[Rod Parsons]

IMO there has been too much emphasis on making holes in plate. This is only part of the equation, though an important one.
My particular developing interest is in the detail of the padding, how it is combined with other elements and the geometry of the points.
I am awaiting a reply about the padding from a couple of people at the Royal Armouries who have some knowledge of the subject of padding and brigandine construction.
I am also going to talk to Hector about some steeled heads in two or three different geometries.
If I can get some suitable maille and plate I would like to look at the individual performance of these different heads against the layers of protection both separately and in combination in the hope of getting a clearer picture of the role of the different components.
This is not an academic project, more of an intention to do a little systematic practical testing.
Anything I learn, I will be more than happy to share with you, though I will say that this activity is not an essential activity given my usual financial condition, just something I find interesting.
Rod.

[Felix Wang]

[Rod Parsons]

I came across this in "The Great Warbow", Chapter 15, p.279 though it is not the item for which I was looking...

"... though in other instances longbow arrows succeeded in penetrating helmets. In1356 the French Lord the Bastard of l'Isle was slain at the seige of Castelgrat "by an arrow which went through his head"."

And presumably from the context, his hemet too?

From a letter from Sir John Wingfield to Sir Richard Stafford.

[Dan Howard]

[Dan Howard]

Regarding a mail test: to make me happy your aketon should be made from 12-15 layers of linen canvass quilted vertically with less than one inch between each row of stitching. This would produce a semi-rigid torso defense which is unsuitable for the sleeves. Sleeves would be fewer layers - perhaps half as many. To make me really happy you can rotate each layer by, say 45 deg, so that the weft and waft of each layer run in different directions. As far as I know there is no evidence that arming garments were specifically constructed with this "rotation" method but there is evidence that the technique was used to strengthen some garments. Ideally there should be a range of aketons made differently to test the efectiveness of various constructions.

[Rod Parsons]

Except that Strickland quotes it in the context of talking about helmet penetration. Sloppy of him. :-)
But this is not the quote I was looking for which explicitly names the victim and says that he was killed by a shaft which penetrated the side of his helm. The part you WILL like is that it was also held to be a marvellous shot. :-)
Rod.

PS. What weight of linen canvas? I have a remarkable selection. I prefer to put dense coat wool (fustian) layers between linen, but I can test a variety of recipies.

[Dan Howard]

[Rod Parsons]

See my postscript above about linen canvas.
Who is acceptable to make the maille and what are the criteria?
Rod.

[Dan Howard]

Re: linen. I don't think it is possible to know what sorts of weights were used. Ideally, multiple garments would be constructed using different weight fabrics. The lighter the cloth, the more layers that would be quilted together.

Regarding mail. Erik is the only commercial producer of mail I can think of who would make a suitable test patch. Others make nice mail but they don't do it commercially. Thomas Lazar, for example, has been investing a lot of time in producing accurate mail reconstructions. He posted some photos of his latest attempts on SFI. As with the breastplate, you need to select an extant example of mail from the time period of interest and find someone capable of making an exacting copy. Plenty ofpeople make riveted mail but few of them produce a product that resembles a museum sample. I've heard that Pekka makes decent mail but haven't seen a sample of his work.

[Rod Parsons]

I had Erik in mind for the maille. With the linen canvas that many layers of 18 oz would be as inflexible as a cardboard tube.
I would use no more than 10 oz or 12 oz but the 14 oz heavy linen has the tightest weave.
I like the idea of <2 linen / 9 fustian/ 2 linen> for the sleeves and doubled (2 sandwiches) for the torso, but I am awaiting advice from one of the curators at the Royal Armouries.
Rod.

[Carl Scholer]

[Randall Moffett]

While seeing the value of such testing as it indeed was a very well done test, I especially think the way they used the scan for thickness was very nice, giving a perfect idea of the variation of it on these two articles. I persoanlly think that it is possible to get modern pieces very similarly made out of comparable materials and get similar results. While valuable information was gained, and I think her research on them is excellent, I still am not sure I think it a valid use of irreplacable artifacts and HOPE no person ever does this with 15th century breastplates (which are very few in number) to test something that could be done without destroying priceless artifacts. I suppose with the large number of 17th century breastplates it is not as bad ethically, I still do not feel I would test any historical object to destruction as the test does still come out modern testing on priceless artifact as it is not in the real scene of its historical action (battle).
I wish they would have stated what the composition of the gunpowder they used to represent 17th century gunpowder, not all powders are created equal but seeing her attention to detail I assume it was well researched out anyways, but more info is always better than less. I think I may actually have heard of her testing before from a friend I will have to see when she is sending him the reprt and see how she did thickness. I think he said the scans were ultrasound scans if it is the same research.
I also would point out that even if it did not penetrate but left a inch and a half dent over your lungs or heart the blunt force trama likely would kill you, so even if it does not penetrate, you might still die. I am not sure I would like to be behind the breastplate either.


Randall

[Dan Howard]

[Randall Moffett]

Dan,

I totally agree they would have worn something under but the types of coats and buff coats in use in the 17th century are very different from padding of the previous centuries. I am not a specialist but have been working lately with almost exclusivly 16th and 17th century armour. I am sure you have a possibility of being fine but the dent on that breastplate likely would have broke most of the ribs uner it and possibly ruptured the lung or placed enough force on the heart to put it into cardiac concussion. Its a just another variable but the modern German reqs for bullent resistant jackets in their military is I think 20mm indent in the balistics clay and I am pretty sure this breastplate would not have passed.... I have no doubt your account happened and likely fairly often as in battle if someoen got that (the distance in the testing)close with a gun a pike would have stabbed them.

Randall

[Dan Howard]

That dent would have been nowhere near an inch and a half deep if an arming doublet was worn underneath it. Ideally, the breastplate should have been placed over an arming doublet and this combination should have been placed over ballistic clay to get a better idea of how the impact would affect a human torso.

[Randall Moffett]

Dan,

Agreed. How thick do you think the arming coat of this time was?

Randall

[Dan Howard]

Which time period? I agree with you that earlier arming garments for plate harness were not as substantial as those worn during the English Civil War. Late Middle Ages arming doublets are not within my period of study. I'd wait to see what Rod learns from the Royal Armouries.

[Randall Moffett]

I am interested in padded armour from medieval to early modern in general. I am interested in examples that are still existant for reference and comparison. I have heard many different accounts of padded arming clothing but the medieval ones I have seen usually do not seem describe much of what I have been told. The Jupon of the Black Prince when I saw it was much different than I thought it would be as it seemed to be just some very thick cottony wool material between tow other layers of heavy fabic. II have read it seems like s loose fill might have been placed between two layers and sewn in as they are buying cotton bails for this purpose. I assume that there were many types and manufacturing methods but am curious where are some good places to look for information. I was told the other day that no padding would have been thicker than a hot pad and that was not really important as the plate armour was the defence. Having fought and jousted in armour I was not convinced. That is strange to me because the few items I have seen that are original are much thicker. I also notices all the ones i have seen appear to be loose fiber inside not multiple layered material. Of course I have not seen them all but have gotten to a number of places to look around. Of course this also is in part because the methods likely changed greatly over hundreds of years and also the use of the padded garment, if it was a stand alone defence as in Edward I and Edward II in england for example. We have a doublet/buffcoat at he museum I am at that is very nice but since it is in such good condition it is impossible to tell how it is constructed. It is half buff coat and half padded coat. Generally what methods and material were used and how do we know? What examples exist still. I have no doubt that the padding is essencial to armour. I tell every one who starts to get involved with armour that but it will be interesting to see what peoples opinions of these items are. Perhaps I should make a new post...
I hopefully will be doing some research in a week or so at the Royal Armoury so if Rod wants i can ask around about the padding armour. Who was supposed to get it to you?

Randall

[Jean Thibodeau]

An armour undergarment meant mostly to prevent chafing and to absorb energy to reduce blunt trauma compared to one designed with stopping sharp or pointy things might be put together differently, or might be a lighter / thinner version of the same thing ???

I would think it would be made to do mostly the first and a bit of the second. A stand alone cloth based armour would be thicker I would assume.

Some differences according to period discussed on other topic threads: Viking era we know little if anything about padding worn under maille or even if more than a heavy shirt or ordinary period clothing. Normans 1066 era some sort of substantial under padding & early Crusades use of gambison / aketon seems to become standard and maybe becoming more substantial with time. With plate the padding being maybe lighter than in the all maille or transitional armour period. At least this the information I have absorbed reading many topics posts here. ( And would seem to make sense to me. )

DISCLAIMER:
Oh, I may be making overbroad generalizations from remembered readings that represent, I think, the general consensus arrived at currently. So if I've gotten some things wrong or oversimplified, I invite correction.

[Rod Parsons]