Allen,

Forgot to ask. Is that a forge weld I see at the bottom of one of the pics? If so , what is it holding together?

WR, nope it's a raised ridge seen from the inside of the piece. Maximillian as you know is extensively ridged so the inside is covered in these. We stated slot riveting everything after we got this in and the increased range of motion is really good. It allows pieces to accomodate the little motions much better.

At least two major medieval battle sites have been excavated and some diagnosis of actual wounds made; Hastings and Wisby. Both of the mass graves indicate that the majority of participants wore coat of plates type armor, and that most wounds were to head (Hastings) and lower leg (true to a greater extent at Wisby.) This contrasts with the idea that archers penetrated the mail, and at least some authors have suggested that what the archer's really took down was the horses. Wounds to extremeties (lower arm, lower leg, and head) makes sense to anyone who has sparring practice. This is generally where I succeed in hitting opponents or lose when I get hit.

Jared Smith

reference http://www.shef.ac.uk/assem/issue6/Roses_web.html

Earlier in this thread it was mentiond that the backs of the knees and inside of the elbows were poorly defended. I mentioned voiders for the elbows would cover that area. While mounted, the back of the leg is fairly well protected by the armour and the body of the horse covered by the saddle skirting. As promised I did remember to have some pics of the area in question taken to illustrate this, see the attached pic. I would have to agree that while afoot it would be a different matter and there would be less physical protection, but if the armoured man has his wits about him this area might not be so easy to hit even by multiple opponents. This brings us back to the video clips that started this whole thing. Only one of the opponents got close to landing a blow on the back of the leg and he was dodging a sword blow and was blocked by the fan plate.

---

 Attachment: 111.32 KB

This may be where the nasty curved hook of a Bill type pole arm might be able to get behind the knee and do dammage as the Bill is pulled back.

Nice Pict by the way.

Bill-

A bit off the topic, but who made the harness? Looks really nice! I've wondered about mobility with those massive pauldrons...

Horse looks quite healthy and wonderful as well!

Aaron,

Jeff Hedgecock made the harness. I have been slowly replacing the harness that I made over the years and am almost done. Modifying the gaunts' and the maille sabatons is all that remains . I can still do push ups in the pauldrons with no problem ( I had spaulders before) and did so at a demo a few weeks before. Some wag in the audience said to do a one handed pushup, hell I can't even do that WITHOUT armour but I may work on it.

The horse is 16 years old and multi talented. He does Civil War cavalry also and some guy at Ft Mac wants me to do Napoleanic. Hmmmmmmm. Hussar?

There is a front view of the harness on the Ren Costume thread.[/b]

Hi :)

I looked for an answer of my topic... and found this post... ;)

Mr. Joe Wilson wrote:

Quote:

Posted: Thu 26 May, 2005 7:25 am I seem to remember this one battle in history where a bunch or men in full armor were marching over a bridge, and so the other guys all hid under this bridge with pikes. And when the guys in armor walked over... STICK! right up the rear. I don't think that many suits of armor have much protection right around that area. But yeah, the guys with the pikes won the battle, so it must have worked.

What is the famous war(battle) that this event was happened? :?:

Stamford Bridge?

Thanks Mr. Dan Howard :)

The context of this post...

Quote:

Posted: Thu 26 May, 2005 7:25 am I seem to remember this one battle in history where a bunch or men in full armor were marching over a bridge, and so the other guys all hid under this bridge with pikes. And when the guys in armor walked over... STICK! right up the rear. I don't think that many suits of armor have much protection right around that area. But yeah, the guys with the pikes won the battle, so it must have worked.

I think that the full armor means a plate armour.
And the theme of this topic is "...how would you kill somebody in full plate?"
The Battle of Stamford Bridge happened in September 25, 1066.
Probably I think that this event by the war was happened after the Battle of Stamford Bridge... (this event by the war that happened in the times of fight in plate armor)

I'm fully aware that Stamford Bridge occurred before the advent of plate armour. It is the only battle I can think of where the above circumstances occurred. Plenty of people have confused plate armour and mail. How many people cite Gerald of Wales as an example of an arrow penetrating plate armour? If you read the part you highlighted maybe you can show me where it mentions plate armour?

I have to agree with Dan. Harold's men--who attacked over the bridge--were the better prepared of the two sides at Stamford Bridge, unlike many of the Northmen who hadn't had the time to don their armor. So it's pretty logical that their vanguard would have had "full" armor--the fullest available in their time and geographical region, in this case a knee-length hauberk and a nasal helmet. That's pretty full as far as I'm concerned.

Thanks Mr. Dan Howard and Mr. Lafayette C Curtis :)

I misunderstood it... :(
I must read in detail about Battle of Stamford Bridge.

Sirs-This is why the Danish war axe was so popular untill the use of pole-arms became common. It was the favorite of King Stephen of England ,Richard Lionheart, King Jean of Franceand many knights of the hundred yearswar.in the rime 1340-1390,