| Author |
Message |
|
Darren Tully
Location: Dublin, Ireland Joined: 14 Oct 2008
Posts: 49
|
 Posted: Sun 19 Oct, 2008 2:49 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Hi Marc
It could have been a form of ancient propaganda but like you pointed out , in action movies people who get shot are sent flying thses picures are telling a story like an anchient action movie so what better way to make them more exciting than to dress them up and make them look more gorey
Reguards Dar
|
|
  |
 |
|
Justin King
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Sun 19 Oct, 2008 7:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Most of the artists who painted these works likely never witnessed a battle up close and probably were as unaquainted with the realities of a battlefield as any Hollywood producer. The weapons and armor are easily modeled and thus are sometimes quite detailed and accurately portrayed but I think we should not assume that the events depicted are portrayed with the same accuracy. If anything the artists were likely trying to glorify the strength and ferocity of the "good guys", or excuse a defeat by up-playing the same ferocity on the part of the "bad guys", so a bit of exaggeration is perhaps to be expected.
|
|
|
|
|
Douglas S
|
| Posted: Mon 20 Oct, 2008 10:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| James Arlen Gillaspie wrote: | | As Dr. Alan Williams' data show in 'The Knight and the Blast Furnace', the quality of armour, like weapons, was all over the map. |
In that case, unless you were sure of the quality of your sword, and the (lack of) quality of your foe's helmet, it would probably be a crap shoot to swing directly at the helmet. I am guessing that such a blow would mostly be from chance, or frustration in the direction of the fight. 
|
|
|
|
|
David McElrea
|
| Posted: Mon 20 Oct, 2008 10:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
Justin King wrote: | Quote: | | Most of the artists who painted these works likely never witnessed a battle up close and probably were as unaquainted with the realities of a battlefield as any Hollywood producer. |
This is something that often comes out in these kinds of discussions. While I agree that the illustrations are almost certainly exaggerated for impact, we know as much about the experience of the artists as we do what they ate for breakfast on the morning that they illustrated their texts. I don't think there is any "likely" about it one way or the other. It is just as likely that they had witnessed a battle up close (or at least the aftermath of a battle)... but what do we really know? All we can really do is look at the evidences provided by history and by modern experimental archaeology and work from there.
My two cents, as they say.
|
|
|
|
|
Jeff A. Arbogast
|
| Posted: Sun 26 Oct, 2008 5:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| David McElrea wrote: | Justin King wrote: | Quote: | | Most of the artists who painted these works likely never witnessed a battle up close and probably were as unaquainted with the realities of a battlefield as any Hollywood producer. |
This is something that often comes out in these kinds of discussions. While I agree that the illustrations are almost certainly exaggerated for impact, we know as much about the experience of the artists as we do what they ate for breakfast on the morning that they illustrated their texts. I don't think there is any "likely" about it one way or the other. It is just as likely that they had witnessed a battle up close (or at least the aftermath of a battle)... but what do we really know? All we can really do is look at the evidences provided by history and by modern experimental archaeology and work from there.
My two cents, as they say. |
If I may offer my two cents-
While the pictures in question may be exaggerated as to the depth of the cuts, I DO think that cleaving helms and mail was not unknown. Many factors should be considered. A top-notch sword against a weaker helm. A lucky blow. The force used and the angle at which the blow was struck. Many other factors, all unknowables. One thing IS certain, however-the helmets shown in the Maciejowski Bible were eventually replaced with more rounded versions, such as the sugarloaf style, that were more likely to deflect a blow rather than just accept it squarely on a flat surface. I think one can safely assume that it was for a reason beyond simple aesthetics. There are also scenes of mail being cleaved through. I don't find this impossible to believe either. If that wasn't happening, why bother to start adding plate? And when plate WAS used, why were the areas targeted where the gaps were, and only mail was in those areas. Because it was the weakest spot. So I have no trouble believing the pictures to be somewhat accurate, with perhaps a bit of artistic license used.
To illustrate my point a bit-I have a modified Black Prince helm made by William Hurt of Age of Armour that I would trust against a heavy sword blow (see pic), but an impact from something like a war hammer would certainly ring my bell. But I would NOT trust an older pieced-together helm like those shown in the Maciejowski Bible against a heavy sword blow, especially a head-on blow coming down from the top. Those older Great Helms were pieced together like a Spangenhelm, which means that there were inherent weak spots where they were joined together, not even taking into account any flaws in the metal itself or the construction, the quality of which probably varied widely.
Further, Albion routinely tests their swords by chopping them into the edge of 55 gallon drums. I have seen pics of them doing this, and the cut bit through the ROLLED EDGE and down into the side about 6 inches or so. There was minimal damage to the blade. While I cringe to think of doing that to such a fine weapon, Albion apparently takes their work seriously, and they try to make their swords out of a steel that they consider the equivalent to the very finest blades made back in the day. Based on that, I see no reason why a fine blade would NOT be able to cleave helms and armor, although there was no doubt some damage was done to the blade which would have to be repaired after the fight was over.
One last point, if I may-after I saw Albion cleaving 55 gallon drums, I pulled out my Norman and another sword I had, a CAS Iberia Henry V. I gently tapped the Norman's edge along the edge of the Henry V, and I actually saw the blade chopping little nicks out of the other sword. I have since sold the Henry V, while my Norman is completely unphased by the encounter. So I would say that it is entirely possible that a fine blade COULD do some serious, possibly fatal injury to at least a spangehelm or the early great helms shown in the bible, both types of which are being shown split in half. I know this opinion is running contrary to most of those here, but I would not say that a fine sword was incapable of cleaving the helms depicted, to say nothing of the mail wounds shown.
A man's nose is his castle-and his finger is a mighty sword that he may wield UNHINDERED!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Josh Warren
Location: Manhattan, Kansas Joined: 01 Nov 2006
Posts: 111
|
| Posted: Sun 26 Oct, 2008 9:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
I don't think cutting into the edge of a steel barrel proves anything. Sword impacts on armour are more likely to strike the flat of the plate rather than an edge, and even if it did strike an edge, it wouldn't be an unsupported edge like that of the barrel. A sword--no matter how high-quality--simply isn't going to cleave through the flat face of a steel plate. Swords killing men by cutting into breastplates is firmly in the realm of myth, not reality.
Non Concedo
|
|
|
|
|
|
James R.Fox
Location: Youngstowm,Ohio Joined: 29 Feb 2008
Posts: 253
|
| Posted: Sun 26 Oct, 2008 9:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sirs-I think we are quibbleing here. We know nothing of the strength of the blade ( and some Very good ones were made) nor do we know the strength of the men. Remember, the average knight stayed in training to use these weapons.Finally,the two-handed danish axe was popular in Western Europe untill around 1300,(it was Richard the Lion-Hearts favorite weapon) and thse weapons were meant to cleave helm, mail, and plate (also horses} I refer you to the Bayeaux Tapistry.
Ja68ms
|
|
 |
|
Bruno Giordan
|
| Posted: Sun 26 Oct, 2008 10:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
The metallurgy of modern steel varies totally from that of ancient examples.
the swords quoted above are made with modern steels and heat treatment, which makes them far more sturdy than originals.
Having seen some originals i do not think an original sword, with its uneven carbon content and lack fo proper heat treatment, could make any gash into a 2 mm early medieval helm.
Later helms were even better made and had some kind of heat treatment apparently, so that we see the apeparance of war hammers to pry a hole into them.
Judging such matter with modern replicas as test objects is absurd.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Max Chouinard
Location: Quebec, Qc Joined: 23 Apr 2008
Posts: 108
|
| Posted: Sun 26 Oct, 2008 10:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
I believe it would be a possibility. If we have two people coming at each other on horses (as is most often shown in those illustrations, imagine the combined energy that is delivered) with a good sword and a very poorly made iron helmet. I have seen no tests that strive to approach those conditions. Only on foot with a rather good sword and a good helmet, which isn't the same thing at all.
Maxime Chouinard
Antrim Bata
Quebec City Kenjutsu
I don't do longsword
|
|
 |
|
|
James R.Fox
Location: Youngstowm,Ohio Joined: 29 Feb 2008
Posts: 253
|
| Posted: Sun 26 Oct, 2008 11:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sirs I agree that metalurgy and heat treatment of early swords was a hit-or-miss sublect. It did not prevent the Japanese smiths from turning out swords of this capacity, and they had no better understanding on a scientific level of what they were doing, and their materials were no better. Check George Cameron Stone on Japanese blades. They picked their steel strictly by eye,and were strictly consencious on heat treatment. As Mr Oakshott points out in Records of the Medieval Sword, the La Tene Celts sometimes produced swords this good. The best smiths of Medieval times came from the old provence of Noricum where the old Celtic smiths were located, and ALL smithing knowledge was passed down by word of mouth. We Don't Know what they were doing,they May have hit on the same methods the Japanese used.Agreed, we can mass-prodice steels superiorr to medieval steel, thie does NOT mean individual smiths couldn't produce Japanese-equavalent swords.As somebody or other said absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. 
Ja68ms
|
|
|
|
|
Bruno Giordan
|
| Posted: Sun 26 Oct, 2008 1:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| James R.Fox wrote: | | Sirs I agree that metalurgy and heat treatment of early swords was a hit-or-miss sublect. It did not prevent the Japanese smiths from turning out swords of this capacity, and they had no better understanding on a scientific level of what they were doing, and their materials were no better. Check George Cameron Stone on Japanese blades. They picked their steel strictly by eye,and were strictly consencious on heat treatment. As Mr Oakshott points out in Records of the Medieval Sword, the La Tene Celts sometimes produced swords this good. The best smiths of Medieval times came from the old provence of Noricum where the old Celtic smiths were located, and ALL smithing knowledge was passed down by word of mouth. We Don't Know what they were doing,they May have hit on the same methods the Japanese used.Agreed, we can mass-prodice steels superiorr to medieval steel, thie does NOT mean individual smiths couldn't produce Japanese-equavalent swords.As somebody or other said absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. |
Most data that are available speak of perlite, slag inclusions, varying carbon content, traces of quenching appear later.
the japanese smiths used a very different method and their swords became what we know quite late.
You cannot compare an albion sword that is heat treated in salt bath, so being likely bainitc in structure, with a sulfur free material that is alloyed with modern materials so as to guarantee an uniform quench to the highly imperfect medieval materials.
I think most originals would chip or break if they were used to hack a simple oil barrel.
I have data of an etruscan falcata that shows just a poor piled structure of ferrite and perlite, what an achievement it would be today.
Just look at this real data from the early medieval period. Please notice the carbon content of the first "mytical" Ulfberth sword (the norvegian one has a perfect carbon content though, 0.75): it is decent at the edges, but just enough to be hard, for the times it was used in (I doubt it would cut through a 2 mm thick iron helm)
http://forums.swordforum.com/showthread.php?t=75531
Early medieval period:
Ulfberht sword, Donnybrook, Dublin, Ireland, ?
Centre:
- carbon contents: 0.2%
- phosporous contents: 0.02%
- manganese contents: 0.1-1.0%
Fine grained ferrite with spheroidal pearlite
Edge:
- carbon contents: 0.3-0.4%
- phosporous contents: trace
- manganese contents: 0.1%
Quench-hardened to 520-550 HV
Notes: piled layout.
French pattern-welded swords:
M. 7 core:
- carbon contents: 0.12%
- phosporous contents: 0.21%
- manganese contents: 0.01%
M. 10 core:
- carbon contents: 0.09%
- phosporous contents: 0.30%
- manganese contents: 0.05%
M.11 core:
- carbon contents: 0.08%
- phosporous contents: 0.16%
- manganese contents: nil
M.11 edge:
- carbon contents: 0.2%
- phosporous contents: 0.14%
- manganese contents: nil
Luneville sword, core:
- carbon contents: 0.01-0.05%
- phosporous contents: 0.18%
- manganese contents: nil
Luneville sword, edge:
- carbon contents: 0.02-0.03%
- phosporous contents: -
- manganese contents: -
Three Norwegian pattern welded swords: 0.414% C, 0.401% C and 0.52% C
Ulfberht sword from Norway, 10th century AD: 0.75% C (not patternwelded)
Frankish sword, Canwick Common, 9th-10th century AD:
Piled in 2mm thick layers
Structure varies from high-carbon martensite to lower-carbon structure throughout the structure
Hardness 306-630HV
Pattern-welded sword of Palace of Westminster, UK, 9nd century AD:
Patternwelded areas down the center consist of 0.2% C iron together with fine and coarse grained ferrite and small globules of slag. Hardness 186-188 HV. The edges consist of fine-grained mild steel with a ferrite + pearlite structure, but surprizingly only a hardness of 136- 145 HV. Patternwelded areas are possibly harder due to higher phosphorous contents.
And obviously this feature at myArmoury
http://www.myArmoury.com/feature_bladehardness.html
The most definitive characteristic that we can see from the hardness testing that has been done on original swords is the fact that the hardness varies dramatically throughout a piece, not just surface to core or edge to mid blade, but literally in the span of the material the hardness will fluctuate through quite a range. As an example, an 11th to 13th century sword in the Hofjagd und Rustkammer shows a range of hardness from 119 to 520 VPH.4 The average of the piece is 217VPH. The sword was additionally tested with four samples removed from the blade. These pieces were tested across the thickness of the blade and the microhardnesses ranged from 258VPH to 329VPH, with an average of 300 VPH. When we would describe this sword using the Rockwell system, we are looking at a piece that ranges from less than 20Rc to 50Rc, with the average still below 20Rc.
Last edited by Bruno Giordan on Sun 26 Oct, 2008 2:02 pm; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
James R.Fox
Location: Youngstowm,Ohio Joined: 29 Feb 2008
Posts: 253
|
| Posted: Sun 26 Oct, 2008 2:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mr Gordon-your Ulfbhert sword from Norway shows what I mean. The Ulfbhert swords were made in the old Celtic ares-see Mr Oakshott's Records of the Medieval Sword- and so the smiths of that area Could have hit on methods that raised carbon content of steel. It Can be done in a regular forge,Norwegen smiths of the 1700'ss could do it. I will try to find the article, it's on-line and I have it somewhere in my harddrive if I didn't accidently dump it when I was cleaning house. As an asside, many monks were ex-knights, they often spent their last years in a monastary doing pennance for all the robbery,rape and killing of their early days.They could have given advice to the artist,
Ja68ms
|
|
|
|
|
Bruno Giordan
|
| Posted: Sun 26 Oct, 2008 2:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| James R.Fox wrote: | | Mr Gordon-your Ulfbhert sword from Norway shows what I mean. The Ulfbhert swords were made in the old Celtic ares-see Mr Oakshott's Records of the Medieval Sword- and so the smiths of that area Could have hit on methods that raised carbon content of steel. It Can be done in a regular forge,Norwegen smiths of the 1700'ss could do it. I will try to find the article, it's on-line and I have it somewhere in my harddrive if I didn't accidently dump it when I was cleaning house. As an asside, many monks were ex-knights, they often spent their last years in a monastary doing pennance for all the robbery,rape and killing of their early days.They could have given advice to the artist, |
What can be carbon content for if there is no martensitic transfrmation due to quenching?
Modern blades are superior because of sophisticated heat treatments that give a martensitic or a more modern bainitic structure.
In this XII century italian blade made of a carburized/piled structure there are no traces of quenching as its outer carburized layer is perlitic.
download pdf here
http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/isijinter...0/_article
Results from the vickers tests, quite a pitiful performance for modern standards
The Vickers micro-hardness tests have been performed
on the thickness centre of the different distinguished
welded layers (Fig. 15) (Table 2). A very symmetric trend
of the hardness profile has been pointed out from a surface
layer to the opposite one and the decreasing trend from the
surface to the core is very clear. The surface layers reach a
micro-hardness value of 179–181HV while at the core this
value decreases to 105HV.
i.e. less than 20 hrc !
|
|
|
|
|
|
James R.Fox
Location: Youngstowm,Ohio Joined: 29 Feb 2008
Posts: 253
|
| Posted: Sun 26 Oct, 2008 2:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mr Gordon-I quite agree. My point is we don't Know if some individual smiths ever hit on quenching. After all we have only tested a few of the hundreds of thousands if not millions of swords made in Western Europe, and we have only anecdotal evidence as to effectiveness. By rhe time of the article I referred to earlier, in the 1700's of course smiths did quench. I'm still looking for the article, but I'm affraid that I did dump it, and so will have to hunt it up on-line again.(I have since gotten a seagate external drive so I don't have to dump so much. I do alot of photos and videos,and they chew up so much space is am starting to keep articles on my seagate)
Ja68ms
|
|
|
|
|
Jeff A. Arbogast
|
| Posted: Sun 26 Oct, 2008 3:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Josh Warren wrote: | | I don't think cutting into the edge of a steel barrel proves anything. Sword impacts on armour are more likely to strike the flat of the plate rather than an edge, and even if it did strike an edge, it wouldn't be an unsupported edge like that of the barrel. A sword--no matter how high-quality--simply isn't going to cleave through the flat face of a steel plate. Swords killing men by cutting into breastplates is firmly in the realm of myth, not reality. |
I never said anything about chopping through breastplates. I was talking about a cleaving stroke straight down onto an older square-edged pieced-together great helm or spangenhelm of uneven quality, not a fully plate-encased Agincourt-era knight who needs to be knocked to the ground with a warhammer or some such. All helms and armor are not created equal. And I DO think cleaving a barrel with a sword that Albion does try to make as authentic as possible, shows that it was indeed possible to cleave at least the early helms with a top-quality weapon. I heard nothing as to why those helms were discontinued. I heard nothing as to why plate started gaining favor as time went on. Simple. Because the armor of the day wasn't "cutting it." And even if the swords of that era weren't as strong as an Albion (which is unproven), then, all things being equal, neither was the armor.
A man's nose is his castle-and his finger is a mighty sword that he may wield UNHINDERED!
|
|
|
|
|
|
James R.Fox
Location: Youngstowm,Ohio Joined: 29 Feb 2008
Posts: 253
|
| Posted: Sun 26 Oct, 2008 3:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sirs-I agree and would point out that new weapons, espically the crossbow had alot to do with it too. A good axe, a war hammer, a halbard etc were chewing up Knightly a,,s all over the battlefield.
Ja68ms
|
|
|
|
|
Dan Howard
|
| Posted: Sun 26 Oct, 2008 7:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The original question was specifically about swords. Nobody is disputing that axes, halberds, warhammers, etc can be effective against plate armour. If swords were just as effective then why would anyone bother with the others?
| Quote: | | I heard nothing as to why plate started gaining favor as time went on. |
The initial development of plate armour had little if anything to do with the effectiveness of previous armours. This is a summary:
http://forums.swordforum.com/showthread.php?t=41041
The subject has been covered so many times that it is not worth wasting bandwith repeating it again and again every time a related thread is started.
|
|
|
|
|
M. Eversberg II
|
| Posted: Sun 26 Oct, 2008 10:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Wait, if early swords were not quenched, wouldn't they be very soft? If you're not quenching, you're letting it air cool, and air cooled iron bends easily, doesn't it?
M.
This space for rent or lease.
|
|
    |
|
|
Aleksei Sosnovski
|
| Posted: Sun 26 Oct, 2008 11:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jeff A. Arbogast wrote: |
I never said anything about chopping through breastplates. I was talking about a cleaving stroke straight down onto an older square-edged pieced-together great helm or spangenhelm of uneven quality, not a fully plate-encased Agincourt-era knight who needs to be knocked to the ground with a warhammer or some such. All helms and armor are not created equal. And I DO think cleaving a barrel with a sword that Albion does try to make as authentic as possible, shows that it was indeed possible to cleave at least the early helms with a top-quality weapon. I heard nothing as to why those helms were discontinued. I heard nothing as to why plate started gaining favor as time went on. Simple. Because the armor of the day wasn't "cutting it." And even if the swords of that era weren't as strong as an Albion (which is unproven), then, all things being equal, neither was the armor. |
Pieced together helms may actually be even more difficult to cut through due to the material overlap where the pieces are riveted together. For example a great helm made of 2 mm thick steel is actually 4 mm thick at the top edge where the top plate is riveted to the helm. It is not too difficult to put enough rivets to make such joint more robust then a welded joint. However due to that overlap pieced helms are heavier then the ones made of a single piece. Also rounded shape makes for a lighter helm (a sphere has the smallest surface at the same volume compared to other shapes). Two main reasons for making helms with rounded shapes and out of one piece of steel (or out of several pieces, but forge-weld them together instead of riveting) were their ability to deflect blows (a very important feature when fighting against people armed with heavy weapons) and their smaller weight. Oh, and maybe fashion, as they were more difficult to make and therefore more expensive when they first appeared.
P.S. Cutting a standing barrel and cutting a helm on a human head are actually very different things. Human body cushions a blow and absorbs a lot of energy, while the barrel stands still and does not move.
P.P.S. Can't find now, but I remember a picture of a knight fighting with his great helm deeply cut (do not remember if there was blood flowing from the cut or not). Do not think that somebody would be able to continue fighting after receiving such a blow. I think that it was just a common way of depicting results of a good hit, and not the actual wound. Or maybe depicting any wound no matter how serious it was. Again, there are pictures of knights wearing maille with cuts and blood all over their bodies, but still fighting.
|
|
|
|
|
Bruno Giordan
|
| Posted: Mon 27 Oct, 2008 2:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| M. Eversberg II wrote: | Wait, if early swords were not quenched, wouldn't they be very soft? If you're not quenching, you're letting it air cool, and air cooled iron bends easily, doesn't it?
M. |
They were not annealed, on the contrary, they were probably work hardened.
Hammering continued in teh early austenitic range, the one quoted by Hrisoulas in hs book.
He took this knowledge by an old german artisan from Solingen who shared with him this german artisan technique,a dn I can assure you that in Brescia a famous foil maker was dong the same in the twentieth century.
Itw as probably a knowledge passed down for generations, another brescian smith from Valle Camonica (the Valley quoted famously by Biringuccio, this was the main sword production centre for teh veentian republic), advised me to do the same, even he told me to hammer harden cautiously the blade after it had cooled using the trip hammer.
His family was a smith family, as most of the families of that little town, who had been involved into the smithy trade since ancient times, being one of the main brescian production nodes.
Until the eighties the town had still many traditional forges in a fully operational state, the last one closed just a month ago for want of youngsters willing to take up the work (most modern production s quality agricultural tools)
Some forges have been acquired by the Municipality and are operated for cultural purposes by retired smiths.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
All contents © Copyright 2003-2024 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum
|
This is a standard topic