@@GuitarsRockForever - But it doesn't just absorb impacts. It deflects energy. Remember in the first Avengers movie when Thor hits Cap's shield and everyone but Captain America gets knocked down by the shockwave.
@@GuitarsRockForever well in the comics it was a combination of vibranium and proto-adamantium. Not saying that fixes the problems, just that comic-wise there's potential room for an excuse.
Fascinating and riveting as Always. For some reasons I really like the steel rounder. I can Imagine the sound of weapons hitting It. The scutum probably wasn't moved around much and it's an extremely difficult shield to bypass and it's a lot harder to make It pivot. It Is insteresting however that the Romans did have Parma shields for cavalry, and gave round shields to some of their gladiators. I think a round shield wokrs Better for a 1v1 but a scutum works Better in formation, even though the Greeks might disagree with that.
The kite shield is quite easy to defend in that the vast majority of fighting is in open fields where it is perfect you get maximum body coverage to weight ratio. Also in a fight you aren't going to have it in the relaxed carrying position where it will catch on doorways, you're going to have it out in front of you ready to defend against blows from hidden defenders or slung over the back rather than just walking in rooms blindly & getting clubbed from the sides or behind by defenders.
@@KamikazKid Bigger thing is that you get *most* of the leg protection of a scutum or similar when fighting on an open field, and you can also still use it when mounted, either with some protection for one leg, or carried at a different angle to not risk getting it hung up on the horse. Kind of a one-size-does-everything sort of design.
As i recall from reenactment, some guys would use their shields as plates or even tables. A big round shield on a stool works as a table for eating on.
It's just occurred to me, carry 2 scutum horizontally and you become a tie fighter! Hours of fun. Round, polished shields were better for reflecting titans ....
And I thought TIE/LN are unshielded. But TIE/LN sucks ass, take 3 heater shields instead, strap one to your helmet, and you got the much better TIE/Defender, which does have shielding.
I reckon that weight distribution is also easier to handle with a round shield. And its impossible to hold "wrong" as there is always the same distance from center to edge.
Honestly one of the things I really love about Kingdom Come: Deliverance is that almost every bandit shield has a different design painted on it. And that would look awesome on a round shield.
If you're using a traditional shield making technique of gluing alternate layers of wood strips together you can use a strip of of wet raw hide stitched around the edge. When it dries and shrinks it helps to hold the shield together.
Fun fact I just remembered: Vaccuum cleaners used to be square, because it offers more space for the bag. But, people realized that they would get suck on all kinds of corners, so they made them have round fronts so you could more easily drag them behind you. Even cars went through a similar phase, now all cars are sort of drop-shaped because it gives them less wind resistance. Looks like no matter where you go, round is preferred to edgy.
Ahh yes! During the Third Night of the Battle of Claire Zecundi I Used my Elders Timeless Shield of The Deep to put seven Legions of the Kar'Thungli Ravagers into a Deep Sleep! Twas' a great moment indeed.
I think you missed something important. You talked about being able to conceal the rotation of the grip, but it's also more efficient at performing the rotation. Corners poking out add extra leverage to slow you down. The circular design makes it quite nimble for the mass and surface area.
@@Specter_1125 Simple experiment to show the principle. 1)Hold a broom handle in the middle and twist wrist from side to side, seeing how fast you can do it. 2)Now grip it by the end and do the same. Extremely tedious. Part of that is because of the increased leverage, part of it is because it's off-balance. 3)Now cut it in half, tape halves together and do the same as step 1. You'll see you can do it much more quickly with less leverage. It's the same principle. A kite shield is usually not gripped center mass and sticks way out, similar to example 2. It tries to minimize the issue by tapering out. A scutum is held center mass, but still sticks out, similar to 3. As mass at the ends increases, balance and decreasing leverage becomes more important. Through logic, experimentation and observing design details, it appears to matter.
When you speak about the handles and comfortability of the round shield around 6:00, I think round shields also have the advantage of being easy to carry and easy to use since the handles allow both horizontal and vertical usage. You can carry it like a briefcase (like the horizontal handled Roman scutum) when on the march and it won't bang against your body like a curved kite shield with a vertically oriented handle. You can then use it vertically in actual combat, which makes it easier to use and move around your body compared to a horizontally gripped shield like a scutum. But that mostly applies to a totally round shield, and not oval shields or oval figure Aegean 8 shields.
If I have the choice I always go with a round domed shield from the mid Byzantine period. It varied in size from a hoplon down to slightly larger than a Rotella, but with a Rotella-like grip. When used with a spathion or a short spear, it is nearly unbeatable. Fast, easy to maneuver, and great on the offense as much as the defense. Thank you Matt for showing the benefits because they really are there!
It maximizes the protected area with respect to the diameter. In short this means, that it is the shape that has the best protection/awkwardness ratio. It is also probably easier to make and better for general use individual protection. Of course a kite shield is better for riding combat or a scutum is better for formations, but overall I think that the round shield is a good general purpose shield.
If a shield is made from planks, rather than some lamellar structure, then a circular shape will help in making sure a strike doesn't hit along the grain, where it would risk splitting the shield.
Or ensuring that it WILL land along the grain, if your intent is to trap the blade. Either way, it makes it your choice instead of the opponent's choice.
Potential additional reason - from all angles of attack, the edge presents a curved surface which is more likely to deflect the edge of a striking weapon instead of giving it a flat surface to chop into and damage the shield.
From a carpenter: 1) round shields cover the most area with the least amount of material 2) you therefore get the lightest shield possible for the most coverage; 3) VERY easy to build if flat; domed a little more time consuming 4) can be built with a lot of scraps, shorter pieces.5) round is inherently strong; lamination stronger still. From a logistics point of view, the "cheapest and best" shield to quickly outfit an army. Plus what Matt said. Cheers
One thing I don't see anyone mentioning is the actual impact of the shape. A round shield is effectively one long arch. It's structurally stronger than most other shapes because the 'back' (let's say, the edge closest to your elbow) is still supporting the 'front'. It's like the difference between putting a blow on the top of an arch vs. striking the middle of a beam. The ends of the beam don't support the middle beyond the material strength, but the ends of an arch do support the middle with compressive strength in addition to material strength.
Another benefit to round shields, related to your point about shields catching on things, is how well the shields work in rough or brushy terrain. I know where I live, in the western U.S., there are sagebrush bushes almost belly button high that would stop any tight shield formation from staying tight and constantly pull a long shield, such as a kite shield, out of alignment. But a round shield wouldn't even be bothered by brush.
I've wondered if there was a highly unlikely scenario where ancient weapons went back in vogue (think something like the Emberverse series) what sort of regional variations of armament there would be in North America.
@@kevinfogle7929 Well, I think a lot would depend on that highly unlikely scenario. If it were a matter of choice, chances are there would be a wide array right away, but I suspect various kinds of swords would be the top pick for weapons, because of our fascination with them, and likely mail, plate, or a combination thereof for the armor. If the scenario were different, say society suddenly failed and we had to go back to using whatever we and our neighbors could make, then I suspect bows, spears, and axes would be the most common weapons, and gambeson the most common armor.
I have a few thoughts on why round shields would be so universal. First is simplicity it's a very basic geometric shape whether flat or domed or with a boss or a spike like a targe. So that's one major point. Second item is weight all soldiers everywhere recognize that lighter is better especially when you have to march and carry everything yourself. Third is cost the simpler an item is to make the more likely you can afford it or your patron can in your stead. Just a couple factors that tend to be ignored.
Now can you please do boss grip vs strap shields, advantages / disadvantages? eg. strap shields are more secure but boss grip allows to hold the shield further out and maneuver it more
Matt, could you please talk more about sword and buckler in general? It's been a while! Also, it seems like larger(non-buckler) round shields like the rotella, came back into fashion during the period of Marozzo. I could be wrong, but it almost seems like this grew out of the Renaissance idea of a sort of homage to the round shields used in Classical Antiquity(?)...
I take your umbrella comment quite seriously. I thought that using the shield to ward off rain or projectiles while moving as a group (formation or independently) is much easier with a round shape.
Perhaps it’s also somewhat easier for the carrier of the round shield to keep track of what lines of attack that are covered. Subconsciously at least, since it forms an even cone of defence. When not manipulated of course.
All about practicing more with your shield of choice. I fought for years with a heater and got a really good feel-based sense of how well that back or bottom corner was covering me without ever actually seeing it. Granted, picking up a round was much more intuitive, but if rounds were universally better, other shapes wouldn't exist.
Can you imagine the effect of an entire line of troops with crosses on their round shield spinning them back and forth lol That could potentially really mess with your eyes!
I really like Roland Warzecha's observation that with a round center-gripped boss shield you know how the grain of boards is aligned, while your opponent does not. This means that you can align the shield edge to facilitate either deflection of a blow (grain perpendicular to the incoming sword blow) or to catch the opponent's blade (grain parallel to the incoming sword blow). Another advantage comes into play if the round center-gripped boss shield has a nice taper towards the edges. Most of its mass is close to the hand, making it that much more nimble and less tiring to use.
+scholagladiatoria *Round shields evolved with swords, spears, and tactics.* The Hellenic infantry shield originated in an era of duelling champions, and the convex curve was useful for deflecting the occasional _kopis_ of enemy cavalry. Later, European center-grip shields permitted delivering blunt force by punching.
A round shield is inherently stronger to edge cuts. Every hit creates compressive pressure towards the center of the shield. Any angled cut on a square shield creates a splitting force that drives material out away from the center of the shield. The geometry makes the shield stronger no matter the material it is made from.
I suggest to you Matt to try this for your self. Try sparring with someone while using first a round shield then a square shield.. The square one is just awkward, it gets stuck on things, you hit your self with the corners, its easily manipulated etc etc.. try it out
I think you just gave most of the answer to "why always round shields?" with this video. As for the designs painted on boss-grip shields... I don't know for sure about misaligned patterns, that's an interesting point. But from my understanding, concealing orientation of the hand was exactly the point of painting so many migration-era shields with simple symmetrical patterns. A complex heraldig device reveals orientation, but pie-wedges of the heraldic colours are harder to track. It's also important because it can indicate (or hide) which way the grain of the wood runs in the shield, which can tell you where a weapon can get trapped. A thought on misaligning the grip and the pattern comes to mind. If an army's worth of shields have randomly-aligned patterns, all the same template but angled differently across the grip and the wood grain, it becomes very difficult to predict just which way a particular soldier is holding their shield. Even if you engage one person, figure it out and beat them, the next one you face will be different and you have to solve it all over again.
Though this clashes somewhat with the Aspis used by Hoplites, round shields seem to be especially popular paired with more cutting oriented weapons. Here the shape is especially useful in keeping the line covered, without blocking your own line of attack. Especially for cuts moving diagonaly upwards, you would need to move aside a heater shield or Scutum, exposing the front of your body. With a round central grip or strapped shield you can quite more easily cut around the face of the shield, while keeping it mostly in front of you. With the Scutum even diagonally downward blows are quite difficult to pull of without removing the Scutum from facing your opponent.
If you can’t take the battery out of a flashlight, don’t buy it. If you can’t unscrew the tail cap to lock out a flashlight, don’t buy it, no matter how reputable the makers name is. Manny of these lights have caused fires and melted lenses because the battery can not be removed. I try to help the buyers of this world as much as I can by motivating the makers to be fair to us. No more severely overpriced throwaway garbage. Plus it’s better to have 50 cheep flashlights than one overpriced over powered rechargeable throw away
Round shield was my choice when I was geeky but sporty SCA kid (I'm old now and yes, 20 year olds are kids by way of perspective). I chose solid green in the boss grip. Later I added a spiral white pattern to the facing. Fun video, thank you!
Round shields work on foot, horseback, a boat or ship, behind and in front of fortifications, etc. I think versatility is what makes this kind of shield so wide spread and popular.
My go to explanation as an experienced hiker is that lighter, better for marching is best. Bucklers & round shields are great for hiking through the wilderness compared to other designs.
A point on what you talk about orientation of the shield. For SCA fighting, one of the first things to take measure about your opponent, is to see how their shield is strapped. You do this by looking at the rivets on the surface to get an idea of how its being gripped. Same for center grips like bucklers. You look for the rivets holding the handle on, to see the orientation. Some people will add superficial rivets, especially for center gripped round shields, for this reason.
I would have thought that with any kind of frame structured shield a disk or shallow dome shape gives slightly greater strength to weight characteristic than anything with an edge or asymmetry.
Something this made me think of is shield grips (center grip vs a strap and handle). A while ago, when I was doing SCA armored fighting, I got the chance to borrow someone’s center grip shield. Up until that point I used a heater shield with the strap and handle, but after using a center gripped shield you notice some interesting things. Like the center grip shield can be held farther from your body, thus giving you more space between you and your opponent. Also you can use the shield to block your opponents view of your weapon (and this is especially so for bigger center gripped shields). But the biggest drawback (and this was certainly true for me) was your arm gets tired pretty quick. Though, I really didn’t do much weight lifting or anything back then, and I’m sure someone with more shoulder strength could keep that shield up longer.
A major advantage is when you are bashing someone with the edge of the shield, using it as a weapon, it doesnt matter what edge you hit him with, the circle means you have have maximum force on that point. If you hit someone with a square shield edge, it is more likely to glance off and not deliver maximum force.
"You know what a Norman shield looks like, you know what a Roman shield looks like..." So did they. Another advantage to having different sizes, and shapes of Shields was it could make it easier to identify who you're trying to kill in a Mêlée. After the lines crash together, and it turns into a moshpit, it can be easy to get disorientated, and they had things like helmet crests for that, too. However, a lot of guys were probably holding their shields up, protectively. They also used that handy area for decoration, heraldry, so you knew that was Philip de Braose's shield, but if it was Romans vs Gauls, you could tell at a glance that the guy hiding behind that shield was probably an enemy, trying to kill you. (Unless, of course, he picked up a dropped shield off the ground, because it's a mêlée, and unpredictable things happen.)
Adding to the topic of projections catching on things, the parts of a shield that can catch a blade are the parts that are going to break first, so a shield with projections is weaker than a round shield.
Two further thoughts: 1. Round shields are easy to make - you stick boards, layers of hide, whatever together, the you attach them to a lathe, spin them, and cut them into a nice, regular circle. 2. Unless you have a specific fighting style that is going to involve keeping the shield in a particular orientation, - like the Scutum for making a testudo - a round shield gave the best weight to protection factor. Why have extra weight in "additional" corners that would rarely be or benefit (thinking of those dreadful square-ish shield in The Last Kingdom, for example. The only time I trained to use a shield for real it was (by memory) about 2' wide and 6' high. It was made of perspex. I have not studied this, but my impression is, looking at pictures in the news of anti-riot police/troops more recently, that those sorts of shields seem to have disappeared, and round ones have become the norm.
The kite shield is for a horseman, the Roman shield is to form a wall, and the round shield is for loose battle formations but can also be used as a wall if the shield is large. I like the round shield best of all.
I reckon besides the advantages you pointed out (or implied) that ease of manufacture probably plays a part. I don't know how all the different wooden round shields are made, but if you take the targe you need a tree, a saw, an animal hide, and rivets (I guess, I've never watched an in-depth construction of one).
I'm not actually sure but two things come to mind. First you can strike equally with any part of the edge. Don't know how important that is but it came to mind when you talked about hiding you hand position. No matter how you are holding a circular shield you can always strike with the edge effectively. Second and I keep doubting myself here, but I think if you are supplying an army circular shields would be easier to mass produce.
Great video. It seems there was some convergent evolution around the world where people adopted similar characteristics. I am curious about certain types of shields around the world. Why do ancient Chinese "double arced" shields resemble an upside down medieval kite shield with grooves (why did strapped versions of these double arced shields also have grooves)? Why did the ancient Aegean people use figure 8 shields instead of just oval shields? Why did Eastern Europeans and some Greeks (eg. peltast skirmishers) use crescent shaped shields? Why do oval Zulu shields have poles sticking from the top and bottom?
I just bought a dark age styled shield that has a triple wolf design that may work with your last point best. The wolf heads are all facing the same direction so it might be easier to make a subtle but effective move with it.
Other people have probably already commented this, but I'd be curious to see a video about why the Japanese seemed to "never" use shields. As for our theories about why round shields were so dominant, I think one reason is the fact that a round shield has a symmetrical mass distribution in every axis, meaning it's equally easy to move in every direction. A circular shield is just as easy to tilt up and down as it is left and right, whereas a very tall shield is much harder to tilt up and down because it has a different moment of inertia.
I think popularity of type is a combination of what weapon you are holding, what weapon you expect the enemy to be holding, and what tactics as a unit are available to you. Spears seem to be popular with round shaped shields maybe that has something to do with it.
As far as round shields being so common, I think, as with many military situations, it comes down to the most common usage. For most people, especially people without specialized training, the round shield will do everything that you would need a shield to do. It's naturally balanced because it's round and one thing that you touched on is that it doesn't become cumbersome in most situations. So much time spent on activities that aren't battle that it's good to have a convenient set of arms to carry.
I think one of the main reason could be linked to the cone of cover the shield give. A round shape cover more regularly and perhaps this makes more safe and simple to use a round shield than a different shaped one.
It's funny that you asked for comments about what we think (dat youtube engagement, yo!) Because I had an immediate thought when you said that. It seems intuitive to me, in my non-expert opinion, that a cirlcle must be one of the most effecient shapes in terms of protection/coverage for weight, if not THE most efficient shape. Sure, it doesn't protect your legs, but your legs are the part of you furthest from the other guy's killy bits, and the hoplites seemed to be able to account for that weakness well enough. All the stuff about how its easier to move around because it's balanced just seemed like a bonus to me.
Weight and leverage can also work together against the user. An item with more mass farther from the center of rotation has a greater moment of inertia. Basically, kite shields take longer to move into different positions because they're heavier and that mass has more leverage to act on your arm. Radially symmetric round shields are better balanced around the center.
Paint the spiral on round shield, spin it and hypnotised your oponent 😵 Stationary spiral often give the illusion of spinning it might be distracting, concentric rings have similar effect.
I think the Buckler was a bad choice for arguing that you can not see, how the Hand angle is behind the shield, because you can clearly see it with this Buckler. The two rivets on the outside clearly gives away in which angle your Hand is. But i must admit i never thought about most of the advantages you where tellig us about. Thank you a lot i really love your channel for this.
This is possibly an extension of your first point but how about balance? A round shield is balanced whichever way you hold it. Second, how about longevity? If part of my round shield has been smashed, I can turn the shield around to maximise remaining protection.
One of the advantages are that with round shields you can do way more variates of offensive angles with the sword. You ca attack all around the shield edge without the limitation of the different shaped shield. Your opponent also can't guess from which side of the shield the blade will come as it can come from any possible spot (this is when you fight with sword behind the shield manner... And many warriors fought exactly this way). That type of fight and techniques can be utilised only with a round shields.
Possible advantage is: sticking the shield in front of you and moving the weapon around it it's easier. This is done with sword and buckler quite often, like in first stance or fifth stance.
I always wondered why late medieval nights did not return to round shields when shields were getting smaller again. It just dawned on me - if an arm-held shield has a pivot point in line with the arm, then there is an extra advantage to a knight's heater shield - The flat top is diagonal from the pivot. That means a blow that otherwise might jam that side down and into a person, actually is more likely to deflect off the angled edge, reducing its power to make the shield pivot. Also, by the time kite shields started to be considered too bulky, coats of arms were on shields, clearly exposing the shield's orientation. Therefore, there was less utility in returning to round shields unless you wanted to do away with coats of arms again. Might as well use a heater shield, with its extra strong arm grip, deflection to reduce pivoting, and a nice shape for a coat of arms.
I have a 23" 18ga plain steel Rotella shield with straps which I bought from Therion Arms for $95. This weighs 5lbs 4.8 oz. He does offer other models. His 18ga steel white painted Rotella is 5lbs 14.5oz and 21 3/4" large. This one has one strap and one bar. Both are pretty good for the price.
On your round painted shield you could possibly make the hand hold rotatable by having it fastened to a round ring enclosed in a collar plate so that its free moving. Just to add you could use the movement of the shield design as a distraction during an attack too.
Fourth point; a strapped round shield is dirt simple to learn the basics. A noob can pick it up in an hour. Just use your covered fist to intercept (block or slap) the opponent's weapon. Anyone who can throw a punch can do it. Offensive strikes are easy, too. Knight's shields or "Kite" shields require bending of the knees, rotating the hips or raising the shoulders and are more counterintuitive.
I'd think balance was an advantage, too. The uneven balance of a kite shield or a scutum requires more power to change orientation, and constant power to hold that orientation. It's the "scratch your ear" thing, only more "get that shield high, near horizontal, tilted to the wright, and fast". Rotational symmetry should also mean easier awareness of its position and what it covers.
First thing we need to realize is that, well, a shield needs to have some shape, and that shape needs to be practical to carry around and protective (i.e. needs to cover important bits of person holding it). If you were deaisning shields without knowing any, and you were sticking to basic shapes, well, there's the circle, ellipse, triangle and rectangle. There's also deltoid and others, but the listed 4 are the most intuitive. From those four, triangle is right out, it leaves some bits of you uncovered and has corners that are kinda sharp and structurally weak - kite and norman shields are sort of triangular, but the important bit is sorta, they all use some kind of a trick to deal with triangle's weaknesses, and aren't really a basic shape. So, circle, ellipse and rectangle it is. All three were used, so all three work. But, here's the thing, if you're trying to draw the shape on the material you're working with (be it planks or leather), ellipse is... well, not incredibly difficult, but definitely harder to do than circle or rectangle. Circle is the easiest, actually, you just need a string and someone/something to hold it, for a rectangle, you need some sort of angle tool or gravity, a string and a weight (rock will do). So, yeah, circle is just a really intuitive shape to arrive to when your goal is to make a lot of shields easily, and since this is a property of its shape, it's cross-cultural. It has the disadvantage of not scaling up very well, which is where ellipse and rectangle come in. Triangles only tend to get added to them if someone's solving a specific problem (e.g. my leg is exposed on a horse with this round shield).
Your final point on round shields rings true. Playing with my "viking shield" I had the same thoughts. I believe those wave/spiral designs served to distract an opponent and confuse them about your hand orientation while moving. I think the designs were more than decoration.
The round shield might be easier to maintain them one with corners. It might also be that it did not matter how you held it it would still do it's job and not block your vision any different. Just my immediate thoughts on that.
I think also the distribution of mass on a round shield vs other shapes also plays into the maneuverability and "feel" of handling the shield. Somebody who is using the shield in a more active manner ie- fencing WITH the shield rather than around it would possibly feel the symmetrical form of a round shield easier to maneuver than something oblong or with protrusions that could create drag, affect the shield's momentum when in motion, or obstruct some dynamic movements. It's a bit hard to describe in words but essentially, something round should *feel* easier to manipulate in a variety of directions than something with an oblong or irregular shape due to drag and momentum. The lack of protrusions or hard corners also keeps the shield out of the way of strikes with your weapon as well though you might have mentioned that and I maybe missed it.
Another advantage is that I don't need to pay attention to where coverage is greater or lesser; a "heater" has areas of greater and lesser protection, for example.
You probably should have brought on the spartan shield to compare with as well, since the two most discussed non-round shields here were considerably larger than the round ones shown. Just my two cents, love the vids!
Round shields are easier for the user manipulate. It doesn't matter which axis you need to turn it on, there's no projections for gravity to apply a moment and make your job more difficult. That means as much when fighting as it does when marching. The result is they turn easily in any axis. Even If you hold a buckler edge on, you can defend any line by turning the hand just like rotating through rapier and saber guards. I.33 and Marozzo both utilize this. They're also easy to make in any size, no need for patterns at all, just a piece of string in the desired radius.
You forgot the advantage of a round shield in mounted combat. It can be moved from side to side without getting caught on the saddle or reins. As I've pointed out before, we see mounted knights (men-at-arms?) on the Bayeax Tapestry carrying teardrop shaped shields, but with the points behind them rather than down by the leg. Based on this, my conclusion is that the popularity of the kite-shield was more for its ability to switch between mounted or dismounted combat. They carried it with the point behind them when on horseback, to get the benefits of a round shield in mounted combat, and then shifted the point downward to protect their legs when they dismounted.
I read somewhere that ancient Greeks used a lathe to make their shields. The lathe cuts wood in a circular manner. So round shields were easier to manufacture.
I think structural strength is also important. Circles provide even distribution of weight and force, so they're less likely to break at any certain point.
Also, if you bash someone with the edge of a round shield the force is always perpendiculat to the object struck (in that plane), which gives you the maximum force possible and the minimum chance of glancing off without delivering that force into, for example, your opponents helmet.
I think it is because while a round shield might not be better than a certain other type of shields in specific applications, they are likely better overall. While they would not offer the same protection against arrows that the Norman and Roman shields offer, in a chaotic melee battle they would likely perform better as their lighter weight would not tire you out so quickly as well as allow you to move the shield easily to absorb incoming threats from different directions. The fact that they do not snag on things is also an advantage as it would mean you would not have to worry about moving it and it either hitting something and leaving you open or interfering with a comrade. As it is pointed out in the video, people could ride with them and if you could not afford a horse the lighter weight would make carrying it easier.
Its interesting the Romans only seem to have used that half dustbin type shield for a few decades in the 1st century AD - before and after they used oval shields or more rounded edged rectangular shields, possibly for the reasons you mentioned!
I believe Lloyd did a video a while back talking about how circular edges always meet an object at right angles to the center, transferring more force like billiard balls colliding, rather than glancing and sliding past. This he applied to axe edges for maximizing percussive force, and to round shields for deflecting weapons
On the subject of Kite and Heater shields, what are the advantages and disadvantages of different strap positions? Your kite shield has the straps such that the arm is diagonal when the shield is straight, but I've seen other configurations that keep the arm horizontal or vertical when the shield is straight.
When not strapped to, or on the body, the round shield is easier to flip, and then carry under your arm. You even see it in a couple of pictorial and material sources. It works. And, of course, there the whole cone-of-defence and shield-to-the-mouf-thing, but that's a topic for another time :)
How were bucklers worn? I've heard a great many times how easy to wear they are but I can't seem to get my head around how you would attach it in any practical and accessible way...
Looped casually over the hilt of your sword works as long as you aren't doing anything too gymnastic and the sword isn't hung too close to it's balance point.
Interestingly, in the book by a myarmoury forum member 'Bronze Age Military Equipment,' the author speculates that Hektor and many other Homeric heroes carried a center-grip round shield of cattle hide and bronze facing. Maybe the center grip round shield is just all around good at defending an individual under attack from numerous angles.
Why are round shields so common? (serious answer this time) A round shield has an obvious centre of gravity and rotation at which a boss grip is usually rotated, and on opposite sides of which a pair of straps will be located with that kind of grip. The middle of the shield is a clear and easily identified balance point around which rotation of the shield is easy without any change in its protective properties in any direction. This fact means that a round shield will typically need to be moved far less to protect against blows from different directions. All you're usually going to need is the rotation of the shield, not a major repositioning of it. That fact alone is a major point in favour of a round shield, which makes any other design - and particularly the non-regular designs with protrusions in a single direction - far less efficient as a general-purpose protective tool (though they have their specialised roles for which they're designed - as Matt always reminds us, context matters)
A shop once tried to talk me into buying a roundshield that I would certainly say would have been a nuisance and inconvenience. The bloody thing weighed as much as a night stand or coffee table!
Then it was poorly made. Can't speak much any types before the Viking period but Viking shields generally were estimated to be between 4 and 8lbs (1.81 to 3.63kg) which is quite manageable. They did this by tapering the shield thickness - the thickest part of the shield surrounded the boss and it narrowed as it approached the edge. The edge could be very thin, sometimes as little as 1/8 inch (3.3mm) and at the boss it might be 1/2" (12.7mm). When I attempted to build my first Viking shield with planks, hide glue and so forth I kept feeling that I was tapering the shield too much, thinning it excessively. When I was done, my shield weighed in at almost 15lb (6.8kg). Subsequent visits to Europe where I was able to see actual Viking shield remains (Trelleborg Viking fortress in Denmark had a great display of the remains of a shield which you can examine from an edge-on perspective) and they were incredibly thin at the edge.
@@AndyTernay - I concluded that it was really just a failed experimental shield for being so heavy, and relegated to an overpriced wallhanger. The shop folks would not confirm that though, which seemed shady, so I moved on. Someone eventually bought it though.
Another potential reason, economics. A round shield requires less material and is easier to make than pretty much any other design, especially the large curved shields. Outfitting your army is expensive. If a round shield costs X, and a kite shield costs 3X, then that kite shield needs to be WAY better than the round shield, or you're probably better off spending that money elsewhere. If I had to choose between giving my soldiers a kite shield and brigandine, or a round shield and brigandine with mail underneath, then I'm not buying any kite shields. I know that you're not going to save anywhere near enough money on a shield to afford a set of mail, but you get the idea. Outfitting an army is about compromise, and getting the most bang for your buck. A lot of the time, good enough is good enough. And round shields are clearly good enough.
14:13 As he mentioned with his metal rotella, the domed shape provides additional strength to the shield itself. The arm resting behind the centerline of the shield coupled with that domed shape makes for a tremendously strong defense along that axis. However, an opponent can still easily manipulate the shield on those sides where the arm is not located.
I'd say a huge part of their popularity is that the design is just so obvious, and it works well enough so there's not that big of a reason to change it. Then your first point of convenience is huge as well. No corners to get stuck on anything and the point of balance is at the grip so it's light to use and carry.
Please Matt I'm trying to study stop sneaking interesting speculations into my work day
I can relate
The circle is the perfect shape.
This is studying. Not what you planned to, but details
I feel your pain.
Same
Aaah, but you've forgotten. A round shield is easier to throw like a frisbee and take out multiple opponents, especially when it's made of vibranium.
or when you're a Paladin from World of Warcraft ^.^
@@GuitarsRockForever - But it doesn't just absorb impacts. It deflects energy. Remember in the first Avengers movie when Thor hits Cap's shield and everyone but Captain America gets knocked down by the shockwave.
Thrown more like a discus than a frisbee
Thats what I nicknamed my battery powered butt plug 0.o
@@GuitarsRockForever well in the comics it was a combination of vibranium and proto-adamantium. Not saying that fixes the problems, just that comic-wise there's potential room for an excuse.
Fascinating and riveting as Always. For some reasons I really like the steel rounder. I can Imagine the sound of weapons hitting It.
The scutum probably wasn't moved around much and it's an extremely difficult shield to bypass and it's a lot harder to make It pivot.
It Is insteresting however that the Romans did have Parma shields for cavalry, and gave round shields to some of their gladiators. I think a round shield wokrs Better for a 1v1 but a scutum works Better in formation, even though the Greeks might disagree with that.
Waiting for Shad's defense of the kite shield.
he'd probably point out that the very reason the strap exists is because the shield is so unweildy when carried in hand ^.^
Shart?
@@ME-kd1ko Shadversity.
The kite shield is quite easy to defend in that the vast majority of fighting is in open fields where it is perfect you get maximum body coverage to weight ratio. Also in a fight you aren't going to have it in the relaxed carrying position where it will catch on doorways, you're going to have it out in front of you ready to defend against blows from hidden defenders or slung over the back rather than just walking in rooms blindly & getting clubbed from the sides or behind by defenders.
@@KamikazKid Bigger thing is that you get *most* of the leg protection of a scutum or similar when fighting on an open field, and you can also still use it when mounted, either with some protection for one leg, or carried at a different angle to not risk getting it hung up on the horse. Kind of a one-size-does-everything sort of design.
As i recall from reenactment, some guys would use their shields as plates or even tables. A big round shield on a stool works as a table for eating on.
The irony being that medieval 'plates' were square :-D
@@scholagladiatoria Really? XD
Well, a 'trencher' could be round, but they were often square. Originally it was a slice of stale bread, but they were later made of wood.
@@scholagladiatoria Huh. This is why I follow your channel, I genuinely don't know where else I would have been able to learn that!
about as useful as using your buckler as an emergency pot.
It's just occurred to me, carry 2 scutum horizontally and you become a tie fighter! Hours of fun. Round, polished shields were better for reflecting titans ....
XD
Vader's personal craft, to be precise.
And I thought TIE/LN are unshielded. But TIE/LN sucks ass, take 3 heater shields instead, strap one to your helmet, and you got the much better TIE/Defender, which does have shielding.
I reckon that weight distribution is also easier to handle with a round shield.
And its impossible to hold "wrong" as there is always the same distance from center to edge.
Agreed, I was going to mention the weight distribution and ease of carrying.
That Soundgarden shirt would make a badass design for a round shield
Especially if the pattern was raised.
I was thinking the same!
Honestly one of the things I really love about Kingdom Come: Deliverance is that almost every bandit shield has a different design painted on it. And that would look awesome on a round shield.
If you're using a traditional shield making technique of gluing alternate layers of wood strips together you can use a strip of of wet raw hide stitched around the edge. When it dries and shrinks it helps to hold the shield together.
Fun fact I just remembered:
Vaccuum cleaners used to be square, because it offers more space for the bag.
But, people realized that they would get suck on all kinds of corners, so they made them have round fronts so you could more easily drag them behind you.
Even cars went through a similar phase, now all cars are sort of drop-shaped because it gives them less wind resistance.
Looks like no matter where you go, round is preferred to edgy.
When turning your shield with the cross on it your eyes are almost involuntarily drawn to the shield.
Yea and I'm thinking a more complex design (spiral or a pattern) might even make it more difficult to focus/read it's movements 🤔
Should have painted a spiral pattern to hypnotize enemies.
@@PaletoB Like the patterns painted on ships to make them harder to hit.
Ahh yes! During the Third Night of the Battle of Claire Zecundi I Used my Elders Timeless Shield of The Deep to put seven Legions of the Kar'Thungli Ravagers into a Deep Sleep! Twas' a great moment indeed.
+1
I think you missed something important. You talked about being able to conceal the rotation of the grip, but it's also more efficient at performing the rotation. Corners poking out add extra leverage to slow you down. The circular design makes it quite nimble for the mass and surface area.
I think at that point you're massively overthinking it though.
Any other shield of comparable size is gonna have a negligible difference if any.
@@Specter_1125 Simple experiment to show the principle.
1)Hold a broom handle in the middle and twist wrist from side to side, seeing how fast you can do it.
2)Now grip it by the end and do the same. Extremely tedious. Part of that is because of the increased leverage, part of it is because it's off-balance.
3)Now cut it in half, tape halves together and do the same as step 1. You'll see you can do it much more quickly with less leverage.
It's the same principle. A kite shield is usually not gripped center mass and sticks way out, similar to example 2. It tries to minimize the issue by tapering out.
A scutum is held center mass, but still sticks out, similar to 3. As mass at the ends increases, balance and decreasing leverage becomes more important.
Through logic, experimentation and observing design details, it appears to matter.
When you speak about the handles and comfortability of the round shield around 6:00, I think round shields also have the advantage of being easy to carry and easy to use since the handles allow both horizontal and vertical usage. You can carry it like a briefcase (like the horizontal handled Roman scutum) when on the march and it won't bang against your body like a curved kite shield with a vertically oriented handle. You can then use it vertically in actual combat, which makes it easier to use and move around your body compared to a horizontally gripped shield like a scutum. But that mostly applies to a totally round shield, and not oval shields or oval figure Aegean 8 shields.
If I have the choice I always go with a round domed shield from the mid Byzantine period. It varied in size from a hoplon down to slightly larger than a Rotella, but with a Rotella-like grip. When used with a spathion or a short spear, it is nearly unbeatable. Fast, easy to maneuver, and great on the offense as much as the defense. Thank you Matt for showing the benefits because they really are there!
It maximizes the protected area with respect to the diameter. In short this means, that it is the shape that has the best protection/awkwardness ratio. It is also probably easier to make and better for general use individual protection. Of course a kite shield is better for riding combat or a scutum is better for formations, but overall I think that the round shield is a good general purpose shield.
If a shield is made from planks, rather than some lamellar structure, then a circular shape will help in making sure a strike doesn't hit along the grain, where it would risk splitting the shield.
Or ensuring that it WILL land along the grain, if your intent is to trap the blade. Either way, it makes it your choice instead of the opponent's choice.
Potential additional reason - from all angles of attack, the edge presents a curved surface which is more likely to deflect the edge of a striking weapon instead of giving it a flat surface to chop into and damage the shield.
From a carpenter: 1) round shields cover the most area with the least amount of material 2) you therefore get the lightest shield possible for the most coverage; 3) VERY easy to build if flat; domed a little more time consuming 4) can be built with a lot of scraps, shorter pieces.5) round is inherently strong; lamination stronger still. From a logistics point of view, the "cheapest and best" shield to quickly outfit an army. Plus what Matt said. Cheers
One thing I don't see anyone mentioning is the actual impact of the shape. A round shield is effectively one long arch. It's structurally stronger than most other shapes because the 'back' (let's say, the edge closest to your elbow) is still supporting the 'front'. It's like the difference between putting a blow on the top of an arch vs. striking the middle of a beam. The ends of the beam don't support the middle beyond the material strength, but the ends of an arch do support the middle with compressive strength in addition to material strength.
Another benefit to round shields, related to your point about shields catching on things, is how well the shields work in rough or brushy terrain. I know where I live, in the western U.S., there are sagebrush bushes almost belly button high that would stop any tight shield formation from staying tight and constantly pull a long shield, such as a kite shield, out of alignment. But a round shield wouldn't even be bothered by brush.
I've wondered if there was a highly unlikely scenario where ancient weapons went back in vogue (think something like the Emberverse series) what sort of regional variations of armament there would be in North America.
@@kevinfogle7929 Well, I think a lot would depend on that highly unlikely scenario. If it were a matter of choice, chances are there would be a wide array right away, but I suspect various kinds of swords would be the top pick for weapons, because of our fascination with them, and likely mail, plate, or a combination thereof for the armor. If the scenario were different, say society suddenly failed and we had to go back to using whatever we and our neighbors could make, then I suspect bows, spears, and axes would be the most common weapons, and gambeson the most common armor.
I have a few thoughts on why round shields would be so universal. First is simplicity it's a very basic geometric shape whether flat or domed or with a boss or a spike like a targe. So that's one major point. Second item is weight all soldiers everywhere recognize that lighter is better especially when you have to march and carry everything yourself. Third is cost the simpler an item is to make the more likely you can afford it or your patron can in your stead. Just a couple factors that tend to be ignored.
Now can you please do boss grip vs strap shields, advantages / disadvantages? eg. strap shields are more secure but boss grip allows to hold the shield further out and maneuver it more
Matt, could you please talk more about sword and buckler in general? It's been a while! Also, it seems like larger(non-buckler) round shields like the rotella, came back into fashion during the period of Marozzo. I could be wrong, but it almost seems like this grew out of the Renaissance idea of a sort of homage to the round shields used in Classical Antiquity(?)...
@12:40 This part regarding the orientation and emblem on the round shield is truly a stunning realization for me Matt. Thanks!
1. sledding
2. spare wheel
3. umbrella
Ah, but it's not a scutum, which can be a tent, a backpack and a bench.
I take your umbrella comment quite seriously. I thought that using the shield to ward off rain or projectiles while moving as a group (formation or independently) is much easier with a round shape.
dinner plate
Perhaps it’s also somewhat easier for the carrier of the round shield to keep track of what lines of attack that are covered. Subconsciously at least, since it forms an even cone of defence. When not manipulated of course.
this is 100% true and everyone in boffer combat knows it... HEMA people aren't doing enough sparring with shields
All about practicing more with your shield of choice. I fought for years with a heater and got a really good feel-based sense of how well that back or bottom corner was covering me without ever actually seeing it. Granted, picking up a round was much more intuitive, but if rounds were universally better, other shapes wouldn't exist.
Can you imagine the effect of an entire line of troops with crosses on their round shield spinning them back and forth lol That could potentially really mess with your eyes!
I wonder if it would lead to nausea and vomiting.
I really like Roland Warzecha's observation that with a round center-gripped boss shield you know how the grain of boards is aligned, while your opponent does not. This means that you can align the shield edge to facilitate either deflection of a blow (grain perpendicular to the incoming sword blow) or to catch the opponent's blade (grain parallel to the incoming sword blow).
Another advantage comes into play if the round center-gripped boss shield has a nice taper towards the edges. Most of its mass is close to the hand, making it that much more nimble and less tiring to use.
+scholagladiatoria *Round shields evolved with swords, spears, and tactics.* The Hellenic infantry shield originated in an era of duelling champions, and the convex curve was useful for deflecting the occasional _kopis_ of enemy cavalry. Later, European center-grip shields permitted delivering blunt force by punching.
When the hoplite shield came into being as we know it, almost no cavalry was used in combat.
A round shield is inherently stronger to edge cuts. Every hit creates compressive pressure towards the center of the shield. Any angled cut on a square shield creates a splitting force that drives material out away from the center of the shield. The geometry makes the shield stronger no matter the material it is made from.
Magic. I see.
@@marcondespaulo magic compressive strength of the arch.
@@macavitythemysterycat your explanation seemed off, but english is not my first language.
Great idea with making a confusing pattern to hide hand positions
I suggest to you Matt to try this for your self. Try sparring with someone while using first a round shield then a square shield.. The square one is just awkward, it gets stuck on things, you hit your self with the corners, its easily manipulated etc etc.. try it out
Me: - only has a round shield and doesn't wanna buy another shield - ah yes, round shield master race. I agree
*Shadiversity wants to know your location*
Have fun on horse back
I think you just gave most of the answer to "why always round shields?" with this video. As for the designs painted on boss-grip shields... I don't know for sure about misaligned patterns, that's an interesting point. But from my understanding, concealing orientation of the hand was exactly the point of painting so many migration-era shields with simple symmetrical patterns. A complex heraldig device reveals orientation, but pie-wedges of the heraldic colours are harder to track. It's also important because it can indicate (or hide) which way the grain of the wood runs in the shield, which can tell you where a weapon can get trapped.
A thought on misaligning the grip and the pattern comes to mind. If an army's worth of shields have randomly-aligned patterns, all the same template but angled differently across the grip and the wood grain, it becomes very difficult to predict just which way a particular soldier is holding their shield. Even if you engage one person, figure it out and beat them, the next one you face will be different and you have to solve it all over again.
Though this clashes somewhat with the Aspis used by Hoplites, round shields seem to be especially popular paired with more cutting oriented weapons.
Here the shape is especially useful in keeping the line covered, without blocking your own line of attack.
Especially for cuts moving diagonaly upwards, you would need to move aside a heater shield or Scutum, exposing the front of your body.
With a round central grip or strapped shield you can quite more easily cut around the face of the shield, while keeping it mostly in front of you.
With the Scutum even diagonally downward blows are quite difficult to pull of without removing the Scutum from facing your opponent.
olights are really great. Have a couple of their flashlights and they never disappoint
If you can’t take the battery out of a flashlight, don’t buy it.
If you can’t unscrew the tail cap to lock out a flashlight, don’t buy it, no matter how reputable the makers name is. Manny of these lights have caused fires and melted lenses because the battery can not be removed.
I try to help the buyers of this world as much as I can by motivating the makers to be fair to us. No more severely overpriced throwaway garbage.
Plus it’s better to have 50 cheep flashlights than one overpriced over powered rechargeable throw away
Round shield was my choice when I was geeky but sporty SCA kid (I'm old now and yes, 20 year olds are kids by way of perspective). I chose solid green in the boss grip. Later I added a spiral white pattern to the facing. Fun video, thank you!
Round shields work on foot, horseback, a boat or ship, behind and in front of fortifications, etc. I think versatility is what makes this kind of shield so wide spread and popular.
A round shield with a center grip is gonna be interesting using on horse back
My go to explanation as an experienced hiker is that lighter, better for marching is best. Bucklers & round shields are great for hiking through the wilderness compared to other designs.
A point on what you talk about orientation of the shield. For SCA fighting, one of the first things to take measure about your opponent, is to see how their shield is strapped. You do this by looking at the rivets on the surface to get an idea of how its being gripped. Same for center grips like bucklers. You look for the rivets holding the handle on, to see the orientation. Some people will add superficial rivets, especially for center gripped round shields, for this reason.
I would have thought that with any kind of frame structured shield a disk or shallow dome shape gives slightly greater strength to weight characteristic than anything with an edge or asymmetry.
1:16 Don't forget Zulu shields.
2:39 They're completely symmetrical; you get the same protection no matter how you twist your wrist+arm.
Something this made me think of is shield grips (center grip vs a strap and handle). A while ago, when I was doing SCA armored fighting, I got the chance to borrow someone’s center grip shield. Up until that point I used a heater shield with the strap and handle, but after using a center gripped shield you notice some interesting things. Like the center grip shield can be held farther from your body, thus giving you more space between you and your opponent. Also you can use the shield to block your opponents view of your weapon (and this is especially so for bigger center gripped shields). But the biggest drawback (and this was certainly true for me) was your arm gets tired pretty quick. Though, I really didn’t do much weight lifting or anything back then, and I’m sure someone with more shoulder strength could keep that shield up longer.
A major advantage is when you are bashing someone with the edge of the shield, using it as a weapon, it doesnt matter what edge you hit him with, the circle means you have have maximum force on that point. If you hit someone with a square shield edge, it is more likely to glance off and not deliver maximum force.
"You know what a Norman shield looks like, you know what a Roman shield looks like..." So did they. Another advantage to having different sizes, and shapes of Shields was it could make it easier to identify who you're trying to kill in a Mêlée. After the lines crash together, and it turns into a moshpit, it can be easy to get disorientated, and they had things like helmet crests for that, too. However, a lot of guys were probably holding their shields up, protectively. They also used that handy area for decoration, heraldry, so you knew that was Philip de Braose's shield, but if it was Romans vs Gauls, you could tell at a glance that the guy hiding behind that shield was probably an enemy, trying to kill you. (Unless, of course, he picked up a dropped shield off the ground, because it's a mêlée, and unpredictable things happen.)
Adding to the topic of projections catching on things, the parts of a shield that can catch a blade are the parts that are going to break first, so a shield with projections is weaker than a round shield.
Off to play Black Hole Sun now, that's my night lost in 80's and 90's rock!
Want to keep your youth, huh?
Two further thoughts:
1. Round shields are easy to make - you stick boards, layers of hide, whatever together, the you attach them to a lathe, spin them, and cut them into a nice, regular circle.
2. Unless you have a specific fighting style that is going to involve keeping the shield in a particular orientation, - like the Scutum for making a testudo - a round shield gave the best weight to protection factor. Why have extra weight in "additional" corners that would rarely be or benefit (thinking of those dreadful square-ish shield in The Last Kingdom, for example.
The only time I trained to use a shield for real it was (by memory) about 2' wide and 6' high. It was made of perspex. I have not studied this, but my impression is, looking at pictures in the news of anti-riot police/troops more recently, that those sorts of shields seem to have disappeared, and round ones have become the norm.
The kite shield is for a horseman, the Roman shield is to form a wall, and the round shield is for loose battle formations but can also be used as a wall if the shield is large. I like the round shield best of all.
Advantage one: 3:36
Advantage two: 6:22
Advantage three: 8:38
I reckon besides the advantages you pointed out (or implied) that ease of manufacture probably plays a part. I don't know how all the different wooden round shields are made, but if you take the targe you need a tree, a saw, an animal hide, and rivets (I guess, I've never watched an in-depth construction of one).
I'm not actually sure but two things come to mind. First you can strike equally with any part of the edge. Don't know how important that is but it came to mind when you talked about hiding you hand position. No matter how you are holding a circular shield you can always strike with the edge effectively. Second and I keep doubting myself here, but I think if you are supplying an army circular shields would be easier to mass produce.
Great video. It seems there was some convergent evolution around the world where people adopted similar characteristics. I am curious about certain types of shields around the world. Why do ancient Chinese "double arced" shields resemble an upside down medieval kite shield with grooves (why did strapped versions of these double arced shields also have grooves)? Why did the ancient Aegean people use figure 8 shields instead of just oval shields? Why did Eastern Europeans and some Greeks (eg. peltast skirmishers) use crescent shaped shields? Why do oval Zulu shields have poles sticking from the top and bottom?
I just bought a dark age styled shield that has a triple wolf design that may work with your last point best. The wolf heads are all facing the same direction so it might be easier to make a subtle but effective move with it.
The best thing about this video is Matt's T-shirt.
Haha yeees, was looking for this comment
Other people have probably already commented this, but I'd be curious to see a video about why the Japanese seemed to "never" use shields.
As for our theories about why round shields were so dominant, I think one reason is the fact that a round shield has a symmetrical mass distribution in every axis, meaning it's equally easy to move in every direction. A circular shield is just as easy to tilt up and down as it is left and right, whereas a very tall shield is much harder to tilt up and down because it has a different moment of inertia.
I think popularity of type is a combination of what weapon you are holding, what weapon you expect the enemy to be holding, and what tactics as a unit are available to you. Spears seem to be popular with round shaped shields maybe that has something to do with it.
ever tried holding a shield while firing a bow?
As far as round shields being so common, I think, as with many military situations, it comes down to the most common usage. For most people, especially people without specialized training, the round shield will do everything that you would need a shield to do. It's naturally balanced because it's round and one thing that you touched on is that it doesn't become cumbersome in most situations. So much time spent on activities that aren't battle that it's good to have a convenient set of arms to carry.
I think one of the main reason could be linked to the cone of cover the shield give. A round shape cover more regularly and perhaps this makes more safe and simple to use a round shield than a different shaped one.
It's funny that you asked for comments about what we think (dat youtube engagement, yo!) Because I had an immediate thought when you said that. It seems intuitive to me, in my non-expert opinion, that a cirlcle must be one of the most effecient shapes in terms of protection/coverage for weight, if not THE most efficient shape. Sure, it doesn't protect your legs, but your legs are the part of you furthest from the other guy's killy bits, and the hoplites seemed to be able to account for that weakness well enough. All the stuff about how its easier to move around because it's balanced just seemed like a bonus to me.
Brilliant bit of latteral thinking there! Cool to see him figuring something out on the fly!
Weight and leverage can also work together against the user. An item with more mass farther from the center of rotation has a greater moment of inertia. Basically, kite shields take longer to move into different positions because they're heavier and that mass has more leverage to act on your arm. Radially symmetric round shields are better balanced around the center.
Paint the spiral on round shield, spin it and hypnotised your oponent 😵
Stationary spiral often give the illusion of spinning it might be distracting, concentric rings have similar effect.
I think the Buckler was a bad choice for arguing that you can not see, how the Hand angle is behind the shield, because you can clearly see it with this Buckler. The two rivets on the outside clearly gives away in which angle your Hand is. But i must admit i never thought about most of the advantages you where tellig us about. Thank you a lot i really love your channel for this.
This is possibly an extension of your first point but how about balance? A round shield is balanced whichever way you hold it. Second, how about longevity? If part of my round shield has been smashed, I can turn the shield around to maximise remaining protection.
One of the advantages are that with round shields you can do way more variates of offensive angles with the sword. You ca attack all around the shield edge without the limitation of the different shaped shield. Your opponent also can't guess from which side of the shield the blade will come as it can come from any possible spot (this is when you fight with sword behind the shield manner... And many warriors fought exactly this way). That type of fight and techniques can be utilised only with a round shields.
Possible advantage is: sticking the shield in front of you and moving the weapon around it it's easier. This is done with sword and buckler quite often, like in first stance or fifth stance.
I always wondered why late medieval nights did not return to round shields when shields were getting smaller again. It just dawned on me - if an arm-held shield has a pivot point in line with the arm, then there is an extra advantage to a knight's heater shield - The flat top is diagonal from the pivot. That means a blow that otherwise might jam that side down and into a person, actually is more likely to deflect off the angled edge, reducing its power to make the shield pivot. Also, by the time kite shields started to be considered too bulky, coats of arms were on shields, clearly exposing the shield's orientation. Therefore, there was less utility in returning to round shields unless you wanted to do away with coats of arms again. Might as well use a heater shield, with its extra strong arm grip, deflection to reduce pivoting, and a nice shape for a coat of arms.
I have a 23" 18ga plain steel Rotella shield with straps which I bought from Therion Arms for $95. This weighs 5lbs 4.8 oz.
He does offer other models.
His 18ga steel white painted Rotella is 5lbs 14.5oz and 21 3/4" large. This one has one strap and one bar.
Both are pretty good for the price.
On your round painted shield you could possibly make the hand hold rotatable by having it fastened to a round ring enclosed in a collar plate so that its free moving. Just to add you could use the movement of the shield design as a distraction during an attack too.
weight efficient shape, to deflect/not catch, best peripheral vision, no alignment issues , sweeping attack option.
look for the orientation of the rivets on the round shields, they can also give away the orientation of the hand/arm
Fourth point; a strapped round shield is dirt simple to learn the basics. A noob can pick it up in an hour. Just use your covered fist to intercept (block or slap) the opponent's weapon. Anyone who can throw a punch can do it. Offensive strikes are easy, too. Knight's shields or "Kite" shields require bending of the knees, rotating the hips or raising the shoulders and are more counterintuitive.
I'd think balance was an advantage, too. The uneven balance of a kite shield or a scutum requires more power to change orientation, and constant power to hold that orientation. It's the "scratch your ear" thing, only more "get that shield high, near horizontal, tilted to the wright, and fast". Rotational symmetry should also mean easier awareness of its position and what it covers.
While not shown in the Bayeux Tapistry, IMO, a kite shield wall alternated up and down shields, to provide channels for spear thrusts.
First thing we need to realize is that, well, a shield needs to have some shape, and that shape needs to be practical to carry around and protective (i.e. needs to cover important bits of person holding it). If you were deaisning shields without knowing any, and you were sticking to basic shapes, well, there's the circle, ellipse, triangle and rectangle. There's also deltoid and others, but the listed 4 are the most intuitive.
From those four, triangle is right out, it leaves some bits of you uncovered and has corners that are kinda sharp and structurally weak - kite and norman shields are sort of triangular, but the important bit is sorta, they all use some kind of a trick to deal with triangle's weaknesses, and aren't really a basic shape. So, circle, ellipse and rectangle it is. All three were used, so all three work.
But, here's the thing, if you're trying to draw the shape on the material you're working with (be it planks or leather), ellipse is... well, not incredibly difficult, but definitely harder to do than circle or rectangle. Circle is the easiest, actually, you just need a string and someone/something to hold it, for a rectangle, you need some sort of angle tool or gravity, a string and a weight (rock will do).
So, yeah, circle is just a really intuitive shape to arrive to when your goal is to make a lot of shields easily, and since this is a property of its shape, it's cross-cultural. It has the disadvantage of not scaling up very well, which is where ellipse and rectangle come in. Triangles only tend to get added to them if someone's solving a specific problem (e.g. my leg is exposed on a horse with this round shield).
Your final point on round shields rings true. Playing with my "viking shield" I had the same thoughts. I believe those wave/spiral designs served to distract an opponent and confuse them about your hand orientation while moving. I think the designs were more than decoration.
The round shield might be easier to maintain them one with corners. It might also be that it did not matter how you held it it would still do it's job and not block your vision any different. Just my immediate thoughts on that.
I think also the distribution of mass on a round shield vs other shapes also plays into the maneuverability and "feel" of handling the shield. Somebody who is using the shield in a more active manner ie- fencing WITH the shield rather than around it would possibly feel the symmetrical form of a round shield easier to maneuver than something oblong or with protrusions that could create drag, affect the shield's momentum when in motion, or obstruct some dynamic movements. It's a bit hard to describe in words but essentially, something round should *feel* easier to manipulate in a variety of directions than something with an oblong or irregular shape due to drag and momentum. The lack of protrusions or hard corners also keeps the shield out of the way of strikes with your weapon as well though you might have mentioned that and I maybe missed it.
Another advantage is that I don't need to pay attention to where coverage is greater or lesser; a "heater" has areas of greater and lesser protection, for example.
You probably should have brought on the spartan shield to compare with as well, since the two most discussed non-round shields here were considerably larger than the round ones shown. Just my two cents, love the vids!
Round shields are easier for the user manipulate. It doesn't matter which axis you need to turn it on, there's no projections for gravity to apply a moment and make your job more difficult. That means as much when fighting as it does when marching.
The result is they turn easily in any axis. Even If you hold a buckler edge on, you can defend any line by turning the hand just like rotating through rapier and saber guards. I.33 and Marozzo both utilize this.
They're also easy to make in any size, no need for patterns at all, just a piece of string in the desired radius.
You forgot the advantage of a round shield in mounted combat. It can be moved from side to side without getting caught on the saddle or reins.
As I've pointed out before, we see mounted knights (men-at-arms?) on the Bayeax Tapestry carrying teardrop shaped shields, but with the points behind them rather than down by the leg. Based on this, my conclusion is that the popularity of the kite-shield was more for its ability to switch between mounted or dismounted combat. They carried it with the point behind them when on horseback, to get the benefits of a round shield in mounted combat, and then shifted the point downward to protect their legs when they dismounted.
I read somewhere that ancient Greeks used a lathe to make their shields. The lathe cuts wood in a circular manner. So round shields were easier to manufacture.
I think structural strength is also important. Circles provide even distribution of weight and force, so they're less likely to break at any certain point.
Also, if you bash someone with the edge of a round shield the force is always perpendiculat to the object struck (in that plane), which gives you the maximum force possible and the minimum chance of glancing off without delivering that force into, for example, your opponents helmet.
I think it is because while a round shield might not be better than a certain other type of shields in specific applications, they are likely better overall. While they would not offer the same protection against arrows that the Norman and Roman shields offer, in a chaotic melee battle they would likely perform better as their lighter weight would not tire you out so quickly as well as allow you to move the shield easily to absorb incoming threats from different directions. The fact that they do not snag on things is also an advantage as it would mean you would not have to worry about moving it and it either hitting something and leaving you open or interfering with a comrade. As it is pointed out in the video, people could ride with them and if you could not afford a horse the lighter weight would make carrying it easier.
Its interesting the Romans only seem to have used that half dustbin type shield for a few decades in the 1st century AD - before and after they used oval shields or more rounded edged rectangular shields, possibly for the reasons you mentioned!
I believe Lloyd did a video a while back talking about how circular edges always meet an object at right angles to the center, transferring more force like billiard balls colliding, rather than glancing and sliding past. This he applied to axe edges for maximizing percussive force, and to round shields for deflecting weapons
On the subject of Kite and Heater shields, what are the advantages and disadvantages of different strap positions? Your kite shield has the straps such that the arm is diagonal when the shield is straight, but I've seen other configurations that keep the arm horizontal or vertical when the shield is straight.
When not strapped to, or on the body, the round shield is easier to flip, and then carry under your arm. You even see it in a couple of pictorial and material sources. It works.
And, of course, there the whole cone-of-defence and shield-to-the-mouf-thing, but that's a topic for another time :)
How were bucklers worn? I've heard a great many times how easy to wear they are but I can't seem to get my head around how you would attach it in any practical and accessible way...
Looped casually over the hilt of your sword works as long as you aren't doing anything too gymnastic and the sword isn't hung too close to it's balance point.
@@jimheaton9503 my buckler doesn't fit over the hilts of any of my swords... Is that just because it's a cheaper reproduction?
Interestingly, in the book by a myarmoury forum member 'Bronze Age Military Equipment,' the author speculates that Hektor and many other Homeric heroes carried a center-grip round shield of cattle hide and bronze facing. Maybe the center grip round shield is just all around good at defending an individual under attack from numerous angles.
Why are round shields so common? (serious answer this time)
A round shield has an obvious centre of gravity and rotation at which a boss grip is usually rotated, and on opposite sides of which a pair of straps will be located with that kind of grip. The middle of the shield is a clear and easily identified balance point around which rotation of the shield is easy without any change in its protective properties in any direction. This fact means that a round shield will typically need to be moved far less to protect against blows from different directions. All you're usually going to need is the rotation of the shield, not a major repositioning of it. That fact alone is a major point in favour of a round shield, which makes any other design - and particularly the non-regular designs with protrusions in a single direction - far less efficient as a general-purpose protective tool (though they have their specialised roles for which they're designed - as Matt always reminds us, context matters)
Perhaps the spiral stripes seen as round shield decoration were chosen because they don't telegraph what the grip orientation is .
A shop once tried to talk me into buying a roundshield that I would certainly say would have been a nuisance and inconvenience. The bloody thing weighed as much as a night stand or coffee table!
Then it was poorly made. Can't speak much any types before the Viking period but Viking shields generally were estimated to be between 4 and 8lbs (1.81 to 3.63kg) which is quite manageable. They did this by tapering the shield thickness - the thickest part of the shield surrounded the boss and it narrowed as it approached the edge. The edge could be very thin, sometimes as little as 1/8 inch (3.3mm) and at the boss it might be 1/2" (12.7mm).
When I attempted to build my first Viking shield with planks, hide glue and so forth I kept feeling that I was tapering the shield too much, thinning it excessively. When I was done, my shield weighed in at almost 15lb (6.8kg). Subsequent visits to Europe where I was able to see actual Viking shield remains (Trelleborg Viking fortress in Denmark had a great display of the remains of a shield which you can examine from an edge-on perspective) and they were incredibly thin at the edge.
@@AndyTernay - I concluded that it was really just a failed experimental shield for being so heavy, and relegated to an overpriced wallhanger. The shop folks would not confirm that though, which seemed shady, so I moved on. Someone eventually bought it though.
Another potential reason, economics. A round shield requires less material and is easier to make than pretty much any other design, especially the large curved shields. Outfitting your army is expensive. If a round shield costs X, and a kite shield costs 3X, then that kite shield needs to be WAY better than the round shield, or you're probably better off spending that money elsewhere.
If I had to choose between giving my soldiers a kite shield and brigandine, or a round shield and brigandine with mail underneath, then I'm not buying any kite shields. I know that you're not going to save anywhere near enough money on a shield to afford a set of mail, but you get the idea. Outfitting an army is about compromise, and getting the most bang for your buck.
A lot of the time, good enough is good enough. And round shields are clearly good enough.
It's well balanced, and you have the same coverage above an below the arm and its ampidextrous
What are the advantages a convex Shield compared to a flat round Shield? Does a flat round Shield have any advantages over a convex?
14:13 As he mentioned with his metal rotella, the domed shape provides additional strength to the shield itself. The arm resting behind the centerline of the shield coupled with that domed shape makes for a tremendously strong defense along that axis.
However, an opponent can still easily manipulate the shield on those sides where the arm is not located.
I'd say a huge part of their popularity is that the design is just so obvious, and it works well enough so there's not that big of a reason to change it. Then your first point of convenience is huge as well. No corners to get stuck on anything and the point of balance is at the grip so it's light to use and carry.
Thanks, I always wander about the pivot. As kids we use round 🗑 trash can lids as shelds and they are uncomfortable and pivoted.