|
Author
|
Topic: Spurs?
|
Strongbow
Member
Member # 461
|
posted 01-24-2004 01:04 PM
   
AS I piece together my household archer kit, I find that most household archers would have been mounted on campaign in the late-14th or 15thcentury (yes?). So two questions:First, would such a mounted archer wear spurs as part of his daily kit, or only when about to ride? Two, What the characteristics of late-14th and 15th century spurs? single or double loop terminals? What size rowel? What about construction? Most antiques I've seen are iron... most replicas I've seen are bronze... what's correct? What vendor makes the type of spur appropriate for my station? Thanks!
Strongbow
Registered: Apr 2003 | IP: Logged
|
|
hauptmann
unregistered
|
posted 01-24-2004 07:02 PM
There is strong evidence that mounted archers wore spurs when riding. That archers wore spurs at times other than when they were immediately riding seems unlikely. Usually spurs are shown in illustrations when the wearer is mounted or recently dismounted or is preparing to ride. As with riding today, why wear spurs on foot when they just get in the way? Unlike some reenactors today, the evidence indicates that medieval horsemen didn't wear their riding boots and spurs around all the time "just to look cool". If they are depicted wearing riding boots and spurs, it's because they were about to ride, riding, or had just dismounted, or the artist is intentionally identifying the person as an equestrian.I have several spurs in my collection and they are all iron. I have also seen many 14th and 15th century spurs for sale which have all been iron. This is not to say that bronze spurs didn't exist, as there are museum examples cited as 'gilt cooper alloy'. Most replicas made today, the ones I offer included, are bronze because of ease of producton. The easiest way to replicate affordable spurs is by investment or sand casting, and iron or steel cast by these methods is prohibitively expensive for small runs. Bronze or brass is easy to cast in both sand and investment molds and is therefore quite inexpensive to produce and affordable to the purchaser. For forms of spurs, of which there are far too many variations to discuss here, I recommend the Museum of London's book "The Medieval Horse and its Equipment - Medieval Finds from Excavations in London". This book has probably the largest number of spurs shown in any single place. There are many other works that show medieval spurs, but usually only a few in each book. [ 01-24-2004: Message edited by: hauptmann ] [ 01-24-2004: Message edited by: hauptmann ]
IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Angelique
Member
Member # 404
|
posted 01-27-2004 08:48 PM
quote:
Usually spurs are shown in illustrations when the wearer is mounted or recently dismounted or is preparing to ride. As with riding today, why wear spurs on foot when they just get in the way?
I feel like such a goof when I read that, hehe, I walk around with my spurs on all the time because I forget to take them off my boots at the barn. Guess I have gotten used to not tripping myself, but I can certainly see where that might be an issue in a battle for a dismounted archer. I would be the one flat on my face while everyone else was firing off volleys. Man, you guys just know so much  -------------------- Dahlin', this can't be real emergency, I only brought one bottle of bourbon and one bottle of Tabasco...
Registered: Dec 2002 | IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Fire Stryker
Admin & Advocatus Diaboli
Member # 2
|
posted 01-28-2004 02:45 PM
Burgundian sources specified that archers removed their spurs, but did not mention a footware change. If an archer is dismounting to go into battle, I doubt footware changes are a good idea, especially if speed is of the essence. (*speculative since I don't have a reference in either direction) -------------------- ad finem fidelis
Registered: May 2000 | IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
LHF
Member
Member # 71
|
posted 01-28-2004 11:15 PM
hmmmmmm.... i remember seeing a bunch of burgundian archers standing behind a "hedge" all wearing their fancy riding boots all the way mid thigh. they had a bunch of "pikemen" standing behind them. c'mon someone help me here, where have i seen this pic? Jen any ideas?daniel -------------------- Db D'rustynail
Registered: Nov 2000 | IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Woodcrafter
Member
Member # 197
|
posted 02-02-2004 10:18 AM
I believe iron was more expensive than bronze. However most horse fittings are iron because of the strength of the animal. Spurs are not required to be of iron and therefore falls into the catagory what the owner could afford. Most people able to own a horse could afford iron or silver, gold plated, etc. This makes spurs valuable. They are also easily lost. So it may have been a social or frugal reason that when dismounted spurs were removed. I am hesistant to paint everyone removing theirs spurs, or everyone leaving them on. The majority of finds seems to be iron, but there are bronze and silver/gold plated iron spurs out there. This then probably means the expensive ones were well cared for/strapped on. There would a servant keeping an eye on this. The bronze ones for those who can just afford their position, may not have been that numerous. Iron spurs were tinned to prevent rust, and luckly tinned bronze gives the impression of greater wealth. It is my opinion, that though someone may have been born 'noble', that status must be maintained with evident wealth. If the person falls too 'poor', then it would be very hard to prove his or her status. What I mean is, that they did not carry a card saying 'hobilier' or 'squire.' You had to 'toe the line' as is evident by the standards for Jacks. If you showed up without the required kit, you were sent away as not employable. If you want to claim noble status, lets see the gold plated items, expensive cloths and the servants required of the position. Otherwise in their eyes you are not.So for a mounted archer, tinned bronze spurs, take them off when dismounted. They would be still valuable to a low (in comparison to others) paid archer. Also the tinning will not wear off as quickly. They can be hung in an area to be seen. I have a set of brass spurs that I have used cheap and dirty electrical (liquid) tinning on. They shone like bright silver for a day or two, then went very dull. I have yet to attempt to polish them up, but that should be easy to do with a light abrasive. I am unsure of special riding boots. I don't believe they are requested or easily affordable for a mounted archer. Are there pictures of mounted archers in boots? [ 02-02-2004: Message edited by: Woodcrafter ] -------------------- Woodcrafter
14th c. Woodworking
Registered: Jul 2001 | IP: Logged
|
|
Gwen
Member
Member # 126
|
posted 02-02-2004 10:57 AM
Woodcrafter. are your comments based on fact (inventories, muster rolls, etc.) or are they your speculations?In Gaston Phoebus nearly 100% of the riders wear both "riding boots" and both gold and silver spurs. In the Elsmere manuscript, the wife of Bath is wearing gold-colored spurs. In Rene's Book of the Tournament, many men are wearing riding boots (King of arms, his retainers, pages, herald, the Duke of Brittany's retainers, the Duke of bourbon's retainers, etc.)and -everyone- is wearing silver colored spurs. In the latter text, the only dismounted men wearing spurs are the King of Arms and his attendants, the implication being that they have just ridden in to present the challenge sword and have not taken the time to change footwear. Gwen
Registered: Feb 2001 | IP: Logged
|
|
Woodcrafter
Member
Member # 197
|
posted 02-02-2004 12:00 PM
Both actually. Surviving examples presented in the MoL books are of all types.If as you mentioned, the riders can afford gold spurs, then they should be able to afford specialty riding boots. The King of Arms, retainers, pages, heralds belonging to a Duke would be required to wear the best as an indication of their master's wealth. They may not have bought this themselves, but have it provided by the Duke. If you wish to portray a duke, then you must foot the bill for well dressed servants. My comments are if you could only afford tinned brass, you would not necessarily afford riding boots. Materials are expensive, labour is not. A lot of leather goes into riding boot, far less in shoes. -------------------- Woodcrafter
14th c. Woodworking
Registered: Jul 2001 | IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fire Stryker
Admin & Advocatus Diaboli
Member # 2
|
posted 02-03-2004 10:54 AM
Had the same thought as Gwen in regard to mounted vs. foot.In your impression, "who" are you attached to? Are you English (WoR) or are you an English archer in the service of Burgundy? The Burgundians distributed a lot of equipment almost to the degree of modern militaries. If you are attached to a household of a lord or knight, this whole boot/spur issue may be a moot one. -------------------- ad finem fidelis
Registered: May 2000 | IP: Logged
|
|
Fire Stryker
Admin & Advocatus Diaboli
Member # 2
|
posted 02-03-2004 10:56 AM
Also in the vein of being attached to a great lord's household, you would usually be equipped.Lord's and knights, I believe were expected to have the means to equip any men under them, else you run into the aforementioned problems of not living up to one's station. -------------------- ad finem fidelis
Registered: May 2000 | IP: Logged
|
|
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
