What was the first example of full plate armour? or the closest

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dendra_panoply

>>1713041
What a manlet

>>1713118
You are too stupid to be allowed to live

>>1715883
You are even dumber than he is:>>1713118

>>1715795
>>1715919
>asks a question
>insults those that answer him and try to help

Go to bed anon, what is your problem with >>1713118

I dunno but I have a clothing qualification wherein we did history of clothing and I know full body armour as usually portrayed in western culture wasn't actually used for very long because it was too heavy, expensive, and impractical.

File: images.jpg (6KB, 196x188px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 196x188px

>>1715883
>it's not even full plate

>>1715941
I'm not OP you retarded fuck

>>1715883
dem tits

>>1715953
>wasn't actually used for very long
A period of roughly two hundred years (by most descriptions = 15th century to decline in the 17th century) isn't super long, but it's not really short, either.

>too heavy
Full plate isn't really that heavy. Most modern soldiers carry more weight, and plate armor is distributed much better. People that have worn it don't usually complain about weight.

>expensive
Yes, but only for a full set. Lots of poorer people had cuirasses and helmets.

>impractical
How? Wearing full plate armor basically turns you into a tiny tank. People wearing full plate armors are incredibly hard to kill, which is why you see a big shift in weaponry with its increased usage.

It makes sense that a bunch of tailors wouldn't know anything about medieval warfare, but come on, man, don't just accept something as fact because you learned it from someone who wasn't qualified to talk about it.

>>1715795
why ?