In response to a claim from Paul May that a broadsword could sever an
armoured forearm
> At 04:59 PM 27/08/04, Jane wrote:
> >What period's that? It's one of my favourite attacks,
> >personally, aiming at the forearm when your opponent's
> >got more reach than you. Only bit I can reach :(
On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 02:26, Paul May wrote:
> Renaissance and similar; relatively late. There was one battle where
> the dead from both sides laid in the open for too long (I think there was
> a war on), so in the interests of not getting the plague they put the
> lot, unlooted, in a plague pit.
> On excavation, they found a most amazing collection of armour - and a
> large preponderance of lower arm and lower leg severings. It was the
> most common injury.
> It included one man, armoured in breastplate and chain (IIRC) with
> plate greaves, who had had both legs severed mid-shin by the same blow
> through the greaves - the cuts lined up... Hand-and-a-half sword blow.
I'm pretty sure you're talking about Wisby here, since the Wisby one is renown for its wound analysis. It's not really renaissance. It's also unlikely that most of the severed limbs were armoured with plate. As far as I'm aware, the causes of the wounds were supposition at best (apart from the arrow wounds where the arrowhead was still wedged in the bone, and the pick strikes to the skull which produce nice square holes through the skull.)
There are wounds of the nature that you describe, however the photo's suggest that the body wasn't wearing armour.
Most of the Wisby body armours were brigandine or lamelar. (which I think some Gloranthan troops wear). After a quick flick through the Wisby book, there appear to have been no limb armour other than mail, except the occasional plate gauntlet of a primitive style. I also note that there are several bodies wearing lamelar torso armour, a mail coif, and no limb armour (that has survived). Possibly they were wearing a helmet, but also it's possible that they were not.
Incidentally, my theories on why shields were mostly discarded in the 15thC has to do with the armour getting sufficiently advanced that a single handed weapon could no longer reliably take down someone in good armour, and that a 2 handed weapon was required. This of course, meant that you couldn't use a shield. I don't think that there is any armour that the Orlanthi have encountered which this is true for (IMG at least, but then, IMG it's only 1330).
Cheers,
Stephen
-- Stephen Rennell steve_at_... Wellington, New Zealand GPG fingerprint - CD0F 78C6 1AAE 8726 803A F1D0 F123 8486 062F 0317
Powered by hypermail