The Milan armor of the master Pompeo della Chiesa of the late 16th century

Composite north Italian armor. Place of production - Milan, approximately 1590 g. One of the latest creations of the master Pompeo della Chiesa (Pompeo della Chiesa). He worked as a master gunsmith from 1571 to 1591. The armor is not full - some details have not been preserved: parts of the elements on the right shoulder pad, a plate on the right thigh shield and, probably, thigh leggings. Translation from English, some inaccuracies are possible. All photos are high resolution, clickable.

Dimensions: height (with stand) 191 x width 68 x length 50 cm.

Tight-fitting heavy closed helmet with a pronounced forward bend. The helmet has a low ridge with traces left over from numerous chopping punches. There are traces of blows on other elements of the armor. In the front, front, part of the helmet is an observation slot (visor) with a central division.

It should be noted that the term "closed helmet" is used only in our time. At the time of using the helmet it was called "arm".

In the area of ​​the nape there is a traditional tubular plume (feather) holder made of brass.

Along the bottom edge of the helmet, there is a convex groove, into which the protruding edge of the upper plate of the collar (boarder) with pairs of diagonal lines enters. Thus, the helmet is fixed on the armor, or rather, on the gorget.

On the right side are small holes to improve ventilation inside the helmet. The visor is double, attached to the helmet on two wing nuts and a steel fastener on the right.

This mount allows the helmet to rotate freely to the right and left on the collar. There is no gap between the helmet and the collar, which gives a high degree of protection against weapons the adversary. This method of fastening the helmet - the most difficult to manufacture, but also the most perfect. For the possibility of tilting the head back and forth, the plate collar is made of articulated three plates, with some degree of freedom relative to each other.

The cuirass includes a bib and a backrest, which are fixed on top with straps. Probably one of the owners of the armor was a knight of the Order of Malta - a Maltese cross was knocked out on the front inside of the cuirass.

The breastplate ends with a small skirt of a single plate, made so that it is comfortable to sit in the saddle. To the skirt on four belts are fastened two thigh-shield plates (tassets), consisting of seven plates left and six plates - right. Because of this, the thigh plates look asymmetrical: the left one is noticeably lower than the right. One of the plates on the right panel is lost.

Shoulders also consist of seven plates each and also look asymmetrically, since part of the elements were damaged on the right, and in the subsequent of those parts that remained, it was re-formed. Fastened to the top of the plate collar straps.

Bracers completely cover the wrists, attached to the shoulder pads in the region of the biceps with a belt. In the elbow joint, mobile elbow pads are used from three plates at the back and a heart-shaped coater in the front. This design allows relatively free to move your hands, and at the same time provides maximum protection.

Multiple finger-type plate gloves with bell-shaped cuffs are made using a large number of plates and rivets, which does not hinder movement and at the same time perfectly protects.

It should be noted the magnificent engraving of this armor, made using gilding. The engraving is made very elegantly, without kitsch.

Comments

[Hikar]

Damn how to breathe in a helmet ...

[ShturmKGB]

Beautiful armor, thanks for the review!

[koosss]

beauties .. now they don’t do that

[koosss]

beauties .. now they don’t do that

[PDM80]

breathe well. and the toilet, and wash! and most importantly scratch yourself

[abrakadabre]

breathe well. and the toilet, and wash! and most importantly scratch yourself

Is it convenient to use a standard body armor with a helmet?

[PDM80]

it’s much easier to remove them, and yourself. and the knight alone could not dress or rejoice, and in a military campaign he was in constant standing in daspeh because if you don’t have time to dress,

[abrakadabre]

no knight could dress or rejoice could

Specifically, this armor can be independently dressed and removed. Just not very convenient and much longer. Other types yes, without outside help not all ties and straps can be reached.
Well, progress does not stand still. An ancient Egyptian or Khetian chariot is not so comfortable to ride. like a modern Mercedes. But it is possible. Even the pharaohs and kings of kings did this.

[Su24]

chain mail and brilliant armor can be removed and put on yourself.

[Su24]

Quote: abrakadabre

breathe well. and the toilet, and wash! and most importantly scratch yourself

Is it convenient to use a standard body armor with a helmet?

Warrior) Ancient and medieval armor performed their function - the defense of a warrior. Almost all battles were won better by armored armies.

[Saburov]

You tell the Goths or the Pechenegs with the Mongols. Armies were won, which had everything well with tactics and who had the best mobility, because in fact armor, even with heavy cavalry, protected only from arrows reliably, and they did not save from the sword and spears, since the main thing that the sword did was crush and break it bones, only the tip was sharpened and all the remains of the warriors were mostly with broken bones and stab wounds, which is confirmed by excavations at the battle sites.

[Ingvar 72]

Quote: Hnikar

Damn how to breathe in such a helmet ..

The helmet for hand-to-hand combat is a grill, and breathing is much harder. I can’t imagine how you can survive in this shell during the battle.

[Kombrig]

Imagine, figuratively, that a knight in such armor is a tank, breaking the enemy’s system with its mass and the mass of its horse, remaining invulnerable to the enemy’s weapons, but for its effective military labor, it needs the support of light cavalry and infantry .... Something like this. ..)))

[abrakadabre]

The truth is so.

[erg]

A horse bumping into a tightly closed formation, bristling with spears, always stops. For her, it's just a wall. A knight’s horse, and just a cavalry horse is not an athlete (so to speak about a horse) to jump over an obstacle. She knows how to jump, but only in extreme cases, from her point of view. And you don’t jump with a heavy rider on yourself. That is why ordinary infantry armed with rifles with bayonets, or as before peaks (regiments of pikemen), built in a square or, as they used to say in the phalanx, always stopped the cavalry attack. Even chivalrous. Therefore, the genius of tactics (but not strategy) Napoleon always accompanied the cavalry attack with the support of infantry and artillery. Macedonian, in order to neutralize the actions of the Persian chariots, had to teach soldiers to rebuild the phalanx. The horses stopped in front of the ranks of the warriors and the charioteers launched a chariot along the ranks, hitting the warriors with darts and arrows. The Macedonians began to rebuild so that in front of a horse drawn by a horse drawn into a chariot, a corridor formed, ending in a wall of warriors. In this way, a chariot, but still stopping the chariot, was found to be surrounded on three sides and there wasn’t any room for maneuver. But if before the horse an open formation of soldiers, then the cavalry was successful. And it was not for nothing that cavalry attacks were practiced against artillery batteries. The guns do not stand tight with each other. And if the battery did not have time to shoot the cavalry, then it was usually captured by it.

[abrakadabre]

In the helmet for hand-to-hand combat

In what type of helmet and what century (we will take only the Middle Ages)? Do you have a grill in the valve? Or in a closed bourguignot? Or is Barbut a very open helmet?
Both took on the late arme fell only for the actual lance collapse. Then, during the transition to fencing, no one forbade picking up one of the two.

[Su24]

Quote: Ingvar 72

Quote: Hnikar

Damn how to breathe in such a helmet ..

The helmet for hand-to-hand combat is a grill, and breathing is much harder. I can’t imagine how you can survive in this shell during the battle.

From childhood to train.

[abrakadabre]

I can’t imagine how you can survive in this shell during the battle.

Did you serve in the army? Have you ever been ordered to attack a hill with full gear after commanding "Gases!" I'll tell you the topic ... In comparison with which this "shell" is a mere trifle.
Moreover, having pulled the visor over your face, you are riding a horse, and not galloping across the field "In short dashes, from right to left, two by two! ...", with flops and rolls over everything that is hung on the belt.
Or did you try to run cross-country in the OZK and gas mask, with an automatic rifle behind you, pouches and a full flask on your navel and a sapper shoulder blade on jo ...? After this, in the presented armor you will have a sanatorium. Despite the fact that the armor is three times heavier.

[Su24]

Quote: Hnikar

Damn how to breathe in a helmet ...

Mouth and nose

[smart ass]

Very beautiful creation of the master

[Igor39]

This is a masterpiece! I imagine its value

[rkkasa xnumx]

Quote: Igor39

This is a masterpiece! I imagine its value

Very beautiful armor, even without engraving would look great!
Indeed, it would be interesting to know how much it cost, and not only in gold or silver, but in laboriousness. For example: 1 armor = 20 swords or 1 armor = 10 muskets.

[Login_Off]

If you compare armor in modern terms. Here is a comparison here shown of some Bugatti Veyron or Maclaren, or Trash Probe.
Not everyone could afford it. Basically took Mercedes, Porsche, At worst, Toyota

[Yun Klob]

It looks like tournament armor. The left side (from the side of the impact of the tournament spear) without holes for breathing.

[sub307]

Yes, you seem to be right. The end of the 16th century .... Firearms on the battlefields were already dictating the "conditions of the game" with might and main. "Swan song" of similar devices.

[erg]

Not tournament. For a lance the helmet was used, which rested on the knight's shoulders, and did not sit on his head. Otherwise, you could break your neck. Such a helmet, and began to be called - lance. But in other matters, there were cases of using ordinary armor at tournaments. Tournaments were too expensive.

[kolyhalovs]

Definitely a tournament. In battle, you’ll just die wearing such a burden, even if you don’t have to wave anything. And about freedom of movement and the review can not speak. The armor is sharpened to sit in one position and look at one point. Yes, and about the fact that it stupidly suffocate on the battlefield, much has been written already here. Yes, and engraving is, damn it, the doctor prescribed it in battle.

[abrakadabre]

Definitely a tournament. In battle, you’ll just die wearing such a burden, even if you don’t have to wave anything. And about freedom of movement and the review can not speak. The armor is sharpened to sit in one position and look at one point. Yes, and about the fact that it stupidly suffocate on the battlefield, much has been written already here. Yes, and engraving is, damn it, the doctor prescribed it in battle.

Before writing uh ... like that ..., tell me how many armors you personally wore and how many fights did you fight? I have full armor (this is from the soles to the top of the head, and not as in the article - half-armor, which is easier than full) and I regularly train and fight in it. Therefore, if I tell you that it is convenient and high mobility in it, then I personally checked it for myself.
What are your statements based on?

[abrakadabre]

Such a helmet, and began to be called - lance.

Hmm ... You made a discovery in armor studies ... There were no such names. This type of helmet was called and is called ARME. All! The rest is the dubious insinuations of people far from the topic, inventing sensations.
Inventing all sorts of weapon classifications refers to the relatively scientific approach of the 19th and 20th centuries. In the Middle Ages, this did not bother.
The only medieval group name for helmets by type of use, which you can recall offhand is an assault helmet. They were used during sieges and assaults on fortifications and were distinguished by developed fields that protect against all rubbish dumped by the defenders on the heads of the assaults.
Even the name "tournament helmet" did not exist in the Middle Ages and was coined in the 19th century. Although the same "toad's head" was actually used only in tournaments, not in combat. But it was not specifically called a separate class of tournament armor. Just because everyone didn't care how to classify it. If only the head was intact.

[abrakadabre]

It looks like tournament armor.

No. Tournament is very different in the direction of weighting and increased protection overhead.

[Nayhas]

Judging by the notches on the helmet, the owner of this armor repeatedly received on the head ... it is likely that the sensations were not pleasant ...

[Aryan]

Quote: Nayhas

Judging by the notches on the helmet, the owner of this armor repeatedly received on the head ... it is likely that the sensations were not pleasant ...

or as an option the ceilings in the stable are low ...

[abrakadabre]

Judging by the notches on the helmet, the owner of this armor repeatedly received on the head ... it is likely that the sensations were not pleasant ...

From my own experience I will say - sensations are practically absent. In the heat of battle you do not even notice that you missed a blow to the helmet. Moreover, the review is significantly limited and not every blow can be discerned to parry. Then only in the video replay can you see the marks on the helmet.
And breathing in this is really extremely problematic. In foot combat and with the duration of the intense phase of the battle more than 3-5 minutes. No one, even the most trained fighter, can stand it. It will just pass out from lack of air.
(Even professional boxers, dressed in undershirts and a shirt and light gloves, lose significantly in the speed of the battle by the end of the round compared to its beginning. And here 20-30 kg of iron are dressed in general, on the arm 2-3 kg of armor and 1 -1,5 kg of the blade in the hand and breathing is not easier than in a gas mask)

But such a helmet is for the rider and spear fighting. And the fact is that the real medieval battle of such an "armored" had enough short pauses to catch his breath between deadly fights with maximum physical activity. Well, such a knight did not run on foot on the battlefield.
An article is a class. I want more!!!

It’s not all politics, but modern weapons.
Thanks to the author. I copied the photo to myself

[olegglin]

A real work of art, (military art) ...

[k1995]

And how to go to the toilet?

[KuigoroZHIK]

for this, squires were needed. There was usually a "door" behind. Her squire opened and helped the "overlord" to relieve himself. If there was no squire, they either tolerated it or for themselves. Because taking off / putting on armor is an hour at least, if at least 1 person helps.

[Astrey]

Quote: Kuygorozhik

remove / put on armor - this is an hour in time at least if at least 1 person will help.

I have not seen such a bullshit for about 5 years. Fake of the highest standard.
Both Milanese and Maximillian armor are removed faster than chain mail. Dancing and doing gymnastics (without fanaticism) is easier than in a tight sheepskin coat.
Hygiene is quite accessible if you remove the manifolds - "plate mittens".
And yes ... Swinging a sword in armor is just as convenient but as without armor, only in armor.

Hopefully a little cheer up the forum users.

[abrakadabre]

And how to go to the toilet?

for this, squires were needed. There was usually a "door" behind. Her squire opened and helped the "overlord" to relieve himself. If there was no squire, they either tolerated it or for themselves.

Nonsense! There were no doors there and they are absolutely unnecessary. To relieve need, you absolutely do not need to remove anything from your armor, except for plate gloves. Well, except that out of great need it is inconvenient to sit on the courts at the usual depth - the mobility of the knee joint of the plate leg is a little insufficient for a comfortable eagle position. Any knight relieved himself and as easily as any of you.

Because to remove / put on armor is an hour in time at least, if at least 1 person will help.

Too nonsense. With the help of a squire, all this is worn / removed in no more than 7-10 minutes. If you really need to hurry, then in 4-5 minutes. This is if you dress, and not walk from corner to corner and pick your nose.
Everything is thought out and very convenient. Although at first glance it is surprising to the uninitiated.

[Yorgven]

It is strange that there are no dents on it, although the crest is not badly cut in such a way and not by the fact that it was a blunt weapon. But if you add a shield to the armor, then the crest is really the most vulnerable spot, like the right shoulder pad. And by the way, the absence of a damaged element of the right healer, this is precisely what this says.

[avt]

Quote: Yorgven

It is strange that there are no dents on it, although the crest is not badly cut in such a way and not by the fact that it was a blunt weapon.

Quote: Yoon Klob

It looks like tournament armor.

Quote: Nayhas

the owner of this armor repeatedly received on the head ... it is likely that the sensations were not pleasant ...

For depreciation, the kit included a not very glamorous comforter, sometimes felt felt hot, but the head was whole.

[KuigoroZHIK]

Quote: avt

For depreciation, the kit included a not very glamorous comforter, sometimes felt felt hot, but the head was whole.

As practice has shown, the reconstructed comforter looks pretty cool.

[abrakadabre]

not very glamorous comforter, sometimes felt is hot, but the head is whole.

No, felt. Felt is harsh and does not absorb shock well. But yes, it’s hot in them.

[abrakadabre]

It is strange that there are no dents on it, although the crest is not badly cut in such a way and not by the fact that it was a blunt weapon. But if you add a shield to the armor, then the crest is really the most vulnerable spot, like the right shoulder pad. And by the way, the absence of a damaged element of the right healer, this is precisely what this says.

Nothing strange.
1. Late armor made in the 1590s. And used later. The spears are already obsolete. Maces with round knuckles (i.e. dents) all the more. The main edged weapons were: the infantry - halberds and pikes, the cavalry (nobles) - a large sword, battle swords (the wrong light toothpicks of later times or civilian wearing) and heavy broadsword options. The main tactic of such a war is a cuirassier attack in a closed horse formation from a short dispersal, with a blade weapon after a pistol salvo.
2. Armor dear, to order. So, from the best steel. Also a little tempered. This is not a relatively cheap consumer goods for ordinary pikemen. You can’t even imagine how difficult it is to procrastinate. Especially if the knight is not ready to wait until you try on yourself, gather your strength and invest in a heavy-duty strike. But small nicks from the blades - the shaft. Vulnerabilities are only joints. Not the crest or plate of the shoulder pads. Therefore, a relatively wide battle sword evolved into a relatively narrow battle sword. By the way, a very brutal contraption, weighing 1400-1600 grams and a long blade more than a meter. Unlike civilian and later versions - weight 400-900 grams, blade length rarely more than 90 cm.
3. Due to the increased quality of the cavalry (primarily) armor, the knightly (and later cuirassier) cavalry did not use shields for this period. For without it, everything is normal, and the excess weight. The light infantry used the shields to a limited extent: all sorts of round-robers in Spanish thirds, Scottish highlanders. Yes, light irregular cavalry, such as hajduks, hussars and other Cossacks.

[290980]

wandering through European museums and considering knightly armor in them, the impression was that they were all remodels, some kind of suspicious small marks on them from the opponent’s weapons, and the metal processing also cast doubt on the originality, some even showed no signs of corrosion, even in the farthest seams and corners .

[Kombrig]

From the end of the 18th century and throughout the 19th century in Europe and in Russia there was a real boom in the manufacture of such armor to decorate their residences, hence a lot of confusion faced by modern reenactors, and there are relatively few real military armor of that time (I mean complete sets, not disparate ones details).

[Evgeny_Lev]

Very beautiful.
Only now the swords nullified all the armor.

[Suvorov000]

not swords, but firearms;

[abrakadabre]

not swords, but firearms

Yes, muskets and cannon fire by buckshot on dense cavalry structures rule.

a sword to him figs what do you do

If only to chop - no, it’s wrong.
If stabbing at the joints (for which the sword actually turned into a sword) or using the half-sword technique, it could and did.

[Suvorov000]

Well, in general, the given armor just implies that even the use of the sword negates its advantages, all joints are made so that no dagger just crawls through, and in battle it is generally complete balancing act and no one will stand and look like you trying to poke a sword, the firearm nullified the armor

[cth; fyn]

Rather, the firearm contributed to the development of armor. expensive armor was checked by shooting at them, and the places where bullets hit were engraved in order to show that the armor was holding the hit.

[Yun Klob]

Please note, Evgeny_Lev not quite wrong. Please note that with the development of armor, swords became lighter and narrower, since he could not cut his sword (except for an ax or halberd), and with a narrow sword one could get into the joints.

[abrakadabre]

Notice that with the development of armor, swords became lighter and narrower, since he could not cut his sword (except perhaps an ax or a halberd), and with a narrow sword one could get into the joints.

Narrow - yes
Easy - no.
Initially, a combat sword is not a light sword. This is a fallacy from civilian options and later, when the bulk of the troops have already abandoned the armor.
Initially, a sword is just a sword with one and a half grip (up to two hands), the corresponding blade length (100 - 115 cm), additional temples on the guard and blade geometry, where the piercing function dominates the cutting (that is, in cross section: the width is slightly smaller, the thickness a little more). The weight is standard for a bastard sword - 1400-1600 grams. Gradually, the guard is becoming more difficult, the blade is already narrower.
And remember, at that time there was no such separate concept as a sword, as now. Spada - it translates just a sword.

[Artyom]

To fight the armor, the Germans invented, if I am not mistaken, a "crow's beak" or a coinage! pierced the armor at once!

[abrakadabre]

"crow's beak" or coin! pierced the armor at once!

Well, not so much at times. The exact strong blow still needs to be dealt. The knight will not wait until you are about to open it. The geometry of the armor and the constant movement of its owner leave very few opportunities to strike not casually, but perpendicularly to the metal in full force. That is, with maximum efficiency for breaking through.
If the armor were ineffective, no one would wear it.
That's when the firearm began to pierce almost any armor, they very quickly refused. What was not observed before when there were plenty of coins. They did not become a superweapon.

[Revolver]

Quote: Suvorov000

not swords, but firearms;

You poke it with a sword, for example, into the viewing gap, it is not for nothing that it is so thinner (it will fit into any gap) and is easier (i.e. more maneuverable) than the sword. And there are armpits and something below the cuirass. A fight (not a tournament) is not boxing, it is possible below the belt, but if you want to live, you need it.
And the firearm - yes, the firearm, but the complexity and, as a result, the duration of the charging process from the muzzle made the arquebus not the most convenient club after the shot. True, then the bayonet was invented.
So it’s unlikely that one specific factor killed the armor, but rather the totality (firearm, maneuverable stitching weapon, and last but not least, the enormous price of armor). The more massive the armies became, the less was the need for the authorities (i.e. the few rich who could afford such armor) to fight directly and personally at short range. And you can view the battlefield from the hill lightly.

[Aryan]

now do not wear armor
but we do not say that they were nullified by tactical nuclear weapons

[cth; fyn]

Well, about armor they don’t have a moot point, the helmet and armor are also kind of armor, especially if you remember that Budenov tested his helmet with a saber, and attack aircraft engineers were carrying armor plates during the Second World War.

[GRune]

Great job!

[Nester]

Quote: Evgeny_Lev

Very beautiful.
Only now the swords nullified all the armor.

Is it a sword? For some reason I thought that the development of firearms ...

[KuigoroZHIK]

That's right. Boomstick nullified all the advantages of armor. Both Suvorov and Menshikov and even Kutuzov fought with the remnants of armor ...

[abrakadabre]

Boomstick nullified all the advantages of armor.

The economy and the greatly increased power of the gunshot defeated the knights:
At first, the arquebus did not penetrate high-quality knight's armor. But a musket with a caliber of 20-25 mm and a long barrel is easy. Cannon buckshot generally mowed absolutely everyone. What is in armor, what is without it.
At the same time, it is possible to replace the killed naked-backed infantryman with a musket in 2-4 weeks of drill and relatively little money. And to raise a quality knight - you need to start training from 5-6 years old and with a lot of good equipment you need a lot of money. With absolutely dubious bullet resistance (except for the most expensive custom-made armor)
As a result ... Well, you understand ...

[erg]

At the time of Suvorov and Kutuzov, armor remained only with the cuirassier cavalry regiments in the form of a cuirass and a later helmet. But for them, the presence of armor was relevant, since the main purpose of the heavy cavalry was the reflection of cavalry attacks. When a light cavalry (hussar or lancer) collided with a heavy one, victory often remained with the cuirassiers. (more often, due to the fact that everyone was hired, and the hussars were partially armed with pikes, which increased their chances of winning).

[Smol79]

It is interesting how this was done, in the modern sense, machines can not be dispensed with, there is little hammer.

[abrakadabre]

It is interesting how this was done, in the modern sense, machines can not be dispensed with, there is little hammer.

You will not believe...
Very even without machine tools can be done. Anvil, blacksmith forge, many hammers and additional anvils-adapt of complex shape, 1-1.5 months for the actual blacksmithing work and up to six months for decoration.
For example, you can watch this video:

On the clips of this Canadian master, many blacksmiths of armor studied.

[Klim2011]

I watched the video, ATP is very interesting, I want to ask: for 28 seconds, the master leaves impressive dents in the metal on a cold sheet with a not heavy hammer. Warm starts later. I understand that this is not a "battle" armor? Or then there is some kind of thermal that is not in the video?

[abrakadabre]

I watched the video, ATP Pts is interesting, I want to ask: for 28 seconds the master leaves an impressive dent in the metal on a cold sheet with a heavy hammer. It starts to warm later.

It simply makes an initial dent, with which the further knocking out of the mold goes. Since the deformation is still not large, it can be done without heating. At the same time, the metal stretches slightly at the point of impact.
But further, to upset (that is, actually bend and compress at the same time) metal, heating is very, very necessary. During upsetting, the thickness of the sheet at a given point either increases or remains unchanged since with frequent strong heating part of the metal burns out into scale. What can be seen in the video when forging. scale flakes off the part.

I understand that this is not a "battle" armor? Or then there is some kind of thermal that is not in the video?

Such a cuirass and without hardening is very, very durable. Hardening curved parts of complex shape is a very difficult task. Because it is extremely difficult to maintain the necessary shape. And the already hardened part is almost impossible to correct without removing the hardening.
For example, I will say that if you take a straight straight blade, heat it for hardening and lower it vertically into the cooling bath, then it will remain straight. If it is tilted, it will bend and get a saber. Or a spring plate, if immersed flat at an angle. If, however, when diving, it is thrown at random, then it is possible to obtain a helical deformation and a mixture of the above deformations.

[Free wind]

I think that to pierce this armor with a sword is problematic. Take a pitchfork and try to break through a bucket, ordinary, tin. I think you will be convinced that it is not so simple. And the armor is certainly awesome. beautiful. Probably when the armor scratched, the owner was very upset, and offended. Moreover, there was no computer selection of paint. In short, the offender flew into the grandmother's sickly. By the way, for so many centuries the armor should have been destroyed by rust, no matter how they were looked after. Does this mean that steel was stainless steel? Or there were highly effective ways to protect metal from corrosion.

[abrakadabre]

By the way, for so many centuries, armor should have been destroyed by rust

Storage in a dry room and regular, timely cleaning and lubrication work wonders. One European city still contains an urban arsenal from the Middle Ages. There for about four hundred years, armor and knives have been stored for about 30-40 thousand sets. And they are stored (contained) in a functional good condition. That is, with standing: without additional preparation of equipment, I chose what is right for you, and put it on the battle.

[Kombrig]

Can you tell me the name of the city, and is there access, in the sense of seeing, taking a picture?

[abrakadabre]

Royal Aresenal of Graz, Styria, Austria.

[Yorgven]

No, just the same, swords, sabers and swords disappeared, and armor at the beginning of the 21st century evolved very much into personal defense systems. New assault armored suits and body armor, calmly hold an armor-piercing bullet from the SVD.

[cth; fyn]

They hold it, but few people remember the injuries, and they are sometimes fatal.

[reality]

Swords? Partly yes, but more muskets) I’m generally interested - at that time they were already using a full firearm, such armor would be more in the way in battle. Maybe really purely tournament. I would like to compare with the Teutonic pots)

[tchoni]

Not every firearm can penetrate such armor, far from at all distances and by no means with every hit. The fact is that only a musket possessed the necessary energy to penetrate the cuirass with a soft bullet (the gun is quite large, powerful with a caliber of 18-25 mm with a bullet weight from 30 to almost 60 grams, it is not easy to handle and requires a certain level of production and handling skill) Arquebus , pistols, etc. were not very effective against such a "crab" In addition, quite a lot of bows and crossbows were used on the battlefields of those years. In addition, this armor perfectly protected against buckshot, which in those days was not always metal (crushed stone was very often used). So there were reasons in such an armor - proof of this was the cuirassiers who existed until the beginning of the 20th century.

[abrakadabre]

I would like to compare with the Teutonic pans

Teutonic "pots", that is, tophelms, widespread in Europe, were widespread much earlier - the second half of the 12th first half of the 14th centuries.
The armor presented in the article is combat.

[spech]

This is just a miracle !
How long did this "outfit" take?

[cth; fyn]

I found in neta that for the order of 50-60 days, but now it is with modern equipment.
Electric drill, pneumatic hammer, markers, grinder and other good things

[abrakadabre]

I found in neta that for the order of 50-60 days, but now it is with modern equipment.
Electric drill, pneumatic hammer, markers, grinder and other good things

Just forged armor made to order could then be done quickly enough. Perhaps in the time specified by you. A very long time - this is the finish. Especially since medieval methods.
The high-class master armor has worked more than one. For the money that cost quality armor to order, a whole workshop worked. And this, in addition to the master, is also a bunch of apprentices of different levels. So while one forged a cuirass, another bracers, etc.
It takes me about 4-5 hours of forging each piece to be cold for turning the cut flat piece into the front and back halves of the cuirass (I haven’t gotten the mountain yet). I do not think that it took much more time for the masters of the Middle Ages. It is unlikely that a high-class craftsman was engaged in preliminary forging of a sheet from a blank. Either instructed apprentices, or, in general, bought or ordered from, as they would now be called, an accessory.
But drilling neat holes (there were no electric drills and carbide drills), making small parts ... That's where time is spent very, very

[Zymran]

I wonder how much he weighs?

[abrakadabre]

I wonder how much he weighs?

Combat (rather than tournament) full armor weighed from 19 (Gothic) to 34 (late Milanese with bulletproof reinforcements) kg. An average of 22-26 kg. But it is complete, from metal Sabaton shoes to a helmet.
Incomplete, like the one presented in the article ~ 12-16 kg.
Helmet (late arme or "closed helmet") - about 4-6 kg
Breastplate - about 5-8 kg
Plate arm - 1.5-2.5 kg
Shoulders - up to 1 kg.
The weights are indicative, the usual weight limits are indicated.

[Alex_T]

It is a pity the weight of the armor is not indicated, the protection against piercing-cutting should be good. The ventilation is weak, with a closed visor you won’t wave for a long time with a sword, you will suffocate. In my opinion, the neck is a weak spot, too mobile. The load from hitting the helmet is not redistributed to the shoulders, the helmet can withstand the blow, and the neck may break or get stretched. Although for the rider, protection from hitting the head from above and from the side probably does not come first.

[Yorgven]

Judging by the marks, the carrier of this device often flew over the cump ... By the way, perhaps the course of the gorgeta is not too big, and in this case the blow to the head is redistributed to the shoulders, since the helmet is rigidly attached to it.

[abrakadabre]

It is a pity the weight of the armor is not indicated, the protection against piercing-cutting should be good. The ventilation is weak, with a closed visor you won’t wave for a long time with a sword, you will suffocate.

Truly so. But this is a horseman and he himself does not need to run. Yes, and wave - killed the enemy, galloped to the next or retreated to catch his breath.

In my opinion, the neck is a weak spot, too mobile.

Everything is normal here. the most top-end option. And in the sense of mobility, and in the sense of security. For comparison: in a super-reliable potted tophelm, which rests on your shoulders, you can’t turn your head at all. You can turn only the whole body. In the saddle, this is especially uncomfortable. Breathing in it is also dreary and there is no overview at all. Although security is like in a safe.

The load from hitting the helmet is not redistributed to the shoulders, the helmet can withstand the blow, and the neck may break or get stretched. Although for the rider, protection from hitting the head from above and from the side probably does not come first.

This design does not need to rest directly on the shoulders as in earlier pot helmets. The main absorber of blows to the head from above and from the side is the weight of the helmet, that is, its inertia. Less than 3 kg - poorly absorbs a blow and transfers it to the neck or to a concussion. More than 6 kg - with prolonged wearing, too much strain on the neck. Are you tired.
This helmet holds a frontal spear strike due to: a) the geometry of the visor, which translates the strike into slipping, b) the limitation of the mobility of the gorget (neck armor) back, the head cannot be thrown back, only tilt forward and rotate, c) the knight is slightly forward to occupy a more advantageous position so that it is not carried out of the saddle with somersault back.
It should also be remembered that in the frontal projection (the most shock-hazardous), the total thickness of the helmet metal is very large: 2-3 layers (the helmet itself and two visors) 2-4 mm each. Above is a powerful stiffening rib of the ridge and an additional amount of under-helmet space under the ridge to absorb the blow from above through crushing of the metal even in case of breaking through. The thinnest part of the helmet is the back-bottom, from ear to ear.

[Roland60135.]

Here are the approximate figures for the weight of armor and weapons in the Middle Ages: a typical 15th century armor weighed about 52 pounds, that is, approximately 23.6 kg. If we take individual parts, then the helmet-armé (full closed helmet) weighed from 6'-7'8 "(2.7-3.4 kg), the gorget (collar) - 9 ounces (0.25 kg), the breastplate from the back and chest parts - 12 '8 "(5.7 kg)," skirt "at the bottom of the cuirass - 1'11" (0.76 kg), right bracer - 2'14 "(1.3 kg), left brace - 2'9" (1.16 kg), "legs" - 6'1 "(2.74 kg) each, ringed shirt with short sleeve - 15'7" (7 kg), long sleeve - 20'11 "(9.38 kg), typical longsword - 2'8" (1.13 kg) ).

[bbss]

Beautiful, elegant, reliable. It’s interesting to read!

[Vasia kruger]

More such articles, thanks very informative!

[Pelican]

For anyone interested, read The Great Firearms Revolution. There, the topic of armor-firearms is disclosed well.

[Alex_T]

They remembered about swords, although there is no sense against full armor from a sword. Swords appeared later, as an addition to the firearms, so that there was something to fight until the musket was reloaded. Means for opening "canned food", at the time of full armor, were a pick, a stamp, a hammer. The spike could pierce the armor and reach the carrier, but it could get stuck. The advantage of the hammer was that it did not get stuck in the armor and slipped less.

[Free wind]

I read that the helmet weighed 4-6 kg, that is, it turns out that the thickness of the steel of this product is from about 3 to 5 mm. You understand that steel 3 mm with a sword, it is difficult to break through with an ax, but it is possible. It is impossible to pierce 4 - 5 mm with a sword!

[abrakadabre]

I read that the helmet weighed 4-6 kg, that is, it turns out that the thickness of the steel of this product is from about 3 to 5 mm. You understand that steel 3 mm with a sword, it is difficult to break through with an ax, but it is possible. It is impossible to pierce 4 - 5 mm with a sword!

Exactly, but not everywhere. A blacksmith forged a helmet with different thicknesses of metal in different parts of the helmet. Because it is necessary to make maximum protection, and leave the helmet weight within reasonable limits. The greatest thickness of the dome is top and front-top. The visor further enhances the front hemisphere.
Because in front of the oncoming courses a spear of the enemy-knight or infantryman-pikeer flies at you. Given the maximum speed of a jerk of a war horse in an attack, a collision can be at a speed of up to 40 km / h in an infantry attack and up to 80 km / h in an oncoming attack of two knights. The weight of destruction in horse armor and with an armored rider could reach 900-1000 kg. And all this impulse must be safely diverted. From here you can estimate the necessary strength of the armor and helmet in particular. And a real opportunity to chop or pierce it with a sweep with one hand.

By the way, cavalry spears differed from infantry by the fragility of the shaft. With a weight of late lances of 5-6 kg, they were glued from the slats hollow. So that at the moment of collision with the enemy the spear breaks. Otherwise, the whole impulse of the horse + knight (and this is up to a ton of weight at a speed of up to 80 km / h on the opposite course, well, the oncoming attacking knight is the same ton) will deliver the spear with the point to the target, and the opposite side to the one who holds the spear. And it will be a suicide attack. So to speak, Newton's law in action.

[rkkasa xnumx]

Thank you very much, your comments are even more interesting than the article.

And you can make a kind of table on the complexity of manufacturing weapons and armor
(sword - 1 hour; musket - 2 hours; armor - 3 hours )

And one more table - by the combat power of the soldiers. Something like:
20 warriors in such armor with a two-handed sword and spear = 50 warriors in chain mail armor and with an ax = 100 warriors armed with muskets.
Of course, if such a table is possible at all

PS:

Quote: abrakadabre

By the way, cavalry spears differed from infantry by the fragility of the shaft. With a weight of late lances of 5-6 kg, they were glued from planks hollow.

Wormwood ?!

[abrakadabre]

And you can make a kind of table on the complexity of manufacturing weapons and armor

in principle, it is possible.
But there are many nuances. I forged the front half of the cuirass in two days (there is no photo on my computer). The back in about the same time. But it is cold, without a hearth and from ordinary structural steel ST3. From 65G, everything is much more complicated. But in addition to actually shaping the details, a lot of time is spent on fitting them to each other, making all kinds of little things - buckles, hinges, and fine polishing. Actually waving a hammer - about 1/4 - 1/5 of the manufacturing time. And if you take up embellishment at the level as in the article, then 1/20 will be. And all this requires a bunch of all sorts of devices that also need to be made.
If you are constantly doing this, then from hand to hand you stuff your hand and become faster and faster.
Or here is an example. This helmet was made in a month, in his spare time from work.

And one more table - by the combat power of the soldiers.

It is unlikely. Because it all depends on the situation. A knight in an open field is a force, on a mountain trail, in a swampy area or in a bush-forest - a suicide.
Or, armored infantry — operating as a system as a single organism — is a terrible force, and in a loose formation it is so-so. Or against crossbowmen.
So you cannot make such a universal table.
The same musketeers will lay down many attacking knights in one gulp. But a dozen knights who broke through to the system will slaughter the musketeers with impunity.
It is practically very difficult to open the Pikiner phalanx with the help of the cavalry, but if this happened, the pikemen will be completely exterminated - they will crush horses like grass and chop down. And those in response to the cramped battle with their 4-6 meter peaks about anything.
And such examples are the sea.

Wormwood ?!

Hollow - from the word cavity, emptiness. If you want to check, do a full-scale experiment:
take a thin water pipe (a thing is very durable) 3-4 meters, lean out of the car and driving at a speed of 30-40 km / h try to ram the roadside concrete ingot, holding the pipe like a spear. At best, your arm breaks. At worst, it will tear it off and break the spine with a tipping force. Riding a horse with equestrian confusion is about the same. Because Lance (cavalry knightly spear) made fragile.

[rkkasa xnumx]

Perhaps the point is not so much the complexity or combat power, but that it is easier to learn and maintain skills of shooting from firearms than to learn how to use knives?

About spear and laughter and sin I didn’t read the stress from hollow strips - and decided it was a typo and it was necessary - of planks - I think how spears were made from wormwood grass ?! And all that from hollow strips

Thanks again for the comments!

PS Cool helmet by the way I like armor and weapons without decorations more, in my opinion engraving, gilding only distract

[abrakadabre]

by the way, I like armor and weapons without decorations more

Heavily adorned armor was worn only by the richest and most senior. Knights simpler of course wore not so rich armor. Utility played a large role for them.

[saygon66]

- As far as I know, the shape of the saddle with a high back bow helped to remove part of the load from the back (?)

[abrakadabre]

As far as I know, the shape of the saddle with a high back bow helped to remove part of the load from the back

Yes, the knight’s saddle made the landing more stable. But no saddle can save if the spear is made too strong.
In this case, even if you yourself inflict a ramming blow, by some miracle you will withstand the collision, then the enemy is pricked on a spear (the point is sharpened and the mass of a horse is comparable to a light car), while continuing to gallop past the enemy, you will plant him along the spear to your own hand and then bump into him. Your horse will run further, but you will have to be very bad. After all, after the collision, it is necessary to leave safely. A fragile spear allows you to do this. But there is no "shaft".

[nnz226]

Confused by the date of manufacture: 1591. At this time, no one wore such armor. Yes - chain mail, helmets, plate breastplates. This is the time of the heyday of firearms, Ivan the Terrible was already: "Kazan took, Astrakhan took" The archers began as a branch of the army. And who would go to the battlefield in such armor?

[Kombrig]

The transitional period from the appearance of a firearm to its complete domination lasted more than one century .....

[abrakadabre]

Confuses production date: 1591 year. Nobody wore such armor at this time.

Very worn. Massive armor began to go out of use in the second half of the 17th century. That is, approximately 50-70 years after the manufacture of this armor.

[Des10]

And by the time of the creation of the armor, and by other important points --- the layman. But admire those who used it. Such times ... and now there are quite a few such people, but armor is not the same. )

[saygon66]

- Why immediately a firearm? His friend was an English big bow, or a crossbow ... English archers pierced the French armor at Agincourt and Cressy ...

[abrakadabre]

English archers pierced French armor at Agincourt and Cressy ...

Do not forget that under Agincourt the knights wore slightly different armor. Mostly brigant. And even such were far from all knights because of the high cost of all armor in general at that time. And not only the coolest ones.
For most of the knights of the time of Crescy and Agincourt, the standard was:
Case: short chain mail, on top of a plastron or brigant
Extremities: brigant or even tire protection, and for hands often without it, but then the chain mail sleeves are full. Gloves are hourglass.
Neck: bevor, and more often just an additional chain mail or brilliant necklace.
Helmet: Bacnet with visor klvizor or hundskugel

[saygon66]

-Sure! I read that the arrow with a narrow tip penetrated the chain mail ring, that the armor plate could be pierced only at right angles, and even then not always ...

[abrakadabre]

For different tasks there were arrows with different tips.
Against chain mail - long awl-shaped
Against the armor - short massive pyramidal
Against horses - large forks or similar to ordinary but with very large tails
and so on

[Tourist Breakfast]

Thank you for the article! There would be more similar materials on the site.
Does anyone know why the breathing holes in the visor are only on the right side?

[saygon66]

When horse knights collided, the spear hit just the left side, the shield could be lower, and the strike was sent a little higher - into the helmet ... about one of the kings of France died - the splintered spear splint hit, through the helmet grate, into the eye.

[Tourist Breakfast]

Thanks for the answer! But is this not like tournament armor?

[saygon66]

- It seems like the tournament armor for horse "collisions" was heavier ... and the left side of the armor was additionally strengthened ...

[abrakadabre]

Does anyone know why the breathing holes in the visor are only on the right side?

Because most people are right-handed and hold weapons with their right hand, and the shield and reins with their left. Accordingly, the left side is more static and passive in repelling the attack. Therefore, when riding a horse they tried to beat it to the left side. Well, since a blow to the head is more deadly than to the corps, the upper class was not to hit the enemy in the shield, but in the helmet.
That's why the entire left side was further strengthened: a more massive elbow, a shoulder pad, the visor on the left was made monolithic and even an overlay was added.
Holes for breathing were made on the right.

[Todos]

Just awesome armor! Thank you for the article

[Eugeniy_369k]

Master virtuoso. The armor for that time is a masterpiece. Posted by +

[Aleksandr67]

Thank you for the article! Very beautiful armor, a work of art !!!

[Ivan_Ivanov]

Like a Ferrari. Beautiful, but useless.

And further...

Have you noticed that there is no Christian symbolism anywhere ??? There are no crosses, lilies, fish ... But ZATO is full of antique pictures. Anyone besides me, this suggests thoughts?

[Ivan_Ivanov]

Quote: nnz226

Confused by the date of manufacture: 1591. At this time, no one wore such armor. Yes - chain mail, helmets, plate breastplates. This is the time of the heyday of firearms, Ivan the Terrible was already: "Kazan took, Astrakhan took" The archers began as a branch of the army. And who would go to the battlefield in such armor?

Or maybe a firearm was still far from widespread? Here, it turns out, we had it, but in Europe it was not there, or there were only a few.

[saygon66]

M. B. because during this period Milan was ruled by the Spaniards ... and the Moorish traditions were strong in Spain - the pattern is very reminiscent of the oriental "islimi" (plant motifs).

[abrakadabre]

But ZATO is full of antique pictures. Anyone besides me, this suggests thoughts?

Renaissance however. Everything was antique in fashion. The authority of the church was greatly reduced. Any reformation there ...

[Ivan_Ivanov]

I will try to answer both of you.

Catholic orders were strong in Spain, Catholicism ruled the ball there. In addition, the master of Milan, and not imported from Spain. In addition, I spoke NOT about the ornament, namely about the embossed pictures.

It is clear that Revival was in vogue. But nobody canceled the dominant Christianity. And here is NOT ONE !!! cross, or other Christian symbol. All antiquity.

[saygon66]

_ Portrait of King Charles V ... And nothing too ... And the Spaniard could have been the customer ...

[saygon66]

- The front helmet of Charles V 1545.

[saygon66]

- And yet, we send a gift to King Philip III by the Duke of Savoy, 1585.

[saygon66]

- Similar in design armor: Children's armor for the infant Philip, 1585. Made in Milan. Sorry you can’t enlarge the picture ...

[saygon66]

- Indeed, I reviewed several portraits of Spanish kings - there are no crosses ...

[Ivan_Ivanov]

You have a great selection. The fact of the absence of Christian symbolism on the armor of Christian knights and monarchs, in paintings and the presence of a large number of antique plots suggests that our ideas, formed by the prevailing historical science, of those times are largely erroneous and false.

[abrakadabre]

The fact of the absence of Christian symbolism on the armor of Christian knights and monarchs, in paintings and the presence in a large number of antique plots suggests that

This does not mean anything, except for two facts:
1. With all the religiosity of the time, the nobility that ordered the armor in the bulk did not belong either to the clergy in general, or to the military chivalry orders in particular. I repeat, for the most zealous commentators who want to troll, taking my words out of context: for the most part.
2. The period under consideration is the era of the Renaissance, when in the proper layers of the population of Europe there was a general craze for antiquity. Especially in Italy, where the best examples of armor were made, including those considered in this article.

[VengefulRat]

I missed so many interesting articles because of these Maidan.

[A1L9E4K9S]

Quote: abrakadabre

Boomstick nullified all the advantages of armor.

Do not say the movie Last Armored Train Remember, the armor then held the bullets.
In general, people were strong, try putting on armor, you won’t be able to walk, but you also had to fight.

[abrakadabre]

In general, people were strong, try wearing armor,you cannot walkbut you also had to fight.

You tried? I tried. Regularly.
In armor it is very comfortable to walk and even run for short distances. Mobility is very high, whatever you think about it. For example, if your flexibility allows it at all, then without any problems to sit in twine. What's in the longitudinal, what's in the transverse. It’s quite easy to tumble over your head or over your shoulder. In general, mobility and load are on average no more than that of a modern infantryman with a laid out. Workout required comparable.
And do not forget, the knight is a rich and arrogant gentleman. It’s not a lordly thing to run cross-country legs on the battlefield with legs. There is a war horse for this. If he is killed under a knight, that is, a spare horse, or even two and horses of servants. And only on special occasions on foot.
Real disadvantages in front of "naked":
- hot and sweaty
- with prolonged wearing or intense physical activity, yes, the weight is tiring, but not as fast as a backpack of the same weight. Because the weight is distributed evenly throughout the body,
- in a closed fighting position she took away breathing problems during intense fighting, real problems ... And into the firebox, the praise of modern fighters in armor that they boast that they are fine. Modern fights no more than 3-5 rounds of 2 minutes. Fiercely beat continuously for half an hour or an hour with a closed visor ...
- reduced visibility and poor hearing (even with special holes in place of the ears.

[reality]

The amount of labor invested in this product is simply amazing. But, most likely, the customer was not the best war, albeit very rich. Inveterate warriors do not like jewelry) I remember Senkevich having a story about the Battle of Grunwald, where the main character, the village ambal-knight Zbyshko, met a rooster in such armor, summoned him to a duel, killed, privatized armor - he immediately became the most mannered among the knights. There were such armor as several villages.

[abrakadabre]

Inveterate warriors of jewelry do not like

Status obliges. Noble title ...

But, most likely, the customer was not the best war, albeit very rich

You are wrong here. Judging by the number of battle marks, the owner of the armor was a lover of "povonzaTsaa" in the forefront and did not hide behind the backs of bodyguards. And he used the armor for its intended purpose without fear of scratching the little flowers.

[saygon66]

- At the beginning of May, theatrical tournaments will be held in our region in the Georgienburg castle (Chernyakhovsk), m. the museum of the Shaaken castle (Nekrasovo) will open The irony of fate - the castles of the knights of the Teutonic Order are being dismantled "into bricks" by the Karabakh Armenians ... who would have guessed ...

[reality]

Well, by the way, yes, I forgot that I should have known my status regularly)

[sledge]

Piece of art.

[Igarr]

Thank you, Valery, for the colorful material.
I repeat, after the guys - the comments are even more interesting than the material.
Because it is more lively and reflect the opinion of the rector himself.
I feel lucky to mess with iron.
And the armor ... well, in the Armory in the Kremlin, there are also full armor (or relatively complete).
Not so richly decorated, more archaic.
In my opinion, this set had a purely decorative, ceremonial meaning. I don’t exclude the possibility that someone in it happened to take part in training, "amusing" battles. Imitations, simulations. But, I will exclude, perhaps, the use of this armor for its intended purpose. It turns out too expensive. But, in the image and likeness of the Warrior-Liberator in Treptower Park (with a sword in his hand and a girl, an anachronism) - I fully admit it.
In Koblenz, in the fortress museum, I happened to see a natural barbut. Amazed by the exhibition quality, polishing. Exactly, specially brought. And not from the storehouse but into the window.
..
Good stuff. Thanks, Valery.

[Lime]

http://bezpekaua.com/fotomaterialu/1575-superpodborka-xolodnogo-oruzhiya.html

[mokeichev81]

very well

[PKsh]

Regarding the mobility of armor

[romandostalo]

The clip is just class. And the armor is just beauty, eh would be worn at least a little bit.

[Mcsim]

Beautiful armor

[sirf]

Nice armor, but engraving is annoying.

[mokeichev81]

very well