gary Teuscher wrote: | The 5'10" 180 lb Spartan comment seemed a bit off also.
But from what I have researched, a Spartan was probably a hair taller than the 5'5" Roman, most estimates put average height in the 5'7" range. Perhaps better nutrition for being a warrior-elite helped, and Spartans DID do some selective breeding, though it was more weeding out the unfit, not breeding for size, and it was in plave for only a short period of time when you look at it in a geneological time frame. |
The most common figure I've seen for the height of the average Roman Imperial legionnaire is 5'4". I've seen estimates for historical heights all around the same range.
I see 5'7" bandied about as the height of the average Greek but that's not right, either. That would have made the Greeks more or less the tallest people on earth at the time. |
I generally see the heights for more northern Europeans at this time as 5'8 to 5'10.
Not the time period in question, though average height in medieval England was about 5'8 for men and 5'3 for women.
Greeks, Romans, and most of the famous ancient civilizations were Mediterranean people, and would have averaged shorter than the rest of Europe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Timo Nieminen
|
| Posted: Tue 19 Jul, 2011 1:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Eric S wrote: | It was only recently that some samurai armor was actually tested to see if the Japanese used steel or just iron in making their armor. Try finding that information in any of the old standard western reference books, you wont because it was not proven until very recently that the Japanese did use steel along with iron plates in their armor......but now in a new book on samurai armor by Trevor Absolon that just came out there is actual a chapter called "Iron or Steel" were the subject of steel in samurai armor is throughly discussed including the conclusive 2005 test at the Royal Armouries of Leeds. Here is a link to page 16.
"The Watanabe Art Musuem Samurai Armour CollectionVolume I ~ Kabuto & Mengu, author Trevor Absolon"
http://books.google.com/books?id=8APyY3eIONcC...amp;f=true |
Oh dear! "Steel is, of course, significantly heavier than a piece of iron of equivalent size." Not good to see things like that.
Japanese steel armour is mentioned in old standard Western reference books, but probably only good ones dealing with Japanese armour. It's mentioned in the major Japanese sources, and the good modern books, even from decades ago, do make use of this. What might well be new is metallurgical testing to support the literary evidence.
"In addition to being efficient, all pole arms were quite nice to look at." - Cherney Berg, A hideous history of weapons, Collier 1963.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tom L.
Location: Toronto, Canada Joined: 20 Jun 2008
Posts: 35
|
| Posted: Tue 19 Jul, 2011 3:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If the question is based on one on one combat, what's to stop an early period mounted Samurai from riding circles around the spartan and pelting him with arrows from outside the reach of the Spartan's spear? Who says the Samurai must close in?
If both combatants are on foot, then are we not forgetting the famous story where a Macedonian foot companion in full kit, armed with his giant pike, was defeated by a Greek athelete armed with a club? Hoplites in full kit would have to modify their technique when fighting in a one on one scenario. I am curious though as to whether the Samurai using his spear with two hands would have the advantage over parrying or knocking aside the Spartan's spear due to better leverage?
If based on the idea of a whole Spartan army versus Samurai, then its more realistically Spartan versus Samurai and Ashigaru. What's to stop the Ashigaru spearmen, handgunners and archers from pinning down the Spartan Phalanx and then the mounted Samurai outflank the Spartans and wreak havoc on them with mounted archery and lances (yari)?
A better question would be who would win? A Togugawa era Samurai army, or Cromwell's New Model army?
The idea of samurai being inferior due to a shieldless fighting system does not make sense. If being shieldless means being inferior, in that sense, would not the 15th century European knight in full plate harness be inferior as well? Just my thoughts.
I have a cunning plan Mr. B.
|
|
|
|
|
Michael Curl
Location: Northern California, US Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Posts: 487
|
| Posted: Tue 19 Jul, 2011 3:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | Michael Curl wrote:
Isn't the riveted clearly a European borrow? Its called nanban after all isn't it? So wouldn't that mean that their was no riveted mail until after European arrival?
not only that but most sources that mention nanban gusari note that they still kept it butted OR like keychain rings,
then again someone on a thread about antique axes showed me an example of a antique battleaxe |
Nanban would not be butted, that's what makes it nanban. Nanban means southern barbarian and was the period term for European, since no European mail was butted (there have been enough arguments to proof that) and they are calling this type of riveted 4-1 mail nanban, I would assume that it was from Europe or a European style (as perceived by the Japanese of course).
I don't see how they could have butted it and called it nanban, unless they were referring to the all circle pattern (as opposed to the Japanese circle oval pattern). So I doubt that it would be butted or keychain style IMHO.
E Pluribus Unum
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sean Manning
|
| Posted: Tue 19 Jul, 2011 4:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Riki K wrote: | | Gary Teuscher wrote: | The 5'10" 180 lb Spartan comment seemed a bit off also.
But from what I have researched, a Spartan was probably a hair taller than the 5'5" Roman, most estimates put average height in the 5'7" range. Perhaps better nutrition for being a warrior-elite helped, and Spartans DID do some selective breeding, though it was more weeding out the unfit, not breeding for size, and it was in plave for only a short period of time when you look at it in a geneological time frame. |
The most common figure I've seen for the height of the average Roman Imperial legionnaire is 5'4". I've seen estimates for historical heights all around the same range.
I see 5'7" bandied about as the height of the average Greek but that's not right, either. That would have made the Greeks more or less the tallest people on earth at the time. |
Based on the length of long bones, the average height of men buried in Italy from -V to +V was 168 cm (66"). Greek heights were similar (around 170-172 cm according to Lawrence Angel). Young, free men fit for military service would have averaged slightly higher. So the average Iron Age Italian was taller than the average Italian conscript until 1956, and the average Dutch conscript before 1920! (G. Kron, Historia, Vol. 54 No. 1 (2005))
You have to forget the idea of constant progress when studying history before +XX. Average heights reflect both genes and health, and some Iron Age societies had an average standard of living as high as any society before the 20th century.
|
|
|
|
|
|
William P
|
| Posted: Tue 19 Jul, 2011 7:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gary Teuscher wrote: | These type of comparisons can be almost silly sometimes. We are talking technologically a difference of about 2,000 years - may as well ask who would win, a Special forces platoon ro a group of Aztec warriors.
| Quote: | | Training a hoplite concentrated on formation drills, whereas training a samurai included a huge amount of single combat work. |
I must say though that this paints Spartan Hoplites in a bad light, and I disagree. Maybe Hoplites getting rudimentary training get this - but with the training we know Spartans had, I'm sure they were not only adept in formation fighting but also in more one-on-one. I look at a Spartan more like a middle ages knight - as the warrior-elite of the culture, they spent much of their time training, and not just for large scale formation battles.
From what we know they were also effective in small unit actions and raiding as well.
The technology would favor the Japanese though of course.
The 5'10" 180 lb Spartan comment seemed a bit off also.
But from what I have researched, a Spartan was probably a hair taller than the 5'5" Roman, most estimates put average height in the 5'7" range. Perhaps better nutrition for being a warrior-elite helped, and Spartans DID do some selective breeding, though it was more weeding out the unfit, not breeding for size, and it was in plave for only a short period of time when you look at it in a geneological time frame. |
not AS MUCH so. because on one hand we have modern, rapid firing, long ranged cartridge using firearms, explosive grenades and other weapons such as steel knives and even night vision equiptment against obsidion arrows, slings and other hand weapons, quite simply modern special forces could easily keep aztecs at a distance. or simply pepper him ful of holes.
the only HUGE differences in technology between the samurai and spartan are, his matchlock. the mere quality of the armour. and the materials of his sword and other weapons, being largely made of iron for the armour and steel for the weapons.
2000 years previous of a modern special forces platoon would be a late era viking, or a norman knight at the battle of hastings. or a hein period japanese samurai, which had iron tanko armour, chokuto, a spear alot like that of the chinese, and actually used a spersonal shield. occasionally.
|
|
|
|
|
Eric S
|
| Posted: Wed 20 Jul, 2011 12:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Michael Curl wrote: |
Isn't the riveted clearly a European borrow? Its called nanban after all isn't it? So wouldn't that mean that their was no riveted mail until after European arrival?
not only that but most sources that mention nanban gusari note that they still kept it butted OR like keychain rings,
Nanban would not be butted, that's what makes it nanban. Nanban means southern barbarian and was the period term for European, since no European mail was butted (there have been enough arguments to proof that) and they are calling this type of riveted 4-1 mail nanban, I would assume that it was from Europe or a European style (as perceived by the Japanese of course).
I don't see how they could have butted it and called it nanban, unless they were referring to the all circle pattern (as opposed to the Japanese circle oval pattern). So I doubt that it would be butted or keychain style IMHO. |
Namban kusari could be either riveted or butted, as long as it uses the European 4 in 1 pattern.
Riveted kusari is known as karakuri-namban, with "nanbam" referring to the 4 in 1 European pattern, in any book or reference mentioning "nanbam kusari" it is referring to the butted Japanese version of the European mail because riveted kusari is not well known and until very recently many of the well known authors of samurai books did not know of its existence or they did not have access to any examples of it. Its likely that the Japanese observed this mail pattern being used by European visitors and copied it in both riveted and butted versions of their own.
The Japanese used many mail patterns .
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gary Teuscher
|
| Posted: Wed 20 Jul, 2011 8:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | Not the time period in question, though average height in medieval England was about 5'8 for men and 5'3 for women.
Greeks, Romans, and most of the famous ancient civilizations were Mediterranean people, and would have averaged shorter than the rest of Europe. |
| Quote: | | Based on the length of long bones, the average height of men buried in Italy from -V to +V was 168 cm (66"). Greek heights were similar (around 170-172 cm according to Lawrence Angel). Young, free men fit for military service would have averaged slightly higher. So the average Iron Age Italian was taller than the average Italian conscript until 1956, and the average Dutch conscript before 1920! (G. Kron, Historia, Vol. 54 No. 1 (2005)) |
Interesting info. without looking into it deeply, many think human height has been a slow progression from the stone age til today.
But there are/were some interesting glitches in that progression. The Hunter-Gatherer height of an average male was in the 5'8" range - the later agrarian late stone age societies were closer to 5'3". Human height then again increased until about the 13th century, the average height then was pretty close to what it is now. Then the plagues and even wrose for human height, the industrial revolution kicked in, causing an average male height of about 5'5" in the 17th-18th centuries.
This is a genrality of course, and is based mostly on European heights, but it shows it was not a steady climb upwards.
|
|
|
|
|
Robert H. Shyan-Norwalt
Location: Cambridge City Indiana Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Posts: 15
|
| Posted: Wed 20 Jul, 2011 12:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sometimes you get the bear, ...sometimes, ...the bear gets you. :P
Collosians 2:8
|
|
 |
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
All contents © Copyright 2003-2024 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum
|
This is a standard topic