Got a Real-World Weapon or Armor Question? Mk. VI

[Galloglaich]

Not to be pedantic (or perhaps to be pedantic) but they believe they were the descendants of one of two men who were weaned on wolves milk, two Gods, and a Hero of the Trojan War (admittedly from the Trojan side).

You are absolutely right I stand corrected.

Anyhow, back on topic, I was playing through Assassin's Creed II recently, and I was wondering about their classification of the Cinquedea as a knife type weapon. I've always thought they were short swords (and seen them classified as such), being suitable for daily wear by a gentleman. That said, I don't know much about them - why are they "Five Fingers" wide, what purpose does that serve? What sort of techniques would they be suitable for?

Thanks!

I heard that game is set in Florence I really want to get it now, but I'd have to get a modern computer mine is more than 5 years old now :(

Is good?

G.

[Galloglaich]

I'm not saying Romans weren't barbarians themselves to some extent (what with waging wars for profit and gladiatorial areas and all). Hell, most cultures had barbaric aspects. The Celts were nice enough fellows who would turn sword to plowshare in good times....but I think 'collecting a single piece of the human body from those you have slain, preserving it and keeping it around your place, sometimes bringing it out on your war chariot for intimidation because you think it gives you magic powers' combined with 'when resources run low, wage tribal warfare to gain more resources and curb the population' is enough for them to qualify as barbarians. If it doesn't, then could you please show me the new official standards on which we decide whether or not a group is 'barbarian'.

The Romans nailed their enemies up onto crosses and left them there to intimidate their own citizens and their foreign subjects until they rotted apart. Wealthy Roman ladies used to scrape the sweat from the backs of Gladiators and use it for perfume before watching them get torn apart by wild beasts in the arena.

I already told you war "Celtic" war Chariots went out in the Bronze Age. The Romans didn't exist as such in the Bronze Age, they were still a minor tribe vassal to the Etruscans at that point.

As for tribal warfare, the Roman Republic waged continual, permanent warfare, they were at war every year the Republic lasted, sometimes with themselves . They fought more than one civil war. The Empire fought so many civil wars I couldn't begin to recite them all.

So I really still don't grasp the precise standard you are using to say the "Celts" by which I guess you mean La Tene Culture tribes from various parts of Europe or the Gauls, or possibly the Celtiberians or the Gallatians in Turkey... or maybe all of them, were Barbarians but the Romans weren't.

The one thing that I don't about the Romans: Sure, the Emperors were of divine bloodline according to the mythology, but why treat them as infallible, especially when each god of the pantheon had some small, human flaw?

Because the Praetorian guard would kill (see crucify, above) anybody who said they weren't a God, so the Emperors could do whatever they liked. Like make their horse a Senator or marry their sister. You know... civilized stuff.

G.

[Kalaska'Agathas]

The beginning of the game is set in Florence, with stops in San Gimignano, Forli, Venice, and a brief sojourn to Rome. The game is quite pretty, with many famous pieces of art featured, along with the excellent architecture of the period. I would have to recommend you play it on console, because of the PC version's required connection to the web in order to play. That said, there are workarounds, so if you're willing to do some work you can play on PC without being connected to the internet.

Also, it features many historical events and personages, 'Il Magnifico' Lorenzo de Medici, Rodrigo Borgia, Niccolo Machiavelli, Caterina Sforza, and several others. All in all it made for a good playing experience, even with its alternate history. I would recommend at least reading the plot of the first, however, if not playing it, as otherwise the forces driving the plot and some of the details will be confusing.

But yeah, in all, it's quite good.

[Fhaolan]

Outside of the British Isles, that ended in the Bronze Age.

The Celts had an interesting innovation to chariots. I'm in contact with an archeologist from the Univeristy of Wales, who has done extensive research on the chariots found in burial mounds.

Unlike Roman and other chariot-using peoples, the Celts appear to have built theirs with a suspension system, made of tightly-sprung rope. This allowed their chariots to navigate much rougher terrain. Heck, if you learn the trick to it, you can actually 'jump' the chariot over logs, according to this archologist.

Likely this is one of the primary reasons chariots stayed in use in the British Isles when everyone else abandoned them.

One of the other reasons is that Celtic-style British chariots found in the mounds tended to be built with fittings that appear to be for mounting benches and like, so they could be used as simple carts when not stripped for war use. Being multi-function probably extended their useful life.

[Galloglaich]

Cool... now I guess I have to get a Console game system.

By the way, I hope y'all will forgive me for kind of playing devils advocate about the whole Barbarian question, my point is really that who was or wasn't a barbarian in our collective past is (I think) a serious question which bears serious consideration.

G.

[Galloglaich]

The Celts had an interesting innovation to chariots. I'm in contact with an archeologist from the Univeristy of Wales, who has done extensive research on the chariots found in burial mounds.

Unlike Roman and other chariot-using peoples, the Celts appear to have built theirs with a suspension system, made of tightly-sprung rope. This allowed their chariots to navigate much rougher terrain. Heck, if you learn the trick to it, you can actually 'jump' the chariot over logs, according to this archologist.

Likely this is one of the primary reasons chariots stayed in use in the British Isles when everyone else abandoned them.

One of the other reasons is that Celtic-style British chariots found in the mounds tended to be built with fittings that appear to be for mounting benches and like, so they could be used as simple carts when not stripped for war use. Being multi-function probably extended their useful life.

I remember the Romans were quite impressed with them and mentioned the jumping, as well as guys running along the bars between the horses to throw javelins etc., but they didn't help too much at least not in the South. Did the Picts and Caledonians use Chariots?

G.

[Fhaolan]

I remember the Romans were quite impressed with them and mentioned the jumping, as well as guys running along the bars between the horses to throw javelins etc., but they didn't help too much at least not in the South. Did the Picts and Caledonians use Chariots?

G.

Excellent question, and I don't know the answer. I'll see if my contact has any more info about the distribution of chariot finds across the isles.

I do know that if you read a lot of the Irish and Welsh epics, it appears that actually fighting from the chariot wasn't as common as you would think. From what I read, it was more a speciallized cart for getting warriors and equipment to a battlefield *fast* with a dedicated driver. Rather than relying on the warriors to get themselves there... mainly because in the epics it seems the warrirors would be too drunk to get to the battle on time. If they could find it in the first place.

EDIT: Fastest reply I've ever gotten from this guy. Must have been a good question.

He said the burial mounds with chariots of this 'advanced' design has a fairly wide distribution, even in areas dominated by the Picts. He also said that the chariots, while being of this advanced design still couldn't compete with the maneuverability of regular cavalry in combat thanks to the four-pillar saddle that was common at that time (which supposedly was also a Celtic innovation). As such they did get relegated to being really just a transport for big-wigs who ranked high enough to have a chauffeur, a blinged-out ride and wanted to do morale-boosting show-off maneuvers for the troops.

[fusilier]

Anybody who isn't Roman is a barbarian. ;-)

Ok, so it's not that simple. It's a loan word from Greek, which essentially meant "not greek." Even in ancient Greece it appears to have been used to refer to the Gaul. All the connotations seem to have developed very early on. At it's root, and the term was sometimes used much later than antiquity in this manner, it was how foreigners of one sort or another were defined. Much like some Victorian British might claim the wogs begin at Calais.

Rome's influence on European history and culture allowed them to define (however arbitrarily) who was a barbarian and who wasn't. There can probably be some sweeping generalizations made about barbarian tribes, but I don't really give the term much consideration (i.e I consider the term to be rather arbitrary).

Returning to the topic of swords: Any easily accessible primers on mid to late 16th century cut-and-thrust drills out there?

[a_humble_lich]

I think the question of the definition of barbarian is important here. I see there are two relevant definitions here (ignoring the original greek meanings of βαρβαρος). First, we use the word to refer to people who are uncivilized, primitive etc. I think Galloglaich makes an excellent point that in comparison to us, that fits the Romans as much as the Celts.

I would argue to that there is a second definition of barbarian which is basically "non-Greek/Roman Iron Age Europeans" in particular the Celts and Germans. In many ways the word was coined to describe the Celts (OK I admit and the Persians, but the Greeks had early interactions with the κελτοι too). After several thousand years a lot of the view of "barbarians" is our romanticized version of the Celts and Germans.

Edit: fusilier basically said exactly what I was trying to. That will teach me to
press reply in a timely manner.

[Psyx]

Let me say it again: we thought taking a human head, preserving it and keeping it around the house gave us MAGICAL POWERS. The Romans were pompous, arrogant and sometimes hypocritical, but they were right in calling Celts barbarians.

Umm...there really is no 'we'. I don't think any of us on the forum have any particular mileage in claiming any kind of direct ties with a culture that died out nearly 2000 years ago...

Everyone was superstitious. Romans and Celt alike performed sacrifices. Rome used to kill people for pure entertainment, remember.
Celtic law had provision for the care of elderly, children and the insane. They also seemed to have more respect for women. The Romans quite happily threw unwanted babies away. Celtic culture didn't write things down and didn't win against Rome. And so history remembers only what the Romans bothered recording. However, it clear from the archaeological finds that the Celts had plenty of skilled craftsmen and traded across the known world.

I'm away from my Middle Liddel and so this may not be entirely accurate)

It's -literally- 'people who speak like "babababa"', I believe. ie: Anyone who doesn't speak Greek.
Barbarian has always essentially meant 'people who aren't us', because people always see their own society as perfect and civil, and anyone else's as repugnant. Pure xenophobia.

"collecting a single piece of the human body from those you have slain, preserving it and keeping it around your place, sometimes bringing it out on your war chariot for intimidation because you think it gives you magic powers"

Not to dissimilar to saintly relics, really.

[hamishspence]

In the Science of Discworld books, the essays between the story chapters go into some depth on "savage vs civilized" (especially in book 2)

and in general there's a strong theme of "it's the civilized people you want to be wary of".

[MarkusWolfe]

I think the question of the definition of barbarian is important here. I see there are two relevant definitions here (ignoring the original greek meanings of βαρβαρος). First, we use the word to refer to people who are uncivilized, primitive etc. I think Galloglaich makes an excellent point that in comparison to us, that fits the Romans as much as the Celts.

I would argue to that there is a second definition of barbarian which is basically "non-Greek/Roman Iron Age Europeans" in particular the Celts and Germans. In many ways the word was coined to describe the Celts (OK I admit and the Persians, but the Greeks had early interactions with the κελτοι too). After several thousand years a lot of the view of "barbarians" is our romanticized version of the Celts and Germans.

Edit: fusilier basically said exactly what I was trying to. That will teach me to
press reply in a timely manner.

Alright, that is a good definition; let's stick to that.

Umm...there really is no 'we'. I don't think any of us on the forum have any particular mileage in claiming any kind of direct ties with a culture that died out nearly 2000 years ago...

Everyone was superstitious. Romans and Celt alike performed sacrifices. Rome used to kill people for pure entertainment, remember.
Celtic law had provision for the care of elderly, children and the insane. They also seemed to have more respect for women. The Romans quite happily threw unwanted babies away. Celtic culture didn't write things down and didn't win against Rome. And so history remembers only what the Romans bothered recording. However, it clear from the archaeological finds that the Celts had plenty of skilled craftsmen and traded across the known world.

Good points. I never knew they had care for the elderly. Perhaps in the big picture, the Romans would've been classified as barbarians if it were the Celts building the large cities and being the most advanced civilization in the known world.

Not to dissimilar to saintly relics, really.

I must've phrased it wrong. Saintly Relics is 'the Gods favored this person. Maybe if I keep a preserved piece of their body in my temple and keep alive the stories of their life and devotion to the Gods, the Gods will favor me as well.' Head hunting is similar, but it's magic because the head is the location of all magic in the human body.

"it's the civilized people you want to be wary of".

Damn straight. I've been seeing a whole lot of this in the thread. Once they get civilized, they think they can get away with anything.....

[Karoht]

I recall hearing somewhere that the Celts were the first people to have regulations regarding maternity leave, or something of that nature. Though I could be just as likely confusing this with the Picts.

[MarkusWolfe]

^

Learning more and more stuff like this all the time on this thread.

Actually, we're getting off topic. Alright, let me make up a weapons question....

umm.....railguns?

[Norsesmithy]

Biggest issue right now is rail erosion, that is to say where the conductive material of the rail is sublimed to plasma by the combination of massive current and the slight fitment gap of the armature.

Probably the best solution would be coming up with some odd metal alloy armature that had a predictable rate of expansion and a lower melting temp than the rails. Unfortunately, this would not be very efficient, due to the likely high resistance of alloys that might work, and each shot would produce a huge cloud of toxic metal vapor.

Harder solutions include high melting point high temp superconductors, probably not a very plausible solution.

Impractical solutions include extending the rails so that the armature and rails can achieve high velocities without the high current loads that cause the erosion.

What will probably happen is that we will have sequentially numbered armatures of slightly bigger and bigger dimensions to accommodate rail erosion, and a short service life for each "gun" in terms of shots, similar to the projectile sizing for the Schwerer Gustav.

[Galloglaich]

Returning to the topic of swords: Any easily accessible primers on mid to late 16th century cut-and-thrust drills out there?

Easily accessible? Not really at this point. You might able to find some moderately difficult instructional DvDs. You'd need to narrow down to German (probably Joachim Meyer) or Italian (Bolognese, or possibly Marrozo).

G.

[Maclav]

Along the same lines, hows about an English translation of Marozzo, 1536, Libro Tertio de Spada da Dev Mane, Cap 161 though 177?

[fusilier]

Along the same lines, hows about an English translation of Marozzo, 1536, Libro Tertio de Spada da Dev Mane, Cap 161 though 177?

Ok, so following along those lines: are there any English translations of these manuals? I personally would lean toward the Italian manuals, but German is ok too.

[Maclav]

Ok, so following along those lines: are there any English translations of these manuals? I personally would lean toward the Italian manuals, but German is ok too.

Marozzo, book 1 and 2: http://www.marozzo.org/marozzo-trans.pdf

[Galloglaich]

Ok, so following along those lines: are there any English translations of these manuals? I personally would lean toward the Italian manuals, but German is ok too.

here is a complete scan of the original of Marozzos Opera Nova from 1568 (there are various editions)

http://mac9.ucc.nau.edu/manuscripts/marozzo.pdf

here are some partial translations

http://www.marozzo.org/marozzo-trans.pdf

This is dagger stuff but includes the images which is useful
http://www.marozzo.org/marozzo-presa.pdf

Some youtube videos... can't vouch for them because I don't know this instructor and don't know Marozzo very well... but this looks like some of the Marozzo sword and rotella stuff that we studied briefly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D71YmcR1f8c
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wYKY...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBR0z...eature=related

This is sparring based on a compilation of 16th Century Bolognese masters including Marozzo.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SbEhl...eature=related

Hope that helps, Bolognese fencing is a challenging path but I suspect worth the effort.

G.

[Galloglaich]

I asked a friend of mine who is a rapier guy (and has won several Rapier tournaments) and he recommended this website, which looks like a good resource:

http://www.salvatorfabris.com/SectionBolognese.shtml

G.

[fusilier]

Wow, ask you shall receive! :-)

Thanks Galloglaich and Maclav, I have a plenty to study now.

[Calintares]

Would it be possible in a traditional medieval setting to make something akin to Surgical masks or at least something that allows one to breathe, but would block out dust?

According to the wikipedia the concept was first thought up by Leonardo da Vinchi during the renesanse, but would it have been possible to make if anyone had thought of it before?

[Psyx]

Desert dwellers have wrapped cloth around their faces for a few thousand years now.

And holding a handkerchief over the face doused in scent was a common way for the wealthy to avoid the stench of medieval urban areas.

[Autolykos]

Would it be possible in a traditional medieval setting to make something akin to Surgical masks or at least something that allows one to breathe, but would block out dust?

Soldiers in WWI soaked rags in water or urine to protect them against gas (with mixed success). That's about as low-tech as you can get, and if it even has a decent chance to protect you against chlorine or phosgene for some time, it should also help against bacteria. Also, what Psyx said.

[Storm Bringer]

during the Black Death, doctors, who thought that the plague was airborune and transfered via 'Bad Air' (not unreasonable, and shows that they could understand the idea of bacterial/viral infection, even if they couldn't phrase in those terms or understand the mechanics. Unfortunatly, they were wrong in this case, it was transmitted via fleas.)

Plague doctors would wear a special suit, which included a mask with

a long, beak like nose

stuffed with perfumes and such, which they though would help keep out the bad air. sound in concept, if you changed the salts to whatever they put in modern gas masks, then it would certianly help agianst gas attacks, though it would not be properly airtight.

edit:

Autolykos, the action of the urine masks was chemical, not physical. their is a chemcial in urine that reacted with chlorine to neutralise it, thus protecting the breather.

[fusilier]

Plague masks were usually stuffed with straw (and probably other stuff). There are different forms of the plague, and if it infected the lungs it could be transmitted through coughing and sneezing (pneumonic plague, see: http://www.drugs.com/cg/plague.html ). I think exposure to open sores could also transmit the plague directly from person to person. As I recall pneumonic plague was the most deadly and quick acting. Victims "ate lunch with their friends and dinner with their ancestors in paradise."

Returning to the topic, if you simply want to filter dust, a fine cloth wrapped around the mouth and nose would probably work fairly well.

[rojomoke]

<quibble>Thats pneumonic, not pneumatic.</quibble>

[fusilier]

<quibble>Thats pneumonic, not pneumatic.</quibble>

Hahaha. I actually did write pneumatic! Hmm, maybe I need some caffeine. Thanks, I've corrected the original post. (Interestingly, the spell checker on this computer rejects the word pneumonic, but not pneumatic).

[Kalaska'Agathas]

I don't want to think about the possible effects of pneumatic plague...

If I could go back to a prior topic, what is it about Bolognese fencing that makes it so difficult? Are the techniques particularly demanding of strength, flexibility, or stamina?

Also, I'd like to thank all of you guys for posting videos of interpretations of Talhoffer et al. I tried one of those techniques in practice with my epée (Play Two - He cuts freely from the roof, he has displaced with turned hand and will step in front and wrench), or a similar one, with less wrenching and more closing the distance and pressing the point into my opponent. Worked like a charm.