Hello there it's me DragoNut1 I am an avid history nut so I thought why not start a thread on history I know this thread is a little out of place in this forum but it was the this is the only place I could put it that was halfway appropriate for this subject, also if you are a new age type PLEASE GO AWAY this thread is for serious history I have no problem with the occasianal odd fact or two but no one wants to discuss aliens, pyriamid power, or atlantis. And this thread is not intended for any historical event past the fifteenth century A.D because after that century people switched from plate armor and swords to muskets and things got boring... (until the machine gun was invented:D but thats another story). so post away please and if anyone has any qustions on ancient times or the middle ages (specifically weapons and warfare) I'll do my best to answer them.

If you're reading this post, like many people you're probably thinking that people in the middle ages were barbaric and unwashed, and that medieval knights were slow, heavy and clumsy. Don't get me wrong, I'm not judging you for that. However, I'd like to disprove that. Many people assume that medieval people were smaller in stature compared to people today based on the size of suits of armor. However, those suits of armor are decorational and are in three quarter scale to show off the craftsmanship. Actual suits of armor that were intended for a real fight have been found for men that stood six feet five inches tall (keep in mind that a knight's diet was protein based) and seventeenth century plate armor weighed only sixty pounds, considerably less than sixteenth century jousting armor. The next post will be about medieval swords and martial arts.

-DragoNut1

many people assume that medieval swords were slow, dull, ponderous and clumsy in fact historians have claimed that medieval swords weighed more than forty pounds, However this simply is not true even great swords some which are over six feet long rarely weighed more than six pounds and those that did were almost always blunt cerimonial or parade weapons and medieval swords were made of carbon steel. many medieval martial arts texts show open handed blows, backhands, grappling bone breaking and even pressure point manipulation although medieval fighters of that era preferred grappling so a duel would have been like wrestling match with swords, and no the katana was not the ultimate sword (appearantly the japanese have'nt done anything to discourage this myth) it coudn't chop into volkswagons or concrete pillars and because of their fine edges they were very prone to chipping and they could break just as easily as a medieval sword also the medieval knight did not chop at his enemy (contrary to what hollywood shows) as plate armor became more common sword fighting styles gravitated toward thrusting for the gaps in a mans armor and a knight parried with the flat of the blade not the edge and they struck with only the first eight to ten inches of the blade. The next post will be on medieval armor and the knight. DragoNut1

Many people assume that medieval armor was slow and clumsy and that advanced missle weapons doomed the knight other experts disagree citing recent metallurgical studies. saying that from the fourteenth century on medieval armor was made of hardened steel plate which could easily turn musket fire of the time (incedintlly plate armor was made as a response to crossbows), contemporary sourses claim that even armor piercing weapons like axes, war hammers and maces, had a hard time getting through plate armor and once in a while they actually did get through plate armor. Supposedly crossbows and longbows couyld get through plate armor and chain main mail at close range but by then a knight would be close enough to kill you. They think that it was economics that doomed the knight I think it was pikes, new more powerful artillery (Knights don't do so good when boulders are raining down on them although the best trebuchet in the world does'nt do you any good if it's operators have been shot) and economics together that doomed the knight along with the new combined arms tactics from switzerland. also a knights armor and weapons and barding (horse armor) if he could afford all that were extremly expensive to purchase, upgrade, and maintain. not to mention the fact theat knights had political power which could make a king extremly nervous if his hold on power got fragile. thats all for now I'll keep you posted ha ha

Please excuse my ignorance... could you explain if medievel armour would stop a bullet from say 1914, if not , why?
was it the modern adoption of gunpowder that killed off the knight?
This may seem basic but you hear of soldiers in ww1 being saved by cigarette cases and helmets.

There are several accounts of people in the eighteen hundreds using steel body armor with varying degrees of sucsess and back they didn't have hollow point and explosive rounds and tkae the ciggarette case story's with a grain of salt if I were you. What really killed of the medieval knights was economics.

What does that have to do with medieval military history? I believe that what you are doing is constituted as spamming, on most forum's you would be banned for that. If you want to know about israel and palestine start your own thread instead of hijacking perfectly good ones with off topic posts or go to another forum(s) that deals with that sort of thing.

Apologies for my post I have no Idea how it turned up here

That's okay just don't do it again.... please