Historical fencing – Dual wielding swords – overview and response to Lindybeige

Historical fencing – Dual wielding swords – overview and response to Lindybeige

hi guys so just making a video to talk about so called dual wielding which is a modern term very modern term I'm only aware of it from the last five or ten years it seems to have come from computer games or role-playing games or something I don't know but essentially it describes the using of two weapons at the same time one in each hand and it seems to usually be used in terms of using the same weapon or the same type of weapon in each hand Lloyd Lindy beige makes a video about this and where he makes a number of points some of which I agree with some of which I disagree with and but essentially what the issue boils down to is that yes dual wielding ie using two swords in this case was done historically contrary to what lawyer says it was done historically and however correctly as as he says it was not something that was done on the battlefield generally although there may be exceptions to that and I'll come to that in a moment so first of all yes it's absolutely true that if you're using a sword I if you're not using a poll weapon or a missile weapon which is the main battlefield weapons all fighting on horseback if you're using a sword then on the battlefield swords were very often in history used with large shields and the reasons for that should be fairly obvious because if you're on a battlefield with opponents that could come from any direction firstly a shield is a good thing because it covers a large area of your body in one go and you don't have to rely on actively seeing where an attacks coming from and parrying an attack you can have the shield there or there or there and you can close one of the lines straight away straight off without having to so you can move around backfield and a lot of your body is covered in missiles ie arrows or javelins or axes get a shot or thrown in your direction then that hopefully will protect you to a larger spin aside from that in a one on one on one fight against someone else who's similarly armed or armed with a pole weapon or or some other kind of weapon and shield and sword is a pretty awesome combo and virtually the shield can be obviously close aligned as I mentioned before but it can be used very very actively to close other lines whilst you do things with the sword so for example in bolognaise Rotella which is a round shield bit like this but it's don't rather than flat they generally seem to match really know for example generally seems to have held the Rotella a kind of shoulder height closing the outside line and then he fights he fights around around the rotella most of the time with one possible exception of a single templo response where he lifts it above the head and gives a repost in the same time and and that's something to mention about using two weapons is that um contrary to what lloyd surmises about and about attack attack attack if you think about it in terms of defend an attack when you've got two weapons be they of the same length or different lengths you've essentially got two options when someone attacks you Co you can either marry the two weapons to get in such a way that you form a very strong defense then you leave one weapon there whilst giving your repost are your follow-up attack or you do have the option to give a single tempo I am one time to defend an attack in the same time and of course that's true when you've got the shield or a buckler or two buttons one of each so generally speaking I just changed sort yet generally speaking with with buckler whatever system you follow and I tend to follow the balloon is Italian sword and buckler so more you you can either defend with the sword and buckler together and then you keep the buckler there pushed against the person's sword whilst reposting or following up with a counter-attack or you've got you have got the option it's more risky with a bucket which is very very small to single time defend with one and a tap with the other and that is actually done more in rapier and dagger okay so there are two very different length weapons but having the having the dagger and the rapier enables you to defend with the dagger was attacking in the same tempo with the rapier okay so these work these are dual wielding if you want to use that term but they're very different objects much like the sword and buckler they have very different jobs to be very different tasks and yes this can attack and this can defend you can defend with the rapier and attack with the dagger but most of the time whether it's sword and buckler or rapier and dagger most of the time you'll be defending with the small short object and attacking or reposting with the long object with the most reach because that's what makes sense so going back to G wielding with two swords um first thing to say is that it was done okay and the situations in which it was done in Europe at least were generally in dueling or classroom fencing scenarios okay so it seems to have been almost a feat of skill to do it and using two swords together if you look at Magdaleno for example who has a section his treatise on using two swords in his case their side swords so a bit like that sword but with a with a finger ring and possibly with side ring and possibly over the knuckle bar as well so a bit more hard caption and and I'm I'm no expert on at all on and actually goes to sort of technique but he does do it it's there documented in 1531 and we know it was part of the Bolognese tradition so in Bologna in Italy in the early 16th century they were definitely doing – sword fighting style okay was it used on the battlefield mmm not really no not that we can tell not very much it seems to have been a skill that the skilled fencers did because it was hard to learn difficult to master um but potentially had some advantages if you were very good at it but only really good in a one-on-one scenario and that's where Lloyd linear age is correcting this video that having two weapons might be good in a one-on-one situation but it's not very good in a battlefield situation or at least not as good as a shield in a weapon shield and sword with V and so last thing I should say on that as well is that outside of Europe we do know that using two swords together was done and it was done in a one-on-one dueling situation and it was done in a battlefield situation there are examples from Japan potentially miss Ashley did it and there is an existing traditional Japanese ro school the teachers – katana start and we know that katana and Waqas actually we use together occasionally and additionally in Indonesia and Malaysia on what was Sarawak we also know that occasionally two short swords we use together and it survived in the martial arts of crabby crab on for example so two swords they were sometimes used together it wasn't very popular probably partly because it's very difficult to learn partly because it's not as good on the battlefield the sword and shield is or a colon or something else but it was done it's difficult to do and it's better suited to one-on-one fight then battlefield fighting thank you

43 Replies to “Historical fencing – Dual wielding swords – overview and response to Lindybeige”

  1. in the Islamic history, it is mentioned that comander Khaled Ibn Al Walid, used 2 swords in battle, some sources say he used them on horse back, how often, i'm not sure, maybe rarely, or in a single occasion, i didn't investigate that, but sources say he was a very skillful swordsman

  2. Dual wielding was also used in the Ottoman empire which was one of the most powerful, enduring and biggest empires in history, at least in the Balkan peninsula and I don't think there is a reason other parts wouldn't do it, it was common to use two yatagan long knifes or a sabre (shamshir) and a Yatagan or a dagger. There is a well known painting of Paja Jovanovic, called "macevanje" (fencing), where he depicted a sword lesson a grandfather in Montenegro teaching his grand son how to use two yatagans. The painting was inspired when he saw a soldier, in western Serbia, who returned from war, teach his younger brother how to use two yatagans. There are also sword dances that are still performed in Albania and I heard in Greece as well that use two sabres or yatagans, that was clearly meant to teach dual wielding.

  3. I think the advantage would be being able to use one to defend and one to counter with. Though, I would think wearing metal gauntlet on your non sword hand might be just as affective. Use the sword defensive and the armored fist toe just pummle, grapple, pull a knife on the opponent.

  4. Then is it possible to carry a bow as a primary and sword(s) as secondary weapon(s) in battlefield ? Reason i am asking this is because a archer on the field is usually encounter less enemy in close quarters and if they do caught at cc situation they can quickly respond to his attackers ? thats the idea in my mind at least, and its a great video that gave me hope for being a rare dual wielder fencer i love you and your videos. Keep up good work

  5. In India, the Marathas, being trained in Martial skills called "Mardani Khel", used to dual-yield in battle actively. Atleast three historical warriors, namely Tipu Sultan of Mysore, Maharana Pratap of Mewar and Rani Laxmi Bai (who incidentally was a female Warrior Queen) of Jhansi was known to carry and use two swords in dual-yielding in battle!!! Also, the trained warriors in "Kalari Payattam" of Kerala in South India were known to use this type of fighting methods with not only swords but also with various types of other weapons!!! Please check the historical sources!!!

  6. Have a look at this. This is folklore dance from town of Korčula in Dalmatia, Croatia, that grew out of some of the fencing schools. First documented mentioning in 1666. It could have something to do with Bolognese school as we were ruled both by Venetian republic at the time. Any comment is welcome…….. 😉

  7. i mean wasn't the main reason you'd want a shield on the battlefield be because two swords will offer you no protection against archers

  8. two swords is just extremely cumbersome and you don't get to utilize the reach advantage of the sword very well. And your defense is pretty lacking.

  9. 3:42 blocks an attack with both swords coming from his left (audience/attacker right) then proceeds to attack with his right hand (audience/attacker left) which is where his opponent would most likely have a shield.

  10. Or the third option, use one to deflect the opponents sword in a manner to create an opening for the other sword to strike from. Although I would not use the two you have, shorter is better and faster. Its very brutal against any solo sword fighter. It is a skill set I use to practice duel for years with two Gladius. Sword deflection and close for the death thrust.

  11. I appreciate that you are European, and appear to have predominantly researched European history/techniques, but to gloss over the Japanese two handed style is very odd.
    Also Escrima, which whilst not specifically a sword style does demonstrate the fluidity you can achieve when both hands are in a reactive defensive/offensive mode.

  12. what if you use the "lead" sword as in fencing and the "backup" sword as in wsord and shield… basically,parry,ripost and attack with the backup sword in "a single motion"?

  13. Speaking as someone who's done a fair amount of fencing, having a second weapon would give you a MASSIVE advantage over someone who's only got one: force their blade away with one, strike with the other. It would be over in seconds. Bless Lloyd, but he does talk a load of old rubbish sometimes (also I can't help but note he did a video more recently talking about some pair of knifey things used in Wing Chun where you strike with both at once).

  14. Can a shield effectively be used to protect you if your surrounded, with protecting both your back and in front? (I’m curious)

    Also if you attack with a sword your opponent is most likely going to block then if you have two swords you could attack with the other sword and if they don’t block you hit them any way, while a shield wouldn’t do as much damage if you hit your enemy with it. Also I feel a sword would be lighter and allow for more movement then a shield. In conclusion I feel two swords could be used to quickly attack and defend as well as allowing for more movement to dodge and such. Any comments or flaws with this reasoning?

  15. Myamoto Musashi, only used both swords when he faced multiple oponents. Never in a duel. At least that is what I have been told.

  16. When he said defend and attack with 2 swords, I was so happy. I'm left handed, but I've trained myself to be ambidextrous when it comes to swordfighting, though I'm still slightly better with my left hand. So what I do is I defend with my right sword and attack with my left, occasionally either attacking with both or defending with both.

  17. What if a Knight carried a sword and shield but kep a separate sword sheathed at his side for 1 on 1 situations.

  18. I'm no expert myself, but I have read accounts of Scottish warriors charging into battle with a sword in each hand. I don't remember the dates involved, but that could be an example of it being used on the battlefield.

    Have you encountered anything similar?

  19. Every time I hear "dual wielding" I imagine a person with a neck beard. Yes people used two weapons but why the same type?
    I would worry about tangling your weapons. Musashi suggested using a short and long sword but the short one was for parries and in case the big one breaks, same as fencing.

  20. Musashi never used two swords when fighting a skilled opponent he carried two swords and used two swords when facing multiple opponents, usually he just used one sword.

  21. I always have to see if you have a responce video after every Lindybeige one lol. No offense to Lindybeige I like him but he seems to often be incorrect about things.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *