Ruby heads is the name of medieval knights. Knight's weapons
People rich enough to not have to work constitute a privileged class, strictly separated from the rest of society. In this upper class, everyone, excluding clergy, are warriors by profession, in the terminology of the Middle Ages, “knights”.
Charlemagne also obliged all free people of his empire to bear arms. The need to protect oneself, a penchant for idleness and adventure, a predisposition to military life led throughout medieval Europe to the formation of a military aristocracy. To attract people to military service, there was no need for the highest authority of the state. Since secular people believed military life the only honorable way of life, then everyone strove for it; the military, knightly class included everyone who had enough money to join it.
The first condition for becoming a knight was the opportunity to purchase weapons at your own expense. Meanwhile, starting from the 9th century, they fought exclusively on horses. Therefore, the medieval warrior was called chevalier in France, caver in the south, caballero in Spain, Ritter in Germany, and in Latin texts the ancient name for a soldier, miles, became synonymous with a knight.
Throughout feudal Europe, war is fought in the same way, and the warriors are armed almost identically.
Armor and weapons of medieval knights
A person who is fully armed for battle, a knight, has his body protected by armor. Until the end of the 9th century, this was armor, a tunic made of leather or fabric, covered with metal plaques or rings; later armor is everywhere replaced by chain mail, a shirt made of metal rings with gauntlets and a hood and with a slit at the top so that it can be worn like a shirt. At first the chain mail reached the feet; when it was shortened to the knees, they began to cover their legs with hoop stockings for protection; Spurs shaped like the tip of a spear were attached to these stockings. The hood covered the back of the head and head and reached the chin, leaving only the eyes, nose and mouth open.
During battle, a medieval knight put a helmet on his head - a conical-shaped steel cap surrounded by a rim and ending in a metal or glass ball (cimier); the helmet was equipped with an iron plate that protected the nose (nasal - nasal, it disappeared by the end of the 12th century) and was tied to the chain mail with leather straps. Only in the XIV century. armor made of metal plates and a helmet with a visor appear, which survived until the 17th century - weapons Bayard and Henry IV, which, however, is often mistaken for conventional weapons medieval knight.
To repel blows, the medieval knight wore a shield made of wood and leather, covered with metal strips and decorated in the middle with a plaque (boucle) made of gilded iron (hence the name of the shield - bouclier). At first round, the shield then becomes oblong and lengthens to the point that it covers the rider from shoulders to toes. The knights hung it around their necks on a wide belt; during battle, it was put on the left hand using handles located on the inside. It was on shields that, starting from the 12th century, they began to draw a coat of arms, recognized by one or another family for its emblem.
The knight's offensive weapons were a sword (branc), usually wide and short, with a flat hilt, and a spear with a long and thin shaft made of ash or hornbeam, ending with an iron tip in the shape of a diamond. Below the tip, a rectangular strip of material (gonfanon - banner) was nailed, which fluttered in the wind. The spear could be thrust into the ground with a handle ending in an iron tip.
Knights. Film 1. Chained in Iron
Dressed and armed in this way, the medieval knight was almost invulnerable, and over time the weapons were increasingly improved, making the warrior look like a living fortress. But at the same time he becomes so heavy that he needs a special kind of horse to fight. The knight has two horses with him: an ordinary one (palefroi) for riding, and a fighting one (dextrier), which is led by a servant by the bridle. Before the battle begins, the knight puts on his armor, mounts his war horse and rushes into battle, pointing his spear forward.
Only knights were considered true warriors; stories about medieval battles tell us only about them, and only about them the battle columns consisted. But they were accompanied on their campaigns by other riders on less hardy horses, dressed in a tunic and a hat, equipped with lighter and less expensive armor, armed with a small shield, a narrow sword, a pike, an ax or a bow. A knight who had heavy weapons could not do without these companions: they led his war horse (on the right side, hence the name dextrier), carried his shield, helped him put on armor at the moment of battle and sit in the saddle. Therefore, they were usually called valets (servants) or ècuyers (shield bearers), and in Latin - scutifer (shield bearer) or armiger (armiger). In the early Middle Ages, knights kept these squires in a subordinate position. Composed at the end of the 11th century. " Song of Roland"They are referred to as the lower class. They shaved their heads like servants and received coarser bread at table. But little by little brotherhood in arms brought the squires closer to the knights; in the 13th century both groups already constituted one class - the highest class of secular society, and both the ancient Latin name noble (nobilis), which constituted belonging to the upper class (edel in German), was applied to both.
Knightly armor and weapons of the Middle Ages changed almost at the same speed as modern fashion. And knightly armor from the mid-15th century. did not even remotely resemble what warriors used to protect themselves in the 12th or 13th centuries. The evolution became especially noticeable in the late Middle Ages, when almost every year brought changes in the appearance of defensive and offensive weapons. In this review, we will talk about what kind of armor the English and French knights wore in the era when, under the leadership of the legendary Joan of Arc, the French defeated the English troops near Orleans, and there was a turning point in the Hundred Years' War.
By the end of the XIV - beginning of the XV century. The appearance of full plate armor finally took shape. In the 20-30s. XV century The best armor was considered to be made by Italian and, above all, Milanese gunsmiths, famous for the extraordinary skill of their work. Along with the Italian ones, gunsmiths from the south of Germany and the Netherlands were also popular.
Armor
Underarmor. A thick quilted jacket was mandatory to be worn under the armor. It was made of leather or strong, coarse fabric on horsehair, cotton wool or tow. In the XIII-XIV centuries. this fabric armor was called “aketon”, in the 15th century. the term “doublet” was assigned to it. The protective properties of any armor largely depended on the thickness of the padding and the quality of the quilting of the doublet. After all, a strong blow could, without breaking through the armor, seriously injure the owner. The doublet was cut according to the style that was fashionable in the 15th century. a short, fitted jacket, usually with a front fastening and a stand-up collar. The long sleeves of the doublet could not be sewn, but laced to the armholes. The thickest padding covered the most vulnerable parts of the body: neck, chest, stomach. On the elbows and under the arms the padding was very thin or completely absent, so as not to restrict the warrior’s movements.
A quilted balaclava was also worn on the head under the helmet. One liner, as a rule, was mounted inside the helmet, the second, thinner and smaller, was worn directly on the head like a cap. Such powerful shock-absorbing pads caused extremely big size helmet, which significantly exceeded the size of the knight's head.
Quilted linings were also required to be worn under the leg armor.
By the first third of the 15th century. knights used four types of helmets: bassinet, arme, salade and helmets with brims (chapelle de fer).
Basinet was very popular already in the 14th century. This is a helmet with a hemispherical or conical head equipped with a visor. Basinets of the late XIV - early XV centuries. had a back plate that went down onto the warrior’s back, as well as a collar, which reliably protected the warrior’s head and neck. Basinettes with an elongated backplate and neck plate were called “large bassinettes” and became quite widespread. Large Basinettes were always equipped with a visor. At the end of the 14th century. The conical visor, which, because of its shape, was called “hundgugel” (dog head) in German, was extremely popular. Thanks to this shape, even powerful blows from the spear slipped off without causing harm. To facilitate breathing and provide better visibility, the visors were equipped with a lower slot at the level of the mouth and numerous round holes. These holes could only be located on the right half of the visor, which was determined by the conditions of equestrian combat with spears, in which the left half of the warrior’s helmet was primarily affected.
Fig.2 Helmet with open and closed visor
At the beginning of the 15th century. Another type of helmet appeared, which later became the very popular “Arme” helmet. The main difference between arme and basinet, in the 30s of the 15th century, was the presence of two cheek plates equipped with hinges, closing in front of the chin and locking with a hook or a belt with a buckle.
Another type of helmet originates from the bassinet, namely the so-called “salad” (in German “shaler”). The term “salade” was first used in 1407. By the time of the siege of Orleans, it began to be equipped with a movable visor attached to two hinges.
At the beginning of the 15th century. Helmets with brims were very popular. These helmets, made in the shape of an ordinary hat (hence the French name “chapel-de-fer”, literally “hat made of iron”), did not impede breathing and provided full visibility. At the same time, the overhanging fields protected the face from lateral impacts. This helmet was most widespread in the infantry, but knights and even crowned heads did not neglect it. Not long ago, during excavations in the Louvre, a luxurious chapel de fer of Charles VI, decorated with gold, was found. The heavy cavalry in the front ranks of the battle formation, which took the first, most terrible spear blow, wore closed helmets, while the fighters in the rear ranks often used helmets with brims.
Helmets of all types under consideration were decorated in accordance with fashion, the desire of the owner and the characteristics of a particular region. Thus, the French knights were characterized by plumes attached to tubes installed in the upper part of the helmet. English knights preferred to wear embroidered “burelets” (stuffed bolsters) on their helmets, and in most cases they did without them. Helmets could also be gilded or painted with tempera paints.
Note that English knights preferred basinettes and only occasionally wore chapelle-de-ferres. The French used all of these types of helmets.
Cuirass. The main element of armor that protected the body was the cuirass. Cuirasses of the 20-30s. XV century were monolithic and composite. Monolithic ones consisted of only two parts: a breastplate and a backrest. In composite ones, the breastplate and backrest were assembled from two parts, upper and lower. The top and bottom of classic Italian cuirasses were connected to each other by belts with buckles. Cuirasses produced for sale to other countries were made with sliding rivets that replaced belts. The breastplate and backrest of the first version were connected on the left side with a loop and fastened on the right side with a buckle. The parts of the cuirass of the second version were connected on the sides by means of belts with buckles. Monolithic cuirasses were more typical of English chivalry, while composite ones were more typical of French chivalry.
Lamellar hems covered the body from the waist to the base of the hips and had smooth outlines. They were assembled from horizontal steel strips stacked on top of each other from bottom to top. They were connected along the edges with rivets; an additional leather strip, riveted from the inside, was usually passed through the center. The number of steel hem strips varied from four to seven or even eight. By the second half of the 1420s. Plates began to be hung on belts from the bottom of the hem, covering the base of the thigh. These plates were called "tassets".
Brigantine. In addition to cuirasses, knights of both warring sides continued to use brigantines - armor consisting of small plates attached to the inside of fabric jackets with rivets. The fabric base was made of velvet with a lining of linen, hemp or thin leather. The most common brigantine tire colors were red and blue.
Since the 30s. XV century brigantines could be reinforced with all-metal elements, namely the lower part of the composite cuirass and a plate hem.
For the convenience of using spears in equestrian combat from the end of the 14th century. the right side of the chest part of the brigantine or cuirass began to be equipped with a support hook. During a horse fight, the shaft of a spear was placed on it.
Hand protection. The warrior’s hands were protected with special steel pads: bracers, elbow pads, shoulder guards, and shoulder pads. The bracers consisted of two wings, connected by a loop and straps with buckles. Elbow pads are strongly convex plates of a hemispherical, conical or dome shape. The outer part of the elbow pads, as a rule, was equipped with a side shield shaped like a shell. The shoulder shield had the shape of a monolithic pipe. The shoulder pad protected the shoulder joint. The armpit could be covered with an additional hanging plate of one shape or another.
An interesting type of covering the shoulder joint were brigantine shoulder pads. They were made in the manner of ordinary brigantine armor with steel plates under the fabric. Such pauldrons were either fastened (laced) to the armor, like a plate pauldron, or cut out with a brigantine.
The hands were covered with plate gloves or mittens. They were made from strips of iron and plates of various shapes and fastened with hinges. The plates that protected the fingers were riveted to narrow leather strips, which, in turn, were sewn to the fingers of ordinary gloves. In the 1420s In Italy, gauntlets made of wide strips of steel with a hinge joint were invented. By the time of the siege of Orleans, this progressive innovation was just beginning to gain popularity in Western Europe and was rarely used by anyone other than the Italians.
Leg protection. The armor that covered the legs was traditionally ahead of the development of wrist armor. The leg guard was connected to the knee pad through adapter plates on hinges. The knee pad, like the elbow pad, with outside complemented by a shell-shaped side shield. The lower part of the knee pad was equipped with several transition plates, the last of which was in the fashion of the 15th century. had a considerable length, up to about a third of the shin (sometimes up to the middle of the shin). In the 1430s. or a little earlier, the upper part of the legguard began to be supplemented with one transition plate, for a better fit of the leg, as well as to enhance the protection of the base of the thigh. The back of the thigh was covered with several vertical stripes on loops and buckles. A double-leaf plate greave was worn under the lower transition plates of the knee pad. The greave accurately repeated the features of the anatomical structure of the lower leg, which met the requirements of convenience and practicality. The foot was placed in the arched cutout of the front flap of the greave. This cutout was rolled around the perimeter to increase the rigidity of the greave.
The foot was protected by a plate shoe “sabaton” or “soleret”. Like the plate gauntlet, the sabaton was made up of transverse strips on hinges. Its toe had a pointed shape in the style of an ordinary leather “pulen” shoe.
Leg and wrist armor were decorated with plates made of non-ferrous metal, often chased or engraved with various geometric patterns.
The weight of the knightly armor we are considering from the first third of the 15th century. together with quilted and chain mail elements, it weighed 20-25 kg, but heavier specimens could also be found. In most cases, it depended on the physical characteristics of its owner. The thickness of the plates was, as a rule, from 1 to 3 mm. The protective parts covering the warrior’s torso, head and joints had the greatest thickness. Surface plate armor additionally saturated with carbon and subjected to heat treatment (hardening), due to which the plates acquired increased strength properties.
Initially, greaves with sabatons were put on, then a quilted doublet was put on the warrior’s body, to which greaves connected to knee pads were laced. Then the wrist armor was put on, laced to the upper part of the doublet sleeve. Subsequently, a cuirass with a plate hem or a brigantine was put on the warrior’s body. After the shoulder pads were secured, a quilted balaclava with a helmet was placed on the warrior’s head. Plate gloves were worn immediately before battle. Dressing a knight in full armor required the help of one or two experienced squires. The process of putting on and adjusting equipment took from 10 to 30 minutes.
During the time period under review, the chivalry of both warring sides still used the shield. The shield was made from one or several boards. It had a different shape (triangular, trapezoidal, rectangular), one or more parallel edges passing through the central part of the shield, and a cutout for a spear located on the right side. The surface of the shield was covered with leather or fabric, after which it was primed and covered with tempera painting. The images on the shields were the coats of arms of the owners, allegorical drawings, “floral” ornaments, and the mottos of the owners or units. A system of belts and a padded shock-absorbing cushion were attached to the inside of the shield.
Weapon
Edged weapons consisted of swords, cutlasses (falchions), daggers, combat knives, stilettos, axes, axes, war hammers, pickers, maces, swords and spears.
Clad in perfect armor and armed with high-quality edged weapons, the English and French knights long time After the siege of Orleans, they fought on the battlefields of the Hundred Years' War with varying degrees of success.
Falchion (falchion) It was a piercing-cutting-chopping weapon, consisting of a massive curved or straight asymmetrical single-edged blade, often greatly expanding towards the tip, a cross-shaped guard, a handle and a pommel. This weapon, which had a massive blade, made it possible to penetrate chain mail protection. In the case where the blow landed on a warrior’s helmet, the enemy could be temporarily stunned. Due to the relatively short length of the blade, the use of falchions was especially effective in foot combat.
Battle ax It was a metal piece of iron (this part corresponds to the tip of a pole weapon), equipped with a wedge (a damaging structural element) and mounted on the handle. Very often, the piece of iron was equipped with a spike-shaped, hook-shaped or pronounced hammer-shaped protrusion on the side of the butt and a lance-shaped or spear-shaped feather directed upward. The two-handed ax already belonged to the pole weapon and was a very popular weapon in foot combat, as it had monstrous penetrating ability and a significant bruising effect.
War Hammer, belonging to the category of pole weapons, initially with only impact-crushing action, was a tip in the form of a metal striker of a cylindrical or coil shape, mounted on a wooden shaft. Quite often in the 15th century. such weapons were equipped with a spear-shaped or lance-shaped tip. The shaft was almost always bound with metal strips, protecting it from chopping blows and splitting.
Pernach was a weapon of shock-crushing action, consisting of a pommel and a handle. The pommel is a complex of impact striking elements in the form of plates of rectangular, triangular, trapezoidal and other shapes, assembled in an amount of 6 to 8 pieces around the circumference and fixed on a common tubular base.
Mace, just like the pernach, being a weapon of shock-crushing action, it consisted of a pommel and a handle. The pommel was made in the form of a metal ball, often equipped with edges or spikes.
Battle scourge was a weapon of shock-crushing action. It was a massive impact load (weight), connected to the handle by means of a flexible suspension (rope, leather belt or chain).
A spear It was the knight's main polearm piercing weapon. This weapon consisted of a steel tip and a wooden shaft equipped with a safety guard. The tip consisted of a faceted feather and a sleeve, through which the tip was attached to the shaft. The shaft was made of wood hard rocks(ash, elm, birch) and had an elongated spindle-shaped shape. To make it easier to control the spear during battle, the shaft was equipped with a protective shield or a special cutout. To improve balance in back the shaft was filled with lead.
Sword consisted of a straight double-edged blade with a pronounced tip, a guard in the form of a cross, a handle and a pommel. Particularly popular were swords with a blade that smoothly tapered to the tip, had a diamond-shaped cross-section, a significant blade thickness and increased rigidity. With such a weapon it was possible to deliver effective piercing blows, capable of hitting the vulnerable spots of plate armor, the application of slashing blows to which did not bring the desired result.
Dagger, in the period under review, consisted of a narrow piercing-cutting double-edged blade, a guard various shapes, handles and, in rare cases, pommels. The dagger was an almost unchanged attribute of secular and military costume. Its presence on the owner’s belt allowed him to get rid of annoying attacks on his wallet in urban conditions, and in battle it made it possible to hit the enemy in the joints and crevices of his armor.
Combat knife in its design and appearance it was not much different from a dagger and performed the same functions as the latter. The main difference was that the knife had a massive elongated triangular single-edged blade.
Stylet, being only a piercing weapon, consisted of a faceted blade with only an edge, a disc-shaped guard, the same pommel and a cylindrical or barrel-shaped handle. This weapon was not yet widely used during this period.
Ax consisted of structural elements similar to the structural elements of a battle axe. The main difference between these related groups of bladed weapons was the presence of a wedge in the ax, the width of which was greater than its length and increased in both directions relative to the vertical plane of the weapon when held with a piece of iron or the tip up. Like the battle axe, this weapon, being the weapon of wealthy warriors, could be richly decorated in the Gothic style.
It should be especially noted that as battle axes, and axes, belonging to the category of polearms, were especially popular in France throughout the 15th century.
Klevets It was a weapon of shock-crushing, piercing action and existed in several versions. One option was a weapon equipped with a handle and did not differ in significant size; the other, due to its size and long handle, can be classified as a pole weapon. A common design feature of these varieties was the presence of a striking structural element in the form of a metal wedge equipped with a tip and a hammer-like thickening of the butt.
On the left is a reconstruction of the weapons of a French knight in the 20-30s. XV century. The knight's armor shows a strong influence of Italian gunsmiths. On the right is a reconstruction of the weapons of an English knight in the 20-30s. XV century. Despite the strong Italian influence, the armor has pronounced national features. The author of both reconstructions is K. Zhukov. Artist: S. Letin
Magazine “Empire of History” No. 2 (2) for 2002
Knights of Western Europe
Klim Zhukov and Dmitry Korovkin
pp. 72-81
How does it usually appear to us?
Anyone who has ever visited the St. Petersburg Hermitage will certainly not forget the impression left by the famous Knights' Hall. And so it seems - through narrow slits in helmets decorated with magnificent plumes, stern warrior-knights from ancient times, clad in steel from head to toe, warily watch everyone who enters. The war horses are almost completely covered with heavy armor - as if they were just waiting for the trumpet signal to rush into battle.
However, what is perhaps most striking is the exquisite craftsmanship of finishing the armor: they are decorated with niello, and expensive gilding, and embossing.
And you can’t take your eyes off the knightly weapons in the glass cases - there are precious stones, silver, gilding on the hilts of the swords, and the mottos of their owners are engraved on the blued blades. The long narrow daggers amaze with the elegance of their work, the perfection and proportionality of their form - it seems that it was not a blacksmith-gunsmith who worked on them, but a skilled jeweler. The spears are decorated with flags, the halberds with lush tassels...
In a word, in all its splendor, in all its romantic beauty, distant knightly times are resurrected before us in one of the museum halls. So you won’t believe it right away: all this colorful, festive splendor belongs... to the worst period of chivalry, to its decline, extinction.
But it really is so! These armor and these weapons of amazing beauty were forged at a time when knights were increasingly losing their importance as the main military force. The first cannons were already thundering on the battlefields, capable of scattering at a distance the armored ranks of a mounted knightly attack; already trained, well-prepared infantry, with the help of special hooks, easily pulled knights from their saddles in close combat, turning the formidable fighters into a pile of metal, helplessly stretched out on the ground.
And neither the weapons masters, nor the knights themselves, accustomed to battles that broke up into separate hand-to-hand duels with the same knights, could no longer oppose the new principles of warfare.
Such armor now adorns museums
Regular armies appeared in Europe - mobile, disciplined. The knightly army was always, in fact, a militia that gathered only at the call of its lord. And by the 16th century - and most of the shiny armor and weapons date back to this time - all that remained for the knightly class was to shine at royal parades as an honorary escort, and go to tournaments in the hope of earning the favorable glance of some of the court ladies on a luxuriously decorated podium.
And yet, for more than half a thousand years, knights were the main force of medieval Europe, and not only military. Much has changed during this time - a person’s worldview, his way of life, architecture, art. And the knight of the 10th century was not at all similar to the knight of, say, the 12th century; Even their appearance was strikingly different. This is due to the development of knightly weapons - both protective armor and offensive weapons were constantly improved. In the military sphere, the eternal competition between attack and defense has never ceased, and gunsmiths have found many original solutions.
True, it is now not so easy to judge how European weapons changed before the 10th century: historians rely mainly only on miniatures of ancient manuscripts, which are not always accurately executed. But there is no doubt that European peoples used the main types of ancient Roman weapons, slightly changing them.
From the book Knights author Malov Vladimir IgorevichKnightly weapons How do we usually imagine them? Anyone who has ever visited the St. Petersburg Hermitage will certainly not forget the impression left by the famous Knights' Hall. And so it seems - through the narrow slits in the helmets, decorated with lush
From the book 100 Great Wonders of Technology author Mussky Sergey Anatolievich From the book Big Soviet Encyclopedia(AR) of the author TSBKnightly weapons in the 15th century In the 15th century, knightly weapons quickly changed, and individual parts continued to be improved. The bracers were significantly improved by the addition of round convex plaques that protected the elbow. Later to half before
From the book Great Soviet Encyclopedia (ZA) by the author TSBWEAPONS
From the book Great Soviet Encyclopedia (PA) by the author TSB From the book Great Soviet Encyclopedia (RY) by the author TSB From the book Great Soviet Encyclopedia (TE) by the author TSB From the book Basics of Guerrilla Warfare author author unknown From the book Medieval France author Polo de Beaulieu Marie-Anne From the book Knights author Malov Vladimir Igorevich From the book Encyclopedia of Modern Military Aviation 1945-2002: Part 2. Helicopters author Morozov V.P.Armament Giving any recommendations about what weapons the partisans should (or should not) arm themselves with is pointless and stupid. The partisan fights with what he was able to acquire, capture from the enemy, make on his own, steal or obtain in some other way.
From book Airborne troops. History of the Russian landing author Alekhin Roman Viktorovich From the author's bookWhat were knightly weapons like at the dawn of chivalry? Roman warriors used a double-edged sword with a width of 3 to 5 centimeters and a length of 50 to 70 centimeters as an offensive weapon. The cone-shaped edge of the sword was well sharpened; such a weapon could
From the author's bookKnightly weapons in the 15th century In the 15th century, knightly weapons quickly changed, and individual parts continued to be improved. The bracers were significantly improved by the addition of round convex plaques that protected the elbow. Later to half before
From the author's bookBOMB WEAPONS
From the author's bookARMAMENT OF THE AIRBOARDS AND SPECIAL FORCES By this time, a significant amount of engineering and special ammunition and weapon systems had been adopted into service with special reconnaissance units, with the help of which saboteurs were supposed to destroy nuclear attack weapons
Let's leave people for a moment and talk about soulless objects, about the objects that made up knightly weapons. And in this matter we will limit our interest mainly to the 12th and partly to the 13th centuries. Let's first get acquainted with offensive weapons. There were two of them: a sword and a spear.
A sword in the shape of a cross is an exclusively knightly weapon. It consists of three parts; steel blade, handle and disc-shaped addition to the latter at the very top. Particles of relics or some kind of relics were often placed in the disc-shaped appendage to the handle. In ancient times, single-edged blades were made, and then double-edged blades came into use. Various inscriptions and figures were carved on the blades. Either the name of the sword was inscribed (since there was a custom of calling them by name), or some short saying. Various figures were made: for example, we find a mention of a sword, on the blade of which three crosses were depicted on one side, and three leopards on the other. Carved inscriptions and figures were usually covered with gilding. The sword was usually placed in a sheath made of leather, or wood, upholstered with rich material, or even gold. The sheath was sometimes decorated with precious stones.
The knight prayed in front of the sword, thrusting its tip into the ground, took an oath, placing his hand on its cross-shaped handle. A wonderful monument of medieval poetry - “The Song of Roland” - unusually vividly and touchingly depicts the ardent love that a true knight had for his sword. Mortally wounded, Roland thinks about his sword and speaks to it as if it were a sentient being dear to his heart. Not wanting Durandal - that was the name of his sword - to fall to his enemies, he, with pain in his heart, decides to smash it against a rock. But the sword is strong, it bounces off the stone. Then the knight begins to mourn him:
...How beautiful you are, how holy, my damask sword,
In your golden, heavy hilt
The relics are kept...
You must not fall to the pagans;
Christ's servant must only own you!
But Roland's strength is weakening.
The count sensed that the hour of death was near:
My forehead and chest were gripped by a deadly cold...
Roland is running, and now under the canopy of a fir tree
He fell on the green grass.
Lying face down, with his hands to his chest
He pressed his sword...
The sword was generally looked upon as a sacred object. Yes, this should not be surprising if we remember that knightly swords were consecrated in the church. If a knight was buried in a church, a sword was placed on his tomb.
In addition to the sword, they also used a dagger in battle. But the dagger, like the berdysh, was not considered a real knightly weapon.
Another offensive weapon was the spear. It also consisted of three parts; staff, iron tip and badge, or flag. The shaft reached large sizes, up to eight feet, and later even up to fifteen. It was made from different types of wood, but the best was considered to be made from ash. The shaft was usually painted - mainly green or blue. It ended with a metal tip that easily stuck into the ground. The iron spear tip was most often made in the shape of a rhombus, but there were also tips in the shape of a high cone. A badge or flag was nailed under the tip with three or more silver or gilded nails. It reached a great length, going down to the knight's helmet, and ended with three long tongues. Its most common colors were green, white and blue. Sometimes a long ribbon was attached instead of a flag. This is how Roland's spear is described:
A wonderful count
Battle armor suits him;
In his hands he holds a sharp spear,
Plays to them and to the blue sky
He lifts the steel tip;
A snow-white badge is attached to the spear,
And they fall from him to his very hands
Golden ribbons...
The badge (flag) should not be confused in any way with the banner. The first was a generally accepted subject, while the second belonged only to those knights who owned large lands and brought a certain number of armed men with them to war. In the 13th century, coats of arms appeared on both flags and banners.
The knight on foot carried a spear on his right shoulder; the horseman held it vertically, and during the battle - horizontally, above the thigh, and later under the armpit. The spear was exclusively a knightly weapon; the squire could only fight with a shield and sword (but not a knight’s). Sometimes the spear, like the sword, had its own name.
Defensive weapons consisted of a shield, chain mail and a helmet. Until the second half of the 11th century, round shields were used, and then oblong shields became generally accepted, designed to cover the entire length of the knight, starting from the shoulders. Usually the shields were not flat, but curved. They were made from wooden boards, upholstered on the inside with something soft, and on the outside with leather, which was often painted; it depicted lions, eagles, crosses, flowers, which at first were just simple decorations that had nothing to do with coats of arms. Two leather handles were attached to the inside of the shield, and there was also a wide belt made of leather or richly decorated material. Outside of battle, the knight threw this sling over his shoulder. Those who fell in battle were carried from the battlefield on shields.
Chain mail was a long shirt made of iron rings that reached and even went down below the knees. From the first half of the 12th century, it came into general use, replacing the previously used leather shirt with metal plaques sewn on it. So that chain mail could better withstand enemy blows, it was made from double and triple rings. The chain mail was equipped with a hood to protect the head. Like other parts of knightly weapons, chain mail did not remain without decoration. Along its lower edge, as well as along the edges of the sleeves, some semblance of lace or sewing was made from wires passed through the holes of the rings. Lords and princes silvered and gilded their chain mail. Chain mail was also worn by squires, but for them it was lighter and, therefore, less effective in protecting against enemy attacks.
A helmet was an egg-shaped or conical helmet made of steel. The lower edge of the helmet was edged with a metal rim. From the front side of it, a metal plate descended onto the knight’s face, the French name of which is nasal (nasal) clearly indicates its purpose - to serve as a protection for the nose. Sometimes another plate came down from the back of the helmet, in which a piece of thick material was attached to protect the back of the head. The nose plate was used until the very end of the 12th century, and later a visor came into use - something like a lattice - which served as protection for the entire face. It goes without saying that it is impossible to indicate a sharp boundary when the visor replaced the nose plate. There was a time when both objects were in use. Already in Jerusalem Assisakh there is an indication of a helmet with a visor.
Knight in full armor
We have already talked above about the hood, which ended at the top of the chain mail. Usually the helmet was attached to this hood with leather loops threaded through rings: the number of these loops varied between fifteen and thirty. The helmet was laced up only for the duration of the battle. If a knight received a wound in battle, the first thing they did was unlace his helmet, which was never put directly on his head. They usually wore a feather cap underneath it, and a linen or silk cap on top of it. For noble and wealthy people, mainly leaders, the helmet was gilded, and the rim was richly decorated, and precious stones were also used. At the top, the helmet was sometimes decorated with a ball made of some kind of metal or colored glass. Sometimes some inscription was carved on the rim of the helmet. The squires wore an iron cap on their heads, which was lighter than a knight's helmet and did not have any decorations.
German armor of the 16th century for knight and horse
The field of weapons and armor is surrounded by romantic legends, monstrous myths and widespread misconceptions. Their sources are often a lack of knowledge and experience of communicating with real things and their history. Most of these ideas are absurd and based on nothing.
Perhaps one of the most notorious examples is the belief that “knights had to be mounted by crane,” which is as absurd as it is a common belief, even among historians. In other cases, certain technical details that defy obvious description have become the object of passionate and fantastically inventive attempts to explain their purpose. Among them, the first place seems to be occupied by the spear rest, protruding from the right side of the breastplate.
The following text will attempt to correct the most popular misconceptions and answer questions often asked during museum tours.
Misconceptions and questions about armor
1. Only knights wore armor
This erroneous but common belief probably stems from the romantic idea of the “knight in shining armor,” a picture that itself gives rise to further misconceptions. First, knights rarely fought alone, and armies in the Middle Ages and Renaissance did not consist entirely of mounted knights. Although the knights were the dominant force in most of these armies, they were invariably - and increasingly over time - supported (and countered) by foot soldiers such as archers, pikemen, crossbowmen and firearms soldiers. On campaign, the knight depended on a group of servants, squires and soldiers to provide armed support and look after his horses, armor and other equipment, not to mention the peasants and artisans who made a feudal society with a warrior class possible.
Armor for a knight's duel, late 16th century
Secondly, it is wrong to believe that every noble man was a knight. Knights were not born, knights were created by other knights, feudal lords or sometimes priests. And under certain conditions, people of non-noble birth could be knighted (although knights were often considered the lowest rank of nobility). Sometimes mercenaries or civilians who fought as ordinary soldiers could be knighted for demonstrating extreme bravery and courage, and later knighthood could be purchased for money.
In other words, the ability to wear armor and fight in armor was not the prerogative of knights. Infantry from mercenaries, or groups of soldiers consisting of peasants, or burghers (city dwellers) also took part in armed conflicts and accordingly protected themselves with armor of varying quality and size. Indeed, burghers (of a certain age and above a certain income or wealth) in most medieval and Renaissance cities were required - often by law and decrees - to purchase and store their own weapons and armor. Usually it was not full armor, but at least it included a helmet, body protection in the form of chain mail, cloth armor or a breastplate, and a weapon - a spear, pike, bow or crossbow.
Indian chain mail of the 17th century
In 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 most historical periods, there is evidence of women taking part in armed conflicts. There is evidence of noble ladies turning into military commanders, such as Joan of Penthièvre (1319–1384). There are rare references to women from lower society, who stood “under the gun.” There are records of women fighting in armor, but no contemporary illustrations of this topic survive. Joan of Arc (1412–1431) will perhaps be the most famous example of a female warrior, and there is evidence that she wore armor commissioned for her by King Charles VII of France. 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 come from the fact that most of the armor displayed in museums is equipment High Quality, and most of the simpler armor that belonged to ordinary people and the lowest of the nobles was hidden in storage or lost through the centuries.Indeed, with the exception of obtaining armor on the battlefield or winning a tournament, acquiring armor was a very expensive undertaking. However, since there were differences in the quality of armor, there must have been differences in their cost. Armor of low and medium quality, available to burghers, mercenaries and the lower nobility, could be bought ready-made at markets, fairs and city stores. On the other hand, there was also high-class armor, made to order in imperial or royal workshops and from famous German and Italian gunsmiths.
Armor of King Henry VIII of England, 16th century
Although we have extant examples of the cost of armor, weapons and equipment in some of the historical periods, it is very difficult to translate historical costs into modern equivalents. It is clear, however, that the cost of armor ranged from inexpensive, low-quality or obsolete, second-hand items available to citizens and mercenaries, to the cost of the full armor of an English knight, which in 1374 was estimated at £16. This was equivalent to the cost of 5-8 years of rent for a merchant's house in London, or three years the salary of 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 showed 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 allowed recognition of the person, and also made him vulnerable and at the same time demonstrated that his right hand (which usually held a sword) did not have a weapon. 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 the use more words than necessary for description). 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, as it seemed to them, many different types armor: rings, chains, ring bracelets, scale armor, small plates, etc. As a result, all ancient armor was called “mail”, distinguishing it only by its appearance, which is where the terms “ring-mail”, “chain-mail”, “banded mail”, “scale-mail”, “plate-mail” came from. Today, it is generally accepted that most of these different images were just different attempts by artists to correctly depict the surface of a type of armor that is difficult to capture in painting and sculpture. Instead of depicting individual rings, these details were stylized using dots, strokes, squiggles, circles and other things, which led to errors.
9. How long did it take to make a full suit of armor?
It is difficult to answer this question unambiguously for many reasons. First, there is no surviving evidence that can paint a complete picture for any of the periods. From around the 15th century, scattered examples survive of how armor was ordered, how long orders took, and how much various pieces of armor cost. Secondly, a complete armor could consist of parts made by various armorers with a narrow specialization. Armor parts could be sold unfinished and then customized locally for a certain amount. Finally, the matter was complicated by regional and national differences.In the case of German gunsmiths, most workshops were controlled by strict guild rules that limited the number of apprentices, thereby controlling the number of items that one master and his workshop could produce. In Italy, on the other hand, there were no such restrictions and workshops could grow, which improved the speed of creation and the quantity of products.
In any case, it is worth keeping in mind that the production of armor and weapons flourished during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. Gunsmiths, manufacturers of blades, pistols, bows, crossbows and arrows were present in any large city. As now, their market depended on supply and demand, and efficient operation was a key parameter for success. The common myth that simple chain mail took several years to make is nonsense (but it cannot be denied that chain mail was very labor-intensive to make).
The answer to this question is simple and elusive at the same time. The production time for armor depended on several factors, for example, the customer, who was entrusted with the production of the order (the number of people in production and the workshop busy with other orders), and the quality of the armor. Two famous examples will serve to illustrate this.
In 1473, Martin Rondel, possibly an Italian gunsmith working in Bruges, who called himself "armourer to my bastard of Burgundy", wrote to his English client, Sir John Paston. The armorer informed Sir John that he could fulfill the request for the production of armor as soon as the English knight informed him which parts of the costume he needed, in what form, and the time frame by which the armor should be completed (unfortunately, the armorer did not indicate possible deadlines ). In the court workshops, the production of armor for high-ranking persons appears to have taken more time. The court armorer Jörg Seusenhofer (with a small number of assistants) apparently took more than a year to make the armor for the horse and the large armor for the king. The order was made in November 1546 by King (later Emperor) Ferdinand I (1503–1564) for himself and his son, and was completed in November 1547. We do not know whether Seusenhofer and his workshop were working on other orders at this time.
10. Armor details - spear support and codpiece
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 detail 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 is a small group of helmets that have come down to us from the Celtic Bronze Age, found in Scandinavia and in the territory of modern 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 a specific person can give an approximate idea of his height, with an error of up to 2-5 cm, since the overlap of the protection of the lower abdomen (shirt and thigh guards) and hips (gaiters) can only be estimated approximately.
Armor came in all shapes and sizes, including armor for children and youth (as opposed to adults), and there was even armor for dwarfs and giants (often found in European courts as "curiosities"). In addition, other factors must be taken into account, such as the difference in average height between northern and southern Europeans, or simply the fact that people have always been unusually tall or unusually tall. short people, when compared with their 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 It wraps from left to right, because that’s 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 carry swords in in public places Only persons of noble birth were eligible. Since in most places swords were perceived as “weapons of war” (as opposed to the same daggers), peasants and burghers who did not belong to the warrior class of medieval society could not carry swords. An exception to the rule was made for travelers (citizens, traders and pilgrims) due to the dangers of traveling by land and sea. Within the walls of most medieval cities, the carrying of swords was forbidden to everyone - sometimes even nobles - at least in times of peace. Standard rules of trade, often present at churches or town halls, often also included examples of the permitted length of daggers or swords that could be carried without hindrance within city walls.
Without a doubt, it was these rules that gave rise to the idea that the sword is the exclusive symbol of the warrior and knight. But due to social changes and new fighting techniques that appeared in the 15th and 16th centuries, it became possible and acceptable for citizens and knights to carry lighter and thinner descendants of swords - swords, as a daily 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 specimens, few people held them in their hands. real sword 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.
Loading...
