Hi Tod you say that there isn't a recipe for this so I wonder if you've ever seen this one. "Take lether that ys half tannyd and drye hym, and schave the flesshe syd; and take glwe wt water, and set yt over the fyere, and melte yt wt water, and then al hote ly yt a pone the leder on the flesshe syde, and strawe ther on the powder of glasce bete yn a brasene morter wt fylyne of yrene y mellyd to geder; and then laye a nother pece of the same lether flesshe seyde to flesshe, and nayle hym to the scylde and lete hyme drye, and ther nother sper nother ege tole enter ther ynne" It comes from a text kept at the Ashmolean museum and although it is said to be a recipe for a doublet of fense, it sounds similar to what you're talking about.
@@tods_workshop so you have two pieces of half tanned leather stuck together flesh side to flesh side with a mixture of glue powdered glass and iron filings.
Imagine how people were 5,000 years ago without God’s True Book. How would they have known how they were supposed to live? How would they have known how they were supposed to be in order to please their Creator? So God gave the law of Moses back then. This law was for the people to know how to be. They saw what God expected out of them. God had high expectations from the Israelites. Why shouldn't He? Should He drop His expectations for love and grace? If He drops His expectations to accommodate what man wants, then He compromised His perfection for man’s imperfection. Does a Perfect God compromise His perfection? So God has expectations once He tells His creation how He wants things. His love and grace gives His creation time to change. He is willing to help them change if they ask Him. Then His creation, while repenting or changing to do His will, see His Beauty. This is a relationship formed now with the Creator. If He is the Most Beautiful Being, which He is, how can His creation not want to obey Him? How can His creation not want to please Him? The reason why is because of foolishness. Man loves his own foolishness rather than God’s wisdom, Jn 3:19. Man loves his sin. If anyone loves himself, he will stay in sin. So man who stays in sin rejects his perfect Creator or Father, and exchanges it for his own foolishness. So now fast forward to today where we have God’s True Book. We officially know what God wants. God gave His creation a big help, the Word, to show us how He wants us to live. If we follow His perfect teachings, we all live with perfect peace, love, joy and unity. This is His perfect design for His children's lives. When we go against His perfect design for what we want, sin, we throw away that perfect plan. We throw away that perfect peace, love, joy and unity. Giving up these things is foolish. So sinning against God proves to be the worst plan for us! God wanted to help mankind. God wanted to save man from his foolishness. He wanted to help us the best way possible because He is Good. The best and only way to do it, as God saw fit, was to give mankind His Son. Why? The Son is the Word, Jn 1:1. The Word always obeys the Father's will. The Father's will is spoken through His Word. The Word proceeds forth from the Father's will and mind. So the Word that God speaks is the pure sequel to what was inside the Father's mind and heart. Jesus is that perfection manifest. He is the physical embodiment of God's will and thought. God's will and thought is expressed through His Word. Jesus, the human part, is the perfect, physical expression of God. Jesus, the human part that walked this earth, came to teach us the perfect will of God. How? He did this by example. This is why Jesus walked this earth perfectly without sinning. So Jesus taught us perfectly. He even was willing to die not only death, but the death He did not deserve since He never sinned against God the Father. He chose to give His life. That's why Jesus says no man forces Him to lay down His life, He chose to lay it down, Jn 10:18. God wanted to save mankind. Jesus wants what the Father wants. The Word always obeys the will. He shed even His perfect, pure blood for us. His blood is the fulfillment of perfect obedience to the Father. Why? Because the Son asked 3 times in the Garden, "Take my cup not by my will but by yours." The Father said the Son still had to shed His blood on the cross. The Son obeyed the Father's will over His own. So the blood was shed for that purpose. Nobody else had that kind of blood. Nobody else pleased the Father perfectly like the Son. So now instead of the law of Moses showing us the way to live rightly in God's eyes, we have the Son. This is the New Covenant. In Jesus and His blood, we now obey Him instead of the Mosaic law as part of this new agreement between man and God. So as man wants to live rightly to please His Creator, man now must turn to the Word of the Creator. So obeying the perfect teachings of Jesus brings us to how God wants us to live. The Son conquered the grave. The grave is the end of all who sin. The grave is the payment for sin. Satan founded the grave. How? Because Satan started death by being the first to sin against Almighty God. Jesus destroyed Satan's creation and fulfills the very first prophecy spoken of the Savior in Genesis 3:15. That's why Jesus came to "...destroy the works of the devil," 1 Jn 3:8. Satan came to ruin God's Creation with sin. Jesus came to ruin Satan's creation, death, with perfect obedience, which His blood shed proves. That's why in His blood, there is life. So the Gospel is God's reconciliation with man. How? Only through the Son. If you disobey the Son, you disobey the Father. Jesus says, “He who has seen me has seen the Father,” Jn 14:9. Repent and accept Jesus as Your Lord NOW!!! Then start to read the Gospels and obey His commands. Follow Jesus only, no other man, no religion. Only Jesus. Joseph, Servant of God Sent by Christ to evangelize the whole world www.clevelandstreetpreachers.com TH-cam CLEVELAND STREET PREACHERS,.
Hello I spent 20 years making leather armour, yes adding a type of resin to leather is a way of hardening it, but I found that heating the leather in water to approximately 70 degrees until it changes colour, 3-6 minutes. not to dark of course then it snaps, it becomes like a thermo plastic. Just as a note the leather I used for armour was a product called veg tan soul bend, the same stuff used on your shoes and would range in thickness from 8-10mm it’s a very dense leather. I sometimes used leather up to 14mm thick , must have been a very old cow. I was exploring full thickness raw hide as armour, (dog chew) it has great properties for shaping and excellent stiffness and durability. Also just as an extra, the thicker leather can be treated differently, adding boiling water to the rear or flesh side makes stiffened areas, also it shrinks the leather in that spot. So you can make an area more flexible than another area. I look back on those days making armour with great fondness , love the channel and try and pick up some full thickness soul bend , you will be amazed
interesting, i think, just by intuition that the glue soaking would be something of an exception and not the majority of the cases. I think your plastic- like material, that Tod made isn't taking advantage of all the qualities of the leather and is just to stiff and brittle. Tod, i think you should give the voices that speak for the just boiled or otherwise partially tanned version more credit. To me it seemed a bit farfeatched- that glue soaking would be the major way it was done and for several reasons: Water- would soften the glue and possibly deform your armour. It would smell and possibly rot. Animal glue makes for a stiff and also heavy product none of wich may be in your interest. And in my mind a leather armour should be closer to the qualities of hide and leather that involve flexibility and thoughness and less hardness or stiffness. As mentioned by others this method, tried by Tod, was something used. I i think that it's compelling to say it was used by some in some places, but i just don't think that it could the norm or the one important way to do it. I could be wrong.
I dont want to poke you with this, but do you make fantasy or "historical" armors? As far as I know, there is little evidence of hardened leather being used as proper armor.
@@chettonex i guess you are talking to the first comment but i will reply you. I did hear of it being used from people who are well documented and i trust like Matt Easton from scholagladiatoria and also Tod- the dispute here wasn't if leather made an armour it was rather how the leather was treated to make it into an armour.
Love the great Practical insight and testing, layering seems obvious and using a plate backing, or even a chainmail layer, for constuction and shaping seems plausible to me... Woven inside the gambason ,, soft to wear, good visual and or backing to fix the "boiled " Leathers.. ..fabric,metal,fabric, leather.. and Thinking of cost vs efficiency.. less metal is best, as it is laborious to get.. (re)using woodnails, or horse shoe nails as fastning....studded...(scattered, sewn in chainmail rings on).. really catch spead out of slicing, and have some protective quality to stopping sword impacts like a net almost would, or preventing it to slide, travel /glance towards necks, openings and armpits.. like the V shape on the breastplates.. and knowledge of shape vs blows/strikes on in helmets..... A Arrow and or Bolt is very specific impact... and it changed the type of armors (again)..but up to that point and after.. most people fight with sticks .. pointy or or sharp..sword or spears, farmtools and derivatives of those.. looking at the chaos even at staged fights .. the wear on the user of full armor is so high.. the would have sacrificed the weight, and maybe some protection from its total density and thickness of its total armor... to gain the spead, the endurance and recovery time, at the least if not cost, per user/soldier and the skills to make these might be as simple as covering the proper armor and using it as a shape holder.. pressing it down with sacks .. filling it with perhaps sand to push and set the leather quick.. warm it underneath even...You could almost see a fantasy movie version, using the inflatable tank technic the brits used to intimidate .. using a bigger printing press setup to print an army......and or simulate a massive counter army of dummies and non fighters standing ground and scaring of the enemy..:) But..I really think that shaped wright... the shape itself will be good protection too like the shell of an egg has strength in the shape...wich the armorers really got good at.. thinning and shaping to reflect /deflect or repel and resist impact types...these beautyfull lab conditions give such good result.. a less perfect impact of a weapon would struggle... especially an increasingly more tired soldier in full armor... trying to lift his heavy arm.. and his even more heavy sword or weapon.. About the ingredients.... somehow they always used actual urine in almost anything....... but..no pee.. then Bee... why not just a batch of say 90 /10 wax and oils.. (Bee)wax has a fantastic warm and cold state..they really got wax down in those times... mixed with a drop of olive oil or animal oils... as a bit of flex .. I would love to see that boiled up and have the leather soak it and than cover a plate armor .. with and without (use a mold release! layer of a fine woven cotten/silk.. or two.. .. to split gap between metal and fixture jelly/gleu/Curred leather ... .. so less thickness could be used in metal and it be added in leather layers... looking at lots and lots of paintings, it mostly show or thought as as metal brigadine style busts and clothes.. the Stiffend Gambason/layer combo seems so plausible with even chainmail like weaves .. using small plates of the leather in stead of the big plate shape... again.. woven as a layer inside a gambason,...well defended in rough public life... yet still baring your skills or family colors in decorative woven materials... That all just my minds idea.,but they loved color.. and where proud people .. in harsh times.. Fancy did win from perhaps perfect armor in battle.. Hostages where recognised on the battlefield...and held for cash or influances... Daily..more common days would not be filled with wararmor... it would have been the personal protective outfit... against the plunderer with a knife or or yes.. the forks and cuttlery of a household.... I really feel you proof the damn good quality, it even has against perfect struck bolts or arrows... I feel it has even way more effectiveness against the blades and terrors of other weapons.. shaped wright and interlaced in wearable pieces... outrunning and enduring a fight wins them... and metal is metal... Well trained Buhurt fighters show a really good impression into how long a good trained fighter lasts .. in a ring.in good wearable,.. but heavy armor... not having to walk to that battlefield 5/10km.... having 10 metal soldiers .. vs .. what.. 10-20-30 unit size faster long lasting.. pretty confident fighters.. not in fancy heavy tank bejeweld armor... fighting for there lands ... my bet is on leather, fabrics and or chainmail interlaced.... hope Im not beeing boring or negative.. Im so loving this work and speculation, it does fill the gaps,... where recorded history finds, and documents sometimes leave out or just are lost.. It's so nice and inspirational seeing these actual impressive studie and trails... here .. weapons are so banned.. so even for these things sorry to trouble with such long reply.. have a great time everyone.. and hope to tickle someone to build it..
@@chettonex THere is some evidence for it though its a little circumstantial - one of the biggest its is actually linguisitic. Its thought that 'cuir bouilli' is the root of 'cuirass'. We certainly know it was used for shield sin the bronze age, and I believe there's been a few other occasional finds, but the problem is it doesn't normally survive. The thought with medieval armour is that they would wear leather cuirasses in addition to mail underneath the surcoats - there are a few statues that seem to show something smoot being worn there in an era where we don't find steel breastplates. Its also a possible material for the greek Linothorax (the linen theory is a theory, it is unproven and not without dispute) and I *think* some greco-Roman muscle cuirasses (though we know they did bronze as well)
Yes, not to mention that a human body would absorb so of the impact, muscles fat and skin move and flex with the force, and the body as a whole would be moved away from the direction of impact, which lessens the penetrating potential
"Leur faut les jaques de trente toiles d’épaisseur ou, pour le moins, de vingt-cinq, avec un cuir de cerf. " saying to come from an order of louis XI for his free archers (can't find the source, if any one have it please share)
@@benjaminhaupais6470 They will require a 30 ply or at least 25 ply of gambeson and deer leather. A jacque is an ensemble of leather over gambeson. (rough translation)
When you are impregnating a porous material with a liquid, and you heat up the liquid to lower its viscosity, the combination looks like it is boiling even when far below the boiling temperature of the liquid. As the liquid replaces the air in the material the bubbles come to the surface. So its not technically boiling, it just looks like it's boiling. It could be the same with the "boiled leather."
very true and quite clever in the naming of it as well, and plus the actual dictionary meaning of boiling is "having reached the boiling point; steaming or bubbling up under the action of heat" "fiercely churning or swirling the boiling seas. " "(of anger, rage, etc.) intense; fierce; heated."
Also - if boiling leather in an aqueous solution it will boil out any residual fats/oils making it very inflexible / brittle giving that curled brittle parchment effect, when dry. Whatever they are doing, it is likely that the beginning product will be salted "rawhide" rather than tanned leather, and the "boiling"/"glueing" process is the actual tanning process, ensuring fibres are partly lubricated / separated by the matrix ensures toughness. Hard leather armour appears time and time again in history, so it must at least work to reduce battlefield mortality (even if fighters suffer injuries and post battle morbidity) - to win on the day of battle is key - "make the other's fighters die for their "cause". - note that use of gelatine vs casein as the binder properties will vary - other possibilities include distilled tree oils / resins?? -casein is waterproof when set. - (looking into it its recipes almost look like tanning solutions - add a few salts and you get hard chrome tanning in one step.. www.fpl.fs.fed.us/documnts/fplrn/fplrn158.pdf (areas of research abound, time to do research is inversely proportional to time spent watching educational videos..)
Hi hi! Hey Tod. I'm a jukendo practitioner, and we use a heavy cuirbolli protector for our left arm and shoulder. It's made from buffalo leather, about 8 mils thick. It is aparently created in the traditioal jaspanese style, which imvolves soaking it in animal glue (fish glue in this case), moulding and then lacquering. I am pretty sure you could contact Tozando or some of the other makers and ask for notes. I made some cuirbolli long ago by soaking leather in Dubbin and then baking it in a kiln. It stopped the problem with fragility and came out tough as nails My best friend at the time also made cuirbolli. He did it by putting leather in a deep frier filled with oil (because - you know - he was an idiot). He came up with brittle armour that smelled DELICIOUS! Like fried beef! Every time he wore it, dogs would follow him about.
I actually experimented with boiled leather quite some time and the trick is not actually boiling it on 100°C. Instead heat it in water between 75 an 80°C for 10 to 25 minutes till it gets a certain shade of dark brown. The pieces in the beginning are already to dark. It's possible to get a good compromise between hard and flexible if you take it out of the water at the right time. After taking it out of the water you got a very short time to form it, for instance by nailing it on piece of wood carved like a human chest (or the body part you want to make armour for) That said, I just love your videos.
I'm actually a leather worker, and the process Philipp just described is very similar to the way that I harden my costume armor pieces. Rather than submerging the leather in 80C water and then trying to form it, I prefer to wet mold my pieces, and then pop them in the oven at about 90C while they're still wet. I find that gives me a little more control over my heating and shaping. But like I said, I'm usually making costume pieces. I have yet to test them against actual weapons. I would love to see this version of hardening tested as well.
Yes...Tod's boiled leather was over done. If you get your water to the right temperature( 70 to 87 degrees Celcius) and only boil it until it changes colour you come out with a pliable piece which can be formed which will dry hard and not brittle.
It would be nice to get chemist's or physisist's explanation to these temperatures and what reaction is going on and how it changes when temperature varies from 60-100C.
@@laurivaisanen6918 There are two variables, the temperature and the duration the material is exposed to it. It is like cooking an egg (or anything really). It might take 5 minutes of 100°C to get similar result to 30 minutes at 60°C. The big difference is that at lower temperatures the material has more time to heat evenly. I suppose sometimes you might prefer the longer process at lower temperature while in other context shorter one at higher temperature might provide material with some gradient of different properties. Anyway I suspect the leather was not just boiled/heated but impregnated as well, I wonder if someone actually checked what chemical residues they can find in it and what materials people used.
Watching him manhandle glass fibers without gloves gave me chills. Getting those little fibers in your skin is a recipe for days on days of itching and anger.
It's really not that bad. I've worked with it for years and a few seconds exposure like that isn't really enough to irritate the skin. In my experience anyway.
i know the feeling. Use vinegar and water to stop the burning and itching. also works to clean your washing machine after washing greasy clothes or washing clothes that have fiberglass on them. Go easy on the vinegar as it is an ACID. I recommend just a cup of vinegar on large load on washing machine with nothing else inside.
Rehydrate the leather with warm steam. As the leather rehydrates, the lipid layer becomes more permeable and supple. Leather is basically skin. Skin is mostly lipids (fatty acids). Lipids are insoluble in water but soluble in organic solvents. Hide glue (animal glue) is mostly made of collagen (a type of fibrous protein ie. cartilage, various connective tissues etc.). When proteins are heated, the arrangement of the molecular structure denatures from a tangled mess, to a more organized looking structure (more fiberglass like) and becomes more viscous. This is an important step for the collagen to penetrate into the leather efficiently. The combination between the lipid layer being molecularly reinforced by the collagen, when cooled, becomes stable and more structurally “strong”. The “nature” of the properties of both macromolecules have changed and therefore become structurally changed at the molecular level. The result is a more structurally “strong” thing as opposed to a “soft and malleable” thing. ...I hope that makes sense.
I hope Todd reads this one because it seems a very hard work of fine-tuning, one that medieval and ancient leatherworkers would know well but which we have to sadly relearn from scratch, as it seems to be quite forgotten. I wonder if asking in places where traditional leatherworking has persisted, such as in Marrakech, may be of help. They certainly do some curious work even today but it's not armor.
For bullet proof glass, they use a lot of layers of varying hardness. So the first layer may be hard, but the second softer and stickier, then hard, then soft. You could look into doing something similar if you want to do more tests.
@@tods_workshop I didn't understand the recipe Could you make a video detailing the steps in a simple way? Did you use tanned or half tanned leather? a long time ago, I watched an old TV series And in that series they showed that 6 to 8 layers of leather were able to repel a bullet from an harquebus. 🤔
I'd actually be interested in a video of you actually making the hard leather, step by step and what your process is and materials used. Keep up the great videos!
He's actually not even using it to its fullest potential. Do you see that flat disc on the back? The intention is that after you stab, you can repeatedly hammer your fist into the back of the knife, driving it into your target.
@@jeffmorris5802 You don't repeatedly hammer your fist into it unless you wanna break your hand. What you do is, once you've driven it home, you can cup your palm over the disk and then lean your weight into it, to drive it in deep. Remember, these daggers were often used by knights to finish off other knight, once a fight had gone to the ground.
@@clearmelody6252 Exactly, get it into the gap under their armpit or their neck and just push, nasty way to go but effective. Alternatively you could probably get it into the gap even a little bit and threaten to drive it in, capturing a fellow knight and ransoming him was a viable tactic and most sane people when they're down in the mud with a knife pricking their neck will concede.
I think what I love most in these videos (aside from the obvious emphasis on keeping things as accurate as possible in a historic sense) is Todd's incredible and obvious enjoyment! Just seeing his happiness and enthusiasm makes the video so much more than mere education or science.
I'd love to see that happening. I also can imagine that the quality of the leather plays a part. The belly for example is less dense than other parts of a hide.
Where else can I get material science, mechanical engineering, historical research in multiple languages, economic analysis of Middle Age warfare, and experimental genius in one package? Thanks for all your comments.
I know it's a bit outside your normal historical range and a dubious historical source, but the Iliad has some passages that detail the use of leather in shields. Ajax's shield is famously 7 layers of bull's hide with a covering of bronze. (Bk vii, 233-312.) It would be fascinating to see how that would fare. "[Hector] struck Ajax’s fearful shield of seven-layered bull’s hide on its eighth layer, the covering of bronze. It pierced six layers but the seventh stopped it."
best part is that depending on the size of the shield as well as the thickness of the bronze it could perceptibly be quite light for a shield, although I would say a good chainmail cover would make it even better without making it much heavier
I’ll try to keep this succinct. I made leather armor years ago. I used natural, vegetable tanned, full weight cow hide. It was a minimum of 1/4 of an inch thick in all places. (It was impossible to cut out the pieces. It dulled every blade in a matter of linear feet. I ended up using aviator shears-which where dull by themselves.) First, to form each piece I completely immersed it in water. I let it soak until air bubbles quit rising from it, indicating the water had penetrated clear through. The leather was then floppy, soft, and, most important, moldable and stretchable. I molded it around my body and let as much water drain out as I could, then let it dry in that shape. Once it was thoroughly dry, it became very hard, though not brittle like the boiled leather he showed. Ideally at this point I would have immersed it liquid beeswax just like I did the water, but I was/am poor. I schemed hard, but keeping a vat of wax liquid was being my means. So I melted a block of paraffin on it with a heat gun and let the wax penetrate until it dripped through the other side. When the wax cooled it was done. This is the toughest stuff I have ever seen. It is still flexible, but very hard. I’ve heard LARPers follow this or a similar method. I’ve read, in the heat of the sun and during gameplay the wax gets beaten out and the leather softens. When that happens they simply melt more wax into the armor and it’s like new again.
As an additional thought, Thorold Rogers' work suggests that in the late 13th century a tanned cowhide would cost 3-4 shillings each (2-3s as a raw hide, 1s for tanning it). Medieval cows were smaller than modern cows, and their hides thinner (~3mm according to the armour examined by Chris Dobson), so you're probably only getting a single breast and back from each hide. For five layers on the front, 3 on the rear, you're looking at 4 complete hides, which is 12-16s. Randall Storey's thesis shows that, at the same time, the average price for a CoP was 12s.11d., and they could be had (presumably second hand) for as little as 2s.3d. I'm not sure that, given the protection, such a heavily layered defence is economically viable in medieval Europe except maybe in Ireland or the far remote regions where cattle were raised in larger numbers and they were further removed from standard trade networks.
The evidence from the Tower of London archives suggests cuir bouilli had more ceremonial and tournament use rather than battlefield use. One of the few entries that mentions it directly describes it as being purchased alongside Balleen swords for a tournament at Windsor. That certainly fits in with cuir bouilli being the more expensive option.
@@jaybluff281 This is broadly true for England by the late 13th century, but a number of 12th and early-to-mid 13th century sources firmly place it as battlefield armour for both knights and infantry (the Gesta Herawardi, John of Salisbury's Policratius, Wace's Roman de Rou, the Chronique des ducs de Normandie, Walter Map's Courtier's trifles, Ralph Niger's writings, William the Breton's Plilippide, armour hires by Genoese merchants and the regulations of the Bolognese armed societies). Infantry wore it as stand alone armour, while knights wore it as reinforcement over their mail. Additionally, as Chris Dobson has made clear in "As Tough as Old Boots", leather limb armour remained popular in Italy throughout the 14th century. And, from what he's said, one of his forthcoming books has a lot more information on the use of leather armour by knights. Generally, leather armour appears to have been the cheapest option for infantry, since it probably wasn't more than one or two layers and layered linen tended to be more expensive. For knights, even as a reinforcing layer it was likely cheaper and lighter than textile armour and less likely to receive surface damage from non-penetrating blows. Iron armour was by far more protective, though, so it rapidly supplanted leather in the 13th century as the CoP became more popular.
This made me remember a series of books by Raymond E. Feist where he described a world were metals were EXTREMELY rare and so they had compensated by using other things and in case of weapons they used laminated leather. Never seen that anywhere else :-) Interesting video and I am looking forward to the next one.
Modelled on RL medieval/ancient Japan (see the other cultural differences & preferences for using resin-impregnated wood/fibre for armour & even blade construction, due to the lack of available native metals)
E.J. Cheshire did similar experiments in his Phd thesis "Non-Metallic Armour prior to the First World War", and one part I found particularly interesting was the section on "hard-faced" cuir bouilli, in which a surface coating of very hard material such as sand or crushed glass was applied to the surface of the leather to improve arrow resistance, with fantastic results. I would love to see you try this.
From Edward Cheshire's tests results, we can conclude that "leather armor" was not actually leather and more likely to be made of rawhide. In his work: "Non-metallic Armour Prior to the First World War," he found that rawhide is significantly stronger than leather when used as armor. So rawhide (which is hide that isn't tanned or only partially tanned) is both cheaper and stronger than fully tanned leather. He also found that boiling leather significantly weakened the material, while boiling rawhide only slightly weakened it while allowing it to be molded, thickened, and/or take on other properties. So other than cuir bouilli being this glue-infused leather, there is a possibility that cuir bouilli was boiled rawhide or glue-infused rawhide rather than leather treated in some way.
@@Intranetusa That potentially means that the term "boiled leather" originally came from the method of manufacture (i.e. "leather made by boiling rawhide") rather than it being a method of post-processing (i.e. "boiling tanned leather").
I know some people just don't get any 'noticeable' damage from it, especially people who work with it a bit. My father spent like 20 years making boats out of fiberglass, and 10 years before that making/selling camping trailers out of it and he could touch it directly without any problems or itchiness, but when i helped with any fiber glass i was told to put on gloves and i found out why when i tried touching it like he did.
@@KickyFut Its bad for everything, glass is like the one solid thing you don't want shards of in your blood system, well, not the only but one of the worst. Its basically like sand or rocks, it won't be broken down by the body, so the only way to get it out is that it gets caught on anything and then slowly pushed out of the body. Its as unlikely as getting hit by lightning because usually its big enough that it will just remain where it is and slowly get pushed out again by your body, or just simply not go deep enough. However, the danger is in thin strips of glass, like glass fiber. The thinner and smaller the glass that breaks off inside you, the higher the risk. Now again, the chances are minuscule, but you know, not impossible. However, why would you risk it, so use gloves when you can.
Very interesting! You don't see boiled leather very often! Interesting to know that throughout the late XIII century to about the end of the XIV century, boiled leather was heavily implemented in armour (for example in Italy but also in other countries throughout Europe). We often know it as composite armour, because it's not solely iron or steel but a composition of iron/steel parts and boiled leather. From the half and late XIV century we know that they made vambraces, greaves and cuisses (earlier in the century even rerebraces, finely embossed and decorated). Some extant boiled leather vambraces are in the range of 3-4 mm in thickness, they were mostly lined and covered with metal splints riveted to the leather. In less cases such splints were on the outer side only, meaning that between splints there was just boiled leather. Such protections were worn (on the arms for example) over mail and some padding. More exposed parts of the body like the torso and head were protected with iron/steel. The arms would be covered, in most cases, by a shield. I wonder what splinted boiled leather, mail and padding could do against such a hefty punch. Probably all three these layers are enough to stop arrows from causing lethal wounds, but I know it depends from case to case. Probably with a shield, splinted boiled leather, mail and some padding, a knight's arm would be mostly safe, even if safe is a big word here, if such a knight finds himself under the fire of a line of archers. That must be really annoying. Very interesting experiment, can't wait to see more!
@@rolfs2165 Yes exactly. Which would broadly simulate the arm of an European knight or man-at-arms say, from roughly 1340-70 AD. That would be a cool test to see.
@@bikeman1x11 Worked fine, actually. Not as well as steel ofc but it was mostly the native allies that made the Spanish conquest possible. Bullets tho..... well, only steel may help convincingly
@@McHobotheBobo eh, there are accounts of fifty or so Spaniards killing over 1000 native warriors suffering zero casualties aside from minor cuts and wounds.
Great video! And lots of great comments to the video too! One important way to make the chest piece less penetrable, is to give it a pointed bird chest shape. This will/can result in 4 things. 1: When shot at from straight ahead, the arrow would need to penetrate much more leather because of the angle. 2:You will get an extra cavity besides a gambeson, between the leather and the body, where it would be the most lethal to be hit. 3: There would be a chance for the arrow to deflect off from the armor. 4: There would be a better chance for the arrowhead to bend, with a reduced penetration as the result.
There is mention about 'gambeson blacked in the normal way' and the glue from this process when made in iron vats becomes black like old oil, so I think it could have been exactly this
By starting with a nice piece of leather I think you might be making this too difficult. From a hide you can make leather and/or hide glue; the natural composite material that you’re looking for, and both processes require boiling. This would satisfy both the name, and the manufacturing imagery you have of ‘boiled leather’.
Tod - During WWI & WWII it was found that layered armour, for example, two layered plates of 6” each, for a total of 12” was less effective against incoming fire than single layer of 12” armour. Perhaps the same applies to your hardened leather. It might be worthy of an experiment.
I would love to see some sword cuts and thrust tests on these leathers.. and spear stabbings, and axe chops.. I bet you that 2-3 layer is _very_ resistant to cuts..
@Raspian Kiado not really, like he said about 5-6kg for front and back.. thats about the same or half the weight of historical breastplates. It wouldnt be as effective.. but it would be ALOT cheaper..
@Raspian Kiado I really doubt they'd wear this without a gambeson underneath, so would just be another armor piece outside of the basic inner gear. Neither metal nor stiffened leather are pliable either so they'd have to be shaped into similar sections. The primary advantages of metal would be that it is less likely to crack and it would be significantly thinner which may aid in movement, though I bet a slightly different form would alleviate that.
Holy moly 6 seconds ago! .Edit: Fantastic video, as always. I believe it was Lindybeige who did a video that introduced me to the idea of a resin impregnated *linen* cuirass used by the Greeks that could be effective armor, and I think the idea was that it was some sort of animal glue as well. It makes sense to me that using similar techniques on leather would produce a very cheap and effective armor, and therefore very popular. Especially given that leather would be more available than either good iron or the skill to make iron into effective armor.
There is in fact a book on the subject! Experimental archaeology out of Johns Hopkins University, apparently. I haven't read the book so no idea if its any good, but it does exist. Link below is to the blog post by one of the two principle investigators. jhupress.wordpress.com/2013/04/24/unraveling-the-linothorax-mystery-or-how-linen-armor-came-to-dominate-our-lives/
Friends of mine in my local SCA group have made Greek hoplite linen cuirass out of linen and animal glue. With ten layers the stuff is hard like a rock, and not too terribly heavy. I could definitely see having a lot of trouble putting a spearhead through it. The only real downside I see to the technique is that much linen would have been pretty expensive at the time, but of course people were often willing to lay out a lot of money for good armor if they could.
Crud, just soaking cloth in linseed oil stiffens it up greatly. Found that out when oiling a gun stock. The used rags were very stiff once the oil finally dried.
I am loving this series so much ! Nowhere else can we get such a real and in depth look at the medieval experience.Thank you for the great entertainment and all the best from Bulgaria Tod !
@@skyereave9454 "[Hector] struck Ajax’s fearful shield of seven-layered bull’s hide on its eighth layer, the covering of bronze. It pierced six layers but the seventh stopped it." From book seven of the Iliad
Considering the huge ranges of penetration between only 1 and 2 layers of cuir bouille, a 5-7 layer shield seems like it would be an incredible defense.
Just got one of Tod's Scottish dirks, I am absolutely thrilled with it, the blade has a wicked shape, took a razors edge, & has perfect handling characteristics. Tod's cutlery represents unbelievable value, other dirks I've handled and own look and feel like junk in comparison, even much more expensive ones. (I have been into martial arts and arms collecting for decades) I'm not sure how he can price his items so reasonably, considering all the time & effort that obviously goes into their construction. His items are certainly museum quality, and would not look out of place if they could time travel. I'm looking forward to adding more from his line into my collection! If you're thinking about getting something from his shop... do it! You won't be disappointed!
Tod, I love these videos and the moment you started talking about the animal fibers and animal glue you got me to thinking. Would it be possible to make a few pieces of your hardened leather and place sheets of linen between the layers with rotated fiber direction? The sandwich would be: hardened leather, layer of linen with fibers aligned vert/horizontal, layer of linen rotated 45 degrees, layer of linen rotated another 45 degrees, layer of hardened leather. Rinse and repeat to stack thickness required. You would be able to mold to shape and if you use animal glue to fix the layers of sandwiched material together you should get increased durability from the rotated fibers just like you do in your shields by rotating the grain of the wood layers in the ply. The increased weight and thickness would be minimal, but possibly the durability would increase to compensate.
I think it would help a great deal, but I don't know if they did this. Most armours are layers of different things after all, but I assume that leather armour would be worn with gambeson or similar
@@tods_workshop from my limited understanding there are really limited examples surviving, I guess because of rot since its organic. Do you think it would be a worthy test? As you say our ancestors weren't stupid, they knew layering things increased material strength after all.
Also maybe use more but thinner layers of hardened leather would work. Often penetrating more thinner things is tougher than penetrating one thing with same thickness.
Another possibility would be to combine hardened leather with unhardened leather in layers. It's not hard to think this might've been originally done to make the outside surfaces nicer? easier to work with?
Good theory, but I suspect that the bonding agent (resin, gelatin-based animal glue, WHY) will be too brittle once it cures/sets into its eventual position, thus reducing or even eliminating the limited amount of malleability needed for a good, effective armour. Plus it would be v susceptible to water dmg over a relatively short timespan: if not pressure treated correctly the linen fibres would tend to gather/retain moisture, leading to the softening of their surrounding bone (animal-based, therefore mostly boiled/steamed hide scraps, bone marrow, cartilage etc) glue even without potential expansion-of-fibres issues :( My dad used to repair antiques as authentically as he could (as a well-paying hobby), so I'm v familiar with the properties of 'bone glue', its preparation, uses & weaknesses in certain environments etc (eg the way it crystallises, or its loss of bonding ability if subject to moisture over even a relatively short time) 'Pycrete', the red resin bees manufacture & use to seal their hives, may be an alternative - at least it's waterproof - but prolly too brittle & expensive in quantity. Fish glue may work; I'm not as familiar with its properties as I am with mammal-derived glue.. but this is getting too involved now for a YT comment section IMO, & I'm by no means an expert! :)
I love your channel and thank you for bringing up leather, im an old school tanner (fat and bark only) and out of experience leahter can differ so much for instance an old ox hide hewn thinn is still a lot more dense than leahter from a calf. we here in sweden use "rawstripleahter" (cant remember right english word atm) its when you dont let the hides turn to leather all the way (leaving a strip of rawhide in the center) so the center i basically the same material as a dogs chewing bone, such leather would probably not stop a bolt but i know from experience it can stop Mora knifes and axes. cause you get a softer fiberous layer, then the center that is hard , thenit has to go through the fiberous part again. just wanted to give that input :)keep up the amazing work!
Sounds like what a lot of other people have mentioned in other comments above this one. Also Tod is looking for scandinavian sources of "half tanned rawhide" that will sell and deliver to him in the UK, just like what you are talking about as far as i can follow your description. Maybe have look at the longer threads at the top of this video's Comment section. If you can't help him directly, you maybe have a better understanding of which shops are the most reliable / qualitative best and where you can get the most value for your money ;)
and this is where i may talk about torg and ray. about the materials. but i wont. i think i was privileged to learn about stuff. lovely to watch this ♥️
Three kilos seems pretty spot on for a guess, given that there is an Iranian buffalo hide cuirass in the Metropolitan Museum that weighs 3.5 kg (just shy of eight pounds). A fair number of Asian and middle eastern leather armours exist in museum collections. It would interesting to study those and reverse engineer how they were made. www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/24182
Those historical leather armors are more appropriately called rawhide or partially tanned rawhide armor. In Edward Cheshire' work: "Non-metallic Armour Prior to the First World War," he conducted tests of leather and rawhide, and found that rawhide is significantly stronger than leather when used as armor. So rawhide (which is hide that isn't tanned or only partially tanned) is both cheaper and stronger than fully tanned leather. He also found that boiling leather significantly weakened the material, while boiling rawhide only slightly weakened it while allowing it to be molded, thickened, and/or take on other properties. So other than cuir bouilli being this glue-infused leather, there is a possibility that cuir bouilli was boiled rawhide or glue-infused rawhide rather than leather treated in some way.
@@MustObeyTheRules imo the fights these armors would have been used, you wouldnt face too many warbows. If this is indeed a real thing, and ppl made armor out of it, fairly certain it would have been used vs mediumweight longbows and shortbows. Look more like a cheap way to protect yourself as a peasent
This is brilliant, Tod, really. A comment on the material science part: seems to me that the filler (the glue) is really playing a vital role in the overall characteristics of this material. I would suspect, as in any composite material, that a small variation in composition will lead to huge variations in mechanical properties and thus in behavior in stress tests like shooting arrows at it. For example, the "just right" hardness and elasticity balance point to reduce penetration absorbing the shock... I fear you are up for a very extensive exploration of glue (and resin, as suggested below?) compositions...
I’ve been very intrigued with this particular video. My own experiments into this, took a different approach, and were based on the fact that when drying oils ( such as boiled linseed or tung oil ) dry, they undergo a chemical reaction, that causes the molecules within the oil, to crosslink, just like epoxy or polyester resin. At the time, my friend ( who did a lot of leather work ) and I were testing how leather reacted to being saturated with drying oils, and then left to dry. We were starting to get some interesting results, similar to a piece of woodwork gets a slightly tougher and water resistant exterior, after being treated with boiled linseed, but found that our method of soaking the leather, caused a quite protracted drying time, and I moved away before the test pieces had finished drying...so testing came to a full standstill. I’m still fairly positive that similar drying oil treatments, with the addition of various natural waxes and resins, still might provide some positive results, either in support of the animal glue theory or as a possible alternative.
same. lIke using clamps inside the water connected to the pot. I guess the challenge would be getting the soft leather into the correct shape before putting it into the water. I also think because the heat and moisture would make the leather expand and break while being boiled.
The main issue is the shrinkage, you'd have to oversize the frame and hope that it shrinks exactly as you planned. Using some kind of resin to fill the gaps in a fibre makes far more sense and is something humans have been using for hundreds of years.
Please don't assume that. I have very little experience making this and a slightly weaker strength would make the system tougher and they would have know how to get the best out of it
We had a leather worker a few years ago on Quondam Belgium He used a formula out of a Tekst out of a Swiss museum if I remember right. Veggie tam leather that was cold water formed, dried and rubbed in with the first spring bee wax that has not yet been contaminated with honey. Heated to 46celcius (not sure about the exact temp, had to do with certain molecules losing there properties/bonds at that temp) Scrape exes wax off and repeat. The leather was extremely hard but not brittle, it would dent before it would brake.
At close range with a cross bow and impacting at near to ninety degrees. Maybe at longer range and hitting at an angle like sloped tank armour the leather would be viable.
Hi Tod! That was a very informative video. I had always wondered about how effective leather armor would be against all kinds of projectiles. As I recall, Cole Younger, an Outlaw from Missouri that rode with the James Gang in the 1860s and 70's, wore a "vest" made of seven layers of cowhide to stop, or at least lessen the penetration of any bullets from his waist to his neck, so he could keep on his feet and firing back. It's a far cry from Ned Kelly and his boilerplate armor!
Boiling means heating enough so that a liquid makes bubbles, but the liquid can be anything it doesn't have to be water so I think you're 100% right that it was done with animal glue or resin or something similar (beeswax maybe ?)
And it might not be leather at all. Historical leather armors are more appropriately called rawhide or partially tanned rawhide armor. In Edward Cheshire' work: "Non-metallic Armour Prior to the First World War," he conducted tests of leather and rawhide, and found that rawhide is significantly stronger than leather when used as armor. So rawhide (which is hide that isn't tanned or only partially tanned) is both cheaper and stronger than fully tanned leather. He also found that boiling leather significantly weakened the material, while boiling rawhide only slightly weakened it while allowing it to be molded, thickened, and/or take on other properties. So other than cuir bouilli being this glue-infused leather, there is a possibility that cuir bouilli was boiled rawhide or glue-infused rawhide rather than leather treated in some way.
I don't work much with leather, but it's porous to some extent if I'm not mistaken. So it would stand to reason that bubbles could show up at some point prior to actually boiling when it displaces gas stuck in the material. Or if some chemical reaction with the water/glue/whatever below the boiling point of the liquid results in the production of a gas, maybe this is why it is referred to as boiled in the name?
The Chinese during the Warring States (457-221BC) had "plate armour" made out of rhino leather. picture: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Leather_armour,_Warring_States_period,_Hubei_Museum.jpg
We have the same name and both are into blacksmithing and armorcraft. Although I've only ever made a small pocket knife haha. You're a very good educator and speak in a way that allows anybody to completely understand what your point is. Please put out more videos.
@Sunbro Adresse that's... Not actually true. There are a few particularly stupid bits (like -ough), but in terms of reading what is written out loud, English is generally very regular. There are, however, a few things that make that less obvious than it could be. First, and most obvious: dialects. Which is fair enough... Until you realize that Written English also has dialects (US vs Commonwealth, broadly, but the Commonwealth version has a few subdialects here and there too. Admittedly, it's usually things like New Zealand spelling fjord as fiord (because they actually have them so use the word all the time rather than it just being an "odd foreign thing")) Stress: English doesn't mark this in written form. It really, Really should, because the stress moves and moving it changes almost Everything pronunciation wise (and is often the Difference between two words that are spelled identically with closely related meaning, but have different grammatical functions and are pronounced differently) Finally, when reading English, you absolutely must think in clusters, not individual characters. English has it's monographs, but due to possessing an unwavering hatred of diacritics of all types, it also has digraphs. Which isn't that odd, except it also has Trigraphs. Though I think French has some of those too (or at least they look like it to me). English, of course, must one-up that. And it does. English has tetragraphs. -ough is one, hopeless as it is, but so is -tion (the ti is read as sh, but Only if it's in the four character sequence "tion"). It's usually the same with silent letters. (Though some of them are a result of influential people one to two hundred years ago going on a "Latin is the best so clearly, English, being the language o F the English people, who are the best, must behave like Latin ad everything else is just errors by the ignorant!" Kick. Now, for fairly obvious reasons (English is a Germanic language with heavy influence from Celtic and other Germanic languages on how it all worked, which then borrowed a tonne of vocabulary from everyone else... And inexplicably took a "how to form new words out of old ones" course as taught by ancient Greek, and less bafflingly another from Latin. I'm probably forgetting something. Point is,for the most part English isn't actually Irregular. It's just excessively ( needlessly (?) ) complicated.
I am reminded of my D&D players that called it "queer bully" when they first heard the word. It's a bit hard for English to find the balance between E and Y sound. It's probably more like the Y in really, so try kwyr.
@@jorgeporras9262 Yup, and for some unknown reason (probably habit) English decided to take a bunch of French words and truly mangle them. Just to be extra awkward (and possibly just to annoy the French.)
@@chubbymoth5810 It's always hard to pronounce foreign words, especially when they contain phonems that don't exist in your own language, hence the "zis" when most French try to say "this" : the phonem thorn doesn't exist in French so most of us try to find the closest equivalent. "Bouilli" is made from the phonems [b] pronounced as in English, "ou" or [u] as in "who", "ill" or [j] as in "yard" and "i" or [i] as in "be". "Booyee"
Imagine how people were 5,000 years ago without God’s True Book. How would they have known how they were supposed to live? How would they have known how they were supposed to be in order to please their Creator? So God gave the law of Moses back then. This law was for the people to know how to be. They saw what God expected out of them. God had high expectations from the Israelites. Why shouldn't He? Should He drop His expectations for love and grace? If He drops His expectations to accommodate what man wants, then He compromised His perfection for man’s imperfection. Does a Perfect God compromise His perfection? So God has expectations once He tells His creation how He wants things. His love and grace gives His creation time to change. He is willing to help them change if they ask Him. Then His creation, while repenting or changing to do His will, see His Beauty. This is a relationship formed now with the Creator. If He is the Most Beautiful Being, which He is, how can His creation not want to obey Him? How can His creation not want to please Him? The reason why is because of foolishness. Man loves his own foolishness rather than God’s wisdom, Jn 3:19. Man loves his sin. If anyone loves himself, he will stay in sin. So man who stays in sin rejects his perfect Creator or Father, and exchanges it for his own foolishness. So now fast forward to today where we have God’s True Book. We officially know what God wants. God gave His creation a big help, the Word, to show us how He wants us to live. If we follow His perfect teachings, we all live with perfect peace, love, joy and unity. This is His perfect design for His children's lives. When we go against His perfect design for what we want, sin, we throw away that perfect plan. We throw away that perfect peace, love, joy and unity. Giving up these things is foolish. So sinning against God proves to be the worst plan for us! God wanted to help mankind. God wanted to save man from his foolishness. He wanted to help us the best way possible because He is Good. The best and only way to do it, as God saw fit, was to give mankind His Son. Why? The Son is the Word, Jn 1:1. The Word always obeys the Father's will. The Father's will is spoken through His Word. The Word proceeds forth from the Father's will and mind. So the Word that God speaks is the pure sequel to what was inside the Father's mind and heart. Jesus is that perfection manifest. He is the physical embodiment of God's will and thought. God's will and thought is expressed through His Word. Jesus, the human part, is the perfect, physical expression of God. Jesus, the human part that walked this earth, came to teach us the perfect will of God. How? He did this by example. This is why Jesus walked this earth perfectly without sinning. So Jesus taught us perfectly. He even was willing to die not only death, but the death He did not deserve since He never sinned against God the Father. He chose to give His life. That's why Jesus says no man forces Him to lay down His life, He chose to lay it down, Jn 10:18. God wanted to save mankind. Jesus wants what the Father wants. The Word always obeys the will. He shed even His perfect, pure blood for us. His blood is the fulfillment of perfect obedience to the Father. Why? Because the Son asked 3 times in the Garden, "Take my cup not by my will but by yours." The Father said the Son still had to shed His blood on the cross. The Son obeyed the Father's will over His own. So the blood was shed for that purpose. Nobody else had that kind of blood. Nobody else pleased the Father perfectly like the Son. So now instead of the law of Moses showing us the way to live rightly in God's eyes, we have the Son. This is the New Covenant. In Jesus and His blood, we now obey Him instead of the Mosaic law as part of this new agreement between man and God. So as man wants to live rightly to please His Creator, man now must turn to the Word of the Creator. So obeying the perfect teachings of Jesus brings us to how God wants us to live. The Son conquered the grave. The grave is the end of all who sin. The grave is the payment for sin. Satan founded the grave. How? Because Satan started death by being the first to sin against Almighty God. Jesus destroyed Satan's creation and fulfills the very first prophecy spoken of the Savior in Genesis 3:15. That's why Jesus came to "...destroy the works of the devil," 1 Jn 3:8. Satan came to ruin God's Creation with sin. Jesus came to ruin Satan's creation, death, with perfect obedience, which His blood shed proves. That's why in His blood, there is life. So the Gospel is God's reconciliation with man. How? Only through the Son. If you disobey the Son, you disobey the Father. Jesus says, “He who has seen me has seen the Father,” Jn 14:9. Repent and accept Jesus as Your Lord NOW!!! Then start to read the Gospels and obey His commands. Follow Jesus only, no other man, no religion. Only Jesus. Joseph, Servant of God Sent by Christ to evangelize the whole world www.clevelandstreetpreachers.com TH-cam CLEVELAND STREET PREACHERS,,.
It's regular stained leather on the outside and then have plates of harden leather underneath kinda like a IBA for the military looks good and would stop knives and arrows
Imagine how people were 5,000 years ago without God’s True Book. How would they have known how they were supposed to live? How would they have known how they were supposed to be in order to please their Creator? So God gave the law of Moses back then. This law was for the people to know how to be. They saw what God expected out of them. God had high expectations from the Israelites. Why shouldn't He? Should He drop His expectations for love and grace? If He drops His expectations to accommodate what man wants, then He compromised His perfection for man’s imperfection. Does a Perfect God compromise His perfection? So God has expectations once He tells His creation how He wants things. His love and grace gives His creation time to change. He is willing to help them change if they ask Him. Then His creation, while repenting or changing to do His will, see His Beauty. This is a relationship formed now with the Creator. If He is the Most Beautiful Being, which He is, how can His creation not want to obey Him? How can His creation not want to please Him? The reason why is because of foolishness. Man loves his own foolishness rather than God’s wisdom, Jn 3:19. Man loves his sin. If anyone loves himself, he will stay in sin. So man who stays in sin rejects his perfect Creator or Father, and exchanges it for his own foolishness. So now fast forward to today where we have God’s True Book. We officially know what God wants. God gave His creation a big help, the Word, to show us how He wants us to live. If we follow His perfect teachings, we all live with perfect peace, love, joy and unity. This is His perfect design for His children's lives. When we go against His perfect design for what we want, sin, we throw away that perfect plan. We throw away that perfect peace, love, joy and unity. Giving up these things is foolish. So sinning against God proves to be the worst plan for us! God wanted to help mankind. God wanted to save man from his foolishness. He wanted to help us the best way possible because He is Good. The best and only way to do it, as God saw fit, was to give mankind His Son. Why? The Son is the Word, Jn 1:1. The Word always obeys the Father's will. The Father's will is spoken through His Word. The Word proceeds forth from the Father's will and mind. So the Word that God speaks is the pure sequel to what was inside the Father's mind and heart. Jesus is that perfection manifest. He is the physical embodiment of God's will and thought. God's will and thought is expressed through His Word. Jesus, the human part, is the perfect, physical expression of God. Jesus, the human part that walked this earth, came to teach us the perfect will of God. How? He did this by example. This is why Jesus walked this earth perfectly without sinning. So Jesus taught us perfectly. He even was willing to die not only death, but the death He did not deserve since He never sinned against God the Father. He chose to give His life. That's why Jesus says no man forces Him to lay down His life, He chose to lay it down, Jn 10:18. God wanted to save mankind. Jesus wants what the Father wants. The Word always obeys the will. He shed even His perfect, pure blood for us. His blood is the fulfillment of perfect obedience to the Father. Why? Because the Son asked 3 times in the Garden, "Take my cup not by my will but by yours." The Father said the Son still had to shed His blood on the cross. The Son obeyed the Father's will over His own. So the blood was shed for that purpose. Nobody else had that kind of blood. Nobody else pleased the Father perfectly like the Son. So now instead of the law of Moses showing us the way to live rightly in God's eyes, we have the Son. This is the New Covenant. In Jesus and His blood, we now obey Him instead of the Mosaic law as part of this new agreement between man and God. So as man wants to live rightly to please His Creator, man now must turn to the Word of the Creator. So obeying the perfect teachings of Jesus brings us to how God wants us to live. The Son conquered the grave. The grave is the end of all who sin. The grave is the payment for sin. Satan founded the grave. How? Because Satan started death by being the first to sin against Almighty God. Jesus destroyed Satan's creation and fulfills the very first prophecy spoken of the Savior in Genesis 3:15. That's why Jesus came to "...destroy the works of the devil," 1 Jn 3:8. Satan came to ruin God's Creation with sin. Jesus came to ruin Satan's creation, death, with perfect obedience, which His blood shed proves. That's why in His blood, there is life. So the Gospel is God's reconciliation with man. How? Only through the Son. If you disobey the Son, you disobey the Father. Jesus says, “He who has seen me has seen the Father,” Jn 14:9. Repent and accept Jesus as Your Lord NOW!!! Then start to read the Gospels and obey His commands. Follow Jesus only, no other man, no religion. Only Jesus. Joseph, Servant of God Sent by Christ to evangelize the whole world www.clevelandstreetpreachers.com TH-cam CLEVELAND STREET PREACHERS,,
@@potatotactics1398 As long as people dosn't show up with the "It's not because there is no evidence, that they did not, they could do it, so they should have done it"
Hello, just an axperiment I've known about. Ancient poet Homer described Ajax's shield as made of 7 layers of leather. He also described an instance where a thrwown spear penetrated 6 of them and stoped on the 7th. Modern experiments tend to concur with this! A thrown spear tends to stop on the 7th layer of leather! I don't have any details on the leather hardening procedure (if any). But the commentator claimed that it's not only about the overall thickness; it's the fact that 7 layers have 6 gaps between them. And a missile passing through alternate layers of thickness, and with tiny gaps of air inbetween, tends to create extra friction. Friction transforsm kinetic energy into thermal energy (heat). And that is what causes a missile to stop. I can reffer to the book if anyone's interested.
It would also allow to use the layers in alternating orientation so that the natural texture of the hide doesn't create weak points... flipping your skins 6 times would mean no one direction to split in and so on... One commenter above cited an old english text where they mixed rawhide layers with glue, glasspowder and small iron filings in between... which would have a similar effect of breaking up the progress of any projectile as the presumed airgaps you talk about.
I love it. I do hardened leather myself and it is all experimentation with a lots of variety. Each armorer likely had their own proprietary method. I found that layered works much better at slowing and topping penetration. I usually have a base layer of 13-15 ounce vegetable tan saddle skirt with a top layer of 8-9 ounce stitched together then hardened. My crossbow is only 70 pounds at an 8 1/2 inch draw so nowhere near your power level. But you are also shooting at kind of the top end of the spectrum at 160 pound pull. Bows of that poundage were not all that common at least in the early period, and were pretty expensive. I believe, though I can't put my hands on it right now, but the average longbows the everyday person used only had a pull of about half that around 70-80 pounds. My crossbow is a reproduction of the Skane notch bow and I think they estimated it at around 70-80 pounds. Though I could certainly be remembering wrong. I love your videos and the testing.
The average longbow that people used for training and hunting are around 70 pounds as you said. However, wartime longbows had a range from 100-160 pounds
@@stupidburp I wouldn't really know much about the early medieval period but from what I know, 12th century onwards every single bow made for war had a draw strength upwards of 100 pounds. For hunting however you would commonly have them to be around 70 or 80 pounds. During the early medieval period most armies switched over to crossbows because they were cheaper and easier to train with. So there were just less warbows and thus less bows with a draw weight above 100.
Great bit of experimentation there, Tod. I was wondering how angle might affect penetration. Like, the later Spanish breastplates were fairly well known to have a central vertical ridge, and were fairly curved too, so that the chances of a flat-on impact were very thin indeed. Would you get as much penetration from a bodkin at say 35 degrees, I wonder? I think with metal plate armour it's fairly much a no-brainer as the point would almost certainly slide off, but with leather? I think maybe some penetration might happen but would you get the shaft breaking off perhaps & only minimal penetration? Worth further experimentation I think.
My humble oppinion: not all the layers should be the same density. Soft at the outside and harder to the inside.. friction folowed by plate, slow folowed by block.
From concertina bellows repair and making, I can attest that adding glycerin to hide glue will decrease brittleness of a finished joint. [this works just as well with PVA glue] Also I understand that birch bark glue was made less brittle by adding powdered charcoal ------ a stone age technology employed for attaching arrowheads to wood shafts
I knew some people who did quite a bit of experimentation with making different types of boiled leather for SCA fighting. They found that they had the best results with raw hide or only partially tanned leather and hot beeswax. It was still tricky to get timing and temperature right. They had wood forms made to clamp and press the hide into the desired shape after soaking in hot wax. Some would then do a second dip and a light clamp. I inspected the material and found it to be pretty hard but slightly flexible without being brittle. This then was used in armor that was beat on repeatedly with clubs without breaking.
Damn you're gonna have some itchy hands from that fiberglass. You're a braver man than I to be handling fiberglass without gloves haha. Great video, immensely informative as usual!
I wonder though about how much cheaper than metal it would have been, after all large animal meat was pretty expensive... So maybe, it wasn't cheap enough to compensate for the poorer performance/durability... The smaller the leather, the cheaper it should get. This makes me wonder why we have no records of leather scales (also taking the repair into account) or leather plates inside a gambesson.
Hi Tod you say that there isn't a recipe for this so I wonder if you've ever seen this one.
"Take lether that ys half tannyd and drye hym, and schave the flesshe syd; and take glwe wt water, and set yt over the fyere, and melte yt wt water, and then al hote ly yt a pone the leder on the flesshe syde, and strawe ther on the powder of glasce bete yn a brasene morter wt fylyne of yrene y mellyd to geder; and then laye a nother pece of the same lether flesshe seyde to flesshe, and nayle hym to the scylde and lete hyme drye, and ther nother sper nother ege tole enter ther ynne"
It comes from a text kept at the Ashmolean museum and although it is said to be a recipe for a doublet of fense, it sounds similar to what you're talking about.
no and that is fabulous - thanks so much for posting this. Gold!!!!!!
reading text that's been written before a standardized writing system is always gonna be amusing to me xd.
@@tods_workshop so you have two pieces of half tanned leather stuck together flesh side to flesh side with a mixture of glue powdered glass and iron filings.
@@Stephen_Curtin Glass and iron glue would really make it much harder.
@@chris5240 also the leather is not fully tanned so the core of each piece of leather would still be like rawhide. This would also add to the hardness
"It's the pointiest one I sell."
-Tod
What a great thing to be able to say
It might imply he has even pointier one he keeps to himself
"I just had to shoot this, I needed to know" = Tod speaking from his heart
.... whilst aiming at yours.
"I gots to know" - thug in Dirty Harry
Imagine how people were 5,000 years ago without God’s True Book. How would they have known how they were
supposed to live? How would they have known how they were supposed to be in order to please their Creator? So
God gave the law of Moses back then. This law was for the people to know how to be. They saw what God expected
out of them. God had high expectations from the Israelites. Why shouldn't He? Should He drop His expectations for
love and grace? If He drops His expectations to accommodate what man wants, then He compromised His
perfection for man’s imperfection. Does a Perfect God compromise His perfection?
So God has expectations once He tells His creation how He wants things. His love and grace gives His creation time
to change. He is willing to help them change if they ask Him. Then His creation, while repenting or changing to do
His will, see His Beauty. This is a relationship formed now with the Creator. If He is the Most Beautiful Being, which
He is, how can His creation not want to obey Him? How can His creation not want to please Him? The reason why is
because of foolishness. Man loves his own foolishness rather than God’s wisdom, Jn 3:19. Man loves his sin. If
anyone loves himself, he will stay in sin. So man who stays in sin rejects his perfect Creator or Father, and
exchanges it for his own foolishness.
So now fast forward to today where we have God’s True Book. We officially know what God wants. God gave His
creation a big help, the Word, to show us how He wants us to live. If we follow His perfect teachings, we all live
with perfect peace, love, joy and unity. This is His perfect design for His children's lives. When we go against His
perfect design for what we want, sin, we throw away that perfect plan. We throw away that perfect peace, love, joy
and unity. Giving up these things is foolish. So sinning against God proves to be the worst plan for us!
God wanted to help mankind. God wanted to save man from his foolishness. He wanted to help us the best way
possible because He is Good. The best and only way to do it, as God saw fit, was to give mankind His Son. Why? The
Son is the Word, Jn 1:1. The Word always obeys the Father's will. The Father's will is spoken through His Word.
The Word proceeds forth from the Father's will and mind. So the Word that God speaks is the pure sequel to what
was inside the Father's mind and heart. Jesus is that perfection manifest. He is the physical embodiment of God's
will and thought. God's will and thought is expressed through His Word. Jesus, the human part, is the perfect,
physical expression of God. Jesus, the human part that walked this earth, came to teach us the perfect will of God.
How? He did this by example. This is why Jesus walked this earth perfectly without sinning.
So Jesus taught us perfectly. He even was willing to die not only death, but the death He did not deserve since He
never sinned against God the Father. He chose to give His life. That's why Jesus says no man forces Him to lay down
His life, He chose to lay it down, Jn 10:18. God wanted to save mankind. Jesus wants what the Father wants. The
Word always obeys the will. He shed even His perfect, pure blood for us. His blood is the fulfillment of perfect
obedience to the Father. Why? Because the Son asked 3 times in the Garden, "Take my cup not by my will but by
yours." The Father said the Son still had to shed His blood on the cross. The Son obeyed the Father's will over His
own. So the blood was shed for that purpose. Nobody else had that kind of blood. Nobody else pleased the Father
perfectly like the Son. So now instead of the law of Moses showing us the way to live rightly in God's eyes, we have
the Son. This is the New Covenant. In Jesus and His blood, we now obey Him instead of the Mosaic law as part of
this new agreement between man and God. So as man wants to live rightly to please His Creator, man now must
turn to the Word of the Creator. So obeying the perfect teachings of Jesus brings us to how God wants us to live.
The Son conquered the grave. The grave is the end of all who sin. The grave is the payment for sin. Satan founded
the grave. How? Because Satan started death by being the first to sin against Almighty God. Jesus destroyed Satan's
creation and fulfills the very first prophecy spoken of the Savior in Genesis 3:15. That's why Jesus came to
"...destroy the works of the devil," 1 Jn 3:8. Satan came to ruin God's Creation with sin. Jesus came to ruin Satan's
creation, death, with perfect obedience, which His blood shed proves. That's why in His blood, there is life. So the
Gospel is God's reconciliation with man. How? Only through the Son. If you disobey the Son, you disobey the
Father. Jesus says, “He who has seen me has seen the Father,” Jn 14:9. Repent and accept Jesus as Your Lord NOW!!!
Then start to read the Gospels and obey His commands. Follow Jesus only, no other man, no religion. Only Jesus.
Joseph, Servant of God Sent by Christ to evangelize the whole world
www.clevelandstreetpreachers.com TH-cam CLEVELAND STREET PREACHERS,.
Hello I spent 20 years making leather armour, yes adding a type of resin to leather is a way of hardening it, but I found that heating the leather in water to approximately 70 degrees until it changes colour, 3-6 minutes. not to dark of course then it snaps, it becomes like a thermo plastic. Just as a note the leather I used for armour was a product called veg tan soul bend, the same stuff used on your shoes and would range in thickness from 8-10mm it’s a very dense leather. I sometimes used leather up to 14mm thick , must have been a very old cow. I was exploring full thickness raw hide as armour, (dog chew) it has great properties for shaping and excellent stiffness and durability. Also just as an extra, the thicker leather can be treated differently, adding boiling water to the rear or flesh side makes stiffened areas, also it shrinks the leather in that spot. So you can make an area more flexible than another area. I look back on those days making armour with great fondness , love the channel and try and pick up some full thickness soul bend , you will be amazed
interesting, i think, just by intuition that the glue soaking would be something of an exception and not the majority of the cases. I think your plastic- like material, that Tod made isn't taking advantage of all the qualities of the leather and is just to stiff and brittle. Tod, i think you should give the voices that speak for the just boiled or otherwise partially tanned version more credit. To me it seemed a bit farfeatched- that glue soaking would be the major way it was done and for several reasons: Water- would soften the glue and possibly deform your armour. It would smell and possibly rot. Animal glue makes for a stiff and also heavy product none of wich may be in your interest. And in my mind a leather armour should be closer to the qualities of hide and leather that involve flexibility and thoughness and less hardness or stiffness. As mentioned by others this method, tried by Tod, was something used. I i think that it's compelling to say it was used by some in some places, but i just don't think that it could the norm or the one important way to do it. I could be wrong.
I dont want to poke you with this, but do you make fantasy or "historical" armors? As far as I know, there is little evidence of hardened leather being used as proper armor.
@@chettonex i guess you are talking to the first comment but i will reply you. I did hear of it being used from people who are well documented and i trust like Matt Easton from scholagladiatoria and also Tod- the dispute here wasn't if leather made an armour it was rather how the leather was treated to make it into an armour.
Love the great Practical insight and testing, layering seems obvious and using a plate backing, or even a chainmail layer, for constuction and shaping seems plausible to me... Woven inside the gambason ,, soft to wear, good visual and or backing to fix the "boiled " Leathers.. ..fabric,metal,fabric, leather.. and Thinking of cost vs efficiency.. less metal is best, as it is laborious to get.. (re)using woodnails, or horse shoe nails as fastning....studded...(scattered, sewn in chainmail rings on).. really catch spead out of slicing, and have some protective quality to stopping sword impacts like a net almost would, or preventing it to slide, travel /glance towards necks, openings and armpits.. like the V shape on the breastplates.. and knowledge of shape vs blows/strikes on in helmets..... A Arrow and or Bolt is very specific impact... and it changed the type of armors (again)..but up to that point and after.. most people fight with sticks .. pointy or or sharp..sword or spears, farmtools and derivatives of those.. looking at the chaos even at staged fights .. the wear on the user of full armor is so high.. the would have sacrificed the weight, and maybe some protection from its total density and thickness of its total armor... to gain the spead, the endurance and recovery time, at the least if not cost, per user/soldier and the skills to make these might be as simple as covering the proper armor and using it as a shape holder.. pressing it down with sacks .. filling it with perhaps sand to push and set the leather quick.. warm it underneath even...You could almost see a fantasy movie version, using the inflatable tank technic the brits used to intimidate .. using a bigger printing press setup to print an army......and or simulate a massive counter army of dummies and non fighters standing ground and scaring of the enemy..:)
But..I really think that shaped wright... the shape itself will be good protection too like the shell of an egg has strength in the shape...wich the armorers really got good at.. thinning and shaping to reflect /deflect or repel and resist impact types...these beautyfull lab conditions give such good result.. a less perfect impact of a weapon would struggle... especially an increasingly more tired soldier in full armor... trying to lift his heavy arm.. and his even more heavy sword or weapon..
About the ingredients.... somehow they always used actual urine in almost anything....... but..no pee.. then Bee... why not just a batch of say 90 /10 wax and oils.. (Bee)wax has a fantastic warm and cold state..they really got wax down in those times... mixed with a drop of olive oil or animal oils... as a bit of flex .. I would love to see that boiled up and have the leather soak it and than cover a plate armor .. with and without (use a mold release! layer of a fine woven cotten/silk.. or two.. .. to split gap between metal and fixture jelly/gleu/Curred leather ... .. so less thickness could be used in metal and it be added in leather layers... looking at lots and lots of paintings, it mostly show or thought as as metal brigadine style busts and clothes.. the Stiffend Gambason/layer combo seems so plausible with even chainmail like weaves .. using small plates of the leather in stead of the big plate shape... again.. woven as a layer inside a gambason,...well defended in rough public life... yet still baring your skills or family colors in decorative woven materials...
That all just my minds idea.,but they loved color.. and where proud people .. in harsh times.. Fancy did win from perhaps perfect armor in battle.. Hostages where recognised on the battlefield...and held for cash or influances... Daily..more common days would not be filled with wararmor... it would have been the personal protective outfit... against the plunderer with a knife or or yes.. the forks and cuttlery of a household....
I really feel you proof the damn good quality, it even has against perfect struck bolts or arrows... I feel it has even way more effectiveness against the blades and terrors of other weapons.. shaped wright and interlaced in wearable pieces... outrunning and enduring a fight wins them... and metal is metal... Well trained Buhurt fighters show a really good impression into how long a good trained fighter lasts .. in a ring.in good wearable,.. but heavy armor... not having to walk to that battlefield 5/10km.... having 10 metal soldiers .. vs .. what.. 10-20-30 unit size faster long lasting.. pretty confident fighters.. not in fancy heavy tank bejeweld armor... fighting for there lands ... my bet is on leather, fabrics and or chainmail interlaced.... hope Im not beeing boring or negative.. Im so loving this work and speculation, it does fill the gaps,... where recorded history finds, and documents sometimes leave out or just are lost..
It's so nice and inspirational seeing these actual impressive studie and trails... here .. weapons are so banned.. so even for these things
sorry to trouble with such long reply.. have a great time everyone.. and hope to tickle someone to build it..
@@chettonex THere is some evidence for it though its a little circumstantial - one of the biggest its is actually linguisitic. Its thought that 'cuir bouilli' is the root of 'cuirass'. We certainly know it was used for shield sin the bronze age, and I believe there's been a few other occasional finds, but the problem is it doesn't normally survive. The thought with medieval armour is that they would wear leather cuirasses in addition to mail underneath the surcoats - there are a few statues that seem to show something smoot being worn there in an era where we don't find steel breastplates.
Its also a possible material for the greek Linothorax (the linen theory is a theory, it is unproven and not without dispute) and I *think* some greco-Roman muscle cuirasses (though we know they did bronze as well)
id say theyd almost defnitely have some sort of gambeson underneath that aswell so its really quite feasible
Yes, not to mention that a human body would absorb so of the impact, muscles fat and skin move and flex with the force, and the body as a whole would be moved away from the direction of impact, which lessens the penetrating potential
"Leur faut les jaques de trente toiles d’épaisseur ou, pour le moins, de vingt-cinq, avec un cuir de cerf. " saying to come from an order of louis XI for his free archers (can't find the source, if any one have it please share)
Also IIRC armor in that period usually had some sort of a swell away from the chest so that dents or slight penetrations wouldn't hurt.
@@benjaminhaupais6470 They will require a 30 ply or at least 25 ply of gambeson and deer leather. A jacque is an ensemble of leather over gambeson.
(rough translation)
I can definitely see that this could've been the poor mans plate mail.
When you are impregnating a porous material with a liquid, and you heat up the liquid to lower its viscosity, the combination looks like it is boiling even when far below the boiling temperature of the liquid. As the liquid replaces the air in the material the bubbles come to the surface. So its not technically boiling, it just looks like it's boiling. It could be the same with the "boiled leather."
good point - thanks
The non-scientific meaning the word boil is bubble.
very true and quite clever in the naming of it as well, and plus the actual dictionary meaning of boiling is "having reached the boiling point; steaming or bubbling up under the action of heat"
"fiercely churning or swirling
the boiling seas.
"
"(of anger, rage, etc.) intense; fierce; heated."
Also - if boiling leather in an aqueous solution it will boil out any residual fats/oils making it very inflexible / brittle giving that curled brittle parchment effect, when dry. Whatever they are doing, it is likely that the beginning product will be salted "rawhide" rather than tanned leather, and the "boiling"/"glueing" process is the actual tanning process, ensuring fibres are partly lubricated / separated by the matrix ensures toughness.
Hard leather armour appears time and time again in history, so it must at least work to reduce battlefield mortality (even if fighters suffer injuries and post battle morbidity) - to win on the day of battle is key - "make the other's fighters die for their "cause".
- note that use of gelatine vs casein as the binder properties will vary - other possibilities include distilled tree oils / resins??
-casein is waterproof when set. - (looking into it its recipes almost look like tanning solutions - add a few salts and you get hard chrome tanning in one step.. www.fpl.fs.fed.us/documnts/fplrn/fplrn158.pdf (areas of research abound, time to do research is inversely proportional to time spent watching educational videos..)
@@kadmow I'm curious why tanning would be beneficial for the purpose of creating armor. Wouldn't the naturally stiffer rawhide be better?
Joerg , your English has improved dramatically good work mate.
🤣🤣🤣
That was exactly what came to my mind before I read the channel name :D
“Let me show you it’s features!” (laughs in German)
Kek
Im new here and English myself. I thought he was a native speaker
Hi hi!
Hey Tod. I'm a jukendo practitioner, and we use a heavy cuirbolli protector for our left arm and shoulder. It's made from buffalo leather, about 8 mils thick. It is aparently created in the traditioal jaspanese style, which imvolves soaking it in animal glue (fish glue in this case), moulding and then lacquering. I am pretty sure you could contact Tozando or some of the other makers and ask for notes.
I made some cuirbolli long ago by soaking leather in Dubbin and then baking it in a kiln. It stopped the problem with fragility and came out tough as nails
My best friend at the time also made cuirbolli. He did it by putting leather in a deep frier filled with oil (because - you know - he was an idiot). He came up with brittle armour that smelled DELICIOUS! Like fried beef! Every time he wore it, dogs would follow him about.
+100 animal charm
I actually experimented with boiled leather quite some time and the trick is not actually boiling it on 100°C. Instead heat it in water between 75 an 80°C for 10 to 25 minutes till it gets a certain shade of dark brown. The pieces in the beginning are already to dark. It's possible to get a good compromise between hard and flexible if you take it out of the water at the right time. After taking it out of the water you got a very short time to form it, for instance by nailing it on piece of wood carved like a human chest (or the body part you want to make armour for) That said, I just love your videos.
I'm actually a leather worker, and the process Philipp just described is very similar to the way that I harden my costume armor pieces. Rather than submerging the leather in 80C water and then trying to form it, I prefer to wet mold my pieces, and then pop them in the oven at about 90C while they're still wet. I find that gives me a little more control over my heating and shaping. But like I said, I'm usually making costume pieces. I have yet to test them against actual weapons. I would love to see this version of hardening tested as well.
Yes...Tod's boiled leather was over done. If you get your water to the right temperature( 70 to 87 degrees Celcius) and only boil it until it changes colour you come out with a pliable piece which can be formed which will dry hard and not brittle.
It would be nice to get chemist's or physisist's explanation to these temperatures and what reaction is going on and how it changes when temperature varies from 60-100C.
I would love to see Todd do tests using the different types of hardening and then doing a comparison & contrast
@@laurivaisanen6918 There are two variables, the temperature and the duration the material is exposed to it. It is like cooking an egg (or anything really). It might take 5 minutes of 100°C to get similar result to 30 minutes at 60°C. The big difference is that at lower temperatures the material has more time to heat evenly. I suppose sometimes you might prefer the longer process at lower temperature while in other context shorter one at higher temperature might provide material with some gradient of different properties.
Anyway I suspect the leather was not just boiled/heated but impregnated as well, I wonder if someone actually checked what chemical residues they can find in it and what materials people used.
I broke out in a sympathetic rash when I saw you handle that fibreglass.
he grew up handling asbestos same way, prob.
@@sillysad3198 oof
I had a fiberglass pole rub against a pant leg and every time I wore those pants they would itch. It was horrible.
Irritative contact dermatitis is the first ddx
Watching him manhandle glass fibers without gloves gave me chills. Getting those little fibers in your skin is a recipe for days on days of itching and anger.
It's really not that bad. I've worked with it for years and a few seconds exposure like that isn't really enough to irritate the skin. In my experience anyway.
i know the feeling. Use vinegar and water to stop the burning and itching. also works to clean your washing machine after washing greasy clothes or washing clothes that have fiberglass on them. Go easy on the vinegar as it is an ACID. I recommend just a cup of vinegar on large load on washing machine with nothing else inside.
Rehydrate the leather with warm steam. As the leather rehydrates, the lipid layer becomes more permeable and supple. Leather is basically skin. Skin is mostly lipids (fatty acids). Lipids are insoluble in water but soluble in organic solvents. Hide glue (animal glue) is mostly made of collagen (a type of fibrous protein ie. cartilage, various connective tissues etc.). When proteins are heated, the arrangement of the molecular structure denatures from a tangled mess, to a more organized looking structure (more fiberglass like) and becomes more viscous. This is an important step for the collagen to penetrate into the leather efficiently. The combination between the lipid layer being molecularly reinforced by the collagen, when cooled, becomes stable and more structurally “strong”. The “nature” of the properties of both macromolecules have changed and therefore become structurally changed at the molecular level. The result is a more structurally “strong” thing as opposed to a “soft and malleable” thing.
...I hope that makes sense.
I hope Todd reads this one because it seems a very hard work of fine-tuning, one that medieval and ancient leatherworkers would know well but which we have to sadly relearn from scratch, as it seems to be quite forgotten. I wonder if asking in places where traditional leatherworking has persisted, such as in Marrakech, may be of help. They certainly do some curious work even today but it's not armor.
Thanks for taking the time to add this
For bullet proof glass, they use a lot of layers of varying hardness. So the first layer may be hard, but the second softer and stickier, then hard, then soft. You could look into doing something similar if you want to do more tests.
Something similar is coming
@@tods_workshop
I didn't understand the recipe
Could you make a video detailing the steps in a simple way?
Did you use tanned or half tanned leather?
a long time ago, I watched an old TV series
And in that series they showed that 6 to 8 layers of leather were able to repel a bullet from an harquebus.
🤔
I'd actually be interested in a video of you actually making the hard leather, step by step and what your process is and materials used.
Keep up the great videos!
Yes please!
Seconded
Yeah, that'd be super interesting!
Agree!
Agreed!
I always thougt "What do I need a rondal dagger for?" but now you made a great agrument for it
He's actually not even using it to its fullest potential. Do you see that flat disc on the back? The intention is that after you stab, you can repeatedly hammer your fist into the back of the knife, driving it into your target.
@@jeffmorris5802 You don't repeatedly hammer your fist into it unless you wanna break your hand. What you do is, once you've driven it home, you can cup your palm over the disk and then lean your weight into it, to drive it in deep. Remember, these daggers were often used by knights to finish off other knight, once a fight had gone to the ground.
@@clearmelody6252 Exactly, get it into the gap under their armpit or their neck and just push, nasty way to go but effective.
Alternatively you could probably get it into the gap even a little bit and threaten to drive it in, capturing a fellow knight and ransoming him was a viable tactic and most sane people when they're down in the mud with a knife pricking their neck will concede.
The best reason, to support Tods channel!
it was a rather pointed argument
I think what I love most in these videos (aside from the obvious emphasis on keeping things as accurate as possible in a historic sense) is Todd's incredible and obvious enjoyment! Just seeing his happiness and enthusiasm makes the video so much more than mere education or science.
Thanks and I am having fun finding this stuff out
Now I'd love to see you trying different mixtures etc. To find the most effective one :D
This, Tod please go on another bender after this and research boiled leather recipes
Same here
Yesss!! :)
Same!!!
I'd love to see that happening.
I also can imagine that the quality of the leather plays a part. The belly for example is less dense than other parts of a hide.
This is one of the best videos I've ever watched
Thanks and I like it too, but I think you need to get out more!
I enjoy your humour, and I find your acceptance of not having all the facts very refreshing.
Where else can I get material science, mechanical engineering, historical research in multiple languages, economic analysis of Middle Age warfare, and experimental genius in one package? Thanks for all your comments.
I love the comments - so much information
I know it's a bit outside your normal historical range and a dubious historical source, but the Iliad has some passages that detail the use of leather in shields. Ajax's shield is famously 7 layers of bull's hide with a covering of bronze. (Bk vii, 233-312.) It would be fascinating to see how that would fare.
"[Hector] struck Ajax’s fearful shield of seven-layered bull’s hide on its eighth layer, the covering of bronze. It pierced six layers but the seventh stopped it."
A really good point. The Illiad contains many important references to how things were made that often pass somewhat unnoticed to the untrained reader.
That sounds like it would be extremely expensive in todays world
That sounds like a monster of a shield.
best part is that depending on the size of the shield as well as the thickness of the bronze it could perceptibly be quite light for a shield, although I would say a good chainmail cover would make it even better without making it much heavier
@@Banzai_AWOS It would probably make it a lot heavier. Having worn chainmail myself, it's not quite as light as you might think.
I’ll try to keep this succinct. I made leather armor years ago. I used natural, vegetable tanned, full weight cow hide. It was a minimum of 1/4 of an inch thick in all places. (It was impossible to cut out the pieces. It dulled every blade in a matter of linear feet. I ended up using aviator shears-which where dull by themselves.) First, to form each piece I completely immersed it in water. I let it soak until air bubbles quit rising from it, indicating the water had penetrated clear through. The leather was then floppy, soft, and, most important, moldable and stretchable. I molded it around my body and let as much water drain out as I could, then let it dry in that shape. Once it was thoroughly dry, it became very hard, though not brittle like the boiled leather he showed. Ideally at this point I would have immersed it liquid beeswax just like I did the water, but I was/am poor. I schemed hard, but keeping a vat of wax liquid was being my means. So I melted a block of paraffin on it with a heat gun and let the wax penetrate until it dripped through the other side. When the wax cooled it was done.
This is the toughest stuff I have ever seen. It is still flexible, but very hard. I’ve heard LARPers follow this or a similar method. I’ve read, in the heat of the sun and during gameplay the wax gets beaten out and the leather softens. When that happens they simply melt more wax into the armor and it’s like new again.
All of youtube should be like this: STRAIGHT TO THE POINT
Agreed...and I see what you did there!!!
As an additional thought, Thorold Rogers' work suggests that in the late 13th century a tanned cowhide would cost 3-4 shillings each (2-3s as a raw hide, 1s for tanning it). Medieval cows were smaller than modern cows, and their hides thinner (~3mm according to the armour examined by Chris Dobson), so you're probably only getting a single breast and back from each hide. For five layers on the front, 3 on the rear, you're looking at 4 complete hides, which is 12-16s. Randall Storey's thesis shows that, at the same time, the average price for a CoP was 12s.11d., and they could be had (presumably second hand) for as little as 2s.3d. I'm not sure that, given the protection, such a heavily layered defence is economically viable in medieval Europe except maybe in Ireland or the far remote regions where cattle were raised in larger numbers and they were further removed from standard trade networks.
Makes me wonder what armor made from aurochs hide would be like...
The evidence from the Tower of London archives suggests cuir bouilli had more ceremonial and tournament use rather than battlefield use. One of the few entries that mentions it directly describes it as being purchased alongside Balleen swords for a tournament at Windsor. That certainly fits in with cuir bouilli being the more expensive option.
@@jaybluff281 This is broadly true for England by the late 13th century, but a number of 12th and early-to-mid 13th century sources firmly place it as battlefield armour for both knights and infantry (the Gesta Herawardi, John of Salisbury's Policratius, Wace's Roman de Rou, the Chronique des ducs de Normandie, Walter Map's Courtier's trifles, Ralph Niger's writings, William the Breton's Plilippide, armour hires by Genoese merchants and the regulations of the Bolognese armed societies). Infantry wore it as stand alone armour, while knights wore it as reinforcement over their mail.
Additionally, as Chris Dobson has made clear in "As Tough as Old Boots", leather limb armour remained popular in Italy throughout the 14th century. And, from what he's said, one of his forthcoming books has a lot more information on the use of leather armour by knights.
Generally, leather armour appears to have been the cheapest option for infantry, since it probably wasn't more than one or two layers and layered linen tended to be more expensive. For knights, even as a reinforcing layer it was likely cheaper and lighter than textile armour and less likely to receive surface damage from non-penetrating blows. Iron armour was by far more protective, though, so it rapidly supplanted leather in the 13th century as the CoP became more popular.
@@Cahirable Very interesting stuff, guys. Can someone tell me what CoP is? Normally I can make a good guess at TLAs but this one isn't coming to me.
@@inthefade Coat of Plates
Wow, so much fantastic information in the comments! Excellent material for further experiments.
This made me remember a series of books by Raymond E. Feist where he described a world were metals were EXTREMELY rare and so they had compensated by using other things and in case of weapons they used laminated leather. Never seen that anywhere else :-)
Interesting video and I am looking forward to the next one.
The Magician series
Don't forget flint and obsidian. The aztecs, etc just loved their "stone" weapons.
Favorite comment on the internet this week! Such a great series.
@@donovansweet9566 Mara is a badass ;-)
Modelled on RL medieval/ancient Japan (see the other cultural differences & preferences for using resin-impregnated wood/fibre for armour & even blade construction, due to the lack of available native metals)
E.J. Cheshire did similar experiments in his Phd thesis "Non-Metallic Armour prior to the First World War", and one part I found particularly interesting was the section on "hard-faced" cuir bouilli, in which a surface coating of very hard material such as sand or crushed glass was applied to the surface of the leather to improve arrow resistance, with fantastic results. I would love to see you try this.
From Edward Cheshire's tests results, we can conclude that "leather armor" was not actually leather and more likely to be made of rawhide. In his work: "Non-metallic Armour Prior to the First World War," he found that rawhide is significantly stronger than leather when used as armor. So rawhide (which is hide that isn't tanned or only partially tanned) is both cheaper and stronger than fully tanned leather. He also found that boiling leather significantly weakened the material, while boiling rawhide only slightly weakened it while allowing it to be molded, thickened, and/or take on other properties. So other than cuir bouilli being this glue-infused leather, there is a possibility that cuir bouilli was boiled rawhide or glue-infused rawhide rather than leather treated in some way.
@@Intranetusa That potentially means that the term "boiled leather" originally came from the method of manufacture (i.e. "leather made by boiling rawhide") rather than it being a method of post-processing (i.e. "boiling tanned leather").
That quote that's pinned to the top seems to support this idea. ""Take lether that ys half tannyd and drye hym" sounds very much like rawhide.
Both the Mamluks and Apache are recorded doing exactly what E.J. Cheshire said
From memory (and for what it’s worth) weren’t the Homeric Heroes shields “six fold” leather…I’m pretty sure that’s true. LOVING these videos!
I nearly threw my phone across the room at 3:00 when you picked up that fiberglass with bare hands. . .
*[shudder]* i itch just watching it.
You and me both!
I know some people just don't get any 'noticeable' damage from it, especially people who work with it a bit. My father spent like 20 years making boats out of fiberglass, and 10 years before that making/selling camping trailers out of it and he could touch it directly without any problems or itchiness, but when i helped with any fiber glass i was told to put on gloves and i found out why when i tried touching it like he did.
@@blackfang101 Yeah... I was also shocked he was letting it blow all over the place! Isn't it really bad for animals and such?
@@KickyFut Its bad for everything, glass is like the one solid thing you don't want shards of in your blood system, well, not the only but one of the worst. Its basically like sand or rocks, it won't be broken down by the body, so the only way to get it out is that it gets caught on anything and then slowly pushed out of the body. Its as unlikely as getting hit by lightning because usually its big enough that it will just remain where it is and slowly get pushed out again by your body, or just simply not go deep enough. However, the danger is in thin strips of glass, like glass fiber. The thinner and smaller the glass that breaks off inside you, the higher the risk.
Now again, the chances are minuscule, but you know, not impossible. However, why would you risk it, so use gloves when you can.
Oh god you weren’t kidding. I touched a fibreglass pole once and was picking the needles out for a week.
Very interesting! You don't see boiled leather very often!
Interesting to know that throughout the late XIII century to about the end of the XIV century, boiled leather was heavily implemented in armour (for example in Italy but also in other countries throughout Europe). We often know it as composite armour, because it's not solely iron or steel but a composition of iron/steel parts and boiled leather. From the half and late XIV century we know that they made vambraces, greaves and cuisses (earlier in the century even rerebraces, finely embossed and decorated).
Some extant boiled leather vambraces are in the range of 3-4 mm in thickness, they were mostly lined and covered with metal splints riveted to the leather. In less cases such splints were on the outer side only, meaning that between splints there was just boiled leather.
Such protections were worn (on the arms for example) over mail and some padding. More exposed parts of the body like the torso and head were protected with iron/steel. The arms would be covered, in most cases, by a shield.
I wonder what splinted boiled leather, mail and padding could do against such a hefty punch. Probably all three these layers are enough to stop arrows from causing lethal wounds, but I know it depends from case to case.
Probably with a shield, splinted boiled leather, mail and some padding, a knight's arm would be mostly safe, even if safe is a big word here, if such a knight finds himself under the fire of a line of archers. That must be really annoying.
Very interesting experiment, can't wait to see more!
Hm, that would be another interesting shield test to see.
Shield - boiled leather - mail - thin gambeson - pig.
@@rolfs2165 Yes exactly. Which would broadly simulate the arm of an European knight or man-at-arms say, from roughly 1340-70 AD.
That would be a cool test to see.
ps: the mail should be proper mail like the one Isak Krogh or Erik Schmid make.
Commercial mail is horrible compared to properly self-made mail.
@@ValendianCrafts yes, has to be riveted amail with good rings. Like proper armor ;)
@@ValendianCraftsGambesons weren't worn under plate in that period. Arming doublets aren't padded like a gambeson.
funny thing about the salt-infused gambeson is that the Aztecs supposedly also soaked their quilted cotton armor in brine to make it stiff
Seems like the ancients knew all the tricks lol
that didnt work well against toledo steel
@@bikeman1x11 even less effective agaisnt european flus xD
@@bikeman1x11 Worked fine, actually. Not as well as steel ofc but it was mostly the native allies that made the Spanish conquest possible. Bullets tho..... well, only steel may help convincingly
@@McHobotheBobo eh, there are accounts of fifty or so Spaniards killing over 1000 native warriors suffering zero casualties aside from minor cuts and wounds.
Why does YT permit only one like?!? There's so many likes I want to give to this!
It's the unaccountable tech company that pays no taxes version of democracy.
should have timestamp likes too.
Love this series so far.
Great video!
And lots of great comments to the video too!
One important way to make the chest piece less penetrable, is to give it a pointed bird chest shape.
This will/can result in 4 things.
1: When shot at from straight ahead, the arrow would need to penetrate much more leather because of the angle.
2:You will get an extra cavity besides a gambeson, between the leather and the body, where it would be the most lethal to be hit.
3: There would be a chance for the arrow to deflect off from the armor.
4: There would be a better chance for the arrowhead to bend, with a reduced penetration as the result.
This was awesome!! You mentioned they might have "boiled" a gambeson mesh the same way. That could be a reeeallly interesting video.
There is mention about 'gambeson blacked in the normal way' and the glue from this process when made in iron vats becomes black like old oil, so I think it could have been exactly this
@@tods_workshop ooh.
Also boiled plate just to complete the set.
By starting with a nice piece of leather I think you might be making this too difficult. From a hide you can make leather and/or hide glue; the natural composite material that you’re looking for, and both processes require boiling.
This would satisfy both the name, and the manufacturing imagery you have of ‘boiled leather’.
So this would mean tgat you can make leather without boiling hide.
Tod - During WWI & WWII it was found that layered armour, for example, two layered plates of 6” each, for a total of 12” was less effective against incoming fire than single layer of 12” armour. Perhaps the same applies to your hardened leather. It might be worthy of an experiment.
I would love to see some sword cuts and thrust tests on these leathers.. and spear stabbings, and axe chops.. I bet you that 2-3 layer is _very_ resistant to cuts..
@Raspian Kiado not really, like he said about 5-6kg for front and back.. thats about the same or half the weight of historical breastplates. It wouldnt be as effective.. but it would be ALOT cheaper..
@Raspian Kiado I really doubt they'd wear this without a gambeson underneath, so would just be another armor piece outside of the basic inner gear. Neither metal nor stiffened leather are pliable either so they'd have to be shaped into similar sections. The primary advantages of metal would be that it is less likely to crack and it would be significantly thinner which may aid in movement, though I bet a slightly different form would alleviate that.
Holy moly 6 seconds ago!
.Edit: Fantastic video, as always. I believe it was Lindybeige who did a video that introduced me to the idea of a resin impregnated *linen* cuirass used by the Greeks that could be effective armor, and I think the idea was that it was some sort of animal glue as well. It makes sense to me that using similar techniques on leather would produce a very cheap and effective armor, and therefore very popular. Especially given that leather would be more available than either good iron or the skill to make iron into effective armor.
There is in fact a book on the subject! Experimental archaeology out of Johns Hopkins University, apparently. I haven't read the book so no idea if its any good, but it does exist. Link below is to the blog post by one of the two principle investigators.
jhupress.wordpress.com/2013/04/24/unraveling-the-linothorax-mystery-or-how-linen-armor-came-to-dominate-our-lives/
Friends of mine in my local SCA group have made Greek hoplite linen cuirass out of linen and animal glue. With ten layers the stuff is hard like a rock, and not too terribly heavy. I could definitely see having a lot of trouble putting a spearhead through it.
The only real downside I see to the technique is that much linen would have been pretty expensive at the time, but of course people were often willing to lay out a lot of money for good armor if they could.
Crud, just soaking cloth in linseed oil stiffens it up greatly.
Found that out when oiling a gun stock. The used rags were very stiff once the oil finally dried.
I am loving this series so much ! Nowhere else can we get such a real and in depth look at the medieval experience.Thank you for the great entertainment and all the best from Bulgaria Tod !
So you should use this kind of leather for shields? Yes?
Recreate the shiled test with these could be interessting
There were Leather shields from about the bronze age found in the British Isles
@@MrTrilbe doesn't the Illiad reference shields that are made with layers of hide? Like the seven layer of Aias
@@skyereave9454 "[Hector] struck Ajax’s fearful shield of seven-layered bull’s hide on its eighth layer, the covering of bronze. It pierced six layers but the seventh stopped it." From book seven of the Iliad
Considering the huge ranges of penetration between only 1 and 2 layers of cuir bouille, a 5-7 layer shield seems like it would be an incredible defense.
Doomrider one or two layers on the face of face of a otherwise wooden shield should also prove pretty effective
Just got one of Tod's Scottish dirks, I am absolutely thrilled with it, the blade has a wicked shape, took a razors edge, & has perfect handling characteristics. Tod's cutlery represents unbelievable value, other dirks I've handled and own look and feel like junk in comparison, even much more expensive ones. (I have been into martial arts and arms collecting for decades) I'm not sure how he can price his items so reasonably, considering all the time & effort that obviously goes into their construction. His items are certainly museum quality, and would not look out of place if they could time travel. I'm looking forward to adding more from his line into my collection! If you're thinking about getting something from his shop... do it! You won't be disappointed!
I ordered one as well. Still waiting on it to be delivered through.
@@noahpatton3023 Excellent! Worth the wait for sure
I don't own a dirk. I am dirkless.
@@TheApocalypticKnight bummer
His maces really "hit the spot".
Love the comment "...so back to school, but I'll make it good. I''ll make it the way school should have been". Sounds like my sort of school :-)
It is cool, but it doesn't scale in real life ;) You can't spend in school a lesson on one type of armour. There is just too much stuff to cover.
Tod, I love these videos and the moment you started talking about the animal fibers and animal glue you got me to thinking.
Would it be possible to make a few pieces of your hardened leather and place sheets of linen between the layers with rotated fiber direction? The sandwich would be: hardened leather, layer of linen with fibers aligned vert/horizontal, layer of linen rotated 45 degrees, layer of linen rotated another 45 degrees, layer of hardened leather. Rinse and repeat to stack thickness required. You would be able to mold to shape and if you use animal glue to fix the layers of sandwiched material together you should get increased durability from the rotated fibers just like you do in your shields by rotating the grain of the wood layers in the ply. The increased weight and thickness would be minimal, but possibly the durability would increase to compensate.
I think it would help a great deal, but I don't know if they did this. Most armours are layers of different things after all, but I assume that leather armour would be worn with gambeson or similar
@@tods_workshop from my limited understanding there are really limited examples surviving, I guess because of rot since its organic. Do you think it would be a worthy test? As you say our ancestors weren't stupid, they knew layering things increased material strength after all.
Also maybe use more but thinner layers of hardened leather would work. Often penetrating more thinner things is tougher than penetrating one thing with same thickness.
Another possibility would be to combine hardened leather with unhardened leather in layers. It's not hard to think this might've been originally done to make the outside surfaces nicer? easier to work with?
Good theory, but I suspect that the bonding agent (resin, gelatin-based animal glue, WHY) will be too brittle once it cures/sets into its eventual position, thus reducing or even eliminating the limited amount of malleability needed for a good, effective armour. Plus it would be v susceptible to water dmg over a relatively short timespan: if not pressure treated correctly the linen fibres would tend to gather/retain moisture, leading to the softening of their surrounding bone (animal-based, therefore mostly boiled/steamed hide scraps, bone marrow, cartilage etc) glue even without potential expansion-of-fibres issues :(
My dad used to repair antiques as authentically as he could (as a well-paying hobby), so I'm v familiar with the properties of 'bone glue', its preparation, uses & weaknesses in certain environments etc (eg the way it crystallises, or its loss of bonding ability if subject to moisture over even a relatively short time)
'Pycrete', the red resin bees manufacture & use to seal their hives, may be an alternative - at least it's waterproof - but prolly too brittle & expensive in quantity. Fish glue may work; I'm not as familiar with its properties as I am with mammal-derived glue.. but this is getting too involved now for a YT comment section IMO, & I'm by no means an expert! :)
I love your channel and thank you for bringing up leather, im an old school tanner (fat and bark only) and out of experience leahter can differ so much for instance an old ox hide hewn thinn is still a lot more dense than leahter from a calf. we here in sweden use "rawstripleahter" (cant remember right english word atm) its when you dont let the hides turn to leather all the way (leaving a strip of rawhide in the center) so the center i basically the same material as a dogs chewing bone, such leather would probably not stop a bolt but i know from experience it can stop Mora knifes and axes. cause you get a softer fiberous layer, then the center that is hard , thenit has to go through the fiberous part again. just wanted to give that input :)keep up the amazing work!
Sounds like what a lot of other people have mentioned in other comments above this one. Also Tod is looking for scandinavian sources of "half tanned rawhide" that will sell and deliver to him in the UK, just like what you are talking about as far as i can follow your description. Maybe have look at the longer threads at the top of this video's Comment section. If you can't help him directly, you maybe have a better understanding of which shops are the most reliable / qualitative best and where you can get the most value for your money ;)
and this is where i may talk about torg and ray. about the materials. but i wont. i think i was privileged to learn about stuff. lovely to watch this ♥️
Three kilos seems pretty spot on for a guess, given that there is an Iranian buffalo hide cuirass in the Metropolitan Museum that weighs 3.5 kg (just shy of eight pounds). A fair number of Asian and middle eastern leather armours exist in museum collections. It would interesting to study those and reverse engineer how they were made.
www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/24182
Those historical leather armors are more appropriately called rawhide or partially tanned rawhide armor. In Edward Cheshire' work: "Non-metallic Armour Prior to the First World War," he conducted tests of leather and rawhide, and found that rawhide is significantly stronger than leather when used as armor. So rawhide (which is hide that isn't tanned or only partially tanned) is both cheaper and stronger than fully tanned leather. He also found that boiling leather significantly weakened the material, while boiling rawhide only slightly weakened it while allowing it to be molded, thickened, and/or take on other properties. So other than cuir bouilli being this glue-infused leather, there is a possibility that cuir bouilli was boiled rawhide or glue-infused rawhide rather than leather treated in some way.
The moral of the story, avoid the chap with the crossbow
a modern crossbow puts old bows to shame
Well no, he uses that because he can’t pull a warbow back and that crossbow shoots those heavy arrows at the same speed as the warbow
@@MustObeyTheRules imo the fights these armors would have been used, you wouldnt face too many warbows. If this is indeed a real thing, and ppl made armor out of it, fairly certain it would have been used vs mediumweight longbows and shortbows. Look more like a cheap way to protect yourself as a peasent
personally i'd rather be right next to him rather than a good distance away.
Especially at short range!
This is the first video I’ve seen from this guy and I have to say that I quite enjoyed this video. It was educational but also quite entertaining.
This is brilliant, Tod, really. A comment on the material science part: seems to me that the filler (the glue) is really playing a vital role in the overall characteristics of this material. I would suspect, as in any composite material, that a small variation in composition will lead to huge variations in mechanical properties and thus in behavior in stress tests like shooting arrows at it. For example, the "just right" hardness and elasticity balance point to reduce penetration absorbing the shock... I fear you are up for a very extensive exploration of glue (and resin, as suggested below?) compositions...
Would love to see him do a video with different methods of hardening
(water, glue, etc)
@@DMZwerg also, I'd suggest rawhide vs tanned leather
I’ve been very intrigued with this particular video.
My own experiments into this, took a different approach, and were based on the fact that when drying oils ( such as boiled linseed or tung oil ) dry, they undergo a chemical reaction, that causes the molecules within the oil, to crosslink, just like epoxy or polyester resin. At the time, my friend ( who did a lot of leather work ) and I were testing how leather reacted to being saturated with drying oils, and then left to dry.
We were starting to get some interesting results, similar to a piece of woodwork gets a slightly tougher and water resistant exterior, after being treated with boiled linseed, but found that our method of soaking the leather, caused a quite protracted drying time, and I moved away before the test pieces had finished drying...so testing came to a full standstill.
I’m still fairly positive that similar drying oil treatments, with the addition of various natural waxes and resins, still might provide some positive results, either in support of the animal glue theory or as a possible alternative.
Love your channel, the world could use more people like you.
If you wanted boiled leather, could you mold it to a frame to keep the leather in the correct shape while you boiled it?
I had this exact same question
same. lIke using clamps inside the water connected to the pot. I guess the challenge would be getting the soft leather into the correct shape before putting it into the water. I also think because the heat and moisture would make the leather expand and break while being boiled.
The main issue is the shrinkage, you'd have to oversize the frame and hope that it shrinks exactly as you planned.
Using some kind of resin to fill the gaps in a fibre makes far more sense and is something humans have been using for hundreds of years.
Maybe, but the problem seems to be that it comes out hard but not tough enough.
Please don't assume that. I have very little experience making this and a slightly weaker strength would make the system tougher and they would have know how to get the best out of it
You're literally living my dream, doing all this every day. Thank you for these amazing videos!
You deserve a salute! Man.. The effort and time to boil it, harden it really shows that you did this out of passion
you had me with "how school should have been". Again great video! Thanks Tod!
That leather still seems very viable as a closequarters armor. Thanks for the video.
I would preffer gambeson to leather, and Steel to all of them.
We had a leather worker a few years ago on Quondam Belgium
He used a formula out of a Tekst out of a Swiss museum if I remember right.
Veggie tam leather that was cold water formed, dried and rubbed in with the first spring bee wax that has not yet been contaminated with honey. Heated to 46celcius (not sure about the exact temp, had to do with certain molecules losing there properties/bonds at that temp)
Scrape exes wax off and repeat.
The leather was extremely hard but not brittle, it would dent before it would brake.
_sees Tod chopping fence post with leather_
My thoughts: Tod X kiwami japan collaboration when?
OMG someone else that watches Tod and Kiwami!!!!
They do exist!
No cucumbers were harmed during the making of this episode.
oh god!!! kiwami japan have a recipe for hard leather knifes!!!!!!!!!!!
I was really suprised to see the leather do such an amazing job at stopping those arrows at such a short range.
Tod always has the best value added content. The comments are ample and thoughtful.
I absolutely love the comments section; there is just so much collective knowledge here it is awesome
At close range with a cross bow and impacting at near to ninety degrees. Maybe at longer range and hitting at an angle like sloped tank armour the leather would be viable.
Very curious now how this would handle against things like a spear, axe, sword. Also how it would handle against a slash or a chop.
Leather is pretty solid against a slice.
@@ScottKenny1978 I know some can be, I'm more curious the difference between this and other leathers.
So you are suggesting you have Todd send some of his boiled leather to Matt to let him attack it with swords, axes and spears?
@@sunshaker01 did not think of that but I like where you are going
Hi Tod! That was a very informative video. I had always wondered about how effective leather armor would be against all kinds of projectiles. As I recall, Cole Younger, an Outlaw from Missouri that rode with the James Gang in the 1860s and 70's, wore a "vest" made of seven layers of cowhide to stop, or at least lessen the penetration of any bullets from his waist to his neck, so he could keep on his feet and firing back. It's a far cry from Ned Kelly and his boilerplate armor!
Boiling means heating enough so that a liquid makes bubbles, but the liquid can be anything it doesn't have to be water so I think you're 100% right that it was done with animal glue or resin or something similar (beeswax maybe ?)
And it might not be leather at all. Historical leather armors are more appropriately called rawhide or partially tanned rawhide armor. In Edward Cheshire' work: "Non-metallic Armour Prior to the First World War," he conducted tests of leather and rawhide, and found that rawhide is significantly stronger than leather when used as armor. So rawhide (which is hide that isn't tanned or only partially tanned) is both cheaper and stronger than fully tanned leather. He also found that boiling leather significantly weakened the material, while boiling rawhide only slightly weakened it while allowing it to be molded, thickened, and/or take on other properties. So other than cuir bouilli being this glue-infused leather, there is a possibility that cuir bouilli was boiled rawhide or glue-infused rawhide rather than leather treated in some way.
I don't work much with leather, but it's porous to some extent if I'm not mistaken. So it would stand to reason that bubbles could show up at some point prior to actually boiling when it displaces gas stuck in the material. Or if some chemical reaction with the water/glue/whatever below the boiling point of the liquid results in the production of a gas, maybe this is why it is referred to as boiled in the name?
The Chinese during the Warring States (457-221BC) had "plate armour" made out of rhino leather.
picture: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Leather_armour,_Warring_States_period,_Hubei_Museum.jpg
Can you imagine being the dude to show up to battle in Rhino Hide armor! What a boss.
@@HeadCannonPrime But then the winged hussars arrived...
So you're saying there's a reason to farm rhinos except for their milk?
@@Xentillus "There's no reason not to farm Rhinos" - Your manager.
@incinerator950
They ate them all so they're onto bats😜
We have the same name and both are into blacksmithing and armorcraft. Although I've only ever made a small pocket knife haha. You're a very good educator and speak in a way that allows anybody to completely understand what your point is. Please put out more videos.
"Bouilli" is pronounced booyee, if you’re interested.
like the stock cubes?
@@IeshiAke Not quite, that would be "bouillon" which has a different sound at the end.
French seems to be designed by someone who is messing with people.
@Sunbro Adresse so many silent letters
@Sunbro Adresse that's... Not actually true. There are a few particularly stupid bits (like -ough), but in terms of reading what is written out loud, English is generally very regular. There are, however, a few things that make that less obvious than it could be.
First, and most obvious: dialects. Which is fair enough... Until you realize that Written English also has dialects (US vs Commonwealth, broadly, but the Commonwealth version has a few subdialects here and there too. Admittedly, it's usually things like New Zealand spelling fjord as fiord (because they actually have them so use the word all the time rather than it just being an "odd foreign thing"))
Stress: English doesn't mark this in written form. It really, Really should, because the stress moves and moving it changes almost Everything pronunciation wise (and is often the Difference between two words that are spelled identically with closely related meaning, but have different grammatical functions and are pronounced differently)
Finally, when reading English, you absolutely must think in clusters, not individual characters. English has it's monographs, but due to possessing an unwavering hatred of diacritics of all types, it also has digraphs. Which isn't that odd, except it also has Trigraphs. Though I think French has some of those too (or at least they look like it to me). English, of course, must one-up that. And it does. English has tetragraphs. -ough is one, hopeless as it is, but so is -tion (the ti is read as sh, but Only if it's in the four character sequence "tion"). It's usually the same with silent letters. (Though some of them are a result of influential people one to two hundred years ago going on a "Latin is the best so clearly, English, being the language o
F the English people, who are the best, must behave like Latin ad everything else is just errors by the ignorant!" Kick. Now, for fairly obvious reasons (English is a Germanic language with heavy influence from Celtic and other Germanic languages on how it all worked, which then borrowed a tonne of vocabulary from everyone else... And inexplicably took a "how to form new words out of old ones" course as taught by ancient Greek, and less bafflingly another from Latin.
I'm probably forgetting something.
Point is,for the most part English isn't actually Irregular. It's just excessively ( needlessly (?) ) complicated.
French here. "cuir bouilli" is pronounced something like "kweer boo-yee". Don't worry though, we will be magnanimous for this time.
Thank you!
Except we are speaking English and therefore reserve the right to mangle foreign words as much as we damn well want. Especially French.
I am reminded of my D&D players that called it "queer bully" when they first heard the word. It's a bit hard for English to find the balance between E and Y sound. It's probably more like the Y in really, so try kwyr.
@@jorgeporras9262 Yup, and for some unknown reason (probably habit) English decided to take a bunch of French words and truly mangle them. Just to be extra awkward (and possibly just to annoy the French.)
@@chubbymoth5810 It's always hard to pronounce foreign words, especially when they contain phonems that don't exist in your own language, hence the "zis" when most French try to say "this" : the phonem thorn doesn't exist in French so most of us try to find the closest equivalent.
"Bouilli" is made from the phonems [b] pronounced as in English, "ou" or [u] as in "who", "ill" or [j] as in "yard" and "i" or [i] as in "be". "Booyee"
"Even if i sound like i'm adamant, i'm not certain. But i think i'm right" - Todd Cutler
Great quote, im gonna start using it from now on.
Everyone knows the strongest armour sets are:
a. Plot armour
and
b. Female bikini armour
Female Bikini Armour.....deflects arrows - but not stares.
Imagine how people were 5,000 years ago without God’s True Book. How would they have known how they were
supposed to live? How would they have known how they were supposed to be in order to please their Creator? So
God gave the law of Moses back then. This law was for the people to know how to be. They saw what God expected
out of them. God had high expectations from the Israelites. Why shouldn't He? Should He drop His expectations for
love and grace? If He drops His expectations to accommodate what man wants, then He compromised His
perfection for man’s imperfection. Does a Perfect God compromise His perfection?
So God has expectations once He tells His creation how He wants things. His love and grace gives His creation time
to change. He is willing to help them change if they ask Him. Then His creation, while repenting or changing to do
His will, see His Beauty. This is a relationship formed now with the Creator. If He is the Most Beautiful Being, which
He is, how can His creation not want to obey Him? How can His creation not want to please Him? The reason why is
because of foolishness. Man loves his own foolishness rather than God’s wisdom, Jn 3:19. Man loves his sin. If
anyone loves himself, he will stay in sin. So man who stays in sin rejects his perfect Creator or Father, and
exchanges it for his own foolishness.
So now fast forward to today where we have God’s True Book. We officially know what God wants. God gave His
creation a big help, the Word, to show us how He wants us to live. If we follow His perfect teachings, we all live
with perfect peace, love, joy and unity. This is His perfect design for His children's lives. When we go against His
perfect design for what we want, sin, we throw away that perfect plan. We throw away that perfect peace, love, joy
and unity. Giving up these things is foolish. So sinning against God proves to be the worst plan for us!
God wanted to help mankind. God wanted to save man from his foolishness. He wanted to help us the best way
possible because He is Good. The best and only way to do it, as God saw fit, was to give mankind His Son. Why? The
Son is the Word, Jn 1:1. The Word always obeys the Father's will. The Father's will is spoken through His Word.
The Word proceeds forth from the Father's will and mind. So the Word that God speaks is the pure sequel to what
was inside the Father's mind and heart. Jesus is that perfection manifest. He is the physical embodiment of God's
will and thought. God's will and thought is expressed through His Word. Jesus, the human part, is the perfect,
physical expression of God. Jesus, the human part that walked this earth, came to teach us the perfect will of God.
How? He did this by example. This is why Jesus walked this earth perfectly without sinning.
So Jesus taught us perfectly. He even was willing to die not only death, but the death He did not deserve since He
never sinned against God the Father. He chose to give His life. That's why Jesus says no man forces Him to lay down
His life, He chose to lay it down, Jn 10:18. God wanted to save mankind. Jesus wants what the Father wants. The
Word always obeys the will. He shed even His perfect, pure blood for us. His blood is the fulfillment of perfect
obedience to the Father. Why? Because the Son asked 3 times in the Garden, "Take my cup not by my will but by
yours." The Father said the Son still had to shed His blood on the cross. The Son obeyed the Father's will over His
own. So the blood was shed for that purpose. Nobody else had that kind of blood. Nobody else pleased the Father
perfectly like the Son. So now instead of the law of Moses showing us the way to live rightly in God's eyes, we have
the Son. This is the New Covenant. In Jesus and His blood, we now obey Him instead of the Mosaic law as part of
this new agreement between man and God. So as man wants to live rightly to please His Creator, man now must
turn to the Word of the Creator. So obeying the perfect teachings of Jesus brings us to how God wants us to live.
The Son conquered the grave. The grave is the end of all who sin. The grave is the payment for sin. Satan founded
the grave. How? Because Satan started death by being the first to sin against Almighty God. Jesus destroyed Satan's
creation and fulfills the very first prophecy spoken of the Savior in Genesis 3:15. That's why Jesus came to
"...destroy the works of the devil," 1 Jn 3:8. Satan came to ruin God's Creation with sin. Jesus came to ruin Satan's
creation, death, with perfect obedience, which His blood shed proves. That's why in His blood, there is life. So the
Gospel is God's reconciliation with man. How? Only through the Son. If you disobey the Son, you disobey the
Father. Jesus says, “He who has seen me has seen the Father,” Jn 14:9. Repent and accept Jesus as Your Lord NOW!!!
Then start to read the Gospels and obey His commands. Follow Jesus only, no other man, no religion. Only Jesus.
Joseph, Servant of God Sent by Christ to evangelize the whole world
www.clevelandstreetpreachers.com TH-cam CLEVELAND STREET PREACHERS,,.
Yeah nothing protects vitals and crucial bodyparts like female bikini armor.
@@Juel92 That's what sphere of greater protection is for...
@@violinmaestroknight9347 whoa that's wild man I respecc you for spending that much time spreading the gospel I just make short tiktok videos
It's regular stained leather on the outside and then have plates of harden leather underneath kinda like a IBA for the military looks good and would stop knives and arrows
the clear joy this man has, and the way he so enthusiastically explains everything... man i'd study the hell out of any class he'd be teaching xD
The Aztecs wore layered cotton armor soaked and dried in lime. Was supposed to stop arrows from atlatls
Anything specific about lime that makes that combo tough?
Imagine how people were 5,000 years ago without God’s True Book. How would they have known how they were
supposed to live? How would they have known how they were supposed to be in order to please their Creator? So
God gave the law of Moses back then. This law was for the people to know how to be. They saw what God expected
out of them. God had high expectations from the Israelites. Why shouldn't He? Should He drop His expectations for
love and grace? If He drops His expectations to accommodate what man wants, then He compromised His
perfection for man’s imperfection. Does a Perfect God compromise His perfection?
So God has expectations once He tells His creation how He wants things. His love and grace gives His creation time
to change. He is willing to help them change if they ask Him. Then His creation, while repenting or changing to do
His will, see His Beauty. This is a relationship formed now with the Creator. If He is the Most Beautiful Being, which
He is, how can His creation not want to obey Him? How can His creation not want to please Him? The reason why is
because of foolishness. Man loves his own foolishness rather than God’s wisdom, Jn 3:19. Man loves his sin. If
anyone loves himself, he will stay in sin. So man who stays in sin rejects his perfect Creator or Father, and
exchanges it for his own foolishness.
So now fast forward to today where we have God’s True Book. We officially know what God wants. God gave His
creation a big help, the Word, to show us how He wants us to live. If we follow His perfect teachings, we all live
with perfect peace, love, joy and unity. This is His perfect design for His children's lives. When we go against His
perfect design for what we want, sin, we throw away that perfect plan. We throw away that perfect peace, love, joy
and unity. Giving up these things is foolish. So sinning against God proves to be the worst plan for us!
God wanted to help mankind. God wanted to save man from his foolishness. He wanted to help us the best way
possible because He is Good. The best and only way to do it, as God saw fit, was to give mankind His Son. Why? The
Son is the Word, Jn 1:1. The Word always obeys the Father's will. The Father's will is spoken through His Word.
The Word proceeds forth from the Father's will and mind. So the Word that God speaks is the pure sequel to what
was inside the Father's mind and heart. Jesus is that perfection manifest. He is the physical embodiment of God's
will and thought. God's will and thought is expressed through His Word. Jesus, the human part, is the perfect,
physical expression of God. Jesus, the human part that walked this earth, came to teach us the perfect will of God.
How? He did this by example. This is why Jesus walked this earth perfectly without sinning.
So Jesus taught us perfectly. He even was willing to die not only death, but the death He did not deserve since He
never sinned against God the Father. He chose to give His life. That's why Jesus says no man forces Him to lay down
His life, He chose to lay it down, Jn 10:18. God wanted to save mankind. Jesus wants what the Father wants. The
Word always obeys the will. He shed even His perfect, pure blood for us. His blood is the fulfillment of perfect
obedience to the Father. Why? Because the Son asked 3 times in the Garden, "Take my cup not by my will but by
yours." The Father said the Son still had to shed His blood on the cross. The Son obeyed the Father's will over His
own. So the blood was shed for that purpose. Nobody else had that kind of blood. Nobody else pleased the Father
perfectly like the Son. So now instead of the law of Moses showing us the way to live rightly in God's eyes, we have
the Son. This is the New Covenant. In Jesus and His blood, we now obey Him instead of the Mosaic law as part of
this new agreement between man and God. So as man wants to live rightly to please His Creator, man now must
turn to the Word of the Creator. So obeying the perfect teachings of Jesus brings us to how God wants us to live.
The Son conquered the grave. The grave is the end of all who sin. The grave is the payment for sin. Satan founded
the grave. How? Because Satan started death by being the first to sin against Almighty God. Jesus destroyed Satan's
creation and fulfills the very first prophecy spoken of the Savior in Genesis 3:15. That's why Jesus came to
"...destroy the works of the devil," 1 Jn 3:8. Satan came to ruin God's Creation with sin. Jesus came to ruin Satan's
creation, death, with perfect obedience, which His blood shed proves. That's why in His blood, there is life. So the
Gospel is God's reconciliation with man. How? Only through the Son. If you disobey the Son, you disobey the
Father. Jesus says, “He who has seen me has seen the Father,” Jn 14:9. Repent and accept Jesus as Your Lord NOW!!!
Then start to read the Gospels and obey His commands. Follow Jesus only, no other man, no religion. Only Jesus.
Joseph, Servant of God Sent by Christ to evangelize the whole world
www.clevelandstreetpreachers.com TH-cam CLEVELAND STREET PREACHERS,,
@@violinmaestroknight9347 bad bot
Welp, this is perfect, finished my Armour stand, almost done with my viking shield, so now I can learn how to make decent leather armour. Thank you!
You sure viking had leather armour tho ?
@@Ulfheodin I imagine they'd have chain. I mean, did they really have that much leather available? Idk
@@potatotactics1398 Even if they did had leather that much, or the technic to make it hard etc
Did they really did armor with it ?
@@Ulfheodin I'm sure someone used hardened leather as armor, but definitely not the Vikings imo
@@potatotactics1398 As long as people dosn't show up with the "It's not because there is no evidence, that they did not, they could do it, so they should have done it"
Hello, just an axperiment I've known about. Ancient poet Homer described Ajax's shield as made of 7 layers of leather. He also described an instance where a thrwown spear penetrated 6 of them and stoped on the 7th. Modern experiments tend to concur with this! A thrown spear tends to stop on the 7th layer of leather! I don't have any details on the leather hardening procedure (if any). But the commentator claimed that it's not only about the overall thickness; it's the fact that 7 layers have 6 gaps between them. And a missile passing through alternate layers of thickness, and with tiny gaps of air inbetween, tends to create extra friction. Friction transforsm kinetic energy into thermal energy (heat). And that is what causes a missile to stop. I can reffer to the book if anyone's interested.
It would also allow to use the layers in alternating orientation so that the natural texture of the hide doesn't create weak points... flipping your skins 6 times would mean no one direction to split in and so on...
One commenter above cited an old english text where they mixed rawhide layers with glue, glasspowder and small iron filings in between... which would have a similar effect of breaking up the progress of any projectile as the presumed airgaps you talk about.
The Dungeons & Dragons player in me wants a head-to-head of the three layer vs. gambeson.
Then send that info up to Wizards to out it in the book.
*_One layer over thin/un-dense maille and a mid thickness gambeson would stop an ton of melee weapons_*
It's so fun to see him have a good time!
I love it. I do hardened leather myself and it is all experimentation with a lots of variety. Each armorer likely had their own proprietary method. I found that layered works much better at slowing and topping penetration. I usually have a base layer of 13-15 ounce vegetable tan saddle skirt with a top layer of 8-9 ounce stitched together then hardened. My crossbow is only 70 pounds at an 8 1/2 inch draw so nowhere near your power level. But you are also shooting at kind of the top end of the spectrum at 160 pound pull. Bows of that poundage were not all that common at least in the early period, and were pretty expensive. I believe, though I can't put my hands on it right now, but the average longbows the everyday person used only had a pull of about half that around 70-80 pounds. My crossbow is a reproduction of the Skane notch bow and I think they estimated it at around 70-80 pounds. Though I could certainly be remembering wrong. I love your videos and the testing.
The average longbow that people used for training and hunting are around 70 pounds as you said.
However, wartime longbows had a range from 100-160 pounds
@@alephkasai9384 Bows of over 100 pound pull were not common in the early middle ages.
@@stupidburp I wouldn't really know much about the early medieval period but from what I know, 12th century onwards every single bow made for war had a draw strength upwards of 100 pounds. For hunting however you would commonly have them to be around 70 or 80 pounds.
During the early medieval period most armies switched over to crossbows because they were cheaper and easier to train with.
So there were just less warbows and thus less bows with a draw weight above 100.
Great bit of experimentation there, Tod. I was wondering how angle might affect penetration. Like, the later Spanish breastplates were fairly well known to have a central vertical ridge, and were fairly curved too, so that the chances of a flat-on impact were very thin indeed. Would you get as much penetration from a bodkin at say 35 degrees, I wonder? I think with metal plate armour it's fairly much a no-brainer as the point would almost certainly slide off, but with leather? I think maybe some penetration might happen but would you get the shaft breaking off perhaps & only minimal penetration? Worth further experimentation I think.
Don't know why I didn't find this channel sooner. Awesome!
"Let's do two more, just because."
I know you're enjoying this as much as I am. Admit it
Athenian "Linothorax" was basically linen impregnated with glue
The Iliad describes the soldiers using leather shields. I didn't understand how that worked, but thanks to your video, I do now. Thank you.
Another episode of Tod Cutler: Addicted to Science
My humble oppinion: not all the layers should be the same density. Soft at the outside and harder to the inside.. friction folowed by plate, slow folowed by block.
Yeah agreed, maybe also another layer of slow behind the block, like a sandwich, or maybe that extra layer would be unnecessary?
B.C if silk capes are used by japanees samurai to stop arrows from hitting in the back by friction.. then why not this?
Sounds like a heath bar.
Love that you did the 5 ply test
I would like to see an experiment with a less powerful weapon, like a simple bow.
Just sayin - I’d buy a piece of boiled leather with your logo branded into it maybe a keychain or something
From concertina bellows repair and making, I can attest that adding glycerin to hide glue will decrease brittleness of a finished joint. [this works just as well with PVA glue]
Also I understand that birch bark glue was made less brittle by adding powdered charcoal ------ a stone age technology employed for attaching arrowheads to wood shafts
Just an fyi. Americans don't necessarily call jelly 'jelo'. Jelo is a brand of flavoured gelatin
@Jay M I'm not american.
I thought it was jello with 2 l's
Would love to see how well wrought iron armour stands up compared to steel.
I knew some people who did quite a bit of experimentation with making different types of boiled leather for SCA fighting. They found that they had the best results with raw hide or only partially tanned leather and hot beeswax. It was still tricky to get timing and temperature right. They had wood forms made to clamp and press the hide into the desired shape after soaking in hot wax. Some would then do a second dip and a light clamp. I inspected the material and found it to be pretty hard but slightly flexible without being brittle. This then was used in armor that was beat on repeatedly with clubs without breaking.
Damn you're gonna have some itchy hands from that fiberglass. You're a braver man than I to be handling fiberglass without gloves haha.
Great video, immensely informative as usual!
Nah the guy is crafter, his hand skin is thougher than that boiled leather
@@ecthelionalfa I think everyone should shake hands with a carpenter at least once in their lives.
Fencepost Vs Leather 2 - Whoever wins, we win.
Isn't cool when you see your favorite armourer improving his aiming skills?
As far as historical cuir boulli armour, most evidence was limb armour, for that, I'd think no more than the 3 layers to move.
I wonder though about how much cheaper than metal it would have been, after all large animal meat was pretty expensive... So maybe, it wasn't cheap enough to compensate for the poorer performance/durability... The smaller the leather, the cheaper it should get. This makes me wonder why we have no records of leather scales (also taking the repair into account) or leather plates inside a gambesson.
I can tell you were super excited for this one! More excitement than usual. Loved the testing and explanations
I'm not a tanner... Does leather have a grain, like wood, which could be alternated?