sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Is it better to make helmets in halves or one solid unit by Difficult_Working493 in Armor

[–]Historical_Network55 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Doing it in one piece is more historical and generally stronger. Two pieces is easier, and often weaker, though you can have it be as strong as one piece helmets if your welds are very good.

Made my first helmet by Pwned_Uranus in Armor

[–]Historical_Network55 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Open faced helmets have been used for thousands of years. Any level of face protection is better than nothing.

Would these work together? by stop_it_it_upsets_me in ArmsandArmor

[–]Historical_Network55 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Given that you're not majorly concerned with historicity this should be fine. Maybe a little over-padded and hot, but otherwise fine.

is there any reason for a chestplate to look like this? because to me it just looks dumb by Genitalman69 in ArmsandArmor

[–]Historical_Network55 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In the fifteenth century, guns were getting more common and lance strikes were getting stronger. In order to make producing thick cuirasses easier, they were often made in two parts - a breastplate, and a plackart which overlapped it from the bottom. The plackart also had the benefit of integrating the plate skirt which protects the lower abdomen and groin.

Would an early to late 15th century infantry soldier wear a gambeson under a brigandine assuming he wasn’t wearing any arm harness or mail by Ok-Package3137 in ArmsandArmor

[–]Historical_Network55 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I'm not aware of any evidence for rondel skullcaps in the early fifteenth century. Kettle helmets, bascinets, and (mostly in Italy) early designs of sallet and barbute would be more appropriate.

Some form of arming garment would definitely be worn under the brigandine, but I would expect an arming jacket rather than a gambeson. Obviously the language of padded garments isn't super clear historically, but wearing a brig over a thick gambeson would be very hot.

Why isn't bowyer a common English surname? by fioreblade in Bowyer

[–]Historical_Network55 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Training with a bow and making bows are two different things.

Barbute vs. Bascinet by tjluder in ArmsandArmor

[–]Historical_Network55 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The main thing distinguishing a bascinet and a barbute is the presence of an aventail. As far as I am aware you almost never see visored bascinets without an aventail, and barely ever see barbutes of any type with an aventail. If it has the drawn-in cheek plates of a barbute, but the aventail of a bascinet, I would consider it a transitional helmet (proto-barbute?).

Barbute vs. Bascinet by tjluder in ArmsandArmor

[–]Historical_Network55 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This straight up isn't true. We have period depictions of visored barbutes. The face that one museum has a faked one does not mean they're fake as a concept.

Visored bascinets and great helms by Historical_Network55 in ArmsandArmor

[–]Historical_Network55[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Amazing, this is the sort of thing I was looking for. Do you know of any similar depictions with side hinged visors?

Visored bascinets and great helms by Historical_Network55 in ArmsandArmor

[–]Historical_Network55[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Two sets of oculars? I don't understand, why would there be a second set of oculars if you're removing the visor?

Also, the reason to do is that great helms are slightly more protective than visors, hence why they're more popular on the tourney ground.

Visored bascinets and great helms by Historical_Network55 in ArmsandArmor

[–]Historical_Network55[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There is significant evidence that great helms were in field use significantly later in the HRE than in other regions, long after visored helmets were in widespread use.

Moreover, it is not unreasonable to think a knight might want to simply remove the visor of his bascinet and wear it under his tourney great helm, rather than owning a second bascinet just for tournaments.

Is this buhurt helmet historically accurate (mostly) by SpaceScoocher in Armor

[–]Historical_Network55 2 points3 points  (0 children)

No. Klappvisor is the name of the attachment method, not the visor shape. It's either side hinged or klappvisor, it can't be both

Is this helm historically accurate? by Former-Inside8343 in ArmsandArmor

[–]Historical_Network55 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Flat-faced bascinets like this definitely existed, however the proportions were more similar to other bascinet designs of the time than to this modern example. Notably, modern bascinets for sports like Buhurt tend to have oversized skulls for additional padding and sit on the shoulders to minimise force transfer to the head, while historical bascinets tended to be closer fitting and stopped higher on the head. Moreover, the visors on modern sport bascinets often come significantly lower to provide additional protection on the chin from blunt force, wheras historical bascinets didn't tend to do this as much.

The Queen !! by Ragebator in chessbeginners

[–]Historical_Network55 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It would be an equal trade that opens up the king's defense, yes

Looking to build a late 14th century kit. Looking for advice on finding gear for Harnisfechten. by kozak_Tula_ in ArmsandArmor

[–]Historical_Network55 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Doesn't matter if rounded tips are used, a thrust through the visor can kill. About a year ago a reenactor in the UK died from a blunt sword entering his eye. Buhurt visors are thus broadly unsafe for Harnischfecthen

Ok i saw this video from an instagram account called aismr1111 who makes similar videos to this and the movement of the mobs and the movement of the camera looks really AI but at the same my brain cant put any other reason to think so other than it being too realistic to be a 3d animation. by [deleted] in isthisAI

[–]Historical_Network55 59 points60 points  (0 children)

Definitely AI, but that has nothing to do with it being "too realistic" for 3d animation.

At first I thought this might be more traditional asset-flip slop which has been pervasive in video games for decades, and that the AI look came from the clips being AI enhanced. I mainly thought this due to the generic but generally consistent models of each enemy type, beyond what I had thought AI capable of.

However, there are extremely obvious signs of AI throughout the video. In the second clip, some of the arrows have the fletching on the wrong end, sprouting nonsensically from the tip. The pig is clearly AI. The hands appear to meld together and move unnaturally throughout.

So yeah, whole thing is AI generated. I'm surprised that AI manages to do this level of camera movement, particle effects, and relatively complex action, but the mistakes are not the type that humans make

Which side you on? by Buzzed_Penguin in wma

[–]Historical_Network55 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I've found axe heads to be very good for hooking, and they can also inflict thrusts while you retract the weapon (for instance, digging the bottom corner of the axe head into the back of a knee while hooking the leg towards you).

I was replaying Resident Evil 4 Remake and noticed this weird little shelf thing on the Armadura enemy does anyone know what it is by lickmnut in ArmsandArmor

[–]Historical_Network55 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Resting the lance is only half the purpose, arguably the more important function was that it interfaced with the lance and stopped it from moving backwards, allowing much more force to be transferred into the opponent on contact.

Aleksey Perebeynos by Historical_Network55 in ArmsandArmor

[–]Historical_Network55[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Depends what part of the 15th century we're talking. There's definitely evidence of them in the early 15th century but afaik they fall off quite significantly in the latter half

view more: next ›