This is not a Saxon huscarl. Not even close. A typical Norman horseman's chain mail, a Romanesque sword not typical for Britain of that period, a fantasy helmet. This is not a historical reconstruction, this is a character from the Vikings series.
I highly, highly doubt you are even close to being correct. Feel free to DM me on Instagram what you believe an authentic 11th Century Saxon huscarl would look like. IG - Alex The History Guy
fantasy helmet, romanesque sword?? the helmet is a spangenhelm with minimal face protection, not much fantasy. maybe a larp version, but still, i'm doubtful of where you got that from and about the sword; it could be a bit thicker, but i'm not sure how it's romanesque
I think it's safe to say he doesn't know what he's talking about - especially considering this entire harness is directly built from Harold's depiction in the Bayeux Tapestry dated 1080AD, but I am always happy to educate :)
We see the same type of maille hauberks and haubergeon being used across Europe. We have many depictions in Denmark from the 11th and 12th century. The same goes for the helmets and shields
I would have thought a single piece nasal helmet would have been more appropriate, but that's just my interpretation of the tapestry + grave finds from continental Europe. Mitch's kit is definitely goals, definitely gotta save up and get a nice hauberk from Habibi for Christmas...
Good video. That Huskalr was quite wealth to afford that mail shirt . And to detractors, it might not be perfect but its close enough . i think the shield might have been round in most periods, but if this was meant mid 11th century its hard to say
King Cnut introduced a rule/law that insisted all his Huscarle's must have a gold decorated sword. Effectively this was a clever move as it meant the guys he himself was entrusting to be his tax collectors, fix-it men and of course his bodyguard were from the wealthiest families from across his empire. Giving him the opportunity to not only build loyalty of these elite troops directly to himself but also potentially give him eyes on rivals from within the aristocracy. So Huscarles would have been wealthy its right for re-enactors to demonstrate that. Also Kite sields were quite common (if the tapestry is to be believed) for any elite/professional warrior by the mid 11thC although obiously round shields were still a thing.
The Bayeux tapestry does not show what Harold *would* have worn, it shows pretty much all the Saxons wearing the same thing (since only around 4 or 5 colour threads were used in the construction of the tapestry). So in the tapestry Harold is wearing the same as most of the other Saxon warriors depicted. The kit is based off this, using Harold's depiction as a specific base to build from. I hope that clears it up a bit more :)
Weren't the Huscarls the elite of the day, they certainly could have afforded the best gear, Harold wouldn't want his personal guards to running around in rags and hand me downs would he?
I almost managed to film a historical reenactor who has full Sutton Hoo kit including the helmet and all the finery, unfortunately the weather said otherwise. I have him on my radar to film a video with him next year.
Awesome video! Wasn’t there a stipulation from at least Cnut’s reign that a huscarl was also supposed to have a “fearsome and bloodthirsty two-handed axe” as well?
In the Bayeux tapestry, the warriors seem to be wearing scale mail (cow horm?). Some warriors had rectangular chainmail reinforcement covering the heart area.Some warriors hey also seemed to have fastened the scale mail around the legs like trousers ( more mobility?). The Bayeux tapistry is very accurate and shows the Normans mounted on pony stallions. It would be great to see the Bayeux tapestry redone in its origin colouts. Green done as copper( boat hulls), black ( swords etc ) as silver for eg. The Bayeux tapestry is really an embroidaryso that it should really be called the Bayeux Embroidary.
I wouldn't take the Bayeux depictions too seriously. The large rings are just to save time since sewing all that takes ages. The rectangles on the chest are likely face masks which just aren't being used (in the video the Huscarl shows you how it's used). The authenticity of the Bayeux is good, but the quality is basic.
Thank for another interesting video Alex, this is a subject that I've always been interested in. I'm especially grateful as know that these videos take a huge amount of time and research to produce. Unfortunately with this one, I found the text boxes almost impossible to read. The cursive font was the main problem. May I suggest a voice-over in future? I know from your previous videos that you have a good voice which is pleasing to listen to.
Adding text is generally a much more accurate way to get the message across to ALL comers - including Furriners! Auto captions (and even worse auto translated captions) reduce the impact and are harder to hit the pause button on for us Old Sluggards. 😉😊
Part I’d take difference with that I was kinda surprised to see not taken up by all the keyboard warriors (with mostly great responses by @Alexthehistoryguy) is the bit that swords are ineffective against maille. Yes it does provide significant protection against cuts, but is much less protection against the blunt force of the heavy blades that were common at the time. It’s really hard to fight after a couple ribs get fractured. One thing it did absolutely do though was increase the odds that the flesh above those fractures wasn’t lacerated. Since antibiotics were not a thing that is an immeasurable benefit to anyone surviving the fight. Having been hit with rattan weapons in maille it does redistribute the blow a bit, but not so much that on a swords edge you will not receive significant injuries under the maille from the blunt force. Not even enough that significant injuries with rattan are that uncommon. Also a different angle is it’s protection against stabbing, this is where it’s not so protective. In summary: better than cloth? Absolutely. Impenetrable protection against a sword? Absolutely not.
You are indeed correct, a sword would still inflict a lot of blunt force trauma to an opponent in maille, but you'd get the same benefit with a heavy stock from a tree haha. So the fact that it's a sword isn't really too important. Swords were also great status symbols as well so favoured by both Saxons and Normans during this time. I'm sure they knew all the tricks of how to use them effectively during their military careers.
The swords they used generally don't seem to be made for piercing mail so it's unlikely they tried to use them against it. Like with any other weapon, they would've stabbed at the gaps. No reason to stab at the armour even when your weapon can potentially pierce it. It's like intentionally hitting someone's shield instead of their body. Maybe doing some damage by trying to hit someone as hard as you can is a stupid idea when they are actively killing you while you attempt (and likely fail) to do anything. Sure you can do it as set up, or you can miss and do it, but you would not be aiming for that because it would be hard to safely do any damage and won't end the fight anyway. Hitting something as hard as you can is also not as dexterous as a controlled strike at a weak point. More force and effort, and less control and speed, for something that is bound to fail. And your enemy isn't just standing there.
What weapons were good against chainmail in this 10th-11th centuries? Can you explain what the banner on the spear is? Did every spearmen have one? Were axes intermixed with the spears, or were they a specific unit?
Most crushing weapons really. A sword can still be useful against maille but you're really using it as a metal bar to create blunt force trauma so you may be better off using an axe for that. The banner on the spear is called a Pennant. It's an early form of heraldry to identify where certain soldiers are on the battlefield. Since this is the 11th century, there is not much reliable information to explain the 'how' and the 'why' they were used so I can't tell you specifics.
@@AlexTheHistoryGuy If I remember the Bayeux Tapestry correctly, some of the guys are waving big old sticks around, I think we have a tendency to underestimate how common and effective something as simple as a cudgel actually is, simply because it doesn't look 'cool'.
@@AlexTheHistoryGuy Practical testing by a rëenactor 😉. I've given combat demonstrations at Archeon museum park during a heat wave. A soaked rag in the right place helps a surprising amount. Any historical evidence of a neckerchief may point that they used the same trick back then.
Where's the Axe? I know they fall with axis at the battle of Hastings against the Normans. I believe they had a round shields at the Battle if I'm not mistaken because they made a shield wall. That kite shield looks like it belongs to a Norman horseman
There was no regimental equipment during this time, some huscarls had axes and some didn't. They used whatever they wanted to bring. As for round shields - the Saxons are depicted on the Bayeux tapestry often with kite shields. Also, kiteshields are easier to make a shield wall with because you can strengthen the shield wall by supporting the bottom part of the kiteshield with your knee.
In the 13th century, yes. There aren't any examples of padding or written references to padding from the 11th century as far as we know. We believe they likely wore woolen under-tunics, possibly more than one, which were naturally quite thick. But gambessons and arming jackets don't arrive on the scene until over a hundred years later.
Whenever I see modern depictions of dark age warriors, or modern re-enactors such as this video, mail seems to be the only type of body armour. The only other thing worn is a simple cloth shirt/tunic. I don't know about re-enactors but there's an increasing belief amongst wargamers that there must have been many forms of early gambeson type protection as well. Thick padded clothing can provide quite a remarkable degree of protection against many weapons. If a member of the saxon fyrd couldn't afford mail - and most probably couldn't, then it would seem a very logical choice. And even a huscarl who had mail would benefit from wearing this underneath the mail, as we know they did in the later medieval period. There are reports from the early crusades, which wasn't too long after hastings, of islamic forces lamenting the amount of protection that the 'franks' wore. Many of the companies that produce figures from this period for wargaming are now making figures with padded cloth 'armour'
the oldest evidence for gambeson is 1150. some evidence exists for quilted under armour in the medieval roman empire but not western europe and not standalone armour, and we are not even certain of its existance. the interpreation is also solely depicted for elite units. its possible varagians brought it westwards, if it existed in the first place. we also know that early medieval technology cloth was not as cheap as latter period when we know standalone gambesons existed. (specifically the horizontal loom and the spinning wheel did not exist). its very very unlikely a gambeson like garment would be cheaper than mail+wool tunic until these technologies are widespread. hence probably being in byzantium first (where the tech came to first) and only for elite troops.
You're gonna love a video I'm currently working on then. It's "How A Saxon Thegn Shall Be Armed" and it features a quilted padded kaftan for body armour instead of maille.
Dane axes are for Danes! This kit is a reproduction of Harold Godwinson depicted in the Bayeux Tapestry and he was depicted as holding a spear. Huscarls likely did also have two handed axes as well.
@@AlexTheHistoryGuy not true, the English Huscarles of 1066 were using long axes/Dane Axes and are referenced in the historic matterial. Its thought they may have been adopted in England in the early 11thC while Cnut was on the throne. Interestingly, after 1066 so many English warriors fled to join the Varangian Guard (another force famed for its use of the 'Dane Axe' that for a while it became known as the English Guard. Sort of an ironic twist considering the English defeated Harold Hadrada would was obviously a commander of the VG previously.
Most of these comments are cringe redditors who love to hate. Great showing, the mustache completed the Harold Godwinson ensemble. I would love an accurate tv show about the death of Edward the Confessor and the conflict between the Anglo-Saxons and Normans. I think there’s plenty of good drama that can be found from the events like Harold having to march his army up the length of England to suppress a Norse invasion and back again, and beginning the battle of Hastings already exhausted. William flying the pope’s banner perhaps without attaining his blessing yet. The story ought to be written in such a way that both kings have an equal claim to the throne and the audience is torn over who has the rightful claim. Like a better Game of Thrones.
Haha well only a couple comments, and backed up by a huge amount of positive and well informed comments which I do love to see. I pinned the silly comment because I thought it was pretty funny! Yes that would be a wonderful series to see, alas it seems impossible for film productions to discuss the early medieval era without delving straight into silly fantasy things. I'd love to see a Game of Thrones style production about the War of the Roses but alas we will never see that...ironic considering the inspirations for game of thrones itself.
Yes there was a large population of peasants, however, not all peasants were necessarily poor. Saxons did utilize slavery quite a lot though so household slaves were not uncommon.
Very informative! Thanks! Many of the old Norse wore the exact helmets. Not those stupid horned helmets that were wrongly portraited. They also wore chainmaile of the same exact type. It is said that the Norse bought their chainmaile but I personally believe that they took them off of their fallen opponents.
Great kit! Fingered leather gloves did rise my eyebrows, however. Care to share sources for that? Not claiming they aren't historically accurate, I'm no expert when it comes to British Isles, but it isn't something I expect in this time period.
To be honest they are mainly for protection as I was fighting literally 5 minutes after this video. But in terms of sources physical is difficult due to well…. Leather rotting in our highly acidic soil. And textual is difficult, we don’t really have many early 11th century depictions of anything let alone the gloves. Cheers for asking though mate!
@@mitchelllawrence7407 I think it is understandable to forgo some historical accuracy for additional safety and comfort in reenactment. Especially when the rest of your kit is so well done and researched. Thanks for answering. Cheers!
to be fair in Britain most re-enactment clubs/societies either insist or recommend the wearing of protective gloves as a safety compromise despite the lack of historic evidence. Similarly, some require helmets to although historically these would have been much less widespread at the time but at the end of the day, most re-enactors have a day job they need to return to on Monday after a weekend of rampaging battles ;-)
@@Huscarle09 Yep, this is pretty much universal in reenactment. I personally don't experience it that much since I'm doing XVth century reenactment but I had friends doing earlier periods so I am aware they have to compromise in order to practice this hobby with relative safety. Although I have to say interacting with doctors after receiving injuries in reenactment is usually material for the funniest stories.
Huscarl is the contemporary Danish term, 'housecarl' is the C19th Victorian version. The word came into English usage during Knut's reign as King of England. It could ge used interchangably with existing Old, English terms such as thegn, cniht or geneat. There was no elite royal guard of either Eadweard 'the Confessor' or Harold II Godwineson called huscarls, that is another Victorian myth.
Great video, I have to say though I do think the idea that swords weren’t very useful against maille is an over correction, like I don’t think spear heads of the time were much pointier than the cutting edge swords :) and they were probably harder to stab hard with (meaning less wieldy) and although probably not nearly as pointy as later swords, I’d say in the 15th century the best non two handed polearm weapon for defeating armour was swords. Also I have to ask, have you ever tried tying the helmet strap over the neck square thing? It seems such an obvious way to mimic the closer fitting of the later coif that I think there must be a reason I’ve never seen a reenactor doing it that I’m not seeing
You’re wrong because the swords of that period were designed to be slashing blades not stabbing ones like in later centuries. You’re also wrong about swords being the best one handed weapons vs 15th century armour. Those were bludgeoning weapons like maces, picks and axes.
@jwgolf5442 that’s patently incorrect, during the the 15th century you almost never see maces being used on foot as anything but a badge of office or to signify royalty despite them still being depicted on horseback, the reason is that a one handed mace or hammer will not hit hard enough under the force a person can generate to badly hurt someone in full plate armour typical of the 15th century but a mace paired with the momentum of a horse can, one handed warhammers still get used because the spike(s) at the back (and often top) provide a way for someone on foot to defeat armour, you also see two handed pollaxes becoming the pinnacle of knightly combat on foot specifically because the heavier head and longer handle of the pollaxe combined with 2(or 3 or even just 1) spikes is capable of doing that damage, and I acknowledge that swords of the 11th century weren’t as pointy as armoured fighting swords of the 15th century, but the swords of the 11th century are significantly pointier than earlier swords and more or less as pointy as the spears that we all agree have a decent chance of defeating armour
There is a lot left unsaid about swords and their capabilities during the 11th century (specifically during the battle of Hastings), but the general consensus is that swords weren't too useful against maille, but the majority of warriors during the battle of the Hastings weren't wearing full maille so swords were still considered useful in general
Nope Saxons also had kiteshields by the 11th century. Most armour in western Europe was fairly shared and similar amongst all the factions. And the huscarls were indeed the cream of the crop of Saxon military society so they could certainly afford it!
A most important topic in these modern times is that Saxon means "Sons of Isaac." I will not say more here, just look up W.H. Bennett's Story of Celto-Saxon Israel if you are interested. Rev. 2:9, 3:9 extremely important in these modern times.
It does not mean that. Saxon as a name and as a culture predates the appearance of Christianity in northern Europe and the name is most likely related to their cultural style of knife.
@@Jtbrahh Around 900 BC the twelve Tribes of Israel were split in two, due to Solomon sacrificing children to Ba'al. The ten northern tribes (Israel) and the two southern (Jews). In fact, the first time Jews are mentioned in the Bible in 2 Kings 16:6 is in the context of a war between the Jews and Israel. The Ten Northern Tribes (Israel) were taken north into captivity in Assyria in 700 BC and the Jews were taken east to Babylon in 600 BC. After the collapse of the Assyrian empire, the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel migrated north into Europe, and became the waves of Celts and Saxons. The symbols of their tribes from Genesis 49 can be found in the European family crests. They were supposed to use these symbols as in Numbers 2:2 so as not to forget their heritage. The fact that the modern state of Israel is called "Israel" is to help erase the memory of the Celto-Saxon as being of the Lost Tribes of Israel. "British" means "Covenant People." The Irish had the Harp of David on their flag for many centuries, and Gaelic has many similarities to ancient Hebrew. Jacob's Pillow, the Stone of Scone, is in the Royal Coronation Chair. But the main evidence is in the European family crests. Sacae, Scythian, Saxon...the Sons of Isaac..."Iberia" (Spain) means Hebrew...
@@Jtbrahh Around 900 BC the twelve Tribes of Israel were split in two, due to Solomon sacrificing children to Ba'al. The ten northern tribes (Israel) and the two southern (Jews). In fact, the first time Jews are mentioned in the Bible in 2 Kings 16:6 is in the context of a war between the Jews and Israel. The Ten Northern Tribes (Israel) were taken north into captivity in Assyria in 700 BC and the Jews were taken east to Babylon in 600 BC. After the collapse of the Assyrian empire, the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel migrated north into Europe, and became the waves of Celts and Saxons. The symbols of their tribes from Genesis 49 can be found in the European family crests. They were supposed to use these symbols as in Numbers 2:2 so as not to forget their heritage. The fact that the modern state of Israel is called "Israel" is to help erase the memory of the Celto-Saxon as being of the Lost Tribes of Israel. "British" means "Covenant People." The Irish had the Harp of David on their flag for many centuries, and Gaelic has many similarities to ancient Hebrew. Jacob's Pillow, the Stone of Scone, is in the Royal Coronation Chair. But the main evidence is in the European family crests. Sacae, Scythian, Saxon...the Sons of Isaac..."Iberia" (Spain) means Hebrew...
This is not a Saxon huscarl. Not even close. A typical Norman horseman's chain mail, a Romanesque sword not typical for Britain of that period, a fantasy helmet. This is not a historical reconstruction, this is a character from the Vikings series.
I highly, highly doubt you are even close to being correct. Feel free to DM me on Instagram what you believe an authentic 11th Century Saxon huscarl would look like. IG - Alex The History Guy
fantasy helmet, romanesque sword??
the helmet is a spangenhelm with minimal face protection, not much fantasy. maybe a larp version, but still, i'm doubtful of where you got that from
and about the sword; it could be a bit thicker, but i'm not sure how it's romanesque
I think it's safe to say he doesn't know what he's talking about - especially considering this entire harness is directly built from Harold's depiction in the Bayeux Tapestry dated 1080AD, but I am always happy to educate :)
We see the same type of maille hauberks and haubergeon being used across Europe. We have many depictions in Denmark from the 11th and 12th century. The same goes for the helmets and shields
Never cook again
All the comments whinging about how this Huscarl doesn't look like the ones of the 8th Century... Yeah. Warriors and their equipment adapt.
this is incredibly cool
Ayy thank you
Such a classic look. Love a kite shield!
This man looks realy like a Saxon.....🇩🇪brother👌👋👋
It is pretty beautiful
I really love this video. Excellent to see it in action.
Many more videos to come! One will be very soon 👀
This is so cool. Subbed, can't wait to see more!
Got another one already in the works ;)
I would have thought a single piece nasal helmet would have been more appropriate, but that's just my interpretation of the tapestry + grave finds from continental Europe. Mitch's kit is definitely goals, definitely gotta save up and get a nice hauberk from Habibi for Christmas...
Good video. That Huskalr was quite wealth to afford that mail shirt . And to detractors, it might not be perfect but its close enough . i think the shield might have been round in most periods, but if this was meant mid 11th century its hard to say
The entire kit is a reproduction of Harold Godwinson depicted in the Bayeux Tapestry from 1080AD and he's wearing a kiteshield :)
@@AlexTheHistoryGuy, But Harold Godwinson was not a huscarl, he was a king and had access to a completely different level of equipment than a huscarl.
King Cnut introduced a rule/law that insisted all his Huscarle's must have a gold decorated sword. Effectively this was a clever move as it meant the guys he himself was entrusting to be his tax collectors, fix-it men and of course his bodyguard were from the wealthiest families from across his empire. Giving him the opportunity to not only build loyalty of these elite troops directly to himself but also potentially give him eyes on rivals from within the aristocracy. So Huscarles would have been wealthy its right for re-enactors to demonstrate that. Also Kite sields were quite common (if the tapestry is to be believed) for any elite/professional warrior by the mid 11thC although obiously round shields were still a thing.
The Bayeux tapestry does not show what Harold *would* have worn, it shows pretty much all the Saxons wearing the same thing (since only around 4 or 5 colour threads were used in the construction of the tapestry). So in the tapestry Harold is wearing the same as most of the other Saxon warriors depicted.
The kit is based off this, using Harold's depiction as a specific base to build from. I hope that clears it up a bit more :)
Weren't the Huscarls the elite of the day, they certainly could have afforded the best gear, Harold wouldn't want his personal guards to running around in rags and hand me downs would he?
I hope the battle's still raging by the time he's got dressed and is ready to fight! 😀
Haha well in comparison to the 15th century, these 11th century guys can don their armour pretty quick!
Man,
if only the Sutton Hoo helmet was a common piece of equipment. It looks so cool lol.
I almost managed to film a historical reenactor who has full Sutton Hoo kit including the helmet and all the finery, unfortunately the weather said otherwise. I have him on my radar to film a video with him next year.
Awesome video! Wasn’t there a stipulation from at least Cnut’s reign that a huscarl was also supposed to have a “fearsome and bloodthirsty two-handed axe” as well?
A lot of them did have those
Yes, most had axes. See the bayeux tapestry.
Pretty good job 👌
the music makes me think he's in the shire, and this hobbit is about to go to mordor.
In the Bayeux tapestry, the warriors seem to be wearing scale mail (cow horm?). Some warriors had rectangular chainmail reinforcement covering the heart area.Some warriors hey also seemed to have fastened the scale mail around the legs like trousers ( more mobility?).
The Bayeux tapistry is very accurate and shows the Normans mounted on pony stallions. It would be great to see the Bayeux tapestry redone in its origin colouts. Green done as copper( boat hulls), black ( swords etc ) as silver for eg.
The Bayeux tapestry is really an embroidaryso that it should really be called the Bayeux Embroidary.
I wouldn't take the Bayeux depictions too seriously. The large rings are just to save time since sewing all that takes ages. The rectangles on the chest are likely face masks which just aren't being used (in the video the Huscarl shows you how it's used). The authenticity of the Bayeux is good, but the quality is basic.
@@AlexTheHistoryGuy But it sure as heck is a marvellous reference artifact from the time. 😊
Looks glorious!
It is indeed ❤️
Thank you.
this man looks realy like a Saxon 🇩🇪brother👍👏
He does indeed!
our brothers👊🇩🇪🇬🇧
Nice work!
Interesting video thanks for sharing.
My pleasure
Très belle reconstitution!!!❤❤❤
Thank for another interesting video Alex, this is a subject that I've always been interested in. I'm especially grateful as know that these videos take a huge amount of time and research to produce. Unfortunately with this one, I found the text boxes almost impossible to read. The cursive font was the main problem. May I suggest a voice-over in future? I know from your previous videos that you have a good voice which is pleasing to listen to.
Adding text is generally a much more accurate way to get the message across to ALL comers - including Furriners! Auto captions (and even worse auto translated captions) reduce the impact and are harder to hit the pause button on for us Old Sluggards. 😉😊
from what skyrim told me, huscarls are big strong women
Part I’d take difference with that I was kinda surprised to see not taken up by all the keyboard warriors (with mostly great responses by @Alexthehistoryguy) is the bit that swords are ineffective against maille. Yes it does provide significant protection against cuts, but is much less protection against the blunt force of the heavy blades that were common at the time. It’s really hard to fight after a couple ribs get fractured. One thing it did absolutely do though was increase the odds that the flesh above those fractures wasn’t lacerated. Since antibiotics were not a thing that is an immeasurable benefit to anyone surviving the fight. Having been hit with rattan weapons in maille it does redistribute the blow a bit, but not so much that on a swords edge you will not receive significant injuries under the maille from the blunt force. Not even enough that significant injuries with rattan are that uncommon.
Also a different angle is it’s protection against stabbing, this is where it’s not so protective.
In summary: better than cloth? Absolutely. Impenetrable protection against a sword? Absolutely not.
You are indeed correct, a sword would still inflict a lot of blunt force trauma to an opponent in maille, but you'd get the same benefit with a heavy stock from a tree haha. So the fact that it's a sword isn't really too important.
Swords were also great status symbols as well so favoured by both Saxons and Normans during this time. I'm sure they knew all the tricks of how to use them effectively during their military careers.
The swords they used generally don't seem to be made for piercing mail so it's unlikely they tried to use them against it. Like with any other weapon, they would've stabbed at the gaps. No reason to stab at the armour even when your weapon can potentially pierce it. It's like intentionally hitting someone's shield instead of their body. Maybe doing some damage by trying to hit someone as hard as you can is a stupid idea when they are actively killing you while you attempt (and likely fail) to do anything. Sure you can do it as set up, or you can miss and do it, but you would not be aiming for that because it would be hard to safely do any damage and won't end the fight anyway. Hitting something as hard as you can is also not as dexterous as a controlled strike at a weak point. More force and effort, and less control and speed, for something that is bound to fail. And your enemy isn't just standing there.
Ancient weapons and tactics fascinate me.
What weapons were good against chainmail in this 10th-11th centuries? Can you explain what the banner on the spear is? Did every spearmen have one? Were axes intermixed with the spears, or were they a specific unit?
Most crushing weapons really. A sword can still be useful against maille but you're really using it as a metal bar to create blunt force trauma so you may be better off using an axe for that.
The banner on the spear is called a Pennant. It's an early form of heraldry to identify where certain soldiers are on the battlefield. Since this is the 11th century, there is not much reliable information to explain the 'how' and the 'why' they were used so I can't tell you specifics.
@@AlexTheHistoryGuy If I remember the Bayeux Tapestry correctly, some of the guys are waving big old sticks around, I think we have a tendency to underestimate how common and effective something as simple as a cudgel actually is, simply because it doesn't look 'cool'.
Cudgels are pretty cool
thank you sir
The double tassel sword belt is interesting. Would you happen to have a source on it for study? I'd like to see about recreating it.
Soldiers still jump up and down to get their kit to settle into place. I believe the Americans when fully geared up, call it the full battle rattle 😊
It's funny because both him in the video and myself filming have both been in the military so we are very familiar with the full battle rattle.
Epic kit
Much appreciated
This video is epic
Ayy thanks mate, feel free to check out my 15th century knight one too
Good work.
Wonderful. Have you ever read Bulwer Lyttons book 'Harold Last of the Saxon Kings' ?
The cloth scarf around the neck would be made wet in warmer weather, to help shed the heat of the armor.
Do we have a source for that? 🧐
@@AlexTheHistoryGuy Practical testing by a rëenactor 😉. I've given combat demonstrations at Archeon museum park during a heat wave. A soaked rag in the right place helps a surprising amount. Any historical evidence of a neckerchief may point that they used the same trick back then.
Where can i find a maille hauberk like this?
I get my maille from Habibi Armoury
Where's the Axe? I know they fall with axis at the battle of Hastings against the Normans. I believe they had a round shields at the Battle if I'm not mistaken because they made a shield wall. That kite shield looks like it belongs to a Norman horseman
There was no regimental equipment during this time, some huscarls had axes and some didn't. They used whatever they wanted to bring.
As for round shields - the Saxons are depicted on the Bayeux tapestry often with kite shields. Also, kiteshields are easier to make a shield wall with because you can strengthen the shield wall by supporting the bottom part of the kiteshield with your knee.
Very cool! Where did you get the chainmail from? Thanks
I believe he got it from Habibi Armoury. I have also ordered multiple high quality items from them and I have been very happy with everything!
@@AlexTheHistoryGuy +1 for Habibi Armoury. Though I notice his QC this past year wasn't as good as I've been led to believe.
Where is the dagger or the seax ?
I love saxons.
where did you get the haubert?
I believe it was custom made from Habibi Armoury in India, very good value and decent quality.
Impeccable fit
No one wore chain mail over a simple shirt. Chain mail was always worn over a soft jacket to soften the blows.
In the 13th century, yes. There aren't any examples of padding or written references to padding from the 11th century as far as we know.
We believe they likely wore woolen under-tunics, possibly more than one, which were naturally quite thick.
But gambessons and arming jackets don't arrive on the scene until over a hundred years later.
great video! does the helmet have a padded lining, or does the coif provide the padding?
If modern day English football hooligans are any indication they probably didn't need very much skull padding! 🤔😱
The huscarls after Canute usually had a Dane axe
Canute was a Dane though, this geezer is a Saxon ⚔️
@@AlexTheHistoryGuy He hired Anglo Saxons though
Well, not this guy then 😎 but yes good point.
informative. Nice
Thank you :)
Orthodox English, Wales and Ireland and Scotland ☦️❤️
Whenever I see modern depictions of dark age warriors, or modern re-enactors such as this video, mail seems to be the only type of body armour. The only other thing worn is a simple cloth shirt/tunic.
I don't know about re-enactors but there's an increasing belief amongst wargamers that there must have been many forms of early gambeson type protection as well. Thick padded clothing can provide quite a remarkable degree of protection against many weapons. If a member of the saxon fyrd couldn't afford mail - and most probably couldn't, then it would seem a very logical choice. And even a huscarl who had mail would benefit from wearing this underneath the mail, as we know they did in the later medieval period.
There are reports from the early crusades, which wasn't too long after hastings, of islamic forces lamenting the amount of protection that the 'franks' wore. Many of the companies that produce figures from this period for wargaming are now making figures with padded cloth 'armour'
the oldest evidence for gambeson is 1150. some evidence exists for quilted under armour in the medieval roman empire but not western europe and not standalone armour, and we are not even certain of its existance. the interpreation is also solely depicted for elite units. its possible varagians brought it westwards, if it existed in the first place.
we also know that early medieval technology cloth was not as cheap as latter period when we know standalone gambesons existed. (specifically the horizontal loom and the spinning wheel did not exist). its very very unlikely a gambeson like garment would be cheaper than mail+wool tunic until these technologies are widespread. hence probably being in byzantium first (where the tech came to first) and only for elite troops.
You're gonna love a video I'm currently working on then. It's "How A Saxon Thegn Shall Be Armed" and it features a quilted padded kaftan for body armour instead of maille.
Im not sure about the spear. I mean there probably would be huscarls using spears but wouldnt a daneaxe fit more^^
Dane axes are for Danes! This kit is a reproduction of Harold Godwinson depicted in the Bayeux Tapestry and he was depicted as holding a spear. Huscarls likely did also have two handed axes as well.
I agree, Dane axes are way cooler and in the tapestry too! Any old Fyrd can have a spear 😂
@@AlexTheHistoryGuy not true, the English Huscarles of 1066 were using long axes/Dane Axes and are referenced in the historic matterial. Its thought they may have been adopted in England in the early 11thC while Cnut was on the throne. Interestingly, after 1066 so many English warriors fled to join the Varangian Guard (another force famed for its use of the 'Dane Axe' that for a while it became known as the English Guard. Sort of an ironic twist considering the English defeated Harold Hadrada would was obviously a commander of the VG previously.
Yes I said the Saxons probably did have Dane axes too, but they just probably didn't call them Dane axes :^)
Most of these comments are cringe redditors who love to hate. Great showing, the mustache completed the Harold Godwinson ensemble.
I would love an accurate tv show about the death of Edward the Confessor and the conflict between the Anglo-Saxons and Normans. I think there’s plenty of good drama that can be found from the events like Harold having to march his army up the length of England to suppress a Norse invasion and back again, and beginning the battle of Hastings already exhausted. William flying the pope’s banner perhaps without attaining his blessing yet. The story ought to be written in such a way that both kings have an equal claim to the throne and the audience is torn over who has the rightful claim. Like a better Game of Thrones.
Haha well only a couple comments, and backed up by a huge amount of positive and well informed comments which I do love to see. I pinned the silly comment because I thought it was pretty funny!
Yes that would be a wonderful series to see, alas it seems impossible for film productions to discuss the early medieval era without delving straight into silly fantasy things.
I'd love to see a Game of Thrones style production about the War of the Roses but alas we will never see that...ironic considering the inspirations for game of thrones itself.
Where's his big, scary axe?
Embedded in a Normans back, I'd assume.
@@AlexTheHistoryGuy This is not good news for the Normans. LoL
Wow.
That sword does not look like a Saxon example at all.
It does :)
So who are the guys beneath this guy?
There was a huge peasant faction right?
Please excuse my ignorance.
Yes there was a large population of peasants, however, not all peasants were necessarily poor. Saxons did utilize slavery quite a lot though so household slaves were not uncommon.
Very informative! Thanks! Many of the old Norse wore the exact helmets. Not those stupid horned helmets that were wrongly portraited. They also wore chainmaile of the same exact type. It is said that the Norse bought their chainmaile but I personally believe that they took them off of their fallen opponents.
Thank you, I appreciate the attention to historical authenticity
Great kit! Fingered leather gloves did rise my eyebrows, however. Care to share sources for that? Not claiming they aren't historically accurate, I'm no expert when it comes to British Isles, but it isn't something I expect in this time period.
To be honest they are mainly for protection as I was fighting literally 5 minutes after this video. But in terms of sources physical is difficult due to well…. Leather rotting in our highly acidic soil. And textual is difficult, we don’t really have many early 11th century depictions of anything let alone the gloves. Cheers for asking though mate!
@@mitchelllawrence7407 I think it is understandable to forgo some historical accuracy for additional safety and comfort in reenactment. Especially when the rest of your kit is so well done and researched. Thanks for answering. Cheers!
to be fair in Britain most re-enactment clubs/societies either insist or recommend the wearing of protective gloves as a safety compromise despite the lack of historic evidence. Similarly, some require helmets to although historically these would have been much less widespread at the time but at the end of the day, most re-enactors have a day job they need to return to on Monday after a weekend of rampaging battles ;-)
@@Huscarle09 Yep, this is pretty much universal in reenactment. I personally don't experience it that much since I'm doing XVth century reenactment but I had friends doing earlier periods so I am aware they have to compromise in order to practice this hobby with relative safety.
Although I have to say interacting with doctors after receiving injuries in reenactment is usually material for the funniest stories.
Well if you do 15th century reenactment then be sure to watch my "how a knight shall be armed" video that I also filmed with Mitch ;)
And then an arrows hits an eye.....
That font is wretched
:(
I've heard of housecarl. Is that the same thing?
Yep. No uniform spelling of it.
Huscarl is the contemporary Danish term, 'housecarl' is the C19th Victorian version. The word came into English usage during Knut's reign as King of England. It could ge used interchangably with existing Old, English terms such as thegn, cniht or geneat. There was no elite royal guard of either Eadweard 'the Confessor' or Harold II Godwineson called huscarls, that is another Victorian myth.
Aren't Huscarls fame for using dane axes?
Some did, some didn't :)
Great video, I have to say though I do think the idea that swords weren’t very useful against maille is an over correction, like I don’t think spear heads of the time were much pointier than the cutting edge swords :) and they were probably harder to stab hard with (meaning less wieldy) and although probably not nearly as pointy as later swords, I’d say in the 15th century the best non two handed polearm weapon for defeating armour was swords. Also I have to ask, have you ever tried tying the helmet strap over the neck square thing? It seems such an obvious way to mimic the closer fitting of the later coif that I think there must be a reason I’ve never seen a reenactor doing it that I’m not seeing
You’re wrong because the swords of that period were designed to be slashing blades not stabbing ones like in later centuries.
You’re also wrong about swords being the best one handed weapons vs 15th century armour. Those were bludgeoning weapons like maces, picks and axes.
@jwgolf5442 that’s patently incorrect, during the the 15th century you almost never see maces being used on foot as anything but a badge of office or to signify royalty despite them still being depicted on horseback, the reason is that a one handed mace or hammer will not hit hard enough under the force a person can generate to badly hurt someone in full plate armour typical of the 15th century but a mace paired with the momentum of a horse can, one handed warhammers still get used because the spike(s) at the back (and often top) provide a way for someone on foot to defeat armour, you also see two handed pollaxes becoming the pinnacle of knightly combat on foot specifically because the heavier head and longer handle of the pollaxe combined with 2(or 3 or even just 1) spikes is capable of doing that damage, and I acknowledge that swords of the 11th century weren’t as pointy as armoured fighting swords of the 15th century, but the swords of the 11th century are significantly pointier than earlier swords and more or less as pointy as the spears that we all agree have a decent chance of defeating armour
There is a lot left unsaid about swords and their capabilities during the 11th century (specifically during the battle of Hastings), but the general consensus is that swords weren't too useful against maille, but the majority of warriors during the battle of the Hastings weren't wearing full maille so swords were still considered useful in general
þæt is eac swelc wundorlice cytel. Ic eom wundrod!
You took the words right out of my mouth!
@@AlexTheHistoryGuy Yep. I kneed ta git me false teef fixed tu! 🤔😉
Didn’t the Saxons only have round shields and no kite shields? Only the elite soldiers would have dressed like this, most the army were farmer levies.
Nope Saxons also had kiteshields by the 11th century. Most armour in western Europe was fairly shared and similar amongst all the factions.
And the huscarls were indeed the cream of the crop of Saxon military society so they could certainly afford it!
Damn! You wouldn’t want to get undressed fro a week after that exercise
If it took this long for a saxon warrior to get dressed it's no wonder Harold lost! 😂😂😂
A good instructive video though.
An anglo saxon housecarl should be armed with a great axe instead of a spear. And how come that the guy wears a 13 century type sword?
Everything you see is a reconstruction of Harold Godwinsons depiction in the Bayeux Tapestry est. 1080AD :)
My only question is what happens after u put all this armor😮😢 on and then suddenly u gotta go really bad for # 2 take all that’s stuff off again 😮😅😢
Honest answer? You'd most likely go in your pants.
thats not 6mm rings, easily 9mm
6mm internal diameter
I can't imagine trying to wear maille while sporting an epic beard. All the tugging, yanking, pulling, jerking...
You underestimate the strength of his mustache wax. His tache could cut through metal.
We need to dress like this. Why did we ever give it up?
Well, as a reenactor I still do dress like this hahah
Go to any big city on a Friday night in England and it’ should be compulsory.
If this was a BBC documentary, the huscarl would be depicted as African.
A most important topic in these modern times is that Saxon means "Sons of Isaac." I will not say more here, just look up W.H. Bennett's Story of Celto-Saxon Israel if you are interested. Rev. 2:9, 3:9 extremely important in these modern times.
Utter bollocks. Go away.
It does not mean that. Saxon as a name and as a culture predates the appearance of Christianity in northern Europe and the name is most likely related to their cultural style of knife.
@@Jtbrahh Around 900 BC the twelve Tribes of Israel were split in two, due to Solomon sacrificing children to Ba'al. The ten northern tribes (Israel) and the two southern (Jews). In fact, the first time Jews are mentioned in the Bible in 2 Kings 16:6 is in the context of a war between the Jews and Israel. The Ten Northern Tribes (Israel) were taken north into captivity in Assyria in 700 BC and the Jews were taken east to Babylon in 600 BC. After the collapse of the Assyrian empire, the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel migrated north into Europe, and became the waves of Celts and Saxons. The symbols of their tribes from Genesis 49 can be found in the European family crests. They were supposed to use these symbols as in Numbers 2:2 so as not to forget their heritage. The fact that the modern state of Israel is called "Israel" is to help erase the memory of the Celto-Saxon as being of the Lost Tribes of Israel. "British" means "Covenant People." The Irish had the Harp of David on their flag for many centuries, and Gaelic has many similarities to ancient Hebrew. Jacob's Pillow, the Stone of Scone, is in the Royal Coronation Chair. But the main evidence is in the European family crests. Sacae, Scythian, Saxon...the Sons of Isaac..."Iberia" (Spain) means Hebrew...
@@MasonBryant Hosea 4:6 "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge"
John 8:32 "And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."
@@Jtbrahh Around 900 BC the twelve Tribes of Israel were split in two, due to Solomon sacrificing children to Ba'al. The ten northern tribes (Israel) and the two southern (Jews). In fact, the first time Jews are mentioned in the Bible in 2 Kings 16:6 is in the context of a war between the Jews and Israel. The Ten Northern Tribes (Israel) were taken north into captivity in Assyria in 700 BC and the Jews were taken east to Babylon in 600 BC. After the collapse of the Assyrian empire, the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel migrated north into Europe, and became the waves of Celts and Saxons. The symbols of their tribes from Genesis 49 can be found in the European family crests. They were supposed to use these symbols as in Numbers 2:2 so as not to forget their heritage. The fact that the modern state of Israel is called "Israel" is to help erase the memory of the Celto-Saxon as being of the Lost Tribes of Israel. "British" means "Covenant People." The Irish had the Harp of David on their flag for many centuries, and Gaelic has many similarities to ancient Hebrew. Jacob's Pillow, the Stone of Scone, is in the Royal Coronation Chair. But the main evidence is in the European family crests. Sacae, Scythian, Saxon...the Sons of Isaac..."Iberia" (Spain) means Hebrew...