The Armour Archive

You are going to fight a real battle. Not a big battle- just a small skirmish. There will be no firearms- just edged weapons and impact weapons. You are on foot, swinging a 2-handed weapon, so no shield. You have the choice of any type of armor. What pieces of armor do you take, and what material is each piece made of?

A few points before you give your opinion: The armor should be sufficient to give good protection. However, it should be light enough so as not to overly fatigue you, if the battle lasts longer than you expected, and also to allow for the quickness of movement needed to deliver and avoid blows. The armor should give enough freedom of movement so your range of motion is not hindered when fighting.

As you can see there are compromises to be considered. What do you think?

Peisandros

Peisandros wrote:You are going to fight a real battle. Not a big battle- just a small skirmish. There will be no firearms- just edged weapons and impact weapons. You are on foot, swinging a 2-handed weapon, so no shield. You have the choice of any type of armor. What pieces of armor do you take, and what material is each piece made of?

A few points before you give your opinion: The armor should be sufficient to give good protection. However, it should be light enough so as not to overly fatigue you, if the battle lasts longer than you expected, and also to allow for the quickness of movement needed to deliver and avoid blows. The armor should give enough freedom of movement so your range of motion is not hindered when fighting.

As you can see there are compromises to be considered. What do you think?

Peisandros

What time period are the weapons from?

Off the cuff I'd go with full plate or later 14th cen transitional
armor... but the types of weapons being used would
make a difference in the armor I'd pick.

Peisandros wrote:You are going to fight a real battle. Not a big battle- just a small skirmish. There will be no firearms- just edged weapons and impact weapons. You are on foot, swinging a 2-handed weapon, so no shield. You have the choice of any type of armor. What pieces of armor do you take, and what material is each piece made of?

A few points before you give your opinion: The armor should be sufficient to give good protection. However, it should be light enough so as not to overly fatigue you, if the battle lasts longer than you expected, and also to allow for the quickness of movement needed to deliver and avoid blows. The armor should give enough freedom of movement so your range of motion is not hindered when fighting.

As you can see there are compromises to be considered. What do you think?

Peisandros

Since you've decided to bias your poll heavily, I think I'll sit on the sidelines and watch.

It might have been a wiser choice to just ask people what their choices would be, without loading the question with what they should consider - in your opinion.

I am sharing a bench and a beer with Gavin on this one

Iron Man's : )

My first thought was the young Henry VIII's armour that I saw at Leeds. Most complete plate coverage I've ever seen.

But, I've never seen it worn in action. The narrow lames covering the insides of the elbows and knees are beautiful to look at, and wonderful craftsmanship -- but how much freedom of movement does it allow, compared to a maille voider?

So I think I'll go for early 15th century Milanese full plate.

Bring it bitch

Henry the 8th foot combat armour.

Lucan Dux wrote:Iron Man's : )

IF that's not available, I'd go for what I wear normally. IF I ever got the Tonlet Armour of the Chamberlain of Burgandy's suit in spring-stainless, and trained in it enough, I'd go with that one.

I'm tuning up my suit this weekend some more. Charlotte J is helping me figure out how to sew up hosen, hat and arming coat!

Iron Man's suit is one to drool over IMO. And what an arming squire!

-Aaron

PS: Yes, I like my suit. [/u][/b]

It's pretty obvious that anyone in their right mind would be wearing as much light armor as they possibly could...most people would probably pick some sort of plate.

But I think we may be misunderstanding your question. Are you asking purely as an academic exercise or is there some reason behind it?

What year? What is my income?

But to answer your question specifically, as no firearms? A tank. I'll remove any firing mechanisms from it, or simply not bring any munitions with me.

But if I'm actually fighting for my life I'm wearing a tank. Literally...an M1 Abrams.

The Avant harness

Armor is primarily worn based upon what you are intending to be facing as the opposition arsenal. Not what you yourself are wielding. And what tactics you expect them to use is how you should determine what you are weilding. Otherwise, you might be bringing a knife to a gun fight.

It's better and more productive to ask something like you see in the "I want to be" forums. "I want to be a 15th cen scott with a claymore", what would I most likely be wearing for armor?"
-Cian

IN any historical reference to the availability of plate armour, firearms would have been available, and very probably used, and crossbows and bows would have been available, and used throughout trhe entire span of full harness of any sort.

You are creating a situation that would probably never happen, or have happened, so your constraint is highly artificial.

You might as well as "what armour would I wear to the combat of the 30?" which was a rare historical example of the sort of contrived fight you are envisioning.

My choice would be a light white harness of tempered steel, a deep chapel de fer and bevor, with the appropriate voiders, mail skirt, and standard, the whole thing to be under 50lbs weight. I might replace the cuirasse with a brigandine, depending on circumstance.

Why are we assumiong a fight on foot?

Full plate and carry a polehammer.

Hmmm climate and terrain would decide my choices...full plate in my part of the Knowne World...hmmmm.. not...transistional over all.
Adair

Is there room on the bench with Gavin and Magnus?


I have beer....

I vote for Conal!

InsaneIrish wrote:

Bring it bitch

Henry the 8th foot combat armour.

Hope you can run in that suit!!!!!!!!!!

Hey, what? No gunpowder... Right?

Iron Man is passe. I want the scout suit that Felix wore in 'Armor' By Johnathan Steakly. No Fire-arms does not preclude blaze-bombs. Then again pocket nukes and the armor used in Starship-trooper would be a good choice too.

Or did you mean medieval armor? I'd choose a PROPERLY FITTED, spring steel 15th century kit with great bascinet... and a horse also armored. And a good crossbow that dosn't take a 2 man team to use... just in case the other guy dosn't want to fight like a man.

I can see the gamer/LARP perspective in the question. If your opponent wears more armor then you and you bring a longer weapon or even a bow you can try to dance around the outside all day taking pot-shots in the hope that something gets in. If he gives chase then you hope to outrun. If your opponent wears less then you, you hope to beat him in a straight up fight... which if he has half a clue he will refuse to engage in. It seems like rock-paper-scisors that always favors greater range and mobility.

The problem with any of these scenarios is they lack anything to fight over. The opportunity to retreat is endless. There is never a wall or a river or cliff to find your back up against.

If Robin Hood wants to to play in the woods all day because he is lightly armored then fine. But he can't TAKE the town. He can't rescue the Innocents. The big-guys in the plate armor kick in the door, rape the women, kill the priests and take whatever is in the poor-box and then leave. There is no reason for them to stay and fight. All Robin Hood can do is harass and hope to capitalize on a mistake.

Judicial deul, confined area, where running away is recognition that God is not on your side and you are put to death... light armor and playing at range not so good of a plan either.

Armor works. If the guys in the early 15th century thought it would be better going back to the armor worn in the late 14th century rather then going forward they would have done it. Same thing applies for every century before and after. Your stipulation is best armor without fire-arms then likely it will be the last suit developed and tested with lives on the line prior to efficient firearms. That's mid 15th C I believe.

Sean

Godly Plate of the Whale of course.

Edwin wrote:Godly Plate of the Whale of course.

LOL... forgot about that stuff...

InsaneIrish wrote:

Bring it bitch

Henry the 8th foot combat armour.

You talking to me?



1527, absolutely State of The Art.


There are variations, but the best protecting armor will be found between 1450-1560, or so. It is mostly variations in styling if you are talking top of the line gear.

Can I have Dragon scale with a +8 against cutting weapons?

If not, I'll join the beer and bench group.

Vebrand

Peisandros wrote:You are going to fight a real battle. Not a big battle- just a small skirmish. There will be no firearms- just edged weapons and impact weapons. You are on foot, swinging a 2-handed weapon, so no shield. You have the choice of any type of armor. What pieces of armor do you take, and what material is each piece made of?

A few points before you give your opinion: The armor should be sufficient to give good protection. However, it should be light enough so as not to overly fatigue you, if the battle lasts longer than you expected, and also to allow for the quickness of movement needed to deliver and avoid blows. The armor should give enough freedom of movement so your range of motion is not hindered when fighting.

As you can see there are compromises to be considered. What do you think?

Peisandros

dance with the girl you brought

Is the battle field knee deep in mud? What tactics does the enemy prefer, lightning strikes or static lines (terrain would be a factor), what time of year and in what type of climate is it, are we fighting uphill the entire way, how far do we have to run.

On flat open even ground, with nice weather, single engagement, and fighting on foot I would want to wear the most advanced foot armour available to me.

I would wear:

half leg armour, milanese

Maille shirt, with elbow length sleeves

Breastplate, with no back or a lungplate brigandine.

Arm armour worn under maille sleeves with no spaulders

half mitten, half finger gauntlets

Visored sallet with bevor.


All that is a minimum. I might be persuaded to exchange the plate arms for full length maille sleeves.

Thaddeus wrote:Is there room on the bench with Gavin and Magnus?


I have beer....

Sure, if you got beer there is room.

Cisco wrote:But to answer your question specifically, as no firearms? A tank. I'll remove any firing mechanisms from it, or simply not bring any munitions with me.

But if I'm actually fighting for my life I'm wearing a tank. Literally...an M1 Abrams.

Thank you so much for the good, hearty belly laugh.
Also, I just thought you should know, the aforementioned laugh just woke up everyone in the house. Breakfast might get a bit tense if the coffee's not done brewing...

A Northworld Royal powersuit

[img]http://david-drake.com/images/books/northworld.jpg[/img]


Glaukos

Sean Powell wrote:Iron Man is passe. I want the scout suit that Felix wore in 'Armor' By Johnathan Steakly. No Fire-arms does not preclude blaze-bombs. Then again pocket nukes and the armor used in Starship-trooper would be a good choice too.

Or did you mean medieval armor? I'd choose a PROPERLY FITTED, spring steel 15th century kit with great bascinet... and a horse also armored. And a good crossbow that dosn't take a 2 man team to use... just in case the other guy dosn't want to fight like a man.

I can see the gamer/LARP perspective in the question. If your opponent wears more armor then you and you bring a longer weapon or even a bow you can try to dance around the outside all day taking pot-shots in the hope that something gets in. If he gives chase then you hope to outrun. If your opponent wears less then you, you hope to beat him in a straight up fight... which if he has half a clue he will refuse to engage in. It seems like rock-paper-scisors that always favors greater range and mobility.

The problem with any of these scenarios is they lack anything to fight over. The opportunity to retreat is endless. There is never a wall or a river or cliff to find your back up against.

If Robin Hood wants to to play in the woods all day because he is lightly armored then fine. But he can't TAKE the town. He can't rescue the Innocents. The big-guys in the plate armor kick in the door, rape the women, kill the priests and take whatever is in the poor-box and then leave. There is no reason for them to stay and fight. All Robin Hood can do is harass and hope to capitalize on a mistake.

Judicial deul, confined area, where running away is recognition that God is not on your side and you are put to death... light armor and playing at range not so good of a plan either.

Armor works. If the guys in the early 15th century thought it would be better going back to the armor worn in the late 14th century rather then going forward they would have done it. Same thing applies for every century before and after. Your stipulation is best armor without fire-arms then likely it will be the last suit developed and tested with lives on the line prior to efficient firearms. That's mid 15th C I believe.

Sean

Firearms were certainly effective before the mid 15th century - only the tactical efficiency in deployment was lacking. The Hussites employed them extremely effectively prior to the mid 15th century, for instance. Before that, they were effectively employed on gun-carts as ribauldkins, in several late 14th century battles.

There is no doubt that a well fitted mid 15th century armour, proofed, would be technically superior to late 14th century mail and plate transitional armours. After that, there is no difference in preformance, and changes are stylistic, until efforts began to proof such armours against firearms (mid 16th century).

45 lbs. of steel and mail (which would weigh what I'm used to wearing, and cover a whole lot more). See, if I were really doing this, I'd have an armourer on my staff to work out the dings at the end of the day.

If I went Japanese, I'd probably go with a sendai-do (less lacing to get cut), and bishamon-kote (the integral shoulder protection would be closer to what I'm used to). Plain zunari with a closer-fitting shikoro and so-men (rather like what I wear now). Definitely hai-date and sune-ate, even though I don't wear them often. Guru-wa for sure. Basically a full suit with all the optional parts.

And I'd sure as hell bring a squire or two to watch the back door. And I'd probably be looking to grapple anyway. Maybe take a shot getting in, grab'em and hold'em until either I've killed them or the squire has an open shot.

Then again, under the circumstances, why would I be on foot? Far better to be on a horse with a bow...

First of all thanks everyone who answered, I appreciate all of your opinions. Some of your replys contained questions, which I will try to answer here. If I pre-loaded my question with bias, as some suggested, that was to focus the answers on my point of interest.

The weapon: A Gransfors Bruks double-bit axe, with a 36 inch handle and a 3 lb. head.

The year in which I am setting the question: 2009
Income: not to be considered- just what is best

Reason for question: apocalyptic view of future

Climate- sub-tropical

Terrain: fairly flat, with low rolling hills

As to suggestion that I am a computer
gamer- you wound me. I have never played a computer game in my life, nor do I expect to.

As to my concerns about weight of the armor- I have been doing most of my training with a weighted vest that weighs 25-30 lbs, and I get winded very quickly with the vest.

Concerning those who suggested Iron Mans kit, that would be nice. I have been an Iron Man fan for over 40 years.

Thanks again to all,
Peisandros

This, but I'd wear the mail voyders that are not pictured in this photo:

Joaquin,

You harness is awesome, but it looks like it was captured by Vlad the Impaler. You may want to place a piece of fabric on the the post o the stand...

Glaukos...