RE: Re: Shields

From: donald_at_...
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 11:15:00 GMT


In message <000001c48cbf$a988bf10$0302a8c0_at_master> "Jane Williams" writes:

>> 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.
>
>Can't comment on a mace, but I've had a friend hit me on the shield
>(wooden, ply, painted, rawhide edging), with a full force greatsword as
>a demo. There was some impact shock, and I wouldn't want to keep that up
>all day. On one try I did move back a foot or so. But no damage to the
>arm.
>
>I gather there was a technique of battering away at a shield so as to
>tire the shield arm: not even trying to get past it as a defence, just
>hammering away until the supporting arm tires from the repeated impact
>enough to be slowed down. This isn't something I've ever tried in demo -
>by definition, it would be very hard to do safely.

I'm not sure who would tire first, it was probably also a training exercise to build up strength and endurance. Of course a multi-person actual combat is going to be different with possibilities of catching the shield at a bad angle etc. rather than standing prepared for an expected blow.

>> 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.
>
>I believe this is the case - once plate came in, there was no longer
>much point in trying to cut through it. Impact shock was more important.
>A TV program a week or so ago showed small maces designed for this, with
>flanges to concentrate the impact. They also did a reconstruction of the
>shockwaves going through the body due to a blow on plate armour. The
>armour itself was undamaged - the gel "body" underneath didn't look
>happy.

For good fighters there would also be targets like the shoulders, elbows and head to go for. You don't have to bend the metal of a complex joint much to jam it and however good the padding is a head strike is going to give the receiver a headache at least.

>Going much further back, wasn't there once (Roman?) a class of heavily
>armoured cavalry called "cataphracts"? Who had immense trouble with some
>unarmoured peasants with clubs? I'm sure someone out there knows more?

Sarmation auxillaries, there was a unit stationed in Britain. They, and their horses, wore armour made of small overlapping metal plates on a leather coat. Must have been even more cumbersome than medieval plate but probably just as effective. They were arguably the first troops to use a couched lance depending on whether you accept the evidence for stirrups or not. That's what I envisage Tarshite cataphracts wearing and possibly Carmenian ones as well.

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

Powered by hypermail