Hafted Weapons in Medieval and Renaissance Europe: The Evolution of European Staff Weapons between 1200 and 1650 (History of Warfare 31) (History of Warfare)

HAFTED WEAPONS IN MEDIEVAL AND RENAISSANCE EUROPE

HISTORY OF WARFARE General Editor

kelly devries Loyola College Founding Editors

theresa vann paul chevedden VOLUME 31

HAFTED WEAPONS IN MEDIEVAL AND RENAISSANCE EUROPE The Evolution of European Staff Weapons between 1200 and 1650 BY

JOHN WALDMAN

BRILL LEIDEN BOSTON 2005 •

On the cover: The Kornmarktbrunnen, a potable water fountain in Basel, Switzerland. Moved from its original place near the old marketplace to its present location, and commemorating a local Swiss captain active at the end of the 15th century. It dates from ca. 1525. Brill Academic Publishers has done its best to establish rights to use of the materials printed herein. Should any other party feel that its rights have been infringed we would be glad to take up contact with them.

This book is printed on acid-free paper.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A C.I.P. record for this book is available from the Library of Congress.

ISSN 1385–7827 ISBN 90 04 14409 9 © Copyright 2005 by John Waldman. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910 Danvers MA 01923, USA. Fees are subject to change. printed in the netherlands

CONTENTS

List of Illustrations .......................................................................................................... vii Foreword ........................................................................................................................ xxiii by Walter J. Karcheski, Jr. Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................... xxv Introduction ....................................................................................................................

1

Chapter One General Background and Forerunners .............................................. Iron ..............................................................................................................................

7 10

Chapter Two Halberds .............................................................................................. Portage of Arms by the Untitled Swiss .................................................................... Possible Early Halberd Forms ..................................................................................

17 20 21

Chapter Three Extant Examples of Halberds ........................................................ Halberds Elsewhere in Europe .................................................................................. “Oriental” Influences ..................................................................................................

33 63 78

Chapter Four

Different Styles in Simultaneous Use ..............................................

81

Chapter Five Fastenings, Poles, and Finishing Procedures ....................................

87

Chapter Six

The Use of Halberds ............................................................................

99

Chapter Seven Halberds: Details of Rapid Identification ...................................... Thirteenth Century .................................................................................................... Fourteenth Century .................................................................................................... Fifteenth Century ........................................................................................................ Sixteenth Century ...................................................................................................... Seventeenth Century ..................................................................................................

105 105 105 105 105 106

Chapter Eight

Glaives ..............................................................................................

107

Chapter Nine Bills ......................................................................................................

115

Chapter Ten Partizans ..............................................................................................

125

Chapter Eleven The Morgenstern Group ..............................................................

137

Chapter Twelve

Ahlspiesse ......................................................................................

151

Chapter Thirteen Axes and Axe Derivatives ..........................................................

155

\

vi

contents

Chapter Fourteen The Guisarme and the Bardiche ..............................................

165

Chapter Fifteen The Brandistocco, Corseke, and Related Weapons ..................

177

Chapter Sixteen Vouge and Couteau de Brèche ..................................................

183

Chapter Seventeen The Military Scythe ................................................................

191

Chapter Eighteen

The Jedburgh Staff and Lochaber Axe ....................................

195

Chapter Nineteen The Doloir ..................................................................................

199

Chapter Twenty

Conservation and Restoration of Polearms ................................

203

Chapter Twenty-One The Marketplace ..................................................................

209

Postscript ..........................................................................................................................

211

List of Marks .................................................................................................................. Bibliography .................................................................................................................... Index ................................................................................................................................

213 215 219

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Cover: The “Kornmarktbrunnen”, a potable water fountain in Basel, Switzerland; moved from its original place near the old marketplace to its present location, and commemorating a local Swiss captain active at the end of the 15th century. It dates from ca. 1525. Fig. 1. Winged spear or “Bohemian ear spoon”, ca. 1500. Note that the wings arise from the socket (see chapter 12), as opposed to the wings of partizans, which issue from the bottom of the blades. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 14.25.460. Fig. 2. Stone age axe; the shaft and thongs are reconstructions. If used under wet conditions these thongs would tend to relax and loosen, allowing stress on the split upper shaft portion. Private collection. Fig. 3. The mass of this large axe found near London, and possibly of Viking origin, hinges on the relatively small “eye” over the shaft making this joint unstable in a heavy blow. Lengthening the blade vertically and bringing it closer to the shaft brought with it greater stability. The guisarme, with the added feature of having the lower portion of the blade attached to the shaft, was probably a later example of such a weapon. (See chapter 14.) Courtesy of the Museum of London, inv. no. 887. Fig. 4a. A pair of rare surviving ingots of Roman iron from Swiss mines in the Jura. They are locally called “masseln”. Courtesy of the Cantonal Museum of Baselland. Fig. 4b. Ingots of raw iron, a ground find now in the Museum Ferdinandeum in Graz, 5th to 1st century B.C. Courtesy of the Museum Ferdinandeum. Fig. 5. Scavenging the battlefield for armor and weapons with infighting (lower right). From a panel painting of the victory of Louis the Great over the Serbs (? Turks), ca. 1430, by the Master of the Votive Panel of St. Lambert (Hans von Tübingen), Cloister of St. Lambert, now displayed in the Steiermarkisches Landesmuseum Joanneum, Alte Galerie, Graz. Note the sharpened extension of the pole above the upper eye of the halberd in the right foreground and compare with fig. 16. Courtesy of the Cloister and the Alte Galerie, Graz. Fig. 6. Page 172 of the “Waffenbuch” of Hans Döring, 1544–55. Note the chronological disparity between the arms and armor of the old man on the left and the soldiers on the right. Note also the leather wrapped shaft of the long spear, as well as the “capped” shaft of the halberd on the right. Private collection. Fig. 7. German Landsknechts and their captain, with chronologically homogeneous arms and armor, in the “Kriegsordnung” of 1545 by Hans Döring. Private collection. Fig. 8. A German Landsknecht (in the waning years of this profession) carrying a halberd, in the “Kriegsordnung” of 1545 by Hans Döring. Private collection.

viii

list of illustrations

Fig. 9. Chinese dagger axe known as a “ji”. Bronze Age, but designated “halberd” in modern times. Private collection. Fig. 10. A very early halberd closely related to a guisarme. Excavated in Alsace, near Basel, middle to second half of the 13th century. Note that the upper end of the blade is not yet particularly suited for thrusting, but a beak is already present, and welded to the upper eye. Courtesy of the Historical Museum of Bern, inv. no. 13741. Fig. 11. “Betrayal and Arrest of Christ”, Psalter, Germany, early to mid-thirteenth century. MS. Lat. 17961, folio 113 verso. Note the “halberd” in the hands of the soldier on the left resembling the ones in Bern and Basel (figs. 10 and 25). Courtesy of the Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris. Fig. 12. Detail of a wall painting in the chapel of St. Nicklausen, Canton Obwald, Switzerland, ca. 1375. The halberd’s shaft is “capped”, that is, the superior eye is integral with the upper back portion of the blade and is closed on top. Fig. 13. “Betrayal and Arrest of Christ,” Très Belles Heures de Notre Dame, 1380–1413, France. Note that the left halberd, although resembling the one in the St. Lambert panel (fig. 5), is more slender and has no sharpened and protruding wooden shaft at the upper end. These forms coexist with the more “developed” forms such as in fig. 14. Courtesy of the Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, MS. Nouv. Acq. Lat 3093 folio 181 recto. Fig. 14. Reduced modern impression from the right hand wood block (one of the original three) called the Bois Protat, ca. 1370–80. The halberd is capped as in fig. 12 but appears to have a longer shaft. The original woodblock is in the Paper Museum of the city of Basel, Switzerland. Private collection. Fig. 15. Early halberd blade resembling that in the foreground of the St. Lambert Panel in Graz (fig. 5) and mounted on a new shaft. Note that the St. Lambert halberd’s shaft extends above the upper eye and is sharpened to a point, that is, into a wooden spike. Private collection. Fig. 16. Swiss warrior carrying a halberd with a (presumably) sharpened extension of the shaft above the blade and resembling that of figs. 5 and 15. Mid 16th century Swiss chronicle of Johan Stumpf. It is probable that the woodcut itself is from a slightly earlier period, that is, early 16th century, but the halberd itself is of 15th century manufacture. Courtesy of Karl Mohler, Basel. Figs. 17a and b. Two representations from the Passion in Codex 339 “Mystisches Traktat zum Leiden Christi”, Luzern, 1396, in the library of the Benedictine Cloister in Engelberg, Switzerland. The halberd in the doorway of the building in 17b is a pure “Sempach” form; the one in the right of 17a is described in the text as the “capped” form with the spike in line with the shaft. Courtesy of the library of the Cloister. Fig. 18. Partial view of the Swiss army in the large woodcut “Dorneck 1499”. Note the profusion of “Sempach” type halberds with the spike point in front of the shaft axis. Courtesy of the Kupferstichkabinet, Basel.

list of illustrations

ix

Fig. 19. Thrusting with the halberd spike of a weapon contemporary with the woodcut. “Dorneck 1499”. Courtesy of the Kupferstichkabinett, Basel. Fig. 20. “Dorneck 1499”. Thrusting with a halberd. Courtesy of the Kupferstichkabinett, Basel. Fig. 21. “Dorneck 1499”. Overhead swing with a halberd. Courtesy of the Kupferstichkabinett, Basel. Fig. 22. “Dorneck 1499”. Sideswing with a halberd and decapitation. Courtesy of the Kupferstichkabinett, Basel. Fig. 23. Martin Schongauer, “Christ Taken” from the engraved passion, ca. 1480. Note the non-contemporary halberd shafted by “eyes” and the slightly forward curved spike. Courtesy Vassar College. Fig. 24. Early halberds in the Landesmuseum, Zurich. From an illustration in the 1928 article by E.A. Gessler on the development of the halberd. The individual blades are discussed in the text, and numbered left to right. Fig. 25. This 13th century halberd in Basel (inv. no. 1873.24, neg. no. 12375) measures 47cm in length and has a greatest width of 6.5 cm. It is almost identical to the first halberd in fig. 24, including the triangular top eye. Courtesy of the Historisches Museum, Basel. Fig. 26. Halberd #2 in fig. 24, late 13th century, found near Rorbas, Canton Zurich. It measures 42 cm. in length and has a greatest width of 7 cm. The upper eye is almost completely broken off. Note that the blade back is now straight and useful for thrusting. Courtesy of the Landesmuseum, Zurich, inv. no. 4327. Fig. 27. Halberd #3 in fig. 24. It is the first to show a real indent between the blade and the spike. The length is 43 cm., the spike is 15 cm., and its weight is 960 g. It was found amongst the vine roots in Cormondrèche near Neuchâtel. Courtesy of the Landesmuseum, Zurich, inv. no. LM6345. Fig. 28. Halberd of about 1300–20, very similar to the one in fig. 27. Note that both edges of the spike are sharpened as well as the rear blade edge between the eyes. Courtesy of the Historisches Museum Bern, inv. no. 3463. Fig. 29. Halberd blade with a broken spike probably used at the battle of Morgarten in 1315 and excavated there in the 1860’s. Note how compact and massive the weapon is. Courtesy of the Landesmuseum, Zurich, inv. no. 13153. Fig. 30. Reconstructed drawing of the halberd in fig. 29, Landesmuseum, Zurich, inv. no. 13153. Fig. 31. Halberd blade closely following the Morgarten blade of fig. 29 of ca. 1330,(?). Note the very long lower eye. Ex. collection Charles Boissonnas, found in the river Broye in the 19th century. Photo courtesy of Landesmuseum, Zurich.

x

list of illustrations

Fig. 32. Halberd blade on a new pole somewhat after the one in fig. 31 (ca. 1350?). It is larger and more slender. The blade is slightly drawn in at the base. Ex collection Charles Boissonnas. Found in the river Thièle in the 19th century. Photo courtesy of the Landesmuseum Zurich. Fig. 33. Halberd blade of the middle of the 14th century, found in 1985 in 5 meters (16 ft.) of water in the Greifensee (Switzerland) near the shore. Two small pieces of the staff were trapped in the eyes but were lost during the process of conservation. It measures 37 cm. in length; the spike is 14.2 cm. and its weight 578 g. Courtesy of the Landesmuseum, Zurich, inv. no. KZ 11476. Fig. 34. Halberd blade found in the excavation of the castle of Hünenberg, Canton Zug in 1945. Length 39.5 cm., weight 590 g. Second third of the 14th century. Displayed in the Landesmuseum, Zurich, inv. no. Dep. 3453. Courtesy of the Landesmuseum Zurich. Fig. 35. Halberd blade on a replacement staff and with a separate beak, the latter showing the weld mark. End of the 14th century. The thick curved dorsal langet appears at about this time (see also fig. 37), the anterior one is sometimes a later addition. What is novel in this weapon is that the spike point is in line with the shaft because of its slight backward lean. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 14.25.35. Fig. 36. Halberd blade on a new staff with distinct and partially dehiscent weld marks. A posterior rounded langet is present as well as a small beak as part of the upper eye. Note the slight forward curve of the beak edge of the flat spike (vaguely like fig. 23). This is one of the last halberds before the change in hafting from “eyes” to a socket. Courtesy of the Historisches Museum, Bern. Fig. 37. Halberd of ca. 1400 with a long narrow blade and an angled convexity leading to the spike which also leans backwards slightly so that the point as in fig. 35 is in line with the shaft. The spike tip is clearly reinforced and the last 3.5 cm. are quadrangular. The blade measures 43.8 cm. in length. Only a short rear langet is present. It has possibly the oldest surviving shaft, and one of the last of a round diameter, which measures 181 cm. in length and has a diameter of 3.8 cm. just below the langet. The shaft between the eyes measures 3.1 cm. in diameter and appears to be made of a soft wood such as pine. It is also among the last halberds before the appearance of sockets, but as shown throughout this book, such types were probably made and used until late in the 15th century and are shown in illustrations of ca. 1500 alongside later forms. Private collection. Fig. 38. Schematic diagram illustrating the method of creating the “eyes” on a 14th century halberd. A mandrel would have been inserted during the final bending of the eye and during the hammer welding process. The Morgarten blade in Zurich (fig. 29) was created in this way. Hardened steel might have subsequently been welded on the cutting edges of the blade, the spike point and the beak, if there was one. Fig. 39. Two photographs of the lower eye of the early Basel halberd in fig. 25. The retouched one shows that there is a single weld of a strap bent as in fig. 38. The upper (triangular) eye is welded on both sides.

list of illustrations

xi

Fig. 40. Detail of the hammer weld of the left side of the upper eye of the Morgarten halberd in Zurich (fig. 29). The eye is not welded on the right side, indicating that it is a strap bent as in fig. 38. Fig. 41. Another view of a strap with a weld on the right side of the blade. It is similar in appearance to the one in fig. 39, but is of a later date. Fig. 42. Detail of the weld on the bottom eye of the halberd in fig. 37, which represents a fusion of the two blade halves (see the diagram in fig. 38). Fig. 43. A 14th century halberd with a lower eye welded on both sides, showing early dehiscence. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 14.25.35. Fig. 44. The two blade halves, welded together over the top eye. Halberd in fig. 37, ca. 1400. Private collection. Fig. 45. Schematic diagram of the construction of the halberd in fig. 37. Fig. 46. Weld seam of lower eye of right side of blade on the halberd in fig. 35, after the brazing repair to close it. The faint scratch marks on the blade and seam area are not old. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 14.25.35. Fig. 47. Corroded halberd found in 1908 on the shore of the Rhine near Rheinfelden, 1390–1400. The blade is double-leafed (see fig. 44); it has the earliest socket and flange. Courtesy of the Historisches Museum, Basel, inv. no. 1910.93. Negative no. 12373. Fig. 48. 15th century halberd (perhaps middle) showing the rather rare flat spike with the axis behind the shaft line. The mandrel used to form the socket was inserted fully to the top of the blade. The finished halberd shows therefore a small hole on the upper blade edge. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 52.208.8. Fig. 49. Halberd, probably from the third quarter of the 15th century, showing large proportions and mass. An identical one is present in the Museum Altes Zeughaus, Solothurn. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 42.50.17. Fig. 50. A mid-15th century halberd. Note the elongate blade approximately twice as high as wide. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 42.50.18. Fig. 51. On the left: detail of the top mandrel opening, in this case between the spike base and the top of the beak, as in fig. 52. Visible in the photo on the right are the top of the wooden shaft and the weld mark between the hardened point of the beak and the beak body. Private collection. Fig. 52. Halberd of last quarter of 15th century. Note the pronounced concavity of the upper and lower blade edges and the beginning slant of the cutting edge. This line of development eventually leads to the 16th century triangular forms. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 14.25.74.

xii

list of illustrations

Fig. 53. Sketch of what is possibly the earliest halberd with a shaft socket (Historisches Museum, Basel, no. 1910.93). The dotted lines show the edges of the corroded right leaf of the blade as well as the welded joint line at the front edge of the spike. Fig. 54. Sketches of four halberd blades, displayed in the Landesmuseum, Zurich, showing from right to left, the transition from the eye-shafting method to the socket form. The blade on the left is roughly a decade later than the Basel halberd in fig. 47. (Drawings not to scale). Courtesy of the Landesmuseum, Zurich. Fig. 55. “Sturmhalbarte” from the arsenal of the city of Vienna. The spike of this massive weapon is hollow-ground. Its great weight required skill and strength to manipulate. Courtesy of the Museums of the City of Vienna, inv. no. 126011. Fig. 56. Late 15th–early 16th century halberd with a flat sword-like spike showing a strong central rib. This type, commonly depicted by Dürer in his woodcuts and engravings, may therefore be of German rather than Swiss design and manufacture. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 25.135.7. Fig. 57. Woodcut by Hans Wechtlin (1480–after 1526): “Christ Before Anna”, from the series entitled “The Life of Jesus Christ”, 1508. Note the halberd like those in figs. 50, 52, and 56, as well as the “Hängelaschen” (hanging plates) covering the shoulders and attached to the collar of the Maximilian-style helmet. (See page 147.) Private collection. Fig. 58. Albrecht Dürer: “The Crucifixion” from the engraved Passion of 1511. Note the halberd with a flat spike on the right which appears to be more popular in Germany than in Switzerland. Private collection. Fig. 59a. A halberd in the Altes Zeughaus in Solothurn showing signs of use and wear, and without 17th century marks, distinguished also by a different smithing technique, and consistent with a 15th century date. Halberds like this one may have served as a model for the 17th century types such as in fig. 59b. Courtesy of the Museum Altes Zeughaus, Solothurn. Fig. 59b. 17th century halberd by Lamprecht Koller of Würenlos, canton of Aargau, 1663–81, until fairly recently classified mistakenly as 15th century and called a “Sempach” halberd. The shafting nails are sunk in conical holes in the langets and ground flat. Private collection. Fig. 60. A halberd of ca. 1500 marked with a cross of St. Andrew on the right side of the blade, probably German or Flemish (Burgundian) and of the type shown in fig. 61. Private collection. Fig. 61. Woodcut by Wolf Huber for the Triumphal Arch of Maximilian, 1512–1515. The Swiss and Imperial forces meet during the Swabian war of 1499. Note the halberds and longspears on both sides, as well as the cross of St. Andrew and the Helvetian cross (St. George) marking clothing and flags. The “ready” position of the longspears in the foreground is also interesting. Private collection.

list of illustrations

xiii

Fig. 62. Large decorated Italian halberd, probably end of the first quarter of the 16th century and made for the bodyguard of the Emperor Charles V. (Several have survived) Courtesy of Galerie Fischer, Lucerne. Fig. 63. Italian halberd of about 1500. Both edges of the spike are sharpened down to the beak-spike. Note the scorpion mark. Private collection. Fig. 64. Italian “scorpion” of about 1530. Note that although the weapon is quite functional, there are already many small attempts at decoration. The weld mark of the mid back spike is shown in the detail photo of the scorpion mark. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 14.25.360. Fig. 65. Italian halberd ca. 1500 with punctuate decorations on both faces. This side shows a dog barking at a rabbit (the right world) as opposed to the other side, which shows a fox barking at a dog (the “world upside down”). The flat spike with the prominent rib is similar to the one in fig. 56. Courtesy of the Historiches Museum, Basel, inv. no. 1905.4142. Fig. 66. Halberd of ca. 1510–20 with a quadrangular thickening of the beak tip (similar to the spike tip). Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 42.50.20. Fig 67a. Early 16th century halberd with a convex cutting edge. The mandrel opening is present between the base of the spike and the beak. Private collection. Fig 67b. Typical “triangular” bladed halberd of ca. 1520, with a sharply drawn in cutting edge. The spike is massive, as is the beak. Private collection. Fig. 68a. Halberd of ca. 1520 with a concave cutting edge and a broken superior tip as well as a weakened lower tip. The blade as usual is constructed of two leaves welded together. The langets measure 76 cm. in length. Private collection. Fig. 68b. Halberd of ca. 1520 with an unusual socket and central straight vertical rib above it that is entirely solid. Probably German. Private collection. Fig. 69a. Halberd of ca. 1530–40 showing “flame” shaped langets on an original ash shaft. Private collection. Fig. 69b. Detail of A. Dürer’s “The Great Cannon” iron etching of 1518 M. 96. The halberd held by the Landsknecht leaning against the cannon, though slightly indistinct against the roof of the house, is typical during a relatively long span of time in the 16th century. Private collection. Fig. 70. Ash shaft of halberd showing a rough cut, as well as refined mark, “5”. The upper figure is possibly the arsenal mark itself. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 42.50.20. Fig. 71. Saber-halberd, probably 19th century. The spike blade is too flexible for effective cutting and is not very useful for thrusting. The mass of the halberd head is not at the

xiv

list of illustrations

end of the weapon, thus also reducing its impact. Although these weapons are well made, they are in all probability products of 19th century romanticism. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 25.188.2. Fig. 72a. Thrusting Styrian halberd of about 1575 by Peter Schreckeisen of Waldneukirchen; the beak is still functional appearing, the blade less so. Courtesy of the Landeszeughaus, Landesmuseum Joanneum, Graz. Fig. 72b. Etching by Jacques Callot of the Crucifixion scene, ca. 1640. Note the halberd as well as a morgenstern, roncone, and true pikes. Callot worked extensively in Italy, and at this time, Italian halberds resembled those from elsewhere. Private collection. Fig. 73. Detail of the bottom illustration of folio 28 recto by Dürer in the Emperor Maximilian I’s “Book of Hours”. This scene shows a remarkable mixture of staff weapons of differing epochs (see text). Courtesy of the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Munich, L impr. membr. 64. Fig. 74. Detail of the bottom illustration of folio 55 verso by Albrecht Dürer in the “Book of Hours” of the Emperor Maximilian I. The contrast of the armamentation of the combattants is striking. It speaks volumes on the reversal of roles and warfare in general. Courtesy of the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Munich, L impr. membr. 64. Fig. 75. Right hand page of “The Battle of Grandson 1476” from the Diebold Schilling Lucerne Chronicle of 1513, folio 100. As stated in the text, armamentation is with 15th and 16th century equipment though some of the halberds shown are even earlier. Courtesy of the Korporations Verwaltung der Stadt Luzern. Fig. 76. A rear langet of an early 16th century halberd, both in place and by itself. Note the small claw-like upper portion which anchors itself in the throat of the socket between the flange leaves (and the blade leaves in case of the front one). It also wedges itself between the cheeks of the socket, thus forming a rigid box and stabilizing the whole structure. Private collection. Fig. 77. A rapid and inexpensive method of stabilizing the union between the halberd head and the shaft. The lower part of the socket, consisting mostly of a broad langet, is hammered around the square shaft. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Fig. 78a. Opposing nails driven straight through and in two instances emerging through the opposite hole and bent over, under the opposing nail head. Early 16th century halberd. Private collection. Fig. 78b. Nails driven against the opposing inner face of the langet and bent over for up to 1 cm. This radiograph is of a Lucern hammer. Private collection. Fig. 79a. A mid to late 16th century halberd fastened with hammer-driven screws. Private collection.

list of illustrations

xv

Fig. 79b. A radiograph of the halberd in fig. 37. Note the long dorsal nail through the langet which has been driven into an ironed plate or an anvil applied to the front of the shaft so that the nail curves back on itself to lock into place. Private collection. Fig. 80a. A Lamprecht Koller halberd of the 17th century with peened over nail tips ground flush with the langet surface. Private collection. Fig. 80b. In this halberd the boltheads and the peened over points are not ground down. Private collection. Fig. 81. Halberd of ca. 1500, octagonal ash shaft with a shaft makers’ (?) mark burned in at the base of the shaft. Private collecion. Fig. 82. Halberd of ca. 1510 with two sets of opposing (three) marks burned into the top of the shaft sides. They appear to be a letter “M” with a bar across the top. Private collection. Fig. 83. A shaft maker of the Eschental turning an ash shaft in a metal cutting die. Slots are present either for various diameters or possibly to shape the sections of split ash sapplings gradually from square to round. From the “Swiss Chronicles” of Johan Stumpf, 1586, Book 9, p. 554. Courtesy of Karl Mohler, Basel. Fig. 84. Detail of an early 16th century halberd showing th original grinding (polishing) marks as well as the smith’s mark, an 8-pointed star. Private collection. Fig. 85. Huge head wound on a fallen German (Imperial) soldier most likely caused by a halberd. From the woodcut “Dorneck 1499”. Courtesy of the Kupferstichkabinett, Basel. Fig. 86. Another detail of the woodcut “Dorneck 1499” (during the battle) showing how quickly bodies were stripped, but with possible exaggeration of the number of injuries suffered (13). Courtesy of the Kupferstichkabinett, Basel. Fig. 87. Three skulls from the battle of Dorneck in 1499 recently studied and restored (stabilized). These fatal wounds were probably inflicted by halberds. Courtesy of the Museum Altes Zeughaus, Solothurn. Fig. 88. From folio 10 recto of the Maciejowski Bible. The soldier at the left border carries a relatively short-shafted “glaive”. Courtesy of the Pierpont Morgan Library, M 638. Fig. 89. From folio 10 verso of the Maciejowski Bible. The mounted figure in the center foreground ( Joshua) is using a short-shafted “glaive”. Courtesy of the Pierpont Morgan Library, M 638. Fig. 90a. Sketches of two long-shafted glaives from an illustrated prayer book prayer book of ca. 1380. They are carried by footsoldiers in scenes from the Passion, along with a profusion of other staff weapons. Parma MS Pal. 56.

xvi

list of illustrations

Fig. 90b. An early Italian glaive, mid to late 15th century, the forerunner of the glaive pictured in fig. 92. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 14.25.259, gift of Wm. H. Riggs, 1913. Fig. 91. Two knights fighting at close quarters with a vouge Française and a glaive. Note the roundels at the blade bases for protecting the hands. From the Caesar Tapestry, ca. 1470, taken as booty from the Burgundian camp in 1476. Courtesy of the Historisches Museum, Bern, inv. no. 8. Fig. 92. The most widespread form of glaive—an Italian weapon of ca. 1500–20. Its overall length is 270 cm. (8 ft. 10 in.). It is possibly a guard weapon, but could clearly be used for thrusting and cutting in the field. Private collection. Fig. 93. Venetian glaive, end of 16th century. Although the weapon is somewhat similar to the one in fig. 92; it is longer, more elaborate and has non-functional additions which distinguish it from weapons of war. Its great length also makes it impractical to manipulate in a crowded field of battle. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 04.3.103. Fig. 94. This purely ceremonial glaive was meant mostly to impress and is also Venetian.It was a type used by palace guards of such important figures as the Doge, has lost its thrusting function and can merely cut. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 04.3.102. Fig. 95a. Roman securis or roncola, with a tang instead of the usual socket which was open on one side (see fig. 95b). Other forms had a small upward-facing rear hook. The shortest of these were purely tools and worn tucked into the belt. Private collection. Fig. 95b. A Roman Securis recently excavated near Jerusalem, from between the end of first to the fourth century A.D. The inside of the socket contains fragmentary remnants of the short wooden shaft and its securing nail. This grip was probably no longer than ca. 12 cm. (4.5”) Private collection. Fig. 96. The Italian type of Roncola arma pictured here is also found in Merovingian graves in the North. The actual weapon shown here is probably much younger, by virtue of the marks. The original forms were made, more or less unchanged, until the 15th century. Private collection. Fig. 97. The Ronca, a much more refined weapon that the preceding Roncola arma, is fully capable of both cut and thrust action and is widespread throughout Europe. It still shows the presence of an open-throated socket for its shaft. Private collection. Fig. 98. A Welsh bill which is described as a weapon, but appears to be too delicate and frail to be successful as such. Its function is more likely to have been a symbol of authority in the hands of a constable or watchman. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 14.25.155.

list of illustrations

xvii

Fig. 99a. A fully developed Roncone of early 16th century Italy, similar to the contemporary Rossschinder of the Germans. This Italian specimen has typical “eyelash” marks along the lower rear blade. Private collection. Fig. 99b. Closeup of another roncone’s “eyelash” marks. Private collection. Fig. 100. An English bill of ca. 1500. Note the typically open socket which is a folded triangle, the weld marks of the beak joints, as well as the “grain” of the blade steel at the bifurcation of the spike and the bill hook. This last indicates that the smith split the blade down to the bifurcation to separate the hook and the spike. Courtesy of the Board of Trustees of the Royal Armouries, inv. no. VII-1493. Fig. 101. Late 15th century spear with a heavy and elaborately worked head, resembling a partizan. Courtesy of the Museums of the City of Vienna, inv. no. 686, from the old city arsenal. Fig. 102. 15th century Italian partizan stamped with a Gothic “4” and without langets. The base of the blade is drawn in towards the socket at approximately 90°. The blade is 55 cm. long and 10 cm. wide. Private collection. Fig. 103. Early 16th century partizan with small side wings at the base of the blade and a strong central rib. The blade, without socket, is 78 cm. long; the width without the wings is 11 cm. Private collection. Fig. 104. Partizan or lingua di bue, ca. 1500, probably Venetian. Two round brass inlays with seven perforations are present on the blade. The socket is hexagonal, and the tassels are probably a later addition. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 1425.119. Fig. 105. Spiedi da guerra, probably Bolognese, end of 15th century. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 04.3.76. Fig. 106. The emperor Maximilian I, asleep in his chamber, about to be attacked by soldiers bearing various staff weapons. In this largely fictionalized book, his life guards who were said to carry Austrian partizans, are not present. From the 5th edition of “Theuerdank”, M. Schultes, 1679. Private collection. Fig. 107. Austrian partizan, end of the 15th century, said to have been carried by the bodyguard of Maximilian I. Note the solid construction and the ogival arch-like upper end of the blade point, which it has in common with the Venetian types. This example has a simple socket in the manner of an early ronca, but others in this group have carefully constructed hexagonal sockets. None have langets. The shafts, which are not original, have a hexagonal shape. Courtesy of the Hofjagt- und Rüstkammer of the Historisches Museum, Vienna, inv. no. A117. Fig. 108. Partizan of the second half of the 16th century, whose socket shows a “nodus” between it and the base of the blade. Private collection.

xviii

list of illustrations

Fig. 109. Partizan or “Langue de bœuf ”, 17th century, appearing to have been altered by drawing in the top of the blade (the slight asymmetry would suggest a post-manufacture alteration). The weapon has a width-to-length ratio of 1 to 5.5. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 14.25.90. Fig. 110. Sponton or “spontoon” from Brunswick, Germany, 17–18th century. The weapon is still clearly a short partizan with basal wings and added lower portions. Although its primary function is rank associated, it could still be used as a weapon. Private collection. Fig. 111. Sponton-halberd. This late weapon, a combination of a short partizan (sponton) and a small halberd, is highly decorated. Although it was either a parade weapon or associated with military rank, it could still have been used as a weapon. Courtesy of the Museums of the City of Vienna. Fig. 112a. Detail of the front carving on the Courtrai Chest showing the Flemish burgers carrying their staff weapons, Godentacs or Plançons à Picot, with which they defeated the French chivalry. Courtesy of the Warden and Scholars of New College, Oxford and Bridgeman Art Library International. Fig. 112b. Morgenstern from the arsenal of the City of Vienna, probably mid-16th century, now in the depot. Courtesy of the Museums of the City of Vienna, inv. no. 126.207. Fig. 113. This all-steel headed Morgenstern is from the arsenal of the City of Vienna. The craftsmanship is striking and the weapon is well balanced. Courtesy of the Museums of the City of Vienna. Fig. 114. Detail of the Morgenstern in fig. 113 showing the intricate smithwork used to produce a relatively light but stable and strong steel head. Fig. 115. An all-steel headed morgenstern in the hands of a fleeing soldier in Ariovistus’s army ( Julius Caesar is the mounted knight in the upper left corner, spearing an opponent). Detail from the Caesar Tapestries of Charles the Bold. Courtesy of the Historisches Museum Bern, inv. no. 8. Fig. 116. Holy-water sprinkler, probably English, early 16th century. This type of weapon was very popular in England and was certainly made by expert smiths, probably in large series. Courtesy of the Board of Trustees of the Royal Armouries, inv. no. VII-1642. Fig. 117. Morgenstern, 15th–16th century, probably Swiss. The shaft is pine. A weapon such as this could have been made by a blacksmith. Private collection. Fig. 118. A carefully constructed “kettenmorgenstern” probably 15th–16th century, German or Swiss. The pole, of ash, is worn between the top retaining band and the lower part of the langets, which is the area that can be touched by the spikes. Private collection. Fig. 119. A Kettenmorgenstern and a regular morgenstern, from a line drawing of a 15th century polyptych fragment, possibly Czech. Note the similarity of the kettenmorgenstern to the one in fig. 118.

list of illustrations

xix

Fig. 120. The knight “Debile” in mortal combat with Philippe of Burgundy. Detail from an anonymous woodcut of about 1485 in the poem “Le Chevalier Délibéré” by Olivier de la Marche (Chiswick Press, 1898, London). Note that the knight has, slung over his left shoulder, two Morgensterns, one almost identical to the one in fig. 118 and the other like in fig. 119. Note also that he is about to strike with a dart. Private collection. Fig. 121. Detail of a woodcut out of the “Nuremberg Chronicle” of Hartman Schedel, 1493, German edition, showing the Pharaoh’s army being covered by the Red Sea. Note, among the many and interesting staff weapons, the military flail. Private collection. Figs. 122a and b. Two ahlspiesse, probably Austrian, second half of the 15th century. Three marks are stamped into one flat at the base of the spike, which is the usual place for marks. The spike is usually longer than one meter and is stiff (rigid). The rounded contour langets are rough and unpolished. The presence of the roundel guard and its seating grooves distinguish the ahlspiess from the breach pike or “breschspiess” (see text). Fig. 122a. Courtesy the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 14.25.396. Fig. 122b. Courtesy of the Hofjagd- und Rüstkammer, of the Historisches Museum, Vienna, inv. no. A85. Fig. 123. Detail of the roundel guard of an Ahlspiess set into the special grooves at the base of the spike. Courtesy of the Museums of the City of Vienna. Fig. 124. Top view of the roundel guard of an Ahlspiess. Courtesy of the Museums of the City of Vienna, one of a large unnumbered lot. Fig. 125. 15th century pollaxe with inlaid brass punched and chiseled decorations. The rear facing hammer head has a central steel quadrangular beak. The head is fastened to the staff by laterally screwed in side lugs. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 14.25.288. Fig. 126. Gilt and etched early 16th century pollaxe. The axe-hammer head is fastened underneath the carefully constructed langets with pyramidal side lugs. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 25.135.21. Fig. 127. Anonymous German woodcut of ca. 1460–70 showing a long shafted “mordaxt”. A roundel guard is present a short distance below the blade. Private collection. Fig. 128. Detail of the Caesar Tapestry in the Historical Museum of Bern adjacent to the morgenstern in fig. 114. The knight swings a “mordaxt” bearing a roundel guard which does not appear to be steel (leather?). Courtesy of the Historisches Museum, Bern, inv. no. 8. Fig. 129. Detail of the woodcut “Dorneck 1499” showing a veteran Swiss soldier swinging a short version of a “fussstreitaxt”. It cannot properly be called a “fussstreitaxt” even though it has a hammer in back of the blade, because of its length, which appears to be only a meter (39 in.) or so. Courtesy of the Kupferstichkabinett, Basel. Fig. 130. Late 16th century “fussstreitaxt” by the Swiss weaponsmith Lerchli. The weapon is part of a series delivered to the Zurich arsenal between 1585 and 1591. Note that the

xx

list of illustrations

only difference between this axe and the one in fig. 127 is its length (ca. 1.5 m.) and the presence of langets. Courtesy of Landesmuseum, Zurich, inv. no. K2–1263. Fig. 131. A differently shaped “fussstreitaxt” also of the same time period as the previous one and in the Zurich arsenal. Courtesy of Landesmuseum, Zurich, inv. no. K2–601. Fig. 132. Bec-de-corbin or Lucerne hammer with a massive beak measuring 13 cm. in length. End of the 15th century or 1500. The shaft is oak and is an ovalized octagon. Private collection. Fig. 133. Italian “Martello d’arme” or “Fussstreitaxt” ca. 1500. Note the three-pronged hammer with the single prong on top. The solid langets fit over the central hammer and beak portion, which is slotted to receive them. Courtesy of Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 14.25.465. Fig. 134. The classic Lucerne hammer which persists without much change from the early 16th century into the 17th century. Note the “L” on its side on the base of the spike. Private collection. Fig. 135. A very large Russian guisarme of 1530, whose blade alone is more than a meter in length. It is fastened to the shaft by an elaborate system of nails which are themselves decorated. Courtesy of the Tøjhusmuseets, Copenhagen, inv. no. C50 (45). Fig. 136. A near Eastern or Russian guisarme with a thrusting point and geometric partially gilt decoration. Courtesy of Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 04.3.100. Fig. 137. A somewhat smaller but still massive guisarme on what is likely the original staff and showing a complex pattern of geometrically arranged marks (see text). The upper point of the blade is broken off. Courtesy of the Kung. Livrustkammeren, Stockholm, inv. no. 691020. Fig. 138. A guisarme, Swedish or Russian, 15th century or earlier. Weapons similar to this one are seen in illuminations as old as the 13th century. Courtesy of the Kung. Livrustkammeren, Stockholm, inv. no. LRK GN 2403. Fig. 139. Excavated guisarme blade with a variant of a rear-facing hammer and langets. The inferior blade point is broken off but appears to have reconnected with the shaft in the standard manner of a guisarme. Courtesy of the Danish National Museum, Copenhagen. Fig. 140. Variant of a guisarme-like weapon with a long flattened top spike. Courtesy of the Kung. Livrustkammeren, Stockholm, inv. no. LRK GN 06:12. Fig. 141. A Russian bardiche, possibly on the original staff and fastened to it by means of the front blade extension and leather thongs. Rear perforations, almost a hallmark of this weapon, are present. Courtesy of Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 14.25.463. Fig. 142a. A 15th century cut and thrust weapon without a name and appearing to be unique, it may or may not be related to the roncone, or an equally nameless weapon in

list of illustrations

xxi

the Maciejowski bible described in the text. Courtesy of the Danish National Museum, inv. no. 212. Fig. 142b. Detail of 142a, showing marks and the profile of the topspike. Fig. 142c. Drawing of a vaguely similar weapon said to be early 14th century in a private collection, and pictured in Troso’s book “Le Armi in Asta”. It has no forward facing beak as in 142a. The blade and socket are 107 cm. long. Marks are not described. Fig. 143. Detail of an altarpiece by Dieric Bouts of about 1450 showing the “taking of Christ”. Note the weapon to the right of the flaming torch which is almost identical to the Copenhagen weapon in fig. 142a and b. Courtesy of the Alte Pinakothek, Munich, and Artothek. Fig. 144. Small bardiche on a broken shaft. The shaft might have been short to begin with, suggesting the possibility that this was a horseman’s weapon. Possibly 15th century. Courtesy of the Kung. Livrustkammeren, Stockholm, inv. no. LRK GN 5729:12. Fig. 145. Early 16th century runka, also called brandistocco, with etched decorations at the base of the blade and wings. The thick blade has a strong central rib. Courtesy of the Museums of the City of Vienna. Fig. 146. This large corseke, also called furloni as well as spetum in the North, although dating to about 1500, is too long for field combat. It was probably used against civil unrest or for guard duty, and is Italian. Private collection. Fig. 147. Friuli spear of the later 16th century. Note the long slender quadrangular spike and the needle-like wing tips. Courtesy of Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 29.156.38. Fig. 148. This Chauve-souris, or Pipistrello, is probably Italian, ca. 1530–40, and from the Veneto region. It measures 246 cm. in length and the steel head is 59 cm. long. The blade is thin but rigid because of the strong central rib. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 25.135.9. Fig. 149. Military fork, or Sturmgabel, Austrian, early 16th century. The fork has a tang inserted into the top of the shaft which is prevented from breaking by the presence of a wide metal retaining band surrounding that portion of the shaft. Courtesy of the Museums of the City of Vienna, inv. no. 410. Fig. 150. A Vouge française of about 1500, on what may be the original shaft. Note the heavy gauge of the steel blade. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 14.25.272. Fig. 151. Massive vouge française, showing decorative nails in the upper shaft. Early 16th century. Private collection. Fig. 152. Couteau de brèche, or Couse, end of the 15th century, with nailed-on langets. Note the thin flat blade. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 14.25.260.

xxii

list of illustrations

Fig. 153. A sturdy but roughly made weapon of the early 16th century, somewhat between a Vouge and a Couteau de brèche. It has what would be unique for either of these weapons: a beak. From the old arsenal of the City of Vienna. Courtesy of the Museums of the City of Vienna, inv. no. 126094. Fig. 154. A “Gusy”—a late 16th century weapon delivered in substantial numbers to the armory in Graz by Peter Schreckeisen. The word relates to “couse”, but the blade is really a vouge française, thus blurring the distinction. Coutesy of the Landeszeughaus, Landesmuseum Joanneum, Graz. Fig. 155a. Trabantenkuse of the Archducal guard of Ferdinand, King of Bohemia (1617), King of Hungary (1618) and Emperor (1619). It has an overall length of 2.53 m. (8 ft. 4 in.). Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 14.25.383. Fig. 155b. Trabantenkuse (also called Gardekuse) of the Emperor Ferdinand I of Austria. Courtesy of the Hofjagd- und Rüstkammer of the Kunsthistorisches Museun, Vienna, inv. no. A 673. Fig. 156. War scythe, 16th to 17th century. Note the rough workmanship and the crude punched decorative pattern on the blade. One of a great number still preserved. Courtesy of the Landesmuseum in Zurich. Fig. 157. Special war scythe for cutting ships’ rigging or other rope fastenings. From one of the Caesar Tapestries. Courtesy of the Historical Museum of Berne. Fig. 158. Jedburgh staff, 15th to 16th century. Note the resemblance to 14th century halberds and the prominent hook replacing the beak of a halberd, and welded to the upper eye. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 29.156.10. Fig. 159. Lochaber axe, 16th to 17th century. It is distinguished from the Jedburgh staff by the more crescent-shaped blade, smaller lower “eye” and the hook that is mostly inserted by a tang into the top of the shaft. The lower eye has been modified into two ear-like lobes that are nailed to the front of the shaft, and a full length anterior langet is present. Courtesy of the Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto. Inv. no. 925.49.9. Fig. 160. Doloir or wagoner’s axe of ca. 1500–1550. Note the heavy hammer head and the broad offset blade with punched decorations and initialed cartouches. The blade measures 44 cm. (17 in.) in length. Private collection. Fig. 161. Detail of a woodcut by Albrecht Altdorfer out of the series “The Triumphal Procession of the Emperor Maximilian”, 1517, showing a short shafted doloir carried by a non-combatant accompanying a wagon train, who is probably a carpenter trained in wagon repair. Private collection.

FOREWORD Walter J. Karcheski, Jr.

Of the wide array of medieval European and Renaissance weaponry the category comprised of those arms with offensive elements affixed to poles of various lengths is the one of which there has been the least research and publication. Variously known as polearms, hafted, shafted or staff weapons, these form an extremely varied, historically important and intriguing family of arms. These include the spear, perhaps the oldest of all of Man’s offensive weapons, with roots that date back half a million years, and which in one form or another has been used almost universally the world over. Despite this great potential interest and historical importance, the study and publication of European staff weapons has lagged greatly when compared to that of other weapons, especially as regards those works published in the English language. Even in his monumental, five-volume magnum opus, A Record of European Armour and Arms through Seven Centuries, Sir Guy F. Laking devoted only two quite modest chapters to his study of the weapons. In the mid-1930s Charles Buttin prepared a series of important articles for the Musée de l’Armée in Paris. While these covered many of the weapons and provided much useful information that drew upon a number of primary sources, Buttin’s articles were not wellillustrated, were available only via a limited circulation, and were published only in French. Since the nineteenth century many articles have appeared in the specialist literature of arms and armor journals and periodicals. However, these tended to focus on single types of staff weapons, often focusing on a single aspect of their history, or military use. Such articles were largely in languages other than English, limiting their value and usefulness to many contemporary readers, who are also often without ready access to these relatively obscure and often hard-to-find works. In more recent years there has been only the occasional, limited monographic study, and the only attempt at a serious overall survey, Mario Troso’s Le armi in asta delle fanterie europee (1000–1500), was written in Italian, and hard to obtain. Some historians also appear to have considered staff weapons to be of secondary interest. This was perhaps due to the fact that with few exceptions, they were not “knightly” arms, and thus were perceived as less worthy of serious study. However, the role and importance of certain staff weapons such as the halberd and the long spear or pike in the rebirth of professional infantry forces in Europe during the fifteenth, sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries has been long recognized. This makes the need for a sound, Englishlanguage monographic study of European medieval and Renaissance staff weapons even more critical. The fact that staff weapons were for the most part the arms of the common foot soldier, and sometimes of irregular troops or even the peasantry, adds to the complexity of their study. A particular weapon might be referred to by several names, or erroneously associated with another type, with the error perpetuated by generations of students and scholars. Over the years many collectors and students of military history, and some Englishspeaking arms historians have expressed their desire to see the subject dealt with in detail in the form of a monographic study, and the fog of misunderstanding and misinformation lifted. Dr. Waldman is the first to have taken on the task head-on. He has drawn upon the best of the secondary source literature, but most importantly, the primary sources,

xxiv

foreword

both written and artistic, and coupled this with his extensive personal knowledge of the actual weapons themselves. He has consulted with curators and collectors internationally, and visited the major (and some minor) public collections in the Americas and in Europe. Many of the reference sources and images of the arms in use are little-known outside of specialist circles, or have never been examined in this context. As evidenced in the chapters of this well-researched, well-written and extensively illustrated book, he has, for many readers, “lifted the veil” of the lack of knowledge of the development, manufacture and use, and the period nomenclature of a great many staff weapons. He modestly states that his is not the definitive work on the subject. Nonetheless, this important book will prove of considerable value and interest not only to collectors of antique arms and armor, but also to social and military historians, those interested in the historical technology of metalworking, and art scholars of the medieval through Early Modern periods. Focusing on the “golden age” of staff weapons—those centuries of the Later Middle Ages until the dawn of the seventeenth century—Hafted Weapons in Medieval and Renaissance Europe will be a valuable reference work to libraries, museums and a range of audiences. Walter J. Karcheski, Jr. Chief Curator of Arms and Armor Frazier Historical Arms Museum Louisville, Kentucky, USA

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am deeply indebted to a large number of people for their help and encouragement. Among them are, Jürg A. Meier, conservator and curator of the collection of the castle of Grandson, Arms and Armor expert for Sotheby’s Zürich and formerly of Galerie Fischer in Lucerne, whose scholarship is well known and who has provided me with valuable information on early pieces, and taken the time to read and critique the manuscript, Donald J. La Rocca and Stuart Pyhrr of the Metropolitan Museum of Art for their tireless cooperation and permission to examine the non-exhibited staff weapons at the museum, and especially to Mr. La Rocca for his highly constructive comments and criticism on this project, as well as his material contribution of articles and for facilitating the use of photographic material for the book. I am beholden to him also for proofreading portions of the manuscript, and adding his very helpful and sobering comments. Ian Eaves, whom I met through Mr. La Rocca, is a storehouse of information and encouragement. Dirk Breiding, also of the Metropolitan Museum was responsible for the connection with Brill Publishers and supplied me with art references with which I was not familiar. Claude Blair, whom I had the great pleasure of meeting, pointed me towards some important reference sources that I was unaware of. The kindness of Matthias Senn of the Landesmuseum in Zurich, in allowing me to examine and photograph the wonderful early pieces in the collection, is very much appreciated. I wish to thank Marianne Berchtold, the curator of the weapons collection in the Historical Museum of Bern for her time and cooperation, also Franz Egger, curator of arms and armor of the Historical Museum of Basel, for permission to examine and photograph groundfinds in storage; and particularly Martin Sauter, restorer in the Basel museum, for his time and patience in locating the off-site items, and finding archival photographs with their histories. The kindness and continued cooperation of Franziska Heuss in the Kupferstich Kabinet of the Öffentliche Kunstsammlung Basel is much appreciated, as is that of Dr. Marco A.R. Leutenegger, director of the Museum Altes Zeughaus in Solothurn and his permission to use the museum’s photographs produced by its restorer and photographer. It was a great pleasure to meet and talk with Dr. Sylvia Mattl-Wurm of the Historische Museum der Stadt Wien through whose efforts I was able to see and photograph parts of the vast collection in storage (with the help of the custodian, Herr Gapp). Dr. Günter Düriegl, the director of the museum was instrumental in connecting me with Dr. Mattl. Thanks also to Dr. Christian Beaufort-Spontin, the director of the Hofjagd- und Rüstkammer in Vienna for his suggestion to contact Matthias Pfaffenbichler, curator in the same institution, who shared his knowledge and the museum’s inventory with me. I appreciated the cooperation of Dr. M.L. Schaller of the Zentralbibliothek Luzern, whom I persuaded to send me its photograph of a page of the Diebold Schilling Chronicle. Dr. Alfred Geibig, director of the Veste Coburg, although not personally present, had the kindness to ask Mr. Wernhofer, the museum’s restorer to host me during my visit. K. Corey Keeble, curator of Western Art and Culture at the Royal Ontario museum in Toronto, was most kind, helpful and encouraging. Ms. Carla Pirani of the Gabinetto dei Disegni e delle Stampe in Bologna gave me her time in locating original engravings containing staff weapons. Mr. Jonathan Cotton, curator of prehistory at the Museum of London, suggested relevant sources for Bronze Age “halberds.” Mr. Walter Karcheski formerly of the Higgins Armory Museum in Worcester, and currently

xxvi

acknowledgements

chief curator of the Frazier Historical Arms Museum in Louisville, Kentucky, opened the Worcester collection for me, and gave his valuable time and comments, and introduced me (by letter) to Dr. Peter Krenn, director of the Landeszeughaus Graz, who was most cooperative during my visit there. To him also, I owe special thanks for reading the final manuscript for the Leiden, Netherlands publishing house, Brill, and offering invaluable advice and numerous corrections. Mr. Julian Deahl, Senior Acquisitions Editor for Brill, was the first to take interest in my work, and Mrs. Marcella Mulder, Assistant Editor, was kind enough to walk me through the lengthy publication process. Ms. Barbara Edsall, registrar of the Higgins Armory Museum in Worcester, kindly supplied me with an important photograph and information. Mr. Kent dur Russell, director of the Higgins, was most cooperative as was Dr. Jeffrey Forgeng, its curator. Ms. Sue Reid and Ms. Page Hamilton of the department of prints and drawings in the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston were helpful in locating relevant prints for my use. Father Sigisbert, the librarian of the Benedictine cloister library in Engelberg, Canton Obwald, Switzerland, located codex 339 for me and permitted the reproduction of illustrations from it. In the Scandinavian countries, Mr. Nils Drejholt, curator of Arms and Armor at the Livrustkammaren in Stockholm was gracious with his time, information on Swedish arms manufacturing and photographs, as was Ms. Nina Heins in the department of photography for producing new ones. Mr. Fred Sandstedt of the Armémuseum also in Stockholm provided printed materials, information on military history and files on the collection, which was temporarily closed for restoration. I could not avail myself of Mr. Bengt Kylsberg’s offer to visit the collection at Skokloster Castle for lack of time. In Copenhagen, Ms. Åse Højlund Nielsen, curator of the medieval collection at the Danish Nationalmuseet, helped me obtain photos of an unusual weapon in that collection. Mr. Michael Hielscher, director of the Tøjhusmuseet in Copenhagen, arranged in his absence, access to staff weapons, and permission to use a photograph in this book. Magister Karin Leitner of the Alte Galerie in the Joanneum in Graz helped me secure an important photograph. Ms. Francesca Consagra, curator of prints and drawings at Vassar College provided material for my use. Mr. Ian Ashdown of the Center for Restoration and Conservation, in his capacity as restorer for the collection in the Castle of Grandson, kindly showed me the weapons in the storage area and the main collection. A debt of gratitude is due to my friend Evelyne Tiersky, who translated letters, discussed the text and made it more readable. My friend Dr. George Snook is partly responsible for the inspiration to write this book, and has never failed in the early days, to prod me into activity when I have lagged. His wife, Lee, was of help in locating books and articles in libraries both near and far. Christine Pratt, of Dark Horse Photographics, developed and printed many of the black and white photos. Last but not least, the book would surely not have been acceptable for publication without the careful editing by both Walter Karcheski (as I previously mentioned), and Dr. Kate Sampsell, whose commands of the English language, composition and history are profound.

INTRODUCTION

This book deals primarily with the origins of hafted weapons and their development during the expansionist and turbulent period in European history shortly after the turn of the first millennium. Some of the facts relevant to this period can be summarized, if only in a brief way, leaving out specific political-historical references and emphasizing the social and demographic ones. Geopolitical changes during the period under discussion were rapid in the small and not-so-small dynastic states, while population sizes, despite natural setbacks such as reduction by wars, the plague, and adverse climatic changes, were increasing. For example, the population of the Helvetic tribes in what is now Switzerland doubled between the early and late Middle Ages, from about 400,000 in the tenth century to 800,000 in the fourteenth.1 It is at this time that major efforts of intentional primeval deforestation were occurring, and the resulting emergence of farmlands with their increased food supply, along with increased utilization of the mining of ores as well as the improvement of trade routes, helped to bring about these population growths and related migrations. One finds already at about 1100 A.D. a rapidly improving infrastructure for travel, that is, reasonably good roads that were physically safe from natural hazards in the mountains, bridges to cross torrents, rivers, and chasms, and an evolving system of hostels and taverns for comfort. These amenities decreased the high risk of traveling, especially for traders and merchants. The newfound advantages were, however, somewhat offset by the institutions of tolls initially set up to pay for improvements made, and soon corrupted by the local lords or landowners as a means of monetary gains, with often no actual improvements being made. Companies of bandits and armed robbers from all levels of social life also constituted an ever-present danger to tradesmen, travelers and pilgrims on these routes. In short, where in the early middle ages cities, towns, and hamlets were relatively isolated, separated by vast forests, rivers, and mountains that were difficult to traverse, a few hundred years later, with significant reductions of those barriers, trading prospered. In the late Middle Ages; circa 1400, the inhabitants of these rural and urban centers could now count on an adequate food supply from the new farmlands created out of forests that now produced opportunities for both agriculture and animal husbandry. Central Europe had at last undergone the same changes that the classical world had, more than a millennium before, and as a consequence of these changes, Europeans could look from the problems of subsistence to those of expansion and might. The major urban centers of the late middle ages began to accumulate vast wealth for their ruling classes, who, impressed with their own power, expressed their greed for expansion with military campaigns against neighboring states. One of the most typical examples of such expansionist desire occurred in the latter part of the fifteenth century in the duchy of Burgundy under one of the richest men in the world; Charles the Bold. What Charles tried and failed to do by armed conquest, his son-in-law Maximilian did by politically advantageous marriages. Maximilian was far more successful than Charles in accumulating territory, despite the fact that he was constantly at war and on the verge of bankruptcy.

1

Meyer, W., Hirsebrei und Hellebarde, Walter-Verlag, A.G., Olten, 1985, p. 42.

2

introduction

The political maneuvers typified by Charles’ and Maximilian’s ambitions necessitated the use of armed force: in the period under discussion, Europe in one location or another, was almost constantly at war. The empires of Alexander the Great and Charlemagne attest to the fact that warfare and military conquest were not new to Europe, but that in the early part of the second millennium, technology had reached a somewhat greater degree of sophistication and craft in which the development of arms and armor was no mean part. The war machine had evolved by circa 1350 from the pre-medieval and medieval form of feudalism where landed knights had been led by nobility who had little regard, if not utter contempt, for the concept of a peasant infantry—to one in the later middle ages powered mainly by a respected infantry. That infantry model provides the framework of this book; it discusses the weapons most favored, and found most effective, by the foot soldier. As the importance of the infantry increased, the peasant foot soldier and his weapons, specifically staff weapons, eclipsed the sword-and lance-wielding knightly horseman. The book also concerns itself with not only the staff weapons’ impact on the structure of armies, but also with their use and forms, and relies on the study of the surviving objects, as well as texts and illustrations found in chronicles, manuscripts, and books. As with many other objects throughout history, cultural artifacts change with time as society itself changes. The purpose, and therefore the significance of staff weapons, was modified continuously from their inception throughout their rise and decline. During the latter period, most of the weapons became ceremonial, that is, symbolic; they are known for their decoration and the great variety. These surviving and mostly late forms are in modern times much publicized and prized for their artistry and visual impact, both by collectors and museums. They are not, however, the subject of this book, which will focus on the often confusing nomenclature, military significance, techniques of manufacture, and above all chronological development of staff weapons, especially halberds, where this is discernible, in the period up to circa 1650. By far the greatest difficulty, in writing a book of this sort, is the association of a weapons’ name to a given illustration. That is to say that manuscript or other illustrations, almost never have an accompanying text to identify or describe the particular weapon in question. It is usually by the association of known historical facts with a contemporary illustration, and series of similar illustrations that the rational identification of a given arm is made. Even the best descriptions in the modern literature on staff weapons are usually not specific enough to make positive identification, and often a work will add what previous authors consider synonyms at the end, thus muddying the waters even more. When a reasonable association has been made, as is attempted in this book, one can then work both forward and backward, relying on specific changes in the weapon’s morphology that are expected, knowing general stylistic trends, and the related history. Using this methodology, the book tries to be as specific as possible. Past works are quoted not merely because they are in print, but to make a point and to extract from them significant observations. Only the most widely used types of weapons are discussed. Many subtypes exist, which are not really insignificant, but found limited use in battle, and lack the military importance of the major weapons which comprise the greatest volume in this work. So, for instance, the sponton-halberd which is a very late combination of a diminutive partisan and a halberd, having use only in the military ranking system of the seventeenth century and later, is given little more than mention, as it has no real combative use, and as with all other staff weapons of that period, had become obsolete in the field of battle.

introduction

3

The arms that will be discussed most fully, are those used by the Swiss. This has two reasons; the first is that Swiss hafted arms have been the principal focus of personal studies for many years. The second is that because of their particular political and geographic history, the Swiss were at their greatest power using these arms against their continuously invasive neighbors, the Habsburgs (as well as, early on, against each other), and much of the development of some of the most important types of staff weapons occurred in this very centrally located part of Europe. One must not, however, think of “Swiss” in the modern concept; as in the formative years of the confederation that we are dealing with, these tribes were anything but homogeneous, either geographically or politically, and often sections (cantons) of the modern country were on opposite sides of the strife. The nuclear states of the later nation, bound together by a treaty in 1291, added on additional states for mutual protection over several centuries. In theory, at least, a critical survey of all extant staff weapons in the world would find no two to be identical, minor variations being evident in weapons even from the same workshops. If this sounds unreasonable, it should be remembered that all weapons of this period were literally hand made, portions by master craftsmen, parts by apprentices or journeymen, in workshops perhaps within one city, or perhaps hundreds of miles apart. Countless small towns throughout Europe have small exhibitions in town halls or local museums dealing with local history and mostly but not always using archaeological finds. Those near castles, ruined or not, as well as those near sites of battles, or on the banks of rivers are even more likely to have excavated ground or river finds of, among other things, weapons. Although many of these weapons have been published, there is as yet no mechanism by which these objects can be collated and studied as a group. One would have to spend years traveling to see them all. The author has not gone to this length, of course, but has made an effort to personally examine as many as possible of these lesser-known but often very important examples. Early specimens in private collections are important also, but are often inaccessible and their origins are mostly obscure; doubtless they are not much more than a fraction of the material in the collective town exhibits. The length of chapters in this book is an indication of the assessment of both the importance of the weapon, and of the amount of surviving documentary evidence, including contemporary pictorial material. This is not to say that other weapons were not important, just that there is less available evidence concerning them, as well as fewer of the surviving arms themselves. They may have been dropped from use, or been converted, with changes, into guard or parade arms. Their importance in civil life is enhanced however, because they often became a vehicle for the decorative arts, involving masters of not only crafts such as goldsmithing, but also of the arts of engraving, damascening, etching and silver inlay—often on blue black metallic ground.2 Some of these masters; Daniel Hopfer of Augsburg for example, were also skilled in the graphic arts on paper. The principal weapon discussed is the halberd, because it—in conjunction with the longspear (“Langspiess” in German) was one of the primary weapons used by the armies involved in the wide-ranging shifts of power that occurred across Europe between 1250 2 Niello; a technique dating back to the Romans and consisting of mostly linear decoration of metallic surfaces using both physical and complex chemical procedures, appears in Turkey and Russia in the period under discussion. Axes decorated with the Niello technique are present in the State Armoury of the Kremlin in Moscow.

4

introduction

and 1550. Firearms, to be sure, which were developing during the last half of this time period, overshadowed hafted weapons by the mid-sixteenth century, although longspears in a somewhat shortened version, at this time known as pikes, were used in the early seventeenth century to protect the marksmen during the reloading maneuver. Conservatives, nonetheless clung tenaciously to the belief that hafted arms as well as some other non-firearms should be stocked in the town arsenals, and so in present times we see some strange bedfellows in surviving arsenals such as in Graz, Austria and Solothurn, Switzerland: halberds of a fourteenth century form alongside longspears of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries 5 meters (16 feet) in length, matchlocks, wheellocks, flintlock pistols, and long arms of various periods, not to mention mail shirts and armor whose dates of manufacture span more than a hundred years. This all to our good fortune, as in so many other instances, intentional destruction of outdated or “archaic” objects deemed useless, occurs, and we are left only with pictorial and occasional written references to those objects. Documentary evidence by such persons as ambassadors and other observers exists, to what would appear to be large numbers of specialized weapons. Nicolo di Savri, the Italian ambassador to England, noted in 1513 that 12,000 holy water sprinklers were carried by the English at that time. Whether indeed such large numbers of this now rarely found weapon did exist, is a matter of conjecture, as we can assume that no matter how impressed di Savri was, he did not actually count those weapons personally. Where we find greater accuracy is in the logbooks of the arsenals and in town records, as these weapons had to be paid for, and the books balanced.3 Other difficulties encountered in accurately describing weapons and their variations include the liberties a given artist takes with his subject matter (not to mention the bias in interpreting, say, the outcome of a given battle, or the guilt or innocence of a well known and influential person), and the degree of artistic skill, or the span of time elapsed between the episode depicted and the execution of the work of art. One can, however, draw rational conclusions after having studied enough of an artist’s oeuvre, and by knowing in whose employ or under whose patronage the artist worked. Identification of the precise form of a weapon and tying it to a date may indeed place it close to the time and place where a weapons smith created it, but this analysis cannot be performed on the basis of merely finding it in a dated illustration. Weapons of a given form may not only be manufactured unchanged over a very long period of time during which newer forms are also being made, most likely by other workshops; but much older forms may persist as well. Dating is therefore a difficult matter and it should be understood that this book attempts to tie in the form with its earliest appearance, unless otherwise noted. A survey of various works of art shows that artists sometimes accurately depict weapon forms some 100 years or so apart in design, as being used, at the same time.4 That is, they can; but just as often they do not, and depict historical events from remote times as if they were happening in the latest style of their own time. This lack of historical and stylistic perspective is readily understood when one realizes that printed matter was scarce

3 Many such logbooks or inventories of arsenals survive. A few examples are: the inventories of the Archduke Ferdinand of Tyrolia of 1555, 1583, 1593, and 1596 (the last three under his son Ferdinand II). The 1485 inventory of the Vienna city arsenal (the oldest one) records all purchases since 1424 and was periodically updated, as were those of Graz and Zurich. 4 See for instance fig. 18.

introduction

5

and concerned itself mainly with religious, philosophical and moral issues—and hardly with issues of style. The whole concept of style and art history is relatively modern. There is however, a slow progression in stylistic accuracy by the seventeenth century; examples to point to are some the Biblical works of Rembrandt in which pale robes clothe the figures in the manner of the near East, but more often than not, seventeenth century styles are seen on important figures to indicate wealth or prominence, and military clothing and weapons are either sketchy and vague or more frequently distinctly sixteenth or seventeenth century. The etching “Ecce Homo” of 1635, also known as “Christ before Pilate” is an example of this. It is decidedly Oriental in character, and this is explained by the fact that Rembrandt had studied the world of Orientalism both from books such as by the historian Flavius Josephus, and by old pictorial representations that he had access to. Thus the artist-scholar begins to incorporate history into art, which in turn depicts history. As this material is put together, it appears that there are more unanswered questions and speculation than one would wish, but the work does hopefully serve as a foundation for future research and amplification.

%1.174
2.#6'5

(KI

5ECXGPIKPI
VJG
DCVVNGjGNF
HQT
CTOQT
CPF
YGCRQPU
YKVJ
KPjIJVKPI
NQYGT
TKIJV
(TQO
C
RCPGN
RCKPVKPI
QH
VJG
XKEVQT[
QH
.QWKU
VJG
)TGCV
QXGT
VJG
5GTDU
6WTMU!
EC

D[
VJG
/CUVGT
QH
VJG
8QVKXG
2CPGN
QH
5V
.CODGTV
*CPU
XQP
6ÃDKPIGP
%NQKUVGT
QH
5V
.CODGTV
PQY
FKURNC[GF
KP
VJG
5VGKGTOCTMKUEJGU
.CPFGUOWUGWO
,QCPPGWO
#NVG
)CN GTKG
)TC\
0QVG
VJG
UJCTRGPGF
GZVGPUKQP
QH
VJG
RQNG
CDQXG
VJG
WRRGT
G[G
QH
VJG
JCNDGTF
KP
VJG
TKIJV
HQTGITQWPF
CPF EQORCTG
YKVJ
jI

%QWTVGU[
QH
VJG
%NQKUVGT
CPF
VJG
#NVG
)CNGTKG
)TC\

(KI

2CIG

QH
VJG
g
9CHHGPDWEJg
QH
*CPU
&½TKPI

0QVG
VJG
EJTQPQNQIKECN
FKURCTKV[
DGVYGGP
VJG
CTOU
CPF
CTOQT
QH
VJG
QNF
OCP
QP
VJG
NGHV
CPF
VJG
UQNFKGTU
QP
VJG
TKIJV
0QVG
CNUQ
VJG
NGCVJGT
YTCRRGF UJCHV
QH
VJG
NQPI
URGCT
CU
YGNN
CU
VJG
fECRRGFg
UJCHV
QH
VJG
JCNDGTF
QP
VJG
TKIJV
2TKXCVG
EQNNGEVKQP

(KI

)GTOCP
.CPFUMPGEJVU
CPF
VJGKT
ECRVCKP
YKVJ
EJTQPQNQIKECNN[
JQOQIGPGQWU
CTOU
CPF
CTOQT
KP VJG
f-TKGIUQTFPWPIg
QH

D[
*CPU
&½TKPI
2TKXCVG
EQNNGEVKQP

(KI

#
)GTOCP
.CPFUMPGEJV
KP
VJG
YCPKPI
[GCTU
QH
VJKU
RTQHGUUKQP
ECTT[KPI
C
JCNDGTF
KP
VJG
f-TKGIU QTFPWPIg
QH

D[
*CPU
&½TKPI
2TKXCVG
EQNNGEVKQP

(KI

f$GVTC[CN
CPF
#TTGUV
QH
%JTKUVg
2UCNVGT
)GTOCP[
GCTN[
VQ
OKF
VJKTVGPVJ
EGPVWT[
/5
.CV

HQNKQ

XGTUQ
0QVG
VJG
fJCNDGTFg
KP
VJG
JCPFU
QH
VJG
UQNFKGT
QP
VJG
NGHV
TGUGODNKPI
VJG
QPGU
KP
$GTP
CPF $CUGN
jIU

CPF

%QWTVGU[
QH
VJG
$KDNKQVJ°SWG
0CVKQPCNG
2CTKU

(KI

f$GVTC[CN
CPF
#TTGUV
QH
%JTKUVg
6T°U
$GNNGU
*GWTGU
FG
0QVTG
&COG

(TCPEG
0QVG
VJCV
VJG
NGHV
JCNDGTF
CNVJQWIJ
TGUGODNKPI
VJG
QPG
KP
VJG
5V
.CODGTV
RCPGN
jI

KU
OQTG
UNGPFGT
CPF
JCU
PQ
UJCTRGPGF
CPF
RTQVTWFKPI
YQQFGP
UJCHV
CV
VJG
WRRGT
GPF
6JGUG
HQTOU
EQGZKUV
YKVJ
VJG
OQTG
fFGXGNQRGFg
HQTOU
UWEJ
CU
KP
jI
%QWTVGU[
QH
VJG
$KDNKQVJ°SWG
0CVKQPCNG
2CTKU
/5
0QWX
#ES
.CV

HQNKQ
 TGEVQ

(KI

2CTVKCN
XKGY
QH
VJG
5YKUU
CTO[
KP
VJG
NCTIG
YQQFEWV
f&QTPGEM
g

0QVG
VJG
RTQHWUKQP
QH
f5GORCEJg V[RG
JCNDGTFU
YKVJ
VJG
URKMG
RQKPV
KP
HTQPV
QH
VJG
UJCHV
CZKU
%QWTVGU[
QH
VJG
-WRHGTUVKEJMCDKPGV
$CUGN

(KI

6JTWUVKPI
YKVJ
VJG
JCNDGTF
URKMG
QH
C
YGCRQP
EQPVGORQTCT[
YKVJ
VJG
YQQFEWV
f&QTPGEM
g %QWTVGU[
QH
VJG
-WRHGTUVKEJMCDKPGVV
$CUGN

(KI

f&QTPGEM
g
6JTWUVKPI
YKVJ
C
JCNDGTF
%QWTVGU[ QH
VJG
-WRHGTUVKEJMCDKPGVV
$CUGN

(KI

f&QTPGEM
g
1XGTJGCF
UYKPI
YKVJ
C
JCN DGTF
%QWTVGU[
QH
VJG
-WRHGTUVKEJMCDKPGVV
$CUGN

(KI

f&QTPGEM
g
5KFGUYKPI
YKVJ
C
JCNDGTF
CPF
FGECRK VCVKQP
%QWTVGU[
QH
VJG
-WRHGTUVKEJMCDKPGVV
$CUGN

(KI

9GNF
UGCO
QH
NQYGT
G[G
QH
TKIJV
UKFG
QH
DNCFG
QP
VJG
JCNDGTF
KP
jI

CHVGT
VJG
DTC\KPI
TGRCKT
VQ
ENQUG
KV
6JG
HCKPV
UETCVEJ
OCTMU
QP
VJG
DNCFG
CPF
UGCO
CTGC
CTG
PQV
QNF
%QWTVGU[
QH
VJG
/GVTQRQNK VCP
/WUGWO
QH
#TV
KPX
PQ


(KI

4KIJV
JCPF
RCIG
QH
f6JG
$CVVNG
QH
)TCPFUQP
g
HTQO
VJG
&KGDQNF
5EJKNNKPI
.WEGTPG
%JTQPKENG
QH

HQNKQ

#U
UVCVGF
KP
VJG
VGZV
CTOCOGPVCVKQP
KU
YKVJ
VJ
CPF
VJ
EGPVWT[
GSWKROGPV
VJQWIJ
UQOG
QH
VJG
JCNDGTFU UJQYP
CTG
GXGP
GCTNKGT
%QWTVGU[
QH
VJG
-QTRQTCVKQPU
8GTYCNVWPI
FGT
5VCFV
.W\GTP

(KI

*WIG
JGCF
YQWPF
QP
C
HCNNGP
)GTOCP
+ORGTKCN
UQNFKGT
OQUV
NKMGN[
ECWUGF
D[
C
JCNDGTF
(TQO
VJG
YQQFEWV
f&QTPGEM
g
%QWTVGU[
QH
VJG
-WRHGTUVKEJMCDKPGVV $CUGN

(KI

#PQVJGT
FGVCKN
QH
VJG
YQQFEWV
f&QTPGEM
g
FWTKPI
VJG
DCVVNG
UJQYKPI
JQY
SWKEMN[
DQFKGU
YGTG
UVTKRRGF
DWV
YKVJ
RQUUKDNG
GZCIIGTCVKQP
QH
VJG
PWODGT
QH KPLWTKGU
UWHHGTGF

%QWTVGU[
QH
VJG
-WRHGTUVKEJMCDKPGVV
$CUGN

(KI

(TQO
HQNKQ

TGEVQ
QH
VJG
/CEKGLQYUMK
$KDNG
6JG
UQNFKGT
CV
VJG
NGHV
DQTFGT
ECTTKGU
C
TGNCVKXGN[
UJQTVUJCHVGF
fINCKXGg
%QWTVGU[
QH
VJG
2KGTRQPV
/QTICP
.KDTCT[ /



(KI

(TQO
HQNKQ

XGTUQ
QH
VJG
/CEKGLQYUMK
$KDNG
6JG
OQWPVGF
jIWTG
KP
VJG
EGPVGT
HQTGITQWPF
,QUJWC
KU
WUKPI
C
UJQTVUJCHVGF
fINCKXGg
%QWTVGU[
QH
VJG 2KGTRQPV
/QTICP
.KDTCT[
/


(KI

6YQ
MPKIJVU
jIJVKPI
CV
ENQUG
SWCTVGTU
YKVJ
C
XQWIG
(TCP¯CKUG
CPF
C
INCKXG
0QVG
VJG
TQWPFGNU
CV
VJG
DNCFG
DCUGU
HQT
RTQVGEVKPI
VJG
JCPFU
(TQO
VJG
%CGUCT
VCRGUVT[
EC

VCMGP
CU
DQQV[
HTQO
VJG
$WTIWPFKCP
ECOR
KP

%QWTVGU[
QH
VJG
*KUVQTKUEJGU
/WUGWO $GTP
KPX
PQ


(KI
C
&GVCKN
QH
VJG
HTQPV
ECTXKPI
QP
VJG
%QWTVTCK
%JGUV
UJQYKPI
VJG
(NGOKUJ
DWTIGTU
ECT T[KPI
VJGKT
UVCHH
YGCRQPU
'ODENTACS
QT
0LAN ONSÌ0ICOT
YKVJ
YJKEJ
VJG[
FGHGCVGF
VJG
(TGPEJ
EJKXCNT[
%QWTVGU[
QH
VJG
9CTFGP
CPF
5EJQNCTU
QH
0GY
%QNNGIG
1ZHQTF
CPF
$TKFIGOCP
#TV .KDTCT[
+PVGTPCVKQPCN

(KI

#P
CNN
UVGGN
JGCFGF
OQTIGPUVGTP
KP
VJG
JCPFU
QH
C
kGGKPI
UQNFKGT
KP
#TKQ XKUVWU U
CTO[
,WNKWU
%CGUCT
KU
VJG
OQWPVGF
MPKIJV
KP
VJG
WRRGT
NGHV
EQTPGT
URGCTKPI
CP
QRRQPGPV
&GVCKN
HTQO
VJG
%CGUCT
VCRGUVTKGU
QH
%JCTNGU
VJG
$QNF
%QWTVGU[
QH VJG
*KUVQTKUEJGU
/WUGWO
$GTP
KPX
PQ


(KI

&GVCKN
QH
VJG
%CGUCT
VCRGUVT[
KP
VJG
*KUVQTKECN
/WUGWO
QH
$GTP
CFLCEGPV
VQ
VJG
MORGENSTERN
KP
jI

6JG
MPKIJV
UYKPIU
C
fOQTFCZVg
DGCTKPI
C
TQWPFGN
IWCTF
YJKEJ
FQGU
PQV
CRRGCT
VQ
DG
UVGGN
NGCVJGT!
%QWTVGU[
QH
VJG
*KUVQTKUEJGU
/WUGWO $GTP
KPX
PQ


(KI

&GVCKN
QH
VJG
YQQFEWV
f&QTPGEM
g
UJQYKPI
C
XGVGTCP
5YKUU
UQNFKGT
UYKPIKPI
C
UJQTV
XGTUKQP
QH
C
fHWUUUVTGKVCZVg
+V
ECPPQV
RTQRGTN[
DG
ECNNGF
C
fHWUUUVTGKVCZVg
GXGP
VJQWIJ
KV
JCU
C
JCOOGT
KP
DCEM
QH
VJG
DNCFG
DGECWUG
QH
KVU
NGPIVJ
YJKEJ
CRRGCTU
VQ
DG
QPN[
C
OGVGT


KP
QT
UQ
%QWTVGU[
QH
VJG
-WRHGTUVKEJMCDKPGVV
$CUGN

(KI

&GVCKN
QH
CP
CNVCTRKGEG
D[
&KGTKE
$QWVU
QH
CDQWV

UJQYKPI
VJG
fVCMKPI
QH
%JTKUVg
0QVG
VJG
YGCRQP
VQ
VJG
TKIJV
QH
VJG
kCOKPI
VQTEJ
YJKEJ
KU
CNOQUV
KFGPVKECN
VQ
VJG
%QRGPJCIGP YGCRQP
KP
jI
C
CPF
D
%QWTVGU[
QH
VJG
#NVG
2KPCMQVJGM
/WPKEJ
CPF
#TVQVJGM

(KI

5RGEKCN
YCT
UE[VJG
HQT
EWVVKPI
UJKRU
TKIIKPI
QT
QVJGT
TQRG
HCUVGPKPIU
(TQO
QPG
QH
VJG
%CGUCT 6CRGUVTKGU
%QWTVGU[
QH
VJG
*KUVQTKECN
/WUGWO
QH
$GTPG
KPX
PQ


CHAPTER ONE

GENERAL BACKGROUND AND FORERUNNERS

The rudimentary spear is perhaps the simplest and earliest form of a hafted weapon, being an attempt to increase the thrusting length of the weaponed arm in combat and in the hunt. Its typology and development during the millennia of its existence need not be discussed here at length, as detailed and excellent works exist concerning this weapon.1 These weapons include the winged spears ( flügellanzen or knebelspiesse in German, epieu or espieu de guerre in French, and derived from the Latin Spiculum) that are used throughout the period under discussion, the so called Bohemian ear-spoons (fig. 1), together with their relative, the hunting spears, spiedi da caccia, jagdspiesse, epieu de chasse used mainly for boar and bear hunting well into the seventeenth century.2 Nonetheless, the spear being the first staff weapon deserves some discussion here. Beginning with the fourteenth century, the infantry spear was known as a “longspear” (Langspiess in German, Picca lunga in Italian and Pique longue in French). The English word “pike” is not used here because it refers to a later type of weapon. The first use of the word “pike” is recorded in the Oxford English Dictionary as occurring in 1511. The longspear was, from the fourteenth century on, commonly 15 to 18 feet (5 to 6 meters) in length, and its major use was as a defensive weapon. It was very effective in dense mutually supporting masses and in combination with other weapons such as halberds and axes and finally two-handed swords and firearms in combat with the old cavalry formations of the medieval and early renaissance nobility. The longspear, regardless of its length could only be used for a short forward thrust by the combatant on foot but was able, if its thrust was well directed, to reach an equestrian before being in range of his lance or other weapon. In contrast, the equestrian lance had a long and sustained forward motion and had the advantage of tremendous momentum, but one can imagine the accuracy needed to transfix a target moving tangentially and at a relatively short distance.3 The length of the lance itself was limited by the fact that it had to be held by only one hand, the other being needed to guide and control the horse. Historically, the spear was used successfully as a thrusting weapon against such bodily protection as bronze plate (Greek and Roman), leather or “cuir bouilli,” mail (from Roman

1 Ellehauge, Martin, The Spear—Traced through its Post Roman Development, Møller, Copenhagen, 1948. Oakeshott, R.E., European Weapons and Armour, Lutterworth Press, Guilford and London, 1980. Oakeshott, R.E., The Archaeology of Weapons, Lutterworth Press, London, 1960. Wegeli, R., Inventar der Waffensammlung des Bernischen Historischen Museums in Bern, III Stangenwaffen, K.J. Wyss, Erben A.G., 1939. 2 This weapon is seen not only in Bohemian illustrations, but also elsewhere in Europe. Surviving examples are diversely manufactured as well. The term is böhmischer Ohrlöffel in German and is derived from the small instrument used to clean an ear, having a stop at its base. 3 The throwing version of the spear, the javelin and pilum were all but discarded by the early middle ages, as bows and crossbows could have much more devastating effects and over much larger distances. A failed thrust might be repeated, but a failed throw was the loss of the weapon, which might indeed be used against one by the target soldier. A few javelin-like weapons continue to be seen into the sixteenth century, resembling giant arrows, and javelins were for a time the designated weapon assigned to guards protecting judges and magistrates traveling to their assizes. These “javelins” are often depicted as being thrust, rather than thrown. (See p. 61).

8

chapter one

Fig. 1. Winged spear or “Bohemian ear spoon”, ca. 1500. Note that the wings arise from the socket (see chapter 12), as opposed to the wings of partizans, which issue from the bottom of the blades. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 14.25.460.

general background and forerunners

9

to Renaissance), and “reinforced” mail (fourteenth century Europe).4 For this last function, the spear-head was long slender and quadrangular in shape, not unlike its’ dagger equivalent used to pierce mail and known as “Panzerstecher” in German. The use of the spear persisted well into the seventeenth century, not only on the battlefields, but also as the favorite weapon in the exercise of equestrian tournaments in which it took on a very specialized form and function. But, the discussion in this chapter is meant to illustrate the changes in arms and armor that led to the development of staff weapons other than spears. Suffice it to say that with other and later developed arms such as the halberd, the spear was often used side by side with them, especially in the tight formations of the Swiss during the Burgundian wars of the last half of the fifteenth century, in the Swabian War (1499), and throughout the battles of the first quarter of the sixteenth century. Thereafter hafted arms used chiefly for thrusting as well as most other hafted arms found their use limited and in decline. They were eventually replaced by firearms and by the resurgent use of the sword. Increasingly, however, with the continuous development of better and generally heavier body armor in the late fourteenth century, the spear began to lose the surety of its penetrating power, especially against plate armor. This last, a marvel in protective engineering and technology, was the culmination of refinements and experiments made over long periods of time. Plate armor provided great security against such traditional weapons as the spear and sword. This success in turn necessitated the development of new classes of weapons that would be effective against plate armor, and is only one example of the adaptation that was the chief hallmark of the ever-evolving ballet of battlefield strategy and tactics. The first of these was the cutting staff weapon (at least, certain of its subtypes), the other being the portable firearm. Success against armor-wearing opponents meant the successful penetration of that armor, which in turn depended on hitting the opponent squarely, that is, perpendicular to the plane of the protection, and even more important was the ability to “catch” into some type of channel that would guide the weapon through the armor. Most of the success of plate armor was in presenting rounded and glancing surfaces to a weapon, so that a thrust would be deflected. A more sophisticated type of weapon was needed which could not only thrust, cut and hook, but which contained such great mass and momentum was such that it could penetrate or disrupt the plate steel. Altogether staff weapons, and especially halberds, were designed with such functions in mind. Other arms, such as hammers, maces, Morgensterne (chapter 11) and various configuration of the axe family also found use against plate. All this is not to say that staff weapons are just redesigned spears. Far more so their action is linked with an axe-like weapon, although early on, their action might have been more like heavy knives. The axe is a weapon that is probably as old as the spear but has appeared somewhat less regularly throughout the ages, except perhaps during the Viking and Saxon age in Europe. In warfare it was used in conjunction with the sword and the spear; in peace, it had many uses as a tool. Whereas in the Stone Age, axe heads were hafted in the split ends of a stick and bound with hide strips (fig. 2), they were later perforated in the center and the top of the shaft was inserted through them. The rationale

4 Besides “Ailettes” (shoulder defenses, also heraldic devices), various pieces of plate armor were added gradually to the mail in the fourteenth century, in some instances even earlier, so that by the third quarter of the century the plates were contoured and articulated, and by ca. 1400, fully covered the body.

10

chapter one

of this step is of great importance in the use and efficiency of this weapon and ultimately in the design of all staff weapons. As wood is composed of longitudinally arranged fibers, its greatest strength and resistance to disruption lies in maintaining the cohesiveness of its tightly cemented cell bundles (the grain). A force directed at right angles to the grain meets the greatest resistance to rupture, whereas one directed parallel to the fibers tends to separate them. Thus the splitting of the ends of a wooden shaft to accommodate an axe head for example, even though it is intricately bound with hide or other material, breached the integrity of the cohesive fiber structure; subsequent blows tended to further disrupt the structure of the shaft. The union of axe head and shaft was far more stable and long-lived if the shaft penetrated the axe head. Whether the head was of stone, copper, bronze, or iron, these dense materials had far greater internal cohesion than wood. Each blow delivered with this design actually pressed the wood fibers together, since the head acted as a rigid band surrounding the shaft end. Later with more refined shapes, the shaft hole became eccentric, and in order to prevent inadvertent rotation of the weapon with the blow, the perforation tended to be of oval cross-section rather than round. To further the ease of penetration, the mass of the head, as well as its length, was increased, and in order to best utilize these altered dimensions, the shaft hole was moved towards the rear of the axe head, much as is seen in the modern single-bitted axe. This development was continued by increasing the size of the blade in all dimensions and by moving the shaft hole to the rim of the back of the axe head. Of course this last refinement became possible only with the use of a metal blade. Finally, the large blade, flat at the cutting edge and narrow at the junction with the shaft, was effectively joined to a ring or short tube (the “eye”), which fitted over the end of the shaft. The cutting mass was, by the time of the Bronze Age, almost universally of metal rather than stone, except for such weapons that were used for ceremonial purposes.5 These metal axes fitted on various lengths of wooden shafts were in use for long periods of time and were a favorite amongst the Norse and Saxons (fig. 3).

Iron It is necessary, in order to fully understand and appreciate the capabilities (and limitations) of staff weapons under discussion, to include a short discussion dealing with the metallurgy of iron and the process of making steel: the metal used almost exclusively at the time hafted weapon blades were being produced. Many different methods were already developed in antiquity for the hardening of iron and to produce a more-or-less flexible steel.6 Steel is, roughly speaking, iron with the addition of a small percentage of carbon. After the dissolution of the Roman Empire, the ensuing political chaos prevented the development and expansion of mining operations, so smiths found themselves re-using and re-working existing weapons, and the art of smelting ores and carbonizing iron into a desirable form of steel for weapons declined.7 Only after the ninth century did the situation

5 6 7

Such ceremonial axes are seen for example in Celtic Ireland, but also in China, made of exquisite jadeite. Davidson, H.R.E., The Sword in Anglo-Saxon England, The Boydell Press, Woodbridge, 1962 and 1996. Also known as carburizing.

general background and forerunners

11

Fig. 2. Stone age axe; the shaft and thongs are reconstructions. If used under wet conditions these thongs would tend to relax and loosen, allowing stress on the split upper shaft portion. Private collection.

Fig. 3. The mass of this large axe found near London, and possibly of Viking origin, hinges on the relatively small “eye” over the shaft making this joint unstable in a heavy blow. Lengthening the blade vertically and bringing it closer to the shaft brought with it greater stability. The guisarme, with the added feature of having the lower portion of the blade attached to the shaft, was probably a later example of such a weapon. (See chapter 14.) Courtesy of the Museum of London, inv. no. 887.

12

chapter one

begin to improve; new mines were opened and new procedures for producing steel were established. The Romans, as early as the sixth century B.C., had use of steely iron with a carbon content of between 0.1 to 1 percent, and in some cases as high as 3 to 4 percent. This iron in most instances was imported from India in two-pound blocks or cakes smelted in sealed clay crucibles and later designated “wootz.”8 Most of the local bog iron ores in Europe and England contained traces of impurities such as phosphorus that rendered the iron unsuitable for thin weapons such as sword blades but were probably suitable for axe blades. Nevertheless, Celtic iron mined in central Europe (Styria for example) was also a valuable source of high quality iron for the Romans. The smelting and forging process appears to have been performed in this region as well. Finds of the La Tène period (ca. 550 B.C.–1 A.D.) are exhibited in the Museé d’Unterlinden in Colmar, France. Here the ingots are slender, long and tapered almost to a point at each end. It appears possible that mining localities can be identified by the shape of the ingots. For example, recent excavations near the Swiss city of Liestal in the Canton Baselland unearthed, among many other artifacts, a Roman smithy in which heavy hammers, tongs, and other tools lay together. These finds are exhibited in the Cantonal museum. Two blocks of raw iron (ingots) were also found. These blocks are much larger than the Indian wootz cakes, weigh an estimated 10 kg. (22 lbs.) each, and are slightly drawn out cubes with tapered ends (fig. 4a). They are also, according to recent archaeological research, of local origin, coming from ancient iron mines in the adjacent Canton of Jura.9 The local Swiss-German name for them is “masseln.” In the Museum Ferdinandeum in Graz Austria, there are very similar ingots of raw iron (fig. 4b) dating, however, to the earlier La Tène period. Blade weapon finds of several epochs between the Roman and medieval periods have been analyzed for structure and carbon content. One such dagger revealed a complex makeup not unlike that of some of the early halberds. The soft pure iron core had a carbon content of 0.05 percent, the harder mid-portion 0.5 percent, and the cutting edge 1.8 percent. The impurities in European ores cited by Davidson as being incompatible with high quality blades had, it seems, by the eighth or ninth centuries been worked out of the iron by processing it. Bog ores containing these impurities could also have been used for iron and steel artifacts other than blades. The Swiss ores just cited are magmatic, (rock ores) as are the Styrian, Lorraine, and other sources of Merovingian to medieval ores. Many of the excellent sword and other weapon blades of this period were probably therefore of European rather than of Indian origin, including possibly the damascened ones. Specific information as to the origin of iron used for the manufacture of staff weapon blades in the periods covered by this book has not yet been found, but given the above information; it is likely that the ores used were from local sites as well. As previously mentioned, by the late thirteenth or early fourteenth centuries, steel or iron in the form of plates reinforced the quintessential mail defenses, which had formed

8 Most of the information on early iron and steel is taken from Davidson’s book (see footnote 10). She writes of the availability of Indian steel blocks in Europe as early as the sixth century B.C., and notes that they were later called “wootz.” There is no conflict with the statement by Bronson that steel made in India from the second century onward was called wootz; as it—or a similar metal, was also made earlier under a different name. Davidson’s second edition was printed and revised in 1996, well after Bronson’s article in Archeomaterials. 9 Bronson, B., “The Making and selling of Wootz, a Crucible steel of India”, Archeomaterials, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 13–51.

general background and forerunners

13

Fig. 4a. A pair of rare surviving ingots of Roman iron from Swiss mines in the Jura. They are locally called “masseln”. Courtesy of the Cantonal Museum of Baselland.

Fig. 4b. Ingots of raw iron, a ground find now in the Museum Ferdinandeum in Graz, 5th to 1st century B.C. Courtesy of the Museum Ferdinandeum.

14

chapter one

the prime defensive armor for millennia before. Mail, even though relatively heavy but extremely flexible, was vulnerable, to well-placed axe cuts and lance thrusts as well as to arrows and crossbow bolts. Plate-like additions in ever increasing sizes and shapes eventually supplanted mail; although as late as the fifteenth century or even in the early sixteenth century mail shirts or sleeves were worn under plate armor for additional protection. This plate armor, a beautifully formed series of hinged, articulated, and strapped steel plates, was significantly developed by 1350 to 1380 and essentially covered the body by ca. 1400. It could successfully stop the effects of most lance thrusts as well as sword cuts and thrusts and tended by virtue of its rounded form to deflect even most axe blows, unless they were directed at a right angle to the surface of the plate armor. It is still somewhat controversial whether plate armor could resist penetration by crossbow bolts, but it is likely that a direct hit at relatively short range would not be stopped by armor covering the extremities, as it was usually not as thick as the plate covering the chest and head (breastplate and helm). Nevertheless, a fifteenth century archer’s sallet in the historical museum in Bern evidences several crossbow bolts having penetrated the helmet. It should be noted, however, that at this time, very few foot combatants in an army would actually be using the “latest” defenses; this plate armor was very expensive and was produced at first only in relatively small numbers, largely for the titled and wealthy. Peasants recruited as infantry had, as is seen in many illustrations, simple (sometimes non-metallic) defenses and unsophisticated arms often converted from farm implements. Peasant tools were transformed massively at the time of the crusades because it would have been impossible to arm these “soldiers” with real weapons. Charles Buttin cites the conversion of such tools as fourche, faux, couteau de charrue, hache, serpe, maillet, fleau (fork, scythe, ploughshare, axe, bill-hook, mallet, flail), as well as the conversion of hunting weapons. There was a stimulus to develop new and better forms of weapons occasioned by military success in the field, such as the battle of Morgarten in 1315, where the soldiers of the newly founded Swiss confederation, using the recently introduced halberds, established their superiority over the mail-clad Hapsburg forces. This victory highlighted the staff weapons used, and probably accelerated the evolutionary process of these and other similar weapons, because the user was out of reach of the sword, mace, war hammer, or dagger often associated with the wearer of plate armor. Halberds were also used, most importantly, to complement the longspear. The effect of improvements and additions to armor during the fourteenth century was the continued development of these new weapons so as to be capable of penetrating the plate armor reinforcements, but one must again bear in mind that in any given military force only the uppermost echelons would be wearing mail and plates. The vast majority of combatants, that is the common infantry—the importance of which became increasingly apparent with the adoption of hafted weapons—would only have leather protection or parts and pieces of plundered armor. Scavenging a battlefield was the most common way for foot soldiers and peasants to acquire arms and armor. This activity is clearly seen in the foreground of the painting of ca. 1430 showing the victory of Louis The Great (1342–1382) over the Serbs (fig. 5).10 Already in a much earlier period, mail defenses, swords, shields, and helmets were obtained in this way. A lower border scene in the Bayeux tapestry, now more correctly called “embroidery,” of ca. 1070, shows, under the depiction of the death

10 In the Steiermarkisches Landesmuseum Joanneum, Abteilung Alte Galerie, on loan from the cloister of St. Lambert.

general background and forerunners

15

of King Harold, soldiers stripping mail garments from the fallen warriors and gathering up swords from the battlefield. No doubt this method of acquisition has always existed. It seems that the gathering of booty was often begun well before the end of a battle, although field commanders generally forbade this practice until its conclusion. Against these foot soldiers, staff weapons were already quite effective. There is some disagreement as to how functional fourteenth- as well as fifteenth-century weapons such as the halberd were against the new plate armor (see chapter 6); however, it is not true that the famous “hardening” of the cutting edge of halberds made them as vulnerable to shattering (like “glass”) on impact with steel armor as is generally claimed; nor is it true that the lesser weight of the early forms, as opposed to the greater weight of the fifteenth-, sixteenth- and seventeenth-century halberds, should have caused them to be classified as a “knife-like” weapon rather than an “ax-like” one. Extant war scythes, couteaux de brèche, couses, guisarmes, and vouges, are more knife-like, without question, but the fourteenthcentury halberd was used successfully in an axe-like way against the “lighter” armor generally worn in that time, as did the heavier and more compact halberds of later times against heavier armor.11 This does not mean that the function of spearing the opponent with the spike of the halberd was not an important one nor was the swinging of the weapon to use its beak useless. We shall retrace some of this development as it applies to halberds. The first experiments of the thirteenth century probably proved rather quickly that a simple axe-like head mounted on a long shaft would weaken or break the shaft just below the “eye” socket on a solid impact unless the eye and shaft were of large diameter. A large diameter shaft, however, was too heavy and unwieldy to swing quickly, no matter what type of wood was used. The initial solution in the second quarter of the thirteenth century appears to have been to add a small strap to the lower edge of the blade and to fasten this to the shaft. This type of weapon is currently designated a guisarme (see chapter 16). Soon after, greater stability was achieved by adding a second eye to the back of the somewhat lengthened axe blade instead, which would distribute the shock of the blow along a greater surface area of the shaft. These weapons were the first “halberds” (see chapters 4–6). Many ideas on the manufacture and development of arms were spontaneous, sometimes very local and for a specific purpose. At times these “experiments” died quickly after their inception, but often the typology, if successful, would spread rapidly. Coexistence over a long period of time of widely varying designs of halberds was common. This last point is of great interest because it can lead to confusion in dating and tracing the evolution of a design; therefore it is an important phenomenon of the late Middle Ages and early Renaissance and needs to be elaborated on. In his “Wappenbuch” (Heraldry Book) of 1544–1555,12 the Hessian painter Hans Döring illustrates on his page 172, two groups of Swiss soldiers of the Canton of Appenzell, three in armor of the period (mid sixteenth century) and a single figure of an older man wearing armor dating to the end of the fifteenth century (fig. 6).13 Both he and one of the others carry halberds of a much older date than the book. Even allowing for some degree of artistic license, the first halberd is probably from the late fourteenth century and the

11

Despite Schneider’s experiment described on page 99. In the Landesbibliothek, Dresden. 13 He wears a kettle-hat with eye slits, a long mail shirt and a two-piece “Gothic “breastplate. His sword has a wheel-pommel and straight flat quillons. His shoes are pointed (fifteenth century) as opposed to the broad-toed shoes of the younger men (sixteenth century). 12

16

chapter one

other from the mid- to late fifteenth. In each case they precede the date of the armor by more than fifty years. Once a weapon had demonstrated itself to be successful, its users might be loath to change it for one of another design. This supposition is supported by the fact that the manufacture of halberds persisted well into the seventeenth century using the shapes of weapons that initially proved themselves in battles of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, as well as those that were newly designed but were constructed using old manufacturing techniques. Furthermore, the town councils in some Swiss cities placed large orders to restock the town arsenal long after the massive use of halberds had disappeared from the battlefields. In contrast to the heterogeneous armaments shown in fig. 6, the illustration from a related work dated 1545 (fig. 7), shows a mounted knight armed with a lance, surrounded by his retinue of foot soldiers, probably equipped by him, all wearing very much the “latest” of 1545.14 All halberds depicted in the illustrations are identical in form and of that date. The soldiers’ only armor consists of bishop’s mantles (mail collars extended like a mantle over the shoulders) and a few helmets. Two out of the eight soldiers carry what appear to be matchlocks. Therefore, a wealthy knight or lord might outfit his whole retinue with recently made arms and armor, or a poorer or less generous lord might only permit the scavenging of these. Economics and social conditions thus often dictated the style and usage of weapons and defensive gear. Finally, a word about the methods of carrying hafted weapons is called for. In fig. 8, the landsknecht carries his halberd slung over his right shoulder and grasps it over the base of the spike. This may not have been as unusual as its awkwardness might suggest, as this method is seen again in a single-leaf woodcut portrait of a sergeant in 1535 by the artist Erhard Schön.15 The illustrations that duplicate this method of carrying spiked staff weapons, halberds as well as other spiked weapons, show them to be well-balanced, light and easy to support, which would have been essential during the long marches between countries. Doubtlessly a variety of positions were used for portage of these arms depending on the specific weapon, its weight and balance, and the individual soldier’s strength. Although spears were among the most ancient hafted weapons, and despite the fact that they never completely disappeared, a process of offensive and defensive evolution, as well as technological advancements and access to raw materials, both mandated and allowed diversification in types of staff weapons, culminating in the Swiss type halberd of the late 15th- and early 16th-centuries, The success of the halberd led to its being a prolific and oft-copied weapon that proved to be flexible in battle and inspired confidence in its users as well as fear in their enemies.

14 Doring, H. Kriegsordnung of Count Reinhard the Elder of Salms, 1545—in the Staatsbibliothek Munich (Cod. Germ. 3663). 15 Erhard Schön, “Sergeant,” woodcut, ca. 1535, Göttingen, G. 1205 (Geissberg) Pass. 25, Rö. 214, probably cut and printed by Hans Guldenmund.

CHAPTER TWO

HALBERDS

A halberd is defined as being a cut and thrust combination staff weapon, consisting at first of an elongated axe-like blade, early forms of which are sometimes described as knifelike, from which a vertical spike of varying shape and length arises. It is fastened to its shaft by two circular straps at the rear of the blade, referred to herein as “eyes”.1 Later forms have a socket in the center of the blade to receive the shaft, longer and thinner spikes, and steel straps called “langets” (longue bandes de fer in French, and schaftbänder in German) issuing from the base of the blade socket down the shaft. A rear-facing beak is variably present in the early forms but is always to be found on later halberds. It had a piercing function (see figs. 7 and 10). A “flange” is present after ca. 1400. This is a rear facing flat, mostly rectangular part below the base of the beak that extends down to the level of the base of the blade, thus forming a rear closure for the shaft socket. Its edges are often incised or scalloped. The flange disappeared from halberds again after ca. 1570. The word halberd is derived from the old German Halm, a shaft, and Barte, an early axe form, probably similar to the Viking ax blades.2 According to the O.E.D., the word “halberd” is not recorded in the English language until 1495. The Italian term is “alabarda,” the French, derived from the Italian, has been “hallebarde” since 1448 but was originally “alabarde” (after 1333). The Spanish word was originally “alabardero,” then “alabarda,” and was taken from French and Italian.3 The Portuguese appellation is the same as the Spanish. The greatest variety of spellings of the word occurs in the tongue of its inception: German. They are “helmbart(e)”, “halbart(e)”, “hellebarde”, “halparte”, (1920s) and stand apart from the medieval and renaissance terms that will be discussed later in this chapter. The most agreed on modern term in the German literature is “halbarte”. Two more terms should no longer be used because they are confusing as well as inaccurate. The first that should be excised from the lexicon is the term “Vouge Suisse”, or simply vouge, and its various translations. “Vouge” refers to halberds before the use of a socket, when the blade, hafted by means of two “eyes”, in effect, describes the pre-circa 1400 weapon. The term is modern, having been used for the first time by Viollet-le Duc in the latter part of the nineteenth century, although he “quotes” earlier unnamed sources. The term Vouge was used in the Middle Ages for a different weapon, one that is described in chapter 18. The second term is the German expression Hippe (defined in the dictionary as a sickle, hedging or pruning knife, billhook or scythe) and short for Kriegshippe, (war scythe) and also used to describe the pre-1400 halberds fastened to the shaft by eyes.

1 This term, used in Stone, G.C., A Glossary of the Construction Decoration and Use of Arms and Armor, Jack Brussel, N.Y. 1961, p. 654, is probably modern but seems preferable to “ring” or “tube”. The German equivalent terms vary in the literature, and are “Stangenring”, “Tulle”, or “Schaft öse”, but they are also modern. The French term “frette” was used by Viollet-le-Duc in 1875, but Buttin uses the term “bague” and “oeil”. 2 Gessler, E.A. “Das Aufkommen der Halbarte und Ihre Entwicklung von der Frühzeit bis in das 15. Jahrhundert,” Revue Internationale d’Histoire Militaire, Paris, 1939–40. Vol. I, p. 145. 3 Corominas, J., Pascual, J.A., Diccionario Crítico Etimológico Castellano e Hispánico, Editorial Gredos S.A., Madrid 1980.

18

chapter two

Clarification follows for yet another use of the word halberd in modern times. A small to medium sized weapon of early Bronze Age Europe (ca. 2000 B.C.), called a “halberd,” is discussed in the scholarly literature.4 These objects were found in Irish bogs as well as in Scotland and are made from Irish copper. They have also been found in hoards as opposed to graves, and thus they show very little wear. This leads to the conclusion that they were likely not fighting weapons but were more ceremonial in nature. Similar blades are also designated Irish daggers, and one can be hard put to distinguish between the two types of blades, except that most “halberds” have slightly curved blades. They both have in common longitudinal ridges, a length of about 10–25 cm., and a shoulder at their base pierced for rivets, some of which have been found still in place. These rivets in the daggers serve to attach the one-piece grip and pommel, still present on some of the finds. A very fine example of a copper Irish dagger—a weapon designed to be used with one hand— is present in the London Museum, where it is mounted onto a modern shaft. An example of a very similar bronze Chinese form was de-accessioned from a provincial museum in China; also designated a “halberd” (fig. 9), it is definitely not a dagger, and can easily be pictured mounted into a slot at the head of a shaft. The more accurate name of these archeological finds is “dagger axe,”5 ji or ge in Chinese.6 Only small number of such blades were excavated in Hubei province, China, intact with their shafts; the double and triple blade form bears the name ji, but single blades found elsewhere without their shafts could have been part of either a ji or the single bladed variety; ge, some of which were also found intact in the Hubei excavation. These shafted weapons, it is believed, did have military use, the long-shafted ji as a charioteer’s weapon and the shorter ge, as a foot-soldier’s. Reference is also made to the European early bronze-age “halberd” called “Dolchstab” in German or “hafted dagger” in English. This hafting is done with a shafting plate (tang) passing horizontally through the wooden shaft at a level with the main blade, along the back of which are holes and slits for lashing. The actual shaft is relatively thin and bent backwards on top. Shang dynasty pictographs (ca. 1400 B.C.) show this weapon being carried over the shoulder, and in relation to the length of the person carrying it, some 4 feet in length. The shaft base is knob-shaped, and one such pictograph shows a trident at the base. The ge is not found outside of China, but analogies are seen in Oceania and Africa in addition to Bronze Age Europe. Beautiful examples, some with inlaid sea-animal figures, are found in Greece dating as far back as 1450 B.C. None of these items qualifies for the name, or function of a European halberd. Considering the etymology of the word halberd, the use of the word in the association of this name with the weapons just discussed is a convention adopted by historians and archaeologists in the twentieth century. Returning now to the early development of the European halberds, as well as other shafted varieties; they appear very infrequently in the early wall paintings of Greek and Byzantine monasteries (6th to 8th centuries) but are virtually non-existent in those of the Cappadocian rock churches of the 8th to 12th centuries. A number of papers have been 4 Coles, J., “Scottish Early Bronze Age metalwork”, Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland 101, pp. 1–110 1968–9. Harbison, P. “The Daggers of the Early Bronze Age in Ireland,” Prähistorische Bronzefunde, division 6, vol. 1. 5 Loehr, M., Chinese Bronze Age Weapons from the Chinese National Palace Museum, Peking University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, 1956, pp. 49, 57. 6 Yang, X., ed. The Golden Age of Chinese Archaeology, Yale University Press, New Haven, 1999, p. 301, no. 102.

halberds

19

Fig. 9. Chinese dagger axe known as a “ji”. Bronze Age, but designated “halberd” in modern times. Private collection.

Fig. 10. A very early halberd closely related to a guisarme. Excavated in Alsace, near Basel, middle to second half of the 13th century. Note that the upper end of the blade is not yet particularly suited for thrusting, but a beak is already present, and welded to the upper eye. Courtesy of the Historical Museum of Bern, inv. no. 13741.

20

chapter two

published using early pictorial references to show the origin of hafted weapons such as the halberd to be a staff weapon whose metal head is a scramasax or a scramasax-like blade with its tang centrally inserted into the wooden shaft end, and sometimes nailed to the side of a shaft.7 These publications base their conclusions on the examination of a Carolingian wall painting originally found in the Cloister of St. John in the town of Müstair in the Grisons, Switzerland, and which has been transferred to the Landesmuseum in Zurich. The weapons do have a long blade with a slightly convex cutting edge but are clearly not scramasaxes. The scramasax is a Frankish weapon; the long version of which was used as a sword in combat. It was common between the 4th and 7th centuries, had a single cutting edge, grooved sides, and a length up to 40 inches. The short version outlived the long one and was used as a knife. As Schneider pointed out, it would be curious indeed to see a scramasax, which is a sword, suddenly transformed into a staff weapon; there are, he concluded, cheaper ways to produce a cutting weapon than to affix an expensive sword to a staff.8 In all probability there were multi-centric efforts to create such a weapon during the centuries following the turn of the first millennium. Even the “development” such as we shall try to reconstruct it, ran in parallel series: some early forms having had long thin blades, angular and curving as in the Müstair painting; others had nearly untransformed squarish axes, and so on.

Portage of Arms by the Untitled Swiss It is significant that the use and development of arms, including staff weapons, was accelerated in the peasant population of the old Swiss forest cantons, as opposed to peasants elsewhere. One major reason for this distinction is the fact that before the first millennium they had been declared free, subject only to the royal person. King Louis the German initiated this situation by donating lands to the convent of Sts. Felix and Regula in the year 853. The important corollary to the donation mandated that all persons associated with the convent and area were given the privilege of enjoying what was called “Reichsfreiheit” in German or freedom of the realm. Soon thereafter, inhabitants of the neighboring districts in Uri began to commend themselves to the abbey, thus obtaining the same privileges. This freedom included the right to bear arms, and this in turn allowed a familiarity with, and possession of, weapons that was forbidden elsewhere to persons without rank. The general oversight or rule of this original “free” territory was given by King Louis to an “advocatus” in Latin9 or “vogt” in the German vernacular, somewhat similar to the function of the English Medieval “Shire-Reeve” or “Sheriff.” Soon after their creation, however, these overseers began to restrict the customs and habits of their charges to the point of unjust repression and taxation, as is so well illustrated by the legend of Wilhelm Tell, so that these transgressions upon this system and its freedoms earned for the thirteenth century Habsburg family; the vogts of that time, the wrath and enmity of the “free” Swiss.

7 Gessler, E.A., Schweizerisches Landesmuseum. Führer durch die Waffensammlung. Zurich, 1928, p. 52. Wegeli, R., Inventar der Waffensammlung des Bernischen Historischen Museums in Bern. Bern, vol. III, p. 45. 1939. Bosson, C. “La Hallebarde.” Genava, Musée d’Art et d’Histoire, Genève. Ash, D., “The Fighting Halberd,” The Connoisseur, May 1950. 8 Schneider, Hugo, “Zur Fabrikation der Halbarte,” Zeitschrift für Schweizerische Archäologie und Kunstgeschichte, Vol. 19, 1959, pp. 60–65. 9 Literally; “the voice for another” (the King’s).

halberds

21

The Emperor Frederick II, in 1240, granted the same freedoms to the inhabitants of the community of the Canton of Schwyz, which is adjacent to the Canton of Uri. For mutual protection, mainly against the Habsburgs, knowledge of fighting tactics was encouraged in Uri, and as a result an informal voluntary part-time “standing” army was created. So engrained was the use of weapons in the population that a multitude of restrictive decrees were later issued by the townships limiting the use of these arms in an attempt to curb the brawling and violence associated with their portage. Thus in the same vein, and possibly as a protective measure, a decree of 1438 in the canton of Schwyz required every citizen earning twenty to forty pounds a year to purchase a breastplate and additional breastplates for every multiple of forty pounds earned in a year.10 This decree however, probably served a dual purpose in that it also prepared the population for the eventuality of war. Reichsfreiheit in another form came as late as 1511 to the peasants and other folk in Tyrolia as a consequence of the general order by the emperor Maximilian, binding all eligible men for military service, but only for the defense of national boundaries. Ancillary to this was the permission to possess weapons at home.

Possible Early Halberd Forms Rudolph of Habsburg, leading troops from Strasbourg in 1262, defeated the bishop of Basel’s forces in the battle of Hausbergen using weapons called “Haches Danoises,” Danish axes.11 These Danish axes, survivors of the Viking Age in Scandinavia, were long shafted weapons for two-handed use. The English called them broad axes, as the cutting edge of their convex blades could measure up to 30 cm. (fig. 3). The form was triangular, that is, narrowing down sharply towards the haft portion, and ending as an “eye” just as the two eyes in the later halberds. Their construction was somewhat awkward and the massive axe blade might have been broken off just below the shaft eye after a heavy blow. It is also possible that some forms resembled either guisarmes, which were probably derived from Danish axes, or early halberds such as the groundfind in the Historical Museum of Bern (fig. 10) that was excavated in Alsace near Basel and dated from the time of Hausbergen, or the Basel blade (fig. 25).12 Similar weapons were carried by soldiers from Canton Schwyz in 1289, in the service of Rudolph of Habsburg.13 It is likely, therefore, that this form of early halberd was adopted by the soldiers of Basel and possibly developed by them, as well as by soldiers of the original Swiss cantons, in those intervening years. These hafted weapons had changed forms rapidly during the next quarter century as evidenced by the results of the use of the deadly halberds in the battle of Morgarten in 1315. Certainly, if the Habsburg forces carried “halberds” during this battle, the weapons were a small minority compared to those of the Confederation and possibly still in the “undeveloped” style of the hache Danoise. This line of development paralleled another one typified by the squarish axe-like form seen in the St. Lambert panel, and the surviving

10

Laffont, R. The Ancient Art of Warfare, ILTE Turin, 1966, p. 451. The discussion and facts are in part taken from: Schneewind, W., Sonderabdruck aus dem Basler Jahrbuch, 1957, pp. 99–100. 12 There is evidence that will be discussed in a later chapter, that there were halberds—even earlier than 1250. 13 Schneewind, W., ibid. 11

chapter two

22

example, as well as the sixteenth century woodcut seen in figs. 5, 15, and 16. This form had, by the late fifteenth century, metamorphosed to the same form as other Swiss halberds. In any case it seems likely that one particular form of an early polearm such as a Danish axe, or a gisarme derived from a Danish axe either in one or several localities, developed into what eventually became a “halberd,” and another developed into an elongated cutting arm such as a fauchard, vouge, couteau de brèche, or bardiche. Some became percussive weapons, but most evolved into some form of combination weapon designed to cut and thrust. Even in late periods of development, such as the end of the fifteenth and beginning sixteenth centuries, the distinction between the weapons is sometimes blurred, and the nomenclature in both old and modern literature even more so. According to the article published in 1928 and expanded in 1939 by E.A. Gessler, the first mention of the word “halberd” is in a text by the poet Konrad of Würzburg, who died in 1287.14 He uses it in a poem on the Trojan War, stressing its deadly nature and writes in Middle-High German: Sechs Tusend Man Ze Fuoz Bereit . . . Die Truogen Hallenbarten Ser Unde Wol Gesliffen Swaz si Damite Ergriffen Daz Was Ze Töde Gar Verlorn.

Six thousand ready men on foot . . . They carried halberds So well sharpened that those Who were hit by them Were lost to death.15

In 1348, the Franciscan, John of Winterthur, described the battle of Morgarten (1315) in his chronicles in which battle his own father was a combatant. He commented on the deadliness of the halberd: Habebant quoque Switenses in manibus quedam instumente occisionis qesa in vulgari illo appellata helnbartam valde terribilia, quibus adversarios firmissime armatos quasi cum novacula diviserunt et in frusta conciderunt. The Swiss had in their hands a terrible sort of weapon called a halberd in the vernacular, with which they cut through their enemy’s armor as though with a razor, and reduced them to pieces.16

And again, reiterating the description by the king of Bohemia of the mercenaries of Glarus serving in the army of Ludwig of Austria in 1330 at Colmar, John said: Rex Boemus pertransiens per circuitum castrorum ducis et perveniems ad aciem virorum de Glarus vidensque eorum instrumenta bellica et vasa interfectionis gesa dicta in vulgari helnbarton, amirans ait: o quam terribilis aspectus est istius cunei cum suis instrumentis horribilibus et non modicum metuendis. As the King of Bohemia passed through the camp of the Duke and reached the battle lines of the men of Glarus, he saw their fighting equipment and the murderous weapons, the Gesa, in dialect called halberds, and said with amazement: “What a terrible sight this wedge formation is, with its horrible and frightening instruments of death.17

14

Gessler, E.A., ibid., footnote 15. “Der Trojanischer Krieg von Konrad von Würzburg,” A. Von Keller ed. Stuttgart 1858 p. 358, v. 30050, as quoted by Gessler, E.A. In “Das Aufkommen der Halbarte von ihrer Frühzeit bis zum Ende des 14. Jahrhunderts”, Stans, 1928. English translation by the author. 16 “Johannis Vitodurani Chronicon,” Archiv für Schweizer Geschichte, vol. II., Zürich, 1846, Gessler E.A., ibid., footnote 15, English translation by the author. 17 “Johannis Vitidurani Chronicon,” Mon. Germ. Hist. Scriptores III, Berlin 1924, quoted in Gessler, E.A. ibid., footnote 15, English translation by the author. 15

halberds

23

An illustration in a German Psalter stylistically relatable to the early thirteenth century (fig. 11), shows a halberd in the hands of a soldier in a “Betrayal and Arrest of Christ” scene.18 Several groundfinds exist that mirror this precise type. The fact that they have been thought of as somewhat later creations (ca. 1280), will be discussed in the next chapter. An early but indisputable halberd is depicted in an al secco wall painting in the choir of the mid-fourteenth century chapel in St. Nicklausen, Canton Obwald in Switzerland, executed ca. 1370–1380. It is held by a sleeping soldier, as a part of the Resurrection scene (fig. 12). The soldier is dressed in a full suit of mail including a coif and chausses, over which he wears a surcoat, perhaps of leather. This defensive armor style is that of the early fourteenth century.19 His halberd blade is short, massive and almost square, rising to a relatively short obtuse point. The short shaft appears to be only 3–4 feet long and passes through a lower eye into a socket integral with the superior part of the blade. The point (which cannot yet be designated a spike) is in line with the shaft in contrast to most early halberds where the point is in front of the shaft. Two halberds from a Book of Hours of about 1380 seen in fig. 13 (contemporary with the battle of Sempach of 1386), show little change in style from the far earlier type represented in the previous illustration from the early thirteenth century German Psalter (fig. 11).20 The left one of the two in fig. 13 is quite distinct from the other in that the lower part of the blade extends itself to a point well below the lower eye. It is therefore a still more elongated and less massive halberd than the type seen in fig. 12 and that in the St. Lambert panel in Graz (fig. 5). The other is very similar to the one in the early thirteenth century German Psalter, and to the earliest ground finds of Basel, Bern, and Zurich. A similar halberd with a slightly more elongate blade and more acute point is present in the hands of the Legionary behind the Roman captain in a crucifixion scene, the subject of the oldest pictorial woodblock known: the Bois Protat (fig. 14). This block, one of three used for the print, has survived from the second half of the fourteenth century. Although no original prints survive, modern prints have been pulled from the block. The short flared cuff of the captain’s gauntlet with what appears to be a brass border is consistent with a date of about 1370–1375.21 Because they appear to be rough and primitive, two halberds in a panel painting of 1430, by the Master of the Votive Panel of St. Lambert that is now hung in the Alte Galerie in Graz, Austria, are most interesting. The first is in the hands of the man on foot involved in recovering arms and armor from the dead in a battlefield scene; the second is a similar weapon in the right upper corner in the midst of a mêlée (fig. 5). These two weapons appear simply as large axe blades mounted on a pole, each with two large eyes. Both appear to be far older in style than the date of the painting.22 The upper and lower ends of the blade are pointed and similar, but the upper is more acute and slightly

18

Betrayal and Arrest of Christ, Psalter, Germany, thirteenth century. Paris Bibliothèque Nationale MS., lat. 17961, folio 113, verso. 19 The armor is very similar to that shown in an illustration in the “Sachsenspiegel” of ca. 1330 of Eike von Repgow. 20 Betrayal and Arrest of Chris. Très Belles Heures, France, 1380–1413, Paris Bibliothèque Nationale MS. nouv. acq. Lat. 3093, folio 181, recto, 21 Boccia, Rossi, Morin, “Armi e Armature Lombarde”, Electa Editrice, 1980. figs. 12, 13. 22 However, it should be noted that simple forms such as these, made by local blacksmiths working in relative isolation, might look quite different from contemporary weapons of urban centers.

24

chapter two

Fig. 12. Detail of a wall painting in the chapel of St. Nicklausen, Canton Obwald, Switzerland, ca. 1375. The halberd’s shaft is “capped”, that is, the superior eye is integral with the upper back portion of the blade and is closed on top.

halberds

25

Fig. 14. Reduced modern impression from the right hand wood block (one of the original three) called the Bois Protat, ca. 1370–80. The halberd is capped as in fig. 12 but appears to have a longer shaft. The original woodblock is in the Paper Museum of the city of Basel, Switzerland. Private collection.

26

chapter two

longer. The uppermost portion of the shaft is shaped into a spike and protrudes some 30 cm. or so above the upper eye. A halberd blade like this one is illustrated in fig. 15, mounted on a new shaft. A similar weapon is illustrated in a much later woodcut in the mid-sixteenth century Swiss chronicle of Johann Stumpf (fig. 16) on p. 647 of the second edition. The illustration is meant to depict a late-fifteenth-century combatant and uses what is likely a much earlier surviving weapon as a model. The halbardier wears a Swiss dagger, or more probably a Basilard (only the pommel and part of the grip is visible) worn as a sword on the left side, both of which were typical weapons of the first half of the sixteenth century, along with a long-sleeved mail shirt.23 The backward facing plumes on his cap help identify him as a Swiss reislaüfer or soldier.24 This rather primitive form of a halberd relied on a sharpened wooden staff for thrusting rather than a modified upper blade portion as in all other halberds. Unless a lance-like point was fastened onto this spike, it could not have been terribly effective against armor. In the St. Lambert illustration, no such metal point is seen. The blunt axe-like halberd with a wooden spike, perhaps of peasant manufacture, had probably fallen out of use by the mid fifteenth century and was certainly a less capable weapon than the all steel head type present since the thirteenth century. In contrast to this type, there are illustrations in the cloister library in Engelberg, Switzerland, in Codex 339, that dates from 1380–1390, and that depicts the Passion of Christ (figs. 17a, 17b). In these pictures, the soldiers carry halberds that are in a form essentially like the one in the National Museum in Zurich, LM 13675 (fig. 29) that was excavated from the battlefield of Morgarten (1315), except that the point of the spike in one of the Codex illustrations is in line with the shaft rather than in front of it. These are the types of halberds that were used at the battle of Sempach in 1386, and they should not be confused with the modern and erroneous term “Sempach” halberd, and which refers to a seventeenth century halberd (see chapter 3). In general it is true that the later the halberd style, the more the spike point moves back in relation to the shaft; however, variations and exceptions do occur. The woodcut depicting scenes from of Dorneck, the decisive battle of the Swabian War in 1499, clearly shows halberds whose spike points are in front of the axis of the pole.25 They had either survived from earlier times and were favored by reputation as being battle-worthy, or, as was more likely, the earlier type continued being constructed contemporaneously with more “advanced or developed” forms whose spike points were in line with (and sometimes behind) the shaft axis. These types can be seen in a partial view of the Swiss force in fig. 18. This large colored woodcut, printed from two blocks and vertically joined in the center; was created by an unknown Swiss artist who depicts the merciless rout of the Burgundian and German forces of Maximilian I in 1499, at the castle of Dorneck. The Burgundians, marked by an “X” on their clothing and armor symbolizing the cross of St. Andrew, are being hacked, speared, and decapitated by the halberd-wielding Swiss foot soldiers, marked by the cross of St. George on their clothes. The various figures reproduced here (figs. 19, 20, 21, 22) show the techniques of use of the halberds, such as thrusting with the spike and, huge overhead swings using the

The basilard is a dagger, popular in both fifteenth and sixteenth-century Switzerland and Germany. Bächtiger, F., Bemerkungen zum “Widersacher” des Eidgenossen von 1529, Zeitschrift für Schweizerische Archäologie und Kunstgeschichte, 1980 vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 252–259. 25 “Dorneck 1499,” Anonymous colored woodcut—Kupferstichkabinet, Kunstmuseum, Basel. 23 24

halberds

27

Fig. 15. Early halberd blade resembling that in the foreground of the St. Lambert Panel in Graz (fig. 5) and mounted on a new shaft. Note that the St. Lambert halberd’s shaft extends above the upper eye and is sharpened to a point, that is, into a wooden spike. Private collection.

Fig. 16. Swiss warrior carrying a halberd with a (presumably) sharpened extension of the shaft above the blade and resembling that of figs. 5 and 15. Mid 16th century Swiss chronicle of Johan Stumpf. It is probable that the woodcut itself is from a slightly earlier period, that is, early 16th century, but the halberd itself is of 15th century manufacture. Courtesy of Karl Mohler, Basel.

28

chapter two

Figs. 17a and b. Two representations from the Passion in Codex 339 “Mystisches Traktat zum Leiden Christi”, Luzern, 1396, in the library of the Benedictine Cloister in Engelberg, Switzerland. The halberd in the doorway of the building in 17b is a pure “Sempach” form; the one in the right of 17a is described in the text as the “capped” form with the spike in line with the shaft. Courtesy of the library of the Cloister.

halberds

29

blade (figs. 19, 20), as well as sideward swings of the weapon (figs. 21, 22). It is again noteworthy that the weapons used were more than one hundred years apart in style. The earlier types were only slightly later than Morgarten (figs. 21, 22) and were used beside “1499” types (figs. 19, 20) which were manufactured without great change during the latter half of the fifteenth century and in the first quarter of the sixteenth century. Judging from the remaining details in the woodcut, especially the arms and armor worn, the illustration is in all likelihood created close to 1499.26 There is no doubt that there is an “evolution” of the form of the halberd in both warfare and civil defense, but noting the example of the above woodcut of 1499, this evolution is anything but linear. There is, in a Bohemian panel painting of the second half of the 13th century, a type of halberd differing from the rapidly developing Swiss models. A typical example is seen in the hands of a soldier in the panel painting of the resurrection of Christ by the Master of the T®eboÏnskÿ Altar, formerly in the National Gallery in Prague and now in the Cloister of St. Agnes in that city. It resembles somewhat the type seen in the St. Lambert panel (fig. 5) but is more slender. The eyes are slightly further from the back of the blade, which has an inferior point usually indented on the back side and slightly shorter than the superior point of the blade—which is questionably useful for thrusting. It bears, therefore, a remote resemblance to the halberds in figs. 15 and 16. There can be one or two small beaks (pointed straight back) welded to the eyes, as well as a spear-like metal point capping the shaft, the latter being of the usual length. An early but unusually formed halberd is pictured in the hands of the soldier-guard of the tomb in a Bohemian Resurrection panel painting by the Hohenfurther Master, of ca. 1350. This halberd shows the presence of a cylindrical cap-spike curved backwards at the tip to which a blade is solidly attached without eyes; it has a slightly convex cutting edge, not unlike the primitive one in the St. Lambert panel. The curved spike, fused eyes, and extremely attenuated blade points are probably the idiosyncratic depiction by this artist.27 By contrast, an early halberd is depicted in Martin Schongauer’s engraved Passion of about 1480 in the “Christ Taken” scene in the hands of a fully armored man wearing a visored hounskull (pig-faced basinet) of about 1400. The halberd, of approximately the same date (fig. 23), is fastened to its shaft by eyes and has a large slightly forward-curved spike, retaining nonetheless its thrusting function. Although only one such surviving halberd has been identified (it is located in the castle of Chillon), near Lausanne, Switzerland, Schongauer’s acute sense of detail and accurate depictions lead one to believe that this form existed in somewhat larger numbers at that time. These details also demonstrate that a man of means might have kept himself in the latest style of arms and armor, but that a common soldier certainly could not afford to do

26 Breastplates are two piece “Gothic”; these are not made after 1500. Helmets, when worn, are visored German sallets (Fig. 11) and swords have both wheel-pommels with S shaped quillons (Fig. 9) as well as vase shaped pommels, which are beginning to replace the wheel-pommel by 1450 (Fig. 7). It should be noted here that, especially in this period of time, that artists, whether or not they were actual witnesses of a scene or event would depict it using the latest in style, arms, architecture, etc. The rule is not absolute, but very useful in dating a work of art. In this case, the fact that various types of weapons and armor are shown probably indicates that the artist was an actual witness. It was not uncommon, in fact, to find artist-soldiers; well known ones include Niklaus Manuel Deutsch and Urs Graf. 27 What justifies calling this weapon a halberd is the fact that a simple axe would not have a spike; and a pollaxe, which may have a short spike, would not have as long a shaft, and would not be found in the hands of a common soldier acting as a guard in the fourteenth century. The pollaxe is found mainly in the fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries, and was an elaborate and expensive weapon, used mainly by the nobility. (See chapter 15).

30

chapter two

Fig. 23. Martin Schongauer, “Christ Taken” from the engraved passion, ca. 1480. Note the non-contemporary halberd shafted by “eyes” and the slightly forward curved spike. Courtesy Vassar College.

halberds

31

so and could count himself most fortunate to possess armor of, in this instance, some sixty years of age. The halberd, a far less expensive item to acquire, was therefore more a matter of personal choice for the foot soldier (halberds were not used by mounted warriors). This particular early weapon, as depicted by Schongauer, although “antiquated” in his day, was just as functional as the later halberd forms of 1460–1480. The peasant footsoldier or landsknecht, once having acquired a fighting arm as required by the muster; the repair or replacement of the weapon, damaged or lost in military use, was the responsibility of the army command, not the soldier. Some of the reasons given for the rise in the success of the early halberd as a weapon of the infantry were the Reichsfreiheit of the non-titled, which gave them the freedom to bear arms. Propositions for the development of halberds from earlier weapons are given, as almost no written, pictorial or other surviving evidence is known to exist of the 12thand early 13th-centuries, when this evolution took place. Descriptions of its deadliness in the ancient literature which recounted the fear it evoked in its victims, and contemporary depictions of them in use, now lead us to discuss the finer details of the physical weapon from the early to the late forms by studying the extant examples themselves.

CHAPTER THREE

EXTANT EXAMPLES OF HALBERDS

The following is an attempt to list the features of the design and structure of halberds, focusing on the evolution of the manufacture itself and recognizing again that all throughout this period of time, older and “outdated” halberds were in active use side by side with newer and developing forms. This chapter is based primarily, although not solely, on the study of surviving halberds rather than pictorial evidence. The latter, although immensely helpful in general, does not provide fine detail the way an actual weapon does. If one can imagine the difficulty encountered by art historians in arranging in chronological order solely by stylistic criteria, the undated prints of an artist such as Albrecht Dürer or Rembrandt van Rijn for example, then it becomes obvious that trying to arrange halberds in chronological order can also be a difficult matter. The variables here include: different smiths (dozens judging from the stamped marks), different locations of manufacture (regional or national), preferences of styles, (that is, the persistence of an older style because of personal experience), failed experiments, and the degree of exposure a given style has in conflicts, which in turn can introduce a style to a new region. It is, furthermore, not possible to know which important forms in the course of such a development were destroyed during those developmental years and the metal reused to make more recent or “advanced” forms. Nonetheless, judging by surviving examples and illustrations of those times, a certain line of evolution (and involution) took shape over centuries. As in human evolution, it is difficult to state specifically when proto-halberds yielded to early examples of the complete weapon. Notwithstanding the possibility of a missing link, some of the earliest ground finds that merit being called halberds, are present in the collection of the Historical Museum of Basel, the Landesmuseum in Zürich and in the Historical Museum of Bern. The Zurich blades were used to illustrate the earliest phases of the development of halberds in the 1939 article by Gessler1 and later again by Schneider.2 These weapons are typically long, thin, faintly crescent shaped, and have a convex cutting edge. The first (pictured at the left on p. 149, fig. 18, in Gessler’s article, and reproduced here as fig. 24) rises to a point which is not yet demarcated as a spike and has a questionable thrusting function: the vector of forces of such a thrust would put great stress on the lower eye, tending to move it forward. It thus differs in this respect from all subsequent halberds. The lower end of the blade is pulled-in (narrow) and has a thin ringlike eye welded onto it. A second eye is present on the mid portion of the blade back and appears somewhat stronger. The upper eye has a smaller diameter than the lower one. An almost identical blade is present in Basel (No. 1873.24, fig. 25) in relatively good condition. The rear edge of this blade, beginning at the tip, is sharpened down to and including the section between the eyes. A very similar halberd blade, mounted on a modern shaft, is in the collection of the Historical Museum of Bern3 (fig. 10); it differs only

1

Gessler, E.A., Das Aufkommen der Halbarte. Schneider, H., “Gedanken zur Halbarte aus Hünenberg,” Helvetia Archaeologica, Schwabe & Co., Basel. 3 It is pictured and described in the 1945 Copenhagen monograph by Martin Ellehauge, entitled “The Glaive.” He dates it, as does the author, to the thirteenth century. 2

34

chapter three

in that it possesses a small straight triangular beak welded on to the rear of the upper eye. Traditionally these three halberd blades are assigned to the last two decades of the thirteenth century, but as can be seen in fig. 11, in a German Psalter which shows a very similar halberd on a shaft approximately 2 meters long and is dated to the earlier part of the thirteenth century, this form is already present some half century earlier. Reference should be made to an illustration not reproduced here, in order to point out how variably in a given period of time the spread of a new weapon form occurs. The Scrovegni Chapel in Padua contains one of the great masterpieces of the early fourteenth century: the fresco cycles by Giotto of 1305. In the “Betrayal and Arrest” scene, two staff weapons are present (left and right) resembling early halberds such as the first three described above. The weapons differ only from these three in one respect; the lowest portion of the blade is attached to the pole only by a nail-like extension, which pierced the shaft and was probably bent over on the other side. This shows that this “halberd”-form of manufacture existed in Italy by 1305, but there is not evidence that it was further developed or used there at this time, nor really until well over a century later. In fact the halberd appears never to have been used in great numbers in battles in Italy as it was in the North, but made a transition via the “scorpion” form, which was indeed a powerful weapon of the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries, to a decorative guard or parade weapon in that country later in that century. What may also be significant about this illustration is the observation that the weapon on the left as well as on the right has a lower nailed fastening like in a guisarme (see chapter 14). This may in fact distinguish them from a true halberd. This type of a lower fastening may have just preceded the establishment of the lower eye of halberds and may have been a transitional form between the Danish great axes and the thirteenth century halberd blades excavated. If so, the transition must have occurred earlier than ca. 1230 (see fig. 11) because shortly after that time the earliest true halberd forms are already shown in illustrations. Also, this example points out another vexing problem, that of semantics or nomenclature. Troso in his book, citing the illustration above calls the weapon on the left a Swiss voulge, and the one on the right, a bardiche.4 Borg, writing a very enlightened article on “Gisarmes and Great Axes” calls the Giotto weapon an axe, probably Danish, but concludes that these elongated axe-like weapons were soon called gisarmes (guisarmes).5 Very similar weapons are pictured in the fresco cycle by Barna of Siena in the Collegiate Church in San Gimigniano, on the second arcade panel entitled the “Betrayal and Arrest,” said to have been executed towards the middle of the fourteenth century. Furthermore, three other extant weapons can be included in a catalog of the earliest halberds. Halberd no. 2 in Gessler’s fig. 13 (fig. 26) is no longer convex and saber-like. It has a long, thin, rectangular blade, eyes similar to the previous one but clearly shows a slight angulation of the blade backwards above the level of the upper eye, a faint indication of a “spike” and is certainly functional as a thrusting weapon. A similar but slightly later halberd appeared as lot no. 1 in a 1959 Galerie Fischer (Lucerne) sale catalog.6 It shows a long narrow blade with a vertical measurement 4 to 5 times its width, and it narrows again towards the base. The superior end sweeps back into the relatively long flat spike with a minimal concavity. No beak is present. These five weapons described in 4

Troso, M., ibid. Borg, A., Gisarmes and Great Axes, Journal of the Arms and Armor Society, vol. 8, 1974–76, pp. 337–342. 6 Galerie Fischer, Luzern, Waffenauktion Frühe Schweizer Waffen, Sammlung Boissonas, November 25, 1959 (Katalog 136). 5

extant examples of halberds

35

Fig. 24. Early halberds in the Landesmuseum, Zurich. From an illustration in the 1928 article by E.A. Gessler on the development of the halberd. The individual blades are discussed in the text, and numbered left to right.

Fig. 25. This 13th century halberd in Basel (inv. no. 1873.24, neg. no. 12375) measures 47 cm. in length and has a greatest width of 6.5 cm. It is almost identical to the first halberd in fig. 24, including the triangular top eye. Courtesy of the Historisches Museum, Basel.

36

chapter three

Fig. 26. Halberd #2 in fig. 24, late 13th century, found near Rorbas, Canton Zurich. It measures 42 cm. in length and has a greatest width of 7 cm. The upper eye is almost completely broken off. Note that the blade back is now straight and useful for thrusting. Courtesy of the Landesmuseum, Zurich, inv. no. 4327.

Fig. 27. Halberd #3 in fig. 24. It is the first to show a real indent between the blade and the spike. The length is 43 cm., the spike is 15 cm., and its weight is 960 g. It was found amongst the vine roots in Cormondrèche near Neuchâtel. Courtesy of the Landesmuseum, Zurich, inv. no. LM6345.

extant examples of halberds

37

the last two paragraphs precede the Morgarten types that follow; they are certainly thirteenth century arms. The third halberd in Gessler’s fig. 13 (fig. 27) is slightly later. Although similar to the preceding two it shows a clear cut indentation of the cutting edge of the blade above the upper eye demarcating the flat short spike with a low central ridge, both edges of which are sharp. The blade is heavier, more solid and rectangular. The bottom edge has a very slight downward slant. The eyes are stronger, of larger and equal diameters and thicker vertically. Its date is probably around 1300. The fourth weapon in Gessler’s fig. 13 (fig. 27) is very likely a modern copy.7 Fig. 28 is of a groundfind mounted on a new pole in the collection of the Historical Museum of Berne; it is slightly later but very similar to the halberd in fig. 27, and appears to be the immediate predecessor of the fifth halberd in Gessler’s fig. 13 (fig. 29). This last was found in the 1860’s buried in the stump of a tree, which was being removed from the soil very near the memorial on the battlefield of Morgarten (1315), between it and the lake of Aegeri. Although it appears massive and short, this is only because the spike tip has broken off; it must have been originally at least 4 cm. longer. The author’s reconstruction is depicted in fig. 30. The base of the blade was missing a piece when originally found, as well as a small fragment removed in modern times for metallurgic analysis. The next six halberds pictured, including one already described (fig. 24, no. 5, and figs. 19, 21, 22, 23, 25) are classic for the forms following the battle of Morgarten (1315) to the end of the fourteenth century and are characterized by a slightly longer blade, longer tubular eyes that are closer together and a straight, slightly convex, or most frequently concave sweep from the top of the blade to the tip of the flat broad spike. A good example is shown in fig. 31, recovered from the river Broye in Switzerland, and showing the massive lower eye as well as the emerging quadrangular spike tip. Another river find, seen in fig. 32 shows yet more elongation of the blade, and dates to about the mid-14th century. It begins to resemble the typical halberd used at the battle of Sempach (1386). Any or all these halberds might have had a small beak arising from around the shaft between the eyes, or from the upper eye (figs. 35, 36). An excavated halberd blade from the last quarter of the fourteenth century is present in the historical museum of the town of Murten (Morat in French), the site of the battle in 1476 marking the second major defeat of Charles the Bold on Swiss soil. It differs from the Morgarten halberd of 1315, in that the blade is slightly longer, just as is the halberd blade in fig. 32, and also shows a significant change in the spike, which is flat and sharpened in the front, swelling slightly towards the rear, and forming a primitive “quadrangular” (actually triangular) thickening near the tip. This thickening became more pronounced with time, and coexisted with the flat spike throughout most of the fifteenth century. But by the sixteenth century, the spike points were almost universally quadrangular, except for the flat sword-like spikes seen mostly in Germany. The spike point in the Murten blade and other halberds of the fourteenth century was still in front of the shaft line.

7 The word copy is used here in a neutral sense, meaning simply that the piece is made to look like an older piece (style) i.e. is not original. What is not implied in using the word “copy,” is whether the piece was meant to deceive the modern eye, or merely represent the form of an older original piece. Copies without intent to deceive (deceive = fake) usually can be distinguished by means of a clear (modern) maker’s mark or some identifying icon stamped into it. Dr Matthias Senn, curator of Arms and Armor in the Landesmuseum in Zurich agrees with the interpretation of this weapon as a copy.

38

chapter three

Fig. 28. Halberd of about 1300–20, very similar to the one in fig. 27. Note that both edges of the spike are sharpened as well as the rear blade edge between the eyes. Courtesy of the Historisches Museum Bern, inv. no. 3463.

Fig. 29. Halberd blade with a broken spike probably used at the battle of Morgarten in 1315 and excavated there in the 1860’s. Note how compact and massive the weapon is. Courtesy of the Landesmuseum, Zurich, inv. no. 13153.

extant examples of halberds

Fig. 30. Reconstructed drawing of the halberd in fig. 29, Landesmuseum, Zurich, inv. no. 13153.

39

Fig. 31. Halberd blade closely following the Morgarten blade of fig. 29 of ca. 1330, (?). Note the very long lower eye. Ex. collection Charles Boissonnas, found in the river Broye in the 19th century. Photo courtesy of Landesmuseum, Zurich.

40

chapter three

Fig. 32. Halberd blade on a new pole somewhat after the one in fig. 31 (ca. 1350?). It is larger and more slender. The blade is slightly drawn in at the base. Ex collection Charles Boissonnas. Found in the river Thièle in the 19th century. Photo courtesy of the Landesmuseum Zurich.

Fig. 33. Halberd blade of the middle of the 14th century, found in 1985 in 5 meters (16 ft.) of water in the Greifensee (Switzerland) near the shore. Two small pieces of the staff were trapped in the eyes but were lost during the process of conservation. It measures 37 cm. in length; the spike is 14.2 cm. and its weight 578 g. Courtesy of the Landesmuseum, Zurich, inv. no. KZ 11476.

extant examples of halberds

41

Between the time of the battle of Morgarten and the end of the century, the method of construction and finishing of the early halberds with two rear shaft eyes appears to have varied greatly. Careful examination of the original ground- and water-finds in the Landesmuseum in Zürich (LM KZ 11476, 6345, 13153, 3453, fig. 24), and the weapon in fig. 37, reveals in some, a faint longitudinal indentation in the rear edge of the blade, indicating that the blade consists of either two pieces of iron, hammer welded, or a single piece folded on itself at the cutting edge and then welded together (fig. 44). The actual cutting edge leading up to the spike tip and down the back side to the upper eye could have been made of hardened high carbon content steel and welded onto a central portion of the blade of softer iron with a technique allowing the hardened qualities of the steel to persist. In these specimens the front or rear vertical joint lines are of course, not visible. Unlike the method of construction proposed in Schneider’s article of 1983,8 the eyes on these early blades are not always separate pieces of metal welded over the rear edge of the blade but were sometimes integral with the blade before the welding as two rectangular straps which are then bent around a mandrel to conform to the diameter of the shaft and then hammer welded on one side of the blade (figs. 29, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42). In the well-preserved halberd in the Landesmuseum of Zurich, (KZ 11476, fig. 33), a water-find from the Greifensee in Switzerland, these weld marks are especially clear through the slight corrosion that has occurred. The much longer lower eye has a great overlap with the blade body and the weld edge is only a short distance from the front cutting edge (approximately 1.5 cm.). The upper eye is welded onto the blade very close to the rear cutting edge, again only 1.5 cm. from the cutting edge. The same technique is seen in the construction of DEP 3453 in the Landesmuseum of Zurich, found during the excavation of the castle of Hünenberg in 1945 (fig. 34). This halberd shows a central ridge down the entire length of the spike to the upper eye. Also in contrast to Schneider’s diagram in his article, most blades, as previously mentioned, were constructed out of two leaves or a folded one (figs. 42, 44). Some eyes were, as proposed by Schneider, a separate strap welded to the blade on both sides (fig. 37 top eye and fig. 43). One of these, having come apart, is pictured in fig. 36. Finally, these early types can be distinguished by the fact that the rear edge of the spike, which is invariably located just in front of the shaft, was sharpened just like the front edge. This area of sharpening is quite wide (approximately 1 cm.) and is angled, giving the cross section of the spike a flat hexagonal appearance. Between the middle of the fourteenth century and the middle of the fifteenth, the spike became somewhat longer and thinner, allowing the front and rear sharpened edges to meet in the middle, thus forming a quadrangular cross section instead of a hexagonal one. The halberd in fig. 35 has a curved rear langet, as well as the remnants of an anterior one. Both langets appear to have been welded on. This halberd is from approximately 1390; it shows the spike tip to have a faint swelling creating a quadrangular cross section. The rear edge of the spike, however, was still sharpened down to the upper eye. A very similar halberd in the collection of the Royal Armouries in Leeds gives some insight into the techniques of manufacture. It has a long slender beak welded on to the upper eye, which is in itself somewhat crudely welded to the rear edge of the blade. The spike which is slightly shorter than the one in fig. 35, appears to be sharpened down

8

Schneider, H., ibid.

42

chapter three

Fig. 34. Halberd blade found in the excavation of the castle of Hünenberg, Canton Zug in 1945. Length 39.5 cm., weight 590 g. Second third of the 14th century. Displayed in the Landesmuseum, Zurich, inv. no. Dep. 3453. Courtesy of the Landesmuseum Zurich.

Fig. 35. Halberd blade on a replacement staff and with a separate beak, the latter showing the weld mark. End of the 14th century. The thick curved dorsal langet appears at about this time (see also fig. 37), the anterior one is sometimes a later addition. What is novel in this weapon is that the spike point is in line with the shaft because of its slight backward lean. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 14.25.35.

extant examples of halberds

Fig. 36. Halberd blade on a new staff with distinct and partially dehiscent weld marks. A posterior rounded langet is present as well as a small beak as part of the upper eye. Note the slight forward curve of the beak edge of the flat spike (vaguely like fig. 23). This is one of the last halberds before the change in hafting from “eyes” to a socket. Courtesy of the Historisches Museum, Bern.

43

Fig. 37. Halberd of ca. 1400 with a long narrow blade and an angled convexity leading to the spike which also leans backwards slightly so that the point as in fig. 35 is in line with the shaft. The spike tip is clearly reinforced and the last 3.5 cm. are quadrangular. The blade measures 43.8 cm. in length. Only a short rear langet is present. It has possibly the oldest surviving shaft, and one of the last of a round diameter, which measures 181 cm. in length and has a diameter of 3.8 cm. just below the langet. The shaft between the eyes measures 3.1 cm. in diameter and appears to be made of a soft wood such as pine. It is also among the last halberds before the appearance of sockets, but as shown throughout this book, such types were probably made and used until late in the 15th century and are shown in illustrations of ca. 1500 alongside later forms. Private collection.

44

chapter three

Fig. 38. Schematic diagram illustrating the method of creating the “eyes” on a 14th century halberd. A mandrel would have been inserted during the final bending of the eye and during the hammer welding process. The Morgarten blade in Zurich (fig. 29) was created in this way. Hardened steel might have subsequently been welded on the cutting edges of the blade, the spike point and the beak, if there was one.

Fig. 39. Two photographs of the lower eye of the early Basel halberd in fig. 25. The retouched one shows that there is a single weld of a strap bent as in fig. 38. The upper (triangular) eye is welded on both sides.

extant examples of halberds

Fig. 40. Detail of the hammer weld of the left side of the upper eye of the Morgarten halberd in Zurich (fig. 29). The eye is not welded on the right side, indicating that it is a strap bent as in fig. 38.

45

Fig. 41. Another view of a strap with a weld on the right side of the blade. It is similar in appearance to the one in fig. 39, but is of a later date.

46

chapter three

Fig. 42. Detail of the weld on the bottom eye of the halberd in fig. 37, which represents a fusion of the two blade halves (see the diagram in fig. 38).

Fig. 43. A 14th century halberd with a lower eye welded on both sides, showing early dehiscence. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 14.25.35.

extant examples of halberds

Fig. 44. The two blade halves, welded together over the top eye. Halberd in fig. 37, ca. 1400. Private collection.

47

Fig. 45. Schematic diagram of the construction of the halberd in fig. 37.

48

chapter three

the rear edge of the blade, which carries a smith’s mark on both sides and is completely flat in cross section. It is nevertheless from the same period as the former halberd dated ca. 1400. The halberd of fig. 37 has a short but clear quadrangular spike at its tip 3.5 cm. in length, as well as a single curved dorsal langet. This early halberd on its original shaft has yet another method of construction differing from that previously described in fourteenth century halberds. The blade is composed of a double leaf, connected in the back by a wide strap that became the lower eye when it was bent around a mandrel. Also it has a wide downward extension that becomes a dorsal langet. The upper eye is a separate strap, hammer-welded on.9 Although the reconstructed pattern before welding looks somewhat strange and complex (see the diagram in fig. 45), no other explanation is possible, since welded seams are not present between the lower eyes and the blade and all metal parts (aside of the spike tip) are of nearly equal thickness (fig. 42). The cutting edge of the blade does not have a hardened steel edge welded onto it; it reveals, however, a faint joint line in the front, almost at the very edge where the leaves are joined. In some of the early halberds such as the Morgarten type, the cutting edge does appear to be welded on, as has been previously described. Metallographic studies10 performed on a sixteenth century halberd from the Historical Museum in Bern show the lightly etched surface of a hammer-weld to consist of a joint between a soft iron, relatively free of carbon, and a much harder mix of pearlite-ferrite steel.11 On occasion, within the working life of these weapons, a hammer-welded seam between the eye and the blade would open. Repairs could be made by oven-brazing, which consisted of filling the open seams with powdered or granular filings of brass, and heating in an oven or furnace.12 The powder melted into the seam much as modern solder would, using a point/heat source. The weld was achieved at lower temperatures than with hammer welding, which probably served to protect the tempered steel edges, should they be present (fig. 46). Following the earliest types from the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries as represented by groundfinds, in general, the halberd shows a rectangular box-like blade a little more than twice as high as wide. The superior end sweeps backward in a concave form into a relatively short spike, originally flat, but soon showing a central ridge and again later a quadrangular reinforcement of the tip in the fifteenth century (figs. 47–52). Almost invariably the lower eye is larger than the upper, (if they are not equal) and the pole is trimmed accordingly. Surviving original poles of this period are exceedingly rare. One original shaft is found on the halberd in fig. 37 and shows that fitting the shaft to the differing diameter eyes is accomplished not as in many modern restorations by forming a conical end to the shaft between the eyes (figs. 10 and 28), but by keeping a cylindrical shape of two diameters throughout. The significance of this fact is that if the

9 The technique of hammer welding was a delicate procedure and had to be performed at temperatures of between 1300 and 1400 degrees centigrade at which time rapid hammer blows forced the pieces being supported on an anvil together. The slag inherent in the steel melted at these temperatures and acted as a flux preventing oxidation from interfering with the bond. When thus properly performed the bond was a strong and stable one. From Smith, R.D., Brown, R.R. Bombards-Mons Meg and her Sisters, Royal Armouries Monograph 1, 1989, p. viii. 10 Rupp, A., Metallographische Untersuchung von Halbarten des Historischen Museums Bern zur Ermittlung Unterschiedlicher Herstellungsverfahren und Eisenqualitäten, in the “Sonderdruck aus dem Jahrbuch des Bernischen Historischen Museums 1979–80”, pp. 279–284. 11 Using the Vickers Pyramid Hardness scale. The figures indicate the Kg. pressure per sq. mm. necessary to create a measured indentation with a diamond point. 12 Personal communication by Robert Carroll, armorer of the Metropolitan Museum of Art.

extant examples of halberds

Fig. 47. Corroded halberd found in 1908 on the shore of the Rhine near Rheinfelden, 1390–1400. The blade is double-leafed (see fig. 44); it has the earliest socket and flange. Courtesy of the Historisches Museum, Basel, inv. no. 1910.93. Negative no. 12373.

49

Fig. 48. 15th century halberd (perhaps middle) showing the rather rare flat spike with the axis behind the shaft line. The mandrel used to form the socket was inserted fully to the top of the blade. The finished halberd shows therefore a small hole on the upper blade edge. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 52.208.8.

50

chapter three

Fig. 49. Halberd, probably from the third quarter of the 15th century, showing large proportions and mass. An identical one is present in the Museum Altes Zeughaus, Solothurn. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 42.50.17.

Fig. 50. A mid-15th century halberd. Note the elongate blade approximately twice as high as wide. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 42.50.18.

extant examples of halberds

51

Fig. 51. On the left: detail of the top mandrel opening, in this case between the spike base and the top of the beak, as in fig. 52. Visible in the photo on the right are the top of the wooden shaft and the weld mark between the hardened point of the beak and the beak body. Private collection.

Fig. 52. Halberd of last quarter of 15th century. Note the pronounced concavity of the upper and lower blade edges and the beginning slant of the cutting edge. This line of development eventually leads to the 16th century triangular forms. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 14.25.74.

52

chapter three

weapon had been fitted with the typical primitive beak on a cylindrical shaft, the stability and strength of the beak upon delivering a strong blow would have been vastly increased as opposed to that of a weapon where a conical shaft prompted an upward displacement encouraged by any levered force. Moreover, many surviving beaks of this period are on eyes with cylindrical internal diameters. At least two exceptions to this rule are readily found. They are in the thirteenth century Basel halberd in fig. 25, discovered in Alsace, in which the upper eye has a triangular shape (see fig. 39) and in the almost identical Zurich blade, found in the Rhine near Basel, (the first halberd in fig. 24, which illustration was used for the first time by Gessler in his 1928 article).13 The only cogent reason for creating this shape appears to be to prevent rotation of the beak, as well as of course, the rotation of the whole shaft in the halberd head. The beak when it first appeared in the late thirteenth century was independently forged, and was fastened onto the wooden shaft between the eyes of the blade. This construction is clearly seen in fig. 18 and 21 (Dorneck 1499), as well as in the fourteenth century halberd in fig. 35. It is slender, long, slightly curved and does not appear capable of resisting great force. Soon the eye of the beak was elongated vertically to fill more of the space between the blade eyes. Already in the fourteenth century (fig. 21) and in one instance in the thirteenth century (fig. 10), the independent beak was replaced with one welded to the upper eye, first of the same shape as the older ones but soon of more massive vertical dimension. Not all halberds possessed beaks. They do not appear to be a regular feature until the fifteenth century. The lower portion of the beak shows a downward extension, called the flange, which appears at the very end of the fourteenth century and is in reality the rear edge of the blade, which could be expressed weakly or strongly, both because of the location and angle of the shaft socket and because of its use as a counterweight for the blade and also later as a matrix for decorative purposes (fig. 47). Curved metal reinforcing plates were occasionally nailed to the smaller diameter shaft between the eyes to strengthen that portion of the shaft, to protect it from a cutting injury and at the same time to prevent slippage of the halberd eyes over the shaft. This last was also accomplished by creating a rear langet descending from the lower eye and nailed to the back of the shaft. The langet initially had a length of approximately 9 to 18 inches and was fastened with 1 to 3 nails to the almost universally round shaft. As opposed to the later long, thin, and flat langets, these early types were curved to fit tightly against the round shaft. Somewhere in the transition of the fourteenth to the fifteenth centuries, the upper eye was occasionally closed on top, capping the shaft (fig. 17). The axis of the spike point on fourteenth century halberds was generally forward of the shaft, but with capping of the shaft after 1400; the placement is further back to be in line with it. Occasionally, in the fifteenth century, the spike axis was even behind the shaft but this is rare (fig. 48). On some halberds of the early fifteenth century, there is no upper eye; instead, the lower eye has been elongated to form a cylinder of approximately 5 to 6 inches in length and has a rear langet. Half the blade, the spike, and beak rise over this cylinder. A slightly later halberd is similar, but shows the significant step of transforming the function of the eye in holding the shaft to a more centrally placed socket, built into the blade to hold the shaft. The technique of forming this socket is discussed below. With this step, the greater part of the mass of the halberd was now located on

13

Gessler, E.A., Das Aufkommen der Halbarte von ihrer Frühzeit bis zum Ende des 14. Jahrhundert, Jubiläumsschrift von Dr. Robert Durrer, Stans, 1928.

extant examples of halberds

53

either side of the shaft—pattern that persisted through all subsequent forms of the halberd and even through its decline in the seventeenth century. A fine group in the collection of the Landesmuseum in Zurich is composed of four early halberds that serve to show the transition from eye hafting to socket hafting. The sketches in fig. 54, based on these examples, illustrate this change. The Basel groundfind in fig. 47 of ca. 1400 is very similar to the last of these four and appears to be the earliest surviving example of a shaft socket. It is located in the storage facilities of the Historical Museum in Basel, number 1910.93. The lower portion of the socket has rusted away, revealing a small remnant of the original shaft. In contrast to the well formed contour of later sockets, this one is merely a swelling over the pole caused by rough hammer welding over a mandrel; nevertheless, a slight backward tilt is already present in the shape of the socket. A poorly demarcated long flange was thus formed behind the shaft. The halberd itself is a long rectangle, its spike is flat, triangular and integral with the blade and its point is slightly behind the shaft axis. The partial destruction of this halberd by corrosion allows us to thoroughly analyze its construction technique. The weapon consists of two leaves of steel, hammer-welded together over a mandrel as stated before. Whereas the right blade leaf is completely intact, the left, which might have been a little thinner originally than the right, has corroded away as shown in the sketch in fig. 53. By following the remaining margins one can see that each leaf was the complete contour of the blade except that the beak is entirely from the left leaf. As opposed to most other halberds, the langets appear to be integral with the blade leaves, but this is not certain. The poles or shafts of the halberds under discussion gradually make the transition from round to square (or octagonal) cross section as an aid to maintaining a directional blow both during the swing and contact phase. Most weapons produced after the mid-fifteenth century have shafts of square or rectangular cross section, although occasional weapons are found whose shafts have oval cross sections. After the transition from eye hafting to socket hafting, the form tends to be square, which coincides also with the appearance of lateral langets. In the fifteenth and early sixteenth century the halberd in northern Europe reached the zenith of its use and many differing forms co-existed at this time. After the middle of the sixteenth century, large numbers of halberds were being used, and military strategy was being changed in Germany. Also France, Burgundy, Italy and Spain began to use halberds but to a much lesser extent; the weapon did not achieve great popularity in those countries. Halberds were, in the era of the fifteenth century Burgundian wars; not a common weapon in the army of Charles the Bold, except in the hands of mercenaries. In France in 1448, however, Charles VII began to change the composition of the standing French army in favor of the infantryman, recognizing the economic value of this move as opposed to the far more expensive option of equipping mounted knights. Louis XI, some thirty years later, having been duly impressed with the fate of Charles the Bold in the Burgundian wars against the Swiss, replaced some of his archery units with mercenaries, both Swiss and German, who were equipped with halberds and other staff weapons. As an aristocrat, Duke Charles did not believe in the importance of the foot soldier until the very end of his life. In fact, his lasting belief in the chivalric structure of the feudal society, which he helped to preserve and perpetuate, and his frenzied attempts to annex lands to Burgundy while ignoring that which was becoming clear to others, contributed heavily towards his defeat and death.14

14

The preceding discussion is based in part on Brusten’s L’Armee Bourguingnone de 1465 a 1468, p. 90 in

54

chapter three

Fig. 53. Sketch of what is possibly the earliest halberd with a shaft socket (Historisches Museum, Basel, no. 1910.93). The dotted lines show the edges of the corroded right leaf of the blade as well as the welded joint line at the front edge of the spike.

Fig. 54. Sketches of four halberd blades, displayed in the Landesmuseum, Zurich, showing from right to left, the transition from the eye-shafting method to the socket form. The blade on the left is roughly a decade later than the Basel halberd in fig. 47. (Drawings not to scale). Courtesy of the Landesmuseum, Zurich.

extant examples of halberds

55

Despite its substantial worth as an infantry weapon, the halberd was most effective when used in consort with other hafted weapons. The Swiss in spite of their successes of the fourteenth century against the Habsburgs, had come to realize, after their defeat at the battle of Arbedo in 1422, that the halberd could not be used alone and without the support of the longspear. Furthermore, the marked increase of the use of this last weapon led to their continued military success for the remainder of the fifteenth century, especially against the attacks of Charles the Bold, again in the Burgundian Wars. The use of the halberd in the composition of armies of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries is well documented in an excellent article by Meier.15 According to this study the German landsknecht adopted the halberd fully by the fourth quarter of the fifteenth century, and used it successfully, as did the Swiss, through the first half of the sixteenth century. The arsenal of the city of Vienna has a most remarkable halberd dating from the end of the fifteenth century, a type that is seen in only a few illustrations extant from that period.16 An identical halberd is present in a private Swiss collection,17 another in the von Kienbusch collection in the Philadelphia Museum of Art (inv. no. 481 in the von Kienbusch catalog). The catalog entry for this halberd mentions the existence of three more such weapons, probably held in private collections.18 The Vienna example (fig. 55) is well preserved, having been in the arsenal since the date of its manufacture. It is known in German as a “Sturmhalbarte,” or “Hallebarde d’Assaut” in French (“assault” halberd in both languages), and is distinguished by its large mass (weight) and dimensions, including a shaft of ash with a diameter of close to 3 cm. The blade is a long rectangle with a slightly convex cutting edge, and measures 32 × 10 cm. The spike is quadrangular but hollowground and only 25 cm. long. A beak is present and shows a mark, but it has no flange. The socket is exceptionally long, curved slightly back, and recurves slightly as it continues into the lateral edges of the hollow-ground spike. It recurves again at the base as it joins the langets, which measure 65 cm. and contain eight nails each. Hammer welding is evident at the socket base. The man wielding this type of weapon must have been extraordinarily large and strong, and its effect was surely devastating. The sturmhalbarte was used to defend a given area such as a town square under attack, but it appears too massive to have been used on a moving field of battle. There is, however, a battle scene in the “Saxon Chronicle” printed in Mainz by Peter Schoeffler in 1492 showing the use of halberds very similar in size and shape to the “sturm” halberds just described, leaving open the possibility that it might have been a combat weapon as well.19

which he makes it clear that the “vouges” (i.e. halberds) he portrays are those in the Musee de la Porte de Hal in Brussels (now the Musée de L’Armée), which may or may not have an association with the fifteenth century Burgundian armies, and adds that none of these are found in contemporary illustrations of the Burgundian wars, and of the period in general. His primary sources include the chronicles of Jean de Wavrin, Jean de Haynin, Jean de Roye, Jean de Looz, Philippe de Commines and Olivier de la Marche. Charles the Bold believed in strong artillery (described at great length by Brusten), which he built up following the lead of his ancestors, to be the best in Europe, but most of which was lost in the consecutive defeats he suffered in the fight against the Swiss, along with his life. 15 Meier, Jürg A., “Verbreitung und Herkunft der Halbarte im alten Zurich”, Zurcher Chronik, February 1972. 16 For example, The raising of Christ on the Cross, painting by Wolf Huber, 1525, Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna. This type of halberd is seen on the right half of the panel. 17 Armes Anciennes des Collections Suisses, Heer, E., et al., ed. Musée Rath, Geneva, Edita, Lausanne, 1972, p. 57, no. 261. 18 The one in footnote 17 may well be one of these. 19 The entity of the “sturm” halberd is here identified by its peculiar enlarged and twisted spike tip, its’ massive blade, as compared to a man’s head (top left center), and the shape of the blade. Interestingly; the combatants are driven on by a trumpeter on one side and a drummer on the other.

56

chapter three

Fig. 55. “Sturmhalbarte” from the arsenal of the city of Vienna. The spike of this massive weapon is hollowground. Its great weight required skill and strength to manipulate. Courtesy of the Museums of the City of Vienna, inv. no. 126011.

Fig. 56. Late 15th–early 16th century halberd with a flat sword-like spike showing a strong central rib. This type, commonly depicted by Dürer in his woodcuts and engravings, may therefore be of German rather than Swiss design and manufacture. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 25.135.7.

extant examples of halberds

57

A large heavy rectangular form like that of the late fifteenth century persists into the sixteenth century (fig. 50) and is illustrated in fig. 57, a 1508 woodcut by Hans Wechtlin, a Strassburg master, as well as in an engraving by Dürer (fig. 58),20 with the vertical diameter of the blade still twice its width. In the evolution of the weapon there was initially a triangular flat spike, wide at its base, but soon a quadrangular spike tip emerged, turned so that an edge, not a flat face, faced forward, and was less wide at its base, this example is illustrated in fig. 50. The large blade (20.4 × 10.2 cm.) is rectangular but the lower portion is generally narrower than the top, and the cutting edge therefore is slightly drawn in (fig. 52). Beak and flange are prominent and flat. One variant of this time had a convex blade pulled in completely to the socket at its base. Another variant featured an almost square blade with rounded edges, an almost straight cutting edge, a stout flat spike set well in back of the shaft axis and a relatively small straight beak. The most interesting feature of this as well as other examples (fig. 48) is the long vertical shaft socket, and the tip open to the superior edge of the blade. The oldest shaft sockets that were integral with the blade were tilted back towards the beak at their tips and in some instances, such as the one cited above, remained open to the surface at the superior edge of the beak. A photograph of this detail is seen in fig. 51, with the tip of the shaft being visible at this opening. In general the shape of the socket straightened out later in the sixteenth century and was completely vertical. The shaft socket was formed by hammer-welding the two heated leaves of iron (the blade) over a mandrel of cool iron, the shape of which was either curved or straight and corresponded to that of the upper end of the wooden shaft. Although the reason for the backward tilt of the socket tip is not clear, it can be postulated that this form served to increase the diameter (depth) of the cutting blade at that point, which allowed it to cut more deeply before the shaft socket stopped its penetration. Depictions of halberds in fifteenth-century illustrations show the large rectangular type of halberd to be the most widespread, especially in the land of its birth, Switzerland. However, certain other types were also present in significant numbers, namely those resembling the Zürich type, which more recently have been unfortunately labeled as “Sempach” halberds. There is no evidence whatsoever that these weapons were extant at the time of the battle of Sempach (1386). The Zürich-type halberds rather were manufactured largely in the seventeenth century by smiths such as Lamprecht Koller and Hans Balthasar Erhardt, to fulfill orders to stock the city arsenals (fig. 59b). These weapon-smiths appear to have invented the form of not only the Zürich type halberds, but other types as well, each associated with specific cities in Switzerland. The fact that large numbers of Zurich type halberds, for instance, were ordered leaves us with a historical mystery and a disagreement among scholars. It would have been strange, for the city fathers to order vast numbers of halberds to stock their arsenals for use in time of war without evidence of a workable shape and without a previous record of use and success on the battlefield. Nevertheless, there is some evidence that this indeed was done, as a few of the contracts between the smiths and the town councils have survived. One of these, between the master smith Claus Lerchli of Kempten, Germany and the city government of Zurich in 1585 accepts the form of the halberds as delivered to them, and states elsewhere that the drawing the master had provided the town was an

20 Dürer, A., Crucifixion, from the engraved passion, 1511, B. 13, M. 13, as well as in many other engravings and woodcuts of this period.

58

chapter three

Fig. 57. Woodcut by Hans Wechtlin (1480-after 1526): “Christ Before Anna”, from the series entitled “The Life of Jesus Christ”, 1508. Note the halberd like those in figs. 50, 52, and 56, as well as the “Hängelaschen” (hanging plates) covering the shoulders and attached to the collar of the Maximilian-style helmet. (See page 147.) Private collection.

extant examples of halberds

59

Fig. 58. Albrecht Dürer: “The Crucifixion” from the engraved Passion of 1511. Note the halberd with a flat spike on the right which appears to be more popular in Germany than in Switzerland. Private collection.

60

chapter three

Fig. 59a. A halberd in the Altes Zeughaus in Solothurn showing signs of use and wear, and without 17th century marks, distinguished also by a different smithing technique, and consistent with a 15th century date. Halberds like this one may have served as a model for the 17th century types such as in fig. 59b. Courtesy of the Museum Altes Zeughaus, Solothurn.

Fig. 59b. 17th century halberd by Lamprecht Koller of Würenlos, canton of Aargau, 1663–81, until fairly recently classified mistakenly as 15th century and called a “Sempach” halberd. The shafting nails are sunk in conical holes in the langets and ground flat. Private collection.

extant examples of halberds

61

acceptable form for these halberds.21 One could assume, however, that Lerchli as well as the later Swiss smiths such as Koller and Erhardt might have used an older type as a model rather than invent one. Soldiers in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries might have had strong opinions on the subject of using unknown forms of weapons, but by the second half of the sixteenth century, city governments decided (and provided) the weapons to be used in case of attack. Whether the smith invented the Zurich type halberd or based his drawing on older battle tested halberds, specifically on one type still extant in the arsenal of Solothurn is as yet unknown. This halberd in the Arsenal of Solothurn, Switzerland, appears slightly smaller than the seventeenth century “Zurich” types and has marks not associated with the seventeenth century smiths previously mentioned. It has a different smithing technique, is also less well preserved and shows scars of use; the shaft diameter is smaller and the wood has an older appearance (fig. 59a). It is at least possible, that it represents a true fifteenth century halberd type on which the seventeenth century design was based (fig. 59b). Contrarywise however, these forms are neither numerous nor are they shown in contemporary fifteenth century illustrations, leaving the whole question somewhat open. One other such weapon, however, was a part of a sale at Galerie Fischer in Lucerne in 1985.22 It had almost the exact proportions of the seventeenth century Zurich types, but a flat broad spike, sharpened only in the front, four long and broad langets, and a keeper (a somewhat later addition). The shaft was a replacement. The beak had a mark, resembling, but not identical with, the Schorno mark, but definitely not that of the atelier Schmidt.23 It originated slightly before the year 1500, and it seems quite probable that it, or one like it (as in Solothurn), served as a model for the huge seventeenth century series we have just discussed. On this subject, there is considerable disagreement, and J.A. Meier firmly believes that no such forms existed in the fifteenth century.24 Other older forms similar to those used at Morgarten (1315) were also made for the purpose of stocking arsenals. The reader is referred to the publication of J.A. Meier cited below clarifying the long time confusion on this subject.25 The halberd in question, the “Zurich” halberd of the seventeenth century (and possibly of the fifteenth), is typified by a compact square blade with a slightly convex cutting edge, short triangular massive spike, at first flat then with a low central rib and with or without quadrangular spike tip. The shaft socket is central, in line with the spike and straight. Relatively long langets are present, and the flange is small. The beak is a powerful downward facing triangle somewhat like a nose in profile. The blade is often perforated by a cross and stamped with a mark at the base of the beak, features not seen in fifteenth and sixteenth century illustrations.

21 Meier, J.A., Stangenwaffen aus Kempten für Zürich, Rapport de l’Institut Suisse d’Armes Anciennes (Grandson), vol. 3–4, published under Marc A. Barblan. 22 Catalog for the weapons auction at Galerie Fischer, Lucerne, May 28, 1985, item no. 2. 23 This workshop, in Munich, produced large numbers of halberds as well as other staff weapons in imitation of various types of originals, towards the end of the nineteenth century that were, for decades, thought to be genuine. The atelier did this in response to a sudden popular demand for this type of weapon from central European nations, more acutely aware of their historic past, and known now as the period of “historismus.” It included some revision of their history, the worship of these formative years of their countries, and the desire to collect of weapons and other artifacts of these periods. 24 Personal communication. 25 Meier, J.A., “Sempacher Halbarten—Die schweizerische Halbartenrenaissance im 17. Jahrhundert ”, Festschrift Hugo Schneider, Zurich, 1982.

chapter three

62

The end of the fifteenth century marks the beginning of the final phase of the great popularity of the halberd, now in the hands of each side of perennial rivalry: the German Landsknechts and the Swiss Reislaufer. Staff weapons other than the spear or pike were not universally used in Europe. They were present, if at all, in minor quantities in the armies levied by the French. But, beginning with the last quarter of the fifteenth century and during the first half of the sixteenth century, mercenaries (Landsknechte) hired by Francis I, and also led by Georg von Frundsberg for Charles V at the battle of Pavia in 1525, certainly fought with staff weapons. They are seen on both sides in the Swabian war of 1499 (the Imperial forces of Maximilian against the Swiss) and in the battle of Novara on the sixth of June 1513. The armies of fifteenth century Burgundy did not use staff weapons other than long spears to any great extent, but a change occurred in the armies under Maximilian I after he acquired the Duchy of Burgundy, first by marriage and then by succession to Charles the Bold, his father in law (d. 1477). Maximilian was an astute military leader and realized the significance of the successful Swiss tactics and their weapons. He began training six or seven thousand German soldiers in the style of warfare used by the Swiss. It is stated that it was he who coined the word “Landsknecht,” which is somewhat untranslatable but designates a freewheeling warrior moving mostly in groups, having something less than the rank of a squire (knecht) and being mostly a free peasant or farm-hand seeking his fortune as a soldier. These men had the advantage of being muscular, used to the rigors of peasant life (doing “without” and enduring), and willing to quit the isolation of the farm for a very attractive alternative; the excitement of war, women, wine and booty. Maximilian also realized the value of grouping these Landsknechts according to the districts they came from, thus creating a solidarity and single-mindedness of purpose. These formidable soldiers usually stood him good stead, but there were drawbacks. The record reveals that on occasion, they were quick to disagree with the field commanders, wont to do their own will, and in the case of the much-feared Swiss “Reislaufer” (mercenaries used by the French), they might indeed decide to desert en masse, and at critical times. There are small but significant differences between Burgundian-German-Austrian halberds, weapons used by the forces of the Holy Roman Empire, and those of the Swiss Confederation. The Swiss, who had as we have seen, developed and “refined” the halberd, came to rely more and more on the importation of the halberd by beginning of the sixteenth century. They imported their weapons principally from the Germans, who had built up many smithies specialized in the large-scale production of such weapons as the halberd. Nevertheless some production by the Swiss persisted into the seventeenth century, but by that time, the large numbers of halberds ordered by the Swiss town-governments were made in German shops almost exclusively.26 The final decoration if there was one, and the shafting, was probably executed locally. For example, the Swiss would have cut a St. Georges cross into the blade, whereas the Germans might have cut a long-tailed trefoil into the beak. In the final years of the fifteenth century and in the first decade or so of the sixteenth, the cross of St. Andrew, derived from the coat of arms of the Duchy of Burgundy, would have decorated German halberds, as it was the symbol of Maximilian I. Existing examples of these “Burgundian” halberds are rare. Only four are easily researched. The first is marked on one side of the blade with a large cross of St. Andrew inlaid in latten; its beak is pierced with a long tailed trefoil, which is probably of Styrian manu-

26

Personal communication by J.A. Meier.

extant examples of halberds

63

facture (ca. 1500). This halberd was most probably used by the forces of Maximilian in the Swabian war (fig. 60). An illustration of these forces in action, is seen in a woodcut panel out of the “Triumphal Arch” of Maximilian by the artist Wolf Huber (fig. 61). The German landsknechts, bearing the symbols of Burgundy (the cross of St. Andrew) on their dress and on their weapons, had by then adopted halberds. The Swiss on the right of this illustration, are marked by the cross of St. George, known later as the Helvetian cross and worn by them for the first time at the battle of Laupen in 1339. The second and third such halberds are in the arsenal in Graz, are of slightly later date, and are marked by a brass inlaid X on the flat base of the spike and a perforated bulbous-ended X respectively. A photograph of the fourth halberd, marked by a point-perforated cross on its blade can be found in an auction catalog published by Galerie Fischer in Lucerne (1999). A similar halberd was carried by a German landsknecht facing death in a large anonymous woodcut entitled “Death and a Landsknecht” of 1504, which is now in a private collection in Schloss Friedenstein in Gotha.27 A similarly marked but slightly later halberd is carried by a landsknecht guarding the Emperor Charles V in a single-leaf woodcut of 1530 by Jörg Breu the Elder, now in Wolfenbüttel (one of a set of 10 prints, G. 357).

Halberds Elsewhere in Europe Although England and Italy made limited use of halberds, a fair number of halberds of the Italian style and make, have been present in the Tower of London since the sixteenth century. It is documented that Henry VIII ordered such weapons from Italy. A well-known Italian merchant, Leonardo Frescobaldi, is known to have sold Italian staff weapons including halberds to England around 1510.28 Shortly thereafter, Henry formed an army to invade France. In describing his departure from London, the Venetian observer, Antonio Bavaria wrote of the presence of a 6000-man contingent bearing halberds.29 The Royal Armouries also possess halberds, some as groundfinds, of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. The bill, as will be discussed later, was on the whole, a much more popular weapon in England. Halberds were little used in warfare in Spain and in the Scandinavian countries. The scholarship on Spain relating to staff weapons is mostly old and in need of revision. The large catalog of 1898 of the Real Armería of Madrid by the Conde de Valencia de Don Juan, mentions only two halberds of the sixteenth century from the army of Charles V (possibly of German manufacture) and only a further fifteen halberds of the seventeenth to nineteenth centuries, described as parade arms.30 Calvert’s historical and descriptive account of 1907, while giving us very good photographic plates of the Armería, adds little to the 1898 book and is full of inaccuracies.31 For instance, regarding halberds, Calvert depicts a sixteenth century folding spear (? folding partisan) spiedo di ripiegarsi, which otherwise resembles a decorated runka, as the Emperor Charles V’s halberd. In the same illustration,

27 Walter Karcheski has kindly called my attention to this illustration, which Geisberg has numbered 1573 in his list of unidentified artists. 28 Seitz, H., Blankwaffen I, Klinkhardt & Bierman, Braunschwig 1965, p. 383. 29 Bosson, C., Le Morgenstern, in Armi Antiche, Bolletino dell’Accademia di S. Marciano, Torino, 1963, no. 1 p. 117. 30 Don Juan, El Conde V De Valencia de, Catálogo de la Real Armería de Madrid, Madrid, 1898. 31 Calvert, A.F., “Spanish arms and Armor ” New York, John Lane Company, 1907. Calvert was not a student of arms and armor.

64

chapter three

Fig. 60. A halberd of ca. 1500 marked with a cross of St. Andrew on the right side of the blade, probably German or Flemish (Burgundian) and of the type shown in fig. 61. Private collection.

extant examples of halberds

65

Fig. 61. Woodcut by Wolf Huber for the Triumphal Arch of Maximilian, 1512–1515. The Swiss and Imperial forces meet during the Swabian war of 1499. Note the halberds and longspears on both sides, as well as the cross of St. Andrew and the Helvetian cross (St. George) marking clothing and flags. The “ready” position of the longspears in the foreground is also interesting. Private collection.

66

chapter three

an Italian roncone of 1500 is labeled as being a Moorish boarding weapon. The small guide of the Armería by Javier Cortès in 1956 sheds no additional light on the subject.32 The latest guide is a small, well-illustrated booklet published in 1987, in which there are illustrated two large partizans of the early sixteenth century.33 One is being held in the hands of Charles V’s “oak leaf skirt” armor garniture for combat on foot; the other is in the hands of a highly decorated half armor of the early seventeenth century. A large Italian type of halberd with gilding and etched decoration is present in the Castle of Chillon on the lake of Geneva, and an identical one was sold at Galerie Fischer, Lucerne in November 1959, No. 57 (fig. 62). The weapons are decorated with a large crowned “K” surrounded by a fasciculated ring and four flint and steel symbols with emanating flames suggesting the Arms of fifteenth century Burgundy and associated with the order of the Golden Fleece. These motifs were adopted by Charles the Bold, (Karl der Kühne, Charles le Téméraire) or his father, Philip the Good. If the letter “K” stands for Karel in Flemish, then it suggests that these weapons were carried by Charles’ Flemish bodyguards. Although the weapon is massive and simple in form, it appears to be later in style than the times of Charles’ rule (he died in 1477 in the battle of Nancy). Because of the ties between the Duchy of Burgundy and the Holy Roman Empire, which were cemented by the marriage in 1475 of Maximilian I to Mary of Burgundy, daughter of Charles, it is also possible that Maximilian’s grandson Charles, (son of Philip the Fair) who became Duke of Burgundy in 1515 and King of Spain as Charles I in 1518 (and upon the death of Maximilian in 1519, Emperor Charles V), had the halberds made for his bodyguards. Both the close ties of the Dukes of Burgundy and those of the Holy Roman Empire to the Papacy may explain the Italian style of the halberds. In any case, it is noteworthy that the Italian style halberds, with their forward tilted blades such as this one, bear a slight resemblance to the roncone, a very popular Italian weapon of this time, derived over a long period of time from a Roman pruning tool and described in a later chapter. In the second printing of the “Nuremberg Chronicle” by Anton Koberger in December of 1493, the German text refers to Charlemagne as “Karl der Gross(e)” above his woodcut portrait, while retaining “Carolus” as his name in the text. It is therefore perfectly plausible that the letter “K” on the halberd in 1516 would be used to refer to Charles V (“Karl” in German). There is question as to its authenticity by J.A. Meier, but its slightly unusual form could be the result of its transformation into a guard weapon, otherwise it is very similar to the Italian weapon shown in fig. 65. The Italians hardly used significant numbers of these weapons before 1500; they did arm themselves with glaives, roncas, and roncones, as well as slender long partizans, and spiedi da guerra. A notable exception is the presence of a prominently displayed early halberd in an illustration by Niccolò di Giacomo of 1373 in a manuscript from Bologna (near the time of the battle of Sempach) reminiscent of the halberd of fig. 62.34 The two are similar except that the inferior part of the di Giacomo blade is fastened to the shaft by an anterior langet, and the upper shaft is inserted into an eye that is capped and integral with the top of the blade. The somewhat short shaft is studded with large nails along its

32 Cortes, J., Guia Ilustrada de la Real Armeria de Madrid, Patrimonio Nacional, Madrid, 1956. A scholar and personal friend; but severely limited in his official duties by the lack of funds under the Franco regime. 33 Lacaci, G.Q., Armeria del Palacio Real de Madrid, editorial Patrimonio Nacional, Madrid 1987, p. 25 and p. 131. 34 Lucain, Pharsalus Trivulsian Library, Milan, Ms. 691, fol. 87, Pompeus Gnaeus (magnus) and his troops.

extant examples of halberds

67

Fig. 63. Italian halberd of about 1500. Both edges of the spike are sharpened down to the beak-spike. Note the scorpion mark. Private collection. Fig. 62. Large decorated Italian halberd, probably end of the first quarter of the 16th century and made for the bodyguard of the Emperor Charles V. (Several have survived) Courtesy of Galerie Fischer, Lucerne.

68

chapter three

Fig. 64. Italian “scorpion” of about 1530. Note that although the weapon is quite functional, there are already many small attempts at decoration. The weld mark of the mid back spike is shown in the detail photo of the scorpion mark. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art inv. no. 14.25.360.

extant examples of halberds

69

entire length, and its base is shod with iron. It should be noted that this halberd, with its quite long blade (length to width ratio of 6:1) although similar in appearance to the early glaive seen in the Maciejowski Bible illustration in fig. 88, is differentiated from it by the fact that the glaive is hafted by its socket to the top of the shaft whereas the halberd’s shaft is behind it, extends into an upper eye, and has a lower anterior langet. Italian use of halberds is greatest in the years between 1500 and 1600. The typical weapon from the early part of the century shows either a slightly concave or straight cutting edge on a long thin blade capped by a flat triangular spike, most showing however a low central ridge. A small straight spike may also be present in the mid back portion of the blade with decorations at its base (fig. 63). There is no flange. Pointed basal lugs may be present; either straight or curved. The shaft socket is below the blade and is in line with the spike. An evolutionary relationship is suggested between this type of halberd, a preceding bill-like weapon, and the concomitant and more popular roncone. It also coexists with a similar form called a “Scorpion,” so named because it bears a scorpion mark (fig. 64). The scorpion, however, has a less massive blade and a raised, acutely pointed upper blade edge. The beak arises high on the blade back and is curved downward. A pair of basal lugs, front and back, are usually present, as well as a second small horizontal spike issuing from the middle of the back of the blade. A very well preserved halberd of this type from about 1500, which may have originally been a gift to the city of Basel and has been in its arsenal since then, illustrates a playful artistic freedom. It is now exhibited in the Historical Museum of Basel (fig. 65). It has, besides all the classical features of Italian halberds such as lightly punched-in dots on both faces of the blade as decoration, a most outstanding design; namely a fox barking at a dog. This “reversed order of things” die umgekehrte Welt of the Germans and le monde à l’envers of the French, that we find here was a popular theme in the late middle ages and renaissance but can be found in illustrations well into the nineteenth century.35 Famous examples of the phenomenon include Pieter Bruegel the Elder’s masterpiece “The Netherlandish Proverbs” of 1560 which illustrates this reversal of the normal order of things. Israel van Meckenem’s late fifteenth century engraving “Hares Roasting the Hunter” in which the rabbits carry the hounds to the roasting area for boiling, is a similar example. Late forms of Italian halberds are hardly distinguishable from those of other countries in the seventeenth century, except of course Switzerland, which stocked earlier type weapons into its arsenals and simultaneously manufactured some weapons typical of the seventeenth century elsewhere. The late Italian halberds are probably unique in the respect that they manifest the widest variability of form found anywhere. One finds them combined with all manners of other staff weapons as well as exhibiting a great array of elaborate design that emphasized form over function, as was characteristic for Italian art and decoration over many centuries. Despite great variation, the shapes of halberds in the period 1500–1550 do have certain common characteristics that distinguish them. By 1500 the blade had diminished somewhat in mass and size, having slowly evolved into a triangular shape (not much higher than wide, (figs. 66–69a). Its spike had lengthened over the previous century and was almost universally of quadrangular cross-section and in line with the shaft. Figure 69b, a 1518 iron etching by Dürer illustrates this style.36 The inventory of Basel’s Zeughaus (arsenal)

35 36

Tristan, F., Le Monde à L’envers, Atelier Hachette/Massin, 1980. Albrecht Dürer, “The Cannon,” iron etching of 1518.

70

chapter three

Fig. 65. Italian halberd ca. 1500 with punctuate decorations on both faces. This side shows a dog barking at a rabbit (the right world) as opposed to the other side, which shows a fox barking at a dog (the “world upside down”). The flat spike with the prominent rib is similar to the one in fig. 56. Courtesy of the Historisches Museum, Basel, inv. no. 1905.4142.

Fig. 66. Halberd of ca. 1510–20 with a quadrangular thickening of the beak tip (similar to the spike tip). Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 42.50.20.

extant examples of halberds

71

Fig 67a. Early 16th century halberd with a convex cutting edge. The mandrel opening is present between the base of the spike and the beak. Private collection. Fig 67b. Typical “triangular” bladed halberd of ca. 1520, with a sharply drawn in cutting edge. The spike is massive, as is the beak. Private collection.

72

chapter three

Fig. 68a. Halberd of ca. 1520 with a concave cutting edge and a broken superior tip as well as a weakened lower tip. The blade as usual is constructed of two leaves welded together. The langets measure 76 cm. in length. Private collection.

Fig. 68b. Halberd of ca. 1520 with an unusual socket and central straight vertical rib above it that is entirely solid. Probably German. Private collection.

extant examples of halberds

Fig. 69a. Halberd of ca. 1530–40 showing “flame” shaped langets on an original ash shaft. Private collection.

73

Fig. 70. Ash shaft of halberd showing a rough cut, as well as refined mark, “5”. The upper figure is possibly the arsenal mark itself. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 42.50.20.

74

chapter three

Fig. 69b. Detail of A. Dürer’s “The Great Cannon” iron etching of 1518 M. 96. The halberd held by the Landsknecht leaning against the cannon, though slightly indistinct against the roof of the house, is typical during a relatively long span of time in the 16th century. Private collection.

extant examples of halberds

75

of 1591 notes the presence of 334 halberds with awl-spikes, “ahlspitzen”, thus we know the contemporary name of the quadrangular spikes of the fifteenth, sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.37 The awl-pike, (ahlspiess in German) a fifteenth and early sixteenth century weapon favored by the Austrians, had the same type of long spike, but it featured a roundel at the base, where it was mounted on a pole. The older halberd spikes, it should be remembered, were flat rather than quadrangular. An exception to the quadrangular form of spikes, were those found only in the closing years of the fifteenth and in the beginning of the sixteenth century. They were flat and sword-like with a median sharp ridge and of medium length (fig. 56 for example). They were most probably of German, rather than Swiss, origin. In the beginning of the sixteenth century, halberds had two or four broad and long langets (see chapter 5). By the middle of the century the langets were thinner and shorter. The lateral langets integral with the shaft socket on Swiss halberds occasionally have a wave or “flame” form (fig. 69a). Just below the throat, at the joint of the socket and the langets, there appeared occasionally a “keeper” (zwinge in German), a tight square ring around the shaft and its langets, to strengthen the bond of the metal head to the shaft (fig. 56). The function of the langets, other than to prevent the cutting off of the shaft by some other weapon, was to stabilize and strengthen the union between shaft and halberd head, as it also did for other weapons such as pikes, glaives, roncones, and other shafted arms. The cutting edge of the blade could have been convex, straight, or concave and was generally angled to the shaft axis, the superior portion, jutting forward. Surviving specimens show that the straight and convex blades were more successful. Extant concave blades tend to show broken superior or inferior tips (fig. 68a). The beak of sixteenth century halberds was almost universally flat and angled down, but rare quadrangular beaks do exist (fig. 66). As some of these weapons were, by about 1500, beginning to be stored in town arsenals, some of the few surviving shafts show arsenal marks and numbers cut and sometimes burned into the wood (fig. 70). Rarely the shafts are shod with iron. A rather peculiar and rather rare series of halberds stylistically consistent with a sixteenth century origin, called saber-halberds have survived. These weapons, of dubious authenticity, have a small convex blade and a long, extremely flexible flat spike resembling a saber blade (fig. 71). They do not appear terribly effective, are poorly balanced, and do not have enough stiffness in the blade to cut or thrust effectively. They have no beak or flange but rather a very long socket enclosing two or four non-integral langets. The spike blade has a central groove. The weapon has a length of about 8 feet (2.4 meters), which, with its heavy head, must have made it very difficult to use in close combat, if it was ever used at all. Despite exhaustive research the weapon does not appear in the manuscript or book illustrations consulted. It is most likely a nineteenth century invention. There are, in some localities, instances of late but functional halberds lacking the decoration usually seen on late staff weapons. One such non-decorated halberd by the Styrian smith Peter Schreckeisen of about 1570 is shown in fig. 72a, whose main function judging by its very long spike, was thrusting. Combinations of halberds with other weapons are usually unique variations, such as a halberd with a beak transformed into a hammer.38 The later the date of the weapon, the more likely it was that variations might have appeared, as for example in a circa 1600

37 38

Schneewind, W. ibid. Müller und Köllig, “Europäische Hieb und Stichwaffen,” Militärverlag der DDR., Berlin, 1981, p. 254, #249.

76

chapter three

Fig. 71. Saber-halberd, probably 19th century. The spike blade is too flexible for effective cutting and is not very useful for thrusting. The mass of the halberd head is not at the end of the weapon, thus also reducing its impact. Although these weapons are well made, they are in all probability products of 19th century romanticism. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 25.188.2.

Fig. 72a. Thrusting Styrian halberd of about 1575 by Peter Schreckeisen of Waldneukirchen; the beak is still functional appearing, the blade less so. Courtesy of the Landeszeughaus, Landesmuseum Joanneum, Graz.

extant examples of halberds

77

Fig. 72b. Etching by Jacques Callot of the Crucifixion scene, ca. 1640. Note the halberd as well as a morgenstern, roncone, and true pikes. Callot worked extensively in Italy, and at this time, Italian halberds resembled those from elsewhere. Private collection.

78

chapter three

north Italian halberd showing two spikes in a V shape configuration.39 “Custom made” variations, although interesting, are not significant in the overall history and use of the weapon.

“Oriental” Influences Local blacksmiths as well as more specialized weapons manufacturers must have had ample opportunities to examine weapons and armor foreign to them. One can imagine trophies found on battlefields being brought back by returning soldiers. Furthermore, mercenaries (Landsknechts or Reislaüfer) constantly passed through villages and cities, en route to armies or new “employers”. Here they would stay for a shorter or longer period of time and participate in activities and festivities (usually to the detriment of the community) as well as exchange information. These smiths then might easily have tried to copy weapons they or the soldiers found interesting or effective, or to modify or change their own design. In fact, smiths themselves would have been recruited to accompany armies into the field, less to manufacture weapons than to repair damaged ones. Here again they would have found opportunities to observe and examine material from other parts of Europe and elsewhere. For any given smith working alongside smiths from other locations in field forges, these differing techniques might also be learned and thoughts exchanged. Undoubtedly knights and local soldiers returning from war also described weapons they had found effective even if they did not possess them. Of course this type of exposure leading to stylistic borrowing was not limited to weapons. Armor and even styles of clothing were designed occasionally to imitate foreign, often Middle-Eastern, styles. When what we call “Middle-Eastern” styles influenced Europeans of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the influence was called “Oriental.” For example, by the middle of the sixteenth century, and after the Turkish invasions, Ferdinand II of Austria had established tournaments in the oriental style (alla turca), and had moreover, ordered armor made in the Turkish style, not only for his personal use, but also for most of the participants of the tournaments.40 The extant collection of Ferdinand’s weapons can be found in the “Turkish Room” in the castle of Ambras, near Innsbruck; although no long staff weapons outside of lances are present, maces, swords and axes in the Turkish style are represented. It seems likely that the popularity and therefore the perpetuation of a given design of staff weapon was dependent on its success, without regard to numbers of them in any given conflict situation. In the days before municipal arsenals issued arms to its citizens, that is before the sixteenth century, it was the individual soldier or group of soldiers who commissioned and bought weapons from the weapon-smith and probably had some say as to the form and style of the weapon requested. Despite the copying, some designs remained unique to a given location, such was the case in fact with the Lucerne hammer, and the Styrian “gusy.”

39

Boccia, L.G., Coelho, E.J., “Armi Bianchi Italiane,” Bramante editrice, Milan, 1975, N.TR. 461. Pfaffenbichler, M., Europäische Waffen im orientalischen Stil aus den Beständen der Hofjagt- und Rüstkammer des Kunsthistorischen Museums in Wien, Z.H.W.K. Otto Schwartz & Co., Göttingen, 1996, pp. 117–128. Gamber, O., Führer durch die Rüstkammern Erzherzog Ferdinands, in Schloss Ambras- Rüstkammern, Kunsthistorisches Museum, Wien, 1981, pp. 33–59. 40

extant examples of halberds

79

Around 1550, the halberd began to show a rapid decline in numbers used in warfare, as well as in the quality of its material and manufacture; but, at the same time, it became subject to extensive decoration.41 Although still popular, the halberds’ use shifted by 1600 to functions other than in battle. A fairly functional-appearing halberd appears in an etching by Jacques Callot of ca. 1640, in the hands of a soldier or guard in a crucifixion scene (fig. 72b). At first the ceremonial halberd was relegated to town guardsmen and night watchmen, then in the eighteenth century it was given to non-commissioned officers as a mark of rank. Ceremonial halberds were even present in America during the period of the Revolution. The use of the halberd in ceremonies continued into the nineteenth century in Europe where, in combination with a sponton, as Gessler writes, it found its way into the hands of village police, railroad functionaries and guardians of vineyards.42 The evolution of the halberd into a non-military, purely ceremonial function was the capstone on an almost 700-year-long period of its use as a fearsome weapon that played an important part in the reshaping of armies, the roles of classes in society, and, at least in some measure, the boundaries of nations.

41

Meier, J.A., ibid. Gessler, E.A. “Das Aufkommen der Halbarte und ihre entwicklung von der Frühzeit bis in das 15 Jahrhundert.” Revue d’Histoire Militaire, Paris, 1939–40, Vol. I, p. 148. 42

CHAPTER FOUR

DIFFERENT STYLES IN SIMULTANEOUS USE

Towards the end of the Middle Ages, and before regimentation and standardization of troops, individual combatants were often left to make their own choice of a particular weapon with which they were familiar and practiced. This weapon might be newly acquired or old, perhaps inherited through several generations, or recently transformed from a farm tool. Occasionally, it might have even been given by the local arsenal if there was one, or by the governing lord of the town or region. Early on, however, percentages of combatants bearing one type or another of a weapon were specified by royalty, the company leaders or captains, or even by town officials. This chapter seeks to demonstrate this diversity of use. In a marginal illustration by Albrecht Dürer dated 1515 on folio 28, recto in the “Prayer Book” of the Emperor Maximilian I, a group of peasants, battle landsknechts. The peasants wield various weapons, including a boar spear, an ahl-spiess (awl-pike), a lugged spear, and three halberds (fig. 73). The most prominent halberd is held high overhead at the beginning of, or during, a mighty swing, it appears to be an early type with two shaft eyes and a beak welded onto the superior eye, a rectangular narrow blade, and a relatively short flat spike in-line with the shaft, that is in effect an extension of the upper eye. The drawing’s date 1515 is inscribed on the blade. This halberd originates (stylistically) in the last decade or so of the fourteenth century. The figure on the far left wearing a fifteenth-century kettle-hat as well as some elements of armor including arm defenses and a mail shirt, however, wields a halberd contemporary with the drawing. It has a convex blade of small dimension, straight socket, small beak and a short flat spike. The blade shows three marks. A partly obscured figure in the group wields a halberd pointed forward, which resembles an Italian halberd again contemporary with the illustration (ca. 1500–1515) and similar to the one illustrated in fig. 62 and one in the Tower of London.1 It has a thin long concave curved blade ending in a short stout spike with a curved beak high on the back of the blade. One of the landsknechts is in the process of spearing a peasant lying on the ground with the spike of his halberd. The weapon has the typical features of a late fifteenth- or early sixteenth-century German or Swiss halberd; a massive square blade, a convex cutting edge, a quadrangular spike, a large beak and a flange. Another wields a javelin-like weapon resembling an oversized arrow, including feathers, known as a dart. Because of its fragile nature, it is possible that no specimens have survived, nonetheless, there are many are found in illustrations in literary works, so this weapon deserves discussion even though it is unrelated to the halberd. The head of the dart was barbed, and it could have been used either as a thrusting weapon as shown or thrown, hence its name “dart.” The feathers stabilized the trajectory during flight. It is also known as a “lancegay”, or “lance-ague” from the French, and appears to be identical with the “archegayes” or “assagays” of the Arabs, Byzantines, and

1

Troso, M., “Le Armi in Asta,” Istituto Geografico di Agostini, Novara, 1988, p. 118, no. 8.

82

chapter four

Fig. 73. Detail of the bottom illustration of folio 28 recto by Dürer in the Emperor Maximilian I’s “Book of Hours”. This scene shows a remarkable mixture of staff weapons of differing epochs (see text). Courtesy of the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Munich, L impr. membr. 64.

different styles in simultaneous use

83

the Moors of Andalusia. Froissart in his “Grand Chroniques de France,” describes how “men, armed in the manner of Castile, launched and threw darts and archegayes.”2 This weapon, with some modification, has survived in use and is manufactured to the present day by the African Massai. The dart appears often in the art of the fifteenth century, for example, this same weapon is seen in the St. Lambert panel, top center, in the hands of a mounted warrior riding next to Louis I, the Great, (1326–1382). He is about to thrust it into a mounted Turk facing him as an overhead strike (fig. 5). In an almost identical pose, a knight in full armor is about to strike an enemy in the second Clovis Tapestry hung in the cathedral treasury in Rheims. The tapestry, depicting the battle between Clovis and King Gondebaud was woven in mid fifteenth century Paris or Arras for Duke Philip the Good of Burgundy. A similar dart can be found about to be hurled by a mounted knight at a fleeing warrior chest deep in a river, in a fifteenth century miniature painting by Jean Fouquet entitled “The Battle Between Jonathan and Simon Maccabeus against Bacchid” from the book Antiquités et guerre des juifs, by Josephus. Again, a feathered dart lies next to a fallen knight under the hoofs of Penthesileas’ charging horse in a beautiful detailed miniature illustration of ca. 1460.3 In an exhaustive monograph on the subject of ceremonial arrowheads from Bohemia,4 Helmut Nickel describes the use of the dart as a symbol of authority in the hands of royalty (Maximilian I), officers of a court (a woodcut by Urs Graf ), and soldiers (a drawing by Albrecht Dürer of 1489). Olivier de la Marche (1425–1502) in his lengthy poem “Le Chevalier Délibéré” first published about 1486 with contemporary woodcuts by an unidentified illustrator, gives precise instructions for details of the pictures. In several scenes dealing with trials by combat and officiated over by “death,” the latter wields a dart of considerable size to command the outcome (fig. 120).5 Thus one can infer that the dart in addition to its use as a combat weapon had magisterial use as well. Again, turning to illustrations that record the field of battle where more than one weapon was in use simultaneously and where certain weapons are used in a non-traditional fashion, Maximilian’s prayer book scene is interesting. In addition to showing the traditional conflict of classes at the turn of the fifteenth to sixteenth centuries, it shows this remarkable mixture of battle elements from difference countries and epochs. Another marginal illustration by Dürer on folio 55, verso of Maximilian’s prayer book raises important questions regarding the places of chivalry and the knightly tradition in the politics of fifteenth to sixteenth-century Europe and the interaction of the artist with his patron in a rapidly changing cultural atmosphere. The drawing shows a foot soldier (landsknecht) attacking a fully armored knight on a heavily armored horse. The landsknecht uses his halberd as a spear (fig. 74). The halberd so depicted is massive, contemporary with the illustration, and has a flat triangular spike merging in the front with the

2

Froissart, J., Grand Chroniques de France, book III, John of Gaunt’s expedition to Spain (1386–87), “hommes armés à l’usage de Castille lançant et jetant dards et archegayes.” 3 Pisan, Christine de, Épitre d’Othéa, M.S. BR. 9392, fol. 18 verso, Bibliothèque Royale Albert Ier, Brussels. Pethesilea, the fabled and bloodthirsty queen of the Amazons, along with her subjects, was a popular subject of discussion for millennia, and in the works of Herodotus, Homer, Virgil, and Boccaccio as well as more modern authors. 4 Nickel, H., Ceremonial Arrowheads from Bohemia, Metropolitan Museum Journal, Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1968, vol. 1, pp. 61–93. 5 de la Marche, O., Le Chevalier Délibéré, Chiswick Press, London, 1898, plates on p. 44 and p. 48.

84

chapter four

upper part of the blade. Long wide langets are present for two thirds of the length of the shaft. The knight, in contrast, wields a minuscule war hammer appearing unequal to the foot soldiers weapon and inappropriate for the task. One questions why Dürer, who was dependent on the Emperor for his commissions and his promised pension, should choose to show a foot soldier so effectively challenging a member of the nobility? Maximilian, it should be remembered, was called “the last knight,” referring to him as the defender of chivalry and the whole medieval concept of order, which was rapidly coming to an end. Perhaps it was Dürer’s only way to communicate, or perhaps the Emperor despite his traditional stand, was not blind to the significant changes taking place all over Europe. As will be demonstrated in the chapter on the morgenstern group, Maximilian also championed foot combat with weapons previously regarded with scorn by the nobility. In this period, it becomes more and more common to find illustrations of foot soldiers challenging the mounted horseman, who was usually of noble rank. The fact that the nobility was loosing its primacy in winning any given conflict is demonstrated by the rise of the worth of the foot soldier armed with halberd, long spear, hand and a half sword, two-handers, and with a further variety of staff weapons as the determining element in the outcome of any given battle. Another example is pictured in the 1512 drawing by Albrecht Altdorfer, entitled “Knight Confronted by a Landsknecht in a Forest”, in which the knight bears a sword and is only lightly armored.6 Social stratification and the influence of battle on culture and politics can be found in the illustration of the Battle of Grandson (1476) in the Diebold Schilling Lucerne Chronicle of 1513 (fig. 75).7 The illustration shows soldiers equipped with late fifteenth century armor. The breastplates are of “gothic” two-piece overlapping construction. Sallets of the German type are worn, partly with reinforced brows, some with visors, and bevors fastened over the breastplates. Foot soldiers wear kettle-hats, sallets, and archers’ sallets with mail coifs or bevors. The clothing shows rounded shoes (“bear toes”), which do not appear before 1490–1500. One Swiss foot soldier wears “puffed” sleeves, a stylistically striking style of clothing seen in Switzerland (and soon elsewhere) beginning with the last two decades of the fifteenth century and becoming immensely popular for the next sixty years. This style is said by some scholars to have originated with the stripping of finely made Burgundian clothes from the well-to-do battle victims and from general booty. The burly Swiss, who could not fit into these smaller Burgundians’ clothes, simply slashed them to increase their size, and sewed in additional (and differently colored) material as filler. Yet in this illustration, the soldiers are wielding fourteenth to early fifteenth century halberds. This is evident because each halberd has two eyes over the shaft and a relatively long thin blade rising with a concave sweep to a spike point in front of the shaft axis. Some of these appear to have a dorsal langet, and the shaft portion under the blade is wrapped in a spiral manner with cloth or metal, much as the shafts of the cantonal flags carried by the Swiss. The Burgundians are seen wielding roncones, in this case, rossschinder (see chapter 9). This curious mixture of styles can be interpreted as reflecting the artist’s attempt in 1513 to depict (fairly accurately) combat in the third quarter of the fifteenth century. Thus one can imply that battlefields were often a mixture of new, old and eclectic compromise.

6

Rotterdam, Museum Boymans (MB 248). “The Battle of Grandson, 1476 ”, Diebold Schilling, 1513, from Amtlicher Luzerner Chronik, ff. 99V–100, Luzern, Zentralbibliotek. 7

different styles in simultaneous use

85

Fig. 74. Detail of the bottom illustration of folio 55 verso by Albrecht Dürer in the “Book of Hours” of the Emperor Maximilian I. The contrast of the armamentation of the combattants is striking. It speaks volumes on the reversal of roles and warfare in general. Courtesy of the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Munich, L impr. membr. 64.

86

chapter four

An example of revived manufacture of an older type of halberd at a time when even newer designs were being discarded or used for ceremonial purposes only can be found in the arsenals (now mostly transferred to museums) of many Swiss cities. It is a profoundly interesting point moreover, that the large quantities of these mostly seventeenth century weapons having been manufactured were not totally homogeneous but were in the style of many different halberds used over a time span of 200 years.8 Notwithstanding this introduction of certain stylistic irregularities, certain details both in the manufacturing process and in the design, aside from the smith’s marks however, make this era of design distinct.9 It is somewhat ironic that of the many thousands of seventeenth century halberds manufactured to stock Swiss arsenals, none at all were ever used for their intended purpose, although they appear to have excellent fighting qualities. The firearm had rendered them quite obsolete and ineffective. Yet, their manufacture and stockpiling continued. This has led to many errors in dating and labeling this category of weapon. In the crypt of the Historical Museum of Basel, for instance, a halberd of the type called “Sempach” (after the battle of 1386) is displayed as a fifteenth century weapon. It was in reality one of Hans Balthasar Erhardt’s halberds of 1627. The blade is fastened to the shaft by eyes, which, while having rounded edges, are basically squares. Thirteenth and fourteenth century halberds and those that continued to be made in the fifteenth, with very few exceptions, have round eyes. One exception is the excavated thirteenth century blade in the same museum, number 1873–1824, whose upper eye is almost a triangle (fig. 39). Square eyes are found in the early halberd shown in fig. 15, whose origins are much more likely directly linked to the Danish axe rather than to the thirteenth century blades such as in fig. 25, whose direct ancestors are more likely a gisarme-like weapon (but which in turn is also derived from the Danish great axe). The previously discussed illustrations among many others, intend to show the decline in the power and respect for the mounted knight, whose role in society and warfare was, by the beginning of the sixteenth century, no longer a leading one. The bourgeoisie had established itself firmly and was a power to be reckoned with both in peace and war. The nobility clung to the outward trappings that distinguished them from the lower classes, including armor, decorated weapons, and the continued martial exercises such as the tournament and personal combat. They were, however, observed by the common gentry with some indulgence but perhaps also with scorn. These mounted warriors who fought with individual valor became an insignificant minority, easily defeated by infantry formations. In the last phase of their existence, knights dismounted and fought on foot next to the common man turned soldier. By the end of the sixteenth and the beginning seventeenth centuries, battles were fought by disciplined soldiers governed not by their lords in civilian life but by professional officers. The halberd, in the hands of the footsoldier, and in conjunction with other staff weapons, was a powerful weapon that signaled a seismic change in the power relations on and off the battlefield. The medieval system had ceased to function.

8 9

Meier, J.A., ibid. See chapter 3 for details of these seventeenth century halberds.

CHAPTER FIVE

FASTENINGS, POLES, AND FINISHING PROCEDURES

In the general scholarship on arms and armor this subject is remarkably under-represented, therefore, it seems a few words on the subject are relevant. X-ray studies of a number of fifteenth and sixteenth century staff weapons reveal the techniques of fastening the weapons to the shafts to be moderately uniform with, however, a few exceptions. In the earliest halberds, blades with “eye” fastenings, single or two opposing nails are driven into the lower eye (usually from the side). The upper eye may or may not be nailed. An additional few nails are present in the dorsal langet (the steel strap issuing from the lower eye) when it is present. With the development of lateral langets, a larger number of shaft nails are found—the same number on both sides—ranging from 2 or 3 to 7 or 8 per side. The longest and largest langets are found on halberds of the outgoing fifteenth century. Additional front/back langets are sometimes present (not integral with the blade) predominantly in late fifteenth- early sixteenth-century halberds (fig. 76). The shaft on these halberds is thus protected on all four sides from cutting damage. Another quicker and somewhat cruder way of stabilizing the junction between the head and the shaft in the sixteenth century is shown in fig. 77, where the very broad langets are hammered around the edges of the square shaft. This method is not often seen. Nail holes can be opposite each other or not. When exactly opposed, the nails are driven in at an angle so as not to exit at the opposed hole. Rarely they are driven straight through and peened over so that they rest under the head of the opposing nail head (fig. 78a). The most common and (it would seem) best method was to drive a nail longer than the shaft diameter against the opposite inside surface of the langet where it is bent over for a distance up to a centimeter or so (fig. 78b). This method prevented loosening of the halberd head from the shaft upon repeated impact of or on the weapon. Screws, although known at these times, were not used for this purpose. They are found in the bases of spikes in the heads of percussion weapons such as morgensterns or “Godendags.” Later decorative and rank-associated halberds do occasionally show screws (seventeenth century), as do some of the functional halberds of the late sixteenth century. Screw-like profiles are seen in the X-rays studies of these staves, but because no slot is present in the nail heads, (which can be of either iron or brass), they must therefore have been hammer-driven (fig. 79a).1 Another system of fastening was the use of round headed bolts driven straight through and hammered over to form a similar rivet-like head on the opposite side (fig. 80b) This method is found often in the seventeenth century weapons commissioned for the town arsenals such as the “Sempach” types by Koller or Schorno. On some Sempach types, as the one in fig. 59 by Koller, the langet hole is conical, and the bolt heads were ground down to be flush with the langet surface (fig. 80a). In the early halberd in fig. 37, the rear curved langet is fastened in its center with a long nail driven through the shaft against a metal surface such as an anvil, since there is no opposing langet, and bent back into the shaft (fig. 79b). 1

It is not possible on the X-ray film to distinguish between true screws and ribbed nails.

88

chapter five

Fig. 76. A rear langet of an early 16th century halberd, both in place and by itself. Note the small claw-like upper portion which anchors itself in the throat of the socket between the flange leaves (and the blade leaves in case of the front one). It also wedges itself between the cheeks of the socket, thus forming a rigid box and stabilizing the whole structure. Private collection.

Fig. 77. A rapid and inexpensive method of stabilizing the union between the halberd head and the shaft. The lower part of the socket, consisting mostly of a broad langet, is hammered around the square shaft. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art.

fastening, poles, and finishing procedures

89

Fig. 78a. Opposing nails driven straight through and in two instances emerging through the opposite hole and bent over, under the opposing nail head. Early 16th century halberd. Private collection. Fig. 78b. Nails driven against the opposing inner face of the langet and bent over for up to 1 cm. This radiograph is of a Lucern hammer. Private collection.

90

chapter five

Fig. 79a. A mid to late 16th century halberd fastened with hammer-driven screws. Private collection. Fig. 79b. A radiograph of the halberd in fig. 37. Note the long dorsal nail through the langet which has been driven into an iron plate or an anvil applied to the front of the shaft so that the nail curves back on itself to lock into place. Private collection.

fastening, poles, and finishing procedures

91

Fig. 80a. A Lamprecht Koller halberd of the 17th century with peened over nail tips ground flush with the langet surface. Private collection. Fig. 80b. In this halberd the boltheads and the peened over points are not ground down. Private collection.

92

chapter five

Careful scrutiny of surviving staff weapons, especially halberds, reveals that a few have notches filed into the lower half of the throat just above the junction with the langet. It is questionable whether these marks represent the number of fatalities caused by that weapon. The habit was certainly not widespread. Some notches might also have been cut into the wooden shaft, but none is evident in any of the several hundred original shafts studied. Many of the surviving shafts are newer ones substituted for an original that was damaged, wormed, or bowed. This substitution might have taken place anytime between the actual life and use of the weapon to the present day, where presumably it was done for purposes of display or to enhance the weapon’s sale value. Original shafts are almost always plain and smooth and have a certain patina that gives them a luster that is hard to recreate. Many now have wormholes in varying numbers. The use of decoration such as incising or knobbing is more associated with hunting weapons where the staff is less likely to break or be lost. Tassels and leather bands are not originally associated with arms of war, except on weapons also used as standards or with pennants. Such accoutrements were popular in the latter half of the sixteenth century and in subsequent centuries especially on ceremonial weapons, as well as on those of lifeguards of the nobility and in the civil guard (night watchmen and functionaries). There are illustrations in early sixteenth century Swiss chronicles showing the wrapping of portions of the shaft with leather to strengthen the grip of the weapon in use, but such examples of this practice do not seem to have survived. There are early sixteenth century Brussels tapestry illustrations moreover, that show the upper part of the shaft wound with cord, but it does not seem to have been a widespread practice, and not seen in other contemporary depictions. Despite the use of langets as protection, halberd and other weapon shafts were often damaged and replaced within the period of their working lives. Surviving shafts often show grooving (for langets) and shaping that does not perfectly fit around the metal parts. Rather than indicative of poor workmanship in the preparation and fitting of the shaft to the weapon, this would more likely be the result of drying and shrinkage of the wood over time. Then again, some shafts, although undoubtedly original, fit the weapon perfectly. In these cases it is very likely that the shaft wood was seasoned before fitting, especially at the times of manufacture, but of course, such careful craftsmanship was impossible for battlefield replacements; these are the shafts of arms which, while stemming from close to the date of manufacture, would eventually show a strong tendency to warp. Storage of the weapons without thought for preservation in arsenals, castles, collections, and museums would also over time tend to cause warping. The natural shrinkage of wood due to drying, with time, could have effected a buckling of the langets as well as a loosening of the fastening nails, especially if they were not driven against the opposing langet so as to bend them at their tips within the wood (and thus anchor them firmly). Most original shafts, other than those of longspears, have a length of approximately 160 to 180 cm. (5 to 6 ft.). The oldest (round) shafts measure 4 cm. in diameter and the fifteenth- and sixteenth-centuries rectangular or square shafts with shaved corners (octagonalized), are usually 3.3 to 3.8 cm. in diameter. There was also standardization in the shaping of shafts; their mid-portions are the thickest; the bottoms and tops are slightly smaller (by 2–3 mm). The reason for this is not yet evident, but it does not seem to be from wear as the edges and angles of the bottom of the shafts are sharp. Bowing of original shafts is a not uncommon phenomenon. Most old shafts, when bowed, are convex on the beak side, possibly as a result of horizontal storage with the blade facing down. If notches were not found on shafts (it made sense not to cut into the upper shaft-wood

fastening, poles, and finishing procedures

93

so as not to weaken the points of greatest stress), letters or numbers associated with arsenals in their attempt to inventory weapons certainly can be found. We know for instance, because of a recorded transfer of 20 pikes from Lucerne to Bern in 1896, that Lucerne poles were branded LZ. These letters were usually burned into the wood. Rarely, a mark is seen near the base of the shaft, but there is one, for instance, on a German halberd of about 1500 (fig. 81). The mark is in the shape of a triangular arrowhead with a lower crosspiece and notched at the base. It may possibly represent a shaftmaker’s mark. This ash shaft shows much luster and is greatly worn just below the langet. Another shaft, perhaps a decade younger, has six marks burned into it just below the langets (three on each side) consisting of a roman “M” with a bar across its top (fig. 82). They may represent either shaftmakers’ or arsenal marks. Research so far has not shed light on the identities of the shaftmakers associated with these marks. Ash was the wood preferred by shaft makers. Cities in which shaft manufacturing was a large-scale industry reserved areas of certain domainial forests rich in ash trees for their use. These could be harvested periodically to supply the shafts for the staff weapons. In fifteenth and sixteenth century Switzerland, for example, there was a valley called the “Eschental,” the “Valley of the Ash Trees,” referring to the trees naturally growing in large numbers used originally for the manufacture of shafts.2 The valley was annexed by force from Italy; one of the Swiss military forays to it in 1410 presumably for the purpose of securing natural resources to support this military industry, is pictured in the 1470 chronicle of Benedict Tschachtlan. It is uncommon that wood other than ash was used during the period of active manufacture of staff weapons, as ash had the most desirable characteristics needed: it was light, extremely strong, hard, durable and relatively splinter free. Shafts of wood other than ash on a surviving weapon are almost certainly replacements, either old or modern. However, in the 1939 inventory of the historical weapons of the arsenal of Berne, Wegeli mentions that out of a total of 96 pikes, three had shafts of beech wood or birch, the rest were ash.3 Peasant weapons such as “morgensterne” (morning stars) or “godendags” as they were also called, are the exception. Their wood is usually pine or fir, but occasionally oak or ash. The metal portions were often fashioned by local blacksmiths and probably shafted by the peasants themselves. The process of shaft manufacture is described in some detail in the mid-sixteenth century “Swiss Chronicle”, by Johann Stumpf.4 The shaft makers from the Eschental split the trunk of a young ash into four longitudinal portions and then planed each to approximately the correct diameter. Each shaft was finally drawn and worked through one or more metallic die cutters set into sturdy wooden forms (fig. 83). The process was similar to (but in a much larger format) the wire drawing devices used in the making of mail, and wire in general. The shafts were then boiled in oil (probably linseed) in long copper vats up to 18 feet in length, since these shafts were used for long spears as well as halberds and

2

The “Eschental” is currently the Val d’Ossola in the most Northern portion of the Piedmont region of Italy. In 1410, a joint military force from several Swiss cantons was able to annex the Eschental almost without resistance as far south as Domodossola. In the ensuing 100 years (until 1515 to be exact) the valley changed nationality several times. These political changes probably had little effect on the trade for ash shafts for the Swiss. 3 Wegeli, Rudolf, Inventar des Waffensammlung des Bernischen Historichen Museums in Bern; K.J. Wyss Erben A.G., Bern, 1939. 4 Stumpf, J., Gemeiner loblicher Eydgnossenschaft Stetten, Landen, und Volckeren Chronik wirdigen Thaaten Beschreybung, 1548, (first ed.), book 9.

Fig. 81. Halberd of ca. 1500, octagonal ash shaft with a shaft makers’ (?) mark burned in at the base of the shaft. Private collecion.

Fig. 82. Halberd of ca. 1510 with two sets of opposing (three) marks burned into the top of the shaft sides. They appear to be a letter “M” with a bar across the top. Private collection.

94 chapter five

fastening, poles, and finishing procedures

95

other weapons.5 With use and continued handling, natural oils from the hands were deposited on the wood surface, causing in addition to the linseed oil, a smooth patina, referred to above. Although the Italian and French-Swiss shaft makers of the Eschental had great renown, there were also local shaft makers around Berne, Zurich, and Aarberg. As mentioned in the Solothurn archives, sources for shafts were woods near the city itself as well as in the Jura foothills between Yverdon and Aarberg. After 1600, many of the shafts were imported from Milan and other parts of Italy. Interestingly enough, the Swiss longspears were originally adopted from the spears used in Italy. There is documentation that in 1202 the Italians differentiated between the “lanceae longea” and the somewhat shorter lances of the mounted knight. Ordinances of 1327 in Torino specify a length of 18 feet for longspears of the militia.6 As stated in the arsenal of Berne’s inventory, the assembly of metal to wood, the actual shafting of staff weapons regardless of type, was a separate profession. In the days of town arsenals, the craft was performed either at the arsenal itself or in the workshops of the shafters. In 1587 raw halberd heads were delivered by Claus Lerchli to the town arsenal of Zurich, here they were ground and polished by the armorer Jörg Köchli. The actual shafting was done either by the arsenal assistants or the town carpenter.7 Archives in Graz reveal that Mert Pilgramb shafted the spearheads of master Michael Strobl for delivery to the arsenal, and Bartlmä Guessneger, Michael Schau, Hans Weiss, and Simon Wallpauer in the town of Stübing, supplied shafts to the arsenal between 1570 and 1580. The main smiths to manufacture spearheads (as well as halberds and couses) for the arsenal were Pancraz Taller and Peter Schreckeisen.8 While a reference to the shafting profession in earlier times is elusive, it is reasonable to assume that staff weapons in the thirteenth, fourteenth and fifteenth centuries were assembled either by the smith, or an independent “shafter,” in a municipal place, perhaps the town hall. As an indication of the importance of these shafts, the Berne arsenal inventory records 8,158 long spears present as late as 1687. This figure does not include halberds or other staff weapons. It was by no means the largest arsenal in Switzerland. Zurich had six arsenals before they were dismantled. For comparison, one should note that the arsenal in Solothurn (today the only surviving stocked arsenal in Switzerland) contains far more staff weapons than longspears: there are some three hundred and fifty staff weapons for 100 longspears. The Landeszeughaus Graz still has 2,826 halberds but only a few hundred longspears and less than 100 other staff weapons (partizans, couses, etc.). These numbers may have reflected the mix of weapons prescribed for battle at a given time in the history of the arsenal but were very likely changed since that time by de-accession, actual loss, or replacement by more modern weapons (i.e. firearms). 5 Somewhat surprisingly, Stumpf also reports and illustrates the fact that the long pikes were wrapped with leather some 130 cm. from their butt end to create a better grip. Such grips were not seen in any of the numerous surviving shafts examined. Several of the late fifteenth century Swiss chronicles, notably the Diebold Schilling-Lucerne and the Schodoler chronicles show a distinct spiral wrapping of the halberd shafts near the blade for a length of about 30 cm. This wrapping appears to be decorative, is often colored and not in an area used to wield the weapon in combat. 6 Although the largest numbers of surviving spears are to be found in the arsenal in Graz, they measure only about 3 meters in length. They are shortened longspears of sixteenth-century manufacture, but it was not the need to convert them to “pikes” in the seventeenth century that caused the shortening, but a whim of the nineteenth, during periods of rearrangements. 7 Meier, J.A., Stangewaffen aus Kempten, ibid. 8 Schwarz, O., Das Steiermarkische Landeszeughaus in Graz, Steiermarkisches Landesmuseum Joanneum, Graz, 1953, p. 34.

96

chapter five

Fig. 83. A shaft maker of the Eschental turning an ash shaft in a metal cutting die. Slots are present either for various diameters or possibly to shape the sections of split ash sapplings gradually from square to round. From the “Swiss Chronicles” of Johan Stumpf, 1586, Book 9, p. 554. Courtesy of Karl Mohler, Basel.

Fig. 84. Detail of an early 16th century halberd showing the original grinding (polishing) marks as well as the smith’s mark, an 8-pointed star. Private collection.

fastening, poles, and finishing procedures

97

Since some of these cities in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries including their outlying districts, could put some 10 to 20 thousand men in the field it is safe to suppose that they contained close to that number of staff weapons.9 An even larger arsenal was built in Innsbruck, in 1506 by Maximilian I. It was called the “new” arsenal because it replaced the insufficient small old one. It was also intended to be a safe and shielded space for the manufacture of gunpowder. It became, within the next ten years, the storehouse for Maximilian’s army and is said to have had sufficient arms and armor to equip 30,000 men. This was at a time when “his” landsknechts must have borne staff weapons in large numbers. Today however it does not have the authenticity of the arsenals in either Graz or Solothurn, as the original inventory is almost totally depleted and its method of storage is completely replaced by modern displays.10 Although not directly related to the above subject material, a few words should be said about the finishing procedures of halberd blades, but that hold for most other staff weapons as well. To remove hammer marks and eliminate small smithing defects from halberds and most other staff weapons, the blades were passed to a grinder and polisher before being shafted. It is thought that the only tool used by the finisher was the grindstone, both hand-turned and later, water driven. However, it is possible that filing was also used for this purpose, as some of the marks surviving resemble file marks. The most carefully finished items were undoubtedly armor and sword blades; the more mass produced shafted weapons must have been processed more quickly and were seldom really polished, the exceptions of course were the later highly decorated, etched and gilt parade and guard weapons. Many halberds that are well-preserved show very clearly the marks left by the grinding tools. The direction of these marks varies according to the contour and shape of the metal surface being worked (see fig. 84). By the fourteenth century, when cities were situated next to rivers, water mills were erected to perform a variety of water-powered tasks, such as wire drawing, grinding and polishing, processing grain, and powering large hammers to beat out metal plates from billets, in part for the use of producing armor. Some of these facilities, just outside the gates of Nuremberg, although not specifically those for grinding or polishing but for wire drawing, were the subject of a water color painting by Albrecht Dürer in 1489.11 The power of these mills was obtained from water wheels that carried the grindstones on long direct shafts, but they also used primitive gear wheels consisting of round spokes protruding radially from the wheels to change the turning direction. These relatively advanced “factories” sped up manufacturing procedures to the point where in the sixteenth century, series of armors, so called “munitions armor” for the common soldier, 9 Valentinitsch, H., in “Der Grazer Harnisch.” Styria Press, Graz, 1971, pp. 37–38. Also Vienna in the late fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, Waissenberger, R. “Die wehrhaften Burger Wiens” in “Das Wiener Burgerliche Zeughaus” Eigenverlag der Museen der Stadt Wien, 1977, pp. 28–29. 10 Pressures are nowadays put on museum directors and curators to modernize displays of these surviving rarities, usually by civil authorities in an attempt to attract larger numbers of visitors, that is, to popularize the institutions; but in the process the original purpose of the arsenals is destroyed. The original layout in Solothurn was altered a hundred years ago, that of Graz less drastically, but also significantly. An order by the Empress Marie Theresia of Austria to liquidate the “outdated” contents of the arsenal was overturned by intense diplomatic efforts. 11 Dürer, A., trotzich müll, watercolor on paper, Berlin, S.M.P.K., Kupferstichkabinett, KdZ 4. Reid and Burgess in their article entitled A habergeon of Westwale (The Antiquaries Journal, Oxford University Press, Jan.–April 1960, vol. XL, nos. 1, 2, p. 47) state that a certain Robert of Nuremberg is credited in 1350 for adopting waterpower to the manufacture of wire, which, it should be remembered was used principally for the production of mail defenses.

98

chapter five

were being made in large numbers. Heavy water hammers lifted by cams sped up the process of producing sheet iron which could be used both for the making of shafted weapons as well as for the production of plate armor. The finishing of staff weapons, among other metal artifacts, was of course, also enhanced. Lastly, in the seventeenth century, some but not many, staff weapons, were fire-finished, that is, blackened, to protect them from rust. Application of chemicals to the surface also produced a similar effect. The manufacture of shafted weapons, except for spears and the anachronistic demand for halberds by the Swiss into the middle of the seventeenth century for the town arsenals, all but ceased by about 1600 when the production of firearms in the field totally eclipsed staff weapons. Almost none of the seventeenth century halberds stocked in the Swiss town arsenals ever saw use, and those that have survived are still today in mint condition.

CHAPTER SIX

THE USE OF HALBERDS

The use of the halberd can be examined from two different perspectives: the actual wounds caused by its use and how the weapon played a role in the wider development of military efficiency and the growth and importance of infantry in battle. It is no exaggeration to claim that the use of such weapons as the halberd, grosso modo, helped to change the map of modern Europe. So impressed are the written and illustrated documents of the many witnesses with the use and effect of the halberd throughout its useful life (ca. 1315–1550) that one is forced to consider these accounts as serious and realistic, even when allowing for the usual and expected medieval exaggerations. Scenes of deadly injuries, such as decapitation (some even through armor), as shown in some of the illustrations of this chapter, were recorded by eyewitnesses to the actual event. Well-known artists such as Hans Holbein the younger, Urs Graf, Nicklaus Manuel (Deutsch), Albrecht Altdorfer, and other members of the Danube School have shown us in gruesome detail the work of the halberd. Some of these artists spent years as part of armies and were in actual combat situations, which they then chronicled pictorially. Others such as Benedikt Tschachtlan and Diebold Schilling gathered information some years following the battles of the Burgundian wars and wrote long and detailed chronicles with hand painted illustrations. The anonymous woodcut in the Kupferstichkabinet of Basel called “Dorneck 1499” illustrated earlier in this book (Chapter 2) is also a graphic example of the gruesome efficiency of the halberd (see figs. 22, 85, 86). Physical remains also give archaeological evidence of the effectiveness of the halberd. In 1898 the tombs of the Austrian nobility killed at the battle of Sempach in 1386, kept within the memorial chapel in Königsfelden, were opened. Most of the skulls found had been widely split open by what could likely have been halberds.1 The account of the death of Charles the Bold, who reputedly died of a stroke of a halberd in 1477 that was said to have cleaved his head to his chin, may or may not be apocryphal. Although it has been supposed that he might have been without his helmet on the battlefield, it would have been strange if he or anyone else of rank fought in a battle without a helmet, thus inviting sure death. It is also said that by the time his body was discovered it was halfeaten by wolves. No matter, if true—the cleft skull would still have been clearly visible. Whether the report of a halberd strike was first person, deduced from examining his remains or convenient to a chronicler is uncertain. Hugo Schneider, in trying to test the effects of halberds, performed an experiment in 1982. In the test, his locksmith at the Landesmuseum of Zurich, after some practice, swung a halberd dating from about 1650 and fitted with a new ash shaft, against a munitions

1 Although skull wounds caused by two handed swords cannot definitively be separated from those caused by a halberd, the greater weight and force of a blow from the latter is more likely to cause the dislodgement of a large bowl-like fragment of the calvarium than a blow from a two-hander (the only other weapon large and massive enough to cause such damage). Because of the lesser mass of the sword, a vertical blow would more likely be seen as a deep cut into the bone as opposed to a complete separation of a portion of the skull.

100

chapter six

armor of the third quarter of the sixteenth century mounted on a dummy.2 He was not able to pierce or seriously damage the comb of the helmet or the shoulder pieces. Instead, the hacking motion caused the halberd head to move backwards off the shaft with its langet and was thus disabled. Turning the halberd so as to use the beak, however, he succeeded in piercing the skull of the helmet easily, and then thrusting with the spike produced penetration of the rounded breastplate. Schneider concluded that halberds blades were basically unsuccessful against armor, but that the beak was in this respect better. Notwithstanding these findings, the experiment can be viewed with some doubt as to its validity. A film was made of the experiment, but it is difficult to obtain a copy.3 The halberd used in this experiment must have been one of the numerous (but anachronistic) seventeenth-century weapons ordered to stock one of the Zurich town arsenals. A new shaft was fitted to the halberd head, perhaps, as the experiment showed, not very well. The dummy, not housing a weighty human, possibly did not offer the resistance to the halberd blows, which might have otherwise caused the helm and armor to give under the force of the blow. The locksmith, although perhaps used to hammering, was certainly not as practiced as fourteenth-century Swiss peasants who had come by their expertise in chopping trees and splitting wood with axes since their childhood and whose very lives depended on producing the maximum force with the unrestricted swing of a halberd. A Swiss-arsenal halberd of the early seventeenth century was, of course, not primarily intended for use against armor. Earlier halberds of the fifteenth century had a nearly similar mass of metal, but they also were most successful against lightly armed infantry such as companies composed of landsknechts. The beak would, probably, pierce armor as tested because the mass of the weapon, with its swung velocity affecting just the point of the beak, would, if applied at right angles to the metal in question, bring enormous pressure to bear. It is quite certain that earlier halberds in the hands of a practiced fourteenth- or fifteenthcentury Swiss reisläufer could disrupt flesh and bone, mail, and occasionally armor if the blows landed correctly. There is enough attestation to the efficacy of the halberd in the literature and art of the period, as well as in the surviving evidence (fig. 87). One must bear in mind however that prior to about 1400, the steel mass of halberd heads was considerably less than the arsenal halberds of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, and their efficacy fell somewhere between a knife cut and an axe blow. A number of skulls recently excavated from a site near Dornach, Switzerland are apparently the remains of military casualties from the 1499 battle between the Swiss and the forces of Maximilian. The skulls have been cleaned and studied by anthropologists, who were able to divide them into the two distinct populations under Maximilian, the Burgundians and Germans, by their shapes. They were on display, with labeling, in the Museum Altes Zeughaus, Solothurn, but are currently shown elsewhere. What is relevant here are the shapes and sizes of the mostly fatal wounds caused by weapons that can probably be ascribed to having been halberds.4 Angled cuts are present penetrating completely through the convex surface of the skulls and exiting again in the region of the ear, removing a plate or bowl-like piece of bone. Unless the head was unprotected at the time of the blow (a circumstance that was possible on occasion) it seems unlikely that a sword, no matter how powerful the blow, or strong the bearer could split open a skull in this way. Figure 87,

2

Schneider, Hugo, “Erfahrungen mit der Halbarte,” Schweitzer Waffen Magazin: No. 1, Nov. 1982, pp. 48–9. This film has not been viewed by the author. 4 Some wounds could have been caused by two-handed swords; except that the surviving pictorial evidence of the time shows mostly halberds in use. 3

the use of halberds

101

Fig. 87. Three skulls from the battle of Dorneck in 1499 recently studied and restored (stabilized). These fatal wounds were probably inflicted by halberds. Courtesy of the Museum Altes Zeughaus, Solothurn.

102

chapter six

showing skulls in the Museum Altes Zeughaus, illustrates this point. A skull identified as being Burgundian from the battle of Murten (Morat) in 1476 is exhibited at the museum in Murten. It shows two large oblique cuts through the occipital (rear) portion, approximately 7 and 10 cm. in length, 3–4 mm. in width, and no signs of healing (which indicates that it was fatal). The length and width of the cuts are consistent with having been made by a halberd, although a two-handed sword might have produced similar defects. It is interesting to speculate whether the location of the blows indicates a fleeing man or even one lying prone on the ground. Notwithstanding this indirect evidence, such deathdealing blows are not uncommonly found in battlefield remains of these times. Thordeman, in his astounding archaeological chronicle of 1939, described in minute detail the skeletons of the warriors who fell during the battle of Wisby in 1361. He illustrated fatal wounds in skulls similar to the ones just described. There were no halberds in the mass graves, nor any large weapons, not even swords. The grave finds included large numbers of arrow and bolt heads and knives. One cannot rule out the fact that large weapons were indeed used, however. These, being much more costly to replace than arrows and knives, would certainly have been salvaged from the fallen. The battle occurred at about the same time as the battle of Sempach in Switzerland in 1386, in which halberds were a major weapon component after the front lines of the Austrians longspears had been opened. It is also possible that the use of the halberd had not in 1361 spread to the Danes and inhabitants of Wisby in Gotland.5 It is interesting to note that the use of a mail coif for protection of the head was relatively common, as many were found still on the excavated skulls of the Wisby defendants. The coif ’s prolific appearance is noteworthy first because it was expensive to own and most if not all the defeated Wisby defendants were peasants and other non-titled townsmen hurriedly amassed (some quite old). Secondly, their demise, despite this protection, was often a crushing or cutting blow across the exposed face (as well as penetration by arrows). It is assumed that there was no additional head protection besides the mail coif. In summary, it cannot be determined with any degree of certainty which weapons produced the horrendous skull wounds just described, but it seems likely given the illustrations in Swiss chronicles and poems cited, that the Dornach skulls, at least, were injured by halberds. There are many sagas, chronicles, and epic poems of the Middle Ages such as the Song of Roland, Froissart’s Chroniques de France, Mallory’s Le Morte d’Arthur, not to mention illustrations in the Maciejowski Bible or the Caesar Tapestries in Bern, that tell of or show a powerful knight or king splitting his mail clad and helmeted opponent (sometimes including his horse) virtually in half with a blow of his sword. These descriptions are perhaps wishful thinking or meant to flatter, but in any case they are vastly exaggerated, and, it seems, rather impossible. It also seems highly unlikely that a construction technique as difficult as that employed by the halberd-smiths would be used to manufacture a blade incapable of inflicting severe damage in battle. It is far more likely that both actions of the halberd were used, that is, cut and thrust. This is best illustrated in the Basel woodcut “Dorneck 1499,” whose enormous and complex battle scenes show the Swiss piercing armpits and buttocks with halberd spikes as well as exercising large overhead swings against an opponent with resulting decapitation or other fatal head wounds. Despite Schneider’s

5

Thordeman, B., Armour from the Battle of Wisby, Almquist & Wiksells Boktryckeri A.B., 1939.

the use of halberds

103

great expertise and research, the experiment previously described and the conclusions drawn from it, do not seem plausible or supported by contemporary illustrations. Many peasants, as discussed in a previous chapter, turned to the profession of soldiering as mercenaries. This was the transformation to “Landsknecht” or “Reislaüfer” and brought with it monetary rewards and a freer lifestyle than farming. In battles they were fierce and successful, recalling the words of John of Winterthur and the King of Bohemia (p. 34),—“they cut through their enemy’s armor as though with a razor, and reduced them to pieces”, and—“what a terrible sight this wedge formation is, with its horrible and frightening instruments of death”. Mercenaries were active in Europe even before the time of Christ. Contemporary artists, most of them sixteenth century, however, made it quite clear that the realities of landsknecht life were usually anything but rosy. Many illustrations show the returning landsknechtmercenary in rags, with an empty purse (having lost all with drinking, whoring, and gambling), and with the scars, mutilations and physical losses of war. At least one of them shows a figure, one-half brightly clad and wholesome as the landsknecht starting out to war, and the other half, wounded, worn, older and in rags and poverty, returning home. More needs to be said about the Swiss tactics in battle and as halbardiers. During their period of success in warfare in the fourteenth century, Swiss foot-soldiers were rather loosely guided by a field captain or leader who gave the time for attack or retreat but left it largely to the combatants to enact the command in whatever fashion they chose. As their cultural and social background was fairly uniform, the troops carried out the action by collective instinct, skirting fields at the edge of slopes or mountains, or creating a wedge formation for a direct attack, a phenomenon initially not formally prepared or rehearsed.6 Movement on a battlefield came naturally, much as might be found in a modern marathon race—the phenomenon of breaking up a standing group into a running one tending to produce a “wedge.” Later in the fifteenth and through the sixteenth centuries, organization and structured leadership became more prevalent. Towns determined the exact makeup of the troops both in terms of the weapons used and the rules of using them (classically, the mix of halberds and longspears and later, firearms). Also; the “hedgehog” formations or “squares,” and the lines of command were more clearly defined. These tight formations composed of longspears and halberds pushed in unison against the enemy— and only when the integrity of the other formation had been disrupted, did the hacking and thrusting begin. The Swiss were not alone in this use of the wedge. Military commanders often wrote treatises on warfare based on their years of experience in the field. Thus, Charles the Bold, in his military “ordonnance of Bohain en Vermandois” of 1472, described in minute detail the arming and composition of his regular troops. Furthermore he, as well as other commanders like Louis XI, Charles VII, and Maximilian I contracted with armorers and weapons smiths for large and specific standing orders of arms and armor to be delivered mostly on a yearly basis (although the shops themselves usually preferred to commit themselves only to a daily production rate). By the latter half of the fifteenth century, rulers had come away from the haphazard massing of troops and had come to realize the valuable connection between weapons technology, organization, and strategy.

6 Meyer, W., Hirsebrei und Hellebarde, Walter-Verlag A.G., Olten, 1985, p. 357. Meyer points out that the muster called out groups from towns and villages who had known each other as neighbors, friends or relatives and whose customs, habits and thinking were relatively “homogeneous”, and who, in all likelihood, would tend to react similarly in a given military situation.

104

chapter six

Although the increasing use of firearms slowly retired weapons such as the halberd from use on the field of battle during the 16th century, the halberdiers, in conjunction with the longspear-men in their hedgehog formations, inspired awe and terror in Europe during the 14th and 15th centuries. They helped to change the power structure and boundaries of the Holy Roman Empire, the Swiss Confederation, Burgundy, before its incorporation into the Empire, and, to a lesser extent, Italy and France, where their obsolescence was made definitive.

CHAPTER SEVEN

HALBERDS: DETAILS OF RAPID IDENTIFICATION

Thirteenth century Long, thin, slightly curved convex blade coming to a point without a well-defined spike. Small beak between eyes, or integral with upper eye. Blade is secured to round shaft by nails in one or both eyes. Rudimentary spike/point is present at turn of century. Rare depictions of shorter shafted square blades; few have survived.

Fourteenth century Upper edge of blade indents to form clearly demarcated spike. Head becomes larger, heavier, and more rectangular. Beak disappears as a separate part and is integral with head. Axis of spike is in front of shaft. Spike is short and sharpened, front and back. Rudimentary langets, integral with back (occasionally front) of lower eye, appear. Shaft socket created in blade, replacing eyes (very end of century).

Fifteenth century Blades are rectangular (early); some become angular (later). Flange appears. Spike moves back to be aligned with shaft, some of rectangular cross section. Beak is more robust and angulated slightly downwards. Langets become heavier and longer; second sets of langets appear (front and back). Shaft socket curves towards flange.

Sixteenth century Spike becomes longer with quadrangular cross section. Occasional flat spike with medial ridge. Concave or convex cutting edge appears; head becomes smaller in second half of century. Langets number two to four, becoming thinner and less massive. Shaft socket is straight after ca. 1540. Zwinge (collaret) appears.

106

chapter seven Seventeenth century

Pronounced crescent shape or light square head with long or short spike. Elaborate piercing, engraving and other decoration. Shaft may be shod in iron. Tassels and covering of shaft may be present (may also be added to earlier weapons). Massive and utilitarian forms in earlier styles produced for Swiss arsenals, alongside light parade and guard halberds. Note: production and use of early forms may persist locally into a subsequent century.

CHAPTER EIGHT

GLAIVES

The glaive is a large cutting and thrusting weapon whose shaft can be up to 2 meters (6’ 6”) in length. The blade edge is convex, the back is usually straight, but may be slightly concave. The shaft socket is central (unlike the similar appearing vouge) and basal lugs may be present. It appears in illustrations of the mid-13th century and may have been used even earlier. The name glaive, however, has been the source of confusion for a long time. It is important, therefore, to discuss the various names used for what we now call the glaive and the various weapons that bore those names. The confusion becomes understandable if one considers the multiplicity of geopolitical “enclaves” and the division of languages and dialects within which these weapons saw their use. It seems that many of these names are also probably errors of observation on the part of authors who, in the early twentieth century, were basing their opinions on yet earlier works of the nineteenth century as well as on anonymous (and incorrect) labels on weapons in dusty museums or storage areas. It should be remembered that nineteenthcentury writers on arms and armor were trying to organize a vast and almost forgotten subject matter and regarded merely as a curiosity with long obsolete information and sources. Standing out from this group, however, is the epoch making work of Charles Buttin, who meticulously researched archival information on staff weapons. His notes were published posthumously by his son in a series of articles called “Les Armes d’Hast” in the “Bulletin Trimestriel de la Société des Amis du Musée de l’Armée”. Rather than insist on establishing a “correct” name for a number of staff weapons having either vague or clear similarities, this chapter describes the development of a particular form, to give the names associated with it by quoting sources, and shows interrelationships with other staff weapons. In different modern and slightly older books and at different times, the “glaive” has been called a variety of names. To give an example, as described in Martin Ellehauge’s monograph on glaives, the word “glaive” is generic for long bladed cutting staff weapons with a minor thrusting component.1 Specifically, however, he refers to one form (like fig. 99) as a guisarme (a French term), which it is not.2 This same weapon is called a gläfe (glaive) by August Demmin, who gives as synonyms: guisarme and gisarme (English), again which it is not.3 He states that the English almost invariably confuse this weapon with a halberd and that the Welsh call it Llawnawr or Gleddir. The German name for what Demmin describes is rossschinder (horse-cutter literally, or “ham-stringer”) and the Italian name for this same weapon form is roncone or ronca (Troso writes elaborately about this weapon [see chapter 11]).4 The English call it a bill (late form). The modern Italian name is falcione. The French name, which is also used in English, is fauchard,5 which is perfectly acceptable, 1 Ellehauge, Martin, “Certain Phases in the Origin and Development of the Glaive,” Tøjhusmuseets Skrifter 2, Nordlundes Bogtrykkeri, Copenhagen, 1945. 2 Illustrations 28 through 33. 3 Demmin, August, “Die Kriegswaffen,” E.A. Seemann, Leipzig, 1886, p. 594. 4 Troso, Mario, “Le Armi in Asta,” Istituto Geografico De Agostini, Novara, 1988. 5 This weapon is called “fausart” in 1180, 1260 and 1288; “faussars” in 1370 and again in 1373 by Bernard de Guesclin, and “fauchart” in 1380.

108

chapter eight

but a slightly better synonym in English is still “glaive,” it seems, because of its more ancient roots. The staff weapon often called “glaive,” which name is derived from the Latin “gladius,” “glavea,” meaning sword, but which is definitely not a sword; is seen in illustrations as far back as the middle of the twelfth century.6 This word, in one spelling or another, is found in the English language as early as 1297, but then the word was used interchangeably for a lance or sword. The statement has been made that the glaive evolved from the war scythe at some point between 1200 and 1400.7 This is a difficult point to prove, as the two have little in common. The war scythe continued to be made in a more or less unchanged style and technique from antiquity into the seventeenth century and beyond (see chapter 19); its blade was adapted almost unchanged from a farming scythe, and all extant examples feature a corresponding concave (rather than the glaive’s convex) cutting edge, which would have been unsuited for thrusting. The glaive, as described more fully below, has a symmetrical, carefully worked haft (socket), is of a much thicker steel than the scythe, and has either a convex, or recurved cutting edge to the blade, suitable for thrusting. The oldest forms, moreover, have either a medium length or long shaft. There is not a reason to assume there is a developmental connection between the farming scythe and the glaive. A survey of the available pictorial documentation for the period of circa 1250–1450, illustrates early occurrences of the glaive roughly contemporary with the early development of the halberd. The blade of a glaive as seen in these early illustrations is, initially, slightly saber-like (single edged), had a slightly concave back-side and convex cutting edge. It is sharply drawn in near its base into a ricasso-like narrow portion, which is fastened possibly with a tang, into a short shaft appearing round and having approximately the same thickness as the shaft of a spear in the same illustrations. A fuller runs most of the length of the blade near the back edge, which on some illustrations is occasionally augmented by a wavy incised decoration. These images are found in the Maciejowski Bible of approximately 1250 that are probably from the Paris School, as they show figural similarities to the personages depicted in the Sainte Chapelle in Paris, dating from this period. In this manuscript, folio 10, recto, “The Israelites are repulsed from Hai,” the soldier at the extreme left carries a glaive-like weapon measuring approximately 126 cm. in length: the blade and haft each measure approximately 63 cm. (fig. 88). On folio 10, verso, entitled “Joshua cuts in half a mailed warrior,” Joshua uses a short-shafted glaive measuring 133 cm. in length; the grip is 33 cm., the blade 100 cm. (fig. 89).8 No sword-like grip is present, nor are there quillons or a pommel. In fact, the illustration on folio 10, verso, leaves open the possibility that the structure previously described as tang-like is in actuality a socket fitting over the shaft. Some illustrations in other manuscripts from Europe also feature glaive-like weapons, thus confirming their early use, but many do not, indicating only local and not widespread early use. The delicately drawn illustrations in the Winchester Bible from the second half of the twelfth century do not show glaive-like weapons.9

6 The Roman gladius was short and not at all like the slightly later Teutonic sword or the glaive at any point in time. 7 Puricelli-Guerra, A., The Glaive and the Bill. 8 These numbers are derived using proportions of the rider’s arm and those of a live model. 9 The Bible is still at Winchester Cathedral where it was produced ca. 1150.

glaives

109

An examination of the Wenceslas Bible in the Staatsbibliotheke in Vienna shows two large glaives in the hands of Israelite foot soldiers in folio 207, recto, where they confront the nobles and kings of other lands who carry swords and lances. These glaives, stylistically of about 1380, are remarkably similar to those of the mid-15th and early 16th centuries as can be seen in figs. 90b and 92. One of them even has a vertical backspike as in fig. 90b. The Wenceslas Bible was created over a long span of time, with a long hiatus towards the end, and covers stylistically almost a century (1360–1450). There is documentation that glaives were in use in Italy shortly after 1300. A prayer book of approximately 1380 in the library of Parma, Ms. Pal. 56, shows three scenes: “The Kiss of Judas,” “Christ in Front of Pilate,” and “The Mocking of Christ,” in which long shafted glaives are being carried by foot-soldiers, (alongside shafted sickles, spears with and without hooks, and military forks). Sketches of these glaive forms are shown in fig. 90a. Although glaives are relatively easy to find as single weapons in illustrations of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries (and they must have had a devastating effect in actual use), some drawbacks must also have been associated with their use as they were never present in large numbers, nor did contemporary “regulations” give them a prescribed number within military formations, as opposed to long spears, halberds, crossbows, longbows and later, firearms. In one of the Caesar Tapestries in Bern (fig. 91), an armored knight uses a glaive while locked in deadly combat with another knight who is fighting with a vouge. Each of these weapons has a roundel at the base of the blade, and, because the men are fighting at very close quarters, they grip the (long-shafted) weapons just under the roundel with their right hands and the shaft again, some two feet back, with their left hands. The weapons, which are cut and thrust in type, are used here for thrusting only, again because of the close quarters in this crowded and animated battle scene. Early to mid-fifteenth century glaives that survive are much like the earlier simple versions that have a fork-like backspike projecting upwards (parallel to the blade).10 Such a weapon is seen in fig. 90b. But, by the mid fifteenth century glaives, as well as other similar weapons, developed small stylistic and utilitarian additions. The classical glaive (fig. 92), which found its most widespread use in Italy in the late fifteenth century, had a slender half-moon like back-spike angled upwards; and above it, showed a rounded decorative swelling, portions of which were filed out. The half moon section might have been to “catch” the opponent’s weapon. Front and back basal lugs with cut out profiles were also present in some weapons and might have served a similar purpose. It is possible to gauge the widespread use of glaives in Italy in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries by their presence in illustrations by Paolo Uccello, Cosimo Tura, and Tintoretto, among others. Maker’s marks are common on Italian glaives of the sixteenth century including the well-known “scorpion” mark also found on Italian roncones and halberds (figs. 63 and 64). During the next hundred years of glaive manufacture, regional differences such as the Venetian forms (fig. 93) developed, and as always, ornamentation increased steadily— be it in the form of etched or engraved inscriptions, coats of arms or designs, gilding, or the practice of covering of the staff with velvet and adding tassels, indicating use by the

10 Just such a weapon is swung overhand against a shield bearing and armored foot soldier in a midfifteenth century Veronese drawing in the Frits Lugt collection. Pictured in Hale, J.R., Artists and Warfare in the Renaissance, Yale University press, New Haven & London, 1990, p. 149, fig. 195.

110

chapter eight

Fig. 90a. Sketches of two long-shafted glaives from an illustrated prayer book prayer book of ca. 1380. They are carried by footsoldiers in scenes from the Passion, along with a profusion of other staff weapons. Parma MS Pal. 56.

Fig. 90b. An early Italian glaive, mid to late 15th century, the forerunner of the glaive pictured in fig. 92. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. No. 14.25.259, gift of Wm. H. Riggs, 1913.

glaives

Fig. 92. The most widespread form of glaive—an Italian weapon of ca. 1500–20. Its overall length is 270 cm. (8 ft. 10 in.). It is possibly a guard weapon, but could clearly be used for thrusting and cutting in the field. Private collection.

111

Fig. 93. Venetian glaive, end of 16th century. Although the weapon is somewhat similar to the one in fig. 92; it is longer, more elaborate and has non-functional additions which distinguish it from weapons of war. Its great length also makes it impractical to manipulate in a crowded field of battle. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 04.3.103.

112

chapter eight

bodyguards of the titled and wealthy. It is safe to say that very little combat was seen by late-sixteenth-century glaives. Because they were more for ceremonial use and show, they were large, impressive, and decorated to commanded respect. Some extant glaive heads measure 85 cm. (2’ 10”) in length (including the socket) and have relatively short langets, containing only four brass nails, but some glaives have longer langets with iron nails similar to those of halberds. The shafts are commonly two meters (6’ 6”) in length and are usually rectangular in cross section or oval on each side. The Venetian palatial glaives that were popular at this time were massive, the blade having grown into a more bulbous apex with a rear-facing small apical point, which could no longer be used for thrusting (fig. 94). They were purely ceremonial and used by the Doges as well as by other guards of nobility. This arm was never found in great numbers in Northern Europe, although one can find glaives illustrated there before 1500. For example, there are two simple slender and long glaives; one with a backspike and one without, in the hands of French soldiers clad in typical Gothic armor in a manuscript of Giovanni Boccaccio’s “Des Cas des Nobles Homes et Femmes” from the region of the Loire valley in France, circa 1470. A small glaive is seen in the hands of Flemish infantrymen in a woodcut of ca. 1480 by the Master of the WA, of Bruges, similar to the one in the Caesar Tapestry. With a roundel at the base of the blade, it appears to be a local adaptation, as it is not seen elsewhere. Also of interest in this woodcut illustration is the fact that the glaives are interspersed between the long spears in the back row of soldiers (behind the archers), which is reminiscent of the use of halberds between the long spears of the Swiss. A glaive is being thrust against a Swiss by an Imperial soldier in an illustration from “Der Weisskunig,” Maximilian’s account of his deeds that was written between 1514 and 1516. Just as in the reports of modern conflicts; success was often claimed by both sides. Judging from this illustration of the Swabian war, the Imperial forces seem to be routing the Swiss. Looking at the woodcut produced by an anonymous Swiss artist, entitled “Dornach 1499” (figs. 18 through 22 in chapter 2), just the opposite appears to be the case. The truth, as usual, is somewhere inbetween; nonetheless, it is quite clear that Maximilian, after the Swabian war, had lost the Helvetian confederation permanently. Later, there is the woodcut of 1535 by Erhard Schön entitled “Infantry Company” which, very much in the style of the “Triumphal Processions” of this time by Dürer, Altdorfer, and Burgkmair, gives us a picture of the composition and order of both infantry and cavalry.11 In this particular woodcut it is noteworthy that large numbers of halbardiers and pikemen are present, along with somewhat smaller numbers of soldiers carrying matchlocks and two-handed swords. Only one landsknecht is present in the company of halbardiers, and he carries a glaive. The glaive ceased to be manufactured and used as a weapon by the middle of the seventeenth century.

11 Pictured in Andersson, C., and Talbot, C. “From a Mighty Fortress.” The Detroit Institute of Arts, 1983, pp. 334–336.

glaives

113

Fig. 94. This purely ceremonial glaive was meant mostly to impress and is also Venetian. It was a type used by palace guards of such important figures as the Doge, has lost its thrusting function and can merely cut. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 04.3.102.

CHAPTER NINE

BILLS

The bill is a ubiquitous weapon with many forms throughout more than a millennium of use, but it always features a forward facing hook on the upper end of the blade and often can be found with various spikes on the back facing up or rearward (or both). According to Laking, who concludes that the bill was the most popular staff weapon in England, the common bill was, in the late Middle-Ages, predominantly an English weapon.1 He cites the Royal Armouries’ inventory as recording the presence of 6,700 bills in the mid-sixteenth century. The glaive’s origins are somewhat in dispute, but it has been recently traced to Roman times. In an extensive discussion, Gaitzsch (1992), established a relationship between Roman sickle-shaped vine-pruning knives known as the securis or sichelmesser in German, (worn tucked into a belt) and the medieval and renaissance “glaives” or what we will designate “bills” (“ronca” or “roncone” in Italian).2 There seems to be little confusion about the nomenclature of bills except in the 1981 publication by Müller and Köllig, in which this weapon is called an “Italian halberd.”3 The Roman agricultural tool, as well as the later forms through the Middle-Ages, were simply made and have a simple shape (fig. 95a and b). The basic form of the securis is a that of a thick round or angle-headed sickle, usually with a small upward facing hook on its back and having almost invariably a roughly hammered, partially open socket at its base resembling a flange folded around a pole or shaft. It has previously not been clear whether the roman knife indeed had a shaft or was held by the metal socket itself. An example of this early type of weapon is the large securislike blade in the Cantonal museum of Baselland, which has a long stout tang instead of the more common half open shaft socket as seen in fig. 96. A Roman securis from a period between the late first and fourth centuries A.D. recently excavated near Jerusalem, is shown in fig. 95b. Dry soil conditions around the find allowed a minute fragment of wood to survive surrounding the securing nail driven into the shaft through the socket. This seems to indicate quite clearly that a wooden shaft, even if short, was present as a grip for the tool. The iron socket that held the wooden grip, as in practically all forms of the developing roncone, is a folded triangle as is mentioned above. This securis has a simple shape without the chisel-like cutting portion sometimes seen on the back of the blade or the upward facing hook; it resembles the type C of Schulze-Dörrlamm as pictured in Gaitzsch’s article.4 It is not surprising that in about two thousand years of burial in dry soil, an iron blade survived fairly intact, whereas arms and armor recently exca-

1

Laking, Guy Francis, “A Record of European Armour and Arms Through Seven Centuries,” London, 1920–22, Vol. 1, p. 144. 2 Gaitzsch, Wolfgang, “Sichelförmige Klingen römischer und Frühmittelalterlicher Datierung,” Waffen und Kostumkunde, Otto Schwartz & Co., Göttingen, 1992, pp. 85–98. 3 Müller, Henrich, and Köllig, Hartmut, “Europäische Hieb-und Stichwaffen,” Militärverlag DDR. Berlin, 1981, p. 248. 4 Gaitzsch, W., op. cit., but the type C illustrated is supposedly early medieval rather than Roman. Its’ very long socket, back rib, and long sharp point suggests that it may be a sickle, rather than a pruning knife or weapon.

116

chapter nine

vated from the moist and sometimes acid soil of northern battlefields having been interred fifteen hundred years later can be found almost totally destroyed by rust. A typical securis measures about 22 to 28 cm. in length; however larger forms have also been found that are probably of a slightly later date. Their size eliminates them from association with viticulture. Occasionally as in fig. 95a, a tang was present instead of the socket. Often, tools and weapons can be easily confused; this is particularly true with the bill because of its close relationship to a pruning tool. Discerning tool from weapon requires close examination and attention to makers’ marks, construction and presence or absence of shafts. For example, some securis-like forms have been found in burial sites dating from as early as Merovingian times. But, because they had remnants of longer wooden shafts, clearly they were used as weapons rather than as pruning knives. Bills of this simple type would have been widespread and popular in the Middle-Ages, and they could easily have been made by a local blacksmith. Figure 96 shows the shape of such a weapon, but this example was probably made by a moderately experienced smith in much more recent times (in either the eighteenth or nineteenth century) and for agricultural use rather than for battle. Its blade shows two large heart-shaped punch marks, and careful scrutiny reveals a longitudinal weld mark running from the curved blade tip to the lower back of the blade, close to the beginning of the shaft socket. Although the weld on the back speaks against concluding that it was a tool, the heart-shaped marks are conclusive. The Renaissance types, which are more complex, of better quality steel, and are better finished, show marks consistent with a weapon-making specialization of the smith. The Renaissance variations possess a spike making the bill similar to, albeit less massive, than a halberd or roncone. As opposed to the spikes of halberds, however, this quadrangular spike was fully in line with the blade surfaces (halberd spikes are turned 45° so that a sharp edge faces front, back, and to each side rather than a flat). Some roncone spikes were also flat and sword-like, as opposed to quadrangular. The sockets in better-made examples are closed, or if they were still open on one side, a solid cylindrical base was added (fig. 97). The backspike of these forms no longer curved upwards but projected straight back. An exception to this reinforced manufacture is the bill in fig. 98, whose delicate and elongate form belies the fact that it was made as a weapon of war. It is called a Faucille in French. Its’ long attenuated blade is curved into a right angle gradually over its 70 cm. length, and the backspike, after a 3–4 cm. horizontal projection, is bent upward and exceeds the height of the top of the blade. The base of the blade is hardly wider than the rounded socket, which shows the usual open side. It is difficult to believe that it was a successful weapon; even if the smith had tempered the blade extremely well, the thinness, light weight, and unusual length of the weapon suggests that it would have tended to bend or break with any significant resistance. The backspike would seem to be even more vulnerable than the blade. In a recent article, Blair discusses these forms, called Welsh bills, glaives or hooks, and forest bills, and shows that large numbers of them were ordered as early as 1493, by King Richard III.5 Nevertheless, he points out that the greatest documented use of them is by watchmen and constables. The weapon could not have caused great damage to an armored opponent or even to one wearing a brigandine, cuir bouilli, or even thick padded and quilted defenses. Its construction leaves little doubt that

5 Blair, C., Welsh Bills, Glaives, and Hooks, The Journal of The Arms & Armour Society, vol. XVI, No. 2, March 1999, Dyer & Son, Surrey.

bills

117

Fig. 95b. A Roman Securis recently excavated near Jerusalem, from between the end of first to the fourth century A.D. The inside of the socket contains fragmentary remnants of the short wooden shaft and its securing nail. This grip was probably no longer than ca. 12 cm. (4.5”) Private collection.

Fig. 95a. Roman securis or roncola, with a tang instead of the usual socket which was open on one side (see fig. 95b). Other forms had a small upward-facing rear hook. The shortest of these were purely tools and worn tucked into the belt. Private collection.

118

chapter nine

Fig. 96. The Italian type of Roncola armi pictured here is also found in Merovingian graves in the North. The actual weapon shown here is probably much younger, by virtue of the marks. The original forms were made, more or less unchanged, until the 15th century. Private collection.

Fig. 97. The Ronca, a much more refined weapon that the preceding Roncola armi, is fully capable of both cut and thrust action and is widespread throughout Europe. It still shows the presence of an open-throated socket for its shaft. Private collection.

bills

119

it was derived from the ronca (bill), and indeed the early forms shown in fig. 2 of the article (p. 75) bear a strong resemblance to the earliest ancestor, the securis in fig. 95b, and to Gaitzsch’s type A.6 The ronca in fig. 97 has a 20 cm.-long spike that is 1.3 cm. thick; the backspike is 9 cm. in length, and the blade is 6 mm. thick. It has a large mark punched near the back edge of the blade towards the base. The closed portion of the socket is fastened through the shaft with a large two-headed nail. This type would have been used on a 1.5 m. (5 ft.) long shaft in the fifteenth century. A larger, heavier, and more elongated form was popular in the fifteenth, sixteenth, and seventeenth centuries in Italy and spread around 1500 to North Central Europe, particularly Germany. This final form (fig. 99a) was called the Roncone in Italy or Rossschinder in Germany. Troso, in his very detailed description of these weapons, breaks them down into four types, namely: Roncola, the agricultural tool dating back to the Romans and in use well into the early Middle Ages; Roncola Armi, the weapon similar in shape to the aforementioned entity but generally longer and better made; Ronca, a fully developed fighting bill, with a backspike jutting out at 90 degrees from the back of the blade and with or without a topspike as previously mentioned.7 This is the “Brown Bill” used in England, but used widely elsewhere as well. This weapon was called a “Kriegsgertel” in German. A typical English bill is pictured in the exhibition catalog “Treasures from the Tower of London,” fig. 100.8 It bears more than a superficial resemblance to a halberd of about 1500, but as can be seen in the following description; is clearly not one. The light corrosion has served to show lines corresponding to the smith’s working the metal. It shows the back-spike or beak welded on just as in some halberds and some lines suggesting the possibility that the blade is a folded-over leaf. The socket, open on one side, is the usual triangular piece of steel folded over as in other bills and welded together as a bottom ring. The blade is somewhat square but has the top forward “hook” of a ronca. The topspike is especially prominent for a ronca and is angled back from the axis of the pole slightly. A similar bill is present in the Higgins Armory Museum in Worcester, Mass., except that its spike tip is quadrangular rather than flat. This type of weapon, much feared and used extensively by the English for centuries, appears to have been influenced by the shape of the continental halberd and the Italian ronca and seems to have been capable of performing both functions. One can certainly imagine the weapon being swung like a halberd and the blade edge having similar effects. The roncone is the fully developed Italian Renaissance bill. As Troso points out, the superior edge of the roncone’s billhook is sharp, which is in contrast to the blunt edge of the preceding forms. Several other features distinguish the two groups. The roncone pictured in fig. 99a, has a shallow longitudinal ridge in the center of the blade and two broad fullers on each side of it. The front one extends from the basal lugs into the beginning of the billhook and ends in a forward curve. The rear one runs out into the base of the spike. Some have a single fuller or none at all, i.e. the blade is flat. The back of the side of the blade is decorated with “eyelash marks,” common in this and other Italian staff weapons of the sixteenth century (fig. 99b). Two maker’s marks (eight-point stars) are present on each side near the base of the back spike. A thick bronze “keeper” is present over the base of the socket, which has a four-sided trapezoid shape. Short langets are present. 6 7 8

Gaitzsch, W., ibid., pictured on p. 89, fig. 7. Troso, M., ibid. Norman, A.V.B., and Wilson, G.M. ibid., p. 68, no. 52.

120

chapter nine

Fig. 98. A Welsh bill which is described as a weapon, but appears to be too delicate and frail to be successful as such. Its function is more likely to have been a symbol of authority in the hands of a constable or watchman. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 14.25.155.

Fig. 100. An English bill of ca. 1500. Note the typically open socket which is a folded triangle, the weld marks of the beak joints, as well as the “grain” of the blade steel at the bifurcation of the spike and the bill hook. This last indicates that the smith split the blade down to the bifurcation to separate the hook and the spike. Courtesy of the Board of Trustees of the Royal Armouries, inv. no. VII-1493.

bills

121

Fig. 99b. Closeup of another roncone’s “eyelash” marks. Private collection.

Fig. 99a. A fully developed Roncone of early 16th century Italy, similar to the contemporary Rossschinder of the Germans. This Italian specimen has typical “eyelash” marks along the lower rear blade. Private collection.

122

chapter nine

The shaft, which is not ash (possibly pine or cedar), was cut to be quadrangular to fit the socket; it, thereafter, was rounded for most of its length. This roncone is an example of the oft-appearing flat spikes that have sharp edges and a low central ridge; others, usually later, show spikes just like those on a halberd; that is, they are quadrangular and turned 45 degrees. The later the roncone blades; the wider they become, but almost all have a central convexity on the cutting edge of the blade. They measure an average of 80 cm. from spike tip to the base of the socket. The head of the roncone in fig. 99a weighs 1.3 kg. (ca. 2.5 lbs.), and has very sharp cutting edges, that extend down to the backspike. Below the backspike the blade back is flat across. Both edges of the backspike are sharp. Although most popular in Italy, illustrations of these weapons are also found in French and German manuscripts and books of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Illustrations in Maximilian’s “Weisskunig,” finished in 1516 but not published until centuries after his death, show the use of roncas by both the Swiss and the Germans in battle scenes (see also the lower right scene in fig. 75). Strangely enough, a large number of similar woodcuts of this period do not show bills in use. Most of them show only the usual mix of pikes and halberds. Bills and partizans, after they had been discarded as fighting weapons and in a diminutive form, assumed a role as the insignia of low ranking officers in the seventeenth century and even into the eighteenth in France and northern Italy. The best documentation of illustrations and text dealing with bills of all epochs is in a lengthy chapter in Troso’s book on pole arms. The reader is referred to it for more detailed information.9 The gross metallurgic structure of bills, that is the manufacturing technique, appears to be quite different from that of most halberds. No other weapon examined in this volume shows the complexity of manufacture of the early halberds. The roncone blade appears to come from a single billet of steel. No hammer-welded seam to indicate that two leaves had been welded together is present on the back of the blade. Instead, the surface is flat (see fig. 44). Initially, to make a halberd, a smith worked a billet of metal by cutting and folding it into a relatively complex blade, spikes, and lugs. The back flat at the base of the spike in such a halberd of the late 15th and early 16th century could measure up to 1.8 cm. in thickness. Conversely, in the roncone pictured in fig. 99a, the blade measures 4 mm. in thickness on the back flat and the socket walls are approximately 2 mm. thick. The socket was worked out by beating out a wide flat pyramidal shaped base and then folding it over a mandrel and hammer-welding it in the middle of one side. Langets were then welded on to the base of the socket. O’Hara and Williams cut multiple cross sections of an early sixteenth century roncone, said to be Italian (neither photographs nor marks are published).10 They performed hardness studies on the polished sections and photographed them as well. Their conclusion from these studies was, as is stated here, that the roncone was derived from a single billet of heterogeneous steel, folded and forged to shape. They mention also that no attempt was made to harden the steel (by analyzing the pattern of carburisation), although the pearlite and ferrite present were reasonably hard. The actual hardness varied greatly throughout the blade, ranging from 75.2 to 313 kg./sq. mm.11

9

Troso, M., ibid. O’Hara, J.G. and Williams, A.R., “The Technology of a sixteenth century staff weapon,” pp. 198–200, and five plates, Journal of the Arms and Armor Society, London vol. 9, #5, June 1979. 11 Using the Vickers Pyramid Hardness scale. The figures indicate the kg. pressure per sq. mm. needed to create a measured indentation by a diamond point. 10

bills

123

Thus, although the bill was a more-simply manufactured weapon than the halberd, it could—and did—function as a substitute for the more expensive and complex weapon. Interestingly, as was discussed, its use was just as geographically local as that of the halberd, and without any significant overlap between the two.

CHAPTER TEN

PARTIZANS

Partizan blades are basically long and triangular, like an enlarged spearhead, that has, in its’ later incarnations, small basal “wings”. The weapon was shortened and often combined with other weapon types such as the halberd, as it declined in importance. The partizan is one of the few polearms whose nomenclature is relatively uniform in Europe of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. It has relatively recent origins, arising gradually from the short spear, the evolution of which can be identified by a lengthening blade that, at some point (perhaps early fifteenth century) reached more than around 40–45 cm. (18 in.) in length and branched off the family tree of simple spears becoming known as a partizan. Seitz, commenting on the etymology of the word “partisan,” points to its Italian roots and that the name “partigiana” is the feminized word “partigiano”—meaning a member of a party (political or military)—and concludes that it must have been carried by groups united by some specific cause.1 In fact, the name seems to refer specifically to the members and guards of Italian princes and nobles, the partigiani.2 The name in slightly altered form was adopted by most European nations. In English a “z” was substituted for the “s,” probably to distinguish the weapon from the more commonly used human designation “partisan.” However, both forms are valid. The old French spelling is pertuisane, and the modern, partisanne, derived from the Italian partigiana. The exact forerunners of the partizan are not the winged spears of the Carolingian and Viking periods, whose blades generally were some 30–35 cm. in length (flugellanzen). The Carolingian spear’s “wings” arose from the socket rather than the blade itself, its’ equivalent in the time-period of the partizans is the Böhmischer Ohrenlöffel or Knebelspiess. Rather, the non-winged war spears, the spiedi da guerra, which had blades occasionally longer than 40 cm. were the partizan’s direct ancestor. As opposed to the partizan, the lower blade edges of the spiedi were gradually pulled in to meet a generally conical socket, with or without langets. A beautiful example of a late fifteenth century northern spear that is contemporaneous with partizan use; is present in the arsenal of the city of Vienna (fig. 101). It is an example of superb craftsmanship, and was so well constructed that it might have been used both for hunting or war, depending possibly on the length of its shaft. It would not have been used as an infantry weapon, however, as its head would have been too heavy on a 5 meter (16 foot) long pole and its construction too expensive. It could have found use as a horseman’s lance. The partizan, in contrast to a large spiedi da guerra, aside of having a longer blade, is also wider at its base, has straight edges and the base of the blade is more sharply pulled in, either at approximately 90° in early forms (fig. 102), or some 110–120° (fig. 103) in sixteenth century ones. Just after 1500, small upward pointed sidewings jut out from

1

Seitz, Heribert “Blankwaffen” Klinkhardt + Biermann, Braunschweig 1965 p. 231. Thomas, B., Gamber, O., Schedelman, H., Arms and Armor, Thames and Hudson, London, 1964, plate 45b, “folding-partisan”. 2

126

chapter ten

Fig. 101. Late 15th century spear with a heavy and elaborately worked head, resembling a partizan. Courtesy of the Museums of the City of Vienna, inv. no. 686, from the old city arsenal.

partizans

Fig. 102. 15th century Italian partizan stamped with a Gothic “4” and without langets. The base of the blade is drawn in towards the socket at approximately 90°. The blade is 55 cm. long and 10 cm. wide. Private collection.

127

Fig. 103. Early 16th century partizan with small side wings at the base of the blade and a strong central rib. The blade, without socket, is 78 cm. long; the width without the wings is 11 cm. Private collection.

128

chapter ten

Fig. 104. Partizan or lingua di bue, ca. 1500, probably Venetian. Two round brass inlays with seven perforations are present on the blade. The socket is hexagonal, and the tassels are probably a later addition. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 1425.119.

Fig. 105. Spiedi da guerra, probably Bolognese, end of 15th century. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 04.3.76.

partizans

129

the base. They became a regular feature of sixteenth century partizans (fig. 103), as well as on those of the seventeenth century and on later ceremonial forms. Fifteenth-century partizan blades are usually some 55 cm. in length and 6–10 cm. wide at the base (fig. 104). This type of partizan has been called ochsenzunge by the Germans, lingua di bue by the Italians, and langue de boeuf; at least since 1441, by the French. In an anonymous ordonnance of 1446 entitled “Du costume militaire des Français,” foot soldiers are to be armed with the very popular langues de boeuf. In contrast, the English, in the 1450 Rolls of Parliament, name the langue de boeuf the “forbodon wepon” (forbidden weapon), because they, along with boar-spears and long swords, were considered “unmerciable” (merciless) except in times of war. In 1487, the will of a J. Cooke of Somerset House mentions a “Jak ( Jack), a salett and a long debefe”.3 In the sixteenth century, partizan blades were longer and averaged some 75 cm. in length and generally 11–12 cm. in width at the base. There is almost always a central ridge, which can be faint (early) or sharply raised (later). The side wings vary somewhat in length but are usually only 2–3 cm. long. This weapon was also present in England in 1556, as Heywood names “Byls, bowes partisance, pikes.”4 The two partizans shown in Lacaci’s guide to the Armería in Madrid are similar to other partizans of the early sixteenth century, except that the shafts are covered with red velvet and are studded with brass nails.5 Tassels are also present. These features suggest either a later addition, or the special finish accorded to palace weapons for guarding, in this instance, the royal person of Charles V, as is suggested by their inclusion in the “Illuminated Inventory” of 1544. They show the small peculiarity of a shallow double concavity in the base of the blade joined by a third minute indentation. A shallow central rib is present along the entire blade. Two illustrations in Boccia and Coelho’s book on swords and staff weapons need comment. The first is of a partizan in the Hermitage Museum in St. Petersburg, probably Venetian, bearing the same mark (that of a large gothic 4) and having almost identical dimensions as the one in fig. 102. Both of these date from the end of the fifteenth century. The one from the book, number 182, has a delicate brass rosette with seven perforations inlaid in each side of the base of the blade. An almost identical one was present in the Galerie Fischer sale of June 1994, stamped with a mark resembling a small sword. Its brass rosette inlay has eight perforations. Both the Fischer and the Hermitage weapons have a peculiar rounded point as compared to the spiedi da guerra from which they arose. This probably indicates a slightly different function and their demarcation as a new weapon. The Hermitage specimen is called a “spear “in the previously mentioned book. Another very similar partizan, although with a somewhat shorter blade, is in the collection of the Metropolitan Museum of Art (fig. 104). It has two basal rosettes in steel with seven perforations. The blade is not a perfect triangle but shows the point to be more pulled in for the top 5 or 6 cm. The mark is a doubly crossed line issuing from a circle. Measurements of the length and width of the blade show most of these early partizans to have a remarkably similar width to length ratio (1:5.5), regardless of the actual length. This is in sharp contrast to the true spiedi da guerra, regardless of the country of origin. The spiedi (fig. 183 in Boccia and Coelho’s book quoted in footnote 142) typically were

3 4 5

Quotations from the Oxford English Dictionary, second edition. O.E.D., Ibid. Lacaci, G.Q., ibid.

130

chapter ten

long and slender, having a ratio of 1:11. An almost identical weapon from the Metropolitan Museum of Art (fig. 105) is marked “libtas” on the blade.6 The later partizans (early sixteenth century) typically had a much larger and longer blade so that the ratio was now more variable. A subset of partizans is seen in Boccia and Coelho’s book, numbers 307 and 308.7 They are called spiedi alla Bolognese in this work and are distinguished by ornamentation at the base, both etched and chiseled, and by the presence of two broad, shallow, concave hollows (fullers) on each side of the blade, meeting in a low median ridge. The points are angled in from the rest of the blade edge, somewhat like the top of an obelisk. The blades are relatively short and broad. Although the transformation of spiedi da guerra to partizan took place in Italy, it does not exclude a similar phenomenon elsewhere. Partizans were used in Northern Europe in the fifteenth century such as the ones that have survived in the dynastic collection of the Habsburgs in the Hofjagd-und Rüstkammer now in the Neue Burg in Vienna. These were carried and used by the bodyguard of Maximilian I, at that time king of the Romans, during his unpopular sojourn in Bruges in 1488. Because of the unpopularity of Hapsburg rule, personal safety was a real issue. He is said to have slept in his mail shirt; at least one woodcut in his illustrated autobiography “Theuerdanck” shows him sleeping in full armor, his sword at his side, while the enemy is preparing to attack him outside the bedroom door with a variety of staff weapons (Ill. no. 86, our fig. 106). Since in this largely fictionalized work he is almost invincible, the partizan-carrying bodyguard has been dispensed with; he is left with only his constant witness, Ehrenhold. These northern partizans are examples of great skill and workmanship in their construction (fig. 107); they are heavy and decidedly different from their Italian counterparts. Nonetheless, there are some similarities, like the Italianate partizans in the fifteenth century; the base of their blades had no wingtips. The Austrian partizans are much thicker, measuring just under 1 cm. at the base, and, as opposed to the Italian blades (except those from Venice and Bologna), that are basically triangular, the Austrian examples demonstrate an ogival arch forming their points. These long blades have a faint medial ridge. The bases show a number of inlaid brass marks including a large running wolf of Passau and a few shield-shaped marks or inlaid circles, for example. The sockets are hexagonal with additional faceting front and back towards the base of the socket. The shafts are fastened to the sockets with a large diameter double-headed bolt, and additional nail holes may be present above them. No langets are present. The socket bases have a large diameter (approx. 3 cm.); all shafts appear to be modern replacements but are made to be true hexagons to fit. The blade bases can be straight in towards the socket, slightly concave, or convex. Most interesting is the pattern of the original polishing marks. The blade was polished crosswise between the base and the brass marks and longitudinally above them. The socket, although carefully finished, clearly shows the usual hammer-welded seams. The blade edges, when examined with a loupe, show them to have a two-leaf construction, as very slight separation is evident where the edges are damaged, and occasionally the weld seam is not at the edge but is more central. Sixteenth century Austrian partisans resemble Italian ones more, except for (in the ones examined at the Hofjagd-und Rüstkammer) the point, which appears deliberately and

6 7

The word “libtas” stands in all probability for “libertas,” which is the motto of the city of Bologna. Boccia, L.G., Coelho, E.T., ibid.

partizans

131

Fig. 106. The emperor Maximilian I, asleep in his chamber, about to be attacked by soldiers bearing various staff weapons. In this largely fictionalized book, his life guards who were said to carry Austrian partizans, are not present. From the 5th edition of “Theuerdank”, M. Schultes, 1679. Private collection.

132

chapter ten

originally truncated in a pyramidal fashion with chamfered and polished edges, not unlike a Japanese sword tip. A strong medial rib is usually present, along with basal wings.8 A somewhat common feature of partizans of the second part of the sixteenth century is the presence of a nodus (a round ball) between the socket and the blade (fig. 108). The shaft had been reduced in diameter, and langets were often used. The langue de boeuf persisted in a rather shortened form up to about 1600, an example of which is in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. On this particular weapon, the upper end is drawn in from the almost parallel sides to form a spike like point (fig. 109). By the early seventeenth century, as with most specialized staff weapons, there was a sharp decline in use and manufacture, but here and there the weapons persisted. Thereafter the blades became much shorter and assumed a variety of ornate forms, including flamed edges, single recurved side wings, heavily ornamented and cut out wings, tassels, etc. These forms are generally called spontons or spontoons and serve mainly as ceremonial weapons associated with military rank. They persisted for well over another century in this manner (fig. 110), as did certain portions of armor.9 In combination with a diminutive halberd blade and beak, the sponton became a sponton-halberd, generally a decorated weapon that had only symbolic or decorative use (fig. 111). A significant number of these sponton halberds made by Pancras Thaller were delivered to the arsenal of Graz in the second half of the sixteenth century. They were beautifully etched and blackened in the German style and were signed “PD”—the “D” being the soft form of “T” in the maker’s mark. As in the roncone, no complex metallurgic techniques appear to have been used generally in the manufacturing procedure of partisans. That being said; close examination of the early partizan in fig. 102 shows a faint irregular hammer-weld mark near one edge of the base of the blade, suggesting that the blade may be double leaved or folded over. The socket shows a single hammer-welded seam, which would tend to verify the concept of a folded over blade leaf. The socket of the early-sixteenth-century partizan in fig. 103 is finely finished and has ten facets running out in two langets measuring 32 cm. in length and fastened with 4 nails each. The shafts of both are octagonal, and about 165 cm. long, making the entire weapon approximately 230 cm. (7’ 6”) in length. The shaft diameters appear to be slightly smaller than those of contemporary halberds or roncones by about an eighth of an inch (3 mm.) This is probably a reflection of the fact that partizans are chiefly thrusting weapons with a small cutting component (sideward slashing) as opposed to both the halberd and roncone, which are capable of being swung widely, to deliver a considerable force at right angles to the shaft at the time of impact, so that a thicker sturdier shaft was needed. The partisan, being originally an outgrowth of the Italian war spear, as just mentioned, was mainly a thrusting and to a lesser extent, a slashing weapon, and was used focally both in Northern and Southern Europe during the 15th and 16th centuries. It was not produced, even at its zenith of use around 1500, in great numbers and had thereafter, with a variety of additions, more of a symbolic use than that of a weapon of war.

8 It would be tempting to think that an outgrowth of the winged-shaped partizan became a runka or brandistocco (fig. 144) with its straight central blade and large side wings, but this is merely speculation. 9 The gorget. (fifteenth to eighteenth century, and even sporadically into the twentieth century).

partizans

133

Fig. 107. Austrian partizan, end of the 15th century, said to have been carried by the bodyguard of Maximilian I. Note the solid construction and the ogival arch-like upper end of the blade point, which it has in common with the Venetian types. This example has a simple socket in the manner of an early ronca, but others in this group have carefully constructed hexagonal sockets. None have langets. The shafts, which are not original, have a hexagonal shape. Courtesy of the Hofjagt-und Rüstkammer of the Historisches Museum, Vienna, inv. no. A117.

134

chapter ten

Fig. 108. Partizan of the second half of the 16th century, whose socket shows a “nodus” between it and the base of the blade. Private collection.

Fig. 109. Partizan or “Langue de bœuf ”, 17th century, appearing to have been altered by drawing in the top of the blade (the slight asymmetry would suggest a post-manufacture alteration). The weapon has a widthto-length ratio of 1 to 5.5. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 14.25.90.

partizans

135

Fig. 110. Sponton or “spontoon” from Brunswick, Germany, 17–18th century. The weapon is still clearly a short partizan with basal wings and added lower portions. Although its primary function is rank associated, it could still be used as a weapon. Private collection.

Fig. 111. Sponton-halberd. This late weapon, a combination of a short partizan (sponton) and a small halberd, is highly decorated. Although it was either a parade weapon or associated with military rank, it could still have been used as a weapon. Courtesy of the Museums of the City of Vienna.

CHAPTER ELEVEN

THE MORGENSTERN GROUP

The group is defined as being percussion weapons even though almost all have spikes, which along with a crush injury also cause penetrating wounds. Although, as will be seen in the following text, there are elaborate forms; most are plain and simple weapons. The German term Morgenstern (literally “morning star”) is most commonly used, German or Swiss synonyms are Sturmkolben and Knüttel. The English sixteenth century name is “holy water sprinkler” but this name is restricted to weapons such as Henry VIII’s “walking stick,” whose enlarged cylindrical head resembles the ecclesiastic object, and the French Goupillon, which is the equivalent of this English name. “Morgenstern” appears to be the term to use, for this weapon is mainly of continental use. The early Flemish weapon, which is later described, is called a Godendag. The weapon is called a Spikklubba in Swedish, which is readily understandable in English. References to a club-like weapon, with or without spikes, and varying from a one handed form (mace) to a two handed version, exist in Europe as early as 1300,1 and they are seen in illustrations of the eleventh century.2 All forms were originally wooden, some with iron reinforcements and radial spikes. The mace, developing somewhat independently, is shod with iron or bronze, and became, by the fifteenth century, mostly all metal. Its two handed equivalent, the morgenstern, of course remained wooden, since it would otherwise have been far too heavy to manipulate. Later maces (mostly in Asia Minor and Eastern Europe) occasionally reverted to wood for the shaft. Ceremonial maces persisted into the late seventeenth century. One of the earliest references to this type of staff weapon, specifically, the godendag (or godendac, which means literally “good day”) is that the Flemish burghers and peasants of Courtrai used it with devastating effect, in conjunction with spears in 1302 in the defense of their town against the flower of French chivalry under Robert of Artois. This battle, earlier than Morgarten (1315), which was the first success of Swiss staff weapons, and earlier than the success of the Scottish pikemen at Bannockburn, or of the English in the Hundred Years’ War, shocked western European nobility. The fact that common foot soldiers had prevailed in battle against mounted and heavily armed and organized chivalry was a quiet turning point in the military history of Central Europe. It is said that 500 pairs of gilt spurs were collected from the field after the battle. But the immediate effect on the nobility was minor, and their belief in their own superiority lived on for another two centuries despite ever increasing signs of the fallacy of this thinking. Thirteen years after Courtrai, the Habsburg chivalry was all but exterminated in the battle of Morgarten by a Swiss peasant force. Charles Buttin identifies the Courtrai weapon as Plançon a Picot, and shows in his text a miniature drawing depicting the battle of Mons-en-Pevele in 1304

1

Krenn, P., Das Steiermarkishe Landeszeughaus in Graz, 1974, p. 48. The wooden clubs carried over the shoulder by mounted warriors in the Bayeux embroidery are related to the early (thirteenth century) maces, which then with a longer haft, pass into the hands of the foot soldier by the early fourteenth century. 2

chapter eleven

138

where the Flemish combatants use this same weapon, just as the ones carved on the Courtrai Chest (see below). A wonderful depiction of the battle of Courtrai, as well as the events leading up to this battle between the county of Flanders and the forces of Philip IV the Fair of France, is carved into the front of a chest located within New College Oxford, England (fig. 112a). It is referred to as the Oxford or the Courtrai chest, but whether or not the carving can be dated to the early fourteenth century has been debated for some time. A stylistic analysis can support a conclusion that the chest is indeed from about 1300. A fresco of that period discovered in Ghent in 1845 is very similar to the Courtrai chest in the essential details; also several illuminations in a contemporary edition of the “Grand Chroniques de France” are again stylistically similar. In analyzing the arms, armor, building style, as well as the methods of depiction of the time, there can be little doubt that the carving is genuinely old, although this is based only on seeing good photographs, as well as details of those photographs, rather than on an examination of the object itself. Furthermore, scientific analysis reinforces the early date. Dendrochronologic analysis of the wood by radiocarbon dating as well as by accelerator-based mass spectrometry is apparently consistent with its presumed age of the early fourteenth century. The conclusion is that the tree was felled about 1250, seasoned for about 50 years and then used to construct the chest around 1300.3 A last piece of evidence useful in dating the chest is literary. Charles Ffoulkes described the carving in his 1912 account of the arms and armor of the University of Oxford. Ffoulkes quoted from Guillaume Guiart’s “Branche des royaulx lignages,” a contemporary account of the battle: A granz bastons pesanz ferrez A un leur fer agu devant Vont ceux de France recevant Tiex bastons, qu’il portent en guerre Ont nom godentac en la terre Goden-tac c’est bon jour a dire Qui en Francois le veust descrire.4

A rough translation is: The peasants used large clubs With a sharp iron point on top Those of France faced Those clubs they carried in war Called godentac there Goden-tac is to say good morning Whoever wants to describe them in French.

When compared to this description, the images carved on the chest can be read as a consistent contemporaneous account. One sees on the chest, the mail-clad burghers of Courtrai and other Flemish towns wearing skullcaps and mail coifs, and armed with long wooden clubs of a conical shape (Godentacs), that terminate with an iron spike. Longspears are also shown on the panel, but are depicted as being relatively short, only because of the

3

Hall, E.T., The Courtrai Chest from New College, Oxford, Reexamined, Antiquity 61, no. 231 (1987): pp. 104–107. Ffoulkes, C., “European Arms and Armour in the University of Oxford,” Clarendon Press, 1912. Guiart, G. “Branche des royaulx lignages” (1304–1307), 1st published by Buchon, J.A., Paris, 1828, lines 5428. 4

the morgenstern group

139

lack of space in the panel of the carving. The burghers are represented as using them against mounted and charging knights who wear surcoats and great helms and wield swords, many of who have fallen from their chargers (lower right hand panel).5 The godentacs vary somewhat in length, but range between 120 and 180 cm. (4 and 6 feet) in length, and are used with one or both hands by the carved soldiers. In an attempt to definitively date the chest, a number of studies exist in 2001, which explored the events of historical record and the age of the wood, rather than the date of the carving. As was often done, a carving might have been added later to an old chest. The date of the carving is of paramount importance here because it can help to date the weapons. Some studies postulating that the godentacs were modified work tools such as might have been used by weavers, offer as proof for this deduction that in battles subsequent to Courtrai between the Flemish and the French, they were not mentioned. This conclusion is easily refuted. Rather than disappearing from the material record, there are further developments and uses of the morgenstern family of weapons found well into the seventeenth century. But more importantly, battle-tactics, arms and especially armor used by combatants towards the end of the fourteenth century had changed drastically to favor such weapons as the halberd, the longspear, and other staff weapons over spiked clubs like the godentac. Lastly, the use of godentac-like weapons was by no means new at the time of Courtrai, nor restricted to that part of Europe. Although it has been generally assumed that weapons such as the “morgenstern” are unsophisticated, that is, coarsely and cheaply made by non-weapon-specialized blacksmiths and for use mainly by peasants in their ongoing efforts to revolt from an oppressive feudal system, this assumption is not, in fact, completely correct. Clement Bosson, in his 1963 article on the morgenstern,6 divides the group into three types: the military type made in series by weaponsmiths, the peasant type cut by the peasants in the forest7 and shod with nails and spikes by the local blacksmith, and luxury types, mostly short-staffed, of metal, and decorated.8 There is, for instance, a carefully crafted and shaped morgenstern of the military type in the arsenal of the city of Vienna (fig. 112b). The shafter used well-seasoned wood, which is smooth and straight. The head, containing the polished and uniform radially arranged spikes, is constructed of a separate wooden cylinder slipped over the head of the shaft and secured to it by the spikes (that generally have a screw base). A steel plate is present over the top and bottom of the cylinder and fastened to it by nails and is reinforced by steel retaining-bands at the top and bottom edges. The top-spike is made like one of a sixteenth-century halberd, measures 55 cm. in length and is of quadrangular cross section. This morgenstern is 236 cm. (93 inches) in length and has two langets each fastened with 5 nails. The substantial construction suggests having been made by an

5 The great helms worn by the French chivalry have relatively pointed tops as opposed to the flatter tops seen in earlier helms, which puts them in the middle to late phase of great helms. This type of helm was no longer in combat use after circa 1350. The plate construction and riveting are also correct for these helms. The panel showing the arrival of Guy de Namur has not only the correct coat of arms on his shield, but shows him wearing heraldic “aillettes” typical of this period. No attempt was made to show plate armor (which did not exist in 1302). In short, none of the usual stylistic mistakes of a modern forger are seen here, and there is no reason to doubt the authenticity of the carving. 6 Bosson, C., op. cit. pp. 109 and 132. 7 It is worth noting that Bosson in the article just cited, refers to the forest as the “arsenal of God,” i.e. supplying peasants with material for their arms. One assumes it is an old expression. 8 For example the sixteenth century morgenstern in the Wallace collection, London, no. A 986, which is all steel and is damascened. It carries 22 spikes.

140

chapter eleven

Fig. 112b. Morgenstern from the arsenal of the City of Vienna, probably mid-16th century, now in the depot. Courtesy of the Museums of the City of Vienna, inv. no. 126.207.

the morgenstern group

141

experienced smith. Because the Vienna arsenal contains no weapons except those deposited for the military defense of the city, perhaps this morgenstern is one of a series made for the arsenal. This is supported in the text of a museum catalog, which states that some portions of the military companies in Vienna were equipped with various types of staff weapons in the year 1571.9 Although the morgenstern is difficult to date without this knowledge, it is certainly consistent with being from the end of the 16th century. Even more impressive in the same arsenal is the presence of a steel-headed morgenstern on a long shaft that measures slightly less than two meters in length (6 ft. 3 in.) (figs. 113 and 114), whose construction is very complex and could only have been executed by an expert smith. Although this weapon appears to be from the early sixteenth century it is similar to even earlier forms. The long stout spike is quadrangular; its tip is twisted some 30 degrees and has a sculptured indent at that part. Hammer-welded onto its slightly divergent base are four V-shaped spikes, also of quadrangular section, which join again inside a long tubular socket fitting over the top of the shaft. Inline with the shaft is a twisted and braided steel bar, joining the base of the spike with the socket. Somewhat less complex than the wooden morgenstern in the Vienna arsenal, but still present in large numbers, (183) there are similar weapons in the Steiermarkische Landeszeughaus in Graz.10 They have bulbous heads turned on a lathe and three rows of radially arranged spikes, as well as a longitudinal top spike measuring approximately 30 cm. in length. Below the turned head on the shaft there are two nailed langets measuring about 40 cm. These weapons have a length of 205 cm. (6 ft. 9 in.) and were delivered to the arsenal in 1685 by the turner Egid Rotter. They arrived too late, however, to have found actual military use. A similar morgenstern is being carried by a fully armored knight, on the second of the famous Caesar Tapestries in the Historical Museum of Bern. Caesar attacks and vanquishes Ariovistus (fig. 115), in this second tapestry out of four, woven in Tournai ca. 1465–1470, and which were taken as booty from Charles the Bold after one of his defeats during the Burgundian Wars against the Swiss. In the previously quoted poetic work by Olivier de la Marche, Charles the Bold is defeated by the knight “Weakness” under direction of “Death” (fig. 12).11 The knight is heavily armed with a dart (like Death), which he wields for an overhead thrust, but he also carries besides this a sword, and slung over his left shoulder are two morgensterns; a solid one like figs. 117 and 119, and one “kettenmorgenstern” as in fig. 118. One can deduce therefore, that morgensterns found some use in the knightly class in the fifteenth century. The somewhat later simple wooden forms were then possibly a re-adaptation by the peasant class. Despite this last supposition, it should be noted that all these percussive weapons have a common origin in the ancient “club” or one of its permutations. Early forms of the morgenstern that are similar to the later types are found in art. A rather typical one can be seen carried by a soldier in the Berswordt Altar’s central panel of the Crucifixion, dating from 1390, in the Church of St. Mary in Dortmund, Germany. A steel-headed mace-length morgenstern is raised above the head of a mounted knight of about this same period, held high with both hands and poised for a strike in a miniature

9 Catalog “Das Wiener Bürgerliche Zeughaus” 40th special exhibit of the Historical Museums of the City of Vienna, published by the museums of the city of Vienna, Oct. 1977—Principal author Dr. Günter Düriegl, director of the Museums of the City of Vienna, nr. 591/1, p. 146, ill. nr. 62. 10 Krenn, P., ibid. 11 de la Marche, O., ibid.

142

chapter eleven

Fig. 114. Detail of the Morgenstern in fig. 113 showing the intricate smithwork used to produce a relatively light but stable and strong steel head.

Fig. 113. This all-steel headed Morgenstern is from the arsenal of the City of Vienna. The craftsmanship is striking and the weapon is well balanced. Courtesy of the Museums of the City of Vienna.

the morgenstern group

143

book illustration in folio 226 recto, of the Wenceslas Bible in the National Library in Vienna. An even earlier depiction of a morgenstern is seen in the Maciejowski Bible from the Paris school of ca. 1250, folio 14, verso, in the scene of Samson slaying the Philistines with the jawbone of an ass. In this illustration, the weapon is being carried by an armored soldier. Later, fifteenth century examples abound in all forms of pictures as well as in sculpture. A peasant variety of a morgenstern is carried by a soldier in Martin Schongauer’s engraving “Christ before Anna” of ca. 1475. The morgenstern depicted in 1250 was substantially similar to the 15th century weapons. In a charming little vignette out of Diebold Schilling’s “Luzerner Chronik,” one sees just outside the city of Mulhouse, in upper Alsace, an outdoor court scene, shaded by a linden tree. It is fenced off and contains a variety of persons including lawyers and a judge, who is seated at a table and attended by a marshal in simple clothes. The marshal is armed with a morgenstern. This last is of the peasant type with four rows of radially arranged spikes and has a length of about 170 cm., but no top spike. Whether the weapon was depicted used because it was readily available to the marshal, or whether it had a specific symbolic function, is not clear. In somewhat more recent times, the shorter version, the mace, or marshal’s baton does have specific symbolism in the carriage of justice. Another morgenstern with an improbable name has an English origin. The “holy water sprinkler” is an all-steel headed weapon and can be found in the Royal Armouries. The sprinkler’s 18 spikes are sub-divisions of six flanges that are in turn reminiscent of a mace head (fig. 116).12 They are surmounted by a short stout spike of quadrangular section and set into a hexagonal socket. The shaft is square and protected by four langets. Its length is 189 cm. The archives show that in the mid-sixteenth century some 493 of these were present in the armory. This morgenstern is certainly the work of weapon-smiths, who probably produced this as well as similar weapons in the large series quoted above. That this type of weapon was not limited to use in England, is proven by its presence in a Flemish book of hours of ca. 1500, probably from Bruges, in which Goliath faces David, carrying an almost identical holy water sprinkler in his right hand.13 Nonetheless, this weapon seemed to be favored by the English. For example, there is a written reference to the presence of some 12,000 sprinklers in the English army of the first quarter of the sixteenth century. The Venetian observer Antonio Bavaria wrote in 1513 that when the army of Henry VIII sailed for Calais, it had a contingent of 5000 soldiers armed with 6 foot-long weapons whose ball-like head bore six metal spikes.14 Figure 117 shows a typical peasant weapon. The head and staff are one piece, not turned but hand-cut from what appears to be pine. The head is sharply demarcated from the shaft and shows radially arranged nails at the junction as well as four rows of crudely made spikes in radial arrangements around the head. A top spike is also present measuring 25 cm. and is stabilized by nails driven in next to its insertion as well as by an iron band at the top of the head. Several crosses are carved into the head either as a religious motif or to declare it of Swiss origin. The quadrangular spike is identical to that of a halberd and was possibly removed from a defective weapon. It is difficult to date but

12 Described in Norman, A.V.B. and Wilson, G.M., “Treasures in the Tower of London,” Lund Humphries Ltd. London 1982 p. 69 # 54. 13 Master of the Dresden Prayer Book, The Crohin—La Fontaine Hours, in the J. Paul Getty Museum, Ms. 23, fol. 121v. 14 Bosson, C., ibid., p. 117.

144

chapter eleven

Fig. 116. Holy-water sprinkler, probably English, early 16th century. This type of weapon was very popular in England and was certainly made by expert smiths, probably in large series. Courtesy of the Board of Trustees of the Royal Armouries, inv. no. VII-1642.

Fig. 117. Morgenstern, 15th–16th century, probably Swiss. The shaft is pine. A weapon such as this could have been made by a blacksmith. Private collection.

the morgenstern group

145

Fig. 118. A carefully constructed “kettenmorgenstern” probably 15th–16th century, German or Swiss. The pole, of ash, is worn between the top retaining band and the lower part of the langets, which is the area that can be touched by the spikes. Private collection.

Fig. 119. A Kettenmorgenstern and a regular morgenstern, from a line drawing of a 15th century polyptych fragment, possibly Czech. Note the similarity of the kettenmorgenstern to the one in fig. 118.

146

chapter eleven

appears to be relatively early, possibly sixteenth or even late fifteenth century.15 Similar weapons can be up to 30 cm. (12 in.) longer, somewhat thinner, and plainer (i.e. without a well defined head), these usually date from the end of the sixteenth or the seventeenth centuries, but can also be dated much earlier. Another variety of a morgenstern is present in the Tøjhusmuseets in Copenhagen as a single specimen. It has a globose but somewhat corroded metal head, possibly bronze, that is 6 cm. (2 1/2 in.) in diameter. An integral upper and lower circular flange is present through which the large diameter wooden shaft was inserted. A stout quadrangular spike is inserted into the top end of the staff, giving the weapon an overall length of two meters (6 ft. 6 in.). It weighs 2.45 kg. (4.5 lbs.). An unusual feature is the presence of many square holes radially arranged in an equatorial plane of four holes and two non-equatorial planes each with six holes, through which spikes of square cross-section were driven into the shaft, thereby anchoring them and the metal head. It is labeled as being sixteenth-century Danish. There is a great deal of individual variation in the details of the earlier weapons because each was hand crafted by a local blacksmith using available materials; very few were made in series. So for instance, one may find flat top-spikes or side spikes of varying construction in one weapon. Langet-like side straps can be present through which the actual spikes protrude, on other pieces the top retaining band is sometimes modified to form a hook like a back spike, and some contain large numbers of short stubby pyramidal spikes. At least one morgenstern extant has a military scythe-like “topspike.” Despite all of the peasant variations, collections of morgensterns can still be found in some of the Swiss city arsenals, among which are Zurich and Lucerne. These were almost exclusively seventeenth century deposits. They are described as being useful in the defense of walls and breaches in them.16 Two variations of morgensterns are also found with some frequency. The first is the ball and chain type or kettenmorgenstern, which is either a variation of the morgenstern or of the military flail. The flail did not develop from the morgenstern but from a threshing implement used to harvest grain, that is, separate the grain from the chaff. The ball and chain type is a relative rarity and has survived only in small numbers, an example of which is seen in fig. 118. Despite this, as with the ordinary morgenstern, many variations can be seen. The ball can be round or polygonal, especially made for the weapon or adapted from a heavy sword pommel, symmetrical hammerhead, or other tool. The quality of the chain work, iron fastenings, and staff can vary widely. Because it is rarely found in illustrations, the kettenmorgenstern cannot have had widespread and significant use (an exception is fig. 119, a line drawing of a polyptych fragment in eastern Europe from about the middle of the fifteenth century). One reason for its relative scarcity might have been the fact that it was a dangerous weapon to use. If the swung blow did not directly find its mark, the momentum of the ball would tend to throw the user off balance and the recovery time would have been dangerously long. The weapon depicted in fig. 118 has a large wooden ball measuring 11.5 cm. in diameter and has 17 somewhat heterogeneous spikes set and screwed into it. The shaft is 163 cm. long, of ash and much damaged and worn in the area where the spikes touch it indicating that

15

The very substantial softwood hand-carved shaft, distinct head and quadrangular spike point to an early

date. 16 Gessler, E.A., “Führer durch die Waffensammlung” (Schweizerisches Landesmuseum) H.R. Sauerländer, Aarau, 1928, p. 40.

the morgenstern group

147

the spikes often fell against the shaft. The 20 cm.-long chain of eight links is fastened to a terminal spike that pierces the ball and has a rough expanded portion on each side to keep it from slipping. The upper end of the chain is held by an iron loop fastened to the shaft by langets. The uppermost end of the shaft is encircled by an iron band, as is the equatorial portion of the ball. An excellent example of these weapons being carried, but not in use, is the early woodcut in the poem “Le Chevalier Délibéré” by Olivier de la Marche, (fig. 120). The military flail, kriegs-dreschflegel in German and fléau d’armes in French, was more popular than the kettenmorgenstern and used in somewhat greater numbers by peasants, as indicated by contemporary illustrations of different countries. In Hartmann Schedel’s Nuremberg Chronicle (Buch der Chroniken) of 1493, for instance, folio 30 verso, shows a fascinating scene of Moses closing the Red Sea over the Pharaoh’s army, which is clad in gothic armor. Among a great variety of polearms carried by the soldiers, including ahlspiesse, halberds, mordaxte, a mace, a military fork and lances plus a crossbow, there is a well reproduced military flail (fig. 121). The agricultural non-military flail is depicted in many chronicles of even earlier centuries, such as the Luttrell Psalter of the early fourteenth century, and the Maciejowski Bible of about 1250. As with the kettenmorgenstern, the flail was never of greatly sophisticated manufacture or wide use, but it was easily converted from a farming tool in times of need. Some military flails, however, do show a relatively skilled degree of workmanship such as decoratively twisted longitudinal bands along four borders of the flail, that are held in place by top and bottom retaining bands. Generally, the flail was probably as effective as the kettenmorgenstern in use, and easier to direct, because the chain was shorter. In the case of a converted farming implement, the chain consisted only of two links. The reduced momentum of the short-chained cylindrical flail was offset by the increased accuracy of the blow and the reduced likelihood of a backswing towards the wielder. Furthermore, in the case of a peasant army, the soldier using the flail would have had years of experience using the farm implement effectively, safely, and well. A good example of a relatively late (early seventeenth century) military flail is in the collection of the Museum of the City of Vienna out of its old arsenal (inventory no. 162.623). In the large series of woodcuts called “the Triumph of the Emperor Maximilian,” the exact composition of which was dictated by the Emperor himself to his secretary Marx Treitzsaurwein in 1512, there appears a group of well-dressed landsknechts carrying military flails. The remarkable information gleaned from the “Triumph” is the fact that the flail portion was specified to be made of leather rather than wood. This suggests strongly that these weapons were also used in foot tournaments by the landsknechts and squires, such weapons being thought unfit for nobility. It is said, however, that Maximilian himself, great admirer and advocate of not only chivalry but also of sport and discipline, fought on foot and with a great variety of weapons, thus popularizing them. This particular illustration depicting leather military flails is entitled “Gefecht,” which translates into “duelling” or “fencing,” and listed under this heading are the weapons to be used, which include flails, quarterstaves, lances, halberds, battleaxes, bucklers and swords, roundels, swords, two-handed swords, and (Hungarians with) maces and paveses. There is, in fact, an illustration in the “Freydal” on fol. 75, another of Maximilian’s illustrated poems about himself, that shows him in a tournament duel using leather flails. Also of interest is the fact that both contestants are wearing close helmets, from the collars of which project (hanging) radial plates (hänge-laschen in German) covering and protecting the shoulders, which might also have been specified for this type of combat. There is a surviving such

148

chapter eleven

Fig. 120. The knight “Debile” in mortal combat with Philippe of Burgundy. Detail from an anonymous woodcut of about 1485 in the poem “Le Chevalier Délibéré” by Olivier de la Marche (Chiswick Press, 1898, London). Note that the knight has, slung over his left shoulder, two Morgensterns, one almost identical to the one in fig. 118 and the other like in fig. 119. Note also that he is about to strike with a dart. Private collection.

the morgenstern group

149

Fig. 121. Detail of a woodcut out of the “Nuremberg Chronicle” of Hartman Schedel, 1493, German edition, showing the Pharaoh’s army being covered by the Red Sea. Note, among the many and interesting staff weapons, the military flail. Private collection.

150

chapter eleven

helmet by Lorenz Helmschmied of 149217 in the castle Churburg in South Tyrolea, which was visited by the Emperor at a time when his title was still “King of the Romans.”18 The concept of duelling becomes immensely popular from this time on, with almost all classes of people, and many manuals in this sport, or art are published throughout the next centuries. It is easy to picture duelling with leather flails, but rather difficult to imagine the same of halberds or lances. Some of these duels must have remained in the Emperor’s imagination.

17

Gamber, O., Ein Visier Helm der Churburger Rüstkammer, in Festschrift Oswald Trapp, Universitätsverlag Wagner, Innsbruck, 1959, pp. 59–61. 18 The idea of attaching hanging metal plates from a helmet was not new in 1492 however, as a Norse helmet similar to the British Museum’s Sutton Hoo helm, of iron; a “spangenhelm” in the Historical Museum in Stockholm, has the same type of iron lames hung onto the rear neck portion as a protection for the upper back and neck.

CHAPTER TWELVE

AHLSPIESSE

The ahlspiess is a long thin quadrangular spike set on top of the shaft and secured by langets. The base may or may not have a disc guard, although one is usually present in extant examples. The ahlspiess, or “awl-pike” in English, puntone a piatello in Italian and lance à pousser in French, is documented in the archives of the city of Vienna as appearing as early as 1444 and it is likely that it was adopted by the Austrians from the Hussites who used it in combination with a large shield (the pavese or setz-tartsche).1 Its use thereafter was largely by the Austrians, but not exclusively so. The term “ahl,” or “ahle” is the German word for the awl, a small acutely pointed tool of the same form used mainly for piercing, not as Stone incorrectly translates the word, to eel (“aal ” in German) in his Glossary.2 German ahlspiesse are recorded in the early fifteenth century, and are pictured without a disc hand guard. This particular form of the ahlspiess is known by the term breach pike in English, breschspiess in German, pique de brèche in French, and quadrellone in Italian. It is identical to the fifteenth century Austrian weapon except that there is no sculpted indent for the roundel (see below). Handsome and well-formed examples exist with hexagonal solid throats whose spikes measure some 95 cm. (36”) in length. They appear to have persisted longer than the ahlspiess, as late-sixteenth- century forms exist with the typical nodus between the spike base and the shaft socket. Relatively large numbers of ahlspiesse (164) survive in the arsenal of the city of Vienna (Bürgerliches Zeughaus der Stadt Wien) as well as in the Imperial Jagd- und Rüstkammer in Vienna. Judging by illustrations of the fifteenth century, as for example fig. 121, they did have a multi-national distribution. The construction of the ahlspiess is relatively simple. It was a pure thrusting weapon, like the spear and pike. A spike of square cross-section, measuring a meter or more in length, is fastened to a round shaft by two langets issuing from the shaft socket (figs. 122a and b). Just above the junction of the socket and spike a double indentation is found around the spike. A round flat guard-plate, having a central square hole and raised square flanges around it, slips over the spike and snaps in between the two indentations (fig. 123). The flanges are pressed into the upper recess or indentation. These plates serve to deflect downward blows along the spike and away from the hands on the shaft. The plate itself is seen in fig. 124. An alternate form of protection is seen on a specimen in the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s collection (14.25.247) that has four prongs issuing from the area between the base of the spike and the throat. This last is hexagonal and has langets welded to it. The prongs are either self-sufficient in deflecting blows from the hands on the shaft, or serve to support a roundel (plate) above it.

1

Duriegl, G., ibid. Stone, G.C., A Glossary of the Construction, Decoration and Use of Arms and Armor, Jack Brussel, New York, 1934, 1961, p. 79. 2

152

chapter twelve

Figs. 122a and b. Two ahlspiesse, probably Austrian, second half of the 15th century. Three marks are stamped into one flat at the base of the spike, which is the usual place for marks. The spike is usually longer than one meter and is stiff (rigid). The rounded contour langets are rough and unpolished. The presence of the roundel guard and its seating grooves distinguish the ahlspiess from the breach pike or “breschspiess” (see text). Fig. 122a. Courtesy the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 14.25.396. Fig. 122b. Courtesy of the Hofjagd- und Rüstkammer, of the Historisches Museum, Vienna, inv. no. A85.

ahlspiesse

153

Fig. 124. Top view of the roundel guard of an Ahlspiess. Courtesy of the Museums of the City of Vienna, one of a large unnumbered lot.

Fig. 123. Detail of the roundel guard of an Ahlspiess set into the special grooves at the base of the spike. Courtesy of the Museums of the City of Vienna.

154

chapter twelve

The lengths of the original shafts are not known with certainty, as many extant shafts appear to be modern replacements. They range from 1.6 to 1.8 m. (5 to 6 feet) in length. As seen in some contemporary paintings of the fifteenth century, however, their length appears to be slightly longer than the replacements. The “ahlspiesse” do not appear to be much used after the first quarter of the sixteenth century. The most significant smith recorded is Hans Maidburger of Piesting in Lower Austria, who delivered 322 of the Vienna arsenal’s ahlspiesse between 1497 and 1500. Occasional ahlspiesse have thicker spikes that are round and much shorter than the classical ones but have similar shafts. They are seen in illustrations of the fourteenth century, suggesting that they may have, in fact, been the precursors of the ahlspiess. One such weapon is present in the right hand background scene in fig. 13, a detail from the “Très Belles Heures” of about 1400.3 A similar weapon is present in an illustration from the emperor Maximilian’s book “Der Weisskunig” of the early sixteenth century entitled “The Battle Against the Blue Company,” the image depicts such an ahlspiess carried by a Swiss soldier in the background of the picture. The Italian term for this weapon type is “candeliere”, referring to a round candlestick of this period, having in its center, a pricket that held the candle in place. The French term for the weapon is plançon à broche. This weapon must also have had an international distribution, as it is present in an illustration in an English manuscript of about 1480, next to a pollaxe.4 The caption makes it clear that they were to be used for combat on foot by fully armored knights. In this picture it is seen that the English version of the candeliere at least, is more short-shafted than either the awl pike or the breach pike, as it is exactly as long as the pole axe next to it, that is, approximately 1.5 meters (5 feet). Interestingly, the shaft below the guard plate appears to be spirally wrapped with leather. An excavated and partially restored candeliere is present in the collection of the castle of Grandson in Switzerland. Its shaft, although a replacement, is also about this length.

3

Bibliothèque Nationale de France, MS. nouv. acq. lat. 3093, folio 181 recto. The Hastings MS., The Pierpont Morgan Library, New York. The illustration shows the knight being armed by his squire, and the text reads “How a man schall be armyd at his ese (ease), when he schal fyghte on foote.” 4

CHAPTER THIRTEEN

AXES AND AXE DERIVATIVES

The history and nature of the axe is briefly discussed in chapter one; what concerns us here is the period of the high Middle Ages, where diversification of the old axe form takes place, adding to its cutting function, that of crushing and thrusting. The battle-axe, which in the period of time following the expansionist age of the Vikings, that is the ninth and tenth centuries, had come into disuse in central Europe, perhaps in favor of the sword, did, however, persist in the Scandinavian countries. It returned to use in the rest of Europe by about the middle of the eleventh century and it was widely used in the battle of Hastings, judging by the Bayeux Embroidery (as it is now termed) of about 1070 and appears to have continued in use relatively unchanged for several centuries thereafter. The Bayeux Embroidery shows very clearly, for instance, a representation of Count Guy de Ponthieu holding a long shafted Viking-type axe whose shaft is some 150 cm. (five feet) in length. A somewhat earlier but similar weapon is present as a miniature illustration in a tenth-century manuscript by Aurelius Clemens Prudentius.1 A pagan warrior swings an axe resembling the one in fig. 3 (but with a slightly more curved blade edge) against the figure of “Belief.” Its shaft is some 140 cm. (4.5 ft.) in length. A large collection of these axe blades is present in the Museum of London, most of which are groundfinds. One of these is shown in fig. 3. There are many illustrations of axes in battle scenes in later manuscripts and chronicles; for example in the Maciejowski Bible of about 1250 axes are shown only slightly larger than the old Danish axes of the ninth century but otherwise similar. As we have seen in the earlier chapter on halberds, that weapon was developed by the last half of the thirteenth century, probably from a weapon such as the Danish broad axe, or from a closely related weapon, the guisarme. These axes, as well as persisting in unchanged form, underwent a series of transformations well into the sixteenth century, some of which went so far as to lose entirely the original axe blade in favor of hammers and beaks. These variations were shafted mainly as two-handed weapons, measuring between 140 and 190 cm. (4.5 to 6 ft.) in length. By about 1400, the broadaxe developed into what was called a pollaxe in English, a fussstreitaxt in German, ascia da fante in Italian, and hache de pieton in French.2 There is mention far earlier of a “pollax” by a chronicle quoting Richard I, Coeur de Lion (1157–1199), and by GeoffreyChaucer in 1386, but the exact shape and function of these weapons is not known. 1 Prudentius, A.C., Psychomachie, Ms. 10066–77, Fol. 115, verso, Lorraine, tenth century. The Ms. is in the Burgundian Library of the “Handschriftenkabinett” of the Royal Belgian Library, and published in Delaissé, L.M.J., Mittelalterliche Miniaturen, M. Dumont Schauberg, Cologne, 1959, p. 23. Prudentius is sometimes called the Western World’s (or Christianity’s) first poet. At a time of great turbulence and shifts of power between the Christian religion and the old Roman Pantheism, and during the time when the Emperor Julian reintroduced the old Roman religion, Prudentius, a Christian born in 348, writes about the then popular theme of the triumph of the Belief of Christianity over the “false” Gods. 2 Sometimes erroneously referred to as “pole axe,” the present weapon name refers to the word “poll,” meaning the head.

156

chapter thirteen

After 1400, the pollaxe became fairly standardized with a length of about 5 feet (150 cm.) a relatively small convex axe blade diminishing to a single “eye,” a back-spike (beak), and a short top-spike. The back-spike could also be hammer-like and even had a short spike tip protruding from the hammer face (fig. 125). Pyramidal side lugs might be present as in a Lucerne hammer, and indeed it differs from this last only by virtue of the fact that the Lucerne hammer has four prongs in the front instead of an axe blade and usually a slightly longer beak. Langets, usually four in number, can be present as well. The weapon could be plain or decorated, sometimes highly so, with inlaid brass and cut out, filed or chiseled ornamentation. Several such etched and gilt sixteenth-century axes are extant in the ducal palace in Venice showing the spike integral with the heavy langets over the eye of the axe-hammer, which is over the end of the pole, the whole being held together by screwed-on side lugs and shaft nails. A round or polyhedral plate was usually present around the upper part of the shaft in the earlier forms, slipped over the langets, not unlike the one on an ahlspiess, to protect the hands. It is generally believed that this weapon was used more for foot duels between two opponents or in tournaments rather than in general combat, although there are exceptions. An example of the pollaxe being used in a foot duel is seen in the illustration from the Bernese Chronicle of Diebold Schilling of 1483, depicting the fatal duel between Gerhart von Steffis and Otto von Grandson in Bourg-en-Bresse in 1397. Otto, armed with a pollaxe had fallen to his knees, and Gerhart, standing over him pushed the spike of his pollaxe into the back of his neck through the camail of his visored bascinet. As the pollaxe is usually of high quality and ornate (without, however, losing its strength); it is associated with and documented as being the weapon of the aristocrat, in contradistinction to almost all other staff weapons (fig. 126). The rare surviving and less ornate infantry version was still no match for the halberd, although its shorter length gave it good maneuverability. A close cousin of the pollaxe, however, has a slightly less crescent-shaped and larger blade (more like the older Danish axes), a back-spike or hammer, with or (mostly) without a short top-spike and was called a Mordaxt in German (literally a murderous axe); it is not clear that there is an English equivalent term. It is seen in the hands of a heavily armored knight on foot in a woodcut of about 1460–1470, mounted on a round shaft some two meters (6 ft. 6 in.) in length (fig. 127). Two very similar mordaxte are seen in the woodcut of just a few decades later (fig. 121) from the Nuremberg Chronicle. This weapon became quite popular in Swiss, German, and Burgundian territories and in the late fifteenth and sixteenth centuries rivaled the halberd in some areas such as Burgundy, judging from details of the Caesar Tapestries seen in figs. 128 and 129. The Swiss midsixteenth century version had a somewhat smaller and convex axe blade and a strong spike and was the length of most halberds. Although used less in the seventeenth century, the Swiss mordaxt was, like a variety of halberd forms, manufactured in considerable numbers for the town arsenals by such smiths as Hans Balthasar Erhardt from Meilen near Zurich. The Landesmuseum in Zurich, which assimilated the city arsenal, still has a considerable collection of these axes (figs. 130 and 131), and deposits of further numbers of them can be found in the castle of Kyburg, which is under the direction of this museum. Their shafts vary somewhat in length but are usually between 150 and 170 cm. (5–5 1/2 ft.) in length. The construction is relatively simple; the quadrangular or crescent shaped blade and opposed back spike is slipped over the wedge-shaped top of the shaft, which is covered by the wide portion of the langet, and nails are wedged into the top of the shaft between the edge of the eye and the shaft.

axes and axe derivatives

Fig. 125. 15th century pollaxe with inlaid brass punched and chiseled decorations. The rear facing hammer head has a central steel quadrangular beak. The head is fastened to the staff by laterally screwed in side lugs. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 14.25.288.

157

Fig. 126. Gilt and etched early 16th century pollaxe. The axe-hammer head is fastened underneath the carefully constructed langets with pyramidal side lugs. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 25.135.21.

158

chapter thirteen

Fig. 127. Anonymous German woodcut of ca. 1460–70 showing a long shafted “mordaxt”. A roundel guard is present a short distance below the blade. Private collection.

axes and axe derivatives

159

This last appears to be hammer-welded to the blade and perhaps to the back spike as well. In the case of the closely related fussstreitaxt, the technique of fastening is the same as with Lucerne hammers of the sixteenth century; the blade is brought up from under, over the langets and wedged in place with the shaft (see below). Overall, an amazing variety of axes and hammers of multinational use and manufacture were used in the period under discussion. A slightly different version of this weapon developed at the end of the first quarter of the fifteenth century, typified by a 180–210 cm. (6–7 ft.) long shaft and roundel guards of either metal or leather sometimes present towards both ends of the shaft.3 Several texts of the time describe its use in great detail. This weapon referred to generically as “la Hache” in French, “Axt” in German, and “l’Azza” in Italian is in most instances not an axe but rather a hammer-headed weapon with a rear facing beak that can be angled down or curved but is usually straight. When equipped with an axe blade, it was described by Olivier de la Marche in 1448, as “taillant” (cutting). A short spike either of blade form or quadrangular protrudes from the top of the blade. The hammer itself was usually pronged rather than flat or massive. Side lugs and langets fasten the head to the shaft, and the bottom end of the shaft might be shod with a short spike-like point for use in combat. Overall there is a great resemblance between this weapon and the longer-shafted Lucerne hammer. However, the Hache is distinguished from all other such weapons by the fact that it appears to have been developed as a training weapon for knights, or indeed even for common soldiers, and became one of the early subjects of treatises on the formalized use of a weapon, i.e., the first duelling or “fencing” weapons, excluding staves or quarter staffs and excluding of course the specialized swords, clubs, maces, and lances used in tournaments. Later, in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, such manuals of duelling or fencing, now using swords and rapiers, abound. As opposed to the pollaxe duels which generally resulted in fatality, these axe fights ( Jeux de la Hache) appeared to cause little damage, except, perhaps, to the ego, despite the fact that they were fought by heavily armored opponents (Fiore del Liberi in 1409, and Talhoffer in 1443).4 In a slightly later version, (Talhoffer in 1467), the duels were fought by non-armored combatants, which surely would not have been the case in reality. One of the oldest “hammers” to have survived is a beautifully decorated weapon now in the Doge’s palace in Venice, probably having belonged to Francesco da Carrara the Elder, lord of Padua between 1355 and 1388.5 The head and socket are cast in bronze, but the four-pronged hammer ending in the rear-facing beak, forged of steel, is inserted through the casting. The bronze portion is zoomorphic resembles a dragon, and bears under its feet the shield and arms of the Carrara family. The shaft has been replaced, but the whole weapon as displayed measures 1.8 m. in length. Interestingly, the four prongs are arranged so that one is on top of the other three (in a diamond pattern). This diamond arrangement is also found on the two fifteenth-century examples currently in the

3 This discussion is taken in part from the article by Anglo in “Archaeologia”. The reader is referred to it for a detailed analysis of this type of combat training. Anglo, S., Le Jeu de la Hache, A Fifteenth-Century Treatise on the Technique of Chivalric Axe Combat, Archaeologia, vol. CIX, 1991, pp. 113–128. 4 These illustrations appear stylistically to originate at about 1400, judging by the “pig-faced” basinet and the hour-glass shaped gauntlet cuffs. 5 It is pictured in Boccia, L.G., Coelho, E.J. ibid. ill. 33–34.

160

chapter thirteen

Fig. 130. Late 16th century “fussstreitaxt” by the Swiss weaponsmith Lerchli. The weapon is part of a series delivered to the Zurich arsenal between 1585 and 1591. Note that the only difference between this axe and the one in fig. 127 is its length (ca. 1.5 m.) and the presence of langets. Courtesy of Landesmuseum, Zurich, inv. no. K2–1263.

Fig. 131. A differently shaped “fussstreitaxt” also of the same time period as the previous one and in the Zurich arsenal. Courtesy of Landesmuseum, Zurich, inv. no. K2–601.

axes and axe derivatives

161

collection of the Museum of German History in Berlin.6 They are called fussstreithammer in German, roughly translated into English as “infantry war hammer”. Most have a hammer-like head split into three or four short stout prongs, a very short and massive spike (between 7 and 17 cm. in length), and instead of the fastening mechanism discussed with the Lucerne hammer, the hammer head with its corresponding back spike is slipped over the topspike and fixed in place by “U” shaped langets pierced for the top spike and inverted over it. It was then bolted in place over the regular langets, which, as in many other staff weapons, were hammer welded to the base of the top spike. In the case of one of the Berlin hammers, the inverted langet was also fastened through the hammerhead by short truncated pyramidal lugs. These two are clearly fifteenth century weapons, and possibly because of the diamond pattern of the hammer prongs; of Italian manufacture. Italian early-fifteenth-century hammers are massive, compact, and four-pronged as discussed above, but the late-fifteenth-century hammers are, besides being elaborately worked and ornamented, three-pronged with the single prong being on top in a pyramidal construction (fig. 133). A number of such hammers and axes are shown in the very popular midfifteenth century blockbook, “Speculum Humanae Salvationis,” the “Mirror of Man’s Salvation.” In one scene entitled “Three Knights Brought Water from the Cistern to King David,” one of the three carries a mordaxt-like weapon, the second bears a hammer appearing to be the immediate forerunner of the Lucerne hammer, and the third is armed with a fussstreitaxt, very much like those later weapons in the Swiss arsenals made by such smiths as Hans Balthasar Erhardt. All have langets, and the illustration clearly shows a roundel some 40 cm. from the hammer’s base demarcating the grip area.7 In another panel showing the Resurrection, a sleeping guard carries a hammer that appears to have four prongs, and a soldier in the background carries what may be a rossschinder or roncone. The early Lucerne hammer, or bec-de-corbin pictured in fig. 132, differs from the previously mentioned weapon in fig. 133 in that the hammer head, after having been slipped over the top spike, was fastened to the spike and shaft only by means of the long pyramidal side lugs, which were screwed one on another. It has four langets instead of the previous two and shows secondary fastenings by means of ordinary nails driven in between the spike and head and next to the langets, being bent over them as well. The term “Lucerne Hammer” is a modern one, having been created just after the middle of the nineteenth century in order to name this variant of a fussstreithammer, peculiar to the region of Lucerne. What characterizes this weapon is the splitting of the hammer head into four prongs, the lateral two on each side being parallel to the shaft unlike the placement of the prongs in the older Italian hammers, and the long thick beak-like back spike which is almost like the “papageienschnabel” (parrot’s beak) seen in sixteenth-century war hammers of the cavalry.

Müller, H., Köllig, H., ibid. p. 197 figs. 116 and 117. The dating of these Netherlandish woodblock books is still a matter of some speculation, but the woodcut illustrations appear to be of the 1440’s as the general style of arms and above all, armor fits into this period. The illustration entitled “Sangar killed six hundred men with a plowshare,” reveals a typical Kastenbrust,” or “box” breastplate, a short-lived style of about 1435–40. The same Kastenbrust is seen in Konrad Witz’ 1435–40 panel painting of the three warriors bringing water to the thirsty king David, and worn by the middle knight, Sabobai in the composition (located in the Kunstmuseum, Basel). This same subject and composition is present in the “Speculum” as mentioned above in the text, and although it is slightly indistinct, the middle warrior in the woodcut also appears to wear a “Kastenbrust.” One of the two artists must have seen the work of the other, as even the King wears similar robes and an almost identical headpiece. 6 7

162

chapter thirteen

Fig. 132. Bec-de-corbin or Lucerne hammer with a massive beak measuring 13 cm. in length. End of the 15th century or 1500. The shaft is oak and is an ovalized octagon. Private collection.

Fig. 133. Italian “Martello d’arme” or “Fussstreitaxt” ca. 1500. Note the three-pronged hammer with the single prong on top. The solid langets fit over the central hammer and beak portion, which is slotted to receive them. Courtesy of Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 14.25.465.

axes and axe derivatives

163

The Lucerne hammer, although a popular weapon in the Swiss city, appears never to have existed in very large numbers except near Lucerne, (Zurich being an exception). Nonetheless, they can be found in the Historical Museum in Bern stamped with the Bernese arsenal mark; furthermore, some bear the arsenal mark of the Canton of Nidwalden.8 The weapon is most likely derived from the Mordaxt or Fussstreithammer. Like a long-shafted Becde-corbin (also called Bec de faucon), it made its debut in central Switzerland in the closing years of the fifteenth century (fig. 132). Although examples are found in illustrations from elsewhere, it was, as previously stated, used in the Lucerne region, where it was also quickly adapted for use as an individual weapon and carried by town-related guards and functionaries and somewhat later by low ranking military officers. The later and most numerous Lucerne hammer forms, those that occurred during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, are characterized by an ever-lengthening top spikethus paralleling the halberd of the same period- a lighter hammer and back spike, and most importantly, a different fastening method. The hammerhead; instead of fitting over the top spike, was passed over the langets from under them upwards. They were then spread apart by the upward insertion of the shaft, whose top is wedge shaped; everything was then screwed together by the bolt and nut pyramidal side lugs. An early 17th century Lucerne hammer of this type is present in the collection of the Higgins Armory Museum, bearing the mark of Hans Horwer, active in Lucerne between 1605 and 1620s.9 The original shafts were usually ash, and of quadrangular section with rounded edges or weakly octagonal. Some of the later forms have an oval shaft. In general the surviving shafts are fairly uniform in length, measuring 165 cm., the entire length then varies according to the length of the spike but is between 185 and 220 cm. Some Lucerne hammers of this period are marked on their dome-shaped lower spike portions (immediately over the hammer head) with a large “L” either lying on its vertical side or erect (fig. 134). Since the early forms of the Lucerne hammer were developed in the fifteenth century when defensive plate armor was in general use, the more massive, short-pronged hammerhead was a better weapon to break and disrupt the armor. Later, with the ever-decreasing use of body armor occasioned by the use of firearms, the prongs were lengthened and slightly everted to facilitate their penetrating power. These changes, of course, did not apply to the long shafted axe forms, which although decreasing in numbers, remained unchanged, and indeed as we have seen, were manufactured far into the seventeenth century.

8

Statement by Rudolf Beglinger in 1999. The association of the mark on the hammer with the weapons smith Hans Horwer, (Horw is an outlying district of the city of Lucerne) was made by Walter Karcheski, even though Horwer is also listed as being a gunsmith by Hugo Schneider, the former curator of the arms and armor section of the Schweizerisches Landesmuseum in Zurich. 9

164

chapter thirteen

Fig. 134. The classic Lucerne hammer which persists without much change from the early 16th century into the 17th century. Note the “L” on its side on the base of the spike. Private collection.

CHAPTER FOURTEEN

THE GUISARME AND THE BARDICHE

The guisarme and the bardiche are both variations of axes, and therefore cutting arms, but some may also have a minor thrusting function. The two have often been confused, quite understandably so, as they are very similar. The main difference between the two is that the bardiche is characterized by a rear facing concavity on the uppermost part of the blade. Secondly, its blade is usually thicker and wider, that is, more parallel especially towards the top, where it is truncated by the concavity. The gisarme (and the bardiche) have only one eye towards the upper end of the blade and have a secondary fastening at the bottom of the blade which is pin-like or strap(langet) like. It is most likely that the Danish great axes were the inspiration for the guisarme, as well as a number of others, and that the substitution of a lower eye for the thin strap or nail of the guisarme, thus giving it greater strength and stability, transformed this weapon into a “halberd,” in the early to mid-thirteenth century. Despite the similarities, these two weapons were generally not used together in the same geographical areas, or very likely during the same periods of time. The guisarme is older, more central European, but made and used perhaps in smaller numbers; the bardiche (also berdiche, berdyche or berdysh) appears to have been used mainly in eastern Europe, including Turkey, and Russia and far longer into recent times. The word, as Borg points out, is recent in the English language and in the West in general. Borg, also in his previously cited article on gisarmes and great axes, gives convincing evidence that this weapon is already extant in the thirteenth century and cites a writ enforcing the Assize of Arms of 1252 in which among other weapons, “gisarmes” are named.1 Quoting again from this document, he shows that in fourteenth century Scotland the English translation of “gisarme” is “Scottish handaxe”. There is documentation that the French term, as far back as 1150, is “Jusarme”,2 and Froissart cites the use of the weapon among the Castilians in the fourteenth century, where it may have been called “Visarma”. In 1436, guisarmes were preferred over the vouge for arming foot soldiers, and ordered by Phillip le Bon to be made in Saint-Omer, a city famous for its staff weapons. In reference to the discussion on page 43 in the chapter on “Surviving Material”, the staff weapons under discussion, in the Giotto fresco, which are halberd-like; are in all probability guisarmes because of their specific blade form and the fastening of the lower blade point to the shaft with a short slender nail-strap, which enters the shaft at a right angle (as opposed to the fastening technique of the later guisarme and the bardiche where the connecting strap points downward and is perforated for the fastening nails, much as in a langet). The Guisarme blade itself is usually a long and quite large, new-moon-shaped crescent, fastened to the shaft in its center with an eye, which is hammer welded to the

1 2

Borg, A., ibid. Le Grand Robert, Dictionaire de la Langue Française, second edition, Paris, 1992.

166

chapter fourteen

blade, either plain or set with an upper small rear facing sharp portion. Early blades are relatively short, being 38 cm. in a fourteenth century example, but 60 cm. long in another of approximately the same date. The weapon is not for thrusting, but some forms have a slight indent towards the upper portion of the blade, which would allow a thrusting motion. The Tøjhusmuseets has a very large well preserved guisarme, (fig. 135) whose blade measures ca. 1 meter in length without the langets, which themselves measure 80 cm. in length and are fastened to the shaft by five nails. A leather strap is spirally wound down the shaft from the blade to 50 cm. below it. The flattened octagonal shaft becomes triangular just below and through the eye. Twelve hexagonal cone-headed nails fasten to the shaft from the rear of the eye and five more are driven through a brass plate into the top of the shaft. The weapon measures 217 cm. in length and weighs 3.81 kg. (8 lbs.). Although it is very large, it is totally devoid of surface decoration and so would probably not have been a presentation arm. It could very likely have been used in either battle or guard duty by an experienced soldier, and is dated to 1530. In the Betrayal and Arrest scene in the Missal of Henry Chichester of the mid-thirteenth century,3 Borg cites a weapon in the middle of the picture, with two eyes over the shaft and calls it a gisarme.4 It is, however, identical to the others found in similar illustrations of this time, and which are clearly halberds (see fig. 11). In the anonymous late fourteenth century tale of “Sir Gawain and the Green Knight” both the Green Knight and Gawain possess a “gisarme” as a weapon. A fourteenth century illustration in the British Museum clearly shows what could be described as a Danish axe with a long curved lower segment attached to the shaft by a pin or being wrapped around it at that point. A good example of a guisarme is present in the Royal Armouries, no. VII-868. Another is in the collection of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, (fig. 136), which although having a crescentic broad blade, has a thrusting point, and has the lower part of the blade fastened to the shaft by a langet-like strap. It has also been called a form of bardiche, but lacks the characteristic rear indent of the upper back of the blade. This highly decorated weapon, probably of Eastern, that is possibly Turkish, origin (or possibly Russian) is difficult to classify, as it has a blade form somewhat in-between a bardiche and a guisarme. The Sienese artist Duccio di Buonisegna, in his superb “Maesta” finished in 1311 for the Duomo in Siena, and now in the Museo dell’Opere del Duomo, shows in a number of scenes from the passion, shafted weapons best described as guisarmes. They are hafted by a single eye, which in this instance also caps the shaft, and whose lower blade point is appositional to the shaft, as is typical (the shaft nail is not clearly seen). Two of them have another distinctive feature, in that the upper rear edge of the blade, which is a hollow crescent, has a slightly expressed shoulder, somewhat like the reverse of a Morgarten type halberd, appearing to demarcate a thrusting “spike.” Whether this slight “shoulder” is a precursor to the later bardiches is an open question. The largest number of surviving guisarmes can now be found in the Kung. Rustkammaren, within the Royal Palace in Stockholm; although most carry old labels of bardiche. Some of these weapons were acquired for the royal armory by Charles the XV in 1867 along with many other weapons from Germany, through his German buyer-merchant. There is, despite

3 The Missal of Henry Chichester (thirteenth century) John Rylands Library, Manchester, MS. 24, folio 150, verso. 4 Borg, A., ibid.

the guisarme and the bardiche

Fig. 135. A very large Russian guisarme of 1530, whose blade alone is more than a meter in length. It is fastened to the shaft by an elaborate system of nails which are themselves decorated. Courtesy of the Tøjhusmuseets, Copenhagen, inv. no. C50 (45).

167

Fig. 136. A near Eastern or Russian guisarme with a thrusting point and geometric partially gilt decoration. Courtesy of Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 04.3.100.

168

chapter fourteen

some controversy on the matter, evidence that these weapons were in use in Sweden in the fifteenth century, and in all likelihood much earlier. A wall painting in the church at Kumla in Vastmansland shows a battle scene in which guisarmes are in use, and carries the date of 1482. A large Swedish late Gothic altar from ca. 1450, preserved in the Historical Museum of Stockholm shows guisarmes in the hands of soldiers about to kill St. Olaf and St. Erik. They appear much like the interesting weapon from the province of Bleckinge, which is shown in fig. 137, now in the Livrustkammaren, on what is possibly the original shaft, and also of the fifteenth century. It is now described in some detail. The point is broken off and would have added about 3 cm. to its length of 45 cm. It weighs 2.95 kg. (ca. 6 lbs.) There are small holes of various shapes, which pierce the blade near the upper rear edge. The widest portion is adjacent to the welded on eye, and measures together with the eye, 16 cm. The left face of the blade shows four U shaped marks whose bases face each other and whose arms end in small stamped crosses. Other crosses are between the U’s and pierce the metal. Centered between the U’s is a mark: a blunt shield containing a cross under which is an arc (curved line). The lower part of the blade is more sharply drawn in and nailed to the shaft through a short langet, which is actually the narrow lower point of the blade twisted over 90° to lie flat on the shaft. This last is 132 cm. in length, oval in cross section, and shows shrinkage within and below the eye, as well as irregularities of the surface. A slightly later but similar weapon also in the Livrustkammaren is shown in fig. 138, with a much longer but attenuated blade and pierced decorations along its back edge both above and below the eye. It is probably a fifteenth century weapon. An almost identical guisarme is in the Askeri Museum in Istanbul, without the perforations and on a new short display-staff. A guisarme, much corroded and evidently a ground find, is present in the Danish National Museum in Copenhagen (fig. 139) and has some unusual features. The first is the presence of thick and wide langets issuing from a rear central extension of the blade. The second is the presence of a somewhat small square hammerhead behind the point of issue of the langets. The weapon is possibly fifteenth century because of the presence of the langets. It is not a fussstreitaxt, because the blade is typically a guisarme even though the lowest part of the blade where the twisted langet attaches to the shaft is missing. The last variation is that the upper blade portion is shorter than the lower one: the reverse of the usual situation. Another example in the Askeri Museum, shares the feature of a rearfacing hammerhead, has no langets and has a very broad blade with even less of an upper portion. A weapon, which is only vaguely related to guisarmes if at all, is shown in fig. 140 from the Livrustkammaren. It has an arc-shaped blade of uniform width, from the hollowed out back portion of which a short strap like extension is present, bearing behind it the shaft eye. The inferior part of the blade is, like guisarmes and bardiches, turned 90° to form the strap that fastens to the shaft. The superior end of the blade bears a large flattened and almost parallel-sided spike with a low central ridge. The tip is rounded off, possibly because of a broken point. The spike is directly in front of the shaft axis, but the shaft itself has not survived. It is difficult to date as is not seen it in art work, but may represent an unsuccessful transition between a guisarme and an early halberd in giving the weapon a thrusting function. Bardiches, which are now described, are possibly evolved from guisarmes, but this is still believed to be an open question, as the weapon from the Maciejowski Bible discussed below is another possible ancestor. The bardiche has a blade, which although convex, is more uniform in thickness, usually somewhat wider especially near the upper end, and is

the guisarme and the bardiche

169

Fig. 137. A somewhat smaller but still massive guisarme on what is likely the original staff and showing a complex pattern of geometrically arranged marks (see text). The upper point of the blade is broken off. Courtesy of the Kung. Livrustkammeren, Stockholm, inv. no. 691020.

Fig. 138. A guisarme, Swedish or Russian, 15th century or earlier. Weapons similar to this one are seen in illuminations as old as the 13th century. Courtesy of the Kung. Livrustkammeren, Stockholm, inv. no. LRK GN 2403.

170

chapter fourteen

Fig. 139. Excavated guisarme blade with a variant of a rear-facing hammer and langets. The inferior blade point is broken off but appears to have reconnected with the shaft in the standard manner of a guisarme. Courtesy of the Danish National Museum, Copenhagen.

Fig. 140. Variant of a guisarme-like weapon with a long flattened top spike. Courtesy of the Kung. Livrustkammeren, Stockholm, inv. no. LRK GN 06:12.

the guisarme and the bardiche

171

also fastened to the shaft at its lower end by a strap. The joint of the strap to the blade can also be reinforced with leather ties. The blade is commonly 60 to 80 cm. in length, and curves backwards rather sharply towards the upper end; the rear edge more than the front, and a concavity connects the point with the upper back edge. It shows, rather frequently, a large number of perforations along the entire length of the back edge of the blade, and can also be decorated to various degrees with incised lines and gilding. The shafts were relatively short, not more than 150 cm., of oval or quadrangular section with rounded edges and flattened or otherwise modified to fit the oval upper eye. The shaft itself could be slightly curved much as in a modern axe handle. The weapon in fig. 141 is in the collection of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, and is typical for the genre. Much as in the case of the late, large, and highly decorated Venetian glaives, bardiches of extraordinary size and decoration were used for ceremonial occasions, and as presentation pieces for visiting dignitaries. Two very similar bardiches are in the Museum für Deutsche Geschichte in Berlin and illustrated in Müller-Köllig.5 There is a weapon shown in many of the illustrations of the Maciejowski Bible, which is possibly an ancestor of the bardiche. It is shown clearly only in one illustration, folio 3, verso, entitled “the rescue of Lot” in which it has a relatively short wooden shaft and is being wielded by both hands in an overhead swing. It is partly hidden in all other illustrations; being in back of groups of figures, and generally in a vertical position. It can be seen in the illustration in fig. 88, (folio 10, recto), in back of the helmet of the rider of the white horse on the left. Since this weapon is in the hands of the rider of the dark horse in back of the white one, its shaft is presumably not very long, and the conversion to a long shafted weapon must have occurred later, if indeed there is a relationship at all. The blade is, near its point, somewhat similar to a bardiche in that it has a rear facing concavity, and has a similar pattern of vertical punched dots or perforations decorating its back edge. An additional concavity is occasionally present below the first one. As opposed to the bardiche however, the front of the blade is fairly straight, instead of convex, and even slightly concave, a surviving example of this exact weapon, either complete or in fragmentary form has not been seen. It is not a falchion, and does not appear to have a sword-like grip. Since no other weapon exists with such a prominent concavity near its tip, it may have evolved with a curving of its blade, and lengthening of its shaft, into a bardiche, although this is only speculation. A unique staff weapon present in the collection of the Danish National Museum in Copenhagen that shows some similarities to the Maciejowski weapon is shown in fig. 142a. Its blade is a long heavy rectangle, some 75 cm. in height and diverging very slightly between the 4.5 cm. base and the 5.5 cm. top end. The front of the blade top is extended forward in a small lip or hook, like that of a mini roncone. From this forward tip, a concave sweep upwards leads to a short flat 3 cm. spike whose axis is in the middle of the blade, and has a quadrangular reinforcement at the tip. A second steeper concavity leads back down to a small horizontal shoulder at the rear edge of the blade, which then drops down vertically to the base. The base has a front and back thin downward-curled “wing”. There is no true socket, but two long flat lateral langets are hammer welded to the blade base. Three marks are present in a vertical line at the top rear edge of the left blade face. The shaft is a modern replacement and is quadrangular but may have originally been an octagon. Judging from the langets, it was probably at least 1.5 meters in length, giving

5

Müller, H., Köllig, H., ibid. P. 240, no. 211, 212.

172

chapter fourteen

Fig. 141. A Russian bardiche, possibly on the original staff and fastened to it by means of the front blade extension and leather thongs. Rear perforations, almost a hallmark of this weapon, are present. Courtesy of Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 14.25.463. Fig. 142a. A 15th century cut and thrust weapon without a name and appearing to be unique, It may or may not be related to the roncone, or an equally nameless weapon in the Maciejowski bible described in the text. Courtesy of the Danish National Museum, inv. no. 212.

the guisarme and the bardiche

173

Fig. 142b. Detail of 142a, showing marks and the profile of the topspike.

Fig. 142c. Drawing of a vaguely similar weapon said to be early 14th century in a private collection, and pictured in Troso’s book “Le Armi in Asta”. It has no forward facing beak as in 142a. The blade and socket are 107 cm. long. Marks are not described.

174

chapter fourteen

the weapon an overall length of 2.25 meters (7 ft. 4 in.) This nameless weapon is probably mid-fifteenth century, and may be a rare descendant from the Maciejowski arm. It is also possible that it is an extremely heavy form of a roncone because of its small forward facing beak, but because of its attributed age, it does not fit into the scheme of the development of the roncone. The long slender and curved Italian roncone blades of the late fifteenth and sixteenth centuries were not yet in existence in the mid-fifteenth, where one finds the shorter and stouter Ronca Armi- not at all similar to the weapon in fig. 142a. It remains for the present, unique as a surviving polearm with vague resemblances to the Maciejowski weapon and a use similar to a halberd. Like the “Sturmhalbarte,” it appears too massive to have been used in the field, but could have been used in a defined area by specially trained soldiers. The great length of the blade negates the effect of the mass of a short blade on a point of contact that is the feature of the halberd; nevertheless it is ultimately less in the roncone family than a sub-type of halberd. These last even in their classic forms vary significantly from region to region and in their “stages” of development. The Danish National Museum weapon is clearly represented in a Flemish panel painting, part of an altarpiece from ca. 1450, by Dieric Bouts in the Alte Pinakothek in Munich, in the hands of a soldier coming to arrest Christ (fig. 143). It is almost identical to the weapon in Copenhagen, being just slightly shorter, and having the basal “wings” uncurled out from the blade rather than curled under as in the Copenhagen one. Another vaguely similar weapon is illustrated in Troso’s book on staff weapons, and from a private collection.6 It has a long rectangular blade like the Danish weapon, with a short flat spike, falling to a rear weak point, (fig. 142b) and is said to be early fourteenth century. No forward facing beak is present, however, and therefore it resembles the Maciejowski weapon somewhat less. A very similar weapon is in the hands of a kneeling soldier who is offering the crown of King Saul (who has just fallen on his sword in the left half of the illustration) to David. It is found in the Ninth German bible of 1483.7 The difference here is that the blade of the weapon is slightly shorter and that there is a rearward extension of the back shoulder, making it into a short straight beak. Historically, the bardiche is documented as being in use in northern Europe including the Scandinavian countries, and in the hands of the Russian Streltsy (also Strelitz or Strjeltsi), a ruthless and undisciplined body of militia raised by Ivan the Terrible in the middle of the sixteenth century. Initially they were the “household” troops, but soon numbered some 40,000 strong, widened their functions, and through mutinous rebellion became semi independent, and began to oppose the regular troops.8 Besides the bardiche and other weapons they possessed large numbers of muskets, and were in fact also known as “musketeers”. It is said that the “Streltsy” musketeers could use the bardiche as a rest for their firearm. They were finally crushed and annihilated at the end of the seventeenth century by Peter the Great, after one of their rebellions. A somewhat shorter version of the bardiche was adopted by the mounted Streltsy, much as were the shorter versions of other staff weapons like the war hammer, mace, or Danish axe in other military uses. Such a bardiche is in the Livrustkammaren (fig. 144), whose blade measures 59 cm. in length and 16 cm. in width, and is nailed to the shaft by means of four large-headed and rear facing nails through the eye. Three further nails are driven

6 7 8

Troso, M., ibid. p. 111, no. 1. Koberger, A., (printer) The Ninth German Bible, Nuremberg, 1483, book 1, p. 113. A somewhat similar situation, although far less aggravated, existed in France.

the guisarme and the bardiche

175

Fig. 144. Small bardiche on a broken shaft. The shaft might have been short to begin with, suggesting the possibility that this was a horseman’s weapon. Possibly 15th century. Courtesy of the Kung. Livrustkammeren, Stockholm, inv. no. LRK GN 5729:12.

176

chapter fourteen

into the triangular shaped top of the shaft, through a brass plate. The blade has a greatest width of 16 cm. The shaft which is more oval below the eye but triangular below that, is broken off midway down the anterior “langet” which is as usual, the inferior tip of the blade twisted 90° and downward. It is probably from ca. 1500. There is evidence, however, that the classic bardiche was present in some of the southern European countries as well. In a large panel painting by the Catalan artists Guerau Gener and Lluís Borrassã of about 1405, depicting the Resurrection, and located in the Museu Nacional d’Art de Catalunya, the sleeping guard in the left background carries a typical bardiche, whose large blade bears the mark of a salamander.

CHAPTER FIFTEEN

THE BRANDISTOCCO, CORSEKE, AND RELATED WEAPONS

This group of weapons, which may or may not be developmentally related, is put together because of a common form and function. As in some of the other weapons, nomenclature is a problem, even in the more recent literature. In the preparation of this chapter, eight lengthy texts consulted contained absolutely no agreement on a given photograph of weapons of this group. Nevertheless, their generic description is that of a (usually) long shafted, spear-like weapon, from whose blade or socket there issue sharpened curved side wings of varying shape and dimensions. As indicated in the chapter on partizans, it is easy to imagine that these weapons are outgrowths or further developments of the winged partizan, but this is unlikely, because some of these weapons precede or at the very least are concurrent with the winged partizans of the early sixteenth century (which is the time period when the wings on partizans appear). It is at least possible, that this type of weapon is derived from the winged spear of the fifteenth century, the “Flügellanze”, but it is more likely that this last (which harks back to the winged spears of the Vikings) developed into the popular and numerous hunting spears of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The Brandistocco, principally an Italian weapon, called Runka in German, or Ranseur in French; on whose shape and nomenclature there is some, if not unanimous agreement, has a long rather thin straight blade of flattened diamond section, which may also show shallow fullers between the central ridge and the sharpened edge (fig. 145). The side wings arise directly from the base of the blade, are sharpened on the inside edge, which is concave, and mounted on a conical socket with or without langets. The shafts are usually octagonal, have the usual 3.5 cm. diameter and a length of about 175–185 cm. There is some evidence that the term brandistocco can also represent a variant of this weapon, present mainly in the sixteenth century, whose spike-blade and side wings are retractable and hidden in the upper end of the shaft by a spring catch, and released by a sudden forward motion of the weapon. Another variant or synonym, the buttafuori, conceals only a long thin spike, like that of an ahlspiess, in its shaft, as well as the sharp slender side wings. The English name for this type of weapon is “featherstaff ”. In their book “Arms and Armor,” Thomas et al., designate a beautifully decorated Brandistocco-like weapon with an elaborate folding mechanism for the wings, blade, and portions of the shaft, a “folding partisan”.1 A more appropriate title would be “folding brandistocco,” as this weapon has far less in common with a partizan than with a brandistocco. In any case the mechanism has nothing to do with the surprise of an attack, but is clearly intended to provide the user with the means to reduce the size and dimensions of the weapon for purposes of storage and travel. It is known, moreover, that the bodyguards of the nobility and wealthy, accompanied their masters on trips with such folded weapons as baggage. 1 Thomas, B., Gamber, O., Schedelman, H., ibid., plate 45. This weapon that was until 1999 in the HofJagd und Rüstkammer in Vienna, was recently returned to the Rothschild family from whom it had been stolen, and was subsequently auctioned and acquired by Walter Karcheski for the Higgins Armory Museum in Worcester, Massachussetts.

178

chapter fifteen

Fig. 146. This large corseke, also called furloni as well as spetum in the North, although dating to about 1500, is too long for field combat. It was probably used against civil unrest or for guard duty, and is Italian. Private collection. Fig. 145. Early 16th century runka, also called brandistocco, with etched decorations at the base of the blade and wings. The thick blade has a strong central rib. Courtesy of the Museums of the City of Vienna.

the brandistocco, corseke, and related weapons

179

The Corseke or Corseca (Korseke in German and Corseque in French) is similar to the Brandistocco except for the curvature of the side wings. The larger types are also called Spiedo friulano or more specifically Furloni. Weapons with somewhat shorter wings are termed Corsecone. The unusually prominent side wings arise not directly from the base of the blade, but from a flat non cutting section between the blade base and the top of the socket (equivalent to a ricasso on a sword blade), with their convexity towards the blade edges. They can reach very large dimensions; (fig. 146) the side wings in this example, which dates from the end of the fifteenth century, measure 46 cm. in length. The blade measures 74 cm., and has punctate decoration. Most examples are of somewhat smaller dimensions. Langets may or may not be present, they are more commonly found in the later weapons, and are usually short. The shafts are round or weakly facetted octagons, and in the specimen in fig. 146, measure up to 4 cm. in diameter. They are most used in the outgoing years of the fifteenth century, through the sixteenth, and bridge the turn into the seventeenth century before disappearing. Late forms show a peculiarity in that the end of the side wings do not come to a symmetrical point but appear truncated and the top portion recurves, forming a needle-like slightly down curved point (fig. 147). This form can also be called a Friuli spear (Friauler spiess in German) and it is said, was used on warships of Venice and Trieste (in Friuli), as a boarding weapon.2 The word Spetum is sometimes applied to the Friuli spear in the North, as well as to the runka and even to the corseke. Its’ name is said to be derived from the Latin Spendum, spear, or the Italian Spiedo, meaning the same, or Spido, meaning a spit. The weapon is also used north of the Alps, but in a limited way. A more or less closely related weapon is called the Chauve-souris (French and English) and Pipistrello in Italian. In the 1547 inventory of Henry the VIII’s personal goods; this weapon is called, however, a “three-grayned stave”. It appears to evoke the image of a bat in most observers (fig. 148), hence its French and Italian name. The blade in this weapon is short and stout, and each tine always clearly a triangle. The indent between the bottom of the blade and the flat under it, joining it to the socket is variously shaped, one sees arches, multiple arcs, perforations, or merely slits separating the base from the side wings. These last are usually straight with a central rib and have variously arcaded and angulated edges resembling the wings of a bat. The central blade also has a median sharply raised ridge, running down to the socket. The socket is round or faceted, measuring some 10 to 15 cm., but the weapon generally lacks langets. Shafts average 170 cm. (5 1/2 ft.) in length and tend to be octagonal rather than round. Round-headed brass nails sometimes decorate the shaft. The weapon is manufactured principally in Italy, but also in France, and possibly elsewhere as well. A somewhat similar appearing, but unrelated weapon, is the trident. The outline is almost the same but the peasant variety has no true blades. Instead one finds round pitchfork like tines, the middle being the longest, and sometimes of quadrangular section as is a late sixteenth century halberd spike. Groundfinds of earlier centuries show flat tines, more of equal length, but all these weapons are rare, and have little documentation. As usual; ornate, fanciful, and imposing sixteenth century palace-guard specimens exist. One such trident was probably made for the guard of Francesco I della Rovere of Urbino, and is now in the Bargello in Florence; no. M414. It has three massive diamond section spikes,

2 Tarassuk, L., Blair, C., Arms and Weapons, (the complete encyclopedia of ) B.T. Batsford Ltd. London 1982, p. 141.

180

chapter fifteen

Fig. 147. Friuli spear of the later 16th century. Note the long slender quadrangular spike and the needlelike wing tips. Courtesy of Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 29.156.38.

Fig. 148. This Chauve-souris, or Pipistrello, is probably Italian, ca. 1530–40, and from the Veneto region. It measures 246 cm. in length and the steel head is 59 cm long. The blade is thin but rigid because of the strong central rib. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 25.135.9.

the brandistocco, corseke, and related weapons

181

held by a box-like frame decorated with acorns, over curved steel ornamental forms, and ends in a long polygonal socket with langets. The military fork, Forca da guerra in Italian, Sturmgabel in German, and Fourche de guerre in French, clearly a farm tool conversion, appears more closely related to the trident than to the preceding weapons. It served, as many other similarly derived weapons, to equip, at least in part, the common farmer suddenly pressed into military service. The principal difference between the farm tool and its military derivative is that the slightly curved tines of the tool are beaten out straight to enable a more stable thrusting function. If time allowed, a thicker sturdier shaft would have been fitted. As primitive as the weapon may appear to be, it found use over many centuries. It is said to have been in popular use during the Crusades and was still in use through the seventeenth and into the nineteenth centuries, and in one instance, in the twentieth.3 This is not to say that all military forks were conversions, far more the weapon was created as such and underwent many modifications. A military fork created for combat (without conversion) is shown in fig. 149, and stems from the old Vienna arsenal. In another form of military fork, reversed rounded tines are seen implanted into the top of the shaft between the main tines, serving to hook and pull. Italian military forks of the early sixteenth century show heavy tines of flattened diamond section. Some have assumed a beautifully crafted half-moon shape (Mezza luna), and one in particular is combined with a semicircular axe blade and opposed facetted hammer held in place beneath the long solid throat of the fork by strong heavily nailed langets. It is appropriately termed “Forca-azza”.4 Forks are also found with barbs on the points of the tines. It should be understood that all these weapons, in serving their particular purpose, were popular by tradition or experience mainly with the peasant class, but it is interesting that in their hands the success of the weapon was considerable, recalling to a degree the continued use of much “outdated” halberds passed on through generations, perhaps within a given family. Forks are not often specified in chronicles of military action, nor mentioned in military ordinances dealing with the constitution of armies until the end of the seventeenth century in France, Italy, and Germany.5 Conversely, illustrations of forks abound in illustrations between the thirteenth and sixteenth centuries. These are seen predominantly in New Testament scenes of the Betrayal and Arrest of Christ (as are many other weapons), but also in other scenes, specifically in the scene from the Old Testament, of Moses closing the Red Sea over the troops of Pharaoh, in the Nuremberg Chronicle, folio 30 verso (fig. 121), showing a fork with a roundel guard near the base of the tines. An even more clearly depicted fork is shown in folio 63, recto of the same work, the “Expulsion of the Babylonians out of Egypt,” whose tines are slightly divergent and having two roundels near the shaft socket. A fork with a small central polled tine was used in sixteenth century Italy, and also elsewhere, for hunting, and is termed Forca da caccia in Italian, Jagtgabel in German, and Fourche de chasse in French.

3 Tarassuk, L., Blair, C., ibid. Some of the preceding facts are taken from Tarassuk and Blair’s “Arms and Weapons” The use of military forks in the twentieth century is quoted as those being used by Polish farm troops in 1920 to help defeat Soviet troops attacking Warsaw. 4 Vienna, Hofjagd-und Rüstkammer, nr. A 191. 5 Tarassuk, L., Blair, C., ibid., p. 186.

182

chapter fifteen

Fig. 149. Military fork, or Sturmgabel, Austrian, early 16th century. The fork has a tang inserted into the top of the shaft which is prevented from breaking by the presence of a wide metal retaining band surrounding that portion of the shaft. Courtesy of the Museums of the City of Vienna, inv. no. 410.

CHAPTER SIXTEEN

VOUGE AND COUTEAU DE BRÈCHE

A sturdy cut and thrust weapon, appearing to originate in France, and used between the twelfth to sixteenth centuries is variably named vouge (voulge), vouge française, and couteau de brèche in French, couse (kuse in German), and coltello da breccia in Italian. The term vouge derives from the Latin “vidubium,” and becomes the Gallic “vooge” of the twelfth century.1 More than any other weapon, this group presents enormous problems in the matching of the name to the weapon itself. The current literature is replete with apologies for the ambiguity in this matter, and this is definitely understandable; as there is not a clear-cut illustration associated with the terms mentioned, and the final “facts” are a matter of conjecture. This notwithstanding, the weapons will be sorted out as best possible. The weapon in fig. 150, from the Metropolitan Museum of Art, is typical for the type called vouge française, based on the following facts, after its description. This typical vouge has a very slightly convex cutting edge to the blade, which is 48 cm. long, and tapers to a point. The almost straight backside of the blade is sharpened down to approximately two-thirds of its length, where it assumes a thick flat shape. A cross section of the blade at this point is triangular; above this part, it is of flattened diamond shape, the meeting point being a rounded chamfered indent. The socket is asymmetrically hexagonal, the flat parts facing front and rear. Two langets are present with 6 nails in this specimen that is on a hexagonal shaft, appearing to be original. It suggests a date of approximately 1500, but is similar to the weapon depicted in the Caesar Tapestry panel in Bern previously mentioned (fig. 91). This last, has a roundel guard near the shaft socket, as many different fifteenth century staff weapons seem to have had, most of which are now lost, possibly as a consequence of shaft replacement. This illustration is useful also because it shows the technique of its use, although it could certainly also have been swung for a cutting blow. The vouge française was reportedly used at the battles of Grandson, Morat and Nancy by foot soldiers in the service of Anthony of Burgundy, the Great Bastard, and the natural son of Philip the Good.2 This strongly suggests, by association, that the name of the weapon in question on the Caesar Tapestry, which was made for Charles the Bold, Anthony’s half brother, at about this time (1465–1470), is “vouge.” Troso also considers this weapon to be a vouge.3 The French 15th century artist Jean Fouquet, shows, in a prominent place in at least two paintings, the armament of soldiers and knights with the vouge française.4 In the first, the Scottish bodyguards of Charles VII carry bows and vouges, in the second, entitled “The Battle of Cannes”, knights in golden armor, mostly of scale construction, and in the focal point of the painting, are swinging a vouge with a roundel, a poll axe, a glaive and a medium shafted morgenstern. A very well preserved vouge of ca. 1500 is shown in fig. 151, bearing a small mark of three dots. Its head is even more massive than the one in fig. 150. There is evidence that the vouge was also popular elsewhere in Europe,

1 2 3 4

Le Grand Robert, ibid. Tarassuk, L., Blair, C., Arms and Weapons, ibid., p. 497. Troso, M., ibid. Jean Fouquet, c. 1420–c. 1481, painter for Etienne Chevalier, Charles VII, and Louis XI.

184

chapter sixteen

Fig. 150. A Vouge française of about 1500, on what may be the original shaft. Note the heavy gauge of the steel blade. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 14.25.272.

Fig. 151. Massive vouge française, showing decorative nails in the upper shaft. Early 16th century. Private collection.

vouge and couteau de brèche

185

as it is clearly seen in Portuguese paintings of the outgoing fifteenth century. A large six panel painting with near life-size figures called the panels of St. Vicente de Fora by the master of that name, shows in the right of center image, the saint surrounded by armored soldiers, three of whom hold classic vouges with five foot long shafts and bearing pointed iron shoes. They resemble the vouge in fig. 151. The panels are in themselves unique in that they are said to be the oldest large-scale representation of a group portrait of real people.5 This lends credence to the fact that the details such as the weapons pictured, are accurate. A weapon having some similarity to the vouge is the couse, and bearing the synonym, of couteau de brèche. The classic couse at the end of the fifteenth century, was a cut and thrust weapon whose blade is much thinner than the vouge, but with a larger surface area. The cutting edge of the blade is slightly more convex than the back, which is almost straight (fig. 152), and in this example, measures 63 by 8.5 cm. The bottom edge of the blade is pulled in at a right angle except that it also contains a cut out arch. The shaft socket is in line with the back of the blade, and either square, or octagonal. Two or four langet are usually present, containing, in this weapon, six nails each. A rosette-like perforation is present with six holes surrounding a central one, as well as a mark 4 cm. above the socket joint. A rare “couse” is in the collection of the Museums of the City of Vienna, from its now dismantled arsenal and is shown in fig. 153, fitting somewhere in between the two weapons in structure. It has a short stout backspike or beak, showing a slight downward curve, and dates from the early part of the sixteenth century. The socket is constructed somewhat in the manner of a halberd. Despite this exercise in logic and association, there are weapons present in relatively large numbers in the arsenal in Graz, manufactured by the weapons-smith Peter Schreckeisen of Waldneukirchen in Upper Austria, (as well as by other smiths such as Pancraz Taller), which throw some doubt on the foregoing nomenclature. They have long blades resembling in their structure and cross-section the vouge Française, but have at the base a beak like a halberd, from the top edge of which a half-moon curl arises, pointed forward (fig. 154), and which are also typical on late and decorated Styrian halberds. Most bear a smiths’ mark, and are referred to in the 1581 inventory of the Arsenal as a “Gusy”.6 This word must refer to the term “Couse”. What sets the couse and vouge apart from other similar weapons (i.e. partizans, roncones, military forks, corsekes), is the fact that the haft, that is to say, the socket, is not centrally placed under the blade, but offset to one side. The weapons therefore resemble long-shafted knives. The glaive, possibly the ancestor of these two weapons, is centrally shafted in the more “modern” forms of the late fifteenth and sixteenth century, but is similarly offset in the earliest illustrations, such as in the Maciejowski Bible. The couse survives, as do many of the other polearms, into the sixteenth, seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries becoming as usual, more decorated, (fig. 155) and assumes an important role as a palace guard weapon, called “trabantenkuse” in German. Gilding, etching, engraving, and bluing are all used to decorate weapons of sixteenth to eighteenth century nobility. This elaborate decoration, which includes coats of arms, proper names

5

The panels, which were found in 1882, are in the Museu Nacional de Arte Antiga in Lisbon. Krenn, P., Das Steiermarkische Landeszeughaus in Graz, Veröffentlichungen des Landeszeughaus Graz, 1978 p. 47. Krenn, P., Schwert und Spiess, Landeszeughaus Graz, Kunstverlag Hoffstetter, Ried, 1997, p. 57. This unusual weapon also appears in Peter Krenn and Walter J. Karcheski, Jr., Imperial Austria (Houston: Museum of Fine Arts), p. 31, fig. 29. 6

186

chapter sixteen

Fig. 152. Couteau de brèche, or Couse, end of the 15th century, with nailed-on langets. Note the thin flat blade. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 14.25.260.

Fig. 153. A sturdy but roughly made weapon of the early 16th century, somewhat between a Vouge and a Couteau de brèche. It has what would be unique for either of these weapons: a beak. From the old arsenal of the City of Vienna. Courtesy of the Museums of the City of Vienna, inv. no. 126094.

vouge and couteau de brèche

187

Fig. 154. A “Gusy”—a late 16th century weapon delivered in substantial numbers to the armory in Graz by Peter Schreckeisen. The word relates to “couse”, but the blade is really a vouge française, thus blurring the distinction. Coutesy of the Landeszeughaus, Landesmuseum Joanneum, Graz.

188

chapter sixteen

and titles or rank, figural decoration, as well as cut, chiseled, or incised accents, replaces the functional aspect of these weapons, and transforms them into symbols. Some of these symbolic weapons persist to the present day, as in for instance, the halberds of the Swiss Papal guards, or the partizans of the Yeoman Warders of the Tower of London.

vouge and couteau de brèche

Fig. 155a. Trabantenkuse of the Archducal guard of Ferdinand, King of Bohemia (1617), King of Hungary (1618) and Emperor (1619). It has an overall length of 2.53 m. (8 ft. 4 in.). Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 14.25.383.

189

Fig. 155b. Trabantenkuse (also called Gardekuse) of the Emperor Ferdinand I of Austria. Courtesy of the Hofjagd- und Rüstkammer of the Kunsthistorisches Museun, Vienna, inv. no. A 673.

CHAPTER SEVENTEEN

THE MILITARY SCYTHE

The military scythe is perhaps, next to the military fork, the most simple and primitive of the staff weapons, but one which is active over a large time span. It was, like the military fork; used by Polish peasants against the Russians early in the twentieth century. Far from being weak or ineffectual, however, it was a deadly arm. Over the centuries of its use, it was the weapon of the peasant (again like the military fork) and easily converted from the tool by the farmer himself, or by the local blacksmith, to its military equivalent. It was called the kriegssense in German, faux de guerre in French, and falce da guerre in Italian. The construction was relatively simple; after partially cutting the almost right-angle connection to the original shaft, a rectangular piece remained in line with the rolled up back of the blade. This was fastened onto one side of the new straight staff by means of a thick nail or bolt, and two squarish keepers were clamped around the shaft and the rectangular base of the scythe over and under the bolt. Some scythes have a slightly more elaborate fastening method with additional straps bolted or welded to the blade base. The blades measure some 65–70 cm. in length, but can be up to 10 cm. wide at the blade base. The original shaft was unusable for battle as it was usually both curved and recurved. The steel of the blades is thin, hard and relatively flexible in order to make the tool light, as farming required many hours of daily use and repetitive motion. No grinding or polishing is usually found and one sees the hammer marks from the manufacturing process quite clearly. Relatively large numbers of these scythes have survived, some appearing so similar to each other as to suggest a serial manufacture by a relatively experienced smith. Impressive quantities are displayed in the castle of Kyburg in Switzerland, and are in storage in the Landesmuseum in Zurich. These weapons, whether or not converted from a tool, also show no attempt at refinement, either of the technique or the finish. Although the hammer marks on the blade are still obvious, some of those suggesting serial manufacture do show punctate or incised patterns of crude decoration (fig. 156). The weapon was questionably useful for thrusting, and was doubtlessly only successful against unarmored soldiers, having only a thin blade without great mass. As it was very sharp, however, the cut inflicted by it into an unarmored part, would have been deep and deadly. In general it should be noted that the effect of a wound, even what we would call a non-serious flesh wound, might have an entirely different end effect in the centuries under discussion. It is said for instance, that caltrops were smeared with horse or cow dung, to cause wound infection, which would remove the combatants from that particular action, and possibly in a permanent way.1 This was done, of course, on the basis of observation and experience, and without any knowledge of the basis of infectious disease. Aside of the

1 Caltrops are four relatively small iron spikes radiating from a common point, so that three lie on the ground and one always faces up. They were scattered in large quantities in areas suspected of being under enemy forces, and to hinder, wound, and incapacitate them.

192

chapter seventeen

Fig. 156. War scythe, 16th to 17th century. Note the rough workmanship and the crude punched decorative pattern on the blade. One of a great number still preserved. Courtesy of the Landesmuseum in Zurich.

the military scythe

193

care of weapons to prevent rust and other deterioration, these weapons were certainly not cleaned per se. Far more likely, they might have been purposefully contaminated, as above, to incapacitate the combatant, although there is no reference to this particular subject in documents. This type of “biological” warfare would have had far more of an effect in a long term situation, a campaign, or series of battles, or a siege, rather than in a single battle situation, as the “incubation time” of bacteria is never less than a few days.2 Medical treatment was mostly an individual matter in the field until the late sixteenth to seventeenth century. Considering the status of medical knowledge at that time, and the lack of availability of trained physicians in the field, the wounded soldier was perhaps in better hands treating himself, or receiving first aid from a fellow soldier. A war scythe with a special purpose is depicted in use in a scene from one of the Caesar Tapestries in the Historical Museum of Berne at the bottom of fig. 157, cutting the rigging of a ship of war. As opposed to the common variety of war scythes, this weapon’s blade is set, like the farm tool, at right angles to the shaft, which is, as in all war scythes; straight. The purpose of this weapon would seem to be to hook and cut by pulling back rather than to slash.

2

The period of time between infection and the onset of recognizable disease.

CHAPTER EIGHTEEN

THE JEDBURGH STAFF AND LOCHABER AXE

These weapons are not of continental European origin or use and were deployed almost exclusively in Scotland. A typical Jedburgh axe, or staff, stave, Jeddart axe, (all synonyms) is shown in fig. 158. It bears a remarkable resemblance to the continental Swiss halberd of the late fourteenth century, but has instead of the beak, a downward curved hook welded to the back of the superior eye, and being either quadrangular or round in section. Wagner calls it a Scottish halberd.1 The lower half of the blade’s cutting edge is drawn in to form a concavity, and the base of the blade is stamped twice with a crowned “S” mark, reminiscent of Milanese marks of the fifteenth century. The eyes are, as in other forms, welded on, the lower being of larger diameter than the upper, and the pole is modified to fit these differing diameters much the same way as in the early halberd in fig. 37. They are nailed to the round shaft with lateral nails. The medium-length spike is quadrangular and again, like halberds, has a sharp edge facing forward. The weapon appears to have been in use between the fifteenth and eighteenth centuries. A reference to the arming of troops with this weapon occurs in 1643, in the Scottish Acts of Charles I that provides “that they be furnisched with halbert, lochwaber axes or Jedburgh staffes and swordis.” Interestingly enough the weapon never made the transition from eye-fastenings to socket fastenings. There is not a general consensus as to the use and significance of the rear-facing hook, nor is there a contemporary reference to it. It is variously claimed to assist in scaling walls, hooking an opponent, mounted or on foot, or even the horse itself. It seems questionable, however, that such a relatively small hook would be used against a horse, or an armored rider, unless the armor were mail. Using this weapon for hooking and pulling, would put the attacking soldier within reach of the rider’s sword, or a foot soldier’s weapon, during the relatively slow motion of a pull. It has even been suggested that the hook was to hang the weapon on a pole while in a guardroom, or in storage. The question is not yet answered. The Lochaber axe is first mentioned in the literature in 1501 as an “old Scottish batale ax of Lochaber fasoun” (fashion) and was Latinized to “securis Lochaber”.2 The weapon is somewhat similar to the Jedburgh staff, but has a larger and heavier crescent-shaped blade, with a broad middle portion and without a true spike (fig. 158). The main portion of the blade rests squarely on the shaft without a space. Its rear-facing hook is slightly more curved and smaller at the opening than that of the Jedburgh staff and arises either from the rear portion of the blade or more commonly from the top of the upper eye, to which it is either welded, or inserted into the top of the pole using a tang. It cannot possibly have had a use for pulling on a person, as the hook opening is too small to “catch”. In the weapon illustrated in fig. 159, a unique feature appears to be present. The lower eye has been replaced by rear facing lobes, which are nailed to the shaft, and a full-length

1 Wagner, E., et al., Tracht, Wehr und Waffen des späten Mittelalters (1350–1450), Artia, Prag, 1957, part 5, plate 30. 2 The Scottish National Dictionary, Grant, W., editor, the Riverside Press Ltd., Edinburgh, n.d.

196

chapter eighteen

Fig. 158. Jedburgh staff, 15th to 16th century. Note the resemblance to 14th century halberds and the prominent hook replacing the beak of a halberd, and welded to the upper eye. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 29.156.10.

Fig. 159. Lochaber axe, 16th to 17th century. It is distinguished from the Jedburgh staff by the more crescent-shaped blade, smaller lower “eye” and the hook that is mostly inserted by a tang into the top of the shaft. The lower eye has been modified into two earlike lobes that are nailed to the front of the shaft, and a full length anterior langet is present. Courtesy of the Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto. Inv. no. 925.49.9.

the jedburgh staff and lochaber axe

197

forward facing langet has been welded to the lobes and extends to the iron shoe to which it is also welded, thus forming a metal skeleton between the shoe and the head. The pole, in order to be mounted, must have had to be first inserted through the upper eye and slightly above it, then slid back into the shoe, before nailing. Others may have a front and back langet of regular length, and all use a round diameter staff. The Lochaber axe found use in later years as the weapon of city guards, especially in Edinburgh. It is possibly also a Scottish adaptation of the early continental halberds, as is the Jedburgh staff. The use of the hook here is also not clear, but in the later forms that were used by the city guards, where the hook is almost in line with the top of the staff, and hardly of use in hooking a moving object, it may possibly, like the Jedburgh Staff, have been used to hang the weapon on a rack in the guard room.

CHAPTER NINETEEN

THE DOLOIR

The doloir or wagoner’s axe, is not, strictly speaking, a weapon of war. It is discussed briefly here because its use is found in the hands of the wagoner, or a man in charge of the supply trains accompanying troops on the march, and who used it, both as a tool, and in case of attack; in self defense. The term appears to be French, and is first mentioned as doleoir in 1150, and subsequently as doloire in 1372, and is probably derived from the Latin dolabra, meaning axe. It is shown in fig. 160 as a heavy, somewhat clumsy appearing arm or tool, with a blade offset at a 15–20 degree angle. The shaft can be straight or slightly curved, (convex to the front of the weapon), is usually no longer than 1.5 meters (5 ft.), and of oval section. The back is a heavy square hammerhead, which is welded to the rear of the relatively long oval eye, the blade being welded onto the front of this eye. The blade is a large heavy triangle, the rear blunt edge is vertical with its base rounded in front, and having only the front and bottom edges sharpened, indicating that its design is primarily for working and shaping wood rather than as a weapon of attack. On the ground floor of the castle of Spiez, Switzerland, however, amidst a display of arms and armor, there is a doloir-like weapon with a four and a half foot shaft, differing only because the hammer (at the rear of most doloirs) is instead, a slender straight rearfacing beak. This clearly indicates that it was used as a weapon.1 The specific purpose of this axe, other than defense, is that of a tool useful in the repair of wagons and similar vehicles and wooden structures. The use of the hammer is obvious; the axe portion can be used for cutting and shaping new wooden parts or for reworking old ones, somewhat in the manner of an older type adze. The offset blade; although less efficient in chopping trees; was useful in planing or finishing wooden surfaces, and above all; in self-defense. The wagoner, when attacked could stand up from his seat and swing the axe downward and across to hit his opponent. Although it was understood ever since the early middle ages that wagon trains were to be considered a non-combative part of an army, and therefore immune from attack, this concept was occasionally violated, both for practical as well as demoralizing reasons. Wagoners and wagon attendants were traditionally, men too old to fight or boys, and women in the role of labor and other supportive functions. On occasion, violations against these people so enraged the combatants for whom they worked, that their anger helped turn the tide of battle. The doloir pictured in fig. 160 has a blade measuring 44 by 13.5 cm., a hammerhead of 4.5 by 6 cm., and an eye measuring 9 cm. in height. The decoration of these blades is quite uniform and somewhat peculiar, suggesting a common origin for them. It is punched and incised in an abstract flower-like pattern, where some of the flower buds are replaced by cartouches containing initials; one illustrated having two with the letters “IK” and one with the letters “AF.” In yet other examples the cartouches are not a part of the incised pattern, but grouped at the juncture of the blade and the eye. They often contain

1 The castle of Spietz was the ancestral home of Adrian von Bubenberg, one of the military leaders of the Swiss confederation during the Burgundian wars of the late fifteenth century.

200

chapter nineteen

Fig. 160. Doloir or wagoner’s axe of ca. 1500–1550. Note the heavy hammer head and the broad offset blade with punched decorations and initialed cartouches. The blade measures 44 cm. (17 in.) in length. Private collection.

the doloir

201

a “key” as a mark. No name or place of manufacture has as yet been identified for them and the dating of them is uncertain as well. There are in agricultural museums, doloirlike tools, said to have been in use well into the eighteenth century, and having somewhat similar decorative engravings, but without cartouches. It has also been suggested that the doloir was used in the defense of the walls of fortifications, to repel attackers approaching from below on ladders, or in any situation where a downward swing would be made more efficient by an offset blade. Reference to the fact that it may also have been used as an executioner’s axe, although this seems somewhat unlikely, is found in a French text.2 A smaller one-handed variety also exists, which should be called a wagoner’s hatchet, as an axe is a two-handed tool or weapon (“beil” in German for the one handed variety, as opposed to “axt” for the two handed entity). A moderate number of these weapontools have survived. It very difficult to date them, as illustrations are rare, however, in a woodcut of 1526 created for the “Triumphal Procession of the Emperor Maximilian” by Albrecht Altdorfer showing the wagon trains or baggage carts with all the attendants; a man trudging along in the foreground carries a short-handled version of the doloir in his right hand and a boar spear over his left shoulder (fig. 161). Two separate figures in front of this man are shown carrying more traditional and more generic carpenters tools: hatchets and adzes. In an earlier woodcut from the “Triumphal Arch of the Emperor Maximilian” of 1517, a doloir with a shaft of undetermined length lies on the ground, its shaft broken near the hafting eye, but suggesting strongly that it had been used in battle. It can be concluded that the doloir, by association, is, in this instance, a German weapon-tool and that it is in use as such at the beginning of the sixteenth century. It should be noted also that the short-shafted doloirs in these early woodcuts do not have a rear facing hammerhead, and might possibly have had a slightly different function as well as a different name.

2

Le Grand Robert, ibid.

202

chapter nineteen

Fig. 161. Detail of a woodcut by Albrecht Altdorfer out of the series “The Triumphal Procession of the Emperor Maximilian”, 1517, showing a short shafted doloir carried by a non-combatant accompanying a wagon train, who is probably a carpenter trained in wagon repair. Private collection.

CHAPTER TWENTY

CONSERVATION AND RESTORATION OF POLEARMS

Since nature and man have both contributed heavily towards the destruction of ancient artifacts, the first by chemistry and the second by intent, neglect or ignorance; it becomes paramount to try to arrest this loss and to conserve what is left, so that future generations can appreciate and understand their cultural heritage; should they wish to do so. Conservation always precedes restoration but at times, conservation and restoration are one and the same process, that is, conserving an object properly will often also restore it. The most important principle in undertaking a restoration is that the process of doing so acts less to improve its cosmetic appearance, than to stabilize and reverse, if possible, damage that has already occurred. In undertaking this momentous task it is important to emulate the first commandment of medicine, paraphrased as follows: “above all do no harm.” The following procedures are but a few of the simpler methods of conservation or restoration, they are by no means complete, nor are they even totally up to date, as that is not in the main objective of this book. They are listed and described not with the intent of creating conservation laboratories in every home or institution, but merely as examples of what can and sometimes has to be done by qualified individuals, and to make the reader aware of pitfalls and problems. It is firmly believed that the most positive thing that can be done in respect to all antiques and art objects is to hand them over to the next generation in as good a condition as possible to assure their continued existence. The materials concerned, are mostly metal; overwhelmingly iron and steel, then wood and rarely, leather. A discussion follows in some detail, bearing in mind that this addresses only some of the more common problems. Most commonly, iron (used interchangeably with “steel”) will show evidence of oxidation, or if this is allowed to proceed unchecked for long periods of time: deep and disfiguring corrosion. Corrosion can occur in moist air, in earth, or in water, but not uniformly so. Dry air, dry soil or sand, and even deep still water above an object lying under a layer of anoxic mud, can actually conserve well. Iron objects have been found in lake-beds after burial periods of a thousand years, almost perfectly preserved. Such an object was found in a Swiss lake recently, a Viking sword of the tenth century, which, although having lost its grip wood and leather covering, showed underneath its calcareous and shell encrusted surface, a smooth shiny blade with gold inlay; the surface molecules having been converted chemically to crystalline Goethite, a ferric hydroxide, in the muddy quiet bottom of the lake bed. Occasionally an iron phosphate compound will form in organic mud, and have a similar appearance. In the case of the Viking sword, three possibilities present themselves: spray the object with a protective wax; remove the incrustation, or further remove the thin layer of Goethite to reveal the original finish of the blade, hilt and pommel. These are very difficult decisions to make, as the more one removes, the more the risk of irreversible damage, but of course the more clearly one gets to see the object as it was in the tenth century. This, in essence, is the decision everyone undertaking a restoration project faces. If a staff weapon is heavily corroded, it more often than not ends up in a museal or archaeological collection, but the corrosion, especially if it has been buried in the ground,

204

chapter twenty

will probably continue unless it is specifically stopped. During the time it is buried, small fissures, cracks or pores due to the heterogeneity of the metal will occur as it rusts, and the many salts present in the earth will leach into these spaces. Removal of the object from the earth does little to stop the corrosion and eventual disintegration because the moisture present in the air allows these salts to continue working chemically. What must be done to remove the salts is painstaking and slow, but can be effective. The object is first washed and thoroughly but gently brushed to remove as much as possible of soft crumbling surface material but without marking the firm metallic oxide surface. The next step is to fully immerse the object in distilled water for periods up to two or three days, using a non-metallic container filled with between five and ten times the volume of the metal. This procedure is repeated with careful in-between brushing as long as any turbidity is present in the wash water after removal of the object and with gentle agitation under an angled incident light (which serves to make particulate matter in the solution visible to the naked eye). What this process serves to do is to move the salts from the pores into the water. The following procedure, although somewhat painstaking, will ensure that all salts have been removed from the metal.1 Two clear glasses (or test tubes) are placed next to each other in front of a black background. The first is filled with distilled water, the second with the last wash water. To each, 5 drops of a 5 percent solution of nitric acid is added, followed by 3 drops of a 1 percent solution of silver nitrate. After slight agitation and about 5 minutes, a comparison between the two is made. Any differing turbidity between the two indicates remaining salts in the wash water, and the procedure must be repeated until no difference is seen. When this stage has finally been reached, the metal must be quickly dried to prevent new red rust from forming on any non-oxidized metal, using gentle heat. The next step is the filling of the pores and cracks using microcrystalline wax, such as that used as an embedding medium in a histology laboratory in a hospital setting. It can also be purchased from a good pharmacy. Canning wax is similar enough so that it can also be used for this purpose, although the melting temperature of it is somewhat higher than the embedding wax. These waxes, firm at room temperature, melt easily in any container that will hold the object, when placed in an ordinary oven at approximately 75 degrees Celsius (160 degrees Fahrenheit). The object must be covered by the melted wax for about 30 minutes, and then removed to drip out on any absorbent paper. The last step in the procedure is to lightly wipe the surface with a rag dipped in alcohol, or better in Xylene, but making sure that the rag is barely wet, so as to leave wax in the smallest pores and cracks. There is also a process called the alkali sulphide method of extraction, which is said to remove even non-water soluble salts, but the author is not familiar with it. Acrylic plastics have also been used to seal the cleaned surfaces of corroded iron, but these cannot be subsequently removed. Far more frequently, a much lesser degree of corrosion, rust, or surface staining will be present. This also may be removed, but here it is even more critical not to mar or polish the metallic surface beyond what is actually present. If the surface is dull and yellowed, it is called staining; a minor and superficial form of oxidation which usually stabilizes the surface. It detracts, however, from the aesthetic appearance of the metal, and may indeed hide certain details, which are important, i.e. finely inlaid marks on a blade sur-

1 Mühlethaler, B., Kleines Handbuch der Konservierungstechnik, Paul Haupt, Bern and Stuttgart, fourth ed. 1988, p. 66.

conservation and restoration of polearms

205

face, which may identify the place of manufacture and the smith, or the original polishing marks, which allow the study of the polishing techniques used (see fig. 84). Somewhat similar in appearance is the practice of varnishing or shellacking the metal surface in an attempt to protect it, practiced mainly in the earlier part of the twentieth century. With time, this covering, although protecting the surface well, turns a dull yellow-tan, and hides all fine detail. If the weapon is well preserved to start, a minor miracle can be accomplished by cleaning it with solvent in the case of varnish, or alcohol in the case of shellac, using cotton pledges, or in stubborn cases, a stiff cloth or even 0000 grade steel wool. If there is spotty red rust, dry 0000 steel wool, will usually remove it without marking the surface. Almost the worst case is a surface that has been over-cleaned, that is when the surface has been so polished that the original finish has been destroyed. Two choices present themselves here. The first and probably the better one, is to leave the finish alone and hope that an eventual tarnish or stain will improve the appearance. The second which is recommended with great caution, is to rough up the surface (which is already ruined) with something like 350 grit wet machine paper, in a random orbital sander. This helps the aesthetic appearance but does nothing to restore its historical value. In the case of light but firm uniform dark rust, a mechanical wheel made of curled stiff nylon, less hard than the surface of iron, but harder than soft to medium rust, can be used for its removal and is sold in parts of Europe,2 by subsidiaries of the U.S. 3M company and is also available through specialty catalogues. This type of brush is too soft for thick hard rust. What it does is remove minute plugs of rust from “pores” in the metal, thus exposing the entire metal surface, but creating thereby a surface unevenness, which some do not like. A finish with fine emery paper (3–400 grit) can improve that appearance, but most restorers prefer to use the paper straight off without the wheel. This last method provides a smooth surface, but with blackened points. A wire wheel must never be used to clean metal surfaces, as it alters the surface and gives it a peculiar and artificial shine (partially through the heat of friction). Acid of any type or strength should never be used to clean metal of historic value, as it eats deep tiny pores in the relatively inhomogeneous metal, giving it a dull moth-eaten appearance, from which it cannot be restored. The use of a buffing wheel is also not recommended, as it will produce a lustrous artificialappearing shine, again obscuring original markings, should they be present. After the surface has been cleaned, and active rust removed, great care should be taken to protect this now vulnerable bare metal.3 The simplest finishing is obtained by wiping mineral oil onto the surface of the metal, but this method has slight drawbacks in that it is then messy to examine or handle. With time and gravity, the coating may become uneven and thin, although rusting will probably not take place, assuming always that the place of storage is relatively dry, and that care is taken when handling (to prevent the perspiration on hands, which contains salt—the worst enemy of iron, from coming into contact with the metal). In this respect, one should thoroughly wash hands before handling any iron weapon, or as by “industry standards”, wear clean cotton gloves. Better than mineral oil is the application of a hard wax, although it is more time consuming and difficult. Only a few waxes are suitable, all liquid waxes are inappropriate,

2 This tool is sold by the Swiss firm MIGROS in a chain of stores somewhat like Sears Roebuck in the U.S., but manufactured by a Minnesota Mining subsidiary in Europe. 3 Iron plates which were used before copper for the technique of etching, were soon discarded for this purpose because they so rapidly formed surface rust that prints pulled from them had reddish spots in the paper that were unsightly.

206

chapter twenty

and have a relatively short life span. So-called armorer’s wax, although probably still obtainable, leaves a peculiar dull surface. What is recommended is the plain original “Simoniz” paste wax, without any additives or softeners. Although it is slightly acid (pH 6), no harmful effects of this are observed. It is rubbed on (in patches, if desired), allowed to dry for a few minutes, and then rubbed to produce an acceptable luster, which hides nothing of the metal’s fine surface structure. Small accumulations of unrubbed wax in pores or cracks, which show as white deposits, can be removed with a bristle brush. In more than forty years of use no ill effects from it on steel or wood have been observed. If the objects must be stored in less than desirable conditions, and where there may be moisture, such as a warehouse, a thin layer of mineral oil may be applied onto the waxed surface, as an additional safeguard. The wooden shafts present quite different problems of conservation. There are obviously two kinds, the original ones that need careful attention, and the replacement shafts that are modern, that need mostly cosmetic care. The modern replacement shafts can be completely raw wood, if in a museum setting, the intent is to show the original weapon head as an archaeological find or a reconstruction and to make it clear that the shaft is a modern copy. Mostly, however, the intent is to make the shaft look like an original one, in order to create the overall impression of the original appearance. These are the majority of shafts seen on surviving staff weapons, whether in museums, in the marketplace, or in a collection. The term “modern” encompasses any shaft united with the head after the period of its use down to the modern day. These shafts can date back to the seventeenth or eighteenth century, but most are nineteenth or twentieth century additions. The older of these may be subject to the same problems and diseases as the original poles, and probably deserve conservation rather than replacement, unless they are basically incorrect in length, diameter, contour, or have extensive mold or insect infestation. As an example of this type of shaft, there is a beautiful doloir of the usual large dimensions (fig. 156), mounted on a machined, thin round shaft probably of the eighteenth or nineteenth century, measuring only 1.25 inches in diameter, but over 6 feet long, and wrapped just below the eye with cord, silk and a large red tassel. This shaft, in the light of modern knowledge, deserves to be replaced, as it has no resemblance whatsoever to the original one. Original and accurate replacement shafts should be kept at all costs, even if they are fragmentary or unstable. The following problems must be dealt with, if present. Insect, or “woodworm” infestation, manifests itself by the steady slow destruction of the wood, and is usually noted by the presence of very fine light colored “sawdust” beneath or on the side of the shaft. It is progressive and relentless. Several species of insects can cause this damage singly or together. If this slow inexorable process is not arrested, the shaft will eventually be destroyed. There are chemical products available, some in pressurized cans, either for spraying or for injection by means of a needle on a plastic tube connected to the can, but unfortunately the best of these, and the only one that really works, contains Lindane, and is manufactured in France.4 It is available in the United States with great difficulty and then only to qualified personnel because of its toxic nature (it must not be inhaled). It is generally applied by injecting the liquid into the wormhole (escape hatch), thus flooding the galleries and passages and killing both adults and larvae. 4 “Xylophène,” manufactured by Xylochimie, 7 à 11, boulevard de Courbevoie, 92200 Neuilly s. Seine, France.

conservation and restoration of polearms

207

Just as effective, but also difficult to access, is treatment with ethylene oxide, a gas having germicidal (and insecticidal) properties used routinely by certain industries, for sterilizing mechanical equipment such as medical machinery and instruments used in operations. This equipment consists of closed airtight gas-filled containers, heated or not, in which the object is given contact with the gas for about 24 hours. The length of the shafts, of course makes this procedure difficult, but airtight plastic sacks can substitute for the rigid containers, provided sealed rooms are used for this procedure. The easiest solution appears to be a new procedure, with promising results. It is called oxygen deprivation methodology, and works by flooding a chamber or impermeable plastic sack with an inert gas such as common nitrogen or argon, and occasionally repeating this flooding over a more or less long period of time, until all the insects have died of suffocation. This method should be available from furniture restoration dealers, whose clients face the same problems as those caring for polearms. A quick remedy, that has a chance of being effective, is the application of colorless wood preservatives sold in hardware stores, but the use of these compounds does not guarantee the ultimate riddance of some species of insects, and the shafts should be monitored periodically for signs of renewed activity. The older texts claim that these worms may be eliminated by instilling kerosene, alkaline salts, carbon disulfide, arsenical salts, or benzene, into their holes.5 The author has no experience with these methods whatsoever, and believes that they were less efficacious than the ones mentioned above, and are, moreover hazardous to work with. Benzene, an organic solvent for instance, has long been recognized as being carcinogenic, even with limited exposure. Most of these chemicals are no longer on the market. A further and annoying problem with shafts is bowing, which can occur with both original and working replacement shafts. This can sometimes be quite extreme, and is only theoretically remediable. Steaming and bending the shaft is possible, but the risk of breakage is great, and the author has no personal experience with it. Most woodworking professionals including shipwrights, will not accept the task, fearing a break, and given the great age of the shafts and that they may be simultaneously affected with insect damage, it is not an unreasonable refusal. These shafts are, therefore, best left as is. Other organic damage is rare, as the wood is usually too dry for mold growth. Wood that has lost too much of its moisture content, and is brittle presents special problems of conservation, especially if it has also been weakened by insects. Here injections of an epoxy resin might be useful, especially if there are wormholes to inject through, but this type of procedure is best left to a professional wood restorer. Merely overly dried wood can be partly helped by applying coats of walnut oil to the surface and allowing it to be slowly absorbed into the pores. After no more oil is taken in, the surface must be dried and defatted (wicked with towel or filter paper) and after a week or so, waxed as below. Holes of moderately large diameters were drilled through staff weapons mostly in the nineteenth century, (during the period of what is called “historismus” in German, i.e., nineteenth and early twentieth century adulation and imitation of medieval objects and styles, also called neo-Gothic in the English speaking world), when both in private collections, museums and even arsenals, it was fashionable to create panoplies consisting of objects hung high on a wall, with a fan-like shape or completely round, such as spokes

5 Haenel, E., Alte Waffen, Carl Schmidt & Co., Berlin w 62, 1920. Poschenburg, V., Die Schutz und Trutzwaffen des Mittelalters, Saturn Verlag, Vienna, 1936.

208

chapter twenty

of a wheel. These holes should be filled, if it is desired to fill them, with a dowel as a plug rather than with “plastic wood,” as the latter tends to shrink, cannot be properly sanded smooth without scratching the original surface and usually does not take on stain evenly. The dowel is best left unglued, and with a tight fit, so that it may be removed to permit examination of the wood core; if desired. It can then be stained to match the color of the rest of the shaft. All shafts should have a protective coating of wax just as do the metal parts, and usually they can be done together as one procedure. Care should be taken when rubbing the dried wax on the shafts, not to raise splinters, both for the sake of the shaft and of the hand. This usually means rubbing in only one direction. Leather is rarely present on staff weapons, except on the shafts of hunting spears, or if it has survived on a bardiche, tying the bottom of the blade to the shaft. There is written documentation that halberds, longspears and occasionally other staff weapons had portions of their shafts covered with leather for a better grip, but none appear to have survived outside of a late tournament lance. The only recommendation made is that leather, if present, be treated with a small quantity of pure unscented lanolin, which may take days to be absorbed. It is a natural product of the skin (generally of sheep), and helps to give leather a small amount of suppleness without weakening it. The author has no experience with the various leather-care products on the market for this purpose, and has only used them with varying success on newer leather products, that is, those without historical value. Brass; as found in ornamental nail heads, marks and inlays, is a softer metal than iron, and should be cleaned only with a specific brass or metal cleaning liquid or paste It will partially re-tarnish even under wax, with time. Storage or display of staff weapons is not difficult, but certain precautions should be mentioned at this point. The degree of humidity is ideally the same as for humans, in the range of 40 to 60 percent saturation. Temperature variations are less important and can vary greatly, bearing in mind that high temperatures are mostly accompanied by high humidity, unless it is artificially removed. The physical position of staff weapon is important, especially to prevent deformation of the shaft. The weapons should not lean on a wall by the tip or spike point. A completely vertical position is probably the best, but a horizontal display or storage is acceptable if the shaft is evenly supported along its length, and even the placement of several layers of staff weapons on top of each other is acceptable as long as they are, again, supported and stable. A good display example of this is seen in the early sixteenth century arsenal of Solothurn, Switzerland, where large bundles of similar and dissimilar polearms are, and have been; stored for centuries in horizontal racks without evidence of warping. In the arsenal of Graz, the weapons are carefully separated and evenly stored in horizontal racks, supported only at two points, but so that there is an overall balance of their weight. Once a shaft is warped, position is no longer critical, and the aesthetics can be the guideline for display. It is safe to say that placing a warped shaft in a horizontal and convex position, even with weights attached to the middle of the convexity, has little or no effect on straightening it, at least during any reasonable length of time. As mentioned in an earlier chapter, warped shafts are far more frequently found in replacement shafts than in the originals as these last are the most carefully selected and cured, although I have also seen some of the best quality original shafts warp.

CHAPTER TWENTY-ONE

THE MARKETPLACE

As a short appendage to the previous portion of the text, a word or two can be said about staff weapons in the marketplace. Collecting, unfortunately, is not always done for the sake of helping to preserve the objects in question for posterity. It is usually done with a degree of passion, which is a very positive emotion, but is even better when tempered with reason. This last can relate to the choice of the object as well as its price. There will be, for a long time I believe, these weapons available for purchase, but an equal number if not actually more, will be recent imitations, some of which will be very hard to detect as such. If the objective is to acquire staff weapons (and this holds for all arms and armor), that are used only for decorative purposes, then the reader of this book probably would not have read it, however, having done so; and desiring weapons for show, the purchase of good copies is advisable, as the impression of displaying such a weapon is almost the same, and the price (sometimes) quite different. For the serious student/connoisseur/collector, the task is far more difficult as well as costly, although with patience and some luck even a person of modest means can acquire some good material. There are good auction houses in many countries, which are probably better sources for staff weapons than private galleries, both from the point of view of scholarship as well as price and availability. It is a constant source of amazement to see what actually shows up in the market place, and the condition of the objects ranges from frightening to laughable, which is to say from total neglect to over-restored in innovative, if not correct, ways. I would plead with the collector to put uppermost, as a priority, the correct conservation of the acquired objects, so that these irreplaceable human artefacts persist for future generations to study and enjoy. This plea is not only for weapons, of course, but for all antiquarian objects, be they books, illustrations, or any creation of the fertile human mind and hand. The most difficult thing to do is to keep an open mind about objects that do not immediately appeal, for aesthetic, philosophical, or pecuniary reasons. One has only to think of the mindless mass destruction of ecclesiastic and secular sculpture in France following the Revolution, which destroyed for all time and for all people countless masterpieces of Romanesque and Gothic sculptural art; or the melting down of the marvelous goldsmiths’ works by the Swiss, following the rout of the Burgundian army under Charles the Bold at Grandson, on March 2, 1476. During the nineteenth-century, wealthy collectors cut apart illuminated medieval manuscripts, and then cut out of the individual pages the illuminations themselves. More than half of an exhibition at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York of such illuminations consisted of these cut out illustrations. In the twentieth century, we have for instance, the aerial bombing of European cathedrals, and similar damage has occurred, for the same reasons in the Orient. I believe, however, that the greatest damage by far is the one occurring constantly and insidiously by mere ignorance and neglect. It happens not only in the homes of private individuals, but most glaringly in some of the world’s well-known museums and archives, and regardless of the reasons, it is perhaps the greatest pity of them all. Examples that the author has seen in recent years include armor in Valetta in Malta

\

210

chapter twenty-one

(now largely corrected by professional conservation) and the high castle in Salzburg, Austria, where red rust was evident on most iron objects. Objects in the Wallace collection in London and the Bavarian National Museum in Munich, suffer from overzealous cleaning and polishing that they received during earlier parts of the nineteenth century. I am naming but a few places that contain such casualties.

POSTSCRIPT

Hopefully this brief discussion has served the purpose of describing most staff weapons used for their intended military purpose, including some facts regarding their development, deployment, manufacture, and above all their nomenclature. This is certainly not a definitive work (such a thing probably does not exist anyway), and much more work is needed, and in more countries, to complete this chapter of European history; and above all, the deciphering of weapon-smiths’ marks to identify the time and origin of these and other weapons. This last is a daunting and so far, frustrating task, not dealt with in this work. Ideally in the future, a center could be created to gather global information on all such weapons, their photographs, characteristics and marks, to clarify the many uncertainties that still exist. Ideally also, the same center or other centers could do the same thing with armor. I would say, moreover, based on my limited but very pleasant contact with curators and other professionals on two continents, that an extensive informational network already exists, and that cooperation is generally not hard to find.

LIST OF MARKS

Scale 1:1, except for those marked with an asterisk The second 67b is from a halberd not illustrated in the book, but is included because the halberd is virtually identical to the first no. 67B and although the mark and therefore the smith, are different, must come from the same workshop.

\

1

32

34

35

36

37

48

49

50

52

55

56

56

60

64

66

list of marks

214

67a

67b

67b

68a

99a

102

104

107

121a

125

133

141

144

150

154

156

BIBLIOGRAPHY Alexander, J. and Binski, P., ed., Age of Chivalry, Royal Academy of Arts, London, 1987. Andersson, C., Talbot, C., From a Mighty Fortress, The Detroit Institute of Arts, 1983. Anglo, S., A Fifteenth Century Treatise on the Technique of Chivalric Axe Combat, The Devonshire Press, Archaeologia, vol. 109, 1991. Anzelewsky, F. et al., Der Hübsche Martin, Unterlinden Museum, Colmar, 1991. Appelbaum, S., The Triumph of Maximillian I, Dover Publications, Inc., New York, 1964. Ash, D., The Fighting Halberd, The Connoisseur, May, 1950. Avril, F., L’Enluminure À L’Époque Gothique, Bibiotheque de L’Image, 1995. Bartrum, G., German Renaissance Prints, British Museum Press, London, 1995. Blackmore, H.L., Arms and Armor, Studio Vista Ltd., London, 1965. Blair, C., European and American Arms, Crown Publishers, Inc., New York, 1958. ——, Welsh Bills, Glaives, and Hooks, The Arms and Armour Society, Dyer & Sons, Surrey, vol. XVI, no. 2, March 1999. Boccia, L.G., L’Oploteca Nel Museo Nazionale Di Ravenna, Longo Editore Ravenna, 1989. ——, and Coelho, E.T., Armi Bianche Italiane, Bramante Editrice, Milan, 1975. ——, Rossi, F., Morin, M., Armi e Armature Lombarde, Electa Editrice, Milano, 1980. Borg, A., Gisarmes and Great Axes, Journal of the Arms and Armor Society, vol. 8, 1974–76. Bosson, C., La Hallebarde, Genava, Musée d’Art et d’Histoire, Genève. ——, in Armi Antiche, Bolletino dell’Accademia di S. Marciano, Torino, 1963, no. 1. ——, Géroudet, R. and Heer, E., Armes Anciennes des Collections Suisses, Edita, Lausanne, 1972. Bronson, B., The Making and Selling of Wootz, a Crucible Steel of India, Archeomaterials vol. 1 no. 1, n.d. Brusten, C., L’Armée Bourguignonne de 1465 à 1468, Editions Fr. Van Muysewinkel, Brussels, n.d. Buttin, C.H., Les Armes d’Hast, published posthumously as “Les Armes d’Hast par Charles Buttin” by François Buttin in Bulletin Trimestriel de la Société des Amis du Musée de l’Armée, No. 44, 1936, no. 45, 1936, no. 46 1937, no. 48, 1938, no. 49, 1939, no. 50, 1946, no. 51, 1948. Calvert, A.F., Spanish Arms and Armour, John Lane Company, New York, 1907. Cartellieri, O., The Court of Burgundy, Haskell House Publishers Ltd., New York, 1970. Cimarelli, A.G., Armi Bianche, Rizzoli Editore, Milano, 1969. Cockerell, S.C. and Plummer, J., Old Testament Miniatures, (Morgan Library M.638), George Braziller, New York, n.d. Coles, J., Scottish Early Bronze Age Metalwork, Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, 1968–9. Contamine, P., La Guerre au Moyen Age, Nouvelle Clio, Presses Universitaires de France, 1980. Corominas, J. And Pascual, J.A., Diccionario Crítico Etimológico Castellano e Hispánico, Editorial Gredos S.A., Madrid, 1980. Cortés, J., Guia Ilustrada de la Real Armeria de Madrid, Los Talleres de Blass, S.A. Madrid, 1956. Davidson, H.R.E., The Sword in Anglo-Saxon England, The Boydell Press, Suffolk, 1994. Delaissé, L.M.J., Mittelalterliche Mimiaturen, M. Dumont Schauberg, Cologne, 1959. Demmin, A., Die Kriegswaffen, E.A. Seemann, Leipzig, 1886. Döbeli, C., Weber, H., et al., Die Habsburger, Roth Grafik & Partner, Allschwil, 1996. Doring, H., Kriegsordnung of Count Reinhard the Elder of Salms, 1545, Staatsbibliothek Munich (Cod.Germ. 3663). Draeyer, H., Jolidon, Y., Alltag zu Sempacherzeit, Lehrmittel Verlag, Luzern, 1986. Düriegl, G., Waissenberger, R., Das Wiener Bürgerliche Zeughaus, Eigenverlag der Museen der Stadt Wien, 1977. El Conde V. De Valencia de Don Juan, Catálogo de la Real Armería de Madrid, Madrid, 1898. Ellehauge, M. Certain Phases in the Origin and Development of the Glaive, Tøjhusmuseets Skrifter 2, Nordlundes Bogtrykkeri, Copenhagen, 1945. ——, The Spear—Traced Through its Post Roman Development, Møller, Copenhagen, 1948. Ffoulkes, C., European Arms and Armor in the University of Oxford, The Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1912. Fliegel, S.N., Arms and Armor, The Cleveland Museum of Art, Ghent, 1998. Froissart, J., Chronicles, Brereton, G. ed., Penguin Books, London, 1978. Gaier-Lhoest, C. and J., Catalogue des Armes du Musée Curtius, Vaillant-Carmanne, S.A., Liège, 1963. Gaitzsch, W., Sichelförmige Klingen römischer und frühmittelalterlicher Datierung, Waffen und Kostumkunde, Otto Schwartz & Co., Göttingen, 1992. Galerie Fischer, Waffenauktion Fruhe Schweizer Waffen, Luzern, November 1959 (catalog 136). Gamber, O., Schloss Ambras, Die Rüstkammeren, (Guide through the museum of the history of art), Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna, 1981. Geisberg, M., The German Single-Leaf Woodcut: 1500–1550, Strauss, W.L. Ed., Hacker Art Books Inc., 1974. Gessler, E.A., Schweizerishes Landesmuseum, Führer Durch die Waffensammlung, H.R. Sauerländer & Co. Aarau, 1928. ——, Das Aufkommen der Halbarte von ihrer Fruhzeit bis zum Ende des 14. Jahrhundert, in Jubiläumsschrift von Dr. Robert Durrer, Stans, 1928.

\

216

bibliography

——, Das Aufkommen der Halbarte und Ihre Entwicklung von der Frühzeit bis in das 15. Jahrhundert, Revue Internationale d’Histoire Militaire, Paris, 1939–40, no. 3 & 4. ——, and Meyer-Schnyder, J., Katalog der Historischen Sammlungen im Rathause in Luzern, Räber & Cie. Luzern, n.d. Godoy, J.A., Renaissance Arms and Armor from the Patrimonio Nacional, in Resplendence of the Spanish Monarchy, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1991. Grand Larousse de la Langue Française, Librairie Larousse, Paris, 1971. Grande Dizionario della Lingue Italiana, Unione Tipografico, Editrice Torinese, Torino, 1994. Guillaud, J. and Guillaud, M., Altdorfer and Fantastic Realism, Rizzoli International, 1985. Haenel, E., Alte Waffen, Richard Carl Schmidt & Co., Berlin, 1920. Hale, J.R., Artists and Warfare in the Renaissance, Yale University Press, New Haven and London, 1990. Harbison, P., The Daggers of the Early Bronze Age in Ireland, Prähistorische Bronzefunde, division 6, vol. 1 n.d. Hummelberger, W. and Gamber, O., Das Wiener Bürgerliche Zeughaus, Published by the Museums of the City of Vienna, 1960. Janella, C., Duccio di Buoninsegna, Scala/Riverside, 1991. Karcheski, J. and Krenn, P., Imperial Austria, Prestel, Munich, 1992. Von Kienbusch, O., et al., The Kretschmar von Kienbusch collection of Arms and Armor, Princeton University Press, 1963. Koegler, H., Urs Graf, Im Urs-Graf-Verlag, Basel, 1947. Krenn, P., Das Steiermarkische Landeszeughaus in Graz, Styria, Graz, 1974. ——, Schwert und Spiess (Swords and Spears) Landeszeughaus Graz, Kunstverlag Hoffstetter, 1997. Lacaci, G.Q., Armeria del Palacio Real de Madrid, Editorial Patrimonio Nacional, Madrid, 1987. ——, Armeria Del Palacio Real Madrid, Editorial Patrimonio Nacional Madrid, 1987. Laffont, R., The Ancient Art of Warfare, New York Graphic Society LTD. Greenwich, 1966, Vol. 1. Laking, G.F., A record of European Armour and Arms Through Seven Centuries, London, 1920. Landau, D. and Parshall, P., The Renaissance Print 1470–1550, Yale University press, New Haven and London, 1994. Laschitzer, S., Der Theuerdank, Akademische Druck-Verlagsanstalt, Graz, 1966. Le Grand Robert, Dictionnaire de la Langue Française, 2nd Edition, Paris, 1992. Loehr, M., Chinese Bronze Age Weapons from the Chinese National Palace Museum, Peking University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, 1956. Mann, J.,The Wallace Collection Catalogues-European Arms and Armor, William Clowes and Sons Ltd., London, 1962. Martin, P., Waffen und Rüstungen, Umschau Verlag, Frankfurt, 1967. Meier, J.A., Verbreitung und Herkunft der Halbarte im alten Zurich, in Zurcher Chronik, February 1972. ——, Sempacher Halbarten—Die Schweizerische Halbartenrenaissance im 17. Jahrhundert, Fertschrift Hugo Schneider, Zurich, 1982. Meyer, W., Hirsebrei und Hellebarde, Walter-Verlag Olten und Freiburg im Breisgau, 1986. Moxey, K., Peasants Warriors and Wives, University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London, 1989. Mühlethaler, B., Kleines Handbuch der Konservierungstechnik, Paul Haupt, Bern and Stuttgart, 4th ed., 1988. Müller, H. und Köllig, H., Europäische Hieb und Stichwaffen, Militärverlag der DDR., Berlin, 1981. Muschg, W. and Gessler, E.A., Die Schweizer Bilderchroniken, Atlantis Verlag Zürich, 1941. Nickel, H., Ceremonial Arrowheads from Bohemia, Metropolitan Museum Journal, Metropolitan Museum of Art, vol. 1, 1968. ——, Pyhrr, S. and Tarassuk, L., The Art of Chivalry, American Federation of Arts, New York, 1982. Norman, A.V.B., Wilson, G.M., Treasures from the Tower of London, Sainsbury Centre for Visual Arts, University of East Anglia, 1982. Oakeshott, R.E., The Sword in the Age of Chivalry, Arms and Armour Press, London-Melbourne, 1981. ——, European Weapons and Armour, Lutterworht Press, Guilford and London, 1980. ——, The Archaeology of Weapons, Lutterworth Press, London, 1960. O’Hara, J.G., Williams, A.R., The Technology of a 16th Century Staff Weapon, Journal of the Arms and Armor Society, vol. 9, No. 5, 1979. Perkins, J.B. Ward, London Museum Medieval Catalogue 1940, Anglia Publishing, Suffolk, 1940. Pfaff, C., Die Welt der Schweizer Bilderchroniken, Edition 91, Schwyz, 1991. Pfaffenbichler, M., Europäische Waffen im Orientalischen Stil aus der Beständen der Hofjagt—und Rüstkammer des Kunsthistorischen Museums in Wien, Z.H.W.K. Otto Schwartz & Co., Göttingen, 1996. Plenderleith, H.J., The Conservation of Antiquities and Works of Art, London Oxford University Press, 1956. Poschenburg, V., Die Schutz- und Trutzwaffen des Mittelalters, Saturn-Verlag, Vienna, 1936. Von Reitzenstein, A., Der Waffenschmied, Prestel Verlag, München, 1964. Rupp, A., Metallographische Untersuchung von Halbaten des Historischen Museums Bern zur Ermittlung Unterschiedlicher Herstellungsverfahren und Eisenqualitäten, Jahrbuch des Bernischen Historischen Museums, 1979–80. Saul, N., ed., Age of Chivalry, Brockhampton Press, 1995. Schilling, D., Luzerner Bilderchronik-1513, Verlag Sandag S.A., Geneva, 1932. Schneewind, W., Sonderabdruck aus dem Basler Jahrbuch, 1957. Schneider, H., Gedanken zur Halbarte aus Hünenburg, Helvetia Archaeologica, Schwabe & Co., Basel, n.d. ——, Zur Fabrikation der Halbarte, Zeitschrift für Schweizerische Archäologie und Kunstgeschichte, vol. 9, 1959. ——, Erfahrungen mit der Halbarte, Schweizer Waffen Magazin: no. 1, Nov. 1982.

bibliography

217

Schwarz, D.W.H., Kurz, H.R., Deuchler, F., The Burgundian Booty and Works of Burgundian Court Art, Catalog of the Historical Museum of Berne, Stämpfli & Cie., Berne, 1969. Seitz, H., Blankwaffen I, Klinkhardt & Bierman, Braunschwig, 1965. Senn, M., Von Kopie zur Fälschung, Revue de l’Association pour l’ètudes des Armes et Armures, vol. 1 no. 4, 1989. Stone, G.C., A Glossary of the Construction, Decoration and Use of Arms and Armour, Jack Brussel, New York, 1961. Stüber, K., Wetter, H. Ed., Blankwaffen (Edged Weapons), Th. Gut & Co. Verlag, Stäfa (Zurich). Stumpf, J.R., Gemeiner Loblicher Eydgnossenschaft Stetten, Landen und Volckeren Chronikwirdigen Thaaten Beschreybung, 1548 (1st ed.). Tarassuk, L. and Blair, C., ed., The Complete Encyclopedia of Arms and Weapons, B.T. Batsford LTD., London, 1982. Von Tavel, H.C., Das Triumphbild als Memento, Bächtiger, F., Bemerkungen zum “Widersacher” des Eidgenossen von 1529, Andersson, C., Symbolik und Gebärdesprache bei Nicklaus Manuel und Urs Graf, in Zeitschrift für Schweizerische Archäologie und Kunstgeschichte, Berichthaus, Zürich, vol. 37, no. 4, 1980. The Encyclopedia Brittanica, 14th ed., London & New York, 1929. The Burgundian Booty and Works of Burgundian Court Art, Historical Museum Berne, 1969. The Scottish National Dictionary, Grant, W., ed., The Riverside Press Ltd., Edinburgh, n.d. The Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd Edition, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1989. Der Theuerdank, dictated by Maximilian I to Marx Treytzsauerwein (1st ed., 1517), Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, Graz, 1966, ed. Laschitzer, S. Thomas, B., Gamber, O. and Schedelmann, H., Arms and Armour, Thames and Hudson, London, 1964. Trèsor de la Langue Française, Éditions du Centre Nationale de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris, 1983. Tristan, F., Le Monde a L’envers, Atelier Hachette/Massin, 1980. Troso, M., Le Armi in Asta, Istituto Geografico De Agostini, Novara, 1988. Valentinitsch, H., in Der Grazer Harnisch, Styria Press, Graz, 1971. Vital, N., Das Alte Zeughaus Solothurn, Vogt-Schild, Solothurn, 1985. Viollet le Duc, E.,after, Encyclopedie Medievale, vol. 1, Normandie Roto Impressions s.a., Lonrai, 1993. Wagner, E., Drobná, Z. and Durdík, J., Tracht, Wehr und Waffen, Artia, Prag, 1957. Ward Perkins, J.B., London Museum Medieval Catalogue 1940, Anglia Publishing, Ipswich, 1993. Wegeli, R., Inventar der Waffensammlung des Bernischen Historischen Museums in Bern, III Stangenwaffen, K.J. Wyss Erben A.G., 1939. Wilson, A., The Making of the Nuremberg Chronicle, Nico Israel, Amsterdam, 1978.

INDEX

Note: References in italics are to black & white illustrations (page number). References in bold are to colour plates (figure number). Aarberg 95 acid 116, 204–206 Aegeri 37 ahlspiess 75, 147, 151, 152–153, 154 ailettes 9 Alsace 19, 21, 52, 143 Altdorfer 84, 99, 112, 201, 202 Anthony of Burgundy 183 Anton Koberger 66 Appenzell 15 Arbedo 55 archegayes 81, 83 Ariovistus 141 Armería 66 armor 2, 4, 9, 14–17, 22–23, 26, 29, 31, 34, 37, 48, 63, 66, 78, 81, 83–84, 86–87, 95, 97–100, 103, 107, 109, 112, 115–116, 119, 122, 125, 130, 132, 138–139, 141, 143, 147, 151, 154, 156, 159, 161, 163, 166, 177, 183, 185, 191, 195, 199, 206, 209, 211 arrows 7, 14, 34, 102 arsenals 4, 16, 55, 56, 57, 61, 63, 69, 73, 75, 78, 81, 86–87, 92–93, 95, 97–98, 100, 106, 125, 126, 132, 139, 140, 141, 142, 147, 151, 154, 156, 160, 161, 163, 181, 185, 186, 207–208 ascia da fante 155 ash 55, 73, 83, 93, 94, 96, 99, 122, 132, 145, 146, 163 awl-pike 75, 81, 151, 154 awl-spikes 75 axes 3, 7, 9–10, 11, 12, 14–15, 17–18, 19, 20–23, 26, 29, 34, 78, 86, 100, 147, 154–156, 157, 159, 160, 161, 163, 165–166, 171, 174, 181, 183, 195, 196, 197, 199, 200, 201 axt 147, 155–156, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 168, 201 backspike 109, 112, 116, 119, 122, 185 Bannockburn 137 barbs 181 bardiche 22, 34, 165–166, 168, 171, 172, 174, 175, 176, 208 Bargello 179 Barna of Siena 34 Barte 17 Basel 10, 21, 23, 25, 26, 27, 33, 35, 44, 49, 52–54, 69, 70, 86, 96, 99, 102, 115, 161 Baselland 12, 13, 115 basilard 26 battle axe 155 Battle of Cannes 183 Bayeux tapestry 14 beak 15, 17, 19, 29, 34, 37, 41, 42–44, 51, 52–53, 55, 57, 61–62, 67, 69, 70–71, 75, 76, 81, 92, 100, 105, 119, 120, 132, 155–157, 159, 161, 162, 173, 174, 185, 186, 195, 196, 199

bec-de-corbin 161, 162, 163 bec de faucon 163 beech wood 93 Benedikt Tschachtlan 99 Berlin 115, 161, 171, 207 Berswordt Altar 141 bill 14, 63, 69, 107–108, 115–116, 119, 120, 122–123 biological warfare 193 birch 93 bishop’s mantles 16 boar spear 81, 129, 201 Bohain en Vermandois 103 Bohemia 22, 83, 103, 189, 216 Bohemian 7, 29 Bohemian ear spoons 7–8 Böhmischer Ohrenlöffel 7, 125 Bois Protat 23, 25 bolts 14, 87 Borg 34, 165–166 Bouts, Dieric 174 bows 7, 109, 183 brandistocco 177, 179 brass 23, 48, 63, 87, 112, 128, 129–130, 156, 157, 166, 176, 179, 208 brazing 48 breach pike 151, 152, 154 breastplate 14–15, 21, 29, 84, 100, 161 breschspiess 151, 152 broadaxe 155 bronze 7, 10, 18, 19, 119, 137, 146, 159 bronze plate 7 Brown Bill 119 Bruegel 69 Bruges 112, 130, 143 Bürgerliches Zeughaus der Stadt Wien 151 Burgundy 1, 53, 62–63, 66, 83, 104, 148, 156, 183 Burgundy-Spain 53, 63, 66, 83 buttafuori 177 Caesar 141 Caesar Tapestries 102, 109, 112, 141, 156, 183, 193 Callot 77, 79 caltrops 191 Calvert 63 candeliere 154 Carolus 66 Charlemagne 2, 66 Charles V 62–63, 66, 67, 129 Charles VII 53, 103, 183 Charles the Bold 1, 37, 53, 55, 62, 66, 99, 103, 141, 183 Chauve-souris 179, 180 Chillon 29, 66

220

index

Chroniques de France 83, 102, 138 Coeur de Lion 155 coltello da breccia 183 conservation 40, 203, 206–207, 209–210 copper 10, 18, 93, 205 corrosion 41, 203–204 corseke 177, 178, 179, 185 Cortès 66 Courtrai 137–139 couse 15, 95, 183, 185, 186, 187 couteau de brèche 183, 185, 186 crossbow 7, 109, 147 crossbow bolts 14 Crusades 14, 181 cuir bouilli 7, 116 dagger 9, 12, 14, 18, 26 dagger axe 18, 19 Danish axes 21, 155–156 Danish National Museum 168, 170, 171, 172, 174 Danube School 99 David 143, 161, 174 Diebold Schilling 84, 95, 99, 143, 156 Dolchstab 18 doloir 199, 200, 201, 202, 206 Dornach 100, 102, 112 Dorneck 26, 101 Dorneck 1499 26, 52, 99, 102 duelling 147, 150 Dürer 56, 57, 59, 69, 74 Egid Rotter 141 Engelberg 26, 28 Erhard Schön 16 Eschental 93, 95, 96 ethylene oxide 207 eye 15, 19, 21, 23, 24, 26, 27, 33–34, 35–36, 37, 39, 41, 43–47, 48, 52–53, 54, 69, 81, 86–87, 105, 156, 165–166, 168, 171, 174, 176, 195, 196, 197, 199, 201, 204, 206 eyelash Marks 119, 121 falce da guerre 191 falcione 107 fauchard 22, 107 faux de guerre 14, 191 fencing 147 Ferdinand II 4, 12, 78, 189 Fiore del Liberi 159 firearms 4, 9 Fischer 34, 61, 63, 66, 67, 129 flange 17, 105 flintlock 4 flugellanzen 7 forca da caccia 181 forca da guerra 181 forca-azza 181 fourche de chasse 181 France 12, 23, 53, 63, 83, 102, 104, 112, 122, 138, 154, 174, 179, 181, 183, 206, 209 Francesco da Carrara 159 Francis I 62 Frescobaldi 63 Freydal 147

Froissart 83, 102, 165 Friuli spear-Trieste 179, 180 fullers 119, 130, 177 fussstreitaxt 155, 159, 160, 161, 162, 168 fussstreithammer 161, 163 gauntlet 23, 159 ge 18 Geneva 55, 66 Georg von Frundsberg 62 Gerhard von Steffis 156 Germany 23, 26, 37, 53, 57, 59, 119, 135, 141, 166, 181 Gesa 22 Gessler 17, 20, 22, 33–34, 35, 37, 52, 79, 146 Giotto 34, 165 gisarme 22, 86, 107, 165–166 gladius 108 gläfe 107 glaive 33, 69, 107–109, 110–111, 112, 113, 115, 183, 185 glarus 22 glavea 108 gleddir 107 godendag 137 Goethite 203 Gotha 63 Grandson 61, 66, 84, 154, 183, 209 Graz 4, 12, 13, 23, 27, 63, 76, 95, 97, 132, 137, 141, 185, 187, 208 great axes 34, 165 Greifensee 40, 41 guisarme 11, 15, 19, 21, 34, 107, 155, 165–166, 167, 168, 169–170 gusy 78, 185, 187 Habsburgs 3, 21, 55, 130 hache de pieton 155 hache Danoises 21 hafted dagger 18 halberd 2–4, 7, 9, 12, 14–18, 19, 20–23, 24–25, 26, 27–28, 29, 30, 31, 33–34, 35–36, 37, 38, 40, 41, 42–45, 47, 48, 49–51, 52–53, 54, 55, 56, 57–58, 59–60, 61–63, 64–65, 66, 67, 69, 70–74, 75, 76–77, 78–79, 81, 84, 86–87, 88–89, 91, 92–93, 94, 95, 96, 97–100, 101, 102–110, 112, 115–116, 119, 122–123, 125, 132, 135, 139, 143, 147, 150, 155–156, 163, 165–166, 168, 174, 179, 181, 185, 188, 195, 196, 197, 208, 213 hallebarde d’assaut 55 Halm 17 Hans Balthasar Erhardt 56, 60, 86, 156, 160 Hans Döring 16, 6–8 Hans Guldenmund 16 Hans Holbein 99 Hans Maidburger 154 Hausbergen 20 helmets 14, 16, 28, 146 Helvetian Confederation 62, 64, 112 Henry VIII 62, 136, 142, 166, 178 Hermitage Museum 128 Higgins Armory 118, 162, 176 Hippe 16 holy water sprinklers; sprinklers 4, 143

index humidity 208 Hünenberg 41, 42 hunting spears 6, 176, 208 Illuminated Inventory 128 Imperial Jagd-und-Rüstkammer 130 infantry hammer 161 Irish daggers 18 iron 10, 12, 13, 41, 48, 57, 69, 74, 75, 87, 90, 98, 106, 112, 115, 137–138, 143, 146–147, 150, 185, 191, 197, 203–205, 208, 210 Italy 34, 53, 62, 76, 92, 94, 104, 108, 118, 120, 122, 130, 178, 180 Ivan the Terrible 174 jagdspiesse 7 jagtgabel 181 javelin 7, 81 Jedburgh axe 195, 196, 197 Jeux de la Hache 159 ji 18, 19 John of Winterthur 22, 103 Jörg Breu 63 Joshua 108–109 Jura 12, 13, 95 jusarme 165 Kastenbrust 161 keeper 61, 75, 119, 191 kettenmorgenstern 141, 145, 146–147 kettle-hat 15, 81, 84 Konrad of Würzburg 22 Konrad Witz 161 Kriegsgertel 119 Kriegshippe 17 kriegssense 191 Kumla 168 Kyburg 156, 191 Lambrecht Koller 57, 60, 61, 87, 91 lance 2, 7, 14, 16, 26, 108, 125, 151, 208 lance à pousser 151 lancegay 81 Landesmuseum 14, 20, 33, 35–36, 37, 38–40, 41, 42, 53, 54, 76, 95, 99, 146, 156, 160, 163, 187, 191, 192 landsknecht 16, 31, 55, 63, 74, 84, 103, 112 langets 17, 41, 52–53, 55, 60, 61, 72–73, 75, 84, 87, 92–93, 105, 112, 119, 122, 125, 127, 130, 132, 133, 139, 141, 143, 145, 147, 151, 152, 156, 157, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 166, 168, 170, 171, 177, 179, 181, 183, 186 Langspiess 3, 7 langue de boeuf 129, 132, 134 Laupen 63 Le Morte d’Arthur 102 leather 7, 14, 23, 92, 95, 147, 150, 154, 159, 166, 171, 172, 203, 208 Lindane 206 lingua di bue 128, 129 Livrustkammaren 168, 174 Llawnawr 107 Lochaber axe 195, 196, 197 long spear 62, 84, 93, 95, 109, 112

221

Lorraine 12, 155 Louis XI 53, 103, 183 Louis the German 20 Lucerne 61, 63, 66, 67, 78, 84, 93, 95, 146, 156, 159, 161, 162, 163, 164 Lucerne hammer 156, 159, 161, 163 Ludwig of Austria 22 mace 9, 14, 78, 137, 141, 143, 147, 159, 174 Maciejowski Bible 69, 102, 108, 143, 147, 155, 168, 171, 172, 174, 185 mail 4, 7, 9, 12, 14–16, 23, 26, 81, 84, 93, 97, 100, 102, 108, 130, 138, 156, 195 Martin Schongauer 29, 30, 31, 143 Marx Treitzsauerwein 147 Mary of Burgundy 66, 141 Massai 83 masseln 12 matchlocks 4, 16, 112 Maximilian 1–2, 21, 26, 58, 62–63, 65, 66, 81, 82, 83–84, 85, 97, 100, 103, 112, 122, 130, 131, 147, 154, 201, 202 Meier 55, 61–62, 66, 79, 86, 95 Merovingian 12, 116, 118 Metropolitan Museum of Art 8, 42, 46, 48, 49–51, 56, 68, 70, 73, 76, 83, 88, 110, 111, 113, 120, 128, 129–130, 132, 134, 151, 152, 157, 162, 166, 167, 171, 172, 180, 183, 184, 186, 189, 196, 209 mezza Luna 181 microcrystalline wax 204 MIGROS 205 Milan 66, 78, 95, 195 military flail 146–147, 149 military fork 14, 109, 147, 179, 181, 182, 185, 191 military scythe 146, 191 mineral oil 205–206 Missal of Henry Chichester 166 Morat 183 mordaxt 147, 156, 158, 161, 163 Morgarten 14, 21–22, 26, 29, 37, 38–39, 41, 44–45, 48, 61, 137, 166 morgenstern 9, 63, 77, 84, 87, 93, 137, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144–145, 146–147, 148, 183 Moses 147, 181 Mulhouse 143 munitions armor 97 Murten 37, 102 Müstair 20 Nancy 66, 183 Nicklaus Manuel 99 Nicolo di Savri 4 Niello 3 notches 92 Novara 62, 107 Nuremberg Chronicle

66, 147, 149, 156, 181

oak 66, 93, 162 Obwald 23, 24 ochsenzunge 129 Olivier de la Marche 55, 83, 141, 147, 148, 159 Otto von Grandson 156 oxygen deprivation 207

index

222 Padua 34, 159 partigiana 125 partisanne 125 partizans 66, 95, 122, 125, 129–130, 132, 133, 177, 185, 188 pavese 147, 151 pertuisane 125 Peter the Great 174 Philip the Fair 66 Philip the Good 66, 83, 183 physicians 193 picca lunga 7 pictographs 18 pike 4, 7, 62, 75, 81, 151, 152, 154 pilum 7 pine 43, 93, 122, 143, 144 Pipistrello 179, 180 pique de brèche 151 pique longue 7 plançon à broche 154 plate armor 9, 14–15, 98, 139, 163 polishing marks 96, 130, 205 pollaxe 29, 154, 156, 157, 159 pommels 15, 18, 26, 29, 108, 146, 203 puntone a piatello 151 quadrellone

151

radial plates 147 Ranseur 177 Reichsfreiheit 20–21, 31 reinforced mail 9, 12 Reislaüfer 62 Renaissance 7, 9, 15, 17, 61, 69, 109, 115–116, 119 restoration 48, 203, 207 Resurrection 23, 29, 161, 176 ricasso 108, 179 Robert of Artois 137 Romans 3, 12, 119, 130, 150 ronca 66, 107, 115, 118, 119, 122, 133, 174 roncola 117–118, 119 Roncola Armi 119 roncone 66, 69, 75, 77, 84, 107, 109, 115–116, 121, 122, 132, 161, 171, 172, 174, 185 rossschinder 84, 107, 119, 121, 161 Rudolph of Habsburg 21 runka 63, 132, 177, 178, 179 saber-halberds 75, 76 Sainte Chapelle 108 sallets 29, 84 salts 204, 207 Saxons 10 Schmidt 61, 207 Schneider 15, 20, 33, 41, 61, 99–100, 102, 163 Schön 16 Schorno 61, 87 Schwyz 21 scorpion 34, 67–68, 69, 109 Scottish Acts 195 Scottish halberd 195 Scottish handaxe 165 scramasax 20 screws 87, 90

Scrovegni 34 scythe 14–15, 17, 108, 146, 191, 192, 193 securis 115–116, 117, 119 securis Lochaber 195 Sempach 23, 26, 28, 37, 57, 60, 66, 86–87, 99, 102 setz-tartsche 151 shafter 95, 139 shellacking 205 shields 14 skulls 99, 101, 102 socket 8, 15, 17, 23, 43, 49, 52–53, 54, 55, 57, 61, 69, 72, 75, 81, 88, 105, 107–108, 112, 115–116, 117–118, 119, 120, 122, 125, 127–128, 130, 132, 133–134, 141, 151, 159, 171, 173, 177, 179, 181, 183, 185, 195 Solothurn 4, 50, 60, 61, 95, 97, 100, 101, 208 spear 7, 8, 9, 16, 26, 29, 62–63, 81, 83–84, 93, 95, 98, 108–109, 112, 125, 126, 129, 137–138, 151, 177, 179, 180, 201, 208 Speculum Humanae Salvationis 161 spetum 178, 179 spiedi alla Bolognese 128, 130 spiedi da caccia 7 spiedo di Ripiegarsi 63 spiedo friulano 179 spike 15–17, 23, 26, 27–28, 29, 30, 33, 36, 37, 38, 40, 41, 42–44, 48, 49, 51, 52–53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 61, 63, 67–68, 69, 70–71, 75, 76, 78, 81, 84, 87, 100, 102, 105–106, 109, 112, 115–116, 119, 120, 122, 132, 137, 139, 141, 143, 145, 146–147, 151, 152–153, 154, 156, 159, 161, 163, 164, 166, 168, 170, 171, 173, 174, 179, 180, 185, 191, 195, 208 sponton-halberd 132, 135 spontons 132 spurs 137 St. Andrew 26, 62–63, 64–65 St. Erik 168 St. George 26, 62–63, 65 St. Olaf 168 staff 2–3, 7, 9–10, 12, 14–17, 20, 26, 34, 40, 42–43, 53, 61–63, 69, 75, 78, 82, 84, 86–87, 92–93, 95, 97–98, 107–109, 110, 115, 122, 129–130, 131, 132, 137, 139, 141, 146, 149, 156, 157, 159, 161, 165, 168, 169, 171, 172, 174, 177, 183, 191, 195, 196, 197, 203, 206, 208–209, 211 staff weapon 7, 9, 17, 20, 78, 108, 115, 122, 137, 171, 203, 208 steaming 207 stone 10, 17, 151 stone age 9, 11 Strassburg 57 Streltsy 174 Sturmgabel 181, 182 Sturmhalbarte 55, 56, 174 Styria 12, 97 Sutton Hoo 150 Swabian War 9, 26, 62–63, 65, 112 Swiss dagger 26 Switzerland 1, 4, 20, 23, 24–25, 26, 28, 29, 37, 40, 41, 57, 59, 61, 69, 84, 93, 95, 100, 102, 154, 163, 191, 199, 209 sword 2, 7, 9–10, 12, 14–15, 20, 26, 29, 37, 56, 75, 78, 84, 97, 99–100, 102, 108–109, 112, 116,

index 129–130, 132, 139, 141, 146–147, 155, 159, 171, 174, 179, 195, 203 taillant 159 Talhoffer 159 tang 18, 20, 108, 115–116, 117, 182, 195, 196 tassels 92, 106, 109, 128, 129, 132 temperature 204, 208 Theuerdanck 130 Tojhusmuseets 146, 166, 167 Torino 63, 95 Tournai 141 tournaments 9, 78, 147, 156, 159 trabantenkuse 185, 189 trident 18, 179, 181 Triumph of the Emperor Maximilian 147 Triumphal Arch 63, 65, 201 Troso 34, 81, 107, 119, 122, 173, 174, 183 Turkish 78, 166 two handed swords 7, 99–100, 112, 147 Urbino 179 Uri 20–21 Urs Graf 29, 83, 99 varnishing 205 Venetian glaives 171 Venice 130 Vickers 48, 122 Vienna 5, 55, 56, 97, 109, 125, 126, 130, 133, 135, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 147, 151, 152–153, 154, 177, 178, 181, 182, 185, 186, 189, 207 Vikings 155, 177 visarma 165 vogt 20

223

Von Meckenem 69 vooge 183 vouge 17, 22, 107, 109, 165, 183, 184, 185, 186–187 vouge Suisse 17 voulge 34, 183 wagoner’s axe 199 wagons 199 walnut oil 207 war hammer 14, 84, 161, 174 war scythe 18, 108, 192, 193 wax 203–206, 208 Wechtlin 57, 58 wedge 103, 156, 163 Weisskunig 112, 122, 154 Wenceslas Bible 109, 143 wheel-pommel 15, 29 wheellock 4 Winchester Bible 108 winged partizan 177 winged spears 7, 125, 177 Witz 161 Wolf Huber 55, 63, 65 Wolf of Passau 130 woodworm 206 wootz 12 X-ray

87

Yeoman Warders

188

Zürich 4, 20, 23, 26, 33, 35–36, 37, 38–40, 41, 42, 44–45, 52–53, 54, 55, 57, 61, 95, 99–100, 146, 156, 160, 163, 191, 192

HISTORY OF WARFARE History of Warfare presents the latest research on all aspects of military history. Publications in the series will examine technology, strategy, logistics, and economic and social developments related to warfare in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East from ancient times until the early nineteenth century. The series will accept monographs, collections of essays, conference proceedings, and translation of military texts.

1. HOEVEN, M. VAN DER (ed.). Exercise of Arms. Warfare in the Netherlands, 1568-1648. 1997. ISBN 90 04 10727 4 2. RAUDZENS, G. (ed.). Technology, Disease and Colonial Conquests, Sixteenth to Eighteenth Centuries. Essays Reappraising the Guns and Germs Theories. 2001. ISBN 90 04 11745 8 3. LENIHAN P. (ed.). Conquest and Resistance. War in Seventeenth-Century Ireland. 2001. ISBN 90 04 11743 1 4. NICHOLSON, H. Love, War and the Grail. 2001. ISBN 90 04 12014 9 5. BIRKENMEIER, J.W. The Development of the Komnenian Army: 1081-1180. 2002. ISBN 90 04 11710 5 6. MURDOCH, S. (ed.). Scotland and the Thirty Years’ War, 1618-1648. 2001. ISBN 90 04 12086 6 7. TUYLL VAN SEROOSKERKEN, H.P. VAN. The Netherlands and World War I. Espionage, Diplomacy and Survival. 2001. ISBN 90 04 12243 5 8. DEVRIES, K. A Cumulative Bibliography of Medieval Military History and Tech-nology. 2002. ISBN 90 04 12227 3 9. CUNEO, P. (ed.). Artful Armies, Beautiful Battles. Art and Warfare in Early Modern Europe. 2002. ISBN 90 04 11588 9 10. KUNZLE, D. From Criminal to Courtier. The Soldier in Netherlandish Art 1550-1672. 2002. ISBN 90 04 12369 5 11. TRIM, D.J.B. (ed.). The Chivalric Ethos and the Development of Military Professionalism. 2003. ISBN 90 04 12095 5 12. WILLIAMS, A. The Knight and the Blast Furnace. A History of the Metallurgy of Armour in the Middle Ages & the Early Modern Period. 2003. ISBN 90 04 12498 5 13. KAGAY, D.J. & L.J.A. VILLALON (eds.). Crusaders, Condottieri, and Cannon. Medieval Warfare in Societies Around the Mediterranean. 2002. ISBN 90 04 12553 1 14. LOHR, E. & M. POE (eds.). The Military and Society in Russia: 1450-1917. 2002. ISBN 90 04 12273 7 15. MURDOCH, S. & A. MACKILLOP (eds.). Fighting for Identity. Scottish Military Experience c. 1550-1900. 2002. ISBN 90 04 12823 9 16. HACKER, B.C. World Military History Bibliography. Premodern and Non-western Military Institutions and Warfare. 2003. ISBN 90 04 12997 9 17. MACKILLOP, A. & S. MURDOCH (eds.). Military Governors and Imperial Frontiers c. 1600-1800. A Study of Scotland and Empires. 2003. ISBN 90 04 12970 7 18. SATTERFIELD, G. Princes, Posts and Partisans. The Army of Louis XVI and Partisan Warfare in the Netherlands (16731678). 2003. ISBN 90 04 13176 0 20. MACLEOD, J. & P. PURSEIGLE (eds.). Uncovered Fields. Perspectives in First World War Studies. 2004. ISBN 90 04 13264 3 21. WORTHINGTON, D. Scots in the Habsburg Service, 1618-1648. 2004. ISBN 90 04 13575 8 22. GRIFFIN, M. Regulating Religion and Morality in the King’s Armies, 1639-1646. 2004. ISBN 90 04 13170 1 23. SICKING, L. Neptune and the Netherlands. State, Economy, and War at Sea in the Renaissance. 2004. ISBN 90 04 13850 1 24. GLOZIER, M. Scottish Soldiers in France in the Reign of the Sun King. Nursery for Men of Honour. 2004. ISBN 90 04 13865 X 25. VILLALON, L.J.A. & D.J. KAGAY (eds.). The Hundred Years War. A Wider Focus. 2005. ISBN 90 04 13969 9 26. DEVRIES, K. A Cumulative Bibliography of Medieval Military History and Technology, Update 2004. 2005. ISBN 90 04 14040 9 27. HACKER, B.C. World Military History Annotated Bibliography. Premodern and Nonwestern Military Institutions (Works Published before 1967). 2005. ISBN 90 04 14071 9 28. WALTON, S.A. (ed.). Instrumental in War. Science, Research, and Instruments Between Knowledge and the World. 2005. ISBN 90 04 14281 9 29. STEINBERG, J.W., B.W. MENNING, D. SCHIMMELPENNINCK VAN DER OYE, D. WOLFF & S. YOKOTE (eds.). The Russo-Japanese War in Global Perspective. World War Zero. 2005. ISBN 90 04 14284 3 30. PURSEIGLE, P. (ed.). Warfare and Belligerence. Perspectives in First World War Studies. 2005. ISBN 90 04 14352 1 31. WALDMAN, J. Hafted Weapons in Medieval and Renaissance Europe. The Evolution of European Staff Weapons between 1200 and 1650. 2005. ISBN 90 04 14409 9 32. SPEELMAN, P. War, Society and Enlightenment. The Works of General Lloyd. 2005. ISBN 90 04 14410 2 33. WRIGHT, D.C. From War to Diplomatic Parity in Eleventh-century China. Sung’s Foreign Relations with Kitan Liao. 2005. ISBN 90 04 14456 0

ISSN 1385–7827