If flying splinters and pieces of wood caused injuries to sailors of the Age of Discovery and the Age of Sail. Why din't they were helmets or armor?

by Opinel06

I just finished whatching "master and commander" and that question arose, with some protection, many of the injuries qould not habe ocurred.

TauvaVodder

It's been a while since I saw the movie. Who was injured by splinters? Were any of them serious?

The debate rages on whether splinters would cause serious injury during an age of sail battle. I found this quote, "that wounds caused by gunshot and splinters were grossly contused (injure without breaking the skin, forming a bruise) but not gangrenous."

Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine Volume 78 September 1985 753 Some forgotten contributions of naval surgeons'

___deleted-

It’s harder to answer “why didn’t they” type questions.

One reason sailors had no armor is that a ship’s crew had to purchase their clothing from the purser on the ship. Most sailors had no money so the cost was often an advance on their wages.

A helmet and armor would be a large and unaffordable expense relative to the “slops” they wore made of coarse sailcloth.

*Ships are dampened regularly with seawater making maintenance of metal armor a challenge. *No body armor is protection from a cannonball or chain shot projectiles

A source on English Naval practices: Shipboard Life and Organisation, 1731-1815, Lavery