and actively, defensively and offensively, whether mounted or on foot. For
hundreds of years, the sword and shield were considered integral.
Medieval shields were generally tough and well made. They were de-
signed to withstand repeated blows and generally could not be purposely
attacked and destroyed by any sword. The coming of firearms and massed
pike-formations eventually rendered the shield obsolete as a practical im-
plement of war. But prior to this, it was a highly prized tool. Study today
of this most simple yet formidable instrument can be a fascinating martial
exercise. The medieval sword and shield never employed a “wham-bam,
whack-whack” style, or mere brutish hacking. This combination was em-
ployed with a dynamic skill that took coordination and intense practice.
The conditions under which they effectively operated required subtle and
tight movements more than aggressive hitting. The effectiveness of a prop-
erly handled medieval shield and sword is formidable. A shield consider-
ably enhanced a warrior’s defense, especially in the case of unarmored or
lightly armored fighters. At the same time, it scarcely diminished a war-
rior’s offense. A shield could eliminate almost half the body’s targets and
allow a weapon to remain hidden and ready to strike from an indirect po-
sition, particularly against an adversary’s legs. A fighter using a shield
could step right up with virtual impunity and deliver a wicked and swift
blow, seemingly from out of nowhere. A shield allowed a fighter to close in
against pole weapons such as pikes and charge or stand under assault by
arrow and spear. It could also be a weapon in itself, and it is likely that no
medieval warrior thought of it only as an implement of passive protection.
Historically, a warrior would avoid hitting his enemy’s shield in favor
of feigning attacks to provoke openings that permitted cuts at the head,
neck, hand, forearm, and especially the shin and ankle. Other targets were
the face, throat, underarm, and groin. The feint was not the only means of
creating an opportunity for a cut. Swords could cut into the edges of
untrimmed shields. The bare wood let a blade bite into it a few inches, and
for an instant, the sword would stick. Until it was pulled free, an attacker
was left quite vulnerable. For this reason, shields without metal rims were
actually sometimes favored over trimmed shields. Therefore, no purpose
was served by intentionally hacking away at the edges of an opponent’s
shield and in the process creating an opening for a counterblow. Instead,
the idea was to force the adversary to react, move his shield in defense, and
become vulnerable.
Medieval shields blocked with both their flat face and their edges. The
flat surface of a shield naturally acts as its own area defense. Even in the
case of untrimmed shields, the edge of the shield was also used, not just the
flat. The shield was not held so close to the body that maneuverability was
lost. It did not just hang, but moved to hit the adversary’s shield or to divert
Swordsmanship, European Medieval 573