today i visited an exhibition on the aztecs at the australian museum which, btw was pretty great, reccomend all those who live in sydney to see it

however the one piece of spanish armour puzzled me... it was supposedly attributed toi cortes right hand man pedro de alvarado and therefore dated to around 1520 or so but what struck me as wierd was, the armour felt a little plain for a man of such status, and second, that the greaves feature butted, flat ring maille around the back of the greave....

it struck me as wierd, since i cant think of any reason why it would be butted, even if it was small link size...

that and a few other things like inconsistant and not very crisp 'roping around the edges of the neck and shoulder areas made me think it was perhaps a 18th century replica to commemorate their hero or something similar

photos of the suit, and info cards attatches to the exhibits are in the photos on flickr |
https://www.flickr.com/photos/64955660@N08/ it appears i have some duplicates of the same picture which i'll get rid of fairly soon
https://www.flickr.com/photos/64955660@N08/16007619299/ but you can see the maille is clearly butted

I'll let others comment more fully on the mail (although I have huuuuge doubts) but the armour is a bit of a mess. Its certainly not 1520's and given its very cobbled together and not that convincing appearance I'd say avoid as any source to show what Mr Alvarado might have looked like.

If I get a chance I'll do a more detailed list but it has a more 1560's onwards feel to it (so its in the 1500's as they saybut thats speaking generally. If you had any other pics of the legs that would be jolly useful.

One of the index cards in the display says that the "breastplate" belonged to Pedro. If it's talking about the one below, then the style of decoration on it is certainly appropriate for the era.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/64955660@N08/15573258003/

Concerning the full harness, as Mark noted, it's definitely a mixed bag. The close helm is clearly a style that developed in the second half of the 16th century. The cuirass could c. 1520 or so, but not much earlier with the strong central rib and the long tassets (edit: I note one example in a brief search from the Royal Armouries dated 1515 with a similarly defined rib). The mitten gauntlets are reasonable for the 1520s, as is the arm harness... I'd put the pauldrons a bit later but that's not necessarily true... Gosh, I haven't looked at this 16th century stuff in a while, come to think of it! Pauldrons may be fine as well.

In any case, based on the way the stuff is fit together on the display it's hard to tell whether it "matches" at all, as far as fit and function are concerned if it were all sitting on a human. I doubt that much of it was originally all in the same place at the same time, though. Usually wasn't.

-Gregory

The powerful mid rib of the breastplate and it's downward pointed profile initially looked to me like it might be of a later period than 1520. But the poster above noted that they were around in 1520.

Maybe someone could discern if the breastplate and helmet contain the same engraved motif. It might give us some insight as to whether the two pieces are of the same period.

This vague depiction on the top left corner caught my attention.

[ Linked Image ]

I outlined the shield and leg wear in red. If those vertical stripes are what they look like then it might be a depiction of these padded hoses which where a mid to late 16th century thing and not something found in 1520.

[ Linked Image ]

[ Linked Image ]
However the shield could indicate it's meant to depict a soldier (possible roman or mythological) wearing a skirt/roman tunic.

If someone with a keener eye and more expertise says it's one of those late 16th century padded hoses then we can be pretty sure it's not from 1520. If not then maybe someone who knows more about 16th century mythological depictions can tell us from which decade it is. Perhaps it's a depiction of a saint like Saint Michael.

I'd take my hat off to you but no point, you're obviously now blind by all that squinting at armour pictures!

Nice one, I concur with that.

and the tassets touch at the cod area. They should sit a lot further out, following the line of the arch in the centre. The lower lame of the fauld is a bit mismatched too...

Everything below the waist hangs a bit squiffy, we've all been there...

William,

Thanks for posting this,really like the idea of finding obscure/hidden treasures.

Agree with all that is said ... The chamfron, gauntlets, etc. The half armour, and separate breast plate; a real mixed bag, but more than likely there are some original pieces here. However, the greaves, not only look like sections of stove pipe(?), but have not seen plate (front) and mail (rear) used so. Am doubtful as to how practical this would be, both in arming and how they would remain in place.

Although probably not pleasing to the purist, combining pieces (composite armour) certainly helps in the preservation of these items.

Regards,
Dan

The helm is a fine example of Italian form c. 1600, as is that separate mutilated breastplate, both reminding me of the work of Pompeo della Cesa, but I wouldn't want to say so definitively without better photos. Pity the breast is so worn down. The gauntlet could be mostly real. The cuff looks early 'Maximilian', but a roped edge would be unusual for German stuff so early that you would have a fluted cuff without the fluting continuing, a nearly impossible thing in later 'Maximilian' armour. Ends of the flutes looks weird, too. Sometimes armour parts are composite, however. Spanish armour can be odd, though, if anything on the harness is of Spanish make at all. I have seen other examples of fine Italian work out of Mexico; the Spanish bought a lot of it, always did. Harness is often mis-attributed and mixed up. The 'Anne de Montmorency' harness at the Met NYC is a classic example.

Mail was made in Mexico, but the quality is not well documented. That butted stuff would be very odd, though, as the flat links would be more arrow resistant (links don't spread nearly as easily), but not as much as riveted, to be sure. Most likely a 'restoration'.

That horse chanfron... :lol: