Yujizakai // Horrors and gaming i dont think hoplites are that forgotten just everyone knows about em so no one talks about it naw what's truly lost to history is the ethiopian "hoplites" that were at the battle of troy...its even right in the illiad but no one ever talks or even knows they existed when I heard of em i was like wait what Ethiopian hoplites???
I think he wanted to keep it unisex and bikiniarmor was historically female only armor. Just my thoughts why he wouldn't include this masterpiece of armor tho 🤔
Excellent overview, thx! Was also surprised to learn that a typical medieval knight's metal armor actually weighed _less_ than the aprox. 60 lbs of gear a modern infantryman often carries now.
Knights were pretty much the special forces of the Medieval times. It boggles my mind why general public think that knights clunky soldiers who are ungraceful as an elephant and only wielding a sword. Knights at a young age were trained. Time and resources were poured in to make them elites of the battlefield. Expert masters teaching knights to be versatile with their weaponry. But sure. Lets just assume they’re just foot soldiers with higher level armour that has +10 defence.
They are not special forces. They were bunch of soft arrogant aristocratic rich boys blowing daddy's money to acquire every battlefield advantage at obscene price points and mistaken it for gallantry and skills. No organized army would field counter parts to noble knights of late Medieval periods because they were prohibitively price inefficient: who would pay the price of a modern main battle tank equivalent but can still be overwhelmed easily when outnumbered. It's much cheaper and more effective to hire 5-6 men at arms/ranged mercenaries or 3 light cavalrymen and surround and overwhelm the single knight in a suit of plate in nearly all conceivable situations, which was exactly what English did in 100 years War and everyone started to do after that War. The inefficiency of knightly warfare is fully exposed in 100 years war. A army that is at least 10 times more expensive to field can still have a substantial chance to lose to bunch of rudimentary men at arms with swords & boards and bows & arrows. Are you serious? If you want to know how ineffective a knightly army is, all you need to do is research all the English victories in the 100 years War; especially the Battle of Agincourt. What's the point of the knight centered military doctrine that costs 10 times more when a bunch of men at arms who are much cheaper can be just as good if not better under the right circumstances?
The same reason modern day armies field tanks despite the fact a single fire team with the right equipment and training can take it out easy peasy. And as you say it's far cheaper and easy to train and equip a few blokes off the street than to buy a tank . But their attitude aside Knights were the tanks of their day. Sure they can be killed under the right circumstances but even the most battle hardened man at arms is going to be slightly hesitant to throw himself at a ton of horse flesh carrying a man in a suit of steel . After all no sane man is suicidal. And in the initial charge that Knight and his friends are basically a unstoppable wall of steel doing a good 20 kilometres a hour , go ahead do that math. It's some serious physics involved. And even the most illiterate potato digger can figure it out. Never underestimate the mind game, battles are fought as much in the mind as they are in the field itself Also I am really tired of people bringing up the 100 years wars. The English victories in it can be attributed as much to French incompetence as it can to English tactics.
ravenpy Are you seriously saying that nobles were HIRED to show up on a battlefield? man-at-arms literally means heavy cavalry, both nobility and mercenaries are man-at-arms. Oh, you're trying to prove your point with the battle of Agincourt, I'm sorry, didn't know I was talking with someone who's mentally disabled. (also the English lost the 100 years war, and the French cavalry still played a major role in making them lose)
Asuka-san Mate I hate to break it to you but there is a slight mistake with your claim. Men at Arms are never nobility or if they they rank so low on the totem pole they are basically commoners. Nobility took to the field as Knights or squires depending on their age. Men at Arms are the professional soldiers of their day, and can simply be the standing army of a Noble . Being a Mercenary isn't a requirement to be a Man at Arms. And in a way yes Noble were hired to show up on a battlefield. Their social and political rank along with their fiefdom was in fact their wages. They had to maintain armour and horse for themselves, and equipment for a certain number of men which varied based on their noble rank. A Duke for example was expected to show up with far more men than say a Viscount. About the only thing you got right aside from the English losing the 100 Year war was that Men at Arms often found themselves atop horses in battles. Usually as result of their Lord favouring cavalry over infantry. Or if they were particularly successful mercenaries. Horses were a significant expense, more so if they were warhorses . And maintaining a cavalry especially on the march was a daunting prospect , just keeping them fed was a hard enough task. Keeping them fit for battle was a even worse chore.
"A man-at-arms was a soldier of the High Medieval to Renaissance periods who was typically well-versed in the use of arms and served as a fully armoured heavy cavalryman.[a] A man-at-arms could be a knight or nobleman, a member of a knight or nobleman's retinue or a mercenary in a company under a mercenary captain. " Man-at-arms literally means nothing more than well-trained heavy cavalry, nothing more. It has nothing to do with social standing. Every knight is a man-at-arms, not every man-at-arms is a knight. Discussing semantics isn't going to change a thing, nobility wasn't hired for a wage. Nobility had a set of rights and privileges in exchange for a set of obligations, end of story.
🤣😂 I cannot help but think of the Dendra soldiers squatting down, tucking their knees and shrugging their shoulders to turtle their legs and head inside the armor. (Like a turtle)
It actually took many, many, legions of Rome almost 300 years to defeat the celts and a lot of historians are of the opinion that it was treachery from within that helped seal the deal. The Celts were expert warriors, metal workers, craftsmen, and tacticians.
when you consider that most war casualties were to infection and disease, you see the utility of nudity. Clothing is just material to carry grime and whatnot into your wounds.
This comment is peak stupidity. Spanish conquistadors intentionally only used Aztec armor because it was better, obsidian weapons were able to piece metal armor very easily
@@Juanito_Pecados it's literally written on virtually all accounts by the conquistadors. There are horror stories of obsidian arrows going right through the next of the horse and impaling them through their armor.
@@trollerjakthetrollinggod-e7761 then I dont know where your sources come from, but probably you misunderstood something or said sources are not trustworthy, because it would be imposible to pierce armor designed to stop firearms of the time with steel arrows, let alone obsidian arrows. Obsidian is the sharpest material on earth, but is extremely brittle.
+Charles Ramsbottom aha and what is that supposed to mean? You are saying a democratic decision by the British people to regain autonomy over their own country subverts the OP's statement?
+Jimmy Klorol I'm German not Arabic. And why is it a mistake? Are you one of those people who like to dismantle sovereign states, defined by peoples grown over thousands of years and turning them into random, indistinguishable administrative units?
+Jimmy Klorol Why are you talking about things if you have no clue about them? My name is in Arabic script but it is a German word. It even uses non-Arabic letters. I agree with the rest of the statement up until the part about the EU. The thing about the EU is that the UK never joined it in the first place, what they joined was the European Economic Community which then turned into the EU. They wanted to be part of a trade union that worked together on economic affairs and ensured cooperation and friendship among European countries, NOT part of a political union that takes away sovereignty from its member countries increasingly and also does not care about what defines Europe, which is its many different historically grown peoples and the borders and differences between those peoples.
One interesting an beautiful variation of scale armor was the Chinese 'mountain' scale armor that is a lot like a cross between the brigand armor and chainmail in the way it interlocks with one another.
it is quite interesting to realize that samurai appear in almost all types of armor, metatron you could make a video about the variations of armor used in ancient japan 😉
@@SilverforceX rich samurai, at least early on. guns were a bit rare for much of the samurai's history, and even towards the end of their era where guns were widely available some still used the bow because of tradition and the relative ease of reloading, especially on horseback.
@@tylermech66 Nobunaga won all his victories by using footsoldiers with guns. Fun fact is that the gun was the battlefield weapon of choice a generation before the Sword Saint (Musashi) was even born. He was born several years after Nobunaga died.
@@tylermech66 My point is that most of the katana myths are post-Musashi, and at that time it was an obsolete war-fighting tool. It's social and combat role should be closer to that of a rapier. Sidearm and status symbol for nobles. The samurai's weapon choice of war since before the Sword Saint even existed was the gun. In Nagoya castle there are lots of screens printed with scenes of mass firearm battles (because of Nobunaga) as well as many guns on display.
I was in Greece last year and did an unplanned quick visit in a small local museum before moving on to Athens and was completely surprised to see the Dendra armor on display there. I really had assumed that they would keep such an important find in the national museum. Keeping it close to where it was found is actually pretty cool.
Bikini armor is super effective against most male opponents. Just make and entire army of women in bikini armors and you will seduce all your enemies to join your side.
But then they can counter with homosexuals or bisexuals as soldiers O_O >Oh wait most of them don't become soldiers and even if so the huge overwhelming amount of soldiers succumbing to and joining the ranks of the Bikini Armor army would be too much xD
it is a prejudice H. and B. are generally less male. There is a majority among them that is absolutely normal exept for sexual orientation. You would find a lot of homosexuals that would be able to fight in your antiamazon army. Also your logic is flawed: Bisexuals would react to attractive women.
You know, I tend to dislike and mistrust all kind of "top ten", "top 25" videos. You are an exception :) Thank you very much. Very instructive as always. QUESTION: how well does an armour protect from unarmed damage? Can a really powerful kick or a strike reinforced with metal cause injury, trauma or disorientation? That's for a fight scene i wrote. Thanks.
Well, disorientation of course. Look up poleaxe fighting, or battle of the nations, that sort of thing. Bapping a guy on the helmet to throw him off his game, or just straight up trying to knock him over is all very important. Rarely ever hurts anybody at all, though. Unarmed... Well, it would be remarkably less effective than with a weapon. And if you just straight up tried to sock a knight all you would probably end up with is a broken hand and a remarkably angry opponent. Same goes for any metal plate (go punch a car to test this). Hitting a guy in mail or segmented armor probably wouldn't do you serious harm, but probably not a whole lot to them either.
I have never been in that situation but I have been kicked in the shins with a steel-toed boot while wearing polymer shinguards. Barely felt a thing after a couple of seconds, plus the adrenaline of the fight helps put it away. Unarmed combat, no matter how strong the kick/punch, delivers a relatively limited force, so there is no point unless kicking someone in the head very hard so that both the noise and the impact (if wearing a helmet, considering your question) can disorient or cause a small traumatism. Consider something else - it is true that grappling and unarmed combat were taught since the very early dawn of warfare, even with steel plate armor being common in the XVI century - but as an addition to safeguard the use of weapons. Finally, I recommend you make some small scale test to see it yourself, that generally helps. But I'd say that, yeah, best case scenario, you kick someone in the head while they are on the ground and they'll get disoriented for a few seconds.
Depending on the type of helmet a kick to the head could still hyperextend the neck if the helmet doesn't attach to the shoulders. Likewise if there is any significant opening on the helm a steel toed boot would be very painful on an open face helm. And in a sudden street brawl it might not be uncommon for the fighters to have left their face guards open in a "you insulted my mother" situation. A kick to a plated gut probably wouldn't do anything except stub your toe on a bad kick. That's the thickest part of most armors.
Wait he said reinforced with metal....do you mean like plate armor knights brawling hand to hand? Because if so i imagine that might work if theyre particularly strong but only joint and head strikes would really do anything, though grappling was common with knights
Yeah, it's pretty old at this point. I still go back to it every so often for a single player campaign with some new mod I haven't tried yet. There are great mods out there that completely change the game.
@Orgeneral Başkomutan Filozof Üstad Dr HCO cc 1 - It was an absolute fiasco, not in the decision to delay it but in the decision to announce it. It was a either a failure in design or in the execution of the project, but a failure nonetheless. As for the delay, I agree, persisting the the mistake would be way worse, and I'm more patient that most fans. 2- Cool, I'll check that out.
The amount of misconceptions about Knights and their plate armour is staggering. Thank you for rightly putting it to the top of the list. It must have been such a formidable sight seeing Knights fully kitted out. If I was a squire at the time, I would probably jizz at the sight of these guys trotting past. They were literally like the SAS of their day. The ultimate badasses of the age.
Not SAS but rather more of a Heavy Armored Breakthrough units of 20-21 century. Turkish akinji's and deli's and ukrainian cossacks would fit the description light raider cavalry
Something else that I personally really appreciate of late 15th/early 16th century European plate armour, specifically gothic plate, is the "wings" sometimes seen on the pauldrons which would allow extraordinary mobility in the shoulder. Either way, excellent video with some really nice pictures, one can never see that suit of gothic plate armour from the Wallace collection too many times.
I am still surprised about the hair everytime I see it. Speaking of apperance, did common soilders in the middle ages have regulations regarding their personal hygene? Also was it a problem to maintain a healthy level of cleanliness during a siege (on both sides)? Would be nice if someone can answer this with reliable sources.
During the discovery of brazil in the 15h century and the coloning whe learned a few things about european hygiene. One is mentioned about the king that was ''told'' to shower twice a year to reduce the bad smells... Sure a knight covered in blood i guess would have to take more showers but stills. They didnt clean themselves very well
They also all brushed their teeth, knights and other nobles used tooth brushes while others typically used little bits of green twig, there methods worked well. The myth of all medieval people missing their teeth by age thirty is incorrct. Check out modern history by Jason kingsley. He does this kind of stuff, great channel.
Vanarin considering that knights were pretty rich, they probably had personal baths back at home, but they probably only bathed on campaign if they came across a river or something. Bathing was a common activity until around the 1500s
I love the videos in which we see different kinds of armour weapons or anything. Because I discover inspiring things from our world that I didn't know and their explanations make me understand how it works so I can imagine a fantasy setting with realistic features
Warching this five years late, my gosh how much you andnyoru channel has changed since then. Thanks for all of the historical vids man. Glad you heen going storng for years.
On the padded armor id like to propose the cotton armors used by native americans(mainly the aztecs,mayas and incas) it was the equivalent of a XVct gambeson and sometimes better the spanish started to wear it along their mail/plate armor during the conquests
Mythbusters did a test on ancient Chinese "paper armor" made out of mulberry paper (so basically similar to cotton armor or linen armor as they're all plant fibers). It was quite effective - being able to stop a bullet from an early flintlock pistol.
@@HappyBeezerStudios when you consider it the aztecs wore a full body gambeson to battle, their elite warriors used it and on top they used the regular one, must been a lot loooot of layers, full padded body, thick wood shields and bronze protection on legs and arms, if they managed to employ more metal weapons im sure they would probably lasted a bit longer
@@kyomademon453 even something as delicate as silk can be useful as armour if you put enough layers of it together. Actually, silk might even work as some kind of medieval Kevlar.
Tony Yeah. But I mean the full armor is like a Lorica segmentata covering all the body...the Romans could have done it easily but the interesting thing with Lorica segments is that a warrior can run across the battle field and change formation quickly. That’s something that can’t be done with full plate armor.
@@g.l207 uh, yes they can? the reason the romans never made full plate armor wasn't that their metallurgical skills weren't up to snuff, they had great metal, it was that their armor technology that wasn't as developed as late medieval Europe. Also, to the romans infantry was king, and the idea of making full plate for literal legions of troops is inconceivable to any empire. their cavalry tended towards light cavalry and typically weren't romans themselves anyway, they mostly wore mail, scale, or foreign armors. Basically, did you even listen when he stated in the part about plate how you actually CAN run across a battlefield and be very mobile because it's weight is distributed evenly? Hell,. the lorica segmentata was hell on the shoulders. while the romans did have a small amount of the weight on the hips, the main weight of it rested on the shoulders, making it seem heavier than it needed to be.
Brigandine is my personal favorite... it can be beautiful, very light, far less expensive than steel plate and was meant for the every man. Late mideval plate armor will always be the best but your average soldier could rely on a Brigandine in most situations.
How does Chainmail reign above Lamellar when lamellar while heavier was over all more better against slashing and thrusting weapons and was better against arrows.
the Aztecs had a variation of cloth armor, shields, and some leather armors. It's kind of funny actually, look at a picture of their jaguar warriors, they look like they're wearing pajamas :D some of the more northern peoples also had the rare bone armors, kind of like lamellar but admittedly more primitive.
Native Americans in North America had shields, thick hide shirts, woven cloth armor, and bone armor. They didn’t normally practice combat with the intent kill their opponent, but show that they could. When a came to all our warfare, they were just as efficient at it as everyone else in history, just with a slightly set of tools. Natives to South America had full suits of cloth armor intended to defeat their glass edged swords and glass tipped spears. Humans are great at killing each other, and quite ingenious at figuring ways to escalate an arms race.
well, the wars in the ancient american continent were totally different than those in the rest of the world. Some fo the Native American nations did not fight to kill but just to harm or stun. Not the case with the aztecs (aka mexicas) who had powerful but primitive weapons, it is a fact that arrows and obsidian clubs were far more effective for the aztecs than the spanish arquebuse
Lets not forget that plating was so revolutionary to Europe at the time it began spreading rumors of how their swords, axes, and countless other sharp weapons were essentially dull, and blunt metal clubs. When in all actuality the plate was just that invulnerable to them.
rarely do i see a ranking list of weapons or armor that i fully agree with. it's more of a self back pat because i'm impressed with myself that i share views with scholars like you.
Hey Raf! Man I really like your channel, hope you don't mind some harsher feedback. Man, your video and audio quality could improve a lot still. I don't think its an issue of equipment, I believe it might be just a matter of some adjustments and some tricks. I'll give some suggestions, maybe consider try some of them out. First, the audio could use some work. There are filters that you can use to lower the ambient sound. Audacity is a good software for that. Concerning video, your camera usually looks just slightly out of focus maybe try to give that a look. Also, backgrounds are really important. Maybe use a green screen, or make a nicely decorated set. Hope you take this the right way, I just think your channel (and you) deserve all the quality it can get. Cheers!
@@HappyBeezerStudios it really has been until a couple of days ago, at least in Northen Italy. Not so sure though (quite the opposite) about Sicily, the only way you could see snow there is during a fallout so yes, usually pretty hot there
this list is the wrong way round - everyone who watches this chanel knows which armor will be the no 1, what was most interesting to me was the bronze armor as hadnt seen it before. This list is better seen in ascending order from #1 to #10
Not many people actually. Because it's fucking ancient. Like, if a hoplite from the wars against the persians, or a macedonian cavalry or a legionaire started to do campsite tasks and started to dig and suddenly found that, it would already be fucking old. For example, the wars against the persians (particularly the ones you think when seeing 300) are located in a period (archaic) that was between 800-480 bc and this armor is from the mycenean period which was between 1600-1100 bc, the example in question is from like 15 century bc, meaning that it was like 1000 years old to them (first war 492 bc, second one in 480). The classical period that followed, lasted like 200 years and ended when Alexander the Great died (323 bc), then to the macedonian cavalryman that's around 1200 years old, if we put this roman soldier to end the subsecuent Hellenistic period he would be arround 146 bc, so like 1400 years old, or if we think of him as the classical legionaire using lorica segmentata, then it could be 1450-1750 years old. Now, Knight Errant has a video called "Putting the middle ages in perspective" because we tend to mix everything medieval, and he shows excelently that the norman knight at Hastings is exactly as far from the reinassance full-plated shining armor knight as that one is from us (roughly 500 years), i mention it because we tend to do the same, we tend to think soldiers of the roman fall all used lorica segmentata and so did the first roman warriors when in reality the first ones looked very similar to the neighbouring Gallic/Gaelic (celtic) peoples, and the last ones looked a lot like the germanic migration/vendel warriors (which borrowed helmet construction, mail and even sword styles), continuing with that, we also imagine the macedonian greek army that conquered asia using corinthian helmets and the greek warriors in the Illyiad too, when it was too old at Alexander's time and too far away when the facts of the age created what we later called the troyan war. It is the armor from this period what we can think Achilles weared when we talk about Troy, Mycenean warriors, not Hoplites. I've made numbers and great-grandpa started to be arround like 100 years ago, taking that, then we have 2000 years+ 1500 from the date this armor possibly relates to, so there's like 140 generations between the Mycenean warrior who weared that and us. It's like seeing great grandpa's 138-139 times-removed armor's in a museum.
Yeah you completely misunderstood his point it seems. He was saying that plate Armour being the final point (number one) on the list is pointless because anyone with a brain knows that but nobody really knows about the first point (number 10). So the list should have been inverted in his opinion because less people would know about the bronze armour tham the plate.
Thanks for the video. I have two questions: 1. While full plate was mobile enough for fighting, was it mobile enough for strategic marching on foot? If the ancient Romans had access to medieval plate armor technology and resources, would they still choose to equip their legionnaires with it (especially post-Marius, without supply trains) ? It's one thing to use an armor for several hours during a battle, and another to march 30-40km a day wearing a full plate suit. 2. Why were Roman style shields (and formations which relied on them) abandoned in medeival warfare? I understand they are not very effective against some types of cavalry or other mobile warfare, but in battles like those of the 100-year war, where French knights marched upon English longbowmen, why did they not use large shields (especially since they could now make them out of iron or steel, not just wood) to protect against bows? I'd imagine a large front-facing shield is much more effective against arrows coming from a known direction with a long warning period, compared to body armor which is thinner, and of more use in melee where the timing and direction of attacks can be much more unpredictable.
The Romans had the tech to make full body armour as we see in gladiator combat, but they still didn't. If they had access to full plate Late Medieval armour they would equip the equites with it, not the legionaries. Large shields weren't completely abandoned, they changed. If you look at Kite shields you'll see that.
Fair enough. What about Roman-style formations? Wouldn't a Testudo formation be effective at storming a defensive position manned by longbowmen? What kind of infantry tactics were used in late medeival warfare? Because stereotypically, when I hear of the medieval era, I imagine orderly and well-trained knights fighting in well-polished formations and styles such as charge cavalry, but as soon as we get to infantry combat (which most combatants still were), it's a mass of poorly trained, poorly armed peasants (with some mediocre men-at-arms thrown in), usually only equipped with a helmet and soft armor, fighting in chaotic, unorganized combat, and little more formation than a "human wave". And knights, when forced to dismount (such as during several key 100 year war battles), were not benefitting from their mounted combat training, and without training in infantry formations, fared little better as a group, even despite their individually superior training as warriors. Is this is a fair representation, especially by late medieval warfare, or was infantry combat more structured and disciplined than this stereotype?
That style of combat was a mainstay all the way up into the age of guns, despite Hollywood depictions. They just usually werent as well trained and disciplined. Soldiers got expensive so wide use of levies tended to take prevelence, but even still they used shields even large ones and often combat would turn into two walls slaming up against eachother. Bur wventually pile formations took over as calvary became big and giant walls of spears would slam into eachother, though medieval and dark ages was kind of shenanigans with nobility pretty mutch amuseing themselve buy fighting wars like you play video games, so knights became a centralized part of armies.
Gene i would like too say the norse were well known for using roman style tactics in open battle even their equipment was quite similar in practice their strategy was celtic but their tactics were mostly Romanesque its kinda cool
1. you ride about in full plate, you don't walk your rich enough to afford multiple horses. If you walking then it the weight that's the problem, haveing bits of armour on your legs tires you out. Carrying it is a little better but the weight is still there for you to carry. While it takes time to don a suit of full plate, it's minutes. 2. when your dressed head to toe in steel a shield is bad trade off, you can't use a two hand weapon.
PFFF NUMBER ONE CAN BE EASILY CUTTED IN TWO PIECES LIKE AN ICE CUBE BY A POWERFUL KATANA!1!1!1!;)Great video as usual, I'm also pleased to know more on "Dendra armour".
I am curious how the protection level of the tosei gusoku actually compares to the lorica segementata, as well as to the lamellar. If the gusoku or segmentata were worn over mail I wonder how they would compare to a brigandine/coat of plates. I wonder if there are any tests showing this. I think I would have left off the bronze bell and placed at #2 or #3 the armor of the famous Polish Winged Hussar. While perhaps a bit too later in terms of years it fits the theme still and looks just plain badass while also giving superb protection.
Take a look at the theng thrand channel, he just made some very nice tests on a tosei gusoku suit of armor attacking it with different weapons. I havent seen test like that made on roman armor but he also did some on mail
I think that the main issue here is that he put together armor styles like the Dendra or the Lorica, types like mail/lamellar etc. and armor system like Tosei Gusoku or Full plate. Those three categories shouldn't be compared imho. To simply ask your question, in the Tosei Gusoku family you also see Hotoke Dou, which is a single plate breastplate, so it's superior in anyway to lamellar, coat of plates or segmentata. Even the Okegawa do, which is a laminar armor, would be better of most coat of plates, lorica etc.. because it is build like a globose cuirass so it's much better at deflecting. The same is true for the Anime cuirass, which is the same type of armor; in fact there isn't much different from anime or single plate. Also, if you consider Tosei Gusoku, you are talking about a full armor system, from head to toe, which by default is better than any cuirass alone.
![ละลาย (LALALYE) - DAOU PITTAYA ต้าห์อู๋ พิทยา [OFFICIAL MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wo6r9TgausI/mqdefault.jpg)
Good, but my favorite armor - plot armor is not on the list.
Best of the best. You can run at enemy naked, and they will not be able to hit you anyway...
@@heretyk_1337 I hear NPC women have the same style of nude armor
@@TactiClaus Exactly why enemy can`t hit them
The original deus ex machina lol
that trumps everything else lol
I can't believe 16th century is considered ancient...
I'm getting old.
Yes, this label is misleading...
Relative to modern armors designed to stop firearm projectiles, these are all part of the same ancient lineage.
Well... “Liu” is an ancient name.
its BC not AD. 16th cent. BC
Ivan Lee So is lee
Really like that you covered an armour of a warrior who is rarely talked about (No. 10).
I believe I once saw that armour in an episode of Ancient Discoveries years ago. It was in an episode about the Trojan War story and the Myceneans.
Hoplites and their variants are almost rarely talked about.
My bad this is because the warriors using it is almost forgotten in history.
Yujizakai // Horrors and gaming i dont think hoplites are that forgotten just everyone knows about em so no one talks about it naw what's truly lost to history is the ethiopian "hoplites" that were at the battle of troy...its even right in the illiad but no one ever talks or even knows they existed when I heard of em i was like wait what Ethiopian hoplites???
@@mondaysinsanity8193
Ethiopian Mercenaries during Mycenaean Greece? Nah man the Mercenaries came from Numidia
#0- *the Viking muscle armour...*
and beard for protection
Too many movies and series on you bud read some books okay, then come here good boy!
@@Zulanderr is a joke idiot
@@sebastiantorrez8563 ever heard of a joke
@@josiahm.8711 nah you got me there
This is actually a very useful video got GM/DMs to show their players when teaching them the basics of what is meant by different types of armour.
metatron went from jesus to caesar in one year.
Looks more like Leonidas to me...
Caesar haircut, maybe. The beard is decidedly not Caesar though.
@@AlexanderDiviFilius yeah, looks far more like a greek than a roman
@@AlexanderDiviFilius Nah. He looks decidedly Hadrian lite.
@@tylermech66 His nose betrays that he is in fact, Italian
What?! No bikiniarmor?
I think he wanted to keep it unisex and bikiniarmor was historically female only armor. Just my thoughts why he wouldn't include this masterpiece of armor tho 🤔
aysseralwan wait, Bikini Armour exists?
@@avixka7751 no we're making fun lol
Yes it is! Haven't you ever seen the documentary series "Xena, warrior princess"?
Bikini armor aka level 100 armor
Great video. One of the most fair, balanced and well-considered comparisons I've seen.
Glad to hear that and thank you for watching
@@metatronyt it's sarcasm
@@nikolasrollins9334Stay salty
@@samnunnink7575 Stay in the basement
Excellent overview, thx! Was also surprised to learn that a typical medieval knight's metal armor actually weighed _less_ than the aprox. 60 lbs of gear a modern infantryman often carries now.
Yeah but the knight was Calvary. I would like to see a comparison of what the late Republic Roman infantryman carried .
I finally understand “studded leather” armor, thanks brigandine!
Worn by studs
Knights were pretty much the special forces of the Medieval times. It boggles my mind why general public think that knights clunky soldiers who are ungraceful as an elephant and only wielding a sword.
Knights at a young age were trained. Time and resources were poured in to make them elites of the battlefield. Expert masters teaching knights to be versatile with their weaponry.
But sure. Lets just assume they’re just foot soldiers with higher level armour that has +10 defence.
They are not special forces. They were bunch of soft arrogant aristocratic rich boys blowing daddy's money to acquire every battlefield advantage at obscene price points and mistaken it for gallantry and skills. No organized army would field counter parts to noble knights of late Medieval periods because they were prohibitively price inefficient: who would pay the price of a modern main battle tank equivalent but can still be overwhelmed easily when outnumbered. It's much cheaper and more effective to hire 5-6 men at arms/ranged mercenaries or 3 light cavalrymen and surround and overwhelm the single knight in a suit of plate in nearly all conceivable situations, which was exactly what English did in 100 years War and everyone started to do after that War. The inefficiency of knightly warfare is fully exposed in 100 years war. A army that is at least 10 times more expensive to field can still have a substantial chance to lose to bunch of rudimentary men at arms with swords & boards and bows & arrows. Are you serious? If you want to know how ineffective a knightly army is, all you need to do is research all the English victories in the 100 years War; especially the Battle of Agincourt. What's the point of the knight centered military doctrine that costs 10 times more when a bunch of men at arms who are much cheaper can be just as good if not better under the right circumstances?
The same reason modern day armies field tanks despite the fact a single fire team with the right equipment and training can take it out easy peasy. And as you say it's far cheaper and easy to train and equip a few blokes off the street than to buy a tank .
But their attitude aside Knights were the tanks of their day. Sure they can be killed under the right circumstances but even the most battle hardened man at arms is going to be slightly hesitant to throw himself at a ton of horse flesh carrying a man in a suit of steel . After all no sane man is suicidal. And in the initial charge that Knight and his friends are basically a unstoppable wall of steel doing a good 20 kilometres a hour , go ahead do that math. It's some serious physics involved. And even the most illiterate potato digger can figure it out. Never underestimate the mind game, battles are fought as much in the mind as they are in the field itself
Also I am really tired of people bringing up the 100 years wars. The English victories in it can be attributed as much to French incompetence as it can to English tactics.
ravenpy
Are you seriously saying that nobles were HIRED to show up on a battlefield?
man-at-arms literally means heavy cavalry, both nobility and mercenaries are man-at-arms.
Oh, you're trying to prove your point with the battle of Agincourt, I'm sorry, didn't know I was talking with someone who's mentally disabled. (also the English lost the 100 years war, and the French cavalry still played a major role in making them lose)
Asuka-san
Mate I hate to break it to you but there is a slight mistake with your claim. Men at Arms are never nobility or if they they rank so low on the totem pole they are basically commoners. Nobility took to the field as Knights or squires depending on their age. Men at Arms are the professional soldiers of their day, and can simply be the standing army of a Noble . Being a Mercenary isn't a requirement to be a Man at Arms.
And in a way yes Noble were hired to show up on a battlefield. Their social and political rank along with their fiefdom was in fact their wages. They had to maintain armour and horse for themselves, and equipment for a certain number of men which varied based on their noble rank. A Duke for example was expected to show up with far more men than say a Viscount.
About the only thing you got right aside from the English losing the 100 Year war was that Men at Arms often found themselves atop horses in battles. Usually as result of their Lord favouring cavalry over infantry. Or if they were particularly successful mercenaries. Horses were a significant expense, more so if they were warhorses . And maintaining a cavalry especially on the march was a daunting prospect , just keeping them fed was a hard enough task. Keeping them fit for battle was a even worse chore.
"A man-at-arms was a soldier of the High Medieval to Renaissance periods who was typically well-versed in the use of arms and served as a fully armoured heavy cavalryman.[a] A man-at-arms could be a knight or nobleman, a member of a knight or nobleman's retinue or a mercenary in a company under a mercenary captain. "
Man-at-arms literally means nothing more than well-trained heavy cavalry, nothing more. It has nothing to do with social standing. Every knight is a man-at-arms, not every man-at-arms is a knight.
Discussing semantics isn't going to change a thing, nobility wasn't hired for a wage. Nobility had a set of rights and privileges in exchange for a set of obligations, end of story.
I'm stull not used to seeing that Metatron actually has ears.
the ears are a lie, they're prosthetics he puts on for these more recent videos,modern medicine's great ain't it?
Its all an illusion
I miss the long hair. That should've been on this list as the most effective armor for ears.
🤣😂
I cannot help but think of the Dendra soldiers squatting down, tucking their knees and shrugging their shoulders to turtle their legs and head inside the armor. (Like a turtle)
The ultimate form of protection, an impenetrable barrier
#0 - Cisalpine Celts naked warriors
" The blessing of the gods is armor enough for any warrior"
@AG DM except on those two pesky ocasions in which they defeated the romans and went on to sack their city
unless you where a noble then you had chainmail
It actually took many, many, legions of Rome almost 300 years to defeat the celts and a lot of historians are of the opinion that it was treachery from within that helped seal the deal. The Celts were expert warriors, metal workers, craftsmen, and tacticians.
when you consider that most war casualties were to infection and disease, you see the utility of nudity. Clothing is just material to carry grime and whatnot into your wounds.
Imagine being an aztek guy with a obsidian sword and going up against a full plate european swordman. You wouldnt stand a chance.
This comment is peak stupidity. Spanish conquistadors intentionally only used Aztec armor because it was better, obsidian weapons were able to piece metal armor very easily
@@trollerjakthetrollinggod-e7761 I assume this is sarcasm
@@Juanito_Pecados it's literally written on virtually all accounts by the conquistadors. There are horror stories of obsidian arrows going right through the next of the horse and impaling them through their armor.
@@trollerjakthetrollinggod-e7761 then I dont know where your sources come from, but probably you misunderstood something or said sources are not trustworthy, because it would be imposible to pierce armor designed to stop firearms of the time with steel arrows, let alone obsidian arrows. Obsidian is the sharpest material on earth, but is extremely brittle.
His user name has troll in it multiple times, lol, I wouldn't waste my time with him.
If European plate armor wasn’t number 1 this list would be invalid.
I mean you're literally covered in all plate armor. Ofcourse it would!
+Charles Ramsbottom aha and what is that supposed to mean? You are saying a democratic decision by the British people to regain autonomy over their own country subverts the OP's statement?
Jimmy Klorol He could be living in the UK
+Jimmy Klorol I'm German not Arabic. And why is it a mistake? Are you one of those people who like to dismantle sovereign states, defined by peoples grown over thousands of years and turning them into random, indistinguishable administrative units?
+Jimmy Klorol Why are you talking about things if you have no clue about them? My name is in Arabic script but it is a German word. It even uses non-Arabic letters.
I agree with the rest of the statement up until the part about the EU. The thing about the EU is that the UK never joined it in the first place, what they joined was the European Economic Community which then turned into the EU. They wanted to be part of a trade union that worked together on economic affairs and ensured cooperation and friendship among European countries, NOT part of a political union that takes away sovereignty from its member countries increasingly and also does not care about what defines Europe, which is its many different historically grown peoples and the borders and differences between those peoples.
I stumbled into your channel 3 days ago and I’ve been fascinated by the historical facts and the knowledge that you possess , Great channel 👍🏿
Welcome among the noble ones :)
Whenever I'm reminded of asymmetric armor, I wonder how many, if any, suits made for left handed combatants have been found.
Right?
@@empress9554 No, left 🤣
One interesting an beautiful variation of scale armor was the Chinese 'mountain' scale armor that is a lot like a cross between the brigand armor and chainmail in the way it interlocks with one another.
Could you make a video about the armour the non-knightly classes used
How the fuck did you choose that picture?
@@johnmccrossan9376 what do you mean?
A fan of Extra History as I can see. * thumbs up *
Show me how to get images as my avatar!
@@johnmccrossan9376 Are you on a phone or PC?
it is quite interesting to realize that samurai appear in almost all types of armor, metatron you could make a video about the variations of armor used in ancient japan 😉
They use anything they could get that was better than previous, flexible. Like when guns arrived, they instantly ditched bows and switched to guns.
@@SilverforceX rich samurai, at least early on. guns were a bit rare for much of the samurai's history, and even towards the end of their era where guns were widely available some still used the bow because of tradition and the relative ease of reloading, especially on horseback.
@@tylermech66 Nobunaga won all his victories by using footsoldiers with guns. Fun fact is that the gun was the battlefield weapon of choice a generation before the Sword Saint (Musashi) was even born. He was born several years after Nobunaga died.
@@dimman77i'm not talking about nobunaga, i'm talking about when guns were introduced to japan. it wasn't at all an instant transition.
@@tylermech66 My point is that most of the katana myths are post-Musashi, and at that time it was an obsolete war-fighting tool. It's social and combat role should be closer to that of a rapier. Sidearm and status symbol for nobles. The samurai's weapon choice of war since before the Sword Saint even existed was the gun. In Nagoya castle there are lots of screens printed with scenes of mass firearm battles (because of Nobunaga) as well as many guns on display.
I was in Greece last year and did an unplanned quick visit in a small local museum before moving on to Athens and was completely surprised to see the Dendra armor on display there. I really had assumed that they would keep such an important find in the national museum. Keeping it close to where it was found is actually pretty cool.
Why didn't they make pommel proof armor? #Ignorancemakesmeangry
Bismarck because Pommels are simply too powerful, I’ve seen Pommels cut through Tanks like butter.
The big bang was two pommels colliding. There is no armor against that.
You know Goliath? The massive, cruel, nigh unkillable Warrior from the Bible? Well David didn’t sling a rock at him, he used a pommel.
it`s impossible
impommelssible
Now we wait for TopTenz to debunk this video with alt. facts as retaliation.
Clearly, Bikini Armor was OP for viking amazons from Atlantis.
Say what you will about it but it really lets your ass breathe
Bikini armor is super effective against most male opponents.
Just make and entire army of women in bikini armors and you will seduce all your enemies to join your side.
But then they can counter with homosexuals or bisexuals as soldiers O_O
>Oh wait most of them don't become soldiers and even if so the huge overwhelming amount of soldiers succumbing to and joining the ranks of the Bikini Armor army would be too much xD
it is a prejudice H. and B. are generally less male. There is a majority among them that is absolutely normal exept for sexual orientation. You would find a lot of homosexuals that would be able to fight in your antiamazon army.
Also your logic is flawed: Bisexuals would react to attractive women.
If you drop a heavy rock from high enough, no armor is that effective
a helmet that allows you to see and hear well would suffice most of the times I suppose
Like the M&B pictures
alexander wachtel did you just say bannerlord when?
@@jojobloodraven 2019 i hope
that MB picture at 1:09 seems to be used everywhere when vikings are mentioned ^^
THAT'S A NICE HEAD YOU HAVE ON YOUR SHOULDERS!
bannerlord when?
You know, I tend to dislike and mistrust all kind of "top ten", "top 25" videos.
You are an exception :)
Thank you very much. Very instructive as always.
QUESTION: how well does an armour protect from unarmed damage? Can a really powerful kick or a strike reinforced with metal cause injury, trauma or disorientation? That's for a fight scene i wrote. Thanks.
Well, disorientation of course. Look up poleaxe fighting, or battle of the nations, that sort of thing.
Bapping a guy on the helmet to throw him off his game, or just straight up trying to knock him over is all very important. Rarely ever hurts anybody at all, though.
Unarmed... Well, it would be remarkably less effective than with a weapon. And if you just straight up tried to sock a knight all you would probably end up with is a broken hand and a remarkably angry opponent. Same goes for any metal plate (go punch a car to test this).
Hitting a guy in mail or segmented armor probably wouldn't do you serious harm, but probably not a whole lot to them either.
I have never been in that situation but I have been kicked in the shins with a steel-toed boot while wearing polymer shinguards. Barely felt a thing after a couple of seconds, plus the adrenaline of the fight helps put it away.
Unarmed combat, no matter how strong the kick/punch, delivers a relatively limited force, so there is no point unless kicking someone in the head very hard so that both the noise and the impact (if wearing a helmet, considering your question) can disorient or cause a small traumatism.
Consider something else - it is true that grappling and unarmed combat were taught since the very early dawn of warfare, even with steel plate armor being common in the XVI century - but as an addition to safeguard the use of weapons.
Finally, I recommend you make some small scale test to see it yourself, that generally helps. But I'd say that, yeah, best case scenario, you kick someone in the head while they are on the ground and they'll get disoriented for a few seconds.
Clearly the best thing to put in your fight scene is to have one of them screw off the pommel and end his opponent rightly.
Depending on the type of helmet a kick to the head could still hyperextend the neck if the helmet doesn't attach to the shoulders. Likewise if there is any significant opening on the helm a steel toed boot would be very painful on an open face helm. And in a sudden street brawl it might not be uncommon for the fighters to have left their face guards open in a "you insulted my mother" situation.
A kick to a plated gut probably wouldn't do anything except stub your toe on a bad kick. That's the thickest part of most armors.
Wait he said reinforced with metal....do you mean like plate armor knights brawling hand to hand? Because if so i imagine that might work if theyre particularly strong but only joint and head strikes would really do anything, though grappling was common with knights
All these armor gangsta til the wearer needs to use the bathroom
They shit and piss their pants. That's the definition of gangster.
@@xplosivesmoke490 it's warm y'know
I see Mount & Blade and Battle Brothers in the background images ;)
Yeah mount and blade is sadly dead not a lot of online ganes now i just play the career that you make
Yeah, it's pretty old at this point. I still go back to it every so often for a single player campaign with some new mod I haven't tried yet. There are great mods out there that completely change the game.
@Orgeneral Başkomutan Filozof Üstad Dr HCO cc What source are you basing that on? There's been no official announcement since the 2016 fiasco.
@Orgeneral Başkomutan Filozof Üstad Dr HCO cc 1 - It was an absolute fiasco, not in the decision to delay it but in the decision to announce it. It was a either a failure in design or in the execution of the project, but a failure nonetheless. As for the delay, I agree, persisting the the mistake would be way worse, and I'm more patient that most fans.
2- Cool, I'll check that out.
2020 Welcome to Bannerlord
I’m delighted you included the Dendra armor on this list. I’ve always thought it rather impressive for it’s time period.
The amount of misconceptions about Knights and their plate armour is staggering.
Thank you for rightly putting it to the top of the list. It must have been such a formidable sight seeing Knights fully kitted out.
If I was a squire at the time, I would probably jizz at the sight of these guys trotting past. They were literally like the SAS of their day.
The ultimate badasses of the age.
Not SAS but rather more of a Heavy Armored Breakthrough units of 20-21 century. Turkish akinji's and deli's and ukrainian cossacks would fit the description light raider cavalry
Henry comes to visit us! God be praised!
More like actual tanks
Obviously, full plate is n. 1, because it has glancing surfaces against pommels.
Heretic, the pommel to the head would still incapacitate you for a split second required to deliver the decisive blow!
Who said the pommel's capability is restricted to direct kinetic impact? ( ͡º ͜ʖ ͡º)
The peasant meatshield protects you even better if its big enough
Something else that I personally really appreciate of late 15th/early 16th century European plate armour, specifically gothic plate, is the "wings" sometimes seen on the pauldrons which would allow extraordinary mobility in the shoulder. Either way, excellent video with some really nice pictures, one can never see that suit of gothic plate armour from the Wallace collection too many times.
How about Dragonscale Armor?
Steel kills dragons therefore full plate is better :)
Nah thats too much Skyrim :D :D :D
Dovakhin armor
1 - Diamond Set
Lol I have a mod to make bedrock armour suck it
I am still surprised about the hair everytime I see it. Speaking of apperance, did common soilders in the middle ages have regulations regarding their personal hygene? Also was it a problem to maintain a healthy level of cleanliness during a siege (on both sides)? Would be nice if someone can answer this with reliable sources.
A large number is sieges were ended by disease iirc.
During the discovery of brazil in the 15h century and the coloning whe learned a few things about european hygiene. One is mentioned about the king that was ''told'' to shower twice a year to reduce the bad smells... Sure a knight covered in blood i guess would have to take more showers but stills. They didnt clean themselves very well
Jimmy132 I think that hygiene deteriorated after the Black Death because people believed rumors that it would protect them from the plague.
They also all brushed their teeth, knights and other nobles used tooth brushes while others typically used little bits of green twig, there methods worked well. The myth of all medieval people missing their teeth by age thirty is incorrct. Check out modern history by Jason kingsley. He does this kind of stuff, great channel.
Vanarin considering that knights were pretty rich, they probably had personal baths back at home, but they probably only bathed on campaign if they came across a river or something. Bathing was a common activity until around the 1500s
I love the videos in which we see different kinds of armour weapons or anything. Because I discover inspiring things from our world that I didn't know and their explanations make me understand how it works so I can imagine a fantasy setting with realistic features
Warching this five years late, my gosh how much you andnyoru channel has changed since then. Thanks for all of the historical vids man. Glad you heen going storng for years.
well executed and informative...love your work
I agree with the #1 choice. Only firearms and Warhammer could regularly defeat it.
On the padded armor id like to propose the cotton armors used by native americans(mainly the aztecs,mayas and incas) it was the equivalent of a XVct gambeson and sometimes better the spanish started to wear it along their mail/plate armor during the conquests
Mythbusters did a test on ancient Chinese "paper armor" made out of mulberry paper (so basically similar to cotton armor or linen armor as they're all plant fibers). It was quite effective - being able to stop a bullet from an early flintlock pistol.
it goes a bit into the gambeson/aceton kind of effectiveness. Many layers for more strength.
@@HappyBeezerStudios when you consider it the aztecs wore a full body gambeson to battle, their elite warriors used it and on top they used the regular one, must been a lot loooot of layers, full padded body, thick wood shields and bronze protection on legs and arms, if they managed to employ more metal weapons im sure they would probably lasted a bit longer
@@kyomademon453 even something as delicate as silk can be useful as armour if you put enough layers of it together. Actually, silk might even work as some kind of medieval Kevlar.
@@HappyBeezerStudios silk worked for the persians and arabs, seemed to be good against cuts
my expectation:
1 lorica segmentata
2 lorica segmentata
3 lorica segmentata
4 lorica segmentata
5 lorica segmentata
6 lorica segmentata
7 lorica segmentata
8 lorica segmentata
9 lorica segmentata
10 lorica segmentata
Tony Yeah. But I mean the full armor is like a Lorica segmentata covering all the body...the Romans could have done it easily but the interesting thing with Lorica segments is that a warrior can run across the battle field and change formation quickly. That’s something that can’t be done with full plate armor.
@@g.l207 uh, yes they can? the reason the romans never made full plate armor wasn't that their metallurgical skills weren't up to snuff, they had great metal, it was that their armor technology that wasn't as developed as late medieval Europe. Also, to the romans infantry was king, and the idea of making full plate for literal legions of troops is inconceivable to any empire. their cavalry tended towards light cavalry and typically weren't romans themselves anyway, they mostly wore mail, scale, or foreign armors.
Basically, did you even listen when he stated in the part about plate how you actually CAN run across a battlefield and be very mobile because it's weight is distributed evenly?
Hell,. the lorica segmentata was hell on the shoulders. while the romans did have a small amount of the weight on the hips, the main weight of it rested on the shoulders, making it seem heavier than it needed to be.
Tank > Any armor
@@Thesinistereyes1tank is not infantry
@@tylermech66 yes it is. it's called motorized infantry.
Amazing video. I apologize if you've already made this but the next video should be the opposite. Ten least effective armors in fantasy.
I like the idea of mail or brigandine armor
Armors are for fashion, all that you need is proper +10 weapon.
And use lightning to take advantage of their fancy selections.
Glad the top 10 videos made a come back mate ^^
Talks about scale armor.....Doesn't mention it's use between the slavic tribes....
Goes and Cries in corner as mad world is playing
Scale Armor is the worlds step child whilst Mail is their favorite child
Sir Steam LAMELLAR
Excellent work, congratulations From Bogota Colombia !!!
Brigandine is my personal favorite... it can be beautiful, very light, far less expensive than steel plate and was meant for the every man. Late mideval plate armor will always be the best but your average soldier could rely on a Brigandine in most situations.
Sweet. I think that 12th century European armor is the most aesthetically pleasing to me. I like the look with the surcoats over the armor.
Mycenians be like: a milk storage can will do just fine
i've seen them survive house fires so why not. your decorative milk can armor will be undecorated after it's melted off though.
Fun fact: NASA used Plate Armors as a kind of blueprint for their spacesuits
#1 Should’ve been plot armor
George RR Martin disagrees...
Finally, a good ol' Metatron-style vid!
How does Chainmail reign above Lamellar when lamellar while heavier was over all more better against slashing and thrusting weapons and was better against arrows.
chainmail by its self is not that good but it was often paired up with a gamberson under it
This is the video we needed metatron
Native American armor: witchcraft
the Aztecs had a variation of cloth armor, shields, and some leather armors. It's kind of funny actually, look at a picture of their jaguar warriors, they look like they're wearing pajamas :D
some of the more northern peoples also had the rare bone armors, kind of like lamellar but admittedly more primitive.
Native Americans in North America had shields, thick hide shirts, woven cloth armor, and bone armor. They didn’t normally practice combat with the intent kill their opponent, but show that they could. When a came to all our warfare, they were just as efficient at it as everyone else in history, just with a slightly set of tools.
Natives to South America had full suits of cloth armor intended to defeat their glass edged swords and glass tipped spears. Humans are great at killing each other, and quite ingenious at figuring ways to escalate an arms race.
Interestingly, Elk hide will stop a .50 cal musket round outside of 30 yards. It’ll hurt, but it won’t penetrate.
well, the wars in the ancient american continent were totally different than those in the rest of the world. Some fo the Native American nations did not fight to kill but just to harm or stun. Not the case with the aztecs (aka mexicas) who had powerful but primitive weapons, it is a fact that arrows and obsidian clubs were far more effective for the aztecs than the spanish arquebuse
@@tylermech66 There's other forms of armors that involve the use of wooden slats and probably wolven plant fibers? I don't remember much.
This videos going to be helpful in the apocalypse
2 MOUNT&BLADE WARBAND IMAGES , BOOOIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
full plate armour, I knew it
Can you do a video about swords,daggers and armor from Arabia ?
Keep making great videos 👍🏼
Lets not forget that plating was so revolutionary to Europe at the time it began spreading rumors of how their swords, axes, and countless other sharp weapons were essentially dull, and blunt metal clubs. When in all actuality the plate was just that invulnerable to them.
Metatron: “lamellar Armor” Me: RUN CUMANS!
Ah, a fellow Henry. Jesus Christ be praised
@@laufert7100 I wonder what Teresa’s doing, haven’t seen her in a while.
Crazy to see how dawg your channel has come in such a short time production wise! As always, amazing video!
Every TV viewer knows that armour is completely useless and that a soldier in his skimpy underwear can defeat 20 fully armoured knights.
Steven Littlechild you mean He-Man?
I mean yes. Even I could do that, as long as I got a pistol and enough magazines
Great photos, etc. I paused on many for full appreciation. Always great work. Thank you.
plot armor is still the best
rarely do i see a ranking list of weapons or armor that i fully agree with.
it's more of a self back pat because i'm impressed with myself that i share views with scholars like you.
Tosei gusoku is my favorite
I just can’t believe that scale armor isn’t made from dragon scales
Very good job pronouncing dendra.Most foreigners would butcher it(Δένδρα).
I am glad you began the video with an explanation of your judgements. Thank you.
Brigandines have always been a personal fav, and I almost shouted when I saw it appear. Dunno why I got so hyped for an armor top 10 list. Whatever.
Nobody: ......
Metatron: **VIBRANCE**
Hey Raf! Man I really like your channel, hope you don't mind some harsher feedback. Man, your video and audio quality could improve a lot still. I don't think its an issue of equipment, I believe it might be just a matter of some adjustments and some tricks. I'll give some suggestions, maybe consider try some of them out. First, the audio could use some work. There are filters that you can use to lower the ambient sound. Audacity is a good software for that. Concerning video, your camera usually looks just slightly out of focus maybe try to give that a look. Also, backgrounds are really important. Maybe use a green screen, or make a nicely decorated set. Hope you take this the right way, I just think your channel (and you) deserve all the quality it can get. Cheers!
Im lucky to have a museum nearby that has a pretty nice collection of 15th and 16th century plate armor.
I have a final in 4 hours why am i watching this
An army full of full plated soldiers seem like a great way to deal with zombies
Noble One and Proud❤️
Love your channel one of the few worth while youtubers out there
I hadn't seen your videos in a while (for reasons). Your hair is even shorter.
Yes :3
Looks like a roman now. Is there something coming up that requires short hair, or is it just the hot italian summer?
@@HappyBeezerStudios it really has been until a couple of days ago, at least in Northen Italy. Not so sure though (quite the opposite) about Sicily, the only way you could see snow there is during a fallout so yes, usually pretty hot there
@@shinkiro403 our summer up further north is over for about a week.
Bus I expect further south a bit more sun for longer.
for some reason when with the music and how you talked about the full plate armor at the end i got super hyped
Good to hear!
3:49 Eminem
I am confused
It's good to be able to watch your videos again, my friend :)
this list is the wrong way round - everyone who watches this chanel knows which armor will be the no 1, what was most interesting to me was the bronze armor as hadnt seen it before. This list is better seen in ascending order from #1 to #10
Not many people actually. Because it's fucking ancient. Like, if a hoplite from the wars against the persians, or a macedonian cavalry or a legionaire started to do campsite tasks and started to dig and suddenly found that, it would already be fucking old. For example, the wars against the persians (particularly the ones you think when seeing 300) are located in a period (archaic) that was between 800-480 bc and this armor is from the mycenean period which was between 1600-1100 bc, the example in question is from like 15 century bc, meaning that it was like 1000 years old to them (first war 492 bc, second one in 480). The classical period that followed, lasted like 200 years and ended when Alexander the Great died (323 bc), then to the macedonian cavalryman that's around 1200 years old, if we put this roman soldier to end the subsecuent Hellenistic period he would be arround 146 bc, so like 1400 years old, or if we think of him as the classical legionaire using lorica segmentata, then it could be 1450-1750 years old. Now, Knight Errant has a video called "Putting the middle ages in perspective" because we tend to mix everything medieval, and he shows excelently that the norman knight at Hastings is exactly as far from the reinassance full-plated shining armor knight as that one is from us (roughly 500 years), i mention it because we tend to do the same, we tend to think soldiers of the roman fall all used lorica segmentata and so did the first roman warriors when in reality the first ones looked very similar to the neighbouring Gallic/Gaelic (celtic) peoples, and the last ones looked a lot like the germanic migration/vendel warriors (which borrowed helmet construction, mail and even sword styles), continuing with that, we also imagine the macedonian greek army that conquered asia using corinthian helmets and the greek warriors in the Illyiad too, when it was too old at Alexander's time and too far away when the facts of the age created what we later called the troyan war. It is the armor from this period what we can think Achilles weared when we talk about Troy, Mycenean warriors, not Hoplites. I've made numbers and great-grandpa started to be arround like 100 years ago, taking that, then we have 2000 years+ 1500 from the date this armor possibly relates to, so there's like 140 generations between the Mycenean warrior who weared that and us. It's like seeing great grandpa's 138-139 times-removed armor's in a museum.
Yeah you completely misunderstood his point it seems. He was saying that plate Armour being the final point (number one) on the list is pointless because anyone with a brain knows that but nobody really knows about the first point (number 10).
So the list should have been inverted in his opinion because less people would know about the bronze armour tham the plate.
@@MrSpartanspud I dont think juan david restrepo duran was refuting me but just adding info.
Awesome video, I expect no less from Metatron!
Thanks for the video. I have two questions:
1. While full plate was mobile enough for fighting, was it mobile enough for strategic marching on foot? If the ancient Romans had access to medieval plate armor technology and resources, would they still choose to equip their legionnaires with it (especially post-Marius, without supply trains) ? It's one thing to use an armor for several hours during a battle, and another to march 30-40km a day wearing a full plate suit.
2. Why were Roman style shields (and formations which relied on them) abandoned in medeival warfare? I understand they are not very effective against some types of cavalry or other mobile warfare, but in battles like those of the 100-year war, where French knights marched upon English longbowmen, why did they not use large shields (especially since they could now make them out of iron or steel, not just wood) to protect against bows? I'd imagine a large front-facing shield is much more effective against arrows coming from a known direction with a long warning period, compared to body armor which is thinner, and of more use in melee where the timing and direction of attacks can be much more unpredictable.
The Romans had the tech to make full body armour as we see in gladiator combat, but they still didn't. If they had access to full plate Late Medieval armour they would equip the equites with it, not the legionaries.
Large shields weren't completely abandoned, they changed. If you look at Kite shields you'll see that.
Fair enough. What about Roman-style formations? Wouldn't a Testudo formation be effective at storming a defensive position manned by longbowmen?
What kind of infantry tactics were used in late medeival warfare? Because stereotypically, when I hear of the medieval era, I imagine orderly and well-trained knights fighting in well-polished formations and styles such as charge cavalry, but as soon as we get to infantry combat (which most combatants still were), it's a mass of poorly trained, poorly armed peasants (with some mediocre men-at-arms thrown in), usually only equipped with a helmet and soft armor, fighting in chaotic, unorganized combat, and little more formation than a "human wave".
And knights, when forced to dismount (such as during several key 100 year war battles), were not benefitting from their mounted combat training, and without training in infantry formations, fared little better as a group, even despite their individually superior training as warriors.
Is this is a fair representation, especially by late medieval warfare, or was infantry combat more structured and disciplined than this stereotype?
That style of combat was a mainstay all the way up into the age of guns, despite Hollywood depictions. They just usually werent as well trained and disciplined. Soldiers got expensive so wide use of levies tended to take prevelence, but even still they used shields even large ones and often combat would turn into two walls slaming up against eachother. Bur wventually pile formations took over as calvary became big and giant walls of spears would slam into eachother, though medieval and dark ages was kind of shenanigans with nobility pretty mutch amuseing themselve buy fighting wars like you play video games, so knights became a centralized part of armies.
Gene i would like too say the norse were well known for using roman style tactics in open battle even their equipment was quite similar in practice their strategy was celtic but their tactics were mostly Romanesque its kinda cool
1. you ride about in full plate, you don't walk your rich enough to afford multiple horses.
If you walking then it the weight that's the problem, haveing bits of armour on your legs tires you out.
Carrying it is a little better but the weight is still there for you to carry.
While it takes time to don a suit of full plate, it's minutes.
2. when your dressed head to toe in steel a shield is bad trade off, you can't use a two hand weapon.
Thank you so much!I finally found what i was looking for!
PFFF NUMBER ONE CAN BE EASILY CUTTED IN TWO PIECES LIKE AN ICE CUBE BY A POWERFUL KATANA!1!1!1!;)Great video as usual, I'm also pleased to know more on "Dendra armour".
Katana is worthless against plate
But the forces of Pommel can is so powerful that it was that created the Big Bang and wiped out the dinosaurs.
@Michael Smith Negative, bladed weapons don't work against plate armour. That Katana would break.
sixty: r/woosh...
@@cobraglatiator whut
Also Winged Hussars' ones were really specialized to fight in theses times,they were that hard,that a bullet from musket couldn't penetrate that.
The armor in the 15th century is considered to be the peak of European armor, although I think samurai armor is effective as well as versatile
Finally a video with results
Riguardo al sesto classificato, quando cercai una traduzione in italiano di "gambason" trovai "faretto d'arme", conosci un termine più corretto?
intendi "farsetto"?
Very good top-10. Some armour you mentioned I had not heard of.
No mention of Greek/Hellenic musculata bronze plate?
This will help with my novel, so thank you
I am curious how the protection level of the tosei gusoku actually compares to the lorica segementata, as well as to the lamellar. If the gusoku or segmentata were worn over mail I wonder how they would compare to a brigandine/coat of plates. I wonder if there are any tests showing this.
I think I would have left off the bronze bell and placed at #2 or #3 the armor of the famous Polish Winged Hussar. While perhaps a bit too later in terms of years it fits the theme still and looks just plain badass while also giving superb protection.
They're Polish-Lithuanian hussars damnit.
Take a look at the theng thrand channel, he just made some very nice tests on a tosei gusoku suit of armor attacking it with different weapons. I havent seen test like that made on roman armor but he also did some on mail
I think that the main issue here is that he put together armor styles like the Dendra or the Lorica, types like mail/lamellar etc. and armor system like Tosei Gusoku or Full plate. Those three categories shouldn't be compared imho.
To simply ask your question, in the Tosei Gusoku family you also see Hotoke Dou, which is a single plate breastplate, so it's superior in anyway to lamellar, coat of plates or segmentata.
Even the Okegawa do, which is a laminar armor, would be better of most coat of plates, lorica etc.. because it is build like a globose cuirass so it's much better at deflecting. The same is true for the Anime cuirass, which is the same type of armor; in fact there isn't much different from anime or single plate.
Also, if you consider Tosei Gusoku, you are talking about a full armor system, from head to toe, which by default is better than any cuirass alone.
Warning! Jump scare of cursed short haired metatron! You have been warned
Your haircut is oddly arousing....
_yeet_
Are you a girl?
Robert Crawford nope
@@rodom303 hmm, I find this unsettling. Carry on.
That`s nice for you!
Just discovered your channel. A wealth of practical information, thanks.
Thanks and welcome