Page 3 of 3

Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:27 pm
by lucasbu
Medicus Matt wrote:The first one is a La Tene style Iron Age sword, so that's 2nd-1st century BC.

The second one is a spanish falcata so again that's Iron Age.

The fourth one is a Bronze Age sword, about 1000BC?

So, whilst they certainly fit the description "Not common on a 15th century battlefield" I think that using 2500-1700 year old antiques might be pushing the boundaries a little too far?
i know, i just posted the image. it's what google came with when i searched for Kilij

Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2009 11:23 pm
by narvek
Before your next post read this: http://livinghistory.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=18540

then read it again aloud to make sure you understand it. A pak přestan vymýšlet píčoviny.

:P

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 10:19 am
by Medicus Matt
lucasbu wrote:
i know, i just posted the image. it's what google came with when i searched for Kilij
None of the swords in that picture is a kilij.
If you know that as well then I don't see the point of you posting it.

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 12:52 pm
by WorkMonkey
There is no point to this entire thread, other than to wind me, and many others, up.

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 2:03 pm
by Fox
Marcus Woodhouse wrote:The bardische is one of those weapons that is more popular among re-enactors then density should allow. My own research points to it being reasonably common (in illustartions-not finds) throughout Europe in the middle of the 14th century and then it reappears almost solely in Northern and eartern europe at the end of the 15th century, however its second appearence seems to show it more as a low status weapon (often dipicted by men carrying spears as well).
All so true.
In my defence, I'd never seen one before I bought it, that's how uncommon they were.
If my undeserved reputation with the weapon has been even partly responsible for it's spread, I appologise.
There still aren't that many out there.

I recall (and this was nearly ten years ago, so I couldn't tell you where, or how) that I provinanced a bardiche to England in the 14thC. That evidence might, or might not, reach my higher standard of proof now.

Certainly they were more common in Eastern Europe early in the 15thC, and those were mostly also "commoners" weapons.

Finds, and I think the two in a case above show one of each, range from unbalanced, rustic axes to better made, balanced weapons.

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 3:02 pm
by Dave B
Fox wrote:I recall (and this was nearly ten years ago, so I couldn't tell you where, or how) that I provinanced a bardiche to England in the 14thC. That evidence might, or might not, reach my higher standard of proof now.
When I disucssed it with him, Roger Lankford (sp) had two sources, an illustration and some sort of carving. IIRC the illustration was high status, a knight of some sort.

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 8:00 pm
by Marcus Woodhouse
It is and he seems to be using it one handed!

Posted: Sun Sep 06, 2009 7:08 pm
by Nigel
WorkMonkey wrote:There is no point to this entire thread, other than to wind me, and many others, up.
want me to be nice to him ?

Posted: Tue Sep 08, 2009 9:22 pm
by Grymm
Daft 16thC weapons now
The gurt big lump o'wood
Image
The agricultural scythe
Image
Sickle (not like the one in The Hair Bear Bunch)
Image
BDSM with a footmans flail
Image
And a post combat cuddle
Image

Posted: Tue Sep 08, 2009 11:13 pm
by Phil the Grips

Posted: Wed Sep 09, 2009 12:23 am
by stephen wootten
id say a machette or a reed knife

Posted: Wed Sep 09, 2009 9:04 am
by Marcus Woodhouse
Was the big log of wood only invented in the 16th century?
I'm trying to provedence it for 15th century use.

Posted: Wed Sep 09, 2009 9:18 am
by Grymm
Marcus Woodhouse wrote:Was the big log of wood only invented in the 16th century?
I'm trying to provedence it for 15th century use.
Nah Def 16thC and German not used in Britain 'til 1625.

Posted: Wed Sep 09, 2009 12:29 pm
by Colin Middleton
While the 'big lump of wood' was known of well before 1500, it was not until the 'enlightenment' of the renaisance saw all intelligence concentrated in the hands (heads?) of an elite few that the general public at large became SO stupid as to regard the 'big lump of wood' as a viable weapon. During the Middle Ages, most people had the good common sense to use far more effective weapons and keep the big lump of wood for more important purposes, like burning.

:wink:

Posted: Wed Sep 09, 2009 11:38 pm
by paul bennett
Grymm wrote:Daft 16thC weapons now
The gurt big lump o'wood
Image
The agricultural scythe
Image
Sickle (not like the one in The Hair Bear Bunch)
Image
BDSM with a footmans flail
Image
And a post combat cuddle
Image
Dreynshlag did a fantastic demo of scythe fighting a few years ago, dramatized as Paulus Hector Mair (author of those fechtbuchs) vs Death.
The whole thing was sub-titled by people with large sheets of paper with the script written on them

Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 3:19 am
by behanner
[quote="Black Pear"]
The most exotic I would go with is a Goedendaag. Been to the continent, met some Flemish troops, brought a pointy pickaxe handle home. Enough said.[quote]

I'll one better you on this one.
Inventory of War Materials at Calais 1481.
In godon dawghes with pikes of iron ix

Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 8:22 am
by Marcus Woodhouse
So no lumps of wood.
:(
I'll have to carry on using a longsword and pollaxe then.
:D