Nevertheless, some are recorded as having fought in armor, although no contemporary illustrations showing any of them actually wearing armor appear to have survived. Joan of Arc ca. Yet only one small illustration of her, undoubtedly drawn during her lifetime, has come down to us, showing her with a sword and banner but not dressed in armor.
The fact that contemporaries apparently perceived women leading an army, or even wearing armor, as something worth recording at least in writing indicates that such a sight must have been an exception rather than the rule.
This idea may stem from the fact that much of the armor on exhibition in institutions like the Metropolitan Museum represents equipment of especially high quality, while much of the plainer arms and armor of the common man and lower nobility has been either relegated to storerooms or lost over the centuries. It is true that, unless looted from a battlefield or won in a tournament, the acquisition of armor would have been a costly affair. However, as there are certainly differences in the quality of armor, there also would have been differences in price.
Armor of low to medium quality, affordable to burghers, mercenaries, and lower nobility, could be bought, ready-made, at markets, trading fairs, and in urban shops.
On the other hand, there were also the high-end, made-to-measure products of the imperial or royal court workshops, and of famous German and Italian armorers. Although examples of the price of armor, weapons, and equipment are known from several periods in history, it is difficult to translate historical monetary value into modern terms. At the upper end of the scale, we find examples such as a large garniture a basic suit of armor that, through the addition of further pieces and plates, could be adapted for various purposes both on the battlefield and in different types of tournament commissioned in by a German king later emperor for his son.
An entire suit of field armor that is, armor for battle usually weighs between 45 and 55 lbs. Moreover, while most modern equipment is chiefly suspended from the shoulders or waist, the weight of a well-fitted armor is distributed all over the body. It was not until the seventeenth century that the weight of field armor was greatly increased in order to render it bulletproof against ever more accurate firearms.
At the same time, however, full armor became increasingly rare, and only vital parts of the body, such as the head, torso, and hands, remained protected by metal plate. A harness of plate armor was made up of individual elements for each limb. The widely held view that a man in armor could hardly move, and, once he had fallen to the ground, was unable to rise again, is also without foundation.
On the contrary, historical sources tell us of the famous French knight Jean de Maingre ca. Furthermore, there are several illustrations from the Middle Ages and the Renaissance depicting men-at-arms, squires, or knights, all in full armor, mounting horses without help or instruments such as ladders or cranes. Modern experiments with genuine fifteenth- and sixteenth-century armor as well as with accurate copies have shown that even an untrained man in a properly fitted armor can mount and dismount a horse, sit or lie on the ground, get up again, run, and generally move his limbs freely and without discomfort.
Tournament armor was made for very specific occasions and would have been worn only for limited periods of time. The man-at-arms would have mounted his steed with the aid of his squire or a small step, and the last pieces of his armor could then be donned after securely sitting in the saddle. This notion appears to have originated during the late nineteenth century as a joke. It entered popular fiction during the following decades, and the image was finally immortalized in when Sir Laurence Olivier used it in his movie Henry V —despite the protestations of his historical advisors, who included the eminent authority Sir James Mann, Master of the Armouries at HM Tower of London.
As outlined above, most armor is neither so heavy nor inflexible as to immobilize the wearer. Most men-at-arms would have been able to simply put one foot in a stirrup and mount their horse without assistance. A stool or perhaps the help of a squire would have made the process even speedier; a crane, however, was absolutely unnecessary.
When the person wearing armor was not engaged in warfare, he would simply do what people do today. Being on the battlefield must have been a different matter. In this case, we do not know the answer. It is sometimes argued that the military salute originated during the Roman Republic , when assassinations were common and citizens were required to approach public officials with their right hand raised in order to show that they did not conceal a weapon. A more common account is that the modern military salute originated from men in armor raising the visors of their helmets before greeting their lord or comrades.
This gesture would have made a person both recognizable as well as vulnerable, at the same time demonstrating that the right hand i.
Although these theories are compelling and romantic , there is actually little evidence to support either of them as the direct origin of the modern military salute. As for the Roman practice, it would be virtually impossible to prove that it continued through fifteen centuries or was revived during the Renaissance , leading in a straight line to the modern military salute.
There is also no direct evidence for the visor theory, although it is more recent. The majority of helmets for war after around were increasingly of types not fitted with visors, and helmets became rare on European battlefields after about As with so many misconceptions, the origins of this misnomer are to be found in the nineteenth century. When early scholars of armor looked at medieval artworks, they noticed what they thought to be depictions of many different forms of armor: rings, chains, bands of rings, scales, small plates, etc.
It is today commonly accepted, however, that most of these different depictions are actually various attempts by artists to efficiently show the surface of a type of armor that is difficult to render both in paint or sculpture.
Rather than showing each interlinking ring, the small links were stylized by dots, slashes, S-shapes, circles, and the like, which readily lent themselves to misinterpretation. To give a definitive answer to this question is impossible for several reasons. First, hardly any evidence survives that would provide a complete picture for any given period.
Scarce evidence is available from the fifteenth century onward as to how armor was ordered, in what time the order was completed, and how much the parts or entire armor cost. Second, a complete armor could comprise elements made by several specialized armorers.
Pieces might also be held in stock half-finished and then fitted for a specific commission. Finally, the matter is complicated by regional and national differences. Throughout the German-speaking lands, most armorer workshops were controlled by strict guild regulations , which limited the number of apprentices, and thus had a direct effect on the number of pieces that could be produced by one master and his small workshop.
In Italy, on the other hand, no such regulations existed, and workshops could accordingly be much larger, which undoubtedly must have enhanced speed and quantity of production. In any case, one must bear in mind that the production of arms and armor was a thriving business throughout the Middle Ages and the Renaissance.
Armorers, blade smiths, gun makers, crossbow and bow makers, and fletchers were found in every large town. Then as now, their market was regulated by supply and demand, and time-efficient work must have been an essential part of a successful business.
The answer to this question is therefore perhaps as simple as it is elusive. The time it took to make armor depended on several factors, namely, who ordered the work, from whom the work was commissioned i. Two famous examples may serve to illustrate this point. The armorer informs Sir John that he can make the requested suit of armor as soon as the English knight tells him what pieces he requires, in which fashion, and when the armor must be completed unfortunately, no time frame is given.
In court workshops, the production of garnitures for a princely client appears to have required more time. The term Haubergeon "little hauberk" refers to a shorter variant with partial sleeves, but the terms are often used interchangeably.
Slits to accommodate horseback-riding are often incorporated below the waist. Most are put on over the head. Hauberk can also refer to a similar garment of scale armour. Roman armies adopted similar technology after encountering it. Mail armour spread throughout the Mediterranean Basin with the expansion of the Romans. It was quickly adopted by virtually every iron-using culture in the world, with the exception of the Chinese. The Chinese used it rarely, despite being heavily exposed to it from other cultures.
The short-hemmed, short-sleeved hauberk may have originated from the medieval Islamic world. The Bayeux Tapestry illustrates Norman soldiers wearing a knee-length version of the hauberk, with three-quarter length sleeves and a split from hem to crotch. In Europe, use of mail hauberks continued up through the 14th century, when plate armour began to supplant it. Pixane A mail collar. It is a circle with a hole for the neck to fit through. It covers the shoulders, breast and upper back.
Gousset 14th C. Mail that protects areas not covered by plate. Chausses Mail hose, either knee-high or cover the whole leg. Mail is still used as protective clothing by butchers, woodcarvers, police and Scuba divers and as decoration on some military uniforms.
Mail coif This example is a modern reproduction, courtesy "Swords and Armor". A Knight removing his mail hauberk. Detail from the Morgan Bible f28r. An aventail or camail is a flexible curtain of chainmail that covers the neck and shoulders.
Plate armour, which protected the chest and the lower limbs, was used by the ancient Greeks and Romans, but it fell into disuse after the collapse of the Roman Empire because of the cost and work involved in producing a lorica segmentata or comparable plate armour.
Single plates of metal armour were again used from the late 13th century on, to protect joints and shins, and these were worn over a mail hauberk. By the end of the 14th century, larger and complete full plates of armour had been developed. European leaders in armouring techniques were northern Italians and southern Germans. England produced armour in Greenwich and they both developed their own unique style. Maximilian style armour immediately followed this, in the early 16th century.
Maximilian armour was typically denoted by fluting and decorative etching, as opposed to the plainer finish on 15th century white armour. This era also saw the use of Close helms, as opposed to the 15th century style sallets and barbutes.
Turkey also made wide use of plate armour but incorporated large amounts of mail into their armour, which was widely used by shock troops such as the Janissary Corps. In the rest of the world, though, the general trend was towards mail, scale, or lamellar armour. Full plate armour was expensive to produce and remained therefore restricted to the upper strata of society; lavishly decorated suits of armour remained the fashion with 18th century nobles and generals long after they had ceased to be militarily useful on the battlefield due to the advent of powerful muskets.
Reduced plate armour, typically consisting of a breastplate, a burgonet, morion or cabasset and gauntlets, however, also became popular among 16th century mercenaries and there are many references to so-called munition armour being ordered for infantrymen at a fraction of the cost of full plate armour. This mass-produced armour was often heavier and made of lower quality metal than knight armour.
From the 15th century on, armour specifically designed for jousting rather than for battle and parade armour also became popular. Many of the latter were decorated with biblical or mythological motifs. Armour was not confined to the Middle Ages, and in fact was widely used by most armies until the end of the 17th century for both foot and mounted troops.
It was only the development of powerful rifled firearms which made all but the finest and heaviest armour obsolete.
The increasing power and availability of firearms and the nature of large, state-supported infantry led to more portions of plate armour being cast off in favour of cheaper, more mobile troops. Leg protection was the first part to go, replaced by tall leather boots. By the early part of the 18th century, only field marshals, commanders and royalty remained in full armour on the battlefield as they were tempting targets for musket fire.
Cavalry units, especially cuirassiers, continued to use front and back plates that could protect them from distanced fire and either helmets or "secrets", a steel protection they wore under a floppy hat. Other armour was hidden under decorative uniforms.
The cavalry armour of Napoleon, and the French, German, and British empires heavy cavalry known as cuirassiers were actively used through the 19th century right up to the first year of World War I, when French cuirassiers went to meet the enemy in armour outside of Paris. Plate armour could have consisted of a helmet, a gorget or bevor , pauldrons or spaulders , couters, vambraces, gauntlets, a cuirass back and breastplate with a fauld, tassets and a culet, a mail skirt, cuisses, poleyns, greaves, and sabatons.
While it looks heavy, a full plate armour set could be as light as only 20 kg 45 pounds if well made of tempered steel. This is less than the weight of modern combat gear of an infantry soldier usually 25 to 35 kg , and the weight is more evenly distributed.
The weight was so well spread over the body that a fit man could run, or jump into his saddle. Modern re-enactment activity has proven it is even possible to swim in armour, though it is difficult. It is possible for a fit and trained man in armour to run after and catch an unarmoured archer, as witnessed in re-enactment combat. The notion that it was necessary to lift a fully armed knight onto his horse with the help of pulleys is a myth originating in Victorian times.
Even knights in heavy jousting armour were not winched onto their horses. This type of "sporting" armour was meant only for ceremonial lancing matches and its design was deliberately made extremely thick to protect the wearer from severe accidents, such as the one which caused the death of King Henry II of France.
Tournament armour is always heavier, clumsier and more protective than combat armour. Combat armour is a compromise between protection and mobility, while tournament armour stresses protection on cost of mobility.
Plate armour was virtually sword-proof. It also protects the wearer well against spear or pike thrusts and provides decent defence against blunt trauma. The evolution of plate armour also triggered developments in the design of offensive weapons.
While this armour was effective against cuts or blows, their weak points could be exploited by long tapered swords or other weapons designed for the purpose, such as poleaxes and halberds. The effect of arrows and bolts is still a point of contention in regards to plate armour. Fluted plate was not only decorations, but also reinforced the plate against bending under slashing or blunt impact. This offsets against the fact that flutes could sometimes catch piercing blows.
In armoured techniques taught in the German school of swordsmanship, the attacker concentrates on these "weak spots", resulting in a fighting style very different from unarmored sword-fighting. Because of this weakness most warriors wore a mail shirt haubergeon or hauberk beneath their plate armour or coat-of-plates. Later, full mail shirts were replaced with mail patches, called goussets, sewn onto a gambeson or arming jacket.
Further protection for plate armour was the use of small round plates called besagews that covered the armpit area and couters and poleyns with "wings" to protect the inside of the joint.
The evolution of the 14th century plate armour also triggered the development of various polearms. They were designed to deliver a strong impact and concentrate energy on a small area and cause damage through the plate. Maces, war hammers and the hammer-heads of pollaxes poleaxes were used to inflict blunt trauma through armour. Tournament Helm made of steel, possibly English, c , for tournaments fought on foot.
Tournament Helm, steel, possibly English, c , This helm was made for tournaments fought on foot. The evolution of head armour from the Dark Age Spangel Helm to the seventeenth century. They have never fallen out of use but have evolved not only for military use, but for many other spheres of live where there is a danger of head injury - mines, horse and motor cycle riding, building sites and so on.
The medieval version - or rather upwards of a dozen medieval versions - are also preserved in coats of arms where they form an essential part of the crest. Indeed crests were originally bird-like crests on the helmet.
Mantling or lambrequin is drapery tied to the helmet above the shield. It forms a backdrop for the shield. It is a depiction of the protective cloth covering often of linen worn by knights from their helmets to stave off the elements, and, secondarily, to decrease the effects of sword-blows against the helmet in battle, from which it is usually shown tattered or cut to shreds as if damaged in combat, though the edges of most are simply decorated at the emblazoner's discretion.
The nasal helmet was a form of helmet with a domed or raised centre, usually formed around a basic skull-cap design, with a single protruding strip that extended down over the nose to provide additional facial protection. The helmet appeared throughout Europe late in the 9th century, and became the predominant form of head protection, replacing the previous pudding-bowl design, and the Vendel-style spectical helm.
One of the earliest versions of the nasal helm is the Vasgaard Helmet. The Bayeux Tapestry features many such helmets, it being the most popular form of protection at the time. The helmet began to lose popularity at the end of the 12th century to helmets that provided more facial protection, and although the nasal helm lost popularity amongst the higher classes of knights and men-at-arms, they were still seen amongst archers to whom a wide field of vision was crucial.
The helmet can also be viewed throughout the Maciejowski Bible as a minority item for cavalrymen, giving the impression that it had become uncommon though not unknown by the mid-thirteenth century. Nasal helmets have been found of both one-piece and Spangenhelm construction, with the later period helmets being made of a single, smooth raised dome to allow weapons to glance off with ease.
The name is of German origin. Spangen refers to the metal strips that form the framework for the helmet and could be translated as clips. The strips connect three to six steel or bronze plates. The frame takes a conical design that curves with the shape of the head and culminates in a point. The front of the helmet may include a nose protector a nasal.
Older spangenhelms often include cheek flaps made from metal or leather. Spangenhelms may incorporate mail as neck protection, thus forming a partial aventail. Some spangenhelms include eye protection in a shape that resembles modern eyeglass frames. Other spangenhelms include a full face mask. The spangenhelm originated in Central Asia and Ancient Persia, arriving in Europe by way of what is now southern Russia and Ukraine, spread by nomadic Iranian tribes such as the Scythians and Sarmatians who lived among the the Eursian steppes.
By the 6th century it was the most common helmet design in Europe and in popular use throughout the Middle East. It remained in use at least as late as the 9th century. The spangenhelm was an effective protection that was relatively easy to produce.
Weakness of the design were its partial head protection and its jointed construction. It was replaced by similarly shaped helmets made with one-piece skulls nasal helms , kettle hats and eventually the Great helm or casque.
The great helm or heaume, also called pot helm, bucket helm and barrel helm, of the High Middle Ages arose in the late twelfth century in the context of the crusades and remained in use until the fourteenth century. They were used by knights and heavy infantry in most European armies between about to AD. In its simplest form, the great helm was a flat-topped cylinder of steel that completely covered the head and had only very small openings for the eyes and mouth. Later designs gained more of a curved design, particularly on the top, to deflect or lessen the impact of blows.
The style is sometimes referred to as a 'crusader helmet', but also as a 'pot helm', and a later variant with a more conical top is known as a 'sugarloaf helm'. In Spanish they are called yelmo de Zaragoza, referring to Saragossa where they were introduced for the first time in the Iberian peninsula.
Although the great helm offered greater protection than previous helmets, such as the nasal helm and spangenhelm, it limited the wearer's vision to some extent, and provided poor ventilation. A knight might wear the close-fitting steel skull cap known as a cervelliere, or its later development the bascinet beneath the great helm. A great helm may have also an attached mail collar, or camail, to protect the wearer's neck, throat, and shoulders. The bascinet evolved from its early skull cap form to supersede the great helm for combat.
The great helm fell into disuse during the 15th century, however it was used commonly in tournaments where a version of the great helm, the a frog-mouthed tilting helm, evolved. Frog-mouthed great helm - commonly in tournaments during the 15th century. This is a modern reproduction. The earliest versions of the bascinet, at the beginning of the 14th century, had no visors, and were worn underneath larger "great helms. Thus, having a smaller helmet underneath was a real advantage.
Small "nasals" were developed to protect the nose and part of the face after the great helm was discarded. By the middle of the 14th century, most knights discarded the great helm altogether in favour of a fully visored bascinet. The visor was often conical, giving the appearance of a muzzle or a beak. They were sometimes called "dog faced" medievally known as a hounskull or "pig faced" a common modern term.
The early versions sometimes had a neck defence of mail called a camail or aventail, while later versions at the end of the 14th century often protected the neck with a separate but attached plate assembly, the gorget. The aventail was attached to a leather band, which was in turn attached to the lower border of the bascinet by a series of staples called vervelles.
Holes in the leather band were passed over the vervelles, and a waxed cord was passed through the holes in the vervelles to secure it. The helmet also had a series of small holes around the bottom edge of the helmet and the face hole. These holes were used to sew a padded liner inside the helmet. The liner was made of linen or a linen blend cloth stuffed with wool or horsehair. The top of the liner was a series of lobes which were gathered by a cord to adjust how high the helmet rode on the wearer's head.
While no known chin straps were used, the bascinet was often prevented from being lifted off the wearer's head by tying or strapping the camail to the surcoat or armour. The bascinet, both with and without a visor visors were often removable for better visibility and ventilation , was the most common helmet worn in Europe during the latter portions of the 14th and early 15th century, including during the Hundred Years' War.
Contemporary illustrations show nearly every knight and man-at-arms wearing one of a few variants of the basic hounskull helmet. The basic design was intended to direct blows from weapons downward and away from the skull and face of the wearer. In Germany a more bulbous version also appeared in the beginning of the 15th century.
During the first half of the 15th century, more plates were added to protect the throat better, producing a form called the "great bascinet". Both the portion covering the skull and the hinged visor over the face became less angular and more rounded, until by the mid- to late s, the great bascinet had evolved into the armet. Two styles of attaching the visor existed. The "klappvisor" was a single hinge at the front of the forehead that was commonly seen in Germany.
The side-pivot mount used two pivots on the side of the helmet, which connected to the visor with hinges to compensate for the lack of parallelism in the pivots. The side-pivot system was commonly seen in Italian armours. Some seasoned knights often wore their bascinets without visors for better visibility and breathing during hand-to-hand combat, and to avoid heat exhaustion.
An aventail or camail is a flexible curtain of chainmail on a helmet, that extends to cover the neck and shoulders.
The mail could be attached to the helm by threading a leather cord through brass rings at the edge of the helm. Aventails were most commonly seen on bascinets in the 14th century and served as a replacement for a chainmail coif. Some aventails were decorated with edging in brass or bronze links, or dagged edges. By the late 15th century, the Aventail had replaced the chainmail coif completely.
Only those who were poor or who were collectors of the sort had a chainmail coif. Aventails were typically attached to the helmet via small staples known as vervelles. A bowl helmet that encloses the entire head with the use of hinged cheek plates that fold backwards. A gorget was attached and a comb may be present. It may also have a rondel at the rear. Later armets have a visor.
A stereotypical knight's helm especially favoured in Italy. The sallet also called salade and schaller was a war helmet that replaced the bascinet in northern Europe and Hungary during the midth century. Some sallets were close fitting except at the back of the head where they extended and formed a pointed tail.
Some Italian ones followed the shape of the neck, and had an additional plate riveted on. Many sallets were worn with an extended, padded, gorget called a bevor that protected the wearer's jaw. Some sallet versions have occularia in the form of a slit in a visor, some have this slit in the front of the helm, or even in the brim.
Most sallets needed no breathing holes, as there was a natural gap where it overlapped the bevor near the wearer's mouth. Some Italian sallets had a "bellows visor" with breaths cut into the visor. This helmet design contrasted with the barbute which was popular in Italy at the same time. Unlike the sallet, the barbute itself protected the jaw and neck.
So whereas the gorget or bevor were important counterparts to the sallet, they were usually absent in barbutes. Barbutes did not pivot. Sallets did not share the barbute's resemblance to classical Greek or Roman artefacts. One characteristic that distinguishes early sallets from late sallets is the length of the helmet tail, which became more pronounced toward the end of the century.
Some helmets are of intermediate design, incorporating elements of both the barbute and the sallet. In the early 16th century this evolved into the burgonet. A bevor is a piece of plate armour designed to protect the neck.
The bevor was typically worn in conjunction with a sallet, and later with a burgonet, in a form known as a falling buffe. In both cases the two pieces of armour combined to provide protection for the whole of the head and neck. A gorget was a steel or leather collar also designed to protect the throat. It was a feature of older types of armour and intended to protect against swords and other non-projectile weapons. Later, particularly from the 18th century onwards, the gorget became primarily ornamental, serving only as a symbolic accessory on military uniforms.
A barbute is a visorless war helmet of fifteenth century Italian design, often with distinctive "T" shaped or "Y" shaped opening for the eyes and mouth. The barbute resembles classical Greek helmets and may have been influenced by a renewed interest in ancient artefacts. The close helm was a military helmet worn by knights and other combatants in the late medieval and early renaissance era. It carried a visor that pivoted up and fully enclosed the head and neck area, unlike earlier helms such as the Sallet and Barbute, which sometimes may have left the wearer more exposed, or needed a bevor to be added to protect the chin and neck.
The close helm is a helm which is very similar to an armet, but has a different method of opening. While an armet has two cheekpieces, a close helm instead has a kind of bevor, which is attached in the same way to pivots as its visor. The close helmet most probably evolved from a number of different helmets, from the armet, the Italian bellows-visored sallets and possibly hinged Great Bascinets. As a type of helm, they largely appeared in the later 15th century, though there are earlier examples.
The close helm was used in battle, but was also popular in tournaments, where sometimes the visor would be less solid, and instead have bars which would still offer protection but allow more visibility. Close helms for jousting were heavier, weighing up to 12 pounds, while the helms for normal combat were lighter, often around 8 pounds. Modern armor history reaches all the way back to the years ago when earliest bronze metal armor sets and gear was created in Ancient Greece.
If you are interested to learn more about military history of our ancestors, there is no better place to start than with combat armors, their types, most popular designs and other interesting facts about armors.
History of protective gear that is worn by soldiers, civilian and law protection agencies, security guards, body guards and private citizens goes back all the way to the earliest times of our modern civilization. With many types of basic natural materials being capable to protect our bodies from bladed, blunt or ranged weapons, our ancestors started developing a steady stream of upgrades that touched all the areas of body protection — hand shields, head protection, limb protection and body armors.
In the beginning, armors were made from simpler and lighter materials such as hard cloth and leather that was intentionally hardened, mixed with other materials pieces of cloth, animal fur, horse hair and created in multi-layered design that could stop smaller bladed weapons. However, arrival of bronze metallurgy between 3rd and 1nd millennia BC enabled several early civilizations to start producing protective gear that was much more durable and able to withstand blows from larger and more powerful bladed weapons, blunt attacks and ranged weapons arrows.
0コメント