|
Post by Jordan Williams on Sept 20, 2019 3:10:06 GMT
Helm-cleaving shows up all over the place going back to early medieval manuscripts. Yet the testing all shows it to be all but impossible esp. with a one-handed sword. Maybe there's something we've missed in the tests. Possible crappy iron that shatters with enough force? I'm with you. I mean, Let's say the iron shatters, would there still be enough momentum to cleave cleanly through the likely added cloth padding/mail underneath and then the rest of the skull to that extent? Perhaps Timo Nieminen can chime in on the topic of if Indian 19th century "chiefs" would wear a padded cap under their steel cap. I haven't seen any reference to it in writing or images.
Surely, if we can assume the armor maker had messed up on the construction of the steel cap (I've seen them described as skullcaps) then we can also assume he didn't make the more complex armor, mail, as well? Momentum is not the only thing to cut with. It was a 19th century notion that the draw cut actually did not need to be swung at all to cut, just pressed into and drawn out.
I wouldn't know, and am not sure how confident I am in the following; but skull wasn't such a big deal according to the accounts, lots of people doing the cleaving and getting cleaved, makes it sound like the sharper and sword, and the more blade presence the easier it is. None of us have done it, or anything close to it (I cut a chicken apart with my sabre once, but that's about it par bone) so forgive me if I reference the sources compiled by D.A. Kingsley too much for 19th century accounts of fighting. There really is a lot of information in the book, and as someone who practices 19th century sabre fencing it remains relevant to my interests.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Sept 20, 2019 3:35:00 GMT
Also, how many times are we going to reference modern "tests" in discussion of whether the account of the cavalry man cutting through the helmet is true that use nothing relevant to that account? How many tests use a sword later than the medieval era, and armor of the same? Renaissance at latest. Cutting through a medieval helmet with a medieval sword is much different than cutting through a helmet of a different design with a sword of terrifically different design to most medieval swords.
A katana into a japanese helmet almost farther.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Sept 20, 2019 3:47:41 GMT
Perhaps Timo Nieminen can chime in on the topic of if Indian 19th century "chiefs" would wear a padded cap under their steel cap. I haven't seen any reference to it in writing or images.
Surely, if we can assume the armor maker had messed up on the construction of the steel cap (I've seen them described as skullcaps) then we can also assume he didn't make the more complex armor, mail, as well? Momentum is not the only thing to cut with. It was a 19th century notion that the draw cut actually did not need to be swung at all to cut, just pressed into and drawn out.
I wouldn't know, and am not sure how confident I am in the following; but skull wasn't such a big deal according to the accounts, lots of people doing the cleaving and getting cleaved, makes it sound like the sharper and sword, and the more blade presence the easier it is. None of us have done it, or anything close to it (I cut a chicken apart with my sabre once, but that's about it par bone) so forgive me if I reference the sources compiled by D.A. Kingsley too much for 19th century accounts of fighting. There really is a lot of information in the book, and as someone who practices 19th century sabre fencing it remains relevant to my interests.
Oh I don't think a skull by itself will offer too much resistance it's just when we are thinking about it in conjunction with the helmet AND a possible padded cap. It's definitely an interesting account though and I can definitely appreciate the value of those sources. Oh certainly, I don't at all think that the strike would have been light or an easy feat, and I definitely do think that for the most part, armor protects. But we do have a skewed view of things given the relative quality of even "crap" Indian or Pakistani armor.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Sept 20, 2019 4:14:17 GMT
Jordan, just curious but what is the hardest targets you have cut? In terms of actual hardness? A stainless steel dog bowl with a windlass sabre. It took a pronounced draw to cut into it, lacking a good stand I placed it on the floor and took downright cuts at it. In terms of what required the best technique, sharpest edge, and the right sword, then rolled newspaper, about 6" thick in diameter. Most interesting to cut would be a raw rotisserie chicken strung up in a tree. It doesn't take much force to cut through it.
|
|
|
Post by Cosmoline on Sept 20, 2019 16:53:19 GMT
It could be bragging, but it shows up over a very long span. Another possibility is that the poor-quality helms were smashed in with enough force to cause scalp lacerations, thus prompting the usual massive head bleeding you get with those. *WE* know the brain is not destroyed by such a hit, and we know that the sword doesn't have to even cut in that circumstances. But it looks horrific, with copious scalp blood pouring all over. I recall medieval art showing blood in this fashion, and essentially pairing it with a complete split of the helm and the sword buried in the skull. But we could be seeing the fish get larger in the telling. A hit that caused blood to pour onto the face from secondary wounds (sharp iron, poor fitting coif, broken shards inside, etc) is then recounted as splitting the head half in two.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2019 16:57:56 GMT
Obata sensei wrecked a helmet with a katana. Maybe you're not using a strong enough sword? This video also shows a katana against a helmet but even with that big downward 2 handed swinging it isn't splitting it in half or anything. at 0.30 So? Why does it have to be literally split in half?
|
|
|
Post by Cosmoline on Sept 20, 2019 17:02:30 GMT
Because that's what's been shown or described from the Morgan Bible to the 19th century accounts. Even the two-handed Japanese blade only opened the top. But, again, this would have likely produced a prolific bleeder.
|
|
|
Post by markus313 on Sept 20, 2019 18:04:54 GMT
On test-cutting with mail and padding, using different techniques: from Hank Reinhardt's THE BOOK OF THE SWORD, 2009, p. 43ff:
On the mail used:
“One variable over which there is no control is mail. Mail came in all shapes and sizes, some thick, some thin. Made individually, each shirt would be slightly different. So I settled on what was available to me.”
Further:
“But frankly, none of us can hold a candle to what a 25-year-old Viking warrior could do. He spent most of his life in hard physical labor—working a farm, fishing, chopping wood, and learning to fight. So keep this in mind when you read the results of the test cuts. Also remember that I am cutting a shoulder roast on a stump. From this you may extrapolate what would happen in a real fight, though my results are not a one-to-one correlation for a historical fight.”
[…]
“The mail was cut, the padding dented, and the flesh sustained a longer cut on each, but with slightly less depth. The cuts were about 4 inches in length, with a depth of about one quarter inch.”
[…]
“As for mail: original mail has such incredible variety of ring and diameter sizes that it simply is not possible to make a categorical statement. What I found with my mail was pretty much the same result as on flesh: the rounded point cut mail about as well as a blow with the optimal striking point. It was also able to penetrate mail, but swords with very narrow sharp points penetrated better. One thing this rounded point will do, is allow the sword to be used as if it were a longer blade.”
|
|
|
Post by Cosmoline on Sept 20, 2019 18:23:34 GMT
That's interesting. What kind of mail did he use?
I'm always skeptical of the "they were stronger back then" concept. On average they were more fit, to be sure, but it's very difficult to compare qualitative feats of strength mentioned in old sources with quantified feats in the modern world. One area we can do this is warbows, and modern people have shown that with training they can use bows as heavy as anything on the Mary Rose.
|
|
|
Post by markus313 on Sept 20, 2019 18:38:27 GMT
Sadly he doesn’t go further into what kind of mail he used. Also I strongly suspect two things, namely that Hank was a good if not great cutter by today’s standards and that the mail he used was not the best modern mail available today.
|
|
|
Post by markus313 on Sept 20, 2019 18:39:11 GMT
One area we can do this is warbows, and modern people have shown that with training they can use bows as heavy as anything on the Mary Rose. But for how long and at what cadence?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2019 19:05:30 GMT
A) Just then a French officer stooping over the body of one of his countrymen, who dropped the instant on his horse's neck, delivered a thrust at poor Harry Wilson's body; and delivered it effectually. I firmly believe that Wilson died on the instant yet, though he felt the sword in its progress, he, with characteristic self-command, kept his eye on the enemy in his front; and, raising himself in his stirrups, let fall upon the Frenchman's head such a blow, that brass and skull parted before it, and the man's head was cloven asunder to the chin. It was the most tremendous blow I ever beheld struck; and both he who gave, and his opponent who received it, dropped dead together. The brass helmet was afterwards examined by order of a French officer, who, as well as myself, was astonished at the exploit; and the cut was found to be as clean as if the sword had gone through a turnip, not so much as a dint being left on either side of it.web.archive.org/web/20080111011120/http://swordforum.com/articles/ams/cavalrycombat.phpwww.swordforum.com/vb4/showthread.php?68153-1796-LC-sabre-French-complaints````````````````````````````````` On heavy targets, it has been awhile and when working in warehouses. The pallet wrap cores are cardboard tubes about 3 1/2" id and walls about 1/2". Free standing on a mat stand, they were devilishly tough to cut and impossible (to those of us) using a katana. We were succeeding using an A&A Edward III bladed sword, the A&A German bastard (a wrist beast) and a light ATrim XIIIa. My other heavy target at home was a leather Wellington boot, stuffed with a 2-litre bottle filled with .50 cal lead shot. Devised as a thrusting target, I did cut into a few times when I first got my A&A Black Prince. Surprisingly, with a little practice, the XVa was making wounds in the boot not far from the XIIIa (it just took some adjustment in perceived POP). In these later years with sabres, cutting has been pretty much limited to mats. I did at one point up end a #10 can and "drop" the German Bastard blade through it with little effort. I can't speak to the references Jordan has listed. We've all (no doubt) watched the History Channel programs with cutting and blows. With our own experiences, we can speculate and refute certain accounts but without better specifics at times, it amounts to a lot of uselessly expended key strokes and at times a bit of denial. A classic of my own denial at one moment was denying sail powered hydrofoils. Some helms appear quite possible defeats, while others pretty obviously less able to be cut. Again though, armour was worn to defeat cuts, blows and penetration. The account of the brass helm French Napoleonic, maybe stands out but the accounts of decapitation, limbing and split skulls, common enough that they were probably not too terribly exaggerated. See the Walsingham account of Homildon Hill quoted above and it relates first hand accounts with (imo) little reason for bias or stretching the truth. Todeschini's recent archery experiments good fun and results (to me) seemed fairly predictable. Cheers GC The tube from pallet wrap were dense and sparkly inside. I'm sure more easily cut if clamped but that wasn't the challenge. Cutting unpegged mat stumps similarly taking technique and pvc lined pegs too often cut through that sleeving pegs was discontinued (did make it easier to swap them out though.
|
|
|
Post by Cosmoline on Sept 20, 2019 19:21:11 GMT
One area we can do this is warbows, and modern people have shown that with training they can use bows as heavy as anything on the Mary Rose. But for how long and at what cadence?
I'll let a modern master address that question. He can do 160 easily, but 200 is a stretch for him. That's within the highest estimated paramters for period warbows, and likely higher than what was actually in the field.
|
|
|
Post by Cosmoline on Sept 20, 2019 19:22:17 GMT
Sadly he doesn’t go further into what kind of mail he used. Also I strongly suspect two things, namely that Hank was a good if not great cutter by today’s standards and that the mail he used was not the best modern mail available today. Well damn. That was a test I hadn't heard about before. If it was butted the test doesn't mean much.
|
|
|
Post by markus313 on Sept 20, 2019 19:42:07 GMT
A quarter-inch depth cut would likely not even get beyond the Gambeson though. I read that as cutting the mail, denting the padding and cutting (ripping?) the flesh.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2019 19:46:24 GMT
|
|
|
Post by markus313 on Sept 20, 2019 19:46:58 GMT
But for how long and at what cadence?
I'll let a modern master address that question. He can do 160 easily, but 200 is a stretch for him. That's within the highest estimated paramters for period warbows, and likely higher than what was actually in the field.
7:01: "With a 200-pound bow, after six arrows I’m knackered". 7:07: "With a 160-pound bow I can shoot all day and accurate".
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Sept 20, 2019 19:58:23 GMT
In terms of actual hardness? A stainless steel dog bowl with a windlass sabre. It took a pronounced draw to cut into it, lacking a good stand I placed it on the floor and took downright cuts at it. In terms of what required the best technique, sharpest edge, and the right sword, then rolled newspaper, about 6" thick in diameter. Most interesting to cut would be a raw rotisserie chicken strung up in a tree. It doesn't take much force to cut through it. I guess my reason for asking is that you cite this experience with the dog bowl being difficult even with a downward cuts with gravity helping on top of it. Idk the strength of a stainless steel dog bowl in comparison with the iron helmet but I wouldn't imagine that it would be far superior. But perhaps it is ...Kinda funny to think our modern dog bowls are better armor then a designated helmet. See, that's the thing though. There was no room for any deeper a cut than the tip allowed, and it wasn't hard at all to cut through. Just the material in and of itself was hard, if that makes sense. The only thing that mattered was chopping vs drawing, and of course tip speed. This was also a few years back when I knew less of sword theory then I do now.
|
|
|
Post by markus313 on Sept 20, 2019 20:02:02 GMT
From Reinhardt, 2009:
“In the past I have done a great deal of testing of mail, on all of the average sizes given above. I found the most effective mail was riveted and made with soft iron wire. The soft mail has a tendency to fold around a sword blade, rather than be cut. Spring steel mail and case hardened mail put up a little more resistance, but then would break or shatter and allow a sword to cut deeper. Riveted mail was much more resistant to thrusts. When struck with maces, hammers, or clubs, mail showed a positively gory tendency to grind itself into whatever was underneath. It did not stop the shock of the blow, and when using a pig shoulder joint, the mail cut through the leather backing and into the meat itself. A padded undergarment helps distribute the shock of the blow and improves the effectiveness of mail. A partially educated guess would be about 30 percent improvement. Not a figure to be ignored when it's your hide you are protecting.”
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2019 20:06:35 GMT
myarmoury.com/talk/spotlight.phpIn reading warbow threads for decades, even 160# was a higher draw with the norm more in the 120#-150# range. The numbers of archers in the 13th-15th century growing exponentially in the UK and the transition towards plate still left a lot of soft spots for massive flights of arrows that might make a wound. Kind of a spray and pray which, in some cases, carried the day. Any good accounts of archers in the Colosseum? Cheers GC
|
|