(Continued from Part 2.)
I will return to the question of swords below, but to make the discussion more systematic, let us outline some criteria for melee weapon choice. Some points are:
(1) Availability and accessibility, one should have access to the weapons, and be able to acquire backups in case of breakage, or extra people in one’s team, even if this means improvisation, or making them first hand.
(2) Versatility: the weapon should be able to cover the bases, so that a bladed weapon should be ideally suitable for both stabbing and slashing/chopping, and even a stick should still be able to be used to thrust, so its geometry should permit this.
(3) Durability: as already mentioned, in the post-apocalyptic scenario, there will be vastly reduced resources, and weapons that are high maintenance would be a disadvantage.
(4) Ease of use: melee weapons should be relatively easy to use, and not require vast quantities of time training; most flexible weapons such as whips and chain weapons, would not be suitable compared to other weapons such as sticks.
(5) Portability, and ease of carry: in the post-apocalyptic wastelands, as in pre-modernity, melee weapons will usually need to be carried on the person, so weight and size could be issues. For example, the wood chopping axe and sledge hammer are heavy, and not easy to carry on one’s person. But one would certainly not want to get hit in the head by either.
(6) Cost/economics: this criterion is often not discussed in weapons selection, with the writers simply assuming that people have plenty of money and are not in a cost-of-ling crisis. It will be a key consideration in the discussion to follow, as the melee weapons literature does not consider the economics factor seriously enough.Continue reading“Dark Age 2.0: Melee Weapons – Part 3, by Dr. Joseph”