another on the topic of gambesons
Moderator: Glen K
-
- Archive Member
- Posts: 2374
- Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 4:09 pm
- Location: Storvik, Atlantia
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
I have another question about making a padded garment for wearing beneath mail alone (without any plate). I've gained the impression that mail protected against pointed weapons and arrows by being able to move with the force of the thrust. (For example, it's harder to pierce or cut fabric when it's hanging than when it's stretched flat on a hard surface.) I guess, therefore, that the garment needs to be soft enough not to interfere with the mail's movement? Nor should the garment be so bulky that the mail is stretched tight over it.
Flittie Smeddum of Dagorhir
Tibbie Croser of the SCA
Tibbie Croser of the SCA
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
I think you want soft with loft. The aketon acts as a shock absorber.
ferrum ferro acuitur et homo exacuit faciem amici sui
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
I'm sure there are others more knowledgable in this than myself, but I think you are only partially correct.
From what I understand, "maille" is only marginal protection against pointy weapons and arrows...
There are a slew of YouTube videos showing chainmaille failing in the face of arrows - http://www.youtube.com/results?search_q ... 4YAqdv2C6E
Again, from what I understand, bodkins and field points practically laugh at maille...
Later period pointy steel swords/daggers (rondels) were equally adept at piercing maille...
Yes, a loosely hanging piece of maille is far less likely to fail. But it's the lack of anything behind the target that permits the maille to be pushed out of the way by the arrow and thus not get pierced - similar to the pendullum in a physics momentum experiment: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCCZOaHb6y4
If you place abarrier behind the pendulum, the impact energy will get distributed to the barrier instead of be consumed by the motion of the pendullum.
Yes, a firmly stretched fabric (maille) is more likely to be pierced. Part of this is the distribution of the impact energy, you already have forces pulling the maille in multiple directions (generically away from the point of impact), then you apply additional force in an opposing direction and the materials fail, opening a gap in the maille and allowing the sword/arrow to continue through.
Maille is mostly good against slashes/cuts. The gambeson under neither is to help reduce tissue damage from the impact and to give the maille some room to flow with the blow (your body is the barrier, the pendulum is only going so far..). If your maille is too small and therefore pulled tight, you are creating a rigid surface that is more likely to fail.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MyXTYZM4RNY
From what I understand, "maille" is only marginal protection against pointy weapons and arrows...
There are a slew of YouTube videos showing chainmaille failing in the face of arrows - http://www.youtube.com/results?search_q ... 4YAqdv2C6E
Again, from what I understand, bodkins and field points practically laugh at maille...
Later period pointy steel swords/daggers (rondels) were equally adept at piercing maille...
Yes, a loosely hanging piece of maille is far less likely to fail. But it's the lack of anything behind the target that permits the maille to be pushed out of the way by the arrow and thus not get pierced - similar to the pendullum in a physics momentum experiment: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCCZOaHb6y4
If you place abarrier behind the pendulum, the impact energy will get distributed to the barrier instead of be consumed by the motion of the pendullum.
Yes, a firmly stretched fabric (maille) is more likely to be pierced. Part of this is the distribution of the impact energy, you already have forces pulling the maille in multiple directions (generically away from the point of impact), then you apply additional force in an opposing direction and the materials fail, opening a gap in the maille and allowing the sword/arrow to continue through.
Maille is mostly good against slashes/cuts. The gambeson under neither is to help reduce tissue damage from the impact and to give the maille some room to flow with the blow (your body is the barrier, the pendulum is only going so far..). If your maille is too small and therefore pulled tight, you are creating a rigid surface that is more likely to fail.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MyXTYZM4RNY
-
- Archive Member
- Posts: 11800
- Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2000 1:01 am
- Location: HQ, Garden Gnome Liberation Front
- Contact:
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
Glen asked me to peek in here and give my $.02.
Pointy things against mail: a bodkin penetrator needs to deliver ~45J at impact. If it can meet that, it's in. Otherwise, not. Style of bow, fletching, etcetera makes a HUGE difference here.
I am honestly not sure your "basic" gambeson needs any tailoring at all, because of the frequency we see the surcoats looking like they're wearing shoulder pads. If you take a rectangular form with a neck-hole, and put it over the body, then sew down the sides or lace them down, you get precisely those big shoulders, while the mail then tends to drape quite well. Same deal with mail later: I've had a guy I have a leather doublet as a gift, cut to 14c tastes (sleeveless). His mail was "re-enactor typical," but over top of that doublet, the mail was suddenly conforming to the tailoring of the garment, and LOOKED tailored.
Now, granted, we also know of shirt that definitely WERE tailored. But I'd be skeptical of thinking they all were.
Pointy things against mail: a bodkin penetrator needs to deliver ~45J at impact. If it can meet that, it's in. Otherwise, not. Style of bow, fletching, etcetera makes a HUGE difference here.
I am honestly not sure your "basic" gambeson needs any tailoring at all, because of the frequency we see the surcoats looking like they're wearing shoulder pads. If you take a rectangular form with a neck-hole, and put it over the body, then sew down the sides or lace them down, you get precisely those big shoulders, while the mail then tends to drape quite well. Same deal with mail later: I've had a guy I have a leather doublet as a gift, cut to 14c tastes (sleeveless). His mail was "re-enactor typical," but over top of that doublet, the mail was suddenly conforming to the tailoring of the garment, and LOOKED tailored.
Now, granted, we also know of shirt that definitely WERE tailored. But I'd be skeptical of thinking they all were.
No one cares how much you know, until they know how much you care.
- RandallMoffett
- Archive Member
- Posts: 4613
- Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 1:01 am
- Location: SE Iowa
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
I'd guess that aketons/gambesons ran the full gambit for fit. That said it has to fit well enough to work but apart from that I suppose some were rather simple.
-
- New Member
- Posts: 24
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 4:16 pm
- Location: Arizona
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
Sorry for being out of it for a bit, haven't been checking here lately.
As far as going for a full LH kit, it all depends on if you're willing to handstitch the garment. I made mine out of all cotton and machine stitched it so I could run it through the wash. I live in a pretty hot climate area, with little to no humidity so I sweat a lot, and it cools me down a lot. This in turn creates one stanky gambeson. Is it totally period? No. Does it look the part from 10 feet away, let alone as I don the garb and prepare for battle and others comment on it, yes!
As a side note, I plan on making a true experimental archaeology kit with a new aketon and gambeson, all handstitched and with loose tallow. But that won't be the one I'm fighting and getting dirty.
As for the mail, it depends on what your kit is going to be used for. Mine, it's designed for functionality first and foremost, including the mail. It's all hand riveted, made from 16.5g annealed rebar wire. I made a 1 sqft section, tested it against our rebated blades with my gambeson over it and my aketon underneath on a hay bale. It works for what I need it to, and it doesn't break nomatter what we threw at it.
Again, mileage differs, and such. It all depends on what you're using it for. I know plenty love welded stainless and for good reason! It's just for the cost of that mail, I have my full kit: wisby style gauntlets hidden under a mitten, crusader tophelm with back of head protection, aketon, gambeson, padded hood/coif, full hauberk, full chausses, rebated steel sword, and my sword belt and scabbard. But minus the sword and helmet, I'm making it all myself.
Against rattan, as I have played in the SCA a bit, I don't know. But for my group's weapons mail definitely works and is actually required when one doesn't wear full plate armor. Once I get the hauberk done, I can't wait to test it out. But already, the rebated swords barely are felt through my aketon and gambeson and I have sensitive ribs. I also wear elbow and knee protection, but nothing like in the SCA, more sport pads like for hockey or skating.
I also recommend an Aketon tailored to you. I learned this the "fun" way, as I like to call it. At first, my gambeson was way too big. We tailored it in, and then decided an Aketon underneath it with sleeves on it would be a better way to go. We tailored the Aketon to me. We made our own patterns and left little extra for the little lofting of the cotton batting. The Aketon, as I've said before, is only one layer thick and there isn't much there. My arms are free to move as they please as I built a gusset under the arm like in most of the period tunics. I just didn't add as many gores to it on the bottom, instead adding slits to the front and back with only gores on the sides, and those are little ones, about 6" at the bottom.
When one looks at my Aketon and Gambeson, laid out on the floor, they're very basic garments, little more than a front panel and back panel with a hole for my head and slits in the middle at the bottom. The Aketon has sleeves as well. But they are fitted to me, and the Aketon is rather tight, more like a compression shirt or fully tightening a kevlar vest, as that's how I like it, and it pads well because of it.
Unfortunately, the leprechauns are still at large in my apartment and I'm still not having any way to take photos or I would to try and help out if you wanted them. And again, they are my interpretations of these padded garments, made to be easily washed in a machine and even machine dried, which I do, just on "fluff" setting for about 10 minutes to ring out the extra water, then I hang them to dry the rest of the way.
I'd be careful in doing a full LH gambeson, because of the handstitching and loose tallow. But by far and bar none, others here, especially Tailoress would know more about that than me. After all, her posts, blog, and tutorials are what have been teaching me to make all of mine.
YIS
B Patricius
As far as going for a full LH kit, it all depends on if you're willing to handstitch the garment. I made mine out of all cotton and machine stitched it so I could run it through the wash. I live in a pretty hot climate area, with little to no humidity so I sweat a lot, and it cools me down a lot. This in turn creates one stanky gambeson. Is it totally period? No. Does it look the part from 10 feet away, let alone as I don the garb and prepare for battle and others comment on it, yes!
As a side note, I plan on making a true experimental archaeology kit with a new aketon and gambeson, all handstitched and with loose tallow. But that won't be the one I'm fighting and getting dirty.
As for the mail, it depends on what your kit is going to be used for. Mine, it's designed for functionality first and foremost, including the mail. It's all hand riveted, made from 16.5g annealed rebar wire. I made a 1 sqft section, tested it against our rebated blades with my gambeson over it and my aketon underneath on a hay bale. It works for what I need it to, and it doesn't break nomatter what we threw at it.
Again, mileage differs, and such. It all depends on what you're using it for. I know plenty love welded stainless and for good reason! It's just for the cost of that mail, I have my full kit: wisby style gauntlets hidden under a mitten, crusader tophelm with back of head protection, aketon, gambeson, padded hood/coif, full hauberk, full chausses, rebated steel sword, and my sword belt and scabbard. But minus the sword and helmet, I'm making it all myself.
Against rattan, as I have played in the SCA a bit, I don't know. But for my group's weapons mail definitely works and is actually required when one doesn't wear full plate armor. Once I get the hauberk done, I can't wait to test it out. But already, the rebated swords barely are felt through my aketon and gambeson and I have sensitive ribs. I also wear elbow and knee protection, but nothing like in the SCA, more sport pads like for hockey or skating.
I also recommend an Aketon tailored to you. I learned this the "fun" way, as I like to call it. At first, my gambeson was way too big. We tailored it in, and then decided an Aketon underneath it with sleeves on it would be a better way to go. We tailored the Aketon to me. We made our own patterns and left little extra for the little lofting of the cotton batting. The Aketon, as I've said before, is only one layer thick and there isn't much there. My arms are free to move as they please as I built a gusset under the arm like in most of the period tunics. I just didn't add as many gores to it on the bottom, instead adding slits to the front and back with only gores on the sides, and those are little ones, about 6" at the bottom.
When one looks at my Aketon and Gambeson, laid out on the floor, they're very basic garments, little more than a front panel and back panel with a hole for my head and slits in the middle at the bottom. The Aketon has sleeves as well. But they are fitted to me, and the Aketon is rather tight, more like a compression shirt or fully tightening a kevlar vest, as that's how I like it, and it pads well because of it.
Unfortunately, the leprechauns are still at large in my apartment and I'm still not having any way to take photos or I would to try and help out if you wanted them. And again, they are my interpretations of these padded garments, made to be easily washed in a machine and even machine dried, which I do, just on "fluff" setting for about 10 minutes to ring out the extra water, then I hang them to dry the rest of the way.
I'd be careful in doing a full LH gambeson, because of the handstitching and loose tallow. But by far and bar none, others here, especially Tailoress would know more about that than me. After all, her posts, blog, and tutorials are what have been teaching me to make all of mine.
YIS
B Patricius
"Never theorize before you have data. Invariably, you end up twisting facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts." - Sherlock Holmes ~ Sr Arthur Conan Doyle
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
One point to consider might be closures or lack of them. If one has to pull the aketon on and off over the head, how tight can you make it? Can you find buttoned or laced tunics for the 12th century, Glen?
ferrum ferro acuitur et homo exacuit faciem amici sui
-
- Archive Member
- Posts: 2374
- Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 4:09 pm
- Location: Storvik, Atlantia
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
B. Patricius, what's the tallow for? Is that for waxing the thread or for waterproofing the fabric? I've usually heard of people using beeswax for waxing the thread.
Flittie Smeddum of Dagorhir
Tibbie Croser of the SCA
Tibbie Croser of the SCA
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
Maybe he meant "tow"?Tibbie Croser wrote:B. Patricius, what's the tallow for? Is that for waxing the thread or for waterproofing the fabric? I've usually heard of people using beeswax for waxing the thread.
Latest blog post: Pourpoint of Charles VI of France article now available in digital format!
Charles de Blois Pourpoint pattern
To follow my arts and research, check out my La cotte simple facebook page.
Charles de Blois Pourpoint pattern
To follow my arts and research, check out my La cotte simple facebook page.
-
- Archive Member
- Posts: 26725
- Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2001 1:01 am
- Location: Port Hueneme CA USA
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
He meant tow.
-
- New Member
- Posts: 24
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 4:16 pm
- Location: Arizona
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
Sorry about that I put tallow here, and tow in my blackpowder forums.Tailoress wrote:Maybe he meant "tow"?Tibbie Croser wrote:B. Patricius, what's the tallow for? Is that for waxing the thread or for waterproofing the fabric? I've usually heard of people using beeswax for waxing the thread.
Also as to the closures and such on the padded garments, mine don't have any closures. I just put them on like a shirt. Plenty of room for movement with good enough tailoring as well. Hopefully this weekend I'll have some sort of camera so I can take pics of some of my garments. Also, this may have something to do with how I'm built as well, I'm more a barrel shape than anything with gratefully, still larger chest and shoulders than my waist.
"Never theorize before you have data. Invariably, you end up twisting facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts." - Sherlock Holmes ~ Sr Arthur Conan Doyle
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
Hmmm, some interesting finds...
The first picture is one I had remembered, but didn't remember the date, from a marble candlestick by Nicola d'Angelo at the San Paolo in Rome. I think it's the earliest "very likely a gambeson" evidence I've come across yet, but it's still 1170.
The second one is more curious and "dangerous," as in "it looks like something I want it to be." I just got a copy of the Osprey campaign on the Third Crusade (and, btw, the book should be called "Arsuf" because it barely touches on the siege of Acre...), and this is what I found in it. Another Italian carving, this time from a baptistry in Verona c.1200. They certainly look gambeson-esque to me, and lo and behold look how form-fitting they are, even with the more traditional larger/flow-y garment underneath. That image, assuming it actualy does represent a tailored gambeson, could very much support the form-fitting look of mail in contemporary images. Also note the significant width between stitch lines, which (again, if accurate) would say to me they were quilting lines rather than stuffed channels.
Thoughts?
The first picture is one I had remembered, but didn't remember the date, from a marble candlestick by Nicola d'Angelo at the San Paolo in Rome. I think it's the earliest "very likely a gambeson" evidence I've come across yet, but it's still 1170.
The second one is more curious and "dangerous," as in "it looks like something I want it to be." I just got a copy of the Osprey campaign on the Third Crusade (and, btw, the book should be called "Arsuf" because it barely touches on the siege of Acre...), and this is what I found in it. Another Italian carving, this time from a baptistry in Verona c.1200. They certainly look gambeson-esque to me, and lo and behold look how form-fitting they are, even with the more traditional larger/flow-y garment underneath. That image, assuming it actualy does represent a tailored gambeson, could very much support the form-fitting look of mail in contemporary images. Also note the significant width between stitch lines, which (again, if accurate) would say to me they were quilting lines rather than stuffed channels.
Thoughts?
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
Glen,
Good find!
Here's the best online photo I could find of the St. Giovanni in Fonte Massacre of the Holy Innocents panel:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... hlehem.jpg
The sculptor has included enough detail to have shown the lines in the palm of the mother's hand. There are no visible buttons or laces, and the line pattern seems to indicate a gore at the front of the skirt. A small slit at the neck is also visible. I'd say the vertical lines certainly indicate sewing lines, as the folds in clothing are more intricately done.
The short length also explains why we don't see aketons protruding beneath the hauberk skirts in the early 13th century art.
EDIT TO ADD: The somewhat worse-for-wear previous panel of Herod's soldiers:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... ldaten.jpg
Good find!
Here's the best online photo I could find of the St. Giovanni in Fonte Massacre of the Holy Innocents panel:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... hlehem.jpg
The sculptor has included enough detail to have shown the lines in the palm of the mother's hand. There are no visible buttons or laces, and the line pattern seems to indicate a gore at the front of the skirt. A small slit at the neck is also visible. I'd say the vertical lines certainly indicate sewing lines, as the folds in clothing are more intricately done.
The short length also explains why we don't see aketons protruding beneath the hauberk skirts in the early 13th century art.
EDIT TO ADD: The somewhat worse-for-wear previous panel of Herod's soldiers:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... ldaten.jpg
ferrum ferro acuitur et homo exacuit faciem amici sui
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
Thanks, Ernst, but I have to chalk it up to luck and "dang ol' Nicole"... I don't agree with all his thoughts on western/eastern interaction, but there is no one who can dig up obscure carvings across Europe for all these awesome little nuggets. My thanks, though, for finding a better picture of it!
Based on this find, I think this is what I'll make the experimental gambeson to represent. I already have the material, and I hope to get the basic cutting and some sewing done this weekend.
As for what to do with the mail, I also found this very interesting article from Craig Sitch at Manning Imperial:
http://www.nvg.org.au/documents/vv/vv_issue_70.pdf
Skipping to page 20 he shows a method of hauberk construction I'd never seen anyone reproduce before, but looking at it and contemporary art it seems so obvious it's embarassing I didn't notice at least a hint of it before. It will take a bit more work, but I think I'm going to try his method (remember, with butted, because I'm not crazy nor do I want to be!) and see what ends up happening.
Based on this find, I think this is what I'll make the experimental gambeson to represent. I already have the material, and I hope to get the basic cutting and some sewing done this weekend.
As for what to do with the mail, I also found this very interesting article from Craig Sitch at Manning Imperial:
http://www.nvg.org.au/documents/vv/vv_issue_70.pdf
Skipping to page 20 he shows a method of hauberk construction I'd never seen anyone reproduce before, but looking at it and contemporary art it seems so obvious it's embarassing I didn't notice at least a hint of it before. It will take a bit more work, but I think I'm going to try his method (remember, with butted, because I'm not crazy nor do I want to be!) and see what ends up happening.
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
I've done a couple of old, butted hauberks with yoke-tops in the past. Manning's instructions call for a bit too much symmetry in the expansions, and the missing "gores" should be larger in the back than the front, with the sleeves canted forward, and not straight out to the side. If I can give any pointers, feel free to ask.
ferrum ferro acuitur et homo exacuit faciem amici sui
-
- Archive Member
- Posts: 1204
- Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2002 1:01 am
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
Hi Glen, I made a hauberk using this method in 2002. It worked well, was an absolute PITA to get to right as I was making it up as I went and I wished I had seen Craigs article. I used butted spring steel rings and solid punched rings, (funnily enough from Craig).Glen K wrote:
As for what to do with the mail, I also found this very interesting article from Craig Sitch at Manning Imperial:
http://www.nvg.org.au/documents/vv/vv_issue_70.pdf
Skipping to page 20 he shows a method of hauberk construction I'd never seen anyone reproduce before, but looking at it and contemporary art it seems so obvious it's embarassing I didn't notice at least a hint of it before. It will take a bit more work, but I think I'm going to try his method (remember, with butted, because I'm not crazy nor do I want to be!) and see what ends up happening.
For the version below in 2009 I used rivetted mail and solids for some of the tailoring I did to an existing hauberk. You can see where I turned the sleeves around to get the taper I was happy with. I also pulled the body apart and added and removed mail to get a better fit.
This was used in our solid lance/steel coronel joust I did with Joram. I wasn't sure about padding as such under the mail, I couldn't really find anything. So I am wearing a lined linen tunic under my mail. We jousted with the solid lances and also did some mounted melee in the lead up and it seemed more than protective enough. I took a few good sword strikes to the body and whilst bruised I was no worse for wear. We were testing this in a tournament situation.
I am putting a new version of this harness together for another project and I also want to try the buckled breast and backplates (leather????) glimpsed in the Temple effigies this time over my mail and under the surcoat.
God keep you Rod. So few people hear the call of madness so clearly and follow it so loyally. - Jehan de Pelham
More attitude than a Lesbian Manhater with a nice pair and a Peachy Arse.
Wyvern Leather Works on Facebook
Wyvern Leather Works
More attitude than a Lesbian Manhater with a nice pair and a Peachy Arse.
Wyvern Leather Works on Facebook
Wyvern Leather Works
-
- Archive Member
- Posts: 26725
- Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2001 1:01 am
- Location: Port Hueneme CA USA
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
So, Rod, a cuirie?. . . I also want to try the buckled breast and backplates (leather????) glimpsed in the Temple effigies . . .
-
- Archive Member
- Posts: 1204
- Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2002 1:01 am
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
Yep I have some suitable leather that would work well.Konstantin the Red wrote:So, Rod, a cuirie?. . . I also want to try the buckled breast and backplates (leather????) glimpsed in the Temple effigies . . .
God keep you Rod. So few people hear the call of madness so clearly and follow it so loyally. - Jehan de Pelham
More attitude than a Lesbian Manhater with a nice pair and a Peachy Arse.
Wyvern Leather Works on Facebook
Wyvern Leather Works
More attitude than a Lesbian Manhater with a nice pair and a Peachy Arse.
Wyvern Leather Works on Facebook
Wyvern Leather Works
-
- New Member
- Posts: 24
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 4:16 pm
- Location: Arizona
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
Any chance of showing those Temple effigies? I'm a might curiousRod Walker wrote:Yep I have some suitable leather that would work well.Konstantin the Red wrote:So, Rod, a cuirie?. . . I also want to try the buckled breast and backplates (leather????) glimpsed in the Temple effigies . . .
"Never theorize before you have data. Invariably, you end up twisting facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts." - Sherlock Holmes ~ Sr Arthur Conan Doyle
-
- Archive Member
- Posts: 1204
- Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2002 1:01 am
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
Both of these come from the Osprey English Medieval Knight 1200-1300.
This first one is from Pershore Abbey C.1270-80. You can see the 3 buckles and straps joining a breast and back pate of some sort together.
The second from the Temple Church, supposedly Gilbert Marshal. You can just see the buckles and straps and the shape of the cuirass in the gap and under the surcoat. (it's a bad scan, sorry.)
This first one is from Pershore Abbey C.1270-80. You can see the 3 buckles and straps joining a breast and back pate of some sort together.
The second from the Temple Church, supposedly Gilbert Marshal. You can just see the buckles and straps and the shape of the cuirass in the gap and under the surcoat. (it's a bad scan, sorry.)
God keep you Rod. So few people hear the call of madness so clearly and follow it so loyally. - Jehan de Pelham
More attitude than a Lesbian Manhater with a nice pair and a Peachy Arse.
Wyvern Leather Works on Facebook
Wyvern Leather Works
More attitude than a Lesbian Manhater with a nice pair and a Peachy Arse.
Wyvern Leather Works on Facebook
Wyvern Leather Works
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
Rod,
Thanks for sharing! I love that look, and you and your horse friends pull it off very well. I wish I'd been there for those passes... Seeing the mantle/yoke method "live" does look more form-fitting and closer to many of the illustrations.
However... I'm beginning to do what I always do, continue to research and start to waffle on fundamental ideas. What, me overthink something? Never!
The St. Wenceslas hauberk in Prague seems to be the most complete mail garment from anywhere near the 1066-1200 time period. The good saint died in the 930s, so if its provenance is to him, that's pretty early. Based on the length of the skirts, etc. I personally think that's unlikely, but I don't think we can say for sure. However, also based on the dimensions of it, I'd have to agree with Blair when he says that it can't be any later than 13th century. Therefore, it seems the best extant example that we have to go on. And, looking at it:
And an older perspective with the (probably unassociated) collar:
It looks to me like it is definitely of the T-construction, more in line with modern reconstructions and with the rings on the arms running the "wrong" way. So, now I'm going to spend all weekend trying to decide which direction to take with this. At least, I hope it only takes the weekend At least I'm pretty settled on the subarmalis, and I need to complete that before I really start doing mail stuff anyway.
Thanks for sharing! I love that look, and you and your horse friends pull it off very well. I wish I'd been there for those passes... Seeing the mantle/yoke method "live" does look more form-fitting and closer to many of the illustrations.
However... I'm beginning to do what I always do, continue to research and start to waffle on fundamental ideas. What, me overthink something? Never!
The St. Wenceslas hauberk in Prague seems to be the most complete mail garment from anywhere near the 1066-1200 time period. The good saint died in the 930s, so if its provenance is to him, that's pretty early. Based on the length of the skirts, etc. I personally think that's unlikely, but I don't think we can say for sure. However, also based on the dimensions of it, I'd have to agree with Blair when he says that it can't be any later than 13th century. Therefore, it seems the best extant example that we have to go on. And, looking at it:
And an older perspective with the (probably unassociated) collar:
It looks to me like it is definitely of the T-construction, more in line with modern reconstructions and with the rings on the arms running the "wrong" way. So, now I'm going to spend all weekend trying to decide which direction to take with this. At least, I hope it only takes the weekend At least I'm pretty settled on the subarmalis, and I need to complete that before I really start doing mail stuff anyway.
- RandallMoffett
- Archive Member
- Posts: 4613
- Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 1:01 am
- Location: SE Iowa
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
Glen,
What is that under the mail? Any better close ups?
RPM
What is that under the mail? Any better close ups?
RPM
-
- Archive Member
- Posts: 4532
- Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 4:15 am
- Location: Nicholasville, KY
- Contact:
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
I think Steve may be asking if you are meaning the loose stuff is layered between the cloth layers and quilted through, or was it stuffed into pre quilted channels ( or maybe both).Tailoress wrote:Sure, "stuffed" works just as "padding" does -- perhaps more accurately, because it was loose stuff, not like our modern batting. They were quilted to hold the stuffing in place. When I refer to "padding" I mean loose stuff, not extra layers of fabric. The point I'm making is that if they were a martial garment, they had stuffing and they were quilted. The two went hand in hand.Steve -SoFC- wrote:Do you mean "stuffed" here? Because obviously they were padded. Quilted or stuffed, they were padded.Unfortunately, I was one of the proponents of that theory, that arming garments may have been less-stuffed or not stuffed and that quilting layers of fabric was all that was needed. However, after way more research, I have changed my mind. I think that a) they were absolutely padded (just not the way we modern people do it), and b) if they needed it to be close-profile, they simply made the channels smaller. Like, way smaller.
Steve
Tom
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
I have no idea, I just scrounged that photo off the internet. If I had to guess in a hopeful way, it's a museum-quality archival body form w/ a buffering layer directly in contact with the mail. If I had to guess in a more realistic way, it could just be draped right on top of a wooden torso. Either way, I believe what's underneath is just mounting/display hardware, and nothing remotely of a historic nature.RandallMoffett wrote:Glen,
What is that under the mail? Any better close ups?
RPM
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
I answered him on page 2, but I'll also mention this: I think that stuffing pre-quilted channels may very well have been done and was far more likely to happen for thicker quilted items -- but only in cases where the channels were straight lines, parallel to each other. For thinner quilted items I suspect that laying a thin layer of loose stuff between layers of fabric and stitching through worked well enough; I think the 13thc padded/quilted chemise attributed to Isabelle, sister of St. Louis of France may have been done this way. However, as soon as curves or variable loft (height) was incorporated into the design (and it was, certainly sometime in the second half of the 14thc), a whole different technique was used. That's what's in my paper published in Waffen- und Kostuemkunde. I'm encouraging people to actually buy it, rather than get the Cliff's Notes from me here on a forum, because "supporting academic publications" and stuff. I don't get a penny for your purchases, btw. I just want the journal supported.Tom B. wrote:I think Steve may be asking if you are meaning the loose stuff is layered between the cloth layers and quilted through, or was it stuffed into pre quilted channels ( or maybe both).Tailoress wrote:Sure, "stuffed" works just as "padding" does -- perhaps more accurately, because it was loose stuff, not like our modern batting. They were quilted to hold the stuffing in place. When I refer to "padding" I mean loose stuff, not extra layers of fabric. The point I'm making is that if they were a martial garment, they had stuffing and they were quilted. The two went hand in hand.Steve -SoFC- wrote:Do you mean "stuffed" here? Because obviously they were padded. Quilted or stuffed, they were padded.Unfortunately, I was one of the proponents of that theory, that arming garments may have been less-stuffed or not stuffed and that quilting layers of fabric was all that was needed. However, after way more research, I have changed my mind. I think that a) they were absolutely padded (just not the way we modern people do it), and b) if they needed it to be close-profile, they simply made the channels smaller. Like, way smaller.
Steve
Tom
Latest blog post: Pourpoint of Charles VI of France article now available in digital format!
Charles de Blois Pourpoint pattern
To follow my arts and research, check out my La cotte simple facebook page.
Charles de Blois Pourpoint pattern
To follow my arts and research, check out my La cotte simple facebook page.
-
- New Member
- Posts: 24
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 4:16 pm
- Location: Arizona
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
ok,
figured out the problem I wasn't subscribed to this topic! doh!
Rod Walker, thank you very much for posting those effigies for me, they'll be a big help when the time comes to work on my chest armour. I always enjoy having precedence in as period a way as I can. Effigies are only secondary sources in my work, but they're still better than nothing at all! I really appreciate it.
Tailoress,
supporting academic journals is always a good thing.
If I may ask, what journals do you all recommend for our periods of study?
also, I have a camera now yay! and hopefully this weekend, Sunday maybe I'll be able to take pics of my gambeson to post up here.
figured out the problem I wasn't subscribed to this topic! doh!
Rod Walker, thank you very much for posting those effigies for me, they'll be a big help when the time comes to work on my chest armour. I always enjoy having precedence in as period a way as I can. Effigies are only secondary sources in my work, but they're still better than nothing at all! I really appreciate it.
Tailoress,
supporting academic journals is always a good thing.
If I may ask, what journals do you all recommend for our periods of study?
also, I have a camera now yay! and hopefully this weekend, Sunday maybe I'll be able to take pics of my gambeson to post up here.
"Never theorize before you have data. Invariably, you end up twisting facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts." - Sherlock Holmes ~ Sr Arthur Conan Doyle
- RandallMoffett
- Archive Member
- Posts: 4613
- Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 1:01 am
- Location: SE Iowa
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
Tasha,
Do we actually have any remaining garments made that way? channels sewn then stuffed? I have seen a few and none are made this ways which is why I am curious to see evidence of this practice. It is way easier but has some major issues that go along with it. For example if you do not cross sew after it the padding all sinks down and the top where you need the protection is nearly gone. Also the fact from what I have seen the channels come apart as they are under more pressure because the push of the stuffed material now in the channels.
I will look up the full publication info and have a read as soon as I get midterm and some other things cleared away, promise.
RPM
Do we actually have any remaining garments made that way? channels sewn then stuffed? I have seen a few and none are made this ways which is why I am curious to see evidence of this practice. It is way easier but has some major issues that go along with it. For example if you do not cross sew after it the padding all sinks down and the top where you need the protection is nearly gone. Also the fact from what I have seen the channels come apart as they are under more pressure because the push of the stuffed material now in the channels.
I will look up the full publication info and have a read as soon as I get midterm and some other things cleared away, promise.
RPM
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
Because I like you guys...Harry Marinakis wrote:11th/12th Century isfoundation garments...Glen K wrote:...the period in which we have the least knowledge of....
clothing...
tents...
shoes...
accessories...
bags...
etc.
The 11th/12th centuries are a real PITA
The Eadwine Psalter at Cambridge University, Trinity College, MS R.17.1, c. 1150
http://www.trin.cam.ac.uk/james/show.php?index=1229
Some fairly decent looking tents on folio 044v for example. (And another on fo 73v with several electric guitars)
ferrum ferro acuitur et homo exacuit faciem amici sui
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
The Charles VI pourpoint is made of stuffed channels. However, it's done in a different way than "sewing and then stuffing". The end result, however, is the same -- stuffing inside of channels. And it is rock-solid, all padding where it should be, over 600 years later -- thanks to the many fabric layers and the ingenious method used. For more, read my article.RandallMoffett wrote:Tasha,
Do we actually have any remaining garments made that way? channels sewn then stuffed? I have seen a few and none are made this ways which is why I am curious to see evidence of this practice. It is way easier but has some major issues that go along with it. For example if you do not cross sew after it the padding all sinks down and the top where you need the protection is nearly gone. Also the fact from what I have seen the channels come apart as they are under more pressure because the push of the stuffed material now in the channels.
I will look up the full publication info and have a read as soon as I get midterm and some other things cleared away, promise.
RPM
Latest blog post: Pourpoint of Charles VI of France article now available in digital format!
Charles de Blois Pourpoint pattern
To follow my arts and research, check out my La cotte simple facebook page.
Charles de Blois Pourpoint pattern
To follow my arts and research, check out my La cotte simple facebook page.
- RandallMoffett
- Archive Member
- Posts: 4613
- Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 1:01 am
- Location: SE Iowa
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
Tasha,
Very interesting. I am indeed intrigued to read the article to see how to not sew and stuff to have stuffed channels.
RPM
Very interesting. I am indeed intrigued to read the article to see how to not sew and stuff to have stuffed channels.
RPM
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
Rod Walker wrote:Both of these come from the Osprey English Medieval Knight 1200-1300.
This first one is from Pershore Abbey C.1270-80. You can see the 3 buckles and straps joining a breast and back pate of some sort together.
This is a fascinating picture. The details like the surcoat, mail mittens and the belt fittings make me believe the date is correct. Which means the buckled garment beneath is most liley a CoP of some sort. Curiously though, those buckles don't match anything I've seen for that period. They seem more like early 15th century buckles to me. A fascinating picture.
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
Glen K wrote:I have no idea, I just scrounged that photo off the internet. If I had to guess in a hopeful way, it's a museum-quality archival body form w/ a buffering layer directly in contact with the mail. If I had to guess in a more realistic way, it could just be draped right on top of a wooden torso. Either way, I believe what's underneath is just mounting/display hardware, and nothing remotely of a historic nature.RandallMoffett wrote:Glen,
What is that under the mail? Any better close ups?
RPM
Here's a photo from Lorenzo at M.A.I.L. showing the pisane/standard. It looks to be mounted on a plastic needlework fabric.
http://www.mailleartisans.org/gallery/g ... p?key=5756
ferrum ferro acuitur et homo exacuit faciem amici sui
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
Hmm, interesting... Museum-person wise AND mail wise!
Re: another on the topic of gambesons
scott2978 wrote:Rod Walker wrote:Both of these come from the Osprey English Medieval Knight 1200-1300.
This first one is from Pershore Abbey C.1270-80. You can see the 3 buckles and straps joining a breast and back pate of some sort together.
This is a fascinating picture. The details like the surcoat, mail mittens and the belt fittings make me believe the date is correct. Which means the buckled garment beneath is most liley a CoP of some sort. Curiously though, those buckles don't match anything I've seen for that period. They seem more like early 15th century buckles to me. A fascinating picture.
For anyone interested, this effigy appears in the BBC series "Weapons that made Britain" episode 5. Here is a link to it on YouTube. I found it an interesting work. Though I am not an expert, he seems to be telling it true and not regurgitating 19th century romanticized versions.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqoh0okQ6Ho
Scott