Firearms of the Pirate Golden Age: An Overview

Рет қаралды 15,760

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер: 121

@GoldandGunpowder 4 ай бұрын

Other videos on pirate weaponry and firearms: History of the Flintlock: kzbin.info/www/bejne/laLXpHh6j7uGn9U Pirates and armor: kzbin.info/www/bejne/p3K4n4eGfp1kidk Swords: kzbin.info/www/bejne/h56uppKgrKyBmqc Artillery: kzbin.info/www/bejne/l5uyl4F-ocR4fNE

@random_number_sequence 4 ай бұрын

thank you for bestowing a feast upon us

@HerrWayne45 4 ай бұрын

10:23 "very often you'd just fire the pistol right into someone's face" i have no idea why but the delivery of that line and the accompanied image had me absolutely rolling.

@thereseemstobeenanerror1219 4 ай бұрын

It looks like he's just doing it very casually.

@matthijsvancampen7901 4 ай бұрын

Don’t let the comparatively low views of the channel discourage you brother! You have a small but dedicated community with you who love this kind of stuff. And you’re basically the only comprehensive KZbin channel on the era!

@richardprice5978 3 ай бұрын

hiding history and new-law-challenger's makes it easier to take the usa and turning it into Canada/AZ/NZ pass id rather knowledge of the pirates um i meant founder's/president's-will vs the kingdom uk

@rm6330 20 күн бұрын

💯

@aj7419 4 ай бұрын

your comment about people of the future looking back at us with our ballistic projectile weapons reminds me of a scene in stargate sg-1 where one of the sg-1 team is talking to an advanced race of alien who says, "we would never invent a weapon that propels small weights of iron & carbon alloys by igniting a powder of potassium nitrate, charcoal, and sulphur" in relation to of course, guns clarification edit: (spoilers for stargate sg-1 - it's old, relax) The two are having this conversation in the first place because the aliens have encountered an enemy that they cannot seem to defeat - your self replicating, technology stealing kind - so they come to humanity for help. We learn in the episode that our weaponry is good at destroying these things cause guns blow them to smithereens with sheer kinetic force and (relatively) primitive methods of propulsion that the enemy cannot copy highly recommend the show to any science fiction fans

@DMRaptorJesus 4 ай бұрын

all our weapons technology is based around a very simple concept: I can throw a rock farther than you

@tomalexander4327 4 ай бұрын

@@DMRaptorJesusand faster!

@carloshenriquezimmer7543 4 ай бұрын

@@tomalexander4327 and a "pointier" rock than yours

@Predator20357 4 ай бұрын

@@DMRaptorJesusand for Missiles, make the rock hurt more people

@jonathangodin4775 4 ай бұрын

@@DMRaptorJesusfarther and faster! But 100% that is the essence of the entire history of weapons development! Exept for that funny time in history we thought melee was better

@ethanetn 4 ай бұрын

Muskets are fairly accurate up to 100 yards, its just that the moa (minute of angle) increases exponentially at further ranges because of the Bernoulli effect. With rifling and conical bullets, this prevents that from happening and allows the bullet to reach further distances

@Pegasuz1233 4 ай бұрын

Don't forget that the biggest factor of the firearm accuracy is the shooter himself, some blackpowder youtubers like duelist 1954 and 11bangbang could shoot a man-sized target with smoothbore musket at 150 meters and a bit further, markmanship is not needed for the common line infantry, but for the light infantry who usually fight in skirmishes it is

@susancorvalan6765 4 ай бұрын

Your vids are like cartoons for adults with educational value. And I really enjoy them! Yarrr!

@jpvthegamer1209 Ай бұрын

Absolutely phenomenal video! I've been researching about the different kinds of black powder weapons used on this era and trust me when I tell you this is by far the most complete and informative video on the topic out there!! I am so grateful I found this video along some other gems you've showed us in the past. I want to continue further my research on these weapons, so naturally I do have a request for another video on this series about... The absurd weapons of the era! You know, things like nock guns, duck-foot pistols, axe-pistols, etc! The more bizarre, the better!

@Dataism 4 ай бұрын

The last section has such cool weapons i am shocked these don't get more love in pop media.

@waltonchan3931 4 ай бұрын

I love your videos! One correction though, modern smokeless powder does not detonate, rather it just has a more forceful and rapid deflagration. I believe the difference between detonation and deflagration is the speed of the flame front, but I could be mistaken.

@kennethhummel4409 4 ай бұрын

Smooth bores were more accurate than most folks will give them credit an average shot can put the musket ball into a man sized silhouette at 100 yards and could do well if allowed to pick their own target firing in their own time volley fire was an area of effect kind of thing.

@theoldman8877 2 ай бұрын

This is the first time I have heard anyone say to fill the flash pan first. Every other person I have heard said to put in the main charge patch and ball first then fill the flash pan last on flint locks. On cap and ball the cap is always the last thing installed.

@brianhowe201 Ай бұрын

I believe a lot of modern shooters do it that way for safety reasons, so as not to have live powder in the pan when loading. But in the past, especially when loading from paper cartridges, you'd fill the pan first, then dump the remaining powder down the barrel, and then the ball with paper wad. It's the only practical way to do it with a paper cartridge and a slightly faster way of loading.

@theoldman8877 Ай бұрын

@brianhowe201 I always use fine powder in the pan from a different flask for faster flash times improved accuracy. Everything in the paper cartage goes down the musel . Carrying the gun with a loaded charge and empty flash pan is a little safer. I found it helps to keep the pan dry by covering it with tape in wet conditions, fog rain snow. An uncovered pan will funnel water into the flash hole in the rain. It takes very little water to convert your flintlock into a fancy walking stick.

@ihn-90 4 ай бұрын

Another upload from the pirate king him self

@kairos468 4 ай бұрын

Black powder firearms are just so incredibly interesting. Thanks for the video!

@theprancingprussian 4 ай бұрын

4:50 from fair training ( standardised grade not sharpshooter grade ) you could hit single targets most times at around 75 metres, modern firearms arent useless if they dont hit all shots, effective range was about 100 metres, bulkier weapons and smaller bores would reduce accuracy like some of ge bulky matchlocks used by most European armies and smaller bores more common in austria etc The janissaries and some dutch sharpshooters could get good hitrates and range even without volleys, around 100-150 metres without volleys and a good hitrate was the high end Muskets by the 1750s were lighter and larger bore so could hit 90 or so metres away very reliably on single target with British grade training ( made up for smaller army size ) Another thing about loading random stuff, 'blunderbusses' or pretty much reffered to as a clumsy or drunk style of bore would have been seen, harder or thicker barrels more common, shorter barrel to get more spread, be more handy in cqb and to keep the slightly heavier barrel in check, bore usually a bit wider so you could fit a greater range of shot

@jamestosches8553 4 ай бұрын

Love your Videos brother! There’s no other channel Here on KZbin with your attention to detail and pirate history/day in the life.

@thetankers14 4 ай бұрын

Thank you for adding subtitles directly to your video, it helps immensely with non-native english speakers like me

@samuelprice2461 4 ай бұрын

I just recently acquired a colonial (before 1740) American made 22” straight bladed, single edged hanger. Binging your new videos with some rum this morning (third shift, lol).

@scelonferdi 4 ай бұрын

pyrotechnical blunderbuss kinda sounds like piratechnical blunderbuss, which is ofc perfect!

@NathanDudani 4 ай бұрын

Shiver me timbers

@morgan258 4 ай бұрын

Consider your timbers, shivered

@misterkefir 4 ай бұрын

yaaaaargh!

@Kaijugan 4 ай бұрын

Part of something I always found particularly interesting about pirate games like AC: Black Flag in particular is that due to the nature of reloading a firearm in the GAoP you kinda needed to carry a few pistols on your person if you wanted be able to gun down several sailors. Talk about deadly practicality!

@tatumergo3931 4 ай бұрын

One thing is video games and quite another is reality. Usually those two don't mix well, for one thing reality tends to be stranger than fiction and fictional games need to be entertaining to create interest in them. Otherwise they don't sell.....!

@Kaijugan 4 ай бұрын

@@tatumergo3931 I was referring to back then the pistols had to be reloaded every shot so you had to have multiple guns to shoot multiple times because of this and in games like Black Flag, it’s something that’s common knowledge to the average pirate. What’re you getting on about reality tends to be stranger than fiction? I’m saying in those games they’re mirroring reality. You’re just saying something to argue

@tatumergo3931 4 ай бұрын

@@Kaijugan . Games don't mirror reality, they mirror a conceived supposed reality. Although some pirates did carried several pistols with them while boarding, that wouldn't have been the necessity nor a reality. Like in the case of Edward Teach, it was more for a psychological effect and his trademark. You see the crew of the ship been boarded would have been already decimated, with limited to little any resistance. The few remaining crewmembers that would have been still alive, if they offered any kind of resistance would have been quickly dispatched. A pirate attack would have occurred quickly and without previous chance of preparation. A lightning fast cannonade on the crew on deck, would have taken out the majority of the crew. Leaving only a few survivors below deck, not too willing to offer any kind of resistance. A merchant ship did not carry a lot of crew, just the essential personnel for the operation of the ship. These were not the large numbers of sailors found on naval military ships. The pirate ships on the other hand would have had as many men aboard to keep the odds at 3 to 1 ratio. You still see this today with Somali pirates, where you have 20 to 30 pirates taking over a ship with 7 to 10 crewmembers.

@Kaijugan 4 ай бұрын

@@tatumergo3931 Pretty sure it’s Thatch not Teach but I see your point. But the fact that that a good portion of pirates indeed carried more than one pistol for boarding still kinda proves my point. If not for outright combat than for a little added insurance for that one or two crazy crews who would be willing to fight even if they were waylaid and severely outnumbered. Cuz even if they strike out of nowhere fast and hard, there’s gotta be that 1% of ships that’s willing to throw down and I think having an extra gun or two would make all the difference, if the cannons don’t finish it first

@Kaijugan 4 ай бұрын

@@tatumergo3931 Also, you mentioned merchant ships not having a lot of crew, and that’s true, so a pirate crew’s almost Viking-like tactics would definitely work, but something tells me that a Treasure Convoy or Galleon transporting treasure would put up a bit more of a fight, if you catch my drift

@Schwarzvogel1 4 ай бұрын

A minor correction at 12:14. Modern smokeless powder _also_ doesn't detonate--it deflagrates, or burns very fast like black powder. The main difference is that modern smokeless powder is much more energetic in its reaction, and produces a far higher volume of high-pressure gases, allowing for much higher velocities than you'd get with black powder. And, of course, as implied by the name, smokeless powder doesn't produce as much fouling and smoke as black powder when burned. Now, I find myself wondering if pirates ever formulated their own gunpowder, or whether they relied mostly on supplies of factory-produced powder that they could trade for/buy/steal. I'm guessing more the latter, because I'm not sure how widespread the knowledge of how to make gunpowder was among people who weren't (al)chemists, gunsmiths, or purveyors of gunpowder by trade. After all, information back then wasn't as widely accessible as it is today. For any writers out there--cordite is a specific type of smokeless propellant developed by the British near the turn of the 20th century. It is *not* a synonym for "smokeless powder/propellant" in general. Nobody has used or produced cordite since the 1960s, and it is obsolete as a propellant for firearm cartridges and shells.

@jeffreyrobinson3555 4 ай бұрын

Good job. But some little points. Pistol flints tended to that smaller size . Musket flints were pretty big. An inch it an inch and a quarter square My research in to powders finds serpentine powder referred to powder where the components were dry ground and milled dry for hours. Better powder was made by wetting serpentine and making a cake that would be pressed though screens to make the grain size

@kylemackinnon5696 2 ай бұрын

And people say hunt showdowns melee varients are unrealistic lol

@arthurratti9834 3 ай бұрын

Great content

@H_P_Lovecraft 4 ай бұрын

Imagine if pirates somehow got their hands on the Walker-pattern revolver

@GoldandGunpowder 4 ай бұрын

some time traveler dropped a couple in but forgot the percussion caps

@Uncle_Roadkill 4 ай бұрын

Revolvers? Percussion caps? Ye mustve hit yarr head hard fallin from that topsail, matey! Have a swig o good olde rum and load yarr flintlock, we got merchants to plunder!

@H_P_Lovecraft 4 ай бұрын

@@GoldandGunpowder Lol yeah at least they’d be useful as a tiny club

@thecreweofthefancy 4 ай бұрын

In a Naval setting I'd question their use. Given their weight, there would still be a certain debate over why not just carrying a brace and minimizing chain fires. Even post-Colt Dragoon/Walker single shots pistols were still Naval issue. What would really change things would be some of the breech loading and repeating longarms and artillery, which were used in a Naval context down to versions incorporating more brass than their land counterparts to limit corrosion. Keep in mind cutlasses were still issued as serious weapons until relatively late.

@unknowntrooper_2791 4 ай бұрын

Good vid once again. Speaking of blunderbusses they do seem to be indeed quite rare compared to muskets and certainly it varied. Still I think one barrel for blunderbuss was found in QAR wreck and pirate ship inventory (found in Fox's Pirates in their own words) from 1718 lists 80 muskets against 5 blunderbusses and 5 pistols as well as only 7 cutlasses (I presume many pistols and swords were more a personal weapons not necessarily included in this inventory of the ship). Anyways looking forward to more content. Cheers!

@GoldandGunpowder 4 ай бұрын

I know of these findings and written mentions and they are evidence of how uncommon blunderbusses were, which again, proves what was said in the video. But in an overview, I cannot sift through every example which only proves the point made: blunderbusses were not common.

@unknowntrooper_2791 4 ай бұрын

Oh of course. Waiting for the separate vid. Cheers!

@GeneralG28 2 ай бұрын

Good.

@moto_rad 4 ай бұрын

A video on sources and descriptions of scattershot! Especially in muskets. Round single ball is implied but I would like to see references otherwise. It makes intuitive sense with them being smoothbore afterall.

@ladykkk1480 4 ай бұрын

Great video , thank you

@brockgrosso3262 4 ай бұрын

Can you please talk about if pirates ever attacked forts, just curious

@tatumergo3931 4 ай бұрын

Depends on who are you calling a pirate, and who was called a pirate by the standards of the day. They certainly did, and usually by stratagem and not so much directly, as that would have required a large fleet of ships and men. At the battle of Cartagenas de Indias, the Spanish garrison there did considered Sir Francis Drake to be no less than a common pirate.

@brockgrosso3262 4 ай бұрын

@@tatumergo3931 thanks for the response do you know anymore famous fort raids I can read about

@tatumergo3931 4 ай бұрын

@@brockgrosso3262 Howell Davis A clever pirate who preferred tricks to violence, Davis captured Gambia Castle, an English fort on the African coast in 1718. Robert Searle Also known as John Davis, Searle led English pirates who attacked a town, killed 60 people, and looted every building. Henry Morgan A Welsh buccaneer who raided the Spanish city of Portobelo, Panama in 1668 with the British Government's permission. Bartholomew Roberts A Welsh pirate who raided ships off the Americas and West Africa between 1719 and 1722. Sir Francis Drake A pirate who raided many Spanish and Portuguese ships and ports while circumnavigating the world. Henry Jennings stablished Nassau as his base for further raids on Spanish wrecks after being declared a pirate by Lord Archibald Hamilton. Black Caesar An African pirate and former slave who raided ships off the Florida Keys in the early 1700s.

@leedleleedleleedlelee283 4 ай бұрын

A like for the algorithm

@kn1834 4 ай бұрын

Thank you

@slippysnek9507 4 ай бұрын

would love a video further discussing combustibles and fireworks

@tacticalmanatee 5 күн бұрын

Could you please share the details of the image at 3:10? That is an interesting gun I've never seen before.

@jonathanwells223 4 ай бұрын

Will the firearms have the average shot load included? I’m having trouble finding info online.

@tatumergo3931 4 ай бұрын

What do you mean by: "have the average shot included"?

@jonathanwells223 3 ай бұрын

@@tatumergo3931read my comment again

@aojroxos4990 4 ай бұрын

Ah, yes, the old force multipliers😂

@ianslaby5703 4 ай бұрын

willl you discuss wheellock firearms at all? I doubt that they would be heavily used, but they are a rather interesting middle step between matchlocks and flintlocks.

@GoldandGunpowder 4 ай бұрын

I partially covered wheellocks in the previous video on flintlocks, but since that video did not perform well, I'm not sure I will do one on wheellocks since the flintlock one was very consuming to make

@ianslaby5703 4 ай бұрын

@@GoldandGunpowder oh ok, I'll give it a watch. Talking about firearms and related stuff on KZbin is a tough gig.

@arathyn8294 4 ай бұрын

So, the Sea of Thieves "eye of reach" is more of a carbine, rather than a musket?

@Lionslycer 4 ай бұрын

I like it a lot

@Goodroosters 3 ай бұрын

Arrrgh tiver me shimbers

@ET-mr4iu 4 ай бұрын

" no gun is going to be 100% clean".....tell it to some of my former NCO's😅

@BickleyLTO Ай бұрын

Oh you want me to check the star chamber? Let me grab my white gloves

@ET-mr4iu Ай бұрын

@BickleyLTO that's about it 😑

@ostrowulf 4 ай бұрын

I want to see swivles. Folks tend to overlook at them.

@tatumergo3931 4 ай бұрын

Do you mean swivel guns? Yes I agree that it is a subject not much discussed. When in the majority of the cases, pirate ships would have been primarily and most extensively armed with those types of weapons. Most people tend to think that pirates were sailing around in big frigates or brigantines. When in reality their preferred ships would have been schooners.... although fast, they are too small to be carrying too many big guns. The amount of many guns was necessary for been able to successfully take a merchant ship.

@ostrowulf 4 ай бұрын

Not just that, but sinking a ship looses the cargo. Heck, a cannon shot that does not sink the ship could damage the cargo. Better to sweep the deck with muskets, swivles and grape shot.

@tatumergo3931 4 ай бұрын

@@ostrowulf. Exactly, that is also why most acts of piracy occurred near the coast lines or in the proximity, where ships could be trapped between islands, reefs or sandbags. The Caribbean Islands and Florida keys where such a place perfect for those types of activities. Often times the mere thought of being engaged and boarded by pirates was enough for the ship to parlay and surrender the cargo. Not doing so would have provoke the pirates to kill everyone aboard if capture.

@patron8597 4 ай бұрын

9:40 are you sure about it not being an effective hunting weapon? Seems like it could be used much the same way buckshot or birdshot is used today. The bit about Italians using it because they couldn't afford better guns seems especially odd, since just before that you said that pirates wouldn't use them much since they could get a musket for the same price. Maybe whoever wrote the historic account this info comes from just didn't think of it much and concluded "eh, I dunno, Italians probably use them because they are icky, poor, srupid and *foreign."*

@GoldandGunpowder 4 ай бұрын

Yes, I am sure, otherwise I wouldn't have put it in my script. A blunderbuss loaded with scattering ammunition can accomplish about the same, usually worse, as a musket or other long-barreled arm with the same scattering ammunition, but with much less range. The most damning piece of evidence should be the fact that hunters of the period always preferring muskets - usually with longer barrels. Bird hunters did not use blunderbusses - they used fowlers, long muskets loaded with scattering ammunition. >The bit about Italians using it because they couldn't afford better guns Not what I said. From the video script: >Neither was it an especially effective hunting weapon, but in Italy it was used for poaching, because the peasantry couldn't get their hands on better firearms. There's a difference between "AFFORDING" and "GETTING THEIR HANDS ON"(synonymous with "acquiring"). There were firearms restrictions in Italy.

@JerryRussell-cv6ng 4 ай бұрын

Lol, your closed caption call flintlock, " flint clock "

@brookingsbeachcomber 4 ай бұрын

they have been hiding your videos from me... Cheers Captain

@restitvtororbis5330 4 ай бұрын

19:44 I have a hard time believing that putting actual bullets inside this bomb would accomplish anything beyond wasting bullets. If you filled up a bag with black powder and bullets and it got even a little shaken around, the bullets are probably going to settle towards the bottom, and if you threw that on the deck of a ship, it's more than likely that the bullets (being heavier than powder) are going to make the bag land with most of them at the bottom. If the bullets were somehow evenly mixed with the powder, the ones in the center probably won't go anywhere because they have black powder exploding from both sides, canceling out any potential acceleration. Even if the bullets were All on the close to the outside, I still doubt that they would be accelerated enough to cause any more damage than a bruise. Handheld thrown explosives like grenades, pipe bombs, or other explosives that resemble this bullet bag all have one thing in common, and that's small, light, sharp, and numerous fragmentation pieces. That's why glass and small nails are commonly used for things like this. Even smaller calibur bullets would just have too much mass to be accelerated effectively by an undirected and low pressure black powder explosion behind them. Even with modern cased ammunition and smokeless (high pressure) powder, if a bullet goes off outside the chamber, the fragments of metal from the case are vastly more dangerous than the lead bullet, because the bullet barely even moves. I'm interested to know what source that bullet bag claim came from because I'm very dubious of it. Even if it was actually done, I doubt it would do anything that a bag of pebbles, glass and black powder couldn't do significantly better and cheaper.

@vondantalingting 4 ай бұрын

You're considering this from a point of view that humans are fearless robots. I'd first recommend you to have someone throw a cigarette sized fire cracker at your feet and gauge your own response. You might think that all those things in the bag and the blast with shrapnel was the point. That was the bonus, the point was to screw your opponent psychologically. No matter how veteran those crew were, some of them are likely new fresh faced replacements with only a few years worth of experience fishing with small boats. Those people running around in a panic could result in a manic stampede no matter the veterancy, that itself is already a good result. You are not usually trying to kill people as a pirate, you are trying to rob them, enslave them, and ransom them. A dead prodigy from a noble family is worth nothing and a wanted poster, a living one can be ransomed for things greater than a house. You want them alive, because if they were all dead who would you rob? Who would you recruit from? Most pirates weren't born pirates, they were either fishermen moonlighting as pirates or those of a military background with a need for more money. Killing all the crews and the people prowling the seas is bad for business. Piracy is not total war, it is not Genocide. It's a business, a business as old as time. Pirates with a reputation for sparing merchant crewmen would find more disadvantaged ships willing to surrender compared to those with a more infamous reputation. If you're very sketchy with these things simply look at his other videos. They can explain it in more detail. Also if possible get a psychology class, it'll help you understand why some things happen despite the illogical nature of it.

@restitvtororbis5330 3 ай бұрын

@@vondantalingtingtrue, I wouldn't appreciate someone throwing a firecracker or a bag of black powder at my feet, and i doubt most people would feel any different. I don't think i ever said anything about the psychological effect, which certainly is there, but that wasn't my issue with the 'bullet bag bomb' thing. If psychological effect is the objective, just filling it with black powder would work just the same as anything else. Hell, you could throw one bag of black powder and three bags of sand with a lit fuse sticking out and people would still panic because they don't know which bags go boom and which don't. My entire issue is the idea that they would put bullets inside those bags. If the goal was psychological, there's no point in putting anything but black powder and maybe something else that can produce more smoke, but putting lead bullets inside would do nothing more from a psychological standpoint. They also wouldn't do anything from a lethality standpoint for all the reasons in my original comment, so my issue is, why would they bother wasting lead balls in these?

@Seefahrerkatzi 4 ай бұрын

♥️

@justinsane7128 4 ай бұрын

Tally Ho

@Spam1192 2 ай бұрын

Comment for Algorithm related reasons

@RachDarastrix2 4 ай бұрын

During the late 15 hundreds and early 16 hundreds they began making plate armor thicker and to compensate for the additional weight they covered less of the body. Grieves were the first to go. Here is my theory, it is because during this period they stopped using the sling. Yes see for millennia grieves may have actually been for protecting against slings. If your aim with a sling is deadly precise but you did not aim far enough the stone or clay/lead ball will keep skipping forward and could break the enemy's leg. Musketballs and crossbow bolts don't have this problem, and few would aim for the leg on purpose as its a hard target .

@jordanhicks5131 4 ай бұрын

Cannister shot from artillery would often be shot at knee height on advancing infantry. Cannon balls are also known to skip along the ground taking off feet and legs along the way

@Schwarzvogel1 4 ай бұрын

Not exactly. Where did you get the idea that slings were used in such a manner?! If your aim is "deadly precise but you did not aim far enough" then your aim *isn't* "deadly precise." Because you'll miss your target. Moreover, rain and mud have been constant sources of misery for soldiers for thousands of years... and a sling's bullet isn't going to skip forward with lethal velocity if you hurl it into muddy or soft ground. It'll just embed in the mud and leave you with a pissed-off enemy swordsman still charging towards you to spill your innards into the muck at your feet. Second, greaves weren't the first armour component to fall into disuse in the West. Shields were. Over the course of the mediaeval era into the Renaissance and early modern era, shields shrank in size from the kite shields of the 11th and 12th centuries to the heaters of the late mediaeval era and the bucklers of the Renaissance. In fact, many knights and men-at-arms in full plate by the end of the medieval era didn't even bother with shields--they used two-handed swords instead of their predecessors' one-handed arming swords. Greaves disappeared from soldiers' kit for the same reason that armour did over the centuries since the mediaeval era: firearms. Greaves were of greatest relevance for cavalry, to protect their legs against strikes from footsoldiers. But when most (or all) of the footsoldiers have guns now, well, a piece of iron over your shins isn't going to do much good, and it's extra weight your horse has to carry too. By the 18th century, it wasn't really feasible to produce a suit of man-portable armour that would reliably defeat musket and rifle threats on the battlefield. Sure, mediaeval-style armour (full plate or even mail) would have protected you nicely on an 18th century battlefield from sabres, cutlasses, bayonets, and arrows from indigenous tribes. However, it wouldn't have helped you one bit against any of the far more immediate threats: 1. Volleys of musket fire from enemy infantrymen. 2. Cannon balls and other artillery (including grapeshot and canister) 3. Heat stroke, communicable diseases, contaminated water and/or food, or any of the myriad causes not directly related to enemy action which killed the majority of soldiers in early modern warfare.