[Joe Maccarrone]

I'm gearing up for Terry Brown's class at WMAW; one of the items of equipment is an ash quarterstaff.

Based on the photos in Mr. Brown's book, it seems that a rather hefty staff is in order; they look to be at least 1-1/2" in diameter, though it's difficult to tell from the photos.

Can anyone weigh in with historical info here? 1-1/2"? 1-1/4"? I'm thinking the 1-1/8" ash poles commonly sold as spear shafts are simply too light to function as a quarterstaff...

Thanks

[Benjamin H. Abbott]

Paul Wagner says, in his book on Silver, that an eight to nine foot staff should weigh close to five pounds. This seems about right to me.

The shaft width on some polearms could make a decent staff. Take my A&A English Bill's ash shaft for example. It's about 1-1/8", though not perfectly round. Make it nine feet long and it'd weight about 4.9 lbs. A little thicker couldn't hurt, but that's not bad...

[Joe Maccarrone]

Interesting, thanks.

Just checked the staves that Purpleheart sells. The 8' long, 1-1/4" ash staff is listed at 3.2 pounds. The 6' long, 1-1/4" hickory staff is listed at 3.1 pounds.

Hickory is a good, heavy wood, but it isn't historical for England, is it?

Here's another question: does anyone have a period illustration of a 'tipstaff' -- a quarterstaff that was iron-shod at the tips, and usually about 6' long? Mr. Brown mentions these in his book, and I'm interested in having one made, but I don't know what the iron tips would look like... A regular buttcap? A series of langets?

[Cole Sibley]

Hickory isn't historical for England though in my own opinion its not obviously different from an ash or spruce (to an untrained eye). I've personally been using old oak wagon tongues, which are about 1 1/4 octagonal, and I find them nearly unbreakable. I suppose the full wagon tongue would be worth 10x the cost of buying a similar amount of stave, but I use what I have

It was my understanding that 'ironshod' staves were merely capped staves, which would move the center of percussion out a bit, as well as add a bit of mass for tip strikes. Opinion only, apologies.

[Benjamin H. Abbott]

[Cole Sibley]

I would disagree that a heavier butt-cap would move a CoP back (or 'in'), I believe it moves it 'out'. In other words; away from the rotation point, just like the pommel on a sword. Of course I'm unfamiliar with historical use of the quarterstaff, but my limited viewings of historical manuals leads me to believe their construction follows the same constraints as swords, poleaxes or any 'percussion' weapon.

[Benjamin H. Abbott]

Hmm... yes, you're right, I guess I was confusing CoP with CoM/CoB. It would move the CoM back though, which doesn't help much for striking.

[Cole Sibley]

Thats a good point. One would think a 'stick' would not require complex features to make it work, but there you go. One must give some credit to our ancestors, who no doubt had a far greater grasp of the application of blunt force than I likely ever will.

[Benjamin H. Abbott]

Yes, and with all that said, I'm pretty sure a four and half to five and half pound staff will have more than enough power to get the job done, without or without shodding. As for durability, it's hard to say. Swetnam warns that a blow can break a staff, but he says the same thing about swords. Silver never mentions it...

It is an interesting point about the CoP, though. That's an advantage of heavier butt shodding that I hadn't thought of (moving the CoM back, of course, gives greater control for thrusting). Silver seems to have preferred the hands set reasonably closely together, with the back by the butt (in my reading, at least), so this makes sense.