Org Mobile Site
Thread: Lugian Swordsmen etc
I am curious, for I have found no source for the following units;
Lugian Swordsmen
Their British Equivalent (whatever its name is)
Cordinau Orcae (Scordisci Elite Infantry)
What is the source for them?
Edited to be poliet and thank you for your answers.
Lugian Swordsmen
Their British Equivalent (whatever its name is)
Cordinau Orcae (Scordisci Elite Infantry)
What is the source for them?
Edited to be poliet and thank you for your answers.
I think the Kluddargos (Briton Swords Masters) were hotly debated some time ago...
By the way I once read the scordisci founded a kingdom like state around 380 so maybe they are a faction in EBII 
Originally Posted by athanaric:
I think the Kluddargos (Briton Swords Masters) were hotly debated some time ago...
Yes, and so were the Lugii. The problem is that the people who researched these units are no longer part of the team, so we can't ask them. For many units, particularly the older ones, there is no record of what sources were used in their conception, either. I understand the team will be more systematic in their use of sources for EB2.I think the Kluddargos (Briton Swords Masters) were hotly debated some time ago...
Originally Posted by Ludens:
Yes, and so were the Lugii. The problem is that the people who researched these units are no longer part of the team, so we can't ask them. For many units, particularly the older ones, there is no record of what sources were used in their conception, either. I understand the team will be more systematic in their use of sources for EB2.
Do we have contact details for them? I never heard of La Tené swords being used two-handed or as hand-and-a-half swords and am mighty curious.Yes, and so were the Lugii. The problem is that the people who researched these units are no longer part of the team, so we can't ask them. For many units, particularly the older ones, there is no record of what sources were used in their conception, either. I understand the team will be more systematic in their use of sources for EB2.
Thing is, I suspect these are the "Roman Ninja" of EB, so getting confirmation would be very nice indeed, but I also have reasons of my own.
Wouldnt the iron the celts used be extemly easy to break, if used in such a long shape?
Oh no a speculation thread.
Guys, don't gut the Casse of their last remaining cool unit.
Guys, don't gut the Casse of their last remaining cool unit.
Olaf, I have non-EB related reasons, but if the unit is ahistorical it does not belong here, whether it is "cool" or not. Roman Ninjas were "cool" as well...
There are finds in the region where the Lugians lived with a sword/swords that are quite hefty, not slender like other blades. Until a time machine is invented we won't really know how that sword was wielded for sure, but could have been in some two-handed/bastard sword style, or it could have been a thick bladed one-handed sword. The Scordisci unit is backed by region finds of the greaves and the curved blade. There was a great article in Romanian and English on the finds of all this that I cannot find in my overflowing .pdf stash for some reason on the Scordisci unit. The Briton unit was, as already mentioned, a very debatable unit and the creators are no longer on the team.
EDIT: Yeah, the "cool factor" does not determine a unit in EB2
EDIT: Yeah, the "cool factor" does not determine a unit in EB2
Originally Posted by Macilrille:
Olaf, I have non-EB related reasons, but if the unit is ahistorical it does not belong here, whether it is "cool" or not. Roman Ninjas were "cool" as well...
How do we know if it's ahistorical? A guy that used to be in the team obviously knew a lot about it, I doubt anyone would make up "cool" units for EB1. Too bad they can't contact him and ask for sources anymore, but I'm sure that guy knew more than you.Olaf, I have non-EB related reasons, but if the unit is ahistorical it does not belong here, whether it is "cool" or not. Roman Ninjas were "cool" as well...
Originally Posted by seienchin:
Wouldnt the iron the celts used be extemly easy to break, if used in such a long shape?
The Celts were some of the best iron workers of the time, so if anyone could make such long swords, it was them. Of course it's not inconceivable that these swords were ceremonial or sacrificial objects rather than actual weapons. IIRC there are some ridiculously long Japanese swords gifted to shrines. I imagine these weapons would break if you tried to lift them (but you can't lift them because they are far too heavy).Wouldnt the iron the celts used be extemly easy to break, if used in such a long shape?
Originally Posted by Macilrille:
Do we have contact details for them? I never heard of La Tené swords being used two-handed or as hand-and-a-half swords and am mighty curious.
I am certain that the team would have contacted them if they could.Do we have contact details for them? I never heard of La Tené swords being used two-handed or as hand-and-a-half swords and am mighty curious.
Originally Posted by Olaf The Great:
How do we know if it's ahistorical? A guy that used to be in the team obviously knew a lot about it, I doubt anyone would make up "cool" units for EB1.
Not so long ago, a couple of guys argued that these units were made up. That discussion wasn't very civil. Let's not go there again. The units are being re-evaluated for EB2: if they appear again, the team should have sources ready to answer your questions.How do we know if it's ahistorical? A guy that used to be in the team obviously knew a lot about it, I doubt anyone would make up "cool" units for EB1.
I believe I can keep it civil and non-personal- you know what to do if not, and I am mighty curious. For though Olaf may have a hard time believing it, I do know a little bit on that particular topic and am puzzled that I have not heard of the two-handed swords elsewhere.
However;
1. I want to know more and this would be one way to learn it.
2. To me, the find of a long-ish sword is not enough to prove that hand-and-a-half or two-handed swords existed, there can be many reasons for such and many ways of wielding them. "One source is no source", we historians say, and if the only source is that a long-ish sword has been found, I find that highly dubious.
I thus want to know more, see "1" above, and if possible and the units incorrect, perhaps see an improvement in historicity of EB II. Olaf may see the EB team as infalliable, but I do not. If ever I did, 6 years studying history and political science taught me to challenge interpretations that has no sources and "traditional" interpretations, any given historical interpretation is so coloured by its own time that you would not believe it...
Anyway, I see the EB Team as highly competent and admirable for the work they do to bring historical accuracy to RTW, but no-one is infallible- not even me
. And the EB team can make mistakes or even misinterpretations, or interpretations I or others do not agree to and only through debate can the matter be cleared up and perhaps I learn something new; again, see "1". 
Now, the la Tène swords I have seen are many and varied, and though I can concievably see the longest 95- 105 Cm ones wielded with two hands or one-and-a-half-handed, the handles are too short and clearly for one-handed use. That is why I am curious and wonder if I have missed a source.
Power2the1, if you can find the article about the Scordisci or a link to it I would appreciate it, anything on the alleged find on heavier blades even more so. We may not ever know for certain, but having wielded a viking sword for 16 years I can probably wager a pretty good guess at its use
However;
1. I want to know more and this would be one way to learn it.
2. To me, the find of a long-ish sword is not enough to prove that hand-and-a-half or two-handed swords existed, there can be many reasons for such and many ways of wielding them. "One source is no source", we historians say, and if the only source is that a long-ish sword has been found, I find that highly dubious.
I thus want to know more, see "1" above, and if possible and the units incorrect, perhaps see an improvement in historicity of EB II. Olaf may see the EB team as infalliable, but I do not. If ever I did, 6 years studying history and political science taught me to challenge interpretations that has no sources and "traditional" interpretations, any given historical interpretation is so coloured by its own time that you would not believe it...
Anyway, I see the EB Team as highly competent and admirable for the work they do to bring historical accuracy to RTW, but no-one is infallible- not even me
. And the EB team can make mistakes or even misinterpretations, or interpretations I or others do not agree to and only through debate can the matter be cleared up and perhaps I learn something new; again, see "1". Now, the la Tène swords I have seen are many and varied, and though I can concievably see the longest 95- 105 Cm ones wielded with two hands or one-and-a-half-handed, the handles are too short and clearly for one-handed use. That is why I am curious and wonder if I have missed a source.
Power2the1, if you can find the article about the Scordisci or a link to it I would appreciate it, anything on the alleged find on heavier blades even more so. We may not ever know for certain, but having wielded a viking sword for 16 years I can probably wager a pretty good guess at its use
Great Macilrille,
I put already the question here:
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...15#post4949215
It is although you would be impassioned by the Celts you too.
I put already the question here:
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...15#post4949215
It is although you would be impassioned by the Celts you too.
http://https://forums.totalwar.org/v...ad.php?t=48920
My first post to these forums a long while back dealt with the Celtic two-handed sword and hammer units. I haven't re-read through the whole thing but I think it mostly deals with the hammer units. We do get info from Khelvan and Ranika which provides interesting background on these units - although it is mostly out of date considering it was back 2005...
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...ght=swordforum
Then there is this old, but more recent, thread that deals with the existence of two-handed Celtic swords. I don't remember everything it exactly covers but I think the gist of it being that there were some Celtic swords that have unusually long tangs for single-handers and could point to hand-and-a-half/two-handed use. I could be wrong, but it should provide an interesting read...
My first post to these forums a long while back dealt with the Celtic two-handed sword and hammer units. I haven't re-read through the whole thing but I think it mostly deals with the hammer units. We do get info from Khelvan and Ranika which provides interesting background on these units - although it is mostly out of date considering it was back 2005...
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...ght=swordforum
Then there is this old, but more recent, thread that deals with the existence of two-handed Celtic swords. I don't remember everything it exactly covers but I think the gist of it being that there were some Celtic swords that have unusually long tangs for single-handers and could point to hand-and-a-half/two-handed use. I could be wrong, but it should provide an interesting read...
Only makes me more undecided. And I am not dizzing the EB Team, if I had a low opinion of them I would not play. But I am also curious and doubtful about the subject matter.
I guess some literature on the matter is appropriate... will visit the uni library and see what I can find at some point.
I guess some literature on the matter is appropriate... will visit the uni library and see what I can find at some point.
I think you have no reasons to believe the Celts used two-handed weapons.
An article on the Prezerworsk culture:
http://www.limitis.org/documentation/Article010.pdf
A two-handed sword is too encumbering and too expensive. With the method of metallurgy of the Celts and Germans, it's impossible to have a good two-handed sword. The two-handed swords are manufactured for the war only during the XIIIth century (the "Branc d'Arçon"). There are some exceptions, but it's always an exception! The majority of the two-handed swords are manufactured for the "pageantry" ("apparat" in french), the great dacian falx are simply a weapon for the poor warriors as the axe for the Celts and the Germans... it's a weapon which penalize the protection, very risky in fight.
An article on the Prezerworsk culture:
http://www.limitis.org/documentation/Article010.pdf
A two-handed sword is too encumbering and too expensive. With the method of metallurgy of the Celts and Germans, it's impossible to have a good two-handed sword. The two-handed swords are manufactured for the war only during the XIIIth century (the "Branc d'Arçon"). There are some exceptions, but it's always an exception! The majority of the two-handed swords are manufactured for the "pageantry" ("apparat" in french), the great dacian falx are simply a weapon for the poor warriors as the axe for the Celts and the Germans... it's a weapon which penalize the protection, very risky in fight.
That is in French :-( Not one of the three languages I master, one I plan to learn, but planning is not having done ;-)
Anyway, I shall look at pics, drawings and use the bibliography.
Anyway, I shall look at pics, drawings and use the bibliography.
Originally Posted by Genava:
I think you have no reasons to believe the Celts used two-handed weapons.
An article on the Prezerworsk culture:
http://www.limitis.org/documentation/Article010.pdf
A two-handed sword is too encumbering and too expensive. With the method of metallurgy of the Celts and Germans, it's impossible to have a good two-handed sword. The two-handed swords are manufactured for the war only during the XIIIth century (the "Branc d'Arçon"). There are some exceptions, but it's always an exception! The majority of the two-handed swords are manufactured for the "pageantry" ("apparat" in french), the great dacian falx are simply a weapon for the poor warriors as the axe for the Celts and the Germans... it's a weapon which penalize the protection, very risky in fight.
Exactly my point. Medieval two hand swords only worked, because of their advanced steel production. Iron is just too heavy() and easy to shatter. Falxes and axes have a wooden shaft to make them usable.I think you have no reasons to believe the Celts used two-handed weapons.
An article on the Prezerworsk culture:
http://www.limitis.org/documentation/Article010.pdf
A two-handed sword is too encumbering and too expensive. With the method of metallurgy of the Celts and Germans, it's impossible to have a good two-handed sword. The two-handed swords are manufactured for the war only during the XIIIth century (the "Branc d'Arçon"). There are some exceptions, but it's always an exception! The majority of the two-handed swords are manufactured for the "pageantry" ("apparat" in french), the great dacian falx are simply a weapon for the poor warriors as the axe for the Celts and the Germans... it's a weapon which penalize the protection, very risky in fight.
But we are not talking Zwei-händern or Flamberges here, we are talking something akin to a 12th- 13th century hand-and-a-half sword. Even the short-ish Viking Swords (75-105 cm total length, with very narrow grip/short tang) were sometimes gripped by two hands to deliver more powerful blows- if we can believe our later narrative sources...
However, until such time as I or someone else who posts here reads and digests books on the matter and cite them as sources, I will probably keep my gob shut on the matter, for it seems no-one knows anything for certain.
However, until such time as I or someone else who posts here reads and digests books on the matter and cite them as sources, I will probably keep my gob shut on the matter, for it seems no-one knows anything for certain.
Originally Posted by :
Even the short-ish Viking Swords (75-105 cm total length, with very narrow grip/short tang) were sometimes gripped by two hands to deliver more powerful blows- if we can believe our later narrative sources...
But it's not the mainly function of these swords. There is no series of swords being used for the combat with two hands before the XIIIth century. I can seize a simple sword with the two hands if it is needed, but the sword remains more adapted for the comabt with a shield. I don't imagine the Germans and Celts didn't use a shield whereas the most used weapons are the spears and the javelins.Even the short-ish Viking Swords (75-105 cm total length, with very narrow grip/short tang) were sometimes gripped by two hands to deliver more powerful blows- if we can believe our later narrative sources...
I forget where exactly I grabbed these pics from. For all we know all these swords could have been single handed. However, some of the tangs when compared to the nearby single-handed examples, are indeed unnecessarily long for single-hand usage only. Perhaps these were only weapons of the cavalry.
here is a compilation of La Tene blades...
The first sword is a long sword of cavalry for one hand. It is very known and several authors (Jean-Louis Brunaux, André Rapin) already wrote above.
http://www.gallicobelgae.org/la_tene_chronology.htm
I have some books on the celtic armament, none speaks about sword with two hands. A large pommel doesn't inevitably mean use with two hands.
My sources:
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/...uL._SS500_.jpg
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/...ML._SS500_.jpg
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/...rL._SS500_.jpg
http://www.jeuxdepees.fr/JEUX%20D%27...ombatCelt1.pdf
http://gladius.revistas.csic.es/inde...viewFile/13/14
http://www.archeoart.org/accueil.html
Wow nice!
Also Genava what is that picture from in your Signature with the Celts? Looks great.
Also Genava what is that picture from in your Signature with the Celts? Looks great.
It's from a french comic book made by several historians, very very interesting and instructive.
http://www.lecasquedagris.com/
And for the fun:
TUMULTUS GALLICUS http://www.les-ambiani.com/videos/tumultus_gallicus.php
http://www.lecasquedagris.com/
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
And for the fun:
TUMULTUS GALLICUS http://www.les-ambiani.com/videos/tumultus_gallicus.php
Phalanx300, if you like the Gallic civilization 
:
http://pagesperso-orange.fr/leuki/images/tg2.jpg
It's Franck Mathieu, an expert of the re-enactment.
His website: http://www.archeoart.org/accueil.html
His re-enactment group: http://pagesperso-orange.fr/leuki/asso.html
A beautiful shield of 250 BC:
http://www.archeoart.org/images/B4.jpg
:http://pagesperso-orange.fr/leuki/images/tg2.jpg
It's Franck Mathieu, an expert of the re-enactment.
His website: http://www.archeoart.org/accueil.html
His re-enactment group: http://pagesperso-orange.fr/leuki/asso.html
A beautiful shield of 250 BC:
http://www.archeoart.org/images/B4.jpg
It is a very nice compilation!
Where it come from?
Where it come from?
that seems a nice comic book except for being in french part seems that such warriors wouldn´t speak in that tongue maybe a translation to german or to english would help make the storie more compelable when the dude screams charge i can´t help to think of him screaming with the french accent ... it defeats the point basically
it needs a more rugged tongue and not polished language
it needs a more rugged tongue and not polished language
But, it's Gaul.
Pretty much French speaking these days. Why can't the French read about Gauls in their own language?
Pretty much French speaking these days. Why can't the French read about Gauls in their own language?
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO