![]() |
![]() |
#21 | |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Kent
Posts: 2,658
|
![]() Quote:
Hi Richard ![]() I should have made the point more clearly. I totally agree that these men were 'physically conditioned' to cope with the demands of battle.....afterall being unfit was potentially lethal ![]() Another thing I have noticed is that armour evolution increased the thickness and hardness of the plate and increased the number of 'parts' to increase mobility and protection. To lessen gaps in the armour would increase the 'heat up' factor. Helmets became more 'enclosed' and the 'breathing' holes / slits became smaller to prevent 'stabbing' to the area, which again would increase 'heat' and restrict oxygen intake. It suggests to me that designers had protection as the critical factor, not the conditions suffered by the wearer. Men at arms would have to 'work around' the problems.....short 'breaks' to rest and take on water would be the obvious remedy ....in a 'drawn out' battle. I also have to agree about the war bow situation, English archers were well trained and exhumed bodies of archers have significantly larger bone mass in their draw arm (through repetition, the bone structure would 'enlarge' as the muscle mass increased) ....I doubt this physical 'abnormality' would occur in a 'modern' archer. This is an interesting link... http://www.companionsofthelongbow.co.../Page27783.htm Kind Regards David |
|
![]() |
![]() |
|
|