Late Fourteenth Century Arming Garments II: The Upper Body

[Ernst]

Late 14th century is a century beyond my primary study area, so excuse my ignorance. I would come from the opposite direction, and ask what evidence for pointing remains on the cuisses and rebraces. Are there pairs of rivets at the tops of the cuisse or rebrace holding a leather tab, or pairs of holes, etc?

[James B.]

This guy is not in harness, but what were those tabs laced to?

The blue doublet underneath. Look at the arm the red garment is a gown layer over a blue garment which is likely a doublet under the red garment.

[Mac]

It would also be comforting to have evidence for how the points were attached to the doublet. Were they sewn on, laced through eyelets on the doublet, or laced through tabs? I don't understand that bit about the peplum of the Charles de Bois doublet.

The points of Charles' doublet are sewn right into the inside of his skirt (I think the word "pablum" really implies something looser). This creates a situation where they are not visible from the outside. Note, that they are just above the place where the skirt is slit on the sides. I think this will be just about the height of the hip joints. The slits in the skirt allow freer movement of the legs, as well as making it easier to get at the points.

And this belongs in thread III, but do we know whether hosen under armour would have been laced to the braes or to the doublet? Some people find lacing the doublet to the hosen restricting, and it would be hard to loosen the hosen once the armour was on.

By the late 143th C., attaching the hosen to the braes was pretty "old fashion". Anyone who had any pretenses to being anyone would have had their hosen tied to their doublet. Knights should have them attached to their doublets. Farmers might still have them trussed to their braes or perhaps to a belt.

PS. Once again, that Franciscan missal (BNF Latin 757 folio 286r) has something interesting. This scene has two men stoning a saint, and one of them is suffering from a a wardrobe malfunction:

I don't think this is a "wardrobe malfunction". I think that we are seeing the pouch of his braes. If they are tailored well, this is really how they look from that angle. Please take my word for it....I don't want to have to post a pic of myself from this angle in my medieval undies.

For an unequivocal wardrobe malfunction, see Della Francesca's "carrying the true cross" http://home.earthlink.net/~lizjones429/ ... s-det1.JPG

This guy is not in harness, but what were those tabs laced to?

I believe that those tabs would be fastened to center back of the doublet skirt. That would be under the red outer garment. The blue sleeves that we can see are part of the doublet, although the part we can not see may well be undied. (see Cathrine of Cleves giving alms to beggars http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9 ... ruKrRIzkUg)

The Chalres to Blois doublet has a point of dearskin at this location. I think that another (albeit undocumented) possibility is a metal hook. If I wore hosen like this, I would be experimenting with hooks for sure.
Mac

[James B.]

Late 14th century is a century beyond my primary study area, so excuse my ignorance. I would come from the opposite direction, and ask what evidence for pointing remains on the cuisses and rebraces. Are there pairs of rivets at the tops of the cuisse or rebrace holding a leather tab, or pairs of holes, etc?

Yes especially in later 14th and early 15th example and beyond.

[PartsAndTechnical]

Klaus,

I wonder if you are conflating these two images.




They are pulled from Blaz's thread over on Myarmoury. http://www.myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=21451 Dr Toby published them in his article on arming doublets in Waffen- und Kostümkunde (or whatever it is currently called)

They are later than what we are discussing, but sometimes it helps to "see where they went", and work back from there.

Mac

Forgive me for being so blunt....I think this solves 95% of the problem. The hose are clearly suspended so its obvious the doublet cords are used for something else...and that something else can only be armour...right? ?

The only detail I do wonder is the buttons vs lacing. Lacing is just superior to buttons as it has a sort of "constantly adjusting grasp" that buttons tend to lack. This image almost suggests (for lack of seeing the entire picture) that the button doublet is not used for the leg armour....we see arm harness point but none for the leg armour. Do we have the full image of this fella? Does he have on leg armour?




The only detail Im still concerned with is how high the leg points should be set....I think mounting the tabs higher up for leg armour would seem more logical, stronger, less likely to distort the purpose of a firm waist tension.

[PartsAndTechnical]

I just realized something....the king is in bondage......he has shackles on his feet. Is he also barefoot and hose-less?

Because if this is true, then the points at the base of his doublet may have been for his wool hose rather than a leg harness.





So what then are the points doing on his arm? This is why I have problems with interpreting the art too literally. It almost makes me think the artists were not as familiar with the details of arming up a man as we might think. ....almost makes me think the artist here is conflating civilian and military details.

[Klaus the Red]

If you look at the MyArmoury discussion, it establishes the use of sleeve points as simply decorative elements on civilian 15th century doublets. Having said that, I'm quite certain this is an arming coat.

[Mac]

Drew,

Syphax was taken prisoner in a military engagement. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syphax He has been stripped of his armor, but what he wears is without a doubt intended to represent arming clothes.

then the points at the base of his doublet may have been for his wool hose rather than a leg harness.

If you look closely, you will see that the lacing points are not attached at the base of his doublet. Those horizontal dashes at above hip-joint level represent where the laces are passed from the outside to the inside of his skirt. I see no reason to think that these laces could not have held up his leg armor as well as his hosen.

There are similar dashes for the attachment of the points on the upper arms as well, save that in this case the laces must end up on the outside.

So what then are the points doing on his arm? This is why I have problems with interpreting the art too literally.

They are for holding up his arm defenses. In this case you are not interpreting literally enough.

Mac

[Klaus the Red]

Mac, I think the unwritten part of that question was, "If the doublet only holds up his hose, then it is probably civilian, and therefore why...?"

Drew- I wouldn't worry too much about finding the absolute answer to what was pointed where. Experiment. Put several sets of holes in your coat and move things around. When you find an arrangement that lets you move and fight effectively, it must, ipso facto, be authentic.

[James B.]

If you look at the MyArmoury discussion, it establishes the use of sleeve points as simply decorative elements on civilian 15th century doublets. Having said that, I'm quite certain this is an arming coat.

That is a bizarre conclusion almost every one of those images is of a military figure. Even if the setting has no armor there is symbolism in the points. Why would anyone just wear points as a fashion.

[Klaus the Red]

James, the conclusion is not mine- several of the posted photos are labeled, "civil garment with decorative points." I nonetheless find it plausible.

[Sean M]

PS. Once again, that Franciscan missal (BNF Latin 757 folio 286r) has something interesting. This scene has two men stoning a saint, and one of them is suffering from a a wardrobe malfunction:

I don't think this is a "wardrobe malfunction". I think that we are seeing the pouch of his braes. If they are tailored well, this is really how they look from that angle. Please take my word for it....I don't want to have to post a pic of myself from this angle in my medieval undies.

For an unequivocal wardrobe malfunction, see Della Francesca's "carrying the true cross" http://home.earthlink.net/~lizjones429/ ... s-det1.JPG

Thanks Mac, much food for thought.

I think that painting is enough pictures of braes for one thread! The back of his hosen have come loose somehow, whether he loosened them himself or whether they burst open.

The “Rex Siphax” drawing is interesting, and no so different from late 14th century fashions, but it is also late. I agree that anything from 1300 to 1450 or so is relevant (the quilting on his sleeve reminds me of the jupon worn by the soldier in the "Von dem passion Jhesu Christ" scene), but it would be a comfort to have something similar from the period 1350-1400. We have already found more than I expected.

[James B.]

The “Rex Siphax” drawing is interesting, and no so different from late 14th century fashions, but it is also late.

The early doublet and the late kirtle have a natural and overlapping transition and that early doublet and later fashions have another. It's perfectly withing its time from with the scalloped skirt and clearly Italian with the baggy upper sleeve style though in the early 15th century you find it in French art too. It is mid 15th century when you see the doublet start to have a much shorter skirt/peplum area as common fashion.

Here are some early 15th century military doublets:

[James B.]

More images

[James B.]

And one more set of three

[Mac]

Mac, I think the unwritten part of that question was, "If the doublet only holds up his hose, then it is probably civilian, and therefore why...?"

....But, why would the doublet only hold up his hosen?

Mac

[Klaus the Red]

Hell if I know, the picture makes perfect sense to me.

[Bertus Brokamp]

Outside the late 14th c. scope, but I think still nice for comparison, is a doublet found in the grave of Diego Cavaniglia (*1453 +1481) from the Naples area.
This photo shows two rows of holes in the quilted skirt of his fancy doublet. I presume the lower ones were for his hosen and the upper ones to hold up leg armour.




There are also holes in his upper sleeves, presumably to hold up arm armour (upper right in pic, below/halfway the two vertical lines)




I'm not going into the discussion whether this can not have been an arming garment since it is made of such lovely expensive fabric (personally I say bollocks to that, why not, conspicuous consumption etc.) but if it was not an arming garment and those holes were there as a fashion statement, then you'd say that a tailor would nót go out of his way to suddenly put them in a different location than when making an arming doublet.

[James B.]

Bertus thanks for sharing that have not seen it before.

[Klaus the Red]

The $10K questions is- do the "armor" eyelets show any signs of wear? I don't think it's beyond the pale for a man of means to have worn armor for parade/ceremonial purposes over a fancy civil doublet, without voiders. That's just my gut talking- I haven't seen pictorial evidence of that per se.

[Signo]

Klaus, do you think a man of the elite, wealthy enough to wear such rich clothes, would have used it so much to wear it visibly, and then buried with the same dress? He was not a reenactor, he probably had a dozen of such garments. We all would want to see the tear of years of use of such equipment, sadly, reality is often quite different from our imaginary view of how thing should have been. Those men that wore armour, and were in the position to own it, and not have it from the town's armoury, for sure didn't use the same dress for years and years. We have proof of something like that with London findings, especially in regards of shoes. For some reason we think that medieval shoes should have been everlasting, the reality is that they lasted much less than we though, we would be really disappointed to buy those shoes today.

[Klaus the Red]

Excellent point, you are quite correct. It's also possible that this could have been made specifically as a funerary garment. In that case, it makes sense that it is both of rich material and has the features of a military garment, if it's a ceremonial representation of the man's rank.

The distinction between "civilian" and "military" clothing of the armed nobility in the late medieval period should be handled cautiously, because of course every nobleman was a soldier, so in a sense, everything he wore when not in armor was a "dress uniform." Certainly in the late 14th century, armored and unarmored fashion played off each other- we see men wearing quilted pourpoints in a day-to-day context, as a statement of martial status. I think the decorative use of arming points in unarmored fashion of the late 15th century is a continuation of that impulse.

[Tracy Justus]

Thanks for the photos, Bertus. Note also that below the waist there are eyelets for lacing and above there are buttons and buttonholes.

T.

[RScivias]

Later than the purpose of this topic, but closer to the period of Bertus' pictures : this is the PhD work of Sophie JOLIVET
"Pour soi vêtir honnêtement à la cour de monseigneur le duc : costume et dispositif vestimentaire à la cour de Philippe le Bon, de 1430 à 1455"

(English summary) http://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-00392310/fr/
( full text in French, intersting bibliography) http://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00 ... SOPHIE.pdf
and the 2nd opus with the figures, pictures.. http://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00 ... exes_3.pdf

[Sean M]

Bertus, I suspect that you know this question is coming, but where has that doublet been published, and where is it kept now? One goal of this thread is to provide a basis for serious research, which can be tricky when isolated pictures float around.

I am intrigued that only the skirt of that doublet is quilted.

[Mac]

There are also holes in his upper sleeves, presumably to hold up arm armour (upper right in pic, below/halfway the two vertical lines)

Wow! Thank you, Bertus!


I have not yet found the holes in the upper sleeve. Can someone help me?

Mac

[Klaus the Red]

Mac, look between the two "brackets" of decoration in the top right, toward the bottom.

[Mac]

Klaus,

If I am following you correctly, all I see there are a sort of "flower" or "pineapple" of the original cut-velvet design.

Perhaps, someone can re-post the pic with circles around the places....?

Mac

[Signo]

The waist of that doublet is pretty interesting and tell us about it's functionality. The tight quilting and the lacing holes suggest that it was supposed to be firmly secured over the hips, and that should have been able to sustain some stress (to contain the belly or to sustain the weight of armour or both?). The marked bell shape prevent the waist line to be pulled down by leg harness and hoses, at the same time this would prevent to feel the weight over the shoulder or having restriction raising the hands.
I find interesting that the lower edge has groups of 3 holes, I don't understand how you would lace something using all three.

[Klaus the Red]

Perhaps, someone can re-post the pic with circles around the places....?

I would if I wasn't late for work... Do you see the square chunk that's missing from the upper right edge? Look immediately to its left.

[Mac]

Perhaps, someone can re-post the pic with circles around the places....?

I would if I wasn't late for work... Do you see the square chunk that's missing from the upper right edge? Look immediately to its left.

I do see the missing square. When I look to the left of it I do not see anything that is not part of the cut-velvet pattern.

Mac

[Mac]

I find interesting that the lower edge has groups of 3 holes, I don't understand how you would lace something using all three.

Marco,

I think the wearer is supposed to chose from each group of three, the two holes that line up best with the holes on his hosen.

Mac

[Sean M]

Mac, I think they mean these dots. I can't make much sense out of that sleeve to be honest; I can't figure out where the shoulder and wrist seams are or why there would be points at that spot.

[Mac]

Mac, I think they mean these dots.

Sean,

I see the dots you mean, but I don't think that they are the same sort of thing as the "buttonholed" holes on the skirt.

I can't make much sense out of that sleeve to be honest; I can't figure out where the shoulder and wrist seams are or why there would be points at that spot.

This is only the upper arm. The lower arm would be a separate piece; sort of like the Charles de Blois doublet. The piece shown here is the "left". The seam would go down the back of the arm.

Mac

[Tom B.]

Diego Cavaniglia was born in 1453, as the third son of Spanish Giovanni Garzia I and Italian Giula Caracciolo. His father died the year he was born, and the young boy was taken under the wings of king Ferdinand I of Naples. He married Margerita Orsini in 1477, and became count of Montella, Bagnoli and Cassano. He fought against the Turks in 1481, and was wounded. He died shortly after. His body was brought home to Montella and interred in the San Francesco a Folloni convent. His wife commissioned a splendid tomb, but it was not finished until many years later. In the mean time he was buried under the sacristy, and faith would have it that he was never placed in the destined tomb. Instead it was moved around several times, until one in 2004 examined the content of the unknown coffin. The remains has been examined, and showed a man of approximately 30 years of age, and a height of ca. 175 centimeters. Researchers were able to finally match him to the count Diego. The whole story was published in the book "Diego Cavaniglia - La rinascita di un conte" in 2010. The restoration of the garments has been lead by Dr. Lucia Portoghesi.

His funeral clothes were very fashionable. The main garment was a doublet (farseto) of silk damask with button closing in front, and lacing in the lower waist and at the doublet skirts. The lacing holes are hand bound over metal rings. This is where the tights of breeches could be attached. The collar is so nicely stitched it seems machine sewn. The sleeves were made of two parts; from shoulder to elbow, and from elbow to wrist. The lower sleeve is tight, and has a 16 centimeter long slit where it's closed with out buttons. The pattern of the silk damask, a "flowered pine cone" pattern, does not match up on the left and right side. The pattern of the damask is similar to a surcoat which Ferdinand I of Aragon was buried in, in San Domenico Maggiore in nearby Naples. More rare is the overgown (giornea) found in his grave. It was made of crimson silk satin, padded with wool. The neckline is wide, and bound with the same red silk satin. It was almost knee length, and with straight panel over the shoulders and a skirt padded to make it look like thick pleats. There also seems to be some darker trim going around the whole edge. Diego's giornea is thought to originally have been of crimson satin with a gold trim around the edge, and with additional embroidery. Giorneas for men were usually sleeveless and worn over the doublet with a belt in the waist, as can be seen in Francesco del Cossa's depiction of "April". In the 16th century the giornea was largely replaced by the saio.