[Low-Tech] Labrys
 

How would you classify the double-headed axe? According to Wikipedia it was used as a weapon, but I've heard that it was solely for ceremonial occasions. I'd think an extra blade would add weight with no real improvement in function, but I'm not an expert. Anyone know anything more?

Re: [Low-Tech] Labrys
 

I can't think of a culture that used a double-bitted axe in battle. If you want to give it stats then increase weight and MinST. There are no positive benefits apart from giving you another edge if the first becomes blunt or chipped.

Re: [Low-Tech] Labrys
 

I'll take your word over Wikipedia's. I'll use it for the thunder god and no one else.

Re: [Low-Tech] Labrys
 

I'll note that Wikipedia cites a paper which was written in 1953 (so it's way, way behind current scholarship) and by Marija Gimbutas, whose work should be taken with a pillar of salt. A double-bitted axe of the sort you'll find in forestry can be pressed into service for fighting, though it provides no particular benefit. However, the Minoan labrys would be a ludicrous weapon. As usually illustrated, it would have a haft much too thin for its oversized head. It would most likely snap, be too heavy to pick up, or both.

Re: [Low-Tech] Labrys
 

Methinks the wikipedia article was written by someone desperately trying to find sources to justify the stoopid weapons in DnD.

Re: [Low-Tech] Labrys
 

LTC2 will have rules for double-bitted axes. They don't do much beyond give you an extra edge in case one breaks, though.

Re: [Low-Tech] Labrys
 

Have the Byzantine iconagraphic works been shown to not support the use of a one-handed double bitted axe?

See this thread and look up Egfroth's post. He used to have a pic of this kind of axe in an illumination but I am not sure where his stuff is at these days.

Re: [Low-Tech] Labrys
 

Double-bitted axes exist. Woodcutters and carpenters use them. I'd be surprised if these were never used in battle. I've yet to see one specifically designed for combat though.

Re: [Low-Tech] Labrys
 

In fact, I have one in my shed. Of course, the reason for using them on wood is because it lets you go twice as long before resharpening your axe, not because of any specific benefit of having two heads for any given strike.

Re: [Low-Tech] Labrys
 

I kind of doubt that the illuminations I have seen showing mounted and armored men brandishing double-bitted axes was referencing the Revolt of the Woodcutters in 1187. It looks like Egfroth's/Steve Lowe's, web page is not showing that article right now (you may know him - he is from your hemisphere). It may be on this Archive -web.archive.org/web/*/geocities.com/egfroth1/Labrys.html. - but I can't access it right now.

Re: [Low-Tech] Labrys
 

I apply the same sort of "grain of salt" filter to medieval art that I apply to modern action movies. Someday in the far future someone is going to be arguing that the Desert Eagle was a common police sidearm based on the "evidence" of the Governor of California's early career.

People in the visual arts sometimes choose things just because they look kewl. Double-headed axes, improbably large falchions, BFGs, etc.

Re: [Low-Tech] Labrys
 

I know absolutely nothing about these things, but isn't it possible that added weight at the end of the shaft might slightly increase the impact of the blade that is being used? If so, I would doubt that it would be worthwhile, but isn't it possible? I mean, Gurkha Kukri's are bladed weapons heavily weighted at the end in order to do more damage. They were stated generously in GURPS, were they not? Again, this is all merely uninformed guesswork.

Re: [Low-Tech] Labrys
 

A double-bitted axe doesn't weight any more than a regular one. I suspect damage to axe blades may be more common than GURPS gives credit for, however.

Re: [Low-Tech] Labrys
 

Moreso given that her work since 1953 has leaned heavily toward the cult symbol side, interpreting the double axe as a symbol derived from the butterfly. I think fairly convincingly myself - the double axes that actually have versions of insect winged goddess etched on them seem to be about as conclusive a proof of the linkage as you could reasonably expect.

Re: [Low-Tech] Labrys
 

So... you're saying that one big sharp metal thing hanging off the end of a stick doesn't weigh more than two big sharp metal things hanging off the end of a stick then?

I'm sorry. It might just be me, but I'm somehow confused...

Re: [Low-Tech] Labrys
 

Yes. A single-bitted axe (wood axe at least) has a thick and heavy back-side, which is missing on the double-bitted axe. In any case, the weight of an axe-head is basically whatever you want it to weigh, the minimum weight for an axe isn't very large.

Re: [Low-Tech] Labrys
 

Fair enough. That sounds reasonable to me. As I said, I don't really know what I'm talking about. Thanks for setting me right.

Re: [Low-Tech] Labrys
 

Also, it gives you two blades that can have different handling. As you don't normally need to cut your foes up to make furniture out of them, you don't usually need this feature in a combat axe.

Re: [Low-Tech] Labrys
 

Axes designed for combat are very thin while wood axes are more wedge-shaped. You couldn't add a second bit to a combat axe without using more metal and thus increasing its weight.

Re: [Low-Tech] Labrys
 

While that extra weight could certainly increase Min ST (and possibly upset the weapon's balance) would it be sufficient to add +1 damage, considering the granularity of GURPS?

Re: [Low-Tech] Labrys
 

I wouldn't think so, not even on a Danish axe.

Re: [Low-Tech] Labrys
 

There's no simple canonical principle of weight adding to damage though you do sort of see that with the Gada and Hyperdense rules. You''d need to add 50% weight/2 lbs to an Axe to get a +1 to damage there.

If you look at the Customization rules in MA a backspike, thrusting point, hook or sickle blade only add 0.5 lbs. I doubt even a full axe blade would go over 1 lbs and well short of +2 lbs.

Re: [Low-Tech] Labrys
 

Double bitted axes might be a D&D-ísm, but an ax with a pick or hook on the back is realistic, right?

Re: [Low-Tech] Labrys
 

Not as much a D&D-ism as a DF-ism. They sure were present in early Swedish RPGs - mostly as weapons for (appropriately enough) minotaurs. They were kind of the ultimate badass weapon.

Re: [Low-Tech] Labrys
 

David Nicolle includes depictions of Byzantine double-bitted axes in Arms and Armour of the Crusading Era. He outright claims their use by Byzantine forces in the Medieval Warfare Source Book. They may be rare but there seems to be some evidence for their use in a military setting.

I don't have AaAotCE but it could be enlightening if some one wants to bring Nicolle's findings to the forum for discussion.

Re: [Low-Tech] Labrys
 

Combat axes don't have a poll? That seems odd, given that the point of having that weight on the opposite side from the blade is to bring the center of gravity back onto the line of the shaft, which would seem at least as valuable for a weapon as for a cutting tool.

I can't see any reason a double headed axe couldn't work. The gigantic ones seen in art are clearly useless, but then they'd be just as useless if you cut one of the blades off. I don't see any *advantage* to it either, but putting another edge on the back side of an already functional combat axe seems pretty harmless as fantasy weapons go.

Re: [Low-Tech] Labrys
 

Yup. When you go up against mail and plate armored opponents, throwing a crushing head or spike head onto the back of your saddle axe. Adding a thrusting spike to the head isn't a bad idea either: it gives you more versatility.