Knight's armor description. Knight and his armor. The emergence of new helmet models

Studying medieval armor is not only a look at its appearance, but also an insight into the mood, horror and grandeur of a long-gone era. Yes, the armor provided the knight with protection, but it also reveals what those times were filled with, as well as the importance of the person who wore it, not to mention the fact that the armor will allow us to know, and perhaps even tell us about the era, so rich in legends, saturated with the spirit of historicism.

A little over five hundred years ago, a knight from the noble and ancient Franconian family of Schott owned magnificent armor made by one of the famous Nuremberg gunsmiths. This knight, whose name was Kunz Schott von Hellingen, died in 1526, but his armor has still been preserved and looks like new. All the details have been preserved, there is not a single dent or nick, and the shine of the metal has also been preserved. In a word, this armor is a wonderful example of the work of a gunsmith.

The armor was made between 1490 and 1497, when Schott and forty other knights jointly owned a large castle in Rothenburg. Forty-one knights made up a small professional army that participated in the endless internecine wars of the barons of Southern Germany, offering services to any of them for a fee. In total, there were about five hundred well-trained, battle-hardened soldiers in the castle. This castle still stands near the city of Nuremberg.

In 1497, Schott was elected commander of this army and commandant of the Rothenburg fortress. One of his first independent actions was the war with Nuremberg in response, as Schott himself said, to the unbearable hostility shown by the city council towards the Rothenburg knights. Thanks to this war, we can establish the date exactly when the armor was made, within one or two years. It took a lot of time to make armor of this type; the owner had to often come to the gunsmith to have his military attire adjusted. If Schott had stuck his nose into Nuremberg after the war began in 1497, he would have immediately lost his nose along with his head, even if we assume that there was a gunsmith who would agree to make armor for a man at war with his hometown . So we can safely assume that the armor was made before this war began at the end of the 15th century. Based on the style and style of the armor, we can conclude that they could not have been made before 1490. We also know that the armor was made in Nuremberg, since on inside The cuirass bears the mark of the Nuremberg Armourers' Guild - a Gothic letter framed by a chain of pearls or dots (see Fig. 1a). In addition, Schott's armor is distinguished by some features characteristic of the work of Nuremberg masters.

Today we see this armor highly polished, but when Schott wore it, it was probably painted black or dark purple. At the top of the breastplate of the cuirass was engraved his coat of arms, which at that time had a bright color, but since then it has worn off and disappeared. Undoubtedly, the bright coat of arms and plume formed a sharp contrast with the dark trim of the armor. The heraldic shield of the coat of arms was divided into four fields, which were staggered in silver and red, or, in heraldic terms, it was a four-field shield with scarlet and silver. (Schott's armor is in the magnificent private collection of Mr. R. T. Gwynne of Epsom.)

Schott's career as a commander of a free squad turned out to be extremely successful. Shortly after his election, he sent a letter of formal challenge to one of the powerful German princes, the imperial electors, who, as Schott stated in the letter, held the castle of Hornburg, which was the hereditary possession of Schott himself. We do not know what came of this enterprise, but Schott probably felt confident enough to dare to challenge such a powerful tycoon to a fight. During Schott's first raids against the Nurembergers, one of the city council members, Wilhelm Döring, had the misfortune of falling into Schott's hands. Schott took Doering to Rothenburg, where the poor man's right hand was cut off. After this, Doering was sent home with a rude letter from Schott to the city council. For this crime, Emperor Maximilian I declared Schott an outlaw, which, however, did not bother the latter at all. One of the powerful barons, Margrave Friedrich von Bayreuth, supported Schott, and he continued his previous activities. Of course, all this time, Schott and his squad offered their services for a fee to any baron who needed it. When money talks, mercenaries listen. When there were no clients willing to pay money, Schott and his men began to rob at their own peril and risk.

A few years later, Schott entered the service of Margrave Casimir of Brandenburg and became commandant of the small town and fortress of Streitburg. Here Schott developed such vigorous activity that the Swabian barons sent a note to the margrave, in which they wrote that if he did not stop Schott, they would devastate his possessions. Casimir, so the story goes, secretly beheaded Schott at Kadolzberg in 1523.

Since supporters of Nuremberg adhered to this interpretation of Schott’s death, this story must be taken on faith with some reservations. Some evidence suggests that he was still alive in 1525 and died of natural causes in Streitburg in 1526. We can safely conclude that the story of Schott's execution - although dramatic and entertaining - is not true. There are grains of truth in this story regarding how Schott was perceived in some circles. The execution ending is a stretch for the gullible. But whatever Schott was, he was undoubtedly a man of his time - cruel, warlike and unscrupulous in his means. At the same time, he was also a brave, courageous military leader, a fully accomplished knight.

Figure 1 may give some idea of ​​the shape and appearance of Schott's armor, but no drawing can do justice to the skill of the armorer and the form of the armor, which in reality has a dark steel sheen that is unusually vibrant and at the same time terrifying. Looking at them more closely, you get a sense of their greatness, so it is very difficult to believe that this armor is no longer worn by the warrior who so often wore it in battle - in defense and on the offensive.

Schott's armor is not the only one commissioned by famous historical figures that has survived to this day. True, many of the armors that you see today in museums or in private collections are prefabricated - they are assembled from parts and pieces. The legguard and greaves are from some, the bracers are from others, the cuirass is from others, and the helmet placed on top generally belongs to a different era. In such armor, moreover, there are probably many parts made today, but still in such vestments there is the brilliance and magic that we expect from seeing them. Probably due to the enchanting splendor and romantic legends that were formed about them, a false impression arose, thanks to which a lot of nonsense has been written about armor; Therefore, we will put an end to some misunderstandings right now.

Rice. 1. Armor of Kunz Schott von Hellingen. Made in Nuremberg between 1490 and 1497.

Rice. 1a. Emblem of the Nuremberg Gunsmiths Guild.

To begin with, it must be said that in those days when armor was a common item, it was used every day and no one called it a “plate suit.” They were simply called armor or armor, and more often “harness”; indeed, the expression “to die in harness” did not mean that the person died harnessed like a horse to a cart; it meant death in armor. The expression "suit of plate" was not used at all until 1600.

In addition, the phrase “chain mail” can often be read. This expression, denoting a protective covering made of small, interconnected iron rings, has passed into everyday language, although it is fundamentally incorrect. What they mean is simply called "chain mail", a flexible armor consisting of interconnected rings. The Celts used chain mail as early as the 5th century BC. e.; just like the Romans who called it macula, that is, a lattice or network.

The northern peoples, the Vikings and their ancestors, very often used expressions containing the word “net” to refer to chain mail. These people often used poetic allegorical expressions: “his battle net, woven by the skill of a blacksmith,” “their solid nets, joined by hands, sparkled brightly,” “brilliant breast net,” “net from spears.” No one has ever used the word “chain” to refer to chain mail, always only “net”. If you look closely at the chain mail, you will immediately understand why. IN English language the chain mail is called "mail". The word comes from French, in which this item of defensive weaponry was called the word “mailles”, that is, a modified Latin word “macula”.

The most serious mistake regarding armor concerns its weight. Knights were never hoisted into their saddles by winches; the relative weight and composition of armor was well known and deeply studied, but this idiocy wanders from book to book and from film to film. Careful research on this issue carried out more than thirty years ago can dispel all doubts among those who prefer accuracy in everything. In the tests I mentioned, the people of the Middle Ages wore real armor, and not aluminum or tin stage props. The most accurate of these tests were funded by the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, where they were filmed. Footage from these films proves that a man in full armor could run, jump, lie on his stomach and back and stand up without assistance, jump on and off a horse. Naturally, a person - even a trained one - soon got tired if he had to move in this way for a very long time. Of course, our ancestors learned to wield weapons and wear armor from the very beginning. early age, but no one expected them to constantly walk or run in iron armor. Full plate armor was used only in equestrian formation, when the main weight of the armor was borne by the horse, which served as a source of energy and driving force. But even under this condition, a real warrior had to independently sit in the saddle from the ground, without resorting to stirrups, in full combat gear. King Edward I of England was a famous master of this craft (he is said to have been a great fan of mounting a horse from the ground without assistance); his more famous successor Henry V was famous for the same thing.

Most of the English armor made before 1550 and presented in the collections of even large national museums are prefabricated, although some have survived to this day in complete form and are not inferior in quality to Schott’s vestments. For example, the armor of Henry VIII, both the example from the Tower of London and from Windsor Castle, are brilliant examples of armor that have been fully preserved to this day. The armor of Windsor Castle stands on the landing, and as you walk up the steps you can easily imagine yourself standing, and perhaps in awe, before the most regal of English kings (Fig. 2). The Tower of London also houses some armor made in the royal workshops at Greenwich for famous aristocrats of the era of Elizabeth I, but in fact all this armor is of later origin and is not truly medieval. In search of completely preserved armor, which was a battle vestment, and not part of a court costume, we should go to the continent. There you can find fully preserved harnesses dating from the period from 1420 to 1550. These are magnificent examples, polished and shiny, but marked like battle scars, nicks and dents from battle.

Rice. 2. Armor of Henry VIII. Made in the royal armories in Greenwich in 1537 (Windsor Castle).

What is lacking in the armor that has survived to this day is more than made up for by grave sculptures, sculptures and paintings. For example, a statue of a knight made of white stone lying on a gravestone, like a fish on a baking sheet, seems simply to be the embodiment of death, but it is not without interest from a historical point of view. In almost every case, such a statue bears an exact copy of the armor that the person lying under the slab wore during his lifetime. Drawings from ancient manuscripts, which are usually reproduced in textbooks on the history of the Middle Ages, often seem strange, especially to us, whose eyes are accustomed to photographs or to drawings made in compliance with the laws of perspective. But these drawings provide a glimpse into the past and how people dressed, lived, worked and fought. However, we must remember well that not all medieval paintings give an accurate picture of the past. Many give, but not all. While the best drawings and paintings are instructive, the bad ones give a completely false impression of the past.

There is one more thing to remember about medieval armor: until the 15th century, there were only minor differences in style between the armor of different European countries. If, say, we want to know what an English baron looked like at the Battle of Lewes in 1264, then a picture from a Swedish or Spanish manuscript will tell us about this no worse than sculptures in German or French cathedrals. After 1350, as we will see a little later, national styles began to emerge, and as time passed, the differences between them became more and more obvious.

Rice. 3. Statue of Sir Reginald Cobham on his tomb in Lingfield Church, Surrey. He was one of the Black Prince's captains and died in 1361.

It is very tempting to think that to get acquainted with armor it is enough to familiarize yourself with English monuments or illustrations, but in the Middle Ages England did not play an important role on the world political stage. France, Spain and Germany were then great powers, and together with Italy, England, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and others formed a broad unity of Christian nations. With the exception of simple protective elements, armor was not generally made in England until 1519. Henry VIII invited several gunsmiths from Germany and founded the Royal Armories in Greenwich. Until then, no English style in the manufacture of armor simply existed. However, until 1420, all European armor was practically the same, and the international style dominated. But from that time on, Italian and German styles began to develop, and knights, according to their tastes and preferences, wore armor made either in the Italian or German style.

In this book I deal with the armor of the late Middle Ages, that is, the period between 1100 and 1500, so the armor of ancient people will not be discussed in detail here. The armor of the Greeks and Romans deserves separate study; we will not lose anything if we do not touch on Roman armor here, since they had practically no influence on the development of plate art in medieval Europe. On the contrary, this influence was exerted by the barbarians - that is, the Gauls, Goths, Lombards and Franks. The Gothic horsemen who conquered Italy in the 5th and 6th centuries were no different in their weapons from the knights of William of Normandy under Senlac or from the crusaders of the 12th and 13th centuries. The differences were very, very small. Just like their descendants, the Goths rode on large, tall horses, fought with spears and broad swords, wore helmets and chain mail shirts and covered themselves with shields in battle. The combat tactics of the Goths were developed over a millennium. Figures 5 and 6 show what warriors looked like wearing chain mail armor in 1250 and plate armor in 1375. The period of greatest distribution of chain mail lasted until approximately 1350, and the period of greatest distribution of plate armor from approximately 1350 to 1650, although, of course, after 1550 there is no longer any talk about the widespread use of plate armor and the art of making armor gradually declines.

There were also armor made from other materials; for example, in the inventory of the weapons of Charles VI of France there is an entry about full armor for a warrior and a horse, made of Syrian leather. It is known that horn and whalebone were also used.

Rice. 4. Making chain mail. Using the tool in his right hand, the artisan automatically inserts rivets into the holes and flattens them, connecting the rings.

It should be noted that chain mail is a flexible material, very hard, but not heavy; chain mail is strong enough to protect its wearer from cutting blows, although it was vulnerable to spear strikes. Although chain mail generally held up well against arrows, it was no match for crossbow bolts and the fearsome arrows of Welsh and English archers. Chain mail was made from metal rings intertwined so that each ring was connected to four others. The rings were made from iron wire, with the ends of each ring flattened, overlapped and riveted, or (until the end of the 14th century) from “solid” rings that were squeezed out of a thin iron plate. Such solid rings - when they were used - alternated with riveted rings.

Rice. 5. Full chain mail vestment of a warrior (circa 1250).

Several chain mail rings. It is shown how they connected with each other.

Rice. 6. Full plate armor (circa 1350). This type of armor was used throughout Europe from 1350 to 1420.

Chain mail products - shirts, hoods, knee socks, gloves - were made according to the same principle by which wool products are knitted in our time, increasing or decreasing the number of loops (rings) in a row or the number of rows themselves - depending on the method of wearing - facial or purl. We are fairly well aware of how chain mail was made, but we know practically nothing about what the parts of chain mail were called. An analysis of the samples that have survived to this day clearly shows that they were made in the same way as any other knitted products, so there is no doubt that in their work the chainmail masters used the same terminology as the wool knitters. "Solid" or "closed" rings were most likely punched out of a thin sheet of iron, while "open" or "riveted" rings were made from wire. A piece of wire of the required length was wound, like a reel, onto a rod of the required diameter. The result was a real coil with one layer of coiled wire. This wire was cut in a straight line along the rod and many open, unclosed rings were obtained. These rings were heated red hot, the ends were flattened and holes were punched in them for rivets. Then the rings passed from the blacksmith to the chain mail maker, who assembled them in accordance with the desired pattern, connecting the rings together and riveting their ends.

We still know little about the specific methods and techniques of making plate armor, but something can be gleaned from the few illustrations of artisans at work, from lists of tools, and from careful analysis of how the craft of making mail armor developed. We also know something about the organization of work in weapons workshops, although this knowledge is depressingly scarce. There is evidence indicating specialization among the artisans who made chain mail. Sometime between 1298 and 1344, the Italian author Galvano Fiarnma composed a work called Chronichon Extravagans, in which he described some of the details of the work of the gunsmiths of Milan, one of the most important centers of arms production between the 13th and 16th centuries. “In our territory,” writes Fjarnma, “there are a great variety of artisans who make every kind of armor and weapons - hauberks, breastplates, plates, helmets, helmets, steel hats, necklaces, gauntlets, leggings, legguards, knee pads, as well as spears, throwing spears, swords and so on. These things are made of hard iron, sparkling like a mirror. There are at least a hundred chain mail makers alone, not to mention countless apprentices who make chain mail rings with the greatest skill. There are craftsmen who make round shields, large and small, and there are an incredible variety of people who make weapons. This city supplies all the cities of Italy with weapons and exports them even to the Tatars and Saracens.” In Fjarnma's work we have evidence compiled by an eyewitness that in the Middle Ages there was a certain specialization among gunsmiths, since each artisan performed a certain type of work. In addition, from Fjarnma's book we learn that carapace armor was already worn in the first half of the 14th century.

Even more is known from later documents. It is worth, for example, looking at the lists of artisans who worked in the Greenwich armories of Henry VIII in the 16th century. From these lists we learn a lot about the specialization that existed in the workshops: “hammers” forged plates, “rollers” shaped and polished the plates after forging them, “metalworkers” attached hinges, fasteners and fastenings to finished armor, and other artisans looked after correct assembly armor and made the lining.

In the Milanese workshops of the 15th century we find a specialization rivaling that of modern production lines for the mass production of goods. Each of the artisans working in Milan was exclusively engaged in the manufacture of one specific piece of armor. Indeed, it is unlikely that there was once a time when one person could make an entire piece of armor - from start to finish. It is also incredible that one person in this day and age could make a car from start to finish.

Armor vestments were made from bars (billets) of steel or hardened iron; these bars were hammered into flat plates by hand or with water falling hammers. The plates were then cut according to prepared patterns of different parts of future armor, and then they were forged on a “template” or form, similar to those with which silversmiths work in our time. We call templates a set of small anvils of different shapes mounted on a vertical stand, which could serve as a machine tool or a large wooden block.

Cold hammering was used to give the plate its basic rough shape, although the plate may have been annealed or hardened once or twice during this process. Some operations, such as folded parts, rolled edges, could only be produced by hot forging. After all the blanks were given the desired shape, the most difficult part of the work began: assembling and fitting the parts. This stage was, of course, the most important, because if the different parts did not fit together or did not overlap each other, then the main purpose of making armor would not be fulfilled - they would not protect their owner, would not provide sufficient flexibility and freedom movements, and dangerous gaps would arise between the parts. Take a closer look at the finished armor and you will see for yourself how carefully each detail is matched to the next. When the assembly and fitting of the parts was completed, the product was handed over to the polishers, who cleaned and polished the armor on water abrasive wheels. If the armor was supposed to be decorated with notches or inlays, then the finished product was handed over to engravers or jewelers, and when they finished their work, the mechanic hung loops, clasps and straps on the finished armor. And finally, the inside was lined and finished final assembly ready-made armor

The thickness of steel in armor varies; not only do different parts differ in thickness, but the same part in different places could have different thicknesses. The breastplate is not only thicker than the back part of the cuirass, but its front part is thicker than the side parts; the front part of the helmet, protecting the crown, is thicker than the part covering the back of the head. The hardness of the surface also varies, with the outer part being much harder than the inner part.

The surface of the armor is as hard as glass; it is difficult to leave a scratch on it with any material; but this surface does not even remotely have the fragility of glass. Some kind of additives must have been used when casting the steel, although no one now knows exactly how this was done. Hardness was important for plate armor for very practical reasons: hardness prevented penetration of the armor, since the hard, smooth, rounded and polished surface of the plate was designed to deflect and reflect the most powerful blows. From the descriptions of the last period of the Hundred Years' War, we learn that even the arrows of English archers could not pierce the shells of French soldiers - such armor was designed specifically to counter archers, even if they shot at close range, the arrows simply bounced off. But, despite such hardness, we know that sometimes crushing blows with an axe, hammer or sword still pierced the armor.

On most of the best-quality armor you can find a gunsmith's mark - individual or workshop. In some cases, the mark is affixed only to the main parts, in other cases - on all parts and even on each plate. Sometimes on the outer (although more often still on the inside) side of the armor you can see the sign of the owner - these are engraved or drawn icons (magic formulas or images of amulets). For example, red Jerusalem crosses were painted on both knee pads (on the inside) and on the inside of both shoulder pads of Schott von Hellingen's armor. The coat of arms of Schott was engraved on the upper part of the outer side of the breastplate of the cuirass (Fig. 59). These signs and maker's marks, a kind of signature, testify to the pride of the people who made the armor. The gunsmiths sought to leave their mark, evidence that the armor was made by them. Sometimes the sign was placed as a symbol of loyalty to the overlord. In addition, in the manufacture of armor one can see the beginnings of civic dignity, since in addition to the marks of the gunsmiths, we can often observe on the armor “views of the cities” where the craftsmen lived, or notice the coats of arms of individual rulers (this is especially true for products made at the end of the Middle Ages) .

Armor has never been as heavy as we often imagine. The full armor of 1470 was no heavier - and sometimes lighter - than the full kit of an English infantryman from the First World War. Average weight armor was 57 pounds (approximately 26 kilograms), but we must remember that this weight did not press on the shoulders, as it does on the shoulders of an infantryman, but was evenly distributed throughout the body. Contrary to popular belief, armor was, among other things, made to be comfortable to wear. The gunsmith's main concern was to fit the armor exactly to the wearer's figure - not every first-class tailor achieves this skill. If there was such an opportunity, then measurements were taken from the owner of the future armor, and then the finished product was adjusted over several fittings. If for some reason the owner of the future armor could not come to the workshop himself, then the measurement data was sent there. For example, knights of England or Spain often ordered armor from Milan or Augsburg. Sometimes the sizes were sent with clothing samples, and sometimes wax copies were taken from the customer's limbs. For example, the Duke of Touraine in 1386 “sent a small doublet to Germany as a model for making a pair of plates (breastplate and back) for his person.”

Or let us cite an entry in the account book of the Spanish royal house, dating back to the second quarter of the 16th century: “For wax for the casting of a model of His Majesty’s legs, sent to Mr. Desiderius Colman, who is engaged in the manufacture of armor...” This concern for the exact fit of armor applies to both chainmail armor and and to plate armor, although, of course, the flexibility of chain mail made it possible to pay less attention to the precise fit of equipment. And finally, anyone who was destined to become a warrior began to train in wearing armor from the age of seven, so when a child became a knight, he was already accustomed to constantly wearing armor (all boys of noble birth belonged to the warrior class, but there were exceptions).

The noble youths of the Middle Ages learned to wear armor, just as children now learn to read and write - from a very early age. Juan Quejada de Reago, a knight and writer of the early 16th century, asserts “the need to educate a warrior from that early age when a boy begins to learn to read, learning the alphabet” (“Doctrine of the Art of Chivalry” (“Doctrina Delia Arte Delia Cavalleria”). Every day the student wore armor and trained in it, because when he became a man, he had to spend a lot of time in armor, not to mention the fact that he had to fight in it (in the Middle Ages, a person who had reached the age of fourteen began to be considered a warrior). The warrior not only knew how to wear armor, he was the proud heir to the tradition founded by his ancestors a thousand years ago - to spend most of his life in battle gear.

Of course, the armor also had major flaws. The biggest ones - no matter how accustomed the wearer was to wearing them or how well they fit - were stuffiness and overheating. In armor, a warrior could suffer from unbearable heat. Shakespeare is obviously well acquainted with this problem, since in the second part of the historical tragedy “King Henry the Fourth” he says the following through the lips of Prince Henry:

The way the rich wear armor on a hot day,
That they will burn you with their reliability.

((Act IV, verses 30-31))

At the great battle of Agincourt in 1415, King Henry's uncle the Duke of York - an obese middle-aged man - died of exhaustion and heatstroke in his armor.

If we take prehistoric times as a starting point, then the development of European protective equipment went in two directions - classical and barbaric. The first includes the bronze and iron armor of the Mycenaeans, Greeks and Romans. This development began around 2000 BC. e. and ended at the beginning of the Middle Ages in the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantium). The beginning of the second direction was laid by the leather and chain mail armor of the barbarians - the Celtic and Teutonic peoples, who fought against Rome for centuries and ultimately overthrew the great empire in the 5th and 6th centuries. This type of armor existed in Europe until the 17th century.

At the end of the first chapter it was said that the 12th century crusader was armed and equipped in the same way as his Gothic ancestor in the 4th century: it should be noted that the plate equipment of the Celtic warrior in 400 BC. e. was, in general terms, the same as that of the crusader. The basis of all European armor was the chain mail shirt. The origin of chain mail and the time of its first appearance are unknown, but there is enough documentary evidence that the Celts used chain mail back in the 4th century BC. e.

Rice. 7.

Before chain mail, the barbarian warrior protected his body in battle with armor made of leather, such, apparently, as the “bull shells” that were worn in all the armies of Europe in the period from 1650 to 1750, when the production of metal armor was finally stopped. Conical bronze helmets and large wooden shields have been found in burials dating back to 700 BC. e. The Gauls who fought with Rome left a lot of archaeological evidence of their weapons and armor: chain mail shirts, fully preserved shields, a large number of helmets of different types, countless spears and numerous swords. We find information about these items from Roman writers, who not only described in detail the weapons themselves, but also how their owners used them. The picture is complemented by fragments of sculptures that have survived to this day - large and small (Fig. 8). Approximately the same weapons and the same armor were used mainly by European warriors until the time of the Normans, that is, until 1066. There are many illustrations that convincingly demonstrate that in the first millennium AD. e. Gallic influence was very strongly felt in the armament of European knights. For example, Figure 9 shows an image of a mounted warrior, minted on the side of a large gold vase made around 860 AD. e. This vase is part of a treasure found in Hungary, in a place whose name is very difficult for English speakers to pronounce - Nagyszentmiklos.

I drew this image in a modern manner because, despite the fact that the ancient goldsmith depicted the weapons and armor in great detail, the rider and horse still look rather strange to the modern reader. In addition, the warrior does not have a sword on the vase. There were probably good reasons for this, but for our purposes I took the risk of providing him with a sword. As you can see, the weapons and equipment of this warrior are very similar to the attire of the Gaul from Vacheres (Fig. 8), but this horseman is even more similar to the Norman knights from the Bayeux Tapestry.

Rice. 8. Gallo-Roman statue of a Celtic warrior from approximately 100 BC. e. from Vashere.

Chain shirt (which the northern peoples called tags, and in the rest of Europe they called hauberk) It was a long robe, almost reaching to the knees. The neck opening was tightened with a cord or flap clasp, and after 1100 the short, loose sleeves became long and tight-fitting. After 1175, the sleeves of many hauberks began to end with blind “mittens”, which were pulled over the hands. Mittens were small chain mail bags with a separate container for thumb. The palm, for a very obvious reason, was not protected by chain mail, but in some cases a piece of fabric was sewn to the edges of the hole. There was a hole in the fabric from which one could easily remove one's hand, since the mitten was put on only when a collision became inevitable. Until about 1250, indispensable integral part The hauberk had a chain mail hood. After 1250, this hood began to be made as a separate part. The front hole was tightened with a cord passed through the edge of the hole, or fastened using a special fastener with a valve (Fig. 5). Worn on the head, this hood was very similar to a balaclava helmet.

Rice. 9. Horse warrior of the 9th century. Redrawn from an image on a gold vase found at Nagyszentmiklos, Hungary.

At the very beginning of the era of wearing chain mail, legs were protected only by leather or linen trousers (cut approximately like modern jeans), which were tied crosswise at the knees if the knight did not wear knee-high boots, but starting in 1100, wealthy warriors began to wear chain mail stockings , which were the length of the foot and also covered it. The stockings were held in place by strips of leather attached to a belt. Such stockings were called “shossami” (harem pants) (Fig. 11).

Chain mail armor protected its owner from the effects of cutting and slashing blows, but since chain mail is flexible and pliable, it could not protect against bruises and fractures. Therefore, under the chain mail they wore leather clothes - long “pants” on the legs and a tight-fitting leather camisole and a thick quilted shirt. These leather clothes, worn under chain mail, quite effectively absorbed the force of blows, but still the warrior’s main means of protection was a shield and agility in dodging blows. It was much better to dodge the blow than to test the strength of the armor.

Rice. 10."Mitten" (mail mitten), fragment of a copper effigy of Sir Robert de Septvance in a Kentish church (1306).

Rice. eleven. Dressing in chain mail. The warrior on the left is fastening the shosse, the man in the center is pulling on the stockings that protect his thighs, and the man on the right is pulling the hauberk, which was worn over the quilted “robe,” over his head.

Until about 1190, the hauberk was worn over all other clothing, but after this time, linen clothing, similar in style to a nightgown, began to be worn over the chain mail (Fig. 7 and 12). This coating probably served to protect the metal chain mail from moisture, and perhaps to prevent overheating from the sun's rays. Later, linen clothing was decorated with coats of arms and other heraldic symbols.

Rice. 12. A mounted warrior dressed in chain mail fights with a halberdier. The drawing shows the earliest form of the halberd, as it was used at the beginning of the 14th century. On the head of an infantryman, armed with a halberd, is an iron “bowler hat”, a leather cap and a quilted brigandine.

The chainmail cap was worn over a tight-fitting small quilted cap, similar to a hairnet, and a small helmet was worn over the cap. Until approximately 1050-1100, this protective headdress in our minds was associated with the Normans, although throughout Europe it was worn starting from the early Iron Age (about 800 BC), and in the early Middle Ages the chain mail cap was very popular throughout the world. space from Persia to Sweden. Prehistoric helmets or caps were forged from thin bronze, but already at the beginning of the Middle Ages, helmets began to be made from triangular iron plates riveted to a bronze frame. Medieval helmets were edged along the lower edge with a horizontal strip at eyebrow level, and to this strip were attached two (or more) curved iron strips, which were fastened at an angle at the top of the helmet. After 1050, helmets of this type increasingly began to be made from a single iron plate. But why did this happen? Probably because a solid, seamless iron plate provided more reliable protection. After 1150, a tall helmet with a flat top and straight sides appears, slightly reminiscent of a saucepan. But since 1220, this type of helmet has been replaced by a more practical cap made to the shape of the head; such steel caps began to dominate along with nut-shaped helmets.

What we have now briefly described was the basis of the “harness” of European warriors from 1050 to 1300. This armor was effective if we consider its ability to prevent death from blows from edged weapons to be effective, but the armor described could not prevent injuries, many of which caused permanent injuries; if an archer hit a warrior, then the armor turned out to be completely useless, since the narrow “pilum” (tip) of an arrow almost one meter long, flying with terrible force, passed through the chain mail like a knife through butter.

The words and deeds of Herald of Wales, known as Giraldus Cambrenzis, are very instructive; This twelfth-century chronicler, who, in his aims and intentions, may well be called a medieval journalist, among other things, tells many interesting things about the endless battles on the Welsh border that took place at the end of the twelfth century. Describing a clash between the soldiers of one of the English barons, William de Braose, and the Welsh, the Herald tells how a Welsh archer fired at an English cavalryman. The arrow hit the Englishman in the thigh, pierced his chain mail shirt (hauberk), chain mail legguard, and trousers; Having pierced the leg right through, the arrow passed through the wooden and leather parts of the saddle and wounded the horse. Against a weapon that had such penetrating power and caused physical wounds and a lot of difficult experiences, chain mail obviously could not resist. At the beginning of the 14th century, the effectiveness of the bow against chain mail was demonstrated with terrifying clarity. It was during this period that the English yeomen, having mastered the Welsh bow, practically destroyed two Scottish armies at Dupplin (1332) and Halidon Hill (1333). Later, in 1346, at Crecy, an English army, two-thirds consisting of archers, mowed down the arrogant French knighthood. After such a demonstration of the power of the longbow, the terrible fame of this weapon spread throughout Europe. It became clear to most military men that the bow required more effective protection than chain mail. But what, pray tell, could withstand the deadly effect of a precisely aimed sharp arrow fired from a large powerful bow, bent by the hands of an experienced archer? Besides, if you think about it, then longbow was not the only problem that faced the warrior’s protective equipment, for just at the same time a new infantry weapon appeared on the battlefields - big ax with a wide blade and a thick point at the end of the shaft, which at the same time gave it a resemblance to a spear. Mounted on a shaft about five feet long, this axe-like weapon was later called halberd. At the Battle of Courtrai in Flanders (1302), the halberd was used by strong Flemish townspeople who destroyed a large and superbly armed army of French knights. Later, in 1315, Swiss peasants used the halberd with such deadly force that they literally cut to pieces the Austrian cavalry at Morgarten. England, too, was not without this new tool when the Scots army under Bruce defeated Edward II's large army at Bannockburn in 1314. The weapons used during these battles demonstrated all their power, accuracy and strength, delivering crippling blows in a far from knightly manner and easily piercing the armor of chain-mailed cavalrymen.

Such threatening events for chivalry and the use of the mentioned weapons undoubtedly accelerated the development of armored armor. But they were not the only reason for this development. In any case, from the very beginning of the 14th century, for thirty years, experiments were carried out using plate armor to protect the limbs. In addition, we must not forget that solid armor has always been used to protect the body, starting from ancient times.

In the middle of the 13th century, plate knee protection was added to chain mail stockings, shoss. These devices, called knee pads, attached to the lower edge of thick quilted pants that covered the hips. Some of these "gaiters" were made in the form of separate sleeves worn over the hips, like bloomers, but in some cases they were real pants, reminiscent of breeches in shape. In some cases, mainly after 1230, the front of the shins began to be covered with light metal plates, which were called half leggings, but they were rare until the end of the century. Beginning around 1300, they began to increasingly use closed greaves. They were made from two plates, one for the front of the shin, the second for the back. The plates were connected to each other by loops on the outer side of the shin and fastened with straps and buckles on the inner side (Fig. 13 and 14).

Rice. 13. Half Leggings, around 1310.

Rice. 14. Closed greaves, around 1325. Although closed greaves became widespread after 1320, there is evidence that they were worn as early as 1310.

Rice. 15. Doublet. Small, overlapping iron plates were riveted to the inside surface of the vest. The side plates extend onto the back, where they are secured to the back plates by straps and buckles; The neck part of the doublet, not reinforced with plates, which was worn over the head, is located on the shoulders and is attached to the rest of the part with “buttons.”

Solid iron or leather armor to protect the torso appeared simultaneously with half-leggings. No samples of this equipment have survived to this day. As is known, they were worn under clothing, so we can judge their design only from statues and illustrations, which give only an approximate idea. We have reliable literary sources, proving that iron plates began to be used for the manufacture of breastplates as early as 1190 (see the books of Giraldus Cambrenzis “Topographia Hibernica et Expugnatio Hibernica”, lib. I, chapter XX; Guillaume le Breton “Philippide”, lib. III, lines 494- 498). Another, more common type of protective equipment has also been developed; he was named doublet or brigandine. We can say that it was an ordinary vest made of fabric, the inner surface of which was covered overlapping with small metal plates, which were attached (usually with rivets) to the fabric. Sometimes the doublet served as outerwear. Metal plates were riveted or sewn to the inside of the doublet on the chest and back, leaving the floors free. In other cases, the doublet was made as a separate part of the equipment and put on a chain mail shirt and under outer clothing (Fig. 15).

Until about 1340, many wealthy and fashionable warriors used reinforced chain mail. However, equipment of this type was very vulnerable to halberds and bows. Why? The fact is that these means of protection had connecting seams that could be pierced, expanded, or pierced with the tip of a sword or the tip of a spear. In addition, such equipment was multi-layered - a leather camisole, a quilted pad, a hauberk, a doublet or brigandine, an outer cape - all this made the knight clumsy and clumsy. Soon, what made movements awkward became ineffective and fell out of use. The result was a fully body-fitting, flexible, articulated protective gear that was in some ways a step back to chain mail, but now made using a material with a hard, impenetrable surface.

Rice. 16. Late 14th century breastplate (Bavarian National Museum, Munich).

The doublet was the main means of protecting the torso throughout the 14th century, although steel breastplates were already in use in 1350; these breastplates were made from one solid plate; often a back protector was also worn at the same time. We draw information on the appearance and design of such equipment mainly from sculptural images of knights of that time, but in Munich there is a real breastplate made around 1390 (see Fig. 16). This shell covers the body from neck to waist and, like a good old doublet, is covered with fabric (red velvet on rough linen). This fabric goes down below the waist and goes into short skirt, to the inner surface of which five semicircular iron strips are riveted, overlapping like scales with the upper parts. This protection is made in the style of the previous doublet, but it is more effective, since the semicircular loops go to the sides of the skirt and thus cover not only the front. This skirt was called a cape or belly and was used as long as armor was used in warfare.

Many cuirasses have survived to this day, all of them made after 1420. These examples prove the observation and accuracy in the depiction of armor, weapons and clothing of medieval sculptors and artists. Cuirass called a protective device that covers both the chest and back; the term began to be used starting from the 15th century, and it comes from the word “cuirie” or “cuiret”, which meant a (usually leather) breastplate. Another term for chest and back protection since the 14th century is “pair plate.”

Rice. 17. Leg armor, around 1380. This is part of the armor (kept in Chartres) made for the French King Charles VI when he was a child.

The armor that protected the leg consisted of closed leggings, knee pads and leg guards. Leggings (such as those shown in Figure 14) covered the entire lower leg; The knee pad was made from one metal plate, in which a convex depression was made, corresponding in shape to the knee pad and covering the kneecap, then on the sides the knee pad turned into a small flat plate that covered the lateral and back surfaces of the knee joint. The main part of the knee guard was attached from above and below to narrow plates, one of which was attached to the leggings, and the second to the legguard. The inner surface of the knee joint was left unprotected, as this would make it difficult to sit in the saddle. The legguard was made from one single plate, forged to the shape of the outer part of the thigh.

Starting around 1380, a second, narrower plate began to be riveted to the main plate, protecting back hips (Fig. 17). The foot was also reliably protected using the so-called solereta or sabaton – consisting of overlapping narrow plates (the sabaton looked like the body of a wasp or lobster). Sometimes the sabatons were attached to the bottom of the leggings, and sometimes they were made as a separate pair of shoes. When attached to the leggings, a pair of straps were passed under the heel, which held the sabatons. If the soleret was a separate part of the equipment, then it was attached to the shoes. The legguards were held in place by straps wrapped around the thigh. The cord was attached to a leather flap, which was riveted at one end to the legguard, and the other end was hung from the belt, that is, in the same way as in more early times for attaching chain mail stockings.

Rice. 18. Bracers, around 1360.

The arm armor was called bracers. At first, this term denoted a protective device for the forearm, and from the end of the 14th century, steel began to protect the entire hand. The arm armor consisted of a lower bracer - a pair of small plates that covered the forearm, just like leggings protected the shin. The lower bracer was attached to an elbow pad, similar in shape to a knee pad. The elbow pad, in turn, was attached to the upper bracer - a pair of plates that protected the shoulder. Unlike the legguard, the upper bracer covered the entire circumference of the shoulder. The shoulder girdle was protected by a series of overlapping small plates called a pauldron. At the same time, the area shoulder joint remained unprotected, but since knights, as a rule, wore a chain mail shirt under their armor, this area was not completely defenseless. This deficiency was compensated for by a plate that protected the armpit. A strap was riveted to the back surface of the plate, which was fastened to the shoulder pad, that is, the plate was freely suspended above the armpit area.

Rice. 19. Hourglass-shaped gauntlet, circa 1360.

Plate gauntlets protected the hands; As early as the middle of the 13th century, small iron plates, as well as plates made from horn or whalebone, began to be attached to leather gloves. However, by 1350 a simpler design had been developed. One plate was forged in the form of a short, expanding cuff with a bell that protected the back of the hand and the lateral surface of the thumb. This plate was attached to a leather glove, onto the fingers of which overlapping small plates were riveted (Fig. 19). Many such gauntlets can be seen on tombstones, and almost completely preserved gauntlets that belonged to Edward the Black Prince are still kept in Canterbury Cathedral. Even leather gloves were preserved in these mittens.

The helmets worn with armor of the type described had something in common with the old conical helmets of the Normans, but were higher, and the sides and back of the head descended lower. Instead of wearing a chain mail cap under the helmet, now the chain mail began to be attached to the lower edge of the helmet, and it hung from them like a curtain, covering the chin and neck, falling over the shoulders like a cape (Fig. 21). This cape is called aventail (the English called it “aventail”, the French “camail”). The facial opening of helmets called bascinets, cover visor. On some helmets the old nosepiece was retained, as on the helmets of the ancient Normans, but now, in the 14th century, the nosepiece was not part of the helmet protruding forward and down from its front part, but became part of the aventail; when the nosepiece was not needed, it hung on the chest. When the hour of battle came, the warrior simply lifted it and attached it to the frontal part of the helmet. As a result, part of the aventail also rose up and covered the mouth and cheeks. It was a fairly popular device, but it was by no means particularly effective. Much better was the visor, which was made from one large plate that completely covered the face. The visor was attached to the frontal part of the helmet with a loop, but just like the nosepiece, it could be removed if there was no need to fight. Many such visors have survived; some had very simple form(Fig. 20), but in others the front part was made in the form of a protruding trunk. Above the trunk there were viewing slits equipped with a protruding rim to protect the eyes; the same gap was under the trunk, which made the visor a grotesque copy human face. Enlarged versions of the visor with a trunk were also produced. The sides of the visor were moved back and overlapped the sides of the helmet. The sides were attached to pins fixed to the main part of the helmet above the ears (Fig. 21). This mount resembled a hinged pendant with removable pins; when the knight did not need the visor, he simply pulled the pins out of the loops. The pins were suspended from the helmet on leather straps and were not lost. Outside of battle, the knight generally removed the visor from his helmet and wore it separately (or, more likely, gave it to his squire).

Rice. 20. Bascinet with a looped visor called clapvisor(Valeria Museum, Sitten).

Rice. 21. Bascinet with visor, around 1390 (arsenal of Hurburg Castle, Tyrol).

Until about 1420, outer clothing was worn over the armor. It was no longer a cape fluttering in the wind, looking like a 13th-century nightgown. Now it was well-fitted clothing, tightly fitting to the armor, and it looked like a sailor's uniform. These clothes were usually picturesquely decorated with the coats of arms of the owners. In England it was called that - coat of arms(coat of arms). Now this expression is used to refer to wearing a coat of arms. After 1420 (and on the continent even earlier), the wearing of coats of arms was abandoned, and knights, for the first time in their long history, appeared clad from head to toe in shining steel. In those days, uncovered armor was called “white” armor.

After about 1420, several important changes occurred in the design and style of armor making. The most noticeable phenomenon was the refusal to wear coat of arms, although in the late fifties of the 15th century they began to wear cloaks. These capes were worn over armor and decorated with a coat of arms. Another innovation was the increase in the size of the plate cape. This feature is shown in Figure 22. To illustrate the main features of the armor from around 1430, I have chosen a silver figurine of St. George from Barcelona. The figurine, made in the second half of the 15th century, depicts – very faithfully and with precise details – Milanese armor of that era. True, when redrawing the figurine, I took some liberties: I removed the shield added in the 19th century, restored the upper legguards (small plates hanging from the lower edge of the cape), depicting them, as expected, with the front side out. Once they were removed, and then hung again, but inside out. Similar armor can be seen on the statue of William Philip, Lord Berdolf in Dennington Church, Suffolk. Several interconnected hoops were attached to the lower edge of the back of the cuirass. This element of armor was called culet. Sometimes a loosely hanging plate was attached to the lower edge of the culet, covering the sacrum - rear legguard. By 1450 the style of the plate cape had changed. An arcuate hole was cut out in the bottom plate. Gradually this cutout increased in size, and eventually the bottom plate was simply divided into two, creating a pair of large leg guards. Compare Figure 23, which shows a cuirass of this type (Milanese work around 1460), with Figure 22.

Rice. 22. Silver figurine of Saint George, circa 1430 (Barcelona).

Rice. 23. Milanese cuirass around 1460. Front, side and back views. Four holes in the right side of the breastplate are intended for bolts that fastened the removable support for the spear.

On the statuette of St. George you see a small additional plate at the bottom of the breastplate of the cuirass, which is attached to it by a belt located in the center of the plate - this reinforcing part is called poster card. As the century passed, this part became larger. On the cuirass shown in Figure 23, this part reaches almost to the very top of the breastplate. The back plate of the cuirass is made of overlapping parts, which gives it quite good flexibility. The rivet holes are more of a slits (movable or German rivets) that allow for movement in an up and down direction. In Figure 23b the cuirass is shown on the left side. As you can see, the front and back parts of the cuirass are fastened with loops in this place. In order to put on this part of the armor, the warrior opened the cuirass on its hinges, put it on and closed it. After this, both halves of the cuirass were fastened together with clasps located on the right side of the armor. The strap was attached to the breastplate and threaded through a buckle located on the back of the cuirass. The upper edges of the cape and culet were simply thrown over the cuirass from above in its lower part. You may have already noticed that the main distinguishing feature of the armor is the abundance of overlapping plates. Wherever possible, the plates are overlapped so as to deflect the piercing and slashing blows of any weapon the enemy may use. Obviously this was the most the main task artisan gunsmith and his sign high skill based on a practical concern for safety, which is, after all, main goal, since we are talking about armor. But it is surprising that when imitation armor is made, for some reason this iron rule is often neglected.

The armor of those times always had powerful, outwardly curved edges of the main plates, especially the edges of the holes for the hands and the neck of the cuirass. The same protruding powerful ribs were added to the legguards (stopping ribs); the purpose was to fix or deflect the tip of any weapon that slid across the plate. This trend is especially clearly visible in the style of the necklace, where the protruding ribs eventually took the form of a standing collar that protected vulnerable spot between the bottom edge of the helmet and top part cuirasses.

Rice. 24. Bracers, around 1460. Compare with the bracers in Figure 18.

In general, the form of armor in Europe changed little until about 1420, when two distinctive national schools arose, two completely different national styles - one in Italy, and the second in Germany. The Italian style followed the traditions of the early "International" style, although the armor became heavier and stronger, and the small side extensions (blade plates) - on the side surfaces of the knee and elbow pads - became larger and acquired a V-shaped prong in the middle. This prong extended the metal cover to the back of the knee and the area of ​​the elbow. By 1440, most of the back of the knee and elbow were protected in most armor. Small scapulars from the 14th century survived, but were now covered by a necklace, a separate and complex element made from several plates and better covering the shoulder blades (Fig. 24). In Italy, these necklaces became simply huge at the back, but in many cases they had a different shapes. The right side of the necklace was cut off so as not to interfere with the use of the spear, which was often held under the arm in battle. The left side of the necklace became larger and now almost completely covered the upper part of the breastplate, since it now played the role of a shield, which for the most part went out of use by 1400. Similarly, reinforcing and lengthening elements were introduced into the design of the left elbow pad and the left part of the necklace, respectively. It was impossible to use these elements on the right, since they fixed the arm in a bent position. If a warrior fought on horseback, then he left hand remained practically motionless the entire time. But if the warrior fought on foot, then he did not put on additional “shields” on the elbow pad and on the necklace, since in this situation both hands had to be free - in order to hold a sword or a long ax with both hands, a weapon that became very popular among knights in the 15th century. century (Fig. 26). Sometimes the elements that strengthened the necklace and elbow pads were fastened with pins threaded into a special ring, but more often waxed braided cords were used, sewn to the lower clothing; their ends were threaded into the holes of the plates and tied (Fig. 25).

Rice. 25. Knotted elbow pad, circa 1460.

Rice. 26. The Ax (Wallace Collection, London).

Like the Italian, the German style began to develop after 1420; His first achievement was to change the shape of the lower part of the bib - it began to have the shape of a rectangular box, which the Germans called Kastenburst (see Fig. 34a). Somewhat later, relief diverging rays were added; After about 1440, German armorers stopped making a rectangular protrusion on the breastplate and switched to making elegant, refined armor, the breastplates of which were often decorated with such relief radiating rays. Later, after 1455, the Germans began to add rays to other plate elements of armor - to the necklace, bracers, legguards and knee pads, but never to the greaves. German armor of the late 15th century began to be called gothic, probably due to their thin, elongated shape and elegant decorations, which were similar to the decoration of Gothic architecture buildings. Some of the most beautiful, most magnificent armor belongs to this type. Some fine armor is kept in Vienna, they are excellent examples of craftsmanship, but they were never intended for actual battles; these were “ceremonial” armor. In the 15th century, armor played a social role, symbolizing wealth and social status, and was worn on special occasions. For combat use made simpler (and even more beautiful) armor. This armor was called field or combat armor; usually they were simple in execution and unadorned. A good example of this kind is the armor of Schott von Hellingen. But for all that, the most beautiful of the battle armors were also decorated with diverging chased rays and corrugations. These rays were applied to the armor not only to make it more beautiful; on thin plates, the rays played the role of protrusions on corrugated iron - the protrusions make the steel stronger and increase its resistance to impact (Fig. 27).

Rice. 27."Gothic" field armor of Baron Pankratz von Freyberg, made around 1475. These plates, together with horse armor, were acquired from the weapons collection of the Austrian castle of Hohenschau and are currently presented in all their splendor in the Wallace collection in London. A dummy knight sits astride a horse, also clad in armor. Lack of space forced me to depict the knight on foot, without gauntlets, sabatons and bouvier on the chin. But even in those days there was nothing unusual in wearing armor like this.

At the end of the 15th century, Italian and German styles merged, forming the so-called “Maximilian” style, since it appeared during the reign of this romantic and chivalrous, but also incomparably courageous emperor (1493-1519). The armor becomes more rounded and powerful; Schott's armor can be called an early example of such a mixed style. Some parts of the armor fit tightly to the body (with the exception of the greaves) and are covered with dense checkering, the grooves running parallel, rather than diverging, as in early Gothic style armor. Such embossed and grooved armor was called comb. Towards the end of the 15th century a new element was added to the armor. After 1490, the breastplate of the cuirass became shorter, its upper part now reached the upper part of the sternum, and not the throat, so it appeared necklace, an element that protected the throat and upper chest. The necklace eventually took the form of a high collar made of three or four narrow horizontal plates that reached to the lower jaw. Later I will describe how the necklace was worn.

Rice. 28. Plate gauntlets.

A - from Hurburg Castle, around 1390 b – from Hurburg Castle, around 1425 (German style).

V - Milanese glove, around 1460 G - Gothic glove, around 1470 d – Maximilian style gauntlet, circa 1520.

A short plate glove forged from a single plate with a bell and small plates fixed to the fingers of a leather glove was used until the second quarter of the 15th century, when it was replaced by a larger glove of a more complex design. Drawings show better than words how the design of gauntlets developed throughout the 15th century (Fig. 29).

There was considerable variety in the helmets worn during the 15th century; most types were developed before 1440, and their style did not change much until about 1500. Until 1425, the most popular were helmets with a large proboscis visor of the type bascinet, although even at the beginning of this century helmets forged from a single metal plate began to replace helmets with chainmail aventail. These all-metal helmets were also distinguished by their name - they were called large bascinets. The form of these latter began to undergo changes starting from 1425. The visor, having lost its elongated shape, began to be made in the form of a hemisphere. The breathing gap disappeared, giving way to numerous small holes (Fig. 22 and 29), while the back surface of the domed part of the helmet, instead of a vertically descending wall, began to be shaped according to the line of the skull. This type of helmet, very popular throughout the 15th century, became the basis for the development of the most common type of helmet in the 16th and 17th centuries - the closed helmet.

Rice. 29. a – Sir Giles Caple's helmet, possibly made in London in 1511 (Metropolitan Museum, New York). This type of helmet is the result of further development of the bascinet. Was very popular at the beginning of the 16th century; b – Great bascinet of the Imperial Count Frederick the Victorious. Around 1450. Made by Tommaso da Missaglia in Milan (Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna).

Rice. thirty. Helmets, Italy, around 1474: A - closed, b – open, ready to put on.

Rice. 31. Salad.

Even earlier, around 1440, another new style of helmet appeared. Currently it is called arma, and the same designation was in use in the 15th century. But given the terminological uncertainty that reigned in the Middle Ages, it can be assumed that the word “arme” indiscriminately designated all helmets equipped with a visor. The lightweight and tight-fitting arma provided better protection and greater mobility than the bascinet. Figure 30 shows the design of the armament. Helmets of this style, developed in Italy, found great favor in France, but never became popular in England. At the same time, another type of helmet appeared in Germany. This very ancient style was very popular in its time for centuries. The helmet had a wide brim and was called bowler helmet. In the middle of the 15th century, however, a more elegant and beautiful version of such an open helmet appeared, called salad(Fig. 31). Sometimes the salad was worn on its own, just like a hat; but often they joined him bouviger, protecting the chin. A chainmail cap was also worn under the helmet to protect the neck and back of the head, which protruded from under the rear edge of the helmet (Fig. 32). There were many different forms of lettuce between 1450 and 1510, with each type often reflecting a national style.

Rice. 32. Wearing lettuce: A - with the visor down and the bouvier (chinrest) raised; b –long hair picked up to hide under the lettuce; V - before putting on the salad, the chin and head were covered with soft cloth; G - Salad with a raised visor and a lowered bouvier.

One of the features of these 15th-century helmets was the appearance that the craftsmen gave to the upper domed part of the helmet, which was pulled upward in the form of a longitudinal ridge that stretched from the eyebrows to the back of the head. In some salads this ridge was especially distinct and high. In the closed helmets of the 16th century, this feature was especially clearly expressed. In some cases this cockscomb was about two inches high above the dome of the helmet.

At the same time, when the arme model was being developed in Italy, and the salada model in Germany, a completely different form of helmet was created in Italy, or more precisely, revived. Revived - because it almost exactly copied the shape of a certain Greek - Corinthian - helmet; it can be assumed that the interest in Greek sculpture and painted ceramics that arose at that time stimulated the desire of Italian gunsmiths of the mid-15th century to copy this form (Fig. 33).

Until the second quarter of the 17th century, armor was used in real combat conditions, although it was increasingly rarely worn in full. Attempts to make armor so strong that it could withstand the impact of bullets fired from handguns led to the armor becoming heavier, so much so that it became unsuitable for practical use. No matter how well a particular armorer made armor, the development of handguns and the increasing power of cannons made it impossible to create completely safe plate vestments. By the end of the 16th century, armor was increasingly used as “ceremonial attire” and less and less often as “field armor”. At the end of the century, however, many magnificent armor were still made, but their excellent forms were in many respects lost - lost forever.

Rice. 33. A helmet made in the style now known as "barbute", copied from Greek Corinthian helmets.

The cuirass and helmet shapes are the most notable pieces of armor from this late period of decline. I have already described the basic principles of cuirass design, so I will briefly touch only on their later types. In the 15th century, warriors sometimes entered battle only in cuirasses and helmets, without wearing leg armor, bracers and shoulder pads. The abandonment of heavy equipment was dictated by considerations of convenience; After 1500, this approach to armor became more common, and plates were now made with additional details - for example, elongated legguards protected the upper thigh. Therefore, equipment could now be worn in parts, selectively. However, this did not mean that simplification began to dominate in the art of gunsmiths. Many of the armor that has come down to us from that time look truly chivalrous.

The images in Figures 34 and 35 show the main forms of cuirass from 1440 to 1650. The most noticeable changes were made to the front of the bib. Gradually, the rounded spherical shapes of the early 16th century began to stretch out and around 1535 they acquired a rather strange appearance - with a sharp protrusion in the front part. By the sixties of the 16th century, this type of cuirass was gradually declining; soon it completely disappears, giving way to a long breastplate descending onto the stomach with a longitudinal elevation. At the same time, the cape becomes shorter and wider with legguards suspended from the breastplate. This change in the shape of the cape was due to the wearing of then fashionable pants with puffs. Indeed, armor followed on the heels of fashion. For example, at the beginning of the 16th century, puffs and slits came into fashion, and armor began to imitate this form of clothing. For example, the fashion for a “puffed” double camisole, which appeared in the sixties of the 16th century, attracted the attention of gunsmiths (Fig. 35, b), and puffed capes and leg guards appeared. At the end of the Elizabethan era and with the introduction of the “cavalier” style into fashion, the style of armor also changed, becoming downright ugly (Fig. 35, c). (By the way, the Elizabethan era lasted long after the death of the formidable queen. The end of this period falls on the twenties of the 17th century.) Short-brimmed camisoles were imitated by very short, shapeless breastplates, the cape became unnecessary, and it was replaced by a pair of very long legguards that hung almost to the knees. These legguards went very well with the huge, baggy, knee-length breeches that came into fashion between 1610 and 1650. These bulky breeches were a great advantage for marauders, as they could stuff a lot of loot into such pants. The wearing of armor was almost completely abandoned by 1650, which, if we limit our curiosity about historical armor to its aesthetic contemplation, was only for the better. It is better to abandon the idea of ​​wearing armor altogether than to be disgusted by disgusting and ugly styles.

This was the armor worn during the English Civil War and the endless wars on the continent (the Thirty Years' War being just one of them). However, soon the long legguards were abandoned, and the soldiers in the active army wore only cuirasses and a helmet; sometimes this equipment was supplemented with a small necklace or a pair of long plate gauntlets, which were worn over clothing made of thick (ox) leather.

Rice. 34. Shapes of cuirasses and helmets: A - German, around 1430. Large bascinet and kastenburst; b – German "Gothic" form, 1480, salade and bouviger; V -"Maximilian", 1520, closed helmet with corrugated visor; G - German style, pointed bib and burgonet.

Rice. 35. Cuirass and helmet shapes: A - 1550-1570, with helmet; b – 1570-1600, with morion; V - 1620-1640, with long legguards and an open helmet.

This period was a time of endless variety of helmets, but all their types were a development of three main types, which were based on the same medieval styles. The closed helmet (Fig. 34, a and 35, a) comes from the large bascinet of the 15th century; the burgonet (Fig. 34, d) was an open helmet with cheek protection, originating from the lettuce, and Various types helmets that resemble hats are derived from the bowler helmet. These latter are probably the most famous and widespread forms in the history of armor. Morion(Fig. 35, b) and cabasset, which the Elizabethan English called Spanish Morion(although the Spaniards rarely wore it) come from a purely Spanish form of the 15th century, from a bowler hat, which was called a cabacete. The well-known “lobster tail” helmet of the English Civil War, a result of the development of the burgonet (Fig. 35), remained in service until the end of the 17th century.

In order to get an accurate idea of ​​the complete set of armor, it is necessary to consider some additional accessories necessary to understand the function of armor and its role in medieval life. These accessories include a helmet, shield, baldric and spurs. So, we will look at how helmets and shields were made, as well as various types of belts and spurs.

Rice. 36. a – Swedish helmet with visor, 7th century; from the leader's burial in Valsgerd; b – flat-top helmet with visor, circa 1190; V - helmet, around 1250.

Rice. 37. Helmet, around 1290. The configuration of the five parts and how they were connected to each other is shown.

The medieval helmet is often not considered as an integral part of the full protective vestment, which included the chain mail cap or small nut-shaped helmet, and later the bascinet, arme and salad. Made from several steel plates riveted together, the helmet served as a large, barrel-shaped covering for the head. It all started with a simple helmet with a flat dome, to which a visor was attached to protect the face. Northern peoples used such helmets with visors back in the 12th century, but they fell out of use; this happened at the end of the 12th century. At the beginning of the 13th century, the helmet already covered the entire head; it was worn for better protection over a small iron cap and a chain mail cap. Figure 26 shows an ancient visored helmet dating from around 650, a helmet from 1190 and full helmet approximately 1250; Figure 37 shows its further evolution, dating back to about 1290. In my drawings I showed how it was riveted from five parts. A helmet of this type, with modifications, was used until the beginning of the 15th century, although it practically ceased to be used in actual battles from about 1340; its place was taken by a more convenient bascinet with a visor, and the old modification was used in fights and tournaments. Helmets from the late 14th and early 15th centuries were similar to those from the 13th century, but their tops were rounded rather than flat. There are several perfectly preserved examples in England - the helmet of the Black Prince (1372) in Canterbury Cathedral (Fig. 38), the helmet of Henry V (1422) in Westminster Abbey (Fig. 39) and two similar examples in Cobham Church in Kent. These “pots” did not rest on the shoulders. A thoughtful and well-cut leather lining held the helmet on the head over the hair, which was then worn long and matched when wearing the helmet under a small linen cap, a chain mail cap, and sometimes under a small iron cap. Only later, for example, helmets made after 1420 began to rest on the shoulders, they were attached to the armor on the chest and back using fasteners or bolts. Previously, they were secured using cords (probably braided belts) sewn to the lining in front of the ears and tied at the back of the head. The heralds had this in mind when they gave the signal for the start of the tournament - before the command “laissez aller” they sounded: “tie your helmets.”

Rice. 38. Helmet of the Black Prince (Canterbury Cathedral).

Rice. 39. Helmet of Henry V (Westminster Abbey).

Rice. 40. Helmet possibly belonging to Henry VII (Westminster Abbey).

After 1420, a special tournament helmet appears. It was, so to speak, a general purpose version, like, for example, the helmet of Henry V, and due to its shape it was called the “frog helmet”. These can be seen in countless paintings and sculptures after 1420. There are many well-preserved specimens; one of these (though of later origin) is in Westminster Abbey, where it was taken for the funeral of King Henry VII in 1500 (Fig. 40). When making these tournament helmets, the craftsmen followed practical principles, namely, a thick, curved front plate, the upper edge of which overlapped the upper plate that covered the vault of the skull, completely protecting the eyes. Nevertheless, the warrior could see through the viewing slit if he put his shoulders forward and tilted his head - it was in this position that the clash took place during tournament spear fights. I know for sure that this position allows you to see well, since I myself tried to do it with the helmet of Henry VII in Westminster Abbey. True, at the very moment of the collision you need to raise your head, and at that moment you really stop seeing anything, but at the moment of the collision this is no longer important, but the knight was completely safe.

Since prehistoric times, the shape of the shield has undergone numerous and varied changes, but the purpose of its use has never changed. During the Middle Ages, the cavalry shield was the most important type, although there were others - small round shields for fighting on foot, and at the end of the Middle Ages long shields became widespread. mantlets – to protect archers and crossbowmen. The mantlet was similar to the shield of a Roman legionnaire - long, rectangular and concave. The early form of the knight's shield is very aptly described by the definition "shield in the form of a kite."

Rice. 41. Shield styles (1050-1450).

In some cases, warriors of the Scandinavian peoples used shields similar in shape to a kite until the 12th century, although rarely; they usually used large round shields, both in sea and land battles. For the Scandinavians, fighting on land meant fighting on foot; in other parts of Europe, warriors fought in the old Gothic manner - sitting astride war horses, and rectangular “kite” shields began to be used no later than the 9th century. This shield continued to be used until the middle of the 12th century (that is, until the end of the Norman period of English history). After this, the shield becomes shorter, and by 1220 it becomes smaller. It now has a straight horizontal top edge. Such shields are depicted on two fighting warriors in Figure 7.

Shields always had a concavity corresponding to the contour of the body, although at the end of the 13th century completely flat small shields were sometimes used. This type of shield survived until the early 15th century - Henry V's shield in Westminster Abbey is of this type - although there is no evidence that it was widely used in battle. In the middle of the 14th century, a shield appeared new form, intended mainly for tournament dueling with spears. It had the shape of an irregular rectangle—please forgive me for such a geometrically impossible definition—and its concavity was directed outward, not inward. In some shields closer to right hand in the upper edge there was a cutout for a spear taken at the ready (Fig. 41).

Many medieval shields have survived to this day, so we can study them to understand how they could deflect blows dealt to them on the battlefield and in martial arts. From the shields of the 13th, 14th and 15th centuries we can tell exactly how they were made. The manufacture of any shield followed the same principles: they were made from plywood. The best shields were made from thin wooden plates glued together, with the fibers of each subsequent plate located at right angles to the direction of the fibers of the previous plate. We used wood with a dense arrangement of fibers - birch or linden. No wonder the ancient Scandinavians and Saxons poetically and allegorically called shields “the warlinden” (the root linden in Germanic languages ​​means “linden”; the word can be translated as “linden of war” or “root of war”). The wooden base was covered with leather or parchment on the outside, and a layer of plaster was applied on top (as a primer for drawing). On the outside of the shield the coat of arms or motto of the owner was painted; sometimes this design was made in low relief. The inner surface of the shield was covered with fabric, sometimes dyed linen, and in some cases (such as the shield of Henry V) the fabric was decorated with artistic embroidery. In the middle of the inner surface there was a small rectangular pillow, placed in a quilted cover and stuffed with tow, horsehair, and sometimes just hay. The pillow served as a shock absorber, absorbing the energy of impacts and protecting the hand from injury.

Various straps, the so-called enarms, with the help of which the warrior held the shield. The handles of ancient shields from the Bronze Age to the Viking Age were made in the form of a thick beam, which was riveted to the inside above a large hollow recess in the center of the round shield. This recess protruded from the outside in the form of a bump, leaving a cavity at the back where the fist was placed, squeezing the handle. Holding such a shield was the same as holding the lid of a laundry bin by the handle, the only difference being that the shield was flat or had a concavity directed inward. The Vikings had an additional support for the hand in the form of a belt stretched to the left side of the shield. The Viking passed his hand under this belt - this way it was possible to fix the shield more securely with his hand, and it was much more convenient to hold it. Some additional devices of this kind may have been used in the Bronze Age; The Greeks definitely had such devices. But since the wooden or leather linings of bronze shields have not survived to this day, that is, the parts to which the belts would have been attached have not survived, we cannot say how common such means of wearing shields were in the Bronze Age.

The enarms of medieval shields consisted of three belts. Their fastening and relative position could vary significantly, but the principle in each case remained the same: 1) a belt located on the left side of the shield, riveted on both sides so that a muscular forearm in chain mail could pass between it and the shield; 2) the same, but shorter belt, located closer to the right edge of the shield. The wrist was threaded under this belt; 3) and finally, a few inches further, another strap for the fingers was riveted, in case the fingers did not hold the horse's bridle. Another important addition was the fourth belt, the so-called guizh, for which the shield was suspended from the warrior’s neck. In chronicles and novels you can often find the expression “with a shield around your neck.” When you encounter such an expression, think about guizhe, and you will immediately imagine what the author meant. This is a belt that was actually in two pieces, like the strap of a camera bag. These pieces were connected to each other with a buckle, that is, the length of the belt could be adjusted. The ends of the belt were riveted to both upper corners of the shield. It appears that these rivets were inserted before the outer surface of the shield was covered with plaster and finished (Figs. 42 and 43).

Rice. 42. Inner side of a 13th century shield; the arm pillow, enarms and huizh are shown.

Rice. 43. Another relative arrangement of straps on the inside of a 13th-century shield.

You often see shields with embossed coats of arms on graves or on the walls of medieval churches. They are depicted as if the driving belts are hooked onto the pegs on which they hang. Especially good in this regard are the shields of the barons of Henry III, hanging on the walls of the choir aisles of Westminster Abbey.

Rice. 44. Method of attaching a baldric to a scabbard in the 12th century.

Rice. 45. A later method of attaching a baldric to a scabbard (XIII century).

The sword was never suspended from a belt that tightly covered the knight's waist. From 500 to 900, swords were usually worn on a shoulder sling, with the hilt sometimes located at chest level, but this method was only suitable for fighting in chariots or on foot. It was more convenient for the cavalryman if the handle was located lower, especially if he was simultaneously using a shield. Therefore, a heavily armed horseman of the 10th-15th centuries wore a sword either on a sling that fit loosely around his hips, or on belts hanging from his belt. Until approximately 1340, the rider wore a baldric made in the form of a wide belt that held a scabbard on both sides. The belt was wrapped around the scabbard about six inches below the neckline, and then passed over the left thigh, around the back and right thigh to the flap with a buckle, to which this end of the belt was attached, fastening it to the buckle in front. The flap with a buckle was attached to the sheath directly under the neck and directed along the front surface of the abdomen towards the other end of the waist belt. (This method of carrying a sword is shown in Figures 44 and 45.) In some European countries - mainly in England, France and Spain - belts were fastened with large buckles. But in Germany, Italy and Scandinavia, fastening the sword was simpler: the end of the belt was cut lengthwise into two tails, and there was no buckle on the counter flap, but instead two parallel longitudinal slits were cut into it, where the tails were passed, which were then simply tied in a knot (Fig. 45).

Rice. 46. Attaching a baldric to a scabbard at the beginning of the 14th century; with this method, instead of wrapping the sheath with a belt, locks and rings were used.

With the advent of the "international" style of plate armor in the third quarter of the 14th century, a new method of attaching the baldric to the scabbard also appeared on the medieval scene. The belt of the sling no longer ran diagonally to the left thigh, but was positioned horizontally low on the hips. The sword was hung from the left side in one of two ways. Either to fasten the sword they used a hook on the belt, from which the sheath was hung by a special ring located on the back edge of the sheath, or for this they used a pair of short belts that were fastened to buckles on the back edge of the sheath. Most of the baldrics of this type were richly decorated with square or round plates of beautiful jewelry work (Fig. 46 and 47), and each such decoration was connected to its neighbors using loops.

At the beginning of the 15th century - that is, when they abandoned outer clothing and began to wear “white” armor that sparkled with steel - the sword began to be suspended from a narrow belt that ran diagonally down to the left thigh along a steel cape (Fig. 48). Later, in the same century, the sword began to be suspended on belt “loops” from the waist belt. These loops were fastened or wound around the scabbard - one near the neck of the scabbard, and the other half the distance from the neck to the opposite end. With this method of wearing, the scabbard was at an angle (sometimes up to forty-five degrees) to the knight’s body, and did not hang vertically, as was customary from about 1350.

Rice. 47. Late 14th century baldric, decorated with plaques. They wore such a sling low on the hips.

Rice. 48. A sling running down the cape obliquely to the left thigh.

Rice. 49. Further development more early style, 1450-1480.

Our discussion of medieval armor would be incomplete without saying a few words about the spurs of that time; after all, they played an extremely important role not only in ordinary riding, but also in how the knight wore armor while sitting in the saddle. There were two types of medieval spurs - simple "awl" spurs and spurs with wheels. The first type was the only one in use until about 1270. Greek and Roman spurs were very small, ending in long pyramidal "spikes" and very short shoulders; each shoulder ended with a button or rivet, to which a strap was attached, which was wound around the foot or attached to a leather shoe. This type of spur was used in Europe until the 7th-8th centuries, after which the shoulders became much longer; they now covered the entire heel and ran along the sides of the foot, ending in front of the ankles. A slot was made at the end of each shoulder, and a fastener was inserted into it, which was used to secure the strap, which was passed under the heel and over the top of the foot. By the end of the XTT century, the shoulders of the spurs began to be made figuratively curved, repeating the outlines of the ankles (Fig. 51 and 52). At the same time, the belts began to be attached to pins on the lower surface of the outer shoulder. The strap was then passed under the foot, threaded through a slot made in the edge of the inside shoulder, passed over the top of the foot, and fastened to a buckle located on the top edge of the outside shoulder (Fig. 53).

Rice. 50. Free hanging sword; Italian style 1460-1510.

The wheel in the spur first appears at the end of the 13th century. At first, the spur wheel was small, had six teeth and was placed at the end of a short “neck”. By the middle of the 14th century, the neck became longer, the teeth larger and more numerous; in some cases the spur wheel began to resemble a daisy flower; Wheels with a large (up to 32) number of teeth were very popular (Fig. 54). At the same time, spurs were attached to metal greaves rather than to chain mail stockings - the shoulders connected above the Achilles tendon and diverged from there at a sharper angle than earlier spurs. The neck of the spur became even longer towards the end of the 19th century. By about 1420, the average spur neck length reached four inches, and the teeth of the wheels became quite long. Between 1415 and 1440 - in a relatively short period of time - the shoulders began to form a very deep curvature under the ankles. But after 1440, the craftsmen again returned to the old style spurs, although nevertheless the neck became even longer; for example, by the last quarter of this century the length of the neck sometimes reached 10 inches.

Rice. 51. Viking Spur.

Rice. 52. Spur of the 12th century.

Rice. 53. An early type of spur with a wheel, around 1300.

Rice. 54. Spur with a large wheel; 1330-1360.

When people see such long spurs and sharp spikes on wheels, many exclaim: “What terrible suffering the poor horses endured!” But I believe that such sympathy for long-suffering and, by the way, long-dead animals is completely inappropriate in this case. The teeth of the wheels could not penetrate deep into the horse's skin, since they were too tightly seated on the wheel for this. The horse has very thick skin, and by the time the spur with wheels appeared, most horses were covered with linen blankets before riding. Maybe this is what caused the invention of wheels, although I personally think this reason is unlikely. The exceptional length of the neck was a natural result of the appearance in the 15th century horse armor; the metal protection of the sides of the animal protruded so high above the horse’s body that it would be completely impossible to reach the skin with an ordinary short spur. Frankly speaking, it seems to me that the awl-shaped spur, which nothing prevented from piercing the body of the animal, was a more cruel element of the harness than the ominous-looking spurs with wheels; and the short European awl spurs were a child's toy to tickle the horse, compared to the narrow, about two inches long, awl spurs of the medieval Arabian horsemen.

Rice. 55. The inscription on the picture is in Middle English: “How a man should be dressed in armor so that he can fight comfortably on foot.”

Now, after we took a look at how knightly armor was made in medieval Europe and how this equipment developed, we need to get acquainted with how it was worn. To make this clear, let's go back to where we started. Let us return to our old friend Kunz Schott von Hellingen, Burgrave of Rothenburg, and see how five hundred years ago he put on beautiful armor, which even today looks the same as the day he last took it off.

The first thing that attracts the eye in Schott's chambers at Rothenburg Castle is a long table mounted on trestles, on which sparkling pieces of armor are laid out along with a sword, spurs and a short cape (tabard), decorated with Schott's coat of arms - a four-field shield in silver and red colors . Let us imagine that Schott himself enters the room, and the small, bare-walled room suddenly comes alive in the presence of this energetic personality. Schott is about thirty-five years old, of powerful build, a tall man; his tough, strong face produces a rather repulsive impression, despite the open and bold look of his mocking and cheerful eyes. The look of your hair can be captivating: it is long and falls freely over your shoulders. Upon entering, he tucks them under his underarmor cap, which looks like a hairnet. In 1500, it was fashionable to wear long hair, and this was dictated not only by fashion, but also by purely practical considerations: the hair, collected under a cap, forms a thick and elastic cushion, an excellent means of absorbing the energy of impacts in addition to the quilted lining of the helmet. Imagine now young man, one of his servants - squires, without whose help Schott would not have been able to put on armor. The squire's duties include cleaning and lubricating the armor and maintaining it in working condition.

The clothes that Schott is wearing indicate that he is ready to don the combat harness. He wears a long-sleeved shirt that reaches to his hips, long, tight pants, and sturdy leather boots. Pieces of chain mail are sewn into the sleeves of the shirt and at the elbows, and the trousers at the knees are wrapped in woolen fabric. In addition, he is wearing chain mail breeches, similar to modern swim briefs. Looking at these clothes, you involuntarily recall the description of the 15th century “How a man schall be armyd at his ese when he schal fight on foote” (“How to dress a man in armor so that he can fight comfortably on foot”). The military equipment described is equally suitable for equipping a foot warrior and for fighting on horseback. The mentioned treatise examines armor intended for peaceful fights, friendly sparring on sites, or chanclos, which were a fenced space reminiscent of a boxing ring, where opponents fought on foot. It is very interesting to look at this authentic description of the armor, which I will give in a translation similar to the original version; it is very easy to understand, and I would be sorry to convey it in modern writing. Here is part of the treatise, which describes the clothes in which Schott is dressed: “He should not wear a shirt, but a doublet made of strong linen with a silk lining with numerous holes. The doublet must be of strong weave... and stripes of chain mail must be sewn to the doublet at the sleeves and at the armholes underneath. Thick waxed cords should be woven from thin, strong threads, such as are used to make crossbow strings. They must be carefully separated and woven properly. You should also wax them, and then they will not split or tear. Also a pair of quilted trousers and a couple of short pieces of fine wool to wrap around his knees under his greaves so that they would not rub the skin. Also a pair of good quality and thick cords..."

What follows is a rather mysterious and dark instruction on how “three thin cords should be firmly tied to the sole of the shoe...”. Moreover, “to the middle of the foot” it should have been wrapped with a cord like football boots, that is, around the foot and around the ankles. Thick waxed cords were used to fasten the doublet to the shoulders and the trousers to the hips. These garters were used to secure the upper bracers to the shoulders and to secure the legguard.

Rice. 56. Hat and scarf around the neck.

Squire Schott takes the right greave from the table. It is not fastened, so the squire easily opens it on its hinges, and while the master puts on the legguards, the squire places the greaves on Schott's shins and fastens them on the inside of the shins. The leggings are secured with small spring pins - one at the top, the other at the bottom. Locking the leggings automatically places the knee pads in place over the wool that is wrapped around the knees, so that the knee pads do not rub the skin when bending the legs in a knee joint. The squire can only tighten the cords that secure the knee pads in the right places. While the squire is busy with the kneepads, his knight places the legguards on his legs. This is a more complex piece of armor than the legguards of the 14th century, for they are now higher and end in three plates, which, overlapping each other, are attached to the lower, main plate, increasing flexibility as much as possible, and protecting the groin inside, and outside the hip joint area. A convex ridge is minted in the upper part of the main plate, which is capable of deflecting the impact of the tip of any weapon aimed at this place. A small leather flap is riveted to the upper edge of the uppermost plate, above the hip joint, and two small holes are made in this flap through which Schott threads the cords sewn to the trousers and ties the cords in a knot. This fastening holds the legplates in place and strengthens the fixation of the two thigh straps that the squire has just fastened to the buckles. The same procedure is done with the left leg. There are no solerets (sabatons) in Schott's armor; the feet are protected only by shoes made of thick, durable leather. After this, the knight puts on a necklace that covers the neck and upper chest and back. But before putting on the necklace, Schott wraps a scarf around his neck so that the steel collar does not rub his neck (Fig. 56). The necklace is made of two large plates, one front and one back, and six overlapping hooks that form three clasps corresponding to three collars that fit into each other - this provides protection from the neck to the ears. The edge of the upper collar is bent outward so that the steel rubs less on the neck. If you see the necklace assembled, you will probably be surprised, wondering how it can be put on, but in reality it is very easy to put on; the necklace, as a rule, was constructed in the same way as the greaves, that is, it had loops on which it was fastened on the left shoulder, and a lock with a spring that locked the necklace closed around the neck on the right shoulder. The three overlapping collars are also divided into two halves. So when the necklace needed to be put on, the lock was opened and this entire piece of armor opened on its hinges. The necklace was worn on left shoulder and fastened around the neck, and then fastened the lock on the right shoulder. At the same time, the end of the scarf was pulled out over the edge of the collar in front.

When the necklace was properly put on, the knight donned the cuirass. The Schott cuirass is made a little differently from the earlier cuirass described in the previous chapter; it has no loops on the left side and no clasps on the right. The plates of this cuirass are completely separated - these are separate parts of the armor, although the design of the culet and cape remains the same. The breastplate is equipped with small movable plates inserted into the arm holes; this gives the armor greater flexibility and provides better protection than if you enlarge the main plate of the breastplate and try to cover the armpit with it.

The squire hands Schott the breastplate, and he takes the back of the cuirass and places it on his back, and the knight adjusts the breastplate into place. Its rear edges overlap the front side edges of the back of the cuirass, and the rear edges of the cape plates overlap the front edges of the culet. Putting the plates of the cuirass in place, the knight and his squire use two belts riveted to the shoulder parts of the breastplate, fastening them with the help of fasteners located on the shoulder parts of the back plate, connecting the two parts of the cuirass. Finally, a belt is tightly secured around both plates on the belt. Then the bracers are put on the hands, following the same method as the leg armor is put on. The lower bracer is fastened around the forearm, the elbow pad is placed on the elbow, and the shoulder is covered with the upper bracer. After this, a light small shoulder pad is fixed to the necklace, and a heavy shoulder pad above it. The cords sewn to the shoulders of the doublet are passed through small holes in the shoulder pads and tied in a knot.

Rice. 57. Schott von Hellingen necklace.

Now that the knight has put on most of the armor, you understand why the strips of chain mail sewn to the doublet are needed - they protect those parts of the body that were not covered by the steel plates. When a warrior is seated in the saddle, the space between the two upper legguards is additionally protected by the high pommel of the saddle. For additional protection of the armpits there are special plates, and these plates are now attached by the squire to the necklace using straps. On the back of these plates are wide leather straps about six inches long. Through the holes made in the ends of these belts, laces are threaded, with which the plate is freely suspended from the necklace, additionally covering the areas of the shoulder and armpit area protected only by chain mail. With the tying of the armpit plates, the main process of donning the armor ends, but before continuing with the donning, the knight makes many different movements to make sure that the armor fits and is put on comfortably, does not pinch anywhere and does not loose anything anywhere. He swings his arms, raises and lowers his shoulders, bends to the sides, bends and straightens his knees. Everything seems to be in order, the knight bends down so that the squire puts a cape over his head - a short cloak - tabard This cape is an ordinary rectangular piece of cloth with a hole in the middle for the head. This is a simple cape that covers the chest and back and reaches just below the waist. The tabard was held in place by the sword belt.

Rice. 58. His cuirass.

Rice. 59. Schott von Hellingen's full plate armament.

Rice. 60. His long sword.

The squire takes gilded spurs from the table, Schott places his foot on the bench, and the squire attaches the spur to his foot. While the squire is putting on the spur, Schott takes the large sword from the table and unsheathes it; the knight wants to make sure both edges of the blade are (literally) razor sharp. The sword looks quite heavy; the blade measures nearly forty inches in length, but is in fact relatively light, weighing no more than four pounds, and the excellent balance and precisely calculated weight of the head make the sword comfortable to use. (We often hear tales that medieval swords were so heavy that modern man could not even lift them, and similar fables. This is the same nonsense as the statement that knights had to be put into saddles using winches .) Satisfied with the sharpness of the weapon, Schott places it back in its sheath; the squire takes the sword, unwinds the baldric, ties the scabbard with a loop and fastens the baldric to his belt. Now Schott is fully equipped, except for the gauntlets and helmet that he will put on when he mounts his horse and is ready to ride. He takes mittens from the table, and the squire carries behind him a helmet, which is an example of a late salad. The dome part of the helmet almost completely follows the shape of the head and fits quite tightly to it. The shape of the helmet is not elongated, which was typical for many German salads made in the eighties and nineties of the 15th century. Attached to the back of the helmet at the bottom are three overlapping small plates that protect the neck. The facial opening is large and corresponds in size to the opening of a 14th-century bascinet; the hole is closed by a large and deep visor, which, curving downwards, completely covers the chin. Accompanied by his squire, Schott exits the door and descends the narrow spiral staircase. You hear him coming and are surprised that the armor does not rattle; all their parts are perfectly fitted, and as they move, accompanied by the musical ringing of spurs, they only quietly rustle and tap.

Rice. 61. One of his spurs.

From the dark arch of the door, Schott emerges into the castle courtyard, flooded with bright light, and immediately the armor flashes with incredible brilliance - polished knee pads and leg guards, elbow pads, shoulder pads and salads sparkle; The heraldic symbols on the tabard, pennant and flags are striking in their diversity. Half of Schott's people are here. They are already sitting on their war horses and ready to ride, just waiting for their leader to appear. Now they will go to make a quick raid on the lands of the baron living next door. In front of the door, the groom holds the bridle of a large stallion, a steed more powerful than modern hunting horses. Putting on his mittens, Schott exchanges a few words with his assistant. While talking, the leader looks at his people with an appraising glance. Then he easily jumps into the saddle, settles comfortably in it and stretches out his hand for the helmet. Schott takes it, examines it carefully for a few moments, and then puts it on his head, after straightening the lining and adjusting the cap. He then fastens the buckle of his belt under his chin and nods to the groom. He lets go of the bridle and jumps to the side, as the thoroughbred animal proudly raises its head, snores and dances, then rears up, as purebred horses have always done and will do. Then the horse moves at a quiet gait towards the gate and is restrained from breaking into a frisky gallop only by the iron hand of a skilled rider. Following Schott is a fourteen-year-old boy on an equally tall and thoroughbred horse (reserve horse), carrying a spear with a red and white pennant. The whole long cavalcade is moving behind them. The horses bravely clatter their hooves on the stones, you can hear the clanking of weapons and armor, funny jokes, and laughter. The cavalcade, accompanied by a booming echo, leaves from under the gate arch onto the drawbridge, and we see only the suddenly empty castle courtyard, where only grooms and pigeons remain.

The city of Nuremberg offered a reward of 2,000 guilders for the head of Schott von Hellingen. The period of his activity was the bloodiest in the entire history of this city. Schott's knights constantly ambushed Nuremberg soldiers, and few managed to escape alive.

Schott's feud with Nuremberg ended in 1525, and he was given a safe conduct to pass through the city to Heilbronner Hof, which, although located within the perimeter of the city walls, belonged to the Margrave von Ansbach-Bayreuth. Here, during Schott's fatal illness, some famous Nuremberg doctors visited him. Schott died on January 8, 1526. There was a house chapel in the palace, and back in 1757 there was a sign on which one could read: “In the year 1526, on the first Monday after New Year’s Day, the noble and valiant Konrad (Kuntz) Schott, chief of Streitburg, died, and his soul remains now in the care of God.”

Hornburg Castle, for the possession of which Schott entered into a dispute with the Imperial Elector, still stands on the Neckar River, and the door of one of the doors is still decorated with his coat of arms (I consider it my pleasant duty to thank Mr. R. T. Gwynne, owner of Schott's armor , for the information provided to me and for the opportunity to personally inspect the armor and become familiar with it in detail).

They preferred armor. Chain armor began to lose its relevance when longbows and crossbows were invented. Their penetrating power was so great that the mesh of metal rings became useless. Therefore, I had to protect myself with solid metal sheets. Later, when the dominant position was occupied firearms, they also abandoned lat. The rules were dictated by military progress, and the gunsmiths only adapted to them.

A knight in chain mail with a surcoat over it
There are espaulers on the shoulders (the ancestors of epaulettes)

At first, chain mail covered only the chest and back. Then it was complemented with long sleeves and mittens. By the 12th century, chain mail stockings appeared. So almost all parts of the body were protected. But the most important thing is the head. The helmet covered her, but her face remained open.

Then they made a solid helmet that also covered the face. But in order to put it on, a thick fabric cap was first put on the head. A chain mail headdress was pulled over him. And on top they placed a metal riveted helmet on his head.Naturally, my head was very hot. After all, the inside of the helmet was also covered with suede. Therefore, many holes were made in it for ventilation. But this did not help much, and the knights tried to remove the heavy metal protection from their heads immediately after the battle.

Knight's helmets of the 12th-13th centuries

The shields were made in a teardrop shape. Knight's coats of arms were applied to them. The coats of arms were also displayed on special shoulder shields - espaulers. The espaulers themselves were made not of metal, but of leather, and performed purely decorative functions. Helmet decorations were made of wood and covered with leather. Most often they were made in the form of horns, eagle wings or figures of people and animals.

The knight's weapons included a spear, sword, and dagger. The handles of the swords were long so that they could be grasped with two hands. Sometimes used instead of a sword falchion. This is a cutting blade similar in shape to a machete.

Falchion on top and two knight's swords

In the 13th century, leather plates began to be applied to chain mail. They were made from several layers of boiled leather. They were added only to the arms and legs. And, of course, surcoat. It was very important element clothes. It was a fabric caftan that was worn over armor. Rich knights sewed themselves surcoats from the most expensive fabrics. They were decorated with coats of arms and emblems. This type of clothing was required. According to the concepts of Catholic morality, undisguised knightly armor was akin to a naked body. Therefore, appearing in them in public was considered indecent. That's why they were covered with cloth. In addition, the white fabric reflected the sun's rays, and the metal heated up less on hot summer days.

Knight in armor

Knights in armor

As already mentioned, in the second half of the 13th century, large bows and crossbows appeared. The bow reached 1.8 meters in height, and an arrow fired from it pierced chain mail at a distance of 400 meters. Crossbows were not as powerful. They pierced armor at a distance of 120 meters. Therefore, we had to gradually abandon chain mail, and they were replaced by solid metal armor. The swords have also changed. Previously they were slashing, but now they have become piercing. The sharp end could pierce the joint of the plates and hit the enemy.

They began to attach visors to helmets in the shape of an elongated cone. This shape prevented arrows from hitting the helmet. They slid along the metal, but did not pierce it.

Helmets of this shape began to be called Bundhugels or "dog faces". By the beginning of the 15th century, armor had completely replaced chain mail, and knightly armor had taken on a different quality. Metal began to be decorated with gilding and niello. If the metal was undecorated, it was called “white.” Helmets continued to be improved.

From left to right: Arme, Bundhugel, Bikok

The helmet was quite original bicock. His visor did not rise, but opened like a door. It was considered the strongest and most expensive helmet arme. He withstood any blows. It was invented by Italian masters. True, it weighed about 5 kg, but the knight felt absolutely safe in it.

Entire schools of craftsmen appeared who competed with each other in the manufacture of armor. Italian armor

outwardly very different from the German ones

and Spanish.

And they had very little in common with the English ones.

As the craftsmanship improved, so did the price. The armor was getting more and more expensive. A knight of that time required several types of armor: one for battles, two for tournaments (for horse and foot combat), and also “ceremonial.”
Therefore, armor sets came into fashion. That is, you could order the full set, or you could only pay for part of it. The number of parts in such prefabricated armor reached up to 200. The weight of a complete set sometimes reached 40 kg. If a person shackled in them fell, he could no longer get up without outside help.

But we must not forget that people get used to everything. The knights felt quite comfortable in armor for battle.

All you had to do was walk around in them for two weeks, and they became like family. It should also be noted that after the appearance of armor, shields began to disappear. A professional warrior, clad in iron plates, no longer needed this type of protection. The shield lost its relevance, since the armor itself served as a shield.
Time passed, and knightly armor gradually turned from a means of protection into a luxury item.

This was due to the advent of firearms. The bullet pierced the metal. Of course, the armor could be made thicker, but in this case its weight increased significantly. And this had a negative impact on both horses and riders.

At first they fired stone bullets from matchlock guns, and later lead bullets. And even if they did not pierce the metal, they made large dents on it and rendered the armor unusable. Therefore, by the end of the 16th century, knights in armor became rare. And at the beginning of the 17th century they disappeared completely.

Only isolated elements remained from the armor. These are metal breastplates (cuirasses) and helmets. Home impact force arquebusiers and musketeers became part of European armies. The sword replaced the sword, and the pistol replaced the spear. Has begun new stage a story in which armored knights no longer had a place.
Sergey Davydov

We have become acquainted with the harmonious, consistent official version of the development of knightly armor. The following facts can be extracted from it:
1. From the 9th to the mid-13th century, chain mail dominated. And from the second half of the 13th century until the end of the 16th century, noble knights preferred armor, due to the appearance of crossbows and powerful bows.
2. The inside of a solid steel helmet was covered with suede. To prevent the head from overheating inside the helmet, many holes were made in it. Before putting on a helmet, a fabric cap was put on the head, and a chain mail headband was pulled over it.
3. They began to attach visors to helmets in the shape of an elongated cone. This shape prevented arrows from hitting the helmet. They slid along the metal, but did not pierce it.
4. According to the concepts of Catholic morality, undisguised knightly armor was akin to a naked body. Therefore, appearing in them in public was considered indecent. Therefore, they were covered with cloth ( surcoat). In addition, the white fabric reflected the sun's rays, and the metal heated up less on hot summer days. Rich knights sewed themselves surcoats from the most expensive fabrics. They were decorated with coats of arms and emblems.
5. The knight had several types of armor: one for battles, two for tournaments (for horse and foot combat), and also “ceremonial.”

So, who are the knights?
Answer:
These are professional military men who, as a rule, have their own military formations and who, in between serving the crown and the church, were engaged in the redistribution of property among themselves. This is colorfully narrated in handwritten chronicles and numerous legends about the exploits of their famous ancestors, carefully preserved by grateful descendants.
In them, the ancestors-knights appear as noble warriors, and necessarily with famous superpowers that are not characteristic of mere mortals.

Below are some excerpts about the sometimes incredible abilities of ancient knights, from http://pro-vladimir.livejournal.com/266616.html#comments(more details here)
Exoskeletons of medieval knights
...
..."You would be there yourself ( in the castle ) began to spend all their days being the ruler of the surrounding lands? What about riding in full armor and even sleeping? After all, even about “sleeping,” they say, the Knight slept standing up! What kind of endurance and willpower is needed to win? To do it right in your pants, sit in a piece of metal in wet clothes, with your own secretions floating around, and even sleep standing up? Is this some kind of voluntary torture? Yes, you will rot alive there!..

What is known about Knights in full armor? That they even have a SOLID calf joint and no heel as such, i.e. The “shoe” immediately bends over the foot. At the same time, you can insert your leg, foot first, through the one-piece calf armor only by unfastening your foot, or without having one, or by stretching the armor, or by having armor that is several sizes larger or by having thin legs. But later armor already had doors on the calf joint... it is quite logical to use overhead armor from different materials, but it is no longer logical to use armor entirely made of metal, including boots that will slide... They also did not have a “door” and early helmets, but the visor opened later, and the head had to be put through the neck hole. Moreover, this is not a sweater or knitted material that stretches, and not jeans that can be stretched, it is metal! Anyone who has the desire can try to stick his head into a 10 liter jar through the narrow neck. If the ears go through, it will fit through, but pulling it back out is a problem!..

The armor was not removed by the Knights outside the Castle. Which is already strange. Those. on a hike you are in armor for many days, weeks! You pee and poop right there! And so that it doesn't stink too much, they pour water on you through... through a raised visor or neck joint. Here historians have versions; in the chronicles there is no exact indication of how to pour water on a knight, but there is a clear explanation that it needs to be poured inside, from above, and at least several times a day! This is probably easiest to do through an opening visor; some helmets are even made like funnels, where the opening from the inside looks up!..

Stubbornly, because it is written in the documents, they claim that the Knights left the Castle already in Armor! At receptions, feasts, etc., they wore Armor! Details and versions vary, but the essence remains!

Other oddities associated with the “iron” Knights are also known from documents. Legends tell us that even with his head blown off, such a Knight could fight! And in the engravings we can see that the removal of the head, like a limb, did not defeat the Knight...

There are also cases known in history when Knights fought a battle for SEVERAL days, and their army watched on the sidelines, “smoking,” perhaps all together celebrating this event, looking at the battle. After all, it’s not for nothing that they talk about a theater of military operations, maybe it was a theater, and only then the spectators began to hit each other’s faces, but doesn’t that happen here? The judge took the bait and off we went. And so when the Knight surrendered to the mercy of the winner, then his warriors were reassigned with the CONSENT of the losing Knight to the winner. Otherwise they would simply be eliminated. Those. resubordination took place with the CONSENT of the losing side, something like a surrender pact, and not by the very fact of victory. Isn't that the case with us? And it would seem why? Why give away some keys to some cities and castles to the winners? They can take them away anyway. But no! Even completely, COMPLETELY defeated enemies MUST sign something there and take the keys to the winners, otherwise there is no other way. Like the victory doesn't count...

Knights, as legends tell us, had other oddities. For the LOSS of a Knight, his entire army was completely liquidated, the defeat with the transfer to another knight was not counted, but it was physically LIQUIDATED. Which gave this army quite a good incentive to protect the Knight. This strange custom is well known from documents, although historians cannot explain it in any way...

Pictures about a knightly attitude are more like idealization, and there is a subtlety there that the lady of the Knight’s heart MUST be with her husband, i.e. there could be no talk of any physical intercourse between the Knight and the lady, only handkerchiefs and sighs, and in public, i.e. to the public. Moreover, often it was generally visual contact or in one-sided handkerchief mode from the hand of the chosen lady, after rubbing the eyes and blotting the mouth by the lady! Naturally from feelings, sir. And such a handkerchief with tears, licked by her and the Lady’s snot, was passed on to the Knight. The value is extraordinary, since they already collected tournaments for this!..

Author pro_vladimir prefaces his post with the words:
"... Some luminaries from science really want the foundations not to be touched. They don’t bother with the oddities that stick out from these foundations in all directions. For this reason, they are ready to forget how to distinguish the height of a doorway from the height of the ceiling. They are ready to brand technical elements as beautifully useless. It’s developing the impression is that, for the sake of the usual, they are ready to put an equal sign between a military parade and a gay parade. But bullshit, there are useless decorations here and there. It turns out that not everyone is able to distinguish between round and square, especially when they don’t want to notice the difference. .. which I completely agree with (as with all the criticism, by the way). The author also gives his own version explaining the superpowers of knights:

... "It’s a completely different matter if it’s a cephalopod, and it needs armor like an aquarium, then all the carefully sealed cracks in the armor and the need to go out into the world only in it can be explained. And with the need to refresh yourself inside with water, and other household little things are easy explainable, as is high strength with sometimes small stature. After all, physical mechanics cannot be deceived, if people have an internal skeleton and muscles are based on them, then the volume of the muscles matters, and the bones of the skeleton prevent them from increasing their volume, just as the strength of the muscles themselves has a limit, because they will simply tear. But if you are entirely a muscle, then the entire available volume is available for you to build up power, and you use the outer shell as bones, as do crayfish, crabs, and others who have powerful claws, but they are also for them and a skeleton...
...Those. for some reason the Knight was always in armor in open spaces, for some reason he needed water and quite a lot, and inside. Maybe to compensate for evaporation and leaks, and not to flush away excrement? And for some reason there was an advertised and replicated ritual of handing over a “handkerchief” from certain Ladies, for a heart or something else. Did the Knights fight or do something? Why do they even need this scarf with the snot and discharge of the ladies? Fetish? Or transfer of genetic material? After all, mollusks are hermaphrodites and they have no idea who is who and how many times, and during mating they can even release seed material into the water. But there is no water here, as such, and seed material can be transferred through the air with a handkerchief. Then the principle is logical and the Lady is married and the battle for her scarf is when the more worthy Knight receives the seed material and retires to his castle to be fruitful and multiply. Like a fish in a mobile aquarium left its own, got to the next one, received a portion of seeds, and took it to its own aquarium. Everything is quite logical. It’s more logical than replicating and romanticizing fetishism for the snotty scarf of Dam’s discharge...
I beg to differ with the version of a mollusk, like an octopus, inside the armor:
Muscles work only for contraction, i.e. for flexion-extension, for example, in one joint. a flexor muscle and, accordingly, an extensor muscle, and movement in the joint with the help of this pair of muscles is possible at a maximum of 180 degrees and in one plane. And so on for each joint. In addition, the muscles should be attached to adjacent segments of armor to create leverage, and this d.b. suction cups, and again with a set of specific muscles, and this will again take up part of the volume of the limb. If there are no suction cups, then the limb of the reptile sitting inside will dangle from wall to wall, i.e., a tentacle not attached to the armor segments, to ensure degrees of freedom at each point of the tentacle, b. a set of pairs of muscles, similar to the human tongue, providing movement in two perpendicular vertical planes and one horizontal, perpendicular to the vertical ones, so the force of movement in one direction will be provided by muscles occupying a small part of the cross section (6th part), for example, the arms of a knight. And in general, why does a mollusk need an alien life, alien passions and alien desires?
Another note about the official concept of knights' helmets:
The historian who invented suede and a fabric cap between the head and the steel of the helmet clearly deviated from the army in his youth. Such a gasket will not protect against loss of consciousness after being hit with a club. Well, and most importantly, the bulk, especially the supposedly more ancient armor, of higher quality, as metallurgists say, are made of stamped rolled alloy steel, when such technologies had not yet been invented. The video, which barely depicts agility in a modern reconstruction of the capabilities of a knight dressed in stamped armor, is not convincing. If a person is actually dressed in forged armor, for clarity, look at the thickness of the helmet,
then, having fallen in full clothing, he would hardly have been able to get up without outside help. It is also worth considering that there is a structural difference between “endurance” muscles and “fast” ones: the former lose speed, the latter lose endurance.

Below from the comments:
elektromexanik And here's more about the eye line...

Here, to use the eyes through the slits of the helmet, a normal person must tilt his head back in order to see anything. In the second case, in order to see the surroundings, you need to stuff a cap the size of a pillow into your helmet.

Below is an actual find that has lain in the ground for some time, although the accuracy of the dating is questionable.

It's taken away. The archaeological find may be related to the events of the Crusade of 1396 and the Battle of Nicopolis. Veliko Tarnovo Museum, Bulgaria.

In medieval times, life was not easy, clothing played an important role in the flesh to preserve life.
Simple clothing made of flimsy fabric was common, leather was considered a rarity, but armor was worn only by wealthy gentlemen.

Henry VIII's Armet, known as the "Horned Shell". Innsbruck, Austria, 1511

There are several versions regarding the appearance of the first armor. Some believe it all started with robes made of forged metal. Others believe that wood protection should also be considered, in which case we need to remember the truly distant ancestors with stones and sticks. But most people think that armor came from those difficult times when men were knights and women languished in anticipation of them.

Another strange shell-mask, from Augsburg, Germany, 1515.

A separate article should be devoted to the variety of shapes and styles of medieval armor:

Either armor or nothing
The first armor was very simple: rough metal plates designed to protect the knight inside from spears and swords. But gradually the weapons became more and more complicated, and the blacksmiths had to take this into account and make the armor more and more durable, light and flexible, until they had the maximum degree of protection.

One of the most brilliant innovations was the improvement of chain mail. According to rumors, it was first created by the Celts many centuries ago. It was a long process that took a very long time until gunsmiths took on it and took the idea to new heights. This idea is not entirely logical: instead of making armor from strong plates and very reliable metal, why not make it from several thousand carefully connected rings? It turned out great: light and durable, the chain mail allowed its owner to be mobile and was often key factor how he leaves the battlefield: on a horse or on a stretcher. When plate armor was added to chain mail, the result was stunning: the armor of the Middle Ages appeared.

Medieval arms race
Now it is difficult to imagine that for a long time the knight on horseback was a truly terrible weapon of that era: arriving at the scene of battle on a war horse, often also dressed in armor, he was as terrible as he was invincible. Nothing could stop such knights when, with a sword and spear, they could easily attack almost anyone.

Here is an imaginary knight, reminiscent of heroic and victorious times (drawn by the delightful illustrator John Howe):

Bizarre Monsters
Combat became more and more “ritualistic,” leading to the jousting tournaments we all know and love from movies and books. Armor became less useful in practice and gradually became more of a mere indicator of high social level and welfare. Only the rich or nobles could afford armor, however only a truly rich or very wealthy baron, duke, prince or king could afford fantastic armor of the highest quality.

Did this make them especially beautiful? After a while, the armor began to look more like dinner wear than battle gear: impeccable metal work, precious metals, ornate coats of arms and regalia... All of this, while looking amazing, was useless during battle.

Just look at the armor belonging to Henry VIII: isn't it a masterpiece of art of the time? The armor was designed and made, like most all armor of the time, to fit the wearer. In Henry's case, however, his costume looked more noble than fearsome. Who can remember the royal armor? Looking at a set of such armor, the question arises: were they invented for fighting or for showing off? But honestly, we can't blame Henry for his choice: his armor was never really designed for war.

England comes up with ideas
What is certain is that the suit of armor was a terrifying weapon of the day. But any days come to an end, and in the case of classic armor, their end was simply worse than ever.
1415, northern France: on one side - the French; on the other - the British. Although their numbers are a matter of debate, it is generally believed that the French outnumbered the English by a ratio of about 10 to 1. For the English, under Henry (5th, forefather of the aforementioned 8th), this was not at all pleasant. Most likely, they will be, to use a military term, "killed." But then something happened that not only determined the outcome of the war, but also changed Europe forever, as well as dooming armor as a primary weapon.

Invented in ancient times, they were continuously improved, keeping pace with fashion and advances in weaponry. Meanwhile, not everyone can afford the best. The rest of the story will be about that. how medieval armor went from chain mail, which consisted of intertwined metal, to armor that covered the entire body.

Chainmail

At the dawn of the Middle Ages, most knights wore chain mail, which consisted of thousands of tiny steel rings with a diameter of 6-12 millimeters. This type of armor has been known since ancient times and weighed 10-25 kilograms. Not only shirts were made from chain mail, but also hoods called coifs, mittens and stockings, as well as armor for horses. The chain mail shirt, strong and flexible, protected quite well from slashing blows with a sword. However, swipe a mace could break bones and cause internal bleeding without piercing the chain mail. It did not provide sufficient protection from spear strikes or arrows. At first, knights tried to increase their chances of survival by wearing a quilted jacket under their chain mail. Later, over the chain mail they began to wear a brigantine - leather armor onto which small steel plates were riveted. During the period of the Crusades, they began to wear a special light cloak over the chain mail - a surcoat. Not only did it provide protection from the elements, but it also displayed the knight's distinctive colors or coat of arms. Chain mail remained in use until the 18th century, but starting in the 1200s, knights began to switch to more reliable forged armor.

Lamellar and scale armor

In parallel with chain mail, other types of armor were also used in the Middle Ages, which were cheaper, but were quite reliable. For example, the upper armor of the Franks under Charlemagne and the Normans under William the Conqueror was covered with plates, scales and rings, which were attached to a leather base in the following ways:

Knight in mail, 1066

This 11th-century knight wears full mail armor, which required approximately 30,000 rings to make. The weight of such armor was about 14 kilograms. But the chain mail quickly rusted. Rust was removed by pages, “washing” the armor in a barrel of sand.

1 aventail

2 long sleeve mail shirt (replaced by the short sleeve shirt in the 1100s)

3 double edged sword

4 there were slits in the front and back of the chain mail shirt for the convenience of mounted warriors

a) metal rings sewn together;

b) scale armor (scales made of steel or tanned leather lay overlapping like tiles on a roof);

c) light plates (made of metal or leather and riveted onto a leather base).

Short-sleeved chainmail shirt - hauberk, leather greaves, conical helmet with nosepiece, shield (long teardrop-shaped or round)

Long-sleeve hauberk, gloves, aventail, chain mail shawls, flat-top helmet, long straight-top shield

Hauberk, gloves, aventail, leather shoulder pads, chained shossa, knee pads, surcoat, helmet, ecu shield

Hauberk and chain mail chains connected to steel plates, leggings, brigantine, surcoat, large bascinet, aventail, ecu shield

Plate armor with chain mail on open areas, armet, aventail, ecu shield

Full Gothic plate armor, made in Italy, with chain mail on open areas and reinforced protection for the shoulders and knees instead of a shield, salad helmet

Making chain mail

Making a hauberk was not very difficult, but it required long and painstaking work that lasted several weeks. The sequence of actions was as follows:

a) the heated wire was wound around an iron rod, and then divided into rings using a cold cutting tool or tongs;

b) the rings were compressed using a clamp to bring their ends together;

c) the ends of the rings were flattened, and a hole was punched in each of them;

d) each ring was connected to four neighboring ones and riveted together - the “four into one” weaving was the most popular, but there were other options.

Plate armor

By the 13th century, fashion and the level of development of weaponry had changed. With the advent of pointed swords that could pierce chain mail, knights increasingly attached tanned leather plates to it. In the 14th century, leather plates were replaced by metal ones, and the breastplate, bracers and leggings began to be made of hard steel sheets. In the next century, knights were already dressed from head to toe in sparkling steel, which repelled the blows of the sword. This is how full plate armor appeared.

In the Battle of Bouvines in 1214, the French king Philip II Augustus was surrounded by enemy infantry, but thanks to the excellent quality of his armor, he survived - the enemy was not able to “open the tin.” The monarch, who was on the verge of death, was saved by help arriving in time.

Gambeson, or quilt

The quilt was the cheapest and most common protective garment, worn on its own or as underarmor. It increased protection and made it possible to wear armor with greater comfort.

German armor of the 16th century for knight and horse

The field of weapons and armor is surrounded by romantic legends, monstrous myths and widespread misconceptions. Their sources are often a lack of knowledge and experience of communicating with real things and their history. Most of these ideas are absurd and based on nothing.

Perhaps one of the most notorious examples is the belief that “knights had to be mounted by crane,” which is as absurd as it is a common belief, even among historians. In other cases, certain technical details that defy obvious description have become the object of passionate and fantastically inventive attempts to explain their purpose. Among them, the first place seems to be occupied by the spear rest, protruding from the right side of the breastplate.

The following text will attempt to correct the most popular misconceptions and answer questions often asked during museum tours.

1. Only knights wore armor

Armor for a knight's duel, late 16th century

Secondly, it is wrong to believe that every noble man was a knight. Knights were not born, knights were created by other knights, feudal lords or sometimes priests. And under certain conditions, people of non-noble birth could be knighted (although knights were often considered the lowest rank of nobility). Sometimes mercenaries or civilians who fought as ordinary soldiers could be knighted for demonstrating extreme bravery and courage, and later knighthood could be purchased for money.

In other words, the ability to wear armor and fight in armor was not the prerogative of knights. Infantry from mercenaries, or groups of soldiers consisting of peasants, or burghers (city dwellers) also took part in armed conflicts and accordingly protected themselves with armor of varying quality and size. Indeed, burghers (of a certain age and above a certain income or wealth) in most medieval and Renaissance cities were required - often by law and decrees - to purchase and store their own weapons and armor. Usually it was not full armor, but at least it included a helmet, body protection in the form of chain mail, fabric armor or a breastplate, and a weapon - a spear, pike, bow or crossbow.

Indian chain mail of the 17th century

In times of war, these militias were required to defend the city or perform military duties for feudal lords or allied cities. During the 15th century, when some rich and influential cities began to become more independent and self-reliant, even the burghers organized their own tournaments, in which they, of course, wore armor.

Because of this, not every piece of armor has ever been worn by a knight, and not every person depicted wearing armor will be a knight. It would be more correct to call a man in armor a soldier or a man in armor.

2. Women in the old days never wore armor or fought in battles.

3. The armor was so expensive that only princes and rich nobles could afford it.

Indeed, with the exception of obtaining armor on the battlefield or winning a tournament, acquiring armor was a very expensive undertaking. However, since there were differences in the quality of armor, there must have been differences in their cost. Armor of low and medium quality, available to burghers, mercenaries and the lower nobility, could be bought ready-made at markets, fairs and city stores. On the other hand, there was also high-class armor, made to order in imperial or royal workshops and from famous German and Italian gunsmiths.

Although we have extant examples of the cost of armor, weapons and equipment in some of the historical periods, it is very difficult to translate historical costs into modern equivalents. It is clear, however, that the cost of armor ranged from inexpensive, low-quality or obsolete, second-hand items available to citizens and mercenaries, to the cost of the full armor of an English knight, which in 1374 was estimated at £16. This was analogous to the cost of 5-8 years of rent for a merchant's house in London, or three years of salary for an experienced worker, and the price of a helmet alone (with a visor, and probably with an aventail) was more than the price of a cow.

At the higher end of the scale one finds examples such as a large suit of armor (a basic suit that, with the help of additional items and plates, could be adapted for various uses, both on the battlefield and in tournament), commissioned in 1546 by the German king (later - emperor) for his son. Upon completion of this order, for a year of work, the court armorer Jörg Seusenhofer from Innsbruck received an incredible sum of 1200 gold moment, equivalent to twelve annual salaries of a senior court official.

4. The armor is extremely heavy and greatly limits the mobility of its wearer.

A full set of combat armor usually weighs between 20 and 25 kg, and a helmet between 2 and 4 kg. This is less than a firefighter's full oxygen outfit, or what modern soldiers have had to carry into battle since the nineteenth century. Moreover, while modern equipment usually hangs from the shoulders or waist, the weight of well-fitted armor is distributed over the entire body. It was not until the 17th century that the weight of combat armor was greatly increased to make it bulletproof due to the improved accuracy of firearms. At the same time, full armor became increasingly rare, and only important parts of the body: the head, torso and arms were protected by metal plates.

The opinion that wearing armor (which took shape by 1420-30) greatly reduced the mobility of a warrior is not true. The armor equipment was made from separate elements for each limb. Each element consisted of metal plates and plates connected by movable rivets and leather straps, which allowed any movement without restrictions imposed by the rigidity of the material. The widespread idea that a man in armor could barely move, and having fallen to the ground, could not get up, has no basis. On the contrary, historical sources tell about the famous French knight Jean II le Mengre, nicknamed Boucicault (1366-1421), who, dressed in full armor, could, by grabbing the steps of a ladder from below, on the reverse side, climb it using only hands Moreover, there are several illustrations from the Middle Ages and the Renaissance in which soldiers, squires or knights, in full armor, mount horses without assistance or any equipment, without ladders or cranes. Modern experiments with real armor of the 15th and 16th centuries and with their exact copies have shown that even an untrained person in properly selected armor can climb on and off a horse, sit or lie, and then get up from the ground, run and move his limbs freely and without discomfort.

In some exceptional cases, the armor was very heavy or held the wearer in almost one position, for example, in some types of tournaments. Tournament armor was made for special occasions and was worn for a limited time. A man in armor would then climb onto the horse with the help of a squire or a small ladder, and the last elements of the armor could be put on him after he was settled in the saddle.

5. Knights had to be placed in the saddle using cranes

As stated above, most armor was light and flexible enough not to bind the wearer. Most people wearing armor should have no problem being able to place one foot in the stirrup and saddle a horse without assistance. A stool or the help of a squire would speed up this process. But the crane was absolutely unnecessary.

6. How did people in armor go to the toilet?

7. The military salute came from the gesture of raising the visor

Although these theories sound intriguing and romantic, there is virtually no evidence that the military salute originated from them. As for Roman customs, it would be virtually impossible to prove that they lasted fifteen centuries (or were restored during the Renaissance) and led to the modern military salute. There is also no direct confirmation of the visor theory, although it is more recent. Most military helmets after 1600 were no longer equipped with visors, and after 1700 helmets were rarely worn on European battlefields.

One way or another, military records in 17th century England reflect that “the formal act of greeting was the removal of headdress.” By 1745, the English regiment of the Coldstream Guards appears to have perfected this procedure, making it "putting the hand to the head and bowing upon meeting."

Other English regiments adopted this practice, and it may have spread to America (during the Revolutionary War) and continental Europe (during the Napoleonic Wars). So the truth may lie somewhere in the middle, in which the military salute evolved from a gesture of respect and politeness, paralleling the civilian habit of raising or touching the brim of a hat, perhaps with a combination of the warrior custom of showing the unarmed right hand.

8. Chain mail - “chain mail” or “mail”?

German chain mail of the 15th century

A protective garment consisting of interlocking rings should properly be called “mail” or “mail armor” in English. The common term "chain mail" is a modern pleonasm (a linguistic error meaning using more words than necessary to describe it). In our case, “chain” and “mail” describe an object consisting of a sequence of intertwined rings. That is, the term “chain mail” simply repeats the same thing twice.

As with other misconceptions, the roots of this error should be sought in the 19th century. When those who began to study armor looked at medieval paintings, they noticed what seemed to them to be many different types of armor: rings, chains, ring bracelets, scale armor, small plates, etc. As a result, all ancient armor was called “mail”, distinguishing it only by its appearance, which is where the terms “ring-mail”, “chain-mail”, “banded mail”, “scale-mail”, “plate-mail” came from. Today, it is generally accepted that most of these different images were just different attempts by artists to correctly depict the surface of a type of armor that is difficult to capture in painting and sculpture. Instead of depicting individual rings, these details were stylized using dots, strokes, squiggles, circles and other things, which led to errors.

9. How long did it take to make a full suit of armor?

In the case of German gunsmiths, most workshops were controlled by strict guild rules that limited the number of apprentices, thereby controlling the number of items that one master and his workshop could produce. In Italy, on the other hand, there were no such restrictions and workshops could grow, which improved the speed of creation and the quantity of products.

In any case, it is worth keeping in mind that the production of armor and weapons flourished during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. Gunsmiths, manufacturers of blades, pistols, bows, crossbows and arrows were present in any large city. As now, their market depended on supply and demand, and efficient operation was a key parameter for success. The common myth that simple chain mail took several years to make is nonsense (but it cannot be denied that chain mail was very labor intensive to make).

The answer to this question is simple and elusive at the same time. The production time for armor depended on several factors, for example, the customer, who was entrusted with the production of the order (the number of people in production and the workshop busy with other orders), and the quality of the armor. Two famous examples will serve to illustrate this.

In 1473, Martin Rondel, possibly an Italian gunsmith working in Bruges who called himself "armourer to my bastard of Burgundy", wrote to his English client, Sir John Paston. The armorer informed Sir John that he could fulfill the request for the production of armor as soon as the English knight informed him which parts of the costume he needed, in what form, and the time frame by which the armor should be completed (unfortunately, the armorer did not indicate possible deadlines ). In the court workshops, the production of armor for high-ranking persons appears to have taken more time. The court armorer Jörg Seusenhofer (with a small number of assistants) apparently took more than a year to make the armor for the horse and the large armor for the king. The order was made in November 1546 by King (later Emperor) Ferdinand I (1503-1564) for himself and his son, and was completed in November 1547. We do not know whether Seusenhofer and his workshop were working on other orders at this time.

10. Armor details - spear support and codpiece

The spear support appeared shortly after the appearance of the solid chest plate at the end of the 14th century and existed until the armor itself began to disappear. Contrary to the literal meaning of the English term "lance rest", its main purpose was not to bear the weight of the spear. It was actually used for two purposes, which are better described by the French term "arrêt de cuirasse" (spear restraint). It allowed the mounted warrior to hold the spear firmly under his right hand, preventing it from slipping back. This allowed the spear to be stabilized and balanced, which improved aim. In addition, the combined weight and speed of the horse and rider were transferred to the tip of the spear, which made this weapon very formidable. If the target was hit, the spear rest also acted as a shock absorber, preventing the spear from "firing" backwards, and distributing the blow across the chest plate over the entire upper torso, rather than just the right arm, wrist, elbow and shoulder. It is worth noting that on most battle armor the spear support could be folded upward so as not to interfere with the mobility of the sword hand after the warrior got rid of the spear.

The history of the armored codpiece is closely connected with its counterpart in the civilian men's suit. From the middle of the 14th century, the upper part of men's clothing began to be shortened so much that it no longer covered the crotch. In those days, pants had not yet been invented, and men wore leggings clipped to their underwear or a belt, with the crotch hidden behind a hollow attached to the inside of the top edge of each leg of the leggings. At the beginning of the 16th century, this floor began to be filled and visually enlarged. And the codpiece remained a part of the men's suit until the end of the 16th century. On armor, the codpiece as a separate plate protecting the genitals appeared in the second decade of the 16th century, and remained relevant until the 1570s. It had a thick lining on the inside and was joined to the armor at the center of the bottom edge of the shirt. Early varieties were bowl-shaped, but due to the influence of civilian costume it gradually transformed into an upward-pointing shape. It was not usually used when riding a horse, because, firstly, it would get in the way, and secondly, the armored front of the combat saddle provided sufficient protection for the crotch. The codpiece was therefore commonly used for armor intended for fighting on foot, both in war and in tournaments, and while it had some value for protection, it was used just as much for fashion.

11. Did the Vikings wear horns on their helmets?

One of the most enduring and popular images of the medieval warrior is that of the Viking, who can be instantly recognized by his helmet equipped with a pair of horns. However, there is very little evidence that the Vikings ever used horns to decorate their helmets.

The earliest example of a helmet being decorated with a pair of stylized horns comes from a small group of Celtic Bronze Age helmets found in Scandinavia and what is now France, Germany and Austria. These decorations were made of bronze and could take the form of two horns or a flat triangular profile. These helmets date back to the 12th or 11th century BC. Two thousand years later, from 1250, pairs of horns gained popularity in Europe and remained one of the most commonly used heraldic symbols on helmets for battle and tournaments in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. It is easy to see that the two periods indicated do not coincide with what is usually associated with the Scandinavian raids that took place from the end of the 8th to the end of the 11th centuries.

Viking helmets were usually conical or hemispherical, sometimes made from a single piece of metal, sometimes from segments held together by strips (Spangenhelm).

Many of these helmets were also equipped with face protection. The latter could take the form of a metal bar covering the nose, or a face sheet consisting of protection for the nose and two eyes, as well as the upper part of the cheekbones, or protection for the entire face and neck in the form of chain mail.

12. Armor became unnecessary due to the advent of firearms

Finally, it is worth noting that the armor never completely disappeared. The widespread use of helmets by modern soldiers and police proves that armor, although it has changed materials and may have lost some of its importance, is still a necessary part of military equipment throughout the world. Additionally, torso protection continued to exist in the form of experimental chest plates during the American Civil War, airman's plates in World War II, and bulletproof vests of modern times.

13. The size of the armor suggests that people were smaller in the Middle Ages and Renaissance

However, when drawing such general conclusions based on armor, many factors must be considered. Firstly, is the armor complete and uniform, that is, did all the parts fit together, thereby giving the correct impression of its original owner? Secondly, even high-quality armor made to order for a specific person can give an approximate idea of ​​his height, with an error of up to 2-5 cm, since the overlap of the protection of the lower abdomen (shirt and thigh guards) and hips (gaiters) can only be estimated approximately.

Armor came in all shapes and sizes, including armor for children and youth (as opposed to adults), and there was even armor for dwarfs and giants (often found in European courts as "curiosities"). In addition, there are other factors to consider, such as the difference in average height between northern and southern Europeans, or simply the fact that there have always been unusually tall or unusually short people when compared with average contemporaries.

Notable exceptions include examples from kings, such as Francis I, King of France (1515-47), or Henry VIII, King of England (1509-47). The latter’s height was 180 cm, as evidenced by contemporaries has been preserved, and which can be verified thanks to half a dozen of his armor that have come down to us.

Armor of the German Duke Johann Wilhelm, 16th century

Armor of Emperor Ferdinand I, 16th century

Visitors to the Metropolitan Museum can compare German armor dating from 1530 with the battle armor of Emperor Ferdinand I (1503-1564), dating from 1555. Both armors are incomplete and the dimensions of their wearers are only approximate, but the difference in size is still striking. The height of the owner of the first armor was apparently about 193 cm, and the chest circumference was 137 cm, while the height of Emperor Ferdinand did not exceed 170 cm.

14. Men's clothing is wrapped from left to right, because this is how the armor was originally closed.

The theory is compelling, but there is little evidence that modern clothing was directly influenced by such armor. Additionally, while the armor protection theory may be true for the Middle Ages and Renaissance, some examples of helmets and body armor wrap the other way.

Misconceptions and questions about cutting weapons

Dagger, 16th century

As with armor, not everyone who carried a sword was a knight. But the idea that the sword is the prerogative of knights is not so far from the truth. Customs or even the right to carry a sword varied depending on time, place and laws.

In medieval Europe, swords were the main weapon of knights and horsemen. In times of peace, only persons of noble birth had the right to carry swords in public places. Since in most places swords were perceived as “weapons of war” (as opposed to the same daggers), peasants and burghers who did not belong to the warrior class of medieval society could not carry swords. An exception to the rule was made for travelers (citizens, traders and pilgrims) due to the dangers of traveling by land and sea. Within the walls of most medieval cities, the carrying of swords was forbidden to everyone - sometimes even nobles - at least in times of peace. Standard rules of trade, often present at churches or town halls, often also included examples of the permitted length of daggers or swords that could be carried without hindrance within city walls.

Without a doubt, it was these rules that gave rise to the idea that the sword is the exclusive symbol of the warrior and knight. But due to social changes and new fighting techniques that appeared in the 15th and 16th centuries, it became possible and acceptable for citizens and knights to carry lighter and thinner descendants of swords - swords, as an everyday weapon for self-defense in public places. And until the beginning of the 19th century, swords and small swords became an indispensable attribute of the clothing of the European gentleman.

It is widely believed that the swords of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance were simple tools of brute force, very heavy, and as a result, impossible to handle for the “ordinary person”, that is, very ineffective weapons. The reasons for these accusations are easy to understand. Due to the rarity of surviving examples, few people held a real sword in their hands from the Middle Ages or the Renaissance. Most of these swords were obtained from excavations. Their rusty current appearance can easily give the impression of roughness - like a burnt-out car that has lost all signs of its former grandeur and complexity.

Most real swords from the Middle Ages and Renaissance tell a different story. A one-handed sword usually weighed 1-2 kg, and even a large two-handed "war sword" of the 14th-16th centuries rarely weighed more than 4.5 kg. The weight of the blade was balanced by the weight of the hilt, and the swords were light, complex and sometimes very beautifully decorated. Documents and paintings show that such a sword, in skilled hands, could be used with terrible effectiveness, from cutting off limbs to piercing armor.

Turkish saber with scabbard, 18th century

Swords and some daggers, both European and Asian, and weapons from the Islamic world, often have one or more grooves on the blade. Misconceptions about their purpose led to the emergence of the term “bloodstock.” It is claimed that these grooves speed up the flow of blood from an opponent's wound, thus enhancing the effect of the wound, or that they make it easier to remove the blade from the wound, allowing the weapon to be easily drawn without twisting. While such theories may be entertaining, the actual purpose of this groove, called the fuller, is simply to lighten the blade, reducing its mass without weakening the blade or compromising its flexibility.

On some European blades, in particular swords, rapiers and daggers, as well as on some fighting poles, these grooves have a complex shape and perforation. The same perforations are present on cutting weapons from India and the Middle East. Based on scanty documentary evidence, it is believed that this perforation must have contained poison so that the blow was guaranteed to lead to the death of the enemy. This misconception has led to weapons with such perforations being called “assassin weapons.”

While references to Indian poison-bladed weapons exist, and similar rare cases may have occurred in Renaissance Europe, the true purpose of this perforation is not at all so sensational. Firstly, perforation eliminated some material and made the blade lighter. Secondly, it was often made in elaborate and intricate patterns, and served as both a demonstration of the blacksmith's skill and as decoration. To prove it, it is only necessary to point out that most of these perforations are usually located near the handle (hilt) of the weapon, and not on the other side, as would have to be done in the case of poison.