|
Post by Yamanouchi Eidou on Jul 3, 2009 0:21:14 GMT -5
good advice from his grace
|
|
|
Post by maredudd on Jul 3, 2009 2:43:38 GMT -5
I'm very much aware that in my Japanese persona and armour I would not fight in single combat with any sort of shield. For melee and war I will be behind the shield wall with my spear or naginata. This buckler is an answer to the (fairly frequent over here) problem, of what to do in a tournament, such as Crown, where it is announced at the last minute that Their Majesties wish the first round to be fought with sword and shield. In such circumstances I'm already in my armour for the day and would rather have a shield that looks vaguely like it might be part of my kit than pick up a heater. This is my personal compromise on an issue where there is no "right way" (even if we ignore the incongruity of fighting in a Western style tournament in the first place). If a good time before the tournament it is announced that shields are required, I would fight in armour that allows for one. All that said, even if I was told today that the tournament I'll be fighting in August (Viceroy Tournament of Insulae Draconis) required shields, I would still fight in my Japanese kit and use the fan because my Consort has spent time and money on her Japanese outfit and my retainers are excited about the whole thing. I don't deserve retainers, but people are coming out of the woodwork, saying that they've always fancied trying Japanese but didn't want to be the only one
|
|
|
Post by solveig on Jul 3, 2009 7:10:02 GMT -5
Noble Cousin!
Greetings from Solveig! The thing that can be justified historically may or may not look better, but there is an illustration which shows one member of a group storming a building holding a miniature version of the tate. Gosh, I wish I could recall where that illustration is located. Regardless, it is a very small shield. Maybe similar in size to the sort of buckler that fencers use. Regardless, it is rectangular shaped.
|
|
|
Post by roninpenguin on Jul 3, 2009 22:54:14 GMT -5
As Li said in an earlier post, remember that we are visitors in their court, so I feel that if you are fighting in tournaments held by them using a European style shield would be fine for the situation because you are borrowing it from them. Of course when you are trying to match the pageantry of the other fighters having that European shield could detract from your look. So now you have to put yourself in the mindset of your persona in the same situation. Would they not care about the fact that they have a Euro shield in this tournament? Would they even flaunt it as a way of saying "I can best you on your own terms"? Would they adapt some article from their home to use in its place like a fan or Jingasa? This is where I think the "C" in SCA comes in. You have to creatively find solutions to your problem that you feel match your persona. So when it comes to shields people are going to have different opinions and as long as they don't get to outlandish I don't really think there is a wrong answer as it depends on the personality of the player and in turn their persona.
Of course I hate fighting with a shield and don't touch one unless I really, really have to. ;D
|
|
|
Post by dothacker on Mar 1, 2010 5:58:40 GMT -5
Excuse me that I am new here, but I am a bit surprised nobody has mentioned (despite mentioning familiarity with bushido) that the "shield" of a samurai is their katana itself. Not the edge, of course, as you see in movies.
|
|
|
Post by Yamanouchi Eidou on Mar 1, 2010 10:32:06 GMT -5
no, we understand, but parrying with a blade is much different from having a shield. Have you done much fighting?
|
|
|
Post by Yagyu Jubei Takemori on Mar 1, 2010 10:55:55 GMT -5
The mongols DID invade japan twice during Kublai Kahns time, you could have picked one up from them when they retreated, and used it........?
While there would be no real historical support for this, its doable.
I have a round that I am going to write "This isn't mine" in Japanese on it and call it good.
|
|
|
Post by worldantiques on Mar 1, 2010 14:21:28 GMT -5
The mongols DID invade japan twice during Kublai Kahns time, you could have picked one up from them when they retreated, and used it........? While there would be no real historical support for this, its doable. I have a round that I am going to write "This isn't mine" in Japanese on it and call it good. This is the only place that claims to have a individual Japanese shield that I have ever seen, they do sell very high quality samurai items but its hard to believe they have the only one in existance but here it is. www.worldofsamurai.com/shop/default.asp?page=2&cid=122&pid=1101&img=VA1101b.jpg&menuName=Various%20weapons,%20teppo%20tessen..
|
|
|
Post by Takeda Sanjuichiro on Mar 1, 2010 15:37:50 GMT -5
AmericanSamurai wrote:
The hammer work, the clipped-corner rectangular backers for the straps (common in the west, much less common in east), the rolled edge, the stacked center make me wonder. Also the item appears neither lacquered, russeted, nor as usual for iron/steel items not subjected to either of the above treatments, patinaed and then inlaid with gold or silver. For those reasons I tend to think this was an imported piece rather than Japanese made.
I would not remove the possibility this is an imported munitions piece that has subsequently been "improved" to Japanese tastes, but that possibility is not high on my list, for the same reasons cited above.
I tend to think this is a piece from Spanish Phillipines, Goa, Macao, or possibly Indian in origin.
That is my take on it. -Takeda
|
|
|
Post by worldantiques on Mar 1, 2010 20:27:03 GMT -5
AmericanSamurai wrote: The hammer work, the clipped-corner rectangular backers for the straps (common in the west, much less common in east), the rolled edge, the stacked center make me wonder. Also the item appears neither lacquered, russeted, nor as usual for iron/steel items not subjected to either of the above treatments, patinaed and then inlaid with gold or silver. For those reasons I tend to think this was an imported piece rather than Japanese made. I would not remove the possibility this is an imported munitions piece that has subsequently been "improved" to Japanese tastes, but that possibility is not high on my list, for the same reasons cited above. I tend to think this is a piece from Spanish Phillipines, Goa, Macao, or possibly Indian in origin. That is my take on it. -Takeda I agree that it probably found its way into Japan from some were else, the seller is located in japan and is well known, I have heard that korea and Mongolia used shields but have not seen any examples.
|
|
|
Post by tengumoon on Mar 1, 2010 20:36:20 GMT -5
dothacker - I mentioned the use of weapons in defence on page 2 @takeyama-dono - I like the "its not mine" thing The use of shieds just doesnt fit the mindset of the samurai or the weapons styles Samurai primarily were a horse riding archer group, you dont use shields whilst engaging in archery. Some in history (non Japanese) may have worn shields upon their backs but this doesnt fit the samurai mindset either. Foot archers did use large barriers, but not handeheld for obvious reasons. The main battlefield weapons of naginata or yari are definitely 2 handed weapons,no way to use a shield. Even the humble katana is a 2 handed weapon,agin where to put shield? The idea of using a sword in a single hand was very rare, evidence of this is even by Miyamoto Musashi's time it was considered odd to use the daisho together rather than seperately. My solution is simply to use a normal heater shield when the use of sword and shield is required. The other point is that when using a shield do you use a basket hilt? Thats not exaclty accurate either! my single swords I use a short handle as the long tsuka of a katana simply doesnt work with shield (it gets all kinds of caught up) Overall this is a game. I play the game as best I can with what I have available. When doing Japanese weapons, such as naginata, nagimaki, katana, or yari I do them as accurately as possible When doing sword and shiled, I just deal with it. One has to at east be competitive or it gets boring real quick.
|
|
|
Post by tengumoon on Mar 1, 2010 22:44:13 GMT -5
Not the edge, of course, as you see in movies. I would like to ask how much combat with real swords you have done. There has been a lot of discussion over the years about edge vs flat defence... ...and simple body mechanics dictates that generally defence with the edge (and back of the blade or both edges in the cae of two edged sords) rather than the flat is much more effective So say many of the traditional ryuha of Japan and historical European manuscripts
|
|
|
Post by Yagyu Jubei Takemori on Mar 2, 2010 9:58:30 GMT -5
Samurai eventually swapped the Bow and arrow for the spear, allowing them to be more melee friendly cavalry as well, if you are looking for an excuse to go into war, be a spearman, or make a nagamaki or naginata, or tetsubo and go 2H. As for sheilds, its really not a samurai thing.
Watching the C&T guys and listening to them, a parry as we see in movies and anime is a weak defense. Most of the C&T parrys are more of an attack to deflect the incoming weapons mass as opposed to stopping it. This also tends to throw the opponents weapon wide leaving them open for an attack.
|
|
|
Post by Yamanouchi Eidou on Mar 3, 2010 0:52:09 GMT -5
Tengu, not only do the vast majority of manuscripts talk about using the flat of the blade to deflect but hitting any swords edge to edge ruins your sword. Like, really bad.
|
|
|
Post by Please Delete on Mar 3, 2010 3:04:23 GMT -5
RE: Edge v. flat (v. back)--this is a long debate, as has been mentioned. That said, EVERY school of Japanese sword I've studied so far, or seminars I've participated in (including Seitei, Nakamura Ryu/Toyama Ryu, Muso Jikiden Eishin Ryu, Muso Shinden Ryu, Edo Yagyu Shinkage Ryu, Mugai Ryu, Kasumi Shinto Ryu, etc.) has used the flat for the majority of parries. This is for several reasons, not always stated, but among other things most such parries are some form of an uke-nagashi, and that requires the opponent's plade to continue on its trajectory. If you go edge to edge, it is usually because you are both attacking and you happen to be attacking in a defensive manner, such that you end up blade to blade.
I don't necessarily want to parry hard, either. Strength only goes so far--I just need to take enough energy from the blade that it can't cut me deeply.
On the Western front, I recommend Gregory Mele's article in the first Spada journal, where he shows that:
a) A parry was not considered desirable, but it was sometimes inevitable.
b) The majority (if not all) pictures where blade orientation is shown seem to show edge to flat.
To me, that is enough of an answer. I'd be interested in what schools train you to specifically block with the edge.
-Ii
|
|