[James Arlen Gillaspie]

I know someone doing a documentary who is wondering what the Seljuk Turks in Jerusalem were wearing when the city was taken. I'm thinking something conical, no nasal, could be spangenhelm construction, body armour mail either exposed or cloth covered. Is that about right?

[Sean Manning]

When the Crusaders attacked Jerusalem was held by the Fatamid Egyptians not the Seljuk Turks.

A lot of Turks had no armour whatsoever. You would have to research what types of troops were in the city: a ghulam or mamluk might have armour and a helmet, a common soldier probably not.

[Ahmad Tabari]

Well equipped garrison troops would have worn mail coats as primary body protection. Turbans over mail coifs or segmented hemets would have also been worn. And shields would have either been kite shaped or round. However kite shields would have been more common among the Fatimids.

[James Arlen Gillaspie]

Well, now I feel REALLY stupid!

[Gary Teuscher]

Well, Don't feel too bad James.

The Fatamid armies made extensive use of Mamluks, who were most often of Armenian, Sudanese or Turkish extraction. The Turkish mamluks would be somewhat similar in equipment to the Seljuks.

Most common form of amrour though would be none

[John Coris]

Actually, the Seljuks were fought by the crusaders during the first Crusade, as they occupied most of Asia Minor and were on their way to Jerusalem. The crusaders agreed with the Byzantines to surrender back to the Empire their lands in Asia Minor in exchange for their support. Well, they partially did so, as mutual suspiciousnes gradually poisoned their relations and in the end the Normans refused to give back Antioch, thus breaking the deal.