Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Maces and flails

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
TJK View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Poland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 367
  Quote TJK Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Maces and flails
    Posted: 24-Aug-2004 at 16:06

Im not sure about english meaning of the word flail

flail = cep

Back to Top
Mosquito View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar
Suspended

Joined: 05-Aug-2004
Location: Sarmatia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2537
  Quote Mosquito Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Aug-2004 at 16:15
Originally posted by TJK

Im not sure about english meaning of the word flail

flail = cep

Ahh, i see. Thx a lot.

Back to Top
TJK View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Poland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 367
  Quote TJK Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Aug-2004 at 12:04

completely agree except for the armour thing...I ahve read the exact opposite, they were not armoured at all for speed and since they were peasants, they could no tafford armor (except helmets)

Yep, you are right when it concern the peasents - my post regrd the hussite mercenaries which have much more armour then ordinary peasents..


Hussite mercenaries



Edited by TJK
Back to Top
Temujin View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Sirdar Bahadur

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Eurasia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5221
  Quote Temujin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Aug-2004 at 13:24
mmh, was this golden chalice on red also used on pavises? IIve only seen it as flag so far...and what exactly does it mean?
Back to Top
TJK View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Poland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 367
  Quote TJK Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Aug-2004 at 13:31
This representing their key demand of Comunion in two kinds. It appeared in one form or another on nearly all of their Battle and signal standards. The other major symbol was that of a goose, often combined with a chalice
Back to Top
Temujin View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Sirdar Bahadur

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Eurasia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5221
  Quote Temujin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Aug-2004 at 13:45

I see...

 

BTW, what's your opinion of the battle of Lipany?

Back to Top
TJK View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Poland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 367
  Quote TJK Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Aug-2004 at 13:54
Just Hussites ( Calixtines)  won with Hussities (Taborites)...

Edited by TJK
Back to Top
Temujin View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Sirdar Bahadur

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Eurasia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5221
  Quote Temujin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Aug-2004 at 13:57
yes, but I mean the details...George Podiebrad won with the help of cavalry
Back to Top
TJK View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Poland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 367
  Quote TJK Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Aug-2004 at 14:08

George Podiebrad won with the help of cavalry

Yes sure (BTW was the George of Podierbrad really commander at Lipany :unsure)..but in fact it was the trick with feinged retreat of Calixtines from their tabor which was a decisive factor...

Back to Top
Quetzalcoatl View Drop Down
General
General

Suspended

Joined: 05-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 984
  Quote Quetzalcoatl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Aug-2004 at 19:34

 

 I've read that report from the book from spears to cannon.

During the Norman invasion, one French knight (I think it was a Frank nobleman not a norman) engaged 2 other English knights also noble. The french knight rushed one Englishman with his lance (lance may not be the appropriate name here), and his lance pierced the Englishman from front to back, the victim fell and the tip of lance broke. The French knight then took his mace and smash the skull of the other Englishman. According to that report the mace was only a side weapon for French knight. I think the mace might be more effective when you are fighting another knight because you can't slash properly on a horse with the European style of sword which is more for stabbing.

 

Back to Top
Hyarmendacil View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 17-Aug-2004
Location: Indonesia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 114
  Quote Hyarmendacil Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Aug-2004 at 07:59
Mmm. Not exactly. Up until the middle of the 17th century the prevailing style of European military swords was suited to both cutting and thrusting, and the style lasted well into the 19th century with some English cavalry units that still carried straight backswords when most other units (both English and continental) had adopted the curved Eastern European-style saber. The explanation offered earlier--that mace was easier to use against armor--is probably the more valid one, as cutting through mail is quite difficult because it involves both getting the proper edge alignment and the right amount of strength to break through the mail. Even then, the padding under it can still dissipate much of the force of the blow, rendering it no more effective than a blunt blow delivered with somewhat less strength. Therefore, why bother with sword when you could just put your whole strength behind the bash with a mace? That was the logic followed by the knights at that time.
Back to Top
Temujin View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Sirdar Bahadur

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Eurasia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5221
  Quote Temujin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Aug-2004 at 11:46

Originally posted by TJK

(BTW was the George of Podierbrad really commander at Lipany :unsure).

you're right, it was probably Prokov the great who had the command...

Originally posted by Hyarmendacil

and the style lasted well into the 19th century with some English cavalry units that still carried straight backswords when most other units (both English and continental) had adopted the curved Eastern European-style saber.

well, there was a difference, Napoleonic cavalries were classified as heavy and light cavalry, the heavy cavalry was intended to charge with stright broad-swords, therefore they had straight sabers (sometimes slightly curved) t chareg itno the enemy as if they had lances. the light cavalry had scimitars, they were not intended to charge but only to slash with their sabres, therefore they were curved...

Back to Top
TJK View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Poland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 367
  Quote TJK Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Aug-2004 at 16:08

it was probably Prokov the great who had the command...

Well, Prokop the Great was a commander of Taborities however I have not find any name of general Calixtine's commander in my sources ("Hussite warfare" by Jan Durdik, "Hussities" by Anrzej Michaek and "Hussite Wars" by Piotr Marczak) 

Back to Top
Quetzalcoatl View Drop Down
General
General

Suspended

Joined: 05-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 984
  Quote Quetzalcoatl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Aug-2004 at 00:30

Mmm. Not exactly. Up until the middle of the 17th century the prevailing style of European military swords was suited to both cutting and thrusting, and the style lasted well into the 19th century with some English cavalry units that still carried straight backswords when most other units (both English and continental) had adopted the curved Eastern European-style saber. The explanation offered earlier--that mace was easier to use against armor--is probably the more valid one, as cutting through mail is quite difficult because it involves both getting the proper edge alignment and the right amount of strength to break through the mail.

 

 I don't know what you are talking about but you just reinforced what I've been saying.  I said when fighting a knight a mace is more effective that a straight sword, for the reason you can't slash through a knight armour effective on with a sword. That's why I said fighting knight and nothing else. Gotta read properly mate. A mace will everytime crushed a knight skull at full power and their simplicity of use made them effective during melee between knights where there is little room to manoeuver . We are in the medieval here.

Back to Top
Hyarmendacil View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 17-Aug-2004
Location: Indonesia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 114
  Quote Hyarmendacil Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Aug-2004 at 10:20

I didn't say that I disagreed with you, did I?

However, it's more likely for a knight to aim for the opponent's chest and arms than the head for the simple reason that the head is damned small and difficult to hit. Cutting swords might be dead ineffective against solid helmets, but they could still cut through mail and the padding beneath if the cut was delivered at the correct angle and with eneough speed. And, by the way, swords could be made longer because their weight was more evenly distributed than that of maces, giving them a longer reach than could still be useful.

Of course it took that much more skill to effectively use a sword from horseback against another knight on horseback, so the mace still had an advantage like you said. It's just that the advantage isn't that clear-cut. The knights had a long history of experience of trial and error before they developed a pragmatic preference for the mace as an effective antiarmor weapon.

P.S.: It's worth remarking that the European knights had a martial tradition every bit as effective (and as convoluted) as Eastern martial arts, but much of it was lost when firearms gained complete ascendance in the Baroque era. From what I see of your post, you probably already know about it.



Edited by Hyarmendacil
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.063 seconds.