I made a set of armor out of cardboard for my horse for Halloween this past year, and it's insanely helpful to know exactly how the real stuff is attached to the tack! I tied the shaffron to the bridle like you did, but I didn't have the idea to tie additional straps from the crinet around his neck. Because of this, it bounced like crazy when we went to trot, and he didn't like that. I also had no idea where to begin with a crupper, so this is a real eye-opener!
Wonderful. I think that a lot of people who want to try out things with their animals get too carried away and want everything to work immediately, rather than gradually and slowly. Love to see how you keep offering the horse a distraction/ peace treaty to tolerate what it probably sees as nonsense :D
true, the funny thing is that the 'slow' way is much quicker. Thorough can be fast. take your time but don't waste time. usually an adult horse of good conformation can be trained in about a year to get to 'this' point, aand then builds stamina and other qualities in another 1-2 years. Of course the first time you train an animal to that standard, you might take longer, and that is ok, but effectiveness is not measured inbeing slower. BUt the methods used need to be very low in pressure and so forth, like it was described in so many of the manuals of the period describe how warhorses should not be strongarmed into training.
Wow thats amazing. I also ride in medieval style (12th century - with sword and lance) so I can understand what you are doing here. A great work with this horse. Really appreciate that.
Very nice to actually see it move and with a horse with such experience and a very good rider! It also good to see that you can still work between each other as its all one household in these times.
Max was pretty big hearted trying all that without a fit! This looked like a lot of fun. Interesting about riding with your seat and leg yields as in western its pretty common, guess I figured everyone does. Awesome video! Glad yt offered it and following! We have a Clyde and Gypsy Drum that has the build that begs full barding lol Probably not historically correct but fun thought anyway. Thanks again!
yeah the neck rein with a crinet is pretty annoying, but we use a lot of shoulder in, travers and renvers in training horses, obviously a good warhorse was expected to do canter pirouettes and various two-time gallops.
Eres un Maestro, aprendo con tus videos una materia, difícil/ imposible de contar con un Maestro en mi querido Pais. Intento poner en práctica tus consejos. Saludos y respetos desde Argentina.
I love your armor and how horse eating things frequently. I also taking photo with horse in 21 century uniform so I'm jerious to you have such a nice horse! patient,calm,and well-trained.
Wow, absolut genial! Du erklärst alles sehr gut und professionell, teils sogar besser als manche Dokus. Es freut mich, dass es Leute wie dich gibt, die so interessiert und talentiert sind, so etwas zu machen. Ebenfalls viele Grüße aus Thüringen! 😊
@@airnt Bis jetzt nicht, aber auf alle Fälle sehr historisch interessiert. Habe mir schon zwei Bücher über Friedrich Barbarossa/ das HRR gekauft (fange ich dann an, wenn ich mit Martin Kuckenburgs "Die Kelten" fertig bin). Aber egal welche Epoche, ich finde das immer super cool, wenn Leute sich die Mühe machen und versuchen, das praktisch nachzustellen. Da kam mir dein Video gerade recht. 😉
Thank you for showing this! I never tried getting on my pony in my full plate, she would probably have killed both of us, she sometimes used to try to buck her saddle off the first time we picked up a trot if it hadn't been put on exactly right, and a noisy clanking barding would have terrified her when she started moving, so if I was going to get her used to barding, we'd have started with her on the lead... When we did pony dress-up for barn parties, I'd armour us both up and lead her, she wore a chamfron I made (the first piece of steel plate armour I ever made) and I repurposed some faulds for a chest piece and also got into my armour in front of her and jumped up and down in front of her so she was used to the amount of noise I made just moving around... she did get used to me swinging a sword ovver her head, though... the only time I ever mounted up while fully armoured was at a medieval festival where the jousting troupe offered pony rides on their jousting horses, I got on fine with hte mounting block but getting off required a little more thinking because I couldn't lift my leg over the saddle!
if you think that does it not upset you to see them abused like that? With its head tied down and forced to miserably trot around in circles on freaking gravel just to stroke this persons ego? Ive worked with and trained animals for most of my life. My aunt was a riding instructor and riding competition judge. I had a job where I worked in animal competitions and it made me realize how abusive it all is. It didnt take much questioning of my aunt for her to realize she was part of an abusive system and she had just never given it that much thought.
thank you! Interestingly the 'great horse' bred in Brabant in the 15th century topped out at the size of this guy. He is my great freind, this last decade, challenged by his body, but a sharp mind and a loyal companion
are you referring to the thun scetchbuch version with the whole leg armour? It is somewhat questionable if that one was ever built, and even if it was it was not typical at all, but a one off. 'full bards' are considered in period distinct from 'half bards' yet we know they did not have to have every concievable element to be considered 'full bards' Especialy Flanchards are often omitted in period. The whole system is a modular set that can be used as needed. Especially crinets add a lot of weight and complexity and not that much added protection, and are often omitted. making a choice on that matter might also be a question how much work the horse needs to do and if tiring its' head posture prematurely might be more detrimental than the protection afforded.
@@River.E.M mail is generally heavier, especialy at comparable defensive strength. yet mail is somewhat easier to handle around horses, and the chance of the animal injuring itself on the mail is less. also through mail you can still give rein aids to some degree, whereas the plate numbs the horse to the neck rein almost entirely. Mail crinets are known and the underneck is often protected by mail, but those are really of significant weight. mail peytrals are also known, there is one original in private hands that i have handled. (obviously earlier full mail caparisons were also known already in the 13th century and perhaps before) Leather shaffrons are known, sometimes silvered to look like steel, Leather crinets i do not know about, but they could have existed as leather peytrals and cruppers are probably the most common forms of body armour of horses in the period. the leahter can give some bulk and articulation issues but is less likely to cut the animal itself. Horse bards from leather (or even rhino hide) are often very thick, so a crinet would have to be distinctly thinner than those. This might really reduce its defensive capabilities to the point where it will not be used at all.
@airnt ah, so steel is lighter, but a Crinette is often unnecessary anyway. I'll take that into account then. I suppose a crinette only be really desired when engaging cavalry as they may try to cut down against the horse neck?
@@River.E.M well the underneck is often protected against pikes and whatnot, but it adds a lot of weight and complexity. just the crinet for the neck is 6 kg + but a full crinet is heavier still and an underneck mail cover is really a lot of weight. so it could be half the horse armours' weight, in theory.
Awesome video and I really enjoyed it! I own a similar suit, four helmets and love wearing it! And I LOVE the two-piece sallet and gorget of all helms. My favorites are those helmets with the protruding "accordion" faces that look bad@$$, and not like the stereotypical "knight in shining armor" enclosed helm.
in fact that armour has had horses trample all over it, years ago. on another occasaion my shin was kicked by another stallion while riding him, and the greave withstood it with no visible damage at all. i think it would withstand a kick quite ok.
i go into this in detail on the walk around talking video basically there are plate designs that cover this area, but they are somewhat uncommon. They add a lot of weight to the whole armour. Already the crinet is really the heaviest section. Mail versions of this coverage is even heavier. also this section is the most likely to have malfunctions and cause very big issues in the functioning of the horse. the area is not entirely without protection, though. even just the presence of the shanks of the bit prevents upwards slashing and the horses' nose and shaffron are covering the frontal arc rather well. falling shot from bows or crossbows is likely covered by the crinet and its mail fringes. direct thrusts from the side from poleweapons are rather unlikely to be present due to the position in the formation, and thereby being covered by other riders. In a skirmish the rider can more easily parry this area with his weapons. protecting the front of the head of the animal is much harder (though possible) with a parry than the side of the neck, where you can parry with lances, swords and even warhammers. The more lethal thrusts to the poll and the throat are really high up in the neck and are covered by the crinet already, there is largely flesh that is uncovered. so though there IS a protective benefit from covering this area, it comes at a large weight penalty and does not add that much security compared to its costs.
the "la brida" style is used when riding with armor. You keep your legs more forward on the horse and have your stirrups tied together underneath the horse. Back then you balanced on the horses mouth instead of neck reining him. "a la Jinete" is another style but more for light cavalrymen.
the distinction 'a la brida' vs 'a la jinetta' is slightly later. If you read the works of Don Duarte in 1430 Bem Cavalgar, he talks about the 5 saddles and the 5 ways of riding in them. The jinetta seat is seen in there, i suppose, but the distinction is not just between those two. the A la brida style as described by duarte mostly applies to raised seat saddles, which i have ridden a faair bit over the years, however this is a 'bravante' saddle, hence the verry often depicted style with an almost 'classical' position however with the toes a little lower. this is actually remarkably often shown. It is perhaps striking to see the depictions where medieval art shows more extended legs, but htere are plenty where the bravante style seat are shown, in particular in 15th century warfare. Notable exceptions can be jousting (but also not 100% of the time) but in particular complex maneuvers often shown the legs 'on' Also in the fencing manuscripts of this particular period we see the maneuvers mostly done with legs 'on'. (like turning under the lance in particular) there are a whole host of depictions by different authors that do show this. The Schilling chronicle has 1000s of riders depicted and a large proportion has their legs 'on' maybe 50% again the Outremer chronicles (1470s France)have a similar 50% split. the 1480s wolfegger haausbuch has even more legs 'on'. the 13th century postion is a little more likely to be extended a little forward, but not as consistently as often supposed.
" Is the Southern German,🇩🇪 Gothic plate,🍽 armor and chainmail,⛓ bulletproof?" "Is the Northern Italian,🇮🇹 Milanese plate, 🍽 armor and chainmail,⛓ bulletproof?"
bullet proofing is seen after longbow and crossbowproofing. This period most knightly harnesses, like one this represents, would be definitely crossbowproof on the breastplate and helmet. (this is a distinctly higher grade than the longbowproof armour) bulletproofing becomes more common lateron. this is usually anything over 3 mm thick, but much thicker pieces are made, that are quite simply overengineered on that point. this breastplate is actually 3 mm thick hardened and tempered carbon steel, so i would imagine it would be pretty bulletproof for anything up to 1850 that falls under a hand held gun. (muskets or whatever) 'pistol proof' is a thing you see in the late 16th century, which is a les sturdy class of bullet proof, and the helmet would definitely also be that, in that is it about 2,5 mm hardened and tempered carbon steel, i think.
I was soooo worried the lady would run outta cookies haha. Good sport this. I’d be terrified and hope I had a very long point implements if he came running at me…
I wonder how they trained horses for battle? I'm guessing they have agressive instincts the could be used? Did they know to seek and chase enemies? Are they in tune with the riders intentions or dis they have to me managed all the time?
we have a few mentions, like training where the infantry first runs away from the horses giving them confidence, there is a lot more to it. you place every hoof all the time, really, as footwork to your martial arts, this is why the dressage is so important
I suppose the armor makes sense vs ranged weapons, and it's certainly a lot harder to hit the horse with lances. Feet, nose, and throat are still exposed, throat could be covered in chainmail. I guess the feet remain unprotected, or did they also strap armor on the feet sometimes?
There was a leg armour designed for Maximilian I and supposedly made for a parade. it seems very risky and complicated. the mail for the thoat has examples, but they are remarkkably rare, also in depictions. plate ones are actually lighter than mail ones that actually stop anything. Mail is really comfortable, silky and moves with the horse, yet it weighs a lot. plate throats like the one in Vienna are known and very thin. Yet crinets are really where the weight starts piling up and the maneuverability issues start becoming very difficult. the head of the horse with the shaffron and the bit itself actually cover a lot of threats to the throat and falling shot is hardly going to be able to do much damage. coverage of armour is hardly ever meant to be complete, and priority of more vital parts being heavier in their protection with the deliberate reduction of coverage is very common. the main plate of the peytral in the Chicago museum is 4 mm thick, but only in the very front section. but there it is definately able to stop a bullet. i have another video where i go into the details where the weak points are and why priorities were taken as we see in this design. There is several examples of the same conceptual concept. (wallace, royal armouries, germanisches museum, etc) it worked for them. and the earlier Italian armours often leave the crinet out alltogether and those were noted at Verneuil to be able to resist the impacts of the longbows. in Dutch pension accounts this is classed explicitly as a 'full bard strong enough to charge through a pikeblock'. The in period assumption is that this design is fully sufficient
I'm sure that in medieval times, if they had invented Cliplocks or at least Pull-The-Dot fasteners, the person who invented them would have been made a landed Baron in gratitude, for all the time saved in donning and doffing armor for both people and horses.
of course clip pins ar seen on period armour, spring pins, detents, etc. Just the fancy things tend to be the points of failure. the forces on armour are quite serious at times
it is a conglomerate of many armourers, the main armourer for the bard was Isak Krogh, but elements were built and adjusted by Roman tereschenko, Lars and Augusto Boer Bront. the armour for the man is mostly historic enterprizes, but i have new pieces from Peter Spätling, Craig Sitch, Roman Tereschenko and Luke binks.
A premiere. This has not happened in centuries. Very special to me. One question: Is there any chance you can show the strapping in more detail? Maybe I can then improve my model even more. Also, you can show me horse armour videos every day, I would appreciate that. Personally, I think the flapping of the peytral and crupper is considerable (uncontrolled up and down motion). I wonder if these were fixed a bit more in some way to prevent this...or maybe the horses just had to get used to that. On my model, I connected the crupper to the saddle at a lower point. I did that because the modern saddlebags I used in real life also had that connection strap to prevent them from uncontrolled flapping. Just a thought...
that can be a restriction of higher front leg lift. The strap just over the wither is commonly seen in originals and the attachment to the saddle is already very low down. Most have buckles that are higher up... by a little. the attachment straight to the tree has its' merit. the horse also needs to bend considerably, so this also needs a range of movement. the crinet is buckled to the saddle and attached by a hinge to the shaffron, it has multiple straps around the throat of the horse. the shaffron is tied to the bridle and strapped around the nose. again the crupper has two straps crossing over the croup and then a few places where we pointed it to the saddletree, but normally we see buckles here historically.a strap under the tail really is the only other attachment.
the shaffron and crinet were originally commisioned from Roman Tereschenko 8 years ago. several rounds of adjustments were made to that, now finally being functional the peytral and crupper were made by Isak Krog and Augusto de Boer-Bont. Isak had volunteerd to make me the bard (or complete it to go with the shaffron and crinet) as a thank you gift for living/learning/working/riding here for 5 years. So it was pretty much made on site here in the Armouring workshop here in the garden
This might be a little exotic question, but some (of course not all) chamfrons have "unicorn spike" situated roughly above horses forehead. Given the propulsive capability of a horse plus the power it could potentially generate in pushing it into objects with its head, would there be any hint this couldve been ever used practically as an auxilliary mode of attack, or does everything points to it being clearly just a fashionable appendage?
there is one source that specifically mentions an accident with one of those: the horses at a joust at smithfield collided thaa the spike went up the other horses' nostril and killed it. the spikes are remarkably uncommon, though. a few around museums are reproductions or later additions. getting a horse to bite is a definite thing, getting them to trample onto prople is a definite thing, heaadbitting might happen very easily. sideways swipes with a horses' head can easily knock you off your feet, spike or not. the spike hitting anything and actuaally penertrating would be a liaability s the horse would dislodge the shaaffron at the very least to some extent and as it shifts across eyes and ears this would pose a great danger. the bridle would most likely also shift any the whole thing can easily come off. so headbutting without a spike is probably almost as effective and much safer. having said all of that, those spikes were around. I think they are used as a strong structure aas armour as well as a deterrent to manhandle the horse. There are bits that have spikes to stop people from graabbing your bit, as well, for the same reason.
@@airnt Thank you for the detailed answer. 🙂 One thing that inspired my c uriosity about it was a video on Tods armoury, which demonstrated the penetrating capabilities of a rondel dagger. One part of the test consisted of a da gger being used to stab and then push into roughly 1 mm thick mild steel flat plate, which the dagger achieved astonishingly easily in both cases. (It was M at Easton doing the stabbing) Of course this probably only has vague implications for actual combat use, once armour surface curvature is counted in and rondel dagger blade geometry seems quite different from most of these spikes (ideally triangular/diamond profile, hardened and sharpened edge and acute tip vs a spike with circular and quite wide profile ), but it was just a though exercise of what a slight push of a horses head could achieve vs man penetrating the plate by just pushing it in - engaging both hands on the handle. One more unrelated thought, but still regarding chamfrons in particular is, despite quite small surface compared to the rest of a horse, how much actual practical protection could it provide? Given the horse in extension, while galloping into contact, of course it hugely enhances the protection of the head, but armoured horses head seems to also be the first and quite sizeable obstacle in the face of anyone facing the rider. So is there any merit to thinking that chamfron alone could do much more for the protection of both man and his horse, when confronting opponents frontally than any other armour part, or would this be too hyperbolized?
@@jaroslavkravcak7938 i go into detail in my other video, a waalk around a 15th centur horse armour, on deaadly targets on the horse etc. 1 mm flat rolled sheet , even of medium carbon steel, is massively different to penetrate than a slightly shped piece from the same material. the hammering not only work hardens it, but also distorts opportunity to tear it. the sape itself works as a 3d spring, and distributes the energy massively and pushes the area together like an architectural dome. furthermore the shape will make glancing effects much more pronounced, so no purchaase means less energy transferred to begin with. even arrows would not go through this, especially not when ont exactly square on. you might want to look at the recent tods workshop video series that do staate these things too, the flat sheet, the mild steel armour for the azincourt test, etc.
@@airnt Yes I watched all those with interest, as they are an incredible work of applied archeology. It was similar with longbow test agains flat surface vs crafted armour piece, but in case of the dagger I found it quite surprising it could defeat even the flat plate at all. (a viable scenario, where I find it relevant is how much of a choice a man with rondel had in targets on top of an already pinned down opponent) Nevertheless, these documents were certainly feast for the eyes, I can only hope something similar might one day be realized with testing of a lance impact. (on such a scale and with such a sizeable sample of impacts, as given my theoretical knowledge of the matter, Im somehow not entirely convinced even a full on lance impact would be enough to penetrate higher tier quality armour in most instances since cca 1450s onwards. Or at least that it is a point of controversy similar to the argument of whether longbow pierces/not pierces period breastplate, which as far as I know was raging for decades before being settled by experiment, with the exception of exponentially less people being deeply interested in this concrete topic.)
Technically 'horse exported from Spain' (so unpapared andalusian). Percherons are MUCh larger, have a steeper shoulder, much larger hooves, feathers, etc. This horse is pretty much as big as medieval warhorses got. There is ONE example in the archeological record of the size of this horse from the 15th century (siege of Utrecht) at 158 cm at the wither. (=15hh2") most warhorses did not really exceed 15hh. Even as taller horses start becoming more available, by the 16th and 17th century, they are NOT selected for warhorses, again 15hh horses being explicitly preferred. some of the larger horses in that period are used ot pull large artillery trains, though. moreover the cavalry warhorse is generally selected for ability to collect until the middle of the 19th century or so; hence the warhorse has a shoulder and croup built to collect, a very different chest to a draft, etc, Percherons are lovely horses but not particularly close to medieval warhorses, objectively speaking.
What is it like riding the horse with a sallet on? How does visability effect the riding and do you think the sallet and bevor on their own greatly effect the riding experience?
it is one of the most conveinient contemporaary styles. armets are distinctly worse, for instance, especially with aa wrapper (and there is contemporary complaints about that too) you can move your head and look down pretty well, you caan open the visor and maintain a lot of protection, face hits are very well covered. in general any helm does affect riding, the weight, but also the fact that you are looking out of a vision slit, does affect your balance, but you get used to it. I have ridden in these helmets regularly since the beginning of my riding career, so i don't think it is a big deal at all.
pike blocks, known at the time as 'gewalthaufen' (violence heaps) were absolutely huge in order to try and withstand them. We are talking about up to 11000 men in a single unit. but there are definitely examples of pikeblocks being pierced by cavalry charges, from bouvines in 1214 to Gavere in the 15th cenutry, and others. yet usually the huge formations were not the main target of cavalry charges, who mostly were concerned with other cavalry. the thing is... several thousand men huddled in a heap... are not necesarily doing anything usefull on the battlefield, so they can be left standing there whilst the cavalry attacks more important objectives. when large formations manage to coordinate attacks, like the swiss did in the burgundian wars it gets much more complicated. but even there the burgundian cavalry attackd in squadron strength im promtu charges and penetrated the pikeblocks, 'and had their hands on the standard' yet they did not defeat the Gewalthaufen and had to retreat and lost the battle. Inpavia the cavakry runs over an infantry block almost by accident, yet retreats after anyway (though that is a flank charge, i think) but yes, pikeblocks could be breached by barded cavalry
@airnt very interesting! I didn't realise a pike block was so huge... I doubt any squadron sized force could route one of those! I was thinking of a pike and shotte sized pike block (the sort that winged hussars ran down many times) lol. But can I see how effective barding is now
@@River.E.M the winged hussars attacks with very large units. a squadron was usually 20-25 riders. Having said that medieval lance charges were often 300 or more riders, but the ideal was often about 1500 at a single charge. Azincourt is a good example, where the French intended to select 1500 riders for the initial charge (before the main assault on foot), but only could find 300 riders in the event. conversely at the battle of Tewkesbury 300 lancers from the woods behind the hillock attacked somerset in the back of his formation and sessntially won the battle.
@airnt ah I see that the cavalry squadron has varied in size greatly! In more recent times, about 120 men, and in Alexander's era, more like 300. Thanks for the information
@@River.E.M it depends also on what you mean with 'squadron' the 'eskadron' and 'schwadron' of later times is much much larger than the 'banner' that became the 'conroi' or 'Escadre' of the 15th century. it originally is the number of troopers a count or duke or maybe a 'knight banneret' would field. So the size is limited by recruting, not a practical limit ont he size of a unit in the field. these 'banners' were combined into units for the field. Like a 'vanguard' of anywhere up to 4000 riders, for instance. later uses of these deliniations are multiples of one another... tehreby we see squadrons becoming a word for a larger troop, put together in regiments and brigades or divisions. so the meaning of 'squadron' really shifts. but even in aircroft today, different nations have rather different numbers of aircraft in squadrons and so forth.
i mostly use it for 'live action wargaming' (re-enactment) rather than 'live action role playing' to be honest. LARP is by its definition based around the playing of a role in a context, and live action in that you get dressed up. This is mostly used in a context of playing at tactical scenario play, like a tabletop wargame is using figures on a tabletop to consider tactical dispositions. in fact an event i am organizing in September is billed (by an actual veteran and military officer) as 'medieval mil sim'. all of these activities have definite overlaps, so it depends on what you find defining of them. but if you want to cathagorize it as LARP i have no real problem with that.
the bridle itself or the shaffron and crinet? the bridle is made of leather strips and attachments with brass plates wrapped around the end and rivetted on (or you could use chicago screws so you can swap bits etc) the steel parts are much more involved. those are cut from 1 mm C45 carbon steel sheet, then heated with a gas torch and forged with hammer and anvil into complex shapes, polished and deburred... lining fashioned form padded linen, straps of leather, buckles hand made... so that is quite involved. the fitting is really critical. this crinet is a series of ball joints, so particularly complex and sophisticated. or did i misunderstand the question altogether?
it is a good question , i have another video that explains more of the details of the armour in a talking head format, that goes into it further. there are such arrangements, like the bard in Vienna, or mail counterparts of throat guards. these are however comparatively rare in actual use. (overrepresented in museum displays as they look cool) there are a few factors. weight and range f motion is a big issue for a rider. falling shot is a major part of the threat, as is frontal attack. then there is the lethality of the wound, the spinal damage will drop the horse immediately. the shaffron and the bit itself will actuall protect a lot of the throat in pratice, though by no means absolute, it is apparently seen as suffiencent to take the full crinet away. full crinets need to be really thin to not be overly heavy. the articulation adds a lot of overlap and weight. The crinet can weigh as much as a whole crupper or could weight double the peytral. so diminishing returns to add it, is really the answer.
@@airnt thanks for the response i was thinking that the shaffron can be a protecting to the throat especially with the horse arching his neck and pointing his head to the ground some horse armor protects the throat of the horse with plates like the armor of sigismund 2 but in general the throat is not protected or is protected with mail armor , maybe the reason was the mobility of the neck or breathing
@@akramkarim3780 breathing is easy.. the things are bulky, so also transport of a full crinet is quite troublesome. A lot of horse armour can be remarkably flat pack, or packed with multiple sets in a cart. this is a really important part of having them on your horse when you need them. The vertical head postion is a big part of how you make the horse function both physically as wel as mentally in combat, this would be literally second nature to any competent horseman at the time. This means you can get the horse to face threats really quite easily. Like with most armour designs throughout history, it is mostly frontal. Having lighter armour on the saide is usually preferred to increase frontal thickness. there is plenty of original armours where the crupper plates are quite thin, yet the central section of the peytral (chest) is MUCH thicker (in places 4 mm) this is a very small area, yet it is the pirmary kill zone. similar for the chaffrons. the aim of these things is for the horse to keep going until you hit the enemy, survival of the animal is a bonus. this survival rate probably mosty goes up as the attackers assum an attack on the animal is wasted and concentrat on the rider, for instance, Armour can be a statistics game as well, and in close formation multiple riders are shields to one another as well.
hahah yes, to think that 200 of these might well have spearheaded charges of up to 2000 men-at-arms! (or a mere 20-50 leading such a number of riders) i think sometimes people underestimate the sheer numbers of cavalrymen involved in medieval battles. Even some major parts of the wars of the Roses.
So the Saffron and crinet were inititally made by Roman Tereschenko, then altered several times since, by Sven and then by Isak Krogh. The main horse armour was made by Isak Krogh assisted by Augusto Boer Bront
historical riding styles are training very collected movements, the first teach sidemovements, then turns and acceleraating out of tight turns. they really do muscle up the horses deliberately and make aan effort to be ind so the horse will be relaiable in battle. The minimum level of ability (in armour one handed) for men-at-arms, and definitely knights, waas to be able to casually ride canter pirouette, mezair, lead changes, things like that. movements/exercises at or beyond grand prix level of dressage were taken for granted for whole units of cavalry, hundreds or even thousands in a unit. so yes, they were bodybuilding their horses deliberately for the work.
Looks cool, however there was a veterinary article that showed that horses begin to struggle when the weight of the rider and the tack exceeds 25% of the horses weight. I'm pretty sure the rider and the armour here exceed that. EDIT: Take a look at his answer in the comments, the total weight is actually within the limits!
the actual numbers: rider armour 25,1 kg (in this configuration) sword: 1,5 kg Lance: 2 kg saddle 5 kg Horse armour 15,6 kg (the tailguard was omitted here and that adds 2,3 kg) (i mistakingly stated the weight INCLUDING The taildragon in the description, will edit in a moment) rider 78 kg total 128,2 kg horse weighs 521 kg as per veterinarians scales. This constitutes 24,6% which study are you referring to? they mostly show 29 or 30 % but most studies are extremely low number cohorts, have very questionable methodology (like only studying two quarter horses that suffer from navicular, for instance) and '29' might be a bit optimistic as a conclusion where 2 significant numbers is very questionable, hence that would really be 30% as well. most (if not none) do not actually measure that percentage as such, but something else and only refer to this percentage indirectly inthe conclusion... very few studies even weigh the animals in the study.. so it is hard to state a percentage of an unknown (estimated) number with such accuracy. 25 or 30% is a massive practical difference. There IS a study that merely measures effort, as opposed to proxies for distress or damage etc. The effort is evident at a lower level of burden, but effort is not a cause for shying away from the work. The Japanese study actually claims that 48% is still ok, in fact (not sure if i would want to go that far, but that is what they say). Anyway it is pretty darned cclose but not exceeding the 25% even when counting the saddle, shabrak, sword incl scabbard, underclothing of the rider, etc... i literally weighed all of it.
@@airntthanks for the answer. I have to say I expected a larger total weight. You might be right about it being ~30% and I agree that 48% is definitely too much. Sorry for the quick judgement, I'll make sure I edit my comment so other viewers can learn.
It would make sense riding from the legs and seat considering what we have learned from the old Spanish traditional riders and how they have taught horses. That’s how Western bridle horses became a thing via California and Texas. So that old tradition isn’t lost, it turned into something different. They brought their way of riding in the 1500s to the New World and it stayed.
"Don't forget to convert the savage hostile primitive stone,🪨 age native american tribes of mesoamerica and the andes of South America,🌎 to christianity."💒 "By firing,🔥 a late 15th century to early 16th century renaissance Southern German,🇩🇪 built,🏢 gunpowder and metal lead ball, ⚽ matchlock arquebus with a burning,🔥 wicker cord match attached to the serpentine holder of the matchlock arquebus in order to detonate,💥 the gunpowder inside the arquebus to fire,🔥 the metal lead ball,⚽ from the gun,🔫 barrel and straight into the sky."
there are several traditions that have their roots in this type of work for similar reasons. all of these traditions have changed over time, to some degree. What we have done with the Hofreitschule Bückeburg, for instance, is to go back on look at historical sources how we should test those traditional methods, and perhaps recalibrate them back to what their original idea was, and especially clean up some weird things that have slipped into them. You see a similar process in Californio Vaqueros, like Jeff Sanders, trying to clean up the tradition back to its' roots in a similar process. Having said that, we are quite unashamedly cherry picking the nicer bits, we are aware of the less savoury parts of history, just recreate the bits we like.
This is very interesting to watch, both to put some context and reality to the source material, but also that age old "infantry vs. cavalry" debate in military history circles. I suspect you are leaning towards (based on some of the comments in this and the historical horse armor video) a logistical interpretation. The expense, training, and time to deploy for armored and mounted men at arms strikes me as a supply officer's worst nightmare. I would also be interested, if it could be done safely, in seeing how pikemen and lancers actually relate in reach: is it an individual advantage, or is it just that the number of pikemen equal to the cost of the horseman can make it a very difficult for a frontal attack to work?
uhhh!! very nice subjects! Those indeed need long explanations of my position on them usually the arguments of why 'knights were actually useless' are rather unconvincing. the expense and whole structure of society was there to support the production of quality cavalry, so it seems important to them. also even the prime examples of battles where 'cavalry failed' to a large extant were actually won with cavalry charges )crecy and poitiers the english charged on horseback to decide the matter) the massive importance of rider war that i keep japping on about for the last decade is a huge thing, and the difference in supply lines issues from modern warfare make cavalry less problematic. having said all of that, combined arms are the way to go... given that you combine arms correctly for each situation. infantry is easily left behind, though, with the lack of trains and trucks, they might easily just not be in a place to do anything at all. This even goes for sieges where a swift advance might preclude an enemy to build up the defenses enough to prevent a frontal assualt from succeeding earlyon. Fredrick the victorious does a lot of that. Hence... the quintessential plucky chip-on-your-shoulder-against-aristorcatic-repression yeoman archer isn't actually even infantry pre se, in that they are widely used as dragoons, really. The fact that they are horse mobile seems a large part of their value over other archers, which were widespread and used the same bows. supplying horses was a big deal and the quality and type of said horses. Yet warhorses by the thousands in well structured units, set up for the occasion, almost like a 'kampfgruppe' in WWII parlance, where troops were hand picked for a job, were widely used and generally effective. anyway, i have done tests to charge cavalry through pikeblocks, even with 6 m pikes vs 3 meter lances (medieval reality seems to only have evidence for 4,5 m pikes and 3,6-4,5 m lances, so this test was stacking the odds against the cavalry) and with lance techniques from the fencing manuscripts you can open up a pikeblock with a committed wedge attack as described and depicted in the period sources. the size of the formations is key to their ability to resist cavalry attack, at 5000 men strong blocks etc. also, don't underestimate the complexity of the formations involved, like cavalry wings supporting the infantry, and gunners in the tertios. pikeblocks do get charged and defeated, like at the battle of gavere. i think the main thing that makes the 'top trumps' discussion of 'cav v s inf' so rubbish is that people completely ignore the difficulty of controlling large bodies of men in tactical coordination without radios and the like. Hand to hand fighting requires very very tight coordination, and this is essentially based on pre planned maneuvres for the infantry, whereas the cavalry can have tendril-like wedge attacks following a specific commander like a fluid , hence being the only real thing a commander can use to react to the enemies actions.
@@airnt Thank you for the detailed reply. 1). Is this pike and lancer thing something you either have a video of, or can do another one in the future? This wouldn't just be interesting for the youtube historical scene, but actually of enormous importance for notions of "military revolution", and many other contexts with armored lancers (Indian, Central Asian, Sassanian or Iron Pagoda Horsemen in Jin China). After all, it is hard for even the best historians to sift fact from fiction without people actually doing the physical actions (Froissart, for instance, has a number of sequences that were "spicing up" events to make them more chivalric and exciting). It would be great to have a better grasp of what is pure fantasy, and what is reasonably plausible. 2). I think the point about movement for infantry is critical. Especially in Eastern Europe, it would be easy for a mounted army (Scythian, Hun, Mongol, Crimean Tatar, or some Russian and Polish armies) to simply avoid infantry columns, destroy the fodder for their supply wagons, or pick only good engagements. 3). When I was talking about logistics, I meant not only as a relative cost thing within Medieval and Early Modern Western European armies (infantry unit vs cavalry unit), but also a comparative one vs armies in Eastern Europe, Central Asia, Iran, India, and China. Jos Gommans, for example, estimates that there were between 1-3 million war horses in India and China (each) in the 1100-1800 CE period. The book is "The Indian Frontier: Horse and Warband in the making of Empires", on page 104. This would obviously not be sustainable in Europe (especially western europe) at this time, and would have a lot to do with rapidly increasing armies becoming proportionally more infantry populated.
@@lachirtel1 just a quick reply: the tricky part of all these topics is that the usual bias is to absolutism... as in... 'pike trump cav' this is not true, but the tendency to be heard to say 'cav trumps pikes' would be equally wrong. Tryin to make an argument about it is a long discussion to do it justice. I have been trying to gather enough material to really reference enough examples to show the point convincingly, though i need to make sure i have followed up all the examples fully. The annoying thing is to get the original reference, or text without translation errors just takes time. (as i am not a historian, it is more of a faff for me than for most) the issues with source critiscism are also complicated... just being sceptical of more herioc actions is not good enough. because source critiscism is not just staying in the middle of the road, it is figuring out what the data actually shows through the fog of bias. hence it is easy to show that things are not 'impossible' but how often things were actuall attempted at all, or when it was applied or if there were other solutions to the problem (that further made it possible) is quite another. anyway, i will try to make a good video about it. I did cover some of this in my lecture i did a while ago for
@@airnt Outstanding video - I 'found' it via 'Modern History TV' where you did a session with Jason Kingsley which was most impressive. If I may add just one small observation to this fascinating debate about 'car v inf': I'd suggest that this might eb due to the experience of what would probably be described the last persistent cavalry attacks on infantry, namely the Battle of Waterloo where the British squares, the foot soldiers, acted like pikemen against Marshal Ney's cavalry and beat them back. But that's just my opinion - I'm only now learning about all those thrilling aspects of medieval warfare. See: this is the one thing lockdown is definitely good for: enlarging one's knowledge, especially thanks to outstanding videos by people like you.
i go into detail on why that wasn't armoured in the video 'a look around a 1480 full plate horse armour' on this channel, it is a bit of a long story and it is eaasier if i can show the angles in that video
intersting question. there are actual depictions of the horses being hurt there. the damage to the top of the neck would immediately stop the animal from moving, whereas the damage to the bottom 'only' eventually kills it. The head with the shaffron is sort of in the way anyway, so actual shots at this are hard. it is mostly a matter of shots at the throatlatch from the side. Even with a full enclosing crinet, this is not really protected very well. some shaffrons extend though to cover this gap. the underneck armour adds a lot of weight and complexity and it is not a very commonly see target. the chest is.
@@airnt Thank you very much. In asian t style horse armor. There are lots of examples which have full enclose protection for the horse's neck. Maybe it's because Asians are more likely to use lamellar and mail, which can provide more flexibility.
@@airnt And I so some example of light armor which only protect the front of the neck. This shows a great difference with the european design. And in some ancient Chinese record mention that this is mainly use to protect the artery of the horse, in the front of the neck.
@@蛤牛古手 there are mail throats, plate throats, scale throats and cloth throat coverings. The cloth coverings might not be protective at all, not really have any evidence that they were. the plate ones are seen a few times, and there is a medieval one extant in Vienna. (several later ones too) these are however adding weight. I think that most mail throat armours are heavier than the plate ones. the fringes i have on mine are seen more regularly. the interesting thing is that the crinet is left off with some regularity. horse armour is quite modular and the shaffron and peytral probably make the biggest difference. for some reason, most hits on horses from arrows and bolt in depictions seen to be in the rump, though, not sure if this is in any way representative. this is where the side covering crupper plates could be quite interesting.
it was made by a host of armourers as i aquired replacement bits over the years. the main bard was mae as a thank you for 5 years of tuition and housing one of my students, Isak Krogh. the Chamfron and crinet were first made by Roman Tereschenko, but adjusted by Sven and Isak. the main armour for the main has mail by Isak Krogh and has pieces by Roman Tereschenko, Craigh Sitch, Peter Spätling, Luke binks but was first commisioned as a single project to be made by HE the armour was commissioned in 2003 and actuaaally made from 2004 -2008 (3 years overdue) and then added on until 2021, so over those years much has changed, also in how armourers work and how much they cost. Also... correcting for inflation is kinda tricky. then... including fitting trips? in particulaar fitting trips where the armourer hadn't worked on the armour at all in between so i needed to book another incontinental flight to have an additional fitting? so all told i don't know. sooo i am guessing this whole set if you had to commision it today. armour for the man 20k ish mail and clothes 2k horse armour 10- 15k???? saddle 2k sword 500 ish lance 100-250 € totals... 35-40k€??? but a few design descisions could easily change that quite dramatically... like an italian suit can be quite nice from 16k onwards. also i have exchange pieces like spaudlers, a fromouth and a kolbenturnierhelm and another helmet so all those are extras on top. i paid 5000 U$, 1700 AU$ and €1000 respectively. (so that varies wildly) totals more than 47k € including travel this can add up also. So depends on what you would like to know
Isak Krogh, Roman Tereschenko, Luke Binks, but multiple people have contributed to this one. there are others to recommend too. Currently in a really cool project with George Juliot, and two projects down the line with Augusto Boer Bront and Chris 'plattner' (and another with Isak Krogh).
the shaffron and crinet were originally commisioned from Roman Tereschenko 8 years ago. several rounds of adjustments were made to that, now finally being functional the peytral and crupper were made by Isak Krog and Augusto de Boer-Bont. Isak had volunteerd to make me the bard (or complete it to go with the shaffron and crinet) as a thank you gift for living/learning/working/riding here for 5 years. So it was pretty much made on site here in the Armouring workshop here in the garden
@@airnt Dude that’s probably like 30 grand worth of armor that you have strapped that horse someone gifted you the equivalent of a five grand at least piece of armor I don’t know what friends you have but I would love to be friends with them. I have so much desire for that And whatever you did to make friends that are that cool please for the love of God keep them because I don’t think you could ever replace people that awesome. I hope y’all have fun this year
I wonder if there are medieval/hema nerd horses that are like "ahhh, fuck yeahhh!, barding."
The man armored his horse gently.
Horse: Eating Eating Eating
yes, my Warhorse miight be slightly spoiled :)
Quite a sight with every piece on it. Really impressive.
thank you
Nice profile pic, that was an amazing set of armor.
@@GiskardRevenlov thanks. Jiri did an amazing job
I see Augusto cleverly edited out the crane used to get you up on Max ;)
hahaha
I was looking to see the mounting a horse part so bad!
@@IarctusI i might make a specific video about it, maybe
@@airnt would be extremely interesting
Yo Ian I miss your videos so much man.
dam im jealous. i wanna be fully wearing armor and riding an armored horse with a lance, just, dam
I made a set of armor out of cardboard for my horse for Halloween this past year, and it's insanely helpful to know exactly how the real stuff is attached to the tack! I tied the shaffron to the bridle like you did, but I didn't have the idea to tie additional straps from the crinet around his neck. Because of this, it bounced like crazy when we went to trot, and he didn't like that. I also had no idea where to begin with a crupper, so this is a real eye-opener!
thank you, yes this is a really major factor, and actually something that with steel can have dire consequences when the crinet comes off the neck.
"Ooh!" "Wow!" "Bizarre!"
Wonderful.
I think that a lot of people who want to try out things with their animals get too carried away and want everything to work immediately, rather than gradually and slowly. Love to see how you keep offering the horse a distraction/ peace treaty to tolerate what it probably sees as nonsense :D
true, the funny thing is that the 'slow' way is much quicker. Thorough can be fast.
take your time but don't waste time.
usually an adult horse of good conformation can be trained in about a year to get to 'this' point, aand then builds stamina and other qualities in another 1-2 years.
Of course the first time you train an animal to that standard, you might take longer, and that is ok, but effectiveness is not measured inbeing slower.
BUt the methods used need to be very low in pressure and so forth, like it was described in so many of the manuals of the period describe how warhorses should not be strongarmed into training.
Wow thats amazing. I also ride in medieval style (12th century - with sword and lance) so I can understand what you are doing here. A great work with this horse. Really appreciate that.
I hope to complete my 13th century gear with mail barding too, eventually
could u upload some videos?! :D
What a glorious sight. Thank you for sharing this with us all.
Glad you enjoyed it
Very nice to actually see it move and with a horse with such experience and a very good rider! It also good to see that you can still work between each other as its all one household in these times.
it is so nice to have good people to make this kind of stuff happen
This is perfect representation of steel barded horse
thank you
How doesn't this have more recognition? It's great!
thank you, kind words, It is just a little video of a tryout, i am not sure it is life changing :)
I was waiting for the mounting section. Still, very impressive. Thank you. I never thought I would see this in live action. Very interesting.
Max was pretty big hearted trying all that without a fit! This looked like a lot of fun. Interesting about riding with your seat and leg yields as in western its pretty common, guess I figured everyone does. Awesome video! Glad yt offered it and following! We have a Clyde and Gypsy Drum that has the build that begs full barding lol Probably not historically correct but fun thought anyway. Thanks again!
yeah the neck rein with a crinet is pretty annoying,
but we use a lot of shoulder in, travers and renvers in training horses, obviously a good warhorse was expected to do canter pirouettes and various two-time gallops.
Eres un Maestro, aprendo con tus videos una materia, difícil/ imposible de contar con un Maestro en mi querido Pais. Intento poner en práctica tus consejos.
Saludos y respetos desde Argentina.
seriously, AMAZING! the craftmanship is unbelievable
I love your armor and how horse eating things frequently. I also taking photo with horse in 21 century uniform so I'm jerious to you have such a nice horse! patient,calm,and well-trained.
thank you very much, i love him dearly
Essential watching for the topic, and you still make everything look so easy even in full harness. 🙂
thank you, too kind, as always
Superb video, and insight, and excellent riding. Thank you
very kind of you, thank you
How wonderful to see this, (and need to find more videos) but you clearly care so much about your horse being happy with his work!
I'm blown away! Too much beauty! 🤯😍
Inspiring as always. Thanks Arne et al!
thank you for watching, it always means a lot from the guys who do this to hear their feedback
Thank you for sharing your knowledge 🙏. I'm new to this channel and am enjoying it immensely. 😊
Wow, absolut genial!
Du erklärst alles sehr gut und professionell, teils sogar besser als manche Dokus. Es freut mich, dass es Leute wie dich gibt, die so interessiert und talentiert sind, so etwas zu machen.
Ebenfalls viele Grüße aus Thüringen! 😊
ah! das schöne Thüringen... ich freue mich total hier zu wohnen. Selber auch im Mittelalterscene unterwegs?
@@airnt Bis jetzt nicht, aber auf alle Fälle sehr historisch interessiert. Habe mir schon zwei Bücher über Friedrich Barbarossa/ das HRR gekauft (fange ich dann an, wenn ich mit Martin Kuckenburgs "Die Kelten" fertig bin).
Aber egal welche Epoche, ich finde das immer super cool, wenn Leute sich die Mühe machen und versuchen, das praktisch nachzustellen. Da kam mir dein Video gerade recht. 😉
This video was cooler than I thought it would be👍
You look so cool on that horse in full Armour!
thank you, very kind
Thank you for showing this!
I never tried getting on my pony in my full plate, she would probably have killed both of us, she sometimes used to try to buck her saddle off the first time we picked up a trot if it hadn't been put on exactly right, and a noisy clanking barding would have terrified her when she started moving, so if I was going to get her used to barding, we'd have started with her on the lead... When we did pony dress-up for barn parties, I'd armour us both up and lead her, she wore a chamfron I made (the first piece of steel plate armour I ever made) and I repurposed some faulds for a chest piece and also got into my armour in front of her and jumped up and down in front of her so she was used to the amount of noise I made just moving around... she did get used to me swinging a sword ovver her head, though... the only time I ever mounted up while fully armoured was at a medieval festival where the jousting troupe offered pony rides on their jousting horses, I got on fine with hte mounting block but getting off required a little more thinking because I couldn't lift my leg over the saddle!
Such a beautiful animal.
if you think that does it not upset you to see them abused like that? With its head tied down and forced to miserably trot around in circles on freaking gravel just to stroke this persons ego?
Ive worked with and trained animals for most of my life. My aunt was a riding instructor and riding competition judge. I had a job where I worked in animal competitions and it made me realize how abusive it all is. It didnt take much questioning of my aunt for her to realize she was part of an abusive system and she had just never given it that much thought.
@@doggodoggo3000 Ok
I thought the horse was beautiful before with armor on its drop dead gorgeous
thank you
that is very kind
Can you please tell me the horse's name
NVM it's max
Do you guys use him for like movies
Awesome work everyone involved!
Magnificent. Simply magnificent
thank you very much, i hope some more footage will come out of the september event with several horse armours in a line abreast, charging
Очень! Очень показательно и доступно для понимания. Отличный материал для изучения истории. Спасибо.
What a great horse!
thank you!
Interestingly the 'great horse' bred in Brabant in the 15th century topped out at the size of this guy.
He is my great freind, this last decade, challenged by his body, but a sharp mind and a loyal companion
this is the dude that models for faber castell's pencils
haha, thank you
Wow that’s amazing!
German Gothic armor looks so badass.
thank you. i quite like it too :)
Nowhere near a full bard. Maximilian is rolling in his elaborate sepulcher...
are you referring to the thun scetchbuch version with the whole leg armour? It is somewhat questionable if that one was ever built, and even if it was it was not typical at all, but a one off.
'full bards' are considered in period distinct from 'half bards' yet we know they did not have to have every concievable element to be considered 'full bards' Especialy Flanchards are often omitted in period.
The whole system is a modular set that can be used as needed.
Especially crinets add a lot of weight and complexity and not that much added protection, and are often omitted.
making a choice on that matter might also be a question how much work the horse needs to do and if tiring its' head posture prematurely might be more detrimental than the protection afforded.
@@airntwould a chain-mail or leather crinette be favourable as a lighter option?
@@River.E.M mail is generally heavier, especialy at comparable defensive strength.
yet mail is somewhat easier to handle around horses, and the chance of the animal injuring itself on the mail is less.
also through mail you can still give rein aids to some degree, whereas the plate numbs the horse to the neck rein almost entirely.
Mail crinets are known and the underneck is often protected by mail, but those are really of significant weight.
mail peytrals are also known, there is one original in private hands that i have handled.
(obviously earlier full mail caparisons were also known already in the 13th century and perhaps before)
Leather shaffrons are known, sometimes silvered to look like steel, Leather crinets i do not know about, but they could have existed as leather peytrals and cruppers are probably the most common forms of body armour of horses in the period.
the leahter can give some bulk and articulation issues but is less likely to cut the animal itself.
Horse bards from leather (or even rhino hide) are often very thick, so a crinet would have to be distinctly thinner than those. This might really reduce its defensive capabilities to the point where it will not be used at all.
@airnt ah, so steel is lighter, but a Crinette is often unnecessary anyway. I'll take that into account then. I suppose a crinette only be really desired when engaging cavalry as they may try to cut down against the horse neck?
@@River.E.M well the underneck is often protected against pikes and whatnot, but it adds a lot of weight and complexity.
just the crinet for the neck is 6 kg + but a full crinet is heavier still and an underneck mail cover is really a lot of weight.
so it could be half the horse armours' weight, in theory.
this is beautiful. thanks for sharing!
amazing and tremendous
That was very informative and fun to watch.
glad you think so, thanks
7:25 You'll never see Gusto happier than here, believe me.
Beautiful white horse
Awesome video and I really enjoyed it! I own a similar suit, four helmets and love wearing it! And I LOVE the two-piece sallet and gorget of all helms. My favorites are those helmets with the protruding "accordion" faces that look bad@$$, and not like the stereotypical "knight in shining armor" enclosed helm.
Only if the other guys wear medieval dresses this would look even better
i suppose we could do some videos that are more filmic with backgrounds and stuff, i do have an idea for that, but that project might take a while
Amazing! Thank you so much for showing this.
Girls riding horses: I want one, (5 weeks later) I want a horse
Boys riding horses:
Nice! Absolutely marvelous!
Bravo! Giel!
Beautiful and so impressive !
Thank you very much!
Letting the other guy handle the back of the horse is a good idea, a kick from that horse would definitely damage that stunning piece of armor.
in fact that armour has had horses trample all over it, years ago. on another occasaion my shin was kicked by another stallion while riding him, and the greave withstood it with no visible damage at all. i think it would withstand a kick quite ok.
i reallllly enjoyed this video ! thank you verry much!
i am glad! thank you for watching
seems like the front of the neck of the horse would be highly exposed to a injury from weapons
i go into this in detail on the walk around talking video
basically there are plate designs that cover this area, but they are somewhat uncommon. They add a lot of weight to the whole armour.
Already the crinet is really the heaviest section.
Mail versions of this coverage is even heavier.
also this section is the most likely to have malfunctions and cause very big issues in the functioning of the horse.
the area is not entirely without protection, though.
even just the presence of the shanks of the bit prevents upwards slashing and the horses' nose and shaffron are covering the frontal arc rather well.
falling shot from bows or crossbows is likely covered by the crinet and its mail fringes.
direct thrusts from the side from poleweapons are rather unlikely to be present due to the position in the formation, and thereby being covered by other riders.
In a skirmish the rider can more easily parry this area with his weapons.
protecting the front of the head of the animal is much harder (though possible) with a parry than the side of the neck, where you can parry with lances, swords and even warhammers.
The more lethal thrusts to the poll and the throat are really high up in the neck and are covered by the crinet already, there is largely flesh that is uncovered.
so though there IS a protective benefit from covering this area, it comes at a large weight penalty and does not add that much security compared to its costs.
the "la brida" style is used when riding with armor. You keep your legs more forward on the horse and have your stirrups tied together underneath the horse. Back then you balanced on the horses mouth instead of neck reining him. "a la Jinete" is another style but more for light cavalrymen.
the distinction 'a la brida' vs 'a la jinetta' is slightly later. If you read the works of Don Duarte in 1430 Bem Cavalgar, he talks about the 5 saddles and the 5 ways of riding in them. The jinetta seat is seen in there, i suppose, but the distinction is not just between those two.
the A la brida style as described by duarte mostly applies to raised seat saddles, which i have ridden a faair bit over the years, however this is a 'bravante' saddle, hence the verry often depicted style with an almost 'classical' position however with the toes a little lower.
this is actually remarkably often shown. It is perhaps striking to see the depictions where medieval art shows more extended legs, but htere are plenty where the bravante style seat are shown, in particular in 15th century warfare.
Notable exceptions can be jousting (but also not 100% of the time) but in particular complex maneuvers often shown the legs 'on'
Also in the fencing manuscripts of this particular period we see the maneuvers mostly done with legs 'on'.
(like turning under the lance in particular) there are a whole host of depictions by different authors that do show this.
The Schilling chronicle has 1000s of riders depicted and a large proportion has their legs 'on' maybe 50%
again the Outremer chronicles (1470s France)have a similar 50% split.
the 1480s wolfegger haausbuch has even more legs 'on'.
the 13th century postion is a little more likely to be extended a little forward, but not as consistently as often supposed.
" Is the Southern German,🇩🇪 Gothic plate,🍽 armor and chainmail,⛓ bulletproof?" "Is the Northern Italian,🇮🇹 Milanese plate, 🍽 armor and chainmail,⛓ bulletproof?"
bullet proofing is seen after longbow and crossbowproofing. This period most knightly harnesses, like one this represents, would be definitely crossbowproof on the breastplate and helmet. (this is a distinctly higher grade than the longbowproof armour)
bulletproofing becomes more common lateron.
this is usually anything over 3 mm thick, but much thicker pieces are made, that are quite simply overengineered on that point.
this breastplate is actually 3 mm thick hardened and tempered carbon steel, so i would imagine it would be pretty bulletproof for anything up to 1850 that falls under a hand held gun. (muskets or whatever)
'pistol proof' is a thing you see in the late 16th century, which is a les sturdy class of bullet proof, and the helmet would definitely also be that, in that is it about 2,5 mm hardened and tempered carbon steel, i think.
That’s the best thing on you tube today. Thanks for providing a respite from our election apocalypse. 🙂
always glad to be a distraction
I was soooo worried the lady would run outta cookies haha. Good sport this. I’d be terrified and hope I had a very long point implements if he came running at me…
I wonder how they trained horses for battle? I'm guessing they have agressive instincts the could be used? Did they know to seek and chase enemies? Are they in tune with the riders intentions or dis they have to me managed all the time?
we have a few mentions, like training where the infantry first runs away from the horses giving them confidence, there is a lot more to it.
you place every hoof all the time, really, as footwork to your martial arts, this is why the dressage is so important
now imagine doing this on a ill tempered destrier
well he might not be particularly ill tempered, but since he knows the 'sauts' max would be a perfectly good representation of a destrier.
Majestic AF
Who made the barding? I have been looking for someone or some company who makes bardings
it is a complicated process, this was made by sak krogh , augusto boer bont, and roman tereschenko
@@airnt Thank you I will try and look him up. Will try to get in touch with him
Very interesting video! Good job :)
Love the square
Its like an albrecht durer engraving, jumped off of the page?.
I suppose the armor makes sense vs ranged weapons, and it's certainly a lot harder to hit the horse with lances.
Feet, nose, and throat are still exposed, throat could be covered in chainmail.
I guess the feet remain unprotected, or did they also strap armor on the feet sometimes?
There was a leg armour designed for Maximilian I and supposedly made for a parade. it seems very risky and complicated.
the mail for the thoat has examples, but they are remarkkably rare, also in depictions.
plate ones are actually lighter than mail ones that actually stop anything. Mail is really comfortable, silky and moves with the horse, yet it weighs a lot.
plate throats like the one in Vienna are known and very thin. Yet crinets are really where the weight starts piling up and the maneuverability issues start becoming very difficult.
the head of the horse with the shaffron and the bit itself actually cover a lot of threats to the throat and falling shot is hardly going to be able to do much damage.
coverage of armour is hardly ever meant to be complete, and priority of more vital parts being heavier in their protection with the deliberate reduction of coverage is very common.
the main plate of the peytral in the Chicago museum is 4 mm thick, but only in the very front section. but there it is definately able to stop a bullet.
i have another video where i go into the details where the weak points are and why priorities were taken as we see in this design. There is several examples of the same conceptual concept. (wallace, royal armouries, germanisches museum, etc)
it worked for them.
and the earlier Italian armours often leave the crinet out alltogether and those were noted at Verneuil to be able to resist the impacts of the longbows.
in Dutch pension accounts this is classed explicitly as a 'full bard strong enough to charge through a pikeblock'. The in period assumption is that this design is fully sufficient
I'm sure that in medieval times, if they had invented Cliplocks or at least Pull-The-Dot fasteners, the person who invented them would have been made a landed Baron in gratitude, for all the time saved in donning and doffing armor for both people and horses.
of course clip pins ar seen on period armour, spring pins, detents, etc.
Just the fancy things tend to be the points of failure.
the forces on armour are quite serious at times
I wonder how different scale or chainmail armor is putting on a horse
well it works differently, a bit more like putting a caparison on, really.
Amazing video.
Sir, you look great. Please, who made that wonderful armor for you both? It’s unbelievable great. Thanks for this video.
it is a conglomerate of many armourers,
the main armourer for the bard was Isak Krogh, but elements were built and adjusted by Roman tereschenko, Lars and Augusto Boer Bront.
the armour for the man is mostly historic enterprizes, but i have new pieces from Peter Spätling, Craig Sitch, Roman Tereschenko and Luke binks.
A premiere. This has not happened in centuries. Very special to me. One question: Is there any chance you can show the strapping in more detail? Maybe I can then improve my model even more. Also, you can show me horse armour videos every day, I would appreciate that. Personally, I think the flapping of the peytral and crupper is considerable (uncontrolled up and down motion). I wonder if these were fixed a bit more in some way to prevent this...or maybe the horses just had to get used to that. On my model, I connected the crupper to the saddle at a lower point. I did that because the modern saddlebags I used in real life also had that connection strap to prevent them from uncontrolled flapping. Just a thought...
that can be a restriction of higher front leg lift. The strap just over the wither is commonly seen in originals and the attachment to the saddle is already very low down. Most have buckles that are higher up... by a little.
the attachment straight to the tree has its' merit.
the horse also needs to bend considerably, so this also needs a range of movement.
the crinet is buckled to the saddle and attached by a hinge to the shaffron, it has multiple straps around the throat of the horse.
the shaffron is tied to the bridle and strapped around the nose.
again the crupper has two straps crossing over the croup and then a few places where we pointed it to the saddletree, but normally we see buckles here historically.a strap under the tail really is the only other attachment.
That's a really beautiful full plate harness you have, may I ask how and where you had it made?
the shaffron and crinet were originally commisioned from Roman Tereschenko 8 years ago. several rounds of adjustments were made to that, now finally being functional
the peytral and crupper were made by Isak Krog and Augusto de Boer-Bont.
Isak had volunteerd to make me the bard (or complete it to go with the shaffron and crinet) as a thank you gift for living/learning/working/riding here for 5 years.
So it was pretty much made on site here in the Armouring workshop here in the garden
@@airnt I was asking more about your personal body harness; apologies, should've been more specific
That man is huge, reminded me the hound from game of thrones
I liked your channel and subbed. I am excited to learn moe from you :)
I am only 193, really!
The two people next to me are blessed with a more compact physique
The squire handing up the lance is over 2 m tall
This might be a little exotic question, but some (of course not all) chamfrons have "unicorn spike" situated roughly above horses forehead. Given the propulsive capability of a horse plus the power it could potentially generate in pushing it into objects with its head, would there be any hint this couldve been ever used practically as an auxilliary mode of attack, or does everything points to it being clearly just a fashionable appendage?
there is one source that specifically mentions an accident with one of those: the horses at a joust at smithfield collided thaa the spike went up the other horses' nostril and killed it.
the spikes are remarkably uncommon, though.
a few around museums are reproductions or later additions.
getting a horse to bite is a definite thing, getting them to trample onto prople is a definite thing, heaadbitting might happen very easily.
sideways swipes with a horses' head can easily knock you off your feet, spike or not.
the spike hitting anything and actuaally penertrating would be a liaability s the horse would dislodge the shaaffron at the very least to some extent and as it shifts across eyes and ears this would pose a great danger.
the bridle would most likely also shift any the whole thing can easily come off.
so headbutting without a spike is probably almost as effective and much safer.
having said all of that, those spikes were around.
I think they are used as a strong structure aas armour as well as a deterrent to manhandle the horse.
There are bits that have spikes to stop people from graabbing your bit, as well, for the same reason.
@@airnt Thank you for the detailed answer. 🙂
One thing that inspired my c
uriosity about it was a video on Tods armoury, which demonstrated the penetrating capabilities of a rondel dagger. One part of the test consisted of a da
gger being used to stab and then push into roughly 1 mm thick mild steel flat plate, which the dagger achieved astonishingly easily in both cases. (It was M
at Easton doing the stabbing) Of course this probably only has vague implications for actual combat use, once armour surface curvature is counted in and rondel dagger blade geometry seems quite different from most of these spikes (ideally triangular/diamond profile, hardened and sharpened edge and acute tip vs a spike with circular and quite wide profile
), but it was just a though exercise of what a slight push of a horses head could achieve vs man penetrating the plate by just pushing it in - engaging both hands on the handle.
One more unrelated thought, but still regarding chamfrons in particular is, despite quite small surface compared to the rest
of a horse,
how much actual practical protection could it
provide? Given the horse in extension, while galloping into contact, of course it hugely enhances the protection of the head, but armoured horses head seems to also be the first and quite sizeable obstacle in the face of anyone facing the rider. So is there any merit to thinking that chamfron alone could do much more for the protection of both man and his horse, when confronting opponents frontally than any other armour part, or would this be too hyperbolized?
@@jaroslavkravcak7938 i go into detail in my other video, a waalk around a 15th centur horse armour, on deaadly targets on the horse etc.
1 mm flat rolled sheet , even of medium carbon steel, is massively different to penetrate than a slightly shped piece from the same material.
the hammering not only work hardens it, but also distorts opportunity to tear it.
the sape itself works as a 3d spring, and distributes the energy massively and pushes the area together like an architectural dome.
furthermore the shape will make glancing effects much more pronounced, so no purchaase means less energy transferred to begin with.
even arrows would not go through this, especially not when ont exactly square on.
you might want to look at the recent tods workshop video series that do staate these things too, the flat sheet, the mild steel armour for the azincourt test, etc.
@@airnt Yes I watched all those with interest, as they are an incredible work of applied archeology. It was similar with longbow test agains flat surface vs crafted armour piece, but in case of the dagger I found it quite surprising it could defeat even the flat plate at all. (a viable scenario, where I find it relevant is how much of a choice a man with rondel had in targets on top of an already pinned down
opponent)
Nevertheless, these documents were certainly feast for the eyes, I can only hope something similar might one day be realized with testing of a lance impact. (on such a scale and with such a sizeable sample of impacts, as given my theoretical knowledge of the matter, Im somehow not entirely convinced even a full on lance impact would be enough to penetrate higher tier quality armour in most instances since cca 1450s onwards.
Or at least that it is a point of controversy similar to the argument of whether longbow pierces/not pierces period breastplate, which as far as I know was raging for decades before being settled by experiment, with the exception of exponentially less people being deeply interested in this concrete topic.)
@@jaroslavkravcak7938 ua-cam.com/video/oNkLWBTowZg/v-deo.html
What is Max's breed? Percheron? I love that roman nose :)
Technically 'horse exported from Spain' (so unpapared andalusian).
Percherons are MUCh larger, have a steeper shoulder, much larger hooves, feathers, etc.
This horse is pretty much as big as medieval warhorses got. There is ONE example in the archeological record of the size of this horse from the 15th century (siege of Utrecht) at 158 cm at the wither. (=15hh2") most warhorses did not really exceed 15hh. Even as taller horses start becoming more available, by the 16th and 17th century, they are NOT selected for warhorses, again 15hh horses being explicitly preferred.
some of the larger horses in that period are used ot pull large artillery trains, though.
moreover the cavalry warhorse is generally selected for ability to collect until the middle of the 19th century or so; hence the warhorse has a shoulder and croup built to collect, a very different chest to a draft, etc, Percherons are lovely horses but not particularly close to medieval warhorses, objectively speaking.
What is it like riding the horse with a sallet on? How does visability effect the riding and do you think the sallet and bevor on their own greatly effect the riding experience?
it is one of the most conveinient contemporaary styles.
armets are distinctly worse, for instance, especially with aa wrapper (and there is contemporary complaints about that too)
you can move your head and look down pretty well, you caan open the visor and maintain a lot of protection, face hits are very well covered.
in general any helm does affect riding, the weight, but also the fact that you are looking out of a vision slit, does affect your balance, but you get used to it.
I have ridden in these helmets regularly since the beginning of my riding career, so i don't think it is a big deal at all.
Even a pike block wouldnt stand a chance against a squadron of barded lancers
pike blocks, known at the time as 'gewalthaufen' (violence heaps) were absolutely huge in order to try and withstand them. We are talking about up to 11000 men in a single unit.
but there are definitely examples of pikeblocks being pierced by cavalry charges, from bouvines in 1214 to Gavere in the 15th cenutry, and others.
yet usually the huge formations were not the main target of cavalry charges, who mostly were concerned with other cavalry.
the thing is... several thousand men huddled in a heap... are not necesarily doing anything usefull on the battlefield, so they can be left standing there whilst the cavalry attacks more important objectives.
when large formations manage to coordinate attacks, like the swiss did in the burgundian wars it gets much more complicated.
but even there the burgundian cavalry attackd in squadron strength im promtu charges and penetrated the pikeblocks, 'and had their hands on the standard' yet they did not defeat the Gewalthaufen and had to retreat and lost the battle.
Inpavia the cavakry runs over an infantry block almost by accident, yet retreats after anyway (though that is a flank charge, i think)
but yes, pikeblocks could be breached by barded cavalry
@airnt very interesting! I didn't realise a pike block was so huge... I doubt any squadron sized force could route one of those! I was thinking of a pike and shotte sized pike block (the sort that winged hussars ran down many times) lol. But can I see how effective barding is now
@@River.E.M the winged hussars attacks with very large units.
a squadron was usually 20-25 riders. Having said that medieval lance charges were often 300 or more riders, but the ideal was often about 1500 at a single charge.
Azincourt is a good example, where the French intended to select 1500 riders for the initial charge (before the main assault on foot), but only could find 300 riders in the event.
conversely at the battle of Tewkesbury 300 lancers from the woods behind the hillock attacked somerset in the back of his formation and sessntially won the battle.
@airnt ah I see that the cavalry squadron has varied in size greatly! In more recent times, about 120 men, and in Alexander's era, more like 300. Thanks for the information
@@River.E.M it depends also on what you mean with 'squadron'
the 'eskadron' and 'schwadron' of later times is much much larger than the 'banner' that became the 'conroi' or 'Escadre' of the 15th century.
it originally is the number of troopers a count or duke or maybe a 'knight banneret' would field.
So the size is limited by recruting, not a practical limit ont he size of a unit in the field.
these 'banners' were combined into units for the field.
Like a 'vanguard' of anywhere up to 4000 riders, for instance.
later uses of these deliniations are multiples of one another...
tehreby we see squadrons becoming a word for a larger troop, put together in regiments and brigades or divisions.
so the meaning of 'squadron' really shifts.
but even in aircroft today, different nations have rather different numbers of aircraft in squadrons and so forth.
Great LARP video!
i mostly use it for 'live action wargaming' (re-enactment) rather than 'live action role playing' to be honest.
LARP is by its definition based around the playing of a role in a context, and live action in that you get dressed up. This is mostly used in a context of playing at tactical scenario play, like a tabletop wargame is using figures on a tabletop to consider tactical dispositions.
in fact an event i am organizing in September is billed (by an actual veteran and military officer) as 'medieval mil sim'.
all of these activities have definite overlaps, so it depends on what you find defining of them.
but if you want to cathagorize it as LARP i have no real problem with that.
You are bad ass brother
how do you know of my gastro intestinal problems?! :P :D
Bonjour en quoi est faite l'armure du cheval en quel matériau ?
C45 steel, Shaffron: Roman Tereschenko, Armure: Isak Krogh
This is amazing
thank you
Does anyone know how I can make the tack around the horses face &mane?!!
the bridle itself or the shaffron and crinet?
the bridle is made of leather strips and attachments with brass plates wrapped around the end and rivetted on (or you could use chicago screws so you can swap bits etc)
the steel parts are much more involved.
those are cut from 1 mm C45 carbon steel sheet, then heated with a gas torch and forged with hammer and anvil into complex shapes, polished and deburred... lining fashioned form padded linen, straps of leather, buckles hand made...
so that is quite involved. the fitting is really critical.
this crinet is a series of ball joints, so particularly complex and sophisticated.
or did i misunderstand the question altogether?
why the neck armor is in the back of the neck not the front even if the front is the part expose to the enemies
it is a good question , i have another video that explains more of the details of the armour in a talking head format, that goes into it further.
there are such arrangements, like the bard in Vienna, or mail counterparts of throat guards.
these are however comparatively rare in actual use. (overrepresented in museum displays as they look cool)
there are a few factors.
weight and range f motion is a big issue for a rider.
falling shot is a major part of the threat, as is frontal attack.
then there is the lethality of the wound, the spinal damage will drop the horse immediately.
the shaffron and the bit itself will actuall protect a lot of the throat in pratice, though by no means absolute, it is apparently seen as suffiencent to take the full crinet away.
full crinets need to be really thin to not be overly heavy. the articulation adds a lot of overlap and weight. The crinet can weigh as much as a whole crupper or could weight double the peytral.
so diminishing returns to add it, is really the answer.
@@airnt thanks for the response
i was thinking that the shaffron can be a protecting to the throat especially with the horse arching his neck and pointing his head to the ground
some horse armor protects the throat of the horse with plates like the armor of sigismund 2 but in general the throat is not protected or is protected with mail armor , maybe the reason was the mobility of the neck or breathing
@@akramkarim3780 breathing is easy.. the things are bulky, so also transport of a full crinet is quite troublesome. A lot of horse armour can be remarkably flat pack, or packed with multiple sets in a cart.
this is a really important part of having them on your horse when you need them.
The vertical head postion is a big part of how you make the horse function both physically as wel as mentally in combat, this would be literally second nature to any competent horseman at the time. This means you can get the horse to face threats really quite easily.
Like with most armour designs throughout history, it is mostly frontal. Having lighter armour on the saide is usually preferred to increase frontal thickness.
there is plenty of original armours where the crupper plates are quite thin, yet the central section of the peytral (chest) is MUCH thicker (in places 4 mm) this is a very small area, yet it is the pirmary kill zone.
similar for the chaffrons.
the aim of these things is for the horse to keep going until you hit the enemy, survival of the animal is a bonus.
this survival rate probably mosty goes up as the attackers assum an attack on the animal is wasted and concentrat on the rider, for instance,
Armour can be a statistics game as well, and in close formation multiple riders are shields to one another as well.
Give me 200 of these and we can easily reestablish the HRE
hahah
yes, to think that 200 of these might well have spearheaded charges of up to 2000 men-at-arms!
(or a mere 20-50 leading such a number of riders)
i think sometimes people underestimate the sheer numbers of cavalrymen involved in medieval battles.
Even some major parts of the wars of the Roses.
Great video, who was your and the horses armourer? 7:22 I missed the name of the armourer could you please tell me it. Thanks.
So the Saffron and crinet were inititally made by Roman Tereschenko, then altered several times since, by Sven and then by Isak Krogh.
The main horse armour was made by Isak Krogh assisted by Augusto Boer Bront
@@airnt thank you
how did they train them to be able to carry barding and an armored rider? they must have been the horse equivilent of a bodybuilder
historical riding styles are training very collected movements, the first teach sidemovements, then turns and acceleraating out of tight turns.
they really do muscle up the horses deliberately and make aan effort to be ind so the horse will be relaiable in battle.
The minimum level of ability (in armour one handed) for men-at-arms, and definitely knights, waas to be able to casually ride canter pirouette, mezair, lead changes, things like that.
movements/exercises at or beyond grand prix level of dressage were taken for granted for whole units of cavalry, hundreds or even thousands in a unit.
so yes, they were bodybuilding their horses deliberately for the work.
Brilliant!!!
danke dir
Looks cool, however there was a veterinary article that showed that horses begin to struggle when the weight of the rider and the tack exceeds 25% of the horses weight. I'm pretty sure the rider and the armour here exceed that.
EDIT: Take a look at his answer in the comments, the total weight is actually within the limits!
the actual numbers:
rider armour 25,1 kg (in this configuration)
sword: 1,5 kg
Lance: 2 kg
saddle 5 kg
Horse armour 15,6 kg (the tailguard was omitted here and that adds 2,3 kg) (i mistakingly stated the weight INCLUDING The taildragon in the description, will edit in a moment)
rider 78 kg
total 128,2 kg
horse weighs 521 kg as per veterinarians scales.
This constitutes 24,6%
which study are you referring to? they mostly show 29 or 30 % but most studies are extremely low number cohorts, have very questionable methodology (like only studying two quarter horses that suffer from navicular, for instance) and '29' might be a bit optimistic as a conclusion where 2 significant numbers is very questionable, hence that would really be 30% as well.
most (if not none) do not actually measure that percentage as such, but something else and only refer to this percentage indirectly inthe conclusion... very few studies even weigh the animals in the study.. so it is hard to state a percentage of an unknown (estimated) number with such accuracy.
25 or 30% is a massive practical difference.
There IS a study that merely measures effort, as opposed to proxies for distress or damage etc.
The effort is evident at a lower level of burden, but effort is not a cause for shying away from the work.
The Japanese study actually claims that 48% is still ok, in fact (not sure if i would want to go that far, but that is what they say).
Anyway it is pretty darned cclose but not exceeding the 25% even when counting the saddle, shabrak, sword incl scabbard, underclothing of the rider, etc... i literally weighed all of it.
@@airntthanks for the answer. I have to say I expected a larger total weight. You might be right about it being ~30% and I agree that 48% is definitely too much. Sorry for the quick judgement, I'll make sure I edit my comment so other viewers can learn.
It would make sense riding from the legs and seat considering what we have learned from the old Spanish traditional riders and how they have taught horses. That’s how Western bridle horses became a thing via California and Texas. So that old tradition isn’t lost, it turned into something different. They brought their way of riding in the 1500s to the New World and it stayed.
"Don't forget to convert the savage hostile primitive stone,🪨 age native american tribes of mesoamerica and the andes of South America,🌎 to christianity."💒 "By firing,🔥 a late 15th century to early 16th century renaissance Southern German,🇩🇪 built,🏢 gunpowder and metal lead ball, ⚽ matchlock arquebus with a burning,🔥 wicker cord match attached to the serpentine holder of the matchlock arquebus in order to detonate,💥 the gunpowder inside the arquebus to fire,🔥 the metal lead ball,⚽ from the gun,🔫 barrel and straight into the sky."
there are several traditions that have their roots in this type of work for similar reasons.
all of these traditions have changed over time, to some degree.
What we have done with the Hofreitschule Bückeburg, for instance, is to go back on look at historical sources how we should test those traditional methods, and perhaps recalibrate them back to what their original idea was, and especially clean up some weird things that have slipped into them.
You see a similar process in Californio Vaqueros, like Jeff Sanders, trying to clean up the tradition back to its' roots in a similar process.
Having said that, we are quite unashamedly cherry picking the nicer bits, we are aware of the less savoury parts of history, just recreate the bits we like.
"Alright then."
This is very interesting to watch, both to put some context and reality to the source material, but also that age old "infantry vs. cavalry" debate in military history circles. I suspect you are leaning towards (based on some of the comments in this and the historical horse armor video) a logistical interpretation. The expense, training, and time to deploy for armored and mounted men at arms strikes me as a supply officer's worst nightmare.
I would also be interested, if it could be done safely, in seeing how pikemen and lancers actually relate in reach: is it an individual advantage, or is it just that the number of pikemen equal to the cost of the horseman can make it a very difficult for a frontal attack to work?
uhhh!! very nice subjects!
Those indeed need long explanations of my position on them
usually the arguments of why 'knights were actually useless' are rather unconvincing.
the expense and whole structure of society was there to support the production of quality cavalry, so it seems important to them.
also even the prime examples of battles where 'cavalry failed' to a large extant were actually won with cavalry charges )crecy and poitiers the english charged on horseback to decide the matter)
the massive importance of rider war that i keep japping on about for the last decade is a huge thing, and the difference in supply lines issues from modern warfare make cavalry less problematic.
having said all of that, combined arms are the way to go... given that you combine arms correctly for each situation.
infantry is easily left behind, though, with the lack of trains and trucks, they might easily just not be in a place to do anything at all. This even goes for sieges where a swift advance might preclude an enemy to build up the defenses enough to prevent a frontal assualt from succeeding earlyon.
Fredrick the victorious does a lot of that.
Hence... the quintessential plucky chip-on-your-shoulder-against-aristorcatic-repression yeoman archer isn't actually even infantry pre se, in that they are widely used as dragoons, really. The fact that they are horse mobile seems a large part of their value over other archers, which were widespread and used the same bows.
supplying horses was a big deal and the quality and type of said horses. Yet warhorses by the thousands in well structured units, set up for the occasion, almost like a 'kampfgruppe' in WWII parlance, where troops were hand picked for a job, were widely used and generally effective.
anyway, i have done tests to charge cavalry through pikeblocks, even with 6 m pikes vs 3 meter lances (medieval reality seems to only have evidence for 4,5 m pikes and 3,6-4,5 m lances, so this test was stacking the odds against the cavalry) and with lance techniques from the fencing manuscripts you can open up a pikeblock with a committed wedge attack as described and depicted in the period sources.
the size of the formations is key to their ability to resist cavalry attack, at 5000 men strong blocks etc.
also, don't underestimate the complexity of the formations involved, like cavalry wings supporting the infantry, and gunners in the tertios.
pikeblocks do get charged and defeated, like at the battle of gavere.
i think the main thing that makes the 'top trumps' discussion of 'cav v s inf' so rubbish is that people completely ignore the difficulty of controlling large bodies of men in tactical coordination without radios and the like. Hand to hand fighting requires very very tight coordination, and this is essentially based on pre planned maneuvres for the infantry, whereas the cavalry can have tendril-like wedge attacks following a specific commander like a fluid , hence being the only real thing a commander can use to react to the enemies actions.
@@airnt Thank you for the detailed reply.
1). Is this pike and lancer thing something you either have a video of, or can do another one in the future?
This wouldn't just be interesting for the youtube historical scene, but actually of enormous importance for notions of "military revolution", and many other contexts with armored lancers (Indian, Central Asian, Sassanian or Iron Pagoda Horsemen in Jin China).
After all, it is hard for even the best historians to sift fact from fiction without people actually doing the physical actions (Froissart, for instance, has a number of sequences that were "spicing up" events to make them more chivalric and exciting).
It would be great to have a better grasp of what is pure fantasy, and what is reasonably plausible.
2). I think the point about movement for infantry is critical. Especially in Eastern Europe, it would be easy for a mounted army (Scythian, Hun, Mongol, Crimean Tatar, or some Russian and Polish armies) to simply avoid infantry columns, destroy the fodder for their supply wagons, or pick only good engagements.
3). When I was talking about logistics, I meant not only as a relative cost thing within Medieval and Early Modern Western European armies (infantry unit vs cavalry unit), but also a comparative one vs armies in Eastern Europe, Central Asia, Iran, India, and China.
Jos Gommans, for example, estimates that there were between 1-3 million war horses in India and China (each) in the 1100-1800 CE period. The book is "The Indian Frontier: Horse and Warband in the making of Empires", on page 104.
This would obviously not be sustainable in Europe (especially western europe) at this time, and would have a lot to do with rapidly increasing armies becoming proportionally more infantry populated.
@@lachirtel1 just a quick reply: the tricky part of all these topics is that the usual bias is to absolutism... as in... 'pike trump cav' this is not true, but the tendency to be heard to say 'cav trumps pikes' would be equally wrong.
Tryin to make an argument about it is a long discussion to do it justice. I have been trying to gather enough material to really reference enough examples to show the point convincingly, though i need to make sure i have followed up all the examples fully. The annoying thing is to get the original reference, or text without translation errors just takes time. (as i am not a historian, it is more of a faff for me than for most)
the issues with source critiscism are also complicated... just being sceptical of more herioc actions is not good enough. because source critiscism is not just staying in the middle of the road, it is figuring out what the data actually shows through the fog of bias.
hence it is easy to show that things are not 'impossible' but how often things were actuall attempted at all, or when it was applied or if there were other solutions to the problem (that further made it possible) is quite another.
anyway, i will try to make a good video about it. I did cover some of this in my lecture i did a while ago for
@@airnt Outstanding video - I 'found' it via 'Modern History TV' where you did a session with Jason Kingsley which was most impressive.
If I may add just one small observation to this fascinating debate about 'car v inf': I'd suggest that this might eb due to the experience of what would probably be described the last persistent cavalry attacks on infantry, namely the Battle of Waterloo where the British squares, the foot soldiers, acted like pikemen against Marshal Ney's cavalry and beat them back. But that's just my opinion - I'm only now learning about all those thrilling aspects of medieval warfare. See: this is the one thing lockdown is definitely good for: enlarging one's knowledge, especially thanks to outstanding videos by people like you.
Brilliant! Danke.
the girl looks upset that her guy (if thats her guy sorry for assuming a little) enjoys reenactment or something like that.
What about the horses legs?
i go into detail on why that wasn't armoured in the video 'a look around a 1480 full plate horse armour' on this channel, it is a bit of a long story and it is eaasier if i can show the angles in that video
Why does the armor only protect the back of the neck of the horse instead of the front? I think the front may taken more damage in battle field.
intersting question.
there are actual depictions of the horses being hurt there.
the damage to the top of the neck would immediately stop the animal from moving, whereas the damage to the bottom 'only' eventually kills it.
The head with the shaffron is sort of in the way anyway, so actual shots at this are hard.
it is mostly a matter of shots at the throatlatch from the side. Even with a full enclosing crinet, this is not really protected very well.
some shaffrons extend though to cover this gap.
the underneck armour adds a lot of weight and complexity and it is not a very commonly see target.
the chest is.
@@airnt Thank you very much. In asian t
style horse armor. There are lots of examples which have full enclose protection for the horse's neck. Maybe it's because Asians are more likely to use lamellar and mail, which can provide more flexibility.
@@airnt And I so some example of light armor which only protect the front of the neck. This shows a great difference with the european design. And in some ancient Chinese record mention that this is mainly use to protect the artery of the horse, in the front of the neck.
@@蛤牛古手 there are mail throats, plate throats, scale throats and cloth throat coverings. The cloth coverings might not be protective at all, not really have any evidence that they were.
the plate ones are seen a few times, and there is a medieval one extant in Vienna. (several later ones too)
these are however adding weight.
I think that most mail throat armours are heavier than the plate ones.
the fringes i have on mine are seen more regularly.
the interesting thing is that the crinet is left off with some regularity.
horse armour is quite modular and the shaffron and peytral probably make the biggest difference.
for some reason, most hits on horses from arrows and bolt in depictions seen to be in the rump, though, not sure if this is in any way representative.
this is where the side covering crupper plates could be quite interesting.
Do you mind telling me whether you made your own armour or did you buy it and also if it's not too much how much in total did this entire set cost
it was made by a host of armourers as i aquired replacement bits over the years.
the main bard was mae as a thank you for 5 years of tuition and housing one of my students, Isak Krogh.
the Chamfron and crinet were first made by Roman Tereschenko, but adjusted by Sven and Isak.
the main armour for the main has mail by Isak Krogh and has pieces by Roman Tereschenko, Craigh Sitch, Peter Spätling, Luke binks but was first commisioned as a single project to be made by HE
the armour was commissioned in 2003 and actuaaally made from 2004 -2008 (3 years overdue) and then added on until 2021, so over those years much has changed, also in how armourers work and how much they cost.
Also... correcting for inflation is kinda tricky.
then... including fitting trips? in particulaar fitting trips where the armourer hadn't worked on the armour at all in between so i needed to book another incontinental flight to have an additional fitting?
so all told i don't know.
sooo i am guessing this whole set if you had to commision it today.
armour for the man 20k ish
mail and clothes 2k
horse armour 10- 15k????
saddle 2k
sword 500 ish
lance 100-250 €
totals... 35-40k€???
but a few design descisions could easily change that quite dramatically... like an italian suit can be quite nice from 16k onwards.
also i have exchange pieces like spaudlers, a fromouth and a kolbenturnierhelm and another helmet so all those are extras on top.
i paid 5000 U$, 1700 AU$ and €1000 respectively. (so that varies wildly)
totals more than 47k €
including travel this can add up also.
So depends on what you would like to know
How much did the horse armor DLC cost?
most of it was a trade, so i paid 1000 and 300 euros
I think... the whole project was about.. 8 years?
How much do you weigh?
i myself weigh 78 kg
Very well done to experience history
no
I must ask, where did you acquire your gothic armour? It looks immaculate and I would love to see the makers of this magnificent set!
Isak Krogh, Roman Tereschenko, Luke Binks, but multiple people have contributed to this one.
there are others to recommend too.
Currently in a really cool project with George Juliot, and two projects down the line with Augusto Boer Bront and Chris 'plattner' (and another with Isak Krogh).
Thanks so much, it’s hard to find proper knight armour these days, historically accurate and functional!
what was the basis for your cuirass?
Ulrich Busch effigy
@@arnekoets3085 thank you!
All you need is a mastiff in armor and you’ll look like a german lord ready to crush some rebels
well i do live in a German Schloß ;)
Where on gods green earth did you get this from I must know
the shaffron and crinet were originally commisioned from Roman Tereschenko 8 years ago. several rounds of adjustments were made to that, now finally being functional
the peytral and crupper were made by Isak Krog and Augusto de Boer-Bont.
Isak had volunteerd to make me the bard (or complete it to go with the shaffron and crinet) as a thank you gift for living/learning/working/riding here for 5 years.
So it was pretty much made on site here in the Armouring workshop here in the garden
@@airnt Dude that’s probably like 30 grand worth of armor that you have strapped that horse someone gifted you the equivalent of a five grand at least piece of armor I don’t know what friends you have but I would love to be friends with them. I have so much desire for that And whatever you did to make friends that are that cool please for the love of God keep them because I don’t think you could ever replace people that awesome. I hope y’all have fun this year