Study of Warwick Shaffron c. 1400

[Erpingham]

Another one for cavalry and armour fans.  For those who don't want to read it all, the key info is summarised in the conclusion

"Discussions with owners of modern jousting horses confirms that shaffrons do need to be manufactured to an appropriate size to fit their mounts. As we observed ourselves, practically, transferring a shaffron intended for a larger horse to a smaller one and vice-versa can result in misalignment with key anatomical features such as ear and eye holes. While horse head size certainly does not vary in direct proportion to stature at the withers, there is clearly a positive correlation. By comparison with the modern examples, it appears that the vast majority of shaffrons held by the Royal Armouries would be consistent with animals of between 14–16 hands high. Some may indeed fall below that. This is also consistent with metrical evidence obtained from archaeological medieval horse bones that suggests that animals around 13 hh were average and those above 14 hh were unusually large, and there is no current evidence for medieval English horses that exceed 16 hh.

Based upon shaffron length and positions of eye and ear holes, the Warwick Shaffron is not exceptional in size when compared to later shaffrons. It is larger than average in these respects, but is far from being an outlier. One of Henry VIII's early-sixteenth century shaffrons, object number VI.1, is in fact clearly the largest example held in the collections of the Royal Armouries. It is the width measurement that gives the Warwick Shaffron its bulky appearance, rather than key anatomical landmarks. We propose that the most parsimonious explanation for this is that this earlier form of heavy, all-enclosing, shaffron was worn with more padding than later forms. Up to a likely maximum of 5 cm of padding may have been employed at key locations on the head to support the shaffron. If the measurements are modelled to take approximate account of such additional padding, then the horse the shaffron was made for would appear to be mid-range in size on all key dimensions. Direct evidence for padding practices at c. 1400 is absent. However, the form and function of Warwick-type shaffrons may reasonably have necessitated such additional protection. We conclude, therefore, that the Warwick Shaffron was made to fit a horse that was likely of impressive size for its date, but in line with other war and jousting mounts from later periods, and that its design and use required additional width to accommodate extra padding."