Quote: |
the notion that the spear is easier to use than the sword is more fanciful than true. It might be true when it just comes to couching the spear under your armpit and scaring off another formation of equally inexperienced, equally scared levies, but against professional and/or experienced enemies it will only expose your inexperience and low morale.
|
Thank you. As I have been saying all the time. If you want your levies to be effective, give them spears. Then they might do something usefull. Especially if led properly.
Some examples
Gulathingslagen
Weapons to bring:
Shield, spear, sword or axe.
Or
Bow and 2 times 12 arrows.
As you can see in lhis old vikinglaw, the spear is a must, but you have options of taking either a swords or an axe. You can also see that to bring bow and arrows is also accepted.
Södermannalagen
Each fightingman had to bring:
Bow/crossbow with 3 times 12 arrows.
Spear
Sword
Shield
Ironhat
Muza or mail or plata
Again you can see the spear as a must.
Quote: |
If the spear has any advantage over the sword, then it is strategic rather than tactical--the spear is much easier to make and to repair when broken. Its more rudimentary forms can also be used as a utility tool for hunting or fishing or even as an improvised tent-pole. None of these have any bearing upon its performance in battle.
If the sword has any advantage over the spear, then it is neither strategic nor tactical--it is prestige. A spear might be a huntsman's or fisherman's tool for all we care, but a sword can't be anything other than a weapon, and a rather expensive weapon at that. In many societies (if not most) the mere possession of a sword speaks a lot about the owner's place in the social ladder. Again, this doesn't say much (if anything) about its performance in battle. |
You totaly forget that with the spear you got range and rank. With long spears you can fight with up to 5 ranks and with swords just the first rank. With spears you also have the abilty to mix ranks.
Look at Dolnsteins drawings of Landsknechts fighting Swedish peasants. The peasants have crossbowmen at front and men with spears and swordstaffs in the ranks behind.
Peasant levies in good and mixed formations.
As to compare the sword and spear, there is LOTS of differense.
At first i can quote John Clements in his book, medieval swordsmanship.
"Another advantage of spears and shafted weapons is that, like axes, they are fairly easy to use with little instuction, whereas a sword requires swordsmanship to be used properly."
As you can see, the spear is easier to use than the sword. I train with both spears swords and I agree with mr Clements.
To continue the quotes:
"The brutal speed of a poleweapons thrust and itīs formidable ability to feint and disengage are often underestimated."
As the spear is quite light and has exelent pointcontroll makes it very dangerous. Itīs doesnīt take much practice to learn to make rapid and multiple thrusts at various openings on an opponent.
To defeat a spear you must get past the point. But if you do, the spearman will probably drop his spear and draw his secondary weapon. If he is in formation, his buddies behind him will still thrust at you with thier spears.
The sword however takes lots of practise to use effectivly. You have the three wonders to get to know. But when you know them, you got a lot of more options than a spearman. The whole sword is dangeruos.
In a formation you are at a disadvantage with a sword.
With shields you are better of with a shortsword. (Details on how that works can be found in the exelent statement by Bram Verbeek)
Longer swords are much more difficult in a formations as you risk hitting you buddies.
Fact is that halfsword technics where most often used when in formation. For example thats why the flammenschwerts used by the doppelsöldners have a second grip on the blade.