The classic
image of the kite shield is seen in the Norman cavalryman as depicted on the
Bayeux Tapestry, as depicted above. He is noted for his conical helmet with
simple nose-guard protection for the face. His neck to knee chain hauberk with
padded gambeson underneath, his long cruciform sword, and his kite shield.
These are the essential elements. What is most interesting is that this format
was the standard for many Western European military forces in the period and
for quite a while afterward as well.
Thanks to
manuscripts, documents and the few extant examples of kite shields left behind,
it is possible to trace the rise of the kite shield, and also the process of
its decline. The beginnings of the kite shield, and its documentation are found
in the eleventh century, by this time the kite shield was established.
The “heater”
shield is the one which is most likened and related to medieval history. It is
related to heraldry and it is related to the medieval knight. As soon as
someone says the word “shield”, or at least “medieval shield”, it is usually
this shield which comes to mind. How did it get its name? Quite by convenience
of its shape, “the so-called "heater" shield, due to its resemblance
to the bottom of a heating iron.” (Kelly, 2017). A fine example of a heater
shield is depicted in Figure 1.
Beginning
To find the beginnings of the
heater is to examine the kite shield which came before it, and was also a
contemporary of it. The heater was a modification of the kite shield, rather
than the rounded top edge, it was changed to a flat top edge, so it was easier
to see over.
“the evidence of innumerable documents shows that after 1150 a type
of large triangular shield with a straight upper edge predominated. Some still
had central bosses, some did not. This feature is occasionally seen as late as
the mid-thirteenth century,” (Oakeshott, 1996:274)
This was the
beginning of the change from the kite to the heater shield. Further development
took place for the shield to change to its classic shape. One of the first
things that happened was that it became more triangular, thus shorter in
length. This improved its utility off the horse, and also lightened the shield,
and the central boss began disappearing.
"With the flattening of the top, the shield of the 13th century
acquired a more triangular form (see the effigy of William Longespée, 1240). It
was still convex but became even smaller in length. The majority of depicted
shields do not have central bosses, although some did (Relief from Church of
St. Justina, Padua, 1210).” (Kelly, 2017)
Kite Not Gone
"Until the middle of the century
[13th] the large kite-shaped shield remained in vogue, but already a
smaller form, shaped like the base of a flat-iron, was becoming fashionable.
Both types were usually slightly curved to the body. In Italy the kite-shaped
shield remained in use by the infantry until the fifteenth century.” (Norman,
1970:14)
What needs to
be noted is that the kite shield did not vanish suddenly, or even quickly. This
style of shield was to remain in use with some popularity with some troops for
an extended period of time. Often it’s assumed that when one type of weapon or
armour or shield comes in another simply vanishes, this is not actually the
case, most often the former one lingers and sometimes remains, if in a lesser
amount.
"Classic" Heater
“By about 1250, somewhat shorter
shields of a more triangular shape with flatter tops emerged from the larger
kite styles. The heater ... is the
shield so classically associated with the Medieval knight and heraldry.”
(Clements, 1998:102)
The kite shield
eventually changed shape into the classic style of the heater which is so
well-known and so associated with knights and heraldry, but the shield itself
cannot be just taken as being simple. There are varying complexities that need
to be taken into account. “At first, they too were flat, but after 1300 or so
heater shields commonly were convex.” (Clements, 1998:102). The heater also
changed shape, if only on one plane and there were also larger ones and smaller
ones present, though it was the smaller variety which were to last longer in
the service of the armoured warriors.
Smaller and Gone?
A trend can
be noted in the change in shape of the shield. In the 13th century
“the shield began to evolve into a shorter and wider triangular shape.”
(Bouchard, 2009:86). This is where the change went from the kite shield to the
heater shield, and this is discussing in very general terms. The 14th
century knight’s equipment included both, a shield and a sword (Grant,
2009:67), the shield being in the classic smaller heater form. Of course at
this stage armour was improving for foot combatants. This in the 1300s and
1400s, foot combat became more common, due to better armour, the heater became
smaller and smaller, and eventually abandoned due to need for both hands on
weapon, because of the better armour there was no need for the shield
(Clements, 1998:104). It would seem that the shield, according to Clements
(1998) disappears almost completely, but this is not exactly true. Kelly (2017)
gives a good review of the heater from its beginning through its use to its
later prime use in tournament jousting, thus it is noted that the shield does
not quite disappear, especially as it reappears in the forms of the Renaissance
rotella and targe.
“Towards
the end of the 13th century the shield became even smaller and the
shape changed to [heater] ... This is the shape that predominated until the
early 15th century. This is, of course, an oversimplification, since in Italy
the kite-shaped shield seems to have been as popular as the heater-shield. The
heater shield was much flatter than its predecessors and did not feature the
same convex shape. Towards the end of 14th century the top-right
corner of the heater shield was notched. This allowed the shield to be used to
guide the lance during mounted charge, likely during tournament jousting, but
perhaps also on the battlefield.” (Kelly, 2017)
Construction
“Several surviving shields from
the 12th to 14th century give us much detail about how the shields were
constructed. One in the Landesmuseum, Zurich, dating from circa 1180, was made
of lime wood covered inside and out with leather. Another shield from the late
13th century in the Armeria Real de Madrid is made from cedar-like wood with
parchment covering on both sides, the parchment being thicker on the front.
Both faces of this shield were painted black. Another late 13th century
triangular shield bearing the arms of Von Nordech from Rabenau in the
Nationalmuseum, Munich was made from three planks of wood, covered with leather
and gesso (gypsum) and then painted. One of the most well-known examples of a
surviving 14th century shield is the purported shield of Edward the Black
Prince in the Canterbury Cathedral. This shield is thought to have been made
especially for Edward's funeral achievements as it lacks any of the attachment
straps that are required for military use. The shield measures 28 3/4 inches in
height and 23 1/4 inches in width. It is made of joined poplar wood planks. The
wood is covered with canvas and gesso, which are overlain by parchment and
finally, leather. The front is painted and the Plantagenet coat of arms, made
from molded leather, is glued on top. The three vertical metal bars on the
shield represent Edward's rank in the family as first-born son. The back of the
shield was painted green.” (Kelly, 2017)
Kelly (2017)
gives some excellent sources and examples of the construction of heaters from
various museums. This provides a great over view of how they were constructed,
and also supplies some specifics also. This form of information is most useful
especially should a person want to reconstruct a shield from this period
because it can be compared against historical examples. On the other hand, for
a more general approach, it can be said that heaters and later shields were ½
to ¾ inch thick, they were covered front and back with linen, parchment or
rawhide, which was glued or tacked on (Clements, 1998:92). In both cases it can
be seen that these shields were made to last and were not the flimsy items that
some movies would like us to believe that they were.
Dimensions
What will be
noted of the heater is the size, which is smaller as compared to the kite
shield as a result the weight is also smaller. This is especially the case with
regard to the smaller variants with a weight of 3 to 6lb, 20 x 30 inches for
the larger and 14 x 18 inches for the smaller (Clements, 1998:102). This is a
reduction in size, but an increase in mobility. This change in size is also
noted as significant by Oakeshott (1996).
“From the early years of the
thirteenth century the shield was a good deal shorter – about 30 in. from base
to apex – and considerably wider, often strongly curved to enclose the body in
the manner of old Roman shields. Towards the century’s end a type of very
small, flat shield seems to have been popular as an alternative to the big one.
We find them on many English brasses and monuments dating between 1280 and
1325. They appear to be rather similar in purpose to the little flat
fist-bucklers which were often used for fighting on foot, but they were of the
flat-iron shape” (Oakeshott, 1996:274)
The
comparison is made between the heater and the kite shield. This smaller shield
was more mobile, thus able to complete quicker movements from one position to
another. The smaller shield was also in response to an increase in the
protection provided by armour. What was most interesting is that these shields
were actually thicker than the previous ones in some instances.
“Shields were also made thicker.
The smallest, lightest heaters allowed the warrior to release the second hand
for use on a weapon. These smaller buckler-sized heaters were in use as early
as 1280. Some Italian cavalry of 1300s also used a small shield called an ecu.” (Clements, 1998:102)
Strapping
Like the kite shield, the heater could
be mounted in various ways. Some of the same techniques were used, and some
were not. The single central handle with a boss was left behind in favour of
the enarmes, or arm straps. More
specific examples can be found by examining extant examples, and iconography.
“The
way the shields were carried is most easily understood by studying the effigy
of Sir Robert de Shurland (1330) and a surviving shield from the first half of
the 14th century, currently in the Tyroler Landesmuseum, Innsbruck, which
retains all its original straps. Both shields have two sets of straps. The
first set consists of two buckled, adjustable straps forming a single loop
called a guige, which is used to carry
the shield over the shoulder. The second set of straps consists of three loops
called enarmes, through which the left
arm of the user goes. The left-most strap is near the elbow, the middle one is
near the wrist, and the right-most strap could be grasped within the hand of
the user if his hands were not used to hold the horse's reigns. The distancing
and location of the three enarmes appears to have varied according to personal
taste.” (Kelly, 2017)
Kelly (2017) gives two examples of
shields which retain all of their original strapping. What will be noticed is
that in both cases enarmes and a guige are both used. These were both
common on the kite shield, and no doubt were retained on the larger of the
heater shields. Kelly notes that the arrangement of the straps varied according
to personal taste and this is clearly noted by the different methods of
locating straps on different shields noted in various iconography, and also
extant examples. Time is still being spent to see how these shields were used
correctly so that these straps could be properly utilised.
Oakeshott (1996) notes that on
the effigy of Sir Robert Shurland c.1330, previously noted by Kelly (2017)
multiple straps were used: guige,
long strap fixed by rivet to top right-hand side, shorter with buckle on top
left; enarmes, loops through which
arm is passed, three straps - one at elbow, one at wrist, one held; held strap
could be discarded to hold reins, or other, if required (Oakeshott, 1996:274).
This description gives us some idea how some of these straps may have been
utilised and some of the reasons why a strap may or may not have been added to
a shield.
Target and Rotella
The two classic Renaissance shields
are the target or targe and the rotella. Often they are considered to be the same type of shield
simply just in a different format. What is important is that there are some
differences between the two and even period sources note these differences.
Cesare d’Evoli (1583) Delle ordinanze et
battaglie which is an obscure resource in comparison to most, makes note of
the difference between the targe and the rotella, especially in their utility.
“although d’Evoli believes that
the small round shield known as the rotella
is a useful defence for infantry against pike, he is unimpressed by the
cavalry’s targa or wooden shield. The
latter has to be secured to the man using it with a leather strap and buckles
so entangling him that he is no longer free to move about quickly. Moreover,
because the targa is made of wood,
the metal tip of a lance strikes it full on rather than slipping off safely to
one side or another. Worse still, it defends only one side of the body, leaving
the rest unprotected,” (Anglo, 2000:220)
In general,
it could be said that d’Evoli is not particularly in favour of the use of the
shield at all, but he has a preference for the rotella over the target due to
construction and utility. Both of these shields come to prominence during the
Renaissance period, primarily as infantry shields, but also in some instances
as cavalry shields as indicated above. With the simple difference, the target
being made of wood and the rotella being made of metal, it is possible to
investigate both of these shields further.
Target
“Other foot soldiers used the targe, or target, a fairly large, concave shield that came in a variety of
shapes, although it was often round. It was equipped with enarmes, or leather straps, which allowed it to be attached to the
left forearm and gripped with the left hand.” (Bouchard, 2009:87)
The target
was most commonly round but was also found in square and other shapes. It had
enarmes (arm straps) with which to hold it. Thus it was held on the forearm.
This shield could be seen as a cross between the old round shield and also that
of the heater in some ways, though it was often smaller than the heater. The
target is most often related as a later development of the shield.
“Another type of small Medieval shield was the targe, or targatt,
associated most commonly with Scots. Unlike bucklers, targes were worn on the
arm, as were typical shields, and ranged in size from 20 to 23 inches.”
(Clements, 1998:105)
Rotella
Kelly (2017), once again, gives some
very in-depth detail about the rotella. In the beginning of the statement about
it there is a reference about how it is often referred to as a target and it
often is, as far as the English are concerned, in the period. This blending
between the rotella and target should be noted, and while the target may be
either steel or wooden, the rotella was only steel; this is the real defining
characteristic between the two types of shield. This is the same sort of blurry
line that exists between the classifications of swords.
“Variants of the round shield existed and were known by names such as
the Italian rotella, the Spanish rodela and the English target. In the late
17th century many European armies had units of targeteers, soldiers armed with
sword and target whose job was to storm breeches in walls during sieges. Even
though the shield no longer enjoyed as large a role as it had in the Middle
Ages some armies still favored it. An account by Beranl Diaz, a soldier in
Herman Cortez's 1519 expedition to Mexico, records that the vast majority of
Cortez's troops during his campaigns in the New World were rodeleros, or shield
bearers, and outnumbered arquebusiers and crossbowmen. This was atypical, as
other armies in Europe relied far less on the shield, and may have more to do
with other factors of the New World, such as climate or availability of gun
powder.” (Kelly, 2017)
What will be noted is that these metal
rotella and target only appear in the Renaissance period, usually in response
to pike formations. Rather than having the opponent’s point stick to the
shield, it is designed to slip off the shield, “Only in the later Renaissance
did some large metal shields find limited use against pike formations.”
(Clements, 1998:92). This meant that men armed with sword and shield could move
between the pikes to attack the formations, within the pikes. The shield was
losing its place on the battlefield as firearms were becoming more effective,
however it became more popular as a civilian defence.
“While the shield may have become less popular on the battlefield, it
became more popular as a civilian form of defense. An interesting point to note
is that, with the exception of specialized shields and bucklers, there is no
surviving manuscript detailing the use of the shield prior to the Renaissance,
when shields were more common. Yet in the Renaissance, when the personal duel
became more common, there are several fencing manuals explaining the usage of
the round shield. While other weapon combinations seem more common in these
manuscripts, it would make sense that some combatants would prefer the
defensive qualities of a shield since gentlemen usually were unarmoured in the duel.”
(Kelly, 2017).
Scottish Targe
“The targe (targaid)
is the Scottish version of a small wooden shield worn on the arm. According to
Dr. Stephen Bull (curator of the Lancashire County and Regimental Museum), the
targe was in use in Scotland from the 12th century until late in the 18th (long
after shields had disappeared from military service elsewhere) but most of the
surviving examples date to the 16th century or later. The Glasgow workshops
appear to have made the majority of mass-produced targes. The overall shape and
face embellishments on the targe make it one of the easiest shield types to
spot and distinguish. This type of shield is almost invariably circular with
diameter of about 20 inches. The face of the shield is usually covered with
leather, often heavily ornamented by tooling elaborate patterns onto the
leather and/or by developing complicated designs with metal tacks. Stewart
Maxwell recently developed a typology of the Scottish targe based on these
decorative elements. The targe often featured a central boss sometimes fitted
with a metal spike projecting forward. Such spikes were removable and could be
stored in scabbards in the back of the targe. Carrying straps appear to have
been uncommon.” (Kelly, 2017)
The Scottish targe is a classic
accompaniment to the Scottish broadsword especially in the 18th-century.
Images of this can be found in literature and discussed in manuals into the 18th-century,
but as has been noted the targe has a much longer history. This is the shield
that most people think of when the word “targe” is mentioned. Their
construction was much the same as other shields of similar periods.
“According to Collin Rolland, most surviving targes appear to have
been made from oak or pine. The oak examples appear to be a bit thinner, as oak
is heavier. On average targes were about half an inch thick. Damage or X-ray
inspection of surviving examples reveals that all targes were of two-ply
construction. Each ply consisted of irregular number of boards simply butted
together. The boards were of different width, and were laid cross-wise to the
other ply. The plies were held together by concentric rows of wooden pegs.”
(Kelly, 2017)
The two-ply
construction is similar to that found on early round shields along with the
thickness of the wood used in the construction. The major difference is that
while the round shield was glued in place or held by the outside covering,
wooden pegs held the Scottish targe together resulting in a much more solid
construction. The covering of the shield was in much the same fashion as the
round shield, using leather to cover the front and back.
“The backing of the targe varied
from simple leather and calf or cow skin, to dear skin, seal or mountain goat
skin. Often the skin used for the backing of the targe retained some of the
animal hair. It typically also was stuffed with hair, straw, animal skin, etc.
under the portion of the backing contacting the user's arm. The stuffing was
held in place by a pair of parallel leather bands about 7 inches apart.”
(Kelly, 2017)
The strapping
for the targe works by the use of enarmes
as can be expected, with a handle for the hand. These were placed for the
greatest utility of both the shield and the arm so that even with the shield on
the arm, the hand could still be used. This concept is also seen on previous
shield types.
“The targe is usually depicted as
worn on the left arm to protect the upper body from cuts and thrusts. It was
secured to the user's arm by a wide leather band (or two narrow, closely spaced
bands) at the forearm (arm-loop) and by a leather or metal handle held in the
palm (hand-grip). The forearm loop was secured to the targe by means of a metal
staple or nails and so were the hand-grips when made of leather. These leather
hand-grips had the thickness of a sword grip (by virtue of the wooden or rope
core of the grip). The metal grips (the less common of the two types) were
attached to the targe by means of two split pins and usually were inwardly
concave to allow the user to pass his arm through the handgrip” (Kelly, 2017)
Other Shapes
There have
been three different shapes of shield and essentially four different types of
shield which have been investigated in this discussion. This would almost give
the impression that they were the only kinds which were used. In actual fact,
this is far from the truth, “Like the Medieval sword, the Medieval shield
existed in great variety over many centuries.” (Clements, 1998:89). There were
many different shapes of shield which were used throughout the medieval and
Renaissance periods.
The featured
shields which form the previous investigations only form a very small portion
of the shields which were used during the period. This is an important note
that needs to be made to ensure that it is understood that while there were
some dominant forms of shield there were others also which were used. The
particular shield that was used at the time could entirely depend on what was
required in that particular circumstance.
“Often in the Middle Ages the
most effective defensive armament was the shield. It was produced in a number
of different shapes, sizes, and materials, depending upon what it was likely to
be defending against.” (Bouchard, 2009:86)
A smaller
shield may be more suitable for the close-in situation of the melee, whereas a
larger shield may be preferable for better protection during a siege. There was
also the consideration of whether the individual was mounted or not. A longer
shield may impede his movement while mounted, yet a shorter one would not give
as much protection while being on foot. While it is likely that each individual
had their preference for armament and shield, it is also likely that this would
have changed depending on the particular scenario that they faced. Of course it
should be noted that each shield had its own characteristics.
“Although they were all used in a
general way, each type of shield that developed did so for a particular manner
of combat. There are trade-offs with any size and shape of shield and those
factors had to be weighed in relation to the user’s personal preference.”
(Clements, 1998:90)
The
particular manner in which a shield was used along with its particular
characteristics would be a reason to choose a particular shield, or even change
to a different type of shield for a particular encounter. There is no doubt, as
stated each combatant would have had their preference, but this preference
would have also taken into account different situations which they would have
faced. Thus changing shield to suit a particular scenario is not that unlikely.
Most importantly it should be noted that there were a wide variety of shields
which were used, and that they were not as restricted as some would like us to
believe.
Conclusion
The shield is
one of the most under-rated and under-researched objects known extensively to
historians and western martial artists. More than just a companion to another
weapon it was a weapon of its own with its own development and changes over
time. While often accompanied by another weapon, it could be used to defend and
could also be used to offend the opponent. Some shields were even designed to
be used alone with not accompaniment for offence and defence. These were a
specialised kind of shield which were not mentioned in this study.
There were
four main types of shield which were investigated in this discussion of the
shield, as the final part of the discussion makes known, it should not be
assumed that these were the only shapes of shield which were made or used.
There were many other different types of shield which were made and used. The
only reason that these four types of shield were used and discussed is because
they were the most populace of the types of shield available. They also provide
the greatest amount of data about them, which can be used to infer about other
shield types.
The use of a
shield was specific to its shape. A large shield gave better coverage but was
heavier and thus moved slower. A small shield had less coverage but was lighter
and thus moved quicker. These characteristics of the shield makes it important
that while some general ideas can be made about shields, it is important to be
more specific when discussing them as their use changes with their shape.
The shield is
known as a defensive device. It was primarily designed to protect the wielder
from incoming attacks from an opponent or opponents. What needs to be noted is
that this most often was not a passive defence and it also does not take into
account the offensive capabilities of the shield. The shield can be used to
strike out at an incoming blow in defence, but it can also be used to strike
out at an opponent as well. This capability of the shield should not be
underestimated.
Shields were
not as weak as Hollywood would have us believe. In movies we see shields being
shattered and broken. This is simply not the case for real shields, they were
designed to last. They had reinforced edges and faces, the destruction of a
shield would take a great amount of time and effort. Opponents did not try to
go through shields, they went around them.
The round
shield was the most common shield, especially in the early periods. What will
be noted is that the same shape appears again in later periods as well. The rotella for example is a round shield
and appears in the Renaissance. These shields were used by the Anglo-Saxons and
the Vikings, at least these are where we have the best examples of round
shields from the earliest medieval periods. These shields were solidly build,
glued together, often multi-layered, edged with leather or metal. Obviously
they were designed to last. Strapping was in the form of a solid handle behind
a boss or two leather straps, some had both. There was also a shoulder strap
which could be added.
Next is the
kite shield which held popularity for an extended period of time, evidence for
this type of shield can be even found in the fifteenth-century. The prime users
of this shield were the Normans. The prime place where they are often seen is
on the Bayeux Tapestry. Again, this was a solidly build shield following a
similar pattern of construction to the round shield. Multi-layered, edged and
then covered with linen or leather. Strapping was with a handle or straps with
a supporting shoulder strap where required. Later kite shields had flat tops so
that they could be more easily seen over. Eventually, these lost ground in the
main to the heater, a smaller shield, which was based on the kite.
The heater
started out as a shortened but broadened kite shield. This was the change from
one to the other. The flattening of the top of the kite shield was the start of
the process. The use of the shield in foot combat meant that the shield was
more convenient shorter, thus the kite lost its tail and the heater came about.
The heater is the greatest expression of the medieval shield. It is what people
think of when the term “medieval shield” comes up. It is also heavily related
to heraldry. The same construction process that was established previously
follows through with the heater shield. For strapping, the heater, except in
the larger examples mostly dispensed with the shoulder strap and primarily used
the straps for holding it. They were in many different configurations. For the
most part the organisation of these straps would depend on personal preference.
So the rotella and target are not medieval per
se, but they form the end of a selection of shields which were used in a
particular fashion and present the end of the shield on the battlefield. The rotella is really the only metal shield
to see full-scale use. These were primarily effective against pikes where they
could be used to deflect the pikes and thus move in and strike against the
pikemen. The target in its “classic” form saw use in the Scottish rebellions
and other places; it is really the last western wooden shield. Both of these
had straps on the back.
The shield
moves through the medieval and Renaissance periods changing as it goes. Some
designs continue, others disappear, and others get left behind. What is known
is that the shield was an item which was not a single-use and throw away item.
It was used often repeatedly by the same user and a lot of work went into its
construction to make it so. The shield should not be underestimated as a
legitimate item of research or collection, learning how to use the sword in
sword and shield is only half of the study, the shield also needs to be learnt.
Effective use of the shield is essential and appreciation of the ability and
the history of the shield is also essential for understanding.
Bibliography
Anglo, S. (2000) The
Martial Arts of Renaissance Europe, Yale University Press, New Haven
Bouchard, C. (2009) Knights
in History and Legend, Global Book Publishing Ltd, Lane Cove
Clements, J. (1998) Medieval
Swordsmanship: Illustrated Methods and Techniques, Paladin Press, Boulder,
Colorado
Cummins, J. (2008) The
War Chronicles: From Chariots to Flintlocks: New Perspectives on the Two
Thousand Years of Bloodshed that Shaped the Modern World, Allen &
Unwin, Crows Nest
Grant, R. (2009) Warrior:
A Visual History of the Fighting Man, Dorling Kindersley Limited, New York
Holmes, R. (ed) (2010) Weapon:
A Visual History of Arms and Armour, Dorling Kindersley Limited, London
Norman, V. (1970) Arms
and Armour, Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London
Oakeshott, E. (1996) The
Archaeology of Weapons: Arms and Armour from Prehistory to the Age of Chivalry,
Dover Publications Inc., Mineola
