Please explain Flail usage (SCA / Historical)

[Felnar]

thanks for the move Plane Sailing

Just to be clear here---by flail, are you refering to the weapon that outside of D&D circles is usually called a mace and chain?

i was referring to any weapon which is is not entirely rigid and is made of one or more hard/stiff sections connected together with a flexible section (the flexible section being anything from a chain/rope to a simple hinge)

any of you more historical types know what prompted its military development? the rise of cavalry? larger shields?

 

[HeavenShallBurn]

any of you more historical types know what prompted its military development? the rise of cavalry? larger shields?

Everything I've heard points to the increasing use of rigid armours over time. This was much harder to pierce than previous mail and it was more efficient to simply crush the armor and whatever was wearing it.

 

[TarionzCousin]

Another vote here for the long-handled/short chain flail. I've used flails in SCA armor (no, they weren't SCA legal, but we weren't really fighting--just trying them out) and foam flails. When the handle is long, you limit the possibilities of hitting yourself. Also, like several people have mentioned, a long chain can cause problems either because it gets tangled up or because it's too dangerous in a pretend fight.

The 4' handle, 1' chain with a round ball on the end was very effective vs. Sword and Shield.

The Ritter Steel picture is the fantasy version, not the medieval kind, IMHO.

 

[Gentlegamer]

To see a variant of the flail in action, the chain hammer, watch the film Braveheart.

 

[Felnar]

To see a variant of the flail in action, the chain hammer, watch the film Braveheart.

refresh my memory, was it used other than where mel rides a horse into a guys bedroom?

 

[trancejeremy]

If you remember the 70s, you might remember a toy called "Kerbangers". Basically 2 really hard clear plastic balls on a string (sort of like a bolo). The idea was you pulled the end, and banged them together. But in practice, they were twirled around, and despite only being plastic, they maimed millions of children. Smashed fingers, bloody noses, missing teeth, skull fractures, burst eyeballs.

I have to think an actual hard metal ball on a stick would be much, much worse.

 

[Bagpuss]

and somewhere i got the idea that some SCA groups dont allow the use of flails because they are "too good"

Most likely they don't use them because it is near impossible to pull your blow with a none ridged weapon like a fail, because the even if you slow the haft the momentum continues in the business end.

 

[Bagpuss]

So to answer your question, yes, you could swing around the shield, though it wasn't the intended purpose, it worked. Eventually, the idea of tripping and opponent came into being another reason for having a second weapon (especially an axe). The user would wrap the legs, pull, then cleave the skull open with the axe of the now prone defender. If the user was practiced enough, they could draw their second weapon and still get in a killing blow before the defender could regain their wits, which of course allowed them to use a shield.

Combat Expertise, Improved Trip, and Quick Draw!

 

[Thunderfoot]

Combat Expertise, Improved Trip, and Quick Draw!

Yep, that about sums it up.

 

[Thunderfoot]

thanks for the move Plane Sailing

i was referring to any weapon which is is not entirely rigid and is made of one or more hard/stiff sections connected together with a flexible section (the flexible section being anything from a chain/rope to a simple hinge)

any of you more historical types know what prompted its military development? the rise of cavalry? larger shields?

Check posts - 8 & 9. Its use was evolutionary, its continued use was due to effectiveness. Like I stated originally, when a military mined person sees anything being used as a weapon and can then translate that to a more effective version, you get a transition weapon, such as the grain flail/military flail, the pruning hook/the fauchard, the pitch fork/military fork, the scythe/the glaive and the sickle/the bill/the saber. All of these evolved into more military uses which (for the most part) required only a small amount of training to use.

They stayed around because it was found that they were more effective against the emerging plat and mail technology that traditional weapons (spears, swords and such) were less effective against. Honestly, its hard to say if these would be more than a historical footnote if firearms (which more than ended the armor production of Europe) had been developed but 100 years earlier.