I remember this one time when i was like 11 or 12 i went to a renaissance fair. Their was this one guy in full plate armor who literally let me and other kids swing swords at him and they just glanced off and didn't hurt him at all.
@@bilbobaggins3478 scared of what? Having a crappy blacksmith? Because a sword swung by a child can do nothing but harmlessly bounce off plate armor. If a blow did somehow get through, you need to have a word with your black Smith.
Armor doesn't make one invincible, but it sure makes one a lot harder to kill. To kill an unarmored guy you just need to hit him ... pretty much anywhere, with any weapon. To kill an armored guy you need to topple him over, immobilize him, and then shove something sharp into the gap of his armor. The latter scenario is unlikely to happen when you're in a formation, surrounded by your buddies. That was why plate armor cost a fortune - it greatly improved the chance of surviving a fight of its wearer - you weren't gonna be killed by a stray arrow, a random blow, or even many random blows, chances of losing limbs were also severely reduced. If armor was as ineffective as cinemas try to make us believe, no one would've bothered wearing it.
+Observer29830 IIRC: Armor cost the rough equivalent of what a house does today, so if it was ineffective, there's no way in hell anyone would have used it.
Also, I'd love to see someone edit the part of LotR where legolas says to aim for the neck where the armor's weakest (shitty design flaw, and just plain inaccurate from the armor the props department put together) to immediately cut to the scene where someone chops right through it and have the guy say "why bother?"
+ken berby Stormtrooper armor is actually pretty good in universe, the problem is blasters are very powerful meaning any armor that could stop them would be too heavy for infantry.
Actually, no medieval combat armor would restrict the freedom of mobility and they weight the same as a modern soldier would carry it's equipment today.
My grand sensei's number one rule of all martial arts: " everything is harder and you think it is." It's harder to do a spin kick than you think, you never have as much endurance as you think, and armor is always better than you think
I find what you said about a battle between knights basically being a wrestling match interesting, because that's historically backed up on the Eastern side of warfare as well, particularly among the Samurai in Japan. The martial art of jiu-jitsu was originally developed as a training regiment and combat art for the Samurai. For those that don't know, jiu-jitsu as a martial art is entirely about using your opponents momentum against them to throw them off balance or pin them to the ground, and though jiu-jitsu today is used mostly for self-defense disarming techniques or submission holds, its been historically recorded that on the battlefield the Samurai used mostly throwing techniques (which, years later, was refined into the art of Judo) against other armored opponents, and then once downed they would quickly draw their dagger (or tantō in a Samurai's case) and finish off their opponent with it in that way on the ground. So.. kind of interesting to see that, generally speaking, opposite ends of the world came up with very similar techniques in armored combat.
Cheers for this, I been tryin to find out about "why is master chief the best spartan?" for a while now, and I think this has helped. Have you heard people talk about - Cenackenzie Conspicuous Cure - (do a search on google ) ? It is a great one off guide for discovering how to create an amazing Master Chief Halo or Iron Man suit costume minus the headache. Ive heard some decent things about it and my work buddy got excellent results with it.
Same with hoplite phalanx, they were basically shoving matches when 2 hoplite lines met with each side shoving until the other guys line either got pushed back until they lost the neat straight shield wall and bowed in or simply got worn out. It's one of the reasons they stacked their men so many lines deep and why hoplite are often portrayed in statues and pottery as having thick thighs and bootys
steven weimer funny thing about that, the best weapons in any age are the ones that weaponized math instead of athletic skills or really any human talent other than intelligence. Brian always beats brawn when used. Trebuchets and other srtillery were some of the best weapons for any combat other than melee combat in the medieval age. And today our artillery is some of the most powerful stuff because of math. Think of the best hand held gun for war, the sniper rifle. When you picture it or use it in games you're always aiming through the scope and making snap shots and whatnot. In reality, you and another person are using caluclations to fire your rifle 1-3 miles away where you can't even see your target throw the naked eye, let alone get a straight shot.
My friend once saw some gamers show up to a LARP in plate armor. Bad idea. You can move fast, and have high defense, but heatstroke becomes a very real danger, especially if you try to chase someone.
@@robsonez That's right, you would continue clinging to your personal preferences based purely on emotion and with no meaningful research. Shad is not an ultimate authority on the matter, but he is significantly more educated than anyone you're likely to have heard on the topic before, and the available evidence agrees with what he says in this video.
@@robsonez Shad does his research and when gets something wrong, he accepts it and tries to fix it. What he says has more value than whatever garbage comes from your mouth.
The only reason you would aim at your opponent's armor would be because you are swinging a large heavy blunt object ("SCREW SHARP BLADES!") at your opponent. Or throwing a pommel at a fallen opponent.
Pommel throwing is a myth. Pommels on swords are part of the tang (basically the blade is part of the pommel. Its 1 solid piece) so its impossible to remove 1. and even if you could, have you tried to unscrew 1 in armour? Not easy or quick. Just stab them with the dagger if theyre downed.
The claim that medieval armor weighs the same as modern soldier gear is a myth. Modern soldiers bear even more weight than a knight would, and it's even less evenly distributed compared to medieval armor.
indeed. I feel there is not much appreciation for the medieval/fantasy genre nowadays. (and most of the ones out there are complete shit) it kinda bores me seeing everyone write contemporary stuff
During the early stages of gun powder, most high quality armor of the time could stop a lead ball fired from a black powder pistol or musket. In fact most breastplates that were made by some reputable smiths use to test fire at it to prove it's bullet proof. Then of inevitably guns became more powerful then basically ended the era of medieval warfare as we know it.
im super late to the party, but it wasn't piercing armor that made guns dominate the battlefield, it was simply that it became several fathoms easier to train an army to use guns rather than melee weapons or bows. To this day, steel plates are a favorite to put into armor plate carriers.
The first "musket" was a heavy version of the arquebus, from what I heard. This musket was unique towards the Renaissance, as it was designed to penetrate armor, and was really heavy. They used this kind of musket less and less and used smaller muskets in the Colonial Period because people stopped wearing armor. It's also fascinating to hear that muskets go with swashbuckling line of swords too because in the later age of gunpowder, because armor was obsolete, because guns were common but still were cumbersome to reload and inaccurate at range, people still went into melee and so would have swashbuckling line of swords as backup weapons.
@@Vooman I'm even later to the party, but the problem with your comment is that the modern plate carrier made out of steel and/or ceramics that you speak of only really took off in popularity during the 2000's. Like literally just around 20 years ago! I was literally born just before it came back. But prior to that period body armor was almost non-existent for most infantry. Only body armor you would ever see for around 4 entire centuries since the decline of personal protection would be cuirasses for cavalrymen and even these had dubious and varying protection capabilities against actual contemporary bullets. For the better part of the 20th Century, nearly all infantry would not wear any physically protective gear outside of helmets right up until the mid Vietnam War when Flak Jackets started getting used (even those only protected against random stray shrapnel). Of course, there were exceptions of relatively modern body armor throughout both World Wars like steel bibs for British field medics and the iconic SN-42 steel cuirass of the Soviet Union in the case of WW2 and those (laughable in retrospect) attempts at creating "modern knights" in WW1 with German Sappenpanzer suits and the Arditis' armors, but they were never worth their practical downsides to be standard issue for infantry en mass and were only issued for specialized units with very specific roles.
I blame media for most of this. But I think they depict all this stuff, like armor being able to be cut through etc, not just because they didn't have proper weapon and combat historians to inform them, but also to make the battles go by quicker. From my understanding, many battles were just exhausting for both sides. Killing people on either side was often times a much slower process in the later medieval periods.
They do have historians. They choose to ignore them, because it won't fit the narrative that everybody wants to see. If anything, blame the consumer. The media is a genie, granting the stupid wishes of its fucked up audience.
In medieval battles most combatants would not die actually. Both sides would lose 10-30% of their forces then one sides morale would break and the battle would be over.
Recommend reading "Fatal Colours" relating to the Wars of the Roses including the Battle of Towton. The routs happened where momentum, not necessarily high losses, made loss inevitable. The massacres happened where one side had nowhere to run, and where quarter was not going to be given, even for ransom.
Ryan Jensen they don’t get through but damage the person in the armor as a musket fires at 1000 fps. Like a mace the weapon doesn’t pierce the armor, as that is hard, but damage the person in it. Blunt force worked very well against knight’s
@@bobrosser1101 A musketball has less kinetic energy than an arrow fired from a longbow. Muskets were simply not a very effective weapon against armored knights.
Back in the 70's? the American Rifleman magazine had a article in it about Plate armor. They took a real brestplate and tested it. As the author of the article says, plate armor was extremely good steel, probably even more so then he even knows. If I remember correctly, the only handgun that would penetrate it was full power 44mag or 357 mag. the stuff was designed to be bulletproof, and the stuff was. the armorer would even test his armor before the customer received it buy firing a gun at it. Super, Super high quality steel. At the end of his video he forgot to tell you, when you had the knight on the ground, and about to kill him with the dagger, you probably didn't, because he was worth more alive then dead, the ransom and all.
Actually that's a good idea to cover. You could cover the For Honor based on real world knowledge. You'd get a great amount of views, introduce you to new audiences, and probably get a few subscribers. I don't know if For Honor is out yet, but if it isn't it could still be topical.
The_Shinigami Yeah after I commented on this I found a video of him basically covering everything I mentioned. I should take this down. I'll leave you the opportunity to see my failure before I do though. Cheers!
If anything, the Lawbringer should technically be semi-immortal against nearly everything else (except against the Shoguki and Conquerer) in For Honor purely due to the other playable classes lacking good anti-armor weaponry (not to mention the fact that, realistically speaking, a halberd is quite versatile contrary to For Honor's Lawbringer using it like an idiot). If an actual medieval warrior had a suit of Lawbringer armor, he would be laughing and shrugging off most blows from other characters purely due to how over-the-top durable that armor would make him.
Tell your friends "what's the difference between a Medieval Jousting Armor and a Medieval Combat Armor", no blacksmith would ever restrict the freedom of mobility to Plate Armor.
"I just wanna know if you can shoot open hard plate. Is someone in Full Hard Plate bulletproof?" Against a historical firearm of the time? Maybe. But unlikely. It wasnt _unheard_ of for an older fire arm of the era to skid off of the plate, or simply dent it. Maybe the gun was of lesser quality. Maybe they didnt have a good burn. Maybe there wasnt enough powder. Maybe it hit a very angled, thicker part of the armor. Maybe... It was known to happen. But it wasnt likely. And certainly wasnt a "thing" for long. Firearm technology advanced quickly. very quickly. And in no time guns were more than strong enough to reliably punch through even the best armor- Which is a huge factor in why such armor disappeared so quickly, despite armor having been around for so long beforehand.
Hey @Shadiversity , as person who did re-enactment, comes from Europe and also has a fix on Medieval stuff, i have to point out the reasoning behind the "Plate is Super-Heavy" Myth. Especially i am referring to Italian and German Jousting armor which indeed was much much thicker and heavier than "normal" combat armor - Jousting was not supposed to be a deadly Activity, hence the Armor was there to ensure better protection, they didnt need to move in it, you only needed to unsaddle your opponent to win. And indeed, some of the heavier ones required some sort of Aid to get on to the horse This may not be evident when looking at the Armor itself, but when you see them side by side in a museum, the difference in thickness is quite evident (Jousting armor is 3 to 4 times thicker than combat armor) Problem is, Combat Armor was a Utility, hence not much of it is prevalent in museums for the public to see, whereas Jousting or even Ceremonial armor (which might have been even heavier due to gems, gold etc) is more seen by the grater public. So in general, the Myth that Full-Plate is heavy and you cant move in it is true, BUT only in reference to Jousting Armor
Heavy or not. the average fighting time of full plate knight was 3 minutes until he was to tired to continue fighting. If you really are reenactor you know that.
Seeing as force lightning is eerily similiar to electricity and iron armour is made from, well, iron (Fe in chemical classification, one of the metals that become magnetic when they have electricity flowing through them, so called feromagnetic metals), it would be difficult to get the lightning into the armour. It's called a Faraday cage, one example of which is a car. Just like the passenger parts of cars and airplanes protect you from lightning, so would steel armour, I assume. You might have to put rubber on the feet to prevent grounding...
My personal favourite is the HEAT-FS VT high explosive tank fired anti armour fin stabilized proximity fused round fired out of the 120mm L/44 main turret of a GDLS American M1A2 system enhanced U.S Army Main Battle tank.
I was gonna say "yeah that's a classic" but then I noticed you both included VT (variable timefuse) AND proximity fuse which I think is just a fantasy you just made up! :D By the way, 120mm is getting obsolete.
@@rudolphantler6309 nope! 'One of the first practical *proximity* fuzes was codenamed the *VT* fuze, an acronym of "Variable Time fuze"' Source- www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=military.wikia.org/wiki/Proximity_fuze&ved=2ahUKEwjEkdCQ8KbuAhUzJMUKHVc4ATMQFjAUegQIMhAB&usg=AOvVaw15yue2comyjahPmEHGHU-f
2:28 I'm studying mechanical engineering, can confirm. Metals come in many kinds of crystalline structures that mostly fall into 3 umbrella terms: Simple Cubic, Body Centered Cubic, Face Centered Cubic, and Hexagonal Close Packed. These are the atom arrangements, again, those are just common "umbrella terms". There can then be many different phases in a metal. They are usually named with greek letters. Alpha phase, Beta phase, Gamma, etc. Also, certain "combinations of phases" may exist, such as interlocking "sheets" of the different phases like in for example Perlite (if i remember correctly, I only took one course on this last semester) or in fine needles of one phase in a "sea" of the other phase (example: Baninite, I think) or in spheres of one phase in the other (martensite, spheroidite, etc). But there is one more level, there are also grains. Metals are typically arranged in grains because they begins to crystallize in many different places, and then where they start to grow. While boundaries between grains are generally weaker places of the metal, having different grains is desirable in some situations because they different structures are stronger in certain directions (crystallographic directions) than others. So they "average out". Also, because of the different orientations, it might be difficult for the "sheets", for example, to slide past one another because not all the grains are orientated the same way. Having more boundaries typically makes the metal harder because dislocations can't easily occur. However, this means the metal can't defform as much, which makes it less tough. Toughness and hardness are not the same thing. More, bigger grains usually results in a tougher metal because more deformation can occur, but it is also less hard. Grains may grow by increasing the temperature of the metal, allowing for diffusion to occur, and small grains to "merge into one another", or they may be "broken up" into smaller ones by doing "cold work" on the metal, which is a fancy way of saying "permanently deforming" the metal. If you quench the metal, you can get some "oversaturation" of for example carbon in steel, which means you can get the carbon to form little "pockets" of carbon that aren't able to properly "mix" into the metal's structure, and end up forming their own little pockets. These pockets are extremely hard and extremely brittle, and sprinkled throughout the metal, they help to make it harder (another way to harden a metal). If you want them to go away, you can heat the metal up to a temperature at which diffusion can occur at a significant rate (less say, an hour at 400 degrees versus maybe hundreds of years at room temperature) and you can dissolve the "nuggets" of the carbon or whatever it may be. Again, I only took a basic introductory course, soif anyone out there spots any mistakes or wants to add more information to what i have said, feel free! :-D
Good job summarizing the first few chapters of Callister. If you are interested in a deeper study of dislocations, among other things, I can recommend "Mechanical Behaviour of Materials" by Courtney.
A friend I did reenactment with once told me that in some period the pope tried to ban daggers. Reasoning being that a daggers only purpose is to kill, you can subdue an enemy without killing them with most other weapons, but the dagger was pretty much only used to finish off opponents. And of course outside of battles a dagger is more of a murderer's weapon that something like a sword. Not sure if that's true or not, but there you go.
The thing is, in a lot of time periods civilians would want to be armed most of the time. Anything long will poke out and hamper you will doing mundane stuff like trying to sit in chairs with a scabbard. A knife-like dagger (not a stabby thing like a rondell) has many uses in mundande activities, as it could function as makeshift scissors or a kitchen knife and it can be carried around easily around your belt. Also, any idiot can reasonably wield a knife, whereas longer weapons usually require some amount of training and coordination. I agree that knife fights are ridiculously lethal, usually killing the loser of the fight on the spot and the winner later due to blood loss, but it's fairly convenient to carry around if you don't actually plan on fighting.
Not a Papal ban, nor on daggers per se, but there were some states that banned the manufacture or importation of stillettos, esp. France in the wake of the assassination of Henri IV. Oddly enough, Henri was stabbed to death by an ordinary knife.
After 2 buddies grab a guy in plate armor a better option than killing him is tying him down to ransom. Anyone who wore full plate back then tended to come from a wealthy family who would ransom your hostage.
+asdfghjkl In 15th century due to the long wars it wasn't uncommon for young guys without any real future to sell everything they had and to buy military equipment. For some of them it was the best way to get at least some fortune. And they quite often were able to buy full plate armour. That was one of many reasons why noble knights started to decorate their armour so heavily. Because no knight wants to be mistaken for thouse guys
Well,I study history on the university, I have my own classes and some popular history shows. This is just reflection of both "white harness" and "golden plate" being in use at same time. Also there are still intact equipment recommendations for heavy cavalry from many wars through the Europe and also numbers of nobles and non-noble fighters in heavy cavalry. And because every heavy cavalry men had to wear plate armor, but not every was noble, we do know that even quite poor guys were using plate armor. The story about guys selling their home to buy armor is a story from some chronicles. I'm sorry, there were too many of them I had read in last years. I cannot say it was true, because it was a recommendation from a knight to his squire to not take sergantes as prisoners, because they own nothing but their armor.
@@fotisst8886 Nothing human-wielded will really "slice through" chainmail. Some things can pierce it, maybe cut short segments, but nothing will slice huge gashes in it (like a sword would in, say, flesh).
I remember reading somewhere that quite often knights would walk off the battlefield by themselves only to die some days or weeks later from all the internal damage they got from people banging on their armor with blunt weapons.
It isn't only movies and games that spread this kind of misinformation. I have two books about medieval armor and weapons at home. One literally says: The Full Plate Armor of the late 15th cenutry weighed between 40 to 80 kg. It has some neat pictures in it depicting a crane, to lift a knight on his horse. The other one states that the average man of this period was very small, didn't wash himself, like ever, and was utter stupid. Also in the world of this book a "broadsword" weighs about 10kg... Oh and did you know, that a mail doesn't protect you from cuts with a sword? That book says so!
Note to self: People writting history books weren't actually there either, so anything they say that isn't based on findings etc is speculation and should at least be looked at with a bit of skeptisism/questioned with logic Also, people who were writting the stuff in their time may still have had a limited point of view (nobles writing about the abilities of 'peasants' for instance 😂) So basically: trust no one, go time travel... 💪
To be fair, even among nobles people would tend to wash thhem selves hardly at all in central and western europe by choice. This was because bei ng too cleanly could have you targeted as a Jew by the inquisition or angry mobs.
Boi please Include the DT system (Damage Threshold, yes it's from Fallout 1,2, Tactics and New Vegas) Full plate probably gives a good 30-50 DT to all limbs along with that resistance
This is what I like about Sekiro; the only guy you literally can't kill is a European in full plate armor. Frick your dumb katana, this is real combat.
funny thing is Katana was never used against Armored opponents ( usually ) in Japan , main weapons of Samurais in battle was Bows and spears , for heavy infantry it was sword similar to straight sword , or later Zanbato ( anti cavalry sword ) , polearm ( Naginata ) , No - dachi ( long sword ) .... and ofc beloved weapon of Samurais Tanto ... which you guess it was a dagger ... which against armored enemies was used more frequently than Katana ... because Samurais armore ( though it's not exactly a full plate armor ) was very hard to deal with Katana or any similar type of weapon ... Samurai Armor was god dam amazing .. even though approach to defense was different ..because of obvious differences in warfare / tactics ... later on in 16th century they were effective against Muskets ... so that i find pretty amazing , though i like Katana and Japanese weapons , the Armor is most impressive of all medieval inventory ... just types and forms of Yoroi armor seem to be similar to variety in China and EU ...
@theFareulookinat no i didn't Samurais were either cavalry ( archers ) or heavy infantry (Ashigaru - later using Muskets ) was using Katana or No-Dachi ( long sword used against cavalry ) , while primary weapon in clash would be Naginata for portion of Samurais ( other than cavalry ) , anti armor weapon would be kanabō ( a metal stick ) , Katana wasn't used as anti armor weapon , it would be pretty much useless against plate armor , but Samurai had techniques using Katana as well , targeting 'not so defended parts of the body ' because of chain mail being so unpopular early , Katana was still a primary weapon even for infantry , but it doesn't mean it was used as weapon against armor , so MR. but i have seen how Samurais could cut in half armored opponents ' - it's not anime , even though Katana was very useful and effective blade , it's kinda obvious that Samurais were wearing more than 2 blades ( of different sized not only for looks ) Tanto and Wakizashi were used , it's pathetic to assume that Samurais were using them only for ceremonial and decorative reasons , plus pommel and spears , polearms of different kind were used against infantry or cavalry , while Katana was primarily self defense tool , there was an actual martial art Tantojutsu ( not sure about name ) so you can check , it's fascinating that you didn't understand that even Europeans never used swords against armor , especially full plate armor , and when ever used , it was in different manner , cutting opponent was just pointless , so blade was always accompanied with dagger , and here you have Tanto , as well as Wakizashi ( yes later they became more ceremonial and decorative - because they start using Muskets and heavy cavalry - while Katana was still a self defense weapon like in EU or central Asia ( long sword , Sabres )
@theFareulookinat ok wtf are you saying ... i'm trying to understand why you arguing or trying to ask there is Wikipage about Zanbatō i just checked , also multiple sites about armor and weapons of Samurais where you can find it ... you either are just annoying me or didn't even tried ( here is also other weapons used for certain purposes www.ancient-origins.net/artifacts-ancient-technology/samurai-weapons-0010730 / www.historyhit.com/weapons-of-the-japanese-samurai/ ) www.japanaccents.com/swords/japanese-horse-killing-sword - about Zanbato
Yep I totally agree with your point on how movies and video games distort our perception of plate armor. It's actually not that difficult to simulate armored combat in a video game imo. All we need to change is to make hits that land on plate armor deduct stamina instead of health points. When stamina gets depleted the character can be knocked down by the next hit, and when characters that have been knocked down get hit again an animation event is triggered and a 'finishing move' animation is played whereby the attacker finishes the knocked down character with a dagger through the visor or a gap in the armor. Alas I'm no programmer and won't be able to contribute anything so I'm putting these ideas here in the hope that it will inspire someone proficient in C++ to write some fun programs in the near future
+Henrick Likesrabbits That could be a decent way to simulate it. Different weapons would also have to have different amounts of damage done to health and stamina. That could be in many forms via different stats or just a penalty to armor. Maybe I should make a skyrim mod for it, either that or make something in unity.
there is a game in development that exactly/Mostly has that fighting system. It is from a company called warhorse studios. The game is called Kingdom Come or something like that, you should give it a look.
+Henrick Likesrabbits Game Exanima i close to that model. You receive two types of damage. Permanent when your body gets wounded and temporary reflecting stunning effect when your armour stops the blow but you still suffer from impact.
***** That strategy is OK, but you can do better. A hit to the upper part of the armor wouldn't necessarily effect another part of the same piece. You also have to ask will the weapon do any damage to the armor after all. Try swinging a sword at plate armor it won't do anything at all.
It shocks me how often hollywood writers dont even do a quick google search. Thats how you wind up with musketeer style rapiers used against Vikings and Knights, or Edo Period Samurai fighting Medieval Knights.
Why would they? Usually it’s for entertainment, not education. Even when they’re doing “based on a true story” movies, they take a lot of liberties for the sake of entertainment value. Sure, you can still do a lot of interesting things while staying completely 100% realistic and historic accuracy... but it just looks nice on film. When you see someone cleave through plate it looks more impressive in the scale of strength. Makes these characters look more menacing or heroic.
Albert-John Freeman That's the point. A knight or man-at-arms going into combat wore his armor and carried his weapons, and not much else. Modern troops going into combat carry their basic combat kit as well as supplies to sustain them for several days at the least. Even disregarding the ruck, which holds the bulk of the weight, a Soldier/Marine/etc. going into a combat zone still needs his weapon, a combat load of ammunition, his protective equipment, a water source, and various smaller items such as first aid equipment, notepads and writing utensils, multitools, so on and so forth. This adds up to a greater weight than what many knights and men-at-arms tended to carry, and almost all of that weight rests on the shoulders rather than being spread across the body. And the average man in medieval europe wasn't a 5' midget. They were shorter than modern men on average, yes, but not THAT much shorter.
Michael, I believe that during the Industrial Age, people were, on average, actually shorter than people were in either the Medieval era, or the Modern era? Due to bad working conditions, crowded and dirty(dirty as in disease ridden cess pools), possibly less nutritious food(Since a lot of people were moving to crowded cities, whereas before they were pretty....rural? Would rural really fit as a terminology for that time?)
02:30 No Shad, fret not, that is exactly what happens: some of the stress is taken out of the crystal structure, thus making the armor less prone to shattering (i.e. giving it toughness). The only difference is between quenching and tempering: quenching is when you bring steel to its critical temperature (where it loses its magnetic property, which could not have been verified in the medieval ages, of course) and submerging it into water, oil, salted water etc. When tempering, the metal is heated to a straw color for blades (results in harder metal, better edge retention, bit more brittle) or a deep blue for armor (more 'springy' since edge retention isn't an issue) and usually let to cool down on its own. Quenching again would just result in another rapid dip in temperature, thus introducing more stress into the metal. Love your videos, keep it up!
Shad, your thoughts on hardening steel and such are mostly correct, so allow me to help out with the materials. When steel is heat treated, it is heated the first time until it is no longer magnetic, and then quenched. This armor is very hard, but brittle. Then to temper, or depending on what steel the Smith used, the armor is heated to a temperature point where the color changes, but does not glow, and this removes a little bit of the hardness to allow for flex, which will make up for the lost hardness in the first place. Hope this helps. :)
I'm wondering, did people use scale mail in combination with chain mail? Or perhaps chain mail to cover the joint areas while wearing plate armour? What about torso-plate armour that consists of interlocking plates to allow even better mobility, rather than one solid piece?
Maille was worn over unprotected areas (armpits, sometimes the backs of knees) and if you were wearing a Barbute helmet, you'd have a standard (Imagaine a Maille bib) and also Maille skirts. So it was used still in the mid-late 15C. By the late 15C plate for the body was 2 bits, that would slide, but still very restrictive compared to Brigandine, which was much more flexible. but not much you can do with armour without making it pointless. You sacrifice mobility for defence.
adding to a list of armour piercing weapon - Koncerz is actually a renaissance period weapon, though it was made to penetrate plate armour, or at least mail of enemy armoured horse raiders - it worked as a lance, they used it from the horse, leaning its grip on the pommel of the saddle to pass through the mass of the horse, pointing its tip towards incoming opponent. Liked your video very much :)
it is different, but verry simmillar. ''he closest western European equivalent is the estoc, or "tuck". '' plus it is 1.6 metters long, practically or almost of greatsword leangth deppending on the height of the person an estoc was 1.3 meters and evolved from a cavalery weapon to be used on foot and caried in a scabard on person, while the Koncerz evolved , like Ziemowit said to be a lance type poking sword of astonishing leangth.
8:05 Dude, in my martial arts group there's some individuals who are similar to your current body build who kick my butt. Body type is only a factor in proficiency (both past and present). Don't sell yourself short
To explain what you are talking about when you refer to the 'hardening' method, it's just heat treating. When heat treating sword, for example, the smith heats up the blade to what they call 'above criticle temperature (they base this on the color of the steel so I don't know the temperature), then dip it into something (anything from water to dragons blood, modern smiths use a special oil) to cool it(quenching). This makes the metal as hard as it can possible be. To hard for combat. It is then reheated to a specific temperature to make is as soft enough to be springy. Armour is the same. It is quenched, then reheated to a specific temperature to be sophened to absorb inpact for combat. Plate armor is heated to about 700 degrees Fahrenheit.For further detail look up Man At Arms: Reforged, Hylian Sheild episode.
This is actually quite accurate in many regards. In the Swiss war for independence, the Swiss peasants were fighting armored knights and in one battle actually immobilized them and were having a hard time actually finishing them off. Some of the peasants actually pinned them down with pitchforks while they sent men to go bring back mining picks so they could finish off the armored knights. I'm sure someone more versed in history will know the exact battle I am talking about. Armor was a serious advantage as long as you didn't end up on your back or in a swamp.
I was wondering, what is a good reference for how different mechanisms are used to attach armour together and the reasons for that certain system. Such as how certain pauldron are attached or how certain chest armours are put on. Any good books or videos? Something with diagrams and pictures would be nice (different historical examples and so on would be a bonus). Sorry I'm a bit of a noob with kind of stuff.
I'll tell you when I get more experience with making armor. As it stands I'm just trying to make something functional out of steel cans and an old barbeque pit. Gave it a bit of a test today before work, and it isn't that bad. Also, I've found that even the cheap stainless steel we use in canning
I watched this video when it first came out, 4 years ago now, I was 15 this man has been apart of my life, thank you shad for your good content and for doing it for so long
Hardening steel. First you warm it to it glows bright orange, then you dump it in water. This will make the metal very brittle. Second phase, you warm it up again to you see a nice blue color to the metal, then you dump it in water again. You now have hardened steel that is very strong and not so brittle. The trick here is to warm it evenly specially with larger pieces.
And all that comes after your do all the pretty shaping that also increased the strength of the armor. You don't engrave and imbelish unitl after heat treating and polishing.
People often confuse fighting armor with jousting armor. Jousting armor is meant to worn a very short period of time for very limited motions. Fighting armor had to allow to make all the motions you can do when you are not armored. Late period tempered armor (heat treated) is no thicker then a garbage can or baking pan so very light. Depend more on the heat treatment for strength. You still want to block all incoming blows with shield or weapon. Aside from targeting the openings in joints you can also target the articulation of the joints. We use much thicker and stronger steel and rivets at he joints today and the articulation points are the first to break. Lighter, thinner 15 th century armor would be vulnerable to impact at those point.
+Pocono Gym Actually early renaissance full plate suit of armors (like the Gothic ones) were not used with a shield because they offered so much protection a shield was no longer needed. Instead they used larger two-handed weapons like German long-swords, halberds, poleaxes and maces.
He did say "-or weapon" in that statement. Also, the reason for blocking with the weapon or shield (because not everyone could afford a full suit of armor) was because armor cost far more to repair or replace.
I think what you said here is often overlooked in the more researched armor discussions. With most of the anti-armor thrusting weapons (tapered long swords, estocs, or even daggers) the goal was certainly to try to thrust between the plates. But with enough force behind a hit, especially using a heavier pointed weapon like a spiked hammer or poleaxe, rather than slide between the plates they could be caved in at a joint. I'm not sure how commonly this happened, and whether this or just the concussive force was the point of these heavier, non-thrusting weapons, but I don't see it talked about as frequently.
Very early or soft iron armors, perhaps, were used in tandem with a shield, but late period armor was literally the reason for the resurgence of two-handed weaponry.
I've realized there was more to "Kırkpınar" Wrestling tradition in Turkey, especially since it all started during Ottoman - Byzantine wars as a method to keep Turkish troops in shape. The rule is that you lose if both of your shoulders hit the ground
I remember in Deadliest warrior episode "Joan of Arc vs William the Conquer" they debunked the idea that chain mail is less restrictive than plate armor
There's also another important consideration: Middle-ages medicine was quite good at dealing with blunt force trauma, but bad at the sorts of antibacterial stuff we take for granted today. For a soldier in the middle ages, a bruise or a small fracture will not kill but breaching the skin could easily turn septic, so the armour is optimised to prevent penetration at the expense of mitigating blunt force impacts.
I like how you set up your studio, with the swords and shields - a very appropriate medieval look. However, the superhero poster seems awfully out of place. Why not a poster of a castle or something more medieval?
John LaBrie You think so? Superior individuals (mostly male) who run around saving the day, who are faster, stronger, and/or better armed than the average guy. That will do well for starters. I have more if you like. :)
Some knights and other warriors, warlords, and high standing members of society were depicted as gods or godly. Some for bravado, intimidation, emphasis on the gap in the pecking order so to speak. Propaganda, morale campaigns. Mainly in fictional works, oral story telling. To glorify war, conflict. The strength of men. Beowulf is a good example. It's not uncommon. Super heroes back then didn't shoot lasers out of their eyes simply because it wasn't with the time, super heroes are influenced by reality, tangible things taken to extremes, believe it or not. I agree with you that Greek gods are more like super heroes than most living people at the time. However there a few types of super heroes. You have super heroes that can do about anything, there is also other types that aren't too crazy. A majority of super heroes aren't that crazy at all. Marvel has a lot of good examples. Wolverine, Deadpool, Deathstroke, Cyborg, Daredevil and many more that I can't think of. Figure heads and popular super heroes stand out from the rest so I see some confusion. Not really as we see them today but I see his point. Little peasant children looking at the local guards, idolizing knights. Thinking of them as invincible gods. The stories told to them, their adamancy to join the army. This is a constant even seen today. Just adaptations. Super hero is a very vague term and people take it to extremes. Both authors and readers. A super hero is just a person who has above average traits and/or abilities. It doesn't have to be much, just enough to create an easily seen gap.
Also if you see this , i'm trying to figure out what kind of weapons i should use for my first kit . A lot of people in Béhourd use Falchion ( one handed ), small axex and maces . there is also Vouge and two handed axe but i'm not strong or experienced enough for them haha . I'm wondering if maces , yet ugly and small in reach are not the ideal type for Béhourd and blunt strikes . The purpose is to " break " the stance and balance of the oponent so ...
There's hardened and tempered. Hardened is brittle, but strong. Tempered is the 2-quench process. There's also different tempers. Example: T6061-T6 Aluminum T6 = temper type (not necessarily re-hardened six times).
id say hardened is hard but brittle. strong/tough is considered to be the abilty to not break. something hardened but not tempered would break easily so i wouldnt call it strong
Helmets were shaped so that swords would glance off instead of distributing full force. I suppose if the helmet wasn't designed for that, then yeah the sword's concussive force would hurt. Joints in armor would of ideally had chainmail underneath (patches sewn into aketon or gambeson, called gousettes; it might also be possible to wear a byrnie underneath the plate, overtop of the sleeved gambeson). The small point of a sword was designed more to get through the rings - hence why the tip is so incredibly small (available when they actually figured out how to taper swords that much). An armor joint in the groin or somewhere might not be all that small.
+Usammity Well what if you were wearing a great helm? Then all the force would be transfered to your neck and spine, even maybe forcing you head down very quickly and causing severe injury.
habr28 Those were worn by cavalry, for taking hits to the face rather than the top. They'd also wear a smaler helmet underneath, which would still give some top protection. Some of those were rounded at the top instead of conical (wiki 'cervelliere'), possibly to fit under a great helm; of course, this was a compromise in top defense once the great helm was removed. Great helms were big, hence the name.
Thank you for clearing this up! Just watched a show where a character is stabbed in the back, through his plate armor and the sword comes out the front. Pierced both sides. Didn’t think that was possible but wanted to hear an explanation!
I remember how this youtube video exposing the TRUTH about full plate armor completely changed the way soldiers approached the battlefield after it went viral in the middle centuries
shad: "the unsung hero of killing armored foes is"... me" heavy battle axe or battle hammer or heavy mace and flai-" shad: daggers me: how tf what!???!??!?!?
The Lion In Winter. There's a scene where Eleanor of Aquitaine bribes a guard to sneak her out of the castle. He's forced to confront another guard and it's a relatively quiet but desperate wrestling match (with daggers and mail). Still seems like a realistic portrayal to me of how it would go down.
This video was a huge help. Thank you! I knew the tissue paper steel depictions were false, but I didn't know *exactly* how effective different weapons are against armor or how to realistically depict plate armor combat. This gives me a lot better picture of how the battles should go and look like. Again, thanks for the help.
Hey Shad, just had a question come into mind whilst watching "The Great Wall", was coloured armour (plate) an option if money was no object, if so what's the history of it? I know that different forging and metalwork techniques can allow for variations of colour etc and I would imagine the highly polished armour portrayed today was less common and an impractical finish to maintain. I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts
Just use the HEAT-FS VT high explosive tank fired anti armour fin stabilized proximity fused round fired out of the 120mm L/44 main turret of a GDLS American M1A2 system enhanced U.S Army Main Battle tank.
Armor of steel. Was truly a wonder during those times. If anything it does show the true art and work that the blacksmiths of old were truly capable of creating.
I'm into D&D, Tolkien, and real medieval stuff in general. But even if I wasn't, I get the impression I'd watch these vids through to the end if I clicked on them by accident. Great delivery.
A very, very nice video, I agree completely! I sure hope your channel is going to get bigger, it's a bit sad this video only has 42 views right now :/ you should get Matt Easton or Thrand or Skall to mention you in their videos, that would get you some instant subs :D
Martin Vranovsky Well every channel has to start out somewhere and honestly I'm thrilled with the growth I'm currently getting. Very exciting. Thanks for your support mate and I'm glad you like!
Actually, armor mostly became invalidated largely because of cost. I mean, yeah, as firearms got better so did they begin to outpace armor, but by the Late Medieval period people were moving towards bigger states, which were protected by *professional, centralized* armies rather than rural levies from feudal lords. This meant you'd need to arm more and more of these sorts of men rather than relying on them to arm themselves as Early-Mid Medieval armies did. Armor's nice, but in the end the weapons are more important-- and moreover, most all weapons are cheaper to supply en masse than full sets of plate armor. And @AHeckman118, big, big, *big* crossbows could break armor better than any bows could, but these were expensive to make, took longer to load than the guns that were competing with them, and were rather niche weapons. If the answer to armor was simply the crossbow, plate armor would have died out much much earlier than it actually did.
Heated to roughly 1500-1650 higher or lower depending on the steel, then quenched. That's the hardening process. Then heated to 400-750, this is called the temper, to relieve stresses from the quench. Then quenched to arrest the temper
what about spears vs plate armor, spears seem to have a fair amount of force to really give a wallap but are also rather accurate when thrusting at someone.
I know I'm really late to this comment, but I'm gonna leave my opinion anyway. I think you'd be better off using quarterstaff techniques with a spear, and basically ignoring the blade (using it only as a weight or maybe using the blunt parts of it that are on certain spearheads) that's not to say it wouldn't be fairly effective, quarterstaffs can have a ton of force if you know how to use them. a couple heavy blows and your opponent would be stunned enough to give you time to slip your spearhead in somewhere
Pliny describes both the pilum and the gladius as being effective against Macedonian armored infantry, but he wasn't a tactical analyst or metallurgist, so I don't suggest this is anywhere close to the final word.
@ Angryowl a dagger is double edged to improve thrusting effectiveness, a large knife is still just a knife where as a 1 inch blade would be a dagger if double edged
One of the thoughts on the section about blunt force was the scene from A Knights Tale where the main char is in the sword contest and hes just beating on his oponent like he's a drum until the guy drops his sword dropping to his knees and the fight is called.
I remember this one time when i was like 11 or 12 i went to a renaissance fair. Their was this one guy in full plate armor who literally let me and other kids swing swords at him and they just glanced off and didn't hurt him at all.
I used to do that to show kids how strong the armor was.
if I was that dude I would have been SCARED
@@bilbobaggins3478 scared of what? Having a crappy blacksmith? Because a sword swung by a child can do nothing but harmlessly bounce off plate armor. If a blow did somehow get through, you need to have a word with your black Smith.
Yeah but then one kid ruins it by printing a pole axe.
@@sadgiraffe6669or a hammer
Armor doesn't make one invincible, but it sure makes one a lot harder to kill. To kill an unarmored guy you just need to hit him ... pretty much anywhere, with any weapon.
To kill an armored guy you need to topple him over, immobilize him, and then shove something sharp into the gap of his armor. The latter scenario is unlikely to happen when you're in a formation, surrounded by your buddies. That was why plate armor cost a fortune - it greatly improved the chance of surviving a fight of its wearer - you weren't gonna be killed by a stray arrow, a random blow, or even many random blows, chances of losing limbs were also severely reduced.
If armor was as ineffective as cinemas try to make us believe, no one would've bothered wearing it.
+Observer29830 IIRC: Armor cost the rough equivalent of what a house does today, so if it was ineffective, there's no way in hell anyone would have used it.
Actually plate armor cost so much because it took a lot of time, skill, and materials to produce.
Also, I'd love to see someone edit the part of LotR where legolas says to aim for the neck where the armor's weakest (shitty design flaw, and just plain inaccurate from the armor the props department put together) to immediately cut to the scene where someone chops right through it and have the guy say "why bother?"
+ken berby Stormtrooper armor is actually pretty good in universe, the problem is blasters are very powerful meaning any armor that could stop them would be too heavy for infantry.
Actually, no medieval combat armor would restrict the freedom of mobility and they weight the same as a modern soldier would carry it's equipment today.
I have the crane lift the horse onto my back, then I carry it into battle.
You can't life the horse onto your back yourself?
Those new hardened metals are quite heavy.
not enough articulated joins xD
you can if its a miniature pony... & a colt. lol
Catherine of Russia is that you?
My grand sensei's number one rule of all martial arts: " everything is harder and you think it is."
It's harder to do a spin kick than you think, you never have as much endurance as you think, and armor is always better than you think
Wise words.
Whoa can you tell more about your grand sensei
Sounds very realistic...
69 likes, noice
I find what you said about a battle between knights basically being a wrestling match interesting, because that's historically backed up on the Eastern side of warfare as well, particularly among the Samurai in Japan. The martial art of jiu-jitsu was originally developed as a training regiment and combat art for the Samurai. For those that don't know, jiu-jitsu as a martial art is entirely about using your opponents momentum against them to throw them off balance or pin them to the ground, and though jiu-jitsu today is used mostly for self-defense disarming techniques or submission holds, its been historically recorded that on the battlefield the Samurai used mostly throwing techniques (which, years later, was refined into the art of Judo) against other armored opponents, and then once downed they would quickly draw their dagger (or tantō in a Samurai's case) and finish off their opponent with it in that way on the ground.
So.. kind of interesting to see that, generally speaking, opposite ends of the world came up with very similar techniques in armored combat.
I thought Judo was the first art then Jujitsu came second
Because we can all agree on that *all swords are terrible against armour*
Cheers for this, I been tryin to find out about "why is master chief the best spartan?" for a while now, and I think this has helped. Have you heard people talk about - Cenackenzie Conspicuous Cure - (do a search on google ) ? It is a great one off guide for discovering how to create an amazing Master Chief Halo or Iron Man suit costume minus the headache. Ive heard some decent things about it and my work buddy got excellent results with it.
Same with hoplite phalanx, they were basically shoving matches when 2 hoplite lines met with each side shoving until the other guys line either got pushed back until they lost the neat straight shield wall and bowed in or simply got worn out. It's one of the reasons they stacked their men so many lines deep and why hoplite are often portrayed in statues and pottery as having thick thighs and bootys
If it works, humans figure it out lol
trebuchet will beat plate armor. always go with the trebuchet.
Or a ballista, they can get through plate like light gets through potato chips.
steven weimer funny thing about that, the best weapons in any age are the ones that weaponized math instead of athletic skills or really any human talent other than intelligence. Brian always beats brawn when used. Trebuchets and other srtillery were some of the best weapons for any combat other than melee combat in the medieval age. And today our artillery is some of the most powerful stuff because of math. Think of the best hand held gun for war, the sniper rifle. When you picture it or use it in games you're always aiming through the scope and making snap shots and whatnot. In reality, you and another person are using caluclations to fire your rifle 1-3 miles away where you can't even see your target throw the naked eye, let alone get a straight shot.
Why not just go all the way and use a tank? Hell, not even that, an atomic bomb.
hell.. why atomic bomb.. just use laser.. u will cook that knight in his armor and he wont even see it coming
what about the 1 trillion folds meteor katana?
As an aspiring fantasy author, your information is something I absolutely value and take to mind.
My friend once saw some gamers show up to a LARP in plate armor. Bad idea. You can move fast, and have high defense, but heatstroke becomes a very real danger, especially if you try to chase someone.
I wouldn't value speculative opinions based on very little research
@@robsonez That's right, you would continue clinging to your personal preferences based purely on emotion and with no meaningful research. Shad is not an ultimate authority on the matter, but he is significantly more educated than anyone you're likely to have heard on the topic before, and the available evidence agrees with what he says in this video.
@@robsonez Shad does his research and when gets something wrong, he accepts it and tries to fix it. What he says has more value than whatever garbage comes from your mouth.
same, friend. As a fellow fantasy author myself, the genre is one not many have an appreciation for these days
The only reason you would aim at your opponent's armor would be because you are swinging a large heavy blunt object ("SCREW SHARP BLADES!") at your opponent.
Or throwing a pommel at a fallen opponent.
Mordhau i guess you mean?
You must end them rightly!
end them rightly XD
Pommel throwing is a myth. Pommels on swords are part of the tang (basically the blade is part of the pommel. Its 1 solid piece) so its impossible to remove 1. and even if you could, have you tried to unscrew 1 in armour? Not easy or quick. Just stab them with the dagger if theyre downed.
Stop using 1 when you mean one. STOP IT
** Me playing for honor ** ** Kensei cuts me in half through plate, mail, and gambeson ** me: “you weren’t supposed to do that”
Swippity spamitty your armor is like wet spaguetti
stop hurting yourself
play Mordhau.
Warlight I don’t have pc
@@stoicgaardian i pity you. really, i felt sad that you have to get stuck on For Honor. no one should have gone through that kind of misery.
@@Wolvenworks I mean, Mordhau is still far from perfect as well.
The claim that medieval armor weighs the same as modern soldier gear is a myth. Modern soldiers bear even more weight than a knight would, and it's even less evenly distributed compared to medieval armor.
But still, medieval armor ain't that heavy then
@@demonking86420 Yes, that was his point.
@@demonking86420 Knight gym
He simply said backpack, he wasnt includong the vest and other gear modern soldiers wear
I'm happy to see so many people interested in medieval things
Isabelle Layla I love this stuff
Well when the war happens and all weapons and ammo are spent, we will go back to this.
@@MrMaKeMeDiNnEr that wont happen buddy we all ways have guns and ammo in this world
Knowledge is a drug :D
indeed. I feel there is not much appreciation for the medieval/fantasy genre nowadays. (and most of the ones out there are complete shit)
it kinda bores me seeing everyone write contemporary stuff
During the early stages of gun powder, most high quality armor of the time could stop a lead ball fired from a black powder pistol or musket. In fact most breastplates that were made by some reputable smiths use to test fire at it to prove it's bullet proof. Then of inevitably guns became more powerful then basically ended the era of medieval warfare as we know it.
im super late to the party, but it wasn't piercing armor that made guns dominate the battlefield, it was simply that it became several fathoms easier to train an army to use guns rather than melee weapons or bows. To this day, steel plates are a favorite to put into armor plate carriers.
The first "musket" was a heavy version of the arquebus, from what I heard. This musket was unique towards the Renaissance, as it was designed to penetrate armor, and was really heavy. They used this kind of musket less and less and used smaller muskets in the Colonial Period because people stopped wearing armor. It's also fascinating to hear that muskets go with swashbuckling line of swords too because in the later age of gunpowder, because armor was obsolete, because guns were common but still were cumbersome to reload and inaccurate at range, people still went into melee and so would have swashbuckling line of swords as backup weapons.
It's pretty rare to have armour strong enough to stop muskets
@@Vooman I'm even later to the party, but the problem with your comment is that the modern plate carrier made out of steel and/or ceramics that you speak of only really took off in popularity during the 2000's. Like literally just around 20 years ago! I was literally born just before it came back. But prior to that period body armor was almost non-existent for most infantry. Only body armor you would ever see for around 4 entire centuries since the decline of personal protection would be cuirasses for cavalrymen and even these had dubious and varying protection capabilities against actual contemporary bullets.
For the better part of the 20th Century, nearly all infantry would not wear any physically protective gear outside of helmets right up until the mid Vietnam War when Flak Jackets started getting used (even those only protected against random stray shrapnel). Of course, there were exceptions of relatively modern body armor throughout both World Wars like steel bibs for British field medics and the iconic SN-42 steel cuirass of the Soviet Union in the case of WW2 and those (laughable in retrospect) attempts at creating "modern knights" in WW1 with German Sappenpanzer suits and the Arditis' armors, but they were never worth their practical downsides to be standard issue for infantry en mass and were only issued for specialized units with very specific roles.
I blame media for most of this. But I think they depict all this stuff, like armor being able to be cut through etc, not just because they didn't have proper weapon and combat historians to inform them, but also to make the battles go by quicker. From my understanding, many battles were just exhausting for both sides. Killing people on either side was often times a much slower process in the later medieval periods.
Makes sense
They do have historians. They choose to ignore them, because it won't fit the narrative that everybody wants to see. If anything, blame the consumer. The media is a genie, granting the stupid wishes of its fucked up audience.
In medieval battles most combatants would not die actually. Both sides would lose 10-30% of their forces then one sides morale would break and the battle would be over.
I read somewhere that a rout most often occurs with only 15% losses in a unit.
Recommend reading "Fatal Colours" relating to the Wars of the Roses including the Battle of Towton. The routs happened where momentum, not necessarily high losses, made loss inevitable. The massacres happened where one side had nowhere to run, and where quarter was not going to be given, even for ransom.
Shad: “the unsung hero of killing people in armor is..”
Me: “gunpowde-“
Shad: “daggers.”
Me: “of course, daggers”
Because musket is very inaccurate.
@@freedisappointment815 Because musket would ever, even in your dreams, get through plate armor.
Ryan Jensen they don’t get through but damage the person in the armor as a musket fires at 1000 fps. Like a mace the weapon doesn’t pierce the armor, as that is hard, but damage the person in it. Blunt force worked very well against knight’s
@@bobrosser1101 A musketball has less kinetic energy than an arrow fired from a longbow. Muskets were simply not a very effective weapon against armored knights.
@@EllipticalReasoning Nah mate, the kinetic energy of an arrow shot from the *ENGLISH* longbow is 371.6J. While a 1.5oz musket ball is 3,100J.
Back in the 70's? the American Rifleman magazine had a article in it about Plate armor. They took a real brestplate and tested it. As the author of the article says, plate armor was extremely good steel, probably even more so then he even knows. If I remember correctly, the only handgun that would penetrate it was full power 44mag or 357 mag. the stuff was designed to be bulletproof, and the stuff was. the armorer would even test his armor before the customer received it buy firing a gun at it. Super, Super high quality steel.
At the end of his video he forgot to tell you, when you had the knight on the ground, and about to kill him with the dagger, you probably didn't, because he was worth more alive then dead, the ransom and all.
would be nice to know the exact article this was in.
Sounds like they only tested against handguns. Rifles wouldnt have that problem.
If memory serves me right, it was muskets that made armor obsolete. Those musket balls would go right through hardened steel.
@@rickregina5053 well, most rifles wouldnt. *cough .22LR cough* 🤣
@@thesocialistsarecoming8565 If its 22lr, you'd just aim for the face. No significant recoil, quick follow up shots.
So essentially in For Honor the knights would just decimate everyone.
Actually that's a good idea to cover. You could cover the For Honor based on real world knowledge. You'd get a great amount of views, introduce you to new audiences, and probably get a few subscribers. I don't know if For Honor is out yet, but if it isn't it could still be topical.
Beta is out i think
The_Shinigami Yeah after I commented on this I found a video of him basically covering everything I mentioned. I should take this down. I'll leave you the opportunity to see my failure before I do though. Cheers!
well sort of if it was realistic not completely
If anything, the Lawbringer should technically be semi-immortal against nearly everything else (except against the Shoguki and Conquerer) in For Honor purely due to the other playable classes lacking good anti-armor weaponry (not to mention the fact that, realistically speaking, a halberd is quite versatile contrary to For Honor's Lawbringer using it like an idiot).
If an actual medieval warrior had a suit of Lawbringer armor, he would be laughing and shrugging off most blows from other characters purely due to how over-the-top durable that armor would make him.
Literally wish I could tell all my classmates this they think of plate armour as heavy but has the defense quality of tin
+Fletcher Bullock tell your friends theyre idiots. It was expensive and labor intensive. Neither of which youd exert on something that didnt work.
You can tell them... They just won't listen.
Tell your friends "what's the difference between a Medieval Jousting Armor and a Medieval Combat Armor", no blacksmith would ever restrict the freedom of mobility to Plate Armor.
I just wanna know if you can shoot open hard plate. Is someone in Full Hard Plate bulletproof?
"I just wanna know if you can shoot open hard plate. Is someone in Full Hard Plate bulletproof?"
Against a historical firearm of the time?
Maybe.
But unlikely. It wasnt _unheard_ of for an older fire arm of the era to skid off of the plate, or simply dent it. Maybe the gun was of lesser quality. Maybe they didnt have a good burn. Maybe there wasnt enough powder. Maybe it hit a very angled, thicker part of the armor. Maybe...
It was known to happen.
But it wasnt likely. And certainly wasnt a "thing" for long. Firearm technology advanced quickly. very quickly. And in no time guns were more than strong enough to reliably punch through even the best armor- Which is a huge factor in why such armor disappeared so quickly, despite armor having been around for so long beforehand.
Hey @Shadiversity
, as person who did re-enactment, comes from Europe and also has a fix on Medieval stuff, i have to point out the reasoning behind the "Plate is Super-Heavy" Myth.
Especially i am referring to Italian and German Jousting armor which indeed was much much thicker and heavier than "normal" combat armor - Jousting was not supposed to be a deadly Activity, hence the Armor was there to ensure better protection, they didnt need to move in it, you only needed to unsaddle your opponent to win.
And indeed, some of the heavier ones required some sort of Aid to get on to the horse
This may not be evident when looking at the Armor itself, but when you see them side by side in a museum, the difference in thickness is quite evident (Jousting armor is 3 to 4 times thicker than combat armor)
Problem is, Combat Armor was a Utility, hence not much of it is prevalent in museums for the public to see, whereas Jousting or even Ceremonial armor (which might have been even heavier due to gems, gold etc) is more seen by the grater public.
So in general, the Myth that Full-Plate is heavy and you cant move in it is true, BUT only in reference to Jousting Armor
Thanks for this! Good information. :)
Good point !
Heavy or not. the average fighting time of full plate knight was 3 minutes until he was to tired to continue fighting. If you really are reenactor you know that.
@@17MrLeon did knights just go for a sleep mid battle then? your talking shite.
@@17MrLeon got proof for that claim?
My favorite tools against armored opponents is force lightning, infinity gauntlet snap, or a tiger tank.
Seeing as force lightning is eerily similiar to electricity and iron armour is made from, well, iron (Fe in chemical classification, one of the metals that become magnetic when they have electricity flowing through them, so called feromagnetic metals), it would be difficult to get the lightning into the armour.
It's called a Faraday cage, one example of which is a car. Just like the passenger parts of cars and airplanes protect you from lightning, so would steel armour, I assume. You might have to put rubber on the feet to prevent grounding...
My personal favourite is the
HEAT-FS VT high explosive tank fired anti armour fin stabilized proximity fused round fired out of the 120mm L/44 main turret of a GDLS American M1A2 system enhanced U.S Army Main Battle tank.
I was gonna say "yeah that's a classic" but then I noticed you both included VT (variable timefuse) AND proximity fuse which I think is just a fantasy you just made up! :D
By the way, 120mm is getting obsolete.
@@rudolphantler6309 nope!
'One of the first practical *proximity* fuzes was codenamed the *VT* fuze, an acronym of "Variable Time fuze"'
Source-
www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=military.wikia.org/wiki/Proximity_fuze&ved=2ahUKEwjEkdCQ8KbuAhUzJMUKHVc4ATMQFjAUegQIMhAB&usg=AOvVaw15yue2comyjahPmEHGHU-f
2:28 I'm studying mechanical engineering, can confirm. Metals come in many kinds of crystalline structures that mostly fall into 3 umbrella terms: Simple Cubic, Body Centered Cubic, Face Centered Cubic, and Hexagonal Close Packed.
These are the atom arrangements, again, those are just common "umbrella terms". There can then be many different phases in a metal. They are usually named with greek letters. Alpha phase, Beta phase, Gamma, etc. Also, certain "combinations of phases" may exist, such as interlocking "sheets" of the different phases like in for example Perlite (if i remember correctly, I only took one course on this last semester) or in fine needles of one phase in a "sea" of the other phase (example: Baninite, I think) or in spheres of one phase in the other (martensite, spheroidite, etc).
But there is one more level, there are also grains. Metals are typically arranged in grains because they begins to crystallize in many different places, and then where they start to grow. While boundaries between grains are generally weaker places of the metal, having different grains is desirable in some situations because they different structures are stronger in certain directions (crystallographic directions) than others. So they "average out". Also, because of the different orientations, it might be difficult for the "sheets", for example, to slide past one another because not all the grains are orientated the same way. Having more boundaries typically makes the metal harder because dislocations can't easily occur. However, this means the metal can't defform as much, which makes it less tough. Toughness and hardness are not the same thing. More, bigger grains usually results in a tougher metal because more deformation can occur, but it is also less hard.
Grains may grow by increasing the temperature of the metal, allowing for diffusion to occur, and small grains to "merge into one another", or they may be "broken up" into smaller ones by doing "cold work" on the metal, which is a fancy way of saying "permanently deforming" the metal. If you quench the metal, you can get some "oversaturation" of for example carbon in steel, which means you can get the carbon to form little "pockets" of carbon that aren't able to properly "mix" into the metal's structure, and end up forming their own little pockets. These pockets are extremely hard and extremely brittle, and sprinkled throughout the metal, they help to make it harder (another way to harden a metal). If you want them to go away, you can heat the metal up to a temperature at which diffusion can occur at a significant rate (less say, an hour at 400 degrees versus maybe hundreds of years at room temperature) and you can dissolve the "nuggets" of the carbon or whatever it may be.
Again, I only took a basic introductory course, soif anyone out there spots any mistakes or wants to add more information to what i have said, feel free! :-D
Good job summarizing the first few chapters of Callister. If you are interested in a deeper study of dislocations, among other things, I can recommend "Mechanical Behaviour of Materials" by Courtney.
A friend I did reenactment with once told me that in some period the pope tried to ban daggers. Reasoning being that a daggers only purpose is to kill, you can subdue an enemy without killing them with most other weapons, but the dagger was pretty much only used to finish off opponents.
And of course outside of battles a dagger is more of a murderer's weapon that something like a sword.
Not sure if that's true or not, but there you go.
I totally agree!
If you ask fantasy writers its not.
+Shadiversity So there were no other metal besides Steel back then?
The thing is, in a lot of time periods civilians would want to be armed most of the time. Anything long will poke out and hamper you will doing mundane stuff like trying to sit in chairs with a scabbard. A knife-like dagger (not a stabby thing like a rondell) has many uses in mundande activities, as it could function as makeshift scissors or a kitchen knife and it can be carried around easily around your belt. Also, any idiot can reasonably wield a knife, whereas longer weapons usually require some amount of training and coordination.
I agree that knife fights are ridiculously lethal, usually killing the loser of the fight on the spot and the winner later due to blood loss, but it's fairly convenient to carry around if you don't actually plan on fighting.
Not a Papal ban, nor on daggers per se, but there were some states that banned the manufacture or importation of stillettos, esp. France in the wake of the assassination of Henri IV. Oddly enough, Henri was stabbed to death by an ordinary knife.
After 2 buddies grab a guy in plate armor a better option than killing him is tying him down to ransom. Anyone who wore full plate back then tended to come from a wealthy family who would ransom your hostage.
+asdfghjkl Well...no. At the times, when plate armour was common, it wwasn't uncommon for many soldiers to own nothing more than the armour...
Vojtěch Nosek People who wore full plate were rich. Brigandine, lamellar, etc. were far more common with average soldiers who were not rich.
+asdfghjkl In 15th century due to the long wars it wasn't uncommon for young guys without any real future to sell everything they had and to buy military equipment. For some of them it was the best way to get at least some fortune. And they quite often were able to buy full plate armour. That was one of many reasons why noble knights started to decorate their armour so heavily. Because no knight wants to be mistaken for thouse guys
+Vojtěch Nosek Just curious. Where'd you learn this?
Well,I study history on the university, I have my own classes and some popular history shows. This is just reflection of both "white harness" and "golden plate" being in use at same time.
Also there are still intact equipment recommendations for heavy cavalry from many wars through the Europe and also numbers of nobles and non-noble fighters in heavy cavalry. And because every heavy cavalry men had to wear plate armor, but not every was noble, we do know that even quite poor guys were using plate armor.
The story about guys selling their home to buy armor is a story from some chronicles. I'm sorry, there were too many of them I had read in last years. I cannot say it was true, because it was a recommendation from a knight to his squire to not take sergantes as prisoners, because they own nothing but their armor.
I love how weeaboos come at me saying a Katana could slice a full-plate armoured knight in half hahahahahahaha
A katana cant even slice chainmail it just has not enogh mass
Couldn't really slice gambeson either
@@Matthew-yc2qr i doubt about it.
@@fotisst8886 Nothing human-wielded will really "slice through" chainmail. Some things can pierce it, maybe cut short segments, but nothing will slice huge gashes in it (like a sword would in, say, flesh).
I don't think anyone has ever said a katana or any sword could cut plate armour in half.
I remember reading somewhere that quite often knights would walk off the battlefield by themselves only to die some days or weeks later from all the internal damage they got from people banging on their armor with blunt weapons.
It isn't only movies and games that spread this kind of misinformation. I have two books about medieval armor and weapons at home. One literally says: The Full Plate Armor of the late 15th cenutry weighed between 40 to 80 kg. It has some neat pictures in it depicting a crane, to lift a knight on his horse.
The other one states that the average man of this period was very small, didn't wash himself, like ever, and was utter stupid. Also in the world of this book a "broadsword" weighs about 10kg...
Oh and did you know, that a mail doesn't protect you from cuts with a sword? That book says so!
I'm pretty sure that broadswords and longswords weighed about 1-3kg. Not even a great sword weighs 10kg.
Kris L Like anyone who writes a book about anything historical LOL
Note to self: People writting history books weren't actually there either, so anything they say that isn't based on findings etc is speculation and should at least be looked at with a bit of skeptisism/questioned with logic
Also, people who were writting the stuff in their time may still have had a limited point of view (nobles writing about the abilities of 'peasants' for instance 😂)
So basically: trust no one, go time travel... 💪
To be fair, even among nobles people would tend to wash thhem selves hardly at all in central and western europe by choice. This was because bei ng too cleanly could have you targeted as a Jew by the inquisition or angry mobs.
80kgs suit of plate would be imprevious to anything, not even modern bullets would harm it
Pshhh everyone knows that full plate armor gives 50% physical damage resistance.
A flat rate, of course- right alongside a full set of tattered rags.
Nick H. Senior depends on what your heavy armor skill is at
Boi please
Include the DT system
(Damage Threshold, yes it's from Fallout 1,2, Tactics and New Vegas)
Full plate probably gives a good 30-50 DT to all limbs along with that resistance
It gives 100% damage reduction vs cut attacks.
However it only reduces 50% of thrust attacks.
Atleast it works and the armor do its main purpose to protect you.
Carry a towel and throw it over his head
Soak it in very hot water beforehand and they will fall like flies with every throw!
Always know where your towel is!
And Don't Panic!
he didn't see that one comming
No you should carry a second pommel and throw it at your enemy to end them rightly
"Don't have a lot of experience killing people in armor".
But tons of experience killing people that is not wearing armor😂
This is what I like about Sekiro; the only guy you literally can't kill is a European in full plate armor. Frick your dumb katana, this is real combat.
I was pretty underwhelmed by how Sekiro looked as "another generic weebo samurai gaame." But that's Epic.
ROBERTOOOOOOO!
funny thing is Katana was never used against Armored opponents ( usually ) in Japan , main weapons of Samurais in battle was Bows and spears , for heavy infantry it was sword similar to straight sword , or later Zanbato ( anti cavalry sword ) , polearm ( Naginata ) , No - dachi ( long sword ) .... and ofc beloved weapon of Samurais Tanto ... which you guess it was a dagger ... which against armored enemies was used more frequently than Katana ... because Samurais armore ( though it's not exactly a full plate armor ) was very hard to deal with Katana or any similar type of weapon ... Samurai Armor was god dam amazing .. even though approach to defense was different ..because of obvious differences in warfare / tactics ... later on in 16th century they were effective against Muskets ... so that i find pretty amazing , though i like Katana and Japanese weapons , the Armor is most impressive of all medieval inventory ... just types and forms of Yoroi armor seem to be similar to variety in China and EU ...
@theFareulookinat no i didn't Samurais were either cavalry ( archers ) or heavy infantry (Ashigaru - later using Muskets ) was using Katana or No-Dachi ( long sword used against cavalry ) , while primary weapon in clash would be Naginata for portion of Samurais ( other than cavalry ) , anti armor weapon would be kanabō ( a metal stick ) , Katana wasn't used as anti armor weapon , it would be pretty much useless against plate armor , but Samurai had techniques using Katana as well , targeting 'not so defended parts of the body ' because of chain mail being so unpopular early , Katana was still a primary weapon even for infantry , but it doesn't mean it was used as weapon against armor , so MR. but i have seen how Samurais could cut in half armored opponents ' - it's not anime , even though Katana was very useful and effective blade , it's kinda obvious that Samurais were wearing more than 2 blades ( of different sized not only for looks ) Tanto and Wakizashi were used , it's pathetic to assume that Samurais were using them only for ceremonial and decorative reasons , plus pommel and spears , polearms of different kind were used against infantry or cavalry , while Katana was primarily self defense tool , there was an actual martial art Tantojutsu ( not sure about name ) so you can check , it's fascinating that you didn't understand that even Europeans never used swords against armor , especially full plate armor , and when ever used , it was in different manner , cutting opponent was just pointless , so blade was always accompanied with dagger , and here you have Tanto , as well as Wakizashi ( yes later they became more ceremonial and decorative - because they start using Muskets and heavy cavalry - while Katana was still a self defense weapon like in EU or central Asia ( long sword , Sabres )
@theFareulookinat ok wtf are you saying ... i'm trying to understand why you arguing or trying to ask there is Wikipage about Zanbatō i just checked , also multiple sites about armor and weapons of Samurais where you can find it ... you either are just annoying me or didn't even tried ( here is also other weapons used for certain purposes www.ancient-origins.net/artifacts-ancient-technology/samurai-weapons-0010730 / www.historyhit.com/weapons-of-the-japanese-samurai/ ) www.japanaccents.com/swords/japanese-horse-killing-sword - about Zanbato
"This new game, for honour..." that is when I realized this video came out a few years ago. Well, still enjoying it
Yep I totally agree with your point on how movies and video games distort our perception of plate armor. It's actually not that difficult to simulate armored combat in a video game imo. All we need to change is to make hits that land on plate armor deduct stamina instead of health points. When stamina gets depleted the character can be knocked down by the next hit, and when characters that have been knocked down get hit again an animation event is triggered and a 'finishing move' animation is played whereby the attacker finishes the knocked down character with a dagger through the visor or a gap in the armor. Alas I'm no programmer and won't be able to contribute anything so I'm putting these ideas here in the hope that it will inspire someone proficient in C++ to write some fun programs in the near future
+Henrick Likesrabbits That could be a decent way to simulate it. Different weapons would also have to have different amounts of damage done to health and stamina. That could be in many forms via different stats or just a penalty to armor. Maybe I should make a skyrim mod for it, either that or make something in unity.
there is a game in development that exactly/Mostly has that fighting system.
It is from a company called warhorse studios.
The game is called Kingdom Come or something like that, you should give it a look.
So like how dark souls handles shields (at least the ones that aren't shit)?
+Henrick Likesrabbits Game Exanima i close to that model. You receive two types of damage. Permanent when your body gets wounded and temporary reflecting stunning effect when your armour stops the blow but you still suffer from impact.
***** That strategy is OK, but you can do better. A hit to the upper part of the armor wouldn't necessarily effect another part of the same piece.
You also have to ask will the weapon do any damage to the armor after all. Try swinging a sword at plate armor it won't do anything at all.
You should do a series called "The Shad Truth About ...".
LOLOLOL
Shad ruins everything (historical)
@@dreamingnight13 That title may get confusing because there's an artist named Shadman who ruins everything
@@arthas640
I've seen an Adam who ruins everything...
I used to be a knight like you, but then I took a dagger to the back of the knee
How to hurt someone wearing plate armour?
Why, throw your pommel at them and end them rightly, of course!
So, half-swording then?
We need hardened armpits before we fight Shad "The Great"
😄😄😄
I hope hollywood is taking notes. Who am I kidding ? Of course they are not.
It shocks me how often hollywood writers dont even do a quick google search. Thats how you wind up with musketeer style rapiers used against Vikings and Knights, or Edo Period Samurai fighting Medieval Knights.
Do you get to the cloud district very often?
Fedyx 1 what are you talking about? Of course he doesn’t, Also have you seen Nazeem?
Why would they? Usually it’s for entertainment, not education. Even when they’re doing “based on a true story” movies, they take a lot of liberties for the sake of entertainment value.
Sure, you can still do a lot of interesting things while staying completely 100% realistic and historic accuracy... but it just looks nice on film.
When you see someone cleave through plate it looks more impressive in the scale of strength. Makes these characters look more menacing or heroic.
Pre season 8 got
everytime he says hum or armor , the translator writes obama.
Love your avatar icon lol
Vast left wing conspiracy!
two years has passed, my life changed, but im still here! go Shad!
For a moment I read “ooba” and was quite confused
Whoa. Modern soldiers carry a MUCH heavier load than the weight of full plate. Many soldiers carry over 100 lbs, Full plate was around 50.
Those knights did not carry a bunch of extra ammo and survival gear like how modern soldiers do.
They were also much shorter on average.
Albert-John Freeman That's the point. A knight or man-at-arms going into combat wore his armor and carried his weapons, and not much else. Modern troops going into combat carry their basic combat kit as well as supplies to sustain them for several days at the least.
Even disregarding the ruck, which holds the bulk of the weight, a Soldier/Marine/etc. going into a combat zone still needs his weapon, a combat load of ammunition, his protective equipment, a water source, and various smaller items such as first aid equipment, notepads and writing utensils, multitools, so on and so forth. This adds up to a greater weight than what many knights and men-at-arms tended to carry, and almost all of that weight rests on the shoulders rather than being spread across the body.
And the average man in medieval europe wasn't a 5' midget. They were shorter than modern men on average, yes, but not THAT much shorter.
Justin Lee depending on the century, there was up to a four inch difference, which is significant
Michael, I believe that during the Industrial Age, people were, on average, actually shorter than people were in either the Medieval era, or the Modern era? Due to bad working conditions, crowded and dirty(dirty as in disease ridden cess pools), possibly less nutritious food(Since a lot of people were moving to crowded cities, whereas before they were pretty....rural? Would rural really fit as a terminology for that time?)
12:37 - Great, now my longsword is stuck in the wall.
02:30 No Shad, fret not, that is exactly what happens: some of the stress is taken out of the crystal structure, thus making the armor less prone to shattering (i.e. giving it toughness).
The only difference is between quenching and tempering: quenching is when you bring steel to its critical temperature (where it loses its magnetic property, which could not have been verified in the medieval ages, of course) and submerging it into water, oil, salted water etc.
When tempering, the metal is heated to a straw color for blades (results in harder metal, better edge retention, bit more brittle) or a deep blue for armor (more 'springy' since edge retention isn't an issue) and usually let to cool down on its own. Quenching again would just result in another rapid dip in temperature, thus introducing more stress into the metal.
Love your videos, keep it up!
Shad, your thoughts on hardening steel and such are mostly correct, so allow me to help out with the materials.
When steel is heat treated, it is heated the first time until it is no longer magnetic, and then quenched. This armor is very hard, but brittle. Then to temper, or depending on what steel the Smith used, the armor is heated to a temperature point where the color changes, but does not glow, and this removes a little bit of the hardness to allow for flex, which will make up for the lost hardness in the first place. Hope this helps. :)
I've been sick for days and you've saved me from boredom.
I'm honoured to do so, hope you feel better soon.
I'm wondering, did people use scale mail in combination with chain mail? Or perhaps chain mail to cover the joint areas while wearing plate armour? What about torso-plate armour that consists of interlocking plates to allow even better mobility, rather than one solid piece?
Maille was worn over unprotected areas (armpits, sometimes the backs of knees) and if you were wearing a Barbute helmet, you'd have a standard (Imagaine a Maille bib) and also Maille skirts. So it was used still in the mid-late 15C. By the late 15C plate for the body was 2 bits, that would slide, but still very restrictive compared to Brigandine, which was much more flexible. but not much you can do with armour without making it pointless. You sacrifice mobility for defence.
adding to a list of armour piercing weapon - Koncerz is actually a renaissance period weapon, though it was made to penetrate plate armour, or at least mail of enemy armoured horse raiders - it worked as a lance, they used it from the horse, leaning its grip on the pommel of the saddle to pass through the mass of the horse, pointing its tip towards incoming opponent. Liked your video very much :)
+Ziemowit Ziemba Ooh, that's a cool weapon. I'm honored you liked the vid ^_^
+Ziemowit Ziemba
I believe the english name for the weapon is "Estoc"
it is different, but verry simmillar. ''he closest western European equivalent is the estoc, or "tuck". '' plus it is 1.6 metters long, practically or almost of greatsword leangth deppending on the height of the person an estoc was 1.3 meters and evolved from a cavalery weapon to be used on foot and caried in a scabard on person, while the Koncerz evolved , like Ziemowit said to be a lance type poking sword of astonishing leangth.
Use a Flammenwerfer that werfs flamme.
Joseph Stalin wut?
It's a Reference.
Yu schnacking to matsch!
You are responsible for the deaths of millions, what have you to say for yourself?
@@HexenProzess Erm... Take a joke lol?
8:05
Dude, in my martial arts group there's some individuals who are similar to your current body build who kick my butt. Body type is only a factor in proficiency (both past and present). Don't sell yourself short
Film Theory made a video about that.
"You can roll"
I always knew it. Dark Souls confirmed
Dude, check out Kingdom Come Deliverance, it's a super-realistic medieval video game, and the armor definitely protects you the game.
My favorite game of 2018 and 2019
You could learn to use a sword, mace, and bow... or you could just poison their food and kick them in their sleep
To explain what you are talking about when you refer to the 'hardening' method, it's just heat treating. When heat treating sword, for example, the smith heats up the blade to what they call 'above criticle temperature (they base this on the color of the steel so I don't know the temperature), then dip it into something (anything from water to dragons blood, modern smiths use a special oil) to cool it(quenching). This makes the metal as hard as it can possible be. To hard for combat. It is then reheated to a specific temperature to make is as soft enough to be springy. Armour is the same. It is quenched, then reheated to a specific temperature to be sophened to absorb inpact for combat. Plate armor is heated to about 700 degrees Fahrenheit.For further detail look up Man At Arms: Reforged, Hylian Sheild episode.
But swords weren't heat treated to stop arbelest quarrels and late (high) medieval plate armor was.
This is actually quite accurate in many regards. In the Swiss war for independence, the Swiss peasants were fighting armored knights and in one battle actually immobilized them and were having a hard time actually finishing them off. Some of the peasants actually pinned them down with pitchforks while they sent men to go bring back mining picks so they could finish off the armored knights. I'm sure someone more versed in history will know the exact battle I am talking about. Armor was a serious advantage as long as you didn't end up on your back or in a swamp.
15:20 awww missed a chance to say "end him rightly" in this part
This was really interesting and informative, thanks! Really enjoyed this.
+Lonely Goblin It is my pleasure sir!
I was wondering, what is a good reference for how different mechanisms are used to attach armour together and the reasons for that certain system. Such as how certain pauldron are attached or how certain chest armours are put on. Any good books or videos? Something with diagrams and pictures would be nice (different historical examples and so on would be a bonus). Sorry I'm a bit of a noob with kind of stuff.
I'll tell you when I get more experience with making armor. As it stands I'm just trying to make something functional out of steel cans and an old barbeque pit. Gave it a bit of a test today before work, and it isn't that bad. Also, I've found that even the cheap stainless steel we use in canning
Has enough carbon in it for hardening to work. We treat as scrap materials that would have been sought after in ages past.
I think the most underrated weapon against full plate armor is mud!
*Grumbles in French*
Ground is super effective against Steel
One of the reasons the martial arts of the day was also focused on using a shield as a weapon
I watched this video when it first came out, 4 years ago now, I was 15 this man has been apart of my life, thank you shad for your good content and for doing it for so long
Today we'll talk about plate armor.
So ignore the justice league portrait in the background.
"Main reason for lacking practical experience in killing people in full plate: Not many people wear fullplate."
Seems legit.
Hardening steel. First you warm it to it glows bright orange, then you dump it in water. This will make the metal very brittle. Second phase, you warm it up again to you see a nice blue color to the metal, then you dump it in water again. You now have hardened steel that is very strong and not so brittle. The trick here is to warm it evenly specially with larger pieces.
First step is hardening. Second step is tempering. And you don't quench again at the end of the temper, you let it cool slowly.
I stand corrected :)
Blueing the armor
Even tho quenching in water is correct it makes me cringe everytime i do it i like oil way better myself
And all that comes after your do all the pretty shaping that also increased the strength of the armor. You don't engrave and imbelish unitl after heat treating and polishing.
People often confuse fighting armor with jousting armor. Jousting armor is meant to worn a very short period of time for very limited motions. Fighting armor had to allow to make all the motions you can do when you are not armored.
Late period tempered armor (heat treated) is no thicker then a garbage can or baking pan so very light. Depend more on the heat treatment for strength. You still want to block all incoming blows with shield or weapon. Aside from targeting the openings in joints you can also target the articulation of the joints. We use much thicker and stronger steel and rivets at he joints today and the articulation points are the first to break. Lighter, thinner 15 th century armor would be vulnerable to impact at those point.
+Pocono Gym Actually early renaissance full plate suit of armors (like the Gothic ones) were not used with a shield because they offered so much protection a shield was no longer needed. Instead they used larger two-handed weapons like German long-swords, halberds, poleaxes and maces.
He did say "-or weapon" in that statement. Also, the reason for blocking with the weapon or shield (because not everyone could afford a full suit of armor) was because armor cost far more to repair or replace.
I think what you said here is often overlooked in the more researched armor discussions. With most of the anti-armor thrusting weapons (tapered long swords, estocs, or even daggers) the goal was certainly to try to thrust between the plates. But with enough force behind a hit, especially using a heavier pointed weapon like a spiked hammer or poleaxe, rather than slide between the plates they could be caved in at a joint. I'm not sure how commonly this happened, and whether this or just the concussive force was the point of these heavier, non-thrusting weapons, but I don't see it talked about as frequently.
Very early or soft iron armors, perhaps, were used in tandem with a shield, but late period armor was literally the reason for the resurgence of two-handed weaponry.
@@backup4536 You're assuming everyone on the battlefield wore full armor. They didn't.
I’ve always feel like people underestimate blunt force trauma. Internal bleeding and concussions exist, you don’t need to punch armor to hurt someone.
Moral of the story. Knock on that armor! They'll hear them bells ringing!
I've realized there was more to "Kırkpınar" Wrestling tradition in Turkey, especially since it all started during Ottoman - Byzantine wars as a method to keep Turkish troops in shape. The rule is that you lose if both of your shoulders hit the ground
I like you. You swallow your pride in the name of truth. Wish our leaders could do that...
Plebs: "Jet fuel can't melt steel beams!"
*Me,* an intellectual: "yOU cAn'T cUt tHrOUgh hArdEnED sTEa L! !1! !"
I remember in Deadliest warrior episode "Joan of Arc vs William the Conquer" they debunked the idea that chain mail is less restrictive than plate armor
There's also another important consideration: Middle-ages medicine was quite good at dealing with blunt force trauma, but bad at the sorts of antibacterial stuff we take for granted today. For a soldier in the middle ages, a bruise or a small fracture will not kill but breaching the skin could easily turn septic, so the armour is optimised to prevent penetration at the expense of mitigating blunt force impacts.
You earned yourself a subscriber good Sir ! + extra sympathy for that Justice League picture.
+LKVideos Welcome to the craziness!
I like how you set up your studio, with the swords and shields - a very appropriate medieval look. However, the superhero poster seems awfully out of place. Why not a poster of a castle or something more medieval?
The parallels are uncanny. Super heroes are essentially fictional medieval knights.
saltypork101 that's bullshit. :)
John LaBrie You think so?
Superior individuals (mostly male) who run around saving the day, who are faster, stronger, and/or better armed than the average guy.
That will do well for starters. I have more if you like. :)
saltypork101 well, you might have a point. But they didn't have crazy superpowers. Superheroes are more like Greek gods.
Some knights and other warriors, warlords, and high standing members of society were depicted as gods or godly.
Some for bravado, intimidation, emphasis on the gap in the pecking order so to speak. Propaganda, morale campaigns.
Mainly in fictional works, oral story telling. To glorify war, conflict. The strength of men. Beowulf is a good example. It's not uncommon.
Super heroes back then didn't shoot lasers out of their eyes simply because it wasn't with the time, super heroes are influenced by reality, tangible things taken to extremes, believe it or not.
I agree with you that Greek gods are more like super heroes than most living people at the time. However there a few types of super heroes.
You have super heroes that can do about anything, there is also other types that aren't too crazy. A majority of super heroes aren't that crazy at all. Marvel has a lot of good examples.
Wolverine, Deadpool, Deathstroke, Cyborg, Daredevil and many more that I can't think of. Figure heads and popular super heroes stand out from the rest so I see some confusion.
Not really as we see them today but I see his point. Little peasant children looking at the local guards, idolizing knights. Thinking of them as invincible gods.
The stories told to them, their adamancy to join the army. This is a constant even seen today. Just adaptations.
Super hero is a very vague term and people take it to extremes. Both authors and readers. A super hero is just a person who has above average traits and/or abilities. It doesn't have to be much, just enough to create an easily seen gap.
Nice! 🙂
The most powerful armor to ever exist is plot armor! 😂
I don't know how I ended up here but you earned a sub quick. Well spoken, well put together info, and entertaining to boot! Thank you
Started Béhourd not so long ago , your videos are a treasure to discover the medieval geek i had in me , thank you kindly , regards from France .
Also if you see this , i'm trying to figure out what kind of weapons i should use for my first kit . A lot of people in Béhourd use Falchion ( one handed ), small axex and maces . there is also Vouge and two handed axe but i'm not strong or experienced enough for them haha . I'm wondering if maces , yet ugly and small in reach are not the ideal type for Béhourd and blunt strikes . The purpose is to " break " the stance and balance of the oponent so ...
Unsung "bring your buddies" method. Or make his buddies be far enough while your buddies right here. The good tactics is priced for a reason.
fizikshizik I agree completely.
There's hardened and tempered.
Hardened is brittle, but strong.
Tempered is the 2-quench process.
There's also different tempers.
Example: T6061-T6 Aluminum
T6 = temper type (not necessarily re-hardened six times).
id say hardened is hard but brittle. strong/tough is considered to be the abilty to not break. something hardened but not tempered would break easily so i wouldnt call it strong
Helmets were shaped so that swords would glance off instead of distributing full force. I suppose if the helmet wasn't designed for that, then yeah the sword's concussive force would hurt. Joints in armor would of ideally had chainmail underneath (patches sewn into aketon or gambeson, called gousettes; it might also be possible to wear a byrnie underneath the plate, overtop of the sleeved gambeson). The small point of a sword was designed more to get through the rings - hence why the tip is so incredibly small (available when they actually figured out how to taper swords that much). An armor joint in the groin or somewhere might not be all that small.
Usammity I agree completely ^_^
I am Shad
Good. I'm glad that you agree, because I'm obviously the smartest person on youtube, obviously (obviously).
Obviously.
+Usammity Well what if you were wearing a great helm? Then all the force would be transfered to your neck and spine, even maybe forcing you head down very quickly and causing severe injury.
habr28
Those were worn by cavalry, for taking hits to the face rather than the top. They'd also wear a smaler helmet underneath, which would still give some top protection. Some of those were rounded at the top instead of conical (wiki 'cervelliere'), possibly to fit under a great helm; of course, this was a compromise in top defense once the great helm was removed.
Great helms were big, hence the name.
+Usammity And the flat-top design didn´t stick around for too long, so they probably figured out that it was not so ideal.
Thank you for clearing this up! Just watched a show where a character is stabbed in the back, through his plate armor and the sword comes out the front. Pierced both sides. Didn’t think that was possible but wanted to hear an explanation!
I remember how this youtube video exposing the TRUTH about full plate armor completely changed the way soldiers approached the battlefield after it went viral in the middle centuries
"I don't have any experience killing someone in armor..." so are you saying guy have experience killing someone without armor??? Lol
shad: "the unsung hero of killing armored foes is"...
me" heavy battle axe or battle hammer or heavy mace and flai-"
shad: daggers
me: how tf what!???!??!?!?
Daggers? I think shad meant a stiletto
Or you could just throw your pommel at your armoured opponent...
Not possible. Pommels are full tang (part of the blade) and would just bounce off the armour.
Robert Atkinson You know that's a joke, right?
spiked pommels with gunpowder! ohh boy!
Is no one getting this joke?
are you not getting that we do get the joke, but take it even further?
The Lion In Winter. There's a scene where Eleanor of Aquitaine bribes a guard to sneak her out of the castle. He's forced to confront another guard and it's a relatively quiet but desperate wrestling match (with daggers and mail). Still seems like a realistic portrayal to me of how it would go down.
This video was a huge help. Thank you! I knew the tissue paper steel depictions were false, but I didn't know *exactly* how effective different weapons are against armor or how to realistically depict plate armor combat. This gives me a lot better picture of how the battles should go and look like. Again, thanks for the help.
Rolling in armor you say? I WILL FULFILL MY DESTINY! I WILL BE JOHNNY DARK SOULS!!!!!!
Hey Shad, just had a question come into mind whilst watching "The Great Wall", was coloured armour (plate) an option if money was no object, if so what's the history of it?
I know that different forging and metalwork techniques can allow for variations of colour etc and I would imagine the highly polished armour portrayed today was less common and an impractical finish to maintain.
I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts
Just use the
HEAT-FS VT high explosive tank fired anti armour fin stabilized proximity fused round fired out of the 120mm L/44 main turret of a GDLS American M1A2 system enhanced U.S Army Main Battle tank.
Armor of steel. Was truly a wonder during those times. If anything it does show the true art and work that the blacksmiths of old were truly capable of creating.
I'm into D&D, Tolkien, and real medieval stuff in general. But even if I wasn't, I get the impression I'd watch these vids through to the end if I clicked on them by accident. Great delivery.
A very, very nice video, I agree completely! I sure hope your channel is going to get bigger, it's a bit sad this video only has 42 views right now :/ you should get Matt Easton or Thrand or Skall to mention you in their videos, that would get you some instant subs :D
Martin Vranovsky Well every channel has to start out somewhere and honestly I'm thrilled with the growth I'm currently getting. Very exciting. Thanks for your support mate and I'm glad you like!
Do an episode about the armour in Game of Thrones!
"What weapon am I talking about that is so effective at killing guys in armor?"
It's called a harquebus.
Yeah, exactly. AFAIK plate armor was short-lived because of the firearm.
I was thinking crossbow.
Actually, armor mostly became invalidated largely because of cost. I mean, yeah, as firearms got better so did they begin to outpace armor, but by the Late Medieval period people were moving towards bigger states, which were protected by *professional, centralized* armies rather than rural levies from feudal lords.
This meant you'd need to arm more and more of these sorts of men rather than relying on them to arm themselves as Early-Mid Medieval armies did. Armor's nice, but in the end the weapons are more important-- and moreover, most all weapons are cheaper to supply en masse than full sets of plate armor.
And @AHeckman118, big, big, *big* crossbows could break armor better than any bows could, but these were expensive to make, took longer to load than the guns that were competing with them, and were rather niche weapons. If the answer to armor was simply the crossbow, plate armor would have died out much much earlier than it actually did.
The heavy crossbow was often called an Arbilast or Arbilest, depening on how Francophiled you were...
Fact-check. Early guns were ineffective against plate armor.
Heated to roughly 1500-1650 higher or lower depending on the steel, then quenched. That's the hardening process. Then heated to 400-750, this is called the temper, to relieve stresses from the quench. Then quenched to arrest the temper
Im making a medieval video game and these videos are really helpful. Thanks a lot :)
plot armor is the best kind of armor
what about spears vs plate armor,
spears seem to have a fair amount of force to really give a wallap but are also rather accurate when thrusting at someone.
I think one would have to be very precise with their strikes in that case.
I know I'm really late to this comment, but I'm gonna leave my opinion anyway. I think you'd be better off using quarterstaff techniques with a spear, and basically ignoring the blade (using it only as a weight or maybe using the blunt parts of it that are on certain spearheads)
that's not to say it wouldn't be fairly effective, quarterstaffs can have a ton of force if you know how to use them. a couple heavy blows and your opponent would be stunned enough to give you time to slip your spearhead in somewhere
Pliny describes both the pilum and the gladius as being effective against Macedonian armored infantry, but he wasn't a tactical analyst or metallurgist, so I don't suggest this is anywhere close to the final word.
Also using said techniques, you can accomplish the task of knocking them prone and then use the spearhead in the vulnerable spots.
I have a question Whats the different between a dagger and a knife,Is it that a knife is utility tool and a dagger is exclusively a weapon.
daggers are double edged & symmetrical.
They are usually longer too , right?
LEE BENNETT mainly length. A large knife can be considered a dagger, especially if it's double-edged.
every thing about them
@ Angryowl a dagger is double edged to improve thrusting effectiveness, a large knife is still just a knife where as a 1 inch blade would be a dagger if double edged
One of the thoughts on the section about blunt force was the scene from A Knights Tale where the main char is in the sword contest and hes just beating on his oponent like he's a drum until the guy drops his sword dropping to his knees and the fight is called.
Hey Shad, video idea:
what would medieval armour made with modern materials look like? Aluminum? Titanium? Carbon fibre? Filament printed? HDPE?
Daggers can be concealed,swords cannot,so must be openly carried,
"Facts are facts, I believe"
good save in case we live in the matrix
Master, we would like to see some of your moves in some of your videos. For old times sake.
th-cam.com/video/CCBaFWX6ig4/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/b5znQ50HNB8/w-d-xo.html
+Shadiversity many thanks Master.
It's kind of disturbing when you call him master... But I'm sure it's good motivation of Shad!
there is no such a thing as old times with videos we can go back when ever we wan't
i remember Excalibur from 1981, every single person had full plate armor and it was utterly useless, they cut through it like paper
I love how you articulate yourself. I always walk away from watching one of your videos with a full understanding.