Plate armor elements. Armor - armor made of large metal plates

Gothic armor, Germany, XV century

Milanese armor, Italy, 16th century

Armor of the winged hussars, Poland, XVI century

Different types of armor as museum exhibits

armor- armor made of large metal plates, anatomically repeating the male figure. Compared to other types of armor, the manufacture of such armor was the most difficult and required a considerable amount of steel, and therefore the art of making armor began to develop actively only from the middle of the 14th century.

Because of these difficulties, even in the 15th century, plate armor was not cheap and was often made to order. Of course, only representatives of the nobility could afford such a luxury, which is why the armor became a symbol of chivalry and high birth. So how effective is such armor and was it worth the money? Let's figure it out:

Myth 1: the armor weighed so much that the fallen knight could not rise without assistance

This is not true. The total weight of full combat armor rarely exceeded 30 kg. The figure may seem big to you, but do not forget that the weight was evenly distributed throughout the body, moreover, men at arms, as a rule, fought on horseback. With this in mind, we get the approximate weight of the modern equipment of an army infantryman. Heavier varieties belonged to tournament armor, deliberately sacrificing mobility in favor of increasing the thickness of the armor, which reduced the risk of injury when struck by a spear or falling from a horse. Modern reenactors repeatedly proved that in a replica of full armor you can not only run fast, but even fencing and climb stairs.

Myth 2: Plate armor could be easily penetrated by conventional weapons

And this is a lie. The main distinguishing feature of plate armor is its excellent resistance to all types of damage. Cutting blows do not cause him any harm, unless the knight at full gallop is substituted under the blow of the reed. The piercing blows could penetrate soft, poorly hardened steel, but later armor also held the blow of the sharp end of the war hammer quite well. In addition, the armor (contrary to the opinion of popular culture, which loves to decorate armor with spikes and ribs) was made as smooth and streamlined as possible in order to evenly distribute the energy from the impact and thereby increase the strength of the entire structure. The really effective means against the man-at-arms were daggers, which, due to the shortest possible attack distance, are the easiest to hit the joints of the armor, and two-handed swords, specially created as countermeasures against heavy infantry and cavalry. In contrast, video recordings are often cited, in which the tester breaks through a plate breastplate with a morning star or a lucernhammer. It should be noted here that theoretically this is indeed possible, but it is very difficult to deliver a direct blow with a wide swing at an ideal right angle during a battle, otherwise the man-at-arms has every chance of completely or partially avoiding damage.

Myth 3: It is enough just to hit a weak spot, and the man-at-arms will be defeated

That's a moot point. Yes, there are several weak points in plate armor (belt garters, gaps in the joints and joints), hitting which will in fact cause significant damage to the enemy. But it wasn't easy to do so:

Firstly, under the armor, the knights wore at least a gambeson, consisting of several layers of dense linen. It provided good protection on its own, being surprisingly strong and light, and most knights did not disdain to pull chain mail over it. Thus, the weapon had to overcome several layers of armor before reaching the body.

Secondly, gunsmiths, who quickly realized the main weakness of armor in a combat clash, tried to protect the knight from the threat as much as possible. All belts and garters were hidden deep inside the armor, special "wings" (a continuation of the cast armor plate) served as a screen for joints and joints. All parts of the armor fit together as tightly as possible, which in the crush and turmoil of major battles significantly increased the chances of survival.

So what was bad about plate armor?

The main disadvantage is the need for maintenance. Due to the large area of ​​the armor itself, the metal quickly rusted, and it had to be protected from corrosion. Over time, gunsmiths learned to burn armor, which made them darker and gave good protection against oxidation. In field conditions, the armor was lubricated with oil, and in peacetime it was stored in isolated conditions, usually wrapped in several layers of cloth. Otherwise, the armor was much more effective than any analogues - frayed straps can be quickly and easily replaced, and straightening a dent on a solid plate is much easier than repairing chain mail or replacing segments in lamellar armor. However, sometimes it was almost impossible to put on plate armor on your own, and if you were wounded, it was just as difficult to take it off. Many knights managed to bleed out from a trifling wound, which put them out of action for the entire battle.

The end of the golden age of armor came along with the beginning of the era of firearms. When the firearm appeared in service with regular armies, armor began to gradually disappear from everyday life. A lead bullet pierced such armor without any problems, although in the early stages, when the power of firearms was not great, they could still serve as a very effective defense.

Plate armor that protected the chest and lower limbs was used by the ancient Greeks and Romans, but fell out of use after the collapse of the Roman Empire due to the cost and labor required to make or armor. Separate metal plates began to be used again from the end of the 13th century to protect the joints and lower legs, they were worn in full. By the end of the 14th century, larger and more complete pieces of armor were being developed. In the early 1500s, the design of the helmet and balaclava changed, resulting in the so-called Nuremberg armor, many examples of which are masterpieces of craftsmanship and design. The European leaders in armor production were northern Italians and southern Germans. This led to the Milanese style of armor in Milan, and the Gothic style of armor in the Holy Roman Empire. England made armor in Greenwich, and developed its own unique style. Maximilian armor appeared after a short time, at the beginning of the 16th century. Maximilian armor was usually expressed by fluting and decorative engraving, as opposed to the simpler so-called white (i.e. smooth) armor of the late 15th century. This era is characterized by the appearance of closed helmets, in contrast to the model of the 15th century. In Japan, elite samurai wore armor made from tightly stitched plates, which had characteristics similar to full plate armor. With the arrival of the Europeans, the Japanese added steel plates to their armor options. Turkey also made extensive use of plate armor, but Turkish armor included a large amount of , which was widely used by shock troops such as the Janissary corps. In the rest of the world, however, the general trend was: mail, scale armor, and lamellar armor.

Full plate armor was very expensive to manufacture, and was mostly used only by the upper strata of society; lavishly decorated armor remained fashionable among 18th century nobility and generals long after it lost its military importance on the battlefield with the advent of muskets. Simplified plate armor, usually consisting of a breastplate, morion or cabasset, and gloves, however, also became popular among mercenaries in the 16th century, and there are many references to so-called ammunition armor, mass-produced for foot soldiers at a price much less than full plate armor. This mass-produced armor was often heavier and made of lower quality metal than knight armour. Beginning in the 15th century, armor specially designed for tournaments (rather than battles) and dress armor became popular again. Many of the later armors were decorated with biblical or mythological motifs.

The use of armor was not limited to the Middle Ages, and in fact armor was widely used by most armies until the end of the 17th century, both on foot and on horseback. There was a development of firearms, which made all but the best and heaviest armor obsolete. The increasing power and availability of firearms and the nature of the massive, state-funded infantry meant that fewer and fewer plate-armoured warriors were left to be replaced by cheaper and more mobile troops. Leg protection (gaiters, knee pads, greaves, sabatons) was the first piece of armor to be abandoned in favor of mobility, replaced by high leather boots. By the early 18th century, only field marshals, commanders, and members of the royal families remained in full armor on the battlefield, as they presented a tempting target for musket fire. However, horsemen, especially cuirassiers, continued to use chest and back plates that could protect them from distant fire, and either helmets or "secrets" - steel protection that was worn on the head under a soft hat. Other armor was hidden under decorative uniforms. Armor (flak jackets) had a brief appearance in the American Civil War with mixed success. However, bulletproof vests of that time were expensive and thus were bought by individual soldiers, and were not full-time, since the effectiveness of such armor varied greatly depending on its manufacturer. The improvised plate armor was successfully replicated by notorious Australian outlaw Ned Kelly and his gang, giving them a great advantage in their gunfights with the police. Napoleon's armored cavalry, like those of the French, German, and British empires (heavy cavalry known as cuirassiers), were in active use during the 19th century until the first year of World War I, when French cuirassiers went to meet the armored enemy outside of Paris. During the war both sides experimented with shrapnel armor and some soldiers used their own armor, but highly specialized ballistic armor such as the "American Brewster Body Shield" was not widely adopted.

Plate armor made a brief reappearance during World War II in the Soviet Infantry Assault Troops, who wore steel breastplates capable of stopping bullets from pistols and submachine guns. The Japanese and Americans had several prototypes, but none were mass-produced due to their cost and the need for metal in other industries. In the Korean War, body armor reappeared in the US infantry, and then to an even greater extent, body armor was used in Vietnam. Nowadays, there are lightweight Kevlar helmets and body armor, the latter often reinforced with ceramic inserts.

Materials used in plate armor

The first plate armor was bronze, and was worn by elite soldiers, in the Greek armies in particular. Bronze, although not as strong as iron, was easier to manufacture and work, making it suitable for making large plates. Over time, iron began to be used by the advanced military forces of Europe and the Middle East. Gradually, steel processing methods were improved, and steel replaced iron in almost everything except body armor. Steel was continually made stronger and thicker to resist bullets, but ultimately sufficient protection was too heavy and expensive for most troops. In the 20th century, titanium and extra strong "ballistic" steel began to be used to make plates. Subsequently, ceramic plates made of aluminum oxide and silicon carbide appeared.

Plate armor today

Plate armor technology has advanced significantly over the last 50 years, perhaps outstripping the development of firearms during that period. Thus, it can be argued that the level of improvement in materials and body armor technology will mean a return to the philosophy of the Middle Ages: highly trained and well-protected individual warriors will replace the masses of undertrained and cheap conscripts. The current trend shown in the wars of our time, such as those in Iraq, Lebanon, and Sri Lanka, is that parties to a conflict that are able to provide better armor to their troops give them a great advantage in combat. This trend contributes to differences in the level of casualties between modern equipped troops and their enemies, the guerrillas, who often do not have a similar level of protection. Modern ballistic vests offer much better protection against conventional military firearms than even those of 40 years ago, increasing the chances of surviving combat and reducing the need for manpower.

Plate armor structure

Plate armor consisted of a helmet, (or), bracers, mittens, cuirass (back and chest plates) with, leg guards and kulet, gaiters, knee pads, greaves and sabatons. While such armor looks very heavy, a full plate armor could weigh only 20 kg if it was made of steel proportional in thickness. This is less than the weight of a modern infantryman's full load (usually 25 - 35 kg), and the weight of plate armor was more evenly distributed. The weight of the armor was so well distributed that a healthy person could run, or jump into a horse's saddle. Modern reconstruction has shown that it was even possible to swim in such armor, although this was certainly difficult. It was possible for a healthy and trained man in armor to run and catch an unarmored archer, as shown in reenactment battles. The notion that a fully armed knight had to be mounted by a system of pulleys is a myth derived from Mark Twain's Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court. (And, in fact, the existence of plate armor during the Arthurian era is also a myth: 6th century knights would have worn mail instead.) Even knights in extremely heavy tournament armor did not winch on their horses. This type of "sporting" armor was reserved for ceremonial javelin matches only, and was made extremely thick to protect the wearer from serious accidents, such as the one that caused the death of King Henry II of France.

Tournament armor is always heavier, more clumsy, and more secure than combat armor. This is because no one wants to get killed in the game, but the battlefield is a matter of life and death, so mobility and stamina is more important for survival in combat than passive defense. Therefore, combat armor is a compromise between security and mobility, while tournament armor emphasizes security at the expense of mobility.

Impact of weapons development

Plate armor is "sword-resistant". It also protects the wearer well from spear or pike attacks, and provides decent protection against blunt weapons. The development of plate armor provoked the development of offensive weapons. While this armor was effective against slashing and cutting blows, their weak points could be hit by long wedge-shaped swords (estoks) or other weapons designed specifically for this purpose, such as pollaxes and halberds. The effectiveness of crossbow arrows and bolts against plate armor is still a matter of debate. Some argue that longbows and/or crossbows could regularly penetrate plate armour, others argue that they could rarely do so due to the fact that arrowheads were made of a much lower quality metal compared to the best steel of the time, which usually went for plate armor. In favor of the latter version, such arguments are also made that the cost of equipment for archers, assuming that the arrowheads were made of high-quality steel, would be enormous. The various corrugations on the surface of the armor were not only decoration, but also strengthened the plates of the armor against bending under a blunt blow and could cause blows from slashing weapons to get stuck on the surface of the armor or bounce instead of slipping into a more vulnerable joint. Armored fencing manuals taught at the German fencing school focus on these "weak points" for the attacker, resulting in a style of fighting very different from unarmored fighting. Due to the presence of such weak points, most warriors wore chain mail under plate armor. Later, full chain mail was replaced by partial use of them, called gossets, sewn into the underarmour. Further protection of the plate armor was the use of small round plates called rondels, which covered the armpit area, elbow pads and knee pads with "wings" to protect the inside of the joint. The 14th century development of plate armor also prompted the development of various polearms. These weapons were designed to provide a strong impact and focus energy in a small area, and thereby inflict damage through the plates of the armor. Hammer-tipped maces and pollaxes were used to inflict injuries through armor without destroying it.

The armor of the knights of the Middle Ages, the photos and descriptions of which are presented in the article, have gone through a difficult evolutionary path. They can be seen in weapons museums. This is a real work of art.

They surprise not only with their protective properties, but also with luxury and grandeur. However, few people know that the monolithic iron armor of the knights of the Middle Ages is dated to the late period of that era. It was no longer protection, but traditional clothing, which emphasized the high social status of the owner. This is a kind of analogue of modern expensive business suits. From them it was possible to judge the position in society. We will talk about this in more detail later, we will present a photo of knights in the armor of the Middle Ages. But first, where did they come from.

First armor

The weapons and armor of the knights of the Middle Ages developed together. This is understandable. Improving lethal means necessarily leads to the development of defensive ones. Even in prehistoric times, man tried to protect his body. The first armor was the skin of animals. She protected well from non-sharp tools: sledgehammers, primitive axes, etc. The ancient Celts achieved perfection in this. Their protective skins sometimes even withstood sharp spears and arrows. Surprisingly, the main emphasis in defense was on the back. The logic was this: in a frontal attack, it was possible to hide from shells. It is impossible to see the blows in the back. Flight and retreat was part of the military tactics of these peoples.

cloth armor

Few people know, but the armor of the knights of the Middle Ages in the early period was made of matter. It was difficult to distinguish them from peaceful civilian clothes. The only difference is that they were glued together from several layers of matter (up to 30 layers). It was light, from 2 to 6 kg, inexpensive armor. In the era of mass battles and the primitiveness of chopping guns, this is an ideal option. Any militia could afford such protection. Surprisingly, such armor even withstood arrows with stone tips, which easily pierced iron. This was due to cushioning on the fabric. The more prosperous instead used quilted caftans stuffed with horsehair, cotton wool, and hemp.

The peoples of the Caucasus until the 19th century used a similar protection. Their felted wool cloak was rarely cut with a saber, withstood not only arrows, but also bullets from smooth-bore guns from 100 meters. Recall that such armor was in service with our army until the Crimean War of 1853-1856, when our soldiers died from rifled European guns.

leather armor

The armor of the knights of the Middle Ages made of leather replaced the cloth ones. They were also widely used in Russia. Leather craftsmen were widely valued at the time.

In Europe, they were poorly developed, since the use of crossbows and bows was a favorite tactic of Europeans during the entire Middle Ages. Leather protection was used by archers and crossbowmen. She protected from light cavalry, as well as from brothers-in-arms of the opposite side. From long distances, they could withstand bolts and arrows.

Buffalo skin was especially prized. Getting it was almost impossible. Only the richest could afford it. There were relatively light leather armor of the knights of the Middle Ages. Weight was from 4 to 15 kg.

Armor Evolution: Lamellar Armor

Further evolution takes place - the manufacture of the armor of the knights of the Middle Ages from metal begins. One of the varieties is lamellar armor. The first mention of such technology is observed in Mesopotamia. The armor there was made of copper. In a similar protective technology began to be used from metal. Lamellar armor is a scaly shell. They have proven to be the most reliable. They were only pierced by bullets. Their main disadvantage is their weight up to 25 kg. It is impossible to put it on alone. In addition, if a knight fell from a horse, he was completely neutralized. It was impossible to get up.

chain mail

The armor of the knights of the Middle Ages in the form of chain mail was the most common. Already in the 12th century they became widespread. Ringed armor weighed relatively little: 8-10 kg. A complete set, including stockings, a helmet, gloves, reached up to 40 kg. The main advantage is that the armor did not hamper movement. Only the wealthiest aristocrats could afford them. The spread among the middle class only occurs in the 14th century, when rich aristocrats donned plate armor. They will be discussed further.

armor

Plate armor is the pinnacle of evolution. Only with the development of metal forging technology could such a work of art be created. The plate armor of the knights of the Middle Ages is almost impossible to make with your own hands. It was a single monolithic shell. Only the richest aristocrats could afford such protection. Their distribution falls on the Late Middle Ages. A knight in plate armor on the battlefield is a real armored tank. It was impossible to beat him. One such warrior among the troops tipped the scales in the direction of victory. Italy is the birthplace of such protection. It was this country that was famous for its masters in the production of armor.

The desire to have a heavy defense is due to the battle tactics of the medieval cavalry. First, she delivered a powerful swift blow in close ranks. As a rule, after one blow with a wedge against infantry, the battle ended in victory. Therefore, in the forefront were the most privileged aristocrats, among whom was the king himself. Knights in armor almost did not die. It was impossible to kill him in battle, and after the battle, the captured aristocrats were not executed, since everyone knew each other. Yesterday's enemy turned into a friend today. In addition, the exchange and sale of captured aristocrats was sometimes the main goal of the battles. In fact, medieval battles were similar to them. The “best people” rarely died, but in real battles this still happened. Therefore, the need for improvement constantly arose.

"Peaceful battle"

In 1439, in Italy, in the homeland of the best blacksmiths, a battle took place near the city of Anghiari. Several thousand knights took part in it. After four hours of battle, only one warrior died. He fell off his horse and fell under his hooves.

The end of the battle armor era

England put an end to "peaceful" wars. In one of the battles, the British, led by Henry XIII, who were ten times fewer, used powerful Welsh bows against French aristocrats in armor. Marching confidently, they felt safe. Imagine their surprise when arrows began to fall from above. The shock was that before that they had never hit the knights from above. Shields were used against frontal damage. A close formation of them reliably protected from bows and crossbows. However, the Welsh weapons were able to pierce the armor from above. This defeat at the dawn of the Middle Ages, where the "best people" of France died, put an end to such battles.

Armor - a symbol of aristocracy

Armor has always been a symbol of aristocracy, not only in Europe, but throughout the world. Even the development of firearms did not put an end to their use. The coat of arms was always depicted on the armor, they were the ceremonial uniform.

They were worn for holidays, celebrations, official meetings. Of course, ceremonial armor was made in a lightweight version. The last time their combat use was in Japan already in the 19th century, during the time of the samurai uprisings. However, firearms have shown that any peasant with a rifle is much more effective than a professional warrior with a cold weapon, dressed in heavy armor.

Armor of a knight of the Middle Ages: description

So, the classic set of the average knight consisted of the following things:

Weapons and armor were not uniform throughout the history of the Middle Ages, since they performed two functions. The first is protection. The second - armor was a distinctive attribute of a high social position. One complex helmet could cost entire villages with serfs. Not everyone could afford it. This also applies to complex armor. Therefore, it was impossible to find two identical sets. Feudal armor is not a uniform form of soldier recruits in later eras. They differ in individuality.

Enemies jumped on such a warrior, chopped him with sabers, stabbed him with knives, and he sat as if nothing had happened and looked ironically at the enemies. If he was pulled by the leg from the horse, he did not get lost here either: he lay on the ground and looked ironically at the enemies. Having spent several hours fruitlessly over the knight, the enemies scratched their heads and, cursing, rushed to other enemies, and faithful servants approached the winner and again dragged him onto the horse.

With the invention of gunpowder, the affairs of the brave, reserved knights completely fell into decline. It was enough to drag such a knight off his horse and put two pounds of gunpowder under him, as he immediately opened up, shattered into pieces and fell into complete disrepair.

A. Averchenko, "World History Processed by Satyricon"

Full armor is a magnificent armor that has amazed the imagination of descendants for centuries, fanned by an aura of romance. In the mass consciousness, he is inextricably linked with the image of a knight. But ironically, they appeared too late, at the end of the 14th century, when firearms were already booming, and in less than two centuries they turned from military equipment into a decorative element of palaces.

How armor works

Plate armor, depending on the time and place of their creation, varies quite a lot, but their main elements are unchanged.

Parts of armor

The warrior's head was protected by a full helmet with visor- usually it was lettuce, armet or bourguignot, movably connected to a segmented neck necklaces completely covering the neck.

chest closed bib, and the back backrest, which could be whole, two-part, or, occasionally, segmented. Often the breastplate was made convex to make slippage of the stabbing more likely. A hook was often attached to the breastplate of equestrian armor on the right, on which a spear clasped under the arm rested.

Shoulders were protected by massive shoulder pads, arms - whole or segmented bracers with obligatory elbow pad, brushes - plate gloves. Often attached to the shoulder axillary discs protecting vulnerable armpits.

At the level of the belt, it was attached to the bib and backrest skirt covering the lower part of the body, and legguards that covered the hips in front. In equestrian armor, the skirt had deep cutouts in front and behind; in foot armor, it could be longer.

Leggings consisted of choirs, covering the thighs from the outside and in front (the inner side of the thighs was almost never covered by them), knee pads, greaves covering the whole shins, and plate shoes. A frequent detail of the German foot armor was a huge forged codpiece, shamelessly exaggerating the manhood of the owner.

Quilted was worn under the armor gambeson, sometimes chain mail was worn over it, which was quickly abandoned due to excessive weight. However, chain mail elements were preserved in many types of armor, mail mesh protected the armpits and in the armor of riders, the groin. Due to the rigidity of the armor, the requirements for the thickness of the underarmor were significantly lower than in the case of chain mail.

a - helmet, b - visor, c - chin rest, d - neck,
e - rear edge of the crown, f - necklace, g - bib,
h - back pad, i - skirt, k - shoulder pad, l - shoulder pad reinforcement, m - anti-decapitator, n - bracer, o - elbow pad,
p - glove, q - pike mount, r - greave, s - knee pad, t - greave, u - sabaton shoe, v - chain mail protection

Assembly

The elements of plate armor were forged, the thickness of steel in combat armor averaged one and a half to two millimeters. Plates of tournament armor, not intended for long-term wear, were often made even thicker. At the end of the 16th century, at the decline of heavy cavalry, a futile attempt was made to make armor a reliable protection against bullets - the thickness of the breastplate increased to 3-6 millimeters.

Parts of the armor were connected either with riveted pins or strips of thick leather, to which the plates were riveted alternately, overlapping each other. On the body of a warrior, the elements of armor were fixed either with belts with buckles, or by connecting them with detachable pins.

Armor of the Earl of Worcester.

By proper fitting, at the same time, high mobility was achieved at the articulation points, an even distribution of weight and an overall rigidity of the armor, which made it possible to withstand a blow. The evolution of armor went along the path of integrating individual parts of the armor, in the most successful cases, their parts organically complement each other and, after joining, form a single whole.

Attention is a myth: it is believed that the armor was so heavy that the knight who fell from his horse could not rise to his feet on his own and remained lying, unable to move. And the squires had to put him on a horse. In fact, the weight of combat plate armor rarely exceeds twenty kilograms, the load is very comfortably distributed, and such problems do not arise. Moreover, the Landsknecht armor intended for infantry, which appeared at the beginning of the 16th century, practically did not differ from knightly ones. Perhaps this misconception arose from a superficial acquaintance with tournament armor, which was sometimes really very heavy (forty or more kilograms) and was in no way intended for real combat.

Usually the armor plates were smooth. Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian I invented corrugated armor, later called Maximilian or (completely incorrectly) Gothic. Thanks to the corrugated surface, such armor resisted chopping and piercing blows better (and even withstood a bullet, if not at close range), but it was much more difficult to manufacture and was not widely used.

Many artists, when depicting various kinds of villains, supply their armor in abundance with spikes and blades, jagged edges and other sinister but useless additions. In addition to the intimidating appearance, their “benefit”, apparently, lies in the fact that the enemy, who managed to enter into a wrestling duel with the owner, will be pretty scolded. In fact, this is a suicide armor: any extra ledge that an enemy’s weapon can catch on is a potential threat to the owner of the armor, since it has a chance to turn a glancing blow into a penetrating blow or rip off part of the armor. It is no coincidence that gunsmiths tried to make the armor as smooth as possible so that most blows would slide off of them.

It is interesting: perhaps the only somewhat popular version of a large ledge on the armor is the famous wings of the Polish hussars (they were worn, of course, with incomplete armor). There is an opinion that they protected from ... lasso. But the wings were worn from behind, where they are capable of causing relatively little harm to their owner, not like in front or from the side.

Not only for people

A warrior in light armor rarely took the trouble to protect a horse as well: after all, an extra load slows it down a lot, and horse armor weighs much more than a human one. In ancient times, however, a horse harnessed to a war chariot of a noble warrior was protected by a headband and breastplate (usually leather); this was sometimes done with the horse of a Greek cataphractary heavy cavalryman.

An unusual version of horse armor - with holes in the neck and closed sides. However, this armor has never been in battle.

In the era of armor, an asymmetric answer was found for overweighting armor: aim not at the rider, but at the horse. It will be hard for the fallen and in armor, and will he still have time to get up? Therefore, we had to protect the horses, and, of course, the appropriate horses were needed for this.

In horse armor, the head of the horse was protected by a solid headband, or shampron, covering it up to the neck, and in the most complex versions there were ear tubes, protecting the ears of the animal, and the eye holes of the headband were closed eye grids.

The neck was covered end(aka krinje), consisting of overlapping plates. The chest of the horse was covered with a massive bib - forbug with protruding lower edges, shaped like a snowplow blade.

The croup of the horse closed krupnik-geliger, one-piece or consisting of two halves. Kanz and geliger were attached to the saddle with high bows, which helped the rider to stay in the saddle when struck.

Horse sides were protected less often, and even if they were protected, then more often with leather plates - flanchards. The fact is that, firstly, the side of the horse is exposed to a relatively lesser threat (and is partially covered by the saddle and rider), and secondly, it is difficult to control through the armor (without the help of the legs they control a draft horse, but not a riding one!).

All this intricate design was often covered with a fabric “cover” on top. This, in theory, should prevent you from seeing holes in horse armor (which are almost always there), and then it's just beautiful.

There is another unusual piece of horse armor: protection ... bridles. It is difficult to say how often the bits were cut in battle, but, in any case, special shields for them were in use.

Non-combat armor

Plate armor gave gunsmiths a huge scope for artistic creativity - the magnificence of the armor of kings and generals is amazing. Ceremonial armor was polished to a mirror shine and decorated with exquisite ornaments, coats of arms and mottos of the owner, flowers and heraldic animals - engraving and blackening, enamel, gilding and inlays with non-ferrous metals were used.

Armor was made even for children... if they are heirs to the throne. This armor does not even reach 130 cm in height.

In the sixteenth century, the so-called "costume" armor appeared, the bracers of which imitated the puffy welt sleeves that were fashionable at that time, and the breastplates and legguards were decorated with metal puffs.

No other ruler's attire, in terms of the degree of impression made, comes close to the ceremonial armor, emphasizing both wealth and nobility, as well as the courage and militancy of the ruler. Therefore, it is no coincidence that in the ceremonial portraits of the 17th-18th centuries, many commanders and sovereigns appear before us in precisely armor, which have long lost any practical significance ...

Separately, it is worth mentioning tournament armor, which in essence were real sports equipment, as unsuitable for combat operations as a modern sports sword.

For obvious reasons, these armors have reached the next generations in large numbers and have had a significant impact on the emergence of many modern prejudices. Since they didn’t need to be worn for a long time, and the knights didn’t want to get serious wounds at the tournament, they were made much heavier (the weight reached forty kilograms or more), they were supplied with additional elements that protect against the most likely dangers. For example, armor for equestrian duels had an extremely reinforced and enlarged left pauldron.

As a result, the mobility of individual parts of the body could be severely limited, which in a real battle could be fatal. In such armor, the knight was really clumsy and often could not get into the saddle without outside help (although it is worth saying that there were tournament armor for foot fights as well). Of course, only really wealthy people could afford such equipment, the knights competed more victoriously in ordinary combat armor - and often received injuries.

Is it worth it to wear armor?

Sure, but only when you can afford it. This is the best armor available, but it demands a lot from its wearer. The rider needs to have a horse that can not only withstand his weight in armor, but also stay in shape for a long time, and for a kit - a second, simpler one, for long transitions. A personal squire or servant is also very desirable (also on a horse, or at least on a “beautiful mule”). A horse, at least a fighting one, must be fed with oats, it will not last long on pasture, and again, fodder must be carried with you or mined, which does not always work out. So the hackneyed image of a lone paladin in full armor, wandering through the wilderness on his faithful (and also very armored) horse is very utopian.

Charles I of England had a chance to use this armor on the battlefield. True, not for long.

Weapon for breakdown lat.

A footman at arms does not need a horse, but must carry, in addition to armor, weapons and supplies - with appropriate training, this is quite possible, but it is better to let everything superfluous ride on a cart. Therefore, full plate armor remained the prerogative of military leaders and the elite: knights and selected, trained heavy infantry. In the "battles" of the Swiss and landsknechts, only the best warriors walking in the forefront were dressed in full armor, the rear ones were content with incomplete armor.

The main advantage of plate armor is, of course, the maximum protection of a warrior. This is perhaps the most perfect of all armor created by mankind.

Plate armor resists slashing weapons extremely well, somewhat worse - piercing and impact weapons. It was almost impossible to pierce the breastplate with a dagger blow or cut through it with a sword, the solid metal of the armor nullified the cutting effect of the curved blades.

An important advantage of armor was that, thanks to the sloping surfaces of the armor, an inaccurately delivered blow was translated into a sliding one. To inflict serious damage with conventional weapons, it was necessary to accurately hit the articulation site.

It was with the advent of full armor that the spread of special "armor-piercing" types of weapons - klevtsov, stabbing swords-konchars, alshpis, stilettos - was associated; battle axes are becoming popular again.

Armor protects well from arrows, with the exception of heavy crossbow ones. Arrows with leaf-shaped tips practically did not pierce them - this required special conical or faceted tips. Bullets from early firearms often flattened against breastplates without penetrating them.

Of course, the degree of invulnerability of knights in armor is often exaggerated many times over. Often there are stories about how rebellious peasants or townspeople, having knocked a knight off a horse, for a long time could not do anything with his armor and were forced to deal with him in some non-standard way - for example, they drowned him in a pond. However, the Swiss infantrymen, who intimidated the knights, who, under pain of death, were forbidden to take prisoners, apparently did not experience such difficulties.

The armor of John of Gaunt (kept in the Tower of London). This brave knight was over 210 cm tall; who said that in the Middle Ages all people were much lower than us?

With the development of firearms, the advantage given by plate armor quickly waned. Full armor turns into three-quarter, then into half-armor. First of all, they refuse to protect the legs, and finally, the reverse evolution of the armor ends with the cuirass of the cavalry guard, consisting only of a backplate and a breastplate.

Well-fitting plate armor somewhat restricts, but practically does not impede movement, the weight of the armor is evenly distributed, and it can be worn without removing it for a long time. Landsknechts in full armor, which did not differ in weight from knights, made long marches on foot.

The armor significantly limits the speed of movement - you can’t run in them for a long time, the horse under the armor also gets tired quickly. Plate armor cannot be put on or taken off quickly, especially without outside help - it is better that someone else tighten the numerous belts. When removed, they take up a lot of space, you can’t put them in a bag like chain mail.

British armets.

Making plate armor is a complex and lengthy process, requiring a significant level of skill from the gunsmith, so armor has always been a piece product and was expensive.

Armor should fit the wearer's figure well and ideally be custom made. Fitting plate armor to a new owner usually required the help of a professional armorer. Although it is difficult to damage such armor, it is no less difficult to repair it: it is very difficult to reforge the cut elements, and often they had to be replaced. The most that can be done in the field is to straighten dents and replace torn lashing straps.

Armor is armor for temperate climates, in warm weather it is hot in them, the metal quickly heats up in the sun, and there is a very real prospect of heat stroke. To combat this, they tried to make slots in the plates, but this did not give much effect. In cold weather, and even more so in frost, it is even worse, with active movements, a person still sweats due to the weight of the armor, and the mass of cold metal takes away body heat - pneumonia is just around the corner. Moreover, you can’t wear anything other than a cloak over plate armor.

Finally, the armor must be regularly lubricated and cleaned, which is not at all easy - rust appears primarily in hard-to-reach joints, so cleaning the armor takes a lot of time.

Armor of other worlds

World of Warcraft.

In fantasy worlds, armor is usually a standard attribute of noble chivalry and elite warriors of the dark lords. Like any other armor, they can be made from heavy-duty metals, such as adamantite, and a large number of flat surfaces make it possible to inscribe sacred writings, sinister runes and mysterious hexagrams on it in abundance, giving it additional strength, fireproof and water-repellent properties.

In the worlds of steampunk, somewhat lightweight armor, equipped with built-in dischargers, spring amplifiers and patented cutters in half, serve as armor, weapons and tools of crazy professors and fighters for world domination at the same time.

Finally, thanks to the romantic areola enveloping the plate armor, in the distant future, he is resurrected again in the form of battle armor of Space Marines and inhuman aliens.

Full armor is a wonderful armor for large creatures, since in this case the thickness of the plates can be increased so much that it will be completely unrealistic for a person not armed with a magic sword or, at worst, with a jackhammer. Therefore, most fantasy writers avoid issuing armor to ogres and trolls, limiting them to skins or, say, rusty chain mail.

Warhammer: Mark of Chaos.

In the world Warhammer full plate armor is well-known, but only available to a select few—they are worn by the knights of the Empire, the "ironbreakers" of the dwarves, the warriors of Chaos, and the Dragon Princes of the high elves. But in Bretonnia, famous for its knightly traditions, there is no plate armor, as expected.

In the world Wheels of Time full plate armor is worn only by the Shinari, a professional heavy cavalry that hones its skills in the ongoing war against the Trollocs.

The armor of the warriors of Gondor, as we see them in Peter Jackson, is also, in essence, almost full armor; judging by the book, however, they are somewhat easier. This is also indicated by the fact that horse armor in middle earth not seen.

Love the armor and the knights of the Temple from Elenia David Eddings, with the exception of the northern Thalesians: for their mountains, such armor is too heavy. By the way, at the same time they manage to do without squires: in the entire Order of Pandion, a single squire is for the Knight of the Queen.

Armor in games

Neverwinter Nights 2.

In computer games, armor is extremely loved: they look great, and, whatever one may say, it’s easier to make them than in real life (and it’s easy to animate). Therefore, there are a huge number of games in which they are. At times, they even dress up representatives of peoples who, in principle, had nothing of the kind: Vikings, Russians, even Turks.

That's just the armor usually looks so non-historical that it's just right to grab your head. All these spikes, protrusions and other embellishments in reality would not only bring their wearer under attack, but would not even give a chance to move in any normal way.

So, for example, in World of Warcraft the popular design of the shoulder pads is made in the form of “wings” pulled up: such shoulder pads accurately direct even the most inaccurate blow to the neck of their owner. It is understandable why they are worn by ascetic paladins - this is a natural mortification of the flesh in the most literal sense. The real prototype of such wings are small protrusions - "counter-decapitators" that easily bend when hit from above and certainly do not result in a blow to the neck, maximum to the shoulder. They served as a counterbalance to the popular sword strike from below and from the side.

In case the blow is not on the shoulder pad, there is such a wonderful decoration as the horns on the helmet. Nobody ever wore this either: even if the horn does not take the blow to the crown, it has every chance of causing a neck fracture. The Vikings (who are usually credited with such stupidity) wore wings on their helmets, not horns. And these wings were made of natural feathers - they just fell off on impact.

The plate skirt is often replaced by pants made up of rings or pipes, neatly covering the inner thighs. In such "samovar pipes" it is very inconvenient to move, and it is almost impossible to sit on a horse.

The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion.

Until recently, in role-playing games, armor did little to limit the warrior. They, of course, prevent them from moving silently, but the “tank” is already out of his hands, and they also do not allow him to conjure - which warriors, as a rule, do not know how to do anyway. Therefore, armor was worn by all the workers of the sword and ax who were able to get them; in order to preserve other types of armor, armor was allowed to be worn only by certain classes of characters.

In the third edition of D&D, armor slows down movement, and also significantly limits the benefits of a fighter's dexterity; this is a much more correct model, and artificial frames are no longer needed. A number of games quickly embraced the idea. It is terrible to think, but even in the recent " The Witcher"We are quite seriously talking about heavy armor for Main character!

The protective plus armor, as a rule, is one and a half to two times higher than that of chain mail, and three to five times higher than that of leather armor. Some games (for example, many MUDs) give armor a hit damage reduction effect.

The idea of ​​"mysterious metals" for lat role-playing games has been greatly expanded. In them you can see such wonders as ... bone, wooden and even glass armor. But there are no tin ones!

In strategies, the role of armor is easiest to describe as follows: an almost indispensable attribute of knights and other heavy cavalry. They usually look more modest and decent there than in role-playing games (although the armor of the Chaos Knights from Warhammer: Mark of Chaos able to compete with any of the wonders of World of Warcraft). In addition, armor in strategy games is usually observed from a greater distance than in role-playing games.

It is safe to say that we will see a lot more armor in the games - but, oddly enough, almost all of them will have very little resemblance to the real ones. The typical designs of knightly helmets, for example, are still almost non-existent in games; fictional ones seem much more interesting to developers. Most likely, it will continue to be so: after all, armor provides artists with unlimited scope for imagination.