rare medieval weapon against heavy Armour.

[fearn]

Originally Posted by cornelistromp

yes I have done ,nothing of this size.
though the defenition of billhooks agrees not but fact seems to be that 99.9% has a hook or curve

also seems to handle of the different manuscript images of steel instead of a wooden stick like the billhooks.

we disagree, for me it is not a billhook, but of course you are free to your own opinion.

best,
jasper

Hi Jasper,

Always a *really* good idea to check the color of the sword hilts appearing in the picture, before you assume it's metal. None of the swords in those illustrations have wood or even cloth handles, yet we know from historical evidence that none of them had solid steel handles.

There are a bunch of problems with a solid metal hilt, which is why they are very uncommon. They get very hot in the sun, and even colder in the winter (for example, Cold Steel's all-metal Bushman cannot be used barehanded in the snow, and is not fun to hold if left in a sunny car all day. Guess how I learned that?). Even worse, potentially, solid steel does a wonderful job transferring shocks from cutting edge to hand. While a lot of us like to whine about how "weak" rat-tail tangs in wooden handles are, compared with slab handles on solid tangs, the real problem is that solid tang transfer a lot more hand shock than the rat-tail does. Hand shock won't kill you, at least until your hands are so sore that you can no longer hold the blade. At that point, you're in serious trouble. If you're talking about a weapon that's theoretically hewing through armor, hand shock is going to be a huge issue every time the warrior connects. If you're fighting all day with a solid steel weapon, you're going to have trouble holding onto it long before the end of the day.

I'd be quite willing to bet that the weapons had wooden handles. They may have been wire-wrapped or clad in metal strips, but structurally, they had wood cores, and may well have had socketed heads.

Best,

F

[cornelistromp]

thanks for the explanation, a small attempt to convince you.

I agree that this tool is not likely to be developed as a weapon but exceptionally be used so.

re: wooden or steel handle?
if we take the manuscript as an example, here the artist has made 2 drawings, where all the steel/metal is gray colored (armour blades helmet eso) and also can be seen that the shaft of pole weapons is in a wood-tone color, fe see the Swiss voulge on the right drawing you can clearly see the difference between metal and wood!

The grip of the sword is with detailed windings clearly visible as a sword grip with some kind of binding.

However the big squareshaped! handle of the tool is gray colored! why not as the polearmshafts in the wood-tone color ?
...............because it is not wood.

best,
jasper

[Andi]

Does someone know the German or its historic name of the tool?

[cornelistromp]

Originally Posted by Andi

Does someone know the German or its historic name of the tool?

yes I think so
in the book Speculum Humanae salvation (a mediëval mirror) above the drawing can be read
sangoz occidit sexcetos vios cu vome
this must be read in latin as:
sangoz occidit sexce(n)tos vi(r)os cu(m) vom(er)e this means something like
sangoz killed 600 men with a ???goad??? (ploughshare)

In the old german historic translations vomere is translated as plōgaz or plōguz

best,
jasper

[fearn]

Okay, I'll take your word for it, although I think strong faith is misplaced. I'd still suggest swinging something like that against a hard target before believing the artwork uncritically (or at least, pick up a rectangular piece of metal about the same size and swing it against a hard target. An iron stake should do as a crude replica).

Also remember the Biblical story of Samson killing a thousand men with "the jawbone of a donkey" (Judges 15:16). It's not inconceivable that someone borrowed the idea of killing a massive number of enemies with an improbable implement and restated it in Medieval times.

Best,

F

[Richard Furrer]

Such large steel tool need not weigh much...I guess that glaive was about five pounds.
The gaive from that Bible was reproduced by a friend not long ago

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8JevwURrwQA

Michael is a good smith and so were those in Medieval Europe. By putting just enough metal in just the right places I think you would be amazed ay how large you can go and still be useful.

Ric

[fearn]

I should point out that most one-handed swords (steel and bronze) way no more than about a kilogram. Five pounds is reasonable for a two-handed weapon, but that's not what is shown. As for the video, he's not the first to reproduce the Maciejowski glaive. Museum Replicas had an edition about a decade ago, and it was judged extremely awkward and tip heavy.

The point here is that when most warriors go for kilogram-scale single-handed weapons, regardless of culture, regardless even of metal used, a double-weight weapon doesn't immediately jump out as a massive improvement

Just to dump some more sand in the gears, I'd like to point out that the plow (pflug) is one of the fundamental stances in European sword fighting, one that probably will look very familiar (http://www.thearma.org/essays/StancesIntro.htm). If a swordsman says "the Plow" is his favorite and he's killed many men with it, what's an artist to make of that? Paint a warrior with a plowshare in his hand, perhaps?

Best,

F