Other Medieval Weapons

Q&A: was medieval European armor truly helpful or was it just for display?

Problem by Sam: was medieval European armor in fact helpful or was it just for demonstrate?
you know these medieval knights dressed up in all that armor(seeking great). did that armor truly protect them? i indicate i saw some photos and swords spears arrows had went via them like scorching knife by means of butter. is that why Muslims owned them before ? due to the fact they really manufactured armor that was supplied adequate safety and permitted the soldiers to move more less difficult?

Very best reply:

Solution by Krunchee
Armor was great protection. Mitigation, not invincibility, is the genuine function of armor. A fatal blow may possibly be lowered to a wound, or a wounding blow may do nothing at all. Armor has never been designed to make a warrior completely invulnerable to hurt on the battlefield, it can be often been a trade off amongst protection and mobility.

Create your very own reply in the feedback!

Related posts

One Thought to “Q&A: was medieval European armor truly helpful or was it just for display?”

  1. paul v

    The armor protected them very well against arrows and swords. Don’t believe what you see in movies.
    They actually beat he muslims in the crusades. After a one-year march through the Balkans and the Middle East they were strong enough to beat the Arab armies and occupy the Holy Land for 200 years.
    Body armor was only used by knights, as it was very expensive. Ordinary soldiers had to do with chain mail.
    Armor became useless after the invention of firearms, to which armor was no protection.

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.