>>22094392>There's literally no reason to think anyone in Europe used this for combat. Textiles would actually be more effective, cheaper, lighter, and more comfortable. Absolutely wrong. It was called cuir bouilli and there are actually references to it historically from the 13th to 15th centuries as pieces of armor. References largely disappear after the 15th century, and are not picked up again until the 17th. There is also at least one surviving arm guard made of cuir bouilli from the 14th century in a London museum.
The problem is we do not know how they boiled/hardened their leather, but there are many sources that show it was a common practice. (In fact, the debate about how they did it is patently stupid, because it assumes there was one way, when modern practice shows there are many effective ways to reach the same end)
Your bit about a single tournament is bullshit and unsupported by the fact numerous other sources (Mandeville, Chaucer, Barbour) make reference to cuir bouilli as armor apparel. And Index of Middle English Prose Handlist IX ASHMOLE 1389 p36 makes reference to using 2 pieces of half-tanned leather glued together to make a chest covering.
The only thing in question is whether or not they used hardened leather for chest armor. Given the etymology of the word cuirass actually originates from the French word for leather, and ultimately both originate from the Latin word for leather, I think it is safe to assume cuir bouilli breast plates did exist at least at one point.
