celtic combat

[Macilrille]

Notice that "throwing themselves at" can be a flowery way of saying attacking or charging in ancient and medieval texts/rethoric, in fact in certain parts of the world I believe it still is.

[Africanvs]

Notice that "throwing themselves at" can be a flowery way of saying attacking or charging in ancient and medieval texts/rethoric, in fact in certain parts of the world I believe it still is.

I think in this sense, the term "throwing themselves at" means a frontal charge which successfully broke the Roman phalanx.

[Power2the1]

These are my musings from the plethora of articles and books I have read on the Celts. I will address a few points on Celtic combat in general.

First, its important to remember that combat in the Celtic world did not typically revolve around armies of multiple thousands and thousands of warriors. Celtic tribes and confederations typically would allow their heroes, champions, and other skilled warriors to settle issues and disputes. It was pretty much an issue based on honor and prestige. If a smaller group, or a single champion, could settle a dispute though single combats against the opposition's own hero, then that keeps the community intact and the death toll is minimal. Classical mention of druids overseeing conflict was just that: they oversaw these duels between champions and could put a stop to the battle and declare one tribe winner or loser. Things did get out of hand. No, theres no classical reference to this happening specifically, at least that I know of, but you have champions and there clients/vassals watching the fight and if your man lost, you'd be upset. Its not a great stretch of the imagination that larger scale battles would and did happen. After all, its about bringing fame and glory to you and also you tribe. No room for sore losers here.

However, does that mean that Celtic armies, such as Telamon, were free-for-alls? Not at all. The champions and their retinue were not that impulsive for personal fame, nor were the freemen that joined with the armies on the march to greater adventures. They understood the concepts of discipline and order in a large army, as plenty classical sources mentions deployments, fine order, divisions, quick positioning, battle arrays, etc... Standards, the carnyx, and perhaps drums could all be used to signal maneuvers and coordination on the battlefield.

Now something I was thinking about reading this is what we know of chariot display; the whole manner of performing stunts and feats of acrobatics while the chariot was moving. If the Celtic warriors and champions would do that on a chariot, then they would surely have 'moves' to display against an opponent while ready to fight on foot. After, its not just about killing your opponent, its could also be how glorious you look doing it . If the two or more dueling heroes spun, jumped, ducked, swerved, and all other manners of fighting, then it truly was a unique style of fighting where the skill and one's own abilities mattered and if you won, then you really won not just the match, but the admiration and prestige from whomever was watching, something that deeply mattered in the Celtic culture. Also, just in case someone did know already in RTW games, the Celtic chariot is not quite true in it's depiction. Yes, the warrior would throw javelins while riding, but he would dismount when these were used up and fight on foot. Unfortunately we cannot have the chariot warrior dismount in RTW.

Looking at how the Celtic shield was made, it was and could be used as a weapon in itself. Since it wasn't strapped to the arm, it had farther reach than the lower and upper arm. The Celtic shield could be as mobile as the warrior using it. It can be moved quickly; brought up and down in the blink of an eye. You can hold out much further out in front of you, thus giving more space for the opponent to close, and giving you more time to maneuver around and respond. The shield can be brought up and the rim smash an opponents face quickly, followed by your sword strike. Sword feints could be concealed behind it to fool the opponent into thinking the sword strike is coming from one direction, when its really coming from another. The Celtic shield was large, medium sized, and very small. It could be broad as well as rather narrow, not covering the entire body.

The order of the Macedonian style phalanx could be broken with a mass advance/charge from the Celtic warrior. Hellenistic armies were defeated, probably more than once, by the Celts rolling under the spears. Pergamene phallangites would kneel to prevent this. Wielding the longer slashing swords, one would have a harder time physically rolling. They cannot run with the swords draw because rolling could cut you badly. Having the long swords sheathed meant having a iron 'pole' almost as long as your leg attached to your hip as you try and role. Chances are (my guess) is the warriors in this initial assault would use medium or shorter swords for this initial assault, or champions would do with a smaller sword, not the very long swords. No way to tell for sure, but perhaps once the warriors disrupted the phalanx formations, the heavy infantry wasn't far behind to really bring the pain. The majority of phallangites would not stand a chance 1 on 1 vs. the Celtic warrior once they realized the phalanx had fallen.

About the very long swords. Who used them: The Celtic cavalry or the infantry? Chances are it was primarily the cavalry, but that need not mean it was exclusive to the cavalry. Burials have been found at Bibracte, capitol of the Aedui, with spurs (denoting a cavalryman, thus, a noble/wealthy warrior) and the very long swords. However, not every long sword is accompanied by spurs. Draw your own conclusions on this. Also, plenty of Celtic swords had points, perfect for both slashing and stabbing. The Gallic word for a sword is cladio, and this is where the Latin word gladius could have have derived from. Some of these swords contain the name or stamp of the sword smith too, such as the "Sword of Korisios," who forged the iron on the outside of the swords to be harder, while the core was softer, giving the blade elasticity. Some blades were becoming thinner without broad flat cutting edges. Findings in Aedui territory and a find in Port-Nidau reveal atypical blades shapes and unique hilts to go with them.

Anyway, my 2 cents

[heldelance]

I think the chaotic tactics like the salmon dive are at least plausible. I mean think about it. Romans fought in a solid line, if it was disrupted or breached, it would cause them some trouble. By leaping over the first rank and landing in the second/third, you'd cause a decent amount of chaos, even if it were your corpse that landed on them. I'd think they would've done something like the Galatikoi to be impervious to pain thus allowing them to fight a little longer than normal. Anyway, a live "salmon" thrashing about in the midst of semi densely packed soldiers would be an inconvenience.

[A Very Super Market]

Those are hoplites. Unless you are talking about the early Romans, the salmon dive would make no sense whatsoever.

[MeinPanzer]

The Celtic shield was large, medium sized, and very small. It could be broad as well as rather narrow, not covering the entire body.

I don't think I've ever seen a "very small" Celtic thureos. In most cases, though, we simply can't tell how big Celtic thureoi were based on representational evidence.

The order of the Macedonian style phalanx could be broken with a mass advance/charge from the Celtic warrior. Hellenistic armies were defeated, probably more than once, by the Celts rolling under the spears. Pergamene phallangites would kneel to prevent this. Wielding the longer slashing swords, one would have a harder time physically rolling. They cannot run with the swords draw because rolling could cut you badly. Having the long swords sheathed meant having a iron 'pole' almost as long as your leg attached to your hip as you try and role. Chances are (my guess) is the warriors in this initial assault would use medium or shorter swords for this initial assault, or champions would do with a smaller sword, not the very long swords. No way to tell for sure, but perhaps once the warriors disrupted the phalanx formations, the heavy infantry wasn't far behind to really bring the pain. The majority of phallangites would not stand a chance 1 on 1 vs. the Celtic warrior once they realized the phalanx had fallen.

Do you have a source for any of this?

About the very long swords. Who used them: The Celtic cavalry or the infantry? Chances are it was primarily the cavalry, but that need not mean it was exclusive to the cavalry. Burials have been found at Bibracte, capitol of the Aedui, with spurs (denoting a cavalryman, thus, a noble/wealthy warrior) and the very long swords. However, not every long sword is accompanied by spurs. Draw your own conclusions on this.

Plenty of burials have been found of both infantrymen and cavalrymen with long swords. There's no need to speculate.

[SwissBarbar]

The ceremonial weapon they lay in your grave, must not be the same you used in battle.

[Macilrille]

I apologise in advance for any insult my comment will cause...

"I think the chaotic tactics like the salmon dive are at least plausible. I mean think about it. Romans fought in a solid line, if it was disrupted or breached, it would cause them some trouble. By leaping over the first rank and landing in the second/third, you'd cause a decent amount of chaos, even if it were your corpse that landed on them. I'd think they would've done something like the Galatikoi to be impervious to pain thus allowing them to fight a little longer than normal. Anyway, a live "salmon" thrashing about in the midst of semi densely packed soldiers would be an inconvenience."

No it would die horribly. And I do speak from 16 years of experience with unit combat with swords, spears and axes. In fact in the opening scene of Rome there is a foolish barbarian that leaps over the Romans and die immediately. In any case, if you guys think the Salmon Leap is feasible, I invite you to one of our traning sessions so you can try it yourself, we will try not to hurt you too much, but landing on weapons does hurt. This is about as sensible as the mounted slingers debate a while back. It defines all logic and expert statements, if you still believe it, go and try it. Lots of people do Parceur, they will gladly train you, then try it against a formation with weapons. That will be the end of that theory.

I am sorry if I sound arrogant, but the amount of theories people can come up with in front of their screens with no practical knowledge is incredible. Go try it.

[SwissBarbar]

not arrogant, but logical. I completely agree. Any non-suicidal warrior of any nation would not do such a daring feat in abttle

[DeathFinger]

Don't know much about celtic combat, but I can submit you a video. It's an encounter between two groups of experimental archeology, the Santons (from South-West Gaul, "Pictonnes-like" I think) and the Trimatricii (mix of Mediomatricii and Triboi, which were the 2 most important tribes in what's actually Alsace).

Watching from 4:30 . We have firstly melee, and after som one-by-ones.

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/k15WFmMchorMY5RzW0

There's surely some comments to do ^^

I also have the website of the Mediomatricii if you want (It's in french of course )

http://gaulois.trimatrici.over-blog.com/

[SwissBarbar]

awesome looks fun, I want to join *GGG*

[DeathFinger]

awesome looks fun, I want to join *GGG*

Me too
One friend send to the Trimatrici a message and we're waiting for the response. In the case I am caught in the group I would surely have lot of questions to ask to them about celtic crafts and way of fighting, it may still serve

[SwissBarbar]

I'd join as a Gaesatae-Warrior

[ziegenpeter]

Definetly!

[MeinPanzer]

The ceremonial weapon they lay in your grave, must not be the same you used in battle.

There's no reason to think that long swords placed in the burials of infantrymen are ceremonial weapons, especially with the mention in literary sources of Celtic infantrymen using long swords in combat.

[Africanvs]

There's no reason to think that long swords placed in the burials of infantrymen are ceremonial weapons, especially with the mention in literary sources of Celtic infantrymen using long swords in combat.

I would imagine they can look at the swords burried with soldiers and see if they've been used in battle? Knotches in the blade? Besides I imagine a sword like that would have been relatively expensive for a warrior to aquire right? Doesn't make since to me to be buried with a shiny new sword you've never used. If I am a warrior, I want to be buried with the sword I have taken to combat countless times.

[Aurgelmir]

Aurgelmir, for an "easy" book about the Celts read "De Oude Belgen" by "Udo Janssens".
And it's in Dutch too, so possibly easier to read for you.

lol...

In dutch....hm,but to be honest,i only read that are written in german....i think the german language is the best...to read,i'm NOT a nazi or someything like that

And it dont have to be an''easy''book...Now i feel insulted...slithly


So ok i'm convinced that this move would be bad in a battle line........BUT...one on one...its not a bad move at all...its not that the chinese wu shu't there way against full army's lol...but more for individual fights...

I did 3,5 years of wing tjun...and individual fights an (group)fights are totally different...when it comes to technique and approaching the enemy

So...it can be possible that they used this move.....youtube or not..but i dont see an army standing behind that guy...mayby i have troubles with my eyes...dont know


But some titles of books would be nice,in english(Mediolanicus..lol),german...or dutch


Thx...

[Macilrille]

People who think it is a good idea in single combat are encouraged to come to our trainings and try it as well. I will personally, and despite permanent injuries making me much less effective than I was 5 years ago, take on the challenge and if you beat me or even the noob-est beginner we have with this move I will buy you a crate of my favorite beer, Refsvindinge Blue Ale nr 16.

Gauntlet is thrown, pick it up or forget about this fantasy-Salvatore-move please. This is the third time today I apologise for my possible arrogance and the second time in this thread, but I am fed up with armchair/screen fighters. Listen to the people who actually fight for God's sake, or think! How long are you in the air? Defenceless. That is how long I have to react and possibly strike at you, coming down while your guts spill out would be embarrasing no?

How far our society has come from actual body use and excertion :-(

[SwissBarbar]

Where is your training?

[Macilrille]

Risskov, Aarhus, Denmark, the biggest battle we fight is at Moesgaard, S of aarhus, Denmark.

BTW, somewhere you asked where I am from, I am from aarhus, denmark. And I have been to Switzerland but briefly, but I love the Alps and like the Swiss I have met.

[Power2the1]

I don't think I've ever seen a "very small" Celtic thureos. In most cases, though, we simply can't tell how big Celtic thureoi were based on representational evidence.

I never pecifically said thureos, becasue the thureos would need to be defined first. Do we only go by the "door size" connotation that the Greeks gave to the large shield? Do we go only by size alone? Shape? Presence of a central spine (round shields have central spines too). In some ways, calling the Celtic shield a thureos is/can be, misleading.

However, a perfect example is the Clonoura shield from Ireland. Made of wood but completely covered in leather, it only measures 57 x 37 cm, obviously making this a tiny shield compared to they average shield. For continental examples the best (and only, I think) example are from the Civitia Alba terracottas. All of those shields, when compared to ones on the Vacheres and Mondragon statues, and late Boian coin shields, all have a huge differential in size as well as shape.

Do you have a source for any of this?

None that I have read myself (doesn't mean its not true), but I've not read anything refuting this tactic either.

As I've read, high casualties would result initially from blindly charging straight into a Macedonian phalanx...a great way to kill off all of your nobility if they lead that charge, so, either they would have to try and go under, or, send in the 'lesser infantry', who'd have smaller, shorter swords, to disrupt the formation first. Too bad theres no details from classical sources to tell exactly what happened the moment before impact.

Plenty of burials have been found of both infantrymen and cavalrymen with long swords. There's no need to speculate.

No speculation needed, but for the record certain books on Celts do favor or specifically mention those swords of that size being a cavalry weapon as they would be too unwieldy to use in hand to hand combat.

[SwissBarbar]

Unfortunately I've never been to Denmark. Maybe I'll visit you there once, and join such a celtic battle ;-) I always wanted to do sth. like that.

[Macilrille]

Viking, we do Viking, denmark was never Celtic, and you would be required to train with an organised group for a while before joining. But I have enough leverage that should anyone want to try a salmon Leap I can arrange something ;-)

This guy has lots of vids of the big fight at Moesgaard https://www.youtube.com/user/waraegerking

[SwissBarbar]

I know denmark was never Celtic. But that would not prevent you from making the experience and discovering the fighting style of EB ^^ would be funny. half of you form a phalanx, the other half some galatians.

viking of course is cool too

[MeinPanzer]

I never pecifically said thureos, becasue the thureos would need to be defined first. Do we only go by the "door size" connotation that the Greeks gave to the large shield? Do we go only by size alone? Shape? Presence of a central spine (round shields have central spines too). In some ways, calling the Celtic shield a thureos is/can be, misleading.

Well, using "Celtic shield" is more problematic. Firstly, the name "thureos" comes from the shape of the shield resembling the doorstone of a tomb, and not because of its size. The thureos can be pretty clearly defined as any oblong shield with a spine and/or boss running lengthwise.

However, a perfect example is the Clonoura shield from Ireland. Made of wood but completely covered in leather, it only measures 57 x 37 cm, obviously making this a tiny shield compared to they average shield.

This is an example from an isolated and peripheral region of the Celtic world which dates to the 2nd c. AD or so. It is relevant neither to the mainland Celts nor to Celts of the EB time period. We do have fairly small thureoi from northern Europe, but they are from Germanic contexts (e.g. Hjortspring).

For continental examples the best (and only, I think) example are from the Civitia Alba terracottas. All of those shields, when compared to ones on the Vacheres and Mondragon statues, and late Boian coin shields, all have a huge differential in size as well as shape.

But again, it is extremely difficult to judge size from representational evidence, as artists often distorted the size of weapons. Even so, though, we never really see small thureoi (as in Hjortspring small) in Celtic use in representational evidence.

None that I have read myself (doesn't mean its not true), but I've not read anything refuting this tactic either.

Which is about as good as saying it never happened.

No speculation needed, but for the record certain books on Celts do favor or specifically mention those swords of that size being a cavalry weapon as they would be too unwieldy to use in hand to hand combat.

A supposition which is clearly proven wrong by literary mentions of Celtic infantry using exceptionally long swords.

[Macilrille]

No speculation needed, but for the record certain books on Celts do favor or specifically mention those swords of that size being a cavalry weapon as they would be too unwieldy to use in hand to hand combat.

Notice that there is often a large difference between what people theorise to be possible and what experimental archeology (in my case Viking fighting re-enactment), find in practice is.

[Power2the1]

Well, using "Celtic shield" is more problematic. Firstly, the name "thureos" comes from the shape of the shield resembling the doorstone of a tomb, and not because of its size.

Obviously that the origin of the word, and I am sure you've noticed, too, that pretty much all doorstones to tombs are nearly door sized. Still, I wasn't exactly clear by what I meant by the door size comparison however so it's my fault.

The thureos can be pretty clearly defined as any oblong shield with a spine and/or boss running lengthwise.

And to that add the small rounded shields and 'weird' squarish shields like the one shown on the Como relief.

This is an example from an isolated and peripheral region of the Celtic world which dates to the 2nd c. AD or so. It is relevant neither to the mainland Celts nor to Celts of the EB time period. We do have fairly small thureoi from northern Europe, but they are from Germanic contexts (e.g. Hjortspring).

But again, it is extremely difficult to judge size from representational evidence, as artists often distorted the size of weapons. Even so, though, we never really see small thureoi (as in Hjortspring small) in Celtic use in representational evidence.

Discoveries on what you term "the periphery of the Celtic World" doesn't disqualify the find. Look at the Clonora, look at the Civitia Alba and the Hjortspring examples, especially the shield missing it's boss with the hole in the middle, and you can visually see the size connection on these shields here. I'm not saying shields of this size were all the rage, not at all, but they did exist. At La Tene we've a thureos shield barely over 3 ft. tall and only 2 ft. wide. Again, compare that to Mondragon and Vacheres shields and its pretty clear that the La Tene shield finding is very similar in proportion to the Hjortspring and Civitas Alba depictions, a depiction that you are the only person that has called into question the validity of what is displayed. Of the scene, there are no discrepancies in the scale/size of the men, horses, or the loot they are carrying, nor any reason to think that the shields are solely disproportioned.

Which is about as good as saying it never happened.

Which is about as good as saying you cannot disprove...


Really, the notion that Celtic nobility, who would typically lead the charge, willingly flung themselves upon a wall of pikes is absurd. There'd be no nobility left after a stunt like that and their tactics would need to change. Not every single warrior rolled under the pikes. If so that left nothing to surprise the enemy with. We know they would attack and disrupt the phalanxes, but it probably wasn't by doing Salmon leaps

A supposition which is clearly proven wrong by literary mentions of Celtic infantry using exceptionally long swords.

Yes, I agree, but we also have to realize that not every long sword used by the Celts was say, a rounded tipped double edged sword of the 85-90cm variety. The classical writers would no doubt compare the Celtic blades to contemporary Greek or Roman blades which are obviously shorter. Many Celtic swords could be seen as very large and super long to the writer, although in a Celtic only context, they would be classified as a sword of average, medium, or slightly over average in length.

[Aurgelmir]

People who think it is a good idea in single combat are encouraged to come to our trainings and try it as well. I will personally, and despite permanent injuries making me much less effective than I was 5 years ago, take on the challenge and if you beat me or even the noob-est beginner we have with this move I will buy you a crate of my favorite beer, Refsvindinge Blue Ale nr 16.

Gauntlet is thrown, pick it up or forget about this fantasy-Salvatore-move please. This is the third time today I apologise for my possible arrogance and the second time in this thread, but I am fed up with armchair/screen fighters. Listen to the people who actually fight for God's sake, or think! How long are you in the air? Defenceless. That is how long I have to react and possibly strike at you, coming down while your guts spill out would be embarrasing no?

How far our society has come from actual body use and excertion :-(

Actually i would love to try to do that,You may laughing now,but throwing you sand in your eyes,you would have trouble to see me lol

Listen to the people who actually fight for God's sake....SRRY...playing viking does not count as fighting.
I did wing tjun and Mu thai..pls
Its a shame that you not live in holland. REALLY because it would not be the first time to put an end to people who thinking they can fight...come on.I did box for money....i know how to shed REAL blood,only to give my fam some food and pay my dephts

For my arrogance...27-9 for my count...official fights,onofficial...i lost the count..
SO I KNOW HOW TO FIGHT!!

So i'm irritated by your arrogance,mayby with a sword you would have a VERY little chance.
Mu thai is more focused on weapons than the most people know,so i think that i have a pretty good chance.And i have a hard time to inmagine how you beat me with viking techniques,that probably just move's right out your inmagination.Vikings did not write much down...so

I rest my case...

Lol this topic was just about a few questions over the celts....and ALWAYS someone post something,that is not helpfull at all...i ask about celtic stuff...then you are coming and telling me thats impossible to do because you and your friends are playing viking?????

Jesus christ...Your arrogance will be your downfall........someday......

[SwissBarbar]

1. Celtic warriors did not fight Mu thai

2. Don't take this wrong, but I think a trained and battle-tested ancient warrior, a Greek, a Roman and especially a Celt still would have hit your ass up in combat

3. The question in this thread was, if this strange loop and stuff would have been a good Celtic battle tactic. Answer: NO, it would not have been. Even a Mu thai fighter, if making a loop over the first battleline of any hostile army, would have given the enemy (with 8-50 more ranks behind it) enough time to make a coffee (including discovering southern america, establish a coffee plantation...) and still stab him 20 times while he hurtled through the air.

IF the Celts really used it (we cannot prove) , to me at least it would explain why they got conquered by the Romans relatively easily.


Edit

Let me illustrate it

Would you make a loop over these first battlelines?

[Aurgelmir]

1. Celtic warriors did not fight Mu thai

2. Don't take this wrong, but I think a trained and battle-tested ancient warrior, a Greek, a Roman and especially a Celt still would have hit your ass up in combat

3. The question in this thread was, if this strange loop and stuff would have been a good Celtic battle tactic. Answer: NO, it would not have been. Even a Mu thai fighter, if making a loop over the first battleline of any hostile army, would have given the enemy (with 8-50 more ranks behind it) enough time to make a coffee (including discovering southern america, establish a coffee plantation...) and still stab him 20 times while he hurtled through the air.

IF the Celts really used it (we cannot prove) , to me at least it would explain why they got conquered by the Romans relatively easily.


Edit

Let me illustrate it

Would you make a loop over these first battlelines?

1.I know...lol...hm i inmagine how they low kick there way into there ranks

2.We can not know that,but i would love to try....eastern fighting art compared to the old hand to hand combat/wrestling of the roman/celt/greek....pls are you kidding me
I'm not small at all,and exactly 109 kg...have exp in the ring and outside...but i read somewhere that they had more muscular strenght compared to us today...so we cannot know it
But i guess in the ring,me training for it.....i dont think so lol

3.You are all right here....but as i posted before, in individual fights they could use it,without getting stabbed from behind.


I dont say that they used it,i wasn't there,i just saw this on youtube and asked myself could they used it?..but getting this arrogant''i know better'' posts are not helping either..
The most of you where helpfull though.

I asked for some book titles...english/german/dutch is ok...thx again