Contents
An elbow solves a specific problem: covering the elbow without turning the arm into a piece rigid. This defense must accompany flexion and be coordinated with the plates located above and below the joint. Therefore, to understand its shape, it is useful to look at the entire arm and how it changes when bent.
In armor, the codal is the protection centered on the elbow; In museum catalogs it also appears with the English term couter. Its design was not unique throughout the Middle Ages: the solutions varied depending on the era, the workshop and the function of the set.
The elbow: a joint that needs room to move
When we extend and bend the arm, the distance between its inner and outer surfaces changes. Continuous rigid cover would make that movement difficult. The gunsmiths worked with separate pieces, curved profiles and joints capable of moving to maintain the defense around the joint.
The elbow cup embraces the protruding part of the elbow. In many designs, a fin or side guard is added, which expands the surface covered next to the joint. Its shape and size must be interpreted within the whole: a highly visible guard does not explain, by itself, how the entire arm works.
How the plates were articulated
In an articulated defense, the codal works with the launas: metal strips that overlap and link the parts of the arm. Movable rivets and straps allow parts to change position. The effect is best understood when imagining a fan: the elements move relative to each other, although each one retains its rigidity.
The Metropolitan Museum explains that plate harnesses combined individual elements held together by movable rivets and leather straps. This system allowed mobility far superior to the popular image of the gentleman unable to bend. It does not mean that all armor offered the same travel: the fit and its purpose were still decisive.
There are also independent codals, held by straps or other fixings. We must not confuse an isolated cup with a complete and articulated defense: the first shows the shape of the elbow protection; The second allows you to study how it relates to the rest of the arm.
The evolution: from localized reinforcement to plate harness
It is more useful to speak of a gradual development than to attribute to all codals a date of birth and an identical sequence. During the 14th century, articulated plate defenses for arms, legs and hands were developed. At the beginning of the 15th century, full plate harnesses were already part of European equipment.
A specific reference is the Italian codal dated around 1430–1440 kept by the Metropolitan Museum, with inventory number 29,150,117. It is made of steel and comes from the set of armor found in the fortress of Chalcis, on the island of Euboea. This object helps to place a real piece in its context, without turning it into a universal model for all of Europe.
The differences between simple defenses and more enveloping sets are not equivalent to a staircase in which each design immediately replaces the previous one. Region, date, and intended use matter when comparing silhouettes.
Codal, armband and shoulder pad: read the arm by zone
The elbow does not cover the entire arm. To identify it on a suit of armor, first locate the elbow and follow the pieces towards the wrist and towards the shoulder. Historical and catalog terminology may vary, but this tour avoids confusion.
- Elbow: the elbow cup and, when present, its side guard.
- Forearm: the defense that extends towards the wrist, usually called a bracer in the current catalog.
- Upper arm: the plates that connect the elbow area to the shoulder guards.
- Shoulder: the shoulder pad, with a function and position different from that of the elbow.
The reproductions of the collection of bracers and forearm defenses allow us to observe this difference in location. It is advisable to pay attention to where each piece ends and whether or not it incorporates specific protection for the elbow.
Why Tournament Armor May Look Different
A campaign armor and one intended for a specific tournament type did not pursue exactly the same balance. The Metropolitan Museum notes that certain tournament armor could be much more restrictive of posture and was worn for limited periods.
Therefore, it should not be deduced that all right codals were larger than left ones, nor that a large guard always demonstrated a certain function. To explain an asymmetry you have to know the harness and its method of use; the shape of an isolated piece leaves some of that information unresolved.
How to interpret a current playback
Reproduction photographs help recognize cups, guards, straps and launas, but they are not evidence of historical dating. To reconstruct a period, the reference must be a documented object or an identifiable contemporary representation.
Similarly, the metallic or articulated appearance alone does not prove that a piece is suitable for a contact activity. Manufacturer specifications and activity requirements must be checked. Understanding historical construction and verifying the use of a reproduction are different tasks.
To recognize these shapes in current pieces, you can explore the collection of elbow protectors and elbow protections. And to see your position within a set, the collection of armor and harness parts offers a broader view of equipment.
Sources and references
- Metropolitan Museum of Art: Arms and Armor in Medieval Europe. Context of the development of articulated fenders and the plate harness.
- Metropolitan Museum of Art: Elbow defense (Couter), circa 1430–1440, inventory 29.150.117. Documented historical example from Calcis.
- Metropolitan Museum of Art: Arms and Armor—Common Misconceptions and Frequently Asked Questions. Articulation, mobility and differences between field and tournament armor.
