The socio-economics of Iroquoian armour.
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 4 окт 2024
- Link to part one. • Iroquoian wooden armou...
Link to part two. • Iroquoian wooden armou...
Link to part three. • Iroquoian armour part ...
Link to part four. • A brief demonstration ...
Link to part five. • Virtual tour. Aquiento...
Link to patreon if you are so inclined.
www.patreon.co...
Yes! Specialization of labour causes class to emerge and reinforce itself.
There is no unskilled labour, if anyone can do it it is UBIQUITOUS labour and paid for at a baseline rate of exploitability (minimum wage if your nation has one).
The higher salary of specialized jobs does not mean that they are more productive than others. They are just not as ubiquitous to employ and take more time to train. They are chokepoints that funnel and amplify large amounts of less specialized labour using more or less ubiquitous means of production. "unskilled" workers are not inherently less valuable or productive. They are just cheaper and easier to replace and all compete with each other.
A great example for this is child labour being used to mine rare earth minerals needed for the manufacturing of microelectronics.
Greater differences in skill specialization along the production chain of a product lead to greater stratification, estrangement and inequality among the workers.
Thank you based Marx 😘
@@astebbinall the comment says is that specialization produces social classes. There's no value judgement being made.
@@guernica5413 a good chunk of what marx wrote was just that, material analysis.
Thanks for breaking down something I knew but could not explain.
@@inthefade There are benefits to capitalism. Before capitalism, mankind produced a single product.
A bunch of people, usually a family or a tribe produced corn, twine, etc., the Tanner family tanned hides, the Baker family baked bread, Stonebridge clan were masons, etc., Capitalism broke all that down and the Tanners along with the Smiths and the Stonebridge families all began working under the same roof, combing their crafts in what was the first stage of manufacture some 400 years ago. The very beginnings of capitalism in the history of work coincides with te beginning of social revolutions changing the members of society as equal owners divided into buyers and sellers, a Free Market.
In the second stage of manufacturing the new division of work in the workshop. Best illustrated in the work process of watch making where one man makes a whole product but a gold smith and artist are in the process refinishing the watch took another several hundred years before somebody developed a machine that can make a watch and pushed the whole economy into a third stage of manufacturing using complex tools, and less skilled labor, and less labor in general, the beginnings of the downside of capitalism, when some industries were still powered by human labor, other industries converted over to tools, until the fourth stage the complex tool became powered by steam, oil, gas, coal and the machines made smaller, as technology shrunk the mass of people displaced by automation swelled, and labor become thoroughly unskilled work side by side a more advanced machine, and workers produced a part of the total product, thus a social product, with a cheaper price. The electronics of a car are made in China, the frame of the car is made with steel from the US, the paint of a car made by another industry and for long the whole economy is built on machine manufacturing spread across the world containing less labor and less value per unit to produce. Cheapening the cost to make a car, a house, growing food, simultaneously, produces material wealth beyond comprehension. The share of which material wealth is accumulated by a single capitalist or a handful of rich nations as the case may be. The last stage of production after machinery has become the basis where social products dominate the economies of the world is to match that production with an appropriate social form the Free Market system is not! Laissez Faire Capitalism was a form of production appropriate to the first three stages of manufacturing but not in the fourth where it begins to fail and definitely inappropriate for the last stage of this human progress. America can never compete with China. Here is why?
You can buy a pair of good quality boots direct from the factory in China but you cannot buy a boot direct from a factory in the US. China’s price for the boot will always be lower than the price of the American boot because the Free Market system has a bunch of middle men selling the boots the factory cannot simply turn away and blame as the reason prices cannot go lower. If American manufacturers did this they would all be hung by the neck till dead for not being patriotic. Sadly the American capitalist is caught between a rock and hard place choked by a powerful lobby of American retailers and beaten by a foreign competitor.
I like the idea that there’s just one guy who’s a string wizard, and totally into the philosophical attributes of string and its means of production.
honestly i'd love to have seen his reaction to a spindle , like i am imagining just complete happyness that they can make string faster !
If survival games have taught me right, string is like gold!
Lots of women were and are string wizards. But I bet ol' Bezalel could talk their ears off about the lore, creation techniques, and applications of all thread materials.
Ever seen the film Mouse Hunt?
Level 12 String Wizard 🧙♂️🪢
Great video. As usual, excellent points. The community might also reason "Bob is a jerk, but he is a big strong jerk and we want him to survive and deal his massive damage well into the fight. Let's make him a suit of armour even though he is not our favourite neighbour in peacetime."
the real question is when to use armor or when not to use it. I would like to see some of the tests to see how well wood armor holds up in combat. My first thought was it would be effective against Arrows so it would be great for those shooting bows defensively.
@@MrChickennugget360 He has a video about it. It makes you difficult to wound with stone arrows and stone spears, but metal can get through and it offers almost no help against bullets.
@@Genktarov Turns a fatal stone arrow wound into a miserable, giant purple bruise instead--great bargain, really.
The armour is extremely good against blunt force.
@@MrChickennugget360You'll find such tests all over his channel. It performs quite well against most things it would reasonably encounter and some it wouldn't.
even in Asia especially south east Asian there are a lot of ethnic groups or tribes that used wooden armor or in my country in the olden times the common people and peasants used rattan and, if you are wealthy you might ad a plated buffalo horn or turtle shells or thin metal plate. Only royalties and nobles used metal plated armor that mostly imported from Middle east or India. Rattan are actually super strong and can be treated to be even harder and can fend of blade and arrows.
I'm actually sad that although I might have the same heritage as you, (also the fact that I identified as indigenous) I don't know shit about my ancestors.
Other than the fact that I know that I'm a descendant of "mountain people" that farm pineapples, avocado, coconuts etc. on literal hillsides and cliffs, idk anything more, no history, no unique culture.
Which cultures are you thinking of specifically?
@@InevitableTruth. that is a lot more common than you realize. This is most humans on the planet since most cultures in history did not record much.
@@InevitableTruth. Check James C Scott "The Art of Not Being Governed: An Anarchist History of Upland Southeast Asia" about the history of Zomia
@@koboldgeorge2140 yayoi period of Japanese history they had wooden armor as well as neolithic and bronze age China as well, which is use a mix of lacquered leather, wooden and bronze armor we have remnants of leather and bronze, and there's speculation about wooden armor, since it is used in Southeast Asia
This why I love RUclips, you just randomly come across a challel about a dude with a passion for a niche subject you'd never think of.... And you find yourself watching for hours. Thanks Malcolm.
This reminds me of the concept of “wealth in persons” that is a person’s power is directly tied to their charismatic and familial social relationships
Sounds a lot like the concept of "social capital", interesting!
I was going to make a comment musing whether the social status gained from Wooden slate armour was through making it yourself. As in you're respected for mastering all these various skills to make this on top fulfilling your responsibilities within the community. But I think I like the idea of "wealth in persons" better.
The grimmer version of that concept can manifest in terms of how many slaves one controls.
I'm not certain why RUclips brought me here, but I'm glad it did. That armor is beautiful and your commentary was really interesting!
This channel is truly a hidden gem.
Probably D&D content
Malcolm, your videos are some of the most fascinating and worthwhile educational content I've seen about American history.
I'm from the Southwest, where historic Native cultures left many tangible traces of their presence, and where their contemporary descendants still live today. When I travel to the Midwest or the East, I'm surprised by how markedly forgotten the Native role in American history and culture seems to be, even though those regions hosted some of the most unique cultures on this continent, like the Ojibwe who mined copper in Michigan or the Iroquois whose model of governance helped shape our own.
Your videos help make clear that Native history is American history, and that history is alive. Thank you for doing what you do.
I read on the Catawba for my graduate studies course on South Carolina history and it's sad, shocking, but also a touch of fascinating how effective Colonial Americans were at erasing that history and culture and what peoples like the Catawba had to do to survive it.
I remember commenting on a previous video about how you should cut out all the "ums" and stuff, and now I'm seeing a lot of cuts in the video.
I wanna say that it works and the video is a lot more presentable and coherent this way.
Less wind noise also helps.
@@MalcolmPL I've always hated doing any kind of presentation and I'd never do it on camera, but I've found having a short list of 1 or 2 word bullet points in big letters somewhere I could see it really helped. Not sure if it'd work with your setup, but I've found I often don't even look at it and it still seems to help.
I love this channel. There are startlingly few historical/anthropological channels that deal with social and material history in such a fascinating way.
I agree on some of your points regarding Metall-Armor but especially from the 14th century onwards Metallarmor becomes fairly omnipresent throughout almost all classes on the battlefield. The major difference is the quality of the metal, the quality of craftsmanship and of course the artistic level in terms of engravings and platting and such stuff.
That has more to do with the rise of mercenaries and less to do with affordability. A mercenary sees armor as an investment to ply his trade while keeping himself alive and as free from harm as possible.
The average person would invest in the weapons he was legally required to own and could use for self defense of hunting/poaching. He might own a helmet but metal armor was well out of his means while a gambeson is essentially a deep winter coat.
Even in France of the 100 years war levies with rudimentary equipment and no armor whatsoever are well recorded.
@@ΕρνέστοςΣμίθ Of course, but if you take a look at the battlefields of the "War of the roses" you will see platearmors more often than not, even among the common soldiery which were often not just mercenaries. Same thing with the citizen-soldiers in the free cities of the Holy Roman Empire which were by decrete of the city counsels required to have a certain amount of armor based on their status. For example in Cologne a craftsman of any occupation was required to posses a "Krebs" ( upper part of an harness, including helmet, chestplate, gauntlets and protection for the arms) around the year of 1440. I would also argue that at least in the second half of the 100-years war increased body armor became much more common than "just" gambesons. My main point is that this connotation of the "Warrior class" kinda only works till the 14th century, afterwards it changes fairly rapidly.
@@belisar4397 Armor and swords had piled up from war, and after the black death it was much easier to obtain these items. Armor was very much a class marker all the way through, with the quality and technology of elites armor being of far higher quality.
@@belisar4397 It's true that far more armor was worn in the 15th century than in previous ones but the armored infantryman never became a majority in medieval or renaissance times. The majority of infantry would only have helmets and jack chains and perhaps some bits they had acquired during the course of the campaign. Even in Ceasar's time, there was a proportion of legionaries who wore only "coactilia", that is padded/quilted cloth and felt.
The problem with artistic depictions is that these tend to show the best of what was available rather than the norm. Any Ferrari model is more often depicted/photographed than a Ford Fiesta but there are more Fiesta's than all Ferrari's combined.
Even the craftsmen of a city's guild were a minority of the city's population and a tiny minority of the total population which was majority rural even in most urbanized areas such as Italy and the Low Countries.
The cost of metal armor far outweighs the benefit it has for a person that might take the field once or twice in their lifetime. Only the people who expected to see action for many years would really invest in it.
@@ΕρνέστοςΣμίθ First and foremost, the Renaissance is an art epoch, not and age on itself. A part of it belongs to the late Middle ages and a part to the new modern era (sorry for the rant, I'm just sick of hearing the Renaissance as a comparison to the middleages). Secondly I wouldn't be so sure about this, take a look at the outputs of major arming industry areas such as southern Germany or northern Italy alone, around the year of 1450 we're talking of orders of thousands of armor pieces per month. Especially Nuremberg and Milano had crazy output and they are just the cherry on the top in terms of armor production. Regarding the depiction of contemporary artists I wouldn't be so sure about that, their depictions of armor distribution seems fairly good when we take a look at equipment lists of armies, according to which soldiers were paid based on the equipment they brought with them. Same thing in the holy Roman Empire. I gotta agree at one point though, the amount of armoured soldiers became less when modern tactics and formations such as the Swiss " Gewalthaufen" or the Spanish "Tercio" in which soldiers were mostly armed according to their job and not their wealth. One reason might also be that from the 1500s onwards soldiers were armed by their leaders more often and costs had to be cut.
One thing to think about too which I didn't see discussed in the video is the difference in durability. Metal armor, properly maintained, can be handed down or resold much later, and as such it becomes a sort of permanent culture and capital, insofar as it is a machine for the production of violence.
Iroqois armor and other similar kinds of armor look like they would be more perishable. With proper care and maintenance they can probably also last a long time, but I anticipate that it will still fall apart faster than the metal. Thus it is necessary for each generation to craft their own. Since it doesn't require as much economic complexity to do so, they probably did that anyway, since it's not as big of an ask.
I was just thinking about this while world building an indigenous culture for my tabletop roleplaying game. They also make armor from wood and almost all of them have it because how labor is divided they have a lot of "free time" to make it.
You might be interested in the "Brotherhood of the Canoe", which was a society that formed over the knowledge of building an extremely complex and sophisticated canoe which was indispensable at the time. If you Google that and "The Chumash and the Tomol" you should be about to find out more about it.
I am an european prehistoric archaeologist. The distinction is very often lost among my collegues.
I also wonder if we will ever find wooden armor from the neolitic age in Europe, the circumstances would make it feasible, but the chances for a piece to survive are extemly slim.
There is a wooden object assumed to be a helmets of the Negau typology from Iron Age Denmark.
It definitely existed since even as late as 1080 AD, wooden armor for the shins and knees is recorded in the Strategikon of Kekaumeunos of the eastern Roman Empire.
Certainly possible. Probably more varied resources and trade available in europe so superior materials like hardened leather might have pushed timber out of armour production a long time ago.
Hi! Didn't we (I didn't do nothing, I mean you) find a bark shield? I'll try to look up where and when it was from. Edit: Welp, it was iron age Leicester, about 2200y ago. But if we had them in the iron age, we might as well have had it in the neolithic, the tools required for a bark shield are super basic (you could make one with an unrefined stone off the ground and patience)
I know basically nothing about archeology, but I'm slightly better informed as a woodworker in traditional tools, and can understand it would be really hard to identify the remains of wooden armour as such, specially if it's as articulate and segmented as the Iriquoian ones for example. The needs of the construction would probably make it not have distinctive features, like for example you wouldn't drill holes to stitch it, since boring (as the name implies) is boring, specially without specialized drill bits. And let's be honest, if we found a pile of sticks of differing length with notches at weird intervals and remains of plant fiber in a burial site, you know what we would say the purpose is. Say it with me class:
What I wonder about is basketry armour and shields. Willows and similar could make a nice layer that wouldn't be too rigid; or shields and helmets weaved, which would be indistinguishable from baskets. And thought basketry doesn't survive too well, as you said there could technically be the circumstances for it to happen
Personally, I wonder if we ever found remains of Native American armor in warriors' burials before & it just went right over all our heads because we all generally assumed they never did that.
Of course, this depends on the nature of warfare in a given period. The notion of a "professional warrior," one who would need a suit of armor, also derives from who went to war and for what purpose. A bunch of neolithic tribesmen who embarked on an opportunistic raid on their neighbors likely wouldn't kit up all that much, whereas, if they made a habit of it, they (and their beleaguered neighbors) might well invest in defensive garments, especially as smaller groups could ill-afford many losses. War as a ritual affair (such as the Aztec "Flower Wars") might call for less armor, and this is also reflected in the Native American concept of counting coup, demonstrating courage by giving your opponent opportunity to do you lethal harm, while making only symbolic attacks, yourself. If you weren't out for a body count, the expense and encumbrance was unnecessary. Conversely, if the weapons being used overmatched any armor you might wear, again, the practicality of armor diminishes. =^[.]^=
I really love the videos that look at a topic through an economic lens. It's an under-used tool in a lot of areas of history. I can think of a few historical exceptions to the general rule that metal armour is closely associated with a warrior elite. The Greeks and Romans fielded large numbers of well-armoured troops, many of whom didn't come from the social elite. Unfortunately I suspect that this was probably facilitated by the widespread use of slavery in the production process. Also, later in the medieval era, into the Early Modern era, it became common for local authorities in Europe to maintain stocks of armour and weapons in order to equip militia, and it seems to have become more available to ordinary soldiers over time. Metal armour was expensive to manufacture, but it was by its nature durable, so it could be acquired second hand and pass through multiple owners. Presumably the comparative ease of manufacture of wooden armour would make the existence of second hand or heirloom suits less likely- you could make yourself something that fits well, rather than settle for something cheap that rubs when you walk, etc.
yes, they would give you a breast plate or a chain shirt and padding, a helmet, gauntlets maybe, hopefully. and a spear.
the "warrior elite" would be outfitted with armor that protected every concievable area, with plate metal, chain under that layer and padded layer that on its own can stop many slashes and stabs. this was the culmination of personal armor, and thus neccicitation for a way to defeat a fully armored knight was created. mainly longbows, cross bows
@@GhostScout42 My understanding is that Roman soldiers had to buy their own equipment, it wasn't given. Often they'd buy it off of the army and they could sell it back to them if it was in good nick when they retired. They were paid a wage during service and rewarded with land when/if they retired. So it was tied to class, at least during Caesar's and Hadrian's era, which are the eras that I've learned about.
ah, for sure, the scenario i had in my mind was the lord arming the peasant army
So broadly I think this is right, but it's important to remember that for much of European history, metal armour wasn't really limited to the elite. Ælfred's fyrds might only have had helmets and shields, but by the Norman conquest most of the lower class troops would have had mail armour. (Of course, this comes with it's own whole bundle of socio-economic factors, as some points the armour might or might not be paid for by a lord). The degree to which knights and their equivalent had massively heavier armour than the the infantry is not as wide as one might think.
The Fyrd was mostly made up by inhabitants of Burhs during the 11th century. They had not to pay taxes and were farming soldiers. Most other villagers had to pay taxes, could not pay for armor and were not called to war.
@@jarlnils435 11th century? I was thinking a couple centuries before, Ælfred (reigned 886 - 899) had the problem whereby his troops couldn't be held at muster for expended periods because they needed to go and farm the land. Of course it's quite hard to say what portion of any given army of that period was composed of temporary troops versus professionals (housecarls)
@@pavarottiaardvark3431 you said norman conquest, that's 11th century
@@jarlnils435 yes, as a point of contrast
@@pavarottiaardvark3431 and that's what I commented. The late Fyrd had the wealth to buy armor.
For a gambeson or linothorax you would need much more string. Those were armors of richer farmers. The women would weave and string making was children work.
As you said, it is time. I can see it that the women would weave this wooden armor like the greek women would weave the linen for their husband's armor. It is time consuming, but people around the world spend time working on things which protect their live.
Time is also a sign of wealth or success in a society. If you have time to build something without worry about starving, you are successful.
great video; you could say armor is a case-study in which your social and economic "safety net" is directly represented in your physical "safety net".
I think about how much labor and how many raw resources went in to creating the steel for a suit of european plate armor and realize that it probably was closer to the modern economic equivalent of an MBT. Not to mention the resources needed to support the proffesional soldiery of knights. Then, later, how you could give some peasant a musket and a days training and he could make it all dissapear in an eyeblink
I wrote this before watching the video and realized it was the first thing he talked about
@@roostertheastronaut4513 That's just silly. You can figure out the cost of armor by simply looking at the material costs because the labor cost is inconsequential relative to the material costs. Let's say 40 pounds of steel. A month's low class wages for a typical half pound knife. So you're looking at an equivalent cost of ~80 months of wages, so in modern terms that'd be about 100k.
@@ChaosSwissroIl I can't see how the labor cost would be inconsequential as it would take a specialist hundreds of hours to complete a full suit of armor. Also, I know that production of really high quality steel was difficult to scale up and required a lot of low quality iron to create good steel. I haven't done the math but I feel that you are discounting some factors
@@roostertheastronaut4513 Because in the medieval world materials were very expensive relative to the cost of labor. A dozen nails might cost you a day's labor despite only taking the blacksmith about 10 minutes of work. Meanwhile today 500 nails costs us about 1 hour of labor. The nails still have the exact same value, the difference is in the cost of the materials compared to the cost of the labor.
Steel in the modern day is worth literally 10 cents per pound. That's about 10 seconds of labor. 10 seconds vs more than a month of labor. A modern suit of armor will be probably about 10% material costs and 90% labor costs, meanwhile in the medieval it would be about 99% material costs and 1% labor costs.
You just broke *whole pages* of my notes against a knee... and I am very gratefull to you for this!
My ideas were reinventive compared to your stories.
My WorldBuilding will be so much better from now on, because of them.
Thank you!
“This is a totally manageable amount of string to make.” Sheesh I ain’t made my string quota ever in my life.
Really, this is a fascinating perception of armor in relations to what material they’re made out of. I love it. Dan Carlin often remarks that history being made amidst battles often comes down to a seemingly minute factor of weapons and equipment
Haven’t seen your channel in awhile but am happy to see your back giving the world some good knowledge on Kanienkeha history! Need my RUclips algorithm to show more of you!
I randomly got recommended this video and it was fascinating. Thank you. I hadn't considered the economic statement that metal vs wooden armour has, but you're reasoning and explanation totally makes sense.
I think it's interesting that you mentioned the idea of the community coming together to help make armor. For the common medieval soldier that is normally what happened. The knight who is the lord of a village would announce that he was going on campaign and would need lets say ten people from this village. The village would come together and help equip those ten people, because they're all someone's son/relative. And depending on how wealthy the lord is, he may already have a stockpile of equipment to divvy out.
I was brought into your online space by a writing exercise about crappy looking swords that fight well, I'm subscribing because very few people on RUclips can talk about (1) Non-European Armor, and (2) Non-European Socioeconomics. I sent this and the LotR "Is this a good Sword?" to a lot of nerds I know who hopefully will also send it around.
Work like this is so precious. Thank you so much for what you do here.
This was really cool! I feel like after getting passed battles, great leaders, and historical events, people start to get more interested in society and economics of history. Because its really cool to see how it all tied together. I hope your channel takes off, this is really great information!
I'm happy the role of manufacturing string was not overlooked.
I just want to say you are among the most insightful and intelligent commenters on material history, culture, etc. I always come away with so much food for thought. I really appreciate it.
This has so many interesting implications and applications for both the real world and for fantasy worldbuilding.
everytime i see bro posted a video about his wooden armour I get excited
Thank you for a most interesting soliloquy; I wasn't even aware of Iroquoian wooden armour before this, and I found the comparison to European armour quite thought-provoking ! And what a glorious location !
Interesting video as always! I addressed a similar point in recreating Mississippian armour, but came to nearly the opposite conclusion😅 While not as labour and resource intensive as something like making various forms of medieval European defensive equipment, I still came to the conclusion that (at least in the Middle Mississippian world) the social and economic investment would have been inextricably linked to craft specialization, and by extension, a warrior elite functioning perhaps primarily within a force-multiplication role as sapper, for example. Just as the elite COULD make pottery, but prestige vessels used in feasts and as status symbols were created by specialists instead FOR the elite, the amount of time and skill evident in sourcing and processing the materials for American armour, much less the actual component manufacture, production and usage, and the social role played in presentation and combat, all point to craft specialization. The elites’ consumption (acquisition, usage, display) still appears economic to me, even if one of the primary factors of exchange is time.
Of course, I’m well aware we’re discussing different cultures and different time periods, with a minimum of geographic and temporal overlap, and even differing methods of construction, even if the basic forms and materials appear similar. As well, I am acutely aware I’ve primarily viewed the production and consumption of armour from a hoplological (and, some might say, ‘Eurasian’) perspective, but I’ve done my best to research and compare roughly contemporaneous (and abit later) American analogues. The North American Dendric armour traditions are woefully underrepresented in the discussion of indigenous American hoplology, and your recreations, discussions and unique perspectives on them are both badly needed and much appreciated!
I hope this ramble has made at least some sense 🙃 As I think I said in another video comment, I still think you should write a paper with an eye towards publication and presentation. We need as much work and as many different viewpoints as we can get!
I love that point you make at about the third minute about economic class (ie knighthood or elite warrior class) being, "meaningless and arbitrary"
I love your videos. Idk why but i just broke out smiling and laughing at the beauty of our past. Its truly amazing
Fascinating take, would love to see you pursue this topic more, I can definitely agree with your hypothesis being apt.
A fascinating take on how best to use resources you have available and how deeply valueable a community willing to divide labour amongst themselves is!
I really enjoy making things myself from scratch, and the few times I've had other people offer me parts, materials, or help working on projects have made a huge difference. It really solidified in my mind how much even a small group of people willing to lend a hand could make a daunting task like making full wooden armour into a fun weekend project for the family!
Pretty neat. Interesting to thing how the materials used for war in different parts of the world might have led to different social outcomes. Glad this came up as a recommendation.
This is such a cool channel. Thank you for sharing your knowledge and thoughts.
I will say that this kind of reminds me of a system native to a metal armor culture, specifically england, in the fyrd
English armies of the time (tenth and first half or so of the eleventh century) were almost exclusively armored since the common infantry were "fyrdsmen", a sort of militia or draft that were expected to be armed by their community with helm, shield, maille, and spear. As a result while you dont have the distinction of "this guy is well armed and thus well liked" you do have "this village is large, they've contributed many feared" and connotations of who the village thought were suitable people to send to war
I enjoyed this video very much, I love the idea of a warrior elite based on social empathic connections rather than economic dominance and exploitation.
Very well and articulately put. Reminds a bit of "I, Pencil" by Leonard E. Read which discusses all the collective effort it takes to make a pencil.
One of the best frameworks by which to consider any peice of military technology, well done sir!
I think the usual limiting factor for Medieval Europe's warrior elite is more horses than it was armor, because horses phyiscally need lots of land to graze and train and people looking after them while armor could more or less just be figured out by blacksmiths.
Before the medieval era there were plenty of states that would end up with more sort of militia setups where they call up whoever's able-bodied and not some kind of underclass. That's how it was in much of Ancient Greece and Gaul. Ancient Rome eventually took the approach of the state paying to outfit people's gear.
These are some interesting points and also has good implications on steppe society where we see significant amounts of wood, bone, horn, and other armors made of natural materials (also worth noting that Taim Bo Cuilange refers to Wood Armor). Also twined/macrame armor (like the linen body armor of Ancient Greece), which we know from surviving finds was made using cord that was finger-spun and didn't use drop spindles or spindle whorls.
My only criticism is on the availability of leather, which could create socioeconomic dividing lines due to the value of livestock or even game (poached or otherwise).
Excellent analysis, the armored knight should really be thought of as moore of a mobile suit, almost like a mecha. A European knight had a whole retinue of aides during a battle.
Also i need a cloth goods action figure of this armor
On historical digsite, we rarely find wooden tool/armour, because it rotten away compared to metal/stone ones, and expensive metal one is buried more carefully.
Such a beautiful history just disappeared because it didn't hold to hard weather, such shame.
This is a fascinating video, thank you for making it. I never knew that wooden armour was a thing although now im looking into it a bit more it really seems obvious.
Plus as a D&D player it gives me fresh ideas.
This was awesome! I do HEMA and JSA… familiar with armour but all Metal. This was really cool. So cool!
VERY interesting. The look and mechanics of the wooden armor fascinate me, but the anthropology/sociology of them is just as fascinating as their appearance and use! Furthermore, I laud your researcher brain. You are asking the right questions. Other RUclipsrs would just say “this armor wouldn’t support the same social class as metal armor” and call it a day. You go a step further to rationalize and ground your hypothesis, if not prove it yet. You ask what role it WOULD support and speculate as to why. It’s a small thing, I guess, but it shows your careful consideration and let’s me know I can trust you as a researcher/speaker.
Really appreciate what you have to share. Interesting to think about wealth as a reflection of rich social ties, rather than proximity to power (like the knight who is close to the king)
It feels more naturally social. People donating supplies or time to protect someone they care about, rather than a knight whos elevated beyond everyone else by arbitrary status.
Thinking a lot about this. Thank you.
Dude you rock. I hope you get more views 🙏
I have no illusions. The channel is niche. I work on a very specific region in a very specific time period, the potential audience is very limited.
Besides that I am not interested in pretending to be fun or entertaining, and I can't be bothered with putting in the effort to achieve high production values, both of which limit the appeal.
@@MalcolmPL There seems to be a fairly large community of people interested in all things military history. Lindybeige built most of his following just being a guy who talked to camera about old timey stuff. I think there is room for growth. I wish the best for you.
@@trikepilot101 Lindybeige is not a good comparison. He is a very different channel with a very different skillset.
@MalcolmPL
Its amazing all the same.
The stereotype among white Americans is *all* Indigenous North American people before Europeans arrives wearing buckskin with feathers and shooting stone tipped arrows from horses and living in some form of skin tent or grass hut.
Not people making wood armor, working native copper into knives and axe heads, carving advanced wood and stonework, building huge dwellings, weaving cloth and so on.
And here you are not only telling it like it was, youre flat out showing how it worked.
Even if most people are too vapid to pay attention, what you are doing is very important and awesome.
I read alot of historical first sources and I remember reading a trapper describing the Indians wearing armor and living in castles made of wood. With cities so dense that you could not navigate them without a guide. When he returned years later the city was mysteriously abandoned.
A perspective I’d not considered before.
Dude my age of empires game is gonna be fire after researching this vid
Dude! Great segment!!
Interesting thoughts. Glad I clicked the video.
Honestly, I have no idea how I ended up on this video, but this was fascinating.
Good thinking, similarly I always wondered why greeks and the Romans abandoned the lino thorax since the materials are a fraction of the cost of the early adoption of mail armor. Linen and any sort of glue are easy to come by vs how you described the iron process. I think it's also interesting how pre samurai Japanese armor have historical mentions of wooden armor until splinted iron armor took over.
Some price differences are not definitive. There was a time in my life I could not afford a car. If someone had offered me a cheap car that had no seatbelts I would not have taken it. Not even for free. The risks would be to high. I can see lino thorax being a significant enough step down in protection that no one feeling they needed armour would be satisfied with anything less than metal.
We may be overemphasizing the role the Roman or other (state, military, soldiers) demand for specific products mattered, what craftsmen would have practiced and how widespread their skills were might also have been the result of their own commercial interests or just a point in time where iron working became a widely diffused skill across the region, and itself the result of unprecedented access to iron ore relative to previous ages.
These videos are very inspiring for some reason. I'm very thankful for them.
Studying northeastern American societies is so interesting partially because of how individualistic they often were. European society (and the way we study it) tends to split people off into large socioeconomic classes, while this approach to history leaves a lot more room for individuals and their relationships with one another.
I wouldn't necessarily say individualistic, since there were very large communities like the Haudonosaunee Confederacy, but certainly more egalitarian
Excellent point here, and I agree completely! Years ago, I was making a ball headed war club out of sugar maple using only tools that would have been available in the 18th century. This took many hours of solitary work and provided lots of time for reflection. At one point, in a sudden flash of insight, I realized that very few young warriors would have had that much free time. So who did??? I instantly realized that most of these clubs were probably made by OLD MEN!! As former warriors themselves, they would have been very familiar with weapons; but since they were no longer going on long raiding trips anymore, or even doing very much hunting, they would have had endless amounts of time to sit in camp, patiently scraping away at a club for their son or grandson to carry into battle.
This is a truly interesting video essay.
This was absolutely fascinating! I taught world history for 18 years and this video gave me an entirely new perspective! I really learned a lot. Thanks for such wonderful content!
Incredibly fascinating analysis. Since reading Engels' "On the Origin of Family, Private Property, and the State," as well as some of Margaret Mead's work a few years ago I've been increasingly struck by just how hampered sociology has been by Europe's ravaging of the Americas. When people refer to us existing in the bad or evil timeline, I sometimes can't help but believe that colonialism, having removed the possibility of a dialectical relationship between world cultures has doomed us to irresolvable conflict within the collective soul of humanity. Anyhow great video, I'll def be checking out the previous parts.
Impressively interesting good first impression of your channel.
I do think basing it on the example of heavy cavalry knights is focused on just one example when lots of armor use fell outside those in full plate.
It is interesting that metalworking tribal Europeans tended to have a God dedicated to the craft.
I love how a thing we take for granted such as armor or clothes have tons of different political, social, and hierarchical implications. What a fascinating topic and excellent video covering it!
I agree completely with this. Full plate armour is only possible in a hierarchical society where very few people can actually afford to wear it. Wooden armour could be worn by anyone on a battlefield
This was the best video about armour and string I’ve ever seen. 10/10
What a pleasant surprise, running across this topic insightfully invented. I hardly expected to have the chance to learn about this. Rock on!
i remembered david greber and david wengrow generally speaking going against the line at the end :
that specialized labour doesn't necessarly create class divisions ...
but yeah these are honestly intresting points , another thing is : the armor isn't too form fitting , like chain or steel plate may be ...
so it can be worn by more than one person ...
it would create a much more equitable war situation if a tribe feared for war or choose to make it their main thing
Thank you for your interesting video.
This was incredibly fascinating. I've never even considered ideas like this before
Fascinating video on the intersection between material and social history!
This is a very good video.
I will say however that making the BEST wooden armor probably was a tradesman skill at some point. In any kind of craftsmanship there are going to be tricks and skills that only the apprenticed from childhood are likely to have. I can see where there might have been many tricks in wood selection, preparation, seasoning, geometry of the pieces, etc.
Also keep in mind that most metal armor in Iron Age and tribal Europe was many layered cloth and mail rings made from iron wire. Not quite the investment that the famous suits of the late Middle Ages represent.
This is amazing. A Brilliant.analysis of something I never even considered ...
Very different society structure and views. Its interesting to think about
Very interesting thoughts indeed
Yay. More educated speculation!
I really appreciate your thoughts on this
Mind blown. Subscribed
Such an insightful video! Subbed
I agree with pretty much everything you said (this time) :). I can imagine a certain amount of social pressure for every person of fighting age to make their armour. If you didnt make your armour I expect you would have been shunned by others, since, your armour increases the survival chances of everybody in the community.
EDIT: It just occurred to me (hence the edit). There is another non economic reason that only the upper class had the best armour and weapons. Since the upper class are always fewer in number, you need to be able to supress rebellion, so, you need you upper class to be better armed.
I would first like to say I appreciate the work you put in to provide us with tangible cultural heritage with regards to indigenous peoples arm and armor. I myself am delving into my own cultural background, specifically northern Thai people and surrounding tribal areas.
There is supposedly a similar form of armor used by the Thai-Laos people by weaving rattan that can be wrapped around the body.
With very little evidence besides scant texts from neighboring nations and contemporary artistic interpretations, I am seeking to create and test out this form of armor to see its effectiveness and perhaps add validity to its existence with these results.
The final bit of encouragement into actually starting this project is all thanks to your work and research which inspired me to understand my own heritage.
Hope to see more work from you!
I do recall an english king sending all the used arrows of his campaign back to england to be refurbished and sent back to his armies while campaigning in france. The historian in question used this example as an example of the difficulties with campaigning in foreign lands and as a counter to the mythologizing of armies "living off the land". Of course wood armor doesnt need to exist in nearly as large quantities as arrows nor does it need feathers or specific rocks etc etc but that gets into more of a science which is far beyond the scope of my brain typing this in the afternoon on the couch.
Great stuff! greetings from sardinia
You really really REALLY deserve more views man. Keep at it, keep up the good work, and bless you.
while metal armour is tied to economics its not just the rich who had metal armour, while that was true for certain times and places it was also not true in other times and places within Feudal societies like medieval europe and feudal japan.
for example the entire Norman army that invaded England in 1066 had metal armour beyond helmets. ie varying lengths of mail. the vast majority of men in the war of the roses had some kind of metal body armour, be it plate cuirasses or brigandines, and often had metal neck and arm armour too. infact the helmet and brigandine had become the minimum requirement for lower class soldiers.
Love me some good materialist breakdown. Thankyou for making such interesting content
Very interesting point. I see a crossover with cross over with the spread of hoplites in the 6th century BC Greek world. Due to the phalanx tactics that the aspis shield created, soldiers didn't need full suits of expensive bronze armor. Instead, as long as they had helmet, shield, and spear, they could stand in the line and fight as effectively as fully armored. It's probably also the reason we see the "tube and yolk cuirass" (either leather or linen body armor) take over from bronze breast plates at the same time as we see Greek democracy as a concept. Once the average person is fighting in an equal position to their rich neighbors, they generally view they should have an equal role in government!
Nice video. Cool idea. Hope you don't mind me saying that there is something very 'Carl Sagan' about you. The way you look, and talk and even the way the video is filmed. It's meant as a big compliment!
Thank you for doing what you do and for having the thoughts you think shared.
I spend less time as I would wish at your channel. thank you so much.
It’s really cool seeing you get into this kinda inquiry about the wooden armor- I remember that I started following your channel when you first were making it, and I was interested in wooden armor for a world building project. I ended up going down a different route for that story, but this was exactly the kind of question I was thinking about while doing that research.
Peasants didn't wear leather armor. Boiled leather was expensive and time consuming to make. Also, leather armor isn't very good on its own, it was more of a reinforcement worn over chainmail, to help keep the mail from falling apart as easily, as cutting through the leather took part of the kinetic energy out of the strike.
I don't know if a musing could do more to tickle my brain. I am deeply glad that I listened to this. I do armored fighting, and naturally, it does not take long before you are into repairs and alterations. I've picked up some leather working skills, but working with sheet metal, even with ready scraps from work and power tools to cut and shape it, it is intimidating.
I love the thought that armor could be an expression of social capital, and knowing someone is what a metal kit requires, I can see how different the two would be. Hell, even in my group, the guy who had his armor worked on and finished most recently was notably "getting snacks" in the armorer's tent.
In a way, it is easy to see that a Knight's armor is both a tool, and an expression of oppression, whereas wooden armor would be a representation of human connection and obligation and compassion. I will be spending time thinking on this, and perhaps twisting string for those I respect and admire. Thank you for this, may you be blessed.
This is an excellent video essay. Great to see folks discussing NA armor. Great points. I do disagree on a small point, though I largely agree with you. The amount of time spent is in its own right an economic indictor. I am certain im not saying thing you dont already onow but i would equate time intensive activities dedicated to not the society as a whole but the individual to mortuary practices. The 8mportance ofan individual in a society (generally) can be demonstrated by the hours spent on the practice. This may be as grand as building earthworks/ tombs and sacrifices to having days of feasting and performances. The more effort that goes into makingarmor I would say demonstrates the importance of the individual. Though this may not be as severe as the european warrior class, but one would assume the armor of the leaders of the tribe and nations would be of a higher and finer quality than that of folks that maybe once or twice in a lifetime has to break out the armor. I would agree in a society that is more egaltarian that im sure the distinction between the finest and common was slight for the reasons you state, materials were readily availible, members would pitch in to assemble pieces, though at the end of the day, the members with the most social capitol would have armor that took the greatest amount of time in their construction.
Best channel on yt
This is a very interesting series. Thank You Malcolm P.L.
...now just some of my thinking regarding the provision of the wood armor:
The persons making the components of the wooden armor would have had to acquire those skills by months and years of instruction and practice.
Can you go into a forest and select a suitable tree to be felled and then to be carefully beaten with a weighted mallet to fracture the wood into strips
which can be peeled while the wood is still green, take those strips and carefully work them while they are still green, set them aside and come back
to accomplish much of the dry work, and then proceed on to retrieve after being seasoned to the point required for that stage of work to complete?
Meanwhile there are those who must select for the cordage, string, thread,,as they obtain the tools to twist the cordage and the awls and needles to
sew or quide the thread. And then the skill of knotting, whether working in sinew or fiber.
Loved the video, love your presentation style and cadence too, feels like a cross between Carl Sagan and Jacob Bronowski. Keep it up!
i couldn’t figure out if u were in front of a green screen for the first third of the video. great video and great points. xoxo
I've always found the armor of societies that haven't developed metallurgy extremely interesting. The juxtaposition between the tribes of the Americas with wooden armor and the European kingdoms with their plate and mail armor is fascinating to me.
There is some truth to what you are saying here, but I think you are overstating your case.
First of all, the knight did not *only* provide service to the king. He provided service to his people too. You can see it very clearly in South East Poland (where I live), which was subjected to periodic Tatar raids. If the knight did not go after the Tatars, did not bother to free the captured peasants, did not bother to attack the returning raiders, he very quickly ran out of people. They were either captured or ran away to someone who did all those things.
Then, I think you overstate the requirements for specialized skills. Every village had a blacksmith, or several of them. A simple helmet is basically a metal pot with liners and leather suspension. Nothing out of reach of an average family. Most armor throughout the ages was maile armor, which was produced in the villages. The equipment required for producing the wire and making the rings was nothing special and it did not require that much skill. Anybody who tries to do it, becomes pretty good at it long before they finish their first project.
So it's a similar story. As long as you had the time and patience required, you could make yourself a full suit of armor. And it wouldn't even encumber you in your travels, because peasants did not have to periodically move, which is the norm for hunter-gatherers. They could and did do it, but then they'd likely sell it to someone who needed that stuff more.
However, it is true that a full suit of articulated plate armor was out of reach for a peasant. On the other hand, even those who owned it, very rarely used it. It's just not that practical.