A cuirasse breastplate ... for review

[fernando]

Here is a chart on Brits height evolution ... and involution; to note how tall they were in the period when theses armor implements were used.


.

[Jim McDougall]

Thank you so much for the elucidation (as always) and for breaking your original notice of not bothering us with exhaustive details. I am always glad when you are encouraged to do further research and share it here with us.
As one not particularly well versed in armor, it is good to have these pertinent (not exhaustive) details applied, and providing much better perspective.

While some of the hypothetical suggestions seem of course, somewhat out of place (i.e. dwarves), it is sometimes just broadening discussion to even remote possibilities for the sake of note. I would point out here that my mention of smaller display item was in concurrence with Victrix' note on miniature harness (=armor) as a possibility. The notion of 'damage' as well as apparent 'mounting' apertures may also lend to this idea as positioning such a piece to receive blows (much as in proving armor) does not seem far fetched.
I agree with the comment on the elements of armor being comprised of components that would better adjust to the wearers 'physique' and moveability. It was mentioned that the bevor (gorget and chin guard) above and tassets below would complete the coverage of the individual with this breast plate central.

I had indeed not seen your recent entries when I mentioned this topic and subject breastplate (avoiding the term cuirass in case of technicality) in the case of an unusually small katar on the ethno forum. I had not realized I had sounded so decisive in my comments which I thought indicated that the possible circumstances shown and discussed remained inconclusive.

As I had been focused on the katar, I simply thought of this discussion and brought it up as an analogy of similar circumstances in weapon size. It was not meant as a conclusive case as evidence of any presentation, and certainly not meant to cause you concern. Mea Culpa.

[Victrix]

This was written by Dirk Breiding, Department of Arms and Armour, Metropolitan Museum:

“Medical and anthropological research demonstrates that the average height of men and women has gradually increased over the centuries, a process that, for reasons of progressively better diet and public health, has accelerated during the past 150 years or so. The majority of surviving armors from the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries appear to confirm these findings.

However, when trying to affirm such generalizations from armor, a number of factors need to be carefully considered. First, is the armor complete and homogeneous (i.e., do all parts belong together), thereby giving an accurate impression of the height of the original wearer? Second, even a high-quality armor, made to measure for a particular owner, can provide only an estimate of its former wearer’s height with a margin of at least an inch or two (2–5 cm), since the overlap of the protections for lower abdomen (skirt and tassets) and thighs (cuisses) can only be approximated.

Indeed, armor comes in all shapes and sizes, such as armor for children or young men (as opposed to that for adults), and there are even armors made for dwarfs and giants (often found at European courts as “curiosities”). Moreover, then as now, other general factors have to be taken into account, such as differences in average body height between northern and southern Europeans for example, or the simple fact that there have always been people who were exceptionally tall or short when compared to their average contemporary.”

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Victrix

This was written by Dirk Breiding, Department of Arms and Armour, Metropolitan Museum:

“Medical and anthropological research demonstrates that the average height of men and women has gradually increased over the centuries, a process that, for reasons of progressively better diet and public health, has accelerated during the past 150 years or so. The majority of surviving armors from the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries appear to confirm these findings.

However, when trying to affirm such generalizations from armor, a number of factors need to be carefully considered. First, is the armor complete and homogeneous (i.e., do all parts belong together), thereby giving an accurate impression of the height of the original wearer? Second, even a high-quality armor, made to measure for a particular owner, can provide only an estimate of its former wearer’s height with a margin of at least an inch or two (2–5 cm), since the overlap of the protections for lower abdomen (skirt and tassets) and thighs (cuisses) can only be approximated.

Indeed, armor comes in all shapes and sizes, such as armor for children or young men (as opposed to that for adults), and there are even armors made for dwarfs and giants (often found at European courts as “curiosities”). Moreover, then as now, other general factors have to be taken into account, such as differences in average body height between northern and southern Europeans for example, or the simple fact that there have always been people who were exceptionally tall or short when compared to their average contemporary.”

Now THIS is a valuable and most pertinent reference!!! Thank you so much Victrix, very, very much appreciated.

[Victrix]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Now THIS is a valuable and most pertinent reference!!! Thank you so much Victrix, very, very much appreciated.

Not at all Jim. We all thank you, for sharing with us your wisdom and encyclopedic knowledge in these matters which you acquired through decades of research. This is very valuable to us indeed.

Separately on a different matter, in our inquiry it’s important for us to keep an open mind regarding ALL eventualities. It’s preposterous to think that “small” people would not have worn armour in the old days just because they are small. Curiously it seems that human diversity was much more accepted in the old days (pre 20thC?) and indeed even appreciated and celebrated.

[fernando]

Goo points Victrix, those written by Dirk Breiding; and my i say that his words converge here and there with what has been assumed here.
Also indisputable the existence of armour for teenager nobility, as well as a more rare, but still patent, number of oddities for giants and dwarfs.
I would then add that, besides stature dimensions, also resistance must have been part of the smith's different recipes, as a "compassion" for users who only had them for exhibition, parades, ceremonies and such non combat purposes; hence building the parts with a less sturdy consistence (read weight). A piece of armour for a short soldier would certainly weigh more than a "show off" specimen for a an individual of similar size who doesn't have to engage into battle.
The breastplate in discussion has a laminated construction and almost 4 m/m in its thinner parts.

[fernando]

An oil paint depicting Charles II of Great Britain, attributed to Van Dyck's school. The little prince in full armour, with a wheel lock pistol in his hand.
He later married Dona Catarina de Bragança of Portugal, the one who introduced to the Brits the habit of drinking tea.
(Collection Rainer Daehnhardt).

-