Alternatve profiles of 14th and 15th century cuirasses

[PartsAndTechnical]

The subject of 'profiles and lines' comes up a lot. Ive been kicking around some ideas lately; more like pushing forward with some observations on a new cuirass to see how it turns out. I seem to notice two fairly distinct shapes in late 14th and early 15th century cuirasses.

Regardless of height or central apex creases, which can vary a bit:


--one cuirass shape appears to be fairly uniform globosity from side-to-front-to-side

--while the other appears to have slightly higher profile peak. Its almost as if approximately between the sides and center this alternative cuirass flattens just a bit, allowing the profile peak to rise upward a bit. Im not suggesting a wasp or even greyhound look, as the shape would not be terribly different if viewing it from the front. Only the side profile or a 3/4 angle would begin to show a slight difference. Ive been wondering if its just me (always a possibility ) or if there was some degree of interest in shaping cuirasses to increase its glancing ability.

Off hand I cant think of any specific effigies or extant examples but I thought Id kick off a discussion, see what you all think.

[jarlragnar]

You should post some images to illustrate what you're talkng about, too. Me, I think the greyhound look comes from a globose BP, but a fauld that is pretty flat in front. The wasp waist is evident when viewed head on. I would love to hear from more who are especially knowledgeable on the subject.

[PartsAndTechnical]

Working on photos...

[jarlragnar]

beautiful.

[zachos]

Like this one?:

[jarlragnar]

Like this one?:

That's interesting. I figured there would be a placard on that guy. Speaking of proper profiles, you, my friend have one nice kit that few could squeeze into. Kudos and whatnot.

[PartsAndTechnical]

To put it more succinctly, I think I am seeing patterns in two types of 14th and early 15th cuirasses:


--a lower peak style, possibly with more depth to the curved sides (churburg 13 or even churburg 14)

and

--a slightly higher peak (occasionally less curved/seemingly more shallow shape and sides as depicted in effigy post above ) and often with a crease resulting in a more knee cop/arch shaped cuirass.


If indeed this is a true pattern, the questions arise as to why?....clearly a crease down the front helps with strength and deflecting direct impacts. Could this apexual shape be designed to decrease likelihood of blades moving upward toward the throat?

[jarlragnar]

Or maybe since the arms and legs have medial ridges, it made sense to the armourer (or effigy carver) to be consistent and put one on the body. Who knows.

[Galfrid atte grene]

I tend to see type II on germanic effigies, and type I on english and french effigies. Maybe a regional style?

[PartsAndTechnical]

I tend to see type II on germanic effigies, and type I on english and french effigies. Maybe a regional style?

YES Galfrid I think you may be right about that, Ive thought something very similar.

Ive seen a few English images of the type IIs, but nothing I can immediately recall as extant or in effigial prominence.

[PartsAndTechnical]

I tend to see type II on germanic effigies, and type I on english and french effigies. Maybe a regional style?

YES Galfrid I think you may be right about that, Ive thought something very similar.

Ive seen a few English images of the type IIs, but nothing I can immediately recall as extant or in effigial prominence.

I seem to think a type III, (often segmented with a type I bulbous shape, but seemingly higher and occasionally with a central crease like type II) appears in a lot of eastern European art.

Now the question is whether this is a real trend or a product of the various art schools. I suspect there is something to it all, but I dont think we can really prove it unless Talbot (ahem, ahem, cough, cough) undertakes one of his exhausting yet sexy effigial and art research projects to track trends.

[jarlragnar]

When you guys refer to " type I, type II, etc." are you referring to a typology that is floating around on this board somewhere? This conversation might make a lot more sense to me if there's something else to look at.

[Galfrid atte grene]

jarlragnar, no, that is just the order in which P&T described them.


The particular shape being a product of the sculptor's preference rather than a reflection of reality is something I considered as well. I know proportions are not always well-represented on such monuments. But, given the detail of the depiction of other parts of the armour, I'm not sure I'd attribute the difference in shape to the sculptor. I think a reasonable way to verify would be to compare art in another medium and see if the difference holds true.