More Love for Spears

It's odd to me that the oldest weapon of mankind is also the least appreciated these days. Consider the facts. The spear was in continuous, active use as the primary weapon for hunting and battle from the dawn of mankind right up into the 19th century, when calvary units continued to use them. Indeed most of the great war rifles of the 20th century were also formidible spears, and were used as such many times.

But now the spear is relegated to the museum--a relic with no apparent place in the world of practical self defense. Considering how long a track record the spear has, as well as its flexibility as a weapon, that seems odd. It's a weapon that allows the user to deliver an almost instantly fatal wound at a distance with nothing more than a shove. It can be thrown if balanced and has not only brought down all game on the planet, there's considerable evidence it drove scores of massive, dangerous animals into extinction from the cave bear to the wooly mammoth

So what current production, practical spears are out there? Do any martial arts still train people in the use of spears?

If you decide to "go spear" let me know and I'll drive up to Alaska and take those new fangled guns off your hands . . . .

:)

But now the spear is relegated to the museum--a relic with no apparent place in the world of practical self defense. Considering how long a track record the spear has, as well as its flexibility as a weapon, that seems odd.


Not really. Seen anyone carrying a spear lately? It's big and long and clunky. You get a lot more bang for your buck w/ a nice small pistol. And more bang period, really. I'd rather have a gun than a spear.

And it doesn't lend itself well to improvisational self-defense either. You can find things similar to to a staff or an escrima in every day life, but how many long pointy things are there out there?

That's just technology for you. I bet people put their rocks in the museum pretty quick when stone knives and spears came out. As to modern production spears...try Cold Steel's website (http://www.coldsteel.com/spears-high-performance-spears.html).

shaolin still train with spears. do a search on file share programs like bearshare and you can find some pretty neat free (legal and illegal) martial arts videos..even spear forms

Another vote to check out Cold Steel. With the short shaft they are not too unweildy. I have actually considered one for home back-up since it's basically a razor sharp short sword.

Oh, and I think PA has put in a spear season for deer or were at least thinking about it. So the spear might be making a comeback!

Not really. Seen anyone carrying a spear lately? It's big and long and clunky. You get a lot more bang for your buck w/ a nice small pistol. And more bang period, really. I'd rather have a gun than a spear.


Certainly, but this being the non-firearms forum it's not quite what I was getting at. Look how much attention is paid to knives, swords and the like. Clearly the advent of the firearm did not render all non-firearm weapons obsolete.

As far as carrying a spear, the same thing applies to swords but that doesn't stop people from having fixations on them and spending tons of money on new ones.

It just seems odd to me that we focus so much on large knives and swords when these weapons played a much more minor role in human history, and are less effective. The spear is the purest means of using sectional density to kill. It, far more than the sword or knife, is the direct linear ancestor of the firearm.

If you decide to "go spear" let me know and I'll drive up to Alaska and take those new fangled guns off your hands . . . .

:)

As it happens, most of my rifles are also spears. But I'll admit I haven't a clue how to use them as spears. That's another point. Bayonet training with the great war rifles was once seen as critical, but is now viewed as bizarre and archaic. There used to be a whole martial art around thrusts and blocks with the bayonet. The bayonet on a nine pound Mauser or Mosin makes it into an absolutely lethal spear and close combat weapon.

http://ejmas.com/jnc/boxbayonet/Fig6.jpg

Here's a good example of what I'm talking about. Compare the Clovis Point with the rifle bullet. There you can see the links very clearly indeed.

http://www.ohiohistorycentral.org/images/prehistory/artifacts/csp-l.jpg

http://www.questbullets.com/Images/A%20boattail%20bullet.jpg

The spear is the most formidable manual weapon at close range, without a doubt.

It's easy to use a spear. You thrust. Yeah, you can get fancier, but that's the most important part. You can also (especially with rifle w/ bayonet) use a butt stroke or smash. Also easily learned.

John

I'll be amking a bunch of spears next month for Boy Scouts - should be interesting. Some lowlife stole the ones they had so we'll make some more.

Many years ago, I spent several days of BCT learning bayonet fighting. That is about as close to spear fighting as I've seen. I wonder if the Army still teaches bayonet fighting? On the end of an M-14, it was nasty. On the end of the M-16 (when I was in RVN), it looked like a joke. I feared if I actually tried using it the rifle would break. Thankfully, I never saw it tested out.

"...calvary units continued to use them..." Lance, not a spear. In any case, spears were used in times past because they were cheap to make and required less training for a peasant army. A spear was generally less easy to defend against, armour-wise, too. Mind you, a good swordsman(rapier mostly) will merely knock it out of the way and promptly kill the spearman. That's how the Spanish beat the Swiss pikemen.
"...my rifles are also spears..." The book 'Cold Steel' covers bayonet fighting with an M-1. I'm not sure if it's still being printed. Paladin Books maybe. Have it around here some place. I'm not sure where or I'd post the author etc.

The Swiss pikes were extremely long--over 20 feet! That was long enough break the ranks of the enemy phalanx-style, but it was also so long that a Spaniard brave and quick enough could dodge underneath. A shorter spear would have been more effective at blocking the swordsmen, if not calvary charges. It's an example of relying too much on one highly specialized type of weapon. In that case the very long pike. And let's not forget how effective those "archaic" Pikemen were in other battles. Those Swiss “hedgehogs" could block the most highly armed knight, and the Swiss won many more battles than they lost using the tactics. They were in very high demand as mercenaries, and it was the loss of many trained pikemen to fight for other nations that helped weaken the overall military force.

Later on, a similar pattern emerged when the Zulu short battle spear was also used to undermine overlong traditional spears.

Mind you, a good swordsman(rapier mostly) will merely knock it out of the way and promptly kill the spearman.

It's nowhere near that easy, esp. if you're facing a spear of more maneuverable length. The spear has reach on the rapier, and its greater weight and increased leverage makes batting it out of the way like a foil an unrealistic proposition. It would be a very interesting exercise to pit two trained inviduals against each other in a fencing bout, one with a blunt spear and the other with a foil.

The spear is also far more practical as a hunting weapon than a sword.

Cos, if you want a "real" spear, probably best to go with a custom job. Or, get a custom staff and then mount your own head (maybe a harpoon head?). Treating the wood properly (flexible yet strong) is the tricky part.

For training, one usually sees these with the blunted blades:
http://www.wle.com/products/w030.html

Many martial arts train the spear, Choy Li Fut, White Crane, Long Fist, Hung Gar, Praying Mantis, inter alia.

Mantis trains the Big Four (staff, saber, spear, straight sword) initially and has several spear forms including spear vs. broadsword or spear vs. double daggers or spear vs. tiger hook swords that you usually see in demonstrations. Let me ask my fellow martial arts knuckleheads and see if I can get you a video. There was one on the Indy club's site but it's gone now.

Other styles have not specifically study the spear but its long weapons can be readily adapted to spears, e.g. Wing Chun whose 6 and 1/2 staff looks very "speary."

Indeed most of the great war rifles of the 20th century were also formidible spears, Well, spears, yes. Formidible spears, not so much, but we get the point.

Do any martial arts still train people in the use of spears? Yup, just ask John Shirley, ElTe, or Daniel who've all trained in spear. Many Chinese styles that teach weapons teach spear. The westeren MA styles taught by ARMA cover spear.

So what current production, practical spears are out there? Cas Iberia and Cold Steel come to mind. It's almost unfair to mention both at the same time considering the CS products are spare utilitarian things while the CI are historically correct. http://www.casiberia.com/cas/images/products/SH2152.jpg http://www.casiberia.com/cas/images/products/XH2038.jpghttp://www.casiberia.com/cas/images/products/XH1078.jpghttp://www.casiberia.com/cas/images/products/XH1077.jpghttp://us.st11.yimg.com/store1.yimg.com/I/csstoreonline_1873_1084591

Here's a good example of what I'm talking about. Compare the Clovis Point with the rifle bullet. There you can see the links very clearly indeed.

Let's not confuse coincidence with causal relationships. One is based on hypersonic aerodynamics the other on attachment to a shaft.

Mind you, a good swordsman(rapier mostly) will merely knock it out of the way and promptly kill the spearman. The rapier is much too light to knock a spear or pike aside. Are you referring to the battle of Marignano, the great defeat of the Swiss?

Certainly, but this being the non-firearms forum it's not quite what I was getting at. Look how much attention is paid to knives, swords and the like. Clearly the advent of the firearm did not render all non-firearm weapons obsolete.

As far as carrying a spear, the same thing applies to swords but that doesn't stop people from having fixations on them and spending tons of money on new ones.

It just seems odd to me that we focus so much on large knives and swords when these weapons played a much more minor role in human history, and are less effective.


Fair enough. I based my reply on the fact that you said "practical" self-defense, which to me implies something that's reasonable for every day use. Carrying around a spear (or even a sword) hardly falls into that category.

I think knives are a reasonable thing to focus on because a knife can easily supplement a firearm, while a sword or (especially) a spear is to much to handle. As for swords, I think those have more intrinsic coolness than spears. Plus there are a lot of people, relatively speaking, that still use swords. SCA, fencing, martial arts, etc. I own a very real sword, but it's because I'm a martial arts practitioner, not just a fan.

(Also, I agree w/ hso's second post.)






As it happens, most of my rifles are also spears. But I'll admit I haven't a clue how to use them as spears. That's another point. Bayonet training with the great war rifles was once seen as critical, but is now viewed as bizarre and archaic. There used to be a whole martial art around thrusts and blocks with the bayonet. The bayonet on a nine pound Mauser or Mosin makes it into an absolutely lethal spear and close combat weapon.



Many years ago, I spent several days of BCT learning bayonet fighting. That is about as close to spear fighting as I've seen. I wonder if the Army still teaches bayonet fighting? On the end of an M-14, it was nasty. On the end of the M-16 (when I was in RVN), it looked like a joke. I feared if I actually tried using it the rifle would break. Thankfully, I never saw it tested out.



We spent one morning praticing bayonet techniques and another fighting w/ pugil sticks. And, honestly, I think it was more to instill "warrior ethos" than for any practical use. Our drill sergeants told us "if you are surrounded and you have to 'fix bayonets' you are f***ed."

I think the reason for that is the development of effective repeating rifles. Watch a movie like "The Mask of Zorro", for example. He run around w/ a sword because all the soldiers w/ rifles get one shot at him. Probably not a terribly accurate shot, either. Fast forward to today. Haji would hold down the trigger on his AK and let loose a whole 30 round magazine and Zorro would be dead as a doornail.

The "great war rifles" were usually bolt action, w/ limited magazine capacity. So it was very likely you would run your magazine dry or get stuck reloading or not have time to work the bolt for another shot. Current war rifles (M-16, AK, etc) give you 30 rounds until you run dry, magazine changes are very quick, and you just keep pulling the trigger until you run dry. Plus you can carry a sidearm, w/ another 7-17 rounds on tap, which is going to be significantly more lethal than an M4 w/ a bayonet.

Well, spears, yes. Formidible spears, not so much, but we get the point.

You'd be surprised! An eight pound Mauser or Mosin with a bayonet fixed could stick a wild boar, no problem. I've run through birch trees with a single blow from one. THey're pretty scary. Human flesh wouldn't even slow that blade down, even with a light thrust.

We spent one morning praticing bayonet techniques and another fighting w/ pugil sticks. And, honestly, I think it was more to instill "warrior ethos" than for any practical use. Our drill sergeants told us "if you are surrounded and you have to 'fix bayonets' you are f***ed."

On the modern battlefield, when your bayonet is just a cruddy knife attached to a light assault rifle--I'm sure that's true. But even today, you put a bayonet on a big hardwood war rifle and you've got a surprisingly effective and lethal killing tool. The Chicoms did some real damage with their Mosins during the Korean conflict.

Let's not confuse coincidence with causal relationships. One is based on hypersonic aerodynamics the other on attachment to a shaft.

Both use sectional density to kill. There's no coincidence there. You can attach a shoe to a shaft--the clovis point evolved and spread across the world because when attached to a shaft it penetrated flesh extremely well. The spitzer BT bullet penetrates air extremely well, but also moves through flesh very effectively. The physics of ballstics are of course different from the pysics of a spear in some respects. In the case of the spearhead the sharpness of the edges matters more, for example. But in both cases sectional density is a primary key to lethality, esp. when hunting large furry things.

On the modern battlefield, when your bayonet is just a cruddy knife attached to a light assault rifle--I'm sure that's true. But even today, you put a bayonet on a big hardwood war rifle and you've got a surprisingly effective and lethal killing tool. The Chicoms did some real damage with their Mosins during the Korean conflict.


The issue isn't the size of the pointy thing, it's what the defender is using. I'll admit a Mosin w/ bayonet probably is more effective than an M4 w/ a bayonet but 30 rounds of 5.56 or 7.62x39 will still beat it.



Both use sectional density to kill. There's no coincidence there. You can attach a shoe to a shaft--the clovis point evolved and spread across the world because when attached to a shaft it penetrated flesh extremely well. The spitzer BT bullet penetrates air extremely well, but also moves through flesh very effectively. The physics of ballstics are of course different from the pysics of a spear in some respects. In the case of the spearhead the sharpness of the edges matters more, for example. But in both cases sectional density is a primary key to lethality, esp. when hunting large furry things.


I agree that spears and spitzers bullets are more effective than shoes on a stick and lead balls, respectively, but it's still just a coincidence. There is no developmental link. Did someone shove a Clovis point spear into a guy a the speed of sound and say "Hey, this is great. I should make a bullet shaped like this spear?"

The fundamental differences between firearms and non-firearm weapons (i.e. gunpowder and projectiles moving at the speed of sound) pretty much invalidate that idea. Are pistols evolved from swords? Do people study bows to develop more effective missiles or cannons?



P.S. hso, would you throw some page breaks in between your pictures? Having to scroll left and right to read people's posts is driving me nuts.

I have to agree. I bought one of the Cold Steel short Assegai spears a couple of years ago and it was dirt cheap. Spear use is pretty self-explanatory: thrust/impale. I'd hate to be shot, but what really gives me the shivers is the thought of having a double-edged, 8-inch blade stuck through me. Ouch!

George Silver was right when he said "The half-pike hath advantage against all weapons." If you aren't using projectiles a ~six foot spear is a terrifying thing. If you have a good-sized rifle with a long bayonet it's a fair approximation.

The Japanese have a martial art devoted entirely to bayonet fighting, Juken-Jutsu. I don't know if there are any teachers or clubs in your area. The Indian subcontinent has superb staff and spear traditions. I'm generally not so big on the way weapons are taught in the Chinese martial arts. More often than not you learn some forms, but the training methods, teaching progressions and two-person work that are required to make it useful have been abandoned.

Try looking at old field military training manuals. The bayonet has been in use for over 300 years.

The spear is the superior hand-to-hand weapon all other things being equal, but it doesn't have the romance of the sword. The sword was usually used by the nobility and often carried as a status symbol. The spear was used by everyone. The sword's mystique keeps it popular despite the irrelevance of hand-to-hand weapons in today's world.

The sword's mystique keeps it popular despite the irrelevance of hand-to-hand weapons in today's world.

To which I must respectfully say "Nonsense". Weapons other than firearms are of vital importance to anyone interested in self protection, both as tools for defense and as things an aggressor may use against the defender.

I agree that spears and spitzers bullets are more effective than shoes on a stick and lead balls, respectively, but it's still just a coincidence. There is no developmental link. Did someone shove a Clovis point spear into a guy a the speed of sound and say "Hey, this is great. I should make a bullet shaped like this spear?"


I'm not claiming a deliberate developmental link. The link is USING SECTIONAL DENSITY AS AN AID TO KILLING. The SD of the bullet and the SD of the spear DO lead to similar shapes between bullets and speartips.

I'll admit a Mosin w/ bayonet probably is more effective than an M4 w/ a bayonet but 30 rounds of 5.56 or 7.62x39 will still beat it.


Not when you get stabbed from behind. And not when the cartridges run dry, as all cartridges do.

"...calvary units continued to use them..." Lance, not a spear. In any case, spears were used in times past because they were cheap to make and required less training for a peasant army. A spear was generally less easy to defend against, armour-wise, too. Mind you, a good swordsman(rapier mostly) will merely knock it out of the way and promptly kill the spearman. That's how the Spanish beat the Swiss pikemen.
"...my rifles are also spears..." The book 'Cold Steel' covers bayonet fighting with an M-1. I'm not sure if it's still being printed. Paladin Books maybe. Have it around here some place. I'm not sure where or I'd post the author etc.

Hmm, yes and no, in particular "No".

The Chinese and many others considered the spear to be the king of weapons. It can skewer a swordsman at a range where the swordsman isn't dangerous. If it's being used in a two-handed grip it's very difficult to "knock it out of the way". Even if you do you're likely to get skewered after a disengage. Or get hit upside the head by the butt-stroke.

The Spanish method of swordsmen dealing with pike formations was a group tactic. The one you're probably thinking of involved two men. One would move inside and grab as many pikes as he could get a hold of. His partner followed up with a halberd to break the pikeshafts. If the halbarier didn't show up very quickly life would be very hard and short for the man holding onto a bunch of spears. This has limited applicability to one-on-one fighting.

Both use sectional density to kill. There's no coincidence there. You can attach a shoe to a shaft--the clovis point evolved and spread across the world because when attached to a shaft it penetrated flesh extremely well. The spitzer BT bullet penetrates air extremely well, but also moves through flesh very effectively. The physics of ballstics are of course different from the pysics of a spear in some respects. In the case of the spearhead the sharpness of the edges matters more, for example. But in both cases sectional density is a primary key to lethality, esp. when hunting large furry things.

Cosmo, the spitzer bullet is an aerodynamic development allowing greater accuracy and range while many other dumb less aerodynamic bullets with equivalent sectional density did just as well at killing when they hit their target. The physics is not similar because your dealing with a small mass depending upon high velocity to provide momentum and energy while the clovis depends upon Ogg to provide the momentum and energy. It's a clerver, but poor analogy.

Parts of it are, but I still like it! :neener:

Besides, what makes you so sure aerodynamics didn't play a role in the evolution of the speartip, just as aerodynamics did in the evolution from roundball to modern bullet--whether spitzer or RN.

Mind you, a good swordsman(rapier mostly) will merely knock it out of the way and promptly kill the spearman.

Sunray, I challenge you to provide some basis for your statement- which appears to be at odds with what I've heard historically, and with my own sojutsu practice, which usually involved heavy 8' training spears vs. heavy wooden bokken.

John, history major and martial artist

Sunray, I challenge you to provide some basis for your statement-

Me too, Sunray. The only significant defeat that the Swiss suffered that I can recall was at Marignano. This was at the hands of a combined French and Venetian army and then primarily because of the heavy use of cannon against the Swiss. The French cannon plowed gorey rows through the ranks of Swiss pikemen and still the losses on the French+Venetian side were terrible.

While not of the same training as John, I have trained in rapier and do not see how a single swordsman with a rapier would be making a dent in a Swiss Hedgehog.

Spears are to swords as Rifles are to Handguns.

All things being equal, a Spear is a better weapon than a sword. I've done a fair ammount of playing with both, and in 9 situations out of ten, I would pick a spear over a sword.

Rifles and spears don't have the "bling" or "coolness" factor of handguns or swords, which are both sidearms.

My brother and I are considering going on a Wild Hog hunt here in Florida at some point using lugged spears.

Spears are to swords as Rifles are to Handguns.

Rifles and spears don't have the "bling" or "coolness" factor of handguns or swords, which are both sidearms.

My brother and I are considering going on a Wild Hog hunt here in Florida at some point using lugged spears.

That's just it. The sword or the pistol is a symbol of the officer, the guy who needs a weapon but does the leading and has sweaty goons with big weapons to carry out his plans.

Perfect analogy. I like it!

During the War for Independence, American officers carried spears called "spontoons". George Washington thought they were the ideal weapon with which to arm officers.

Those spontoons look pretty nasty!

http://www.ambroseantiques.com/images/swords/hessian1.JPG

Oh, and I think PA has put in a spear season for deer or were at least thinking about it. So the spear might be making a comeback!


Is it an Atlatl (http://www.atlatl.com/) season they are discussing?

Yep. It's an atlatl season. If someone can bring down a deer with a throwing stick and a big dart he darned well deserves to keep it!

Anyone who says spears are no longer a viable combat weapon hasn't seen "traditional weapons" in use in countries like South Africa. During the violence of the 1980's and early 1990's, I was "privileged" (if that's the right word - scared ****less would be a better description!!!) to see Zulus using assegaai's on numerous occasions in tribal and urban conflict, right in front of my two widdle eyes. Their stabbing techniques with this short spear were dreadfully effective, inflicting horrific wounds, and terminating most fights right there and then. Their battle cry of "N'gidlha!" ("I have eaten!"), with its sibilant hissing sound, is a truly terrifying thing to hear close up. They insert the spear flat, then twist it through 90 degrees and withdraw it, so that the viscera and intestines come out with the spearhead through the gaping wound cut in the abdominal wall. :eek:

I've seen mobs of Zulu mineworkers, with assegaai's and shields, take on firearm-wielding opponents (including police) and overwhelm them, despite taking heavy losses from the firearms. When they're in their battle frenzy, you can shoot them multiple times with minor calibers (i.e. 9mm. ball and 5.56mm. military FMJ) and not be guaranteed that they'll fall down until they've emptied your intestines all over your boots. Very tough customers...

To give a bit of background on the development of the assegaai, see this excellent article (http://rapidttp.com/milhist/vol044sb.html) on the development of the Zulu army. An extract is below.

The Assegai. Shaka's most often-quoted innovation is his introduction of the iKlwa, the short stabbing assegai. It did not replace entirely the throwing spear (um-Khonto) because the stabbing assegai was carried, more often than not, in addition to one or more throwing assegais.

According to legend, Shaka, having conceived the idea, induced his most trusted blacksmith, under cover of night, to forge a blade to his new specification. He altered the conventional shape and made the whole a much shorter and heavier weapon, unfit for throwing and only to be used in hand-to-hand fighting. A sorcerer supplied the human liver and fat with which the blade was fortified. Zulus believe the liver, not the heart, to be the seat of valour. Shaka then personally supervised the hafting of the blade into a shaft of his selection and to his specification.

Having tested the efficacy of the new weapon he collected all the throwing assegais, threw away the shafts, and sent the blades to every smithy he could reach to be turned into stabbing assegais.

Then he issued them to his troops and instructed them in their use and enjoined every warrior that he should take but one assegai, which was to be exhibited after the fight, stained by the blood of the enemy. Failure to do so meant death by impalement as a coward. The struggle could only be hand to hand, with only one conclusion: death or victory.

Delegorgue observed that "this new way of fighting, unknown to the neighbouring nations, and which seemed to speak of something desperate, facilitated Shaka's conquest to such a degree that in the twelve years of his reign he succeeded in destroying more than a million men, women, and children. This is the number estimated by Captain Jervis, who, during my stay in Natal (i.e., 1838 and following years) busied himself with the history of these people."(1)

Assegais as such, were a necessity of everyday life, being the only cutting implement the Zulus knew. The assegai blade was used as a knife for cutting, carving, and shaving. The assegai was indispensable in the slaughtering of cattle, for hunting, and fighting. As with the shields, so the Zulu vocabulary contains more than a dozen words to describe different kinds of assegais. The assegai is regarded as the symbol of order, law, and justice.

The blacksmiths were a respected and highly important guild in which the secrets of their trade were jealously guarded and handed down from father to son. Their services were much sought after, for only they could supply the weapons of war and the implements of peace such as the hoes with which to cultivate their gardens. They also knew how to smelt brass and forge it into ornaments. They knew where to mine the iron ore and how to smelt it in sandstone crucibles over charcoal fires, and how to construct the necessary bellows both for smelting and forging. Using stone hammers and stone anvils their workmanship with such primitive implements was admirable and taking circumstances into account they could hardly be surpassed in this art.

Their manufacture had the property of resisting damp without rusting. The blade of the assegai was made of soft iron, yet so excellently tempered, that it took a very sharp edge: so sharp, indeed, that it was used even for shaving the head.

The tang of the assegai was fitted into a hole burnt into one end of a suitable shaft, glued in with scilla sap and then bound with a plaited sleeve of wet fibre or strips of raw hide which contracted on drying. Instead of the foregoing method the tip of the tail of an ox, or that of a calf, was taken, a piece about four inches in length cut off, the skin drawn from it so as to form a tube and this tube was slipped over the joint. As in the case with the hide or fibre lashing, the tube contracted and a very firm fixture was achieved. The shaft usually had a bulbous thickening at the end to prevent it slipping through the hand on being withdrawn from a body, during which process the blade would cause the sucking sound which gave it its name: iKlwa.

Finally, you'll note that the article spells the word "assegai", while I've spelt it with two a's, as assegaai. Both are acceptable spelling in South Africa, AFAIK - I was brought up on the second one.

If you don't mind my asking, did the Zulu mostly use the short spears "underhanded," stabbing up into the opponent's solar-plexus?

The reason I ask is that I remember reading somewhere that the Saxons, Franks, Vikings, ect.. targeted the solar-plexus area of the opponent and considered it to be the most reliable "one shot stop" when using a spear.

As the only person I know of that has seen such things in action, what are your thoughts?

Thanks again.

Yes, they were used against the torso and abdomen, rather than overhand against the neck and upper torso, as the ancient Greeks did. The blades were specifically designed to make a heck of a hole, and drag out internal bits and pieces through that hole. Very effective, too... :barf:

Read the whole of the article I linked above for an interesting look at their overall style of warfare. Their "medical" treatments weren't much good, though - if you were wounded, it was either a slight injury, or certain death, either on the battlefield, or later under the ministrations of the "doctors".

The spear is one of the most difficult weapons to use in its complexity. However, also the most effective, known in china as the King of weapons.
pricking, depth, pushing, thrusts, bends, slicing at every angle, trapping, speed etc all should be masterd to be considerd effective.

but before you learn to use a long weapon, you should learn to effectivly use youre body. become efficient.
then find a weapon and weapon form that coordinate.
Try ShaoLin, and forms therein.
Ive stuck with Northern ShaoLin styles for 12 yrs.

check out www.ymaa.com

Actually, "effectiveness" only requires learning how to thrust. I know three types of thrusts. Practice those for a few minutes a day, for a mere week, and you'll be dangerous with a spear.

Yeah, I can do some cool swishy things with spears too, but those aren't required to be dangerous.

Some schools actually teach weapons training early in the curriculum, because certain weapons actually teach your body how to move- improving your body movement even when unarmed.

John

what a fascinating thread.
I've been looking for another primitive weapon to study along with the recurve bow. Maybe I've found it. :cool:

Very interesting thread.

Not sure I'd use a spear for defense simply because it's too big to carry around all day, and there's more maneuverable weapons inside the home.

In its day, the spear was a real b*tch to deal with. Not only were they cheap enough that every peasant could have one (even if the tips were just sharpened wood dipped in tin for a one-time AP ability), and with minimal training, a group of such cheap soldiers could defeat the much more expensive (and rare) trained, armored horseman, and swordsmen. One of the reasons spearmen, pikemen and halberdiers were so widely used.

The early firearms era, right up to the middle of the 20th century did indeed, as Cosmoline pointed out) teach bayonet fighting as a primary skill of the infantryman. One of the reasons the No1 MkIII Enfield's bayonet, and indeed the bayonets of all the major rifles of the era were so long was so that they wouldn't lose any reach over the earlier weapons which had longer barrels and somewhat shorter bayonets.

Although not as often used today, there have been several instances of use of the M16's bayonet in Iraq by our guys, and one rather spectacular feat of a bayonet charge by Scottish highlanders in Iraq. So, it DOES happen. Fact is, if you're expecting close contact, fixing the bayonet on your rifle provides a close-in weapon that is faster to use than drawing a pistol (if you even have one, not every soldier does), and never runs out of ammo. Also, people generally fear being stabbed more than being shot, and it adds an intimidation factor.

Cosmoline is right on another fact, those bayonets, especially the ones on teh Mosin-Nagants are some mean motor-scooters. The 91/30's bayonet is 17" of cruciform "blade" that's strong in all axes and takes well to being yanked around inside the target, and they do tend to run things through, even trees (yes, trees) quite easily.

But not everything about weapons is about self-defense.
Grab one of the Cold Steel boar spears and go on a hog hunt, nothing like it.

http://www.deantiques.com/PLG/images/Repos/the_boar_hunt_REAL_CROP.jpg

http://www.a-wild-boar-hog-hunting-florida-guide-service.com/boar-hubert%20spear%204-3-03.jpg

Amazingly, there's still some outfits that conduct spear hunts

http://www.a-wild-boar-hog-hunting-florida-guide-service.com/

If I had much larger hoden than I do, I'd coat myself in fish oil and walk into the Chugach Nat'l Park with nothing but a spear and a predator call. But I'm going to leave that to Spiff.

Hm. I've got guts, but I don't want to see 'em!

I'd rather have a 12 gauge with slugs than a spear against anything large and toothy. (OTOH, I would rather have a spear FOR SELF-DEFENSE against large animals than a .357 Mag or smaller sidearm.)

John

Hm. I've got guts, but I don't want to see 'em!

I'd rather have a 12 gauge with slugs than a spear against anything large and toothy. (OTOH, I would rather have a spear FOR SELF-DEFENSE against large animals than a .357 Mag or smaller sidearm.)

John

Some years back I read an article in the British Medical Journal about injuries from wild boars in Melanesia. It opened with a quote from Richard the First's Bestiary which said "The boar is the fellest of beasts and will soonest kill a man." The most common victims were British and Australians who went hunting with shotguns. Turns out the pigs are better in the brush than most Europeans. Fancy that. The locals carry at least two spears and use dogs who are trained to grab the boars by the scrotum. Of the reported cases "Most exsanguinated on the spot. Those who survived had wounds that were long, wide, deep, jagged and septic and required delayed closure.":eek:

Now that's what I call sport hunting. Sometimes you get the pig. Sometimes the pig gets you.

Most folks with shotguns use shot.

Not I.

Nice pics Cosmoline!
Man, I am so there!

Part of Shaka's innovation (it's root source is open to debate, he did have exposure to Europeans, I'm willing to grant it to his autochtonic genius) in the assegai wasn't just (as Preacherman alluded to) in its new shape and technique but that Shaka used it to turn what used to be the same old traditional "stand far away and throw stuff at each other til you've made your point", ineffective, Eastern/tribal, honor-based warfare into (comparatively) heavy infantry Western-style shock action. The tribes around the Zulu didn't know what to do as the Zulu ignored their sound and fury displays, ran under their spear casts, surrounded them and went belly to belly using the shield and assegai as a weapons system in annihilation-style battle.

If the Zulu's southern migration hadn't run up against Europeans with firearms at the Fish River before they could expand their territory and population even more using Shaka's innovations the history of Southern Africa might have been very different.

(freely cribbed from "The Washing of the Spears")

Without a doubt, one of history's great military geniuses. Not a nice man, but great conquerors seldom are.