The Armour Archive

What is the thoughts on when akertons appeared? Would the normans in 1066 have been wearing them or just a thick woolen tunic?

G'day mate. I think we must have met at the Leongatha archery day recently.

There is no real evidence of any padded garments used by western European warriors before the Crusades. The general consensus is that Normans at Hastings would not have worn aketons under their mail, though the Hastings 2006 organisers were prepared to let "Normans" wear them, but this was a concession to attendees, rather than an official position regarding their accuracy or appropriateness.

OTOH, such garments were in common use in Byzantium and among their Arab and Turkish opponents. It is possible that they spread to the west after the Crusades, but we have no real evidence to back that up.

They don't show up clearly as "under-mail" garments for knights in MS illuminations until 1250-1280 AD. Foot soldiers wear a heavy quilted armor in the M-ski Bible (c. 1250), but the knights are all wearing what appears to be a simple tunic under their hauberks.

If this is for SCA purposes--

Be authentic. Be a man. Take the pain.

M.

Probably not. Unless I miss my guess, Len is part of the Leongatha Mediaeval Society, who fight with REAL weapons.

But I thought the LMS just did 14th century? Don't tell me we have someone nibbling at the idea of doing the 11th?

Come to the Dark Side, Len . . . you know you want to . . .

Thanks for the info guys.Yes LMS does focus on the 14th C and perticulary the era of the Black Prince however I have a interest in all the medieval period(like most people) and particulary the history of the English longbow and as such I am always reseaching the armours the archers had to contend with through the ages.That was a hot day Egfroth at the archery day wasn't it!

Egfroth wrote:Probably not. Unless I miss my guess, Len is part of the Leongatha Mediaeval Society, who fight with REAL weapons.

Are the weapons sharp?

No the weopons are not sharp but we do train in full armour to allow decent hits.

Len wrote:No the weopons are not sharp but we do train in full armour to allow decent hits.

Whew. I thought ya'll had lost yer minds.

Good idea on the full armour.

Egfroth wrote:OTOH, such garments were in common use in Byzantium and among their Arab and Turkish opponents. It is possible that they spread to the west after the Crusades, but we have no real evidence to back that up.

Egfroth,

It's almost certain that the terminology (aketon, haqueton, etc.) come from Arabic's "al-qutun" or cotton. If I am not mistaken, aketons start being mentioned in the West slightly before the Crusades. One alternate theory is that aketons spread from the Iberian peninsula--al-Andulus to Leon and France. Perhaps the Arabs picked up the idea from the Eastern Romans and then transferred the idea back to the West?

http://forums.armourarchive.org/phpBB2/ ... hp?t=52881 may be of interest

Ernst wrote:If I am not mistaken, aketons start being mentioned in the West slightly before the Crusades.

I would love to see a reference that backs this up.

Earliest date i have for a padded thing worn as armour is 1181 and that is _instead_ of mail rather than with it.

Ernst wrote: Egfroth,

It's almost certain that the terminology (aketon, haqueton, etc.) come from Arabic's "al-qutun" or cotton. If I am not mistaken, aketons start being mentioned in the West slightly before the Crusades. One alternate theory is that aketons spread from the Iberian peninsula--al-Andulus to Leon and France. Perhaps the Arabs picked up the idea from the Eastern Romans and then transferred the idea back to the West?

Agreed. And gambeson is a frenchified version of the good germanic word wambais (relating to the guts - the word "womb" is about the only modern survival).

As the French can't pronounce a "W" . . .

and yes, it's wierd - they can make the "W" sound - as in the word "oui"

. . . they turn the "W" in wambais into a "G" (as in Guillaume for William, Guy for Wido).

They don't pronounce an "S" on the end of a word, either, so they use the suffix "on" to allow the "S" to be heard.

So you get "gambeson".

Regarding the Spanish thing - that's a long and indirect way for padded garments to have travelled from Byzantium - via the Holy Lad, Egypt and North Africa. Not saying it's impossible, but I think there would have been more direct routes.

nathan,

the assize of arms I see. It seems Henry II did this on the continent first so it could be somewhat earlier use than 1181. As far as before the crusades I have not heard that before.

Egfroth,

In Byzantium what date is padded armour seem to be first used? Is it a continuation of old roman under armour?

RPM

Guys,

Excuse me. Brain Fart. I have no idea why I suddenly came up with a pre-12th century date. Too many hours at work as of late I hope, and not some sort of early-onset senility. Yes, the specific references to aketons in all their various spelling appear in the late 12th century per every scholar I have checked and as I noted in my previous postings which Nathan linked.

The earliest clear depiction of a padded armor over mail does appear in a Spanish apocalypse of about 1220. I don't know if that's what popped out of my brain during the alluded brain fart or not. Damn, I hadn't even had a beer before I posted.

mea culpa

RandallMoffett wrote:the assize of arms I see. It seems Henry II did this on the continent first so it could be somewhat earlier use than 1181. As far as before the crusades I have not heard that before.

Hi Randall

Any idea when Henrey enacted this in his contenental dominion, be nice to push back stand-alone padded armour if only by a few years.

Cheers
N.

Nathan,

the edict of La Mans 1180. It also is likely that he would not make something brand new a required item for all freemen. I figured it would need to be in large enough circulation that anyone could own one. This assize is actually much more detailed than the one issued in England. Edward III makes COP's required for men at arms and armed men in the 1330's but the COP or armoured surcoat had been around for probably 80 years in some form by then. It seems to be that way for most arms and armour from the laws I have read over.

Here is a past post on this that has indication of padding worn under mail in the 13th. The one is a saga that indicates it was done in the past as well.
It should be revived if anyone has new info...

http://forums.armourarchive.org/phpBB2/ ... hp?t=70174

Cheers!

RPM

Just something to perhaps add to the idea of padding under armour. In this pic. Jonathan has his coif down and the King Saul revealing what appears to the the padded collar of a aketon.

http://www.medievaltymes.com/courtyard/ ... 24ra&b.gif

just like the one this guy is wearing without armour---
http://www.medievaltymes.com/courtyard/ ... 27va&b.gif

RPM

found a picture of a carved candlestick of the betrayal in San Paolo fuori la Mura, Rome that shows a padded garment under mail from 1170.

RPM

Nice one, Randall. I've never noticed this before - so, evidence in the Mac Bible of aketons worn under the mail!

Got a picture of the candlestick? Always helps to get it earlier...

It is in the Norman osprey book by D. Nicolle. No other picture could be found online though..... Pity is has nice vertical lines looks thick and everything.

RPM

Egfroth,

In Byzantium what date is padded armour seem to be first used? Is it a continuation of old roman under armour?

RPM

I'm not Egfroth, but I'm pretty sure troops under Constaitine were wearing padded garments as "thick as could be stitched". Linen armour goes back another two-three thousand years in the middle-east. As far as extant remains, I believe there's some linothorax cuirasses from macedonia and greece. But by the time of Maruice(7th century I hink), you had widespread use of padded garments in te Skutatoi/Kontaratoi regiments. Only after the 9th century do infantry begin to pick up alot more armou in the byzantium army.

I really have trouble understanding why some form of padding beneath the armour wouldn't be worn. Was it just not something people wanted to do, or what? Did legionaires just wear a simple tunic beneath their lorica hamata? Was this tunic multi-ply, or just a single layer? Was it padded or not?

RandallMoffett wrote:It is in the Norman osprey book by D. Nicolle. No other picture could be found online though..... Pity is has nice vertical lines looks thick and everything.

RPM

This looks to be it, right?

Well, it certainly shows something under the mail, but I'd be a bit wary of stating that it was a definitive representation of padding. It could be, but it could be other things as well (such as a tunic forced into pleats by the weight of the mail). Is there a better picture available?

Just trying to be advocatus diaboli here. I'd love to see definitive proof of aketons earlier - preferably as early as 1066, so I could wear it - but so far no luck.

I dont know about 1066, but I would take that as proof enough (under a "trial reconstruction" heading). The lines head all the way down to the bottom, leading me to think that it wasnt pleating. The lines also tend to be pretty evenly spaced, arguing against folds in the fabric. And the fact that there are two representative images, both with the same vertical lines (the guy to the left has one on as well), seem to indicate a padded garment. I would argue that this, combined with teh Assise of Arms mentioned earlier, would be enough to establish for me personally, the authentication of gambesons under maille (with sufficient documentation). The second link has a bigger picture that tends to put it in perspective (had a hard time visualizing the rest of the picture, and what I was seeing).

Is it just me, or is that frikkin huge candlestick? Or is it really fine detail work?

I agree it may not be concrete but looking at it I'd say it looks unlike any tunic I have seen in the era. As Oswyn said I cannot really see it as much else. I think the devil advocate is good though for more interpretation.

We also have the story of Richard I where it gives an account of him jousting and it lists the layers. Written likely before the second decade of the 13th it likely was an event of the late 12th and lists the mail over gambeson. Apart from the two assizes listing they existed I am sure there is more still to be dug up.

I think it would be nice to find evidence for 1066. The only thing I can say is for the pure periodists, per the bayeaux tapestry you would have to go commando if you did not reason they had something on under and it might as well be someting protective and useful. Perhaps not a gambeson but good grief that'd be painful....

RPM

Christophe,

Thanks for finding them. I hope they were not too much trouble to find. I hope you do not mind me shuffling them into my picture folder for fututre use..

RPM

RandallMoffett wrote:We also have the story of Richard I where it gives an account of him jousting and it lists the layers. Written likely before the second decade of the 13th it likely was an event of the late 12th and lists the mail over gambeson.

To save me wading through a lot of old text, any idea where?

N.