The Advancement of European Body Armor:

Ancient to the Middle AgesFigure 1. Full suit of German Gothic Armor.

Source: Woosnam-Savage & Hall, 2000, p. 68

Isaac J. SwansonResearch Document

March 16, 2006WR 227

Body Armor 1

Summary

This article begins with a brief history of prehistoric armor and how armor

development may have occurred in the millennia before civilized society began. This

introductive section is mainly speculative on the origin of armored protection and what

materials were used in the manufacturing of the final product.

Upon finishing this discourse, the history of armor production starts during the

Greco-Roman period. The paper briefly describes the ingenuity of Greek armor and

quickly moves on to improvements borrowed and developed by Rome. The superior

armor of the Roman legions is discussed.

After the fall of Rome, historical information on armor shifts to chain mail. In this

section, the origin of chain armor is discussed. More information is given regarding the

construction methods used to produce chain mail and the weight of each piece.

Plate armor is introduced next. Renditions of plate development over a timeline

are discussed as well as the various defensive pieces covering the body are also

described. The remaining details included in this section are attributed to armor weight

and costs.

The last section of the paper discusses the development of protective helmets,

starting with a brief history. From there, various improvements are explained on the

transitory period of head defense as well as the construction method used to build each

helmet.

A brief conclusion sums up the paper touching on the preservation and the future

of armor.

Body Armor 2

The Advancement of European Body Armor:

Ancient to the Middle Ages

I. An Overview of Body Armor:

A. Kinds of Protection.

1. Shields.

2. Chest protection.

3. Head gear.

B. Armor Materials.

1. Padded Fabric.

2. Leather.

3. Metal.

a. Bronze.

b. Steel.

4. Ceramics and Modern Woven.

II. The Roman Legions:

A. The ingenuity of Lorica Segmentata.

1. Mobility of light weight armor.

2. Flexibility of articulated bands.

B. The effectiveness of Gallic Helmets.

Body Armor 3

1. Ear guards.

2. Mobile cheek guards.

3. Protective Neck guard.

C. Superiority of the Suctum.

1. Deflective curve.

2. Full body protection.

3. Interlocking phalanx and the turtle formation.

III. Medieval Armor:

A. Chain Mail.

1. Origin of development.

2. Construction method.

3. Weight and size.

4. Mobility.

B. Plate Mail.

1. Origin of development.

2. Construction method.

3. Weight and size.

4. Mobility.

C. Padded Armor and the Gambeson.

Body Armor 4

1. The use of the Gambeson.

2. Effectiveness of Padded Armor.

D. Helms and Helmets.

1. Early Middle Age helmet development.

a. Brief history of the helmet.

b. Spangenhelms.

c. Conical Helms.

2. The Bassinet

a. Replacing the conical helmets.

b. Variations on designs.

c. Visor additions and changes.

d. Chain mail Adventails and their replacement.

3. The Kettle Helm.

a. Simple structure and construction method.

b. Protection bonuses.

c. Sight, hearing, and breathing bonuses.

4. The Sallet and Barbuta.

a. Brief history.

b. Popular dominance.

Body Armor 5

c. Barbuta design.

d. Sallet design with bevor.

e. Problems with the bevor.

IV. Conclusion:

A. Recap of historic timeline.

B. A need to preserve the historical pieces.

C. Development of armor in the future.

Body Armor 6

The Advancement of European Body Armor:

Ancient to the Middle Ages

Throughout the ages man-kind has been innovative by creating and manipulating

new inventions as the human race progresses. One such development is the production of

protective body armor. Body armor has been around for several millennia. In fact, there is

no exact evidence of when or where armor was developed, but without a doubt it

originated as nomadic people hunted dangerous game and warred with each other (Pike,

2006, n.p.; Yates, 2004, n.p.; and Klučina, 1992, pp. 7-9).

Several kinds of body protection developed from these early times. Shields were

most likely the first form of protection developed. They were made out of wood and

hides, which were light, and allowed the body to move fluidly. Also the shield could be

discarded with relative ease or propped up to hide behind. Soon after shields appeared,

crude but serviceable forms of body protection began to be developed. These armors

were again made from leather and stiffened fabrics. Along with the shield and torso

protection, a form of head protection was introduced. In the earlier eras, leather and the

skulls of large animals were crafted into head protection. Soon all forms of body

protection were being used defensively as well as offensively.

As time progressed, new techniques of metallurgy were discovered and hides,

wood, and bone were replaced with metal protection (Pike, 2006, n.p.; Yates, 2004, n.p.;

and Klučina, 1992, pp. 12-18). Wheelock, Hobbs, & Maddok (n.d.) explain that bronze,

being one of the first strong alloys, was forged into helms, cuirass, and greaves, along

with weapons, by the Greeks around 800-600 BCE (n.p). Woosnam-Savage & Hall

Body Armor 7

(2000) state that the Greeks were the first to forge their cuirass, or back and breast plates,

into contoured muscle shapes of the chest and abdomen. However, they first made these

muscled cuirasses out of hardened linen or leather. The independent Greek city-states had

the first superior armored troops in Europe (pp. 28-29). A few hundred years after these

Greek innovations, the Romans were dominating the Mediterranean region in iron armor

around 250 BCE (Wheelock, Hobbs, & Maddok, n.p., n.d.).

Armor of the Roman Legions

Even though the Greeks had many technological advances in armor forging, it

was the Romans that produced a military unrivaled for nearly 1000 years. Not only were

Rome’s soldiers better trained in tactics and maneuvers, but they also possessed superior

technologies which had either been developed or

borrowed from conquered subjects. With the introduction

of segmented armor, or Lorica Segmentata, the Romans

could produce armor that was simpler and cheaper to

make (see figure 2). The simplicity of this armor made it

easy to maintain. Also being made of iron instead of

bronze, the armor was stronger for the same amount of

weight (Wheeler, n.d., n.p.). Since the Lorica

Segmentata, also known as Lamellar, was made of 24

large separate metal plates that were tied together by

leather straps, it allowed for each soldier in the Roman

legions to move with improved flexibility (Woosnam-

Savage & Hall, 2001, p. 36).

Body Armor 8

Figure 2. A Fully Armed Roman Trooper.

Source: Woosnam-Savage & Hall, 2000, p. 37.

The Romans developed several types of helmets throughout the time of their

imperial dominance. However, Rome’s most successful development in head protection

was the introduction of Gallic helmets (see figure 2). This occurred about the same time

that Lorica Segmentata was adopted into widespread use throughout the legions.

Evidence from Woosnam-Savage & Hall (2000) as well as from Wheeler (n.d.) explain

that the Imperial Gallic Helmet was made from one solid piece of iron and included

hinged cheek guards. The cheek guards helped protect the sides of the face from slashing

blows while still giving the soldier full visibility with no breathing restrictions. The

Romans also developed a broad brim that protected the back of the neck, which could

deflect arrows, rocks, and direct sword blows. Another feature that was later added to the

Gallic helmet, were the open ear guards. The Romans, like the Greeks before them,

discovered that it was hard to hear orders wearing their helmets, especially during the

peak of battle. To fix this simple problem the Romans cut a hole, behind the cheek guard,

and added a guard that protruded from the helmet to protect the ear. With these features

the Gallic helmet was used until the collapse of the Roman Empire, when much of the

engineering technology was lost (p. 36) (n.p.).

According to Pike (2006), the final superior defense to Rome’s military machine

was the tower shield, also known as the Suctum (see figure 2). The Suctum was a large

rectangular shield made of two boards that were laminated together. After this process

this large shield was covered in canvas or leather for looks and so it would not be weather

damaged. The Suctum was incurved into the shape of one quarter of a cylinder. This

curvature was much better at deflecting arrows and swords. The Suctum had its edges

and corners were strengthened by banned iron rims and the center by an oval boss called

Body Armor 9

an umbo, for rigidity (n.p). Rome’s legions could interlock these shields into a protective

shell against a hail of arrows and projectiles, adding to the superiority of the Roman

military.

Chain Mail

After the Roman Empire fell, Europe descended into the Dark Ages. However,

towards the end of this period, armor began to develop once again. According to Waddell

& Palermo (2002), suits of chain mail were one of the earliest forms of armor that were

used before and during the Dark Ages. The Romans adopted it into use for their lighter

auxiliary troops. The development of chain mail has been attributed to the Celts in the 3rd

century BCE. It was widely dispersed throughout Europe at this period in time. “Plate

armor technology fell into general disuse” when the Roman Empire fell to Germanic

invaders, since the tribesmen did not know how to work the massive forges. Yet, chain

mail endured and remained used well into the 15th century (p. 57).

Waddell & Palermo continue by explaining that chain mail is made of interlinked

and riveted metal rings. These rings were made by “cutting long strips” from a sheet of

metal. After the cutting, the strips were heated and beaten into a rough form of wire. At

this point the armorers would pull the wire strips through bored holes to achieve the

proper gauge of wire. The next step in the complex process of creating chain mail was

wrapping the wire around a wooden stick. “A hammer and chisel were used to cut”

through the wrapped wire and form them into separate links. The cut end of these links

were hammered flat and pierced where a rivet was inserted and pinched to hold each link

together (p. 58). This process, making a suit of chain mail, consumed a greater amount of

time than later methods used to develop new types of armor.

Body Armor 10

Since the interlinked design of chain mail was extremely flexible, armed warriors

had no mobility problems. Waddell & Palermo explain further, how a knee length full

armed mail shirt or hauberk as it was called; only weighed a surprising 30 pounds. This

light armor was used and favored for well over 1300 years. Scale mail armor was used

during this same period and was an alternative to chain mail. It had overlapping scales of

metal that were punched and sewn to a leather backing, much like the scales on a fish.

This type of armor was used more in Eastern Europe. However, it was not as widely used

as chain mail (p. 59), but it led to the development of solid plate armors.

Plate Mail

Plate armor, or plate mail, as it is sometimes called, came about gradually as

weapons became more durable. Since chain mail could not withstand a direct shot from

an arrow, a new method of protection, called plate armor, was developed and introduced

as a means of defense that became superior to chain mail.

According to Waddell & Palermo (2002) the first form of plate armor to develop,

aside from the helmet, was the cuirass. The cuirass being reintroduced, from its Greek

origin, was made from a solid piece of hardened leather that covered the front and

sometimes the back of the torso. It was worn over a chain mail hauberk and under the

surcoat (p. 60). Later the cuirass was forged out of metal which made the armor resilient

in deflecting piercing blows as well as long range shots from standard bows. The next

plate armor development focused on leg protection, since legs were the most vulnerable

while on horseback. Poleyns, knee plate, were the first leg plate armor to come into

common use. Soon after the introduction of leg armor, plate armor protecting the arms,

called couters, followed. In the second decade of the 14th century armored foot defense,

Body Armor 11

called sabatons, were introduced (p. 56). Eventually armor became so complex that the

medieval warrior “was said to be armed cap-a-pie,” which was derived from an “old

French phrase meaning, from head to foot” (Gravett,1998, p. 29). Towards the later 13th

and early 14th centuries, armorers developed articulated plates to allow freedom of

movement (p. 56). This made the well armored warrior not only a formidable fighting

force, but a more agile one as well.

Gravett (1998) wrote that plate armor

was forged much differently than chain mail.

First an armorer began the armor forging

process by heating and hammering a bar or

lump of steel into a flat sheet. After this, the

armorer would hammer out a piece of steel on

an anvil into the shape that was desired. When

the hammering was finished the armorer would

then plunge the metal into a barrel of cool water

to strengthen it, sometimes the piece would be

reheated and the hammering process would

begin again to perfect the armor. After the

forging process, the hammered metal was then

sent to another armorer who cut the hammered

metal into the shape of the destined piece. From

here, the piece of armor was sent to the finisher,

who punched holes in the plates, riveted the

Body Armor 12

Figure 3. Avant armor made in Milan 1440-1445.

Source: Woosnam-Savage & Hall, 2000, p. 37.

separate plates together, and added leather straps. The finisher would then send the

finished armor to be painted and polished by other craftsmen (pp. 32-33). Parks (1992)

admits, to some surprise, that the leather straps were fastened together exactly like belt

buckles are currently. Also due to the introduction and rapidly improving firearms of later

period armor, armor smiths would fire guns at their finished product. The dent left by the

bullet was called a “proof mark,” proving that the armor could withstand gunfire (n.p).

This shows that the medieval smiths prided themselves in providing the best quality

work.

Most people today think that a knight’s body armor was cumbersome and

extremely heavy. Woosnam-Savage& Hall (2000), explain that this misrepresentation of

armor has come mainly from “Hollywood and British films.” In the movie Henry V,

filmed in 1945, the producers portray knights as “being winched up by pulleys onto their

steeds,” which is completely inaccurate. “Armor had to be flexible and efficient;”

otherwise it would have been useless while engaging in battle and most likely would have

been discarded. As mentioned before a chain mail hauberk weight around 30 pounds, a

full suit of plate armor weight between 60 and 70 pounds. This may seem like a lot of

weight, however, troops in full combat fatigues today carry anywhere from 120 to 140

pounds of gear. In addition to the low weight of armor, a man of noble birth was trained

to wear the armor starting between the ages of eight and ten. Also since the armor pieces

were “evenly distributed about the body,” armored men could run, lie down, and lift

themselves into the saddle. This quote from Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, IV.1, taken

from the text of Woosnam-Savage & Hall, shows the true lightweight mobility of plate

body armor:

Body Armor 13

I saw young Harry- with his beaver on,

His cuisses on his thighs, gallantly arm’d,

Rise from the ground like a feathered Mercury,

And vaulted with such ease into his seat,

As if an angel dropp’d down from the clouds,

And witch the world with noble horsemanship.

(p. 70)

In continuation, Woosnam-Savage & Hall (2000) express that the cost of armor

was relative to the quality and the inflation from earlier times, which is similar to what

occurs with prices today. Superior quality plate armor was custom forged based on the

wearer’s specifications and took longer to forge. Unsurprisingly this armor and even the

iron and steel materials were extremely expensive. At the peak of armor smithing in 1547

a suit of armor “cost roughly 1258 guilders,” or the “equivalent of 12 years of pay of a

courtier.” A variant suit of armor made only a few years later, in 1559, was guilded and

“cost 2400 Welsche (Italian) Kronen.” This exorbitant amount of money equaled the sum

of master masons earnings for 59 years, including weekends. Cheaper armor, however,

was available to the common soldier. These “munition grade armors” were mass

produced, but were not sized to fit every individual soldier. They were also of much

poorer quality than the armors made for the aristocracy. In fact, “Henry the VIII

purchased 2000 of these munition armors at the price of 16 shillings apiece” (p. 70).

These forms of plate armor were undoubtedly superior to anything that had come before

them. Pike (2006) explains that armor progressed well into the 17th century until it was

made obsolete by modern firearms (n.p).

Body Armor 14

Soft Armor

Soft armors were the first form of armor in recorded history. According to

Wheelock, Hobbs, & Maddok (n.d.) and Waddell & Palermo (2002), pourpoints, or

quilted defenses, called aketons were worn under chain or plate armor to reduce the

impact of blows (see figure 4). Aketons were made of at least two layers of linen material

and were filled with rags or tow as padding and was

quilted vertically. The aketon, when worn under armor,

reached to knee length and had long sleeves for full

upper body protection. Another form of padded armor

was the gambeson. Gambesons were worn over plate or

chain armor as an extra padded defense. Common

soldiers who could not afford the expensive metal armor

often wore gambesons by themselves, for defense.

Gambesons were made of finer materials and were often

decorated. Of course the nobles could afford to have fine

fabrics used on their gambesons, while the best the

ordinary soldier could get was made of leather (n.p.) (pp.

59-60). Padded armor was a light weight and cheap alternative. It gave excellent

protection to bashing blows while being worn beneath plate and chain mail armor.

Pourpoints, worn by themselves were an adequate defense against a slashing blow. A

chop by a great axe, however, would cut through the padded defense easily. A piercing

blow from a sword or arrow, or even a lance tip, could also prove itself fatal to the

common soldier.

Body Armor 15

Figure 4. Soldier wearing Aketon and Kettle Hat.

Source: Gravett, 1998, p. 20.

Helmets and Helms

The first metal head protection manifested approximately around 3000 BCE in

civilized Middle Eastern societies to protect from lethal blows to the scalp by mace like

implements (Tenner, 2003, n.p.). Leather and wood were most likely used for much

earlier head defense, but there are no artifacts or written evidence supporting this claim.

Head protection developed and dispersed, spreading into Europe. With much innovation

by the Greeks and Romans metal helmet protection became supreme in the west, until the

fall of Rome when superior forging technologies were lost.

Wheelock, Hobbs, & Maddok (n.d.), explain that the first helms to be used in

Europe after the fall of Rome were based on the late empire’s spangenhelms. These

helms were constructed by riveting beaten iron panels to a framework of iron or bronze

strips. These later progressed into the construction of the great helm which gave full head

protection, but did not provide great visibility. Around 900 CE helmets that were forged

entirely from one solid piece of metal were beginning to appear throughout Europe.

Around this same time period conical helmets first introduced by the Normans began to

be widely used among armored soldiers. The conical helms were bullet shaped and

usually had a bar for a nasal guard. These helms were commonly worn over a chain mail

coif by knights until the 1250s in Europe (n.p.).

Wheelock, Hobbs, & Maddok (n.d.) continue by adding that during the late 1200s

conical helmets were replaced by a domed version called the cervelière, or better know as

the basinet. This close fitting rounded skull cap could be worn either under a chain mail

coif or over it. It was also worn for extra defense under the great helm for added

protection. “At first there were three basic types of basinets.” The first type was

Body Armor 16

constructed in a deep conical form that “extended down the back of the neck and had a

visor.” Another form of basinet was “closefitting and globular” and “only reached just

below the ears.” The third was a tall conical helm that reached just to the “top of the

ears.” These basinets remain in widespread use until the 1350s, where a medium height

conical helm appears with protection extending along the cheeks and “nape of the neck.”

By the end of the 12th century the basinet was extended down to the base of the neck and

protected the cheekbones. The conical point moved further back on the crest of the helm

until it disappeared altogether (n.p.).

Eventually the basinets developed better face protection that was not just one

solid piece like the great helm. “Throughout Europe in the 1380s,” basinets began to

develop a visor that had a pronounced snout, which was mussel shaped, along with eye

and mouth slits. This jetliner nosed look was designed to deflect blows to the facial area

by sword, lance, or arrow. Breath holes were also added to the visor for better ventilation.

In addition to the snout, hinges were also incorporated into the visor. This not only

allowed for the visor to be lowered or raised, but for it also to be removed by pulling pins

from the hinges (n.p.).

Adventails were “fan-shaped curtains of mail” that “extended from the base of the

basinet.” This defensive covering only protected the shoulders and down to the sternum

area in the front and back of the helm. The adventail protected the throat and shoulder

area but did not cover the face. This additional chain defense could be removed from

rivets in the basinet to be repaired or cleaned. At a later date the adventail was replaced

by a full necked helmet or a gorget (n.p.).

Body Armor 17

Another helmet innovation that came about around the transition between the 11th

and 12th centuries, according to Wheelock, Hobbs, & Maddok (n.d.), was the chapel de

fer, otherwise known as the kettle hat since it resembles potted cooking wear (see figure

4). The kettle hat was made from a bowl shaped piece with a wide brim. The bowl was

either constructed in a solid, hammered, piece or by multiple plates that were riveted to a

cross of steel (n.p.). The war hat, as it is also sometimes called, was relatively

inexpensive and “took less time and skill” to forge (Tenner, 2003, n.p.). When first

introduced knights sometimes wore this helm over a basinet or mail coif (Wheelock,

Hobbs, & Maddok, n.d., n.p.). While duly noted, Tenner (2003) affirms that the chapel de

fer was ideally used for foot soldiers in mass numbers. The wide brim made the kettle

helm a favorite over many centuries because of its increased protection from “volleys of

arrows and missiles hurled from walls during sieges.” Several other reasons the chapel de

fer was popular for several centuries was due to the fact that it was “comfortable to

wear,” easy to remove when needed, and had no interference with vision or hearing. With

this beneficial design the kettle helm not only possessed a means of popular defense in

Medieval Europe, but was reused during the World Wars and continues to be used today

as hard hat protection for miners, construction workers, and many other hazardous jobs.

The most effective helmets were developed in the early to mid 15th century.

Woosnam-Savage & Hall (2000) indicate that the two most common and well designed

helmets were the sallet and the barbuta. The barbuta design was based from the ancient

Greek Corinthian style helm by applying a “T shaped opening” that allowed for sight and

ventilation (see figure 3). This simple but effective design allowed the armored warrior to

have complete head protection while still allowing for unobstructed vision and respiration

Body Armor 18

(p. 62). Both Tenner (2003) and Woosnam-Savage & Hall (2000) suggest that the sallet,

being the other helmet of choice, was widely favored in England and the Germanic

regions of Europe. This helmet offered superior visibility with its pivoted visor which

could be raised or lowered during times of noncombatant exchanges. Also the versatile

sallet had a contoured brim that covered the back of the neck for additional protection.

The sallet, when incorporated with full plate armor, was fitted with a bevor, or a chin and

neck protective plate (see figure 1.) (n.p.) (p. 62). Woosnam-Savage & Hall (2000) add

that while the ability to remove the bevor was a bonus, the chin protection itself did not

have much ventilation. Many soldier and knights that either forgot to don the bevor or

that lowered it for better ventilation were commonly killed in battle due to the exposure

of the throat (p. 62). Both the barbuta and the sallet are thought to have originated in

northern Italy and then spread throughout Europe (Tenner, n.d., n.p.). Even with these

slight disadvantages, the barbuta and the sallet remained in use until the necessity for full

plate armor was reduced and eventually died out.

Armor has changed throughout history in both appearance and defense. It could

be stated that the rise of nations were not only created and defended by courageous men,

but also by the armored protection that they wore. These legendary plates of steel, not

only represent the past struggles of civilizations, but the very essence of survival of

societies. It would be a shame to lose sight of the artful and practical design armor has

wrought throughout history. By remembering and preserving these wondrous metallic

defenses, future societies will be able to better see and understand the progression of

man. Who knows, the suits of ancient glory may inspire the achievement of tomorrow’s

body protection.

Body Armor 19

References

Bull, S. (1997). An historical guide to arms and armour. London, UK: Random House.

Gravett, C. (1998). The world of the medieval knight. New York: Peter Bedrick.

Klučina, P. & Pevný, P. (1992). Armor: From ancient to modern times. Bratislava,

Slovakia: Slovart.

Parks, E. (1992). Around the mall and beyond. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution.

Pike, J. (2006, Jan. 16). Body armor history. Retrieved February 22, 2006, from

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/body-armor2.htm

Tenner, E. (2003). Hardheaded logic: The helmet is older than the city-state and newer

than the airplane. Retrieved February 22, 2006, from

http://www.inventionandtechnology.com/xml/2003/1/it_2003_1_feat_0.xml

Waddell, J. & Palermo, B. (2002, Dec. 10). Medieval arms, armor, and tactics: An

interactive qualifying project. Retrieved February 25, 2006, from

http://sallerin.club.fr/telechargement/Medieval%20Arms%20Armor%20and%20T

actics.pdf

Wheeler, J. S. (n.d.). Reader’s companion to military history: Armor. Retrieved February

25, 2006, from

http://college.hmco.com/history/readerscomp/mil/html/mh_003100_armor.htm

Wheelock, A., Hobbs, I., & Maddok, J. (n.d.). A general history of armor. Retrieved

February 22, 2006, from

http://users.wpi.edu/~dev_alac/iqp/indepth/historyofarmor.html

Woosnam-Savage, R. & Hall, A. (2000). Brassey’s book of body armor. Dulles, VA:

Brassey’s.

Body Armor 20

Yates, J. (2004, Dec. 04). Lorica. Retrieved February 22, 2006, from

http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/secondary/SMIGRA*/Loric

a.html

Body Armor 21