This is the reason why the FBI and other law enforcement swapped to a larger cartridge — the. These rounds are still the choice for law enforcement officers today, and it may be surprising to learn that they were originally adopted to overcome body armor. During the early years of World War 2, military planners were still stuck thinking about the last war.
As the war progressed, however, it became increasingly apparent that body armor was a necessity for certain types of troops. From , the first recognizably modern form of body armor started to emerge. The British led the way, issuing armor made of manganese plates to anti-aircraft and naval gunners. These vests were enormously popular, because for the first time they provided protection against low-velocity projectiles while still allowing the wearer to move around.
What really spurred on the development of modern body armor, however, was the bombing campaign in Europe. By , it was recognized that the majority of injuries to bomber crews was caused by relatively low-velocity shrapnel, rather than by bullets. The first signs of truly modern body armor, however, would have to wait until the closing year of the war. The US, having finally recognized the importance of issuing effective armor to its soldiers, had developed bullet-proof vests made of Doron Plate, a type of fiberglass laminate.
Vests that incorporated these plates were first used by tank crews in the Battle Of Okinawa. It was clear by that laminate plates were the way forward when it came to body armor. During the Korean war, a number of new vests were produced for US infantry soldiers. The most commonly used was the M , which used either aluminum or plastic plates to stop projectiles. Officially, it was claimed that these vests were able to stop 7.
Developments in non-military body armor were also made during this period. The next big advance in body armor, and the one that set the mould for armor produced up until the modern day, came in Stephanie Kwolek , a research chemist working for DuPont, was experimenting with liquid crystalline polymer materials.
After much work, she finally found a material with exceptional strength and stiffness, and this material came to be known as Kevlar. Kevlar was a revelation. It is sometimes argued that the military salute originated during the Roman Republic , when assassinations were common and citizens were required to approach public officials with their right hand raised in order to show that they did not conceal a weapon.
A more common account is that the modern military salute originated from men in armor raising the visors of their helmets before greeting their lord or comrades. This gesture would have made a person both recognizable as well as vulnerable, at the same time demonstrating that the right hand i.
Although these theories are compelling and romantic , there is actually little evidence to support either of them as the direct origin of the modern military salute. As for the Roman practice, it would be virtually impossible to prove that it continued through fifteen centuries or was revived during the Renaissance , leading in a straight line to the modern military salute.
There is also no direct evidence for the visor theory, although it is more recent. The majority of helmets for war after around were increasingly of types not fitted with visors, and helmets became rare on European battlefields after about As with so many misconceptions, the origins of this misnomer are to be found in the nineteenth century.
When early scholars of armor looked at medieval artworks, they noticed what they thought to be depictions of many different forms of armor: rings, chains, bands of rings, scales, small plates, etc.
It is today commonly accepted, however, that most of these different depictions are actually various attempts by artists to efficiently show the surface of a type of armor that is difficult to render both in paint or sculpture. Rather than showing each interlinking ring, the small links were stylized by dots, slashes, S-shapes, circles, and the like, which readily lent themselves to misinterpretation.
To give a definitive answer to this question is impossible for several reasons. First, hardly any evidence survives that would provide a complete picture for any given period. Scarce evidence is available from the fifteenth century onward as to how armor was ordered, in what time the order was completed, and how much the parts or entire armor cost.
Second, a complete armor could comprise elements made by several specialized armorers. Pieces might also be held in stock half-finished and then fitted for a specific commission.
Finally, the matter is complicated by regional and national differences. Throughout the German-speaking lands, most armorer workshops were controlled by strict guild regulations , which limited the number of apprentices, and thus had a direct effect on the number of pieces that could be produced by one master and his small workshop. In Italy, on the other hand, no such regulations existed, and workshops could accordingly be much larger, which undoubtedly must have enhanced speed and quantity of production.
In any case, one must bear in mind that the production of arms and armor was a thriving business throughout the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. Armorers, blade smiths, gun makers, crossbow and bow makers, and fletchers were found in every large town. Then as now, their market was regulated by supply and demand, and time-efficient work must have been an essential part of a successful business. The answer to this question is therefore perhaps as simple as it is elusive.
The time it took to make armor depended on several factors, namely, who ordered the work, from whom the work was commissioned i. Two famous examples may serve to illustrate this point.
The armorer informs Sir John that he can make the requested suit of armor as soon as the English knight tells him what pieces he requires, in which fashion, and when the armor must be completed unfortunately, no time frame is given. In court workshops, the production of garnitures for a princely client appears to have required more time.
We do not know whether Seusenhofer and his workshop were also working on other commissions during that time. The lance rest appeared soon after the emergence of the solid breastplate in the late fourteenth century and remained in use until the decline of armor.
This serves to stabilize and balance the lance, permitting a better aim. Furthermore, the combined weight and speed of horse and rider are transferred onto the point of the lance, making it a most formidable weapon. It is noteworthy that on most field armors, the lance rest can usually be folded upward so that it would not impede the mobility of the sword arm, after the lance had been discarded.
The history of the armored codpiece is closely related to its counterpart in civilian male costume. From the mid-fourteenth century onward, male garments for the upper body had occasionally become so short as to almost reveal the crotch. In these times prior to the development of trousers, men wore leggings tied to their undergarment or a belt, and the crotch was hidden with a flap secured to the upper inside edge of each legging. At the beginning of the sixteenth century, this flap began to be padded and thus visually emphasized.
As such, the codpiece remained commonplace in European male costume until the end of the sixteenth century. On armor, the codpiece as a separate piece of plate defense for the genitals appeared during the second decade of the sixteenth century and remained in use and fashion until about Thickly padded on the inside, it is attached to the armor at the center of the lower edge of the skirt.
While its early form was rather cuplike, it remained under direct influence of civilian costume, and later examples are somewhat more pointed upward. It was, however, not typically worn with armor for use on horseback; first, because it would get in the way, and second, because the armored front bow of the war saddle usually offered enough protection for the groin area.
Thus the codpiece is usually found on armor used for fighting on foot, both in war and tournament, and, although of some protective value, it has always been as much an element of fashion as one of defense. Plate armour was widely used by most armies until the end of the 17th century for both foot and mounted troops such as the cuirassiers , dragoons , demi-lancers and Polish hussars.
The infantry armour of the 16th century developed into the Savoyard type of three-quarters armour by Full plate armour was expensive to produce and remained therefore restricted to the upper strata of society; lavishly decorated suits of armour remained the fashion with 18th-century nobles and generals long after they had ceased to be militarily useful on the battlefield due to the advent of inexpensive muskets.
The development of powerful rifled firearms made all but the finest and heaviest armour obsolete. The increasing power and availability of firearms and the nature of large, state-supported infantry led to more portions of plate armour being cast off in favour of cheaper, more mobile troops. Leg protection was the first part to go, replaced by tall leather boots. By the beginning of the 18th century, only field marshals , commanders and royalty remained in full armour on the battlefield, more as a sign of rank than for practical considerations.
It remained fashionable for monarchs to be portrayed in armour during the first half of the 18th century, but even this tradition became obsolete. Thus, a portrait of Frederick the Great in still shows him in armour, while a later painting showing him as a commander in the Seven Years' War s depicts him without armour. Body armour remained in use throughout the 18th century with cavalry units, especially cuirassiers , including front and back plates that could protect the wearer from distanced fire and either helmets or "secrets", a steel protection they wore under a floppy hat.
A Japanese samurai 16th century suit of plate armour with a western-style cuirass. In Kofun period Japan, during the 4th and 5th centuries, very advanced iron plate cuirasses called tanko and helmets were made. In Japan the warfare of the Sengoku period 15th and 16th centuries required large quantities of armour to be produced for the ever growing armies of foot soldiers ashigaru.
In , the Portuguese brought matchlock firearms tanegashima to Japan. In the s warfare in Japan came to an end but the samurai continued to use plate armour until the end of the samurai era in the s, with the known last use of samurai armour occurring in during the satsuma rebellion. Body armour made a brief reappearance in the American Civil War with mixed success.
However, the armour vests of the time were expensive and thus bought by individual troops and not issued, meaning that the effectiveness of the armour varied widely depending on its maker. Plate armour was successfully implemented by Australian outlaw Ned Kelly and his gang, giving them a large advantage in their gunfights against police. The cavalry armour of Napoleon , and the French, German , and British empires heavy cavalry known as cuirassiers were actively used through the 19th century right up to the first year of World War I , when French cuirassiers went to meet the enemy in armour outside of Paris.
During the war both sides experimented with shrapnel armour and some soldiers used their own but dedicated ballistic armour such as the American Brewster Body Shield, although not widely produced. In General Adrian of the French army provided an abdominal shield which was light in weight two pounds and easy to wear.
It was made of an oblong plate of metal bent in a curve and moulded somewhat to the abdomen, hip and groin guards were added to the abdominal shield. General Adrian devised a breastplate which joined the abdominal defence which was also provided with a gorget. About three thousand of these defences which weighed about five and a half pounds were made and they were given practical tests. During World War I, a number of British officers recognized that many casualties could be avoided if effective armor were available.
Isolated efforts at developing armor were made, and soldiers could make individual purchases or efforts, but there was no armor issued to the troops. For example, soft armor made of silk was tried on a small scale based on Japanese designs, but this material did not last well under the harsh environmental conditions. Malcolm C. He thought that many wounds he was treating could have been prevented by some kind of light armor. In he was awarded the Legion of Merit for developing the flak vest.
Unfortunately, flak jackets proved to be too bulky for wear within the confines of the RAF's standard bomber aircraft , the Avro Lancaster. Japanese iron helmet and armour with gilt bronze decoration, Kofun period, 5th century. Tokyo National Museum. The first plate armour was that of bronze, being worn by elite soldiers in Greek armies in particular.
Bronze, whilst easier to work with, was much less commonly available requiring copper and tin, which are almost never found in close proximity. Iron was, however, adequate enough for the task, eventually becoming more popular because of its strength as well as its far greater availability to be used in the advanced militaries of Europe and the Middle East. Gradually methods of making steel were perfected and steel replaced iron in most capacities except munition armour.
Medieval swords were capable of inflicting horrific injuries, well able to remove a limb or kill with a single solid blow. In order to cut effectively, they needed to be light and relatively thin. A thin blade moves less material aside as it cuts, allowing for a deeper wound to be made more easily than it would if it were thicker; however, this means that the edge can be easily damaged, and when notched a sword will not only not cut, it can also be crack or shatter with a solid blow.
Blades had to be designed with these considerations in mind. There was a difference, however, for those blades that were intended primarily to cut and those blades that were designed to cut and thrust.
Purely cutting blades were very flexible, whereas blades intended for thrusting had to be more rigid you can see why by looking at sport fencing weapons: for safety purposes, they are extremely flexible, and bend when pushed into their target.
The depression in the blade above is called a fuller. It allows the blade to retain strength while being just a little bit lighter and easier to wield. It also tends to make the weapon stronger than it would be if it were completely flat. Sometimes one finds swords made in a diamond shape on the blade, rather than being flattened or fullered. In this case, the swords in question are almost universally designed for strong thrusts against heavy armor, and any experienced knight or professional soldier would have been able to note these details at a glance, and by doing so, have a good idea of what to expect from his opponent.
The falchion is a specialized sword form intended solely for chopping, and is used in one hand only. Arms and Armor of the Medieval Knight , p. As you can see, it has a very wide blade, with the point of impact in front of where the hand would be, just like an axe blade.
In spite of being wide, the blades are no heavier than other swords: the blades get much thinner as one moves from the handle to the tip, and so they are quick with great penetrating power.
They can cut directly through mail, damage plate armor, or tear up a shield in a matter of moments, and while they were never the most popular variety of sword, they gained popularity during the fourteenth century because of their inherent usefulness against heavy armor.
0コメント