The Met armor isn't the only example with straps on the front. And this armor style would have started becoming more prevalent towards the end of the medieval era to wealthy mercenaries and bands that didn't have the manpower or option to take servants.
Yes... and no. You see, the Corrazina is a later 14th and early 15th century armor. It was a knightly armor, and it had the straps at the back.
What you're referring to is a later development of the corazzina, known as the brigandine. It was an infantry development, with two main differences. While the corrazina became the solid breastplates you see in the 15th century, the brigandine went the other way and had tons of small plates, which was easier to make. It was generally an infantry armor, with the straps at the front. It is not the same armor, and should not be confused. It came a few decades later
Full Plate Armor overall was already falling out of use by this time in the way we saw it in the medieval era as it was just too cumbersome and unpractical to use, even those who could afford it weren't using it.
Oh no, it was definitely not. I don't know where you got that idea from. There's so much wrong with that sentence
Plate armor never actually fell out of use. Full plate harnesses did yes, but that was in the 17th century, not the 15th. And even so curaissers still used breastplates, and even some WW2 troops used heavy metal armor. The body armor worn today is still steel plates (unless you use kevlar).
"it was just too cumbersome and unpractical to use"
Said no one ever. That has ever used plate armor at least. It is neither cumbersome nor unpractical. A general 15th century suit weighed around 25-30 kg, and that's the mail and helmet counted too. The 30 kg was really only the Italian armors, since they for some reason still wore full mail shirts under their plate armors. Most other regions did only wear mail sleeves or voiders, which brought the weight down a few kilos
visitors can't see pics , please
register or
loginThe second part of it was that the weight was distributed
naturally across your body. The breastplate is distributed mostly on your waist and a bit on your shoulders. The arm armor goes on the arm. The leg armor goes on the leg.
What this does is that you don't actually feel the weight excessively. You still tire faster than without wearing it, and movement is slightly limited. But to call it
cumbersome? No, never
It was extremely practical too, being able to stop virtually any weapon, from lances to crossbows and even firearms if we're talking 16th century plate.
Everyone who could afford it wore it.
And if you still don't believe me: just look at this guy go climbing, doing a sommersault and even a half flip in mid 15th century armor:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-bnM5SuQkI
Show Posts
