It's notable that little to nothing in this armor layout needs to be closely tailored. No greaves, no enclosed cuisses, vambraces or rerebraces. Breastplate and back plate overlap and can be slid to suit a range of waist sizes. Indicative of a transition away from feudal knights and men at arms towards professional and mass trained/equipped armies.
At this time infantry armour would be mass produced and assigned to soldiers by the state, they would have to return it after there servise. Cavalerie and higher officers would often have there own armours and you wil see more tailord armour pieces with them. Eccept for greaves since they would have been replaced by high riding boots.
You think this could have been used by the Roman army if they were introduced to it? It's more protective due to it being a single breastplate, and the shoulders and head are about as protected, honestly, the only thing this falls short is shock absorbance in the shoulders and face protection, but that is really easy to fix.
@@joaosturza The romans did use mass produced armour like the the lorica srgmentatta because of the limitations of the tame it takes a different form. We also see bigger pouldrens for the shoulders in the time. But the ones on this armour would be the cheapest and easyest to produce. The face protection as not that big of a probem during a push of pike, sins your arm, pike and the brim of your helmet could cover a big part of the gap A Spanish style morion would have a bigger gap.
@@AllemansendRe-enactment i always had this theory that bill hooks and poleaxes would have been extremely effective on the Romans for a few reasons 1. they armored their shoulders and head above everything else to they clearly prioritize being hit straight from above, less so any sideways attack to the neck but still, if you look the amount of metal on the pauldrons is kinda ridiculous, it is made to provide almost a spring like effect to cushion blows to the shoulder, 2. a notably fierce and feared enemy were the Thracians famed for using scythes with long handles capable of devastating cuts and of hooking and pulling off shields both things bills and poleaxes excel at 3. one of the few large scale armor changes the Romans did to their armor designs was the additional reinforcement band attributed to the Thracian campaigns, it one of the few large scale and pattern modifications they did to large numbers of armor, since in those days people fought with the armor as their parents and grandparents fought with
I love these mostly unknown TH-cam channels that do videos like this. When it's not for money it's driven by passion and it makes these videos so good. I'll take one of these over a high budget video for a channel with millions of subs any day!
The renaissance was about 150-200 years before this time period. Spotted the American who think renaissance fairs are realistic ‘medieval’ reinactments
@@Tarnatos14 The clothing most people wear to renaissance fairs are 17-18th century low fantasy clothing. The renaissance (the most famous one) is the 14th century north Italian renaissance. With the height of it reacing in 15th and early 16th century.
This, and matchlock musket with a fork underneath are my fovourite combat equipments in the entire human history. Warfare really did peaked in the pike&shot era.
Very good video and kit! This is similar (if not the same) as our New Model Army pikemans kit from our..second(?) Civil war (Parliament vs Royalists) also fun fact; the mayor's ceremonial bodyguard still wears this armour for ceremony. And we carry halberds, swords and dagger to escort the mayor. Ceremonial yes, but also the legitimate bodyguard :) once again, well done!
Yes these kinds of armour are very similar, though the Brits sometimes preferred larger tassets. And the shoulder protection had pretty much gone out of use by this time.
It looks like putting the gorget under the body armor limits mobility (causing the body armor to be pulled up by the shoulders/gorget when the arms are raised. It also looks like putting the gorget over the body armor would mitigate that. Was that done historically or was the lack of that part of mobility not a concern?
The gorget is almost always worn under the curas. Otherwise if a blade travels up the breast plate it could go under the gorget. Your observation that lifting the shoulders also lifts the curas is correct, but wearing the gorget and spolders ontop would conflict with the straps of the curras. Personaly i know of no historical image where a gorget is worn ontop of a breastplate. But il never clame to know or have seen everything.
Interesting I always thought shoulder and neck protection is worn over cuiras. It was this was in previous ages. It was like that in the Napoleonic era.
In the napoleonic era georgettes are not used for defence any more as far as i know some evolved/devolved versions are worn as a sign of office, and cuirassiers dont seem to have had gorgettes. In earlyer times the gourget was almost alwais under the curas, due to the construction of some closed helmets an bevers it can look like there is a gorget on top. But im not an expert on these periods.
It makes me wonder. In earlier times the regular solider would rather have ok-ish protection over large areas of the body - padding on the whole torso, arms and legs, a hauberk also covering limbs, some plate couter on elbows, knee protection. And in the early modern era it was exchanged for very good protection (plate armor) on a quite limited area of the body. I mean those completely exposed arms and legs are quite suprising to me. I wonder what was the rationale for that.
In short the rational was, firearms. In this period melee fighting became less common. In the 16th century we see the concept of "bad war" which refers to a melee between 2 blocks of infantry. Since the idea was that if this happens multiple things had gone wrong tactically The pike blocks mostly functioned as mobile forts to protect the musketeers from the cavalry. Also most of the infantry armour was not bulletproof but they were resistant against musket fire from a certain distance, since the musket balls lost their velocity rather quickly. It's because of these firearms that they prioritized to protect the head and torso over the arms and legs. It is also more expensive to equip soldiers with a high amount of armour. With cavalry it was more common to see closed helmets and protection on the arms and legs.
Great info thx!!! The jerkin is exactly what I need to make or commission to be made. Have you suggestions on patterns and leather type and weight? THx!!
It's relatively simple, ither use a basic doublet pattern, but give it a long skirt of 4 tabs a little passed mid thigh. You can also look up buffcoat patterns since the sleeveles versions can look very simular. The leather has to be fairly supple and can range from goats leather to cow leather i believe Toms jerkin was made of brushed cows leather.
@AllemansendRe-enactment Thank you. Do you have any recommended reading for Dutch armour and cloths worn in this period? Osprey books? Other? Thx again.
That is always dificult i have some books on my list im hoping to find second hand some day like the patterns of fashion, modern maker and some archeological books that are not often regularly available
would a thick buff-coat like material be used for the boots and lower leg protection as well? That is to say the parts of the lower leg not protected by metal of any sort.
Not for infantry, cavalry would wear high riding boots to give a little more protection the the legs and to givr a bit more comfort when riding a horse. the infantry did not seem concerned about lower leg protection of any sort.
@@AllemansendRe-enactment huh. That seems peculiar to me. Was that more the result of what soldiers were supplied with and could be affordably offered or just because it wasn't much if an issue? I guess from my perspective, if I was a somewhat privately wealthy individual who was roped into service, I would maybe pay a bit of money to add some protection to the parts of my body that the gear I was supplied didn't cover. - maybe that is silly or based off an ahisorical assumption, but it seems reasonable.
@@cyphermasq7870 The Dutch army in the beginning of the 17th century did not provide its soldiers with standardised footwear. Clothing would most often just be the individuals daily clothes from before they joined the army. At the time heavy cavalry who wore the most amount of armour at the time, would only have steal protection down til the knee. Down from there they had the riding boots i mentioned before. High boots like that were expensive items. And the nature of pike and shot combat, gave less need to protect the legs. Since most of the combat with pikes was aimed at the torso and head. Some well to do pikemen would cover there the whole of there left arm with plate armour but with the legs it seems that maneuverability was more inportant then protection.
The music in this video sounds like something it came out of Civ 6. It could be however, I have not yet played as the English. I have only played as the Polish, Russians, Germans, Norwegians, and Australians.
Most mass produced infantry armour would not have been proved (actually tested). Even most privately owned cavalry armours were only proofed against pistols. one of our members has tried to shoot a hole in his helmet a couple of years back which took him 3 shots at 20 meters. i have read accounts from.the first half of the war when the Dutch stil used a combination of muskets and what they called roers(a shorter lower caliber firearm). and it stated that the "roers" were more manoverable which was better in rough terain but could not penetrate armour. Also the armour penetrating ability of most muskets would drop significantly with distence.
"Not even the primitive stone 🪨 age and early Bronze 🥉 age ancient Aztecs, Mayans, Toltecs, Mixtecs, Olmecs, and Zapotecs of Mexico, 🇲🇽 aren't a match for Spanish,🇪🇸 armored horsemen, 🏇southern German 🇩🇪 pikemen, such as the Landsknechts, arquebusiers, halberdiers, and northern Italian,🇮🇹 Genoese, crossbowmen 🏹 with attack dogs,🕃 🐶 such as Doberman pinscher, 🇩🇪 Rottweiler, 🇩🇪 English, 🏴 Bull Mastiff, German,🇩🇪 shepherd, Boxer,🥊 🇩🇪 Belgian 🇧🇪 Malinoi, and Northern Italian,🇮🇹 Cane Corso, deadly ☠️ and frightening 😱 old🧓world 🗺 diseases, ☣ such as smallpox, chicken 🐔 pox and English,🏴 mumps, German, 🇩🇪 measles, scarlet 🩸 fever, Spanish,🇪🇸 influenza, varicella, cholera, diphtheria, and bubonic plague, and their indigenous native american auxiliaries, such as the Tlaxcala and the Tarascans, of Mexico,🇲🇽 alongside the African Nigerian 🇳🇬 slaves."
Then imagine that in the period a pike block would have over a hundred men and that there would be multiple blocks on a 16th or 17th century battle field. Next year we have the battle of Grolle again, one of the biggest 17th century events with over 1100 reenactor from over the whole world.
I'm not completely sure why gambesons fell out of favor with the military, it could be because plate armour became cheaper for infantry since it was mass produced in this period. The leather jerkin in this video offered next to no protection against swords or fire arms, it protects the clothing of the wearer of the armour against chafing. We do see thicker buff coats with officers and cavalry, there offers more protection against cuts but were also alot more expencive. Even if they could impede the wearers movement.
@@AllemansendRe-enactment I've also heard that some cowboys wore really heavy duty leather coats that could way like 10 kg and would offer some protection against blades. My guess is that leather was more expensive, but did better in rain compared to the more cumbersome, but also more protective and cheaper gambesson. The latter also provides more protection against blunt force trauma, which is where I wonder why people didn't feel the need anymore. Another aspect may be wound contamination if a bullet or fragments go through armour. Mail would be quite a bad choice too...
Gambeson works good against blunt force trauma, this is true. It dose not work that wel against slashes and stabs. The weapons used in the time and period we focus on mainly focus on the thrust and or cut. Plate is more effective in this regard, with knights in the late middle ages we also see the the "arming doublets" which are worn under the curas get a lot thinner than traditional gambeson.
@@AllemansendRe-enactment From what I've heard, some gambeson did offer significant protection against cuts and thrusts. This includes stopping broadhead arrows at a longer range. However, even a thin gambeson can offer you protection against slashes, as there are enough modern examples, where a jumper or leather jacket protected its wearer from a Katana or Machete, as bad cuts simply won't go through... (which is not just a matter of lacking skill, but also due to the fact that targets rarely hold still...)
@@AllemansendRe-enactment Another question: why did pikes become so dominant? I can't imagine that they work well against plate armor, and for attacking other infantry, they are huge, cumbersome, and floppy... Pike vs Pike would be a nightmare for me, just like Musket vs Musket in formation... It has much less to do with individual physical strength, fighting prowess, or equipment, but much more with luck, discipline and statistics... In earlier times, I would really see good use of pikes against cavalry, especially when mail was the dominant armor, but I can't recall it being popular then...
I wander, why shoulder plates are stuked below gorget and cuirass? Usually it is done the other way around. How comfortable is that? It's visible how the whole cuirass goes up when he lifts hands only halfway. And I don't see any advantages of this design
The gorget always goes under the cuirass in this period. It is a common misconception that it would go over the cuirass, but this would make it more likely that a blade would slip through the gap. The gorget would also be less secure and ride up on the neck even more, by wearing it under the cuirass it stays in place. It also dissipates the weight of the cuirass over a larger area. Some cavalry armours look like they have a gorget above the cuirass, though this is part of the helmet and a separate gorget is worn under the curas. All types of armour are a give and take of protection, mobility and caste. In many types of plate armour its hard to lift your arms all the way up if possible at all. These types of infantry armour would have been relatively cheap and mass produced in the period so the aim was to get the maximum protection and mobility(for the movements a pikemen was expected to do) for the lowest posible cost. More expensive armours from the period could offer more protection and mobility. In the period you can also find large shoulder protection often referred to as pauldrons, these do overlap over the cuirass further closing the gap near the armpit, but also attach to the gorget under the cuiras. These wer alsomore expensive and had to be better fitting then the spolders you see in the video and often dont provide better mobility. I have worn the gorget you see in the video with a different cuirass and i can assure you that it was perfectly confortable.
There were gorgettes that offer more protein around the neck with moving plates, some even covered the whole neck. But these would have been more expensive the gorget you see in the video is mostly to atach the spolders and disapate the waight of the breast and back plate over a larger area of the shoulders, while giving a small amount of extra protection around the neck and shoulder.
Some did in the 16th century, but getting shot with a musket ball kinda sucks, having pieces of broken chainmail in the wound sucks more. The English colonists in north America did use chainmaille in the first half of the 17th century to protec against the arrows of the native Americans.
Its from the painting: Het afdanken der waardgelders door prins Maurits op de Neude te Utrecht, 31 juli 1618, by Pauwels van Hillegaert, 1627. It can be found in Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam togeather with a verry simular painting by Joost Cornelisz, Droochsloot, 1625.
Hello Sir, I have a question about the Dutch pikeman armor. First I wonder about the price of the armor pieces of the Dutch pikeman (low or high cost) ? The Second question is about the clothes you wearing, are they hand made by yourself or buy on specialized website or something ?
Thank you for your questions, The price of a set of armour like the one shown in the video. Im not shure if you'r askimg about what a set of armour costs these days or back in the 17th century. The armour in the video is made by Adam Blockely, in the U.K. and is of high quality. Adam is also capable of pistol proofing his armour sets. In the period it would be relatively cheap and mass produced pieces atleast for pikemen armour provided by the army. And The clother are made by hand.
We have made a video about the 17th century Dutch pike drill by Jacob de Gheyn, and acording to that manual you dont use a pike overhead. One of our members is working on interpreting 16th century german treatises on dueling with pike, these duels would be unarmourd and you do see overhead grips. When it comes to other pole arms like hellbeards or partizans, they were not used by infantry at this time only by officers.
This style can be found in the verry late 16th century and the first 3/4 of the 17th. Its hard to give an exact date of when it was or was not used since aslong as they could be used ore repaird they wer handed out to soldiers. The bare leather straps do indicate its a slightly older style compared to the ones with hooks. I hope this answers your question a little.
@@AllemansendRe-enactment Thank you for the quick answer. I'm researching / reenacting the long turkish war (1590-1605) in Hungary, particularly the involvement of western (walloon, french, dutch, german) soldiers brought in by the Habsburg emperor/king. Im in the process to make a similar infantry armour like yours in the video, I have gathered quite a bit of info on the breast and backplate, and I have a helmet ready. Sadly I couldnt find much info on tassets in this period (1590-1610). Could you point me to some sources? Is it plausible that the tassets in the video fit in this period? Edit: correcting the dates
@@gaborfabian1239 sorry but did you mean 1690-1710 or 1590-1610? As for 1590-1610 the Dutch would have had tassets, same gows for most western european countrys. I dont realy know alot about eastern european countrys to be honest. The tassets could be flexible you find this alot on the early types, the later types are almost alwais solid but the emulate the look with horizontal lines and fake rivits. If you ment 1690-1710. Then i could not realy say. Since there are not alot of images of pikemen, because they would be replaced more and more by musketeers with bayonets who did not wear armour. I do know tassets wer stil used in the 1670s and 80s.
@@AllemansendRe-enactment Sorry, my bad, 1590-1610 is the correct date. I will edit the other comment as well. To be specific: around this date, 1590-1610, the flexible tasset or the solid tasset was the common type for the dutch infantrymen? Story time: eastern Europe was a "fun" place during these times. All kinds of western soldiers were hired by the Habsburg emperor (also king of Hungary) to push back the Ottoman empire from Viennas doorstep. But the Carpathian basin from Transylvania to Vienna, from Prague to Belgrade was a chaotic place, where western pikemen, musketeers and dragoons, hungarian haiducks and hussars, ottoman sipahi, janissaries, tatars and all other kinds of soldiers played free-for-all for along time. Its a fascinating piece of history (and a bloody one for sure).
@@gaborfabian1239 they would bouth be correct. But the easiest source would be the pike drill by Jacob de Gheyn 2 (1597-1607) Which shows solide tassets. The clothing worn by the soldiers is a bit fancey but it shows alot of detail. We have a video of that pikedrill on the channel although the images in it can be a bit small.
Im not shure what you mean, but it could also be from bad reproductions of armours from the 1800's. Later gorgets were used as a badge of office for oficers in the 18th and 19th century but this would be reduced to small decorated plates
@@AllemansendRe-enactment I tried to reply but the comment was deleted because I put the link. Cavalry helmets had the part that covered the neck and is called a gorget, too. Since this part was the integral part of the helmet, it had to be worn above the breast plate. Likewise, the pauldrons on the plate cavalry armour are worn above the breast plate. Your video helped me notice the differences I was not aware before. Also, only today I realized how the breast and back plates did not reach much bellow the bellybutton and the tassets haven't protected only the upper thighs but the lower abdomen, too.
@@doppel5627 it would depend on the type of cavalry helmet. If the gorget is attached to the helmet without movable parts it is also inposible to move the head. In the portraits of nobelmen in armour from the period we do see gorgets with a high neckline that is made to be flexible and wil close the gap between the helmet and the curras and protect the neck. The gorgets for infantrymen also dont have room for the straps of the curas when worn over the curas. Maibey we wil show the gorget being worn over the curas in a future video. But we stil have alot of video ideas and net alot of time to make them.
@@AllemansendRe-enactment thank you for the answer. Ate you into musketmen/arquebusiers, too? I can't find any realistic videos about the actual way the rank and file drill worked. In the reenactments videos I often see them firing in sort of 19th century double lines but in the 17th c a soldier would stand in a column, fire, walk to the end of the column, reload, wait his turn to shoot. I guess the reenactment companies are too small to do it properly but it would be interesting to see. I don't want to bother you with details, but maybe you could point me to a channel that cover that part of military history?
@@doppel5627 true most companys are to small to do the counter march propperly. We do plan to make a video on the musket drill by de Gheyn as we have already done for the pike. De Gheyn dose the movements for the counter march with chainging leg positions. Appart from the motions for a musketeer on sentry duty. Vully fire with 2 lines did exist in the 17th century and was often called Swedish fire. Sinse it was used by the Swedes under Gustavus Adolphus during the 30 years war.
In my case 11 years of slavery with a contract that the money technically not paid to me does not get taxed so that the slave owner can stash what I earn away in secret and eventually use it to pay for the armor, give it to me, and I am free.
This armour is based on late 16th early 17th century examples, but armour of this time would be in use threwout the 17th century. Untile pikes would compleatly be replaced by muskets
No landsknecht, the landsknechts were active in the early 16th century 100 years earlyer. The landsknechts did use pikes but so did almost every military force in the 16th and 17th centurys. This armour is an interpretation of that used by the Dutch standing army from the first half of the 17th century.
They had to make something that was cheap to produce in large amounts and keep it as functional as possible, so that did not invest too much in looks. Or what 17th century armour styles do you prefer?
It's notable that little to nothing in this armor layout needs to be closely tailored. No greaves, no enclosed cuisses, vambraces or rerebraces. Breastplate and back plate overlap and can be slid to suit a range of waist sizes. Indicative of a transition away from feudal knights and men at arms towards professional and mass trained/equipped armies.
At this time infantry armour would be mass produced and assigned to soldiers by the state, they would have to return it after there servise.
Cavalerie and higher officers would often have there own armours and you wil see more tailord armour pieces with them.
Eccept for greaves since they would have been replaced by high riding boots.
You think this could have been used by the Roman army if they were introduced to it?
It's more protective due to it being a single breastplate, and the shoulders and head are about as protected, honestly, the only thing this falls short is shock absorbance in the shoulders and face protection, but that is really easy to fix.
@@joaosturza The romans did use mass produced armour like the the lorica srgmentatta because of the limitations of the tame it takes a different form.
We also see bigger pouldrens for the shoulders in the time.
But the ones on this armour would be the cheapest and easyest to produce.
The face protection as not that big of a probem during a push of pike, sins your arm, pike and the brim of your helmet could cover a big part of the gap
A Spanish style morion would have a bigger gap.
@@AllemansendRe-enactment i always had this theory that bill hooks and poleaxes would have been extremely effective on the Romans
for a few reasons
1. they armored their shoulders and head above everything else to they clearly prioritize being hit straight from above, less so any sideways attack to the neck but still, if you look the amount of metal on the pauldrons is kinda ridiculous, it is made to provide almost a spring like effect to cushion blows to the shoulder,
2. a notably fierce and feared enemy were the Thracians famed for using scythes with long handles capable of devastating cuts and of hooking and pulling off shields
both things bills and poleaxes excel at
3. one of the few large scale armor changes the Romans did to their armor designs was the additional reinforcement band attributed to the Thracian campaigns, it one of the few large scale and pattern modifications they did to large numbers of armor, since in those days people fought with the armor as their parents and grandparents fought with
@@joaosturza sorry but my in dept knolige on the Roman periods is limited.
And we mainly focus on the early modern era.
I love these mostly unknown TH-cam channels that do videos like this. When it's not for money it's driven by passion and it makes these videos so good. I'll take one of these over a high budget video for a channel with millions of subs any day!
I'm designing a 17th century TTRPG setting. Your content is a great reference. Thank you!
TTRPG ? Testicular Torsion Rocket Propelled Grenade ?
Gorgeous, keep the good work, we are in need of renaissance history
It isn’t rennaisance, its early modern era
yeah an rennaisance isnt a own "epoch" in between others its a epoch as part of medieval and early modern era, not on its own@@That_migueldude68
The renaissance was about 150-200 years before this time period. Spotted the American who think renaissance fairs are realistic ‘medieval’ reinactments
@@HansWurst1569 Well if its about renaissance before 1500 it can be realistic for a certain part and place of medieval
@@Tarnatos14 The clothing most people wear to renaissance fairs are 17-18th century low fantasy clothing. The renaissance (the most famous one) is the 14th century north Italian renaissance. With the height of it reacing in 15th and early 16th century.
This, and matchlock musket with a fork underneath are my fovourite combat equipments in the entire human history.
Warfare really did peaked in the pike&shot era.
An excellent video demonstrating the mobility of the armour. 😀😀😀
Very good video and kit! This is similar (if not the same) as our New Model Army pikemans kit from our..second(?) Civil war (Parliament vs Royalists) also fun fact; the mayor's ceremonial bodyguard still wears this armour for ceremony. And we carry halberds, swords and dagger to escort the mayor. Ceremonial yes, but also the legitimate bodyguard :) once again, well done!
Yes these kinds of armour are very similar, though the Brits sometimes preferred larger tassets.
And the shoulder protection had pretty much gone out of use by this time.
Wonderful video guys, thank you so much for this. Super interesting :)
lol, i like how you forgot your hat when putting on the armor, same thing happens to me too with a baseball hat.
Same happens with 18th c gear…. Just gonna put on that cartridge pou…err…take off hat….t, THEN put on cartridge pouch.. 🙈
It looks like putting the gorget under the body armor limits mobility (causing the body armor to be pulled up by the shoulders/gorget when the arms are raised.
It also looks like putting the gorget over the body armor would mitigate that.
Was that done historically or was the lack of that part of mobility not a concern?
The gorget is almost always worn under the curas.
Otherwise if a blade travels up the breast plate it could go under the gorget.
Your observation that lifting the shoulders also lifts the curas is correct, but wearing the gorget and spolders ontop would conflict with the straps of the curras.
Personaly i know of no historical image where a gorget is worn ontop of a breastplate.
But il never clame to know or have seen everything.
The gorget under the cuirasse also helps distributing the weight of the latter
Interesting
I always thought shoulder and neck protection is worn over cuiras.
It was this was in previous ages. It was like that in the Napoleonic era.
In the napoleonic era georgettes are not used for defence any more as far as i know some evolved/devolved versions are worn as a sign of office, and cuirassiers dont seem to have had gorgettes.
In earlyer times the gourget was almost alwais under the curas, due to the construction of some closed helmets an bevers it can look like there is a gorget on top.
But im not an expert on these periods.
Love your videos!
Thank you :D
4:35 ITS DRUNKEN SAILOR :3
Its used in multiple of our videos, i thought it's fitting since Allemansend is a nautical group.
Wow, good reconstruction 👋 Hallo from Ukraine 😁🇺🇦
It makes me wonder. In earlier times the regular solider would rather have ok-ish protection over large areas of the body - padding on the whole torso, arms and legs, a hauberk also covering limbs, some plate couter on elbows, knee protection.
And in the early modern era it was exchanged for very good protection (plate armor) on a quite limited area of the body. I mean those completely exposed arms and legs are quite suprising to me. I wonder what was the rationale for that.
In short the rational was, firearms.
In this period melee fighting became less common.
In the 16th century we see the concept of "bad war" which refers to a melee between 2 blocks of infantry. Since the idea was that if this happens multiple things had gone wrong tactically
The pike blocks mostly functioned as mobile forts to protect the musketeers from the cavalry.
Also most of the infantry armour was not bulletproof but they were resistant against musket fire from a certain distance, since the musket balls lost their velocity rather quickly.
It's because of these firearms that they prioritized to protect the head and torso over the arms and legs.
It is also more expensive to equip soldiers with a high amount of armour.
With cavalry it was more common to see closed helmets and protection on the arms and legs.
Great info thx!!! The jerkin is exactly what I need to make or commission to be made. Have you suggestions on patterns and leather type and weight? THx!!
It's relatively simple, ither use a basic doublet pattern, but give it a long skirt of 4 tabs a little passed mid thigh.
You can also look up buffcoat patterns since the sleeveles versions can look very simular.
The leather has to be fairly supple and can range from goats leather to cow leather i believe Toms jerkin was made of brushed cows leather.
@AllemansendRe-enactment Thank you. Do you have any recommended reading for Dutch armour and cloths worn in this period? Osprey books? Other? Thx again.
The arsenal of the word, Dutch arms trade in the 17th century.
Is a good one and its in english
@@AllemansendRe-enactment No longer available anywhere on line that I can find ......
That is always dificult i have some books on my list im hoping to find second hand some day like the patterns of fashion, modern maker and some archeological books that are not often regularly available
would a thick buff-coat like material be used for the boots and lower leg protection as well? That is to say the parts of the lower leg not protected by metal of any sort.
Not for infantry, cavalry would wear high riding boots to give a little more protection the the legs and to givr a bit more comfort when riding a horse.
the infantry did not seem concerned about lower leg protection of any sort.
@@AllemansendRe-enactment huh. That seems peculiar to me. Was that more the result of what soldiers were supplied with and could be affordably offered or just because it wasn't much if an issue?
I guess from my perspective, if I was a somewhat privately wealthy individual who was roped into service, I would maybe pay a bit of money to add some protection to the parts of my body that the gear I was supplied didn't cover. - maybe that is silly or based off an ahisorical assumption, but it seems reasonable.
@@cyphermasq7870 The Dutch army in the beginning of the 17th century did not provide its soldiers with standardised footwear.
Clothing would most often just be the individuals daily clothes from before they joined the army.
At the time heavy cavalry who wore the most amount of armour at the time, would only have steal protection down til the knee.
Down from there they had the riding boots i mentioned before.
High boots like that were expensive items.
And the nature of pike and shot combat, gave less need to protect the legs.
Since most of the combat with pikes was aimed at the torso and head.
Some well to do pikemen would cover there the whole of there left arm with plate armour but with the legs it seems that maneuverability was more inportant then protection.
@@AllemansendRe-enactment huh, interesting. Thanks for the info.
@@cyphermasq7870 if it helps fighting in formation dose not alow for alot of strikes to the legs.
The music in this video sounds like something it came out of Civ 6. It could be however, I have not yet played as the English. I have only played as the Polish, Russians, Germans, Norwegians, and Australians.
I would not know if its used in a game, all the music we use is copyright free so it could be verry posible.
Would there armor still be musket proof around this time?
Most mass produced infantry armour would not have been proved (actually tested).
Even most privately owned cavalry armours were only proofed against pistols.
one of our members has tried to shoot a hole in his helmet a couple of years back which took him 3 shots at 20 meters.
i have read accounts from.the first half of the war when the Dutch stil used a combination of muskets and what they called roers(a shorter lower caliber firearm). and it stated that the "roers" were more manoverable which was better in rough terain but could not penetrate armour.
Also the armour penetrating ability of most muskets would drop significantly with distence.
@@AllemansendRe-enactmentthats interesting
"Not even the primitive stone 🪨 age and early Bronze 🥉 age ancient Aztecs, Mayans, Toltecs, Mixtecs, Olmecs, and Zapotecs of Mexico, 🇲🇽 aren't a match for Spanish,🇪🇸 armored horsemen, 🏇southern German 🇩🇪 pikemen, such as the Landsknechts, arquebusiers, halberdiers, and northern Italian,🇮🇹 Genoese, crossbowmen 🏹 with attack dogs,🕃 🐶 such as Doberman pinscher, 🇩🇪 Rottweiler, 🇩🇪 English, 🏴 Bull Mastiff, German,🇩🇪 shepherd, Boxer,🥊 🇩🇪 Belgian 🇧🇪 Malinoi, and Northern Italian,🇮🇹 Cane Corso, deadly ☠️ and frightening 😱 old🧓world 🗺 diseases, ☣ such as smallpox, chicken 🐔 pox and English,🏴 mumps, German, 🇩🇪 measles, scarlet 🩸 fever, Spanish,🇪🇸 influenza, varicella, cholera, diphtheria, and bubonic plague, and their indigenous native american auxiliaries, such as the Tlaxcala and the Tarascans, of Mexico,🇲🇽 alongside the African Nigerian 🇳🇬 slaves."
"Arrgh!" ☠️ 🏴☠️ 🦜
@@joeerickson516 ?
20 similarly armored men with pikes would be formidable.
Then imagine that in the period a pike block would have over a hundred men and that there would be multiple blocks on a 16th or 17th century battle field.
Next year we have the battle of Grolle again, one of the biggest 17th century events with over 1100 reenactor from over the whole world.
Cool very interesting
I wonder why leather armour was rare in the middle ages, but a thick leather coat replaced the gambesson later...
I'm not completely sure why gambesons fell out of favor with the military, it could be because plate armour became cheaper for infantry since it was mass produced in this period.
The leather jerkin in this video offered next to no protection against swords or fire arms, it protects the clothing of the wearer of the armour against chafing.
We do see thicker buff coats with officers and cavalry, there offers more protection against cuts but were also alot more expencive.
Even if they could impede the wearers movement.
@@AllemansendRe-enactment I've also heard that some cowboys wore really heavy duty leather coats that could way like 10 kg and would offer some protection against blades.
My guess is that leather was more expensive, but did better in rain compared to the more cumbersome, but also more protective and cheaper gambesson. The latter also provides more protection against blunt force trauma, which is where I wonder why people didn't feel the need anymore. Another aspect may be wound contamination if a bullet or fragments go through armour. Mail would be quite a bad choice too...
Gambeson works good against blunt force trauma, this is true.
It dose not work that wel against slashes and stabs.
The weapons used in the time and period we focus on mainly focus on the thrust and or cut.
Plate is more effective in this regard, with knights in the late middle ages we also see the the "arming doublets" which are worn under the curas get a lot thinner than traditional gambeson.
@@AllemansendRe-enactment From what I've heard, some gambeson did offer significant protection against cuts and thrusts. This includes stopping broadhead arrows at a longer range. However, even a thin gambeson can offer you protection against slashes, as there are enough modern examples, where a jumper or leather jacket protected its wearer from a Katana or Machete, as bad cuts simply won't go through... (which is not just a matter of lacking skill, but also due to the fact that targets rarely hold still...)
@@AllemansendRe-enactment Another question: why did pikes become so dominant?
I can't imagine that they work well against plate armor, and for attacking other infantry, they are huge, cumbersome, and floppy... Pike vs Pike would be a nightmare for me, just like Musket vs Musket in formation... It has much less to do with individual physical strength, fighting prowess, or equipment, but much more with luck, discipline and statistics...
In earlier times, I would really see good use of pikes against cavalry, especially when mail was the dominant armor, but I can't recall it being popular then...
I wander, why shoulder plates are stuked below gorget and cuirass? Usually it is done the other way around. How comfortable is that? It's visible how the whole cuirass goes up when he lifts hands only halfway. And I don't see any advantages of this design
The gorget always goes under the cuirass in this period.
It is a common misconception that it would go over the cuirass, but this would make it more likely that a blade would slip through the gap.
The gorget would also be less secure and ride up on the neck even more, by wearing it under the cuirass it stays in place.
It also dissipates the weight of the cuirass over a larger area.
Some cavalry armours look like they have a gorget above the cuirass, though this is part of the helmet and a separate gorget is worn under the curas.
All types of armour are a give and take of protection, mobility and caste. In many types of plate armour its hard to lift your arms all the way up if possible at all.
These types of infantry armour would have been relatively cheap and mass produced in the period so the aim was to get the maximum protection and mobility(for the movements a pikemen was expected to do) for the lowest posible cost.
More expensive armours from the period could offer more protection and mobility.
In the period you can also find large shoulder protection often referred to as pauldrons, these do overlap over the cuirass further closing the gap near the armpit, but also attach to the gorget under the cuiras. These wer alsomore expensive and had to be better fitting then the spolders you see in the video and often dont provide better mobility.
I have worn the gorget you see in the video with a different cuirass and i can assure you that it was perfectly confortable.
Spaulders do fall out of use during the later stages of the war and for infantry the gorget often fell out of use aswel.
im surprised that the gorget doesnt cover the neck more 😮
There were gorgettes that offer more protein around the neck with moving plates, some even covered the whole neck.
But these would have been more expensive the gorget you see in the video is mostly to atach the spolders and disapate the waight of the breast and back plate over a larger area of the shoulders, while giving a small amount of extra protection around the neck and shoulder.
"So you get an idea of the Nobility"
The nobility: 0
No Belgians where harmed making this video....
that's a shame..
You mean Spanish Dutch, not Belgians 😂
Does anyone know, why the pikemen did not wear chainmail to protect the gaps of the armour like the lower arms?
Some did in the 16th century, but getting shot with a musket ball kinda sucks, having pieces of broken chainmail in the wound sucks more.
The English colonists in north America did use chainmaille in the first half of the 17th century to protec against the arrows of the native Americans.
Did they use this armour in Indonesia?
Yes, the Dutch in this period did not use armour or uniforms in occupied/colonial territories that differed from what was used in the Netherlands.
What painting is used at 1:50 please? Is it Snayers or Vrancx? I haven't seen it yet.
Its from the painting: Het afdanken der waardgelders door prins Maurits op de Neude te Utrecht, 31 juli 1618, by Pauwels van Hillegaert, 1627.
It can be found in Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam togeather with a verry simular painting by Joost Cornelisz, Droochsloot, 1625.
Hello Sir, I have a question about the Dutch pikeman armor. First I wonder about the price of the armor pieces of the Dutch pikeman (low or high cost) ? The Second question is about the clothes you wearing, are they hand made by yourself or buy on specialized website or something ?
Thank you for your questions,
The price of a set of armour like the one shown in the video.
Im not shure if you'r askimg about what a set of armour costs these days or back in the 17th century.
The armour in the video is made by Adam Blockely, in the U.K. and is of high quality.
Adam is also capable of pistol proofing his armour sets.
In the period it would be relatively cheap and mass produced pieces atleast for pikemen armour provided by the army.
And The clother are made by hand.
how is it holding a polearm overhead?
We have made a video about the 17th century Dutch pike drill by Jacob de Gheyn, and acording to that manual you dont use a pike overhead.
One of our members is working on interpreting 16th century german treatises on dueling with pike, these duels would be unarmourd and you do see overhead grips.
When it comes to other pole arms like hellbeards or partizans, they were not used by infantry at this time only by officers.
Wich part of the 17th century does this particular armor belongs to?
This style can be found in the verry late 16th century and the first 3/4 of the 17th.
Its hard to give an exact date of when it was or was not used since aslong as they could be used ore repaird they wer handed out to soldiers.
The bare leather straps do indicate its a slightly older style compared to the ones with hooks.
I hope this answers your question a little.
@@AllemansendRe-enactment Thank you for the quick answer.
I'm researching / reenacting the long turkish war (1590-1605) in Hungary, particularly the involvement of western (walloon, french, dutch, german) soldiers brought in by the Habsburg emperor/king. Im in the process to make a similar infantry armour like yours in the video, I have gathered quite a bit of info on the breast and backplate, and I have a helmet ready.
Sadly I couldnt find much info on tassets in this period (1590-1610). Could you point me to some sources? Is it plausible that the tassets in the video fit in this period?
Edit: correcting the dates
@@gaborfabian1239 sorry but did you mean 1690-1710 or 1590-1610?
As for 1590-1610 the Dutch would have had tassets, same gows for most western european countrys.
I dont realy know alot about eastern european countrys to be honest.
The tassets could be flexible you find this alot on the early types, the later types are almost alwais solid but the emulate the look with horizontal lines and fake rivits.
If you ment 1690-1710.
Then i could not realy say.
Since there are not alot of images of pikemen, because they would be replaced more and more by musketeers with bayonets who did not wear armour.
I do know tassets wer stil used in the 1670s and 80s.
@@AllemansendRe-enactment Sorry, my bad, 1590-1610 is the correct date. I will edit the other comment as well.
To be specific: around this date, 1590-1610, the flexible tasset or the solid tasset was the common type for the dutch infantrymen?
Story time: eastern Europe was a "fun" place during these times. All kinds of western soldiers were hired by the Habsburg emperor (also king of Hungary) to push back the Ottoman empire from Viennas doorstep. But the Carpathian basin from Transylvania to Vienna, from Prague to Belgrade was a chaotic place, where western pikemen, musketeers and dragoons, hungarian haiducks and hussars, ottoman sipahi, janissaries, tatars and all other kinds of soldiers played free-for-all for along time. Its a fascinating piece of history (and a bloody one for sure).
@@gaborfabian1239 they would bouth be correct.
But the easiest source would be the pike drill by Jacob de Gheyn 2 (1597-1607)
Which shows solide tassets.
The clothing worn by the soldiers is a bit fancey but it shows alot of detail.
We have a video of that pikedrill on the channel although the images in it can be a bit small.
I suppose the gorget and the shoulder plates above the cuirass is the idea we get from the coats of arms, but there are usually cavalry armours?
Im not shure what you mean, but it could also be from bad reproductions of armours from the 1800's.
Later gorgets were used as a badge of office for oficers in the 18th and 19th century but this would be reduced to small decorated plates
@@AllemansendRe-enactment I tried to reply but the comment was deleted because I put the link. Cavalry helmets had the part that covered the neck and is called a gorget, too. Since this part was the integral part of the helmet, it had to be worn above the breast plate. Likewise, the pauldrons on the plate cavalry armour are worn above the breast plate. Your video helped me notice the differences I was not aware before. Also, only today I realized how the breast and back plates did not reach much bellow the bellybutton and the tassets haven't protected only the upper thighs but the lower abdomen, too.
@@doppel5627 it would depend on the type of cavalry helmet.
If the gorget is attached to the helmet without movable parts it is also inposible to move the head.
In the portraits of nobelmen in armour from the period we do see gorgets with a high neckline that is made to be flexible and wil close the gap between the helmet and the curras and protect the neck.
The gorgets for infantrymen also dont have room for the straps of the curas when worn over the curas.
Maibey we wil show the gorget being worn over the curas in a future video.
But we stil have alot of video ideas and net alot of time to make them.
@@AllemansendRe-enactment thank you for the answer. Ate you into musketmen/arquebusiers, too? I can't find any realistic videos about the actual way the rank and file drill worked. In the reenactments videos I often see them firing in sort of 19th century double lines but in the 17th c a soldier would stand in a column, fire, walk to the end of the column, reload, wait his turn to shoot. I guess the reenactment companies are too small to do it properly but it would be interesting to see. I don't want to bother you with details, but maybe you could point me to a channel that cover that part of military history?
@@doppel5627 true most companys are to small to do the counter march propperly.
We do plan to make a video on the musket drill by de Gheyn as we have already done for the pike.
De Gheyn dose the movements for the counter march with chainging leg positions.
Appart from the motions for a musketeer on sentry duty.
Vully fire with 2 lines did exist in the 17th century and was often called Swedish fire.
Sinse it was used by the Swedes under Gustavus Adolphus during the 30 years war.
What would one have to pay for such a set of armor?
You could ask Adam Blockley link in the discription
In my case 11 years of slavery with a contract that the money technically not paid to me does not get taxed so that the slave owner can stash what I earn away in secret and eventually use it to pay for the armor, give it to me, and I am free.
Hurayyyy :)
Could you specify? is it late or early 17th century?
This armour is based on late 16th early 17th century examples, but armour of this time would be in use threwout the 17th century.
Untile pikes would compleatly be replaced by muskets
Love the Dutch accent..
Thank you, i just can't seem to get rid of it.
It gets a little better when i drink though.
At least he has shoulder pads.
was the armour typically blued?
They could be blued although blackend or painted black were more common.
is it a Spanish influenced design?
No, it probebly comes grom germanic/swis designe.
Landsknecht?
No landsknecht, the landsknechts were active in the early 16th century 100 years earlyer.
The landsknechts did use pikes but so did almost every military force in the 16th and 17th centurys.
This armour is an interpretation of that used by the Dutch standing army from the first half of the 17th century.
Colonial uniform 17 th century
Dutch pokemon armor
dutch had some real ugly armour
They had to make something that was cheap to produce in large amounts and keep it as functional as possible, so that did not invest too much in looks.
Or what 17th century armour styles do you prefer?
This was armour for the common foot soldier. English and French period foot soldier armor for the common pike men won't look very different.