What kind of protection did the knights have? Gothic armor. Dressing a knight for battle. Critical areas on the body
Renowned Sheid reenactor speaks fondly of this practical outfit
The ceremonial doublet looks more like civilian clothing
Gambeson(from the French gambeson or gambaison), also known as the usual Russian “steganka”, is armor clothing made from several layers of dense fabric. This term has quite a few meanings, but for convenience we will stick to the most traditional ones. IN in a broad sense, a gambeson is an underarmor or overarmor, and more narrowly, a quilted/padded/leather jacket worn under or instead of armor.
There are several types of such clothing:
Aketon- This is a jacket made of several layers of cotton or linen fabric, quilted together. Sometimes leather cords were sewn onto it to secure armor. Doublet- a leather or fabric jacket, more similar to civilian clothing than to an element of a military uniform. Purpoin- fabric underarmor with a narrowed waist and inflated chest. Jacques- a multi-layer fabric jacket, which was used as independent armor for infantry.
Gray gambeson - army reliability and brevity
What was the advantage of such armor, you ask? At first glance, it loses even to single-layer chain mail, because linen and cotton are easily cut even with ordinary scissors. However, not everything is so simple: a thick, 5-6-layer gambeson not only perfectly retained heat and served as a guarantee that the armor fit snugly to the body. It itself was another layer of additional protection, which often played an important role, stopping the tips of swords and spears a millimeter from the body. Judge for yourself: such dense fabric perfectly absorbs the force of an impact, so it was not at all easy to pierce even a soldier dressed in jackets with a knife or pike.
Another significant plus is mobility. Due to the fact that a fabric or (less often) leather jacket almost did not hinder movement, the fighter often received a huge advantage in speed over an opponent clad in armor. As you know, speed and maneuverability were one of the main factors ensuring survival in battle. Chain mail was often worn over a gambeson: it weighed little, did not rub the body, and besides, the fabric absorbed moisture and rust - the number one scourge of all chain mail - did not cover the metal so quickly.
The gambeson was also worn on armor. This, firstly, protected them from direct sunlight and did not allow the metal to heat up so quickly, and secondly, it protected the expensive armor from scratches and even more serious damage. After all, a torn gambeson could simply be stitched up, while field repairs to chain mail or lamellas often turned out to be a big problem.
And finally, gambesons were stylish. Often representatives of military professions wore them just like that, or they wore “weekend” versions of the jackets, covered with patterns and painted in bright colors. Since the very design of this clothing made it possible to modify it in every possible way - cutting off the sleeves or making them detachable, sewing on cords, buttons and fasteners, making slits in the front and back, etc., the gambeson can rightfully be considered part of a medieval costume. Popular Mechanics hopes that the gambeson will one day come back into fashion as a practical and reliable option for fall and winter clothing.
German armor of the 16th century for knight and horse
The field of weapons and armor is surrounded by romantic legends, monstrous myths and widespread misconceptions. Their sources are often a lack of knowledge and experience of communicating with real things and their history. Most of these ideas are absurd and based on nothing.
Perhaps one of the most notorious examples is the belief that “knights had to be mounted by crane,” which is as absurd as it is a common belief, even among historians. In other cases, certain technical details that defy obvious description have become the object of passionate and fantastically inventive attempts to explain their purpose. Among them, the first place seems to be occupied by the spear rest, protruding from the right side of the breastplate.
The following text will attempt to correct the most popular misconceptions and answer questions often asked during museum tours.
1. Only knights wore armor
This erroneous but common belief probably stems from the romantic idea of the “knight in shining armor,” a picture that itself gives rise to further misconceptions. First, knights rarely fought alone, and armies in the Middle Ages and Renaissance did not consist entirely of mounted knights. Although the knights were the dominant force in most of these armies, they were invariably - and increasingly over time - supported (and countered) by foot soldiers such as archers, pikemen, crossbowmen and firearms soldiers. On campaign, the knight depended on a group of servants, squires and soldiers to provide armed support and look after his horses, armor and other equipment, not to mention the peasants and artisans who made a feudal society with a warrior class possible.Armor for a knight's duel, late 16th century
Secondly, it is wrong to assume that everyone noble man was a knight. Knights were not born, knights were created by other knights, feudal lords or sometimes priests. And under certain conditions, people of non-noble birth could be knighted (although knights were often considered the lowest rank of nobility). Sometimes mercenaries or civilians who fought as ordinary soldiers could be knighted for demonstrating extreme bravery and courage, and later knighthood could be purchased for money.
In other words, the ability to wear armor and fight in armor was not the prerogative of knights. Infantry from mercenaries, or groups of soldiers consisting of peasants, or burghers (city dwellers) also took part in armed conflicts and accordingly protected themselves with armor of varying quality and size. Indeed, burghers (of a certain age and above a certain income or wealth) in most medieval and Renaissance cities were required - often by law and decrees - to purchase and store their own weapons and armor. Usually it was not full armor, but at least it included a helmet, body protection in the form of chain mail, fabric armor or a breastplate, and a weapon - a spear, pike, bow or crossbow.
Indian chain mail of the 17th century
In times of war, these militias were required to defend the city or perform military duties for feudal lords or allied cities. During the 15th century, when some rich and influential cities began to become more independent and self-reliant, even the burghers organized their own tournaments, in which they, of course, wore armor.
Because of this, not every piece of armor has ever been worn by a knight, and not every person depicted wearing armor will be a knight. It would be more correct to call a man in armor a soldier or a man in armor.
2. Women in the old days never wore armor or fought in battles.
In most historical periods, there is evidence of women taking part in armed conflicts. There is evidence of noble ladies turning into military commanders, such as Joan of Penthièvre (1319-1384). There are rare references to women from lower society who stood “under the gun.” There are records of women fighting in armor, but no contemporary illustrations of this topic survive. Joan of Arc (1412-1431) will perhaps be the most famous example of a female warrior, and there is evidence that she wore armor commissioned for her by King Charles VII of France. But only one small illustration of her, made during her lifetime, has reached us, in which she is depicted with a sword and banner, but without armor. The fact that contemporaries perceived a woman commanding an army, or even wearing armor, as something worthy of recording suggests that this spectacle was the exception and not the rule.3. The armor was so expensive that only princes and rich nobles could afford it.
This idea may have arisen from the fact that most of the armor displayed in museums is high quality equipment, while most of the simpler armor that belonged to the common people and the lowest of the nobles was hidden in storage or lost through the centuries.Indeed, with the exception of obtaining armor on the battlefield or winning a tournament, acquiring armor was a very expensive undertaking. However, since there were differences in the quality of armor, there must have been differences in their cost. Armor of low and medium quality, available to burghers, mercenaries and the lower nobility, could be bought ready-made at markets, fairs and city stores. On the other hand, there was also high-class armor, made to order in imperial or royal workshops and from famous German and Italian gunsmiths.
Armor of King Henry VIII of England, 16th century
Although we have extant examples of the cost of armor, weapons and equipment in some of the historical periods, it is very difficult to translate historical costs into modern equivalents. It is clear, however, that the cost of armor ranged from inexpensive, low-quality or obsolete, second-hand items available to citizens and mercenaries, to the cost of the full armor of an English knight, which in 1374 was estimated at £16. This was analogous to the cost of 5-8 years of rent for a merchant's house in London, or three years of salary for an experienced worker, and the price of a helmet alone (with a visor, and probably with an aventail) was more than the price of a cow.
At the higher end of the scale one finds examples such as a large suit of armor (a basic suit that, with the help of additional items and plates, could be adapted for various uses, both on the battlefield and in tournament), commissioned in 1546 by the German king (later - emperor) for his son. Upon completion of this order, for a year of work, the court armorer Jörg Seusenhofer from Innsbruck received an incredible sum of 1200 gold moment, equivalent to twelve annual salaries of a senior court official.
4. The armor is extremely heavy and greatly limits the mobility of its wearer.
A full set of combat armor usually weighs between 20 and 25 kg, and a helmet between 2 and 4 kg. This is less than a firefighter's full oxygen outfit, or what modern soldiers have had to carry into battle since the nineteenth century. Moreover, while modern equipment usually hangs from the shoulders or waist, the weight of well-fitted armor is distributed over the entire body. It was not until the 17th century that the weight of combat armor was greatly increased to make it bulletproof due to the improved accuracy of firearms. At the same time, full armor became increasingly rare, and only important parts of the body: the head, torso and arms were protected by metal plates.
The opinion that wearing armor (which took shape by 1420-30) greatly reduced the mobility of a warrior is not true. The armor equipment was made from separate elements for each limb. Each element consisted of metal plates and plates connected by movable rivets and leather straps, which allowed any movement without restrictions imposed by the rigidity of the material. The widespread idea that a man in armor could barely move, and having fallen to the ground, could not get up, has no basis. On the contrary, historical sources tell about the famous French knight Jean II le Mengre, nicknamed Boucicault (1366-1421), who, dressed in full armor, could, by grabbing the steps of a ladder from below, on the reverse side, climb it using only hands Moreover, there are several illustrations from the Middle Ages and the Renaissance in which soldiers, squires or knights, in full armor, mount horses without assistance or any equipment, without ladders or cranes. Modern experiments with real armor of the 15th and 16th centuries and with their exact copies have shown that even an untrained person in properly selected armor can climb on and off a horse, sit or lie, and then get up from the ground, run and move his limbs freely and without discomfort.
In some exceptional cases, the armor was very heavy or held the wearer in almost one position, for example, in some types of tournaments. Tournament armor was made for special occasions and was worn for a limited time. A man in armor would then climb onto the horse with the help of a squire or a small ladder, and the last elements of the armor could be put on him after he was settled in the saddle.
5. Knights had to be placed in the saddle using cranes
This idea appears to have originated in the late nineteenth century as a joke. It entered popular fiction in subsequent decades, and the picture was eventually immortalized in 1944, when Laurence Olivier used it in his film King Henry V, despite the protests of historical advisers, including such eminent authorities as James Mann, chief armorer of the Tower of London.As stated above, most armor was light and flexible enough not to bind the wearer. Most people wearing armor should have no problem being able to place one foot in the stirrup and saddle a horse without assistance. A stool or the help of a squire would speed up this process. But the crane was absolutely unnecessary.
6. How did people in armor go to the toilet?
One of the most popular questions, especially among young museum visitors, unfortunately, does not have an exact answer. When the man in armor was not busy in battle, he did the same things that people do today. He would go to the toilet (which in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance was called a privy or latrine) or other secluded place, remove the appropriate pieces of armor and clothing and surrender to the call of nature. On the battlefield, everything should have happened differently. In this case, the answer is unknown to us. However, it must be taken into account that the desire to go to the toilet in the heat of battle was most likely low on the list of priorities.7. The military salute came from the gesture of raising the visor
Some believe that the military salute originated during the Roman Republic, when contract killing was the order of the day, and citizens were required to raise their right hand when approaching officials to show that they were not carrying a concealed weapon. The more common belief is that the modern military salute came from men in armor raising the visors of their helmets before saluting their comrades or lords. This gesture allowed recognition of the person, and also made him vulnerable and at the same time demonstrated that his right hand (which usually held a sword) did not have a weapon. These were all signs of trust and good intentions.Although these theories sound intriguing and romantic, there is virtually no evidence that the military salute originated from them. As for Roman customs, it would be virtually impossible to prove that they lasted fifteen centuries (or were restored during the Renaissance) and led to the modern military salute. There is also no direct confirmation of the visor theory, although it is more recent. Most military helmets after 1600 were no longer equipped with visors, and after 1700 helmets were rarely worn on European battlefields.
One way or another, military records in 17th century England reflect that “the formal act of greeting was the removal of headdress.” By 1745, the English regiment of the Coldstream Guards appears to have perfected this procedure, making it "putting the hand to the head and bowing upon meeting."
Coldstream Guards
Other English regiments adopted this practice, and it may have spread to America (during the Revolutionary War) and continental Europe (during the Napoleonic Wars). So the truth may lie somewhere in the middle, in which the military salute evolved from a gesture of respect and politeness, paralleling the civilian habit of raising or touching the brim of a hat, perhaps with a combination of the warrior custom of showing the unarmed right hand.
8. Chain mail - “chain mail” or “mail”?
German chain mail of the 15th century
A protective garment consisting of interlocking rings should properly be called “mail” or “mail armor” in English. The common term "chain mail" is a modern pleonasm (a linguistic error meaning using more words than necessary to describe it). In our case, “chain” and “mail” describe an object consisting of a sequence of intertwined rings. That is, the term “chain mail” simply repeats the same thing twice.
As with other misconceptions, the roots of this error should be sought in the 19th century. When those who began to study armor looked at medieval paintings, they noticed what seemed to them to be many different types of armor: rings, chains, ring bracelets, scale armor, small plates, etc. As a result, all ancient armor was called “mail”, distinguishing it only by appearance, where the terms “ring-mail”, “chain-mail”, “banded mail”, “scale-mail”, “plate-mail” came from. Today, it is generally accepted that most of these different images were just different attempts by artists to correctly depict the surface of a type of armor that is difficult to capture in painting and sculpture. Instead of depicting individual rings, these details were stylized using dots, strokes, squiggles, circles and other things, which led to errors.
9. How long did it take to make a full suit of armor?
It is difficult to answer this question unambiguously for many reasons. First, there is no surviving evidence that can paint a complete picture for any of the periods. From around the 15th century, scattered examples survive of how armor was ordered, how long orders took, and how much various pieces of armor cost. Secondly, a complete armor could consist of parts made by various armorers with a narrow specialization. Armor parts could be sold unfinished and then customized locally for a certain amount. Finally, the matter was complicated by regional and national differences.In the case of German gunsmiths, most workshops were controlled by strict guild rules that limited the number of apprentices, thereby controlling the number of items that one master and his workshop could produce. In Italy, on the other hand, there were no such restrictions and workshops could grow, which improved the speed of creation and the quantity of products.
In any case, it is worth keeping in mind that the production of armor and weapons flourished during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. Gunsmiths, manufacturers of blades, pistols, bows, crossbows and arrows were present in any large city. As now, their market depended on supply and demand, and efficient operation was a key parameter for success. The common myth that simple chain mail took several years to make is nonsense (but it cannot be denied that chain mail was very labor intensive to make).
The answer to this question is simple and elusive at the same time. The production time for armor depended on several factors, for example, the customer, who was entrusted with the production of the order (the number of people in production and the workshop busy with other orders), and the quality of the armor. Two famous examples will serve to illustrate this.
In 1473, Martin Rondel, possibly an Italian gunsmith working in Bruges, who called himself "armourer to my bastard of Burgundy", wrote to his English client, Sir John Paston. The armorer informed Sir John that he could fulfill the request for the production of armor as soon as the English knight informed him which parts of the costume he needed, in what form, and the time frame by which the armor should be completed (unfortunately, the armorer did not indicate possible deadlines ). In the court workshops, the production of armor for high-ranking persons appears to have taken more time. The court armorer Jörg Seusenhofer (with a small number of assistants) apparently took more than a year to make the armor for the horse and the large armor for the king. The order was made in November 1546 by King (later Emperor) Ferdinand I (1503-1564) for himself and his son, and was completed in November 1547. We do not know whether Seusenhofer and his workshop were working on other orders at this time.
10. Armor details - spear support and codpiece
Two parts of the armor most spark the public's imagination: one is described as "that thing sticking out to the right of the chest," and the second is referred to, after muffled giggles, as "that thing between the legs." In weapon and armor terminology they are known as the spear rest and codpiece.
The spear support appeared shortly after the appearance of the solid chest plate at the end of the 14th century and existed until the armor itself began to disappear. Contrary to the literal meaning English term“lance rest” (spear stand), its main purpose was not to bear the weight of the spear. It was actually used for two purposes, which are better described by the French term "arrêt de cuirasse" (spear restraint). It allowed the mounted warrior to hold the spear firmly under his right hand, preventing it from slipping back. This allowed the spear to be stabilized and balanced, which improved aim. In addition, the combined weight and speed of the horse and rider were transferred to the tip of the spear, which made this weapon very formidable. If the target was hit, the spear rest also acted as a shock absorber, preventing the spear from "firing" backwards, and distributing the blow across the chest plate over the entire upper torso, rather than just the right arm, wrist, elbow and shoulder. It is worth noting that on most battle armor the spear support could be folded upward so as not to interfere with the mobility of the sword hand after the warrior got rid of the spear.
The history of the armored codpiece is closely connected with its counterpart in the civilian men's suit. From the middle of the 14th century, the upper part of men's clothing began to be shortened so much that it no longer covered the crotch. In those days, pants had not yet been invented, and men wore leggings clipped to their underwear or a belt, with the crotch hidden behind a hollow attached to the inside of the top edge of each leg of the leggings. At the beginning of the 16th century, this floor began to be filled and visually enlarged. And the codpiece remained a part of the men's suit until the end of the 16th century. On armor, the codpiece as a separate plate protecting the genitals appeared in the second decade of the 16th century, and remained relevant until the 1570s. It had a thick lining on the inside and was joined to the armor at the center of the bottom edge of the shirt. Early varieties were bowl-shaped, but due to the influence of civilian costume it gradually transformed into an upward-pointing shape. It was not usually used when riding a horse, because, firstly, it would get in the way, and secondly, the armored front of the combat saddle provided sufficient protection for the crotch. The codpiece was therefore commonly used for armor intended for fighting on foot, both in war and in tournaments, and while it had some value for protection, it was used just as much for fashion.
11. Did the Vikings wear horns on their helmets?
One of the most enduring and popular images of the medieval warrior is that of the Viking, who can be instantly recognized by his helmet equipped with a pair of horns. However, there is very little evidence that the Vikings ever used horns to decorate their helmets.
The earliest example of a helmet being decorated with a pair of stylized horns comes from a small group of Celtic Bronze Age helmets found in Scandinavia and what is now France, Germany and Austria. These decorations were made of bronze and could take the form of two horns or a flat triangular profile. These helmets date back to the 12th or 11th century BC. Two thousand years later, from 1250, pairs of horns gained popularity in Europe and remained one of the most commonly used heraldic symbols on helmets for battle and tournaments in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. It is easy to see that the two periods indicated do not coincide with what is usually associated with the Scandinavian raids that took place from the end of the 8th to the end of the 11th centuries.
Viking helmets were usually conical or hemispherical, sometimes made from a single piece of metal, sometimes from segments held together by strips (Spangenhelm).
Many of these helmets were also equipped with face protection. The latter could take the form of a metal bar covering the nose, or a face sheet consisting of protection for the nose and two eyes, as well as the upper part of the cheekbones, or protection for the entire face and neck in the form of chain mail.
12. Armor became unnecessary due to the advent of firearms
In general, the gradual decline of armor was not due to the advent of firearms as such, but due to their constant improvement. Since the first firearms appeared in Europe already in the third decade of the 14th century, and the gradual decline of armor was not noted until the second half of the 17th century, armor and firearms existed together for more than 300 years. During the 16th century, attempts were made to make bulletproof armor, either by reinforcing the steel, thickening the armor, or adding individual reinforcements on top of the regular armor. 
German arquebus from the late 14th century
Finally, it is worth noting that the armor never completely disappeared. The widespread use of helmets by modern soldiers and police proves that armor, although it has changed materials and may have lost some of its importance, is still a necessary part of military equipment throughout the world. Additionally, torso protection continued to exist in the form of experimental chest plates during the American Civil War, airman's plates in World War II, and bulletproof vests of modern times.
13. The size of the armor suggests that people were smaller in the Middle Ages and Renaissance
Medical and anthropological research shows that the average height of men and women has gradually increased over the centuries, a process that has accelerated over the past 150 years due to improvements in diet and public health. Most of the armor that has come down to us from the 15th and 16th centuries confirms these discoveries.However, when drawing such general conclusions based on armor, many factors must be considered. Firstly, is the armor complete and uniform, that is, did all the parts fit together, thereby giving the correct impression of its original owner? Secondly, even high-quality armor made to order for a specific person can give an approximate idea of his height, with an error of up to 2-5 cm, since the overlap of the protection of the lower abdomen (shirt and thigh guards) and hips (gaiters) can only be estimated approximately.
Armor came in all shapes and sizes, including armor for children and youth (as opposed to adults), and there was even armor for dwarfs and giants (often found in European courts as "curiosities"). In addition, other factors must be taken into account, such as the difference in average height between northern and southern Europeans, or simply the fact that people have always been unusually tall or unusually tall. short people, when compared with their average contemporaries.
Notable exceptions include examples from kings, such as Francis I, King of France (1515-47), or Henry VIII, King of England (1509-47). The latter’s height was 180 cm, as evidenced by contemporaries has been preserved, and which can be verified thanks to half a dozen of his armor that have come down to us.
Armor of the German Duke Johann Wilhelm, 16th century
Armor of Emperor Ferdinand I, 16th century
Visitors to the Metropolitan Museum can compare German armor dating from 1530 with the battle armor of Emperor Ferdinand I (1503-1564), dating from 1555. Both armors are incomplete and the dimensions of their wearers are only approximate, but the difference in size is still striking. The height of the owner of the first armor was apparently about 193 cm, and the chest circumference was 137 cm, while the height of Emperor Ferdinand did not exceed 170 cm.
14. Men's clothing is wrapped from left to right, because this is how the armor was originally closed.
The theory behind this claim is that some early forms of armor (plate protection and brigantine of the 14th and 15th centuries, armet - a closed cavalry helmet of the 15th-16th centuries, cuirass of the 16th century) were designed so that the left side overlapped the right, so as not to allow the blow of the enemy's sword to penetrate. Since most people are right-handed, most of the penetrating blows would have come from the left, and, if successful, should have slid across the armor through the scent and to the right.The theory is compelling, but there is little evidence that modern clothing was directly influenced by such armor. Additionally, while the armor protection theory may be true for the Middle Ages and Renaissance, some examples of helmets and body armor wrap the other way.
Misconceptions and questions about cutting weapons
Sword, early 15th century
Dagger, 16th century
As with armor, not everyone who carried a sword was a knight. But the idea that the sword is the prerogative of knights is not so far from the truth. Customs or even the right to carry a sword varied depending on time, place and laws.
In medieval Europe, swords were the main weapon of knights and horsemen. In times of peace, carry swords in in public places Only persons of noble birth were eligible. Since in most places swords were perceived as “weapons of war” (as opposed to the same daggers), peasants and burghers who did not belong to the warrior class of medieval society could not carry swords. An exception to the rule was made for travelers (citizens, traders and pilgrims) due to the dangers of traveling by land and sea. Within the walls of most medieval cities, the carrying of swords was forbidden to everyone - sometimes even nobles - at least in times of peace. Standard rules of trade, often present at churches or town halls, often also included examples of the permitted length of daggers or swords that could be carried without hindrance within city walls.
Without a doubt, it was these rules that gave rise to the idea that the sword is the exclusive symbol of the warrior and knight. But due to social changes and new fighting techniques that appeared in the 15th and 16th centuries, it became possible and acceptable for citizens and knights to carry lighter and thinner descendants of swords - swords, as an everyday weapon for self-defense in public places. And until the beginning of the 19th century, swords and small swords became an indispensable attribute of the clothing of the European gentleman.
It is widely believed that swords of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance were simple tools brute force, very heavy, and as a result, impossible to handle for the “ordinary person”, that is, a very ineffective weapon. The reasons for these accusations are easy to understand. Due to the rarity of surviving examples, few people held a real sword in their hands from the Middle Ages or the Renaissance. Most of these swords were obtained from excavations. Their rusty current appearance can easily give the impression of roughness - like a burnt-out car that has lost all signs of its former grandeur and complexity.
Most real swords from the Middle Ages and Renaissance tell a different story. A one-handed sword usually weighed 1-2 kg, and even a large two-handed "war sword" of the 14th-16th centuries rarely weighed more than 4.5 kg. The weight of the blade was balanced by the weight of the hilt, and the swords were light, complex and sometimes very beautifully decorated. Documents and paintings show that such a sword, in skilled hands, could be used with terrible effectiveness, from cutting off limbs to piercing armor.
Turkish saber with scabbard, 18th century
Japanese katana and wakizashi short sword, 15th century
Swords and some daggers, both European and Asian, and weapons from the Islamic world, often have one or more grooves on the blade. Misconceptions about their purpose led to the emergence of the term “bloodstock.” It is claimed that these grooves speed up the flow of blood from an opponent's wound, thus enhancing the effect of the wound, or that they make it easier to remove the blade from the wound, allowing the weapon to be easily drawn without twisting. While such theories may be entertaining, the actual purpose of this groove, called the fuller, is simply to lighten the blade, reducing its mass without weakening the blade or compromising its flexibility.
On some European blades, in particular swords, rapiers and daggers, as well as on some fighting poles, these grooves have a complex shape and perforation. The same perforations are present on cutting weapons from India and the Middle East. Based on scanty documentary evidence, it is believed that this perforation must have contained poison so that the blow was guaranteed to lead to the death of the enemy. This misconception has led to weapons with such perforations being called “assassin weapons.”
While references to Indian poison-bladed weapons exist, and similar rare cases may have occurred in Renaissance Europe, the true purpose of this perforation is not at all so sensational. Firstly, perforation eliminated some material and made the blade lighter. Secondly, it was often made in elaborate and intricate patterns, and served as both a demonstration of the blacksmith's skill and as decoration. To prove it, it is only necessary to point out that most of these perforations are usually located near the handle (hilt) of the weapon, and not on the other side, as would have to be done in the case of poison.
Chapter 5 HOW THE ARMOR WEARED
Now, after we took a look at how knightly armor was made in medieval Europe and how this equipment developed, we need to get acquainted with how it was worn. To make this clear, let's go back to where we started. Let us return to our old friend Kunz Schott von Hellingen, Burgrave of Rothenburg, and see how five hundred years ago he put on beautiful armor, which even today looks the same as the day he last took it off.
The first thing that attracts the eye in Schott's chambers in Rothenburg Castle is a long table mounted on trestles, on which sparkling pieces of armor are laid out along with a sword, spurs and a short cape (tabard), decorated with Schott's coat of arms - a four-field shield in silver and red colors . Let us imagine that Schott himself enters the room, and the small, bare-walled room suddenly comes alive in the presence of this energetic personality. Schott is about thirty-five years old, a powerfully built, tall man; his tough, strong face produces a rather repulsive impression, despite the open and bold look of his mocking and cheerful eyes. The look of your hair can be captivating: it is long and falls freely over your shoulders. Upon entering, he tucks them under his underarmor cap, which looks like a hair net. In 1500, it was fashionable to wear long hair, and this was dictated not only by fashion, but also by purely practical considerations: the hair, collected under a cap, forms a thick and elastic cushion, an excellent means of absorbing the energy of impacts in addition to the quilted lining of the helmet. Imagine now a young man, one of his servants - squires, without whose help Schott would not have been able to put on armor. The squire's duties include cleaning and lubricating the armor and maintaining it in working condition.
The clothes that Schott is wearing indicate that he is ready to don the combat harness. He wears a long-sleeved shirt that reaches to his hips, long, tight pants, and sturdy leather boots. Pieces of chain mail are sewn into the sleeves of the shirt and at the elbows, and the trousers at the knees are wrapped in woolen fabric. In addition, he is wearing chain mail breeches, similar to modern swim briefs. Looking at these clothes, you involuntarily recall the description of the 15th century “How a man schall be armyd at his ese when he schal fight on foote” (“How to dress a man in armor so that he can fight comfortably on foot”). The military equipment described is equally suitable for equipping a foot warrior and for fighting on horseback. The mentioned treatise examines armor intended for peaceful fights, friendly sparring on sites, or chanclos, which were a fenced space reminiscent of a boxing ring, where opponents fought on foot. It is very interesting to look at this authentic description of the armor, which I will give in a translation similar to the original version; it is very easy to understand, and I would be sorry to convey it in modern writing. Here is part of the treatise, which describes the clothes in which Schott is dressed: “He should not wear a shirt, but a doublet made of strong linen with a silk lining with numerous holes. The doublet must be of strong weave... and stripes of chain mail must be sewn to the doublet at the sleeves and at the armholes underneath. Thick waxed cords should be woven from thin, strong threads, such as are used to make crossbow strings. They must be carefully separated and woven properly. You should also wax them, and then they will not split or tear. Also a pair of quilted trousers and a couple of short pieces of fine wool to wrap around his knees under his greaves so that they would not rub the skin. Also a pair of good quality and thick cords..."
What follows is a rather mysterious and dark instruction on how “three thin cords should be firmly tied to the sole of the shoe...”. Moreover, “to the middle of the foot” it should have been wrapped with a cord like football boots, that is, around the foot and around the ankles. Thick waxed cords were used to fasten the doublet to the shoulders and the trousers to the hips. These garters were used to secure the upper bracers to the shoulders and to secure the legguard.
Squire Schott takes the right greave from the table. It is not fastened, so the squire easily opens it on its hinges, and while the master puts on the legguards, the squire places the greaves on Schott's shins and fastens them on the inside of the shins. The leggings are secured with small spring pins - one at the top, the other at the bottom. Locking the leggings automatically places the knee pads in place over the wool that is wrapped around the knees, so that the knee pads do not rub the skin when bending the legs at the knee joint. The squire can only tighten the cords that secure the knee pads to in the right places. While the squire is busy with the kneepads, his knight places the legguards on his legs. This is a more complex piece of armor than the legguards of the 14th century, for they are now higher and end in three plates, which, overlapping each other, are attached to the lower, main plate, increasing flexibility as much as possible, and protecting the groin inside, and outside the hip joint area. A convex ridge is minted in the upper part of the main plate, which is capable of deflecting the impact of the tip of any weapon aimed at this place. A small leather flap is riveted to the upper edge of the uppermost plate, above the hip joint, and two small holes are made in this flap through which Schott threads the cords sewn to the trousers and ties the cords in a knot. This fastening holds the legplates in place and strengthens the fixation of the two thigh straps that the squire has just fastened to the buckles. The same procedure is done with the left leg. There are no solerets (sabatons) in Schott's armor; the feet are protected only by shoes made of thick, durable leather. After this, the knight puts on a necklace that covers the neck and upper chest and back. But before putting on the necklace, Schott wraps a scarf around his neck so that the steel collar does not rub his neck (Fig. 56). The necklace is made of two large plates, one front and one back, and six overlapping hooks that form three clasps corresponding to three collars that fit into each other - this provides protection from the neck to the ears. The edge of the upper collar is bent outward so that the steel rubs less on the neck. If you see the necklace assembled, you will probably be surprised, wondering how it can be put on, but in reality it is very easy to put on; the necklace, as a rule, was constructed in the same way as the greaves, that is, it had loops on which it was fastened on the left shoulder, and a lock with a spring that locked the necklace closed around the neck on the right shoulder. The three overlapping collars are also divided into two halves. So when the necklace needed to be put on, the lock was opened and this entire piece of armor opened on its hinges. The necklace was placed on the left shoulder and fastened around the neck, and then the lock was fastened on the right shoulder. At the same time, the end of the scarf was pulled out over the edge of the collar in front.
When the necklace was properly put on, the knight donned the cuirass. The Schott cuirass is made a little differently from the earlier cuirass described in the previous chapter; it has no loops on the left side and no clasps on the right. The plates of this cuirass are completely separated - these are separate parts of the armor, although the design of the culet and cape remains the same. The breastplate is equipped with small movable plates inserted into the arm holes; this gives the armor greater flexibility and provides better protection than if you enlarge the main plate of the breastplate and try to cover the armpit with it.
The squire hands Schott the breastplate, and he takes the back of the cuirass and places it on his back, and the knight adjusts the breastplate into place. Its rear edges overlap the front side edges of the back of the cuirass, and the rear edges of the cape plates overlap the front edges of the culet. Putting the plates of the cuirass in place, the knight and his squire use two belts riveted to the shoulder parts of the breastplate, fastening them with the help of fasteners located on the shoulder parts of the back plate, connecting the two parts of the cuirass. Finally, a belt is tightly secured around both plates on the belt. Then the bracers are put on the hands, following the same method as the leg armor is put on. The lower bracer is fastened around the forearm, the elbow pad is placed on the elbow, and the shoulder is covered with the upper bracer. After this, a light small shoulder pad is fixed to the necklace, and a heavy shoulder pad above it. The cords sewn to the shoulders of the doublet are passed through small holes in the shoulder pads and tied in a knot.
Now that the knight has put on most of the armor, you understand why the strips of chain mail sewn to the doublet are needed - they protect those parts of the body that were not covered by the steel plates. When a warrior is seated in the saddle, the space between the two upper legguards is additionally protected by the high pommel of the saddle. For additional protection of the armpits there are special plates, and these plates are now attached by the squire to the necklace using straps. On the back of these plates are wide leather straps about six inches long. Through the holes made in the ends of these belts, laces are threaded, with which the plate is freely suspended from the necklace, additionally covering the areas of the shoulder and armpit area protected only by chain mail. With the tying of the armpit plates, the main process of donning the armor ends, but before continuing with the donning, the knight makes many different movements to make sure that the armor fits and is put on comfortably, does not pinch anywhere and does not loose anything anywhere. He swings his arms, raises and lowers his shoulders, bends to the sides, bends and straightens his knees. Everything seems to be in order, the knight bends down so that the squire puts a cape over his head - a short cloak - tabard This cape is an ordinary rectangular piece of cloth with a hole in the middle for the head. This is a simple cape that covers the chest and back and reaches just below the waist. The tabard was held in place by the sword belt.
The squire takes gilded spurs from the table, Schott places his foot on the bench, and the squire attaches the spur to his foot. While the squire puts on a spur, Schott takes from the table big sword and takes it out of its scabbard; the knight wants to make sure both edges of the blade are (literally) razor sharp. The sword looks quite heavy; the blade measures nearly forty inches in length, but is in fact relatively light, weighing no more than four pounds, and the excellent balance and precisely calculated weight of the head make the sword comfortable to use. (We often hear tales that medieval swords were so heavy that modern man could not even lift them, and similar fables. This is the same nonsense as the statement that knights had to be put into saddles using winches .) Satisfied with the sharpness of the weapon, Schott places it back in its sheath; the squire takes the sword, unwinds the baldric, ties the scabbard with a loop and fastens the baldric to his belt. Now Schott is fully equipped, except for the gauntlets and helmet that he will put on when he mounts his horse and is ready to ride. He takes mittens from the table, and the squire carries behind him a helmet, which is an example of a late salad. The dome part of the helmet almost completely follows the shape of the head and fits quite tightly to it. The shape of the helmet is not elongated, which was typical for many German salads made in the eighties and nineties of the 15th century. Attached to the back of the helmet at the bottom are three overlapping small plates that protect the neck. The facial opening is large and corresponds in size to the opening of a 14th-century bascinet; the hole is closed by a large and deep visor, which, curving downwards, completely covers the chin. Accompanied by his squire, Schott exits the door and descends the narrow spiral staircase. You hear him coming and are surprised that the armor does not rattle; all their parts are perfectly fitted, and as they move, accompanied by the musical ringing of spurs, they only quietly rustle and tap.
From the dark arch of the door, Schott emerges into the castle courtyard, flooded with bright light, and immediately the armor flashes with incredible brilliance - polished knee pads and leg guards, elbow pads, shoulder pads and salads sparkle; The heraldic symbols on the tabard, pennant and flags are striking in their diversity. Half of Schott's people are here. They are already sitting on their war horses and ready to ride, just waiting for their leader to appear. Now they will go to make a quick raid on the lands of the baron living next door. In front of the door, the groom holds the bridle of a large stallion, a steed more powerful than modern hunting horses. Putting on his mittens, Schott exchanges a few words with his assistant. While talking, the leader looks at his people with an appraising glance. Then he easily jumps into the saddle, settles comfortably in it and stretches out his hand for the helmet. Schott takes it, examines it carefully for a few moments, and then puts it on his head, after straightening the lining and adjusting the cap. He then fastens the buckle of his belt under his chin and nods to the groom. He lets go of the bridle and jumps to the side, as the thoroughbred animal proudly raises its head, snores and dances, then rears up, as purebred horses have always done and will do. Then the horse moves at a quiet gait towards the gate and is restrained from breaking into a frisky gallop only by the iron hand of a skilled rider. Following Schott is a fourteen-year-old boy on an equally tall and thoroughbred horse (reserve horse), carrying a spear with a red and white pennant. The whole long cavalcade is moving behind them. The horses bravely clatter their hooves on the stones, you can hear the clanking of weapons and armor, funny jokes, and laughter. The cavalcade, accompanied by a booming echo, leaves from under the gate arch onto the drawbridge, and we see only the suddenly empty castle courtyard, where only grooms and pigeons remain.
From book Newest book facts. Volume 3 [Physics, chemistry and technology. History and archaeology. Miscellaneous] author Kondrashov Anatoly Pavlovich From the book Claws of the Invisible [Genuine Ninja Weapons and Gear] author Gorbylev Alexey MikhailovichChapter 1. GAME SUIT AND NINJA ARMOR While working on this book, I looked through several dozen Western and Russian-language works on ninjutsu, but nowhere could I find any detailed description ninja camouflage suit (shinobi shozoku). A
author Sitnikov Vitaly Pavlovich From the book Who's Who in Russian History author Sitnikov Vitaly Pavlovich From the book Who's Who in Russian History author Sitnikov Vitaly Pavlovich From the book Who's Who in Russian History author Sitnikov Vitaly Pavlovich From the book Reconstruction general history[text only] author8. THE “ANCIENT” MAYAN INDIANS IN AMERICA WEARED, IT TURNS OUT, CHALMA Today it is believed that CHALMA was worn exclusively by the Ottomans = atamans. AT THE SAME TIME, THE RUSSIAN COSSACKS WORN THE CHALMA. See details in the book “Biblical Rus'”. By the way, the name “turban” itself most likely came from
From the book The Great Troubles. End of the Empire author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich6. Novgorodians, both men and women, wore braids. The famous icon “Praying Novgorodians” from the 15th century shows a large number of Novgorod residents, men and women, in Russian clothes. It’s amazing that ALL OF THEM HAVE HAIR BRAIDED IN BRAIDS, fig. 171 and 172. Moreover, men are depicted with
From book Everyday life nobility of Pushkin's time. Etiquette author Lavrentieva Elena VladimirovnaChapter VI. “And at their tables they brought dishes to guests according to rank.” Guests took their places at the table according to certain rules accepted in secular society. “Guests should be seated at the table according to their rank or dignity, age and personal respect. Provide
From the book Book 2. The Mystery of Russian History [New Chronology of Rus'. Tatar and Arabic languages in Rus'. Yaroslavl as Veliky Novgorod. Ancient English history author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich16. Novgorodians, both men and women, wore braids. The famous icon “Praying Novgorodians” from the 15th century shows a large number of Novgorod residents, men and women, in Russian clothes. It’s amazing that ALL OF THEM HAVE HAIR BRAIDED IN BRAIDS, fig. 2.68 and fig. 2.69. Moreover, men
by Oakeshott EwartChapter 3 Saddle, bridle and armor for a horse The word “harness” has long been used to denote equipment and refers to a soldier’s armor. Today, this word refers to the harness accessories of a working horse, such as a draft or draft horse. As applied to a riding horse
From the book The Knight and His Castle [Medieval fortresses and siege works] by Oakeshott EwartChapter 5 Tournament armor At the dawn of the knightly era, people fought in tournaments in ordinary knightly attire. But as the rules became more and more ceremonial, and as the flower of chivalry was senselessly lost in tournaments, they were developed
by Oakeshott Ewart From the book Archeology of Weapons. From the Bronze Age to the Renaissance by Oakeshott EwartChapter 16 Armor and longbow in the 14th and 15th centuries. Between 1300 and 1500 there was a slow transition from the medieval world to the one we live in now; he influenced the art of warfare in the same way as other areas of human life. Perhaps the most significant of
From the book Knights of the New World [with illustrations] author Kofman Andrey FedorovichArmor Those readers who were interested in the Spanish conquest of America probably remember the illustrations depicting knights, clad in iron from head to toe, chasing naked savages. But we invite you to think: what was it like for these knights in
From the book Book 2. Conquest of America by Russia-Horde [Biblical Rus'. The Beginning of American Civilizations. Biblical Noah and medieval Columbus. Revolt of the Reformation. Dilapidated author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich20. The “ancient” Mayan Indians in America wore, it turns out, a Cossack turban. Today it is believed that the turban was worn exclusively by the Ottomans = atamans. At the same time, Russian Cossacks wore turbans, see “New Chronology of Rus'”, ch. 3:4, "Empire". By the way, the very name “turban” came from
The first knights put on their armor themselves: they pulled the chain mail over their heads and fastened the equipment on the back or on the sides and shoulders. A knight had to put on plate armor, which appeared in the 13th century and became very popular in the 14th century, with the help of a squire. It took a little time, just a few minutes. The armor was worn over a special combat jacket, from bottom to top. In the 14th century, some parts were laced to the camisole, but a century later they were connected to each other with belts or clasps.
A book miniature from the mid-15th century gives an idea of how a knight dressed for battle.
A medieval manuscript talks about what kind of costume he should wear under his armor:
"He shall have no shirt except a doublet of ffustean, lined with perforated satin. The doublet must be sewn firmly; the ties must be fastened on the crook of the arm, front and back. For lacing the chain mail wedges, the ties must also be sewn on in the crook of the arm and at the armpit. The ties should be made of thin twine, such as crossbow strings are made from. The ties should have tips for threading through the holes. And they should be wired so that they do not stretch or break. And it should have a pair stockings (chose) made of worsted fabric. The knees should be wrapped in thin tapes to reduce the friction of the armor on the legs. He should be dressed in thick shoes with ties sewn to the heel and to the middle of the sole at a distance of three fingers."
The procedure for dressing a knight for a foot duel is also described there.
"First you need to put on the plate shoes (sabatons) and tie them to the shoes with small ties that will not tear. Then put on the greaves and cuisses, the ringed skirt. Then put on the tassets on the hips. And then the breastplate. and backplate, vambraces and shoulder pads. And then gauntlets. Hang his dagger on the right, and his short sword on the left on the round ring. Then put a cote on his back. Next - a bascinet, which is tied to the cuirass on the chest and back so that it is in place. Then his long sword in his right hand, a pennant with the image of St. George or the Virgin Mary in his left, to bless him when he goes to the platform and on the duel site.
On the day that the applicant and the defendant are to fight, the defendant must provide:
Place a tent on the site
Also a chair
Also bath
Also five loaves of bread
Also a gallon (4.5 L) of wine
Also a dish (?) of meat or fish
Also a board and a couple of trestles to put meat and drink on
Also cloth
Also a meat cleaver
Also a cup to drink from
Also a glass with a prepared drink
Also a dozen ties
Also a hammer, pliers and a small anvil
Also a dozen armor nails (rivets)
Also spear, long sword, short sword and dagger
Also a scarf to make a visor on his bascinet
Also a pennant to carry in his hand while he is called."
By the mid-15th century, plate armor made of wide iron (and steel) plates tailored to the human anatomy became standard for noble knighthood. Several styles of such armor were formed. The most famous are Milanese (Italian) and Gothic (German), just the vestments in Gothic are shown below.
1. Combat jacket. Waxed laces are sewn to the quilted camisole for attaching various parts of the armor. Chain mail inserts provide additional protection. 
2. Plate shoe, greave, knee pad and leg guard. A knee pad and leg guard were fastened to the plate shoe and greave covering the legs up to the knee. 
3. Mail belly. A chain mail belly was tied to a belt and covered the lower part of the body. Such chain mail did not interfere with bending down and sitting down 
4. Backrest. The backrest was put on from the bottom up. Its curved edge deflected blows aimed at the lower back and thighs. A belt with a buckle was riveted to the front flaps of the backrest. 
5. Bib. Together, the breastplate and backrest formed a cuirass. They were fastened with a belt and tied at the shoulders.
6. Shoulder pad, elbow pad, bracers and armpit pad. The bracers and elbow pads were tied together with laces through paired holes in the plates. The shoulder pad and axillary shield covered the shoulder and armpit 
7. Plate gloves. Sword and dagger. The plates covering the fingers were attached to a leather glove. Straps on the sword's sling made it possible to hold the scabbard at the desired angle. The dagger hung on the right side. 
8. Chinpad. The chin guard protected the lower part of the face, complete with a salad - a typically German helmet. 
9. Spurs and helmet. Wheel spurs were fastened to the knight's feet, and a helmet with a lining that softened blows was put on his head. The neck strap held the helmet firmly on the head. 
10. Ready for battle! 
The knight had a hard time in the battle. A hail of blows rained down on him: swords, axes, pikes, arrows and heavy metal maces. To protect the body and head, knights wore heavy metal armor. Putting on the armor was a very difficult task. The knights were assisted by squires - young men who were just preparing to become knights. Armor is not the most comfortable garment, so the knights wore a thick quilted camisole and trousers underneath.
Until the beginning of the 13th century, knights wore chain mail - a shirt “woven” from metal rings. Then armor began to be made from metal plates. By the end of the Middle Ages, knights were clad in armor from head to toe.
Why was the castle surrounded by a moat?
A ditch is a deep and wide ditch filled with water. They surrounded the castle to block the way for the invaders. Guests were allowed to enter the gate via a drawbridge. And when the castle was attacked by enemies, the bridge was raised.
Having surrounded the castle, the invaders waited for the people sheltering inside the fortress walls to run out of water and food. When this happened, the castle's defenders surrendered. In the Middle Ages, protective stone walls were built around settlements and cities. The city of Great Zimbabwe in South Africa was built by the Shona people in the 11th century. Pueblo Bonito (the largest of the "palace" villages) was built by the Anasazi people between 950 and 1300.
