>>27728595https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xm11yAXeeggyou could mention how death by commoner grew less and less likely as coverage improved, generally, knights were only ever killed in particularly gruesome battles like Agincourt, where ransom wasn't an objective, so the development of virtually arrow proof armour helped with the whole chivalrous capturing of fellow nobility as it was often only the nobility who could afford the best armour, hence why most accounts of battles name knights being "unhorsed" more than killed, as the knight on foot would more often than not surrender to a knight with the advantage of a mount. people like to say that bodkins can penetrate plate, this is a myth, bodkins rose during the time of chain mail as they could slip in-between the links and break them while penetrating into the body; a bodkin from a crossbow at point blank may be able to do the job but if they are that close already they would have a better chance aiming for the gaps where only chain mail covers the body.
the billhook and certain halberds were designed to catch on heavily armoured riders so that commoners could drag heavy cavalry down and overwhelm them, often times, Halberdier units would rove through battles picking off nobles from their horses mid fight so that they could get a reward from their masters for the capture.
as plate armour became more common amongst the rank and file men at arms (c.late 16th early 17th century?), tactics where using one's sword quillons to crowbar an enemy to the ground so you could stab into their eye holes and such become standard practice on a battlefield, and so you could say this was one of the contributing factors to the death of chivalry (as well as firearms, cannon, etc.) this is also coincidently the time where the classic knight sword (arming sword) evolved into the side sword and later to the rapier, understandable as the evolutions offer easier penetration and versatility around breastplates and the like.
