The Armour Archive

A good magician could make protective armor out of a wet noodle.

Reminds of me of that line from the early medieval rowing song (which I've now misplaced) "and deliver us o Lord, from the power of smiths!"

Definitely not armour, but I wanted to show that in stories some guys like to wear animal skins just to look bad-ass.

The viking hero Gram
"He went into Gothland, and, in order to frighten people out of his path, strode on clad in goats' skins, swathed in the motley hides of beasts, and grasping in his right hand a dreadful weapon, thus feigning the attire of a giant"

Recently at Pennsic we were all sitting around bsing.
A VERY large gentlemen strolled by wearing nothing but a VERY large side of leather. (and by large I mean he put me to shame)

A friend quietly asked "What the hell is that?"
My reply was a quick and simple one.
"About a dozen pair of shoes"

Is that useful to the discussion? Perhaps not but still pretty funny:) (at least IMO)

The one that is most commonly dredged up is the Sami-enchanted reindeer-hide shirts in Olav's Saga. Nobody has yet found anything that could be defined as leather armour.

Dan Howard wrote:The one that is most commonly dredged up is the Sami-enchanted reindeer-hide shirts in Olav's Saga. Nobody has yet found anything that could be defined as leather armour.

Even you need to qualify that broad and absolute statement, Dan. We all know you have your mind made up on the subject and are totally unwilling to consider the possibility that some things that don't really look like metal might actually be leather. That, however, does not make the broad and absolute statement you've made above an accurate one.

There absolutely have been finds of what is clearly leather armour. There are surviving examples, both on display and in storage at museums.

If you're referring to Anglo-Saxon finds specifically, would it be too much to ask that you say so?

My mind isn't made up about anything. As soon as someone comes up with credible evidence for Viking or Anglon-Saxon leather armour then I'll change my mind in an instant. A drawing that can have half a dozen different interpretations is hardly credible evidence. Laking did some wonderful work in this field. That doesn't mean that everything he wrote is correct. We've had a century of scholarship since that time but this work would be much harder without pioneers like Laking and Meyrick.

There absolutely have been finds of what is clearly leather armour. There are surviving examples, both on display and in storage at museums.

So? People, including myself, have already acknowledged that in this very thread.

If you're referring to Anglo-Saxon finds specifically, would it be too much to ask that you say so?

I did. Very first post. Perhaps the OP should have picked a subject header that was less confusing for you.

If I was a famous warrior, or was going to be a famous warrior, I'd want the best armor possible, so I could hear everyone praise me later.

And if I had a magician on retainer, I'd get him to improve my gear. "Magical bull hide" to cover my shield? Sure! Get me a +2 helmet, and +5 sword? Great! If I could get me some good armor, I'd totally rip Grendel's arm off and beat him to death with it! Then I'd gorilla **** his mom! Maybe the magician has some mithril mail, or something really good? Enchanted leather?

What a quack, you can't make something that is worthless for protection into "magical armor!".

I think I'll go back to fishing for a living.

The Sami had the right idea. Enchant clothing to resist weapons and you have the ideal concealed armour. Would be handy for a duellist.

For years people have been using objects carrying an enchantment as an excuse to dismiss the object in question. The enchantment of objects simply means that a protective luck spell has been placed on the object by a shaman/witch doctor to give it some advantage.

For thousands of years african warriors had spells placed on their bodies before each battle to make their skin impervious to weapons. Every zulu believed he was protected against the white mans bullets. So you might ask "Didn't they learn real quick that spells don't protect?"-- Nope. The holy man always has an excuse: "You didn't believe...The gods have abandoned you... The enemy has stronger witchcraft...

When you read of an object holding an enchantment in a saga, don't think the object wasn't real. King Arthur's scabbard, Prince Dietrich's helmet, Skeggi's sword, King Hother's invulnerable coat and Hrolleif's protective cloak were all enchanted-- but scabbards, swords, helmets, coats and cloaks were all very real. The idea of an object being enchanted shouldn't make any reader nervous, it usually just means that it only brings good luck to it's owner (so you don't have to lend it out to maniacs who mishandle your stuff).

So don't dismiss the real possibility of the Sami making a special reindeer coat for war just because you see the word enchantment. If the eskimo and the chukchi had special coats for war http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eskimo , why not the sami and the fins? By the way, has any one thought to ask a Sami historian about reindeer armour? Could clear the whole thing up lickety split.

Dan Howard wrote:I'm pretty sure cu chulain wore linen armour, not leather.

This might be helpful - a section from the Tain bo Cuailnge, which describes some of what Cuchulainn wore as armour...

“…twenty-seven tunics [cneslenti] worn next to his skin, waxed, board like, compact, which were bound with strings and ropes and thongs close to his fair skin…Over that outside he put his hero’s battle girdle [cathchriss] of hard leather, tough and tanned, made from the best part of seven ox-hides of yearlings, which covered him from the thin part of his side to the thick part of his arm-pit; he used to wear it to repel spears [gai] and points [rend] and darts [iaernn] and lances [sleg] and arrows [saiget], for they glanced from it as if they had struck against stone or rock or horn."

Leather was certainly in the personal armoury of the Hound of Cullen.


Waxed cloth and hardened leather as protective gear? Plausible. The Tain has a ton of heroic excess in it, but multiple tunics waxed and covered with ox hide isn't exactly mythic.

The construction of an early Irish Battle 'girdle'? No clue.

Although, the battle girdle is called a cathchriss or cath crios. Chriss/crios means belt, so essentially it was a belt wide enough that it covered his vitals, from his hips to armpits. In other words, an actual girdle, a leather corset. Still no clue how it was constructed.

Finnacan wrote:

Dan Howard wrote:I'm pretty sure cu chulain wore linen armour, not leather.

This might be helpful - a section from the Tain bo Cuailnge, which describes some of what Cuchulainn wore as armour...

“…twenty-seven tunics [cneslenti] worn next to his skin, waxed, board like, compact, which were bound with strings and ropes and thongs close to his fair skin…Over that outside he put his hero’s battle girdle [cathchriss] of hard leather, tough and tanned, made from the best part of seven ox-hides of yearlings, which covered him from the thin part of his side to the thick part of his arm-pit; he used to wear it to repel spears [gai] and points [rend] and darts [iaernn] and lances [sleg] and arrows [saiget], for they glanced from it as if they had struck against stone or rock or horn."

Good find, that is the year and location for this?

In any case it is a pretty good indication of both cloth and leather armor in existence. You are right it is a little scanty on construction methods but seems like a very wide belt of thick leather or possibly hardened leather. One could also make the argument that it could even be a leather vest covering the shoulders slightly as well.

The reference to 27 tunics remind me of some documentation I saw on roman linen armor; a layer of linen a layer of glue and another layer of linen.....continue until you are out of linen or sick of the project. In that case I think the guy used 20 yards of linen to make one breast plate, ug.

Not to long age I posted my thoughts connecting cu chulain's leather war girdle with the wide belts in caroligian art. You can see one here (5th pic down) http://www.myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=9561 You have a detailed description of leather being worn as armour in Ireland, together with images of wide belts on the continent. And from what I understand they weren't making large plates of metal like that yet.

Godric of Castlemont wrote:The reference to 27 tunics remind me of some documentation I saw on roman linen armor; a layer of linen a layer of glue and another layer of linen.....continue until you are out of linen or sick of the project. In that case I think the guy used 20 yards of linen to make one breast plate, ug.

It almost certainly is a reference to layered linen armour. Glue has never been used in this construction in any culture or time period; the layers were quilted together just like padded jacks. Though I can see a waterproofing agent of some sort being used to protect the surface. A leather cover was commonly used for this.

Perhaps the linen construction was too rigid for the stomach/groin and a more flexible leather girdle was worn to cover this location.

Godric of Castlemont wrote:The reference to 27 tunics remind me of some documentation I saw on roman linen armor; a layer of linen a layer of glue and another layer of linen.....continue until you are out of linen or sick of the project. In that case I think the guy used 20 yards of linen to make one breast plate, ug.

Not Roman but Greek, as on my own humble page:

http://www.larp.com/hoplite/linothor.html

Though as Dan said, we no longer believe those were glued linen at all. Those shown on Classical artwork were more likely *leather*, while *quilted* linen would be Hellenistic.

Len Parker wrote:Not to long age I posted my thoughts connecting cu chulain's leather war girdle with the wide belts in caroligian art. You can see one here (5th pic down) http://www.myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=9561 You have a detailed description of leather being worn as armour in Ireland, together with images of wide belts on the continent.

That particular image looks like something quilted to me, but of course that's only one possibility! I tend to agree that Cuchulainn's belt sounds like a piece of leather armor to me, though like the armor described in the Iliad it's hard to tell what's covering what. They really do emphasize the toughness of it. What stinks is that this seems to be the only description of such a thing in Irish literature, that I've ever heard mentioned. And arguing the date of this little tale is a whole 'nother thread...

And from what I understand they weren't making large plates of metal like that yet.

Sorry, not sure what you're getting at. Given the helmets and cauldrons that have been found, I don't think a solid cuirass was beyond their capabilities, but that doesn't really enter the equation, here. (If Cuchulainn dates to the Late Bronze Age, Ireland was producing bronze shields 3 feet in diameter, MUCH bigger than a breastplate!)

Matthew

Yeah, there are obvious issues seeing details from the Tain as concrete evidence.

For one thing, the collected stories of Cuchulainn are presumed to be from pre-Christian Ireland, anywhere from the Late Bronze Age and up to 200-400 AD.

Second, the Tain itself is first recorded in the Yellow Book of Leinster, which is from the 1100s, so one is left to wonder how many details about material culture (clothing, armor, etc) is more contemporary to the 12th century, and how much is older oral tradition maintained by the bardic community.

Third, Cuchulainn and his fellow Red Branch knights are myths, legends, inhabiting the same cultural shelf as Perseus, Theseus, Achilles and Jason. The stuff is a mix of fragmented history, pure fantasy, ancient symbolism and fable wrapped in the colored cloak of entertainment.

...I was just pointing out that Cuchulainn was described with leather.

I'm really surprised that no one has yet mentioned the Sutton Hoo burial.

The 'shoulder clasps' and their associated fittings have been suggested as being from a pseudo-Roman cuirass of leather (Bruce-Mitford, personal comment at a lecture, Macquarie Uni, Sydney, Australia 1983 as well as print sources)

If you get a look at some clear photos, they have smooth enclosed backs (pretty much required by the cloisone garnets) and large gold wire loops to fasten them onto something. The closest other objects to this that I have seen are belt buckles that have tabs on the back that go thru' small slots in a leather belt, which then have a thick thread run through holes in them to hold the buckle in place.

The legs and arm splints of the V8 find were once suggested to be body armour and now that is a laughable notion (at least to anyone that has done any real research on that grave.)
My point being, archaeologists are not infallible when it comes to their suggestions.
I have done alot of reading on the SH find and while there is no doubt some of the items in the grave have a strong Roman influence I dont yet fully buy into the Roman cuirass thing.
Its been a few years since I actually kept up with the most up to date material on SH so the proof may be there and I just havent seen it yet.

bsrlee wrote:I'm really surprised that no one has yet mentioned the Sutton Hoo burial.

The 'shoulder clasps' and their associated fittings have been suggested as being from a pseudo-Roman cuirass of leather (Bruce-Mitford, personal comment at a lecture, Macquarie Uni, Sydney, Australia 1983 as well as print sources)

There have been a couple discussions of those clasps, either here or on MyArmoury. Paul Mortimer is the man you want to talk to--he has the full kit reconstructed. Unfortunately I don't recall the details, but I *think* the upshot was that the whole "Shoulder clasps for a leather cuirass" idea was pretty vague, basically just one guy's opinion blown into dogma. They could easily be baldric clasps. But even if they *were* from a leather cuirass of some sort, that makes them perfect evidence for *royal* leather armor, not really applicable to your average peasant.

Matthew

Yeah. His argument stems from the old belief that the Romans actually wore leather cuirasses. A belt clasp would be my guess too.

Also, as this is a burial, the cuirass (if it was one) could have been specially made for the body in order to make it look Roman - that doesn't mean that anyone living would have worn similar as part of their normal battle dress.

Medicus Matt on RAT posted these museum pics (at bottom) and I immediately thought of the Sutton Hoo clasps. http://s418.photobucket.com/albums/pp263/medicusmatt/Nydam%20Hall%20-%20Schleswig%20Museum/#!cpZZ3QQtppZZ16
If this display is legitimate, this might be the answer to the Sutton Hoo mystery.

Len Parker wrote:Medicus Matt on RAT posted these museum pics (at bottom) and I immediately thought of the Sutton Hoo clasps. http://s418.photobucket.com/albums/pp263/medicusmatt/Nydam%20Hall%20-%20Schleswig%20Museum/#!cpZZ3QQtppZZ16
If this display is legitimate, this might be the answer to the Sutton Hoo mystery.

Wow thank you for that link. That is amazing.

"I've translated every line in the Iliad"...

Sorry for the derail but Dan you must have been EPIC in school to get that many lines!

Thomas Powers wrote:"I've translated every line in the Iliad"...

Sorry for the derail but Dan you must have been EPIC in school to get that many lines!

Hi Thomas. It was for a book that is coming out later this year.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Bronze-Age-Mili ... 6432714-21

I had to go through the Iliad and pull out all of the references to armour and shields to see if there was enough detail to make reconstructions. The available translations are not reliable enough so I went back to the original Greek.

That is the way to do it Dan! Well done.

I will have to take a look at it once its is out. Maybe I'll add some to my Greek section for next term.

RPM

Well done, Dan... just placed a pre-order! (though everyone knows that bronze age stuff is so boring... )

Thanks for the support guys.

Baron Alcyoneus wrote:Here it is as I found it:

The only people in British history noted to use leather, for instance, were the Welsh by Gerald of Wales in the late 12th Century- ''they eschew armour- instead wearing corslets of leather''.

Is this the same passage? This translation is on Gutenburg
http://www.gutenberg.org/catalog/world/ ... &pageno=17

"They make use of light arms, which do not impede their agility, small coats of mail, bundles of arrows, and long lances, helmets and shields, and more rarely greaves plated with iron." [Bk I, Ch 8]

The latin says loricis minoribus which just means "little armour". In most texts lorica refers to metal armour of some sort so leather is unlikely. Mail seems the most likely given the place and time.

There are only two mentions of leather or hides in the entire translation: one refers to shoes and the other refers to boats.

Dan Howard wrote:I'm pretty sure cu chulain wore linen armour, not leather. I've translated every line in the Iliad and know for certain that Homer doesn't mention leather armour anywhere in his book. Lion and leopard hides are sometimes worn as clothing but don't protect against weapons. The Nemean lion is a special case because its skin was magically impervious to weapons.

IIRC, cu chullains saga mentions leather, or bull hide. I'm quite certain that he had a mixture of fabric and leather.

Already mentioned above. He had some kind of girdle made of leather but it is pretty hard to figure out what is covered by what.