I'm not looking for viking bed info or 17-18th C. rope beds. Is there any *real* info on a 15th C. bed that's appropriate for us to use "on campaign"? I've been looking through Der Burgunderbuete, but haven't come up with anything. Jeff and I have seen lots of beds in museums and in paintings, but none of these are meant to be drug out into the field.

Jeff came up with a conjectural design that is simple and cheap to make, sets up in minutes with no tools or special equipment, breaks down just as quickly and is incredibly stable. When we had our old setup at Pennsic we used to use the bed as a couch and once had about 8 people sitting on it, and the thing never even groaned. The problem is that it is conjectural, and I'd love to see some info on what's historically correct.

James and I use a version of the second best bed from Bayleaf at the Weald & Downland Museum in Sussex. I'm not entirely convinced it's reasonable for campaign use but it's fairly easy to break down and isn't as elaborate as most of the beds seen in paintings, and it's dated late 15th/early 16th century. The main picture we used is out of Bayleaf Medieval Farmstead which appears to be available from the W&D bookstore( http://www.wealddown.co.uk/book-shop-building-conservation-craft.htm ). A scan of the photo in the book is at http://www.greydragon.org/furniture/beds/index.htm

This is a SCAdian article about consturcting a rope bed based on an example in a 13th century Byzantine Ivory. - http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Medieval/Articles/rope_bed/rope_bed.htm

The most intersting part of this page was a 15th century woodcut showing a bed in a tent - http://www.dnaco.net/~arundel/bed.html

I look forward to more discussion on this issue.

Mitake.

A very interesting question. Of course it is all a matter of station - the captain will probably have a portable camp bed, and of course the pikemen would not, and would have to make due with blankets and straw.

An interesting side not on the junk that would be lugged around on campaign. I was just re-reading Commynes and came across a passage dealing with an incident during the War of Public Weal (1465) when the allied lords thought they would have to retire from the blockade of Paris. The Marshal of Burgundy and the Lord of Ufre made the suggestion "...That all men who commanded less than 10 lances should have to abandon their cart..." in order to facilitate an orderly withdrawal. This is a good indication that many men at arms very low on the totem pole had carts with them to lug their equipage in. That is the sort of thing you would need to carry a bed frame in, and I would suggest that a camp bed may have been common for that class of men.

At the end of the 14th c. a scathing sermon delivered against the military class of France because of their failure in the ill fated crusade of 1396 mentioned "... That the ancients were superior to us in all things..." and "that the Romans did not have little brass stoves brought on campaign so that they might have nice little pies made for their comfort.....". I just though I would throw that out there as more evidence of junk lugging on the part of the 2nd estate.

I do have a copy of "Early English Furniture" put out by the Victoria and Albert - I'll have a look through it for beds. The book we really need to potentially answer this question (and I would sell you all to white slavers for) (joke!)is "Furniture in England, France, & the Netherlands from the 12th - 15th c." by Penelope Eames published by The Furniture History Society 1977.

I will look and see what I can find. My suspition is that this sort of knock down bed would not have survived the centuries. What we normally see surviving are great beds or beds of state. Only the Duke of Burgundy, The Kings of France & England, and the Holy Roman Emperor would lug something like that around.

------------------
Bob R.

The arrangement would be extremely simple and low-tech, and innately collapsible (I mean that in a good way). I wouldn't want to invest in anything more elaborate, if there was the risk of having to abandon my carts - but I'm not one of those extravagant types.

Where is your sense of adventure? The Swiss would think you were no fun to loot.

Seriously, those trestle beds sound promising.

Jeff says that citation was what made him decide to make the slat bed for us to use at events. He feels probably the way to make his arrangement closer to correct (based on that painting) would be to use 4 legs on the trestles instead of the mortised "T" he used on ours. However, butting 4 legs in at that sort of angle has it's own inherent set of problems, and we'd rather not go there.

Like John, our camp bed supports a futon mattress, and we love it! Jeff used rough-sawn cedar fence boards for the planks, and the roughness seems to hold onto the futon pretty well, preventing it from sliding around on the boards. Interestingly, one of the guys in our group thought the rough boards were too ugly so he useed smotth boards which he stained and varnished, and his matress tick slides around like crazy. Maybe the rough-sawn boards are the way to go with this!

Gwen, your solution as to finish is the correct one. Surviving Medieval furniture has at best the surface given to it by a hand plane. Linseed oil or egg tempra paint would be the best finish, and many pieces (certainly those dragged on campign)would have no finish at all.

Mirror smooth surfaces and stains & varnishes on furniture are the hallmark of the late 17th c. and beyond.

Mirror smooth surfaces and stains & varnishes on furniture are the hallmark of the late 17th c. and beyond.'

Bob, you say that with such resounding authority that I feel compelled to request citations to support your assertion.

I certainly am no recognised authority on Medieval furniture, nor do I pretend to be one.

I have had the opportunity to examine pieces at Hammond Castle, a couple at the Higgins, and peruse some in the MET's collection of Medieval objects on display. I talked at length to the cabinetmaker at Plimoth Plantation on the subject when I started to persue Medieval woodworking. The best book I have on the subject is "English Medieval Furniture and Woodwork", which unfortunatly only rarely mentions finish on the pieces in the V&A - here are a couple of examples mentioned in the book.

Entry 296 - refering to a 13th c. chest "There are traces of red on the roundels of the Stoke Dabernon chest (Johnston 1907, 273). The application of bright colours to these simple motifs would have been extremely effective.

Entry 298 "From the Great Bedwyn Church., Wiltshire, this chest was featured in Cescinskey and Gribble (1922) FIG 1. The piece is of rough workmanship saw marks being clearly visible on the front panel..."

Entry 299 Chest, ark shaped, composed of horizontal boards mortised into four uprights..
dated late 13th c (speculative as explained later in the entry)... Ark construction used riven timbers and is illustrated in Macqouid & Edwards(1927). Short of Dendochronology it is impossible to date an object like this with any precision because it lacks any ornamental feature.

I'm posting a few scans of chests and details of cupboards (the latter with delicate carving around the ventelation 'holes' in the pannel, but with tool marks visible on the "smooth" surfaces of the surrounding board).

The information I have on period finish was supplied to me by the Master joiner or cabinetmaker at Plimoth Plantation, who kindly spent an hour discussing this with me and a friend in 98, and who invited me to participate in a class he was teaching which I unfortunately could not attend due to lack of time and funds. He gave me the reference to the Penelope Eames book which he said would be the best study on the subject - if I could find a copy (and I might have at last, if I do, I will post any new information on this thread).

I have had the privilige of running my fingers over a couple of late medieval pieces - dissasembled panels of a carved chest commemorating the surrender of Grenada to Ferdinand and Isabelle, carved within 3 years of the event, a late 15th/ early 16th c. cerrule chair, a 16th c. ambrey cupboard, and a 15th c. French door. None of the pieces I touched was of 'rough' workmanship (excluding the door), and all were relatively smooth to the touch. Every one of them had the uneveness on the surface charachteristic of a planed surface that had not been sanded. The door was unfinished, the other pieces had a finish charactaristic of a boiled linseed oil finish. One piece had traces of paint. The Master Joiner/Cabinetmaker told me that linseed oil was the normal finish on a bare wood surface that would be finished, and that paint on furniture was typicaly egg tempera until the 17th c.

I think the cupboard panel detail shows best both the quality of carving contrasted with the finish of the plain surface. The ironwork is missing so the bits underneath will be less worn.

on the subject of "rough" finishing in the middle ages.

I have heard this arguement from many craftsmen playing with medieval techniques but personally I find it hard to believe for several reasons....

1. it is VERY possible to get a mirror surface with nothing more than a hand plane.(I've done it myself, on my never ending clampboard chest project ). we have numerous pictures of Joseph in his workshop using or being surrounded by handplanes.
2. period art books like Cennini give recipes for varnish (and they're not unsimilar to some of the commerical preparations available today)
3. the extant examples are half a millenium old and so I am hesitant to use their current condition as proof of their original appearance
4. I have heard this arguement many times, but its usually attatched to the sentiment that since medieval artisans are so "primitive" theres no way for them to have made things as "good" as we do today

Remember that in medieval times, labor was cheap. materials were expensive. its nothing to have your apprenti plane a board over and over and over to get it smooth as silk. I cant believe that the medieval asthetic was to leave wood rough and snaggy, so working it was painful to the artisan as well as painful to the person using it, as they get stuck with splinters, it shreds your sheets and coverlets, harbors insects, etc.

More likely the extant examples we see now were originally painted, and that paint has worn away with the years, leaving a pitted and rough surface.

at least that's MY theory

That some work was left very rough I hope I have proved with two of my references, to the chest in catalog # 298 which has the saw marks on the boards (notably, the catalog says from the dimensions it was probably intended to be portable), and to catalog # 299 which was made from riven boards (also thought to have been intended for travel from it's size).

Even Daniel Dhiel managed to locate a hewn timber chest (and this is really rough styled workmanship) in the possesion of Hereford Cathederal dated to the 15th c. which he thoughtfully provides a colour photo of in his second "book" on Medieval furniture (and I don't reference his books as I question their scholarship). This is the type of 'furniture' that is apparently designed with travel in mind that would have most likely been carried on campaign - not a carved 8'Flemish settle of Oak or Elm.

I would be the last person to argue that Medieval woodworking skills were "primitive".Their carving was wonderful. Their joinerey was primitive by all surviving evidence, with butt joined boards and rabbit joins being most common, and mortise & tennoning being near the hieght of the technology of joinery on surviving pieces. Yes, a primitive dovetail join does exist on a single surviving Medieval chest that I am aware of, but that is so far off the bellcurve as to be on the order of the Trebon alterpiece's painting of the hinged bargrille on a bascinet.

I think the thing to keep in mind is that as a rule furniture did not play as important a role in peoples lives as it did later.A Medieval person would probably find our dwellings cluttered when it came to furniture - plenty of documentation in the form of wills and inventories shows the ammount of furniture common (and it's less than we have on average now). The most important pieces being beds of state, chairs of state, elaborate cuboards to display plate, and elaborate settles in places of prominence in important households - all designed to impress the visitor with a persons wealth and station. Most peoples most important furniture consisted of chests to put things in, and a bed to sleep on. Benches and forms were the most common seating arrangement for most people, and most tables were trestles and boards, and were not designed to be 'dormant'.

Yes, a very nice finish can be gotten by repeatedly planing a board. I have provided you with examples where toolmarks are visible. Perhaps varnish is a common phenomenon on furniture in Southern Europe, but I am under the impression that linseed oil was the norm on furniture in Northern Europe. I was assured that this was the case on late 16th & early 17th c. furniture by the Master Joiner at Plimoth, and he is expert on that period of furniture.

From surviving pieces of furniture, it can be argued successfuly the mirror surface was not the norm. I belive it could be argued that a rougher finish was the norm on furniture designed to be lugged around out of doors on campaign.

"'and many pieces (certainly those dragged on campign)would have no finish at all."
So they take those bleeding big tents, fancy carpets, glorious (and expensive!) armour, "sylver pyssing baysn", robes lined with leopard, etc. on campaign.... and cheapo chests with no finish? Sorry my friend, you'll have to do better than that.

"Mirror smooth surfaces and stains & varnishes on furniture are the hallmark of the late 17th c. and beyond.'
I think I know what you meant by this, and if so I would hazard to say that those finishes are generally a product of the 18thC., not as early as the 17th. I think you are referring to the glass-like finishes seen on Regency and Colonial furniture and beyond. I think you're right in what you say, if that was your meaning.

Mostly, I was challenging your tone of absolute and complete knowledge of what was done in all cases. There is so much that we have no idea about, that I can't let a statement like "THEY ALWAYS DID THIS THIS WAY" go unchallenged.

I like your examples, but you've just proved that painted finishes existed in the 13th C., and with all that carving, I'd hazard a guess that that chest had a pretty nice finish on it when it was new. Probably not glassy, but pretty slick. I love to look at the furniture in the Met, and am always amazed by the beautiful finish on the Italian cassone.

If you've ever seen the inlaid panels from the Montefeltro studiolo, you just wouldn't believe the craftsmanship and the fine finish.

I did not say "they always did it this way", I said "surviving medieval furniture has at best...". Perhaps I should have said Surviving Northern European furniture....

I'd like someone to show me the documentation for a stained & varnished piece of hardwood furniture from Northern Europe pre 1700 where they can document that as the original finish.

The carving and inlaying of Medieval furniture and woodwork in general is lovely. For someone used to seeing 18th c. Queen Anne and Chippendale furniture up close all the time in comparison it is heavy, clunky,uneven in surface and poorly joined. That does not mean I love it any the less, just that the woodworkers who know me think I'm completely nuts to want to emulate the form and copy pieces - something I have not been able to do for the past few years since I no longer have access to a workshop and I live in a glorified shoebox. Pieter has the space and is slowly accumulating tools so we should be able to rectify that by this summer.

Keep in mind most of those wonderful 15th c. paintings from the lowlands are painted smack on a couple of poorly joined, rough, gessoed boards. I am of the opinion that while the ability to carve and inlay was highly developed amongst Medieval craftsmen, cabinetmaking and joinery was a skill in it's infancy (childhood anyway), and the majority of surviving pieces show this.

Other than two beds, what other "furniture" did John Howard take? You will find some reference to various boxes or chests - there are no references to livery cupboards or chairs of state. The majority of chests designed to be portable show comparitavely rough workmanship - if you like, I can count the number in the V&A catalog & compare. Lest we forget, barrels were a more popular method of transport than chests according to inventories I've seen - perhaps Peder can give us a few examples as he has access to all those lovely books... .

I've seen evidence presented for slats of various forms for the 15th C. and evidence for ropes earlier and later, but not 15thC. As for canvas, I've not seen anything that suggests canvas slings were used at all.

hey from AM
I know its not a bed, but theres a great example of a medieval music stand of iron that uses tablet woven bands as the support for the book. I grant you fully that I dont know if those are original (and I doubt it). to further compound the issue, a suspiciously similar music stand is redrawn in Viollet le Ducs book on medieval architechture (about 1850) and is shown with a solid piece of fabric, not bands.

aint I helpful?

I have a wooden bench that I finsihed with only wood scrapers and linseed oil. After curing, the linseed oil has dried to a hard, shiney surface (that's also very water resistant. yay!). The matching bench that I finsihed at the same time has worn off most of the finish (I only tend to use one) and looks pretty scruffy.

one also wonders if the addition of beeswax either as a finish in iteslf or added to the linseed oil would yield even shinier finish?

this is a very useful discussion to me...I want to make sure I finish my #$% clampfront chest appropriately. I have already planed the boards, and am using hide glue, as well as cutting all the mortice and tenon joints with chisels. I'd hate to use the wrong stuff at the end after all that!

I know its not a bed, but theres a great example of a medieval music stand of iron that uses tablet woven bands as the support for the book. I grant you fully that I dont know if those are original (and I doubt it).

This reminds me of something I saw in Florence a few years ago, in an antique shop window: a wrought-iron folding x-frame stool with a few tattered strips of woven webbing forming the seat. The strips were about 3"wide, coarsely woven, and stitched together along their edges to form a continuous seat stretcher. I'm not sure if the web was card-woven or heddle-woven, but it resembled the web reinforecment I examined on the 17th century pavillion pitched at the Graz exhibit in Ottawa, and also looked a lot like the paintings of saddle-girth webbing as seen, for instance, in Uccello's Bettle of San Romano pictures.

I don't know if the seat of the stool was original, either, but we're seeing a pattern develop here...

OK, many of you disagree with me about late medieval furniture finish and thats alright. I may be dead wrong as I am not an expert, but further research into this would be interesting, if I am proved wrong then I will be learning alongside you as well. Can you back up your belief with documentation? I was able to scrounge some up - how about you?

Since the topic is portable beds, we can start there. I think we should broaden it to include furniture obviously designed to be portable, not dormant, as that is the sort of furniture that would be lugged on campaign. This leaves out church pews, cupboards, whopping big beds on platforms, those large desk/reading stands, and oversized chests used to keep church vestements. Oh yes, lets keep the dates from 1300 - 1500 and the region of origen being England, France, and Flanders. This way we will all be comparing oranges with oranges.

AM, out of curiosity, what type of wood are you making your chests and benches out of? Jeff J., the question for you is can you document cabinet scrapers to the 14th & 15th c.?

Ladies & Gentlemen, you may start your engines....

I used a combination of boiled linseed oil brushed on and wiped off after 5 - 10 minutes, 2 or 3 times. I then used a double-boiler (5 gal. of water with coffee can inside) to melt beeswax in the boiled linseed oil. This brushes on smooth but gels up quickly and is very messy. Elbow grease (friction) melts the wax into the wood leaving a shiny, water repellent finish equal to any of the "poly"-type varnishes.
I used to use tung oil, which is "period" so to speak, but was Asian in origion and therefore inappropriate. It worked equally well as the boiled linseed oil. Floor wax works as a cleaner and convenient resealer.

cool!
I know IKEA of all places sells a "beeswax" finish that is basically a petroleum oil of some kind and beeswax. It makes a quick, convenient finish that with curing dries to hard and waterresistant.

I'd really like to finish my box with appropriate stuff, and so am hunting through the period how to books to find some fun treatment. Its been pointed out that most of the extant examples of similar chests to mine show signgs of being painted originally, but its a shame to cover up that beautiful vertical sawn white oak (I know, I know, not a very medieval mindset.....)

Bob, can you send me SIMPLE instructions on how to post pictures? I'll try and track down some of my box pictures and put them here....

To post images, you first have to have a directory on a webhost, maybe the server your group's page is on.

Upload your images to that directory then you can link 2 ways, one with images, the other with the URL.

"[" img "]" (remove the quotes); type url here "[" "/" "img" "]" remove quotes.

The above will display the image. To just establish a link...

"[" url "]" type in full image address "[" "/" url "]"

Once again, take out the quotes. If you click the "*UBB Code is ON" link to the left of you text window, it will show you the syntax of how to post images.

Hope this helps, Jenn

We now return you to our regularly scheduled topic.

OH, if you all want to talk about historical finishes on furniture, portable or otherwise, you might want to start a thread that addresses that issue specifically.

Do not despair regarding painting your chest. The examples with traces of paint in the V&A have the paint on details - refer to the chest with rondels quoted above. The only traces of paint on it are on the rondels, and traces would be left where the boards are joined if these had been painted as well.

I was told by the Master Joiner at Plimoth that this was a practise prevalant until the last quarter of the 16th c.. Tastes changed in the 17th c. He produces a dozen pieces a year on average, and the pieces he produces are copies of "hierloom" high grade furniture that would have been for middle class consumption. The pieces he copies date from the mid to late 16th c - a generation or so from before the founding of the colony - what the pilgrims brought with them as their most valuable household objects - copies of pieces in extant in private families possesions or owned by the historical society.

These chests and cupboards are all made of quarter-sawn oak (they saw the boards in a sawing pit on site - it takes them about ten days to saw all the boards out of a log). They are of panel construction, and like the originals examined, they are painted. The paint however does not cover the whole piece, but highlights details like the moulding around a panel. They raffel off a piece every year - I ought to go down and enter! Thgey sell pieces (commission bespoke pieces actually) commercially, but the cost is staggering (this coming from someone who doesn't blink at ordering high grade harness).

He also produces turned furniture (on a tradle powered pole last!) of a style in use from the 13th - 17th c. - stools and chairs, bulky things though and ungainly looking.

Anyhow, I have some better reference material on the subject on order. I'll post what is said on the subject of finish as soon as I have them in hand.

Maybe we ought to start a topic dealing specificly with furniture finish?