The Armour Archive

I'm very slowly launching a line of heat-treated spaulders in collaboration with Max Engel (see separate thread in classifieds), articulating on sliding rivets on the wearer's front side- ie, toward the armpits- and leather straps on the back. I've also received a certain number of challenges to that layout, to the effect that "leather straps collapse better than sliding rivets, therefore they should be in the front," and/or "historical spaulders had the leather in the front." I believe this second point is based on 15th-16th century evidence. To my knowledge there are no surviving 14th-century spaulders, so my layout can neither be proven nor disproven for that time period.

Anyway, by my experience with this design so far, the slotted rivets collapse better than the leather, not the other way around- assuming the length of the riveted side, with the slots fully extended, is the same length as the leather-strapped side at rest. My reasoning is that when you flex your arm, the tricep/back side doesn't really change size much, whereas the bicep/front side compresses and gets much shorter. Ergo, the side of the spaulder which compresses should be in the front.

I'm not saying my way is "the" way, but that none of the arguments I've heard thus far have convinced me that I'm wrong. I'm interested in hearing anyone else's POV and reasons for it. The prototype pair of spaulders were sold to Murdock, but I should have the next pair (my own) assembled before too long. I can take photos of the mechanics in action if it will help in the discussion. I should be clear up front that I have not actually fought yet in these spaulders myself, but only tested the range of motion of the prototype pair pointed to my arming coat.

Klaus

Klaus-I would very much like to see pictures! I'm contemplating making a set of articulated pauldrons. PLEASE post pics and more discussion. Can't wait to see them.

Hi Klaus,

You can, of course, make them how every you like. In my own personal experience leathers can collaps more then sliding rivets. With sliding rivets, the lames will only move as far as the slot that the rivet is in. For leathers it depends on how they are riveted to the lames. If you are riveting them in the center of the lame, then yes you will not get the same amount of movement. Depending on how the lames sit in relation to each other, the leathers are either riveted to the very bottom edge or the very top edge of the lames. This gives the spaulder a lot of flexibility.

Historically, your information is correct, spaulders were constructed with sliding rivets on the back and internal leathers in the front and middle. The only exceptions that I have see were on some late 15th century German pauldrons which had sliding rivets in the front on the upper lames. Usually these lames were attached with simple articulation rivets. The earliest I have seen are a pair of spaulders/semi pauldrons in Churburg from about the 1420's with engraved bears on them. They have the typical sliding rivets in back and internal leathers front and center. If I'm not misstaken, isn't the best guess for historians these days, that 14th century spaulders were articulated completely with internal leathers?

What I'm observing is more or less like a Venetian blind when you're tugging on one string more than the other- one side collapses upward faster than the other and produces an asymmetrical result. On my spaulders, the leather side is the strong side and provides a little bit of resistance, whereas the slotted rivets slide more easily and that side compresses faster. This may in fact be due to brand spankin' new leather that needs to be broken in somewhat. However, I have also observed that with spaulders articulated entirely on leather straps, once the leather is thoroughly broken in, the lames start to flex in the horizontal as well as the vertical axis and don't stay in a nice stacked position the way they should. My old spaulders (about two years of fighting) are pretty sloppy.

It might also have something to do with the lames on mine being so light. A 16 or 18 ga. mild steel spaulder probably provides more resistance to the leather than a 20 ga. heat-treated one. The more the leather has to push against, the more likely it is to compress.

Klaus

Thusly...

Ah, I see now. Does it do this while someone is wearing them? It could be like you said that the leather you used may need to be worn in a little. Or the leather is too thick. It could also be how you measured out the distance between the rivet holes on the leathers. What you want on the sliding rivets side (the back) is for the lames to be fully compressed when the arm is straight down. And then fully expanded when the arm has moved forward. You don't need to worry about the arm moving back very much unless your shoulder does things that mine can't. So when I rivet the lames together I rivet the sliding rivet first and use it as a base line. I fully compress the lame so that the rivet is at the top of the slot and then mark the holes for the leathers. What I want is for the lames to lay horizontal and even when the arm is straight down. It sounds like you may have made the sliding rivets slide up instead of down thus making the central leather act like a hinge point. The leather on the front pushes the lames down and the sliding rivets up. I h ave found, for spaulders and pauldrons at least, is that sliding rivets work opposite of how it looks like they should work.

Oops, I didn't see your pic until I submitted my post. It looks to me that your leather is too thick. You need some leather that is about half as thick, but well stretched so that the lames will not sag over time and use. This layout really only works if you have a central leather too. You need something to help control the sliding rivets and a central leather will do that. For 15th century spaulders like yours there doesn't appear to be very much evidence that there were central leathers. This might be the reason that many people think that both front and back where just leathered. I do know that you will have much better luck with thinner and more flexible leathers then the one you have now. Hope this helps,

Edited because I see you did set the slots in the right place, sorry about that.

What you want on the sliding rivets side (the back) is for the lames to be fully compressed when the arm is straight down. And then fully expanded when the arm has moved forward.

I think I see what you're getting at- so the fully extended span of the leather strap should actually be equal to the span of the slotted side when compressed, not when extended? Thus, when you flex your arm and compress the leather on the inside, it encourages the riveted side to expand? In your version, the slotted rivets are at rest when fully compressed and that side gets longer, whereas with mine, the resting position is when they are expanded and they get shorter. Does this sound right?

If I am correct, it means I can use the same pattern for the lames but just shorten the leather strap, so that the lames overlap more in the resting position and the rivet slots only show up when the arm flexes and exposes more of the underlying lames.

Yes!! You got it! Just changing out the leather and readjusting the rivet holes should fix it up. That and thinner leather.

Enlightenment! (Cue giant lightbulb over head and heavenly choir...) Thank you so much for clearing that up for me.

I've also seen some spaulders that have 3/4" nylon strapping for the internal attachement points (still use leather for the straps that you can actually see). Its more flexible, and very strong.

That's as may be, but strapping high-end, heat-treated spaulders with nylon would be like taking your expensive wedding photo album and captioning it by hand in crayon...

K

Klaus, while I would agree totally if you were doing museum or collector reproduction pieces, if its sport armour meant to be used on a day to day basis I'm less pickey if its something that will never be seen at all.

But I understand your point. Its like the store bought buckle versus authentic hand made buckle issue.

To each his own

Indeed. I don't, as a rule, do sport armor as a matter of principle- buy what works for you, but it's not the sort of game I want to play, or make equipment for. But then, I wear wool hose in 90-degree weather.

Come to think of it, using heat-treated lightweight steel for a lot of applications is tantamount to "sporterizing" it. It's authentic for 15th century Milanese white harness, but you'd never see it in a mid-14th century pair of Wisby style gauntlets (which are on my potential prototype list). So maybe I'm not as great a purist as all that.

K