Philip, thank you so much for this information and photos on the brigandines and leathern armor!!!! I do recall reading of these in my quest for the elusive 'cuera' I was studying.
(yes Fernando...I AM very fond of.....leather!!! but not in a kinky way
)
The cuera I was studying was made in a very classic style with tassets etc. and had been found in storage unit in Arizona after reposing there for decades. It had come from a small private museum which closed, and legal disputes with estate had kept it entangled thus.
What was so unusual about this was that its form was nothing like the rawhide cuera typically worn by the 'soldados de cuera' who were the cavalry in the presidios of the Southwest frontiers into early 19thc.
Apparently this particular cuera was of a unique form (to Santa Fe, N.M.) made by Pueblo Indians under direction of Spanish during the revolts of 1690s.
As apparently no examples of cuera have survived (with the exception of one c.1770s found in Madrid; and one c.1820s in Smithsonian) the discovery of this one was a revelation.
The type was unknown to writers on Spanish arms and armor who wrote in latter 19th c. and into early 20th, as well as to Pierce Chamberlain ("Spanish Military Weapons in Colonial America 1700-1821", 1972) whom I knew and had great talks with years before the cuera study.
The reason it was unknown was that the only depiction of it was in a tryptych
painted c.1715 of a battle just prior where the Indian forces with the Spaniards were wearing these. They had been produced during the 1690s reconquest of Santa Fe by Pueblos using the cuir boulli process.
* the paintings were done by Pueblo's with survivors of the battle advising.
The paintings (on hides) were given to Jesuit priest, who sent them to his family in Switzerland during the expulsions of 1770s. There they remained until discovered and brought back to Santa Fe in late 1980s.
This is why this form was unknown......examples had disappeared, and the only record pictorially had been absent from America until AFTER the last reference on Spanish Colonial arms and armor was written (1972).
I know, quite off topic, but pertinent in a sense in that there is a notable dearth of accurate material concerning arms and armor used by the Spanish in the America's in early times.
Regarding Padilla being a credible informant, what was meant by Mr. Curtis was NOT that he was informed by him personally, but that he was relying on accounts/narratives by him that WERE compiled in the period by an observer who had first hand information. This is often done by writers investigating events, and even after the persons involved have long since passed. I would suppose that much as with art, writers employ a degree of 'license' as used by novelists. However, those who strive for accuracy are generally holding to as much corroborated evidence as possible. I believe this is what Mr. Curtis was trying to convey.
Fernando, as always, thank you so much for the great etymology on these terms!!! It is fascinating to have the genuine insights with your knowledge and resources, which give resounding perspective in these discussions.