Sword and large shield combat

[Jay Vail]

Thought for discussion: do (or do not) the systems of sword and buckler combat derive from older systems of combat with the sword and the large shield? If so, would it not be possible to recreate combat with the large sword and shield at least in part by "extrapolating back" from the sword and buckler?

I ask this because there are one or two instances in Brian Hunt's essay on the I33 and comparative wards that show similar wards used with the large shield. See http://www.thearma.org/Manuals/I33-guards.html.

[Randall Pleasant]

Java

Ernie Perez of the ARMA DFW study group has recently started working in this area. Using the I.33 techniques to modified how he uses his shield in a number of siturations Ernie has gotten good results. I will drop him a message to respond to your post.

[Keith Culbertson]

if the shield is mobile like the vikings an others use, then I suggest the buckler is a smaller and faster development from them (they were often used for entangling/catching an opponent's weapon fast then dropped away so a warrior was free to dispatch the now-unarmed enemy, rather disposable in fact), but being more a displacer than entangler, especially metal ones. Yet, some ancient and many later medieval shields are strapped on and wielded closely as a barrier or ram head for ones body, so that intention is very unlike a buckler to my mind. This is the feeling I get from having read sagas and various histories of fighting encounters of different periods.

[Benjamin Smith]

Well as far as iconography is concerned the line between a small shield held in the fist and a buckler is a little blurry. There are also very old depictions of bucklers back in the middle ages. The Roman era societies did not use bucklers to my knowledge, but their shields were a different animal altogether.

[Axel Pettersson]

The Hammaborg group from Germany has done some viking sword and shield experiments from 1:33 and other sources:

http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=tossetoke

[Jay Vail]

The Hammaborg group from Germany has done some viking sword and shield experiments from 1:33 and other sources:

http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=tossetoke

I have seen those videos. They were, in part, one of the reasons I asked the question, which unfortunately does not seem to be generating much interest.

[Henri de La Garde]

Hang on, Jay, I'm interested!

I work alot with (arm-strapped) non- or slightly-curved heater shields, and I use sources such as:
1) the Talhoffer dueling shield and sword and buckler sections (even some of the messer plates are inspiring for sword and shield).
2) Ringeck sections on sword and buckler.
3) I.33 of course.
4) the Talhoffer-derived system explained by Paul Wagner and Steven Hand in the two SPADA journals, and currently being beautifully expounded upon by Hammaborg in their series of YouTube videos.

To answer your question, which I think is, 'Does I.33 reflect the mechanics of larger sword and shield use?' I would say, absolutely.
But I'm discovering more and more that there is not simply one shield; and just as we would never expect rapiers, estocs, longswords, and arming swords to be used in the same way, so too must shield type determine use.
For example:
Take a look at the Hammaborg clips again, in particular, think of the clip in which the swordsman advances and switches the shield from the left to the right (what the SPADA articles refer to as an inside ward) to trap the opponent, whose exposed sword arm is then cut (this is in the first 17 seconds of the video titled "Hammaborg Talhoffer variations for Viking Shield and Sword"). The technique works because the shield is a large, center grip round shield. While you can probably imagine a variation on this with an arm strapped heater shield, the obstruction (in inside ward) of the heater shield makes the subsequent sword strike a bit slower than when the Viking round is used.

I don't know if this is fair, but recently I've been putting various shield types in my mind on three different axis:

1) The first one is the amount of curvature of the shield: the heavier the curve, the closer to the body the shield is likely to be held, and the flatter the shield the more it can be brought edge-on to the opponent (regardless of size: I.33 and the Hammaborg videos both feature 'edge-on' shield use).
Deeply curved shields are very likely to be used in a guige configuration, as they don't need to be held away from the body. This idea comes entirely from the SPADA II article.
2) The second axis is the size axis, of course. The larger the shield, the more movement the fighter will do around the shield, and the less the shield will be moved around the fighter. While Talhoffer dueling shields are arguably fairly stationary, the I.33 buckler obviously orbits the fighter, and not the opposite. Also with this comes the notion that the smaller the shield, the further it can be held from the body. I.33 involves the buckler often extended as far from the body forward as possible, both because it allows the fighter to protect the sword hand, and because it makes geometrical sense that the buckler can easily intercept incoming attacks with smaller motions the closer it is to the opponent.
3) The third axis is shield reach. Take a center-gripped Viking round like those shown in the Hammaborg videos and stand square. Hold both arms out in front, with the sword in the non-shield arm. The distance from the shield hand to the shield rim is probably in the neighbourhood of 10 to 12 inches. The distance from the sword hand to the sword tip is likely to be around 30 inches. So, you are now carrying two instruments with varying reach beyond the hands to intercept attacks and bind the opponent. Now try the same experiment with the sword and buckler: while the sword reach is the same, a buckler only extends about 5-7 inches forward past the hand. Therefore the techniques used for binding with sword and buckler might involve the use of the sword as the first weapon to make contact with the enemy's ('falling under the sword') or both weapons make contact simultaneously ('the shield knock'). Heater shields and bucklers share this in common, as both a heater shield and a buckler, regardless of their size, have a similar forward reach past the hand of only a few inches. Whereas with center gripped shields with larger reach, a greater variety of binding and shield to shield engagements can be used.

I'm not sure if I'm explaining this right, but the short answer I would give is that I.33 has much in common with other shield use, particularly if the shield happens to be a small or medium sized flat shield with only 5 to 7 inches of forward reach.
Thanks for reading my rambling prose.....

[Stacy Clifford]

Di Grassi has a section on sword and "round target" which shows a large round shield strapped to the arm. It's a late source, not Medieval, but one of the only ones to actually describe that type of shield that I know of, so it should be worth a look.

[Bill Tsafa]

I have trained extensively with large shields and also done some work with bucklers. I can't reference any manuals because none exist for full size shields. I can say for certain that you want to keep a large shield close to the body. You can hold the edge out against a like-handed fighter but you must hold it very flat against an off-handed fighter. With a heater you want to keep the corner up to cover your head. Drop the lower point to block you upper-leg, sword block to cover your lower-leg. A long, narrow kite gives good head and leg protection, but you need to move that side to side to cover shots. You really want to keep the movement to a minimal because a full shield will weigh 7 to 12 lbs. If you start moving the shield around too much, you arm will tire and your head will become exposed as you drop it lower.

With a buckler I have found it is best to block the shot at the source. It can be hard to see where shots are going. Some people are good with low-rising shots and high-low shots. When the sword is moving at 150 mph, you can't see the blade. You do know where the shot is coming from... the shoulder. That means to block a low-leg shot you don't have to bring your buckler to your feet. If you punch out you will stop the arch at your waist level. This is good if he faked and is going high instead because now your buckler does not have to move too far get in front of your face. With the buckler, you also have to do a lot more on sword blocking. The buckler can't be everywhere. I know that I.33 is always interpreted as using the buckler to cover the hand. I disagree. Obviously you will protect you hand too... but I interpret it as buckler covering low and sword covering high.

I'm not being historical, I'm just saying what works.