In this article, in the most general outline the process of development of armor in Western Europe in the Middle Ages (VII - late XV centuries) and at the very beginning of early modern times (early XVI century). The material is provided with a large number of illustrations for a better understanding of the topic. Most of the text is translated from English.

Mid-VIIth - IX centuries. Viking in a Vendel helmet. They were used mainly in Northern Europe by the Normans, Germans, etc., although they were often found in other parts of Europe. Very often has a half mask covering the upper part of the face. Later evolved into the Norman helmet. Armor: short chain mail without a chain mail hood, worn over a shirt. The shield is round, flat, medium in size, with a large umbon - a metal convex hemispherical plate in the center, typical of Northern Europe of this period. On shields, a gyuzh is used - a belt for wearing the shield while marching on the neck or shoulder. Naturally, horned helmets did not exist at that time.

X - beginning of XIII centuries. Knight in a Norman helmet with rondache. An open Norman helmet of a conical or ovoid shape. Usually,
A nasal plate is attached in front - a metal nasal plate. It was widespread throughout Europe, both in the western and eastern parts. Armor: long chain mail to the knees, with sleeves of full or partial (to the elbows) length, with a coif - a chain mail hood, separate or integral with the chain mail. In the latter case, the chain mail was called “hauberk”. The front and back of the chain mail have slits at the hem for more comfortable movement (and it’s also more comfortable to sit in the saddle). From the end of the 9th - beginning of the 10th centuries. under the chain mail, knights begin to wear a gambeson - a long under-armor garment stuffed with wool or tow to such a state as to absorb blows to the chain mail. In addition, arrows were perfectly stuck in gambesons. It was often used as a separate armor by poorer infantrymen compared to knights, especially archers.

Bayeux Tapestry. Created in the 1070s. It is clearly visible that the Norman archers (on the left) have no armor at all

Chain mail stockings were often worn to protect the legs. From the 10th century a rondache appears - a large Western European shield of knights of the early Middle Ages, and often infantrymen - for example, Anglo-Saxon huskerls. Could have different shapes, usually round or oval, curved and with a umbon. For knights, the rondache almost always has a pointed shape at the bottom - the knights used it to cover left leg. Produced in various versions in Europe in the 10th-13th centuries.

Attack of knights in Norman helmets. This is exactly what the crusaders looked like when they captured Jerusalem in 1099

XII - early XIII centuries. A knight in a one-piece Norman helmet wearing a surcoat. The nosepiece is no longer attached, but is forged together with the helmet. Over the chain mail they began to wear a surcoat - a long and spacious cape of different styles: with and without sleeves of various lengths, plain or with a pattern. The fashion began with the first Crusade, when the knights saw similar cloaks among the Arabs. Like chain mail, it had slits at the hem at the front and back. Functions of the cloak: protecting the chain mail from overheating in the sun, protecting it from rain and dirt. Rich knights, in order to improve protection, could wear double chain mail, and in addition to the nosepiece, attach a half mask that covered the upper part of the face.

Archer with a long bow. XI-XIV centuries

End of XII - XIII centuries. Knight in a closed sweatshirt. Early pothelmas were without facial protection and could have a nose cap. Gradually the protection increased until the helmet completely covered the face. Late Pothelm is the first helmet in Europe with a visor that completely covers the face. By the middle of the 13th century. evolved into topfhelm - a potted or large helmet. The armor does not change significantly: still the same long chain mail with a hood. Muffers appear - chain mail mittens woven to the houberk. But they did not become widespread; leather gloves were popular among knights. The surcoat somewhat increases in volume, in its largest version becoming a tabard - a garment worn over armor, sleeveless, on which the owner’s coat of arms was depicted.

King Edward I Longshanks of England (1239-1307) wearing an open sweatshirt and tabard

First half of the 13th century. Knight in topfhelm with targe. Topfhelm is a knight's helmet that appeared at the end of the 12th - beginning of the 13th century. Used exclusively by knights. The shape can be cylindrical, barrel-shaped or in the shape of a truncated cone, it completely protects the head. The tophelm was worn over a chainmail hood, under which, in turn, a felt liner was worn to cushion blows to the head. Armor: long chain mail, sometimes double, with a hood. In the 13th century chain mail-brigantine armor appears as a mass phenomenon, providing stronger protection than just chain mail. Brigantine is armor made of metal plates riveted on a cloth or quilted linen base. Early chain mail-brigantine armor consisted of breastplates or vests worn over chain mail. The shields of the knights, due to the improvement by the middle of the 13th century. protective qualities of armor and the appearance of fully closed helmets, significantly decrease in size, turning into a targe. Tarje is a type of shield in the shape of a wedge, without a umbon, actually a version of the teardrop-shaped rondache cut off at the top. Now knights no longer hide their faces behind shields.

Brigantine

Second half of the XIII - beginning of the XIV centuries. Knight in topfhelm in surcoat with aylettes. A specific feature of tophelms is very poor visibility, so they were used, as a rule, only in spear clashes. Topfhelm is poorly suited for hand-to-hand combat due to its disgusting visibility. Therefore, the knights, if it came to hand-to-hand combat, threw him down. And so that the expensive helmet would not be lost during battle, it was attached to the back of the neck with a special chain or belt. After which the knight remained in a chain mail hood with a felt liner underneath, which was weak protection against the powerful blows of a heavy medieval sword. Therefore, very soon the knights began to wear a spherical helmet under the tophelm - a cervelier or hirnhaube, which is a small hemispherical helmet that fits tightly to the head, similar to a helmet. The cervelier does not have any elements of facial protection; only very rare cerveliers have nose guards. In this case, in order for the tophelm to sit more tightly on the head and not move to the sides, a felt roller was placed under it over the cervelier.

Cervelier. XIV century

The tophelm was no longer attached to the head and rested on the shoulders. Naturally, the poor knights managed without a cervelier. Ayletts are rectangular shoulder shields, similar to shoulder straps, covered with heraldic symbols. Used in Western Europe in the 13th - early 14th centuries. as primitive shoulder pads. There is a hypothesis that epaulettes originated from the Ayletts.

From the end of the XIII - beginning of the XIV centuries. Tournament helmet decorations became widespread - various heraldic figures (cleinodes), which were made of leather or wood and attached to the helmet. Various types of horns became widespread among the Germans. Ultimately, topfhelms completely fell out of use in the war, remaining purely tournament helmets for spear clashes.

First half of the 14th - beginning of the 15th centuries. Knight in bascinet with aventile. In the first half of the 14th century. The topfhelm is replaced by a bascinet - a spheroconic helmet with a pointed top, to which is woven an aventail - a chainmail cape that frames the helmet along the lower edge and covers the neck, shoulders, back of the head and sides of the head. The bascinet was worn not only by knights, but also by infantrymen. Exists great amount varieties of bascinets, both in the shape of the helmet and in the type of fastening of the visor of various types, with and without a nosepiece. The simplest, and therefore most common, visors for bascinets were relatively flat clapvisors - in fact, a face mask. At the same time, a variety of bascinets with a visor, the Hundsgugel, appeared - the ugliest helmet in Europe, nevertheless very common. Obviously, security at that time was more important than appearance.

Bascinet with Hundsgugel visor. End of the 14th century

Later, from the beginning of the 15th century, bascinets began to be equipped with plate neck protection instead of chain mail aventail. Armor at this time also developed along the path of increasing protection: chain mail with brigantine reinforcement was still used, but with larger plates that could withstand blows better. Individual elements of plate armor began to appear: first plastrons or placards that covered the stomach, and breastplates, and then plate cuirasses. Although, due to their high cost, plate cuirasses were used at the beginning of the 15th century. were available to few knights. Also appearing in large quantities: bracers - part of the armor that protects the arms from the elbow to the hand, as well as developed elbow pads, greaves and knee pads. In the second half of the 14th century. The gambeson is replaced by the aketon - a quilted underarmor jacket with sleeves, similar to a gambeson, only not so thick and long. It was made from several layers of fabric, quilted with vertical or rhombic seams. Additionally, I no longer stuffed myself with anything. The sleeves were made separately and laced to the shoulders of the aketon. With the development of plate armor, which did not require such thick underarmor as chain mail, in the first half of the 15th century. The aketone gradually replaced the gambeson among the knights, although it remained popular among the infantry until the end of the 15th century, primarily because of its cheapness. In addition, richer knights could use a doublet or purpuen - essentially the same aketon, but with enhanced protection from chain mail inserts.

This period, the end of the 14th - beginning of the 15th centuries, is characterized by a huge variety of combinations of armor: chain mail, chain mail-brigantine, composite of a chain mail or brigantine base with plate breastplates, backrests or cuirasses, and even splint-brigantine armor, not to mention all kinds of bracers , elbow pads, knee pads and greaves, as well as closed and open helmets with a wide variety of visors. Small shields (tarzhe) are still used by knights.

Looting the city. France. Miniature from the early 15th century.

By the middle of the 14th century, following the new fashion for shortening outer clothing that had spread throughout Western Europe, the surcoat was also greatly shortened and turned into a zhupon or tabar, which performed the same function. The bascinet gradually developed into the grand bascinet - a closed helmet, round, with neck protection and a hemispherical visor with numerous holes. It fell out of use at the end of the 15th century.

First half and end of the 15th century. Knight in a salad. All further development of armor follows the path of increasing protection. It was the 15th century. can be called the age of plate armor, when they became somewhat more accessible and, as a result, appeared en masse among knights and, to a lesser extent, among infantry.

Crossbowman with paveza. Mid-second half of the 15th century.

As blacksmithing developed, the design of plate armor became more and more improved, and the armor itself changed according to armor fashion, but Western European plate armor always had the best protective qualities. By the middle of the 15th century. the arms and legs of most knights were already completely protected by plate armor, the torso by a cuirass with a plate skirt attached to the lower edge of the cuirass. Also, plate gloves are appearing en masse instead of leather ones. Aventail is being replaced by gorje - plate protection of the neck and upper chest. It could be combined with both a helmet and a cuirass.

In the second half of the 15th century. arme appears - new type knight's helmet of the 15th-16th centuries, with a double visor and neck protection. In the design of the helmet, the spherical dome has a rigid back part and movable protection of the face and neck on the front and sides, over which a visor attached to the dome is lowered. Thanks to this design, the armor provides excellent protection both in a spear collision and in hand-to-hand combat. Arme is the highest level of evolution of helmets in Europe.

Arme. Mid XVI V.

But it was very expensive and therefore available only to rich knights. Most of the knights from the second half of the 15th century. wore all kinds of salads - a type of helmet that is elongated and covers the back of the neck. Salads were widely used, along with chapelles - the simplest helmets - in the infantry.

Infantryman in chapelle and cuirass. First half of the 15th century

For knights, deep salads were specially forged with full protection of the face (the fields in front and on the sides were forged vertical and actually became part of the dome) and neck, for which the helmet was supplemented with a bouvier - protection for the collarbones, neck and lower part of the face.

Knight in chapelle and bouvigère. Middle - second half of the 15th century.

In the 15th century There is a gradual abandonment of shields as such (due to mass appearance plate armor). Shields in the 15th century. turned into bucklers - small round fist shields, always made of steel and with a umbon. They appeared as a replacement for knightly targes for foot combat, where they were used to parry blows and strike the enemy’s face with the umbo or edge.

Buckler. Diameter 39.5 cm. Beginning of the 16th century.

The end of the XV - XVI centuries. Knight in full plate armor. XVI century Historians no longer date it back to the Middle Ages, but to the early modern era. Therefore, full plate armor is more a phenomenon of the New Age than of the Middle Ages, although it appeared in the first half of the 15th century. in Milan, famous as the center for the production of the best armor in Europe. In addition, full plate armor was always very expensive, and therefore was available only to the wealthiest part of the knighthood. Full plate armor, covering the entire body with steel plates and the head with a closed helmet, is the culmination of the development of European armor. Poldrones appear - plate shoulder pads that provide protection for the shoulder, upper arm, and shoulder blades with steel plates due to their rather large size. Also, to enhance protection, they began to attach tassets - hip pads - to the plate skirt.

During the same period, the bard appeared - plate horse armor. They consisted of the following elements: chanfrien - protection of the muzzle, critnet - protection of the neck, peytral - protection of the chest, crupper - protection of the croup and flanshard - protection of the sides.

Full armor for knight and horse. Nuremberg. Weight (total) of the rider’s armor is 26.39 kg. The weight (total) of the horse's armor is 28.47 kg. 1532-1536

At the end of the 15th - beginning of the 16th centuries. two mutually opposite processes take place: if the armor of the cavalry is increasingly strengthened, then the infantry, on the contrary, is increasingly exposed. During this period, the famous Landsknechts appeared - German mercenaries who served during the reign of Maximilian I (1486-1519) and his grandson Charles V (1519-1556), who retained for themselves, at best, only a cuirass with tassets.

Landsknecht. The end of the 15th - first half of the 16th centuries.

Landsknechts. Engraving from the early 16th century.

• Translation

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, apparently, is occupied by the spear rest, protruding from right side bib.

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 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.

In the majority 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 ordered for her 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 originated from the fact that most of armor exhibited in museums is high quality equipment, and most of the simpler armor that belonged to ordinary people and the lowest of the nobles, was hidden in vaults or lost through the ages.

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 armor upper class, 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. Only to XVII century The weight of combat armor was greatly increased to make it bulletproof due to the increased 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 were 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 strict rules guilds that limited the number of apprentices, and thereby controlled 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 effective work 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, 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

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. 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, plates of gunner pilots in World War II and bulletproof vests of our time.

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 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 approximately estimated.

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 claim 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 the left side overlapped the right, so as not to allow the blow of the enemy's sword to penetrate. 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 peaceful times 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

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 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.

“Oh, knights, arise, the hour of action has come!
You have shields, steel helmets and armor.
Your dedicated sword is ready to fight for your faith.
Give me strength, oh God, for new glorious battles.
I, a beggar, will take rich spoils there.
I don’t need gold and I don’t need land,
But maybe I will be, singer, mentor, warrior,
Rewarded with heavenly bliss forever"
(Walter von der Vogelweide. Translation by V. Levick)

A sufficient number of articles on the topic of knightly weapons and, in particular, knightly armor have already been published on the VO website. However, this topic is so interesting that you can delve into it for a very long time. The reason for turning to her again is banal... weight. Weight of armor and weapons. Alas, I recently asked students again how much a knight’s sword weighs, and received the following set of numbers: 5, 10 and 15 kilograms. They considered chain mail weighing 16 kg to be very light, although not all of them did, and the weight of plate armor at just over 20 kilos was simply ridiculous.

Figures of a knight and a horse in full protective equipment. Traditionally, knights were imagined exactly like this - “chained in armor.” (Cleveland Museum of Art)

At VO, naturally, “things with weight” are much better due to regular publications on this topic. However, the opinion about the excessive weight of the “knightly costume” of the classical type has not yet been eradicated here. Therefore, it makes sense to return to this topic and consider it with specific examples.

Western European chain mail (hauberk) 1400 - 1460 Weight 10.47 kg. (Cleveland Museum of Art)

Let's start with the fact that British weapons historians created a very reasonable and clear classification of armor according to their specific characteristics and ultimately divided the entire Middle Ages, guided, naturally, by available sources, into three eras: “the era of chain mail”, “the era of mixed chain mail and plate protective weapons" and "the era of solid forged armor." All three eras together make up the period from 1066 to 1700. Accordingly, the first era has a framework of 1066 - 1250, the second - the era of chain mail-plate armor - 1250 - 1330. And then this: the early stage in the development of knightly plate armor (1330 - 1410), the “great period” in the history of knights in “white”, stands out armor" (1410 - 1500) and the era of decline of knightly armor (1500 - 1700).

Chain mail together with a helmet and aventail (aventail) XIII - XIV centuries. (Royal Arsenal, Leeds)

During the years of “wonderful Soviet education” we had never heard of such periodization. But in the school textbook “History of the Middle Ages” for VΙ grade for many years, with some rehashes, one could read the following:
“It was not easy for the peasants to defeat even one feudal lord. The mounted warrior - the knight - was armed with a heavy sword and a long spear. He could cover himself from head to toe with a large shield. The knight's body was protected by chain mail - a shirt woven from iron rings. Later, chain mail was replaced by armor - armor made of iron plates.

Classic knightly armor, which was most often discussed in textbooks for schools and universities. Before us is Italian armor of the 15th century, restored in the 19th century. Height 170.2 cm. Weight 26.10 kg. Helmet weight 2850 g (Metropolitan Museum, New York)

Knights fought on strong, hardy horses, which were also protected by armor. The knight's weapons were very heavy: they weighed up to 50 kilograms. Therefore, the warrior was clumsy and clumsy. If a rider was thrown from his horse, he could not get up without help and was usually captured. To fight on horseback heavy armor, long training was needed, the feudal lords were preparing for military service since childhood. They constantly practiced fencing, horse riding, wrestling, swimming, and javelin throwing.

German armor 1535. Presumably from Brunswick. Weight 27.85 kg. (Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York)

A war horse and knightly weapons were very expensive: for all this a whole herd had to be given - 45 cows! The landowner for whom the peasants worked could perform knightly service. Therefore, military affairs became an occupation almost exclusively of feudal lords” (Agibalova, E.V. History of the Middle Ages: Textbook for the 6th grade / E.V. Agibalova, G.M. Donskoy, M.: Prosveshchenie, 1969. P.33; Golin, E.M. History of the Middle Ages: Tutorial for 6th grade evening (shift) school / E.M. Golin, V.L. Kuzmenko, M.Ya. Leuberg. M.: Education, 1965. P. 31-32.)

A knight in armor and a horse in horse armor. The work of master Kunz Lochner. Nuremberg, Germany 1510 - 1567 Dated 1548 Total weight rider's equipment including horse armor and saddle 41.73 kg. (Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York)

Only in the 3rd edition of the textbook “History of the Middle Ages” for VΙ grade high school V.A. Vedyushkin, published in 2002, the description of knightly weapons became somewhat truly thoughtful and corresponded to the above-mentioned periodization used today by historians around the world: “At first, the knight was protected by a shield, helmet and chain mail. Then the most vulnerable parts of the body began to be hidden behind metal plates, and from the 15th century, chain mail was finally replaced by solid armor. Battle armor weighed up to 30 kg, so for battle the knights chose hardy horses, also protected by armor.”

Armor of Emperor Ferdinand I (1503-1564) Gunsmith Kunz Lochner. Germany, Nuremberg 1510 - 1567 Dated 1549. Height 170.2 cm. Weight 24 kg.

That is, in the first case, intentionally or out of ignorance, the armor was divided into eras in a simplified manner, while a weight of 50 kg was attributed to both the armor of the “era of chain mail” and the “era of all-metal armor” without dividing into the actual armor of the knight and the armor of his horse. That is, judging by the text, our children were offered information that “the warrior was clumsy and clumsy.” In fact, the first articles showing that this is actually not the case were publications by V.P. Gorelik in the magazines “Around the World” in 1975, but this information never made it into textbooks for Soviet schools at that time. The reason is clear. Using anything, using any examples, show the superiority of the military skills of Russian soldiers over the “dog knights”! Unfortunately, the inertia of thinking and the not-so-great significance of this information make it difficult to disseminate information that corresponds to scientific data.

Armor set from 1549, which belonged to Emperor Maximilian II. (Wallace Collection) As you can see, the option in the photo is tournament armor, as it features a grandguard. However, it could be removed and then the armor became combat. This achieved considerable savings.

Nevertheless, the provisions of the school textbook V.A. Vedyushkina are completely true. Moreover, information about the weight of armor, well, say, from the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York (as well as from other museums, including our Hermitage in St. Petersburg, then Leningrad) was available for a very long time, but in the textbooks of Agibalov and Donskoy For some reason I didn’t get there in due time. However, it’s clear why. After all, we had the best education in the world. However, this special case, although quite revealing. It turned out that there were chain mail, then - again and again, and now armor. Meanwhile, the process of their appearance was more than lengthy. For example, only around 1350 was the appearance of the so-called “metal chest” with chains (from one to four) that went to a dagger, sword and shield, and sometimes a helmet was attached to the chain. Helmets at this time were not yet connected to protective plates on the chest, but under them they wore chain mail hoods that had a wide shoulder. Around 1360, armor began to have clasps; in 1370, the knights were almost completely dressed in iron armor, and chain mail fabric was used as a base. The first brigandines appeared - caftans, and lining made of metal plates. They were used as an independent type of protective clothing, and were worn together with chain mail, both in the West and in the East.

Knight's armor with a brigandine over chain mail and a bascinet helmet. Around 1400-1450 Italy. Weight 18.6 kg. (Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York)

Since 1385, the thighs began to be covered with armor made of articulated strips of metal. In 1410, full-plate armor for all parts of the body had spread throughout Europe, but mail throat cover was still in use; in 1430, the first grooves appeared on the elbow and knee pads, and by 1450, armor made of forged steel sheets had reached its perfection. Beginning in 1475, the grooves on them became increasingly popular until fully fluted or so-called “Maximilian armor”, the authorship of which is attributed to the Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian I, became a measure of the skill of their manufacturer and the wealth of their owners. Subsequently, knightly armor became smooth again - their shape was influenced by fashion, but the skills achieved in the craftsmanship of their finishing continued to develop. Now it was not only people who fought in armor. The horses also received it, as a result the knight with the horse turned into something like a real statue made of polished metal that sparkled in the sun!

Another “Maximilian” armor from Nuremberg 1525 - 1530. It belonged to Duke Ulrich, the son of Henry of Württemberg (1487 - 1550). (Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna)

Although... although fashionistas and innovators, “running ahead of the locomotive,” have always been there too. For example, it is known that in 1410 a certain English knight named John de Fiarles paid Burgundian gunsmiths 1,727 pounds sterling for armor, a sword and a dagger made for him, which he ordered to be decorated with pearls and... diamonds (!) - a luxury that was not only unheard of time, but even for him it is not at all characteristic.

Field armor of Sir John Scudamore (1541 or 1542-1623). Armourer Jacob Jacob Halder (Greenwich Workshop 1558-1608) Circa 1587, restored 1915. Weight 31.07 kg. (Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York)

Each piece of plate armor received its own name. For example, plates for the thighs were called cuisses, knee pads - logs (poleyns), jambers (jambers) - for the legs and sabatons (sabatons) for the feet. Gorgets or bevors (gorgets, or bevors) protected the throat and neck, cutters (couters) - elbows, e(c)paulers, or pauldrones (espaudlers, or pauldrons) - shoulders, rerebraces (rerebraces) - forearm , vambraces - part of the arm down from the elbow, and gantelets - these are “plate gloves” - protected the hands. The full set of armor also included a helmet and, at least at first, a shield, which subsequently ceased to be used on the battlefield around the middle of the 15th century.

Armor of Henry Herbert (1534-1601), Second Earl of Pembroke. Made around 1585 - 1586. in the Greenwich armory (1511 - 1640). Weight 27.24 kg. (Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York)

As for the number of parts in the “white armor”, in the armor of the mid-15th century their total number could reach 200 units, and taking into account all the buckles and nails, along with hooks and various screws, even up to 1000. The weight of the armor was 20 - 24 kg, and it was distributed evenly over the knight’s body, unlike chain mail, which put pressure on the man’s shoulders. So “no crane was required to put such a rider in his saddle. And knocked off his horse to the ground, he did not at all look like a helpless beetle.” But the knight of those years was not a mountain of meat and muscles, and he by no means relied solely on brute strength and bestial ferocity. And if we pay attention to how knights are described in medieval works, we will see that very often they had a fragile (!) and graceful physique, and at the same time they had flexibility, developed muscles, and were strong and very agile, even when dressed in armor, with a well-developed muscle reaction.

Tournament armor made by Anton Peffenhauser around 1580 (Germany, Augsburg, 1525-1603) Height 174.6 cm); shoulder width 45.72 cm; weight 36.8 kg. It should be noted that tournament armor was usually always heavier than combat armor. (Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York)

In the last years of the 15th century, knightly weapons became the subject of special concern for European sovereigns, and, in particular, Emperor Maximilian I (1493 - 1519), who is credited with creating knightly armor with grooves along their entire surface, eventually called “Maximilian.” It was used without any special changes in the 16th century, when new improvements were required due to the ongoing development of small arms.

Now just a little about swords, because if you write about them in detail, then they deserve a separate topic. J. Clements, a well-known British expert on edged weapons of the Middle Ages, believes that it was the advent of multi-layer combined armor (for example, on the effigy of John de Creque we see as many as four layers of protective clothing) that led to the appearance of a “sword in one and a half hands.” Well, the blades of such swords ranged from 101 to 121 cm, and weight from 1.2 to 1.5 kg. Moreover, blades are known for chopping and piercing blows, as well as purely for stabbing. He notes that horsemen used such swords until 1500, and they were especially popular in Italy and Germany, where they were called Reitschwert (equestrian) or knight's sword. In the 16th century, swords appeared with wavy and even jagged sawtooth blades. Moreover, their length itself could reach human height with a weight of 1.4 to 2 kg. Moreover, such swords appeared in England only around 1480. Average weight of a sword in the 10th and 15th centuries. was 1.3 kg; and in the sixteenth century. - 900 g. Bastard swords “one and a half hands” weighed about 1.5 - 1.8 kg, and the weight of two-handed swords was rarely more than 3 kg. The latter reached their peak between 1500 and 1600, but were always infantry weapons.

Three-quarter cuirassier armor, ca. 1610-1630 Milan or Brescia, Lombardy. Weight 39.24 kg. Obviously, since they have no armor below the knees, the extra weight comes from thickening the armor.

But shortened three-quarter armor for cuirassiers and pistoleers, even in its shortened form, often weighed more than those that offered protection only from edged weapons and they were very heavy to wear. Cuirassier armor has been preserved, the weight of which was about 42 kg, i.e. even more than classic knightly armor, although they covered a much smaller surface of the body of the person for whom they were intended! But this, it should be emphasized, is not knightly armor, that’s the point!

Horse armor, possibly made for Count Antonio IV Colalto (1548-1620), circa 1580-1590. Place of manufacture: probably Brescia. Weight with saddle 42.2 kg. (Metropolitan Museum, New York) By the way, a horse in full armor under an armored rider could even swim. The horse armor weighed 20-40 kg - a few percent of the own weight of a huge and strong knight's horse.

In the Middle Ages, the helmet was an invariable and most important attribute of knightly armor. In addition to its main purpose ─ to protect the owner’s head, it also served to intimidate opponents, and in in some cases was a badge of distinction during tournaments and battles, where in the general “extras” it was difficult to make out who was who. For this reason, gunsmiths tried to endow each of their products with features inherent only to it, and often real works of art appeared in their workshops.

Helmets of the inhabitants of the Ancient World

The oldest prototypes of future knightly helmets, dating back to III millennium BC e., discovered during excavations of Ur ─ the largest city of the Sumerian civilization. Their appearance in that era became possible thanks to a fairly high level of metal processing technology.

However, helmets made of gold and copper were extremely expensive and unaffordable for most warriors. Therefore, the bulk of the warriors used special headdresses made of leather and linen, reinforced with copper plates only in the most vulnerable places.

The birthplace of iron helmets, which appeared in the 8th - 7th centuries BC, were two states of the Ancient World - Assyria and Urartu. There, for the first time, gunsmiths began to abandon bronze and gave preference to a cheaper and more durable material - iron. The workshops made steel helmets of spheroconic shape, however, they were able to completely displace their bronze predecessors only in the 1st millennium AD. e.

Armor as a symbol of the era

Historians have noted a very paradoxical fact: the heyday of the production of knightly armor, and in particular helmets, occurred in the period of the Late Middle Ages, that is, the XIV ─ XV centuries, when chivalry itself had already lost its significance as the main fighting force.

Thus, numerous armor presented in various museums around the world and sometimes representing genuine masterpieces of weaponry art, for the most part are only decorative attributes of the era and indicators of the high social status of their owners.

The appearance of steel helmets in Europe

The beginning of the widespread use of protective equipment made of iron in Europe is considered to be the Early Middle Ages, which, as is commonly believed, began after the fall of the Western Roman Empire in 476. Combat helmets, created in early period of this era, were distinguished by a characteristic feature - they were based on a frame made of thick steel strips, on top of which metal segments were attached. This design ensured their reliability and simplified the manufacturing process, but also significantly increased the weight of the product.

Only in the 6th century did European gunsmiths abandon the frame structure and switch to making a new type of helmet, riveted or soldered from several segments. Often the craftsmen supplemented them with nose guards - narrow, vertically located metal strips that protected the warrior’s face. This novelty was first used by the Scandinavians and Anglo-Saxons, and only over the next two centuries did it become widespread among other European peoples.

The emergence of new helmet models

In the 12th century, knightly helmets with a cylindrical crown came into use, which were soon transformed into a new independent type, which received the name “topfhelm” for its characteristic shape, which translated from German means “pot helmet”. They survived until the 14th century.

Around the same period, another unique type of helmet appeared - chapels, which were metal caps with brims, the shape of which often varied depending on the taste of the master and the wishes of the customer.

Since the main advantage of chapels was their relative cheapness, they were used mainly by infantry and poor mounted knights. By the way, in the 15th - 16th centuries, one of the varieties of this type of helmet was used by the conquistadors - the Spanish and Portuguese conquerors of the New World.

Further developments by gunsmiths

The most widespread were the so-called cerveliers - iron hemispherical helmets that fit tightly around the head and resembled a modern helmet. They were deprived of any external protective elements, with the exception of the nose pads, but at the same time they had an important advantage: gaskets made of thick shock-absorbing material and covered with fabric were attached to their inside. They softened the blows the warrior received to the head.

Cerveliers remained in service with the largest European armies until the beginning of the 14th century, after which they were replaced by domed or hemispherical bascinet helmets, equipped with a chain mail aventail, and had many varieties. It is known that initially they, like the cerveliers, were intended to be worn under the larger topfhelm helmets, which were discussed above, but over time they received independent use.

Many authentic helmets of this type, equipped with visors, have survived to this day. various designs. Some of their samples are equipped only with nose guards or even have a design that does not provide for face protection. The common element has always been the chain mail frame, which protected the warrior’s neck and shoulders.

Knights sung by poets

Modern researchers receive information about knightly armor and its transformation over the centuries not only on the basis of those specimens that make up the collections of the largest museums in the world, but also from the literary monuments of the Middle Ages, among which French poems occupy a special place.

Their authors paid great attention to describing not only the exploits of the heroes, but also their armor, the decoration of which was sometimes both decorative and heraldic in nature. For example, knightly helmets often featured not only plumes of feathers, but also rather complex designs in the form of horns and crests of fantastic animals, as well as elements of the family coats of arms of their owners.

The appearance of helmets equipped with a visor

An important stage in the history of defensive weapons was the appearance in the first quarter of the 13th century of helmets that completely protected the head and were equipped with only narrow slits for the eyes. The effectiveness of this design prompted gunsmiths to further develop it, and about a century later knightly helmets, equipped with a visor ─ a movable part designed to protect the warrior’s face, came into use. In the middle of the 14th century, they became an integral part of any combat armor.

When studying helmets from different eras, what is striking is characteristic difference, inherent in Western European samples. It is noted that Asia in all centuries was characterized by open designs that provided soldiers with wide visibility, the same can be said about the helmets of Ancient Rome. In Europe, on the contrary, knights preferred reliable solid protection of the head and face, even in cases where it created certain inconveniences.

"Dog Hood"

Gunsmiths sought to combine reliability with comfort in their products. An example of this is the type of helmet that appeared in the 14th century and was firmly established, bearing the characteristic name “Hundsgugel”, which translated from German means “dog hood”.

Its peculiarity was the presence of a cone-shaped visor extended forward, the shape of which actually resembled a dog’s muzzle. This design served two purposes. Firstly, it made the warrior’s head more protected from enemy arrows and spears that ricocheted down an inclined surface, and secondly, it made it possible to make a larger number of ventilation holes on the enlarged surface of the visor, thereby making breathing easier.

Models of helmets of the Late Middle Ages

In the 15th century, despite the fact that the importance of heavy cavalry in battles had significantly decreased, the design of armor continued to be improved, as the custom of holding knightly tournaments continued throughout Europe. At this time, the most interesting new product was a helmet with a visor, called “armet”.

Unlike the cone-shaped structures that existed at that time, this helmet had a spherical shape and a chin that opened into two halves, fastened with a pin during battle. In addition, it was equipped with a second visor that moved to the back of the head and special devices that reliably protected the throat and collarbones.

Another knight’s helmet, which became widespread in the Late Middle Ages, is also very interesting. It is called “salad” and is a distant relative of the bascinets described above. A characteristic feature of these designs was the backplate ─ part of the helmet extended back, which not only protected the warrior from attacks from the rear, but also did not allow him to be pulled off the horse with special hooks designed for this purpose. Salads were made both with and without visors. In the first case, they were intended for mounted warriors, in the second, for infantry.

Combat and tournament helmets

Helmets of the Middle Ages, like all defensive weapons, developed in two different ways depending on their purpose. For tournaments, heavier and stronger samples were forged, which provided greater safety, but did not allow one to stay in them for a long time. In particular, the widely used “toad head” tournament model, which was one of the most reliable in the history of chivalry, but lacked proper ventilation, was designed only for short-term use, not exceeding 5 minutes. After this period, the supply of air in it dried up, and the warrior began to suffocate.

Military weapons, which included the entire set of armor, were made in such a way as to allow the owner to stay in it for a long time. Based on this, when making it, gunsmiths tried to give all the details lightest weight. This requirement fully applied to helmets. Without compromising reliability, they had to be extremely light, well ventilated and provide good visibility.

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.

The variety of shapes and styles of medieval shells should be devoted to separate article:

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 a knight on a horse was truly terrible weapon of that era: arriving at the scene of battle on a war horse, often also dressed in armor, he was as terrifying 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 an indicator of high social level and well-being. 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 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 all 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.