Hi all,

I'm thinking of asking Mark Vickers of St George Armoury to make me a custom buckler, based on the ones in Talhoffer's Fechtbuch (1467, as in the pic below - not the 'extra spikey' version shown in the 1459 Thott Codex).

Below are photos of Mark's standard version of this buckler; I'm going to request a spiked coppola/boss.

From a reproduction point of view, I have two questions:

Would a tubular handle like this have been used in period? The best view we have of the handle in Talhoffer is plate 238, and the handle shown there does appear to be tubular.

Question two:

Stephen Hand wrote:

The most important thing for I.33 is to have the handle set back enough that you can turn the buckler in your hand. I've seen many bucklers where the handle is flush with the back of the buckler, so you can't turn the buckler to lie along your arm.

Does the handle on Mark's version below look like it is set back far enough as Stephen describes? I think the side view photo here is not dead-on, but the handle does appear to be set back in the back view ... is it set back enough?

Thoughts, anyone?

---

 Attachment: 37.1 KB

Best view of bucklers in Talhoffer 1467

 Attachment: 29.63 KB

Talhoffer buckler by Mark Vickers - St George Armoury

 Attachment: 19.18 KB

Side view

 Attachment: 16.06 KB

Handle

Here is the view of the buckler handle from Talhoffer's 1467 plate 238. I'll post two versions, as the handle detail is a little hard to make out. It's easier to see in Rector's Medieval combat.

---

 Attachment: 28.27 KB

Talhoffer 1467 plate 238 version 1

 Attachment: 24.54 KB

Talhoffer 1467 plate 238 version 2

And, just for comparison, the handle in Talhoffer 1459 (Thott Codex):

---

 Attachment: 173.85 KB

There is a surviving example of a very similar buckler... somewhere. I've seen photos of it but I don't remember where. I don't know what the handles were like historically, at least not from looking at artifacts.

But!

That handle looks like it gives you enough room to turn the buckler on your hand if you want to. It's really about how deep the bowl is at the handle, so with a deep bowl, you don't need a set back handle.

Regardless, it is more effective (both faster and stronger) to switch your hand from pronated to supinated position to change the angle of the buckler, which does not require extra room in the boss. One of my bucklers has to be jammed onto my hand because the grip is so snug, but I can still use it for these techniques.

On the other hand. I am skeptical of the effectiveness of that style of buckler for I.33 for two reasons. The shape looks like it will make it difficult to do some of the transition that involve slipping your buckler under your sword arm. Also, the buckler is used for pinning in I.33, and never shown used for attacking directly. I suspect that the angled structure will be harder to pin with. These are my guesses having never used a buckler like that.

I do think it's a beautiful buckler, and I'd love to get one myself. If I did, I would certainly try it for I.33, I just wouldn't have high hopes. Talhoffer does his own cool stuff with that buckler, although he didn't leave us very much information about it.

If you do get this buckler, I'd love to hear how it works out for you. I really like this style and have thought about getting one for years. I don't know why I haven't yet.

Another maker that has similar bucklers is http://www.armorymarek.com/shields . In this case he's definitely got the handle running the wrong way (horizontal instead of vertical) but I imagine he could change that. The shape of the buckler is certainly lovely.

The actual buckler I've seen is posted by Matt Easton (sort of) in this thread:

http://www.myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t...p;start=20

Hugh, that's a beautiful buckler. Does Greg sell them? The size looks good to me. I like an 11 inch diameter buckler when using a round one, because anything bigger hampers some of the techniques, at least a little.

Hi Craig and Hugh,

Thanks for your replies.

Craig Shackleton wrote:

That handle looks like it gives you enough room to turn the buckler on your hand if you want to.

Great!

Craig Shackleton wrote:

On the other hand. I am skeptical of the effectiveness of that style of buckler for I.33 for two reasons. The shape looks like it will make it difficult to do some of the transition that involve slipping your buckler under your sword arm. Also, the buckler is used for pinning in I.33, and never shown used for attacking directly. I suspect that the angled structure will be harder to pin with. These are my guesses having never used a buckler like that. I do think it's a beautiful buckler, and I'd love to get one myself. If I did, I would certainly try it for I.33, I just wouldn't have high hopes. Talhoffer does his own cool stuff with that buckler, although he didn't leave us very much information about it.

Yes, I'm curious to see what its pros and cons are. I was interested to read Martin Peter Forrester's comment in this thread about Hugh's Talhoffer buckler:

Martin Peter Forrester wrote:

V nice! I've been training for a bit with a similar buckler from Mark Vickers ... I find the scalloped bits great for bracing your sword against in defence, especially when guarding your shins against heavy pole arms. Hope you have as much fun as I'm having!

I'm not sure from the quote if that means that Martin is trying to use it in 'formal' Fechtbucher training, or in a more living history context, but it will be interesting to play with.

I'm keen to get one only partly to experiment and see what the practical/tactical advantages might be. Another reason is to put together a representative 'Talhoffer armoury' of one of each of the weapons in Talhoffer - I think that would make for a nice little collection.

The other reason for getting one is just to enjoy the sheer exuberance of the thing!

Thanks for the lead on Armory Marek's buckler; I hadn't seen that one yet. I'll post photos of it from his website here, to add to the discussion, for comparison, and possibly to send some orders his way.

Hugh Knight wrote:

One of my students, Greg Wosnak, a very talented armorer, made me a copy of the Talhoffer 1467 buckler. I like the rolled edge he applied because it matches the art and because it strengthens the rim; without it, the rim will get bent pretty easily.

Thanks for the tip about the rolled edges. I'll have to see if Mark will do that.

Hugh Knight wrote:

The handle is flat stock with a wrap of heavy leather. To me, this gives a far better grip than the tubular handles I have seen, and seems to match what some buckler art shows.

Does anyone have some examples of art showing leather-wrapped handles?

---

 Attachment: 60.45 KB

Talhoffer-style buckler by Armory Marek - front

 Attachment: 66.95 KB

Talhoffer-style buckler by Armory Marek - back

Hugh: I forgot to say thanks for having posted pics of yours on your original thread ... seeing those helped me explore options for getting my own made up.

Does anyone else have photos of a Talhoffer-style buckler they'd like to share, or experience in using one?

Here's another pic from the thread about Hugh's buckler which gives a different sense of its shape, as well as the curve on the tips that we're discussing:

---

 Attachment: 169.58 KB

does anyone sell these?

I have now ordered one of these from Armory Marek, asking them to align the handle correctly, but I haven't received it yet. I ordered a few things from them, and I'll give a mini review once I have them.

I received my buckler (along with two messers and a longsword) from armory marek today.

They have posted new pictures on their website, which show my specific buckler. I'm guessing that based on the image I sent them from Talhoffer, they realized that their old grip style was incorrect.
[ Linked Image ]
[ Linked Image ]

The buckler is flatter than I expected. The crease lines are really just that; crease lines with no real depth. The upside is that the boss gives the impression of a point, but is not actually pointy. I won't be poking anyone with the point when I shieldknock.

It is also a little on the heavy side for my preference, but not outrageous, at 2 lb, 13 oz.. Still lighter than the lightest GDFB manhole cover/12 inch buckler. One reason it is heavy is that instead of rolling the edges, they welded on light round bar stock (~4mm).

The grip is just flat stock which I will need to wrap with something (or I may just replace it with a wooden grip).

The finish is good, service was great, and I am happy with the transaction.

As an aside, the other items I received are beautifully made, but slightly overbuilt. Since they arrived less than an hour ago, I have not played with them in earnest.

Craig,

Congrats on your new buckler and other items. This buckler still looks very good if indeed a bit flat. I think if I ever get past my obsessing love of two-handed weapons and order a buckler, I'll get the same as yours.

I too recieved items from Armory Marek a little while ago and had the same impression as you - pretty but a bit overbuilt. I would be very interested in knowing which items you got and what's your impression of them, as I'll probably order again from Marek in the future. And I really need to get around to writing a review of the items I already bought...