Armor

Why did Russia use the eastern half-plate-half-mail armor? Their armor is nearly identical to that of the Ottomans.

Was it due to them being conquered by the Mongols and then copieng them?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous
    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      cultural, economic and political influences from steppe peoples, and technological limitations.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Ottoman armor of that same period.

    Plus, why did the Russian use the same equipment?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Why did two Muslims Turkik country used same equipment

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      All the steppe nomads had a military-culture continuum from 'Korea' to Hungary. The "Ottoman armor" is an evolution of the Byzantine armor with chinese, persian and local influence. Russia/Nogvorod/etc were influenced by norsemen and Byzantium (the main actor doing controlled migrations-settlement-invasions by nomads).

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Pretty much. The Steppes had basically one military superculyure and everybody did more or less identical things.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Those helmets are pretty neat

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >why did these asiatic """people""" with asiatic culture use asiatic armor?
    hmm I sure wonder why anon

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    wasn't all good plate armor esentially just made in a few places in germany and italy?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Nah, it became quite widespread. But underdeveloped regions to the East didn't have the resources or skills to make it.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        wasn't all good plate armor esentially just made in a few places in germany and italy?

        Maybe the fact is in reference to some specific sort of plate. But plate was fielded quite commonly by English and French armies in the Hundred Years War. It was ubiquitous. It became more rare as fire arms took root for many reasons, one being that making plate actually worth using on a field where guns were common was expensive and harder to do. Also, you had a whole shift in how militaries were put together which meant men at arms no longer had the budgets they once did.

        Plate usage really peaks towards the end of the Hundred Years War and in the Italian mercenary campaigns.

        The armor used in later periods, pretty much reserved for the elite, was largely made in Germany and Italy if I recall correctly, but it was also uncommon by then. But this would be the final evolution of full plate, which increasingly was used for jousting more than warfare.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Yes and no.

        The half-plate-half-mail armor allowed heavy cavalry to do more than just charge into battle. By opting for this style instead of full plate armor, they could also act as horse archers. The Turks, who were known for their skirmishing tactics, had a range of skirmishers, including regular archers, light horse archers, and the versatile Sipahi, who could shoot arrows while on horseback. Their goal was to disrupt enemy formations and take advantage of any weaknesses before launching powerful heavy cavalry charges.

        A great example of this strategy in action is the Battle of Nicopolis.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Here we see a brave and noble Swadian Knight defend his butter yield against a swarthy Sarranid Mamluke eager for spreadable dairy fats.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            A Rhodok bolt strikes down the fools who came in range of his castle

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >The half-plate-half-mail armor allowed heavy cavalry
          Not so heavy cavalry, lol

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Light-heavyweight?

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              medium is the techincal term

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous
      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        It became widespread, but it was still almost all made in northern Italy or western Germany. Have you heard of "exports", moron?

        [...]
        Maybe the fact is in reference to some specific sort of plate. But plate was fielded quite commonly by English and French armies in the Hundred Years War. It was ubiquitous. It became more rare as fire arms took root for many reasons, one being that making plate actually worth using on a field where guns were common was expensive and harder to do. Also, you had a whole shift in how militaries were put together which meant men at arms no longer had the budgets they once did.

        Plate usage really peaks towards the end of the Hundred Years War and in the Italian mercenary campaigns.

        The armor used in later periods, pretty much reserved for the elite, was largely made in Germany and Italy if I recall correctly, but it was also uncommon by then. But this would be the final evolution of full plate, which increasingly was used for jousting more than warfare.

        Whenever you find English or French records of plate armors being bought it's almost always Italian, Flemish or German imports.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        It's the difference of mode of warfare between East vs West. Russians inherited a mentality from Turko-Mongols

        West (Germany and Westwards) planned warfare around the battle itself and focused on the vanguard. It resulted in heavy armor and drilling formations, the goal was trying to route the enemy in an exchange of violence. Eastern perception of warfare was very different and the focus was about trying to set themselves up a more advantageous position forcing the enemy to route. This meant they wanted maneuverability for their soldiers and the focus was controlling high ground, cutting enemies off from water, harassing baggage lines, general steppe tactics of feign retreats and ambushes.

        plate armor existed in east but it wasn't popular because it was too heavy and negated their preferred battle tactics which weren't vanguard focused.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Also I'll add that plate armor provided almost no protection from double recurve bows, which the East was full of. The most effective armor in the East was leather armor on silk undergarments (if you could afford it). Armies in the East were more concerned with bows.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Leather on silk more protective than plate
            Lol
            LMAO

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              I think the point he was trying to make is that the arrowhead wouldnt puncture the silk, just get wrapped up in it. The arrow is still gonna pen you but its much much easier to pull out. I read this in a mongol book 30 years ago so it might be some fuddlore

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              boiled leather curiasses were fairly tough, not on the same level as plate but far lighter and less brutal on hot days. the silk undies were thought to reduce the severity of a puncture wound, not prevent one.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Also I'll add that plate armor provided almost no protection from double recurve bows
            LMAO

            There is no difference in power between a 160 lb self bow and a 160 lb recurve, when both have the same draw stroke, the only difference is in portability and the fact that you need to be a taller man to get the same length of draw stroke with a recurve as you would with a self-bow, because the recurve is naturally deeper when strung and at rest.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >There is no difference in power between a 160 lb self bow and a 160 lb recurve, when both have the same draw stroke,
              Akshually there is. Recurves have better efficiency and turn more of the stored energy into arrow kinetic energy. Also recurve with same max draw strength stores much more energy because it starts with higher draw strength in beginning of the draw.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Also I'll add that plate armor provided almost no protection from double recurve bows, which the East was full of.
            Yeah this is why they wore mail.
            3rd wold cope.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >plate armor provided almost no protection from double recurve bows
            ??
            The western longbow performed better against armor than typical eastern warbows would be because their length allows them to launch heavier arrows more effectively, which is also why the manchus preferred bows that were larger than their contemporaries along with heavier arrows. And even if they did perform better, there's not a chance of any arrow getting through plate, I'm really not sure what you mean by this.

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Why did Russia use the eastern half-plate-half-mail armor?
    Hmmm probably because they are in the east? Byzantines use the same armor too.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Well to be fair, all of these armor so far are Byzantine.

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Russia got spoiled by it's neigh unconquerable climate so they tended to slack behind the latest military advances.

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Because we mainly fought steppe nomads and you can only fight horse archers with more horse archers

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    You cannot really move or see in full plate armor. This was reserved almost exclusively for mounted cavalry. They were likely expected to be able to dismount and fight on foot, or were infantry.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >You cannot really move or see in full plate armor.
      This some kind of joke?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Your fuddb8 is lacking

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Similar environment I imagine. Russia gets cold but it snows in Anatolia too. It also gets obscenely hot too. Both wanted something that breathes a little.

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The answer is because they were mainly culturally influenced by the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantines) and by the Vikings, and therefore primarily inherited their types of armor that happen to converge in style to that of the saracens.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Change Vikings and Byzantines to Golden Horde and Ottomans and your post will go from completly moronic to actually reasonable

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Horseback archery

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    This armor was extremely maneuverable, in Europe at that time, powerful head-on collisions occurred most often, where it was difficult to move in the heat of battle and the strength of the armor played a greater role than its mobility

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Why did some countries geographically located in Eastern Europe, such as Bohemia, Poland, Lithuania, Hungary, etc. adopted Western style of warfare of chivalric armored knights, whereas in Novogorod, Kiev, Muscovy, they remained more Mongolic and Turkic influence?

    You are not permitted to answer, because Czechs, Poles and Lithuanians were more exposed to Western influence.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      because they had more in common with mongols, tatars and other steppeBlack folk to begin with, living side to side and intermixing from the get-go

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Western style of warfare of chivalric armored knights
      Armored knights warfare was brought to Europe by Alans, the steppe empire succeeding Huns and preceding Hungarians. Early Medieval Western Europe was the barbaric Black person frontier of the Great Steppe civilization just like antique Northern Europe was the barbaric Black person frontier of the Roman civilization.

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Scythian type armors were all developed on the steppes or at least are first noticed there or in central and eastern Europe. It is far more likely that the Mongols and Ottomans copied these armor types from the migrating Slavs, Magyars, and Germanics. It is also possible that these armors were copied from much earlier times by other less known peoples. But long bows, scaled, plate, composite, and mail armors all are seen in central (Alps region to Carpathian basin) and eastern Europe or on the steppes more than 3000 years ago.

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Was it due to them being conquered by the Mongols and then copieng them?
    Yes.
    Also poor production capabilities so Russians imported much of arms and armor from neighbors and such neighbors happen to be Asian.

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Russians literally needed Dutch entrepreneurs to teach them how to make steel (and latter Soviet "industrialisation" was made by American businessesman).

    In 1632, Tsar Mikhail Fedorovich gave the Dutch merchant Vinius a patent on the construction of an ironworks in the region of Tula. Production was based on the Didilov mine. It was no longer “bog iron”, but deposits of high-quality iron ore near the village of Didilovo. The issue with the labor force was decided by assigning an entire volost to the enterprise, so the category of assigned peasants began to arise. In addition, “eager people,” that is, freelance workers, also worked at the enterprise. Vinius' enterprise became a real manufactory using machines.

    Soon, Vinius was joined by the Dutch merchant Filimon Akema and the Danish from Hamburg, Peter Marcelis. They built three more manufactories in the Tula region ("Gorodische plants"). At the enterprises not only Russians worked, but also masters invited from Europe. Marcelis and Akema built several more iron-making manufactories on the Sknig River (Kashirsky Plants). These iron enterprises became the core of metallurgy in Russia. However, an attempt to launch copper production in Karelia and free itself from expensive imported metal failed. Due to the small reserves of copper, the high complexity of the work and the associated significant costs, the plant was declared unprofitable and closed. True, in the 1680s in Karelia they were able to open five metallurgical manufactories on water energy ("Olonets factories")

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      the basis for the increase in industry under the tsars was also imported expertise and machinery from the low countries and france.
      the entire basis for russian industry is imports

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *