|
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
Footnotes for Part 1 [1] The word is derived from the Old French bocle for the “buckle-like” boss or umbo on a shield. The term “boss” is from the 12th century French Boce, bocle, called bloca, in 12th-13th century Spain (Nicolle, Arms and Armor, p. 549). [2] The 1611 edition of Florio’s Italian-English dictionary, gives Brocchiéro, Broccoliéro, as “a buckler, a target, a shield.” Although often described as near synonymous with the buckler, a targe (or targa and adarga) differed from a buckler in that it was a small wooden shield with a leather cover and leather or metal trim. Some were also covered with metal studs or spikes. Unlike bucklers, targes were worn on the arm like other types of shields. They were also usually flat rather than convex. Elizabethans referred to the practice of “Sworde and targat”. The word “targe” apparently comes from small “targets” placed on archery practice dummies. Some forms of medium sized steel shields from the Renaissance are often classed as targes or the Italian rondella . Though associated with the Scots, the “targe” was actually used throughout Europe. They were most popular in the early Renaissance and the Scots were merely the last to use them. [3] Following Livy, T. Thomas’s 1587 Latin-English dictionary, Dictionarium Linguae Latinae et Anglicanae, defined umbo as “the bosse of a buckler or shield (London, R. Boyle). Thomas also listed Parmularius as “A buckler or target maker, or he that useth such a one” and the old Roman Pelta as “A target or buckler like a halfe moone: also a square buckler or targen.” [4] It has also been speculated that an advantage of the buckler in the crush of Medieval combat lay in its adaptability. Whereas a larger shield worn on the arm could be hooked or pulled by various types of polearms and axes, thereby vulnerably encumbering the fighter, a smaller more nimble hand-held buckler could easily dislodge itself from such attempts or suddenly be discarded by a fighter. [5] http://albionacademyofarmes.org/essay1.htm [6] A Government Besieged by Conflict. Paper delivered by Donald Kagay at the 13th Annual Medieval and Renaissance Studies Conference at the New College of South Florida, March 16th, 2002. Pp. 34-35. [7] Michael Mallet. Mercenaries and Their Masters – Warfare in Renaissance Italy. Rowman and Littlefield, Totowa, NJ, 1974, p. 155. [8] Interestingly, the cloak is interestingly wrapped around the left arm identical to the manner that was to become the custom in the 16th century.
|
The preceding material was excerpted a forthcoming book on Historical Fencing due in 2003. © Copyright 2002 by John Clements. |
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|||
The Sword & Buckler Tradition -
Part 1
Although,
the sword and buckler is often associated with the fencing methods
of the early 1500s and with the common serving man, it was a
form of fighting with a much longer tradition. Sword and buckler
fighting also became a “combat sport” of sorts, but
not before it had already long been a martial system of self-defense
and battlefield skill. What is recognizable about the
buckler is that it was foremost a military tool used in war
by both soldiers and knights. That the tradition survived
longer than large shields and ended up occasionally facing off
against the rapier has engendered it (no small thanks to Shakespeare)
with something of an unjust legacy. Given its military
fitness, its eventual unsuitability for civilian duelling and
urban combat during the age of the rapier comes as no surprise. 
But
the study of the sword and buckler has suffered somewhat from
a lack of attention by historians of fencing and Medieval warfare.
On the one hand, it is so ubiquitous as to not be of much significance,
and on the other, because of comparisons to 16th
century rapier fencing, it is frequently viewed as being somehow
brutish or unsophisticated. Further, while assorted types
of shield developed and changed their shapes and sizes, bucklers
remained much more consistent, so scholars and historians have
not had much reason to focus on them. As well, unlike
shields bucklers served no heraldic function either and this
too has perhaps limited some of their appeal.
A
buckler differs from a shield in that the latter is carried
by straps and worn on the arm whereas the former is held in
single-hand in a “fist” grip. It is difficult
to trace the history of the weapon as many times any type of
round shield or small targe would be called buckler, regardless
of whether it was held in the fist or worn on the arm.
Considerable varieties
of bucklers were developed. Often a pointed spike protruded
from the central boss or umbo.
The
versatility of the sword and buckler as a method of fighting
can be said to lay in its simplicity. As a two-weapon combination,
it is simultaneously defensive and offensive. It offered
some protection against missile weapons and was convenient for
facing heavier weapons such as polearms and axes.
In the Middle Ages,
bucklers were common armaments among both knights and common
soldiers – even more so than shields. A buckler
was less cumbersome and more agile than a larger shield and
easier to carry about or wear on the hip. We know that
sword and buckler play was a popular pastime in northern Italy,
in Germany, and in England.
The
primary use of the buckler in Europe was by infantry. Light
infantry, made up of commoners armed with bucklers and swords
or falchions lined up behind troops with pole-weapons, were
used frequently in armies during the 1100s to 1300s. Early Medieval
pictorial sources, from c.650 to c.1100, additionally show bucklers
in use by Celtic, Frankish, and Byzantine horsemen. Medievalist
Donald Kagay reports of ordinances from 1363 by the Crown of
Aragon’s parliament of Monzón which specified the military
equipment required for frontier troops on active duty.
Light mounted troops were required to have among their weapons
a cuyrase (breast plate), a camisol (maile shirt),
helmet, lance, and a small round leather shield called a darga
de scut.
At
the Agincourt battle in 1415, the only defence recorded for
the English bowmen is a round buckler 1 foot in diameter.
(Edge, p. 65). The 1457, Bridport Muster Roll shows
that many of the common folk called up (including 5 apparent
women) were equipped with sword and buckler. While a description
by Dominic Mancini in 1483 of the equipment of the troops under
Richard Duke of Gloucester (the future Richard III) noted, “the
sword is accompanied by an iron buckler.” (Edge, p. 128).
The Spanish sword and buckler men of the early 1500s are
among the best known proponents of the weapons. They wreaked
havoc up and down the battlefields of Europe, even against the
famed Swiss pikemen. A favored tactic was to close against
pike formations and try to roll under the polearms then pop
up among their clustered opponents where their shorter weapons
could wreak havoc. 
By 1500, the Spanish
infantry of Gonsalvo de Cordova used short thrusting swords
and bucklers, wore steel caps, breast and back plates, and greaves.
(Oman, p. 63). The infamous Machiavelli himself in his
own 1521 Arte of Warre, wrote of how at the battle of
Barletta in 1503 the Spanish sword and buckler men dealt with
the Swiss pikemen: “When they came to engage, the Swiss
pressed so hard on their enemy with their pikes, that they soon
opened their ranks; but the Spaniards, under the cover of their
bucklers, nimbly rushed in upon them with their swords, and
laid about them so furiously, that they made a very great slaughter
of the Swiss, and gained a complete victory.” (Machiavelli,
p. 66). As Machiavelli tells it, the Spaniards at the battle
of Ravenna in 1512 fell furiously on the Germans, “rushing
at the pikes, or throwing themselves on the ground and slipping
below the points, so that they darted in among the legs of the
pikemen.” The Spaniards “made so good a use
of their swords, that not one of the enemy would have been left
alive, if a body of French cavalry had not fortunately come
up to rescue them.” (Machiavelli, p. 70). “This
fight was typical of many more in which during the first quarter
of the sixteenth century the sword and buckler were proved to
be more than master of the pike.” (Oman, p. 110). In
1618 Adam van Breen wrote a work in the Netherlands on military
drill which in 1625 was reprinted as Mars His Field,
“or The Exercise of Armes, wherein in lively figures is
shewn the Right use and perfect manner of Handling the Buckler,
Sword, and Pike...”
Author
Wilbur Prescott writing on the art of war in late Medieval
Spain, suggests the reason for the proficiency of the Spanish
sword and buckler men of the early 1500s, was curiously,
their considerable experience in late 15th century
siege warfare which at the time relied heavily on close
combat skills with shields. (Prescott, p. 26). Following
along the work of Vegetius (influential throughout the Middle
Ages and Renaissance), Machiavelli even suggested that armies
of the time should actually equip their soldiers with swords
and bucklers. Their advantage in pike warfare lay
in the well-timed ability of such agile fighters to close
in among the longer weapons of their tightly packed adversaries. In
1583 the Italian military writer Cesare d’Evoli said
he favored small round metal shields for deflecting pikes.
(Anglo, p. 220). 
