Karwansaray BV

Protecting the arms

Author(s): Graham Ashford
Source: Medieval Warfare , 2014, Vol. 4, No. 5, Theme - Richard I in the Mediterranean
(2014), pp. 40-42
Published by: Karwansaray BV

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/48579058

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Karwansaray BV is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Medieval
Warfare

This content downloaded from

88.240.181.39 on Sun, 09 Oct 2022 19:15:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Blacksmithing

The medieval armourer at work

Protecting
the arms
Throughout history, the arms were low on the priority list of ar-
mourers. arms do not contain vital organs, and they are less cru-
cial for mobility. at the same time, the warrior has to be able to
freely move his arms to attack and defend himself. where armour
did exist, it was made of rather flexible material to not impede
movement. with the rise of completely enveloping plate armour,
smiths had to solve the problem of building a mobile construction
out of inflexible components.

by Graham ashford that the cuffs are badly damaged, suggests that
they may actually have been a reasonable rep-

Effigy of Richard Pembridge, a
Knight of the Garter under Eng-
lish King Edward III, in Hereford
Cathedral. The armour is exem-
plary of defensive equipment
of the time. Notice the inward
turn of the couter’s wing into the
crook of the elbow.
© Graham Ashford
T
hroughout this article, we’ll be con-
sidering the fully articulated arm
harness of the mid- to late four-
teenth century. More specifically,
we’ll be looking at one type of harness, as re-
gional, stylistic and chronological differences
are so many that it would be impossible to
consider everything in an article of this length.
Unfortunately, there is relatively little com-
plete armour of this type left for us to study.
Instead, we must draw most of our aesthetic
and design conclusions from monumental
and brass effigies, like that of Sir Richard Pem-
bridge in Hereford Cathedral (c. 1375). Some
manuscript illustrations and a few surviving
pieces make up the rest of the evidence.
It is important to remember that, although
the effigy is a fine example of the artisan’s crafts-
manship, it has not been made by an armourer. In
fact, it often includes errors that would make the
armour awkward to wear at best, or even impos-
sible to move in. Limbs, for instance, were often
compressed to keep them close to the body and
prevent damage. In Sir Richard’s case, the fact
resentation of the real thing. Indeed, evidence of
massive damage can be seen all over it, the result
of the collapse of one of the towers in 1786.
There are a great many different terms
used for the same pieces of armour worn on
the arm. For the purposes of brevity, we will
use the terms ‘vambrace’ and ‘wrapper’ (cov-
ering the forearm; the vambrace often has an
integrated hinge with a long strap with buck-
le), ‘couter’ and ‘fan’ (for the elbow; the couter
usually has a pair of lames attached above and
below), ‘rerebrace’ (upper arm) and ‘spaulder’
(shoulder and associated lames).
fit and build
A well fitting arm harness should not impede
the movement of the wearer or be uncomfort-
able. The armour itself is as important as a
well-made, correctly fitting gambeson. Thus,
it is essential that the fit be considered in
quite some depth. By the fourteenth century,
the thicker gambesons from earlier days had
given way to more tailored, well-fitted items of
clothing. The snugness of the jacket’s sleeves

40 Medieval warfare IV-5

This content downloaded from
88.240.181.39 on Sun, 09 Oct 2022 19:15:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

mw_4-5.indd 40 17/09/14 15:33


around the wrists, elbow and armpit are criti-
cal for properly fitted armour to be worn over
it. A thick, bloated, ill-made gambeson will
result in similarly thick and bloated armour.
Thus, the gambeson should receive as much
attention and effort as the metal armour. For
the sake of argument, we’ll assume that a
well-made gambeson is being worn.
Critical to the proper fit of the arm har-
ness is its position at the wrist. Too long and
it will rest on the hand, impeding movement
and causing considerable pain. Too short, and
the forearm will be exposed. If it’s too wide,
properly made gauntlets cannot be worn, but
make it too narrow and the armour cannot be
buckled correctly, leaving unsightly and po-
tentially dangerous gaps. Generally speaking,
the armour ought to stop at the wrist, just be-
fore the head of the ulna (the bony outcrop
before the wrist on the outside of the arm
when the palm is facing down).
The couter, at the elbow, should be deep
enough to allow the arm to bend and move
without being restricted by the metal work.
As couters became smaller, they generally
became deeper, often taking on a deeper
arch-like appearance, which was favoured
throughout the mid- to late fourteenth century
in both architecture and fashion. The lames
attaching the vambrace and rerebrace to the
couter ought to move smoothly throughout
their range, with no gapping. Otherwise, it can
cause a guillotine-like pinch when closing. The
same goes for the rerebrace: too tight, loose,
small or large, and it can cause similar issues.
The spaulders should be in proportion
to the rest of the armour and not too large.
Spaulders are often depicted as being slightly
narrower at the front of the armpit than at the
rear. This forced compression allowed for a
much sleeker look to the armour and gave a
significantly improved arm movement across
the body. The spaulder points to the top of the
shoulder towards the back of the neck, thus
holding the whole arm harness in place.
The first step is to draw a piece (life size if
possible) from multiple angles, as it will help
get the mind working on the required shapes as
well as the aesthetics of the period in question.
More importantly, it helps forestall any prob-
lems faced in the armour’s production. Rivet
positions conflicting with straps, lames not be-
ing able to move fully due to a rivet, and other
such issues can all be seen and inexpensively
88.240.181.39 on Sun, 09 Oct 2022 19:15:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
mw_4-5.indd 41
Blacksmithing
avoided in pencil rather than discovered ex-
pensively in metal. In most modern workshops,
the lone armourer carries out a multitude of
tasks that would have historically belonged to a
series of craftsmen. As a result, I tend to make
the hinges and any other fittings before starting
the rest of the work, so the build does not slow
down in the final stages. It can prove frustrating
when almost finished with the polished build to
stop and make hinges, buckles and straps.
Lames and their rivet positions are of-
Assemble the arms throughout
ten considered hard to make, but in reality,
the build to constantly check
it is fairly easy. Firstly, it is important to re- proportions. Shown are two
member that crafting a lame only takes about complete arm harnesses, with
30 minutes, so it’s easy to replace if an error the spaulders not yet attached.
occurs. Secondly, medieval armourers re- © Graham Ashford
peatedly got it wrong themselves, with some
lames having as many as three or four differ-
ent holes in them as the movement of the ar-
ticulation was adjusted. Thirdly, a lame can
be made too long, positioned and then cut
back to the desired size and fit. Armouring
is not engineering and patterns do not have
to be exact to the nearest 1/100mm, so one
can easily experiment with some card and
cut the lame to shape when satisfied.
Techniques used for making a vambrace
are very similar to making a greave (as dis-
cussed in Medieval Warfare IV-3), except the
shapes are much subtler. They should not be-
come simple tubes, but fit precisely based on
the exact form of the arm.
The couter
The couter contributes greatly to the scale
and feel of the final harness. Couters are of-
ten surprisingly narrow from top to bottom.
Too large and they can easily dominate the
piece, giving it a clunky appearance. In the
second half of the fourteenth century, the
wing of the couter was beginning to cross
into the crook of the elbow and take on in-
creasing decoration.
Once the pattern for the couter is cut, it
is generally best to first do as much work as
possible on the wing. Start with the slight curve
of the wing as it comes into the crook of the el-
bow and then add any details, such as the sub-
tle shaping of Sir Richard Pembridge’s version.
From here, work can begin on the couter dish
itself. During the cutting phase, do not cut into Making a vambrace. Cut the
the corners where the wing and the main body straight lines of the vambrace once
of the couter meet. This area will experience the two sides are properly married.
© Graham Ashford
severe stresses during manufacture. It’s best left
Medieval warfare IV-5 41
This content downloaded from
17/09/14 15:33
 Blacksmithing
Couter under construction,
with the lames extended. There
should be no gaps in the lames
during the movement.
© Graham Ashford
A spaulder under construction.
Keeping the work together dur-
ing the build can help ensure
correct proportions and styles.
© Graham Ashford
42 Medieval Warfare IV-5
mw_4-5.indd 42
wider than necessary and trimmed back to-
wards the end of the couter’s build.
In my experience, both dishing and rais-
ing techniques are equally valid for getting
deeper shapes. In fact, using a combination
of dishing to get the shape roughly formed
and then raising to add the extra depth and
refinement works well. It is important to leave
the most pointed part of the couter’s shape
until last; during its manufacture, this area is
worked on extensively, and it can be danger-
ously thinned during the polishing stage.
The dishing is done with a ball stake or
rounded hammer, which pushes the material
into a dished form about 4 to 6 inches in di-
ameter and a couple of inches deep at its most
extreme. Begin with a gentle dishing movement
throughout the whole of the couter and then
move more into the middle, driving directly
down into the shape and always working in cir-
cles. The fourteenth century couter silhouette
should resemble arches found in contemporary
architecture, as this was considered a fashion-
able shape. The dishing often produces a shal-
lower, wider shape than required. Deepen
the shape over a raising stake by working the
outward facing edge of the couter down onto
the stake in concentric circles until the desired
shape is made. Shaping material using raising
techniques can take a lot of practice. However,
once mastered it offers an amazing control of
the piece and it is worthy of the time.
Once finished and roughly planished,
the point on the couter can be added with a
small peen from inside the couter to create a
decent point. Place a ball peen on the inside
exactly where you want the point to be on the
outside and give it a stout smack with a raw-
hide hammer; then dress back from the out-
side with a planishing hammer, integrating
the misshapen point into the overall shape
of the couter. It is vital, once all this work is
done, to ensure that the couter has a uniform
shape where the lames will meet it. After all,
this can throw out the movement once the
vambrace and rerebrace are attached.
Most people have an elbow width of be-
tween 4 to 5 inches. Using a semi-circular
block of wood or metal stake that is about 4 to
5 inches across will ensure a proper check for
the couter’s curve and enable a sliding rivet
to operate in a semi circle, like a bifurcated
capitol ‘O’ rather than a jammed, elongated
shape resembling a capitol ‘U’. The connec-
This content downloaded from
88.240.181.39 on Sun, 09 Oct 2022 19:15:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
tion of the vambrace and rerebrace should be
such that they in no way impede the articula-
tion of the elbow. In fact, the movement of the
arm harness should be greater than the move-
ment of the wearer’s own arm.
The spaulder
No rivets are visible in Pembridge’s spaulder
or its lames. In all likelihood, the spaulder and
lames are attached to the rerebrace through
three internal leather straps. These straps allow
the spaulder to move through the rotation of the
arm and shoulder without restriction. As with
all lames, there should be no gaps between
them when they are in position. The dishing on
the spaulder should be such that it nestles neat-
ly on the shoulder and does not dig in along its
edges. The spaulder is not hemispherical; rather
it is a little flatter along its outside facing edge,
mimicking the anatomy of the human shoulder.
While attaching the internal leather
straps to the spaulder, be sure to keep the front
edge about half an inch shorter across all three
lames. This will assist with the movement and
better copy the effigy evidence. The attach-
ment of the leather to the spaulder should be
done halfway up its length, or higher, to in-
crease the freedom of movement.
A leather tab is attached to the top of the
spaulder with a couple of rivets. This tab is
pointed to the arming jacket. Holding the ar-
mour to the body this way places the weight
of the arm harness across the shoulders rather
than the arms. The cuter strap holds the armour
to the arm and not on the arm.
Final thoughts
The finish of the armour is more often than not
a ‘shine between the scratches’. Medieval pol-
ishing techniques employed the use of filing,
burnishing and large water-powered clean-
ing wheels that left the surface of the armour
scratched but cleaned and polished. It appears
that the function and movement of the whole
armour was more important than the final fin-
ish of the individual pieces. Thus, although
cleaned and bright, the separate pieces are of-
ten not as perfect as they could be. MW
Graham started making armour as profession-
al in 2008. He trained for three years under
Master Armourer David Hewitt of White Rose
Armouries, which was funded by the Queen
Elizabeth Scholarship Trust (QEST).
17/09/14 15:36