Why Battle Axes & Halberds have Curved or Straight Edges?
2024 ж. 9 Қаң.
150 348 Рет қаралды
Why do some fighting axes have curved cutting edges, while others are straight? And why are some tilted, while others are parallel to the shaft?
▼3 extra EXCLUSIVE videos each month on PATREON, which make this channel possible:
/ scholagladiatoria
▼Facebook & Twitter updates, info, memes and fun:
/ historicalfencing
/ scholagladiato1
▼Schola Gladiatoria HEMA - sword fighting classes in the UK:
www.swordfightinglondon.com
▼Matt Easton's website & Pinterest:
www.matt-easton.co.uk/
www.pinterest.co.uk/matt_east...
▼Easton Antique Arms - antique swords for sale:
www.antique-swords.co.uk/
#medieval #axe #martialarts
Matt was back to being a child there for a moment, excitedly fighting an immaginary foe with a pollaxe, almost knocking the sword off the wall. I felt that, very rejuvenating ;)
Dwarven giant-fighting technique: Hammer to the knee, Axe to the hamstrings, Pommel to the groin. Try to avoid taking out the wall...
Lol at - "... back to..", "... there for a moment..."
Matt smash!
A genuine star wars kid moment, for those who remember that iconic video from the medieval days of the internet
Poleaxe surely?
A few remarks from a professional axe (and other edged tool) designer: •The skew of the edge relative to the eye is known as the "set" of the bit. •In wood chopping axes a line drawn through the heel and toe of the bit usually either intersects the lower grip point or would pass slightly in front of the knuckles. •Indeed, as you surmised, one finds that the set of the bit is more open for tools like turf axes used for cutting sod blocks (a low target, literally the ground) and is more closed for higher targets, such as the shoulder/neck/head of an opponent. •A curved blade is less particular about the presentation of the edge to the target at the time of impact and is more penetrating due to its smaller point of contact. •A straight edge in this context is less likely to slip off of a resistant surface like a curved edge would. •With wood targets (in woodchopping) a curved edge bites deeper, but is harder to connect repeated blows across the face of a cut. This is why most carpenter's/woodworker's axes have straight or only slightly curved edges. •I believe the chisel edge type you're looking for is akin to a cold chisel meant for shearing sheet metal or cutting wire and chain links, etc. They are "dull" to the fingers but to quote an old Irish agricultural gazette discussing axe geometry, "the edges of cutting tools should be made as thin as possible *for requisite strength*" and as you state, the function dictates the form in good design. •All hand tools (including weapons) are effectively "converters" made to take the force generated by the human body and delivering them to the work in a mode that most effectively accomplishes that task with minimal waste/loss of energy.
Oh, I forgot to mention, one will notice that the dynamic of the presentation of the bit relative to the hand shows up in "primitive" tanged or socketed axes as well, at least those for which we have surviving handles. You'll notice that the branches selected for hafting them will have the correct angle for this, or in the case of tanged axes like many of those found on the African continent they will be burned into the root ball handle at an angle to produce this effect. In other cases where there is two-part construction of the wooden aspect (either the head mounted to a piece of wood with an eye for the handle, or mounted on a piece of wood that then passed through a mortise in the handle) this is also usually done at such an angle as to produce the same dynamic. Alteration of the presentation of the bit can be done EITHER by skewing the cutting line of the bit itself, altering the "pivot" of the bit and the eye with what would normally be a symmetrical bit, or by altering the shape of the handle and how it positions the head (and edge) relative to the interface of the hand(s).
I don't fully agree with the bit set is adapted to target height theory. Guillotines were fitted with slanted blades to make sure they fully cut necks and beheaded people in one go, iow a guillotine blade was intended to slice instead of chop because that resulted in a quicker and "more humane" execution, so I think these large two handed axes have set bits to make sure they don't get stuck in the target but cut through it cleanly because getting a two handed axe stuck during battle is as good as a death sentence.
@FortyTwoBlades - I see you a lot in these comments - do you happen to be a gentleman from certain firm called Baryonyx Knives as per your avatar picture, the maker of among various other useful tools, of Kingfisher Machette? Good day to you, sir! :)
@@JerehmiaBoaz the slant on a guillotine is to impart a smaller initial contact surface to ease penetration of the target, producing a shearing effect. It helps ensure that a cut is produced rather than a pinch, as it is relying entirely on the condition of the edge and its own mass to provide the cutting action on a very difficult target. That slant would not meaningfully impact how predisposed the bit of an axe would be to get stuck--that is much more determined by the degree of pinch induced to the bit after impact, which is largely not a concern given their geometries. Flesh gives readily and "green" bone does not provide a strong pinching action on geometries sufficiently strong not to be damaged by them. If an axe was to become stuck it would be far more likely due to the heel or toe snagging on a piece of armor or clothing during attempted extraction.
@@titanscerw indeed, I am.
In his 1594 treatise, Sir John Smythe specify that the halberdiers for his proposed army should have "long straight edges, with good piques backward, and strong pointes of conuenient length, but in no wise too long forward." He didn't explain why, but he did express a preference for straight edges. He imagined his halberdiers as facing other armored infantry & cavalry, so use against armor was definitely the context. He instructed halberdiers to strike at the head & thrust at the face.
The formula for pressure is force divided by area. Therefore a curved blade, as you said Matt, has a focal point, AKA a small area, thus increasing the pressure at that point. As for straight blades, the only possible explanation I can think of is that the tip of the blade may act as a more condensed focal point of pressure, much like the tip of a spear, thus increasing the pressure even more but only at the tip of the blade, which might offer an advantage against armor. This is only an initial hypothesis however. Unfortunately, I can't offer a definitive explanation.
This was my guess as well.
My guess is that a rounded ax will be better against soft targets, and one with a straight edges will be better at hitting a hard, round, armored target (shoulders, head in armor). Why? A rounded ax could slip off more easily when hitting a hard target. Tilted forward edges should be better for hitting the opponent from above. Again - less chance of it slipping off target.
@TheSilverdragon07 A curved blade would have more of a chance to deflect and not bite or dent into armor I would imagine that's what the armor is designed for, for deflecting
My father found a curved battle ax like yours hen he was a kid, during the 1950´s in Western Norway. It is kept at one of the museums in Bergen. I remember we had an appointment with the museum, and they pulled it out of storage to let us see it in person. A nice thing to remember my dad by!
thats awesome
If you're attacking a particularly curved target (like a helmet), the focus point is already provided, and using a curved blade just makes glancing more likely at that point.
Damn you and your better power of logic! That seems so obvious now that you say it.
I came down here to say exactly this.
No. Two circles intersecting is the easiest way to effectively transfer kinetic energy. This physical principle is clear if you've ever watched curling. A bit with a halfmoon edge though has a disadvantage for draw/push cuts and hooking, and if you're going to hit armor with a pollax you have the hammerhead/spike side to use.
@@fiendishrabbit8259 You'll definitely get an energy transfer, but unless you hit with the right part of the blade it won't be in the same direction as your cut. A flat blade's behaviour is more predictable as the tangent at the point of contact is always the same no matter the distal position, so among other things your weapon shouldn't be deflected away from or towards your hand. (Of course it can still glance left or right if you're off centre laterally, but I suspect that's part of the benefit of the meat tenderiser side.)
I like how enthusiastic Matt got with that Polle. The temptation to swing a polearm about is always present when in the hand.
Having played around with axes, mostly to find the best geometry for green wood work, I have found two bad things about a curved blade in line with the handle. These are thin bladed axes but with a wide bite. Firstly it it easier to get a axe stuck in the wood, it bites deeper but it's significantly harder to leverage the axe loose (leverage applied in line with the handle). I think that this is a combination of the larger area of axe in the "wound" increasing friction and the fact that your leverage point is slanted making the axe "wanting" to go deeper. This problem is the minor one for woodworking, the mayor one is the fact that if you are a bit of on your hit the axe have a tendency to jolt towards the heel or toe of the bite. This makes you tend to hold the axe in a much more firm grip wich is inducing more fatigue and fatigue have a negative impact on your aim making the problem worse. A slight rake to the blade (12° was enough for me) made any jarring motion point away from me and I could work with a much looser arm. Was a bit easier to pull free to in my opinion.
In regards to the tilt: In blacksmithing texts, when making handtools you generally want to make sure the plane of the tool strike is landing flat on the object to be worked. So for an adze the top curve of the tool is a radius from the pivot point (ie the controlling hand), for a hammer, the plain of the face should be at an angle perpendicular to the pivot point (not parallel to the handle). Measuring this is acheived by taking a string and putting it where the controlling hand would be on the tool handle and using the string swung from that point to define the curve or the line that would keep the striking face flat. In either case this would give you the angles you are looking for. Both of those cases for working the tool involve verticle type stuff, ie (standing and striking downwards), so you may have somthing in that horizontal striking idea. I'm not sure this actually applies to these tools though, the dane axe you show at the begining has an angle that is obviously turned in way more than it being perpendicular to the controlling hand. Perhaps it is intended to be useful to be swung over what is being aimed at and pulled in at the same time? The Slavic axe you showed actually looked like it did have the right slant to it, it didn't look to me like it was strictly parallel to the handle (based on the points at either end of the cutting edge). I bet if you measured that one with a string from your controlling hand it would end up with a straight line through those points. I'm not sure if this is actually related or not, but it defintely is a thing in hand tools.
Dane Axe blade is good for hooking over shields and either pulling backwards to drag the shieldwall protection down, or thrusting forward into the opponent holding the shield. Having the blade tilted forward (down when extended) allows the axe-man to pull with the back tip like a grapple hook, or thrust with the forward tip like a spear, more in line with the power vector of the arms/waist with less deflection. In other words, it's more likely to stay hooked, and more likely to penetrate straight forward, without bouncing or slipping out of the line of attack. Notice the angle of the shaft when you are holding it at waist height at your end, with the head of the axe at the enemies' head height, then consider the trigonometry of push & pull from there. You can chop AT the shield, but you'd rather chop at or reach OVER the rim of the shield, then pull it back/down enough to then stab foward. Alternately, if your first shot gets the shield lowered enough to stab at the shieldman straightaway, forcing them to pull their face back from their shield, you can then jerk back & down against the inside flat of the shield with your whole weight. "Rinse & repeat." Think of manuevering the axe with the shield-rim as a fulcrum, while also using the axe to manipulate the shield position. ("Use his shield against him, lad!") This can put a gap in the shieldwall that will not be able to reform, and breaking their formation is essentially victory. Having the outer tip of the blade angled away from the shaft also moves the point of impact a little farther outward on the reach range and angles it down a little bit more like a spike, so it has a little more punch to get through light-medium armor types. The angle also reduces impact-reverberation stresses on the axe shaft, so you can use more power or are less likely to break it.
This was precisely what I was picturing when focusing on the curvature of the Dane axe’s blade, and the context in which it would be used. A hybrid hook-and-spear sort of weapon.
Why wouldn’t they just add a spear poison then.
Even a straight edge will have a focal point when it comes in contact with plate armor. Armors have curves naturally from copying the shape of human body (especially high quality ones that were tailored for a specific individual). They also have artificial curves and shapes designed to make certain strikes glance: for instance the houndskull type helmet, or cuirasses with varying degree of pointiness. It's not easy to find a straight piece of armor on which a straight blade doesn't make a small initial point of impact.
The same has been said in the past about wood cutting axes- that we very rarely cut against flat wood and even then certainly do not present the edge parrallel to it. Surely a straight edge against a round target is the same as a round edge against a straight target as in both situations it can only contact at a single point? While this is true for the initial impact, as the blade sinks deeper into the material either by cutting or deformation (be it wood, flesh, mail or plate) then the curved blade begins to focus more energy in the centre of the impact (focal point) while the straight blade has a tendency to perform most of the cutting/crushing action at one of the edges of the cut.
It is true that axes and axe-like implements for making round portions of wood into flattened surfaces, they're straight edges. It's to bite into the curve. A flat blade bites a curved hardened surface better, and a curved blade bites a flat hardened surface better. If the surface is way softer than the blade, I don't think that it makes that much of an operational difference, at the amount of force involved in the impacts.
Watching Skellagrim doing destructive testing of armor withvarious weapons, a corner of an axe striking ahead of the rest of the edge concentrates force and rips through flexible armor much more dramatically than an edge hitting evenly can cut into it. I don't know if the angled heads were made so the upper corner would rip though gambeson and mail but that would frequently have happened.
@@j.f.fisher5318 Yes, this is true going all the way back to Bronze Age axes, and probably even earlier. I'm just not aware of any particular earlier examples. Axe blade shapes can be optimized for the chop with a long impact edge, or for the penetration with a narrower impact edge. Having the top point of the blade significantly forward is a way to keep a long edge for chopping, and still have a narrower point available for penetrating. The sparth axe is a good example of this.
Some halberd have a *concave* curved edge. Is this perhaps the reason for it?
Could you please speak more on the Irish weapons of the period? I would love to hear your exploration of their potential uses and tactics
I was thinking of the sparth as I listened to this.
Love Irish history and it's incredibly underrepresented
Would love to hear about Gallowglass and Kerns too.
Very interesting! My thoughts on this as an engineer: more surface equals more friction. More friction results in a lower chance of the weapon being deflected by armor. In my opinion, the evolution from chainmail to plated armour is really going from armour that absorbs blows to one that mostly deflects. When hitting chainmail, the armor doesn't really deflect but rather gives in and absorbs the blow. Therefore, in the viking era you wanted a rounded blade that could penetrate the chainmail at a single spot because you didn't care so much about deflection. In the plate era, you wanted a blade that didn't get deflected. Therefore the flat blade with more surface, giving you a higher chance of actually gripping the armor. I think this is also why there are those little pyramids on the hammer side on the pollaxe shown in the video. They provide more surface area und thus more friction. The best analogy I can think of today is to try and cut a tomato with a flat or serrated knife. The flat knife has quite a high chance of sliding off the side while the serrated knife with more surface and more friction can "catch" the tomato skin much better and actually cut.
I love how animated you are... Clearly you're very passionate & knowledgeable about your subject.
[0:00] 🪓 Curved vs. straight edges in fighting axes [0:23] 🛡 London Bridge fortified during Viking raids in 1066 [1:00] 🌍 Viking attacks on London in the 900s [2:29] 🏹 Viking weapons found in the River Thames [3:06] 🪓 Faithful replica of a Dan axe from Thor's Forge [3:54] 🪓 Comparison of axes with curved and straight blades [5:02] 🗡 Halberds and poleaxes with straight and curved edges [5:44] 🤔 Exploring the reasons behind forward-tilted blades [7:32] ⚔ The impact of axe design on hitting angles [9:43] 🪓 Axes with parallel blades on short shafts; curved blades on long shafts [11:32] 🪓 Poleaxes with parallel or forward-tilted blades [12:17] ⚖ Assessing strengths and weaknesses of curved vs. straight edges [14:02] 🛡 Impact of armor on weapon design [16:00] 🗡 Late medieval and Renaissance poleaxes as hitting, not cutting, weapons [17:00] 🪓 Advantages of straight blades against armored opponents [20:29] 🪓 Different axes for different purposes in medieval warfare
forgot 19:00 - Impact of weapon on weapon
thank you!!!
In my very, very limited experience in medieval reenactment sparring I found the tilted head of a halberd to be all about hooking and jabbing. The tilt of the blade changes the "negative space" underneath it to be better at holding on, and then the angle on top changes into a very close quarters weapon, the point of the top of the axe blade becoming something to jab with. This includes hooking shields, ankles, other polarms, what have you. Just thought I'd share! I'm certainly no expert!
That's what I was thinking as well. It's all the later axeheads that double as hooks against armor that end up flat, presumably because it's easier to build them into a hook that way. Being an axehead seems like more of a bonus.
Your videos are always both entertaining and informative. Thank you for making them!
This was a great video! I learned a lot and very interesting. Also, I really do love your enthusiasm, its contagious. Thank you!
Love your animation and excitement in this one, Matt! 😄
Love this video! Always wondered about the irish bronze age halberd and the effectiveness of the shape. Would love to see a video on that of possible
Matt, you were having so much fun. It made watching the vid more enjoyable.
Great video Matt, keep it up!!
18:50 Happy Matt getting into his kid mode, smashing things around with his favourite toys!
Feels good when Matt is back to uploading several videos a week again
Holy hell this is so much more interesting and insightful than I expected it to be
Thanks Matt, great and informative video.
Great video. Thanks Matt
Many surviving halberds are as much processional as tactical. The pretty weapons of the House Guard were more likely to be hung on the wall and saved vs the rougher made weapons of the common soldier. The blades come in A LOT of shapes; curved, flat, concave (some to an extreme), broad pointed, etc. Some of these may be more "looks cool" than "works well".
This was one of my favorite videos in a while. Just a sucker for an axe, I guess. Thank you for being the person to cover two-handed axes.
Would love to see Todd and yourself have a go at testing the differences between the two on unarmored and various levels of armored targets.
Interesting, informative and very entertaining! Thank you Matt!
Thank you for your expertise
Excellent video. Glad to see your head is growing back.
I enjoyed the energy there at the end!
Hi Matt. In my ongoing efforts to regain my sanity and "cure" the pain caused by bad posture leading to "computer neck" I have turned off ALL notifications from my subscriptions ... except for you, because I admire and appreciate your approach and the quality of your presentations. Plus I'm crazy for arms and armour and you are the best I've found. So thank you once again for continuing to be Matt Easton. Cheers!
I think you hand position on the great axe and the pole axe gives a clue. Holding the end of great axe with the angled head potentially gives you a greater attacking angle over a shield. However you were almost half swording the pole axe meaning that the angle was less important, also it was less likely to come up against a shield in full plate. Totally agree with your explanation of the straight blade against armour.
When you say straight edges are better for striking armour, i think you're right but for a different reason. If you have two rounded shapes, both of which are hard, they are going to be far more likely to deflect away from each other. In this, most armour is rounded specifically to deflect attacks as much as possible. So, having a straighter edge, while you're not going to punch through, maybe it's because it is easier to land an attack which stays on target and is harder to be deflected away.
What about concave poleaxe and halberd axe blades?
Very knowledgeable, informative, and entertaining video.
I noticed the difference and wondered about it. Your explanation makes perfect sense to me. Different styles for different situations.
This a really cool insight. Thank you for making poleaxes even more interesting 😮😊
Interesting. I always thought the angled edges functioned similar to an angled blade on a guillotine or a paper slicer, where the blade is meant to hit with the forward part first and achieve more of a slicing motion as opposed to a chop. But I like this theory too where it hits with a flat chop…but at head/shoulder height instead.
In regards to slanted vs. parallel edges, slanted edges have a couple of features I personally prefer. 1st, they impact the target with the whole of the blade earlier. You can end a swing with the weapon at a 15 degree angle from the ground and still hit your target with maximum area. This means you can cut your follow-through shorter since when the haft is parallel to the ground, you'll have already hit your target and pushed through. That can speed up your recovery. If you end your strike parallel to the ground its a bit easier to transition to a parry, thrust or non-rising follow-up cut, as compared to what happens if you end with your haft pointing towards the ground. 2nd, it lets you strike with a much smaller point that has a much easier time penatrating mail/breaking bone. In addition, the slanted point can make a draw cut much more damaging. If you strike with the whole ax head and pop some rings, the draw motion can dig that forward point into the opening created and cut the whole opening before leaving the target. But of course, that only matters when you are facing mail and similar armor that you might compromise in such a fashion. If you are fighting opponents in a plate, then that all just means it will break the weapon sooner. And recovery doesn't matter as much if you have really dependable armor to protect you from incidental attacks and such
I had long wondered about the straight axe blades. The idea I've heard about the angled axe blades is to facilitate pull cuts.
The pull cut thing feels instinctual, now that I'm imagining using one of those Dane axes.
I imagine the straight-edged axes are built that way because they're also just hooks. They want as much of an angle back towards the hilt as possible. Being an axehead as well seems like more of a bonus.
I really appreciated that you asked the questions first before presenting your answers. I'd already come to much the same conclusions as you by the time you presented them. But I think there is also another design factor at play. A slightly innacurate hit with a curved axe would produce a force vector away from the blow, especially against steel armor. Whereas, the flat bladed axe would have the same force vectors across the edge of the blade, and thus increasing effectiveness against plate armor. The preference for inwardly-angled straight edged axe blades can be explained by a tactic of using the blow to knock your enemy forward into a vulnerable prone position where they can be quickly dispatched using the sharp point at the end. Thanks for the entertaining and informative video.
Great vid. Thanks Matt
Big fan of both these guys. Drach is a legend. Excellent you tuber
i had actually thought about the straight blade polearms for quite some time. Seems counter intuitive, but you make a lot of sense. Thank you.
When I have trained with the pollaxe, what I have learned is that the axe wasn't just for cutting to any large extent, but as grapplers to topple enemies. Attacks against plate armor was carried out with the hammer and the dagger(upper point) and tail(lower point) was used against weaknesses in the armor. In the manuscript "Le Jeu de la Hache"(the play of the axe), the author assumes a pollaxe which doesn't have an axeblade at all but a hook.
This was always what I thought. In my opinion, you nailed it.
Spot on about cutting versus bashing. Clearly it's about the durability of those edges. Thank you.
Matt, good vid. I can think of another reason for flat blades. When you swing one against armour I think it would be less likely to glance off and more likely to find purchase on the surface of the armour. Further if you hit with say just the last 1.5 inches of the top of the blade it would be more likely to punch through it. I think. 😊 Also what about the concave poleaxe blades? I think they would function as I mentioned above but more so. 😀
Another classic topic and I'm glad to know that there are some new conclusions! We left with the assumption that atilted blade was for sythe-like movement mostly to the legs, but clearly is possible to give more direct blows to the upper parts. In art there are indeed examples of cutting pole-axes and to me got a lot of sense to have a versatile weapon for a proper knight!
Thanks for the video 👍🏻
Duller edge on a poleaxe also allows it to be better used as a crowd control implement, and the thicker more durable "blade" allows you to hook, pull, push, trip, etc.
Great insight, didn't occur to me. That was a pretty cool video 😊
Very interesting. I enjoyed this discussing.
Thank you! ❤
That angle also creates a hook which can be used to topple an opponent. I think you do a great job on these vids.
Dear Matt, I'd love a coop with Schwerpunkt. Cheers
You can tell this guy is a sincere, "actual nerd" in how he can talk so incredibly passionately, and at such length, without even answering the question as presented. Not a dis in the slightest. Quite the opposite, really. This is the guy who finds things out and gets things done.
in addition, because the poleaxe and halberd are such a massive weapons, even if the blade is dull and flat, the momentum of a swing will probably be enough to chop flesh regardless. Basically a curved edge makes more sense on smaller and lighter axes with a shorter shaft.
Yooo, 6,500th like! Loved this video, really interesting learning about which shape goes to which purpose and their advantages and disadvantages. Keep up the great work!
Matt Easton is such a hugely likeable guy its unbelievable
Matt, you don’t give yourself enough credit. Long n short: yes you are correct, curved blade gives u more hitting power, which is always good on a one-hander; straight-forward-leaning blades on two-handers gives you a little more control to pull down opponents shields and/or hafted weapons. Also… we need to remember that people have always been human and that fashion has a huge impact on weapon n armor design. Great work as always. Ciao!!!
I don’t have knowledge about different time periods but I can add my observations of actual ax usage and cutting flesh and bone. I’m a hunter and woodsman. Curved vs straight- there is some truth about curved bits focusing energy in a small area, but in actual use the great advantage is that if it becomes stuck in the target you can rock it back and forth to free it. I use fiskar axes often times to cut trees and split wood. They have wedge shaped straight edges and can be difficult to free when stuck. I have butchered deer in the forest with axes and Bowie type blades. As you noted, I have rolled and chipped thinner blades when chopping through bone ( lower leg bones ). Angle to handle - if the target is 90 degrees to your hands when impact happens, a parallel angle is good. Impact happens at the exact time of maximum speed. Of the impact will happen at unpredictable points in the swing, leaning the angle forward makes the bit hit correctly. Draw a stick man on a piece of paper and then draw a circle ( arc of the swing) around him. Then make a line ( handle) from the man to the circle like the hands of a clock. To make the blade alway be close to 90degrees , you have to tilt it. In this manner it would not matter if the target is high as a mounted horseman’s head or as low as an infantry soldier feet. Again, I know little of historical context. The straight blade would be good for targets like arms and lower legs as you can expect to chop through bone( also the “depth of the blade ie edge to eye”is shallower). The great ax seems suited to striking flesh ( horses neck, man’s thighs, etc ) as it is thinner and has a greater distance between the edge and the eye or handle. Perhaps that will make some sort of sense to you when you apply what you know about context.
Why would you want to smash with an axeblade, when you got a perfectly fine hammer face on the other side? What I've noticed was that: Halberds: either straight edge but tilted, or concave. Most are blunt. Polaxes: either straight or convex, but typically symmetrical. To go a bit more into detail with halberds: I think that there are three main types: A: big axeblade and spike (can be a spearblade, but very slim and thick). The blade is often concave and the edges are likely the thickest part of it, thus it might cut somewhat in the middle, which would probably focus the energy and help damage the shafts of other polearms. The edges would act more like a beque de corbin. B: small axe blade and fully developed spear: here the axe"blade" is almost exclusively blunt and more like a mace. There's a variant where instead of the spear, there's a naginata-style blade (Säbelhellebarde) C: small axe blade and long spike (typically square cross-section). Pretty much the same as B, but more purpose-built for dealing with armor. Notice that I didn't mention a fourth combination: big axeblade (often convex) and big spearhead. You'll find that one mostly in movies, games, and other non-historical depictions. I've seen only one historical example and that was probably well past the prime of these weapons and thus more ceremonial, just like the butterfly halberds...
15:40 What's funny is that I had this video on while I was using resin and a putty knife to repair some grip damage on my feder. The putty knife is a conpletely blunt 0.5-1mm steel flap. Right as you were talking about this, the knife caught on a divot in the wood grip, the burst free and dug a pretty nasty chunk out of my hand. I have no doubt that a completely blunt pollaxe could break skin and shatter bone without an issue.
Another thing to note is that because of the focal point as you mentioned a curved blade will bite into softer materials and transfer that force very effectively, but that same small contact area has the opposite effect if it's not able to penetrate and is likely to glance off something like plate. In a similar vein, hammers are likely to glance off more heavily curved pieces of plate if contact isn't made at just the right point/angle, where a flat blade has at least the one axis along its length that doesn't require that precision.
As always i learned a lot. I think that Dane axe blade shape could also be used to stab with the upper point of the blade. Also as i have come to learn from watching your channel, the warrior would use whatever blade shape he felt worked best.
Maybe a round edge is also worse to transfer energy. If we exaggerate the form to a spike you can see that it will easily slip on a hard curved surface. I can imagine a feeling of the axe being pulled out of your hand if a curved axehead meets armor with a hard swing.
I'd love to be able to have enough knowledge and insight to dialogue with you about the purpose of straight/curved edges, but I don't so I can't really do anything but accept your compelling arguments! That flat-edge halberd using the blade to split armor makes so much sense in conjunction with the point for stabbing weak points and the hammer for mashing plates
Thanks for the video! My guess on the tilt is that it turns the blade to face more into the arc of motion. With a parallel blade a line from the handle to the center of the blade would be above the arc of motion. It also makes the top point of the axe more pointy so maybe you could poke with it a little better?
Thanks, Matt.
Two thoughts: 1. The forward curve on the great axe might make it easier to use the top point to stab and thrust with in a close combat situation (where the long handle would be somewhat of a disadvantage). 2. The flat, blunt edge on the halberd could work better to bend plate armour when the aim is to stop the joints flexing properly (as you mentioned in another video). The flat edge would put a 'crease' in the metal instead of a dent. Great video as always :)
Matt A point I want to mention. From watching Skallagrim's videos where his old training buddies break his weapons mostly his axes and from my personal experience,from splitting and cutting wood . I would like to add to the idea that Parallel curved axes receive less Stress on the wood handle since they distribute the force equally along the blade and then the shaft while forward facing axes create a lever effect due to uneven force distribution causing the metal blade to dig in the wooden shaft and damaging the wood shaft further. This also explains why wood cutting and splitting axes are less bearded and less flared so the force will be distributed equally along the blade and handle so it would not cause damage to the axe handle or unevenly blunt the blade.
I had almost the same thought some time ago about the pole ax blade. Didn't seem like it was meant to cut, but would be great at smashing articulating points in plate armor.
Totally agree about the tilt of the blade. You can find similar tilt on shoes repair hammers. It has to do with the height of the workbench. You can work at belly height and have the face of the hammer hit flat on your piece without breaking your wrist.
I think the flat head is for creasing armor. You won't cut through armor with an axe, but you could put a nasty crease in it.
Thats actually a really good point. Creasing might even be one of the most efficient ways to transfer a blow through plate armor. Especially on arms or legs.
One of the functions of the pole axes was to pull riders off horses and pulling shields out of the way the flat edge would seem easier to disengage so you could strike
Great video. So the poll axe’s portion behind that straight edge could be used for hooking and blocking. That may have been it’s primary use against armored opponents-since that “chopping blade” isn’t effective against armor anyways. But you could still use it to hook an opponent’s weapon or extremity to drag them off balance, or to use it forwards against an opponent’s weapon or extremity to block or push them off balance. Same as many other poll arms that had hook like projections. That may have been such a commonly known feature that it didn’t warrant much treatment in historic treaties. So think of the poll axe blade as two hooks-one curved downwards and one curved upwards, and they just slapped a straight edge between them to provide an additional option should an unarmored target arise. Sometimes folks lost their helmets in fighting, so even a “dull edged” poll axe blade won’t have a problem splitting thru an unarmored target.
Thank you for the opportunity to have your viewers think and muse about "why" these differences are there. It was an interesting to watch. I think a potential reason might have been to save (or create) "space" (by removing material), but still fully keep the grappling/stabbing potential, which is much more suitable against armored opponents (as the narrator mentions as well). There's much trauma to inflicted with a "blunt object" and if it can bent the metal suitable enough could cause apart from trauma also discomfort of the metal creating a closer space for the wearer. Breaking bones, causing internal bleeding (examples of high energy impact that does not need the rupture of a skin to be devasting or serious enough). So basically for convenience of "movement" through smaller spaces, grappling shields/armor-pieces and inflicting max trauma "through" armor. Idk
Hi Matt, in support of your tilted axe head on longer axes, I the tilted blade angle would also aid thrusting with the tip when using two handed.
Have you seen the axes used by Norwegian farmer soldiers in more modern times? I saw some in the Oslo military museum, and the angle is in the shaft in a surprising way
Oh man, you know how to keep a person in suspense! What way/what angle do they have? I think I have seen them, but I can't remember if it was there or in Schleswig or perhaps Lund that I saw them? You mean tge ones tilted at a 35-45° angle upward from the shaft right? Almost the opposite of Matt's Dane axe, right?
To save people from the suspense, and explain to anyone who haven’t seen one: the Norwegian “peasant axes” or militia axes of the early modern era had their heads tilted sharply backwards, so the edge is pointed upwards if the shaft is held vertically. Most of them are tilted about 35-45 degrees as you said, but you do find examples that are tilted 60 degrees or so as well. For pictures, search for “bondeøks”.
Can see it being employed much the same as a greatsword for breaking a line ,axe striking over shields whilst either side different range weapons i.e.spearmen ,halbeards ,hammers messers,(basically a section attack)protect him and open up the gap he has created and everyone pours in and kicks the shite oot of the baddies,great vid as always,aw ra best from sunny Troon 😊
Your conclusion is the same one I came to at the question proposed at the beginning, "Use Case" Tilt works better against an opponent while parallel works better on an object. Some theories on the poleax being parallel instead of tilted forward: 1. For a weapon like your on-hand example, the balance could be thrown off if there was a significant tilt on the axe blade end, whether that was from user feel or how effective the hammer end was if the axe weight wasn't evenly behind it. 2. Some may have been used mounted or from an elevated position like a platform or stairs in a guardsman position, which may have worked against the tilted formats contact point. 3. May affect thrusting if the blade is tilted, or getting the forward tilt with a perpendicular distal point that was still effective in thrusting may have weakened that tip too much.
just thinking, what i noticed in the halberts in the Dutch National Army Museum is that most curved blades were of "city guards" type of troops, and most straight blades were of "army infantry". Might it be that the city guards normally didn't expect to chase and fight plate armoured burglars and so, but civilian dressed people . And the infantry kind of expected their counterpart to be atleast helmed and wearing a cuirrass or so. In the 80-years war the townguards of several Dutch cities fought the Spaniards as infantry, so they brought their curved bladed halberds to the battlefield because they allready had them anyway.
an excellent point that I haven't seen reflected in other comments! city guards would be used more as potential riot control / defense against civil unrest.
I would say it has to do with physics. The cutting surface for the great axe, an earlier design, concentrates the force to a relatively small surface. Hence, the psi will be increased versus the straight blade. In addition, the Dane axe was used against chain armor when it was designed. The straight blade was designed for battling heavier armor in general and a different marshall style fighting more organized groups. This blade was a chop-chop style over the line, whereas the Dane axe was used, in general, in small group tactics. To chop and pull the target toward you and the group. The pole axe was used to break off plate armor pieces.
In the metal cutting/shaping "Die" industry we refer to these actions as pierce & shear.
I can imagine that a strike with the blunt poleaxe on an arm, for example, has the ability to bend or deform the movable pieces that connect the shoulder and elbow joints with the arm pieces, causing difficulty in mobility or even incapacitating the arm for combat as the metal plates get out of place. Pieces like that blunt poleaxe resemble the wedges used to fold metal sheets and shape them in factories and workshops. In combat against armor, it wouldn't be necessary to constantly look for gaps, and that part could be used to immobilize or incapacitate.
Fascinating video. It made me think of two questions. First, how much of personal preference of the warrior/knight/ whatever go into weapon design? Might one Viking go to the black smith and request one style of axe blade, and another Viking go to the same smith and ask for one with more angle or less curve, or whatever? The second question is how much of weapon design was just what you got? By that I mean the blacksmith is banging on metal to make a bunch of axe heads and whatever shape they came came out was what went on the axe handles and some were more curved and some were more angled?
Easy there, Matt.....mustn't damage the antiques hanging on the wall. I do appreciate you're passion and exuberance, so we'll just let it slide lol One observation about the Dane axe tip placement; the angle of the blade makes a lot of sense with the application you described, but I was thinking if you were faced one-on-one with only the axe, you could use that extended area at the top of the blade for blocking overhand blows from swords or other axes, but the pointy tip could be used for thrusting/slicing. It's not terribly practical, but a point is a point, and getting poked anywhere, especially the face or neck, would debilitating. Sadly, it would open your guard to attack, but any attack opens you to a counter, so there's that. I will say that watching Ironclad and seeing the work done by the Gil Becket character, portrayed quite well by Jason Flemying (he also portrayed the Jekyll/Hyde character in League of Extraordinary Gentlemen), was a tutorial on how the halberd can be used. Just my observation, sir. Thank you for the review.
I'm not sure I can agree with your conclusion because why, if they were going to be attacking armor with a blunted axe edge, was there also a hammer head on the back? Wouldn't you want a sharpened blade on one side, so that you could chop unarmored targets when there was an opportunity to do so?
Matt got possessed by the Demon of Bonk. Wholesome moment
Very interesting to see the forge-welded edge on one of the Thames retrieved Dane-axes. High-class production piece there.
fortytwoblades I've competed in axe events in OZ and the US, Im also a tomahawk user. and rendezvous attender . We sharpen and angle our blades to the task. I also have combat experience with the US army issue tomahawks. all your suppositions are on par. axe and hawk men always modify the tools for the job at hand
I want to make a cheesy 80s slasher with this guy as the killer. The entire movie will be a captured victim tied up getting an hours long explanation of a wide variety of historical bladed weapons while someone tries to save them by tracking diwn the clues. At the end he finally finishes explaining the most complicated weapon in his arsenal, with the most historical tangents, and is about to kill the victim the moment the protagonists bust in to thwart his plans. At that point he just draws a completely modern pistol, blasts everyone, smash cut to credits.
Strictly a guess, but considering both angled and parallel axe heads were found in the river, the head angle is probably a choice of the individual warrior based on how they swung their axe. If we swing an axe and lead with our hands in a push-drag motion (top hand dominated), then the angled head hits flush. If we gain axe head speed with a push-pull motion (bottom hand dominated), then the parallel head would hit flush. Whether the warrior would swing an axe with his hands far apart or close together, would also influence the head choice. Handle length may also be a factor. Since the wood has rotted away, we don't know how much variation there would have been in handle length. I used to teach fly casting with two handed fly rods and we see the same thing with anglers; some are top hand dominant and some are bottom hand dominant. Some styles of casting place the hands far apart while other styles have the hands closer together. Their are different rod actions that cater to different styles of casting. No reason why that couldn't be true of battle axes as well.
When you think about it, if the parallel axe blade did hit an opponent in the way you first described with the Dane axe, it would be angled and therefore be good at slicing
If you look at the effectiveness of the dacian, not exactly the full on 'hook' blade design, but the more subtle forward 'leaning' blade design, its said that they are more effective against shields, that they "cut into roman shields deeper and more effectively then straight blades". I can only imagine that could be even more true for froward 'tilted' axe heads close to 40 degrees or so. Also I think the tilted axes as apposed to the parallel axes would have more of a 'hooking effect when you are swinging it, like the directions that the force travels in would be different. The tree analogy is a good one, imagine tryna chop into the trunk the same with a tilted axe as you would a parallel axe, the point that the blade sinks in would feel and act differently, bad for chopping into trees but possible better for chopping into people especially with overhead attacks where you could catch someone on the backside of their trap muscles and possible dig into their shoulder blade a little, or hooking someone's leg/calf could be more useful whether that's catching them with the actual blade closer to the back of their leg or actually trying to hook with the bottom of the blade/dull bottom space in-between the shaft and the blade. I think different cut/swing angles and movements would be more or less effective depending on the axe head, overheads angles to the head may be easier to land with an angled axe but it would be more awkward trying to hit other parts of the body 'square on' because of the top part of the axe possibly hitting first whereas the parallel axe head could be better for hitting parts of the body lower down then the head and upper torso due to the blade hitting 'flatter' and you being able to then 'biomechanically' drive more force behind the blow making it more of an impactful, pushing, fully 'followed through' strike. Perhaps the to 'pointing out' part of the angled axe head also allows for more jabbing/stabbing type of strikes to be thrown, so that you can throw true straight strikes/stabs from point A to point B, straight/linear, instead of having to always throw some kind of swinging angled motion, ofcourse not an issue for poleaxes/halberds.
I think a lot of the point about the forward facing axe blade is that an axe is an axe but it's ok as a hook and a spear but an axe with a forward facing blade is a better compromise of a spear and a hook and it's an axe too.
Love this material, MORE POLEARMS!