Covered breastplates in the 14th Century?

[Graham Ashford]

Hello all

I have made a globose breastplate and before cleaning it up I was wondering whether anyone had come across covered globose? I have seen them when used in conjuction with a plackart (like kinniekat's recent and excellent version) and when the breastplate is part of a corrizina or similar. But wondered about when used simply as a globose over maille?

Any thoughts?

Kind regards

Graham

[Angusm0628]

Murdock did a covered globose for the CotT two years ago. Not sure exactly who he based it off though.

[knitebee]

This is the most published and recognized one, I believe it resides in Munich.

http://houseasgard.com/asgardpic/armorh ... plate1.jpg

[es02]

Theres a rather pretty one in Italy too, similar to the munich (minus the faulds) but with extra decoratve rivets.

I wonder if the lack of rivets across the bottom edge suggests t orgiginally had a fauld?

[chef de chambre]

This is the most published and recognized one, I believe it resides in Munich.

http://houseasgard.com/asgardpic/armorh ... plate1.jpg

Yes, but it isn't 14th century. It is early 15th century.

[chef de chambre]

Theres a rather pretty one in Italy too, similar to the munich (minus the faulds) but with extra decoratve rivets.

I wonder if the lack of rivets across the bottom edge suggests t orgiginally had a fauld?

Most likely. It looks like it may have had a lance rest too. Again, it is an early 15th century piece, rather than a 14th century one.

[es02]

Theres a rather pretty one in Italy too, similar to the munich (minus the faulds) but with extra decoratve rivets.

I wonder if the lack of rivets across the bottom edge suggests t orgiginally had a fauld?

Most likely. It looks like it may have had a lance rest too. Again, it is an early 15th century piece, rather than a 14th century one.

All the dating I have for the Venice BP is 1396, the Munich 1390. Why do you believe they are later?

[chef de chambre]

Theres a rather pretty one in Italy too, similar to the munich (minus the faulds) but with extra decoratve rivets.

I wonder if the lack of rivets across the bottom edge suggests t orgiginally had a fauld?

Most likely. It looks like it may have had a lance rest too. Again, it is an early 15th century piece, rather than a 14th century one.

All the dating I have for the Venice BP is 1396, the Munich 1390. Why do you believe they are later?

Neither breatplate is dated that firmly by anyone. Both match breastplate styles seen in art as late as the 1460's. The late 14th century dating is usually put there by people with a really keen desire for them to be that, but no data that firm to place them in it. At best, I have seen a CA 1400 on the Munich example, which gives a 5 year leeway in either direction.

A lance rest is a dead giveaway for a 15th century date.

[RandallMoffett]

Why would a lance rest be a dead give away for the 15th century? Since they are in use in the 14th, is it a real indication to the earlier or later date? Even if it is more common in the 15th over 14th, this in and of itself does not preclude the earlier date. Breastplates with lance rests show up in text by 1380-1390, the best known I can think of being from Chaucer as well as artwork .

As far as the decorative rivets as an indication I do not think it has to be a sign of the 15th century either. Patterns of half circles and the likes are found in 14th century artwork as well as the 15th. An example from the 14th is Sir Ralph de Kneyvnton from c. 1370, same exact set up as the Munich example. down to the faulds.

That said I see no reason why it could not be early 15th century as they were in use for a decent space of time but I see little reason to exclude the last few decades of the 14th either.

RPM

[chef de chambre]

Actually Randal, having posted in haste this morning, the full faulds are the final identifying mark for probable date. Do you really have any examples of complete sets of faulds encompassing the hip from the 14th century?

An example from the 14th is Sir Ralph de Kneyvnton from c. 1370, same exact set up as the Munich example. down to the faulds

No, I think that is not a case that can be made, for you are comparing a coat of plates, a most likely construction of multiple plates over the abdomen, with what here is clearly a covered cuirasse of plate.

Come on, an exact date of 1396 is ludicrous, how did they deduce that? Unless it bears the mark of a plattener who deceased at that date, or a year or two after, there is no way you can claim such a precise date. There are a whole series of identifiers giving an early 15th century date far more probable for either piece, when taken altogether. Looking at Italian art, through Boccia's work, a date of 1410-1420 is far more likely.

On the one, we have the most probable pendant fauld, the lance rest and the stop ribs, the other is more clearly seen commonly in early 15th century effigies. In the 1390's in Northern Europe, we see a hell of a lot more images of armour covered by gambesons - the intellectual shift made by the 14th century afficianados is that somehow, they have complete cuirasse as seen circa 1400-1420 underneath, when we have effigies showing exposed breastplates over gambesons, with no faulds, and the only two solidly documentable 14th century breastplates lack faulds - both late 14th century in date.

[RandallMoffett]

Chef,

I really do not think that Kneyvnton is a COP at all. To me, adjusting for the artistic style of the effigy stretching the torso out which is similar to other 14th century art, it is a basic covered one part breastplate with attached faulds. The fact that the half circle of rivets are complete and not compact as they would have to be for a smaller solid plate over the torso to the thoracic diaphragm like the Bavarian COP, while Ralph's terminating just above or at the navel indicates full breastplate to me. That said I think his faulds likely stop just past the groin or there about. I think Sir Ralph likely is wearing something similar to the breastplate with faulds found in the Pistoia Altar piece but perhaps a tad longer, straight edge of the bottom fauld and fabric covered.

Now how far down the faulds were in the 14th would take some time for me to review. I agree that it is likely they grew longer to cover more of the thigh but I an not sure the Munich faulds would cover drastically more than the artist is depicting in the Kneyvnton effigy. Now as far as the exact dates for these two covered breastplates I do not know how they arrived at such specific dates. I have never found enough information available on how they were dated to argue one way or the other, only that there are enough textual and artistic evidence for covered breastplates and faulds that it does not set my radar alert off.

RPM

[chef de chambre]

Randall, I don't think you can realistically alter the perspective of the Effigy in question, and come to any firm conclusion about detail of construction such as you are making. It is akin to trying to make Gumby's body shape more closely resemble a human beings.

If he had a solid breastplate, and complete faulds, he is ahead of every other contemporary depiction out there. Frankly, I think he is in a fitted coat of plates as depicted more realistically on the Prague St. George, rather than being a solitary depiction of a development we have no other evidence for from the beginning of the third quarter of the century.

[RandallMoffett]

I cannot disagree that his proportions are very askew, though I still think the way it is done looks more like a solid BP and faulds but I can see your point completely... and he does look a bit gumbyish. But since nearly 90% of the effigies of his time are covered in surcoats who knows if he was isolated or not, yet this alone makes his effigy so important. A rare view of what was under the surcoat This to me is perhaps one of the most difficult aspects of IDing this period's torso armour.

I think the evidence of related armour is still pretty good. We have a large number of fabric covered breastplates in text starting in the second half of the 1350s onward so there I do not think there is an issue. The Register of Edward, The Black Prince includes breastplates; some that are covered in fabric, one being black velvet with white feathers, maybe for his jousting gear. Now whether or not they have faulds is any ones guess. Even in 15th century inventories faulds likely are omitted as they are simply included in the cuirass. As far as faulds in the second half of the 14th the Pistoia is still the best that comes to mind having multiple examples.

RPM

[es02]

Dieter von Hohenberg (1381) has what looks like a cuirass with faulds

And Gerhard von Rieneck (1382)

And Beringer Von Berlichingen (1377)

Also the Churburg #13 has a lance rest and a stoprib. The C#14 has the rivet holes for a lance rest.

Now detachable lancerests I will happily accept as a 15thC indicator although there appears to be one in the otepaa castle collection dated to 1396.

[chef de chambre]

Dieter von Hohenberg (1381) has what looks like a cuirass with faulds

And Gerhard von Rieneck (1382)

And Beringer Von Berlichingen (1377)

Also the Churburg #13 has a lance rest and a stoprib. The C#14 has the rivet holes for a lance rest.

Now detachable lancerests I will happily accept as a 15thC indicator although there appears to be one in the otepaa castle collection dated to 1396.

All three effigies seem to have what appears to be a seperae fauld, or apron. Note the deliniating line, and the edge of the breastplate over the fauld. In point of fact, it could be a seperate breastplate worn over a coat of plates.

Nobody debates breastplates existed, a breastplate is not an entire cuirasse. Once more, the only two solidly dateable breastplates to the 14th century exist - both of which you mention, neither of which has an integral pendant fauld, and neither of which was made to have one.

[Talbot]

Here is a list of covored globose breastplates from the later 14th and early 15th centuries

Bayerisches Nationalmuseum, Munich, Germany
Inventory Number: W195

Southampton Museums Service, England
Inventory Number: A.2000.79.106 (VERY fragmentary)

Monastero Di San Lazzaro Degli Armeni, Venice, Italy

Institute of History of the University of Tallinn, Estonia

Institute of History of the University of Tallinn, Estonia

Institute of History of the University of Tallinn, Estonia

Westfälisches Museum für Archäologie, Münster, Germany
Inventory Number: M 1737/K 198

Private Collection. Sold in Munich in 1989

[chef de chambre]

Just to reiterate, or clarify my point.

1. Clearly breastplates existed in the 14th century. Apparently, going by written evidence, plastrons of iron may have been worn under or over mail as early as the late 13th century. What we see in many of the German images is much more probably, in my thinking, to be a seperate breastplate, be it worn over a coat of plates, or a gambeson. I will point to the two extant 1440 jacks from Lubeck which specifically were manufactured to have a breastplate worn over them as a probable example of what we are seeing.

In other words, I think that the cuirasse with pendant faulds seen in early 15th century context likely developed from the idea of wearing a large breastplate in conjunction with a coat of plates, as seen in German art and sculpture of the last quarter of the 14th century. What you see in Late 14th century Italian art is usually small, incomplete sets of faulds, not hip-encompassing ones.

2. My point is that the Munisch breastplate has far more 15th century than 14th century characteristics. I would be far more comfortable dating it circa 1410, and FAR more evidence in art, of much better quality exists to support such a dating, than exists to support a pre 1400 position.