Would The Vikings Have Used Full Plate Given the Chance?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 23 апр 2021
- Thanks to V.K.N.G. for sponsoring my video! Check out these links!
META50 for 50% Off during 48h on the Vegvisir Pendant Runic CLICK HERE bit.ly/3sHFl57
META15 for 15% Off during 10 days on the Whole store CLICK HERE bit.ly/3tNkO0e
Vikings were Norse seafarers, mainly speaking the Old Norse language, who raided and traded from their Northern European homes across wide areas of Europe, during the late 8th to late 11th centuries.
They had advanced sailing and navigational skills, summarized in the typical longship, Viking activities at times also extended into the Mediterranean littoral, North Africa, the Middle East and Central Asia. Following extended phases of exploration, expansion and settlement, Viking (Norse) communities were established in diverse areas of north-western Europe, European Russia, the North Atlantic islands and as far as the north-eastern coast of North America.
Popular, modern conceptions of the Vikings often strongly differ from the complex picture that emerges from archaeology and historical sources. Modern conceptions of the Vikings it's very different from the reality that emerges from archaeology and historical sources.
Perceived views of the Vikings sometimes as brutal, piratical heathens or other times as brave adventurers is mostly due to conflicting varieties of the modern Viking myth that had taken shape by the early 20th century. Current representations of the Vikings are usually based on cultural clichés and stereotypes. These representations are not always accurate, like in the case of the helmets because there is no evidence that they wore horned helmets.
Follow me on my social networks:
/ themetatron
Check out my Metatron merch online shop!
teespring.com/shop/metatron-c...
/ metatron_youtube
Metatron-153...
/ puremetatron
/ realmetatron
Royalty free music by Epidemic Sound:
intro ES_Knights Templar 1 - Johannes Bornlöf
intro 2 ES_Medieval Adventure 01 - Johannes Bornlöf
outro ES_Knights Templar 2 - Johannes Bornlöf
Check out my GF"s Channel:
/ crissangellover56
Check out my friend Salvo's channel
/ @littlesalvo000
#Metatron #Vikings #Armour
I Would wear full plate if given the chance......no one asked but i would.
Noone:
Absolutely noone:
aBandit: "I would wear full plate if given the chance."
;)
I’d gladly walk into work in a suit of full plate, but it would be hell getting through the metal detector.
My thoughts exactly
I concur to the most of the agreeing possible
Having worn good reproductions of both, yeah, I'd take plate any time
If Skyrim has taught me anything, if I unlock the right perk, my armor will weigh nothing no matter how heavy it normally is.
Indeed. In reality you probably do get used to wearing it. A more realistic variant in that game would have been a fatigue penalty that are reduced by unlocking those perks.
Like your sports gear, it weights a lot in a bag, but once wearing it it's just there, may be it will make you tired quicker, but certainly it's not making you feel slow or clumsy...
I would be much more worried about heat exhaustion than the extra weight.
"Would vikings wear full-plate armor?"
Short answer: Yes
Long answer: Yes but with a demonstration as well.
Proceeds to fall down and drown in waist deep water. Yes, that happened quite often. That's why moats for so effective. No amphibious shock troops in the age of plate wore full plate, let alone raiding pirates.
@@majungasaurusaaaa Really, care to present some historical proof of Scandinavian Vikings drowning in waist deep water? Since it, as you said "happened quite often", and if it is plate armored people that drowned. Well moats were not waist deep, try to jump in one if you dont believe me. Also most people did not know how to swim (except for the Scandinavians which often were taught it as children). And finally, Scandinavians DID use plate armor, when it came to exist. The question asked in the video, is stupid as the plate armor didn't exist, he might have asked: Would the Vikings had use machineguns if they existed? Of cause they would and in case of the armor they did. First recorded use of armor in Scandinavia is in the 13th hundred.
@@madselmvig1457 Not scandinavian raiders since they didn't wear full plate. The heaviest armor they would have worn would have been a maille shirt no heavier than 15kg. Still, amphibiously operating in that was quite a skill. The roman batavi troops were famed for being able to swim in a cuirass (which was nowhere near full plate) carrying a full kit of gear, showing that even for top notch professional roman troops, that skill was rare.
Marines historically were always light infantry.
The most infamous example of men drowning due to their heavy armor was the battle of Argincourt. And that was just below the knee deep mud. Imagine what a moat could do. That's why they were so effective. When you add combat and exhaustion on top of prolonged fatigue from the weight, the armor becomes far more penalizing than watching cartwheeling stuntmen doing it for a couple seconds in a fresh state would tell you.
@@majungasaurusaaaa Plate armor didn't exist during the Viking ages and that is why they didn't use them. There is nothing "historical" in reference to "Marines" when talking about 800-1000. While some, like the romans, had a naval based army (2 legions), they were equipped like the rest of the legions. The first dedicated marines are from 1537 and they had muskets. In Argincourt people were stepped on and drowned. It was quite infamous for that. Not for people falling and just drowning.
Damn imagime pirate of caribbean but with knights. Paladin Jack Sparrow
The norse mercenaries serving the "byzantine " empire wore whatever armor they were expected to.
True
Did the Byzantines use a lot of plating?
@@CJ_F0x I have seen illustrations but I don't know. I think that they did have shock cavalry I know their enemies did. Ask Metatron.
@@markhorton3994 Thnx I'll look into it. I honestly have no idea what else the Byzantines used as armour so I'm curious
The Byzantines had a lot of Italian mercenaries at the Fall of Constantinople and it's possible some native Byzantines used plate. At the end of the empire the Varangian Guard still existed and were almost entirely English at that point so they could be equipped as 15th century English knights.
They definitely would, without a doubt. They’d recognize the use of plate armor, and while having a bit of mobility is their thing, we know historical armor had a great range of motion.
You can swim (with some difficulty) while wearing chainmail. But can you swim while wearing full plate armor? I'm sure Vikings would've loved to use full plate armor, but I wonder if there were situations where they would've preferred more flexible armor.
@@Intranetusa They probably just wouldn't have worn it when at sea, though I can't say I know much about Viking naval combat. Perhaps they would have gone for partial plate when at sea.
@@robertlewis6915 naval combat at that time was just land combat on ships, shoot them or board and stab them
@@Intranetusa They didn't wear their armor while sailing . They put it in a chest for that reason. Then would put it on when they got close to their targets. So yeah they wouldn't have it on at sea in the first place.
@@John2r1 I was thinking more of when they had to fight at sea (eg. attack another ship) and had to wear armor while at sea.
I can see partial plate being popular. I could see them loving brigantines. More protection than mail for similar weight and perhaps more comfortable.
My first thought was keep the arms and shield, switch to open face barbutte, brigandine cuirass and brigandine or plate pauldrons. Then maybe a bracero on the right arm, possibly sabatons and even greaves, or just a left leg greave. Anything more with the traditional shield would be excessive I should think, and thus generally avoided.
That’s what I thought, a banded mail type armor
You know, I've got to remember to turn my safe search settings back on when I try to find your videos by searching "Italian dude plays with his sword for two minutes."
you got a laugh out of me.
"sword"
YES, "NORSE GOING ON VIKINGS!" First time I can recall ever hearing anyone say that.
Yay. Viking is more of a job than a people.
my favorite Italian Japanese person on the internet, holding a european sword in hasso and waki no kamae,priceless.
Yes, I have studied them for over a decade, they incorporated the best weapons and armor they could find all the time, they were addicting to visit other lands and trading and getting goods they did not have, Indian swords, Russian armor etc.
Wootz steel, mate?
@@walangchahangyelingden8252 What about it?
@@Beardshire I'd presume he was referencing the fact that viking swords were found that were made from Wootz steel, and the only source for it at the time was Asiatic, supporting the notion that vikings were known to trade in the regions you mentioned. Could be wrong, just seemed like he was alluding to supporting evidence.
Imagine a viking berserker in full plate.
The Anglo-Saxons: *Dear God*
@@normalcitizen_1 HELP
Varangian's are the closest we'll get lol
A lot of the berserker impact (whether they existed or not) comes down to professional warriors with their blood up and no qualms about killing anyone in their way fighting against a peasant militia who's training has all been about basic formation fighting.
The popularity of large mercinary companies in the 14th and 15th century gives some good comparisons.
And yes, German and Italian armoured mercs, often with two handed weapons, had quite the reputation for being impenetrable monsters of slaughter.
@@AlanGChenery from what I got so far the berserker was not elite fighters but norse man who are criminals fighting for there freedom..... that may all so explain why they was talked about having bear or wolf hide in combat and no armor to have them marked while in battle and the fact they was not worried if they came out alive or not
I don’t know why, but for some reason seeing Meta swing all those weapons around hitting thin air is really funny
I think we have a good historical comparison already... The Spanish Conquistadors were adventurers and raiders much like the Norse vikings. They had at their disposal late 14th and 15th century full plate armor which they initially used in battle, but slowly shed pieces, mostly arm and leg armor, preferring the light mobility of just a plate cuirass and helmet on the battlefield. I believe a light, fast moving group of Norse raiders would have come to a similar conclusion. Just a thought.
I mean, surely they'd want all the protection they could get no? Just the 'viking age' (dubious term, I know) didn't extend to a time when full plate armour was about
Also love the sponsor btw, gotten quite a few items from them, and managed to use a code of yours a year ago for my birthday. So cheers for that!
@Fishy Vagina maille is hardly light. Also why would the be fully armed on a boat?
@Fishy Vagina with the 9/11th century technology the Vikings utilised, sure. Whose to say their ship tech wouldn’t improve along with the rest of the medieval worlds? Bigger more robust ships with enough capacity to hold full plate armour.
Also the Varangians utilised lamellar/scale (can never quite remember the difference) that’s not very portable either . Yet they wanted the protection
@@TheOldBlackShuckyDog IIRC part of what made the Norse so successful at, well _viking_, was the ability for their long ships to traverse shallower waters to more inland areas so they didn't _have_ to raid _only_ settlements along the ocean shores and could take connecting routes between major water ways that other comparable ships of the time could not. Increasing the _storage space_ on their ships without compromising that ability to navigate shallow waters seems like it would require either an increase to their widths and their lengths, either of which would effect their maneuverability in more confined waterways; though to what degree and how much that would effect their ability to conduct raids and trade with distant nations I couldn't say.
Beyond that though, I know that the geometry of the longship helped it deal with ocean swells and other such conditions, but I don't know if widening or lengthening the ship without also increasing it's depth would lead to issues out on the open ocean or deep seas. I don't have the expertise to know if those changed would be enough to significantly impact their ability to sail in deeper water or navigate inland waterways, but we can't discount the possibility that it might _not_ have been feasible to make too drastic a change to their long ships without compromising their navigational advantages.
It's not _always_ safe to assume that a technology designed for a _specific_ purpose would advance significantly simply because adjacent technologies built for a _different_ purpose do. From what little I know about ships and sailing, advances in the rigging of sails and things like that would have likely transferred over, but I'd need a more compelling argument then just "other ships got bigger" before I bought into the idea that Viking longships would have gotten larger as well; and I'm too lazy to actually refresh myself on ship physics, research Viking sailing and raiding routes, and run the numbers myself.
That's not to say Vikings _couldn't_ or _wouldn't_ have adapted to newer, larger ship designs that would let them pack away plate, just that it likely would have required a drastic change to their behaviors and that the specialist longships would be likely to persist alongside them if they wanted to continue raiding and trading as they once had.
All that said, I need to reiterate that I'm far from an expert, I'm just playing devils advocate because you're assumptions seem too brief and strongly stated from what little I've picked up from casual readings and documentary watching.
@@julianweir3030 tbf it’s brief because I’m busy and trying not to get too preoccupied with youtube. And I honestly don’t think I’ve strongly stated a single opinion I’ve given. With the ship tech one I literally started the sentence off as “who’s to say” as the reality is neither you nor I actually know
@@julianweir3030 actually giving it a further look over, I disagree with the sentiment that the only type of vessel was the longboat, there were many other types of vessels used at the time by the Norse and other cultures alike. It just so happens the longboats were the moats prestigious and expensive and so have become the most associated with the Norse peoples.
The idea of the ship evolving in order to carry more cargo was just something I spitballed out there, the reality is in my opinion the idea they could store anything and everything apart from plate armour, I just really don’t get.
Unfortunately, due to Covid, the only things the Vikings could raid today....... is a fridge
Yess! That means I'm a Viking!
Yes. Professional raiders and pillagers are well known for following the rules and never doing anything the general public might find distasteful. ...
They might enjoy all the riots for a little while though.
Covid? They haven't raided anything since they cucked to christianity.
@@ktheterkuceder6825 All the Scandinavian countries maintain armies up to this day. They might not go on raids on other countries, but they still have to defend themselves on a continent full of warring nations. It would be interesting to see how the Danish, Swedish, and Norwegian armies equipped themselves during the 13th, 14th,and 15th centuries.
@@emmitstewart1921 Swedenistan disagrees.
Get that sponsor Metatron!!! I can’t wait until you get your own tv show and drop knowledge on us on the daily! You’ll be clapping cheeks on both the internet and tv! A double dose of clapping!!!
You're PFP perfectly captures my expression while Reading this comment
@Crusader crux Thanks fam! That’s just my son Lil’Jabari!!!
@@thebigone6071 that's awesome
@@thebigone6071 why is your son so scared?
@The one guy 3030 : he was just scared cause we were riding in the hood late at night my g. But he’s good fam!
I like how you think, You forget one thing, vikings was sailers, they came from europa on a ship with limited space, meaning Fullplate would take up that space. That said they might chose a breastplate but a full plate is out of the question.
Let's go launch lightning quick amphibious raids wear full plate against unprepared positions facing mostly women and children!
I figure a reason against the norseman going on Viking raids using plate is that plate armor would take up more volume on the ship, hence less loot to take back.
So you'd give up protecting the life of your nobility, for a little extra loot, if you were a group of Vikings?
@@aidansumner8364 That's up to whoever owns the longboat
@@aidansumner8364 Mobility=protection more than any armor. Raiders do not have the numbers to fight any real opposition. The point is to move fast and strike unprepared, undefended positions. You don't need armor when kidnapping women and children.
If I recall, some 15th cent. Varangians did begin to go full plate
Source?
@@willek1335 Osprey Publishing has a book on the Varangians
Metatron: Vikings were quick, fought unprepared, and possibly unarmed, opponents
A Viking: So what you're saying is...*I'm an operator*
playing valheim and watching this :)
I think the Norse raiders could've made good use out of Roman segmented armour should they have happened to find some. In a way that's also plate armour and seeming as it was invented before the Viking age, it could've been possible for said raiders to run into someone who could make segmented armour. And I suppose you can confirm which armour weighs you down more, seeming as you have both a mail shirt and a Roman segmented armour.
Real segmentata where made of thin mild steel and even the Romans upgraded to mail given the chance. I would not feal safe wearing an armour made out of tin cans.
They would have worn it until the straps gave out and then recycled it. The armor is too maintenance heavy.
Raph, mobility in my opinion is not the only aspect of full plate armor being used. To be able to use full plate armor you also need more time and effort to prepare for battle, which restricts your ability to react when suddenly attacked or if you want to surprise your enemy with an early morning attack. It also would have limited a persons time on the battlefield. War too has it's economics. Therefor I think only some parts of full plate would have been used, sparsely. Arms and hands I'd guess.
That’s why you don’t take off your armor when you’re expecting to attack or be attacked. Some people literally slept in it. Even then, it only takes 5 minutes to put on.
Now do a video on "Would The Vikings Have Used Machine Guns Given the Chance?" That would only be nine centuries out, as opposed to the four centuries difference between the viking age and full plate armour.
There are places in the world today where there are people into raiding behaviour and they indeed use modern weapons. Vikings are seen as glamorous but thease modern criminals are not. Came to think of it, here in Sweden, in the nineties there where a bank robbery where the robbers had a guy with a roof mounted machinegun ready to provide suppressive fire from their getaway car.
@@michaelpettersson4919 A norse raider is just the equivalent of today's somalian pirate.
When I first saw the title of this video I thought about the 13th Warrior each of them had their own t h i n g one even had Spanish armor ? I expect that they would adapt to what they thought was best for them
Because what this channel really needs is a movie training montage. :-)
Metatron a better yardstick for what they would have chosen, consider what their actual descendants both in Scandinavia and in Normandy where most of the Normand nobility were mostly the grandchildren of Norse settlers/conquers chose to utilize later on
He's the least threatening person I've ever seen, idk why, he's just got a very friendly face.
I have played enough Mount & Blade to say, "Yes, they would."
Vegvisir = Pathfinder, so basically a magic rune to help you find a path trough obstacles.
in modern Norwegian we'd still say (depending abit on dialect) Veg/Veiviser, altough the word is more used for a person, a scout or a locally knowledgable person to guide you.
Painfully often mistaken as a "Viking rune magic" thing, when in reality, it's from I believe 17th (might have been 16th) century Iceland.
A swedish translation would be vägvisare, väg meaning way/road, visa meaning to show, visare being someone or something that shows, pointer could work as an English translation. In the context of showing the road, guide would be an apt translation, road-guide for instance.
Pathfinder itself works of course and has a nice ring to it, but I thought I'd comment this in case someone is interested in a more literal translation.
@@sartanko Japp, kan bekräfta hehe
Obviously not viking yeah, it comes from a Christian byzantine book originally
Had the armor been available at the time, I reckon their choice would probably, at least to some degree, be based on the period - in the beginning when we only raided during warmer months and spent the colder ones at home, they would probably have favored lighter armor, for example, leg protection isn't something we've traditionally used to any great extent up here in Scandinavia, but if we're talking later period where we stayed in France, England or out East, I'd say they would probably have chosen the extra protection a plate armor gives. I mean, the Viking Era stretches a couple of hundred years, and there's a big difference between being optimally suited for quick hit-and-run's on settlements that hopefully aren't aware of the impending assault, and then having to protect your own settlements. As we were happily beating the snot out of each other back home in Denmark, Sweden, and Norway while we were being horrible guests to people farther away, fighting from static defenses weren't at all foreign to us, so if we didn't have to get off our asses and go somewhere I think my ancestors would've used anything they could get their hands on, but let's not forget that a full suit of plate armor takes up a lot more space than a simple chainmail and a helmet. Some of our longships were quite impressive, but the sleek design of the warships doesn't offer a whole lot of room for gear, and we _did_ expect to have to carry home the loot, thralls, and so on, so I don't think there'd be much room left if everyone is also bringing a plate armor. For what it's worth.
@Fishy Vagina Exactly.
Great video, cheers!
Greetings glorious Noble Ones! Another great video Raf, and of course the Vikings would use plate armor if given the chance, who wouldn’t!
I love the music in this video!
need the name for that
I dont think there is any reason not to and with the large axes they have, I am sure that with full plate armor they'd go into poleaxes/hammers real fast
Naturally
I must say, you have some really nice paintings in your house
Great video on the Norse and Vikingr journeys
Now comes the question would the Norse adopt Lorica Segmentata? as it is adapted for shield walls ;)
They did, during the time period Lorica Segmentata was being used. The Roman Empire stopped using it (where it was being produced) and so did the rest of Western Europe. Maille armour really isn't inferior to Lorica Segmentata honestly.
They did use roman gear. Many norsemen enlisted as mercs in the roman empire. But the romans at the time have dropped the segmented armor for torso protection, opting for lamellar.
Great video, mostly agree with you.
Also, nice editing but please credit the song, it was kickass ;)
I would use partial plate for some parts of my armor. Personal preference, given the era I'd be fighting in
Great video.
If I was a Viking, I would use a breastplate but not a full set. My focus would be on being able to put my own armor on quickly, and also taking it off quickly. And the fuller sets of armor require help, while some pieces can be put on with out help... but that’s my opinion.
You could buddy up though - you don't go on viking all by your lonesome. So while they didn't have squires per se, they could help each other get the armor on if need be.
I think they would do what Japan did when they encountered the plate armor technology: modification to suit their own idea of warfare. Look at the Sengoku Jidai typical Samurai plate armor: It has less protection on shoulders, joints, and waist in order to maintain maximum flexibility of the extremities. Japanese did these modifications because Samurais were expected to fight with bows and arrows on foot and mounted as well as all the typical melee and impact warfare everyone else does. I think Norse might make similar modifications to maintain their agility as much as possible since they are raiders first and soldiers 2nd.
Again. Take a look at the Samurai armor of 16th century onward. Although it does not cover almost 99% of the human body like European armors do, they still covers around 80% of the body and samurais made up the deficiency with the flexibility to properly use a great range of projectile weapons on and off horse such as arquebuses and bows.
That background music was pretty badass! Who is it?
I assume most Norse warriors would use gauntlets and greaves/armored boots. Also: I just noticed that Jin Kazama picture on the wall :3
It's interesting how we've found metal splint bracers and greaves from the Vendel era but not the Viking age. It implies they might have known of and how to make such armor pieces but generally chose not to. (Some may have ofc, but they would be rare, considering we don't have any evidence of such armor archaeologically or literarily.)
@@brightonbegole5459 I also don't think it was necessary for the most part, the great majority of people would have been fighting with a large round shield and a spear
@@googlename3859 Yeah people forget how massive shields really were. A 3' diameter round shield was far from uncommon.
@@brightonbegole5459 Splints and greaves were exclusively for cavalry use, were it would be difficult to cover yourself with a shield, they even wore just one bracer on the sword/spear arm while opting for no bracer on the shield arm.
@@harryh4rp4n31 We have no evidence the Norse used cavalry, nor is there evidence for that idea about how they wore bracers anywhere.
I would imagine they would wear it and strut about with an air of being wealthy like in modern times if someone is wearing an expensive clothing or accessories. Then, of course, they have to show it off to their Viking friends like in the intro. I bet it'll be one epic tale of how that one warrior "stole" a full plate armour set from within a noble's castle!
And they would celebrate a successful raid by hitting their chest plates against each other, and the ones who don't have any would just look and feel sad :)
Most scandinavian warriors weren't bandits and thieves. They were the retinue and levies of their lord like any other medieval army.
It makes total sense, on a battle you don't want to think "do I look viking", no, you want to survive and win, so it makes sense tu wear a higher technology if given the chance
And you can always paint a Thors hammer on that chestplate if you want to keep announcing your heritage...
@@michaelpettersson4919 good point
As a guy who works on a tugboat just wanting to add having your arms, legs, foot and neck covered with plate armour would probably get in the way of basic tasks that has to do with fast rope handling and sails, the more stuff and out poking bits you have on you aswell basically makes the whole boating experience alot more dangerous and unpractical i would imagine.
But I could see them putting it on for the raids and wearing chain onboard
@@ninja5861 Sure, getting armoured up on land might be possible. but that seems like hassle in both upkeep, space and time.
On longer conquests that happened later in the British and French lands sure, could see that happen there. But for a quick in and out of a random village down the Volga? skeptical if that would be worth it.
Nice gear and the music is just A+
I was literally thinking about this yesterday.
I hoped there gonna be "Best music compilation" voice :P BTW every opportunity to show your armor is a good opportunity to show your armor :D
Would have the Romans worn sleeves eventually? Hehe!
Some Roman armor had them.
@Alvi Syahri they did. :)
In the 13th Warrior they do. One also wear a Chinese lamelar armor, one wears a Tercio kit, and one have a bronze gladiator helmet.
I loved watching you dance, or at least I think it was dancing. We should make up a new dance, The Medieval Weapon Swing...
I swing things around just as much, love it.
With or without full plate they were phenomenal warriors.
Being a sailor I would say that a few of the biggest considerations of not having plate armor is transport. Obviously you would want to avoid being heavily armored on a Viking long ship when you risk falling overboard. The other things is storage space. When they went a Viking, they expected to acquire loot. For size, weight and space you may have had to choose between gold and other things to bring back. I can't give you specific loads of traditional Norse ships but I can tell you that there is a lot of planning and science put into loading a ship. We still take this into consideration on modern warships. Even loading a small boat, you have to factor this in. In your home village, I absolutely agree with you.
You’re absolutely right! I made my ten-year-old son wear both the mail byrnie and the Cromwellian 17th Century breast- and backplate (English Civil War) when we were at the Wallace Collection. (I think the Civil War suit of armour was genuine and the other must have been a replica, but both were meant for guests trying them out.) He definitely found the viking mail shirt a lot heavier (and I can confirm it was). I suppose you could say it was a bit harsh of me to make him wear the armour, but remember what Sir Charles Oman said about the vikings in his magnum opus, that they were taught swordplay from age five.
I feel your not considering a HUGE factor that will effect the type of armor used. That factor is luggage! That boat they are in is how big? How much room do you have for your gear versus your buddies gear versus food versus place to put your spoils after the raid? What you need to test is how small of a place you can pack a breast plate versus chain shirt.
Why are people assuming that they would still use longships? It would be highly anachronistic to use full plate armour a thousand years ago. Moving along the vikings to an era where they can get their hands on plate they probably upgrade their ships as well.
mobility tests like this are things I like to be aware of, but the physical act is always very funny looking. 6:00
This video is clearly addressed to me! Got any plate armour for my bass guitar too? 😉
They would wear it on a set battlefield but avoid it when out raiding towns and monasteries. On a "hit and run" raid plate would be to much a hassle to put on and it would take up more storage space on the ship than maille. Not a heaping hell of a lot of storage space on a "average" Viking raiding ship and they'd need that for whatever captives and plunder they acquired.
Thanks now I have a image in my head of knight standing on top of a horse charging at enemies
The only reason why they wouldn't is the relative time it takes to put on plate armour versus a chainmail hauberk which you can throw on in a matter of minutes. If you're in a fast paced raiding situation you may not want to take a long time putting on plate harness when you need to tool up, hit hard and get out
Would be pretty cool if you could maybe do a video on Achilles as in what he armour he probably used during the battle of troy/any previous known battle he fought or what sort of weapons he may have used or maybe if he had a unique fighting style?
Just look at Mycenaean armor, and you got an answer of what type of armor Achilles could use.
Mail may have been easier to take on and off and store away for a sea raiders on longboats though, there's the practicality of it.
I'm GLAD you specifically said "depending on the situation", because the Norsemen were often sailing, and consequently, FIGHTING at sea; so if they somehow got sent off the ship and fell into the water, a mail shirt and Spangenhelm would be the MOST armor they could wear and still SWIM. So they probably WOULDN'T wear it when sailing to somewhere they had to go by sea to get to, but if they were fighting on LAND back HOME, or in some OTHER place they could get to by land, they probably WOULD'VE used full plate armor given the chance; it might've even led them to start using two-handed swords in certain situations.
helmet & breastplates probably will be the most viable & most comfortable to use while traveling all the time, especially in the naval traveling, so the vikings would use that. The rest probably not so much imo. Maybe, I would argue the vikings will likely use brigandine armors instead. Cheaper, effective, fast to wear, easy to fix, easy to maintain. Kinda like Conquistadors basically.
On the theme of weight yeah in videgames, etc. plate armor is usually way heavier than chainmail but irl it's so close that I wouldn't be surprised if someone found one specific set of plate armor that was lighter than one specific set of chain mail armor.
This probably started out during the Victorian era and a sudden "need" for wealthy people to use full suits of plate armour as decorations and the demand of thease outstripping the availability. So new suits needed to be made for this purpose and details like realism where not that important. They also made weapons to go with thease deforation armours, again, realism of little consequence. Put on one of thease armours and you may indeed need a ladder or crane to mount a horse, something a real knight didn't need.
Mail for the same weight would impede the wear far more than properly fitted plate due to its flexibility.
This is a question that I've asked myself ever since I saw Steel Plate from Skyrim
Hey Raph, a long time ago you said you'd do some video's going over all the runes, and what they mean. If you still felt like doing that, that'd be great! ^_^
knight Errant had a really good video on felxabiliy in the various layers of his harness
Love the portrait of Jin Kazama behind
"Given the choice"... I'd say it's circumstantial.
If a large party of norse raiders are offered plate armour so that everyone can get a suit of their own, then yes. Maybe.
But looking at it from a historical perspective: the arms and armaments of norse raiders was very diverse and not uniform, because not every member of a raiding party or army could afford their own mail or swords etc.
The only uniform thing about them seems to have been that they would almost always be equipped with a one handed weapon and a shield as a bare minimum.
And their tactics were adapted to this, utilizing almost a phalanx or testudo with their shields in combat in the open.
If one flashy norse raider decides to wear plate and skip the shield altogether, then his mates would see him as not fulfilling his role in a shield wall.
If he were to use his shield with the full plate, then it might be more cumbersome for him (since full plate isn't necessarily intended for use with shields).
So there is a very reasonable objection to the notion that they'd use full plate in the sense that it doesn't fit with their cooperative shield use as a team.
I suspect old Norse would do what Japan did when they encountered the plate armor technology: modification to suit their own idea of warfare. Look at the Sengoku Jidai typical Samurai plate armor: It has less protection on shoulders, joints, and waist in order to maintain maximum flexibility of the extremities. Japanese did these modifications because Samurais were expected to fight with bows and arrows on foot and mounted as well as all the typical melee and impact warfare that everyone else do. I think Norse might make similar modifications to maintain their agility as much as possible since they are raiders first and soldiers 2nd.
Again. Take a look at the Samurai armor of 16th century onward. Although it does not cover almost 99% of the human body like European armors do, they still covers around 80% of the body and samurais made up the deficiency with the flexibility to properly use a great range of projectile weapons on and off horses such as arquebuses and bows.
Entirely possible.
Imagine if they had access. Maybe they would have modified armor to fit their fighting style and their preferred ascetics. It would have made for some bad ass looking gear, I think.
A great idea! If even a single piece of plate armour was brought back from their raiding, I also think they may try to create their own armour aethestics after having a closer examination on the latest plate armour technology.
@@Richard-mo1nc I really don't understand why they wouldn't have adopted it as soon as everyone else did. They were not technologically inferior during their day.
@@aidansumner8364 hmm. The idea of adopting better technology when available really gets one thinking how soon can a nation or faction can make something that they found is better readily available for themselves and who'd be the first few to possess this new technology? No doubt, during the feudal era of Europe, most factions will have about the same level of military technology at some point in time. However, there'd still be disparity in the military arms race between different medieval factions regarding who has the superior technology and who is still catching up to the new tech in weapons and armour.
I think, like all practical warriors, once they'd seen the advantages that plate armour gave them they'd definitely have adopted it.
Nice video, thanks for the practical demonstration, much appreciated as always :-)
The ottomans and beyond fought and knew plate. Yet they never bothered with it. Not even with imports. At the same period, everyone and their brother were scrambling to get their hands on gunpowder. The ones that were slow like the Mamluk sultanate and Champa were destroyed.
Arms and armor were the product of culture and the ability to produce and procure. Places with no facilities and craftsmen to make plate didn't bother because it wasn't worth it. The existing armor was adequate.
Plate was also unsuitable for eurasia's elite strike arm, the cavalry. The ability to operate the bow from horseback was impeded by plate. The Poles had access to plate, yet the bulk of their elite cavalry, the armored companions (pancerni) would not wear plate, not even munition though they could afford it. They were horse archers first.
Sorry for the long post, but the video gave me food for thought :) I generally agree, although, I'd like to point out some ideas that might be worth considering. Vikings were relying on raids mainly and on rapidity of action on poorly defended targets, when they found themselves in real battles, the results could really go either way, and, one could argue when looking at past battles, generally not in their advantage. So they aimed to limit that as much as possible with quick raids.
In this context, maybe another point can limit the use of full plate armor. Generally speaking you wouldn't want to sail all the time in armor, be it plate or mail. You'd sail without armor most of the time, and just put it on as you are nearing your target, hopefully rather quickly, so you can be ready before people spot your ship and either prepare their defense or run away with their most valuable possessions.
The problem is plate is a lot longer to put on than mail. As stated previously you can't really afford to take a break in your approach to put it on. This forces you to either not use it, or put it on before you're even on sight of your target, and sail or row for a while in armor, and then land in armor, both of which would be taxing on your stamina. (you do overheat faster in plate than you do in mail) You could however counter this by increasing the number of person on the ship, having dedicated sailors and dedicated warriors, warriors having the full plate armor, and sailors staying in civilian clothes and either not fighting, or fighting with a higher risk for their life, but you lower the profitability of the raid by having more employees.
Another point to consider is how much would you need it ? When raiding monasteries and villages, do you really need the extra protection when you consider the threats you'll be facing ? Possibly, depends on your luck I guess, you might either meet no resistance at all, face a merchant with a knife trying to defend his family or a guard with a spear, the last one you'd definitely be better of with plate, the merchant, it wouldn't hurt, but you're probably ok with your shield and a longer weapon.
However I do agree that they'd definitely use pieces of plate given the chance, a later helmett and a breast plate wouldn't take much time to put on, or even, if available, perhaps they might favor a brigandine, which is usually quite fast to put on.
All of those points concern only the raiding part, when assaulting a well defending city or facing an army in battle, they would most definitely use the full plate if they could, especially those, for the late viking era, who would use a dane axe.
Armour is worn against likely weapons you expect to face. So full plate armour would have been an overkill considering the opposing weapons at the time.
if full plate armor was around during the viking age, the weapons to combat it would of also been developed sooner. armor is developed in response to weapons, and in turn weapons are developed in response armor
If you really think about it, this is like asking if soldiers of the 1800's would wear modern bulletproof body armor.
Given the chance they probably adopt them in a hearbeat.
In my humble opinion, norsemen would have used asymmetrical plate armor. Heavy armor on their domininat arm, helmet, possibly something for the torso, and very little/the usual on their secondary arm. The secondary arm is already protected by a shield, plates could perhaps make wearing said shield more uncomfortable than it has to be, since the shield already offers enough protection.
I agree 100%. If you can reduce the chances and severity of wounds in battle without adding significant discomfort, why would you not.
On horseback, the stirrups in conjunction with the saddle arw meant to distribute your weight and that of other gear so as to prevent stress on the horse and avoid reducing the horse's ballance and mobility.
I don't think they would. But not for the reason you would think. If you live on a ship you have the constraints of limited storage. Chain is more easy to store and repair dose not require a full forge. Also it's not as if they had no armor formed from different steel plates the spectacle helmet was often made from plates put together. That in mind it wouldn't be that crazy to think if they had the technology to make armor in that way. they would have at least added small plated to the armor but they did not. I believe this is because of the storage constraints of living on a ship
"Hypothetical discussions tend to be rather theoretical, but today we're going practical."
In the next video:
> would Vikings have used a t-64 main battle tank if given the chance?
That “training montage” though!
For raids, the more armor (by weight) you wear, the less loot you can carry back, unless you capture slaves.
Stand up battles, the more the better.
I would pay to see the face of a neighbor just having a peek out the window
👀
Mail has a logistic advantage if you are raiding. You can fit a whole set of mail Armor+Helmet+Gambeson into a Chest. Also mail doesn't rust as easy as plate. Yes really, I'm fighting with both kinds of armour in the rain, so I know a thing or two. ;-) For a full scale batte on the other hand: Yes, for sure, that's the next step in armor revolution.
What is the music at 5:50? It doesn't appear credited in your description.
What is that song? Vikings would love a bit of that to dance to while raiding in their full plate armor!
Any chance we can get a Metatron Grade Rating System. Everything from Armors, Weapons, Tools, and Clothing. Just a thought, also thanks for the video, looking forward for the next one.
Seems kind of like asking whether they would use automatic rifles if they could have. OF COURSE. There is no comparison between full place and what they had. They would have been essentially unstoppable raiders, save perhaps for the need to deal with all the rust on the grieves.
Most warriors are practical and adapt to new technology. In any kind of expected battle, the Norse definitely would've used plate armour, and it might have caused them to use more two-handed weapons instead of a one-hander and shield. The weight, from my understanding, isn't that different from mail (depending on coverage, obviously). They might not have worn it as much for actual raids, since they spent most of the time in boats, and especially if they didn't expect much resistance. It's still very possible they would. They certainly would have tried.
The Japanese quickly adopted the brestplate from Europeans. And they picked up the arqebus as well and revolutionised their warfare with it.
"Viking raiders" had to ride a ship as it breached, likely rowing to get it there. Then they had to jump into the water ( of uncertain depth) wade ashore and fight any opposition they met. Full armor would be inconvenient at best.
Hi Metatron! Could you do a "How historical accurate is armour in Conqueror's Blade?". It is a free PC game, you can download it on Steam. I think you'll find this one very interesting (lot's of weapons, armours, from all around the world). The thing I like the most of this game is that you are not a hack and slash hero, lone warrior. Instead you command your forces during battle. I hope you give it a try. Cheers from Argentina!
Does no one know what music starts playing at 5:42? I looked through every comment and I couldn't find it. It's not credited in the description either.
Considering the Norse adopted full plate at the same time the rest of Europe adopted it I think they actually did adopt full plate as soon as they were given the chance.
A 1250 ad military text, the King's Mirror, for Norwegian nobility, adviced fighters on longships to use a blackened gambeson. The same source also described early coats of plate, but for knights.
Viking=/= Norse. Calling a norse a viking would be like calling a mexican a narco. Vikings were pirates who didn't fight real opposition. Their strength was in mobility to sail up unprepared spots, hit fast and got out of there before the cops arrived. Full plate would be counter productive.
Honestly considering that Vikings were using chainmail (which are usually the heaviest part of a full plate set if you use full chainmail for that) probably they wouldn't mind using plate mails, or maybe even going for a bit of an in-between solution, plates on most vital parts and rest protected with mail, so pretty much transitional period armor, honestly more interesting question for me is how would Viking plate-mail look like, just extrapolating the style of their equipment for later age and trying to figure out what it could happen if Viking age has ended later
When Europeans reached Japan the locals quickly picked up breastplates that where incorporated into the samurai's outfits. I envision a "viking brestplate" as something decorated with runes, dragon motives or symbols for the gods. Tyr and Thor would be most appropriate for a warrior but a chieftain may choose Odin instead. And since we are talking about seaborn raiders Njord would also be fitting.
@@michaelpettersson4919 yeah but part of the reason why Japan was using European armors is because of how exotic and unusual for them they looked, Vikings had their unique style but not so exotic compared to the rest of Europe so I think that more likely scenario for them would be to use mostly the same tech but with their own unique style
I don’t see why they wouldn’t have. Superior protection.
The _real_ question is,
"Would Vikings wear Milanese, Burgundian, or Gothic?"