Sword & Shield? Two Handed Sword? My Preference Based On History/Sparring
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 24 апр 2017
- A video where I talk about my personal experience with combat and sparring and justify my personal choices through practice and historical understanding.
General info on swords
A sword is a long bladed weapon intended for slashing or thrusting. The precise definition of the term varies with the historical epoch or the geographical region under consideration. A sword consists of a long blade attached to a hilt. The blade can be straight or curved. Thrusting swords have a pointed tip on the blade, and tend to be straighter; slashing swords have sharpened cutting edge on one or both sides of the blade, and are more likely to be curved. Many swords are designed for both thrusting and slashing.
Historically, the sword developed in the Bronze Age, evolving from the dagger; the earliest specimens date to about 1600 BC. The later Iron Age sword remained fairly short and without a crossguard. The spatha, as it developed in the Late Roman army, became the predecessor of the European sword of the Middle Ages, at first adopted as the Migration period sword, and only in the High Middle Ages, developed into the classical arming sword with crossguard. The word sword continues the Old English, sweord.
During the Middle Ages sword technology improved, and the sword became a very advanced weapon. It was frequently used by men in battle, particularly during an attack. The spatha type remained popular throughout the Migration period and well into the Middle Ages. Vendel Age spathas were decorated with Germanic artwork (not unlike the Germanic bracteates fashioned after Roman coins). The Viking Age saw again a more standardized production, but the basic design remained indebted to the spatha.
Around the 10th century, the use of properly quenched hardened and tempered steel started to become much more common than in previous periods. The Frankish 'Ulfberht' blades (the name of the maker inlaid in the blade) were of particularly consistent high quality. Charles the Bald tried to prohibit the export of these swords, as they were used by Vikings in raids against the Franks.
Wootz steel which is also known as Damascus steel was a unique and highly prized steel developed on the Indian subcontinent as early as the 5th century BC. Its properties were unique due to the special smelting and reworking of the steel creating networks of iron carbides described as a globular cementite in a matrix of pearlite. The use of Damascus steel in swords became extremely popular in the 16th and 17th centuries.
It was only from the 11th century that Norman swords began to develop the crossguard (quillons). During the Crusades of the 12th to 13th century, this cruciform type of arming sword remained essentially stable, with variations mainly concerning the shape of the pommel. These swords were designed as cutting weapons, although effective points were becoming common to counter improvements in armour, especially the 14th-century change from mail to plate armour.
It was during the 14th century, with the growing use of more advanced armour, that the hand and a half sword, also known as a "bastard sword", came into being. It had an extended grip that meant it could be used with either one or two hands. Though these swords did not provide a full two-hand grip they allowed their wielders to hold a shield or parrying dagger in their off hand, or to use it as a two-handed sword for a more powerful blow. The names given to many swords in mythology, literature, and history reflected the high prestige of the weapon and the wealth of the owner.
The Oakeshott typology was created by historian and illustrator Ewart Oakeshott as a way to define and catalogue the medieval sword based on physical form. It categorizes the swords of the European Middle Ages (roughly 11th to 15th centuries) into 13 main types labelled X to XXII. Oakeshott introduced it in his treatise The Archaeology of Weapons: Arms and Armour from Prehistory to the Age of Chivalry in 1960.
The system is a continuation of Jan Petersen's typology of the Viking sword, introduced in De Norske Vikingsverd ("The Norwegian Viking Swords", 1919), modified in 1927 by R. E. M. Wheeler into a typology of nine types labelled I to IX.
Follow me on my social networks:
/ themetatron
/ metatron_youtube
Metatron-153...
/ puremetatron
/ realmetatron
Royalty free music by Epidemic Sound:
intro ES_Knights Templar 1 - Johannes Bornlöf
intro 2 ES_Medieval Adventure 01 - Johannes Bornlöf
outro ES_Knights Templar 2 - Johannes Bornlöf
Check out the facebook page of the photographer who works with me, he has lots of fantastic pictures
amedeo.capor...
and his instagram
amedeo.capor...
Check out my friend Salvo's channel
/ @littlesalvo000
two handed shield?
meuclone #dailymotion That would be something like a general purpose machine gun ;)
nope, dual wield shields.
It works because samurai Jack
Dinh's bulwark
meuclone #dailymotion
That's called a Pavis and was used to protect against archers
And soon to come, Shadiversity: "Why the Kite Shield is much more than just a cavalry shield!"
1k1 Nights The ball is in his court now. I really hope he does a VR on that part, even though he's already spoken extensively about kite shields lol @Shadiversity Are you watching???
for me it would depend on the level of armor I had, if I was lightly armored shield and sword, but full plate two hands.
That's honestly how it was most often used in warfare
No I think most people had a bag of pommels to end all your foes rightly.
Docktor Rock but ending him rightly only works if you screw it off mid combat so you gotta carry a bag if swords
And honestly that probably had a lot to do with it, if u asked a 12 y.o. me it wouldn't matter how much armor I had I would have taken a shield, I really like shields, they so cool
Buckler and mace with plate armor could be good
Hey Metatron, in which army would you feel safer. A early medieval army circa 10 to 11th century, or a classical Roman legions circa 200 A.D?
Gimme Rome over anything ;)
Don't know if 200 CE is really "classical" Rome, since Rome as it had been known for centuries was on its way out.
Regardless, as much as I like western European medieval stuff, I'd also feel much safer in a traditional Roman legion in its heyday. After all, from what I understand, military stuff wasn't really what the Roman Empire had trouble with, it was politics, management of the empire, etc..
Tantibus Draws Can I choose a 13th to 15th century knight? I want to be taken prisonner instead of killed
Metatron even over full plate armor knights and mass produced crossbows ?
ALVARO DAVID LOAIZA ORDUZ Full Plate armour was introduced in the 14 to 16 century,crossbows don't and Roman armour around early Empire Late Republic was Plate.
I like the idea of using a shield offensively. Of course hitting someone with a shield boss will knock most people back. What is sometimes overlooked is that the top edge of the shield can be bashed up under someones chin. This is particularly useful unless the opponent has a plate helmet on.
Nah mate. It would still stun him. I get hit with boxing gloves under my chin and it did not hurt. Butt the force of the hit was still eneugh to knock me back and stun me. Even if the plate takes the hurt part. The guy would still be knocked back.
Yup stagger and stun a man and you can end him quickly, this is what most fighters do when they see a staggered opponent you immediately hit them again in this case a staggered man being hit with a shield could be charged and rammed with the shield causing him to fall on the ground a very dangerous spot to be in. The shield is a weapon in itself when used right some were designed to be more offensive like placing a large spikes and even blades on the point.
Why didnt people add a spike to the boss of the shield
X Infinity That's called a targe.
If you do you should definitely watch Narnia 2
You are my favorite RUclipsr, I find your videos so interesting and informative. keep up the great work
There is one form of combat, particularly modern combat, that teaches one to square off the shoulders toward an enemy and that is with firearms. The reason for this is because, as a modern warrior, your ballistic plate covers your chest area more than others. In a firefight, you want to present more of your armor at the enemy rather than your unarmored bits. Of course, there are all sorts of schools of though on this, but it does exist.
I'm pretty sure sword and buckler also teaches you to fight with shoulders square towards your enemy. That's how it's depicted in I.33 if I recall correctly, which is pretty much one of the biggest swordfighting schools there is.
I'm not expert in sword and buckler, not even a novice lol so I'll take your word for it. I'm sure these two are not the only martial arts that teach you to square off against an opponent.
Someone I know who was in the military also said it's because a triangle is stronger, and that any other position while using a pistol would be weaker
That's what my law enforcement training has gotten me. You have people arguing between Weaver and Isoceles all day long, but Isoceles is still by and large popular because of that whole triangle balance thing. Some of my Army buddies also say that their old training was shit because Isoceles is making its way back, even in rifle manipulation, chiefly because of the whole balance thing and the presentation of your body armor rather than your soft bits.
+joost1120 I was about to say that too. It's a pretty crucial part of sword and buckler, the buckler can't do it's job of protecting your hand if there's a large gap between them.
i really liked that you spoke a lot about stances. Very interesting!
thanks for your videos. they're very relaxing for the end of the day.
Very cool, I just got done making a Heater Shield for my outfit to the upcoming ren faire in my area, and just happened to have this on my home page when I brought up youtube, how nice!
I'd rather have two shields or a shield and a pommel.
A sheild and a hammer axe. A mace would be great too. : )
to end him rightly, I'll have 2 pommels
ThePyrosirys - bandolier of pommels and a scutum for me. Why use one pommel if you can have 10?!?!?!!
See...what you do, you...is you get a flail...but replace the part that hits them...with pommels. Then you can people rightly, endlessly.
well you can carry a few shield bosses and frisbee throw them
But, how do you end him rightly while holding a shield?
unscrewing the handle and throwing it
unscrewing the handle of shield and trowing it on enemy
okienative through the entire shield!
actually the manual explained it pretty well, you drop your shield and your spear, and THEN you proceed to unscrew your pomel.
This joke really needs to be ended.
...rightly.
Fuck.
Perfect vídeo.
PS: I love the soundtracks of your videos.
Best regards from Brazil. o7
That Roman-style camping video sounds like good fun! Hopefully everything goes well with that.
This was a neat video too; I've only tried sparring with a two handed sword, but after watching this I'd like to try with a shield too if I ever get the chance
I'm an ex - policeman, and I would go for sword and shield every time. I've been involved in crowd control. Having a shield is a major advantage. Push then hit! As a dense wall as the Romans did is still to some extent used today. Good video.
Injust watched a full 1 minute ad and clicked on it cuz I wanna support you :)
The Metatron should have an opening for videos like this where he's wearing historically accurate *European* armor instead of Samurai armor.
long story short : The reason two handed swords were even made was when armour became good enough to make a shield unnecessary.
one thing my cousing thought me when I started playing Starcraft was that "you don't need to protect yourself from what you have already killed" (hence always upgrade damage before defense), is a similar way, sure, you are not going to be suicidal, but I likely would go for some range advantage (bow, spear etc) with some side arm or something.
Now, on my kenjutsu training, the aproach I found to be work the best (for now) for me, and please note, I pratice Ninten Ichi Ryu, Musashi's dual wielding style, was to quickly close in the gap between me and the enemy, use the longer blade to "lock" my oponent's blade to the side while I go in with the shorter blade for the "kill". While the more experienced my oponent is, the easier for him to avoid my "lock", even them if caught have a hard time escaping/retaliating the sequence. And that is because I can't even use stabs yet (only once I have enough control of the blade not to hurt my oponent). It's specially hard to use this against the oponents that adopt a lower stance or those that are also dual wielding, but against spear/long sword in a medium or high stance, no matter if center, left or right, it have being my best attempt at hitting them first and without getting retaliated. Well, also striking with the longer on the head, than using the shorter against the belly while they parry the higher strike, that one is excelent against those that do not half-sword yet and don't have a good measure of dodging instead of parrying either (I once fought a instructor that would constantly keep a inch away from the tip of your blade while he studies your attack pattern, than he would sudenly intercept your attack midway both striking and blocking you in a signle movement).
Of course, all of this applies to dual wielding, which is suicidal in a battlefield with archers.
I definitely feel more comfortable with a two handed weapon, but what you say in this video makes allot of sense. My personal favourite part is the part about interchangeable grip, something that almost all games mess up on.
Metatron... It's not a good idea to stay in a forest in roman armour... Remeber the Battle of the Teutoburg Forest? XD
Hello Metatron, just commenting on your mention about keeping your shoulders towards your opponent. In Wing Chun and Lai Tung Pai actually puts a lot of emphasis on controlling the opponents center line while maintaining yours. This usually means "squaring" off with your opponent. Stance as you stated before, is very important and takes a fair amount of training to fully utilize this. I don't comment much, but your channel is great. Keep up the good work!
Could you make a short video quickly going through the weapons you own, what they are, how they're used and how you acquired them?
I'd especially like to know more about the second sword from the top, the first metal one below the wooden one.
I prefer Longsword , I started hema and buhurt aswell at the same time (at the place i am, it can be both learned) about 1 month ago (2-2.5 weeks actual fighting [2 days a week for about 3 hours each])
When i arrived to the place, it was friday, when we usually have the armor and longsword part prioritized, so i picked up a practicing longsword and met the longsword guy. He told me that we are learning italian fighting style from Fiore's manuscript.
He showed me the 3 basic movements, the basic cuts and the middle thrust.
He showed me about 8 Guards, attacking from that and blocking stances. He showed the 3 ways of defending + "the try not to get hit" method :D The "Blow away" was the best for me, was perfect for the first time, did it 5 more times and was still perfect.
The 8 Guards were:
-"Queen" (left+right and the variety range)
-"Window" (left+right and the variety range)
-"
wild boar fang"
-"Iron Gate"
-"Crown (left and right)"
-"Short stance"
-"Long Stance"
-"Long tail (left and right)"
(The names are straight translations from hungarian lang.. so if its wrong, sorry for that)
He showed me the first 12 Games(or Plays, idk) with Longsword, pretty mutch all of them went ok.
And showed some pretty fancy moves aswell :D
With the Buhurt part:
I got tought 3 basic cuts, the way to defend yourself, basic advice.
Aaaand some moves like: trip (or trip-up , idk)
Conclusion for me:
Although, i didnt learn too mutch from the buhurt part,
i prefer longsword because of 4 things:
1,
Because i'm not that fit and my wrist is really weak, its easier for me to hold it, strike with the right hand and help it with the other.
2,
When i use shield i always try to go behind it, like if i'm using a towershield , so i don't see the enemy attacking and i kinda fear the short sword more than the longsword.
3,
For me, defending myself with longsword is a lot more natural (i don't know how and why :D)
4,
I think its a bit cooler , since i'm 153-156cms tall and the sword i'm using is about 125cms tall ..
Feels more powerful.
Sadly i'll not have practice tomorrow (friday) because of national holiday.
Ty for reading, my brudda.
Btw: i wanna try halberd too, saw one of the head person fighting with it, and tripping-up another guy without using his legs, WAS AWESOME :D
DEUS VULT!
Edit: Wow, i wrote some amounts of text :D
Topic suggestion:
Preference or comparison between differents types of shield.
There is a large range of topics ranging from the combat style used with the differents shields to the evolution of shields sizes and shapes.
Man I love your channel Greetings from Mexico.
+Metatron Could you do a review of the fighting techniques and swords used in the movie *Alatriste* with Viggo Mortensen playing the part of the Spanish Captain Alatriste in the Dutch& Spanish war.
ThatDutchguy Viggo Mortensen is a trained Swordsman and famously picky in his roles. I bet the movie does the historical swordplay justice.
Sean Hembree I suspect it will. Still, very mutch interested in Metatron's views and knowledge on these swords and techniques used in the movie.
Would like to see the Metatron do a review of the 1977 movie *The duellists* too. It had Harvey Keitel and Keith Carridine both playing French officers as the two main antagonist duelling it out for most of the movie during the Napoleonic War's.
Even a few cameo appearance of Edward Fox is in the movie, playing a minor but important role.
I'd be very interested what the Metatron thinks of the swords and techniques used in that movie aswell as Viggo Mortensen's one.
Could you please do a future video on kite shields and other types of shields? I would really love to learn more!
p.s.: Love your channel and content!!! c:
+Metatron Could you do a video on Babylonians, Olmecs, Mayans, Incans, Aztecs or a video on the validity and practicality of fighting with just a shield like Captain America, twin swords(MOTU 200x) or sword staffs?
Captain America had a shield and a pistol.
Great video!
Another great video! I have a suggestion (if you haven't done it already) In the USA we used different types of sabers from the revolutionary war through to WWI. The Cavalry especially made use of them during the Civil War up to the turn of the century. We now have them strictly for certain dress uniforms. Could you possibly do a video on these styles of swords? The history of the bayonet is very interesting as well along with the myriad of designs. Thanks again for putting the time and effort into your channel. God bless
Thanks for your video. Take care. Juan
Which are the best weapons to be paired with a shield then? I've seen Shield + Sword and Shield + Spear. Are there other options?
And what about bucklers? Do they have advantages over other weapons?
Thank you for the video, it was amazing I love it.
Hello Metatron. Nice video, thanks for teaching us so much. I have a question: do you know if it's possible to use a shield and a two handed sword if you are really strong? Videogames often depict this combo, but was it done historically? Thanks again.
In the I.33 sword and buckler fechtbuch, we do see both shoulders are forward, however one is slightly below the other. The reason both shoulders are forward is because buckler covers sword hand and both hands come together during the sword action. It creates a trap for the opposing sword in the bind which allows a split second for a follow-up strike unopposed. It's really quite something.
grande sei il migliore! sine metu et usque ad finem! Ciao Raffaello!
totally random but I still can't get over the coolness of that intro!!
That crossbow on the balcony thing happens more often than think!
Adam
Very nice video, once again, Metatron!
Norsemen used their shields, the Skjöldr; very similarly to ie. Roman Legionaries; they hid the sword behind the shield.
The largest Skjöldr are very large so you can easily hide your weapon (sword, axe) behind it.
I love the halberd with hammerback. No-one can beat the mighty halberd. Its reach is superior and its power awesome. Pummel armor with the hammer, slice flesh with the axe, nothing can beat it, all from a safe distance.
Number two is the polehammer, then the poleaxe and then the quarterstaff.
Could you make a video differentiating the katana and the tachi? I practice Bujinkan Budō Taijutsu for years and we use tachi a lot since schools focus on the periods from S.XIV to S.XVI (at least in my dojo)
Depends what armour I'm wearing.
Full steel harness - Two handed.
Anything else - Shield.
6:25 I've been taught that in I33 sword & buckler, you keep your hips and shoulders straight-on (but not your feet, of course; one is always forward depending on which ward you are adopting). The reason I believe has to do with the fact that the buckler is so small that if your right hand reaches past it, it loses all protection the buckler would give. On the other hand, if your buckler is forward all the time, your reach is limited (and indeed, the reach you have with the buckler ought to be taken into account as well--after all, it is a weapon). Standing square-on is kind of a compromise between the two (?). At least that's my understanding. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. Besides, I'm sure it's different for larger shields.
Love this channel. Meta-awesome-tron!
Anxiously awaiting the roman encampment study!!!
Hello Metatron! Can you do another Random video? Btw.. love your channel
Same experience with sword and dagger. It just makes the fencing a lot more clear, with a far less number of doubles if I have a second 'anything' for defense.
Being schooled in Joachim Meyer's longsword, I'm just a sucker for the unarmoured combat with the Longsword. There's something in the synergy in the handling with 2 hands that I just don't get with one-handed weapons... :)
"The God's gave you two hands, and you use them both for your weapon. I can respect that."
Another terrible cliché from Skyrim, but it's actually relevant for once in a context like this!
Mai tai martial arts basic stance starts with shoulders square, in response to your 7:00 question. From my understanding this is developed from the frequent use of kicks. I would say you are right in saying that any (human) fighting style prioritizing the arms would have a dominate side, as even with mai tai (kick focused) you have one leg forward (although you hips are square). Just some interesting information.
Wow!
Go, go! That's exactly what we all of us were & are waiting for!
Vai Metatron!
I'm excited for the roman camping thing
The "square on" sort of position is described in certain English and Highland broadsword treatises. It's used because it allows you to freely step in any direction with any foot, and it comes from before linear footwork dominated all European fencing.
Salut à vous Metatron, what about your preference between the center grip or strap grip for your shield? Both seem to have strengths and weaknesses.
Regarding your question if there is a martial art in which the figher stands square in front of his opponent - Muay Thai. One foot is forward, but shoulders are square. Grappling, too, depending on the style and intended maneuver.
i would be interested in seeing a video on sparring/fighting with ONLY a shield (possibly different ones). i don't think theres a lot of content about that on youtube. but it probably happened at some point that a sword broke or simply wasn't on hand for some reason so it has some significance in my opinion.
Battleborn or greymane?
Battleborn.
Battleborn
Battleborn.
RICH tacnyan14 i hate idolaf, but if i want to do mephalas quest, battleborn. Because i can kill him to make the ebony blade stronk
Greymane
Well, it depends.......
Single target or AoE....
:P
what had age of empires to do with this ?
Hello, Metatron! I too am a preferer of the shield! I fight a lot of rapierists primarily, and they tend to go non-stop sword and dagger, or a case of swords (I honestly find this less intimidating than the dagger most times.) When I'm fighting them with my earlier period weapon forms, longsword feels just about as applicable as single sword. When it's single rapier against longsword, it feels more balanced.
I tend to go with sword and buckler/shield for everything we do. It's nice all around. It's good for the melee scenarios we play. It responds better to force than a dagger, but does not bind or offer the same projection of offense as a dagger.
That being said, I am also of the camp that would consider using a sword one-handed, even if I had no other piece of equipment to use in that hand.Being able to cut from the wrist quickly, using your best forward geometry, facing largely weapons of similar length (within period bounds), you aren't at a massive disadvantage against someone wielding their sword in two hands. I will say, depending on the weapon, context is everything.
Depending on what my sword does while I play with single-sword, I tend to alternate between using it as a single handed sword, or using it in two hands. I figure the more tools I have to use effectively against my opponents, the better off I'll be int he long run - once I know how to properly use most of them.
I think the real answer to your question is what era are we talking about- Late plate armor is designed to use two handed weapons without a shield with the armor BEING the shield- In such a case the two handed approach would be better, especially as you need the extra power of penetration to actually hurt so well armored opponents.
Not sure if I like the term "power of penetration", in a plate armour context it would kinda apply when using a sword in the murder stroke way. But for something like half swording the biggest benefit of that second hand on the weapon isn't so much power but rather being able to control the tip precisely into the small vulnerable gaps.
In that context though I would really prefer something more suited to fight people in plate armour over a sword but sometimes its the only tool available I guess.
I would like a video about the pros and cons about every weapon like a mace, warhammer, crosbow vs bow and axe.
I wonder what makes you think kite shield is a cavalry shield ? We see it a lot among infantry, both in the bayeux tapestry and in other norman period iconography. (Also wasn't it given up eventually on horseback because it wasn't easy to maneuver ?)
I think when talking about shield stances you didn't talk about passing footwork? I myself don't keep the same side forward all the time with a shield it depends on the moment but I'm glad you explained your overall preference for a defense focused style overall
Any love for the urumi sword? How would it compare to a long sword, or other ancient swords of its time?
What blade length would you use with a kite shield?
Could you please link to where you bought that shield? Not the black one, the white and red one
In russian historical fencing we are taught to stand with shouder line perpendicular to line between you and opponent. A "home" stance: shield hand is in front and sword lays at the right top of the shield (from your perpective). We have rather small round strapped shields though. It's pretty tough stance to get through: both shield and a sword are far away from your main target, kinda like with rapiers
Can you give some examples of historical manuals, where is shown two-handed usage of single handed swords? Thanks.
One question: Which weapon set is better for offense- Sword and Shield or Two-handed sword (Longsword, Greatsword, etc...)? I ask this because tanks tend to be associated with the former, while more offensively-minded warriors are more associated with the latter (with regards to swords, anyways), so I was curious.
What are your thoughts on buckler and sword, and buckler and two handed sword
Metatron, dya have anyplans on talking about archer? european or japanese or many other forms. ^-^ pretty pls
metatron I have come across some ancient Roman weaponry and armour, I noticed your collection and wondered if you would want to buy these artefacts to add to it. :)
Good videoa but 2 points to consider.
1) kite shield was mainly used on foot.
2) your kite shield was a bit short in the lower part.
Question Metatron. You said that your preference would depend on the battlefield. Do you mean that if you got attack orders and were told to march you would grab two weapon sets? Would historic knights do this or did they just leave home with the one set?
In the way Roland Warzecha proposes shield combat with large center grip is the shield side forward but not completely. The shield and sword are both used for offence and defence are used together rather than the shield as static defence
The big question is what kind of armor do you have, with the secondary one being what is the nature of the battle. For most situations I think a good kite shield with a straight one-handed sword of some kind should be most broadly useful.
Rafaelo can you make a video of types of swords used by Templars and Crusaders?
they mostly used longswords and standard arming swords
i've started with HEMA this year with the two handed sword cause I thought to myself "which cool dude uses a shield?" but now 5 months later I'm in love with the 1.33
I like to have the weapon foot first (right side in my case, I'm righthanded) but rotate the upper body so that the shield is in front like if I had the left side in front. this gives me the same effect as shield in front and I keep the reach advantage from having the weaponhand in front
5:50 range can be a tricky thing. I dont know much about sword fight, but in my expirience a punch from rear hand can have a longer reach than from front hand.
It occurs to me that with switching which hand is on top and which foot is in front there are four "stances" (or grip/stance combinations) for a two handed sword/weapon.
Matchlock behind you, ist that working replic?
There are no two handed roman legionary weapons, so I guess that was a strangly pronounced rhetorical question at the end....also I suck with two handed swords.
Great channel btw. School led me to stop learning Latin, you inspired me to start it again and I'm better than ever before. Thank you for that and greetings from Raetia!
Hey Raffa, Kite shield was used by the infantary too. Look at the Bayeux tapestry
Minatomat - true but it is optimized for cavalry
as you've pointed out yourself, there are just too many situations where the advantages of the styles switch, so I would just rather have two swords, one intended for two-handed use and another for one-handed, and a shield. With Shad's back-sheathe, which could even be upgraded to a double sheathe with the smaller sheathe mounted on top of the larger sheathe, this should absolutely be feasible. Now we just need a practical mechanism to apply the shield to the back for a quick draw...
What's your opinion on two handed weapons like a pole axe, halberd, warhammer, or naginata
nice, this is early enough, good that i activated Notifications :)
I was thinking about how the Romans used a weighted Gladius to train with, and since they were probably always moving around a lot, did they share these extra training weapons? The reason I wonder if because if they are carrying their armor and shield and pilum and water and food and whatever else they had to carry, they would have probably wanted to eliminate as much weight s possible. Was the weights something added later? Like rocks they found or were there guys wholes role was to to carry their training implements until they set up camp and then they basically make a gym? I am just trying to imagine all the stuff they needed to carry. I picture that they could have stretched their pilum onto the shoulders of the guy in front and they turn their shields concave side down to use the inner cavity to carry stuff instead of having to hold everything in their hands. What do you think?
I find when I spar arming sword and (Heater) shield against longsword is I suffer a lot of leg shots due to reduced leverage with the sword when I try to redirect leg strikes without both hands. Also I lose a huge advantage in binds.
Why weren't the Roman gladius and scutum used elsewhere and later? (Or were they?)
Is the shield at 5:45 a kite shield or a heater shield? It looks to small to be a kite shield but to big to be a heater shield.
Which shield would be your favorite?
(A point about having the weapon hand held back - particularly behind a shield - is it makes it far more difficult for the enemy to grab your weapon hand) - Probably go with the grey area of the hand and a half, preferably ether Oakeshott type XVa, or XVIII and a shield
can you film your sparing w/ your friends
I wanna see film where he doesn't spare his friends.
Hello 👋 metatron, thanks for your amazing videos.
I would choose sword and shield.
I'm personally a big fan of a 4' Morningstar and a scutum-type metal shield with chakram as skirmish missiles. Definitely with shield forward, since in my experience there's a seemingly psychological urge for opponents to aim blows directly at the shield first -leaving themselves open to a windup strike from a heavy piercing/bludgeoning weapon... Seems crazy, but it's really quite commonplace. The chakram lend themselves nicely to being hung on the back of the shield and quickly distributed into the fray with plenty of time to swap to the Morningstar (which works astonishingly well against armor, and does just about what you think versus unarmored opponents).
I think it's best to use an estoc with a shield or a 2-h cut-and-thrust sword with a shield. Thrusting with a 2-h sword while holding it in one hand seems to be less clumsy and slightly quicker than slashing with it. With this setup, you can fight just as well but with different tactics even if you lose the shield.(I've only tried wielding a staff like a 2-h sword with one hand and as such, it's a really bad representation of a 2-h sword due to the weight distribution but I think it still applies)
I've wanted to know this for a long time.
So, most single edge blades I've seen have a flat spine,are there different types?
I would go with a strapped kite shield with a hand & a half sword. In that situation on the battle field i have good protection from projectile fire without tiring my arm or hands & a sword that functions both well as a single handed or two handed weapon incase my shield breaks.
Also when I'm travelling i can either just have the shield strapped to my arm so i don't have to think about it or even better have it strapped to my back to give greater protection against projectile fire from the rear & allows me to use my sword two handed ,grapple with one hand, potentially duel wield with a dagger in my off hand (wouldn't recommend though), end them rightly or just throw down the sword & tackle them while still having my back covered.
The my opinion is that the right type of sword & shield just gives you more options than a more dedicated two handed approach that can apply to a diverse set of situations.
There is a very traditional style of Boxing were you rely very heavily on parrying with both hands forward.
While you do bring one side or the other forward when commiting to a punch, or backwards when avoiding or rolling punches, you do spend a large majority of the time squared up or only slightly staggered. Much more staggered at the feet than the shoulders.
George Foreman, Sandy Saddler, Jack Johnson, and Sam Langford are the most famous and successful World Champions that come to mind.
Another traditional style or guard known as barring, the Locks, or the Cross Guard, has you squared up deflecting punches with your arms wrapped around your body and face.
Daniel Mendoza, George Foreman, Archie Moore, Gene Fullmer, and Joe Frazier used it heavily.
Many used it briefly as a supplemental tool in their arsenal of tricks.
Daniel Mendoza won the world Heavyweight Title while only a Middleweight during the 1700's.
He wrote about Barring as his favorite, and in his view the most scientific form of Boxing.
You can find his book online in a PDF for free.
These two Guards or styles also blend together very well.