|
 NetSword Discussion Forums
 Live Steel/Swordsmanship
 Sword vs. Battle Axe (Page 1)
|
 UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! This topic is 5 pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 |
next newest topic | next oldest topic |
| Author | Topic: Sword vs. Battle Axe |
|
belacose Member |
posted 01-14-2003 02:10 PM
   
Hey all! I am wondering in all out combat, betwae one person with a sword, and one person with an axe, who would win? Assuming that both people are equilally matched! What kind of sword would work best for Axe? What kind of Axe would work best for sword? What kind of techniques would be used in both sides? Thank you for all input!! Caleb Moore <>< IP: Logged |
|
Marshal Member |
posted 01-14-2003 05:45 PM
If two combatants were truly equally matched, neither would win. They would fight to a standstill. Barring a stroke of luck, that is. Much depends, too, on the respective weapons. You say "axe", but---poleaxe? Dane axe? Tomahawk? Horseman's axe? And is that pitted against a rapier, a shortsword, a longsword, a baskethilt, a two-hander, a shamshir, a smallsword? You can set up a pair so mismatched that it almost guarantees the outcome ( hatchet against longsword, for instance ). But for the most part the weapon alone will not be decisive. It will be the wielder. Otherwise, the innate superiority of a given weapon would have made itself plain and every warrior and every army would have adopted it, and all others would have fallen out of use... IP: Logged |
|
belacose Member |
posted 01-14-2003 07:59 PM
Yeah, your right! I just thought it was an interesting comparison of weapons. I wasn't thinking about them being equil, as long as the fighters are equil... As long as each person, knows how to avoid every attack, it would never end. But out of curiosity, and still persuing the topic. If you were to be matched up against an Axe, and what you had was a sword. What kind of techniques would you use? If you were matched up against a sword and all you had was an axe, what kind of techniques would you use? Well, Thanks for at least listening to my question... Caleb Moore <>< IP: Logged |
|
muttman Member |
posted 01-15-2003 01:14 AM
again, what kind of axe? What kind of sword? Do I have a shield? Does He? Any armor involved? If so, on who? We need more specifics or there are too many variables to go into them all here. IP: Logged |
|
Alan E Member |
posted 01-15-2003 02:14 AM
How about as a starting point,making it an era when sword and axe might have met in battle: Late DA, early medieval; mail hauberks, swordsman has a shield and a single-handed maiker (sp? - see Oakeshott, DA Warrior) - to allow thrust as well as cut. Axeman has no shioeld but a two-handed (single bladed) axe of Norse type. Gives enough to go on, and is a reasonable set of assumptions ? IP: Logged |
|
Rob Lovett Member |
posted 01-15-2003 03:17 AM
This is a knight vs samurai question with a different slant! It comes down to the most skillful fighter - if we level that in this model and compare a sword and shield vs an axe and shield - then I would go for hand axe and shield - the hooking effect of the axe will have a real advantage, however, the swords and shield man would realise this and not allow this advantage to be used If we talk long sword/war sword/great sword against poll axe - both combatants armoured then my money would be on the poll axe which has a better design for destroying armour, but again this would depend upon the combatants involved. Rob IP: Logged |
|
deBoissey Member |
posted 01-15-2003 06:23 AM
If we are talking Dane Axe, or similar, then personally, I would expect a skilled axeman to take a skilled sword and shield combination. The power of a Dane Axe is awesome, look at the Battle of Stamford Bridge, the Axeman is reputed to have taken down 40 men before he received a spear from below the bridge - even if this is an exaggeration he still effectively closed the bridge against an army. The Dane Axe, supported by an accessible secondary, and can be used as staff, spear, axe, blade breaker and hook, its only weakness is the strength of the haft. I find at hard to believe that any swordsman can successfully block a full power Dane Axe strike to the head with a sword – I know… I once tried and ended up with a re-modelled nose. I was lucky it was just my nose, the axeman was well over 6 feet tall and over 300 pounds… ah happy days. [This message has been edited by deBoissey (edited 01-15-2003).] IP: Logged |
|
Alan E Member |
posted 01-15-2003 11:14 AM
How about if the swordsman uses the magic 'new '(old) system revealed in SPADA (sword 'n' shield vs Danish axe) ? Rob, it's a more European slant, and definitely more historical ! IP: Logged |
|
Marshal Member |
posted 01-15-2003 06:00 PM
Throughout the Migration period and subsequent early MA the sword was a weapon largely confined, generally speaking, to more affluent individuals. The axe was probably more widespread, yet the jarls and eorls and cununcs and their warbands obtained and used swords whenever possible ( with some notable exceptions, of course ). Can this preference have been based solely upon prestige? Or was there some practical factor or factors which led people to switch to the sword once they could afford it? I tend, though mildly at best, toward the latter view: the sword is a bit more versatile. It can cut with a longer portion of its structure, it can thrust as well as cut, and unlike the axe it has no vulnerable wooden haft. It takes a more skilled smith to make a good one, and it is more likely that it will be made of better steel. Albeit again it depends on the type of sword and axe, the match-up ( Holmgang? Large battlefield? Shipboard? Mural staircase? ), the men wielding them, etc, etc, etc. In the examples given, Dane axe vs longsword or sword and shield, I would expect the swordsman to have the edge ( sorry ) on condition that he could expect to be free of outside interference or time pressure. The sword being lighter and more balanced, I've found that it is more efficient in terms of energy expenditure. If the swordsman keeps the axeman swinging ( and missing ) long enough the latter will be exhausted first, I think. But all of this is really splitting hairs [This message has been edited by Marshal (edited 01-15-2003).] IP: Logged |
|
belacose Member |
posted 01-16-2003 03:34 PM
Yeah, it makes since that if a swordsman can avoid being hit, it is most likely that an axe man would lose. However pull off one hit to the sword, or person, it's likely that they would win. Does the question fall down to Agility vs. strength? If both weapons, are the same size, then would balance be an issue? By taking a stance allowing to hold an unbalanced weapon, would it also leave you open in some areas? To wield an axe you must keep it going to get full efect. Does that factor in? How about training? If two people began training at the same time, one taking the Sword, one taking the axe, assuming that they both had equially qualified teachers, who would achieve mastery first? If they were brought together in a year or two of training, would the victor be predictable? OK, I am going to leave it at that!! Thanks for the input! Caleb Moore <>< IP: Logged |
|
Valnorran Member |
posted 01-17-2003 09:35 AM
Swords are a hell of a lot easier to parry or block than axes. An axe with a large blade, however, could easily be employed as a buckler, one that could withstand a sword's force. Personally, I find axes to be wonderfully versatile weapons. And you can thrust with an axe,even if there is no point at the end of the haft. You simply will not stab the opponent. You will butt him with the end of the haft, a wonderful diversionary technique when applied to the face. There were several types of armor and shields that stood up well to swords. I don't know of any that could stand against an axe for very long. I don't know that stamina would be a factor, either. If we have opponents of similar skill, than the axeman will be accustomed to his weapon. I think the axeman will have a few more options in that he could block, parry, or avoid the sword, but the swordsman would only have the option of avoidance. Blocks and parries are good for setting up a counterstrike. IP: Logged |
|
Stuart McDermid Member |
posted 01-17-2003 03:24 PM
quote: Hi Caleb, All of the medieval sources I have seen use mostly (if not exclusively) wards (guards) of invitation. For example: The sword guy might hold his shield on the inside guard (ie on his right side with his elbow facing his adversary and his left foot forwards) and his sword well back in order to draw an attack to his left side. When the axe man attacks, he would pass forward, flip the shield to the outside guard and cut or stab the axe man depending on the nature of the axe attack. By cutting off an attack to his right side, he forces the axeman to either feint or attack to his left side. Guards where you attempt to cover everything are not much used in medieval swordplay, you almost always leave an "invitation". IP: Logged |
|
belacose Member |
posted 01-24-2003 03:12 AM
Hey, that technique would work really good! I had to read it over a couple times to get the jist! Where can I look to learn more about that kinda thing? As far as internet sites... I heard that the Katana is a non blocking weapon, what could you do if you faced an axe, and you had a Katana and no shield? Eastern MA is a lot different! What kind of Axe would historically be put up against a Katana? Are there any eastern style axes? Thanks for input! sorry that it has been so long since I have replied! Caleb Moore <>< IP: Logged |
|
Valnorran Member |
posted 01-24-2003 08:37 AM
I don't know about continental Asia, but in Japan I think the main axe-like weapon they had was the naginata. This was just a curved blade mounted on the end of a haft. A man with a katana would be at a tremendous disadvantage facing one with a naginata (assuming, of course, we have combatants of the same approximate skill). Obviously the man with the naginata has the range advantage. If I were the one with the katana, I think I'd focus on my opponent's hands. IP: Logged |
|
Felix Member |
posted 01-25-2003 07:24 PM
I don't know of any Japanese weapon that would qualify as a purpose-made battle axe. The naginata strikes me as being a cutting/thrusting weapon rather than one used to chop. Unlike the axe tactics mentioned above, the naginata cannot hook a shield or any part of any opponent. I would think that one of the advantages of the katana would be speed; and the swordsman would probably use mobility to avoid the axe - at least in theory IP: Logged |
|
Oswulf Member |
posted 01-26-2003 07:59 AM
The sword is a quicker and much better ballanced weapon but an axe is probably more destructive. A Daneaxe meanwhile is sudden death with bells on it wil go through shield, mail etc and trying to parry one with a sword would in my experience by all but suicidal (certainly with a one handed Viking era sword) if you were taking on a Daneaxe man with a non missile weapon you would really be best advised to get a long spear IP: Logged |
|
Paul Wagner Member |
posted 01-26-2003 04:31 PM
A dane-axe vs sword-and-shield should be no contest - if the shield-guy knows what he's doing. "Hey, that technique would work really good! I had to read it over a couple times to get the jist! Where can I look to learn more about that kinda thing?" Hi Belecose, ===================================== There is one historical example of a sword vs axe contest, from mid 16th century Ireland. A group of Highland mercenaries met an English force of Irish galloglas mercenaries, led by an English knight. The leader of the Highlanders stepped out and challenged the leader of the galloglas to single combat. The English knight was a bit reluctant, so to save face an Irishman stepped forward and claimed *he* was the real leader. The Scotsman was armed with a sword - presumably a two-hander - and the Irishman with a two-handed axe. After a long and furious fight, the Scot slew the galloglas - so chalk one up for the sword! At this point, the Englishman, seeing that the Highlander was now exhausted, stepped forward to engage him. After another furious fight the Englishman succeeded on wounding the Scot on the leg - at which point the rest of the Scots charged... Paul IP: Logged |
|
Paul Wagner Member |
posted 01-26-2003 04:35 PM
A dane-axe vs sword-and-shield should be no contest - if the shield-guy knows what he's doing. "Hey, that technique would work really good! I had to read it over a couple times to get the jist! Where can I look to learn more about that kinda thing?" Hi Belecose, ===================================== There is one historical example of a sword vs axe contest, from mid 16th century Ireland. A group of Highland mercenaries met an English force of Irish galloglas mercenaries, led by an English knight. The leader of the Highlanders stepped out and challenged the leader of the galloglas to single combat. The English knight was a bit reluctant, so to save face an Irishman stepped forward and claimed *he* was the real leader. The Scotsman was armed with a sword - presumably a two-hander - and the Irishman with a two-handed axe. After a long and furious fight, the Scot slew the galloglas - so chalk one up for the sword! At this point, the Englishman, seeing that the Highlander was now exhausted, stepped forward to engage him. After another furious fight the Englishman succeeded on wounding the Scot on the leg - at which point the rest of the Scots charged... Paul IP: Logged |
|
Oswulf Member |
posted 01-27-2003 03:43 AM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Paul Wagner: [B]A dane-axe vs sword-and-shield should be no contest - if the shield-guy knows what he's doing. Hi Paul IP: Logged |
|
Marshal Member |
posted 01-27-2003 06:39 PM
Well, but "parrying" is not the only, or even the best, thing to do in combat with hand weapons. As the saying goes, the best parry is to be absent when the blow arrives. An axe, having once missed its blow, is going to be very slightly slower to check or redirect its momentum and come back again than is a sword, I think. Also, while it may be the case that a stout blow from an axe will make splinters of a shield and the arm behnd it, I would think that nor every blow will be met full-on with an attempt to block or arrest the axe. the swordsman, unless he is a fool, will be trying to deflect the blow, not stop it. And unlike the ( two-handed ) axe, the sword can strike at the same time as the shield is warding---or the shield itself can be used to strike... IP: Logged |
|
Oswulf Member |
posted 01-28-2003 03:06 AM
True - no weapon is infalible, but a skilled Daneaxe man can swing the weapon in a fast figure of 8 type swing, so a missed blow comes back at you before you have time to get in and do him. Deflecting is also very difficult because of the momentum the thing builds up in a very short distance and the angles a skilled wielder will swing it at. Obviously in any fight the skill and spirit of the fighters is the key factor, far more important than the weapon (missiles excepted) but the Daneaxe is such a savagely effective weapon for its period (980AD - 1200ish) that if I had to fight "for real" it is definately the one I would use. Cheers All [This message has been edited by Oswulf (edited 01-28-2003).] IP: Logged |
|
Paul Wagner Member |
posted 01-28-2003 11:53 PM
Marshal basically said it - the swordsman should avoid and deflect, making the most use of hie "double-weapon" as possible, and if timed right, the axe will be too slow to recover. I'd also recommed countercutting at the hands, as these are unprotected by quillons and thus a bit vulnerable "True - no weapon is infalible, but a skilled Daneaxe man can swing the weapon in a fast figure of 8 type swing, so a missed blow comes back at you before you have time to get in and do him" True, but the figure-8 is somewhat predictable, and that can be exploited, like any rhythm. I'd also say it's not true that the dane-axe can't be parried - the head of the axe surely can't, but if you do what Silver says and close right in, i.e parry the shaft near the hands, there is very little force to stop. Once the first swing goes by, I'd plough straight up the middle with my shield extended edge-on at the axe-man's elbows, and prevent that second swing build up any momentum. Paul IP: Logged |
|
Kevin I Member |
posted 01-29-2003 10:48 AM
So... question from someone who hasn't studied the axe much. It's got such potential for all these cool binds and such... but how do you get there? From a parry? With the wooden shaft, near your hands? Eek! No thanks. Is there a way to parry with an axe, or do you just try to pick up the sword after the cut has stopped, during an avoid? I can see doing a parry with a steel-shafted axe, while wearing gauntlets, but not with any kind of wood handled axe, or with exposed fingers just down the shaft. IP: Logged |
|
Oswulf Member |
posted 01-29-2003 11:34 AM
Hi again I'm not saying that a daneaxe cannot be beaten with a sword & shield but I do very strongly disagree with the contention that it would be no contest if the swordsman knows what he is doing. A daneaxe is a devastating and effective weapon perhaps not as graceful as a sword but every bit as effective. As for a figure of 8 being predictable, watch a skilled practitioner and see both how he varies it and the speed he goes at. I swear it is a real feat of timing (and nerve) to get in. Not saying it cant be done but then there is no easy wins between to good fighters. Cheers IP: Logged |
|
Alric Member |
posted 01-29-2003 12:02 PM
It is always tempting to focus too strongly on ones own preferred weapon(s) and style(s). Tempting - but a fatal mistake in any form of combat. If you went into a fight with a Quaterstaff, or Bo staff wielder expecting them to use it like a baseball bat, you would probably get a nasty surprise.. same goes for all weapons. Most people picture in their minds the 'typical' confrontation.. trouble is especially with weapons with reputations - there is often a little too much Hollywood and too little reality in it. Typical axe vs sword - huge swing of the axe cutting through shield armor and man. Or in the swordsmans mind - huge swing checked or avoided - nimble swordsman steps in for the kill on sluggish axeman. Whenever comparing weapons and styles you must presume similar skill and proficiency on both parts. Historical accounts and evidence should indicate that the Daneaxe was indeed a highly effective weapon - but as with any dead art we are faced with the challenge of how it was used. I shouldn't think a skilled Daneaxeman would be any the more likely to commit himself to a huge hacking swing, than the swordsman would be to let said swing hit him. The figure of eight may be predictable. But would it be carbon copied into a live fight? Any training drill is predictable and I see the figure of eight as just that. It teaches handling of the weapon, manouvering its weight etc. That technique, used properly might not be a full sweeping figure eight, but the transfer of momentum would certainly be capable of shocking the unwary swordsman who thought he was inside it! The axe need not be swung in huge movements. Using proper body movement, the distancing can be manipulated very quickly by the axeman. Those same body movents also lend fearsome power to even the shortest of swings. Furthermore, the head is not the only usable end of an axe. Both the butt and the head can be used effectively in both offense and defense, with the ever-present threat of the head being whipped around with messy consequences. I wouldn't presume to say that either weapon is inherently superior. Personally I don't consider any Dane-axe wielder I have ever seen to be close to the skill its historical users would have posessed. Also one must always bear in mind the huge difference in between battlefield effectiveness and dueling effectiveness. However what I would say, is if you assume mastery of timing and distancing on the part of the axeman, along with a less-crude ability to use all of his weapon - the contest is far from clearcut. IP: Logged |
....This topic is 5 pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 All times are CST, GMT-6 | next newest topic | next oldest topic |
  |
|
Contact Us |
NetSword
Netsword.com retains rights to all contained on this site. Writtem permission must be obtained for reprint.
Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.47a