Sry to say this, but please do not support this scammers. Raid Shadow Legend is not a real video game. It is all just a scam, to milk a few vulnerable people, that are susceptive to gambling. I would never judge you for taking this contract, because everyone has to make money, but it would be realy cool, if you could find another sponsor. I always thought something like Paradox would be very fitting for your channel.
@@Hunter27771 It's called an RPG, but it's just a gatcha and all the positive reviews are bought and the fact that they can afford to buy that many reviews, and even celebrities and TH-camrs tells you how much money they make from gambling addicts... I love Matt's content, but I really hate that he sold his soul and bends over for them like that!
You and Tod should rent a range and set up a chronograph in front then a chronograph behind a wooden shield then a steel shield of the medieval age and see how much they actually slow down medieval pistol and long gun ball in feet per second. That guy that was shooting armor on Modern History’s channel might be down!
Matt: "...and very often big shields are to compensate for a..." Roman reenactors: *looking worried* Matt: "...a deficit, or lack of..." Roman reenactoors: *sweating* Matt: "...eh, lots of armor." Roman reenactors: "Phew!"
Well theoretically u do indeed need a larger shield to compensate for the lack or deficit of that.. people get to be so defensive when it comes to sensitive topics which is the lack of that.. 😂
Big shields aren't there to compensate for the deficit or lack of... that. They're there to prevent such deficit or lack from occurring in the first place.
I wasn't aware Matt had a daughter. But you immediatly have to imagine some Kindergarden / Elementry School scene. Teacher: "What's you favorite animal?" Little Miss Easton: "Depends on the context, for jousting I prefer a pony"
Wait, "Raid: Shadow Legends" is only 2 years old? Why does it feel like its been around for forever? Oh, probably because I've seen like 75 years worth of TH-cam ads for it...
When I see a notice for a 40+ minute video from other TH-camrs my thought is, "Maybe I'll watch if I find the time." When I see a 40+ minute video from Matt Easton my thought is, "I will find the time to watch this."
@@AnotherDuck Watch some of his really old videos. Dude picks up a sword and tells you fascinating things about it for just long enough to get TH-cam mid-rolls.
@@nicholasbenjamin3826 It's a joke. I wonder how much of it is from being an instructor, since saying things two or three times in different wordings help people understanding and remembering them.
Ah Matt, you were doing so well! You didn't say 'context' until 22:44 :) - and you didn't say it thereafter. Seriously, though, that was 47 minutes well spent. Thank you.
Gladiators weren't just fighting single combat exhibitions, or being eaten by lions. The Colosseum also featured Reenactments of both famous battles, but also Myths, like the Tragedies. (A lot of the Myths, including the Tragedies were based on Greek myths, heroes, and Tragedies.) So, they also had Gladiators kitted out pretty much exactly like Roman soldiers, as Extras, acting out some glorious battle or other.
@@dapeach06 But seriously. It's technically possible that they flooded the Colosseum to play out the Odyssey, but with the catacombs they had underneath. It's doubtful. I'm thinking more like a bunch of guys carrying the Argos, and rocking it to play out those tragedies, but they did the classics. Likewise, stories of feeding Christians to the lions is thought to be actually Hercules, fighting the Nemean lion, only re-told until the story only barely resembles the actual first witnesses'. That tends to happen over thousands of years, which is where these stories originally came from.
@@Psiberzerker The catacombs weren't there in the original design, but were added about ten years later. During that ten year period, there's good evidence that three naumachiae were held in the Colosseum, the first in 80 AD, the last in 89 AD. The excavation to build the catacombs were probably done in connection with the last naumachiae. The greater problem wasn't the catacombs, but the fact that the arena was too small for full scale naumachiae, which typically involved dozens of ships, thousands of men, and water deep enough that a ship could fully sink. I suspect the naumachiae in the Colosseum must have used smaller replicas of war ships, and, even so, fewer ships than usual. It will still have impressed the audience greatly to see it accomplished in a proper, permanent arena, with all the amenities, as opposed to the temporary, somewhat improvised, for-purpose arenas usually used for naumachiae. Rather than see the arena and audience brought to the "ocean"*, they saw the "ocean" brought to the arena and audience. The fact that it was difficult is exactly why it was impressive, and impressing the public is exactly why the wealthy were willing to pay for these extravaganzas. Executions ad bestias were routine. Sometimes, they would force the condemned to be "stunt men" for the final scene in tragedies, often recounting the death of heroes. Other times, they just put them in the arena, naked and unarmed, along with dangerous animals (not necessarily predators; in fact, a wild bull is less likely to tire of killing people than a lion is). There were too many condemned to make a big production out of every execution. Since we're talking about naumachiae: in some of those, up to 30,000 condemned people were executed by drowning with the ships. You can't recount the story of Hercules fighting the Nemean lion 30,000 times during a festival, and expect the audience to keep up interest to the end. Some times, you just have to "fast forward" through most of the executions. They'd tire doubly fast if Hercules kept losing to the damn lion, which, obviously, is what would happen. Well, unless they dressed the lion up as Hercules and the condemned up as a lion... Today, we think of human life as precious in itself, and therefore not available to be wasted. The Romans had no such issue. Gladiators were valuable because they were trained specialists, not because they were human beings. An untrained criminal or prisoner of war had no such value; the death sentence was the only affordable "long term" sentence, and therefore frequently used; and, once people were condemned, they had to be killed. They weren't wasting lives; they were working overtime to get rid of "superfluous" lives. It's a way of thinking that's completely alien to most modern people (in part thanks to the influence of Christianity and other religions that are less bloodthirsty than European Iron Age paganism), but it was nevertheless the reality in Rome, and is well documented. *N.B.: They never used the actual ocean, but rather a dam or pond connected to the Tiber. However, it's still more impressive to bring a gigantic pond to the arena than the other way around. Man vs. nature and such. P.S.: Sorry for writing a book in your thread... I only intended to write the first two paragraphs; all the rest was written purely by accident. Believe it or not.
A classic example of a shield being used to express identity is the Highland Targe. Typically round, worn on the forearm, covered in leather, often with patterns made by tooling the leather, and by hammering in brass nails. A really important part of Highland and Jacobite identity in late 17th and early 18th century. Lowland Scots and English who joined the Jacobite army in 1745 would buy highland dress and weapons in order to identify with the cause. And it was also a form of uniform for IFF.
Screw Hollywood, *I* am surprised at that statement. Being the son of a transprofessional (MechE who wanted to be a long-haul trucker) I had to do far more auto repair myself than anyone (who thinks cars are just a poor man's teleportation booth) should. Maybe the Mountain could, with the right hilt to avoid him cutting off his own fingers, but I cannot imagine anyone else stabbing through a car door. Cutting it with an axe, maybe, but not stabbing it. Or is he referring to fiberglass doors on a car reproduction, like a neighbor had of a Model A? That could be cut with a kitchen knife, but why bother when you could kick through the side, if you avoided the bracing.
@@davidweihe6052 As someone who wears homemade armor and shields made out of car body sheet metal (22 gauge steel), that statement reassures me a bit! XD
@@davidweihe6052 idk about modern cars or trucks but a Skoda Octavia from early 2000s would like to have a discussion about this topic. And I'm not even particularly strong (granted I was a lot stronger when I was stabbing things with knives) Edit: it wasn't a kitchen knife though, it was a thick and rigid "combat knife" type of thing.
'You can pretty much stick a kitchen knife through a car door.' Ok, this needs to be our next armor test! I want to see Matt and Tod get together (perhaps with Dr. Toby Capwell) to test various weapons against car doors!
The more I study with my sister school, the more I love Georgian sword and buckler. Khevsureti used a flat steel buckler made of concentric rings and a cross holding them together, usually on some hide. And they are held in hand with two leather straps, fist up against the buckler. Very different from European ones but I love them. Fascinating warrior culture too.
Adding to the point about identity, there could be added the simple fact, that carrying a uniform type of shields would be a very good, convenient and relatively cheap way to achieve some "uniformity" - making it easier to tell apart allies from foes on a chaotic battlefield. A relatively minor point (as often people from the same or similar cultures would clash, using the same kind of shields) but not entirely insignificant, I believe.
Even today, Riot shields have different sizes to supplement the remainder of the gear and the doctrine of the riot control. I remember 20 years ago training as a soldier, where we were equipped with a large rectangular shield for a shield wall, it covered the area from the visors helmet to just below the knees. The rest of the legs were covered with moderne greaves. It was for a specific tactical use. It would be rubbish for a mobile force.
One shield very interesting were the cork bucker, very used in spanish territories on 16th and 17th centuries to try to hook rapier points when the adversary try to thrust you. They were only used in civilian context and were considered a kind of "dirty weapon", but very effective.
To me, always the most interesting question is not “how we’re things used?” (although of course that’s very important) but “why did usage, and the needs they addressed, change?” Unfortunately, even really great history channels (like Kings and Generals or Historia Civilis) tend to do a bad job of this because they don’t know enough about the usage in the first place. I love Matt’s videos that address these topics.
Knight: soo blacksmith i want a shield like what Hugo used in this battle since he came out pretty fine, but im a little more wide in the shoulder and taller, maybe you could adapt it a little to me Blacksmith: sure pal, give me a couple of weeks
What about the Rotella/Rodelo? I've seen pictures of 16C Spanish Soldiers wearing a Rodelo Shield , Rapier and Morion helmets. At least on Therion Arms page. How popular was the Rotella Shield? Who would use this medium 23" shield? Would this shield be standard for Infantryman? Was it mostly a luxury? Too expensive?
Point Four made me think about how from some historical sources we hear about groups of people having a good tradition of blacksmithing, but these people for certain reasons, don't necessarily come across as the cutting edge arms makers of their time. Just made me think about how for any decently sized military having the labor and economy to procure raw materials, and the manufacturing capability to produce weapons that are "good enough" have a bigger impact than an expert smith making your soldiers the latest finest blade. Reminds me of the whole WW2 balance of innovation and effectiveness vs production, training, and logistics.
Love your analogy about using an appropriately sized personal protection weapon. I completely agree and speaking from experience, carrying around a metal framed pistol all day gets old real fast! Keep up the great work! Cheers from Texas!
The Romans did basically that with their auxiliaries. "You can have similar gear, maybe older styles, but at least slightly inferior incase you turn on us, and we want you to know it's inferior." It was probably basically the same anytime in history when Conquerors conscripted from the conquered.
Why do shields come in so many different sizes and shapes? Because CONTEXT! As Xenophon and the 10,000 marched through Asia, he was at pains to point out the difference in costume, weapons, armor, and shields between the different peoples the Greeks encountered. Plainly those sorts of obvious display were extremely important cultural markers -- all those peoples were subjects of the Persian Empire, but they maintained their tribal/national identities by means of the gear they used.
Thanks Matt, another interesting video with heaps to think about in it. I would emphasize, as an historian the social character of the warrior and the division of labour that lies behind them. For instance, the Roman scutum has evolved through its manufacture in specialised fabricums requiring complex specialisation of labour to make, presented complete to the professional warriors who used it. Indian arms guilds also have highly developed and complex designs made possible for state/urban milleaux. The far more basic round plank constructed shield of the early medieval period is for farmer/warriors, made by local craftsmen from locally available resources.
That was fun :) Maybe a good follow up is the weird armour parts that replaced aspects of shields? Anything on the forearm or legs, pauldrons, helmet adaptations....
"What are your opponents using?" Well the Persians really overlooked that one. They kept running up on the Greeks with those wack wicker sheilds. I always thought they should have improved their armor a long before the Thermopoli battle.
The popularity aspect still applies today at least in the U.S.. Whatever the military chooses to use receives a massive spike in popularity, no matter how many other competitive (or even superior) options exist in the marketplace. When the Army switched to the M9 pistol in the 1980s suddenly a whole lot of movie action heroes and TV cops switched to the same pistol. The 5.56 NATO cartridge is one of the least powerful rifle cartridges you could use for large game in North America but the military still uses it so people insist it's good enough for hunting. Last year the Army announced they were switching away from the M4 to a new kind of rifle made by Sig Sauer in a different caliber. It will be several years before the transition is complete but civilian versions of the same rifle TRIPLED in price after the announcement. Whatever camouflage pattern the military uses is popular for both practical use (like hunting) but also for fashion no matter how many other good patterns also are available.
Before the video starts: I think one reason Shields have so many different shapes and sizes is there might be some kind of cultural aspect to it. For comparison, think the horns and frills of Ceratopsian Dinosaurs. If they were primarily for defense against meat-eaters, then evolution would have just standardized their horns and frills, but that's not the case. Each species has a unique set of horns and frills. I think a similar thing is going on with Shields: different cultures have different styles of shields because of difference approaches to and/or views on combat.
21:30 What you're missing here is the fact that "duels" were often "higher class person tries to legally murder lower class person". That is to say, the person of lower station does NOT want to maim/kill the higher station person who just drunkenly attacked them on the pretext of honor. Because the social/legal/economic repercussions of spilling noble blood means if you win the duel, your life is going to be destroyed. The lower station person wants to just survive/escape the 'duel' without serious harm to themselves OR the attacker. So "bars on shield"- catch a clumsy attack by your drunk attacker, bend their pretty sword in half, push them in the mud, then never speak of the incident again.
I've been experimenting with doing a solid leather shield. Between layering and a form of cuir bouilli the prototype was really tough. I could pierce it but only 2 layers. Weighs less than a pound while being about 1 inch at its thickest.
Question @scholagladiatoria In Roman times they formed shield walls in battle. Makes sense. But did anybody ever do do a shield wedge to break it? A simple bar systeem on the edges of the shield would allow them to form two 'walls' that tie together at the point. Every shield would have a person driving that point into the opposing wall, piercing it and driving a wedge into the rear lines. Once the line has been split, it would release the shields allowing for mele behind enemy lines. Had they ever tried this?
what do you all think about moon shaped shields? the ones that resemble a crescent moon, I think they look cool but I don't know how practical they are since they're "missing" a part. I saw them in the movie Troy and I fell in love but I all ways wondered if they protect you from arrows or not. I want to add them to my ideas for a fantasy novel. I imagined a sea people culture where the moon is a big cultural thing. would these shields be viable or they just look cool? I'm thinking about arrows mostly but since they're a sea culture I want them to board ships too. maybe if they're inconvenient I could use round shields for boarding ships and crescent moon shields for maybe land battles or even duels? I just think they're cool and want a practical excuse to use them 😁
Some small crescent shields where used by steppe peoples (Scythians and the like) to have a shield while using a bow. The shield would be strapped to the arm and the crescent shape allowed the person to hold and use their bow.
@@ermenher8381 oooooh! that's so cool, thank you! it fits with my ideas since I also associated bows with the moon on my cultures. that's great! I'm adding that right to my plan 😀
It could also potentially be used in a shield wall for crowd control. It protects the soldier or officer while providing a place for a prod or spear to be held thus denying access to rioters or perhaps mutineers. It also could direct them to certain areas as the force marches forth because they have to move to avoid contact with the spears or prods.
I think all these reasons blend, so you could kind of see that as an extra reason. I can only imagine a Roman legionary would be proud of being part of the legion and that being part of their culture a lot of the times, whether or not that is a desirable thing (I mean, we see that today, and those idiots back then are just as human as the idiots today). Even if the Roman fighting evolved, unless the practice really required a change in design, you might imagine that the iconography of "looking like a legionary, just like those great ones before my time, like those I grew up admiring and wanting to be like" played a role. And that for multiple cultures. The function dictates the shape at one point which then becomes part of the identity, which in turn creates a strong favoritism for certain shapes. And so on. I think in the case of the Romans and probably other groups the "what team are you on" also works internally. You see a few fellow soldier on a distance, you know exactly what their job is depending what they're wearing including shield (something easy to see even from a distance). Lower chance to fuck up giving wrong orders to the wrong people. As an organized force, people like the Romans would appreciate a bit of risk management.
Hey Matt, Romans fought in a tactical structure you can call "a formation", indeed, but as individual fighters. Practically every source say this was the case for the scutum and pilum era. There's a reason the scutum had an anatomical shape and the aspis did not, it's because a roman soldier could not count on the shield of his comrades to protect him, they were too busy "dueling" with someone else. Now that I mentioned it, Romans had a very strong dueling tradition at least in the republican times, that's quite telling. It's also telling that the few times they tried to fight in a closer formation, like at Cannae, the ancients tell us they did so. Also they got slaughtered.
Regarding metal shields: What about the fully bronze (or at least bronze faced) of classical Greece and Italy? As an example look at the Vatican aspis, the captured spartan shield in Athens. Bronze, if I recall right is heavier than steel. Are there really no metal shields between the size of buckler and a hoplon in all western history?
On the bit about national identity of equipment: Its still present in the modern era. The obvious one is American experiments with personal camouflage in the western part of WW2 were dropped not because they weren’t effective but because any personal camouflage use was so heavily associated with Germans it caused IFF problems. I’ve seen frequent mention that in Urgent Fury the PASGT’s resemblance to the stalhelm bugged some people, but I’ve never seen any primary sources on it (best I can find is a New York Times article that describes it as looking like one).
Shields as weapons. You touched on that but I saw a knight fight. And when the other guy fell over the small shield was the tool to use. Love your content. Keep it up.
Leave it to Easton to say he's providing 5 reasons and then he goes on to list over 10. Here's my summarized notes: 1. Intended use: a) on foot v. mounted v. used for both; b) individual v. formation; c) primary armament v. secondary/backup; d) military use v. civilian/sport/dueling. 2) Interaction with intended weapon and armor pairing 3) What opponents are using 4) Technology and materials available 5) Identity (i.e. the anthropologist's favorite catch-all explanation: "cultural reasons") including positive/negative influences from neighboring cultures. *Gladiators are a wild card - their gear is frequently caricatured / fantastic
When Matt shills for Raid he gets really close to the camera and I can't help but lean back in my chair to make some distance. Ever heard of personal space, man? Nevermind, I forget you are Mr. Penetration.
Peptuck 1 second ago It also makes it really easy to tell from the scroll bar which part of the video is the ad and which part is the actual video, so it's super-easy to skip ahead.
Yeah, wicker shields were actually pretty common throughout history. Simply a very available material that can make a fairly sturdy shield for the common soldier.
Well that goes back to the materials and technology you have available. Just because he didn't mention them specifically does not mean that point does not apply.
In this era of mechanized industrial manufacturing, items tend to be rather homogeneous. In the days of long ago, items used to be made by artisans, sometimes tailor-made to the preferences of a particular client. Also, there are specific regional styles, conventions, traditions, fighting techniques and philosophies, all of these have an influence on the appearance of any and all types of equipment.
29:33, adaptation of shields reminded me that various forms of defence have had to be adapted with the emergence of previously unknown threats. Case in point, many folks subscribe to a VPN, which two or three decades ago didn’t have the currency which VPNs have now.
Another great, thought provoking video Matt. Thanks! Question: if you were a civilian living in Europe around 1500 and you owned (and carried in your day to day life) a rapier or side sword or some such - would you choose to carry a buckler, or main gauche, something else - or nothing? With the stipulation that you could choose only one from the list. And, of course, why?
Another fine video production and as always, quite informative. One note however is that political and religious reasons are the same as "cultural". Politics and religion are part of the definition of culture. Apologize if this comes across as nitpicking, but they drill this into you in archeology and anthropology (physical and cultural). Thanks again!
Oooh, gonna hard disagree on the hide being the reason for the Figure 8's weird shape there. But they're a fascinating case study. Firstly because the immediate predecessors (and contemporaries) to those shields are also depicted as as being cowskin, but those were shown as pure rectangles. So they could obviously make them in a more conventional shape, and if it was easier to do the weird shape they'd have done that first. Secondly because the Figure 8 shape is REALLY weird in a three dimensional way, thats very...structured? Given the depictions of them being worn solely by shoulder straps, I believe (though cannot prove) that this is because of how they were used. It looks like they'd go into battle with the shield on the back while two handing a spear, then they have the option of swinging the shield round in front of them for when they switch to one handed weapons. They're less like a hoplite shield and more like a turtleshell that could be worn at different angles. Rectangular curved ones that are very scutumlike were used at the same time as the Figure 8's (earlier ones look like flat rectangles, bur that could be art style) but the I think the 'pinch' was the shield being designed to sorta wrap around the bodies, while the top and bottom flared out wider and somewhat flatter, so that you had more arm and leg movement. www.salimbeti.com/micenei/images/sword234.jpg www.salimbeti.com/micenei/images/bodyshield15.jpg www.salimbeti.com/micenei/images/bodyshield16.jpg
I find the picture of the guy @6:50 interesting. He is using a lenticular shield and look how much he has choked up on his spear. Only the blade of the spear is showing around the shield. It is almost as if he is using it like a short sword. That seems a bit odd and not what one would expect. What piece of artwork is that from?
Are there any common modern schools/disciplines practicing 1 on 1 duel w/ shields? I guess I mean larger than buckler. I'd love to watch some spear-shield duels and see how someone can actually deliver the point into the right places!
Would have been nice if you gave a historical example of point number three. You pointed out some enemies that would be new to people but not a specific example of a shield change. Still a good video ofc
I’m curious about the apparently wooden piece hanging from the latch beside the small shield bearing the club crest. It’s shape reminds me of the check piece from Roman helmets but it’s clearly a bit large for that and, as I said appears to be wooden.
I thoroughly enjoyed this, so thank you. 👍👍 What kind of weapon is that to the left of your Knightly shield hanging on the wall?? It kind of looks like a wooded jaw bone with a handle on it.
Well, it's nice to see that wee Easton is pulling her weight in the family business. ;) It's a good question and a good video. Thanks. Now to connect this to the round shield question. What is it about round shields that makes them so often an attractive choice.
Perhaps it should go without saying, but there were also shields that were composite. I've seen a number of historical examples of shield's that were wooden structures with leather or or bronze covering, for example.
People tend to forget that shields are still very much in use today. They are an essential piece of riot police gear. And police still use both big square ones and smaller round ones.
The shape and fashion of shields could be a good indication of the "team", but it's a misconception that heraldry itself played that role *in the midst of battle*. This has been pointed out most notably by Arthur Charles Fox-Davies: heraldic arms from the same region were often extremely similar (three lions passant, three lion regardant...), the colours were similar and, in any case, decorations on shields, flags etc would very likely become unreadable at any appreciable distance due to dirt, mud, rips and cuts, cracks, battle damage, blood and so on. Much like medals in modern armies, which serve to indicate an honour but do not, in and of themselves, have the function of helping to tell who is who.
Other than Context, the other word for me is Compromise. If it's too big, and covers too much area, then you have to get it through a doorway, at some point. (In this case, and Old World doorway, or possibly in a coach.) It's not your Primary weapon, at least I can't think of anyone that used a shield in the main hand, or both, without another offensive weapon. (Judicial duels don't count, they don't Chose those weapons, they're chosen to make it "Fair.") So, you have to be able to carry, and use your primary weapon, whatever that is. Like Captain Context pointed out, if you have to ride a horse, or a chariot, at any point in your duties, you can't use a shield that doesn't work on horseback, then ditch it when you have to deliver a message, (For example, messengers, even traveling through Bandit Country) Same thing on ships, and boats. Vikings famously used longboats, and they knew about the Scutum, but at some point, one of them made the Compromise that they're not going to give up a rank of Oars, just to have something like that in their next Raid. The ultimte compromise is the Buckler, but not only can that be worn more easily than the Sword you're also carrying, but it's also the fastest reacting shield for Parrying. You don't Block with a buckler, it's a Parrying shield, so it was very useful in the smallsword/rapier/tuck era, where they were mostly stabbing at each other. (A rapier can cut, but there's a lot of Compromise there to give it more reach, and a quicker point.)
You've probably answered this in another video and I missed it, but, in later centuries when kings could raise armies, were there extra shields carted along in the supply trains for the soldiers? Was there a trading post in camp where the soldier could go to requisition a new shield after a battle, or did they have to purchase a new shield with their own money?
I meant to ask this earlier; A quick question in regard to Shield Bosses. Do we have evidence that Viking shield bosses had raised centres/knobs as slightly earlier Anglo-Saxon ones did (many examples have been found in the archaeological record eg -@ )?
+scholagladiatoria *Tactics dictated the styles and employment of shields, both infantry and cavalry.* The Romans developed an optimal shield for the heavy infantry formation, which could be targeted for archery barrages short of the merge. Persian, Sumero-Akkadi, Chatti, and Hellenic culture favored single combat between opposing champions, which influenced the round dual-strap shields later used in the infantry phalanx; round center-grip shields were scaled from civilian bucklers to military targes.
Another reason you don’t really want to carry around a desert eagle as your personal protection side arm- the recoil from .44 magnum and .50 AE is too heavy for those calibers to really be useful in a gunfight. So that’s something all those videos games featuring desert eagles as an option get wrong. The DE is really more of an expensive range you than a practical combat weapon.
4) if the Scandinavian had plywood. Thay would have made shields out of it. 5) thats why Hollywood always gives one army square shields.(and jet an expensive actor never gets a special reginiseble helmet
The buckler is so handy you have to wonder why anyone who used a sword didn't use one on their sword hand. If its attached with a leather strap across the palm, you could easily wear it on your dominant sword hand and it would cover the entire back side of your hand/limb with essentially no penalty. Please weigh in! Im saying this as a talking point!
The way you grip a sword isn't static, you change grips and orientation all the time, plus most bucklers have metal or wooden grips not much leather grips. It would be a hassle to have in your sword hand. People just then would have worn Gauntlets or indeed the development of more complex hilted weapons. The real question is if you could use a buckler in your left hand while two handing a polearm. That one is sorta doable.
Thanks for the really informative video. You mentioned shields made from rhino or elephant hide. Do you need a CITES II permit for owning one or is it already covered by beeing an (obvious) antique?
![SAFEPLANET - ดาวเคราะห์ [ THE PLANET ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4X1XL3I_k3c/mqdefault.jpg)
Install Raid for Free ✅ IOS/ANDROID/PC: clcr.me/qBFDuB and get a special starter pack 💥 Available only for the next 30 days
Sry to say this, but please do not support this scammers. Raid Shadow
Legend is not a real video game. It is all just a scam, to milk a few vulnerable people, that are susceptive to gambling. I would never judge you for taking this contract, because everyone has to make money, but it would be realy cool, if you could find another sponsor.
I always thought something like Paradox would be very fitting for your channel.
Raid sucks, but if they want to give Matt money, then I think it’s okay.
@@Hunter27771 It's called an RPG, but it's just a gatcha and all the positive reviews are bought and the fact that they can afford to buy that many reviews, and even celebrities and TH-camrs tells you how much money they make from gambling addicts...
I love Matt's content, but I really hate that he sold his soul and bends over for them like that!
This is basically casino for kids. I know they pay good money, but advertising them longer may harm your channel in the long run.
You and Tod should rent a range and set up a chronograph in front then a chronograph behind a wooden shield then a steel shield of the medieval age and see how much they actually slow down medieval pistol and long gun ball in feet per second. That guy that was shooting armor on Modern History’s channel might be down!
Matt: "...and very often big shields are to compensate for a..."
Roman reenactors: *looking worried*
Matt: "...a deficit, or lack of..."
Roman reenactoors: *sweating*
Matt: "...eh, lots of armor."
Roman reenactors: "Phew!"
Well theoretically u do indeed need a larger shield to compensate for the lack or deficit of that.. people get to be so defensive when it comes to sensitive topics which is the lack of that.. 😂
If you are already heavily packed, you don't need to worry about your shield size.
Best comment right here!
@@marcusviniciusmagalhaesdea3779 aye my dong always swats away arrows and sword blows 🤣
Big shields aren't there to compensate for the deficit or lack of... that. They're there to prevent such deficit or lack from occurring in the first place.
I wasn't aware Matt had a daughter. But you immediatly have to imagine some Kindergarden / Elementry School scene.
Teacher: "What's you favorite animal?"
Little Miss Easton: "Depends on the context, for jousting I prefer a pony"
Matt has two kids. If I remember correctly it’s a girl and boy
@@beardedbjorn5520 we're all Matt's kids
I have a cousin for whom sports = combat sports
Wait, "Raid: Shadow Legends" is only 2 years old? Why does it feel like its been around for forever?
Oh, probably because I've seen like 75 years worth of TH-cam ads for it...
RAID SHADOW LEGENDS
at least it is not hero wars ...
Same thought
This comment is sponsored by RAID: Shadow Legends
It's actually a poor game. Casino for kids disguised as an sooper-dooper game. Scammy shit.
When I see a notice for a 40+ minute video from other TH-camrs my thought is, "Maybe I'll watch if I find the time."
When I see a 40+ minute video from Matt Easton my thought is, "I will find the time to watch this."
yes.
I watched it at 1.5x speed, which helps a bit, haha.
Did you really force your daughter to listen to a 47 minute explanation? 😀😀😀😀
Wait I have done that before.
No, she got the 30 second version :-)
@@scholagladiatoria So, you told her, "It's because of context". :D
@@scholagladiatoria You can do that? Explain a topic in less than 20 minutes? O_O
@@AnotherDuck Watch some of his really old videos. Dude picks up a sword and tells you fascinating things about it for just long enough to get TH-cam mid-rolls.
@@nicholasbenjamin3826 It's a joke.
I wonder how much of it is from being an instructor, since saying things two or three times in different wordings help people understanding and remembering them.
I was literally just watching Tod's most recent video and was wondering why were shields shaped the way they were and lo and behold!
Though I don't think Tod is Matt's daughter.
Somebody get this man a TV show, he'd do great!
To sum it up in one word "Context".
Ah Matt, you were doing so well! You didn't say 'context' until 22:44 :) - and you didn't say it thereafter.
Seriously, though, that was 47 minutes well spent. Thank you.
@18:48 Matt Easton with the equivalent of "The .380 you have is better than the .45 you left at home," argument.
The best weapon is the one in your hand.
@@AnotherDuck that is why size and weight factored heavily in my choice of EDC. Accordingly, my program compliance is pretty high.
Gladiators weren't just fighting single combat exhibitions, or being eaten by lions. The Colosseum also featured Reenactments of both famous battles, but also Myths, like the Tragedies. (A lot of the Myths, including the Tragedies were based on Greek myths, heroes, and Tragedies.) So, they also had Gladiators kitted out pretty much exactly like Roman soldiers, as Extras, acting out some glorious battle or other.
And naval battles!
@@dapeach06 Navel duels are hard enough if you both have outies.
@@dapeach06 But seriously. It's technically possible that they flooded the Colosseum to play out the Odyssey, but with the catacombs they had underneath. It's doubtful. I'm thinking more like a bunch of guys carrying the Argos, and rocking it to play out those tragedies, but they did the classics. Likewise, stories of feeding Christians to the lions is thought to be actually Hercules, fighting the Nemean lion, only re-told until the story only barely resembles the actual first witnesses'. That tends to happen over thousands of years, which is where these stories originally came from.
@@Psiberzerker The catacombs weren't there in the original design, but were added about ten years later. During that ten year period, there's good evidence that three naumachiae were held in the Colosseum, the first in 80 AD, the last in 89 AD. The excavation to build the catacombs were probably done in connection with the last naumachiae.
The greater problem wasn't the catacombs, but the fact that the arena was too small for full scale naumachiae, which typically involved dozens of ships, thousands of men, and water deep enough that a ship could fully sink. I suspect the naumachiae in the Colosseum must have used smaller replicas of war ships, and, even so, fewer ships than usual.
It will still have impressed the audience greatly to see it accomplished in a proper, permanent arena, with all the amenities, as opposed to the temporary, somewhat improvised, for-purpose arenas usually used for naumachiae. Rather than see the arena and audience brought to the "ocean"*, they saw the "ocean" brought to the arena and audience. The fact that it was difficult is exactly why it was impressive, and impressing the public is exactly why the wealthy were willing to pay for these extravaganzas.
Executions ad bestias were routine. Sometimes, they would force the condemned to be "stunt men" for the final scene in tragedies, often recounting the death of heroes. Other times, they just put them in the arena, naked and unarmed, along with dangerous animals (not necessarily predators; in fact, a wild bull is less likely to tire of killing people than a lion is). There were too many condemned to make a big production out of every execution. Since we're talking about naumachiae: in some of those, up to 30,000 condemned people were executed by drowning with the ships. You can't recount the story of Hercules fighting the Nemean lion 30,000 times during a festival, and expect the audience to keep up interest to the end. Some times, you just have to "fast forward" through most of the executions. They'd tire doubly fast if Hercules kept losing to the damn lion, which, obviously, is what would happen. Well, unless they dressed the lion up as Hercules and the condemned up as a lion...
Today, we think of human life as precious in itself, and therefore not available to be wasted. The Romans had no such issue. Gladiators were valuable because they were trained specialists, not because they were human beings. An untrained criminal or prisoner of war had no such value; the death sentence was the only affordable "long term" sentence, and therefore frequently used; and, once people were condemned, they had to be killed. They weren't wasting lives; they were working overtime to get rid of "superfluous" lives. It's a way of thinking that's completely alien to most modern people (in part thanks to the influence of Christianity and other religions that are less bloodthirsty than European Iron Age paganism), but it was nevertheless the reality in Rome, and is well documented.
*N.B.: They never used the actual ocean, but rather a dam or pond connected to the Tiber. However, it's still more impressive to bring a gigantic pond to the arena than the other way around. Man vs. nature and such.
P.S.: Sorry for writing a book in your thread... I only intended to write the first two paragraphs; all the rest was written purely by accident. Believe it or not.
@@erikjarandson5458 "There's good evidence..." I'd love to see that. Don't be sorry for writing a book, I like reading.
Kids see the world through fresh eyes. Bless them.
Bless them with 47 min. Of information
@David Single Matt: what have you got there?
His daughter: A SWORD!
Matt: NO!.... Wait.... YES.... wait... *CONTEXT*!?
*Chase ensues*
"Those Normans, they're pretty fly!"
-Matt Easton, 2021
33:06 I'm quite surprised you can still find those shields everywhere. Seems like they didn't bother to hide it at all
A classic example of a shield being used to express identity is the Highland Targe.
Typically round, worn on the forearm, covered in leather, often with patterns made by tooling the leather, and by hammering in brass nails.
A really important part of Highland and Jacobite identity in late 17th and early 18th century.
Lowland Scots and English who joined the Jacobite army in 1745 would buy highland dress and weapons in order to identify with the cause.
And it was also a form of uniform for IFF.
"You can pretty much stick a kitchen knife through a car door."
Hollywood: Surprised Pikachu Face
"But we thought they were bullet proof!"
What? You mean car doors are not resistant to machine gun fire? NOOO!
Screw Hollywood, *I* am surprised at that statement. Being the son of a transprofessional (MechE who wanted to be a long-haul trucker) I had to do far more auto repair myself than anyone (who thinks cars are just a poor man's teleportation booth) should. Maybe the Mountain could, with the right hilt to avoid him cutting off his own fingers, but I cannot imagine anyone else stabbing through a car door. Cutting it with an axe, maybe, but not stabbing it.
Or is he referring to fiberglass doors on a car reproduction, like a neighbor had of a Model A? That could be cut with a kitchen knife, but why bother when you could kick through the side, if you avoided the bracing.
@@davidweihe6052 As someone who wears homemade armor and shields made out of car body sheet metal (22 gauge steel), that statement reassures me a bit! XD
@@davidweihe6052 idk about modern cars or trucks but a Skoda Octavia from early 2000s would like to have a discussion about this topic. And I'm not even particularly strong (granted I was a lot stronger when I was stabbing things with knives)
Edit: it wasn't a kitchen knife though, it was a thick and rigid "combat knife" type of thing.
'You can pretty much stick a kitchen knife through a car door.'
Ok, this needs to be our next armor test! I want to see Matt and Tod get together (perhaps with Dr. Toby Capwell) to test various weapons against car doors!
And Joerg Spraeve
@@johnladuke6475 car doors. Not engine blocks.
😃
I'm pretty sure Thegn Thrand has done testing on car doors, or at least car bonnets.
The more I study with my sister school, the more I love Georgian sword and buckler. Khevsureti used a flat steel buckler made of concentric rings and a cross holding them together, usually on some hide. And they are held in hand with two leather straps, fist up against the buckler. Very different from European ones but I love them. Fascinating warrior culture too.
More people need to know about khevsur sword and buckler really interesting system
Adding to the point about identity, there could be added the simple fact, that carrying a uniform type of shields would be a very good, convenient and relatively cheap way to achieve some "uniformity" - making it easier to tell apart allies from foes on a chaotic battlefield. A relatively minor point (as often people from the same or similar cultures would clash, using the same kind of shields) but not entirely insignificant, I believe.
I love the longer videos like this. All of the details and all of the context.
One of my favorite things about this channel is Matt's enthusiasm and knowledge of Indian weapons and armor.
“Those Normans are pretty fly. “
Love it
😂
And all the girls say I'm pretty fly, for a norman guy! *The Offspring intensifies*
Also, leather shields were used a lot in Portugal. I guess in spain as well, but really a lot in Portugal.
Would you be able to provide evidence to that? That sounds cool.
Even today, Riot shields have different sizes to supplement the remainder of the gear and the doctrine of the riot control.
I remember 20 years ago training as a soldier, where we were equipped with a large rectangular shield for a shield wall, it covered the area from the visors helmet to just below the knees. The rest of the legs were covered with moderne greaves. It was for a specific tactical use. It would be rubbish for a mobile force.
That scutum needs a good paint job.
It does! Apart from anything, the bright white really messes with the camera.
@@scholagladiatoria Keep showing us your scutum on camera, Matt ;)
Please try adding sections for each shape to this video! This is such good info and it would be useful to jump to specific sections.
One shield very interesting were the cork bucker, very used in spanish territories on 16th and 17th centuries to try to hook rapier points when the adversary try to thrust you. They were only used in civilian context and were considered a kind of "dirty weapon", but very effective.
To me, always the most interesting question is not “how we’re things used?” (although of course that’s very important) but “why did usage, and the needs they addressed, change?” Unfortunately, even really great history channels (like Kings and Generals or Historia Civilis) tend to do a bad job of this because they don’t know enough about the usage in the first place.
I love Matt’s videos that address these topics.
Knight: soo blacksmith i want a shield like what Hugo used in this battle since he came out pretty fine, but im a little more wide in the shoulder and taller, maybe you could adapt it a little to me
Blacksmith: sure pal, give me a couple of weeks
@@FeedMeMister 🤣🤣 why am I cry laughing
What about the Rotella/Rodelo?
I've seen pictures of 16C Spanish Soldiers wearing a Rodelo Shield , Rapier and Morion helmets. At least on Therion Arms page.
How popular was the Rotella Shield? Who would use this medium 23" shield?
Would this shield be standard for Infantryman? Was it mostly a luxury? Too expensive?
how has the status of shields changed over time? The shield had a high status among the Spartans and it was a great shame to lose the shield.
Point Four made me think about how from some historical sources we hear about groups of people having a good tradition of blacksmithing, but these people for certain reasons, don't necessarily come across as the cutting edge arms makers of their time. Just made me think about how for any decently sized military having the labor and economy to procure raw materials, and the manufacturing capability to produce weapons that are "good enough" have a bigger impact than an expert smith making your soldiers the latest finest blade. Reminds me of the whole WW2 balance of innovation and effectiveness vs production, training, and logistics.
Great observations. This is why S&W J Frames are so popular, even though they are difficult to shoot well.
The thumbnail makes Matt look like he's got a rad mohawk
Love your analogy about using an appropriately sized personal protection weapon. I completely agree and speaking from experience, carrying around a metal framed pistol all day gets old real fast! Keep up the great work! Cheers from Texas!
Do we have cases where new overlords set standards? "Only we conquerors can use this design; you vanquished may only carry this design."
The Romans did basically that with their auxiliaries. "You can have similar gear, maybe older styles, but at least slightly inferior incase you turn on us, and we want you to know it's inferior." It was probably basically the same anytime in history when Conquerors conscripted from the conquered.
The Saxons in The Last Kingdom having square, pre-Roman Germanic shields was very odd, yes.
Why do shields come in so many different sizes and shapes? Because CONTEXT!
As Xenophon and the 10,000 marched through Asia, he was at pains to point out the difference in costume, weapons, armor, and shields between the different peoples the Greeks encountered. Plainly those sorts of obvious display were extremely important cultural markers -- all those peoples were subjects of the Persian Empire, but they maintained their tribal/national identities by means of the gear they used.
My favorite subject. I'm so grateful.
Thanks Matt, another interesting video with heaps to think about in it. I would emphasize, as an historian the social character of the warrior and the division of labour that lies behind them. For instance, the Roman scutum has evolved through its manufacture in specialised fabricums requiring complex specialisation of labour to make, presented complete to the professional warriors who used it. Indian arms guilds also have highly developed and complex designs made possible for state/urban milleaux. The far more basic round plank constructed shield of the early medieval period is for farmer/warriors, made by local craftsmen from locally available resources.
Is there a video on the different rim materials of shields and what is most common for which locations?
That was fun :)
Maybe a good follow up is the weird armour parts that replaced aspects of shields?
Anything on the forearm or legs, pauldrons, helmet adaptations....
this will help a lot with my world-building and homebrews for the RPGs I love
I hope it's OSR or D&D 0e, 1e...
@@nosotrosloslobosestamosreg4115
Hehehe how is dnd 5e(bit of a youngster) and also cogent
@@nosotrosloslobosestamosreg4115 but I would love to try dnd 1e if I can get my hands on it.
@@FeedMeMister that's what I heard is everyone likes 3.5 and pathfinder with 5e as a second favorite.
@@FeedMeMister what about 3e dies that even exist? never heard of it just 3.5
Brilliant Matt! Thanks to you and your daughter - interesting and thought-provoking as always!!
"What are your opponents using?" Well the Persians really overlooked that one. They kept running up on the Greeks with those wack wicker sheilds. I always thought they should have improved their armor a long before the Thermopoli battle.
The popularity aspect still applies today at least in the U.S.. Whatever the military chooses to use receives a massive spike in popularity, no matter how many other competitive (or even superior) options exist in the marketplace. When the Army switched to the M9 pistol in the 1980s suddenly a whole lot of movie action heroes and TV cops switched to the same pistol. The 5.56 NATO cartridge is one of the least powerful rifle cartridges you could use for large game in North America but the military still uses it so people insist it's good enough for hunting. Last year the Army announced they were switching away from the M4 to a new kind of rifle made by Sig Sauer in a different caliber. It will be several years before the transition is complete but civilian versions of the same rifle TRIPLED in price after the announcement. Whatever camouflage pattern the military uses is popular for both practical use (like hunting) but also for fashion no matter how many other good patterns also are available.
Before the video starts: I think one reason Shields have so many different shapes and sizes is there might be some kind of cultural aspect to it. For comparison, think the horns and frills of Ceratopsian Dinosaurs. If they were primarily for defense against meat-eaters, then evolution would have just standardized their horns and frills, but that's not the case. Each species has a unique set of horns and frills. I think a similar thing is going on with Shields: different cultures have different styles of shields because of difference approaches to and/or views on combat.
21:30 What you're missing here is the fact that "duels" were often "higher class person tries to legally murder lower class person". That is to say, the person of lower station does NOT want to maim/kill the higher station person who just drunkenly attacked them on the pretext of honor.
Because the social/legal/economic repercussions of spilling noble blood means if you win the duel, your life is going to be destroyed.
The lower station person wants to just survive/escape the 'duel' without serious harm to themselves OR the attacker. So "bars on shield"- catch a clumsy attack by your drunk attacker, bend their pretty sword in half, push them in the mud, then never speak of the incident again.
Can you cover byzantine sabers and other ERE equipment?
I've been experimenting with doing a solid leather shield. Between layering and a form of cuir bouilli the prototype was really tough. I could pierce it but only 2 layers. Weighs less than a pound while being about 1 inch at its thickest.
The Moorish adarga is a very good example of an European leather shield used in the Middle Ages
Question @scholagladiatoria In Roman times they formed shield walls in battle. Makes sense. But did anybody ever do do a shield wedge to break it? A simple bar systeem on the edges of the shield would allow them to form two 'walls' that tie together at the point. Every shield would have a person driving that point into the opposing wall, piercing it and driving a wedge into the rear lines. Once the line has been split, it would release the shields allowing for mele behind enemy lines. Had they ever tried this?
what do you all think about moon shaped shields? the ones that resemble a crescent moon, I think they look cool but I don't know how practical they are since they're "missing" a part. I saw them in the movie Troy and I fell in love but I all ways wondered if they protect you from arrows or not.
I want to add them to my ideas for a fantasy novel. I imagined a sea people culture where the moon is a big cultural thing. would these shields be viable or they just look cool? I'm thinking about arrows mostly but since they're a sea culture I want them to board ships too. maybe if they're inconvenient I could use round shields for boarding ships and crescent moon shields for maybe land battles or even duels? I just think they're cool and want a practical excuse to use them 😁
It's your world, your creation ... why the heck not?? Go for it, I say!
Thracians and Scythians had them, so knock yourself out!
Some small crescent shields where used by steppe peoples (Scythians and the like) to have a shield while using a bow. The shield would be strapped to the arm and the crescent shape allowed the person to hold and use their bow.
@@ermenher8381 oooooh! that's so cool, thank you! it fits with my ideas since I also associated bows with the moon on my cultures. that's great! I'm adding that right to my plan 😀
It could also potentially be used in a shield wall for crowd control. It protects the soldier or officer while providing a place for a prod or spear to be held thus denying access to rioters or perhaps mutineers. It also could direct them to certain areas as the force marches forth because they have to move to avoid contact with the spears or prods.
Raid add end at 4:25
I think all these reasons blend, so you could kind of see that as an extra reason. I can only imagine a Roman legionary would be proud of being part of the legion and that being part of their culture a lot of the times, whether or not that is a desirable thing (I mean, we see that today, and those idiots back then are just as human as the idiots today). Even if the Roman fighting evolved, unless the practice really required a change in design, you might imagine that the iconography of "looking like a legionary, just like those great ones before my time, like those I grew up admiring and wanting to be like" played a role. And that for multiple cultures. The function dictates the shape at one point which then becomes part of the identity, which in turn creates a strong favoritism for certain shapes. And so on.
I think in the case of the Romans and probably other groups the "what team are you on" also works internally. You see a few fellow soldier on a distance, you know exactly what their job is depending what they're wearing including shield (something easy to see even from a distance). Lower chance to fuck up giving wrong orders to the wrong people. As an organized force, people like the Romans would appreciate a bit of risk management.
If Agent Smith can comfortably carry and conceal a Desert Eagle while chasing Neo, anyone can.
We are all Agents after all... .
Hey Matt, Romans fought in a tactical structure you can call "a formation", indeed, but as individual fighters. Practically every source say this was the case for the scutum and pilum era. There's a reason the scutum had an anatomical shape and the aspis did not, it's because a roman soldier could not count on the shield of his comrades to protect him, they were too busy "dueling" with someone else. Now that I mentioned it, Romans had a very strong dueling tradition at least in the republican times, that's quite telling. It's also telling that the few times they tried to fight in a closer formation, like at Cannae, the ancients tell us they did so. Also they got slaughtered.
Regarding metal shields: What about the fully bronze (or at least bronze faced) of classical Greece and Italy? As an example look at the Vatican aspis, the captured spartan shield in Athens. Bronze, if I recall right is heavier than steel. Are there really no metal shields between the size of buckler and a hoplon in all western history?
On the bit about national identity of equipment: Its still present in the modern era. The obvious one is American experiments with personal camouflage in the western part of WW2 were dropped not because they weren’t effective but because any personal camouflage use was so heavily associated with Germans it caused IFF problems. I’ve seen frequent mention that in Urgent Fury the PASGT’s resemblance to the stalhelm bugged some people, but I’ve never seen any primary sources on it (best I can find is a New York Times article that describes it as looking like one).
My first thought was “It’s because of context.”
Shields as weapons. You touched on that but I saw a knight fight. And when the other guy fell over the small shield was the tool to use. Love your content. Keep it up.
Leave it to Easton to say he's providing 5 reasons and then he goes on to list over 10.
Here's my summarized notes:
1. Intended use: a) on foot v. mounted v. used for both; b) individual v. formation; c) primary armament v. secondary/backup; d) military use v. civilian/sport/dueling.
2) Interaction with intended weapon and armor pairing
3) What opponents are using
4) Technology and materials available
5) Identity (i.e. the anthropologist's favorite catch-all explanation: "cultural reasons") including positive/negative influences from neighboring cultures.
*Gladiators are a wild card - their gear is frequently caricatured / fantastic
Matt, could you tell us a bit about bulletproof shields, like Maurice in the 80 years war tried to use?
When Matt shills for Raid he gets really close to the camera and I can't help but lean back in my chair to make some distance. Ever heard of personal space, man? Nevermind, I forget you are Mr. Penetration.
Peptuck
1 second ago
It also makes it really easy to tell from the scroll bar which part of the video is the ad and which part is the actual video, so it's super-easy to skip ahead.
@@Peptuck
Jean paul
One year into the future
Aids shadow legends
You missed out some rare types of shields like plant fibre shields.
Yeah, wicker shields were actually pretty common throughout history. Simply a very available material that can make a fairly sturdy shield for the common soldier.
Woven shields are really quick to make (comparatively)
Well that goes back to the materials and technology you have available. Just because he didn't mention them specifically does not mean that point does not apply.
@@adambielen8996 indeed
@@sereminar4 ye strange enough they do the job (to an extent ofcourse) looking at the I thought they'd rip in one strike lol.
In this era of mechanized industrial manufacturing, items tend to be rather homogeneous. In the days of long ago, items used to be made by artisans, sometimes tailor-made to the preferences of a particular client. Also, there are specific regional styles, conventions, traditions, fighting techniques and philosophies, all of these have an influence on the appearance of any and all types of equipment.
29:33, adaptation of shields reminded me that various forms of defence have had to be adapted with the emergence of previously unknown threats. Case in point, many folks subscribe to a VPN, which two or three decades ago didn’t have the currency which VPNs have now.
Another great, thought provoking video Matt. Thanks! Question: if you were a civilian living in Europe around 1500 and you owned (and carried in your day to day life) a rapier or side sword or some such - would you choose to carry a buckler, or main gauche, something else - or nothing? With the stipulation that you could choose only one from the list. And, of course, why?
Matt, how would shield materials differ in terms of general maintenance and wear and tear (rain, mud, combat damage etc)?
Another fine video production and as always, quite informative. One note however is that political and religious reasons are the same as "cultural". Politics and religion are part of the definition of culture. Apologize if this comes across as nitpicking, but they drill this into you in archeology and anthropology (physical and cultural). Thanks again!
Oooh, gonna hard disagree on the hide being the reason for the Figure 8's weird shape there. But they're a fascinating case study. Firstly because the immediate predecessors (and contemporaries) to those shields are also depicted as as being cowskin, but those were shown as pure rectangles. So they could obviously make them in a more conventional shape, and if it was easier to do the weird shape they'd have done that first.
Secondly because the Figure 8 shape is REALLY weird in a three dimensional way, thats very...structured? Given the depictions of them being worn solely by shoulder straps, I believe (though cannot prove) that this is because of how they were used. It looks like they'd go into battle with the shield on the back while two handing a spear, then they have the option of swinging the shield round in front of them for when they switch to one handed weapons. They're less like a hoplite shield and more like a turtleshell that could be worn at different angles.
Rectangular curved ones that are very scutumlike were used at the same time as the Figure 8's (earlier ones look like flat rectangles, bur that could be art style) but the I think the 'pinch' was the shield being designed to sorta wrap around the bodies, while the top and bottom flared out wider and somewhat flatter, so that you had more arm and leg movement.
www.salimbeti.com/micenei/images/sword234.jpg
www.salimbeti.com/micenei/images/bodyshield15.jpg
www.salimbeti.com/micenei/images/bodyshield16.jpg
"Available materials" was actually the first thing I thought of.
Mine was "context" :D
Yeah.. I was thinking.. on the culture at the time. And purpose. Most materials, u can make into very similar shapes. And sizes
I THINK YOU GAVE A VERY EXCELLENT PRESENTATION
Highly informative. This helps a lot with my own research.
I find the picture of the guy @6:50 interesting. He is using a lenticular shield and look how much he has choked up on his spear. Only the blade of the spear is showing around the shield. It is almost as if he is using it like a short sword. That seems a bit odd and not what one would expect. What piece of artwork is that from?
-Greetings father, what is raid shadow legends?
-I'm so fucking glad you asked..
/sings/ When Captain American throws his mighty shield...
Are there any common modern schools/disciplines practicing 1 on 1 duel w/ shields? I guess I mean larger than buckler. I'd love to watch some spear-shield duels and see how someone can actually deliver the point into the right places!
Would have been nice if you gave a historical example of point number three. You pointed out some enemies that would be new to people but not a specific example of a shield change.
Still a good video ofc
I’m curious about the apparently wooden piece hanging from the latch beside the small shield bearing the club crest. It’s shape reminds me of the check piece from Roman helmets but it’s clearly a bit large for that and, as I said appears to be wooden.
Matt Easton the apostle of raid shadow legends
I thoroughly enjoyed this, so thank you. 👍👍
What kind of weapon is that to the left of your Knightly shield hanging on the wall?? It kind of looks like a wooded jaw bone with a handle on it.
It's a Polynesian club.
Well, it's nice to see that wee Easton is pulling her weight in the family business. ;)
It's a good question and a good video. Thanks.
Now to connect this to the round shield question. What is it about round shields that makes them so often an attractive choice.
Perhaps it should go without saying, but there were also shields that were composite. I've seen a number of historical examples of shield's that were wooden structures with leather or or bronze covering, for example.
People tend to forget that shields are still very much in use today. They are an essential piece of riot police gear. And police still use both big square ones and smaller round ones.
The shape and fashion of shields could be a good indication of the "team", but it's a misconception that heraldry itself played that role *in the midst of battle*. This has been pointed out most notably by Arthur Charles Fox-Davies: heraldic arms from the same region were often extremely similar (three lions passant, three lion regardant...), the colours were similar and, in any case, decorations on shields, flags etc would very likely become unreadable at any appreciable distance due to dirt, mud, rips and cuts, cracks, battle damage, blood and so on.
Much like medals in modern armies, which serve to indicate an honour but do not, in and of themselves, have the function of helping to tell who is who.
Other than Context, the other word for me is Compromise. If it's too big, and covers too much area, then you have to get it through a doorway, at some point. (In this case, and Old World doorway, or possibly in a coach.) It's not your Primary weapon, at least I can't think of anyone that used a shield in the main hand, or both, without another offensive weapon. (Judicial duels don't count, they don't Chose those weapons, they're chosen to make it "Fair.") So, you have to be able to carry, and use your primary weapon, whatever that is. Like Captain Context pointed out, if you have to ride a horse, or a chariot, at any point in your duties, you can't use a shield that doesn't work on horseback, then ditch it when you have to deliver a message, (For example, messengers, even traveling through Bandit Country) Same thing on ships, and boats. Vikings famously used longboats, and they knew about the Scutum, but at some point, one of them made the Compromise that they're not going to give up a rank of Oars, just to have something like that in their next Raid. The ultimte compromise is the Buckler, but not only can that be worn more easily than the Sword you're also carrying, but it's also the fastest reacting shield for Parrying. You don't Block with a buckler, it's a Parrying shield, so it was very useful in the smallsword/rapier/tuck era, where they were mostly stabbing at each other. (A rapier can cut, but there's a lot of Compromise there to give it more reach, and a quicker point.)
You've probably answered this in another video and I missed it, but, in later centuries when kings could raise armies, were there extra shields carted along in the supply trains for the soldiers? Was there a trading post in camp where the soldier could go to requisition a new shield after a battle, or did they have to purchase a new shield with their own money?
I meant to ask this earlier;
A quick question in regard to Shield Bosses.
Do we have evidence that Viking shield bosses had raised centres/knobs as slightly earlier Anglo-Saxon ones did (many examples have been found in the archaeological record eg -@ )?
+scholagladiatoria *Tactics dictated the styles and employment of shields, both infantry and cavalry.* The Romans developed an optimal shield for the heavy infantry formation, which could be targeted for archery barrages short of the merge. Persian, Sumero-Akkadi, Chatti, and Hellenic culture favored single combat between opposing champions, which influenced the round dual-strap shields later used in the infantry phalanx; round center-grip shields were scaled from civilian bucklers to military targes.
Another reason you don’t really want to carry around a desert eagle as your personal protection side arm- the recoil from .44 magnum and .50 AE is too heavy for those calibers to really be useful in a gunfight.
So that’s something all those videos games featuring desert eagles as an option get wrong. The DE is really more of an expensive range you than a practical combat weapon.
@31:45 - i want to hear more about the speel shafts made out of stear.
Great video very good points about tactics and what other armor components someone may have.
Thanks.. very informative
😊helped greatly in my project
8:39 that guy with the yellow and black was in the rebel alliance - back when it was still good
4) if the Scandinavian had plywood. Thay would have made shields out of it.
5) thats why Hollywood always gives one army square shields.(and jet an expensive actor never gets a special reginiseble helmet
The buckler is so handy you have to wonder why anyone who used a sword didn't use one on their sword hand. If its attached with a leather strap across the palm, you could easily wear it on your dominant sword hand and it would cover the entire back side of your hand/limb with essentially no penalty. Please weigh in! Im saying this as a talking point!
The way you grip a sword isn't static, you change grips and orientation all the time, plus most bucklers have metal or wooden grips not much leather grips. It would be a hassle to have in your sword hand. People just then would have worn Gauntlets or indeed the development of more complex hilted weapons.
The real question is if you could use a buckler in your left hand while two handing a polearm. That one is sorta doable.
Great video. I love this type of analysis.
Thanks for the really informative video. You mentioned shields made from rhino or elephant hide. Do you need a CITES II permit for owning one or is it already covered by beeing an (obvious) antique?