Battle weapons

I followed Weds' links to Conquests and saw those videos of fighting with battle axe! It's brutal! And I agree that it is an offensive weapon and when attacked from all sides, won't be effective in defending a warrior....Richard, who was a career soldier would have know about its shortcomings when he decided to charged down that hill! So I am more and more inclined to believe that he was perusing a suicidal mission knowing full well the sequences! But here's the question though, are we sure that he did indeed fight with a battle axe and not a broadsword ? Or combination of both?
It seems one has to be exceptionally strong to use a battle axe effectively. It is assumed that he was a thin little man( bah!) so how could he have wielded an weapon favored by the humongous Vikings?
Ishita

Sent from my iPad

Ishita: To go off-topic for a moment, after I saw the painting of Joanna of Portugal, I, too, became convinced poor Richard committed suicide!! Maire.

--- In , Ishita Bandyo wrote:
>
> I followed Weds' links to Conquests and saw those videos of fighting with battle axe! It's brutal! And I agree that it is an offensive weapon and when attacked from all sides, won't be effective in defending a warrior....Richard, who was a career soldier would have know about its shortcomings when he decided to charged down that hill! So I am more and more inclined to believe that he was perusing a suicidal mission knowing full well the sequences! But here's the question though, are we sure that he did indeed fight with a battle axe and not a broadsword ? Or combination of both?
> It seems one has to be exceptionally strong to use a battle axe effectively. It is assumed that he was a thin little man( bah!) so how could he have wielded an weapon favored by the humongous Vikings?
> Ishita
>
> Sent from my iPad
>

IIshita said:  
It is assumed that he was a thin little man( bah!) so how could he have wielded an weapon favored by the humongous Vikings?
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Liz replied:

'Cos he was brill   :-)

I imagine he was very wiry and in very good shape. After all, he was obviously a very young, healthy man - despite what may turn out to be scoliosis. Maire.

--- In , liz williams wrote:
>
>
>
>
> IIshita said:  
> It is assumed that he was a thin little man( bah!) so how could he have wielded an weapon favored by the humongous Vikings?
> ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>
> Liz replied:
>
> 'Cos he was brill   :-)
>
>
>

Because he trained from an early age. William Nevill, Lord Fauconberg, is
also said to have been a man of small stature, and one of the finest (if not
the finest) soldiers of his day.

Karen

From: liz williams <ferrymansdaughter@...>
Reply-To: <>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 14:05:33 +0000 (GMT)
To: ""
<>
Subject: Re: Battle weapons








IIshita said:
It is assumed that he was a thin little man( bah!) so how could he have
wielded an weapon favored by the humongous Vikings?
__________________________________________________________

Liz replied:

'Cos he was brill :-)

Then it is not particularly necessary to be a big man to wield an axe -its all about practice! And talent:). Even so I think it would have served his purpose better if he used an weapon that  had some defensive element to it rather than all offensive!What does that tell us about him? It was always all or nothing for him. He was not a person to compromise much , I guess.
About his mental and physical state at Bosworth- I am completely sure he was depressed at that point of his life. King or not, he was a person. But do you think he might also have suffered from heat stroke? It was brutally hot and he was in that steel shell!! He would be roasting inside that thing!





________________________________
From: Karen Clark <Ragged_staff@...>
To:
Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2013 9:14 AM
Subject: Re: Battle weapons


 
Because he trained from an early age. William Nevill, Lord Fauconberg, is
also said to have been a man of small stature, and one of the finest (if not
the finest) soldiers of his day.

Karen

From: liz williams ferrymansdaughter@...>
Reply-To: >
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 14:05:33 +0000 (GMT)
To: ""
>
Subject: Re: Battle weapons

IIshita said:
It is assumed that he was a thin little man( bah!) so how could he have
wielded an weapon favored by the humongous Vikings?
__________________________________________________________

Liz replied:

'Cos he was brill :-)

Maire wrote:
>
> I imagine he was very wiry and in very good shape. After all, he was obviously a very young, healthy man - despite what may turn out to be scoliosis.

Carol responds:

Right. The archaeologists described the Leicester skeleton (which I am confident will prove to be Richard's) as that of a strong and active man (no mention of his being small or slender). It will be interesting to see the estimates of his height and weight when all the test results are in.

However, I'm not at all convinced that the charge was intended as a suicide mission (as others have mentioned). If the Stanley faction had chosen to join Richard instead of Tudor, it would have been a rout--with the victorious Richard as the undoubted king and no one wishing to meet a fate similar to the Tydder's! Also, with the new location for the battle being more or less confirmed, the Ambion Hill scenario will have to be rethought. Does anyone know if there's even a hill on the new site?

Carol

Even if the charge was not a premeditated suicidal mission, it was a not one that a battle commander of Richard's calibre should have made. Did he truly believe the Stanley's were going to have his back? After they refused to budge after so many requests? Again, I am NOT an expert by any stretch of imagination. But even in my limited knowledge I would venture to guess that R did not really expect any help from the Stanleys.....
And yes, Richard was too brave for his own good:(

Sent from my iPad

On Jan 13, 2013, at 3:45 PM, "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...> wrote:

> Maire wrote:
> >
> > I imagine he was very wiry and in very good shape. After all, he was obviously a very young, healthy man - despite what may turn out to be scoliosis.
>
> Carol responds:
>
> Right. The archaeologists described the Leicester skeleton (which I am confident will prove to be Richard's) as that of a strong and active man (no mention of his being small or slender). It will be interesting to see the estimates of his height and weight when all the test results are in.
>
> However, I'm not at all convinced that the charge was intended as a suicide mission (as others have mentioned). If the Stanley faction had chosen to join Richard instead of Tudor, it would have been a rout--with the victorious Richard as the undoubted king and no one wishing to meet a fate similar to the Tydder's! Also, with the new location for the battle being more or less confirmed, the Ambion Hill scenario will have to be rethought. Does anyone know if there's even a hill on the new site?
>
> Carol
>
>

As Jedi Master Qui-Gon Jinn said to the Toydarian, "If you gamble, my friend, sometimes you lose."

Even if Richard didn't expect any help from the Stanleys, it seems he never suspected they'd betray and attack him from behind. Traditionally, the Stanleys helped no one in battle. "Nothing personal, just good business." I guess it was just good business for the Stanleys to commit treason that day. Hey, it worked; the family and their wealth survived.

Was ignoring orders and not helping considered treasonous? Or did one have to physically attack the king (or fight against the king) to commit treason on the battlefield? Otherwise, a noble could just stand there with his metaphorical fingers in his ears, chant "La la la can't hear you", and all would be forgiven at the end of the day?

Didn't Northumberland refuse to budge as well?

~Weds

--- In , Ishita Bandyo wrote:
>
> Even if the charge was not a premeditated suicidal mission, it was a not one that a battle commander of Richard's calibre should have made. Did he truly believe the Stanley's were going to have his back? After they refused to budge after so many requests? Again, I am NOT an expert by any stretch of imagination. But even in my limited knowledge I would venture to guess that R did not really expect any help from the Stanleys.....
> And yes, Richard was too brave for his own good:(

Treacherous bastards!!! Didn't N betray Warwick before Barnet too? Stanleys have changed sides a lot too, I think! Didn't Dickon catch them in the king's road with an army heading out to help Warwick when they were supposed to be helping the King? Betrayal was in their blood!


Ishita Bandyo
www.ishitabandyo.com
www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com

On Jan 14, 2013, at 12:41 PM, "wednesday_mc" <wednesday.mac@...> wrote:

> As Jedi Master Qui-Gon Jinn said to the Toydarian, "If you gamble, my friend, sometimes you lose."
>
> Even if Richard didn't expect any help from the Stanleys, it seems he never suspected they'd betray and attack him from behind. Traditionally, the Stanleys helped no one in battle. "Nothing personal, just good business." I guess it was just good business for the Stanleys to commit treason that day. Hey, it worked; the family and their wealth survived.
>
> Was ignoring orders and not helping considered treasonous? Or did one have to physically attack the king (or fight against the king) to commit treason on the battlefield? Otherwise, a noble could just stand there with his metaphorical fingers in his ears, chant "La la la can't hear you", and all would be forgiven at the end of the day?
>
> Didn't Northumberland refuse to budge as well?
>
> ~Weds
>
> --- In , Ishita Bandyo wrote:
> >
> > Even if the charge was not a premeditated suicidal mission, it was a not one that a battle commander of Richard's calibre should have made. Did he truly believe the Stanley's were going to have his back? After they refused to budge after so many requests? Again, I am NOT an expert by any stretch of imagination. But even in my limited knowledge I would venture to guess that R did not really expect any help from the Stanleys.....
> > And yes, Richard was too brave for his own good:(
>
>