[Edward Lee]

Hello

I have a wonder regarding the armor being cut in battle, not the armor itself but the leather straps that keeps the armor on a person. Would it be possible to cut someone's leather straps for a breast and backplate? Would this have been considered by fighting men back in the early days of plate armors? Would a single breastplate would have risked more on the straps being cut and the man losing his torso defense(unless he had mail under)since it's crossed on the back.

Thanks

[Matthew Amt]

My guess is that it wasn't that big a deal. There *were* some 17th century armors with metal plates riveted to the straps, so it looks like some kind of protection was at least considered, but there are plenty of other armors through the centuries that had exposed leather straps all over the place.

I don't think anyone was really worried about an opponent *deliberately* cutting their straps, since someone with aim that good was more likely to go for the gaps and slice the guy inside. Especially the back straps--if you're behind your opponent, why aim at his *straps*? Plus, one cut strap is rarely a disaster. You'd need to cut 2 at least, and even then the armor might not just fall off.

I sometimes get visitors asking about the lacing down the front and back of my Roman lorica segmentata, and I assure them that even if anyone was lucky (or persistent?) enough to cut 6 laces, a strap, *and* my brass-plated belt, the armor would just sit there, maybe with a slight gap at the front. And that's behind my shield, by the way! Not a likely scenario.

If the original armor had exposed leather straps, I can only conclude that it usually worked for them.

Matthew

[Philip Dyer]

Yeah, the only time I thing aiming for the straps is considered is if you have forced the opponent to the ground, as I way to open up a large enough gap to stab the guy. A leather strap thin enough to be cut quick without being hit by the opponent when he standing and fighting you would be poor strain long term for armor, also, good armor, especially rigid full body late armor, tended to be custom fitted because if it was to big or to small, it can awfully straining to move in or immobilized certain body parts. I think you have played to much Zelda and taken link fighting the Darknuts to serious, non withstanding how cool fighting them is.

[Edward Lee]

Interesting, you are right if someone were to be behind me he might go for a kill. Italian armors often had straps exposed in the front and back that upholds the plackart with the breastplate and they never had problem with it for a century it seems.

I have never played Zelda Link game, but I looked at the video it seems he just knocks them off. It was originally brought up by a friend who claims that unarmored samurai would try to aim for armor lacing, but now that I think of it , it would just prolong the fight and make it really tiring.

Thanks for the inputs.

[Craig Peters]

Ed,

It's a lot easier and much more efficient to knock an armoured man to the ground, lift up his visor and stab him in the face with a sword or a dagger. Trying to slice through straps would be a nightmare unless the person was lying down and holding still. Thus, my guess is that this would not have been a strategy employed in the past. There are far more effective ways to kill a man in plate than trying to remove the straps to target his chest.

[Philip Dyer]

[Benjamin H. Abbott]

[Lafayette C Curtis]

The one glaring problem I can see with this approach is that while we're concentrating on slicing off the exposed straps and points on the enemy's armour, the enemy would be free to focus on stabbing or cutting the unarmoured targets on our body. There's no point getting the opponent's breastplate to hang askew if it would just get us fatally skewered through the face.