Based on feeling, aura, sovl, zoz, etc; what is the best iteration of the fighting man? modern Knight? ancient hoplite? viking? shield? 2hander? barbarian? full plate?Post your favorite fighting man. For me, it might be...
>>98757918>modern Knight?What?
>>98757918...something weeb like erdrick armor + crossguard classic sword. Though from the OP's pic, it is hard to top the flow of the 1300s one
>>98757921old knights: x century, mail, cone helmets etcmodern knights: xv century, plate armor and suchi meant modern in the sense of the historic modern era that starts at 1492
>>98757918That 1500's armor SHOULD by all rights get the same flak here as boob plate (except not because inly retards complain about the practicality of boob plate), that green codpiece thing is like waving a flag saying "stab me here." Not just because there's no armor, but because it's the only green thing on him, it draws attention to itself.Anyway, I prefer armor that has fantasy elements to it, but not some obscene Warcraft pauldroncore, and looks like the character can move more easily in it, they're an adventurer who has to deal with a huge variety of challenges, they're not marching on a battlefield being attacked from all directions at once, so something as encompassing as full plate isn't neccesary.
>>98757963>That 1500's armor SHOULD by all rights get the same flak here as boob plate (except not because inly retards complain about the practicality of boob plate), that green codpiece thing is like waving a flag saying "stab me here." Not just because there's no armor, but because it's the only green thing on him, it draws attention to itself.It's cavalry armor you absolute retard. No need to armor your groin if a horse is in the way
>>98757977Right because there's no way you'll ever not be on a horse.
>>98757950Your broader point is well taken.That said: the transition from the Middle Ages can't be pinned to any one particular date. One historian might fix it at the fall of Constantinople, and the diaspora of Greek scholars therefrom. Another might see modernity as intimately tied to protestantism, and fix 1517 or even later as the definite end of medieval Christendom.
>>98758062discovery of america nigga, 2 worlds collided. humanity became one, also jews expelled from spain
>>98758109>discovery of america niggaDidn't exactly have a huge impact on European culture, politics or technology within the first few decades. Especially not on the "fighting men aestethic" that OP's on about.>>98757963>>98758007Oh look, an attention whore.
>>98757918Future psychic warrior who carries a laser rifle but mostly does battle on the mental plane by having deadly arguments over philosophy.
>>98758292Veterans of the psychic war, very metal.
>>98757918I'm a sucker for the classic period aesthetics.Probably why I can't get into moderns, the uniforms all suck from a hobbyist standpoint.
>>98757977>No need to armor your groin if a horse is in the wayRoman cavalry had most of their wounds in the groin because it's a natural weak point in armor due to the need to move your legs and it was easier to stab than the body.
>>98757918>zozI do not speak zoomerish
>>98758062Except it's 1492, rounded up to 1500 if you're being loosey goosey.
>>98757977It's not so much a "don't need it" issue as a "can't sit on a horse while wearing it" issue.>>98758007Steel codpieces were in use for that.
>>98757918Anything drawn by McBride
>>98757936>>98757918I like early 2000s korean MMOslop. Particularly early concept art for Lineage 2
>>98757918Modern day jeans-and-raid-plates operator.
>>98758062Literally zero historians refer to the end of the middle ages as 1517
>>98758765I can't think of anything relevant happening in 1492.1453 is a better date - fall of byzantium, Middle Ages begin with the fall of rome and ends with the fall of rome
>>98761473>I can't think of anything relevant happening in 1492.Blame your history teacher and your own ancestors for selecting curiosity out of your genepool.>Middle Ages begin with the fall of rome and ends with the fall of romePoetic, certainly. But it's 1492.
>>98759846Osprey art is great but should never be taken as historical fact. They have a tendency to make errors or propagate ahistorical memes.
>>98762252Okay?
>>98762252Your mom has a tendency to make errors or propagate ahistorical memes.
>>98761473You never heard of the Fall of Granada?
>>98763365Local incident irrelevant outside of Spain.
>>98763398To be fair, it's also an important event of African and American history.
>>98762252nta but the thread is not limited to historical/real life periods
how would you describe this aesthetic?
>>98763569artsy and ahistorical
>>98757918a knight with some stylish cloth over full plate and a big sword is peak
>>98757918For history the aesthetic, it's Warring States samurai and bushi or 1200s knightly armor (more specifically very late 1200s and very early 1300s for the coat of plates rep). Fantasy, I like Dragon's Dogma, Dark Souls, Elden Ring, and Fire Emblem's designs. Hero and Wyvern Lord is by far my favorite classes in the games. If there is an avatar, I always class into one of those. Fates Conquest had such a great hero design, basically perfect. Don't look up awakening's hero design... That shit was a travesty.
>>98757918>>98766502Oh, and echoes had a great Hero class, too. When my gray promoted I felt a little sad on my first playthrough. Only because I thought the fit was such a massive downgrade.
>>98757918eastern european drip was the best, alongside 11th/12th century western europe
>>98772430
>>98772433
>>98762252>>98759846>>98762364>>98762402>>98763553Ironically enough Osprey's art for Mesoamerican stuff is pretty good, despite the fact it's a region that often gets butchered even by otherwise reputable sources on world historyIt's not perfect, though:- The hanging fringe on shields, and the skirts on Ehuatl wartunics/warjackets is often depicted as flat strips of leather or large single feathers, when in reality these would likely be rope tassels that then had a fluffy feather covering. In pic related, look at the leftmost shield on the bottom row, the red one with the blue Plumed Coyote on the front: That shield gets the fringe correct, and the depiction of the gilded and skirted warjacket just to the left of it (which unlike all the other art in the collage, is NOT an ospray depiction) also gets the skirt right- It's not visible in any of the art in pic related itself, but Angus Mcbride, one of three(?) artists Osprey uses for their Mesoamerican books, had a tendency to depict architecture without smooth plaster over the brickwork and without painted murals/frescoes over the plaster. This is actually a pretty big thing to get wrong, unlike the shield fringe/skirt tassel thing which is minor, but even this isn't really actually a large problem because Angus only rarely depicts architecture/buildings in his art to begin with, at most you usually just see a wall in the background here or there. And I think I had a third critique, but if I did I forget what it was? Off the top of my head those are the only two issues Angus Mcbride's, Adam Hook, and Peter Dennnis's Mesoamerican art for the Osprey books have that I can think of. However, the information of the TEXT in the books has many further issues, so I would not recommend them for that, even if I mostly endorse the artwork.
>>987729678/10. If only they had a better weapon those aztecs would be true sovl aesthetic. Maybe some kind of broadsword or axe?
>>98758799I do like his stuff, in general, I like iron age, bronze age stuff.
>>98773838>8/10. If only they had a better weapon those aztecs would be true sovl aesthetic. Maybe some kind of broadsword or axe?A modern baseball bat
>>98772967Cont:>>98773838>>98774135I'm not a sword nerd, so IDK if a broadsword SPECIFICALLY is the best comparison, but I would argue that Macuahuitl are at least a more of a sword than a club:Nahuatl sources call Spanish swords "Metal macahuitl", Spanish sources called Macuahuitl "swords", and Macuahuitl are consistently described as slicing/cutting weapons, not as bludgeoning ones. This is also supported by the fact that the surviving macuahuitl specimens, as seen on the top right of the left-side collage, are rather thin, the San Marcos Street specimen especially, to the point where it's questionable if striking with it on anything other then the blades to cut with might crack or snap the weapon, and as can be seen in the Royal Madrid Armory specimen, the obsidian blades on the edges formed a even continuous cutting edge without gaps, unlike how the weapon is typically depicted in pop culture (tho you can argue some manuscript depictions do suggest some of them had gaps: I would argue that's likely artistic stylization, at least in most cases) Also, as can be see in this pic as well, the Mesoamericans had weapons which were more obviously clubs, maces, batons, etc, in contrast to the macuahuitl (and similar bladed weapons like the curved Mixtec examples), as well as a variety of other types of weapons: A lot of people underestimate Mesoamerican weapon diversity. Axes for example definitely existed in Mesoamerica, either with stone blades, or copper/bronze ones. They were more utilitarian tools (for woodworking) or ceremonial/ritual items (associated with merchantry and a few other things) than weapons of war though, but there ARE some depictions of them in military contexts, but if these are true depictions of military use or just ceremonial displays that also include military gear is contentious... but I think at least two are true depictions of military use, and Bernal Diaz also mentions a boarding party of Huastec(?) soldiers using metal axes2/?
>>98776113>>98773838>>98774135Having said all of that, the Huastec are not Aztec (I did add a "?" next to Huastec in my last post, because Diaz does not specifically identify the boarding party as being from a specific city or culture, but he says this happened on or near the Paunco river and assuming I'm thinking of the right Panuco, that would be in the Huasteca area of Mexico... on the flip side, I did come across one publication recently which claimed that Panuco was actually mostly populated by Nahuas, and you can argue any/all Nahuas are "Aztecs", but they certainly would not have been Mexica Nahuas, at least, who are what people are MOSTLY thinking of when they say "Aztec"), and the arguably depictions of axes in military contexts I mentioned are all(?) from Mixtec codices, who are also not Aztec.So simply because some Mesoamerican civilizations might have used axes in warfare doesn't mean the Aztec did: The Mexica, other Nahuas etc who we'd typically think of as being "Aztec" are pretty consistently depicted mostly using Macuahuitl, Tepoztopilli, clubs or maces, Atlatl (with occasional mentions of bows and slings in text accounts), etc. But it's certainly plausible that if the Huastec and Mixtec did use them in war, that the Mexica may have rarely done so too (In pic related for example, Mossacannibalis speculatively gives the Mexica Shorn Ones/Cuachicqueh on the top left some bronae/copper axes as sidearms strapped to their belts. Note also how Mossa correctly handles the shield fringe and skirt tassels re: what I say in >>98772967)To address the other anon mentioning baseball bats, the Huitzauhqui as described in Hassig's "Aztec Warfare" sounds to me like basically a baseball bat with stone studs or blades/flanges on it, but Hassig is the only source I know of which mentions them and I haven't been able to get my hands on the source he cites for the description of the weapon yet, I am a little skeptical of it being a thing. 3/3 for now
>>98776253>as sidearms strapped to their belts.Actually, I misremembered the art, Mossa didn't give them belts (and they shouldn't have them anyways, probably), they're holding the axes in their shield hands or have them hanging within the straps of the back of the shield, which is also where we know atlatl darts were held/kept (see the soldier in the left-center of the image in the bluish-green warsuit with the "umbrella" style xolotl back-banner within the same image) I will also note while I'm sneaking this extra post in that Mossa gives the Mexica king/Aztec emperor Axayacatl a very long thing Macuahuitl on the top right, but that depiction of Axayacatl is based on the Codex Cozcatzin, and in that depiction, Axayacatl actually seems to be wielding what seems to be a quarter/bo-staff of some kind, as seen in pic related by ohs688ohs actually seems to ambiguously interpret it as EITHER a Macuahuitl or a staff, but having looked at the highest res available scans of the original manuscript before, there does not seem to be any kind of handle on the weapon nor blades on the side. MAYBE you could argue that it's simply a hastily or poorly drawn Macuahuitl, in some other manuscripts there are certainly times where the artist seems to have simply drawn the blades as if it were a really thick outline, and I question if the "bladeless macuahuitl" in the Codex Mendoza as seen in >>98776113 might also have just had the artist get lazy and not draw the blades (though other pages of the Mendoza do show blades on them, so it's probably more likely the lack of blades and the more "rounded/curved" shaft shape on the bladeless ones is them depicting a distinct weapon type, IMO), but I personally think it's relatively clear that the Cozatzin weapon isn't a Macuahuitl if you zoom all the way inThere's a few other nitpicks I could give on other bits of Mossa's artwork in that collage, but overall he did a fantastic job
>>98773838The Purepecha had bronze axes but their king surrendered to the Spanish to avoid bloodshed but they killed him anyways.
>>98776482The explicit mentioned example of the Purepecha having bronze/copper weapons in the Relacion de Michoacan is them a sort of morning-star mace with metal spikes/blades on the striking head, rather then it being an axe.Some people interpret the weapon depicted pictorally in the Relacion that I have marked as "Purepecha Weapon?" in the polearm collage on the top right of >>98776113 as representing a metal axe, but it's hard to say for sure what's actually being depicted there.
>>98758786>Steel codpieces were in use for that.And he's not wearing one, which is exactly my point.
>>98777106Interesting that you'd fixate on his codpiece being off when he's not even armed. Your eyes betray you, homo.>>98776113>>98776253>>98776327>>98776777I don't know why I read all of this, but it was very interesting. Thanks for posting.I was under the impression that the Mesoamericans were stone-age-maxxing and didn't have bronze. If they did, how come bronze weapons, armour and tools didn't become widespread?
>>98763569Silmarillion OC (not derogatory). I reverse image searched it and apparently it's Elric, but from the artstyle (which is similar to other middle-earth art) I immediately associated it with a hypothetical 16th valar, or elves which managed to use the forces of darkness without becoming orcs.
The biggest issue with historical paintings is that sometimes they're using outdated or wrong sources. Usually the best place to find up-to-date information is by following archeologists and extremely autistic reenactors. If I see one more boomer make a miniature line based on extremely outdated Angus McBride drawings I'm going to freak.
>>98779111I hope that you feel compelled to throw out your miniatures next year when the new archaeological papers suggest that doublet buttons in the 1420s were actually typically uncovered horn, not lackered wood as you made the critical mistake of painting them as based on last year's most recent archaeological papers.
>>98777507>you'd fixate on his codpieceLike I said, it draws attention to itself by being green when the rest of him is metallic gray.
>>98757936Damn DQ is so boring but I always enjoyed the aesthetics
>>98777507>how come bronze weapons, armour and tools didn't become widespread?That's something I've always been fascinated by, it was an conscious choice by multiple civilizations to use clubs and obsidian blades. Which makes me think it's a lot more effective than we wanna give credit for.
>>98781656Isn't knapping obsidian easier than forging bronze?
>>98781717Yes, but if bronze and metal was so much better they'd use it. People in the middle east set up trade routes up into Northern Europe for tin to make Bronze.
>>98781742For greater context, the mountain incas figured out how sail on rafts up to Guerrero in Mexico for conch shells because it was that important to them.
>>98781742Not necessarily. Cultures don't adapt superior technology all the time for various reasons. I suspect the obsidian clubs never went away because there was no need to adapt their way of fighting to anything new until Europeans came and completely took over.
>>98781656I'm sure a club is a perfectly sufficient weapon. It's still in use today after all. But why was bronze armour not widespread?A bronze helmet is obviously superior to no helmet or a wooden spangenhelm or whatever.>>98781742>if x was better then [given people] would use itThat's not true at all and totally illogical anyway, unless you attribute these magical powers only to Mesoamericans. Eurasians had wood, bone and stone too, and yet everyone went to metal helmets when that became available.
>>98779775It's nothing minor like that, it's more that idiot boomers use shit hundreds of years out of date.
>>98784329One day, some Gen Deltoid will be laughing at you for not having read the 2062 paper showing that your army should be wearing mauve, not plum.
>>98777507>>98781656>>98781778>>98781851>>98782151>I was under the impression that the Mesoamericans were stone-ageWell, for most of Mesoamerican history, they didn't have Bronze, which shows up at ~1300AD, only 2 centuries before the Spanish. Copper metallurgy appears earlier, by ~600AD (I say "shows up"/"appears" over '"developed", as popular proposals have either or both arriving from South America, either through gradual diffusion thru Central America over land, and/or via naval/coastal trade between West Mexico and Ecuador) but even before then, I would strongly challenge the idea they were "Stone age"The "Stone Age" as we think of it describes Paleolithic and Neolithic societies in Afro-Eurasia primarily, and Mesoamerica has periods analogous to those: The Paleoindian/Lithic (from when humans first arrive to ~8000 BC) and Archaic (18000ish BC to 2000 or 1500ish BC), respectively. The former has non-sedentary hunter-gatherers with only very simple tools, the second saw the development of (relatively) more complex stone tools, sedentary life, agriculture etc, though IIRC sedentary life and agriculture didn't become dominant in some areas till the next period (at Mesoamerica's northern edge, it NEVER became dominant), and ceramics also appear only very late in the Archaic or early in the next periodAs seen in pic related, there's another 3 periods of development covering 3000-3500 years after that before Spanish contact, with what is often considered the region's first city showing up by ~1400BC, what is probably the region's first written script (tho maybe not "true writing") up by ~900BC, the first bureaucratic(?), formal state government by at least 500BC (if not 1000 years earlier with those first cities), true writing in the strict sense around then or a few centuries later, and gradually increasing sophistication and innovations with city planning, engineering etc over the next few millenniaSo, calling them "Stone Age" is pretty misleading6/?
>>98788948Right, but why wasn't bronze armour widespread then? Was it simply because the tech was still in its infancy?I mean, even chad Aztec warriors probably want to survive the battle and go home and make chad Aztec babies, right?I went and watched a whole ass youtube documentary about this yesterday, and it didn't give me any answers, although there appear to have been very occasional use of very primitive metal armour, although perhaps primarily for elite funerary goods.
>>98789069I really imagine it has more to do with a combination of culture (we've been using obsidian weps and cloth armor for thousands of years and it works perfectly fine!), ignorance (no one thought of utilizing metal in such a way and if they did think of it they either thought it was unrealistic to use in large numbers or someone else shot them down), and having no need to adapt (none of their enemies used metal weps and armor so their was no need to adopt metallic weapons for war.)
>>98789203All of these filters applied to Eurasian cultures too, and yet we wore metal armour so we could go home after a battle and make more baby Eurasians.Survivorship bias should favor the guys wearing metal armour, so there must be some quite significant and unique factor(s) at play.
>>98782151>That's not true at all and totally illogical anywayThe Aztecs had a disastrous war with the Purepechas that the latter attributed their victory to their bronze weapons.The Aztec response was not to use metal weapons, but instead develop the huextecatl warrior society instead. The Purepecha likewise didn't push into their territory.
>>98793902
>>98795959>>98795959For people who are unaware, since I suppose I should give info while i'm bumping the thread so it doesn't 404, these are Tlingit warriors, a group from the Pacific Northwestern United States and Canada, as you can see they had cool wooden armor and even made some out of Chinese coins that washed up in the area>>98788948>>98789069>>98789203>>98789700I should clarify that I do intend to finish my infodump and answering questions, I have just been too busy to resume since I posted >>98788948 , I'll try to finish on Friday
>>98795959looks cool
>>98800991Indigenous soldiery very much is but tends to be forgotten about.
>>98757918No justification required
Bump
>>98801109Eh, "Soldiery" implies a certain degree of command structure; I think "Warriors" is still the more appropriate term, since they are men fighting for their community and personal honour, rather than as a "Profession" in a modern economy of specialists.It is however, extremely similar to Siberian native armours, used by the likes of the Chukchee and the Yugakhir.
>>98801109>forgotten aboutCompared to what?
>>98811046Mostly western Europe.
>>98789203>>98789700>>98790882Lack of tin may have been the factor that caused the slow spread of Bronze use while Obsidian was a common and renewable resource around active volcanoes. Pretty much all the bronze in the Americas can be traced to Western Mexico.
>>98799172apologies for my continued absence, been dealing with a lotI hope to resume the autistic mesoamerican infodump soon
>>98789069>>98789700As a bronze age enjoyer myself, you see something similar with the bronze age in Eurasia too. It took hundreds of years after bronze to start seeing bronze armor. And you didn't see the wide spread use metal armor until surprisingly late into the bronze age. It takes some time to design effective armor, get used to the new alloy and to have a new metal in large enough supplies adequate enough to start thinking about more than the occasional suit of armor. While the term stone age and bronze age implies a total progression, turnover is a lot more gradual between materials. The Mezo Americans had bronze about as long as the pre-literate Sumerian city states when the Spanish showed up, and you don't exactly see a lot of bronze armor in early sumeria.
>>98815235Cool it with the antinordic remarks.>>98811068That's not really a reasonable comparison. Western Europe dominated the world for centuries, and we're the ones who wrote down anything about these guys at all to begin with. More has been written by Western Europeans about the Amerindians of this period than about Norwegians.>>98811240That isn't a unique factor at all. I'm not aware of any places that have large deposits of copper and tin in the same place. The bronze that clashed at the walls of Ilium was made with tin hailing from Britain.>>98816222Checked. That makes sense and was my first guess as well.
>>98758479Blue Oyster Cult
>I'm just a nigga with a rocket launcher
>>98776777roll
>>98815235>>98818365>Cool it with the antinordic remarks.I get it, the only way to get banned on this board is posting porn or shit talking wh^te people.
>>98788948Weren't the great lake natives using copper 9500 thousand years ago? Was it just the lack of tin that fucked them?
>>98821884Copper's pretty soft without tin.
>>98758062Work on your art.
>>98821849J*ws aren't White.
>>98758062I left /tg/ for a decade and the only thing that has changed is you draw tits bigger
>>98795959>>98799172These guys are cool because they combine their look with guns.
