Cumans' armament

well no not really. You wrote:

If it is so, then it is strange you don’t understand that this is the quality of steel that makes armour or a weapon cheap or expensive, not the decorations.

And I wrote, no. The quality of the steel can be neglected. Steel is steel, you can make decent armour with a lot of alloys. There is no breastplate (made of “super steel”) that costs twice as much as the same breastplate just made of “less good steel”. The plain gold needed for some 16th century suits of armour costs more than the whole suit. Decorations make armour expensive.

Oh, no. This is what I cannot agree with. Ever. I’ve seen tons of examples. Say, two swords of almost the same size and weight, no gold at all, but one for $100 and the other for $1000. And it is the quality of the blade that was different between them. The first one I could perfectly polish myself, but it would never add more than $20 to the price. There are lots of variables that make difference. Including the very origin of the ore. Then the production process. A pattern-welded blade is not just about a fancy look.

I’M NOT TALKING ABOUT MODERN TIMES.
I’m talking about armour, 600 years ago. The armourers had their suppliers and used the same stuff, day in, day out. This is what can be neglected. The only thing that made a difference is the construction and the decoration (polishing, gilding, rivets, filing …)
And back then no matter where you went. The armourer just took what he had available. Steel. As always, if the steel had 0,6% of carbon or 0,8% of carbon does not make a difference as the tempering will result in a very similar final hardness.

I’m not, too.

Exactly. And what they had available was not equal in terms of quality. “Steel is steel” when you can pick up a rusty leaf-spring from a truck and forge a perfect sword of it provided you have the necessary equipment and skills. Because this kind of steel is ubiquitous nowadays.

But let’s put this point aside. The construction of the harness can also make difference. I hope you’ll agree about it. And I think you understand that a smith, however good he is and whatever good steel he can get, cannot possibly provide everyone with equally well-designed armour. A good harness is made individually, fitted to the figure. It is not what you can make in thousands pieces everyday without a modern-day production line. And it is unlikely that a commoner or an ordinary soldier could afford this kind of armour.

So you are implying that nobleman and common soldiers had same armour just without decoration?
Full plate armour would be expensive even without decoration. Sallet is one example which would be used both by common soldiers and nobility, but that doesn’t mean, that it was the case with all types of armour. For example common foot soldier with visored bascinet would look weird.

If I was nobleman, then to the battlefield, I would take the usual armor with some little decorations(To show my status(But who cares at the battle?)).

It costs not, that much(For noble) and repairing as well.

Beautiful armor is more logical to use at the holidays or tournaments.

I wonder how much it would take to clean and restore such armor? :thinking:

1 Like

Say, two swords of almost the same size and weight, no gold at all, but one for $100 and the other for $1000.

yes you are.

Exactly. And what they had available was not equal in terms of quality.

You are missing the point I already wrote my answer, here again, sorry for the double post: “Steel. As always, if the steel had 0,6% of carbon or 0,8% of carbon does not make a difference as the tempering will result in a very similar final hardness.”

The construction of the harness can also make difference.

I agree.

And I think you understand that a smith, however good he is and whatever good steel he can get, cannot possibly provide everyone with equally well-designed armour.

The armourer can. The only question is whether the customer can afford it.

A good harness is made individually, fitted to the figure.

I agree again.

It is not what you can make in thousands pieces everyday without a modern-day production line.

I disagree.

““Within the group of the seven following workers, one makes arm defenses for the foot soldiers. Each of the other six workers finishes 12 breastplates – until ready for filing and hardening – within one week of his regular service to his Imperial Highness. For each further deep-drawn breastplate he finishes for hardening after his regular working-time, he is paid 5 Kreuzer.”
[Some more informations]
“This text clearly says that in average the 6 workers after the regular working-time together finished 18 additional breastplates a week – hence 3 breastplates were made by one man. Together with the 12 breastplates made in his regular working time, one man made 15 and therefore all the workers together made a total of 90 breastplates a week.”

The mentioned breastplates were made using a die. Serial production of armour took place and probably made up a big part of the armour available.
If you want to know more, read this: Iron Documents

And it is unlikely that a commoner or an ordinary soldier could afford this kind of armour.

What kind of armour? Armour made of good steel? Of course he could afford it.

@Zub I agree with you, a bascinet with visor and no other armour at all would look weird. My point initially was that this eastern nasal helmet with the decorations could be used for an average soldier as well. If you remove all the decorations. I see absolutely no reason why this shouldn’t be possible. Protecting the head comes first. Even if you don’t have other armour, you still wear a helmet when possible.
A visored sallet on a soldier with no breastplate would look weird as well. Putting the fact aside that every soldier in the late 15th had at least some torso protection, most of the time a simple breastplate.

That 's a field harness as well. Just belonged to the Emperor. He fought in it directly at the front lines.

In case someone is wondering what the mass produced armour I mentioned earlier looked like. That 's an extant piece.

That stuff is hardened, comfortable and offers quite decent protection. It of course could be better. But it 's very good for a foot soldier, as well as a nobleman who has to equip a whole army.

1 Like

Thank you, I will study this with a great interest.

1 Like

Looks beautiful! Yeah, i guess, Emperor won’t fight in the battles with his army, so his armour is just for status. :thinking: But some nobleman’s… I guess, they will fight in some battles and use not that much cheaper armor.

No. He DID fight, himself! That 's what’s so wicked about it.
Richard III also lead his charge at Bosworth field himself. He died, but still he lead the attack himself. (And he was King of England)

I didn’t know, that this’s Richard’s III armor. Respect him for what he was not afraid of battle.

No, that 's the armour of Maximilian I., he was Emperor of the HRE. Richard III died in 1485 at Bosworth field, his armour did not survive. It is said that it was richly decorated. But I know no exact details. If you want to learn more about Richard III and see some good armour in general take a look at this documentary on youtube

Yes, but you said previously this was achieved using a die. So these thousands of breastplates were not individually fitted. But I agree that a soldier could afford such a breastplate. Because they were affordable. And it had nothing to do with the quality of steel. But, c’mon, haven’t you seen those crappy Chinese-made “stainless steel” knives that actually get stained?

You confused me. :disappointed:

The emperor’s one is not that wealthy decorated actually. And what you’re trying to put, there is absolutely no difference, right? Then why that “field emperor’s set of armor” was not produced in series for every soldier?

Can we not derail the purpose of this thread please? Make a separate thread if you want to discuss plate armor manufactoring.

Maximilians armour (the so called A60) is decorated as hell. That is a REALLY expensive suit of armour. He had another one (the A62), quite similar with even more decorations.

Yeah Lucem is right, lets stop this here. If anyone has questions write me a pm. Cheers :slight_smile:

And following your reasoning, if one removed all the decorations then it could be used by an average soldier. Then why it was not the case?

Weapons.
Blunt weapons.


There are two types of blunt weapons: pernach and Sauron’s mace, which should be doomed at the flames of Orodruin.
While pernach is fine. There could be several types of pernaches, with different amount of “feathers”, where the most wide-spread is the version with six “feathers”, called “shestopyor”. (Literally - six-feathered)


Pernaches also differed with presence of this jut, used to stick opponents at face:


https://library.hungaricana.hu/en/view/MEGY_BEKE_GYULAIKAT_02/?query=SZO%3D(szablya%20)&pg=106&layout=s - Several findings of maces in Hungary.

1 Like