Jump into War Machines! Command iconic tanks, upgrade, team up, and don't miss out on exciting new Expendables content. Download free now: bit.ly/scholagladiatoriaxWarMachines
You showed Phrygian style nasal helmet even though wide spread is not a Norman style though an easy mistake to make Matt. I do find it amazing that out of arms & armour helmets barely get mentioned yet they are present on near every battle field in history being a universal norm. Their is a reason helmet's were the 1st piece of armour if not the only piece of armour that wasn't fabric worn. Helmets deserve more mention then any article of armour in my opinion & is the 1st thing I would grab before any weapon. Unlike nobility most other classes from peasants to merchants etcetera didn't give their son a 'sword', status or what have you but a their own helmet they often got from their own father. Helmets were among the some of the most common heirlooms in history for nothing says I care more then 'son take my helmet so you don't die in battle'' if it served the father well enough that he lived so the same should be true of the son.
I must say! I am a great fan of your work. I tried unecessfuly comunicate to you through facebook messages and instagram, I think. Just wanna say that I appreciate a lot your videos, greetings from Brazil. Obs: I saw a gravure of a guy chopping to a plate helmet, could that be possible, cut (or pierce) plate armor with swords? I don't remember if it was you or another that made I video about those gravure in bibble texts
@@thalesmoraes1312 You don't have the leverage or dedicated point in swords to piece decent made armour. The Falx a very short polearm often mistaken for a sword does possess the ability to penetrate helmets hence why the Roman reinforced their helmets with central ridges to better deal with such arms. You need a poleaxe or halberd to realistically penetrate plate armour. The best a sword will do is rupture link i chain mail & that is not guaranteed. Swords are sidearms & the only 2 sidearms that can reliably take on plate without going after between the gaps are maces & war picks/hammers. soldier in history even resulted to using large branch or anything large-solid for blunt impact over swords shown in art & accounts. Don't underestimate an improvised cudgel!. Neolithic man till ww1` trench's used clubs simple or complex. The club is around 3.3 million years old made the same time as the 1st stone tools by Australopithecus afarensis long before true humans as in homo sapiens existed roughly 1/4million years ago. Many of the 1st weapon were made by pre human Hominini ancestors. The oldest know spear is 0.4 million years old made 100,000 years before humanity existed as we are! I never understood the obsession with swords as arguably the oldest sword dort of a dagger/shorts word being the Swords of Arslantepe are only 5300years old. Swords were never the primary dominant weapon on the battlefield & arguably the spear never died out as it is now the bayonet on a rifle! The origin of precision throwing began with Homo erectus 2million years ago which is when hominid's went from being prey in any sense to troop predators though when hominids became the Apex predators of the globe not so clear in prehistoric findings.
Speaking of vectors and angles, recently I watched a video titled "Is a Highlander Shield Bulletproof? Targe vs Flintlock Musket & Pistol - Historical Myth Busting". They tested 4 shields with different quality and at varying angles. What surprised me was that even the cheapest, most simple shield could stop a pistol bullet if angled, and had a small chance to stop a musket bullet. But what surprised me even more was that the better built shields were practically bulletproof if angled correctly. Of course it also depends on the types of firearms and load/bullet, so we can't take this test as 100% accurate, but very interesting stuff.
Deflection from a helm is extra important because it's your noggin. The impact alone on a head blow can be dangerous in several ways without breaching the armour. So deflection is the name if the game. Extra extra extra so on hits with significant force. Crossbow shots, late medieval arrows, and any of the impact based hand weapons transfer a huge amount of impulse if they hit without some deflection.
Sometimes I feel that a surprising amount of military history can be described by one branch or era discovering the hard way that the lessons learned by another branch applies to them too.
I think any guy who has been hit in the nuts knows you don't want to be standing front square on. If you angle a bit and bend your lead leg just a little bit you will always take a glancing blow on that leg instead. This is how I survived highschool footsal.
I recently studied a few historical examples of Armets and Close Helms and one detail I noticed is that the main part of the visor is usually slightly concave. I had previously assumed that convex surfaces were best for deflection but the more I thought about it the more I realized that the concave curves of an armet visor would tend to guide projectiles downwards and away from the eyes. If the visor was convex then something like an arrow might be more likely to glance upwards and hop over the edge of the plate towards the eyes. I've been studying armor for most of my life and it never ceases to amaze me how many subtle yet critical details there are in armor design.
If anyone else is interested, one of the examples I was studying was a 1525 German close helm (listed as an armet) in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, accession Number: 38.143a
This may dovetail in with the videos about the reasoning behind curved swords, but how about a discussion on curved vs. straight edge axes (especially pollaxes)? At some point, did weapons adapt to the deflective nature of curved armor, and if so, what was the most effective adaptation?
THANK YOU so much Matt, for not including that obnoxious music in this ad read. it was much more tolerable and i didnt have to skip through that section. please do this in future! dramatic background music doesnt fit with your vibe/brand.
Another thing with curved plates is that they get stiffer. A flat plate can bend and flex much more than a bent plate. And if you have it double curved it get stoff in all direction and much harder to deform.
Yeah it's amazing how sturdy a complex curve can be. Currently making a copper bowl, and the 1,5mm bent copper sheet can actually hold my 65kg/144lbs, I was surprised
Important to note that plate armour had ofcourse been around for thousands of years but by the medieval period and renaissance it was much better, cheaper and more available. And angled armour in WW2 was also about increasing the thickness of the armour presented to a target rather than just deflection.
19:32 I've been told this is why modern police are taught to stand square in a gunfight. They have a two-handed pistol technique which tends to square up the body, and this is preferred to the old target technique of holding one arm out extended even though it makes your body a larger target. Partly because the Kevlar armor is reinforced in the front and absent under the armpit for mobility.
The Weaver Stance and Isosceles Stance are intended for better recoil absorption, reducing muzzle flip and providing a more steady sight picture. The fact that Isosceles Stance makes better use of body armor is just a happy coincidence.
27:15 Aren't those slopes at the bottom of castle walls part of foundation, their function is purely structural? They extend under the ground, so the walls under the ground are wider (thicker?) than above it... I watched it in some Lindy's or Shad's video, can't remember which one...
Great video! Funnily enough, I often feel safer with a relatively square stance in my late 14th century Italian kit. I don't use upper arm plate harness, so presenting my chest and keeping my elbows in is often a safer bet. That said, I certainly adopt a more profile stance depending on the circumstance and just need to be very attentive to my lead arm.
Boob armour has problems with angles. It guides the energy of the blow to trap it on your chest rather than deflect the energy away. Honestly, I really think that you should have a follow up about Boob Armour. Jill Bearup would approve!
Absolutely (when you look at the classic fantasy stuff)! However, titty titanium can be functional if you have a functional breastplate shape underneath, and then add fasionable breasts as embellishments on top, such as wide and shallow brass cones :). Then it's hardly different from codpieces, which were worn by people of status, even in battle. Fuckin' weirdos, lol Happy to see a fellow Jill watcher! Hello :D
@@necroseusembellishment or not, accentuated breast shapes will guide the blow towards the center of the chest, rather than deflect the force away. You're creating a sort of valley in the middle that traps stuff.
The real advantage of trapping a blow is that you can guide it in to the strongest armour, normally that's a stop rib. But a boob armour would have a strong centre, extra thick in the valley.
Great video as always, Matt. One thing you said I have always wondered about. Were there any left-handed knights in medeivel times? I've never seen left-handed armour of any kind. My assumption has always been that naturally left-handed people were trained to fight right handed. Both from a practical point of view, that armourers would have difficulty reversing designs, militarily, having someone holding a shield in the opposite hand would disrupt a line of battle for instance. Also culturally, as left was "sinister". I just thought it might be a fun topic.
I tried to find out some data about that. What I found was basically that lines of battles required warriors to fight with the right hand. The question still stands when talking of later periods, for knights where they were basically fighting alone, and a left handed knight would have made no difference in a charge or a fight. I found nothing. No left handed armour (which does not mean they never existed, as only very few of them survived). No mention in old treaties (but some may exist in some books I am not aware of, or books mentioning that mays have not survived). I suspect left handed knights were trained with the right hand, by tradition, because jousts required it, because it made no difference in the fight, as they were highly trained from a young age and were probably as good as right handed knights with their right hand (or compensated with their other hand). After all, pianists play with both hands. Add to that that this focus on the right hand survived well into the 20th century : left handed children were still teached to use their right hand at school, here in France, in the 60s. But I would be interested too to have some scholar presentation.
No good and just knight of olden times would dare portray himself as sinister. And yes, if you ever have to fight in formation, everyone fights right-handed.
If the plate is 1 mm and the weapon hit the target at 45 degrees, the relative thickness is not 1 mm, but 1.41mm. It's simply 1/cos(45) = 1.41mm That's why points are being deflected on armour. However, if the weapon can penetrate the relative thickness, it will penetrate, even at 60 degrees. During the Warbow trials in 2005 they penetrated a 1.15 mm plate at 40 degrees to a depth of 85mm with a short type 9 bodkin and 92 Joules. The relative thickness was therefore 1.5 mm. At 60 degrees this 1.15 mm plate had a relative thickness of 2.3mm. The arrow penetrated this plate to 80mm. The puddled wrought iron plate had a Vickers hardness of 206 (average) and was about 98% pure iron.
By the way, completely off-topic, but is it possible to carry a maces on the street in Great Britain? a metal knight's maces? If there are people from other countries here, I'm also curious what this matter looks like in their countries.
He wasn't influenced by any hate mob. His friends who felt offended by Shad's words might have made him aware, but he confirmed for himself, considers them hurtful himself, and he cares for his friends so he chose to cut ties with Shad. He never named Shad, expressed his reasons and politely cut ties. Shad got upset at this and his fans have been harassing Matt as a result. Thankfully, this is starting to die down. Shad can continue being Shad and Matt can continue being Matt.
@@dragonguard666 did Shad say something threatening to these people or are they simply offended by his opinions? If it’s the latter of the two then this is beyond a childish, and if it’s the former of the two that would validate the stance he took. Obviously Matt is under no obligation to be friends or even friendly with Shad, but at the same time it’s extremely unjust and borderline cowardice to cut yourself off from a peer (especially in the public way he did) due to ideological differences… That’s the definition of regressive. Obviously I am not privy to everything that happened, but neither of them should have made it a public issue if it’s of private nature.
@@Benevolent_Fafnir So you would force someone to continue to collab with someone who insulted his friends (it seems some of his friends are part of the group that Shad has strong negative opinions about) just because they both like swords? Could it have been done quietly? Sure. But I think it's unfair to condemn Matt for sticking up for his friends.
@@dragonguard666 I would expect people to be mature enough to not have a falling out over a difference of opinion or belief yes… Unless Shad has said something deliberately targeted or threatening towards those people I would look past it, and I would hope that anyone I surround myself with would be mature enough to look past it too. It’s an Opinion… An opinion held by a deeply religious person so of course they are going to have that opinion. Shutting yourself off from people with differing opinions does nothing but cause segregation and eventual radicalization of said opinions. How many thousands of Matt’s fans share the same opinions as Shad? Is Matt just going to never engage with those people because of that? What if people in his clubs share those views? Is he going to forbid their participation? Honestly though the big issue I have (on the part of both Shad and Matt) is that they felt the need to make it public… If Matt wanted to distance himself from Shad he could have done so without involving his followers… Shad for his part should have just let it go and not responded.
Hey Matt, I regularly watch your content but inadvertently took a brief break. This was inadvertent because CZcams, for some reason, has stopped recommending your videos to me. Might be something to look into, though I'm not sure what you could do about it.
Pre-history has an undetermined start. Only the end is determined, Though it's a bit fuzzy - recorded history starts at different times in different places after all. :)
Flat topped crusader great helms. One of the biggest armor mistakes in history. It's not like they didn't have the technology or skills to make the top curved, they just didn't do it.
Would a strike not be more likely to hit the brim than the flat top? And if the knight would bow his head against a spearpoint the top would offer an angled surface?
@@aegirkarl1411 Is a chance of a flat top not acting like a flat top better or as good as not having a flat top at all? There's a reason this style of helmet hasn't been repeated in history whereas most other helmet shapes have.
Sure, flattop is not a popular design through history,propably for it did not work that well or was not convicing. But I assume people were not stupid and had practical experience so I wonder about “the mystery of the flattop”.
Hello, Matt! It is the first time in two years of dutifully watching every one of your videos that I disagree with you. I think that you want to know that no fixed fortification in (at least) European history was designed to deflect any kind of projectile, including medieval castles. All changes in geometry were meant to enhance structural stability of the building, to reduce weak spots and blind spots, and to provide defenders with a means to apply comparable firepower. Deflecting projectiles was never the case. In fact, internal structure of a polygonal bastion commonly associated with baroque star-shaped fortification is meant to absorbe (swallow, if you will) iron balls without losing internal stability. (A function that was rendered obsolete the moment that explosive ordnance was invented.) I do not contradict that deflection can occur. Stone balls certainly can be deflected by stone walls at extreme angles. However, there was never the intention to enhance this inherent ability. I think you need to understand that a shape which seems to provide better ability to reflect projectiles is also usually the shape that provides better structural stability that is needed to withstand the efects of forces exerted by the impact of said projectiles. In order to deflect, you would need an outer skin that is of a hardness comparable to the projectile's, and that hasn't been the case with buildings. I hope this has been informative. See you next time. Cheers! :)
25:33 such a beautiful example piece of plate armour. Thank for sharing this. Also, I just got your channel recomended by YT, and I'm having a blast here. Great work
the only time i can confidently say standing square is a good thing is when cutting an angle laterally (stepping and strafing to the side i mean) this is especially true if im trying to get an underhook or trying to get better position for an underhook, even still i can do that with a staggered stance and im going to step into it, most likely from a staggered stance anyways. nonetheless, just an example where being squared off is appropriate.
Před 11 měsíci+1
Thx for the earlier examples of the use of angeled armor. I have a youtubechannel on Tank related Stuff and at some point I want to do a mythbusting Video on "The T-34 invented sloped armor" :)
I'm not sure why so many HEMA experts talk like shields and armor stopped being used. Armor and shields are in the arsenal of every modern millitary and every modern police force; All cops are trained for Shield / Club combat. Even American Civil War, WW1 and WW2 soldiers had Flak Jackets which is bullet and explosive Armor.
Shields came out of use in Europe mid of 18th century, both in Scotland and in , Balkan' Region. A small Comeback came in wwl. In case of Police, the Comeback of shields was arround 1970. After 1650 Armour dissappeared, so up to modern Kevlar vests, there was for three centuries nearly No protection for common soldier.
@@brittakriep2938Common Soldiers wore Flak Jackets in the 1800's up to WW2. That is bullet resistant hard plate armor. Shields stopped being used on the Front Line but never stopped being used for Riot Control.
@@SuperFunkmachineHollywood shows Katanas cutting through steel and Soldiers wearing cloth. Neither is true. Armor changed it didn't go away, early 1800s ballistic armor is armor.
Hi Matt, I have been interested in armour since childhood when I went to the London armouries and the Wallace collection. One thing I've never understood is the development of Maximilian armour. What was the advantage? Why did it become so popular? Thanks!
People need to remember that as far as year 1300 artillery men had to take earth curvature into math when shooting from long range. Yes, the trebuchet era. They also understand angling and arrow deflections.
Not sure it's the right niche but if anyone's interested in a thorough series of knightly unit videos arms & armor I hotly recommend Schwerpunkt. I wonder what Matt would think about him
Why? Exactly the same reason tanks care about slopes and angles in their forward armour--and before them why the 'trace italienne' was such a successful pattern for resisting early gunpowder artillery, especially the glacis and barbettes. Fort George is an absolutely beautiful example of this and so to a lesser extent is Fort Nelson above Portsmouth.
Always preferred your content to shad’s, but have to argue it’s shameful that you’ve decided to lean away from him due to difference of opinion. I’m out ✌️
Shad insults a group of people Matt considers as his friends. Matt cares for his friends. It's not a mere difference of opinion when it involves people.
@scholagladiatoria Are you going to do a new fight analysis for IGN on the sword fights in the new Ahsoka TV series from Star Wars? Seems like the choreographers have been listing to your (or someone like you's) advice on making them more comprehensive and realistic (at least as realistic as you can get with force-using-lightsaber-wielding-samurai/ninja/knights).
Most people WERE right-handed, they weren't "taught to fight right-handed." As to whether and to what extent left-handed people also fought right-handed, and/or were taught to, you have no idea.
Yeah, insulting the friends of a friend is really bad huh? And then playing victim when his friend doesn't like him insulting his friends, that's pretty scummy. I agree.
Come on dude. I like Shad still but just bounce. Not everybody has to agree with how you see a certain person online. At the end of the day you make that decision of who matters in your life more and sometimes it may not line up how you like it to.
Jump into War Machines! Command iconic tanks, upgrade, team up, and don't miss out on exciting new Expendables content. Download free now: bit.ly/scholagladiatoriaxWarMachines
You showed Phrygian style nasal helmet even though wide spread is not a Norman style though an easy mistake to make Matt.
I do find it amazing that out of arms & armour helmets barely get mentioned yet they are present on near every battle field in history being a universal norm.
Their is a reason helmet's were the 1st piece of armour if not the only piece of armour that wasn't fabric worn.
Helmets deserve more mention then any article of armour in my opinion & is the 1st thing I would grab before any weapon.
Unlike nobility most other classes from peasants to merchants etcetera didn't give their son a 'sword', status or what have you but a their own helmet they often got from their own father.
Helmets were among the some of the most common heirlooms in history for nothing says I care more then 'son take my helmet so you don't die in battle'' if it served the father well enough that he lived so the same should be true of the son.
I must say! I am a great fan of your work. I tried unecessfuly comunicate to you through facebook messages and instagram, I think. Just wanna say that I appreciate a lot your videos, greetings from Brazil.
Obs: I saw a gravure of a guy chopping to a plate helmet, could that be possible, cut (or pierce) plate armor with swords? I don't remember if it was you or another that made I video about those gravure in bibble texts
@@thalesmoraes1312 You don't have the leverage or dedicated point in swords to piece decent made armour.
The Falx a very short polearm often mistaken for a sword does possess the ability to penetrate helmets hence why the Roman reinforced their helmets with central ridges to better deal with such arms.
You need a poleaxe or halberd to realistically penetrate plate armour.
The best a sword will do is rupture link i chain mail & that is not guaranteed.
Swords are sidearms & the only 2 sidearms that can reliably take on plate without going after between the gaps are maces & war picks/hammers.
soldier in history even resulted to using large branch or anything large-solid for blunt impact over swords shown in art & accounts.
Don't underestimate an improvised cudgel!.
Neolithic man till ww1` trench's used clubs simple or complex.
The club is around 3.3 million years old made the same time as the 1st stone tools by Australopithecus afarensis long before true humans as in homo sapiens existed roughly 1/4million years ago.
Many of the 1st weapon were made by pre human Hominini ancestors.
The oldest know spear is 0.4 million years old made 100,000 years before humanity existed as we are!
I never understood the obsession with swords as arguably the oldest sword dort of a dagger/shorts word being the Swords of Arslantepe are only 5300years old.
Swords were never the primary dominant weapon on the battlefield & arguably the spear never died out as it is now the bayonet on a rifle!
The origin of precision throwing began with Homo erectus 2million years ago which is when hominid's went from being prey in any sense to troop predators though when hominids became the Apex predators of the globe not so clear in prehistoric findings.
Speaking of vectors and angles, recently I watched a video titled "Is a Highlander Shield Bulletproof? Targe vs Flintlock Musket & Pistol - Historical Myth Busting". They tested 4 shields with different quality and at varying angles. What surprised me was that even the cheapest, most simple shield could stop a pistol bullet if angled, and had a small chance to stop a musket bullet. But what surprised me even more was that the better built shields were practically bulletproof if angled correctly. Of course it also depends on the types of firearms and load/bullet, so we can't take this test as 100% accurate, but very interesting stuff.
Medieval Knights also cared about Saxons in addition to Angles. Ba-doom-bam!
Jutes! I'm sure the Frisian Stans will be along soon.
Nice
Deflection from a helm is extra important because it's your noggin. The impact alone on a head blow can be dangerous in several ways without breaching the armour. So deflection is the name if the game. Extra extra extra so on hits with significant force. Crossbow shots, late medieval arrows, and any of the impact based hand weapons transfer a huge amount of impulse if they hit without some deflection.
Exactly, reducing the momentum transfer to the head is vital. After all, a mace doesn't need to crush the helmet in order to kill.
That trip to the Tank Museum really got you thinking! Great post. A follow-up on handguards on weapons would be good.
"Drive me closer, I wish to hit them with my sword" Matt, probably.
Sometimes I feel that a surprising amount of military history can be described by one branch or era discovering the hard way that the lessons learned by another branch applies to them too.
Definitely interested in that full armour video! Maybe bring Tod in for a chat?
I saw your Tank Museum video, very good presentation!
Thank you very much!
I think any guy who has been hit in the nuts knows you don't want to be standing front square on. If you angle a bit and bend your lead leg just a little bit you will always take a glancing blow on that leg instead. This is how I survived highschool footsal.
I recently studied a few historical examples of Armets and Close Helms and one detail I noticed is that the main part of the visor is usually slightly concave. I had previously assumed that convex surfaces were best for deflection but the more I thought about it the more I realized that the concave curves of an armet visor would tend to guide projectiles downwards and away from the eyes. If the visor was convex then something like an arrow might be more likely to glance upwards and hop over the edge of the plate towards the eyes.
I've been studying armor for most of my life and it never ceases to amaze me how many subtle yet critical details there are in armor design.
If anyone else is interested, one of the examples I was studying was a 1525 German close helm (listed as an armet) in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, accession Number: 38.143a
This may dovetail in with the videos about the reasoning behind curved swords, but how about a discussion on curved vs. straight edge axes (especially pollaxes)? At some point, did weapons adapt to the deflective nature of curved armor, and if so, what was the most effective adaptation?
This.
Look at poleaxes for the response to solid sloped armour.
THANK YOU so much Matt, for not including that obnoxious music in this ad read. it was much more tolerable and i didnt have to skip through that section. please do this in future! dramatic background music doesnt fit with your vibe/brand.
Another thing with curved plates is that they get stiffer. A flat plate can bend and flex much more than a bent plate.
And if you have it double curved it get stoff in all direction and much harder to deform.
Yeah it's amazing how sturdy a complex curve can be. Currently making a copper bowl, and the 1,5mm bent copper sheet can actually hold my 65kg/144lbs, I was surprised
Important to note that plate armour had ofcourse been around for thousands of years but by the medieval period and renaissance it was much better, cheaper and more available.
And angled armour in WW2 was also about increasing the thickness of the armour presented to a target rather than just deflection.
Wait! You mean sloped armor wasn't invented by the Russians with the T-34. Blasphemy! Great show. Lots of info!
Tanks for this one, Matt. I’m so sloped to watch it!
19:32 I've been told this is why modern police are taught to stand square in a gunfight. They have a two-handed pistol technique which tends to square up the body, and this is preferred to the old target technique of holding one arm out extended even though it makes your body a larger target. Partly because the Kevlar armor is reinforced in the front and absent under the armpit for mobility.
The Weaver Stance and Isosceles Stance are intended for better recoil absorption, reducing muzzle flip and providing a more steady sight picture. The fact that Isosceles Stance makes better use of body armor is just a happy coincidence.
The Moment you said:
Bare with me, if you are not here for tanks...
A gif of a waveing Lindybeige would habe been hilarious.
Still love your vids
27:15 Aren't those slopes at the bottom of castle walls part of foundation, their function is purely structural? They extend under the ground, so the walls under the ground are wider (thicker?) than above it...
I watched it in some Lindy's or Shad's video, can't remember which one...
The slopes originally were put there to make it harder to plant ladders or get battering rams close enough to do damage.
Great video! Funnily enough, I often feel safer with a relatively square stance in my late 14th century Italian kit. I don't use upper arm plate harness, so presenting my chest and keeping my elbows in is often a safer bet. That said, I certainly adopt a more profile stance depending on the circumstance and just need to be very attentive to my lead arm.
Boob armour has problems with angles. It guides the energy of the blow to trap it on your chest rather than deflect the energy away. Honestly, I really think that you should have a follow up about Boob Armour. Jill Bearup would approve!
Absolutely (when you look at the classic fantasy stuff)!
However, titty titanium can be functional if you have a functional breastplate shape underneath, and then add fasionable breasts as embellishments on top, such as wide and shallow brass cones :). Then it's hardly different from codpieces, which were worn by people of status, even in battle. Fuckin' weirdos, lol
Happy to see a fellow Jill watcher! Hello :D
@@necroseusembellishment or not, accentuated breast shapes will guide the blow towards the center of the chest, rather than deflect the force away. You're creating a sort of valley in the middle that traps stuff.
The boobs guide the blow you say… I’ll have to check that out.
The real advantage of trapping a blow is that you can guide it in to the strongest armour, normally that's a stop rib.
But a boob armour would have a strong centre, extra thick in the valley.
Boob armor would seem at home alongside those bronze age armors with the detailed abs and pecs.
Great video as always, Matt.
One thing you said I have always wondered about. Were there any left-handed knights in medeivel times? I've never seen left-handed armour of any kind. My assumption has always been that naturally left-handed people were trained to fight right handed. Both from a practical point of view, that armourers would have difficulty reversing designs, militarily, having someone holding a shield in the opposite hand would disrupt a line of battle for instance. Also culturally, as left was "sinister".
I just thought it might be a fun topic.
I tried to find out some data about that. What I found was basically that lines of battles required warriors to fight with the right hand.
The question still stands when talking of later periods, for knights where they were basically fighting alone, and a left handed knight would have made no difference in a charge or a fight.
I found nothing. No left handed armour (which does not mean they never existed, as only very few of them survived). No mention in old treaties (but some may exist in some books I am not aware of, or books mentioning that mays have not survived).
I suspect left handed knights were trained with the right hand, by tradition, because jousts required it, because it made no difference in the fight, as they were highly trained from a young age and were probably as good as right handed knights with their right hand (or compensated with their other hand). After all, pianists play with both hands.
Add to that that this focus on the right hand survived well into the 20th century : left handed children were still teached to use their right hand at school, here in France, in the 60s.
But I would be interested too to have some scholar presentation.
No good and just knight of olden times would dare portray himself as sinister. And yes, if you ever have to fight in formation, everyone fights right-handed.
If the plate is 1 mm and the weapon hit the target at 45 degrees, the relative thickness is not 1 mm, but 1.41mm.
It's simply 1/cos(45) = 1.41mm
That's why points are being deflected on armour. However, if the weapon can penetrate the relative thickness, it will penetrate, even at 60 degrees. During the Warbow trials in 2005 they penetrated a 1.15 mm plate at 40 degrees to a depth of 85mm with a short type 9 bodkin and 92 Joules. The relative thickness was therefore 1.5 mm. At 60 degrees this 1.15 mm plate had a relative thickness of 2.3mm. The arrow penetrated this plate to 80mm. The puddled wrought iron plate had a Vickers hardness of 206 (average) and was about 98% pure iron.
"Slain 'r unharmed, Thou art coming with me"
-Roboknight (formerly Sir Easton).
Today I learned the word "ocularia" which is way better than "lookin' holes"
Deflection also sends the energy away from the head/body.... lowers blunt force trauma. 👍👍👍
A Scholagladiatoria video on body armor? Yes please!
ngl, that game sounds kinda cool, might try it
By the way, completely off-topic, but is it possible to carry a maces on the street in Great Britain? a metal knight's maces? If there are people from other countries here, I'm also curious what this matter looks like in their countries.
Good overview. Thanks, Matt!
On a side note what the heck is going on though between you and Shad?
Please tell me you didn’t really cut him off because the hate mob in those pics.
He wasn't influenced by any hate mob. His friends who felt offended by Shad's words might have made him aware, but he confirmed for himself, considers them hurtful himself, and he cares for his friends so he chose to cut ties with Shad. He never named Shad, expressed his reasons and politely cut ties. Shad got upset at this and his fans have been harassing Matt as a result. Thankfully, this is starting to die down. Shad can continue being Shad and Matt can continue being Matt.
@@dragonguard666 did Shad say something threatening to these people or are they simply offended by his opinions? If it’s the latter of the two then this is beyond a childish, and if it’s the former of the two that would validate the stance he took.
Obviously Matt is under no obligation to be friends or even friendly with Shad, but at the same time it’s extremely unjust and borderline cowardice to cut yourself off from a peer (especially in the public way he did) due to ideological differences… That’s the definition of regressive.
Obviously I am not privy to everything that happened, but neither of them should have made it a public issue if it’s of private nature.
@@Benevolent_Fafnir
Matt has gay and female friends and Shad has expressed negative sentiment towards gays and women in his Knight's Watch channel.
@@Benevolent_Fafnir So you would force someone to continue to collab with someone who insulted his friends (it seems some of his friends are part of the group that Shad has strong negative opinions about) just because they both like swords? Could it have been done quietly? Sure. But I think it's unfair to condemn Matt for sticking up for his friends.
@@dragonguard666 I would expect people to be mature enough to not have a falling out over a difference of opinion or belief yes… Unless Shad has said something deliberately targeted or threatening towards those people I would look past it, and I would hope that anyone I surround myself with would be mature enough to look past it too.
It’s an Opinion… An opinion held by a deeply religious person so of course they are going to have that opinion.
Shutting yourself off from people with differing opinions does nothing but cause segregation and eventual radicalization of said opinions.
How many thousands of Matt’s fans share the same opinions as Shad? Is Matt just going to never engage with those people because of that? What if people in his clubs share those views? Is he going to forbid their participation?
Honestly though the big issue I have (on the part of both Shad and Matt) is that they felt the need to make it public… If Matt wanted to distance himself from Shad he could have done so without involving his followers… Shad for his part should have just let it go and not responded.
Great discussion. If you want to do more related to this topic, I will be here to watch, like and comment. Thank you.
Thanks, Matt.
15:07 early model of the helmets worn by the adepta sororitas.
Next video: How a Rapier Swordsman Defeats a WWII Tank!
Climb up to the visor plate and stabby stab, if you're somehow not swiss-cheesed by machineguns yet
@@luigivercotti6410 Who knew WWII tanks were so effete!! I guess I have some time travelling to do.
Hey Matt, I regularly watch your content but inadvertently took a brief break. This was inadvertent because CZcams, for some reason, has stopped recommending your videos to me. Might be something to look into, though I'm not sure what you could do about it.
If you subscribe, and request notifications, CZcams should inform you of future videos.
"It's like a helmet for my whole body!" - the first guy to make a breast plate
(Incredible video Matt!)
Wait wait. When the hell does PRE-history start?
Pre-history has an undetermined start. Only the end is determined, Though it's a bit fuzzy - recorded history starts at different times in different places after all. :)
9:20 that lad's going to lose his umbrella if he isn't careful! It's not safe hanging it on your belt like that. ;-)
Any video on armour would be welcomed :))
Flat topped crusader great helms. One of the biggest armor mistakes in history. It's not like they didn't have the technology or skills to make the top curved, they just didn't do it.
cost reasons?
@@luigivercotti6410 Usually that's the answer to something like this, but most of those guys were rich and probably don't want impacted spines.
Would a strike not be more likely to hit the brim than the flat top? And if the knight would bow his head against a spearpoint the top would offer an angled surface?
@@aegirkarl1411 Is a chance of a flat top not acting like a flat top better or as good as not having a flat top at all? There's a reason this style of helmet hasn't been repeated in history whereas most other helmet shapes have.
Sure, flattop is not a popular design through history,propably for it did not work that well or was not convicing. But I assume people were not stupid and had practical experience so I wonder about “the mystery of the flattop”.
Grade A thumbnail.
So when are we getting explosive-reactive body armour?
A quilted tannerite gambeson would be fun
Personally, I would be really interested for you to do a video on early modern armour, specifically the strange parts that feel tacked on them.
Hello, Matt!
It is the first time in two years of dutifully watching every one of your videos that I disagree with you. I think that you want to know that no fixed fortification in (at least) European history was designed to deflect any kind of projectile, including medieval castles.
All changes in geometry were meant to enhance structural stability of the building, to reduce weak spots and blind spots, and to provide defenders with a means to apply comparable firepower. Deflecting projectiles was never the case. In fact, internal structure of a polygonal bastion commonly associated with baroque star-shaped fortification is meant to absorbe (swallow, if you will) iron balls without losing internal stability. (A function that was rendered obsolete the moment that explosive ordnance was invented.)
I do not contradict that deflection can occur. Stone balls certainly can be deflected by stone walls at extreme angles. However, there was never the intention to enhance this inherent ability. I think you need to understand that a shape which seems to provide better ability to reflect projectiles is also usually the shape that provides better structural stability that is needed to withstand the efects of forces exerted by the impact of said projectiles. In order to deflect, you would need an outer skin that is of a hardness comparable to the projectile's, and that hasn't been the case with buildings.
I hope this has been informative. See you next time. Cheers! :)
I can be your angle
or yuor slope
Angle and stoppers
The alpha and the omega of any Armor or fortification
At least until the age of reactive armor
Wait... sloped armor... from tanks.. is about much more thickness..
Slopes for body armor.. is more about deflecting. And deflection.
11:23 "particularly me" that gave me a good chuckle XD
May the Angles protect you, Matt.
I used to be an adventurer like you. Then I took an arrow in the elbow...
25:33 such a beautiful example piece of plate armour. Thank for sharing this. Also, I just got your channel recomended by YT, and I'm having a blast here. Great work
the only time i can confidently say standing square is a good thing is when cutting an angle laterally (stepping and strafing to the side i mean) this is especially true if im trying to get an underhook or trying to get better position for an underhook, even still i can do that with a staggered stance and im going to step into it, most likely from a staggered stance anyways. nonetheless, just an example where being squared off is appropriate.
Thx for the earlier examples of the use of angeled armor. I have a youtubechannel on Tank related Stuff and at some point I want to do a mythbusting Video on "The T-34 invented sloped armor" :)
So, your helmet could either be your angle (if it's properly crafted)... or yuor devil.
Angles: they named the entire country after them, didn't they?
dear matt :) sloped armour on fighting vehicles is actually a ww1 thing :)
Oooh ANGLES lol I was like ANGELS? COOL!? But this is cool too. Damn dyslexia.
Another place angles come up is age of sail ships, where some ships would have more curved/angled broadsides to deflect cannons.
I'm not sure why so many HEMA experts talk like shields and armor stopped being used. Armor and shields are in the arsenal of every modern millitary and every modern police force; All cops are trained for Shield / Club combat. Even American Civil War, WW1 and WW2 soldiers had Flak Jackets which is bullet and explosive Armor.
Shields came out of use in Europe mid of 18th century, both in Scotland and in , Balkan' Region. A small Comeback came in wwl. In case of Police, the Comeback of shields was arround 1970. After 1650 Armour dissappeared, so up to modern Kevlar vests, there was for three centuries nearly No protection for common soldier.
@@brittakriep2938Common Soldiers wore Flak Jackets in the 1800's up to WW2. That is bullet resistant hard plate armor. Shields stopped being used on the Front Line but never stopped being used for Riot Control.
There was a complete abandonment of armour by 1700, with only a few country's heavy cavalry having any armour.
@@SuperFunkmachine In the 1860s during the American Civil War, Soldiers wore Flak Jackets with Solid Plates. That is Armor in the 1800's.
@@SuperFunkmachineHollywood shows Katanas cutting through steel and Soldiers wearing cloth. Neither is true. Armor changed it didn't go away, early 1800s ballistic armor is armor.
Hi Matt,
I have been interested in armour since childhood when I went to the London armouries and the Wallace collection. One thing I've never understood is the development of Maximilian armour. What was the advantage? Why did it become so popular?
Thanks!
The ribs make it stiffer but the multi rib ones are more for fashion then effect.
Tanks? I drove a Leopard once 😊 I’m afraid a tank game would take over my day 😅
People need to remember that as far as year 1300 artillery men had to take earth curvature into math when shooting from long range. Yes, the trebuchet era.
They also understand angling and arrow deflections.
20:54 Was this the same reason why T-72 tanks had this letter "V" on their frontal armor?
I wonder if you can make a stealth shield instead of a bow you have angles like a stealth fighter ?
🗿👍🏿
we must not forget that a surface with ridges, like fluting, can easily chip and dull the edge of a sword or an axe
Am i the only one dumb enough to read the title as "Angels" and then get very surprised within first sentence of video...?
Thanks for the good video ⚔️
This is a good angle on this topic.
I would venture to say that no medieval knights cared more about Angles than the Saxons.
and here I was thinking that only Samurai cared about slopes.
Nice shirt. What does it mean?
It's a rock band.
Not sure it's the right niche but if anyone's interested in a thorough series of knightly unit videos arms & armor I hotly recommend Schwerpunkt. I wonder what Matt would think about him
GO TEAM MATT! right side of history!
@@lu544 the people who are actively destroying European societies are on "the right side of history" in case you didnt know lol
I would hope you research people as well as you do history
He has and it reinforced his decision.
@@dragonguard666My brother in Chirst. Stop virtue signalling. You're literally subscribed to Armored Skeptic
@@wanomanleones1723 I haven't watched his content in years. Stop crying over Shad and move on already
Yeah, watching a second of “Knights Watch” is good enough research in my opinion.
Why? Exactly the same reason tanks care about slopes and angles in their forward armour--and before them why the 'trace italienne' was such a successful pattern for resisting early gunpowder artillery, especially the glacis and barbettes. Fort George is an absolutely beautiful example of this and so to a lesser extent is Fort Nelson above Portsmouth.
At first glance I read angels instead of angles. :D
Shad Brooks is the closest thing to a father I've ever had a
Why little fella ?
That's really sad
:(
My condolences.
@@matthewpham9525why
More about body armor ? YHESSS !:)) - please :)
Even back in the day, Ser Chud knew about the slippery slope!
Boss...what's up with the soy expression on the thumbnail?
Always preferred your content to shad’s, but have to argue it’s shameful that you’ve decided to lean away from him due to difference of opinion. I’m out ✌️
Shad insults a group of people Matt considers as his friends. Matt cares for his friends. It's not a mere difference of opinion when it involves people.
@scholagladiatoria Are you going to do a new fight analysis for IGN on the sword fights in the new Ahsoka TV series from Star Wars? Seems like the choreographers have been listing to your (or someone like you's) advice on making them more comprehensive and realistic (at least as realistic as you can get with force-using-lightsaber-wielding-samurai/ninja/knights).
Christ is King
So is Elvis
I misread the title of the video. I though it said angels instead of angles
Most people WERE right-handed, they weren't "taught to fight right-handed." As to whether and to what extent left-handed people also fought right-handed, and/or were taught to, you have no idea.
There was a substantial negative bias against lefthandedness in the medieval era.
The real character and worth of a man is most easy seen in how they treat those they have call freind.
And the person you allude to was never my friend. My loyalty is and has always been to my actual friends.
Yeah, insulting the friends of a friend is really bad huh? And then playing victim when his friend doesn't like him insulting his friends, that's pretty scummy. I agree.
Come on dude. I like Shad still but just bounce. Not everybody has to agree with how you see a certain person online. At the end of the day you make that decision of who matters in your life more and sometimes it may not line up how you like it to.
First