Re: Re: Shields

From: donald_at_...
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 21:17:41 GMT


In message <20040827134409.43679.qmail_at_...> Chris Lemens writes:

>On the question of mace v. shield, the mace would tend
>to bounce off (just like a hammer off a wooden plank),
>but that might not stop the arm underneath from
>breaking. That's the reason to angle the sheild so
>that it does not absorb the impact perpendicularly --
>better to let the force of the blow slide off to the
>side.

Well the re-enactors I saw seemed quite happy to demonstrate full force blows with a mace (and morning star etc) onto a held wooden shield. As they'd obviously done the demo before the chances of breaking an arm must be pretty low.

I suspect the reappearance of the mace as a weapon in the middle ages reflects the greater use of armour and smaller shields. A mace would be easier to use than a sword against plate armour.

-- 
Donald Oddy
http://www.grove.demon.co.uk/

Powered by hypermail