Shields

[dubz]

Has anyone else noticed the lack of shields in the books?  I know the aiel use small bucklers but that is the only shields I can remember reading about.  Maybe I read it and forgot because my memory is not as good as it used to be (I blame it on my freshman year) but you would think that there would be some shields used.

 

I can think of a couple of reasons why.  Just as the samurai and other asian warrior classes did not use shields because of the intricacies of their swordmanship this would be why Lan, Rand, Galad and all other great swordsmen do not use shields, simply they do not need them as their sword can act as a shield.  but for all the other warriors who are not as great as the aforementioned masters wouldn't they need a shield?  Especially in the army as they would need to stand up to archer fire, cavalry charges and the like, a shield would be very, very useful.

 

 

 

 

[Sylvia]

I'm pretty sure other's are using shields. Or they're all just big tough manly men who don't need no shields!!! Grrrrr >:(

[ROB_88]

i can name atleast one place where shields are mentioned.

after the battle of Cairhien when Rand and the warriors go in the city some of the guards are nervous about seeing the arrival of half a thousand Far Dareis Mai.

it is said that they insecurely put theyre hands on the swords, spears, long shields and lances

[Builder]

Yeah I think normal soldiers have shields but because the only soldiers that are in focus are the Legion who are crossbowmen.

[Muad Cheade]

The reason for the lack of shields is that the primary infantry is the pikes. Pikemen do not usually use shields.

 

As for the cavalry, I doubt nobles would want to use shields as they are more focused on the "charge." Since the Shienarans have the best heavy cavalry, I would think they'd have shields.

[mb]

There are also two types of shields made by the One Power.

One prevents another channeler from channeling; this kind can be broken.

The other blocks anything short of balefire from entering; this kind cannot be broken.

 

A box of Air might also be considered a shield.

 

 

Another reason for not using an shield might be that they could be Healed afterward if they get a wound.

 

[arkinia]

I don't think being healed later is an excuse for not using a shield. I'm guessing that most of the armies described didn't have a gang of reliable Aes Sedai solely devoted to healing their soldiers when they were created. Also, you can't heal death which is what a shield is ultimately supposed to prevent, not a boo-boo.

[Bob T Dwarf]

The reason for the lack of shields is that the primary infantry is the pikes. Pikemen do not usually use shields.

 

Ummmmm, wrong.

 

Pikemen are the primary users of shields.  They build a fortress of shields around themselves through which they extend a hedgehog of pikes.  It's really the only way that pikes can withstand cavalry.

 

 

 

[Muad Cheade]

The reason for the lack of shields is that the primary infantry is the pikes. Pikemen do not usually use shields.

 

Ummmmm, wrong.

 

Pikemen are the primary users of shields.  They build a fortress of shields around themselves through which they extend a hedgehog of pikes.  It's really the only way that pikes can withstand cavalry.

 

 

 

 

Wrong. You are most likely thinking of the use of spears (or sarissa) in the Classical Era. Then they used shields with their shields because they were predominantly infantry based warfare. Not the pikes that were used later (and in WOT).

 

From Wikipedia

   

To compound their difficulties in a melee, the pikeman often did not have a shield or had only a small shield of limited use in close-quarters fighting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pike_(weapon)

 

[Bob T Dwarf]

Yes, I was referring to the Macedonian Phalanx, which is certainly a "pike" formation, and definitely employed a shield wall.

 

By the Middle Ages and Renaissance, the pike had grown so long and unwieldy that it's users were forced to use both hands to employ it and had no real way to use a shield.  So, archers and musketeers of all types came along to nullify pike formations.

 

We really don't know exactly what form of pike is in use in Randland.  Short enough to be usefully employed with one hand and a shield or so long that shields are impractical.  My guess would be a mix of both depending on how the formation was intended to fight.  Short and shielded for defensive purposes and long and unshielded for offensive.

[water_seeker]

The only type of sword fighting we've seen involves using both hands af far as I know.  Kinda hard to hold onto a shield if you need both hands for your weapon.

[Muad Cheade]

We really don't know exactly what form of pike is in use in Randland.  Short enough to be usefully employed with one hand and a shield or so long that shields are impractical.  My guess would be a mix of both depending on how the formation was intended to fight.  Short and shielded for defensive purposes and long and unshielded for offensive.

 

Yeah. You're right. I think we'll be given more insight on the battles with Tarmon Gai'don because we're don't really know which type of pike is better against Trolloc hordes.

 

If Mat's new crossbow becomes more widespread, I think there'll definitely be more archers per pike which is interesting.

[Kaznen]

In 15th century Europe plate armor pieces began replacing chain armor more and more.  When that happen shields bcame obsolete because sword slashing was pretty much useless against plate armor and the weapons that could damage plate armor were designed to crush or punture steel so they would go right through a wooden shield, and WoT is based in "1700's without guns" according to RJ.

 

Aiel use bucklers, there is a reason they are called "bucklers" instead of "shileds."

 

Shields are used to block attacks and bucklers are used to parry (attack the attacking weapon) or deflect an attack.  And because they are smaller they are easier to use offensively.

 

And the pikes used in WoT are the super long ones.  They came into use so infaltry could take on a rider on a horse.  the kind used in one hand is a spear.

[Luckers]

There are references to soldiers with shields.

 

From tFoH.

 

Hands went uncertainly to sword hilts, or spears and long shields, or lances. Some of-the soldiers half moved as if to close the gates

 

Its just that RJ didn't bother to mention them much.

[Guest The Thin Inn Keeper]

The Legion of the Dragon use tall shields, at least a good proportion of them do.

 

They also carry shortswords as a secondary weapon. Meaning that, once they get in close (i.e. to close for their opponents to effectively use a polearm) they would fight much like a Roman Legionaire.

 

But then, yes, the Legion are remarked upon for being arranged differently.

 

However, there's an example of shields ... and big ones at that.

 

I've always pictured them as being very similar to the Roman legionaires, only with crossbows as opposed to pilae.

 

Interesting, in that in order to advance military thinking, Mat and Bashere have in fact gone back in time to achieve it. But then the Legions were, perhaps, the most effective fighting force pre-gunpowder.

[zanotam]

We do see references to shields, but they're rare and usually a general "oh, and the normal dudes had shields. Duh. What, do you think they're all godly Longbowman/channelers/blade masters/cavalry?", okay, actually, they're rarely mentioned, but the armaments of the average person are rarely mentioned and when they are it's usually something like calvary, but the few times they were mentioned, basic infantry had shields (as far as I can remember)

[Dunedain Fal]

 

But then the Legions were, perhaps, the most effective fighting force pre-gunpowder.

 

Actually it was the Mongol hordu or tumen that was the most effective fighting force pre-gunpowder.

[Kaznen]

The Legion of the Dragon use tall shields, at least a good proportion of them do.

 

They also carry shortswords as a secondary weapon. Meaning that, once they get in close (i.e. to close for their opponents to effectively use a polearm) they would fight much like a Roman Legionaire.

 

But then, yes, the Legion are remarked upon for being arranged differently.

 

However, there's an example of shields ... and big ones at that.

 

I've always pictured them as being very similar to the Roman legionaires, only with crossbows as opposed to pilae.

The shield baring members of the Legion of the Dragon carried the big tower shields.  Their purpose was a moving wall of cover to protect the crossbowmen while they move and reload.  Those six foot tall-three foot wide shields would be worse then useless in hand to hand fighting.

[Guest The Thin Inn Keeper]

Actually it was the Mongol hordu or tumen that was the most effective fighting force pre-gunpowder.

That’s debateable, which is why I wrote “perhaps”.

 

Looking at the size and durability of the Roman Empire, there’s a strong case for saying that their military system was the most effective. Certainly, in terms of logistics and the siege weaponry, the Legion was light years ahead of it’s time.

 

In terms of pure effectiveness on the battlefield, there are also the Spartan Equals and the Macedonian phalanx.

 

Like I said, entirely debateable and subjective. At the end of the day, comparing systems/forces from different time periods is a waste of time. A Roman Legion, armed and equipped with iron weaponry and armour, would go through a bronze age force like a hot knife through butter. Likewise, a fully armoured medieval knight would make mincemeat of his opposite number from Roman days.

The shield baring members of the Legion of the Dragon carried the big tower shields.  Their purpose was a moving wall of cover to protect the crossbowmen while they move and reload.  Those six foot tall-three foot wide shields would be worse then useless in hand to hand fighting.

See RAWs quote here:

Do you have a quote for those dimensions?  Because that is an ... absurdly large shield.  ACoS ch 41 does say that members of the Legion carried what Rand thought were "heavy, unwieldy shields", but six feet by three feet? Rand is comparing these to the Aiel bucklers, the only other shields he has much experience with.  They don't have to be 6' x 3' to be "heavy" and "unwieldy" in his opinion.

 

The same chapter also mentions "twenty men carrying wide shields as tall as their shoulders, followed by perhaps two hundred more with heavy crossbows."  But those shields are probably no more than 4 feet tall, and maybe three feet wide.  Unless all those men were taller than Rand, their shoulders aren't six feet off the ground, and they are carrying the shields, so the bottoms aren't touching the ground. The shields are not six feet tall.

Kaznen, you’re calling them “tower shields”, but where are you getting your figures from?

 

Looking at RAWs thinking, I think it’s more likely that he’s on the money.

The description in TPoD ch 21 doesn't mention the shields at all, but it does mention the short swords, which would be absurd with a 6'x3' shield.

 

A very small portion of the Legions (approximately 9 percent) carries what seem to be shields much like a slightly oversized Imperial Roman scutum.  Maybe three and a half to four feet high, and two to two and a half feet wide.  That is more than large enough to create a shield wall for crossbowmen, but still small enough that the men carrying them could move, and use a short sword in a pinch.

The key is the weapon that goes along with the shield. A short sword would be completely ineffective if the shield is as large as Kaznen is putting forward.

 

Given that the men would, in all likelihood, be formed up into a tight phalanx-like formation when in close combat, a huge shield doesn’t allow you to fight effectively with a short sword.

 

A shield around the size of a scutum does. The gladius was, after all, a wide bladed, heavy shortsword.

 

Consider this… men fighting in a tight formation, relying on the shields of their neighbours to protect them aren’t fighting chest to chest with their opponent. They’re standing almost side on. If you have a tower shield that’s going to stick out, what, a foot on either side of your body well… most people are right handed. That means the shield’s on your left arm, the shortsword in your right hand. A shortsword is at most (roughly) 2 ft / 60 cm long. That means, with a tower shield, that you’re having to (from a side on position) bring your right arm, which is furthest away from the enemy, around the edge of a shield that sticks out to your right by one foot, and then strike the enemy. In short, you’re left with, what? About 30 cm ish to do any damage? You wouldn’t be able to generate the force required to do serious damage.

 

The key is reducing the size of the shield.

 

A scutum also afforded excellent protection. There were a number of formations the Roman legions used to offer protection to their troops, typically all those troops would have to do is crouch slightly and stoop their shoulders to get full coverage from their shield.

 

A scutum would certainly appear to be “wide” to Rand, though not necessarily overly tall. Which would reinforce his “wide shield” comment.

 

Simply put, if you have a shield that is 3 feet wide, then that soldier isn’t intending to move very much. It’d be impossible to fight effectively with a short sword, the shield would be awkward to move and very heavy. Essentially, you’re talking about nothing more than a wall of men whose purpose is to do little other than defend crossbow men. And, when they get into hand-to-hand combat, they’d be pretty ineffective.

 

That doesn’t really sound like the revolutionary new approach everyone who comments on the Legion is talking about.

 

Something similar to the Roman set-up, now that would be revolutionary in Randland.

 

And then clearly, there’s the name…. Legion….

 

To me, it’s pretty clear.

 

****

 

Kaznen, can you name a single army that employed towershields in large numbers for their troops? I can't think of one.

 

The largest shields I can think of that were employed en masse were the Roman scutm and the shield used by Pavise crossbowmen... but that's something slightly different.

 

The Pavise was 4-5ft tall and wide enough to cover the body... which still comes in smaller than the shield your proposing.

[Bob T Dwarf]

Nothing definitive here, but...

 

The average man is maybe 18 to 22 inches wide at the shoulder.  3 feet would be overly wide for anyone to usefully employ a weapon around the periphery of such a shield.  2 feet wide seems much more reasonable.

[Kaznen]

****

 

Kaznen, can you name a single army that employed towershields in large numbers for their troops? I can't think of one.

 

The largest shields I can think of that were employed en masse were the Roman scutm and the shield used by Pavise crossbowmen... but that's something slightly different.

 

The Pavise was 4-5ft tall and wide enough to cover the body... which still comes in smaller than the shield your proposing.

Go to your local library and go to the history section and look up Middle Age Warfare.  When infantry crossbowmen started to become a professional soldier and they started using cranks and windlasses to crank back their bowstrings they would hide behind tower shields, or carry them on their back and turn to reload, to protect themselves from enemy fire.

 

The main difference between real life and WoT was every crossbowman carried a shield, set it up, and fired from their own private "fortress" or hung the very large shield (and three feet wide was necessary) from their back and turned their backs toward enemy troops to reload.

 

Remember the shields the legion are carrying are not for person protection but to protect the crossbowmen behind them.  If their main purpose was hand to hand fighting then it would be wiser to carry pikes, but Rand notes their is not a single pike among them. 

 

 

[Epic]

I always assumed that it would have been the pavise --> they're crossbowman and thats what crossbowman used.  For the most part I think that Robert Jordan didn't put any shields in the book to make the swordsman and their fights seem badass and less gritty --> Waaaay easier to deflect a sword with a shield than another sword and you can't get any sword bashes to the face.  It's for that reason that I think that Perrin's a dumbass, if he'd had a shield, even a small one, at Malden when he was fighting Aram that fight wouldn't have lasted more than a minute: They square off, Aram makes a few thrusts which Perrin will just dodge, Aram goes for a swing, Perrin catches it on his shield and Aram is hit with recoil and left open for Perrin's hammer in his face --> scratch one tinker.

 

(Wouldn't it be siiiick if Perrin tricked his hammer out to have a spike at the base of the haft and another at the top of the hammer itself?)

[Kaznen]

I always assumed that it would have been the pavise --> they're crossbowman and thats what crossbowman used.  For the most part I think that Robert Jordan didn't put any shields in the book to make the swordsman and their fights seem badass and less gritty --> Waaaay easier to deflect a sword with a shield than another sword and you can't get any sword bashes to the face.  It's for that reason that I think that Perrin's a dumbass, if he'd had a shield, even a small one, at Malden when he was fighting Aram that fight wouldn't have lasted more than a minute: They square off, Aram makes a few thrusts which Perrin will just dodge, Aram goes for a swing, Perrin catches it on his shield and Aram is hit with recoil and left open for Perrin's hammer in his face --> scratch one tinker.

 

(Wouldn't it be siiiick if Perrin tricked his hammer out to have a spike at the base of the haft and another at the top of the hammer itself?)

I looked it up on wikipedia and saw that pacises were the name of those tower shields.

 

About the Perrin v Aram-

1. Perrin didn't want to kill Aram.  He just wanted to subdue him so he could deprogram the ex-Tinker.

2. If Perrin pimped out his hammer like you suggest it would defeat the symbolism.  It's a forge hammer, about twice to three times the weight of a warhammer and shorter to boot.  The idea is that it is a tool how primary purpose isn't for fighting, like how the primary purpose for Aiel weapons isn't fighting, but the spear and bow could be used for hunting and a knife has all kinds of purposes.  I'm surprised the Aiel don't use handaxe/tomahawk type weapons also.

[ROB_88]

The idea is that it is a tool how primary purpose isn't for fighting, like how the primary purpose for Aiel weapons isn't fighting, but the spear and bow could be used for hunting and a knife has all kinds of purposes.  I'm surprised the Aiel don't use handaxe/tomahawk type weapons also.

 

as you just said, they use weapons that could also be used for otherstuff aswell, that's why they never use swrods.

 

but axes wouldn't work either cause those are ment to cut down trees, but there are hardly any trees at all in th Waste so i don't think axes are used enough for that

[Kaznen]

The idea is that it is a tool how primary purpose isn't for fighting, like how the primary purpose for Aiel weapons isn't fighting, but the spear and bow could be used for hunting and a knife has all kinds of purposes.  I'm surprised the Aiel don't use handaxe/tomahawk type weapons also.

 

as you just said, they use weapons that could also be used for otherstuff aswell, that's why they never use swrods.

 

but axes wouldn't work either cause those are ment to cut down trees, but there are hardly any trees at all in th Waste so i don't think axes are used enough for that

But they can chop bones better then a knife, shrubs that grow in the waste, and can break up hard ground.  I said hatchet/small axe not a large axe.