> >This "encyclopedia" states that the heavy armored riders (i.e.
> knights)
> >were fighting on foot, because they (mostly the french) suffered
> >grevious losses to the english soldiers on foot (says nothing about
> >armament) in the battle in Courtrai 1304 og against the archers at
> Crecy
> Maybe they were wearing armour too heavy for standard warhorse with
> barding being able to cope with.
> Though you still got a point though, but the question is rather
> how
> >tight this armor was ? Was it plate mail or field plate ? At last the
> >first got some weak spots where arrows easily can penetrate...But
> wait
> >I'm killing my own argument..
> >Sindre
> I thought the field plate was representative of the heaviest, most
> advanced armours that came into vogue in the very late medieval (C16)
> when jousting became an artform/sport rather than a practice for
> battle. Paintings of the "Field of the cloth of gold" (a medieval
> version of a european jousting league championship final) show Henry
> VIII (England) wearing the most impractical armour for true combat
> ever seen and had a horse the size of a cart horse rather than a war
> horse.
> About penetration form arrows or fire arms I do not know because the
> rarity of this armour makes it very expensive and not available for
> balistics test. This was the type of armour that cost 25000gp to
> build because it took 6 months and was tailor made for each individual