Frontier cuirass c. 1720 believed Pueblo Indian in Spanish Style

[Jim McDougall]

Ian and Jose!! I cannot thank you guys enough for your incredible help on this. Yourpoints are well made, and I think we have enough to submit rebuttal and our evidence I thinks stands well......as noted, the burden of proof goes to this unidentified individual.
Good note on the Hopi kilt Jose! Id like to see that.

[RSWORD]

Jim,

I am adding an example to continue the conversation. It is similar to the example you posted but also has noted differences. The differences I note is that the triangle decoration is an additional piece attached to the collar versus carved into the leather, the bindings are rattan, and it is layered leather. The similarities are that it opens at the side, it is a hardened leather and it has leather plates for the skirt. I can see the argument both ways. Is my example Spanish Colonial or an early Filipino armor based on the Spanish example?

[Jim McDougall]

Rick, its always good to hear from ya!!! Instant images of the 'Highlander' scenes!

This is phenomenal, and adds new dimension to this perplexing dilemma of these leather armors. This newly found example is incredibly exciting, though truly throwing a curve into the conclusions earlier drawn toward the example that I presented in beginning this thread.

The problem here is with the character of these armors both having these key decorative elements, however the fact that this example has cataphract or lamellar scales layered. Our original example posted is of cuir boulli (boiled leather) with designs tooled into the leather.

The designs using the skirted tassets are similar, the triangular element in the position of a gorget at the chest is compellingly the same.

Most importantly, as with the armor of the original post, this example is side vented, opening at the side rather than frontally opened as typically seen on Filipino examples.

Our strongest evidence for this type of cuirass comes from the remarkable Seggeser paintings, held in the Museum of the Governors in Santa Fe, which record the obscure 'Villasur massacre' in Nebraska in 1720. These are three panels on buffalo fide painted by a Pueblo artist shortly after the event, and had been unknown until 1980s, when they were returned to the US from Switzerland. As they are the single reference which depicts this type of armor, the had not been included in any of the few published materials on Spanish colonial arms and armor.

In these paintings, the Pueblo allies who were with Villasurs forces, are wearing this unusual style of tasseted armor in contrast to the Spanish men who are wearing 'cuera' (a long rawhide coat). Importantly, the artist deemed it important to detail the 'triskela' like device which seems to have been a symbol, which is present on these leather cuirasses worn by the Pueblo's.

The remarkable detail including these kinds of features suggests that the unknown artist was either a survivor of the event, or worked under the guidance of one. In any case, these features of the armor were clearly known in the Santa Fe context by the 1720s.

Another telling feature on the original example is that it is constructed of cuir boulli, which was the boiled leather method which had long been used in Europe and back to ancient times. Typically, the 'cuera' type coats or jackets were of layered rawhide sewn together.

When Santa Fe fell in the Pueblo uprisings in the 1690s, the governor and many citizens fled to regions near El Paso. Later, as the governor assembled forces to retake Santa Fe, including many loyal Pueblos, he ordered them to fashion leather armor, but 'in the old way' (thus cuir boulli). This process had of course long been known to Indian tribes with their fashioning of various items requiring that durability.
It would appear the production of this type armor had become inherently unique to Santa Fe and the Pueblo loyal to the Spaniards. These men were taught and converted to the Catholic Faith, but were familiar with the baroque styling and features in the art. In this manner, clearly these themes were carried into these traditionally styled armors.

Having established these things, and with the illustrations with provenance set in Santa Fe of post 1720, we are compelled to note the originally posted cuir boulli cuirass as of that context in that period, and while of Pueblo workmanship, under effectively Spanish origin.

Now, coming to this newly found example, it is of the same fashion as our original, and with compelling elements of design and decoration, including the important side venting, the single contrary element would be the RATTAN bindings. This is clearly not a material which would have been available, nor used in the contexts of the Spanish southwest.

At this point the only explanation which might accommodate the comparison of these two examples would be that examples of these early 18th century cuirasses from the Santa Fe contexts, may have traveled via the trade networks into other colonial areas.
In fact, our original example is now known to have been found in California years ago, suggesting the presence of these there. This was of course the key location for the 'Manila galleons' commerce, and naturally, the movement of goods was reciprocal . It would seem likely that these armors would be copied by Filipino craftsmen in the Spanish regions of the Philippines, and these would follow Spanish design. While the Moros did of course follow Spanish design nominally (even to combed morions) they followed also the more commonly known frontal opening armor with mail.

So I guess, as I have done briefly (LOL! NOT!) I would say this is likely a Filipino version of the Spanish (Pueblo) design, secured by the fact that the rattan is not a material available nor used in the Spanish southwest. It would likely be of 19th century, possibly early, but these things are better determined hands on.

Thank you so much Rick!!!!

All very best
Jim

[Ian]

Hi Rick.

Great to see that example of leather armor. I'm struggling to place it as Moro because all the Moro armor that I have seen has been plate and mail. Those plates have been made from a variety of materials, including various metals, carabao horn, and carabao leather. Your multilayered example, with thick over-lapping antique leather strips is unlike any Moro arrangement that I have seen. It does, however, have other Spanish/European elements and its materials fit with a Philippines origin (although both carabao and rattan are widespread in the Philippines, and indeed throughout SE Asia as a whole).

Provenance of this piece is key. Do you know where it came from? How firm is the Moro attribution, or a Philippines origin in general?

Regards, Ian.

[Jim McDougall]

The Philippine history and arms are not a field I have studied that much, but in research on the cuir boullli cuirass I began researching over ten years ago has been concluded to be of Spanish colonial provenance from Santa Fe. N.M. from c. late 17th c. It was apparently fashioned by Pueblo artisans under the direction of the governor of Santa Fe. The process of cuir boulli (boiled ox hide) was obsolete in Europe by this time, though leather armor of brigandine style was in use.

Why this is important is that the overall neo classic style, with tassets, and the decorative symbolism which is paralleled nominally in Rick's example, strongly suggests Spanish colonial influences from the Spanish southwest.

This situation is likely to have derived from the commerce of the so called Manila galleons which went between there and Acapulco, with alternate stops in San Blas in Baja. It is likely these type leather armors went aboard these vessels to the Philippines with soldiers etc.

That being the case, it seems entirely plausible that Rick's example, is a Filipino interpretation of those incorporated with other types of armor which remained in use over long periods in colonial regions. While it is of leather scales overlayed in cataphract (lamellar) style, the use of rattan is telling as it suggests likely Philippine production (the focal point of Spanish occupation in these regions).

The presence of this styling and decorative devices reflect the baroque styling typical of ecclesiastic art of early periods in the Spanish southwest. This emphasizes the likelihood of being produced in the Spanish Philippines rather than the Moro Sultanates.

While Moro arms and armor reflect a notable degree of Spanish influence, the styling and character of their armor is more aligned with Muslim styles of mail.

I hope this is somewhat helpful with this conundrum, which is typical of most Spanish colonial subjects regarding arms and armor. As noted, even after many years of research I still have reservations on some factors, and the mysteries of the Philippines(for me) in this history is daunting indeed.

[RSWORD]

Unfortunately, this is an item that came without any history or provenance. I agree with Jim that this is likely a product of the Spanish Philippines and not Moro. If that is the case, I think it would likely be fairly early and likely late 18th to early 19th century. Leather was readily available in the late 19th century in the Northern Philippines judging by the number of scabbards and scabbard mounts that feature that material and I see no reason it wasn't available a century or more earlier.

I know a number of our esteemed Filipino researchers have found early Spanish accounts in the Philippines and I wonder if any of those mention the locals copying their armor?

[Jim McDougall]

To support the notable presence of scaled (cataphract) armor in the Spanish southwest is best described in the paper written by Dr. Peter Bleed of the University of Nebraska in 'Plains Anthropologist' Vol.60, #235, Aug.2015, p.199-122...." Scale Armor on the North American Frontier".
This describes an element of scaled armor believed of Spanish origin and likely dating from 18th century, possibly earlier, and which is of the form covering chest and shoulders in the sense of a gorget, known as a 'Bishops mantle'.
This came into the possession of Capt. John Gregory Bourke in 1870 while stationed at Ft. Craig, New Mexico.

It was acquired from an army doctor who had described its being found in expeditions in regions between the Rio Grande and Pecos, with the apocryphal and likely romanticized note it was several other items deposited along with bones of presumably Spanish soldier. While that cliche' had become well known in the discovery of numerous relics presumed from early Spanish explorers, the character of this armor was empirically examined by the State Historical Society of Nebraska. It had ended up there through a chain of custody well recorded, and donated in 1960s.

These types of scaled armor, in these cases of iron rather than leather, appear to have been from Spanish colonial provenance but had occasionally remained in use by Native American tribes for generations. In fact with Comanches there are two recorded instances of this, both with Comanche chiefs, one in 1780s, the other with the chief known as 'Iron Shirt' who was finally brought down by a shot from a 'buffalo rifle' in 1858 in Texas.
In both cases, descriptions of the armor were noted as 'scaled'.

The question came up regarding whether this armor might have been either fraternal or theatrical, which was a quite feasible suggestion, and I recall discussing this with Dr. Bleed, and this suggestion was disproven. The metal used in this armor was proven to be of 'bloomery' production, as described later in the paper to have only been obtainable from European sources earlier than the 19th c.

Therefore this type of scaled armor was circulating in the Southwest in earlier times into the 18th century and likely earlier. It appears that these forms, as well as the distictive cuir boulli example of my earlier research were forms which must have crossed the Pacific on the Manila galleons into Spanish controlled regions of Philippines. There native artisans likely reproduced their versions of the Spanish armor, and it is compelling to observe the combining of the scaled metal now in leather scales and the elements of the Santa Fe style cuir boulli decoration and tassets added as well.

Meanwhile the Moro armors of Mindanao and the sphere of the Sultanate used the Islamic armor models, with the interesting adoption of the Spanish combed morions used as well. In the research I did in degree on the armor used by Moros, the use of mail prevailed, and interestingly, the ultimate protection of the warrior was not the goal, but to accommodate further durability in battle, not necessarily survival.

[Ian]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

... interestingly, the ultimate protection of the warrior was not the goal, but to accommodate further durability in battle, not necessarily survival.

Such was the Moro way.

[TVV]

Here are a couple of examples from the Spanish Military Museum in Toledo.