Matthew Amt wrote: |
.
We're talking Viking, Norman, and Anglo Saxon ages here, right? What about small one handed axes or maces? If I hit you with a small axe, and it breaks your mail, your not going to have a nice day. If you have an aketon, then the axe will probably not cut/smash thought that as well, and the burn trauma impact will be sofend. Similar thing with maces. Lastly- arrows. A arrowhead may break mail, or go thought without breaking the rings if it is thin enough. A Gamberson would be another layer of protection. [/quo I dunno, you seem to think that a one-handed weapon *breaking* through mail is some sort of common thing. From the tests and historical accounts I've seen, I'm not sure that's the case. It *is* true that there are Viking-era battle accounts that result in mailshirts being badly damaged, but the wearer is still alive. No broken bones mentioned. So mail can be penetrated without a fatal injury. |
True. I know it was uncommon and often not fatal, but i would still say it was a real enough threat. And I did not mean one handed weapons neccisarily, two handed spears, lances, etc. Etc. It was common enough for mail to be penetrated by them, wasn't it? Or am I getting confused?
Also- I hope I didn't come across agressivly in that comment!
Quote: |
To keep the armor off the body. SHIELDS were invented to keep all those thrown items off you, and *they* were pretty good at their job. |
I would still like a extra layer of protection though. But what your saying is true, but they weren't PERFECT at their job (as you acclmoledged) or archers would have been obsolete.
Quote: |
Weren't wearing mail, were they? ;) I think we all agree that padding is useful and beneficial. All we're saying is that at certain times it looks like many warriors with mail didn't feel the need for a lot of padding under it. |
That's true, but there must have been some use for use for aketon so under mail, as they were the most used armour for years (but, of course, not in the time period concerned with here)
Quote: |
Note that the rather thorough description of the thoracomachus does *not* mention defense against blunt trauma! Yet it is a Late Roman source, long after the famous iron plate lorica segmentata has gone out of use. Mail was the usual armor. Also note that there are no other descriptions of padding used by Romans, yet the use of mail goes back to 300 BC. There are several artistic depictions which *might* be interpreted as Romans wearing some kind of quilted garments, but they are never wearing mail over them.
It also looks to me like padding became more common when 2-handed weapons became more common, such as pikes and polearms. Of course, since it was the grunts on foot using these, and they were the ones wearing heavy gambesons, maybe they were able to use 2-handed weapons *because* they had padding? Matthew |
All true, all true. Good points mentioned, and I can't argue about your points about the Romans at all. (But many one handed spearmen etc. Did use shields with their chainmail and aketon so)