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.

Misconceptions and questions about armor

1. Only knights wore armor

This erroneous but common belief probably stems from the romantic idea of ​​the “knight in shining armor,” a picture that itself gives rise to further misconceptions. First, knights rarely fought alone, and armies in the Middle Ages and Renaissance did not consist entirely of mounted knights. Although the knights were the dominant force in most of these armies, they were invariably - and increasingly over time - supported (and countered) by foot soldiers such as archers, pikemen, crossbowmen and firearms soldiers. On campaign, the knight depended on a group of servants, squires and soldiers to provide armed support and look after his horses, armor and other equipment, not to mention the peasants and artisans who made a feudal society with a warrior class possible.


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, cloth armor or a breastplate, and a weapon - a spear, pike, bow or crossbow.


Indian chain mail of the 17th century

IN war time this popular militia was 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.

In most historical periods there is evidence of women taking part in armed conflicts. There is evidence of noble ladies turning into military commanders, such as Joan of Penthièvre (1319–1384). There are rare references to women from lower society who stood “under the gun.” There are records of women fighting in armor, but no contemporary illustrations of this topic survive. Joan of Arc (1412–1431) will perhaps be the most famous example female warriors, and there is evidence that she wore armor commissioned for her by the French king Charles VII. But only one small illustration of her, made during her lifetime, has reached us, in which she is depicted with a sword and banner, but without armor. The fact that contemporaries perceived a woman commanding an army, or even wearing armor, as something worthy of recording suggests that this spectacle was the exception and not the rule.

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

This idea may have arisen from the fact that most of the armor displayed in museums is high quality equipment, while most of the simpler armor that belonged to the common people and the lowest of the nobles was hidden in storage or lost through the centuries.

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.


Armor of King Henry VIII of England, 16th century

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 coins, equivalent to twelve annual salaries of a senior court official.

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


Thanks for the tip in the comments to the article.

A full set of combat armor usually weighs from 20 to 25 kg, and a helmet - from 2 to 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 of 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

This idea appears to have originated in the late nineteenth century as a joke. It entered popular fiction in subsequent decades, and the picture was eventually immortalized in 1944, when Laurence Olivier used it in his film King Henry V, despite the protests of historical advisers, including such eminent authorities as James Mann, chief armorer of the Tower of London.

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?

One of the most popular questions, especially among young museum visitors, unfortunately, does not have an exact answer. When the man in armor was not busy in battle, he did the same things that people do today. He would go to the toilet (which in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance was called a privy or latrine) or other secluded place, remove the appropriate pieces of armor and clothing and surrender to the call of nature. On the battlefield, everything should have happened differently. In this case, the answer is unknown to us. However, it must be taken into account that the desire to go to the toilet in the heat of battle was most likely low on the list of priorities.

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

Some believe that the military salute originated during the Roman Republic, when contract killing was the order of the day, and citizens were required to raise their right hand when approaching officials to show that they were not carrying a concealed weapon. The more common belief is that the modern military salute came from men in armor raising the visors of their helmets before saluting their comrades or lords. This gesture made it possible to recognize a person, and also made him vulnerable and at the same time demonstrated that in his right hand(in which the sword was usually held) there were no weapons. These were all signs of trust and good intentions.

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."


Coldstream Guards

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?

It is difficult to answer this question unambiguously for many reasons. First, there is no surviving evidence that can paint a complete picture for any of the periods. From around the 15th century, scattered examples survive of how armor was ordered, how long orders took, and how much various pieces of armor cost. Secondly, a complete armor could consist of parts made by various armorers with a narrow specialization. Armor parts could be sold unfinished and then customized locally for a certain amount. Finally, the matter was complicated by regional and national differences.

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 big 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

Two parts of the armor most spark the public's imagination: one is described as "that thing sticking out to the right of the chest," and the second is referred to, after muffled giggles, as "that thing between the legs." In weapon and armor terminology they are known as the spear rest 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, they began to fill this floor and visually enlarge it. 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

In general, the gradual decline of armor was not due to the advent of firearms as such, but due to their constant improvement. Since the first firearms appeared in Europe already in the third decade of the 14th century, and the gradual decline of armor was not noted until the second half of the 17th century; armor and firearms existed together for more than 300 years. During the 16th century, attempts were made to make bulletproof armor, either by reinforcing the steel, thickening the armor, or adding individual reinforcements on top of the regular armor.


German arquebus from the late 14th century

Finally, it is worth noting that the armor never completely disappeared. Widespread use of helmets 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

Medical and anthropological research shows that the average height of men and women has gradually increased over the centuries, a process that has accelerated over the past 150 years due to improvements in diet and public health. Most of the armor that has come down to us from the 15th and 16th centuries confirms these discoveries.

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 behind this statement is that some early forms of armor (plate protection and brigantine of the 14th and 15th centuries, armet - a closed cavalry helmet of the 15th-16th centuries, cuirass of the 16th century) were designed so that left-hand side was superimposed on the right to prevent the blow of the enemy’s sword from penetrating. Since most people are right-handed, most of the penetrating blows would come from the left, and, if successful, should slide across the armor through the smell and to the right.

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


Sword, early 15th century


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, carry swords in in public places Only persons of noble birth were eligible. 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 swords of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance were simple tools of brute force, very heavy, and as a result, impossible to handle for “ ordinary person”, that is, a very ineffective weapon. 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


Japanese katana and wakizashi short sword, 15th 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. Despite the entertainment of such theories, in fact the purpose of this groove, called the fuller, is only to lighten the blade, reducing its mass without weakening the blade or impairing 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 perforation is 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.

Knight's Armament

On the battlefield, a heavily armed knight had all the advantages. Riders of junior ranks (sergeants who were not knights) tried to imitate them in everything, although their armor and weapons were inferior to those of knights. The troops, recruited from urban and rural militia, consisted of archers, crossbowmen, whose role in battles was constantly increasing, and auxiliary infantry units armed with spears, spears and knives. Their armor consisted of an iron helmet and short chain mail woven from rings or armor made of leather and covered with metal plaques.

Knight's Battle Dress

Knight's weapons

The rider's equipment consisted of a spear about three meters long, which he pressed with his hand to his body and, leaning on the stirrups, in a fight with the enemy, he tried to knock him out of the saddle, piercing his shield and armor with the spear. A similar practice of attacking with a spear at the ready, illustrated by embroideries from Bayeux, appeared in the 11th century, although at a later time there were knights fighting using the ancient method of spear throwing.

In addition to the spear, the knight was armed with a straight and wide-bladed sword; sometimes he had another shorter sword attached to his belt. By the end of the 13th century. armor has become so strong that piercing and cutting blows have lost their effectiveness, and the sword becomes a slashing weapon. In battle, the massiveness of the sword was also of great importance, making it possible to knock down the enemy on the spot. In foot combat, the so-called “Danish axe” (introduced by the Vikings) was used, which was usually held with both hands. Being an offensive weapon, the sword also had a symbolic meaning for each knight: it was usually given a name (Roland's sword Durendal), it was blessed on the day of knighting, and it was passed down as part of the lineage.

Defensive knightly armor included chain mail, which went down in the form of a shirt to the knees with slits in the front and back for ease of movement or formed something like pants. It was made of many intertwined iron rings and sometimes had sleeves and a hood. Hands were protected by gloves-mittens, also woven from rings. Total weight knight's armor reached 12 kilograms.

Under the chain mail the knight wore a sweatshirt, and on top - something like a sleeveless tunic, tied at the waist, on which, starting from the 13th century, the warrior's coats of arms were attached. The protection of the most vulnerable parts of the body with metal plates also dates back to this time; connected to each other, they became widespread starting from the end of the 14th century. Around 1300, half armor or light chain mail appeared, which was a short garment made of linen or leather, covered inside or outside with metal plaques or plates. The helmet was worn on the hood and had the most various forms, initially it was conical, then cylindrical with a nosepiece, later it almost completely covered the back of the head and face. Small slits for the eyes and holes in the helmet allowed breathing and orientation in battle. The shield was almond-shaped and made of wood, lined with copper and reinforced with iron. It almost disappeared from use when the wearing of armor became common.

From book Everyday life knights in the Middle Ages by Flory Jean

From the book Daily Life of Knights in the Middle Ages by Flory Jean

Chapter five. From horseman to knight 1 Bumke J. Op. cit. R. 29.

From the book Another History of Wars. From sticks to bombards author Kalyuzhny Dmitry Vitalievich

Weapons and armor of a knight And now let's see what and in what the knights fought. Literature, especially fiction, widely spreads the opinion that European knightly weapons were terribly heavy and inconvenient. As soon as novelists do not mock knights: the poor

From the book Great Secrets of Civilizations. 100 stories about the mysteries of civilizations author Mansurova Tatyana

The sad image of a knight Who do most modern women dream of? That's right, about a noble knight, ready to do anything for his beautiful lady hearts: fight the dragon, throw all the riches of the world at her feet and love until death. Alas, all this is just beautiful fairy tale,

From the book Sword through the Centuries. The Art of Weaponry by Hutton Alfred

Chapter 14 The merry joke of Long Meg from Westminster, and how she defeated the Spanish knight with a sword and buckler “In the time of the memorable Henry VIII, a daughter was born into a family of very worthy people, who later received the nickname Long Meg for her tall stature, for she not only

From the book Knights author Malov Vladimir Igorevich

From the book Knights author Malov Vladimir Igorevich

From the book Knights author Malov Vladimir Igorevich

From the book The Knight and His Armor. Plate vestments and weapons by Oakeshott Ewart

Chapter 1 ARMAMENT OF THE KNIGHT French knights died in hundreds under the terrifying hail of English arrows, fell, struck by blows of swords, axes and maces, which were skillfully used by heavily armed English horsemen. Piles of dead and wounded warriors and their horses

author Livraga Jorge Angel

Vadim Karelin Look for the Knight, or Eternal Watch After its release, the film “Day Watch,” as expected, broke all records. In the first nine days of release alone, it was watched by five million viewers. And if you can talk about the idea of ​​the film and its artistic merits

From the book The Path to the Grail [Collection of articles] author Livraga Jorge Angel

Ilya Molostvov The Path of the Jedi Knight A dull landscape of an almost deserted distant planet. Young Luke Skywalker stands in front of his future teacher Obiwan Kenobi and listens with silent surprise about the secret of the Force that permeates everything, connects everything and is inexhaustible.

author Vorobyovsky Yuri Yurievich

VISIT OF THE KNIGHT OF REVENGE I remember my long-ago interview with Vladimir Ivanovich “the bricklayer”. At first we agreed with N.N., but at the last moment he decided to “keep a low profile.” They say that what the foreign “brothers” will say, there are already enough ill-wishers there. But - gave the go-ahead for

From the book The Fifth Angel Sounded author Vorobyovsky Yuri Yurievich

Now this Kadosh Knight ribbon will fly to the floor. Signs of Masonic revenge fly on the dirty

From the book Vikings. Sailors, pirates and warriors by Hez Yen

Weapons Typical offensive weapons found in Viking habitats are swords, battle axes, spears and bows. Weapons are recovered mainly from burials. Early Danish finds include the same assortment of weapons as

From the book History of the Crusades in documents and materials author Zaborov Mikhail Abramovich

Letter from an unknown knight, participant in the events Let it be known to you that Alexei Barisiak, as I already told you, came to us in Corfu and here, kneeling and shedding tears, humbly and urgently asked us to go with him to Constantinople, to help him,

From the book Ancient China. Volume 2: Chunqiu Period (8th-5th centuries BC) author Vasiliev Leonid Sergeevich

The honor of a knight and the dignity of an aristocrat Ancient China did not know knightly fights, and especially duels, at least, nothing is said about this in the texts. Nevertheless, noble people sometimes measured their strength and killed each other. This is not about fighting in the heat of battle (such

Let's leave people for a moment and talk about soulless objects, about the objects that made up knightly weapons. And in this matter we will limit our interest mainly to the 12th and partly to the 13th centuries. Let's first get acquainted with offensive weapons. There were two of them: a sword and a spear.

A sword in the shape of a cross is an exclusively knightly weapon. It consists of three parts; steel blade, handle and disc-shaped addition to the latter at the very top. Particles of relics or some kind of relics were often placed in the disc-shaped appendage to the handle. In ancient times, single-edged blades were made, and then double-edged blades came into use. Various inscriptions and figures were carved on the blades. Either the name of the sword was inscribed (since there was a custom of calling them by name), or some short saying. Various figures were made: for example, we find a mention of a sword, on the blade of which three crosses were depicted on one side, and three leopards on the other. Carved inscriptions and figures were usually covered with gilding. The sword was usually placed in a sheath made of leather, or wood, upholstered with rich material, or even gold. The scabbard was sometimes decorated with precious stones.

The knight prayed in front of the sword, thrusting its tip into the ground, took an oath, placing his hand on its cross-shaped handle. A wonderful monument of medieval poetry - “The Song of Roland” - unusually vividly and touchingly depicts the ardent love that a true knight had for his sword. Mortally wounded, Roland thinks about his sword and speaks to it as if it were a sentient being dear to his heart. Not wanting Durendal - that was the name of his sword - to fall into the hands of his enemies, he, with pain in his heart, decides to smash it against a rock. But the sword is strong, it bounces off the stone. Then the knight begins to mourn him:

...How beautiful you are, how holy, my damask sword,

In your golden, heavy hilt

The relics are kept...

You must not fall to the pagans;

Christ's servant must only own you!

But Roland's strength is weakening.

The count sensed that the hour of death was near:

My forehead and chest were gripped by a deadly cold...

Roland is running, and now under the canopy of a fir tree

He fell on the green grass.

Lying face down, with his hands to his chest

He pressed his sword...

The sword was generally looked upon as a sacred object. Yes, this should not be surprising if we remember that knightly swords were consecrated in the church. If a knight was buried in a church, a sword was placed on his tomb.

In addition to the sword, they also used a dagger in battle. But the dagger, like the berdysh, was not considered a real knightly weapon.

Another offensive weapon was the spear. It also consisted of three parts; staff, iron tip and badge, or flag. The shaft reached large sizes, up to eight feet, and later even up to fifteen. It was made from different types of wood, but the best was considered to be made from ash. The shaft was usually painted - mainly green or blue. It ended with a metal tip that easily stuck into the ground. Iron tip spears were most often made in the shape of a rhombus, but there were also tips in the shape of a high cone. A badge or flag was nailed under the tip with three or more silver or gilded nails. It reached a great length, going down to the knight's helmet, and ended with three long tongues. Its most common colors were green, white and blue. Sometimes a long ribbon was attached instead of a flag. This is how Roland's spear is described:

A wonderful count

Battle armor suits him;

In his hands he holds a sharp spear,

Plays to them and to the blue sky

He lifts the steel tip;

A snow-white badge is attached to the spear,

And they fall from him to his very hands

Golden ribbons...

The badge (flag) should not be confused in any way with the banner. The first was a generally accepted subject, while the second belonged only to those knights who owned large lands and brought a certain number of armed men with them to war. In the 13th century, coats of arms appeared on both flags and banners.

The knight on foot carried a spear on his right shoulder; the horseman held it vertically, and during the battle - horizontally, above the thigh, and later under the armpit. The spear was exclusively a knightly weapon; the squire could only fight with a shield and sword (but not a knight’s). Sometimes the spear, like the sword, had its own name.

Defensive weapons consisted of a shield, chain mail and a helmet. Until the second half of the 11th century, round shields were used, and then oblong shields became generally accepted, designed to cover the entire length of the knight, starting from the shoulders. Usually the shields were not flat, but curved. They were made from wooden boards, upholstered on the inside with something soft, and on the outside with leather, which was often painted; it depicted lions, eagles, crosses, flowers, which at first were only simple decorations, which had nothing to do with coats of arms. Two leather handles were attached to the inside of the shield, and there was also a wide belt made of leather or richly decorated fabric. Outside of battle, the knight threw this sling over his shoulder. Those who fell in battle were carried from the battlefield on shields.

Chain mail was a long shirt made of iron rings that reached and even went down below the knees. From the first half of the 12th century, it came into general use, replacing the previously used leather shirt with metal plaques sewn on it. So that chain mail could better withstand enemy blows, it was made from double and triple rings. The chain mail was equipped with a hood to protect the head. Like other parts of knightly weapons, chain mail did not remain without decoration. Along its lower edge, as well as along the edges of the sleeves, some semblance of lace or sewing was made from wires passed through the holes of the rings. Lords and princes silvered and gilded their chain mail. Chain mail was also worn by squires, but for them it was lighter and, therefore, less effective in protecting against enemy attacks.

A helmet was an egg-shaped or conical helmet made of steel. The lower edge of the helmet was edged with a metal rim. From the front side of it, a metal plate descended onto the knight’s face, the French name of which is nasal (nasal) clearly indicates its purpose - to serve as a protection for the nose. Sometimes another plate came down from the back of the helmet, in which a piece of thick material was attached to protect the back of the head. The nose plate was used until the very end of the 12th century, and later a visor came into use - something like a lattice - which served as protection for the entire face. It goes without saying that it is impossible to indicate a sharp boundary when the visor replaced the nose plate. There was a time when both objects were in use. Already in Jerusalem Assisakh there is an indication of a helmet with a visor.

Knight in full armor

We have already talked above about the hood, which ended at the top of the chain mail. Usually the helmet was attached to this hood with leather loops threaded through rings: the number of these loops varied between fifteen and thirty. The helmet was laced up only for the duration of the battle. If a knight received a wound in battle, the first thing they did was unlace his helmet, which was never put directly on his head. They usually wore a feather cap underneath it, and a linen or silk cap on top of it. For noble and wealthy people, mainly leaders, the helmet was gilded, and the rim was richly decorated, and precious stones were also used. At the top, the helmet was sometimes decorated with a ball made of some kind of metal or colored glass. Sometimes some inscription was carved on the rim of the helmet. The squires wore an iron cap on their heads, which was lighter than a knight's helmet and did not have any decorations.

A sword is a type of bladed weapon; it was used to inflict piercing, cutting or chopping wounds. Its basic design was simple and consisted of an oblong, straight blade with a hilt. Distinctive feature weapon is the established minimum length of the blade was about 60 cm. The type of sword presented many variations and depended on time, region, social status.

There is no reliable information about the date of the first sword. It is generally accepted that its prototype was a sharpened club made of wood, and the first swords were made of copper. Due to its ductility, copper was soon replaced by a bronze alloy.

The sword is undoubtedly one of the most authoritative and historically significant weapons of antiquity. It is commonly believed to symbolize justice, dignity and courage. Hundreds of folk legends were written about combat battles and knightly duels, and swords were an integral part of them. Later, writers, inspired by these legends, created the main characters in their novels in the image and likeness of the legends. For example, the story of King Arthur has been published countless times, and the greatness of his sword has always remained unchanged.

In addition, swords are reflected in religion. The nobility of edged weapons was closely intertwined with spiritual and divine meaning, which was interpreted by each religion and teaching in its own way. For example, in Buddhist teachings, the sword symbolized wisdom. In Christianity, the interpretation of the “two-edged sword” is directly related to the death of Jesus Christ, and carries the meaning of divine truth and wisdom.

Identifying the sword with a divine symbol, the inhabitants of that time were in awe of the possession of such a weapon and the use of its images. Medieval swords had a cross-shaped handle in the image of a Christian cross. This sword was used for knighting rituals. Also, the image of this weapon has found wide application in the field of heraldry.

By the way, in historical documents that have survived to this day there is information about the cost of swords. Thus, the price of one standard tool was equal to the cost of 4 heads of cattle (cows), and if the work was performed by a famous blacksmith, the amount, of course, was much higher. A middle-class resident could hardly afford expenses of this level. The high price is due to the high cost and rarity of the metals used; in addition, the manufacturing process itself was quite labor-intensive.

The quality of a manufactured sword directly depends on the skill of the blacksmith. His skill lies in the ability to correctly forge a blade from a different alloy of metals, so that the resulting blade is smooth, light in weight, and the surface itself is perfectly smooth. The complex composition of the product created difficulties in mass production. In Europe, good swords began to be produced in large numbers only towards the end of the Middle Ages.

The sword can rightfully be called an elite weapon, and this is due not only to the previously listed factors. Its versatility in use and light weight set the sword apart from its predecessors (axe, spear).

It is also worth noting that not everyone can wield a blade. Those who want to become professional fighters have spent years honing their skills in numerous training sessions. It was for these reasons that every warrior was proud of the honor of possessing a sword.

  1. hilt - a set of components: handle, crosspiece and pommel. Depending on whether the hilt was open or not, the degree of finger protection was determined;
  2. blade - combat unit shotguns with a tapered end;
  3. pommel - the top of a weapon, made of heavy metal. Served to balance weight, sometimes decorated with additional elements;
  4. handle - an element made of wood or metal for holding a sword. Often, the surface was made rough so that the weapon would not slip out of the hands;
  5. guard or cross - arose during the development of fencing art and made it possible to protect hands in battle;
  6. blade - the cutting edge of the blade;
  7. tip.

General differentiation of swords

Regarding the topic of determining the varieties of this weapon, one cannot ignore the scientific works of a researcher from England E. Oakeshott. It was he who introduced the classification of swords and grouped them by time periods. In general terms, two groups of types of medieval and later swords can be distinguished:

By lenght:

  • short sword - blade 60-70 cm, fighters wore it on their belt on the left side. Suitable for close range combat;
  • a long sword - its wedge was 70-90 cm; in battles, as a rule, it was carried in the hands. It was universal for fights on the ground and on horseback;
  • cavalry sword. The length of the blade is more than 90 cm.

By weight of the implement and type of handle:

  • a one-handed sword is the lightest, about 0.7 - 1.5 kg, which makes it possible to operate with one hand;
  • bastard sword or “bastard sword” - the length of the handle did not allow both hands to be placed freely, hence the name. Weight about 1.4 kg, size 90 cm;
  • two-handed sword - its weight was from 3.5 to 6 kg, and its length reached 140 cm.

Despite the general classification of species, the sword is more of an individual weapon and was created taking into account the physiological characteristics of the war. Therefore, it is impossible to find two identical swords.

The weapon was always kept in a sheath and attached to a saddle or belt.

The formation of the sword in antiquity

In early antiquity, bronze steel was actively used in the creation of blades. This alloy, despite its ductility, is distinguished by its strength. The swords of this time are notable for the following: bronze blades were made by casting, which made it possible to create various shapes. In some cases, for greater stability, stiffening ribs were added to the blades. In addition, copper does not corrode, so many archaeological finds retain beautiful appearance up until today.

For example, in the Adygea Republic, during excavations of one of the mounds, a sword was found, which is considered one of the most ancient and dates back to 4 thousand BC. According to ancient customs, during burial, his personal valuables were placed in the mound along with the deceased.

The most famous swords of that time:

  • the sword of hoplites and Macedonians “Xiphos” - a short weapon with a leaf-shaped wedge;
  • the Roman weapon “Gladius” - a 60 cm blade with a massive pommel, effectively delivered piercing and slashing blows;
  • ancient German “Spata” – 80-100 cm, weight up to 2 kg. The one-armed sword was widely popular among the German barbarians. As a result of the migration of peoples, it became popular in Gaul and served as the prototype for many modern swords.
  • “Akinak” is a short piercing and cutting weapon, weighing about 2 kg. The crosspiece is made in a heart shape, the pommel is in the shape of a crescent. Recognized as an element of Scythian culture.

The rise of the sword in the Middle Ages

The Great Migration of Peoples, the seizure of Roman lands by the Goths and Vandals, the raids of barbarians, the inability of the authorities to govern a vast territory, the demographic crisis - all this ultimately provoked the fall of the Roman Empire at the end of the 5th century and marked the formation of a new stage in World History. Humanists subsequently gave it the name “Middle Ages.”

Historians characterize this period as “dark times” for Europe. The decline of trade, the political crisis, and the depletion of land fertility invariably led to fragmentation and endless internecine strife. It can be assumed that it was these reasons that contributed to the flourishing of edged weapons. Particularly noteworthy is the use of swords. The barbarians of Germanic origin, being outnumbered, brought with them the Spata swords and contributed to their popularization. Such swords existed until the 16th century; later, they were replaced by swords.

The diversity of cultures and the disunity of the settlers have significantly reduced the level and quality martial art. Now the battles took place more and more often on open area without using any defensive tactics.

If in the usual sense, combat equipment for war consisted of equipment and weapons, then in the early Middle Ages, the impoverishment of handicrafts led to a shortage of resources. Only elite troops owned swords and rather meager equipment (chain mail or plate armor). According to historical data, armor was practically absent during that period.

A type of sword in the era of the Great Invasions

The different languages, cultures, and religious views of the Germanic settlers and the local Romans invariably led to negative relations. The Romano-Germanic conflict strengthened its position and contributed to new invasions of Roman lands by France and Germany. The list of those wishing to take possession of the lands of Gaul, alas, does not end there.

The Huns' invasion of Europe under the leadership of Attila was catastrophically destructive. It was the Huns who laid the foundation for the “Great Migration”, mercilessly crushing the lands one after another, the Asian nomads reached the Roman lands. Having conquered Germany, France, and Northern Italy along the way, the Huns also broke through the defenses in some parts of the Roman border. The Romans, in turn, were forced to unite with other nations to maintain the defense. For example, some lands were given to the barbarians peacefully in exchange for an obligation to guard the borders of Gaul.

In History, this period was called the “Era of Great Invasions.” Each new ruler sought to make his contribution to the modifications and improvements of the sword; let’s look at the most popular types:

The Merovingian royal dynasty began its reign in the 5th century and ended in the 8th century, when the last representative of this family was dethroned. It was people from the great Merovingian family who made a significant contribution to the expansion of the territory of France. From the middle of the 5th century, the king of the French state (later France), Clovis I, pursued an active policy of conquest in the territory of Gaul. Great importance was paid to the quality of the tools, which is why swords of the Merovingian type arose. The weapon evolved in several stages, the first version, like the ancient German spatha, did not have a point, the end of the blade was uncut or rounded. Often such swords were lavishly decorated and were available only to the upper classes of society.

Main characteristics of the Merovingian weapon:

  • blade length -75 cm, weight about 2 kg;
  • the sword was forged from different types of steel;
  • a wide fuller of small depth ran on both sides of the sword and ended 3 cm from the tip. The appearance of a fuller in the sword significantly lightened its weight;
  • the hilt of the sword is short and has a heavy pommel;
  • the width of the blade almost did not narrow, which made it possible to deliver cutting and chopping blows.

The well-known King Arthur existed precisely in this era, and his sword, possessing unimaginable power, was Merovingian.

The Vikings of the noble Carolingian family came to power in the 8th century, dethroning the last descendants of the Merovingian dynasty, thereby ushering in the “Viking Age,” otherwise known as the “Carolingian Era” in France. Many legends were told about the rulers of the Carolingian dynasty at that time, and some of them are known to us to this day (for example, Pepin, Charlemagne, Louis I). In folk legends, the swords of kings are also most often mentioned. I would like to tell one of the stories that is dedicated to the formation of the first king Pepin the Short of the Carolingians:

Being short, Pepin received the name "Short". He became famous as a brave soldier, but people considered him unworthy to take the place of king because of his height. One day, Pepin ordered to bring a hungry lion and a huge bull. Of course, the predator grabbed the bull’s neck. The future king invited his mockers to kill the lion and free the bull. People did not dare to approach the ferocious animal. Then Pepin took out his sword and cut off the heads of both animals in one fell swoop. Thus, proving his right to the throne and winning the respect of the people of France. So Pepin was proclaimed king, dethroning the last Merovingian.

Pepin's follower was Charlemagne, under whom the French state received the status of an Empire.

Wise politicians of the famous family continued to strengthen the position of France, which naturally affected weapons. The Carolingian sword, otherwise known as the Viking sword, was famous for the following:

  • blade length 63-91 cm;
  • one-handed sword weighing no more than 1.5 kg;
  • lobed or triangular pommel;
  • sharp blade and sharpened point for chopping blows;
  • deep bilateral valley;
  • short handle with a small guard.

Carolingians were mainly used in foot battles. Possessing grace and light weight, it was a weapon for noble representatives of the Vikings (priests or tribal leaders). Simple Vikings more often used spears and axes.

Also, the Carolingian Empire imported its swords to Kievan Rus and contributed to a significant expansion of the weapons arsenal.

The improvement of the sword at every historical stage played a significant role in the formation of a knight's weapon.

3. Romanov (knightly) sword

Hugo Capet (aka Charles Martell) is an abbot, the first king elected following the death of the last descendant of the Carolgins in the 8th century. It was he who was the progenitor of a large dynasty of kings in the Frankish Empire - the Capetians. This period was marked by many reforms, for example the formation of feudal relations, a clear hierarchy appeared in the structure of the board. New changes also gave rise to conflicts. At this time, the biggest events took place religious wars, which began with the First Crusade.

During the reign of the Capetian dynasty (approximately the beginning - mid-6th century), the formation of the knightly sword, also known as the “sword for weapons” or “Romanesque”, began. This sword was a modified version of the Carolingian, and met the following characteristics:

  • blade length was 90-95 cm;
  • significant narrowing of the edges, which made it possible to deliver more accurate blows;
  • reduced monolithic pommel with rounded edge;
  • a curved handle measuring 9-12 cm, this length enabled the knight to protect his hand in combat;

It is worth noting that the listed changes to the components of the hilt made it possible to fight while riding a horse.

Popular knight swords:

Gradually, the weapon evolved from one-handed spathas to two-handed swords. The peak of popularity of wielding a sword with two hands occurred during the era of chivalry. Let's look at the most famous types:

“” is a wavy sword with a flame-shaped blade, a kind of symbiosis of a sword and a saber. Length 1.5 meters, weight 3-4 kg. He was distinguished by his particular cruelty, because with his bends he struck deeply and left lacerated wounds for a long time. The church protested against the flamberge, but nevertheless it was actively used by German mercenaries.

Chivalry as a Privilege

Chivalry arose in the 8th century and is closely related to the emergence of the feudal system, when foot soldiers were retrained as mounted troops. Under religious influence, knighthood was a titled status of nobility. Being a good strategist, Charles Martell distributed church lands to his compatriots, and in return demanded horse service or payment of a tax. In general, the vassalage system was rigidly and hierarchically structured. In addition, obtaining such land limited human freedom. Those who wanted to be free received the status of vassal and joined the ranks of the army. In this way, the knightly cavalry was assembled for the Crusade.

To obtain the desired title, the future knight began training from an early age. By about the age of seven, his warriors needed to master and improve fighting techniques; by the age of twelve, he became a squire, and by the time he came of age, a decision was made. The boy could be left at the same rank or knighted. In any case, serving the knightly cause was equated with freedom.

Knight's military equipment

The progressive development of handicrafts contributed not only to the modernization of tools, but also to military equipment in general; now such attributes as protective shields and armor appeared.

Simple warriors wore armor made of leather for protection, and noble troops used chain mail or leather armor with metal inserts. The helmet was constructed on the same principle.

The shield was made of durable wood 2 cm thick, covered with leather on top. Sometimes metal was used to enhance protection.

Myths and speculation about swords

The history of the existence of such a weapon is full of mysteries, which is probably why it remains interesting today. Over the course of many centuries, many legends have formed around the sword, some of which we will try to refute:

Myth 1. Ancient sword weighed 10-15 kg and was used in battle as a club, leaving opponents shell-shocked. This assertion has no basis. Weight ranged from approximately 600 grams to 1.4 kg.

Myth 2. The sword did not have a sharp edge, and like a chisel it could break through protective equipment. Historical documents contain information that the swords were so sharp that they cut the victim into two parts.

Myth 3. Poor quality steel was used for European swords. Historians have established that since ancient times, Europeans have successfully used various metal alloys.

Myth 4. Fencing was not developed in Europe. A variety of sources claim the opposite: for many centuries, Europeans have been working on fighting tactics, in addition, most techniques are focused on the dexterity and speed of the fencer, and not on brute strength.

Despite the various versions of the origin and development of the sword in history, one fact remains unchanged - its rich cultural heritage and historical importance.

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

They surprise not only with their protective properties, but also luxury and grandeur. However, few people know that the monolithic iron armor of the knights of the Middle Ages dates back to the late period of that era. This was no longer protection, but traditional clothing that emphasized the high social status of the owner. This is a kind of analogue of modern expensive business suits. They could be used to judge the situation in society. We will talk about this in more detail later, presenting photos of knights in armor of the Middle Ages. But first, about where they came from.

First armor

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

Fabric armor

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

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

Leather armor

The armor of medieval knights made of leather replaced cloth ones. They became widespread in Rus'. Leather craftsmen were widely valued at the time.

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

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

Armor Evolution: Lamellar Armor

Next, evolution occurs - the production of armor for medieval knights from metal begins. One of the varieties is lamellar armor. The first mention of such technology is observed in Mesopotamia. The armor there was made of copper. Metal began to be used in similar protective technology. Lammellar armor is a scaly shell. They turned out to be the most reliable. We only got through with bullets. Their main drawback is their weight up to 25 kg. It is impossible to put it on alone. In addition, if a knight fell from his horse, he was completely neutralized. It was impossible to get up.

Chainmail

The armor of medieval knights in the form of chain mail was the most common. Already in the 12th century they became widespread. The ringed armor weighed relatively little: 8-10 kg. The full set, including stockings, helmet, gloves, reached up to 40 kg. The main advantage is that the armor did not restrict movement. Only the wealthiest aristocrats could afford them. It only became widespread among the middle classes in the 14th century, when wealthy aristocrats donned plate armor. They will be discussed further.

Armor

Plate armor is the pinnacle of evolution. Only with the development of metal forging technology was it possible to create such a work of art. It is almost impossible to make the plate armor of medieval knights with your own hands. It was a single monolithic shell. Only the richest aristocrats could afford such protection. Their distribution dates back to the Late Middle Ages. Knight in plate armor on the battlefield - a real armored tank. It was impossible to defeat him. One such warrior among the army tipped the scales towards victory. Italy is the birthplace of such protection. It was this country that was famous for its masters in the production of armor.

The desire for heavy defense stems from the battle tactics of medieval cavalry. Firstly, it delivered a powerful, swift strike in closed ranks. As a rule, after one strike with a wedge against the infantry, the battle ended in victory. Therefore, in the forefront were the most privileged aristocrats, among whom was the king himself. Knights in armor almost never died. It was impossible to kill him in battle, and after the battle the captured aristocrats were not executed, since everyone knew each other. Yesterday's enemy turned into a friend today. In addition, the exchange and sale of captured aristocrats were sometimes the main purpose of the battles. In fact, medieval battles were similar to the ones in which the “best men” rarely died, but in real battles this still happened. Therefore, the need for improvement constantly arose.

"Peaceful Battle"

In 1439 in Italy, at home the best masters blacksmithing, a battle took place near the city of Anghiari. Several thousand knights took part in it. After four hours of battle, only one warrior died. He fell from his horse and fell under its hooves.

The end of the era of combat armor

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

Armor is a symbol of aristocracy

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

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

Armor of a medieval knight: description

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

Weapons and armor were not uniform throughout the history of the Middle Ages, since they performed two functions. The first is protection. Secondly, armor was a distinctive attribute of high social status. One complex helmet could cost entire villages with serfs. Not everyone could afford it. This also applies to complex armor. Therefore, it was impossible to find two identical sets. Feudal armor is not a uniform uniform for recruit soldiers in later eras. They are distinguished by their individuality.