Yet only one small illustration of her, undoubtedly drawn during her lifetime, has come down to us, showing her with a sword and banner but not dressed in armor. 1412–1431), probably the most famous example of a female warrior, is reputed to have had a suit of armor commissioned for her by the French king Charles VII. Nevertheless, some are recorded as having fought in armor, although no contemporary illustrations showing any of them actually wearing armor appear to have survived. While some evidence is available for noble ladies-turned-military commanders, such as Countess Jeanne de Penthièvre (1319–1384), there are only scattered references to women from lower levels of society taking up arms. There are several references to women participating in armed conflict from most periods of history. A person in armor should more correctly be referred to as a man-at-arms or man in armor. During the fifteenth century, as some wealthy and powerful cities became more independent and confident, even burghers organized their own tournaments for which, of course, they would have worn armor.Īccordingly, not every piece of armor was once worn by a knight, nor can every person depicted in an artwork wearing armor be identified as a knight. In times of war, these militia forces were required to defend the city or do military service for feudal lords or allied cities. Usually this would not be a complete suit of armor, but comprised at least a helmet, a body defense in the form of a mail shirt ( 2008.245), fabric armor, or breastplate, as well as a weapon such as a spear, pike, bow, or crossbow.

Indeed, the burghers (of a certain age, and above a stipulated wealth or income) of most medieval and Renaissance cities were expected-an expectation often enforced by laws and decrees-to acquire and keep their own arms and armor. Foot soldiers such as mercenaries, or groups of retainers comprising peasants, as well as burghers, also participated in armed conflict and accordingly protected themselves with armor of varying quality and extent. In other words, it was by no means an exclusive right of the knight to wear and fight in armor. On some occasions, mercenaries or civilians fighting as ordinary soldiers could be knighted for exceptional displays of courage and valor, while in later times a knighthood could be bought. And, under certain conditions, people of non-noble birth could be knighted (although the knighting was often regarded as their admission into lower nobility). Knights were not born but created, by other knights, feudal lords, or sometimes priests. Second, it is wrong to assume that every nobleman was a knight. During a campaign, a knight depended on a small host of retainers, squires, and attendants who lent armed support and looked after his horses, armor, and other equipment-not to mention peasants and craftsmen, who made the organization of a feudal society with its warrior class possible in the first place. Although knights were the dominant force of most of these armies, they were invariably-and with time increasingly so-supported (and opposed) by foot soldiers, such as archers, pikemen, crossbowmen, and handgunners. First, knights rarely fought alone, nor did medieval and Renaissance armies consist entirely of mounted knights. This erroneous but common belief is probably a result of the romantic notion of the “knight in shining armor,” an image that itself harbors a host of further misconceptions.

Misconceptions and Questions Relating to Armor The following text will attempt to correct some of the most popular misconceptions, and to answer some of the questions most frequently asked by the public during guided tours of the Museum’s arms and armor galleries. Among these, the lance rest, an object protruding from the proper right side of many breastplates, probably holds first place. In other instances, certain technical details that escape an obvious explanation have become the focus of lurid and fantastically imaginative attempts to explain their original function. Perhaps the most infamous example is the notion that “knights had to be hoisted into their saddles with a crane,” which is as absurd as it is persistent even among many historians. Most of them are utter nonsense, devoid of any historical base. Their origins usually are to be found in a lack of knowledge of, and experience with, genuine objects and their historical background.

The field of arms and armor is beset with romantic legends, gory myths, and widely held misconceptions.

Custom medieval helmets