The really heavy was the 17th century heavy cavalry "bullet-proof" armor used in the early parts of the English Civil War (1642-1651) that could weigh around 70 to 95+ pounds. Steel was so strong and thick, it could stop a pistol bullet, but extremely heavy and was phased out for a minimal breast plat over a thick leather buff coat.
Good video. As Shadiversity and Metatron also pointed out, armour always had to be both protective and practical. Armour in which you couldn't move or fight was not practical. Better grade armour was made and fitted.
Before the leg armour brigandine was used to keep armour flexible while they were unsure on how to make the entire torso flexible at the time, cuirasses and skirts if maille and plate eventually took hold
12:02 Shields coat of arms was often aided or replaced by surcoats Shields were usd less as to get at other plate you needed things like warhammers ir pollaxes or pollhammers Had an axehead or beak to focus blunt force as plate spread blunt hits over a wide area Both had small blunt heads too The armour was genrally fovused against thrusts, from arrows or bolts and lances which were the reasons plate was deemed to be necessary Arrows and sometimes bolts had started to be determined or projected fourth fast enough to break maille easier in which you could get hit under the maille often
When I picture a suit of armour that I would like to own and wear, it is exactly what you have there (the cavalry set). So please give me that lol. Thanks for making this video, I always enjoy learning about armour!
Very cool video. By the 15th century, the role of knights were in severe doubt and by the 16th century they had started to disappear, this was because firearms, canons and professional armies were starting to be introduced into warfare. The same doubt is true for castles which had largely disappeared by the 17th century, the role of politics had changed and for the first time, regions were coming together to form the modern nation state as we know it. The 17th century nations rather would use standing armies in campaigns on an open battlefield, trench warfare was sometimes used. This is why we don't see castle sieges and knights on horses in the late 17th century or 18th century and onwards. Knights and castles were a product of the early to late medieval period which ended around the 1500s (16th century)
Nice video and I nice suit of armour. I believe you need the faulds for protection of the waist and hips and you are going to have a fully armour of the 1410.
3:40 actually they would become a page at the age of seven and learn about etiquetts and court life and serve as a servant of sorts, at age 14 or 13 or 15 ( it tends to differ) they would become a squire and learn about combat. By all means correct me if i'm wrong.
This is like 14th century armour right at the beginning of the 15th century the later stuff didn't require mail to be worn underneath it has no couters or pauldrons also
So, if we had a time machine and wanted to send a spy into the Middle Ages equipped to be a knight, with typical armour and weapons of that time but made of modern quality steel, he'll probably be invincible? (of course if he also masters combat techniques)
+Journets Through Time Can a musket fire from a brown bess go through a shield, a brigindine, a mail hauberk, and an gambeson, I mean can a musket got through those layers
If you want a suit of late 14th century armor I would personally suggest you make most of the under components yourself. This will include the linen undershirt, hosen, arming doublet (the most important part of the armor), riveted chainmail shirt, leather arming shoes, and the skintight leather gloves for the gauntlets. For the actual armor you're best bet would be to research different armorers and blacksmiths and compare there previous armors they have made and the prices they charge. If you think what is usually charge is to expensive (most major individual components of plate armor go for about $800-$1000) than you can always piecemeal your harness together. Of course you could also purchase off the wall armor, but understand that such harnesses are historically inaccurate, uncomfortable, poorly shaped, and severely lacking in mobility. For the look of your armor I would recommend researching museum examples of surviving armors from the 14th century to find what you want. For more information I would recommend looking up knight errant and pursuing the Knightley arts channel's because they provide in depth information broken down into a easy to watch and fun format.
You say that such armor did not wieght 100 kg - I totally agree with you. But why you then do not do the obvoius thing - tell us how much it does actually weight? Thea would debunk myths about "100 kg" armor much better than simply stating that it is not heavy. BTW - my guess is from 20 to 24 kg.
Depends how "big" is a person wearing it. If you are tall and weight a little more- then your armor weight more. I'm 186 cm, and weight 76 kg, armor for me weight around 28 kg.
If you are carrying all your gear in a bag it's heavy, but when it's evenly distributed on your body tied at points to your arming jacket and your leg armor tied to your lendenier or arming girdle, you don't feel it that much. It doesn't take much training to get used to it. The worst part of armor is the heat that gets trapped in your helmet and torso. That saps your endurance more than the weight. On a nice day with a breeze you're fine, but on a hot sunny day it's hell.
Typical battle plate armor would range from 20 to 28 kilos. The myth of Super heavy armor probably evolved from tournament jousting armor, which could weigh up to 64 kilos.
Why the hips arent protected with metal plates like tassets? I know the fact that you need a relative mobile waist to move, especially in a fight on foot. The problem is that the hips are a weak spot for horizontal cuts and a layer of maille plus gambeson or aketon wont do very much to absorb the damage
first off good vid. but... its half plate not full plate. thats more later periods. also your looking at very early 14th to late 14th century respective from the visby shirt of plates later called what you have brigandine. the churburg is a mid 14th century carried over in to the 15th then replaced with a full set of plates that goes all the way down to cover the upper thighs (tassets). the churburg stops at the belly button as you said for bending. and the rest is either a maille skirt or what you have on and thats why its half plate harness set. later periods of full plate removes the maille and only covers joint locations or is attached in to the gamberson (armpits etc). your missing the sabatons for the feet but other wise a full set of gutter designed plates backed with maille.. your helm bascinet with pig mask or hound mask region respective places it mainly across the 14th century... the 15th is more a fully encased suit of armour with rondels protecting joint locations and patched chain under the slightest of gaps. and the spauldons are a lot larger with guards on them neck guards and other manner of deflective designs up to the later periods of gothic flutted designs. and sallet helms come about with a full range of designs and chin protections. now the shield well, lets say marry it with a crossbow...
Lack of funds. You can check out some of our later videos on the "it's History" Channel. Currently we're thinking about how to get some financing, so we can make some more content.
Video gets a number of things wrong that’s not full plate, it’s half plate. Were it full plate you wouldn’t have a shield and instead would have something to the effect of a two-handed sword or a pole arm of some sort. Also ive never heard anyone say armor weighed 100 kg I’ve heard 100 lbs but never kg I don’t think anyone is so stupid to think people fought in armor that weighs more than they do or nearly the same. Why not say how much armor weighs at that if you want to debunk that myth so badly. I can only imagine it’s because armor actually is spectacularly heavy a set of full plate being around 60 lbs or 27 kg, it was only manageable because of how well designed it was to distribute that weight between the shoulders, hips and legs. More do the hips and shoulders though, that’s more that your average modern soldier carries (though it’s still more manageable since it’s all wore on a soldier’s torso really and not evenly distributed which tires you out more) This is accurate to the period as far as I can tell but is slightly misleading to the uninitiated just getting into the subject.
The really heavy was the 17th century heavy cavalry "bullet-proof" armor used in the early parts of the English Civil War (1642-1651) that could weigh around 70 to 95+ pounds. Steel was so strong and thick, it could stop a pistol bullet, but extremely heavy and was phased out for a minimal breast plat over a thick leather buff coat.
Your squire deserves praise. Also, very good instreuctions and facts that keeps the interest. Music is 10/10.
I am happy you made these videos! Truly.
Good video. As Shadiversity and Metatron also pointed out, armour always had to be both protective and practical. Armour in which you couldn't move or fight was not practical. Better grade armour was made and fitted.
Not just a lance. The shape of the cuirass and the helmet encouraged glancing from swords and other weapons as well.
and now im ready for combat *struggels to pull out sword* lol but good vid though
man, these videos were so great
facts sad that he stopped producing them
Ohhh I just love this series. Glad to see you back!
Before the leg armour brigandine was used to keep armour flexible while they were unsure on how to make the entire torso flexible at the time, cuirasses and skirts if maille and plate eventually took hold
I believe that is riveted mail, noice
Well done guys, great to see you back!
Nice to see you back :)
I miss this content
man.... you deserve more subs and views... i love to see more armor videos!
12:02
Shields coat of arms was often aided or replaced by surcoats
Shields were usd less as to get at other plate you needed things like warhammers ir pollaxes or pollhammers
Had an axehead or beak to focus blunt force as plate spread blunt hits over a wide area
Both had small blunt heads too
The armour was genrally fovused against thrusts, from arrows or bolts and lances which were the reasons plate was deemed to be necessary
Arrows and sometimes bolts had started to be determined or projected fourth fast enough to break maille easier in which you could get hit under the maille often
glad to see you are continuing the series
Yaaayyy, the series isn't dead!!! :)
MORE !!!!! WE HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR SOOO LONG!!!
I am glad i found more of your videoes
I love your channel!
Video was very good, i would apriciate a little lower volume of music. I could barely hear your voice through it.
Excellent video! Also, there are some gambeson parts for legs too ;)
When I picture a suit of armour that I would like to own and wear, it is exactly what you have there (the cavalry set). So please give me that lol. Thanks for making this video, I always enjoy learning about armour!
well, I did not expect that... I hope you're back for good
good job I love this series
Face shape, like Great Helm used for charge against arrows.😊
Thanks to the knight and his brave squire, who travelled all the way from XIV century Europe to make this video
Yes! he finally made another one!!
Very cool video. By the 15th century, the role of knights were in severe doubt and by the 16th century they had started to disappear, this was because firearms, canons and professional armies were starting to be introduced into warfare. The same doubt is true for castles which had largely disappeared by the 17th century, the role of politics had changed and for the first time, regions were coming together to form the modern nation state as we know it. The 17th century nations rather would use standing armies in campaigns on an open battlefield, trench warfare was sometimes used. This is why we don't see castle sieges and knights on horses in the late 17th century or 18th century and onwards. Knights and castles were a product of the early to late medieval period which ended around the 1500s (16th century)
Me and my brother at 3 a.m. because we can't sleep:
Nice video and I nice suit of armour. I believe you need the faulds for protection of the waist and hips and you are going to have a fully armour of the 1410.
Who else thinks the chain mail over the plates looks weird
Mail its just called mail no need to include "chain"
@@ColonelBragg chainmail.
You're back!
Dude, you have a squire. I think you're the most badass person in the world xD
3:40 actually they would become a page at the age of seven and learn about etiquetts and court life and serve as a servant of sorts, at age 14 or 13 or 15 ( it tends to differ) they would become a squire and learn about combat. By all means correct me if i'm wrong.
I love the Bascinet !
you should really go on with your series! I think there are great videos to come from you
The triumphant return...
Nareszcie chłopaki :)
This is like 14th century armour right at the beginning of the 15th century the later stuff didn't require mail to be worn underneath it has no couters or pauldrons also
thank God finally
you just hit 1k subs!!!
you should try out some uniforms during the revolutionary war to the Napoleonic era, they got some really good looking ones too :D
Now let's have someone swing a katana at you to once and for all end the debate of who would win between a knight and a samurai.
I wish there wasn't loud ass music, which almost drowns the explanations.
it's totally strange that I watched the first 3 parts earlier today and now this part has been posted a year after the last one
Nice.
What’s the intro music, it sounds so glorious
Holy shit your back
Hey man ,love the video , what's the cost like of buying the whole set?
Man, try to use the Bates' method for eyes. Saveliy Kramorov corrected his eye so it works.
Mistake, prisoners were taken during the battle of Tanenberg/Grunwald, it was the need to pay the ransoms that bankrupt the Teutonic order.
So, if we had a time machine and wanted to send a spy into the Middle Ages equipped to be a knight, with typical armour and weapons of that time but made of modern quality steel, he'll probably be invincible? (of course if he also masters combat techniques)
Great armor, but a long bowman could make short work of you still. Which is why the hundred years war lasted so long. :)
Aż się zdziwiłem że nie ma tutaj Polaków
That shield is too small for a Genoan Pavise, what do you call it?
Hundskugel means something like dog's cone (kugel is a bit hard to translate, can also mean bullet or sphere/globe), not dog's mouth.
Erm - the English used that armour on foot, at lot (see Cercy and Potiers)
I'm wanting to see if you could a well try and do the evolution of the armor in the Roman army.
We have some plans regarding more films and episodes much more interesting visually. We'll keep you informed.
love the armor ur missing 2 peice though
sabaton
2nd half of breastplate
Enforcer starWolf many knights didn't wear sabatons when on horseback . And back plates weren't developed at the same time
Holy Knight me too
+Journets Through Time Can a musket fire from a brown bess go through a shield, a brigindine, a mail hauberk, and an gambeson, I mean can a musket got through those layers
who made this armor? where can I look to purchase a similar suit? thanks.
If you want a suit of late 14th century armor I would personally suggest you make most of the under components yourself. This will include the linen undershirt, hosen, arming doublet (the most important part of the armor), riveted chainmail shirt, leather arming shoes, and the skintight leather gloves for the gauntlets. For the actual armor you're best bet would be to research different armorers and blacksmiths and compare there previous armors they have made and the prices they charge. If you think what is usually charge is to expensive (most major individual components of plate armor go for about $800-$1000) than you can always piecemeal your harness together. Of course you could also purchase off the wall armor, but understand that such harnesses are historically inaccurate, uncomfortable, poorly shaped, and severely lacking in mobility. For the look of your armor I would recommend researching museum examples of surviving armors from the 14th century to find what you want. For more information I would recommend looking up knight errant and pursuing the Knightley arts channel's because they provide in depth information broken down into a easy to watch and fun format.
when will the next episode be up?
Where are the movies? :D
Nitpick, but those are spaulders, not pauldrons.
Looks very "Projekt14"-ish
Did you borrow polish armour ? :D
Or...are you polish and its yours ? Or none of that all ? ^^
Nice kit :)
All three in fact. I'm Polish and it's my armour and I'm a member of "Projekt 14" :-)
Journeys Through Time Heh. I am giving myself a cookie right now!
I love your groups efforts ! :)
You say that such armor did not wieght 100 kg - I totally agree with you. But why you then do not do the obvoius thing - tell us how much it does actually weight? Thea would debunk myths about "100 kg" armor much better than simply stating that it is not heavy.
BTW - my guess is from 20 to 24 kg.
Depends how "big" is a person wearing it. If you are tall and weight a little more- then your armor weight more.
I'm 186 cm, and weight 76 kg, armor for me weight around 28 kg.
If you are carrying all your gear in a bag it's heavy, but when it's evenly distributed on your body tied at points to your arming jacket and your leg armor tied to your lendenier or arming girdle, you don't feel it that much. It doesn't take much training to get used to it. The worst part of armor is the heat that gets trapped in your helmet and torso. That saps your endurance more than the weight. On a nice day with a breeze you're fine, but on a hot sunny day it's hell.
Typical battle plate armor would range from 20 to 28 kilos. The myth of Super heavy armor probably evolved from tournament jousting armor, which could weigh up to 64 kilos.
About 35 KG with full mail underneth....
Why the hips arent protected with metal plates like tassets? I know the fact that you need a relative mobile waist to move, especially in a fight on foot. The problem is that the hips are a weak spot for horizontal cuts and a layer of maille plus gambeson or aketon wont do very much to absorb the damage
The tassets are a later invention. In the 14th c. the hips were also protected, but these were different sets of armours.
I only have one complaint: the "background music" is a little loud, it's drowning out the narration.
Name of music at 10:14
Isn't your mail a little too short on the arms ? Your joints are exposed, there is only gambeson there.
You are missing Sabatons.
where are you plz make more videos
We have made some more videos for the "it's History" channel. We also have one called "Tylko Historia", but that one's sadly, only in Polish. :-)
first off good vid. but...
its half plate not full plate. thats more later periods. also your looking at very early 14th to late 14th century respective from the visby shirt of plates later called what you have brigandine. the churburg is a mid 14th century carried over in to the 15th then replaced with a full set of plates that goes all the way down to cover the upper thighs (tassets).
the churburg stops at the belly button as you said for bending. and the rest is either a maille skirt or what you have on and thats why its half plate harness set. later periods of full plate removes the maille and only covers joint locations or is attached in to the gamberson (armpits etc). your missing the sabatons for the feet but other wise a full set of gutter designed plates backed with maille.. your helm bascinet with pig mask or hound mask region respective places it mainly across the 14th century... the 15th is more a fully encased suit of armour with rondels protecting joint locations and patched chain under the slightest of gaps. and the spauldons are a lot larger with guards on them neck guards and other manner of deflective designs up to the later periods of gothic flutted designs.
and sallet helms come about with a full range of designs and chin protections.
now the shield well, lets say marry it with a crossbow...
Why you stopped doing this videos?
Lack of funds. You can check out some of our later videos on the "it's History" Channel. Currently we're thinking about how to get some financing, so we can make some more content.
100 kg, thats over 200 pounds
Make more video
Sorry but this is not a FULL plate armour. Those you try to refere to were Milanese and Gothic style FULL plate armour (mid XV century)
@David Lara Widely available for knights- yes, late 15 century.
Swords? Nothing.
Axes? Nothing.
Spears? Nothing.
Arrows and bolts? Nothing.
*Hotel?*
trvigo!
@@colossoanao try again
What happened to this channel?
13th century BTFO
反击
Please turn down the music!
Video gets a number of things wrong that’s not full plate, it’s half plate. Were it full plate you wouldn’t have a shield and instead would have something to the effect of a two-handed sword or a pole arm of some sort.
Also ive never heard anyone say armor weighed 100 kg I’ve heard 100 lbs but never kg I don’t think anyone is so stupid to think people fought in armor that weighs more than they do or nearly the same. Why not say how much armor weighs at that if you want to debunk that myth so badly. I can only imagine it’s because armor actually is spectacularly heavy a set of full plate being around 60 lbs or 27 kg, it was only manageable because of how well designed it was to distribute that weight between the shoulders, hips and legs. More do the hips and shoulders though, that’s more that your average modern soldier carries (though it’s still more manageable since it’s all wore on a soldier’s torso really and not evenly distributed which tires you out more) This is accurate to the period as far as I can tell but is slightly misleading to the uninitiated just getting into the subject.
It's not even a fully plate armour.
че за косоглазый джо