The apogee of plate was, as commonly accepted, with the Gothic Armor of the latter part of the 15th century. Up to that point I agree, firearms were of little danger (aside from provoking a panic induced rout I suppose). I was really referring to the period post, say, 1500 when armor was in decline (degenerate was the term used by Dean, I think). Armor after that time got heavier and not because of man-powered weapons: they had sort of maxed out by the end of the 15th c.
By the end of the 16th c you are seeing either absurdly heavy siege pieces or relatively useless parade pieces.
I guess my contention is that armor development after the first quarter of the 16th century was in response to the improvement of firearms not because of better non-gunpowder weapons.
Interesting question though.
|