16th century closed helmet neck differences -- myArmoury.com

Dana S

Hi, I'm interested to know what would have made the owners decision to go between the attached closed helmet / gorget type with no neck lames and the cone style neck lames that go over the gorget instead? Are there any main differences in mobility / protection that would have made someone decide between one or the other? is one for mounted mainly and the other for ground combat?

Thanks a lot, any info would be great.

http://fabforgottennobility.tumblr.com/post/4...della-cesa

vs

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0c/Scudamorehelmet.jpg/220px-Scudamorehelmet.jpg
https://www.outfit4events.com/runtime/cache/images/productFull/mib_0028x_01.jpg

Mark Moore · Posted: Mon 13 Mar, 2017 9:58 pm Post subject:

Interesting that you should bring this up! I've been looking into various closed helm types lately! From what I see of reproduction models, motion would be fairly limited...be it up/down or side/side. I would assume that these would be primarily 'tourney helms', or jousting helms. The gorget lames might lend a bit toward up/down motion, but I can't really see much advantage at turning the head side/side. A separate gorget, in addition to the helm itself, would seem to be a better option for un-mounted combat. Please take in mind,---these are my own personal observations of modern replica helms. I have limited knowledge of the use/effectiveness of originals of either style. Once again,---these are my personal observations and thoughts. Maybe someone else can give you more knowledgeable insight. I just know that I may see one in my own helm collection soon! Big Grin

.............McM

Mark Griffin · Posted: Thu 16 Mar, 2017 5:50 am Post subject:

You'd have to know who the armourers were as that's an important factor The Pompeo helm is Italian made and the Scudamore from the Greenwich workshops, two very different manufacturing bases with styles they and their patrons were happy with and worked well for them.

I have fought in this copy of the foot tourney helm for Lord Buckhurst and it worked fine for that. Wouldn't have wanted to ride in open battlefield but could have jousted with the correct additional items.

James Arlen Gillaspie · Industry Professional

I've built the locking collar type for some folks and they worked just fine. Check this video out about the 22 minute mark.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjKbi7YUNaI&t=919s

Mark Moore · Posted: Sat 18 Mar, 2017 5:10 am Post subject:

Most excellent video, James! Big Grin

I wouldn't mind having a rinky-dink little workshop and anvil like that. Laughing Out Loud

Thanks for posting!.........McM

Dana S · Posted: Sat 18 Mar, 2017 10:36 am Post subject:

James Arlen Gillaspie · Industry Professional

I should also have said that all the major centers of armour production, including the Italian, made both designs. I believe cost was a major factor; the rotating collar requires vastly more skill to make. I include an example that could use better mounting. The harness is composed; the helm and gorget c. 1600 in the style of Pompeo de la Cesa, but the pauldrons are c. 1570's.

Mark Griffin · Posted: Sat 18 Mar, 2017 2:22 pm Post subject:

Hi Dana,

Have replied via your fb request. But for anyone wanting to know the harness based on the peffenhauser was made by Mark Vickers at St George Armoury in the UK.

Other makers who have done 16th cent items over here are Fred Ryal at Ryal Armouries. Mark Taylor at Dressed to Kill, Dave Hewitt at White Rose Armoury and Adam Blockley, trades under his own name. Fred is about to start an English 1580's one for me.