That whole time fascinates me, and you seem to know a lot.
Only weapons or upthread question on clothes? Men and women, rich and poor? Must have been all kinds of fleas? Lice?
Can you recommend a book?
And when you time travel, take me!
Well, keep in mind the dresses you see in movies about Queen Elizabeth are those worn in general by noble women, and they were rarely expected to actually do much of anything. Similar looking but differently made dresses were worn by the middle and lower class women. The sturdier fabrics and simpler cuts made it easier to do normal household functions. I have formal clothing that I can sit and stand in and even do many of the court dances [or could back before i became a gimp] but I cant work in them [among other things, I am not taking a gown that I spent essentially $2500US in materials and several hundred hours making into the kitchen.] I have much simpler clothing that I have worked in a kitchen making food for several hundred people in, and cooked for my camp at a campfire in.
Actually, an elizabethan corset is fairly comfortable as the purpose wasnt to make you 5 sizes skinnier and wasp waisted, it was designed to smooth your silhouette int a cone shape. They actually are pretty good back support, and more comfortable than the clamshell body cast I got stuck in.
um, yes you can =)
Properly worn elizabethan you can flip up the front of the hoops, reach under and remove the pantlets, step over to the handicapped stall, move in and flip the back up and pee. Think of your legs as the clapper in a large flexible bell.
In period, you remove and pantlets, and flip up the front of the hoops, and hold the chamber pot under the dress.
Oddly enough I have used a chamberpot in an elizabethan at a camping event.
Now I have an image of the wearer lifting both legs into a sitting position and being supported only by the framework under the dress. 
Well, for time travel, try here for a bunch that are local.
For random reading try here for 20 years worth of archives and articles by various medieval recreationists and their email and usenet archives. I have actually known Stefan for about 16 years, and camped at Pennsic with him for about 13 years.
Nice thing about the florelegium is you don’t have to buy a book, though there are suggestions scattered throughout for books on all sorts of subjects.
And if I had wanted to, I could have time travelled today in New Jersey [as I live in East Kingdom]
Simple question. How long did it take the smith to make a full suit of armor like those pictured?
There’s this: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumptuary_laws. Also, cloth was very expensive, and the poor dressed in whatever rags they could find. For a more modern day example, check out a movie from the 30’s, starring Joan Crawford or Jean Harlow, playing upper-crust types. They loll around their art deco mansions in absurd outfits and feathery negligees. The hired help bringing them coffee are dressed in sensible servant-wear!
Wasn’t a lot of armor produced just for show/ceremonial use? The gilded/chased and damascened outfits that you see in museums were not intended for battle. Instead, there were worn for parades and formal parties. I was at te Worcester (MA) Higgins Armory, and saw several of these ceremonial suits-they are beautiful 9and bear no nicks or dents)-clearly they were not made for battle.
No one thinks they look goofy until a generation or so later. I remember the 1970s well, and some of the 1960s. What seemed normal then makes me cringe now. Even the 1980s is starting to look a little goofy to me, and someone who a few years ago saw my passport photo from 1993 remarked on my “90s glasses,” which I hadn’t really though of.
As for fashion and going into battle, military uniforms in most eras have always looked goofy to me.
Quoted for truth.
Well, most surviving armour was made not just for show but for tournaments. So they did take some punishment, from wooden lances and blunted swords. The suits of armour in museums are painstakingly restored and cleaned up by professional master armourers, such as the famous Daniel Tacheaux of the Metropolitan Museum of Art.
For instancem, two of the finest English suits in existence - these - which belonged to the courtier Sir James Scudamore, had been sitting in a chest under a leaking roof in the attic of an abandoned tower for several hundred years before being discovered during renovations. They were in total disrepair, and were sold for the sum of twenty pounds at an auction. Eventually they found their way to the Met and were restored to the state which you see in those pictures.
Ironically, though, much of this cleaning actually altered the appearance of the armour as it originally was. A lot of the shiny, bare-steel armours were originally colored in some way, either blued, blackened, or russeted (browned) by chemicals, and gilded or damascened. In Scudamore’s portrait, in which he is wearing that armour, you can clearly see that the steel was originally a dark blued or blackened finish. The steel on the suit today, though, is uncolored and shiny.
Here is the armour of the Earl of Worcester, William Somerset, made at the same workshop in England, now at the Tower of London. Now, here is Worcester’s portrait, in which he wears the very same armour. You can see that it was originally black and gold.
Personally I think if they are going to restore the suits, and they have a portrait showing what it originally looked like, they should re-color the steel instead of just polishing it bare. They should be seen as they were intended to be seen.
From the James Scudamore link:
Wow…the dealer TELLS HIM that the armor is worth far more than what he’s trying to get for it at auction, buys it for 100 times what Chesterfield was asking for it, and still gets sued by the sore loser (who wins the suit)! Guess it pays to be a noble…
Literally!
But don’t forget that those suits conduct electricity very nicely. Just ask Mark Twain.
Drool cup?
Thanks for all the pics. I think I’ve found out the origins of both the baseball cap and the batting helmet.
On a more serious note, has anyone ever swabbed the inside of those things for old dried sweat or blood? It would be interesting to do DNA testing.
Possibly stupid question: Does DNA last that long?
That’s what I was going to say straightaway. Why the embossed lips smiling? Weird.
This is my favorite. I like the slanted eyeslits and the plume is a nice touch. Looks like he took a musket ball in the lower breastplate, though. Wonder if that’s what did in the wearer.
It can in certain conditions, though what those are I couldn’t tell you.
how do you see, or even breathe in that thing?!