Just found this on wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_armour

Quote:

The garment called "eyelet doublet" is not a form of ring armour, but an undergarment intended to be used under the actual armour. The eyelets are intended as ventilation holes. It was known as a "Schiessjoppe" in Germany.

According to Sir John Smythe* the eyelet doublet most certainly was used as standalone armour.

Quote:

“Archers should wear either eyelet holed doublets that will resist the thrust of a sword or dagger and covered with some trim to the liking of the captain... or else jacks of mail quilted upon fustian."

My question is whether the "eyelet doublet" and schiessjoppe are actually the same thing or whether one is armour and the other is an undergarment.

* John Smythe, Observations and Orders Militarie, (1591). 185

Dan,
If we're thinking of the same thing, I've also seen the [English?] term Holledoublet to describe this. I've come across someone's blog post wherein the author constructed such a thing:

http://medievalgloves.blogspot.com/2007/10/ho...-hell.html

Personally, I would assume that this could have been a stand-alone armor.. it seems unlikely that plate armor would be worn on top of a garment made of textile *and* metal rings (excess weight, and a bit redundant under plate). See also the dog armor for boar hunting - also probably stand-alone armor. But I am not an authority on armament, so don't take my word for this ;)

Consider also the possibility that terminology could be confusing the matter too. Is a doublet "cutte full of hoolis" (referencing the above blog post) speaking of a doublet reinforced throughout with metal rings, or is this in reference to a pourpoint, which also has plenty of holes - i.e. eyelets - over which armor was secured.

I'd be interested to hear what others have to say about this; but I'm always skeptical of Wikipedia's articles, particularly in relation to medieval culture and technology :wtf:

Embleton, in one of his books, refers to an eyelet doublet in which the eyes have been reinforced with a brass ring.
I wonder if that could have further confused the previous generations of armor scholars.

Now I am confused. I thought that the Schiessjoppe was an all-textile defense, definitely without brass eyelets. Is any European armor between the 12th and 16th centuries known to have had brass eyelets? As I remember, it is described both as a stand-alone defense and as something worn under plate. Perhaps it came in a heavier aketon/jack form and a lighter doublet of fence form?

Mr Dongen, I don't mean to be fascetious, but how could Embletons book confuse PREVIOUS generations of scholars? Sorry, but that one made me laugh.

Dan, definitely take wikipedia with a grain of salt. I have seen some mind-bogglingly ridiculous articles there.

It seems to be the same eyelet doublet, I saw in a german forum some months ago. It was labeled there as following:

"Berner Nestelwams" - Swiss, End of 15th century. Armor made of linen. Four layers of cloth stitched together with a tight star-stitch (?). The so strenghtened fabric protected without the use of metal against injuries. To protect the skin from abrasion the front of the fabric was faced towards the body.

It was found as a foundation garment in a 18th century woman's dress, but seems to be a lot older.

Better pictures can be found here:

http://forum.reichsaufgebot.de/viewtopic.php?...p;start=10

Best regards,
Thomas

On the second row there's an eyelet doublet using metal rings. Around the edges, you can see some of the exposed rings. I can't tell whether they're riveted or butted. http://museum.velizariy.kiev.ua/germany/wurzburg/index.html

so, to be clar as mud, THIS is what ringmail is, to chainmaille what bringadine is to lamellar armour...

len, the maille looks riveted in those photos its faint but you can just spot that telltale bulge that indicates where the rings edges have been flattened to provide a surface for the rivet.
you have to lok REALLY closely though. and stare at it for a while.

heres a rough translation

Panzerhemd in English = coat of mail, garment made of linked metal rings
ringel panzer ;
Ringel- (as part of ringelpanzer)
ringed {adj} Ringel {m} ringlet Ringel {pl} ringlets
16th century

second says fragment (of) a leinenpanzers which, my net based translation yields linothorax consistantly by linothorax, im referring to the greek one, the german article for the fabled tube and yoke linothorax is titled leinenpanzer so there ya go.

last one is clearly saying hentze for the right hand..
question is what does hentze mean though CLEARLY judging by the larger photo of the exhibit, itsreferring to a right handed eggshell gauntlet

Thank you William, my zoom isn't the best. My first thought was that the strength of the threads would help hold the butted rings together but I guess not.

im refferringto the larger chain shirt that is riveted, i will guess that all rings in the eyelet doublet are solid punched rings since theres no need to link them to each other
the cloth thing and the chain shirt arnt the same item i dont think theyre attatched, though they might be..

I'm not asking whether they were attached. I'm asking whether the two items were actually worn by the same person at the same time. Or did some art historian think that they might look pretty together on the same display.