Jump to content
Sturgeon's House


Contributing Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Volkswagen

  • Rank
    Contributing Member

Recent Profile Visitors

560 profile views
  1. My point is that he is being extremely unscientific and dishonest. Other than that I'm not quite sure what are you trying to say. Did you take a look at his sources?
  2. That video is fucking awful piece of shit and because of it, I now have super-aids. Just first few points that come to mind: -Dude has a PhD in physics, not in history, which is why it's a bit shady to use it so overtly in a video about history. -the scale of battles are horribly uneven; capture of single frigate (without bloodshed) is considered good enough for jihad and made no distinction to events where tens of thousands of people get killed. Obviously he is trying to inflate the map with his fucking dots. -stops counting crusades after the third one ??? (there are still 4t
  3. Huh. I think I misread something then. Time to read it again, properly that is.
  4. Don't you think Norway gets a little unreasonable statistics for one really high victim count attack? I have also doubts on validity of the statistics in areas where it is basically war during those years. Could be interesting to see what that map would look like if it was 1998-2018.
  6. When I open that blog post, it's in georgian. Am I the only one who has it so?
  7. You can watch the rest of the sa80 videos in advance if you use the playlist he made some time ago.
  8. That first one is about a month old video, but don't know about the second one.
  9. I watched those Lindybeige videos and several points came into my mind: - Reach is a relative statement: if the target zone is hands and face/neck, then at maximum extension overarm should have better reach. If the target is low or mid - then underarm has more reach at maximum extension. - If the enemy has large shields like aspis or lots of armor, the need for long reach is not so relevant anymore. - Whilst cutting with onehanded spears is quite hard (other than pulling/pushing), the binding is very important in order to safely thrust and defend yourself. - You can thrust at the same targ
  10. What I meant with lineage is a non stop continuation of evolution if that makes sense. As in evolution of atgeir might have gone "extinct", and later on when the need for polearms came back - some other solution was created or taken. The translation 'halberd' is a bit confusing; did they translate it to that because that's the only polearm they knew and somewhat fit the description? But yeah, whilst I won't try to guess the possible shape of that weapon, I wouldn't be surprised if it was something pretty basic like early voulges, winged-spears and suchlike. I remember having seen that blog, i
  11. In means of functionality, pretty much yes - but I doubt there is any direct "lineage" between the two. Also wouldn't something like partizan fit more as a successor, considering it doesn't have a axe-like blade? PS. a bit older version of "halberd":
  12. I don't completely disagree with Lloyd but I'd like to remind that once again, not all halberds are uniform in shape. Sometimes the cutting blade is canted, other times it's straight, and sometimes the spike/spearhead is long and stubby - other times it has a ability to cut and is short. The halberds Lloyd show in his video are mostly from late 15th century to late 16th century so it could be just a preferred look of the time. I would also like to point out that the shape of the lower part of the cutting portion will probably be a better indicator to if you wan't to do more of a pulling-cut wi
  13. Basically the ones that are numbered from 30 to 60 are all for warfare, so pretty much all of them. Had to find a better res picture.
  • Create New...