Lie about swords.

[rupol2000]

I'm absolutely sure the sword was a thrusting weapon. It is not the prototype of the saber, but is the prototype of the epee and foil. Absolutely all types of weapons and tools for cutting and chopping have a curved blade and do not have a chute.
There have never been cuttings with swords as it shows in films

Most likely the prototype of the saber was the khopesh

I think that this lie is connected with the fact that they are trying to replace the Hun conquests of Europe with the fictitious conquests of the "Vikings"

 

[rupol2000]

I think the Khopesh got to Egypt with the conquest of the Hyksos, who also had Aryan military technology such as bows and spoked chariots. Until the 20th century, in the steppes of Eurasia, the saber was the main fencing weapon of horsemen

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

 

[rupol2000]

Perhaps the Aryans did this form from the start, because it coincides with the collapse of the Bronze Age.

 

[rupol2000]

The Japanese katana sword is a saber. This is also a forgery
And to test such a weapon, you have to be a warrior.
It requires skills

 

[rupol2000]

By the concept of a sword, I mean this form

How it properly in English?

 

[harmonica]

..combat is not a tv show or movie ........there's more to it in real life

 

[westwall]

I'm absolutely sure the sword was a thrusting weapon. It is not the prototype of the saber, but is the prototype of the epee and foil. Absolutely all types of weapons and tools for cutting and chopping have a curved blade and do not have a chute.
There have never been cuttings with swords as it shows in films

Most likely the prototype of the saber was the khopesh

I think that this lie is connected with the fact that they are trying to replace the Hun conquests of Europe with the fictitious conquests of the "Vikings"

Sword shapes, and their usage, is based in culture, and the technology available for the swords production.

The katana is an excellent example. The Japanese swordsmiths were trying to make straight blades, but as they cooled, they would warp.

Through time the smiths discovered that the warp actually made the blades stronger so they incorporated that into their future designs.

 

[rupol2000]

The katana is an excellent example. The Japanese swordsmiths were trying to make straight blades, but as they cooled, they would warp.

Nonsense. Any katana is a saber. The "sword" is there only in the name.

Swords evolved not into sabers but into epee and foil. Sabers had its own original prototype, it does not come from the sword.

 

[westwall]

Nonsense. Any katana is a saber. The "sword" is there only in the name.

Swords evolved not into sabers but into swords. Sabers had its own original prototype, it does not come from the sword.

Yeah, it does. The history of the katana, and its development is well known.

There are many varieties of sword. Those varieties are based on the technology level, and creativity of the producers.

The Romans, upon invading Iberia, figured out that the Iberian short sword was superior to their own swords, so they adopted it and viola, the "Gladius Iberius" was born.

I don't know where you come up with your weird ideas, but there are plenty of scholarly works out there.

You should read some.

 

[rupol2000]

Yeah, it does. The history of the katana, and its development is well known.

There are many varieties of sword. Those varieties are based on the technology level, and creativity of the producers.

The Romans, upon invading Iberia, figured out that the Iberian short sword was superior to their own swords, so they adopted it and viola, the "Gladius Iberius" was born.

I don't know where you come up with your weird ideas, but there are plenty of scholarly works out there.

You should read some.

The Romans did not have real swords, they fought with pig cutters. The imperial authorities saved on everything, they fought in skirts. Primitive infantry didn't need good weapons

By the way, the shape of gladius is exactly like that of swords. Stabbing

 

[westwall]

The Romans did not have real swords, they fought with pig cutters. The imperial authorities saved on everything, they fought in skirts. Primitive infantry didn't need good weapons

The Romans were advanced compared to who they were fighting.

That's why they won.

 

[rupol2000]

is well known.

It is very poorly known, because modern Japanese are Manchus, and Samurai descend from the nation that lived there before them, like the Ainu

 

[rupol2000]

The Romans were advanced compared to who they were fighting.

That's why they won.

They were repeatedly crushed by the Parthians, the Sassanids wiped their feet on their emperors, and the Huns were even lazy to spit on the Roman army.
The Romans had hardly advanced in military affairs since Macedonian times; they were the most primitive army of slaves in the world. They won only by quantity.

 

[rupol2000]

"swords" of the legionnaires were the size of a knife for chopping cabbage in the kitchen, no more than 60 cm. These are not swords at all, just long daggers

 

[westwall]

They were repeatedly crushed by the Parthians, the Sassanids wiped their feet on their emperors, and the Huns were even lazy to spit on the Roman army.
The Romans had hardly advanced in military affairs since Macedonian times; they were the most primitive army of slaves in the world. They won only by quantity.

They lost big to the Parthians once, then went back and crushed them. The Sassanids, like the Parthians, were at the edge of the empire. And were a horse archer based army. The worst kind for the Roman army to fight.

The roman army was not a slave army you idiot. Yes, they lost battles. Who hasn't, but at the end they had the largest empire ever seen until the Mongols came along.

Their army was relatively small. But their engineering was fantastic. The Roman roads are what allowed them to win the empire, not their swords.

Read a history book sometime. These fantasy novels are just that, novels.

 

[rupol2000]

Although the Romans won from time to time, no one considered them to be real warriors. They were just slaves, trained to walk in formation under shields. They were able to defeat only the West of Europe. In the area of Sormatia they were powerless against cavalry. Rome did not expand eastward. Expeditions in Asia also collapsed.

 

[rupol2000]

They lost big to the Parthians once,

No, there was a long war, as a result of which the Roman army was completely destroyed

 

[rupol2000]

The roman army was not a slave army

it was

 

[Otis Mayfield]

I'm absolutely sure the sword was a thrusting weapon. It is not the prototype of the saber, but is the prototype of the epee and foil. Absolutely all types of weapons and tools for cutting and chopping have a curved blade and do not have a chute.
There have never been cuttings with swords as it shows in films

Most likely the prototype of the saber was the khopesh

I think that this lie is connected with the fact that they are trying to replace the Hun conquests of Europe with the fictitious conquests of the "Vikings"

Another crazy post of your's.

Even the khopesh can be used for slashing and thrusting.