| Author |
Message |
Jean Henri Chandler
|
 Posted: Fri 27 Jul, 2007 4:03 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Dave Womble wrote: | | As for leather not holding up to salt water, people forget Norse activity wasn't restricted to oceanic sojourns...much of their movement was riverine and overland. Seafarers for sure, but they also played on land too. |
Of course, but lets keep a few things in mind: many if not most Norse settlements were on the coast, and often the fastest way to get around (and the best way to move goods) was by boat along the coasts. More importantly, both raiding and trading, activities the wealthier Norse (those who could afford armor) were likely to engage in, was most often done with at least some Sea voyaging. The vast armies which invaded the British Isles did so by sea, presumably these were a fairly large percentage of the warrior class among the Norse in this period.
J
Books and games on Medieval Europe Codex Integrum
Codex Guide to the Medieval Baltic Now available in print
|
|
  |
 |
Robin Smith
|
| Posted: Fri 27 Jul, 2007 4:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm gonna be the bad guy here, and reiterate that there is no evidence for gambesons or other quilted armour or padding in this period. Wish there was! But there's not 
However, a gambeson doesn't add that much that a layer or two of thick wool tunics don't. I have used my maille with both a gambeson, or with just a heavy wool tunic, and honestly I haven't felt that much of a difference...
A furore Normannorum libera nos, Domine
|
|
 |
|
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Fri 27 Jul, 2007 4:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Robin Smith wrote: | | However, a gambeson doesn't add that much that a layer or two of thick wool tunics don't. I have used my maille with both a gambeson, or with just a heavy wool tunic, and honestly I haven't felt that much of a difference... |
Good point as a heavy tunic or two could function as an " unofficial " gambison.
One thing is certain wearing maille directly on the skin wouldn't work and some minimal layer of cloth is needed at the very least to avoid chaffing. From there, in winter, heavier wool would just happen without any special thought being needed.
Noticing that the heavier padding was useful one would first think of just wearing extra layers and later quilting the layers together might be an obvious early form of gambison ?
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
|
|
|
Chuck Russell
|
| Posted: Fri 27 Jul, 2007 9:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ya another vote for no gambison. ive worn riveted mail with a wool tunic and a linen under tunic in steel fighting and never had a problem.
but there is a period picture in the Bay Tap of a gent being robbed of his mail and he's nekked under it (SHOCKING) hehe
|
|
 |
|
|
Lafayette C Curtis
|
| Posted: Sat 28 Jul, 2007 1:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Chuck Russell wrote: | | but there is a period picture in the Bay Tap of a gent being robbed of his mail and he's nekked under it (SHOCKING) hehe |
I've seen that scene too. It makes me wonder about whether the mail could be sewn/pasted/attached to the foundation garment, somewhat like the kazaghand...
|
|
|
|
|
Robin Smith
|
| Posted: Sat 28 Jul, 2007 5:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Lafayette C Curtis wrote: | | Chuck Russell wrote: | | but there is a period picture in the Bay Tap of a gent being robbed of his mail and he's nekked under it (SHOCKING) hehe |
I've seen that scene too. It makes me wonder about whether the mail could be sewn/pasted/attached to the foundation garment, somewhat like the kazaghand... |
Personally the way I see that scene is an artistic allusion to the idea that they are being "stripped naked" of any and everything of value. Much the same way William I's servants did upon his death. Leave it to a dirty Saxon dog to steal another mans braies 
I would say the Bayuex Tap depicts a Kazaghand/Jazaraint differently than a hauberk... On Bishop Odo. Given that there is no evidence for gambesons in this period, I would say that the garment Odo is wearing in the battle scene is a depiction of a Kazaghand/Jazaraint. Also, the very picture cited before, I would argue shows the hauberk inside out with no padding...
A furore Normannorum libera nos, Domine
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Henri Chandler
|
| Posted: Sat 28 Jul, 2007 12:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Robin Smith wrote: | I'm gonna be the bad guy here, and reiterate that there is no evidence for gambesons or other quilted armour or padding in this period. Wish there was! But there's not
However, a gambeson doesn't add that much that a layer or two of thick wool tunics don't. I have used my maille with both a gambeson, or with just a heavy wool tunic, and honestly I haven't felt that much of a difference... |
Functionally I don't see that much difference. I think a quilted linnen gambeson would make more sense in a warmer climate, like the med, but wool would probably make plenty of sense in Scandinavia especially during any season other than summer! The key thing is if they had some textile garment under the mail, or in spite of it.
One other question, is there any civilian clothing which is like a gambeson? I've seen some stuff on re-enactors which looked like that but no idea if it's period. Would think some stuff like that might come from the East, particularly to the Swedes....
J
Books and games on Medieval Europe Codex Integrum
Codex Guide to the Medieval Baltic Now available in print
Last edited by Jean Henri Chandler on Thu 09 Aug, 2007 1:19 pm; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lafayette C Curtis
|
| Posted: Sat 28 Jul, 2007 9:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Robin Smith wrote: | | I would say the Bayuex Tap depicts a Kazaghand/Jazaraint differently than a hauberk... On Bishop Odo. Given that there is no evidence for gambesons in this period, I would say that the garment Odo is wearing in the battle scene is a depiction of a Kazaghand/Jazaraint. Also, the very picture cited before, I would argue shows the hauberk inside out with no padding... |
Ooo. Got to check the way the depict the Bastard's brother there....
|
|
|
|
|
David Huggins
|
| Posted: Thu 09 Aug, 2007 10:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Again just picking up on this thread, the hide armour I believe refers to elkhide, said to be able to turn a sword, that was given as a royal gift. Don't have the particular reference at the mo as my reference library is packed away due to building work. Of the top of my head check out Ospreys Elite series 'The Vikings' for a reference.There does not appear to be any evidence to my knowledge for padded gambesons in Norse or Anglo-saxon warfare, not making its mark in North West Europe proper until after the first crusade. The Byzantines did have cotton gambesons. There is very slight evidence for leather though but this was found in a Scots context for this period, but again I dont think that it can definitely be provenanced for military use.
Lamellar plates have been found in Wales and are said to date to the Viking age. Organic horn as armour, again there is no evidence, often sited is the infill on the Benty Grange Helmet, but this was just conjecture and no evidence was found to suggest this was the case, just that the craftsman who did the repro used horn.
Personally I like to wear a leather kyrtle under my mail, but in truth I havent found it offers any greater protection to the body then wearing a couple of tunics. Just protects the clothing from rust and dirt.
I think the fact is we just don't know, organic materials can be very prone to decay dependant on the soil type it is buried/lost/placed in. Perhaps one day we just might find a form of body armour other then mail.
and he who stands and sheds blood with us, shall be as a brother.
|
|
 |
|
Jean Henri Chandler
|
| Posted: Thu 09 Aug, 2007 1:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| David Huggins wrote: | | The Byzantines did have cotton gambesons. . |
If the Byzantines had them in the time period of the Viking Age I think it's a fairly good bet some came back to Scandinavia from there.
The most likely route would be Norse mercenaries ("varangians") fighting for the Byzantines like Harald Hardrada allegedly did. I think it would be pretty natural to bring your armor back with you, or adapt to the armor the Byzantines were using. I think this is probably also the source of the Lamellar which was found in Scandinavia. The second most likely would be Rus and / or Swedish traders and warriors operating in Southern Russia, black sea region.
At the very least that establishes they knew what it was, IMHO.
J
Books and games on Medieval Europe Codex Integrum
Codex Guide to the Medieval Baltic Now available in print
|
|
|
|
|
David Huggins
|
| Posted: Thu 09 Aug, 2007 8:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Jean,
I agree that is is possible, but i don't think lamellar would be seen as often on so many individuals as is sometimes represented by re-enactment groups. Or again perhaps the material used - ? fish oil boiled leather- has not been durable enough to survive in the archeological record.
best
Dave
and he who stands and sheds blood with us, shall be as a brother.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a standard topic