Talk:Flail (weapon)

message: It's always neat to see other people expand on an article that you've written. Cute picture!
Harkenbane 06:56, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Cute picture

message: The terms "morning star" and "mace" are incorrect when used to describe flails, and are themselves distinct from each other. The defining characteristic of flails (which you touched on) are that they are a mass of metal attached to a haft by means of a chain. Morning stars and maces have no interconnecting chain. -CW
From what I understand the termnology in morning star is actually useable to any of the weapons if it had spikes attached. And that a flail only has one chain link, much like the agricultral flails only with metal studs attached. So what is shown in the article is a mornigstar ball on chain, not a flail. -Dob
:The EB 1911 article Flail says:
:What are the reliable sources that contradict that? -- PBS (talk) 13:09, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Morning star

message: A flail and a meteor hammer are two distinct weapons. The hammer has no handle, and a much, much longer chain. Their origins are also completely distinct.--Vince Skrapits 02:48, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: NO MERGE, as per above Calicore 04:05, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree. --James Hales 07:28, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

text: As my major rewrite will now show, the meteor hammer article is not suitable for merging. Though I must thank you, it is a noteworthy point (and one I have mentioned) that chain weapons are often confused with each other. --Xanthine 13:06, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with [[Meteor hammer]] 

message: Please, please, don't use Wikipedia to document your beliefs or original research.  Look, just below the edit box: content must be verifiable.  Any additions to this page really need to be supported by external sources.  -- Rogerborg 23:26, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources, people 

message: Don't you think that the referencese to single battles where the weapon was used in Legend of Zelda games are a bit too marginal? I think "Use in popular culture" should include something more general, like analytic view of what kind of contexts the weapon is often used, or something like that. LotR reference is a bit marginal too, but probably much more informative to most of the readers. RandomMonitor 09:31, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zelda References? 

message: I removed the following from the article: The Middle Ages was an extremely violent era in history featuring battles in both Europe and the Holy Land when the crusades, and the crusaders who fought them, were numerous. Feudal lords and knights used such weapons as the flail in different types of warfare. The quest for power led to invasions of lands and territories which had to be fought for. Siege warfare, waged to win a castle or a walled town or city, was a frequent occurrence during the Middle Ages. Warfare during the Middle Ages, or Medieval era, called for a variety of weapon expertise. Knights and men-at-arms (foot soldiers, or archers) used different types of weapons. The flail was predominantly used by knights and foot soldiers. The weapons used were dictated according to status and position. The weapons, armor and horse of the knight were extremely expensive. I don't know how this paragraph adds to the article, but it reads like a copy and paste from a school assignment about weapons and warfare generally. -Phoenixrod 21:29, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed vague paragraph

message: I think the haft and chain arrangement allowed the wielder to swing the head with much more force than with typical maces, for example.  I'm not sure if the chain merely adds length to the moment arm, or if the physics is more elaborate, but I believe this weapon hit really, really hard compared to other weapons of similar weight. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by AThousandYoung (talk • contribs) 23:27, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Leverage

message: I say we merge this page with Mace and chain, as both are nor particularly long, the shorter one is a stub, adn it woudl benefit this article. Comments?  --Patar knight 19:35, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with Mace and chain 

message: "A variation of the flail is a handle with several chains attached to it rather than one, none of which have a spiked metal ball at their ends"
i think that merely refers to the flagellant style whip which is sometimes also named a flail, which is allready mentioned in the first paragraph· Lygophile has spoken 00:52, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: also in Variations

message: Is there a variation of the flail where the handle is just a longer chain? I have seen this type of weapon used in fiction but I dont know if it exists in real life. Diabl0658 04:19, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As mentioned above, I have been looking for contemporary evidence for the use of flail-like (or ball-and-chain-like) weapons during the Middle Ages, or in fact, any time. So far, no results. Any kind of multipartite form (i.e. a massive head flexibly attached to some kind of handling device) -- except the modified threshing flail! -- should best be considered fictional until proven otherwise. Trigaranus 17:05, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Without the handle 

message: I've seen that recently two contributors from the US have changed the date (13th-15th centuries to 11th-15th c.). But as so far, nobody has produced any evidence whatsoever of a flail of this kind being used ever, I suggest you only change this dating once you have some reliable information to back it up. If you can prove that such a mace-and-chain flail was actually used, please let us know. Trigaranus (talk) 07:32, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See for examples these threads: http://www.myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?p=137632, http://www.myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=8785 As I understand it the short-handled flails weren't especially common, and most seem to be 15th century or later, but they certainly existed, in a variety of forms. 24.71.150.241 (talk) 05:59, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dating 

message: I have made a major revision to this page in order to reflect the fact that there is no evidence to support the 'iconic' form of the military flail, meaning a short stick with a ball and chain attached, of the military flail ever having existed outside the imagination of Victorian writers and contemporary fantasists. I have retained the use of the flail as an improvised weapon used on the battlefield by peasant armies, and a reference to the Hussites. If clear evidence is presented to refute me, I will certainly relent, but it is very important that we are presenting information verifiable with real evidence rather than merely reinforcing popular-cultural myths, no matter how cool those myths may be.
Dancer_Man (talk) 22:26, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That may be, but the real problem with the article is that it has no sources, either before or after the revision. -Phoenixrod (talk) 23:10, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Very true. I'll try to drum some up.
80.6.158.42 (talk) 13:03, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

text: Nice one. Trigaranus (talk) 08:44, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major Revision 

message: The article contains a detailed description of a woodcut from this book but no citation to the edition.  Although Le Chevalier Delibere is rare in that the author provided detailed notes for illustrators to follow, not all editions were the same.  The illustration mentioned doesn't appear in the editions available online.  Given its prominence in the article, a reference to the edition in which this particular illustration occurs would be valuable Monstrelet (talk) 10:49, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Le Chevalier Delibere 

message: There's a reference mentioned in one of Nicolas Lindy's videos of a French source penned by a Capitaine de Bast in 1836.  I need additional verification on this work, but I did find the text online on a possibly unreliable site (can't tell, I don't speak French):  http://www.crcb.org/batons-et-fleaux-defensifs-1836/.html
With a bit of google translate, "Le fléau" variously translates as "flail" or "scourge."  Best first refers to "Le fléau ou martinet," or "the flail/scourge or whip" and the description sounds like he's actually talking about a cat-o-nine-tails that has been modified to be a lethal weapon.  The handle is very short, it has up to nine strings (not chain), which are tipped with lead balls.  Best describes it as a purely attack oriented weapon that has the potential to kill its wielder if he doesn't know what he's doing.  The second weapon Best describes is "le fléau à battre le grain" which is roughly "the flail to beat the grain," a fairly obvious reference to the long peasant's flail.  It sounds as though Best describes its use as an extension of stick-fighting, which is consistent with Mair's early work.  The last one is "Le fléau brisé" which I think literally means "broken flail," and describes it has having an iron ball with points.  This sounds like a reference to the spiked-ball-style flail, but I can't really make sense of the French.  Anyhow, an interesting source that may be of use, even if it's several centuries later.NicoloSt (talk) 14:46, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The fleau brise does seem to be a spiked-ball flail, with the novelty that it is held together by eel skin Monstrelet (talk) 19:07, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Eel skin?  Very strange.  I have no idea where Best would have seen such a thing.NicoloSt (talk) 19:20, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capitaine de Bast (1836) source 

message: Some more pictures I found on Wiktenauer, a HEMA wiki, of peasant flails in Renaissance documents.
Hans Talhoffer (1450s):
:http://wiktenauer.com/wiki/File:MS_78.A.15_60r.jpg
:http://wiktenauer.com/wiki/File:MS_78.A.15_60v.jpg
Michael Hundt (1611)
:http://wiktenauer.com/wiki/File:Hundt_088.jpg
Jakob Sutor von Baden (1612)
:http://wiktenauer.com/wiki/File:Sutor_108.jpg
NicoloSt (talk) 19:11, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peasant flails in [[Martial_arts_manual#Historical_European_martial_arts|Manuals of Arms]] 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Flail (weapon). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140118014853/http://dvdprime.donga.com/bbs/view.asp?bbslist_id=1511545&master_id=40 to http://dvdprime.donga.com/bbs/view.asp?bbslist_id=1511545&master_id=40
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:04, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I feel that the section is lacking and statements (regarding danger and usability) refer to those two combined but are in my opinion different.
One version has a short(er) handle (to accommodate one hand) and a long chain - the chain (without the ball) is longer than is the length of the handle. I believe that is sometimes called "chain mace" or "ball and chain. It is closer to a chain weapon than a regular flail and should be considered as such, with inherent dangers of wielding a chain weapon. Chain weapons are notoriously difficult to master, so it's not a peasant's weapon even though it is depicted like that.
The other version which has the length of the chain shorter than it's the length of the handle is actually dangerous, questionably effective and honestly a miss. A failed version of two section staff. It can be a peasant's weapon. There is nothing special about it. But it's dangerous as in the heat of the battle you can forget  and grip with both hands (and that can result in crushing one) or the handle can slip. Attention is divided between not crushing your hand and not hitting the body (while with the first version it's only not hitting the body which is a risk with chain weapons). It's very unpractical as it requires attention of chain weapons but does not offer the benefits. It also damages the handle.
To me those two are  quite different weapons. They can't be treated the same.  Setenzatsu (talk) 16:42, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  military flail variations 

message: Any records of usage of flails with multiple balls. That seems like something from games and movies. It doesn't seem to have an effective value. The article could touch on that. Setenzatsu (talk) 16:42, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: The Francesca painting from the 1400s seen in the article and a few others artistic renderings do show multiple striking heads.  However, there are no surviving objects I can find that didn't turn out to be Victorian-era forgeries.  It is more than likely these depictions are intended to be fanciful artistic license by individuals with limited or no combat experience.  Like the Sturtevant article in the references states to, flails mostly appear in art of "the exotic or fantastical."  Plenty of tests show how impractical having multiple heads would be, but the problem is proving a negative.NicoloSt (talk) 17:25, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a genuine two-ball flail in the Royal Armouries.  Note that it is from the 19th century and probably represents a ceremonial rather than practical weapon.  https://collections.royalarmouries.org/object/rac-object-1589.html . Medieval illustrations of multi-ball flails exist but usually in "exotic" contexts, so may not represent real weapons.Monstrelet (talk) 12:09, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Multiple balls

message: According to this there are numerous variations:
*STICK FLAIL | CHIN KUA CH'U LIEN | JINGUACHUILIAN, commonly known as a "Tip Stick"  also known as Shao Zi Gun (梢子棍) and Pan Long Gun (盤龍棍, lit. 'Coiling dragon staff')
*LONG STICK FLAIL  | PA LENG LIEN | BA LENG LIAN | Lian Ting (連梃, lit. 'Linked staff') | Lian Jia Bang (連耞棒) also known as a Two Section Staff 长小棒 is a long two-handed "Tip Stick"  
*Three section flail, Lian Zhu Shuang Tie Bian (連珠雙鐵鞭, lit. 'Linked bead double iron whip') is a variant of Tie Lian Jia Bang (鐵鏈夾棒, lit. 'Iron chain with clubs') flail that has two connected striking ends. It could be an early predecessor of the three-section staff. 
*DOUBLE HEADED FLAIL | 連珠棍 | LANG YA LIEN | LANGYALIAN - long center staff and a shorter flail head on each end (it's not three section staff) 89.201.201.113 (talk) 23:11, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: This one noted that the Russian Wikipedia article has a bunch of information and images that this version just... doesn't. Might be good to look into bringing some of that information to here, too? HighPrincessErinys (talk) 04:04, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  other variations 

message: This article is about a Korean flail.
Examples on the flail page include several of these type of flail, and illustrations of non-Korean ones that are exactly as this article is describing.
This is not really enough substance to be considered for a page on it's own, and the flail article already has a section for "Variations outside Europe", in which a Korean sub-section can be used to put this info in to, as it is roughly one paragraph long. Chaosdruid (talk) 05:05, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Closing, given the uncontested opposition and no support. Klbrain (talk) 17:22, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge of [[Pyeongon]] into [[Flail (weapon)]]