I just found a great description giving advice on how to armour for battle. I would have considered the equipment list 13th century but the source is 12th century Icelandic which is definitely backwoods.
I gives a good description of the armour and under garments.
The source is SPECULUM REGALE as quoted in Ancient Armour and Weapons, by John Hewitt. Of course since it's a 19th century source, no bibliography so I don't know when in the 12th century. While 19th century scholars make leaps in logic worthy of Evel Kinevel, directly translating a source is usually pretty accurate, he does provide the original terms.
Armour for an infantryman: a byrnie or heavy panzar (gambeson), shield or buckler, and a sword.
Armour for naval engagements; long spear, panzar of soft and well-dyed linen, good helmet, steel caps, and broad shields.
Saving the best for last armour for a knight:
hose of soft linen which should reach to the breeches belt, then mail hose, then breeches of strong linen to which are fastened with strong nails thick iron knee caps.
For the upper body: a soft linen panzar to mid-thigh level, a breast defense of iron extending from busom to breeches belt, over that a byrnie, and over all a sleeveless panzar (gambeson) to mid-thigh,
the rest: two swords one girded to the knight one on the saddle bow. a dagger, a spear of tried steel, a good and thick shield suspended from his neck, and a good helm of tried steel and provided with all defence for the face.
Quite impressive for a twelth century source, may bring more proof to the attaching leg armour to a belt discussion.
Theodore
wearing armour, 12th century source
Moderator: Glen K
Theodore,
After reading your fascinating post, I took it and several questions to a list dedicated to 13th-and-early-14th C. re-enactment. The unanimous response is that, as you suspected, this is actually a 13th C. manuscript, dated to about 1260 (there is even some conjecture as to the identity of the author). Since then, one of the members posted the following URL -- an on-line translation of a larger portion of the work you referenced:
http://members.home.net/pkonieczny/kingsmirror.htm
Thank-you for bringing this source to my attention. It raised some exciting questions, and stimulated a fascinating debate over the signicance of "thoroughly blackened linen" *big grin*.... -cheval-
After reading your fascinating post, I took it and several questions to a list dedicated to 13th-and-early-14th C. re-enactment. The unanimous response is that, as you suspected, this is actually a 13th C. manuscript, dated to about 1260 (there is even some conjecture as to the identity of the author). Since then, one of the members posted the following URL -- an on-line translation of a larger portion of the work you referenced:
http://members.home.net/pkonieczny/kingsmirror.htm
Thank-you for bringing this source to my attention. It raised some exciting questions, and stimulated a fascinating debate over the signicance of "thoroughly blackened linen" *big grin*.... -cheval-
Cheval thanks for the link, it is much more complete than the excerpt I found. I have a few lingering questions on the text too. What were the ideas on the well blackened linen? A few ideas I came up with were, linen worth the cost of dyeing very black could have been of the best quality, the linen was soaked in something, I recall vinegar being used in another source,
It also occurred that it could be charred or burnt but I can't fathom a reason for this.
The one thing I keyed on was that the cloth garment to which the knee plates are attached to are named as breeches. Does this imply that gamboised cuisses are actually gamboised breeches. If I were campaigning on a horse that would be a nice luxury.
The quote settles the what would they wear under a hauberk debate because it is explicit about a gambeson. I expect to see the coat of plates since it is 13th century, I've heard of such references really close to 1200 AD. It is somewhat surprising that it was worn under the hauberk, now I just have to figure out why.
I have a thought to bounce off you Cheval, I believe that folded or rolled cloth would be much more efficient in a gambeson than loose stuffing. Several sources discuss using cloth when describing the construction though I believe there all sources and examples of both. What do you think of that possibility?
By the way where is that 13th-14th century list. I do 1370 but have an interest in the 100 years before that too.
Theodore
It also occurred that it could be charred or burnt but I can't fathom a reason for this.
The one thing I keyed on was that the cloth garment to which the knee plates are attached to are named as breeches. Does this imply that gamboised cuisses are actually gamboised breeches. If I were campaigning on a horse that would be a nice luxury.
The quote settles the what would they wear under a hauberk debate because it is explicit about a gambeson. I expect to see the coat of plates since it is 13th century, I've heard of such references really close to 1200 AD. It is somewhat surprising that it was worn under the hauberk, now I just have to figure out why.
I have a thought to bounce off you Cheval, I believe that folded or rolled cloth would be much more efficient in a gambeson than loose stuffing. Several sources discuss using cloth when describing the construction though I believe there all sources and examples of both. What do you think of that possibility?
By the way where is that 13th-14th century list. I do 1370 but have an interest in the 100 years before that too.
Theodore
Theodore: "What were the ideas on the well blackened linen ... linen worth the cost of dyeing very black"
That's the point. Not only is black a very difficult color to achieve, but linen is virtually un-dyeable. This according to the textile people who were commenting.
Theodore: "The quote settles the what would they wear under a hauberk debate because it is explicit about a gambeson."
I don't think it is as clear as you suggest. First, it differentiates between the gambeson under the mail (and describes it as "soft"), and the stiffer gambeson over the mail. Second, we may again be suffering from translation here (I am no expert on nordic language, and I've never seen the primary source). The translator may be seeing the same word used for two different garments but lacks the ability to interpret the context. No reference should ever be taken alone, and other citations (such as the Maciejowski) show that whatever was worn under mail was pretty nominal.
Theodore: "It is somewhat surprising that it was worn under the hauberk, now I just have to figure out why."
It's a puzzler, isn't it?
Theodore: "I believe that folded or rolled cloth would be much more efficient... Several sources discuss using cloth when describing the construction.... What do you think of that possibility?"
I'm not sure what you are asking, but there is evidence of using felt, unfelted wool, tow, flax, rags, and simple layers. I don't really feel qualified to comment, but my next answer might help you...
Theodore: "By the way where is that 13th-14th century list."
Its a YahooGroups mailing list called "75 Years". You don't have to be a Yahoo subscriber to be added to the list, though you do have to sign up if you want to see their on-line files or the archive of posts (where the blackened linen discussion is thoroughly hashed over). There is no cost to signing up -- save the pain of trying to come up with an account name that hasn't already been taken *wry grin*... -c-
That's the point. Not only is black a very difficult color to achieve, but linen is virtually un-dyeable. This according to the textile people who were commenting.
Theodore: "The quote settles the what would they wear under a hauberk debate because it is explicit about a gambeson."
I don't think it is as clear as you suggest. First, it differentiates between the gambeson under the mail (and describes it as "soft"), and the stiffer gambeson over the mail. Second, we may again be suffering from translation here (I am no expert on nordic language, and I've never seen the primary source). The translator may be seeing the same word used for two different garments but lacks the ability to interpret the context. No reference should ever be taken alone, and other citations (such as the Maciejowski) show that whatever was worn under mail was pretty nominal.
Theodore: "It is somewhat surprising that it was worn under the hauberk, now I just have to figure out why."
It's a puzzler, isn't it?
Theodore: "I believe that folded or rolled cloth would be much more efficient... Several sources discuss using cloth when describing the construction.... What do you think of that possibility?"
I'm not sure what you are asking, but there is evidence of using felt, unfelted wool, tow, flax, rags, and simple layers. I don't really feel qualified to comment, but my next answer might help you...
Theodore: "By the way where is that 13th-14th century list."
Its a YahooGroups mailing list called "75 Years". You don't have to be a Yahoo subscriber to be added to the list, though you do have to sign up if you want to see their on-line files or the archive of posts (where the blackened linen discussion is thoroughly hashed over). There is no cost to signing up -- save the pain of trying to come up with an account name that hasn't already been taken *wry grin*... -c-
-
Rev. George
- Archive Member
- Posts: 8917
- Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2000 1:01 am
- Location: athens. ga usa
- Contact:
On the subject of "blackened linen":
I've seen this term tossed around several times. Some people claim that the "black" was actually a dark brown/grey/purple. Some claim that maybe the term "black" meant something else as well, maybe it meant stiffening, etc. (interesting thought, doesnt "blackening" wood harden it?)
Other options are that the garments were indeed black, possibly through some technique we dont know, or wouldnt think to apply to cloth making.
Suggestions I have heard:
Pitch soaking: It would "blacken" fabric, and also make it stiffer.
Bog floating: From what I hear linen has an interesting action when exposed for periods of time to peat. It is supposed to make the cloth very dark and soft....
Problem is perhaps we will never know. So we;ll still have the fishwives attaching your black cloak, etc.
-+G
I've seen this term tossed around several times. Some people claim that the "black" was actually a dark brown/grey/purple. Some claim that maybe the term "black" meant something else as well, maybe it meant stiffening, etc. (interesting thought, doesnt "blackening" wood harden it?)
Other options are that the garments were indeed black, possibly through some technique we dont know, or wouldnt think to apply to cloth making.
Suggestions I have heard:
Pitch soaking: It would "blacken" fabric, and also make it stiffer.
Bog floating: From what I hear linen has an interesting action when exposed for periods of time to peat. It is supposed to make the cloth very dark and soft....
Problem is perhaps we will never know. So we;ll still have the fishwives attaching your black cloak, etc.
-+G