Misc > The Sage's Guild - Historical Discussion

Battle-axes in Western Europe

(1/10) > >>

doorknobdeity:
I've been reading through Barbara Tuchman's A Distant Mirror and a translation of Froissart's Chronicles online at http://www.nipissingu.ca/department/history/muhlberger/froissart/tales.htm, and one thing that's struck me is how often battle-axes are mentioned, despite their relative scarcity in both modern and period portrayals. Just how popular was it compared to weapons like the mace, sword, and spear, which are seen more often? Were they one-handed or two-handed? What precisely was the advantage?

doorknobdeity:
Both Tuchman and Froissart cover the 14th century. However, Dark Ages info would be interesting too.

doorknobdeity:
Why? I mean, I would assume that an axe uses less metal than a sword, which would make it cheaper, but are there any other reasons?

Aqtai:
I think when they are talking about 'battle axes' in the 14th and 15th centuries, they actually mean poleaxes.

Silver:

--- Quote from: doorknobdeity on March 04, 2007, 11:05:48 AM ---Why? I mean, I would assume that an axe uses less metal than a sword, which would make it cheaper, but are there any other reasons?

--- End quote ---

Think of as a tincan-opener and plate armor as the tin can. A sword has a really hard time cutting through plate, but with an axe (that is much heavier, and has a better shape) you can slice it open and then stick other weapons in the soft and tender flesh beneath.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page