Wait so if doing what he normally does is in fact doing something he doesn't normally do, does that mean that if he really wanted to do something that he doesn't normally do, he would have to actually do something that he normally does, which would be, in fact, doing something that he doesn't normally do?
@@MrPablosek Just because it's "just a buckler" doesn't mean it couldn't have been used EFFECTIVELY. A buckler can be used to "punch block", shoving it out to break up an opponent's attack, and leave him open to a counterstrike. A buckler was used most effectively much later, as a counter to pikes; the pike head would be deflected upward, and the person would then slip UNDER it and attack the wielder with a short stabbing sword
@@VioletDeathRei Hell, i've never fought anyone with live blades or guns, but I have fought other men locked inside of a cage. My primary goal was to come out uninjured. Luckily I was able to do that and win. Besides a broken foot.
Even in contemporary writing this is mentioned being done for tournament fights to appease the crowd. It has also been done when two fighters secretly decide on what moves they wanna do beforehand, so they can make it look awesome.
@@ReasonAboveEverything yeah its a fight to death let me just bring this sword behind my back and throw my shield to the sides and get ready for an amazing swing oh im dead he stabbed me XD sad truth
@Abrasax Palante And I'm sure you'd tell us all about it from the shady corner of a tavern on a stormy night. Maybe if we probe hard enough, you'll tell us of your tragic backstory and how you came to be such a badass. Your village burned down and you escaped with nothing to your name but your burning desire for revenge, so you begged a nearby mountain hermit to train you in his ways until he gifted you his legendary blade because you were like a son to him... before he died of the plague... tragically. Or, you know, you'd be a peasant boy who's only ever seen a swordfight as a drawing in a book you couldn't read and you'd drink up that entertainment like a good little normie... just sayin.
As Adam said, anyone who isn't trained to fight usually fight in such a sloppy manner. Just watch an average street fight on a Friday night, and compare it to boxing or MMA. When you factor in most Vikings were farmers or labourers most of the year. and only occasional warriors, some of them would have indeed fought in a pretty sloppy, unprofessional manner.
Well, not really. You still need to parry and strike well and not just try to club your opponent. Finesse isn't relegated to civilian duels or unarmored fighting, you still need technique.
@@michaelomalley1856 This looks exactly how two people who know they aren't going to get hurt would fight. No matter what they do, they're going to be fine. Now at first glance you would think "Ya that means their fighting style is worthless". However this is why armour was so important. Security from death really does make battle easier. Imagine being one or both of these guys with no helmet or armour? Their opinions would alter rather quickly. However if you were in full armour raiding a peasant village........you'd probably mow through them just like this.
Mi A If you call being braindead “surviving” sure however those are myths it’s hard to survive that today let alone before we understood how to prevent infections
I did HEMA for a brief period and in that my instructor said there were only three rules for fighting with swords (and, honestly, probably fighting in general) and one of the rules was optional: 1) Don't get hit. 2) Hit the other guy. 3) Look good doing it. (optional)
Don’t get hit is the most important one, if you’re really good at not getting hit. Eventually the other guy will get tired and decide to take a nap. Then you can hit their sleeping body.
Actually, the chloroplasts inside their eyebrows would only do photosynthesis and produce energy when hit by sunlight, therefore most deaths of starvation happened in the arctic winter, when the sun only shines for several minutes. Shaving the eyebrows was a form of punishment or even execusion among the scandinavian culture.
@@valentinmitterbauer4196 Wow, that explains why they were always raiding and exploring new lands- surely, there must've been a land where the sun always shined!
No Viking fighting manuals? Er, See thine enemy before you. Make a corpse of him and of his wife a widow. Drink to the Allfathers glory. What. More. Did. You want??? :-p
"People didn't always do the best possible thing" This is something I feel needs to be said more. We don't even know for sure what went on in people's heads back then (not that we do now either). Some people might have been even *more* pragmatic about fighting than is expected, but then you have matters of religion, honour and other social things that might have mattered a lot. We often think that today all we care about is big flashy effects and hollywood style fight scenes, but in some ways, especially historical re-enactors interested in the 'practical' warfare, we might have a mentality that was also absent from medieval/viking-era peoples. I can't say that was the case, but I can't say it wasn't either. They may have thought about battle quite differently from us. The reason I say this is that historical re-enactor culture has a somewhat similar tenor to modern military culture: very pragmatic, very utilitarian. I can't say that viking or medieval warriors (some or most) did not think the same way. But the ways of thinking about warfare today may have emerged from the changes brought about by industrialisation (and now digitization) and the detaching of the 'aura' from martial conduct, particularly in the case of the aristocratic warrior caste. Just some possibilities.
It’s certainly possible. A modern example would be most people wanting to fist fight clarify “nothing below the belt” while in a life or death situation people would do anything for an advantage. Or how the modern duels with guns from a century ago is dramatized as a honorable 10 steps away, fire on command but in many cases people just walked up and shot each other, or “cheated” by firing early. Others held their guns in the air to back out of it. Or you can go further and look at stuff like the Geneva Convention banning certain actions during war versus terrorists using women and children as walking bombs. People don’t change, just what technology they’re using.
I do MMA and I can say spinning is used to generate more momentum and force which is not as necessary when you have a weapon. For example, u could use a spinning back kick to finish a tired opponent who is not defending themselves as effectively as before, if someone gets that tired in a sword fight, u just stab/cut 'em, no spinning required
In my experience, you can use a spinning move before your opponent is tired as long as you get a good set up before, otherwise you just got yourself in a world of trouble.
Darth Revan yeah you can and it’s very common. Often times used after setting them up with jabs for example because after a front foot step forward with a jab your feet will be perfectly positioned for spinning your body around for a kick.
if it was real fighting, with their lives on the line, and edged weapons, then I think that the fighting would have been more careful. ie. each combatant would protect himself more, pull back a bit, pick shots, conserve energy etc. like in full contact mma
This was one of the most respectful and enjoyable "reaction" videos ive seen. This would be fun to see thrown in the rotation every once in a while. Keep up the great work Skall!!!
Way I see it, spinning sword strikes is like letting off a blackpowder cannon made of cheese. It can work but it's a lot more likely to blow up in your face Also Skall-dundee "that's not a shield. THIS is a shield."
i think when he mentioned attacking from the sides, he meant the diretion of the attack. instead of attacking in a straight line, attacking horizontally
That Skyrim loading screen annoys me so much, because it just makes me think the Oblivion Crisis could've been prevented if Shinji just got in the dang Dwemerbot
They are actually pretty good for lighting things outside of Christmas, say along the hall to the bathroom so you don't have to turn on all the lights and wake everyone up. There is a mom and pop restaurant I really like that uses them all around the inside because they are cheap and easy.
(13:12) This is the primary reason that I come back to watch more of your videos. Your outlook of never thinking that you know it all, which actually makes you a genius. This is something that with 20+ years more than you, I've yet to master... namely humility. I appreciate your sincerity, it moves you to keep investigating and bringing to light always increasingly cooler stuff! :) Keep up the great work!
Definitely like the point that humans don't always do things the best possible way, as far as historical martial arts go. A lot of technological and general militaristic advancement came from something complicated being invented, then it getting refined down to a simpler, better version that could have existed earlier but didn't due to the lack of the proper perspective to think of it. An example would be how bolt actions are much simpler than lever actions, but lever actions came earlier. Same with the wheel-lock existing before the flintlock. If I didn't already miss a video on it, I would like to see what Skall thinks about Shaka's iklwa- the Zulu shortspear he invented to gain an edge over rival tribes. I believe that apart from being a shortened spear, it also had a larger tip, and some historical pictures also include somewhat of a pommel on them.
one thing, aren't lever actions faster than bolt actions? i mean, thinking about the speed, bolt action makes a lot of sense for a simple and easy long range rifle, but for a repeater, a shotty or the 1800s equivalent of an assault rifle, would lever action not be better? just curious.
@@cobraglatiator As far as speed alone, it depends on the shooter and mechanical condition. You can shoot very quickly with practice on a bolt action, and a beat-up lever action can be hard to cycle. Not to mention bolt actions being easier to cycle from the prone or when leaning them on something. As far as I'm aware, lever actions are also limited to tube magazines, so bolt actions can have the higher capacity.
@@bobmcbob49 interesting, i suppose there's some different ways to do bolt action too, but, idk, i just imagined the action of a bolt action in good condition would be slower than that of a lever action in good condition. thanks for the reply.
@@cobraglatiator keep in mind how far you need to move each action to cycle it. The only catch with the bolt action is you need to get the motion down, but it's a significantly shorter movement.
MxCherryBlue, I know you're joking, but "prehistoric" and "bronze age" might overlap, depending on place and culture. One is defined by metallurgy, the other by the presence of written records.
even in hand to hand spinning attacks are used in very specific situations. One is pursuit, which is to say if you tried to do a round kick, but the opponent stepped back, transitioning from that to a roundhouse kick without stopping your momentum is beneficial. The second is for instance with a spinning side kick, which is well employed when you are very close in with your opponent that you can't lift your front leg into a side kick, but want a strike with a lot of power and reach that can push him away. Arguably, the spinning side kick is also used to generate more speed and power in the strike, but...
Well I'm member of a Viking re-enactment group circa 1066 and the way we fight is mainly hacking slashing and slicing rather than thrusting, stabbing. 1: We do it for safety reasons, as it hurts getting poked with a dull non sharpened blade, and it's more energetic and lively when fighting to see slashing and hacking lateral movement in combat. 2: The historical and archeological finds of Viking swords do have a sharpened point but they were not stabbing weapons as the viking swords were very blade heavy and the handle didn't offer much protection or momentum, also the swords were also used as sharpened metal clubs too. And you could get more damage against a Viking warrior in a shield wall by hacking and bashing their shield with a Viking sword rather than trying to stab and thrust into the chunk of wood and metal.
I'm always reminded when I see people arguing that "The people in the past would have done X this way because it's the most rational and common sense way to do it" and I always think back to the FBI Manuals back in the 1940s and 50s, where they trained their men to hold their pistols at *Dick Level,* Ignore the sights, and stand like they are taking a shit mid-air. HISTORICAL fighting does not have any obligation to make any rational sense.
Point shooting at the time was actually better in a close in engagement, ie most of the times when you would be using a pistol/revolver for men who came into such things without much experience than what was prior standard training practice of essentially single action one-hand target shooting. It's not better than more modern techniques but it was a marked improvement on what had come before. This shows another thing; historically people often had reasons for doing what they were doing as they were not (usually) stupid.
@@BadlanderOutsider British special forces in WW2 were trained to shoot from the low position because in their job it was of essence to be the first to get a shot off, ideally before the traditionally trained opponent had his gun up far enough to use the sights. It was a matter of intensive training and the accuracy thus achieved was no worse than with the normal use. And in low light situations (their usual working condition) it tended to be both quicker and more accurate. Again, those guys were no amateurs, so for normal people it is unlikely to work.
Point shooting is more highly skilled form of shooting. The only reason the weaver stance came into popularity was cops needed to be trained faster and easier. But many of the best shooters are point shooters, it just takes alot longer and its harder to get good at it. It is not an inherently inferior methodology.
The FBI method is still correct today, with revolvers with shit sights it's faster to shoot without sights at close range and accurate enough. When you have good sights you should use them
Biggest modern reason for 24 fps being standard is CGI. 60 fps when you have to render CGI scenes becomes FAR more expensive and time consuming. That was a big problem for the hobbit.
I remember this! It was on a cable show, they where interviewing a group who where trying to figure out how vikings likely fought each other for a HEMA organization, and for archeologists! The editing makes them seem a quite out of touch, and I think they mentioned outside of the clip that they where using what they believed where training tools so training exercises where what they where trying to reproduce. Discover or history channel though... I don't remember Edit: spelling and great video! 😁
been doing viking combat recently and im loving it, seeing skaal doing a review fills my heart with joy, but there are many flaws to this. 1st is that i always stand sideview with the shield in front resting half my sword on top of my shield, therefore restong my sword arm so i dont waste energy, 2nd is that very few actually takes into concideration going around a target because you leave them to YOUR blind side (outside of periphereal vision) and they can then strike you, other than that, GREAT VIDEO ANALYSIS
Whoever uploaded this just filmed two living history vikings doing medieval fair full contact sparring. I know, I grew up doing stuff like that. Medieval Fair/Living History people do a lot for show, so there are some rules, it is a kind of open full contact stage fight to show of. Great for the tourists to watch.
Skall: always have a critical mind Me: hmm, im not so certain. I am a bit critical of that. As to head injures through blunt impact : raider would like to know your location. (#nerfstunningtap)
Skall, you're right about jump cutting, but 24fps is here to stay and there are good reasons for it. The biggest being to avoid the soap opera effect; it helps hide the fact that you're watching actors on a set, maintaining your suspension of disbelief. Check out Filmmakers IQ's video on 24 fps. Don't go tearing down the fence before you know why it's been put up 😄
You should watch "The Scythian" (aka "The Last Warrior"), I really enjoyed the fights for the great coreographic work as well as a fantastic camera work
in our Viking combat training we use the shield at about a 30 degree angle from the eyes out, to the front/side (hard to describe), but it creates stability . A shield is only a good as the leverage of the arm and can be easily knocked to the side, pulled to the side and after just a minute or 2 (our rounds are 1:30) can become very heavy. As with all the "medieval" combat arts things changed with the times along with advances in tech etc. Long story short, if im in a "viking"fight with swords , a shield on an extended arm will result in a dislocated shoulder in the blink of an eye. Sabers and bucklers....different story, kite shields, different, roman shields, different. blah blah blah. xoxoxo
7:05 this is a huge point I make to my friends when debating historical tactics in our down time. Distance= time. Time= safety and options. If you have distance between your opponent then one person has to close and that gives you opportunities to either counter or be proactive and eliminate the advantage of distance that your enemy has.
I didn't expect someone agreeing with me on the 24Hz cinema standard here of all places, but... THANK YOU. As a multimedia student, nothing hurts me more than painstakingly animating something and then having to output it in 24Hz for no other reason than "it's always been like this" even though any modern monitor or even TV are MADE to output 60Hz.
Whilst I do watch Roland's videos and have a great deal of respect for his knowledge and practice, I'll take you back to what Skallagrim said right at the beginning... there are NO extant treatise available on how the Vikings fought, and only references within the Sagas which are a record of the stories told that were written down from the Oral tradition in the 12th and 13th Centuries, as such open to over exaggeration and enhancement, as was the style of the Viking Skald... Roland has used his experience of studying Fighting Manuals from a much later date than the Vikings to re-construct a style of fighting that he believes to be a practical way they used the tools at their disposal as evidenced by their design and ergonomics... but it is just that, no one can say differently as there just is not the evidence to say otherwise...
@@jetsetuk But... nobody is saying differently? I'm not sure what the point of this comment is. I'm well aware that there are no treatises or manuals from Viking-age Scandinavia. However, given that Roland has spent a great portion of his life learning and practicing combat from several different eras, I'm more inclined to side with his interpretation of Viking combat than what we see in the video presented by Skall.
@@FirstLast-ks6vm The point was it's ALL still just conjecture... and your comment was phrased in the same way their video was... "good examples of Viking Combat"... but we don't know that it definitively was, so their video is just as valid as Roland's...
@@jetsetuk Again, I never said their method wasn't valid. However, I do feel that Roland has a better grasp and interpretation. I thought I made myself abundantly clear. In my original comment I didn't say "Roland has better examples than these two", did I? You're making an argument against a perceived implication, which is also an implication I didn't make.
@@FirstLast-ks6vm Same as the implication I didn't credit Roland with everything you said in your reply... however what I said about your original comment still stands... btw I re-enact Vikings, so I have a fair idea of the weapons they used, their limitations and their strengths, and more importantly, I also have a fair idea of what the father and son were trying to demonstrate in their video, as well as the nuances of Roland's work... ;o) That said... none of it is Viking fighting... it's fighting using the weapons that Vikings used in a modern interpretation...
They are reenactment-fencers who use a combat system called "Codex Belli" - which is a combat sport, at best. These people are NOT martial artists or practicioners of HEMA.
Question, Skall. wouldn't it be useless to strike with a Viking-era sword against mail? Even with sharp swords, wouldn't the blows simply glance off the armor? Or does a sharp sword actually stand a chance of "cutting through" it? If they cannot do that, then what they are showing in this video would most *definitely* not be the way Vikings "actually" fought, since the way they do it in the video would be utterly useless, wouldn't it? I would love to read your thoughts on this!
Unlikely to cut through it, but the sheer blunt impact can break bones. Even with padding under the gambeson a powerful strike for example to the collarbone can still do damage.
Thanks for the quick replies. I wasn't aware that mail armor was not common for that age. I had always thought that pretty much every fighting man would have mail. The force of impact is also a good point I had not considered. I tend to be very sceptical when I see two dudes just bashing each other on their armor with swords.
And them being fight choreographers is why they point out they are aiming to hit the enemy, not standing apart and bashing the swords together like they used to do in the films. Same thing with the pirouettes, wood chopping cuts and other stuff frequent in the (older) films.
That hugely telegraphed blow thing was always the first thing I tried to break people of when we used (fake) swords even as a kid; use as little movement as possible to strike as often as possible without losing a good position for guarding yourself.
I think the video ended up being more like "How they moved and what they wore" and the fighting part was just them explaining how they choreograph fights themselves
Skall you should set up some sparring and before ask one of the individuals to try a spin move or two while filming it. Without letting the other person know.
Oh no. Nonononono. I had tried so hard to forget this video and you bring it back. Thanks for your analysis tho. Your commentary is way more interesting than the video itself.
Comments are very funny, but ... It still is more funny watching people so motivated to train and do sword fighting. So doubel fun it is. I don't agree about kicking in combat, generally. it is risky, but if you knew how and in which moment, it is great as for opening as for game changing element of fight. Great video. Thanks.
@@sylvanstrength7520 A soldier who actually wears one has almost no rust because he oils it (it doesn't require much) and also wearing it make the rings rub against each other and minimize it.
@@rodrigodepierola I mean, they're vikings. They're out at sea all day. They could have just waded through salt water and returned from a raid. It's extremely naive to think every viking had greased mail at all times.
So Skall's ideology: Stay covered behind a shield even it reduces your range, power and mobility. Like boxer who does only jabs (except range is worse)
A thing that kind of tells a lot about Viking fighting is a story from one of the saga`s. This was about a battle between ships against each other, after the arrow shooting when they had come to the close combat. It says that they shifted between standing in the front line to get renewed strenght there. And also it said that there was one on board the ship that had it as a job to sharpen the sword that had been used in the front, and that those in the front often shifted swords and axes in the middle of the fight to get a newly sharpened weapon. In a battle in Grenmar(Grenland inTelemark in Norway now) there was also a battle between ships(600 ships) where they fired arrows at each other for 3 days before they finally got in to close combat with each other. Some have asked if the Vikings used Halberds, and if we read between the lines, we knew that some did, but that it was very seldom. For example in Njåls Saga, we can read about a Iclandic Viking that was famous for his halberd and it was feared(they ofted put superstitious belief in to weapons that had been in many victories) As Skallagrim point out in this video, the saga`s was often told as stories, but also they was always basically from real happenings, even if they often was not correct. But we can still use sense and read a lot in between the lines from them. For example there is little doubt that he had a halberd, and it also comes pretty clear out that it was a very seldom weapon to use, and very effective for those who knew how to use it.
I either laugh or cringe at that sword and shield huff and puff, I don't know which. it's like children! cheers from Brasil, Skall, keep up your good material, brother!
"Viking shield size" isn't THAT well-defined. You use the right shield for the job, and the largest ones for "going viking" would be for passively protecting against arrows while raiding civilians, rather than nimble shields for duels. For a one-on-one duel, the smaller round shields are naturally a better fit, as you can use it more like a buckler.
2:14... that was great. It made me laugh out loud for the first time all day. I appreciate how you state that neither is their approach to combat methodology absolutely wrong, nor is yours absolutely right. Nonetheless, I am certain you're correct in stating that it did simply make sense for people to perform the most expedient techniques. When that is more certain to enable survival and victory, why use a more complicated and less ergonomic tactic? I've recently become a sub to this channel, and I've watched many videos in the last few days- not only are you entertaining, but you seem to be a person who researches historical matters diligently. It's an approach to history that is sorely lacking nowadays, and this is the sort of video I have come to appreciate in the short time since I learned of this channel.
Hey there, I happen to one of those who practice that sport (and yes, I do consider it a sport) - these guys there are fighting the german variant of western style viking combat. It is not historically accurate and I have not met any viking reenactor myself yet who claims this is historically accurate. - In fact, the reenactment part is the part we're doing when we're not fighting - when we're fighting, it's a sport. And it is a lot more fluid than what you see in the video. These two in the video are not a good representation of the sport nor of reenactment. But, I can recognize what they are doing though.
Shaky cams only work if you do clausrophobic shots in hallways or a similar small area in a thriller or horror context. If you really want to unnerve the audience. And that well paced. Othewise shaky cams are first massivly overused and it needs some experience.
![อยู่คนเดียวกับเขา - ส้ม มารี (Zom Marie) [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/gq1cWAIQDLg/mqdefault.jpg)
"Constant jump-cuts"
*immediately jump-cuts*
Love the humour.
Every good Skallagrim video starts with "Ok guys i'm gonna do something i don't normally do, but..."
Wait so if doing what he normally does is in fact doing something he doesn't normally do, does that mean that if he really wanted to do something that he doesn't normally do, he would have to actually do something that he normally does, which would be, in fact, doing something that he doesn't normally do?
Wetcorps my head hurts
@@Wetcorps wut ?
@@Wetcorps Yes
Wetcorps no.
Skall went full Crocodile Dundee when it came to the tiny shields :D
"That's not a shield!" *draws bigger one*
Scrolled down just to find this ☺
Reptiloid MitGlied He also has a bigger knife.
@@johnfrancisdoe1563 ahem
That's a buckler
@@MrPablosek Just because it's "just a buckler" doesn't mean it couldn't have been used EFFECTIVELY. A buckler can be used to "punch block", shoving it out to break up an opponent's attack, and leave him open to a counterstrike. A buckler was used most effectively much later, as a counter to pikes; the pike head would be deflected upward, and the person would then slip UNDER it and attack the wielder with a short stabbing sword
"You could argue that historical combat should be based less on 'hit' and more on 'don't get hit'..."
^^^
THIS.
But you're not really fighting if you don't get hit
@@KainaX122 Historical combat, as in REAL combat, not sparring.
@@KainaX122 I see you've never heard the phrase "live to fight another day"
@@yugen or even continue to fight today, it's not like that fact has changed much the goal of a gun fight is to not get hit first and foremost.
@@VioletDeathRei Hell, i've never fought anyone with live blades or guns, but I have fought other men locked inside of a cage. My primary goal was to come out uninjured. Luckily I was able to do that and win. Besides a broken foot.
"We use dull Swords"
"That´s a good point"
lol
It'd be funny if overly telegraphed swings were how they fought and we just don't know it.
Even in contemporary writing this is mentioned being done for tournament fights to appease the crowd. It has also been done when two fighters secretly decide on what moves they wanna do beforehand, so they can make it look awesome.
@@ReasonAboveEverything yeah its a fight to death let me just bring this sword behind my back and throw my shield to the sides and get ready for an amazing swing oh im dead he stabbed me XD sad truth
@@jacktheripper5112 Yeah, well, tournaments usually weren't to the death...
they didn't havw the wrod telegraph, wonder what they used? he pigeon messaged that swing
@Abrasax Palante And I'm sure you'd tell us all about it from the shady corner of a tavern on a stormy night. Maybe if we probe hard enough, you'll tell us of your tragic backstory and how you came to be such a badass. Your village burned down and you escaped with nothing to your name but your burning desire for revenge, so you begged a nearby mountain hermit to train you in his ways until he gifted you his legendary blade because you were like a son to him... before he died of the plague... tragically. Or, you know, you'd be a peasant boy who's only ever seen a swordfight as a drawing in a book you couldn't read and you'd drink up that entertainment like a good little normie... just sayin.
TBH the way their fighting looks like a slap fight.
As Adam said, anyone who isn't trained to fight usually fight in such a sloppy manner. Just watch an average street fight on a Friday night, and compare it to boxing or MMA. When you factor in most Vikings were farmers or labourers most of the year. and only occasional warriors, some of them would have indeed fought in a pretty sloppy, unprofessional manner.
Adam J. Harper well when you have something called armor, finesse can be thrown out the window
Well, not really. You still need to parry and strike well and not just try to club your opponent. Finesse isn't relegated to civilian duels or unarmored fighting, you still need technique.
I agree tis but only Button Mashing good sir.
@@michaelomalley1856 This looks exactly how two people who know they aren't going to get hurt would fight. No matter what they do, they're going to be fine. Now at first glance you would think "Ya that means their fighting style is worthless". However this is why armour was so important. Security from death really does make battle easier. Imagine being one or both of these guys with no helmet or armour? Their opinions would alter rather quickly. However if you were in full armour raiding a peasant village........you'd probably mow through them just like this.
2:13
Well I guess that explains why you keep getting injured.
You're not really fighting if you don't get hit
@@KainaX122 getting hit doesn't mean you get injured
Ouch. Touche
Hand in Europe people have known to date had the tops of the heads cut off with swords and still survive
Mi A
If you call being braindead “surviving” sure however those are myths it’s hard to survive that today let alone before we understood how to prevent infections
I did HEMA for a brief period and in that my instructor said there were only three rules for fighting with swords (and, honestly, probably fighting in general) and one of the rules was optional:
1) Don't get hit.
2) Hit the other guy.
3) Look good doing it. (optional)
@Abrasax Palante Well, you wouldn't duel using a polearm now would you?
@@sheevinopalpatino4782 th-cam.com/video/Ad5RJ3TeKSE/w-d-xo.html
Don’t get hit is the most important one, if you’re really good at not getting hit. Eventually the other guy will get tired and decide to take a nap. Then you can hit their sleeping body.
@@crashalarm3283 what if they’re also really good at not getting hit? Staring contest? Romance perhaps? First man to pass out is killed?
they look like background npcs during a battle on loop
lol
I think what we actually need to talk about is that Link v. Ganondorf painting
which one
@@maxximo2367 i thought he meant this one www.zeldadungeon.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/LinkvsGanon.jpg
@@evandeland6867 that one in the corner of the video. What other Link, Ganondorf picutre is there?
@@trentonwardman4503 i thought he was talking about a different one ok
Is Link using the Master Sword like a bastard sword there or is that supposed to be the Biggoron sword cause it looks pretty short in blade length?
The Thumbnail tells me it was important for the Vikings that their Eyebrows got enough Sun Light.
Gotta get that Scandinavian tan on them bad bois
Actually, the chloroplasts inside their eyebrows would only do photosynthesis and produce energy when hit by sunlight, therefore most deaths of starvation happened in the arctic winter, when the sun only shines for several minutes. Shaving the eyebrows was a form of punishment or even execusion among the scandinavian culture.
@@valentinmitterbauer4196
Wow, that explains why they were always raiding and exploring new lands- surely, there must've been a land where the sun always shined!
2:04 When Skall realized he had been doing it wrong his entire life xD
Skal's HEMA teacher: "We trained him wrong as a joke!"
@@a-blivvy-yus Skall Pow - Enter the sword
@@a-blivvy-yus hahahhahah!!!! That was from a parody whose name I dont remember right??
@@rodrigoacosta9708 It was Kung Pow (as referenced by TheFilthyCasual's comment).
Viking rule: no head shots.
Dang it Randy.
But it worked better.
We didn't rehearse this to win.
But how we suppose to win?
I'd think "Do what is necessary to win"
Maybe avoid them during practice, but in actual fighting, I'd say go for it
KainaX122
Don’t head shot just head butt
It works all the time👍🏻👍🏻
IRON_KING_KNIGHT but then you're head butting yourself at the same time
Viking rule #2: Cutting is the perfect technique against chainmail
@WhoDarestheMAN gamer Randr then?
No Viking fighting manuals?
Er,
See thine enemy before you.
Make a corpse of him and of his wife a widow.
Drink to the Allfathers glory.
What. More. Did. You want???
:-p
pointers on how to do so? maybe? i dunno, i'm no viking....
Technique?
Double woosh!
@@Heulerado i mean,i was joking, i answered knowing the OP was being sardonic. so.
@@cobraglatiator So you want to pledge bad joke to not get charged with woosh? Alright, let's see what the jury thinks
2017 : Sword tests
2018 : Gameplay
2019 : Reaction vids
A long way we have come skal...
@Targaryen Dynasty I would watch a makeup tutorial from Skallagrim.
King Harlaus back to sword tests. We came full circle.
2020: catching ducks with pepsi and mentos
been watching his guy since 2013. very passionate
"People didn't always do the best possible thing"
This is something I feel needs to be said more. We don't even know for sure what went on in people's heads back then (not that we do now either). Some people might have been even *more* pragmatic about fighting than is expected, but then you have matters of religion, honour and other social things that might have mattered a lot. We often think that today all we care about is big flashy effects and hollywood style fight scenes, but in some ways, especially historical re-enactors interested in the 'practical' warfare, we might have a mentality that was also absent from medieval/viking-era peoples. I can't say that was the case, but I can't say it wasn't either. They may have thought about battle quite differently from us. The reason I say this is that historical re-enactor culture has a somewhat similar tenor to modern military culture: very pragmatic, very utilitarian. I can't say that viking or medieval warriors (some or most) did not think the same way. But the ways of thinking about warfare today may have emerged from the changes brought about by industrialisation (and now digitization) and the detaching of the 'aura' from martial conduct, particularly in the case of the aristocratic warrior caste. Just some possibilities.
It’s certainly possible. A modern example would be most people wanting to fist fight clarify “nothing below the belt” while in a life or death situation people would do anything for an advantage. Or how the modern duels with guns from a century ago is dramatized as a honorable 10 steps away, fire on command but in many cases people just walked up and shot each other, or “cheated” by firing early. Others held their guns in the air to back out of it. Or you can go further and look at stuff like the Geneva Convention banning certain actions during war versus terrorists using women and children as walking bombs. People don’t change, just what technology they’re using.
This part "We don't even know for sure what went on in people's heads back then (not that we do now either). " 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣😁
He said " you can injure" his acsent made it sound like "can't"
I do MMA and I can say spinning is used to generate more momentum and force which is not as necessary when you have a weapon. For example, u could use a spinning back kick to finish a tired opponent who is not defending themselves as effectively as before, if someone gets that tired in a sword fight, u just stab/cut 'em, no spinning required
in other words, using momentum to multiply force is not necessary when you're holding a force multiplier.
In my experience, you can use a spinning move before your opponent is tired as long as you get a good set up before, otherwise you just got yourself in a world of trouble.
Darth Revan yeah you can and it’s very common. Often times used after setting them up with jabs for example because after a front foot step forward with a jab your feet will be perfectly positioned for spinning your body around for a kick.
@@HoseTheBeast exactly, and ill tell you what, I felt like a fuckin boss when I once landed a tornado kick in a sparring match
if it was real fighting, with their lives on the line, and edged weapons, then I think that the fighting would have been more careful. ie. each combatant would protect himself more, pull back a bit, pick shots, conserve energy etc. like in full contact mma
This was one of the most respectful and enjoyable "reaction" videos ive seen. This would be fun to see thrown in the rotation every once in a while. Keep up the great work Skall!!!
2:04 since they are choreographers it's clearly aimed at sword-fighting in movies where they just hit each others swords
I miss the Viking intro so much. Badass to the fullest extent!
Way I see it, spinning sword strikes is like letting off a blackpowder cannon made of cheese. It can work but it's a lot more likely to blow up in your face
Also Skall-dundee "that's not a shield. THIS is a shield."
Skallcodile
Seriously though, that looks more like a very big buckler.
Johny Evo damn. Wish I thought of that
Croco-Skall Dundee
KainaX122 I think we just found the next 'end him rightly'
i think when he mentioned attacking from the sides, he meant the diretion of the attack. instead of attacking in a straight line, attacking horizontally
Glad you mentioned Adorea. As a czech I am very proud of them. :D They certainly deserve much more attention.
"Sword Fighting as It Was Not Actually for the Vikings"
'The best techniques are past on by the survivors' Gaiden Shinji 1E 946
That Skyrim loading screen annoys me so much, because it just makes me think the Oblivion Crisis could've been prevented if Shinji just got in the dang Dwemerbot
"This is how Vikings actually fought, trust me, we were there"
Round shield: Exists
Dimicator: Oh yes.
Now THAT is who I want to do a reaction take on this video.
Skall, It's June.
You're in Canada, not West Virginia.
Take down your Christmas lights.
They are actually pretty good for lighting things outside of Christmas, say along the hall to the bathroom so you don't have to turn on all the lights and wake everyone up.
There is a mom and pop restaurant I really like that uses them all around the inside because they are cheap and easy.
(13:12) This is the primary reason that I come back to watch more of your videos. Your outlook of never thinking that you know it all, which actually makes you a genius. This is something that with 20+ years more than you, I've yet to master... namely humility.
I appreciate your sincerity, it moves you to keep investigating and bringing to light always increasingly cooler stuff! :)
Keep up the great work!
Hello from Olomouce, Czech republic. Adorea is very good martial art group and I'm very proud of them.
Oh shit, Olomouc is my hometown, lovely historical town in Moravia, Czech republic. And those videos are awesome.
100% Accurate battle simulator...
Totally Accurate Battle Simulator: Game of the Year Edition
TABS
Most other sword channels or HEMA practitioners on youtube would have made this video 3 times as long, thanks for keeping it short and simple Skall
They: sun is shining.
Skall: *5 min essay on why this is true that sun is shining*
Definitely like the point that humans don't always do things the best possible way, as far as historical martial arts go.
A lot of technological and general militaristic advancement came from something complicated being invented, then it getting refined down to a simpler, better version that could have existed earlier but didn't due to the lack of the proper perspective to think of it.
An example would be how bolt actions are much simpler than lever actions, but lever actions came earlier. Same with the wheel-lock existing before the flintlock.
If I didn't already miss a video on it, I would like to see what Skall thinks about Shaka's iklwa- the Zulu shortspear he invented to gain an edge over rival tribes. I believe that apart from being a shortened spear, it also had a larger tip, and some historical pictures also include somewhat of a pommel on them.
one thing, aren't lever actions faster than bolt actions? i mean, thinking about the speed, bolt action makes a lot of sense for a simple and easy long range rifle, but for a repeater, a shotty or the 1800s equivalent of an assault rifle, would lever action not be better? just curious.
@@cobraglatiator As far as speed alone, it depends on the shooter and mechanical condition.
You can shoot very quickly with practice on a bolt action, and a beat-up lever action can be hard to cycle. Not to mention bolt actions being easier to cycle from the prone or when leaning them on something.
As far as I'm aware, lever actions are also limited to tube magazines, so bolt actions can have the higher capacity.
@@bobmcbob49 interesting, i suppose there's some different ways to do bolt action too, but, idk, i just imagined the action of a bolt action in good condition would be slower than that of a lever action in good condition. thanks for the reply.
@@cobraglatiator keep in mind how far you need to move each action to cycle it.
The only catch with the bolt action is you need to get the motion down, but it's a significantly shorter movement.
@@bobmcbob49 huh, yea, that would cut down on the time, significantly..i see.
Good stuff. How about sword fighting during the early bronze age?
What about sword fighting in the prehistoric?
I am not sure if there were swords in early bronze age, but if there was, it probably was really crude considerong how unwieldy first swords were
@@mxcherryblue5943 What about rock fighting during the neanderthal age?
@@Teemustaja idk, their technology is too advanced
MxCherryBlue, I know you're joking, but "prehistoric" and "bronze age" might overlap, depending on place and culture. One is defined by metallurgy, the other by the presence of written records.
But Skall... Anakin said that spinning is a good trick :/
It is. If you are a space a wizard.
even in hand to hand spinning attacks are used in very specific situations.
One is pursuit, which is to say if you tried to do a round kick, but the opponent stepped back, transitioning from that to a roundhouse kick without stopping your momentum is beneficial.
The second is for instance with a spinning side kick, which is well employed when you are very close in with your opponent that you can't lift your front leg into a side kick, but want a strike with a lot of power and reach that can push him away.
Arguably, the spinning side kick is also used to generate more speed and power in the strike, but...
Well I'm member of a Viking re-enactment group circa 1066 and the way we fight is mainly hacking slashing and slicing rather than thrusting, stabbing.
1: We do it for safety reasons, as it hurts getting poked with a dull non sharpened blade, and it's more energetic and lively when fighting to see slashing and hacking lateral movement in combat.
2: The historical and archeological finds of Viking swords do have a sharpened point but they were not stabbing weapons as the viking swords were very blade heavy and the handle didn't offer much protection or momentum, also the swords were also used as sharpened metal clubs too. And you could get more damage against a Viking warrior in a shield wall by hacking and bashing their shield with a Viking sword rather than trying to stab and thrust into the chunk of wood and metal.
I'm always reminded when I see people arguing that "The people in the past would have done X this way because it's the most rational and common sense way to do it"
and I always think back to the FBI Manuals back in the 1940s and 50s, where they trained their men to hold their pistols at *Dick Level,* Ignore the sights, and stand like they are taking a shit mid-air.
HISTORICAL fighting does not have any obligation to make any rational sense.
ending them rightly is completly rational
Point shooting at the time was actually better in a close in engagement, ie most of the times when you would be using a pistol/revolver for men who came into such things without much experience than what was prior standard training practice of essentially single action one-hand target shooting. It's not better than more modern techniques but it was a marked improvement on what had come before. This shows another thing; historically people often had reasons for doing what they were doing as they were not (usually) stupid.
@@BadlanderOutsider British special forces in WW2 were trained to shoot from the low position because in their job it was of essence to be the first to get a shot off, ideally before the traditionally trained opponent had his gun up far enough to use the sights. It was a matter of intensive training and the accuracy thus achieved was no worse than with the normal use. And in low light situations (their usual working condition) it tended to be both quicker and more accurate. Again, those guys were no amateurs, so for normal people it is unlikely to work.
Point shooting is more highly skilled form of shooting. The only reason the weaver stance came into popularity was cops needed to be trained faster and easier. But many of the best shooters are point shooters, it just takes alot longer and its harder to get good at it. It is not an inherently inferior methodology.
The FBI method is still correct today, with revolvers with shit sights it's faster to shoot without sights at close range and accurate enough. When you have good sights you should use them
Love your breakdown of the techniques
Cool that you did this Skall. Enjoyed it.
Biggest modern reason for 24 fps being standard is CGI. 60 fps when you have to render CGI scenes becomes FAR more expensive and time consuming. That was a big problem for the hobbit.
I remember this! It was on a cable show, they where interviewing a group who where trying to figure out how vikings likely fought each other for a HEMA organization, and for archeologists!
The editing makes them seem a quite out of touch, and I think they mentioned outside of the clip that they where using what they believed where training tools so training exercises where what they where trying to reproduce.
Discover or history channel though...
I don't remember
Edit: spelling and great video! 😁
This show actually got me into HEMA!
been doing viking combat recently and im loving it, seeing skaal doing a review fills my heart with joy, but there are many flaws to this. 1st is that i always stand sideview with the shield in front resting half my sword on top of my shield, therefore restong my sword arm so i dont waste energy,
2nd is that very few actually takes into concideration going around a target because you leave them to YOUR blind side (outside of periphereal vision) and they can then strike you,
other than that, GREAT VIDEO ANALYSIS
Whoever uploaded this just filmed two living history vikings doing medieval fair full contact sparring. I know, I grew up doing stuff like that. Medieval Fair/Living History people do a lot for show, so there are some rules, it is a kind of open full contact stage fight to show of. Great for the tourists to watch.
Skall: always have a critical mind
Me: hmm, im not so certain. I am a bit critical of that.
As to head injures through blunt impact : raider would like to know your location. (#nerfstunningtap)
What are you talking about
@@lillburtlonk3721 for honor
th-cam.com/video/KHbzSif78qQ/w-d-xo.html
Laughs in ccu
No one mentioning that awesome Legend of Zelda art piece in the background?
Skall, you're right about jump cutting, but 24fps is here to stay and there are good reasons for it. The biggest being to avoid the soap opera effect; it helps hide the fact that you're watching actors on a set, maintaining your suspension of disbelief. Check out Filmmakers IQ's video on 24 fps. Don't go tearing down the fence before you know why it's been put up 😄
Shields are more like bucklers with painted viking stuff than viking Shield...
Viking shields varied widely in width from 2 feet to three feet wide
@@sylvanstrength7520 but those are belo 2 feets
@@fdel456 That is very possible. I'd have to take another look
They look like 12 inches at the most
You should do a breakdown review of the Hector v. Achilles fight from Troy :D
That would be awesome!
that was actually a pretty good fight by hollywood standards, and the cinematography was excellent.
You should watch "The Scythian" (aka "The Last Warrior"), I really enjoyed the fights for the great coreographic work as well as a fantastic camera work
in our Viking combat training we use the shield at about a 30 degree angle from the eyes out, to the front/side (hard to describe), but it creates stability . A shield is only a good as the leverage of the arm and can be easily knocked to the side, pulled to the side and after just a minute or 2 (our rounds are 1:30) can become very heavy. As with all the "medieval" combat arts things changed with the times along with advances in tech etc. Long story short, if im in a "viking"fight with swords , a shield on an extended arm will result in a dislocated shoulder in the blink of an eye. Sabers and bucklers....different story, kite shields, different, roman shields, different. blah blah blah. xoxoxo
7:05 this is a huge point I make to my friends when debating historical tactics in our down time. Distance= time. Time= safety and options. If you have distance between your opponent then one person has to close and that gives you opportunities to either counter or be proactive and eliminate the advantage of distance that your enemy has.
I didn't expect someone agreeing with me on the 24Hz cinema standard here of all places, but...
THANK YOU.
As a multimedia student, nothing hurts me more than painstakingly animating something and then having to output it in 24Hz for no other reason than "it's always been like this" even though any modern monitor or even TV are MADE to output 60Hz.
No a multimedia student myself, but I totally agree.
Roland Warzecha of Dimicator has some really good examples of Viking combat.
Whilst I do watch Roland's videos and have a great deal of respect for his knowledge and practice, I'll take you back to what Skallagrim said right at the beginning... there are NO extant treatise available on how the Vikings fought, and only references within the Sagas which are a record of the stories told that were written down from the Oral tradition in the 12th and 13th Centuries, as such open to over exaggeration and enhancement, as was the style of the Viking Skald... Roland has used his experience of studying Fighting Manuals from a much later date than the Vikings to re-construct a style of fighting that he believes to be a practical way they used the tools at their disposal as evidenced by their design and ergonomics... but it is just that, no one can say differently as there just is not the evidence to say otherwise...
@@jetsetuk But... nobody is saying differently? I'm not sure what the point of this comment is. I'm well aware that there are no treatises or manuals from Viking-age Scandinavia. However, given that Roland has spent a great portion of his life learning and practicing combat from several different eras, I'm more inclined to side with his interpretation of Viking combat than what we see in the video presented by Skall.
@@FirstLast-ks6vm The point was it's ALL still just conjecture... and your comment was phrased in the same way their video was... "good examples of Viking Combat"... but we don't know that it definitively was, so their video is just as valid as Roland's...
@@jetsetuk Again, I never said their method wasn't valid. However, I do feel that Roland has a better grasp and interpretation. I thought I made myself abundantly clear. In my original comment I didn't say "Roland has better examples than these two", did I? You're making an argument against a perceived implication, which is also an implication I didn't make.
@@FirstLast-ks6vm Same as the implication I didn't credit Roland with everything you said in your reply... however what I said about your original comment still stands... btw I re-enact Vikings, so I have a fair idea of the weapons they used, their limitations and their strengths, and more importantly, I also have a fair idea of what the father and son were trying to demonstrate in their video, as well as the nuances of Roland's work... ;o) That said... none of it is Viking fighting... it's fighting using the weapons that Vikings used in a modern interpretation...
It's good to see a video commented by someone whose opinion you respect
Great video skall.
They are reenactment-fencers who use a combat system called "Codex Belli" - which is a combat sport, at best.
These people are NOT martial artists or practicioners of HEMA.
Yeah, thank god someone said it.
I wonder why it is sold as historical martial arts so often. It bothers me so much.
Question, Skall. wouldn't it be useless to strike with a Viking-era sword against mail? Even with sharp swords, wouldn't the blows simply glance off the armor? Or does a sharp sword actually stand a chance of "cutting through" it? If they cannot do that, then what they are showing in this video would most *definitely* not be the way Vikings "actually" fought, since the way they do it in the video would be utterly useless, wouldn't it? I would love to read your thoughts on this!
The most common protection in the viking age was gambeson. You can cut through it.
Unlikely to cut through it, but the sheer blunt impact can break bones. Even with padding under the gambeson a powerful strike for example to the collarbone can still do damage.
Thanks for the quick replies. I wasn't aware that mail armor was not common for that age. I had always thought that pretty much every fighting man would have mail.
The force of impact is also a good point I had not considered. I tend to be very sceptical when I see two dudes just bashing each other on their armor with swords.
@@blackbadger4419 You're right to be skeptical when it comes to heavier armor, particularly plate.
the wielder of the 110 cm shield would need to be a big guy. like 7 foot.
Man, haven't seen that vid in ages. Was thinking about it again recently. Thank you for this video.
The fighting in the video seemed realistic, after all have you seen kids fighting with pool noodles?
Reaction videos are wonderful - a shared experience is nice.
The unorthodox and abnormal videos of yours always have a tendency towards being my favorites.
There's a guy I think his channel is called warzecha or something like that he has a good video on realistic Viking sword and shield fighting.
I always had the feeling it was a bit weird...
WEll, now what do you think about Dimicator/Roland Warzecha?
"Professional fight coreographers"
Like those who make every movie fight scenes ever..? Yeah this is gonna be bad..
I mean.....at least they knew not to twirl around like a ballerina in the middle of combat, can't say the same for the other 95% of movies.
And them being fight choreographers is why they point out they are aiming to hit the enemy, not standing apart and bashing the swords together like they used to do in the films.
Same thing with the pirouettes, wood chopping cuts and other stuff frequent in the (older) films.
I miss when movie sword fights were done by people with actual sword training, fencers doing swashbuckling movies.
Damn. Funny start. Nice video man.
You're like the Nostalgia Critic of Sword fighting videos.
holding your shield closer to your body conserves way more energy though, gotta keep stamina up. ; )
Feel like playing Brytenwalda after this...
That hugely telegraphed blow thing was always the first thing I tried to break people of when we used (fake) swords even as a kid; use as little movement as possible to strike as often as possible without losing a good position for guarding yourself.
I think the video ended up being more like "How they moved and what they wore" and the fighting part was just them explaining how they choreograph fights themselves
Skall you should set up some sparring and before ask one of the individuals to try a spin move or two while filming it. Without letting the other person know.
4:02 i thought he was pointless
Hehe
Oh no.
Nonononono.
I had tried so hard to forget this video and you bring it back.
Thanks for your analysis tho. Your commentary is way more interesting than the video itself.
Trying to forget about skall?
Trying to forget about the video he's reacting to.
@@LordCivers it's just you said "I had tried so hard to forget about the video and _you_ "
Oh, sorry. I don't know why I didn't finish my sentence. I'll correct it o/
Comments are very funny, but ... It still is more funny watching people so motivated to train and do sword fighting.
So doubel fun it is.
I don't agree about kicking in combat, generally.
it is risky, but if you knew how and in which moment, it is great as for opening as for game changing element of fight.
Great video.
Thanks.
The rusty mail is incredibly distracting.
YES
Why?
And hazardous to their health.
@@sylvanstrength7520 A soldier who actually wears one has almost no rust because he oils it (it doesn't require much) and also wearing it make the rings rub against each other and minimize it.
@@rodrigodepierola I mean, they're vikings. They're out at sea all day. They could have just waded through salt water and returned from a raid. It's extremely naive to think every viking had greased mail at all times.
So Skall's ideology: Stay covered behind a shield even it reduces your range, power and mobility. Like boxer who does only jabs (except range is worse)
A thing that kind of tells a lot about Viking fighting is a story from one of the saga`s.
This was about a battle between ships against each other, after the arrow shooting when they had come to the close combat.
It says that they shifted between standing in the front line to get renewed strenght there.
And also it said that there was one on board the ship that had it as a job to sharpen the sword that had been used in the front, and that those in the front often shifted swords and axes in the middle of the fight to get a newly sharpened weapon.
In a battle in Grenmar(Grenland inTelemark in Norway now) there was also a battle between ships(600 ships) where they fired arrows at each other for 3 days before they finally got in to close combat with each other.
Some have asked if the Vikings used Halberds, and if we read between the lines, we knew that some did, but that it was very seldom.
For example in Njåls Saga, we can read about a Iclandic Viking that was famous for his halberd and it was feared(they ofted put superstitious belief in to weapons that had been in many victories)
As Skallagrim point out in this video, the saga`s was often told as stories, but also they was always basically from real happenings, even if they often was not correct.
But we can still use sense and read a lot in between the lines from them.
For example there is little doubt that he had a halberd, and it also comes pretty clear out that it was a very seldom weapon to use, and very effective for those who knew how to use it.
Good point. Perspectives changes with time as more information is built.
@skallagrim I think he actually said you "can" Injure somebody, Skall.
If you don't like jump cuts in movies i recommend all the John Wick movies :-)
I am pretty sure he has already seen them
I either laugh or cringe at that sword and shield huff and puff, I don't know which. it's like children! cheers from Brasil, Skall, keep up your good material, brother!
Interesting video.
I've found the original interesting as well, but it's good to get more insight.
He said you CAN injure somebody
Sounds like "can't" to me. Also makes more sense in the context of what he said before and after, I think.
Constant jump cut should be punish by death
Could be worse, could be shaky cam.
"Viking shield size" isn't THAT well-defined. You use the right shield for the job, and the largest ones for "going viking" would be for passively protecting against arrows while raiding civilians, rather than nimble shields for duels. For a one-on-one duel, the smaller round shields are naturally a better fit, as you can use it more like a buckler.
8:21 maybe the guy holding the small shield, no i think its normal shield and the guy is huge :3
Hey Skall what Sennheisers do you use? Are they open or closed back?
No *Sources* from the *Norses* on fighting wih *Sworses* 💪😅🙏
Barney just educated me about viking sword fighting.
2:14... that was great. It made me laugh out loud for the first time all day. I appreciate how you state that neither is their approach to combat methodology absolutely wrong, nor is yours absolutely right. Nonetheless, I am certain you're correct in stating that it did simply make sense for people to perform the most expedient techniques. When that is more certain to enable survival and victory, why use a more complicated and less ergonomic tactic? I've recently become a sub to this channel, and I've watched many videos in the last few days- not only are you entertaining, but you seem to be a person who researches historical matters diligently. It's an approach to history that is sorely lacking nowadays, and this is the sort of video I have come to appreciate in the short time since I learned of this channel.
Hey there, I happen to one of those who practice that sport (and yes, I do consider it a sport) - these guys there are fighting the german variant of western style viking combat. It is not historically accurate and I have not met any viking reenactor myself yet who claims this is historically accurate. - In fact, the reenactment part is the part we're doing when we're not fighting - when we're fighting, it's a sport. And it is a lot more fluid than what you see in the video.
These two in the video are not a good representation of the sport nor of reenactment. But, I can recognize what they are doing though.
Video: "And that's why we use these dull swords"
Skallagrim: "That's a good point"
*No it's not*
@Skallagrim I am fairly confident he said "You CAN injure" but great video non the less :D
Yeah, I'm pretty sure he said "Can" as well. :p
Jump-cuts aren't my biggest problem in movies. Shaky cam is the worst, especially when newer phones have optical stabilization.
Shaky cams only work if you do clausrophobic shots in hallways or a similar small area in a thriller or horror context. If you really want to unnerve the audience. And that well paced. Othewise shaky cams are first massivly overused and it needs some experience.