Please explain Flail usage (SCA / Historical)

Felnar

First Post
can anyone explain how and why flails were used as a weapon
what benefits they had over rigid weapons
my friend says its because they negate the benefits of a shield, and i can see how theyd wrap around a shield, but i dont see why the shield user would block the chain instead of the ball
are they harder to parry with a another weapon? does parrying a flail entangle your weapon?

if someone could detail their personal combat experience with flails/nunchaku that'd be awesome

and somewhere i got the idea that some SCA groups dont allow the use of flails because they are "too good"
is this true? please explain
is their a significant weight difference between a lethal (historical) and non-lethal (SCA) flail?

thanks
- Felnar
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Felnar said:
and somewhere i got the idea that some SCA groups dont allow the use of flails because they are "too good"
is this true? please explain
is their a significant weight difference between a lethal (historical) and non-lethal (SCA) flail?

thanks
- Felnar

While I'm not an SCA person, I've heard from SCA people that it's difficult to design a nonlethal flail (as opposed to a nonlethal sword). Flails have an irritating tendency to dislocate or otherwise mangle limbs, and you can get a serious amount of bludgeoning force going on if you swing it in a wide enough arc.
 

Flails were originally derived from grain-threshing implements -- basically short clubs attached by hinges to longer staves. They work through the good old lever mechanism to allow greater force to be applied at the end -- the striking head is typically moving at a higher speed, and thus having more kinetic energy, than the handle which is moving at the same speed as the striker's arm. The same principle in a ranged weapon applies to both the sling and the atl-atl.

I've never seen an SCA flail, but I'd expect that it'd be like other SCA blunt instruments -- that is, a great deal lighter than the real thing, to avoid blunt trauma. Sadly, I've never swung a flail myself before, although I've seen a few up close. There was one in particular which was apprehended from a football fan at the entrance of a stadium, and is now at that stadium's museum. Wicked thing, that is...
 

I never saw anyone use a Flail while I was in the SCA. Not because they're 'too good' but because they're 'too dangerous'.

As to how useful they'd be in combat (or how much flails actually used resemble the spiked-cannonball-on-a-chain of fantasy literature) I have no useful idea...
 

I think the user of a flail would consider it a bad thing if the chain of the weapon hit anything... The chain isn't designed to wrap around a target, or get around a shield. As others have said, it gives the weapon a wider swinging arc, allowing the impulse upon the weapon to be greater as it is swung, increasing the final hitting force with less effort on the part of the flail-wielder. A flail works because it hits hard, nothing else.

Since a flail kills through mass and raw kinetic energy mostly, I imagine that a "non-lethal" flail would have to be a lot lighter than a real one, for many of the same reasons you can't just blunt the edge of an axe and call it non-lethal...
 

Felnar said:
i can see how theyd wrap around a shield, but i dont see why the shield user would block the chain instead of the ball
Real combat isn't choreographed, it's chaotic. I'm sure no-one on a mediaeval battlefield intended to block the chain and have their head crushed!

As I understand it, a flail-wielder would use a backup weapon, so that if the flail gets tangled, intentionally or otherwise, a sword or axe would come into use.
 

Well, I've futzed about a little with these things in SCA. They have some problems for SCA combat:

1. The string/ cord/ chain thingie wraps around wrists, tangles things up, etc. Realistic? Sure. But in the SCA system, where there is a premium on competition and throwing full force blows, yet allowing massive combats, such tangling could well lead to (it is feared) wrist injuries, people yanked off their feet, weapons flying through the air as they are ripped from grasps, etc. Heck, get that cord somehow stuck in a helmet grill/protrusion (like a Norman style brass nasal) and a good yank is a bit scary to think about. Sad, but the same thing applies to hooking points on polearms and axes- and is why the SCA don't duplicate those as well sword and board;

2. There is a worry about control- harder to pull a blow after a hold (stop command) is given, hard to make sure one doesn't hit forbidden targets (knee and below, fingers- the stuff it is hard to protect adequately); and

3. The string/ chain thingie makes the velocity of the flail's head variable, innately. You have to make the head hard enough to really give a good knock on an unobstructed shot. But, when a rope with a weight on the end is struck midrope- as happens all the time with a shield edge- the weight's speed accelerates. (I'm not a physics major, so I dunno if this is true, but to my naked eye and shield arm behind the shield, it seems true). I get the idea of this accelration better when playing with my dog's leash while he is running about. Usually, I can gently swing it about my body in safety, but once in a while the leash catches wrong, and I get a painful whack from the now speedy clip on the end. I know, a weird habit, but I get bored out there, and he is off the leash every day. Perhaps you've seen lifeguards do the same thing with whistles on a string around their hands. Back to the SCA- this variance makes creating a flail that is always safe yet always lands an adequately hard blow rather tough.

I suppose some skeptics would point out that the randomness a flail would create conceivably could make the best fighters, who are SCA decisionmakers, more vulnerable on the battle field to the less skilled. I, however, prefer to believe that _some_ of those same best fighters are strong propoents of authenticity, "death from behind," etc.


But, see http://marshal.ansteorra.org/armored/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=56&Itemid=26 for an experimental take in a different part of the Known World. More power to them- I hope it works and spreads, as the SCA should ever aspire to greater realisim. There was a time (long ago) when no one thought Crown Tourney could be won in plate armor, as it would simply slow down the fighter too much, until it was done.
 

In college I participated in Dagohir (spelling?) which used foam weapons. We made flails with a padded heft, a nerf ball and a "chain" (rope) covered in cut and taped pipe insulation. So not exactly the real thing.

When used against a person with a shield, we found that aiming the top of the heft for the shield would frequently cause the ball to flip over and smash your opponent's head or shoulder. Typically the defender would try to block anything coming at him or her, so this did work. But against people without shields it wasn't particularly effective.
It was a tricky weapon, mostly because it would rebound in unpredictable ways, and it took a fairly large area to swing (remember space required?).

I would not draw too much from our experiences... but that is what we found.
 

jesseghfan said:
3. The string/ chain thingie makes the velocity of the flail's head variable, innately. You have to make the head hard enough to really give a good knock on an unobstructed shot. But, when a rope with a weight on the end is struck midrope- as happens all the time with a shield edge- the weight's speed accelerates. (I'm not a physics major, so I dunno if this is true, but to my naked eye and shield arm behind the shield, it seems true). I get the idea of this accelration better when playing with my dog's leash while he is running about. Usually, I can gently swing it about my body in safety, but once in a while the leash catches wrong, and I get a painful whack from the now speedy clip on the end. I know, a weird habit, but I get bored out there, and he is off the leash every day. Perhaps you've seen lifeguards do the same thing with whistles on a string around their hands. Back to the SCA- this variance makes creating a flail that is always safe yet always lands an adequately hard blow rather tough.
Well, there is definitely a good reason why it would swing faster if the rotating length of chain got decreased. It is called Conservation of Angular Momentum. Angular Momentum is proportional to mass, angular velocity, and distance from the center of rotation. If that distance suddenly decreases, and mass is inflexible, then angular velocity must increase. It is the same reason why twirling figure-skaters' spin speed increases when they pull their arms close to their bodies.
 

Lots of good SCA posts...so how about a historical view?
As said earlier in the post by Malhost, the flail began life as a grain thresher, a long rod connected to a short rod by a two interlocking perpendicular rings. As it progress from farm tool to weapon, the head become metal and grew in weight and size (width, not height). As the weapon continued to progress, the rings became a heavy chain and the head become more rounded (darn but those ignorant medieval weapons makers had a pretty good grasp of physics. :D ) The chain grew in length and the haft shortened. The head sprouted spikes and eventually you saw variation with multiple heads. So that is the evolution of the weapon, the question though is about usage, but the background information pertains as you'll see.

In the first iteration, the flail was most likely used by peasants in riots, much like the pitch fork, the sickle, the pruning hook and the scythe (all of which later spawned pole arms or the like.) There is very little hard data on when it was first used, but the leap from farm tool to weapon usually had its roots in farmer gets mad and uses what is available to kill local nobility or fellow farmer.

Of course, nobles were smarter than your average peasant and quickly adapted a good thing to more base uses. (ie war). The original heavy head flail (just rings, no chain) had a heck of a whack, but was more like a pole arm than an actual personal weapon. Should you hit, they were devastatingly powerful (more of that applied physics that had not yet been invented) but getting a hit was a real challenge. Never to throw out a good idea, the good nobles decided to shorten the haft and lengthen the pivot point, in this case with a chain. You could say it was a 'smashing' success. :D

The ability of the flail to hit the opponent was increased and the fact that the occasional 'miss' would still find its mark (via wrapping around a shield, arm, leg, weapon...whatever.)was an added bonus. At some point this became such a marvelous idea that they shortened the haft again, lengthened the chain again and put this former infantry weapon in the hands of mounted soldiers. The flail had suddenly become a VERY effective cavalry weapon, one that needed little practice to use (though extensive practice to master) was capable of unseating a rider, killing an infantryman outright (rumor is this is how the idea of polo came to be) disarming an opponent, etc. Of course like all Medieval weapons the best way to upgrade is to add spikes, so they did. And if one head is good, then two or more should be that much better, right? Well, it seems that at some point, the number of heads became the ultimate downfall of the weapon. Someone got the bright idea that a Cat o' nine tails crossed with a Flail was a good idea...it wasn't, it was heavy, unwieldy and just plain laughable. They actually have an example of two at the Royal Museum in London, really gaudy things.

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.
 

Trending content

Remove ads

Top