some questions on breastplates, backplates and scaled faulds

[Armourkris]

I'm building a suit of armour fro a friend of mine, he's trading me shop monkey work and new tools, and I get to build some plate, so win win i figure.
I've got about 8 hours into it so far which amounts to having the breastplate patterned, and mostly shaped. I'll get some pictures of it up tomorrow and some more pertinent questions about it once there are pics for reference.

My general plan of action was to build the breastplate, pattern out the backplate to match, then add on the scale fauld. I may get Sean working on the front half of the fauld once I've got the breast plate shaped, he's already spent a whole bunch of time making scales. Anyways, onto the questions.

Firstly, I've never made a back plate, and i haven't really seen many pics of them, Does anyone have any advice on making one or any pics they would recommend for reference? With the scale fauld we have planned I'm going for 14th century feel. I dont think they show up anywhere else, but possibly some of those funky heroic suits from later in the 15th century had them? I know some had pterguies... and i probably butchered the spelling on that.

next question, Scale faulds, I know I've seen artistic evidence of them, but I cant for the life of me remember where. They are a 14th centure thing though, right? can anyone share some images or references for them?
My plan had been to make a kind of truncated half cone to match the base of the breast/backplate from a couple layers of canvas, rivet the plates to a strip of strapping or some sort then sew the bands of scales to the backing. does that seem reasonable?


I;m sure I'll have more questions tomorrow, thanks for any help you can give guys.

Kris

[Ernst]

On the issue of scale faulds, they are seen in the late 14th and early 15th centuries. There is quite a bit of evidence showing them being worn over tunics or mail as well as with plate breasts, so it seems likely they were a separate piece and not attached. Some forms are a front apron, with limited or no coverage on the back, while others are a full cone, buckling in the back. French,Flemish, and Belgian manuscripts seem to frequently show these scales as latten or leather brown/gold. Here's a few images from the Morgan Library's 15th century collections which haven't made it onto manuscriptminiatures.com yet. I'll tag some examples there as "scale fauld" for further reference.

[Buster]

These are some earlier 14thC examples of scale armour. Though since much of the armour is covered, it's uncertain whether these are faulds or cuirasses.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/trelewis/4 ... /lightbox/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sheepdog_r ... otostream/
http://effigiesandbrasses.com/monuments ... 506/large/
http://effigiesandbrasses.com/monuments ... 408/large/

[Ernst]

The promised tagged items:
http://manuscriptminiatures.com/search/ ... ew=gallery



In the British Library example, some scales have thicker edges than others.

[Pitbull Armory]

I really like the look of scale faulds or skirts. Please post pics when you get time.




Take care

Pb

[Konstantin the Red]

I bet you were faintly recalling Eduard Wagner's Tracht und Waffen a/k/a "Clothing and Weapons, 14th & 15th century." Secondary source, but lots of stuff all under one cover. For some time, it was the easiest reference to consult for stuff kept in Eastern Europe behind the Iron Curtain. You could find some scale faulds in its pages, though just whose and where the originals were could be something of a chase.

Plate backplates: as pieces of white harness they really came into their own in the early fifteenth. By the sixteenth, they could look surprisingly breastplate-like until you compared details: the shoulder blade area could be pretty well raised to give room to wiggle 'em in, almost looking like pectorals. But! The quickest easy distinguisher is the lack of arm cutouts, because arms just don't go back far enough, so that portion of the back of the shoulder could stay rigidly covered. They could be formed pretty far into the small of the back, which also can make the uneducated eye think it looks like a breastplate. 16th-c. backplates also had waist straps attached for buckling the breastplate into place all the way around front. One way of securing breast to back; there were others -- featuring shorter straps. This seems the mode in the 15th; which doesn't altogether take you to the 14th, now does it?

Frankly, for fourteenth century it's easier to swear to just breastplates, solo -- and for your friend, hidden back or spinal-only coverage if he wants it. There are more models of segmented breast than the famed and widely interpreted (sometimes pretty broadly interpreted) Churburg 13 armour's. The rest of them are attested to in artwork of the period -- same method, varied takes on it. And there's the solid globose breast, of very similar profile particularly about the chest and upper belly, of the Churburg 14 armour. There was a certain 14th-c. globose breast style that can't be mistaken for the 15th-century globose model. Yet the latter had its foundation in the former -- same idea, but now two-piece, and a little more bulgy. And a lot more ornate, even a bit fanciful then. 14th-c. stuff was at bottom plain, sober, businesslike. The mid fifteenth with time developed cusps, some flutes, and blingishness. "Just Because We Can" seemed their motto.

The two decades 1390-1410 had the covered breastplate/corrazina, where the fauld mostly or entirely articulated through being riveted into a flexible covering. Quite handsome in its way, but then white harness really took over, and faulds articulated on vertical leathers and slider rivets were the thing for your hips.

[Armourkris]

Alright, thats a whole lotta images to got through, awesome
I'm kind of curious about the context for this one, what with the guys on the right being as tall as men on horseback, largely barefoot, armed with wooden clubs, and my favorite part, they look to have metal unicorn horns. And the anthropomorphic knee cops are pretty bad ass.
http://manuscriptminiatures.com/le-livr ... andre/494/

So here is the breastplate so far, I think I need to push it out a little deeper, but I'm not sure, opinions? We had also considered cutting out the arm holes larger then adding gussets, that pushes us out of the 14th century, but i think it would be a fun feature to add and well, Sean isn't tied to any time frame really, he just wants a steel suit to feel invulnerable in.


IMAG0961 by Armourkris, on Flickr


IMAG0964 by Armourkris, on Flickr

[Ernst]

Alright, thats a whole lotta images to got through, awesome
I'm kind of curious about the context for this one, what with the guys on the right being as tall as men on horseback, largely barefoot, armed with wooden clubs, and my favorite part, they look to have metal unicorn horns. And the anthropomorphic knee cops are pretty bad ass.
http://manuscriptminiatures.com/le-livr ... andre/494/

http://www.bl.uk/catalogues/illuminated ... art=200220
The Alexander Romance has plenty of fantastic adventures, and variants in India and the Islamic world. BL says these are "sword-horned men". Fiction, but portrayed in a context of contemporary knowledge.

[wcallen]

If you want real advice on the shape of the breastplate you really need to post pictures with it on the person. Depending on their shape, it may fit in different ways. My initial reaction is "a little deeper and a little less droop at the center of the waist" but that could be completely off if the wearer has more gut than I am imagining.

Don't put gussets in a 14th c. breastplate. You don't need them. And they aren't right.

Wade

[Pitbull Armory]

Hi, Its looking pretty good so far. Agreed it could be a little deeper but looks nice as is also.

Wade what did you mean by less droop?


Have a good week

Pb

[wcallen]

Hi, Its looking pretty good so far. Agreed it could be a little deeper but looks nice as is also.

Wade what did you mean by less droop?


Have a good week

Pb

It appears to me that the desired waist line in the late 14th c. is straight across the body, not dipping down in the middle of the center of the waist.

The exact opposite is true for late 16th c. breastplates.

Back to 14th... If the person for whom this is being built has a big gut, this might end up with a straight waist. If they are skinny the waist line will be lower in the center than at the sides. I don't think you want that.

Wade

[Pitbull Armory]

Ok Thanks Wade, I see what you mean now, Early musculata had the severe droop you describe that is not correct for 14thc globose.

Kris I think the scale faulds you describe were in fact scale skirts, That method would alow better movement and versatility and just makes more sense to me. I have no factual basis on this theory Its just how I would do it.


Take care

Pb

[Armourkris]

here it is on Sean, I'd say he's size average, no real gut, but not bone and sinew like myself either. If need be I don't think it'll be too difficult to move the waist line around a bit.

IMAG0958 by Armourkris, on Flickr

IMAG0960 by Armourkris, on Flickr

As for gussets, or no gussets, 14th century or 15th century.... Sean's only criteria for this was that he wanted a plate breast and back, with scale around the waist. He doesn't care about period, but I do. So, if scale faulds/skirts show up in the late 14th and early 15th, and having a backplate is also more of a 15th century thing can I tweak this breastplate and bring it into the 15th century? also, do gussets show up in time to still use the scale skirt? Mostly I'd like to give the gussets a shot as I think it's an interesting feature, but if I cant make it fit in and be somewhat period then I wont bother.

As for the fauld or skirt I'm really leaning towards skirt now that I know it's a valid option, I had been worried about the first layer of scales binding on the edge of the breastplate and getting in the way when Sean bent at the waist, but if it's a separate skirt then that should alleviate that problem nicely.

[Jan van Nyenrode]

Gussets are roughly a century later.

Cheers,

Jan

[Jan van Nyenrode]

Just thought of thought of the Churburg n. 13. It has 'sort of' gussets. For details see the thread below.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=153968&p=2337706&hi ... g#p2337706

Cheers,

Jan

[wcallen]

There are some really early gussets on some really high end gothic pieces in the 1490's. Those breastplates don't look anything like what you are making.
There are lots of gussets in the early 16th c. Some of those breastplates look more like what you are making, but scales are right out.

Stick to the late 14th/early 15th.

No gussets.

Looking at the breastplate on him... it isn't bad. A little more shape might be elegant, but it isn't necessary. The waist doesn't look to bad. I think that the droop I see in the front view is mainly an artifact of the shooting angle. You might even it out a little bit.

I would want it wider in the top. Both under the arms (you can bend that out a little bit) and between the arms (nothing you can do about that). Keep the roll narrow and make it as wide as you can.

The goals from their perspective seemed to have been:
Not allow lances etc. into the body cavity (wider at the chest).
To enhance the human form and make the wearer look like he had shape. Remember, fit and flatter, not just fit.

And don't bend the waist out at all "for padding" - he will be fine.

Wade

[Armourkris]

Doh! I was thinking 1500s = 15th century rather than 16th, so definetly no gussets then. There is a bit of droop to the waist, but not as much as the photo shows. I'll have to double check next time he's over, but i think it was only about a half inch or so. In any case the flare is still rough and will get moved around a bit still.
Fit wise, i was planing on bending it out under his arms a bit anyways since it's a bit snug there to allow for the backplate to underlap, especially if he wears more than a t shirt under it. I had also thought about pulling in the waist a bit to add to that hourglass shape.
How much wider would you make the chest? I dont know how much more i can do without loosing too much of his mobility, then again, i dont often find myself trying to touch my elbows together in armour either. I was thinking that i could fudge it a bit wider by putting the rolls onto another piece and flush riveting them ino place woth the rolls flush to the breastplate to hide the seam. I think i recall seeing someone else here do somethung similar not too long ago.

On an unrelated note, i hope my house has power back ok tomorrow, because my phone has a screen about the size of a matchbook and a keyboard about half that. I've been fighting to type this for almost an hour now and i'm really missing my computer right about now.

[Armourkris]

So I let this fall behind the wayside a bit, But here is the most recent picture I've got of the breast and back. I don't have a picture of them all strapped up, but My buddy's been the proud owner of the finished breast and back for a few months now. I'm really happy with how the back plate turned out, I think if anything I might have put in a bit too much shape to it, but it looks nice. I'm considerably less happy with the rolls around the arm holes, in retrospect I should have waited till I had the breast and back shaped then rolled them both at the same time instead of trying to match them up after the fact, it also would have almost definitely turned out better if I hadn't done the rolls on he back while I was drunk.

The scale fauld is what's on the go now.
tonight I'm making up a new template for the scales, then Sean has a buddy with access to a CNC laser cutter, so we're going to scrap the hundred or so scales we had started and get the scales all cut out on the CNC save us a lot of time cutting, punching, drilling, and de-burring. The canvas foundation is 3/4 of the way sewn up.


IMAG1335 by Armourkris, on Flickr

IMAG1334 by Armourkris, on Flickr

[Signo]

Why the backplate shoulder top is almost double the width of the front?