"Medievel Style Fighting " Topic
15 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please don't make fun of others' membernames.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Medieval Discussion Message Board
Areas of InterestMedieval
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Recent Link
Featured Showcase ArticleThe Editor tries out a boardgame - yes, a boardgame - from battle-market magazine.
Featured Workbench Articlewodger begins his series on how to paint a 15mm DBA army well, in a reasonable time frame.
Featured Profile ArticleOur man in Jerusalem reports on the sights of Crusader-era Jerusalem.
Featured Book Review
|
Flashman14 | 02 Oct 2015 12:49 p.m. PST |
Comments? Not infrequently, I raised an eye brow. [I should add in here that Medievals is not my specialty by a long shot.] link |
Kraken Skulls Consortium | 02 Oct 2015 1:12 p.m. PST |
As far as the original post in that thread, I think it was pretty spot on from my research. I think Hollywood and modern fiction have removed a lot of the historical accuracy from depictions of medieval warfare. Bernard Cornwell depicted Viking Age shield wall warfare pretty well in his books, I feel. But every incarnation on screen have people form a solid wall, then charge. Beyond irritating. Why form a wall if you are just going to scatter ;-) I have worn plate armor and mail in reenactments, and well made, they take a little more endurance than not wearing them, but they barely have an effect on speed or movement. Very effective. |
Sigwald | 02 Oct 2015 2:21 p.m. PST |
Seems legit. He mentions Matt Easton of Schola Gladiatoria and I find his you tube clips fascinating and very well reasoned. |
jgibbons | 02 Oct 2015 4:39 p.m. PST |
Seems reasonable fr the mst part based on what i know…. |
Great War Ace | 02 Oct 2015 5:38 p.m. PST |
Lars Andersen is a showman. He doesn't pull his bows beyond halfway when speed shooting. He uses a very light draw weight bow. Nevertheless, if the videos show his accuracy (as opposed to being heavily edited to show the "good stuff") then I wouldn't want him shooting that fast at me! What he lacks in impact energy he makes up for with volume and hitting spots that he aims for, i.e. weaknesses in defenses. The assertion that you can get up as quickly in plate armor as you can "naked" is pure hyperbole. I have watched sparring in plate armor, and the guy on the ground does get to his feet slower. Just not a LOT slower, when he's still fresh, at least. I pretty much agree with the rest of the article…. |
jowady | 02 Oct 2015 7:36 p.m. PST |
Interesting reading, I don't think that I agree with all of it but much of it syncs up with my other readings. |
Winston Smith | 03 Oct 2015 10:49 a.m. PST |
I like what he says about the katana. I get really annoyed with the "eastern martial arts" mysticism and mumbo jumbo. All this nonsense about "Medieval knights never had to face the samurai" is easily countered by stating the opposite. We'll never know, and all the reenactors in the world who are not really trying to kill each other just make pointless arguments. My money would be on Jaime Lannister. Or even that dolt Merryn Trant! |
Great War Ace | 03 Oct 2015 10:59 a.m. PST |
My money would be on Richard Lionheart, or William Marshal…. |
goragrad | 03 Oct 2015 3:43 p.m. PST |
Well, the Spanish and Portuguese did reasonably well against samurai in the 15s and 16s. link link Now one can argue about the effectiveness of sword and buckler vs longsword/broadsword and plate/mail… |
janner | 10 Oct 2015 3:34 a.m. PST |
It's certainly a firm foundation for discussion, but there are a few areas worthy of a rethink and some of the more sweeping statements are simply wrong. I would warn against using I.33 as an indication of how the shield and sword combination prolongs combat. As many are probably aware, the approach of this treatise is that of self preservation above all else. So when two followers of this style meet, they are both fighting defensively, which in itself prolongs the combat. In the axe v sword paragraph, I think that this piece risks underestimating the advantages a one handed axe could bring, especially when used in conjunction with single and two handed spearmen, as well as swordsmen. Unlike a sword, it can be used to hook an opponent or their shield, leaving them open to a strike from elsewhere. It can also strike parts of the body out of reach to a straight blade, such as the back of the neck. I would argue that Medieval combat, as opposed to judicial duels, was a team event. This may also cause the author to reconsider their depiction of the primary use of the Dane Axe. I understand what the comment about leather armour is aimed at, but it ignores the known use of boiled leather armour (cuir bouilli). Full maille, such as that worn by a thirteenth century cavalryman, seemingly weighed considerably more than they suggest, especially when one factors in the gambeson etc. I think that they are referring to the weight of a byrnie on its own. On the other hand, it might also be worth mentioning that a properly tailored maille shirt distributes the weight around the body, and probably was used in comjuction with cloth armour. Plate armour with the associated arming doublet etc is heavy, hot, and constricting. Movements are slower, more deliberate, and there is a signifcant degree of sensory deprivation. As pointed out earlier, to claim that wearing plate armour has no affect on agility is false. Comparisons with the equipment carried by modern infantrymen can be misleading. These weights represent that currently carried into battle, which we accept as being detrimental to performance and way above what you want for close combat. There is a reason why our lightly armed enemy routinely escapes, but our leaders are unwilling to take the parental flak that would result from patrolling out of full kevlar tortoise! In my experience, you can train most people to reasonably level of proficiency with a self bow or composite recurve in a couple of hours. Bow use is seemingly hard wired into the human mind. What takes more time is to learn how to shoot through and around cover, such as when hunting, to use it in conjuction with another skill, such as riding, or to develop the muscles to cope with high poundage bows, such as the English war bow. The author seems to be refering soley to the latter form of bow, which is unsafe – almost as unsafe as taking Lars as a serious model for combat archery As an aside, I think Matt might raise an eyebrow at being described as a professional swordsman |
Great War Ace | 10 Oct 2015 10:00 a.m. PST |
In my experience, you can train most people to reasonably level of proficiency with a self bow or composite recurve in a couple of hours. Could you add more detail please? Because I don't believe that your assertion could apply to combat use. Hitting close to the target, in a couple of hours, yes. But "loading" a bow and shooting in combat, no way could this be prepared for in "a couple of hours"…. |
Bowman | 10 Oct 2015 10:10 a.m. PST |
Not to derail this too much, but: I like what he says about the katana. I get really annoyed with the "eastern martial arts" mysticism and mumbo jumbo. All this nonsense about "Medieval knights never had to face the samurai" is easily countered by stating the opposite. We'll never know…. Yep. Once the Ming showed up in Korea, the Japanese hit their wall in the Imjin wars. From then on, it was one long tactical withdrawal. I think the Katana is a great weapon. I think the Tiger tank is a great weapon. Great weapons aren't enough to win wars. |
janner | 10 Oct 2015 11:35 a.m. PST |
Could you add more detail please? Because I don't believe that your assertion could apply to combat use. Hitting close to the target, in a couple of hours, yes. But "loading" a bow and shooting in combat, no way could this be prepared for in "a couple of hours"…. I see no reason why someone capable of carrying a spear and shield into close quarter battle would be unable to nock and loose an arrow under similar circumstances, albeit at greater distances. I suggest that it is important to distinguish between overall battle inoculation with the time necessary to grasp the rudiments of a particular skill. |
Great War Ace | 14 Oct 2015 10:28 a.m. PST |
@janner: Small motor controls go right down the drain with an adrenaline rush. The holding of a spear and shield in line with mostly others in the same tyro condition would be practical. Standing in a group of archers who just "yesterday" took up a bow and arrows for the first time would result in totally feckless performance. Not only would many arrows be dropped many bow strings cut and many shots sent every which way, but the rate of "shot" would be so slow as to be negligible. Then we can utterly discount shooting "in volley". All of these skills are lacking in holding spear and shield in line/phalanx and standing your ground. Archery in battle is not something that could be taught proficiently to any group of yokels. If that were true, we would see historical examples of far more uses of it in far larger numbers. The ONLY medieval European example we have of all of these drills coming together is the English army of the HYW. Even the English don't hold onto their level of drill, but steadily lose it throughout the 15th century, until, by well into the 16th century, Roger Ascham can only lament the deplorable state of his nation's archers compared to the heyday of their glory on the battlefield…. |
|