• Sign up or login, and you'll have full access to opportunities of forum.

Girls With Swords!, For Erin

Go to CruxDreams.com

Gibbs505

SERVORUM DOMITOR
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Likes
23,721
Location
Canada

Gibbs505

SERVORUM DOMITOR
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Likes
23,721
Location
Canada

Gibbs505

SERVORUM DOMITOR
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Likes
23,721
Location
Canada

Gibbs505

SERVORUM DOMITOR
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Likes
23,721
Location
Canada

Gibbs505

SERVORUM DOMITOR
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Likes
23,721
Location
Canada

Gibbs505

SERVORUM DOMITOR
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Likes
23,721
Location
Canada

Gibbs505

SERVORUM DOMITOR
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Likes
23,721
Location
Canada

Gibbs505

SERVORUM DOMITOR
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Likes
23,721
Location
Canada
I like the ones with the spears. Those are a little light (more like javelins) but I'll take on your sword with a staff weapon any day of the week.

kisses

willowfall
Indeed, the spear was a mighty weapon!
 

Naraku

Draconarius
Joined
Oct 13, 2007
Likes
14,891
Location
Florida, USA
I like the ones with the spears. Those are a little light (more like javelins) but I'll take on your sword with a staff weapon any day of the week.

kisses

willowfall
Indeed, the spear was a mighty weapon!
The spear, perhaps man's oldest purpose made weapon, has also historically been the most common. Although movies would have us think that everyone was fighting with a sword until the gun came along; the fact is that most warriors have been armed with the spear.
From the Greek phalanx:
alexander-the-great-macedonia-phalanx-macedonian.jpg
To the Roman legions:
legion.jpg
To the Scottish schiltron:
schiltron 750_tcm12-562327.jpg
It was the spear, not the sword, that dominated.
The spear is actually a good choice for a woman. The longer reach can compensate for a difference in height and body mass. This is why samurai women trained with the naginata.
naginata1.jpg naginata2.jpg
So, lets hear it for the spearwomen!
spear1.jpg spear2.jpg Spear3.jpg spear4.jpg spear5.jpg
 
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Likes
2,793
Location
USA
The longer reach can compensate for a difference in height and body mass.
I find it is not so much the reach but the ability to defensively cover a much wide area and the ability to compensate quicker for an error in you made defense or attack.

Also you can bring the but end into play much more effectively than a sword.

However the reach can be quite intimidating to an opponent.

Wielding a sword effectively takes years of practice and patience in its usage.

Besides, after sticking some guy with a spear you can always yell "Who got penetrated NOW? Who's your Momma? You were going to stick it to WHO? You got your ass kicked by a GIRL!"

I won't trash talk an opponent in a sporting event but after a battle sure why not.

Besides which if you guys win, you're going to rape me, brand and collar me, rape me some more, whip me, rape me some more, humiliate me by marching me naked in front of my people, rape me in front of them, nail me to a cross, rape me before you nail my feet and then insult me while I'm hanging there.

Com'on, admit it, that's what you'd do ..............................

kisses

willowfall
 

FrankO

Condemned
Joined
Jun 3, 2014
Likes
23
The spear, perhaps man's oldest purpose made weapon, has also historically been the most common. Although movies would have us think that everyone was fighting with a sword until the gun came along; the fact is that most warriors have been armed with the spear.
From the Greek phalanx:
View attachment 637898
To the Roman legions:
View attachment 637899
To the Scottish schiltron:
View attachment 637900
It was the spear, not the sword, that dominated.
The spear is actually a good choice for a woman. The longer reach can compensate for a difference in height and body mass. This is why samurai women trained with the naginata.
View attachment 637906 View attachment 637907
So, lets hear it for the spearwomen!
View attachment 637901 View attachment 637902 View attachment 637903 View attachment 637904 View attachment 637905
Yeah, but:

1. The spear ... especially long spears like the Greek ones ... restricted the manoeuvrability of formations something terrible. The Romans overcame this by adopting the short throwing pilum and relying on the gladius and shield for close in work, which made their formations capable of manoeuvring rings around their opposition - on-the-fly during a battle.

Of course, this didn't have the anti-cavalry effect that a long fending spear had, but they solved this by building earth moved defences and using wooden stakes amongst other things.

2. Later Roman military innovations relied on countering heavy cavalry with their own heavy equites, and shaping the battlefield to their advantage with engineering, artillery, and ranged weapons.

3. Sometimes the spear worked for different military forces (e.g. the Scots on many of the broken ground battlefields they fought the English on) but more often than not the spear had to go through substantial redesigns (e.g. to the 15th Century pike) to become relevant again.

4. The hey day of the spear was probably the Middle Ages, with the mounted Knights an heavy cavalry ... but it was effectively seen off by ranged weapons (English long-bows, cross bows, early guns) in the 14th and 15th centuries

That said, the spear did have a long history of being the primary military formation weapon for 8 thousand years or so.
 
Joined
Mar 28, 2016
Likes
12,387
Location
South Carolina, USA
I find it is not so much the reach but the ability to defensively cover a much wide area and the ability to compensate quicker for an error in you made defense or attack.

Also you can bring the but end into play much more effectively than a sword.

However the reach can be quite intimidating to an opponent.

Wielding a sword effectively takes years of practice and patience in its usage.

Besides, after sticking some guy with a spear you can always yell "Who got penetrated NOW? Who's your Momma? You were going to stick it to WHO? You got your ass kicked by a GIRL!"

I won't trash talk an opponent in a sporting event but after a battle sure why not.

Besides which if you guys win, you're going to rape me, brand and collar me, rape me some more, whip me, rape me some more, humiliate me by marching me naked in front of my people, rape me in front of them, nail me to a cross, rape me before you nail my feet and then insult me while I'm hanging there.

Com'on, admit it, that's what you'd do ..............................

kisses

willowfall
Very insightful post. But I beg to differ with your final rant. I don't think you said rape nearly enough times!
 
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Likes
2,793
Location
USA
Yeah, but:

1. The spear ... especially long spears like the Greek ones ... restricted the manoeuvrability of formations something terrible. The Romans overcame this by adopting the short throwing pilum and relying on the gladius and shield for close in work, which made their formations capable of manoeuvring rings around their opposition - on-the-fly during a battle.

Of course, this didn't have the anti-cavalry effect that a long fending spear had, but they solved this by building earth moved defences and using wooden stakes amongst other things.

2. Later Roman military innovations relied on countering heavy cavalry with their own heavy equites, and shaping the battlefield to their advantage with engineering, artillery, and ranged weapons.

3. Sometimes the spear worked for different military forces (e.g. the Scots on many of the broken ground battlefields they fought the English on) but more often than not the spear had to go through substantial redesigns (e.g. to the 15th Century pike) to become relevant again.

4. The hey day of the spear was probably the Middle Ages, with the mounted Knights an heavy cavalry ... but it was effectively seen off by ranged weapons (English long-bows, cross bows, early guns) in the 14th and 15th centuries

That said, the spear did have a long history of being the primary military formation weapon for 8 thousand years or so.
I have to disagree with point #1. The phalanx pike was too long to be used effectively once an opponent was inside it but the classical Greek spear (pre-Phillip) is a very easy to use weapon due to its relatively short length and having a pointed butt cap so if the front got broken off it could be reversed. The limitation was the Greek method of fighting shoulder to shoulder, not the weapon itself. That being said notice the Greeks never moved to a mostly sword armed force (as the Roman's did to defeat the phalanx).

Heavy cavalry has never been consistently effective against unbroken heavy infantry with long spears (you aim at the horse not the rider) the key here is unbroken. Cavalry will run down broken infantry every time.

Missile armed cavalry is different but as Richard the Lionheart proved on his Crusade PROPER tactics and application of heavy armored spear armed infantry works very well when supported by a small mobile (disciplined) heavy cavalry force.

The Romans were masters at combined arms tactics and learning from their opponents. They switched to a cavalry based army (generally about 30% of their deployed forces) because their opponents were mounted and heavy infantry can't chase a guy on horse back. But even then the heavy infantry was the base upon which their cavalry was maneuvered and made up the bulk of the army.

And the infantry pole arm was not "seen off" until AFTER the Thirty Years War (1630-40ish) and it was done so by a combination of personal fire arms (combined with volley tactics) and small maneuverable field artillery that could move with the infantry on the battlefield. The long and cross bows disappeared from European warfare before the pole arm did.

What can I say. I grew up on military history. The advantage of having 5 older brothers and a father who just loved the stuff.

kisses

willowfall
 
Joined
Mar 28, 2016
Likes
12,387
Location
South Carolina, USA
Yeah, but:

1. The spear ... especially long spears like the Greek ones ... restricted the manoeuvrability of formations something terrible. The Romans overcame this by adopting the short throwing pilum and relying on the gladius and shield for close in work, which made their formations capable of manoeuvring rings around their opposition - on-the-fly during a battle.

Of course, this didn't have the anti-cavalry effect that a long fending spear had, but they solved this by building earth moved defences and using wooden stakes amongst other things.

2. Later Roman military innovations relied on countering heavy cavalry with their own heavy equites, and shaping the battlefield to their advantage with engineering, artillery, and ranged weapons.

3. Sometimes the spear worked for different military forces (e.g. the Scots on many of the broken ground battlefields they fought the English on) but more often than not the spear had to go through substantial redesigns (e.g. to the 15th Century pike) to become relevant again.

4. The hey day of the spear was probably the Middle Ages, with the mounted Knights an heavy cavalry ... but it was effectively seen off by ranged weapons (English long-bows, cross bows, early guns) in the 14th and 15th centuries

That said, the spear did have a long history of being the primary military formation weapon for 8 thousand years or so.
Eventually all those spears had to be converted to pruning hooks. BTW, what is a pruning hook?
 
Top Bottom