Coat of plates Vs Plate

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
Colin Middleton
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 2037
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 12:31 pm
Location: Sheffield
Contact:

Re: Coat of plates Vs Plate

Postby Colin Middleton » Mon Mar 29, 2010 9:30 pm

Marcus Woodhouse wrote:Does the Bridport muster say the fella was going to wear his out dated armour?
Doesn't it conclude that the town is badly served and needs to buy more kit?
Could that mean replacing 50 year old armour as well?
That's if the Bridport Muster is even a muster roll at all.
I don't know enough about it as it is not my main area of interest so would be happy to find out more.


Much as I would like to, I've never been able to have a good look at the Bridgeport or anything directly derived from it. Bridgeport isn't a muster it's a kind of audit (are you ready to defend yourselves). I didn't know about the conclusion, thanks for that.

I think that it's unlikely that they'd throw away perfectly functional amour, after all a turn of the century harness is still much better protection than a jack and haubergon, even if it's not quite as good as the 'modern' armours. That said, they might choose to chop up 1 alwhite harness to make 3 or 4 brigandines.


Colin

"May 'Blood, blood, blood' be your motto!"

Image

User avatar
Captain Reech
Posts: 345
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 5:47 pm
Location: Derby

Re: Coat of plates Vs Plate

Postby Captain Reech » Mon Apr 12, 2010 5:41 pm

On the bascinet question, is it really a bascinet or an early open sallet or something transitional that doesn't have an exact clasification. I've seen helmets classified as Barbuttes or Sallets that are almost identical to a bascinet, but simply of a later period. I don't think any armourer sat up in the morning and said "Stop producing those, they're out of fashion!" more likely each piece changed subtly to incorporate the features required by the customer.

Can we be sure that the artist didn't put his subject in an early pattern of armour to portray a romantic ideal or simply because he wasn't working from a guy in full kit? t's obvious from some of the renderings we've seen here of banded or coat of plates armours which show no hinges or fastners (Maybe he just couldn't do hinges?) that functional detail wasn't always high on the agenda.

One theory I think is reasonable is that if you could afford a variety of armour you wore what was most appropriate, if you had a full harness and you had time to tool up you'd wear it for a pitched battle but, on a march into enemy held territory for example, you might sacrifice some of the protection in favour of something a little more comfortable (and easier to get away in!), maybe leave the greaves and Back and Breast on the cart and travel in a good brig and plate arms to protect you if you were suprised.


"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle."
Edmund Burke(1729 – 1797)
Proof that being "Conservative" wasn't always a bad thing.....

User avatar
gregory23b
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 2923
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 9:46 pm
Location: Gyppeswyk, Suffolk

Re: Coat of plates Vs Plate

Postby gregory23b » Tue Apr 13, 2010 12:56 pm

"Does the Bridport muster say the fella was going to wear his out dated armour? "

It appears to be an audit of kit, by hearth, not necessarily for immediate use.


"Doesn't it conclude that the town is badly served and needs to buy more kit?"

It was of personal kit, not town kit.


"That's if the Bridport Muster is even a muster roll at all."

Not according to Dave Key, who is working on it, the word muster is misapplied as there is no visible intention of readying for any conflict, as he says, an audit of kit available by those who in theory have an obligation to own and if needed, use it.


middle english dictionary

Isabela on G23b "...somehow more approachable in real life"

http://medievalcolours.blogspot.com

"I know my place." Alice the Huswyf

User avatar
Fox
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 2652
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 12:27 pm
Location: Cheshire

Re: Coat of plates Vs Plate

Postby Fox » Tue Apr 13, 2010 5:50 pm

And finally, words in the period are used completely interchangably.

Analysis of import records for instance would seem to show that types of armour predominated, contrary to what's apparent from illustrations or finds; for instance everyone wore gorgets, almost no-one bevoirs; most likely the words are used to mean the same thing.

We have a specific meaning for the word sallet, but in those records it seems to be used interchagably with the other popular word helm, probably both meaning all types of helmet.

I wouldn't read anything specific to any of the terminology used in the Bridport roll beyond the most general meaning.



User avatar
Brendan_the_lesser
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 3:50 pm
Location: Cork, Ireland

Re: Coat of plates Vs Plate

Postby Brendan_the_lesser » Wed Apr 14, 2010 12:43 am

Captain Reech wrote:On the bascinet question, is it really a bascinet or an early open sallet or something transitional that doesn't have an exact clasification. I've seen helmets classified as Barbuttes or Sallets that are almost identical to a bascinet, but simply of a later period. I don't think any armourer sat up in the morning and said "Stop producing those, they're out of fashion!" more likely each piece changed subtly to incorporate the features required by the customer.

Can we be sure that the artist didn't put his subject in an early pattern of armour to portray a romantic ideal or simply because he wasn't working from a guy in full kit? t's obvious from some of the renderings we've seen here of banded or coat of plates armours which show no hinges or fastners (Maybe he just couldn't do hinges?) that functional detail wasn't always high on the agenda.

One theory I think is reasonable is that if you could afford a variety of armour you wore what was most appropriate, if you had a full harness and you had time to tool up you'd wear it for a pitched battle but, on a march into enemy held territory for example, you might sacrifice some of the protection in favour of something a little more comfortable (and easier to get away in!), maybe leave the greaves and Back and Breast on the cart and travel in a good brig and plate arms to protect you if you were suprised.


As far as I'm aware they are described as representing Bascinets in the major work on them but that might just be an assumption rather than a certainty, and i do age with the idea that out of fashion doesn't mean out of use or production.
The idea that it was a much earlier armour, being represented for connections to a romantic ideal or a golden age of chivalry or the like is very interesting and you could argue that given the decline of the anglo-irish colonies during the 14th and 15th centuries that it might make sense for them to look back on a time when they were in a better position, with more power stability and wealth. Of course thats all just theories, but still interesting to consider...

Ya the fasteners are a detail that I can easily imagine avoiding, they'd be awkward, not very pretty and mess up the otherwise nice clean lines of the armour.
A lot of what i'm trying to do with this is add in all that functional detail that was left out for artistic reasons, to create what seems like a realistic interpretation of the sculptures, the most likely form the armour they were based on might have took.

And again i agree with the idea of having armour suited to different tasks, if you were wealthy a COP and full-plate, if not so wealthy maybe just the COP, you would be more comfortable travelling and given fluid nature of warfare in ireland you were likely to be moving a lot but still need the protection, given the possibilities of ambushes.
In fact now that i think about it that seems to make a lot of sense, a cuirass would probably get very uncomfortable over long periods of riding (I imagine, any first hand experience?) while the limbs wouldn't matter as much and what we see is plate arms and legs with a flexible COP, something the rider can have a stretch in, seems ideal for travelling.


If anyone needs me i'll be spinning in my grave...

User avatar
Captain Reech
Posts: 345
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 5:47 pm
Location: Derby

Re: Coat of plates Vs Plate

Postby Captain Reech » Thu Apr 15, 2010 8:15 am

As you say Marlon, these are all theories. One of the most frustrating things I have found in recent research is deciding the relevance of the source material you find to the portrayal you are attempting. Basing costume and equipment on art is a risky business but what other source do we have when so little remains intact? The comments made earlier about the ambiguity of certain period terms is another excellent example, just because the document says 'Sallet' do they really mean the pattern of helmet we recognise as a 'Sallet' or was it simply being used as a generic term? It's the fascinating side of the hobby I find, (and the penance I like to pay for the fun I have getting lumps knocked off me by better billmen!)


"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle."
Edmund Burke(1729 – 1797)
Proof that being "Conservative" wasn't always a bad thing.....

User avatar
gregory23b
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 2923
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 9:46 pm
Location: Gyppeswyk, Suffolk

Re: Coat of plates Vs Plate

Postby gregory23b » Sat Apr 17, 2010 8:17 pm

Sallets are mentioned a lot, some might be assumed to be in a specific sense, for example the sallets that are imported into London, then a more general description when applied to men being 'jacked and salleted'.


middle english dictionary

Isabela on G23b "...somehow more approachable in real life"

http://medievalcolours.blogspot.com

"I know my place." Alice the Huswyf

User avatar
Brendan_the_lesser
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 3:50 pm
Location: Cork, Ireland

Re: Coat of plates Vs Plate

Postby Brendan_the_lesser » Mon Apr 26, 2010 3:42 pm

I've just been re-reading this thread, as i'm getting ready to write the actual thesis, and i realised the amount of ideas and suggestions that were thrown out at me, some i'd already thought, some were completely new, all were appreciated.
I just want to thank everyone who posted here for a great discussion and for letting me hammer out some ideas on ye.
Thanks a million and if anyone else had anything to contribute please do.
Brendan.


If anyone needs me i'll be spinning in my grave...


Return to “1100-1500”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests