Of all your videos I've seen so far, this one was the biggest knowledge bomb on me. Having owned a buckler for a few years, read I33, and most of my melee skill being with one handed long blade, this really spoke to me. I've watched it several times just trying to truly absorb it all. Thank you. I really like "tower shields" to use the DnD term, having rocked a heavy one in LARP for 5 years and loved every second and pound of it. I love Roman history and want to work private security one day. Any information or future videos you could provide on this "class" of shield would be most appreciated. Thank you for distinguishing buckler from targe from heater/kite shield from pavise/tower shield from Norman shield. I've adopted as the base item versions for my home version of VTM and DnD, because I take accuracy of weapon, armor, ammunition, etc stats very seriously, because I enjoy realism in RPGs, and think characters should have diverse options. Thank you.
Another example, which also briefly mentions a difference between probable roman bosse-thrusting and gaulish edge-thrusting techniques due to eventual differences in how their scutums developed czcams.com/video/OcMK80V8DWg/video.html
@scholagladiatoria: I've counted everytime you promise "to talk about that in another video". Are you aware that you owe the internet about 7.000 vids about shields n spears n stuff? :)
If anyone needs a frame of reference, carrying a sword is like carrying a pistol - very lightweight, very convenient and very quick to deploy. Carrying around a full sized shield or a polearm would be the equivalent to carrying around a rifle. The rifle is very much a field weapon (whether it's hunting or battlefield) and so would a polearm, shield or greatsword. Trust me, it gets very annoying and tiring to have to carry that around for hours on end. I was once a Marine, but just ask anyone who's been hunting, and they'll tell you the same thing. Great vid as always, Matt!
Thanks for taking the time to do such an in depth discussion. Really good stuff. I can see how the buckler could provide nearly as much protection as a full sized shield. It makes up for it's small size by being more nimble and being able to be held closer to the adversary. I think it come up short versus missiles since there is no cone of defense anymore when the shots are coming in on parallel lines. And yes, in a civilian setting, that bit isn't important - you're not going to be standing in formation under a barrage of arrows.
Because of this video, I purchased the cold steel buckler. After two hours, of practical reasoning, being right handed. I would use the buckler in my right hand, my sword in my hand. You may think that would not make sense. After just two hours with the buckler, I have a second one on the way. I can't wait to see how it fills to use two at once. Thanks.
Interesting to see you put you take in with the skullagrim and demomanchaos recent talk on the shields, all three of you seem to have had a pulse on the subject at once. thank you very much for the education, entertainments and continued contribution to the 'community'.
sexyxenomorph Oh I'm perfectly happy for the guy if he got popular, and I'm sure he has some fine ideas, I've just also debated with him a while back about some of his less fine ideas (mostly parrying with the flat).
There is an anecdote about carrying a sword and buckler in town. Carrying the buckler with the sword on the same side would cause one to knock against the other, making a characteristic noise with every step. In Italian, this was referred to as 'fare figo', which means 'to be cool'.
I have a recreation of a targe that I bought because it looked cool, and have used for fancy dress on occasion, and I can attest to the fact that it does make everyday activities unnecessarily arduous
I agree with your choice of weapons for wandering those scary places. I'd feel good having them in most modern scary places, much better off than most with the bare minimum of kit.
Having spent many minutes using you for steady sight and small adjustment practice on a big screen, I can say that buckler makes it tougher to aim at you as well. Could just be the camera, but it tends to cover the spots I want to aim at and only leave me small bits. It's pretty fun! I've seen Skall's demonstration of how surprisingly well Medieval armor does against modern firearms. Not suggesting it's great, only that it's not insignificant.
Very interesting and well-thought out commentary on the buckler. The buckler would definitely have become evolved with smaller, faster weapons such as the rapier or stilletto. It also would have been used more aggressively to punch rather than block like a cestus. About 20 years ago, I saw an experiment where someone built themselves a buckler to practice padded swordplay. He tried to extend with the buckler to deflect and nearly has his wrist snapped by the first sword blow. While it may have been his blocking technique, it certainly appeared that extending the buckler was a mistake.
A buckler looks like something that you could cook some bacon and eggs on... And due to angles, at close range a buckler is big protection... Not big protection at all from distant missle attacks, but it is big from close attacks.
I agree 100% with your choice of civilian self-defense weapons in the Middle Ages etc. I wish it was acceptable (and legal...) to wear a sword and buckler today. I would wear them everywhere in addition to my pistol and iiiA armor to be as secure as I can be and still live normal life; maybe a FAST iiiA ballistic helmet.
Thanks for this awesome video. Very educational. I always wondered about why someone would elect to use a buckler over a "normal" round or kite shield that covers more of the body with minimal movement. And I suppose the answer, in short, is that they are lighter and more maneuverable while still providing ample protection (in duels - open battlefields... not so great against arrows or spears/polearms) by holding them to closer to your opponent and simply blocking the essential lines and angles at arm's length rather than being held to the body. Way easier to carry and cheaper for the average civilian or foot soldier.
If I lived "back then" (or even now...) I would carry a buckler just to stay always ready and have a "tower shield" for when I truly expect to fight. I adopt this "light/always ready/covert" and "heavy/expecting combat/overt" philosophy in my EDC gear selection, RPG characters, etc. I know you think it is silly or absurd or even dangerous to go around wearing weapons and armor all day while working a normal civilian life. I happily do with no problem and I look quite ordinary. Not going around "looking silly" as you say in a modern context means I don't wear my AK around my neck with my chest rig of hard armor plates and 9 spare magazines and pistol tucked with helmet and elbow/knee pads like a Western soldier in a warzone. THAT would be absurd, crazy, and very tough (Roman soldier level, I aspire to it). Hiking that way is fun tho. That's the equivalent of going around in full plate with my halberd and longsword etc. in the Medieval context. I would never work a field or tend a forge or brick up a building in full plate with my greatsword on the back as for traveling. I agree, unless you expect to fight or it's your job that's not the way to go. But for RPG characters, that IS their job, kicking down doors and fighting mobs. So just have NPCs react to these unique stand out people the way they should. In the modern context, my armor is very concealable and only for the torso (Metatron's chainmail appeals to me, I'll try it). I've got a pistol the size of a big dagger squished about a bit, and a few pockets have things the size of a cell phone in them. You couldn't pick me out without a DC 15 spot check lol That's the midevial equivalent of just having a light coat of mail or a light breastplate and bringing a longblade and buckler around with a dagger or knife. People did that all the time, except for the armor. It would have saved many lives. Some people carry folding knives (most common weapon for crime, they scare me) clipped in a pocket where everyone can see them. I show less lethal force than that look (which people in the US usually dismiss). So no, I don't "look silly." Neither do my RPG character *single tear rolls down cheek, meanie* Everything is concealed. No, it's not that hard to do or difficult to live with. In fact, it's great exercise, good fun as harmless as I am, and provides real security to me and anyone innocent I have the power to help. If more people did like I did, the world would be a safer place because there would be less helpless victims and fewer passive or powerless bystanders. Evil doesn't like to do what it can't get away with clean and easily or fight battles it might loose or take risks it doesn't have to. Deterrence.
In medieval swordsmanship the guards are positions of action, as you said. You start or finish a move with them, however I've noticed in 19th century saber, the guards are basically already parrying positions. How did this development come by and why wasn't it done earlier? You touched this topic briefly here and I think it would be great to expand on.
Yes, that's generally true - the reason is hand protection. If you try and use a medieval sword like a sabre then you get hit in the hand a lot. The more protective hilt makes it possible to hold the sword out in front more safely.
Much like the buckler, the viking/round shield is much more effective if not held flat forwards. With a buckler you're looking for a reasonably shallow angle, maybe 25-30 degrees off of flat on, but with a round shield you can have it almost directly edge on and it'll work much better - it closes off lines more effectively, it catches more cuts on the flat, it gives you more offensive options, etc. As you mention though, we have no sources for this. As far as I'm aware (read: people who know more about this than me have told me) round shields should not be particularly heavy and you should be able to hold them extended for reasonable amounts of time (like a rotella, for example). Still not something you want to carry around all day though. Many re-enactors, at least here, are guilty of having overly heavy shields, because they understandably don't want their shields getting damaged all the time. Nice video, as always!
Holding "viking"/migration-era round shields edge-out is no doubt very effective. I doubt it's "The" right way to use them, though. Remember these shields were not just used for duels, but also for formation/shield wall combat. Holding them face-forward was probably extremely common in this context.
Josh Ridinger I did forget to mention that, thanks. Yes, shield walls most certainly don't work unless you hold the shield face-on. I should have mentioned that I was talking about the context of single combat.
Yes! More shields please! I don't know if it's your expertise, but can we have an analysis of spear and shield, particularly Hoplite use, and comparisons to sword and shield use, both in war or duel, particularly how Hoplite combat declined, I'm super curious.
Hey Matt. I've recently started doing a historical-combat focused larp. While I fully realize that padded weapons and their use in the point system is VASTLY different from historical combat (with the padded weapons you tend to strike as quickly and often as possible, and of course, aren't nearly as worried about being hit), I've still noticed a few small similarities. The way shields are used, for instance, seems to be pretty on-point. I would love for you to do a video about how to get around shields! It's one problem I've been having in the practice. When we are doing sword and shield practice, it seems the only way to get past a shield is to bind it up or get a really effect feint in to make them move it aside. I'd love to hear your opinion and see your ideas for defeating a shield, getting around it and whatnot. the safest ways to do so and any other thoughts you have on the topic would be greatly appreciated! Thank you so much I've learned tonnes from all of your videos!
I know this was a year ago, and you might have found an answer to it, but anyway: I do not know how historical it might be, but atleast in the SCA there is a strike called a Wrap. You basically let your weapon rotate around your hand, to strike with the back edge around your opponent. It allows you to strike the whole backside of the one you are fighting, and ofcourse also get around shields and wards. Effective when fighting a lefty and taking out their sword arm =) Caveat: This is used almost exclusively in SCA Heavy Fighting. I have had success with it in SCA fencing/HEMA, but alot less. You are most often not close enough to do it, and it requires greater control of your opponent than just feinting and striking him. But if you meet a big shield, bind him up and strike him across the butt :D
I like that you differentiate between a buckler, and a shield. Bucklers aren't shields, that's like calling a dagger a sword. They're similar, they're used similarly, but the critical difference for me is a shield has enough coverage to be effective against Arrows (Slingstones, light shot in some cases) A buckler is for Parrying, a shield is for Blocking. Just like a parrying dagger/main gauche is primarily used for defense (In a Florentine style sword fight) while the Sword/Rapier (Ax...) is primarily used for attack. That doesn't mean you can't use a dagger, buckler, or shield for attack, but that's not what you strapped it to your belt for. That's not what it's designed for, people use all sorts of things to attack, too. (Trying to cover all the FAQs here. Never going to happen, IK.) A shield can also be used for Edge Parries. This is critical in your decision whether to carry a shield, or a buckler. Are you planning on getting shot at? Might want to carry the shield. (Bucklers are also a hell of a lot easier to carry) Just want something to defend yourself in case of a duel, or robber? A buckler should do. Matt mentions that they were popular with civilians on the street, because they weren't expecting to run into massed archers, in formation. Maybe an Pistol. That's another critical difference: In formation, shields are useful for a defensive line, and a buckler is essentially useless. (Once the formations break down to a general melee, any sidearm might be useful, and there's really no predicting what you'll need. Unfortunately, you can't carry a sword, longsword, shield, spear, mace, and ax like you can in games, so chose wisely.)
On the discussion of extant treatises discussing the rotella, Capoferro describes its use paired with rapier in plates 42 and 43 of the Great Representation.
Hello Matt, I saw this statement today on a message board. This doesn't make much sense to me. Can you please address the point made below? "But a Sabre is like a Left-handed opponent to regular swords. Regular Sword and Shield techniques as we know them weren't effective against a Sabers/Schamshirs/Scimitars curved blade, which had a deceptive true length on top of the cultural martial arts that used them being able to just work around a shield easily." Thanks Max
Ive read I. 33 in translation and it gives different advice than the Bolognese or other Italian books. The buckler in that source is used more like the how the later rotella or round shield is advised to be used.
Matt, Hello! Could you please do a video about underarm versus overarm for daggers. I am thinking not only for Medieval & Renaissance Europe, but for more or less all periods and areas. Keep up the good work and cheers !!
scholagladiatoria Is it true that we get the term swashbuckler, that is used to refer to some kinds of fighters, from the sound that the sword makes moving against the buckler when worn on the hip?
@@The1Helleri you have it almost correct, "swash" was an imitative word of something heavy falling or hitting, however instead of it being a "natural" clanking sound (hip wear) as you suggest it seems the noise was made deliberately by grinding the sword against your shield in order to intimidate an opponent, you are literally "swashing your buckler".
@@darthkek1953 So instead of being a derogatory term (as under my previous understanding of it I'd think it would have been used by common folk to refer to them in a mocking way). It was instead descriptive of something they would do just before fighting... Interesting stuff, thanks for the reply.
I am new to this channel, so sorry if was covered already at one point... But I'd love to see a comparison between Langes Messer, Großes Messer and a sword of that era. From what I know both types of Messer where basically developed as a response to the fact that only noblemen were allowed to carry double-edged swords in the Holy Roman Empire. So it would be interesting to see how these commoners weapons actually compare to a sword. And it's quite funny that even then people tried to find legal loopholes.
may I see some source saying only nobleman could carry double edge weapons in Heilige Römische Reich? - important note HRE didnt have unified legal system, tons of local laws thou ...
The only source that I found says that the double-edged sword remains a purely "knightly" weapon throughout the middle ages. It's in german though and a book that is focused on descriptions on the weapons, not the legal issues. So I can't deduct from there wether they were not allowed to carry a sword, or just couldn't afford it... The german wikipedia article about the "langes Messer" states that they were developed in the late middle-ages / early renaissance due to the noblemens privilege of carrying double-edged swords and the demand for a civilian defense weapon in the growing free cities. But they unfortunately don't link a source there. Looking further would be a bit too time consuming for my taste...
morbvsclz yes send me the name of the book and the author (also what pages i can find it at) thank you in advance. wiki dont take as serious source well for almost anything ... also i updated my 1st comment it DIDNT have unified law system :) that was the point emphasized :) and digging for truth is always worth it dont you think? :)
It's available to view online: archive.org/stream/handbuchderwaff00collgoog#page/n249/mode/2up The link should take you to the page (p232) that states that the sword was considered an exclusively knightly weapon. But as I said it does not clearly state why that is, wether it being price or due to class/status privilege. P 238 mentions something similar as well. [...in case a foot-servant was allowed to carry a sword at all, which was considered purely a weapon of the nobleman, the knight. Even in Italy, where they were not as much looked down upon, in the 12th century they only ever carried pikes] I haven't looked much further so far... Actually quite a nice book I think. Does not help too much here though... Let's just say this much. Even if commoners were allowed to carry swords, they probably could not afford one. And even if they could afford it, I imagine they could have gotten in trouble for carrying something that was considered a symbol of knighthood. Probably like breaking a taboo. (I talk about civilian life now, common soldiers on duty are probably a different story yet again)
Matt Easton, could you do a video on what you think cross guard leather flaps such were for? If you look at groups such as Hammaborg, they have them on their swords and you mentioned that in many towns in Germany, civilians were allowed to carry sword length blades and I've read that those towns in Germany and Italy were essentially the dueling centers of Europe.
A few questions: Were boss- or bar-held shields used (fairly commonly) at the same time as strap-on shields? Were heater shields ever center-grip? And would wearing a shield (and/or polearm) in a Renaissance city raise similar reactions to casually having an AK-47 on your shoulder in modern day?
Noah Weisbrod Boss-held shields did continue in use, though with much less frequency, after the introduction of strapped shields. There are images showing boss-gripped heater shields used on foot, yes, though they appear to have been rare. Carrying weapons of war around in some medieval cities would have probably attracted the attention of the aldermen and law enforcers, yes. Revolts and civil unrest was not uncommon in medieval Europe and the governments were careful to keep their populations peaceful or relatively poorly armed.
Most people continued using boss-held shields when the Classical-Hellenistic Greeks and the people they influenced were using strap-on shields, in spite of the fact that Greeks (and their copycats) were everywhere.
Josh Ridinger different period though and the Greeks used the strapped shield for a very different reason - the Hoplon stops you being a hero, it's specifically designed to be great in formation but is terrible in a one on one situation so it forces troops to stick together in the phalanx. Also the lack of stirrups and canted saddles prevented the development of true heavy cavalry, which was the main driver behind the uptake of strapped shields in the medieval period
Personally, I started preferring the 'dark souls' style vertical grip on small and medium shields. Seems to give (me at least, with a previous severe reconstruction on my left elbow) more leverage and stability.
Hey, Matt. I really like your videos and the way you put the inforation, but PLEASE, write the names you speak. I can't spell most of the shield names you said and a lot of times it happens with other kind of wepons. Also images would be really nice. Thanks!
Boss held shields seem to have been predominant for over 1000 years, even though there were exceptions like the Hoplon. Do you have a theory about what triggered the transition from boss held to strapped shields in medieval europe? Under what circumstances do they become the better alternative?
My theory: Those boss held guys were mainly infantry - I'm not saying the center held shield was never used on horseback, but it's a footman's design. The rise of shock cavalry meant that a knight needed a way to have a shield but also hold the reins. A strapped shield moves your hand to the edge of the shield - a center held shield means there's many inches of wood in the way. Also having hold of the reins means your left arm is vulnerable because any movement to avoid a strike will cost you control of the horse. When limb armor got good enough to protect the arm and hand on it's own then the shield became redundant.
i think he mentioned somwhere in the video, that centergrip works better to defend your limbs from incoming strikes, which is quite important in a low/no armour situation. with full body armour becoming more popular, that probably became less of an issue, and i suppose that holding a shield strapped to your arm is more convenient than having to hold it in your hand, because with a centergrip the entire weight of the shield is held by your wrist.
It makes a lot of sense, at least for the heater shield. A theory that explains boss vs straps for all shields is probably to much to ask for. Does anyone know about parthian or other late hellenistic shields? They used heavy shock cavalry much earlier.
Johannes Wolber Just looked online, 80% of the images of cataphract type cavalry show no shield. The rest had forearm mounted shields that were round, but otherwise similar to a heater.
Quick question regarding the maru dhal indo-persian parrying bucklers. Isn't that the best of both worlds then? You have long protruding steel tipped horns on opposite ends for potential thrusting & binding as well as further inhibiting the opponent's line of attack "area"
Rapier and buckler was done, but the dagger is better at dealing with thrusts than bucklers are and the dagger was easier to carry, so for that reason in the age of the rapier the dagger became more popular as a companion to the rapier.
Sword and buckler almost always beats Longsword, it takes a lot of time to work out and figure out how to best a sword and buckler guy. I spent months on end practicing and trying to work out ways to best a sword and buckler fighter. It is very hard and you have to more out think, and feint out your foe to make your opponent over extend the buckler then take his wrist.
Do you have que cards/outline that you use when making your videos or is this completely extemporaneous? What kind of prep do you put in before you film? Excellent work, I enjoy your videos.
That's some skills! Thanks for sharing your knowledge. It is good to find both knowledge & presentation skills together, it makes for enjoyable instruction.
Were these treatises on fencing and other dueling techniques written by single individuals or were they more of a compilation of techniques gathered together into a kind of reference manual? If the former, is much known about these swordmasters? If you haven't done so already, I think a video on the personalities behind the blades is something I'd definitely be interested in.
How much of an issue is visibility in a comparison between parrying daggers, bucklers, and shields. Without any practical experience with shields I can image it ranging from almost no effect on your ability to see, to completely obscuring half your vision. Are there any treatises that discuss using obscured vision against an opponent using a buckler or shield?
I had always thought that swords were rather expensive items in the past. What percentage of people in the various times sword and buckler were popular would have actually them? What was their relative social class and how would it compare to people's incomes today? How many people would have carried simpler weapons like knives or clubs?
Early middle ages,swords were definitely expensive, starting around the high middle as Matt has should shown because the ability to mine for purer iron ore and accumulation, swords now could range from very expensive to very cheap,essentially if you in position that you weren't just living for living, a person could save up enough money to buy a sword. In most Western Europeon countries besides Italy and The Holy Roman Empire, swords were illegal to carry in a city, unless you were a knight or higher in social class, you can see this is the Canterbury tales, the only person depicted carrying a sword was the Knight a person traveling in from the countryside. Knives and daggers would be able to be owned by literally everyone and you can see this is their wide ranged of metal content, from high carbon, heat treated blades or iron spine with forged welded steel edges.
I've noticed most bucklers have a u shaped handle that bulges out (like your's mine is similar). I realize this is probably done to fit a protective glove or because it is cheaper than making the dome bigger, but is it really historically accurate? I thought most bucklers historically had recessed or flat handles. Maybe all our hema bucklers are wrong!!!!
Super late to this vid but around min 16.40 I can feel Link from the Zelda games slinking off in embarrassment. I visited this vid due to wanting to use my left hand more vs. Sabre.
Did bucklers ever have a spike,as seen on many targes? It seems a logical way to increase your weapon power, with more protection than a "Poignard de la Main Gauche"!
Just to add my own thoughts on comparing bucklers vs large round shields. I have both. The buckler weighs a little under 2lbs, approximately the weight of a one-handed sword. The round shield weighs ~5kg (11 lbs). It is quite exhausting to hold up and especially tiring on the muscles of the forearm, shoulder and upper back and is extremely cumbersome in places like doorways where there isn't much space. Additionally while it blocks off a lot of your opponent's lines of attack, it also closes a lot of yours. These two factors mean that I feel fighting with a sword and large shield is all about managing the shield; it becomes your primary focus. In the context of a straight up fight I think I would actually prefer the buckler as it is less tiring to hold and the weight doesn't affect your balance as much, but in a wider military context the larger shield would provide better protection from missiles and can be used as part of a formation with your mates, so I think that the design of the two shield types reflects their different historical roles as civilian and military tools.
With the popularity of using wood for shields and weapons throughout the ages, why was wooden armor pieces never considered if you couldn't afford metal armor?
Is combining a sword and a shield on one weapon a good idea? Like making a katar that covers the outer part of the lower arm. If yes, would it be practical to dual such weapon? If no, what weapon would pair with it well?
You mentioned that bucklers were worn attached to the sword hilt, but I've also seen some modern bucklers with clips to attach them to your belt. How were bucklers usually worn?
scholagladiatoria What's your favorite Albion single handed sword for sword and buckler play? I'm thinking about getting one, and it seems that the Knight is very highly rated by the good folks in myarmoury....
John Huang I don't really know, I suppose it depends on what period you are most interested it and what kind of fighting (civilian or military). For unarmoured duelling the Poitiers, Squire, Lancaster, Condottiere and Doge all seem great - I would personally go for a point of balance closer to the hand, good blade length and overal lightness. Extra hand protection like on the Condottiere or Doge is a bonus.
Were bucklers always round? Or were they in other shapes prior to the 16th century, what of the shoulder mounted shields of then seen in jousts? also what do you know of later sheild types seen in German manuscripts used for spears with holes or slots cut into the side? Would be very interested to know.
Is there historical evidence for shields made of hide over a wooden frame, in Europe? And does the weight/material difference change how it would be employed Vs. a wooden shield?
I have trained in hema for 6 months now and i have grown a curiosity for the knightly shield. Since there are only personal interpretations available for that, were would you recomend to start? I Think that type of shield is a part of the european martial arts and still should have a place in HEMA. Thanks for great videos!
I was thinking, considering that a shield is as much defense as it can (potentially) be an offense weapon, what if you attached a rainbow shaped blade at the bottom of your shield that is sticking out maybe a few inches out of it? Or maybe just make the outer ring of the shield from solid steel and then sharpen the bottom half of it? It could be used in a sweeping motion with your left hand to cut your opponent, to me it sounds practical. What do you think?
But seriously. An opponent could slide his or hers sword into the gap, and pull the shield away from you. And that thing will do nothing. Even if it does hit. The blade on it won't be able to get proper edge alignment for a cut. It can go backwards, up. It might go forwards, put it would make an easy target.
I watched two belegarth fighters fighting and had an epiphany that the flail outshines the axe and sword in getting around shields while still preserve the full kinetic energy of the strike (the ball on chain will continue flying at full velocity even when the stick is blocked). But I also read a text that said flails are not real medieval weapons. Do you have any insight into this?
the problem with a flail is that you can't use it in a formation. From what I've heard, and this is all hearsay, they did exist but very rarely and more as "terror weapons"
but saying tower shield would be wrong? I mean they do look like towers, it's a very intuitive name why would be ridiculous to carry a big shield in your back? I think it looks nice, specially if the shield is painted. Also how heavy are these big shields(pavise, tower)? ~3 kg?
just an open observation , your more willy nilly defensive fighter hence the ideal of more optional defensiveness to your choices . this is an observation and i maybe very well wrong but the impression you give is based upon defensive stand point
you could still carry both the longsword and the buckler, after all one of the advantages of longswords is that you can switch between one handed and two handed grip at will
But a longsword is more encubering than a armingsword or messer. Bare in mind that you carry the sword 99% of the time, not using it, as matt said often.
Blank- blade yes, but the difference would be minimal and you would get a reach advantage. Arming sword weighs around 1kg and has roughly a 90cm reach, longsword (the smaller ones) weight around 1.5-2kg, and have a 110-120cm reach. Granted it would not feel as nimble in the hand, nor it would have an extra hand guard, but one thing it would excell in would be versatility. If you lose the buckler and you have a longsword, you can two hand your weapon and still get an offense boost over your opponent; if you have an arming sword (or any other exclusive 1h sword) however, and you lose the bucker, you can't compensate your loss in any way. Longsword would arguably fair better against multiple opponents because of some factors: buckler would lose a lot of efficacy, better reach, better leverage and hence speed. In the end it would probably be a question of taste, and which swords are acceptable in civilian life for any given period.
melchaios that is not viable combat option - hint: weight alone say nothing about the way such a lever as longsword trully handles :) try it its not superior in any way in real world physics
Firstly, yes you could and it was done occasionally - the sword and buckler shown in Paulus Kal's treatise (mid-15th century) clearly shows a bastard sword and a buckler. However that is the only source I know of that shows it. In general the problem with doing it is that a one handed sword is usually a better one-handed sword than a longsword is (they are specialised for it, after all). You can use a longsword one-handed (for example on a horse, or if climbing a ladder), but they are generally not as quick or nimble as a one-hander (unless it's essentially a one-hander with a longer grip). So what you gain in length you lose in speed, stamina and general fencing ability.
Isn´t Talhoffers treatises partly about the dulling shield. I thing thats how one on one fighting with a wiking schild must have been. correct me if I am wrong.
scholagladiatoria I was wondering if you could answer a question I've had brewing for awhile. You mention the use of dagger and targe by the highland scots. Well, I boffer fight regularly, and wear a targe while using various two handed blades. However, boffer fighting is obviously far from true heavy fighting ,and I was wondering if you thought that this use of targe with a two handed weapon would be plausible in, as I said, actual heavy fighting.
I don't know if this is stupid or not, but when you describe things and bring up new names... it would be nice if you could spell what you are going to talk about on the description. I have found myself trying to guess how what you said is spelled several times... bo...what? shields?
Matt - Is there any circumstance in which you would prefer the longsword to the sword and buckler / shield? I've been wondering why the longsword was considered the noble or knight's weapon and forbidden to peasants. If the arming sword and bucker is superior to the longsword, I'd think the aristocracy would take the better gear for themselves.
docjjp Many noblemen did wear/use the sword and buckler rather than the longsword. But of course the sword and buckler is optimised for unamoured fighting and the longsword and rondel dagger are optimised for armoured fighting - and noblemen always fought armoured in war. So really what we are looking at is civilian vs military and noblemen often liked to appear with their military gear, as it showed their status.
docjjp If you're in full plate armour, you don't need to do much to actively protect yourself so you might as well go for the offensive power of the longsword. Also, against other people in plate armour, the longsword is perhaps more useful with grappling and half-swording techniques (which of course can be done with an arming sword but not as well I imagine)
One thing I never understood was while swords and such are exceptionally sharp I still don't understand how they can cut through plate armor and not simply bounce off of it if you could answer it would be great thanks :)
In short; they generally can't. Plate armour (especially towards the end of the Middle Ages) was incredibly effective at deflecting blows from cutting and thrusting weapons. That is not to say it was invulnerable; there are always weaknesses in joints, and a sufficiently large sword (think greatsword) moving at a fast pace may be able to batter its way through plate armour. Instead, blunt force trauma weapons such as the mace were generally used against plate armour.
Lexicon343 It's only possible if you have enough strength and a massive sword (think Sandor Clegane). Even then, it won't always penetrate. Fortunately, plate armour isn't common in the Game of Thrones Universe,
"Sword and Buckler are pretty awesome"
- Matt Easton 2014
Well, they are :-) If I had more time then sword and buckler is one of the things I'd like to get better at.
i think... he was talking about the grammar...
Of all your videos I've seen so far, this one was the biggest knowledge bomb on me. Having owned a buckler for a few years, read I33, and most of my melee skill being with one handed long blade, this really spoke to me. I've watched it several times just trying to truly absorb it all. Thank you.
I really like "tower shields" to use the DnD term, having rocked a heavy one in LARP for 5 years and loved every second and pound of it. I love Roman history and want to work private security one day. Any information or future videos you could provide on this "class" of shield would be most appreciated.
Thank you for distinguishing buckler from targe from heater/kite shield from pavise/tower shield from Norman shield. I've adopted as the base item versions for my home version of VTM and DnD, because I take accuracy of weapon, armor, ammunition, etc stats very seriously, because I enjoy realism in RPGs, and think characters should have diverse options. Thank you.
Some roman and gaulish reenactment groups do some really interesting stuff with scutums.
czcams.com/video/jFpjEWXmRz8/video.html
Another example, which also briefly mentions a difference between probable roman bosse-thrusting and gaulish edge-thrusting techniques due to eventual differences in how their scutums developed czcams.com/video/OcMK80V8DWg/video.html
@@EidolonSpecus Dude, these are awesome! Thank you! I appreciate you sharing
I feel like this is how geometry should be taught...angles make a lot more sense when you have this kind of visual
@scholagladiatoria: I've counted everytime you promise "to talk about that in another video". Are you aware that you owe the internet about 7.000 vids about shields n spears n stuff? :)
klappspatenkamikaze Well I intend to a live a few years more :-)
Check his latest video out, he's going to deliver, fear not.
I really enjoyed this video! I love the mix of glimpses into medieval life and how they informed the use and popularity of different weapons.
This was one of my favorite videos that you've done. Good work!
You heard the man, asking questions leads to more videos.
QUESTION HIM!
Ok, when will he learn to add a comment to his video?
If anyone needs a frame of reference, carrying a sword is like carrying a pistol - very lightweight, very convenient and very quick to deploy. Carrying around a full sized shield or a polearm would be the equivalent to carrying around a rifle. The rifle is very much a field weapon (whether it's hunting or battlefield) and so would a polearm, shield or greatsword. Trust me, it gets very annoying and tiring to have to carry that around for hours on end. I was once a Marine, but just ask anyone who's been hunting, and they'll tell you the same thing.
Great vid as always, Matt!
Thanks for taking the time to do such an in depth discussion. Really good stuff. I can see how the buckler could provide nearly as much protection as a full sized shield. It makes up for it's small size by being more nimble and being able to be held closer to the adversary. I think it come up short versus missiles since there is no cone of defense anymore when the shots are coming in on parallel lines. And yes, in a civilian setting, that bit isn't important - you're not going to be standing in formation under a barrage of arrows.
I was just lookin gat buckler stuff on your channel yesterday, so perfect timing for me :P
Using sagas to rebuild ancient fighting styles is like trying to learn WWII combat by reading Captain America comics.
hshhahhha
Me and a friend just decided to pick up some Cold Steel training swords and try out some fencing. I'll be using your videos as reference! :D
Cool :-)
i will see you in Valhalla
Because of this video, I purchased the cold steel buckler. After two hours, of practical reasoning, being right handed. I would use the buckler in my right hand, my sword in my hand. You may think that would not make sense. After just two hours with the buckler, I have a second one on the way. I can't wait to see how it fills to use two at once. Thanks.
Interesting to see you put you take in with the skullagrim and demomanchaos recent talk on the shields, all three of you seem to have had a pulse on the subject at once. thank you very much for the education, entertainments and continued contribution to the 'community'.
Demomanchaos got popular did he?
It does not matter if someone is popular if they produce a good idea or contribute to something. Also youtubers are not born into popularity either.
sexyxenomorph
Oh I'm perfectly happy for the guy if he got popular, and I'm sure he has some fine ideas, I've just also debated with him a while back about some of his less fine ideas (mostly parrying with the flat).
in either case everyone seems quiet receptive to criticism and hopefully we'll see the ball bounce around the sides before finding center.
sexyxenomorph
I will certainly say that he wasn't unpleasant to deal with.
There is an anecdote about carrying a sword and buckler in town. Carrying the buckler with the sword on the same side would cause one to knock against the other, making a characteristic noise with every step. In Italian, this was referred to as 'fare figo', which means 'to be cool'.
Great video Matt, I really enjoyed this one. Gonna report back to my D&D crew.
Your videos are great, keep up the good work.
OMG! A video over 10 minutes! You spoil me. :D
I have a recreation of a targe that I bought because it looked cool, and have used for fancy dress on occasion, and I can attest to the fact that it does make everyday activities unnecessarily arduous
I agree with your choice of weapons for wandering those scary places. I'd feel good having them in most modern scary places, much better off than most with the bare minimum of kit.
Your videos are always brilliant. Choc full of information.
great video, but I love that you give your opinion about what you would carry given the choice.
Great video! Keep it up!
Having spent many minutes using you for steady sight and small adjustment practice on a big screen, I can say that buckler makes it tougher to aim at you as well. Could just be the camera, but it tends to cover the spots I want to aim at and only leave me small bits. It's pretty fun! I've seen Skall's demonstration of how surprisingly well Medieval armor does against modern firearms. Not suggesting it's great, only that it's not insignificant.
"bolognese sources" the pun always makes me smirk.
I've always been fond of the Spanish rodelero kit setup; this video was quite enjoyable. :D
Very interesting and well-thought out commentary on the buckler. The buckler would definitely have become evolved with smaller, faster weapons such as the rapier or stilletto. It also would have been used more aggressively to punch rather than block like a cestus.
About 20 years ago, I saw an experiment where someone built themselves a buckler to practice padded swordplay. He tried to extend with the buckler to deflect and nearly has his wrist snapped by the first sword blow. While it may have been his blocking technique, it certainly appeared that extending the buckler was a mistake.
+Morgan Nec, I've seen no historical evidence that "punch" parries were common with the buckler.
A buckler looks like something that you could cook some bacon and eggs on...
And due to angles, at close range a buckler is big protection...
Not big protection at all from distant missle attacks, but it is big from close attacks.
I agree 100% with your choice of civilian self-defense weapons in the Middle Ages etc. I wish it was acceptable (and legal...) to wear a sword and buckler today. I would wear them everywhere in addition to my pistol and iiiA armor to be as secure as I can be and still live normal life; maybe a FAST iiiA ballistic helmet.
Thanks for this awesome video. Very educational. I always wondered about why someone would elect to use a buckler over a "normal" round or kite shield that covers more of the body with minimal movement. And I suppose the answer, in short, is that they are lighter and more maneuverable while still providing ample protection (in duels - open battlefields... not so great against arrows or spears/polearms) by holding them to closer to your opponent and simply blocking the essential lines and angles at arm's length rather than being held to the body. Way easier to carry and cheaper for the average civilian or foot soldier.
crzymn246 A more recent video on the topic: @watch?v=s7mmCG5JmnY&lc=z12dy3ziqtigvtdz504cfdhhnt32cttp10g
scholagladiatoria Thanks again! I will check that video out.
If I lived "back then" (or even now...) I would carry a buckler just to stay always ready and have a "tower shield" for when I truly expect to fight. I adopt this "light/always ready/covert" and "heavy/expecting combat/overt" philosophy in my EDC gear selection, RPG characters, etc.
I know you think it is silly or absurd or even dangerous to go around wearing weapons and armor all day while working a normal civilian life. I happily do with no problem and I look quite ordinary. Not going around "looking silly" as you say in a modern context means I don't wear my AK around my neck with my chest rig of hard armor plates and 9 spare magazines and pistol tucked with helmet and elbow/knee pads like a Western soldier in a warzone. THAT would be absurd, crazy, and very tough (Roman soldier level, I aspire to it). Hiking that way is fun tho. That's the equivalent of going around in full plate with my halberd and longsword etc. in the Medieval context. I would never work a field or tend a forge or brick up a building in full plate with my greatsword on the back as for traveling. I agree, unless you expect to fight or it's your job that's not the way to go.
But for RPG characters, that IS their job, kicking down doors and fighting mobs. So just have NPCs react to these unique stand out people the way they should.
In the modern context, my armor is very concealable and only for the torso (Metatron's chainmail appeals to me, I'll try it). I've got a pistol the size of a big dagger squished about a bit, and a few pockets have things the size of a cell phone in them. You couldn't pick me out without a DC 15 spot check lol That's the midevial equivalent of just having a light coat of mail or a light breastplate and bringing a longblade and buckler around with a dagger or knife. People did that all the time, except for the armor. It would have saved many lives.
Some people carry folding knives (most common weapon for crime, they scare me) clipped in a pocket where everyone can see them. I show less lethal force than that look (which people in the US usually dismiss). So no, I don't "look silly." Neither do my RPG character *single tear rolls down cheek, meanie* Everything is concealed. No, it's not that hard to do or difficult to live with. In fact, it's great exercise, good fun as harmless as I am, and provides real security to me and anyone innocent I have the power to help. If more people did like I did, the world would be a safer place because there would be less helpless victims and fewer passive or powerless bystanders. Evil doesn't like to do what it can't get away with clean and easily or fight battles it might loose or take risks it doesn't have to. Deterrence.
In medieval swordsmanship the guards are positions of action, as you said. You start or finish a move with them, however I've noticed in 19th century saber, the guards are basically already parrying positions. How did this development come by and why wasn't it done earlier?
You touched this topic briefly here and I think it would be great to expand on.
Yes, that's generally true - the reason is hand protection. If you try and use a medieval sword like a sabre then you get hit in the hand a lot. The more protective hilt makes it possible to hold the sword out in front more safely.
Could you possibly do a video on utilizing shields as weapons during combat?
I've just ordered two as they will easily fit in an EDC bag.
Much like the buckler, the viking/round shield is much more effective if not held flat forwards. With a buckler you're looking for a reasonably shallow angle, maybe 25-30 degrees off of flat on, but with a round shield you can have it almost directly edge on and it'll work much better - it closes off lines more effectively, it catches more cuts on the flat, it gives you more offensive options, etc. As you mention though, we have no sources for this.
As far as I'm aware (read: people who know more about this than me have told me) round shields should not be particularly heavy and you should be able to hold them extended for reasonable amounts of time (like a rotella, for example). Still not something you want to carry around all day though. Many re-enactors, at least here, are guilty of having overly heavy shields, because they understandably don't want their shields getting damaged all the time.
Nice video, as always!
Holding "viking"/migration-era round shields edge-out is no doubt very effective. I doubt it's "The" right way to use them, though. Remember these shields were not just used for duels, but also for formation/shield wall combat. Holding them face-forward was probably extremely common in this context.
Josh Ridinger
I did forget to mention that, thanks. Yes, shield walls most certainly don't work unless you hold the shield face-on. I should have mentioned that I was talking about the context of single combat.
Yes! More shields please! I don't know if it's your expertise, but can we have an analysis of spear and shield, particularly Hoplite use, and comparisons to sword and shield use, both in war or duel, particularly how Hoplite combat declined, I'm super curious.
Thumbs up, more longer videos please, I think we've got the attention span.
Really looking forward to your video on dueling shields. Such weird looking things.
Hey Matt. I've recently started doing a historical-combat focused larp. While I fully realize that padded weapons and their use in the point system is VASTLY different from historical combat (with the padded weapons you tend to strike as quickly and often as possible, and of course, aren't nearly as worried about being hit), I've still noticed a few small similarities. The way shields are used, for instance, seems to be pretty on-point.
I would love for you to do a video about how to get around shields! It's one problem I've been having in the practice. When we are doing sword and shield practice, it seems the only way to get past a shield is to bind it up or get a really effect feint in to make them move it aside.
I'd love to hear your opinion and see your ideas for defeating a shield, getting around it and whatnot. the safest ways to do so and any other thoughts you have on the topic would be greatly appreciated! Thank you so much I've learned tonnes from all of your videos!
I know this was a year ago, and you might have found an answer to it, but anyway:
I do not know how historical it might be, but atleast in the SCA there is a strike called a Wrap. You basically let your weapon rotate around your hand, to strike with the back edge around your opponent. It allows you to strike the whole backside of the one you are fighting, and ofcourse also get around shields and wards. Effective when fighting a lefty and taking out their sword arm =)
Caveat: This is used almost exclusively in SCA Heavy Fighting. I have had success with it in SCA fencing/HEMA, but alot less. You are most often not close enough to do it, and it requires greater control of your opponent than just feinting and striking him. But if you meet a big shield, bind him up and strike him across the butt :D
I like that you differentiate between a buckler, and a shield. Bucklers aren't shields, that's like calling a dagger a sword. They're similar, they're used similarly, but the critical difference for me is a shield has enough coverage to be effective against Arrows (Slingstones, light shot in some cases) A buckler is for Parrying, a shield is for Blocking. Just like a parrying dagger/main gauche is primarily used for defense (In a Florentine style sword fight) while the Sword/Rapier (Ax...) is primarily used for attack. That doesn't mean you can't use a dagger, buckler, or shield for attack, but that's not what you strapped it to your belt for. That's not what it's designed for, people use all sorts of things to attack, too. (Trying to cover all the FAQs here. Never going to happen, IK.) A shield can also be used for Edge Parries. This is critical in your decision whether to carry a shield, or a buckler. Are you planning on getting shot at? Might want to carry the shield. (Bucklers are also a hell of a lot easier to carry) Just want something to defend yourself in case of a duel, or robber? A buckler should do. Matt mentions that they were popular with civilians on the street, because they weren't expecting to run into massed archers, in formation. Maybe an Pistol. That's another critical difference: In formation, shields are useful for a defensive line, and a buckler is essentially useless. (Once the formations break down to a general melee, any sidearm might be useful, and there's really no predicting what you'll need. Unfortunately, you can't carry a sword, longsword, shield, spear, mace, and ax like you can in games, so chose wisely.)
On the discussion of extant treatises discussing the rotella, Capoferro describes its use paired with rapier in plates 42 and 43 of the Great Representation.
This video has helped me understand why I'm good with a viking shield and crap with a buckler.
They're used in remarkably similar ways, so why the difference?
Daniel Blay
I hold my hands in close to my body. Almost like a boxing stance with either buckler or shield.
Nich Adams
Both work better when extended, especially if you have the shield edge on (in single combat).
Daniel Blay
My shield is too heavy to fight extended with. I only extend my shield when I attack, which simultaneously blocks.
Nich Adams
Ah, your shield is probably too heavy then. I'm told that the historical examples found of round shields are reasonably light.
Hello Matt,
I saw this statement today on a message board. This doesn't make much sense to me. Can you please address the point made below?
"But a Sabre is like a Left-handed opponent to regular swords.
Regular Sword and Shield techniques as we know them weren't effective against a Sabers/Schamshirs/Scimitars curved blade, which had a deceptive true length on top of the cultural martial arts that used them being able to just work around a shield easily."
Thanks Max
Ive read I. 33 in translation and it gives different advice than the Bolognese or other Italian books. The buckler in that source is used more like the how the later rotella or round shield is advised to be used.
I made a video response on this subject, you can watch it one my youtube channel.
Matt,
Hello! Could you please do a video about underarm versus overarm for daggers. I am thinking not only for Medieval & Renaissance Europe, but for more or less all periods and areas. Keep up the good work and cheers !!
Nice...thank you for sharing!
scholagladiatoria
Is it true that we get the term swashbuckler, that is used to refer to some kinds of fighters, from the sound that the sword makes moving against the buckler when worn on the hip?
***** That's the story. I think it is guess-work, as I've never seen historical confirmation, but it makes sense.
Sort of like how tanks supposedly got their name I guess.
@@The1Helleri you have it almost correct, "swash" was an imitative word of something heavy falling or hitting, however instead of it being a "natural" clanking sound (hip wear) as you suggest it seems the noise was made deliberately by grinding the sword against your shield in order to intimidate an opponent, you are literally "swashing your buckler".
@@darthkek1953 So instead of being a derogatory term (as under my previous understanding of it I'd think it would have been used by common folk to refer to them in a mocking way). It was instead descriptive of something they would do just before fighting... Interesting stuff, thanks for the reply.
@@The1Helleri people were quite descriptive back then, but the term might also have been derogatory too - I have no idea if so.
Also technically a Shield is used to block/stop an attack and the Buckler to Deflect, or sort of a non weapon parry.
many depictions of gurkha footmen, gurkha kings/shahs, carrying EDC bucklers&kukries, PLUS even EDC talwar (talwar-related)
I am new to this channel, so sorry if was covered already at one point... But I'd love to see a comparison between Langes Messer, Großes Messer and a sword of that era. From what I know both types of Messer where basically developed as a response to the fact that only noblemen were allowed to carry double-edged swords in the Holy Roman Empire. So it would be interesting to see how these commoners weapons actually compare to a sword. And it's quite funny that even then people tried to find legal loopholes.
may I see some source saying only nobleman could carry double edge weapons in Heilige Römische Reich? - important note HRE didnt have unified legal system, tons of local laws thou ...
The only source that I found says that the double-edged sword remains a purely "knightly" weapon throughout the middle ages. It's in german though and a book that is focused on descriptions on the weapons, not the legal issues. So I can't deduct from there wether they were not allowed to carry a sword, or just couldn't afford it... The german wikipedia article about the "langes Messer" states that they were developed in the late middle-ages / early renaissance due to the noblemens privilege of carrying double-edged swords and the demand for a civilian defense weapon in the growing free cities. But they unfortunately don't link a source there. Looking further would be a bit too time consuming for my taste...
morbvsclz yes send me the name of the book and the author (also what pages i can find it at) thank you in advance.
wiki dont take as serious source well for almost anything ... also i updated my 1st comment it DIDNT have unified law system :) that was the point emphasized :)
and digging for truth is always worth it dont you think? :)
It's available to view online:
archive.org/stream/handbuchderwaff00collgoog#page/n249/mode/2up
The link should take you to the page (p232) that states that the sword was considered an exclusively knightly weapon. But as I said it does not clearly state why that is, wether it being price or due to class/status privilege. P 238 mentions something similar as well. [...in case a foot-servant was allowed to carry a sword at all, which was considered purely a weapon of the nobleman, the knight. Even in Italy, where they were not as much looked down upon, in the 12th century they only ever carried pikes]
I haven't looked much further so far...
Actually quite a nice book I think. Does not help too much here though... Let's just say this much. Even if commoners were allowed to carry swords, they probably could not afford one. And even if they could afford it, I imagine they could have gotten in trouble for carrying something that was considered a symbol of knighthood. Probably like breaking a taboo. (I talk about civilian life now, common soldiers on duty are probably a different story yet again)
Matt Easton, could you do a video on what you think cross guard leather flaps such were for? If you look at groups such as Hammaborg, they have them on their swords and you mentioned that in many towns in Germany, civilians were allowed to carry sword length blades and I've read that those towns in Germany and Italy were essentially the dueling centers of Europe.
A few questions: Were boss- or bar-held shields used (fairly commonly) at the same time as strap-on shields?
Were heater shields ever center-grip?
And would wearing a shield (and/or polearm) in a Renaissance city raise similar reactions to casually having an AK-47 on your shoulder in modern day?
Noah Weisbrod Boss-held shields did continue in use, though with much less frequency, after the introduction of strapped shields. There are images showing boss-gripped heater shields used on foot, yes, though they appear to have been rare. Carrying weapons of war around in some medieval cities would have probably attracted the attention of the aldermen and law enforcers, yes. Revolts and civil unrest was not uncommon in medieval Europe and the governments were careful to keep their populations peaceful or relatively poorly armed.
Most people continued using boss-held shields when the Classical-Hellenistic Greeks and the people they influenced were using strap-on shields, in spite of the fact that Greeks (and their copycats) were everywhere.
Josh Ridinger
different period though and the Greeks used the strapped shield for a very different reason - the Hoplon stops you being a hero, it's specifically designed to be great in formation but is terrible in a one on one situation so it forces troops to stick together in the phalanx. Also the lack of stirrups and canted saddles prevented the development of true heavy cavalry, which was the main driver behind the uptake of strapped shields in the medieval period
+scholagladiatoria great video. Thank you for posting. Do you have any information on the Chinese wicker shields? Were center grip or strap?
Matt,
What about the Fist Buckler by Kingston Arms? That's an interesting buckler.
Billy Collins loved Bucklers.
Personally, I started preferring the 'dark souls' style vertical grip on small and medium shields. Seems to give (me at least, with a previous severe reconstruction on my left elbow) more leverage and stability.
Hey, Matt. I really like your videos and the way you put the inforation, but PLEASE, write the names you speak. I can't spell most of the shield names you said and a lot of times it happens with other kind of wepons. Also images would be really nice.
Thanks!
Buckler, targe, heater, pavise, kite. There you go!
Boss held shields seem to have been predominant for over 1000 years, even though there were exceptions like the Hoplon. Do you have a theory about what triggered the transition from boss held to strapped shields in medieval europe? Under what circumstances do they become the better alternative?
My theory: Those boss held guys were mainly infantry - I'm not saying the center held shield was never used on horseback, but it's a footman's design. The rise of shock cavalry meant that a knight needed a way to have a shield but also hold the reins. A strapped shield moves your hand to the edge of the shield - a center held shield means there's many inches of wood in the way. Also having hold of the reins means your left arm is vulnerable because any movement to avoid a strike will cost you control of the horse. When limb armor got good enough to protect the arm and hand on it's own then the shield became redundant.
i think he mentioned somwhere in the video, that centergrip works better to defend your limbs from incoming strikes, which is quite important in a low/no armour situation. with full body armour becoming more popular, that probably became less of an issue, and i suppose that holding a shield strapped to your arm is more convenient than having to hold it in your hand, because with a centergrip the entire weight of the shield is held by your wrist.
just thinking - cavalry with stirups + shield strapped to your foearm you can hold the reins in the hand ...
It makes a lot of sense, at least for the heater shield. A theory that explains boss vs straps for all shields is probably to much to ask for. Does anyone know about parthian or other late hellenistic shields? They used heavy shock cavalry much earlier.
Johannes Wolber Just looked online, 80% of the images of cataphract type cavalry show no shield. The rest had forearm mounted shields that were round, but otherwise similar to a heater.
Quick question regarding the maru dhal indo-persian parrying bucklers. Isn't that the best of both worlds then? You have long protruding steel tipped horns on opposite ends for potential thrusting & binding as well as further inhibiting the opponent's line of attack "area"
What about rapier and buckler? Was this combination popular? Would it be better than sword and buckler?
Rapier and buckler was done, but the dagger is better at dealing with thrusts than bucklers are and the dagger was easier to carry, so for that reason in the age of the rapier the dagger became more popular as a companion to the rapier.
Sword and buckler almost always beats Longsword, it takes a lot of time to work out and figure out how to best a sword and buckler guy. I spent months on end practicing and trying to work out ways to best a sword and buckler fighter. It is very hard and you have to more out think, and feint out your foe to make your opponent over extend the buckler then take his wrist.
i've seen dozens of Nepalese period-art depictions, even a few photos, of gurkha foot soldiers, and 'kings', EDC kukri and buckler
Do you have que cards/outline that you use when making your videos or is this completely extemporaneous? What kind of prep do you put in before you film?
Excellent work, I enjoy your videos.
I sometimes make bullet points and stick them under the camera, but I haven't done that recently.
That's some skills! Thanks for sharing your knowledge. It is good to find both knowledge & presentation skills together, it makes for enjoyable instruction.
Were these treatises on fencing and other dueling techniques written by single individuals or were they more of a compilation of techniques gathered together into a kind of reference manual? If the former, is much known about these swordmasters?
If you haven't done so already, I think a video on the personalities behind the blades is something I'd definitely be interested in.
How much of an issue is visibility in a comparison between parrying daggers, bucklers, and shields. Without any practical experience with shields I can image it ranging from almost no effect on your ability to see, to completely obscuring half your vision. Are there any treatises that discuss using obscured vision against an opponent using a buckler or shield?
Would one carry a buckler with a later period sword. I'm thinking of the Munich Town Guard sword, which has a much more covered hand.
I had always thought that swords were rather expensive items in the past. What percentage of people in the various times sword and buckler were popular would have actually them? What was their relative social class and how would it compare to people's incomes today? How many people would have carried simpler weapons like knives or clubs?
Early middle ages,swords were definitely expensive, starting around the high middle as Matt has should shown because the ability to mine for purer iron ore and accumulation, swords now could range from very expensive to very cheap,essentially if you in position that you weren't just living for living, a person could save up enough money to buy a sword. In most Western Europeon countries besides Italy and The Holy Roman Empire, swords were illegal to carry in a city, unless you were a knight or higher in social class, you can see this is the Canterbury tales, the only person depicted carrying a sword was the Knight a person traveling in from the countryside. Knives and daggers would be able to be owned by literally everyone and you can see this is their wide ranged of metal content, from high carbon, heat treated blades or iron spine with forged welded steel edges.
I've noticed most bucklers have a u shaped handle that bulges out (like your's mine is similar). I realize this is probably done to fit a protective glove or because it is cheaper than making the dome bigger, but is it really historically accurate? I thought most bucklers historically had recessed or flat handles. Maybe all our hema bucklers are wrong!!!!
Super late to this vid but around min 16.40 I can feel Link from the Zelda games slinking off in embarrassment. I visited this vid due to wanting to use my left hand more vs. Sabre.
Did bucklers ever have a spike,as seen on many targes? It seems a logical way to increase your weapon power, with more protection than a "Poignard de la Main Gauche"!
It could for punching and catching blades
Yes bucklers did sometimes have spikes.
Just to add my own thoughts on comparing bucklers vs large round shields. I have both. The buckler weighs a little under 2lbs, approximately the weight of a one-handed sword. The round shield weighs ~5kg (11 lbs). It is quite exhausting to hold up and especially tiring on the muscles of the forearm, shoulder and upper back and is extremely cumbersome in places like doorways where there isn't much space. Additionally while it blocks off a lot of your opponent's lines of attack, it also closes a lot of yours. These two factors mean that I feel fighting with a sword and large shield is all about managing the shield; it becomes your primary focus. In the context of a straight up fight I think I would actually prefer the buckler as it is less tiring to hold and the weight doesn't affect your balance as much, but in a wider military context the larger shield would provide better protection from missiles and can be used as part of a formation with your mates, so I think that the design of the two shield types reflects their different historical roles as civilian and military tools.
With the popularity of using wood for shields and weapons throughout the ages, why was wooden armor pieces never considered if you couldn't afford metal armor?
Is combining a sword and a shield on one weapon a good idea? Like making a katar that covers the outer part of the lower arm. If yes, would it be practical to dual such weapon? If no, what weapon would pair with it well?
True Targes also had an 6"-8" spike on them.
You mentioned that bucklers were worn attached to the sword hilt, but I've also seen some modern bucklers with clips to attach them to your belt.
How were bucklers usually worn?
Would you ever use a buckler with a sabre, or is the hand protection good enough to make a buckler superfluous?
scholagladiatoria
What's your favorite Albion single handed sword for sword and buckler play? I'm thinking about getting one, and it seems that the Knight is very highly rated by the good folks in myarmoury....
John Huang I don't really know, I suppose it depends on what period you are most interested it and what kind of fighting (civilian or military). For unarmoured duelling the Poitiers, Squire, Lancaster, Condottiere and Doge all seem great - I would personally go for a point of balance closer to the hand, good blade length and overal lightness. Extra hand protection like on the Condottiere or Doge is a bonus.
scholagladiatoria Might I suggest their Maestro Line I:33 blade
As always a highly interesting chat with plenty of " I hate you Butler " It's (on the buses)
That looks exactly like my buckler... hey, have you been rifling through my collection?
Now imagine that comment in benders voice and look at your icon
Were bucklers always round? Or were they in other shapes prior to the 16th century, what of the shoulder mounted shields of then seen in jousts? also what do you know of later sheild types seen in German manuscripts used for spears with holes or slots cut into the side? Would be very interested to know.
+KinkyPinkFemboiAlex, not always, but usually.
Here's a question... As an off hand item, which would you prefer. A main-gauche or a buckler? Having more defense or the second edge?
+1UsedDj, buckler against a cutter, main gauche against a foiner.
Is there historical evidence for shields made of hide over a wooden frame, in Europe? And does the weight/material difference change how it would be employed Vs. a wooden shield?
A shield can provide some protection from spears and arrows.
I have trained in hema for 6 months now and i have grown a curiosity for the knightly shield. Since there are only personal interpretations available for that, were would you recomend to start? I Think that type of shield is a part of the european martial arts and still should have a place in HEMA. Thanks for great videos!
I was thinking, considering that a shield is as much defense as it can (potentially) be an offense weapon, what if you attached a rainbow shaped blade at the bottom of your shield that is sticking out maybe a few inches out of it?
Or maybe just make the outer ring of the shield from solid steel and then sharpen the bottom half of it?
It could be used in a sweeping motion with your left hand to cut your opponent, to me it sounds practical.
What do you think?
People that are new to weapons. #amiright?
But seriously. An opponent could slide his or hers sword into the gap, and pull the shield away from you. And that thing will do nothing. Even if it does hit. The blade on it won't be able to get proper edge alignment for a cut. It can go backwards, up. It might go forwards, put it would make an easy target.
I watched two belegarth fighters fighting and had an epiphany that the flail outshines the axe and sword in getting around shields while still preserve the full kinetic energy of the strike (the ball on chain will continue flying at full velocity even when the stick is blocked). But I also read a text that said flails are not real medieval weapons. Do you have any insight into this?
the problem with a flail is that you can't use it in a formation. From what I've heard, and this is all hearsay, they did exist but very rarely and more as "terror weapons"
scholagladiatoria, why do you have that bar connecting the 2 walls behind you? are you bracing your walls against cannon fire?
What buckler would you carry in modern times?
Your mention of Skallagrim confirms my theory that you three at least know about eachother (lindybeige)
but saying tower shield would be wrong? I mean they do look like towers, it's a very intuitive name
why would be ridiculous to carry a big shield in your back? I think it looks nice, specially if the shield is painted. Also how heavy are these big shields(pavise, tower)? ~3 kg?
just an open observation , your more willy nilly defensive fighter hence the ideal of more optional defensiveness to your choices . this is an observation and i maybe very well wrong but the impression you give is based upon defensive stand point
you could still carry both the longsword and the buckler, after all one of the advantages of longswords is that you can switch between one handed and two handed grip at will
But a longsword is more encubering than a armingsword or messer.
Bare in mind that you carry the sword 99% of the time, not using it, as matt said often.
Blank- blade yes, but the difference would be minimal and you would get a reach advantage. Arming sword weighs around 1kg and has roughly a 90cm reach, longsword (the smaller ones) weight around 1.5-2kg, and have a 110-120cm reach. Granted it would not feel as nimble in the hand, nor it would have an extra hand guard, but one thing it would excell in would be versatility. If you lose the buckler and you have a longsword, you can two hand your weapon and still get an offense boost over your opponent; if you have an arming sword (or any other exclusive 1h sword) however, and you lose the bucker, you can't compensate your loss in any way. Longsword would arguably fair better against multiple opponents because of some factors: buckler would lose a lot of efficacy, better reach, better leverage and hence speed. In the end it would probably be a question of taste, and which swords are acceptable in civilian life for any given period.
melchaios Have you actually tried this combo in even a sparring situation?
melchaios that is not viable combat option - hint: weight alone say nothing about the way such a lever as longsword trully handles :) try it its not superior in any way in real world physics
Firstly, yes you could and it was done occasionally - the sword and buckler shown in Paulus Kal's treatise (mid-15th century) clearly shows a bastard sword and a buckler. However that is the only source I know of that shows it. In general the problem with doing it is that a one handed sword is usually a better one-handed sword than a longsword is (they are specialised for it, after all). You can use a longsword one-handed (for example on a horse, or if climbing a ladder), but they are generally not as quick or nimble as a one-hander (unless it's essentially a one-hander with a longer grip). So what you gain in length you lose in speed, stamina and general fencing ability.
Isn´t Talhoffers treatises partly about the dulling shield. I thing thats how one on one fighting with a wiking schild must have been. correct me if I am wrong.
scholagladiatoria I was wondering if you could answer a question I've had brewing for awhile. You mention the use of dagger and targe by the highland scots. Well, I boffer fight regularly, and wear a targe while using various two handed blades. However, boffer fighting is obviously far from true heavy fighting ,and I was wondering if you thought that this use of targe with a two handed weapon would be plausible in, as I said, actual heavy fighting.
+Vivalarocknroll,
Not Matt, but as a general rule, two-handed swords were used in two hands, and therefore not with a sidearm.
I don't know if this is stupid or not, but when you describe things and bring up new names... it would be nice if you could spell what you are going to talk about on the description.
I have found myself trying to guess how what you said is spelled several times...
bo...what? shields?
Links to purchase that model of sword and buckler? Should I start with 9 or 12 inch buckler
Matt - Is there any circumstance in which you would prefer the longsword to the sword and buckler / shield? I've been wondering why the longsword was considered the noble or knight's weapon and forbidden to peasants. If the arming sword and bucker is superior to the longsword, I'd think the aristocracy would take the better gear for themselves.
docjjp Many noblemen did wear/use the sword and buckler rather than the longsword. But of course the sword and buckler is optimised for unamoured fighting and the longsword and rondel dagger are optimised for armoured fighting - and noblemen always fought armoured in war. So really what we are looking at is civilian vs military and noblemen often liked to appear with their military gear, as it showed their status.
docjjp If you're in full plate armour, you don't need to do much to actively protect yourself so you might as well go for the offensive power of the longsword. Also, against other people in plate armour, the longsword is perhaps more useful with grappling and half-swording techniques (which of course can be done with an arming sword but not as well I imagine)
One thing I never understood was while swords and such are exceptionally sharp I still don't understand how they can cut through plate armor and not simply bounce off of it if you could answer it would be great thanks :)
In short; they generally can't.
Plate armour (especially towards the end of the Middle Ages) was incredibly effective at deflecting blows from cutting and thrusting weapons. That is not to say it was invulnerable; there are always weaknesses in joints, and a sufficiently large sword (think greatsword) moving at a fast pace may be able to batter its way through plate armour.
Instead, blunt force trauma weapons such as the mace were generally used against plate armour.
Thanks man always was curious how movies thought a sword to a thick metal plate equaled dismemberment
Lexicon343 It's only possible if you have enough strength and a massive sword (think Sandor Clegane). Even then, it won't always penetrate.
Fortunately, plate armour isn't common in the Game of Thrones Universe,
From italy, we have some bolognese...nice
A Target is a small wooden buckler