The Armour Archive

I'm working on patterning right now, and that means I am using up leftover aluminum to work the bugs out of the patterns before I commit to steel.

Now, this means the armor I make is not likely to be used for real fighting- though much of it could be.
I'm planning to set most of these aside as costume pieces for another project.

That being said...

I'm thinking that I love the look of rondels instead of wings.
So I'm planning to use rondels instead of wings on the poleyns for the legs.

But-
The original inspiration is the John Beauchamp legs pattern out of the Historical research press pamphlet by Doug Strong.

The only problem is- I can't remember if I've ever seen a harness in the 1388 period that uses rondels instead of wings.
While I am pretty damn sure it was a style in use during the period, I am not quite certain.

Am I misremembering?
This set is for costumery, though its going to be made in 16 gauge aluminum, so it need not be completely accurate.

But its going to really bug the crap out of me until I confirm whether was actually an alternate style in the late 14th century, or had fallen out of fashion by then.
So I'm asking for informed opinions...
Especially since I can't seem to figure out a better search criteria than what I used so far.

I figure 4-5 inch rondels are about the right size, if I go with that.


Thanks.

-Badger-

I don't think I've ever seen rondels used on poleyns in historical art, let alone in the late 14th.

When in doubt wander Galfrid's wonderful site to see what things really looked like.
Step 2 - knees and elbows are often very different. Just because something is common on an elbow doesn't mean they did it on knees and the reverse.

I don't like to say never, but I don't remember rondels on knees in the late 14th c. on realistic armour. I know when I built my cheap mid 14th c stuff I put a rondel on the elbow and the knee just terminates. No wing and no rondel. Strangely enough, they look ok and work well that way.

The dissimilar elbows and knees look a lot like the brasses/effigies and sculptures I see.

Wade

I'm going out on a very subjective limb here, but heres my thoughts. (I also don't immediately recall seeing rondels on early poleyns, but otheres here are far more researched on the matter)

The knees got steel armour pretty much right after the head it seems to me. I've always found that interesting that they were given such protective priority. Given that most folks who could afford cutting edge (at the time) armour were likely of the mounted variety on the field it was pointed out to me at some point that there is a VERY high likelihood of folks in the Joust or in mounted melee combat in general to whack your knees on all manner of things that would really bloody hurt, like other knees, or squishing them between horse and such. I'm not a rider so I don't really have much idea how true this is but it seemed to make sense that the knee got rigid armour before other seemingly more vital parts given the increased vulnerability of that particular body part in a mounted context.

*If the above is true* I have an idea in my head that perhaps one reason we don't see rondels on knees, despite seeing them on elbows, that rondels catch stuff that wings would smoothly deflect. Picture two folks riding at each other with rondels on the outside of their knee and they brush knees together and the rondels catch. While potentially hilarious to watch if neither one was a friend of yours, its probably not so good for the wearers. On a more mundane note having everything you brush up against slide between poleyn and rondel and getting stuck probably got really old really fast.

The consequences of getting something caught under the rondel on an elbow, aren't really so bad.

I may be totally off (an experienced rider I am not) but thats what my imagination produces.

More reliably, a sufficiently deep poleyn really does a decent job at covering the side of the knee and those nice squishy tendons back there. A rondel to provide additional protection from lateral blows isn't as necessary as on the elbow where many more angles of incoming attack are possible and the inner part of the joint isn't always naturally covered by simply facing your attacker.

Short version, rondels go on elbows and shoulders, not on knees AFAIK.

Now see-

This is why I like the archive so much!

I just spent an hour or so perusing Galfrid's site, and now I have to agree.

Rondel poleyns don't seem to exist on effigies, and after taking Wintertree's comments into account, I see that I have to have been mistaken.


I have no idea why I thought rondels carried over into articulated leg defenses, even though I could swear I had seen it.
It may well be that I am remembering a set of couters, and am thinking of them in the wrong context.

so the archive has saved me a great deal of trouble in making something I would not have been happy with later.

Thank you all, most kindly.

-Badger-

IB,

This might be the source of your quest for articulated knees with rondels.



Mac

That is an example.

I am not sure that there are a lot more.

I assume that is a nice mid-15th c illustration. There seem to have been some uses of rondels in odd places around then on Italianate armour. Blair shows some of the odd circular pauldron reinforces around then.

So there is an example of a rondel on an articulated knee. The armour and other details in the picture don't appear to be trying to convey anything antiquated or classical. They seem to be very current. But not from 1388 or anywhere near that time frame.

Wade

Ironbadger wrote:Now see-

This is why I like the archive so much!

I just spent an hour or so perusing Galfrid's site, and now I have to agree.

Rondel poleyns don't seem to exist on effigies, and after taking Wintertree's comments into account, I see that I have to have been mistaken.


I have no idea why I thought rondels carried over into articulated leg defenses, even though I could swear I had seen it.
It may well be that I am remembering a set of couters, and am thinking of them in the wrong context.

so the archive has saved me a great deal of trouble in making something I would not have been happy with later.

Thank you all, most kindly.

-Badger-

There are isolated effigy examples of rondel poleyns.
Here's one, though it's before your period, and the knee may or may not be articulated.
http://effigiesandbrasses.com/monuments/otho_grandison/image/121/large/

Am I the only one who thinks the guy in Mac's example looks like he's scrolling through his email on a smart phone?

Gaston- I thought that too and had to take a second look

1320-1345 - 'knight, maybe Sir Philip I de la Beche (+1327)', St. Mary's Church, Aldworth, Berkshire, England

More of a a pretty flower detail then rondel and early 14thC

mackenzie wrote:1320-1345 - 'knight, maybe Sir Philip I de la Beche (+1327)', St. Mary's Church, Aldworth, Berkshire, England

More of a a pretty flower detail then rondel and early 14thC

It looks like a rondel with decoration. The rest of the harness is highly decorated, so the rondel was probably intended to match.

wcallen wrote:I assume that is a nice mid-15th c illustration.

King Rene's Book of Tournament. Yes mid 15th c.

mackenzie wrote:1320-1345 - 'knight, maybe Sir Philip I de la Beche (+1327)', St. Mary's Church, Aldworth, Berkshire, England

More of a a pretty flower detail then rondel and early 14thC

The thing about this is that I find the design very reminiscent of Doug's reconstruction of the d'Abernoun knees -- a cop with a short lame above and below. Hm. Now I feel all conflicted.

Effingham wrote:

mackenzie wrote:1320-1345 - 'knight, maybe Sir Philip I de la Beche (+1327)', St. Mary's Church, Aldworth, Berkshire, England

More of a a pretty flower detail then rondel and early 14thC

The thing about this is that I find the design very reminiscent of Doug's reconstruction of the d'Abernoun knees -- a cop with a short lame above and below. Hm. Now I feel all conflicted.

When I posted it I thought much the same thing.

The lame doesn't look short to me, it's much longer than later designs.