| Author |
Message |
Dan Howard
|
 Posted: Fri 29 Jan, 2016 1:18 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Eric S wrote: | | Dan Howard wrote: | | Pieter B. wrote: | | Some African cultures made shields from rhino leather, while I do not know if those were really protective the name has a certain flair. |
Apparently rhino hide doesn't make very good armour. The Chinese needed anywhere from five to seven layers of it to be effective. |
Actually, rhino hide shields were used a lot in India and they were highly valued for their protective abilities.
| Quote: | | Indian shield, made from Rhino hide, which is believed to be the best hide for these shields and counted better and more expensive than shields from Elephant or Buffalo or Hippo. These type of shields were used extensively in North West India and mostly in Rajastan, the center of their manufacturing and decorating. The shield is 13 ¾ inches in Diameter and the hide is about 3/8 inch thick. It has a shallow dome shape with four brass bosses, dated probably to the late 18th Century. |
 |
How is this relevant? Shields and armour are not the same. Rhino armour seems to have been made of multiple layers. This is from the Chou Li
"The armorers (han jên) make the cuirasses (kia). Those made from the hide of the two-horned rhinoceros (si) consist of seven layers of hide; those made from the hide of the singlehorned rhinoceros (se) consist of six layers. Those made from a combination of both hides consist of five layers."
Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen and Sword Books
|
|
  |
 |
|
Timo Nieminen
|
| Posted: Fri 29 Jan, 2016 2:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The classic examples of coats stopping swords are from the Crimean War. Heavy Russian wool greatcoats. Some participant accounts from the Heavy Brigade at Balaclava note coats stopping sword cuts (and thrusts). E.g., "hussar who cut at my head, but the brass pot stood well, and my head is only slightly bruised. I cut again at him, but do not believe that I hurt him more than he hurt me. I received a blow on the shoulder at the same time, which was given by some other man, but the edge must have been very badly delivered for it has only cut my coat and slightly bruised my shoulder."
"In addition to being efficient, all pole arms were quite nice to look at." - Cherney Berg, A hideous history of weapons, Collier 1963.
|
|
 |
|
|
Timo Nieminen
|
| Posted: Fri 29 Jan, 2016 4:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dan Howard wrote: | | Eric S wrote: | | Dan Howard wrote: | | Pieter B. wrote: | | Some African cultures made shields from rhino leather, while I do not know if those were really protective the name has a certain flair. |
Apparently rhino hide doesn't make very good armour. The Chinese needed anywhere from five to seven layers of it to be effective. |
Actually, rhino hide shields were used a lot in India and they were highly valued for their protective abilities.
| Quote: | | Indian shield, made from Rhino hide, which is believed to be the best hide for these shields and counted better and more expensive than shields from Elephant or Buffalo or Hippo. These type of shields were used extensively in North West India and mostly in Rajastan, the center of their manufacturing and decorating. The shield is 13 ¾ inches in Diameter and the hide is about 3/8 inch thick. It has a shallow dome shape with four brass bosses, dated probably to the late 18th Century. |
|
How is this relevant? Shields and armour are not the same. Rhino armour seems to have been made of multiple layers. This is from the Chou Li
"The armorers (han jên) make the cuirasses (kia). Those made from the hide of the two-horned rhinoceros (si) consist of seven layers of hide; those made from the hide of the singlehorned rhinoceros (se) consist of six layers. Those made from a combination of both hides consist of five layers." |
The full quote (as given in Laufer, "Clay Figures"):
"The armorers make the cuirasses (kia). Those made from the hide of the two-horned rhinoceros (si) consist of seven layers of hide; those made from the hide of the single-horned rhinoceros (se) consist of six layers; those made from a combination of both hides consist of five layers. The first endure a hundred years; the second, two hundred
years; the third, three hundred years. In order to accomplish a cuirass, first, a form (dummy) is made, 2 and then the hide is cut in accordance with it. The hide pieces are weighed; and two piles equal in weight are apportioned, the one for the upper, the other for the lower part of the cuirass. The long strips, into which the hide has been cut up, are laid around horizontally. In general when the hide has not been properly cured, the cuirass is not strong; when the hide is worn out, it
will wrinkle. The method of inspecting cuirasses is as follows: the stitches, when examined, must be fine and close; the inner side of the hide must be smooth; the seams are required to be straight; the cuirass must perfectly fit into the case in which it is to be enclosed. Then it is taken up, and when examined, it must allow of ample space. When it is donned, it must not wrinkle. When the stitches are examined, and found to be fine and close, it is a sign that the hide is strong. When the inner side is examined, and found to be smooth, the material is well prepared and durable. When the seams are examined, and found to be straight, the cutting is perfect. When it is rolled up and placed in its case, it should fold closely. When, however, it is taken out, it should offer ample space to the wearer, and it is then beautiful. When it is donned without wrinkling, it will gradually adjust itself to the form of the trunk."
So, the final armour is flexible, and made from horizontal strips joined together. It is certainly not 7 layers of hard rawhide. Laufer discusses and rejects the common contrary opinion that the armours are 7, 6, or 5 horizontal strips joined together rather than that number of layers. His discussion is not convincing. Yes, there are many multi-layered hide armours. Many of those are made of much thinner, and soft, hides, and the final armour is flexible. Rawhide lamellar armours are also multi-layered, with the overlapping giving a thickness of 4 lamellae in most places. Japanese lamellae could also be two layers individually (if thin hide was used; only one if thick hide was used), so the final armour could be 8 (thin) layers.
But rhinoceros hide is much thicker - the thin parts exceed 1cm in thickness (depending on the source, I see figures of 1.5-5cm thick for the whole hide, and 18-20mm as typical for the thinner parts). If the Chinese armours were 5-7 layers, they would have been at least 5cm thick, perhaps about 10cm thick (if made from the thin parts of the hide). Apart from lack of flexibility, there's also the question of weight. 10cm thick leather or rawhide armour would weigh about 100kg per square metre, about the same as 1/2" (12.7mm) of steel. More if they used the thicker parts of the hide.
So I'm in favour of the contrary opinion which Laufer rejects. One layer, including some overlap of the horizontal strips, might be about 20kg/m^2 at minimum, and might offer comparable protection to about 1.5mm mild steel (which would be about 1/2 the weight). Seems more plausible to me. This would also be of similar thickness to 4 thicknesses of typical rawhide lamellae (about 20mm), so of a thickness that was considered by others to be usable for armour.
"In addition to being efficient, all pole arms were quite nice to look at." - Cherney Berg, A hideous history of weapons, Collier 1963.
|
|
|
|
|
Eric S
|
| Posted: Fri 29 Jan, 2016 4:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dan Howard wrote: | | Pieter B. wrote: | | Some African cultures made shields from rhino leather, while I do not know if those were really protective the name has a certain flair. |
Apparently rhino hide doesn't make very good armour. The Chinese needed anywhere from five to seven layers of it to be effective. |
| Dan Howard wrote: | | How is this relevant? Shields and armour are not the same. Rhino armour seems to have been made of multiple layers. This is from the Chou Li |
Exactly Dan, how was your answer relevant to Pieters statement which was about rhino "shields" and not about rhino armor.
| Pieter B. wrote: | | Some African cultures made shields from rhino leather, while I do not know if those were really protective the name has a certain flair. |
I think that my post shows that rhino shields were thought of as very good shields and the example I showed was only 3/8th of an inch thick.
|
|
|
|
|
Eric S
|
| Posted: Fri 29 Jan, 2016 5:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dan Howard wrote: | | The first one that comes to mind are English complaints of their swords failing to cut through Russian coats during the Crimean War. |
Dan, English military swords from some time periods were known to be sub par as well as being dull, and blades that were stored in metal scabbards do not keep a sharp edge. Japanese and Indo-Persian swords used wood or wood lined scabbards which helped to keep blades sharp, and there are many stories of British soldiers having their arms and legs cut off in a singel stroke by Indian/Afghan swords.
The thing is that once again you throw out a statement/statements that as a whole are just not accurate.
| Dan Howard wrote: | | There is no point inventing armour that can only stop cutting attacks. Pretty much anything can stop cutting attacks; a winter coat will stop cutting attacks. Proper armour will stop points - primarily spears and arrows. |
This is a completely ridiculous statement in my opinion, "pretty much anything can stop cutting attacks"...how absurd!!!
...."a winter coat will stop cutting attacks"....another absurd statement......and this one..."Proper armour will stop points - primarily spears and arrows"......another absurd statement. Armor was made to defend against the weapons that the wearer may have encountered, in Edo period Japan for example the armor worn by samurai was designed to defend against swords for the most part and not spears/arrows, samurai were not using arrows in that time period and most samurai were not walking around with spears everywere they went. Just because someones dull sword did not cut another mans thick coat does not mean this was a regular occurrence by any means and if you think that "pretty much anything can stop cutting attacks" then you should not be offering advice to people as this is just laughable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mart Shearer
|
| Posted: Fri 29 Jan, 2016 5:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I guess all those city militia wore gambesons to stay warm?
ferrum ferro acuitur et homo exacuit faciem amici sui
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rusty Thomas
Location: San Antonio, Texas Joined: 30 Oct 2007
Posts: 31
|
| Posted: Fri 29 Jan, 2016 7:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nicholas, if the crabs are the size of cows what about your characters using the arthrodial membrane. It's the flexible "skin" on the joints. I bet this membrane from the inside of a leg joint would be big and thick enough to make some armour from. But would be much lighter than the shell. Possibly behaving similarly to an extra tough and impact resistant rawhide. And it could be molded and dried just like rawhide and leather. Since there isn't as much of this material compared to the shell it would make it even more rare and valuable. Maybe go buy some crab legs and play around with this material for research. I would recommend king crab because they are the biggest but dang those legs are expensive! Also you could get a few whole crabs and start taking them apart to look for any other useful material. Sound fun and delicious!
“The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never be certain if they are genuine or not”
--Abraham Lincoln
|
|
|
|
|
Eric S
|
| Posted: Fri 29 Jan, 2016 10:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mart Shearer wrote: | | I guess all those city militia wore gambesons to stay warm? |
| Dan Howard wrote: | | Pretty much anything can stop cutting attacks; a winter coat will stop cutting attacks. |
Mart, either you agree with Dans statement or you do not, which is it? Is a "gambeson" simply a "winter jacket" (what exactly is a "winter jacket?) or a specifically made garment used as defensive armor??? There is a BIG difference as I am sure you know already. Are you saying that all of those samurai that wore yoroi katabira (armored jackets) could have simply worn a "winter jacket" and they would have been impervious to a sword, thats news to me.
There are of course examples of cloth armor, but they were not "winter jackets", they were specifically designed as armor, they may have kept someone warm during winter but that was not their primary job. There is the Indian peti armor and the chilta hazar masha (coat of a thousand nails), both may have looked like coats but were designed to be armor. I have a lot of winter jackets, leather, wool, cashmire etc, they were not designed to be armor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nat Lamb
|
| Posted: Fri 29 Jan, 2016 11:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Or a turtle species that has a shell with properties a bit better for armour ( I believe turtle shell is too brittle?) and say they have developed a technique to shape it with steam or whatnot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sean Manning
|
| Posted: Sat 30 Jan, 2016 1:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for the cite to Berthold Laufer, Chinese clay figures (link to Internet Archive).
| Timo Nieminen wrote: | | The classic examples of coats stopping swords are from the Crimean War. Heavy Russian wool greatcoats. Some participant accounts from the Heavy Brigade at Balaclava note coats stopping sword cuts (and thrusts). E.g., "hussar who cut at my head, but the brass pot stood well, and my head is only slightly bruised. I cut again at him, but do not believe that I hurt him more than he hurt me. I received a blow on the shoulder at the same time, which was given by some other man, but the edge must have been very badly delivered for it has only cut my coat and slightly bruised my shoulder." |
Another classic set comes from India in the eighteenth and nineteenth century, where most of the native cavalry (and some irregular infantry) wore heavy coats which British cavalry had trouble cutting through. Here is one example. Very many others from Balaclava and India are gathered in D.A. Kinsley's book with the ever-changing names and editions.
In the eighteenth century Donald McBane felt that a hat with a wet handkerchief stuffed inside it was likely to stop cuts from a backsword. Pre-20th-century cloth and felt and leather tend to be very sturdy by our standards since the materials were so precious that it was worth using them carefully.
Or one can just try cutting many layers of cloth or a few with lots of cotton batting inside or thick wool felt ... most people who have never cut through things with a sword before find that it is harder than it looks.
|
|
|
|
|
Eric S
|
| Posted: Sat 30 Jan, 2016 12:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sean Manning wrote: |
Another classic set comes from India in the eighteenth and nineteenth century, where most of the native cavalry (and some irregular infantry) wore heavy coats which British cavalry had trouble cutting through. Here is one example. Very many others from Balaclava and India are gathered in D.A. Kinsley's book with the ever-changing names and editions.
In the eighteenth century Donald McBane felt that a hat with a wet handkerchief stuffed inside it was likely to stop cuts from a backsword. Pre-20th-century cloth and felt and leather tend to be very sturdy by our standards since the materials were so precious that it was worth using them carefully.
Or one can just try cutting many layers of cloth or a few with lots of cotton batting inside or thick wool felt ... most people who have never cut through things with a sword before find that it is harder than it looks. |
Sean, are you kidding here | Quote: | | If you meet with a Man with Sword and Target, and you with your small sword, take off your Coat and Roll it around your Left Hand, and take a wet Napkin and put it under your Hat, and that will prevent his Cuts |
, just because someone says something ridiculous does not make it true, this sounds like something Dan would say.
Sean, even your quote says that | Quote: | | During his travels in India Fitzclarence examined some of the jackets which Indian cavalry wore. Many other Europeans complained that it was hard to cut armoured enemies, although some insisted that better training and a sharp blade would solve the problem. |
Notice that part about a sharp blade and better training? Once again, you can find incidents were a coat was said to stop a blade, but was the sword sharp and how was the coat constructed and did the person know how to use a sword properly, was there a hauberk hidden under the coat?. I can also show you quotes stating that even the British acknowledged that their swords were not kept sharp compared to Indian troops. As for the Indian coats that you mention | Quote: | | The irregular cavalry throughout India are mostly dressed in quilted cotton jackets; though the best of these habiliments are not, as I supposed, stuffed with cotton, but are a number of cotton cloths quilted together. This serves as a defensive armour, and when their heads are swathed round, and under the chin, with linen to a thickness of several folds, it is almost hopeless with the sword to make an impression upon them. They also at time stuff their jackets with the refuse silk of the coccoons, which they say will even turn a ball. There is, in England, a similar idea respecting a silken handkerchief. |
These were not "winter coats", there were garments specifically constructed as defensive clothing such as the Indian armor pictured below.
Here is a quote from "A History of the British Cavalry 1816-1919: Volume 3: 1872-1898" by Lord Anglesey which specifically addresses the sharpness of the swords used by Indian troops (sowars) compared to European troops, and another quote showing that the Indians had not trouble slicing through the british uniforms to the point that the Briish started wearing mail on their sholders to keep their arms from being lopped off.
Indian cloth armor, once again, not a "winter coat" but a garment specifically designed as armor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jean-Carle Hudon
|
| Posted: Sat 30 Jan, 2016 3:04 pm Post subject: Fantasy Armor |
|
|
To get back to the original thread, which dealt with sea shells and fantasy, I wonder if your fantasy world might have giant sting rays. Ray skin has been used for sword grip material and layering textiles is known as a textile armoring technique, so some combination should be available in a fantasy mode. Also shells might not be sufficient as armor, but whalebone was used to stiffen corsets, so again shell scales, and whale bone, walrus tusk, sown in between textiles or skins should help a fantasy warrior temporarily ward fantasy blows, allowing the hero time for a well placed riposte, and would give lots of work to the faithful fantasy sidekick who, for all intents and purposes, should be a skilled tailor/armorer...Have fun.
Bon coeur et bon bras
|
|
|
|
|
Benjamin H. Abbott
|
| Posted: Sat 30 Jan, 2016 7:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
As far as cuts go, remember that they varied in power and the ability to defeat defenses. I've always found that wet-napkin passage from Donald McBane curious. However, I can see how a hat reinforced with cloth would make a decent makeshift helmet and would protect against many of the cuts likely to land in a duel. I'm skeptical it would be much good against full blows made by a strong arm in George Silver's style; circa-1600 English coroner's rolls in include cuts that deeply penetrate the skull. The cut-vs.-thrust argument raged for the entire time swords saw martial use. While McBane had an undeniably impressive career, the weight of the evidence I've seen from medical and military records supports Silver's position: on unarmored targets, powerful cuts tend to disable more often than thrusts.
There's little question that soldiers at times did wear defensive gear specifically designed to prevent or reduce the severity of sword cuts. For example, Sir John Smythe recommended sleeves striped with narrow stripes of cerecloth or mail, specifically to resist sword cuts. Various 16th-century sources noted mail sleeves for their defense of the arms against sword cuts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael Brudon
Location: South Pacific Joined: 21 Dec 2013
Posts: 107
|
| Posted: Sat 30 Jan, 2016 9:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Back to the OP I think you should just go ahead and design your shell armour and crab armour without worrying too much how these items on earth do. As mentioned our earth creatures materials are probably no good for your purposes any way you stretch it.
But if you have your giant cow crab shell with its own chemical composition who can argue?
Maybe explain the armour has multiple layers with a special curing process needed( opportunity for discussing a sub culture of 'armourers' or tribal 'shellsmiths' in your world) then you can make it do whatever you want.
Also draw a distinction to "normal shells" or "small edible crab species" , so readers know not to compare your special armour-worthy species with the 'normal species'. That should keep everyone including regular fans, biologists and armour fans happy 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nat Lamb
|
| Posted: Sun 31 Jan, 2016 12:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
special resin made from boiling seaweed x and fish bladder from species y that makes crab shell tougher when treated?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sean Manning
|
| Posted: Sun 31 Jan, 2016 12:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Baileen (any hard material from a whale) and horn were absolutely used for armour by cultures with access to steel. Others have addressed why crabshell and seashells don't make good armour in our world. But if everything was the same as our world, it would not be a fantasy setting ...
| Benjamin H. Abbott wrote: | | As far as cuts go, remember that they varied in power and the ability to defeat defenses. I've always found that wet-napkin passage from Donald McBane curious. However, I can see how a hat reinforced with cloth would make a decent makeshift helmet and would protect against many of the cuts likely to land in a duel. |
Well, I try to base my opinions on people who have seen a thing happen rather than just reasoning about it. And I have read dozens of stories like the ones which Fitzclarence and McBane tell, read people's descriptions of cutting parties, and participated in a few myself. Thick coats, fur or felt hats, and rolls of turban or wadded rags have stopped very many cuts from doing serious damage, although some people with some swords can cut right through them. You or Eric are welcome to try it yourselves. Most people armed with most swords are disappointed the first few times they try cutting at a simulation of heavy clothing from a few hundred years ago.
Last edited by Sean Manning on Sun 31 Jan, 2016 12:55 am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
Eric S
|
| Posted: Sun 31 Jan, 2016 12:47 am Post subject: Re: Armor made from sea shells and crustacean exoskeletons |
|
|
| Nicholas Penner wrote: | First off, I should make clear that I am trying to do some research for a fantasy book that I am writing. I have asked this topic before on a couple of writing forums, but did not learn much.
Arms and armor made from sea shells and the exoskeletons of crabs. Sounds crazy, right? Why would anyone use these when you have metal to work with? Well in my book I am writing, the world has little metal to mine that is easily accessible to the people there. Mostly because this is a fantasy world of mine where I just decided that most of the metal would be very deep underground, and also the inhabitants of this world are still in sort of a very late stone age.
|
Nicholas, here are a few crocodile armors that might give you some ideas.
|
|
|
|
|
Eric S
|
| Posted: Sun 31 Jan, 2016 1:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sean Manning wrote: | | Well, I try to base my opinions on people who have seen a thing happen rather than just reasoning about it. And I have read dozens of stories like the ones which Fitzclarence and McBane tell, read people's descriptions of cutting parties, and participated in a few myself. Thick coats, fur or felt hats, and rolls of turban or wadded rags have stopped very many cuts from doing serious damage, although some people with some swords can cut right through them. You or Eric are welcome to try it yourselves. Most people armed with most swords are disappointed the first few times they try cutting at a simulation of heavy clothing from a few hundred years ago. |
Sean, Dan did not say anyting about "heavy clothing from a few hundred years ago", he did not mention "thick coats, fur or felt hats, and rolls of turban or wadded rags, etc etc.
| Dan Howard wrote: | | Pretty much anything can stop cutting attacks; a winter coat will stop cutting attacks |
He did not say that there are instances of coats stopping a cutting attack etc, he said "a winter coat will stop cutting attacks"....This is typical Dan Howard, he says something ridiculous and then scurrys away and lets someone else try to find a way to make his ridiculous statement true. So I will ask you, do you agree with Dans statement as it is or not? Does anyone here have the ability to read the words as they are written and either agree or disagree without trying to find one instance in history that may fit Dans statement or to twist his words into meaning something else.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bram Verbeek
|
| Posted: Sun 31 Jan, 2016 1:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
I thought the 18th and 19th century spadroons were quite bad for the cut, a proper sword would fare better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sean Manning
|
| Posted: Sun 31 Jan, 2016 2:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Eric S wrote: | | So I will ask you, do you agree with Dans statement as it is or not? Does anyone here have the ability to read the words as they are written and either agree or disagree without trying to find one instance in history that may fit Dans statement or to twist his words into meaning something else. |
I think that many cuts against heavy garments, such as a quilted or thick felt coat, will not do serious damage to the wearer. There are so many accounts of that, and it is so easy to test for oneself, that it should not be controversial. I already gave two (Fitzclarence's folds of turban and McBane's handkerchief inside a hat) but D.A. Kinsley's book contains many more.
I am not interested in arguing whether a loose statement by someone else is "mostly right" or "mostly wrong" but I do want to lay out some evidence about a very well documented aspect of hand-to-hand combat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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