The Armour Archive

Hey folks,

I'm curious about whether or not there is any evidence to show that a Rus soldier (particularly in the area around the Ukraine) who donned a mail hauberk would wear any sort of padded garment beneath? I'm looking for evidence for or against this situation from anywhere between 1100-1300, considering the scarcity of resources on the topic of Rus armour. Thanks!

-Gerhard

I can't cite a source, but since that part of the world often warred in winter, if they didn't have some sort of padding under there, they'd have frozen to death.

They didn't wear gambesons.
Heavy felt or wool caftans, on the other hand, would have been ubiquitous.

Russ -
that is a very definite statement.
Why?

If by Gambeson is meant quilted Kaftan, then why not?

Gerhard,
There are materials - just often not in English.

Now -
if you are working on a Russian personna, you have to change your date range a little.
The big events that give cut-offs is when new waves of nomads and invaders arive.
The biggest change after the destruction of the Khazar empire at the end of the 10th century was 1230ies and 1240ies.
Within the same decade you have both the arrival of the Mongols from the East and the Crusaders from the West.
(within the period 1000 to 1240, there are two smaller changes - first Pechenegs arive, then Polovtsi/ Kipchaks - but these are not quite as world changing as the 1230ies and 40ies)
So, you should possibly have two questions - did they use quilted coats before 1240? did they use quited coats after 1240?

The Mongols certainly had quilted coats and I am quite certain that these would have been used by the Russians as well - contrary to the nationalist reconstructions, the costume and arms moved quite fluidly at least in the noble ranks where the vassalage also included a strong degree of intermarriage and like mixing.
Before the Mongols, it is hard to say. I am not familiar with specific finds of quilted material but, if we believe the Russian reconstruction artists (who tend to be far better educated than folks like Angus McBride - often historians in their own right), the answer would be Yes.

So - in summary - I believe, a fairly definite Yes for the last 50 years of your period and a likely-Yes for the rest of it.

Certainly Russian reenactors use quilted coats.

I knew I'd seen some basis for the reconstructions.

As a quick example - from this overview article on early North-Kavkaz finds: http://www.naslediepredkov.ru/rekon/rhazar.htm

В могильнике Амгата VII-X вв. обнаружены фрагменты одежды из двухслойного холста, переложенного войлоком и простеганного.

"In the Amgata burial, VII-X cent. are found clothing fragments constructed from two layers of canvas, lined with felt and quilted."

This is not quite Russia but a very close influence and the amazing collection of fairly perfect clothing finds in the Northern Kavkaz burials is commonly used as the basis of proto-Russian reconstructions (for at least the Turkic component of the emerging Russian culture).

Hey Norman,

Thanks for the help. I almost just PMed you about this question, knowing you'd certainly pop in with some details! Here's the deal... Perhaps you could help me with this overarching interest, as well, and tell me whether it sound feasible. I have a full suit of riveted mail, including chausses, a hauberk and a coif. I had planned on making a German harness with this mail, but have found myself flip-flopping more than John Kerry regarding which date to settle on. I think the problem is that I don't like any one of the possibilities too much. On the other hand, I love Eastern arms and armour dearly, particularly when I consider the amount of "bling" I can attach to my person while doing so (I spend evenings drooling over sites like Armour & Castings and Birka Traders). So...

The idea cropped up that perhaps I could use the mail for an early 13th century Russian harness, to suit this interest. Taking either the Nikolskoie or Kiev ocular helmets that date roughly to this era, the idea would be to wear the hauberk, chausses (cut up the back, so as to appear rather archaic compared to the "latest" fashions in Europe), and an aventail around the circumference of the helmet for additional protection. I'd wear a Mongolian belt from Armour & Castings, such as the one from Krasny Yar that they've replicated and state has a Russian-style buckle, and throw in a little Christian pendant and a ring, perhaps, to round out the feel of fluidity in the region that you mention.

A decent sword or saber with a nicely decorated hilt and pommel, a kite shield as shown in some Russian art with a fancy paint job and an appropriate primary weapon such as an axe or spear to finish the job! I think this would be a reasonable portrayal of an armored Rus warrior between say 1225-1240, perhaps?

My question about the gambesons is solved by you, I'd say. I'll have one made up in a diamond-style quilt job like we see in Mongolian art. What kind of leggings and shoes would I wear, Norman - particularly if I wanted to put them under chausses? I know this isn't a known popular form of armor in the area at the time, but I can't believe that a warrior armored in a hauberk wouldn't have no access to chausses by this time on the western Steppes, unless if I'm missing something... Also, considering the point is to use my mail, if I absolutely couldn't use the chausses, I'd probably have to toss the idea.

Cheers!

-Gerhard

Quilted stuff, Norman, absolutely.

But a gambeson as used here on the AA isn't the same as a quilted/padded caftan. If you want to turn "gambeson" into the "kleenex" of padded/quilted garments, sure, I'm right with you -- they're everywhere, as I suggested (though the canvas bit is new to me).
---
There's a sabre on classifieds that's a decent-enough shot for what you're looking. Specifics are off, of course, all depends on how much cash you're looking to spend.

I wouldn't think of chausses as a big deal at all.

If I can find it, I have an 11c stonecarving on a transylvanian church depicting a fellow in a heavily-quilted caftan, also. I'll see if I can dig it up.



Oh. Just in case anybody's interested in the (rather unusual) assembly in its very non-western context.

The question seems to be whether the Russians had a garment specifically designed to be worn under mail (English terms would include aketon or pourpoint) or whether they simply wore regular clothing under mail. IIRC they had a specific term for this garment - pozdor. They also had standalone cloth armour (what we would call a gambeson) called tyegilyai. I don't know the period in which these terms were used, though.

The latter is clearly a loan-word, and sounds like it's coming from an adjective, rather than a noun; makes me wonder about periodization.

Dan Howard wrote: IIRC they had a specific term for this garment - pozdor.

I believe this is an error. Podzor is a general term for edge decorations. It is used for the decorated edges of bed sheets and in traditional Russian architecture for a decorative board added to window panes and such.
With respect to armour, I have seen it used in 19th century books to describe the hem of hauberks and aventails - the decorative dags and/or brass rings.
There is a term in those same books for underarmour - Podlatnik.
It is literal - UnderArmour
and describes as a lightely quilted shorter Kaftan or Zipun.
But this is 19th century in any case.

They also had standalone cloth armour (what we would call a gambeson) called tyegilyai.

Russ Mitchell wrote:The latter is clearly a loan-word, and sounds like it's coming from an adjective, rather than a noun; makes me wonder about periodization.

Tegilyai is a Moscow period quilted armour. Very much in that late period fashion it is described as short sleeved and with a high standing collar. First use I am aware of for the term is for a coat owned by Ivan IV (the Terrible).
Russ, the name in Russian reads like a normal noun. What makes you think it is a loan word or comes from an adjective?
That said - many Russian armour terms are Russified foreign words - Bronya, Panzir, Bakhteretz, Yushman
But it is hard to determine whether this speaks to origin of the defense or the language fashion at the time the term stuck to the armour.
(consider that just prior to the revolution, many Russian nobles spoke French, some did not even know Russian) For instance mail is refered to as Bronya, Panzir, Kolchuga, while early scholars tried to distinguish what armours were refered to - the fact of the matter seems to be that it was just a matter of fashion of the time.

Gerhard von Liebau wrote:Here's the deal... Perhaps you could help me with this overarching interest, as well, and tell me whether it sound feasible. I have a full suit of riveted mail, including chausses, a hauberk and a coif. I had planned on making a German harness with this mail, but have found myself flip-flopping more than John Kerry regarding which date to settle on. I think the problem is that I don't like any one of the possibilities too much. On the other hand, I love Eastern arms and armour dearly, particularly when I consider the amount of "bling" I can attach to my person while doing so (I spend evenings drooling over sites like Armour & Castings and Birka Traders). So...

The idea cropped up that perhaps I could use the mail for an early 13th century Russian harness, to suit this interest. Taking either the Nikolskoie or Kiev ocular helmets that date roughly to this era, the idea would be to wear the hauberk, chausses (cut up the back, so as to appear rather archaic compared to the "latest" fashions in Europe), and an aventail around the circumference of the helmet for additional protection.

Don't cut up the chauses. Cut the coif into an aventail. I don't know of coifs being used but Aventails are all over -- probably came back into Europe from the Eastern European use.
"appear rather archaic compared to the "latest" fashions in Europe" - I think this is the wrong image of Russia. Russia was not more primitive than Europe, she just got her fashion sense elsewhere.
And as to armour specificaly -- it is most likely that the designs traveled East to West rather than the other way.
To go to the chauses specificaly - Russians do not seem to have protected their legs much. But if it were done, there is no reason not to have full chauses (I am assuming in a "stocking" form?).

I'd wear a Mongolian belt from Armour & Castings, such as the one from Krasny Yar that they've replicated and state has a Russian-style buckle, and throw in a little Christian pendant and a ring, perhaps, to round out the feel of fluidity in the region that you mention.

Thats a great Golden Horde belt ! I tried fruitlessly to find the original online and failed
However, it is not realy representative of the "normal" of the period.
If accurate, the fittings are very "modern" Mongol while the buckle is quite old-fashioned -- pre-Mongol style. If accurate, this would indicate a very old-school local artisan fixing a high status Mongol item.
I wish I could see the origin and context of the find.

...and an appropriate primary weapon such as an axe or spear to finish the job!

Just remember that a Russian war axe is a dainty jewel (weighing in at about 300 grams) not the massive polearm of SCA vikings.

I think this would be a reasonable portrayal of an armored Rus warrior between say 1225-1240, perhaps?

The only issue is that the particular belt is very decidedly post-invasion and a definite political statement. It would likely be worn by a happy vasal of the Mongols as a present from them rather than by a "Mongol resistor".

My question about the gambesons is solved by you, I'd say. I'll have one made up in a diamond-style quilt job like we see in Mongolian art. What kind of leggings and shoes would I wear, Norman - particularly if I wanted to put them under chausses?

I don't know what you'd wear under chauses. Trousers and low boots were the standard normaly (not the massively baggy trousers - just ordinary ones).
I would have gone with line quilting on the underarmour. But I don't know that I have any specific basis for this.
You are certainly not going to be wearing the Tegilyai and the line stiching seems to make more sense on a lighter layered garment like described in my earlier quote.

==============================
All in all, I think this would be a good presentation of a Novgorodian in the retinue of Alexander --
Novgorod has more Western influence than Kiev - so you got the chauses
and you can always just model the stiching of the underarmour after the Mispronounsky bible.
On the other hand, you are a good Eastern Orthodox (hence the Russian cross) battling the armies of the pope to protect mother Russia,
At the same time, you boss Alexander joyfully bends the knee to the Mongols - who prop up his power and provide allies in fighting the Crusaders (hence your own nice Mongol belt).

Norman wrote:The only issue is that the particular belt is very decidedly post-invasion and a definite political statement. It would likely be worn by a happy vasal of the Mongols as a present from them rather than by a "Mongol resistor".

Was dress used by the Rus as an ethnic marker to distinguish themselves from the Mongols?

Norman wrote:I believe this is an error. Podzor is a general term for edge decorations. It is used for the decorated edges of bed sheets and in traditional Russian architecture for a decorative board added to window panes and such.

Many thanks for the correction.

There is a term in those same books for underarmour - Podlatnik. It is literal - UnderArmour and describes as a lightely quilted shorter Kaftan or Zipun. But this is 19th century in any case.

So currently there is no evidence that the Russians had a specific garment designed to be worn under mail during the time in question.

Norman:

In the Turkic and Tatar bits I know (and also going into Hungarian, but not northern Finno-Ugric), the agglutinative chegil/tyegil reads as a word (I'm assuming the ty reads "ch-ish," but I could be wrong, since I don't have the original characters it's drawing from and am not a Russian speaker), and ai/yai a modifier which says "like this." The ly-ai being a fairly common thing. I can think of TONS of hungarian examples, and my Tatar is so bad I'm failing to come up with anything off the top of my head at all. Most of what I know is for yelling at people in events. Don't speak Mongol at all.

Russ Mitchell wrote:In the Turkic and Tatar bits I know (and also going into Hungarian, but not northern Finno-Ugric), the agglutinative chegil/tyegil reads as a word (I'm assuming the ty reads "ch-ish," but I could be wrong, since I don't have the original characters it's drawing from and am not a Russian speaker), and ai/yai a modifier which says "like this." The ly-ai being a fairly common thing. I can think of TONS of hungarian examples, and my Tatar is so bad I'm failing to come up with anything off the top of my head at all. Most of what I know is for yelling at people in events. Don't speak Mongol at all.

The word is pronounced as written TeGiLai
Hmn - so you are saying it looks as if it translates into "like a Tegil" Now we need to find what Tegil means.
Any ideas?

Alric of Drentha wrote:

Norman wrote:The only issue is that the particular belt is very decidedly post-invasion and a definite political statement. It would likely be worn by a happy vasal of the Mongols as a present from them rather than by a "Mongol resistor".

Was dress used by the Rus as an ethnic marker to distinguish themselves from the Mongols?

For the most part only coincidentaly -- ie: there are quite local decorative patterns so to some degree the costume in any locality would be different. But more so, the Russians, the Kipchaks, the Black Hats were living in their own separate settlements and had a concience of being different -- so my assumption is that the clothing would have had differences and these could point to the ethnicity of the wearer.
But the Mongols would be all the more so because they had just arrived within the decade -- and as a fiersome invasion force rather than as individual migrants or even small family migrations. Definitely within this early invasion period the clothing would have been fairly outlandish.
Thats theoretical -- more concretely, the main crown of the Tzars has been lately shown to have been given as a present by a Mongol Khan. The fun thing about it is that when given, it was not to the Russian client-king -- but to the Khan's sister who was getting married to this Russian. The hat was a young woman's hat paralelled even in modern traditional use in Turkmenia.
But within a century, the Russian kings were wearing it and claiming that it was a crown given by the Byzantine emperor to Russia's knyaz Monomakh.
Ie: the clothes were so different that the Russian kings got to wearing a bride's hat as the crown and symbol of office!
But in any case -- these differences were not political.

The reason I think the belt would be political is that the warrior belts in the Turkic (and related Russian) and, I believe, Mongol societies were worn as a combination of heraldry and set of medals.
If the belt is mainly heraldic, by wearing it, he would be saying - "I belong to this house" "I owe loyalty to this house"
If it is like a set of medals, it would indicate that he had excelled in some way in the service of some Mongol lord.

Interesting, thanks.

Norman wrote:The word is pronounced as written TeGiLai
Hmn - so you are saying it looks as if it translates into "like a Tegil" Now we need to find what Tegil means.

Or Tegila. Also possible. Like Tornay pottery is "pottery from Torna."

Any ideas?

Need a Tatar/Mongol speaker.

The reason I think the belt would be political is that the warrior belts in the Turkic (and related Russian) and, I believe, Mongol societies were worn as a combination of heraldry and set of medals.
If the belt is mainly heraldic, by wearing it, he would be saying - "I belong to this house" "I owe loyalty to this house"
If it is like a set of medals, it would indicate that he had excelled in some way in the service of some Mongol lord.

Absolutely agreed. Belt decorations were NOT merely bling.