Matt Easton mentions in one of his videos that soldiers are not always fighting 24/7. I'm sure doing a number 1 while wearing those pieces of armor would be rather challenging. A mail skirt is much easier to deal with.
+Gallowglass I can pee without much problem in armor by just lifting the mail skirt and pulling the braes down, but if you have to poop, and you're wearing armor because you need it (i.e., about to fight potentially for your life), I bet you just did what you had to do and cleaned it later.
+ILoveDashie20 If I'm not mistaken most urine tends to be slightly acidic but it is heavily dependant on the diet and amount of water you drink, a pH of 5.5-6.0 seems to be what I remember as typical expected values. But uh that aside I suppose its probably not as salty as sweat which would definitely be worse, about actually using urine the way Mtroostify stated seems a bit strange though! It seems more likely to me for that to be an anecdote that survived where someone had to do what Ian said and do his business in armour for safety then using that as an excuse.
Thanks for the Video clip! Forgive me for the intrusion, I would love your opinion. Have you tried - Trentvorty Fitness Life Theorem (do a google search)? It is an awesome exclusive product for learning how to design your own Iron Man suit without the hard work. Ive heard some interesting things about it and my cousin after many years got great success with it.
"A thousand pounds of horse between your legs is good defence for the groin." A thousand pounds of anything between your legs would be a good defence for the groin, I'd think.
Armor that you couldn't ride in would be like having modern body armor that wouldn't allow you to ride in a car. Great point about the horse providing all the protection you need when riding too.
I don't know but why would you talk specifically about the French ? Instead of talking about opponents in general ? I'm sorry, I just see so much French bashing on the internet that I turned paranoid
***** "constitutionally" ? Did George W Bush added such amendment to the Constitution, or did the Founding Fathers thank France by putting that in it ?
The problem with solid groin protection isn't the weight- adding a pound with a small flap of steel or iron isn't going to be much in the way of encumbrance. The problem, as I'm sure anybody who has worn a cup is familiar with, is the god damn pinching. It doesn't matter how much padding you put on it, the edges always end up digging into your muscle when you move deeply in one direction. I can't even imagine wearing something like that on horseback considering the saddle is already squishing you.
About what you call "exagerated codpieces". I actually think, that they were cosiderably more common of 16th century armour, than the surviving examples we have seem to indicate. Codpieces were an integrated part of aristocratic clothing at the time at they are an extremely common sight in portraits throughout the early-to-middle of the century, regardless if the person depicted is wearing armour or not. Lots of surviving armour from the time also appear to be shaped specifically to allow room for a codpiece. The semi-circular cutout in the fauld makes no sense, if it was just to allow the wearer to sit in a saddle, but it perfectly fits the shape of a codpiece and looks virtually identical to the few surviving examples that has an integrated codpiece, which is why I think, that most of these armours were intented to be worn with a codpiece as well. Whether the exagerated codpieces have been deliberately removed from surviving armours in later times (They didn't really fit later periods' standards of propriety and modesty, and keep in mind, that most surviving armours very used as display pieces) or whether it was simply, that the codpiece was considered part of the personal clothing and not of the armour and therefore didn't survive along with the armour, I just don't know.
As someone with quite a few hours in the saddle, I can say the brayettes or mail skirt would be a hell of a lot more comfortable on horseback than plate protection on the groin... I want good coverage on my 'nads as much as the next guy, but it absolutely needs to be flexible. Let's face it, a poleaxe is going to wreck you down there no matter what armor you've got, so why not be comfortable so you can focus on not giving the opponent that opportunity?
The quality of that Dutch sculpture you show in 7:30 just made me speechless! The sculptor made that piece of mail so delicate that it looks like the real thing and, making this even more spectacular, obviously it's not even marble, but, as it looks, the more brittle sandstone was with wich he worked and even though this did survive all that time!
The earliest inventory mention of a brayette which I have so far found is the 1322 Inventory of arms, Robert of Béthune, (Robert III), Count of Flanders: "Item , unes braies de fier wambisiés." Item, one gamboissed brayette of iron. I suspect the quilted padding beneath the mail would help take some of the sting out of a strike coming beneath the hauberk and aketon skirt.
It makes you wonder why they went from just mail to DPU. Perhaps the prevalent use of halberds with hooks and spikes allowed the attacker more extreme angles of attack than the regular spear. Because of other angles of attack, the armored man would need to keep his heritage protected.
+Wille k I think it's simply a question of evolution of combat. As plate armour grew more sophisticated throughout the 14th century and became ingreasingly impervious to cuts and thrusts, more and more focus was directed towards circumventing the armour and go directly for the least protected parts of the body. We saw a similar development in throat defense in one of Ians earlier videos, where for a long time 1 or 2 layers of maille with padding was considered adequate defense for the throat, only to suddenly become a point of focus with the great bascinet and elaborate bevors in the 15th century.
I would think it works the other way. Having a plate hanging away from the rest of the armour would mean people with bills or halberds may aim to hook it. And nobody wants a 8 foot sharp stick tangled down there
If I were to have to wear a mail skirt into battle for groin protection I think I would have a bit of gambeson like cloth but stiffer in the front under the mail. Stiff like a rug.. any blow to the groin would be absorbed by the mail and cloth making it far less painful. A kick to the crotch wont kill you but could drop you and in a medieval battle that's a death sentence.. even if nobody is kicking I still wouldn't take the chance.
I was told by a history professor that the reason that Henry the VIII's codpiece increased in size was (1) to intimidate other nobles and foreign kings and dignitaries. He had no male heir for many years and to keep in the (2) public's favor he used this as a demonstration on his male virility meaning (it was the woman's fault for having no male heir and thence the formation of the Church of England - so he could divorce and remarry a younger more productive woman. or It was a health issue (3) physicians hypothesized he had an inguinal hernia which as he aged the intestine would drop lower into his scrotum until it affected his outer garments. If you look at his cod piece in his Royal garments (not his armour) the ever growing satin crotch is visible. Or then again maybe he was hiding a turkey drumstick.
the first one is kind of darkly hilarious in light of what we now know thanks to modern science (since the mother always provides one of the X chromosomes for a baby, so it's always the dad that determines whether the other chromosome is an X or Y)
There is an even better example for the articulated gothic groin protection. In nuremberg there is the house of an armourer, which has a statue of St George in a fine harness standing in a alcove typical for old german houses. Seeing him from below you can see the groin protection very clear. And yes. Its an articulated cod-pice essentially ^^
+Blank- blade Yeah, it's an awesome statue. I didn't put images of it in the video though because it's a reproduction of the original (destroyed in WW2).
I would expect nearly always 2 layers... Any combination of hauberk/skirt, brayette, quilting, or horse. There are plenty of images that show layers, and the ones that don't might just not be visible. The mention of a gamboised brayette sounds sensible news to me. I was planning to quilt a liner for my skirt even if evidence is sketchy...
3:50 Answer to the question of how did the knights answer the call of nature lets say. Thank you for the video. It was both enlightening and entertaining. 🙏🖐️
I've heard that Henry VIII had an exaggerated codpiece because he suffered from inflammation due to a venereal disease at the time of the tournament the armor was created for. As to groin protection in general, what about non-metal defenses? If I were a knight I'd be most worried about blunt trauma in that location. A strike to the groin has the potential to be supremely distracting without penetrating the mail at all, but a stiff leather codpiece would be almost as good as a metal one.
I've seen the ball-protection on combat armor in the armory of Graz. It seemed to have been not related to status there, but it was also smaller. (the armors there were predominantly non personalised standard issue armor available in three sizes or so).
+Knyght Errant Thanks for the reply! Those colored suits of armor look sexy. I don't suppose there are any surviving originals? Do you know of any good reproductions?
Quick question here, is there any evidence to suggest that people back then might have worn the equivalent of a modern cup, something that you would not see in effigies or paintings because they would be worn under the mail? In addition to not showing up in artwork they would also likely not survive because I doubt that they'd be the kind of thing that many people would bother keeping after they were done soldiering.
+Riceball01 The best source of information for smaller pieces of equipment that don't necessarily show up in artwork are inventories and wills, and nothing like that shows up in any that I'm aware of. There are also accounts of men either being saved by their mail or getting wounded in the groin with no mention of any additional equipment.
Knyght Errant Ok, thanks for the answer. I guess that the cup was a pretty recent invention then. I'm rather surprised though that it wasn't invented much earlier, either that or it was but never really caught on until the age of modern athletics.
Mail skirt with a rondel over the bits. Overkill? Just imgine a needle point arrow hitting your groin with out it. Such a cool channel got so many ideas about armor now.
Sir, you asked about questions and I have some. we've learned from Matt Easton that the price of sidearms, specifically swords, went down quite a bit during the later Middle Ages (mid 1300's through the early 1500's) to the point that an English archer could easily afford a sword. What about armour? Since during this time a soldier / man at arms was expected to provide his own equipment, how much would it have cost a man to adequately armour himself for the occupation? I know that I've given you a very widely spaced time, and a relatively large selection of armours, but I am curious. Any information that you would give would be appreciated. I enjoy learning from your channel very much. Thank-you, Dante.
+100dfrost This is really an entire topic unto itself, but the main gist of it is that armor could vary wildly in price. Low quality munitions armor could start to be more affordable for a simple non-wealthy man-at-arms. This would become even more true the later in the period you go. A lot of armor prices could get tied up in its level of finish as well. Toby Capwell mentions some armors where the cost of finishing and polishing the final product was more than the actual production of the armor and its base materials. The armor of Sigismund of Tyrol adjusted for modern prices was somewhere in the neighborhood of $2.5 million USD if I remember correctly. But for a non-wealthy individual, you'd be far more likely to be able to afford your own armor in say the year 1460, as opposed to 1340.
Could it be that the number of swords, pieces of armor, and other miltary gear kept going up by accumulation, and a significant percentage of it was still usable though outdated, or could be modified for up to date use? Also, the amount of military-grade iron and steel would keep increasing, and old gear could go into the smelting pot for reuse. It is not as if every time a new weapon or piece of armor were needed iron ore would need to be mined. If the total amount of steel kept increasing, or the total number of pieces of gear, the cost of each could go down.
My view that the groin protection is overkill. As you have pointed out, a warrior knows the limits of their equipment. Therefore trains to mitigate that liability.
I'm not a HEMA practicioner but wouldn't attacks against the groin be quite dangerous for the attacker as well? Your weapon would be off the defensive line by quite a bit and unless you get a clean hit your opponent would have a free shot at your upper body while you bring your weapon back to a defensive position.
What kind of armour is on the "ca. 1510-1520 - 'Conversion of William of Aquitaine', Église Saint-Guillaume, Strasbourg, dép. Bas-Rhin, France" Carving? It seems to be a one piece mail suit, covering the chest, arms and legs (with groin flap). I've never seen another that armour design before and I'm curious what it is called (if it even has a name)
Would you be able to do a video on Horse armour sometime soon? It seems like a really interesting topic with a lot of regional variance in the world, that isn't covered a lot by other uploaders. :)
Also, do we know of any period tools for making chainmail that would have made it easier to produce in larger quantities? I have a hard time imagining that it was all made by hand with pliers.
+Daniel Keil It was generally made with hand pliers. Labor was cheap and plentiful throughout the age of mail. There was no modern concept of mass manufacture. Even modern mail, if you want good stuff, it has to be made by hand. Mass-produced machine made mail doesn't yield the same characteristics of historical mail. Horse armor is something I will look into. A lot of the really impressive horse armor post-dates the Medieval though.
Why do some Armours, esspecially very late ones, have foot protection with insanely long slightly downwards pointing tips? Example: rachelrussell.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/maximilian-armor2.jpg
+Geht KeinenWasAn (SpareTimeWarrior) They followed contemporary style and fashion. Long points on sabatons like that are intended for cavalry use and many of the survivals indicate that the exaggerated toe was removable.
Does the fighting style in the middle ages have something to do with the lack of heavy protection for the groin? I remember to read somewhere that the roman legionaries usually aimed to the groin, so other armies develop stronger groin protection
Falds would be slightly more flexible in the direction they wanted the flexibility, and more importantly, not flexible in other directions (making them better at spreading out blunt-force). If you look at many coat of plates designs, the lower half is basically a very short fald for the same reason.
Chris Genzel Haha, the horny old shrink who didn´t understand the scientific method x) It´s very interesting to read about the sexual cultures of different societies, at different times. Ancient Rome, 15th century Europe and modern day America are the best examples of phallocentric societies :)
hjorturerlend Everything that is longer than it's broad is a phallic symbol, so if people beat each other up with swords, they subconsciously imagine beating the other guy up with a huge metal dick. - Sigmund Freud
The dangling cod was replaced by a full codpiece? Codpieces were a fad at one point in the Renaissance period from what I understand? MMA guys often have metal groin protection under those shorts so it is not as if there wasn't chainmail, the gambeson and a metal cup in the equivalent of a jackstrap....
how do you piss with mail groin protection ? I mean i know that you dont take of your armour to piss normaly but I think this mail could be anoying to wear at war when you dont know when you have the oportunity to piss.
I've seen in a lot of video game armors various sizes and shapes of flaps hanging down from the bottom of the chest armor, depicted as cloth, leather, or leather with metal pieces attached, this would appear to provide some groin protection, was anything like this ever worn historically? Some appear to just hang and some appear to be collapsible but instead of the fauld going all the way around, they have separate "strips" of faulds, but having them be collapsible in strip form seems unnecessary because they would already have articulation from the gaps between flaps. Below are example pics of what I mean: tamrielfoundry.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/dunmer-sentry.jpg files.elderscrollsonline.com/cms/2015/10/5860f6dccbb5b68decd5c9c013dadebb.jpg
+subbss As far as Western European armor goes, that's more of a fantasy / entertainment thing. You see stuff like that on Game of Thrones as well. The closest we see in historical medieval European armor are the triangular faulds I talk about around 9:35. They're not really the same as what we see in a lot of video games, but it's a similar idea.
Henry VIII's "exaggerated" codpiece isn't for show. When I visited the Tower of London they explained that the codpiece was so large so that his genitalia wouldn't touch anything. He was suffering from an STD (I can't remember which, probably syphilis) and Henry would be in immense pain otherwise.
I'm a bit skeptical. It's far too common a feature on armors from that period that have nothing to do with Henry VIII. Perhaps his was exaggerated even **more** for that reason though. Either that or there were a lot of syphilitic knights going around in the tournament circuit ;)
I know this is opening a huge can of worms and there is probably no "right" answer but, of the armour in European history, what would you say provided the best combination of mobility and protection for the warrior who preferred fighting on foot? On the subject matter, a mail mid-thigh length skirt would probably provide adequate groin protection against anyone not trying to hook underneath it, and going Scottish underneath it would allow one to take care of business even in a combat situation.
+Jason Clark I'm not sure there's an answer to your question. Each style of armor throughout European history was best suited for the tactical situation it faced. If it wasn't, it was changed to better suit what it was up against. So there really is no best combination of criteria, since none of them were facing identical threats and tactics.
If one needs to get rid of some bodily waste, it would be fairly easy to take care of that function with mail skirt (pull up your skirt and you're pretty much good to go)... kudos to it for that as well as the protection. Or, articulated groin protection, for the knight that took a viagra not thinking he'd be having to go to war minutes later. Someone should also start a channel where they exclusively talk about codpieces, the youtuber could be named 'codpiece guru' or something like that. Maybe a 'b' channel for you?
I've purchased mail from all over, my current shirt is from www.customchainmail.com and I'm currently getting some properly tailored mail sleeves and a skirt from a friend who runs 'Historically Patterned Mail' on Facebook. Mail chausses would have been supplemented with things like plate knee cops or schynbalds (front greaves), but by the time of the full plate leg harness, the mail leggings are generally reduced to small patches of mail behind the knees or at the instep of the foot and ankle. Full mail leggings would interfere with the close fit of a properly made leg harness and cased greaves.
My current hauberk and chausses are galvanised 8mm butted rings which I wear simply for.training with weight. When.sparring poleaxe OR spear I borrow a riveted hauberk. I need to order one.
Great channel I just found! A question I just posted on an old video about breastplates: It's the common idea, that knights had helpers to get dressed up before a fight. Personally, I think it's true in general. Question: the more advanced groinarmour - wouldnt it be a bit akward to ride with that on? Slippery in the sadle, and not the same feeling into what happened undef you, I would asume. Another question, that doesnt connect to this video in particular has pondered me for a while. And here come some loose theories in, that I have little to none suport for in the books: My theory is that soldiers in all times have used methods and ways that worked at the time. A lot of plate atmour, you could get into by your self with some fiddeling about. Perhaps a slightly different strap somewhere, or a different buckle to fasten that strap with. For example, the brest plate you showed us, you could probably get into if you loosely fastened the upper straps and kind of getting it to hang in place when you get to the waistbelt. I have seen videos about getting into chainmail. But have anyone tried to wriggle into a platemail? The reason I ask, is because lower ranks usually dressed themselves as far as I can understand. And quite a few bits and bobs (breastplates, for an example) trickled down from high knights as time went on. Therefore, I assume low rank soldiers in the 16th hanged their armour on to themselves.
+Erik Granqvist Another important fact about soldiers both ancient and modern is that they don't hesitate to help each other. Helping someone get into armor is not necessarily a subservient action to do. The further back you go in the Late Medieval period (when plate comes about) the lower status the individual, the less likely they are to even have any plate armor. But if they did, they would always have plenty of fellow low-status soldiers to help them prepare. I don't think that being unable to put on your armor is evidence of doing something 'that doesn't work.' Being unable to put on your own armor is inconsequential in the context of belonging to an army. No one, in any army, modern or medieval is a solo soldier. They are all part of a larger unit working toward the same goal, so 'what works for them' is to help each other prepare just as we do today in the modern military. As far as details like individual buckles and straps, we're not guessing as to where they go on modern reproductions. We have ample evidence from survivals to know where and how they were placed and how they functioned.
+Knyght Errant as I said, it is a very loose theory I have. I don't mean that people -now or in the past - usually kit themselves up with no help from their team-mates. We don't do that here in Sweden, and I doubt that would stand for any country now or in the past. The thing is, today (as an infantry soldier in Sweden), you can get everything on if need bee. What I wonder is, could they have done it in a pinch in the past? Was it at all possible? I'm thinking about a highly theoretical situation, where you for some reason or another would wont to get into the kit and get out there.
+Erik Granqvist I think if you're scrambling to get your armor on by yourself it's safe to say you're in some sort of emergency situation. If that's the case, speed is your friend and worrying about getting the whole harness on may not even be a concern. In that case you might be satisfied with just getting your mail shirt and helmet on. I was a military helicopter pilot for 10 years and we regularly sat at different 'alert' statuses. Depending on the situation and how quickly we thought we needed to get into the air, we would set certain conditions of readiness. For example, if you needed to be in the air in minutes, we would have virtually all of our gear on, sitting in the aircraft ready to go. If we had more time, we may just be near the aircraft, with most of our gear on and the aircraft ready to fly, etc... you get the idea. If we look at that in a medieval context, I could imagine a scenario back in camp where the threat of ambush was high. In that case you might have your men-at-arms remain in a reasonable amount of harness (say leg armor and a mail shirt), so the speed with which to get ready could be greatly lessened. You could then progress from there. I'm still skeptical that they would try to put on certain components by themselves though, but I can definitely see scenarios where you might want to do things with haste.
+Erik Granqvist As a former Marine I can also add some insight into this by saying that in the modern infantry is that even though you can get everything on by yourself this doesn't preclude getting help from a buddy. While it's easy enough to get your basic gear on by yourself sometimes having a friend help getting a pack on can be helpful, either directly helping by supporting the pack some or just simply by holding your weapon or helmet. This also might come in the form of putting something onto or in your pack that you might have missed or just gotten, or has slipped or loosened, or it could be digging into your pack for something when you don't have the opportunity to remove your pack to look for it yourself.
Like this is a not a modern problem! The number of soldiers who have left their junk on the modern battle field from land mines and IED's is not a small number even if the loss of both legs is much more evident. War is hell regardless of the era.!
"Having a thousand pound of horse between your legs its pretty good protection for the groin." True and funny :D
It's very fitting that bits of mail are protecting your male bits. ; )
I was laughing so hard when I read your comment.
Lol
I:(
"Today children we learn about the evolution of the codpiece."
Matt Easton mentions in one of his videos that soldiers are not always fighting 24/7. I'm sure doing a number 1 while wearing those pieces of armor would be rather challenging. A mail skirt is much easier to deal with.
+Gallowglass I can pee without much problem in armor by just lifting the mail skirt and pulling the braes down, but if you have to poop, and you're wearing armor because you need it (i.e., about to fight potentially for your life), I bet you just did what you had to do and cleaned it later.
+Knyght Errant if i could remember were i read/heared that armor was cleaned with pee...
Knyght Errant Thanks for that image.
+Mtroostify Isn't urine corrosive?
+ILoveDashie20 If I'm not mistaken most urine tends to be slightly acidic but it is heavily dependant on the diet and amount of water you drink, a pH of 5.5-6.0 seems to be what I remember as typical expected values.
But uh that aside I suppose its probably not as salty as sweat which would definitely be worse, about actually using urine the way Mtroostify stated seems a bit strange though! It seems more likely to me for that to be an anecdote that survived where someone had to do what Ian said and do his business in armour for safety then using that as an excuse.
I just watched a 16 minute video of close-ups on dudes' groins...
Thanks for the Video clip! Forgive me for the intrusion, I would love your opinion. Have you tried - Trentvorty Fitness Life Theorem (do a google search)? It is an awesome exclusive product for learning how to design your own Iron Man suit without the hard work. Ive heard some interesting things about it and my cousin after many years got great success with it.
Were you holding your pommel?
You are funny!
Is this only a joke or do you choose to share what videos these are? 818 588 0377
"A thousand pounds of horse between your legs is good defence for the groin."
A thousand pounds of anything between your legs would be a good defence for the groin, I'd think.
+rhemorigher Good rule of thumb.
How about a thousand pounds of TNT? Or a thousand pounds of enriched uranium? Or just magma.
@@Tennouseijin Well I wouldnt go anywhere near it
Armor that you couldn't ride in would be like having modern body armor that wouldn't allow you to ride in a car. Great point about the horse providing all the protection you need when riding too.
"We're groin to be talking about groin protection today."
Why you *cheeky* little... =_=
I believe exagerated codpieces were also to distract your opponent.
***** If France had an anthem at the time, it could legitimately have been the Imperial March
+Nova Critter why the French ? Is it an insult ?
I don't know but why would you talk specifically about the French ? Instead of talking about opponents in general ? I'm sorry, I just see so much French bashing on the internet that I turned paranoid
Colin Miraglio or perhabs he knows I'm French, I seem to be easy to spot on UA-cam comment section.
***** "constitutionally" ? Did George W Bush added such amendment to the Constitution, or did the Founding Fathers thank France by putting that in it ?
One thing to consider is that you need pee a few times a day, so wearing a plate chastity belt may not be the best.
+TanitAkavirius I think peeing isn't a big concern while someone wants to kill you.^^
Geht KeinenWasAn
What about when no one wants to kill you (99% of the time wearing armor)?
You could only use it when going into battle.
+TanitAkavirius I for one would rather take 5 minutes extra to piss than get stabbed in the dick, if I'm being honest.
***** Or for ceremonial reasons.
The problem with solid groin protection isn't the weight- adding a pound with a small flap of steel or iron isn't going to be much in the way of encumbrance. The problem, as I'm sure anybody who has worn a cup is familiar with, is the god damn pinching. It doesn't matter how much padding you put on it, the edges always end up digging into your muscle when you move deeply in one direction. I can't even imagine wearing something like that on horseback considering the saddle is already squishing you.
About what you call "exagerated codpieces". I actually think, that they were cosiderably more common of 16th century armour, than the surviving examples we have seem to indicate. Codpieces were an integrated part of aristocratic clothing at the time at they are an extremely common sight in portraits throughout the early-to-middle of the century, regardless if the person depicted is wearing armour or not. Lots of surviving armour from the time also appear to be shaped specifically to allow room for a codpiece. The semi-circular cutout in the fauld makes no sense, if it was just to allow the wearer to sit in a saddle, but it perfectly fits the shape of a codpiece and looks virtually identical to the few surviving examples that has an integrated codpiece, which is why I think, that most of these armours were intented to be worn with a codpiece as well. Whether the exagerated codpieces have been deliberately removed from surviving armours in later times (They didn't really fit later periods' standards of propriety and modesty, and keep in mind, that most surviving armours very used as display pieces) or whether it was simply, that the codpiece was considered part of the personal clothing and not of the armour and therefore didn't survive along with the armour, I just don't know.
I love how you can keep such a straight face with that opening line 🤣🤣🤣 this is great stuff, can't wait to watch the rest of your content 😆
As someone with quite a few hours in the saddle, I can say the brayettes or mail skirt would be a hell of a lot more comfortable on horseback than plate protection on the groin... I want good coverage on my 'nads as much as the next guy, but it absolutely needs to be flexible. Let's face it, a poleaxe is going to wreck you down there no matter what armor you've got, so why not be comfortable so you can focus on not giving the opponent that opportunity?
The quality of that Dutch sculpture you show in 7:30 just made me speechless! The sculptor made that piece of mail so delicate that it looks like the real thing and, making this even more spectacular, obviously it's not even marble, but, as it looks, the more brittle sandstone was with wich he worked and even though this did survive all that time!
The earliest inventory mention of a brayette which I have so far found is the 1322 Inventory of arms, Robert of Béthune, (Robert III), Count of Flanders: "Item , unes braies de fier wambisiés." Item, one gamboissed brayette of iron. I suspect the quilted padding beneath the mail would help take some of the sting out of a strike coming beneath the hauberk and aketon skirt.
+Mart Shearer Annotation to the video added at 5:26, thanks for the find Mart.
"Best protect ya dick" - Knights of the Wu-Tang table, 1386
real heroes
King Henry's last armour was clearly designed for psychological warfare.
It makes you wonder why they went from just mail to DPU. Perhaps the prevalent use of halberds with hooks and spikes allowed the attacker more extreme angles of attack than the regular spear. Because of other angles of attack, the armored man would need to keep his heritage protected.
+Wille k I think it's simply a question of evolution of combat. As plate armour grew more sophisticated throughout the 14th century and became ingreasingly impervious to cuts and thrusts, more and more focus was directed towards circumventing the armour and go directly for the least protected parts of the body. We saw a similar development in throat defense in one of Ians earlier videos, where for a long time 1 or 2 layers of maille with padding was considered adequate defense for the throat, only to suddenly become a point of focus with the great bascinet and elaborate bevors in the 15th century.
I would think it works the other way. Having a plate hanging away from the rest of the armour would mean people with bills or halberds may aim to hook it. And nobody wants a 8 foot sharp stick tangled down there
The opening straight face was amazing.
13:40 - I've seen art of people riding horses in that too. Crazy that a skirt could fit like that.
If I were to have to wear a mail skirt into battle for groin protection I think I would have a bit of gambeson like cloth but stiffer in the front under the mail. Stiff like a rug.. any blow to the groin would be absorbed by the mail and cloth making it far less painful. A kick to the crotch wont kill you but could drop you and in a medieval battle that's a death sentence.. even if nobody is kicking I still wouldn't take the chance.
I was told by a history professor that the reason that Henry the VIII's codpiece increased in size was (1) to intimidate other nobles and foreign kings and dignitaries.
He had no male heir for many years and to keep in the (2) public's favor he used this as a demonstration on his male virility meaning (it was the woman's fault for having no male heir and thence the formation of the Church of England - so he could divorce and remarry a younger more productive woman.
or
It was a health issue (3) physicians hypothesized he had an inguinal hernia which as he aged the intestine would drop lower into his scrotum until it affected his outer garments. If you look at his cod piece in his Royal garments (not his armour) the ever growing satin crotch is visible. Or then again maybe he was hiding a turkey drumstick.
the first one is kind of darkly hilarious in light of what we now know thanks to modern science (since the mother always provides one of the X chromosomes for a baby, so it's always the dad that determines whether the other chromosome is an X or Y)
Purposely trying to hit your opponent in the groin is known in the knightly chivalry code as a "dick move"
There is an even better example for the articulated gothic groin protection. In nuremberg there is the house of an armourer, which has a statue of St George in a fine harness standing in a alcove typical for old german houses.
Seeing him from below you can see the groin protection very clear. And yes. Its an articulated cod-pice essentially ^^
+Blank- blade Yeah, it's an awesome statue. I didn't put images of it in the video though because it's a reproduction of the original (destroyed in WW2).
I swear I see a comment of yours in half of these videos at least.
Two small skullcapes, one for each ball
10:09 left image "When you're trying to get an up-skirt but you're blocked by a fauld"
I would expect nearly always 2 layers... Any combination of hauberk/skirt, brayette, quilting, or horse. There are plenty of images that show layers, and the ones that don't might just not be visible. The mention of a gamboised brayette sounds sensible news to me. I was planning to quilt a liner for my skirt even if evidence is sketchy...
3:50
Answer to the question of how did the knights answer the call of nature lets say.
Thank you for the video. It was both enlightening and entertaining. 🙏🖐️
I've heard that Henry VIII had an exaggerated codpiece because he suffered from inflammation due to a venereal disease at the time of the tournament the armor was created for.
As to groin protection in general, what about non-metal defenses? If I were a knight I'd be most worried about blunt trauma in that location. A strike to the groin has the potential to be supremely distracting without penetrating the mail at all, but a stiff leather codpiece would be almost as good as a metal one.
I always had questions about this when I saw armor with an exposed groin. Thank you for the clarification.
I utilise my groin in battle all the time.
LOL...well it's about time..looking up knight's skirts..had to listen twice to catch that pun.
Great video, as per usual, hope there's lots more to come!
14:05 DPU 2.0, never leave home without it.
Why not a triangular patch of mail sewn onto the loin cloth or whatever undergarment rather than something on the Hauberk?
*Intro* This is gonna be so Hawt!
It was indeed, my good friend
I've seen the ball-protection on combat armor in the armory of Graz. It seemed to have been not related to status there, but it was also smaller. (the armors there were predominantly non personalised standard issue armor available in three sizes or so).
tournament armour makes me think of the difference between martial art and marshal sport.
+Davlavi that's pretty much exactly what it is.
I wear brayettes. They work. And work well. Tom Blitter made a damn fine set.
The red armor at 10:05 almost looks painted. Was this an artistic decision made by the painter, or is it just some tight fitting cover or something?
+akumabito2008 It was common in the late 14th century and very beginning of the 15th century to cover armor in textile.
+Knyght Errant Thanks for the reply! Those colored suits of armor look sexy. I don't suppose there are any surviving originals? Do you know of any good reproductions?
Repros:
Velvet (www.pinterest.com/pin/449515606530538085/)
Leather (www.wassonartistry.com/images/armor/1380senglish/IMG_1480.jpg)
Originals:
(www.pinterest.com/pin/294845106830396875/)
Some fragments of textile (www.pinterest.com/pin/294845106830615891/) (www.pinterest.com/pin/294845106831267610/)
That Henry the Vlll armour is niiiiice
Looks like in the 16th century there was another more universal swordfight going down
Thanks! I appreciate the link you provided to get here.
Quick question here, is there any evidence to suggest that people back then might have worn the equivalent of a modern cup, something that you would not see in effigies or paintings because they would be worn under the mail? In addition to not showing up in artwork they would also likely not survive because I doubt that they'd be the kind of thing that many people would bother keeping after they were done soldiering.
+Riceball01 The best source of information for smaller pieces of equipment that don't necessarily show up in artwork are inventories and wills, and nothing like that shows up in any that I'm aware of. There are also accounts of men either being saved by their mail or getting wounded in the groin with no mention of any additional equipment.
Knyght Errant
Ok, thanks for the answer. I guess that the cup was a pretty recent invention then. I'm rather surprised though that it wasn't invented much earlier, either that or it was but never really caught on until the age of modern athletics.
Hey Ian, thank you for another great and detailed video. I love your ongoing "show" and look forward to seeing other types of videos.
What, that whole time no one thought of a cup?
Mail skirt with a rondel over the bits. Overkill? Just imgine a needle point arrow hitting your groin with out it. Such a cool channel got so many ideas about armor now.
Over here squire, I need help with my codpiece.
Nice video. Thank you for all of your efforts. I really enjoy your channel.
Sir, you asked about questions and I have some. we've learned from Matt Easton that the price of sidearms, specifically swords, went down quite a bit during the later Middle Ages (mid 1300's through the early 1500's) to the point that an English archer could easily afford a sword. What about armour? Since during this time a soldier / man at arms was expected to provide his own equipment, how much would it have cost a man to adequately armour himself for the occupation? I know that I've given you a very widely spaced time, and a relatively large selection of armours, but I am curious. Any information that you would give would be appreciated. I enjoy learning from your channel very much. Thank-you, Dante.
+100dfrost This is really an entire topic unto itself, but the main gist of it is that armor could vary wildly in price. Low quality munitions armor could start to be more affordable for a simple non-wealthy man-at-arms. This would become even more true the later in the period you go. A lot of armor prices could get tied up in its level of finish as well. Toby Capwell mentions some armors where the cost of finishing and polishing the final product was more than the actual production of the armor and its base materials. The armor of Sigismund of Tyrol adjusted for modern prices was somewhere in the neighborhood of $2.5 million USD if I remember correctly. But for a non-wealthy individual, you'd be far more likely to be able to afford your own armor in say the year 1460, as opposed to 1340.
+Knyght Errant Sir, thank-you very much. Dante.
Could it be that the number of swords, pieces of armor, and other miltary gear kept going up by accumulation, and a significant percentage of it was still usable though outdated, or could be modified for up to date use? Also, the amount of military-grade iron and steel would keep increasing, and old gear could go into the smelting pot for reuse. It is not as if every time a new weapon or piece of armor were needed iron ore would need to be mined. If the total amount of steel kept increasing, or the total number of pieces of gear, the cost of each could go down.
My view that the groin protection is overkill. As you have pointed out, a warrior knows the limits of their equipment. Therefore trains to mitigate that liability.
More protection means you can go even farther on the offensive
I'm not a HEMA practicioner but wouldn't attacks against the groin be quite dangerous for the attacker as well? Your weapon would be off the defensive line by quite a bit and unless you get a clean hit your opponent would have a free shot at your upper body while you bring your weapon back to a defensive position.
+macharim It isn't very practically, but it is possibly without major lose of your defence. It is called Sackhau.
Even in modern war, a flap of Kevlar is all the groin protection used
such a great video and it answered my question perfectly. is there some sort of database of medieval armor I could browse through?
Awesome
What I'm getting from this is that they thought about using a steel dress
You should have kept a running count on the number of times you said "groin".
Any idea whether the dramatic codpieces would have interfered with riding a horse?
And do they show up on combat as well as tournament armour?
What kind of armour is on the "ca. 1510-1520 - 'Conversion of William of Aquitaine', Église Saint-Guillaume, Strasbourg, dép. Bas-Rhin, France" Carving?
It seems to be a one piece mail suit, covering the chest, arms and legs (with groin flap). I've never seen another that armour design before and I'm curious what it is called (if it even has a name)
I love your videos :)
Is that a brigandine fauld on the right at 10:04?
Yes, there are lots of covered faulds in artwork. There's nothing wrong with a covered fauld, it's more about the construction on the inside.
Thanks that's very helpful.
Balls of steel
Would you be able to do a video on Horse armour sometime soon? It seems like a really interesting topic with a lot of regional variance in the world, that isn't covered a lot by other uploaders. :)
Also, do we know of any period tools for making chainmail that would have made it easier to produce in larger quantities? I have a hard time imagining that it was all made by hand with pliers.
+Daniel Keil It was generally made with hand pliers. Labor was cheap and plentiful throughout the age of mail. There was no modern concept of mass manufacture. Even modern mail, if you want good stuff, it has to be made by hand. Mass-produced machine made mail doesn't yield the same characteristics of historical mail. Horse armor is something I will look into. A lot of the really impressive horse armor post-dates the Medieval though.
I needeth not groin armor, for the Lord hath maketh me to enjoy balls made of cast iron
Whats the name of the painting from 11:20?
Why do some Armours, esspecially very late ones, have foot protection with insanely long slightly downwards pointing tips?
Example: rachelrussell.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/maximilian-armor2.jpg
+Geht KeinenWasAn (SpareTimeWarrior) They followed contemporary style and fashion. Long points on sabatons like that are intended for cavalry use and many of the survivals indicate that the exaggerated toe was removable.
Codpiece is for when you are hate fcking the enemy
great video, thanks for your professional work :D
Please make something about burgonets some day, cant find much information about them anywhere.
Does the fighting style in the middle ages have something to do with the lack of heavy protection for the groin? I remember to read somewhere that the roman legionaries usually aimed to the groin, so other armies develop stronger groin protection
+Toni Lopez Balls of steel
Why didn't they use brigandine armor for the skirts. I would think it would be move flexible than plate and a bit better than mail.
Falds would be slightly more flexible in the direction they wanted the flexibility, and more importantly, not flexible in other directions (making them better at spreading out blunt-force).
If you look at many coat of plates designs, the lower half is basically a very short fald for the same reason.
Did they historical use brigadine skirt or fault as groin protection?
Amusing to see that penis envy is just as alive today as back then.
The 16th century was very... Phallocentric :P
+hjorturerlend
Sigmund Freud approves.
Chris Genzel
Haha, the horny old shrink who didn´t understand the scientific method x)
It´s very interesting to read about the sexual cultures of different societies, at different times.
Ancient Rome, 15th century Europe and modern day America are the best examples of phallocentric societies :)
hjorturerlend
Everything that is longer than it's broad is a phallic symbol, so if people beat each other up with swords, they subconsciously imagine beating the other guy up with a huge metal dick.
- Sigmund Freud
Chris Genzel
Ah, don´t think so x) Though spears and leaf-bladed swords are certainly phallic, for functional reasons, but still...
The dangling cod was replaced by a full codpiece? Codpieces were a fad at one point in the Renaissance period from what I understand? MMA guys often have metal groin protection under those shorts so it is not as if there wasn't chainmail, the gambeson and a metal cup in the equivalent of a jackstrap....
The first late-15th century gothic example. What is the name of that painting?
Let me tell you, hearing the word groin approximately 50 times in 15 minutes completely eliminates the immature comedic value of it.
maybe do a video about women in armor?
how do you piss with mail groin protection ? I mean i know that you dont take of your armour to piss normaly but I think this mail could be anoying to wear at war when you dont know when you have the oportunity to piss.
ua-cam.com/video/40P8bqA0eHg/v-deo.html
I've seen in a lot of video game armors various sizes and shapes of flaps hanging down from the bottom of the chest armor, depicted as cloth, leather, or leather with metal pieces attached, this would appear to provide some groin protection, was anything like this ever worn historically? Some appear to just hang and some appear to be collapsible but instead of the fauld going all the way around, they have separate "strips" of faulds, but having them be collapsible in strip form seems unnecessary because they would already have articulation from the gaps between flaps. Below are example pics of what I mean:
tamrielfoundry.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/dunmer-sentry.jpg
files.elderscrollsonline.com/cms/2015/10/5860f6dccbb5b68decd5c9c013dadebb.jpg
+subbss As far as Western European armor goes, that's more of a fantasy / entertainment thing. You see stuff like that on Game of Thrones as well. The closest we see in historical medieval European armor are the triangular faulds I talk about around 9:35. They're not really the same as what we see in a lot of video games, but it's a similar idea.
Mail Diaper. The diaper for real men.
Henry VIII's "exaggerated" codpiece isn't for show. When I visited the Tower of London they explained that the codpiece was so large so that his genitalia wouldn't touch anything. He was suffering from an STD (I can't remember which, probably syphilis) and Henry would be in immense pain otherwise.
I'm a bit skeptical. It's far too common a feature on armors from that period that have nothing to do with Henry VIII. Perhaps his was exaggerated even **more** for that reason though. Either that or there were a lot of syphilitic knights going around in the tournament circuit ;)
Cup check!
Do chastity belts count as armor
I know this is opening a huge can of worms and there is probably no "right" answer but, of the armour in European history, what would you say provided the best combination of mobility and protection for the warrior who preferred fighting on foot?
On the subject matter, a mail mid-thigh length skirt would probably provide adequate groin protection against anyone not trying to hook underneath it, and going Scottish underneath it would allow one to take care of business even in a combat situation.
+Jason Clark I'm not sure there's an answer to your question. Each style of armor throughout European history was best suited for the tactical situation it faced. If it wasn't, it was changed to better suit what it was up against. So there really is no best combination of criteria, since none of them were facing identical threats and tactics.
Okay, thank you.
Like that shorter intro version.
If one needs to get rid of some bodily waste, it would be fairly easy to take care of that function with mail skirt (pull up your skirt and you're pretty much good to go)... kudos to it for that as well as the protection. Or, articulated groin protection, for the knight that took a viagra not thinking he'd be having to go to war minutes later. Someone should also start a channel where they exclusively talk about codpieces, the youtuber could be named 'codpiece guru' or something like that. Maybe a 'b' channel for you?
12:56 Gotta protect the crown jewels...
Where do you buy your riveted mail ?Also, do you wear chain mail chaisses under your leg plate? Would this have been done?
I've purchased mail from all over, my current shirt is from www.customchainmail.com and I'm currently getting some properly tailored mail sleeves and a skirt from a friend who runs 'Historically Patterned Mail' on Facebook. Mail chausses would have been supplemented with things like plate knee cops or schynbalds (front greaves), but by the time of the full plate leg harness, the mail leggings are generally reduced to small patches of mail behind the knees or at the instep of the foot and ankle. Full mail leggings would interfere with the close fit of a properly made leg harness and cased greaves.
Thanks, I have a riveted aventail and underarm.spacers but
Kk
My current hauberk and chausses are galvanised 8mm butted rings which I wear simply for.training with weight. When.sparring poleaxe OR spear I borrow a riveted hauberk. I need to order one.
I was not prepared for swing Ian with hair. I’m from the future. It’s scary. Like him bald better.
"Having 1000lb of horse between your legs is pretty good protection for the groin" - Ian Laspina, 2016
Great channel I just found!
A question I just posted on an old video about breastplates:
It's the common idea, that knights had helpers to get dressed up before a fight. Personally, I think it's true in general.
Question: the more advanced groinarmour - wouldnt it be a bit akward to ride with that on? Slippery in the sadle, and not the same feeling into what happened undef you, I would asume.
Another question, that doesnt connect to this video in particular has pondered me for a while. And here come some loose theories in, that I have little to none suport for in the books:
My theory is that soldiers in all times have used methods and ways that worked at the time. A lot of plate atmour, you could get into by your self with some fiddeling about. Perhaps a slightly different strap somewhere, or a different buckle to fasten that strap with. For example, the brest plate you showed us, you could probably get into if you loosely fastened the upper straps and kind of getting it to hang in place when you get to the waistbelt.
I have seen videos about getting into chainmail. But have anyone tried to wriggle into a platemail?
The reason I ask, is because lower ranks usually dressed themselves as far as I can understand. And quite a few bits and bobs (breastplates, for an example) trickled down from high knights as time went on. Therefore, I assume low rank soldiers in the 16th hanged their armour on to themselves.
+Erik Granqvist Another important fact about soldiers both ancient and modern is that they don't hesitate to help each other. Helping someone get into armor is not necessarily a subservient action to do. The further back you go in the Late Medieval period (when plate comes about) the lower status the individual, the less likely they are to even have any plate armor. But if they did, they would always have plenty of fellow low-status soldiers to help them prepare. I don't think that being unable to put on your armor is evidence of doing something 'that doesn't work.' Being unable to put on your own armor is inconsequential in the context of belonging to an army. No one, in any army, modern or medieval is a solo soldier. They are all part of a larger unit working toward the same goal, so 'what works for them' is to help each other prepare just as we do today in the modern military. As far as details like individual buckles and straps, we're not guessing as to where they go on modern reproductions. We have ample evidence from survivals to know where and how they were placed and how they functioned.
+Knyght Errant as I said, it is a very loose theory I have. I don't mean that people -now or in the past - usually kit themselves up with no help from their team-mates. We don't do that here in Sweden, and I doubt that would stand for any country now or in the past. The thing is, today (as an infantry soldier in Sweden), you can get everything on if need bee. What I wonder is, could they have done it in a pinch in the past? Was it at all possible? I'm thinking about a highly theoretical situation, where you for some reason or another would wont to get into the kit and get out there.
+Erik Granqvist I think if you're scrambling to get your armor on by yourself it's safe to say you're in some sort of emergency situation. If that's the case, speed is your friend and worrying about getting the whole harness on may not even be a concern. In that case you might be satisfied with just getting your mail shirt and helmet on.
I was a military helicopter pilot for 10 years and we regularly sat at different 'alert' statuses. Depending on the situation and how quickly we thought we needed to get into the air, we would set certain conditions of readiness. For example, if you needed to be in the air in minutes, we would have virtually all of our gear on, sitting in the aircraft ready to go. If we had more time, we may just be near the aircraft, with most of our gear on and the aircraft ready to fly, etc... you get the idea.
If we look at that in a medieval context, I could imagine a scenario back in camp where the threat of ambush was high. In that case you might have your men-at-arms remain in a reasonable amount of harness (say leg armor and a mail shirt), so the speed with which to get ready could be greatly lessened. You could then progress from there. I'm still skeptical that they would try to put on certain components by themselves though, but I can definitely see scenarios where you might want to do things with haste.
+Erik Granqvist As a former Marine I can also add some insight into this by saying that in the modern infantry is that even though you can get everything on by yourself this doesn't preclude getting help from a buddy. While it's easy enough to get your basic gear on by yourself sometimes having a friend help getting a pack on can be helpful, either directly helping by supporting the pack some or just simply by holding your weapon or helmet. This also might come in the form of putting something onto or in your pack that you might have missed or just gotten, or has slipped or loosened, or it could be digging into your pack for something when you don't have the opportunity to remove your pack to look for it yourself.
"Hi guys, Im Ian LeSpina, and we're gonna look up knight's skirts.
Medieval upskirting.
Maybe it wasn't as good protected as other body parts because it was considered a "dick move" to go for the groin?...
the iorn cod peace
I just wish that people stopped using the existence of armored codpieces as an argument why boobplate would be perfecty rational.
bring ur own cup to war boys
Do you know the source of that 14th century hauberk with groin flap?
Musee de l'Armee, Paris c.1350 - www.photo.rmn.fr/C.aspx?IID=2C6NU0BAJXB3&VP3=SearchResult
Thanks!
Like this is a not a modern problem! The number of soldiers who have left their junk on the modern battle field from land mines and IED's is not a small number even if the loss of both legs is much more evident. War is hell regardless of the era.!