Jenn

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

Are you sure that a 1/4" seam allowance is going to be enough to hold the peplum on when it's weighted down with all of those plates?

Yep. It seems to hold the weight of all the plates quite nicely. These are just babee pix. I think it has all of it's plates now. I need to get some updated pix from Craig.

We can also post the specs of the current one. I think the only thing that is holding off completion is the nails.

Jenn

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

It looks reminicent to a similar armour reputedly worn by Philip IV (called the Fair), king of France. The foundation garment had long since rotted away, so they had the plates arranged on a torso-mannekin.

I think this piece is in the Louvre.

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

It is all hand stitched. If there is any serging, it is done by hand. According to what Dave Key has told me, the quality of stitching on the surviving brigs he has seen is surprisingly bad. Mine is more in that tradition.

I've got my foundation and cover sewn, and sewn together. All I need to do is cut and shapoe plates, and start peening nails.

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

What are you guys using for a covering material Bob?

Hey, I just noticed the L shaped plates over the lung area, very cool!

[ 06-25-2001: Message edited by: Jonathan ]

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

The covering material on proto-brig is a herringbone weave hemp. I'd like to get hold of some fustian for the munition brig I intend to make, and my own brig is covered with silk velvet.

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

quote:

---

Originally posted by Templar Bob:
Genevra/Fire Stryker:

It looks reminicent to a similar armour reputedly worn by Philip IV (called the Fair), king of France. The foundation garment had long since rotted away, so they had the plates arranged on a torso-mannekin.

I think this piece is in the Louvre.

---

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

According to the people I chatted with when researching, nobody makes an accurate brigandine for sale. The Royal armouries has a good modern reconstruction they put together, and I think either White Company or St. George might have one they put together. The biggest glaring error that the best modern brigandines for sale have is that they are not waisted - they look like a sack.

The primary reason you don't find armourers making accurate reconstructions of these is they are terribly time consuming - a monumental pain in the butt to make. They couldn't sell them for the price they would have to charge.

That said, there is an English company that has metal plated brigandines made up out of near the number of plates properly in one, and uses the triple nail pattern. They advertise in "Clash of Arms", I believe. When I get home, I'll dig up one of Peters copies and post the contact information. Just an FYI - they aren't cheap. Eric Littlewood saw one for sale a couple of years back in England, and they were on the order of 500 pounds.

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

Does anyone have pics of accurately-waisted brigs he/she could post?
Or for the matter does this:* http://members.tripod.com/montecrist0/halberdier1.jpg
and this:* http://members.tripod.com/montecrist0/man-at-arms1.jpg

strike you as a properly waisted brigs?

It ocurred to me that since there was a production of munition grade plate pieces, was there a production of munition grade brigs? If so, how did these differ from the higher-quality ones?
If properly fitting (waisting) a brig took such work and man hours could there had been a use for "sacked-formed" (as Chef aptly named them) brigs to equip the common soldier?
Or am i just getting misled here and the way Chef described the manufacture of brigs as "very labour intensive" meant it seemed so to our modern standards, and back then in the XVth the time and cost it took to make a proper brig was comparable to that of a similar sized piece of rivetted maille?
Few ppl make riv. maille nowadays, so it doesnt strike me odd that few ppl. make proper brigs nowadays too....

Ok, i am just babbling here, hope you got the point: Is there evidence of "sacked-formed" brigs? or were all of them waisted?

thanks.

p.s. Pics are from early XV cent. Spain, Royal Armoury in Madrid. Full length pics of the back are also available.

[ 07-09-2001: Message edited by: montecristo ]

[ 07-09-2001: Message edited by: montecristo ]

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

http://www.varmouries.com/tran_21.html

But other than that one, and a few obviously bogus ones, people seem to have a problem with thinking a coat-of-plates is the same thing as a brig., and Wisby is close enough to the Wars of the Roses.

Since the Knights of St. Denys has decided to do WoR at the historical timelines we do, and I've invested my time & money on a late 14th C. knightly persona, I figured to do a Burgundian archer, instead of making a half-hearted attempt at portraying a knight in the 15th.

[ 07-09-2001: Message edited by: Seigneur de Leon ]

[ 07-09-2001: Message edited by: Seigneur de Leon ]

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

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

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

hmm.....well, looking at my pics again, i noticed a wide difference betwenn the brigs worn by the halberdier and the man-at-arm, the first's almost a rectangle if it wasnt for that wide belt. While the second's pretty waisted (or all men-at-arms had the torso of a bodybuilder)

With such few evidence still i would dare guess that higher-quality and expensive brigs were very waisted in order to accomodate for its buyer's esthetics of fashion.
Equipment for man-at-arms i guess would account for good-quality one, hence the tapering waist in the pic; while munitions-grade brigs werent fitted much. Either they ended above the waist (billman) or the waist plates were just dished enough to prevent them from digging into their wearers side's when squeezed by a wide belt like in the halberdier's pic. One other option was to leave a stretch without underplates, allowing the belt to fasten tightly there, altough in neither pic i noted a gap in the series of rivets, so i dont think much of this theory.

well guys, anyone else got more cards to play?

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