Rynuusuke said:
2. Yes, I have. However, my point being is that PHDs who have spent their entire lives and specialties in 14-1600's history all agree the above comment.
They have? In case you didn't notice, academics have been one of the single largest sources of bull**** on the subject. The waffle they spout filters down to enthusiasts like *%&# ****ing Bottomley. Part of the problem is that the academic community is one big circlejerk: a sufficiently influential paper will be cited and treated as a usable source by many other academics, even if the contents are utter crap.
Rynuusuke said:
In case you are forgetting, in reality Knights hated being dismounted.
[citation needed]
Rynuusuke said:
So, most of your live steel (dismounted) bouts are simulations of the exception rather than the rule.
You might want to look at
this resource. It's funny how so many treatises have a section dealing with combat on foot, isn't it? I mean, if these people hated being dismounted, you'd think they'd ignore it! They definitely didn't like groundfighting much, and it doesn't appear all that often.
Rynuusuke said:
Now to explain for everyone else what that means. The armor you are moving in is much lighter stronger and finer finished than any brand new armor for 14-1600 Europe. Therefore, not surprising that modern SCA fighters are quite nimble. However, it is not realistic nor accurate to the period as none of your equipment is lowered to the period, in quality of manufacture. As to do so, would be inviting a severe increase in risk of injury or death on the part of participants.
Actually, SCA fighters are known for using munitions armour (budget considerations, custom harness and spring steel components are costly) made with mild steel, which demands a fairly high thickness of steel for adequate protection. They would thus be
more heavily encumbered than knights. Properly fitted period harness allows for mobility sufficient for any battlefield needs.
Rynuusuke said:
Citation: Tower of London Armory (which holds the world's largest collection of arms and armor and the most renowned researchers)
I'm sorry, but you haven't actually established that plate armour of modern manufacture is definitively superior to period examples. Also, appeals to authority without actually citing what the **** the authority says don't hold any weight in an argument.
EDIT: Bloody late to the argument, but I've been overseas getting thumped by better martial artists so I can learn something off them. Still am, actually.