Video of some most enjoyable training fights with Viking sword & shield with my friend Mikkel Mønsted at Wikinger Museum Haithabu. Learn more: dimicator.com/ Never miss a post! Sign up for free: exciting-pioneer-6049.ck.page/profile Find hundreds of related posts here: www.patreon.com/Dimicator/posts and here: exciting-pioneer-6049.ck.page/profile

Beautifully flowing fighting! Thank you for uploading!

Been a wile always enjoy your posts.

Part of me wishes that you could practice with more speed and aggression while working with steel but then the other part of me doesn’t want you to die.

awesome tai chi video!

this gives shadow fighting a whole new meaning

6:32 and they stab each other in the back 😂

Hello Roland, I very much enjoy all of your videos, and was captivated by your demonstration of biomechanics in duelling. I have a question that I hope you might answer: simply, would Saxons and Danes/Norse fight with this style in single combat in the 9-10th centuries? Specifically, I am thinking of single combat before a battle, during captivity or perhaps during a rout or last stand. Could we expect a Saxon and Danish champion to fight in this style, or would they revert to a more expected style of using a shield mainly defensively? This begs another question, in that: if someone did NOT fight in this style, who would be at an advantage? I suppose if one technique was at a significantly higher advantage, the chances of different cultures using the same techniques would be higher

A nice video would be this equipment vs a legionaires

Funny to see shorts while it is winter in Europe and we're wearing warm clothes.

Мечи, это конечно хорошо, но хотелось бы увидеть технику боя на наиболее распространенных видах оружия для того времени копьях и топорах

🧐

Would it get more aggressive if you used foam swords and shields? Would it become more real ? would real anger change the dynamics you practice?

I want to see more shield damage.

Not convinced.

I'm not Roland 😉 Would Saxons/Danes fight like this in single combat in 9-10th century? - Yes and no. Look at modern day boxing. Choose whoever you think are 2 guys with really good technique and pitch them against each other. Then pitch 2 guys against each other who have never had any instructions in boxing whatsoever. You would be watching 2 utterly different matches. And a boxer with superb technique and stamina will probably resort to quick brute force to knock out someone who is posing a real threat to his wife or child. Roland bases his techniques on simple physics, the same physics that existed 1000 years ago and would have led to techniques and styles developed and refined over generations of trial and error. That said, we have no watertight proof of what exactly was done, because noone thought to write it down for us. Just like none of us sit down and write books on how to eat food in case people in 1000 years don't do that anymore and want to know how it's done. Yes, there would have been people who fought like this, and no, there would have been people who fought differently. The scenarios you ask about are vastly different. A (judicial) duel most likely has rules. There will be things you are not allowed to do, possibly under pain of death. There is most likely a given way you have to fight. A duel of champions before a pitched battle might also have rules and it might not, and even without striced rules, certain behaviour could be seen as disgraceful and lead to loss of status despite victory. A champion would possibly want to end this fight quickly, to show his troops that the enemy is easy to defeat. Then again a champion with an obvious strength advantage might choose to prolong the fight, to demonstrate that the other champions techniques are useless against him. Or he might break conventions and use his shield to push his opponent around, again just to show that he can do it and to boost the moral of his side. During a rout (assuming you are on the fleeing side) you will be most likely desperate and not interested in rules and even less in duels. You might have to turn and fight, but each time you do, you risk more than 1 opponent catching up with you, surrounding you. But you probably have small choice in the matter. If you are on the pursuing side you will wont to kill or capture as many of the enemy as possible (though it is normal for a point to come where pursuers tire of the chase). You will not object to your comrades encircling and killing or overwhelming someone who has turned to face you, so that you can loot his body and run for the next prize. Unless you are facing an important opponent and the display of your prowess can effect your status, then you might be in a situation like the 2 champions before the battle. Or you've gaind enough loot, are tired of running and anticipate some fun fighting a desperate man. But on the whole, duels are rare in a rout. And what is the last stand? You know you will die and you just want to take as many of the enemy with you as possible or just plow you way through them knowing you will be cut down quickly? That would most likely be 1 against many, no dueling. Or are you holding a position for as long as you can so your lord or family can get away, as far as possible? Then you will want to convince the enemy to take you on 1 at a time. Do you want to die knowing that some of the enemy pissed themselves as you charged them or do you want them to tell how gallantly you allowed wounded to withdraw before taking on the next challenger? Last stands are mostly over-glorified and often as not just the hacking to bits of a surrounded group and not a place where you would witness dueling. Different styles, who would have the advantage? On the whole it is not just the technique, but the execution of the technique. An other aspect is, how well can someone adjust to, in his view, an unorthodox style? I don't think a clear answer can be given here. Some might rejoice in what they consider to be the easy target of a defensive opponent, others may be clueless as to how to deal with such an unexpected situation. Interesting point with the different cultures. If you mean Saxons and Danes, who basically used identical weapons, then the same style could be prominent in both, but it could also be that each has its different style. Unfortunately we will never know. Often in situations like that, 1 side starts adopting the style of the other, simply because it is perceived as superior. If you mean significantly different cultures, then it is less likely, as the weaponry is different. That said, the same weapon can exist in parallel cultures and be used (slightly) differently. There will always be heated debates if German or Italian longsword style is better. Apparently noone thinks it's English... 😢

It's not clear what the film is about. It's neither sparring, nor practicing technique, nor practicing distance. Two guys clash with shields, for no apparent reason, and bang their swords together. They don't explain why they're doing it, either. This video shows only one thing: with a large shield you are not able to fight with your outstretched hand. So surely such a shield was not used for that.

Beautifully flowing fighting! Thank you for uploading!