Another two sword question

[ScottUK]

Hi Guys/Girls,

Just a few two sword questions following on from an earlier thread:

1 - Does anyone have any reference material on the effectiveness of fighting with daisho by comparison to a single sword?

2 - Since the Samurai (unlike European knights) never fought with shields, was the shoto (when used in conjunction with a daito) mainly a parrying/deflecting weapon?

3 - Finally, to summarize, was the daisho EVER used on the battlefield? I understand Musashi often fought duels with twin bokken, but I wonder how the daisho would fare in mass battle?

Anyone care to lay odds on a matchup between a sword/shield combatant and a nito sword stylist? This is something that has played on my mind for a while now. I have started studying a little Niten Ichi Ryu to complement my MJER Iai and I hope the finest minds of e-budo can assist by adding their opinions.

[Just some guy]

1 - Does anyone have any reference material on the effectiveness of fighting with daisho by comparison to a single sword?

2 - Since the Samurai (unlike European knights) never fought with shields, was the shoto (when used in conjunction with a daito) mainly a parrying/deflecting weapon?

3 - Finally, to summarize, was the daisho EVER used on the battlefield? I understand Musashi often fought duels with twin bokken, but I wonder how the daisho would fare in mass battle?

Anyone care to lay odds on a matchup between a sword/shield combatant and a nito sword stylist? This is something that has played on my mind for a while now. I have started studying a little Niten Ichi Ryu to complement my MJER Iai and I hope the finest minds of e-budo can assist by adding their opinions.

Me:

Well first off I don't think you're quite right about the Samurai NEVER using shields. Though it is clearly to a lesser degree than the European knight, to say it never happened might be exaggerating it a bit. In fact Miyamoto Musashi himself makes clear reference to using a shield in the battle field. Beyond that I can't comment on your second statement as I don't know Nito techniques at the moment.

As for reference material, I think that training would be the best one. The kind of weapons really don't win the fight. Put two swords in the hands of someone who has never held a sword in his life and then pit him against a spearman with spear. Who do you think will win?

For battle field use of nito, I'm not sure but I doubt it. I think (guys, notice I say think here) this was something that came about after the great wars of Japan. As far as I can tell the swords in the Sengoku Jidai were a good bit bigger than the swords later on. I think that the size made nito a bit more trouble than it was worth.

Though I may be showing a prejidice for the Nito stylist, I think he has the advantage against the sword/shield fighter. The good point to a shield is that the opponent can't attack through it. The bad thing is that you can't either. Just as you're safe behind the shield, he's pretty safe in front as well and the shield would also block your vision since it's closer to your eyes than the attacker's. Also, by using the daito, the nito stylist could block and control the weapon of the sword/shield attacker and move in on his open side with his shorter sword. My thought. Everyone feel free to correct me.

[Earl Hartman]

In the modern kendo interpretation of nito, it seems that the shoto is considered to be primarily for defense. I witnessed a match where one participant was using a long and a short sword, and every time the combatants would close to a close distance, where the long swords were useless, the nito guy would do a drum roll on the other guy's head with his shoto, budda-bing, budda-boom, whap, whap, whap! Yet, nary a flag went up, and he did not get a single point for his efforts. When I asked one of my senpai about it, and said that if they were using real swords the poor fellow would have been turned into chunky salsa under that sort of attack, I was told that this was "sport kendo". Oh well.

My feeling is that in kendo it is extremely difficult to get a point from a close distance if you strike and remain within striking distance of your opponent; that is, you must strike and then withdraw to a safe distance where you cannot be attacked in return. Also, if one is assuming that the combatants are wearing some sort of armor, then the assumption would be that it would be difficult if not impossible to cut through the armor with the shoto, especially since it is normally wielded in the left, or the weaker, hand.

Anyway, rank speculation. Hope some Niten Ichi Ryu guys will speak up.

Regarding shields, it is my understanding that in Japan a kind of large stationary shield with a stand was used as a kind of movable fortifiaction behind which archers could hide. This kind of shield was known as a pavise in Europe and was used for the same purpose. However, I don't know of any Japanese ryu that teaches sword-and-shield techniques. Parenthetically, the Yagyu Shingan Ryu has some techniques where the warrior uses his helmet as a shield.

[Tucker Peterson]

Chris-
Where is the Musashi reference to shields? (I've not read anything by him, so I'm asking simply out of curiousity--for all I know it's tattooed on his chest!) :)

Earl-
I too haven't seen anything on hand-held shields; the usual reasoning I've seen given is that the strength, "quickness" and flexibility of the Katana allows one to use it to parry any blows. It is strange though that the Japanese never did use shields--I can't think of another culture that didn't.

Regards,

[gmellis]

I believe the mobile standing shield Earl is referring to is called a ?|(tate) (translated: shield (amazing huh?)). It was evidently used up until the full-scale use of archebuses and canons in the Sengoku Jidai, when soldiers realized that it could not withstand directs hits from such weapons (unlike arrows). While still used on battlefields to protect the archers and cannoneers (better than nothing i suppose), soldiers began using what is called ’|‘©(taketaba) (Traslation: bamboo bundle) in siege warfare, where soldiers were mostly stationery, making them easier targets for arrows and archebuses to fly at. Becuase of the flexible properties providing by the bamboo as well as the techniques of spacing used in tying them, soldiers found them highly resistant to canon as well as standard arrow fire. In Japanese siege warfare, there were several varieties such as ‘å’|‘©(otaketaba), which was merely a HOUGE bundle of bamboo stood up like a pillar for individual soldiers to hide behind or could be lined up and tied together to form formiddable bamboo walls, ’|‘©‹?(taketabaneushi), which was a several of these bundles tied to form a wall and slanted diagonally for soldiers to hide and rest under, ŽÔ’|‘©(kurumataketaba:rolling taketaba) to roll up to castle walls for safe approaches. Finally, they had Ž}•t’|‘©(edatsuki? taketaba: attached branch taketaba), which were smaller versions of taketaba thin enough to hang off the side of a soldier so they could walk safely around the castle perimeter without worry of snipers. They even used Žè?‚(dont know reading) which was more like a standard wooden shield but that was thrown away after penetration of the inner reaches of the castle. You may have noticed that the shields used were more for castle sieging than something you would find on a battlefield. Also, samurai on horseback used to use what what was called a •êˆß (horo), which was either basically a cape hanging from the back of the warior or a bamboo frame (or sometimes other materials) (like a wicker basket with just the main frame to form the shape) covered in cloth the catch arrows heading towards to the horseman from behind (as far as i know). Just a little note.

[Just some guy]

It's in the first part of the book of five rings, when he tells why he named his school Nitin Ichi Ryu. It's also in his 35 Articels on the Art of Swordsmanship. The latter, you won't find in English as it hasn't been mass translated, but the former is everywhere.