I've done some looking around and still not sure if this helm is historically accurate. If so, does anyone have a date/region? All i know is possibly late 14th, somewhere in Italy?
Any help would be appreciated :)
Attachment: 59.42 KB
Hi,
I've done some looking around and still not sure if this helm is historically accurate. If so, does anyone have a date/region? All i know is possibly late 14th, somewhere in Italy?
Any help would be appreciated :)
Attachment: 59.42 KB
I've done some looking around and still not sure if this helm is historically accurate. If so, does anyone have a date/region? All i know is possibly late 14th, somewhere in Italy?
Any help would be appreciated :)
Attachment: 59.42 KBInteresting. :) The barbutte of the 15th Century essentially evolved from the 14th Century bascinet. These drawings look to be a hybridization of the two. I've never seen any historical specimens in these configurations. What is the source of these drawings?
I wouldn't be surprised if these were marriages of loose components that some antiquarian had lying around .
http://www.wolfeargent.com/firestryker/barbute_visor.jpg
http://www.wolfeargent.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb...p;t=000183
I believe it is thought to be a composite.
http://www.wolfeargent.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb...p;t=000183
I believe it is thought to be a composite.
This helmet is composite. The barbuta is from 15th century, the visor, if genuine, does not belong to the helmet. I am not sure if the visor is 19th century or genuine.
This example should not be copied to show a historical helmet.
This example should not be copied to show a historical helmet.
The helmet on this figure, displayed in the Met, does not have an attached camail. Would it be classified as a visored barbutte or a basinet? Believe it is has an open face like all basinets and many barbuttes. In the armoury at Churburg there is basinet with a visor similar to one in Christopher's post. Guess my point/question is .. what feature distinguishes one from? The visor, the face opening, the shape of the crown, or an attached camail? The helmet in Paris; is it a composite or homogenous? It is quite possible that no one really knows for certain; we just have an opinion.
Cheers,
Dan
Cheers,
Dan
| Daniel Sullivan wrote: |
| The helmet on this figure, displayed in the Met, does not have an attached camail. Would it be classified as a visored barbutte or a basinet? Believe it is has an open face like all basinets and many barbuttes. In the armoury at Churburg there is basinet with a visor similar to one in Christopher's post. Guess my point/question is .. what feature distinguishes one from? The visor, the face opening, the shape of the crown, or an attached camail? The helmet in Paris; is it a composite or homogenous? It is quite possible that no one really knows for certain; we just have an opinion.
Cheers, Dan |
That harness from the Met, while attractive, is thought to be quite the composite of pieces. I'd call the helm a bascinet.
Chad,
Knew this harness to be composite, but don't know about the helmet itself. I would tend to call it a barbutte as it does not have a camail.
In the Wallace collection is another helmet where it is hard to determine type (looks like a basinet to me). A 74; Barbutte with Vervelles. Without a doubt it once had a camail and on the forepart what appears to be a fitting for a visor or possibly a nasal piece that could have attached to the mail; seems to me this might be a bit late for the latter. Your thoughts....
Cheers, Dan
Knew this harness to be composite, but don't know about the helmet itself. I would tend to call it a barbutte as it does not have a camail.
In the Wallace collection is another helmet where it is hard to determine type (looks like a basinet to me). A 74; Barbutte with Vervelles. Without a doubt it once had a camail and on the forepart what appears to be a fitting for a visor or possibly a nasal piece that could have attached to the mail; seems to me this might be a bit late for the latter. Your thoughts....
Cheers, Dan
| Daniel Sullivan wrote: |
| Chad,
Knew this harness to be composite, but don't know about the helmet itself. I would tend to call it a barbutte as it does not have a camail. |
I don't believe an aventail is a defining characteristic of a bascinet. Regardless of that, the Met calls it a bascinet. The Met states:
| Quote: |
| This armor was assembled and restored in the 1920s using individual elements that had been discovered in the ruins of the Venetian fortress at Chalcis, on the Greek island of Euboea, which had fallen to the Turks in 1470. The purpose was to present a full armor of the style worn about 1400, a period from which no complete armors survive. Distinctive features are the early form of brigandine (a torso defense constructed of numerous overlapping plates riveted inside a doublet) with two large breast halves and brass borders at the edges of the exposed plates. Portions of the brass at the top edge of the left cuisse (thigh defense), the lower edges of the right greave (lower leg defense), and the visor are genuine; the remainder is restored. The helmet, a visored bascinet, is associated with the armor. The velvet covering of the brigandine is modern.
|
(emphasis mine)
It's possible the restored brass around the edges of the helm cover up holes where an aventail would have been laced. I don't know. The form is more bascinet-like than anything else to me.
That's some interesting stuff Chad, so the visor is genuine. So, the helmet itself could have infact been open faced bascinet of a style typical of the period?
Wild Armourys production seen here- http://www.myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=17449 is what originally spurred my interest in a visored helmet and my original image (source unknown) and the common photos of the composite are all the reference i have to determine accuracy.
Is this visor on an open faced bascinet a proven occurrence?
Again I appreciate everyone comments, my knowledge of such things is limited.
Wild Armourys production seen here- http://www.myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=17449 is what originally spurred my interest in a visored helmet and my original image (source unknown) and the common photos of the composite are all the reference i have to determine accuracy.
Is this visor on an open faced bascinet a proven occurrence?
Again I appreciate everyone comments, my knowledge of such things is limited.
Hmm, it appears this thread (http://www.myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=13754&highlight=aventail) answers most of my questions. Now with the knowledge that the visor is original and that it most likely suited a bascinet, and that we can date what appears to be a painting of such a beast around 1367 makes me very happy!
Thus forms a starting point for my harness :)
Thus forms a starting point for my harness :)
Page 1 of 1
You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
All contents © Copyright 2003-2006 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum