So, around the 1300's, armour started to transition from mail to plates. My question is, what brought it about?
If it was a simple arms race, then shouldn't the adoption of plate occured much earlier in history? If it was some new technology or technique, then what was it?
Thanks in advance!
Plate armour question
Moderator: Alyrium Denryle
Plate armour question
"Hell or plunder, comrades - March!"
-Conan, Black Colossus, Robert E. Howard
-Conan, Black Colossus, Robert E. Howard
-
wolveraptor
- Sith Marauder
- Posts: 4042
- Joined: 2004-12-18 06:09pm
It was probably because knowledge earlier constrained to the East was finally being disseminated to the West. Advanced metallurgy was well-and-alive in Arab kingdoms.
"If one needed proof that a guitar was more than wood and string, that a song was more than notes and words, and that a man could be more than a name and a few faded pictures, then Robert Johnson’s recordings were all one could ask for."
- Herb Bowie, Reason to Rock
- Herb Bowie, Reason to Rock
The thing that started the transition from Chainmail to Plate armor was the Advent of Armor Peircing weapons such as lances.
Your also missing a step. Knight's Plate Armor as we generally think about it evovled from something called a Coat of Plate witch was a type of Torso armor composed of overlapping plates of metal which was common around the 12th to 14th centuries. Coats of Plate evolved into Plate because of the introduction of more powerful armor percing weapons (such as the lance) and the Refinement of Temperature Control in large scale furnaces allowing for the Production of larger plates.
Zor
Your also missing a step. Knight's Plate Armor as we generally think about it evovled from something called a Coat of Plate witch was a type of Torso armor composed of overlapping plates of metal which was common around the 12th to 14th centuries. Coats of Plate evolved into Plate because of the introduction of more powerful armor percing weapons (such as the lance) and the Refinement of Temperature Control in large scale furnaces allowing for the Production of larger plates.
Zor
HAIL ZOR! WE'LL BLOW UP THE OCEAN!
Heros of Cybertron-HAB-Keeper of the Vicious pit of Allosauruses-King Leighton-I, United Kingdom of Zoria: SD.net World/Tsar Mikhail-I of the Red Tsardom: SD.net Kingdoms
WHEN ALL HELL BREAKS LOOSE ON EARTH, ALL EARTH BREAKS LOOSE ON HELL
Terran Sphere
The Art of Zor
Heros of Cybertron-HAB-Keeper of the Vicious pit of Allosauruses-King Leighton-I, United Kingdom of Zoria: SD.net World/Tsar Mikhail-I of the Red Tsardom: SD.net Kingdoms
WHEN ALL HELL BREAKS LOOSE ON EARTH, ALL EARTH BREAKS LOOSE ON HELL
Terran Sphere
The Art of Zor
-
Jalinth
- Jedi Council Member
- Posts: 1577
- Joined: 2004-01-09 05:51pm
- Location: The Wet coast of Canada
The transition was due to a combination of things. Also, you have different types of plate. Plate over chain was the start, then gradually they started having full plate - entire breastplates, etc...
The key thing isn't only the offensive/defensive, you had to consider the transport (horses). The warhorses kept on getting bigger to support more heavily armoured knights. So until the horses were big enough, plate wasn't useful. Lastly, each generation of armour was more and more expensive, so the economy had to improve to support these armoured knights.
Then sneaky peasants and other low-lifes started using pikes, and unmilitary things like early firearms to stop them. So the days of the knights were numbered.
The key thing isn't only the offensive/defensive, you had to consider the transport (horses). The warhorses kept on getting bigger to support more heavily armoured knights. So until the horses were big enough, plate wasn't useful. Lastly, each generation of armour was more and more expensive, so the economy had to improve to support these armoured knights.
Then sneaky peasants and other low-lifes started using pikes, and unmilitary things like early firearms to stop them. So the days of the knights were numbered.
-
Ariphaos
- Jedi Council Member
- Posts: 1739
- Joined: 2005-10-21 02:48am
- Location: Twin Cities, MN, USA
- Contact:
The Stirrup was invented just before Charlemagne's time, and along with it, the lance. Half a millenia before the advent of plate.
As mentioned, it was the development of the requisite forging techniques, combined with Europe's rather plentiful resources, in addition to the growing knowledge of the human body (inside and out), allowing these plates to be properly fitted to their wearer without hampering movement.
Horse size has nothing to do with it. Japanese O-Yoroi armor, used on horseback, is heavier than any non-jousting suit of full plate ever got (30+ kgs versus 20-25 kgs).
The key step, in my mind, was the development of articulated joints. This allowed the transition from plate-and-chain to full and field plate armors.
As mentioned, it was the development of the requisite forging techniques, combined with Europe's rather plentiful resources, in addition to the growing knowledge of the human body (inside and out), allowing these plates to be properly fitted to their wearer without hampering movement.
Horse size has nothing to do with it. Japanese O-Yoroi armor, used on horseback, is heavier than any non-jousting suit of full plate ever got (30+ kgs versus 20-25 kgs).
The key step, in my mind, was the development of articulated joints. This allowed the transition from plate-and-chain to full and field plate armors.
I think the tech drove the armour drove the armsrace, and not the other way around.
Mail-breaking weapons predate anything like proper plate:
Daneaxes feature in early 12th century warfare. Crossbows about then as well. Longswords from 1250. None seem to trigger a massive leap forward in armour, (though coats of plates and other reinforcements kicked in from the 1200s.)
Also, you can't blame the longbow, because the best armour producing centres were Italy and Germany - not famed for their Welshmen.
On the other hand, poleaxes and other armour breakers only seem to become ubiquitous after plate progresses to the point where a sword is no longer your best military weapon - c1350s.
So, to me it looks like the technology and infrastructure suddenly made platearmour possible, thus kicking off an arms race, and not the other way around.
Mail-breaking weapons predate anything like proper plate:
Daneaxes feature in early 12th century warfare. Crossbows about then as well. Longswords from 1250. None seem to trigger a massive leap forward in armour, (though coats of plates and other reinforcements kicked in from the 1200s.)
Also, you can't blame the longbow, because the best armour producing centres were Italy and Germany - not famed for their Welshmen.
On the other hand, poleaxes and other armour breakers only seem to become ubiquitous after plate progresses to the point where a sword is no longer your best military weapon - c1350s.
So, to me it looks like the technology and infrastructure suddenly made platearmour possible, thus kicking off an arms race, and not the other way around.
"Let teachers and philosophers brood over questions of reality and illusion. I know this: if life is illusion, then I am no less an illusion, and being thus, the illusion is real to me. I live, I burn with life, I love, I slay, and am content" (REH's Conan)
-
LaCroix
- Sith Acolyte
- Posts: 5196
- Joined: 2004-12-21 12:14pm
- Location: Sopron District, Hungary, Europe, Terra
Au contraire...
Platemail was not realy a uniform thing in europe, there were many regional differences.
Especially the Italians were in fact well known for the use of crossbows.
When you compare german and italian(genovese) plate, you will see that german platemail is much lighter, and leaves some gaps open, because it was designed for use in a region with very little archery in battle, and so, agility in fighting was a important point.
Italian style armor was nearly double thickness and left no unprotected gaps. Especially genovese battlefields (and even more naval battle) was heavyly "showered" in arrows and crossbow-bolts. Since you were that heavy armored, and your opponents were as well, agility was no thing to think about. An agile, light-armored combatant was not surviving long enough to be a threat in such a type of battle.
One source in english...
http://www.ceu.hu/medstud/manual/SRM/armor.htm
The most important causes for the transition from mail to plate were:
1. The refined production techniques, making plates easier to make (before, they were not impossible, but horrendous pricy since they had to try numerous times to make one working piece), still they were as pricy as a whole town each!
2. The better armor value of plate against piercing, sharp and blunt weapons.
3. The long-range warfare became more important these days, leading to "tortoise"-shelled fighters who did't have to care about the "hard rain", giving them the edge in combat.
Platemail was not realy a uniform thing in europe, there were many regional differences.
Especially the Italians were in fact well known for the use of crossbows.
When you compare german and italian(genovese) plate, you will see that german platemail is much lighter, and leaves some gaps open, because it was designed for use in a region with very little archery in battle, and so, agility in fighting was a important point.
Italian style armor was nearly double thickness and left no unprotected gaps. Especially genovese battlefields (and even more naval battle) was heavyly "showered" in arrows and crossbow-bolts. Since you were that heavy armored, and your opponents were as well, agility was no thing to think about. An agile, light-armored combatant was not surviving long enough to be a threat in such a type of battle.
One source in english...
http://www.ceu.hu/medstud/manual/SRM/armor.htm
The most important causes for the transition from mail to plate were:
1. The refined production techniques, making plates easier to make (before, they were not impossible, but horrendous pricy since they had to try numerous times to make one working piece), still they were as pricy as a whole town each!
2. The better armor value of plate against piercing, sharp and blunt weapons.
3. The long-range warfare became more important these days, leading to "tortoise"-shelled fighters who did't have to care about the "hard rain", giving them the edge in combat.
A minute's thought suggests that the very idea of this is stupid. A more detailed examination raises the possibility that it might be an answer to the question "how could the Germans win the war after the US gets involved?" - Captain Seafort, in a thread proposing a 1942 'D-Day' in Quiberon Bay
I do archery skeet. With a Trebuchet.
I do archery skeet. With a Trebuchet.
Of course there were regional variations! I'd have to go over battle descriptions to see whether your intriguing analysis holds water! I like the idea, but with reservations.*
Your reasoning doesn't explain why the increased use of ranged weapons predates the rise of plate by well over a generation. The Italians were famous for crossbows in the 13th, well before the Milanese started churning out white harness.
In general, crossbows came in in the 12th, real plate in the 14th. That means you have to account for two centuries of knights getting randomly drilled at 300 yards!
You can't even blame it on the rise of polarms. Courtrai was 1304, Bannockburn 1314, but it's more than a generation before integrated plate comes along. That's like facing tanks in 1914, but only developing anti-tank guns in 1950!
Look how quickly canon became ubiquitous. If white harness had been feasible in 1300, Bannockburn would have gone differently.
Really, it has to be economy and techbase.
Thanks for the link. A better source for the history of medieval armour is of course Claude Blair "European Armour", still regarded as a standard work amongst academics. Oakshott's "A Knight and His Armour" is aimed at older kids, but still a very useful summary. There's also the Osprey books....
Cheers
Z
*I suspect you're exaggerating the differences in mobility offerred by the German and Italian armours. For a start, the Italians were able to export quite successfuly to Germany. Conversely, English 15th-century armour tends to have germanesque details, such as shell elbow cops.
That said, my own armour is broadly German in style because I was after mobility.
Your reasoning doesn't explain why the increased use of ranged weapons predates the rise of plate by well over a generation. The Italians were famous for crossbows in the 13th, well before the Milanese started churning out white harness.
In general, crossbows came in in the 12th, real plate in the 14th. That means you have to account for two centuries of knights getting randomly drilled at 300 yards!
You can't even blame it on the rise of polarms. Courtrai was 1304, Bannockburn 1314, but it's more than a generation before integrated plate comes along. That's like facing tanks in 1914, but only developing anti-tank guns in 1950!
Look how quickly canon became ubiquitous. If white harness had been feasible in 1300, Bannockburn would have gone differently.
Really, it has to be economy and techbase.
Thanks for the link. A better source for the history of medieval armour is of course Claude Blair "European Armour", still regarded as a standard work amongst academics. Oakshott's "A Knight and His Armour" is aimed at older kids, but still a very useful summary. There's also the Osprey books....
Cheers
Z
*I suspect you're exaggerating the differences in mobility offerred by the German and Italian armours. For a start, the Italians were able to export quite successfuly to Germany. Conversely, English 15th-century armour tends to have germanesque details, such as shell elbow cops.
That said, my own armour is broadly German in style because I was after mobility.
"Let teachers and philosophers brood over questions of reality and illusion. I know this: if life is illusion, then I am no less an illusion, and being thus, the illusion is real to me. I live, I burn with life, I love, I slay, and am content" (REH's Conan)
-
LaCroix
- Sith Acolyte
- Posts: 5196
- Joined: 2004-12-21 12:14pm
- Location: Sopron District, Hungary, Europe, Terra
Well, while a chainmail is pretty much sufficient to protect you against a volley arrow (direct shots are a different thing, but they are rather seldom used, since archers wer usually far away from the battle line), a volley crossbow bolt carries a lot more energy. also, a rather aimed shot is possible with a crossbow at much higher ranges.
Yes, the crossbow came a lot earlieer, but it took a while to get the evolution to the point where winch-loaded crossbows were available at draw weights to nail the knights. That certainly took a while.
Taking into consideration that bow and crossbow were papal banned weapons, there won't be so much use for a very long time.
Please consider that an good bow or a heavy crossbow still had to get very close to the knight to penetrate chainmail, we are talking of ranges of ~50 m direct LOS to get into armor piercing range. A rare event in medieval fighting. Archers usually had to shoot volleys above the heads of their own fighters, aiming far into the bulk of the enemy. As soon as full melee startet, archers were pretty much unable to contribute in a big way.
Most harm was done by clouds of arrows from above, which only would lead to bruises and little cuts on chainmail wearers. But when the heavy longbows and crossbows became more common, these bruises grew more nasty, making upper torso armor of plate necessary. Also, a rider would have the problems of having his legs more exposed, so the front of the legs was also in need of plate armor.
As the ranges&power grew even more, allowing to "pin-point" the knights on their horses more precisely, making a full, seamless plate armor necessary.
Yes, the crossbow came a lot earlieer, but it took a while to get the evolution to the point where winch-loaded crossbows were available at draw weights to nail the knights. That certainly took a while.
Taking into consideration that bow and crossbow were papal banned weapons, there won't be so much use for a very long time.
Please consider that an good bow or a heavy crossbow still had to get very close to the knight to penetrate chainmail, we are talking of ranges of ~50 m direct LOS to get into armor piercing range. A rare event in medieval fighting. Archers usually had to shoot volleys above the heads of their own fighters, aiming far into the bulk of the enemy. As soon as full melee startet, archers were pretty much unable to contribute in a big way.
Most harm was done by clouds of arrows from above, which only would lead to bruises and little cuts on chainmail wearers. But when the heavy longbows and crossbows became more common, these bruises grew more nasty, making upper torso armor of plate necessary. Also, a rider would have the problems of having his legs more exposed, so the front of the legs was also in need of plate armor.
As the ranges&power grew even more, allowing to "pin-point" the knights on their horses more precisely, making a full, seamless plate armor necessary.
A minute's thought suggests that the very idea of this is stupid. A more detailed examination raises the possibility that it might be an answer to the question "how could the Germans win the war after the US gets involved?" - Captain Seafort, in a thread proposing a 1942 'D-Day' in Quiberon Bay
I do archery skeet. With a Trebuchet.
I do archery skeet. With a Trebuchet.
-
LaCroix
- Sith Acolyte
- Posts: 5196
- Joined: 2004-12-21 12:14pm
- Location: Sopron District, Hungary, Europe, Terra
Adressing the difference.
It was quite a lot difference between italian and german armor.
The italian armor hat some restrictions in mobility that prohibit the use of some fighting techniques (most of them concerning freedom of movement in the shoulder, as far as I am informed)
But they were a lot more protective, so I could imagine that an experienced or simply older knight, not so keen onto the "I can dance all day" techniques would prefer a very strong, gapless armor and hack&slash melee-fighting over a lighter armor with duelling capabilities for "mano a mano" fighting.
A german armor had some gaps to be exploited, a italian armor had to be literally pounded into submission. A feature not to be underestimated in a mostly hand to hand warfare.
It was quite a lot difference between italian and german armor.
The italian armor hat some restrictions in mobility that prohibit the use of some fighting techniques (most of them concerning freedom of movement in the shoulder, as far as I am informed)
But they were a lot more protective, so I could imagine that an experienced or simply older knight, not so keen onto the "I can dance all day" techniques would prefer a very strong, gapless armor and hack&slash melee-fighting over a lighter armor with duelling capabilities for "mano a mano" fighting.
A german armor had some gaps to be exploited, a italian armor had to be literally pounded into submission. A feature not to be underestimated in a mostly hand to hand warfare.
A minute's thought suggests that the very idea of this is stupid. A more detailed examination raises the possibility that it might be an answer to the question "how could the Germans win the war after the US gets involved?" - Captain Seafort, in a thread proposing a 1942 'D-Day' in Quiberon Bay
I do archery skeet. With a Trebuchet.
I do archery skeet. With a Trebuchet.
(Thanks, this is really interesting, btw)
Can you show me evidence for for different coverage? There are German harnesses with full hooped faulds, and not all gaps are real gaps. E.g. the Sigismund armour has no tassets because it's suppose to be worn on horseback with a proper saddle.
As regards shoulders: you're contrasting spaulders with pauldrons. One of the best swordsmen I know wears pauldrons to reenactment events because he finds they give him more mobility than spaulders!
However, I'm wary of any arguments which derive negatives from modern reenactment armour. Modern armourers just aren't as good as their medieval predecessors, and their customers rarely do as many fittings as required.
That said, I agree armour must reflect combat style. For example, IMHO, the German preference for narrow-cuffed fingered gauntlets over Italian flared-cuff mittens probably derives from some of the longsword moves unique to the German tradition.
Can you show me evidence for for different coverage? There are German harnesses with full hooped faulds, and not all gaps are real gaps. E.g. the Sigismund armour has no tassets because it's suppose to be worn on horseback with a proper saddle.
As regards shoulders: you're contrasting spaulders with pauldrons. One of the best swordsmen I know wears pauldrons to reenactment events because he finds they give him more mobility than spaulders!
However, I'm wary of any arguments which derive negatives from modern reenactment armour. Modern armourers just aren't as good as their medieval predecessors, and their customers rarely do as many fittings as required.
That said, I agree armour must reflect combat style. For example, IMHO, the German preference for narrow-cuffed fingered gauntlets over Italian flared-cuff mittens probably derives from some of the longsword moves unique to the German tradition.
"Let teachers and philosophers brood over questions of reality and illusion. I know this: if life is illusion, then I am no less an illusion, and being thus, the illusion is real to me. I live, I burn with life, I love, I slay, and am content" (REH's Conan)
-
the wicked prince
- Youngling
- Posts: 80
- Joined: 2005-06-12 03:58am
What is the difference between these plate armors and the early plates of Gaya Federation or the Greeks?
I presume that unless the coverage is total, and the weight distribution and articulation allow for good movement, the old plate armors are not advantageous over lamellar and chain. Manufacturing techniques likely constrain the amount and quality of plate armors that could have been produced in the good old days
I presume that unless the coverage is total, and the weight distribution and articulation allow for good movement, the old plate armors are not advantageous over lamellar and chain. Manufacturing techniques likely constrain the amount and quality of plate armors that could have been produced in the good old days
The Italians had water hammers etc, and were able to churn out munitions plate at an alarming rate. IIRC, one city requipped an entire army on the fly. Persume the Germans were similar.
Late Medieval full plate is lighter and has better coverage than anything predating it. Even cataphract armour had to rely on lots of mail/scale to cover gaps. The proof is that the 15th-century knight is the heaviest infantryman in history.
Late Medieval full plate is lighter and has better coverage than anything predating it. Even cataphract armour had to rely on lots of mail/scale to cover gaps. The proof is that the 15th-century knight is the heaviest infantryman in history.
"Let teachers and philosophers brood over questions of reality and illusion. I know this: if life is illusion, then I am no less an illusion, and being thus, the illusion is real to me. I live, I burn with life, I love, I slay, and am content" (REH's Conan)
-
LaCroix
- Sith Acolyte
- Posts: 5196
- Joined: 2004-12-21 12:14pm
- Location: Sopron District, Hungary, Europe, Terra
austrian art-historic museum, Armor-archive.
http://www.khm.at/data/page450/ArmaturaFrancese250.jpg
Mailand erw. 1430-1452
http://www.khm.at/data/page459/KuerissHelmschmid250.jpg
Augsburg erw. 1467-1516
http://www.khm.at/data/page460/Reiterha ... and250.jpg
Italienisch, 1490/1500
http://www.khm.at/data/page452/HerkulesHarnisch250.jpg
Antwerpen erw. 1557-1569 very late, but "german" style
http://www.khm.at/data/page465/Prunkhar ... ino250.jpg
Mailand erw. 1570-1595 late italian style
The difference is very obvious.
http://www.khm.at/data/page450/ArmaturaFrancese250.jpg
Mailand erw. 1430-1452
http://www.khm.at/data/page459/KuerissHelmschmid250.jpg
Augsburg erw. 1467-1516
http://www.khm.at/data/page460/Reiterha ... and250.jpg
Italienisch, 1490/1500
http://www.khm.at/data/page452/HerkulesHarnisch250.jpg
Antwerpen erw. 1557-1569 very late, but "german" style
http://www.khm.at/data/page465/Prunkhar ... ino250.jpg
Mailand erw. 1570-1595 late italian style
The difference is very obvious.
A minute's thought suggests that the very idea of this is stupid. A more detailed examination raises the possibility that it might be an answer to the question "how could the Germans win the war after the US gets involved?" - Captain Seafort, in a thread proposing a 1942 'D-Day' in Quiberon Bay
I do archery skeet. With a Trebuchet.
I do archery skeet. With a Trebuchet.
-
CaptainChewbacca
- Browncoat Wookiee
- Posts: 15746
- Joined: 2003-05-06 02:36am
- Location: Deep beneath Boatmurdered.
... do you mean the stirrups?Akhlut wrote:Why does the Mailand, 1430-1452 suit of armor have those long pieces coming off the feet? For really painful kicks to the crotch?
Stuart: The only problem is, I'm losing track of which universe I'm in.
You kinda look like Jesus. With a lightsaber.- Peregrin Toker
You kinda look like Jesus. With a lightsaber.- Peregrin Toker
-
Batman
- Emperor's Hand
- Posts: 16398
- Joined: 2002-07-09 04:51am
- Location: Seriously thinking about moving to Marvel because so much of the DCEU stinks
What stirrups? He's referring to the first link which upon reexamination looks rather weird indeed.CaptainChewbacca wrote:... do you mean the stirrups?Akhlut wrote:Why does the Mailand, 1430-1452 suit of armor have those long pieces coming off the feet? For really painful kicks to the crotch?
'Next time I let Superman take charge, just hit me. Real hard.'
'You're a princess from a society of immortal warriors. I'm a rich kid with issues. Lots of issues.'
'No. No dating for the Batman. It might cut into your brooding time.'
'Tactically we have multiple objectives. So we need to split into teams.'-'Dibs on the Amazon!'
'Hey, we both have a Martian's phone number on our speed dial. I think I deserve the benefit of the doubt.'
'You know, for a guy with like 50 different kinds of vision, you sure are blind.'
'You're a princess from a society of immortal warriors. I'm a rich kid with issues. Lots of issues.'
'No. No dating for the Batman. It might cut into your brooding time.'
'Tactically we have multiple objectives. So we need to split into teams.'-'Dibs on the Amazon!'
'Hey, we both have a Martian's phone number on our speed dial. I think I deserve the benefit of the doubt.'
'You know, for a guy with like 50 different kinds of vision, you sure are blind.'
-
CaptainChewbacca
- Browncoat Wookiee
- Posts: 15746
- Joined: 2003-05-06 02:36am
- Location: Deep beneath Boatmurdered.
Oh, I looked at the wrong Mailand. That's a spiked sabaton. Good for kicking footsoldiers.Batman wrote:What stirrups? He's referring to the first link which upon reexamination looks rather weird indeed.CaptainChewbacca wrote:... do you mean the stirrups?Akhlut wrote:Why does the Mailand, 1430-1452 suit of armor have those long pieces coming off the feet? For really painful kicks to the crotch?
Stuart: The only problem is, I'm losing track of which universe I'm in.
You kinda look like Jesus. With a lightsaber.- Peregrin Toker
You kinda look like Jesus. With a lightsaber.- Peregrin Toker
-
Grey Eminence
- Redshirt
- Posts: 17
- Joined: 2005-06-15 07:07am
- Location: Burnaby, BC.
Here are a few examples of the production capacity of the major armour producing ceters (individual orders).Zornhau wrote:The Italians had water hammers etc, and were able to churn out munitions plate at an alarming rate. IIRC, one city requipped an entire army on the fly. Persume the Germans were similar.
Late Medieval full plate is lighter and has better coverage than anything predating it. Even cataphract armour had to rely on lots of mail/scale to cover gaps. The proof is that the 15th-century knight is the heaviest infantryman in history.
--Sent by Fredrick the Lombard (Milan) to Philip IV in 1295. 4511 mail coats, 5067 coats of plate, 2853 helmets, 1374 gorgets, 751 pairs of gauntlets, 6309 shields.
--Produced in Milan to make good the losses sustained against the Venitians (1427). 4000 sets of cavalry armour, 2000 sets of infantry armour. This was supplied within several days of the request and gives an idea of the inventory in Milan at any one time.
--Produced in Brescia for Venice in 1478. 10000 cuirasses and 10000 helmets.
--Produced in Nuremberg for Charles IV in 1363. 1816 sets of plate armour.
German armour did not really make a big commerical impact in Europe until the 1420's. After that Nuremberg, Augsberg, Landshut, and Innsbruck began to rival the major armour producing centers in Italy (Milan, Brescia). Prior to that if you wanted to equip an army you pretty well had to buy from the Italians since there was no other place in Europe that produced armour on anything more than a small scale.
Crossbow bolts do not carry especially much more energy than arrow. In fact crossbow is mediocre weapon to bow in every aspect BUT training time.
Chainmail does not protect against any sort of heavy war arrows and it can be shot through using mediocre weak 50 lbs bow.It can be shot throug with an arrow without arrowhead, just with sharpened shaft or an arrow with stome point.
Regular steel tipped shaft goes through without even slowing much. Read latest serie of articles in "The Glade" by Marc Stretton.
That is the reason why everybody used such big shield during the golden age of chain mail use.
Now plate is animal of another stripe, but it can be shot through, it was done in mediaval times, it was shot through by some serious archers including me.
There is but something to be said about spearpoint driven by the ton of armored horse and man behind it.
I would be also careful with statements like "german armour lighter, with gaps" and others, because thy arent true. Italian and german armour differ, but they do offer about the same level of protection.
Chainmail does not protect against any sort of heavy war arrows and it can be shot through using mediocre weak 50 lbs bow.It can be shot throug with an arrow without arrowhead, just with sharpened shaft or an arrow with stome point.
Regular steel tipped shaft goes through without even slowing much. Read latest serie of articles in "The Glade" by Marc Stretton.
That is the reason why everybody used such big shield during the golden age of chain mail use.
Now plate is animal of another stripe, but it can be shot through, it was done in mediaval times, it was shot through by some serious archers including me.
There is but something to be said about spearpoint driven by the ton of armored horse and man behind it.
I would be also careful with statements like "german armour lighter, with gaps" and others, because thy arent true. Italian and german armour differ, but they do offer about the same level of protection.
Destrier? 3/4 ton of meat?
Hawkwind, you're not quite right on the crossbows.
The average archer could shoot farther and more accurately with a bow, but in short range the crossbow was the stronger weapon, because it could be cranked to a higher poundage than most archers could pull. More poundage transfers to more kinetic energy hitting the target, but the short quarrel of the crossbow did not have the aerodynamics to fly as far and hit as solidly as a basic war arrow.
In battle, bows were a long-range artillery weapon, meant to cut down the enemy before they got into melee range. Standard battle tactics had the archers firing over their front ranks to hit the enemy.
A crossbow is more of a straight-line shot, losing too much of its energy when fired in a ballistic arc. However, when in range, the sheer force of the quarrel could and did punch through armor that would deflect an arrow fired in the same way.
The average archer could shoot farther and more accurately with a bow, but in short range the crossbow was the stronger weapon, because it could be cranked to a higher poundage than most archers could pull. More poundage transfers to more kinetic energy hitting the target, but the short quarrel of the crossbow did not have the aerodynamics to fly as far and hit as solidly as a basic war arrow.
In battle, bows were a long-range artillery weapon, meant to cut down the enemy before they got into melee range. Standard battle tactics had the archers firing over their front ranks to hit the enemy.
A crossbow is more of a straight-line shot, losing too much of its energy when fired in a ballistic arc. However, when in range, the sheer force of the quarrel could and did punch through armor that would deflect an arrow fired in the same way.
Me: Nope, that's why I have you around to tell me.
Nitram: You -are- beautiful. Anyone tries to tell you otherwise kill them.
"A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory. LLAP" -- Leonard Nimoy, last Tweet
-
LapsedPacifist
- Jedi Knight
- Posts: 608
- Joined: 2004-01-30 12:06pm
- Location: WestCoast N. America
Chainmail was difficult and time consuming to make, every link being hammered and rivited shut. Plate requires more technology to make, but once you've got that technology it requires less man hours to put out.
As far as arrows in the conflict, throughout the War of the Roses the armor tended towards German style, I belive.
LP
As far as arrows in the conflict, throughout the War of the Roses the armor tended towards German style, I belive.
LP
Osprey books have them in Milanese until quite late on. Not everything with a sallet and shell elbow guards is German.
"Let teachers and philosophers brood over questions of reality and illusion. I know this: if life is illusion, then I am no less an illusion, and being thus, the illusion is real to me. I live, I burn with life, I love, I slay, and am content" (REH's Conan)