Main > The Armoury
Armor for SwordChick
Das Bill:
--- Quote from: Sir Edward on 2008-03-29, 17:24:55 ---Wow, you've been busy! It looks like it's turning into a nice little shopping list. Fabulous! (heh) :)
--- End quote ---
Its because I spent so much time planning my own harness before starting to put the pieces together, and I'm still not quite finished, so I have so many books tagged and webpages bookmarked. :)
Das Bill:
I'm having WAY too much fun trying to spend Pamela's money here. :)
So Pamela: First, we were talking about whether or not to get gauntlets right away, and I'm finding plenty of period imagery where full plate harnesses are worn without gauntlets, so you're safe there. We were talking about fingerless demi-gauntlets, and wondering whether that was confined to the 14th century, or whether that continued into the 15th. Well, it definately continued into the 15th. Check out folio 9r in Paulus Kal's treatise:
http://mdz10.bib-bvb.de/~db/bsb00001840/images/index.html?seite=23
There are a number of other images in Kal showing demi-gauntlets over mail gloves, too, and all of this is from the third quarter of the 15th c.
On a similar note, we were talking about a cuirass that only covered the front. There are a lot of images in Kal of fully armoured, mounted knights who appear to not have back plates. Look at folios 6v, 8v, 13r, 15r, 16r, 17r. 6v in particular:
http://mdz10.bib-bvb.de/~db/bsb00001840/images/index.html?seite=18
This image might imply that you could get away with your Revival Clothing gambeson. While it may be intended for 14th c, the rough design might transfer over to later periods. Perhaps not up to living history standards, but I think you might be able to get away with it. Further, the extra padding of the gambeson would probably be too thick for both breast and back plate, but a frontal piece would work well. In the color version of the photo, it appears that the mail fauld is worn under the gambeson.
Of course, you'd still need an arming doublet or pourpoint in order to point the legs. But if you were leaning at all towards 15th c, but the idea of using your gambeson was holding you into the 14th, this might be a tie breaker.
Sword Chick:
--- Quote from: Das Bill on 2008-04-01, 18:26:10 ---I'm having WAY too much fun trying to spend Pamela's money here. :)
--- End quote ---
I truly do appreciate the help. (Thank you dahling! kiss kiss :-*)
That's good news about the half gauntlets or no gauntlets being correct. As you know, I get cranky with trying to find a pair of gloves that fit. So skipping the gauntlets, at least for now, certainly does appeal to me.
--- Quote ---On a similar note, we were talking about a cuirass that only covered the front. There are a lot of images in Kal of fully armoured, mounted knights who appear to not have back plates.
--- End quote ---
Hmm, again, that sounds quite appealing. I can get closer to a complete look sooner.
--- Quote ---Of course, you'd still need an arming doublet or pourpoint in order to point the legs. But if you were leaning at all towards 15th c, but the idea of using your gambeson was holding you into the 14th, this might be a tie breaker.
--- End quote ---
Actually, at this point, I'm kinda excited about attempting to make the arming doublet. And, I was worried about using my gambeson after talking about the possibility that the armour would leave marks on a gambeson. I've decided I like the natural color, so I don't want to see it abused too soon.
I have taken my first official, though minor step. I took advantage of Revival Clothing's March sale and got the ankle boots.
I am leaning (okay, toppling) towards the revival.us legs. I was talking to Christian about them again today. :)
Christian Tobler:
Hey folks,
Yay! Let's *all* help Pamela spend her money. First, I'll take a new watch, a Ferrari, a steak dinner, oh, and...a complete Robert MacPhearson harness!! ;) But seriously...
First, Brother Bill - be careful about gauntlets...if we're talking about Fechtbucher, they are (almost certainly) always wearing them. That they aren't always drawn appears to be an artistic convention. Good examples of what I mean are in several Talhoffers and in Gladiatoria - the gauntlets are only drawn when the technique specifically involves them; otherwise they're omitted for the sake of showing the fingers clearly.
There may be other iconographic sources that show this, with the intent of the fighter truly not wearing them, but we can draw such a conclusion from the treatises.
Now, the jack chains are a great idea - I know of two who wear them: AEMMA's Brian McIlmolye and "Big" Dave Teague. They're way cool...
If you have a foundation garment, and I can see some rationale for using the RC gambeson (but for the legs, your idea of making one is better, Pamela - though you could get the pourpoint as well), based on the Kal evidence, you should first get, and I think in this order:
Helmet
Gauntlets
Breastplate or Brigandine or Coat of Plates
If you're going 15th c., the GDFB breastplate looks good, and I've been meaning to get one to evaluate for our guys (hint, hint Ed: you'll be hearing from me soon!). Has anyone seen this yet?
The jack chains would be a great, inexpensive compliment to that, though they're *usually* shown on guys wearing either just the jack, or a brigandine.
GDFB certainly has helmets that'll work.
The Revival.us legs will go with all of the above.
Now, gauntlets...one possibility is the mitten variety sold on Ebay by Armstreet/Steel Mastery. I haven't evaluated them yet, so I'm not sure. But in any case, these would go on over whatever leather gloves fit you.
I'm at work, so that's all I have for now, but I'll keep an eye out on this thread...
CHT
Sir Edward:
--- Quote from: Christian Tobler on 2008-04-01, 19:39:33 ---If you're going 15th c., the GDFB breastplate looks good, and I've been meaning to get one to evaluate for our guys (hint, hint Ed: you'll be hearing from me soon!). Has anyone seen this yet?
--- End quote ---
Welcome to the forum!!
Unfortunately I haven't had a chance to see the breastplates yet. I'm curious about them as well.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version