Are You Hot in That? A Brief History of Medieval Armor

Little is more iconic than the image of a knight in ‘shining armor’. It might be a chainmail-clad warrior in a Pre-Raphaelite painting, a modern reenactor, a suit of historical armor in a museum, or an armor-clad hero (or heroine) in a video game. But why did people wear medieval armor, how effective was it, and how uncomfortable is it to wear?

Throughout history, from the earliest days of organized violence to the militaries of today, combatants have been concerned with the quality of their equipment; weapons to slay their enemies, and armor to protect themselves. At its simplest, then, armor is used for protection – to keep limbs attached and bodies intact.

However, people and history are anything but simple, and armor has other purposes too. Wearing armor tells a story, it marks its owner as a man (or, very occasionally, woman) of wealth and status. Armor is expensive, and the latest armor even more so. Ergo, anyone who is wearing modern or fashionable armor is likely to have wealth and land – they are someone worth capturing for ransom rather than slaying out of hand. 

Moreover, if they have spent wealth on armor, they are likely leading other warriors, and are almost certainly skilled in battle. Whilst another knight (or knights – honor is for stories, not for battlefields) might seek to defeat and capture a wealthy peer, for a less well-equipped soldier the knight may be someone to avoid. The armor that keeps them safe from blows might encourage a soldier (especially a peasant pressed into armed service) to avoid them entirely!

How Did Medieval Armor Change Throughout Western Europe?

Armor changed a lot during the high medieval period, which in England was from 1066 and the Battle of Hastings to 1485 and the Battle of Bosworth, though armor continued to be worn for centuries after that. A Norman knight at Hastings would have worn a shirt (byrnie or hauberk) of interlocking metal rings called maille (or sometimes chainmail, though that is a Victorian term).

Medieval armor would cover the body and extend to the middle of the thigh (or perhaps to the knee) and to the elbow (or perhaps as far as the wrist) and might include a hood (called a coif) over the head. It was worn with a metal helmet that covers the top of the head with a long bar over the nose. A long, ‘teardrop’ shaped shield (sometimes called a kite shield) offered excellent protection to a warrior fighting on horseback or on foot.

Maille was added to until a knight wore individual leg coverings (called chausses), had mittens or gloves, and might have larger and more complex helmets which totally enclosed the head. This was added to, with reinforcement over vulnerable or delicate parts – elbows and knees were covered with shaped plates (called cops), the body with a leather, wool, or tough canvas garment with overlapping plates riveted inside which protected the torso (a coat-of-plates), and even an additional helmet (a cervelliere or ‘secret’) under the maille coif or hood, worn inside the larger (great) helm.

Maille was gradually supplemented and then replaced with more and more shaped metal plates, particularly as the quality of iron and ability to make steel improved. By the fifteenth century maille was worn either under a full harness of plate, or only in patches (called voiders) which protected areas not enclosed with metal such as armpits, elbows, and knees, along with a collar (standard) and skirt (or occasionally ‘underpants’) of maille. 

Armor could certainly be shiny, and the shiniest medieval armor was another signifier of wealth. Damp was and is a constant threat to iron and steel, and even a beautiful day without a drop of rain provides plenty of water in the form of sweat. Most armor was treated in some way to avoid or reduce rust. It might be ‘blackened’ or ‘blued’ with oil during the forging treatment, steel armor (including helmets for the Normans and their contemporaries) might be painted, armor might be dipped in vinegar or otherwise treated to allow only the surface to be rust (a process known as russeting).

A shining steel harness (never a ‘suit’, that term was introduced again by the Victorians) needs a great deal of care and attention, near-constant cleaning and polishing. Therefore, anyone with shining armor was either in a clean environment, perhaps guard to an important noble or royal, with time to polish, or they had the money to bring people to keep their armor gleaming when on campaign. 

A knight in shining armor clearly had wealth, and was likely surrounded by their household of knights, and was worth keeping alive for ransom!

Does Wearing Armor Slow You Down?

Armor isn’t light and on average a harness of plate weights around 20-25kg (45-55lbs), but well-made and well-fitting armor distributes the weight around the body – and importantly, around a body which has been training for and is used to carrying it whilst marching, fighting, and generally doing violent things to other people.

It is undeniable that an additional twenty kilos of weight slow down a person, but in a fit and strong knight it is possible to do pretty much anything in (good, well fitting) armor that they could do out of it. One famous French knight, Jean de Maingre was said by Froissart (a famous chronicler) was able to “do a somersault armed in all his armor except his bascinet [helmet]”.

Armor was clearly effective; it was expensive, heavy, needed training to use effectively, and took a lot of time to care for. It needs maintaining or it can break or jam in use, if you are unused to wearing it then it does slow down movement and make fighting difficult. Dr. Allan Williams made extensive tests of armor and judged that armor of the late fifteenth century was effectively sword and arrow proof, and largely crossbow resistant too. 

However, ill-fitting armor, worn armor, lower quality metal, or luck could always play its part – and there are as many people who will demonstrate that arrows can go through plate steel as those who demonstrate its effectiveness at protecting from blows – but fundamentally people would not have paid sometimes vast sums (though relatively inexpensive and capable armor was available) and put up with discomfort if it was not useful on the battlefield.

Is Armor Heavy and Hot, or Not?

I have worn armor of a variety of types, from the early medieval/post Roman/Anglo-Saxon period through to the seventeenth century and, well, yes. Well-fitting armor isn’t too uncomfortable, but it gets hot, it is heavy, and by the end of day you know you have been wearing it.

But I’ve also fought in that armor and when the blood starts pumping and the swords (or axes, bills, spears, or maces) start swinging the weight goes away and you have other things to be concerned with than heat or discomfort. It’s heavy. It’s hot. But it’s a tool for a job, and it does that pretty well!

It is nice to take it off at the end of the day though.