30 layers of linen

[Tibbie Croser]

Chef, thank you very much for your reply. In my question above, which wasn't clear enough, I was trying to distinguish among jacks made of stuffing between single layers of fabric, jacks made of 15 to 30 layers of linen with no stuffing; and jacks combining numerous layers of cloth with light stuffing. Is there any evidence for this last type of jack?

[Leopold der Wolf]

Gangsters layered silk (lots of it) and made rudimentary bullet proof vests.

[chef de chambre]

They, to the best of my knowledge, would be a jack built around a mail shirt (a front-opening one, likely, closed by points or straps). They are also termed 'gestraunt' in some late Medival English documents, and could be very well made for important people (John Howard and his sons, in example, where they were covered with an expensive cloth covering, like a brigandine). The diffence between a jack stuffed with mail, and John Howards gestraunt, I suspect, primarily being the quality of the mail shirt used in them, and the quality of the cover - a mail stuffed jack probably having a linen cover like any other jack.

Considering the construction of fabric covered mail, it seems to me the "gestraunt" is linguistically derived from the earlier term for the same armor, jasserant>khazaghand?

Yes, exactly so. It is a loan-word into Middle English.

[chef de chambre]

Chef, thank you very much for your reply. In my question above, which wasn't clear enough, I was trying to distinguish among jacks made of stuffing between single layers of fabric, jacks made of 15 to 30 layers of linen with no stuffing; and jacks combining numerous layers of cloth with light stuffing. Is there any evidence for this last type of jack?

Not that I am aware of, unless you consider the mail shirt of the gestraunt to be a 'light stuffing'. We have several varients of textile defenses described in the Howard Household books, but unfortunately, the 'doublet of fense', and 'gestraunt' are the only ones with clues as to construction. It mentions 'Jacks', 'Scottish Jacks', and 'Welsh jacks', as well as 'doublets of fense', and 'gestraunts', as all clearly being seperate things.

We would have no idea regarding the construction details of Scottish jacks, had not a coupl,e of mid 15th century Scottish ordinances described them loosly, which coincided with Dominic Mancini's description of the defences worn by the Northern Levies raised by Richard, Duke of Gloucester, as Lord Protector in 1483.

[Tibbie Croser]

Is there somewhere that I could find those ordinances and Mancini's description?

Does anyone have theories as to whether and how the Scottish jack evolved into the jack of plates?

[brewer]

Mancini:

"Indeed, the common soldiery have more comfortable tunics that reach down below the loins and are stuffed with tow or some other material. They say that the softer the tunic the better do they withstand the blows of arrows and swords, and besides that in summer they are lighter and in the winter they are more serviceable than iron."

Ordinances of Louis XI:

"And first they must have for the said Jacks, 30, or at least 25 folds of cloth and a stag's skin; those of 30, with the stag's skin, being the best cloth that has been worn and rendered flexible, is best for this purpose, and these Jacks should be made in four quarters. The sleeves should be as strong as the body, with the exception of the leather, and the arm-hole of the sleeve must be large, which arm-hole should be placed near the collar, not on the bone of the shoulder, that it may be broad under the armpit and full under the arm, sufficiently ample and large on the sides below. The collar should be like the rest of the Jack, but not too high behind, to allow room for the sallet. This Jack should be laced in front, and under the opening must be a hanging piece of the same strength as the Jack itself. Thus the Jack will be secure and easy, provided that there be a doublet without sleeves or collar, of two folds of cloth, that shall be only four fingers broad on the shoulder; to which doublet shall be attached the chausses. Thus shall the wearer float, as it were, within his jack and be at his ease; for never have been seen half a dozen men killed by stabs or arrow wounds in such Jacks, particularly if they be troops accustomed to fighting."

Cheers!

Bob

[chef de chambre]

The Scottish ordinances are not well published. There is an out-of-print book, called "Scottish Weapons and Fortifications", that have all of the 15th and early 16th century ordinances published.

These ordinances are not like CHarles the Bolds ordinances for his standing army, nor quite like Louis XI requirements for the Francs Archeirrs laid out, what they fall into is the older variety of Medieval law, laying out what equipment is expected to be maintained by people of X worth, across the social boundaries, either to be worn by them in the raising of the Feudal levy, or by their substitute.

Totally made up example, as I gave away my copy of the bookl, For instance, if you own 3 pounds scot in portable property, you would be expected to maintain a jack, a helmet, and a spear, 5 pound, add a horse and a haubergeon, ect - you get the idea, and the King found it neccessary by the mid 15th century, to include at least once or twice some description of the type of harness required, which is where the description comes from, that shows the Dominic Mancini description is the exact same article of jack.

As I recollect, the description was for a mid thigh to knee length, full sleeved armour, 'well stuffed with tow' - so these things are looking like the images of padded armours you see in late 14th century art - excepting they are described as being made new, for use in the 1450's and 1460's.

Keep in mind that the many layered jacks replaced these in more mainstream European sources during this span of time, which includes the Howard Account descriptions, the 1471 Burgundian description of a 10 layered jack, to be specifically worn in conjunction with a haubergeon, and the twice repeated Francs-Archiers ordinance Bob posted. The bulk of surviving jacks are a hoard of three 15 century survivors - two in Lubeck, and one I believe in Sweden (not counting the disintegrating example at the Royal Armouries, Leeds, on loan), all the continental examples which are multi-layered fabric alone - the Lubeck examples being thinner in the front, as they were made for wear (1440's-50's, from the style) with a breastplate (no backplate), the traces of rust from which are clearly seen on the extant specimens.

At any rate, the Scottish examples seem to be a survivor of an older form of armour, going back in a long line, through 14th century gambesons and 13th century acetons.

[Direwo]

Do they mean well stuffed tubes with tow or a thick layer of tow between an inner and an outher covering ( more like a quilt) ?

I also wonder if the Scottish and Welsh jacks could refer to the style of the jacket and not necessarily the construction of said jacket.

[chef de chambre]

Do they mean well stuffed tubes with tow or a thick layer of tow between an inner and an outher covering ( more like a quilt) ?

I also wonder if the Scottish and Welsh jacks could refer to the style of the jacket and not necessarily the construction of said jacket.

NO. Let me rememphasize that - NNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

NO padded armours, of any sort, at any time in Medieval Europe, were EVER sewn tubes, stuffed with whatever sort of stuffing. Every mention, and extant sample we have, has the stuffing quilted through. If you make tubes, then stuff them, they are useless as defenses, because every point they are sewn together, is a point of two thin layers of cloth, that won't stop a, arrow, swordpoint, or spearpoint. (and properly made textile armours *will* stop these things very often.)

Stuffed tubes are nothing more than modern interpretations of lines on 14th century images, and coming up with an 'easy' method of trying to recreate a look in an image - not a functioning armour.

[chef de chambre]

I doubt the latter refers to a style of cut, and more likely is a construction method. The reason being, that armour generally follows the lines of fashionable clothing, in regards to length of hem, and cut, and in most of Europe, general fashiopn followed the same trend.

Since we know in the case of Scottish Jacks, that it refers to method of manufacture, I think we are on safe ground to take a stab at guessing a 'Welsh jack' would refer to a varient in method of manufacture

[Direwo]

I still wonder where the well stuffed comes from then, since to my mind it implies filling up a cavity with a material. Double meaning in those times ?

[chef de chambre]

I still wonder where the well stuffed comes from then, since to my mind it implies filling up a cavity with a material. Double meaning in those times ?

The stuffing *does* fill a cavity, the cavityn between the top layer(s), and innermost layer(s) of the armour. This is then sewn through all the way, the stitching holding the stuffing in place - this prevents the stuffing from coming loose, or drifting inside the garment.

The method you think normal, is a modern quilting invention - not a medieval practise.

We don't have any extant stuffed jacks, but what we do have a small surviving number of, from the late 15th and early to mid 16th century, is helmet liners - ranging from segmented suspension liners in late sallets, to what amounts to examples like a heavily padded coif/hood, for tying inside frog-mounted jousting helms.

They universally are made as I described, with a inner layer, an outer layer, stuffing of various materials, that are them sewn *through*.

I doubt there is a double-entendre, as you suggest.