Really amusing video, connecting the painting session with some thoughts on armour (and beyond) in a very natural and fluid way. Really liked it! Also great to see some live painting!
When i rarely paint medieval miniatures i, tend to divide my force by wealthiness. Poorer troops get a more rough forge blackened look, for steel armour whilst men at arms/knights get shiney metallics, blued, brass and gold plating. I also like the look of painted armour as well and that goes well for both wealthy and munitions equipment provided troops.
When I went back to painting minis during the first lockdown, the Perry War of the Roses miniatures were some of the first I bought. They are great, and work amazing even for fantasy projects (with a few conversions here and there.)
You're the second channel I follow that I've seen using these Perry figurines, the other channel being The History Squad. As someone with zero painting abilities I'd love to see more content like this. Thanks for the great videos.
Thanks for the note on the Leg armor, I have been a reenactor for Many years now, and I have a set of cuisses and I never thought About it, but now I need get a pair of greaves made 😃 thanks for pointing that out
I have two images saved on my laptop,of cuisses being worn without greaves. One is quite obviously very late 15 / early 16th century (possibly a Landsknecht) due to the clothing. The other is Froissart, but the wearer has knee high boots on top of them,so more than likely has dismounted to fight. It is quite interesting that before a friend of mine purchased greaves,he wore cuisses on their own and they were ripping the skirt of his arming doublet.
Another reason for no leg armor at all in later periods where armor was more common among the lower ranks: Greaves need to be fit the individual's leg. Nothing like arsenal grade breastplates and helmets for the legs to my knowledge unless we go into things like jack chains.
There's some historical depictions of cuisses without greaves, but I believe most of it on light cavalry. I might've seen one or two on infantry. I agree that it's quite over-represented in re-enactment though. n the topic of gauntlets, the lack of them is supported in written accounts too. In the Bridport roll from 1457 for example I believe only a few pairs of gauntlets were mentioned on over 100+ people with recorded equipment. It's pretty interesting because in the 14th century english statutes often specifically mention that gauntlets should be worn by infantry. In english rolls from 1324 and 1345 respectively gauntlets are mentioned as a requirement even for soldiers armed with just aketons and bascinets. There's also a french manuscript from ca 1380-1400 (MS Royal 20 C VII) which depicts lowly armoured soldiers with gauntlets. So I wonder what changed in the 15th century which made them way less common.
You may have seen pics on my FB page, but when I joust, I wear riding leggings as greeves. My armorer doesn't like, but I'm comfortable and it gives a better connection with the horse (I think anyway).
A really good-looking pikeman you got there. Hope your friend will be very happy about him. Regarding the finish of armor: very few painted examples, considered as "lower-tier" pieces, came onto us. These are regarded as exceptions, from what I know. But is it possible that this type of painting, as it was decorative and relatively easy to do, was used by the common soldiers much more than we think to individualize their armor, rust protection (as they usually had nobody to polish their stuff), and maybe to have some kind of camouflage? This is of course hard to tell, as there is no way to know nowadays due to extensive polishing.
It's incredibly hard to know. The main source of crowd scenes we have is manuscript miniatures, and they are too small for the artist to show painted armour. It's very likely that these things went in and out of fashion, both over time and in different parts of Europe.
I have not seen much basis for the popularity of painting helmets in most of the 15th century, either in accounts or art. Surviving low-grade helmets with their finishes intact also aren't usually painted. There seems to be a revive of painted armour in the early 16th century where we have a few helmets with it, such as the black sallets. Personally I've always suspected that the paint on those are from later on in their working life though, since a lot indicates that they'd originally have been textile covered.
Zac, when are you going to stop being awesome? Seriously though, that is super cool that you're painting miniatures too. It's hard for me to pick up interest to play and paint miniatures since it feels like Warhammer has taken over the entire market, and I'm not a fan of that franchise. It's why I'm 3D modeling arms and armour for a War of the Roses mod for Bannerlord instead. Haha
![NISAMANEE - TADA (ท้าดา) [ OFFICIAL MV ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/hcQHEPMmJpU/mqdefault.jpg)
I like the idea of watching someone paint an historical model while talking about the real history behind it. Great video. Definitely would like more.
I will do a few more then.
I second this opinion.
Thanks. It mixes my hobbies nicely.
Nice work. Pikeman turned out well and as always an interesting discussion.
Really amusing video, connecting the painting session with some thoughts on armour (and beyond) in a very natural and fluid way. Really liked it! Also great to see some live painting!
Thanks!
When i rarely paint medieval miniatures i, tend to divide my force by wealthiness. Poorer troops get a more rough forge blackened look, for steel armour whilst men at arms/knights get shiney metallics, blued, brass and gold plating. I also like the look of painted armour as well and that goes well for both wealthy and munitions equipment provided troops.
When I went back to painting minis during the first lockdown, the Perry War of the Roses miniatures were some of the first I bought. They are great, and work amazing even for fantasy projects (with a few conversions here and there.)
You're the second channel I follow that I've seen using these Perry figurines, the other channel being The History Squad. As someone with zero painting abilities I'd love to see more content like this. Thanks for the great videos.
Thanks! I'll carry on then!
Thanks for the note on the Leg armor, I have been a reenactor for Many years now, and I have a set of cuisses and I never thought About it, but now I need get a pair of greaves made 😃 thanks for pointing that out
I wouldn´t mind videos of you painting the rest of the company :). If you do it like this.
I'll see what I can do.
I have two images saved on my laptop,of cuisses being worn without greaves.
One is quite obviously very late 15 / early 16th century (possibly a Landsknecht) due to the clothing. The other is Froissart, but the wearer has knee high boots on top of them,so more than likely has dismounted to fight. It is quite interesting that before a friend of mine purchased greaves,he wore cuisses on their own and they were ripping the skirt of his arming doublet.
That was really cool, both the painting and the information.
Thank you.
Another reason for no leg armor at all in later periods where armor was more common among the lower ranks: Greaves need to be fit the individual's leg. Nothing like arsenal grade breastplates and helmets for the legs to my knowledge unless we go into things like jack chains.
Yes, I thought all you shared very interesting 👌🏻. Please keep these going👍🏻.
Thank you! Will do!
This would be great footage to look at during a discussion or rambling video.
I'll get some more as B roll then.
There are a couple of depictions of soldiers without greaves, but they're usually light cavalry or travelling
Yes, but also usually a bit later than this chap: 1480s ish.
It's really the overrepresentation of no greaves that is a reenactorism.
@@ZacharyEvans oh yes absolutely, I just meant that there are exceptions to the rule.
The people doing this are also never light cavalry lol
Really nice video!
Thank you!
There's some historical depictions of cuisses without greaves, but I believe most of it on light cavalry. I might've seen one or two on infantry. I agree that it's quite over-represented in re-enactment though.
n the topic of gauntlets, the lack of them is supported in written accounts too. In the Bridport roll from 1457 for example I believe only a few pairs of gauntlets were mentioned on over 100+ people with recorded equipment. It's pretty interesting because in the 14th century english statutes often specifically mention that gauntlets should be worn by infantry. In english rolls from 1324 and 1345 respectively gauntlets are mentioned as a requirement even for soldiers armed with just aketons and bascinets. There's also a french manuscript from ca 1380-1400 (MS Royal 20 C VII) which depicts lowly armoured soldiers with gauntlets. So I wonder what changed in the 15th century which made them way less common.
I believe it’s in part due to the finger dexterity needed to use firearms. Complex hilts also become more common, so gauntlets weren’t as necessarily.
You may have seen pics on my FB page, but when I joust, I wear riding leggings as greeves. My armorer doesn't like, but I'm comfortable and it gives a better connection with the horse (I think anyway).
It's certainly done. 16th century and 17th century armour make a big deal of it. 15th century generally not though.
I painted and altered some Perry miniatures for an adventure party based on Commedia dell'Arte chracters.
th-cam.com/video/uv0tcN3WT28/w-d-xo.html
They're such a great base for different projects.
A really good-looking pikeman you got there. Hope your friend will be very happy about him. Regarding the finish of armor: very few painted examples, considered as "lower-tier" pieces, came onto us. These are regarded as exceptions, from what I know. But is it possible that this type of painting, as it was decorative and relatively easy to do, was used by the common soldiers much more than we think to individualize their armor, rust protection (as they usually had nobody to polish their stuff), and maybe to have some kind of camouflage? This is of course hard to tell, as there is no way to know nowadays due to extensive polishing.
It's incredibly hard to know. The main source of crowd scenes we have is manuscript miniatures, and they are too small for the artist to show painted armour. It's very likely that these things went in and out of fashion, both over time and in different parts of Europe.
I have not seen much basis for the popularity of painting helmets in most of the 15th century, either in accounts or art. Surviving low-grade helmets with their finishes intact also aren't usually painted. There seems to be a revive of painted armour in the early 16th century where we have a few helmets with it, such as the black sallets. Personally I've always suspected that the paint on those are from later on in their working life though, since a lot indicates that they'd originally have been textile covered.
Zac, when are you going to stop being awesome? Seriously though, that is super cool that you're painting miniatures too. It's hard for me to pick up interest to play and paint miniatures since it feels like Warhammer has taken over the entire market, and I'm not a fan of that franchise. It's why I'm 3D modeling arms and armour for a War of the Roses mod for Bannerlord instead. Haha
If you said I missed it, what scale is that? (also, great, now do 31 more)
It's 28mm. Glad you liked it.