The Armour Archive

I took down a few breastplates and took some measurements. These include height/width and (as much as possible) detailed thickness measurements at different points in each breastplate.

http://www.allenantiques.com/Breastplat ... Study.html

It would be possible to build more precise charts of the variation of thickness but it would be best performed by several people to measure and record measurements.

Wade Allen

Wade, thank you so much for this. You totally rock!

indeed. this is fascinating stuff.

did i read that right? the Avant harness having parts of the breastplate being 4mm thick? woah!

thanks,

Aaron

Armoured Air Bear wrote:did i read that right? the Avant harness having parts of the breastplate being 4mm thick? woah!

I am not sure about the actual thickness of the breastplate on the 'Avant', I am still waiting to talk with Toby Capwell about it when he gets back from Switzerland, but he did tell me that the fauld is some 4mm thick at the front !! He also told me that the big dent that you can see in the second from bottom lame of the fauld was probably made by a crossbow bolt!

Regards,

Russ

Wade ,

You have some really nice pieces there ! I particularly love the Flemish/ Italian breastplate ( I just love that style ! ), and the Nuremberg tappulbrust, or at least it looks like a tappulbrust from the angle that I can see?
Fascinating stuff, and and fine pieces. Thankyou for sharing them!

Regards,

Russ

The thickest point I was able to find on the breast of the Avant was .125 ", which is 3.18mm. The plackart, however was another story. It's center, just above the waist, was a whopping .150"-.170"! That higher value is fully 4.33mm. The center of the uppermost fauld lame was .160" (4.07mm).

My observations fit in well with Wade's. Massive tool marks on the inside. Thickness values which vary rapidly and dramatically from one tool mark to the next. A general and seemingly intentional thinning of the material towards the sides.

Mac

Mac, thanks for the real numbers off of the Avant armour. My impression is that when Toby wrote about the thickness of the 'breastplate' he was using the general term so it applied to the plackart/lower breastplate as well as the upper breast. He was probably using your measurements as his background. If you have any other measurements from that harness, I would love to see them. While we are talking about the Avant measurements, there is a good deal of overlap between the upper and lower breast, so even if the 'thinner' parts overlap, I bet you end up with a lot of metal right there in the center between the wearer and his opponents weapons.

One reason that we can get these hefty measurements and still end up with relatively light armours (56 pounds for the Avant armour) is that many of them are for comparatively short people. I don't know how tall the Avant really is, but it seemed to be appropriate for someone the same height as my sister - 5'5". When you weigh armours for larger people like the massive Ulrich armour in Churburg, you end up with heavier harnesses. Scalini estimates Ulrich at 'just under 2 metres in height' or just short of 6'6" for those of us used to the English system. That armour weighs over 45 kilos. Even removing the helmet that doesn't go with it (6.3 kilos) and putting back 3-4.5 for a salad or armet, you end up with a pretty heavy armour. Something in between is probably what we really should be aiming for when making a 15th c. Italian armour.

If you want more details on the pieces I posted, each of the images is a live link to additional photographs, some better illustrated than others. Several include inside views so you can get some idea of the interior 'finish'. The same information is on my normal pages, this page was a customized selection from my web site.

I would like to get more measurements from other pieces. It is non-trivial since the pieces really are very non-uniform. I end up spending a lot of time finding the thick and thin spots and estimating representative averages for the various areas of the piece.

If there is a specific piece that interests you, ask. I propose to borrow the deep throat gauge for a little while....

Wade

wcallen wrote:If there is a specific piece that interests you, ask. I propose to borrow the deep throat gauge for a little while....

Wade

do you have access to an ultra sonic thickness tester? of all places to find one, or possibly the use of one, try the nearest Caterpillar dealership, they use them to measure bushing thickness for undercarriage, and might be willing to measure some pieces for you, if nothing other than bragging rights.

Wcallen, thanks for posting those numbers, very informative.

Wade,

I had no idea that Churburg 19 was so heavy! 45kgs + wow! The Avant is only some 25kgs. That is quite a difference, even given the extra size of the Ulrich IX harness. I do have trouble believing that Ulrich was only 6' 6" tall, especially when seen displayed next to the other harness' at Churburg, and assuming that they are about average height for the time. BTW. I seem to recall Toby telling me that the Avant harness was for a man about 5'8". I think that A.60 and A.62 in the KHM. Vienna were also for people about 5'7" and 5'8" respectively.

Regards,

Russ

My 5'5" estimate for Avant was sort of a guess, and it was actually wrong. I was comparing the armour to my sister, not my wife (oops), my sister is 5'6" so we are getting pretty close to Toby's estimate.

The total weight for the Avant harness I am used to seeing was taken without the missing pieces too, so you would have to add another gauntlet, tassets, the right pauldron reinforce and decide what to do about the helmet to get an 'original' weight. Also add some mail...

I only mentioned the heights because we can often forget that the same armour for someone 5'6" and someone 6'2" really won't weigh the same amount if it is built in the same way. So a 'correct' copy of the Avant armour for someone my size (6') and proportioned the same as the original owner (Not a chance for me, but we will make that rash assumption) would weigh more than the Avant armour.

I was looking through the new Churbug book by Scalini. That is where I got the Ulrich height estimate and the additional information that the Mantova armours top out at about 165 cm. Which isn't all that tall.

All of these estimates are just that. They are probably based on the current size of the dummy the armours are displayed on. There isn't a lot of variation in the height you can display a good, complete armour and not have it look funny, but there is a little bit.

At some point I will get a good scale and then I will be able to get good weights on my pieces. That, along with height measurements and the sampled thickness gives a lot better idea of how a piece might scale to fit a particular person.

Most of my pieces come closest to fitting (in height anyway) on my 5'5" wife. I don't have anything (except one pair of greaves, they are at least close) that fits me at 6'. There are certainly pieces out there, but I don't tend to find them.

Back to thickness, when I get around to measuring more of the limb armour (I have a lot less of that), the thickness will be a lot thinner. I think that will help show how an armour can include a thick breastplate and still end up with an overall weight that is still manageable.

If any specific piece in my collection seems especially interesting, speak up. If someone wants to help measure pieces, we might be able to arrange something there too. I am in central NC, USA.

Wade

I would be most interested in any additional information about this italian or german elbow cerca 1510:

http://allenantiques.com/images/A-63-elbow.jpg

I have thought about making a reproduction but am not sure about the size of it or the construction from the back as that style tends to have abreviated coverage there.

A 60 and A 62 KMW were made, respectively, for people about 5' 5" and 5' 7" tall.

The Mantova armours all suffer from what I call 'primary mounting goof syndrom' - the waist indent is put at the tops of the hips. Get a load of B3! WHOA!!!

You are in a little bit of luck. It just so happens that elbow was available so I played with it a little bit over the weekend, I just hadn't uploaded the new text:

http://www.allenantiques.com/A-63.html

I guess you want a back or side photograph. That can happen, it won't be immediately. The cop actually wraps around the back a reasonable amount. It isn't one that just sort of stops at the point of the elbow. I also noticed that the curve of the elbow (where it would fit over the vambraces) has a tighter curve on one side than the other. This seems to have been intentional, and it would make this one a left elbow.

I have 3 similar elbows. This is the largest of the 3. The other one in this 'pair' is pretty close and the third one is definitely smaller. The third one is pictured here:

http://www.allenantiques.com/A-57.html

Wade

Any chance of getting some backplate thicknesses?

I'd also be interested to know any thickness figures anyone has for the backplates/rear plackarts/guards-de-rein on the Avant and Mantova suits...

All of my backplates are pretty late, but sure we can do that.

Without measuring, the answer is that they are really thin.

While I was at the Wallace, Toby showed me the pin striped half suit. It actually has a heavier back than breast, but it is a very late one and, I assume, very atypical in this respect.

Wade

I appreciate it, Wade.

If I recall correctly, at least one of the 15th century Italian cuirasses at Churburg has an upper back that's heavier than the upper breast. My copy of the Churburg catalogue is incomplete, so I can't check on which one it is.

If my calculations are correct, then 1.65 metres is only about 5'4", somewhat smaller than I thought they were, especially compared to the size that I have for the Avant. It would be great fun to make an armour that size wouldn't it ! Most of those that I make are for people six foot plus, six foot nine being the largest.....so far ! I have also been reading the Churburg catalogue recently , a great book ! , and as I said, was somewhat surprised at the size given for Ulrich IX.
Thankyou for the correction there James, I got it slightly wrong.

Thankyou for a fascinating thread Wade.

Regards,

Russ

PS. I seem to recall reading an article by David Edge and Dr.Alan Williams, that mentioned that the backplate of the Wladislas harness was extremely thin, only some 0.9mm thick !

R

Thanks for those dimensions Wade. I thought it must be quite large but I just wanted to check that I wasn't seeing things:). Anyway, if you could post a back and/or top down picture at some point that would be helpful.

The Avant armor has a surprisingly heavy backplate. My notes show it to be between .060" and .075" (1.52mm and 1.91mm) The average seemed to be about .070" (1.78mm) I did not notice any variations which seemed to be intentional.

I don't have a note on the back plackart, but I do have average thicknesses for the cullet lames.

Lame 1 .075" (1.91mm)
Lame 2 .060" (1.52mm)
Lame 3 .060" (1.52mm)

note: all measurements were made in decimal inches, and were converted to metric as I wrote this.

As to the question of the wearer's size; when I saw the armor on it's display stand, my impression was that he was just a little shorter than me. I'm 5'6".

I realize that the stand makes all the difference, but I think that the experienced armorers out there will agree that the stand which Mr. Scot had built for the armor is a good one, and displays the armor well.

Mac

Here's B 3 Mantova. The mannequin situation in the Diocesan Museum reminds me of the Imperial Austria Exhibition back in '91, which had wee mannequins all the same size; some of the armours had the breastplates opened up and pushed down OVER the hips, and their knuckles were practically dragging the floor. B3 would need to moved up at least four inches, by my reckoning, keeping in mind that the legharness and the rest don't necessarily go together.

Mac, thanks for the info on the Avant armour. That is great to have. I don't have any reason to doubt that the dummy is about the right size, it displays really well. It has always been one of my favorite armours.

James, yup, that is a fine counter example of the right size dummy on a harness. That would look very different on a larger dummy.

Anyway, more numbers from misc. pieces:

http://www.allenantiques.com/A-114b.html
http://www.allenantiques.com/A-54.html
http://www.allenantiques.com/A-123.html
http://www.allenantiques.com/A-129.html
http://www.allenantiques.com/A-56.html
http://www.allenantiques.com/A-126.html
http://www.allenantiques.com/A-130.html
http://www.allenantiques.com/A-21.html
http://www.allenantiques.com/A-35.html
http://www.allenantiques.com/A-38.html
http://www.allenantiques.com/A-55.html
http://www.allenantiques.com/A-63.html
http://www.allenantiques.com/A-57.html
http://www.allenantiques.com/A-27.html

Plenty more to do, but that includes some backplates, some bits of arms and some tasset plates.

The metal is a lot thinner and the thickness doesn't seem to intentionally vary based on where it will do the most good.

Wade

Thanks guys. You all completely rock, btw.

I am bumping this awesome and informative thread.

Does anyone have any thickness figures for the cuirasses on any other Italian armours from the mid/late 15th century? I am particularly interested in any information any has on the thicknesses of the Mantova armours (all I have access to are their weights), but any breast/backplate thicknesses of armours of this period would be welcome.

James? Per? Mac? Wade? Russ? Anyone...?

Josh,

You are right this is a great thread.

Wade,

Thanks for putting so much of the info on your collection up. Some very interesting stuff.

RPM

Thanks for the bump Josh, somehow I missed this thread the 1st go round.Excellent thread indeed.

I've been to Mantova, but back in '93 when I was there, no one at the Diocesan Museum of the Gonzaga (English translation) was authorized to open any of the cases. Apparently the care of the pieces is assigned to a specialist from some other museum. Dropping Boccia's name got me a little ways, though, as I had just met him, but he's dead now, so that won't work anymore.

Alas...

I thought I recalled reading a post by Per Lillelund Jensen, years ago, saying that he had gotten to take some measurements of the suit in Bern. I haven't seen him lurking on this forum in some time, though...

The Higgins now has the ex-Churburg, ex-Gwynn late 15th c. Italian export breastplate. Maybe Chef could get his hands on that sometime? It would be very interesting to see measurements from it. It wasn't originally made for one of the Churburg high end armours and it might show some different characteristics.

I had my hands on a 2 piece south german breast years ago. It had the same 'thick in the middle, thin on the edges' concept, but I don't have any way to know what the actual measurements were. It has been over 10 years and my memory isn't that good. I do remember that the 2 were attached by a bolt (where we tend to assume a rivet) and the bolt was threaded into the inner plate. They probably drifted the hole in and so gained some thickness, but with that the body of the piece was heavy enough that they just threaded the upper breastplate. No nut.

Randall, I am happy to share. I am just the current holder of my pieces. I am always annoyed with museums when they make it hard to learn about their pieces so I try to do my part with my few trinkets to make them more accessible.

I may not respond to every request, but I try. I will take pictures, measurements, or add description when people ask. I try to add the new information to the public descriptions so everyone has access to the new information.

If people want to stop by and help update information, I am sure that can be arranged. If anyone knows of another event similar to the ARS study sessions, please share - I am always interested in seeing other pieces.

Wade