This is why I love Reddit:
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/s/A4RFl8dG2uWhy did “full plate” armor not seem to spread much beyond Europe?
Late Medieval/Renaissance plate armor was extraordinarily protective, forcing developments in weapons and fighting styles to counter it. But while I know that Japan started to incorporate plate cuirasses to counter firearms, and Wikipedia mentioned the Ottomans using plate to some degree, the full head-to-toe plate harness seems (at least from what I’ve seen) to be unique to Europe.
Given that people tend to not want to die, and full plate armor looks like it would be the best protection around at the time, why was the design not adopted more across the Middle East and Asia? Were other armors actually as effective, or was it less well suited to other ways of war? Or was it due to social factors/cultural inertia?
Answer:
"Plate armour was a result of multiple factors that conjured into one hyper focus on upping protection to the maximum possible level.
First, European cavalry tactic and technique focusing on the charge, more specifically the couched lance technique. The warrior-nobility class, aka knights, have been using this to kill each other for years.
Second, armour was more than just a gear of war but also a free flowing market product, unlike China, armour was a forbidden technology in any market while centralised government monopolised armour making while funded standing armies was the norms instead. That means there was a motivation for better product to out compete industry rivals, or there was a demand from the user side that demanded improvement with less emphasis of “good enough”.
Third, a sudden spike in projectile technology as recurve bow technology, if my memory serves me right, as mentioned by Mike Loads in his book, around 11~12th century after consistent contact with eastern Mediterranean cultures, which pushes itself into crossbow making , increasing the threat.
Fourth, after a first solid breast plate was introduced, soon lance strikers became more deadly as “lance rest” and “lance stop” that hold the lance in place onto the breast plate and allows the whole user to absorb the blow, instead of the weakness of the human flesh unable to resist the push back when striking a target. In a rough explanation, breast plate made lance strike double or triple its original kinetic energy according to Dr Tobias Capwell’s experiments. Which means old armor tech such as chain or lamellar no longer stand a chance. So Europeans war fighters killing each other have a need to get better gear, when there is need, there is market.
Five, everything begin to spiral and grow, a need for improved armor, a market for improved armour and competing to create better armour, a whole industry, Community and economy grows out from this snd continue to grow , turning into something that is no longer easier replicable , as there is a social and economic environment of various interlinked artisans and communities specifically grown to serve one purpose: build plate armour and all the related not armour components of it, belts, decoration, gilding , silver, copper, textiles. Even if the ottoman want to make armour, it’s cheaper to buy it compare to import the whole interlinked social-economic-production construct that was the European armour industry.
Six, when China , specifically Ming dynasty got in contact with Europeans around 16th century , it’s already the age of gunpowder, or the transitional period of it called the Pike and Shot era. Through naval conflicts or trade, new armour, compared to cannons or new guns, make way less impact to the battle field, not to mention limited budget. If I can spend the same amount for 100 breast plate or a cannon, I’m buying the cannon from my white skinned Frankish red haired south sea barbarian trader . (Even if it’s a third hand cannons that the Dutch salvage from a sunken English merchant ship)."
Home
Chat
Login
Register