Beneath the head-defence of chain-mail was worn a coif of softer material, to mitigate the roughness of the iron-cloth; and perhaps also to assist in protecting the head by being made of quilted-work. See our woodcut, No. 56, from a miniature given by Willemin (Monumens Inédits, j. Pl. cii.) Compare also Painted Chamber, Pl. xxxv., and Willemin, j. Pl. cxliii.
Besides the Hauberk already described, which however forms in a great majority of instances the body-armour of the knights of this time, we have several varieties of defensive equipment. The Haubergeon is still mentioned, and seems to imply, not alone the smaller hauberk of chain-mail, but sometimes a garment of inferior defence and different material. There is also a chain-mail hauberk made with sleeves which reach but little below the elbows. A good example occurs on folio 9 of Roy. MS. 12, F. xiii.; a Bestiarium. See also the figures of Virtues in Plates xxxviii. and xxxix. of the Painted Chamber.
The Gambeson or Pourpoint, or Gambesiata Lorica, as it is called in a will of the year 1286, frequently appears as forming of itself the coat of fence. It is thus noticed in the Statute of Winchester, already quoted; where, while the first class of tenants are prescribed a "hauber, chapel de feer," &c., the third class are to have "parpoint, chapel de feer, espe e cutel." Compare also the Statute of Arms of 1252. In the eighth of Edward I. we read that "Rogerus de Wanstede tenet dimid. serjantiam ibidem per servitium inveniendi unum Valectum per octo dies, sumptibus propriis, cum praepuncto, capella ferrea et lancea, custodire castrum de Portsmut tempore guerrae[332]." In the "Ordonnances sur le Commerce et les Métiers," the duties of the pourpointers of Paris at the close of this century are very exactly defined. "Se l'on fait cotes gamboisiees, que elles soient couchees deuement sur neufves estoffes, et pointees, enfermees, faites a deux fois, bien et nettement emplies, de bonnes estoffes, soient de coton ou dautres estoffes[333]." Again: "Item que nul doresenavant ne puist faire cote gamboisiee ou il n'ait trois livres de coton tout net, si elles ne sont faites en fremes, et au dessous soient faites entremains, et que il y ait un ply de vieil linge emprez l'endroit de demie aulne et demy quartier devant et autant derriere." From these enactments we see that the counterpointers of the thirteenth century were but too apt to construct their armours of unstable materials, and to stuff them with a niggard hand.
The Cuirie (Cuirena) was, as its name implies, originally a defence of leather: it was also made of cloth. It covered the body alone, requiring the addition of Brachières to complete the coat. Thus, in the Roll of Purchases made for the Windsor tournament in the sixth year of Edward I., we have: "De Milon̄. le Cuireur͂ (Milo the Currier) xxxiij. quiret͂, p'c pec̄ iij. s." Each took two ells of the cloth called Carda in its construction: "It͂ pro qualibet quirett͂ ij. uln̄ card." The sleeves appear to have been of pourpointerie: "It͂ pro xxxviij. par͂ brach͂, x. bukerann̄[334]."
An account cited by Ducange, of the date 1239, has:—"Pro hernesio suo, videlicet baccis et cuireniis suis affecturis ix. lib. v. sol. Item pro tribus baccis et tribus cuirenis ad eosdem, iv. lib. iv. sol." See the glossarists under Baca. Guiart also mentions the cuirie:—
The Cargan seems to have been a collar or tippet of chain-mail. It occurs as part of a footman's armour in the Statutes of Frejus, A.D. 1233: "Peditem armatum intelligimus armatum scuto et propuncto, seu auspergoto, et cofa seu capello ferreo, et cargan, vel sine cargan," &c. The glossarists derive this and the cognate word, carcannum, from καρκίνος, genus vinculi; and, if this derivation is the true one, a gorget of chain-mail may be fairly inferred.
Other materials for armour than those mentioned above appear during the thirteenth century; but, before noticing these, it may be well to take a glance at the remaining parts of the knightly suit as they occur in the usual monuments of the time; then to examine the appendages which are attached to the body-armour, as the ailettes; after which we will notice the exceptional materials employed for defensive purposes; and lastly, those portions of the warrior's equipment which have not been included in the above scheme of investigation.
The Chausses, in the early part of the thirteenth century were entirely of chain-mail, covering the whole leg; as shewn in our woodcuts, No. 46, 52, and 54. Sometimes they were tightened below the knee with a lace, as in the two Salisbury effigies (Stothard, Plates xvii. and xxx., and our woodcut, No. 54.) A variety of this defence was laid on the front part of the leg, and then laced up behind. See woodcut, No. 53, from Harl. MS. 5102, fol. 32, a book of the early part of the century; and our numbers 56 and 62, towards the close of this period. Compare also Plates xxxiii. of Hefner, Plate liv. of Strutt's Horda, and folio 10 of Roy. MS. 12, F. xiii.
To the chausses, whether of chain-mail or of banded-mail, are sometimes added Poleyns (or knee-pieces) of plate. It is often, however, difficult to determine whether the poleyns are fixed to the chausses or the chausson, from the upper edge of them being covered by the hauberk. A good example of the chausses armed with the knee-piece is offered by the knightly statue in Salisbury Cathedral (Stothard, Pl. xxx.), circa 1260. See also our woodcuts, No. 75 and 77: the first from Add. MS. 11,639, fol. 520; the latter from a glass-painting in the north transept of Oxford Cathedral. A German example given by Hefner (Pt. i. Pl. lxxvii.), from a manuscript illuminated at Metz c. 1280, is copied in our woodcut, No. 68. Poleyns are named in the Wardrobe Account of 28 Ed. I. (1300): "factura diversorum armorum, vexillorum, et penocellorum, pro Domino Edwardo filio Regis, et Johanne de Lancastria, jamberis, poleyns, platis, uno capello ferri, una cresta cum clavis argenti pro eodem capello," &c.
Towards the close of the thirteenth century the Chausses are most commonly accompanied with a Chausson of leather or quilted-work, the purpose of which was probably to obviate the inconvenience of the long chausses of metal in riding. It is found plain, gamboised in vertical lines, and sometimes richly diapered. The plain chausson is well shewn in Stothard's Plates xxii. and xxvi., effigies at Gloucester and in the Temple Church, London. The gamboised chausson is seen in this drawing of an ivory chess-piece preserved in the Ashmolean Museum. See also the effigy of a De Vere at Hatfield Broadoak, (Stothard, Pl. xxxvi.) An excellent example of the pourpointed chausson worked in a rich diaper is offered by the brass of De Bures, 1302 (Waller, Pt. 2, and Boutell's "Brasses and Slabs"). A curious variety of the chausson and chausses is found in the figure of a knight from Roy. MS. 2, A. xxii. fol. 219, given in our woodcut, No. 62; the chausson here being of chain-mail, while the chausses appear to be of rivetted plates. A chausson of chain-mail again appears in our cut, No. 86, from the Painted Chamber. To the chausson were usually attached knee-pieces of some rigid material: metal, cuir bouilli, or a mixture of both. See our woodcuts, Nos. 59 and 63; an effigy in Ash Church near Sandwich, and an illumination from a German manuscript, Add. MS. 17,687, both of the end of this century. Compare also the effigy at Gosberton (Stothard, Pl. xxxvii.), and those of De Vere and De Bures cited above. Among the embellishments of these poleyns are sometimes found little shields of arms; as in our woodcut, No. 70, the effigy of an unknown knight in Norton Church, Durham, c. 1300[335], and in the statue of Brian Fitz Alan, in Bedale Church, Yorkshire, engraved in Hollis's Effigies, Pt. 4, and in Blore's Monuments.
At the close of this century first appear the Greaves, of metal or cuir bouilli, covering the front of the leg from the knee to the instep. They were probably of German introduction, for their Latin name was Bainbergæ, from the German Beinbergen; and it seems likely that the Germans may have copied them from the examples of classic times with which they had become familiar during their wars in Italy. In the south of Europe, the greaves were already become of a highly ornamental character, as we may see from this sculpture of Gulielmus Balnis, 1289, from a bas-relief in the Annunziata Convent at Florence[336]; while in England they do not once appear among our monumental effigies or on our royal seals. Nor can a single example be found among the pictures that adorned the royal palace of Westminster. They are seen, however, among the illustrations of a manuscript of Matthew Paris' Lives of the two Offas, (Cott. MS., Nero, D. 1,) a work usually assigned to the thirteenth century, but perhaps not earlier than the next age. Our woodcut, No. 80, has an example from this manuscript, folio 7. On comparing the two engravings given by us, it will be seen that, while the vellum picture shews the defence below the knee only, the Italian figure has it both below and above. The abundance of ornament in the latter specimen seems to imply a moulded material—cuir bouilli? Antique examples, however, found at Pompeii and elsewhere, are of metal, highly ornamented with chasing and embossed-work. The name Bainberg occurs in several ancient documents. In the Lex Ripuaria we have: "Bainbergas bonas pro VI. sol. tribuat." And in the will of St. Everard, duke of Frejus: "Bruniam unam, helmum 1. et manicam 1. ad ipsam opus, bemberga II." &c. And again: "Bruniam unam cum halsberga et manicam unam, bemivergas duas." The word in the last passage being probably an error for beinbergas.
In the last quarter of the thirteenth century appear those curious appendages to the knightly suit, the Ailettes. But they do not occur in any frequency till the beginning of the fourteenth century. We shall, therefore, in noticing this novelty, refer to some examples of the later period. From their name, ailettes, Fr.; alette, Ital.; and alettæ in the Latin of the period, they appear to have been a French or Italian invention. An early notice of them is in the Roll of Purchases for the Windsor Tournament in 1278, where they are made of leather covered with the kind of cloth called Carda. "De eodem (Milo the Currier) xxxviij. par͂ alect͂ cor͂ p'c̄ par͂. viij. d." "It͂ pro xxxviij. par͂ alett͂ s͂. pro q̊ par͂ dī uln̄ card. s͂. xix. uln̄." They were fastened with silk laces, supplied by "Richard Paternoster." "D Ricõ pat͂ nr͂ viij. Duoden̄ laqueorum serīc pro alett͂ p'̄c duoden̄ viij. d.[337]" Sir Roger de Trumpington was one of the thirty-eight knights engaged in this tournament, and it is remarkable that his monumental brass furnishes one of the earliest and best pictorial examples of the ailette that has come down to us. (See our woodcut, No. 73.) There is one instance of it, and only one, in the pictures of the Painted Chamber, Pl. xxxv. It is ensigned with a bird. In monumental statues it is very rare. The figure here given is from a knightly tomb in the Church of Ash-by-Sandwich, seemingly of the close of this century[338]. The ailettes appear behind the shoulders, rising from the slab beneath, about the eighth of an inch. They have been quadrangular, the outer corners having become broken by accident: there is no trace of any fastening, and no remain of colour. The other monumental statues in England exhibiting the ailette are those of a Pembridge in Clehongre Church, Herefordshire (figured, with details, in Hollis's Effigies, Pt. 5), and the so-called Crusader at Great Tew, Oxfordshire. The Clehongre figure is especially curious as shewing the ailette fastened by its "laqueus," which appears on the outside. In Switzerland there is the statue of Rudolf von Thierstein, at Basle: the ailettes here are square, and fixed on the side of the figure. (Hefner, Pt. 2, Pl. xli.) Our English monumental brasses furnish several examples. See those of Septvans and Buslingthorpe, given by Waller, and the Gorleston brass, Plate li. of Stothard. The curious painted windows at Tewkesbury, figured in full by Carter (Sculpture and Painting), and in part by Shaw (Dress and Decorations), afford the best illustration contributed by pictured glass. Good examples are found in the ivory carvings and seals of the period. The seals of Edward the Third, as duke and as king, are well-known instances; and the ivory casket engraved by Carter, Plates cxiii. and cxiv., offers a singular variety of this accessory. Illuminated manuscripts furnish abundant examples. See, for instance, Roy. MSS., 14, E. iii. and 2, B. vii., and Add. MS. 10,292. The Louterell Psalter has a good specimen, copied in Carter's work named above, and in the Vetusta Monumenta. French monumental examples, we learn from M. Allou, are very scarce: "L'accessoire qui nous occupe est fort rare dans les monuments français. Nous en trouvons des exemples dans les dessins qui nous ont été communiqués par M. Achille Deville, des pierres sépulchrales de Robert Duplessis, 1322, de Robert d'Estouteville, 1331, et de Jean de Lorraine, Duc de Brabant, 1341[339]."
The forms of the ailette are various: the most frequent is the quadrangular, as in the Ash Church effigy given above, and in this example from Add. MS. 10,293, fol. 58; a book dated in 1316. The round form occurs on the ivory casket engraved in vol. 4 of the Journal of the Archæological Association, and in Plates cxiii. and cxiv. of Carter's Sculpture and Painting. The pentagonal is seen in an illumination of Sloane MS. 3,983, engraved as the frontispiece to Strutt's Dress and Habits; the cruciform, in the figure of a knight from Roy. MS., 2, A. xxii. fol. 219 (our woodcut, No. 62). And on folio 94vo. of Roy. MS., 14, E. iij. is an example, the only one ever observed by the writer, of a lozenge-formed ailette. It is clear, from the Cross on the shield having the same position as the other, that the ailette is not a square one worn awry.
The size of this appendage differs greatly in different monuments. In the round example of the ivory casket, cited above, it is scarcely larger than the palm of the hand: while, in an illumination of Roy. MS., 20, D. 1, fol. 18vo, it is little less than the ordinary shield of the period. Its position is generally behind the shoulder, or at the side of it: sometimes it appears in front: but too strict an interpretation must not be given to the rude memorials of these times.
The use of the ailette has somewhat perplexed antiquarian writers. The French archæologists of the present day confess that it is "difficile d'en expliquer l'usage[340]." Some writers have considered it as a simply defensive provision: others look upon it as an ensign, to indicate to his followers the place of a leader in the field. Against the supposition that it was merely armorial, may be urged that in many cases it has no heraldic bearing at all: sometimes it has a cross only, sometimes a diaper pattern, and sometimes it is quite blank. See examples of all these varieties in the Tewkesbury glass paintings, the Gorleston brass (Stothard, Pl. li.), and the Buslingthorpe brass (Waller, Pt. 10). In vellum pictures it is often seen worn by knights in the tilt; where the heraldic bearings already exhibited on the shield, crest, and surcoat of the rider, and on the caparisons of the horse, would to no useful purpose be repeated on the ailette. In the case of the Clehongre example, quoted above, the outside knotting of the lace does not seem consistent with the display of armorial distinctions on the wing beneath. In Germany they are called Tartschen (Hefner: Trachten, Pt. 2, Pl. xli.), and their purpose of shields seems most in accordance with the numerous ancient evidences in which they appear. The knights, indeed, not content with their panoply of steel, seem in the course of the middle-ages to have fortified themselves with a complete outwork of shields. Thus we have the ailettes, the shield proper, the garde-bras, or elbow-shield, the shoulder-shield, the Beinschiene, or shield for the legs, the vamplate on the lance, and the steel front of the saddle, which was in fact but another shield for the defence of the knight's body. Referring once more to the Clehongre effigy, it will be observed that, while the "défaut de la cuirasse" (where the arm joins the body) is strengthened in front with a steel roundel, this assailable point is covered at the back of the arm with the ailette. See the Details on Hollis's third plate of this monument. The analogy between these defences and those curious upright pieces of steel on the shoulders, so frequent in the armours of the sixteenth century, will at once be recognised.
Ailettes of a superb construction appear in the Inventory of the effects of Piers Gaveston in 1313: "Item, autres divers garnementz des armes le dit Pieres, ovek les alettes garniz et frettez de perles[341]." They are named also in the Inventory of the goods of Umfrey de Bohun in 1322: "iiij peire de alettes des armes le Counte de Hereford[342]."
Besides the defences of chain-mail, which, as we have seen, formed the usual armour of the knights of the thirteenth century, there were other materials occasionally employed for the warrior's habit. Scale-work still appears, though in but few monuments; and it seems to have been used for small portions only of the equipment. See the brass figured by Waller, Part x., and Boutell, page 113.
In this singular figure of a knight from Roy. MS. 2, A. xxii. fol. 219, the leg-defences are composed of a kind of Bezanted Armour: small roundels of metal, placed contiguously, appear to be rivetted to a fabric of cloth or to leather: forming a garment very similar to the "penny plate armour" of the sixteenth century. In the original drawing, the chausses are shaded with blue: but, singularly enough, the chausson is shaded with red, though it seems clearly to be intended for chain-mail. The date of the figure appears to be about the close of the thirteenth century. As a curious illustration of bezanted armour, the late Mr. Hudson Turner told the writer of these pages that he had seen in an ancient record an account of a hauberk of Edward III., studded with gold florins; though, with the usual caution of the antiquarian discoverer, he withheld the name and locality of the document.
In the engraving given overleaf, from Add. MS. 17,687, a German illumination of the end of this century, we have an example of Studded armour. Garments presenting an exterior sprinkled with studs are of frequent occurrence in the next age, and we shall therefore freely use the memorials of that time in illustration of our subject; and indeed we may gather some valuable evidences from existing armours of Eastern manufacture. Many a mystery of middle-age lore may be unravelled by an attentive examination of Oriental productions. As the surface only of the military studded garments is presented to our view in ancient monuments, we can seldom determine with exactness their construction: but, from the comparison of various examples, it seems probable that there were not less than four or five varieties of this kind of apparel. First, we have quilted-work, in which the studs appear to be used for holding together the component parts of the fabric. We have already noticed an example of the kind in our preceding division (woodcut, No. 37). The engraving now before us seems to represent a similar armour: the spots are coloured of a red-brown on a ground of light grey. In the fine manuscript of Meliadus, Add. MS. 12,228, not only parts of the knightly suit, but the saddles of the horses, are seeded with studs; which seems distinctly to imply a quilted covering. See also the effigies engraved by Stothard, (Plates lx. and lxiii.) And in the Tower collection will be found Chinese armour of modern date, formed of a quilted garment sprinkled with metal studs. The next kind of Studded armour is that of which a real specimen of the fourteenth century was found by Dr. Hefner in the excavations of the old Castle of Tannenberg in Germany: a relic which throws the clearest light on the costume of many a knightly effigy of that period. The defence is thus contrived: strips of metal, like hooping, are placed horizontally across the body, the upper edge of each splint being perforated for rivets. These strips slightly overlap each other: a piece of velvet, or other material of a similar kind, is then laid over the whole, and by rows of rivets fastened to the iron splints beneath. The velvet being of a rich hue, and the rivet-heads gilt or silvered, the garment presents exactly the appearance of those knightly suits in which spots of gold or silver are seen studding the whole superficies of a dress of crimson or other brilliant tincture. The relic in question is figured and minutely described in the admirable tract on the results of the find by Doctors Hefner and Wolf: "Die Burg Tannenberg und ihre Ausgrabungen." The Stapelton brass, of which there is a facsimile in the Craven Ord Collection in the British Museum, and an engraving in Stothard's work, and the brass at Aveley in Essex (Waller, Pt. 1), seem to exhibit the armour in question. Foreign examples occur in the figures of Conrad von Saunsheim and those in Bamberg Cathedral, given by Hefner in Part II. of the Trachten. The jazerant coats of the fifteenth century, of which several real specimens yet remain to us, are of a very similar construction. A third kind of Stud-work seems to differ from the articulated sort described above, in its basis being uniform and rigid, while the surface exhibits the same features, of a coloured ground-work spangled with bosses of gold or silver. See Stothard's Plates lxxvi. and xciii. A fourth variety appears to be described in this passage of the Inventory of the effects of Piers Gaveston: "Item, en un autre coffre une peire de plates enclouez et garniz d'argent, od quatre cheynes d'argent, coverz dun drap de velvet vermail besaunte d'or[343]." Here we have a garment of velvet spotted with gold, covering an armour nailed with silver: clearly, therefore, differing from the preceding kinds, where the rivets unite the component materials into one vestment. A further item of the Inventory seems to shew still more clearly that the velvet coat (whether bezanted or not) was distinct from the iron defence: "Item, deux cotes de velvet pur plates coverir." Finally, another kind of studded military garment, of which we trace the existence through the examples of Modern Asia, consisted of several thicknesses of pliable stuff, held together by rivets with bossed heads which appear on the surface. In the Museum of the United Service Institution may be seen a Chinese armour constructed after this method, but having the coat lined at the breast with a few plates of iron about the size of playing-cards. In other examples, the studs are not rivetted, but only sewn down upon the garment.
Towards the close of the thirteenth century we find an armour offering a new appearance, to which has been given the name of Banded Mail. Notwithstanding much careful consideration, its exact structure has not yet been discovered, though the representations of it are very abundant. For a whole century, manuscript illuminations, monumental brasses, painted windows, royal and baronial seals, metal chasings and sculptures of various kinds, afford us an infinity of examples; in none of which has hitherto been detected the exact evidence either of its material or its construction. Monumental sculptures, from their large size and the careful finish of their details, might have been expected to solve a problem which they only perplex. The effigy[344] here engraved, of a knight of the De Sulney family, exhibits the warrior armed from head to foot in a suit of banded-mail; and in the following woodcut we have given a portion of the armour of this figure, of its real size. The profile view has been copied with particular care, in the hope that it might be of use in determining the structure of this very singular defence. By many writers this fabric has been described as pourpointerie; by others it has been considered as only a conventional mode of representing the ordinary chain-mail. Mr. Kerrich, whose opinions will always be received with, the greatest respect, speaking of the rows of little arcs used to express the latter defence, says: "When there are lines between the rows, whether two or only one, I conceive it means still but the same thing[345]." M. Pottier, in the text to Willemin's Monuments Inédits, does not distinguish the so-called banded-mail from the other, but names it simply "armure de mailles[346]." But it seems difficult to believe that the common chain-mail could be intended, so widely different are the two modes of representation, whether in sculpture or in painting. Observe, for instance, the details—especially the portion in profile—from the effigy at Newton Solney. And in the following subject from the Romance of Meliadus, (Add. MS. 12,228, f. 79,) there seems no assignable reason for marking one figure so differently from the rest, unless the armour itself were of a distinct kind[347].
That the banded defences under consideration were of pourpointing is still more unlikely; for a gamboised garment, whether of velvet, silk, cloth, or whatever material, would, in painted representations, exhibit those various colours which are so lavishly displayed in the other portions of the knightly attire. Yet a careful examination of many hundred figures in illuminated manuscripts has failed in detecting a single instance of positive colour on banded-mail, except such as may be referred to the metals. Green, scarlet, crimson, diaper or ray, never appear. But gold or a golden tincture, silver or white, and grey of various shades, occur continually. And all these seem to indicate a fabric in which metal plays at least a conspicuous part. The examples among vellum-paintings, in which the banding is tinted grey or left white, are so numerous that one can scarcely open a manuscript of the period without finding them. Instances of it in silver may be seen in Cotton MSS., Vitellius, A. xiii., and Nero, D. vi.; in Roy. MS. 20, D. i., and Add. MS. 12,228. On folio 217vo. of the last-named book will be found the figure of a knight whose banded-mail is gilt. The same kind of armour, in gold colour, appears in the windows of Beer Ferrers Church, Devonshire, and of Fulborn Church, Cambridgeshire. See Lysons' Devonshire, p. 326, and Kerrich Collections, Add. MS. 6,730, fol. 61, for faithful copies of these examples. If from the foregoing evidences we derive the belief that the basis of this fabric was metal, from a monument figured in the superb work of Count Bastard, Peintures des Manuscrits, &c., we gather that the lines of arcs were rings; for the fillet that binds the coif round the temples is clearly passed through alternate groups of rings, exactly as in the ordinary mail-hood. The figure is from a French Bible of the beginning of the fourteenth century, and occurs in the seventh number of the Peintures. In fairness we must admit that this example is not altogether inadmissible as an evidence in favour of the theory of common chain-mail. And on that side may be ranged the very curious figure of Offa the First, given in our woodcut, No. 80, from the "Lives of the Two Offas," by Matthew Paris (Cott. MS., Nero, D. i. fol. 7); where the upper part of the warrior's coif is of "banded-mail," while the lower portion is marked in the manner usually adopted to express the ordinary chain-mail.
Different from all these is the interpretation offered by M. de Vigne in his Recueil de Costumes du Moyen-Age. On Plate lvi. of that work, the author has given a series of sketches, shewing the supposed construction of various ancient armours. The banded mail is represented as formed of rows of overlapping rings, sewn down on leather or other similar material, "avec les coutures couvertes de petites bandes de cuir." Von Leber, in his sketch of medieval armour, has the same notion: "Vom 13. his nach Anfang des 14. Jahrh. der lederstreifige Ringharnisch als unschöne und unbequeme Ritterhülle[348]." This interpretation, however, is at variance with those ancient monuments where the inside of the defence exhibits the ring-work as well as the exterior. See our print of the De Sulney effigy. A more improbable garment, to say the least of it, than a hauberk of leather, faced with mail and lined with mail, can scarcely be conceived. Other examples of the hauberk, shewing the banding on the inside, are furnished by the brass of De Creke (Waller, Pt. viii.; Boutell, p. 39), a brass at Minster, Isle of Sheppey (Stothard, Pl. liv.; Boutell, p. 42), in the effigy of Sir John D'Aubernoun (Stothard, Pl. lx.), and the brass at Ghent, figured in the Archæological Journal, vol. vii. p. 287.
Sometimes the knight's horse is barded with banded-mail, as in the figure from a manuscript in the Library of Cambrai, given by De Vigne in his Recueil de Costumes, vol. ii., plate viii. In Roy. MS. 20, D. i. fol. 330, a work of about the close of the thirteenth century, are elephants with similar caparisons: on their backs are castles, full of fighting men.
We have already noticed that four sculptured effigies with banded-mail have been observed in England. The Tewkesbury figure is given by Stothard; an example further curious from the hauberk being sculptured as ordinary chain-mail, while the camail alone is of the banded work. In the "Memoirs," p. 125, Stothard, writing of this camail to Mr. Kerrich, says: "Amongst other curious things I have met with, is a figure which has some remarkable points about it; but, for the discovery of these, I devoted a whole day in clearing away a thick coating of whitewash which concealed them. The mail attached to the helmet was of that kind so frequently represented in drawings, and which you have had doubts whether it was not another way of representing that sort we are already acquainted with. I am sorry that I know no more of its construction now than before I met with it." The effigy at Dodford, near Weedon, is engraved in Baker's Northamptonshire, vol. i. p. 360. The knight has hauberk, chausses and coif of banded-mail, with poleyns, coutes and cervellière of plate. The figure at Tollard Royal, Wilts, has not been engraved; but from some memorandums kindly furnished by a friend, it appears that this knight is habited in hauberk, chausses and coif of banded-mail, with a skull-cap of plate.
Compare also the effigy of gilded metal in Westminster Abbey, of William de Valence, who died in 1296 (Stothard, Pl. xliv.). In the following figures, from a German manuscript of about 1280, copied from Hefner's Trachten, it will be observed that each knight differs from his fellow in the manner of his equipment, though the staple defence of all is the banded-mail. Other examples of this kind of armour will be found in our woodcuts, No. 47, 48, 63, 72 and 77. At last, we can establish no definite conclusion. Our proofs are but of a negative character. Yet it is always something, to have determined what a thing is not. It seems pretty clear, then, from the absence of varied colours which we have remarked, that the Banded-mail is not pourpointerie of any kind. And, from the presence of the ring-work on the inside of the armour as well as the outside, it appears not to be of the construction suggested by the German and Belgian antiquaries. If meant for ordinary chain-mail, it must be confessed that the medieval artists never hit upon a mode of expressing this material so little resembling the original. It is to the further examination of ancient evidences, or to the discovery of monuments hitherto unobserved, that we must look for a satisfactory solution of this knightly mystery.
In addition to the various armours already noticed, we find in the thirteenth century the defence expressed by cross-lines which we have remarked in the earlier periods. Good examples occur on folio 9 of Roy. MS. 12, F. xiii., and in Laing's Scottish Seals, Plate iv.
And in a chess-piece of the early part of this century, the markings of the armour are made in a very peculiar manner: by rows of drilled holes divided by lines. (Woodcut 69.) This seems to be the device of a rude artist to express the ordinary chain-mail. The example was first brought into prominent notice in the pages of the Archæological Journal, vol. iii. p. 241.
Occasionally, but very rarely, the chain-mail was indicated in monumental statues by merely painting the links on a flat surface. The effigy of a De l'Isle in Rampton Church, Cambridgeshire, engraved by Stothard, Plate xxi., affords a good instance of this method.
A further singularity of the period is that the chain-mail sometimes presents a surface of a hue which does not appear consistent with a defence of steel. The effigy of Longuespée at Salisbury (woodcut No. 54) has the armour painted brown. The centre figure in our woodcut No. 53 wears a hauberk which is marked with buff on a white ground, the other hauberks being blue. The knight on woodcut No. 62 has a chausson shaded with red. And in Harl. MSS. 1,526 and 1,527 are many figures in which the chain-mail markings appear on a bright red ground. It seems probable, however, that such variations may be charged on the caprice of the artists; as in the colourings of the Bayeux tapestry, where the near legs of the horses are made blue, while the off legs are yellow.
Among the knightly effigies in the Temple Church, London, is a figure which seems to require an especial notice; the armour being of a fashion not elsewhere remarked. It consists of a back and breast-piece, each in a single part, united at the sides by straps. The sculpture being in stone, without any painting preserved, it is of course impossible to ascertain the material which the artist desired to represent. It may have been leather (the cuirie, of which we have already noted the existence); but there seems no good reason why it should not have been iron: and if so, it is perhaps the earliest example of a body-armour formed of a "pair of plates large[349]" that Europe has to offer. The effigy in question lies at the south-east corner of the group in the Round Church.
About the beginning of the thirteenth century arose the use of the military Surcoat. The first English monarch who, on his Great Seal, appears in this garment, is King John: 1199-1216. (See our woodcut, No. 52.) The seal of the dauphin Louis, the rival of John, (appended to Harleian Charter, 43, B. 37, dated 1216,) has it also. The earliest Scottish king who wears the surcoat is Alexander the Second: 1214-1249: a fine impression of his seal is attached to Cotton Charter, xix. 2. Imaginative writers have affirmed that this garment was first used by the Crusaders, in order to mitigate the discomfort of the metal hauberk, "so apt to get heated under a Syrian sun." Cotemporary authority, however, expressly tells us that its purpose was to defend the armour from the wet:—
The Surcoat was of two principal kinds: the sleeveless and the sleeved. The latter is not found till the second half of the century.
The Sleeveless Surcoat occurs of various lengths: sometimes scarcely covering the hauberk, sometimes reaching to the heels. Both the short and the long are seen throughout the century. The long appear on the royal seals noticed above. And on the seal of De Quinci, circa 1250 (woodcut, No. 87); on the sculpture from Haseley, c. 1250 (cut, No. 46); on the brass of D'Aubernoun, 1277 (No. 55); on that of De Trumpington, 1289 (No. 73); on the effigies at Ash and Norton, of the close of the century (Nos. 59 and 70); and on the statues of De Vere and Crouchback (Stothard, Plates xxxvi. and xlii.).
The shorter Surcoat occurs on the effigy of Longuespée, d. 1226 (woodcut, No. 54); the knight at Whitworth, c. 1250 (Stothard, Pl. xxiv.); the figures from the Painted Chamber and the "Lives of the Two Offas" (woodcuts, Nos. 80 and 86); the knight at Florence, 1289 (cut No. 58); De Valence, in Westminster Abbey (Stothard, Pl. xliv.); and our engravings, Nos. 47, 56, 63, 64 and 68: the last-named examples being of the close of the century.
The Surcoat is either of a uniform tint, or diapered, or heraldically pictured. Probably, in some early sculptured effigies, the surcoat, now plain, had armorial devices expressed by painting, which time has obliterated. The armorial surcoat was a necessary result of the visored helm; for when the visor was closed, it was no longer possible to distinguish king from subject, leader from stranger, comrade from foe. A similar inconvenience had already been found in the nasal helmet. At the field of Hastings, Duke William was obliged to remove the bar from his face, in order to convince his followers that he was still alive. The figure of Longuespée at Salisbury, c. 1226, still exhibits a portion of the heraldic decoration of the surcoat. And it is again found on the statue of De l'Isle at Rampton, circa 1250 (Stothard, Pl. xx.). The pictures of the Painted Chamber offer many examples. (See our woodcut, No. 86.) See also our engravings, Nos. 58 and 62. The effigy of William de Valence in Westminster Abbey, circa 1296, offers a curious variety of this garment: it is powdered with escutcheons, on each of which are the bearings of his house. A similar arrangement is seen in one of the figures of the Painted Chamber (Plate vi.)
The knightly surcoat of this time was slit up in front and behind, for convenience of riding. A singular deviation from this fashion of the garment is found in a figure in the Cathedral of Constance, c. 1220; where from the front part a portion passes under the arms, overlaps the part hanging from the shoulders behind, and then fastens at the back. See Hefner's work, Pl. iv. of Pt. i.
Occasionally the surcoat has an ornamental edge of fringe; as in the brasses of D'Aubernoun, 1277, and De Bures, 1302 (woodcut, No. 55, and Waller, Pt. ii.). In some cases, as in the Temple Church figure engraved by Stothard, Pl. xv., the garment has a rigid appearance across the shoulders, which has been taken to indicate a strengthening of the surcoat at that part. But the same treatment is seen in the enamelled effigy at St. Denis, of John, son of St. Louis; where the garment forms part of a civil dress (Willemin, vol. i., Pl. xci., and Guilhermy's Monuments of St. Denis, p. 164). The Surcoat sometimes hangs loose, as in our woodcut, No. 86; but usually it is girt at the waist by a cord or strap. The cord is seen in the brasses of Sir John D'Aubernoun and Sir Roger de Trumpington; the strap, with its long pendent end, in the effigies at Ash Church, Norton Church, and St. Bride's (our woodcuts, Nos. 55, 73, 59, 70 and 74). The group from Add. MS. 17,687 furnishes some further examples (cut, No. 63). Rarely, the surcote is made with a "fente" at the throat, and fastened with a fibula. An effigy in the Temple Church exhibits this arrangement. (Hollis, Pt. ii.)
The Sleeved Surcoat, as we have already noticed, did not come into use till the second half of the thirteenth century. It is frequent in the pictures of the Painted Chamber. A good example is offered by the effigy at Norton, Durham (our woodcut, No. 70); and very similar are found in the statue of Lord Fitz Alan at Bedale, Yorkshire, (engraved by Hollis, Pt. iv., and in Blore's Monuments,) and the Temple sculpture (Stothard, Pl. xxxviii.). The knightly figure on our woodcut No. 56 presents a variety, in the sleeves being "slittered." Those of the Shurland effigy (Stothard, Pl. xli.) are divided under the arm and fastened by ties.
