Fighting with two swords?

[kenneth house]

My apologies.

Kennth House,

Mukhanda International

[LafayetteCCurtis]

From experience, and as I accidentally posted on the "Two-Handed" thread, my own African (Hausa) Gangi tradition uses two swords, and the singular Kaskara type swords, similar to European double edged swords but indigenous to Sudanic Africa, in their extant warrior/hunters traditions. These are still used in duels resulting from disputes between hunters in which serious injury or death sometimes occur. These are also seen in the context of their martial performative displays of their weapons skills during festive periods or the enstoolment of local traditional warlords. The Gangi are very real warriors who still use their combative skills during actual life ad death struggles, so the ability to use two swords to good effect obviously still exists.

Could you provide a link or written reference to this? I'd like to check them out in more detail. And, BTW, is the two-sword style specialized for duels or meant to be usable on the battlefield as well?

[kenneth house]

From experience, and as I accidentally posted on the "Two-Handed" thread, my own African (Hausa) Gangi tradition uses two swords, and the singular Kaskara type swords, similar to European double edged swords but indigenous to Sudanic Africa, in their extant warrior/hunters traditions. These are still used in duels resulting from disputes between hunters in which serious injury or death sometimes occur. These are also seen in the context of their martial performative displays of their weapons skills during festive periods or the enstoolment of local traditional warlords. The Gangi are very real warriors who still use their combative skills during actual life ad death struggles, so the ability to use two swords to good effect obviously still exists.

Could you provide a link or written reference to this? I'd like to check them out in more detail. And, BTW, is the two-sword style specialized for duels or meant to be usable on the battlefield as well?

My knowledge comes from personal interaction, but you may reference these brief entries:http://forums.swordforum.com/showthread.php?

t=13534&page=2&highlight=hausa

The above link cannot be copied as it is an adobe file ( my apologies, but it is from African-American scholar Dr. Ed Powe's archives at BLACFOUNDATION.COM I believe...

As for the weapons, they are both dueling and battlefield weapons. There are even (in Arabic and Manlinke/Bambara) ancient Malian texts, from ancient Mali, which describe the kingdoms military strategies and weapons use.

http://forums.swordforum.com/showthread ... ight=hausa

Fraternal,

Kenneth House

[LafayetteCCurtis]

I have no doubts that the kaskara was used as a battlefield weapon, since I've seen several mentions of it both in translated snippets from African chronicles and in secondary sources. What I was asking is that was the two-sword style ever used on the battlefield with the kaskara? In the absence of documentary evidence I'd assume that it wasn't, although I have no doubts as to its potential usefulness in duels and choreographed performances.

[Shane Smith]

My opinion is that two swords is a viable alternative to sword and buckler or sword and dagger. However, I don't think its advantages over those two combinations are all that significant. I see the tradeoffs on offense and defense balancing each other out, making it roughly equal in effectiveness to the others. Since it's harder to master than S&B or S&D (because an off hand sword requires more training to control), it makes more sense for teachers of the day to concentrate on the most reliable ways to produce effective fighting skills. Two swords would be bonus material for only the best students (or those cocky noble kids too aggressive for their own good, but who you can't say no to). Remember too that the masters frequently preach against ostentatious displays of aggression and bravado. I think they might agree that two swords is more of a "power trip" combo that might be used more for intimidation than actual combat utility.

Is there a historical European precedent for this beyond case of rapier and maybe sword and dagger? I do not recall ever seeing a treatise on two sword combat in the European tradition. Sources please?

[Stacy Clifford]

Is there a historical European precedent for this beyond case of rapier and maybe sword and dagger? I do not recall ever seeing a treatise on two sword combat in the European tradition. Sources please?

Hi Shane, I think I mentioned earlier in the thread that I'm not getting my two-sword ideas from any manual or treatise, it's just from my own experimentation and my opinion. Wish we did have sources for this, but the closest material we have is sword and dagger or just single sword alone, and I think enough can be gleaned from those sources to create an effective two-sword method in the absence of having one spelled out for us. As long as we can make it work based on sound principles, I think the masters would approve.

[Shane Smith]

Is there a historical European precedent for this beyond case of rapier and maybe sword and dagger? I do not recall ever seeing a treatise on two sword combat in the European tradition. Sources please?

Hi Shane, I think I mentioned earlier in the thread that I'm not getting my two-sword ideas from any manual or treatise, it's just from my own experimentation and my opinion. Wish we did have sources for this, but the closest material we have is sword and dagger or just single sword alone, and I think enough can be gleaned from those sources to create an effective two-sword method in the absence of having one spelled out for us. As long as we can make it work based on sound principles, I think the masters would approve.

But doesn't that take us out of the realm of historically accurate RMA and into the realm of our own imaginations? I do not doubt (sincerely) even for a moment that you in particular could be deadly effective with such a method based on sound priciples and your own experience, but that opens the door to all sorts of ahistorical and fanciful things. I think these things are fine for individuals to play with but they don't fit the goals of ARMA I think. Either way, that's just my opinion and others may disagree. Best regards.

[Rodolfo Martínez]

I first agree with Shane about the subject, ARMA uses methods based on historical manuals, and it´s ok.
But, in the other hand, what the first masters would had said to the XV century masters when they decided to employ a side dagger instead of a shield?
In my personal case, i like historical accurate stuff not fantasy. I don´t know how ARMA practise, but maybe a two sword exercise, or technique can help to develop an ambidextrous use of the sword, or an alternative for sword and dagger style in wich you can use both swords to gain offensive advantage, but i don´t know.
I think that we must avoid falling into fantasy, but, if someone in history tried it, we should try it too.

[Stacy Clifford]

But doesn't that take us out of the realm of historically accurate RMA and into the realm of our own imaginations? I do not doubt (sincerely) even for a moment that you in particular could be deadly effective with such a method based on sound priciples and your own experience, but that opens the door to all sorts of ahistorical and fanciful things. I think these things are fine for individuals to play with but they don't fit the goals of ARMA I think. Either way, that's just my opinion and others may disagree. Best regards.

You're right that there's no way we can consider it historically accurate precisely because there are no sources, and I wouldn't advocate teaching this in an ARMA class or presenting it in a demonstration because I am just "an individual playing with it" as you say. I am applying lessons the masters did teach to a weapon combination they didn't teach to see what I can come up with, so in that sense I believe I'm correctly applying the ARMA method, just not to existing historical material.

The reason I've put my two cents in is because of the direction this thread has taken. It started out asking if there were sources for two sword combat other than double rapiers, and then the question arose of whether it's possible to fight with two cutting swords effectively and why the masters are silent on the issue. We can only speculate on why the masters don't mention it, and we've done plenty of that, but I wanted to show that by applying what we do know and testing it that we can answer the question "can it be done?" one way or another with some reasonable degree of confidence. That still doesn't make two swords a good idea or better than anything else, it just indicates that it's possible. For me I guess it's a diversion to test how well I know my basics with other weapons by reapplying them, but of course the first time we find a manual with instruction on using two cutting swords, anything I come up with doesn't mean a thing and I'll happily take a back seat to the real experts.

So basically my opinion is that it's OK to experiment a bit based on what we know as long as we make no claims of authenticity and don't try to make it part of our curriculum, where it has no place. It's human nature to satisfy our curiosity and try to answer other people's questions, but at the end of the day we have to acknowledge the limits of our experience and hope we find a more authoritative voice in some dusty library.[/i]

[Axel Pettersson]

Here is a translation of Manciolini's use of two swords, he makes alot of use of both the cut and the thrust: http://www.hemac.org/modules.php?name=C ... age&pid=15

I cannot remember right now who said it 8it coudl have been agrippa, or perhaps manciolini), but one of the italian masters adviced against cutting with both swords at once, I will have to look it up.

[LafayetteCCurtis]

That's exactly the same link I posted in the first page of this thread--and whined about the way it uses so many false-edge cuts. The movements are rather hard to understand in the absence of illustration plates because we can't be sure he uses his terms to mean exactly the same thing as do the other Italian masters.

[Axel Pettersson]

That's exactly the same link I posted in the first page of this thread--and whined about the way it uses so many false-edge cuts. The movements are rather hard to understand in the absence of illustration plates because we can't be sure he uses his terms to mean exactly the same thing as do the other Italian masters.

Sorry I did not see this. I posted it in response to the above stated question to if there were any treatises on the use of two swords, not only case of rapiers. I am not very familiar with Manciolini, though if someone has figured out for example sword and dagger from his treaties (or other treaties from the Bolognese School), it should be possible to interpret. I think The Order of Seven Hearts work with Bolognese Swordsmanship, might be a good idea to ask them: www.salvatorfabris.com

[J. F. McBrayer]

Manciolino appears to be consistent in his terminiology with the rest of the Bolognese school. The use of false-edge cuts is not unusual for that school, either. I would not worry about the lack of plates, but learn the Bolognese guards and cuts (if you haven't already), and then follow Manciolino's very precise and clear instructions and see what it gets you.

I suspect the previous poster may have been reposting that link because the consensus of the thread was that "there are no historical manuals that teach the use of two swords," when a link to one was posted at the beginning of the thread.

[Nathan Dexter]

The Order of the Seven Hearts contradicts the ARMA on the cutting with rapiers issue, and dissagree with us on the validity of those techniques
be aware of that.

[Axel Pettersson]

The Order of the Seven Hearts contradicts the ARMA on the cutting with rapiers issue, and dissagree with us on the validity of those techniques
be aware of that.

Sure thing, though I also believe that their focus on the Bolognese school make them an interesting actor to discuss with. I am also sorry that I have failed to change my signature where it states that I am still an ARMA member, I have moved to Gothenburg and have joined the Gothenburg Historical Fencing School, and so have not renewed my ARMA membership as it (as I have understood it) is against ARMA policy to be an active member of other WMA groups.

The fact also remains that there is a historical treaties on the use of two swords, which is a main point of discussion in this thread.

Sincerely/Axel, GHFS