11th/12th Century Gambessons

[Flosi]

As it is quite commonly accepted that padded garments were generally worn post-hastings I am looking for period sources talking about the manufacture and appearance of the padded armour of the time. Can anyone help me in my search?

[nathan]

Ok you have mentioned hastings therefore i assume you are looking at a norman 'impression'.

This is something i have looked into recently (need a new Gamby and would prefer to make something as period as possible).

When exactly a specialised undergarment became common under mail is still very unclear.

David Croutch in "Tournament" states (without supplying any evidence) that "the equiptment of he early [1100] knight included these essential items: a helmet; a padded coat, over which was dropped a chain-mail hauberk, often with a hood of mail" he does go on to state that the Similitudo "defined the early twelfth-century equiptment as a hauberk of chain mail, helmet, shield (worn on the left side", spurs, lance and sword." he cites Memorials of St Anselm, ed. R. W. Southern and F. S. Schmitt, 97-102.

The following is an indirect direct qoute from Ralph Niger (a cannon of Lincoln in 1187) taken form the same book "It is the custom for the knights of this world firstly to fix thier spurs th thier shoes, and then to protect their feet, legs and groin with mail leggings. After that they throw thier hauberks over the rest of thier body and arrange it arround thier bodies and limbs with a belt. After that they put on thier helmets and lace them up to thier hauberks and their heads, and finally belt on thier swords. After that they take up their lances and shields..."

The Assize of Henry II (1181) specifies that a landed free men with moveable property worth more than 16 marks should maintain a "aubergel" (mailshirt) but a burgess should maintain a "Wambais" (gambeson) instead.

What i am trying to get at here is that in this part of the medieval period even where we are getting references to gambesons worn on thier own they are not being mentioned in the descriptions of people owning or putting mail on.

You can take this one of two ways:
They don't mention it because it's obvious/irellavent (they are not mentioning that the knight has any clothes on at all (bar shoes).
They don't mention it because they didn't do it.

In an anecdote related to us by Gerald of Wales we have the following snippet (During a Welsh attack on Abergevenny Castle in 1182, two soldiers flee into the keep) "one of the men at arms was struck by an arrow shot at him by a Welshman. It went right through his thigh, high up, where it was protected outside and inside the leg by his mail chausses, then through the skirt of his leather tunic; next it penetrated that part of the saddle that is called the alva or seat; and finally it lodged in his horse, driving in so deep that it killed the animal. An arrow pinned the thigh of another soldier to his siddle , althought the tassets of his leather tunic were there to protect him." The Great Warbow M Strikland & R Hardy, p. 44

I don't have acess to the original text, perhaps somebody out there does and can confirm the 'leather tunic' is an accurate translation. If so perhaps that is what we should be looking at (a thick leather tunic would provide some cushioning, and protect the clothes underneath and so would fill the gap left by the gambeson).

Sorry, the above may be of little help.
N.

[Ernst]

As it is quite commonly accepted that padded garments were generally worn post-hastings I am looking for period sources talking about the manufacture and appearance of the padded armour of the time. Can anyone help me in my search?

I don't know that the wearing of padded armors under mail as early as the 11th century is "commonly accepted". It seems to be commonly presumed, assumed, and wished for by a great many people.

As noted by the previous post, the earlist documnent mentioning these in England dates to 1187, where the padded armor is an alternate to mail, not a supplement to it. The earliest pictoral source seems to be Iberian circa 1220, showing Nebuchadnezzar's guards wearing short-sleeve, Maciejowski-style gambesons over mail. Since these are "wicked" figures, one might suggest such garments were adapted from Moors or Saracen. The etymology of the word "aketon" seems likely to point toward a Middle-Eastern, cotton growing region as a source.

[Dunkeljorm]

I have a couple of XII century carvings in wich the gambeson can be noticed under the chain mail. I will try to post these pics ASAP.

[Caithlinn]

Hi,

The original text of the "Itinerarium Kambriae" can be found in the BNF (gallica, Recherche libre: N050180), on page 54. Is says (as far as I can read it):

"Accidit et tempore Guillelmi de Breusa, ipso testante, quemdam militem suum, in conflictu contra (Gualenses?), a quodam ipsorum per mediam coxam, cum panno loricae ac ocreali ferro utrinque vestitam, sagitta percussum esse; eadem quoque sagitta per partem illam sellae, quae Alva vocatur, usque in ipsum equuum letaliter transpenetrante. Alia quoque sagitta militis alterius coxam, ferro similiter utrinque munitam cum panno loricae, usque in sellam perforavit. Et cum miles ille loris equum in gyrum flecteret, alia sagitta, eodem contorquente, in opposita coxa similem fetum suscepit, equo ab utraque parte firmiter affixus. "

A more direct translation, but still not quite literal, can be found at the Gutenberg project page:

"William de Braose also testifies that one of his soldiers, in a conflict with the Welsh, was wounded by an arrow, which passed through his thigh and the armour with which it was cased on both sides, and, through that part of the saddle which is called the alva, mortally wounded the horse. Another soldier had his hip, equally sheathed in armour, penetrated by an arrow quite to the saddle, and on turning his horse round, received a similar wound on the opposite hip, which fixed him on both sides of his seat."

It looks like loricae was translated with leather tunic ..... I am not too familiar with all the different terms for lorica, but my rudimentary latin makes it something along the lines of "plate" or "harness" I am not quite sure how it can be used here....

Hope this helps,

Caithlinn

[Dunkeljorm]

Good news guys! The original text give us the solution. Infact "Panno loricae" means exactly "Armor made with cloth (or with rags)".

It's quite clear that it is a padded garment.

[Oswyn_de_Wulferton]

Maybe I am missing something, but last I checked, mail did nothing for the impact of a blow (force, not cut). The way maille was first explained to me was the medieval version of kevlar (bear with me, this has a point.) The problem with kevlar (and anyone shot wearing a kevlar vest can back me up) is that you still have all of the force and it feels like you just kicked in the chest by a horse. As far as I understand the properties of maille, the same thing would apply. Why wouldnt they have worn something (insert your popular clothing idea here) to have a little give before the force got to your body? I understand this is the historical section, but sometimes logical reasoning has a point (yes they could have had steam engines too but they had other types of liners. Maille doesnt stop broken bones but broken bones put you out of a fight about as much as a cut would (especially compound fractures). Just my .02 and feel free to chew apart anything I said here with better evidence.

[Flosi]

Well, one of the reasons I am doing this is because I am wanting to explore the various arguements about the use of padding in the early medieval period. I have managed to get my hands on a copy of the translation of 'de rebus bellicis' which is the oft quoted roman evidence for the padded jack in books such as kim siddorns 'Viking Weapons and Warfare' and I am now trying to collate information about the earliest references to padding post roman.

I am sure its something that has been done before, but I like to work from as close to the original source as possible so that I do not have to rely on the opinions of others.

I don't know that the wearing of padded armors under mail as early as the 11th century is "commonly accepted". It seems to be commonly presumed, assumed, and wished for by a great many people.

You are quite right. When I say 'commonly accepted' I am refering to the re-enactors convention of wearing padding, and I should have been clearer.

[Ernst]

Good news guys! The original text give us the solution. Infact "Panno loricae" means exactly "Armor made with cloth (or with rags)".

It's quite clear that it is a padded garment.

But isn't the text from Gerald of Wales dated to 1188, one year after the English assize lists such armors as an alternative to mail? If the arrow were listed as having passed through a mail hauberk (osbergum, lorica ferro, etc.) and then pierced the "panno loricae" and saddle, then you would have evidence of a padded armor being worn under mail for this time, which is still over a century past the Conquest. No one has suggested that padded gambesons were not in use by the 1180's, merely that there isn't any evidence that they were worn beneath mail that early.

[Dunkeljorm]

Hello,
Here there are the pics of a XII cent. carving, it is located in Issoire
(Puy-de-Dôme), Saint Austremoine Church:




Quite interesting, isn't it?

[Ernst]

Certainly the paint is restored. Has the capital been restored as well? My first impression might be that these are folds of the tunic worn beneath the hauberk.

[Glen K]

The trick with the "11th century gambesons" argument is that there simply isn't anything definitive pro or con. I've noticed that a lot of people on both sides of the issue (in an intellectual/professional way, usually) tend to go to lengths to dispute the other side's arguments: folks who really want there to be gambesons look at every drawing/carving/tapestry and say "there, you can see the padding beneath" while others say "no, there's no way that can be anything but a tunic". It's hard to keep an open mind, unfortunately, since this is probably the most hotly-contested question in the world of 11th century arms and armour.

Until we unearth something to shed absolute light on the subject one way or another, my take is this: as far as reenactment/living history kit is concerned, if you make a good attempt at research and contruction, and can make a reasoned argument, that's the best any of us can do.

[Ernst]

Glen,
I think the interpretation of art is difficult and often open to interpretation. I think inventory records and other literary evidence combined with the visual arts make it less likely that these garments are gambesons, aketons, etc. and more likely that they represent gored and draped tunics. I'm not 100% sure of it, and would gladly accept the possibility or likelyhood of padded armors in use during the 11th century if someone can provide more definitive evidence.

[nathan]

No one has suggested that padded gambesons were not in use by the 1180's, merely that there isn't any evidence that they were worn beneath mail that early.

I was actually coming from this general direction, specifically absense of primary evidence of mail worn over a padded layer. Having taken a good hard look at what i could prove given the evidence I had seen I had come to the conclusion that i couldn't prove that padding was worn under mail at any point in the medieval (say C5th to C15th) period in Western Europe.

Once we get into the later end of the medieval period we start seeing padded garments worn _over_ mail or plate and have clear evidence for this practice (Jupons).

Dunkeljorm, your translation of "Panno loricae" as "Armor made with cloth (or with rags)" is interesting. I don't read latin, perhaps you migth share your opinion on the whole sentence. "cum panno loricae ac ocreali ferro utrinque vestitam", is this implying cloth/rag armour worn in conjuntion with iron (ferro being iron? and vestitam being a verb that implies wearing??).

Whilst i am happy that cloth armour exists by the period specified this would help me better understand if they were worn in conjunction (and therfore by the images from the period mail on top of padding).

I think inventory records and other literary evidence combined with the visual arts make it less likely that these garments are gambesons, aketons, etc. and more likely that they represent gored and draped tunics.

The artistic traditions of C12th NW Europe seem quite able to depict gores and drapes in an (admittedly) stylised but 'realistic' way (i.e. horizontal cuves). Carving from the period is particularly well suited to realistic-ish (technical term) depictions of these features of clothing (unlike embroidery/tapestry, probably the worst medieval art form for detail and precision). In this instance i am seeing evenly spaced verticle lines, this doesn't suggest to me that what we are seeing is draping (include the usual caviats about 'restoration' here). Of all the images i have been shown as evidence for padding under mail around this period, this is the least tunic-like.

Taken in conjunction with the translation of gerald of wales this could be a (relativeley) clear indication that the practice of wearing mail and padding in conjunction) was being done by the end of the C12th.

The trick with the "11th century gambesons" argument is that there simply isn't anything definitive pro or con. I've noticed that a lot of people on both sides of the issue (in an intellectual/professional way, usually) tend to go to lengths to dispute the other side's arguments: folks who really want there to be gambesons look at every drawing/carving/tapestry and say "there, you can see the padding beneath" while others say "no, there's no way that can be anything but a tunic".

How depressingly true this is Glen.

N.
(who makes his posts seem really long by quoting half the thread

[Flosi]

The main thing that I am trying to trace from this is if there are any descriptions that match those out of 'De Rebus Bellicis', the 4th C Roman text. For those that are interested, here are the exact quotes out of the translation I have in regards to armour (taken from 'A Roman Reformer and Inventor' by E A Thompson - 1954):

Specification of the Thoracomachus

Among all the inventions devised for military purpose by the ancients in their forethought for future generations we have the Thoracomachus - a wonderfully useful article for relieving physical discomfort - which they invented to counter the weight and friction of armour. For this kind of garment, which is made to measure from felt to protect the human body, was worked out of soft wool by the ingenuity that comes of anxious fear, so that, when it had been donned first, a cuirass (or mail shirt) or the like would not injure the sensitive body through the friction caused by its weight. The limbs of the wearer, too, will be adequate for their work when aided by this comfort amid the vicissitudes of war and weather.

In case the weight of the Thoracomachus itself should be increased when it is sodden with rain and should thereby hamper the wearer, it will certainly be advisable to wear on top of it a similar garment made of well-prepared Libyan fleeces to the cut of the Thoracomachus.

So when, as we have said, the soldier has donned the Thoracomachus (which has adopted the name from the Greek because it protects the body) and put on socci too (that is, boots), and iron greaves, with a helmet on his head and a shield and sword fitted to his side and has caught up his lances in his hand he will be fully armed to enter an infantry battle.

There is also mentioned, later on when talking about the equipment:

It will be advisable for the troops, however, when moving through icy regions, to be protected by the Thoracomachus and armed with other pieces of equipment relating to the protection, as their physical well being demands, so that they can endure the cold and counter missiles, equipped with only small shields. This prevents - a thing that often happens in practise - dense woods from becoming impenetrable owning to the size of the men's shields, and a refuge from being lost owing to the cumbersomeness of their shields.

Reviewing this translation I can understand why people argue that padding was worn earlier on, which is why I am looking for similar descriptions in in the later period. It certainly demonstrates, in my eyes, an early knowledge about the comfort and protection added by the use of specialised arming garments. Although this does not prove the use of them carried on, I was hoping a later document may have something in common with this description.

[Ernst]

Nathan's caveat concerning restoration work weighs heavily on my mind, as a few Google searches for St. Austremoine reveal the abbey church to have been "restored" in the 1830s. Relying on a possibly 19th century carving for evidence of 11th century gambesons is asking for problems.

The translation of Gerald can also add confusion. Are "occreali ferro" (literally 'greaves of iron') really greaves, or mail chausses?

[Dunkeljorm]

Hello again and, as ever, sorry for the delay.

My translation is "covered (dressed) with a cloth armour and iron greaves" in my opinion the term "greaves" here means "mail chausses", keep in mind that in latin there isn't any term that indicates chausses, so here have been used a "generic" term. If we take a look on two different scripts, one written in the Classical period and one in the middle ages maybe we can find the term "olla" (pan) in each one, maybe shape, materials and so on are changed but the term is the same 'cose the function is the same.

This is just a "stupid" example, but I think that it's enough to understand what I want to say (even if I didn't make too much grammar mistakes) .

For what concern the carvings in St. Austremoine, I really doubt that they are a 19th cent "remake", the style used in this kind of stuff is obviously different, you can be sure about it.