The Armour Archive

Hi everyone, I’m planning on moving back to the US soon, and I’m hoping to make it to Pennsic if I get back in time. To that end, I’m thinking about making a ca. 1350s harness (I’m not sure of the region yet, but probably German or English), but I need to keep it simple so that I can build it quickly (a sexier kit will come later...). So it will be a plain great helm, splinted limb protection with floating elbows and knees and a coat of plates.

My main concern for my starter kit, however, is hip and…ahem…posterior protection with the coat of pates. I’ve been doing some research here (particularly here and here) and in my library, and this is what I have come up with as the possible solutions:

Mail shirt (or skirt) extending to mid-thigh with padded backing: This would certainly be the most common period solution, to judge from Douglas Strong’s brilliant effigy analysis, however I will certainly not have time to make a mail skirt before Pennsic. My final kit will have a mail skirt, but I need something faster for now.

Gambeson reaching to mid-thigh: I have not yet found any examples of waist-length COPs worn with thigh-length gambesons where the gamebeson was not also covered by a mail shirt. Still, I imagine this was not infrequently done in period, especially by less well-equipped soldiers. I would prefer to avoid this myself, however, until I have time to make a mail skirt to go with the long gambeson. The uncovered gambeson look doesn't really appeal to me, even if it was fairly common at the time.

Coat of plates with fauld: the only example I could find of a COP with fauld from my period is one from a Genoese trading fortress in at Azov on the Black Sea (see Osprey’s Crusader Knight, 1187-1344, plate J), however the fauld covers only the front, and I am rather more concerned about being covered in back. Anyone have any other references for COPs with faulds?

Scale fauld: I’ve found a handful of depictions of scale faulds, however never in conjunction with a COP. There is an example with a jupon in a painting of the Battle of Crecy, but I am not sure of the date of the painting itself – judging by the rather globose visors on the bascinets, I rather expect the painting dates closer to 1400. There is also the effigy of Johann I von Wertheim, which shows a scale fauld with a globose breastplate, and dates to 1407. Does anyone know of any examples of COPs with scale faulds? If I can find any examples dating to the mid-14th century, I would be well-chuffed, since a scale fauld would look supacool!

A long coat of plates which extends down past the points of the hips. I have read references to longer coats of plates, and Doug Strong mentions them in his analyses, but I’m having trouble finding actual examples. The only one I have found so far is the Lincoln Cathedral misercordia, which is dated a bit vaguely to the 2nd half of the 14th Century. There is also a brigantine from the mid-14th century that goes to mid-thigh (see Osprey’s Italian Militiaman, 1260-1392, plate J), but I'm more interested in COPs (fewer plates = faster construction!). Any references, anyone? I’ve dug around a bit on the effigies site, but no luck so far there.

Any comments or references would be appreciated!!

I'd go with a longer coat of plates. See: Effigy of Rezzo von Bächlingen (c. 1350)

Galfrid atte grene wrote:I'd go with a longer coat of plates. See: Effigy of Rezzo von Bächlingen (c. 1350)

Thanks Galfrid! That's a lot closer to what I have been looking for. Though ideally, I'd like something a bit longer yet, to help protect my rump. Do you know of any COPs longer than this?

Thx!!

Yer supposed to do a Sumerian heavy kit!

Gerhard von Liebau wrote:Yer supposed to do a Sumerian heavy kit!

I'd love to do an Assyrian cataphract kit some day...but the marshalls may object to the tall, pointy helmet...

Yeah, I'm still considering putting together a bronze age kit for heavy combat this Pennsic, but am not sure what I would like to do most - I have several other projects that I'd like done by that time as well, so it would need to be cost and time efficient. Anyway, if you get there and have this 14th century kit off the ground, be sure to check whether or not it's of acceptable quality to be in the Combat of the Thirty! Friggin' amazing fight - I plan on taking a lot of photos of it this year.

-Gerhard

That long CoP is deceiving I think. I doubt that the plates extend so low all around his body, as they would be a great hindrance to movement. Those plates probably only hang low in front and do not offer any hip protection.

After doing much thinking and looking around on this subject, I have surmised that there is no period way to cover your hips with a CoP. The only option is to make the stomach plates a bit longer and wider, so they hang lower and extend a bit over the hip socket, though the protection is still minimal.

Here is an example of a "waist-length COP worn with a thigh length gambeson" without mail dated to 1350.

JoJo Zerach wrote:Here is an example of a "waist-length COP worn with a thigh length gambeson" without mail dated to 1350.

What's to say there's no mail and that that is a gambeson? The way it is pleated gives away the fact that it is a material that is not padded. It looks more like a knight wearing a coat of plates over a light jupon which in all probability has a gambeson and mail below, as was typical. The form of the CoP's shell does not necessarily mean that it had plates as low as the hips. In fact the conformity of the lower section to the angle of the hips suggests that it probably does not. A variety of effigies depict plate armor that extends to the waist in plates but have decorative dags or extended length below. Because it's impossible to tell the location of the plates by giveaways such as rivets or exposed bits of metal, using this to support the idea that this CoP was actually armored down its entire length does not hold up to scrutiny.

-Gerhard

The spirit of the original post was requesting aid in finding a document-able alternative to exposed maille. Not just a longer coat of plates.

Albrecht

PS, Good job JoJo!

Albrechtthesilent wrote:The spirit of the original post was requesting aid in finding a document-able alternative to exposed maille. Not just a longer coat of plates.

Fair enough. I was merely pointing out issues regarding the effigy's actual representation. If you want to use it simply as evidence to suggest that mail was not always exposed, then one has to realize that a long gambeson being worn "without mail" is not the right way to analyze the effigy. The figure is wearing some sort of jupon, which would probably have mail and a padded gambeson beneath. In order to accurately reconstruct the garment worn here to "hide" mail then you'd need to make a jupon, not a gambeson.

And, since the original post brought up the issue of hip protection and a longer coat of plates, it is significant that we cannot assume that this effigy is showing a coat of plates that actually protects the wearer's hips - there is no sign of that in the evidence presented in the sketch.

-Gerhard

Gerhard von Liebau wrote:

JoJo Zerach wrote:Here is an example of a "waist-length COP worn with a thigh length gambeson" without mail dated to 1350.

What's to say there's no mail and that that is a gambeson? The way it is pleated gives away the fact that it is a material that is not padded. It looks more like a knight wearing a coat of plates over a light jupon which in all probability has a gambeson and mail below, as was typical. The form of the CoP's shell does not necessarily mean that it had plates as low as the hips. In fact the conformity of the lower section to the angle of the hips suggests that it probably does not. A variety of effigies depict plate armor that extends to the waist in plates but have decorative dags or extended length below. Because it's impossible to tell the location of the plates by giveaways such as rivets or exposed bits of metal, using this to support the idea that this CoP was actually armored down its entire length does not hold up to scrutiny.

-Gerhard

I was pointing out a way to achieve a historical look without exposed mail.

JoJo Zerach wrote:Here is an example of a "waist-length COP worn with a thigh length gambeson" without mail dated to 1350.

Thanks a ton for the reference, JoJo! While Gerhard may be right that this is not a padded gambeson, it would still allow me to cover my hinder (to general rejoicing, no doubt!) and put some hidden protection in underneath. In fact, it would probably offer the best protection, since it can extend down much farther than a fauld.

I'd still prefer to have some kind of visible armor, if possible, so does anyone have any more info on faulds or scale faulds on mid 14th Century coats of plates?

A long COP is not feasible, I think, as Eltz-Kempenich said. It would seriously hinder movement, and COPs that look long may only do so because the leather or fabric covering was left much longer than the armor itself, often with a fancy dagged lower hem.

Thanks again, JoJo!

Eltz-Kempenich wrote:That long CoP is deceiving I think. I doubt that the plates extend so low all around his body, as they would be a great hindrance to movement. Those plates probably only hang low in front and do not offer any hip protection.

After doing much thinking and looking around on this subject, I have surmised that there is no period way to cover your hips with a CoP. The only option is to make the stomach plates a bit longer and wider, so they hang lower and extend a bit over the hip socket, though the protection is still minimal.

I think a longer COP is feasible, as many well-proportioned effigies depict these.
These two have knee length COPs', with the second one clearly showing plates on the side.
http://effigiesandbrasses.com/monuments/unknown_pembrugge/image/6279/large/
http://effigiesandbrasses.com/monuments/john_leverick/image/3770/large/

This one looks to just cover the hips, then dip down for the groin.
http://effigiesandbrasses.com/monuments/roger_de_salaman/image/5585/large/

The COP's in those effigies are obviously of a diffirent configuration than the Wisby COPs' so perhaps they still offered good mobility.

Thanks a ton for the references, JoJo! The John Leverick effigy in particular is VERY curious!

I imagine they opened at the back - it's pretty clear there is no side opening on Leverick's COP and Roger de Salaman's clearly didn't open at the front. Yet the both seem to hug the figure quite closely. Even if the bottom part of Leverick's COP was split front and back, the garment he wears over it is not, and seems to be laced fairly tight at the sides. I certainly can't imagine sitting on a horse wearing that kind of rig, and walking in it doesn't seem like it would be much easier. But then, I am very likely missing something.

Anyone have any suggestions on how they were put together or how they worked?

The Leverick example is very interesting. It's hard to imagine a coat of plates reaching the knees and being used on horseback, yes - in fact almost impossible to imagine. Even with the way saddles were sometimes situated with a much less relaxed pose in mind (particularly for combat) than we envision today, there is no way one could crouch over a horse with legs exposed only to the knees.

That aside, the details of the Leverick effigy are very fine, and show a number of particular features that give the impression that the artist definitely knew what he was creating based on real experience with the objects. The 19th century sketch cannot be questioned, either. Many photos of the effigy are floating around on the net... Sir Gaston (Chris Gilman) actually used the Leverick effigy for several details on the 14th century harness that he's currently assembling. It might be prudent to ask him what he and anyone who he's talked to about the effigy think of the coat of plates.

For me, one thing that gives away that the length of this CoP should probably be taken literally is the placement of the large belt. Although it typically sat low on a hip-length CoP, it sits high here, correlating to the typical spot it would hang on the hips. If this representation were in fact *too long* and supposed to show a regular length CoP, the belt would have been situated nearer the bottom.

As far as the Pembrugge effigy goes, that is an excellent way to provide coverage, but obviously the lower section of the CoP is not plated due to the way it is draped over the legs. Examples such as that and the previous one Jojo provided are excellent resources for wanting to extend the shell of the CoP low enough to hide any lack of knightliness below.

I still think you should just do Sumerian, Jamie!

I would geusse that the Leverick COP was intended for dismounted combat, but he is also shown wearing his spurs with it.
Leverick's COP most likely opened up the back, but a poncho/surcoat style COP that opened up the sides could give good mobility for walking.
That might be what the first figure I linked is wearing.
(would probably work better if the lower plates weren't overlaped.)

Roger de Salaman's arrangment looks the easiest to figure out, and would protect the hips without impeding movement.

I agree- as unusual as it seems, it certainly appears to be highly accurate, and so most certainly depicts a real piece of armor.

It's a good observation, JoJo, that not overlapping the lower plates would lend a lot more flexibility to it. And splitting it up the sides, like faulds, would certainly improve things. But I do wonder how the original really worked.

It doesn't appear to be split up the sides, and I really can't imagine how he could have walked comfortably in it. My lady kindly demonstrated that walking in a miniskirt of a similar length is quite possible... ...but then, her miniskirt did not have bands of steel riveted into it. Maybe it was split front and back, and the surcoat was flexible enough not to hinder him? Or maybe he had really scrawny thighs?...

When I get back from the English camp I'm teaching at this week, I'm going to have to do some pattern experimentation with card stock.

And Greg, I think I'll stick with my Assyrians. The poor Sumerians only got clunky copper helmets, cloaks, goat-skin kilts and shields the size of doors...and they had a pretty good chance of getting thrown in the burial pit to accompany their king to the afterlife when he died...

Assyrian cataphracts not only didn't get thrown into the graves of their kings, they also got snazzy pointy helmets, long lamellar or scale shirts, and sometimes even scale aventails. Good stuff...

Then question is... Do you have the beard for it?

Alas, I do not have the beard for it. *sigh* I guess I'll have to be a eunuch...*again*...



Thanks for your ideas, everyone. I am intrigued by the long coats of plates, and I think that may well be the direction I take in the end. I'll do a bit of research and start another thread about them specifically once I've gathered my data...