The Armour Archive

Although Italian documents from the fourteenth century are full of names and armourers' marks which seem to have value either for selling the pieces or for identifying them (it looks like a good merchant could recognize different armourers' 'hands,' and maybe customers came asking for a pair of gauntlets like Lorenzo in Florence made). I think that as soon as someone looks through Italian documents as intensively as they have through guild records in Austria and Germany, we will learn about all kinds of people who everyone who was interested in armour in 1380 knew.

Over the last couple of days I have been cleaning up the bevor. That went well enough in the end, but two parts gave me trouble. The first wast the bib plate. I ended up with too much "furrowing" from the 80gr disc, and had to go back and use a random orbit sander on it to smooth it out. I had a similar problem on the fall plate. I though everything was OK till I got close to polish and saw that there were way too many lengthwise scratches. The trouble here was from the difficulty in changing grind directions. One can't see the old scratches if the new scratches go the same way. I fell back a couple of grits and paid closer attention this time, and it came out better.






When the bevor went into the kiln, the fall was secured with 3/16" bolt and a washer. I've opened that hole up to 1/4" and put a similarly sized pin on a spring. As luck had it, I had a very suitable piece of stock for the spring sitting in my box of spring steel scraps. It used to be a "frisket" from the drum of a proofing press in the print shop at Risley Residential College in Cornell. Someone managed to break it back in about 1985 or so, and I made a new one. I kept the old fragment in case it might be useful someday, and that day was Saturday. The curvature was already perfect, and all I had to do was punch a couple of holes and dremel it off to length. The bolt that's holding it in place temporarily has its head shaped on the lathe to fit into the 60° countersink on the other side.



A close up of the pin/button shows that the hole in the main plate is slightly oval to allow for the range of motion.



The bevor attachment cleaned up well, and I have done some decorative floral file work around the rivets. The catch barb is not fully extended here because the spring has not been installed yet.



Mac

Mac, one this I would love to see it how you grind and polish some of the more complex pieces in a video. I know the bigger pieces are pretty straight forward but the small places with the compelx curves would be fascinating to me.

Mac, this is incredible work. I too appreciate the closeup pic of the catch on the bevor. I was just thinking about that type of spring catch that holds the bevor to the breastplate. Its basically the same as the latch on a briefcase. I've been trying to think of other applications and cant come up with any. I assume they were invented by German armourers in the later part of the 15th century? Anyone see them sooner on anything? And has anyone seen them used on anything besides bevors and briefcases?

What is the plan for the interior surfaces? Do they get a coating for rust protection?

Amazing!

Will the hole in the middle get a faux rivet or is the lower riveted solid to the upper?

Thanks, Guys!

Mac

Ckanite wrote:Mac, one this I would love to see it how you grind and polish some of the more complex pieces in a video. I know the bigger pieces are pretty straight forward but the small places with the compelx curves would be fascinating to me.

In the future, I'll try to get more pics that show interesting things about finish technique. It's hard, though, because I frequently change my mind and try different stuff. Sometimes that works and other times not, but it would be best to document it anyway.

Mac

Otto von Teich wrote:....I was just thinking about that type of spring catch that holds the bevor to the breastplate. Its basically the same as the latch on a briefcase. I've been trying to think of other applications and cant come up with any. I assume they were invented by German armourers in the later part of the 15th century? Anyone see them sooner on anything? And has anyone seen them used on anything besides bevors and briefcases?

It's sort of like a briefcase latch, but with a release button. That button complicates things quite a bit because it needs to travel further than the working edge of the barb.

The really fancy ones have a screw to adjust the height as well. Unfortunately, there's no room for one of those here. The bib plate had to fit very close to the neck hem in order to let the pauldrons overlap it properly.

I suppose that these are really locksmith's work, rather than armorer's work per se. That said.... if this sort of catch has antecedents in serrurerie before it appears on armor, I have not seen them.

Mac

Alex Baird wrote:What is the plan for the interior surfaces? Do they get a coating for rust protection?

The bevor will get a padded lining, but I don't have any plans to paint the inner surfaces.

Mac

Xtracted wrote:
Will the hole in the middle get a faux rivet or is the lower riveted solid to the upper?

My working plan is to plug the center hole with a (capped and gilt) rivet and make the side rivets tight enough that the upper parts stay up from the springy interference of the edges dorsal to the pivots. I think that will work.

The corresponding hole on the flange of the main plate will secure part of the lining strip.

Mac

I've started in on grinding the gauntlets, and will try to document some of the techniques I use.

Here's a pic of the parts after a pass on the grinding disc. There are two things to notice here. The first is that this is the most visually disheartening part of armor making. The parts looked "vigorous" and "lively" in the black, but as soon as we start covering them with grind lines, the details are lost in the play of light from the scratches. It's tempting to feel that they are ruined and that they will never look good again. Not to worry. This will pass.



The other thing to notice is the places where the disc could not reach the surface properly. Those are the areas that are still blue/grey from the heat treating and retain their hammer marks. Most notable here are the flutes on the wrist lame and the spots on the cuff, up near the point. In the case of the wrist lame, the flutes are very "tight" and I knew there would be a problem here.



I used the Dremel tool with a sanding disc to get at them.



The point of the cuff was not a problem I was planning for. I should have made the crest line sharper and more dramatic to give the wheel enough room to clear the hems. I would have to use the Dremel here as well.



Mac

I see what you mean about the grinding killing the visual effect as opposed to being right out of the tempering. Is that because the loss of shadow and thus depth perception on the piece or is it more from the details getting lost amongst the noise of all the scratches?

Another point I would like to address here is the direction of the grind lines. Whenever possible, one should grind from several directions. In a wide open place like the middle of a helmet, it's easy to grind from any direction, and a minimum of three coarse grinds at 120° will give good results. Unfortunately, many plates do not allow for that, and we have to make due with fewer changes of direction. In such situations, the results will always be inferior to what one might hope. We must take what consolation we may from knowing that our ancestors had the same trouble, and these are the places where their finish is flawed as well.

Let me present the thumb plates as a example. There is pretty much only two directions that the grinding wheel can take over most of the surface of the thumbs, and we have to make the best of that by diligent work and small changes of angle where possible.

Here's the first grind. The lines are pretty obvious, but I have marked them in blue pen in case that shows up better. In general, it is my practice to make the first grind in the direction that I would like to be my "final" grain to be in. That will help to disguise any residual lines.



The second (and in this case final) coarse grind was laid in this way. It's always surprising how many little dips and valleys are revealed when the grind direction is changed. That's why it's so important to do it.



I'll return to these later today.

Mac

Ckanite wrote:I see what you mean about the grinding killing the visual effect as opposed to being right out of the tempering. Is that because the loss of shadow and thus depth perception on the piece or is it more from the details getting lost amongst the noise of all the scratches?

Yes. The eye sees the light patterns that the scratch direction makes, and the form is all but lost visually. This effect becomes less and less as finer grits are used. It only disappears entirely with a truly specular polish.... which of course leaves all of ones mistakes naked to view. A lot can be concealed with a carefully worked satin finish.

Mac

For what it's worth, here's a bit of working life finish hiding under a liner washer on a North Italian morion from the last quarter of the 16th century. It looks much the same as one I saw under a brow reinforce on an Italian celata of the late 15th century, basically a mirror finish slapped on top of a rather coarse grind, roughly 120 - 150 P grit. It would look a bit... strange to modern eyes, I think.

James,

I recently read an article by Pierre Terjanian about the 15th century helmsmiths of Frankfurt am Main, and he goes into some detail about the various roles associated with the armourers who lived and worked in that city. I recall that when the armouring community was at its height, there were a number of specific groups who worked with particular components (such as the helmsmiths) and also men who solely polished armour. The polishers even held a monopoly on the use of some water mills to use the wheels for their work. It seems possible that the finishes you're describing, which were hidden under integrated components, were those applied by the armourers prior to final polishing. Just a thought.

-Gerhard

Gerhard,

I'm pretty sure that the polishers received the armor in pieces and black from the hammer (or if not actually in pieces, then perhaps held together with temporary rivets or wires that the polishers removed). That is to say, little or no preparatory surface work was done by the armorers. (Ha! Weren't those the days?!) I think that this is why we see a lot of parts with assembly marks that seem to indicate what armor the parts belong to, rather than what order the parts were to be assembled in. Presumably, the armorers could figure out what order things went in, so long as they had the right parts in front of them.

As such, I think what James has found under that rivet is as good as it ever got for that piece, and the funny angled scratches around the periphery, and all the rest we can see is the work of guys who cleaned it up during its working life or (more likely) beyond.

Mac

You don't think the polishers also kept busy polishing armour that was already in use by patrons, or that other folks (squires, for example) could have considerably altered the appearance of pieces once out of the shop? I presume that the finished from final assembly by an armourer might have rather often and quickly been re-worked to accommodate the expectations of the individual owners, especially when it comes to production pieces. I don't see why the finish under a rivet should be considered as representative of how a polished piece of armour was expected to look in its service life.

I dare say that the best examples of how armour was finished would come from finds that were not associated with centuries-old collections. I admit ignorance generally on the subject, and perhaps a lot of stuff did look like those bits under the rivets. However, I'm skeptical of using that as an example without further consideration of the possibility of contemporary changes and preferences.

Gerhard, there is no convenient summary of what we know about polishing (which is not as much as we would like, but far more than nothing). I may be able to write an article on it from an academic perspective one day. The armourers in the cities had access to guilds of professional polishers with watermills (whereas the average owner did not), its easier to aggressively polish things before all the applied decorations has been applied, and we have references to second-hand armour being repolished by dealers. We also have a number of pieces of very expensive armour which still have deep scratches in them, which suggests that customers with money did not mind. If you want to learn, search this forum and the AAF to get started then have a look through the best closeup photos of armour you own.

Wade, Mac, and JAG have read all those threads and thought about this problem hard for a very long time.

And also, why would a plattner do the messiest, roughest grinding themselves (or bother applying a very fine grit on polishing which was just going to be ground away by professionals)? Not only might the polishers' guild object, but they had the skills and tools to do a far better job cheaper and quicker than the plattners could.

One of the important things on the AAF is videos of and inteviews with some of the last people who were trained to polish knives on water-powered or pully-driven machines for a living. Polishing seems to have been like locksmithing, or beating ingots roughly into shape ... its own special trade, separate from the fine forming and design.

Well, it really comes down to the time and place and who was expected to do what work. In the article I previously mentioned the roles of armourers working on different components altered dramatically and then even the polishers seemed to all but disappear, with everyone simply be referenced as "armoursmiths" in the Frankfurt government documents by the mid-16th century. By then the whole business was in decline (noted by the decreasing number of individuals in the trade). I suspect that in many cases the folks making helmets or cuirasses were also expected to apply the finish if there wasn't a strong presence of armourers in the town or region generally, which would preclude the necessity of professional polishers. And I imagine that in places other than Frankfurt entirely different sensibilities towards the specializations of craft could have diminished or highlighted the roles of different craftsmen and their involvement in the entire process, as well.

What little I've bothered reading about it suggests that there is the likelihood of great diversity in the formal organization of armour craft communities in the late Middle Ages, and I only mentioned the distinction of the polishers early on as a point that the rivet was possibly not applied by the same fellow who did the polishing. It could easily have been so, though!

I get the impression that I have offended you, Gerhard. That was not my intention, and I am sorry.

Mac

Not at all, Mac! I'm stating the impressions that I have gathered from a rather precursory survey of such matters, and would be obliged if yourself, James, Sean or anyone else would point me towards the appropriate evidence to either confirm or debunk my suspicions. Just a long day at home and trying to engage in some discourse!

I plan to read through the sorts of threads that Sean suggested earlier and try to understand where you guys are coming from (though I'd be happy to be directed to any in particular). Personally I'm more interested in things like guilds and industry, so my assumptions about the marks on armour may be dead wrong. As Sean mentions, you guys are the ones who have taken the time. I just found it surprising that the area behind a couple of rivets seemed to be used as strong evidence for polishing one way or another.

I can imagine number of circumstances where that might not have been the case during or after assembly, but that's why I'm wondering - what sort of evidence is there to suggest a particular sequence of events and how can we be sure that that sequence was carried out in any given place, with such a diverse number of arrangements between craftsmen and guilds? James cites a celeta and a morion - why couldn't one of those head off for final polishing after the liner rivets were already attached? It would be easier to match the rivet heads to the rest of the finish in that case, would it not? Is there any way to confirm or deny such a sequence based on the available evidence?

Sean M wrote:And also, why would a plattner do the messiest, roughest grinding themselves (or bother applying a very fine grit on polishing which was just going to be ground away by professionals)?

I would defer to Mac on this, but I imagine it's important to get a pretty good idea of what a piece of armour will look like before it undergoes final polishing, to make sure that there are no major imperfections in the work. Some form of rough sanding could be pertinent to that point in the process, perhaps? Can you tell if your pieces are free of imperfections in their blackened state, Mac, or can grinding help to recognize or achieve the final pre-polished form?

Cheers!

-Gerhard

The rivet hole picture which James posted reminds me a lot of the polish you can find on well-preserved tools of the 19th and early 20th centuries. Old handsaws, chisels and plane irons, for instance, seem to have commonly had a similar finish, a fairly coarse grind brightened up by a fine buff with no real effort to remove scratches. In the context of tools, as long as the scratches are even and consistent, the effect is clean and quite pleasing (many modern tools are miserably coarse by comparison).

On another note, the rivet hole in that photo is an excellent example of an original, unmolested and unworn punched hole. Surprisingly crude. I suppose a hole punched for an articulating pivot would be reamed round as a matter of course at an early stage of manufacture.

Hi Gerhard,

I am sorry that I am prickly. Keep watching Gladius and Arms & Armour and you may see something free over the next few years. You are welcome to =buy= the booklet on how I researched my current project, if I can ever afford to write it up.

I don't think that anyone is sure that surfaces under applied fittings and overlapping plates are typical, but they are the bits which had been mucked with least since the piece was delivered. So they are probably as close as we can get to the original finish.

In The Real Fighting Stuff, Toby has a beautiful discussion of the garniture in the Kelvingrove, where the 'restorer' who browned the polished-etched-and-gilt armour did not ruin the places where one plate covered another.

Gerhard von Liebau wrote:Not at all, Mac!



-Gerhard

I am glad of it!

Mac

I can't prove that these are original from the manufacturer finishes, but they do seem to be pretty close.

A morion - parts are really hard to get to :

http://www.allenantiques.com/images/A-184-detail.jpg

And an elbow that has seen less cleaning over the years than many:

http://www.allenantiques.com/images/A-178.jpg

I don't tend to remove my rivets, so I don't have examples from underneath washers.

Wade

We can never know what typical practice was in all places. I'm not even sure we can ever be certain what was typical in any given place.

I am sure that if I could hand over my hammered work to a professional polisher and he would hand it back all ready to assemble I would do that.

We modern armorers end up wearing too many hats. In the past thirty or so years as an "armorer" I have also had to do the work of an armor polisher, a mail maker, a tool maker, a locksmith, a buckle maker and gurteler, a gilder, a jeweler, a nail maker, a braizer, a merchant, a helmet stuffer, a glover, a shoemaker, a tailor, a scholar and a metallurgist . I won't include the various trades I needed to practice in order to make Japanese armor, because that's whole 'nuther thing.

Needless to say, I have only done a half ass job of most of these occupations. The one that stresses me out the most, though, is the armor polisher. Polishing an armor takes a much time as making it in the first place. It's untold hours of tedious, but highly skilled work. There's just so much to know that I don't know, and so much effort is at stake.

I'd like to see more attention given to the polisher's craft, both historical and modern. I'd like to see annual symposia. I'd like to have organized shop tours. I'd like a whole forum where that's all we discuss. If I can't send my work out to a qualified polisher, I'd at least like to know how to make the work easier and less stressful.

Thus endeth a cathartic rant.
Mac

I keep coming back to this picture.



As John V. suggested, this gives us a rare look at shop practice. This hole has never seen a drill, reamer, or any sort of rotating tool. It makes me certain that I know less about holes than I thought I did.

Mac

Mac wrote:I keep coming back to this picture.



As John V. suggested, this gives us a rare look at shop practice. This hole has never seen a drill, reamer, or any sort of rotating tool. It makes me certain that I know less about holes than I thought I did.

Mac

It's a great image to learn from.

Do you think it was pierced from the back of the plate then the tear out hammered back to flat? The "chamfer" is so irregular I am having a hard time picturing it being created. Is it an artifact of the original punching?

I think we all need to go out to our shops and see what it takes to reproduce that hole.

One of the features that puzzles me is the "cold shut" that appears on both sides of the hole. Is this something about the hole making process, or a defect in the iron?

Mac

It has the look of a pierced hole that was roughly "cleaned up" and expanded by someone with a triangular or half-round file. That would let you get an evenly-sloped but highly non-round chamfer.

It gives me the impression of very fast "good enough" work by a professional who knows just how much care is actually needed for function vs. how much is "nice to have". Like the evenness of cuts in a professional kitchen: during rush, you cut things just precisely enough that, for a particular preparation, they cook evenly. They don't need to be identical and you're busy, so you do "just enough".

I wonder if the plate was hot when the hole was punched through? Perhaps with a somewhat worn out punch ( no longer round on the shaft?)

Returning (at least briefly) to the matter at hand.

The next process I applied to the thumb plates was with the belt sander. I used a A65 Trizact belt ...


...over a curved platen.



The A65 structured abrasive is about equal to 220gr. That's a pretty big jump, but parts are small and highly curved. That means the contact area will be small and the pressure can be high. All things considered, the bigger the jump that can be made successfully, the better.

It worked out OK, but there were a few deep scratches in the wrong direction that needed further attention.



I switched over to a flatter platen for the knuckle plates. Note how the belt extends well beyond the platen. This is important. If the edges of the belt are supported, they will cut furrows. This is part of the reason I have jumped to the Trizact belts here. I would normally have used 180gr Al/Zn oxide belts, but my latest batch of those is on a stiffer fabric than I would hope for. The result is that they cut too aggressively on their edges, even if the edges overhang the platen.



Here is what the knuckles look like before and after the A65 belt. It's tough to get all the grind scratches out because I'm constrained to work in pretty much the same direction. While this is authentic, it is irritating.



Returning to the tight flutes on the wrist plates, I made up a wheel for the Dremel tool. The abrasive is 180gr Al oxide on a hook/loop fabric back. I have pinned it down over a 1" (?) felt wheel, and trimmed it to a rough octagon. That shape approximates the newfangled wavy edged discs, and reduces the scalloping effect significantly.



That worked pretty well in the trouble spots.



The rest of the plate was done with a combination of the A65 belt and a 180gr disc; the disc large radius parts of the flutes, and the belt on the cylindrical parts.



Mac