Hey everyone.


Let me start off saying how much I love this site an all of the passion that everyone here possesses.


Now to my question:


I realize that swords are frequently noted to have been able to penetrate the joints and gaps of armour. This, in my opinion, would make the sword virtually ineffective against anything encased in armour. Thrusting would be very difficult and imprecsise. What I want to know is the actual effects of the thrust.

What would be the effects of a direct thrust to the breastplate or other large armor piece on...

a. The sword/spear
b. The Armour
c. The man IN the armor
d. The man delievering the blow



Thank you in advance for any time that you put into this :D

Actually the narrow(ish) tapered swords used in western Europe during the 15th century would have been relatively effective against plate armour if the thrusts were directed against the armpits, the groin or the face. Anywhere else and the point would probably just glance off.

The spike on the end of a pole-axe would have been used in the same way.
http://www.myArmoury.com/feature_spot_poleaxe.html
http://www.the-exiles.org/Images/lejuepoleaxe/image10.GIF

Hmmm....Thats what I thought for joints and vulnerable areas.


I editted the last part of my post to be a bit clearer. I am mainly interested in a direct thrust against a larger piece of armor such as a breastplate or cuisse.

ya. swords are rearly effective against plate. even in teh joints of 15thc you have mail so it needs do have a needle point like a rondel dagger to get thru.

Halfsword, bind and throw or try to stun your opponent with the pommel. If you can get control of the other guy, especially if you can do it on the ground, lift his visor or just line up with an eyeslit, then poke the soft fleshy parts inside.

Basically think about way to use other than just thrusting and cutting like you would an opponent without armor. Better things for that, but the sword can stil be useful. It still offers threats, and it still provides defence. Even if the finishing parts may get a bit more close and personal than when armor is not part of the equation.

What about spears? I'm rather of the opinion it would glance off unless it had a horse behind it, but I could be mistaken and would like to hear the opinions of others.

Hmmm,

I am not convinced that it is impossible to pierce plate armour with a sword, but I am near sure with a pole axe spike penetration is possible. I can only assume that piercing plate armour would be extremely difficult but I have gotten a CAS henry V through a 1.2mm breastplate. The blade even is ok 9more or less). Now some thing to keep in mind is I had a very stationary target and in a real fight that would not happen also it is a bit on the thin side for a plate breastplate but if I could do it I am sure it is not impossible, a better word would be improbable as captain jack sparrow said perhaps. With a spike on a pole axe I found it a perfect weapon for rending plate. In the end totally ahistoric test in ahistoric settings BUT, it penetrated deep enough that I assume poor Johan, Jean or John would be in some sad state thereafter. I do though figure the glancing blow would keep the vast majority of cuts, slashes and most thrusts as well out ( I had a number of tries that glanced off somewhat or bit but were to shallow) and figured that the targeting of joints and other semi-open areas is just that, they are more open areas, soft targets are always easiest and one usually does not have time to perfectly aim and strick on a stationary target in war. If your armour saves you 4 times out of 5 it is still woprth it as long as you avoid the 5th right. I doubt much has been done looking into this but there are also a good number of MS's with pictures depicting such things but you have to take them with some salt.

RPM

Ever read accounts of late 14th century foot combats? Many used spears and swords and injuries again are listed as being to the joints and non plate areas.

It depends on the quality of the plate - if your target is munitions grade wrought iron, which is a bit tougher than the lowest grade wrought iron, and very close to modern mild steel, you might have a slim chance of inflicting a serious wound. If it's anything tougher, to say nothing of the best tempered steel, forget about it. Even the English bills used at Flodden had a hard time against good German plate. In tournament foot combat, breaking lots of weapons(swords, spears, etc.) and wrecking armour components are frequently mentioned, but injuries worse than bruises not so much. Things change, though, when you introduce horses into the equation.

A thrust with a spear might not pierce the plate but it's still a heavy push or shove if the whole body is put behind it: If well timed it might hit when one foot of the opponent was off the ground of body weight badly distributed.

Might not be easy as warrior training would include avoiding being out of balance, but if successful it might be possible to knock someone down with a spear.

Once down finding a gap in the armour might be easier ? Tripping might also be possible ? Just conjectures on my part.

In a battle between armoured men the one who gets exhausted last wins I believe a lot of the time !?

An exhausted man can't defend well the weak points of his armour.

It is interesting. There is actually a plate from Hans Talhoffer depicting armoured combatants in the list and the first move depicts throwing a spear at the adversary and how to deflect the spear throw with the sword. Their faces are exposed so I guess that the spear is aimed at the face. Then the combatants close with the half sword.

My understanding is that it is fairly pointless to attempt to thrust through a plate with a sword and that it just was not done. Maybe it is possible on occasion, maybe not, but it seems to generally be an unsuccessful technique. Cutting with a sword or longsword seems even less likely to penetrate plate but does have some effectiveness. The cut can be used to knock the opponents weapon away or just hitting him hard enough to give you an anvantage (although the question of what this does to your sword still remains). Halfswording is the proper technique for fighting with a long sword and in harness.

Also, there are depictions in period art that depict one-handed swords being used by combatants in plate, and so one-handed swords should not be discounted. Thrusting with a one-handed sword as well as with a longsword or spear can be done quite accurately by a skilled fighter.

James B.,

Yep I read medieval accounts all day every day thats what I get paid to do, it is a good life :D . There are also many account of armour being rended or broken in some way that perhaps should be equated in as well. There are more accounts of hand weapons defeating armour than arrows from what have read. It should also be remembered that most tournements the idea was to not kill ones opponent. Such armour destruction can be found in literature, artwork and coroner accounts as well. Of course the first to can be due to some type of artistic freedom perhaps.

James G.,

I totally agree. I should have added that qualification from the start. Plates quality, thickness, heat treatmetn and carbon content would change its performance. The plate armour at flodden did stop many blows but not all form what it would seem, it also likely was thicker than earlier plate as 16th century followed on to prevent gun injuries and such.

Steven,

It went through the padding and plate about two inches. My padding is also harrassed often for being thicker than average as well, outer canvas layer with inner linen (mix) with cotten insides. Like I said it would have been uncofmfortable, perhaps not fatal depending where it angled in.

Some background perhaps if you will humour it.
I had never thought plate could be punctured until I started working in a metal shop for a few years. We worked mostly 24-16 guage sheet. I noticed it took me much longer cutting holes into the 24-20 guage round and square ductwork we often worked on as I made a hole with a special drill attachment to open it up enough to get hand shears in. I started watching some the the old timers who literally with one hand and a screw driver would stab the thing where they wantd a whole then pry it open enough for the nipper to get in. This made me think that if a man with one hand could pierce 24-20 guage so and quite often then it had to be possible with a larger weapon with two hand, hence the test on 18 guage (I did not want to ruin my sword without starting lower then thicker. The tests on 24-20 guage were almost not contest with flat sheets and the roudned deflected some but most it failed. The 16 guage was pierced but not enough to kill a person outright, but the Henry the V is a smallish sword and I did not want to destroy my sword with alot of tries doind so (the wooden grip cracked a little). It did not get stuck really but made a funny grating sound as removed. As I said before improbably but not impossible and adding the factors in that Allen G. put in thats basically all I can think of.

RPM

Hisham,

Thank you for that link to the 1459 Talhoffer plates. My plates and translation come from the 1467 manuscript (Medieval Combat, A Fifteenth-Century Manual of Swordfighting and Close-Quarter Combat) and unfortunately do not contain nearly as many plates depicting armoured combat. The spear throw shows up again in the 1459 manuscript it seems. As for helmets, I would say that those are most likely sallets but with a different visor than I normally think of. The rest of the helmet, excluding the visor, looks very much like a sallet. The 1467 manuscript, 8 years later, depicts sallets with the visor that I normally think of, and oddly, the combatants all fight with the visor up. I would guess that this represents a progression of visor design. Of course the last plate pictured in the 1459 manuscript, tafel 41, depicts Leutold von Königsegg in a helmet that is clearly not a sallet and with which I am not familiar at all.