Views on SPADA

[Guest]

Hi all,

I`v been reading through SPADA lately and was wondering what other peoples reactions to it are.

What do people on this forum think of SPADA? both as a publication and the articles in it.

Charles

[Jay Vail]

I found the piece on sword and shield very interesting. I don't know enough about that sort of thing to have an opinion, though. It would be interesting to hear what others who have done more work in the area think.

[Guest]

Hi Jay,

I have been doing a little experiment with the large shield idea. As I have been doing free style blunt steel combat for 22 years I thought I would give it a try.

The idea is taken from duelling shields shown in Talhoffer and other manuals. The idea is that you close the line on one side of the body with the shield and therefore open the other side, inviting an attack there. This is usually the right side as most people hold the shield in the left hand. It is the old closing door trick, which I have a picture of me doing in 1983 somewhere around.

The argument is (though I have not read the article yet, I have talked to the author about it in person) that all large shields are used this way, from the Greeks to the Vikings etc. I think that it is also only in single combat situations not battles.

It us obvious that these shields can be used in this way and that sometimes it may be advantageous, especially against unskilled or inexperienced warriors. In my humble and honest opinion, even with the light and large shields that I have, the energy and time required to do this manoeuvre is a lot higher than the corresponding energy and time you have to expend to feint to the opening with the sword and switch back to another target after the shield is committed. Yes you could attempt to return the shield, closing the door on the other side but it seems that the shield wielder is at a disadvantage. I must add that I have not had a lot of time to experiment, but even those experiments I have done lead me to the conclusion above.

When you move onto copper/bronze covered hoplite shields or shields heavier than the ones I have been using, I am inclined to think that it is fanciful thinking.

It is a bit too sweeping a statement that all large shields can be used like this in my opinion. The duelling shields are designed like a revolving door with a pivot stick through the centre and so opening and closing the door is relatively easy, you can rest it on the floor and kick your own or their shield to cause the swing. You also have the ability to use two hands on these shields which is also a bonus in manoeuvring. You can also push on the side with your pommel to aid the swing leaving your sword in the ideal position to crash down on their right shoulder.

I would quite happily take anyone on in a sparring match if they used a large light round or lozenge shaped shield in the manner described (diameter about 30" or 36") and I was using a 22" shield using its best properties. I do mean anyone, anywhere and anytime!! Steel weapons only.

Well that is my pounds worth, I hope it made sense this late in the night.

[Stuart McDermid]

Hi Colin,

My experience with this method is just the opposite. The method of using the shield in defence is just like the sword, it is used to close lines. The important difference between defence with the sword (which is sometimes still done with a smaller shield) and defence with the shield is that the sword is moved to cover the line whereas the shield is only turned and the body is moved behind it. I don't see how you have a problem with the speed at which a shield can be manipulated.

Your opponent should be coming in the time of the foot. The shield is turned in the time of the hand as you pass/step to safety.

Have you ever wondered why Silver says there are only two wards for the sword and target? I believe this is because there are only two safe positions to lie in with a target. These are the inside and outside wards that Steve and Paul show in their article. If you lie with the shield in any other position, it can be bound and you will be helpless.
Cheers,
Stu.

[Gene Tausk]

Charles:

When did you receive your issue of SPADA?


----->>>>>>>>gene

[Randall Pleasant]

Stu

The experience of the ARMA DFW study was the same as Colin's experience. I too consider it something best used against unskilled fighters. A skilled fighter is going to easily guess that you plan to close that big openning. In regard to the time of the hand and foot keep in mind that a sword and a shield do not handle the same due to differences in weight, shape, etc. In other words is not just the time of the hand vs. the time of the foot, it is the time of the foot with a sword vs. the time of the hand with a shield.

In was good research and a good attempt at trying to reconstruct at part of WMA for which we have zero historical documentation. In the end, however, it just does not seem to be martially sound.

[Stuart McDermid]

Hi Guys,

OK Ran/Col what wards do you use with a shield?
Cheers,
Stu

[Guest]

Hi Stu,

This could get long, though I will try to keep it brief.

Wards with the Shield.
Points:
1. I almost exclusively use a small 22 inch shield or a buckler, and have done for the last 15 years.
2. Most of my research in the last 4 years has not been involving anything bigger than the buckler.

When I used a large shield I used it almost several ward positions depending on the situation.

1. The most common position was and still is in my opinion, is the angled middle guard.
Defined as: The shield is held in the left hand for a right-handed person. The shield is held at middle height, the bottom of the elbow of the left hand about half way between the solar plexus and the navel. The angle of the plane of the shield lies at about 45 degrees to the centre line going through the centre of the two opponents.

2. Depending on your strength and predisposition, you can use a high angled middle guard.
Defined as: The shield is held in the left hand for a right-handed person. The shield is held slightly higher than before so that you can still see the opponent, though the shield covers the high line to the head more. The angle of the plane of the shield lies at about 45 degrees to the centre line going through the centre of the two opponents.

3. Sometimes as in large engagements I would use the closed Middle guard.
Defined as: As above angled middle guard though with the angle of the plane of the shield lies at about 90 degrees to the centre line going through the centre of the two opponents.
This last position I would not use much anyway , it is just a possibility.
4. Sometimes I used the full open door of which I think the article is addressing. I have a photo of me doing it in 1983 somewhere in my vast collection.

That is it with large shields.

“My experience with this method is just the opposite.”
What is your experience Stu, please just for my curriosity.

“ The method of using the shield in defence is just like the sword, it is used to close lines.”

Yes, but there is more than one way to close lines.

“ The important difference between defence with the sword (which is sometimes still done with a smaller shield) and defence with the shield is that the sword is moved to cover the line whereas the shield is only turned and the body is moved behind it.”

That I presumably only your opinion, you cannot be stating a fact. If this is a fact then all other forms of shield use are negated. Please see the following technique section of my answer. All this sentence says is, that there is only one way to use a shield and this is a little sweeping IMHO, when there are so many shields styles, types and gripping techniques. What evidence to you base this statement on, an article of which the validity of it, is neither proved or disproved, and therefore open to discussion. This statement seems like dogma to me, which is interesting with the research into all this stuff so early down the long and winding road, I really hope that their is no one out there spreading dogmatic ideas already!! ;_)

“ I don't see how you have a problem with the speed at which a shield can be manipulated.”
Well I just tried it with 3 different large shields of different weight and I do have a problem with it. See technical part later and the part about energy in my first post.

“Your opponent should be coming in the time of the foot. The shield is turned in the time of the hand as you pass/step to safety.”
You can state as many times as you like (oh by the way I love Silver, but see the latest thread about Silver’s times being wrong or in dispute at least, that is interesting too.), but there is one thing in the physical world which is quite important and that is inertia. Depending on the mass of the shield it takes a certain to get it moving and stop it as you know. In my honest opinion I have found through, though not exhaustive experiment, that the sword will out manoeuvre the shield by feinting to the open line and changing line to another opening line if the movement of the shield is large. This not withstanding my technical section to follow.

“Have you ever wondered why Silver says there are only two wards for the sword and target? I believe this is because there are only two safe positions to lie in with a target. These are the inside and outside wards that Steve and Paul show in their article. If you lie with the shield in any other position, it can be bound and you will be helpless.”

Sorry I have not read their article, I just talked to Stephen briefly in Racine. There are, in my honest opinion a few safe places to lie with the shield. The most important for me is angled middle guard. It all depends, IMHO on distance I lie from the opponent. Time should depend upon distance, if I lie at the correct distance you are not going to bind my shield in any way, and if you can bind (depending on the definition of bound you are using) my shield, I can bind yours. See technical section next.

Looking briefly at the technical points:

Both opponents armed the same, presumed. I am using centre gripped shields of about 36" diameter.
1. The patient agent lies in an open ward with the shield covering the outside left opening. The agent lies in angled middle guard (as defined above). The agent throws an angled blow left to right to the right hand upper opening of the patient agent, stepping in with the right foot. The patient agent starts to close the door as the sword comes into range, the agent extends his left arm to bind the PA;s shield on the inside edge with the edge of his. The PA will then have to ward with the sword.
2. The patient agent lies in an open ward with the shield covering the outside left opening. The agent lies in angled middle guard (as defined above). The agent throws an angled blow left to right to the right hand upper opening of the patient agent, stepping in with the right foot. The patient agent starts to close the door as the sword comes into range, the blow is a feint. As the door is closed the agent complete the extension of the shield arm therefore putting the edge of his shield behind the now outside edge (left edge) thereby binding the shield keeping the door open. The agent also realigns his attack to a right to left blow, striking for the head. The PA will have to ward with the sword. Following from this, IMHO the A is in a better position.

I will just use those two examples for the attacker.
In defence the angled middle guard can be used thus.

1. The PA is in angled middle guard (defined above), the A in open ward as per the article. (Angled middle guard does leave an opening of the PA right shoulder as an invitation and the right side of the head.) The A strikes a cut or thrust to the openings on the right. The PA extends his right arm to intercept the A sword arm at the wrist. The PA cuts left to right into the A arm, with a drop of the point.
2. The PA is in angled middle guard (defined above), the A in open ward as per the article. (Angled middle guard does leave an opening of the PA right shoulder as an invitation and the right side of the head.) The A strikes a cut or thrust to the openings on the right. The PA extends his right arm to intercept the A sword arm at the wrist, whilst also covering the original open line with the sword if necessary. The A attack is a feint, he changes line to the left side of the head. The PA is still covering this line to a large extent and only has to lift the shield to cover this line. The PA does have a high ward with the sword as a back up, if he should be bound at the shield, though I consider this bind more difficult to execute this way round as, though I am willing to listen to other ideas.

I will only consider these 4 for brevity. I have left out nearly all considerations of stepping to keep it short and simplified, though I am well aware that stepping will create differences. Discussing the in depth stepping considerations would make an interesting augmentation to the discussion. I am also aware of the limitations of this media and of semantics and any misunderstandings can only be laid at the door of my poor English.

Stu I would be interested in your opinion on the other statements I put forward in my first post especially but not exclusively the following:

"It is a bit too sweeping a statement that all large shields can be used like this in my opinion. The duelling shields are designed like a revolving door with a pivot stick through the centre and so opening and closing the door is relatively easy, you can rest it on the floor and kick your own or their shield to cause the swing. You also have the ability to use two hands on these shields which is also a bonus in manoeuvring. You can also push on the side with your pommel to aid the swing leaving your sword in the ideal position to crash down on their right shoulder." CR first post quote.

So that is a bit long but may explain myself a bit better. I would be interested in your suggestions and ideas, and viewpoints and any specific technical aspects you wish to discuss.

I really wish that we where in the same place then we could spend hour upon lovely hour discussing and sparring. I wish you could get to my summer course at our museum in Norway (where we have a permanent daily HEMA school) and then we could thrash it out!!

As I said before I will spar with anyone, anywhere, anytime, to give it a try. I always like to be proved wrong because it makes me go away and think again, and again.

All the best,

Col

[Derek Wassom]

How can I get a copy of SPADA?

[Guest]

Colin:
I have done this with a 42" round shield (7mm thick ply and 4 layers of cloth on the outside, leather rim and solid boss) My experience with it was that you are using the movement of the body and it is in fact a single time defense/attack, as they move in and commit themselves to an attack to my right or head I move in and left closing the door and hit them at the same time on there exposed right shoulder or head, I`v had more success at reenactment events with this style than I have with shield wall style. (this was mostly in skirmish rather than duel but I have been able to use it in duels as well but that has mostly been against someone else who uses that style.)

Gene:
A long time ago, we downunder got them before the US (due to time of ship in transit) and I went around to Steve's place and grabbed one of the first ones out of the box. I just have been slow to read it

Randall:
so? yes they know but there is not much they can do about it. I can cover any attack they make (most with the shield, some with the sword because using the shield is silly in those situations but more on that later.) and my counter is in the same time as they strike, reenactors, even good ones don't get this. And if there is a style that is nether close the line or reenactor one two (ok so I`v simplified that) then I`d be keen to hear of it.

Colin:
Fairly sound, I`v seen that done before and my only worry is the possibility of being shield bound, that is the attacker presses forward with the rim of there shield and pins your shield to your body, there shield is held high enough to keep your right arm outside there shield and they can cut at your head or leg and you cant defend with the shield as it is pinned, or the sword because you first have to move it around the attackers shield, if you are in a gardent/StGeorge ward you are in a better position but you still have problems defending the leg.
Re: sweeping statement, I don't think it was intended to be one: only an observation of how the shield is moved in this style, I`ll let stu go into more details as he is better at explaining than I am.

I'll post more at uni I`m almost out of time at the moment to do justice to technical points.

Derek:
The link was posted on this forum. I figured people who where interested in this would have gotten it http://www.revival.us/product.asp?3=80 in any case who has got it/read it?

Charles

[Stuart McDermid]

Hi Col,

I can see where you are coming from in terms of the wards you adopt. As Charles said though, your method works very well if you are attacked by the sword. If the attacker deliberately binds you in your right high line with the edge of his shield, he can easily expose your entire left side as your shield will be turned to your right by the impact. Depending on the lying of your sword and the size of your shield, it may even bind up your sword too. This is why we don't come on guard with the face of our shields showing at Stoccata.

Ran,

I don't know what to say except that this is kind of how most older systems of fence work.

You close one line completely to invite an attack in another. This is why a pflug ward is held outside the body. This is why true guardant is held right with your right fist on the left side of your head. This is why a terza is held closing the outside line and quarte is held closing the inside line. The other guy knows which lines are closed and which are open. You know that he knows. He knows that you know that he knows....Welcome to the chess match.
Cheers,
Stu.

[Jay Vail]

Sometimes as in large engagements I would use the closed Middle guard.

Colin, By engagements, do you mean battles?

Sometimes I used the full open door of which I think the article is addressing. I have a photo of me doing it in 1983 somewhere in my vast collection.

What led you, way back then, to experiment with the open door?

Also, Colin, and everyone, this has been an excellent discussion.

[Guest]

Hi Stuart and Jay,

Jay first,

Well I should say engagements that start with a modicum of order so that a semblance of a shield wall is presented. Though I must say that this was a longish time ago, say 6 to 8 years at least. Since that time any reenactment has been with a small 22 inch shield. When I was reasonably competent with it, friends said that I was blocking three almost simultaneous attacks from different quarters of the front with out apparently doing very much, I myself never really noticed because I was concentrating too much on the fight, Ah! gone are the glory days!!!!

What led me to experiment, well it is a bit obvious really. When you pick up weapons and have very little evidence to go on, you will try anything to "win"; the engagement. Also with the large shields we used back then, if you did not leave some people a target they just stood there. So with some people I used to leave an open door , just incase they were of the type that would go for any opening. I would only use it in a situation were only one person was in range. When we started using long spears 8 foot and up and people could "hit" you from 5 people down the line, with a cross strike, then leaving open doors is a bit risky!!. There is a re-enactment group in England that uses this open door system all the time, but unfortunately their rule system is so restrictive that they turned the "fight" almost into a dance, not very interesting really. I really do not think that you can use this open door in any battlefield shield wall type situations which include spear use, as it would expose yourself too much.
Also no one in the discussion has seemed to take up the point that I broached earlier about the duelling shields being designed for this "system" and the other shields do not seem to be functionally designed around this concept.
Form and function is an important aspect and I think that it must be addressed. Does any one else agree with my point?
Stuart said,
"If the attacker deliberately binds you in your right high line with the edge of his shield, he can easily expose your entire left side as your shield will be turned to your right by the impact. Depending on the lying of your sword and the size of your shield, it may even bind up your sword too. This is why we don't come on guard with the face of our shields showing at Stoccata."
Well if you can bind my shield, cannot I bind yours, whatever the alignment? Also if you are in a full open door position and you are bound is not the position a lot worse for you, than say someone bound in angled middle guard?
Like I said, I have not mentioned stepping deliberately to keep it simple. Whatever guard you take up depends on distance and many other factors. You can take up any guard position you like given enough distance. Also I do agree guard positions can be and should be used to draw a response from the opponent, I just think that the open door with a large shield is taking more of a risk than you need to especially against someone who knows what is coming. In the words of Fiore di Liberi (roughly from Bobs Charrons translation), "He knows my play and I know his and we regard each other for a long time". Unexperience combatants fall into traps, experienced combatants try to explote your moves.
Also I think that the shape of the shield is very important. Big oval shields have different properties to big round and kite shield are different again. How you grip the shield is important as well as to your tactical options. Again this is going to influence whether you can do a or b with the shield efficiently. There are many questions still not answered, in my opinion , though it is an interesting line of research. I would add that many treatises seem to imply that you should not stay in only one ward, so that using only the open door seems to go against this sage advice.

All the best

Col

[Jay Vail]

I have done this with a 42" round shield (7mm thick ply and 4 layers of cloth on the outside, leather rim and solid boss) My experience with it was that you are using the movement of the body and it is in fact a single time defense/attack, as they move in and commit themselves to an attack to my right or head I move in and left closing the door and hit them at the same time on there exposed right shoulder or head, I`v had more success at reenactment events with this style than I have with shield wall style. (this was mostly in skirmish rather than duel but I have been able to use it in duels as well but that has mostly been against someone else who uses that style.)

Charles, this is fascinating, but isn't the counter strike when you bind with the inside guard awkward? I've tried it (from the article) and it seems really awkward and rather weak to me.