Fashion in European Armor
by Dirk H. Breiding
Department of Arms and Armor, The Metropolitan Museum of Art


Like most manmade objects, armor was subject not only to technical advances but also to changes in taste as well as aesthetic and artistic expression within each period of its development. In broad outline, this can already be witnessed in the armor worn by warriors throughout the ancient world. In medieval and Renaissance Europe, especially from the fourteenth century onward, it is apparent that armor was strongly influenced by contemporary civilian costume according to current tastes and regional fashions (in some rare instances, armor could even influence civilian fashion). Such influences and fashions could change relatively quickly, and it is probably no exaggeration to argue that, to medieval and Renaissance minds, a concept similar to our understanding of "the '50s," "the '60s," and "the '70s" for the taste of a particular age or decade would probably have been quite familiar. In addition to the influence civilian costume had on the general appearance of armor, such as form and outline, different tastes and fashions are also clearly recognizable in the decoration of armor. To some extent, finally, technical developments and constructional features could also be so confined to a certain region that they can be classified as a local or national style. The study of "fashion in armor" accordingly can provide scholars with valuable information for the dating and geographical identification of armor. The following texts will give a broad outline of fashion in European armor from the eleventh to the seventeenth century, including a selection of the most important developments as well as a number of lesser known trends.


Fashion in European Armor, 1000–1300

Only scattered documentary and archaeological evidence is available for the Migration period and early Middle Ages, which makes any detailed analysis practically impossible. Sometimes precisely this scarcity of sources can give a misleading impression as to an allegedly particular fashion, as for instance in the case of the famous Bayeux Tapestry. Giving a pictorial account of the Norman conquest of Anglo-Saxon England culminating in the Battle of Hastings in 1066, the tapestry shows the majority of Norman men-at-arms as wearing a particular type of conical helmet with a face-protection in the shape of a nasal bar. It is the fame of this evidence, provided by the survival of a singularly outstanding work of art, that has largely contributed to such helmets being referred to as "Norman helmets." However, this type of helmet had already been worn by Viking warriors of earlier periods (before their settlement in Normandy during the tenth century), and a closer look at the tapestry reveals that some of the Anglo-Saxon men-at-arms wear the same helmets as their Norman adversaries. Moreover, during the eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth centuries, nasal helmets are in fact frequently found in depictions of men-at-arms from most other regions of medieval Europe.

When evidence becomes more readily available in larger quantities for the eleventh to the early thirteenth centuries, however, it can be established that, very generally speaking, the appearance of men-at-arms throughout Europe varied only to a small extent during this period. Indeed, the equipment and appearance of twelfth- and early thirteenth-century knights and men-at-arms from England would have differed little from those of their French, German, or Italian counterparts. Usually, such armor would comprise a mail shirt with attached hood and gauntlets, as well as mail leggings (chausses). On top of these a long flowing tunic (surcoat) could be worn, which was often girded with a belt, while a helmet (usually a so-called pot helm or barbiere, or a war hat) provided additional protection for the head. In all but the helmet, this appearance closely mirrored the civilian costume worn throughout Europe at the time. It is during the later part of the thirteenth century that regional differences in armor, especially the defenses for the arms and legs, begin to appear in France, England, Italy, and the Holy Roman Empire.

One of the first markedly noticeable instances of fashion in armor appears to be the use of small shoulder shields (ailettes), which were directly attached to the shoulders or upper arms as protection and/or a heraldic device. These ailettes were in vogue from about 1250 to the mid-fourteenth century, but were worn almost exclusively in France, or regions under strong French influence such as England and Flanders. Most of the scattered examples for the rare use of ailettes in Italy, the German-speaking lands, and Scandinavia appear to be also due to some form of French influence.


Fashion in European Armor, 1300–1400

In terms of the technical development of European armor, the fourteenth century is often referred to as the "age of experimentation." Mail armor was being reinforced with a range of additional defenses of varying shapes and construction for different parts of the body, ultimately leading to the development of the complete suit of plate armor in the following century. An equal variety is witnessed in the use of materials, such as quilted fabrics, hardened leather (cuir bouilli), and metal plates. The fourteenth century also witnessed some remarkable changes in civilian fashion. During the first quarter of the century, the waist as an individual feature of human anatomy began to be emphasized by the cut of the upper garment, and not by girdle or belt alone as before. From around 1340 onward, the upper part of the garment became increasingly tighter, while the waistline was continuously lowered until it reached a line with the crotch, and the skirt (of male garments) became constantly shorter. Contemporary chroniclers in late medieval Europe bewailed these "indecent" developments, for which some blamed a Spanish influence, while others saw France, especially the royal court at Paris, as the source of this new and "sinful" fashion. With sometimes as much as a decade delay, these same new fashions took hold in the appearance of contemporary armor, perhaps with some exceptions. Many chroniclers describe the new garments as being so tight that they severely restricted upper-body movement, while at the same time becoming so short that the breeches (a form of underwear), even genitals and buttocks themselves, could become exposed. But although the nobility certainly held fashion in high esteem, in armor such restriction in mobility and lack of protection would have been tolerated only to the point at which it began to impede its functional and protective qualities.

A particular fashion in armor, which appears to have been confined almost exclusively to the British Isles around 1325–40, was the custom of shortening the surcoat (a garment worn over the actual armor) in the front to about the level of the knees or mid-thigh, while leaving it longer in the back. This brief fashion is very much appreciated today among scholars of armor as it neatly reveals the different layers of protection worn underneath the surcoat.


Fashion in European Armor, 1400–1500

At the beginning of this period, by about 1420, the development of full plate armor—a defense enclosing almost the entire body with a system of steel plates articulated by rivets and leather straps—was complete. Regional and national fashions in civilian costume had been developing and noted long before this period. In armor, however, it is during the fifteenth century that certain characteristics in form, construction, and decoration can be seen, which are typical for different regions of Europe. Since the larger surfaces afforded by plate armor now allowed for an entire harness and its elements to be more individually shaped and decorated than armor of previous periods, such characteristics gave rise to distinctive styles and fashions of certain nationalities.

By far the largest manufacturers of armor were Italy and Germany, and the respective tastes and styles disseminating from the armor-making centers of southern Germany and northern Italy dominantly influenced the styles and fashions of most other regions throughout western Europe. In general, the German style favored a slender, symmetrical outline of the body. An emphasis on elegance and the vertical was achieved by richly decorating the surfaces of the plates with ridges and grooves, often in direct imitation of the folds in contemporary costume, while the plate's edges were decoratively cut with openwork, or embellished with applied or gilt brass borders reminiscent of Gothic tracery. By contrast, fifteenth-century Italian armor usually is asymmetrical (the left side, as the first point of an enemy's attack, being protected by larger plates that sometimes carried additional reinforces), somewhat rounder and heavier in appearance, and—if decorated at all—features less obtrusive decoration. In the Alpine region, where Italian and German tastes met, armor was worn that represented a hybrid of both styles.

But despite the dominance of these German and Italian fashions, fifteenth-century documents demonstrate that contemporaries also distinguished clearly between armor fashionable in France (including Burgundy), Spain, and England, although each of these national styles was usually to some degree influenced by a combination of German and Italian taste. France and England especially had adopted a style based on the German taste, but Italian armorers are recorded as having worked in Spain, France, and the Burgundian Netherlands throughout the fifteenth century, while the large armor-making centers in southern Germany and northern Italy, either by trade or direct commission, supplied clients throughout Europe with their products. Indeed, many Italian workshops produced armor made specifically for export in the fashion worn in Germany (alla tedesca) or France (alla francese).

At about mid-century, Italian armorers began producing armor all'antica: armor imitating (or thought to imitate) arms and armor of the style used by the heroes of classical antiquity. "Muscled cuirasses" and other figuratively embossed armor reappeared in Europe for the first time since antiquity, and became fashionable for use in court festivities.

During the last decade of the fifteenth century, it became fashionable in western Europe to wear a short skirt, often of richly adorned, sumptuous fabrics, over the armor. This fashion continued until well into the first half of the sixteenth century.

A rare example of the influence that armor, or rather the implied privilege and status of wearing armor, could have on civilian costume is demonstrated by an Italian trend of the second half of the fifteenth century, recently published by Tobias Capwell. During this period it appears to have been regarded as fashionable to wear so-called arming points on garments intended purely for civilian use. Arming points are essentially pairs of strings that are normally attached to the arming doublet (a sturdy garment worn underneath armor) in order to secure individual elements of the armor to the body. In later fifteenth-century Italy, these points appear to have acquired fashionable status through their inherent quality of bestowing an aura of chivalry on the wearer.


Fashion in European Armor, 1500–1600

At the turn of the fifteenth to the sixteenth century, one of the most startling changes in taste and fashion occurred, which was immediately mirrored in armor and can best be witnessed in the German harness of the period. Through what appears to have been combined influences from Italy and the (formerly Burgundian) Netherlands, the earlier emphasis on elegance and almost delicate slenderness, which so far had been emblematic of armor worn in many parts of the Holy Roman Empire and western Europe, suddenly—within the space of ten years—gave way to new forms. This change in fashion sprang from a new understanding and acceptance of the human body. Rather than obscuring bodily mass and idealizing its shape and presence, this very presence and physicality of the human body was now being emphasized. In accordance with a changed taste in civilian fashion, a new elegance was achieved by accentuating massive shape, more rounded forms, and a generally heavier outline, while still retaining a distinctive waist and well-modeled male legs.

One of the most well-known and easily recognizable indicators of this new taste is the concurrent development in footwear. Since at least the fourteenth century, the male shoe had a pointed front, and from about 1450 to around 1490, this point could sometimes be elongated to immense length, the so-called piked shoon, or Schnabelschuh (German; Schnabel = beak). The foot defense (sabaton) of the period followed this taste, often making it necessary to produce the sabatons, or at least their final, pointed plates, as separate pieces, to be taken off while the man-at-arms was dismounted in order to make walking easier. The pointed shoe vanished abruptly around 1500, to be replaced by a completely opposite shape. The front of the new shoe now had a straight edge, produced by the toe of the shoe being splayed out at the ball of the foot in a bulge of material. Again, this new outline of footwear was immediately copied for foot defenses, which gave rise to their modern labels of "bear-paw sabaton" or Kuhmaulschuh (German; Kuh = cow, Maul = snout, mouth).

From the beginning of the sixteenth century onward, and at first in addition to the decorative ridges and grooves, armor began to be adorned more and more frequently with etched decoration. Like the form and construction of armor in general, this somewhat newer aspect of decoration was equally susceptible to national and regional tastes and fashion.

Another particularly German fashion in armor can be followed mainly during the second and third decade of the sixteenth century. It was partially adopted by other western European regions, and also influenced export armor produced in Italy. The decorative ridges and grooves of earlier "Gothic" armor were employed in many ways, but by around 1515/20, they developed into a more or less parallel pattern, known as "fluting," that could now cover virtually the entire surface of most elements of armor (usually with the exception of the defenses for the lower legs, the greaves). Such "fluted armor," because of its development roughly coinciding with the reign of Emperor Maximilian I (r. 1493–1519), is commonly referred to by the misleading term of "Maximilian armor."

In Italy, between about 1530 and 1560, the aforementioned taste for armor all'antica reached its artistic peak with works by the famous Italian workshop of Filippo Negroli of Milan. Parade armor in this fashion was produced for the most illustrious clientele of European nobility, exquisitely embossed with figural and floral decoration, and often etched and gilded, or damascened and encrusted with gold and silver. Shields for ceremonial use were made either from wood and painted with elaborate mythological or historical scenes, or—when made of metal—embossed and decorated in the same style as the armor they accompanied. The high standards set by the Negroli workshop were emulated (though never quite attained) until the very end of the sixteenth century, with ceremonial armor for man and horse continuing to be decorated in the all'antica style.

During roughly the same period, an element of armor appeared that was always as much, if not more so, fashionable than functional. The history of the armored codpiece is closely related to its counterpart in civilian male costume. From the mid-fourteenth century onward, male garments for the upper body had occasionally become so short as to almost reveal the crotch. In these times prior to the development of trousers, men wore leggings tied to their undergarment or a belt, and the crotch was hidden with a flap secured to the upper inside edge of each legging. At the beginning of the sixteenth century, this flap began to be padded and thus visually emphasized. As such, the codpiece remained commonplace in European male costume until the end of the sixteenth century. On armor, the codpiece as a separate piece of plate defense for the genitals appeared during the second decade of the sixteenth century and remained in use until about 1570. It was generally thickly padded on the inside and attached to the armor at the center of the lower edge of the skirt. While its early form was rather cuplike, it remained under the direct influence of civilian costume, and later examples are somewhat more pointed upward, similar in shape to a cashew nut.

In the Holy Roman Empire, in Spain, and the Christian nations of southeastern Europe (especially Hungary), fashion received an interesting influence from outside their borders. Spain had witnessed the century-old attempt to free the peninsula from Muslim occupation, while in southeastern Europe several countries had been locked since the fall of Constantinople in 1453 in a continuing struggle against the steadily advancing Turks. This constant—albeit mostly belligerent—cultural interaction led to a somewhat ambiguous European attitude toward the Muslim neighbor, which to some extent was reciprocated on the Muslim side. This attitude was marked by both fear and curiosity and led to attentive observation of the enemy's armor, weapons, and other equipment. A parade helmet from Spain, dating to the late fifteenth or early sixteenth century, is of a typical Spanish shape, while the addition of cutouts over the eyes is a feature of Islamic helmets. Its added decoration in the Hispano-Moresque style suggests that it was once owned by a high-ranking member of the Nasrid court, perhaps even the king himself. During the mid-sixteenth century, some German and eastern European armorers' workshops in return began to cater to a new taste in the "exotic," and produced armor, especially helmets, which in form and decoration was directly copied from Turkish models that presumably had found their way into the empire either as war booty or diplomatic gifts.

Perhaps with the exception of the helmet, no other element of armor has been as important an indicator of fashion throughout most regions of Europe as the breastplate. Its shape and profile changed according to the dictates of a general development in European male costume for the upper body. The broad and immediately visible surface of the breastplate lent itself to adornment in a style of decoration more specific to its region of manufacture, or as requested by the wearer. From the beginning of the century until about 1540, breastplates tended to be rather globose and rounded, lacking a medial ridge, but often decorated with fluting or etching. From about 1530 onward, the breastplate became longer, and less globose both in shape and profile. The overall decoration with fluting and etching appeared to lose much of its former appeal; it became plainer in appearance, and the medial ridge was reintroduced (it had been fashionable throughout the fifteenth century). Immediately, this medial ridge began to be drawn out into an obtuse point at about the center of the breastplate; in Germany, this new feature was sometimes exaggerated into almost a sharp point or small vertical comb, called a Tapul. During the remainder of the century, both in civilian costume and armor, this point was set at a continuously lower level, until during the last decade of the sixteenth century, waistcoats and breastplates had developed into the well-known "goose-belly" or "peascod" shape.


Fashion in European Armor, 1600–1700

Dictated by functionality rather than fashion, armor fell into gradual decline during the seventeenth century, first in quality, later also in quantity. The weight of field armor was greatly increased in order to render it bulletproof against ever more accurate firearms. At the same time, however, the full suit of armor became increasingly rare, not only because of the amplified weight but also because of changes in tactics. Most fighting men, including their leaders, began to abandon what they viewed as excessive equipment, with only vital parts of the body, such as the head, torso, and hands, remaining protected by metal armor. A few masters, mostly court armorers, continued to produce armor of superior quality for more illustrious clients of the European nobility, but such examples were the exception rather than the rule. The growing demand to fit out large standing armies with armor at low cost (and, consequently, low quality) drastically curbed the influence fashion had on armor, although even so-called munition armor was still modeled after contemporary male costume. In shape, the breastplate began to appear squarer, while the former "peascod" profile became flatter, retaining a distinct medial ridge that now ended in a short, sharp point in line with the lower edge of the breastplate. The tassets (defenses for the upper thighs attached to the breastplate) became large in size and mirrored the exuberant emphasis on the broad hips found in contemporary fashion.

Only three elements of armor survived the gradual decline of field armor well into the nineteenth century, and to some extent even today. Helmets and breastplates continued to be worn by soldiers, but rather than being custom-made and subjected to the changing influences of fashion, their appearance came to be dictated by other factors. While changes in the shape of the helmet were determined by functionality and national identity, the breastplate was largely preserved in the shape of the seventeenth century, and—after the mid-nineteenth century—was retained almost exclusively for representative purposes. A similar fate was shared by the gorget, or collar (the neck defense). Its front plate continued to be worn only by high-ranking officers, less for the protection of the upper chest and throat than to denote rank as well as a claim of succession to a chivalrous tradition that had long since passed.

Fun read, very informative.

"Words... words... words..."

I'm sure it's a good read. Will check back later for what is a definite education