@@knightshousegames Better at making them, the shield was still very much extant by the end! I'm actually shocked that it could have so many punctures and slashes through it, but still remain a single object at the end.
It seems that the iron and glass treatment doubles the weight (about 5 pounds to about 11 pounds). If weight is the factor we are trying to optimize, you should compare it with a poplar shield with double-thick planks, to see if the iron and glass treatment gives more protection than simply another layer of wood, and separately apply the iron and glass treatment to a much thinner layer of wood to see if you get comparable performance for less weight.
Indeed. Is there a sweet spot where the extra “armor” over thinner wood offers more protection but at the same weight as a regular shield? If so, is hitting that sweet spot worth the extra labor and materials used? I suspect it isn’t for mass production, otherwise more shields would have been built that way. Still, a knight or someone else with the money to spend might have had it done to gain a small but critical advantage.
@@sanityormadness No, it is the weight of the shield as it sits for this test with the three testing sections being of different composition. 1:45 is where he states this. The full shield being set up with the same composition as the red section would be even heavier than the 11.5 lbs stated there.
@@tods_workshopquestion. What would happen if you made the wood of the shield thinner to help compensate for the weight? Would it still be as effective?
I love that you built a Hussite war flail. Small detail: Jan Hus and the Hussites. Hus is pronounced Hoos, like goose! Hussites are hoo-sights. Hus is in fact Czech for goose !
From some reason I thought that mail was called that, since it's kind of a net, after all. But it indeed seems to be about a shield. The source seems to be Snorra Eda and the word is "oddnets" so more literally "point net". One kenning for mail is "gǫtvar geirrotu" seems it means "clothing/garment of spearrain".
You can also look on the other side of it: modern fencing generally shows a swordsman to have a somewhat marginal advantage over a spearman (each with shields) but that might turn out a lot more significant if the spearhead could get caught up in the opponents shield and leave the spearman open.
It's been 22 years of whiners telling me "Your reenactment fighting is bogus because you rely on a magic shield that'd disintegrate within a minute of REAL dueling!" Now, thanks to your wonderful video, I can tell the haters to find something else to whine about. Thank you!
I think that late Medieval and Renaissance shields were some kind of wood/glue/sinew/other stuff composites for most part. Leather was also sometimes used. In Polish lands at least, pavises and shields were pretty ordinarily made by painters guild (pictores?) not any other one. So applying layers of some sticky stuff that could by applied with a brush was probably integral part of construction. Providing a pavise or a shield was customary payment for joining a painters guild in Kraków, for example. Those guilds were also involving wood carvers, probably to work both on shields as well as preparing planks for actual painting. All the way in 1580 Stanisław Sarnicki mentions hussar's shields: "against lances, they have shields from meaty wood, strenghtened with veins (probably meant sinews, common in 16th century Polish) and glues" Later, Claudio Ragnoli mentions " some hussars only use lance alone, the hatchet and shield from sturdy wood and dried sinew of great beasts, joined with glue. The shield is so strong, it resists every strong blow of the lance. They use those shields so dexterously, that they disregard every enemy, as if they were entirely clad in armor". Medieval Crossbow channel has a recipe for very elaborate composite pavise. ruclips.net/video/G2Rl9DLUfao/видео.html
very interesting! btw, "In Polish lands at least, pavises and shields were pretty ordinarily made by painters guild (pictores?) not any other one." - "Shield" in Dutch is "Schild", and painting is called "Schilderen" and painters are called "schilderaars" - So yeah, I think what you said might have been pretty much standard across the medieval world perhaps
@@lotoreo I think that in German sources shield makers are sometimes listed with their own name "schilders" but it seems that in most cases they were grouped with other artists and woodworking trades. Probably they could form their own guilds in heavily specialized, industrialized South German towns, where there were few towns specializing entirely in making mail, for example. But probably not in Poland, or say, Sweden.
This makes a lot of sense as many paintings were done on wood panels, which would need to be prepared specially for painting on, differently from say pieces of cabinetry. Then there’s the carpentry/joinery and carving skills needed to make picture frames, again specialized for that purpose even though the techniques would be similar to those used to make cabinetry or other purely decorative (as opposed to structural) woodwork.
I think one of the most interesting things about this test, is just how durable this shield is against all of these attacks. That is even more impressive when you think during combat, you wouldn't really be seeing these nice clean attacks and cuts, its far more likely they'd be coming in at a weaker force or less than ideal angle. Plus the defender would be likely trying to deflect the attack sideways. Crazy
Adding on to that, even *if* the attacker managed a blow like one of those in combat, in each case it's completely ineffective at causing a wound in the shield carrier, and in almost every case would result in a disarmed attacker. It's not easy getting any of that out of the shield again. As you said, you would be unlikely to get those angles in combat, so I don't thinkt he disarming would be that likely, but still more likely than somehow wounding the shield carrier *through* the shield.
What I find most interesting is the stickiness and general potential for friction. Probably made it a lot easier to bind an opponent’s weapons than modern fencing can demonstrate.
Yeah, the handaxe out of everything surprised me. I think it's because that's the one I'm most familiar with, but the situations I encounter it in are made to work in its favor. If you're chopping firewood or branches you're going with the grain, there's no reinforcement to try and hold the wood together, it's what the tool was made for.
What I find really interesting is how many of the anti-armour weapons get stuck in the shield on the first heavy blow in a way that in combat would probably force one to draw another weapon. Obviously one would probably try to avoid it and not just hammer in a blow like that into the middle of a shield, but it still can happen. The Falchion did seem to have that trouble, which despite it not damaging the shield that much, could have been a desirable trait. I love those videos!
Love this stuff Tod, you're doing proper "experimental archaeology" on a personal level from the point of view of the average grunt in the field. A bog standard soldier in whatever era you're talking about, this is the kind of weapons, armor, and equipment they'd be using every day in the field. As a grunt in the US Army back in the 90's, when bored we'd do experiments to see if we could improve what we had been issued, whether it was making MRE's taste like anything OTHER than wet cardboard, or adding a bit of padding to our LBE/plate carriers, to tightening/polishing up the actions on our weapons to make em a tiny bit more accurate and reliable. Soldiers as far back as there have been even semi-organized armies did stuff like this to make their lives a little easier and most importantly SAFER in battle.
Fantastic work! I'm thinking, if I'm planning to be fairly immobile and expecting to take lots of arrow hits, I'll take the leather fronted shield. If I want to be mobile, and not expecting lots of arrow hits, I'll take the regular shield. Also, fantastic work on making the beautiful shields, and showcasing some of the beautiful weapons you make in testing them!
Heavy axes are definitely the weapon of choice to produce the most damage. But as you demonstrated, extracting the weapons from the shield is bloody tough 😂 Exposes the attacker to a counter-attack.
banger video and Im super happy there is someone with such a methodical yet functional and entertaining approach doing experimental archeology. Keep it up!
Even if the shield is very tough without the leather, I would definitely want the leather covering the part where my arm is on the back, to prevent penetration into the arm. And then maybe save the weight on the rest of the shield.
Exactly what I was about to suggest. Have it "impenetrable" on that middle section with the grip/armrest, and lighter, but "protective enough" on the rest of the shield. That could maybe cut down the weight down a kilo.
@@tods_workshop which was a beautiful touch and seemed to "fit" with the blade while never being shoved in the viewers face as a "look we did this!!!". Shoved in plenty of monsters faces though.
@euansmith3699 I love that channel! Around the time of the 4-Bore I started asking for a Punt Gun video on every episode. The exact video after I purchased one of the energy drinks that sponsored him, he does a video on the Punt Gun. I was so happy, it felt like Christmas came early.
@euansmith3699 high-speed ballistics is another great channel. The video they did on bullets vs glass was so interesting. Tempered glass breaks so fast!
I guess the shield would fare even better if supported by an arm rather than an easel; as the arm could absorb some of the impact by moving. Thanks for another fun and informative video.
I think if you wanted to revisit this, the next thing to look into would be shield bosses. As noted by Matt Easton in a relatively recent video, they seemed to make a comeback in that 14-15th century. He theorizes that some Heater Shields became boss held due to armor, but my theory after seeing this series is they are a deflecting surface placed on top of where the arm goes, to protect the arm from missiles piercing it like we saw in Part 3 of this series That might be worth investigating. seeing if arrows deflect off of a shield boss, and if so, how much energy they have when they hit the shield. Additionally, I think you should look into just putting a strip of that leather facing just across the middle where the arm goes, and face the rest with canvas, with a boss, and see what the weight is compared to the canvas only shield, to see if it is still usable.
This is a really interesting idea. I don’t think the iron-glass mixture is worth adding but even just getting a calculation for how heavy the smaller treated leather strip would add could be very interesting.
@@andrewreynolds4949 If it's the difference between an arrow maybe putting a hole in your doublet vs an arrow an inch deep into your forearm, that feels worth it to me. My theory is if you just protect the section where your arm is, and leave the rest untreated, anything bouncing off the boss might not even have the energy to penetrate the rawhide and might even just glance off completely, while balancing the weight nicely, since the heaviest part will be attached to you, so the felt weight isn't as bad
@@knightshousegames I'm agreeing with you. It's possibly worth it to protect the arm area with the leather layers, but I doubt the iron-glass mixture does much to be worth the extra effort, just going by the arrow test from earlier. It seems to me the leather is what is making the difference
i was going to say basically the same thing as knightshouse; it would be interesting to see how the weight-to-protection-ratio worked out if you just used the iron+glass treatment in the area where your hand/arm/body would be [behind the shield]. _So putting the iron+glass mix on the leather in something like a square bit in the middle of that heater, which covered approx half the center area of the shield maybe... with the rest of the shield just being wood covered with the standard 1-2 leather-layers or whatever made the best compromise for protection & mobility (and kept arrows from going so deep they were able to also go through your body armor after the shield perhaps). RE: andrewR from this video and the brief testing we see here it might seem like that added effort of adding the metal+glass-mix was not worth the time nor extra weight added, but i'd personally want to test the whole idea a lot more. Using different shield types, perhaps combining a small metal boss with partial metal+glass-mix application in key areas etc. A shield rarely sits still to be struck flat-on at a right-angle (90 degrees ish etc), and it mainly just needs to keep you from getting hit by a few arrows until you can close distance enough that your proximity to the enemy should discourage enemy ranged-weapon-fire for fear of hitting friendlies. In such a case you might carry a 2nd shield or be mostly concerned with how the shield performs in melee, which seemed like the place that the added durability would be most important. _ _The main problem i'm seeing is not the weight... it's actually what happens if the enemy can use the fact their weapon is stuck in your shield against you to pull your shield out of alignment or physically move you around in such a manner that you are easily dispatched as a result... so maybe trying a different wood and/or glue might make weapons stick in the shield a bit less? -just my first thoughts & 2c
@@Dack.howaboutyou I think there will be an issue with weapons/arrows stuck in the spear regardless of the extra layers of protection. I'm still not convinced the iron/glass mixture is worth the extra work, or that it provides much additional protection, particularly based on the arrow penetration tests in the part 3 video, but the treated leather definitely seems to have a significant effect.
On the weight issue: I suspect people had different shields for different situations, you'd bring your lighter shield on the march where the chances of arrows and combat are slim but never zero, choose the "regular" one for a battle but you'd get out the big heavy boy if you know you'll storm a castle during a siege because there will be projectiles by the ton and lots of very unfriedly defenders up on the ramparts. We know of siege armour, only makes sense that the idea extended to the shield as well.
My understanding is that Viking shields kept the wood panels quite thin, then overplayed the leather. That might keep the weight down and allow the hide (and/or glass and iron filings) to become more beneficial. But with this thick chunk of poplar, the laminants don't matter much in comparison.
The archeological ones found have sometimes got thin calfskin/leather or sheepskin coverings, and sometimes nothing but paint, so depending on what you mean by "overplayed" I don't think you're quite right. Leather is very heavy; even adding 2-3 Oz-thickness leather (meaning 1 mm of leather fronting) to a 90cm shield is gonna up the weight by a pound or so.
So - not a scholar in any way, but - from what I understand the biggest find so far is 30-something shields from a single norwegian ship-grave at Gokstad, and all of those had paint-residue straight on the wood, which presumably means no covering. But maybe they were just slapped together and painted for the funeral, and not meant for combat? Hard to say. The one found at Trelleborg has apparently been a covered shield, back in the day, according to the Danish National Museum website. I think there's been some living archaeology-historians in Denmark in recent years, who have definitely popularized the idea that they must've been all covered, because it does tremendously help with their (somewhat flimsy) construction. But then again - the sagas are full of stories of shield being split and sundered, so maybe flimsy shields were just how things were done.
Some times you just have to hit things to see how durable they are. Experimental archeology like this is essential to understanding the past. It is also a load of fun.
What are you doing as a job? Archeologist. That's boring! You have no idea HOW boring it is. Sometimes it's literally boring holes in composite materials!
I was thrilled about this series of videos about this project. The results are very interesting from a historical point of view and also for creating armour in general. The shield became tougher and would take a lot of more brute force until it breaks. The glued on leather helped the wood fibres to stay together. The project gave me inspiration and ideas for a body armour project. The lessons learned in that videos were quite usefull.
By far the greatest channel on RUclips. Your genuine love for your craft and historical armory is so wholesome and happy. Thank you Tod for letting us join you in your fun!
Fascinating that this composite armor uses glass beads, exactly like the early ceramic armor of the T-64 (?). I wonder how much it helps over just leather. Surely it would tend to dull the edge coming through and that'd slow it down a lot...but you've demonstrated really well that it's hard to say. Maybe just gluing it to the outside would be lighter? Anyway, thank you so much for letting us see this kind of thing, it's amazing!
I would like to see if it significantly improved the lifespan of the shield on repeated edge strikes. Also, i do like the concept of putting the leather jusg over the section your arm is behind because it needs less penetration to harm you in that spot only.
I suppose it's worth remembering that nobody was trying to hit a shield. They were trying to avoid it and hit the man. So however effective a weapon was against a shield, it was really only useful (as you've shown) if it removed the shield from use. JAT. 👍
And of course, you don't need to do it for long. If you just hook the end of your axe behind a shield, you can open it up pretty fast to let someone else use a spear.
@@rianfelis3156 I suspect this type of strategy was what made some battle lines far more successful than others. Working in teams to create that hole in the enemy line. Fighting man to man........your odds are even. I remember hearing somewhere that Roman troops were trained to kill the man in front of the man beside them, not the man in front of them. So as to exploit the gaps in enemy shields(and attention) during the pushing battles when two lines collide. I don't know if that's true but it certainly makes some sort of sense.
I love this channel. One of the few that I get genuinely excited to learn on through these experiments. I LOVED castled as a kid and always imagined knights to be undefeatable. It's so cool to think about how they would have to decide between heavy duty and more weight or lighter, more agile... What do you think about using the leather backing on the shield just around the area your arm sits? That would seem to make the most sense for weight vs protection, as the only part that would be affected by most of those weapons that you just tested would be your arm on the back (since most of them went less than 25mm deep) I would love to see a shield build with that section extra protected and the rest just poplar! Or even a modular shield with the middle section permanent/ heavy duty and the top and bottom just replaceable pieces of poplar! Might be going too deep there, but I think the idea of just the arm being protected with the halftanned leather would be excellent blend of strength and weight!
Not quite. The 5lb shield is just leather covered poplar. The 11.5lb shield has an added layer of ground glass & iron filings in glue, so that accounts for the extra weight, not thicker wood. That is why you have the 3 different coloured zones on Tod's test shield, with each differently covered over the same thickness wood. Would it really be too heavy as Tod said? Well if you constantly trained with it you'd get quite used to it, considering that Roman Scutum & Greek Hoplite shields were even heavier.
It really goes to show how far you can get with very little in terms of a defensive object like a shield being useful. It doesn't have to be an indestructible object. It just needs to be good enough, and you're already there.
Can you try the rondel and the spear on the orange part? I wonder if 1 layer is already enough or if the filings and glass really make such a difference. I believe an extra layer might make sense over the area where your arm goes and maybe around the edge, but not everywhere. I agree with you that shields themselves are already pretty strong.
you could achieve something similar by just adding more padding or even a bit of metal behind the shield. but it would take significantly less time and effort
I'd love to see a sparth or a gallowglass axe take a chop at it. That extra leverage and narrow head should get in deeper than your felling axe. Great work as always Tod!
So good to see these practical tests. Obviously we know that shields were used historically, we have loads of paintings and tapestries and written accounts along with whatever surviving relics exist. But it's really fascinating to see just HOW useful they were!
Interesting test. I think it mostly demonstrates why they would not attack the shield. If you have a weapon with a pointy side and a blunt side, you use the blunt side against the shield so it can't get stuck. And then use the pointy end when you can get past the shield. Because getting your primary weapon stuck in someone else's shield is probably worse than holding a shield with a weapon stuck in it.
Or, a pollaxe could be an excellent weapon against such a shield. The bottom end is useful for knocking the shield about, the hammer or axe good for smashing it
Tod - suggestion for another test: a double thickness poplar shield vs. the "impenetrable shield" with leather and, glass and iron bits. The tested shield is slightly more than double the weight of the regular poplar shield. The added layers of leather and glass + iron did make the shield stronger. But for about the same extra weight, how would a poplar shield made twice as thick compare? Presumably armorers experimented with shields of all different thicknesses and if you wanted more protection than the standard poplar shield, you could simply add layer(s) of wood and dial in the trade off between weight and protection more easily than by adding the leather and extra glass and iron. Further from the arrow test, it looks like the added leather and filings helped, but were far from 2x as strong as the standard shield. So, a double thick poplar shield would likely actually be 2x as strong and a better choice. Thanks so much for making these videos. Love your content and have bought a dagger from your shop.
Its so impressive how well they survive, it has so many holes in it, its been beat to shit, but its still functional until a spear gets stuck in it. I'd be really curious to see how you make these shields and what steps (removing the canvas, leather, etc) matter in this indestructibility.
See the earlier videos in this series, particularly “Making leather armor impenetrable part 1” And “Making leather armor part 2”. To summarize, the yellow section is a normal wooden shield. The orange and red areas have a layer of leather boiled with a glue mixture which makes it stiff and very hard. Only under the red section leather he added a mixture of iron filings and glass, as per an old recipe he found.
Could you imagine the impact reverberating through your arm from those hammer blows?? Yikes. Even though it didn’t go through super far, I think I would REALLY feel that in my arm and shoulder. Again, you’ve outdone yourself, Tod!
Remember the test was fully supported across the back of the shield. Being held by a soldier it would have a lot more give & flex when struck near the top or bottom.
Im not going to be the first to say this im sure, but I think that if weight is the main thing after adding the leather, glue, glass and iron shavings to the shield then maybe just the half tan leather with glue might be the best of the two. but im not someone that makes those things so i have no idea but i do have to say that it would be fun to see a shield with a layer of leather on the face of it then a layer on the back of it were the padding and arm strap is. maybe a thick piece on the face of the shield glued and nailed then a thinner one on the back glued and nailed, could mix it up i guess but i feel that would make for a good shield. might weigh more but hopefully not to much more. Now for what i do have to say is thank you for making this wonderful video Tod, I look forward to many more.
The ending made me laugh. It is funny thinking how they must have dealt with having things stuck in their shields while trying to still be reasonably mobile during battle. I wonder if there was a protocol around that situation. Chuck it away, get fellow soldier to pull it out or just keep going as best as you can with the added things sticking out of it until you can pick up an unencumbered shield to replace it with.
Very good points on the weight, but - as you yourself mentioned, you aren't a skilled warrior nor a man of brutish strength. Maybe the iron/glass mix just helps enough against the hardest blows? Get Matt to hit it with a poleaxe. Get Jason to hit it off horseback. Get Joerg to just bash it to bits. More tests are always welcome. Stellar job so far Tod!
Great work, really thought provoking, though in this case I believe given the choice most combatants would pick the glass and iron file, for the reason you've chosen not to as it's weight doesn't only offer more protection but also adds weight to your push and functions far more efficiently as an offensive weapon. Thanks for the videos Tod!
hey todd, I'm curious if you are able to make ballistic shields 🤔 poplar and Kevlar construction... is it more useful to have more Kevlar in the front or the back face. How much difference does it make to glue steel of a few different thicknesses or Ceramic fragments in front of the striking Kevlar layer. I'm sure you are able to produce great results, but you might need to send it to the gun guy... demolition ranch i think.
To be frank, 5 kilos strapped shield doesn't sound all that bad, 4kilos centergripped is manageable in combat, so I'd imagine with the straps, five would be ok ? And to avoid arrows going through your forearm with bits of wood leather and god knows what else at a time where medicine can't really treat infections effectively, I'd probably get the extraweight if I went against longbowmen
You'd have protection on your arms though as well, and if it's only poking through an inch there is no way it would be able to go through your arm armor
I figure there were probably a lot of people who didn’t have solid plate armor for their forearms. Even if I had mail I think I’d want the extra protection, even if it’s just over the arm strap area.
@@tods_workshop Thank you for your answer ! I'll check your other videos to learn more about this type of shield, I haven't looked at finds yet for shield of this era. With center gripped, you get the umbo to protect your hand so I had assumed they wouldn't have switched if it made their arms more vulnerable, but perhaps when the heater shield arrived, bows and arrows weren't as prominent as they used to be and that's why they didn't bother ? I didn't know archaeology had established a common trend in this period's shield weights, I had thought maybe some might have been optimised for dueling and made lighter while others would have been heavier for battle, but if the surviving example share the same weight that's most likely not the case. I guess they just prayed it wouldn't hit the arm rest. Thanks for your passionating videos and very interesting tests I always learn a lot.
It'd be great to see a halberd or poleaxe, both the axehead and the pick. I can imagine that the pick, with the additional leverage of a two-handed swing, would penetrate nicely. It'd also be neat to see if a _manageable_ flail can really hook far enough over the rim to hurt the hand!
With either shield's construction (poplar) I'd imagine it'd be more of a hindrance to the attacker than a help: with one mighty swing they've effectively deprived themselves of (prolly) their main weapon due to it hanging up.. & thus putting themselves at a severe disadvantage to boot, even momentarily - not something one should be attempting to do in battle! :)
@@snafu2350 Yes, probably. But they would have a 6 foot lever attached to something that's strapped to the other guy's arm. (Don't do it against a boss shield tho) The other guy does have his main hand free to either retaliate or slash off the straps, but leather isn't easy to cut. I imagine I'd briefly try to use it to break his arm or trip him to the ground, but if not immediately successful I would have to scramble for my sidearm.
I really want to order one of your rondel daggers. Your video showing how you made one inspired me to make one, and it ended up being my favorite piece iv made. I learned alot making it, and managed to sell it for more than any iv made.
Keep in mind that, in actual battle, the various weapons won't likely penetrate as far as you had them go. (I know, you're not as massive as a typical Roman warrior.) You have the shield mounted on a fairly substantial backing. The same shield on someone's arm, even an impressive arm, would have a lot more give than when supported on all sides. Makes the simple poplar shield all the more impressive.
I believe it would make a significant difference to start the whole project with the idea of placing leather, glass and iron filings on it rather than fabric and gesso... I doubt the gesso and fabric weigh a ton, but maybe this other construction makes them somewhat superfluous and it shaves off a little extra load. Still, if I am to identify with someone potentially facing arrows, seeing these and previous results, I'm getting to train for the extra weight. Let's not forget, this style of shield is strapped around the neck, it won't just be carried by the arm all the time and if they are this effective it's not detrimental that they stick against your shoulder either: at most, you get scratched or bruised through the armour or padding. Such an amazing project, still! It is genuinely inspiring to see the vivid curiousity that spurs you to try these things, I honestly wish all research and modern academia took a page from your book. We'd make giant leaps in understanding how their technology actually worked. Thank you so much for your efforts!
Richard Taylor, in his book on the Greek Phalanx, cites the hoplite shield as 5.5-8kg. Clearly heavier shields were a goer. They lined theirs with inner facing of leather and outer skin of bronze. Seems close to what you're experimenting with.
Good points Thane Max. This is exactly what i was thinking- maybe putting softer-stuff on the inside would help prevent things from getting stuck in the shield quite as much too (which might avoid the issue of giving your enemy a nice handle they can then grab and use to move you in such a way as to get you killed!).
I know it’s not a direct analogy, as we were overbuilding things to reduce injury, but in the 70s and 80s SCA shields hung on the arm like that were up to 16lbs, and not particularly encumbering. Again, realizing that the sca is not necessarily historical, (or battleground focused) but in general, we found that among those who intentionally trained to use the shield offensively - the person with heavier shield could leverage more control in a fight.
Oh absolutely, I am in no way implying that the people in the middle ages did it the same way or even had the same theories about shield usage. Just saying that (admittedly, from a small sample size) the weight might not have been a particularly limiting concern, vs the cost for example.
I wonder if that covering might be a lot more useful if the maker does not have access to the right type of woods (in your case poplar). If you only had access to lighter/softer types of woods, adding a covering like such would allow you to reach a structural strength closer or equivalent to a harder/stronger wood shield.
Would you please mount the sheld on a realistic arm that would move when hit? Would the movement absorb an impact, depleting penetration? Thomas M. Tucson, Arizona
Yes it would reduce penetration, but then any information would be based on how good or bad my 'arm facsimile' was, in this case the shield is in the worst possible position, so if it resists here, it will resist all
@@tods_workshop I agree with your idea. Just thought you might experiment with ball and socket mounted to the shield to change angles. With a spring to allow for some give and movement. Keep up the good work. Enjoy your content
I love seeing all the comments talking about just reinforcing the arm section. It makes me wonder if this isn't why shields with a metal center boss were invented. Increased speed and maneuverability of shield and maximum hand protection while minimizing added weight for said protection.
Center gripped shields were likely first to be invented, and they were predominantly used throughout most of the history (before widespread use of metal bosses, there were wooden bosses reinforced with various ways). Shields strapped to the arm were "invented" for most part, in Europe they seem to become popular around 11th, 12th century. Both types offer some advantages, but center gripped ones were generally way more popular.
Hi Tod, really enjoying your videos! I just wanted to suggest that you start adding name/info titles in the lower third of your videos when people start talking. For example, in your armour test series I had to go online to find the names and websites/channels of your guests. I think your audience, your guests, and yourself would benefit from this addition. It would help with exposure to your site and generate interest in your guests content also. I just noticed this last night and wanted to help. Thanks mate!
One could reinforce the area of the holder, where the arm carries the shield, it with the double leather and the powder layer. That would probably raise the weight of the shield to a little over three kilos, but not reach 5.2 kilos. A compromise? The arm would be relatively well protected and the penetrating arrowheads elsewhere would not be long enough to attack the body.
Is a spike, needlepoint/bodkin arrowheads, piercing style rondal daggers considered "edged weapons" as any edges are 60°for triangular cross sections and 90° for square? - I think of them as pointed weapons rather than edge but don't know if it is just me.
Hi Tod I love your renderings of history. Just a quick comment on the Wallace dagger and your recreation and testing with Matt Easton. Is it probable that this dagger has grips that are turned 90 degrees, in relation to the blade, to exploit gaps in armour. After all the overlaps are all horizontal. Thanks for the great show.
Interesting tests, I'm very impressed of this shield. But there is one question in my mind. Is the better protection worth to use a shield with the double weight of a "normal" poplar shield, especially for a footman?
That is impresive work, shield! There is a higher chance for the attacker to become disarmed than doing any real damage. Might explain why those shields are strapped and not held. 🤔 If you only hold it, the guy with the weapon might have more force and tear the shield away from you, but if it's strapped, you can disarm him.
Would be interesting to see what proper shield techniques would look like for dofferent kinds of shields. Theres all sorts of footwork qnd proper ways to use and handle different kinds of weapons but i wonder if theres any good resources on how to properly use or handle a shield even if it seems relatively strsight forward you could say the same about swinging a sword at first.
Thanks Tod, that was brilliant! Bit disappointed at the end as I would really have loved to see the effect of the sword strike, but laughed. I know that Poplar, Alder & Lime wood were usually chosen for shields for being both light & not splitting too easily along the grain. Then I remembered that Elm has a weird tangled grain, so wondered if that was ever used for shields? I suppose it would be heavier plus maybe harder to split into thin planks. Had all the weapons been well sharpened beforehand?
It would be interesting to see if the basic pavise construction offers more arrow protection compared to the heater. After all it was what it was designed to do and the weight wouldn't be that much of an issue.
@tods_workshop I wonder if the recipe with the leather, iron and glass bits could be for some similar type of "siege" shield and not intended for normal field use...
I wonder what the weight difference would be replacing the canvas with leather? On Fandabi Dozi the targs(sp?) are just wood and letter with a lot of tacks. When a layer of wool was added it did really well against firearms. The leather only looked like it did well, but even replacing canvas with leather still might be too much
![Seungmin "그렇게, 천천히, 우리(As we are)" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kAzmhLHePqU/mqdefault.jpg)
Tod's workshop: come for the crafts, stay for the destruction
Tod's Workshop: He's almost as good at unmaking things as he is at making them
I have my moments
@@knightshousegames Better at making them, the shield was still very much extant by the end! I'm actually shocked that it could have so many punctures and slashes through it, but still remain a single object at the end.
Creation and destruction beling together anyway .
I love that Tod casually tells us both imperial and metric measurements smoothly in quick succession like an absolute chad
Yeah, it's cool he makes his videos accessible to disabled people, as well as people who use Imperial. :)
Funny, but surely the other way round?
As a Fitter and Turner it makes my teeth ache to hear centimetres, urrgh!!cheers Tom
@@thomasfowles7366 As a scientist it makes me die a little inside every time I hear Imperial units.
@@thomasfowles7366it fits better in metrics, how do you measure a millimeter in imperials?
It seems that the iron and glass treatment doubles the weight (about 5 pounds to about 11 pounds). If weight is the factor we are trying to optimize, you should compare it with a poplar shield with double-thick planks, to see if the iron and glass treatment gives more protection than simply another layer of wood, and separately apply the iron and glass treatment to a much thinner layer of wood to see if you get comparable performance for less weight.
My thoughts too. Double layers of wood with grains in horizontal position. Seems it would be less work compared to the leather/glass/iron.
That doubling of the weight isn't even with the full shield covered.
@@corwinhyatt519 It is - it's not the actual weight of the shield as it is, it's the weight *it would be* if it was fully covered.
Indeed. Is there a sweet spot where the extra “armor” over thinner wood offers more protection but at the same weight as a regular shield?
If so, is hitting that sweet spot worth the extra labor and materials used?
I suspect it isn’t for mass production, otherwise more shields would have been built that way.
Still, a knight or someone else with the money to spend might have had it done to gain a small but critical advantage.
@@sanityormadness No, it is the weight of the shield as it sits for this test with the three testing sections being of different composition. 1:45 is where he states this. The full shield being set up with the same composition as the red section would be even heavier than the 11.5 lbs stated there.
its honestly fascinating to see these sort of experiments
Thanks and it is fascinating doing them
@@tods_workshop im a firm believer that things like this need to be more wide spread, maybe then some historical mysteries wont be mysteries anymore
@@tods_workshopquestion. What would happen if you made the wood of the shield thinner to help compensate for the weight? Would it still be as effective?
@@dakken74 great question
I love that you built a Hussite war flail.
Small detail: Jan Hus and the Hussites. Hus is pronounced Hoos, like goose! Hussites are hoo-sights. Hus is in fact Czech for goose !
The Old Norse referred to shields as 'the net of spears.' I guess Tod showed us why.
watching this, lob enough spears and make them too heavy to wield. Net of Spears makes sense.
They did? Source?
From some reason I thought that mail was called that, since it's kind of a net, after all. But it indeed seems to be about a shield.
The source seems to be Snorra Eda and the word is "oddnets" so more literally "point net".
One kenning for mail is "gǫtvar geirrotu" seems it means "clothing/garment of spearrain".
You can also look on the other side of it: modern fencing generally shows a swordsman to have a somewhat marginal advantage over a spearman (each with shields) but that might turn out a lot more significant if the spearhead could get caught up in the opponents shield and leave the spearman open.
It's been 22 years of whiners telling me "Your reenactment fighting is bogus because you rely on a magic shield that'd disintegrate within a minute of REAL dueling!" Now, thanks to your wonderful video, I can tell the haters to find something else to whine about. Thank you!
These real life practical tests really are very interesting. Thank you for showing us how ancient and medieval weapons and armor really worked.
This was a bundle of fun to watch! 😆I hope Tod enjoyed himself too.
I think that's a fairly safe bet.
I think that late Medieval and Renaissance shields were some kind of wood/glue/sinew/other stuff composites for most part. Leather was also sometimes used.
In Polish lands at least, pavises and shields were pretty ordinarily made by painters guild (pictores?) not any other one. So applying layers of some sticky stuff that could by applied with a brush was probably integral part of construction.
Providing a pavise or a shield was customary payment for joining a painters guild in Kraków, for example. Those guilds were also involving wood carvers, probably to work both on shields as well as preparing planks for actual painting.
All the way in 1580 Stanisław Sarnicki mentions hussar's shields:
"against lances, they have shields from meaty wood, strenghtened with veins (probably meant sinews, common in 16th century Polish) and glues"
Later, Claudio Ragnoli mentions " some hussars only use lance alone, the hatchet and shield from sturdy wood and dried sinew of great beasts, joined with glue. The shield is so strong, it resists every strong blow of the lance. They use those shields so dexterously, that they disregard every enemy, as if they were entirely clad in armor".
Medieval Crossbow channel has a recipe for very elaborate composite pavise.
ruclips.net/video/G2Rl9DLUfao/видео.html
Great information! And Kraków is one of my favorite cities! ❤ I would recommend a visit to anyone.
very interesting! btw, "In Polish lands at least, pavises and shields were pretty ordinarily made by painters guild (pictores?) not any other one." - "Shield" in Dutch is "Schild", and painting is called "Schilderen" and painters are called "schilderaars" - So yeah, I think what you said might have been pretty much standard across the medieval world perhaps
Please I want Tod to build and test one
@@lotoreo I think that in German sources shield makers are sometimes listed with their own name "schilders" but it seems that in most cases they were grouped with other artists and woodworking trades.
Probably they could form their own guilds in heavily specialized, industrialized South German towns, where there were few towns specializing entirely in making mail, for example. But probably not in Poland, or say, Sweden.
This makes a lot of sense as many paintings were done on wood panels, which would need to be prepared specially for painting on, differently from say pieces of cabinetry.
Then there’s the carpentry/joinery and carving skills needed to make picture frames, again specialized for that purpose even though the techniques would be similar to those used to make cabinetry or other purely decorative (as opposed to structural) woodwork.
Tod going full "torturerer laying out their tools" on the shield...
Shield: I won't say anything, not even ouch!
Absolutely love your experiments with stuff like this. Please do more weird weapons too! Your flail testing videos are some of my favorites.
Got another very weird weapon coming, probably next week
@@tods_workshop can't wait!
I think one of the most interesting things about this test, is just how durable this shield is against all of these attacks. That is even more impressive when you think during combat, you wouldn't really be seeing these nice clean attacks and cuts, its far more likely they'd be coming in at a weaker force or less than ideal angle. Plus the defender would be likely trying to deflect the attack sideways.
Crazy
Amazingly so
Adding on to that, even *if* the attacker managed a blow like one of those in combat, in each case it's completely ineffective at causing a wound in the shield carrier, and in almost every case would result in a disarmed attacker. It's not easy getting any of that out of the shield again.
As you said, you would be unlikely to get those angles in combat, so I don't thinkt he disarming would be that likely, but still more likely than somehow wounding the shield carrier *through* the shield.
axes look pretty damaging against them!
What I find most interesting is the stickiness and general potential for friction. Probably made it a lot easier to bind an opponent’s weapons than modern fencing can demonstrate.
It's amazing how much punishment that shield can take. I was sure you would shatter it with the axe after a few blows.
It continually amazes me just how tough they are
Yeah, the handaxe out of everything surprised me. I think it's because that's the one I'm most familiar with, but the situations I encounter it in are made to work in its favor. If you're chopping firewood or branches you're going with the grain, there's no reinforcement to try and hold the wood together, it's what the tool was made for.
it did seem like the axe was going to be the tool that made the shortest work of the shield though!
What I find really interesting is how many of the anti-armour weapons get stuck in the shield on the first heavy blow in a way that in combat would probably force one to draw another weapon. Obviously one would probably try to avoid it and not just hammer in a blow like that into the middle of a shield, but it still can happen. The Falchion did seem to have that trouble, which despite it not damaging the shield that much, could have been a desirable trait.
I love those videos!
Love this stuff Tod, you're doing proper "experimental archaeology" on a personal level from the point of view of the average grunt in the field. A bog standard soldier in whatever era you're talking about, this is the kind of weapons, armor, and equipment they'd be using every day in the field. As a grunt in the US Army back in the 90's, when bored we'd do experiments to see if we could improve what we had been issued, whether it was making MRE's taste like anything OTHER than wet cardboard, or adding a bit of padding to our LBE/plate carriers, to tightening/polishing up the actions on our weapons to make em a tiny bit more accurate and reliable. Soldiers as far back as there have been even semi-organized armies did stuff like this to make their lives a little easier and most importantly SAFER in battle.
This behaviour seems to go back as far as time - thanks
Fantastic work! I'm thinking, if I'm planning to be fairly immobile and expecting to take lots of arrow hits, I'll take the leather fronted shield. If I want to be mobile, and not expecting lots of arrow hits, I'll take the regular shield.
Also, fantastic work on making the beautiful shields, and showcasing some of the beautiful weapons you make in testing them!
Thanks and a pleasure
I think if you plan to be fairly immobile a tower shield would be a better bet, but a shield like this might have some niche uses
Okay, you got me with the Witcher sword. Spectacular ending, and a lot of fun from beginning to end!
Heavy axes are definitely the weapon of choice to produce the most damage.
But as you demonstrated, extracting the weapons from the shield is bloody tough 😂
Exposes the attacker to a counter-attack.
banger video and Im super happy there is someone with such a methodical yet functional and entertaining approach doing experimental archeology. Keep it up!
Even if the shield is very tough without the leather, I would definitely want the leather covering the part where my arm is on the back, to prevent penetration into the arm. And then maybe save the weight on the rest of the shield.
Exactly what I was about to suggest. Have it "impenetrable" on that middle section with the grip/armrest, and lighter, but "protective enough" on the rest of the shield. That could maybe cut down the weight down a kilo.
I assume that was a silver sword, because the shield is a monster.
Nice! But actually it was a season two 'brooch' sword
@@tods_workshop which was a beautiful touch and seemed to "fit" with the blade while never being shoved in the viewers face as a "look we did this!!!". Shoved in plenty of monsters faces though.
Love the ending. Put a massive grin on my face, which I needed. Really enjoyed the experimental section too.
I love this kind of content. Doesn't matter if it's guns or melee weapons. Just show me what it does to a target!
Do you watch Kentucky Ballistics? That channel is all about the impact. 😄😄😄👍
@euansmith3699 I love that channel! Around the time of the 4-Bore I started asking for a Punt Gun video on every episode. The exact video after I purchased one of the energy drinks that sponsored him, he does a video on the Punt Gun. I was so happy, it felt like Christmas came early.
@euansmith3699 high-speed ballistics is another great channel. The video they did on bullets vs glass was so interesting. Tempered glass breaks so fast!
@@dogishappy0 Thanks for that recommendation👍👍👍Slo-mo Guys do some great blowing things to bits videos too.
I guess the shield would fare even better if supported by an arm rather than an easel; as the arm could absorb some of the impact by moving.
Thanks for another fun and informative video.
I've been waiting for the conclusion of this.
I think if you wanted to revisit this, the next thing to look into would be shield bosses.
As noted by Matt Easton in a relatively recent video, they seemed to make a comeback in that 14-15th century.
He theorizes that some Heater Shields became boss held due to armor, but my theory after seeing this series is they are a deflecting surface placed on top of where the arm goes, to protect the arm from missiles piercing it like we saw in Part 3 of this series
That might be worth investigating. seeing if arrows deflect off of a shield boss, and if so, how much energy they have when they hit the shield.
Additionally, I think you should look into just putting a strip of that leather facing just across the middle where the arm goes, and face the rest with canvas, with a boss, and see what the weight is compared to the canvas only shield, to see if it is still usable.
This is a really interesting idea. I don’t think the iron-glass mixture is worth adding but even just getting a calculation for how heavy the smaller treated leather strip would add could be very interesting.
@@andrewreynolds4949 If it's the difference between an arrow maybe putting a hole in your doublet vs an arrow an inch deep into your forearm, that feels worth it to me.
My theory is if you just protect the section where your arm is, and leave the rest untreated, anything bouncing off the boss might not even have the energy to penetrate the rawhide and might even just glance off completely, while balancing the weight nicely, since the heaviest part will be attached to you, so the felt weight isn't as bad
@@knightshousegames I'm agreeing with you. It's possibly worth it to protect the arm area with the leather layers, but I doubt the iron-glass mixture does much to be worth the extra effort, just going by the arrow test from earlier. It seems to me the leather is what is making the difference
i was going to say basically the same thing as knightshouse; it would be interesting to see how the weight-to-protection-ratio worked out if you just used the iron+glass treatment in the area where your hand/arm/body would be [behind the shield].
_So putting the iron+glass mix on the leather in something like a square bit in the middle of that heater, which covered approx half the center area of the shield maybe... with the rest of the shield just being wood covered with the standard 1-2 leather-layers
or whatever made the best compromise for protection & mobility (and kept arrows from going so deep they were able to also go through your body armor after the shield perhaps).
RE: andrewR from this video and the brief testing we see here it might seem like that added effort of adding the metal+glass-mix was not worth the time nor extra weight added, but i'd personally want to test the whole idea a lot more. Using different shield types, perhaps combining a small metal boss with partial metal+glass-mix application in key areas etc.
A shield rarely sits still to be struck flat-on at a right-angle (90 degrees ish etc), and it mainly just needs to keep you from getting hit by a few arrows until you can close distance enough that your proximity to the enemy should discourage enemy ranged-weapon-fire for fear of hitting friendlies. In such a case you might carry a 2nd shield or be mostly concerned with how the shield performs in melee, which seemed like the place that the added durability would be most important.
_ _The main problem i'm seeing is not the weight... it's actually what happens if the enemy can use the fact their weapon is stuck in your shield against you to pull your shield out of alignment or physically move you around in such a manner that you are easily dispatched as a result...
so maybe trying a different wood and/or glue might make weapons stick in the shield a bit less?
-just my first thoughts & 2c
@@Dack.howaboutyou I think there will be an issue with weapons/arrows stuck in the spear regardless of the extra layers of protection.
I'm still not convinced the iron/glass mixture is worth the extra work, or that it provides much additional protection, particularly based on the arrow penetration tests in the part 3 video, but the treated leather definitely seems to have a significant effect.
On the weight issue: I suspect people had different shields for different situations, you'd bring your lighter shield on the march where the chances of arrows and combat are slim but never zero, choose the "regular" one for a battle but you'd get out the big heavy boy if you know you'll storm a castle during a siege because there will be projectiles by the ton and lots of very unfriedly defenders up on the ramparts. We know of siege armour, only makes sense that the idea extended to the shield as well.
Todd may not be a professional athlete but he has the coolest way of getting in a workout!
My understanding is that Viking shields kept the wood panels quite thin, then overplayed the leather. That might keep the weight down and allow the hide (and/or glass and iron filings) to become more beneficial. But with this thick chunk of poplar, the laminants don't matter much in comparison.
The archeological ones found have sometimes got thin calfskin/leather or sheepskin coverings, and sometimes nothing but paint, so depending on what you mean by "overplayed" I don't think you're quite right. Leather is very heavy; even adding 2-3 Oz-thickness leather (meaning 1 mm of leather fronting) to a 90cm shield is gonna up the weight by a pound or so.
Thanks Soren, I thoughts they were always covered - is that not so?
So - not a scholar in any way, but - from what I understand the biggest find so far is 30-something shields from a single norwegian ship-grave at Gokstad, and all of those had paint-residue straight on the wood, which presumably means no covering.
But maybe they were just slapped together and painted for the funeral, and not meant for combat? Hard to say. The one found at Trelleborg has apparently been a covered shield, back in the day, according to the Danish National Museum website.
I think there's been some living archaeology-historians in Denmark in recent years, who have definitely popularized the idea that they must've been all covered, because it does tremendously help with their (somewhat flimsy) construction.
But then again - the sagas are full of stories of shield being split and sundered, so maybe flimsy shields were just how things were done.
Some times you just have to hit things to see how durable they are. Experimental archeology like this is essential to understanding the past. It is also a load of fun.
What are you doing as a job?
Archeologist.
That's boring!
You have no idea HOW boring it is. Sometimes it's literally boring holes in composite materials!
I was thrilled about this series of videos about this project. The results are very interesting from a historical point of view and also for creating armour in general. The shield became tougher and would take a lot of more brute force until it breaks. The glued on leather helped the wood fibres to stay together.
The project gave me inspiration and ideas for a body armour project. The lessons learned in that videos were quite usefull.
finally a video where Tod gets to hit the target every single time!!!! :D
By far the greatest channel on RUclips. Your genuine love for your craft and historical armory is so wholesome and happy. Thank you Tod for letting us join you in your fun!
Fascinating that this composite armor uses glass beads, exactly like the early ceramic armor of the T-64 (?). I wonder how much it helps over just leather. Surely it would tend to dull the edge coming through and that'd slow it down a lot...but you've demonstrated really well that it's hard to say. Maybe just gluing it to the outside would be lighter?
Anyway, thank you so much for letting us see this kind of thing, it's amazing!
A pleasure and it is interesting how thought streams seem to go over huge lengths of time n- one of the reasons I love history
This was too much fun too watch, honestly need more of these crazy destruction Tod videos.
I never leave comments but I really enjoy your videos! Wanted to point out that the ending had me burst to laughter!
I would like to see if it significantly improved the lifespan of the shield on repeated edge strikes.
Also, i do like the concept of putting the leather jusg over the section your arm is behind because it needs less penetration to harm you in that spot only.
Axe goes chopchop! Shields really are amazing
I suppose it's worth remembering that nobody was trying to hit a shield. They were trying to avoid it and hit the man. So however effective a weapon was against a shield, it was really only useful (as you've shown) if it removed the shield from use. JAT. 👍
And of course, you don't need to do it for long. If you just hook the end of your axe behind a shield, you can open it up pretty fast to let someone else use a spear.
@@rianfelis3156 I suspect this type of strategy was what made some battle lines far more successful than others. Working in teams to create that hole in the enemy line. Fighting man to man........your odds are even. I remember hearing somewhere that Roman troops were trained to kill the man in front of the man beside them, not the man in front of them. So as to exploit the gaps in enemy shields(and attention) during the pushing battles when two lines collide. I don't know if that's true but it certainly makes some sort of sense.
Coming up to 9 minutes, and the shield is still fully functional. Not bad, that!
Edit: Of course, Tod makes the same point a few minutes later.
I love this channel.
One of the few that I get genuinely excited to learn on through these experiments.
I LOVED castled as a kid and always imagined knights to be undefeatable. It's so cool to think about how they would have to decide between heavy duty and more weight or lighter, more agile...
What do you think about using the leather backing on the shield just around the area your arm sits?
That would seem to make the most sense for weight vs protection, as the only part that would be affected by most of those weapons that you just tested would be your arm on the back (since most of them went less than 25mm deep)
I would love to see a shield build with that section extra protected and the rest just poplar! Or even a modular shield with the middle section permanent/ heavy duty and the top and bottom just replaceable pieces of poplar!
Might be going too deep there, but I think the idea of just the arm being protected with the halftanned leather would be excellent blend of strength and weight!
Really intriguing. But I wonder how resilient an 11.5 pound wood shield would be? It would be twice as thick as the original 5+ pound shield.
Not quite. The 5lb shield is just leather covered poplar. The 11.5lb shield has an added layer of ground glass & iron filings in glue, so that accounts for the extra weight, not thicker wood. That is why you have the 3 different coloured zones on Tod's test shield, with each differently covered over the same thickness wood.
Would it really be too heavy as Tod said? Well if you constantly trained with it you'd get quite used to it, considering that Roman Scutum & Greek Hoplite shields were even heavier.
It really goes to show how far you can get with very little in terms of a defensive object like a shield being useful. It doesn't have to be an indestructible object. It just needs to be good enough, and you're already there.
That is a glorious array of weaponry Tod.
Shields: do they work? Yes. Yes, they do.
Can you try the rondel and the spear on the orange part? I wonder if 1 layer is already enough or if the filings and glass really make such a difference.
I believe an extra layer might make sense over the area where your arm goes and maybe around the edge, but not everywhere. I agree with you that shields themselves are already pretty strong.
you could achieve something similar by just adding more padding or even a bit of metal behind the shield. but it would take significantly less time and effort
It's always a pleasure to watch people hitting stuff with great reproduction weapons =)
Thats Aweesome Tod! Would love to test one against Throwing Weapons :D
Thanks Adam and good to see you here. Unless the thrown weapons had significant mass I doubt they would do much
@@tods_workshop Well i think full spin with a war hammer would do something :P and maybe some spear throw ? Cheers Tod awesome test
I've enjoyed watching this shield series.
I'd love to see a sparth or a gallowglass axe take a chop at it. That extra leverage and narrow head should get in deeper than your felling axe.
Great work as always Tod!
What the hell why didn't YT give me this notification, now Ive missed out on another of your awesome videos for 24 minutes!
But I have rewarded you with a personal 'hello'
So good to see these practical tests. Obviously we know that shields were used historically, we have loads of paintings and tapestries and written accounts along with whatever surviving relics exist. But it's really fascinating to see just HOW useful they were!
yeah, I would have expected that relativly thin wood shield to stop even a spear that good at a frontal assault.
Amazingly resilient, didn’t expect it to do so well vs axes
Interesting test. I think it mostly demonstrates why they would not attack the shield. If you have a weapon with a pointy side and a blunt side, you use the blunt side against the shield so it can't get stuck. And then use the pointy end when you can get past the shield. Because getting your primary weapon stuck in someone else's shield is probably worse than holding a shield with a weapon stuck in it.
Or, a pollaxe could be an excellent weapon against such a shield. The bottom end is useful for knocking the shield about, the hammer or axe good for smashing it
To my way of thinking, freezing the weapon(s) up would give at least a momentary advantage. Then you come up, down, or across with your weapon.
Tod - suggestion for another test: a double thickness poplar shield vs. the "impenetrable shield" with leather and, glass and iron bits.
The tested shield is slightly more than double the weight of the regular poplar shield. The added layers of leather and glass + iron did make the shield stronger. But for about the same extra weight, how would a poplar shield made twice as thick compare?
Presumably armorers experimented with shields of all different thicknesses and if you wanted more protection than the standard poplar shield, you could simply add layer(s) of wood and dial in the trade off between weight and protection more easily than by adding the leather and extra glass and iron. Further from the arrow test, it looks like the added leather and filings helped, but were far from 2x as strong as the standard shield. So, a double thick poplar shield would likely actually be 2x as strong and a better choice.
Thanks so much for making these videos. Love your content and have bought a dagger from your shop.
Keep pounding Todd. Love your creativity in offense/defense
Wow a very light shield the poplar wood.
The composite is much improved and done weapons seemed to bounce more on the upper part.
Its so impressive how well they survive, it has so many holes in it, its been beat to shit, but its still functional until a spear gets stuck in it. I'd be really curious to see how you make these shields and what steps (removing the canvas, leather, etc) matter in this indestructibility.
See the earlier videos in this series, particularly
“Making leather armor impenetrable part 1”
And
“Making leather armor part 2”.
To summarize, the yellow section is a normal wooden shield. The orange and red areas have a layer of leather boiled with a glue mixture which makes it stiff and very hard. Only under the red section leather he added a mixture of iron filings and glass, as per an old recipe he found.
Hello Tod, I recently got the Bruegel Messer from your store. I absolutely love it. Cheers.
Thanks and glad you like it!
Could you imagine the impact reverberating through your arm from those hammer blows?? Yikes. Even though it didn’t go through super far, I think I would REALLY feel that in my arm and shoulder. Again, you’ve outdone yourself, Tod!
That's what the padded backing is for. :) They felt it too!
Thanks
Remember the test was fully supported across the back of the shield. Being held by a soldier it would have a lot more give & flex when struck near the top or bottom.
Thanks, Tod, for all the fine entertainment you're showing. Keep em` coming.
Shields are good, shields stop wham bams very well! Fantastic video, going to check out the previous film now! Thanks Tod.
Im not going to be the first to say this im sure, but I think that if weight is the main thing after adding the leather, glue, glass and iron shavings to the shield then maybe just the half tan leather with glue might be the best of the two. but im not someone that makes those things so i have no idea but i do have to say that it would be fun to see a shield with a layer of leather on the face of it then a layer on the back of it were the padding and arm strap is. maybe a thick piece on the face of the shield glued and nailed then a thinner one on the back glued and nailed, could mix it up i guess but i feel that would make for a good shield. might weigh more but hopefully not to much more. Now for what i do have to say is thank you for making this wonderful video Tod, I look forward to many more.
The ending made me laugh. It is funny thinking how they must have dealt with having things stuck in their shields while trying to still be reasonably mobile during battle. I wonder if there was a protocol around that situation. Chuck it away, get fellow soldier to pull it out or just keep going as best as you can with the added things sticking out of it until you can pick up an unencumbered shield to replace it with.
Very good points on the weight, but - as you yourself mentioned, you aren't a skilled warrior nor a man of brutish strength. Maybe the iron/glass mix just helps enough against the hardest blows?
Get Matt to hit it with a poleaxe. Get Jason to hit it off horseback. Get Joerg to just bash it to bits. More tests are always welcome. Stellar job so far Tod!
Great work, really thought provoking, though in this case I believe given the choice most combatants would pick the glass and iron file, for the reason you've chosen not to as it's weight doesn't only offer more protection but also adds weight to your push and functions far more efficiently as an offensive weapon. Thanks for the videos Tod!
Great film Tod.! that for this demonstration mate!
hey todd, I'm curious if you are able to make ballistic shields 🤔
poplar and Kevlar construction... is it more useful to have more Kevlar in the front or the back face.
How much difference does it make to glue steel of a few different thicknesses or Ceramic fragments in front of the striking Kevlar layer.
I'm sure you are able to produce great results, but you might need to send it to the gun guy... demolition ranch i think.
To be frank, 5 kilos strapped shield doesn't sound all that bad, 4kilos centergripped is manageable in combat, so I'd imagine with the straps, five would be ok ? And to avoid arrows going through your forearm with bits of wood leather and god knows what else at a time where medicine can't really treat infections effectively, I'd probably get the extraweight if I went against longbowmen
If you had the time and resources to train for it, 100% would go for the extra weight
You'd have protection on your arms though as well, and if it's only poking through an inch there is no way it would be able to go through your arm armor
I figure there were probably a lot of people who didn’t have solid plate armor for their forearms. Even if I had mail I think I’d want the extra protection, even if it’s just over the arm strap area.
I generally agree, but this was based on the construction of original 14thC shields and I guess they knew what they were looking for
@@tods_workshop Thank you for your answer ! I'll check your other videos to learn more about this type of shield, I haven't looked at finds yet for shield of this era.
With center gripped, you get the umbo to protect your hand so I had assumed they wouldn't have switched if it made their arms more vulnerable, but perhaps when the heater shield arrived, bows and arrows weren't as prominent as they used to be and that's why they didn't bother ?
I didn't know archaeology had established a common trend in this period's shield weights, I had thought maybe some might have been optimised for dueling and made lighter while others would have been heavier for battle, but if the surviving example share the same weight that's most likely not the case. I guess they just prayed it wouldn't hit the arm rest.
Thanks for your passionating videos and very interesting tests I always learn a lot.
It'd be great to see a halberd or poleaxe, both the axehead and the pick. I can imagine that the pick, with the additional leverage of a two-handed swing, would penetrate nicely. It'd also be neat to see if a _manageable_ flail can really hook far enough over the rim to hurt the hand!
With either shield's construction (poplar) I'd imagine it'd be more of a hindrance to the attacker than a help: with one mighty swing they've effectively deprived themselves of (prolly) their main weapon due to it hanging up.. & thus putting themselves at a severe disadvantage to boot, even momentarily - not something one should be attempting to do in battle! :)
@@snafu2350 Yes, probably. But they would have a 6 foot lever attached to something that's strapped to the other guy's arm. (Don't do it against a boss shield tho) The other guy does have his main hand free to either retaliate or slash off the straps, but leather isn't easy to cut. I imagine I'd briefly try to use it to break his arm or trip him to the ground, but if not immediately successful I would have to scramble for my sidearm.
Awesome work Tod. Always a fun watch and a good time. Thanks.
I really want to order one of your rondel daggers. Your video showing how you made one inspired me to make one, and it ended up being my favorite piece iv made. I learned alot making it, and managed to sell it for more than any iv made.
Keep in mind that, in actual battle, the various weapons won't likely penetrate as far as you had them go. (I know, you're not as massive as a typical Roman warrior.) You have the shield mounted on a fairly substantial backing. The same shield on someone's arm, even an impressive arm, would have a lot more give than when supported on all sides. Makes the simple poplar shield all the more impressive.
Quality content as always !!
I believe it would make a significant difference to start the whole project with the idea of placing leather, glass and iron filings on it rather than fabric and gesso... I doubt the gesso and fabric weigh a ton, but maybe this other construction makes them somewhat superfluous and it shaves off a little extra load. Still, if I am to identify with someone potentially facing arrows, seeing these and previous results, I'm getting to train for the extra weight. Let's not forget, this style of shield is strapped around the neck, it won't just be carried by the arm all the time and if they are this effective it's not detrimental that they stick against your shoulder either: at most, you get scratched or bruised through the armour or padding.
Such an amazing project, still! It is genuinely inspiring to see the vivid curiousity that spurs you to try these things, I honestly wish all research and modern academia took a page from your book. We'd make giant leaps in understanding how their technology actually worked. Thank you so much for your efforts!
Probably the best ending you've done to a vid Mr Tod. 🤣
Richard Taylor, in his book on the Greek Phalanx, cites the hoplite shield as 5.5-8kg. Clearly heavier shields were a goer. They lined theirs with inner facing of leather and outer skin of bronze. Seems close to what you're experimenting with.
Good points Thane Max.
This is exactly what i was thinking- maybe putting softer-stuff on the inside would help prevent things from getting stuck in the shield quite as much too (which might avoid the issue of giving your enemy a nice handle they can then grab and use to move you in such a way as to get you killed!).
Awsomely informative video with an entertaining ending.
Great work as usual Tod!
I know it’s not a direct analogy, as we were overbuilding things to reduce injury, but in the 70s and 80s SCA shields hung on the arm like that were up to 16lbs, and not particularly encumbering.
Again, realizing that the sca is not necessarily historical, (or battleground focused) but in general, we found that among those who intentionally trained to use the shield offensively - the person with heavier shield could leverage more control in a fight.
But this is based on the build of original 14thC shields
Oh absolutely, I am in no way implying that the people in the middle ages did it the same way or even had the same theories about shield usage.
Just saying that (admittedly, from a small sample size) the weight might not have been a particularly limiting concern, vs the cost for example.
Thanks Tod. Another fascinating video.
I wonder if that covering might be a lot more useful if the maker does not have access to the right type of woods (in your case poplar).
If you only had access to lighter/softer types of woods, adding a covering like such would allow you to reach a structural strength closer or equivalent to a harder/stronger wood shield.
Top marks Tod yet again, really enjoyed watching that,very informative too.
Thanks
Would you please mount the sheld on a realistic arm that would move when hit? Would the movement absorb an impact, depleting penetration?
Thomas M.
Tucson, Arizona
Very nice point. But this experiment itself gives us a great point of reference!
Yes it would reduce penetration, but then any information would be based on how good or bad my 'arm facsimile' was, in this case the shield is in the worst possible position, so if it resists here, it will resist all
@@tods_workshop I agree with your idea.
Just thought you might experiment with ball and socket mounted to the shield to change angles. With a spring to allow for some give and movement. Keep up the good work. Enjoy your content
I love seeing all the comments talking about just reinforcing the arm section. It makes me wonder if this isn't why shields with a metal center boss were invented. Increased speed and maneuverability of shield and maximum hand protection while minimizing added weight for said protection.
Center gripped shields were likely first to be invented, and they were predominantly used throughout most of the history (before widespread use of metal bosses, there were wooden bosses reinforced with various ways).
Shields strapped to the arm were "invented" for most part, in Europe they seem to become popular around 11th, 12th century.
Both types offer some advantages, but center gripped ones were generally way more popular.
As another commenter said, when you are wearing vambraces extra protection over the arm is not required
Offered all round pretty good defensive protection I'd say and would give a hefty shove too yeh cheers for the illustration.
Loved the video but that bloody Jumpscare at the end really got me good.
Hi Tod, really enjoying your videos! I just wanted to suggest that you start adding name/info titles in the lower third of your videos when people start talking. For example, in your armour test series I had to go online to find the names and websites/channels of your guests. I think your audience, your guests, and yourself would benefit from this addition. It would help with exposure to your site and generate interest in your guests content also. I just noticed this last night and wanted to help. Thanks mate!
One could reinforce the area of the holder, where the arm carries the shield, it with the double leather and the powder layer. That would probably raise the weight of the shield to a little over three kilos, but not reach 5.2 kilos. A compromise? The arm would be relatively well protected and the penetrating arrowheads elsewhere would not be long enough to attack the body.
Is a spike, needlepoint/bodkin arrowheads, piercing style rondal daggers considered "edged weapons" as any edges are 60°for triangular cross sections and 90° for square? - I think of them as pointed weapons rather than edge but don't know if it is just me.
Hi Tod I love your renderings of history. Just a quick comment on the Wallace dagger and your recreation and testing with Matt Easton. Is it probable that this dagger has grips that are turned 90 degrees, in relation to the blade, to exploit gaps in armour. After all the overlaps are all horizontal. Thanks for the great show.
Interesting tests, I'm very impressed of this shield. But there is one question in my mind. Is the better protection worth to use a shield with the double weight of a "normal" poplar shield, especially for a footman?
That is impresive work, shield!
There is a higher chance for the attacker to become disarmed than doing any real damage. Might explain why those shields are strapped and not held. 🤔 If you only hold it, the guy with the weapon might have more force and tear the shield away from you, but if it's strapped, you can disarm him.
Would be interesting to see what proper shield techniques would look like for dofferent kinds of shields. Theres all sorts of footwork qnd proper ways to use and handle different kinds of weapons but i wonder if theres any good resources on how to properly use or handle a shield even if it seems relatively strsight forward you could say the same about swinging a sword at first.
Thanks Tod, that was brilliant! Bit disappointed at the end as I would really have loved to see the effect of the sword strike, but laughed.
I know that Poplar, Alder & Lime wood were usually chosen for shields for being both light & not splitting too easily along the grain. Then I remembered that Elm has a weird tangled grain, so wondered if that was ever used for shields? I suppose it would be heavier plus maybe harder to split into thin planks.
Had all the weapons been well sharpened beforehand?
Sometimes it seems you have waaaay too much fun. 😂
It's always great seeing you play...I mean, test your toys... weapons...
Keep it up!
Going hell for leather there
awesome
8:00 Tod getting good with editing. That was some nice comedic timing. ^^
Thanks
It would be interesting to see if the basic pavise construction offers more arrow protection compared to the heater. After all it was what it was designed to do and the weight wouldn't be that much of an issue.
I am sure it would because as I understand it they were substantially thicker and often covered and as you say, weight was less of an issue
@tods_workshop I wonder if the recipe with the leather, iron and glass bits could be for some similar type of "siege" shield and not intended for normal field use...
I wonder what the weight difference would be replacing the canvas with leather?
On Fandabi Dozi the targs(sp?) are just wood and letter with a lot of tacks.
When a layer of wool was added it did really well against firearms.
The leather only looked like it did well, but even replacing canvas with leather still might be too much