Who would have thought that being unable to pull out after penetration can land you into serious trouble?

This is why I use a shark as a weapon. If it gets its tooth stuck, it can just shed it and it gets replaced with a new one.

The thing, that really poked out while talking about the pollaxe having no spike, was the 30cm spike for thrusting right next to matt's head.

"Let's talk about the problems with penetration..." Inuendo delivered in a deadpan style worthy of the finest Carry On film - well done, sir! ☝️😎

"Lets talk about the problems with penetration" This is exactly the type of content I subscribe for. ;)

"If any weapon only had advantages, everyone would use it." Halberd: "I'm standing *right here!*"

I remember my grandfather talking about bayonetting in WW2, saying if you stab into the gut, the muscles contract around it as the person doubles over, so getting it out again was a bit of a problem and they basically had to stand on the enemy to pull it out. Not exactly ideal when there are lots of other enemy around.

As ive mentioned b4 in your comments section im roughly half native & those are one of the types my tribe used. Its true it will get stuck, though those were mostly thrown & when they were used in hand it helps if you use it more in a slashing manner in an up close & personal way or aim for the head so it stops em cold. Which it would only be one of the many weapons carried by a warrior. The bow is the main weapon. The tomahawk in dominant hand & the off hand dagger are secondary. At least within the tribal cultures I descend from.

Experience chopping firewood would suggest a weapon stuck in your opponent gives you a really good handle for controlling them; you can use a hatchet to pick up and move wood, so perhaps you could yank them of balance or even off their feet?

I don't know what I love the most: the fact that he does this joke every single time or the casual and subtle way in which he does it, almost as if he's not doing it at all.

An axe with a spike, so you can choose slashing or piercing damage. Gotta work that metagame. 😎

I nearly had a problem with the spike on the back of my battle axe. Its called nearly tripping over a boot when you're putting the bloody thing away after you have cleaned it.

This video was a good discussion starter. I tested and experienced exceptions to this. It’s covered in a video that only a true tomahawk enthusiast would enjoy. There are several spike and tomahawk chopping blade geometries that entirely eliminate extraction issues-they bury to the handle and pop right out just as quickly. These shapes are historic to examples seen in North America, and I have tested these designs against fabric, flesh, and bone and customers have demo’d these on pig heads, etc. Gets nasty but with the right shape, even for a spontoon tomahawk, you will have zero extraction issues. I filmed this in a family friendly video titled “Tomahawks: Penetration and Extraction on Pumpkins” - but pumpkins are much stiffer than people and tend to exaggerate extraction issues vs. flesh and bone targets.

This discussion reminds me of a rule in the tabletop game GURPS. Picks (or generally, swung weapons with an impaling or piercing point) can get stuck in a target, making them unusable for attacks or parries until removed. I don't recall how realistic the rules are (I think there's a Strength roll involved to retrieve the weapon) but it's cool that they tried to include that sort of detail. In most tabletop games, the difference between "longsword" and "warhammer" is maybe a single point of damage, and a damage type which rarely comes into play, with no consideration for how they interact with armor or flesh.

I feel like a short weapon that's prone to getting stuck in your opponent lends itself to a very aggressive, close-in style. You know, yank them around by the weapon that's stuck in them and push/kick/grapple to get it out again.

I did knife fighting as a part of a hand to hand combat fighting course in the military. It was mostly focused on being sure your knife ends up in the other guy, regardless of what happens to you, IE thrusts. They didn't say this but I am pretty sure the doctrine was developed with the idea that if you're fighting hand to hand, you fucked up, you're already dead, and whatever damage you can inflict is a plus. I had done some kali escrima, told the instructor (marginally competent, he was a tae kwon do guy) he was wrong. He got marks across his eyes, both sides of the throat and I was sawing at the tendons of his right shoulder when he figured he won the bout clean because he stuck me in the kidney with the arm I was busy removing. Shitty course, don't recommend it.

I also imagine a Long spike on a poll weapon would be much more likely to sort of glance off of plate armor as opposed to a hammer end

An alternate thought: If your right-angle penetration weapon is stuck in your foe, you have a control handle to use against them. To control their movements to a degree, perhaps to drag them closer for the off-hand knife, or to use them as a shield against another combatant. - Just a thought I had, that's all.

Dear ballistics gelatin manufacturers, please provide professor Easton with testing medium!!!!! This needs testing. I believe the spontoon hawk will pull out...... easier than a traditional tomahawk. Awesome content!

Part of the reason why pistols (revolver days) used by officers (at least in the US) became higher caliber was to increase stopping power because officers fighting at close range would shoot an enemy in CQC and the shot enemy would still get run through with a bayonet.

This applies in unarmed combat too, I've been asked more than once why when I've won a match I always complete the movement, throwing or pinning or disengaging. It's because having been caught in a real fight I'm more conscious of the fact that a solid strike or throw isn't necessarily going to stop "anybody", I don't know how an opponent will react so I "complete the movement" to make sure I'm safe

It should also be noted that points are much more likely to glance, especially when used against plate armor (which is incidentally designed to do exactly that). All the force being focused on a small point is devastating with a flush hit, but if it glances all of that force is lost (essentially). With a hammer face, flanged mace, or otherwise larger surface area on a weapon, more of the force of even a glancing blow will be imparted (I'd imagine this would be why the beaked warhammer didn't eclipse the flanged mace, nor the Bec de Corbin the hammer faced pollaxe).

I imagine getting a spike out would involve a bit of fulcrum action, or perhaps a solid twist to wrench it out. Either way, it would make the wound even messier. Just guessing, though.

I would love to see this tested with a ballistic gel+bone dummy or perhaps a pig carcass. It would be interesting to see this in action and not intuited.

I guess, a straightforward question with another long answer, but assuming the point is intended as a disposable oneshot, what about drawing a secondary weapon to defend, or using this as a specialized and disposable weapon. I have heard the same concerns about the bayonet, I think infamously in All Quiet on the Western Front, the bayonet was disparaged versus the spade for many reasons, but this was one of them. If you drive your rifle deeply into a target, you have to pull it out of them. Whereas with a spade you could continue chopping. I wonder too about the hammer blade, which would effect a glancing motion after impact versus a spike which would remain stuck. Especially those rectangular cross section crows beaks, I would imagine they would drive quite deeply, even into plate. Bone is another problem. Imagine getting a spike stick between ribs or clavicle. I think the spike is unquestionably more lethal, however.

In late period medieval warfare, fully armored combatants were so well protected that you would literally have to immobilize them, and then either get them to submit or strip their armor away and slide daggers into their exposed area. Having a spike stuck your oponent's arm would indeed allow you to immobilze that limb. It was also a good tool for executing an immobilized/captured foe as we see from numerous forensic archeological studies of graves found during this period.

Along with the minuses involved in having your weapon stuck in the enemy, it DOES give you a nifty handle with which to leverage and lever your enemy about.

"Let's talk about the problems with penetration." WOW! Totally caught me off guard! Great video!

Great food for thought presentation, Matt. But a few points for further consideration. 1st - if you make a solid strike with any mass weapon there's a lot of energy deposited into your foe. 2nd - people who get hit hard - MOVE & quite often Fall. This means that your extraction would Not remain a 180° reciprocation of the initial striking angle. Sliding a hand up the haft (primary or support hand) and wrenching away as your opponent's body weight pulled away or fell would facilitate a lot of the needed extraction force. 3rd - axe or hammer blows are to break through an enemy's defense whereas the spike was most often reserved for finishing blows or prying past & into armor, often once both opponents had grappled to the ground. 4th - a lot of straight or hook spike work was done using 2 hands on the weapon's haft to direct the spike's point into the vulnerable or critical target areas once the foe's Defenses had been pushed past. Such as wedging plate away so a Rondel or other dagger could be inserted. ...And not all armor was top quality, perfectly fitted or metallurgically sound. Your observations on double-kill combos are valid but look to your own training & competition experience. You don't make a hit & then stand there waiting to see if your opponent will oblige you by dying instantly. You hit & keep moving, defensively or setting your next attack into motion & respond to what your opponent does (or if the judges or buzzers sound off). The dynamics of the fight don't end just because a single good hit has been achieved, whether using blades or firearms. You keep attacking, striking, stabbing, shooting, etc - until ZERO THREAT remains. Several of your other respondents have also observed that the force you would exert into a foe's body in attempting to extract even a stuck blade, would move an opponent around like a puppet on a stick - not fun for either person I'm sure but that would also mean that your weapon would continue causing further damage & trauma as you sought to dislodge it or until you decided to resort to a secondary or back up weapon. A lot of dynamics going on there - That's my context. 😁👍👌🖖🤺

I use a spike end tomahawk as a pickaroon when cutting/splitting firewood. Just reach out and snag a round out of the pile without having to bend over and pick it up. Works pretty well, but CAN be a chore to unstick sometimes. I use the blade end for trimming a trunk of branches, thereby saving gas, noise, and/or electricity (been using a cordless saw lately as I get older and more decrepit). For limbing, the hawk has a longer reach than a hatchet, and lighter than an ax. Nice intermediate tool, actually, for this work. Use a sword cane to get around with, or when I don't know how long I may have to stand in a line. Thanks for your channel.

Swords and battle axes can both get stuck but axes have leverage to aid the removal and maybe that's the fun part

Matt: First line is a double entendre Me: Makes popcorn

I saw the spike, and thought you were going to say it was used to exert force on the enemy after hitting them. If you embed the spike in the first three layers of their gambeson, maybe you get a pinprick through to the skin. But you've got a grip that's basically nailed to them. You can pull if the weapon is being wielded one-handed, and if it's a two-hander you have the choice of whether to pull or to push sideways, whichever direction you think will throw your enemy off-balance so that you can make your next blow count.

When I was a kid and was first misinformed about the purpose of a fuller, it was for a similar reason. I think it was my Dad, and he told me it was called a “blood groove”- because according to him, when you stuck a blade into someone, it would be locked in there due to suction, and the blood groove allowed a channel for air to get into the wound (and the blood to run out) and release said suction. Wow. I’m so glad that I read a lot even back then, and found out for myself what the purpose actually was! No offense to my Dad (RIP), as he was a voracious reader as well, but I’m sure that one of his uncles was to blame for that particular old wives tale. My Dad was more a reader of modern (WWII-current era) historical fiction than he was of nonfiction historical arms and armour. Anyway, thanks for the great video 👍🏻 Edit: I do wonder, though, if there’s any truth behind that reasoning? Having never personally run a sword through a person, I don’t know if suction could possibly play any part? Doubtful, but if anyone knows, please let me know!

Spiked impact weapons are made to this very day, for the purposes of modern combat. I own a tomahawk by RMJ Tactical of Chattanooga, Tennessee, USA, and it has a traditional tomahawk/axe blade on one end, combined with a ferociously sharp, reinforced spike on the opposite end. Tomahawks with heads such as this have been used as weapons here in the US since about the mid-1600s.

You missed an important point. Even if the point is stuck in the opponent, it would allow you to push and pull them about, causing immense pain and to a certain extent allow you to control them, making it difficult for them to strike back, even if they weren't in shock. I would think it would be easier to force them onto the ground and then you would have time to pull out a secondary weapon and dispatch them easily.

“They can stab you back”. This is why, I’m rapier, we put a toooonnnnnnn of emphasis on striking with control over your opponent’s sword. As you thrust, you capture their blade on your hilt, deflecting their point out of presence and also controlling it enough to prevent a cut. This makes you safe while close, but you also need to get out safely maintaining control of the opponent’s sword with your hilt. So often, folks stop the action when a hit is landed, but we should really not stop the action until you are safely out of measure. Rapier and dagger is actually more dangerous. A rapier is long, so if I stab you and have a foot of sword out your back (really my simulator is extremely bent, your point is behind me - as long as I guard against a cut, I’m safe. If you have a dagger though, you still have an offensive weapon that I have to contend against with my dagger. That’s the best case. If I have sloppy form and don’t have control of your sword, you have two offensive weapons for me to counter with just my dagger.

Polearms, are meant for fighting in formation with two lines of men going against each other, one is pretty safe and covered by everyone else in the line, the goal of the combatants is to hook the enemy by the axe part (some of them have specific uneven shape just for that) and drag them out of their formation, and therefore out of cover, where they will get stabbed to death by the pointy spear bit, or their head crushed by the hammer bit once they're on the ground, another perpendicular spike could be an option, but definitely not a necessity as it indeed can get stuck and one needs to recuperate quickly after a kill so they can be efficient element of the line, covering others again I imagine.

It seems like a "no-brainer" in terms of designing a weapon (increased leverage for your Scream-style stabbies), but it also seems like a weapon who's weaknesses come out with testing/training. Maybe they had a more specific purpose, at least in medieval times: I'd imagine the spike would have been very useful for "cleaning up" after a battle. It would be a quick way to execute a downed opponent without getting too close (presumably you don't want someone slashing at your ankles with a dagger). This way, you could preserve your edged weapons, or get around the fact that they may be extremely dull after a battle. You probably wouldn't even have to remove the guy's helmet. Plus, in that context, you would be surrounded only by allies. Furthermore, in my opinion, many of the spike wounds in medieval skulls appear to have been carried out "execution style" against someone kneeling or lying down. It also makes sense that the spike would be "mounted" on your primary weapon (so convenient). It could be readily deployed during lulls in the battle as well. When used on a defenseless & immobilized person, the spike makes sense. Maybe there was a component of honor as well (e.g. I'll give you a quick death, if you'd do the same for me). I'm just speculating (I don't know anything lol).

Even worse, imagine your 90 degree pointy stick gets stuck in the opponent's shield? Now your weapon is useless (for a time) and the other guy isn't wounded.

All weapons have this problem, swords have a tendency to get stuck if you cut too far down on the blade. Thus it's recommended to cut with the last 2-4 inches of the blade 'so that the blade may free itself'. Consider where the center of percussion is for most blades and think if the blade will free itself if you cut there. Hawk and Dagger...by the time you embed your Hawk in someone's head/body you are stepping in with your dagger. Timidity is not allowed when using two short ranged weapons. Also watch yourself wiggle that Hawk 'as you try to remove it' and imagine what that is doing to the person. Lastly when you have a spike imbedded in a body, you now have a ton of leverage you can apply. Think of how a hook works on Plate armor, you can now manipulate the person with that spike sticking in them.

It could be that that type of tomahawk, once it’s point was embedded in an opponent, could be used by the wielder to push/pull, and more or less control their opponent’s movement. In some cases, you would be able to control your opponent through crippling pain by pushing and pulling. Other martial arts that use hook-like weapons are often paired with an offhand weapon, in the case of a tomahawk perhaps a large knife, allowing the wielder to pull the opponent into a knife stab. Also, I wouldn’t be surprised if the native Americans who used these types of tomahawks employed a kind of teep-kick which would help loosen the axe and provide distance from similarly-armed opponents.

Somewhere in the castle armoury in Bohemia, I saw an interesting warhammer with a short stout spike in the centre of the hammerhead. I didn´t know at that time what it was for but now I think you enlightened me. Thanks.

One very small thought: If, in your defensive dodge at 8:49, you maintained a firm grip on the tomahawk, the result would be a twisting motion of the spike in the wound. This would impart greater wounding/pain and help free the spike.

Steve Jackson also made the sticking point, with things like picks and axes, in GURPS (the Generic Universal Roleplaying System) back in the 1980’s. It was a part of the game mechanics and I’m sure still remains so. You did a great job-thank you.

3:03 "t'is but a scratch" 😉 I would think that the Ponoontomahawk you have could be easier to get out again than the axe you had. Because of the form of the blade. Wiggeling means that the points at the end of the axeblade could find things to get caught in. While this tomahawks blade meand that the part that has penetrated is narrower than what is still outside. ( in the longitudinal direction)

One thing you can do when the spike is stuck, in addition to blocking with a shield or trying to pull the spike out, is to push or pull the target with the spike. Maybe it can disrupt the target a bit or cause more damage.

This video ties in with the one you did on the use of Tomahawks in N America. The literature repeatedly mentioned the preferred strike was to the head, which is more likely to be the instant "off switch" needed to keep from being struck back. I would assume that our Medieval European ancestors reached a similar conclusion with their spikey tools, and strikes to the face/head were preferred/recommended. Thanks again for all the well though out content.

Per Lynn Thompson: If you’re fighting with a tomahawk, at a minimum you should have a 18-24” sharp stick in your off hand. If you don’t have a sharp stick, make one, you have a tomahawk.

I was thinking along the same line too when I wrote my novel. Thank you for the discussion.

Great explanation! And this Tomahawk even has barbs behind the spike... once it's embedded, you'll never get that one out of a body while in the fight.

One thing about a spike one one of them is disabling. If you don't have a weapons or skill to use the weapon to get in-between plates of armor then the spike can focus force at those joints and damage them and even deform them to make them less functional like they cat caught on other pieces or simply cause damage to the wearer and not want to make movements. As far as tomahawks, they were known to be thrown in quick movements and followed up with a knife. Normally the shock of the thrown axe that might not kill but can break into bone which would be a lot of pain and trauma including ribs into the lungs or heart. Allows them time to run up and finish off with the knife and they can easily wrap their hand around the connection point of the handle to the head and pull it out and keep moving. Ambush type warfare like that is why that shape of a Spontoon Tomahawks effective. At the time the armor was coats of leather and maybe fabric clothing so there was not much to stop it.

As a guy who has spent decades on the BJJ mats, I have to say that arguments about what can be done against multiple attackers are almost always spurious. I literally can’t count the number of guys who have showed up at the gym talking about how taekwondo, or Okinawa Karate, or kung fu, or whatever is more effective against multiple attackers than jiu jitsu. Nearly all of them proceed to get tapped out by every white belt in the building. To be fair, this is much less common now than it was 20 years ago because so many more people are aware of the effectiveness of clinching and ground fighting. There is likely truth to the concept of a wounded opponent lashing out and striking his killer who’s weapon is embedded in him. But, all other things being equal, if we are about to wrestle and flail at each other until one of us is dead… I would much prefer that you already have a spontoon hawk embedded in your head or torso. Also, if we are going to go full-on armchair ninja about it: having a spike, beak, or spontoon hawk sunk deep into your opponent’s chest or shoulder should give you insurmountable leverage and control over their position. It would be mighty difficult to throw an effective strike while being dragged around by a tomahawk handle welded to your chest via a mortal wound.

1:24 Spike on top: What am I chopped liver?

A spike will often get stuck in plate armor if it penitrates deep enough. As for mail & gambison over a body it doesn't stick very much. A straight spike on a hammer into a unarmored person doesn't take much effort or time to remove unless it is a thinner spike & it hits large bones. The spike on that war hammer is thick enough that it shouldn't get stuck in anything on the battlefield besides plate armor and possibly a shield. As with any hand held weapon you are most vulnerable during your attack, it doesn't matter if you are going for a penitrateive, slicing or impact attack.

Though a challenge to forge it needs a 3 or 4 face curved tapered piecing point that flares out to a hammer head face maybe even with raised lip or points so that the taper doesn't bind when driven home.

The spike adds balance and weight so you can still hit harder and it would also have basic utility outside of combat And even if you can’t go through plate armor you can still stab in the gaps much more effectively than with the axe as its a smaller more dagger like point, All in all its better than just a battle axe with no spike Edit: also you can have the spike bladed so it can cut its way free and not get stuck also making it do more damage and causing worse injuries so the enemy would bleed out much faster

However, the battleax also has a "spike" - it's top-mounted rather than side-mounted. A spearing motion would be more natural, and allow for a recovery just like a thrust recovery with a sword or saber.

Awesome the pole axe with the spike and hammer seem amazing especially for versitility. Question! Did they have smaller pole axes like a hatchet to the axe or were they all very large like a spear?

Hey Matt thanks for all the great content! I have a question. what is the best way to get into longsword training without access to a hema club? any advice is much appreciated.

With the polearm, you have much less of a problem with retrieving a spike I feel! Since you can wrench it free easier compared to a singlehanded weapon, with both of your hands moving opposite directions to get the spike out!

How much would the "getting stuck" disadvantage matter for a horseman's pick? Was it effective because it was used when the enemy was fleeing, and therefore you didn't have to worry about a counterattack? Was it harder to extract because the horse helped you drive it in? Easier because the horse helps you pull it out?

Something I notice about the Raven Forge tomahawk that might mitigate the issue you bring up - that of being unable to withdraw the spike from armor, or even a human body - is that it has a rounded hammer on the opposite end. Using that, one would be able to deal equal concussive force without needing to take time withdrawing the weapon from the armor. If someone is wearing mail armor, a hit with the rounded hammer will do as much as a cut with the same force, assuming ideal mail armor

Does HEMA have any mention of techniques for after contact?..such as if you drive the spike in and then follow through with a pulling/dragging them as of sorts...or when your thrust is in deep leveraging the blade in directions of advantage..ie rib/spine or between pelvics/femars? Thanks for another video

I've read up on research suggesting that the hammer end was used to attack and not the spike. The spike portion was only used to finish up the job once the opportunity arose.

I do think you have a very good point and I mostly agree with you, if you weapon get stuck is a big deal. But, I think you can have a big advantage: if after a good hit and your weapon get kind of stuck you may move back pulling the weapon and your opponent backward, with decent speed and reaction you likely (in my opinion, I haven't ever test it) could pull your opponent out of balance and knocked him down,or to the very list get your weapon back or get the opponent to follow your movent, giving you the advange. It very could be that it's more complicated than I describe or imagine, but even if the odd off success is 1 to 10 (just a throw numbers), it's a helpfil option.

I think the spikes might have been used more as a way to control an enemy, by hooking their shield or armor. I think it's more likely that they were used to drag an opponent around or unhorse them, rather than as a means to inflict injury. I believe that if the spike did manage to do some damage then that would have been seen as a bonus, but I don't think that inflicting injury was the primary purpose of the back spike. But I don't know how extant the historical evidence is for the spikes being used intentionally as a weapon to injure opponents, so I could be wrong. For all I know, killing enemies with a back spike might have been the thing that all the cool kids were doing in the late 15th century. P.S. I'm not talking about the spontoon tomahawk in this video, on that weapon the blade-point was obviously intended to be the primary means to inflict injury. I wonder if that weapon design was originally intended for the new world market, and if it was, was it a European copy of a native design? Sometimes that was done for trading purposes. The original native weapon might have had an obsidian blade then, and the spontoon tomahawk was just copying the style. I'm really just guessing on that one, based on pictures of trade tomahawks that I saw in a book thirty five years ago. I'm sorry that the people who could have told us with authority how to properly use these weapons have been dead for hundreds of years. I appreciate the efforts of modern historians who work hard to rediscover the secrets of the lost martial arts. I'm secretly hoping that renaissance era greatsword dueling will one day become the new Crossfit.

Matt can you also talks about spear's disadvantages in fully armoured combat, either battlefield and one on one? I feel like most times when people talks about "Spears outranks swords/everything" tests, they seems to be talking about it in more of a armourless manner, with a one-hit judging system that people die when being stabbed only once, but never considered the situation when the opponent wearing armour, giving them better chance to close-in when spear can't penetrate the armour and stopping them from minor damage it gives.

after watching this video I gotta say my gut feeling on your new tomahawk axe is that it's made to be ideal for throwing perhaps? As a melee weapon, the difficulty of getting the axe out of the target means you're more likely to let go of it once it's in the target anyway, as you explained, + also this same factor might make it more effective as a throwing weapon as the opponent now is the one who has to worry about the axe being stuck in him and not you - both pointing towards ranged and not melee as being ideal for that design

Regarding the pollaxe, I'd argue that, with a two-handed shaft (aka pole) weapon, putting your weight behind a thrust is much more effective than with smaller weapons (your hands can be further apart, offering more control and stability, which results in a more precise and better aligned thrust). In addition, switching the spike with one of the side heads (hammer or axe) would make the hammer or axe head ineffective as it would only be usable with thrusting motions. Having a spike on top also allows it to be longer while remaining easy to pull out of an opponent, as you explained with sword thrusts. The added weight of having 3 heads is also less detrimental on a two-handed weapon, so this is the best configuration to have all three options.

Gets stuck, but you could use it as a dagger to finish by hand, not quite for striking when you don't want it getting stuck, but not bad if you don't have a dagger. If you use an axe with a long spike in the back that is. 😅 Short spikes deliver more force on a single point and thus getting more force to the bone behind the armor, because the force of the swing is concentrated on the sturdy tip of the small spike, where a hammer spreads the force on impact more. 🙂 Correct me if I'm wrong 🙃

I use a poleax in SCA combat, weighted and balanced close to museum examples, and have had it used against me a good bit too, and I find that the shock of getting hit with the head end tends to put people off being able to swing back in any way. You get so much momentum going even with relatively light blows that is throws all but the heaviest people off balance, so unless it really is a simultaneous hit there isn't a follow up. I imagine that for any pole arm with a heavy head (poleax, halberd, war pick, whatever) the momentum transfer after a swing is the biggest protection from "oh hell, the weapon is stuck and now he is going to hit me before he dies." Doesn't help much on the thrust probably, but then all thrusty things have that problem.

If your weapon embeds in the opponent, you also got a handle on him. He's not an unmoving, rooted treestump. You can pull or push him with your weapon, unbalance him or even bring him to fall. All of which can be used to make his attack go wide. 9:58 "... with the hammerblade ..." ;-D .... I suggest, singing "ohhohooohooo can't smack this". Now I want you to make a video about the hammerblade. Treatises do seem to show predominantly bec de corbin style heads, but I do not have all of the sources available and didn't actually count the bec heads, so I may well be wrong. ... I am still amazed at the unfailingly deadpan delivery of the at this point, I'd say regular innuendo. You do not even bat an eye or twitch a muscle. Impressive. You should get another job as the PR guy for crazy ppl. Like, film stars, politicians or other indecently rich ppl.

About the spiked axe and warhammer, wouldn't it make sense to fight with the axe or hammer side until you got you opponent into a position where they can't fight back and then using the spike to take them out?

The spadroon tomahawk looks like a chore to get out if it embedded in anything. Throwing it might make a lot of sense because you may only get one use out of it regardless.

Based on my vast experience, the spike would likely be flipped to finish off an armored guy that was stunned or compromised otherwise on the ground.

Great vid as usual, absolutely - weapons sticking in the opponent is a very real scenario...(could you share any first hand accounts that you've read?). Anybody who's chopped wood with an axe compared to a splitting maul knows that too sharp / fine a blade causes sticking instead of splitting issues. Also, If you've butchered large animals you'll know that fresh bone will grab onto a blade too, thats why old butchering cleavers are so huge - the weight makes all the difference. I imagine whacking a tomahawk into the large bones of some poor unfortunate enemy really will make that weapon stick. I've not really thought about it before - very enlightening. Thanks.

Bones, bodies are not all squishy/fleshy things, they have bones. So bones would factor in the getting it out situation.

A somewhat relevant note might be the development of flanged maces which went from spiky flanges to rounded flanges. It is theorized that this change was due to issues with the spiked flanges getting stuck in the target.

I think the spontoon might actually have less of an issue with this give the back of the axe is tapered from the widest point on. The blade is also relatively wide so there should be some stopping power.

One way too look at certain spike weapons is as part of a group action, not duelling. The large heavy spike is driven in and left, the user pulling back while others cover. Especially true of hunting parties against dangerous animals with tough hide. The hooking ability of the hammer or spike is useful, obviously. I think the axe and spike makes it a better utility tool for most things outside of battle. Because the battle portion is fairly rare. But there is a lot of camping work and utility work the spike is great for. I keep a tomahawk in my car's emergency kit that is axe and spike. If I come upon an automobile accident, the spike is a better tool for getting people out of a vehicle. In Afghanistan and Irag, several personnel liked the axe and spike tomahawk for opening doors. The spike could break a padlock and axe could open a standard door lock. Where I look at those big front loaded spikes on a hand weapon as the kind of thing to drive into a leaping or charging animal and let go of. I know people who have dealt with wild boars. One tactic was deliver a fatal injury and climb a tree until it died.

For what it's worth, in videos like those from Cold Steel where they hit pig and cow carcasses and skulls with axes, the axe heads seem to get stuck in as frequently as the spike for all the reasons listed in this video (though with the caveat that they're trying to illustrate how deeply it went in for demonstration purposes, so they aren't trying very much to pull it out)

I notice the spontoon tomahawk has sharpened edges, like a very short, broad dagger. How sharp are the edges? Could they be used for (admittedly weak) draw/push cuts?

One big perk of the warhammer you show here is that the spike is a continuous taper back to the eye of the hammer, and not fullered in closer to the shaft like the back spike on the battleaxe. I think it's designed this way for a purpose, even if the spike were to penetrate to maximum depth there's really nothing to "snag" in the wound or the targets armour making it a lot easier to retrieve from a blow.

I'm not sure how much the spikes would have been used one on one but in a general melee I can see it having use when attacking joints or semes in armor.

Good point :) On a somewhat related note, do you think a broader bladed axe (maybe 6 inches or more cutting edge) would have any appreciable effect on a heavily armored target? My instinct is that it would at least have similar percussion to a mace, but I'd like to hear your thoughts on the matter.

We can see same issue with early Slavic (and Hungarian fokosz) axes, with long thin and narrow axeheads with very shirt blade, like kind of pickaxe which can penetrate very easily into shields and so on, so very often those axes have thick and short spike on the opposite side, for hitting without deep penetration...

Matt, I don't know whether you've noticed, but there's a bloody big spike on the end of your polearm.

I only think of one thing when I see a spike on a weapon: getting through a helmet,block with a shield and aim a shot at their head,if it gets stuck just let go of it and get your sword out,or dagger,and carry right the hell on. ETA: Thinking about it a viable option is to have a sword in your dominate hand and a spiked whatever in the off hand,still aim for the head and still drop it if it gets stuck but until that it's a good blocking object.

I think in Assassin's Creed 3, where you play as a half-native American in the late 1700s, you use a tomahawk along with a knife (possibly the signature hidden blade) as a weapon set.

That spontoon tomahawk, with the tobacco pipe opposite the blade was for ceremonial purposes, not warfare. You met with your opponent and smoked from the same bowl offering peace and at the same time saw the alternative was war and death.

That is a really nice poleaxe. Who is the maker? I've been looking around for a good one, but can't seem to find one with recessed langets (which this one doesn't have). But if it has Matt's stamp of approval, it must be a solid piece.

This is why I prefer the Pollaxe with an axe blade, hammer head, and spear point. Like you said with the sword point, thrusting with a spear point lets you put your whole body into pulling back and freeing your point if it gets stuck. And you get a bludgeoning, slashing, and piercing option.

I have various walking sticks I have made, which have an antler spike for a handle. You would be surprised at the penetration you can get with that, it is scary. More than once I have broken through a heavy wooden door with the spiky bit, when I have accidentally locked myself out. I would not be surprised if you could not penetrate mail with an antler spike. Here is the thing though, it is perfectly legal for me to walk abroad with such a thing, indeed I have been within the precincts of the Palace of Westminster with one of them.

I recall in one of Tod's videos, he was hitting a gambeson (or gambeson with mail on top) with a warhammer, and he found it interesting that that paticular one didn't penetrate the gambeson - but that the focused impact pushed a big indent into the gambeson. Like the beak side was also blunt impact, only more concentrated on a point. Meanwhile, the spike on your axe looks like it could break a chain link and penetrate through a gambeson into the flesh. (And your spontoon tomahawk against unarmoured targets could get deep) Perhaps even these nuanced differences within "the same weapon" - e.g. similar sized warhammers with broad vs. narrow beaks - could have drastically different results and therefore different implications for how to use them.

Do NOT be taking a drink when starting Matt Easton videos.

Could the purpose of the spiked point on the back of the hammer/axe be to strike the flat side of other weapons and perhaps break them? Is it possible for large swords or axe heads to crack or shatter if struck directly? The other thing i thought of was injury to the arm behind a shield. Cool channel!

On a little testing with a spike hawk, pick goes in coconut better than bladed bit. Pick is also a handy digging tool.

I've always assumed that in knightly bludgeoning weapons' like pollexes/polehammers/becdecorbin/etc... the bludgeoning portion was for engaging in combat against other armored opponents, while the spike would likely be reserved for dispatching a foe who had already been knocked on their ass and unable to retaliate effectively, or against unarmored opponents for whom you'd have little defensive concerns as a man in plate armor anyway. Thoughts?

One thing that comes to mind is that spike and hammers are using different strategies to deal with armor. Spikes attempts to puncture armor, be it plate or mail. Hammers are going for blunt force trauma, causing injuries without penetrating armor.