Gentlemen, and ladies
I took this photo in darkest Cheshire a few years ago, and it has confused me since.
It appears that this knight is wearing some sort of decorative hose OVER his armor. This seems impractical.
The effigy was restored during the Victorian times. Have they been creative?
Any wisdom would be appreciated.
Hard to say from the picture, but decorated armour are not unheard of. :)
I'm slightly constrained by the upload size, but there is definitely an folding over like football socks, at the knee.
Quote from: fsn on 28 April 2013, 05:52:35 PM
I'm slightly constrained by the upload size, but there is definitely an folding over like football socks, at the knee.
It might be a female knight and they might be stocking tops... ;) ;D
I reckon it's engraved decoration on the armour. Hard to tell without being there really.
I think I'd tend to agree with Steve.....
But is it the piccy ?....I can't make out any real armour over the 'thighs'....Whatever the name of that part would be.
Is that why it looks a bit strange ? :-\
Cheers - Phil.
There appears to be a surcoat down to mid-thigh, then mail to just above the knee, and then this stocking/hose effect.
You can see there's some kind of plate armour over the knee, but it's all covered with this patterned stocking which is folded over.
Since the effect covers the knee it can't possibly be plate - how would he bend the knee to walk? :-\
Whats the timeperiod for the effigy and how is the fellow kitted out on the upper body ?
Apparently Sir William here died in 1275.
Knight of the garter
I'll get my coat....
Hmm, 1275 would be way pre-plate, if I recall my hazy medival armour knowledge, could he be wearing some sort of Hauberk on top and regular hose beneath ?
I think it's poleyns over mail rather than full plate.
Well so far I prefer the female knight and her stocking tops theory. ???
Quote from: GordonY on 30 April 2013, 07:03:13 AM
Well so far I prefer the female knight and her stocking tops theory. ???
:D ;D :D
I'm with you...
I really think fsn's original comment about the Victorian restoration being creative, is probably the nearest we'll get to the truth.
It just doesn't make any sense to me at all.
I'll go and slap a load green stuff on the bits I think are wrong. :P
Cheers - Phil.
Haven't you noticed the little label that says "armour by Janet Reager"? :D
Well, he's got to wear something to keep his feet warm! ;D
Are they attached to a strap around the instep or is that for the spurs?
Sir William Boydell (1275), St Wilfrid's Church, Grappenhall, Cheshire, at effigiesandbrasses.com (http://effigiesandbrasses.com/monuments/william_boydell/)
large picture (http://www.themcs.org/armour/knights/Grappenhall%20-%20St%20Wilfrid%20William%20Fitz%20William%20le%20Boydell%201275%2070.JPG) from http://www.themcs.org/armour/14th%20century%20armour.htm
Effigy in chancel (north side) of Sir William Boydell, died 1275, found in churchyard and placed in church 1874, restored. http://gohistoric.com/sites/church-st-wilfred-grappenhall-thelwall
Druzhina
Illustrations of Soldiers (http://warfare.likamva.in/index.htm)
Thank you Techno, Druzhina et Al for your helpful responses. :)
It seems to me that it remains a mystery. I don't think it's painted armour, and I can't find any references to overstocking in the period for say, ceremonial purposes. I may just have to revist to have a better look.
The patterning makes me think it might be cuir bouilli, apart from the fact that they appear to wrap around the back of the knee.
He has the Crusader crossed legs so it might be something adopted as a local measure due to the heat.
Nobody's thought that it might be just the whim of a jobbing sculptor? He'd hardly have carved the efigy from life (or death), would he?
Greetings
Quote from: Hertsblue on 14 May 2013, 09:17:57 AM
Nobody's thought that it might be just the whim of a jobbing sculptor? He'd hardly have carved the efigy from life (or death), would he?
You can just imagine the argument over the sculptor's bill ...
'What have you put on his legs ...? How do you mean you thought it looked fashionable?"
Regards
Edward
Greetings
More seriously.
I note that the reference in the church is supposed to be:
'Within the walls of this church rests the body of Sir William Fitz William le Boydell who died about Anno Domini MCCLXXV. This, his monumantal effigy was restored and placed here Anno Domini MDCCCLXXV'. http://www.boydellfamilyhistory.com/id15.html
I suspect Victorian restoration is indeed the culprit and this would just have been mail.
FYI there are other effigies that can be seen at http://www.themcs.org/armour/14th%20century%20armour.htm
Regards
Edward
A padded textile protection over the knee would be about right, would it not?
But surely anything flexible enough to permit free movement would provide precious little protection?
The "stocking" is folded over above the knee - hence the "football socks" comparison. I don't think the stocking be anything too stiff like cuir bouilli.
They may be something from the Crusades, but I think those of you who know about these things (Crusades not one of my interests) would have spotted that one straight away.
Anything material worn all the way around the leg would have been worn away by the mail beneath.
Bloody Victorians.
Yep. Anything "improved" by the Victorians has to be suspect by definition. >:(
Perhaps he is a transvest-knight.
Clap that man in irons !! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
(Says someone who wishes he'd thought of that first.)
Cheers - Phil
;D ;D ;D
You mean an aide-de-really-camp?
Oh groan! ;D
Did someone mention the 'Order of the Gayter' already? Or would that be too late?
It just gets worse and worse !!
I love it!! ;D ;D ;D ;D
Keep'em coming chaps.
Cheers - Phil.
Quote from: OldenBUA on 29 May 2013, 09:06:40 AM
Did someone mention the 'Order of the Gayter' already? Or would that be too late?
;D ;D ;D