Medieval relative scale question (1 Viewer)

Kurt

Sergeant
Joined
Jun 30, 2006
Messages
773
I don't have any Medieval figures yet but am considering it as my next range to collect. However, I haven't seen any of the figures in person. Could someone tell me how these figures compare in scale compared to other First Legion figures, since there is a slight difference as the below picture illustrates. Better yet, if anyone owns some Medieval and Retreat From Russia figures, could you post a comparison photo? Thanks.

relativescale.jpg
 
A few of the very early figures (I think two that I have and I have almost all of them) in the Crusades range are smaller, closer to 54mm. This is similar to a couple other very early ranges. The VAST majority are very similar in scale to their mid to late figures.

The Crusades are my favorite range, and I am itching to start the Agincourt range. As I read more and more about this time period, the armor technical specs, heraldry and weapons I get more impressed by FL's offerings. For example, most reproductions of bascinets have flat bases that make the helmet sit parallel to the floor/ground. This is incorrect as it should be slightly angled to give the wearer more natural movement. All of FL's bascinets that I have examined have this detail correct. In the Crusades range, the French knight is not wearing a full faced helm. This is interesting and I found a first person account of a French knight who recounts a tale of loaning his kettle helm to King Louis the IX while on crusade. There are just so many little details like this.

Several of the Outremer knights in the Crusades range which I did not think I would like as much as the knights of the Military Orders, but they have become my favorite. Also, the downed Hospitaller is another I did not think I would like so much and it is fantastic.
 
Not certain of the early crusade numbers as I do not have them but a couple, even maybe just one, was particularly large and do not know why. I have a number both foot and mounted old and new and they are now all compatible in size with each other in the range which is the most important thing.

Buy with confidence
 
Just to clarify, I am asking about the Medieval range not the Crusaders range.
 
Just to clarify, I am asking about the Medieval range not the Crusaders range.

Sorry, I realized that after I posted my message. I saw the Crusader in the example picture and wrote my post. Only later did it occur to me you were not speaking in general, but in particular.
 
Just to clarify, I am asking about the Medieval range not the Crusaders range.

Btw, just to make you happy I am buying the Boucicault figure (MED012) to see if it fits! :p:tongue:

Seriously, I have wanted to get into this range and I am going to buy the figure, so I can report soon.

I have been reading the William Gold series by Christian Cameron and his father, and the fathers of many of the named figures play prominently in the story.
 
I've been meaning to reply to this since Monday and finally had the chance to shoot a few quick photos. Sorry it took me so long!
NAP510 and MED031 compared in these photos:
NAP510-MED031-3.jpg
NAP510-MED031-2.jpg
NAP510-MED031-1.jpg

Hope this helps!

Julie
 
I've been meaning to reply to this since Monday and finally had the chance to shoot a few quick photos. Sorry it took me so long!
NAP510 and MED031 compared in these photos:
View attachment 194443
View attachment 194444
View attachment 194445

Hope this helps!

Julie

Don't know if it helped anyone or not but it made sure made it harder for me to resist these two ranges, very fine looking figures. Also the pictures are very clear. Thanks for taking the time to do this. regards Gebhard
 
You are welcome! I also took photos of them in front of a ruler and posted that on their individual pages.
It is always on the list of things to do in downtime, I just don't have much of that any longer!

Julie
 
BTW: from looking at armor, I think people were slightly smaller in general in the 15th century than in the 19th. Certainly the Romans were smaller. But all looks good to me from a compatibility point of view.
 
My Jean II Le Maingre de Boucicaut (aka Boucicault) arrived last night and is fantastic. Seems to match my Crusader, Roman and WWII figures for scale.

Boucicaut is in the running for greatest knight of all time along with Geoffrey de Charny and William Marshall. One thing I find interesting is that his father was a great, and chivalrous knight himself. He is a rare example of the son of a great man eclipsing is father while following closely in his footsteps.

Boucicaut appears to be the Michael Jordan of knighthood, in that he was able to perform incredible acts of dexterity and agility in his full harness. A historian captured his daily workout routine which included vaulting into the saddle fully armed and armoured, climbing castle walls, scaling ladders from underneath, long distance running, doing somersaults and running front flips sans bascinet.

Here is a video of a guy replicating each of these drills: https://youtu.be/q-bnM5SuQkI

And a little Wikepedia for your enjoyment:

Jean II Le Maingre (in Old French, Jehan le Meingre), called Boucicaut (August 28, 1366 — June 21, 1421) was marshal of France and a knight renowned for his military skill.

He was the son of marshal Jean I Le Maingre, also called Boucicaut. He became a page at the court of Charles VI of France, and at the age of 12 he accompanied Louis II, Duke of Bourbon, in a campaign against Normandy. At age 16 he was knighted by Louis on the eve of the Battle of Roosebeke (November 27, 1382). In 1383 he began the first of his journeys that would take up more than twenty years of his life.

In 1384 he undertook his first journey to Prussia, in order to assist the Teutonic Order in their war against the pagan Lithuanians, who would convert to Roman Catholicism in 1386. After some campaigns against the Moors in Spain, and against Toulouse in France he again accompanied the duke of Bourbon, this time to Spain, which had become a secondary battlefield of the Hundred Years' War. From there he travelled for two years through the Balkans, the Near East, and the Holy Land, in the company of his friend Renaud of Roye and later with Philip of Artois, Count of Eu. There, he and his companions composed the Livre des Cent Ballades, a poetical defense of the chaste knight the central figure of chivalry, which Johan Huizinga found a startling contrast with the facts of his military career.[1]

In 1390, while the Truce of Leulinghem had temporarily interrupted the war with England, Boucicaut took part in the tournament of Saint-Inglevert, where he defeated the most famous English soldiers in single combat. The next year he travelled to Prussia for a third time. Because of his great service in the war against the heathens in Livonia and Prussia, he was named Marshal of France on December 25, 1391, by Charles VI at the cathedral of St. Martin in Tours.

In 1396 he took part in the joint French-Hungarian crusade against the Ottoman Empire, which suffered a heavy defeat on September 28 at the Battle of Nicopolis. He was taken hostage by the Ottoman sultan Bayezid I, but, unlike many of his companions, escaped execution and was eventually ransomed. In 1399, he founded the Emprise de l'Escu vert à la Dame Blanche, a chivalric order inspired by the ideal of courtly love: "one might have supposed him cured of all chivalrous delusions after the catastrophe of Nicopolis", remarked Huizinga.[2] In the same year, he was sent with six ships carrying 1,200 men to assist Byzantine emperor Manuel II Palaeologus against the Ottomans.

In 1401, due to his military accomplishments and his knowledge of the east, he was appointed French governor of Genoa, which had fallen to Charles VI in 1396. He successfully repelled an attack from King Janus of Cyprus, who tried to take back the city of Famagusta on Cyprus, which had been captured by Genoa. After some struggles in the Mediterranean the Genoese freed themselves from French rule by 1409.

Boucicaut returned to France and became involved in the rivalry between Burgundy and Orléans. In the Battle of Agincourt in 1415 he commanded the French vanguard, but was captured by the English and died six years later in Yorkshire. He was buried in the cathedral of Tours, in his family's chapel, with the epitaph "Grand Constable of the Emperor and of the Empire of Constantinople."
 
Thank you Julie for the excellent photo comparison. Treefrog Treasures has provided a number of photos of figures beside a Millimeter Scale to show the figures size. I consider this to be an invaluable customer service. Figures today can range from 58 mm to 68 mm tall and yet be catagorized as a generic 60 mm. The photo comparison provides reassurance to the collector that a figure will fit into their collection.

I've been meaning to reply to this since Monday and finally had the chance to shoot a few quick photos. Sorry it took me so long!
NAP510 and MED031 compared in these photos:
View attachment 194443
View attachment 194444
View attachment 194445

Hope this helps!

Julie
 
Thank you for posting this. I am still missing this figure in my collection - obviously a mistake. The video is great. I used to jog with a 40 pound weight vest to prepare for backpacking but it became very hard on the knees once I hit 45. Possibly not an issue if your life expectancy is in the 40s.
 
Solo shots:




In the above you can see the fully articulating visor needs to be reseated. I will take some with it open/off later.



From the rear you can see he is wearing a great bascinet.
 
Good shot of the gorget



Something I learned recently that you can see in this picture is that the English were the first to design armor specifically for foot combat, but the French and Germans lagged in this regard. One example is not having fully encased cuisses and knee protection as you can see above. If you are fighting on foot, which the French did at Agincourt, this is weak spot.

 
A suit of medieval plate armor circa 1400 weighed approximatly 70 pounds. The weight was distributed evenly over the body. A knight was trained wearing armor from the age of 7. The armor was thus not a burden as the body was adapted to it over many years. The Crossbow and Welsh Long Bow put an end to the protection plate armor afforded during the 100 years war; as did the Halbard and Pike in the Austro-Swiss wars of independance. Mobility became more protection than armor in the late medeival period with the advent of firearms.
 
A suit of medieval plate armor circa 1400 weighed approximatly 70 pounds. The weight was distributed evenly over the body. A knight was trained wearing armor from the age of 7. The armor was thus not a burden as the body was adapted to it over many years. The Crossbow and Welsh Long Bow put an end to the protection plate armor afforded during the 100 years war; as did the Halbard and Pike in the Austro-Swiss wars of independance. Mobility became more protection than armor in the late medeival period with the advent of firearms.

Definitely agree with the first statement, and the statement about sacrificing protection for mobility. An example of the latter is protection peaked with the great bascinet, but then the sallet emerged that provided less protection but could be worn for longer periods of time, afforded more mobility and greater vision.

I would strongly disagree with this statement, or at least call it highly exaggerated, "The Crossbow and Welsh Long Bow put an end to the protection plate armor afforded during the 100 years war; as did the Halbard and Pike in the Austro-Swiss wars of independance."

I think saying the Crossbow and Long Bow put an end to it is a gross overstatement. They coexisted for 300 years, and I think the renewed interest in understanding the true martial arts and technology of that time is showing that long bows and cross bows were less effective against plate than originally thought.

When my daughter goes to sleep I will grab some info.
 
I agree the Crossbow co-existed with plate armor; however the advent of the spring steel prod increased the power and penetration of the bolt substantially. The development of the hand cannon in the 15th century rendered plate armor obsolete except as parade costume and an insignia of rank.

Historicaly the Long Bow is credited as the means of victory at Crecy, Poiters and Agincourt. The English were heavily outnumbered in all three key battles of the Hundred Years War. The Long Bow and the stand off tactics it inspired offset the numerical superiorty of the French Chivalry. Granted the English tactics were superior to that of the French. The English picked their ground and forced the French to come at them through an arrow storm. The French armor may have partially protected the Knights; but their horses were killed under them and they became dismounted infantry with swords against axes and pikes in marshland in the case of Agincourt. The English could never have won these three key battles without the Longbow and the tactics evolved to use it effectivly enmass IMO!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top