[Joshua Santana]

I have just started on my Kit Project which will be a 16th Century Kit that combines armor and garb together. I have an idea of what I want for this Kit, my concern is the historical accuracy of it. I am aware that armor in the Renaissance was worn both on the battlefield and in the Court (armor worn for show). Yet I can't seem to tell the difference between the two.

I have been looking at several portraits showing examples of what my Kit ideally should look like shown here

http://www.sfexaminer.com/files/blog_images/a...ng1110.jpg

http://images.artnet.com/images_US/magazine/n...2-07-2.jpg

http://thepeerage.com/160114_003.jpg

http://www.tudorplace.com.ar/images/Radcliffe...x%2903.jpg

My first question is this: Is it accurate to argue that "Court armor" did not feature the tassets nor gauntlets?

Second: Was 16th Century battlefield armor decked with the tassets, gauntlets and close helmet with thigh plates and knee plates? Or did they arrive in full harness?

Which of these examples are Courtly Armor or appropriate battlefield armor?

http://www.arador.com/gallery/friend3.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-PwjeSvMEX2E/Ty9n1fO...0_4565.JPG

http://www.artic.edu/aic/collections/citi/ima...330030.jpg

http://www.varmouries.com/cgallery/arch_09a.jpg

Could I make the argument that this was the battlefield armor with combinated tasset plate (replacing the thigh plates) and knee plate?

http://historicalarmouries.webs.com/photos/Knight_G_Gallery-1.jpg

Or could I simply add the leg harness (thigh plates and knee plates) shown in these portraits?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons...ologna.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons...armour.jpg

Feedback, critique, suggestions and recommendations are welcome. Furthermore, I will be ordering my armor via Illusion Armoring, I am a patient individual and I seek to make a wise investment on my part and I want to get the most accuracy out of my Kit design.

[Dan Rosen]

Hi Joshua!

I hope none of the following is repetitive or redundant or stuff you've heard already, and that it's coherent. I wrote this when I was pretty tired.

16th century clothing is one of my absolute favorite areas of study.

I will say that I don't believe people walked around in armor too much to show off in court. Definitely for tournaments and that kind of thing, but what we end up seeing in posed portraits is pretty much showing off; the people in those images are sending a message about themselves and their machismo. Art is often pretty artificial; the artist constructs the scene to tell or do whatever they want and not necessarily reflect reality.

Another consideration is that the links you've provided are from across the 16th and early 17th century. Fashion changed rapidly then too and I would encourage you to find a time and place which you most want to represent and/or pick an earlier date which you could apply to later decades (bearing in mind that the fashionability of the clothing drops significantly with each passing year or so). There are ways to make things semi-generic, but there are many more nuances of fashion and design which would visually glue you into one particular set of dates.

There was some give and take between clothing and armor, however, and in about the late second to early third quarter of the century, you start seeing a trend in very rich men's doublets with padded/stiffened bellies mimicking the contours of a peapod and thereby supposedly granting them the term "peascod" doublets (a middle English word for peapod) or the keel of a ship. Here's a portrait of Robert Dudley, the Earl of Leicester from the 1580's (this fashon was slowly fading by then) which shows a bit of that unnatural belly http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_cpToIwY89Rc/SWEjXbC...eascod.jpg . He's also wearing what are known as trunkhose or roundhose on his legs (Many use the word "slops" to describe these, but it doesn't /exactly/ apply, and the term has more to do with loose and baggy), which you'll notice also follow the form of many tassets around this date. All that said, this might be one direction to take it. Most doublets didn't have ridiculous padding or stiffening, it would seem that only the most extreme garments for those who didn't need to do much else had them, and even they would wear more comfortable things during less hyper-formal events. Dudley owned many linen or hemp canvas doublets as well according to his will/inventories...a lot more comfortable.

Another route to go would be to wearing an arming doublet; a garment meant to be worn under armor so as to pad it up a bit and to help to distribute the weight effectively. Many examples of these in artwork and at least one surviving one are faced with a finer quality fabric like silk with guts of sturdy canvas to take the strain. It's believed that some of them, though built as arming doublets must be, were only meant to make a fashion statement to suggest that the wearer was brave and dashing and all that cool stuff. There is an extant one, for example, that shows no evidence of bearing the load of armor., but is constructed to be functional. Here's my webpage with some more info and LOTS of images to give you some ideas. I think that this might be a good compromise for what you're after. http://livingelizabethan.weebly.com/soldiering-and-sailors.html

As far as Illusion goes, be careful with them. Their armor is very nice and of high quality, but I've heard their communication is rough to put it lightly. I think they also use modern buckles.

I hope this helped some. Please don't hesitate to ask anything else.

[David Evans]

I'd go with Daniel and say you really need to pin down when in the 16th Century you want to do :-)

Early 16th Century is almost the same as late 15th Century, second quarter (1525-1550) differs from first quarter and looks different to third quarter. In fcat, you can safely say that each decade has a different style to it .

Armour is going to be expensive. If you want go do any form of Gentry then you need some etching and various edging on the armour for mid to late 16th, even on the cheapest armour . Earlier you've looking at black and white.

http://www.allenantiques.com/Armour-Breastplates-Collection.html shows plain munition breastplates

http://wallacelive.wallacecollection.org/eMus...y&sp=1

are some fairly simple etched armours

http://wallacelive.wallacecollection.org/eMus...0&sp=1

is top end

[William P]

well not entirely, theres also maximilian which is more widespread, and slightly cheaper. but the full maximillian harnesses were apparently considered passe' by about the early 1540's

one question id like to ask about armour in the 16th century, which relates to the harness styles,

what were the later styles of continental armour called? aside from maximilian.

in particular im curious what the french gendarmes wold have been using, did their armour have a particular named style?

[Joshua Santana]

My thanks for the responses. Yes I have been doing research and I will set my Kit to Mid to Late 1500's (1550 - 1590).

[David Evans]

1550 to 1590 is almost a dozen different fashions

http://www.elizabethan-portraits.com/Edward4.jpg This is Edward VI c.1550

http://www.philipmould.com/gallery/all-works/68 Edward I again

http://www.elizabethan-portraits.com/ThomasGresham.jpg This Sir Thomas Gresham c.1566

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons...om_NPG.jpg Sir Richard Grenville c.1571

http://www.npg.org.uk/collections/search/port...&rNo=0 Sir Francis Drake c.1580

http://www.elizabethan-portraits.com/Essex9.jpg is Robert Devereaux 2nd Earl of Essex c.1596

http://www.elizabethan-portraits.com/Leicester.jpg is Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester c.1560

1550 to 1590 is TOO big a range. You're going to have to narrow down even more to a single decade the more fashionable you want to be. And the more fashionable you want to be, the more it's going to cost to do it right.

Leg harness.....maybe not

http://collections.royalarmouries.org/index.p...=&pg=2 is Sir John Smythe's Light field armour from his Greenwich garntiure

The armour is lightly etched. The upper legs are protected by tassets

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenwich_armour for a brief note.

[F Hynd]

A pair of 16th century harness that dont appear to have been designed for courtiers or are field as opposed to tournament armour. much plainer with less decoration.

First missing its helm here but will all original pieces and more modern leg armour


second with some more modern replacement pieces based of damaged originals. older style leg armour.


nether harness had gauntlets that i know off.

[Dan Rosen]

In any case, I'd focus on clothing and foundation garments first. The armor simply won't work the way or function the way it's supposed to or must without them, and will look plain goofy over anything but. You've got to walk before you run.

As an additional detail, period-correct buckles are available from all over the place and the work to swap them out in minimal. They're still just buckles so they should function the same, but the visual effect in developing detail will boost the appearance, quality, and authenticity of your kit significantly. If you're spending the money on a set of armor, why drop the ball a few feet from the finish line? They can be had very reasonably from a number of suppliers in several materials.

Another question is what do you intend to do with the armor?

With the time period you're after, for both clothing and armor, keep asking questions and lots of them as you have been. Because of events like Renaissance Faires and recreationist groups, the water has been muddied as to correct information, and a lot of what passes as fact about the subjects is comprised of myth, misconception, theatrical & "combat" adaptation, and research that hasn't been updated since some heavy books came out in the 1930's.

[David Evans]

The garniture provide the owner with every single piece of armour that he may need to fight in war or tourney on foot and horseback from the lightest role to the heaviest. A full garniture would include all the horse armour he'd need to protect his horse.

There are indeed very plain sets of late 16th Century armour around. Which reflect social status and wealth, not usage. If Elizabeth I has granted you permission to buy a set of Greenwich armor then you wear it as intended in tourney and war, regardless of how expensive or how bling it is

These are relatively plain sets shown

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons...y_1583.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons...om_NPG.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons...r_1577.jpg

And as Daniel says. Focus on the clothing and get that right first :-) Then get all the bits around that correct. Nowt worse than trunkhose under a 1625 doublet with a baldric hanging a longsword over your left shoulder with a 1640's big and floppy hat on your head ;-)

[Joshua Santana]

I thank you all for your input on this and I have continued to do more research into the matter at hand.

The portrait of Sir Richard Grenville (1571) is close to what I started with originally until I became confused as to whether or not to add the tassets to the breastplate.

The Richard Drake portrait is very good in conjunction with the portrait of Sir Edward Hoby (I admit it is my favorite one).

Now to answer the essential questions.

Firstly, I had designed a Soft Kit in which I will invest first before ordering the plate armor for my Hard Kit. The following is my design.

(My arming doublet I had intended on ordering one via Fuhlen Designs, but this helps a great deal in what design for the arming doublet: http://livingelizabethan.weebly.com/soldiering-and-sailors.html)

http://www.designsbyfantasia.com/mens.html
(for a regular doublet when not wearing the armor)

http://www.pendragoncostumes.com/Merchant2/me...de=bshirts

http://www.moresca.com/product_info.php?products_id=132

http://www.sykesutler.com/clothes.htm
(For the black stockings)

http://www.museumreplicas.com/p-1029-cavalier-boots.aspx

Second, the purpose of this Kit is manifold. I want this Kit for a Living History Project of mine in which it involves research of Chivalry in the Renaissance and getting the word out via school, boy scout, church and living history events. I also am experimenting this type of Kit in recreating 16th Century Armored combat with Renaissance Sidesword and Rotella shield via the Bolognese School of Swordsmanship. A historical example of what I am attempting at can be found in this article: http://www.thearma.org/essays/DOTC.htm. I will probably start a post on the topic.

The reason why i suggested the leg harness was that in the Bolognese School, there are techniques that end with a cut (Mandritto, Mandritto Tondo, Roverso or Roverso Tondo) to the leg in specific the thighs. That is my reason in which I neglected in addressing earlier.

I will say my Kit is designed towards 1570's or 1580's. That should help things a bit.

I came across this painting of what I am looking for if I should add the Tassets to my breastplates.

(Extreme left, what Don Juan of Austria is wearing and what Sebastian Venier is wearing, extreme right)

I hope this helps in clarifying things a bit.

[Glennan Carnie]

[Dan Rosen]

With respect, not one of the links you provided for clothing is close to accurate/authentic in their design or nuances. The "slops" are OK (Roundhose, paned hose, or trunkhose is probably a bit more period appropriate.) As I mentioned in a previous post, a lot of what passes as correct is far from it because of the influences I listed..amongst other things.

Consider these alterations to your plan of attack for soft kit- Not everything is perfect, but it's close. It's hard to find vendors doing semi-authentic work. Alternatively, I have a friend who could probably set you up for a very reasonable price in accurately patterned clothes in correct materials. PM me if you're interested.

For your shirt, for something finer, one of these will be much more accurate-

Mid to third quarter 16th century- http://historicenterprises.com/shirt-holbein-...ath=99_113
Third quarter + http://historicenterprises.com/shirt-hilliard...ath=99_113

For something a little simpler- Bethlehem Trading Post's Linen shirt in white or natural. If you want to get it, ask that they make the collar about 1.5 inches tall and able to stand on its own instead of the way they make most of them (which is for an 18th century clothes) Otherwise the pattern is pretty much perfect for all the way back to the 16th century. - http://www.bethlehemtradingpost.com/clothi...-line-sales.php It'd also be necessary to swap out the buttons for ones of white thread worked over a tiny wooden bead or the same or very similar stuffed cloth. 1/8-2/8" in size.

For your doublet,
Go custom from here- http://www.twinrosesdesigns.com/Custom%20Order.html
Get a "Renaissance Doublet" that buttons with plain fully attached sleeves (removable sleeves in men's doublets seems to be 96% anachronism. See the doublet page on my website for more info) and request that the skirting (or "peplum") goes all the way around the waist so it meets at the center front rather than having a gap. OR, get it with no skirting and no shoulder decorations for an earlier look. Their button selection is weird, so you'll want to either request cloth buttons made from the same fabric as the rest of the doublet wrapped around a round bead about 3/8" in size. Otherwise, request it without buttons and I can help you find some that'll work for it. I'd recommend you get it made in either one of their medium weight wools (one of the ones with no patterns on it) or their heavy or medium-weight natural linens and lined with natural or white linen. I'd very strongly recommend against the heavy wools or meltons. Scroll down on that custom page for an idea of what the fabrics are. The doublet also lacks a lacing strip; a band spanning the perimeter of the waist on the doublet's lining at the waist seam which had pairs of sewn thread eyelets to lace to your breeches to keep them at the correct height (the side seams of period doublets roughly ended at your elbow level), hold up the weight of the breeches, and to prevent unseemly gapping. If you have no skirting on your doublet, you could sew eyelets directly into the waist.

Breeches-
This looks pretty good and reasonably authentic. I'd cover the eyelets in thread or embroidery floss (metal eyelets like that weren't around for another 300 years or so. Something similar show up on /some/ leather items, but rare and not for fabric). http://www.ebay.com/itm/AUTHENTIC-16TH-CENTUR...0354026256

Alternatively, IF those Moresca "slops" end at about the mid-thigh or higher (for most of Europe long breeches with panes ending below or anywhere close to the knee is largely anachronistic) and IF they can be made of out wools or plain silks and not couch fabric, then they /might/ work.


Shoes-
Tall boots (of various kinds) really don't seem to have been worn all that much except before, during, or after riding a horse, wading in water as a fisherman, doing farming tasks, or suggesting nobility by association with the history of the equestrian. Most people, nobility included, wore low shoes for most occasions. This model here is based off a surviving Dutch pair from 1575 and are very similar to other examples found across Europe in art and artifacts. http://store.reconstructinghistory.com/latche...sides.html I can send you some alternatives as well if you'd like.

Stockings
Many stockings in the period were made of wool fabric cut to shape and sewn with a seam up the back and triangular gores at the ankles. Knit stockings were worn as well, however A big consideration is that with the Moresca breeches you were looking at, knee-length stockings won't reach high enough. These- http://www.revivalclothing.com/woolmedievalchauses.aspx are close in pattern to what was worn and reach high enough up the thigh to prevent your skin from showing through. Historic Enterprises linked above (shirts) also carries Chausses (a Medieval name for them), but theirs lack the triangular shape at the ankle. For knit stockings, these are similar and very affordable (as far as reenactment junk goes) http://sallypointer.com/shop/product_info.php...7170df4c48 They're also fully custom fit to your leg and foot. They're not /quite/ right but pretty good and she couldn't be nicer. The "18th Century Stockings" here http://www.southunionmills.com/Knit-Goods.html are even better, but more money.

Have you considered a hat or miscellaneous accessories like a sword hanger, belt, cup, etc. yet?

I seriously can not emphasize enough how messed up and wrong 99% of what passes as Renaissance/16th Century/Elizabethan/Tudor/Whatever gear and fact is completely B.S.

I really really really hope you find this useful

[Joshua Santana]

[Dan Rosen]

I'm glad to hear you're taking this stuff into consideration. Authoritatively speaking to and teaching groups as you intend to about factual history isn't served by fantasy costumes I think the stuff we linked to is mostly in the range of being much more affordable than the stuff you posted initially, so I hope that helps your budget. All that said, unfortunately, what your presentation and portrayal need may not match up with what you pictured in your head initially.

I'm sure someone will answer your tassets question soon. I think it'd be fair to say that many sets had tassets, but I'll let someone with my knowledge of armor tend to a definitive statement

[David Evans]

If your budget is tight. Then Tudor Tailor and Ninya's patterns. can't go wrong with them... :-)

Tassets. If doing a posh end armour, yes, as per the various portraits and pictures supplied. But short for fighting on foot. The knee length stuff is for Horse so avoid unless you can splash out for the horse, the right saddle and all the bits. The style of armour affects the date not the bits added to it.........unless you start wearing a Great Helm ;-)

Historically. The English loathe excess weight so tassets, pauldrons, vambraces and all those bits get binned, along with the burgonnet. They'd much rather wear a tasy little number in a Morrion, much to the disgust of Sir John Smythe. Arming doublets disappear as doubets tend to be lightly padded anyway and armour is very frequently linned with leather, linen canvas, buckram and sheep's wool for padding. Leather jerkins appear and "may" be being used to secure armour to........whilst also being worn as armour in it's own right, and that's Buff jerkins, not 2mm thick glove leather. Buffcoats appear, with the first reference being in 1600 in Ireland.

Mail sleeves are reserved for Light Horse so are out of the question, regardless of Smythe's blowhard ideas........

You can do a decent English impressed soldier from about the mid 1580's quite well and the info is out there.....and it's not going to cost quite so much in fripprey.........

[Joshua Santana]

[Dan Rosen]

[William P]

ive read it fairly thouroughly as part of this book http://kultofathena.com/product.asp?item=19781846 called knight, noble warrior of england, 1200-1600, composed of all 4 of christopher gravetts books on english knights
This book contains material previously published in Warrior 48: English Medieval Knight 1200–1300, Warrior 58: English Medieval Knight 1300–1400,Warrior 35: English Medieval Knight 1400–1500 andWarrior 104: Tudor Knight. It also includes a new introduction and new linking text.

the book all throughout usually has about 3 illustations showuing the equiptment of a knight at a certain period throughout each particular century
the section on the tudor knight has 4 such illustrations, for armours circa 1525 1550 1580 and lastly, a 3/4 armour dated to circa 1590
the greenwich harness (the 1580 illustration, is apparently based on the garniture of the third earl of cumberland, and not only shows the armour, but also shows all the matching pieces of the garniture, including jousting armours, a horse shaffron and even a blued and gilt lance vamplate, plus things like the parts of the helmet, and the arrangement of plates in the leg harness.
it also has quite a few photos of various armours from throughout the century including henry VIII's famous tournament armours'

it has quite a lot of visual information , i cant say how accurate all the text is since i simply dont know the era well enough.
(though notably theres a small chapter on the conflict of ideas between the various opponents and exponents of the use of the rapier, including our old friend )
your better off maybe buying the book by christopher gravett, since it encompasses all 4 centurries of english kniightly development, (and your paying 20 dollars for 4 osprey books instead of 13 dollars for just 1. (unless the larger book has things removed from each chapter
(although the larger book is currently out of stock for alittle while)

[David Evans]

Right. This is were Posh end armour actually works out better for the reenactor for a change.

The bad news is that if you're looking at depicting Tourney, the armour really MUST include etching. Tourney at this stage is as much about showing off bling as it is about fighting.....

BUT. That's not totally bad news as you don't need to buy every piece at once. At heart you need back and breast, gorget, burgonet and falling buffe. Tassets are going to be short for fighting on foot and you can then add the extra pieces to cover to the knees later. If you look at the first armour shown above you can see the that th elegs are covered by two pieces of armour. The arms will need to be covered by pauldrons, vambraces and gauntlests. And you'll need an arming doublet to point them to.

If you avoid Tourney then you can avoid etching.....and can swap mail sleeves sown to the sleeves of the arming doublet but still need gauntlets.

Have a look at here http://www.terminartors.com/artworkprofile/Mo..._in_Armour for an idea of the look

and here for an arming doublet with mail sleeves http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sir_Richard...om_NPG.jpg
and here for mail sleeves http://www.allenantiques.com/M-15.html http://www.allenantiques.com/M-16.html

Here are some 3/4 suits to dribble over http://www.allenantiques.com/Armour-Suits-Collection.html

Try the Wallace collection collection online at http://www.wallacecollection.org/thecollection/wallacelive for more pretty pictures.

Have fun :-)

If you email Wade he's very friendly

[Joshua Santana]