Author |
Message |
C. Stackhouse
|
Posted: Tue 29 Nov, 2005 4:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sean Flynt wrote: | If you want something as crude and brutal as a maul/hammer but common enough to have proven its value, take a look at the weapons of the so-called Morgenstern Group. |
Thanks for the tip, I'll look into that.
Above all else, be armed
-Niccolo Machiavelli
|
|
|
|
Elling Polden
|
Posted: Tue 29 Nov, 2005 5:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There are pictures of several mass weapons, including gotentag's and a two handed, agriculturaly derived flail in the Albums:
http://www.myArmoury.com/albums/thumbnails.ph...amp;page=6
"this [fight] looks curious, almost like a game. See, they are looking around them before they fall, to find a dry spot to fall on, or they are falling on their shields. Can you see blood on their cloths and weapons? No. This must be trickery."
-Reidar Sendeman, from King Sverre's Saga, 1201
|
|
|
|
Gavin Kisebach
|
Posted: Tue 29 Nov, 2005 10:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
SLOphile: Sword Like Object Lover - anyone who prefers fanciful or fantastic weapons to "historic reporductions". This can be for a variety of reasons, budget, useage, or astheics. Not meant to be perjorative, some people just can't figure why you'd pay a grand for a sword that isn't shaped like a dragon wing, and doesn't even have any cool faux gems on it.
the so-called Morgenstern Group? Ummm could you expound a bit?
There are only two kinds of scholars; those who love ideas and those who hate them. ~ Emile Chartier
|
|
|
|
Gavin Kisebach
|
Posted: Wed 30 Nov, 2005 4:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ellis, you mentioned the Flax, which I at first assumed you had mispelled Falx, but by total happenstance I ran into the term whilst killing time on Wikipedia. They define it thusly:
Quote: | This article is about a type improvised medieval weapon. For the similarly named ancient weapon, see falx.
A flax was the name given to the improvised pole arm, derived from the agricultural tool used to gather flax. This consisted of a metal head mounted on a 7-8 foot long pole. The head had a serrated edge much like a saw along one side, topped by a broad flat hook. The reverse sported a simple spike. Much like a bill, this head was made of a single piece of tooled metal rather than many pieces later fixed together. While not designed as a weapon of war, the poorer classes of Europe used all manner of tools to defend themselves during war in the middle ages.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flax_%28weapon%29"
|
Now I generally take anything in an open source encyclopedia with a pound of salt (look at the article history on "battle axe", it's scary) but this sounds like an entirely different weapon, not just a misunderstanding. That said, I can't find any other references to a "flax" as an improvised flail. Wassup wit dat? Which were you referring to? Is the Wiki correct, or is this another sounds-good-on-paper weapon?
There are only two kinds of scholars; those who love ideas and those who hate them. ~ Emile Chartier
|
|
|
|
Elling Polden
|
Posted: Wed 30 Nov, 2005 6:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
I was refeing to the falx... Just mispelled it...
"this [fight] looks curious, almost like a game. See, they are looking around them before they fall, to find a dry spot to fall on, or they are falling on their shields. Can you see blood on their cloths and weapons? No. This must be trickery."
-Reidar Sendeman, from King Sverre's Saga, 1201
|
|
|
|
Gavin Kisebach
|
Posted: Wed 30 Nov, 2005 6:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hehe, just curious. Insanely curious, one might say.
There are only two kinds of scholars; those who love ideas and those who hate them. ~ Emile Chartier
|
|
|
|
Gavin Kisebach
|
Posted: Tue 20 Dec, 2005 3:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
I just had to post this. Its a relatively new offering from by-the-sword.com. I rather like it, though I'm dubious to the durability of the thing, if is hickory or ash it might be OK, but the price is unconscionable.
Attachment: 19.77 KB
|
|
|
|
Wolfgang Armbruster
|
Posted: Tue 20 Dec, 2005 4:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Gavin Kisebach wrote: | I just had to post this. Its a relatively new offering from by-the-sword.com. I rather like it, though I'm dubious to the durability of the thing, if is hickory or ash it might be OK, but the price is unconscionable. |
That thing reminds me of Yojimbo, a movie by Akira Kurosawa (It's been remade as Last Man Standing with Bruce Willis).
One of the villains is wielding such a huge hammer but gets cut in half by our Ronin-hero before he can even lift that large thing
Truly an exotic weapon. I don't think it was used by professional soldiers.
|
|
|
|
C. Stackhouse
|
Posted: Tue 20 Dec, 2005 11:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
yah, I saw that thing a few weeks ago. I wouldn't mind owning it, maybe it could help clear out the 2" layer of ice coating our driveway
|
|
|
|
Mark Eskra
Location: Hillsboro Illinois Joined: 14 Jun 2006
Posts: 37
|
Posted: Wed 14 Jun, 2006 2:10 pm Post subject: well... |
|
|
I would prefer a good Estwing with a knurled face, myself. Major flaw i would think would be the handle-one good wallop and its broken. Any handtool can be a weapon, depending on how hard you try or how desperate you are.
|
|
|
|
Rod Parsons
|
Posted: Fri 16 Jun, 2006 4:20 pm Post subject: One handed use of heavy weapons? |
|
|
In the Boydell and Brewer "Companion to Medieval Arms and Armour" there is a chapter 12 entitled "Close Combat Weapons in the Early Abbasid Period: Maces and Axes".
The maces described therein were very heavy and often wielded with one hand, there being cited a particular warrior regarded as being exceptionally strong, who having lost his right arm trained himself to use an extremely heavy mace with his left hand.
These weapons are described as being useful only when fully committed to one devastating blow.
One example given describes how, missing his man, one such blow succeeded in killing the horse by breaking it's back with the force of the blow on the crupper.
Rod.
|
|
|
|
J. Bedell
|
Posted: Fri 16 Jun, 2006 4:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It seems like a hammer/mallet would be more of a dueling type weapon. It was useful for getting one blow but in an all out battle you would be slaughtered after one swing. In "Medieval Combat" a medieval fighting manual originally Hans Talhoffer there are large wooden maces used for duels. Maybe these evolved from large wooden mallets? Probably not, but maybe.
The pen may be mighter, but the sword is much more fun.
|
|
|
|
Benjamin H. Abbott
|
Posted: Sat 17 Jun, 2006 10:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: | It seems like a hammer/mallet would be more of a dueling type weapon. |
Archers used them.
Quote: | It was useful for getting one blow but in an all out battle you would be slaughtered after one swing. |
Just as a halberdier or billman would be slaughtered after one swing? Come on.
|
|
|
|
Adam Bodorics
Industry Professional
|
Posted: Sun 18 Jun, 2006 1:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Just wanted to add: the two handed falx was the weapon of the RICHEST, not of the poorest. And while romans didn't adopt it, we have numerous coins of romans showing off captured falxes to the emperor. And it was effective enough to force roman legions to adopt the manica, and possibly upper leg protection, as it could puncture the scutum. Or get behind it and cut the shield hand. Even after this improvement, capturing Dacia was a HARD WAR. Of course, the falx-wielding fighters only came to play after the formations have been broken, as it's ineffective against a shield wall.
BTW, explain me something. What is exotic? To me, a katar is exotic, just as the pesh-kabz, or the black-sea yataghan, not to mention the keris, as they are NOT used in Europe. But they were used for centuries... and not for decoration, but for killing. You know, if something doesn't work - you stop using it. Especially when you have such a huge variety of weapons like in India. Oh, mentioning India. Some of these "exotic" weapons were used by Sikh people. Who could defend themselfes against moghul invasion quite well, and in a later revolt, they gave a hard time to even the English.
|
|
|
|
J. Bedell
|
Posted: Mon 19 Jun, 2006 9:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
A halberdier or billman has the advatage of a blade and usually a top spike. With that you wouldnt need such a hard blow to do damage. A mallet has no blade or spike so you can't cut or stab, you need the brute force of the swing to cause damage. A harder swing can mean less control especially if you miss. Also billman and halberdiers were often used in ranks. A lone billman amidst many swordmen would be easily slaughtered. All a swordsman has to do is push the shaft away with his shield and step in with his sword.
Good point about the archers, but isn't that only a last resort? For the common soldier a sword is much better.
-James
The pen may be mighter, but the sword is much more fun.
|
|
|
|
Elling Polden
|
Posted: Mon 19 Jun, 2006 12:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
A bill or or helbard isn't that heavy. The heads are not very large. They do, however, have reach. A sledge hammer style malet does not have more reach than a sword, however. Also, what is refered to as heavy presumably varied as much back in the day as it does now; there was a rather long thread about this not long ago. As did the tales of weapons and their effects.
On what I call Exotic weaponry, I take it to mean weapons that have seen little use, but has a novel use or appearance. As such, the Katar would not be a exotic weapon, as it has been used quite extensively.
The statement is really aimed more at RPGs than anything else: In games, all things exotic are given rules that make them better than a "standard" weapon.
It is also more a reminder than a rule; A weapon design will have disadvantages as well as advantages, and it's usefulness is the product of these.
so, let's see:
Mallet
Pros:
-Hits hard.
Cons:
-Short for a twohanded weapon.
-Sluggish, slow
-Heavy to carry.
-No cutting edge.
-No possibility to stab, even blunt.
As a curious side note, the romans and byzantines used a throwing sledgehammer as a cavalry weapon; It was carried in a holster on the saddle, and hurled at foes. Presumably developed by troops tired of their throwing axes failing to hit edge first...
"this [fight] looks curious, almost like a game. See, they are looking around them before they fall, to find a dry spot to fall on, or they are falling on their shields. Can you see blood on their cloths and weapons? No. This must be trickery."
-Reidar Sendeman, from King Sverre's Saga, 1201
|
|
|
|
Rod Parsons
|
Posted: Mon 19 Jun, 2006 12:48 pm Post subject: Archers side arms. |
|
|
Archers in the Hundred Years War and Wars of the Roses are typically shown with falchions or what appear to my inexperienced eye to be type XV swords. In earlier times Welsh knifemen appear on some lists of array as a separate category from archers.
But it is quite likely that in the free companies a much wider choice of weapons and equipment might be available. Roughly contemporary illustrations tend to show quite uniformly equipped archers such as one might expect to find in a well financed and provided affinity.
In the free companies, it seems to me that there might be a far greater likelihood of improvisation in equipment, much of it "liberated".
I have no doubt that a mallet or maul would be used if there was nothing else to hand, but as the weapon of choice I think it a fanciful view of the "stout yeoman" so beloved of the romantic writers in the period of Imperial expansion, perpetuated in such as the Olivier "Henry V" at Agincourt as a patriotic theme.
Rod.
|
|
|
|
Benjamin H. Abbott
|
Posted: Mon 19 Jun, 2006 10:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: | A mallet has no blade or spike so you can't cut or stab |
According to a 16th century manual, the mallets for archers had five-inch-long top spikes.
Quote: | A lone billman amidst many swordmen would be easily slaughtered. |
Only because he's outnumbered.
Quote: | Good point about the archers, but isn't that only a last resort? For the common soldier a sword is much better. |
Archers almost certainly carried swords as well. Why would a sword be better than a polearm?
Quote: | A sledge hammer style malet does not have more reach than a sword, however. |
The ones used by archers were set on five foot shafts.
Quote: | I have no doubt that a mallet or maul would be used if there was nothing else to hand, but as the weapon of choice I think it a fanciful view of the "stout yeoman" so beloved of the romantic writers in the period of Imperial expansion, perpetuated in such as the Olivier "Henry V" at Agincourt as a patriotic theme. |
Then why did Henry Barrett suggest mauls for archers? A five foot maul with a top spike might as well be a pollaxe. There's no reason to assume it was an ineffective weapon, especially considering that a French source on Agincourt noted English hammers as the deadliest weapons of the day.
|
|
|
|
Elling Polden
|
Posted: Tue 20 Jun, 2006 4:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
It could also be that the word mallet had a different meaning to the writers of the time. A five foot long warhammer with a top spike could in deed be a efficient weapon.
But I have difficulties seeing the large wooden sledgehammers being preferable. Especially with a 5 ft shaft. You do of course have the gotentag, wich is a long cub with a top spike, but the hammer design would be even more unbalanced...
This manual you mention, Ben, does it have a full description of the weapon?
"this [fight] looks curious, almost like a game. See, they are looking around them before they fall, to find a dry spot to fall on, or they are falling on their shields. Can you see blood on their cloths and weapons? No. This must be trickery."
-Reidar Sendeman, from King Sverre's Saga, 1201
|
|
|
|
Rod Parsons
|
Posted: Tue 20 Jun, 2006 4:35 am Post subject: Mauls |
|
|
There is much talk about mauls or mallets but I have yet to see an artefact or a contemporary illustration of such an item in the hands of an archer on the battlefield.
No doubt mallets were employed to drive in stakes and so would be to hand, but given that an archer of the 15thC might have a sword or falchion and buckler as standard equipment, it seems to me that the maul or mallet would be employed only if nothing else were to hand.
Rod.
PS. Who is Henry Barrett?
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
|
All contents © Copyright 2003-2024 myArmoury.com All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum
|