After much searching around on the forums for a thread where one could see and ask for advice regarding the assembly of a kit (either soft, hard or both) I found a disappointing lack of such threads so I decided I should try and make one myself.

So, in this thread you can ask for advice if you're trying to get yourself a kit. You can also give advice if you feel that it would be valuable to others. If you've ever had questions like "I wonder, should I use riveted maille for my kit or should I use cheaper butted maille?" or "What kind of steel should my armour have, mild or spring steel?" or simply questions like "Hm, I wonder if so-and-so producer is worth his name?" this is the place to ask them!

(My babbling starts from here onwards)
~~~

I shall start.

I was thinking of getting myself a kit from somewhere around the first decade of the Fifteenth century (somewhere between 1400 and 1410, maybe leaning a bit to 1415), Western European in style and Italian in flavour, to be more particular about the time and place. One thing I will be looking for in the kit is a versatile compromise between affordability and historical accuracy. Basically, I don't want it to be a cheap knock-off which will get me killed or crippled with the first use, but I can't afford Historical Enterprises-quality stuff either.

First of all, my query begins with the type of maille I should use beneath the breastplate. Riveted or butted? When I ask this question, I ask it with the fact that I plan on participating in battle reenactments with this kit (reenactments where the structural integrity of both the plate and the maille will be tested vigorously). Historical accuracy is very important for me, yet when I think of the agony of seeing some expensive riveted links shattering before my eyes, I rather shudder. I mean, I may sound like a fool here, but is maille easy to mend? I've not had much experience with repairing damaged hauberks and I've not read up on the subject too much.

Second of all, the helm! A bascinet is a must, but considering this is Italy we are speaking of, what kind of a visor would have been most common? A pointed hound's skull? Something more rounded? The rather flattened dog face visor had gone out of fashion after the 1370s, right?

Going on, would spring steel on certain parts of the armour (like the breastplate or spaulders) be out of place from a historical accuracy point of view? Actually, a better question would be, what kind of steel do you recommend for battle reenactments? I was thinking of a combination of spring steel and medium carbon steel.

Going further on, I really love the look of those quilted garments they wore over armour up until the advent of the white harness. The Jupons strike my fancy the most. I am simply in love with the Charles VI Jupon at Chartres Cathedral and I also like the look of the loudel of Joao of Portugal. There's a thread somewhere around these forums about it. Basically it looks just like the Charles jupon minus the sleeves (rather similar to the bases that were in fashion in the early 1500s). Would these kind of garments have been out of place in the year 1400 and shortly after? From what I've read (and from effigies and illustrations) garments covering armour were used up until the very end of the Fourteenth Century. Is there any proof that they weren't used after 1400?

To sum up, the look I am going for is rather similar with harness attached to my post. What period would you attribute to it most, fellow members of myArmoury? From my observations, it rather fits the period of Agincourt and immediately after. Would a jupon be appropriate over such a harness? Well, I would also like the ask if this harness looks Italian. If not, what traits should it have for it to look Italian?

One final thing. I would like to ask myArmoury members what their opinions are on the following manufacturers and what experience have they had with them, if any. Based on my stated goals, what manufacturer do you think suits me best?

http://www.bestarmour.com/

http://www.armorymarek.com/

http://armourandcastings.com/index.php

http://www.armabohemia.cz/Novestr/homeA.htm

http://steel-mastery.com/index.php?&model..._page_id=1

Also, one very important question: What soft-kit manufacturers from Central and Eastern Europe can you recommend from your own experience? I know of only one manufacturer:

http://www.medieval-market.biz/

Their stuff looks great, but I am curious what else is out there.

---

 Attachment: 15.96 KB

Look I am aiming for

I am not quite experienced enough to answer a few of your questions, but I do have some personal experience with armor in this era, as this is almost the exact period my own kit is in. I believe it is in the mid 1420's when the Jupon seems to disappear from fashion to be completely replaced by the white harness. Early 15th century is still a viable time to wear a garment over your breastplate. Personally, I believe heavy quilted garments worn over breastplates were becoming less common in the early 15th century, but lighter sleeveless heraldic things seem to still partially be in fashion, although the deeper you go into the 15th c. the more white armor becomes the norm. Don't quote me on that last bit, I could be wrong, that's just my observation.

Sir Edmund Thorpe 1417, wearing a surcoat.
http://www.gothiceye.com/images/large/KN082-2.jpg

Ralph Neville 1425, who seems to be wearing a surcoat over his breastplate.
http://www.gothiceye.com/images/large/KN092-2.jpg

From what I've seen merctailor.com makes some good products for your period. From what i've seen, there products are well made and decently priced around or below the crap from GDFB. Shipping to romania might be prohibitive (scratch that, is definitely prohibitive) But they are a good resource for anyone in the states looking for quality armor without having the wait (or price) of a commissioned piece.

Thanks for the swift replies, Tom and Robert.

First of all, I am not interested in any suppliers from America or farther afield (Australia, Asia etc.) because of prohibitive shipping costs. From what I've read, shipping a suit of armour (or even armour parts) from the US can cost upwards of several hundred dollars and for that kind of money I'd prefer to acquire extra kit parts. Hence why I am looking towards Czech and Polish providers, mainly.

The Czech market is quite competitive, from what I have observed, and, along with the current financial crisis, I predict marked improvements in price shall occur. From watching world news, I have also noticed that the global price of steel has fallen dramatically so I can only look with hope to the future.

Now to come back to the discussion of the kit itself, I am gladdened to hear that I am not the only one who finds a textile garment over armour to be historically accurate at the turn of the century. As for the lack of textiles over armour from the first quarter of the Fifteenth century onwards, however, I would like to point out that heraldic equipment never quite fell out of fashion among the knightly class. Even in the 1460s and 1470s you could still see tabards being worn by knights and lords who wished to be more easily identified on the field of battle. And in the 1500s we have the popularity of the base (basically a big dress worn over armour) so you could say fashion in armour returned to its roots.

Anyway. One more question I had was, what exactly would have been worn under armour at this time? Maille shirts were still being worn under plate, from what I have seen, so you can't exactly use arming coats of later years. I would guess knights in the period would wear a thinner type of aketon, perhaps?

Best Armour is good stuff.

Iff you want one of the best check out Albert Collins of Stockholm... viaarmorari.com

I've heard of Via Armorari. As much as I would like to order something from them, I am afraid being one of the best comes with a hefty price tag.

Be that as it may, price tag or not, there is also one problem I foresee when it comes to buying such works of art. What happens when you must use them in battle? Seeing as most of the events I will probably be taking place in will be in this area of Europe (Eastern Europe) I do not foresee a healthy future for any piece of armour I shall be wearing to battles and tournaments. People generally don't pull punches over here and I don't even want to imagine my reaction to seeing my beloved harness being damaged by some oaf of an adversary. In a situation like that, I fear I might "get medieval" on someone's unfortunate bottom.

I have a few friends wo use Alber stuff in reenactement battle. His stuff is always casehardened and holds up well. Also he has been known to do repairs of his stuff if something has broken out of wear. He is a true artist and also very keen on better himself so he is always happy to hear that his stuff is used as it was intended.

My 2 cent is that lots of stuff can be a bit cheaper but don´t save money on your helmet and your handprotection. Go for custommade so they fit you. Mainly for saftyreasons. A illfitting gauntlet can hurt you almost as much as no gauntlet. And a illfitting helmet can hinder you so you dont see or can move as you should.

Just a short comment at the moment. You have plenty of options for armourers here in Europe, also you wouldn´t be happy with MercTailor as one of your important points is accuracy. Two armourerer I can recommmend from personal experience because of their way they care about their customers and they have a good eye for the shape.

Here is my thread for kit acquisition, you can see how things changed. http://www.myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t...highlight=

I ordered helmet, breast plate and fauld and elbow cops from Jiri Klepac at www.armour.cz

Wisby Gauntlets are from Plattnerei Wiedner. We visited Christian a few weeks back in his workshop to have the covered breastplate shown in the Neuigkeiten section fitted to a freind of mine. I now have an order for hourglass gauntlets and arms. http://www.plattnerei-wiedner.de/

I bought mostt of my soft kit from medieval market, I met them in person last year to do modifications to my Aketon. They have good customer care, reasonable prizes and you can send them things back foor modifications when something is not fitted enough. In the end you get what you want. Just be sure to be very precise on the cloth used.

Both are reasonable priced.

In terms of the maillle only get rivetted, the 6mm stuff is quite cheap nowadays.

A last thing, it is ridiculous the give the steel price as an argument for armour pricing. There is so much work involved forming a harness, while the acutal steel weight is quite low and the price low compared to the price of man hours involved.

A short comment at the moment? Then I trust an even longer comment will follow. :p

As for getting enthusiastic because of a world drop in steel prices...yes, I realize that the work it takes to craft a harness from a sheet of steel is immense and increases the value of said steel tenfold, if not more but still, if the price for that sheet of steel gets even smaller, I think it will have an influence, if a very small one, on the overall price of the piece itself.

Of course, I could probably be wrong.

And as for going cheaper, as I said, I will try to treat the problem 50/50, with the most respect I can field for historical accuracy and with the most regard I can field for the budget available to me. After all, as a wise man once said, you can acquire an expensive as hell harness made to the utmost specifications but you can't eat or drink it, sadly enough.

As I have said before, with regards to both armour and maille, I am curious what people who have used both intensively (preferably in a full contact environment or something close to it) have to say with regard to the frequency they must repair their kit and the inherent advantages and disadvantages one meets when going with one choice or the other. I have heard some people recommend armour that is not hardened because it is easier to straighten dents while I have heard other people recommend spring steel because it doesn't dent at all (or something of the sort, I may be a little bit off).

Which is better, in your opinions?

I am still shooting for a Jupon, or something similar such as a Loudel. The thing is, I'm shooting for them in their later form, when they ceased to be something meant purely for defensive purposes but started being something meant more for display and heraldry. From what I've understood, they started shifting their function from being heavy quilted defences which fit over the armour to being quilted garments that mainly protected the armour from the elements and announced the identity of the wearer.

Isn't the Charles VI Jupon at Chartres merely a ceremonial piece? I mean, I know it has seven layers of fabric and all, but by that time I doubt these garments kept their defensive role. Also, the funerary achievements of the Black Prince go into this area in my opinion. The achievements include a garment similar to a Jupon, if I am not mistaken. Now, surely such a fine garment was meant first and foremost as a display of the owner's heraldry and only had defending the owner as a secondary if not tertiary attribute.

So, I am not aiming for a heavy quilted Jupon. If I wished to reenact a nobleman-soldier from the 1360s or 1370s or even the 1380s, then perhaps the Jupon would have been a heavy defensive garment. In the iteration I am aiming for (very early 1400s) my Jupon would be more of a decorative garment than a protective one. I am also basing this on illustrations from the time which show a multitude of soldiers wearing textile garments (tight or otherwise) over their armour.

This illustration from the very end of the Fourteenth Century, or perhaps the very beginning of the Fifteenth (note the rounded visors of the bascinets, a prevailing trend in the early 1400s), clearly shows that many, if not all, of the knights and men-at-arms in the image have textile garments over their armour. Tight-fitting garments similar to a Jupon.

This depiction of the battle of Poitiers shows what look I am aiming for even better. The fellow on foot to the right of the image wears a green textile garment over his armour, much as the fellow next to him who wears an almost identical red garment. These pieces of equipment are almost identical to the Charles VI Jupon, save certain differences like the length of the sleeves.

Finally, this depiction of Edward the Third together with his son, the Black Prince, shows what look I wish to achieve as well. Note the tight-fitting heraldic tabards they are wearing. Also, note the great bascinet on the ground near the Black Prince. This clearly denotes the illustration as being from the early 1400s.

Well, either way, I think I've made my point. :p

And as for armets in 1410, there were some early examples by then. Via Armorari has a nice example in their inventory. Look at the Fourteenth century section.

Hi there, some addition.

Here is a picture from Siena, it is around 1400. [ Linked Image ]

For the helmet you would have several options. Jiri did make an interpretation of an early armet as seen in Fiores book and one extant piece [ Linked Image ]

Another possibility would be one of those boxy houndskull visored helmets as those from Vienna or Brescia [ Linked Image ]

Ah, the bit about the early Armet wasn't for me, it was for Robert (since he said he wanted, originally, to sport an early armet with his harness). I wanted to show him what I had found regarding early Armets since I was curious what he would think of the helm in question (whether he would consider too late or just right etc.).

For myself, I would fancy a bascinet. Hm, about bascinets.

When did the klapvisors fall out of use? I mean those flat-visored bascinets that were also known as Dog-faced bascinets (not sure why). I would prefer one of those to a pointed Pig-face or Hound's Skull.

Oh, and the illustration is excellent Felix, thanks a dozen. I swear, those Italian chaps were miles ahead of the bend when it came to illustrations, portraits and paintings. Always the artists.

Ah, and one more question from me. What is the difference between cold-rolled and hot-rolled steel? And which is "better"? I say this with inverted commas because I know it is highly dependent on personal preference.

Edit: Oh, and your picture of an armet works not.

Thanks for the link to that armet, Mihai, yet another interesting take on the S-18's visor. Looks like they just modified a typical bascinet visor. Eventually I scrapped the armet idea and went with a bascinet. The visor was inspired by a few pieces of period art (Some of it a little earlier), and some of those found on later Great Bascinets. If you really delve into some period art, you can find some interesting visors that differ from the typical conical "dog-faced" and klappviser styles. The gent in Felix's picture at the bow of the boat on the right is sporting a different looking bascinet visor, for example. There is another fellow with an interesting crested helm below him, with his visor down delivering a cut to his opponents upper arm or neck.

As for what you were saying about decorative heraldic covering earlier, such as in the picture of Edward III, that is exactly what I myself wear. I always interpreted these as being somewhat lighter cloth, and not a heavy quilted fabric. As soon as I get my breastplate in, I'll probably be recutting mine and working out a lacing system to achieve the extra tight fitting look found on the effigies and in your picture there.

---

 Attachment: 23.02 KB

A picture of my bascinet.

Yeah, don't you just love the tight-fits they had going on back then? I know not why, but there is something very appealing to me that lies in the way you always see knights in those period illustrations: with bulking chests, thin waists and muscular hips (or at least with armour forged to look like that :p).

For example, I'd love to have clothes (and wear them) so that they look just like the clothes on Charles V's Great Chamberlain. I've a question, however. How exactly can you make a cottehardie fit you so tightly as it does the Chamberlain in the illustration? Is there anyone on the forum who owns a cottehardie and has succeeded to do so? I am also curious if clothes that were so tight-fitting were only seen in illustrations meant to depict an idealized appearance (much like our modern-day fashion commercials and fashion events) or if they were actually achieved. I am curious about this since every modern replica I have seen somewhat comes short of being as form-fitting as the ones seen in illustrations.

Thanks a dozen Bjorn! Those are the kind of posts I am sure many of us beginners out there are looking for! Easy to understand advice regarding how we can achieve a period-accurate look.

There is just one thing that rather bothers me, however. There seems to be no consensus on whether or not the garment of Charles de Blois was a pourpoint (martial garb) or a cottehardie (civilian coat). Now, I was recently wondering upon what to use under the armour that will form my harness and I must say that something to the effect of the Charles de Blois "pourpoint" would be quite interesting for me. At the same time, however, I must say that I find the fact that I would basically be wearing three garments of the same style (a pourpoint beneath the armour, the armour itself and a light jupon over it) a bit...disconcerting.

I do not know the reason for this, but it just seems strange that I would be wearing three garments that imitated each other in shape, style and form. Was that the aim back then? For the garments beneath and above the armour to be the same as the armour so as to achieve a uniform fit?

Or were the garments beneath the armour given leeway to look like this or this?

I admit the above designs are rather similar but still, they are not as puffed up as the Charles de Blois garment.

So the question basically is, did arming garments of the late Fourteenth Century and early Fifteenth (up until 1415 or so) look like the puffed-up, form-fitting cottehardies? I know there was no standardization, but was the knight of those days supposed to have both outer and inner garments that matched his armour form for form and vice-versa? Also, another question for you folks, what do you think the Charles de Blois garment is? Civilian clothing or military wear?

My opinion is that the Charles de Blois garment is civilian. Mainly due to the buttons that do not make sense if any armour would go on top. Points would have been a more practical choice if that where the case.

Civilian fashion have a tendency of mimicing military (just see how camouflage hats and pants are worn today, or coifs back in the day) but probably exaggerated or modified in a way that look good but might not be military sound. That is the logic behind having three different garments that has the same style. Wearing them all at once might not be very realistic though.

My assumption would be that a servicable pourpoint for that timeframe would be of the same cut (especially the arms) as the Charle de Blois but less puffy. Exact thickness I know people have very different opinions on. We simply do not know. So you might as well do some trial and error and find a good compromise for fit, safety and comfort.

Why don't you try these guy-http://shop.ebay.com/myarmstreet/m.html
I ordered a dress for my ex a while back and they did a BEAUTIFUL job; tailored, well made and sturdy with metal eyelets for tightening around the body-none of that cheap cloth eyelet stuff. It fit perfectly, looked outstanding and it was only a hundred bucks complete! They make just about anything, and aren't terribly expensive. They are based in Romania.

Romania? I'm from Romania! How do you know they are from Romania, though? Their site mentions not their home. Still, this should be potentially great news. Do they do custom work (like say a custom cottehardie or houppelande)?

Also, I didn't have the chance to thank you for your second post Bjorn. As always, it was quite useful and revealed new insights to me.

I now know that my soft kit will be a cottehardie and some suitable hose and pointed shoes (pointed shoes were in fashion back then if I'm not mistaken) or high-boots (were high-boots fashionable at the onset of the Fifteenth, I wonder?). Hm, another question which sprung to my mind recently is the order of clothes worn on the torso. So you have a shirt (or chemise), a doublet over the shirt then the cottehardie? I guess you can't skip the doublet if you want to be historically accurate, right? Or were cottehardies worn over just the shirt? Also, if I am not mistaken, shirts were usually very long affairs, right? Being so long, wouldn't they slip under the doublet and start showing near where the hose ends? Or were the shirts tucked beneath the doublet.

Since you guys have more experience wearing period-garb than me, I leave it to your collective wisdom to generate an answer.

Also, I previously asked a question which is as of yet unanswered. What are the differences between cold-rolled steel and the other types of steel? I'm asking you guys since you have probably worn and used both and can discern the differences. I've noticed cold-rolled steel is cheaper than the other types. Is this a good or a bad thing?