I have trouble understanding how a coif or aventail could be effective without a lining of some sort. It is gratifying to see Embleton address this subject in his most recent book, Medieval Military Costume. In fact, I have been planning to make a quilted lining for my aventail for some time.

The same goes for a maille halberk. Will it offer you proper protection without under-padding? Thhen there is the question of over-padding which is also frequently seen. Was over-padding used in conjunction with under-padding?

I'd love to hear your opinions & any evidence you might present.

--------------------

Lacking any kind of evidence or documentation, I can only back you up on the "highly improbable use of maille armur without some sort of padding under (and sometimes over)" with what IMHO is common sense. Padding was worn *most* of the time because of comfiness. Heres why:

Picture yourself wearing a maille mitten without a cloth/leather glove underneath, i.e. nothing between your skin and the maille. Now, punch the nearest solid object near you. Voila! instant motivation to use padding. Anyone wearing a hauberk in an armed fight will feel all over his body the same pain you felt when punching with the maille glove, whenever something hits his body. A very unpleasant sensation i'll wagger.

Also, in other circumstances like sitting, riding, laying down, walking; i'll imagine (imagine as in: I havent worn armour for so long as to find out for myself....yet) wearing armour without padding is going to be quite painful. Reason which makes me think there was some sort of padding under the maille even if "over-padding" was worn.

It *might* have been for rough personas, or for ppl in a hurry to just put on the padding sans the padding. but as far as i know (not much admitedly) it wasnt a far-sprung custom nor a rewarding one.

Other issues to think of:
-sweat and metal dont mix very well.
-Metal conducts heat very well, in hot/cold climates i'll rather have cloth on me than metal. (for those naked-save-for-a-hauberk-celtic-barbarians)
-Remember arrows with thin, sharp tips? padding might be a good idea when wearing maille
-Also heard from a friend who read somewhere that (ok, no sneers please) that coarse wool padding also served the part of instant-bandages, clogging onto wounds helping stem bloodflow.

well, gotta go. Hope other (sp. the more knowleadgable) folks here speak up on this one.

--------------------

Padding certainly was worn in other instances, but does not seem to be something we can automatically assume.

The 13th century Speculum Regalae talks about wearing a heavy tunic beneath the hauberk and a quilted garment *over* it.

There are all sorts of variations.

I understand your point with respect to reenactors, but I know there was enough variance to keep it from being a given. All in all I think that we need to consult as many primary sources as possible from the specific time and culture in question before assuming.

On the flip side those who choose not to wear a haubergeon beneath their transitional armor effect me likewise :-)

--------------------

Bob, I agree 100% with you, in that there was a lot of variance in it, and it would be misleading for us to sterotype and assume beforehand things such as wearing under-padding.

yet i quote:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bob Charron:
Chretien de Troyes Arthurian cycle doesn't (12th century) doesn't indicate a padded garment beneath the hauberk, but rather a silk tunic.

---

If by that youre stating that a thin silk tunic the width of a modern silk blouse was worn under the hauberk, without any "bulgy" or "heavy" padding or anything else, i'll beg to disagree on the following grounds.

Wearing your expensive 100% natural silk tunic right under your always-rusting, blood-stained, mud-splattered hauberk, means the tunic wont last long before its reduced to dirty rags (snagging on points in the hauberk being also a problem).
Rather I'll speculate the tunic so mentioned is actually and aketon or some sort of padded garment with a silk lining, with the outer layers of coarser, cheaper materials (protecting the expensive material and mimicking the practice of lining with linen, which like silk, is cooler and more comfortable to wear.)
Naming such garment a "silk tunic" was only a mention of the quality that set it apart from any other tunics or paddings, and identified it as a piece worthy of a king.
Now the benefit of wearing a padding is doubled, not only to protect ones body from blows, but also to protect such rich adornment (reason which also makes unprobable a garment of any kind (and width) with the silk on the outside).

The only other possible scenario i can come up with is that the author consciously omitted any other more common layer of clothing between silk and armour, in order to infer the haste with which the subject armed himself, foregoing the padding.

Nevertheless, my HO about all this, is that certainly there were instances where hauberks were worn without padding of any kind (maybe even over bare skin), but in the 80% of all cases padding was worn. Specially in the circumstances of a Tourney, pas d'armes, behourd, or even battle. I mean, quilted garments were (and still are) of the cheapest/easiest garments to make. If someone could buy/get a hauberk he could assuredly buy/get a gambeson or equivalent.
Now if he chose to forgo it willingly is another matter.

--------------------

The use of silk is not so farfetched; it is very tough, very light, very comfortable, and has reputed surgical benefits when extracting arrows and dealing with wounds.

--------------------

C.

--------------------

--------------------

Consequently, I no longer wear a padded garment, or anything more than the standard linen undertunic and woollen tunic under my byrnie (except for cheating with elbow protection - I may be tough, I'm not totally silly).

--------------------

Go Smiggins Holes 2010!

Egfroth

If you're arguing that you don't wear underpadding because it's not historical, then how can you justify elbow padding? As far as I know, elbow padding alone is totally unknown.

[ 03-24-2002: Message edited by: Jeff Johnson ]

--------------------

I personally wear the following according to period.
11th century Norman miles: a linen shirt, a linen lined wool cotte, my mail. a thinly padded linen coif under my mail coif. I find with this arrangement that I have plenty of protection, you would be surprised at how well the lined woolen cotte absorbs impact.

13th century knight: a linen shirt, a thinly padded sleeved aketon/gambeson?. my mail, a slightly thicker padded sleevless gambeson aketon, my surcoat. I find that padding OVER mail works better than under, for the same thickness of padding. It is easier to move, less bulky and binding and cooler to wear the thinly padded garment under the mail and have the thicker sleeveless garment over the top.

I have based these on observations of the Masciejowski Bible and other manuscripts, I can supply my sources if others would like to have a look when I get back from our big Dark Age camp this weekend.

Cheers

Rod

--------------------