Page:A record of European armour and arms through seven centuries (Volume 5).djvu/60

 origin: if it does not actually come from Petit's workshop it must be the work of some French armourer of the same school. Although it is massively constructed (the suit itself weighs 77 lb. 14 oz.) it has all that clumsiness of form so very much in evidence in its brother suit: indeed, it would be hard to imagine any defence, especially as regards the leg armour, more ungainly. The long tassets reaching to the knee are shapeless, and might easily be merely half hoops of iron, so little skill being evinced in their forging. The jambs, heavy and clumsy, have a peculiar and ugly feature, namely the recessed band studded with a row of rivets, which run down the exterior side of the front plate. These serve no possible purpose, but give the effect of a meaningless interruption of the plate surface, an interruption which is sufficient to mar the appearance of even the most shapely of greaves. Notwithstanding our condemnation of the suit as marking the decadence of the armourer's art, we are ready to admit that, quite apart from its great historical interest, it has a charm of colour and a richness of effect as a pageant suit that cannot wholly be disregarded despite its deficiencies in make. The whole surface is covered with a small design of tendril scrollwork worked with a tool, and thickly plated with gold. The suit with its chanfron, crinet, and saddle steels (portion of the pommel steel is lost) is as complete as when it was mentioned in the 1660 inventory and, strange to say, is in a fine state of preservation. The gilded surface is almost pristine in its freshness, despite the dirt and dust that adhere to it by reason of its continued exposure to the London atmosphere. Poor suit! If its freshness is to be retained it wants first of all a thorough washing and then a good bath of oil. It still has its delicate lining of pink satin, which is embroidered in places with gold thread.

No Charles I armour is so familiar to the Londoner as that in which this King is represented on the statue at Charing Cross. The metal casting around the near fore-foot bears the inscription:. 1633 The beautiful pedestal is by Joshua Marshall, Master Mason to the King. To the armour lover the statue is most interesting, presenting as it does a faithful representation of a suit of armour of French fashion of this date (Fig. 1449).

If the reader finds a considerable sameness in such suits of the XVIIth century as we have so far considered, if, too, he misses a classification into national families in respect of shape and form, he must understand that by this time these national forms had fallen into absolute desuetude. Our excuse for omitting to group the suits we have illustrated is that, all being