Talk:Polearm

Linstock

While the linstock could be used as a weapon, it's primarily a long-match holder for cannons. Thus, I'm cutting the following: Linstock A Linstock is a polearm similar to both a Halberd and a Pike (or Spear.) The primary difference is that a Linstock lacks the blade that a halberd has, and has replaced the blade with a (usually ornamental) cats holder for slow matches. The spear point would be used to defend artillery, and the slow-match would be used to fire the cannon.

"Evolved from"

Please stop using this phrase. Nevermind that it's mis-using a precise technical term from biology to mean 'change over time', but any 'evolutionary' linkages between weapons is a supposition at best, especially when the period of 'evolution' jumps centuries and cultures without the presence of intermediary forms. I strongly suggest using 'similar to' as an alternate phrasing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theblindsage (talk • contribs) 02:00, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Pole Weapon List

1. Trident - Three pronged spear.
2. Military Fork - Military version of a pitch fork. Two tines, straightened.
3. Fauchard/War-Scythe: Scythe blade on a pole, perpendicular to the pole. Inner edge for slashing.
4. Glaive: 18" blade on 6-7 pole. (AKA Naginata) Used for slashing.
5. Guisarme: Pruning hook on a pole. Useful for dismounting horsemen.
6. Voulge: Meat cleaver on a pole. Used for chopping. Later developing a stabbing point.
7. Bardiche: Axe-like voulge. Shorter, with blade extending beyond 2' haft.
8. Lochaber Axe: Midway between Voulge and Bardiche, included a hook on far side for scaling walls.
9. Ranseur - Spear head with protrusions for blocking/trapping. Also used for dismounting.
10. Ox-Tounge - Wide and heavy spear head for slashing with.
11. Spetum - Spear head with forward slanted 'leaves' on the side for slashing.
12. Partisan - Ceremonial. Spetum + Ranseur.

Theblindsage 01:37, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

We appear to have forgotten that old English favourite the bill ... unless we're considering it a kind of guisarme, which would be rather backwards. 62.196.17.197 (talk) 14:28, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

missing weapon

There is a weapon similar to the Naginata but with blades on both ends, curved in opposite directions. anyone nkow what it is called?

I formatted the above edit better..

Pole Arm Links

As I'm researching this, thought it might be polite to include some sources. http://www.retromud.org/weapons/polearms.html (Frighteningly complete) http://www.shoshone.k12.id.us/medieval/handweap.htm http://www.salvatorfabris.com/SectionPolearms.shtml http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~fine/Fun/polearms.html http://www.knives.com/polearm.html http://www.retromud.org/weapons/ http://therionarms.com/armor/polearm10.jpg http://therionarms.com/old_armor_page.shtml http://www.myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=1403&start=20 http://www.preferredarms.com/Pole%20Arms.htm http://www.aurorahistoryboutique.com/ahb_poleArms.htm

Perhaps this article ought be organized into "European Pole-arms" and "Asian Pole-Arms". Traditional kung fu has a baffling variety of its own. http://www.wahlum.com/weapons.htm Japan has not only the naginata, but also the so-called 'monks's spade', and doubtless other undiscovered varieties.

Theblindsage (talk) 09:31, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

More pole arm links.

Japanese pole-arms appear limited to the spear (Yari), and the Naginata. China seems to have a much richer tradition. Aside from the excessive variety of kung-fu weapons, the main pole-arm seems to be the pu-dao, or horsecutter, and closely resembles a falcion blade mounted on a pole about the same length of that of the poll-ax.

---

Rather too many types of pole-arms. http://medieval.ucdavis.edu/20C/Weapons.html

---

Structure and Content

We are in danger here of suffering from the curse of bad articles - lack of clear purpose and direction, which leads to lack of clarity of content. I think we would all agree that this entry is likely to be thrown up by general searches e.g. by internet users not sure what they are looking for. How does this affect content and structure? At present, the weapons lists seem quite random. It mixes weapons from west and east and includes weapons from ancient times, the middle ages and later. It also does not contain anything on important weapons such as the poleaxe or bill.

Rather launch into a major edit, I want to float this first. I suggest we attack this from several directions.

• A clear format, divided either chronologically or (simplest) dividing Western and Oriental as has already been suggested.
• Attempt to agree key weapons and add a short entry on each, with links section expanded to cover a wider range of less significant types
• Improve the referencing - there are a load of fantasy weapon lists out there, this one should be factually & historically basedMonstrelet (talk) 13:52, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

OK, in the absence of cries of "Don't do it" I've restructured the page. I intend to come back with a para on the bill and one on the poleaxe. I don't have the specialist interest in the Ancient and Oriental sections, but there is more could be done there (Chinese polearms anyone?). We might need a Rest of the World category (e.g. polynesian warclubs) but we can cross that bridge when we come to it.Monstrelet (talk) 11:23, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Wonder if we might not be better off just organizing this as a list, with links to the resultant articles? I might leave an image for easy and rapid comparison. Theblindsage (talk) 20:46, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Pole-arm<>Spear

Just to cut the article size down, I'm eliminating spears as pole-weapons. A pole-arm is different than a [spear] in that the 'edge' is perpendicular to the pole, rather than parallel. Some pole-arms include a spear. Also cutting mauls and mallets. While they are 'haft' weapons, they aren't really 'staff' weapons. To make an (arbitrary) distinction, I'll say something needs to be longer than 5' to count as a pole-arm. (So the Dane-Axe can stay.) Theblindsage (talk) 02:26, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

While the removal of spears/pikes may be a good idea (leaving you with some issues about spear derivatives but not insurmountable) where does the idea come from that a pole-arm is defined as something with an edge perpendicular to the pole come from? Also that there is a differential between edged and percussive polearms? If your concern is that the article is too long, I would suggest the answer is probably to split European from Oriental weapons. If you take spears out, there is little in the Ancient category worth keeping, so that could trim down too. Monstrelet (talk) 09:05, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

The list of pole-arms in the article seemed like such a mixed bag, some of which have very little similarity in form or function (Maul, Sarissa, etc). In general, I was bothered by the confusion of two-handed hafted weapons with pole-arms. Was trying to find some sort of categorical similarity--thus the 'parallel' as a working categorization. There are some medieval pole-arms (Godendag, staff flail from peasant rebellions, but most of the proliferation of pole-arms come out of the Renaissance, within a relatively short period of time. Most are anti-cavalry weapons for dismounting riders, (thus the hook/beak), with armor penetration attachments (hammer/spike). There are also many designed for the 'push of pike' (as depicted in the Hans Holbein 'bad war' image--to catch, tangle, and lift other pikes, and maybe cause some damage. Are spears pole-arms? I would so no. Spears/pikes/lances are primarily thrusting weapons. The more weight you add to the head of a thrusting weapon, the more difficult it is to handle. Barring lugs/wings/tsuba, I'm unaware of any that violate this. Theblindsage (talk) 08:28, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Timing--Almost all of it post 1500. Wait--greater inspection of the fechtbooks shows some 1400 stuff. Fiore dei Liberi includes pole-axe techniques, as does Le jeu de la hache ("play of the axe"). Nürnberger Handschrift GNM 3227a (1389) doesn't mention it. Fiore dei Liberi is supposed to have some 'Exotic poleaxes (f 35r)' in its The Pisani-Dossi MS (Flos Duellatorum) variant, but I can't find any images from it beyond this one: http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Flos_Pisani_36A_detail.jpg http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bundesschwur_Zuerich.jpg shows some, but is probably from the late 1400s. As far as I can tell, the only 'pole arm' in Europe prior to 1400: A 'pole axe' with either axe head or hammer head. Of course, the Dane axe has to have existed--think either the Saga's or the Anglo-Saxon chronicle attests to that.Theblindsage (talk) 08:28, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean asking about the difference between edged and percussion weapons. The 'melange' nature of many of the pole-arm heads makes that seem like a strange method of distinction. My edits contain only two reference to edges... The ancient category could almost certainly go. A falx is hardly a pole-arm, and the Trajan's column pic of the Rhompeia shows something more like a Nagimaki. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:AdamclisiMetope14.jpg. Kontos is a lance/pike. Theblindsage (talk) 08:28, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

While I'm still not sure I agree with defining polearms as edged weapons, I've tidied up a bit to ensure that we weren't losing any unique content. The maul subsection had already been copied across to Warhammer, winged spears have coverage under spear. You didn't explain why you'd deleted scottish polearms - most fit your blade definition - I've shifted that content to a separate page Scottish polearms. Monstrelet (talk) 18:09, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

In terms of timing, IIRC the English were using the bill/longbow combination during the hundred years war ... whether from the beginning or not I have no idea. If so, that would place it before 1400, if not, still before 1500. 62.196.17.197 (talk) 14:34, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Handy guide to knowing your pole-arm!

REALLY need a public domain version of this: http://surbrook.devermore.net/herosource/fantasy_hero/armor/polearms2.jpg Theblindsage (talk) 09:08, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Pole-arms is a kind of a difficult category, because many pole-arms are just 'long' versions of regular weapons.

Pike

A pike is a pole weapon, a very long thrusting spear formerly used extensively by infantry.

Currently, this is the opening sentence of the Wikipedia article for the pike. So, follow the internal hyperlink to pole weapon and what does the reader discover? That the pike appears nowhere in the article.

This happens too often in Wikipedia. Editors have to try somehow to ensure at least the semblance of consistency between information provided in articles. This is of course a major problem for Wikipedia that is highlighted by this example. No editor-in-chief to ensure that contradictions between articles are removed, or resolved, or at least explained. This example also demonstrates the lack of precision and rigour that so often accompanies articles on military history cobbled together by enthusiastic amateurs. Somehow, Wikipedia editors have got to try harder. Curb your enthusiasm. Think about what you write. In the end, if a Wikipedia article is to be encyclopaedic rather than an extension of someone's blog, we will all benefit from more thought, more rigour and less waffle.124.186.130.7 (talk) 06:15, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

The pike appears nowhere in the article because spears (of which pikes are but a lengthened version) type weapons are excluded from the definition in the lead paragraph. Editors perhaps should read at least the lead para before placing comments on the talk page of articles. However, if the author of the above wishes to return and discuss whether the definition here should be expanded to include spear-type weapons (which is certainly an arguable point), please do. Monstrelet (talk) 09:33, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Why does "maul" redirect here?

For some reason "maul" redirects here, despite being roughly as much of a pole weapon as a battleaxe is ... anyone know why? 62.196.17.197 (talk) 14:25, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Article needs restructuring

This article is largely inconsistent both within itself and with rest of Wikipedia, where every other article about pole arms includes spears and pikes as polearms and spears have their own subcategory in Pole weapons category, but this article says otherwise. I've seen literally no weapons scholar imply that spears AREN'T pole weapons - this is not an attempt at argument to authority, but pointing out that Wikipedia should probably be consistent with rest of the world - and it's not like said definition at the beginning of the article is sourced in any way, making things even more dubious (the only reason I mentioned 'common knowledge' in the first place, since we don't have an expert's definition anyway); and article DOES mention pike in a one-off link, making entire situation a complete mess... And even then, only thing implying spears shouldn't be included is mention that pole weapons should be swung (which is again a contradiction, since like half of weapons in the article have spear points and could be used for stabbing, too). And worst of all, removal of spears appears to have been done to 'cut the article size down'. I'm not blaming anyone, articles being concise and accessible is of course important, it just seems that there were so many different conflicting attempts to improve this article, in the end they created some glaring inconsistencies that need to be sorted out in some way.

Okay, so currently the article is a hot mess, inconsistent with itself, unsourced in some relatively big chunks (opening definition and every Asian pole weapon), and inconsistent with rest of Wikipedia - including category it is a main article for.

My suggestions are: a) find a good definition of a pole weapon from a notable source; b) include all pole weapons that fit this definition; c)If the article is too long, instead of cutting things out, it may be a good idea to split it into two articles - main "Pole weapon" describing evolution, history and usage of pole weapons over the ages (so e.g from Stone Age when spears were popular, through Medieval times were they were common anti-cavalry weapons, and include a section of decline of use, and remaining use in modern times, and also a section on their use as tools/hunting implements (fishing spears, harpoons) - and instead of listing all pole weapons in the same article, make a new one, "List of pole weapons", that transcribes majority of content from this article.

Of course, I'm kind of new to Wikipedia, so sorry if I came across as rude - not my intention, I'm just surprised by the state of the article and hope to improve it, and of course, any other ideas to improve state of the article are welcome. Shinobody (talk) 22:01, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Levant / Middle East / South Asia

As usual in such articles, there is abundant information and disinformation on European equipment, a lot about China, Korea and Japan, and that's it. It might be useful to include Middle Eastern pole arms, Arabic sabarbarah, Persian das, probably connected to the Byzantine dorydrepanon and to the various South Asian pole arms (Alofs, Studies on Mounted Warfare in Asia III War in History 2015 vol 22(2) p. 149. 217.63.243.52 (talk) 09:49, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 11 April 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved to Polearm. No such user (talk) 13:21, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

---

Pole weapon → Polearm – The term "polearm" with no space or dash seems to by far be the WP:COMMONNAME for this topic. On Google, the term "polearm" is searched for the most worldwide compared to the other three terms combined. Their Google Books results seem to have results in order from most to least: Polearm, Pole arm, then either Pole-arm or Pole weapon. So, may as well have the article titled at what could be considered the least WP:ASTONISH-ing title. Steel1943 (talk) 20:58, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

• Support - on its face, this seems sensible. However I am not a medieval weapons expert, so there might be some specific reason the article is called this. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:53, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

• Support - Google Ngrams also shows that "polearm" and/or "pole arm" massively overshadow "pole weapon". Somewhat interestingly, there seems to have been a change in preference from "pole arm" to "polearm" in late 1990s. - Ljleppan (talk) 08:11, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
  • I added "Pole-arm" to that Ngrams search, and ... interesting jump for that spelling in the 1880s. Steel1943 (talk) 22:12, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

    What a weird peak. Looking at the un-smoothed graph, it's a short-lived but massive peak in 1885. - Ljleppan (talk) 07:57, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

    Hmm ... seems I may have not done that right the first time. Seems that without brackets, Google Ngrams looks for books with the word before the hyphen, but without the word after the hyphen? This search states that "pole-arm" does not appear enough in books for there to be sufficient data to provide results. (Here's some explanation: [1].) If that's true, seems it has even less uses throughout history than any of the other terms. Steel1943 (talk) 09:07, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

• Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 16:23, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
• Support per nom. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 16:59, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
• Support. Very clear common name. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:30, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.