Clothing vs. armor – What to wear for fencing?
I wrote this up with the intent to present it at a display at an event this spring which was cancelled. I came across the mostly finished write-up, going through some files on my computer and figured I may as well put it up here for those who may be interested.
The
concept:
The rules for rapier fencing in the
SCA presume that fencers are wearing “common civil attire” for the purposes of
acknowledging blows. The rapier was,
indeed, a civilian weapon – used for self-defense, affairs of honor, and
occasionally brawling, but not typically on the battlefield. So, this convention makes perfect sense.
However, for reasons of safety there
are certain requirements for the clothes worn by fencers in the list. These requirements regulate the type of
fabric and number of layers in order to minimize the risk of injury. These requirements don’t always match up with
typical clothing construction from the pre-1700 era. Most fencers implement the protective
requirements by building additional layers into a garment that would not normally
have them, or by using modern materials underneath a more period-appropriate
item.
Since I practice a Spanish style of
fencing (first described in writing by Jeronimo Carranza in his book which was
published in 1582), I have been focusing on Spanish clothing of the
1570s-1580s. Attire for a gentleman of
this era would typically consist of several layers. (Gnagy)
So, my goal with this project was to see if I could create an outfit for
fencing with as few deviations from historical construction methods as
possible.
|
Fencing suit, version 1 (before the Unfortunate Incident) |
Planning:
The SCA rules for fencing include
several requirements that I did not try to adjust. This mainly had to do with “rigid
material”. There is not really any part
of normal clothing that would use these sort of materials. So, I accepted these as the necessary
intrusion of modern considerations into my fencing attire. The “rigid materials” include groin
protection (worn under the clothing), a fencing mask (definitely NOT optional),
and neck protection (in my case, a leather gorget worn over the clothing).
The primary considerations for this
project were the construction of the main body garments. These are the doublet, breeches (calçones),
and the sayo (the outer garment, which could be called a jerkin in English
sources). These will each be considered
separately. The rules also require
complete coverage of the back of the head, with no bare skin showing. This requires a sort of garment that is
essentially foreign to late 16th century fashion, but I did create
one that was ultimately rooted in it.
All these garments count as “puncture resistant” – able to withstand
1.5J of force over a 5/32” diameter circle in accordance with the rules’
procedures for punch testing.
In addition to the items constructed
by me for this project, there are some additional accessories that require no
modification to comply with the SCA fencing rules.
The
shirt, as underwear, is essential to dressing in 1580s style. However, as underwear, I did not consider it
in my reckoning of the number of layers required. It is essential for wicking of sweat,
especially in hot weather.
The
legs must be covered by “abrasion resistant” material. Period-appropriate knitted stockings meet
this criteria. Stockings in the late 16th
century would have been knitted from wool or sewn from woven linen. (Arnold)
Knitted silk stockings were also known, but would be inappropriate for
anything short of fancy occasions. While
I may eventually sew some linen hose, I decided not to expand the scope of the
current project too much. Knitted wool
stockings are readily available.
However, while these are fine in cooler weather, they are not usually
thin enough to be comfortable for me in hot North American summers. At Pennsic, I compromised with knitted linen
stockings. There is no evidence of knitting
with linen in the 16th century, however.
The
fencing rules require shoes that completely enclose the foot. I have a pair of leather reproduction shoes
that work well. However, under very
muddy conditions at Pennsic I did resort to some period-ish wooden clogs
(photo).
Lastly,
the rules require gloves of at least “abrasion resistant” material. I am not a glover, so I use commercially
produced gloves. They are made with
leather and the cut is not too different from surviving late 16th
century gloves.
Choice
of materials:
The SCA fencing rules do list
standard materials that are known to meet the standard of “puncture
resistant” as well as testing procedures
to assess puncture resistance. Other
than leather, the listed examples are not typical of fabrics used for common
everyday clothing in the late 16th century.
Surviving
examples of clothing from the 16th century are often silk. (Arnold,
Braun et al.) However, this is clearly
survival bias and internal structural layers of these fancy clothes are of
linen and wool. Everyday clothing would
almost universally be made from wool as the primary material, with wool and/or
linen interior layers and linings. (Gnagy,
Johnson) Linen, in addition to use for
undergarments, was occasionally used for doublets and jackets as well. This use is attested in Spanish colonies in
America and the Caribbean. (LaPorta)
Since
the clothing I made to fence in would be subjected to significant wear, it
needs to be sturdy. It also needs to be
worn during occasionally vigorous exercise, sometimes in very hot weather. Since it is difficult to find densely woven,
sturdy wool in a weight other than those intended for winter coats, I have
chosen to use linen for all parts of these items. Linen canvas doublets are known from this
period. Outer garments (jerkins, sayos,
ropillas, etc.) would probably not have used linen as the outer layer. However, heavier weight linens were known and
used for the internal layers of tailored garments. So, in the absence of suitable wool fabrics I
have made the sayo and breeches out of a heavy weight linen as well.
Since
the complete outfit would consist of a doublet and breeches under a sayo, my
estimation was that the combination of the layers in the doublet and the sayo
would meet the required puncture resistance.
Not counting the linings, the doublet has one layer of heavy linen
canvas and the sayo has two. There is
additional linen in certain areas, as required by the tailoring methods, but
puncture resistance must be measured in the most vulnerable part of the torso
clothing (the fewest number of layers).
The
Doublet:
The doublet is the foundation of
men’s clothing from the late 16th century. Aside from the use of machine stitching for
many of the construction seams, this doublet was made without any deviation
from typical historical construction methods.
The pattern was drafted using Mathew Gnagy’s reconstructed proportional
system and construction mostly follows his recommendations based on analysis of
extant garments. (Gnagy) It is a single
layer of linen canvas, with additional reinforcement of the same canvas used in
the buttonhole areas and the collar. A
lightweight linen was used for lining. The
buttons are ball-shaped metal buttons.
Cast metal buttons were known in this period, and would have been a
cheaper alternative to expensive jeweled buttons, or buttons wrapped in silk
thread (which are seen on higher class surviving garments). There is a strip with eyelets inside the
doublet waist to use for attaching the breeches.
|
The pieces of this linen canvas doublet are shaped as Gnagy describes (using steam to stretch certain areas) even though there is no interlining layer for the body. However, a padstitched piece of canvas in the collar provides essential support for it to hold its shape. Seen here before the buttons and buttonholes were made. |
The
Breeches:
The breeches pattern was also
drafted from Gnagy’s method. The SCA
rules only require abrasion resistant covering on the legs, but since the
breeches do cover the lower part of the torso, I have to consider them in the
overall outfit. I used the same heavy
linen as the first version of the sayo for the outer fabric. The same canvas used for the doublet was used
as a lining. Aside from the use of
machine stitching for some construction seams, the construction mostly followed
historical methods. The single deviation
is discussed below. One huge advantage
of the historical construction is the use of lacing holes on the waistband the
tie the breeches to the doublet. This
essentially prevents any possibility of gapping between the breeches and
doublet which would expose non-puncture resistant underlayers. I am currently using cords made by loop
braiding linen thread. As a utilitarian
garment, I tried to just make wrapped thread ends, but these are proving less
than satisfactory. I intend to put plain
metal aglets on the ends of the points.
A significant safety consideration
in the construction of the breeches was the form of the button opening. This style of breeches, which appears in the
1570s-1580s (photos), lost the ornamental codpiece that was typical of men’s
clothing of the mid-16th century.
The necessary front opening was closed with buttons. However, in portraits these are often not
seen. Gnagy reports that surviving
examples use a deep pleat at the center front to cover the buttons. This configuration is surprisingly practical
for safety purposes. A strip of fabric
with buttonholes extends from the left front of the breeches. The buttons are sewn to the right front. In order for a broken blade to slip under
this fly, it would have to come from the right.
But, the right edge of the fly is never exposed due to the deep pleat
covering it and the fullness of the breeches.
This configuration would probably
have been enough for safety. But I added
another buttonhole stand extending in the opposite direction on the
inside. I will admit that a partial
consideration here was that I couldn’t decide whether to cut the breeches from
the same cloth as the doublet or the sayo (both ways are shown in the cutting
layouts of Freyle’s tailor’s manual).
With a little planning, and the addition of the second button stand, I
have effectively made the breeches reversible.
This is in no way supported by any historical practices. But, I like the idea of effectively having
two pairs of breeches for the effort of one.
The
Sayo:
The sayo was originally cut from the
same heavy linen as the breeches, with a linen canvas interlining and a loftier
linen for the tailored padding layer.
The lining is a lightweight linen.
Again, the pattern was drafted using Gnagy’s system with construction in
line with his methods. Again, machine
stitching was used for many of the construction seams. I have made the sayo to button
right-over-left, while the doublet buttons left-over-right. The direction of buttoning was not
standardized in the 16th century and examples of both can be
found. While I find left-over-right much
easier, as a right-handed person, right-over-left has two advantages in this
instance. Firstly, it has the opening
facing to my left, which is usually the side away from my opponent. This reduces the risk of a broken blade
sliding in between the buttons.
Secondly, by using opposite buttoning for the two layers, it further
reduces the chances of any broken blades penetrating fully.
|
Machine pad-stitching on the interlining layer of the sayo. The 'padding' is actually the same canvas as the interlining itself. This provides no real contribution to the protective aspect of this garment, but is essential to the construction process that gives the garment its shape. |
My original plan for the sayo had
been to use a short-sleeved style. The
SCA fencing rules require puncture resistant material in the armpit, covering
the upper part of the inner, upper arm.
The remainder of the arms only require abrasion resistant material. Short sleeves are rare, but there are several
portraits from the 1560s showing men with short-sleeved overgarments (jerkin,
sayo, etc.). The original plan was to
make sleeves only as long as the portion of the upper arm that needs to be
protected with puncture resistant material.
However, after two attempts, I could not find a configuration of short
sleeves that I felt would not allow a blade to slide up under the sayo
sleeve. So, I changed plans.
The final version of the sayo has a
sleeve shown in tailor’s manuals from just after 1600. This is called a “manga de armar” in Spanish
and usually translated as “arming sleeve”.
I don’t know of any images of this sleeve style, but there are many
reasons why it might not be readily identifiable. It is a one-piece sleeve, cut in a very
unusual shape that folds up to create the same shape as a more common curved,
two-piece sleeve. If fully constructed
in this way, the arming sleeve would have a seam up the back of the forearm,
across the elbow, and then up the front of the upper arm. The more typical two-piece sleeve has two
seams, running the full length of the sleeve at the front and also the back of
the arm.
Since
the arming sleeve shape is much less efficient in use of fabric than the
two-piece sleeve, I find it hard to believe that 16th century
tailors would have constructed the arming sleeve this way. I suspect that it may have been constructed
without sewing any seams at all – leaving the “seam” lines as openings
(possibly with buttons or ties) through which the sleeve underneath would be
visible, or even puff out. Gnagy
suggests that the seam on the upper arm would be sewn closed with slashes only
across the outside of the elbow and down the back of the forearm. This arrangement suited my purposes even
better, as a large opening on the front of the upper arm would be a spot where
a blade could potentially get caught.
However, with the upper arm sewn closed I can still put my forearm
through the elbow slash, leaving the lower sleeve hanging. Since the opening here is at the elbow, any
blade that slipped up under the sayo sleeve would still not get up past the
mid-bicep. I could put my forearm into
the sayo sleeve as well, but having the option to wear it as a hanging sleeve
helps reduce layering on parts of the body where it is not necessary –
something useful in hot weather.
Unfortunately,
after wearing this suit to fence at Pennsic 48 (2019), I washed it. Being constructed entirely of linen, it
should have been safe to wash in the machine.
However, it seems that I neglected to pre-wash the linen I used for the
inter-lining in the sayo. This shrank
during washing, creating a hot mess of a garment that is totally
unwearable. I got myself some more heavy
linen and made a second sayo, duplicating pretty much everything I did on the
first one. This is the currently
displayed sayo.
Aside
from the use of machine stitching, the main deviation from historical
construction practices is the use of linen for the outer fabric. While linen canvas doublets are documented,
colored linen was exceedingly rare (LaPorta) and its use for a sayo is
questionable. In the absence of sturdy, lightweight wool cloth, however, I felt
that this was the better choice for a garment meant to be used during vigorous
physical activity.
|
Version 2. Replacement sayo with the same doublet and breeches.
|
Other
options/future explorations:
Initially, I thought that three
layers of linen canvas would be required to meet the SCA requirement of
puncture resistance. However, I suspect
that the sayo, as made, could pass punch testing on its own. With proper choice of materials, it might be
possible to construct a doublet that functions on its own. This could include making a doublet with
heavy linen canvas for the outer shell and the interlining. It could also involve use of leather, a very
historically appropriate material for clothing and one which would meet the SCA
standard of puncture resistance as well.
There are a few surviving examples
which are presumed to be fencing doublets.
These doublets have quilted padding.
While not necessary for complying with SCA fencing rules, there are
advantages to having a padded garment for fencing. This would be more along the lines of
recreating a period “fencing armor” than “common civil attire” that complies
with SCA rules.
Historical
practice, however, is to stitch buttons to the edge of the garment and place
buttonholes very close to the edge as well.
With a single garment, an additional placket of some sort would have to
be pinned or stitched behind the buttonholes in order to comply with SCA
rules. My use of two layered garments
with opposite-facing button openings eliminates the need for this ahistorical
modification.
Another
deviation from historical practice to consider would be to only interline the
armpit area of the sleeves. It seems
that doublet sleeves were either fully interlined, or not interlined at all. However, to eliminate bulk in the sleeves and
still comply with SCA fencing rules, interlining could be placed only in the
areas where puncture resistance is required.
This would be completely unnoticeable in the finished garment. Another modern “cheat” that could be combined
with this technique would be to cut the layer of padding used in the tailoring
to cover the entire body of the doublet, rather than only the chest and
shoulder area. This would add a third
layer of cloth to the one garment.
Sources:
Johnson, Caroline. The King’s
Servants: Men’s dress at the accession of Henry VIII, ed. Malcolm-Davies
& Mikhaila, Fat Goose Press, 2009.
Gnagy, Mathew. The Modern
Maker Vol. 1: Men’s Doublets,
self-published, 2014.
Gnagy, Mathew. The Modern
Maker Vol. 2: Pattern Manual 1580-1640, self-published, 2018
Includes LaPorta, A.
“Cloth and Clothing in 16th Century Spanish Florida”
Greco, El. Portrait of a man,
1570-75. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:El_Greco_-_Portrait_of_a_Man_-_WGA10428.jpg
Mikhaila, Ninya and Jane Malcolm-Davies. The Tudor Tailor, Costume and Fashion
Press, 2006.
Mor, Anthonis. Portrait of a gentleman https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Anthonis_Mor_Portrait_of_a_Gentleman.jpg
Moroni, Giovanni Battista. Portrait of Don Gabriel de la Cueva, Duke of Albuquerque, 1560. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Giovanni_Battista_Moroni_-_Portrait_of_Don_Gabriel_de_la_Cueva,_later_Duke_of_Alburquerque_-_WGA16256.jpg
Sanchez Coello, Alonso. Circle
of? Undated. https://blouinartsalesindex.com/auctions/Alonso-Sanchez-Coello-6125171/Portrait-of-a-Man,-three-quarter-length,-with-a-double-layered-lace-cartwheel-Ruff;-Portrait-of-a-Woman,-three-quarter-length,-with-a-double-layered-lace-cartwheel-Ruff