So i have been thinking of making a kit suitable for the timeperiod between the battle of hastings and the second crusade, as there isn´t much of a change in equipment in that timeframe. Thus far i have been considering using layered tunics or gambeson underneath a mail hauberk. I have been searching for period illustrations of armoured combatants, and i have stumbled into a few interesting finds. Occasionally you see fighters wearing a garment with a diamond pattern on it. There are a few explanations i could think for it. They may represent gambesons with diamond quilting, or scale armour, and perhaps they could be a very odd representation of mail. So here are a few examples of what i am talking about:[ Linked Image ]
This is from the pillaging scene in the bayeux tapestry. The tapestry is quite simplistic so that diamond pattern might represent scale or gambeson. I tend to gravitate towards the gambeson theory as these riders dont have any head protection and the first piece of metallic protection you would get, was a helmet, as the head is the most vital part of your body. It is interesting to note that the frontmost rider is only wearing his hauberk. Perhaps he is the leader of the raiding party and he wants to be recognizable, as is the case with William at the battle of Hastings removing his helmet to show that he is still alive? Just pure speculation though :P. This pattern appears in the tapestry a few times worn with helmets.

[ Linked Image ]
Dated to 1101-1125, France.
This image is much more detailed than the Bayeux tapestry and im having a hard time imagining that as anything other than
a gambeson. Im open to other suggestions though.

[ Linked Image ]
Dated to 1108-1150, England.
Here is another one, but this one isn't as clear as the last one.

[ Linked Image ]
Dated to 1150, England.
Here are a number of different fighters wearing something with a diamond pattern, shown in multiple colors.

[ Linked Image ]
Dated to 1151-1175, France.
There are some illustrations showing this pattern with a metallic colour. Perhaps these are depictions of scale armor?

There are other depictions of this pattern but i chose this sample to illustrate what i am talking about. Its interesting to note that some of the depictions seem to have an integral padded coif in the same way as the hauberk of that time had an integral mail coif. Perhaps this type of padding was used under the hauberks of that time?

P.S These are just my ideas and opinions, and i am open to other interpretations.

Links to my sources

Bayeux tapestry: http://www.hs-augsburg.de/~harsch/Chronologia..._tama.html

http://manuscriptminiatures.com/3995/11385/

http://manuscriptminiatures.com/4169/12081/

http://manuscriptminiatures.com/5006/15598/

http://manuscriptminiatures.com/4111/12073/

It's all mail. Sometimes it's more or less obvious, Bayeux is harder to decipher, but all other examples are clearly mail if you ask me.

Crosshatching was a common method of rendering mail. If you want to argue that they are gambesons, you first have to provide evidence that gambesons were being used at the time. IIRC the earliest mention of this kind of armour in the sources is over a century later.

Gambesons are not lighter than mail. The whole point of using metal to make amour is that it weighs less than equivalent protection made from leather and cloth.

If you want an accurate portrayal of the armour used in the Battle of Hastings then you have two choices - mail or nothing. There is one possible depiction of Sir Guy wearing scale armour but it is more likely an embroidered tunic.

I forgot to mention the dating, its dated to 1120-1145 England. Heres the link:http://manuscriptminiatures.com/4923/14636/

Also keep in mind that the bayeux tapestry is sewn and not drawn with brush, quill or silver point.

Regardless of how primitive the artistic style seems to modern eyes executing minute detail like mail with needle and thread would of been a challenge. I don’t think using repetitive pattern to represent that was a unreasonable solution to that challenge. And that the people of that era would of instantly understood what was being depicted.

There were certainly soldiers in the 13th century who were not able to afford a helmet but might be able to afford a gambeson and padded coif, so that doesn't seem out of place. I take it you're objecting to Dan's statement that could imply you either have a metal helmet or no armour whatsoever. Perhaps Dan's statement might be revised to "Of all the parts of armour made of metal, the helmet would be the first priority assuming one could afford it."

Cloth and leather armour weren't cheap; they weren't worn by poor soldiers. Poor soldiers wore nothing. If a soldier couldn't afford a helmet then he definitely couldn't afford a gambeson.

Cloth armour was cheaper than mail but you still had to be wealthy to afford it. Today it would be like comparing a $100,000 car with a $300,000 car. The average person can afford neither of them.