Hi!

I have been lurking here for some time and learnt a lot, and have gotten many good references. Hope to be able to give back some time, but as it is now I post in order to get a couple of questions sorted out.

I started building this breastplate in order to get a piece that would work well to fence in (compared to my previous attempts at building breastplates): It stretches over the shoulders and made in a single piece in order to transfer blows from shoulders and chest to the waist. High waist to allow good movement of upper body and wide room for the arms. The breastplate is made in 2mm mild steel, and has been left rough. Worked cold and annealed once (I will never work cold again..).

So I initially didn't have a lot of thought on fitting a clear period in time, I had seen similar designs from the Pistoia alterpiece through the Fiore Dei Liberi manual to gothic pieces. But now I would like to make a decision as to which period I want the breastplate to be from. The most important criterion is that it should be from the first half of the 15th century. As it happens I have found a picture of a helm that I really like, presumably from that timeframe, and I want the breastplate to match it (when I become skilled enough to make such a helm..).

So I have two questions: I have already found out in another thread here that it is a: "[..] 15th century helm, most likely 1425-1450. It is of Italian style, but could have possibly been made elsewhere. The visor does not belong to it and is now displayed as a seperate and distinct piece." ("Early Bascinet Visors?" http://www.myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t...larm%E9e), my first question is if anyone has any more information, such as a narrower date range and more pictures?

The second question is: Given the information on this helmet that I have already seen on this forum and on information that I have missed but that some of you probably have, how could I adapt the breastplate to match the date and area of the helmet? (About how wide lames and how many? Likelihood of being covered in cloth? How about the center ridge? Can I wear it without a backplate and with mail under?)

Really thankful for your time!
/Daniel S.

---

 Attachment: 38.79 KB



 Attachment: 39.15 KB



 Attachment: 54.41 KB



 Attachment: 2.32 KB

Daniel, how about making the breastplate more globose overall, softening the medial ridge a bit if not dispensing with it entirely, and adding a more flared fauld with a bit of an arched groin relief below the medial ridge? I know this would also be quite a bit more work, but you may want to open the arm and neck cutouts a bit. Does the present geometry interfere with any of your movements?

Here is a photo of what I had in mind, but as a single piece breastplate. It is off of Eric Dube's http://www.armuredube.com website. You would still have to add the flared single fauld. Dispensing with the medial ridge altogether would probably be more correct...

---

 Attachment: 50.95 KB

Thanks for those ideas and the photos! Yes the neck cut-out could be made deeper. The arm cut-outs are actually deep enough to allow all types of movements, maybe it doesn't show in the picture. What I like with it as it is right now is that it really fits me and allow movement, its just about getting the correct look. Making it more globose is probably a sound advise in that regard. If I do it more globose then I could make the ridge disappear at the same time. Concerning the fauld, I would prefer having more faulds attached to the first, how ok would that be when the breastplate is solid.

How about the time-period, anyone having an idea for tightening the range of when that helmet would have been used?

Torsten - I am aiming for a more complete harness that could have been worn by a more wealthy foot soldier or a man at arms accustomed to fighting dismounted. (I have quite a few pieces of armour lying around that I need to rebuild or replace to fit the period and place I am deciding on, but the end result will be an armour that must protect during heavy sparring.) So therefore I should narrow down the time-span to around 1425-30. Just hope that no one objects to choosing the earlier part of the suggested time-span of the barbut styled helm. Then, judging by what you are saying, for that period it would be more ok to have a solid breastplate as part of a complete harness including faulds (I want those for protection that's why I keep going back to it..).

As for my plan to include a mail haubergeon underneath the breastplate instead of a backplate: Its not necessary but I would like to do it to improve ventilation in the areas where plate protection is not needed for my purposes, such as the whole back and the upper arms. Would this, together with my preferred helmet, limit the region where such an armour would be used to Italy or could such a harness have been worn in other places as well (for instance where Italian armour were exported)?

Its mainly these decisions that I have some preconceived notions about that it is great to get critique and feed-back on, but when the period and place has become even clearer I'll have a good starting point to begin a more conventional research of the other parts of the armour.

Edit: The surface of the breastplate would also be improved to fit the type of armour I am aiming for.

Thanks!

solid breastplates like that are more 16thc cent are they not? most 15thc breastplates are of 2 pieces (breast and plackart). even the breastplates from the first part of the 1400s show converted globose breasts with a small plackart

if you were to wear your breastplate over a hauberk i think it would be fine. just X strap the straps across your back and put a waist strap as well.

btw you did a good job on the breastplate. i would open it up a tad more and maybe dish the belly more. but if it fits you good thats all that is important.

From a quick look at some of my effigy, brasses and armour pictures I'd say pre 1450 you are fine with a one piece breastplate. The two piece ones do not become terribly common until after this. They seem to show up in the late 1430's or 1440's but single piece ones are still around into the 1460's from my quick look. The one piece comes back up again in the last decade of the 15th at least it appears to be so by way of effigies. If you are not depicting a gentleman it would be even more possible for one piece breastplate. There are even some german gothic one piece breastplates adn italian one piece ones that still exist so really it never really dies out, though it seems much less common in the 2nd half of the 15th.

The ridge on the 15th century breastplate tends to be much less harsh on the effigies that show a ridge on a one piece breastplate. Into the 1430-1450's there are mountains of effigies of english men at arms so if may help to do a bit of looking into them for ideas on an entire harness. Not sure about barbutes. They do not seem to be popular in England or germany. I have heard it is because missile fire.... I do not know if I agree but there you have it.

If you are going to wear an incomplete suit I would think a mail shirt with a breast plate is fine. If you have a complete suit except a backplate I think that's be somewhat odd.

RPM

---

 Attachment: 19.41 KB



 Attachment: 16.94 KB



 Attachment: 66.62 KB

You are right Torsten most combinations from the same period but from different places could perhaps have occurred and since I don't do reenactment I'm a bit more flexible, but its still great getting all the help I can from you guys since I want a harness that isn't too odd.

Thanks Chuck! Even if it fits me well it appears to be a good idea to make it a bit more globose. I have simple fastenings prepared for x straps and a waist strap, I'll just start looking into how I can finish them in a more correct manner.

Randall - Great hearing that you think it could be ok with a one-piece up until 1450 and thanks for the great pictures. I am actually working on a backplate but I started working on it when I didn't have large enough plates to work with so its made of one piece over the back and a piece on each side under the arms so it just doesn't feel right (intended to be riveted together). That's another reason why I started thinking on mail. (If I have a backplate I would still want to have gussets and mail skirt.) But if I go with a pretty early armour maybe I could wear a mail haubergeon under a back and breast plate. Then I should probably make the backplate in thin spring steel so the suit isn't so heavy.

For me the most important thing is that all pieces of the suit are from the same period. I would also prefer that most pieces are from the same area with perhaps a couple of exceptions (remember I am at this point not planning on participating in reenactment so I can be a tad more flexible, I just don't want reenacters to think the suit looks totally off). I would mostly like the suit to be something that a Swedish man at arms (accustomed to fighting dismounted) or foot soldier could have worn. So in that case my choice of helm would perhaps be the piece that is a bit off from the rest. But on the other hand wearing a bit older fashion and mail under plate armour could be ok (as far as I have understood). Well since I want to avoid being to far off my second choice of location is anything ranging from present day Germany through Holland, England and France to Schweiz and Italy.

Still have to decide exactly which rank it could have been worn by. I think it depends on what area I finally decide on since I want an armour used by someone mostly fighting dismounted. Only thing that is clear is that its not going to be an armour for the highest ranks.

Thanks!

i was going to attach some pictures from italian painters, but the maximum allowed file size is way too small.
Anyway, take a look on www.wga.hu for some paintings, statues and illuminations of that period.
In the first page, choose 1400-1450 in the search engine.

Just to warn you. The last image I posted. The more I look at it something looks wrong about the man's faulds/tassets. I will look into it and see what I can.

As far as the back plate. I have seen 16th century backplates enlarged in this manner with side panels so do not worry about it too much. As far as weight goes. Yep I usually make my breast and backplates of different thicknesses. Saves a fair amount of weight in the end.

Glad I could help.

RPM

Thanks Alessio, that looks like a great resource, will go through it more when I have more time on my hand.

Randall, well my reaction on the faulds/tassets was that they looked like something from the early 16th century so pretty interesting if it really is from the time it says.

For enyone else interested in the helm I got this link to an informative older thread given to me by one of the members here at myArmoury: http://www.wolfeargent.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb...p;t=000183 Appears that I should adjust the time-span that I will focus on to about 1430-40.

On a side-note the reason why I'm interested in this helmet is that I really like the look of Corinthian helmets from ancient Greece. This helm really looks like a Corinthian brought to life in the 15th century. With the plus that it can be reinforced with a visor for heavy sparring (or jousting for those who are up for that), even if the visor wasn't originally a part of the helmet I like that idea..

After having gone through the pictures posted here, and found elsewhere, it appears that single-piece breastplates almost invariably have very simple faulds. No curves or pointed centres of the type that can be found on the multiple-piece breastplates. I have attached a couple of pictures of British effigies for anyone interested. Is this something anyone else have noted?

Now, concerning the thread I linked to earlier, after having gotten the link by another member: One of those who posted in the thread about the helm (Chef de Chambre) suggested that it was likely of West European origin but in Italian style and that it could be Flemish. I therefore started looking into Flemish (and Burgundian) armour. So far I have understood that such armour has a sort of Italian base but with German influences. Attached one Flemish painting (StGeorge and the dragon) which features what looks like a one-piece breastplate (but almost like a kastenbrust..). Also attached a painting with what I take to be Flemish clothing (to get an idea of what the pour-point [or jack or aketon] fashion was influenced by). Lastly I attached two pictures of reproduction armour in Flemish style. The style is way of in time (1470) to what I have in mind (1430-40) and the breastplates are not one-piece but its interesting to see nevertheless. So that was just something about the area I am currently homing in on. (If any copyright owners disapproves of me displaying some of the pictures, just let me know)

Regards

---

 Attachment: 16.15 KB



 Attachment: 24.39 KB



 Attachment: 28.1 KB



 Attachment: 70.26 KB



 Attachment: 102.92 KB



 Attachment: 38.84 KB

WARNING: The visored barbute in the original post is a proven fake. The visor is a later addition from unknown origin. Several researchers who I've talked to on the Armour Archive and at the Armour Research Society have echoed this statement. Please don't copy that helmet.

-Gregory-

Well I have seen and previously referenced two threads of discussions that the visor probably doesn't match the helmet. So when you say its a fake is that what you mean or do you go beyond that and mean that the helmet would be a fake even without the visor? Because that would be news to me (and then I would probably settle with a more regular corinthian style barbut).

Gregory,

I think it very likely could have been added during its working like. I agree it likely was not original but many people would be unable to afford a completely new suit for the joust and indeed it is unusual to have completely seperate suits for the joust for some time after. To me this looks like something for jousting. I would assume the helmet is dead on authentic as there are others almost the same 1440-1470 or 80's ish. The visor style looks like jousting visors from inside that time period. You could just pop he visor off when ready for war. In the end there is but testing on the metal to 'prove' it not modern material but it has been in the museum for a long time over 150 years I think so it would be an early fake for its time. The forgery market picks up at the end of the 19th beginning of the 20th if my memeory serves me correct though I suppose it always existed. So fake, not likely in my opinion. Mismatched or not original, yes.

RPM

Thanks for the comments! I can't see why someone owning a barbut couldn't add a visor to increase its range of uses but just to play it safe: I'm thinking on using screws/bolts (sorry don't quite recall which is the correct word in English) instead of rivets to fasten the visor. I know that on the original it is removable via the hinges but I want to be able to remove all parts of the visor in case it turns out it wasn't added during the 'life' of the helmet. (That way the armour can look authentic when I don't wear it for heavy sparring.) I guess more information will pop up as time goes.