How to defeat the spear? (and other polearms)

[James Brazas]

Thanks everyone!

It's beginning to seem like there is very little in the manuals about fighting between disimilar weapons.

Stacy Clifford:
OK. I'll definitely have to look more into Mair and Silver.

Vincent le Chevalier:
True, there is a lot of unarmed vs. dagger - which is very good as it's the most practical and commonly seen both in the Renaissance and nowadays.

All: Would the smallsword vs. something else sections be useful for those of us using earlier weapons? (like sidesword, rapier, etc.)

Would anyone like to offer any insights into fighting between disimilar weapons (especially swords vs. polearms) from personal experience?

I'm thinking of separating this out into a different thread about fights between disimilar weapons. Would that be a good idea?

[Jonathan Hill]

All: Would the smallsword vs. something else sections be useful for those of us using earlier weapons? (like sidesword, rapier, etc.)

Yes. There are in fact quite a few texts on broadsword (gasp) vs bayonet. As it was a quite regular occurrence that an officer would end up fighting a listed man with a bayonet, there were many texts that addressed it. As you noted in a different thread a bayonet is basically a make shift spear. The basics of it are parrying the point, grab the gun (shaft of the spear) with your left hand and chop the head off.

Hutton has many texts on sword and bayonet

On sword vs spear, it’s much the same as bayonet, which you can equate to side sword vs rapier. The challenge is getting past the point and then you just have fun with it.

Sword vs poleaxe is a different beast altogether. With a spear you can more easily grab the shaft and control the weapon. With a poleaxe it’s more like fighting a long heavy longsword with a light single handed blade. You can’t control the weapon and if you cross blades he will batter you all over the place. If you cut at a poor time he can counter cut and manhandle your blade. I’ve found you are best off avoiding the swings and striking around it. Last week I did a spadroon vs side sword, me on spadroon. When I attacked he just bashed my blade all over the place, my blade was too light to hold up to his. I had to take the parries and then thrust or just void his attack and slice a target I could. It reminded me a lot of fighting a poleaxe with a longsword. He has more power and leverage and if he was allowed to use it, I wasn’t very pleased.

[James Brazas]

Interesting. Thanks, Jonathan Hill!

I'd imagine that broadsword techniques could be used quite easily with a sidesword.

So you said those are Hutton manuals? Where would be a good place to get those manuals?

[Stacy Clifford]

Two of Hutton's works are in our Historical Manuals section near the bottom:

http://www.thearma.org/pdf/OldSwordPlay.pdf

http://www.thearma.org/pdf/ColdSteel.pdf

[Jonathan Hill]

Thanks Stacy

now that I look through most of my texts, the area that specifically talks about sword vs Bayonet are the author's notes not specific texts of sword vs bayonet. Almost all the texts be it on bayonet or sword will address fighting the other weapon but a specific text on sword vs bayonet is not that common.

Oh, and sidesword is virtually identical to Broadsword in methodology and practice. The differences are philosophical (and partially metallurgical) ; countercut vs parry-riposte.

[James Brazas]

Jonathan Hill and Stacy Clifford:

Thanks for the Hutton manuals! It looks like he has a few good, practical pieces of advice for the swordsman - though much of it seems to boil down to a quick parry, sidestep while grabbing the gun barrel, then countercut/thrust.

Jonathan Hill (and anyone else who would like to answer):

Hm. Your analysis of sword vs. pollaxe is interesting. Thank you very much! That's precisely the sort of response I was hoping to get.

Would longswords, sideswords, etc. have a speed and nimbleness advantage vs. the pollaxe? I would assume so since they're much lighter.

It's obvious the pollaxe has the advantage in power and leverage - possibly in reach as well.

I've sparred with single sword vs. longsword before. Would that be roughly similar to using longsword against pollaxe?

Would it be worthwhile against pollaxe to give up the reach and power of the longsword and choose sword-and-buckler to get that coverage and the ability to perform simultaneous offense and defense?

Also, is there any realistic chance of a cutting sword like a falchion severely damaging the shaft of the pole-arm? Due to the very short reach of falchions/messers, I tend to assume they would perform poorly against polearms, but I thought it would be worth asking.

My interest is mostly in longsword, sword-and-buckler, and sidesword (with or without off-hand weapons), but I thought I'd ask about the falchion/messer as well. I've always wondered whether cutting at the shaft of a pole-arm was a useful tactic.

[Stacy Clifford]

Speed and nimbleness depends on how you're handling a pole weapon. If you're swing it in an arc from one end, certainly it is slower than any shorter sword. If you spread your hands apart more and you're using both ends, axe and butt spike, polearms can be very nimble despite their extra mass. Thrusting is going to be fast either way. Swords make tighter circles on the whole, but don't underestimate the speed of a polearm; it's fast enough to be reckoned with when used right.

Single sword vs. longsword isn't really a good comparison. The principles of binding and closing remain the same, but most polearms are handled similarly to half-swording with the longsword the majority of the time. Don't worry about analogous fights, just try longsword vs. polearm and see for yourself.

Damaging the shaft of a polearm probably isn't the wisest tactic you could use. It might be possible for it to work, but if you don't severely weaken it with the first blow, it's not like you're going to get to sit there and hack at that same spot until it breaks. While you're attacking your opponent's weapon, he's going to be attacking you. If your blade gets stuck in the wood for even a moment, you're really in trouble because he's got a huge leverage advantage. Polearms also often had metal langets to protect the shaft, and they were usually made of hard, sturdy wood if it was available. You might take a whack at the shaft if you happen to get a free shot, but it should never be Plan A.

[Jonathan Hill]

As Stacy said, give it a try, that’s the best advice. Not sure if ARMA has distributors of them but you can find the. I’m drawing a blank on where we got ours, I didn’t order them sorry.

Here’s a pic of one of the polearm simulators, you can gauge how well you can break that shaft. I’m not sure how ‘historically accurate’ that one is, but the old rusty halberds we have at the salle have a shaft that you aren’t going to hack through.



From my experience I would not want to try to parry/block a strike from a polearm with a buckler. I may try deflecting one to see how it goes but that’s still more risk than I would normally try for in sparring. Old saying I like in this situation, don’t stand under a falling boulder. Mostly they are used by the armor guys, and a good strike with one will stagger them. I did see a solid strike to the head take a guy to his knees.

[Stacy Clifford]

Agreed that you don't want to take hammer/axe blows on a buckler, but if you're doing that then you're at the wrong range anyway. You can successfully defend blows from the middle of the shaft on downwards, but you gotta get in there before the blow falls. You can also defend with both sword and buckler together and then disengage the sword to attack while leaving the buckler on the bind. Same goes for sword & dagger if you're really daring.

[James Brazas]

Got it. I didn't think that cutting against the shaft would work very well, but I thought I would ask anyway.

Hm. So it sounds like swords would have a speed advantage, but not by very much (all depending on the type of technique).

The only pollaxe wasters I know of here in the US are those made by Purpleheart Armory. They have a hammerhead instead of an axe blade. They also have a rectangular cross section (I'm not sure why since octagonal or round would seem to make more sense). And I know ARMA doesn't like Purpleheart very much.

revival.us used to make pollaxe wasters, but all they make now are the axe heads and spikes - no shaft and no rondel. I guess I could try and see if they'll fit on my quarterstaff.

Now that I think of it, if the revival axe-head/fluke and spikes fit on my staff, that would save me a good bit of money.

OK. So would a buckler still be useful against a pollaxe? I get it that simply taking the blow on the buckler is probably a losing tactic, but would it still be effective to close the distance and bind with sword and buckler together? That seems to be what Stacy Clifford is suggesting. It sounds like an I.33 style sword and buckler.

If the buckler really is of such limited use, it sounds like longsword would be a better bet (better relative to sword-and-buckler, sidesword, messer, or rapier).

The longsword might not have as much coverage or the ability to perform combined offensive/defensive techniques, joining and separating the buckler from the sword; but if the buckler really is of limited use against pollaxes, then the reach and power of the longsword sound like they would be of more use.

It also sounds like the pollaxe has the advantage against basically anything.

[Stacy Clifford]

The buckler isn't of more limited use than anything else. Sword & buckler is one of the most versatile combos against dissimilar weapons in my opinion. That said, how your buckler is made makes a difference. If it's round and smooth, like most practice bucklers we have, it can be difficult to bind well except by applying lots of pressure. If the buckler has lots of curves, points and other grabby shapes to it like Talhoffer's bucklers for example, binding can be easier with less effort. Defending with both weapons together isn't just I.33 style either. You see it in Di Grassi too, though it's done in a different way, and we already discussed how Swetnam talks of defending against a staff with sword & dagger. Using both weapons against stronger ones never went out of style.

Also, Icefalcon Armory does have some axe heads and things, though if it's not in stock it might take a while for you to get it:

http://store.fastcommerce.com/icefalcon ... 01e-c.html

[James Brazas]

Thanks!

It's good to know that the buckler isn't just of limited use against pollaxes. More and more, I'm thinking sword-and-buckler might be my favorite sword style. I'm just not sure whether I prefer the arming sword or the sidesword.

What commercially available buckler would you recommend? We've used the A&A English Buckler. It's concave, so it catches rapier and sidesword thrusts really well.

Thanks for the link for polearm parts. I'm thinking I'll probably buy the pollaxe axe-head/hook and spearpoint from revival.us. They're a little cheaper.

http://revival.us/talhoffer1467rubberhammerhead.aspx

I'm guessing that anti-spear tactics still work for the most part (like "attack the hands," "feint to hands and attack to vitals," and "close the distance," "grab the pole shaft," and the Swetnam technique you (Stacy Clifford) mentioned earlier).

Would there need to be any adjustments to the techniques? (Other than realizing that it's harder to parry strikes/cuts from the pollaxe due to its mass and it's harder to grab effectively due to the axe/hammer/hook and rondel.)

[LafayetteCCurtis]

By now I'm pretty much convinced that you're overthinking the issue.

Now STOP. Forget everything you've read in this thread. Go practice some more sword and polearm work according to your preferred master(s). And then, when you feel like you're starting to seriously get the hang of things in both weapon groups, try dissimilar matches against somebody you can trust to approach the subject with (at least) a similar level of integrity and dedication. Then reread this thread, armed with that experience, to help you figure out what you've been doing right and what you've been doing wrong and how to do things more effectively within the context of the historical system.

No matter how much you discuss sword vs. polearm techniques in this thread, NONE of it will matter the first time you try it out. Almost everything you know on the theoretical level will go out of the window. You'll stumble and fumble and make a mess of everything. But that's the way things should be; no amount of theoretical discussion can substitute for actual trial and error in the sparring yard (or the salle or whatever). No number of bytes sent back and forth over the Web can substitute for the sweat and tears (and often blood) that you'll have to shed on the long road towards proficiency.

Why am I suddenly breaking into this rant? Well, your endless search for absolutes and what-ifs makes me think that a dissimilar sword vs. polearm match is still far beyond the reach of your skills at the moment, and going at it so soon may do more harm than good. No offence meant, but most of what's being discussed here seem to sail way over your head (and frankly mine, too). Forget it. Put it out of your mind for the time being. Just go and practice the basics some more. When you come back in a year or six months or even a couple of months, you'll be surprised at how much more useful information you can extract with the aid of the cognitive and martial background you've been building up in the meantime.


(As an aside, many people say that a poleaxe is a "short spear with benefits," and they probably have a point. Most poleaxe fighting at range involves the poll (spearhead) and the butt, just like a short spear, while most strikes with the poleaxe's mail (head) can also be executed with the shaft of a spear just below the head. At one point my sparring partner and I made the mistake of assuming that the spear's shaft (or a short staff) won't strike as hard as a poleaxe's mail so we could relax our control a bit when we did a bit of free-play with it. Well, yes, it didn't strike quite as hard as a poleaxe, but still more than hard enough to knock our masks askew and give us nasty bruises along the cheek and the jaw in the process. Have respect for these weapons. And no matter how much you think you know about a weapon, there's always more to know--much of which cannot be gained without sweating buckets over the practice floor.)

[James Brazas]

Lafayette Curtis:

There is no need to be rude.

Granted:
You have more experience than I do.

Hands-on sparring experience is invaluable.

My experience with disimilar weapons sparring is limited to longsword, messer, sword-and-buckler, sidesword, and sword-and-dagger. So no polearms so far.

But even if you are 100% right, being rude helps no-one.

[Stacy Clifford]

I don't think Lafayette was being rude at all. A little irritable, perhaps, but I kind of agree with his perception that you seem to be looking for absolutes in a subject (fighting) that doesn't have any absolutes. We can share our insights on dissimilar weapons until we're blue in the face, but trying to learn every possible detail before you go out and pick up a weapon isn't the most helpful way to learn. You've got plenty of material to work with already in this thread and it will take quite a while to digest in practice, and it might generate totally different questions once you do. As both a teacher and a student I've seen plenty of people try to bite off more than they could chew all at once, and as much as I admire your enthusiasm, that's what appears to be happening here. It's the internet, which makes judging intent ten times harder, so take criticism with a grain of salt. I think Lafayette meant well and his advice is sound. Nobody's trying to shut you up and run you off, just get you to contemplate and practice what you've already learned before you come back for more.