Perhaps no more than the difference between pants and trousers. Pisan is used from 1345-1500, standard from 1454 on.Keegan Ingrassia wrote: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?
The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
Moderator: Glen K
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
Galleron
http://willscommonplacebook.blogspot.com: My Blog
http://www.cafepress.com/Commonplacegood: My CafePress store for medieval recreation and the Middle Ages
http://willscommonplacebook.blogspot.com: My Blog
http://www.cafepress.com/Commonplacegood: My CafePress store for medieval recreation and the Middle Ages
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
http://etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/3919/1/T ... _final.pdf
It's even more unclear than that. Mildenhall's second account of 1369 lists both 206 pisanes and 144 standards as well as 1,139 aventails among the mail in the Tower Armoury. The standards don't appear in earlier or later 14th century accounts, and the number of pisanes remains fairly constant.
It's even more unclear than that. Mildenhall's second account of 1369 lists both 206 pisanes and 144 standards as well as 1,139 aventails among the mail in the Tower Armoury. The standards don't appear in earlier or later 14th century accounts, and the number of pisanes remains fairly constant.
ferrum ferro acuitur et homo exacuit faciem amici sui
-
RandallMoffett
- Archive Member
- Posts: 4613
- Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 1:01 am
- Location: SE Iowa
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
Galleron,
Assuming the man in the picture simply took them off is pretty dangerous assumption and far past what the illustration supports. One could just as easily assume they simply wore the pisan alone with a bascinet as many illustrations shown was done at that time and be on firmer footing. Maybe if it was there beside them in the illustration that reasoning would have some support but as it is that theory has little standing. There are enough examples of men without helmets in art without the pisan to indicate it was not always worn. Further once again this is ignoring the overwhelming evidence presented in text.
Look at Ernst's last post. 1,139 aventails to at the most 350 mail collars. That means something like 2/3-3/4's of the bascinets there would have been expected to be used without the mail collars and only aventails. And far more bascinets to aventails and collars.This is not unique as referred to Thom's PhD he mentions several consecutive inventories where on average there are far more aventails to collars.
Something that further makes me think that pisans often were used alone is the number of them that have the covers in inventories.
To me this is what 95% of the evidence in text shows. Unless you have support to the contrary I see no reason to not think this untrue.
Keegan,
I'd use pisan if I were you.
RPM
Assuming the man in the picture simply took them off is pretty dangerous assumption and far past what the illustration supports. One could just as easily assume they simply wore the pisan alone with a bascinet as many illustrations shown was done at that time and be on firmer footing. Maybe if it was there beside them in the illustration that reasoning would have some support but as it is that theory has little standing. There are enough examples of men without helmets in art without the pisan to indicate it was not always worn. Further once again this is ignoring the overwhelming evidence presented in text.
Look at Ernst's last post. 1,139 aventails to at the most 350 mail collars. That means something like 2/3-3/4's of the bascinets there would have been expected to be used without the mail collars and only aventails. And far more bascinets to aventails and collars.This is not unique as referred to Thom's PhD he mentions several consecutive inventories where on average there are far more aventails to collars.
Something that further makes me think that pisans often were used alone is the number of them that have the covers in inventories.
To me this is what 95% of the evidence in text shows. Unless you have support to the contrary I see no reason to not think this untrue.
Keegan,
I'd use pisan if I were you.
RPM
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
Just to note there are also 1,956 lorice, mail hauberks & haubergeons in the same inventory, and some of them would likely have had collars, which might bring us to a different ratio of aventails with some additional neck protection (pisane, standard, haubergeon collar) beneath.RandallMoffett wrote:Look at Ernst's last post. 1,139 aventails to at the most 350 mail collars. That means something like 2/3-3/4's of the bascinets there would have been expected to be used without the mail collars and only aventails. And far more bascinets to aventails and collars.This is not unique as referred to Thom's PhD he mentions several consecutive inventories where on average there are far more aventails to collars.
ferrum ferro acuitur et homo exacuit faciem amici sui
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
What about all the artwork, which is no small amount, showing a collar and a aventail together?
I am not sure why you would argue its not a combination when there is so much evidence in art it was a combo and even if the ratio is only 33% of fighters possibly doing this sort of thing based on the inventories that is still a significant number. Combined with the art I think the point is well proven that some armored men chose this combination and some if not most also padded the aventail over the maille standard.
Since a lance or a sword point could slide right under the maille aventail it would make perfect sense to have a standing collar or a pisan as extra protection. I had a pisan on and an aventail in our presentation at Kalamazoo and it worked out perfectly fine.
I am not sure why you would argue its not a combination when there is so much evidence in art it was a combo and even if the ratio is only 33% of fighters possibly doing this sort of thing based on the inventories that is still a significant number. Combined with the art I think the point is well proven that some armored men chose this combination and some if not most also padded the aventail over the maille standard.
Since a lance or a sword point could slide right under the maille aventail it would make perfect sense to have a standing collar or a pisan as extra protection. I had a pisan on and an aventail in our presentation at Kalamazoo and it worked out perfectly fine.
-
RandallMoffett
- Archive Member
- Posts: 4613
- Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 1:01 am
- Location: SE Iowa
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
Ernst,
Could, could have. We are reading into what is wrote there far past what is wrote there. They could also have all sorts of things but using this as evidence is dangerous.
I just looked through the Black Princes inventory and there mix remains pretty constant.
James,
I am not discounting it even remotely. And I am sure it would work fine, adding more layers is better protection no doubt. As I said numerous times I am sure it was done, and fairly often. My issue is mostly this returning sentiment to the collar, aventail mix being the most common or only system in place during this period which by all accounts is incorrect. To me it was simply one of several systems.
The other major issue to me is the fact we are constantly seeing evidence, in this case art, used far more than is healthy for what it is. I am very doubtful if effigies and even art to some extend can be trusted for understanding how frequent something was used in the way they are being used in this respect.
So were pisans in use with aventails for sure. I am trying to balance this out. They were used alone as well and aventails were used alone too. We have many, many options.
RPM
Could, could have. We are reading into what is wrote there far past what is wrote there. They could also have all sorts of things but using this as evidence is dangerous.
I just looked through the Black Princes inventory and there mix remains pretty constant.
James,
I am not discounting it even remotely. And I am sure it would work fine, adding more layers is better protection no doubt. As I said numerous times I am sure it was done, and fairly often. My issue is mostly this returning sentiment to the collar, aventail mix being the most common or only system in place during this period which by all accounts is incorrect. To me it was simply one of several systems.
The other major issue to me is the fact we are constantly seeing evidence, in this case art, used far more than is healthy for what it is. I am very doubtful if effigies and even art to some extend can be trusted for understanding how frequent something was used in the way they are being used in this respect.
So were pisans in use with aventails for sure. I am trying to balance this out. They were used alone as well and aventails were used alone too. We have many, many options.
RPM
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
Cool I am with you there.
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
One of the more fascinating and useful discussions I've read lately.
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
Do we have any examples of a man-at-arms without a collar or gorget of mail in this period? We have hundreds of sources for armed men with some sort of mail at the neck under the aventail. The only ones without mail at the neck which come to mind are some of the kings in the Wenzel Bible (see the “Arming Garments II” thread).
Statistically, the loss of 90% of the evidence is not a problem as long as the destruction was random. If iconoclausts had systematically wrecked effigies with bare necks, or thieves had systematically scraped brasses with mail at the neck, that would weaken them as a source. I think that people often rely too much on effigies, but in this case I see no problem.
The Codice degli stipendarii della repubblica di Firenze shows that men-at-arms were expected to wear a gorget of mail in Florence in 1384. It doesn't explicitly mention the aventail, probably because it was included in the bascinet (It. barbuta ... see Blair for the meaning of barbuta at this date). One could argue that "gorget" meant "aventail" but to my knowledge that was not the practice in other countries so one would need to find evidence.
Statistically, the loss of 90% of the evidence is not a problem as long as the destruction was random. If iconoclausts had systematically wrecked effigies with bare necks, or thieves had systematically scraped brasses with mail at the neck, that would weaken them as a source. I think that people often rely too much on effigies, but in this case I see no problem.
The Codice degli stipendarii della repubblica di Firenze shows that men-at-arms were expected to wear a gorget of mail in Florence in 1384. It doesn't explicitly mention the aventail, probably because it was included in the bascinet (It. barbuta ... see Blair for the meaning of barbuta at this date). One could argue that "gorget" meant "aventail" but to my knowledge that was not the practice in other countries so one would need to find evidence.
DIS MANIBUS GUILLELMI GENTIS MCLEANUM FAMILIARITER GALLERON DICTI
VIR OMNIBUS ARTIBUS PERITUS
Check out Age of Datini: European Material Culture 1360-1410
VIR OMNIBUS ARTIBUS PERITUS
Check out Age of Datini: European Material Culture 1360-1410
-
RandallMoffett
- Archive Member
- Posts: 4613
- Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 1:01 am
- Location: SE Iowa
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
Sean,
Both in text and in art. See above and you have at least a few examples. The imagine I found on the MS website with only a 10-15 minute search so I suspect there are far more around.
But with something perhaps exceeding 90% your original sample group the chance of error in this case goes way up with such heavy loss. The problem is we'd have no idea. Imagine pre Wisby pairs of plates. Many of their ideas were simply wrong because the examples were nearly nil. Once Wisby was excavated changed the game completely.
Once again to me the text is a more solid way of getting more solid ideas on how common something was.
Sean did you look at the Middle English dictionary above? Their definition on the pisan is an aventail. I increasingly am thinking pisan and aventail could have been used interchangeable as half medieval terms fit in that boat. Yet as there is fair evidence in art and perhaps in text of the practice of only wearing a pisan alone one cannot be sure that is what they are saying. My guess is your example above is just as likely an aventail or stand alone pisan as what you are claiming but it certainly is not clear enough to use for evidence of aventail and pisan combo to me.
RPM
Both in text and in art. See above and you have at least a few examples. The imagine I found on the MS website with only a 10-15 minute search so I suspect there are far more around.
But with something perhaps exceeding 90% your original sample group the chance of error in this case goes way up with such heavy loss. The problem is we'd have no idea. Imagine pre Wisby pairs of plates. Many of their ideas were simply wrong because the examples were nearly nil. Once Wisby was excavated changed the game completely.
Once again to me the text is a more solid way of getting more solid ideas on how common something was.
Sean did you look at the Middle English dictionary above? Their definition on the pisan is an aventail. I increasingly am thinking pisan and aventail could have been used interchangeable as half medieval terms fit in that boat. Yet as there is fair evidence in art and perhaps in text of the practice of only wearing a pisan alone one cannot be sure that is what they are saying. My guess is your example above is just as likely an aventail or stand alone pisan as what you are claiming but it certainly is not clear enough to use for evidence of aventail and pisan combo to me.
RPM
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
I think there is numerous evidence, from purchase accounts to muster rolls, that the pisan and aventail are not the same nor interchangable. One interesting reference in describing these early standards in Richardson is given in Sleaford's purchases "154 standards pro loricis". Are the standards distinguished in this way from pisans because they are specifically to be worn with mail shirts as opposed to pairs of plate, or merely to distinguish them from the "standards" listed under flags and banners? Standards also seem to be, on average, cheaper though sometimes they are the same prices as pisans and aventails. Price per unit given:
At 12 pence per shilling, the logical explanation for the lower price is that standards were generally smaller than pisans or aventails. Standards worn with mail shirts (standards pro loricis) might not have had as much mantle as a pisan, but been primarily an added neck defense, needed for older shirts without integral collars.
Another interesting clue is in the language. It is presumed the pisan, pisane, pizan pisayne, etc. is so named because it originated in Pisa, Italy. The etymology of standard, almost literally "stand hard" or stand fast (used for flags as a rallying point), might indicate the denser collars of mail made in 6:1 weave or more commonly weave using denser 4:1 rings. The extra expense of such denser mail would almost have to eliminate the "mantle" portion to be available at half the price. Perhaps pisans had normal mail over the neck, and standards had thicker woven mail?
- Price Standards v. Pisans.jpg (13.74 KiB) Viewed 2198 times
Another interesting clue is in the language. It is presumed the pisan, pisane, pizan pisayne, etc. is so named because it originated in Pisa, Italy. The etymology of standard, almost literally "stand hard" or stand fast (used for flags as a rallying point), might indicate the denser collars of mail made in 6:1 weave or more commonly weave using denser 4:1 rings. The extra expense of such denser mail would almost have to eliminate the "mantle" portion to be available at half the price. Perhaps pisans had normal mail over the neck, and standards had thicker woven mail?
ferrum ferro acuitur et homo exacuit faciem amici sui
-
RandallMoffett
- Archive Member
- Posts: 4613
- Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 1:01 am
- Location: SE Iowa
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
Ernst,
That is not how it works usually though. Think of aketon and gambeson for example. These show up in the same documents over and over again as almost certainly different things and often the same things. You are trying to use the term as a inflexible thing in a period when terms are not.
Now if you assume that the term pisan comes from Pisa we have even less reason to assume the term has to be one object as it could be like blades from Bordeaux- they can be swords, daggers or even lance heads. But often are simply called Bordeaux blades.
Now there are inventories that for sure are trying to depict separate objects where they use aventails and pisan, just like the aketon and gambesons mentioned above and we can assume the author was trying to indicate a difference but I am still wary of the assumption they are a very set and defined article of mail when there is still more than enough up-in-the-air to this.
It could be that pisans were often used alone as well. I have no issues with this and think there is enough evidence to think it was done. But I think that assuming the term pisan is always the same thing may be further than the info we are seeing here as little of the evidence defines use except for when we see aventails that are stated as connected to the helmet.
The fact the standards only show up once in hos entire 100 years covered is a very difficult bit of information to place and the fact it is not used again for 50 years makes it even harder.
RPM
That is not how it works usually though. Think of aketon and gambeson for example. These show up in the same documents over and over again as almost certainly different things and often the same things. You are trying to use the term as a inflexible thing in a period when terms are not.
Now if you assume that the term pisan comes from Pisa we have even less reason to assume the term has to be one object as it could be like blades from Bordeaux- they can be swords, daggers or even lance heads. But often are simply called Bordeaux blades.
Now there are inventories that for sure are trying to depict separate objects where they use aventails and pisan, just like the aketon and gambesons mentioned above and we can assume the author was trying to indicate a difference but I am still wary of the assumption they are a very set and defined article of mail when there is still more than enough up-in-the-air to this.
It could be that pisans were often used alone as well. I have no issues with this and think there is enough evidence to think it was done. But I think that assuming the term pisan is always the same thing may be further than the info we are seeing here as little of the evidence defines use except for when we see aventails that are stated as connected to the helmet.
The fact the standards only show up once in hos entire 100 years covered is a very difficult bit of information to place and the fact it is not used again for 50 years makes it even harder.
RPM
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
However our understanding is not that pisans are made in Pisa. Our understanding is that the original object originated there, and that the type or style of object was so named. A wiener is named because the style of finely ground sausage comes from Wien (Vienna), not because all wieners are made in Austria. The baselard, thought to have originated in Basel, Switzerland, is a better analogy than Bordeaux blades. There is a difference between malla de Milan, mail made in Milan, and a pisan which could have been made anywhere in the style of those armors used first in Pisa.RandallMoffett wrote:Now if you assume that the term pisan comes from Pisa we have even less reason to assume the term has to be one object as it could be like blades from Bordeaux- they can be swords, daggers or even lance heads. But often are simply called Bordeaux blades.
ferrum ferro acuitur et homo exacuit faciem amici sui
-
RandallMoffett
- Archive Member
- Posts: 4613
- Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 1:01 am
- Location: SE Iowa
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
Ernst,
Regardless of where they were made first and then copied I think it still works and the problem of what it actually is remains. I just am not sure this term ALWAYS means the same thing over it meaning something that goes over the neck in one of many forms.
RPM
Regardless of where they were made first and then copied I think it still works and the problem of what it actually is remains. I just am not sure this term ALWAYS means the same thing over it meaning something that goes over the neck in one of many forms.
RPM
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
So I decided to go over the Norwich Rolls in some detail:
http://books.google.com/books?id=rNgGAA ... ns&f=false
Roll A: Leet of Conesford, 1355 (p.295 ff.)
Constabular' plene armat' (Constables, fully armed)
Willelmus Skie unus constabularius armatus cum dublet' plat' bacinett cum pisan & Aventail & bra3 & cerotecis
(William Skie, First Constable; armed with doublet, plates (CoP), bascinet with pisan & aventail & bracers & gauntlets)
Johannes de Causton alter constabularius armatus eodem modo j sagitt
(John of Causton, Second Constable; armed the same manner, 1 bow)
10 additional men appear under the leader beneath the header Plene armati, fully armed. These are primarily listed as armatus ut supra, "armed as above".
The next heading is Dimid' armat', those "half armed" men posessing some armor. There are 19 men on this list. Three are listed as Vintenars (vyntenarius), leader of 20.
Thomas de Hornyng vintenarius armatus cum dublett' plat' bacinett' cum Avental & cerot' de plat'
(Thomas of Horning, Vintenar, armed with doublet, plates (CoP), bascinet with Aventail, and gauntlets of plate)
Notably missing from "half armor" are the pisan, and arm harness. The next 18 of the "half armed" men are again marked as armatus ut supra, "armed as above"
So we have 12 men fully armored with pisan and aventail, and 19 with aventail only, or 63% of 31 armored men wearing aventail and pisan.
Roll B: Leet of Bancroft (p.302 ff.)
Two leaders, "Cent.", Centurions or leaders of 100
Cent. Hugo de Holand 1 p'poynt brac' paunce de mayle pisan plat' bac' cum avent' Waunbras & roiebrase Cuters de fer tunic armat' rub' glad' & cutell' hasta cum.... uno baner
Hugo of Holland, Centurion; 1 pourpoint, bracers, paunces of mail, pisan, plates, bascinet with aventail, vambrace and rerebrace, couters of iron, red surcoat, sword and dagger, etc.
The second in command is again listed as eodem that is idem, ditto or the same.
The Vintenars
Vint. Rob'tus de Fundenhale p'poynt brac' pisan plat' bas' cum avental cerot' de ferr' tunic' armat rub' lanc' cum pens' glad' & cutell'
Robert of Fuldenhale, Vintenar; pourpoint, bracers, pisan, plates, bascinet with avential, gauntlets of iron, red surcoat, lance with pennon, sword and dagger.
14 others armed in like manner, so 17 so far with pisans and aventails.
Plene Armati fully armed
Robertus de Bungey plene armatus p'poynt bras' pisan bas' cum avental Waunbras rerbras Cuter cer' ferr' tunic' armat' rub' glad' & cutell'
(Robert of Bungey, fully armed; pourpoint, bracers, pisan, bascinet with aventail, vambrace, rerebrace, couter, iron gauntlets, red surcoat, sword and dagger)
29 other are listed armed in like manner, bringing us to 47 armored men, all with pisan and aventail.
Dimid' armati
Ric'us de Bunwell p'poynt brac' plat' bac' cum avental cer' fer' tunic armat' rub' glad' & cutell'
(Richard of Bunwell; pourpoint, bracers, plates, bascinet with aventail, iron gauntlets, red surcoat, sword and dagger)
22 names follow of men armed in the same manner. Giving 23 armored men with bascinet and aventail without a pisan.
Of 70 armored men. 47 have both pisan and aventail, 67%.
Roll C: Leet of Wymer (Unfortunately a detailed listing is not given for constables or fully armed men)
Constables, 2
Plene armati, 58 fully armed
Dimid' armati
Ricardus de Harpele dimidio armatus vidz haketon plat' bacinett' cum aventail cerotecis ferreis gladio & cutello
(Richard of Harpele, half armed; aketon, plates, bascinet with aventail, iron gauntlets, sword and dagger)
15 additional men listed.
Of 75 armored men, 60 are presumably fully armed with both pisan and aventail, or 80%, though this is a "best guess" based on other, more detailed rolls.
Roll D: Leet over the water
Unfortunately this has been lost. The surviving analysis is insufficient to determine a ratio of doubled vs. single neck defenses.
Constables, 2 men
Plene armati, 10 men
Dimidi armati, 9 men
hom'arm' (good arms?), 3 men
Unspecified, 18 men of whom 3 are Vintenars
I think this probably gives us a ratio between 15/42 to 33/42, 36%-78%, so a 60%+ estimate seems reasonable.
To be continued...
http://books.google.com/books?id=rNgGAA ... ns&f=false
Roll A: Leet of Conesford, 1355 (p.295 ff.)
Constabular' plene armat' (Constables, fully armed)
Willelmus Skie unus constabularius armatus cum dublet' plat' bacinett cum pisan & Aventail & bra3 & cerotecis
(William Skie, First Constable; armed with doublet, plates (CoP), bascinet with pisan & aventail & bracers & gauntlets)
Johannes de Causton alter constabularius armatus eodem modo j sagitt
(John of Causton, Second Constable; armed the same manner, 1 bow)
10 additional men appear under the leader beneath the header Plene armati, fully armed. These are primarily listed as armatus ut supra, "armed as above".
The next heading is Dimid' armat', those "half armed" men posessing some armor. There are 19 men on this list. Three are listed as Vintenars (vyntenarius), leader of 20.
Thomas de Hornyng vintenarius armatus cum dublett' plat' bacinett' cum Avental & cerot' de plat'
(Thomas of Horning, Vintenar, armed with doublet, plates (CoP), bascinet with Aventail, and gauntlets of plate)
Notably missing from "half armor" are the pisan, and arm harness. The next 18 of the "half armed" men are again marked as armatus ut supra, "armed as above"
So we have 12 men fully armored with pisan and aventail, and 19 with aventail only, or 63% of 31 armored men wearing aventail and pisan.
Roll B: Leet of Bancroft (p.302 ff.)
Two leaders, "Cent.", Centurions or leaders of 100
Cent. Hugo de Holand 1 p'poynt brac' paunce de mayle pisan plat' bac' cum avent' Waunbras & roiebrase Cuters de fer tunic armat' rub' glad' & cutell' hasta cum.... uno baner
Hugo of Holland, Centurion; 1 pourpoint, bracers, paunces of mail, pisan, plates, bascinet with aventail, vambrace and rerebrace, couters of iron, red surcoat, sword and dagger, etc.
The second in command is again listed as eodem that is idem, ditto or the same.
The Vintenars
Vint. Rob'tus de Fundenhale p'poynt brac' pisan plat' bas' cum avental cerot' de ferr' tunic' armat rub' lanc' cum pens' glad' & cutell'
Robert of Fuldenhale, Vintenar; pourpoint, bracers, pisan, plates, bascinet with avential, gauntlets of iron, red surcoat, lance with pennon, sword and dagger.
14 others armed in like manner, so 17 so far with pisans and aventails.
Plene Armati fully armed
Robertus de Bungey plene armatus p'poynt bras' pisan bas' cum avental Waunbras rerbras Cuter cer' ferr' tunic' armat' rub' glad' & cutell'
(Robert of Bungey, fully armed; pourpoint, bracers, pisan, bascinet with aventail, vambrace, rerebrace, couter, iron gauntlets, red surcoat, sword and dagger)
29 other are listed armed in like manner, bringing us to 47 armored men, all with pisan and aventail.
Dimid' armati
Ric'us de Bunwell p'poynt brac' plat' bac' cum avental cer' fer' tunic armat' rub' glad' & cutell'
(Richard of Bunwell; pourpoint, bracers, plates, bascinet with aventail, iron gauntlets, red surcoat, sword and dagger)
22 names follow of men armed in the same manner. Giving 23 armored men with bascinet and aventail without a pisan.
Of 70 armored men. 47 have both pisan and aventail, 67%.
Roll C: Leet of Wymer (Unfortunately a detailed listing is not given for constables or fully armed men)
Constables, 2
Plene armati, 58 fully armed
Dimid' armati
Ricardus de Harpele dimidio armatus vidz haketon plat' bacinett' cum aventail cerotecis ferreis gladio & cutello
(Richard of Harpele, half armed; aketon, plates, bascinet with aventail, iron gauntlets, sword and dagger)
15 additional men listed.
Of 75 armored men, 60 are presumably fully armed with both pisan and aventail, or 80%, though this is a "best guess" based on other, more detailed rolls.
Roll D: Leet over the water
Unfortunately this has been lost. The surviving analysis is insufficient to determine a ratio of doubled vs. single neck defenses.
Constables, 2 men
Plene armati, 10 men
Dimidi armati, 9 men
hom'arm' (good arms?), 3 men
Unspecified, 18 men of whom 3 are Vintenars
I think this probably gives us a ratio between 15/42 to 33/42, 36%-78%, so a 60%+ estimate seems reasonable.
To be continued...
ferrum ferro acuitur et homo exacuit faciem amici sui
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
Is above here? That gives us a handful of examples in art, and Ernst's analysis of the Norwich Rolls gives us more in text.RandallMoffett wrote:Sean,
Both in text and in art. See above and you have at least a few examples. The imagine I found on the MS website with only a 10-15 minute search so I suspect there are far more around.
Well, the loss of records is at least 90%, and as places before 1800 go 14th century western Europe is excellently documented. I think that the bigger issue is the limitations of each type of evidence: effigies show the best armours from the outside but may be based on copybooks as much as observation and are difficult to date, inventories give lists but not descriptions or definitions and don't always say what was worn together or worn underneath, and so on. So using different types of evidence together is key.RandallMoffett wrote:But with something perhaps exceeding 90% your original sample group the chance of error in this case goes way up with such heavy loss. The problem is we'd have no idea. Imagine pre Wisby pairs of plates. Many of their ideas were simply wrong because the examples were nearly nil. Once Wisby was excavated changed the game completely.
Once again to me the text is a more solid way of getting more solid ideas on how common something was.
It seems that the MED has many examples where aventail/ventail and pisane are neck defences worn by the same man, and several where one was worn with a kettle hat, but I can't see any where it is unambigiously attached to a helmet above. A lot of their examples are poetry, and poets sometimes use a group of redundant words for effect ... but that isn't positive evidence.RandallMoffett wrote:Sean did you look at the Middle English dictionary above? Their definition on the pisan is an aventail. I increasingly am thinking pisan and aventail could have been used interchangeable as half medieval terms fit in that boat. Yet as there is fair evidence in art and perhaps in text of the practice of only wearing a pisan alone one cannot be sure that is what they are saying. My guess is your example above is just as likely an aventail or stand alone pisan as what you are claiming but it certainly is not clear enough to use for evidence of aventail and pisan combo to me.
RPM
DIS MANIBUS GUILLELMI GENTIS MCLEANUM FAMILIARITER GALLERON DICTI
VIR OMNIBUS ARTIBUS PERITUS
Check out Age of Datini: European Material Culture 1360-1410
VIR OMNIBUS ARTIBUS PERITUS
Check out Age of Datini: European Material Culture 1360-1410
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
Roll E: Leet of Wymer 1359, 1361, or 1365, date uncertain
Johannes de Hevyngham j homo armatus cum purpont plat' vel haub' bacinet cum aventail & cerotecis gladio & cutell
(John of Hevingham; 1 man armed with pourpoint, plates or haubergeon, bascinet with aventail & gauntlets, sword and dagger)
Following is a list where men equip substitutes.
Johannes de Oulton, Adam Baas, Johannes Pere, j homo armatus, laurentius Rape.
Johannes de Welbourn (in cueria) j homo armatus cum purpont plat' bacinett' cum aventail gladio, Ricardus Starlyng
Johannes ffairchild j homo armatus ut Joh' de Hevyngham. Sufficit in corpore.
Petrus ffairchild j homo armatus ut Joh' de Hevyngham.
(John of Oulton, Adam Baas, John Pere; (provide) 1 armed man, Lawrence Rape.
John of Welborne (in school); (provides) 1 man armed with pourpoint, plates, bascinet with aventail, sword , Richard Starling.
John Fairchild; 1 man armed as John of Hevingham, Sufficient in body.
Peter Fairchild; 1 man armed as John of Hevingham.)
All told, I count 21, so including John of Hevingham we have 22 men, all with aventail but no mention of pisans. 22 armored men 0% with pisans.
Roll F: Leet of Wymer (One of the alternate years mentioned for Roll E.)
Prefix for the list is worn.
.....homines proximo infra armati sunt cum purpoys & plattes vel Alketonum & haub'ionem bacinetto cum auentaill cerotecis de plat' gladio & cutell'.
(....within the next are men armed with pourpoints & plates or aketon & haubergeon, bascinet with aventail, gauntlets of plate, sword and dagger.)
Again, within this leet we have no mention of pisans or standards beneath the aventail.
Johannes de Hevyngham agistatus & arrayatus est ad unum hominem peditem armatum cum purpont platt vel Alketoun cum hauberion bacinetto cum aventail & cerotecis de plat' gladio & cutell'. Et quia idem Johannes impotens est ad laborandum ad arma sua portanda loco suo assignetur--
(John of Hevingham assigns and arrays one man as an armored foot soldier with pourpoint, plates or aketon with haubergeon, bascinet with aventail, & gauntlets of plate, sword and dagger. And because said John is unable to work to his arms, his place assigned and carried--)
So another big 0 for pisan and aventailsfrom the same leet in a different year. Wymer doesn't seem to have much.
Roll G: Gildhall no date, and again only surviving in Fitzpatrick's notes.
This account only seems to deal with money taxes for arms. There are a few mentions of cash for bascinets with aventails.
It. Johi Spanye & Petro de Bomsted 2 bac' cum aventail pro 14s
Unfortunately it doesn't answer the question of percentages wearing aventail with pisan vs. without.
Roll H: 1359
Gives a list of totals for armor:
dublets - 9
de plat' - 21 (all "pairs of plates", paria de plat'
de Avental -25
de pisan - 22
de bacinett -24 (one less than the aventails)
cerotecar' - 19 (all gauntlets of plate)
de bra3- 20 (all pairs of bracers)
88% of the armored men, 22/25, could have aventail and pisane.
Roll K:
http://books.google.com/books?id=rNgGAA ... 295&edge=0
http://books.google.com/books?id=rNgGAA ... 312&edge=0
Well noted on two tables by individual. I count 32 bascinets, 27 aventails, and 27 pisans. Some men have multiple sets, but counted by man the ratio is 24 pisans and aventails for 32 men, some having only one or the other. So 75% of armoured men from Roll K have both pisan and aventail.
Hope this helps further the discussion. I think my question was whether an aventail needed a lining if it was over an haubergeon collar with aketon beneath, or over a pisan with lining. After all we've dug up. I think the answer may be sometimes, or, "It depends."
Johannes de Hevyngham j homo armatus cum purpont plat' vel haub' bacinet cum aventail & cerotecis gladio & cutell
(John of Hevingham; 1 man armed with pourpoint, plates or haubergeon, bascinet with aventail & gauntlets, sword and dagger)
Following is a list where men equip substitutes.
Johannes de Oulton, Adam Baas, Johannes Pere, j homo armatus, laurentius Rape.
Johannes de Welbourn (in cueria) j homo armatus cum purpont plat' bacinett' cum aventail gladio, Ricardus Starlyng
Johannes ffairchild j homo armatus ut Joh' de Hevyngham. Sufficit in corpore.
Petrus ffairchild j homo armatus ut Joh' de Hevyngham.
(John of Oulton, Adam Baas, John Pere; (provide) 1 armed man, Lawrence Rape.
John of Welborne (in school); (provides) 1 man armed with pourpoint, plates, bascinet with aventail, sword , Richard Starling.
John Fairchild; 1 man armed as John of Hevingham, Sufficient in body.
Peter Fairchild; 1 man armed as John of Hevingham.)
All told, I count 21, so including John of Hevingham we have 22 men, all with aventail but no mention of pisans. 22 armored men 0% with pisans.
Roll F: Leet of Wymer (One of the alternate years mentioned for Roll E.)
Prefix for the list is worn.
.....homines proximo infra armati sunt cum purpoys & plattes vel Alketonum & haub'ionem bacinetto cum auentaill cerotecis de plat' gladio & cutell'.
(....within the next are men armed with pourpoints & plates or aketon & haubergeon, bascinet with aventail, gauntlets of plate, sword and dagger.)
Again, within this leet we have no mention of pisans or standards beneath the aventail.
Johannes de Hevyngham agistatus & arrayatus est ad unum hominem peditem armatum cum purpont platt vel Alketoun cum hauberion bacinetto cum aventail & cerotecis de plat' gladio & cutell'. Et quia idem Johannes impotens est ad laborandum ad arma sua portanda loco suo assignetur--
(John of Hevingham assigns and arrays one man as an armored foot soldier with pourpoint, plates or aketon with haubergeon, bascinet with aventail, & gauntlets of plate, sword and dagger. And because said John is unable to work to his arms, his place assigned and carried--)
So another big 0 for pisan and aventailsfrom the same leet in a different year. Wymer doesn't seem to have much.
Roll G: Gildhall no date, and again only surviving in Fitzpatrick's notes.
This account only seems to deal with money taxes for arms. There are a few mentions of cash for bascinets with aventails.
It. Johi Spanye & Petro de Bomsted 2 bac' cum aventail pro 14s
Unfortunately it doesn't answer the question of percentages wearing aventail with pisan vs. without.
Roll H: 1359
Gives a list of totals for armor:
dublets - 9
de plat' - 21 (all "pairs of plates", paria de plat'
de Avental -25
de pisan - 22
de bacinett -24 (one less than the aventails)
cerotecar' - 19 (all gauntlets of plate)
de bra3- 20 (all pairs of bracers)
88% of the armored men, 22/25, could have aventail and pisane.
Roll K:
http://books.google.com/books?id=rNgGAA ... 295&edge=0
http://books.google.com/books?id=rNgGAA ... 312&edge=0
Well noted on two tables by individual. I count 32 bascinets, 27 aventails, and 27 pisans. Some men have multiple sets, but counted by man the ratio is 24 pisans and aventails for 32 men, some having only one or the other. So 75% of armoured men from Roll K have both pisan and aventail.
Hope this helps further the discussion. I think my question was whether an aventail needed a lining if it was over an haubergeon collar with aketon beneath, or over a pisan with lining. After all we've dug up. I think the answer may be sometimes, or, "It depends."
ferrum ferro acuitur et homo exacuit faciem amici sui
-
RandallMoffett
- Archive Member
- Posts: 4613
- Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 1:01 am
- Location: SE Iowa
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
I think so. I am surprised in the flux between the rolls and different group. 0 to 88% is wild. I also would like to look over the other soldiers and see those with bascinets are equipped as well.After all we've dug up. I think the answer may be sometimes, or, "It depends."
RPM
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
I know practical knowledge is generally dismissed outright in scholarly discussion, but reading inventories and looking at artwork only gives you a small part of the picture. The human element, i.e., what the soldiers actually put on their bodies, we'll never know. Look no further than our own modern military and compare what soldiers are issued and told to wear, to what they actually put on when they go out on patrol etc, and you'll see huge discrepancies between the 'inventories' we have today and what's actually used in practice. I was issued a lot of crap to put on to go fly with, and most of it stayed in a cruise box for 6 months...
-
RandallMoffett
- Archive Member
- Posts: 4613
- Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 1:01 am
- Location: SE Iowa
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
Ian,
That may in part be true but in these inventories I suspect are pretty secure for this. The way the local muster worked is a guy would come by 1 or 2 times a year and review your gear that you by law were supposed to own. The less stuff you had under minimum requirement the more they fined you. These fines often were about if not more than what you'd pay for the gear. So if anything the guys would bring everything even the kitchen sink to prove they had everything covered. Now if he wore it I could not say but since most men did not fight there is a good chance no.
Now the earlier inventories there is a chance of that perhaps but I am not sure how likely it is as if a keeper was short he was fiscally responsible..... so imagine how much more incentive people had to ensure the numbers came out right if some one would charge you more than you made over a decade at the end of each year. That would be a pretty hard spot to be in. I can only imagine these guys were doing there best to keep the books as the consequence apart of the financial cost and losing this important post could also be being blackballed by the king.
Now what soldiers generally wore. We have in English armies a good idea as they were paid a type of reward for being equipped beyond the minimum requirements and then fined if below it out of there pay. So we have decades of these old reviews remaining. Now that said I suppose a guy could ditch things after the review but I'd have a hard time thinking that they would even have bothered to do anything over the minimum if that was the case and most do.
I tend to think the medieval requirements for soldiers were far more minimalist than out very bureaucratic modern system in place for equipping soldiers. something pointy to kill the other guy and something to protect you from the other pointy things. I am guessing a lot of the stuff they had had immediate function where you likely had all sorts of things that were unlikely to be immediately useful.
RPM
That may in part be true but in these inventories I suspect are pretty secure for this. The way the local muster worked is a guy would come by 1 or 2 times a year and review your gear that you by law were supposed to own. The less stuff you had under minimum requirement the more they fined you. These fines often were about if not more than what you'd pay for the gear. So if anything the guys would bring everything even the kitchen sink to prove they had everything covered. Now if he wore it I could not say but since most men did not fight there is a good chance no.
Now the earlier inventories there is a chance of that perhaps but I am not sure how likely it is as if a keeper was short he was fiscally responsible..... so imagine how much more incentive people had to ensure the numbers came out right if some one would charge you more than you made over a decade at the end of each year. That would be a pretty hard spot to be in. I can only imagine these guys were doing there best to keep the books as the consequence apart of the financial cost and losing this important post could also be being blackballed by the king.
Now what soldiers generally wore. We have in English armies a good idea as they were paid a type of reward for being equipped beyond the minimum requirements and then fined if below it out of there pay. So we have decades of these old reviews remaining. Now that said I suppose a guy could ditch things after the review but I'd have a hard time thinking that they would even have bothered to do anything over the minimum if that was the case and most do.
I tend to think the medieval requirements for soldiers were far more minimalist than out very bureaucratic modern system in place for equipping soldiers. something pointy to kill the other guy and something to protect you from the other pointy things. I am guessing a lot of the stuff they had had immediate function where you likely had all sorts of things that were unlikely to be immediately useful.
RPM
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
I think the variarion is largely due to lack of information. Some of the higher estimates are based on total number of items, without individual data. As roll K shows, some men have bascinets without aventails but with pisans, some bascinets with aventails and no pisans, and most with both. The low 0% figures from Wymer certainly skew the average down. Without them, it seems likely that somewhere between 2/3 and 3/4 of armed men were using both aventail and pisan. Could it be that the Wymer contingent used pisans, but they weren't accounted for?RandallMoffett wrote:I think so. I am surprised in the flux between the rolls and different group. 0 to 88% is wild. I also would like to look over the other soldiers and see those with bascinets are equipped as well.After all we've dug up. I think the answer may be sometimes, or, "It depends."
RPM
The other soldiers appearing, footmen and archers, don't present with armor at all. The totals for the Leet (ward) of Wymer being given thus:
They are made up of 57 fully armed men 14 half armed 69 archers and 257 unarmed men.
Unarmed in this case meaning no defensive arms. Everyone seems to have a staff/cudgel, baculo, and knife, cutell' (which I translated as dagger for the armed men). Some have swords or axes too. The archers have bows and sometimes crossbows. The average vintenar seems to have served alongside 3 or 4 other fully armed and half-armed men, with the other 16 or so having no defensive arms listed. If called for overseas duty, such men would have to be issued with armor from the King's Tower inventory.
I think I've accounted for all the bascinets listed, though additional eyes are welcome to look through the rolls. I have to wonder if levies from York or London weren't better equipped than those from Norwich, or if some other smaller city might not have been less well equipped. Perhaps you have some links to other muster rolls for comparison, Randall?
It's also worth remembering that the Norwich Rolls all seem to date from the 1350s and 1360s. Things might have changed by 1380.
ferrum ferro acuitur et homo exacuit faciem amici sui
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
To add,
Sean Manning has provided this 1368 Florentine source:
http://books.google.at/books?id=IPQRAAA ... h.&f=false
As I observed on aonther thread, Article V mentions two types of neck armor:
I have proposed the the gorgiera might be the English aventail, and the gorgieretti, being diminuitive, might be the smaller pisan.
Thoughts, comments, or input?
Sean Manning has provided this 1368 Florentine source:
http://books.google.at/books?id=IPQRAAA ... h.&f=false
As I observed on aonther thread, Article V mentions two types of neck armor:
The first two are armor for the leg, the next two for the arm, sleeves of mail and gussets, then the two neck defenses.Gamberuoli, cosciali, bracciali, braccialetti, e maniche di maglia e gozzetti, gorgieretti, gorgiera, barbuta, corazza, guanti di ferro spada e cuiteilo.
I have proposed the the gorgiera might be the English aventail, and the gorgieretti, being diminuitive, might be the smaller pisan.
Thoughts, comments, or input?
ferrum ferro acuitur et homo exacuit faciem amici sui
-
RandallMoffett
- Archive Member
- Posts: 4613
- Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 1:01 am
- Location: SE Iowa
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
Ernst,
I think in Medieval England we can assume armed always means in armour, or at least can start there. Armed man seems to always mean man in armour. I am surprised no one else has armour. Very interesting/odd compared to other archers from towns.
As far as I know both York and Soton's musters reviews are later than this period. I have a few inventories from York and Soton and none mention pisans from what I remember but it has been some year since I read the originals so I should take a new look.
Norwich was a pretty wealthy town during the period so I suspect they would be equipped on the level with the top towns of England. There population was less than London and likely York but not off from many of the other towns there.
RPM
I think in Medieval England we can assume armed always means in armour, or at least can start there. Armed man seems to always mean man in armour. I am surprised no one else has armour. Very interesting/odd compared to other archers from towns.
As far as I know both York and Soton's musters reviews are later than this period. I have a few inventories from York and Soton and none mention pisans from what I remember but it has been some year since I read the originals so I should take a new look.
Norwich was a pretty wealthy town during the period so I suspect they would be equipped on the level with the top towns of England. There population was less than London and likely York but not off from many of the other towns there.
RPM
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
Some pictures of my helm with the aventail finally finished and attached. Next, to make the liner.
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
I've finished making the quilted aventail liner and attaching it with linen cord. There is a subtle but distinct difference in the look of the aventail with the liner underneath it. The overall shape is much more like the effigies, with smooth solid lines and the rings laying more evenly. The face protection also stands up better, and it was slightly easier to turn my head with the liner under the mail. Compare this picture to the one I posted earlier without the liner. Also another thing I noticed, is that the helmet would be a bit more difficult to violently pry off one's head with the additional compression and friction of a well fitted aventail liner, as it's connected to the helmet liner at the edges.
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
That looks excellent Scott! Well done!
-
RandallMoffett
- Archive Member
- Posts: 4613
- Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 1:01 am
- Location: SE Iowa
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
It does indeed. Looks very sleek Scott! I really like the close up shot. The set up you have looks very good!
RPM
RPM
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
Agreed. Would you share details of your liner construction?
ferrum ferro acuitur et homo exacuit faciem amici sui
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
First I drew pencil sketches of what I wanted it to look like from a few different angles, deciding to break it into three pieces for construction. These drawings were updated with measurements as I went so I could refer back to them during construction. Next I made a pattern out of junk fabric, using the aventail itself and my drawings, updating measurements on the drawing as needed. Then I sewed together just one layer of fabric using the pattern and attached it to the aventail so I could try it on and ensure a correct size and shape. The pattern ended up being very slightly oval shaped at the bottom rather than perfectly round, and pretty round at the top. I took it off, made alterations and re-attached for another test fit. Then I took the pattern apart and used it to cut the actual linen liner fabric, and the cotton. For the cotton I used 100% real cotton about 1/4" thick. I adjusted the size of the pattern for the thickness of the cotton when quilted, so I could easily have used more cotton and enlarged my pattern slightly.
I made the actual liner from a layer of cotton sandwiched between two layers of medium weight linen, in 3 separate parts (front, back, and face). With the fabric turned inside out, I sewed along 3/4 of the edges, then I turned it right side out and stuffed the cotton inside before sewing it shut. Then I did the same with the other two parts, leaving a little extra fabric at the bottom of the face for sewing to the neck. Then I sewed the two neck parts together, and quilted it radially. I attached it to the aventail with thread tacking it every few inches for a test fit, and then test fitted the face piece, marking it with a white fabric pencil so I would know exactly how it should fit to the neck. Then I pulled the liner out, sewed the face on, and re-tacked the face to the mail for another final test fit before the last step. After satisfied that the liner was fitting properly, I took it off again for the last time.
With the liner itself finished I sewed it to the mail with beeswaxed heavy linen thread at the bottom edge and around the face, using a locked whipstitch, stopping the thread lengths occasionally. This will make repairs easier later because if it breaks, I won't have to re-stitch the entire thing.
For heraldic reasons I used blue linen.
And that's about it. Let me know if you have any questions. I realize not every material or method I used was historical, but as the Archive knows, absolute authenticity is an enigma anyway, and practical concerns must also be weighed, such as environment in my state. I went with thin padding because it's so hot here, but I doubt that impacted the end result much unless I would be fighting in it, which I won't.
Scott
I made the actual liner from a layer of cotton sandwiched between two layers of medium weight linen, in 3 separate parts (front, back, and face). With the fabric turned inside out, I sewed along 3/4 of the edges, then I turned it right side out and stuffed the cotton inside before sewing it shut. Then I did the same with the other two parts, leaving a little extra fabric at the bottom of the face for sewing to the neck. Then I sewed the two neck parts together, and quilted it radially. I attached it to the aventail with thread tacking it every few inches for a test fit, and then test fitted the face piece, marking it with a white fabric pencil so I would know exactly how it should fit to the neck. Then I pulled the liner out, sewed the face on, and re-tacked the face to the mail for another final test fit before the last step. After satisfied that the liner was fitting properly, I took it off again for the last time.
With the liner itself finished I sewed it to the mail with beeswaxed heavy linen thread at the bottom edge and around the face, using a locked whipstitch, stopping the thread lengths occasionally. This will make repairs easier later because if it breaks, I won't have to re-stitch the entire thing.
For heraldic reasons I used blue linen.
And that's about it. Let me know if you have any questions. I realize not every material or method I used was historical, but as the Archive knows, absolute authenticity is an enigma anyway, and practical concerns must also be weighed, such as environment in my state. I went with thin padding because it's so hot here, but I doubt that impacted the end result much unless I would be fighting in it, which I won't.
Scott
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
By the way, if you have any suggestions for how I could do better next time, please don't politely leave me in the dark! I value your knowledge and experience.
-
RandallMoffett
- Archive Member
- Posts: 4613
- Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 1:01 am
- Location: SE Iowa
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
Sounds like you did more or less what I'd have done.... right or wrong I could not say but I suspect a good solution. If you have inside shots I'd love to see them.
It turned out great Scott! When do we get to see the whole harness?
RPM
It turned out great Scott! When do we get to see the whole harness?
RPM
-
Jason Grimes
- Archive Member
- Posts: 2387
- Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2001 1:01 am
- Location: Fairbanks, AK, USA
- Contact:
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
That looks great! Such a big difference between the liner-less version and the one with. I suspect that is also the difference you can see with bishop's mantles 100 years later (e.g. Landsknechts/Reislaufer) and the modern reproductions.
Jason
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
I've been working hard since February to re-invent my harness to be more historical and it's all finally coming together. Nearly everything is new since then - mail, helm, aventail and liner, gauntlets, greaves, cuises, articulated arm harness, sabatons, aketon, pourpoint, shirt, belt, shield, sword scabbard, rondel scabbard... even the garment laces, arming points and armor buckles on my harness are new and as historical as I can make them with curent knowledge. Much of the smaller bits and sewing are also hand made by yours truly as well. Maybe once I get everything together I'll do a new thread just to show what I've got and ask for ideas on how to improve it.
As for the inside of the aventail liner, I'll get a couple good pics of that for everyone too.
And thanks to all of you for your kind compliments. I post my work and harness on AA for your viewing pleasure and your keen advice because I value your knowledgable opinions so highly. It is my goal to be as historical as possible (given the caveats that implies) so that when the public views the harness and asks questions, they get the correct impression and right information. It's been expensive and at times it has seemed like more of an obsession than a hobby, but an incredible labor of love and adventure into history. So thanks for your support of that, I really appreciate it.
Scott
As for the inside of the aventail liner, I'll get a couple good pics of that for everyone too.
And thanks to all of you for your kind compliments. I post my work and harness on AA for your viewing pleasure and your keen advice because I value your knowledgable opinions so highly. It is my goal to be as historical as possible (given the caveats that implies) so that when the public views the harness and asks questions, they get the correct impression and right information. It's been expensive and at times it has seemed like more of an obsession than a hobby, but an incredible labor of love and adventure into history. So thanks for your support of that, I really appreciate it.
Scott
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
Scott, it does look great, and I only hope I didn't divert the thread too much. One thing about the stitching and lining I would expect would be the need to re-do it occasionally to clean the mail. It's been posited that's the whole reason for the attachment of the aventail to the bascinet with vervelles -- easier removal for cleaning.
Not to beat a dead horse on the issue of multiple layers of armor over the neck, but I was reminded in Richardson's thesis how narrowly we defined that issue, only looking at mail defenses. Various neck defenses of plate (gorgerets, colletins, etc.) also appear in the second half of the 14th century.
Not to beat a dead horse on the issue of multiple layers of armor over the neck, but I was reminded in Richardson's thesis how narrowly we defined that issue, only looking at mail defenses. Various neck defenses of plate (gorgerets, colletins, etc.) also appear in the second half of the 14th century.
ferrum ferro acuitur et homo exacuit faciem amici sui
-
Konstantin the Red
- Archive Member
- Posts: 26725
- Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2001 1:01 am
- Location: Port Hueneme CA USA
Re: The Peel Affinity: Maille aventail liners
Which sentence just begs to be read aloud in one's best Inigo Montoya voice. To leaven the historical lump.RandallMoffett wrote:. . . I think it still works and the problem of what it actually is remains. I just am not sure this term ALWAYS means the same thing over it meaning something that goes over the neck in one of many forms.
RPM
Hhhel-lo. My name is Inigo Jones. After what you did to my architectural drawings of St Paul's, you are gonna &#@*! die.