Veeky Forums, were spears commonly used in duels in early/mid medieval times...

Veeky Forums, were spears commonly used in duels in early/mid medieval times? Also when were spears most popular as mass usage weapons?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=l2YgGY_OBx8
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Spears were always the most popular melee weapon due to their ease of use and ease of make.

Schooled

Pointy sticks were always popular, mate.

I know that much, I wanna know when were they the most popular weapon, considering that in late medieval they were replaced by pikes and halberds

Pikes and halberds are just fancy spears.

He said duels, you illiterates.

swords are simply better better at dueling than pretty much any other weapon apart from firearms

Taken from the Egilssaga:

>After that they prepared themselves for the duel. Egil came forward wearing a helmet on his head and carrying a shield in front of him, with a spear in his hand and his sword Dragvandil tied to his right hand. It was the custom among duellers to have their swords at hand to have them ready when they wanted them, instead of needing to draw them during the fight. Atli was equipped in the same way as Egil. He was strong and courageous, an experienced dueller, and skilled in the magic arts. Then a huge old bull was brought out, known as the sacrificial bull, for the victor to slaughter. Sometimes there was one bull, and sometimes each of the duellers brought his own. When they were ready for the duel, they ran at each other and began by throwing their spears. Neither stuck in the shields; the spears both fell to the ground. Then they both grabbed their swords, closed in and exchanged blows. Atli did not yield. They struck hard and fast, and their shields soon began to split. When Atli's shield was split right through, he tossed it away, took his sword in both hands and hacked away with all his might. Egil struck him a blow on the shoulder, but his sword did not bite. He dealt a second and third blow, finding places to strike because Atli had no protection. Egil wielded his sword with all his might, but it would not bite wherever he struck him. Egil saw that this was pointless, because his own shield was splitting through by then. He threw down his sword and shield, ran for Atli and grabbed him with his hands. By his greater strength, Egil pushed Atli over backwards, then sprawled over him and bit through his throat.

Spears are a low status but extremely practical weapon. They have always been the most popular weapon for mass use, but I doubt they were ever the primary weapon for dueling

Adding to It's interesting how closely this resembles the South German judicial combat in the late middle ages (pic). Described by Hans Sachs later in Early Modern German as:

>Zu fuß man auch der zeyt noch kempffet.
>Gerüst eyner den andren dempffet
>Inn drey wehren, schwerd, dolch und spieß,
>Wo einer auf den andern stieß,
>Verwundet oder gar umb-bracht.

>At this time one fights on foot.
>Armoured one tries to defeat the other
>With three weapons, sword, dagger and spear,
>Where one thrusts for the other,
>To wound or even kill.

Especially the part about the drawn swords.

...

holy fuck

>By his greater strength, Egil pushed Atli over backwards, then sprawled over him and bit through his throat.

Godammit.

>Atli died on the spot. Egil rushed to his feet and ran over to the sacrificial bull, took it by the nostrils with one hand and by the horns with the other, and swung it over on to its back, breaking its neck. Then Egil went over to his companions. He spoke this verse:

>Dragvandill did not bite
>the shield when I brandished it.
>Atli the Short kept blunting
>its edge with his magic.
>I used my strength against
>that sword-wielding braggart,
>my teeth removed that peril.
>Thus I vanquished the beast.

>Then Egil acquired all the lands he had fought over and had claimed as his wife Asgerd's inheritance from her father.

>Nothing else of note is said to have happened at the assembly.

I love reading about duels in the sagas.

>Egil rushed to his feet and ran over to the sacrificial bull, took it by the nostrils with one hand and by the horns with the other, and swung it over on to its back, breaking its neck.

who the hell wrestles a bull to death?

Egill Skallagrimsson

An absolute madman.

No, the reach of a spear of a huge advantage. The greatest disadvantage of a spear is simply that it is inconvenient to carry around, unlike a sword.

Not to mention if a guy with a sword gets past your guard you're pretty much fucked. Spears were probably used in duels but I think that the main advantage of a spear is its usefulness in formations rather than one on one combat.

That's a big if. If the swordsman gets close enough, yes he will have the advantage, but the same appears to dagger vs. rapier for example. I'd still much prefer to have the rapier than the dagger. Plus the spearsman can pull the spear back so he's not exactly "pretty much fucked".

youtube.com/watch?v=l2YgGY_OBx8

I often see people write that, but what I find interesting is reading descriptions like or seeing pictures like , . Where it's clearly stated that they liked to have their swords ready. Especially looking at the depictions of judicial combat in Talhoffer, Wallerstein and later works based on it, e.g. Mair, we see them abandon their spears quite fast in order to close in with swords - which they often have drawn all the time.
I wonder whether people don't overestimate the effectiveness of spears in a duelling environment, especially when armour is involved, since in pretty much all depictions - and descriptions for that matter - we don't see spears play that extraordinary of a role. And this is by no means due to some historical bias against spears which people sometimes claim existed. Spears were a knightly weapon, and high medieval texts are filled with colourful descriptions of how elegantly they were used from horseback in order to stab or dismount other knights.

Ever seen Jackie Chan with a staff in one of those kung fu movies? A spear can be articulated almost as fluidly as a staff.

>especially when armour is involved

Well you maybe right that a sword would be better against heavily armored opponent than a spear (maces, warhammers, poleaxes etc. would be even beter). Sword & (sufficiently large) shield vs. spear or spear & shield is also somewhat more complicated. I don't know how well a zweihänder would do against a spear.

So really it depends on armour/shields a lot, but in an unarmored fight in an open space, spear clearly has the advantage over longsword or one-handed sword without a shield. Or dual-wielded swords for that matter.

Yuros had good armor readily available compared to most of the rest of the world. In a duel between unarmored opponents you could do a lot worse than a light spear (the Chinese in particular have a hard-on for spear dueling) but if your opponent has a shield and/or plate armor then your chances of striking anything more than a glancing blow are much better with something quicker and more versatile. For unarmored combat, mounted combat (dat penetration) and formation fighting a spear is great; not so much otherwise.

Well he's a martial artist. I'm not so sure how exactly much training your average medieval spearman got but I'm fairly confident it was very basic.

...

From the dawn of man until the late medieval period then

The type of person to duel would belong to the martial classes.

Egil was just a bad ass then

>Atli the Short

When will they learn???