Of course. A lot of the armor that is on display in museums and owned by private collectors (and hence shown in books) was purely ornate and never intended to be worn into battle. After all, not setting foot on a battlefield does help improve the chances of your armor not being destroyed.
Prior to firearms, crossbows and other innovations making heavy armor redundant, it was commonplace for rich leaders who didn’t actually set foot on the battlefield to decorate their armor. Roman Emperors in particular seemed fond of looking absolutely fabulous in armor.
Ancestral armor was not really a thing in most places because generally a memorable suit of armor was part of an individual’s identity. A noble’s armor were also unlikely to fit their heirs – outside of Disney movies few families have identical measurements from generation to generation. Finally there was the issue that armor adapted as weapons did – wearing the previous generation’s armor exposed you to the current generation’s weapons.
The armor above was made for Sigismund II Augustus, the then King of Poland (who it seems probably never set foot on a battlefield) – and was one of twenty private armors owned by him at the time of his death. It would not have been unusual for a noble wearing such as suit in a parade to accessorize with a sash and/or long cape.
The important part about purely ornate armor is that it looks like armor – just with decorations that go beyond being practical. They still reflect the core armor values of the era but they’re just over decorated*, questionable accessorized and may have reductions made to facilitate their non-combat use (such as no gauntlets or arm protection if it’s for wearing to dinners and parties).
I thought we’d bring this one back as the reminder that there’s no reason that fabulous looking armor can’t be (at least semi-)practical looking armor… just with more fabulous.
Question: Is it possible to have armor that only serves as aesthetic quality versus functional quality only serve as that? Such as ceremonial armor or ancestral armor.
Of course. A lot of the armor that is on display in museums and owned by private collectors (and hence shown in books) was purely ornate and never intended to be worn into battle. After all, not setting foot on a battlefield does help improve the chances of your armor not being destroyed.
Prior to firearms, crossbows and other innovations making heavy armor redundant, it was commonplace for rich leaders who didn’t actually set foot on the battlefield to decorate their armor. Roman Emperors in particular seemed fond of looking absolutely fabulous in armor.
Ancestral armor was not really a thing in most places because generally a memorable suit of armor was part of an individual’s identity. A noble’s armor were also unlikely to fit their heirs – outside of Disney movies few families have identical measurements from generation to generation. Finally there was the issue that armor adapted as weapons did – wearing the previous generation’s armor exposed you to the current generation’s weapons.
The armor above was made for Sigismund II Augustus, the then King of Poland (who it seems probably never set foot on a battlefield) – and was one of twenty private armors owned by him at the time of his death. It would not have been unusual for a noble wearing such as suit in a parade to accessorize with a sash and/or long cape.
The important part about purely ornate armor is that it looks like armor – just with decorations that go beyond being practical. They still reflect the core armor values of the era but they’re just over decorated*, questionable accessorized and may have reductions made to facilitate their non-combat use (such as no gauntlets or arm protection if it’s for wearing to dinners and parties).
I thought we’d bring this one back as the reminder that there’s no reason that fabulous looking armor can’t be (at least semi-)practical looking armor… just with more fabulous.
This week’s blog is on the fighter women of House Clovenshield, mostly because there were some awesome pictures from Pennsic of the group. (This was supposed to post Friday, apparently the auto-poster thing decided not to. Oops!)
While women are of course equally able to fight in the SCA as men, often women fighters are quite outnumbered by their male counterparts, and in some (hopefully rare or apochrophal) groups there is even talk of animosity towards women fighters. Not so for House Clovenshield! There were five lady fighters present in the group at Pennsic.
1 Siobhan an Einigh, right after inspection, Pennsic 2015
This is me in my kit! My persona is of an Irish woman from around 1030 CE, so my kit is mostly Nordic based. Armor wasn’t really a thing for the Irish at the time, and what armor was worn was usually based off of other cultures. I’m wearing a leather coat of plate made in a viking style, with metal shoulder-cops (that I made myself!) Under that is a linen leine, or tunic, which covers my knees. As we don’t actually want to hurt our friends, our swords are made of rattan, a kind of stick, and covered in duct tape. When out in the field, I’m also wearing a helm.
Of particular interest to me, however, is my shield. I finished it just a few days before this picture was taken, and am particularly proud of it. It is a La Tene style Irish war shield, and is made to the exact dimensions of extant pieces. 48" x 24" is quite huge when someone 5’2" is using it! The shield is made of birch and fiberglass, with a canvas cover. It worked quite well throughout the war!
2 Castle Battle, Pennsic 2015
And this is a line of battle. That person in the red circle? That’s me, fighting with my old kingdom of Calontir (the purple and gold folks). As a shieldman, my job in battle is to defend the spears around me, then rush in with other shields to make a hole in the oposing line. Tis quite fun!
3 House Clovenshield Lady Fighters, Pennsic 2015
And here’s a picture of the five lady fighters of Clovenshield, in our armor! From left to right, they are Susan the Irresponsible (archer), Vixi (shieldman), Haelga (shieldman), me (shieldman), and Susan the short (shield sargent). As you might gather, the lady fighters make up most of our shield line!
4 Silliness, Pennsic 2015
And to end with a bit of silliness, here are Susan and I after a battle (or between battles), being mature adults. Hope you enjoyed the pictures!
This week:
Lady Fighters of Clovenshield!
Next week:
A year in Arts and Sciences!
3rd week:
Pennsic recap!
4th week: Tournament of Chivalry Review!
Another example that people in SCA/LARPers all want the same kind of fun, including practical armor, regardless of gender.
This week’s blog is on the fighter women of House Clovenshield, mostly because there were some awesome pictures from Pennsic of the group. (This was supposed to post Friday, apparently the auto-poster thing decided not to. Oops!)
While women are of course equally able to fight in the SCA as men, often women fighters are quite outnumbered by their male counterparts, and in some (hopefully rare or apochrophal) groups there is even talk of animosity towards women fighters. Not so for House Clovenshield! There were five lady fighters present in the group at Pennsic.
1 Siobhan an Einigh, right after inspection, Pennsic 2015
This is me in my kit! My persona is of an Irish woman from around 1030 CE, so my kit is mostly Nordic based. Armor wasn’t really a thing for the Irish at the time, and what armor was worn was usually based off of other cultures. I’m wearing a leather coat of plate made in a viking style, with metal shoulder-cops (that I made myself!) Under that is a linen leine, or tunic, which covers my knees. As we don’t actually want to hurt our friends, our swords are made of rattan, a kind of stick, and covered in duct tape. When out in the field, I’m also wearing a helm.
Of particular interest to me, however, is my shield. I finished it just a few days before this picture was taken, and am particularly proud of it. It is a La Tene style Irish war shield, and is made to the exact dimensions of extant pieces. 48" x 24" is quite huge when someone 5’2" is using it! The shield is made of birch and fiberglass, with a canvas cover. It worked quite well throughout the war!
2 Castle Battle, Pennsic 2015
And this is a line of battle. That person in the red circle? That’s me, fighting with my old kingdom of Calontir (the purple and gold folks). As a shieldman, my job in battle is to defend the spears around me, then rush in with other shields to make a hole in the oposing line. Tis quite fun!
3 House Clovenshield Lady Fighters, Pennsic 2015
And here’s a picture of the five lady fighters of Clovenshield, in our armor! From left to right, they are Susan the Irresponsible (archer), Vixi (shieldman), Haelga (shieldman), me (shieldman), and Susan the short (shield sargent). As you might gather, the lady fighters make up most of our shield line!
4 Silliness, Pennsic 2015
And to end with a bit of silliness, here are Susan and I after a battle (or between battles), being mature adults. Hope you enjoyed the pictures!
This week:
Lady Fighters of Clovenshield!
Next week:
A year in Arts and Sciences!
3rd week:
Pennsic recap!
4th week: Tournament of Chivalry Review!
Another example that people in SCA/LARPers all want the same kind of fun, including practical armor, regardless of gender.
~Ozzie
Posted on
Last year a How Do I Armor? specifcally on leather armor, this year Skallagrim did a series of videos examining how a sample of the thickest, hardest leather available holds up against a variety of attack types. Including axes:
Crossbows:
Firearms:
Notably this leather he’s testing is extremely thick (6 millimeters, for perspective – leather used for saddles is usually only 4 to 5 millimeters thick). It can be dyed, painted, gilded and embossed, but it certainly can’t be sculpted into skin-tight body hugging fetish attire.
Well not without crushing, pinching and chaffing the wearer to death anyway.
I don’t have a lot of experience in building armor myself, but I reached out to a friend who’s been into extremely enthusiastic for several decades and happens to be a woman. Her recommendation is a globose breastplate with padding for additional support. Something like these:
(Joan of Arc by Albert Lynch (x) and Knightess by TypeSprite (x))
It is possible that one made off a peg suit you, but more likely that you would need one custom made. Regardless you’d be going to a smooth deflective curve such as in the illustrations above. Plate armor like this is actually quite roomy in order to allow movement, so there’ll be plenty of room to add supportive padding.
Globose breastplates are held on with a harness, so with firm padding should be able to restrain even the mightiest bosom. Similar armoring techniques were often used when making custom suits for rotund nobles, Henry VIII of England armors show a gradually increasing girth throughout his life.
(Photo by Chuck, King Henry VIII’s armor in the Tower of London’s Royal Armouries.)
Of course. A lot of the armor that is on display in museums and owned by private collectors (and hence shown in books) was purely ornate and never intended to be worn into battle. After all, not setting foot on a battlefield does help improve the chances of your armor not being destroyed.
Prior to firearms, crossbows and other innovations making heavy armor redundant, it was commonplace for rich leaders who didn’t actually set foot on the battlefield to decorate their armor. Roman Emperors in particular seemed fond of looking absolutely fabulous in armor.
Ancestral armor was not really a thing in most places because generally a memorable suit of armor was part of an individual’s identity. A noble’s armor were also unlikely to fit their heirs – outside of Disney movies few families have identical measurements from generation to generation. Finally there was the issue that armor adapted as weapons did – wearing the previous generation’s armor exposed you to the current generation’s weapons.
The armor above was made for Sigismund II Augustus, the then King of Poland (who it seems probably never set foot on a battlefield) – and was one of twenty private armors owned by him at the time of his death. It would not have been unusual for a noble wearing such as suit in a parade to accessorize with a sash and/or long cape.
The important part about purely ornate armor is that it looks like armor – just with decorations that go beyond being practical. They still reflect the core armor values of the era but they’re just over decorated*, questionable accessorized and may have reductions made to facilitate their non-combat use (such as no gauntlets or arm protection if it’s for wearing to dinners and parties).
