The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners

[Galfrid atte grene]

Galleron, I had read that this monument underwent significant restoration and as such was untrustworthy. What is your opinion?

edit: take a look at the WGA page on this monument: http://www.wga.hu/html_m/s/sluter/philip/4philip1.html
They state that the original was destroyed during the French Revolution and the current one is from the 19th century, modeled after old drawings. That's enough for me to rule it out as good source.

edit 2: here's some antiquarian drawings it was reconstructed from (I think): http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b7 ... .r=.langFR and http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b7 ... .r=.langFR

[RandallMoffett]

Galfrid,

That may be the case but seeing how much it looks like others I think as far as liners go seems like it is likely ok. I have not see it in person so hard to tell what is going on.

RPM

[scott2978]

https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos- ... 3275_n.jpg here's a friend's aventail with liner. it lays perfectly

I wish I knew this man better, as it seems Ian and I always have the same adventures in armor I've learned a good bit just by watching his harness evolve over the years in pictures over the internet. I've studied this and his other pictures of the aventail liner he made over on MyArmoury.com and planned to base mine off his ideas but with some slight changes. I'll probably attach the camail liner to the camail with removable laces instead of sewing it on for storage reasons. One question I want to ask him is whether he sewed his camail liner to his helmet liner or to the leather camail strap, or what.

[Ian L]

.

[Galleron]

Galleron, I had read that this monument underwent significant restoration and as such was untrustworthy. What is your opinion?

edit: take a look at the WGA page on this monument: http://www.wga.hu/html_m/s/sluter/philip/4philip1.html
They state that the original was destroyed during the French Revolution and the current one is from the 19th century, modeled after old drawings. That's enough for me to rule it out as good source.

edit 2: here's some antiquarian drawings it was reconstructed from (I think): http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b7 ... .r=.langFR and http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b7 ... .r=.langFR

Judging by the pattern of cracks visible in close-up, it looks like the restoration mostly consisted of gluing together the shards of the smashed effigy and replacing missing material where necessary, like reassembling a smashed pot from potsherds. The restoration could have been quite extensive while still restoring the effigy to something very close to its original form.

[Kel Rekuta]

Galfrid,

That may be the case but seeing how much it looks like others I think as far as liners go seems like it is likely ok. I have not see it in person so hard to tell what is going on.

RPM

The Web Art Gallery description is misleading. Yes both the monuments were demolished but not completely destroyed. A great number of broken pieces were salvaged and informed the restoration. In addition, the survival of most of the mourning figures illustrates how well the pieces were preserved after the acts of vandalism were past. The helmet alone was carved from one large piece of alabaster with significant interior detail down to the stitch lines. No 19thC reconstruction would have bothered with such details without exemplars to follow.

A few years ago, Matt Easton and/or Fabrice Cognot managed to get up a ladder and photograph details of that monument closely. Unfortunately Matt no longer shares the full series of photos on his website. If Doug Strong ever gets final issue of the Arms and Armour Journal published, Fabrice (now Dr.) Cognot has a study of the liner and possible construction. We have to wait and see if Doug can overcome the hurdles he has to deal with to make it happen. Its a great article, looking forward to the final draft.

Matt has been known to drop by this forum so perhaps he can provide more info on the study.

[Ernst]

Since the issue of mail collars on haubergeons has been questioned several times,
http://etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/3919/1/T ... _final.pdf

The accounts of Fleet’s successors as keeper of the privy
wardrobe, Robert Mildenhall and William Rothwell, also distinguish mail ‘with high
nails’ (de alta clavatura), These accounts also show that earlier shirts (made before
1344) had no collars and the newer types did. An example of such a mail shirt,
offered for sale at auction in 2006, is a short-sleeved, collarless shirt which was
extended with a collar and sleeve extensions of all-riveted mail.(88)

(88) Christie’s, Antique Arms and Armour from the Collection of Dr. & Mrs. Jerome Zwanger (London,
12 December 2006), lot 208.
------------
Large issues of armour were also made to ships, including 115 pisanes to the cog
John, authorised in June 1345. The remain from his first account comprises:
72 pairs of mail sleeves and paunces,
28 pisanes,
8 pairs of musekins,
70 aventails,
47 mail shirts, 16 with collars.(105)

(105) TNA, E 372/198, rot. 35, m. 2d, rot. 36, m. 2.
------------
.....Thomas Colley was issued with a mail shirt with collar and a pisane.
------------
The receipt of William Rothwell from Robert Mildenhall in 1353,.....
173 mail shirts, 88 older examples without collars, 76 newer ones with collars, 4 all-riveted,
3 for the tournament and worn out, one of jazerant mail and one of latten.
------------
3.2 TNA, E 101/392/14, account of William Rothwell,618 keeper of the privy
wardrobe at the Tower of London, 9 May 1353–24 June 1360
.....
Recepta <platorum, loricarum >, pauncorum, bracorum, pizanum, aventallorum et
aliorum hernesiorum de mayle et de plata de dicto Roberto de Mildenhale ut patet
per particulas subscriptas
De predicto Roberto de Mildenhale nuper custode dicte private garderobe Regis infra
Turrim dicto ixo die Maii anno xxvijo per indenturam ipsius Roberti superius
annotatam
cxiiij paria de pauncz quorum l paria de diversis clavaturis et lxiiij debiles
cxxxviij paria et j braces quorum lxxvij paria longa, xlv paria curta, ij paria pro
torniamento et xiiij paria et j bracz communes
ij paria de gusettis
iij paria de chausons
xj pec’ de maille debiles pro coopertoriis equorum
cxlviij pizan’ quorum iiij de platis ferreis et cxliiij de maille
xij paria de musekyns
c iiijxx vj aventalla
clxxiij loricas quarum lxxvj cum coleris de nova factura, iiijxx viij absque coleris de
vetera factura, iiij de alta clavatura, iij pro torniamento debilas, j de maille jasserant
et j de latone

The fact that pizanes are listed as seperate items from the lorica or hauberks with collars of new manufacture is plain.

[RandallMoffett]

Ernst,

Not sure anyone mentioned otherwise? I think it'd be a hard argument to say they did not exist. That said I still wonder if they were used in conjunction in this way any more than alone by lesser equipped troops.

RPM

[scott2978]

Since the Peel Affinity is involved here I would like to point out that in that excellent book there is a character wearing a hauberk with a raised collar that is also covered in mail. The collar is clearly quilted like the gambeson and coverd in mail and can be seen quite clearly in several pictures of this character. Not that La Belle is a definitive historical source, but right there is a depiction of what those high collared mail shirts may have looked like.

[Ernst]

Lesser equipped troops might not have had an aventail, but may have relied solely on the pisane or haubergeon collar.
http://manuscriptminiatures.com/4600/12549/

Certainly the 1360 inventory: 376 aventails, 148 pisanes, 76 loricas with collars, shows the capability of supplying additional neck protection beyond the aventail to 2/3rds of the force, unless aventails and pisanes were not issued together.

http://books.google.com/books?id=rNgGAA ... ns&f=false

Musekyns.jpg (82.76 KiB) Viewed 988 times

Here we see Richard of Byteryng appear for the Norwich militia with 2 pisans and 2 bascinets-one with aventail, and one without. So the pisane is worn regardless of an aventail being present or not.
Thomas de Bumpsted has a pisane, and bascinet with aventail. If his haubergeon is of the newer type with collar, he would have three layers of mail, possibly all with padding over his neck.

I think the evidence for dual throat protection is high, if not universal.

[Bertus Brokamp]

A haubergeon with collar that is assumed to have been worn by the Habsburg duke Leopold of Austria when he was defeated and killed by the Swiss at Sempach in 1386.
The Swiss then kept it as booty / trophy and it is now in the Historisches Museum of Luzern.

Interesting discussion. If I were to choose, I would like to wear multiple layers as well to protect me from sharpe lances aimed for my throat at canter speed.

[RandallMoffett]

Ernst,

"I think the evidence for dual throat protection is high, if not universal."

Universal means everyone does this, which is clearly not correct. We have images that show it clearly was not... and text…. Even your own listed here- Richard had one that was and one that clearly was not work with a pisan. How can you say universal when your own evidence disqualifies this notion right off the bat.

I still think evidence leans toward the bascinet with aventail alone from the evidence I have seen but still as I said before think the pisan was in fairly common use with the aventail and bascinet. I simply suspect the pisan was more commonly used by lower level troops as they often are listed as simply with bascinets and in the scores, if not hundreds.


RPM

[Ernst]

You are correct. "but not universal" would have been a better conjuction.

[Galleron]

Since the Peel Affinity is involved here I would like to point out that in that excellent book there is a character wearing a hauberk with a raised collar that is also covered in mail. The collar is clearly quilted like the gambeson and coverd in mail and can be seen quite clearly in several pictures of this character. Not that La Belle is a definitive historical source, but right there is a depiction of what those high collared mail shirts may have looked like.

That's probably me. It's a pisan, worn over my haubergeon and under my plate defenses.

[Galleron]

Ernst,

"I think the evidence for dual throat protection is high, if not universal."

Universal means everyone does this, which is clearly not correct. We have images that show it clearly was not... and text…. Even your own listed here- Richard had one that was and one that clearly was not work with a pisan. How can you say universal when your own evidence disqualifies this notion right off the bat.

I still think evidence leans toward the bascinet with aventail alone from the evidence I have seen but still as I said before think the pisan was in fairly common use with the aventail and bascinet. I simply suspect the pisan was more commonly used by lower level troops as they often are listed as simply with bascinets and in the scores, if not hundreds.


RPM

In the Effigies and Brasses database for 1380-1415, when martial figures are shown without bascinet and aventail, at least 98% have some sort of standing mail collar. The remainder are ambiguous.

The people that could afford brasses and effigies were elite, but at least within this group a standing mail collar was almost universal, and the majority of them probably wore an aventail over that.

[Ernst]

http://manuscriptminiatures.com/4317/7104/
And notice how the aventail seems to fold up in this example. Certainly some were lined, but were the majority? Did it depend on how much one wore beneath the aventail?

[RandallMoffett]

I am not sure that works Galleron. Most of the effigies of that period are covered with the bascinet and aventail so you are looking at a tiny sliver of the total effigies in this 98% you are mentioning. Assuming this represents a larger group even though it may or may not be true seems problematic. If we had no other evidence that may be what we had to assume.... but it is not the only evidence so there is not reason to.

To me the fact they show up so infrequently in inventories of knights and nobles with a bascinet and aventail is evidence far more compelling than assuming that a small sample group in effigies represents what the rest have on under their aventails. There are many upper nobles who seem to not even own a pisan to conclude the artwork shows a norm. In the Earl of Dunbar's inventory from right around the start of the period you mention he had aventails for all basicnets he owned but not a single pisan, collar or anything like it in his inventory. Of all the bascinets I have found listed in the Hustings rolls, many have aventails but only one or two has a pisan with it.

So if art was out only medium of evidence I'd think your assumption was right but the text does not support that from what I am seeing. I have found a few accounts like that Ernst posted where they show up with pisan or collar of mail but most lay with aventail only accompanying the bascinet.

I have no issue assuming it was done but still maintain it looks unlikely to have been more common.

Ernst,

Just like the pisan issue I'd say that would be a hard one to answer for how frequent something was used compared to other uses, maybe even harder, as liners would likely never be included in text as they were part of another item. To me that is the key to the pisan frequency but for lined aventails we are out of luck I suspect.... unless someone finds an armour regulation saying all aventails had to be lined... which I doubt but who knows.

That said after using one on mine I am not going back. I figure even in period it was very much a mix between lined and unlined aventails and pisans and such. My guess is if one had a lined pisan you may still use a lined aventail. Or maybe not. But likely coming down to personal preference and funds.

RPM

[Ernst]

I think the necessity for the pisane (God, should we spell this with a z, without the e...) was diminished by the aventail's doubling over the shoulders. By adding a collar to the haubergeon, the doubling was completed over the neck as well without the additional piece. Then the "standard" starts to show up instead of the "pisane" and confuse me once again. Perhaps I should climb back into my 13th century hole.

The lining on the collars seems more certain to me from the little piccadils folded over at the neck in miniatures and effigies. It's why I wonder how many layers you need.

[Galfrid atte grene]

I am not sure that works Galleron. Most of the effigies of that period are covered with the bascinet and aventail so you are looking at a tiny sliver of the total effigies in this 98% you are mentioning. Assuming this represents a larger group even though it may or may not be true seems problematic. If we had no other evidence that may be what we had to assume.... but it is not the only evidence so there is not reason to.

Hmm, I think most French monuments show uncovered heads. The English are all in bascinets of course.

[Ian L]

Hmm, I think most French monuments show uncovered heads. The English are all in bascinets of course.

Between 1370 and 1415, the French effigies are overwhelmingly showing uncovered heads, and almost all of them have a pisan showing.


The English effigies for the same stretch of time are almost all showing up wearing their bascinets, the one or two examples that don't have a helmet on show maille protection for the neck. It's worth noting the English sample size is almost 3 times that of the French sample size.

This one might even be a haubergeon collar??:

Ralph de Knevynton
1370

[Galfrid atte grene]

Also note that Knevynton's brass was imported from France.

[RandallMoffett]

Ian,

It is an interesting point and I have looked at far more English inventories than French so I could not say how art stacks against the text in this case. Perhaps it is more a regional phenomena. I also worry about the fact that the current ratio of about 3 English effigies to one French is caused by the loss of so many French effigies and perhaps no longer balanced. That said the fact that more show this is a very compelling.

That said looking at the lists from the Clos de Galees they looks to show up almost as stand alone neck armour but I cannot remember well enough the French inventories I have seen so I'd have to review them to see. That said I find art history a dangerous way of figuring out dates and frequency of use.

This is something I keep going back to because I think it may be something important that shows pisan may not only mean close fit collar of mail. I noticed some time again that pisan shows up often, as well as random other bits of mail, with common troops. Here is a description of a hobelar requirement from January 1345 in the Close Patent Rolls pg. 427, "cum aketona pisario, paletto burnito, cirotecis ferreis et lancea"

I do wonder also if pisan and aventail can be used interchangeably.....

RPM

[Galleron]

The Middle English Dictionary gives many examples of pisans worn with aventails:

http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/m/mec/med ... =143308237

[RandallMoffett]

Galleron,

It sure does. My questions though is largely if they may also be use as an interchangeable word what we think of as a pisan, independent mail collar with aventail, mail that attaches to the helmet and hangs down to cover the neck.. I think we have sufficient evidence in text to say pisans were worn-alone, with an aventail and such but even their definition on this site actually sounds much more like a aventail than what is being discussed here by most of us.

"a) Arm. A piece of metal or mail attached to the helmet and extending over the neck and upper breast;"

That looking at what we are discussing is not a pisan but an aventail.

The other thing I mentioned above is this first example is perhaps one of two times it shows up among the dozens or so times a helmet with aventail shows up in the hustings rolls. If we are typing to discover the frequency to simply the mail aventail we are still no closer s 1 or 2 out of 20-30 is pretty low percentages. That is sort of why I figure it was not as commonly done as a simple aventail. This is further murkier because the fact pisan could mean either seemingly.

It is impressive that they were in use so long but of those accounts listed with it only list aventails with pisans twice out of all of them in these examples. And I am still wondering if the pisan was not used by some to mean an aventail, as their definition indicates they do, unless they think some knights had a double aventail which would be interesting.

RPM

[James B.]

We see so much art with a helmet on the ground and a collar under it. Why would it be depicted so much if it is not a common arrangment?

[chef de chambre]

Hmm, I think most French monuments show uncovered heads. The English are all in bascinets of course.

Between 1370 and 1415, the French effigies are overwhelmingly showing uncovered heads, and almost all of them have a pisan showing.


The English effigies for the same stretch of time are almost all showing up wearing their bascinets, the one or two examples that don't have a helmet on show maille protection for the neck. It's worth noting the English sample size is almost 3 times that of the French sample size.

This one might even be a haubergeon collar??:

Ralph de Knevynton
1370

The bolded may be true of extant effigies and brasses in France, but it is a very deceptive statement regardless. When examining French monuments, you must keep in mind 4 very large events in French history, which have destroyed probably the majority of such monuments made.

The first would be the Wars of Religion, which saw the first destruction of such monuments. The second would be the French Revolution, during which large numbers of statues, heraldry, and monuments connected directly with the ancienne régime were deliberately destroyed as hated reminders of said régime - this could be *quite* thorough, to the point of escutcheons of arms being chiseled off buildings (an example would be the Tour Saint Nicholas in La Rochelle, off the top of my head)

The third would be the First World War, which saw the destruction of monuments in Northern France on a large scale, even such imposing edifices as the donjon of Coucy - nevermind such monuments on a piddling scale as village churches. Ditto the second world war - while the first devastated large stretches of Belgium and Northern France, the Second saw destruction by bombing and fighting all across the country.

The end result is that the survival rates of such monuments in France are *Low* - very low in comparison to the number that were created through the Middle Ages. As a result, broad statements about such monuments, or basing conclusions on the very small sample extant, or even recorded (accurately) before destruction is a hazardous undertaking.

Food for thought.

[RandallMoffett]

James,

I think the issue is that we likely have something like 1 out of ten effigies remaining. I think others have given even worse odds of survival there.

And the rest of French art from 1380-1415 shows a pretty large number without the collar of mail.

For example. Guy in full harness but helmet who is a knight-
http://manuscriptminiatures.com/4315/8640/

And a king fully armed without helmet and no mail collar
http://manuscriptminiatures.com/4284/9644/

Now of course you do have examples with the collar, and even plate collars-
http://manuscriptminiatures.com/4163/8796/

The fact remains that in French MS illustrations some 95% of armed men have bascinets and aventails visible but we have no idea what they most commonly are wearing- nothing as in example 1 here or a iron collar as in example 3 or a mail collar as in example 2. So trying to us art for an answer of frequency is doomed because the majority of the samples are unknowns.

As well you see a ton of gents wearing just the mail collar without any aventail with their bascinet.

http://manuscriptminiatures.com/4310/13895/

All we can use the art for in this case is what we do not see in text. And to me the text is showing the more likely and solid frequency of the collars use.

RPM

[chef de chambre]

A further interesting contrast, Randal, is I believe there are more surviving English effigies than French effigies, and the class that had such monuments made in France was something like three times or more the size of the class in England, just to give an idea of the appalling level of destruction. It is something I think about all the time when trying to undertake research for what is now the region of the Department du Nord, or the cote d'Or.

[RandallMoffett]

Chef,

Very true. It is a very sad thought indeed all that history lost. And also an important fact to consider when trying to use such evidence.

RPM

[Galleron]

James,



As well you see a ton of gents wearing just the mail collar without any aventail with their bascinet.

http://manuscriptminiatures.com/4310/13895/

All we can use the art for in this case is what we do not see in text. And to me the text is showing the more likely and solid frequency of the collars use.

RPM

Those men are not wearing bascinets, but kettle hats.

[Steve S.]

There have been discussions for years that speculate that maille in general may have been a lined garment. Thordeman mentions it in his Wisby book. When I was at the Royal Armouries in Leeds they asked me what I thought about lined maille. I didn't have an opinion other than to mention Thordeman.

The most obvious reason I see for lining maille is to protect the clothing underneath it.

Steve

[RandallMoffett]

Galleron,

Sorry that was just a general example of helmets with pisan alone but there are others. The point is that the pisans seem to have been worn alone fairly often in art but more so in text.

http://manuscriptminiatures.com/4665/12657/
http://manuscriptminiatures.com/4665/12658/
http://manuscriptminiatures.com/4310/13896/

And some bascinets and kettles with pisans
http://manuscriptminiatures.com/4310/13894/

And another iron one
http://manuscriptminiatures.com/4163/7840/
http://manuscriptminiatures.com/4163/8792/

And a few more of them with kettles. This MS has a ton of them.
http://manuscriptminiatures.com/4310/13880/
http://manuscriptminiatures.com/4310/13877/

Looks at this interesting reverse liner...
http://manuscriptminiatures.com/4209/8891/

RPM

[Galfrid atte grene]

Looks at this interesting reverse liner...
http://manuscriptminiatures.com/4209/8891/

I have many of these tagged under "vrysoun", per this thread.

[Galleron]

James,

I think the issue is that we likely have something like 1 out of ten effigies remaining. I think others have given even worse odds of survival there.

And the rest of French art from 1380-1415 shows a pretty large number without the collar of mail.

For example. Guy in full harness but helmet who is a knight-
http://manuscriptminiatures.com/4315/8640/

And a king fully armed without helmet and no mail collar
http://manuscriptminiatures.com/4284/9644/

Yes, but it's complicated. A pisan is often worn with the cape tucked underneath the plate torso defense, but not always:

http://effigiesandbrasses.com/751/1032/

If the pisan is worn with the cape over the plate torso defense, it's easy to remove when you want to be comfortable. So when we see an otherwise armored figure with his helmet off and no pisan, we can't assume he doesn't have one. He may have removed it when he took off his helmet and gauntlets.

[Keegan Ingrassia]

Hm. I'll freely admit that until this thread, I'd never heard of a pisan, and called a neck of mail extending down around the top of the shoulders a standard. I know that the kit I'm building will have this piece, but now I'm not sure what to call it.

So, what exactly is the difference between a pisan and a mail standard?