The Sword & Buckler Tradition

[Ferran]

The Sword & Buckler Tradition - Part 1

By J. Clements

Along with the longsword as a foundational weapon of training, the ARMA has always emphasized the sword and buckler as a vital tool of study. We now present here one of the most comprehensive looks at this system ever offered. The conclusions that can be drawn from the evidence are somewhat surprising and may lead students of the subject to reappraise the historical importance of this fencing method.

As a fencing tradition in Europe the sword and buckler method was one of the oldest and most continuous combative systems.[1] To a large degree however, its place in fencing has been overshadowed by both the popular image of sword and shield fighting in the Middle Ages and the later Renaissance idea of rapier and dagger duelling. But today, modern enthusiasts and students of historical European martial arts are once again acquiring respect for this effective weapon combination. The result is something of a re-evaluation of the familiar conception of this versatile fighting method.



Although, the sword and buckler is often associated with the fencing methods of the early 1500s and with the common serving man, it was a form of fighting with a much longer tradition. Sword and buckler fighting also became a “combat sport” of sorts, but not before it had already long been a martial system of self-defense and battlefield skill. What is recognizable about the buckler is that it was foremost a military tool used in war by both soldiers and knights. That the tradition survived longer than large shields and ended up occasionally facing off against the rapier has engendered it (no small thanks to Shakespeare) with something of an unjust legacy. Given its military fitness, its eventual unsuitability for civilian duelling and urban combat during the age of the rapier comes as no surprise.

But the study of the sword and buckler has suffered somewhat from a lack of attention by historians of fencing and Medieval warfare. On the one hand, it is so ubiquitous as to not be of much significance, and on the other, because of comparisons to 16th century rapier fencing, it is frequently viewed as being somehow brutish or unsophisticated. Further, while assorted types of shield developed and changed their shapes and sizes, bucklers remained much more consistent, so scholars and historians have not had much reason to focus on them. As well, unlike shields bucklers served no heraldic function either and this too has perhaps limited some of their appeal.

La Petite Defense

A buckler differs from a shield in that the latter is carried by straps and worn on the arm whereas the former is held in single-hand in a “fist” grip. It is difficult to trace the history of the weapon as many times any type of round shield or small targe would be called buckler, regardless of whether it was held in the fist or worn on the arm.[2] The buckler was a small, maneuverable, hand-held shield for deflecting and punching blows. It was usually round and made of metal but occasionally of hardened leather or layers of wood. (Tarassuk & Blaire, p. 105). Bucklers were typically round and frequently between 8 to 16 inches in diameter, but octagonal, square, and trapezoidal versions were also known.

Considerable varieties of bucklers were developed. Often a pointed spike protruded from the central boss or umbo.[3] Many bucklers were pointed with a central tip or several smaller “teeth”. These points could be used offensively to great effect as well as aided in binding and deflecting an opponent’s weapon. John Stow wrote in 1631 how using the buckler’s long “pyke” (a spikes 8- 12 inches long) it was the habit of the old fighters “either to breake the swords of their enemies, or suddenly to runne into them and stab”. (Aylward, p. 17). An English Royal proclamation in 1562 even complained of “bucklers with long pykes in them.” (Norman, p. 24) and a spiked buckler from c. 1607 was even found at the Jamestown settlement fort in Virginia. Some 16th century bucklers also had raised metal rings, hooks, or bands that allowed for the catching or knocking of opposing blades. Samples of bucklers with these can be seen on display today in the Wallace Collection Museum in London. Even the special concave buckler, ostensibly developed in the 1500s to more easily facilitate deflecting of rapier thrusts, seems to appear much earlier in a French image of 1375. The light and shadow in the artwork clearly show the buckler to be curved inward and given the variety of short, tapering, thrusting swords in use at the time, this is not difficult to accept.



The versatility of the sword and buckler as a method of fighting can be said to lay in its simplicity. As a two-weapon combination, it is simultaneously defensive and offensive. It offered some protection against missile weapons and was convenient for facing heavier weapons such as polearms and axes.[4] Yet, its small size made it agile and quick. Combined with a good shearing sword or tapering cut-and-thrust blade, it could deflect attacks, strike blows of its own, and yet still allow the user’s own sword to cut around in any direction. Another advantage of metal bucklers was that unlike wooden shields, the point of an opponent’s weapon would not get stuck in the face of the buckler nor would the edge of a blade damage the rim (although, when this occurred it could be used to the shield man’s advantage). In many of the historical images of sword and buckler combat the familiar fighting postures found in longsword fencing manuals can be easily discerned, such as the wards of: high, middle, low, back, and hanging.

A Lengthy Legacy

In the Middle Ages, bucklers were common armaments among both knights and common soldiers – even more so than shields. A buckler was less cumbersome and more agile than a larger shield and easier to carry about or wear on the hip. We know that sword and buckler play was a popular pastime in northern Italy, in Germany, and in England.As British historical fencing researcher-practitioner Martin J. Austwick has pointed out: “The earliest references to professional combat instructors or masters of defense as they were to become known all have one thing in common. They refer to schools of sword and buckler. Add to this the fact that the earliest known fechtbuch or fight book is dedicated solely to sword and buckler combat, then it becomes apparent that sword and buckler combat is arguably the oldest surviving martial tradition within Western Martial Arts today.”[5]

The primary use of the buckler in Europe was by infantry. Light infantry, made up of commoners armed with bucklers and swords or falchions lined up behind troops with pole-weapons, were used frequently in armies during the 1100s to 1300s. Early Medieval pictorial sources, from c.650 to c.1100, additionally show bucklers in use by Celtic, Frankish, and Byzantine horsemen. Medievalist Donald Kagay reports of ordinances from 1363 by the Crown of Aragon’s parliament of Monzón which specified the military equipment required for frontier troops on active duty. Light mounted troops were required to have among their weapons a cuyrase (breast plate), a camisol (maile shirt), helmet, lance, and a small round leather shield called a darga de scut.[6] Bucklers are also common in Medieval artwork depicting Middle Eastern warriors, but these small shields are actually for mounted combat and are typically held sideways by two straps as opposed to the center-held buckler with its single handle. But the sword and buckler was most effective in foot combat such as with the Italian Rotulari (c. 1475) buckler infantry. One historian best explains their development: “It was to combat the new emphasis on field fortifications that a new type of infantry became popular in Italian armies. This was the so-called ‘sword and buckler’ infantry, first experimented with by Braccio. They were lightly armed, agile, and equipped for hand-to-hand offensive fighting. The type had already been developed in Spain in fighting with the Moors, and the establishment of Aragonese in Naples in the 1440s clearly had something to do with their appearance in Italy at this time.”[7]

There is no question of the buckler's popularity over the centuries. The Holkham Picture Bible Book from the early 1300s offers illustrations of combat including that between mounted knights using sword and lance, and between common soldiers (le commoune gent) on foot using axe, falchion, spear, and short sword with small round buckler. (Prestwich, p. 115). An image, dated to the 2nd half of the 14th century, of sword and buckler facing longsword, can even be found in the chapter on violent crimes from the State laws of King Magnus Eriksson, Sweden.

Fresco paintings from c.1340 of northern Italian infantry fighting with sword and buckler can be found on the castle of Sabbionara at Avio in Trento. A late 13th century image from Tuscany also depicts maile-clad helmeted infantry armed only with sword and buckler. A French illumination from c.1317 of the Legende de St. Denis shows militia meeting the king and equipped with buckler among other weapons (MS Fr. 2090-2. f.129r. Paris). A carved relief depicting two sleeping Swabian guards from c.1350 shows them equipped with sword and buckler and wearing maile and partial plate armor. (Nicolle, Arms and Armor, p. 191). An astrological text from the late 14th century offers a colorful image depicting a range of martial exercises practiced in the sun outdoors, including sword and buckler fencing. (C. F. Black, p. 132) Another manuscript illustration of a boar hunt dated c.1300-1350 shows two hunters armed with sword and buckler and sword and cloak. (Nicolle, Arms and Armor, p. 191).[8] A c.1305 image from Flanders of the battle Courtrai portrays numerous maile-clad helmeted Flemish militiamen on foot with bucklers, but no larger shields are shown.

At the Agincourt battle in 1415, the only defence recorded for the English bowmen is a round buckler 1 foot in diameter. (Edge, p. 65). The 1457, Bridport Muster Roll shows that many of the common folk called up (including 5 apparent women) were equipped with sword and buckler. While a description by Dominic Mancini in 1483 of the equipment of the troops under Richard Duke of Gloucester (the future Richard III) noted, “the sword is accompanied by an iron buckler.” (Edge, p. 128). The Spanish sword and buckler men of the early 1500s are among the best known proponents of the weapons. They wreaked havoc up and down the battlefields of Europe, even against the famed Swiss pikemen. A favored tactic was to close against pike formations and try to roll under the polearms then pop up among their clustered opponents where their shorter weapons could wreak havoc.

By 1500, the Spanish infantry of Gonsalvo de Cordova used short thrusting swords and bucklers, wore steel caps, breast and back plates, and greaves. (Oman, p. 63). The infamous Machiavelli himself in his own 1521 Arte of Warre, wrote of how at the battle of Barletta in 1503 the Spanish sword and buckler men dealt with the Swiss pikemen: “When they came to engage, the Swiss pressed so hard on their enemy with their pikes, that they soon opened their ranks; but the Spaniards, under the cover of their bucklers, nimbly rushed in upon them with their swords, and laid about them so furiously, that they made a very great slaughter of the Swiss, and gained a complete victory.” (Machiavelli, p. 66). As Machiavelli tells it, the Spaniards at the battle of Ravenna in 1512 fell furiously on the Germans, “rushing at the pikes, or throwing themselves on the ground and slipping below the points, so that they darted in among the legs of the pikemen.” The Spaniards “made so good a use of their swords, that not one of the enemy would have been left alive, if a body of French cavalry had not fortunately come up to rescue them.” (Machiavelli, p. 70). “This fight was typical of many more in which during the first quarter of the sixteenth century the sword and buckler were proved to be more than master of the pike.” (Oman, p. 110). In 1618 Adam van Breen wrote a work in the Netherlands on military drill which in 1625 was reprinted as Mars His Field, “or The Exercise of Armes, wherein in lively figures is shewn the Right use and perfect manner of Handling the Buckler, Sword, and Pike...”[9]

Author Wilbur Prescott writing on the art of war in late Medieval Spain, suggests the reason for the proficiency of the Spanish sword and buckler men of the early 1500s, was curiously, their considerable experience in late 15th century siege warfare which at the time relied heavily on close combat skills with shields. (Prescott, p. 26). Following along the work of Vegetius (influential throughout the Middle Ages and Renaissance), Machiavelli even suggested that armies of the time should actually equip their soldiers with swords and bucklers. Their advantage in pike warfare lay in the well-timed ability of such agile fighters to close in among the longer weapons of their tightly packed adversaries. In 1583 the Italian military writer Cesare d’Evoli said he favored small round metal shields for deflecting pikes. (Anglo, p. 220).

The Sword & Buckler Tradition - Part 2

A Knightly Tool

Egerton Castle from the 1880s informs us, “A universal feature of the history of all old schools of arms is that they arose among the middle classes.” (Castle, p. 14). Yet, although the sword and buckler has often been associated by historians of fencing with commoner foot soldiers, archers, and cavaliers, there is considerable evidence it was also a knightly arm used and practiced by the highest levels of the Medieval warrior class. Chaucer’s Prologue (c.1386) for instance tells of the Miller with “A swerd and a bocler baar he by his side” (line 558) but also describes a young knight with “by his syde a swerd and a bokeler” (line 112).

Medieval artwork reveals the ubiquity of round bucklers. A buckler is also shown worn by a mid-13th century knight on a tomb effigy of at Malvern Abby in Worchester, England. A manuscript image of armored knights battling on foot across a bridge on the Seine in 1346 illustrates the lead combatant fighting with an arming sword and studded metal buckler, while a similar image (in the Bibliotheqe Nationale de France) shows the same weapons used by foot knights at the battle of St. Omerlate in the early 1300s (but no larger arm-worn shields are visible in either image). An illuminated manuscript image (in the Bibliotheqe Nationale de France) of knights killing peasants during the 1358 Jacquerie revolt in France depicts several with sword and buckler. A silver alter piece of c. 1376 in the Pistoia Cathedral, Italy, shows a knight in typical armor of the time equipped with sword and buckler. (Edge, p. 75).

From the Trebon altarpiece painting, Resurrection, of c.1385-90 (in the National Gallery, Prague), the figure of a knight in maile and partial-plate armor, his grid-iron faced bascinet flipped open, sits below a resurrected Christ, one hand holding his long, tapering sword in its sheath, a roundel dagger in his belt, and his other hand holding a unique round buckler with 12 fluted sides and an especially large pointed boss. A circa 1440 painting, Three Marys at the Tomb, (in the Boymans-van Beuningen museum in Rotterdam) depicts a sitting fighting man in contemporary plate armor holding his lance with his helm and a buckler and falchion sitting nearby. Images from c.1472 of armoured fighters using bucklers with swords and falchions can also be seen in several illustrations from another edition of Froissart's chronicles (MS 722/1196, fol.110v and MS 873/501 fol.292v in the Conde Museum, Chantilly, France). A 15th century painting of merchants coming to blows depicts an outdoor figure seated at a bench and table preparing to defend himself against a standing figure attacking with a rondel dagger. The seated man holds his own dagger in his left hand and a small buckler in his right. (MS 297/1338.f.91v Conde Museum).

One 13th century Codex shows young men engaged in sword and buckler play under the admiring gaze of two noble women. A 14th century painting of the capture of the knight Guy de Greville at Château d’Evreux in France shows his armored captor carrying a spear and wearing sword and buckler. A mid-14th century English Psalter portraying the Biblical combat between David and Goliath portrays Goliath (viewed as a knight) in contemporary plate armor with a sword and buckler.

A realistic 14th century illustration showing Henry V meeting with his knights illustrates the well-armored men equipped with small studded bucklers over the hilts of wide-bladed swords worn on their hips (British Library MS Cotton Julius E IV). A similar 15th century French painting of the battle of Crécy (in 1348) depicts armored knights on foot fighting with sword and buckler and falchion and buckler. From 1469, an illuminated manuscript image by the Flemish artist, Lieven van Lathem, of a winged St. Michael fighting winged demons (J. P. H Getty museum, MS. 37, fol. 15V) similarly has him in plate armor with a short thrusting sword and small, hand-held iron shield.

An anonymous illuminated manuscript image of a battle between an angel and a dragon from the c.1255 Dyson Perrins Apocalypse (J. P. H Getty museum, MS. Ludwig III 1, fol. 20V) pictures the winged seraph wielding a short sword and small, golden buckler.

Along with the use of longswords on foot the knights are also shown mounted with short swords and even bows (yet nowhere in this or its related series of paintings are any shields seen). Even St. George himself is portrayed in 15th and 16th century paintings as a winged angel in golden armor wielding a sword and buckler or a sword and buckler armed knight in plate armor. A 1452 painting of the Last Judgment by Petrus Chritus (in the Gemäldegaleie, Staatlide museen, Berlin), depicts no less a figure than the archangel Gabriel fighting demons with a sword and buckler while armored in full plate.

A colorful image of mid-15th century German knights exercising includes the activities of wrestling, staff fighting, stone lifting, and sword and buckler play. The Emperor Maximilian I is even depicted in full plate armor practicing sword and buckler in Der Freydal (c.1500). The Triumphzug of Maximilian I also shows his processional guards armed with buckler and long bladed close-hilt swords. Even into the 1500s, the sword and buckler continued to be used by knights as much as commoners. For example, an Aztec image of Cortez and his knights under siege in Tenochtitlán in 1520 actually reveals them in full plate armor with several armed with sword and buckler. Even the famous 1547 judicial duel between the courtiers Jarnac and Chatstaigneraie was itself fought with sword and buckler.

A Foundational System

Bucklers were not only weapons for war; they were common tools for essential fencing practice as well. As a training system, the sword and buckler’s value lies in learning the coordination of two weapons, of joint attack and defense, and of applying different ranges and specific techniques of cut and thrust. The learning of timing, judgment, and footwork are also conveyed by the practice.

The martial exercise of sword and buckler, first known as Eskirmye de Bokyler, appears to have first become common in the 12th century. Seen here are two images of the time (MS No. 14, E. iii., and MS No. 20. D. vi, and MS No. 14, E. iii., 13th century.). A late 12th century image of club and buckler fencing can even be found on bronze cathedral door panels in Trani, Italy. About c. 1178, William Fitzstephen described how in London “During the holydays in summer the young men exercise themselves…fighting with bucklers.” The famous I.33 manuscript seems to suggest it as self-defense and martial exercise, at least by monks in Germany, as early the 13th century.

Illustrations of sword-and-buckler contests are depicted in manuscript miniatures from the early and mid 1300s.[1] The term “foyle” (i.e., practice weapon) is even mentioned in reference to sword and buckler fencing as early as the 1200s. (Ashdown, p. 316-317). William Caxton’s translation of the Catholicon Anglicum, an early English-Latin dictionary from c. 1483, even related the art of fencing itself directly to the use of sword and buckler: “a Bucler plaer, gladiator; a Bucler playnge, gladiatura. Swerde & yebucler (bukiller) playnge, gladiatura.” [2] A 15th century Venetian image depicts figures remarkably similiar to German fighters of more than two centuries earlier. A Spanish Bible from c1320 depicts an odd assortment of margin illuminations featuring half-animal half-man figures posing or fighting with various weapons and a considerable portion of them featuring short swords with round bucklers.

There are accounts of sword and buckler practice having been a pastime enjoyed as a form of martial sport by commoners in both England and Northern Italy from the 1200s -1400s and it was also evidently a popular pastime in Germany. We also know “sword and buckler fighting remained a popular spectator sport, particularly in urban areas, well into the 14th century.” (Nicolle, Medieval Warfare, p. 252). The system was also common in judicial combats as one 15th century statement relates that duels among commoners in France were “only fought with the buckler and baton...” (Gilchrist, p. 32) and in 1455 two commoners in Valenciennes were taught the use of the club and buckler for a judicial combat.
In a tale of Robin Hood from Anthony Munday’s, The Downfall of Robert, Earle of Huntington (c.1598) the Medieval sword and buckler tradition is described as both a trusted means of martial contest and self-defense (lines 2560-2570):

Prince John: “What meane this groome and lozell Frier, So strictly matters to inquire? Had I a sword and buckler here. You should aby these questions deare.”
Frier: “Saist thou me so lad? Lend him thine. For in this bush here lyeth mine. Now will I try this newcome guest.”
Scathlock: “I am his first man, Frier Tuck, And if I faile and have no lucke, Then thou with him shalt have a plucke.”
Frier: “Be it so Scathlock. Holde thee lad, No better weapons can be had. The dewe doth them a little rust. But heare ye, they are tooles of trust.”

As a common practice at this time sword and buckler fencing could easily turn into serious brawling. Aylward refers to how in London during the late 1200s the city was pestered by bands of young fellows parading the streets after dark clashing their swords against their bucklers and harassing peaceable citizens to do combat. (Aylward, p. 8). Even in 1452 an English petition complained of, the “gret multitude of mysrewled people” assaulting and murdering others “wyth swerd, bokeler, and dagareis”.[3] It is known that English laws from as early as c. 1180 banned schools of fence within the city of London and Edward I, in the Statuta Civitatis London of 1286, ordered fencing schools teaching Eskirmer au Buckler (or eskirmye de bokyler) banned from the City of London –ostensibly to control villainy and prevent criminal mischief associated with such activities.[4] These edicts against the practice were aimed not specifically at sword and buckler fencing itself, so much as the whole teaching of martial arts to a civilian population. A skillful populace after all might be prone to using their arms in resistance against the civil authority. The restrictions were not at all intended to discourage fighting arts in general in England, but to prevent street-fighting among young “sword-men” bravados and to prevent any training in arms of common thugs and ruffians who did not have the desired social conscience to responsibly bear arms safely in good society.

“In Bergamo in 1179 one particular training exercise is referred to as a ‘battle with small shields’ which suggests light infantry training: this became more common during the 13th century. All classes took part in what became a form of public entertainment. Wooden weapons were used in these pugne or ‘fights’: we also know that judges imposed heavy fines on anybody caught using iron weapons. By the 14th century such exercises often degenerated into brawls in which only youngsters took part: this in itself reflected the decline of the old urban militias.” (Nicolle, Italian Miltiaman, p. 31). Urban militias, the main forces at the disposition of Medieval Italian cities, tended to consist of conscripted freemen or mercenaries and they were expected to be proficient in the use of weapons (particularly the scuderi or “small shield” infantry). (Nicolle, Italian Miltiaman, p. 15 & 16). These Medieval urban militias declined by the late 15th century and were replaced by sword and buckler foot soldiers.

By the 1500s the buckler continued to be recognized as a necessary tool of war as well as a foundational system for learning self-defense. Costume books from the 16th century also depict plebian urban youths around Europe wearing swords and bucklers. (Anglo, Martial Arts, p. 324, Note 111). The Bolognese master Achille Marozzo, in his famous 1536 fencing treatise, Opera Nova, made it clear the Spada e Brochiero (sword and buckler) as a foundational weapon was suited to both war and common self-defense. Marozzo even stated that to save time in describing the various guards for weapons that he would explain them only in terns of the single sword or the sword and buckler –implying ostensibly that the sword and buckler was a foundational tool for learning. He also depicted a unique square buckler (Spada e Targe) with convex curved sides to aid in deflecting.

The buckler’s popularity at this time was still primarily due to its continued utility on the battlefield. In 1558 the Frenchman Stephen Perlin wrote of England, “it is to be noted the servants carry pointed bucklers, even those of bishops and prelates…The husbandmen, when they till the ground, leave their bucklers and swords…so that in this land every body bears arms”. The 1631 edition of John Stow’s, Annales, mentioned how in the mid 1500s “every serving-man, from the base to the best, carried a Buckler at his backe, which hung by the hilt or pommel of his Sword, which hung before him.” Stow also noted that every haberdasher at the time then sold bucklers. (John Stow, Annales, p. 1024).[5]

In an engraving of an ideal army encampment from Leonhard Fronsperger’s 1565 treatise, the Book of War, one portion is marked for two figures practicing with swords and bucklers. (See Arnold, Renaissance at War, p. 56). English military author Gerat Berry in his 1634, A Discourse of Military Discipline, wrote of the value of training with the sword & buckler for war stating:

Let him [the common soldier] practice him selfe in eache sorte of weapon, to imitate as neere as possible the Janisaros Turcos [Turkish Janissaries], who were moste experte in armes trough their continuall exercise; And let him frequent the sworde and target, and specially I woulde wish our Irish to frequent the same for beinge more inclined to this sort of weapon more than any other nation, and besides that of all nationes none are more fitt for the same, nor more resolute. This weapon is of greate imporrance in many occationes, and specially when men close together, or to vive or recnoledge any narowe or straight pasadge or place as trenches, fortes, batteries, assaultes, encamisada, and for other purposes in warr; and specially a boute the cullores or to defende or offende in any narrowe place.[6]

A late 15th century illuminated image by Jardin de Vertueuse (J. P. H Getty museum, MS. Ludwig XV 8, fol. 41) on the life of Alexander presents another example solider in plate mail with a short sword and small buckler on his right hip.

While it may be considered that the sword and buckler also served a secondary role as a training tool for learning to use larger shields, in the same way that a short sword or short staff teaches the use of a longer one, there is no real evidence for this. It is reasonable that knowing how to fight with a smaller, more maneuverable, hand-held shield would be useful in employing larger ones but there are still significant differences in how each is handled and what they can do. Certainly the volume of historical material on fighting with the buckler by far outweighs any on the employment of larger shields. This alone suggests that the sword and buckler was its own independent fencing skill and not viewed as a training tool for something else.

A 15th painting in the Bibliothèque Nationale de France depicting the English and Scots fighting at the 1388 battle of Otterburn from Froissart's Chronicles (BNF FR 2645), includes heavily armored troops using a variety of oval bucklers with their short swords. Another similar painting depicting Charles of Blois being taken prisoner in 1347 (BNF FR 2643) portrays one of his knightly captors wearing at his left thigh a small colored buckler hanging upon his longsword. Over all, bucklers outnumber larger arm-worn shields by a ratio of roughly 5 to 1 in such 14th and 15th century artwork.

The Sword & Buckler
Tradition - Part 3

Buckler Fencing in Martial Arts Literature

Material on sword and buckler fencing is presented in several Medieval German sources. The oldest known European fencing text is that of the “Walpurgis” manual in the Royal Armouries, Leeds – also called Fechtbuch MS I.33 (British Museum No. 14 E iii, No. 20, D. vi), and previously known as the “Tower Fechtbuch” since it was originally long held at the Tower of London. The "Gladiatoria" Fechtbüch (Manuscript 5878 Biblioteka Jagiellonska, Krakow) also depicts a clear illustration of spiked bucklers used with longswords.



This anonymous 13th century manuscript is a rare guide to the use of the sword and buckler. Rather than a theoretical or sporting work, the material presents actual combat techniques. It reveals many sophisticated actions including a significant number of thrusts (particularly to the face), cuts to the shins and feet, and an array of simultaneous parries and strikes. Almost all the elements later associated with supposedly more sophisticated fencing systems –set wards, principles of attack and defense, stop-thrusting, counter-timing, awareness of different ranges, etc., can all be found in the I.33.

The later sword and buckler teachings of Ander Liegnitzer (or Andres Liegnitzer) from the 1430s appear in several German texts of the 15th century and give us some of the most detailed material on the method. Two youthful athletic figures are shown fencing outdoors with spiked bucklers and bastard swords in the anonymous German fencing manuscript of the mid-1400s, known popularly as the “Gladiatoria” (Manuscript 5878 Biblioteka Jagiellonska, Krakow). The Fechtbuch of Paulus Kal from c.1462/c.1482 contains several plates of longsword and buckler, using unique “face-shaped” bucklers whose features ostensibly could be used to trap or bind attacking blades.

The fencing text of Hans Talhoffer from the early 1400s contains signifcant material on the use of sword and buckler. The 1459 color Thott edition of Hans Talhoffer’s Fechtbuch, Alte Alamtur und Ringkunst (Royal Library in Denmark), contains more than 14 plates illustrating sword and buckler combat using both arming swords and Messers. Talhoffer also included a unique flared octagonal buckler. At one point against two attackers it even shows the use of sword with buckler and dagger in the same hand. The 1467 color Talhoffer treatise also shows a figure armed with a sword and a small, deep, fist-sized buckler equipped with a long sharp spike in its center.

An edition of Jörg Wilhalm’s Fechtbuch from c.1540 includes a dozen pairs of sword and buckler figures showing actions very similar to those of the MS I.33 almost 250 years earlier. Even bastard swords with bucklers appear in 10 pairs of figures from an anonymous German manuscript of c. 1500 (Lib. Pic. A. 83, Staadsbibliothek, Berlin) which displays techniques such as punching, kicking, tripping, blade grabbing, and disarming.

From an edition of Jorg Wilhalm's Fechtbuch c.1523

Interestingly, while many German fencing manuals of the 1400s include some material on sword and buckler the two major Italian works known from the period do not. The Master Fiore dei Liberi in his systematic work, the Flos Duellatorum, of 1410, for instance, included longsword, dagger, spear, polaxe, and wrestling but nothing on fighting with or against the sword and buckler, or any shields. As well, while the sword and buckler tradition later appears in Italian, Spanish, and English fencing manuals from the 1500s, it oddly disappears from major German fencing works by the mid 1500s. For example, it is entirely absent from Paulus Hector Mair’s immense tome of c.1540 that includes a wide range of weapons from dagger to sickle to long staff. It is also absent from the various works of Joachim Meyer from 1560 and 1570 and does not appear in later German fencing manuscripts of the decades following.

Images from one anonymous late 15th century German fighting
text depict the basic guards along with a range of actions. including fighting
against a spear, kicking, and dropping to one knee on a thrust.

In 1631, John Stow stated that around the year 1560 the “ancient English fight of sword and buckler was only had in use”, implying in a sense that the sword and buckler was seemingly indigenous to the British Isles, which in fact it was not. Stow’s real meaning was that the “foyning” fence of the new rapier had yet to be introduced by 1560. While the sword and buckler was by no means exclusive to England in the 1500s, the master George Silver is perhaps the best-known advocate of the sword and buckler. In his now famous 1599, Paradoxes of Defense, Silver actually complained that no thrusts were then being used in buckler play and that bucklers at the time were themselves not even being used in the fencing schools. This is somewhat odd, since students of English fencing guilds at the time are recorded as having played for their Prizes with sword and buckler. In 1615 the anonymous author of Third University of England (possibly Sir George Buc) also described how: “In the city there be manie professors of the science of defence, and very skillful men in teaching the best and most offensive and defensive use of verie many weapons as…[including] the sword and buckler…and others.” (McDermott, p 100). Yet, in support of Silver’s comment, Sir Thomas Middelton’s play of 1600, The Blind Beggar, did include the interesting comment “the common fight of these same serving men is sword and dagger, therefore I’ll choose the sword and buckler, they are unskill’d in’t.” (Craig, p. 10, note 28). Of the sword and buckler, George Silver admitted, “I confess, in old times, when blows were only used with short Swords & Bucklers, & back Swords, these kinds of fights were good & most manly, now a days the fight is altered.” (Paradoxes, Chapter 10). By this he meant that the newer foyning fence of the rapier was the cause of the change.

Silver believed the weapon combination was one of the most effective. In the opening to Chapter 21 he declared, “The sword and buckler has the advantage against the sword and target, the sword and dagger, or the rapier and poniard.” Yet, he also felt the sword and buckler less effective for warfare than the sword and shield. Describing the dynamic of battlefield arms in his day, Silver noted: “Yet understand, that in battles, and where variety of weapons are, among multitudes of men and horses, the sword and target, the two handed sword, battle axe, the black bill, and halberd, are better weapons, and more dangerous in their offence and forces, than is the sword and buckler, short staff, long staff, or forest bill. The sword and target leads upon shot, and in troops defends thrusts and blows given by battle axe, halberds, black bill, or two handed swords, far better than can the sword and buckler.” (Paradoxes, Chapter 21). In Chapter 24 however, he stated, “the buckler, by reason of his circumference and weight, being well carried, defends safely in all times and places, whether it be at the point, half sword, the head body, and face, from all manner of blows and thrusts whatsoever.” And in Chapter 25, added, “The sword & buckler man out of his variable, open & guardant fight can come bravely off & on, false & double, strike & thrust home, & make a true cross upon ever occasion at his pleasure.” As well, in his unpublished work of c.1605, Brief Instructions, he noted, “Of the sword & buckler fight” (Chapter 9) that “Sword & Buckler fight, & sword & dagger fight are all one” and it “is the surest fight of all short weapons.”



A generation after George Silver, his fellow Englishman, Joseph Swetnam, in his 1617, Schoole of the Noble and Worthy Science of Defence, took a very different view, declaring, “this I can say and by good experience I speake it, that he which hath a rapier and a close hilted dagger, and skill withall to use him hath great ods against the sword and dagger, or sword and buckler.” On fighting rapier against sword and buckler, Swetnam described the advantage of its deceptive speed and reach in such an encounter:

“By false play a Rapier and Dagger may encounter against a Sword and Buckler, so that Rapier man be provident and carefull of making of his assault, that hee thrust not his Rapier into the others Buckler: but the false play to deceive the Buckler, is by offering a fained thrust at the face of him that hath the Buckler, and then presently put it home to his knee or thigh, as you see occasion; for he will put up his Buckler to save his face, but can not put him downe againe before you have hit him, as aforesaid. Likewise you may proffer or faine a thrust to the knee of the Buckler man, and put it home to his buckler shoulder, or face, for if hee let fall his Buckler to save below, hee can not put him up time enough to defend the upper parts of his body with his Buckler.” (Swetnam, p. 83, 90, 95, 99 & 102).

Naturally, not all Renaissance fencing teachers were concerned with the sword and buckler method. Some may have felt they were not relevant to a gentleman’s needs in urban self-defense and private affairs of honor where the innovative rapier quickly gained predominance. It is no wonder then that the opening to the anonymous 1639 English manual on sword and rapier, Pallas Armata – The Gentleman’s Armorie, stated “that the Dagger, Gauntlet, and Buckler are not in use” (p. A2).

The Sword & Buckler
Tradition - Part 4

Conceptions and Misconceptions

The method of fighting with sword and buckler remained consistent over time. It was not significantly different in the 1500s than it was in the late 1200s. There are no major differences between the wards, strikes, or actions found in sword and buckler fencing literature of these eras. There are of course distinctions between using a lighter tapering blade of the 1500s compared to the earlier wider swords designed more for cutting blows. A narrow cut-and-thrust blade allows for greater use of agile thrusting and quick slices against unarmored opponents. While a Medieval shearing sword, typically encountering more armors and heavier weapons, generally needed to deliver more powerful edge strikes. Still, the techniques of 16th century sword and buckler fencing were not original, but dated back to the Middle Ages.

Yet, a myth of fencing history that has developed is that the sword and buckler (particularly the English system) was by the mid 1500s an antiquated and obsolete style of defence. This view became more entrenched in the recent century. A common prejudice that can be found within modern fencing, which often views 18th & 19th century methods as “superior” rather than as a separate development of civilian dueling and urban self-defence, is that sword buckler fighting was crude and simplistic.



This prejudice is most evident in comments such as that by the famous Victorian scholar of fencing, Egerton Castle, who referred to “relatively barbarous sword and buckler” (Castle, p. 20 & 22). Castle also stated: “Rapier play, coarse as it might seem to modern fencers, was such an improvement over the older-fashioned sword and buckler fighting, and so much better suited to the requirements of a gentleman...” (Castle, p. 88). Alfred Hutton in his 1892 book, Old Swordplay,also declared the old sword and buckler tradition in the age of the rapier “speedily vanished”. (p. 29). Even fencing historian J. D. Aylward in 1956 wrote, “Repugnant as all foreign ideas were to the true born Englishman, Italian conceptions were bound, in the end, to render his traditional [buckler] sword-play obsolete.” (Aylward, p. 39).

It could also be noted that in 1575 a royal entertainment at Kenilworth for the Queen consisted of jousting tournament and also sword and buckler combat using weapons without edges or points and no lunging allowed. (Brailsford, p. 27). But examining the totality of 16th century fencing, we find a much more complex picture. It was not the rapier’s development that “did away” with the sword and buckler (in England or elsewhere) but the changing nature of Renaissance war that reduced its utility. As opposed to the anything goes of the battlefield where the essentially Medieval sword and buckler was well-suited, under urban conditions, it was also easy to control and allowed for men to make displays of bravado. Combatants could make wide slashes and smacking hits and a young man might exert himself in strikes and blows yet not mortally endanger his foe. This is kind of “play” was no doubt part of the method’s historical popularity. Samuel Butler’s Hudibras of 1663 for example makes reference to how, “As in sword and buckler fight, all blows do on the target light.” (Craig, p. 19).

The Italian master Giacomo Di Grassi himself in his 1570 text offered a section on sword and buckler, stating, “the Buckler is a weapon very commodious and much used”. In 1573, the French master Sainct Didier included the buckler and target in his work on "the Single Sword, Mother of All Arms", calling them "very useful and profitable for the gentleman to learn, and for the followers of war" (i.e., common soldiers). Giovanni Antonio Lovino’s text on the rapier and other weapons from 1580, Traite d Escrime, also included material on the classic buckler used with the narrow rapier. Lovino also referred to the sword and buckler as means of common means of judicial duelling (Lauro attore et Aquilo reo, con spada et brocchiero). The use of sword and buckler was in fact still being practiced even in Spain during the late 1500s. For example, in the late 1580s Juan de Morales was tested in Madrid for his skill with weapons including sword with assorted bucklers. (Anglo, Martial Arts, p. 27). A series of images of “sword-dancers” from Arbeau dated to 1589 shows them with small bucklers and short broad blades. Even a 1599 fencing manuscript, Arte de Esgrima, written in Spanish by the Portuguese, Domingo Luis Godinho included material on the sword and buckler. Yet, much has been made of the Italianate Englishman, John Florio, who as early as 1578 in his, First Fruites, was already saying of the buckler, “What weapon is that buckler? A clownish dastardly weapon”. (Aylward, p. 35).



Another part of the belief that the sword and buckler was “antiquated” and “obsolete” may be due in part to misunderstanding of George Silver’s stern complaints against “Italianated” masters of fence and his evident envy of the prestige they were being giving. Yet, the root of Silver’s essential grievance was that the rapier did not prepare men for warfare and national defense, but only for murder and duelling. He in essence argued further that the rapier was really nothing that different and could be beaten by man with a short sword who properly used the core principles of fighting. Somehow over time understanding of Silver was changed to consideration of him as simply being “behind the times”.

The Epistle to the 1594 edition of Giacomo Di Grassi’s, True Arte of Defense, remarked: “The Sworde and Buckler fight was long while allowed in England (and yet practise in all sortes of weapons is praisworthie,) but now being layd downe, the sworde but with Serving men is not much regarded, and the Rapier fight generally allowed, as a wepon because most perilous, therefore most feared, and thereupon private quarrels and common frayes soonest shunned.” The meaning of this passage is that, while traditional sword and buckler was still good for soldiers, the rapier was thought best for single encounters however was so dangerous in them that private fights and duels were more often being avoided. This corresponds to what we know of the rapier’s use by common English fighters in London as early as the 1560s –considerably before it was supposedly first brought to England.

In Henry Porter’s 1599 play, The Two Angry Women of Abingdon, we find the line: “Sword and buckler fight begins to grow out of use...this poking fight of rapier and dagger will come up, ...a good sword and buckler man will be spotted like a cat or a rabbit.” (Castle, p. 20). Writing of English swashbucklers before the advent of rapier fighting, John Stow in 1631 described how the popular manner of sword brawling was common until the uncertain and seemingly risky rapier and dagger came about. Stow described that the “blades” of London would gather in West Smith-field where they swashed and swinged their bucklers with much show of fury.[1] He tells us this areas “was for many years called ‘Ruffians Hall’, by reason that it was the usual place of frayes, and common fighting during the time that sword and bucklers were in use…This manner of Fight, was frequent with all men, untill the fight of Rapier and Dagger tooke place…But in the ensuing deadly fight of Rapier and Dagger suddenly suppressed the fighting with Sword and Buckler.”

In act II, scene iii, of Sir Thomas Middleton's play, The Phoenix (first printed in 1630 but written as early as 1603) in justice Tangle's legal metaphor laced duel with the lawyer, Falso, he included the following exchange:

Tangle: "Oh, that's out of use now! Sword and buckler was call'd a good conscience, but that weapon's left long ago; that was too manly a fight, too sound a weapon for these our days. 'Slid, we are scarce able to lift up a buckler now, our arms are so bound to the pox; one good bang upon a buckler would make most of our gentlemen fly i' pieces; 'tis not for these linty times. Our lawyers are good rapier and dagger men; they'll quickly dispatch your money."
Falso: "Indeed, since sword and buckler time, I have observ'd there has been nothing so much fighting; where be all our gallant swaggerers? There are no good frays o' late."
Tangle: "Oh, sir, the property's altered; you shall see less fighting every day than other, for every one gets him a mistress, and she gives him wounds enow; and, you know, the surgeons cannot be here and there, too: if there were red wounds too, what would become of the Rheinish wounds?"

According to Stow then, it was the common serving man who changed his street fighting habits as a result of the introduction of the rapier. Stow also stated “it was usuall to have Frayues, Fights, and Quarrells, upon the Sundayes and Hollidayes, sometimes twenty, thirty, and forty Swords and Bucklers, halfe against halfe, as well as quarells of appointment as by chance…” These sword and buckler brawls were frequently fought only to “dry blows” or hits with the flat of the blade drawing no blood. (Craig, p. 8). Stowe went on to reveal that “in the Winter season, all the high steetes, were much annoyed and troubled with hourely frayes, of sword and buckler men, who tooke pleasure in that bragging fight; and…they made great shew of much furie, and fought often.” (Stow, p. 1024).

More than 40 years before Stow wrote about the rapier supplanting the traditional English sword and buckler tradition, the traveler Fynes Moryson described it in his itinerary in the 1590s, writing that: "Of olde, when they were senced with Bucklers…nothing was more common with them then to fight about taking the right or left hand, or the wall, or upon any unpleasing countenance. Clashing of swords was then daily musike in every streete, and they did notionely fight combats (Moryson, p. 28).

William Kemp’s ballad of 1600, Nine Daies Wonder, also lamented the decline of sword and buckler fencing in the path of the new foining fence: “Yet all my Hoast remembers not. Ketsfield and Muselborough fray, Were batlles fought but yesterday. O’ twas a goodly matter then, To see your sword and buckler men; They would meete them every where: And now a man is but a pricke, A boy arm’d with a poating sticke, Will dare to challenge Cutting Dicke. O’ t’is a world the world to see, But twill not mend for thee nor mee.”[2] Alluding to the rise of rapier fencing in his 1620, Abortive of an Idle Houre, Thomas Wroth wrote of a time "When Sword and Buckler was in estimation…then a man might have some play; But since this noble fight grew out of fashion, A boy might kill a man in any fraye." (p. 39.)

Despite several statements to the contrary, the rapier was actually in use among common fencers in England as early as the 1560s. For example, in 1568 the London Company of Masters had already begun to include the rapier in their training and Prize contests. (Berry, p. 109 & 47). So, the transition from sword and buckler to rapier (at least in England) was hardly sudden. It appears more than a generation passed between its introduction in the 1560s to the nostalgic reflection of the 1590s.

Thomas Fuller in his 1662, The History of the Worthies of England (Everyman Edition) described “swashblucker” as coming from the action of “swashing and making a noise on the buckler.” Apparently they would strike on their own bucklers with their swords during fighting. Similarly, Baret’s Alvearie of 1573 mentioned “to swash or to make a noise with swordes against tergats” while Ben Johnson in his early 17th century play, Staple of News, included the line, “I do confess a swashing blow”. (Craig, p. 10). Shakespeare in Romeo and Juliet also has the Capulet serving man Gregory make his “swashing blow” (i.e., a wide cut). John Florio also mentions, “A bravo, a swashbuckler, one that for money and good cheere will follow any man to defend him; but if any danger come, he runs away the first, and leaves him in the lurch.” And yet, in 1602 William Bass wrote a religious study that metaphorically referred faith to the confidence found in the “Sword & Buckler” as “The Serving Man’s Defence.”

So while the sword and buckler was losing its value in the late 1500s, its legacy was still surviving with the use of rapier and buckler. Salvatore Fabris for example included material on rapier and buckler in his 1606 fencing text and even Camillo Pallavicini volume two of his 1673, Scherma Illustrata, was still including material on facing the rapier and buckler.

A Re-evaluation



Given the strong connections between Medieval and Renaissance fencing methods, there does not seem to have been much more that was added to the sword and buckler method during the 16th century. Eventually, the sword and buckler method, increasingly irrelevant in European warfare seeing more and more firearms, became less convenient for urban wear as well. The quick-thrusting farther-reaching rapiers could often outmaneuver them in single combat and duel. The result was that the sword and buckler survived past the 17th century only in the old English schools of defence and then among the early 18th century “gladiator” prize shows.

Yet, as the images here suggest, unquestionably this tradition was a deep part of Western fencing for centuries within a variety of conditions. In fact, given the range of evidence we have for the sword and buckler, in literature and art, as an established way of fighting in the Middle Ages, there is every reason to believe it was actually more common than was fighting with a sword and shield. The general historical impression is that variously shaped shields (i.e., defensive implements worn on the arm as opposed to carried in the hand) were by far more common among foot soldiers. While this may have been true before the 14th century, it appears not to be the case from after that period. The widespread use of the sword and buckler is evidence of its utility and effectiveness. With straight or curved blades such a system of fighting was popular around the world since ancient times and in some areas survived into the 20th century. Whether with a tapering cut-and-thrust blade or a wider cutting one, the sword and buckler represents an effective fighting method capable of dealing with larger shields or longer swords as well as staff weapons. With the current revival of study of Renaissance martial arts the versatile art of sword and buckler fencing is being appreciated once more.

The preceding material was excerpted a forthcoming book on Historical Fencing. © Copyright 2002 by John Clements.


Footnotes for Part 1

[1] The word is derived from the Old French bocle for the “buckle-like” boss or umbo on a shield. The term “boss” is from the 12th century French Boce, bocle, called bloca, in 12th-13th century Spain (Nicolle, Arms and Armor, p. 549).

[2] The 1611 edition of Florio’s Italian-English dictionary, gives Brocchiéro, Broccoliéro, as “a buckler, a target, a shield.” Although often described as near synonymous with the buckler, a targe (or targa and adarga) differed from a buckler in that it was a small wooden shield with a leather cover and leather or metal trim. Some were also covered with metal studs or spikes. Unlike bucklers, targes were worn on the arm like other types of shields. They were also usually flat rather than convex. Elizabethans referred to the practice of “Sworde and targat”. The word “targe” apparently comes from small “targets” placed on archery practice dummies. Some forms of medium sized steel shields from the Renaissance are often classed as targes or the Italian rondella . Though associated with the Scots, the “targe” was actually used throughout Europe. They were most popular in the early Renaissance and the Scots were merely the last to use them.

[3] Following Livy, T. Thomas’s 1587 Latin-English dictionary, Dictionarium Linguae Latinae et Anglicanae, defined umbo as “the bosse of a buckler or shield (London, R. Boyle). Thomas also listed Parmularius as “A buckler or target maker, or he that useth such a one” and the old Roman Pelta as “A target or buck*ler like a halfe moone: also a square buckler or targen.”

[4] It has also been speculated that an advantage of the buckler in the crush of Medieval combat lay in its adaptability. Whereas a larger shield worn on the arm could be hooked or pulled by various types of polearms and axes, thereby vulnerably encumbering the fighter, a smaller more nimble hand-held buckler could easily dislodge itself from such attempts or suddenly be discarded by a fighter.

[5] http://albionacademyofarmes.org/essay1.htm

[6] A Government Besieged by Conflict. Paper delivered by Donald Kagay at the 13th Annual Medieval and Renaissance Studies Conference at the New College of South Florida, March 16th, 2002. Pp. 34-35.

[7] Michael Mallet. Mercenaries and Their Masters – Warfare in Renaissance Italy. Rowman and Littlefield, Totowa, NJ, 1974, p. 155.

[8] Interestingly, the cloak is interestingly wrapped around the left arm identical to the manner that was to become the custom in the 16th century.

[9] De Wapen-handelinge van schilt, spies, rapiers, en targis. Nae de nieuwe ordere, vanden...prince van Oraignien, Mauritius van Nassauw ... Door Adam van Breen in figuren ... The Hague, Ghedruckt ...door H. Hondius, 1640.

Footnotes for Part 2

[1] Hewitt, p. 317 as citing Roy. MSS. 14, E. iii. And 20, D. vi, as well as Hefner, Pt. Ii. Plate vii.

[2] Lyf of the noble and Crysten prynce, Charles the Grete translated from the French by William Caxton and printed by him 1485. Edt. Sidney J. H. Herrtage. Early English Text Society. Oxford University Press. London, New York, Toronto. 1880-1881. Derived from British Museum, press mark c. 10, b. 9. Reprinted (as one volume) 1967.

[3] Paston Letters and Papers of the Fifteenth Century,Paston family v. : facsims., map ; 24 cm. : Clarendon PressOxford 1971, p. 59.

[4] “Whereas it is customary for profligates to learn the art of fencing, who are thereby emboldened to commit the most unheard-of villainies, no such school shall be kept in the city for the future”. (Castle, p. 16-17).Interestingly, the edict notes that “most of the aforesaid villainies are committed by foreigners”.

[5] There has been some question as to the manner of wearing the buckler. Medieval illustrations show small bucklers worn face outward on the belt and over the hilt of the sword. No illustrations of outward facing bucklers being worn are known. The famous Wallace Collection in London has several bucklers of various sizes in its armory. Some of these have hooks on their center umbo and others have hooks on their rims. Some of the hooks face upward while others face down. Some of the hooks are very tight while others are much wider. If such hooks were commonly used to hang bucklers on the belt as has been suggested, then this could not possibly work either for those hooks facing upward or for the large wide hooks. Nor would it make sense for those hooks on the rims of the large bucklers for these small shields would be an encumbrance carried that way. Only small bucklers with medium sized hooks would permit them to be slung on the belt or even on the counter-bars of a close-hilt sword. Bucklers with both rim hooks and center spikes certainly could not be carried on the belt. However, on some bucklers these smaller hooks actually sit recessed in the center below the raised bars welded to the buckler’s face. These raised bars were specifically designed to help catch or trap the fine points of rapiers and hooks in this position must have served a similar purpose. Larger hooks and those facing upward on the rim would hardly be useful for this but might be useful for hanging lanterns at night.

[6] Gerat Berry. A Discourse of military discipline, devided into three boockes, declaringe the partes and sufficiencie ordained in a private souldier, and in each officer; servinge in the infantery, till the election and office of the captaine generall; and the last booke treatinge of fire-wourkes of rare executions by sea and lande, as alsoe of firtifications. Composed by captaine Gerat Barry, Irish at Bruxells, by the widowe of John Mommart, 1634, p. 9.


Footnotes for Part 4

[1] Shakespeare in his Henry IV, refers to these “swinge-bucklers” –meaning a “roisterer’ or “rake”.

[2] William Kemp. Kemp’s Nine Daies Wonder, Printed by E.A. for Nicholas Ling, London, 1600.



Source: http://www.thearma.org/essays/SwordandBuckler.htm