[Gary Teuscher]

There was a pretty good video testing various thicknesses of leather vs sword and axe cuts. I know many of these tests are somewhat useless, but this one seemed pretty accurate.

Tested were 4 weight, 8 weight and 2 layers of 8 weight leather, A piece of hardened leather, treated with hot water (I believe it was originally 8 weight, but shrunk, my guess to a 10-12 weight, Also tested was a similar weight armour made of boiled leather lammalae.

The soft leather offered very little of no resistance vs cuts or thrusts, even the 2 layers of 8 weight leather. 8 weight leather is considered mocassin grade leather, and is the equivalent of the thickest of most modern leather jackets.

The Hard leather piece showed good resistance, was rarely pierced (the axe did so, IIRC a thrust penetrated as well but not deeply. The problem I saw with this is that after even 1 hard blow, the leather piece had a lot of cracks in it. It seems as if it would deteriorate quickly if subjected to much stress. Maybe there were ways to treat it to prevent some of this brittleness, though it seemed real easily stressed.

The leather lammelar resisted cuts and trusts well. The lames were cut some, but not deeply. The axe is the only think that penetrated (or may not have, I forget), and if it penetrated the penetration was not deep whatsoever.

Based on this, here are my thoughts - sot Leather jackets, tunics, etc. offerred little protection vs weapons, likely no better than a layer or two of thick cloth. They may have been used for belts and similar, but seemed somewhat useless as true armour. They are heavier than cloth, probably more expensive, and not much protective value.

Someone mentioned to me that they may have used 13-15 weight soft leather as armour. As the sword easily cut two layers of 8 weight, I'm not sure if this would even de very effective. And I'm not sure how rare or how much leather (meaning it's thick enough for 13-15 weight in only a few areas - rarity effects price) it would take to do this, and this would effect the price, perhaps even making it as expensive as metal armour?

The hardened leather - My thoughts here is that it would be useful, but not have a long battlelife. Now if you get hit once or twice on the shins in a battle, it will last a bit. Maybe this type armour would be a bit on the disposable side, in a campaugn you may not have it around by the end, or you carry some spares. Plus leather does not handle weather well at all.

The lammelar would be effective. The only negatives here though - if it is 8 weight., Lammelar would have some overlap. Not knowing what the overlap is, I'll assume you need 1.5 square feet of lames to make 1 square foot of material, so if this is anywhere near correct you are looking at a weight of 12, maybe 14 with lacing?

In comparison steel weighs about 1.6 pounds for a 1 mm thick 1 foot square piece. My guess is mail weighs slightly less. In the early plate/mail period, it seems 1 mm was a fairly common thickness, going up for torso armour over time, limb armour staying at the 1 mm thickness. So leather lammelar would be lighter than plate or mail, but there is not a huge difference in weight.

Add this to the fact that while the leather lammelar was effective vs blows, metal armour will be more so. Metal armour will also be more survivable, it can handle the blows without being stressed as much, so it can be something that's handed down while the leather lammelar may have to be replaced a few times. The romans make mention of leather armour, stating it gets "soggy" in wet climes, whch would indicate deterioration (I think this was Tacitus).

So what is the reason to use leather lammelar instead of metal - it's not overly light, wears badly, not quite as effective as metal. Price better be a big thing here, but I do recall somewhere where it mentions a leather buff coat cost more than a plate back and breast. I'm not sure how to take this, could the buff coat have been a form of Brigandine?

I would think soft leather as a true form of armour would have been not very useful - when thin as the 4 weight, it provides little better armour than heavy cloth - and weighs and costs more. The thicker types stil are not very resistive, would not be real light anf there is that price factor.

Hardened leather as "plate" - OK for spot protection, short battle life though, and once again how expensive?

The leather lammelar armour - this is not bad, but why not upgrade to leather at least in the long run? Once again I'm not sure what the cost would be. I could see it work nicely in a hide rich metal poor people (Steppe Nomads?).

The one area where I do agree leather may have seen some use - a leather/textile composite armour. The Gambesons are sometimes mentioned as 17 layers or more of linen, not sure if this indluded padding as well. MAybe some of the linen layers could have been leather in some gambesons.

[Hadrian Coffin]

It really depends on the leather manufacture. I really would not put stock in it without knowing the way it was made.

[Gary Teuscher]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLGwNY3xMjM&feature=channel

Above is the link.

Not sure what you are referring to how it was manufactured. The hardened part an brittleness is something I'm curious about. We don't know exactly how cuir-boilli was made to my knowledge, though we do have some ideas.

The other issue about leather armour of any type - There are very very few finds of something of this sort. Yes, Leather does not hold up as well over time. But leather shoes are not an uncommon find. Of course, shoes were very common, and leather armour apparently was not, so it's not that you can rule it out completely. But it was certainly not commonplace based on findings, proabably rather rare if using this for evidence.

I do agree to a point with your references about the sagas. While we cannot say it clearly was armour as opposed to clothing, it could have been IMO a composite quilt/leather/cloth type of thing as well.

Im not sure what the thickness of Reindeer hide was. The heavier grade leathers are said to come from cow, moose, and elk. Thinner leathers come from Horse, deer, and goat.

It would seem reindeer would fit on the thinner end, so it would have to be in layers, perhaps with other materials to be effectvee.

Either that or enchanted

[Hadrian Coffin]

I meant is the leather vegeatable tanned, brain tanned, chrome tanned, etc.?
I agree I think any sort of leather armour would be constructed of more then just leather, perhaps layered with linnen, stuffed with wool, leather with stitched on leather braids, quilted, etc. etc. the list goes on and on

[Brawn Barber]

Hello to all..


'Hi there,
I'm trying to do some research into the extact form of leather armour in the early medieval period, I have been so far amazed at the seeming lack of concrete (or even vague) information on this so was wondering if anyone could help. Detailed descriptions, diagrams or photos of reliable reproduction/museum pieces are eagerly sought. The period I'm interested in is 850-1100 and geographically/culturally norman/saxon/viking or french at a push. I plan on hopefully making a piece/set of armour for re-enactment purposes but my group are pretty stringent on authenticity so I'm trying to get reliable source information to base it on.'

http://www.metmuseum.org/Works_Of_Art/recent_...000.66.asp

We have crafted our own version of this cuirass which does produce a rattling sound. I don't know if this addresses your question or another, but it does however address how long leather has been in use as armour, by whatever name. A combination of a 13/15 oz leather cuirass and/or cuirbouille hardened leather in conjunction with maille would form a formidable blunt/slashing/piercing defense. Many times this would be for training purposes which would prove invaluable, especially near the mid to late 1300s when the crafting of metal armour really began to flourish.

"Cuirbouille", or "courbouille" leather must be crafted from vegetable tanned leather as oil tanned leather by the very tanning process involved prevents the leather from hardening properly for this application. The hardening method can be tricky and has to be precisely worked to prevent the leather from becoming too brittle regardless if water, wax or a combination is used. It can be performed properly to provide maximum protection, minimize brittleness and with an extended life however, if fashioned in the correct manner.



Cheers,

Brawn

[Dan Howard]

[Gary Teuscher]

[Brawn Barber]

The emphasis here is that the armour was of leather, is dated as the oldest available and that it was in existence then.
I was addressing how early leather armour had been documented for use.

"Laced with rawhide", not composed of rawhide is what the description reads.

[Gary Teuscher]

[Dan Howard]

Just because someone somewhere used a thing doesn't mean that everyone else did too. That logic leads to highlander ninjas. We must go with available evidence. Until someone produces evidence of leather armour during the early medieval period in Western Europe then we cannot say it was used. Leather scale was used long before the Scythians even existed. An example was found in Tut's tomb and is still in the Cairo museum. In any case, a two thousand year old example of Scythian scale armour is hardly evidence for it being used in Medieval Europe.

Horn armour was defnitely used in Europe but the only text that mentions the form it took is a later source mentioning jacks of plates. The earlier references could be scale, or lamellar, or a rudimentary coat of plates. We simply don't know because the texts aren't specific and none have been found in the archaeologial record. I'm not sure how this relates to the exsistence of leather armour though.

The only thing that Bayeux Tapestry can tell us about armour is that mail was fairly common. All else is speculation.

[Gary Teuscher]

[James Barker]

[Sam Gordon Campbell]

A picture of the supposed Wuttemburg Tournier Helmet, and the Royal Armouries Yearbook 2: "Hardened Leather Armour" text; I've tried getting both, but to no avail, can anyone give me some leads?
Better still, does anyone have an example of them?

[Kristian Fagerström]

[Omero Bernardone Quinto]

Leather was not so expensive, in 1200 a calf hide cost 26 pence.

[Dan Howard]

Calf hide? You make parchment from calf hide. Do you know how many of these would have been needed to make armour? Cuchulain needed seven yearling ox hides just to make a battle girdle (cathchriss). More would have been required to protect the rest of the body. And a yearling ox hide is larger and thicker than calf skin.

[Eric S]

[Dan Howard]

The description says "boiled leather" which implies cuirbouilli, but I agree that rawhide is more likely. If it was "restored" by Bashford Dean then it may not look anything like it did when originally in use.

[Eric S]

[Omero Bernardone Quinto]

Sorry Dan i mean ox hide, not calf hide (bad english), a single ox hide is enough for make several layers, however in ancient time intere siege machine was covered whit leather, if that was so expensive they would have used bronze.
in pre-1135 a Sheep cost 6d in 1268 is 8d, a sheepskin is near 3mm and 1 square meter, im not saying is a prove, i say is not so difficult to make 12mm of leather protection for a little money.