[T. Hamilton]

Hello all. This is my first post, though I have been lurking about the forums for quite a while. My question Is this: Would it be historically accurate to use a sugarloaf great helm in combination with a Del Tin 5140, or is that sword too late for that helm?

[Roger Hooper]

DT-5140 is an Oakeshott type XIV. Oakeshott says that the type was used from around 1275 to 1340.

I believe sugarloaf great helms were being used in 1275 up into at least the early 1300's.

So I say that this sword and helm combination works well

[Luka Borscak]

I think you mixed up something. This is DT5140: http://www.deltin.net/5140.htm and I think it could be called XXa maybe. Anyway, late 14th and first half of the 15th century, most likely. A bit late for sugarloaf greathelm.

[Roger Hooper]

You're right, my mind malfunctioned (again ). Instead of DT 5140, it saw DT2140, which is a XIV. http://www.deltin.net/2140.htm


So, Mr. Hamilton, instead of using the inappropriate DT5140, get the DT2140!

[Thom R.]

Welcome to myArmoury! you have asked a good question.

btw, DT-5140 is not a type XIV, it is a large hand and a half Type XXa last time I looked, big pointy sword good int he thrust and so-so in the cut. it is based on a sword in the Royal Armouries and is reviewed here at myArmoury by Bjorn Hellqvist.

Now back to the original issue, would such a sword be paired in time with a great helm or sugarloaf, that's not very easy to answer (which is probably why you have only two replies so far)

It gets back to the magic date of 1350, which you will see mentioned often (including by Oakeshott) as sort of a marker in time that distinguishes early and late medieval arms and armour. right around mid-century, in the early period of the 100 years war, arms and armour went through a phase of rapid change. lets say from 1340-1370. What was archetypal in 1370 would be very different than what would have been archetypal in 1340. The sugarloaf type of helm, at least on the battlefield, would be more typical of pre-1340, whereas the multi-fullered, large pointy diamond cross section DT5140 would be more typical of post 1370. But thats not to say that someone would not have had both in the transition period. it is always possible I suppose that someone would have preferred the old style great helm over the basinet but would have had a new sword. If you are into strict re-enactment the answer is probably no.......... the folks that organize the re-enactment of the combat of 30 (CotT) would probably say, nah not a completely accurate pairing for their period (1351). It depends on how fussy you want to be about your kit. tr

[T. Hamilton]

Gentlemen, thank you very much for your insight. I knew the point on the 5140 was designed to find the gaps in plate, I was just hoping the dates on that helm would stretch a bit. Oh well, I'll just have to add a basinet (or different sword) to my collection .

[Jean Thibodeau]

Some great helms where still in use along side the bascinet even into the very early 1400's, but tended to be used, even later, for mostly jousting and less and less on the battlefield.

Great helms seem to have started being used in the13th century, very popular in the early to mid 14th century and in the frog faced stile still used for jousting into the 15th century.

So if you change from the " sugar loaf " type which is an early type, to the later types of great helms the sword you like would probably work well with it.

Have a look at this article to fact check what I just wrote off the top of my head:
http://www.myArmoury.com/feature_spot_ghelm.html

Oh, and welcome to the site.