Transcriber's Note:
This text contains two books which were bound in a single volume:
"Armour in England" and "Foreign Armour in England", both by
J. Starkie Gardner.
Every effort has been made to replicate this text as faithfully as
possible, including inconsistent hyphenation. The tables of
contents were created by the transcriber.
In the first book, Sir Noël Paton's Christian name was spelled
"Noel"; this has been retained.
On page 47, in the sentence starting
"A little later, as at the battle of Montlhéry,"
"Montlhéry" is a correction of "Montlhery".
Italic text has been marked with _underscores_.
Letters preceded by carets appeared as superscipts.
OE ligatures have been expanded.
[Illustration: PLATE I.--Full suit of armour of Henry, Prince of
Wales, in the guard-chamber at Windsor Castle. Attributed to William
Pickering, master armourer.]
ARMOUR IN ENGLAND
FROM THE EARLIEST TIMES
TO THE REIGN OF JAMES THE FIRST
_By_
J. STARKIE GARDNER
[Illustration]
LONDON
SEELEY AND CO. LIMITED, GREAT RUSSELL STREET
NEW YORK: THE MACMILLAN COMPANY
1897
CONTENTS
PAGE
I. The Britons--An Early Age of Plate-Armour 5
II. The Mailed Warrior 9
III. The Transition Period--From about the Reign of Edward I.
to that of Richard II., 1272-1399 27
IV. The Age of Plate-Armour 45
V. The Age of Enriched Armour 78
INDEX 99
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
_COLOURED PLATES_ PAGE
I. Full suit of armour of Henry, Prince of Wales, in the
Guard-chamber at Windsor Castle. Attributed to
William Pickering, master-armourer _Frontispiece_
II. Second suit of Sir Henry Lee, Master of the Armoury,
reduced facsimile of No. 19 in the Armourers' Album in
the South Kensington Museum 28
III. First suit of Sir Christopher Hatton, Captain of the
Guard, and subsequently Lord Chancellor. Reduced
facsimile of No. 15 in the Armourers' Album in the
South Kensington Museum 40
IV. Grand-guard of the suit of George, Earl of Cumberland, in
the possession of Lord Hothfield. This is a part of the
20th suit in the Armourers' Album in the South
Kensington Museum 46
V. Grand-guard, used for tilting, belonging to the suit of
Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester, with the gilding
restored. In the Tower of London 58
VI. Profile of the helmet belonging to the French suit
(Fig. 32). In the Guard-chamber of Windsor Castle 76
VII. Ornament on the tapul of the breastplate belonging to the
half-suit of the Earl of Essex (Fig. 35), with the
original gilding slightly restored. In the
Guard-chamber of Windsor Castle 90
VIII. The sword of Charles I. when Prince of Wales, 1616. The
hilt entirely covered with raised gold damascened work
on blue steel matrix, except the grip of silver wire
work. Preserved in Windsor Castle 96
_ILLUSTRATIONS IN THE TEXT_
1. Hauberk, or byrnie, of chain-mail, of the fourth or fifth
century, found at Vimose 11
2. Norman knights in mail hauberks and conical helmets 13
3. A complete suit of mail, with coif and mufflers; A
thirteenth-century suit, with reinforcing plates 17
4. Mail coif, flat-topped, with leather thong 19
5. Mail coif, round-topped, with jewelled fillet 19
6. Mail coif, conical top, with coronet and mantelet 19
7. Helmet of bronze and iron, from County Down 21
8. Illustration of the development of plate-armour 23
9. The sleeping guards, from the Easter Sepulchre in Lincoln
Cathedral 25
10. Melée. From MS. of the fourteenth century 29
11. The helm and crest of the Black Prince, with his shield,
from his monument in Canterbury Cathedral 31
12. The helm of Richard Pembridge, K.G., from Hereford Cathedral 32
13. Bassinet from the tomb of Sir John de Melsa, Aldborough
Church, Holderness 32
14. A bassinet transformed into a sallad in the fifteenth century 33
15. A ridged bassinet with banded camail; Combed and jewelled
bassinet 35
16. Effigy of the Black Prince on his tomb in Canterbury
Cathedral 37
17. Gauntlet from the effigy of Ralph Neville, Earl of
Westmoreland, in Staindrop Church, Durham; Gauntlet from
the effigy of Sir Thomas Cawne, Ightham Church, Kent 41
18. Helm from the tomb of Henry V. in Westminster Abbey 48
19. Effigy of Richard Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick, on his tomb
in St. Mary's Church, Warwick 53
20. The Earl of Warwick slays a "mighty Duke." From the
Beauchamp MS. 55
21. The Duke of Gloucester and Earls of Warwick and Stafford
chase the Duke of Burgundy from the walls of Calais. From
the Beauchamp MS. 57
22. Sallad in St. Mary's Hall, Coventry; Helm of Sir Giles Capel 59
23. English tournament helm over the tomb of John Beaufort,
Duke of Somerset, in Wimborne Minster 60
24. Helm of Sir John Gostwick, in Willington Church 61
25. The entry of Queen Isabel into Paris in 1390. From MS.
of Froissart 63
26. Armet of Sir George Brooke, K.G., 8th Lord Cobham 65
27. English armet from the collection of Seymour Lucas, A.R.A. 65
28. Complete suit for fighting on foot, made for Henry VIII. 67
29. Suit made for Henry VIII. by Conrad Seusenhofer of
Innsbrück, 1511-1514 71
30. Part of a suit made for Sir Christopher Hatton 79
31. Armour of Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester, 1566-1588 83
32. A suit of French armour, early seventeenth century 87
33. Italian suit of blued and gilded steel covered with appliqués
of gold 89
34. A part of the ornament of the Italian suit (Fig. 33),
drawn real size 91
35. Demi-suit of the Earl of Essex, with closed helmet,
magnificently engraved and gilt 93
36. Sword, probably of James I., with basket hilt, entirely
covered with raised gold damascening 95
37. The sword of John Hampden, with hilt of carved steel 97
ARMOUR IN ENGLAND
I
_The Britons--An Early Age of Plate-Armour_
It is the nature of islands to exhibit some peculiarities in their
fauna and flora, and this insularity is no less pronounced in the
manners and customs of the human beings inhabiting them. Thus even the
stone implements of Britain of remote prehistoric days can readily be
distinguished by the expert; and we have the authority of Sir John
Evans for regarding our types of bronze celts and weapons as both
peculiar and indigenous. On first taking a place in history several
strange and extra-European customs were noticed in these isles by
Cæsar, such as the use of chariots in war, and dyeing the skin blue
with woad: British nations were, moreover, frequently ruled by queens,
and some practised the rare and difficult, and very far from barbaric,
art of enamelling on bronze.
Modern opinion is at present opposed to the theory that the culture
and civilisation of Western Europe originated exclusively in the East,
and is inclined to regard our primitive arts and crafts as indigenous.
That this must in a large measure be true appears sufficiently
established; but the large and excellently-made bronze bucklers with
concentric rings of bosses or studs, called the clypeus, the singular
art of enamelling, the use of studs of coral for embellishing weapons
and trinkets, the chariots of war and the government by women, all
so remote from savagery, and so intimately connected with Eastern
civilisation, compel the belief that these isles did actually at some
distant time possess a privileged and intimate communication with the
East. The old and rooted tradition of a direct traffic in tin between
Britain and Phoenicia cannot yet in fact be safely abandoned.
These arts and practices, however, only fall within the scope of our
subject so far as they were applied to arms and weapons. One of these,
very rarely used for the embellishment of arms in later times, is that
of enamelling, a process unknown to the Romans. Philostratus, who wrote
in the third century, referring to some coloured horse-trappings,
observed, "They say that the Barbarians who live in the Ocean pour
these colours on to heated bronze, and that they adhere, become hard as
stone, and preserve the designs which are made in them." The bronze to
be enamelled was cast with the pattern upon it, and the colours used
were varied and bright, but opaque. Some brilliant horse-trappings with
purely Celtic decorations and a few sword-hilts are known, but the bulk
of cast bronze enamelled ware consisted of brooches, seal-boxes, cups,
and vases, all Romano-British in design. A much rarer enamel is found
on beaten or repoussé bronze armour. Pliny, in the Natural History,
remarks that the Gauls were in the habit of adorning their swords,
shields, and helmets with coral, but an immense demand springing up
in India, it became unprocurable. We find accordingly that resort was
had in England to enamel to reproduce the effect of the coral studs.
In the British Museum is an oblong shield of Celtic design, found in
the Witham, embellished with coral, but a smaller and handsomer shield
beside it, found in the Thames, has gold cloisonné studs of blood-red
enamel. The curious Celtic reproduction of the Roman peaked helmet,
and the horned helmet found in the Thames, both from the Meyrick
collection, are also decorated with small raised bosses cross-hatched
to retain red enamel, some of which still adheres. The horned brazen
helmet should, according to Diodorus Siculus, be a relic of, or
borrowed from, the Belgic Gauls, who inhabited so much of this part
of England. The gem-like effect of the enamelled studs, like single
drops of red on the golden bronze, must have been most refined; it is
altogether too restrained to have originated with the enameller, who
usually covers his surfaces. The identity of workmanship of these arms
with the Irish bronze and enamel work suggests that some of those who
produced them passed over and found with their traditions and arts a
peaceful refuge in the sister isle.
Tacitus, however, states most explicitly that the Britons wore neither
helmets nor armour, and were not able, therefore, under Caractacus, to
maintain their resistance. Herodianus also, relating the expedition of
Severus 250 years after Cæsar's invasion, presents an extraordinary
picture of savagery. He observes that the Britons were a most warlike
and sanguinary race, carrying only a small shield and a spear, and a
sword girded to their naked bodies. "Of a breastplate or helmet they
knew not the use, esteeming them an impediment through the marshes."
They encircled their necks and loins with iron rings as an evidence of
wealth, instead of gold, and went naked rather than conceal the tattoos
of different animals which covered and gave a blue cast to their bodies.
In striking contrast to this picture are the large number of chariots
employed in war and the extraordinary skill displayed in handling
them. Cæsar states that Cassivelaunus, when totally defeated and a
fugitive, was still accompanied by 4000 charioteers; the basis probably
of Pomponius Mela's later statement that 4000 two-horsed chariots
armed with scythes formed part of that chieftain's army. Having proved
ineffectual against Roman discipline, this arm was perhaps soon
abandoned, since we find little further mention of war-chariots, though
cavalry did not cease to form part of a British army. In process of
time the subjugated Britons must have become completely Romanised as to
arms, and accustomed to wear the helmet, greaves, and corselet, either
of one piece or formed of smaller and more flexible plates or scales.
Though the manhood of the country enrolled in disciplined cohorts and
legions had deserted it, Roman weapons must have been the arms of those
who remained when the Romans finally retired from Britain in 410.
In the two succeeding centuries, which were to elapse before the
country definitely inclined to become English, an intensely Celtic
feeling, embodied in the legends of King Arthur and wholly opposed to
Roman ideas, had time to spring up. Judged by their ornament, it is
to this period that most of the bronze enamelled arms and trappings
in the British Museum belong. The golden corselet found in a barrow
in Flint, together with many traditions of the finding of golden
armour, such as the helmet of pure gold set with gems found in a bronze
vase and presented to Katharine of Arragon, suggest the idea that
serviceable qualities became sacrificed to a love of display. At this
time it is said the Britons, in obsolete and fantastic panoply, bore an
evil reputation, as being vain and fruitful in menaces, but slow and
little to be feared in action. Their frightfully demoralised state,
if not greatly overdrawn by Gildas, called for a day of reckoning and
the condign, almost exterminating, punishment which overtook them.
The agents destined to execute the vengeance of Providence were the
Frisian pirates, the scourge of the Channel, who had with difficulty
been kept in awe by the most powerful Roman fleets. The country,
left to the divided rule of clergy, nobles, and municipalities, and
described as "glittering with the multitude of cities built by the
Romans," presented a tempting and easy prey to these professors of
rapine. They were Teutons, who relied mainly on the Fram or spear-like
javelin, as when Tacitus described them, and still carried the round
gaudily-painted buckler, though then strengthened with an iron umbo
and rim. Their weapons had been perfected in a long series of grim
experiences in actual war, and they had added to their equipment a
sword and dagger, and some kind of simple headpiece. That they had
adopted any complete defence of plate-armour in the Roman fashion
is improbable, but they were apparently entirely unacquainted with
chain-mail. In the history of armour in Britain this period, taken as a
whole, can only be regarded as a very primitive age of plate. To be an
efficient protection plate-armour must, however, be of an intolerable
weight, at least to men on foot, making celerity of movement
impossible. We cannot close the chapter better than by instancing the
dreadful fate of the Æduan Crupellarians, related by Tacitus, who
clothed themselves in unwieldy iron plate, impenetrable to sword and
javelin. Though the main army was overthrown, these kept their ranks as
if rooted to the ground, until, fallen upon with hatchets and pickaxes,
armour and men were crushed together and left on the ground an
inanimate mass. This lesson was not forgotten by the nations of Europe
who fought on foot with Rome, and no such use of body-armour among them
is again recorded.
II
_The Mailed Warrior_
The appearance of the mail-clad warrior opens up an entirely new era in
the history of European armour. The light plate defences worn by the
Mediterranean nations, whether Greeks, Etruscans, or Romans, were never
calculated to secure immunity from wounds; and as a fighting equipment
they went down before mail, as stone before bronze, or bronze before
iron. Chain-mail body-armour is distinctly represented on the Trajan
column, and wherever worn, whether by the Scythian, the Parthian who
was armoured down to his horse's hoofs, or the dreaded Sassanian horse,
it seems to have flashed like a beacon of victory, and its wearers ever
appear in history as Rome's most dreaded and formidable foes.
The Scandinavian also, isolated so long and unknown in history,
suddenly burst upon Europe as a new and even more redoubtable mail-clad
warrior. How so remote a people became acquainted with chain-mail can
only be surmised, but it was perhaps through some Scythian channel
not open to Western Europe. That the ravaging Viking landed on our
shores equipped in mail, the "war nets" of Beowulf, "woven by the
smiths, hand-locked, and riveted"; "shining over the waters" or in "the
ranks of battle," is sufficiently recorded by the Chroniclers. Shirts
of mail, called "byrnies," attributed to even the fourth and fifth
centuries, are found in Danish peat-bogs fashioned of rings welded
and riveted in alternate rows as neatly and skilfully as can possibly
be, and all made by the hammer, if it be a fact that wire-drawing was
not invented till nearly a thousand years later. The almost perfect
specimen we figure, one-tenth the natural size, was found at Vimose,
with portions of others. Some have also been found at Thorsberg, and
in a burial-place of Roman age in Jutland.
Besides the mail defence, the Danes were armed with a shield, an iron
cap, lance, axe, and sword. Thus equipped they proved for a long time
almost irresistible, and ventured on the most dangerous and desperate
undertakings. When we reflect on their adventurous voyages, the
reckless attacks on powerful nations made by mere handfuls of men, and
the gallant pertinacity they at all times displayed, it is impossible
not to admire their exalted courage. It is easy to detect a rugged
poetry, almost chivalry of a kind, underlying the Viking nature,
in spite of ruthless cruelty, while the exaltation of deceit when
practised on an enemy into a virtue is but a germ of modern statecraft.
Their lives depending at every moment on the quality of their weapons
caused these to be invested, particularly the sword, with a mystic
glamour, which scarcely died out with chivalry itself, and lingers even
yet in the more important functions of state. The chieftain's sword was
in fact his inseparable companion, known and endeared to his followers
by a name symbolic of the havoc they had seen it wreak upon the enemy,
and its fame in sagas was as undying as its owner's. Tradition elevated
the maker of the sword of Odin, a smith, we must believe, who forged
swords of uncommon excellence, into a demigod; and has handed down the
story of how he made a blade called Mimung so keenly tempered that when
challenged to try conclusions with one Amilias, a rival, it sliced him
so cleanly in two as he sat in his armour, that the cut only became
apparent when, as he rose to shake himself, he fell dead in two halves.
The name of this prince of craftsmen yet lives in the mysterious
Wayland Smith of English folklore. Another vaunting smith Mimer was
slain by the sword Grauer wielded by Sigurd; and the sword Hrunting
is made famous by its owner Beowulf, the father of English lyrics. A
Danish sword in the British Museum is inscribed in runes Ægenkoera,
the awe-inspirer. From the Danes the exaltation of the sword passed to
the English, and we find Ethelwulf, Alfred, and Athelstan bequeathing
their swords by will as most precious possessions, equivalent to a
brother's or sister's portion. Thence it passed, in legend at least,
to the Britons, King Arthur's sword Calibon, or Excalibur, presented
ultimately by Richard I. to Tancred when in Sicily, being almost as
famous as Arthur himself. Even Cæsar is provided by history with a
sword named "Crocea mors," captured from him in combat by our valiant
countryman Nennius. The hilts of the Danish swords are described in the
_Edda_ as of gold, and Beowulf speaks of hilts that were treasures of
gold and jewels. Canute's huiscarles and Earl Godwin's crew had swords
inlaid with the precious metals, and some English swords were valued at
eighty mancuses of gold.
[Illustration: FIG. 1.--_Hauberk, or byrnie, of chain-mail, of the
fourth or fifth century, found at Vimose, one-tenth of the real size;
and part of another, full size, from Thorsberg. From "Danish Arts,"
published for the Science and Art Department_.]
The origin of the remarkable veneration for arms and armour, so
apparent in the history of chivalry, is thus traced to wearers of
mail, the first figures also to appear in something like what we
regard as knightly equipment. The dress of Magnus Barefoot, described
in 1093, differed probably but little from that of his predecessors,
and consisted of helmet, a red shield with a golden lion, his sword
called Leg-biter, a battle-axe, and a coat-of-mail, over which he wore
a red silk tunic with a yellow lion.
The wearing of armour, particularly mail, on land, necessitated riding,
and the northern rovers, finding the weight intolerable on their
inland forays, took to horse whenever possible, harrying by this means
an extent of country otherwise almost inaccessible. They even learnt
in time to transport their horses over the sea, and in the ninth and
tenth centuries landed in England from France as a mounted force, as
their descendants after them did at Hastings. The English, on the
other hand, rarely wore mail, though the spoils of the Danes might
have furnished a fair supply, and they only used cavalry as a small
force for scouting. An English king of the eighth century is, however,
represented in mail by Strutt, and Harold and his immediate companions
may have worn mail at Hastings, as represented in the Bayeux tapestry,
and as he certainly did when assisting William in his war against Conan
of Brittany. Handsome presents of Norman arms and armour were then made
to him by Duke William. A little later we have the curious testimony of
Anna Comnena, 1083-1146, that this mail, made entirely of steel rings
riveted together, was wholly unknown in Byzantium, and only worn by the
inhabitants of Northern Europe.
The definite conversion of the Northmen from sea-rovers to mounted
men-at-arms when they settled in Normandy enabled them to lengthen
their coats-of-mail, as well as their shields, lances, and swords, and
to adopt many French manners and customs. But in facing the infantry
wedge at Hastings, the time-honoured fighting formation of Teutonic
stocks from the days of Tacitus, they did not disdain to fall back
on the old Viking tactics of a pretended flight and rally, practised
already by them during two centuries of warfare in England. That the
English should have allowed their impenetrable ranks to be broken by so
threadbare a stratagem is indeed extraordinary.
[Illustration: FIG. 2.--_Norman knights in mail hauberks and conical
helmets. From the Bayeux Tapestry._]
The Norman Conquest introduced into England a permanent mail-clad
cavalry as the chief strength of the battle, as in France, and
infantry was discredited until the disputes of the sons of the
Conqueror led once more to an English infantry force taking the
field. The mail coat of the cavalry had in the meantime been further
lengthened, and changed into a complete sheathing of steel by the
addition of long sleeves and mufflers falling over the hands; leggings
covering the thighs, shins, and feet; and a capuchin-like hood only
leaving the eyes and nose exposed, but which could be thrown back. Thus
enveloped, with a thickly-padded garment under the mail, a conical or
flat-topped steel helmet, a large kite-shaped shield, and long-reaching
weapons, he had little to fear when opposed to light-armed cavalry or
infantry. The mail and helmets were always kept bright, as we know,
but Anna Comnena adds that even the shields of steel and brass were so
brightly polished as to dazzle beholders. Combined with the pennons and
banners of various forms, with their glittering emblazonry, the massed
men-at-arms of that day must have presented a magnificent spectacle,
as the Chroniclers so frequently remind us. The coat-of-mail remained
with but trifling variations the chief knightly defence until the
close of the thirteenth century, and the protection it afforded was
so complete that of 900 combatants who once entered battle in steel
armour but three were slain. At Joppa in 1192, during a battle lasting
from the rising to the setting sun, only three were killed on the side
of the Crusaders; at the battle of Lincoln only three, at Evesham
(1260) one knight and two esquires, at Falkirk (1295) but one knight
and thirty foot on the winning side. These somewhat random examples
seem fairly to represent the loss on the side of the victors, though
terrible massacres overtook the losers. The protection was such that
Saladin's bravest warriors reported our men to be impenetrable; blows,
they said, fell as if on rocks of flint, for our people were of iron
and would yield to no blows. But though so terrible on horseback,
the mailed knight, as observed by Anna Comnena, was little dangerous
when dismounted. Neither had the English failed to observe this, and
thus directed all their efforts to dismount the enemy. They had been
severely galled by the bow at Hastings, and they came to recognise it
as the one weapon likely to render them really formidable to their
Norman oppressors. Henry I. encouraged its use, and we soon find the
English arrows described as falling in battle like a shower on the
grass or as falling snow. In a skirmish at Bourgthéroude in 1124, the
first discharge brought forty horses to the ground before a stroke was
struck, and eighty men-at-arms soon fell prisoners into the victors'
hands. At the battle of the Standard, the cloud of arrows pierced the
unarmoured Scots, and chiefly contributed to the dreadful slaughter,
set down at 11,000. The effects of missile weapons were such that the
mailed period of which we are speaking saw three English kings fall
victims to the bow, while a fourth, Edward I., escaped a like fate
by a miracle. The accounts handed down of the extraordinary range
and precision attained soon afterwards by this weapon appear wholly
incredible in the light of modern toxophilite displays.
The cross-bow was an even more powerful weapon, whose use had been
forbidden in war, but allowed by the Pope to the Crusaders in 1139.
Richard I. appears to have introduced it into the English army, which
became so expert in its use that in some of the sieges conducted
during the twelfth and thirteenth centuries the enemies' walls could
not be manned. It is related of Richard, both at the sieges of Acre
and Nottingham, that he himself slew men with this weapon. The
numbers of cross-bowmen in our armies appear, however, to have been
always relatively small. King John, with 400 knights, had but 250
cross-bowmen, used as skirmishers, keeping a mile in front of the army.
The splendid army of Edward I. assembled at Poitou (1242), numbering
1600 knights and 20,000 foot, comprised but 700. The battle of Lincoln,
however, was gained by them owing to their shot mowing down the
horses of the barons, who were rendered helpless when dismounted. The
cross-bow was at first bent by the hand and foot, but was afterwards
of steel, when it required mechanical aids to charge it. The short and
heavy bolts, called quarrels, struck with greater force than arrows,
and the knight hit full on the head or breast by one was fortunate if
only stunned. Instances are recorded of twofold mail and the quilted
coat being penetrated by them. Cross-bowmen for a long time formed
corps d'élite, the weight of the weapon and the armour causing them
to be frequently mounted, and so early as King John the mounted
"balistarii" were provided with one, two, or even three horses each,
with carts to carry the quarrels and even the cross-bows as well.
Notwithstanding superior accuracy in aim and penetrating power, it fell
into disuse in England soon after the close of the thirteenth century,
owing to its heavy weight and liability to damage by wet, and above
all, on account of the greater rapidity with which arrows could be
discharged from the longbow,--in a ratio of something like ten to one.
Nothing is more constantly met with in chronicles than accounts of the
destructive effects of missiles, whether from bow or cross-bow, upon
the horses of mounted combatants; yet, apart from the poetic fancy of
Wace, who mounts Fitz-Osbert on an iron-clad steed at Hastings, the
first mention of horse-armour at all connected with English history is
at the battle of Gisors in 1198, when Richard I. speaks of the capture
of 140 sets in terms which plainly show that he then met with it for
the first time. It has, however, been concluded, from the absence of
any mention of horse-armour in English statutes until 1298, that it was
unknown here till the close of the thirteenth century. At this time a
man-at-arms in France received half as much again in pay if his horse
was armoured, and in 1303 every man with an estate of 500 livres was
bound to provide horse-armour. A mailed horse appears in the effigy
of Sir Robert de Shirland in Sheppey, and a fine figure of a steed
completely clad in mail is among the figures of _The Painted Chamber_,
published by the Society of Antiquaries.
The English custom of fighting on foot, it is almost needless to add,
had been adopted by the Danish and even the Norman settlers here, and
during the civil wars of Henry I., Stephen, and Henry II., the leaders
on both sides, including the kings in person, fought their battles
dismounted, rendering horse-armour of relatively small importance.
A permanent force was raised by a law of Henry II. in 1181, compelling
every burgess or freeman to possess an iron headpiece, a lance, and
either a mail hauberk or a gambeson, according to his means: and this
was supplemented by the addition, under Henry III. in 1253, of swords
and knives to the infantry equipment, and the calling up of a reserve
of those possessed of less than 40s. of land, armed with scythes,
long-handled axes, knives, and other rustic weapons. Soon afterwards a
wild Welsh and Cornish infantry was enrolled, and we hear of lagers and
intrenchments, and in 1302 one of the first really crushing defeats is
inflicted on chivalry at the hands of burghers by the men of Bruges,
who slew forty counts and barons at Cambray.
This extensive arming of the population led to the formation of bands
of outlaws, who devastated the country, something in the manner of the
free-companies of France at a later time. A young man named William,
declining to acknowledge Lewis of France in 1216, drew together a
thousand bowmen and conducted a guerilla warfare in the forests
of Sussex. The still more renowned Adam Gordon infested the woody
country between Wilts and Hants until Prince Edward at last, about
1267, overcame him in single combat. The ancient Ballads abound with
instances of such exploits, which are embodied in the romance of Robin
Hood.
A contemporary of Richard I. describes the equipment of an English
foot-soldier as consisting of an iron headpiece, a coif and
coat-of-mail, and "a tissue of many folds of linen, difficult of
penetration and artificially worked with the needle, vulgarly called
a pourpoint." He was taught to receive cavalry with the right knee on
the ground, the left leg bent, the shield in the left hand and the butt
of the lance in the ground with the point to the enemy. Between every
two lances was a cross-bowman with a rear rank to load while the front
shot. Against this formation the Moslem cavalry's "surging charges
foamed themselves away," and as at Waterloo, the retreating squadrons
were charged again and again by our heavy-armed horse. On the other
hand, the same tactics, when employed against forces largely composed
of English archers, were unsuccessful; thus the Welsh in 1295 set their
long spears on the ground with points towards the cavalry, but the Earl
of Warwick placed an archer between every two horsemen and routed them.
Wallace's massed pikemen, three years later, were broken by Edward's
archers and military engines, and routed by the men-at-arms, who dashed
into the openings.
[Illustration: FIG. 3.
1. A complete suit of mail, with coif and mufflers, late twelfth
century, said to have been found in a coffin in Goring Church.
2. A thirteenth-century suit, with reinforcing plates, said to have
been found with the other.]
It does not appear that any special study of mail has been undertaken,
or that any good collection of mail has been formed, nor have the many
varieties been arranged chronologically in the order in which they
appeared. Materials for such a study exist, though not very abundantly,
in the Tower, the British Museum, the collection at Woolwich and Dover
Castle, the Armourers' Hall, Warwick Castle, Parham, and in other
private collections, and from these and the effigies of mailed knights
it can be seen that an almost endless variety exists, not only in the
sizes of the links, which vary from 1/6 to 3/4 of an inch in diameter,
but in the sections of the wire used, which may be round, flat,
triangular, trapeziform, quadrate, polygonal, etc. Nor is there less
diversity in the method of closing the rings, which was accomplished
either by welding, single or double riveting, with a flattening and
more or less overlapping of the links, soldering or merely butting.
Again, there are many ways of arranging the links, producing mail
of very different weights, either double or single, as well as mail
in which certain parts are stronger than the rest. In European mail
four links are usually made to pass through a centre one, though this
is not an invariable rule. The statement in Beckman's _History of
Inventions_, that wire-drawing was invented in the fourteenth century,
was held for a long time to furnish a safe date, but two Corporations
of wire-drawers occur in Etienne Boileau's _Paris Livres des Mestiers_,
in the middle of the thirteenth century, and the art is actually of
unknown antiquity. The mail, we read, was kept bright by barreling, but
does not appear to have presented much scope for decoration. The _Edda_
speaks of a byrnie of gold, and there are other allusions to gilded
mail, and we find hauberks scalloped at the extremities, and finished
off with rings of brass.
Two suits of mail (see Fig. 3), illustrated in the catalogue of the
loan collection of Ironmongers' Hall in 1861, now in the possession
of Mr. J. E. Gardner, F.S.A., are formed of unriveted links, the ends
of the rings being merely butted. Their authenticity has therefore
been questioned. The description of them printed in 1861 was to the
effect that they had been found in a chest or in a vault of a church in
Oxfordshire. In the manuscript catalogue of the collection at Parham
is a note to the effect that they were found in stone coffins built
in the wall of the church at Goring, Berks, supposed to be coffins
of the Beche or De Beche family, and contained skeletons, a third
suit having been destroyed except the hood, which is now at Parham.
However this may be, the larger suit affords a good representation
of the mailed figure of the end of the twelfth, and the small one of
that of the thirteenth century, with reinforcing pieces of plate. The
possibility of their having been made for lying in state or funerals
deserves perhaps a passing note, especially in view of their respective
dimensions; and it is in any case very questionable whether the prices
paid for them would have remunerated the labour of producing forgeries.
Another hauberk of large size was found in Phoenix Park, Dublin, thirty
years ago, but a silver badge of an O'Neil found with it showed it to
have been buried not earlier than the middle of the fifteenth century.
In the thirteenth century the curious and well-known banded mail
appears on effigies and other representations, which Mr. J. G. Waller,
F.S.A., regards as caused by the passing of a leather thong through
each alternate row of rings, for the sake of extra strength. This
variety may have originated with the single thong passed through the
links of the coif over the forehead and below the knee, seen in early
effigies like that of William Longespée (Fig. 4) at Salisbury.
[Illustration: FIG. 4.--_Mail coif, flat-topped, with leather thong._
From the effigy of William Longespée, son of Henry II. by Fair
Rosamond, who died 1227. Salisbury Cathedral.]
[Illustration: FIG. 5.--_Mail coif, round-topped, with jewelled fillet._
From the effigy of Robert de Vere, Earl of Oxford, died 1221. Hatfield
Broad-Oak Church.]
[Illustration: FIG. 6.--_Mail coif, conical top, with coronet and
mantelet._
From the effigy of John of Eltham, Earl of Cornwall, died 1334.
Westminster Abbey.]
The defence of the body was for a time wholly left to the mail with
the underlying gambeson, and the shield, but the head had always
received the additional protection of a cap of steel, called the
chapelle-de-fer, worn indifferently under or over the coif of mail.
Effigies of the first half of the thirteenth century show it both round
and flat at the top (Figs. 4, 5, 6, and 7). The nasal piece associated
with the conical helm (Fig. 2) of the eleventh century tended to
disappear in the twelfth.
The fact that English armies under Richard I. were made to abandon
their ancient formation and to engage on horseback, and to rely on
the battle-axe and mace as their chief weapons, and the presence of
the large bodies of archers and arbalisters which he brought into the
field, led to the introduction, probably by Richard himself, of the
great heaume worn over the steel cap and padding, and only put on at
the moment of battle. It is first seen on Richard's second seal, and
consisted of a cylinder, usually flat-topped, with two horizontal
clefts for vision, and strengthened by bands crossing each other over
the face and top. Breathing-holes were added towards the middle of
the century, and the grated front was introduced soon after, to admit
more air. This is seen in the first seal of Henry III., and another
advance, the movable vantail, hinged at the side, in his second seal.
An oft-described specimen in the Tower weighs 13 lb. 8 oz., but is
regarded by Lord Dillon, the present Curator of the Armouries, as a
forgery. About 1270 we sometimes find it with a round top, though the
flat top did not go quite out till the beginning of the fourteenth
century. The attempts made to seize and drag it off, so often noticed
by Chroniclers, led to its being secured by a chain. The further
changes seen were improvements in the visor, giving better vision and
more air, fixing it more securely, and so transferring the weight from
the head to the shoulders, and changing the flat top to a cone, on
which blows fell with less stunning effect.
These heaumes, by concealing the face, intensified a difficulty
already felt at Hastings, when Duke William was obliged to raise his
helmet to contradict a rumour of his death. Recognition, now become
impossible, led to the use of heraldic badges, at first painted on the
helm, as they already were on the shield; and of crests, first in the
fan or peacock's feather shape, as on the second seal of Richard I.,
and afterwards to more distinctive crests and badges. The Crusading
Chroniclers relate that the crests were brilliant with jewels, and they
are represented as circled by coronets in the seals of Henry III. and
his son Edward. The heaume of St. Louis, 1249, was gilded. Richard
himself, in gala dress, on the day after his marriage with Berengaria,
is described by Vinsauf as wearing a Damascus sword with gold hilt
and silver-scaled scabbard, his saddle inlaid with precious stones,
his horse bitted with gold, and in place of the high defensive plates
before and behind in general use two little golden lions with raised
paws.
[Illustration: FIG. 7.--_Helmet of bronze and iron, from County Down.
Twelfth century._]
Next to the headpiece the most urgent necessity was to protect the
breast against the direct shock of the lance, and for this a rigid
defence was of the utmost importance. Thus a beginning was made even
during the mail period towards the introduction of plate-armour.
Jazerant and scale armour of small plates had been adopted to this end
by the Franks, and Charlemagne had introduced the classic breastplate.
Something of the kind was perhaps even known to the Viking, and by
the twelfth century Scandinavians certainly used a defence called a
briostbiorg beneath the mail, extending from the neck to the waist.
Chroniclers allude to shining breastplates long before there is the
slightest appearance of them in illustrations, though from the time
that surcoats were worn over the armour it becomes difficult to see
what is beneath. Allusion is often made to a plastron-de-fer; and in
the combat between Richard, when Earl of Poitou, and William des Barres
we read that an iron defence was worn over the breast. One of the
effigies in the Temple Church is equipped with a back and breast plate
of single plates united by straps. It is stated that the bodyguard of
Henry III., 400 strong, which fled at the battle of Lewes in 1244, wore
breastplates; and in 1277, 300 cavalry so armed were sent to Wales.
[Illustration: FIG. 8.--_Illustration of the development of
plate-armour._
1. The gambeson appearing below the chausses, but covering the
chaussons of mail, forming an extra protection to the knee. From the
effigy of Robert of Normandy.
2. The same, but apparently with an extra applied cap. From the effigy
ascribed to one of the Pembrokes in the Temple Church.
3. The quilted gambeson appearing below the chausses and drawn over
the chaussons, with the additional protection for the knee-cap of an
octagonal plate. From the effigy of Robert de Vere, Earl of Oxford.
4. The chausses and chaussons overlapping, forming a double thickness
of mail, with the addition of a quatrefoil plate over the knee-cap.
From the effigy attributed to the second Longespée at Salisbury.
5. A ridged knee-defence of cuir-bouilli or plate enveloping the knee,
over the mail. From the effigy of Robert Ros in the Temple.
6. Globose knee-cap of Aymer de Valence. Westminster Abbey.
7. Decorated knee-defence from an effigy in Whatton Church.
8. Cross-ridged knee-defence from an effigy of Robert de Bois.]
Following the head and breast, the limbs received protection from
plate-armour, the knees and shins of mounted men-at-arms being
peculiarly exposed to injury in melées with infantry, from blows of
the two-handed battle-axe and mace. Additional security was absolutely
essential against these weapons, which were introduced both for horse
and foot by Richard I., and had grown in favour ever since. These even
penetrated mail, the Irish axe in particular being reputed to cut off
limbs in spite of its protection. The Scandinavians, with their keen
military instincts, had provided themselves in the twelfth century with
knee-caps of iron attached to overalls worn over the mail. Our earlier
mailed effigies, however, show no special defence for the knee, though
the one at Salisbury, attributed by Stothard to William Longespée,
already noticed, has a stout thong passing between the links of mail
just under it. The effigy of Robert of Normandy, of which there is a
cast in the National Portrait Gallery, shows a thick overall under
the chausses of mail, and drawn over the mail chaussons at the knee
(Fig. 8, No. 1), and a similar appearance is seen in the first seal
of Richard I.; in the sleeping guards of the Easter Sepulchre at
Lincoln (Fig. 9); and other monuments of the same date. In the effigy
attributed to William, Earl of Pembroke, in the Temple, who died in
1289 (Fig. 8, No. 2), and in Stothard's drawing of the effigy at
Whitworth, an appearance of a thick cap is also to be seen, perhaps
the extremity of a padded overall overlapping the knee; and in other
examples the thick quilted gambeson leg-defence is clearly seen below
the mail, covering the knee, and in the case of De Vere, who died
1221, it has the interesting addition of an octagonal plate (Fig. 8,
No. 3), apparently of iron, over the kneecap. The effigy, called the
second Longespée, at Salisbury (Fig. 8, No. 4), about 1260, exhibits
an apparently double thickness of mail at this point, caused by the
overlapping of the chausses and chaussons, with the addition of a
circular plate with a quatrefoil upon it. Contemporary Chroniclers also
mention that greaves were worn by knights in the time of Richard I.,
though the earliest manuscript illustration of them occurs in Matthew
of Paris's _Lives of the Offas_.
The feet were cased in mail, and the spurs were simple straight spikes
or goads, perhaps worn on one heel only and called the prick-spur.
Under the early Plantagenets the point was fixed on a ball, while the
rowel spur is seen in the monument to Le Botiler of the reign of Henry
III.
Under the heroic Richard the powers of defence seem to have definitely
triumphed over those of attack. Knights sheathed in mail over quilted
work, and wearing the great battle-helm, appeared invulnerable and
able to encounter the most fearful odds, and even to rescue each other
when dismounted amidst swarming enemies. The further changes during
the mailed period were in the direction of military display, which has
always offered an attractive field. Whenever the pressure for improved
armament was relieved through the defensive equipment for the time
satisfying the wearer, whether a naked savage or well-equipped soldier,
attention was turned to the warrior's personal embellishments, partly
to gratify the wearer's vanity, partly to captivate and dazzle, but
chiefly to affright and awe the enemy. The fact that the French and
English wore the same armour and equipment, and the common occurrence
of internecine wars at this time, rendered distinguishing costumes
particularly necessary. By simply throwing away their cognisance at
the battle of Noyon, Peter de Maule and others escaped recognition and
mingled with the pursuers, while Ralph de Courci mistook the French for
his own side and was taken prisoner. Nothing but the different-coloured
crosses sewn to the garments of the French, English, and Flemish
Crusaders served to distinguish them, and white crosses alone
distinguished the party of Simon de Montfort, 1264, from their enemies.
Nothing approaching to any uniform is heard of in this age, unless when
Richard of Gloucester traversed France in 1250, with a retinue of forty
knights equipped all alike, with new harness glittering with gold, on
his visit to the Pope.
The beautifully-sculptured guards of the early fourteenth century
Easter Sepulchre in Lincoln Cathedral (Fig. 9) present fine examples
of the costume of the knight armed with the mace, sword, and shield
towards the end of the mailed period. The bassinet on the figure to the
right is particularly noteworthy.
[Illustration: FIG. 9.--_The sleeping guards, from the Easter Sepulchre
in Lincoln Cathedral._]
III
_The Transition Period--From about the Reign of Edward I. to that of
Richard II., 1272-1399_
The warrior sheathed in mail, mounted on his charger, whether pricking
alone or in troops over hill and dale, was a picturesque and portentous
figure, and when massed for battle presented an awe-inspiring sight.
The gray burnished steel, glittering in the sun or under lowering
skies, relieved by the fluttering pennons and banners and emblazoned
shields, formed a picture that the old Crusading Chroniclers loved to
dwell on, filling the imagination with those great gatherings of the
chivalry of Europe. In the days of the last of the Paladins, of Godfrey
de Bouillon and Richard Coeur de Lion, the dress of burnished mail
was the knight's especial pride, and no garment concealed it. But as
progress and love of change are universal, and the mail itself could
not well be embellished, an embroidered surcoat was worn over it in
the more degenerate days of John and his son Henry, concealing all but
the limbs and head. This garment became the vehicle for distinguishing
marks and colours, like the modern racing-jacket. A little later, when
emblazoned with heraldry, it served to distinguish the individual.
The transfer of the surcoat from under to over the mail gave rise
to the custom of concealing the steel panoply under rich materials,
which distinguished the Transition Period in armour. While it lasted
we literally and constantly meet with the "iron hand under the velvet
glove." This and the continual piling of one coat of defence upon
another, in the fruitless attempt to secure immunity for life and limb,
are the chief characteristics of the period we are now to treat.