Introductory i3 



for the slit. For when the spur was rivetted to the armour, 

 which was very seldom — but of that more hereafter — it was 

 rivetted to the jambe, or solleret, on the outside, and the 

 armourer spared the trouble of making a meaningless slit. 

 What probably happened in this case was this — the German 

 philosopher, under whose care the suit once was, when it 

 formed part of a German collection, and before it was purchased 

 by Sir Richard Wallace, wishing to show spurs with the 

 suit, was confronted with two difficulties. He had not got a 

 spur with sides made to embrace a man's foot, and he had not 

 got a man's foot inside the armour. So he proceeded to deal with 

 it as his illustrious confr'ere did with the camel, and "evolved" 

 the spur here shown. Very likely the authorities at Hertford 

 House know quite well that these spurs are not genuine ; if 

 so, I think it a pity they do not say so. 



Sir Samuel Meyrick, in his description of his fine collection 

 of armour at Goodrich Court, and which is now, most of it, 

 in the Wallace collection, makes many observations upon 

 spurs, but they contain many inaccuracies. In the beautiful 

 illustrations of this collection, engraved by Joseph Skelton, 

 there is frequently depicted a complete suit of armour in the 

 centre of the page, with the various pieces, drawn to a larger 

 scale, arranged round the central figure. In several instances 

 the jambe, or leg-piece, when represented separately, has a 

 spur rivetted to it, while in the centre figure, representing the 

 whole suit, the spur is shown buckled on with straps in the 

 ordinary way. These cannot be both faithful representations of 

 the same piece of armour. 



