The Armour Archive

I'm working on a new personae in this time frame. I'm formulating a plan. It's a pretty foreign period to most of my research, so bear with me. I have some questions about materials and construction of a couple of items:

1) Padded arming cap suitable for use with a great helm (flat-topped). Anybody ever made one of these? I'm talking about the ones with the padded crown around them. It seems to be unclear historically if they were worn above or below the maille coif. For a great group of illustrations for these, see Embleton's Medieval Military Costume, p. 9. I'd like to make the illustration shown as "L". Could I/would I use cotton for this cap?

2) The doublet/gambeson issue has been beaten to death here recently, but at this point I am planning on making a padded garment to wear underneath my maille. It would be split in the front (similar to p. 6 in the same book but of a different time-frame) and I would be quilting and embroidering it of my livery colors. As this persona would be "attempting" to portray a knight, I would be using the finest materials possible and I'm considering actually having embroidered roping/piping down the channels between the quilting. The bottom of this garment will be bordered as well by my accent color (yellow in this case), with the garment primarily made out of a dyed (black) material. What are some viable materials for this garment? I remember seeing some great links recently here that led to companies who sold these longer garments. Anybody got a link?

3)The surcoat would be pretty much standard fare for the period, sleeveless, decidedly long, split down the front, and bearing my marks of early heraldry. I'm assuming it would need to be of a sturdy fabric - what are some of my choices?

4) Maille will consist of a hauberk similarly split in front hanging to just above the knee. Maille mittens will be integral, and at this point I'm assuming I will need to make one of my coifs attached to the hauberk - I believe this was the style at the time? The shape of the coif will need to be altered to accomodate the padded arming cap yes? Or would a knight ever just have the arming cap and helm? For the legs I'll have the maille chausses. I think it would be appropriate to add early poleyns to the mix, yes? For helm style I'm leaning towards early flat-topped great helms, such as the type typically associated with "crusader" helms.

5) My shield I am assuming would retain the triangular shape, come up to approximately my waist, and be concave in shape. See Hopkins' Knights, p.131, for an idea of what I'm shooting for. Would the shield be covered in fabric or painted? I would of course place my heraldry on the shield as well.

6) Under the maille leggings, I am wondering on what was worn. Do we have good evidence of this anywhere? Another interesting picture which I intend on borrowing elements from is located in Gravett's Norman Knight: 950-1204 AD as plate L (page 44). I am somewhat skepticall of their illustration for hanging the maille legs in this picture, as I've worn them in this style, and it didn't feel "right". To me it would have been more reasonable to have more of a chaps-like structure to tie the maille to. A few points as shown in that illustration just don't look sturdy. But that's just my humble opinion. Any input here?

Thank you all for suffering through these dumb questions. Hopefully I have asked a couple that someone else was afraid to ask!

Thanks,

------------------
Ryan King

"Not the Victory, but the Action. Not the Goal, but the Game. In the Deed, the Glory." - Hartley Buff Alexander, 1897

[This message has been edited by OurDecay (edited 06-29-2002).]

Have you checked out Andy Goddards ca 1265 site? See http://www.bumply.com/Medieval/Kit/kit.htm

It would be good if you could narrow down the timeframe somewhat to enable us to give better answers.
The heraldic surcoat and gambeson are later than your portrayal though.

Oh, and check out the Maciejowski bible too:
http://www.keesn.nl/mac/mac_en.htm
http://www.medievaltymes.com/courtyard/maciejowski_bible.htm

/R

[This message has been edited by Raymund (edited 06-29-2002).]

Wow - I know I've been to Andy's site before but back then I didn't really care as much . Great information to be had there. Cool! I guess amend that to more like c. 1275-1300. Interesting stuff.

I appreciate it! Thanks!


------------------
Ryan King

"Not the Victory, but the Action. Not the Goal, but the Game. In the Deed, the Glory." - Hartley Buff Alexander, 1897

Hi Ryan,

Welcome to the 13th century! There are fortunately several good iconographic examples of gear from this time frame to give us guidance.

1.) It seems that the padded arming caps were used in both ways. The carvings on Wells Cathedral show padded coifs worn over mail hoods, while effigies such as that of William Longsword indicate at least a padded hood, and perhaps a shallow conical helmet, being worn under the mail. You can't go wrong either way. It also seems that a gorget was worn at this time; again, sometimes under and sometimes over the mail.

2.) You are right, we have beaten the gambeson issue to death. But... Certainly it would not have been heraldic if it were worn under mail. The Maciejowski Bible (French, c.1250) shows gambesons worn over mail, as do contemporary Iberian and Scandinavian sources. The "King's Mirror" mentions well-blacked linen being used for the shell, while the Maciejowski shows natural white predominating with blue, red, and pale green also appearing. If you are going to put it under mail, a white linen canvas would probably be used, while gambesons worn over mail might be of a colored silk decorated with dags. Stuffing could be tow, cotton, or old linen rags. I think a light natural cotton canvas looks acceptable in place of the linen, but I'm from Mississippi.

3.) Heraldic surcoats are starting to be seen, but a single color surcoat without charges is common. Likewise, a surcoat made of some fine fabric like a silk damask, not neccesarily in your heraldic colors, could be appliqued or embroidered with small escutcheons bearing your arms in many places.

4.) It is most likely that the mail coif would be integral; however, Nicolle has published drawings from Shropshire wall-paintings which seem to show seperate coifs in this time-frame. Likewise, as the evidence from Wisby has shown, seperate coifs were sometimes worn "tucked-in" at a later date, so we can not be sure what lies under the surcoat. If a given source often shows ventails on integral coifs, but sometimes does not, it may be that some coifs were not integral. One-piece would be safe, but two piece has limited evidence to support it.

5.) I recall that most surviving heaters are covered with leather, but I suspect that poorer sorts of gentry would have used gessoed fabric covered in paint.

6.) I don't know of any evidence for wearing anything under the mail chausses except wool chauses, but a lightly quilted pair of hosen would seem reasonable. You might want to consider something more rigid. I have some documentation for scale chausses in this time, or you might consider the Westminster Psalter knight. I consider these "penny plate" or "bezanted" greaves, while others see only mail.

I urge you to examine the images in Matthew Paris's "Edward the Confessor" manuscript (Ee.3.59) for images. Especially useful are these:

fo.4r-King Sweyn (axes on surcoat) has interesting knees

fo.34v-The knight with the red lions on his surcoat also shows intersting thigh armor

fo.5v-One of Alureds guards still has a 3/4 sleeve hauberk.

You can also find details such as shield strapping, daggers, etc.

Man, you guys are helpful! Some follow-up questions...

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Ernst:
1.) It seems that the padded arming caps were used in both ways. The carvings on Wells Cathedral show padded coifs worn over mail hoods, while effigies such as that of William Longsword indicate at least a padded hood, and perhaps a shallow conical helmet, being worn under the mail. You can't go wrong either way. It also seems that a gorget was worn at this time; again, sometimes under and sometimes over the mail.</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think my approach will be over the maille with a padded cap. And then of course a flat-topped great helm with cresting. Did they use brass for crosses on helms at this time?

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">2.) You are right, we have beaten the gambeson issue to death. But... Certainly it would not have been heraldic if it were worn under mail. The Maciejowski Bible (French, c.1250) shows gambesons worn over mail, as do contemporary Iberian and Scandinavian sources. The "King's Mirror" mentions well-blacked linen being used for the shell, while the Maciejowski shows natural white predominating with blue, red, and pale green also appearing. If you are going to put it under mail, a white linen canvas would probably be used, while gambesons worn over mail might be of a colored silk decorated with dags. Stuffing could be tow, cotton, or old linen rags. I think a light natural cotton canvas looks acceptable in place of the linen, but I'm from Mississippi. </font>

The reason I was thinking of having the bottom of the doublet/gambeson (whatever you would call it under maille) decorated is the recent discussions that have come up for knightly garb in 1470. In that case, even the arming coat - worn under plate and maille - was wildly expensive and could have even been made of silk for the well-to-do knight. I would think a well-off knight would want even his undergarments to show off his wealth and status if they could be seen. But I suppose I could see your point for this time period, as the surcoat was actually longer than both the arming coat and maille - thereby covering up the plain white linen fabric. Am I way off base here? Heraldric colors or not, would the arming coat have ever been dyed for underneath the maille? (as an aside I find darker background colors improve the appearance of maille, but that's really irrelevant here)

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">3.) Heraldic surcoats are starting to be seen, but a single color surcoat without charges is common. Likewise, a surcoat made of some fine fabric like a silk damask, not neccesarily in your heraldic colors, could be appliqued or embroidered with small escutcheons bearing your arms in many places.</font>

So for 1275 or so, would there be some heraldric surcoats? I'm also going to assume (probably wrongly) that having complementary colors and a central theme would create an desirable visual impact for the knight. Regarding embroidery, I finally have access to my mother's $10,000 Bernina machine, so I might be able to cut loose with that. (Those suckers are just silly cool!)

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">4.) It is most likely that the mail coif would be integral; however, Nicolle has published drawings from Shropshire wall-paintings which seem to show seperate coifs in this time-frame. Likewise, as the evidence from Wisby has shown, seperate coifs were sometimes worn "tucked-in" at a later date, so we can not be sure what lies under the surcoat. If a given source often shows ventails on integral coifs, but sometimes does not, it may be that some coifs were not integral. One-piece would be safe, but two piece has limited evidence to support it.</font>

This agrees with what I have read and seen. Understood.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">I recall that most surviving heaters are covered with leather, but I suspect that poorer sorts of gentry would have used gessoed fabric covered in paint.</font>

Ah yes. This is a topic I have some questions about, and a couple of special circumstances. Approximately what date did the shields start to shrink to the heater size and shape? I'm assuming in 1275 that was the current style. I have some limitations in that this harness will be for "live" (rebated) steel combat. The wooden shields in this group tend to take an obnoxious amount of physical abuse, so I would probably just have a separate "fighting" shield made of painted wood, and a correct ornamental one. The strapping arrangment on the back of heater shields is puzzling to me. I have seen examples/illustrations where the forearm rests at 45 degree angle above horizontal, where the forearm is vertical, and even an illustration (see Andy's site) where the forearm is actually down at an angle. Which one is right? Or are they all?

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"><B>I urge you to examine the images in Matthew Paris's "Edward the Confessor" manuscript (Ee.3.59) for images. Especially useful are these:

fo.4r-King Sweyn (axes on surcoat) has interesting knees

fo.34v-The knight with the red lions on his surcoat also shows intersting thigh armor

fo.5v-One of Alureds guards still has a 3/4 sleeve hauberk.

You can also find details such as shield strapping, daggers, etc.</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What? Where? Seriously - what are these references from? Is Paris's manuscript readily available? Sorry again for my ignorance.

Thanks for the help!
Ryan

------------------
Ryan King

"Not the Victory, but the Action. Not the Goal, but the Game. In the Deed, the Glory." - Hartley Buff Alexander, 1897


[This message has been edited by OurDecay (edited 06-30-2002).]

Did you say English? Then try to work in the broken end of a French lance and pennon into your breastplate!!!

Doh!

I should've known you'd say something, Bascot...

You figure out how to hang YOUR rivited legs yet?

I'm working myself into a lather looking at Andy's site and making a mental picture of my future kit in my head...ooo baby. I just might be able to get into this era after all.

As an aside, ever look at a picture and not notice something amazing in the background until you looked at it a second time? I was interested in the guy in red's harness and came across this picture. Check out the treb in the background! SH*T!

<img src=http://www.bumply.com/Medieval/Gallery/caer03.jpg>

That's one big-ass m.f.

I apoligize. I should have made this easier.

http://www.lib.cam.ac.uk/cgi-bin/Ee.3.59/bytext

This should get you to the list of illustrations. If you pick those which mention battles, hostages, etc. you will get armor pics for England circa 1250. There is a "zoom" function which allows you to enlarge details about four times over. A shield strap arrangement is seen in fo. 5 recto, beneath the horses.

It seems that your latest post has moved your date from 1225-1250 to an oft repeated 1275. Armor toward the last quarter of the century does show improvement in the amount of plate or hardened leather defenses available to supplement the mail. For example, the earliest, most tenuous date for plate elbow defenses of simple roundel form may be c.1270, so a 25 year jump can make a very noticable difference.

I don't know of any documentation for brass crosses on heaumes, although a number of sources show cross reinforces of gold color. One can only guess if this is brass or gilt iron. A gold colored cross on a colored helmet is common in other mid-13th century sources.

I think you somewhat miss my point when asking if the gambeons under mail were in livery colors circa 1250. First, I am far from convinced that padded armors were worn under mail at this date, unless you consider a wool tunic a form of padding. Padded armors were certainly worn alone, and over mail by all indications. Certainly by circa 1300, padded coats were being worn under the mail, but when did this transition occur? It's very much like trying to but elbow ops on a figure from 1240.

In ffoulkes' "The Armourer and His Craft", one appendix lists regulations for gambeson construction in 1322. At that later date, the terms "aketn" and "gambeson" seem to be synonymous. Silk covered gambesons (presumably colored or diapered) only with new cotton cloth, old sendal (silk gauze), and "cadar" (I believe cedar chips for repelling vermin) and nothing else! In other words, the law regulated that top quality facing fabrics be filled with expensive materials as well. "Wyite acketonnes" are to be stuffed with old linen and cotton (presumably raw cotton, or cotton "wool" which had not been ginned, carded, spun, and was therefore much cheaper than cotton cloth) within new linen cloth. Some authorities claim gambesons were worn over armor, while aketons were worn beneathit, so you see why I think the armor worn under mail would likely be un-ornamented. Even as late as Chaucer, we get those refereces to the gypon being stained with rust by the haubergeon. If you're going to spend money on fabric, it should be on the surcoat. I have seen silk, sendal, and samite all being mentioned for surcoats, and all of these seem to be forms of silk. To qote Ramon Lull's book from this same time frame (I seem to be doing that a lot thanks to the fols at Chivalry Bookshelf), "A coat is given to a knight in significance of the great hardships that a knight must suffer to honor chivalry, for likewise as the coat is above the other garments of iron, and is in the rain and receives the strokes before the hauberk and other armours, right so is a knight chosen to sustain greater travaille than a lesser man."
(Sacrifice the silk coat for the honor of chivalry. Ouch.)

[This message has been edited by Ernst (edited 07-01-2002).]

Osprey has published a Warrior series titled English Knight 1200-1300. I know there work isn't perfect but I've found them to be a good introduction to periods. That said I had a quick flip through this one and the Plates didn't look up the standard of the other Warrior series books I have. There were a great number of b&w pics of primary sources to peek your interest. I find so many interesting things in those small pics.

Theodore

Ernst,

Thanks again for the help! My motivation here is visual, rather than a concrete year. In other words, I am certain that I want whatever my portrayal ends up being to be wearing a heraldric surcoat. For this type of reenactment, I want a full helm. And I want a time period where the shield bore the heraldic mark and maille was the primary defense. I suppose one could classify this time as just before the transitional period. I have a list of "must-haves" on my list, and I'm working backwards from there. (This is why I quickly changed my time period.)

Your clarification on gambeson/aketon issue makes a good bit of sense. Certainly I will welcome not having to do all that work to the aketon! I think this issue is now resolved (in my mind it is), unless you have anything further to add.

Back to my original question - anybody ever made one of these padded arming caps with the roll of cloth?

On Andy Goddard's site, he shows cuisses. When did these really come into play? I noticed that one of the knights in Embleton's Medieval Costume book is wearing them blue with embroidered gold (I believe somewhere around page 24???). Same thing, or different?

------------------
Ryan King

"Not the Victory, but the Action. Not the Goal, but the Game. In the Deed, the Glory." - Hartley Buff Alexander, 1897

C'mon, Ernst, when are you going to tell Ryan about "75 Years" *grin*??

Ryan, if you have not done so already, you may want to check out the Yahoo group of the same name. It is a mailing list dedicated to 13th and early 14th C. re-enactment. There is a ready stream of good information constantly being posted, and Andy Goddard (among others) is a regular contributor.

Hope this helps... -c-

PS -- the question of heraldic surcotes was covered on the "75 Years" list a few months ago. My take on it was that it is the exception, not the rule. Since the majority of re-enactors are not trying to do high nobility, they are even less inclined to move in this direction. You will be able to find sufficient evidence for what you are looking for... -c-

I confess I haven't checked the group in quite a while. After having reviewed some posts, I might have to register there as well!

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/75years/

One problem with pin-pointing the date for mail and flowing surcoat cam be seen in the brass of Ameling von Varendorp, seen in Osprey's "German Medieval Armies 1300-1500" on page 9. Here we have a Westphalian knight in the long surcoat, mail hauberk and chausses, and simple knees or simply cuisses; yet, this is dated to the mid-14th century. Old fashioned by 1340-50 perhaps, but not unknown. I should note that no mail mittens or helmet are shown, so his image would seem more modern with a bascinet and brig-type gauntlets. Still, there are depictions of crested great helms in war in the 14th century too. Perhaps your time frame does mesh well with the "75 years" of 1250-1325.