Armour & Weapons
Forfatter: Charles Ffoulkes
År: 1909
Forlag: At The Clarendon Press
Sted: Oxford
Sider: 112
UDK: 623 Ffou
With A Preface By Viscount Dillon, V.P.S.A. Curator Of The Tower Armouries
Søgning i bogen
Den bedste måde at søge i bogen er ved at downloade PDF'en og søge i den.
Derved får du fremhævet ordene visuelt direkte på billedet af siden.
Digitaliseret bog
Bogens tekst er maskinlæst, så der kan være en del fejl og mangler.
CHAP VII
WEAPONS
109
to be met with in museums, and we can only judge of their design
and use from illuminated miniatures and paintings. The firearm,
being, as it is, subject to further development, cannot be taken
into full consideration in this work except so far as it affected the
defensive armour and in time ousted the staff-weapon.
With this bare enumeration of the principal weapons in use
from the twelfth to the eighteenth century we draw our all too
meagre notes to a conclusion. The subject is so vast, because each
example is distinct in itself and because no general rule holds
absolutely good for all, that many volumes might be produced
with advantage on each epoch of the defences and weapons of
Europe. No better advice to the would-be student can be given
than that of Baron de Cosson in the Introduction to the Catalogue
of Helmets and Mail (Arch. Journ., vol. xxxvii). He writes :
‘ For the study of ancient armour to be successfully pursued it is
of primary importance that a careful examination be made of
every existing specimen within our reach. . . . Every rivet-hole and
rivet in a piece must be studied and its use and object thought out.
The reasons for the varied forms, thicknesses, and structure of the
different parts must have special attention. . . . This alone will
enable us to derive full profit from our researches into ancient
authors and our examination of ancient monuments. This pre-
liminary study will alone enable us to form a sound opinion on
two important points. First, the authority to be accorded to any
given representation of armour in ancient art . . . whether it
was copied from real armour or whether it was the outcome
of the artist’s imagination ; and also whether a piece of existing
armour is genuine or false, and whether or no it is in its primitive
condition.’
To this may be added that in studying armour at its best epoch,
that is during the fifteenth century, we find the dignity of true
craftsmanship proclaimed, and utility and grace attained without
the addition of that so-called decoration which with the advent
of the Renaissance was the bane of all the crafts.