[Chris Artman]

I just bought and received the A&A Italian Bill... I just posted photos of it under "What is your latest Sword" post.

I like the looks very much, although I have to say the pole itself is wobbly and would snap like a twig if it was attempted to be used. It is not battle ready at all. It looks decent, but it feels flimsy... There is no way somebody would have taken that anorexic wooden shaft into battle, it would just snap at first use... I do like the looks of it however... If I had to make a suggestion for improvement, it would need a thicker pole and sturdier mounting. I would have gladly paid another $100.00 to have a better pole and more robust mounting (and a greater degree of sharpening, etc...).

Moderator's note: This thread was split off from this discussion, as it deserved its own topic.

[Chris Artman]

Also, I would look here for Pole weapons (and lots of things):

http://www.o4e.eu/

Chad thankfully showed me this site, and they have amazing priced high quality weapons. I have a big order of weapons coming in early July...

P.S. I recommend buying from them.. NOT By-the sword... Not only will you save money, you will have many more options. BTS doesn't offer many of the options... I was sad to learn this after I bought a $1,000.00 sword from them... I saw the same sword with wire wrap and many other options that BTS did not offer (and for a lot less).

[Chad Arnow]

[Chris Artman]

I wasn't calling A&A's "stuff" not battle ready at all. I was calling the Italian Bill not battle ready at all (big difference).

This is due to the concern for the ease at which the haft would break. It may very well be that the original haft dimensions and mounting follow the original. All I know is that when I weilded it, I cringed in the sense that it would not be something I would use in battle for it seemingly would snap fairly easy. Many of them probably did snap fairly easy I guess. It is just an observation, and I am only here to express my opinion. As I mentioned, it is a very nice looking piece. I still reccomend it... I just would not consider it battle ready unless you used a thicker shaft and probably a little more rugged mounting.

The looks are very nice. I just learned that a heavier shaft is something I could have requested and this has been offered to me if I wanted it... Like anything, I think this is a learning process. Regardless, it is a very nice looking bill. Since I don't plan on using it in battle, I'm fine with it the way it is

[Joe Fults]

Might just be the way bills are. Don't have experience with originals to know but that socket design seems like it might not distribute stresses through the pole as well as something with langets. I've two A&A pole weapons that have langets and the ash poles seem very robust, which might or might not have something to do with those strips of steel running along a fair length of the shaft. Perhaps somebody has handled some originals and can shed a bit of light.

[Chris Artman]

Apparently adding Langets is something that can be done and A&A would happily do that if I or anyone wished. I would think it would make a huge diffrence in durability: steel langets running down the side vs a simple wood insert... that seems huge to me. What was a bill's primary use? For instance, I picture somebody running at me with full plate... I am almost certain the neck/junction of the haft and bill would snap quite quickly... If this was ment to fend off cavalry... I can't even fathom that unless this bill was mounted on a thicker haft and using langets... Seriously. I was weilding it and you just don't have any confidence it would hold up in such instances.

In any case, I think this is good for the original thread starter to know this as well, so I think this was very contructive. It is nice to know that A&A will work with you to get you what you want...

[Jean Thibodeau]

[Chad Arnow]

The original it's based on doesn't have langets (Wallace Collection A930), so it doesn't surprise me that the reproduction wouldn't have langets. Quite a few polearms on their original hafts don't have langets. If they had been necessary for strength, they would all have them, wouldn't they?

The head length of A&A's version is the same as the original. I'd be surprised if the socket width was significantly different or the haft significantly different. They did omit the many tacks studding the top and length of the haft as well as the fabric cover on the haft. I can see why. Neither would add to structural integrity in any significant way, only to the item's cost.

The shaft may bend and wobble a bit. It's wood. You want it to flex a bit rather than shatter from being too stiff. A heavier haft would make the weapon heavier (of course). If you do a search on the forums here you'll find discussions about different wood's properties and what makes them desirable.

I have an A&A short polearm (Iberian Mace) with a rounded ash haft. Obviously the shorter length and different cross-section will make for some comparison issues to yours, but it held up to hard hits against stationary wood and metal. Joe Fults has a custom halberd whose haft is probably very similar to yours and it held up to cutting thick-skinned pumpkins and biting into the stationary wooden cutting stand they were on.

I still think calling any of A&A items not battle ready is a stretch as they have a long history in this industry and have studied originals very carefully. My personal belief is that they know what makes a functional weapon. While I would imagine hafts would break in battle, I can't recall many (if any) reports of A&A's polearm hafts being insufficient.

I'm going to split this off into a new thread as it doesn't have much to do with the original poster's questions aboiut 14th century polearms.

[Joe Fults]

[Chad Arnow]

[Joe Fults]

[Chad Arnow]

[D. Austin]

This weapon is also known as the roncone in Italian, and in German, the rosschinder, which apparently translates as horse cutter.

This may help to explain the intended function of the weapon in question and it could be that it was not intended to be used in a manner which would require langets, ie. a full powered swing at an armoured foe. This type of swing would in my opinion, probably not be the best use of such a weapon in any case (and a fairly risky, if not impossible one when surrounded by comrades). Personally I would be wary of the thin top spike making contact in this type of attack too.

Although it is one of my favourite weapons, I tend to view it a a rather delicate device. It does have a number of functions as Jean pointed out but I would consider the two main features to be the spike and hook. This would suggest that the two main uses were for pushing (thrusting) and pulling (hooking), neither of which place lateral stress on the joint between the haft and the socket.

[Bill Grandy]

What Chad said.

I've seen the A&A Italian Bill, and I didn't see anything wrong with the haft. I don't mean any disrespect, Chris, but have you seen many museum polearms, or done any work with WMA regarding Italian polearms? I'm not trying to discredit you, but I ask this because a polearm haft needs to be strong enough to support the blade, but light enough to be used quickly. A weapon like this will rely far more on the thrust than the cut (though it will certainly be used for cuts in many cases), and having a weapon that absorbs shock is a good thing. Many period pieces have small hafts, though others have large ones as well, but unless if the wood is really brittle I don't think you have anything to worry about.

Now, perhaps your particular piece is different from the one I've seen, I don't know. Its happened before. If that's the case, perhaps you should talk to A&A about a replacement haft.

[Craig Johnson]

Hello Guys

This is an excellent thread, there are many interesting aspects of what is needed for a pole arm to be serviceable and, even more importantly, how was a pole arm used. This is a topic where there is not as much research material as one would like, though it is much better than it was 10 years ago.

First lets approach the Italian Bill and discuss its particulars. This weapon is iconic for the late medieval and Renaissance periods. It is seen in art and examples in many variations and is depicted in battle as well as guard and show duties. One must remember that many of these types of weapons where not intended to be carried into the field for warfare, but rather where for protection in travel for urban and the country side settings as well as being guard weapons for home or office . Many of these would have been designed for impressing those who saw them as well as being functional weapons for a fight.

There are examples that one could make a good argument for the basic form being seen in early medieval art. The distinct shape and refined form of this example is probably more along the lines of one of the pieces made to be functional but show an ability to purchase a nicely made piece by the owner. Whether it was made with langets at the start is unknowable. The piece could have been done either way and probably would have had tassels and ornamentation mounted below the head.

The lack of langets on this example is an excellent illustration of the challenges of producing replicas today. Do we replicate to the maximized physical strength and durability as possible, adding details that may have been altered over time or as the weapon sits today. Do I construct to the ideas of what a pole arm should be by today’s customer or to what the standard of the period was. Basic elements that many today would consider essential, they did not do. Things like hardening of pole arms. Many are iron and no attempt to heat treat was made or would have been even possible, as they do not have enough carbon in the material.

The design and structure of how they where attached to the haft is a similar challenge. Many had langets that where just straps attached to the hafts. They where not physically attached to the head but rather inlet to slide inside the socket or around the tang of the head. This could be connected by a through rivet but not always.

The rivets that attached the langets to the haft can be done several ways. Today almost everyone drills through and has a rivet that passes through the two langets and the haft and is peened. This is not the way many of the originals where done. They had nails driven through a whole in the langet and long enough that the tips would hit the back of the langet on the other side and curl back to be locked in place, like a cobbler would a shoe sole. Today this would be seen as inferior by a good 95% of my customers, back then it was standard.

In a more general sense I think pole arms are often misunderstood today. They where not great cleaving and hewing types of weapons. In most cases they where designed for thrust and slash type interactions. With quickness and power on there side. Many practitioners overlook the simple physics of how effective these pieces are in combat. A shift of stance or weight by the user can move the hands a few inches but the head of the weapon will move 6 to 8 feet with little effort and deliver a blow that will knock the unsuspecting back into last week as my granddad used to say . This means one with little effort is moving in the same time as grosser actions delivered by a shorter weapon. Thus you can be on top of your opponent time wise with less effort. Which, of course, is always a good thing in a fight

If you are interested in this line of research I would highly recommend the following

Hafted weapons in Medieval and Renaissance Europe by John Waldman(part of the History of Warfare series Vol. 31 by Brill

Basically the Bible on Pole Arms

The Boccia books that deal with weapons- in Italian of course but some beautiful pieces.

The great “Arma in Asta” by Troso –again in Italian but covers the whole of them and has many examples pictured and described.

For the use of the items I would suggest one can do no better but to look at The Order of the Seven Hearts Mr. Leoni gives excellent introduction to the use of pole arms and shows how effective this weapon is.

There are an incredible variety of arms covered by the hafted weapons and it is an area that is ripe for more research and understanding. One of my favorite avenues of research. Here is an area that some might find interesting but also not seen in these parts much, thanks to Ken Pfrenger The Oprishki and it even has a Myspace page with cool music Guild of Righteous Brigands

Another related field of study must be the use of the Two Handed sword in all its later forms especially like the Spadone, Montante, Zweihander and such. These large swords use the same size/time advantage of the pole arms and can inform the study of each quite nicely.

There is more I was thinking but its been a long afternoon and I have had to take a couple of breaks while writing this to get people fed and happy so I while stop here and if anyone has queries I would be more than happy to "geek" on the issue

Best to all
Craig

[Craig Johnson]

I remembered the info I had wanted to add to the above comment.

1 As Mr Austin so rightly commented the use of a big swing with the weapon and having it hit on the long spike would generate a great deal of stress on the joint between the head and the haft. So much so that one could destroy a piece with full attached langets and reinforcing. It is a strong clue to the intended use of such an item.

2 That use was often a very dynamic thrust. The spike on these is a bit over half an inch square at the base and tapers fairly evenly to the tip. I have thrust through a 40 pound bag of sand on a rope covered in padding and a piece of high end riveted mail. The spike did not really even slow down, it was disconcerting how easily it was penetrated.

Best
Craig

[Christopher Gregg]

Kind of amazing how when a weapon's function is examined through its construction, new light is shed upon its use. I have held A & A's Italian Bill, and also thought it might be suspect in the chopping department, but now I can see that because of its construction, it is really a thrusting/slicing weapon through and through. Lord, imagine being in the ranks and having THAT thing coming straight at your face! Well done, Craig, and thanks for your insight.

[Craig Johnson]

[Nathan Robinson]

I wanted to use this topic as an example of how important it is to look at historical arms and armour within the proper context to effectively judge them. This is a principle goal of myArmoury.com. Any modern item can be misjudged if looked at outside of the context of the original on which it is based. An understanding of how a weapon was used in period, why it was manufactured the way it was in period, what it was used against in period, etc, are all key elements to understanding and properly judging a modern interpretation of it. Looking further, understanding the modern maker's approach in creating the interpretation is just as important: Was today's maker trying to replicate the original? Was he trying to improve upon the original? Was he trying to create an inspiration geared towards a specific purpose? (ie, towards theatrical combat, WMA sparring, etc.) All these things are important in judging any of these items.

Over the years, we've seen a lot of online reviews and other commentary of these items that do not take into account any of this context. The results of these reviews are, by and large, meaningless.

[Jean Thibodeau]

Craig;

As you must surely remember making my " Langue de Boeuf " that has a similar thick ( Thicker even ) top spike and a wide and long cutting surface I wonder how you would compare mine to the Italian Bill in usage both in thrust and cutting applications ( Sort of double edge axe-like mixed with sword like qualities ).

Also " Robustness " as mine has long languettes that are in one piece with the socket ?

Now, a powerful blow at an immobile object like a big tree might well see the aft or the whole thing being damaged but in normal use against armour it should be robust enough: Thrusts combined with cuts or chops but under control.

Or, any other comments you might think interesting comparing these two or any other polearms of similar size and usage.

Here is a pic for those who haven't seen the design history of this piece, and for those who might want to read the whole thing: http://www.myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=4397&start=0