How would well equipped warrior from the 1st century BC deal with a one from the 10th century AD?

How would well equipped warrior from the 1st century BC deal with a one from the 10th century AD?
To a novice they seem almost identical. You see the very similar helmet, mail armor, pants, leather boots, spear, iron sword, painted wooden shield.
It would seem like military technology stagnated almost a millennium, while 1000-1500 saw unprecedented progress. A soldier from the 1410 would look very different from a 1470 one.

1st Century Celt has superior offensive rune magic. He's got this.

LIGHTNING BOLT

On foot? his gear is moderately better or worse depending on where exactly the fighters are from.

Ancient cavalry will generally be worse off, but not always.

More pictures like this?

Just Google images "osprey arms and armor"

Anyway, pic related.
You can't tell whether he's supposed to fight the Romans of 100 AD or the Normans of 1000 AD.

Its less to do with the appearance and use of equipment and more of how it was made and from what materials

Go on. How did material quality change?

There is essentially zero difference between those two warriors except arguably the helmet of the carolingian is riveted so its marginally stronger

Steel quality changed quite a bit, but in practice wouldn't be that big a deal, especially when you consider that the left guy is a Gaul, they had some pretty good stuff themselves.

From what I understand, classical shields of the Gallic and Roman sort were of a plywood construction while early medieval ones (coming from a Germanic tradition) were made of glued together planks. It's possible that the plywood construction was stronger but more expensive.

Helmet-wise, the later one was probably tougher (even if they were silver in colour, most classical period helmets were actually bronze), but Gallic helmets had superior coverage compared to a Spangenhelm, although a mail aventail or coif could help remedy that.

Owing to the shield-design, their fighting styles would've been different, contrasting a round, vertical centre-gripped (that image is most likely wrong) for the 10th century guy, while the Gaul had a taller, slimmer shield with a horizontal grip.

I'd say it's a toss-up between those two.

what developments in steel production specifically

It's mostly a matter of quantity, frankly. They could get more steel of acceptable quality out there, and more consistently.

but how, did someone invent a new method or did they discover high quality iron ore somewhere and traded for it

They were shifting from the previous pattern welded style more and more towards the spring steel of medieval times

my ancestors :)

The smiths finally began to get their 99 skill capes is what happened

>not knowing osprey
>not owning a collection of 20 books at least
WEW lad, bet you don't even have Starkey's monarch full series

Water power was introduced to metal making in the 11th century in Europe. By this they where able to power bellows which turned bloomeries into blast furnaces.

More air means higher temperatures and bigger furnaces, as a result you get more yield, on a higher scale, plus the ferro material is purer, as it fully melts, so no slag incursions and more uniform material quality compared to bloomeries.

This ferro material was then taken to the finery forge where it was freshed and then worked with the help of water powered hammers, This way it could be turned into iron and steel.

Good posts. Thanks user(s)

MAGIC MISSILE

mfw little germscums are forced to depict as blond haired to pass as Germanic


LMAO

you germcum are pathetic, also, pic related are actual Frankish warrriors :)

Veeky Forums has some good threads.

Nice try germscum but there is no such thing as blond haired(read Germanic) Franks

And there will never be

I think it should be added that it was mostly Celtic nobles that wore mail armor, as this was more expensive, while in the early Middle ages mail was standard for most soldiers.

...

Rolling for Dex Buff

>reduced to post "muh bait" cause he can't handle actual historiacal facts


Are you butthurt, germs ?

My understanding was that spring tempering was more common during the renaissance than early medieval times

If we're talking about Celts specifically I'd give it to the 1st century BC one because in the 10th century they only rarely wore armor

france is a shithole

Shut up negroe

And speak more politely to you white master or else i'll beat you

>t. algerian about to serve junior for sharia court before his illegal German paternity test comes in

Tempering, a part of heat treatment has nothing to do with steel making.

What is however true is that full quenching became more widespread in the early modern time, before that, slack quenching was the preferred method and full quenched steel blades are really rare.
Theres different reasons for that, first blades where more often a monosteel construction and full quenching would yield better results with that, second ferro-metals where less rare, precious and work intensive due to the blast furnace process, so a blade smith had less worries doing a full quench, despite the higher chance of breaking a blade.

Now unlike slack quenched blades, full quenched ones need tempering, and to temper you need to control time and temperature, and thats a technique that developed during the high and late medieval. Now if you temper for spring hard or for glass hard has a lot to do what you gonna do with that blade and hence cannot be generalized.

>so its marginally weaker
Corrected. The reason they went from solid to riveted construct was that it's cheaper and easier to make. Metal quality on early medieval might be a bit better though.

Daily reminder you were easily conquered by us, and that we created your national identity
There was no German before we conquered you twice(Charlemagne + Napoleon) and you were forced to unite to fight us on equal ground

0/10