Thank you all in advance.

Oh, assume a Burgundian encampment circa 1470, Man at Arms and family of some fair means.

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

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fire Stryker:
We use an oriental carpet with geometric designs on one half of the tent, grass or ground for the other half.

I've seen rush matts, carpets, or nothing at all.

---

You've seen them in paintings/illuminations, or used by other people at events?

If you have sources, could you share?

Will do a search through some books tonight to see if I can find the images.

For some onliners:

The Bibliothèque Nationale de France ...> go to manuscripts link
http://www.bnf.fr/enluminures/aaccueil.htm

The manuscripts are a mix of 14th and 15th century documents.

Image: no floor just regular ground. 15th Century version of Froissarts chronicles.
http://www.bnf.fr/enluminures/images/jpeg/i3_0008.jpg

Next: grass, possibly trampled.
http://www.bnf.fr/enluminures/images/jpeg/i3_0049.jpg

The following is from King Rene's book of the love smitten heart. The floor is clearly patterned. It could be artistic convention, then again it might be a floor covering.
http://home.adelphi.edu/~sbloch/sca/tents/pictures/king_rene/krtent.1.gif

You might want to check Stephen Bloch's web page on tents. I believe he is with La Bella Compagnie. He has a lot of very nice images relating to the 14th and 15th century. Well worth the look.

Hope this helps,

I would imagine that hauling a rug about would be an un-necessary weight most of the time. A ground cloth would be a different matter. However I would think that both would be un-necessary if you had a bed, and most of the pics did have a bed. Even a straw tick on the ground is good enough. I do like using a cloth at the bed for my feet, but beyond that, a complete floor in the tent probably started appearing in the 1950s or there abouts. All the military tents, I have used, never had a floor.

Interesting to see in those above pics, the furniture was a bench, bed and chest. Rarely seen are tables. Also I have never seen a cooking fly or sun shade. Would that be artistic license? Not wanting to show servants? Hunting scenes show cloths spread on the ground to place food on, and for the diners to sit on. But those are 15thc I believe. Also the chests are not footed. That is to say, raised off the ground. Footed chests seem to have been stay at home and unfooted ones travelled with, probably because they pack well with no wasted space. Though I am sure there were exceptions, but generally speaking, not footed. Yet I see alot of them used today, little cubed and footed chests, to sit on and store stuff in.

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

[ 09-02-2004: Message edited by: Martin ]

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

[ 09-02-2004: Message edited by: Martin ]

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

[ 09-02-2004: Message edited by: Martin ]

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

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peder:
So thats a good dozen of no flooring and two maybes. So you need to ask yourself two questions. Do you think you can find more than a small fraction of floor coverings vs non-floor coverings And are you trying to recreate what the evidence says or are you recreating other re-enactors.

Brent

[ 07-12-2004: Message edited by: Peder ]

[ 07-12-2004: Message edited by: Peder ]

---

Right, that was my impression of what I had seen before. I was wondering if I was missing something.

I like the idea about having a small piece of cloth to stand on to get dressed. I am sure it wasn't done, but it is something that could be easily put away.

I think we WANT to see ground coverings, but more than likely they were not used very often. I don't think our medieval counterparts had as much of an aversion to dirt as we do.

Jeff W.

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

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

Great list of images there Peder, they are much appreciated. From that group of images, it appears that the evidence points strongly towards a bare ground floor. I believe that this is the route I shall take.

Woodcrafter says:

quote:

---

I would imagine that hauling a rug about would be an un-necessary weight most of the time.

---

I’m not so sure I agree with this. It does appear that a rug was not commonly carried, however, I’m not convinced that this was due to weight. After all, we have several examples of lists of equipage that show large, heavy and/or bulky items (ie. Books, personal altars & vestments, wooden houses, etc.) being toted about. Compared to some of these items, I would not think that a small rug would be any great burden.

Edric & Peder write:

quote:

---

I like the idea about having a small piece of cloth to stand on to get dressed. I am sure it wasn't done, but it is something that could be easily put away.

---

quote:

---

Don't be so sure, if you go through the texts published with the Babees Book you'll find several references to pieces of cloth intended to be stood on when dressing or getting out of a bath. But be carefull most references to a foot-sheet are for a bed but one specifically says for being stood on. But it would still probably be put away.

---

Here’s something from the “Household accounts of Sir John Howard”:

Item, ij. grete potz of silver, a bagge with gussetz, ij. salades, a peir tabuls, a bagge with cheste men, a piece of canvas.

Seems that carrying a piece of cloth is not unreasonable at all.

Cheers,
Jon
(Edited for clarity)

[ 07-14-2004: Message edited by: Jonathan ]

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