|
Post by Hosokawa Sanosuke on Feb 12, 2006 13:20:11 GMT -5
hello everyone, just a few thoughts on back-blades and butt-spikes on weapons that don't "seem" to be equipped with them historically. I personally had vowed never to put a back-blade on my katana, for historical accuracy. until one day, my good friend Hosokawa takeshi reminded me how it feels to get hit with the back of a katana blade. the next day i put a back-blade on my katana. which leads me to the next point, butt-spikes. in my combat training I was taught that every piece of your weapon can hurt your enemy, going to the extreme of using tsuka-ito as a garrote. this of course includes the butt of a pole arm being used to thrust, this is a very dangerous weapon, that is why we do not leave the end of our rattan raw when it will be used for thrusting, because we don't want to kill our opponent, we just want them to know that they Would be dead if that padding wasn't there. just a few excuses for those who don't need any disadvantages.
|
|
|
Post by Torayoshi on Feb 13, 2006 18:47:01 GMT -5
I agree Very much on the butt-spikes , however I disagree on the back edge... the standard convention is that all fighters are armored in a chain haubark (sp?) and a gambason , open face ... blah ...blah...
So my thought is that a blow with the back-edge would be painfull but hardly disabling. espacily in the head of battle with adrealin pumping ...
I must admit to walking off the field a couple of times with brusies I should have taken as hit but never felt in battle....
Just my toughts why I took the back edge off my Katana.
Torashi
|
|