| Author |
Message |
|
Thrand Godfrey
|
 Posted: Mon 03 Aug, 2015 9:50 am Post subject: Celtic spear and bronze spear tested on 15th century armor! |
 |
|
I tested out a Iron age Celtic spear and Middle age bronze spear made by Neil Burridge on a 15th century breast plate. My overarm throwing slide had the most extreme penetration and wonder if any others got similar results with this form of testing?
Iron Age Celtic Spear Tested on 15th Century Breast Plate! + Bronze Spear Reply to Arms and Armour
https://youtu.be/E8vFfDuG-iA
I am a arms and armour tester and experimental archeologist trying to rediscover ancient and medieval combat methods and tactics.
|
|
  |
 |
Shahril Dzulkifli
|
| Posted: Wed 12 Aug, 2015 7:28 am Post subject: Re: Celtic spear and bronze spear tested on 15th century arm |
|
|
The funny thing is both spears still could not penetrate right through the suit of armour after several thrusts. 
“You have power over your mind - not outside events. Realize this, and you will find strength”
- Marcus Aurelius
|
|
|
|
|
Dan Howard
|
| Posted: Wed 12 Aug, 2015 4:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The lighter 15th C breastplates were often made of medium carbon steel, not mild steel, and some were also hardened. Many were still being worn over mail as well. In any case most breastplates were at least 2mm thick at the front. A spear has no chance of punching through 15th C torso armour; it doesn't matter what the head is made from or its shape.
Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen and Sword Books
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vasilly T
|
| Posted: Thu 13 Aug, 2015 12:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Dan Howard wrote: | | The lighter 15th C breastplates were often made of medium carbon steel, not mild steel, and some were also hardened. Many were still being worn over mail as well. In any case most breastplates were at least 2mm thick at the front. A spear has no chance of punching through 15th C torso armour; it doesn't matter what the head is made from or its shape. |
What about poleaxe, bec de corbin, war hammer etc.?
|
|
|
|
|
Dan Howard
|
| Posted: Thu 13 Aug, 2015 6:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
There were plenty of those weapons used at Wisby yet there wasn't a single torso injury on any of the skeletons.
Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen and Sword Books
|
|
|
|
|
|
Philip Dyer
|
| Posted: Thu 13 Aug, 2015 8:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Dan Howard wrote: | | There were plenty of those weapons used at Wisby yet there wasn't a single torso injury on any of the skeletons. |
Soft tissue damage doesn't show up in skeletal remains and their are square shaped holes and such in the wisby skulls, like hits from a war hammer or spike. Also, a overhand strike from head heavy weapon is just easier to guide. Lastly, the skull is usually always a target because you can't really guard against strikes to it completely without blinding yourself. I would be curious to see what would happen to a breast than was hit by a spear being held by a guy, driving , on a motorbike, going at 30 miles per hour.
|
|
|
|
|
Dan Howard
|
| Posted: Thu 13 Aug, 2015 2:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Philip Dyer wrote: | | Dan Howard wrote: | | There were plenty of those weapons used at Wisby yet there wasn't a single torso injury on any of the skeletons. |
Soft tissue damage doesn't show up in skeletal remains |
So you think that all of the torso injuries at Wisby were to soft tissue? They must have had magical weapons that somehow managed to avoid nicking all of the ribs and spinal columns.
| Quote: | | and their are square shaped holes and such in the wisby skulls, like hits from a war hammer or spike. Also, a overhand strike from head heavy weapon is just easier to guide. |
So? This thread is about attacking breastplates.
| Quote: | | Lastly, the skull is usually always a target because you can't really guard against strikes to it completely without blinding yourself. |
So? This thread is about attacking breastplates.
| Quote: | | I would be curious to see what would happen to a breast than was hit by a spear being held by a guy, driving , on a motorbike, going at 30 miles per hour. |
We have plenty of eye witness accounts of men wearing nothing but mail being hit by mounted lances and continuing to fight afterwards. I'd love to see you to produce evidence of these weapons being used on motorbikes during the time in question.
Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen and Sword Books
|
|
|
|
|
|
Philip Dyer
|
| Posted: Thu 13 Aug, 2015 3:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dan Howard wrote: | | Philip Dyer wrote: | | Dan Howard wrote: | | There were plenty of those weapons used at Wisby yet there wasn't a single torso injury on any of the skeletons. |
Soft tissue damage doesn't show up in skeletal remains |
So you think that all of the torso injuries at Wisby were to soft tissue? They must have had magical weapons that somehow managed to avoid nicking all of the ribs and spinal columns.
| Quote: | | and their are square shaped holes and such in the wisby skulls, like hits from a war hammer or spike. Also, a overhand strike from head heavy weapon is just easier to guide. |
So? This thread is about attacking breastplates.
| Quote: | | Lastly, the skull is usually always a target because you can't really guard against strikes to it completely without blinding yourself. |
So? This thread is about attacking breastplates.
| Quote: | | I would be curious to see what would happen to a breast than was hit by a spear being held by a guy, driving , on a motorbike, going at 30 miles per hour. |
We have plenty of eye witness accounts of men wearing nothing but mail being hit by mounted lances and continuing to fight afterwards. I'd love to see you to produce evidence of these weapons being used on motorbikes during the time in question. |
1. Not magic, their is a large portion of the human body deviod of bone, is called the stomach, just good aim and depth control.
2. The motorbike comment was for a cheap and practical stand in for a horse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matthew Amt
|
| Posted: Thu 13 Aug, 2015 5:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Philip Dyer wrote: | | 1. Not magic, their is a large portion of the human body deviod of bone, is called the stomach, just good aim and depth control. |
"Depth control"? When you're desperately trying to cut a guy in half before he cuts you in half? I'd be hoping my blow went halfway into next week! Plus, I'm feeling around on my stomach, and it really doesn't seem all THAT large. The hip bones are surprisingly shallow, and even with the couple inches I've put on in my Golden Years, it isn't all that far from my navel to my spine...
| Quote: | | 2. The motorbike comment was for a cheap and practical stand in for a horse. |
I figured that out, but it *did* sound a little odd at first!
Matthew
|
|
 |
|
|
Philip Dyer
|
| Posted: Thu 13 Aug, 2015 6:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Matthew Amt wrote: | | Philip Dyer wrote: | | 1. Not magic, their is a large portion of the human body deviod of bone, is called the stomach, just good aim and depth control. |
"Depth control"? When you're desperately trying to cut a guy in half before he cuts you in half? I'd be hoping my blow went halfway into next week! Plus, I'm feeling around on my stomach, and it really doesn't seem all THAT large. The hip bones are surprisingly shallow, and even with the couple inches I've put on in my Golden Years, it isn't all that far from my navel to my spine...
| Quote: | | 2. The motorbike comment was for a cheap and practical stand in for a horse. |
I figured that out, but it *did* sound a little odd at first!
Matthew |
Well, over penetrating someone can be detrimental to you life, for example, you run some through so deeply you can't extract the point of your weapon in time to address a attack to your left and or right. Not like you need to cut a guy in half or run him through to the hilt if you place your shots and angle your weapon right. Makes as large a portion of the human torso as the ribs, so it not like it is magic to not nick a person's ribcage when attacking penetrating the human torso,probably alllot to have that good of aim in the heat of combat, but not impossible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alexis Bataille
Location: montpellier Joined: 31 Aug 2014
Posts: 95
|
| Posted: Fri 14 Aug, 2015 12:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
You can't pierce breastplate with muscle energy weapon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vasilly T
|
| Posted: Fri 14 Aug, 2015 12:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Philip Dyer wrote: | | their are square shaped holes and such in the wisby skulls, like hits from a war hammer or spike. |
You're probably talking about Towton, not Wisby.
| Quote: | | Lastly, the skull is usually always a target because you can't really guard against strikes to it completely without blinding yourself. |
Not exactly true. Let me just quote the article "Head protection in England before WWI":
| Quote: | | At Towton, the majority of killing wounds were undoubtedly those to the skull. This was in contrast to the Wisby finds, which showed evidence of a rain of blows and missiles (crossbow bolts in particular) creating wounds fairly well spread over the bodies. However, the Towton find may not be representative of the overall battlefield casualties, since it offers too small a sample of the total and the circumstances of the victims’ deaths are not clear. They may have been soldiers cut down as they fled, having flung their weapons and encumbering helmets from them as they ran, or they might have been prisoners butchered in the aftermath of battle. |
| Alexis Bataille wrote: | | You can't pierce breastplate with muscle energy weapon. |
What makes you so sure? What about the helmets then? They were about the same thickness.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen Curtin
|
| Posted: Fri 14 Aug, 2015 1:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Philip Dyer wrote: |
1. Not magic, their is a large portion of the human body deviod of bone, is called the stomach, just good aim and depth control. |
Hi Philip. Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the point of this thread about armour penetration? If I had to fight against an opponent who was wearing a breastplate, and for whatever reason I thought it would be a good idea to try and go through that breastplate, rather than around it, I would strike as hard as possible. Armour penetration, and "depth control" seem like mutually exclusive ideas to me.
Éirinn go Brách
|
|
 |
|
Dan Howard
|
| Posted: Fri 14 Aug, 2015 1:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
FWIW a breastplate actually stops at the navel. Much of the stomach is not covered.
Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen and Sword Books
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vasilly T
|
| Posted: Fri 14 Aug, 2015 3:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Dan Howard wrote: | | FWIW a breastplate actually stops at the navel. Much of the stomach is not covered. |
Depends, there were breastplates that did cover the stomach. But there were types that were supposed to go with plackart.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen Curtin
|
| Posted: Fri 14 Aug, 2015 3:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Dan Howard wrote: | | FWIW a breastplate actually stops at the navel. Much of the stomach is not covered. |
Well yes Dan, but the kind of breastplate your talking about, were mostly accompanied with a fauld, which would protect the stomach.
Éirinn go Brách
|
|
|
|
|
|
Philip Dyer
|
| Posted: Fri 14 Aug, 2015 4:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Stephen Curtin wrote: | | Dan Howard wrote: | | FWIW a breastplate actually stops at the navel. Much of the stomach is not covered. |
Well yes Dan, but the kind of breastplate your talking about, were mostly accompanied with a fauld, which would protect the stomach. |
Yeah, I forgot about that, so technically if your were attacking the stomach of a oponent your would be attacking the plackart or flaud, not the breastplate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a standard topic