The Armour Archive

Hello,

I am trying to plan out my next kit, and I am aiming at German-Swiss around 1390...

I have a Klapvisor coming soon.

I am thinking:

Segmented Breastplate (Cherbourg?)
Splint limb defenses

Am I on the right track?

Would I wear an arming coat under this?

If so, anyone know a good source for said arming coat/doublet?

Any and all comments appreciated.


B

Wow...that sounds a lot like the kit I'm putting together. I've got the klap already, and I'm waiting for the armourer to finish/ship my splinted arms/legs and steel breastplate, greaves, demigaunts and spaulders. I'll be following this thread with great interest (including any responses about makers of accurate aketons/arming coats/whatever).

I'd say you were right on track. I'm not sure, but I think Gwen at Historic enterprises might be able to fix you up with an arming coat.Also Valentine Armouries makes them as well.Brian Price has a pic of one made by David Randrup of Los angeles,but I dont know if he makes them for sale. I cant think of anyone else offhand.....Otto

Hi!

I applaud your efforts to maintain a contemporary field presence that is consistent with history! Most people are doing prettty good to say, "Well-it was in the same century".

That said:

I've never seen segmented breastplates outside of Italy. I've only seen Germans wear globose breasts, sometimes with pronounced medial ridges by this time. I have also seen skirts of mail or scale. Coats of plate were also appropriate if you want mobility, though the "pigeon breast" was worked into the shape of the plates (as opposed to the Wisby finds). this could be accomplished by one, two or more plates over the chest.

It would be appropriate for an arming coat, for sure, to be worn under everything. This is really a specialty garment, and needs to be fitted by someone who knows what they're doing. I'd make sure that the seams where the sleeves insert way inside over the chest to ensure mobility. I'd also recommend articulated legs with greaves and possibly sabatons, though those were not the only type used then.

Full sleeves were often mail (mail was being produced chaply in Germany by then, which increased it's popularity despite newer defenses being used). Other alternatives for arms defenses include a mail half-sleeve worn over splinted vanbraces or articulated arms.

I'm sure you've seen the effigy of Walther von Hoenklenken (sp?), who is wearing a jupon with full sleeves under a breast plate. This would allow a really spiff (if hot) field appearance with light arm defenses worn under that large sleeves of the Jupon.

Switzerland was influenced most by Germany and to an extent, France. However, the French influence was tainted by the French invasions of Switzerland, so I'd stick to Swiss and German effigies. Italy was close, but there were those pesky Alps in the way, so it was easier to deal with France and Germany.

Good Luck! If you have any furhter questions, just ask!

Trevor

(Who is glad he finally gets to use the effort placed into breaking down armor of the 100 Years War into 25 year segments!)

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Trevor:
I've never seen segmented breastplates outside of Italy. </font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The segmented breastplate is actually in Churburg which is germany. It is however, apparently made in Italy.

A good option might be something liek the Churburg 14 instead of the segmented 13. It is globose, but of a single piece. It is also dated at closer to your 1390 date where the 13 is now believed to be closer to 1365.

Dan

DO YOU LIEK CHURBURG?????????

Had to do it.

Nope, Churburg is in Italy.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by DanNV:
<B> The segmented breastplate is actually in Churburg which is germany. It is however, apparently made in Italy.
Dan</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I beg to differ. Churburg is in Italy, in the Southern Tyrol region, near the southern Swiss-Austrian border.
Coburg is in Germany, different castle, different armour collection.

Trevor, any references or links to Swiss or German armour of 1350-1400 would be greatly appreciated. I am having trouble getting much from those regions. I have the effigy of Walter von Hohenklingen from AAotMK, but that's about it.

Erik

Brutus, What sort of Klappvisor are you getting. Is it the flat/globose type or the houndskull type? By 1390 I don't think the flat/globose type was in use, having been replaced by the houndskull visor, either side or forehead mounted.

Trevor, where splint lower legs still in use among knights?

Ambrogio, you're just too fast.

Yes, Tyrol is currently part of Italy. So, I was in error as to the modern national affiliation. However, at the time the armor in question was made, Tyrol was one of the German states and the castle was owned by a German family (until very modern times at least, I didn't reread all of the history to post.) If you get the two volume Churburg set, the first volume gives some back ground about the location. One thing ot remember is that at that time, neither Germany nor Italy were organised into what we would consider countries today.

Dan

Hello all,

1st let me just say thanks for all of the responses.

Trevor: That was some great information. Are there any good (read: easy to find at a library or web) sources you would reccomend as a starting point?
I haven't had much success with finding images, which is why this thread is so helpful.

Erik: It is the globose version that I have on the way. Grr, I swear I read that it stayed in use in Germany until later than this, but of course I can't back that up.
Can you reccomend a source that tells when this fell out of use? I'm not averse to altering the time period, and the $$ spent on the helm ultimately will dictate what I do.

I'm gonna need a new thread if that is the case.

DanNV, I am not familiar with the Cherbourg 14. I will look into it, but if you know of any images on the web, or in a easy-to-get book, please let me know.

Thanks everyone for your help, I'd really like to get things "narrowed down" before commiting to the rest of the pieces.

B

Brutus, I'm in a similar state to you when it comes to the lack of period images and examples from Germany.
I'm relying on what other's have written. Edge and Paddock in AAotMK state, in very general terms, that it was replaced in the 1380's.
Don't worry too much. You can drop your timeperiod by 10 years or so and be OK with the klapp, even better for splint and the globose breastplate may still be OK. Mr. von Hohenklingen's effigy is 1386, so close enough to justify the globose breastplate for about 1380, given the Italians had globose breastplates with faulds in the mid 1370's.

Howdy, Brutus...

I spotted your thread and decided to check it out...glad I did - maybe I can add something. With a couple of exceptions, I agree with most of what's been said thus far. In the 14th century, German armorers (and Knights) were a little bit 'backward' compared to their European neighbors, so they had a tendency to hang onto armor styles that were already considered rather outdated in the rest of Europe. German armorers weren't anywhere near as skilled as the Italians at this point, although that certainly changed in the next century when they equalled, and in many ways, surpassed them. Italian city-states in the 14th century were constantly at war with each other, all up and down the peninsula, attracting mercenaries from all over Europe, bringing new ideas and plenty of demand for armor, so they took full advantage of the situation - Italian armoring took off like a shot. As Dan said, the population of Italy's northernmost provinces was largely Germanic, and there were certainly not the same 'country' distinctions that we think of today.

As far as your kit ideas go...about your helm (and I think I know something about it )...it's based on this Swiss Bascinet c. 1390-1400 www.armourworks.com/images/Swiss%20Bascinet.jpg
with modifications for SCA fighting, of course. It is somewhat old-fashioned, but there are numerous instances of this helm style still being worn then. A couple of more 'modern' helms would be a standard pigface or for a German, high fashion would be an onion dome hounskull like the Colburg
http://www.armourworks.com/images/A%20and%20A%20Bascinet2.jpg
(I've just about finished my prototype of the Colburg, btw).

On the segmented breastplate question, Trevor, I have seen a couple of occasions German usage of them - in Northern Italy. Here's an example, made for Vogt von Matsch, 1380-1390. http://www.armourworks.com/images/von%20Match.jpg
Other ideas include a globose, as Trevor suggested with the Hohenklingen effigy - here's a link to it http://www.armourworks.com/images/Effigy%20Hohenklingen%201386.jpg - and a couple more links to another globose in Northern Italy http://www.armourworks.com/images/Globose%20breastplate%201390-1400.jpg http://www.armourworks.com/images/Globose%20Side%201390-14000.jpg http://www.armourworks.com/images/Globose%20Detail%201390-1400.jpg Another idea could be a Corazzina as shown on this Composite Armor from 1400 http://www.armourworks.com/images/Composite%20Armor%201400.jpg

On splinted limb defenses, arms are still appropriate, as shown on the von Steinberg effigy, c. 1397 http://www.armourworks.com/images/Effigy%20von%20Steinberg%201397.jpg . It does show full plate legs, though, and I've not seen any splinted legs past mid-century. It's conceivable that a poorer knight might still have a pair, but one who was in the height of fashion probably wouldn't have worn them. Here's another link to full legs
http://www.armourworks.com/images/Legs%20N%20Ital%2014th%20C.jpg
and some sabatons http://www.armourworks.com/images/Sabatons%20from%20Chartres.jpg , although maille footcoverings were seen all the way into the 15th century.

An arming coat would be perfectly proper, as shown in the Hohenklingen effigy, and this Charles VI coat http://www.armourworks.com/images/charles_vi_coat.jpg but I'm afraid I'm not much help in locating one. Probably having one made would be a good idea; however, the one that Robert Valentine offers looks to me to be more mid- to late-15th rather than 14th.

If you need more info or pics, let me know and I'll see what else I can find.

Olaf

(edited about a dozen times to get these dam*ned links to work right!!)
------------------
Olaf Skalle Krossar
Chieftain
The Armory of Westlig Stjerne
www.armourworks.com
thefolks@armourworks.com

[This message has been edited by Olaf Skalle Krossar (edited 02-16-2002).]

Olaf, thankyou for posting those pitures, especially that of the Swiss Klappvisor bascinet. I had been scouring the web for ages to try and find an image or reference to an image of this piece, but without luck. I was only recently told there is one in the Osprey book, "The Swiss at War", so that will be ordered soon.
However, I must say that I have only ever seen this piece dated to 1370, never as late as 1390-1400.
You say there are numerous instances of this type being worn that late. I have only come across one period illustration of a Klappvisor of similar type(I don't have a copy), dated c1340, from the Sabbionara castle, Avio, Trentino, Italy.
I would be gratefull just for a reference to point me in the right direction. Thanks.

Erik

[This message has been edited by Erik Schmidt (edited 02-16-2002).]

I, too have only seen shallow, round-faced bascinet visors dated to 1370. Not really a big stretch for 1390, given the expense of armor.

Here's a number of pics of 14th century armour that you might find useful:
http://www.isd.net/cdavis/authentic.html
Gotta really cool website on there from Cad, too.

Note regarding arming coats:
There is a difference between "arming coats", "pourpoints" and "Jupons". The big difference is whether the coat is intended to be worn beneath or over the armor.

Pourpoints are designed to be worn under armor, and have points attached to suspend various items worn, i'e chausses, arm harnesses, mail, etc.

Jupons are designed to be worn over or in lieu of armor (though breast plates are sometimes worn over armor, as in the hoenkinken example).

The term "arming coat" seems to have been used interchangably, though I see it more used for the under-armor garment rather than the Jupon.

Goodluck!

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Erik Schmidt:
[B]Trevor, where splint lower legs still in use among knights?
B]</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I haven't seen evidence of splint lower legs in use by the end of the fourteenth century. Two famous examples include the Miles Stapleton brass and Gunther von Scharzbug, both from the middle of the 14th century.

There is another type of splinted leg used on the Hoenkilinken effigy utilizing a central, fluted and shaped plate connected by straps to side plates, but I don't think this is the type you had in mind.

Basically, the middle of the 14th century saw a great many experiments in materials and construction techniques, and in Germany there was more experimentation than anywhere else.

By 1370, the form of the breast plate and torso had acquired the distinctive "pigeon breast" shape, regardless of material or construction. Plate became more and more common, and by the end of the century, the R&D process had mostly settled on plate, though mail was still used for economy and covered breastplates were still common.

AS has been said earlier, in Germany the armor there was still backward to a certain degree.

THE FOLLOWING IS ME TALKING OUT OF MY ASS:

I have to wonder if the Klappvisor was still used because German armorers made beefier locks than their contemporaries, negating the need for the inherently more sturdy side-mounted system. I also wonder if the mail produced there was better in alloy content, since if the armor wasn't any good, no one would use it and new forms would emerge.

One theory of mine regarding the development of plate regards the alloy and hardening processes involved with mail. It follows that it is inherently easier to draw wire that is soft iron than hardened steel. It also follows it would be harder to control the temperature in a coal fire of a shirt made of steel rings than in a single plate. Specifically, the fire would tend to melt some rings before others would get up to temperature, and the heat would dissipate rapidly. I would be very interested to find the hardness of mail shirts...

It is also interesting to note that the water-powered hammer was invented about the time that plate became more common. Whether the trip hammer was invented because plate was in demand or whether plate became available because sheet steel was easier to produce will probably never be known.

There is also some evidence that German iron had naturally occuring manganese in it, resulting in a superior steel. (German armorers would label inferior local steel as "Milanese") This would tend to preserve eariler armor types, since the success of armor would tend to stagnate it's development. Yet, by the fifteenth century, Milanese armorers had certainly mastered the hardening of steel.

(Hoo Boy! It's late, and I'm blathering! Good night.)



------------------
All bleeding eventually stops.

Seems like I've read that the ore from the Innsbrook mines had traces of maganese and chromium. I've had a few pieces of 16th cent German armour that I suspect came from these mines as the metal had a more silvery color and was extremly rust resistant..Otto

Whoops!

One addendum regarding arms: Non-articulated plate arms were also used at this time. They would be tied with points to the arming coat underneath, and would provide a very mobile, protective defense. Splintvanbraces and rerebraces would also be attached in this way.

Also, in lieu of the Swiss at War 1300-1500 book, I'd order German Medieval Armies 1300-1500. The Swiss has only a few references to 14th century stuff, concentrating on the Swiss Wars with France in the 15th century. The German book actually has a greater number of references to the time period you're investigating, and actually uses the Swiss Bascinet in one of it's color plates! One of the best books in my collection. You also might consider ordering Italian Medieval Armies 1300-1500 so you can get a feel for the Italian style of Armor.

(Thanks to Templar Bob, from whom I received my copy of German Medieval Armies in the U.S. Army in trade for a Pennsic T-shirt. Still got that shirt, Bob? )

------------------
All bleeding eventually stops.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Trevor:
<B> I haven't seen evidence of splint lower legs in use by the end of the fourteenth century. Two famous examples include the Miles Stapleton brass and Gunther von Scharzbug, both from the middle of the 14th century.

There is another type of splinted leg used on the Hoenkilinken effigy utilizing a central, fluted and shaped plate connected by straps to side plates, but I don't think this is the type you had in mind.

</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's what I thought.
Although, I wouldn't call the Hohenklingen leg defence splints. I interpret the straps as connecting to plates at the back, not side plates. The Ritter von Steinberg, 1397, shows the same style of legs defence.
There's an English effigy, Thomas Chevne, Esq. with splinted lower legs from 1368.

I am equally admirable of Cad's site. Very usefull!
You wouldn't believe it Trevor, but the three books you mention are the very ones I am ordering. Maybe I could just drop the "Swiss at War" one out of the order. A friend of mine has them, so I'll check them out and decide before ordering. Thanks for the advice Trevor.

Erik

Thanks again all.

Olaf : Thx for the links, and yes, I would imagine you know something about my helm.

Brutus

I agree, Olaf's references are quite helpful, and good fuel for discussion.
A few points to put a finer detail on things:
The harness noted as being for Vogt von Matsch is the Churburg #13.
The Corazzina composite armour was made from various bits found in Rhodes, most likely of Venetian origin. The general feel of the suit is right. At least right enough for the curators at the Met in New York, but it's kind of a Frankenstein's monster of modified original pieces.
By the 1390s two piece vambraces had become common France (the child's arm harness in Chartres http://www.isd.net/cdavis/images/charles_vi_arm.jpg and Edge and Paddock's Arms and Armour of the Medieval Knight), England (the Black Prince's effigy), and northern Italy (the arm harnesses matching the Churburg #13 harness, and two others in the Churburg collection dated 1385). If you're depicting a wealthy and fashionable man from the 1390s, even in Germany I might expect similar vambraces rather than splint. The fashion of the French, English, Flemish and Burgundians to wear large puffy sleeves over their arms might be the look you go with, and make your choice go unnoticed.

The recent publication on the Battle of Wisby has some useful images of 14th century armour and effigies you might want to check out. A lot of their focus is Scandinavian and Germanic, though it's main focus is about 30 years earlier than you want to depict. It does have details like the German fashion of wearing chains from the breastplate to various weapons.

To address Trevor's theories...
Talking out of your ass can have real value, and occasionally we all have neat insights into developments like these. This is a great forum for such things, and prefacing it by saying it might be crap is a commendable thing.

Along those lines, I have a theory that the rapid development of plate in the 14th century had much to do with the Black Death.

First, what spread the plague so quickly? Widespread trade and travel. Cross pollination of ideas travels with it, and technology advances more quickly.

Second, what happened to the population, and labor at the time? Large numbers died, labor rates soared particularly in areas like France and Italy which were hit very hard. Solid plate construction requires skilled labor, but fewer workers than maile. Trip hammers reduce the number of workers you need, so they're a very beneficial invention when that one worker is asking for top livre for his work. Colder regions, and those off the main trade routes weren't hit as hard by the plague, so places like Scandinavia, Scotland, and northern Germany had less financial incentive to adopt plate.

So then a large chunk of Europe starts using plate, and develops weapons to combat it. The Germans realize they're lagging, and in good German tradition don't settle for what everyone else is making, but make their gothic uber-plate of the 15th century.

It's just a theory, it does seem to explain some things.
Gaston

Interesting theory, but it seems to me to have a flaw.
If plate was cheaper than maille to produce when labour costs are high, wouldn't it also be cheaper to make even when labour costs were low, given that they both require about the same amount of iron and both require workshops to work the iron into either plate or wire.
I think there are other theories around regarding the development of technology for working steel bing a critical factor in the emergence of plate. Seems more plausible.

Erik

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Clermont:
The recent publication on the Battle of Wisby has some useful images of 14th century armour and effigies you might want to check out. A lot of their focus is Scandinavian and Germanic, though it's main focus is about 30 years earlier than you want to depict. It does have details like the German fashion of wearing chains from the breastplate to various weapons.</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Forgive my ignorance, but what recent publication on the Battle of Wisby are you referring to, and how can I get a copy?

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Albrekt af Viborg:
Forgive my ignorance, but what recent publication on the Battle of Wisby are you referring to, and how can I get a copy? </font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Brian price is offering these books for around 99 bucks. there is A lot of cool stuff there.

From Knoch

nope still cant spell

Armour from the Battle of Wisby, Bengt Thordeman, Brian R. Price (Introduction); Hardcover
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1891448056/qid=1014761481/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_67_1/104-0219144-3287129
or http://www.chivalrybookshelf.com/titles/wisby/wisby.htm
Its around $100, which is much cheaper than the previous limited run edition, and while it's pricier than your typical Harlequin romance, it's honestly well worth it. There are a ton of images, some amazing data on battlefield wounds, and a lot of comparisons to other armour.

As to my theory, the cost to produce an item is dependent on the materials, and the labor. The cost in materials and manpower to produce wire and good sheet steel certainly shifted during this era, and perhaps that was a more decisive factor than labor prices in determining what people bought. I don't have a great feel for how much manpower it took to make sheet steel, or wire, but they're probably not identical, and probably dependent on slightly different factors, so they won't necessarily rise and fall at the same rate.
Wire Price + Assembly Price = total cost of mail
Plate Price + Construction Price = total cost of plate armour

My theory really derived from the presence of inexpensive mail from India. I work with a lot of folks from the subcontinent, and they all indicate there's a huge labor glut there, so even skilled labor is very cheap. Indian engineers move here because they get paid much better in our tighter labor market. If a mail weaver here bills themselves at a minimum wage rate a hauberk is beyond the price most people are willing to pay, while the Indian hauberks, while not as good as our best maile makers, are generally much cheaper, and affordable to a typical collector or combatant. They're paying about the same as we are for raw materials, but they can make maile more cheaply because their labor is cheaper.

Why don't we see a lot of usable good plate armour from India? Maybe it's a skill they don't have workers for, or maybe they have trouble competing with our plate armourers after all the shipping and import taxes.

Erik- do recommend a source for other theories on plate development?
Gaston

Clermont, I can't give you any specific references to other theories, it is only something I recall having read somewhere.
Another theory is the rise of the English archer I believe.

Here are a couple of references I came across on this site;
http://www.wpi.edu/~jforgeng/plate_armor/indepth/biblio.html
I have not read them, but they may be of interest.

Richardson, Thom. The Introduction of Plate Armour in Medieval Europe. Royal Armouries Yearbook vol. 2(1997): 40-45.
An exceptional article directly dealing with the beginnings of the transition from mail to plate.

Williams, Alan. "Slag Inclusions in Armour." Historical Metallurgy Vol 24, #2 (1990): 69-80.
Interesting comparison of sources of iron in various armors. Also contains information on the price of armor in the middle ages.

Back to your theory.
In the Ffoulkes book he lists some armour workshop prices, and I managed to find one which refers to both wire and plate in the same source. It is from 1544 and states the following costs of supply;
....wispe steel....at 4d./lb.
....wire...........at 4d./lb.
The amount of this wispe steel used in the workshop is small compared to the amount of ordinary steel, which is (as calculated by Ffoulkes)purchased at.......2.5d./lb.

This indicates the wire being not very expensive. Ofcource the main cost is still in the assemply of maille.

You state above that "Indian engineers move here(to the US) because they get paid much better in our tighter labor market". I don't know how you could possibly consider the higher pay rates in the US to be due to less unemployment. You live in a 'Western' affluent society with equivalent pay rates. India is a developing nation with a very poor population. The difference has little to do with the number of unemployed.

Back to the theory.
Are you saying that the plate, having been more expensive than maille, became cheaper than it, or just comparitively less expensive?
I have to ask, what is it about plate that could possibly make it much more expensive than maille when labour costs are low? The amount of raw material is not much different.
Also, one has to consider that iron armour was mostly a resource for the wealthy, and when plate was adopted it was almost always as an addition to the maille, not replacing it. So for a knight who wanted to upgrade his armour when prices had risen would pay extra for both maille and the plate, but the plate had not risen in price as much as maille, but over all it was more expensive and he couldn't just forego the maille in favour of plate, this didn't happen until very in the 14th century, in the meantime there had to be a driving force other than cost to get armour development to the stage where plate replaces maille.

You state that; "Colder regions, and those off the main trade routes weren't hit as hard by the plague, so places like Scandinavia, Scotland, and northern Germany had less financial incentive to adopt plate" Does that include Eastern Europe? Is see on illustrations from there that they were quite advanced in plate armour early on, especially leg and arm defences.
Building on what you said, if the wealthy of the countries less affected by labour price hikes needed armour, they could get it cheaper than those in the countries with higher labour costs. Thus, they should be able to afford better armour for their money, and better armour was plate. Correct? This, ofcourse, is in oppostion to your logic. Which is correct?
I think the incentive to adopt more plate over maille was not financial, as adding plate over maille saved you no money, no matter what the comparative costs of maille and plate. If you already have the maille, then adding plate armour is still not finacially better for those who can get it at higher prices, but comparatively cheaper to maille. Plate would only take off if it had become cheaper than before and this could not happen with increasing labour costs.

When the common soldier adopted metal armour, what was the first? A helm, followed by maille and then a CoP, then metal arm and leg protection. This trend seems to have continued into the 15th century. It also does not suggest a move to plate as a cheaper first option.

Erik

Interesting discussion, all.

MAkes me wonder about a great many things (that is, here's a burst of conscious thought with no discernable purpose nor conclusion ):

If plague meant that there were less workers, it also follows that there were less warriors to build plate for, so perhaps the effect of the plague could be offset somewhat by the decrease in both production and consumption.

Also, given that the economy of the 14th century was by all indications on the upswing, (evidenced by the rise of the merchant class during this time), perhaps the economic factors were less profound. Granted, there were less noblemen about, and their ranks were supplemented by the wealthier merchants at this time. Also, the economic strength of noblemen was hampered by the loss of peasant work force, and compounded by the flight of peasants to the cities.

I think that the effects of the plague were somewhat buffered in regards to the production of plate.

I would think that those regions that were hit hardest by the plague would be less likely to afford plate, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Weirder still is to consider that with all of the death about, this left more property in the hands of the survivors, and in a time where there was little overall wealth, this may have meant an actual financial boost to the well-being of those left alive after the plague.

So we're left with a quandary: why did plate evolve during this time of calamity? Especially in France; where not only did the Plague leave it's mark, but the English and native brigands which plundered France during the times between the English campaigns...

In that thought, one has to consider that no matter what the over-all economic situation is, the ones with the weapons are more likely to get the money. And during times of lawlessness, the effect is even greater still.

So, we're left with an economy of War. When people's lives were on the line, armorers got their pay in full (and probably in advance!). THose at the bottom of the economic food chain had to pay more in taxes and theft, so those at the top were probably insulated.

And there was plenty of war about. And to the victors, the spoils. England enjoyed a great boom in it's economy during this time, with English wives eating off French linen with French silver. With War being a leading and competitive industry, it is no wonder that plate became more prevalent.

Perhaps in Germany, they did not face the longbow as the French had. Therefore less bodkin-resistant forms of armor could survive there longer.

So, to wrap up, there were many reasons for there to be less plate than there was. Yet, it obviously became more prevalent during this time. I think that the driving force behind armor development was war. And as war tactics and weaponry changed, so did the armor, and vise-versa. If you didn't change along with the times, chances were you became extinct.

Thanks for an enlightening discussion!

I'm no expert in these armours... but I can add a little bit. Poland and Hungary were relatively unscathed by the Plague, due to a historical accident: their standards for animal husbandry separated the peasant from his livestock, rather than putting them into extreme close quarters as in Western Europe. While 14th-century Western Europe was falling apart, that same time was glory years for Central Europe.

I asked a friend of mine about the development of plate and he stated that it was due in part new furnace technology.
In the later 13th century they began building larger furnaces and found that they could generate much hotter conditions, actually getting the iron to melt properly. This molten product was much superior to the previously lower temperature extracted iron which was heavely contaminated with ore. From it they were able to develop a superior product for the production of plate.

Well, that's the short version. I don't remember all the technicalities of the long one.

Erik