lower-class armor combinations...

DrTuba · Post by **DrTuba** » Tue Jun 10, 2003 11:27 am

I'm doing landsknecht circa 1500-1510 and wondering about combinations of armor from that period. I had these two halves of a breastplate cut out of plastic and half formed (because the mold was for a much smaller guy) and was determined to use them for a corazzina until I found out that was a century too early, then figured I'd cut it into a brig until I found that was never something landsknechts wore, so I'm stuck...

Should I just give up and go for a gothic breast? If so, would it be landsknecht-appropriate to have a "pieced together CoP style" back?

Also, considering this question, would it be landsknecht appropriate to combine armors much like a battlefield scavenger might? Splinted legs, half-leather-half-steel spaulders, sallet, steel arm cannons, etc.? Wasn't it only the upper class who could afford the "fancy" armors of the time?

How would ye of much experience approach this? (this is a SCA rig, btw) I want to complete my armor but to to have to undo everything I've done thus far (i.e. keep the splinted legs and sallet)

Thanks in advance.

------------------

"Never mistake lack of talent for genius."

[This message has been edited by DrTuba (edited 06-10-2003).]

chef de chambre · Post by **chef de chambre** » Tue Jun 10, 2003 11:55 am

Hi Dr. Tuba,

then figured I'd cut it into a brig until I found that was never something landsknechts wore, so I'm stuck...

Who told you that? Brigandine armours were extremely common until the 1570's, following the fashionable cut of the doublet. Cut the foundation cloth to a doublet pattern of your era, and you should be quite all right.

While it is true that munition plate armours (almain rivit in the era you describe) were the most commonly bought armours stored and distributed to German armies in the HRE, to say that "Landescknechts never wore X "(in this case brigandines), when X was one of the most commonly produced and worn armours of the era is dangerously unsound. Any time someone spouts off wih a "Never", "Always", or any other firmly stated absolute in terms of armour, then you should have alarm bells going off in your head that possiblyn his person doen't know all that much about the subject at hand. Armour scholars are very wary in terms of speaking in absolutes. If this is in reference to earlier enquerries, perhaps it is in terms of a specific patern of brigandine like you are thinking of. I recall stating the corrizone leaves the record of art and extant examples between the middle and hird quarter of he 15th century - C 10 in the Reale Armeria being a late exant example from c 1450 wih brigandine like features, and representation in art, for example, in the Master of WA engravings of the Burgundian army circa 1471.

In example, I can say on prety damned firm ground that "They never wore Roman armour during the conflict known as 'The Wars of the Roses'", and be pretty secure in that statement (likely accuracy 100%). I would be a fool to say that "In the Mid 14th century, English knights never wore composite limb defences of leather and latten or iron, popularly known as 'splinted' armour". I sound more like I know what the hell I'm talking about if I said "Splinted limb defences of the 14th century are most commonly seen in a German context from the mid-3rd quaer of the 14th century, although occuring in other contexts rarely".

------------------
Bob R.

Jason Grimes · Post by **Jason Grimes** » Tue Jun 10, 2003 12:46 pm

Hi Chef,

I have to disagree with you on this one. I wanted to do a brig for my Landsknecht persona, and I could find no evidence that they wore them. The very early Landsknecht could have worn them especially when Maximillian was recruiting Burgundians for his first Landsknecht army. By the early 16th century it appears that the fashion of wearing brigs had died out in Germany. I have yet to find a period woodcut, painting, or written reference to brigs being used by the Landsknecht. Even period written records and drawings by Paul Dolstein depict plate breasts, and this is from the first decade of the 16th century. I definitely have missed a lot in my research so I can't say they "never" wore them, but I can say if they did, it was extremely rare. Of course if you have any information that refutes this, I would love to see it.

This of course does not apply to the English and the Spanish who used brigs a lot and any self respecting Conquistador (sp?) would look just fine in one.

Jason
Veltin Grimm

DrTuba · Post by **DrTuba** » Tue Jun 10, 2003 1:32 pm

Thanks for the answers! I guess I'm asking, in the context of what landsknechts were and did, would it be feasible that they built armors from whatever they could scrounge? I know the woodcuts show a certain style of armor, but looking at them, it's fairly astounding the array of style and outfitting the landsknechts had altogether. Would that not apply armorwise, or, in citing the example that chef quoted, would saying landsknechts used splinted armor be like saying "roman armor in the War of the Roses"?

------------------

"Never mistake lack of talent for genius."

chef de chambre · Post by **chef de chambre** » Tue Jun 10, 2003 2:20 pm

Hi Jason,

By the early 16th century it appears that the fashion of wearing brigs had died out in Germany.

How then do you explain Maximilians personal brigandine in the Vienna Kunshisorichesmuseum? Since the Emperor is the fellow setting the fashion...

Not my area of study, but I wager were you to research it more in depth, and go beyond woodcuts (I'm sure there must be lists of armour purchased by Maximilian in bulk for use by troops), you might find more than you would expect. Remember they can be worn *under* an overgown, and there are accounts of them being worn precisely this way in the 1490's.

I would agree that brigandines in general were less popular in Germany than in the rest of Western Europe (even in the 15th century), but they weren't entirely unknown.

------------------
Bob R.

Jason Grimes · Post by **Jason Grimes** » Tue Jun 10, 2003 3:22 pm

Hi DrTuba,

I don't have a definitive answer for you. If I could take a guess, the answer would be yes, but with a caveat. In order to understand why, you need to know a little about how the Landsknecht army was organized and maintained. When a Landsknecht was mustered, the only equipment requirements was they he had a weapon and could use it. There were other requirements like he had to be in good health and have sturdy clothing, etc. As near as I can tell there were no requirements on armour. A Landsknecht was paid very well (within your period of interest) and once mustered would have been paid their first sold or pay. They could have bought armour with this money. If you were a veteran returning to service you would have had double pay and have the money to purchase armour. Also sometimes the state would issue armour to the Landsknechts, like in the case of Paul Dolstein who received armour from the king of Denmark when he fought against a Swedish uprising for him. There is some evidence for them taking armour off of dead soldiers. Also at this time munition armour was not made as a "set" per se, but a Landskencht could purchase parts "off the peg" if they fit until he had a suit. There are many ways of getting armour then and like you said, there were many styles to choose from.

If by "splinted" you mean strips of iron riveted to a leather backing, then yes. If you mean "splinted vambraces" then no. Wade Allen has several pictures of the typical splinted vambraces or arm harness on his web site. http://www.allenantiques.com/Miscellaneous%20Pieces-Collection.html These were used by the Landsknechts very often and you can see examples in woodcuts and paintings.

Hi Chef,

I agree with you there, I just haven't found any evidence yet. Maximillian wearing a brig makes a lot of sense, as he traveled frequently and never stayed at one town for more then two months. He understood the impact of his court to the economics of areas he visited and tried to spread the cost around. Brigs would work very well for a more comfortable defense when traveling. It would be interesting to research why the Landsknechts did not use them as much as the rest of Europe. Maybe they just didn't work well in shot and pike warfare. Or maybe it was economics and solid breastplates were cheaper then brigs?? Thanks, and I hope that I didn't ramble too much.

Jason
Veltin Grimm

Angus Bjornssen · Post by **Angus Bjornssen** » Wed Jun 11, 2003 1:55 am

I am really only a beginner to armoring and learning about armor but I have one question about the site that Jason linked to. The only description of a splinted vambrace seems to be under a photo that shows two full metal arms. What am I missing that it seems I should know? Mainly, doesn't "splinted" imply metal on leather in some fashion? Or even metal on some other "soft" material? I looked hard at the pics but only saw metal with the exception of a small bit of strap connected to a buckle on the left arm in the picture. Is my impression of splinted armor wrong?

------------------
Angus of the White Mountain Shire

Mikael · Post by **Mikael** » Wed Jun 11, 2003 2:33 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Angus Bjornssen:
I am really only a beginner to armoring and learning about armor but I have one question about the site that Jason linked to. The only description of a splinted vambrace seems to be under a photo that shows two full metal arms. What am I missing that it seems I should know? Mainly, doesn't "splinted" imply metal on leather in some fashion? Or even metal on some other "soft" material?
<snip>
. Is my impression of splinted armor wrong?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hello Angus

Well I didn't find splints from the page Jason linked.
I would say however that your overall impression of splinted armour is correct. Usually when talking about it people mean defence consisting of strips of metal riveted either over or under soft material. Mostly used as limb armour.

In period usage pair of splints could mean hand defence of metal riveted together. "crude defences for the outside of the arm; they were usually of relatively thin metal, with laminated vambraces made in one with the spauudlers... and with couters to protect the joint of the elbow" 140, Edge & Paddock 1988

So splinted armour and pair of splints are two different things.

Mikael

Jason Grimes · Post by **Jason Grimes** » Wed Jun 11, 2003 12:41 pm

Hi Angus,

The period meaning of splint ment to split or cut in half. For instance if you have a broken arm someone might split a piece of wood to make two splints. I'm not sure but I think that the type of splinted armour you are talking about got it's name because it looks like splints used for broken limbs. In period I don't think they would have called it that. If you look at the pictures on Wade's site again the three pictures in a row, starting with the spaulder, are what was called in period a splinted arm harness. Or a harness that looks like it was cut in half. This was typical munition armour in the first half of the 16th century. This appears to be another Victorian naming convension that has been used over the years and now is part of armour terminology. I don't see any problem with this as the name is very apt, but there were other uses for the name in period.

Thanks for the reference Mikael.

Jason
Veltin Grimm

Angus Bjornssen · Post by **Angus Bjornssen** » Wed Jun 11, 2003 5:46 pm

Thanks for the info. So my idea of splinted armor is the more modern description of metal splints on leather or other soft material rather than the original name. The next question I have is: What was that type of armor called in period? I love variants on "splinted" arms and legs and it's fun to make as well but I really would like to use it's proper name in conversation. Call it an effort to sound like I know what I'm talking about.

As to the pics I referred to: those arms are pretty cool as are the other bits and pieces. I assume they are original examples. Is that correct? Whether or not they are original they certainly do provide some inspiration for some things to pound out of some mild...

------------------
Angus of the White Mountain Shire

freiman the minstrel · Thu Jun 12, 2003 6:02 am

Stone's glossary (G Stone, 1964, Jack Brussel, pub, No ISDN) has a photo of two beautiful brigandines (fig 190, p150) it lists as from the 16th century, one listed as "early 16th century", th eother just "16th century".

It lists one as "Spanish", and the other as "Italian" (the "early" one). Both are in the Met.

Since Freundberg sacked rome in 1527 (at least partially) with landskenecht soldiers, then it is reasonable to assume that at least some Landskenects came into contact with Italian armor from the early 16th century.

Somebody check my logic, and my facts.

It's interesting to me that Stone's glossary lists Brigandine as "A kind of armor much used in Europe from the 13th to the 15 century" (p. 149) and then shows NO brigs from the 13th to the 15th centuries, and TWO from the 16th, outside the time frame of his own definition.

freiman

{edited for clarity}

[This message has been edited by freiman the minstrel (edited 06-12-2003).]