@@bloodwynn Don't forget that part of the cause of this is the fact that you often didn't have multiple kinds of shields, swords et cetera coexisting. Hence why we get so many weapons called a long sword in their own time.
Modern Specialist: "They must have named all the armaments but we just didn't get it" Weaponsmith at the time: I call this new weapons "Seventh-thing that hurts-thing on a stick"
Medieval people in medieval times would probably refer to things exactly this way. In their own language of their own period. As just "thing". Modern historians that have to consider all periods and all environments where subcategories and era-specific versions of "thing" have to keep adding specifying terminology to keep "farming Thing from 900AD" separate from "Knight's weapon Thing from late 1500s France"
@@vadenummela9353 okay now try going to a blacksmith and saying make me thing please... Clearly they used names that they never felt the need to write down. But to honestly think people back then we're morons who didn't classify types of variety in weapons you're deluded
@@TuorTheBlessedOfUlmo *Laughs in Latin* I bring you the Gladius which was literally Latin for sword. also Messer and Kriegmesser literally knife and war knife. It's not that medieval people were stupid. They weren't they just were not as hung up on terms as historians have to be to place a weapon in it's proper context.
As an Italian, I would just like to point out that in modern Italian Azza specifically means Pollaxe, whereas a generic Axe is called Ascia. I do not know if at the time the terms were interchangeable, but now they are definitely not.
Ackhtually, if you go by the dictionary, "Axe" would be either "Scure" or "Accetta" depending on the size, while "Ascia" would be a different tool (with the blade perpendicular to the handle). But yeah, today Ascia is a common catch-all term for all of those tools
@@samarkand1585 The spelling "sci" reads with a soft c, like how in English you would pronounce the "Shi" part of "Ship" (the stress in the word may be different though). So you can read "Ascia" as "Asha"
I always thought part of the definition, from a more knowledgeable position, was the use. There's a bit of a mode of use here. Poleaxe/pollaxe/pollhammer is an individual weapon. It's a deliberate anti-armour weapon, it's a weapon of the individual knight. It's meant and can be used close in and has a weakness in range. Sure, you have some range with it, but when you're capped out at 5ft, it's no spear in terms of reach. It's not just a 'knightly' weapon, it's a can opener, it's a brutal weapon and it's a deliberate weapon for defeating armour. It's the control of the user that makes the best of this weapon. A knockout blow or a lethal one. The halberd on the hand is a group weapon, a weapon of block infantry. Even perhaps cavalry. It's got the tools you need to make things interesting for the second and third ranks. More importantly it's not got a pointy/nasty backend to hurt your own guys with. It's about making an area uncomfortable to deadly for the other guy. This is a weapon of the mass drill, repeated drill, it's a weapon of rank and fill lines. On some level it's the definition of assault rifle and battle rifle, in a more modern context. Made even harder when you have a near enough definition of 'rifle' that fits both. Yet, really explains nothing. It's not something you can easily describe. Even with the old manuals, I feel there's some lost context to it that we have to use these specific names to try and cover. What was common, practical knowledge for them, isn't so for us.
THANK YOU! Seriously, Skal, this subject has been driving me absolute nuts. I've been trying to work it out for a lot of my fantasy writing and just couldn't get a mental grip on the differences.
My favorite distinction, I don't remember if it was from Matt Easton or someone else, was distinguishing them primarily by what they're meant to be used for, rather than their length, composition, etc. that can easily vary and become somewhat muddled. Pollaxes are meant for heavily-armored (usually in full plate) knights to fight other heavily-armored knights in a one-on-one or small skirmish. Halberds are meant for lightly armored (relatively; often wearing brigandine or similar armor) infantry to fight other lightly armored infantry in large formations. Those two categories don't have all too much overlap, and while it's not always easy to know what a weapon was meant for when you dig it out of whatever hole it's been sitting in for the last few centuries, approaching it from that perspective makes it easier to classify some of the more ambiguous cases.
Apparently there is some some criticism written in the 16th century from the Spanish on the Italians, for using halberds that are "too light", and pointing as example the Marquis of Pescara, at the Battle of Sessia (1524), who was known for wearing just chainmail for skirmishes. It is told in said battle to be hit on the shoulders by a Halberd and not being wounded. Probably a glancing blow, but it tells about this while insisting on halberds should be "strong" and sharp and to be mainly used on armored enemies, and leave the unarmored to the sword-and-buckler soldiers still used in the era (rodeleros)
One clear difference in my mind, is that the halberd, when used in formation, is long enough to repel calvalry, while the poleaxe was a strictly anti-infantry weapon.
I love your edits when you talk about how a weapon can be used for defense and you either give us a pov strike or bring in your double to demonstrate something, for me a visual learner it makes understanding the techniques your talking about easier to visualize or see the practical use of
What I recall from most reenactors in Czech republic, what we call poleaxe is simply the one that is shorter (the hight of a grown man at most) and used in armor exclusively. It has spikes, hammers, axes etc. in different combinations. Halberd is a weapon used by common infantry mostly and is visibly longer. Also halberd has always an axe part, poleaxe doesn't have to have the axe.
I remember Lindybeige covering this some time ago. He had some trouble finding written history on the use of the halberd, but he offered pretty good speculation.
As I really hope, the next game is Starfield (Not another Skyrim, lord save us!) Having melee polearms there would be... interesting. I really enjoyed using both types though.
HERE is a question I've had that's been bugging me for years because of the inconsistency of sources: What would the *atgeir* be considered, as mentioned in Njal's Saga? Also, awesome polearm content!
Obviously an atgeir is an early firearm, using gunpowder whose nitrates come from fermented Icelandic shark. Didn't you see that video on it back on April 1st?
The tangent about volges and Lucerne hammers gave me flashbacks to the 2nd Edition D&D rules and their dizzying array of polearms with minutely different stats.
Is it weird to savor a youtuber’s video? I was very hesitant to watch this because I was happy just knowing that I had something to look forward to lol. My curiosity got the best of me, though. I’m simply running out of things to watch. My favorite youtubers can only produce so much content at a time.
1:48 for anyone that wants to know,, that book is called Weapon: A Visual History of Arms and Armor, and it's a fuckin' dope book. It got me into weirder weapons, like where they're showing melee weapons that are also firearms.
Thanks for the sparring footage! It reminded me of a technique that I had forgotten about that might help me on my next martial arts exam - which will include the jō (Japanese chest-height staff).
Slight side note - there are many examples of pollaxes dated to 16th C. Online collections have them and also you can find at least one or two in Wallace Collection and likely in some places in Germany, France and Italy. I have also seen one or two of them in Glasgow Kelvingrove Museum (which you should definitely check out if you haven't already!)
There is actual a lot of uses of the term pollaxe in naval senses which considering cattle and beef were an important resource for naval activities at times it would make sense considering a poll was used to dispatch cattle.
Fascinating! I rather like the idea that the poleaxe is essentially the “Swiss army knife” of armored combat, while longer weapons are by their nature more specialized to their head design.
Halberds are basically spears. But the poleaxe is much more of an axe/hammer/spear hybrid and the other side of a poleaxe usually has a spike too. Halberds are really cool weapons for formation fighting because they can hook weapons, use the axe part to push down other weapons or even do neat things like push and pull cuts. So when you're in a formation a halberd can pull someone forward or hook a shield or a piece of armour and then make the other guy free target practice for everyone else. Edit: It's pretty annoying in games like Dark Souls halberds are usually treated like giant axes when they're really just spears. Super long points. But they usually don't include things like poleaxes which are actually pretty decent as an axe/hammer hybrid. It's not really a good idea to chop so much with a halberd, especially considering how long and stiff the point usually is for getting into weak spots between plates.
Depends a lot on the type of halberd you use. Some have really long points some very short ones with broad axe blades. Interestingly enough most halberds with long points are of a much later date often being 1580 and later.The halberd is not really spear in itself while you can thrust with a halberd and ofc they did so.However you often see them using the back spike or the axe blade to deliver powerful blows against heavily amoured opponents.Schilling chronics, the battle of morgarten for example. Halberds also do behave somewhat different compared to partisans for example. Funnily enough Monte suggests a poleaxe that is a bit taller than a man with his outstrechted arm upward which is even taller than some halberds are. Using the Halberd with cuts is really good, Meyer tells us about the so called drivings for the halberd and the famous John Smith also says its best to put Halberds in the second rank so they can hew down the incoming men with swords which is something most Landsknechtarmies did. Even as late as 1711 Guiseppe Colombani tells us that if you need to fight multiple opponents you should use underhews or montanti to fight them off. So i wouldnt really say that a halberd is basically a spear and cuts are quite often used especially in war. However i dont mean that thrusts are bad , what i mean is cuts were used as often as thrusts. If i remember correctly from dark souls the halberd was okay you could thrust, use it with a shield or do circling cuts not the best but decent. At least in Dark Souls 1.
@@superrobotmonkeyhyperteamf3194 Some of your information is a little all over the place. First off, halberd heads that I have seen are pretty much all with a pronounced spear point, typically the most prominent part. Much of the time, this spear point is so large that to perform a typical attack with an axe will cause the spear point to impact first, unless you step out of formation and make sure that you're close enough to do a proper chop which will cause the axe head to impact first. That's why I emphasise push/pull cuts, hooking and thrusting. Not that you can't use the axe head like a normal axe, but how it typically would be used. A poleaxe has a relatively short spear point for this reason. So you can chop, hammer, etc. without the spear point getting in the way and it is there if you need it, just not the most prominent. Landsknecht were pike formations typically. I think every third man had some kind of smaller weapon, either a halberd or a greatsword, if I remember right. So the bulk of the formation is made of pikemen, and you have some troops with close combat weapons for more flexibility, a little like Spanish tercios (1/3rd pikemen, swordsmen, gunpowder). The use of a halberd in a pike fight is completely different compared to a halberd on halberd fight, because in such a battle, the halberd is a shorter weapon, meaning the guys with halberds and greatswords closed with the enemy at the right time as opposed to being the ones holding the line. Guiseppe Colombani I think has advice but more to do with situations other than the battlefield (getting a halberd from your house for example to defend yourself). There are of course differences in fighting in a loose formation by yourself and fighting shoulder to shoulder with other guys and trying to keep a formation. There are good reasons why a lot of people tended to get captured rather than killed, because armour works. That's why you have these long spears with very fine, stiff points like halberds that are meant to be used for this purpose. Even then other weapons were used, like maces, hammers, axes, swords (two handed swords became a lot more prominent), stiff long daggers, etc. A few guys working as a team with halberds is extremely effective in formation and I don't really see why the halberd would mostly be used as an axe when it's very easy to trap people with the halberd and not only that, you can have two or three halberds poking one guy who's been dragged out of formation pretty fast. Spear fighting is already dangerous. Halberd on halberd is even more deadly, especially without full armour, especially considering the weight and the difference in fighting styles. You're now using both hands and ditching the shield, which gives huge leverage to pull and push. If you have a guy opposite with a halberd and your polearms are clashing for position, there's not really a whole lot of time to set up an axe strike. Not when you have a very sharp point facing your direction and the only thing protecting you is your helmet, the distance between you and your own halberd.
@@Masra94 It wont cause the spear point to impact first because you will hit with the blade not the point also the reason why many halberds have short points big axeblades. With the right technique it wont happen. Thrusting and Pulling is very dangerous to do so because you uncover yourself, it was done yes but most times it was axe or back end pike blows look up Schilling Chronics both the elder and the younger, or stumpfsche Chronics. Poleaxes can have very long points too skallagrim showed one in the video and Pietro Montes also has a similar one. Monte also uses Strikes without any problems against opponents in white armour and mentions that the same mechanics work with halberds, two handed swords etc. He calls them levada. The Landsknechte used pikes yeah they often called it Geviert or Gewalthaufen and depending on the time period the ratio of so called kurze Gewehren or short arms was as follow 400 men Fänlein should have 50 Greatswords and Halberds or other good polearms. But later it was much less and earlier time periods it was more halberds. However theres not much different from other Formations regarding the fighting with halberds. Also the short arms were used to defend the own pikes from others that tried to close in thats what their purpose is which is stated for example by the Warbook of Hans Wilhelm Kirchof. He says that every second or third rank should have short arms(greatswords halberds etc) And the spanish Tercios did have similiar ratios of short arms and pikes with more muskets later on.But they also had advanturer and esquadron volante for example. And do not forget they still have to fight the pikes so you dont want to pull or thrust at them the pikes will always win. Guiseppes Advice was for fighting multiple opponents and uses the same strikes as Alfieri mentions with Spadone vs Polearms or Hans Konrad Lavater(who talks about war) which are again similar to the halberd drivings from meyer who tells us to wound with the axe head or the back end spike. You forget that the axe blows of halberds are really strong an the cut defends as it offends as fabris says. Same advices you find from Giganti as well. It is mentioned in many eye witness accounts that it is better to cut because you deflect the incoming enemy weapons at the same time and in formation its often your only chance of defending yourself against incoming weapons. Also trying to thrust into the gaps of armor while you have several opponents before you isnt easy one will displace the other will strike you. With strikes you will get their weapons out of the way or hit their hands. In duels this is also done for example by striking first at the opponents halberd displacing it then thrusting to the face. So it makes perfectly sense. Sure a group of halberds is pretty good but they do not necessarily defeat spears since spears are more nimble. I mean you can look up contemporary evidence from battle etc most times its axe or back end spike blows that will a lot of damage. War is also different from what most treatises teach because the treatises are mostly for civilian or trial by combat duels and self defense. Also to defend yourself against a point is to parry or step or to strike into the sowrd/point which you also find with spadone sources, pietro monte, giganti d'alessandro. So it makes sense to do it in formation or outside of it. But ofc if the opportunity arises you can thrust thats perfectly fine its just that most tactics first rely on heavy blows at least from the swiss , the germans and according to john smith the english as well. You can look that up if you want there is a lot of pictorial evidence out there. Also from my own experience i never hit with the spike first as far as i can remember. So all in all it makes perfect sense to cut a lot, thrusting is really good too and cutting with halberds was done very often mentioned by masters as well as soldiers. Somewhat in a hurry so i apologise for the grammar. EDIT: Its Schilling chronicles not Schillinger corrected it.
@@superrobotmonkeyhyperteamf3194 There are short spear point halberds but I think not as common as ones with long points. Yes cutting and pulling is okay but that's in reference to hands and weapons not primary targets like the head and upper body. The hands are a decent target especially in a dueling scenario but most hits are demonstrably against more logical areas like the head. Mail and gauntlets were common hand protection not to mention the weapon to defend yourself with. Yes you can hit with the axe on the upper body especially the shoulder area but it means stepping out of formation to do a chop and pull. Let's not even start with the pointlessness of cutting plate or the relative ineffectiveness chopping would have in formation versus normal thrusts against armour. Spears are more nimble but in a halberd fight there are so many weapon binds and clashes that it's pointless. Your weapon will be caught no matter how nimble it is. Leverage, teamwork and timing are key. Binding someone's weapon to open him to an attack from someone next to you is key because while you are clashing and binding you are both gaining leverage and attacking while defending yourself and those next to you. There are times to chop. But the first thing is keep the halberd in front of you and maintain the formation's posture. A halberd or spear pointed at someone's face or body is an extremely effective deterrent, which allows you to maintain distance so you can control your own fighting area in the formation. There are a good amount of videos on real halberd fighting. The main thing is how dangerous they are even when blunt and how much the polearms clash even in normal combat. You can't afford to mess around in formation with big sweeping movements. You might see chops but only if the opportunity is there. The primary focus is the thrust and clash.
@@Masra94 Shorter pointed ones tend to be more the older ones the long pointed ones tend to be younger for example many exemplars are from 1600 and the thirty years war and theyre really long compared to older ones. Hands were one of the main targets in battle. Pietro says it, also archeological founds from the massacre of towton showed that main targets were hand and ofc head/face. Many underhews are aimed toward the hands for example. Manciolino also says that in serious fights/war you should target the hands but not in friendly bouts. The fact that they did so suggest otherwise also some sources mentioned gauntles being smashed or cut that is definitely possible. You can cut into the arms even good armour wont protect you fully from those blows. If that isnt enough then just turn the halberd and use the backhand spike as you can see that in one of the Schilling chronicles. The wounds from the remaining skeletons of towton also show that this was possible especially with arms and hands. You assume that the partisan or spear will be found which is hard to do especially with a top heavy halberd. Doesnt mean the halberd has no chance but in reality its much harder to do so since you can simply evade or side step and thrust into the face. Depends mostly on the skill weapon does not really give you an advantage. From what i see from the contemporary sources they kept the halberds with the point toward the sky. You can if you have the space ofc put it before you but then it can be found and displaced or if you are second rank (which was often the case) you simply cant do this. And you cant do much in tight formations they do not often allow for much sophisticated things you find in many civilian manuals. You can show me primary sources about a full formation doing this but so far i only sometimes found it for skirmishing. I think i know most of those videos but most are from treatises in a civilian or semi civilian context but many of those do show lots of cutting as well. Also you dont use big sweeping movements you usw downward strokes, a simple oberhau or fendente. I mean if you look at the sources you see them not using big sweeping blows you see them using simple fedente etc same with great swords and other cutting centric weapons. And for those its mentioned that they do cleave off limbs of soldiers without much effort. Thats all in the context of war from veterans that experienced it first hand so they should know it. For example here: www.stadtwanderer.net/media/1schilling_jammertal.jpg or here: upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/27/Schlacht_Sempach_Stumpf.jpg idk how youtube handles links now so i hope that this is okay.
I don't know why, but I'm never really happy to hear about halberds. Something in me is just like "Eh, why is everyone talking about halberds". At the same time: I'm a big fan of poleaxes. I don't understand my brain either. But it really seems like poleaxes are quite underrepresented in games and movies while you will see at least some halberds. Imagine what kind of combo attack animations you could do with a poleaxe. It would be beautiful. And fun fact: The German name for a poleaxe is "Mordaxt" -> Murder axe. (edit: yes, I paused the video and Skall mentioned it like 5 seconds later) I also read that the poleaxe was first used in Switzerland. I guess that makes sense, it's basically the weapon equivalent of a Swiss army knife. I actually had a seminar about Switzerland in the Early Modern Period at my university, but we didn't really speak about stuff like armor and weapons.
It may be because halberds are, well, ugly. Effective weapons, absolutely! But they're clearly made to be about as cheap as a spear. There are decedant ones, and I like those more than others, but the field halberds are just heinous.
What confuses the situation even more is that the etymology of the word Halberd comes from the Middle High German *Helmbarde* (helm = pole + barde = axe) which basically means Pole-axe.
This would be a good naming switcharoo meme: "So the poleaxe is a polearm axe, right?" "It's more of a polearm hammer, really." "So is Lucerne hammer a synonym, then?" "That would be a polearm pick, actually."
The naming/defining problems are why I prefer pollax(e), since it points at "poll" being an important enough feature for it to be mentioned in the name. Every axe that doesn't have a spike has a regular poll, so it must mean a modified for of poll to be worth mentioning. It's still not perfect but much better than "an axe mounted on a particularly long stick" (which could honestly fit some bills and halberds if we focus on blade profile/usage instead of method of construction) PS I've also seen poll-ax and the source was written in a very non-modern English, idk what's up with that
When I first started getting into my own personal HEMA stuff, polearms were on the radar. Then, I discovered that polearms are a vast, VAST category of weapons deserving of much more consideration. Maybe later on, it's been 7 years now... idk if it's time.
In the UK "Poleaxed" is slang for being helplessly drunk (think unable to control your own arms and legs, lying in a gutter), which I imagine comes from what happens when you're hit by a poleaxe.
Vaguely remember something telling me the pollax was an adaptation of the weapon used to kill cattle...hence the English phrase 'to be pollaxed' I.e. stunned ( by a blow, information or situation etc).
The multi-tool aspect of some early polearms comes from a leatherworking tool that has a round knife, awl, and hammer face mounted to a small wooden handle. There are several in museums mounted to wooden poles that have a very short socket that would simply break off easily if it ever struck something. One of the biggest problems with historians is that they don't consult tradesmen who have a family history of making things like this for centuries. There are paintings and tapestries depicting the use of this halberd head shaped tool in leatherworking, but I can't find any information about it.
I'm not sure how historicaly accurate it is, but I've allways seen the halberd as an anti flesh weapon, rather than an anti armour weapon. Mostly because you tend to see halberd in guard situations, in towns and such. Mostly against the local populous rather than knights
the spelling thing is actually pretty interesting. dictionaries is pretty new (relatively speaking), which means that spelling and exact definitions wasn't a thing up until a couple hundred years ago. this is why there is different spellings for things and a seeming lack of precise terminology in old manuscripts.
Skal will need a bigger apartment, horses, stables and the retinue to keep everything effective while training since 20 years ago, so quite a long shot.
Wonder if halberds in formation are given to infantry (who ard generally from the peasant class) because the movement can resemble the use of hoes and other farming implements? The blade head also seems to be consistent with the movement generally seen during farmwork
I would go further... WAY further for the use of halberds in warfare than just the Battle of Morgarten and surprisingly, it's not any European country. In fact, halberd usage has already been seen to have been used as early as the Western Zhou dynasty and saw proper massive use during the Spring and Autumn period of China during the 2000BC. As chariots and cavalry was still the massive plays of the various rivalling kingdom across China at that time, they had to come up with something and to disable the horses, they've some up with the solution and that's to fit a scythe-like blade on a spear shaft and send troops into battle with it. That worked and became the technical 1st halberd recorded being used and they called it the "Ge" (戈). However, this was only effective towards horses and poses quite a huge issue to the users as they can effectively dismount a cavalry rider or disable the horses by chopping on their hinds but it's impractical to attack someone which thus various states went back and modify it again and this time, they added a axe-like structure to shaft or just added a spike to the scythe-like blade and made another new weapon which they called the "Ji" (戟). If you look it up, they called the "Ji" a "poleaxe" but it's not an poleaxe as it's longer than poleaxes by alot and has the same length as traditional Chinese spears and rivals glaives thus it's more of a halberd than poleaxes.
I like to think of the distinction as the type of tools present on the head of the pole-arm. Halberd being axe and spike, poleaxe being hammer and axe, crow’s beak being spike and hammer-all of which having a spear head. But that’s just my head cannon and I don’t have any expertise in ancient weaponry.
something i learned, though i have no idea how well it holds it (it does with your props though) is that a poleaxe has the "axe" blade horizontal to the haft blade, while a halberd has the blade at an angle such that when the weapon is held vertically the blade still faces downwards the idea being that a poleaxe is intended to swing and hit/cut with the blade, you are supposed to hit them with it and transfer the force into them, while a halberd you are supposed to sort of "over reach" and swing sort of behind them such that the cut is more of a downwards pull, you arent trying to kill them with the cut, you are trying the pull them out of formation poleaxes were "knights" weapons, while halberds were used by infrantry in ranks and formation id say thats probably how id seperate the two, a poleaxe (pollaxe whatever) is a weapon designed for a single person to fight another, its not a "dueling" weapon, but its definetly something you are supposed to fight "alone" with while a halberd is longer and so worse for a single person on their own to fight with, but much better for a formation to wield, its not something you fight with "alone" but with 10 other guys with the same thing at your sides a halberd and poleaxe can have the exact same head, but the halberd is longer making it cluncky to fight with outside of the formation if its difficult to do any sort of fighting other then just stabbing forwards and chopping down, its a halberd if you can do more then that, for example if its actually a feasable idea to hid with the foot of the weapon, or hold it so the head is above or behind you, its a poleaxe
The main difference is that a pollaxe is a "duelling" version of the halberd. The halberd is long, and indended to be used in formation, especially by people with "lighter" armor, where the bullk of the formation gives protection. With a group of people hacking and stabing, the "slowness" is not an issue, because occasional gaps in coverage/offense are covered by your neighbors. But if you are a fully "tin-canned" fighter, not bunched up with the commoners, and out to test your mettle against other solitary fighters, cutting a halberd shorter to make it more wieldy makes sense - and then over time, these people start to add/change bits (buttspike added) to see what works out best against the opposing "tin-cans", and thus, you substitute either the spike or the axe for a hammer, depending on preference.
Just a fun little Thought process, but do you think that maybe the "grab the sword by the blade and smash my opponent over the head" technique was inspired by the poleaxe? cause if you look closely at it a crossguard sword has an elongated blade that extends from the handle and the crossguard protrudes outward, and the handle then extends outward from the top. the poleaxe has an elongated handle, and the protrusions also go out towards both the top and the sides at the head. I would not be surprised if someone who was observing the poleaxe in combat noticed the shape of his crossguard sword was about the same if he reversed it and thought to himself. you know what? I wonder.... and BAM turned his sword around grabbed the blade with both hands and brutally beat his opponent to death with it and then looks at the result and was Like "OH YEAH BABY!! NOW WE'RE THINKING OUTSIDE THE BOX!!!" and thus the technique was born...
I concur. Basically the difference is in intended use. And that's *usually* evident in construction, but quite hard to come up with a one sentence pithy definition.
First off, I've been researching these things for like three days for personal reasons. And what I can conlude is that they are both "polearms". I'd say poleaxes and poleswords are the only two categorys of this long stick with metal bit at the end. Spears are not the same thing, although I'd say a pike could be considered a spear. Now, which is better for eating spaget?
If i would absolutely would have to think of something to complain about it would be ranking pollaxes and halberds equal in durability. Halberds would generally lack langettes, have heavy heads and longer poles, this combines into quite a lot of force focused right under the head when swung. Then again they were mostly made for thrusting so maybe that cancelled out that disadvantage because it wasn't used that way, what do I know?
Another fascinating video. A question though, how viable of a weapon would a sawed-off version of the poleaxe be?. Something that is meant to be used single-handedly so you could still use a shield or an offhand weapon but you retain all of the versatility of a poleaxe in exchange for reach
Or battle axe, or who knows what. Basically there were lots of one handed weapons similar to a pollaxe. So to answer your question, yes there were shorter versions. Altho they werent the exact same design as using a tool one handed, changes the dynamics of its use. And in a life or death situation,most people want the most effective possible tool.
I've seen a lot of pictures of longbow men with a pollaxe and the flat end made very short work of anyone in even the heaviest of armour if they made it to the archers
Pollaxe or Poleaxe? Polearm or Pollarm? My personal guess is that the 'poll' for 'head' is the more probable origin of the name, but between individual choice in spelling, regional variations, a language jump (French to English), and several centuries, pollarms (headed weapons) became polearms (weapons mounted on a pole) in practice. Standardization of spelling in the English language wasn't really a thing until the 18th century, and it took many decades for it to completely catch on. Even after, there were some differences based on what dictionary one looked at. We see a lot of phonetic spellings like 'chuses' (chooses) in older literature, and it was even worse the farther back we go. Trying to read unedited historical English writing is a real pain, in a large part due to the spelling. There are a great many words that originated in Greek, Latin, or other languages that have undergone some radical changes in spelling to today's' current English form, so this would hardly be an unprecedented change.
Fun fact, borderline off topic. In italian the term used for "axe" is "ascia", although when people refer to "ascia" they usually mean an axe, like a battle axe or an axe to chop wood, but the term is used incorrectly. The definition of "ascia" is the tool "adze" (english term) which is a tool with a horizontal blade, like a hoe, used for wood carving. The actual term for wood chopping axe is "accetta" or "scure" and the one for battle axe is, literally, "ascia da battaglia", although the term "ascia" on it's own refers to the tool i mentioned before. Yes, i know, it's very confusing, that's why i mentioned this, because i know how stupidity contorted "term meanings" can be. All of this just to say, definitions are usually very blurry, and often they change over time, there is usually not a universally accepted one (unless you're in the fields of math or science)
I prefer to think of poleaxes, halberds, pole hammers, and other similar weapons much as you would think of a clade of different species in biology. All are clearly related and descended from a common ancestor (in this case, let's say a battle axe) and share certain features. However, each developed differently to better suit a particular need and function. Some are more derived from the original design than others and sometimes similar needs lead to convergent evolution in design so those relationships aren't always clear.
I am inclined to agree, as we have similar interests, but I'd like to introduce you to another concept which I think is much more applicable here! I believe that pollaxes descend from battleaxes, and polehammers branch off from pollaxes. However! I think that Halberds are a convergently evolved species of spear, which have developed to incorperate some of the cutting action and shortness of a battleaxe, but retaining the thrusting centric abilities of the spear which bore it. This can also be seen in how differently the two weapons are constructed; pollaxes are of multiple parts, and halberds are only a morphed shape of a single piece spearhead.
@@necroseus That is definitely a valid conclusion! It certainly fits with my point regarding convergent evolution in weapons. Both weapons may have very well been derived from different origins and at the same time may have influenced the development of each other since they did not exist isolated from one another
I checked the etymology on Halberd (Hellebarde actually) and it literally translates to Pole-Axe lol (It's confusing that Helm can also mean pole or handle but that's how things seem to be)
Then you have the Irish sparth axe which is like a dane axe but the bigger than a poleaxe and smaller than a halberd. Once source says about 6 foot with a foot broad head.
I happen to have a replica of the exact same poleaxe you happend to use for your first reference. 🤣 Also how would you be able to tell the difference between a early bardiche and a late great axe propperly?
This just reminds me of the topic of, when does a Longsword become a Greatsword. Yet also reminds me of the saying, all bastard swords are Longswords, but not all Longswords are bastard swords. Either way, always good to learn more about some of my favorite medival weapons.
Ok... how about warhammer? Did it exist, or is it just fantasy? If it existed, were they they just one handed Lucerne hammer minus the long spiky bit at the top? Or are they those two handed solid blocks of steel as depicted on so many Warhammer 40k/Fantasy artworks?
Warhammers existed and I think the Lucerne hammer is often just seen as a type of warhammer. Most other war hammers had not that spike, correct. Well, there were will others with spikes which were still not called Lucerne hammer, history is confusing. The big blocky hammers are probably more inspired from mallets, wooden hammers which are used as tools in various professions. I think the Luddites used a big hammer made of metal called Enoch's Hammer (probably named after the smith) to destroy machines and maybe to hurt enemies. That was probably the most fantasy-like hammer you will find.
hi Skallagrim i have a suggestion for you to play TABS once again there are cool new factions and modes (for eg unit creator), by the way great video though
