A cuirasse breastplate ... for review

[CSinTX]

It is typical for them to seem "too small". Remember people were smaller back then. There would also be a gorget that would cover some of the upper chest.

I have a reinforcement breast plate that measures 39cm top to bottom.

[fernando]

Thanks much for your input.
Yes, i guess your'e right; even though 3 cm. in height make it a (proportionally) significant difference.
Possibly my guy was a shorty, even for the period .

[Jim McDougall]

Most interesting! I actually have heard of arms and armor for boys, but had no idea of armor for an infant. But then who knows?
The measurements on this cuirass seem remarkably small, even for the smaller size of men in medieval times. Even the notion of dwarves, which certainly existed leads to the idea of appropriately sized armor, but the anomaly of such a piece is notable.

What I wonder is if armorers of the times made display examples to show prospective clients, and to exhibit their skills. It does seem that such items were made of arms and armor both as novelties and to impress.

As mentioned, diminutive size of men in those times was not uncommon, and also, the upper part of the chest was often covered by the 'bevor' which comprised a cover for the lower face and upper chest. The helmet was worn over this component, at least this is what I have understood from what I could find.

Still it is hard to imagine a guy with an 18" chest.

[Victrix]

The breastplate seems too small for a man. It should be around 50cm in height. Are there any items for fastening or attachment for wearing the breastplate?Typically there would be slits in the steel for straps, or hinges on the side for the backplate in the case of cuirass, etc.

In military families children would wear arms (and armour) to prepare them for adulthood. Another possibility (although questionable) would be breastplate for a dwarf?

Final possibility is that this is a decorative item perhaps part of a miniature suit of armour. The many dents seem to indicate that the breastplate has been worn in practice however.

[Jim McDougall]

It seems a remote possibility that an armor for a dwarf could be possible, but it would seem such a novelty that it would seem duly noted and kept as such.

Could it be that as a model or exemplar of an armorers craft, the quality of the steel might be tested or shown to receive blows in the same manner as full size armor?

By striking the display with a hammer (or other tool or blunt object) the quality of the steel used by the armorer would illustrate its strength.

[Will M]

Smaller worn items tend to survive because larger people cannot use the item. Armour, cloth uniforms, belts etc. all the small ones tend to survive because they cannot be reused as larger pieces can be used and therefore damaged/worn out. It is a myth that people were all smaller then.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Will M

Smaller worn items tend to survive because larger people cannot use the item. Armour, cloth uniforms, belts etc. all the small ones tend to survive because they cannot be reused as larger pieces can be used and therefore damaged/worn out. It is a myth that people were all smaller then.

Thanks for responding Will !
That is a most reasonable observation, and such items would obviously have less chance of being worn 'universally' (uh, my uniforms from a 'few' years back not even close to being able to be worn again).

But as you note, people were not all small in those days...…...but this piece, and others seem awfully small.....also, where are the attachment slits or means as Victrix has mentioned?

On an aside, it seems that they found armor some years ago which they believed had belonged to Joan of Arc, and is was if I recall, smaller than typically male armor. I don't think it was ever proven though.