Hmm Giant Sword or Greatswords and Pikes, ... I have a really stupid but interesting question: If you made a sword that is the length of a pike, i.e. 6m -7m, would it a. be possible at all to make a usable sword like this, b. how would such a sword look like, c. How practical would it be and would it have a major impact on the battle and d. would it have advantages over a pike? maybe a topic for a new video XD
Ive come to the conclusion that ceiling height may be a bit of a problem for you. I've got the same issue myself. So many dings on my ceiling. Love the videos man.
Now this is interesting none of that super power stuff just weird weapons and techniques and dope history also I wonder if a steel curass if shot at an angle if the round ball will deflect I can’t and I wonder if the front line marched at a slight angle to help with deflection
The idea of having your buddy next you create an opening for you to enter I think has a lot of merit. Lindybeige made a similar point in one of his older videos. It makes me think of how in chess the pawns can't capture what is directly in front of them, but can capture what is off to the side of the square in front of them, and how they are used primarily as back-up for more powerful units and for controlling important squares like the center of the board, rather than for main attacks.
This also represents the shield wall. You don’t kill the guy in front of you, you kill the guy next to him trying to kill your buddy next to you and your buddy is killing the guy in front of you. So you were defending against your opponent but your buddy was the one fighting your opponent.
@@bertellijustin6376 i dont think this is allways true, i think you are mainly focused on the guy in Front which is why you get speared from the side. Cooridonation requires Training and expirience, so id say youre talking about an ideal the question is how mutch i guess. But yes in a dense shieldwall that serms like a good tactic / something that happens a lot. An Important thing to consider tho are Tunnel Vision, and the fact that formations mid not have allways been so dense. The further appart you are the more one on one it becomes. Teamwork become especialy interessting considering the fact you have a guy close behind you too, who beeing shielded by you, mid be able to Focus more on the attack. Im generaly not a Fan of sutch Theories, but i wonder if there was a comand where everyone would just start rapidly thrusting, and advancing? Simularly to supression fire, where an unprepared enemy gets overwelmed and breaks.
Hey, just wanted to comment one thing i saw: in the Museum in the castle of Coburg, Germany i found a Gun-spear. It is labeled gun-lance, but it looks more like a spear (also germans often use lance/spear for the same thing). It is one of the most fantasy-like weapons i ever saw. Thats all folks, just wanted to share this neat little discovery
@@jacobeldredge2956 there was only one. They have a pretty good and intact armory, mostly things you would expect: footman armors (different than knight armors), some rapiers and sideswords and mostly polearms and muskets. Just one (i think from a bit earlier period then the 16/17th century armory) "gun-spear". One other strange thing: a canon, but not really. It looked like a canon, but without the barrel. Instead a box, maybe 30 cm long with 41 small barrels. Looked straight out of a movie.
Interestingly, the man that mastered 2-sword fighting(and even slew a nue according to legend), Miyamoto Musashi, also wrote a book on tactics in which he seems to acknowledge that the longer reach weapons such as polearms are far more effective on the battlefield than the sword, the weapon he was famous for mastering.
Of course, but Musashi was known for being an excellent duellist (and duels are most commonly fought with swords) so it makes sense that he mastered the sword and not any other weapon.
Yeah, but the Book of the Five Rings is not about large scale battles, it's about dueling Above all else Musashi was a duelist who lived most of his life during the Edo period right after the end of large scale battles during the sengoku jidai. So for him a sword (or two) was a better option since his fights were more of a show to see who is better than a real field battle, basically what he said can be compared to a UFC fighter admitting guns are better for a battlefield than strikes are So yeah, spears are better than swords for a battle and that's why swords are side arms
@@JulianViquez he was talking about strategy and "way of life". He compares duels, one against many, and battlefields in at least one situation in the boom.
What seems extremely fascinating is thinking about those greatswords defending against other great swords in opposing formations trying doing the same thing as them. Imagining a fight between two amid the “forest of pikes.” That must have been so terrifying.
Fun fact: Doppelsöldner can be anyone who recieves double OR more pay than a normal Landsknecht, since veterans also normally got Double the pay, so a Veteran Flambertian would recieve Triple pay, but still called Doppelsöldner.
Unit cohesion and individual skill would make it less of a terrifying prospect. Using a thrust to parry motion from a crouched position to force the pike heads away from yourself, sweeping the blade downward along the horizontal line of the pikes would be able to catch many at one time; Trapping them against the ground as you crouch to allow following soldiers to advance swinging counters of their own with minimal risk to the leading swordsman. Even having freed up allied pikemen use over head downward thrusts from either side to defend against counter attacks from under the pikes being able to reach you. Or even moving some of the allied pike line up along side or behind you to begin stabbing counter attacks from enemy second line pikemen and the tied up firstline pikemen. This manoeuvre would best be used by two Great Sword wielders binding either left or right horazontals respectively, making a hole for one or two following soldiers to advance. Again, it's a matter of skill and unit cohesion. Not just the great sword subunit, but the allied pikemen unit around them as well. Even then, this sort of manoeuvre would be able to be countered if the enemy unit is quick, highly skilled and has proper cohesion as well. Anything from the front line dropping the pikes & allowing their second line to step forward and skewer the swordsmen. Ducking down as they go, they could even drag their dropped pikes out of the bind as they move back to become the seconds line. Or they could drop the pikes, duck low with their drawn swords to deflect enemy pikes as they move forward while their second line moves up to become the first. Move forward under the new locking of pike against pike to engage the greatsword wielder with the advantage of a shorter, more manoeuvrable blade under the bind. Pitting pike formations against one another was brutally silly affair. Far better off to field archers, riflemen or grenadiers against them just before a cavalry charge hits that side of the square. May not get all the pikemen on that side and some cavalry may still get taken down as a result. However, the cavalry that do get through can now dispatch the soldiers from within the square; Quickly and efficiently routing the unit.
I love how nuanced this analysis is! It's not the lazy "swords are just always worse than pikes on a battlefield" answer that other youtubers give, nor does it propagate some fanciful notion that swords are superior or always beat pikes. Instead, it actually looks at history and tries to make sense of it.
@@royalecrafts6252 I mean the romans did manage to be quite successful against spears with their short swords an big shields. Although my guess would be that shield plus sword is better than one big sword. But maybe just very few of those swords in the ranks can be good for binding 2 or 3 pikes at once and help your own pikemen to land a hit.
@@UsoMerit It's not the sword or the big shield (both things are carried by spearmen). It's the 2m heavy javelins they lobbed before charging. That is their main arm. It's so large and a heavy they can't carry a thrusting spear. Without it, the "swordsmen" would be impotent against a phalanx.
For someone who isn't an expert on battlefield tactics, this is one of the more sensible breakdowns of 2handed swords and their use in pike warfare, also pike warfare in general Also as to halfswording with great swords, there's a written passage that Matt Easton once brought up that states that if you're fighting multiple opponents with a montante/spadone you use it like a sword, and if you're fighting a single opponent you can use it like a spear. So there's at least a hint in there
It is more than a hint. If you take a look at Godinho (or at least I think it was Godinho) he specifically explains the montante/greatsword techniques in a many vs one scenario and when he's supposed to talk about montante vs montante he just sends the reader to rapier fencing, for it is a thrust centric scenario
Not really that good, only good points are about swordsmen coming from sides and trying to flank other square (which is oldest trick in the book) and with swords are better at defending but in certain condition not always. Rest its just hema guys talking lot of BS about battle combat based on his experience in duel fighting ;) So modern sport shooter is talking about war combat and generally his war with HEMA critiques
@@swietoslaw No he said quite alot here. You can ignore it if you want, but be breaks down how people possibly were even able to swing 5-6ft swords in a mass melee of pikes and halberds which is still an ongoing debate, what role the sword might play in that type of fight, what probably Wouldn't work, how pikemen would use their pikes in an actual live combat scenario against other pikemen (this ain't total war where they just brace against whatever comes their way) etc etc. And dueling gives good insight into battlefield combat because a pike block is made of individual fighters so it helps us figure out what the individual combatants were doing in order to maintain a cohesive formation during the chaos of battle with long seemingly unwieldy weapons. If you don't think so, make your own 20 min video on what he got wrong and educate us all :)
@@seanpoore2428 His point are based not on real try with even couple of people so its kinda pointless, and i watched his channel long time and he dont really have experience fighting in teams and using great sword ether so yeah its only theory. Dueling not give good insight becasue it have much different point. most of war fighting especially something like pikeblock is such "simple" things like drills, moving in one unit dont break when moving, holding position tight it have nothing in common with dueling, like 95% of dueling will not work. btw dueling give you zero insight how to maintain cohesive formation becasue you dont train it. And even if fight break into more chaotic melee then again you have lots of people all around, your and enemies you use fastest simplest move and have not much room for any special kind of footwork etc. I did both historical reenactment and some hema and have much difrent perspective. Not to bash HEMA but most hema guys train only 1vs 1 combat not even couple vs couple but they like skall have very strong opinions. And in fact i would not be so critical of him if not for his making fun couple of times in this video of keyboard warriors which is kinda bad as he cant take criticism and just how he is the one with no experience in team fighting. And not really about the topic my favorite example During 30 years war when Sweden needed soldiers the most they shorten training to month. They train in weapon use TWO DASY! rest was for formation drills. Which show which is more important. The same is with today soldiers, they know how to use gun, but they are much worse at this then competition, trick shooters etc, and they train shooting not that much. They train combat tactics working as a team then platoon, company ect. Or doing things like exercise to stay fit. Another example look how big fights of football hooligans look like they use tactics but when it brake into chaotic fighting they use simplest fastest attacks becasue your opponents can just come from all the sides and its chaotic you dont have nice big open circle. About how greatsword were used, as i say his point about use them as small flanking force sound good, the same as for defending. I know couple example of greatswordsmen being general flag bodyguards. And also Swiss used halberds in more close combat when pike block was in clash so you could use sword in the same way but more for lighter armed guys. And about how it was use probably nothing fancy, and thats the thing. we have much more data from later periods and fight often end with little casualties in combat itself when one side just brake and start to run. We have examples of Napoleonic soldiers break becasue of bayonet charge but before actual clash. We have examples of Polish Lithuanian winged hussars charging on pikes block and winning and it was probably do to pike block loosing cohesion from lose of morale of bad drilling (again). In fact we dont even know how often pike block really fought something bigger then quick clash and one side breaking. And lastly argument about me not making 20min video is just wrong so I cant criticize a big cinema movie because I never done any? ;)
About the Forlorn Hope: To my knowledge they were partially made up of Doppelsöldner but most men were convicts awaiting the death penalty in the hope of gaining their freedom by surviving a battle. They generally didn't survive
I would agree. I am not a etymologist but "Forlone Hope" sounds very similar to "Verlorene Hoffnung" in German which translates roughly to "Lost Hope". I think this could support such thesis.
@@TheLordFragger That is correct. There was also the common term "verlorener Haufen" wich translates to "forlorn bunch"... Or lost heap. :D Yeah, usually made up of convicts or volunteers.
Christian Dauz - Yes they did, - during the Napoleonic war the term referred to any small group taking on impossible odds, such as breaking through siege defences. I don't think doubling their almost non existent pay would be much of an incentive. (0.0003p per annum)
yeeesss please! more on this! edit: doppelsöldner = doppel (double) + söldner (mercenary, but „sold“ is the money you get; so it‘s more like doubly paid mercenary) the forlon hope was often made up of criminals and later replaced by arquebusiers. you might wanna look into „rodoleros“ as well. soldiers with sword and shield who were said to haven been used during the italian wars to break up enemy pike formations.
Think Galatians found a way to fight Pike's similar to how rodeleros did it. They would run up to a pile formation and get under the Pike's killing the front row and slashing their way through the formation
I heard once that when Landsknechts were attacking pikes with zweihanders what they did was each swordsman attacked the pike/pikes that were threatening the guy to their left. That way each swordsman is still protected by the guy to their right while having the advantage of essentially being able to attack the pikes from the side which made them much easier to bind.
I did some massed rapier combat and this was precisely the tactic we used. It worked quite well, but, obviously, having more range variation than we had would change tactics somewhat.
@@mediapathic works with sword and shield too. You attack the guy in front of you and provoke him to focus on you and your buddy besides you stabs him. Works against all but the best trained adversaries.
Wasn't the catch of the swiss Gewalthaufen (heap of force) that those mad lads actually charged with their pike square, essentially ramming the enemy pike square with their own at speed? Also given how most sources are in german, french or italian the breaking/cutting of pikes with the greatsword could be a proverbial "breaking" of the enemy formation and the "cutting" down of the soldiers. I would argue the greatsword is used to bind with as many pikes as possible (here might the flamed blades come in handy) and use it as a lever to open a gap for your comrades to deal with the next row of pikes or directly charge the opposing pikemen. The mythical swiss hero Winklried is famous for basically grabbing as many pikes as he can (and getting stabbed) to open a gap which might point to the general, less suicidal, idea.
Im thinking the same too. "Cutting" or "Breaking" doesnt reffer to the Pike itself but to the Formation of Pikemen. The Wood of the pike is almost as thick as a wrist. Even the more slender Pikes seen in the Film are 2 Fingers thick - and even so these thinner pikes break rarely during Drills (BOL), its most of the time because ppl fall ontop of them. A drill is oviously not war - but the Pike has to much give to break anywhays and its only gonna be pushed aside.
@@ThePure2HD According to Sancho de Londoño's manual from the second half of the 16th century, a pike shaft had a diameter of barely over an inch near the head. Surviving pikes in museums are considerably lighter than what de Londoño described, though that could be wholly or partially due to aging effects. We have lots of sources for cutting pike shafts with single-handed swords, from France to England to Sweden to China, across many decades.
"Also given how most sources are in german, french or italian the breaking/cutting of pikes with the greatsword could be a proverbial "breaking" " I don't find it particularly meaningful. Those languages are perfectly capable of expressing a precise concept, often with the use of much more specific verbiage than English. There are interpreters and translators and scholars for this, and the Italians/Germans or French themselves who understand the meaning of the sentence very well. I don't think the key to the story is: "We are English we have misunderstood". But I agree that anyway the interpretation of sources is a complex thing, maybe the meaning is actually different from literally "cutting".
"Don't google average pike length, the results are.. fishy" 😂 this is why I keep coming back. You're the best man Edit: Holy crap this blew up! Glad everyone agrees Skall is the best ☺️
This is great. A lot of Chinese Pike/Spear formations often involved mixed unit tactics (for example, the Ming Dynasty's Qi Jiguang's Mandarin Duck Squad), rather than being exclusively pike/spears. So it always confused me when European polearm formations were generally portrayed as uniform, which feels very impractical. Thank you for this demonstration and explanation! PS- Would love to see your analysis of the Mandarin Duck Squad!
Pike formations sound actually terrifying as hell. I really wish we could travel back in time and talk to someone who has been in such units, or to witness these battles ourselves. These men had to have wills of steel.
My thoughts too. The amount of training and discipline needed to advance and maintain formation eye to eye to another unit with the same level of morale seems outstanding. Later period's line formations of musketeers seem like summer camp in comparison.
@@Yataro79 Pikemen could be trained in a couple weeks drilling formations and using the pike - majority of soldiers were not professionals. The discipline and training of line infantry was much more rigorous and the battlefields far more bloody
I think the closest we can get in modern times might be large battles in the SCA armored combat. There are a lot of things that don't translate well into the SCA rules, but nothing else really lets us experience the chaos of a large melee today, as far as I know.
i think the units would help overcome this a lot, being packed into tight formations leaves you with nothing to do but advance and fight, and humans are much better at doing things that they see their peers doing at the same time
Mildly unrelated to the topic of the video, but I've just realized something. Since the main killing blow of a pike is a thrust of some variety, the big poofy sleeves and pants of the landsknechts may serve to exaggerate the size of their limbs, encouraging thrusts to the fabric instead of the limb (in addition to being flamboyant as fuck). I dunno, just a thought.
@@stopsign1626 Oh god, the original assholes with glowing shiny gold skins on everything. The more it makes your eyes bleed, the more badass the wearer is!
@@sfjlfkjsdlfkjds Can be a little of both! A lot of poofy bullshit was good for nobles because during a duel with extra pokey weapons, the layers of cloth get in the way and might catch a stab, and it's just a smidge harder to nail the limbs, which might count. This probably was a factor in why they dressed like this, and choosing multiple flashy colors and designs was an element that doubled down on noble parody/showboating. After all, it would've been cheaper to just get a bunch of drab shit.
@@verager2493 loved the phrase about dangerous jobs. The use of secret protection, armor under the soft-kit was a reason for puffiness too. The color variety with heraldic symbolism, were uniforms that could be easily notated/recalled, for the choosing of Mercenaries from tournament contenders.
Hey, thank you for doing those videos my friend. I am part of a German 600+ people hema landsknecht group that has been trying to depict and reconstruct the tactics of 1520. After hundreds of battles with these kinds of weapons we have a pretty good understanding of how these weapons were used. It would be too long to explain here, but if you want to connect, just reach out I would be happy to answer some of the questions that are still left open. Keep up the great work.
Regarding "academic fencing" vs military drilling and the assertion that there is no use for flowing large movements in the crush of battle: Learning those movements is about learning the weapon and the body's capabilities with it, regardless of their usefulness. The entire range of possibilities with the weapon is what's up in these manuals/treatises, while that range includes everything from flowing movements to rough bashing.
@Daniel Ryslink This is basic fundamental martial arts. It is the fundamental part of boxing, nobody boxes in real life against a speed bag, it is a useful training tool, what repetitive training does is build muscle memory so your body reacts naturally in a real fight. This is the same principal in many Asian martial arts, the repetitive almost ritual movements aren't about using them in a real fight, but conditioning the body and building muscle memory.
I would argue that "cutting pikes" in historical sources propably doesnt mean to cut the actual pikes, but rather to "cut through" the pike formation, as in that greatswords were quite effective at breaking them up. A similar case of the exact usage/meaning of words changing with time and context exists with korean turtleships, which are in some sources described as being "covered with iron", leading alot of people today to believe that these ships had iron armor when in reality it propably just meant that their decks were covered with iron spikes to make boarding them more difficult.
All the pikes and other polearms that had armoured metal along the first few feet of the haft below the head, to make it harder for a greatsword to cut through it beg to differ. They armored the polearms for this exact reason. The greatsword was effective at both of the things you describe. That was one of its best strengths and most common uses. And the reason they started changing the design of polearms to try and counter them, which brought new designs to the greatswords to get around that.
@@captaindred342 Armoring them to resist greatswords specifically makes zero sense when the battlefield is full of halberds, bills, and other polearms that hit and cut MUCH harder. The fact is that even Landsknecht equipment lists (yes, even the "double pay" troops) show that they increasingly removed greatswords from the formation over time, relegating them mostly to line officer and bodyguard roles.
@@TheChiconspiracy The difference is that all those polearms you speak of require a lot of room to make taht sort of swing, room that would space the formation out and make it useless as a mixed formation in the first place. The greatsword does not have that weakness.
@@Gustav_Kuriga You realize there were historical halberds as short as 5-6 feet long right? And even a polearm no longer than a greatsword will hit much harder and also be able to hook, two massive advantages a greatsword lacks.
Honestly it just makes sense you'd have mixed weapons in a unit like this, unless you're using a pike unit for a specific role, such as countering flanking cavalry. The drawback to the pike (and other large polearms) is that it's difficult to counter an opponent who gets past the striking end of your weapon, especially when you're packed into a tight formation where you don't really have the room to pull your weapon back far enough to make use of it effectively. In these cases, having an inner rank of swordsmen or even soldiers armed with shorter polearms like halberds that can counter an enemy push or even make their own push on the enemy once the front ranks create an opening in the enemy pikes is very effective. Not to mention, if you're in a rank of pikemen, and suddenly one of your opponents gets up close and starts shanking your allies, you're going to be more likely to break ranks and try to save your own skin rather than holding the formation. I would not be surprised if the real purpose of pikemen in a formation like this, aside from warding off cavalry, was to create an opening in the enemy formation so swordsmen could rush in and basically eat the enemy formation from the inside out, and once the ranks started to break down, the pikemen would pick off any that turned to flee or turned to engage the swordsmen.
Great video as always! I am German, "Schlachtschwert" refers to "Schlacht" which definitely means battle, although it has the same word stem as "schlachten" (to slaughter, to butcher, what a butcher does with pigs) and "Schlachthaus" or "Schlachthof" (slaughterhouse, with "-haus" = house, "-hof" = court). You have to just love this constructive language, right? ;)
I am Swiss. The problem is that in modern german "Schlacht" is definitely the most common word for battle, but in older german texts I typically see the word "Streit" used instead. Therefore I am a bit unsure what 16th century german actually meant.
Makes sense, and "battle sword" certainly makes sense since you cannot exactly carry it for self-defense... "Slaughter sword" sounds brutally awesome though.
@@samuel.andermatt Could you give some more Context? Maybe this was used because the nobles were in a Feud? But yes you are rigth. The word's Streitmacht, Streitwagen (Chariot), Streitkolben (Mace) or Streiter also refer to this.
@@kalterverwalter4516 I mean in our previous national Anthem (Switzerland) There were statements such as "Freuddvoll zum Streit" (Joyful to battle). It also seems it matches the pattern for other naming. A Poleaxe is a Mordaxt (murder axe) in German (de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mordaxt), formation of the Swiss Army would be called Gewalthaufen (violence rabble) (de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gewalthaufen) so they definitely talked like that.
My group specifically trains with pike/staff weapons and fighting in a line formation in contrast to individual dueling. With a Greatsword against multiple pikes, the most efficient technique is to trap and lift up the pikes, with a ''shovel motion'' so that the guys behind you can rush in and engage. With a Halberd, you use the point between axehead and spear to lock onto a pike. And then with a downward arch, you catch more pikes on the right/left side and pin them down onto the ground. So that the guys behind you again can rush in and engage.
I was thinking during this video the pikes are so long that leverage is completely in the hands of the swordsman and that it would take very little force to move the pikes offline. Is that your experience fighting in drill?
Yeah, the term "Cutting Pikes" I don't believe refers to actually cutting the polearm, but rather using cutting motions to open the formation up to advance upon by the swordsman. Once inside their optimal range, pikes become useless...
It wonderful photography, wardrobe and all of that. But the script it's a mess, you can't cram 4 or 5 books in just one movie. Part of the movie was shoot in my city. There's some funny anecdotes of Viggo and the actress playing the inquisitor sneaking out after shooting and visit the pubs of the area in disguise and in character.
Again, a very well thought-out description and consideration on 2handers vs pikes. I like the way you don't only touch a topic but bring it to a conclusion.
You just planted a pretty badass picture of those Doppelsöldner Landsknecht types in my head. What a sick way to fight. Imagine the codpiece, situational awareness and ruthless conviction needed to rank among them. Must have been pretty intense, desperate people.
Guess what I referenced in the video? :) I know, you weren't at that point yet. It's always satisfying to tick the right boxes so to speak when making and editing videos.
This was, imho, well thought-out and -researched as well as being very enjoyable and fun (fishy pikes!!) thanks for all your hard work it is much appreciated! Stay safe and take care, my friend
Thanks! I under-estimated just how time consuming this one would be, ended up working on it until last minute. Normally I have videos ready and set to publishing the day before, but this time I was 10 min late on my schedule because I was still frantically finishing the video description.
Completely unrelated but 'fishy pikes' make me imagine a military pike, but instead of a spear point... IT HAS A FISH-PIKE! IT'S A PIKE-PIKE! GENIOUS! THEY'LL NEVER EXPECT IT!
Maybe the references to "breaking pikes" much like the "sword breaker" is really using the word "break" to mean stop or disrupt rather than to break in two.
@@ScottKenny1978 That's still kinda using the form of the verb for the separating of a single part into two (in this case, the skin on your skull..." and not the verb's other use for an interruption/disruption/stoppage, as in "let's take a break" or "his fever finally broke."
That makes much more sense, how the Great Sword, both as a weapon and wielder, were employed more like Special Forces units in standard operations. I.e, SF operators are all trained the same (to their respective outfit), so of course they do work together in concentrated groups. But often, they are used more as a 'Special' resource to boost or modulate the combat effectiveness of other, less acutely trained units.
Talking about pose on 4:20 : I, personally, have actually intuitively used this stance, when I was practicing 1 on 1 greatsword vs spear. And I have found this stance quite usefull, because holding it grip up blade down, I was able to cover my full body against few attacks, when holding sword in other ways, blade up, it was hard to recover after first defensive move from low a strike, and my opponent, if he was quick enough, was able to strike me again. Also, in this stance it was easy to push polearm to the side and quickly move closer to the opponent, where it was quite easy to hit him. And sorry for my bad English
YES!!! ♥ I have also used this stance many many times against spears with great success! Like you said, you just wait and keep baiting the spear to strike, then deflect it and rush it down.
@@Papuaani also, speaking about fantasy stuff: Lately I've made boffer Guts' Dragon Slayer sword, and in this stance it also works as shield against arrows
So, if you are going to speak about greatswords in duel and individual context, I should tell you, although you may already know this, that according to the techniques from two portuguese books, from Godinho and Figueiredo, hispanic montantes would be superb bodyguard weapons, as just one man can cover a lot of space and even operate in narrow streets and under the decks of mediterranean galleys to keep enemies at bay. One of such techniques is even called "guardacapa" (cloak ward) or "guardadama" (lady ward), or perhaps these are two separate moves, that seems to be perfect to protect somebody or something from several enemies at once.
This is extremely interesting content! I would love to see more deep dives into weapon specific tactics and employment by large scale formations. Presently there is very little out there like this and I've always wanted to see someone tackle this stuff. I must say that I am not disappointed in the way you covered this, great job! Thank you, I can't wait to see more!
A very impressive account of greatswords. Keep up the good work. Here is a little information about how the Zweihänder was called in the language of the common people. The “Gassenhauer“ (Gasse = path or small street Hauer= “hewer“) “Das Schwert welches eine Gasse durch die feindlichen Reihen schlug“ The sword that cut a path through the enemy ranks Greetings from Germany and Merry Christmas.
Thoughts for fantasy application: this would make small races incredibly tactically valuable because imagine trying to maintain pressing your pike formation against another pike formation with a horde of gnomes with daggers ducking under the shafts and trying to break up the formation. You can't just lower the pikes because then you can't bind the pikemen of the opposing formation so you'd essentially be forced to counter with small races of your own defending your pikemen and it'd result in essentially a sub-battle happening inside the "forest of pike shafts" between the formations, if either side overpowered the other they could EASILY duck under the pikes and destroy the formation composition of tbeur opponent
@@EstellammaSS I don't think that would be particularly effective - can't be braced as easily, smaller target can potentially maneuver around, would hamper the first and second rows a little more, and it'd be difficult to employ that tactic reactively - you wouldn't be able to see shite. So then your best bet might be to do it proactively, but then you're down an extra row of pikes and the chaos if even a few slip past is even worse
there's the additional situation of the length of the pikes making them prohibitively difficult to maneuver and resist redirection that you didn't really discuss here. grab a 20 foot stout staff and attempt to accurately maneuver the tip. not only will your arms fatigue quickly, the tip will be slightly bouncy (from the weighted tip) and the entire thing will be easily brushed aside.
Yeah, but facing a packed formation you would be facing anything from 5 to 15 tips. All looking for gaps in your defence, probably your face. Like musket fire in the 19th century, it would be the volume of points that would do the trick.
A small tidbit: The status of doppelsöldner was not exclusive to frontliners and/or greatsword users. It was also commonly applied to the honor guard of the square's standard, which was both prestigious as well as tactically important. It was also sometimes applied to arquebusiers using their guns from within/around the square.
Great stuff. Very interesting insight to the possible combined fighting methods taking place all together within a what is usually thought of as a single weapon formation.
In some spanish books you can find that Halberds and Mandobles o Espadones (spanish word for spadone) were used to "defend pikes and banners". I never understood how was possible. But with this great explanation I imagine mixed formations, and make a lot of sense.
I would bet that the greatsword user would have better leverage against even several pikes, especially if they aim to swipe at the pikes' tips. I don't think it's farfetched to imagine that 1 greatsword can tangle up a bunch of pikes, pushing pike against pike to disrupt their offense.
A German Kiss Greatsword could be because it has a wavy blade one pike is caught in the curve of the sword then you push that pikeman into the others. Or use a normal Greatsword at an angle and push the first pikeman that hits your blade into all the other pikeman.
The problem is that the great sword user likely would be stabbed. Even with the protection of armor, he could be pushed over and an experienced pike man could hit him with a pike using its leverage to do some real damage. Fighting is a lot easier if the other person is not fighting back.
7:41 It's actually a misconception that the the dopplesoeldners were primarily armed with great swords. The term was in most cases used for heavily armoured landsknecht pikemen who were positioned in the front ranks of the pike square, but also also in the rear ranks of the formation. The soldiers armed with great swords were (at least after the early 16th century) positioned in the middle ranks of the pike square and their primary purpose seemed to have been the protection of the standard.
Maybe the greatsword armed soldiers were mostly meant as sort of tactical reserve mainly for either last ditch defence/delay, or exploitation and pursuit? Pike is not an ideal weapon for pursuit if enemy formation is successfully disrupted, but greatsword seems like much more effective there. Sword-armed fighter can probably easily cut down a single pikeman and repeat the process many times over, unless the enemy throws down the pike and flees - which equates for a defeated enemy anyway. I have seen it speculated that two-handed version of Dacian falx was meant for pursuit and clean-up, rather than a formation fighting, so that might make an interesting parallel.
Great video, I've often thought about this exact subject. I feel the great sword was most likely used because above all other weapons it would maximize the soldiers chances of controlling many opposing pikes possibly damaging them (so that they would be more likely to break in the push) and disrupting the cohesion of the opposing pike formation.
Although this is by no means historical, I used to be involved in the SCA. I went to Pennsic and, almost exclusively played with a great sword. I found that when I was in a line of spears against another line of spears, the opposing side would suffer from tunnel vision. Whether they were concerned that I would suddenly rush their line, which I sometimes did, or because I was different, I found that I could draw a lot of attention. I would focus on parries, while the spearmen on my side would have a much easier time making hits.
I suppose just having two different types of soldier in the enemy square (each with a different type of weapon) makes it more difficult for the enemy to act correctly. If all they faced were pikes, then they'd only have to deal with pikes. But having two different types of soldier (mostly pikemen, plus a number of greatswordsmen among them) would complicate things *more* than twofold?
I'm thinking, first and maybe second row of the enemy formation hold pikes in your direction. They gamble on you being intimidated by the row of sharp points so the pikemen can advance and suddenly lunge their pike tips forwards, killing or injuring men in the first row of the opposing formation. But in such a tight formation, the pikemen won't have full freedom of movement with their pikes. They're kind of limited to thrusting forwards, raising or lowering the pike tip, and only have very sideways motion to work with. Therefore the greatsword units don't necessarily need to "break" the pikes as such. What they need to do is get past the business end of the pikes without getting skewered. Because once you get past the tips of the pikes, they will just be long sticks to your sides, which can't be swung hard to hit you in sideways motions since that might end up crashing into the other pikes. So with sweepint sideways parryint motions of a great sword, you could probably knock the presented pike tips to the side or downwards into the ground purchasing your unit enough time to get men past the pike tips. Once they're past they can just charge and slaughter the pikemen, since tje greatswords will have longer reach than any backup swords the pikemen might carry, and the pikemen will be busy trying to figure out wether they should hold on to their pikes or just drop them in order to meet the advancen of the great swordsmen. So I believe that when the manuscripts talk about "breaking pikes", the probably refer to breaking the formation of the pikes rather than outright severing pike tips from the shafts.
There are a number of sources for swords & other weapons cutting pikes & other wooden weapon shaft. They're quite explicit. Joseph Swetnam knew of a duel in which a man with sword & dagger severe the shaft of a staff. He didn't doubt this happened, but judged the man who wielded the staff a poor fencer for letting the swordsman do it. Lord Orrery wrote that it was easy for cavalry to cut the heads off of pikes that didn't have langets for protection, & that his side had once taken a fort because enemy pikers lacked these langets. Etc.
@@b.h.abbott-motley2427 If a pike has langets, like most of them used on our Drills, the langets are only around 30-40 cm long. They dont do mucv but hold the tip in place. Even if there were no langets at all - the pike has way to much give if the enemy strikrs at it due to the extreme leverage. You cannot cut threw a Polearm and you defenetly cannot cut threw an even thicker pike-Shaft. And you can neither strike it with enough force to breake it since it gets pushed aroun to easily. So either the sources are exagerating or wrong, the tranlastion is wrong or it has been taken out of context. Also a manuscript showing something doesn mean that it is realistic, possible, easy or good. Asch-Wood is known to be strong and flexible and most polearms were made out of asch. I dont think that you could break a pikeshaft even if you fixated it in a vice and went full force swing at it. Also cavslry cannot cut the spikes off of pikes since tge get impaled by the pikemen if they get anywhere near their reach. Also taking a fort has nothing to do with pikes but sige engigen and sieg in general. I doubt the entire story beeing fake/a story without reading it. I will look it up tomorrow Can you link the manuscript your reffering to?
@@ThePure2HD See Lord Orrery's treatise here: quod.lib.umich.edu/e/eebo/A53478.0001.001/1:7.2?rgn=div2;view=fulltext "The Pikes arm'd at the Points with Lozange heads, if the cheeks, or sides of the Pikes are not armed with thin Plates of Iron four Foot deep, are very apt to be broken off near the Heads, if the Push be vigorous, and the Resistance consi∣derable: Nor is this all; for unless the Pikes be armed with those thin Iron Plates, they are easily cut off with sharp Swords, for the Pike, especially toward the end, is carried ta∣pering, to poise it the better, and thereby renders it the more flippent for those who use it; so that the slenderer part of the Pike, if unarm'd, is the more liable to be cut off, it being there nearest the Enemy; whereas if the Pikes were armed with those thin Plates, and four Foot deep, no cutting Swords (which are alwayes of the shortest) could destroy the Pikes, since that part of the Staff of the Pike which is unarmed, would be out of the reach of the Horsemans sharp cutting Sword: I remember we once carried a Fort by storm, because the Enemies Pikes had not those Plates, whereby the Heads of them were cut off." & from Donald Lupton's 17th-century polemic against the pike: "[H]ath it not been seene that three or foure good resolute Soldiers with their swords and Buffe-coats only have cut off ten or twelve Pike-heads, and come off safe without wounds, and purchased to themselves honor and reward? "For an instance of this: The Prince of Orange his Leaguer lying before Scenke-Sconse, it so fell out, that there was a great uproare betwixt the English and Switzers, they being enquarter'd one next to the other; the occasion was small, being about a stiver or two lost at Cards; but the issue had likely to have produced wonder and amazement (if by faire perswasions and entreaties both parties had not been pacified) for the Tumult began to grow to an intestine Mutiny (many men being wounded on both sides) so that the English first, and Switzers at last call'd to Armes: whenas there stood one of the Divisi|ons of the Switzers pikes ready charg'd, did not then two Soldiers of Collonell Burlacyes Regiment with their swords only enter by force into that Body, and cut off divers Pike-heads, and came off againe with three or foure of them in their hands, which in fury and great derision they flung againe amongst them, with this jeere to boote, Oh doe us no harme good men!" & from Giacomo di Grassi, 1594 English translation of 1570 manual: "But because these weapons for the most part are exercised, and vsed to enter through diuers Pikes & other weapons, and to breake and disorder the battell raye, to which ende, and purpose, if it be vsed, then that manner of mannaging and handling is verie conuenient which is practised now adaies, and thus it is: The Partesan, Holberd, and Bill (but not the Iauelin, being in this case nothing effectuall because it hath small force in the edge) must be borne in the middle of the staffe, with the heele thereof before, and verie lowe, and the point neere a mans head. And with the said heele, or halfe staffe vnderneath, from the hande downwardes, he must warde and beat off the pointes and thrustes of the Pikes and other weapons, and hauing made waie, must enter with the encrease of a pace of the hinder foote, and in the same instant, let fall his weapon as forcibly as he maie, and strike with the edge athwart the Pikes. This kinde of blowe is so strong (being deliuered as it ought, considering it commeth from aboue downwardes, and the weapon of it selfe is verie heauie) that it will cut asunder not onely Pikes, but also any other forcible impediment." Donald McBane: "[A] highlandman attacked me with sword and targe, and cut my wooden handled bayonet out of the muzel of my gun; I then clubed my gun and gave him a stroke with it, which made the butt-end to fly off; Seeing the Highland-men to come fast upon me, I took to my heels and run thirty miles before I looked behind me." Joseph Swetnam, 1617 treatise: "I have known a man with a Sword and Dagger hath cut off the end of a Pike-Staffe, but I hold him an ignorant and unskillful man, that hath held the Staffe." Etc. Pikes could be quite thin near the head, perhaps one inch in diameter. (1.06in according to Sancho de Londono's 16th-century manual.) They typically tapered, as Lord Orrery wrote. You can find lots of videos of people cutting through thicker pieces of wood with swords. One of the Arms and Armor people recently cut through a rather thick hickory axe handle with a single swing from a longsword. Hickory is harder & tougher than ash. It's unlikely that all these sources, from across time & space, are inaccurate.
I feel like another benefit of the great sword over the halberd would be how effective they are in very close quarters combat given the longer edge. I also think that both would be effective against a 6 meter plus pile as a pile that size can’t be that well controlled due to the distance between the hand and the point. Great vid!
You got really close to my line of thinking on this when you brought up halfswording. I always assumed in closer, tighter situations like formation fighting/streets and corridors they would try to shorten their reach by halfswording or pulling it further back into their body losing some reach but gaining a lot of control over their blade and using the tip of the blade to thrust into gaps in armor and joints etc.
If anyone wonders what the inscription of the guys sword art 0:52 means: Mein Gelt verspielt 1559 Gambled away my money 1559 (Not sure with the year, it's not easy to see on my phone)
May i help? It's 1519 And due to the phone you may have not seen the "All" on the left. -> All mein Gelt veaspielt 1519 So: Gambled away all my money 1519
@Skallagrim, your demonstration remind me of a very similar idea from a Chinese military training manual, called "Dan Dao Fa Xuan" ("Long saber manual") by Cheng Zong You in 1621. The idea is that a battlefield formation is created by having a swordsman on the left of every spearman, to help cover the spearman side in case of an enemy thrust from the left, and the swordsman & spearmen on each of his sides works together to fight against enemy spearmen. This manual is really interesting as from the interpretation of Jack Chen (a Singapore based martial artist), most of the stances and movements are done in a very linear & straightforward manner to avoid cutting your partners on the left & right side. I started studying it about 2 months ago, and some of the group formations & tactics you tried here are very close : protecting the spearman near you, trying to deflect enemies spearheads, even having your partner spearman blocking multiple enemies spears, using a lot of vertical strikes... (the translator got an interesting channel here on youtube too, and he has made a quick demo of the stances here : ua-cam.com/video/V1Vg4O7g9js/v-deo.html)
I distinctly remember discussions from ARMA on this very subject, and iirc their reconstruction of the method was that the verlorne haufe/doppelzoeldners armed with zweihaenders would basically grab the blade with the left hand. With both hands on the weapon as if holding a staff, the zweihaender itself is used as a pseud-polearm, and the ideal situation would be the pike shaft being caught between the parrying hook and the guard at the ricasso, at which point the soldiers would basically "slide down the shaft" while pushing it to the side. A few soldiers in two groups will push the bundle of pike shafts controlled by the zweihaender to opposing directions to spread between the defense and make a hole, where the rest of the soldiers would attempt to charge in. At least, that was what ARMA people figured around twenty years ago, and they basically concluded chopping off the pike shaft was just not viable. . Another interesting point would be to compare it with 16th century Japanese pike formations, which arrived at the conclusion that when two pike formations are fighting each other, both would focus in trying to bind down thrusting pikes to make an opening. This eventually evolved into a situation where the pikes were now attempting to avoid being "binded" and "opened up" in such a manner by using pikes to swing downwards in an attack, rather than thrust. So if you get a chance to see later-Sengoku era pike combat re-enactment, the pikes formations all raise their pikes and smash it down as if using an elongated glaive, rather than thrust with it. . Pretty interesting shit.
I suggest looking up the Ming manuscripts (or rather resources based on them because xvi century Chinese), they used very elaborate mixed units tactics based on pikes and HAVE PICTURES, it might give more insight on the formation vs formation combat
Nice to see you mentioning and showing the Spanish movie "Alatriste", with the great Viggo Mortensen as then main character.. The warfare parts of it I think they are brilliant and it does show the use of pikes and how other soldiers (normally younger) crawling underneath to stab people on the other side, something mentioned in different sources. Other parts of the movie are not so great, a missed opportunity.
I think it's definitely feasible that this can protect the weilder from pikes. For one all of the manuals describe wide sweeps with it not the standard long point maneuvering of longsword. But more importantly the wide cross guard and "hooks" on the sword work kind of the same way you use a buckler: since the defensive portion is held out away from your body it effectively covers more of your body due to the angling. Not to mention the hooks could give a point to catching and pushing aside whatever long shafts are in front of you creating openings in the formation. Basically, on that demonstration, jist take horizontal swings at that bunch of spears, and you'll be able to knock them aside, without needing to put your body close to the dangerous spear tips due to the reach the sword is giving you.
As a keybo-... as an internet scholar I like to imagine the great sword a decent weapon for 1-1 tournaments. For a battlefield, I think that pike might be preferable, especially in formation. If I had to stand against cavalry, I would prefer the long pike over the great sword. And being protected by a forest of pikes around me.
A greatsword can also be useful when guarding a gateway, as you can occupy an immense amount of space by swinging it. Refer to some of Scholagladiatoria's videos on the subject.
@@johanrunfeldt7174 well if you are in a gate ain’t that big sword hitting the wall so you Are completely useless? Shorter weapon would be more appropriate due to the confined spaces.
@@sergeantsharkseant You stand in front of the gate. It's not like you're stopping an army, more like preventing unauthorised commoners from entering the castle. Doesn't matter how angry and rebellious they are.
If you want to defeat an army in the two-handed long spear phalanx formation, you must try to break the organization of 3 or 4 lines that support each other. If you drag the battle into rough terrain, the formation will be broken. Lack of discipline (kill the leader) can disrupt this order. Your soldiers should have big shields like Roman Legionnaires. Thus, they can more easily enter the gaps formed when the formation is disturbed. More importantly, the enemy army using spears that are too long to carry a shield are vulnerable to arrow attacks, especially if they have weak armor. For this reason, units such as Swiss Pikemen, resistant to archers, did not emerge before the armor technology was well developed
Maybe I’m underestimating how much the pikes would obstruct projectiles or how heavily armored the pikemen would be, but it seems to me that having a few crossbow men scattered throughout your formation to pick off enemy pikemen and thin their formation could be a much safer and more effective alternative to having men with great swords attempting to bind the pikes.
Thought I had is that the greatswords were simply used to control horizontal motion of enemy pikes. Imagine a jail cell with vertical bars. Then imagine sticking a pike between the bars. Your can move the pike vertically with no issues, but your horizontal motion is very limited. In theory these greatswords would act as obstacles that limit threatening angles of attack from your periphery in both directions across an entire battleline. Perhaps multiple greatsword wielders could corral many pikes by going forward and toward one another and crossing swords, which would not only reduce the horizontal motion of pikes even more severely but also by crossing the swords you are also limiting upward motion. The length of the greatsword in this scenario allows for both defensive and offensive options and quite a lot of flexibility to switch options quickly as needed, which puts you at an advantage against someone who needs to draw an entirely separate weapon to defend themselves. I think that these descriptions about greatswords "cutting through" the pikes is perhaps not a literal description of their function but rather a figurative way of describing their ability to be offensive screens that create safer avenues to approach the enemy line or even advance your own formation.
@@Glimmlampe1982 oh yeah you are right, it is German, in my language it would mean wasted (as in: Al mijn geld verspild), it being a drawing from Urs Graf it probably is German.
fun fact i think the "forlorn hope" (07:55) might be called "verlorener haufen" in german which translates to "lost heap or mob" not sure about this but it could be based on a textline from the landsknecht song "weit lasst die fahnen wehen" which says "Lasst den verlor'nen Haufen vorwärts zum Sturme laufen" meaning "let the lost mob run forward to storm/attack"
I feel like a big advantage of the zweihander is that you can engage the front rank of pikes and still be out of range of the second rank because the sword is so long.
I would not be surprised if "cutting pikes" in the historical documents simply referred to cutting down the user, and the author simply assumed that no one would think it meant actually chopping through a hard wooden shaft.
Tell me your thoughts on this Using the great sword as support for the friendly pikes behind rather than attacking the enemy directly. Maybe by clearing as many enemy pikes as possible by striking them down or to the side you create an opening in the enemy formation that the friendly pikemen behind you can take advantage of?
You're much more on the right mark than skallagrim here. I've done exactly that in a larp battle, pushing 3 enemy pikes (blade down like in 4:20) to the side to let my friends use their pikes with great success. Also, people should just unsub skallagrim... it's all trash.
0:38 I can confirm that "Schlacht" in "Schlachtschwert" in this case refers to battle, not slaughter ("die Schlacht" = "the battle"). Just like "Sturm" in "Sturmgewehr" means charge and is translated as assault (from the first World War era where "Stosstruppen" and "Sturmtruppen" (assault troops) were created with specific weaponry and training, the meaning is not in any case storm here as well. German is that way, same with Dutch and a few other Germanic languages in northern Europe. Lots of multiple semantic uses for one noun that aren't immediately obvious.
Perfect timing on this one. A month or so back i got into several quite intense FB arguments in a HEMA group with people who were adamant that groups armed with greatswords were smashing pike blocks left and right. Simply asking them for details, and then pointing out that they actually didn't have any evidence after they couldn't give any references, provoked a nasty bit of flaming.
Having some lessons with the pike myself I find your research very interesting. I think that it must have been very dangerous to be in the front rank if you have a pike or a greatsword. There must be a reason why two handed swords fell out of use while pikes still existed on the battlefields.
Yes, interesting certainly. It would make a great subject for a battle re creation. I can't help but figure that the normal attack on a pike square would be to swipe the points to one side. Thus , the great swordsman would be clearing some space for his guys with pikes to do the actual impaling. The long reach of his weapon would force his enemy to back up extending the points ,or get their head split. This lets him get inside and shove the points aside with his entire weight, the tail ends of the pikes shoving people around. He can then slide his blade down the pike hacking people himself. Balsy for sure , but they had those.
They are both pointy sticks - it’s the length of the stick that was important, or rather the ratio between “pointy” and “stick”. This video is Maximum Pointy:Minimum Stick vs Minimum Pointy:Maximum Stick. Though they all lose to projectile pointy stick. The singularity that changed warfare forever was when we no longer needed the stick.
Not really. The Swiss were one of the first to try out the greatsword, were easily the best melee fighters in Europe, and ultimately banned them from their formation in favor of more halberds.
i'm not really a sword person, i like ancient history, but i do find your videos extremely interesting and your hypophysis thought provoking. you make the subject entertaining :-)
I think you hit the nail on the head with the artwork analysis. Yes, pike formations are great. Part of the way to deal with them is to mix in some other stuff like missile weapons and some big swords and halberds and things.
My thought is that the entire greatsword is functionally the "strong" of the blade when compared to a long and proportionally light pike where there might be 10+ feet of "weak". A greatsword could be used to trap and pin a pike, maybe even more than one at a time. Send a small team of plate armoured greatswordmen against a pike formation, with the first couple swordmen approaching together pinning pikes right and left, leaving a hole that could be large enough to send in the next swordman to attack directly (or maybe another set of pinners, first). Once inside, a greatsword might be able to use those "trademark" large cuts to attack the pikemen that are now trapped by their own tight formation.
@@peterlokin4098 Except not really borne out by the historical evidence. In fact, the only thing I've seen that worked like this was a case of Swiss halberdiers (who were considered the best melee combatants by far) who actually banned greatswords from their formations. Halberds and other polearms hit MUCH harder on both the thrust and cut, and can hook the enemy or their weapons.
Something might worth mentioning about the entire pike/greatsword mix. You also have guns. Now maybe not as many during late 15th-early 16th century, but still, you can use firepower to also try creating gaps in the pike formation and then having your greatswordsmen rush forward into those gaps
I have enjoyed your channel for years but, perhaps the best thing you ever did for me was letting me know about Alatriste. Amazing! (thanks for all the other stuff though)
I think the most underrated element is the length of the pikes: 4 -6 m held at the end makes overcoming inertia very difficult. Also, the lateral movement was limited in crowded conditions. This design is appropriate and necessary to keep the horses relatively far away from the pikemen. It was not designed for hand-to-hand combat. If someone tried to break into the formation, probably many pikes pointed at him but were too slow to effectively engage actively. In contrast, the shorter and better-balanced longsword had a significant speed advantage. Therefore, I think it was actually possible to "wedge in" and create a short opening with two wingmen to pass the tips damage pikes and allow more men to follow.
If you haven't seen part 1 about giant swords and ceremonial vs. practical designs yet: ua-cam.com/video/sAcCJM3Lupk/v-deo.html
hey Skall it looks like your finally loosing weight again! great job! keep it up!
Hmm Giant Sword or Greatswords and Pikes, ... I have a really stupid but interesting question: If you made a sword that is the length of a pike, i.e. 6m -7m, would it a. be possible at all to make a usable sword like this, b. how would such a sword look like, c. How practical would it be and would it have a major impact on the battle and d. would it have advantages over a pike?
maybe a topic for a new video XD
Ive come to the conclusion that ceiling height may be a bit of a problem for you. I've got the same issue myself. So many dings on my ceiling. Love the videos man.
Now this is interesting none of that super power stuff just weird weapons and techniques and dope history also I wonder if a steel curass if shot at an angle if the round ball will deflect I can’t and I wonder if the front line marched at a slight angle to help with deflection
Maybe owning a really large sword was kind of sexy. Good with the girls and all that.
0:56 In case anyone's interested, the writing on the blade translates to "gambled away all my money".
If you had a unit of greatsword wielders you could assemble an entire blues song lyric by lyric
@@googiegress gambled away all my money, written in Hans' sword, the on Jörgen's you have "Drink is my only friend" and so on
Thanks!
No day is a dead loss when you learn something new! 😀
Yes. Somehow I don't suppose middle class virtues were widespread among Landsknechte...
The idea of having your buddy next you create an opening for you to enter I think has a lot of merit. Lindybeige made a similar point in one of his older videos. It makes me think of how in chess the pawns can't capture what is directly in front of them, but can capture what is off to the side of the square in front of them, and how they are used primarily as back-up for more powerful units and for controlling important squares like the center of the board, rather than for main attacks.
This also represents the shield wall. You don’t kill the guy in front of you, you kill the guy next to him trying to kill your buddy next to you and your buddy is killing the guy in front of you. So you were defending against your opponent but your buddy was the one fighting your opponent.
@@bertellijustin6376 i dont think this is allways true, i think you are mainly focused on the guy in Front which is why you get speared from the side. Cooridonation requires Training and expirience, so id say youre talking about an ideal the question is how mutch i guess.
But yes in a dense shieldwall that serms like a good tactic / something that happens a lot.
An Important thing to consider tho are Tunnel Vision, and the fact that formations mid not have allways been so dense. The further appart you are the more one on one it becomes.
Teamwork become especialy interessting considering the fact you have a guy close behind you too, who beeing shielded by you, mid be able to Focus more on the attack.
Im generaly not a Fan of sutch Theories, but i wonder if there was a comand where everyone would just start rapidly thrusting, and advancing? Simularly to supression fire, where an unprepared enemy gets overwelmed and breaks.
In the US Army our hand-to-hand combat trainers would often ask "Who wins a fight?"
The answer was, "The one who's buddy gets there first."
Hey, just wanted to comment one thing i saw: in the Museum in the castle of Coburg, Germany i found a Gun-spear. It is labeled gun-lance, but it looks more like a spear (also germans often use lance/spear for the same thing). It is one of the most fantasy-like weapons i ever saw.
Thats all folks, just wanted to share this neat little discovery
Was it common to see?
A Custodian weapon.
@@spoopyd.8910 Did they also cover themselves with oil and slide around the palace half-naked?.
@@jacobeldredge2956 there was only one. They have a pretty good and intact armory, mostly things you would expect: footman armors (different than knight armors), some rapiers and sideswords and mostly polearms and muskets. Just one (i think from a bit earlier period then the 16/17th century armory) "gun-spear". One other strange thing: a canon, but not really. It looked like a canon, but without the barrel. Instead a box, maybe 30 cm long with 41 small barrels. Looked straight out of a movie.
@@arya31ful jokes on you, but if you cover youreself in oil you will take less damege from blunt weapon and could fly in rain
Interestingly, the man that mastered 2-sword fighting(and even slew a nue according to legend), Miyamoto Musashi, also wrote a book on tactics in which he seems to acknowledge that the longer reach weapons such as polearms are far more effective on the battlefield than the sword, the weapon he was famous for mastering.
Of course, but Musashi was known for being an excellent duellist (and duels are most commonly fought with swords) so it makes sense that he mastered the sword and not any other weapon.
Yeah, but the Book of the Five Rings is not about large scale battles, it's about dueling
Above all else Musashi was a duelist who lived most of his life during the Edo period right after the end of large scale battles during the sengoku jidai. So for him a sword (or two) was a better option since his fights were more of a show to see who is better than a real field battle, basically what he said can be compared to a UFC fighter admitting guns are better for a battlefield than strikes are
So yeah, spears are better than swords for a battle and that's why swords are side arms
@@chicken29843 That's a great way to put it, he was a Murderous Athlete
@@JulianViquez he was talking about strategy and "way of life".
He compares duels, one against many, and battlefields in at least one situation in the boom.
@@JulianViquez No, you are 100% incorrect. Go Rin No Sho 100% discusses large scale warfare. Go read it before speaking on it.
What seems extremely fascinating is thinking about those greatswords defending against other great swords in opposing formations trying doing the same thing as them. Imagining a fight between two amid the “forest of pikes.” That must have been so terrifying.
Thats is why a double pay.
Fun fact: Doppelsöldner can be anyone who recieves double OR more pay than a normal Landsknecht, since veterans also normally got Double the pay, so a Veteran Flambertian would recieve Triple pay, but still called Doppelsöldner.
not terrifying. They can have a lot of fun with women in wars and do whatever they want. Spoils of war is great
@@waefawawrgaw2835??????
Unit cohesion and individual skill would make it less of a terrifying prospect.
Using a thrust to parry motion from a crouched position to force the pike heads away from yourself, sweeping the blade downward along the horizontal line of the pikes would be able to catch many at one time; Trapping them against the ground as you crouch to allow following soldiers to advance swinging counters of their own with minimal risk to the leading swordsman.
Even having freed up allied pikemen use over head downward thrusts from either side to defend against counter attacks from under the pikes being able to reach you. Or even moving some of the allied pike line up along side or behind you to begin stabbing counter attacks from enemy second line pikemen and the tied up firstline pikemen.
This manoeuvre would best be used by two Great Sword wielders binding either left or right horazontals respectively, making a hole for one or two following soldiers to advance.
Again, it's a matter of skill and unit cohesion. Not just the great sword subunit, but the allied pikemen unit around them as well.
Even then, this sort of manoeuvre would be able to be countered if the enemy unit is quick, highly skilled and has proper cohesion as well.
Anything from the front line dropping the pikes & allowing their second line to step forward and skewer the swordsmen. Ducking down as they go, they could even drag their dropped pikes out of the bind as they move back to become the seconds line.
Or they could drop the pikes, duck low with their drawn swords to deflect enemy pikes as they move forward while their second line moves up to become the first. Move forward under the new locking of pike against pike to engage the greatsword wielder with the advantage of a shorter, more manoeuvrable blade under the bind.
Pitting pike formations against one another was brutally silly affair. Far better off to field archers, riflemen or grenadiers against them just before a cavalry charge hits that side of the square.
May not get all the pikemen on that side and some cavalry may still get taken down as a result. However, the cavalry that do get through can now dispatch the soldiers from within the square; Quickly and efficiently routing the unit.
I love how nuanced this analysis is! It's not the lazy "swords are just always worse than pikes on a battlefield" answer that other youtubers give, nor does it propagate some fanciful notion that swords are superior or always beat pikes. Instead, it actually looks at history and tries to make sense of it.
Thank you.
They are a lot worse than pikes/spears tho lol specially in battle formations
@@royalecrafts6252 did you watch the video?
@@royalecrafts6252 I mean the romans did manage to be quite successful against spears with their short swords an big shields. Although my guess would be that shield plus sword is better than one big sword. But maybe just very few of those swords in the ranks can be good for binding 2 or 3 pikes at once and help your own pikemen to land a hit.
@@UsoMerit It's not the sword or the big shield (both things are carried by spearmen). It's the 2m heavy javelins they lobbed before charging. That is their main arm. It's so large and a heavy they can't carry a thrusting spear. Without it, the "swordsmen" would be impotent against a phalanx.
For someone who isn't an expert on battlefield tactics, this is one of the more sensible breakdowns of 2handed swords and their use in pike warfare, also pike warfare in general
Also as to halfswording with great swords, there's a written passage that Matt Easton once brought up that states that if you're fighting multiple opponents with a montante/spadone you use it like a sword, and if you're fighting a single opponent you can use it like a spear. So there's at least a hint in there
That's from Filippo Vadi, and it's more than an hint, if i correctly remember...
It is more than a hint. If you take a look at Godinho (or at least I think it was Godinho) he specifically explains the montante/greatsword techniques in a many vs one scenario and when he's supposed to talk about montante vs montante he just sends the reader to rapier fencing, for it is a thrust centric scenario
Not really that good, only good points are about swordsmen coming from sides and trying to flank other square (which is oldest trick in the book) and with swords are better at defending but in certain condition not always. Rest its just hema guys talking lot of BS about battle combat based on his experience in duel fighting ;) So modern sport shooter is talking about war combat and generally his war with HEMA critiques
@@swietoslaw No he said quite alot here. You can ignore it if you want, but be breaks down how people possibly were even able to swing 5-6ft swords in a mass melee of pikes and halberds which is still an ongoing debate, what role the sword might play in that type of fight, what probably Wouldn't work, how pikemen would use their pikes in an actual live combat scenario against other pikemen (this ain't total war where they just brace against whatever comes their way) etc etc. And dueling gives good insight into battlefield combat because a pike block is made of individual fighters so it helps us figure out what the individual combatants were doing in order to maintain a cohesive formation during the chaos of battle with long seemingly unwieldy weapons. If you don't think so, make your own 20 min video on what he got wrong and educate us all :)
@@seanpoore2428 His point are based not on real try with even couple of people so its kinda pointless, and i watched his channel long time and he dont really have experience fighting in teams and using great sword ether so yeah its only theory.
Dueling not give good insight becasue it have much different point. most of war fighting especially something like pikeblock is such "simple" things like drills, moving in one unit dont break when moving, holding position tight it have nothing in common with dueling, like 95% of dueling will not work.
btw dueling give you zero insight how to maintain cohesive formation becasue you dont train it.
And even if fight break into more chaotic melee then again you have lots of people all around, your and enemies you use fastest simplest move and have not much room for any special kind of footwork etc.
I did both historical reenactment and some hema and have much difrent perspective. Not to bash HEMA but most hema guys train only 1vs 1 combat not even couple vs couple but they like skall have very strong opinions. And in fact i would not be so critical of him if not for his making fun couple of times in this video of keyboard warriors which is kinda bad as he cant take criticism and just how he is the one with no experience in team fighting.
And not really about the topic my favorite example
During 30 years war when Sweden needed soldiers the most they shorten training to month. They train in weapon use TWO DASY! rest was for formation drills. Which show which is more important.
The same is with today soldiers, they know how to use gun, but they are much worse at this then competition, trick shooters etc, and they train shooting not that much. They train combat tactics working as a team then platoon, company ect. Or doing things like exercise to stay fit.
Another example look how big fights of football hooligans look like they use tactics but when it brake into chaotic fighting they use simplest fastest attacks becasue your opponents can just come from all the sides and its chaotic you dont have nice big open circle.
About how greatsword were used, as i say his point about use them as small flanking force sound good, the same as for defending. I know couple example of greatswordsmen being general flag bodyguards.
And also Swiss used halberds in more close combat when pike block was in clash so you could use sword in the same way but more for lighter armed guys.
And about how it was use probably nothing fancy, and thats the thing. we have much more data from later periods and fight often end with little casualties in combat itself when one side just brake and start to run. We have examples of Napoleonic soldiers break becasue of bayonet charge but before actual clash. We have examples of Polish Lithuanian winged hussars charging on pikes block and winning and it was probably do to pike block loosing cohesion from lose of morale of bad drilling (again).
In fact we dont even know how often pike block really fought something bigger then quick clash and one side breaking.
And lastly argument about me not making 20min video is just wrong so I cant criticize a big cinema movie because I never done any? ;)
About the Forlorn Hope:
To my knowledge they were partially made up of Doppelsöldner but most men were convicts awaiting the death penalty in the hope of gaining their freedom by surviving a battle. They generally didn't survive
I would agree. I am not a etymologist but "Forlone Hope" sounds very similar to "Verlorene Hoffnung" in German which translates roughly to "Lost Hope". I think this could support such thesis.
Didn't the British Redcoats have Forlon Hope troops?
@@TheLordFragger That is correct. There was also the common term "verlorener Haufen" wich translates to "forlorn bunch"... Or lost heap. :D
Yeah, usually made up of convicts or volunteers.
@@TheLordFragger Yep, das ist korrekt.
Christian Dauz - Yes they did, - during the Napoleonic war the term referred to any small group taking on impossible odds, such as breaking through siege defences. I don't think doubling their almost non existent pay would be much of an incentive. (0.0003p per annum)
yeeesss please! more on this!
edit: doppelsöldner = doppel (double) + söldner (mercenary, but „sold“ is the money you get; so it‘s more like doubly paid mercenary)
the forlon hope was often made up of criminals and later replaced by arquebusiers.
you might wanna look into „rodoleros“ as well. soldiers with sword and shield who were said to haven been used during the italian wars to break up enemy pike formations.
Not Italian, but Spanish, but good call...
Hey! Love you guys, great content!
To anyone who doesn't know SandRhoman is amazing. (If the name isn't correct this time. I give up #hateautocorrect )
@@Kamamura2 That's what he said, my man. Spanish soldiers fought in the Italian Wars.
Think Galatians found a way to fight Pike's similar to how rodeleros did it. They would run up to a pile formation and get under the Pike's killing the front row and slashing their way through the formation
I heard once that when Landsknechts were attacking pikes with zweihanders what they did was each swordsman attacked the pike/pikes that were threatening the guy to their left. That way each swordsman is still protected by the guy to their right while having the advantage of essentially being able to attack the pikes from the side which made them much easier to bind.
I did some massed rapier combat and this was precisely the tactic we used. It worked quite well, but, obviously, having more range variation than we had would change tactics somewhat.
@@mediapathic works with sword and shield too. You attack the guy in front of you and provoke him to focus on you and your buddy besides you stabs him. Works against all but the best trained adversaries.
Wasn't the catch of the swiss Gewalthaufen (heap of force) that those mad lads actually charged with their pike square, essentially ramming the enemy pike square with their own at speed?
Also given how most sources are in german, french or italian the breaking/cutting of pikes with the greatsword could be a proverbial "breaking" of the enemy formation and the "cutting" down of the soldiers. I would argue the greatsword is used to bind with as many pikes as possible (here might the flamed blades come in handy) and use it as a lever to open a gap for your comrades to deal with the next row of pikes or directly charge the opposing pikemen. The mythical swiss hero Winklried is famous for basically grabbing as many pikes as he can (and getting stabbed) to open a gap which might point to the general, less suicidal, idea.
Im thinking the same too. "Cutting" or "Breaking" doesnt reffer to the Pike itself but to the Formation of Pikemen. The Wood of the pike is almost as thick as a wrist. Even the more slender Pikes seen in the Film are 2 Fingers thick - and even so these thinner pikes break rarely during Drills (BOL), its most of the time because ppl fall ontop of them. A drill is oviously not war - but the Pike has to much give to break anywhays and its only gonna be pushed aside.
Yes, the Swiss solved two problems of the phalanx: Flank attacks and slow speed.
@@ThePure2HD According to Sancho de Londoño's manual from the second half of the 16th century, a pike shaft had a diameter of barely over an inch near the head. Surviving pikes in museums are considerably lighter than what de Londoño described, though that could be wholly or partially due to aging effects. We have lots of sources for cutting pike shafts with single-handed swords, from France to England to Sweden to China, across many decades.
I had the same though. "cutting pikes" sounds like a saying more than a literal description.
"Also given how most sources are in german, french or italian the breaking/cutting of pikes with the greatsword could be a proverbial "breaking" "
I don't find it particularly meaningful.
Those languages are perfectly capable of expressing a precise concept, often with the use of much more specific verbiage than English.
There are interpreters and translators and scholars for this, and the Italians/Germans or French themselves who understand the meaning of the sentence very well.
I don't think the key to the story is: "We are English we have misunderstood".
But I agree that anyway the interpretation of sources is a complex thing, maybe the meaning is actually different from literally "cutting".
"Don't google average pike length, the results are.. fishy" 😂 this is why I keep coming back. You're the best man
Edit: Holy crap this blew up! Glad everyone agrees Skall is the best ☺️
Was expecting a d*ck joke, got a dad pun. Excellent.
You could accurately add a keyword "weapon", like "weapon pike length". This would help to filter the fishes :)
Google "brochet" if you're french and "jädda" if you're swedish. Good luck if you're from anywhere else. And fuck you, of course.
Right .. some guys might be disappointed.. so yeah . Dont do it
Oh my gosh I had to watch this part to get the pun hahaha
The best way to defeat pike formations is with artillery. Or lightsabers.
Edit: I forgot about Balefire
just use guns and if that don't work use more guns
Molotov cocktails
tank-slicing katanas
Obviously holding a pike 2 handed won’t give you much cover from archers
Yeah - Don't bring a pike to lightsaber fight.
(I assume there are no lightpikes)
This is great. A lot of Chinese Pike/Spear formations often involved mixed unit tactics (for example, the Ming Dynasty's Qi Jiguang's Mandarin Duck Squad), rather than being exclusively pike/spears. So it always confused me when European polearm formations were generally portrayed as uniform, which feels very impractical. Thank you for this demonstration and explanation!
PS- Would love to see your analysis of the Mandarin Duck Squad!
Cao Cao!
Pike formations sound actually terrifying as hell. I really wish we could travel back in time and talk to someone who has been in such units, or to witness these battles ourselves. These men had to have wills of steel.
My thoughts too. The amount of training and discipline needed to advance and maintain formation eye to eye to another unit with the same level of morale seems outstanding. Later period's line formations of musketeers seem like summer camp in comparison.
@@Yataro79 Pikemen could be trained in a couple weeks drilling formations and using the pike - majority of soldiers were not professionals. The discipline and training of line infantry was much more rigorous and the battlefields far more bloody
I think the closest we can get in modern times might be large battles in the SCA armored combat. There are a lot of things that don't translate well into the SCA rules, but nothing else really lets us experience the chaos of a large melee today, as far as I know.
i think the units would help overcome this a lot, being packed into tight formations leaves you with nothing to do but advance and fight, and humans are much better at doing things that they see their peers doing at the same time
its more about the group pressure - hard to run away when you're literally trapped in a formation
Mildly unrelated to the topic of the video, but I've just realized something. Since the main killing blow of a pike is a thrust of some variety, the big poofy sleeves and pants of the landsknechts may serve to exaggerate the size of their limbs, encouraging thrusts to the fabric instead of the limb (in addition to being flamboyant as fuck). I dunno, just a thought.
@@sfjlfkjsdlfkjds So it's basically modern online fps games
@@stopsign1626 Oh god, the original assholes with glowing shiny gold skins on everything.
The more it makes your eyes bleed, the more badass the wearer is!
Yes
@@sfjlfkjsdlfkjds Can be a little of both! A lot of poofy bullshit was good for nobles because during a duel with extra pokey weapons, the layers of cloth get in the way and might catch a stab, and it's just a smidge harder to nail the limbs, which might count.
This probably was a factor in why they dressed like this, and choosing multiple flashy colors and designs was an element that doubled down on noble parody/showboating. After all, it would've been cheaper to just get a bunch of drab shit.
@@verager2493 loved the phrase about dangerous jobs. The use of secret protection, armor under the soft-kit was a reason for puffiness too. The color variety with heraldic symbolism, were uniforms that could be easily notated/recalled, for the choosing of Mercenaries
from tournament contenders.
"Battlefield is full chaos, there's no techniques, just men using brute force on each other"
-Dudes who can't even make a fist properly
Just remember, thumb inside the fingers, bend the wrist and strike with the front knuckles ;)
@@SepticFuddy True masters grip their wrist and forearm bash.
I can't make a proper fist, my fingers seem too long. :(
@@planescaped The truest of masters rip their arm off and use it as a club.
@@gooeyboy706 Grandmasters rip both their arms off and dual-wield(tm) them.
A look at Niccolo Machiavelli's writings show some good, early combined arms formations. He liked small pike blocks flanked by swordsmen and gunners.
Also in the last chapter of the prince he advocates for the development of the units we would eventually come to know as dragoons.
Hey, thank you for doing those videos my friend. I am part of a German 600+ people hema landsknecht group that has been trying to depict and reconstruct the tactics of 1520. After hundreds of battles with these kinds of weapons we have a pretty good understanding of how these weapons were used. It would be too long to explain here, but if you want to connect, just reach out I would be happy to answer some of the questions that are still left open. Keep up the great work.
It's easy, they beat pikes because they are great - it's in their name, isn't it?
this man brains
Tsun tsu has nothing on you my boi
what if i counter a great sword with a greater pike, or a long pike? :D
thus the purpose of the greatest sword is revealed
@@Jdjwjsi4483 only a tree trunk could counter that i guess 😅
Regarding "academic fencing" vs military drilling and the assertion that there is no use for flowing large movements in the crush of battle: Learning those movements is about learning the weapon and the body's capabilities with it, regardless of their usefulness. The entire range of possibilities with the weapon is what's up in these manuals/treatises, while that range includes everything from flowing movements to rough bashing.
Spoken like a true armchair general!
@Daniel Ryslink This is basic fundamental martial arts. It is the fundamental part of boxing, nobody boxes in real life against a speed bag, it is a useful training tool, what repetitive training does is build muscle memory so your body reacts naturally in a real fight. This is the same principal in many Asian martial arts, the repetitive almost ritual movements aren't about using them in a real fight, but conditioning the body and building muscle memory.
I would argue that "cutting pikes" in historical sources propably doesnt mean to cut the actual pikes, but rather to "cut through" the pike formation, as in that greatswords were quite effective at breaking them up.
A similar case of the exact usage/meaning of words changing with time and context exists with korean turtleships, which are in some sources described as being "covered with iron", leading alot of people today to believe that these ships had iron armor when in reality it propably just meant that their decks were covered with iron spikes to make boarding them more difficult.
All the pikes and other polearms that had armoured metal along the first few feet of the haft below the head, to make it harder for a greatsword to cut through it beg to differ. They armored the polearms for this exact reason. The greatsword was effective at both of the things you describe. That was one of its best strengths and most common uses. And the reason they started changing the design of polearms to try and counter them, which brought new designs to the greatswords to get around that.
@@captaindred342 Armoring them to resist greatswords specifically makes zero sense when the battlefield is full of halberds, bills, and other polearms that hit and cut MUCH harder.
The fact is that even Landsknecht equipment lists (yes, even the "double pay" troops) show that they increasingly removed greatswords from the formation over time, relegating them mostly to line officer and bodyguard roles.
@@TheChiconspiracy The difference is that all those polearms you speak of require a lot of room to make taht sort of swing, room that would space the formation out and make it useless as a mixed formation in the first place. The greatsword does not have that weakness.
@@Gustav_Kuriga You realize there were historical halberds as short as 5-6 feet long right? And even a polearm no longer than a greatsword will hit much harder and also be able to hook, two massive advantages a greatsword lacks.
@@TheChiconspiracy Isn't a halberd that short just a poleax at that point?..Like how shortening pikes makes them halfpikes or simply spears?..
Honestly it just makes sense you'd have mixed weapons in a unit like this, unless you're using a pike unit for a specific role, such as countering flanking cavalry. The drawback to the pike (and other large polearms) is that it's difficult to counter an opponent who gets past the striking end of your weapon, especially when you're packed into a tight formation where you don't really have the room to pull your weapon back far enough to make use of it effectively. In these cases, having an inner rank of swordsmen or even soldiers armed with shorter polearms like halberds that can counter an enemy push or even make their own push on the enemy once the front ranks create an opening in the enemy pikes is very effective. Not to mention, if you're in a rank of pikemen, and suddenly one of your opponents gets up close and starts shanking your allies, you're going to be more likely to break ranks and try to save your own skin rather than holding the formation. I would not be surprised if the real purpose of pikemen in a formation like this, aside from warding off cavalry, was to create an opening in the enemy formation so swordsmen could rush in and basically eat the enemy formation from the inside out, and once the ranks started to break down, the pikemen would pick off any that turned to flee or turned to engage the swordsmen.
I think I'd want a short weapon if inside the enemy square.
Precursor to Combined Arms Warfare of the 20th Century fascinating!
Great video as always!
I am German, "Schlachtschwert" refers to "Schlacht" which definitely means battle, although it has the same word stem as "schlachten" (to slaughter, to butcher, what a butcher does with pigs) and "Schlachthaus" or "Schlachthof" (slaughterhouse, with "-haus" = house, "-hof" = court). You have to just love this constructive language, right? ;)
I am Swiss. The problem is that in modern german "Schlacht" is definitely the most common word for battle, but in older german texts I typically see the word "Streit" used instead. Therefore I am a bit unsure what 16th century german actually meant.
Makes sense, and "battle sword" certainly makes sense since you cannot exactly carry it for self-defense... "Slaughter sword" sounds brutally awesome though.
@@samuel.andermatt What makes this more awkward is that the Icelandic Bus service is named Streito so...
@@samuel.andermatt Could you give some more Context? Maybe this was used because the nobles were in a Feud? But yes you are rigth. The word's Streitmacht, Streitwagen (Chariot), Streitkolben (Mace) or Streiter also refer to this.
@@kalterverwalter4516 I mean in our previous national Anthem (Switzerland) There were statements such as "Freuddvoll zum Streit" (Joyful to battle).
It also seems it matches the pattern for other naming. A Poleaxe is a Mordaxt (murder axe) in German (de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mordaxt), formation of the Swiss Army would be called Gewalthaufen (violence rabble) (de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gewalthaufen) so they definitely talked like that.
“What is a pike???!! Nothing but a miserable pile of sticks!!! But enough talk, have at you!!!!”
A pike is a fish! A pain un the butt to clean, as well.
This comment deserves a like form Skall
You don't belong in this world
Pike, one particular Albert, was a miserable little pile of secrets indeed
Why has no one created a unit of skeleton pikemen. They would be so OP
My group specifically trains with pike/staff weapons and fighting in a line formation in contrast to individual dueling. With a Greatsword against multiple pikes, the most efficient technique is to trap and lift up the pikes, with a ''shovel motion'' so that the guys behind you can rush in and engage.
With a Halberd, you use the point between axehead and spear to lock onto a pike. And then with a downward arch, you catch more pikes on the right/left side and pin them down onto the ground. So that the guys behind you again can rush in and engage.
I was thinking during this video the pikes are so long that leverage is completely in the hands of the swordsman and that it would take very little force to move the pikes offline. Is that your experience fighting in drill?
Yeah, the term "Cutting Pikes" I don't believe refers to actually cutting the polearm, but rather using cutting motions to open the formation up to advance upon by the swordsman. Once inside their optimal range, pikes become useless...
Alatriste is one of the best movies I've ever seen, it is such an underrated classic
Totally. All because one nation dislikes subtitles in cinemas 😜
It wonderful photography, wardrobe and all of that. But the script it's a mess, you can't cram 4 or 5 books in just one movie.
Part of the movie was shoot in my city. There's some funny anecdotes of Viggo and the actress playing the inquisitor sneaking out after shooting and visit the pubs of the area in disguise and in character.
Again, a very well thought-out description and consideration on 2handers vs pikes. I like the way you don't only touch a topic but bring it to a conclusion.
You just planted a pretty badass picture of those Doppelsöldner Landsknecht types in my head. What a sick way to fight. Imagine the codpiece, situational awareness and ruthless conviction needed to rank among them. Must have been pretty intense, desperate people.
The most realistic fight and battle scenes was alatriste with pikes
Guess what I referenced in the video? :)
I know, you weren't at that point yet. It's always satisfying to tick the right boxes so to speak when making and editing videos.
@@Skallagrim lol yeah sry , you do usually tick those boxes
I try to wait till the end to comment but my add kicks in or i forget what my thought was
@@michaeldecuffa8762 Yeah, I know that too well... ADD thoughts are like magicians, always up for a disappearing act.
That movie so criminaly underrated.
This was, imho, well thought-out and -researched as well as being very enjoyable and fun (fishy pikes!!) thanks for all your hard work it is much appreciated!
Stay safe and take care, my friend
Thanks! I under-estimated just how time consuming this one would be, ended up working on it until last minute. Normally I have videos ready and set to publishing the day before, but this time I was 10 min late on my schedule because I was still frantically finishing the video description.
@@Skallagrim Well, as far as I'm concerned, it was well worth it, but all I had to do was sit back and enjoy ;-)
Completely unrelated but 'fishy pikes' make me imagine a military pike, but instead of a spear point...
IT HAS A FISH-PIKE! IT'S A PIKE-PIKE! GENIOUS! THEY'LL NEVER EXPECT IT!
@@Skallagrim it was worth it!
Maybe the references to "breaking pikes" much like the "sword breaker" is really using the word "break" to mean stop or disrupt rather than to break in two.
Like how a "broken head" meant a bleeding wound, not broken bones?
@@ScottKenny1978 That's still kinda using the form of the verb for the separating of a single part into two (in this case, the skin on your skull..." and not the verb's other use for an interruption/disruption/stoppage, as in "let's take a break" or "his fever finally broke."
@@andrewkelly6828 eh, maybe.
But if you asked a person today what a broken head was, I don't think anyone would say "bleeding from the head"
That makes much more sense, how the Great Sword, both as a weapon and wielder, were employed more like Special Forces units in standard operations. I.e, SF operators are all trained the same (to their respective outfit), so of course they do work together in concentrated groups. But often, they are used more as a 'Special' resource to boost or modulate the combat effectiveness of other, less acutely trained units.
I like how supportive your wife is. Even on the battlefield.
Talking about pose on 4:20 :
I, personally, have actually intuitively used this stance, when I was practicing 1 on 1 greatsword vs spear. And I have found this stance quite usefull, because holding it grip up blade down, I was able to cover my full body against few attacks, when holding sword in other ways, blade up, it was hard to recover after first defensive move from low a strike, and my opponent, if he was quick enough, was able to strike me again.
Also, in this stance it was easy to push polearm to the side and quickly move closer to the opponent, where it was quite easy to hit him.
And sorry for my bad English
YES!!! ♥ I have also used this stance many many times against spears with great success! Like you said, you just wait and keep baiting the spear to strike, then deflect it and rush it down.
@@Papuaani also, speaking about fantasy stuff:
Lately I've made boffer Guts' Dragon Slayer sword, and in this stance it also works as shield against arrows
So, if you are going to speak about greatswords in duel and individual context, I should tell you, although you may already know this, that according to the techniques from two portuguese books, from Godinho and Figueiredo, hispanic montantes would be superb bodyguard weapons, as just one man can cover a lot of space and even operate in narrow streets and under the decks of mediterranean galleys to keep enemies at bay. One of such techniques is even called "guardacapa" (cloak ward) or "guardadama" (lady ward), or perhaps these are two separate moves, that seems to be perfect to protect somebody or something from several enemies at once.
This is extremely interesting content! I would love to see more deep dives into weapon specific tactics and employment by large scale formations. Presently there is very little out there like this and I've always wanted to see someone tackle this stuff. I must say that I am not disappointed in the way you covered this, great job! Thank you, I can't wait to see more!
A very impressive account of greatswords. Keep up the good work. Here is a little information about how the Zweihänder was called in the language of the common people.
The “Gassenhauer“
(Gasse = path or small street Hauer= “hewer“)
“Das Schwert welches eine Gasse durch die feindlichen Reihen schlug“
The sword that cut a path through the enemy ranks
Greetings from Germany and Merry Christmas.
Thanks!
Thoughts for fantasy application: this would make small races incredibly tactically valuable because imagine trying to maintain pressing your pike formation against another pike formation with a horde of gnomes with daggers ducking under the shafts and trying to break up the formation. You can't just lower the pikes because then you can't bind the pikemen of the opposing formation so you'd essentially be forced to counter with small races of your own defending your pikemen and it'd result in essentially a sub-battle happening inside the "forest of pike shafts" between the formations, if either side overpowered the other they could EASILY duck under the pikes and destroy the formation composition of tbeur opponent
I absolutely adore this idea.
Hobbit battlefield assassins. That's frankly terrifying.
But then your small armies would also have small pikes. You'd need an ever smaller army!
You would probably just see the third row of pikers lower their pikes to deal with it.
@@EstellammaSS I don't think that would be particularly effective - can't be braced as easily, smaller target can potentially maneuver around, would hamper the first and second rows a little more, and it'd be difficult to employ that tactic reactively - you wouldn't be able to see shite. So then your best bet might be to do it proactively, but then you're down an extra row of pikes and the chaos if even a few slip past is even worse
there's the additional situation of the length of the pikes making them prohibitively difficult to maneuver and resist redirection that you didn't really discuss here.
grab a 20 foot stout staff and attempt to accurately maneuver the tip. not only will your arms fatigue quickly, the tip will be slightly bouncy (from the weighted tip) and the entire thing will be easily brushed aside.
A 20-foot staff makes it sound as though you are jousting.
Yeah, but facing a packed formation you would be facing anything from 5 to 15 tips. All looking for gaps in your defence, probably your face. Like musket fire in the 19th century, it would be the volume of points that would do the trick.
Ah! Nice to see The Spadone Project being featured on your channel ;-)
A small tidbit: The status of doppelsöldner was not exclusive to frontliners and/or greatsword users. It was also commonly applied to the honor guard of the square's standard, which was both prestigious as well as tactically important. It was also sometimes applied to arquebusiers using their guns from within/around the square.
Therapist: cute Landsknecht Kara isn't real, she can't hurt you
Cute Landsknecht Kara: stabs me with her pike
Great stuff. Very interesting insight to the possible combined fighting methods taking place all together within a what is usually thought of as a single weapon formation.
In some spanish books you can find that Halberds and Mandobles o Espadones (spanish word for spadone) were used to "defend pikes and banners".
I never understood how was possible. But with this great explanation I imagine mixed formations, and make a lot of sense.
I would bet that the greatsword user would have better leverage against even several pikes, especially if they aim to swipe at the pikes' tips. I don't think it's farfetched to imagine that 1 greatsword can tangle up a bunch of pikes, pushing pike against pike to disrupt their offense.
A German Kiss Greatsword could be because it has a wavy blade one pike is caught in the curve of the sword then you push that pikeman into the others. Or use a normal Greatsword at an angle and push the first pikeman that hits your blade into all the other pikeman.
I imagine the "cut" was more of swipe and push pikes aside too. The pikes were too long for easy recover.
@@GuitarsRockForever Yes, I believe that would happen.
The problem is that the great sword user likely would be stabbed. Even with the protection of armor, he could be pushed over and an experienced pike man could hit him with a pike using its leverage to do some real damage.
Fighting is a lot easier if the other person is not fighting back.
Tbf, that's kinda how you use spears and other polearms against spears and pikes too.
7:41 It's actually a misconception that the the dopplesoeldners were primarily armed with great swords. The term was in most cases used for heavily armoured landsknecht pikemen who were positioned in the front ranks of the pike square, but also also in the rear ranks of the formation. The soldiers armed with great swords were (at least after the early 16th century) positioned in the middle ranks of the pike square and their primary purpose seemed to have been the protection of the standard.
Maybe the greatsword armed soldiers were mostly meant as sort of tactical reserve mainly for either last ditch defence/delay, or exploitation and pursuit? Pike is not an ideal weapon for pursuit if enemy formation is successfully disrupted, but greatsword seems like much more effective there. Sword-armed fighter can probably easily cut down a single pikeman and repeat the process many times over, unless the enemy throws down the pike and flees - which equates for a defeated enemy anyway.
I have seen it speculated that two-handed version of Dacian falx was meant for pursuit and clean-up, rather than a formation fighting, so that might make an interesting parallel.
@@terhazza I am fairly certain the swordsmen were for defending the square if enemies got in between the pikes
Excellent video and I love how you put all of the sources in the description so I can go read them later.
Great video, I've often thought about this exact subject. I feel the great sword was most likely used because above all other weapons it would maximize the soldiers chances of controlling many opposing pikes possibly damaging them (so that they would be more likely to break in the push) and disrupting the cohesion of the opposing pike formation.
Although this is by no means historical, I used to be involved in the SCA. I went to Pennsic and, almost exclusively played with a great sword. I found that when I was in a line of spears against another line of spears, the opposing side would suffer from tunnel vision. Whether they were concerned that I would suddenly rush their line, which I sometimes did, or because I was different, I found that I could draw a lot of attention. I would focus on parries, while the spearmen on my side would have a much easier time making hits.
Landsnechkt were known too wear extremely flamboyant clothing aswell
I suppose just having two different types of soldier in the enemy square (each with a different type of weapon) makes it more difficult for the enemy to act correctly.
If all they faced were pikes, then they'd only have to deal with pikes. But having two different types of soldier (mostly pikemen, plus a number of greatswordsmen among them) would complicate things *more* than twofold?
I'm thinking, first and maybe second row of the enemy formation hold pikes in your direction. They gamble on you being intimidated by the row of sharp points so the pikemen can advance and suddenly lunge their pike tips forwards, killing or injuring men in the first row of the opposing formation.
But in such a tight formation, the pikemen won't have full freedom of movement with their pikes. They're kind of limited to thrusting forwards, raising or lowering the pike tip, and only have very sideways motion to work with.
Therefore the greatsword units don't necessarily need to "break" the pikes as such. What they need to do is get past the business end of the pikes without getting skewered.
Because once you get past the tips of the pikes, they will just be long sticks to your sides, which can't be swung hard to hit you in sideways motions since that might end up crashing into the other pikes.
So with sweepint sideways parryint motions of a great sword, you could probably knock the presented pike tips to the side or downwards into the ground purchasing your unit enough time to get men past the pike tips.
Once they're past they can just charge and slaughter the pikemen, since tje greatswords will have longer reach than any backup swords the pikemen might carry, and the pikemen will be busy trying to figure out wether they should hold on to their pikes or just drop them in order to meet the advancen of the great swordsmen.
So I believe that when the manuscripts talk about "breaking pikes", the probably refer to breaking the formation of the pikes rather than outright severing pike tips from the shafts.
I would go this far and say that you'r correct. Thats what I see and do on BOL-Drills all the time. Sucks to be on the Side that gets "broken" XD
There are a number of sources for swords & other weapons cutting pikes & other wooden weapon shaft. They're quite explicit. Joseph Swetnam knew of a duel in which a man with sword & dagger severe the shaft of a staff. He didn't doubt this happened, but judged the man who wielded the staff a poor fencer for letting the swordsman do it. Lord Orrery wrote that it was easy for cavalry to cut the heads off of pikes that didn't have langets for protection, & that his side had once taken a fort because enemy pikers lacked these langets. Etc.
@@b.h.abbott-motley2427 If a pike has langets, like most of them used on our Drills, the langets are only around 30-40 cm long. They dont do mucv but hold the tip in place. Even if there were no langets at all - the pike has way to much give if the enemy strikrs at it due to the extreme leverage. You cannot cut threw a Polearm and you defenetly cannot cut threw an even thicker pike-Shaft. And you can neither strike it with enough force to breake it since it gets pushed aroun to easily.
So either the sources are exagerating or wrong, the tranlastion is wrong or it has been taken out of context. Also a manuscript showing something doesn mean that it is realistic, possible, easy or good.
Asch-Wood is known to be strong and flexible and most polearms were made out of asch. I dont think that you could break a pikeshaft even if you fixated it in a vice and went full force swing at it.
Also cavslry cannot cut the spikes off of pikes since tge get impaled by the pikemen if they get anywhere near their reach. Also taking a fort has nothing to do with pikes but sige engigen and sieg in general. I doubt the entire story beeing fake/a story without reading it. I will look it up tomorrow
Can you link the manuscript your reffering to?
@@ThePure2HD See Lord Orrery's treatise here: quod.lib.umich.edu/e/eebo/A53478.0001.001/1:7.2?rgn=div2;view=fulltext
"The Pikes arm'd at the Points with Lozange heads, if the cheeks, or sides of the Pikes are not armed with thin Plates of Iron four Foot deep, are very apt to be broken off near the Heads, if the Push be vigorous, and the Resistance consi∣derable: Nor is this all; for unless the Pikes be armed with those thin Iron Plates, they are easily cut off with sharp Swords, for the Pike, especially toward the end, is carried ta∣pering, to poise it the better, and thereby renders it the more flippent for those who use it; so that the slenderer part of the Pike, if unarm'd, is the more liable to be cut off, it being there nearest the Enemy; whereas if the Pikes were armed with those thin Plates, and four Foot deep, no cutting Swords (which are alwayes of the shortest) could destroy the Pikes, since that part of the Staff of the Pike which is unarmed, would be out of the reach of the Horsemans sharp cutting
Sword: I remember we once carried a Fort by storm, because the Enemies Pikes had not those Plates, whereby the Heads of them were cut off."
& from Donald Lupton's 17th-century polemic against the pike:
"[H]ath it not been seene that three or foure good resolute Soldiers with their swords and Buffe-coats only have cut off ten or twelve Pike-heads, and come off safe without wounds, and purchased to themselves honor and reward?
"For an instance of this: The Prince of Orange his Leaguer lying before Scenke-Sconse, it so fell out, that there was a great uproare betwixt the English and Switzers, they being enquarter'd one next to the other; the occasion was small, being about a stiver or two lost at Cards; but the issue had likely to have produced wonder and amazement (if by faire perswasions and entreaties both parties had not been pacified) for the Tumult began to grow to an intestine Mutiny (many men being wounded on both sides) so that the English first, and Switzers at last call'd to Armes: whenas there stood one of the Divisi|ons of the Switzers pikes ready charg'd, did not then two Soldiers of Collonell Burlacyes Regiment with their swords only enter by force into that Body, and cut off divers Pike-heads, and came off againe with three or foure of them in their hands, which in fury and great derision they flung againe amongst them, with this jeere to boote, Oh doe us no harme good men!"
& from Giacomo di Grassi, 1594 English translation of 1570 manual:
"But because these weapons for the most part are exercised, and vsed to enter through diuers Pikes & other weapons, and to breake and disorder the battell raye, to which ende, and purpose, if it be vsed, then that manner of mannaging and handling is verie conuenient which is practised now adaies, and thus it is: The Partesan, Holberd, and Bill (but not the Iauelin, being in this case nothing effectuall because it hath small force in the edge) must be borne in the middle of the staffe, with the heele thereof before, and verie lowe, and the point neere a mans head. And with the said heele, or halfe staffe vnderneath, from the hande downwardes, he must warde and beat off the pointes and thrustes of the Pikes and other weapons, and hauing made waie, must enter with the encrease of a pace of the hinder foote, and in the same instant, let fall his weapon as forcibly as he maie, and strike with the edge athwart the Pikes. This kinde of blowe is so strong (being deliuered as it ought, considering it commeth from aboue downwardes, and the weapon of it selfe is verie heauie) that it will cut asunder not onely Pikes, but also any other forcible impediment."
Donald McBane: "[A] highlandman attacked me with sword and targe, and cut my wooden handled bayonet out of the muzel of my gun; I then clubed my gun and gave him a stroke with it, which made the butt-end to fly off; Seeing the Highland-men to come fast upon me, I took to my heels and run thirty miles before I looked behind me."
Joseph Swetnam, 1617 treatise: "I have known a man with a Sword and Dagger hath cut off the end of a Pike-Staffe, but I hold him an ignorant and unskillful man, that hath held the Staffe."
Etc.
Pikes could be quite thin near the head, perhaps one inch in diameter. (1.06in according to Sancho de Londono's 16th-century manual.) They typically tapered, as Lord Orrery wrote. You can find lots of videos of people cutting through thicker pieces of wood with swords. One of the Arms and Armor people recently cut through a rather thick hickory axe handle with a single swing from a longsword. Hickory is harder & tougher than ash. It's unlikely that all these sources, from across time & space, are inaccurate.
@@b.h.abbott-motley2427 Nice References - thanks.
I feel like another benefit of the great sword over the halberd would be how effective they are in very close quarters combat given the longer edge. I also think that both would be effective against a 6 meter plus pile as a pile that size can’t be that well controlled due to the distance between the hand and the point.
Great vid!
For close quarters soldiers use their sidearms
You got really close to my line of thinking on this when you brought up halfswording. I always assumed in closer, tighter situations like formation fighting/streets and corridors they would try to shorten their reach by halfswording or pulling it further back into their body losing some reach but gaining a lot of control over their blade and using the tip of the blade to thrust into gaps in armor and joints etc.
Good to see your lass again ;) love the breakdown into lil bookmarked sections! Very interesting and logical breakdown. Enjoyed this.
If anyone wonders what the inscription of the guys sword art 0:52 means:
Mein Gelt verspielt 1559
Gambled away my money 1559
(Not sure with the year, it's not easy to see on my phone)
May i help? It's 1519
And due to the phone you may have not seen the "All" on the left. -> All mein Gelt veaspielt 1519
So: Gambled away all my money 1519
"Mom, can we have a pike square?"
"We have a pike square at home."
The pike square at home: 13:04
@Skallagrim, your demonstration remind me of a very similar idea from a Chinese military training manual, called "Dan Dao Fa Xuan" ("Long saber manual") by Cheng Zong You in 1621.
The idea is that a battlefield formation is created by having a swordsman on the left of every spearman, to help cover the spearman side in case of an enemy thrust from the left, and the swordsman & spearmen on each of his sides works together to fight against enemy spearmen.
This manual is really interesting as from the interpretation of Jack Chen (a Singapore based martial artist), most of the stances and movements are done in a very linear & straightforward manner to avoid cutting your partners on the left & right side.
I started studying it about 2 months ago, and some of the group formations & tactics you tried here are very close : protecting the spearman near you, trying to deflect enemies spearheads, even having your partner spearman blocking multiple enemies spears, using a lot of vertical strikes...
(the translator got an interesting channel here on youtube too, and he has made a quick demo of the stances here : ua-cam.com/video/V1Vg4O7g9js/v-deo.html)
This is legit one of the best videos you have made, extremely interesting. Well done and thanks!
The Zweihänder is definitely my favorite among all swords. I love the hook-like parrierhaken they all have.
Roland way also (in the myth) a lunatic, so that dude probably behaved madly/ wildly, and managed to beat the pikes
I distinctly remember discussions from ARMA on this very subject, and iirc their reconstruction of the method was that the verlorne haufe/doppelzoeldners armed with zweihaenders would basically grab the blade with the left hand. With both hands on the weapon as if holding a staff, the zweihaender itself is used as a pseud-polearm, and the ideal situation would be the pike shaft being caught between the parrying hook and the guard at the ricasso, at which point the soldiers would basically "slide down the shaft" while pushing it to the side. A few soldiers in two groups will push the bundle of pike shafts controlled by the zweihaender to opposing directions to spread between the defense and make a hole, where the rest of the soldiers would attempt to charge in. At least, that was what ARMA people figured around twenty years ago, and they basically concluded chopping off the pike shaft was just not viable.
.
Another interesting point would be to compare it with 16th century Japanese pike formations, which arrived at the conclusion that when two pike formations are fighting each other, both would focus in trying to bind down thrusting pikes to make an opening. This eventually evolved into a situation where the pikes were now attempting to avoid being "binded" and "opened up" in such a manner by using pikes to swing downwards in an attack, rather than thrust. So if you get a chance to see later-Sengoku era pike combat re-enactment, the pikes formations all raise their pikes and smash it down as if using an elongated glaive, rather than thrust with it.
.
Pretty interesting shit.
I suggest looking up the Ming manuscripts (or rather resources based on them because xvi century Chinese), they used very elaborate mixed units tactics based on pikes and HAVE PICTURES, it might give more insight on the formation vs formation combat
Nice to see you mentioning and showing the Spanish movie "Alatriste", with the great Viggo Mortensen as then main character.. The warfare parts of it I think they are brilliant and it does show the use of pikes and how other soldiers (normally younger) crawling underneath to stab people on the other side, something mentioned in different sources.
Other parts of the movie are not so great, a missed opportunity.
I think it's definitely feasible that this can protect the weilder from pikes. For one all of the manuals describe wide sweeps with it not the standard long point maneuvering of longsword. But more importantly the wide cross guard and "hooks" on the sword work kind of the same way you use a buckler: since the defensive portion is held out away from your body it effectively covers more of your body due to the angling. Not to mention the hooks could give a point to catching and pushing aside whatever long shafts are in front of you creating openings in the formation.
Basically, on that demonstration, jist take horizontal swings at that bunch of spears, and you'll be able to knock them aside, without needing to put your body close to the dangerous spear tips due to the reach the sword is giving you.
As a keybo-... as an internet scholar I like to imagine the great sword a decent weapon for 1-1 tournaments. For a battlefield, I think that pike might be preferable, especially in formation. If I had to stand against cavalry, I would prefer the long pike over the great sword. And being protected by a forest of pikes around me.
In a battle, there's nothing as important as having more friends than enemies. :)
@@AnotherDuck or friends with better toys
A greatsword can also be useful when guarding a gateway, as you can occupy an immense amount of space by swinging it. Refer to some of Scholagladiatoria's videos on the subject.
@@johanrunfeldt7174 well if you are in a gate ain’t that big sword hitting the wall so you Are completely useless? Shorter weapon would be more appropriate due to the confined spaces.
@@sergeantsharkseant You stand in front of the gate. It's not like you're stopping an army, more like preventing unauthorised commoners from entering the castle. Doesn't matter how angry and rebellious they are.
"A pike is a spear on steroids" is now my favourite definition
If you want to defeat an army in the two-handed long spear phalanx formation, you must try to break the organization of 3 or 4 lines that support each other. If you drag the battle into rough terrain, the formation will be broken. Lack of discipline (kill the leader) can disrupt this order. Your soldiers should have big shields like Roman Legionnaires. Thus, they can more easily enter the gaps formed when the formation is disturbed.
More importantly, the enemy army using spears that are too long to carry a shield are vulnerable to arrow attacks, especially if they have weak armor. For this reason, units such as Swiss Pikemen, resistant to archers, did not emerge before the armor technology was well developed
Cool👍
IDK, a bunch of dudes with 2 hander swords charging at me yelling.. I'd pee my pantaloons
I have seen part 1, this ties everything together. Thank you for your hard work researching this topic.
Maybe I’m underestimating how much the pikes would obstruct projectiles or how heavily armored the pikemen would be, but it seems to me that having a few crossbow men scattered throughout your formation to pick off enemy pikemen and thin their formation could be a much safer and more effective alternative to having men with great swords attempting to bind the pikes.
Pike squares had lesser musketeer formations on corners. BTW swedish harquebusiers had a 3 rank formation with pikemen scattered throughout formation.
Winged Hussar:
- Guys! Footmen are switching to 4m and above in terms of pikes. We have to move well beyond 6m in length.
Thought I had is that the greatswords were simply used to control horizontal motion of enemy pikes. Imagine a jail cell with vertical bars. Then imagine sticking a pike between the bars. Your can move the pike vertically with no issues, but your horizontal motion is very limited. In theory these greatswords would act as obstacles that limit threatening angles of attack from your periphery in both directions across an entire battleline. Perhaps multiple greatsword wielders could corral many pikes by going forward and toward one another and crossing swords, which would not only reduce the horizontal motion of pikes even more severely but also by crossing the swords you are also limiting upward motion. The length of the greatsword in this scenario allows for both defensive and offensive options and quite a lot of flexibility to switch options quickly as needed, which puts you at an advantage against someone who needs to draw an entirely separate weapon to defend themselves. I think that these descriptions about greatswords "cutting through" the pikes is perhaps not a literal description of their function but rather a figurative way of describing their ability to be offensive screens that create safer avenues to approach the enemy line or even advance your own formation.
Super interesting subject and great video, my friend!
Thanks for all the research that went into this!
0:53
I love how his sword just reads "I gambled all my money away"
Probably the reason why the dude is working as a mercenary
@@KP3droflxp Yeh, I'd assume that's the point. It's a carricature.
yeah, I saw that too, I don't think says gambled though, more like 'all my money wasted'
@@TobyIKanoby verspielt is best translated to gambled. Wasted would be more something like durchgebracht.
@@Glimmlampe1982 oh yeah you are right, it is German, in my language it would mean wasted (as in: Al mijn geld verspild), it being a drawing from Urs Graf it probably is German.
fun fact i think the "forlorn hope" (07:55) might be called "verlorener haufen" in german which translates to "lost heap or mob" not sure about this but it could be based on a textline from the landsknecht song "weit lasst die fahnen wehen" which says "Lasst den verlor'nen Haufen vorwärts zum Sturme laufen" meaning "let the lost mob run forward to storm/attack"
I feel like a big advantage of the zweihander is that you can engage the front rank of pikes and still be out of range of the second rank because the sword is so long.
I would not be surprised if "cutting pikes" in the historical documents simply referred to cutting down the user, and the author simply assumed that no one would think it meant actually chopping through a hard wooden shaft.
Your scholarship, as always, is admirable, as is the logic on which you base your deductions.
Tell me your thoughts on this
Using the great sword as support for the friendly pikes behind rather than attacking the enemy directly.
Maybe by clearing as many enemy pikes as possible by striking them down or to the side you create an opening in the enemy formation that the friendly pikemen behind you can take advantage of?
You're much more on the right mark than skallagrim here. I've done exactly that in a larp battle, pushing 3 enemy pikes (blade down like in 4:20) to the side to let my friends use their pikes with great success. Also, people should just unsub skallagrim... it's all trash.
0:38 I can confirm that "Schlacht" in "Schlachtschwert" in this case refers to battle, not slaughter ("die Schlacht" = "the battle"). Just like "Sturm" in "Sturmgewehr" means charge and is translated as assault (from the first World War era where "Stosstruppen" and "Sturmtruppen" (assault troops) were created with specific weaponry and training, the meaning is not in any case storm here as well. German is that way, same with Dutch and a few other Germanic languages in northern Europe. Lots of multiple semantic uses for one noun that aren't immediately obvious.
The verb "storm" is uncommonly used in English with that meaning as well. (To storm = to rush, charge, assault).
@@GodzillasaurusJr Storm the front!
Well Schlacht/Slag also means hit/hew. So it could be "Hewing Sword".
So does it specifically refer to battle, combat or to strike? Literally I think it could be either?
Eh, Schlacht comes from schlachten because that is what people do with each other. They are slaughtering each other.
to make your pike square truly invincible, mix in some pommel throwers.
There's a 16th-century account of Swiss pikers throwing everything they had on hand, including bottles. Did this include pommels too? Hmm.
One of your best videos imo! An astute analysis.
Perfect timing on this one. A month or so back i got into several quite intense FB arguments in a HEMA group with people who were adamant that groups armed with greatswords were smashing pike blocks left and right. Simply asking them for details, and then pointing out that they actually didn't have any evidence after they couldn't give any references, provoked a nasty bit of flaming.
I love videos like this, or how to do certain hema attacks or training and such! Keep it up skall, great information. 😄
Having some lessons with the pike myself I find your research very interesting. I think that it must have been very dangerous to be in the front rank if you have a pike or a greatsword. There must be a reason why two handed swords fell out of use while pikes still existed on the battlefields.
Gunpowder took over the killing role of infantry weapons, while pikes still maintained their defensive application against cavalry.
If you were in the front lines you would want a pike and shield.
Yes, interesting certainly. It would make a great subject for a battle re creation.
I can't help but figure that the normal attack on a pike square would be to swipe the points to one side. Thus , the great swordsman would be clearing some space for his guys with pikes to do the actual impaling. The long reach of his weapon would force his enemy to back up extending the points ,or get their head split. This lets him get inside and shove the points aside with his entire weight, the tail ends of the pikes shoving people around. He can then slide his blade down the pike hacking people himself. Balsy for sure , but they had those.
This is some of your best work, period.
I really appreciate the consistently high quality of your posts. Thanks for being so excellent!
so dark souls 3 wasnt right??? impossible that the game with building size sworlds isnt accurate, you must be wrong
*points down at skall*
I mean if you had a building sized sword, pike formations wouldn't last very long
@@kyle18934 yeah fair enough
@@kyle18934 What if you have building sized pikes too?
@@rincewindTA that would be interesting to watch. I honestly don't know. It would be like giant sticks being held by tiny people.
"We're going to call these great swords for simplicity"
Proceeds to call then two handed swords the rest of the video
Pointy stick Vs sharp stick. The war continues
Sharp pointy stick for the win
They are both pointy sticks - it’s the length of the stick that was important, or rather the ratio between “pointy” and “stick”.
This video is Maximum Pointy:Minimum Stick vs Minimum Pointy:Maximum Stick.
Though they all lose to projectile pointy stick. The singularity that changed warfare forever was when we no longer needed the stick.
Not really. The Swiss were one of the first to try out the greatsword, were easily the best melee fighters in Europe, and ultimately banned them from their formation in favor of more halberds.
i'm not really a sword person, i like ancient history, but i do find your videos extremely interesting and your hypophysis thought provoking. you make the subject entertaining :-)
I think you hit the nail on the head with the artwork analysis. Yes, pike formations are great. Part of the way to deal with them is to mix in some other stuff like missile weapons and some big swords and halberds and things.
Landsknechts with un-fancy hats?! This has become literally unwatchable.
lol
My thought is that the entire greatsword is functionally the "strong" of the blade when compared to a long and proportionally light pike where there might be 10+ feet of "weak". A greatsword could be used to trap and pin a pike, maybe even more than one at a time. Send a small team of plate armoured greatswordmen against a pike formation, with the first couple swordmen approaching together pinning pikes right and left, leaving a hole that could be large enough to send in the next swordman to attack directly (or maybe another set of pinners, first). Once inside, a greatsword might be able to use those "trademark" large cuts to attack the pikemen that are now trapped by their own tight formation.
@@peterlokin4098 Except not really borne out by the historical evidence. In fact, the only thing I've seen that worked like this was a case of Swiss halberdiers (who were considered the best melee combatants by far) who actually banned greatswords from their formations.
Halberds and other polearms hit MUCH harder on both the thrust and cut, and can hook the enemy or their weapons.
Something might worth mentioning about the entire pike/greatsword mix. You also have guns. Now maybe not as many during late 15th-early 16th century, but still, you can use firepower to also try creating gaps in the pike formation and then having your greatswordsmen rush forward into those gaps
i think this is more realistic scenario.
I have enjoyed your channel for years but, perhaps the best thing you ever did for me was letting me know about Alatriste. Amazing! (thanks for all the other stuff though)
I think the most underrated element is the length of the pikes: 4 -6 m held at the end makes overcoming inertia very difficult. Also, the lateral movement was limited in crowded conditions. This design is appropriate and necessary to keep the horses relatively far away from the pikemen. It was not designed for hand-to-hand combat. If someone tried to break into the formation, probably many pikes pointed at him but were too slow to effectively engage actively. In contrast, the shorter and better-balanced longsword had a significant speed advantage. Therefore, I think it was actually possible to "wedge in" and create a short opening with two wingmen to pass the tips damage pikes and allow more men to follow.