|
Post by Dalaran1991 on Mar 14, 2012 12:14:58 GMT
My question is that, with the exception of full-plate armor, is it worth it at all to wear armor? I know a few kenjutsu people who say that when sparring full contact a strike to the head with a wood bokken was excruciatingly painful, so in battle a katana to a helmeted head would stun you for half a second, more than enough for a skilled opponent to deliver the coup de grace.
While scale and chainmail offer protection against cut, the blunt force generated will still stagger the warrior, and they all say that in battle 1 second is all you need.
Besides, armor is cumbersome and exhausting. Would it be better to just wear a shield instead? Cheaper, better coverage and more versatile IMO.
Can anyone help me on this?
|
|
|
Post by Vincent Dolan on Mar 14, 2012 12:49:44 GMT
Short answer? Yes, it is worth it.
Long answer (to the best of my knowledge): armor of any kind was always worn over padding of some sort, not only so that the armor didn't dig into the body, but to provide some measure of protection against blunt force. Second, I refuse to believe that the blunt force from a sword is enough to cause a conditioned soldier in armor to stagger. I used to spar full force with a friend wearing no padding whatsoever (stupid, I know) and the only blows that ever made me pause was when I got hit on the thumbs. Now, I'm not trained in any way, nor have I had the kind of conditioning to take a blow that most soldiers of the day would have had, either through regular training or sparring, so it just seems ridiculous to believe that what would make a soft person like myself barely pause would stagger a seasoned warrior. But that's just me; your mileage may very.
Next, a blow to a helmeted head may stun you, but I doubt that'd be enough to allow an opponent to kill you, mainly because the purpose of armor is to prevent that. In that half-second, the most likely way they could do that would be to tackle you to the ground, pin you, and then use a dagger to stab you in the gaps in your armor; gaps which, by the way, are very small and hard to hit with the point of a sword, even when the target is stationary. Also, I'm pretty sure those kenjutsuka are referring to a blow against an unarmored head, which yes, does hurt like hell.
As for armor being cumbersome, this is a bit of a misconception, I think. To someone who has trained regularly and rigorously in their armor, it wouldn't be that cumbersome, particularly if it's made properly. Here's a video featuring a drill in full plate armor. Doesn't look that cumbersome, does it?
Now, a shield is an excellent defensive weapon, but if that's your only line of defense, well, I'd hate to see what's left of you after a fight with a trained swordsman. Add in the fact that while a shield does have good coverage, it can only cover one section of your body at a time. There are feints where you aim low so the shield holder drops the shield to block and then you come up and strike at the unprotected head. No helmet? Free haircut! Armor either covers the entire body or the vital areas: head, torso, and occasionally the forearms and shins. So while I definitely wouldn't want to let a blow past my shield for my armor to take, it wouldn't mean my death (most likely) if I did.
|
|
|
Post by chrisperoni on Mar 14, 2012 13:29:20 GMT
of course it's worth it- any type. Why the heck would anyone ever have worn it when fighting if it didn't help? For that matter why would anyone ever have made it if it wasn't worth it?
|
|
|
Post by Dalaran1991 on Mar 14, 2012 13:34:52 GMT
Wow, the video was really good thank you. I do know that trained warrior can do acrobatics in their full suits, but I've also read accounts of knights dying of heat exhaustion because of their armor so that give me doubt. But anyway, no ordinary sword would cut through that full plate armor so he does have that advantage. chrisperoni: that wasn't very helpful. Could you explain it instead of back-questioning me? I do know they exist for a reason, but I would like to understand how and why.
|
|
|
Post by Lonely Wolf Forge on Mar 14, 2012 13:38:34 GMT
history shows it was very much worth it, consider this, battles werent 1 on 1 fights, you might have guys attacking you from behind while your engaging someone else. if youve done any sparring your see that no matter how skilled you are and how un skilled your opponet is, your GOING TO GET HIT. Maybe not every time, but 50% of the time you will take a hit, my money says im gonna be having armor for when i do get hit.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent Dolan on Mar 14, 2012 14:10:33 GMT
The answer to that should be fairly obvious, I'd think. You're encased in 60lbs of steel, leather, and cloth. Even a moderately warm day will bake you alive after a few hours, particularly when you add the rigors of combat to the mix. If he pops up, just ask Jeremy (Jhart06); he's a stage fighter and regularly fights in armor, so I'm sure he could give you the nitty-gritty on how hot that stuff gets. No sword can cut through plate armor, period. And even the best thrusting swords can penetrate maybe an inch or two at most; then they'll be lodged in and it's no easy thing to wrench them out. No sword can cut through chain maille, either. It's also difficult to thrust through it without either a dedicated thrusting sword (and then penetrating is an inch or two at most) or, and this is your best bet, a poleaxe. A good sword paired with a good swordsman could cut through boiled leather, but it's easier to just thrust through it, which is why the Romans, using the gladius that they preferred to thrust with, were so devastating against the Germanic tribes and the like, who used boiled leather or padded cloth for armor. Speaking of armor, here's an older thread from MyArmoury detailing the defensive capabilities of riveted chain maille and padded jacks. It's an extremely informative test with many photos to illustrate the results.
|
|
jhart06
Member
Slowly coming back from the depths...
Posts: 3,292
|
Post by jhart06 on Mar 14, 2012 14:28:28 GMT
I'm pretty sick today, so forgive me not giving a bit more info, but plate armor can become absurdly hot. Hot enough that to touch the outside will actually burn your bare hand. And i've seen, in extreme heat outside, many gentleman end up dehydrated and heat stroked under an hour. But there is a problem with what we know as the modern endurance in plate and what our ancestors might.. Quite simply, even the most veteran re-enactor spends probably less than 1/3 of the time in his armor as the lowest of low ranked knights did back then.
Also, if someone is wearing plate and overheating, do not under any circumstances give them cold water. Remove their helmet, gauntlets, and sabtons first and foremost, in that order too. Drop their feet in a tank of lukewarm/air temperature water, and then set about removing the rest, giving them the same temp water to drink. At the point of overheating, cold water to the system is bad enough my old group's medic said she saw a gentleman from further south actually go into cardiac arrest when he stumbled off the field and someone threw a bucket of cold water on him. To us the water is tepid and nasty, but to those in the armor, it's icy.
As for the head strike with a katana, I can directly speak for that, as I suffered it. I was knocked out, but -not- as a normal result, the other person hit me right on the hinge of the helm's visor, and the helm suffered a failure at the join which cause it to cave in and crush into my temple.
However, in normal combat v.s. that same person and others, the ringing was disorienting, and if it was a poleaxe or the like, enough to 'stun' me, but you do, slowly, begin to get use to the feeling somewhat, so even when stunned, you can tell, and try to drop back or away in defensive posture. Basically you learn to retreat full bore while trying to clear your head to normal. But a strike to the head, especially properly fitted and padded, wasn't a guaranteed stun.
As for protection v.s. the trade off of mobility, it can be worth it. But you need armor made to your size, and not bought piecemeal in size XL from vendors, if you're going full plate and chain. Having only worn borrowed plate, and seeing the man it was made for then move it, I can tell you there was a radical difference even though my encumbrance wasn't horrible. Shields are wonderful too, but just as vincent pointed out, it can also be used as a reliability by a skilled opponent with things such as a feint and the like. The best way defensively to use a shield, in my opinion, is to cover openings made from when you strike, and to work in conjunction with your stance and blade to defeat strikes from the opponent.
I should also note, i've logged some time fighting, but I was at most considered middling rank/training when injury and relocation out of state stopped me from practicing, and what I call upon for experience is rooted in history, it is not from any one historical school, so their may be gaps or misunderstanding. But any of us will have that in any form of combat re-enactment simply because it's no longer a fight to the death. But I hope some of my ramblings helped you see the pitfalls you mentioned are there, and real, but others have highlighted very well the advantages.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2012 14:41:24 GMT
All armour is useful to varying degrees, depending on the weapons it's facing, which is why they had to keep upgrading the weapons to try overcome the armour. When the armour got to full plate, the weapons evolved into very different tools to deal with it, but any lesser weapons would be of limited effectiveness against any armour more advanced than it.
Considering that warhammers, maces, poleaxes and sturdy swords with strong points and fast tapering blades were designed to go against plate, anything less would be at a handicap. Maile armour could stop a slicing cut and arrows from a distance, and even leather armour would provide a significant obstacle to ligher sword blades. It all worked, which is why it was used historically.
As Vincent mentioned, the swords could not defeat plate, they had to try for the joins and gaps in the armour, while the heavy blunt trauma weapons tried to smash through, and only these could reliably cause a stunning blow through armour.
Forget about katanas in battle against armour, that is a non-event, you'll just chip the fragile hard edge, considering they can't slice through maile. That's why the samurai used the yari (spear) and naginate (glaive) as their primary weapons, along with their yumi (bow), sword was a last-ditch backup weapon, the rest is movie fantasy. Thet also had a bisento (halberd), so they relied on polearms in their armoured combat...
Cutting blades are less effective than thrusting blades against armour, which is why many western swords used in armoured combat evolved into powerful thrusters with fast tapering points, designed for powerful penetration of hard targets, and even daggers developed into desgns where the blades looked like multiple sided reinforced spikes as in the case of some rondel dagger blades.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2012 14:49:29 GMT
With the question of armour being hot, yes it will be hotter than regular clothing, but remember the countries where this was historically developed and used. Full plate was never worn in the history of the US, and in a hot climate like that, it's no surprise (plus the country isn't old enough in terms of the history of migration of western people there, which is the other main reason!)
In the climate of Europe, particularly England, where it's always cold, wet, and overcast, overheating would have been less of a problem. You were more in danger of getting stuck in the mud, such as what happened to the French who were fightng the English in the battle of Agincourt in 1415.
|
|
|
Post by Lonely Wolf Forge on Mar 14, 2012 14:49:35 GMT
i disagree with just one point made above "No sword can cut through chain maille, either." Ive seen swords cut through chain mail in destructive tests, one of Pauls comes to mind where he tested like 5 different swords against maile. Im not saying Maille is worthless, it would be my preferred type of armor actually, but it Can be cut and pierced.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2012 15:06:43 GMT
Depends on the maile and the sword. Butted maile does come apart, while riverted or welded links are much, much stronger. The western swords made for fighting plate could cut maile (see the test of the DSA Gothic two handed sword against maile and plate). Maile is weakest against the thrust, that's correct, it wont protect against a spear but provides very good protection against most lighter cutting/slicing blades.
|
|
jhart06
Member
Slowly coming back from the depths...
Posts: 3,292
|
Post by jhart06 on Mar 14, 2012 15:16:42 GMT
Yeah, unless it's a monster two hander, or one designed for that purpose, properly riveted 4-in-1 or 6-in-1 is going to be a bear to get through. And even then, you have padding and clothing worn under it, so I'd still trust it.
Man, if I had the disposable income, this almost makes me want to rig some hauberks or coifs to throw around on targets at the East Coast meetup for SBG.
Another anecdote- I've seen a six foot ten german man in custom fitted plate do 'the hustle' and the 'charleston' and other goofy dance manuevers better than I could unarmored. He claims he moonwalked that day as well, but I didn't see it. Granted, his suit cost over 10k or so, but it gives you an idea of the mobility properly fitted armor allows. That same gentleman later that day took a full head blow from a glaive to his sallet helm and managed to still beat his opponent. He was dizzy for a few hours, but adrenaline is also something I forgot to mention that can severely under-cut the 'ring their bell' syndrome people often envision against plate wearers.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent Dolan on Mar 14, 2012 15:19:34 GMT
Ah, but see, the maille Paul used in his destructive testing was butted maille, not riveted. Butted maille is absolutely worthless as a defense unless the rings are wrapped around several times like a key ring so that they won't open at the slightest strike. Riveted maille absolutely cannot be cut through if it's properly maintained. Here's a picture from the test I linked to earlier that shows a few nicked & bent rings from several blows via a Del Tin Type XX (at least, that's what the owner believes it to be): As for penetrating riveted maille, it's possible, but has some surprising results, as evidenced here: As you can see, they were getting, at most, 2.4-3" of penetration, which might be enough to kill if you got the right spot, but as seen, the sword gets trapped in the maille the stronger the blow, making it difficult to pull it out and if the thrust isn't an immediate kill, your opponent could potentially use the time it takes you to wrench your sword free to strike you. And if not them then one of their comrades, as you'd likely be doing this in the middle of a melee with dozens of people surrounding you. By the way, in case you're curious, the swords used in the video, unless I miss my guess, are an Albion Count, Agincourt, and Crecy.
|
|
|
Post by MrAcheson on Mar 14, 2012 15:29:33 GMT
Also keep in mind that the modern military combat load isn't that different from back then. US soldiers are wearing padded armor (kevlar), plate armor (SAPI), and helmets (ACH) plus weapons, ammo, etc. And they're operating in places like Iraq that are very hot and potentially humid as well. Which is why the Army adopted slogans like Hydrate or Die.
|
|
Greg
Senior Forumite
Posts: 1,800
|
Post by Greg on Mar 14, 2012 15:35:58 GMT
Edit: My whole post was rendered unnecessary after seeing the above video.
I'm not an history expert, but wasn't it traditional to wear a padded gamberson just below the chainmail? Or if not that, then then below the leather. Either way, 2-3 inches of penetration would likely kill you with the infection rather then that actual strike.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2012 15:45:13 GMT
That's true, tmodern soldiers are carrying the same weight as a knight did, in the hot desert, definitely not the place to be! Ventilation is a bit better thankfully. The suggestion was that in the places where full plate armour was used, they luckily had much cooler climates!
|
|
jhart06
Member
Slowly coming back from the depths...
Posts: 3,292
|
Post by jhart06 on Mar 14, 2012 15:51:09 GMT
Not exactly sure on the historical value, but I always wore padded vest, cur bouili/boiled leather jerkin, and then the chain. And at those rates of penetration, you'd feel it, no doubt. But you'd also likely live, and your opponent might not, as he's suddenly found his sword won't move.
And yes, if you study the Crusades and other places where warfare was warm, like Byzantium or other similar climates [not by necessity time periods] the fuller, more encompassing armor gave way to varied other methods of protection and armoring.
|
|
Luka
Senior Forumite
Posts: 2,848
|
Post by Luka on Mar 14, 2012 18:31:29 GMT
I think that mail that he cut was on the hard surface like wood or something. You can't cut mail with sword on a target representing human body and padding which would be worn beneath it.
|
|
|
Post by Dalaran1991 on Mar 14, 2012 20:11:24 GMT
Wow, thanks for the very detailed answer guys, especially jhart and vincent. How did you come to know all this? I tried to do a research paper on medieval weaponry once but it's hard to find sources. Hearing from you guys is very valuable. Damn, if armor can get hot like that, how in the world did the crusaders capture Jerusalem? Obviously they failed in the big picture, but still... @blackthorn: yes, while I enjoy kenjutsu tremendously I don't buy into the superiority of katana. Any samurai who ever saw or faced a naginata would quickly adopt that death-dealer over the katana any day. In my training in kenjutsu we are always taught to strike the gaps (which there are quite a lot in a suit of yoroi). But if I lose my naginata seriously I'll just switch to jujutsu/aikido and not bother drawing a sword What about ranged weapon? I'm studying abroad in France right now and did upload lots of photos of medieval armor and weapon from the Museum of the Army a while back in the forum. I must admit I'm a bit biased toward the French, so I find it hard to accept what happened at Agincourt, when a bunch of peasant bowmen massacred an army of 10,000 knights. Seriously could longbow with bodkin arrow punch through full-plate? And at that distance? Moving men make poor surface upon which the arrow could lodge, and it lacks the mass required to deliver such a blow (speaking from my limited knowledge of course). Granted, they were firing hundred of arrows, so maybe the sting of each arrow smashing home (even without penetrating) could be overwhelming. What your take on this?
|
|
|
Post by Svadilfari on Mar 14, 2012 20:54:31 GMT
Any armour, even the best, works on a law of averages. Will it protect you from the average sort of attacks from the average weapons you're likely to encounter ? ANY armour can be defeated by a weapon it wasn't designed to protect against. ( No matter how expensive/good your armour is..being hit by a round from a trebuchet isn't survivable, all the armour can do then is to make collecting the remains a bit easier) And an attack doesn't have to kill you outright to take you out of a battle. No matter how good you may be, if you can't fight, you're useless as far as a battle is concerned.
|
|