| Author |
Message |
|
William P
|
 Posted: Tue 13 Sep, 2011 8:13 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Matthew Amt wrote: | | William P wrote: | | as for helmet linings, when i was having my rus style spangenhelm (for the period of roughly the late 10th century- mid 11th century) made up which weighs 3.4kg = ~7lbs made of 16guage steel i.e 1.6mm thick |
Huh, I don't think I've ever seen a published weight for an original helmet (early medieval and earlier) that was more than 4 pounds, in fact the vast majority were 2 to 3 pounds, even well-preserved ones with little corrosion.
You know what I say? I say, Screw blunt trauma! We go over this same thing when arguing about mail, and everyone is all worked up over blunt trauma. Sure, if Babe Ruth walks up and you put your head over home plate, he's gonna knock it out of the park. That's called "losing". But such an event was uncommon, at best. The men who went to battle really don't seem to have considered that to be the most likely possibility, at least. They seemed to be more worried about getting slapped or prodded by something sharp. We'd probably consider most battle blows to be pretty wimpy, but you really don't need much force to lay flesh wide open with an edged weapon. They knew that while a weapon *could* be made to penetrate their armor, or squash them to jelly inside it, most likely an opponent was simply not going to bother hitting them in the hard crunchy parts, but go for something softer. Armor limits an attacker's options, forces him to strike at fewer/smaller/faster-moving targets, or forces him to put a LOT more effort (at more risk to himself) into an attempt to damage his target *through* the armor. Will any of that work? Well, it might! IF he's heroic, lucky, strong, and have really good aim. It's a battlefield, and no armor is perfect, so anything could happen!
But all the talk about scientifically perfect padding, suspension, compression, and contact with your helmet makes it sound like getting hit while wearing an iron hat is worse than nothing at all. I've even heard a reenactor say that the typical nasal helmet or spangenhelm had a bad disadvantage because it would not keep your *neck* from being broken by a strong blow from a 2-handed axe! Um, was that really a high-priority consideration? Would I be better off without the helmet? No, of course not! A helmet which many of us would consider way too thin and poorly padded was vastly better than no helmet at all. Could you set it on a stump and crunch it with an axe? Yup. You gonna wear it in battle anyway? Yup.
Valete,
Matthew |
well thats how much my helmet weighs *shrugs* take it or leave it, i have no idea how much the historical originals weighed but min weighs 3.5kg
tht said i forgot to mention the 2000 ring aventail that goes along with it each ring is 8mm ID 1.4-6mm wire i forget precisely which one since it was made for me to order but its about 2000 rings and i suspect it adds nearly a kilo to the weight of the helmet.
and yeah noone argues that armour significantly increases your lifespan
in fact this entre thread is based around the premiseof discussing in exastive detail PRECISELY how unlikely it is to actually damage armour and helmets using cuts and chops as shown in the macejowski bible.
when faced with a maile hauberked man, you have three choices, ry and go for the exposed points..
get a a nice rigid pointedspear and try and run him tough and hope it works or
3. ditch both sword and spear, grab a mace 2 handed axe and proceed to reduce the man inside to a small twitching lump of meat
for maile, the trauma effects arnt always negligable. yes it stops you from having your stomach slit open.. but your still at ish of your arm getting broken if your hit by a particularly heavy blow. maile will not stop yor arm getting broken or your collarbone being shattered by a hit by an axe or a mace, especially in viking times when general consensus is that there is not much evidence for padded underarmour garments like jacks or gambesons during that period.
maile is a flexible defense
heres a good example, now most of us will know of the byzantine cataphracts these men are know for being armoured almost as well as a plate harness, the exact makeup of their armour is debated but oft includs a knee length hauberkpadded inside and out by gambesons/ quilted jacks, with maile covering the entirity of their faces except the eyes
these guys were VERY hard to kill and were mounted on armoured horsesfor good measure, but i was told of precisely what happens when yo become too difficult to kill by a simple stab to the belly.
one unfortunate cataphract, in a battle with the franks (i forget which) was simply dragged off his horse and subsequently beaten to death with the butts of the frankish lances when their attempts to stab him with their lances didnt work.
and no sane peperson would say no helmet is better than a simple nasal'd spangen their point is that compared to the plethora of helmet design we have come up with the conical spangen especially without aventail is a fair disadvantage and has more weaknesses. and one would indeed be at much greater risk of having their head removed from their shoulders via daneaxe wearing a naselled spangen even with a mail aventail or coif
get hit in the knexk with a bascinet , a barbute or a close helm, and then get hit i the neck wihile wearing an aventailled spangen guess which ones going to break your neck more likely.
Till J
you seem to forget there is another possible effect of being smacked , wearing mail or not. that risk is of broken bones. and no its not a trivial concern i mean also if yur whacked with a harder blow than usual on the head, the hit might daze or concuss you instead of simply caving in your skull,which IS a major mprovement, that im not disputing
the tv show conqest is famous for getting things horribly wrong but they illustrated a very clear point when they attacked the shirt of (butted) mail hanging on a T frame if someone slams you, mail or not, on theshoulder with a mace or axe, your shoulder will be at a decent risk of being broken
te point of these discussions is based on theidea that 'o we know all these armrs protect you... bt which does it BETTER. and where can it not protect you, for example a greek spolas has no armpit protection, a hauberk does.
comparing a hauberk to aplate harness, what happenes to each if you lay at them with a mace to the sternem, maile. = possible cracked strnum, plate.. very low chance of broken sternum.
as you pointout a low quality helm is slightly better than no armor at all.
saying thatlower quality armour is worsethanno armour is like saying a not so good steel capped boot is wore than no steel cap because a heavy fall will causethe steel cap to slce your toes off.
though conversely one piece of advice given to me abot my slapped together attempt at recreating a splinted vambrace using piecesof what was pretty much sheet metal strips, was that the 'splints, didnt ACTUALLY give any protection fr my wrist because thy were too thin i.e they bent to easily. bt they gave me the thinking they WOULD. i.e a false positive
that said this is reenacting where all weapons are blunted so getting slashes isnt an issue but bruises and broken bones are still a problem. which is in itself a not invalid observation even without sharp edges, without protection your still in danger it proves that even a blunt sword is going to still cave in or damage a unprotected skull.
over relying on your armour is almost as foolhardy as not wearing any, its like wearing butted maile to a battlefield and expecting it to stand up to arrows. or sword thrusts.
at least if your not earing that butted maile you know whereyou stand , you know that all you have to rely on is yourself, which would make you more cautious. but less likely to survive a stroke of bad luck.
i say ALMOST because even butted mail will at least stop you from dying from slashes and possily the thrusts of a type X sword. (i sincerely doubt that a viking sword tip would be able to trust through butted maile even.its just too wrongly shaped)
the roman empire alone stands as being one of the few civilizations in history that had a standing army and to have almost their entire army kitted out in metal armour of one form or another. as a testiment to the romans quite immense reserves of money resources and manpower (ill admit thats alittle unfair since by the time anyone after the romans were richand advanced enough to equip large masses of people in armour i.e enlightenment period, the use of armour began to declinedue to the increased incidence of firearms)
very few people had such access to standardised armour and protection than the romans did.
|
|
   |
 |
|
Matthew Amt
|
| Posted: Tue 13 Sep, 2011 7:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| William P wrote: | | well thats how much my helmet weighs *shrugs* take it or leave it, i have no idea how much the historical originals weighed but min weighs 3.5kg |
Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't mean it to sound like that! *My* helmets are all overweight, too! Heck, my own Baldenheim spangenhelm is 6 pounds, and yeah, the aventail is over a pound of that. No, I think I was just getting the idea that you were treating the weight of your helmet as having historical significance. I just think we need to be careful about drawing conclusions that may be influenced (however unwittingly!) by our experience with too many overweight reproductions. No worries, it happens to all of us!
| Quote: | when faced with a maile hauberked man, you have three choices, ry and go for the exposed points..
get a a nice rigid pointedspear and try and run him tough and hope it works or
3. ditch both sword and spear, grab a mace 2 handed axe and proceed to reduce the man inside to a small twitching lump of meat |
Number 3 assumes either that you can fight better than him, or that you have a number of gung-ho friends to help! I'd add #4, Hold a nice tight formation and try to keep him from getting to you by having everyone prod at him with long spears; and #5, Run like crazy! (Technically known as "losing", ha!)
| Quote: | | for maile, the trauma effects arnt always negligable. yes it stops you from having your stomach slit open.. but your still at ish of your arm getting broken if your hit by a particularly heavy blow. |
I realize that, we all agree, but what I'm saying is that such a danger was comparatively rare. It takes quite a bit of force to break a bone, far more than is needed to wound or kill an unarmored man.
| Quote: | | one unfortunate cataphract, in a battle with the franks (i forget which) was simply dragged off his horse and subsequently beaten to death with the butts of the frankish lances when their attempts to stab him with their lances didnt work. |
Sure, you can do that to any man who is alone and surrounded. That's why formations are important, they keep you alive in ways that armor can not. I don't imagine that anyone being charged by cataphracts would think that dragging them from the saddle would be "simple"!
| Quote: | and no sane peperson would say no helmet is better than a simple nasal'd spangen their point is that compared to the plethora of helmet design we have come up with the conical spangen especially without aventail is a fair disadvantage and has more weaknesses. and one would indeed be at much greater risk of having their head removed from their shoulders via daneaxe wearing a naselled spangen even with a mail aventail or coif
get hit in the knexk with a bascinet , a barbute or a close helm, and then get hit i the neck wihile wearing an aventailled spangen guess which ones going to break your neck more likely. |
Hold on! When every helmet on the battlefield is the same general type, there is no advantage or disadvantage at all. Except that having the helmet is an advantage over those who have none. We all agree that some helmets are more protective than others, no problem there. But having a helmet without a neckguard does not *increase* your overall chance of being beheaded, it simply means that having your skull cloven is even *less* likely. (And anyone who is not using their shield to block that Danish axe isn't using their nicely helmeted head, anyway...) Again, if you can hit someone in the neck, you do NOT need to use enough force to break it. A simple slice, and he's toast. And beware, even very protective helmets such as Roman styles or Greek Corinthians or bascinets will not prevent a broken neck from sheer impact, since they are made to allow the head to move very freely. Only helmets articulated or bolted to a plate cuirass might do that.
Finally, I think it's safe to say that plate armor is generally better protection than mail. I don't argue with that, though of course it's a generalization. It simply soaks up more abuse and, yes, blunt trauma than mail. I like to stab myself in my lorica segmentata with my pugio, really hard, to show my audience that it has no effect on me. Just wouldn't feel warm and fuzzy doing that in mail! (For that I drag a nice sharp blade across it.) But that drags us off topic again!
Vale,
Matthew
|
|
 |
|
|
William P
|
| Posted: Wed 14 Sep, 2011 2:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Matthew Amt wrote: | | William P wrote: | | well thats how much my helmet weighs *shrugs* take it or leave it, i have no idea how much the historical originals weighed but min weighs 3.5kg |
Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't mean it to sound like that! *My* helmets are all overweight, too! Heck, my own Baldenheim spangenhelm is 6 pounds, and yeah, the aventail is over a pound of that. No, I think I was just getting the idea that you were treating the weight of your helmet as having historical significance. I just think we need to be careful about drawing conclusions that may be influenced (however unwittingly!) by our experience with too many overweight reproductions. No worries, it happens to all of us!
| Quote: | when faced with a maile hauberked man, you have three choices, ry and go for the exposed points..
get a a nice rigid pointedspear and try and run him tough and hope it works or
3. ditch both sword and spear, grab a mace 2 handed axe and proceed to reduce the man inside to a small twitching lump of meat |
Number 3 assumes either that you can fight better than him, or that you have a number of gung-ho friends to help! I'd add #4, Hold a nice tight formation and try to keep him from getting to you by having everyone prod at him with long spears; and #5, Run like crazy! (Technically known as "losing", ha!)
| Quote: | | for maile, the trauma effects arnt always negligable. yes it stops you from having your stomach slit open.. but your still at ish of your arm getting broken if your hit by a particularly heavy blow. |
I realize that, we all agree, but what I'm saying is that such a danger was comparatively rare. It takes quite a bit of force to break a bone, far more than is needed to wound or kill an unarmored man.
| Quote: | | one unfortunate cataphract, in a battle with the franks (i forget which) was simply dragged off his horse and subsequently beaten to death with the butts of the frankish lances when their attempts to stab him with their lances didnt work. |
Sure, you can do that to any man who is alone and surrounded. That's why formations are important, they keep you alive in ways that armor can not. I don't imagine that anyone being charged by cataphracts would think that dragging them from the saddle would be "simple"!
| Quote: | and no sane peperson would say no helmet is better than a simple nasal'd spangen their point is that compared to the plethora of helmet design we have come up with the conical spangen especially without aventail is a fair disadvantage and has more weaknesses. and one would indeed be at much greater risk of having their head removed from their shoulders via daneaxe wearing a naselled spangen even with a mail aventail or coif
get hit in the knexk with a bascinet , a barbute or a close helm, and then get hit i the neck wihile wearing an aventailled spangen guess which ones going to break your neck more likely. |
Hold on! When every helmet on the battlefield is the same general type, there is no advantage or disadvantage at all. Except that having the helmet is an advantage over those who have none. We all agree that some helmets are more protective than others, no problem there. But having a helmet without a neckguard does not *increase* your overall chance of being beheaded, it simply means that having your skull cloven is even *less* likely. (And anyone who is not using their shield to block that Danish axe isn't using their nicely helmeted head, anyway...) Again, if you can hit someone in the neck, you do NOT need to use enough force to break it. A simple slice, and he's toast. And beware, even very protective helmets such as Roman styles or Greek Corinthians or bascinets will not prevent a broken neck from sheer impact, since they are made to allow the head to move very freely. Only helmets articulated or bolted to a plate cuirass might do that.
Finally, I think it's safe to say that plate armor is generally better protection than mail. I don't argue with that, though of course it's a generalization. It simply soaks up more abuse and, yes, blunt trauma than mail. I like to stab myself in my lorica segmentata with my pugio, really hard, to show my audience that it has no effect on me. Just wouldn't feel warm and fuzzy doing that in mail! (For that I drag a nice sharp blade across it.) But that drags us off topic again!
Vale,
Matthew |
or option 6, get on a horse, grab a bow, take the advice of korean admiral yi sun shi when fighting the samurai navy.. and dont let him get close
(considering the korean army at that point sucked so very badly at close quarter fighting during that time, (but what they did have was a collection of cannons that surpassed even the ming chinese)... this was good sound advice noone under his command felt like arguing with, especially considering your opponents were massive ships packed to the brim with angry samurai... a daunting thing to face at the best of times)
spangen? how many eras are you reenacting?? i know that theres the legio XX, your hoplite panoply, the bronze age aegean stuff.. now a frankish spangen? you wouldnt happen to have a suit of gothic plate stashed in your cupboard as well would you? 
actually, there were spangens and then there were spangens.. you wouldnt argue that every medieval batttle had everyone wearing the same type of helm, and while youd see most people in a greek city state with common taste in helms even then not every person would have the same design (as you probably know even more in detail than i do), despite what popular culture wants us to think not every hoplite the length and breadth of greece was running around with crested corinthian helmets. same goes for saxon and viking engagements, thats assuming everyone HAS a helmet, in reality not everyone did, reenactors just require everyone to wear helmets so that theres less risk of accidental concussions,
and in the viking/ saxon era period we had everything from no helmets at all, to those magnificent vendel period helms like the sutton hoo.with cheek and a neck guard, and a face plate.
http://www.manningimperial.com/list.php?categ...group_id=3 manning imperials list illustrates this somewhat, though admottedly the most striking difference between helms is how much ventail they have or whether they have cheek pieces
i know that even in my group we have a fair variety of helmets, theres my nasaled rus helm with ventail, theres another couple of nasel-less rus helms of various types, theres a more traditional naseled, aventailed viking style helmet (specifically , one more norman based helm, while of the simple design has a ventail that continues around to the front and frames the face (like the manning imperial serbian helm)
another person has a gjermundbu style spectacle helm with a ventail that hangs like a round curtain around the bottom, looking like a wierd cross between an owl and R2D2
and one of the helmets is mostly a padded bowl with a nosepiece, instead of a ventail the wearer is protected by a his gambeson which extends up and around his head like a hood,
and there is also, though i have yet to see it actually used in combat, ive only heard about it, is the master at arm's qipchaq helm, its like your typical rus helm of the period, but it also has a metal mask attatched by a top hinge, whiich makes you look like a cross between ghengis khan and ridley scotts version of baldwin the 4th
http://www.manningimperial.com/item.php?item_...mp;c_id=42
when i mentioned close helms etc. i was actually having trouble thinking of a helm that even HAD dedicated neck protection, the close helm i s the only one to have an integrated gorget and most didnt actually cover the sides of the neck,
and you have a point regarding neck damage of course your gonna block with the shield thats,
that said, while neck damage is a problem, actually the true difference in the protective power of a helm isnt in protecting the side of the neck, but the face and throat, which is where we see the real differences i mean compare a norman spangen with no ventail to a snout nosed bascinet which one would YOU feel safer in during the rages of combat? (its a false dichotomy i do realise) while i consider the snout nose one of the most ugly helmet designs of all the types i have been privileged to hear about... i will admit it is a damn effective design at stopping you being perforated by arrows (its anti arrow intent seems best hinted by the way the eye holes are constructed. ) by contrast the quipchaq helm samurai mempo masks and corinthian helms seem more suited to letting you actually get along with being able to see who your fighting, at the risk of making your eyes an easier target.
as for that poor cataphract, as i mentioned the franks did this supposedly because nothing else would work. and of course the guy was fighting back, its not like he was a Mycenaean chariot driver wearing the dendra cuirass (which may i mention is AWSOME)
the one main disadvantage of the cataphracts was thet there were so few, like the varangians they apparently never numbered more than a few thousand. and were ususally in numbers of only a few hundred within a campaign force of 10-20 thousand
as ive said as well, better armour = hard to kill were not disaggreeing on that in fact your mention of 'armour forces your opponent to work harder by presenting less oppertunities to kill you with, a classic example i always use to illustrate that concept is asking someone with a viking sword to kill a gothic knight in plate.. the viking sword isnt like the type XV which has a needle point with which you can use to pierce the mail in the gaps of the armour like the armpits etc..
the viking sword is, good for pretty much JUST slicing people up. so that guy would have very few ways with which he could kill the knight. and this assumes the knight isnt trying to kill HIM
my options as the viking would be, try for the eyeslot, the neck and you dont even have that option if the guy has a sallet and bevor, or, (since i notice most harnesses dont cover the back of the thighs) go for the femoral artery, thats all the targets i can think of with a viking sword since the point cant pierce the mail covering the armpits etc
or of course the viking would, using his shield knock the knight to the ground, pull up his visor and stab him in the eye using his seax ( always a valid option, if all else fails, wrestle him to the ground and stab him in the eye, not even zombies get up from that one)
(i apologize for the attitude presented but ive been reading this site and it has an effect on you http://www.badassoftheweek.com/list.html)
as for the matter of the macejowski bible, im inclined to think of it in the same way as a comic book.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matthew Amt
|
| Posted: Wed 14 Sep, 2011 5:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| William P wrote: | | spangen? how many eras are you reenacting?? i know that theres the legio XX, your hoplite panoply, the bronze age aegean stuff.. now a frankish spangen? you wouldnt happen to have a suit of gothic plate stashed in your cupboard as well would you? |
Oh, you had to ask! No Gothic harness, unfortunately, though I would LOVE one. I actually have 6 or 7 distinct Bronze Age impressions, Greek hoplite, 3 or 4 Roman impressions, 3 or 4 kits for 7th through 13th century, 15th or 16th century in a pinch (if my hosen still fit, ha!), 16th cent. Highlander/Irish, musketeer 1607 or 1640, and say 3 different Rev War outfits plus a civilian suit. Some of the clothing and other bits serve in different eras or impressions, and I still need a decent sword for the 7th century, but also have a few bits and pieces of various other impressions. Working on a new Viking shield and a Hellenistic theureos (oval shield also good for Gallic or even Villanovan!), got bronze for a bell cuirass and a dozen other projects, steel for a 17th century cuirass and scale armor, etc. etc. Here's my spangenhelm:
http://forums.armourarchive.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=108414
What I meant about helmet styles is that any particular place and time, for example the Battle of Hastings, you may not see a lot of functional difference. There's no point in comparing those helmets to a pig-face bascinet or a Vendel helmet, because no one was wearing those. Sure, in some places and times you get a lot more variation, and I'm sure the folks at those times realized that a more enclosing helmet offered more protection than an open one. And some folks had no helmets at all. It didn't keep them off the battlefield! If you start with the "default" of no armor or helmet at all, anything you add is advantage. Don't start with "steel from head to toe" and then treat anything less as a weakness that every weapon on the field is going to be seeking out! (Even if it sometimes feels that way!) If you're neck and face are the only vulnerable parts of your body, you won't spend the whole battle thinking, "Oh, geez, I hope nobody hits me in the neck or face!" Nor do you frantically try to invent something to cover those gaps. Everyone is in the same boat! What you're thinking is "I'm an armored killing machine! I fear nothing! Raaaarrrrrrrr!"
I am always amused by the scenarios of the unarmored warrior blithely tackling the (apparently sleeping) plate-armored knight and casually sticking him through the visor. That knight has been training for this moment since the age of 7, is surprisingly mobile in his armor, probably outweighs his (otherwise equal) opponent by 50 pounds, and only has to put an elbow in the naked guy's chops to leave him sprawling in the dust searching for his teeth... Basically, the number of times when armor was a DISadvantage were so rare as to be negligible.
We're still not on topic!
Matthew
|
|
|
|
|
|
William P
|
| Posted: Wed 14 Sep, 2011 8:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Matthew Amt wrote: | | William P wrote: | | spangen? how many eras are you reenacting?? i know that theres the legio XX, your hoplite panoply, the bronze age aegean stuff.. now a frankish spangen? you wouldnt happen to have a suit of gothic plate stashed in your cupboard as well would you? |
Oh, you had to ask! No Gothic harness, unfortunately, though I would LOVE one. I actually have 6 or 7 distinct Bronze Age impressions, Greek hoplite, 3 or 4 Roman impressions, 3 or 4 kits for 7th through 13th century, 15th or 16th century in a pinch (if my hosen still fit, ha!), 16th cent. Highlander/Irish, musketeer 1607 or 1640, and say 3 different Rev War outfits plus a civilian suit. Some of the clothing and other bits serve in different eras or impressions, and I still need a decent sword for the 7th century, but also have a few bits and pieces of various other impressions. Working on a new Viking shield and a Hellenistic theureos (oval shield also good for Gallic or even Villanovan!), got bronze for a bell cuirass and a dozen other projects, steel for a 17th century cuirass and scale armor, etc. etc. Here's my spangenhelm:
http://forums.armourarchive.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=108414
What I meant about helmet styles is that any particular place and time, for example the Battle of Hastings, you may not see a lot of functional difference. There's no point in comparing those helmets to a pig-face bascinet or a Vendel helmet, because no one was wearing those. Sure, in some places and times you get a lot more variation, and I'm sure the folks at those times realized that a more enclosing helmet offered more protection than an open one. And some folks had no helmets at all. It didn't keep them off the battlefield! If you start with the "default" of no armor or helmet at all, anything you add is advantage. Don't start with "steel from head to toe" and then treat anything less as a weakness that every weapon on the field is going to be seeking out! (Even if it sometimes feels that way!) If you're neck and face are the only vulnerable parts of your body, you won't spend the whole battle thinking, "Oh, geez, I hope nobody hits me in the neck or face!" Nor do you frantically try to invent something to cover those gaps. Everyone is in the same boat! What you're thinking is "I'm an armored killing machine! I fear nothing! Raaaarrrrrrrr!"
I am always amused by the scenarios of the unarmored warrior blithely tackling the (apparently sleeping) plate-armored knight and casually sticking him through the visor. That knight has been training for this moment since the age of 7, is surprisingly mobile in his armor, probably outweighs his (otherwise equal) opponent by 50 pounds, and only has to put an elbow in the naked guy's chops to leave him sprawling in the dust searching for his teeth... Basically, the number of times when armor was a DISadvantage were so rare as to be negligible.
We're still not on topic!
Matthew |
...thats alot of gear... holycrap, then again ive been doing this.. since the beginning of april this year
well in regards to damaging helmets and hitting a flat verses say the edge of an open steel drum,
one piece of reference is my helmet, ill post photos to illustrate the point but it essentially involves the fact that the very top of my helmet as a hole to allow one to insert a ploume of feathers or horsehair (i went with abit of both,) and my helmet is quite sloped, so anything but a hit to the very peak with a verticle hit (horizontal strikes arnt allowed above the shoulder, because of risks to hitting the neck and causing damage that way) will largely glance off but the rim of that hollow on the peak is alot weaker because the edge provides a point that can collapse when hit more easily the top is also the only place dented,
this was done by blunted swords in reenactment combat
in our reenactment all legal target areas are either a disabled limb or instant death. though id imagine my group leader quarf,
in a actual kill or maim encounter, he would rip me to small bloodyshreds wielding a rus sabre in rivited chain hauberk and tough leather vambraces and a quite long sleeved gambeson, plus either his roundshield or kite shield and maille backed gloves, discounting the fact he is ALOT more skilled and experienced than me, he is also simply alot better protected, i have my helm and a gambeson plus a shield and a vambrace, my gloves are largely non reenforced, hed have no trouble tearing through my gambeson with a nice sabre slash actually he might not bother, i actually expose my thigh so often hed have no problems opening my thigh up to the bone with a simple quick cut with that sabre of his.
, but my norman sword would have a slightly harder time damaging his hauberk doing a similar move, which is why id be eagerly trying to wreck hs forearm and thighs, or simply thrust him to the face,
id see his normally un naseled face as a target with his regular helm but would only bother hitting the head of his qipchaq helm if i wanted to just jolt him for a second and open him up to a more lethal hit. because the qipchaq helm has a nice facemask,
that makes face hits decidedly less effective
but as we agree thats the point of armour in the first place,
regarding the prospect of tackling a cap a pied knight to the ground, im saying that, with the sort of gear wielded by viking swordsman i.e type X sword and seax, plus the maile byrnie and shield thats pretty much your ONLY reasonable way of killing the knight because the nore normal ways, slashs and thrust wont work on the armour and there arnt enough gaps your sword can exploit using the normal motions of sword and shield combat.
 Attachment: 15.58 KB
Attachment: 15.35 KB
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
All contents © Copyright 2003-2024 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum
|
This is a standard topic