Military Review

The development of armor in the Middle Ages in Western Europe

In this article, the development of armor in Western Europe in the Middle Ages (VII – the end of the XV c.) And at the very beginning of the early New Age (beginning of the XVI c.) Is considered in general terms. The material is equipped with a large number of illustrations for a better understanding of the topic. Most of the text is translated from English.

The development of armor in the Middle Ages in Western Europe

The middle of VII - IX centuries. Viking in Wendel helmet. They were used mainly in Northern Europe by the Normans, the Germans, and others, although they were often met in other parts of Europe. Very often it has a half mask covering the upper part of the face. Later evolved into a Norman helmet. Armor: short mail without a chainmail hood, worn over a shirt. The shield is round, flat, of medium size, with a large umbon - a metal convex hemisphere overlay in the center, typical of Northern Europe of this period. On the shields used gyuzh - belt for wearing a shield during a hike on the neck or shoulder. Naturally, horned helmets did not exist at that time.

X - the beginning of the XIII centuries. A knight in a Norman helmet with rondash. Open Norman helmet conical or egg-shaped. Usually,
The nose plate is attached to the front - a metal nasal plate. It was widely distributed throughout Europe, both in the western and in the eastern part. Armor: long mail to the knees, with full or incomplete sleeves (to the elbows) length, with coif - a mail hood, separate or representing a single unit with the mail. In the latter case, the hauberk was called "hoberk". Front and back at the chainmail cuts on the hem for more convenient movement (and more comfortable to sit in the saddle). From the end of the 9th to the beginning of the 10th centuries. under the chain mail, the knights begin to wear a gambeson — long, ready-made clothes, filled with wool or tow, to such an extent as to absorb shocks on the mail. Moreover, in the gambesons, the arrows were perfectly stuck. Often used as a separate armor poorer compared with the knights of the infantry, especially the archers.

Tapestry from Bayeux. Created in 1070-s. It is clearly seen that the archers of the Normans (left) do not have any armor at all.

Often, to protect the legs, Shossas — chain mail stockings — were worn. From the X century. rondash appears - a large Western European shield of the knights of the early Middle Ages, and often infantry - for example, the Anglo-Saxon housker. Could have a different shape, usually round or oval, curved and with a umbon. Among the knights, rhondas almost always have a pointed lower part - the knights covered the left leg with it. Produced in various versions in Europe in the X — XIII centuries.

Attack of the knights in Norman helmets. This is exactly what the crusaders looked like who captured Jerusalem in 1099

XII - early XIII centuries. Knight in solid Norman helmet in surcot. Nanosnik is no longer attached, and forged with the helmet. They began to wear a surcoat over the chain mail - a long and spacious cape of different styles: with sleeves of different lengths and without, one-color or with a pattern. The fashion started from the first Crusade, when the knights saw similar cloaks among the Arabs. Like a hauberk, had front and back cuts on the hem. The functions of the raincoat: protection against overheating of the chain mail in the sun, protecting it from rain and dirt. The rich knights in order to improve the protection could wear double mail, and in addition to the noseband, attach a half mask that covers the upper part of the face.

Archer with a long bow. XI — XIV centuries.

End of XII - XIII centuries. Knight in a closed room. Early Pothelms were without face protection, they could have a nanodera. Gradually, the defense increased until the helmet completely covered the face. Late pothelm is the first helmet in Europe with a visor (visor) that completely covers the face. By the middle of the XIII century. evolved into topfelm - a pot or large helmet. The armor does not change significantly: the same long mail with a hood. Muffers appear - chainmail gauntlets woven to the hawker. But they did not receive wide distribution, leather gloves were popular among knights. Surco increases slightly in volume, in the largest version becoming a cape - clothing, worn over the armor, without sleeves, which depicted the owner's coat of arms.

King of England Edward I Long-Legged (1239-1307) in open coat and coat of arms

First half of the 13th century Knight in Topfhelme with tarzhe. Topfhelm - knight's helmet, which appeared in the late XII - early XIII century. Used exclusively by knights. The shape can be cylindrical, barrel-shaped or in the shape of a truncated cone, fully protects the head. Topfhelm was put on over the chainmail hood, under which, in turn, a felt comforter was put on, to soften the blows to the head. Armor: long mail, sometimes double, with a hood. In the thirteenth century appears as a mass phenomenon, chain mail-brigantine armor, providing more protection than just chain mail. Brigantine - the armor of metal plates, riveted on cloth or quilted linen basis. The early armored armor armor was a breastplate or waistcoat worn over the chain mail. Shields of knights, due to improvement by the middle of the XIII century. the protective qualities of the armor and the appearance of fully closed helmets, are significantly reduced in size, turning into tarzh. Tarje is a type of wedge-shaped shield, without umbon, actually a cut-off version of drop-shaped rhondas. Now the knights no longer hide their faces behind shields.


The second half of the XIII - the beginning of the XIV centuries. Knight in topfhelme in surcot with ilettami. A specific feature of topfhelms is a very bad review, so they were used, as a rule, only in a spear mistake. Topfhelm is bad for hand-to-hand combat due to disgusting visibility. Therefore, the knights, if it came to hand-to-hand, threw him. And so that the expensive helmet was not lost during the battle, it was attached to the back with a special chain or belt. After that, the knight remained in a chain mail hood with a felt comforter under him, which was a weak defense against the powerful blows of a heavy medieval sword. Therefore, very soon, the knights began to wear a spherical helmet under the tophelhelm — a cerveler or hirnhaube, which is a small hemispherical helmet that fits the head tightly, similar to a helmet. The tserveler has no face protection elements, only very rare tselvelery have nose pads. In this case, so that the topfhelm sat on the head more closely and did not move to the sides, a felt roller was worn under it over the tserveler.

Cherveler XIV century.

More topfhelm to the head is not attached, and rested on the shoulders. Naturally, the poor knights dispensed with the tscheveller. Ailetta - shoulder rectangular plates, similar to shoulder straps, covered with heraldic symbols. Used in Western Europe in the XIII - early XIV centuries. as primitive shoulder pads. There is a hypothesis that epaulettes originated from the ailet.

Since the end of the XIII - the beginning of the XIV centuries. Tournament nashlemnye decorations - various heraldic figures (Kleynods), which were made of leather or wood and were attached to the helmet, became widespread. The Germans are widespread various types of horns. In the end, the topfhelms completely fell out of use in the war, remaining purely tournament helmets for a spear mistake.

The first half of the XIV - the beginning of the XV centuries. Knight in bascinet with avantyle. In the first half of the XIV century. to replace topfhelm comes bascinet - a spheroconical helmet with a pointed top, to which the advent is woven - a mail cloak framing the helmet along the bottom edge and covering the neck, shoulders, neck and sides of the head. The bascinet was worn not only by knights, but also by foot soldiers. There are a huge number of varieties of basquettes, both in the form of a helmet and in the type of attachment, they took a wide variety of species, with a padded bag and without it. The simplest, and therefore the most common visor for bascinet, were relatively flat valve valves - in fact, a face mask. At the same time, a variety of baszenets with a visor Hundzgugel appears - the ugliest helmet in the European stories, however very common. Obviously, security at that time was more important than appearance.

Bascinet with visor hundsgugel. Late 14th century

Later, from the beginning of the 15th century, the bazineta began to be supplied with a platinum neck protection instead of a chain mail aventyle. Armor at this time is also developing along the path of enhanced protection: chain armor with boosterin reinforcement is still used, but already with larger plates holding a punch better. Separate elements of plate armor began to appear: first plastrons or plakarts covering the abdomen and breastplates, and then plate cuirass. Although due to its high cost, the plate cuirass at the beginning of the XV century. were available to few knights. Also in large numbers appear: bracers - part of the armor protecting hands from elbow to hand, as well as developed elbow pads, greaves and kneecaps. In the second half of the XIV century. A gambeson comes to replace the gambeson - a quilted padded jacket with sleeves that looks like a gambeson, only not so thick and long. It was made from several layers of fabric, quilted with vertical or rhombic seams. Additionally, no stuffed. The sleeves were made separately and tied to the shoulders of the aketone. With the development of lamellar armor, which did not require such thick podshozhnikov, like chain mail, in the first half of the XV century. The aketon gradually supplanted the gambeson from the knights, although it remained popular among the infantry until the end of the 15th century, primarily because of its cheapness. In addition, the richer knights could use a doublet or puruen - in fact the same aketon, but with enhanced protection from chain mail inserts.

This period, the end of the XIV - the beginning of the XV centuries, is characterized by a huge variety of combinations of armor: mail, mail and brigantine, composite of chain mail or brigantine base with plate breastplates, spine or cuirass, and even tire and brigantine armor, not to mention all kinds of braces , elbow pads, knee pads and greaves, as well as closed and open helmets with a variety of visors. Shields of small sizes (tarzhe) are still used by knights.

Pillaging the city. France. Miniature beginning of the XV century.

By the middle of the 14th century, following the new fashion that had spread throughout Western Europe to shorten outerwear, Surco too was greatly shortened and transformed into Zhupon or Tabar, which performed the same function. The bascinet has gradually evolved into a grand bascinet - a closed helmet, rounded, with neck protection and a hemispherical visor with numerous openings. Out of use at the end of the XV century.

The first half and the end of the XV century. Knight in the Salad. All further development of the armor goes along the path of enhancing protection. It is the XV century. can be called the century of plate armor, when they become somewhat more accessible and, as a result, appear in large numbers among the knights and to a lesser extent among the infantry.

Crossbowman with pavez. Mid-second half of the 15th century

With the development of blacksmithing, the plate armor design was being improved more and more, and the armors themselves changed according to the armor style, but the plate armor of Western Europe always had the best defensive qualities. By the middle of the XV century. the hands and feet of most of the knights were already fully protected by plate armor, the body by a cuirass with a plate skirt fastened to the lower edge of the cuirass. Also in mass order, instead of leather appear plate gloves. Replaced aventyla comes gorzhe - plate protection of the neck and upper chest. It could be combined both with a helmet and a cuirass.

In the second half of the XV century. Arme appears - a new type of knight’s helmet of the 15th — 16th centuries, with double visor and neck protection. In the design of the helmet, the spherical dome has a rigid back and a movable face and neck protection at the front and sides, over which the visually attached to the dome is lowered. Thanks to this design, the arm gives excellent protection in both a spear strike and in hand-to-hand combat. Arme is the highest stage of helmet evolution in Europe.

Arme. Mid XVI century.

But he was very expensive and therefore available only to rich knights. Most of the knights from the second half of the XV century. wore all kinds of salads - a type of helmet that extended and covered the neck from behind. Salads were widely used, along with caps - the simplest helmets, and in the infantry.

Infantryman in the caps and cuirass. First half of the 15th century

For knights, forged salads were specially forged with full face protection (the fields in the front and from the sides were forged vertical and actually became part of the dome) and neck, for which the helmet was supplemented with a buvier — protection for the clavicles, neck and lower face.

Knight in caps and bouvier. The middle - the second half of the XV century.

In the XV century. there is a gradual abandonment of shields as such (due to the massive appearance of plate armor). Shields in the XV century. turned into bucklers - small round fist shields, necessarily steel and with umbon. Appeared as a replacement for knightly targer for foot combat, where they were used to parry strikes and strike blows with umbon or edge on the enemy's face.

Buckler Diameter 39,5, see the beginning of the XVI century.

Late XV - XVI centuries. Knight in full plate armor. XVI century. historians refer not to the Middle Ages, but to the early New Age. Therefore, full plate armor - a phenomenon in a greater degree of the New time, and not the Middle Ages, although it appeared in the first half of the XV century. in Milan, famous as the center of production of the best armor in Europe. In addition, full plate armor was always very expensive, and therefore was only available to the most well-off part of the knighthood. Full plate armor, covering the whole body with steel plates, and the head with a closed helmet - the culmination of the development of European armor. Halfdrones appear - plate shoulder pads provide protection for the shoulder, upper arm, and shoulder blades with steel plates at the expense of its rather large size. Also, to strengthen the protection of the plate skirt began to attach the TASSET - thigh covers.

In the same period, bard - plate horse armor appears. Consisted of the following elements: shanfrien - protection of the muzzle, kritnet - protection of the neck, peytral - protection of the chest, krupper - protection of the croup and flanchard - protection of the sides.

Full armor for a knight and a horse. Nuremberg. The weight (total) of the rider's armor is 26,39 kg. Weight (total) of horse's armor - 28,47 kg. 1532-1536

In the late XV - early XVI centuries. two mutually opposite processes occur: if the armor of the cavalry is becoming more and more strengthened, the infantry, on the contrary, becomes more and more exposed. During this period, the famous Landsknechts appeared - German mercenaries who served under Maximilian I (1486-1519) and his grandson Charles V (1519-1556), who left at best only the cuirass with the tassets for themselves.

Landsknecht. The end of the XV - the first half of the XVI centuries.

Landsknechts. Engraving beginning of the XVI century.

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site:

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. padonok.71
    padonok.71 30 June 2014 10: 34
    Galloping across Europe. The author, of course, tried in general terms, everything is correct, but on the whole it turned out to be a confusion. And they have one sword at all, like in the pictures.
    1. svp67
      svp67 30 June 2014 17: 15
      Quote: padonok.71
      And they have one sword at all, like in the pictures.

      Legacy of the ancestors ... lol
    2. Astrey
      Astrey 30 June 2014 23: 37
      That and that
      Quote: padonok.71
      in outline
      . But, for a minute, I have forgotten to decide in what aspect to present the material - the relevance of the article.
      And the author did not bother to disclose the methodology - what and why he used when writing the article.
      Again, the source base ... What are they? In addition to obscure photos of unknown reenactors.

      And is the article cited material? The author did not submit any conclusions. One gets the impression that the forum member compiled a small fraction of the bare information from inexplicable sources and threw it onto the Internet in order to see the comments denouncing his mistakes. The highlight is out of date.
  2. Ruslan 56
    Ruslan 56 30 June 2014 10: 40
    Very interesting and informative!
    1. Apologet.Ru
      Apologet.Ru 30 June 2014 10: 49
      Sumptuously! THANK YOU VERY MUCH!
  3. inkass_98
    inkass_98 30 June 2014 10: 46
    The article is entertaining, but it is impossible to cover the entire evolution of armor of the medieval period. Of course, ceremonial armor remained behind the scenes, as well as the weapons used by the knights in battle and tournaments, although this was mentioned in passing. It would be more logical to make a series of articles, then everything would be less messy, and the flies would be separate from cutlets. Thank you for your work anyway.
  4. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 30 June 2014 11: 06
    The evolution of armor over the centuries is shown well.
    We are used to films for knights in full plate
    armor of the 15th century, but the reality is different.
  5. Taoist
    Taoist 30 June 2014 11: 50
    I remembered the old Soviet film "the ballad about the valiant knight Ivanhoe" ... As it turns out, there were surprisingly accurately shown both the armor and the tactics of the battle of that time. As the saying goes "not Hollywood".
    1. Fenia04
      Fenia04 30 June 2014 22: 02
      Quote: Taoist
      I remembered the old Soviet film "the ballad about the valiant knight Ivanhoe" ...

      I also remembered, especially the song.
    2. Witness 45
      Witness 45 24 May 2016 23: 13
      In Soviet times, they tried not to do hackwork, even in the film industry, censorship also did not allow hacking.
  6. Tommygun
    Tommygun 30 June 2014 11: 53
    It would be interesting in parallel with the evolution of defenses to compare the evolution of means of destruction, so that the reasons for changing the armor become clear.
  7. Sanya Terek
    Sanya Terek 30 June 2014 12: 45
    Caption to photo № 3 "Knight in a Norman helmet with a rondash."
    According to von Winkler. pictured is a Norman type shield, and the rondash is a round metal shield of the late Middle Ages.
  8. Free wind
    Free wind 30 June 2014 14: 00
    wonderful photos, wonderful article, but the author can make a series of articles about armor and edged weapons. Well, to make it clearer how enhanced defense and weapons. Well, firearms, too. I’ll think how many efforts it was worth making such armor. they were made of iron, there was no sheet iron. I recently found a smithy where the forge was boosted with furs. It turns out the furs were two contour, with increased boost pressure. Emery is also manual. Moreover, emery is a stone of natural origin. It was very interesting to see this. there will be time, I'll take off the pictures of this forge. If this works out.
  9. abrakadabre
    abrakadabre 30 June 2014 14: 55
    Once reconstruction means reconstruction, not bullshit. In order:
    Photos 1 and 2... Viking armor of the 8-10th centuries with reservations. And not the richest. The rich warriors of continental Europe wore scales and a helmet with a full mask and earpieces. The “Papuan” in the photo wore a helmet without a comforter - ANY blow to the head automatically means a fighter with varying degrees of head damage. With no exceptions. Armament - a shield as in the second photo with a fist grip (for this and an umbon to protect the fist) with a diameter of 60-100 cm, a spear as tall as a person or slightly longer as the first weapon, an ax or sword (for the wealthy) as the second. Chain mail long from the middle of the thigh (the poorer option) to the knee (the well-to-do knight = heavy rider), sleeves to the elbow. The helmet is prefabricated, not solid-forged, as in the photo.
    In all the photos where there is chain mail, she is dressed incorrectly. That's right - a crease stretches a little above the belt (like a fat person has a fat hanging over the belt). This allows you to freely move your hands and raise them. In addition, in this case, half the weight of the chain mail on the shoulders, and half on the belt. Which greatly facilitates long wearing.
    Photo 3... 11-12 centuries, late Vikings, knights. In principle, everything is fine. Only a left-handed fighter has a second sword on his left for some reason - hmmmm ... How did he get it going? The shield - a large almond-shaped one - is very common, but primarily a cavalry one. "Rondash" is never a large early shield, and certainly not a cavalry one. This is the name of the late infantry shield of spearmen and other swordsmen. Suitable for fencing.
    Photo 5 (cavalry attack). A highly controversial image: 1) the knight is a heavily armed horseman with the main combat technique of the TARAN SPEAR. Blade attack in a closed horse formation - a phenomenon later, 16 centuries from cuirassier; 2) coifs (chain hoods) of the knights covered their faces; 3) why does the main character have a shield on his back ?! - spears of the enemy in front; 4) shields are shown of a later form (approximately 13-14 centuries) - correctly with almond-shaped shields; 5) the horses of the wealthy leaders (which in the foreground of the frame from the film) are covered with dense blankets (rather chain-mails) from arrows, heat and status-pathos.
    Photo 6. I guess, yes. Option for the relatively poor. Only surko should be with the coat of arms or its embryo. Hauberk is still not with gloves, but with chain mittens attached to the arm of a chain mail. The muzzle of the face is closed by a chain valve (an open version only for base men or extremely poor knights). There are a lot of sources for this. In hauberk chain mail, weaving of the sleeve in the elbow zone was encountered in this variant, but was not popular. With this arrangement of rows of rings, bending the arm at the elbow is very problematic. The most common option - the direction of the rows of rings on the shoulder - full mobility.
    Photo 7 (archer with a long bow). Unambiguous crap. Even in the ancient era, all sorts of naked-backed barbarians from protective armaments got and used primarily a helmet. Let the bullshit, but a helmet, not chain mail. For without half the arms / legs / open abdomen, you can somehow survive. Without half the head - not at 200%. The chain mail is long cavalry, which means the archer can’t afford it (and even without a horse with his legs it’s dreary to wear day and night). Like long-sex clothing under chain mail, it is impractical to run away from angry knights, and at that time it was status expensive. It may be short, but the sword on its side is an inaccessible luxury.
    The correct option is a quilted gambeson, a simple helmet. For the prosperous, chain mail is possible not lower than the middle of the thigh and with short cuts on the sides, and not front-back. For the infantry never even shines in the saddle, but the cocktails must be protected at least illusory. On the belt is not a sword, but a large knife or a rough cleaver. Possible (but not required) shield on the back.
    If anyone is interested, I can continue ...
    1. sivuch
      sivuch 30 June 2014 16: 02
      This is really a debriefing.
      just wanted to clarify
      Photos 1 and 2
      It wasn’t clear what steel helmets were then, but it could be copper or bronze. Helmets with a mask - how common were they? I was somehow used to thinking that they were of little use, and that they were completely flawed, so I rarely used them. Of course, I could be wrong.
      photo3 Yes, there is something one or the second sword or Norman shield.
      photo 5. Well, generally speaking, spears are present in the frame, but for some reason the soldiers of the second row. I read about blankets that they were rare even at the beginning of the tent.
      photo 7. in the order of priridism. the English archers of the third century were precisely the infantry traveling and the sword was affordable for them.
      Continued, of course, it would be interesting
      Wishing the author, they’ve already said that you don’t have to try to shove the unappeared. As a result, a lot is left behind the scenes. Let's say not a word is said about lamellar armor. There are all kinds of alternative materials, like leather or bone. About the largest and most famous places where weapons are made nothing is said either, nor about national features. For example, in Germany they continued to wear salad when in France and England they switched from arme to bourguignot. And another detail - the name of the armor should be brought to one language. For example, tarje and tarch is one and about the same
      1. abrakadabre
        abrakadabre 1 July 2014 09: 35
        It wasn’t clear what steel helmets were then, but they could be copper or bronze.
        Steel (or rather iron) helmets were just the same. There are plenty of copanins on them. Bronze and copper for this period was more expensive than iron. Because the required deposits of copper and tin are few and the main part of them was devastated in ancient times. Therefore, such materials went (in terms of weapons manufacturing) to decorative pads for status armor. And the strength is lower.
        Helmets with a mask - how common were they? I was somehow used to thinking that they were of little use, and that they were full of flaws, so I rarely used them. Of course, I could be wrong.
        You are mistaken a little. The degree of protection they have more than helmets without a mask. But they are more expensive. Therefore, ordinary wars in wireframes and teams of 4-6 petals riveted to the frame with open helmets, and the rich and leaders in helmets with masks.
        the sword was affordable for them.
        The sword was too expensive for them and not for status - nobles would be offended. They had hatchets and falsions. The difference is small, nowadays. But at that time it was very, very big. In addition, the sword is a weapon that requires a level of fencing, which archers could not spend time on. But it’s stupid to chop with a cleaver familiar from childhood in everyday life - no problem. But for them it is a weapon of last chance, if the knight or infantry of the enemy galloped / ran without falling from the arrows.
        Say, not a word is said about lamellar armor.
        The author of course immediately confined himself to Western Europe and centuries, but here I agree with you. In the Wendel period (6-8 centuries), lamellars and scales were used. They are cheaper and easier to manufacture than chain mail. At the same time, they provide incomparably better protection. And even during this period, the production traditions left over from the Roman Empire did not die out even worse. The technological decline was just the greatest since the collapse of Charlemagne's empire. Early medieval European lamellars are very well shown in the Polish film "When the Sun was God".
        1. sivuch
          sivuch 1 July 2014 13: 34
          In my opinion, the mask could only protect against a sliding blow or a long boom. A more or less strong blow just impresses it in the face of the owner. And the disadvantages are overweight, a shift in the central heating, heating in the sun, it’s hard to breathe. It can be compared with bandages (colloquially -nahu-nicki) in sports fencing. Once in a lifetime it can help, but you will earn blood corns in delicate places at the first training session. Therefore, no one wanted to wear.
          But is a falsion not a knight’s weapon? Like, there were even falsions as a sword of possession.
          Thanks for continuing
          1. abrakadabre
            abrakadabre 1 July 2014 13: 46
            A more or less strong blow simply impresses her in the face of the owner.
            Not certainly in that way. The mask only conditionally repeats the face. In size, it is larger and, most importantly, down longer. The lower elongated end of the mask rests on the chest. This is what saves you from typing. It works very well. Verified personally.
            On the same later bacinets with a visor, the valvizor, due to this and a tight fit on the head with a thick comforter, did not use a chin strap. Just put a helmet on his head. At least neither on iso-sources, nor on the preserved copies of the chin strap. Well, a direct reconstruction confirms.
            And protection ... A correctly made visor withstands an extremely powerful blow. In battle, they beat everyone with everything possible: with a plate glove, and the edge of the shield, and with a guard or apple of a sword. An open face is from knockout to severe fractures of the skull bones.
    2. Free wind
      Free wind 30 June 2014 17: 54
      thanks for the comment! I can’t imagine how to make all this? Chain mail was also among the Russian soldiers. Curls out of wire. Well, make a wire of 10 kilogram pigs !!! ??? !!.
      1. uwzek
        uwzek 30 June 2014 20: 03
        Chain mail does not curl - it is woven from rings. The wire for the rings is precisely wired. A piece of metal is uncoated into a sheet, then this sheet is cut into bars, which are passed through a series of holes of decreasing diameter (wire). Then the rings are bent from the wire, part of them is welded immediately, part after plexus. As an option, solid rings were sometimes cut out of a sheet of metal, but this process of making chain mail was unlikely to accelerate, each such ring had to be processed with a file, removing burrs ...
        1. abrakadabre
          abrakadabre 1 July 2014 09: 41
          The wire for the rings is precisely wired.
          The drawing technology in Europe was first safely lost after Ancient Rome, and then restored to the 12th-13th centuries. So in the early Middle Ages the wire was forged from bars.
          rings, some of them are welded immediately, part after plexus.
          The rings were not welded, but riveted. This is less time consuming and the metal does not fade into scale. Welded options are extremely rare.
      2. abrakadabre
        abrakadabre 1 July 2014 09: 37
        I can’t imagine how to make all this?
        You won’t believe ... Very easy. But it is extremely laborious.
  10. borisjdin1957
    borisjdin1957 30 June 2014 14: 57
    from the Don.
    Author! But is it possible about the armor of the Slavs?
    1. abrakadabre
      abrakadabre 1 July 2014 09: 42
      Author! But is it possible about the armor of the Slavs?
      The author has not mastered even the claimed topic in sufficient volume. And you want the author to shove another huge topic.
  11. Cristall
    Cristall 30 June 2014 15: 20
    physical data would be nice ... weight, steel ... it's no secret that the high cost of the armor reached crazy sizes. It would be nice to know the weak points.
    Although weight itself is a weak point, plus sedentary. Why did the cavalry develop armor, while the infantry strove for "maneuver" and got rid of the armor.
    There was a time when the cavalry was very strong, but the development of bows and crossbows again brought out the infantry, but the confrontation between the infantry and cavalry deserves a separate work.
    What were these armored monsters afraid of? Other monsters? Archers, picnics?
    They look like armored, but in essence they are rams. Cavalry pierced the corridors in the walls of the attackers. As far as I understand that an armored knight + horse (armor was also hung on a horse) were not able to maneuver. We walked in a straight line. A sort of uncontrollable attack aircraft.
    In general, the article is interesting.
    1. abrakadabre
      abrakadabre 30 June 2014 15: 34
      physical data would be nice ... weight, steel ...
      The weight of a complete set of real military weapons of the knight ranged from 20 to 30 kg. That in the 10th century, that in 15-16. Less - leaves a lot of vulnerabilities (and for your beloved is sycotic), more - is unnecessarily hard.
      For an infantryman ... Everything is more complicated here. In the Middle Ages, the infantry was not developed and incomparably less rich, and therefore was equipped with an arbitrary way. But always many times cheaper than knights. Because the armor could be absent in principle. And it could be partial. For example, only a helmet, a helmet with a gambeson, more complete ...
      The key point was that the infantry walked on its own, rather than riding. Therefore, in principle, could not be booked in full. We can assume that a well-armed infantryman at the richest and most pathos feudal lord for 12-13 centuries could be dressed as in photos 3 and 5. For 14-15 centuries this is already with partial elements of armor protection.
      In general, this is comparable to the modern average calculation of fighters. And it depends on the physical capabilities of a person. If a person were able to carry 60-100 kg on himself for a long time. you can be sure that the knights would be booked for all these 60-100 kg.
    2. thrower
      thrower 30 June 2014 17: 37
      Look, an interesting video, as I understand it, the guys in Milan armor.

    3. uwzek
      uwzek 30 June 2014 20: 48
      The knights were killed by the infantry. And even without a firearm. As soon as the infantry received long (5-6 meters) peaks, the attack of the knightly cavalry lost its meaning. The horse is not a man - it won’t climb on spears, and the length of the knight’s spear, which was much thicker than the infantryman’s peaks was limited by weight (the knights carried him under his arm, leaning on a special folding hook, which was riveted to the cuirass, not a single photo in the article has this hook (I’m lying - there is a mounted knight)), and the knight in the attack couldn’t reach the infantry formation until the time when the heroic Rocinante turned away to the side, substituting the defenseless rear for the shooters. Then, however, the German Reiters began to use a salvo of pistols instead of a spear attack to break the line of pikemen, which led to the gradual abandonment of the knight's spear (forgot to mention that firearms appeared even before the wide spread of plate armor, but its effectiveness left much to be desired: good the bullet did not hit armor, the infantry were then protected by the same reliable armor (I’m talking about pikemen), but a shot from the musket uniquely knocked a person off his feet or from his horse — this is more fatal for a knight. the emergence of field artillery, after which they gradually abandoned the mass use of medieval steel armor. For a very long time they were worn by cuirassiers, even longer by sappers during siege work (the so-called trench armor). Well, the current bulletproof vests of varying degrees of resistance ...
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 30 June 2014 22: 17
        Actually, the horses were covered with eyes, and they were driven forward blindly, poor.
        To the peaks - so to the peaks.
        I read that the knights were still killed by crossbows. Short steel arrows
        pierced armor.
      2. sivuch
        sivuch 1 July 2014 08: 47
        I would say that they killed the money. If in a battle one knight costs three Swiss, and for money - like 15 or 20, then it is clear what to choose. More than 5000-6000 gendarmes could not afford even France.
        1. abrakadabre
          abrakadabre 1 July 2014 10: 19
          Exactly. The matter was aggravated by losses. Especially when in dense clusters of attacking knights they were hitting not from arquebuses (which most often did not pierce armor, but injured horses), but with buckshot from cannons. No armor in principle was saved from this.
      3. abrakadabre
        abrakadabre 1 July 2014 10: 17
        The knights were killed by the infantry.
        Knights ruined the issue price. For example, if 1000 ragged men with peaks and arquebuses died in the battle, then after 2-3 weeks you can type, train a little (collectively poke with peaks and shoot one way at a command) and poorly equip a new 1000 of the same ragged men. And if 1000 knights died in the battle (count 1000 tanks of the Middle Ages), then to replenish them, you need a lot of time, a huge pile of money. This is a national catastrophe. A complete analogy with modernity in terms of infantry and tanks.
        The development of a disciplined mass infantry (if you do not take a firearm, namely cold steel) only reduced the role of knightly cavalry, and did not make it completely ineffective. So, while in the Battle of Curtra the infantry beat the knights outright, then the infantry regularly lost the following battles. Everything went with varying success and depended more on the low tactical discipline of the knights in the scale of the general battle. Within the framework of the own unit of one feudal lord (one or several copies), the interaction was worked out perfectly. But in large consolidated detachments of various feudal lords there was a mess.
        the infantry were then protected by the same reliable armor (I'm talking about pikemen)
        Nothing like this. The knight had much more money to order full armor made of good steel and precisely in shape (this is an extremely important requirement, who wore the armor, he knows what I mean). The infantry was dressed for other people's money and in standard cheap armor of mediocre quality and standard sizes.
        Due to the fact that the infantryman walked on his own, rather than riding a horse, he could not put on full armor, even if he had money for it. Just because he would be too tired tired of actively moving around the battlefield and fighting. Only the first 1-2 lines were relatively well armored in the infantry formation. With a building depth of 6 or more lines. For it is very expensive and impractical. And this refers to the end of the 15th - 16th centuries.
 1 July 2014 21: 24
          Quote: abrakadabre
          Knights ruined the issue price.

          Quote: uwzek
          The knights were killed by the infantry.

          It depends on what is meant by knights. If the estate, then it was ruined by a change in the socio-economic formation, which led to a decrease in the income of small feudal lords and progress in military equipment and tactics, which made expensive composite armor and high individual combat skill on the battlefield pointless. If it were not for the widespread use of firearms, hand-to-hand combat would remain a decisive form of combat operations and the improvement of armor and individual combat training would continue. And the knights would not have disappeared from the historical arena for a long time.
          If by knights we mean heavy cavalry, then it died much later, already in the 19th century in connection with a significantly increased density of fire. And so in the late Middle Ages and modern times, Reiters and cuirassiers picked up the fallen banner of chivalry and carried it before the advent of machine guns.
          1. abrakadabre
            abrakadabre 3 July 2014 10: 04
            It depends on what is meant by knights.
            We will not verbally and philosophize. The scope of the article is severely limited. The article does not examine the socio-economic evolution throughout the Middle Ages.
            The knight is a heavily armed rider with the main tactics of use - a lance ram at full gallop. Against infantry in a dense horse formation, against the same knightly cavalry - it is rare that opponents galloping at full speed could disperse, and not kill each other in a head-on collision on heading courses (and this is when adding the speeds of both horses, up to 80 km / h).
     4 July 2014 13: 45
              But even if we exclude socio-economic evolutions and then, accordingly, discard the "cost of the issue" as the reason for the disappearance of the knights, there remains just the development of military affairs: tactics and military "technology".
              Lance ram is only part of the tactics of using knightly cavalry. In view of the infinite supply of copies, the ram went into close combat. In addition, knights were often used as heavy infantry, especially during sieges or fortress defenses.
              So we can assume that the cuirassiers are in some way the knights of the new time. Instead of a ram ram - a pistol salvo and the transition to close combat. Therefore, our argument is doomed to remain verbiage. An article about armor, and we talk about what killed the knights. This, of course, is best discussed in an article about knights.
      4. Aljavad
        Aljavad 25 October 2014 04: 10
        The knights were killed by the infantry. And even without a firearm. As soon as the infantry received long (5-6 meters) peaks,

        It's not about picks. And not in armor. "Knights" ie noble horsemen fought with each other. The infantry "provided" their noble duels and the "master", even someone else's, had no right to beat. This is in its "pure" form. Life is, of course, more difficult.
        Knights ruined money. When the opportunity arose to train and maintain a sufficiently large and trained infantry - be it the German Landsknechts, or the Swiss or the Spanish third - knightly fights were a thing of the past. And ceremonially - and in the 18th century commanders put on armor.
  12. Archikah
    Archikah 30 June 2014 15: 22
    Full crap !!! Look - there are a lot of new revealing programs - there are no such technologies in the middle (so-called) centuries and there wasn’t when they did, as one impressive reader put it, (from one piece) of iron. Yes - there was no sheet hire and everything was rather primitive - either it was done wrong. And we are shown remodels and mythical wars invented under these armor and the use of so-called tactics. knights. Come to your senses. It's time to look a little wider at the past of our country. Moreover, there was one reader who asked about the Slavs. Chernyaev, Chudinov and many others. We are specifically bred - so we will not succumb to this crap. negative
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 30 June 2014 17: 49
      "And we are shown remakes and mythical wars invented for this armor
      and the use of so-called tactics. knights. Come to your senses "///

      A conspiracy of historians, archaeologists, writers? paid like everything else
      secret world government? - we are in the know, do not succumb to provocations angry
      1. freerider
        freerider 30 June 2014 19: 40
        laughing ZOG does not sleep, ZOG does not sleep, watches armor
    2. uwzek
      uwzek 30 June 2014 21: 03
      It was from one piece that they were forged, incl. helmets. And the remake is made of tin, not rolled sheet. Therefore, real armor is always "uneven", it is by no means combat damage, but traces of production. All beautiful armor is carnival (ballroom) outfits or furniture for castles from the 17th and later centuries ...
      1. sivuch
        sivuch 1 July 2014 08: 40
        The commentary refers to the VIII-X century. Then they really did not know how to forge helmets from one piece of iron. Even the helmet of the Duke Heinrich Leo, who had no financial difficulties, was riveted from several pieces on a leather basis
      2. abrakadabre
        abrakadabre 1 July 2014 10: 40
        It was from one piece that they were forged, incl. helmets. And the remake is made of tin, not rolled sheet. Therefore, real armor is always "uneven", it is by no means combat damage, but traces of production. All beautiful armor is carnival (ballroom) outfits or furniture for castles from the 17th and later centuries ...
        How many armor have you personally forged, with your own hands, to say that? Own hand ... is, not an excuse. Everything is done and forged smoothly and beautifully. If you wish. Verified personally. Historical combat armor has enough combat damage and repair marks. Here is a link to photographs of a 1440 Bicocket helmet from Fürstenwalde (now kept in the Berlin Museum) with traces of combat damage and repairs [media = http: // S = 4f9cab0880ff00266271a71f4d39e58b
        & showtopic = 26491 # entry296478]. It clearly shows how the helmet dome is broken. Despite the fact that the thickness of the metal dome is 4 mm.
    3. abrakadabre
      abrakadabre 1 July 2014 10: 22
      Full crap !!! ... We are specifically bred - so we will not succumb to this crap.
      And you will be treated ...
      Although... wassat
    4. P. Yaroslav
      P. Yaroslav 25 September 2014 01: 05
      Quote: Archikah
      Full crap !!! Look - a lot of new revealing programs - there are no such technologies in the middle (so-called) centuries

      Dear, what about the jewelry that has not been repeated yet? The surviving armor? And about the remakes, I am a reenactor myself, one of the requirements for reconstructed armor and weapons is compliance with historical materials. Before you start making armor, you have to shovel through an impressive amount of literature, go to museums, take part in excavations ... And if archaeological and chronicle materials are considered a reliable source, then "revelatory transmissions" do not apply to those! And in order to "look wider at the past of our country", it must be studied not by watching dubious TV programs!
  13. 77bob1973
    77bob1973 30 June 2014 15: 51
    I would like to clarify, about the visor photo 13, such as "hundskugel" (dog's snout), this visor appeared after the Crusades because in the hot conditions of the desert, it was impossible to breathe in an ordinary helmet, so the volume of the helmet was increased in this way.
    1. abrakadabre
      abrakadabre 1 July 2014 10: 48
      You're not right. Hundskugel appeared much later than the main crusades. And its appearance is not associated with heat, but with a completely different one. In the desert it is hot and difficult to breathe in absolutely any closed helmet.
      The same form of the visor allows during a lance collision to transfer the enemy’s spear strike relatively sideways relatively painlessly. So that the spear point does not slip into the slot for the eyes, these slots are made convex, with chippers. At the bottom of the visor there are another slits, similar to the mouth. But this is also a cut for the eyes, and not for breathing. So that you can look at your feet.
      1. 78bor1973
        78bor1973 1 July 2014 18: 29
        Open Behaim, at least for yourself.
        1. abrakadabre
          abrakadabre 3 July 2014 10: 11
          Open Behaim, at least for yourself.
          I read Behaima and very carefully. And not only him. And besides, in my free time I also make armor in the forge. And also from time to time I wear armor on myself. And I can experience for myself where it’s hot there, how you breathe, how to wear, wear, and wear comfortably, and how not.
          So your sarcasm speaks against you.
  14. Raphael_83
    Raphael_83 30 June 2014 16: 15
    A little messy, all in a heap and on top, but the cosplay is beautiful (although not without jambs, but okay, we will consider it an artistic assumption)!
    At one time in the journal "LKI" a series of articles on helmets, armor and armor was published, written in a good popular science language, authored by Alexander Dominguez; That material, in general, due to thematic breakdown, turned out in more detail and more complete.
    But the author still thanks for the trouble.
    From SW. hi
    A hundskugel-type helmet - if I'm not mistaken - was shown in Jerzy Hoffman's film "The Crusaders" (based on the novel by G. Sienkiewicz) at the moments of the crusader's duel with Zbyszko and in the Battle of Grunwald. And there is also a reference to the quality of Milanese armor in the novel.
  15. Aaron Zawi
    Aaron Zawi 30 June 2014 17: 32
    I read the article with pleasure. The site is still military-historical.
  16. freerider
    freerider 30 June 2014 19: 41
    good thanks to the author, it was very interesting to read and see
  17. abrakadabre
    abrakadabre 1 July 2014 11: 56
    Continued, of course, it would be interesting
    Ok, let's continue:
    Photo 8 (knight in pothelm)... About a miracle! Where did surco go ?! The knight was robbed? And why chain mail on the "naked body"? Where is the thick underguard that turns the knight into a tumbler. She's not so slim with gambeson. But having received a club on the spine or on the side, it is not so painful and the ribs to the spine are not imprinted.
    Photo 9 (such as the king of England). On the head is not a pothelm, but a cape without borders - a cheap helmet of infantry and servants. The armor peeps out - generally a bit goblin, without historical analogues. Tabard - already agreed above that it is SYURCO.
    Photo 10 (tytsar in a "potted" helmet). When a topfhelm helmet (big helmet or top helmet) is written, in principle, correctly.
    Disadvantages: there is no gambeson, there are no chain mittens with a hauberk, there is no surprise, the shape of the shield is about 100 years later, the location of the rivets on the shield does not match the location of the straps to hold the shield and hang it on the shoulder.
    Photo 12 (knight with aylets). Passable. Wrong:
    - open hands
    - the sword is incorrectly hung on the belt (here a whole separate topic over the centuries),
    - The alets are small, thin and too downward to protect the shoulder. And it should protect from an oblique chopping blow from top to bottom in the shoulder and base of the neck.
    - During and after the Crusades, a bast was popular - a piece of fabric over the helmet. Like Surco, it was originally used not as a decoration, but to protect it from overheating in the hot Palestinian sun. It was held by a fabric roller on the top conical part of topfhelm. He is not here.
    Photo 13 (Zerwerler)... Everything is correct. But for understanding the evolution of armor (the purpose of the article) it is not indicated that gradually it began to "grow" downward and turned into a bascinet. Due to the overall magnification, the topfhelm helmet has also increased to accommodate it all inside. The face plates began to protrude strongly forward with a wedge, to slip off the blow of the spear. Gradually, this multi-layered structure on the head became too burdensome. And in spite of the excellent protection, they refused from topfhelm in battle, adding a visor to the bascinet. TOPfhelm, as an ultra-reliable helmet, remained only for tournaments. The combat history of the pot helmet was still quite long - about 150-200 years.
    The bascinet, however, as soon as it became the only main helmet, it immediately began to grow heavier and sharpen upward in order to better withstand blows from above.
    In general, the optimal weight of a knight's helmet is 3-5 kg. A lighter helmet, even if it is super durable, poorly absorbs the blow and transfers it to the vertebrae. A more massive helmet - a large burden on the neck and fatigue.
    Photo 14 (with the "horned" helmet). The disadvantages are almost the same:
    - open hands
    - no gambeson
    - wrong knight belt and sword pendant
    - later shield
    - no shoulders - aylets
    - no mark on the helmet (uncritical for a decorated helmet)
    At this time, primitive knee pads and elbow pieces begin to appear, in the form of discs and bowls tied to stockings.
    It is worth noting that all the figures (horns especially) on the helmets were for decoration only and had low strength. Strong horns can be made, but it will be an ideal trap for directing all the power of blows from top to bottom in the neck and spine. They tried to divert the blows to slipping as much as possible. This was true for armor until the 17th century.
  18. aetaranov
    aetaranov 1 July 2014 15: 19
    If we consider the "medieval" armor proposed by the author of the article, then they do not correspond to the time of their creation. It brings to mind that these are mainly remakes that could have been created with a sufficiently high level of metal processing technology
    1. abrakadabre
      abrakadabre 3 July 2014 10: 23
      If we consider the "medieval" armor proposed by the author of the article, then they do not correspond to the time of their creation.
      Nobody will allow you to dress and experience real museum exhibits now. Especially such revolutions, as in the photo. Naturally, all these are modern replicas.
      It is suggested that these are mainly remodels that could be created with a fairly high level of metal processing technology
      But this does not mean that all these remarks are made from the bulldozer. In a serious reconstruction, they very strictly approach the authenticity of the finished product. As for metal processing ...
      If you do not know how to work with metal, then better be silent. All this is beautifully made by hand. It is only necessary that there is a desire to learn and hands grow from the right place.
      The main deviation from medieval technology is the use of finished sheet metal, and does not melt on its own. But this only reduces production time, and does not exclude such an opportunity. No more. Smelting kritzas from ore and subsequent forging is not something top-secret and lost. It's just a long and dreary. And significantly increases the cost of manufacturing. Therefore, a full cycle is used (from ore to the finished product) only in exceptional cases. Like shooting a documentary or special requests from museums. And that’s all.
  19. Temer
    Temer 6 July 2014 12: 22
    It seems to me, or did the author confuse something with the brigantine? And in the photo seems Roman armor?
    1. abrakadabre
      abrakadabre 7 July 2014 08: 46
      It seems to me, or did the author confuse something with the brigantine? And in the photo seems Roman armor?
      No, the author did not confuse this. This is the early brigant armor of the late 13th-14th centuries. The ancient Roman lorica of the segmentate looks completely different.
  20. el.krokodil
    el.krokodil 13 July 2014 17: 36
    heh ... criticize masters a lot ... but the fact that the author picked up and laid out, but the time spent seems to be a lot not taken into account, make the material better ... criticize .... weakly ??? ... then ... envy silently or do better ...
  21. pahanches
    pahanches 14 July 2014 12: 35
    Nice article, thanks,
  22. Witness 45
    Witness 45 24 May 2016 23: 41
    Despite the criticism of some users of the site, in general, the article is useful for a general idea of ​​the development of personal protective equipment in the Middle Ages, thanks to the author.
  23. Gerklim
    Gerklim 14 October 2018 20: 06
    I liked the article.