The Armour Archive

I've been studying a lot of effigies lately as I try to narrow down exactly what I want to do for my armour, and I've noticed something.

What I've seen has been a few cases of leg armour being laced to itself rather than hinged or strapped-and-buckled. I wouldn't be surprised to see the lace-up (it looks like a zipper-job -- think of a very tight version of shoelaces) on something fabric like gamboised cuisses, but these aren't. There are two notable examples here on cuisses, and two on greaves, and I'd like to get some opinions and comments.

First, on the inside of the cuisses on the effigy of Sir Richard Pembridge (of helmet fame). Note the pattern that seems to indicate there is a seam on the inside of the thighs held together by tied cord. I can only assume that he is actually wearing metal cuisses by this point (1375), and the effigy certainly seems to indicate it's a solid -- not fabric, studded, or padded -- cuisse. What do we make of this?



The second cuisse example is from the effigy of Lodewijk (Ludwig) van Lichtervelde (1380). It is similar to the Pembridge effigy, but it seems to have the lacing on some sort of border surface. Ideas?



Now, on to greaves.

What I'm noticing in some cases seems to be cased greaves -- a full front and back -- but there is a substantial gap between the two, and they are tied on in the manner of lacing up shoes.

The first is the effigy of Hartrad von Schönecken (1351). Not the serious gaposis. This gives me an idea for constructing cased greaves that may not fit perfectly, but is still clearly documentable. (It also gives me an excuse to make "smaller" greaves that I can diet into.)



The second greaves set is on the effigy of Frederik von Drakenborch (1360). His seems to be a better fit (there is no gap) but is structurally identical to the pattern seen on the Pembridge cuisses. Ideas?



Is there a particular type of construction indicated? Are we looking at metal, or leather?


Effingham

I am betting that in the bottom case, we are looking at leather.

In one of them, it looks like it might be a metal front riveted to a leather backiong. I think that lacing for metal defences less likely, as the laceing is likely to be cut in use, passing through the metal, wothout any sort of grommet for the lace to pass through - not so much of a problem with leather.

The bottom greaves have such a clean line from the greave to the sabatons, though. Seems a bit more like metal. There is that strap across that might be hiding the transition. Looking at them, I really want the top set of greaves and the bottom cuisses to be leather, but can't quite convince myself of it.

I don't see any hinges in the bottom effigy. How do they go on if they are not a flexible material like leather? It would be informative to see whats on the opposite side of the laced cuisses shown as well.

Lorenzo is right! No opposing hinge should mean leather is probable, with the pieces that close fully, at any rate. The gap-osiacs may still be of metal, springing open after the fashion of a hoplite greave. Maybe.

I don't know exactly the english word used for this leather constructions. In frensh we call this "Guettres flandresques". It's a kind of kilted leather pants reinforced by rigid leatrher. They can be covered by metal parts as cuisses and artuculated knees or greaves and knees. there is a great number of variations.

Konstantin the Red wrote:Lorenzo is right! No opposing hinge should mean leather is probable, with the pieces that close fully, at any rate. The gap-osiacs may still be of metal, springing open after the fashion of a hoplite greave. Maybe.

Only if it's an unhardened leather. Hardened leather won't open that far...at least not the way we're making it today.

It does seem unlikely that there would be laces holding steel in this fashion. I had my spalders cut right through the hemp braid points in no time at all Turned out I needed to do a much better job of deburring the holes and they haven't failed on me since.

Still, the probability of a lace like these failing is, imo, much higher than a strap failing if the body of the piece is steel. Leather would be far more forgiving on the lace.

It could be that Effingham has put his finger on a diagnostic - if the effigy shows laces, the armour may have been leather - even if the form is such that we've been dismissing leather as a material option.

The Pembridge cuisses are riveted directly to the knees as if they were articulated. This would be that late 14th c. type of articulation with no lame between the cuisse and the knee (like the cuisse at Chartres). This suggests that Pembridge's cuisses are metal.

An Augsburg tilting armor in the Met in New York has "lace-up"greaves. They enclose only about 3/4 of the circumference of the legs, like those on the Hartrad von Schönecken effigy. They have leather lacing strips riveted inside the edges, and the lace passes through these. The cuisses of the van Lichtervelde effigy (above) look to have a similar construction.

Laced-up limb armor seems uncommon, but not rare in the late 14th c.
Here is another example from 1373.

Mac wrote:

Mac I was also amazed at the detail in the Pembroke effigy, how they captured the rivet& the lines of the lames as the retracted behind the cop.

just a stupid question here from a complete novice, but is it possible(at least in the pembroke) that they wound a wire coil to connect the cuisse front& back together, somewhat like a spiral bound notebook?

Lacing was a common method of fastening in medieval clothing. I see no reason it could not have been used on armours of a variety of materials. Still, if there is no apparent way that the piece could work if made of metal then an alternative must be proposed. Conversely, if a piece would work well as metal and fits in with existing articulation methods then there is really no reason to assume it is leather. I think we are seeing different things in different effigies and trying to simplify too much by lumping them together.

sha-ul wrote: but is it possible(at least in the pembroke) that they wound a wire coil to connect the cuisse front& back together, somewhat like a spiral bound notebook?

It seems to me that as a practical mater, wire would be very difficult to install. Now, I understand that you mean to start with a coil and "thread" it into place by rotating it around its axis. Sort of "screwing" it into place. Although wire would have a defensive advantage over lace, I don't think it would be worth the trouble.

Now, that said, I imagine that *lacing* yourself into one of these things is no treat either!

Thank you for re-posting that image!

Mac


Mac

Having seen the Pembridge effigy a few times I think it is likely that the 'thong' is connecting material (leather?) to metal as otherwise how could this be worn?

I think the thong would likely be buff?

I was wondering whether it could have been like staples, but probably not.

Personally, hardened leather seems the most likely candidate. However until we replicate what we are looking at, this is merely theoretical. As I'm thousands of miles from my shop...I'll leave to someone else to run this little experiment.

Thanks for posting the pics Eff, I must say I had never noticed such an arrangment before. A fellow can learn something new everyday. Having said that I can see why it (whatever it is exactly) was only used for a short time in a limited area. The concept seems much more trouble than it would be worth. Still pretty darn interesting to say the least.

Can I make a strong speculation?
Well, this particular feature is part of XIV century armours, as I've learned in those years, during the XIV century it was common practice to assemble your harness more than order from a single shop a panoplia (an entire harness) entirely made on measure.
My idea is this: this solution allow to have the close fit that cased greaves need with the benefit of mass production instead than a custom tailored piece. My understanding of armouring tell me that even custom tailored pieces were part of a production line, pieces of the right size, maybe slightly adapted, joined togheter to form a form fitting armour. This solution (that apparently had not a long life) could be an aproach to make a very peculiar piece of armour, very hard to fit properly, fit as many people possible without making a dedicated piece for everyone.
Another option is: were at the time maille leggings still in use? Maybe this feature was to allow a close fit with and without maille beneath it.
Speculation mode off.

Staples would have the pointy bits on the inside, rubbing constantly against the leg. I think if that was ever tried, it was probably only once...

It seems like hinges would be much less effort to make than either coiling a spiral notebook wire, or making individual staples.

Laces would be economical than any of these, since leather (or vegetable based cord) would have been much less expensive than steel, and you can train a shaved monkey to do it.

If the pieces in question were originally metal, the holes would likely be punched, not drilled, and therefore relatively burr-free. A quick pass with a countersink style tool would put a nice bevel on them, making them harmless to a lace.

Laces don't have to be laced like shoes, either. The function here would be opening/ closing like a hinge, but with shoes you need to undo the laces frequently. In this case, a lacing pattern can be used which makes it very difficult to unlace, but also lends individual strength to each turn, so cutting a couple won't make the piece fall off. The simplest I can think of would be square knotting each turn, but that would be uncomfortable.

Gentlemen,

I don't think we are all on the same page about these laces. It seems like some people are presuming that the lace is a closure, and others are presuming it is a hinge.

I feel pretty sure that it is a closure.

If the armor was metallic, it will have had hinges on the lateral (outside) surface. Sometimes sculptors don't bother to show hinges, but they must surely have been there.

Mac

I did a quick perusal of the 1344 Romance of Alexander, Bodley MS 264. These laced greaves can be found on the King in folio 63v, 65r, and the right column miniature on folio 82r among others. Generally white lacings on what seems obviously iron greaves is the most common scheme, though black lacing or white on black are not unknown. I would be hesitant to conclude the use of lacings indicates cuir boulli for the greave.

Ernst,

How do we know the artist colouring did not make a mistake? How do we know that the "obviously iron" greaves are not cuirbolli, that has then been silvered, as we know some cuirbolli was gilded? In example of silvering a non-metalic object to make it appear to be metalic, we have that late 13th century list of equipment for tournament that has whalebone "swords" that were silvered.

chef,

Hence the qualifier, "what seems" before the "obviously iron". I think it might be easier to speculate materials from a colored miniature than a monochromatic sculpture or pen and ink drawing. Yes, it's possible that the miniature is showing silver-gilt greaves in the same color as the sabatons, bascinet, and sword, which might all be something besides iron, but this isn't a criminal burden of proof. I wouldn't discout cuir-boulli being used, as I simply wouldn't discount iron being used because laces are shown.

Mac: you're right, but I was fixating on the Pembridge legs above the others.
If that was me, I'd probably lace those twice before either getting it changed to another closure, or finding someone else to do it.
At which point I'm paying someone to crawl around between my legs for 10 minutes, and I'm not exactly getting what I'd expect out of that transaction.


The Schönecken effigy... I'm pretty sure the front lacing isn't meant as an enclosure. If that even is lacing, anyway - I suppose they could be rivets for internal splints on leather.

Also, Mac, couldn't the lack of hinges point to leather? Maybe it is indeed one piece, not hinged on the outside, and laced closed on the inside, and just pried open in order to get the leg through. I suppose that would work for spring steel as well, but it seems to me that armor metallurgy wouldn't be that sophisticated in 1375.

schreiber,
I think you're right about the Schönecken effigy having leather greaves. As you say, you could probably spring them open enough to slip them on.


If they were metal, however, I would be surprised if you could slip them on that way. I don't think that a metallic greave could be sprung open enough to allow your heel to pass through the narrow of the ankle.

I understand that the Greeks "sprung" their bronze greaves on, but their's opened down the back, and not the side. The back opening would allow the heel to pass through easily.

Mac

Ernst wrote:I did a quick perusal of the 1344 Romance of Alexander, Bodley MS 264. These laced greaves can be found on the King in folio 63v, 65r, and the right column miniature on folio 82r among others. Generally white lacings on what seems obviously iron greaves is the most common scheme, though black lacing or white on black are not unknown. I would be hesitant to conclude the use of lacings indicates cuir boulli for the greave.

You're confident identifying steel versus leather by the color ? They did paint leather, and they did paint it steel color. Makes distinguishing one from the other by color a dubious process...

Kilkenny wrote:You're confident identifying steel versus leather by the color ? They did paint leather, and they did paint it steel color. Makes distinguishing one from the other by color a dubious process...

I'm more confident that steel colored armor in a miniature represents steel than I am that all such representations must be silver-gilt leather, just because they're laced and not buckled. I'm not proposing that every effigial example posted is steel, merely that it seems reasonable that the Romance of Alexander examples that are steel colored represent steel-- walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and all that. I don't think it's reasonable to presume the greaves can't be iron/steel because they're laced.

To me, who is building an armour intended for halfswording and wrestling, lacing seems almost as ok as leather and buckles. I have no serious experience in wrestling in armour previously but it seems that the leather straps and buckles would take a serious beating when the armours chaves on eachother and the buckles themselves risk getting stuck and perhaps even opened. Lacing would also suffer a similar fate BUT the lacing could be replaced on-site much easier. Lacing, on leg pieces, would make armour about as difficult to put on as combat boots but on the arms it would require assistance. Perhaps in the long run it was more convenient to use leather and buckles -- and the more tedious process of replacing them once in a while -- rather than lacing, and the more often needed replacing of laces?

As for if images of steel could really be images of painted leather. Well, is it in general more probable that steel colour represents steel or leather? In most cases steel colour represents steel so as long as there are no significant indications of leather. I think it is fair to use the wording that Ernst did and just use a qualifier before the statement. I don't see lacing as a significant indicator of leather as it has been used over and over again in different cultures to connect pices of steel.

As a side note. Mac - wouldn't it be possible to just turn the greaves 90 degrees and let your heel slip through the hole like a hoplite greave, and than turn it back once the foot has gone through?

This

thread

is

AWESOME!!!!!

I now have even more options to choose from for the kit I'm putting together. Good eye, Eff!!!

Christopher

In general I chalk it up to artistic / stylistic treatment. The Romance of Alexander is great little source... however, I'm going play the imp of perversity card... look at some of the other images in the manuscript. You will notice that the not only are the greaves the same color as the sabatons, i.e. iron, but the horses are also the same color...

This is an excellent thread folks. It's good to see people contributing and sharing in pursuit - thank you.

V

I am no expert on things 14th century, but I can tell you from experience that "stringing" armor parts together allows for some flexibility where it's needed (like when you're trying to breath), and more importantly, it is a simple fix outside of a shop, in the field.

Mord.

I've seen a couple extant 16th century greaves that lace up the inside of the leg. Remember that these guys didn't fight every weekend, and so the rate of chaffing on the lacing wouldn't be much of an issue, as you could get new lacing for each tournament/battle you fought in. If it were waxed bowstring as used for the other lacings then it would easily survive the small amount of chaffage dealt by well made greaves.

The lack of hinges may be a turning point, but is not necessarily a deal breaker as the hinges could be on the back of the leg. We know that 3/4 greaves were used, so its entirely possible that design was also used in creating a fully enclosed leg.
Another possibility is a leather covering over advanced splinted legs.

The ones that interest me are the cuisses which are laced on the inside, as the inside thigh wasn't armoured at this point.

Daniel S wrote: As a side note. Mac - wouldn't it be possible to just turn the greaves 90 degrees and let your heel slip through the hole like a hoplite greave, and than turn it back once the foot has gone through?

Huh....
I don't know.
Maybe....
To test this hypothesis; one would have to take a greave, and put a couple of small c-clamps on the hinge-side overlap, (so it could not open normally), and try it. This would only give a sort of first approximation, because even with the upper and lower ends constrained by the clamps, the greave would still open easier than a one-piece one would. Unfortunately I don't have any greaves in the shop that fit me, so I can't test this.

Mac

Well, it was just a thought to counterbalance the 'hole not on the back' argument. I do however agree that those particular grieves (Schönecken) we are talking about probably are leather (since they have studs/rivets for internal steel)! If done in metal it would probably be easier to build the piece with a hinge on the opposite side of the lacing rather than hammering out a tube.

In the Drakenborch picture I really can't see if a hinge is depicted or not.

Zachos brings up an interesting point about the inner thigh. If the Pembridge effigy is showing two pieces of steel laced together on the inner thigh can the suite still be used for riding? Perhaps we are seeing a leather back laced to a metal front?

Lorenzo et Laurence,

Closed steel cuisses are not an impediment to riding, provided you use a saddle with a high narrow seat. Something along the lines of the Henry V saddle will accommodate closed cuisses well. Toby Capwell an I demonstrated this with the English harness and saddle I built for him several years ago. He not only rode in closed cuisses; he kicked ass in them.

Mac

Where were all these bright ideas when I was making these?

I had to assume the laces were for adjustment inside as no hinges are apparent on the outward face of the greaves. The client insisted I use these clunky buckles on the outside. He rides in them.

Next time.....