I look forward to the video on shield types in the hopefully not too distant future.

@markfergerson2145

10 ай бұрын

Yes please. Why is a heater shield called that, because it’s large and heavy, and thus heats the user waving it around? I know, probably not, but I am curious.

@GadoukenRising

10 ай бұрын

@@markfergerson2145 I feel like Matt has covered that topic in a previous video somewhere over the years, but I believe it's shaped like a typical clothes iron from the period where it was so named. I guess clothes irons were called heaters back then.

@brenthunter7965

10 ай бұрын

​@@GadoukenRisingyou're probably right. I think at the time the most common usage of the word iron (other than referring to the material) or irons was the restraints a prisoner would wear. Eg wrist irons, leg irons, etc.

@frankharr9466

10 ай бұрын

Yes!

I feel I’ve gone full circle with this. As a kid I used to draw full plated knights with shields then at some point I got told that wasn’t accurate. Now I’ve seen this video.

@Khornedevotee

10 ай бұрын

You were ahead of those saying it wasn't accurate. ;)

One possible reason for a resurgence in the use of bosses is, as Tod has shown, that often arrows can go straight through a shield and the arm behind it.

We see heather-like shields being used by "Heavy swordsmen" in the 1570's (in Adam van Breen's prints of the Dutch army at the time), interestingly: Those swordsmen are wearing half-armour (essentually protected from the upper thighs up), but do not use armour on their shield-arm Adam van Breen also shows 'light' pikemen (only wearing a helmet and cuirass) using Rotellas in close melee when using their side arms.

@Intranetusa

10 ай бұрын

Interestingly, this video has similarities with one of Scholagladitoria/Matt's earlier videos about the armors of ancient China and its relation to two handed weapons. In his discussion of very long two handed swords of the ancient Han and Chu kingdoms (around the time of the Roman Republic), Matt theorized that elite units wearing heavy lamellar and laminar armor (including metal and rhino hide armor) allowed them to not use a shield and use two handed weapons like very long swords. Of course, small and large shields still continued to be used by other less armored units and by units with different roles.

@b.h.abbott-motley2427

10 ай бұрын

Adam van Breen wasn't alive in the 1570s. The manual in question dates to 1618.

@mnk9073

10 ай бұрын

Weren't those "heavy swordsmen" with their large shields and short swords a slightly excentric attempt to recreate a roman legionaire by some dutch patrician or duke obsessed with all things roman?

@JariB.

10 ай бұрын

@@mnk9073 Not quite, Maurits of Nassau was the first military leader to re-introduce a lot of Roman concepts back into European militaries, such as drilling troops when they're not actively on the march (so when besieging, or when encamped somewhere for a longer period). But he also re-structured the common unit sizes, breaking a (Spanish) Tercio up into various units of musketeers and Pikemen, and, remarkably; Two Rodeleiros (Or; Targeteers in English.) The 'Sword and buckler men', these were meant to be bodyguards to the primary officers of a battalion. There would be 2 in a battalion of pikemen. For musketeers I am not entirely sure, I'd have to check. (I should add: Usually, most people in the English-Speaking world will name Gustavus Adolphus as the 'Father of modern warfare', while in reality, it was he who was following Maurits' developments closely, and expanded on what Maurits started and put into practice first. Maurits started implementing these developments in the 1590's, while Gustavus wouldn't be able to start doing so until the mid to late 1610's, and into the 20's. Hence, the term might be slightly misplaced as it is.)

@mnk9073

10 ай бұрын

@@JariB. Thank you, that's the man I meant. He's a fascinating character.

Judging by Todds arrows versus shields, I'd say the metal boss was to prevent an arrow going through your forearm... probably the same with boss gripped, as they can be held further away from the body to protect it from pointy things going through the shield and into you....

@koticneutralftw7016

10 ай бұрын

Beat me to it. 😆

@Lurklen

10 ай бұрын

Yeah, that has been something of a revelation to me. I always knew that arrows could go through shields, but the level of *penetration* is, frankly startling. Like, it will save you, but don't plan on using that left arm any time soon, and for the love of god keep it out from your face. I would guess, though I have no data to support this, that the deflection off the boss would be enough to sap a lot of the killing power of the arrow.

I knew this, mostly because I find the hodepodge of different arms combinations of the sixteenth century fascinating. In Eastern Europe you've got pavisiers protecting handgunners and reinforcing the wagon laagers, in Spain you've got rodeleros in munition plate with round shields, in the Islamic world you've got the dhal and other similar shields still being carried alongside plated mail, in Kanem-Bornu traditional Kanembu shieldmen are deployed in front of newly imported guns... it's a weird and wonderful period and I love it.

Interestingly, this video has similarities with one of Scholagladitoria/Matt's earlier videos about the armors of ancient China and its relation to two handed weapons. In his discussion of very long two handed swords of the ancient Han and Chu kingdoms (around the time of the Roman Republic), Matt theorized that elite units wearing heavy lamellar and laminar armor (including metal and rhino hide armor) allowed them to not use a shield and use two handed weapons like very long swords. Of course, small and large shields still continued to be used by other less armored units and by units with different roles.

Late Middle/Early Modern shields, please! It needs more _coverage_

I think one thing with bossed shields is that buckler thing for sure, you can get your shield hacked during prolonged fight and before you get a new one, you want that metal shield at least there.

I would very much like to see your take on the Spanish tercio sword and rotella soldiers, specifically their tactics and effectiveness in an era where the shield was seemingly abandoned by everyone else in Europe on the battlefield

@JainaSoloB312

10 ай бұрын

Seconded!

Rocking the Soundgarden shirt hell yeah Matt

@Scholagladiatoria From my experience fighting, I'd wager a major reason to have bosses would be to control enemy weapons better, especially spears. I've mainly done viking reenactment combat, and a commonly taught/used method when charging a spear, is to push the spear to the side with the shield, and get it under the boss, (even better if assisted by weapon), which can buy you a few milliseconds more before the spear user can "recover". By contrast, with a smooth shield, the spear can much more easily slide along the surface of the shield, to get around it. Nothing conclusive of course, but I think it quite simply gives you more potential control over whatever you're warding off with the shield.

Love the hand pavise with beautiful paintings !

That's news to me, didn't expect shields and evolved plate to still have featured together. Intersting, cheers

i knew the 'hand pavise' was a thing but never heard of the bossed heater shield before! i'd pick that with a center grip :)

interesting, also i love the design of some of these, so fancy

With some of the damage arrow fragments and deflections can cause even against plate armor, I'd probably carry some sort of shield too, unless I knew I'd only be fighting other fully armored opponents.

I'm fascinated by the illumination showing someone in full plate using a kite-shaped shield similar to the 11thc Norman.kite shield. I was not aware that this shape was used this late.

Honestly, I was largely ignorant of the idea that shields went out of fashion prior to the era of gunpowder prevalence, maybe it's because my interest is more to do with equipment prior to the 14th century. Still an interesting video, I was surprised to learn that those "jousting" shields were also used on foot and that they started using oddly shaped shields.

I knew that shields were still used in some horse-borne lance applications. And I knew that archets and lightly armed troops had them. Frankly, I wasn't sure if plate-armored knights still used them. Thanks for the video.

I would love to see an in depth video on 14th and 15th century shields

In german town Dresden there is the famous ,Zwinger' museum. It contains a large paintings collection, and former Royal Saxon Arms Collection. Among the items are shields used in Electorate Saxony up to 1709. They look like fantasy opera pieces, but had been used as tournament shields together with cutting swords. In HRE era Saxony was a rather rich german state, so in Era of pompeous french ,Sunking' Louis XIV Saxony was under elector August ,the strong' Germany ' s most pompeous court. Here , tournaments' continued , in a changed way, when this stopped in the other european countries for being outdated. But in 1709 the noted August also to stop, because the fencing style became to different from then modern transistional rapiers/smallswords fencing.

I suspect that some of the strapped shields with a boss were converted from boss grip shields OR maybe they were capable of doing both, depending on the situation at hand. The idea that shields would ever go out of style when arrows and bolts are still flying around and anti armour weapons are becoming more popular. It's just another line of defense which is very useful.

@Zraknul

10 ай бұрын

If you're going to be fighting other heavily armored infantry, you kind of need to wield a weapon effective against them and what they're using. What weapon are you bringing to the party?

@Leo.23232

10 ай бұрын

@@Zraknul dagger

@yurizanelli6538

10 ай бұрын

Poleaxe

I'd love to see a Shields as weapons dedicated video.

Damn. I usually am pretty good on my knowledge of the middle ages, but I was indeed under the impression that someone in full plate would never have any real cause to use a shield. Great video!

@atom8248

10 ай бұрын

You might be able to block strikes from a poleaxe with one, trying that without the shield would probably break your arm even with armor. Also useful against arrows I think, since they can still hit gaps or through your visor.

@BayWa4eva

10 ай бұрын

​@@atom8248blocking a poleaxe with a shield will most definitely break your arm. did you mean deflect?

@atom8248

10 ай бұрын

@@BayWa4eva You could do that too, but I don't actually think it would break your arm, the force would be spread out over a larger surface.

@BayWa4eva

10 ай бұрын

@@atom8248 no it wouldn't. force needs an anchor to dissipate or create movement. if your shield lies on the ground the anchor is as big as the shield and the force dissipates over the whole shield. if your shield is only held by your arm, your bone is the anchor and all the force that doesn't dissipate in movement goes right there. a shield is rather stiff, it does wobble but not a lot, it only takes away a rather small portion of the strike in a direct block. i bet you know of newton pendulum. there are several metal balls in between and yet the entire force of the side impact goes into the last ball. metal is mor rigid than wood but the principle stands: if you block a poleaxe head-on with a shield i am sure you break your arm. if you deflect the strike you don't.

Great video! I've wondered about this for a long time. Thanks for sharing it with us.

Hey Matt! It would be great a video about rodelas! (Or rodellas). They are the last stage of the round shields, which I believe are the kind of shields that have been in continuous use for the longest time; could be?

@ObsydianShade

10 ай бұрын

I own a steel one. I have it and a gladius close at hand in the unlikely scenario anything goes bump in the night. It's an effective, if not exactly historic combination.

@CBZ-vk9bz

10 ай бұрын

Another shield used by the spanish and for a way longer period of time than the rodela was the adarga. Since the islamic invasion of Hispania until the early 19th century(by the Dragones de Cuera). Around a Millenium!

Yes, I did know this: in addition to the shield's use in jousting being depicted universally, I've seen at least one portrait from the ages you illustrate here, in which fully armored men still carried bucklers at their belts, alongside their swords (presumably, they were just used to fighting that way).

yes I would love another video on shield types!

Yes, I was surprised to learn fully armored men carried shields.

Thank you for the video ⚔️

@3:09 "Various new funky types of shapes... but I won't go into depth about this." Ok, but please do go into depth about this.

I would absolutely *LOVE* a video on 15th and 16th century shields 🛡 😀

love the shirts you've been rocking lately

In that picture at 2:16, that looks quite like a dueling shield

@brothersliutgeryitzchakjea7889

10 ай бұрын

It is. That image actually looks like one of my screenshots that has gone around on Pinterest. They are actually not called dueling shields in the sources, and that should be considered when we find them else where. Usually in a siege context for “long shields”

@Glimmlampe1982

10 ай бұрын

@@brothersliutgeryitzchakjea7889 that's quite interesting. I did only know them out of the fencing books. If they were also used on regular battlefields, that might contradict the notion of them being nicely items, only used for duels so no one has a big advantage. Do you know where the picture is from and what is depicted there?

@brothersliutgeryitzchakjea7889

10 ай бұрын

@Glimmlampe1982 Apparently my other comment didn’t come though at first. But the source for the image is: 1484-85 Spiezer Chronicle p53, by Diebold Schilling And a correction I believe this screen shot is the one taken by Steeve as it isn’t so focused on the shield.

@brothersliutgeryitzchakjea7889

10 ай бұрын

Another one can also be seen carried in :Diebold Schilling, Amtliche Berner Chronik, Bd. 3 Bern · 1478-1483 Mss.h.h.I.3 Folio 70

In your earlier video on when shield bosses were being phased out I believe you mentioned that some shields had both boss grips and arm straps; did that also return?

Shields and swords have a tradition stretching to age of Alexander the Great and beyond, so it's perfectly feasible people sort of just practiced that way because that's a tried and tested form of combat and the fighting style was fairly well understood. Now you might later on end up becoming sufficiently well off to acquire a plate armor or be granted one for good service, or simply because a foreign power was arming your dudes. Not everyone with plate started out wealthy enough to take it for granted. You would still stick to the way you learned to fight and if you learned to fight with sword and shield while having only mail or gambeson, well, you wouldn't be in a hurry to ditch those in favor of a weapon you didn't have training on.

Another great video!

Any recommendations for books of art from this era? I'm painting some wars of the roses era Perry Miniatures and could use a good reference, some of the images you've put in this are excellent. Thank you.

Hey, Matt, I know you've kinda walked away a bit from Asian weapons, but a recent tiktok has made an appearance that I would love to see your review on wushu's long tou da zha dao or kirin knife.

If you advance against archers and such, you can't have enough armour and you can always drop it in close or that nasty boss might get stuck in the first one you hit. Also, for the later Tourney Shows, hitting each others shields is much safer and you don't reduce your armour to a rubbish bin.

Not a surprise for me, but that is only because my area of interest is French 1410-1480s roughly. Especially amongst the mounted ethnic units (of which I have almost finish my kit for this) & also the lower class soldiers they are very present. Usually the boss on the French ones is a piece of wood with reinforcing strips of latten metal or iron.

There are plenty of situations (e.g. an assault on a fortification) where even in full plate armour I would be most happy to carry a small pavise or heater shield with a boss/hand grip that I could use until I achieved my primary objective then easily discard...

Question Sir, Pertaining to the corrugated shield you presented The one meant for jousting, you said Assuming one was to carry it on their left forearm What was the purpose of the cutaway high right of the shield? Thank you for your time, sir

What is the practical purpose of the corrogated surface of shields such as the one you showed? I am thinking it would have a neutral or negative effect defending from impacts but positive in dueling (such as tournaments) in that it could redirect or 'trap' an opponent's sword or perhaps a body part into one of the valleys in very close combat scenarios, as opposed to the glancing effect a flat or convex shield would have. Im really only drawing from imagination tho

I was unaware of the controversy. So thank you. That that sun of York going to make someone's winter of discontent a glorious summer?

I have found I can grip my strapped heater shield in a "centre boss" style grip if I grip the hand strap with my fingers and thumb thru the forearm strap. It would then make sense to cover the hand with a boss, especiallyas it is really awkward with mailed mittens. Never tried it with plate gauntlets.

I feel like the balance patch that introduced increased energy costs to dodge roll while wearing a shield also contributed to a decrease in shield mains.

Could you talk more about shields with notches to support pole arms? It's one of the first things I thought of when I started sparring with spears, and it's really confused me why they weren't always used since antiquity. Was it a materials science issue, that older shield making wouldn't work with it? Was it tried but unwieldy? I modified a Cold Steel buckler myself, and it's a compromise for sure, but it's still the way I'd go into battle if it were an option. I've had trouble finding anything that talks about this, other than the fact that jousters did sometimes use them. Thanks, and cheers!

Given the use of shields at some points for defense against arrows, I would assume that the boss would be very good at keeping that from puncturing the arm if the arm is only in mail. It might also be very useful in deflection of other stabby stuff again away from the arm which is right behind the shield itself... Or am I missing something?

Very interesting !

Would a boss help protect a forearm that is strapped to the inside of the heater shield too? That would explain the resurgence, to a degree, as the boss would serve to deflect blows and (possibly) protect the arm from penetrating strikes from side arms, heavy arms, and missiles.

I would imagine a shield would be especially useful for heavy cavalry (while mounted), regardless of the type of armor worn. After all, it would be difficult to use a two-handed weapon from horseback, and no one want to lance to the breastplate.

Aaaaaand why did they used Shields? I tought this question would also bei asked. Keep Up the good Work!

boss shields i reckon could be effective against cavalry too?

In true Matt Easton fashion, context is always needed when blanket statements are made.

And all of the things you mentioned can be done with a buckler (or any shield with a central grip).

i hope that you did not get too wet in the Thunderstorm on the Saturday evening at Tewkesbury...I see that you also have a video of plate vs brigantine in extreme weather...some of the lightening came quite close...maybe pointy Gothic harness is worse for attracting lightening strikes???

That turge shield is so beautiful.

To answer the question, if only from your prior videos I knew shields hadn't entirely disappeared for men-at-arms. Though in my mind, I would assume that a man-at-arm's choice of weapon would dictate it, likely guided by personal preference too. If they are expecting to be fighting other man-at-arms and want a two-hander for that, or just prefer to fight with two-handers, that more or less precludes a shield even if they still have a sword as a sidearm. OTOH, if they do not want to use a two-hander for whatever reason such as having a preference for getting up close and personal with a mace, then a shield would be handy. Though I would reckon it would be a smaller shield used more as a deflecting tool than one you would take cover behind, especially as guns steadily made shields less effective for the weight and size, so the idea that they might have actually gone D&D "full plate AND tower shield tank" like Valerie in Kingmaker is actually a bit surprising... though would make sense if the individual knight/MAA was really worried about long/crossbows. Though TBH with any kind of statements of armaments prior to true standard issue equipment, it's probably a good idea to always qualify it as talking in general trends. IE, shields generally fell out of favor with men-at-arms as plate armor came, but they did not wholly disappear (especially for cavalry who can't really use a two-handed weapon as a two-hander anyways). After all, most of these men-at-arms would have bought their gear themselves or bought their own supplements to a kit issued to them.

@b.h.abbott-motley2427

10 ай бұрын

Men-at-arms did sometimes used weapons in both hands from the saddle. Examples include plays with the heavy lance from Paulus Hector Mair & Pietro Monte's warhammer.

Nice T-Shirt!

centre boss griped shields have a greater reach and more mobility when compared to strapped 1s

No, crossbowmen still needed pavises, and evidence suggests that even bucklers were still worn by those in full armor. But I'm sure Matt's going to add much more context than that!😁

I did know that sometimes shields did get used with plate. Pretty sure you told me that, Matt. 😄Probably in that earlier video that I'll look up after. Edit: Found it, and yes you did say it! I'd link it, but the guardian algorithm wouldn't like it.

Wow, that guy at 3:33 was very cleary totally bonkers. Look at that grin and those eyes! I would have run away for sure just seeing him!

what were some of the reasons why you'd take one or leave one behind?

That large boss looks like it would slow a blow to the shield. If the bearer of the shield can exploit a slowed or stopped slash or cut or blow and “trap (?)” it that’s a large advantage for the next exploit

Before watching, I’m guessing it’s due to arrows and the ability to stop high-leverage attacks short before they can gain enough momentum to hurt through armor

Didn't know you listened to soundgarden. Cool

My thoughts on shield bosses on strapped shields: There is no reason to put a boss onto a shield if you're not going to put a center grip in the boss. You mention 'reinforcement' as a reason to place a metal boss, but it would be much simpler and more effective to simply affix metal bands to the front of the shield for this purpose (some middle-eastern shields do this, and I doubt they're alone). Rather, think of it like viking shields. Center-grip bossed shields with straps for carrying. The grip in the center makes for excellent control (like a big buckler) while the straps are for ease of carrying (this is very important for cavalrymen who might need both hands to steer the horse). I guarantee that these strapped heaters with bosses are constructed that way to allow for flexibility in how they're held.

I believe there was a small wooden shield used in jousting that had a handle protruding from the edge like a bat

Its wild to see bosses that look kinda like migration era shield bosses in the 15th century, evolution of arms and and armour is crazy sometimes, in the 11th century they said hmm maybe we should get rid of bosses then a couple hundred years later they said hmm maybe we should bring them back lol

okay, but why use them with plate? Something against archers? You mentioned the disadvantages, but what are the pros? Tighter spaces perhaps? Fighting against not so armoured opponents?

In Italy there was also sort of a revival of oval shields for infantry, but they tended to be strapped rather than using horizontal boss grips. Kind of a downgrade from the original in my opinion.

What about the kite shield?

I feel like the boss gave a knight enough space to work in his blade, weather a sword or dagger, instead of just being pressed face to face up against a flat surface, this way the warrior could teeter it around and exploit that few inches of space between the two shields.🤷‍♂️

@c-w-h

10 ай бұрын

The boss can be used to place over the shield edge. Go ahead and pull down and away. Creating a timed opening for stabbing. It can be done on the other edges too. But you expose yourself when doing so.

@Zraknul

10 ай бұрын

Boss also gives you a focal point for striking with the shield that isn't the edge.

5:31 The positioning of this figure looks like an anime character. It is quite lovely, sinuous perhaps.

were bucklers repurposed as helmets or cooking utensils?

some bosses also become spikes as well

Was not surprised at all

Please talk about thif fantasy wepon A mace morning star that releses a chain and it becomes a flail

What were they used for. If you had plate armor?

I already knew about this but it is certainly a good point in order to dissipate all the myths around the exclusiveness of the two-handed or bastard sword (incorrectly but always called longsword) in the age of armour. There is a nice shield of king Mathias Corvinus in the Musée de l'Armée of Paris - I have no idea how this end of the 15th century Hungarian king's shield got to Paris, perhaps Napoleon's pillaging or did the Turcs sell it when they desecrated the Hungarian kings' burials at Fehervár and reportedly frew their bones to their dogs?

Okay, so when did the last ones finally disappear?

That T-shirt must be about 25 years old.

I don't actually recall seeing you with that shield in the battle Matt... what happened to it? - Random Yorkist Billman

The Napoleon trailer has been out 8 hours Matt chop chop 👏

4:35 you can also throw it and proceed to grapple getting best of both worlds.

It is not a surprise but i want to know more aboute shields from the 15th

Through my blurry, morning eyes, I misread your shirt as saying "Sword Garden" 😅

Why would you want a corrugated shield for jousting? Isn't the point to have the opponent's lance glance off easily? Wouldn't it catch in those folds?

I'd rather argue its the advent of cannons and firearms that made the need for shields obsolete and why later on they opted to just wear breastplates. Its fascinating how you have 13-15th century full-armour but already in 16th century you see beginning of only breastplates and mass musketry. I find the Tercio formation very fascinating and it very soon was emulated all over Europe battlefields. Muskets (& cannons ofc) won battles, won wars, and were so much easier and faster to train than everything else before.

@b.h.abbott-motley2427

10 ай бұрын

Contrary to what you write as well as to claims Matt Easton has made previously, Martín de Eguiluz's late-16th-century manual recommends using a good steel shield ("rodela azerada") & not wearing a breastplate for certain operations. De Eguiluz argued that such a shield provided sufficient protection against the arquebus while a musket (the heavy musket of the time) would blow through both shield & breastplate. At least some Spanish officers used bullet-resistant steel shields throughout the 16th century & probably into the 17th.

@Red-jl7jj

10 ай бұрын

@@b.h.abbott-motley2427 Sir Roger Williams actually recommends the opposite, a good corslet of proof (against the caliver, at 200-250 yards) and a light target

@b.h.abbott-motley2427

10 ай бұрын

@@Red-jl7jj Yes. Williams mentioned targets of proof carried by armored soldiers according to Spanish practice, but noted how heavy they were. Both texts indicate that some Spanish soldiers wore armor & carried targets of proof. (De Eguiluz's recommendation to ditch the breastplate for certain operations suggests that people often used both breastplate & shield.)

@Red-jl7jj

10 ай бұрын

@@b.h.abbott-motley2427 It was not a specifically a Spanish practice, and Williams makes no note of such. Most Western European armies carried them to some degree.

@b.h.abbott-motley2427

10 ай бұрын

@@Red-jl7jj "Euery hundred hath forty armed men, of which there must be 30. pikes, the tenne others, are halberds & targets of the proof." That's in the first part of the book, which describes Spanish practice ("The diuisions of their foote bands"). It may not have been a specifically Spanish practice, but Williams did explicitly write that Spanish forces of the late 16th century had a small number of armored soldiers equipped with targets of proof. Williams focused on Spanish military practice because he thought it was the best around. The Spanish military was profoundly influential across Western Europe at that time.

you also see dragons in these paintings, so not sure I'd rely on them for acuracy.

Doing a straight up Jojo pose at 2:34 😂

How important was the shield to a knight in the 16th century?

@Red-jl7jj

10 ай бұрын

Still important for sieges.

@Brokenlance

10 ай бұрын

@@Red-jl7jjand even still in general combat. Just because you have armor, doesn’t mean you want to get hit. Shields were used all the way up through the 17th century on battlefields and even with certain cultures such as the Scots in the 18th century.

@Red-jl7jj

10 ай бұрын

@@Brokenlance though I agree, men at arms in the 16th century did not favor the target whilst mounted (ie, the target was not important to them), and the few times they would dismount in the 16th century would be during sieges, or to act as pikemen.

If you were a soldier of the 16th century what weapons would you choose ?

Is that Madonna's shield? Circa 1990 AD?

cool topic! do you know much about painted armor? have seen a few helmets in museums but was this common? or was shiny/patina the more practical style?

@Red-jl7jj

10 ай бұрын

Many of the painted helmets were likely repurposed. The most of the famous painted "black" sallets have holes for a textile covering, for example.

Matt is the Shield Boss

All knights were men at arms, all men at arms were not knights... From the French percpective it seems that the throat to knee shield that may have been known as a pavis was coverd in metal "Plaque fine" . It would be a foolhardy soldier that would go against archers without a shield in spite of his armour being almost arrow proof. Their is evidence that the knights varlets or squires would carry the shield up until combat started where it was either used in the melee or discarded as having served it's purpose. For example, at the Battle of Poitiers (1356), the French men-at-arms formed a shield wall with which Geoffrey le Baker recounts "protecting their bodies with joined shields, [and] turned their faces away from the missiles. So the archers emptied their quivers in vain". This is accurate in that the French archers did use quivers and tells us that the shields were effective unlike some of the shonky shields on Utube vids.