Cased greaves & Sabatons

[Sir James A]

They did have chairs and they did sit back in the middle ages. Knights would ride places on horseback rather than in a car, but still, seated.

Not to pick, but there's a marked difference between riding horseback and riding in a car...last time I rode I was sweating rather profusely- a combination of a fairly warm day (80s temp) and the fact that it is a bit of a workout, especially in the core (unless you ride like a sack of potatoes lol) and the inner thighs.

That's why they had to tie down anything that couldn't keep up on the horse- sacks of grain and prisoners included. 

Oh, absolutely, I agree with you. I was going towards most of the surviving cased greaves we have, being for people with very slim calves. We're not sure if that was because those muscles were under-developed from riding so much (not walking), or if they were somehow strong but slim. The cardio exercise you'd get from walking would be more than riding. Not to say they had it easy; just that it was easier riding than walking and that their muscles wouldn't be as developed as they would be if they walked everywhere. Like we joked at VARF - it's not so hard to be in full harness when the horse is moving the weight around.

You've a point there...because fighting on foot wasn't something they would've practiced or indulged in had they had a choice.  What about the upper body, have you noticed if they were especially large up top, Sir James?

That one is a whole other can of worms, since the breastplate and backplate on the large majority of armors was separate, and can fit quite a range of girths. The primary exception is the late italian cuirass. The cased greaves are almost like a "metal cast" of the calves.

[Joshua Santana]

                They did have chairs and they did sit back in the middle ages. Knights would ride places on horseback rather than in a car, but still, seated.


            Not to pick, but there's a marked difference between riding horseback and riding in a car...last time I rode I was sweating rather profusely- a combination of a fairly warm day (80s temp) and the fact that it is a bit of a workout, especially in the core (unless you ride like a sack of potatoes lol) and the inner thighs.

            That's why they had to tie down anything that couldn't keep up on the horse- sacks of grain and prisoners included. 


        Oh, absolutely, I agree with you. I was going towards most of the surviving cased greaves we have, being for people with very slim calves. We're not sure if that was because those muscles were under-developed from riding so much (not walking), or if they were somehow strong but slim. The cardio exercise you'd get from walking would be more than riding. Not to say they had it easy; just that it was easier riding than walking and that their muscles wouldn't be as developed as they would be if they walked everywhere. Like we joked at VARF - it's not so hard to be in full harness when the horse is moving the weight around.


    You've a point there...because fighting on foot wasn't something they would've practiced or indulged in had they had a choice.  What about the upper body, have you noticed if they were especially large up top, Sir James?


That one is a whole other can of worms, since the breastplate and backplate on the large majority of armors was separate, and can fit quite a range of girths. The primary exception is the late italian cuirass. The cased greaves are almost like a "metal cast" of the calves.

There you go. 

[Ian]

Oh, absolutely, I agree with you. I was going towards most of the surviving cased greaves we have, being for people with very slim calves. We're not sure if that was because those muscles were under-developed from riding so much (not walking), or if they were somehow strong but slim. The cardio exercise you'd get from walking would be more than riding. Not to say they had it easy; just that it was easier riding than walking and that their muscles wouldn't be as developed as they would be if they walked everywhere. Like we joked at VARF - it's not so hard to be in full harness when the horse is moving the weight around.

Slim calves in no way means under-developed calves.  Look at any distance runner, and any number of endurance athletes.  They generally have very slender calf muscles.  You'd be hard pressed to call their calves under-conditioned.  Unless knights were routinely doing toe raises in their armor as part of their training, it's not really surprising that many could have had slender calf muscles while not being atrophied from never walking around.  In fact, walking around doesn't develop your calves size either.  Unless you're genetically predisposed to large calves, the only way to make your calves big is to do high-resistance training targeting them specifically, or specialize in sprinting.  You could walk 100 miles a day and not get big calves. 

Here are my cased greaves before being polished.  As you can see, they just about are as Ivan described, metal casts of my leg.  My calves are also pretty slim, but the shaping of the greaves prevents them from putting any real weight on the top of my foot.  Even with slender calves, the shaping of the metal allows the weight to rest on the muscle and over the surface area of the lower leg.

[Joshua Santana]

Here are my cased greaves before being polished.  As you can see, they just about are as Ivan described, metal casts of my leg.  My calves are also pretty slim, but the shaping of the greaves prevents them from putting any real weight on the top of my foot.  Even with slender calves, the shaping of the metal allows the weight to rest on the muscle and over the surface area of the lower leg.

There you go, that is why you need the greave measurements correct or else pain and discomfort will ensue.

[SirNathanQ]

Gah, perfectly shaped greaves! They exist! 

But concerning knights fighting on foot, that actually was a faily common occurrence. The Germans were poked fun at by the French (bad decision that, poking fun at Germans  ) for their propensity to dismount in times of Crisis as early as the 13th century, and by the early 14th, the English commonly dismounted their knights, only keeping a mounted reserve. By the mid 14th century, even the French were trying it out. Knights fighting dismounted wasn't uncommon at all. 

[Sir James A]

Ian, thanks for the insight. Full harness seems to be an odd duck; while I agree a marathon runner with slim calves would certainly not be out of shape, I do wonder how long they would be mobile in harness with all the extra weight. And if they were moving about in that weight, wouldn't it increase the size of their calves at least somewhat? They could have slim calves but be considerably strong; comparing bodybuilders to some of the "world's strongest X" and the "tough man" competitions, some of the most ridiculously strong and brute-force guys have a very moderate build compared to a "body builder" - so I try not to equate mass with power - there's some correlation, but it's not the end-all, be-all.

Anyways, I mentioned the 'metal cast' (not Ivan), since it's the closest way I could think to describe them. It seems paradoxical, but I'm finding with large calves - or rather, a large variance between calf & ankle circumference - that the weight of the greave really *needs* to sit over top of the foot to allow slight play at the calf, or I can't kneel / kick / hop around comfortably and with full range of motion. For reference, my calf is 16.5" (sadly, it's shrank a bit), and my ankle is 9.5". That's with no exercising. When I was active and in shape, my calf was 18", nearly double my ankle.

The large difference in measurements like that makes it really uncomfortable for the back of the greave to be perfectly fitted to my leg; I keep it as tight as possible against the front (as you could probably guess from my armor bite photos), and let the back have a bit more play. This lets my calf "flex" up and down my leg as I squat / kick / move about. If the back plate is resting on my calf for support, to keep it off the front of my foot, it's horribly uncomfortable on my calf to do any movements that cause my calf muscle to move - I'm literally pressing my muscle up against the steel. With the weight from the greaves supported by the sabatons, and 'separated' by sitting on the spur straps, it's completely comfortable.

I can't find a decent picture online, but very very late period greaves were sometimes solid from the demi-greave down to the bottom of the foot. I don't know if that's to keep the weight over top of the feet like I'm doing, because they were worn on horseback and the stirrups would be taking the weight, or some other reason.

I think the smaller calves makes it easier to wear greaves since there's not as much muscle mass moving around, and tightly fitted armor can be self-supporting without being restrictive. If I just had schynbalds, I don't think they would need to sit on my feet at all. It's the motion of the large calf muscle that complicates it for me.

(Sir Edward - can we get a topic split to something like 'Cased greaves & Sabatons' with some of these posts? I've derailed this thread rather far. )

[Sir Edward]

(Sir Edward - can we get a topic split to something like 'Cased greaves & Sabatons' with some of these posts? I've derailed this thread rather far. )

Done.,

[Ian]

I find no problem with mobility in fully cased greaves.  I used to, but I don't anymore.  If you observe the body mechanics of kneeling / kicking / hopping, etc... the calf doesn't change shape all that much.  If you go watch a youtube video of a Jay Cutler or Ronnie Coleman (Mr. Olympia pro body builders) workout calves, you can see that even guys with stupidly muscular calves don't change shape dramatically when flexed.  The bottom of the muscle is drawn up higher in to the leg as it tightens and you can see the separation of the two heads of the calf.  But the shape change is not so dramatic that it won't fit in your closely fitted greaves anymore if shaped properly.  I really think it comes down to the shaping of the greaves themselves.  If the greaves are not properly shaped, they won't function correctly.

I mentioned above I used to have the same problem but don't anymore.  I don't want this to be misconstrued as an attack on anyone, but my original pair of greaves were the merctailor offering.  They are simply not shaped appropriately to function seamlessly with harness as a greave should.  The only way to allow mobility was to wear them so they sat on the top of my foot, or they would restrict function.  With weight on top of my foot all they did was add to fatigue and made walking around rather uncomfortable.

When I upgraded to cased greaves made to actual casts of my legs, the change of was night and day.  I practically forget I have them on.  When I got my quotes from Jeff Wasson, I was ignorant about the amount of time and skill required to properly shape greaves and came to find out that they were more expensive and more difficult to make than any other piece of armor I ordered from him.  He explained that the fit needs to be really spot on to function properly, and for that, they must be shaped as close as possible to match the contour of your leg.  Basically, unless someone else has doppleganger legs of yours, your greaves will not function as well on them, and they will experience compromised mobility or comfort issues.

[Sir Edward]

Yes, that's the thing people often don't realize about cased greaves. The fit requires so much precision that you really can't make an off-the-rack option that will fit anyone properly.

I remember walking by one of the armorers at Pennsic and saw a sample set hanging in their booth, and I asked what they charge. They said $1500 and clearly expected me to scoff at it. I said "that sounds about right".

I'm not sure what Jeff Wasson charges for them. I'd be curious to find out, since properly fitting greaves (and sabatons) is something I'd really like to get at some point. That's the one thing I completely neglect currently in my 15th century kit.

[Sir William]

Well...sounds like I need a pair myself!