A clear disadvantage of a polearm is when you're dumb enough to give up your weapon and walk close enough to an opponent to be grabbed. A tip that blew my mind first time I heard it. Thought I'd share.
I used to participate in Dagorhir a lot back in the 90s. One day a young man came to a practice and asked if he could play. The other youth said he was a jerk and I shouldn't let him participate. Well I'm not one to just leave people out, so I said OK. The only unused weapon at that point was a 7ft spear. He took that spear and went to town; even challenging me, the most experienced player. Turns out he wasn't really a jerk and he became friends with the entire group and he showed the others that they should have respected the spear more than they did.
It may be out of your preferred period, but can you do a video on how Roman Legionaries were trained to deal with spear and pike. Alternatively, a discussion on how medieval were trained to deal with the above would be equally interesting.
@Hans Günther nope. not how it worked. break into the enemy formation and force the enemy to give up their spears. Thats how the Romans beat Greeks using spears. This also brings to point one other disadvantage of pollarms- they can easily get in each others way. since spears when carried one handed have a long half that risked either hiting a friendly or bumping into another spear that risks knocking your weapon in a wrong direction. also turning in different directions can be difficult in a battle where the enemy has broken into the formation can be extremely difficult since spear shafts are more likely to get in each others way when pointing in multiple directions.
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER! DON'T READ IF YOU HAVN'T WATCHED THE NEW GOT EPISODE! Someone should rant about how Orine got what he deserved for spinning like a madman and not being a solid fighter. That being said, it was really fancy but he was stupid. Sad really because he is an awesome charakter. Reading the books I knew what was going to happen but it was still cool to look at.
BIIGtony SPOILER! Oberyn's entire motive was to get a confession from the mountain and prove the Tywin was responsible for the rape and murder of his sister and her children. Killing him instantly would've meant losing that evidence, the one good thing i can get out of losing one of my favorite characters is that he proved he could beat one of the most feared knights in westeros, flawlessly and that it was his motive of revenge that killed him not the mountains skill.
BIIGtony MORE SPOILERS His name is Oberyn, not Orine. He died because he let it get personal, and forgot that he was fighting for Tyrion, and not himself and his sister. He obviously would've won the fight if he'd just stabbed his spear into The Mountain's neck while he was down. But no, he let his pride get in the way. He was obviously the better fighter, but he was stupid and prideful and let his guard down. That is why he lost. That is why Tyrion is going to be executed, barring some kind of deus ex machina.
FlamswordMage Yeah... you are right I kinda guessed at how to write him. But the whole fight was quite cliché. The mountain as the pure brute. Handling the sword with one hand, running directly into the enemy, the slow brute while Oberyn was the quick and nimble dude. Really roll play like and not realistic in any way. But... really fun to watch.
Are there any historically documented European techniques for breaking an opponent's grip on the polearm? I do Jujutsu and I know it's possible to rotate the polearm around to apply a wrist lock, especially if the enemy has only one hand on the weapon. Might be a good technique to know when using a spear against a shorter weapon.
2:54 demonstrates a perfect walking staff . XD i understand about operating machinery but other than that very specific and probably unlikely task, the pole-arm doesn't need to be carried as a side arm. i think point 3 can be overcome in different ways like armoured hand and or guard on the pole, i just love pole arms , great video .
Are there any historical examples of carrying around a polearm on a long march with a leather strap such as with a rifle? Or even manuals on proper storage and maintenance in any of the treatises given the perishability of polearms?
On a long march, I'd expect the spears and heavy items to be on the baggage train (wagons, mules, pack horses etc.). You only do a long march on a campaign, and you only do a campaign if you have logistics and a supply line.
There is another disadvantage to long shafted weapons. Due to the fact that the shaft ist mostly regularly round it is hard to keep the blade in line, so if you are fighting in close quarters with your lead hand far up the top, it may happen that if you try to cut your opponent you the blade may slip to the flat side and the cut may not connect.
As a lumberjack, I can tell that having your shaft broken in a battle/duel by a sword/axe is extremely unlikely unless it has already been very badly damaged beforehand (in which case you would have probably replaced it anyway).
Lots of close quarters fighting using historically verified hand weapons in the lumberjacking business? Im not surpised... Im a woodworker, and can also attest to that. Apparently that’s an issue in the forestry and lumber milling industry as a whole. I heard rumors that the engineered wood materials business is also getting quite bloody. All that mdf and plywood can make a man mad. Should have listened to my dad and kept my GP office. But you cant practice community/family medicine after all the fighting I went through in woodworking. Your eyes fix in your opponent’s, looking only for a queue to strike, to hopefully down your foe and live another day. You can’t heal someone with eyes like these. Not anymore. Its been 5 years since your testimony. I hope you are faring well and strong, mate! May our shafts never break!
Pabler Arav Because it makes them too heavy - the main advantage of a spear, other than reach, is speed. If you make the spear heavy then it's easier for a person with a short weapon to bind against it and close distance.
***** That question has already sort of been answered. You can hold the spear at the very end, therefore having much more reach. It's also way lighter, so you'd haver much more leverage and maneuverability. So yes. A halberd's advantage over a spear would be its superiority in an armoured fight.
667Gullin You have read into it a little heavily my friend. 3 would best suit my question, as the original poster of this video refers to metal strips running along the length of a polearm as "langets." He then explained how the extra metal would significantly affect the weight of the spear, rendering the advantage of rapidly being able to strike the foot and then right up the face less effective.
+Pabler Arav Just wanted to add that with a mace or hammer, you're trying to crush someone. Speed and precision are pretty useless in crushing but weight will help out immensely. With a spear on the other hand (lances being a notable exception) the whole point is fast movement and slipping the spear tip in to a soft spot that's unprotected (in one on one combat, phalanxes etc... are a whole different story.) Weight won't help you with that and will make the weapon slower and harder to control.
I’m not sure I agree with the first point. Sword blades can be damaged as surely as poles-you can nick the edge, chip the steel, etc. if you use the blade against armoured targets (which we know would have been the case in warfare). An improperly made sword might even shatter or snap. Also, your point about grappling goes two ways: you can grab a pole, yes-although I’ve seen some manuals showing how to grab blades, so it’s not out of the question for swords either-but you can use the pole to grapple your enemy, by tripping them up or using the leverage to disarm them. I agree with most of your other points though-polearms can’t be carried around easily, for sure!
Would love to see this. Obviously something like tower shields just fail in a duel scenario, but I don't know too much about medium sized shields (above bucklers).
***** As far as I'm aware the only advantage of a shield that large and unwieldy is the ability to walk in formation to form a strong defense. What I mean by "duel scenario" is an open non-specific area where 2 combatants will fight for any length of time until one is defeated. In this scenario I see no advantage in having a large, heavy, and immobile piece of equipment. This is really nothing like an actual battle, and I assume the legionnaires were revered for their close quarters abilities in war situations, not in pointless street duels. I'm not really that educated on this stuff, so I could be wrong though.
I would sort of agree, but I'd counter by saying that the ability to have an almost literal wall between you and your opponent is a serious advantage. I'd also add that very large shields seem to have had a place in the judicial duel scene during later times, as illustrated by Talhoffer, although judicial duels during those times seem to have had a lot of very bizarre customs.
Actually a tower shield is very formidable in a one on one duel scenario. It does not just fail. The main disadvantage in combat of a large shield that I can think of might be that you will have a harder time wielding your weapon without accidentally hitting your own shield, so it might reduce how nimble you are with your primary offensive weapon. But, that is also basically the same disadvantage you are placing on your opponent. They are going to have a harder time finding strike paths that don't intercept your shield. In just about any scenario I would consider that trade off to be worthwhile and go for the larger shield. The real disadvantage of a large shield is that it is more encumbering to carry around all day if you don't know you will even need it. This brings up the advantage of bucklers (and the primary reason they became so popular) which is that you can wear them on you belt, just over your sword. If you aren't expecting to fight, but want a shield with you for a potential self-defense scenario, then a buckler is the shield for you. In general you wouldn't use a small shield on a battlefield. Unless you are an archer/gunner who needs to dedicate both hands to operating your missile weapon (no spare hands for carrying around shields) in which case you would probably want a buckler.
Regarding the grappling, I've heard and noticed some people would hold a dagger in their rear hand in addition to gripping the spear in order to combat this to some extent. Would you say this is a viable tactic?
I like how you touched upon tactics about getting past the initial point being similar to tactics against a rapier... the reach of both weapons I imagine would cause considerable problems for a shorter weapon (excluding the exception of the guy with the shorter weapon having a buckler or shield perhaps?) and I know reach is reach and a considerable advantage but I was STILL surprised at how highly you rated pole weapons in your example about the intermediate to advanced swordsman... Again all very interesting, great videos I'm glad I found this channel. (and I will practice some form of HEMA when my long term shoulder injury's repair...)
I should like to add some other considerations to the mix. 1. All the weight is generally at one end. The most clumsy sword is a thing of balanced beauty compared to any pole arm. 2. Check your vertical space! I have successfully fouled pole arms on signs, tree limbs, wires and roof beams just by carrying them! Wielding one calls for some attention. 3. Check your six too, for the same reason as #2. 4. You always need at least one hand dedicated to carrying/holding one. A sheathed sword usually requires 0 hands.
I disagree with your first point. A long wooden shaft is actually fairly heavy so the weight is more distributed in a spear. Something like a halberd is a bit more front-weighted for sure but in no way would I call it clumsy. A sword might superficially seem more elegant or graceful but in battle it's about effectiveness and there is no denying that spears are effective.
great video! just an observation ..when you spoke of the front hand being vulnerable to attacks i think is interesting to note that in chinese spearmanship the front hand never move with the spear as a whole..but the spear always slide forward inside the hand keeping the hand a lot safer and distant from opponent reach
Is the wooden shaft always necessarily a weakness the polearm must have? Why didn't anyone ever make metal shafted polearms? Would it be too heavy? You couldn't make a shaft thin/light enough to be viable? I considered just the cost effectiveness, in that it would be using a lot of metal, but wouldn't there be some who would have done so, considering it worth it to have a non-perishable polearm, since they were such effective main weapons?
I understand that the cutting/breaking of hafts by swords/axes/impact was a big reason why the US tam took rattan to the Battle Of The Nations and to the IMCF '14 competitions as it was cheaper, less likely to break, and wasn't as easy to cut.
Wouldn't a spear with a hollow metal shaft be resistant to damage by bladed weapons and just as light, if not lighter than a wooden shafted spear. I can't think of a disadvantage to using a hollow metal shaft (other than cost and potential vibration upon impact).
We should also take into account that attacking the lead hand, even when it is armoured, the impact will hurt the right hand, and pain is also very effective at making people wary.
+Cameron Nedland Yes, some polearms in the 15th-16th century had a disc on the shaft to protect the top hand and sometimes another one lower down for the other hand. They are most often seen on pollaxes and glaives.
+Cameron Nedland some spears also had rings or little decorations that would halt a sword giving you time to maneuver the spear... But a spear for duels is very different from a battle spear.. Spears are usually made specifically to be cheap.. The spear on the video was specifically designed to be used by groups.. The idea is to the first to parry or lock an opponent weapon, and his friend to poke the same unhappy one... Javelins for an example, had their heads (blade) intentionally brittle (a hard metal that breaks easily), so you wont be giving 1000 good knifes as a gift to your foes.. There were also specialized protected gloves specific for spear using... But to really domain The Spear is stuff of Kings.. the peasant spear user just needs to know how to poke and this is simple...
Are there any examples of sliding hand guards, though? I see from your video that it would be advantageous to be able to slide your front hand across the shaft (ehm... you know what I mean).
Steel gauntlets would mitigate some of the problems, you would not need to worry so much about protecting your lead hand and if your opponent would ever disarm you can still use your fists as a decent weapon until you can gain enough distance to pull out your sidearm.
Yoriko Arran Every-time he hinted at being grappled, I could imagine daggers on his chest ; you keep a hand on the pole-arm on the case he let go and the other quickly stabs the grappler.
Ive been training spear for a quite a number of years and have always found them to be incredibly effective. I like it with a forearm mounted buckler so i can use both hands as well as parry with the buckler. You are correct that an opponent CAN grab the shaft, however, there are numerous techniques for countering or even allowing them to do so. This usually involves a dagger attack or body check.
Why can't the whole weapon be made out of metal, so that it cannot be cut? Would that have made the weapon too heavy? Regarding if the opponent grabs your pole weapon, you can turn the pole axe in a manner that will force the person to let go (they can also try this on you too).
Thirsty Weevils reminds of the tournaments. All the dismounted knights stabbing each other with long sticks without making damage because they stand to close....
I've been thinking about the shape of the blade on most common halberds. Clearly it's primarily a thrust/piercing weapon. But, with the blade angled closer to the shaft at the bottom can you conceive of a pull/cutting maneuver as you bring the weapon back home? Wasn't some armor of the period more bolstered in the front? It would seem that a side/rear contact could be intended to damage the connecting bits of such armor.
You can also use the pole and follow it whith a blade rather easily to reach the hands or the whole body or head if you pass the two branches which are meant to prevent it by the way.
bear in mind that a bajonetted firearm is really heavy (in comparison) and disallows sliding through the lead hand, largely. also the musket with bajonet is fairly long, yet still shorter than most polearms(so the hand is much more vulnerable). of course there are 15thc. polearms with hand guards (rondels) yet i always find those a nuicance. Even with a (rather short) 2 meter pollaxe against long longswords, my hand(/lower arm) rarely gets 'sniped'... I think I have hardly had it sniped at all. A lot of polearms have langets which give tensile strength and help against cutting, in fact some pollaxes have their top 1/3 encased in metal. One great advantage of the sword is in the persuit. butchery is what a sword is great at. a lance is very much a one shot weapon, even in a persuit you would be likely to lose the lance in the first target if not break it. yu wuld want a weapon that is easily drawn (a war hammer is really fiddly to draw on horseback and quite a lot shorter than a sword) and have something that will not tire you out too mcuh and give you some reach and decisive damage. the account of the distribution of dead at Pinkie Cleugh in1547 describes a zone of carnage that the persuiing cavalry did with their swords. but i do agree in principle with most of what you said. but most of those disadvantages are greatly mitigated by group tactics... hence they were so commonly the primary weapon on the battlefield. (whereas in the 'rider war'/chevauchée and other skirmishes the sword is much more prominent.)
I have found polearms to be extremely effective in unarmored combat, and prefer them myself in most situations. Knowing that they have disadvantages doesn't mean that those disadvantages are easily leveraged. People I have faced spear vs longsword always come with the idea of passing the point and charging. Probably 80% find a spear in their chest or abdomen within the first 2 thrusts.
How would somebody "easily shorten their pole weapon" if they were not using two hands? Like Greeks with Shields and Spears? Is a Spear only a formidable pole weapon when operated with two hands?
After what I've learned about Medieval warfare, I know that swords were not commonly the main weapon of soldiers or knights on a battlefield. And it seems that only using a sword is a good way to get yourself killed. In European wars, were there ever dedicated swordsmen and if so what kind of role would they fill?
Swords were secondary or tertiary weapons but their mains use (if not mistaken) was everyday wear. A knight or man-at-arms wouldn't be walking around the city with a spear or halberd. Think of it this way...The Pole-arms were like rifles and swords like pistols.
Some cultures i.e.(Iceland) would resolve village debates by dedicating a champion and having them duel other village champions when the occasion arose. The sword is more of a dueling weapon. Axes and machete type weapons are more common for spear back up. You will also see swords in use by Calvary (for reach) and officers specifically naval officers( and even these are shorter and more machete like) and in the case of officers it would be more for drill.
LaughingOwlKiller That was my logic regarding swords vs. polearms exactly. Bayonet fighting is based off of spear fighting forms. As far as a man -at-arms or a knight was concerned they would rather use their pole weapons first, if that fails switch to a hammer or a mace, then if you're desperate bring out your sword. Carrying a pistol in public is restricted to those with licenses or authorities is much like medieval restrictions on swords in public. My real question is more rhetorical than anything. It was to challenge a common misconception about swords and their place in history. The sword is so often romanticized and a lot more focus is given to it. It's funny how people associate a time period with a side arm rather than a main battle implement. Heck it happens today as well, when someone says "gun" the first thing people will think of is a pistol.
LogicBeforeFaIth True but the main goal of someone climbing the siege ladder was to open the gates and let the rest of the army in. Shorter weapons like a sword or axe would be more common then. Sieges of a walled city or fortress were methods of last resort, it was too costly to do so. Though I seriously doubt it was known then, Sun Tzu made that point clear. It mostly came down to a waiting game, you basically starve them out.
Hey this is way off topic but i very much respect your opinion ...what do you think of the fight choreogrophy on the movie Dune the original? I noticed in the knife fighting scenes with Sting in the end the hero crosses his hands alot and remembered a bunkai from my sensei that utilized this for trapping hands and transfering this to joint manipulations what do you think of this?
So, I know I'm suuuuper late to this, but can someone explain to me, in light of these points... when you would actually use a polearm/spear vs when you'd use a sidearm? Obviously you want to use a polearm whenever it would be advantageous to have a reach longer than your enemy's, which is *literally all the time*. RPGs often make a point of saying "if you get inside your enemy's guard, they're hosed", which would look like a good time to switch to your side-arm, but Matt clearly demonstrated that that isn't true - just choke up on the handle and shorten your grip, and you'll be fine. Or even just back away until they're no longer inside your guard, possibly after a swift punch in the jaw to give you a moment to do so. I'd guess a polearm would be tricky to use indoors? Unless in a building with very high ceilings and wide halls (like, for example, some of the more major hallways of a castle, or a church, not that most in the medieval period woukd want to fight in a church I guess.) And as Matt said, it's something you'd only bother carrying in hand if you were specifically expecting a fight, otherwise you'd probably leave it in your baggage for the sake of convenience. You might not even get out your polearm if you were just walking between towns, unless you KNEW you were going through an area that was badly affected by banditry
If you use the spear with two hands than you have no shield and rely on whatever armor you have (if any) against arrows. If you have a shield than it is much harder to control the spear one-handed and easier for the opponent to close the distance.
If a sharp blade can damage the shaft of the polearm... then how would someone with a polearm fare against someone with a BIG claymore... I feel like a broad swipe of the claymore would shatter the wooden shaft of the polearm if they needed to parry the claymore
The part about getting within the reach of a spear might be significantly multiplied with pikes since they’re often too long to really choke up on without being significantly slowed by the weight sticking out behind you.
Dude you can wear a spear easy, just have some sort of Assassins Creed spring loaded device on your arm! Then you can just retract your spear when you need it! SPEAR ARMS omfg I am such a genius and best ninja ever.
two spears would a stupid idea if you have a one handed spear you'd have a shield. if you have a one handed spear but don't have a shield you'd still use both hands
urbanmyths95 Two spears means twice the stabbing! One spear means you can stab one person, but with two you could stab two at once! Or just spin around and no one could get near you!
You mention in this video and others that you can retract the spear if someone gets very close. One of your friends who has a RU-vid channel (sorry, I forget his name) had a sword versus spear video. Perhaps the people in it aren't experienced with Spears, but it seems when the sword wielder closed to melee the fellow with the spear was quickly defeated.
Personally made my own version of a polearm, not historically accurate whatsoever but my own take. I'm unsure of the correct name but I used peice of metal that had 3 flanges of flat bar protruding from the center, cut it down to 14 inches, sharpened all 3 so now it was a 3 bladed spear, drilled holed in a zig zag formation a couple inches apart halfway down the metal, bolted it to a shaft, sharpened the ends of the now protruding side of the bolts on the back of the shaft, to now have 1 inch long spikes acting as an anti grappling defence, and with the blade purposely mounted on one side of the shaft it naturally corrected the way the polearm was facing due to weight, sanded down the rest of the shaft to form a slight oval shape for better grip, cut some fine grooves in line with the blade so I would know exactly how to place my hands to ensure blade alignment was correct and bobs your uncle, I was sorted. Now while the 3 bladed idea does somewhat negate the cutting capabilities, due to there being more weight on the end than your usual lightweight blade design it created a more bone breaker situation rather than arm cutter. However the payoff is far better, as the stabbing capabilities were now FAR more devastating. Creating an enormous entry wound, larger than a golf ball, with 3 sided blades further creating an ugler mess for any first aid, surgery or repair. Immediate blood loss would be noticeable. This design is obviously for lightly Armoured targets due to its larger surface area for stabbing it wouldn't do well against plate or heavy chain mail. But I've loved it so far
I learned staff first. Found I was a natural with the staff. The I went to the pole-arms. Never had a problem with grappling my pole-arm, but I tend to fight with it like a staff. Try to grab the shaft and the back end swings to hit you. I fight with a pole-arm almost exactly like I fight with a staff. Just like fighting with knives is almost exactly like fighting with fists. Don't rely on the edge or point at the end of the stick. Just be aware that that side can cause more damage and (in my style) should be put in your off hand.
I have a question, do you have a favorite pole arm for mixed weapon and armor combat opponents indulging sidearm swords, other pole arms and two handed swords? Also mixed between chain and plate armor. I like bills against sidearm swords, but they may not be as good against some other other pole arms like spears.
As for grappling a spear. If you were to be grabbed by the spear a good thing would be to quickly release the spear and if not knocking them off balance you'll jump back to gain ground and then draw a sidearm. You could always wear a buckler on you leading hand too though it may inhibit movement a bit but in the end your main attack with a spear is to thrust in the first place.
I think the third reason is also why some stick fighters would try grabbing the butt end of their enemy's stick, should they not hold the stick properly. Even if you don't disarm or harm the opponent, they can't easily regain control of their weapon as you beat them at point blank range.
Many of the issues with pole weapons come from the inability to really carry it just anywhere, but what about telescoping weapons? How effective are they?
That would weaken the weapon, which is an absolute no-go for pole weapons. Pole weaps feature top-heavy construction to begin with, and their extended hafts magnify the force/torque of each impact, so pole weapon shafts probably must be even stronger than other weapons. One of the Wallace pollaxes even had embedded metal languettes on each side of the haft, sunken into the wood, for added reinforcement. So there's simply no way you could successfully use sliding pieces in a pole weap. The first time you tried, presuming the haft didn't snap and the heavy head didn't fly right off, the thin hollow sliding segments would bend and collapse inwardly under the impact, further weakening the construction, jamming the pieces together, and terminating the extending feature anyway.
I'm really interested in how other polearms were used. Especially the glaive, because there's not much information on the internet. And I'd also like to know how good of a choice they are in a duel situation, and how effective they are against other weapons. Can they be used like a spear with the additional ability to cut? Do they have any significant advantages over spears, other polearms or swords etc? I really love the look of glaives, faulcharts and halberds - but there's not much information on these weapons (esp. Glaive) I suppose a glaive would be used almost like the very similar naginata... but that's just speculation - I don't have any experience with weapons.
Longer pole arms such as glaives were not really for a one on one situation. They were used in formation, and often by infantry against cavalry. However, the pole axe, which was shorter, was a very effective weapon in a one one one duel on foot.
I am interested in the spear you have in the vid.. it looks like a Viking winged spear, but I am not aware of them having a counterweight or spike on the other end.. did they?
Would it be possible to bring a spear when assaulting the walls of a castle with siege ladders, or would it be another advantage for the defenders that the attackers would be limited to sidearms?
I disagree with the point about taking down a swordsman if they have a shield. This comes from experince in battle re-enment, I found when taking on a man-at-arms if I wasn't careful I could easily be rushed. However if the man-at-arms was shieldless I could probably take them down. Also I'm probably at a disadvantage because I can't aim at the head. Thoughts anyone wanna prove me wrong.
I fought my 6'4 brother with a polymer dagger, he had a polymer longsword, (I'm 5'10) and that difference of length (about 2 ft) caused him to beat me 3/4 times. I usually win 3/4 if we have equal length swords, I had some fencing training and he didnt, so makes sense
This brings up an interesting question: I heard the flamberge is a sword specially designed for cutting off polearms. Do you know if that is true? I find it hard to believe.
+Schwarzer Ritter I think it would work if the spearpoint was trapped and the operator of the polearm has an iron grip. Otherwise you're just going to knock the it out of the way.
One question though... Why are you holding your hand that far out? Generally when I see historical martial artists using spears they hold both of their hands WAAAAY further back, and getting hit over the hand never seems to be a big problemfor them. I can see why you can't use that technique with a poleax for example, but with a spear it should work just fine, since your main attack is thrusting anyways. Right?
+James Sarvan he's probably holding it in that manner because it's just a discussion of their faults. that, and because his camera setup is pretty much directly in front of him.
As soon as you mentioned the first hand exposed I thought about "ring like" guard - you'd just attach it through the back side so it could also move with your hand. Simple way to increase your hand protection.
I understand that a spear has the advantage against a sword because of reach, but what about those big 2-handed swords? I don't know if it is anachronistic but would a spear still have an advantage against such a weapon?
Some of those swords were made to defeat spears, i.e. the doppelhander for smashing through pikes. Not safe or easy work, though; the men in the Landesknecht doing it were called double soldiers and received double pay.
I don't think it's about weight. It's more about the length. While the spearmen can react quickly due to the leverage advantage of a longer weapon; if someone parries it, the long length give the one parrying a leverage advantage too. Kind work for and against the spearmen.
question: Im having difficulty understanding how heavy armed units and cavalry knights died in combat generally around 1300 to 1600 ad? if we factor out fire arms that is. I've looked into a ton of different weapons from war arrows to great swords and the only thing I can think of that can penetrate mail, plate armor and leather all at once would be either war hammers, maces/morning stars, or hitting unguarded areas/pulling him off his horse then take off his helm or something. Can you tell me what weapons would be good to pierce through such heavy defenses all at once?
+momo manzy I think you have it right. No weapons were intended to pierce plate armor. Maybe a lance in a mounted charge could pierce some plate? Probably not though. Either you attack the weakpoints/unarmored areas or you pummel the guy with blunt weapons to apply trauma through the armor. I heard somewhere that the weapon that killed the most armored knights is actually the dagger: Have your buddy hold him down, open the visor and there you go.
+peterlem1 appretiate the replay, im looking into this out of curiosity from the ways crusaders were dressed in comparison to some of their enemies and how they were left so defeated in both open battles and siege warfare against muslim armies. It really got me stumped because I hear stories of how some crusaders kept fighting with dozens of arrows stuck into their armor and from my own knowledge I know the limitations of some weapons in piercing armor. So thats what got me wondering how exactly do you defeat someone like that.
Couldn't find any information on google about polearm+shield usage in history. But I have seen some historical images where soldiers have halberd and shield together. Can you give some information about how real and practical such stance would be?
well... I'd figure the main disadvantage is the fact you'd be walking through 100's of arrows from longbows before you ever got in range to hit someone.
I am a little puzzled by the Spear work I see online. Everyone seems to be grabbing as afar back as possible and relying solely on the point. I thought Spears were supposed to be gripped near the middle and used like a bayonet-Plenty of Slashes, Butt Strokes and Butt Smashes, alernating attacks from one end to the other. Does/Did no one use a Spear that way? .....RVM45
