The Armour Archive

I recently made a video for a discussion elsewhere on what I believe is a preferred solution for properly suspending your leg harness. I have a bad lower back so any weight I can prevent from being transferred to the shoulders is a huge plus in my book.

Please note I'm only wearing one of those vest things to illustrate a point more easily. I wear a Charles de Blois style doublet to suspend my legs in my actual kit (as can be seen at the end), and it operates on exactly the same principle as the vest, but it would be difficult demonstrate the concept I show the audience in the CdB doublet. I explain that in the video but people keep glossing over that...

*note* this principle really is ideal for a person whose waist is in fact the narrowest part of their torso. If your waist is larger than your hips, this technique has limited use, and it will be harder to avoid transferring weight to the shoulders. The mail hose suspension idea outlined below may work regardless.

VIDEO: Suspend Your Leg Harness Comfortably


I believe the same principle can be applied to suspending maille chausses, and is still in keeping with the primary sources.

THE KING'S MIRROR ca 1250

The rider himself should be equipped in this wise:
he should wear good soft breeches made of soft and
thoroughly blackened linen cloth, which should reach
up to the belt; outside these, good mail hose which
should come up high enough to be girded on with a
double strap;

It seems to me that the most common modern solutions to this problem are a c-belt or a narrow thick leather belt. Both methods are less than optimal. Most people who have experience with a c-belt complain that it restricts movement, is uncomfortable, and in some cases prevents you from sitting down. A narrow belt will begin to cut in to the tops of your hips over time and become increasingly uncomfortable. I've also heard it suggested that a larger stiff belt like a modern weight-lifting belt could work. It will function, but I think over time it will begin to wear on the hips and dig in to the iliac crest making it uncomfortable for extended periods of time.

To me this belt, that allows the mail hose to be 'girded on' suggests a solution similar to what I explain in the video. A wide strap of supple leather tightly bound above the hips and through the waist will function as a comfortable and flexible support system from which to point chausses. To achieve this the leather can neither be thick nor stiff. It functions more like a textile than a piece of cuir bouilli or a shoe sole wrapped around your waist. The key in its functionality is that it's relatively thin and easily moves with the body and by being laced tight enough, it will comfortably support all of the weight of the chausses on the hips. The width of the belt will ensure that the weight is distributed over a large enough surface area that it won't feel like it's putting all the pressure on one particular point. The relative thin nature of the belt will prevent it from having thick edges that are responsible for that digging experienced on c-belts and more traditional belts. I also believe this is in keeping with the sources.

Of course this same thing can be used with plate harness as well, and works exceedingly well for mail paunces.

**edit for clarity 7/19/15**
I've seen a lot of people trying to reproduce this idea over the past few months and I realized I didn't make clear one of the most important parts of this design. It's important to note that the shape of this belt is *NOT* just a really wide rectangle. A rectangle will slide down the body over time. It must form a kind of a cone with the top chopped off in order to function properly when worn. The top and bottom edges are curved in a gentle U shape and the top edge is shorter than the bottom. This is the key to preventing the belt from riding down or sliding over the hips once weight as pointed to it, and is what keeps it in place over long periods of time. The shape of the garment/belt will lock itself into the vertical axis and be unable to slide down because the top edge should be less than the circumference of the hips at the widest point. That combined with the friction created by the width and flexibility/stretch of the leather is what makes it work. Reinforcing the top edge prevents it from stretching and loosening on you, but the stretch in the rest of the belt is what aids it in gripping your hips and preventing slippage.

Laid out flat, this what it should look like. (Mine is configured to strap in the back, the little squares are just arming points, the important part is the overall shape):

Ian, this is fantastic. I've avoided wearing chausses because I could not come up with a method that wouldn't be decried as modern (like suspenders). C-belt, regular belt- either option was uncomfortable after only a very short while. Thanks for sharing, brother.

Awesome. An arming jacket or pourpointe is my next planned piece is armor. But I think I'll try this first.

I'm glad you guys appreciate the idea!

So I have an update to report. The gentleman who built the prototype had the opportunity to try it out for an extended period of time today. He wore his chausses for 8 hrs during an event and reports that it was very comfortable, required no adjustments throughout the entire day, and didn't sag at all.

I'd love to hear some folks' thoughts on the historical viability of such a solution. Maybe I'm overlooking something but not only is this method practical, comfortable, and eliminates all the problems of the other standard methods, but it seems to be in line with the historical evidence as well.

Undoubtedly it works, like lacing the chausses to a vest. But is it the historical method?

Len Parker wrote:Hose of Rodrigo Ximeneze 1247 Madrid

I have to wonder if you need such a wide girdle or not. How narrow can you make it, would 3"/7.5 cm of buckskin work as well?

Ernst wrote:Undoubtedly it works, like lacing the chausses to a vest. But is it the historical method?

...

I have to wonder if you need such a wide girdle or not. How narrow can you make it, would 3"/7.5 cm of buckskin work as well?

We're playing with the width of the belt. Obviously it's easier to remove material than add, so we started very wide. I think it's a matter of finding a balance between support and comfort.

Perhaps simply folding the existing "man-corset" in half is a simple enough experiment?

Ernst wrote:Perhaps simply folding the existing "man-corset" in half is a simple enough experiment?

I will have him try that and report back

Wow this seems so much easier to make the C Belt or even an arming vest garment. I think I might build one to use for my splinted leg harness and see how it holds up. I will make sure to talk to you and Doug about it!

Thanks!
Jorge

So with the belt effectively halved in width (by folding it in half, and only lacing to the 'new' top), it still functions.

Here's what he said

Did a quick test of the man-girdle folded in half, Ian. It seems to still function as intended, though I did notice that the thinner strap was tugging just a little bit at my back. Still not nearly as bad as a belt, though over time it might start to get uncomfortable. I think this is because it has a tendency to want to "bunch" a little in the back due to the more concave anatomy. I only did the test fit over normal clothing, however, so a padded aketon might ease any discomfort a bit. It still fit comfortably over the hips.

So I'll say yes, a thinner strap still works better than the typical options, but with a caveat of "your mileage may vary." I’d say the wider you go, the more comfortable it is, the narrower you go, the more sensitive it is to different variables like placement or tightness of the lacing. Know what I mean?

I suspect some of the bunching he reports could be remedied by using a thin supple leather strap instead of a textile prototype. Maybe even supporting the chausses by more than one point so it's not all pulling from the front.

As for this being the historical method, I suppose we don't know. But I've seen it suggested in another thread that by "good mail hose which should come up high enough to be girded on with a double strap" from the King's Mirror could indicate the use of a double width belt. I definitely don't think a 'c-belt' is the historical solution. If nothing else this certainly has to be closer.

I suppose we'll have to get one of the guys from Kongshirden, or a Norwegian linguist to give us the full meaning of this passage.

The double strap could be something like the Bocksten hosen arrangement.
http://www.personal.utulsa.edu/~marc-ca ... khose.html

Or a double set of ties going to the belt, one in front, and one on the side of the buttocks. Or two straps holding the chausse to the leg without suspending it. Or......

I follow. However, the problem remains that the current solutions are less than optimal. Some are decidedly off the mark historically, some are restrictive, some are just plain uncomfortable, and some are a combination of those things. I'm trying to propose a solution that fits within an interpretation of the historical evidence we do have and solves the inherent problems associated with the current methods. Will it work for everyone? Maybe not. But for those it does work for it can offer a solution to mail hose suspension without the drawbacks associated with the current methods while retaining the potential to be a historical solution.

Brilliant.
Simply brilliant.

When it says "double strap", why not a "double wrap", like the sword belts of the 13th century? I've found them exceedingly comfortable.

Perhaps someone more learned than I can determine if there is anything more to be gleaned from this passage?

he should wear good soft breeches (hosor) made of soft and thoroughly blackened linen cloth, which should reach up to the belt; outside of these, good mail hose (gođar bryn-hosor) which should come up high enough to be girded on with a double strap; over these he must have good trousers made of linen cloth of the sort that I have already described; finally, over these he should have good kneepieces made thick iron and rivets and hard as steel.

http://www.septentrionalia.net/etexts/speculum.pdf
p.103

(20) Gođar hosor / oc linar gorwar af blautu laræpti oc wael / swartađu.
oc taki þær allt til broca bæll- / tis en utan yfir þær gođar bryn-
hosor / swa hafar at mađr mægi gyrđa þær um sec / twifalldum
swæip en utan yfer þat þa þarf / hann at hafa gođar brynbroecr
gorwar mæđ / lerepti at þeim hætti sæm fyrr hæti ec / sagt en
(25) þar um utan þarf hann at hafa go- / þar knebiarger gorwar mæđ
þiuccu / iarni. oc mæđ stalharđum naddum.

My gut feeling is that the chausses are not suspended at all, but are girt (gyrđa) directly to the leg. We frequently see one strap below the knee. The top strap would seem to have to sit at the very top of the thigh, right at the crotch, as this is the only place narrower than the widest part of the thigh. Any lower, and the belt might easily slide downward.

Perhaps Keegan's suggestion of a double wrap belt is correct after all, or the idea of a folded over one is valid.

Old Norse twifalldum, modern Icelandic tvöfaldast = doubled, tvöfaldur = double. The relationship to this and modern English "two folds" is evident. In modern Icelandic, "at mađr magi gyrđa" means "that the man girds to his stomach". A slight spelling difference from the Old Norse at mađr mægi gyrđa.

So my previous suggestion of girdling only to the leg seems contra-indicated by the mention of the stomach.

Ernst wrote:Perhaps someone more learned than I can determine if there is anything more to be gleaned from this passage?
My gut feeling is that the chausses are not suspended at all, but are girt (gyrđa) directly to the leg. We frequently see one strap below the knee. The top strap would seem to have to sit at the very top of the thigh, right at the crotch, as this is the only place narrower than the widest part of the thigh. Any lower, and the belt might easily slide downward.

That would be awfully close to wear the femoral artery is near the surface of the skin. It's roughly in the same location that you would take a femoral pulse. It seems like a bad spot to tightly belt something. Because of the very slight width change between the termination of the upper leg and the meat of the thigh it would have to be pretty tight. I envision a bunch of knights with numb legs 30 minutes after arming up. It's a great spot for a tourniquet!

Ian,
You are, of course correct, and I wasn't thinking as clearly in the early hours. The Old Norse does seem to offer more clues than the common English translation, though.

Ernst wrote:I have to wonder if you need such a wide girdle or not. How narrow can you make it, would 3"/7.5 cm of buckskin work as well?

I used a 3 inch belt to hold up my maille chausses for the La Belle Kalamazoo presentation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jse_b3wbpUo

Ian L wrote:

Ernst wrote:Perhaps someone more learned than I can determine if there is anything more to be gleaned from this passage?
My gut feeling is that the chausses are not suspended at all, but are girt (gyrđa) directly to the leg. We frequently see one strap below the knee. The top strap would seem to have to sit at the very top of the thigh, right at the crotch, as this is the only place narrower than the widest part of the thigh. Any lower, and the belt might easily slide downward.

That would be awfully close to wear the femoral artery is near the surface of the skin. It's roughly in the same location that you would take a femoral pulse. It seems like a bad spot to tightly belt something. Because of the very slight width change between the termination of the upper leg and the meat of the thigh it would have to be pretty tight. I envision a bunch of knights with numb legs 30 minutes after arming up. It's a great spot for a tourniquet!

Particularly when they start swelling from vigorous activity!

I used to use a weight lifter's belt to suspend my leg harness. It was about 6" wide? But ultimately I attached suspenders to it to transfer the weight to my shoulders.

Maybe this is a double strap?

http://s7d4.scene7.com/is/image/BrooksB ... ductimages$

Steve

Is the double strap the girdle or the points in the translation above.

If the girdle there are examples in the Anglo Saxon York leather book as well and the MOL Dress Accessories book. Mostly a nice leather thinner wrapped over a thicker leather core and the over layer is stitched in the center back of the belt. Some examples have a line of stitching holding the two layers together near the edge also.

There is also a girdle with two layers of tablet woven cloth done the same way. A thicker chunkier woven core with a fine silk exterior sewn at the center back and there are fittings attached through the two layers before the center back is closed making the rivet on the back hidden in the layers.

This is the same translation problem as we get for double mail. Double can mean twice as many, twice as wide, two layers or thicknesses, etc.. I think Ian is on the right track by using a softer material, as everyone who has used a rigid leather belt seems to complain about it cutting into the skin.

I used thinner leather and then backed it with wool felt to make it more comfy. I think a girdle style like in this post would be more comfortable no matter what than a c belt for someone with a heavier build around the waist.

James B. wrote:

Ernst wrote:I have to wonder if you need such a wide girdle or not. How narrow can you make it, would 3"/7.5 cm of buckskin work as well?

I used a 3 inch belt to hold up my maille chausses for the La Belle Kalamazoo presentation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jse_b3wbpUo

James B.,

Since the attachment seems to remain hidden beneath your aketon (doublet), do you mind sharing some details? Type of leather, number and location of attachment points, etc.? The noted problem of tugging at the back still remains, as worn belts run through belt loops seem to get a curvature in the small of the back. Perhaps cutting the belt on a gentle curve or with a shallow V-shape would alleviate this issue.

Ernst wrote:Undoubtedly it works, like lacing the chausses to a vest. But is it the historical method?

Len Parker wrote:Hose of Rodrigo Ximeneze 1247 Madrid

Yes. It is described in at least two 13th century German poems.


zwô hosen wîz ûz îsen
hiez er im ane brîsen
vaste, niht swaere,
wan er gerne lîhte waere.
er vuor in stricken als ein tier.
ein harte guoten lendenier
den bant er umde die huf
und nestelte die hosen darûf

I translate this as:

"two hosen white from iron
he put on without (braies?)
sturdy, not heavy,
because he liked to be light.
he went tied up like an animal.
a hard good loin belt
this he bound around his hips
and laced his hosen to this"

&

ame lendenier si entstricket wart
von der hurteclichen vart,
Diu iserhose sanc uf den sporn:
des wart sin blankez bein verlorn.

I translate this as:

"From the loin belt they unlaced
because of the quick canter,
The iron hosen sank to his spurs:
thus he lost his white legs."


For the mid-late 14th century we know from the Limburger Chronicle this loin belt was still in use and was laced tight in the back, padded hard almost a finger thick, and as long as the jupon. And in a c. 1370 document from Bruges it says this belt was made by the guys who also made pourpoints, so I reckon he made them padded and quilted as well.

I take it you are translating the lendenier (lentner, lendener) as a girdle, rather than as a coat as many others have done? Interestingly in the first account this is given as harte, or hard, rather than the proposed softer material.

For the mid-late 14th century we know from the Limburger Chronicle this loin belt was still in use and was laced tight in the back, padded hard almost a finger thick, and as long as the jupon. And in a c. 1370 document from Bruges it says this belt was made by the guys who also made pourpoints, so I reckon he made them padded and quilted as well.

I would like to know more about these "loin belts".

The poem seems to indicate it was "wound around his hips"? Curious.

Steve

Steve S. wrote:

For the mid-late 14th century we know from the Limburger Chronicle this loin belt was still in use and was laced tight in the back, padded hard almost a finger thick, and as long as the jupon. And in a c. 1370 document from Bruges it says this belt was made by the guys who also made pourpoints, so I reckon he made them padded and quilted as well.

I would like to know more about these "loin belts".

The poem seems to indicate it was "wound around his hips"? Curious.

Steve

May just be confirmation bias on my part, but that sounds like the double-wrapped sword belt kind of suspension that I mentioned earlier.

The descriptors of trussed up like an animal, wound, twifalldum do seem to suggest you are correct, Keegan. It seems a soft material like fabric which is quilted in tight rows until it's semi-rigid is what's called for.

I take it you are translating the lendenier (lentner, lendener) as a girdle, rather than as a coat as many others have done? Interestingly in the first account this is given as harte, or hard, rather than the proposed softer material.

Aye. Since it is mentioned next to the wambuis/pourpoint in the Bruges document, and next to the jupon in the Limburger Chronicle it stands to reason it might not the same as a coat. And since it is called a 'loiner' and was used to suspend your maille hosen from, a belt or low corset like object around your hips and abdomen seems to me to be the logical interpretation.

The German author Wendelin Boeheim in his "Handbuch der Waffenkunde" (published 1890) interpreted the Lenter from the Limburger Chronicle as a coat of plates, which it obviously isn't if you read the original description. But since then, all the German authors have copied this...

The poem seems to indicate it was "wound around his hips"? Curious.

This is a mistranslation on my part. Sorry about that. Bant means binding, not winding. So it was bound around his hips.
I've edited the poem passage in my initial post.

May just be confirmation bias on my part, but that sounds like the double-wrapped sword belt kind of suspension that I mentioned earlier.

+1

Steve

Bertus, I have added this and your 2008 Albrechts Bössor thread to the Arming Garments III thread.

I decided to revisit this and prototype the idea in some cow hide I had lying around.

It functions identically to a textile support which is what I had hoped it would do. The leather edging along the top hem prevents the 'belt' from stretching when you buckle it tight. This is important so that it doesn't shift after wearing it. It offers the same flexibility and comfort as a textile, and none of the restrictiveness of a thick c-belt. It also distributes the weight over a large surface area so you don't get digging in to the hips as you would with a thinner belt alternative. You retain the same range of motion you would with an arming doublet, including comfortably sitting down.

This method will also work for maille chausses, and you can easily whip-stitch a maille skirt to the bottom hem to suspend that comfortably as well. The only reason I would choose this method *over* the arming doublet is for ease of tailoring in the textile garment, or convenience. If you do a time period that has a huge gap in knowledge when it comes to suspending legs, this is a viable solution, and dare I say superior to some of the more uncomfortable or inflexible methods out there.

A Charles de Blois style pourpoint is what I normally use to suspend my legs comfortably, but I will be the first to admit that the tailoring of this garment can be tough when you absolutely want to ensure that 0 weight transfer goes to your shoulders. It's quite achievable (I get absolutely no weight transfer to my shoulders in my version), but it may be beyond the comfort level of some folks to tailor. It involves making sure that when laced tightly the garment is completely girdling the hips and waist, and that there is enough vertical length in the garment to prevent tugging at the shoulders when weight is pulling the hem with gravity. It also can't be too much vertical length that it appears in excess and looks messy. If that's not something you want to mess with but seek a comfortable alternative, the leather arming girdle is comparatively simple to engineer. For comparison, my hand-sewn Charles de Blois took about 100 hrs to complete, my hand-sewn leather arming girdle took about 5.



This is the speculative alternative:

Brilliant discussion, everyone. My weight has rebounded enough in the last year (grrr) that my grand asiette pourpoint is now somewhat painful to wear, so I'm considering alternatives for leg suspension before I commit to altering it.