Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Dausuul" data-source="post: 5407247" data-attributes="member: 58197">Indeed. The armor of old was better designed and better crafted. Modern repro armor is made by smiths who have to guess at the techniques that a much larger number of medieval smiths worked out over centuries.Source for this statement, please. Every source I can find indicates a weight range for field plate armor of around 45-60 pounds, no more than that--not exactly feather-light, but certainly not encumbering to the point of being unable to mount a horse or stand up unassisted. Jousting plate was heavier, to be sure, but you didn't wear that stuff to war.To me, claims like this don't pass the smell test. Armor such as you describe is simply not practical for the uncertainties of the battlefield. As others have pointed out, horses can be killed. If you were facing an enemy with the weapons and discipline to threaten you, the mounted knight, the same enemy was quite capable of killing your horse out from under you. On the other hand, if the enemy broke and fled in the face of your cavalry charge, armor was largely irrelevant. Either way, there was nothing to be gained from wearing armor too heavy to move in.Obviously, if you were knocked off your horse in melee, you were in a bad spot--but not because your armor stopped you from getting up. You were in a bad spot because you were a) possibly injured from the fall and b) flat on your back in the middle of a melee!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Dausuul, post: 5407247, member: 58197"] Indeed. The armor of old was better designed and better crafted. Modern repro armor is made by smiths who have to guess at the techniques that a much larger number of medieval smiths worked out over centuries. Source for this statement, please. Every source I can find indicates a weight range for field plate armor of around 45-60 pounds, no more than that--not exactly feather-light, but certainly not encumbering to the point of being unable to mount a horse or stand up unassisted. Jousting plate was heavier, to be sure, but you didn't wear that stuff to war. To me, claims like this don't pass the smell test. Armor such as you describe is simply not practical for the uncertainties of the battlefield. As others have pointed out, horses can be killed. If you were facing an enemy with the weapons and discipline to threaten you, the mounted knight, the same enemy was quite capable of killing your horse out from under you. On the other hand, if the enemy broke and fled in the face of your cavalry charge, armor was largely irrelevant. Either way, there was nothing to be gained from wearing armor too heavy to move in. Obviously, if you were knocked off your horse in melee, you were in a bad spot--but not because your armor stopped you from getting up. You were in a bad spot because you were a) possibly injured from the fall and b) flat on your back in the middle of a melee! [/QUOTE]

Verification