Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > 17th century Armour: Cuisses or Tassets? Reply to topic
This is a standard topic  

Cuisses or Tassets?
Cuisses
28%
 28%  [ 2 ]
Tassets
71%
 71%  [ 5 ]
Total Votes : 7

Author Message
O. Kaappa





Joined: 03 Sep 2017

Posts: 1

PostPosted: Sun 03 Sep, 2017 1:36 pm    Post subject: 17th century Armour: Cuisses or Tassets?         Reply with quote

When speaking of the knee-pieces in late 16th century/early 17th century armour for heavy cavalrymen, which is the correct term? They function as cuisses, but you could also refer to them as tassets.

Any help on discerning the proper terminology would be appreciated.



 Attachment: 97.28 KB
Cuirassier 1.jpg
An example
View user's profile Send private message
T. Kew




Location: Cambridge, UK
Joined: 21 Apr 2012

Posts: 174

PostPosted: Mon 04 Sep, 2017 10:49 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Nowadays they would tend to be called tassets. As the terms are generally used, tassets attach to the fauld(s) and come down from there, while cuisses are separate components attached to the legs/waist directly.
Instructor and scholar, Cambridge HEMA
View user's profile Send private message
Matthew Amt




Location: Laurel, MD, USA
Joined: 17 Sep 2003

Posts: 1,302

PostPosted: Mon 04 Sep, 2017 11:24 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Just to be difficult, I'd call those cuisses because they form to the leg, and likely have straps to secure them.

I'd call them tassets if they look like this:



But I wouldn't be dogmatic about it, either way works for me. Or "cuissets", maybe?

Matthew
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Mark Moore




Location: East backwoods-assed Texas
Joined: 01 Oct 2003
Likes: 6 pages
Reading list: 1 book

Posts: 2,256

PostPosted: Mon 04 Sep, 2017 12:49 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I would have to agree with T. Kew. Cuisses, as my understanding goes, were separate pieces of armor that either buckled to the fauld or were attached to a belt at the waist. These often had an extra plate that wrapped around the outer thigh for extra protection. I would think that cuisses would be more likely used in on-foot combat. But, both photos show tassets, and the one that Mr. Amt provided would also be for foot combat, as in a pikeman's armor. Happy .....McM
''Life is like a box of chocolates...'' --- F. Gump
View user's profile Send private message
Randall Moffett




Location: Northern Utah
Joined: 07 Jun 2006
Reading list: 5 books

Posts: 2,098

PostPosted: Mon 04 Sep, 2017 4:46 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

But to take that a spin in another direction these cuisses actually often have a way to split them from the lower half and polyens.... being very much Tasset, faulds again.

Fun stuff,

RPM
View user's profile Send private message
Henry O.





Joined: 18 Jun 2016

Posts: 147

PostPosted: Mon 04 Sep, 2017 5:58 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

From Robert Barret's glossary:

Cuisset, is the armings of a horseman, for his thigh vnto the knees.

Taisses, a French vvord, and is the arming of the thighes, annexed vnto the forepart of the Corslet.

https://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/eebo/A04863.0001.001/1:17?rgn=div1;view=fulltext


Usually authors seem to use the terms interchangeably, but if you want to get specific it seems that the tasses refers to the upper part that goes down to the thigh, and the cuisset refers to the part covering the lower thigh and the knee.

Quote:
True it is, it is necessarie, for the shocke of a horse to weare a little Cuisset to co∣uer the knee, so ought al the Launtiers to be. We know it by experience; let a horseman be armed, the forepart of his curaces of a light pistoll proofe, his head peece the like, two lames of his pouldrons the like, two or three lames of his tasses of the like proofe, the rest I meane his tasses, cuisses, pouldrons, vambraces, and gauntlets, bee also so light as you can deuise.


-Sir Roger Williams, A Briefe Discourse of VVarre
View user's profile Send private message
M. Nordlund




Location: Sweden
Joined: 03 May 2017

Posts: 6

PostPosted: Wed 06 Sep, 2017 1:54 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

one could proboly say that the cuisses is part of the tasset in the first picture or one could say that that thing is long tassets and reserve the term cuisses for stand alone armor pieces. I would argue that sayng it is not tasset is wrong but at the same time cuisses might be as (or even more) right.
View user's profile Send private message
Lafayette C Curtis




Location: Indonesia
Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Reading list: 7 books

Posts: 2,689

PostPosted: Wed 06 Sep, 2017 2:35 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Didn't Cruso call them tassets? Tassets it is (although I wouldn't be too hard on people who call them cuisses since real proper cuisses were practically nonexistent by then anyway).
View user's profile Send private message


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > 17th century Armour: Cuisses or Tassets?
Page 1 of 1 Reply to topic
All times are GMT - 8 Hours

View previous topic :: View next topic
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum






All contents © Copyright 2003-2018 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum