13th Century

[Ryan Ross]

I was a bit wrong on the period mentioned, I tend to stick in closer to my common portrayal, but the great sword of war and targe combo has been done by English knights around the turn of the 13th and 14th centuries. The targe I use is just under a 2' diameter, at such size it allows me to grip the sword while wearing it. The first couple of times I used this combo it was pretty akward, but then I found the moves to make it happen. The only reason I even tried is because the roots of the targe and the greatsword are in the late 13th C. It derived from the sword I'll actually be using (I can't drop $300 on an event specific weapon right now), which was actually termed a "great sword of war" in the era. It's just under what most people think of as far as great swords in length and at 6'2" I am just tall enough to pull off some interesting manuvers. It's weight and balance are similar to a bastard sword. The boots I'll be wearing are going to have their tops covered with tartan wraps. I just want some of the protection of my normal boots (the guy I'll be fighting likes to go for the legs). I figue as part of the fight I'll switch to using the french-style hand axe that I keep on hand for a back up weapon. From some of the archaeological finds, it seems to be of a style that could have been in use in the area.

Ah, I see... greatsword of war makes more sense, for sure. Really more like a longsword than a greatsword-like claymore.

I'd still be quite interested to see your historical material on its use with the targe, though, if you have it handy in link form. Quite curious.

[Tobus]

Threads like this puzzle me. I mean no disrespect or ill intent, and I fully admit that I'm no expert on martial weapons or history, but it seems like we often see this topic arise under the guise of "historical reenacting", when in fact it appears to be just for the sake of entertainment, with only a cursory nod to actual history, and a lot of liberty taken with the facts.

I may be wrong, but I thought "historical reenacting" was supposed to be founded upon documented sources, with the intent of educating the audience on factual history. What I see this developing into, though (as is often the case), is the reenactor trying to create an image with which the audience will be pleased according to their Hollywood-based ideas of history. Wearing a manner of dress, or using weapons that "could have" been used in a particular time period isn't quite the same as wearing or using items that were documented to have come from that period.

Not that I'm necessarily against fantasy role-playing. In the proper place, it can be very entertaining. But there seem to be a lot of people doing "historical reenacting" by just making things up, or using expedient substitutes for period-correct items. And the public takes it as fact, which does a great disservice to history.

So I hope it's not in poor manners to ask this, but what exactly are you trying to accomplish with this event and costume? Is your intent to educate people on historical facts and give them a true glimpse of what we know of our ancestors? Or is it just to entertain them, with little regard for accuracy? The original post seemed to imply the former, but the transition seems to be leaning toward the latter.

[Bugbear]

You know, Tobus, it took me a long while to sort it out in my squirrel filled brain, but I agree with you from a different angle. I would rather the fantasy role-playing be kept separate from historical reenactment from the fantasy point of view. Having to constantly explain that you aren't trying to reenact, but creating a character in a fantasy world that is using the flavor of several different things mixed together or something like that really ruins the fun. I mean, I grew up watching Dungeons and Dragons cartoons etc, and I never considered it to be a history documentary.

For me, it would be best to try to steer clear of historical reenacting: I just don't have the knack for history.

[Sir Didymous]

The thing is that I was asked to do a short (30 min), demonstraition of combat techniques used by Scottish warriors through the later half of the middle ages and early Ren. period. I was asked to do this by someone with a passing knowledge of Scottish history. My troop which normaly does nothing close to this urged Sir Wulfscyld (another member of the troop) and myself to do this simply for the exposure. It's being done free so we can't spend a lot of money on the equipment or costumes, and the audience in question is a group of boy scouts. So we are hurrying to piece together make-shift kits that are a blend of what the kids will recignize and still have some historical merit. This goal, to be honest is turning into a nightmare. I'm starting to think that we should just cut back to using out English kits just slightly tweeked with some north-of-the-border flair. I figure that I could put together a quick kit and refine it later if I enjoyed doing this. The liberties we are taking are due to a lack of time, but even so we are tying to use reasonable facsimilies of what we know to be accurate. The only "could have been" I have is a French style axe and I figured that since the Scotts and French were military allies much of the period we are being asked to portray (a window so big that it's hard to pin down a look), that a Frenchaxe would not be out of the question. So much of living history is about modest beginings and the constant work toward the goal of authenticity.

As to the sources for the early targes, I based this on art references from the period. As with other weapons, it is not quite fully developed, but it is the direct ancestor to the final targe.
http://manuscriptminiatures.com/apoc...t-d-4-17/1859/

http://manuscriptminiatures.com/the-...or-ee359/3189/

http://manuscriptminiatures.com/quee...l-2-b-vii/803/

Note the center figure in the second image. He is using a two hand axe with a small shield fixed to his upper arm. The fist could be termed a buckler, but the third image is definatly a target. There are a few others in that site that depict them, but thase were the ones I could think of on the spot.

[Ryan Ross]

The thing is that I was asked to do a short (30 min), demonstraition of combat techniques used by Scottish warriors through the later half of the middle ages and early Ren. period. I was asked to do this by someone with a passing knowledge of Scottish history. My troop which normaly does nothing close to this urged Sir Wulfscyld (another member of the troop) and myself to do this simply for the exposure. It's being done free so we can't spend a lot of money on the equipment or costumes, and the audience in question is a group of boy scouts. So we are hurrying to piece together make-shift kits that are a blend of what the kids will recignize and still have some historical merit. This goal, to be honest is turning into a nightmare. I'm starting to think that we should just cut back to using out English kits just slightly tweeked with some north-of-the-border flair. I figure that I could put together a quick kit and refine it later if I enjoyed doing this. The liberties we are taking are due to a lack of time, but even so we are tying to use reasonable facsimilies of what we know to be accurate. The only "could have been" I have is a French style axe and I figured that since the Scotts and French were military allies much of the period we are being asked to portray (a window so big that it's hard to pin down a look), that a Frenchaxe would not be out of the question. So much of living history is about modest beginings and the constant work toward the goal of authenticity.

As to the sources for the early targes, I based this on art references from the period. As with other weapons, it is not quite fully developed, but it is the direct ancestor to the final targe.
http://manuscriptminiatures.com/apoc...t-d-4-17/1859/

http://manuscriptminiatures.com/the-...or-ee359/3189/

http://manuscriptminiatures.com/quee...l-2-b-vii/803/

Note the center figure in the second image. He is using a two hand axe with a small shield fixed to his upper arm. The fist could be termed a buckler, but the third image is definatly a target. There are a few others in that site that depict them, but thase were the ones I could think of on the spot.

I was never questioning the use of a round shield (center grip, OR mounted like a targe)... what I was really hoping for was a bit of historical refrence to using a greatsword, or even a longsword, in conjunction with a shield gripped in the hand (as opposed to mounted on the shoulder).

Have you any pictures or descriptions that show such an arrangement? I've never seen or heard of such a thing, and would as a result, be most interested.

I'm still very confused, as you've said that target an essentially longsword were used together, but my more than passing knowledge of longsword techniques suggests that that would be virtually impossible. The longsword would need to be used one handed (after an identical manner to the single hand sword), sacrificing a good bit of speed and power, or else it would be used two handed, but the majority of it's techniques would be made impossible, due to the shield.

I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt, but I'm very much sceptical, I must admit.

[Sir Didymous]

I'm currently trying to find my original source that made me want to try it. If your interested, tomorow I have a sword practice that I would be willing to use the combo in and record it. Just to show that it can be done. Bear in mind that my war sword only weighs in at just over 2.5 lbs. It's specs are as follows:
Blade Length: 98 cm
Blade width: 4.5cm
Blade thickness at tang: 4mm
Guard width: 25.5cm
Handle length (including guard and pommel): 29cm
Overall lentgh: 128cm

It's a Windslass Steelcrafts sword, and has a great temper.

[Ryan Ross]

I'm currently trying to find my original source that made me want to try it. If your interested, tomorow I have a sword practice that I would be willing to use the combo in and record it. Just to show that it can be done. Bear in mind that my war sword only weighs in at just over 2.5 lbs. It's specs are as follows:
Blade Length: 98 cm
Blade width: 4.5cm
Blade thickness at tang: 4mm
Guard width: 25.5cm
Handle length (including guard and pommel): 29cm
Overall lentgh: 128cm

It's a Windslass Steelcrafts sword, and has a great temper.

I would very much be interested in hearing how your practice comes out, as well as what type of techniques you end up using. I know this may be a slight stretch from the origin of the topic, but I think it's still relevant and hope that no one will take offence to this sort of info being included.

I'll also do a bit of conversion from cm to in, and get an idea of what sort of blade you're using. Off hand, it doesn't sound toooo big, but I'd like to have a better idea in my mind.

Like I said before, I'm certainly interested in giving you the benefit of the doubt here, and will look forward to what you find out in your experiments.

[Dale Seago]

I would very much be interested in hearing how your practice comes out, as well as what type of techniques you end up using. I know this may be a slight stretch from the origin of the topic, but I think it's still relevant and hope that no one will take offence to this sort of info being included.

I'll also do a bit of conversion from cm to in, and get an idea of what sort of blade you're using. Off hand, it doesn't sound toooo big, but I'd like to have a better idea in my mind.

Like I said before, I'm certainly interested in giving you the benefit of the doubt here, and will look forward to what you find out in your experiments.

Ditto -- I have similar historic/hoplological interests.

[Ryan Ross]

Ditto -- I have similar historic/hoplological interests.

Now that's an awesome word that doesn't see near as much usage as it should. And especially apt in this context, as the shield is our current variable.

[warrior]

Ditto -- I have similar historic/hoplological interests.

The late great Col Jeff Cooper USMC even coined a term to describe certain members of modern society, sadly including many on this forum, hoplophobe.