| Author |
Message |
|
William Lawrence Scollard
Location: United States Joined: 16 Aug 2016
Posts: 2
|
 Posted: Tue 16 Aug, 2016 12:00 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| José-Manuel Benito wrote: | If we leave aside the helmet from L.A. Schollard Collection (supposedly Hispanic, non demonstrated), there is no known any exemplar of medieval helmet, neither in España, nor in Portugal, before the fourteenth century.
Again: is sad, but there is no known instance of a helmet, either in Spain or Portugal, for over a thousand and three hundred years between the Roman Gallic A, from cape Moro Boti, at Cabrera island (first century) and the typical basinet from the Cathedral of Burgos (fourteenth century).
Perhaps there are certain exceptions in some private collections, such as the named Scholard in Los Angeles, or the former collection of Axel Guttmann, but all of them are out of context and his location is not reliable.
We'll always have the artistic representations. ;-) |
The Helmet certainly does exist and was verified authentic by many experts that had seen it in person as well as the entire meeting of Arms society members in Washington D.C. while it was exhibited there during the late 1960's. I have kept all the photographs I could of antiques and armor and am comprising a catalog of all his photographed pieces along with several other collections. Eventually(couple years) I'll have the catalog reviewed by Armour and Arms club members in New York to help with descriptions then published.
William Lawrence Scollard II
armeriamarquis@yahoo.com
|
|
   |
 |
|
Philip Dyer
|
| Posted: Wed 17 Aug, 2016 8:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Lafayette C Curtis wrote: | | Connor Ruebusch wrote: | | Those damn Saracens just seemed to use what worked best, though. Bows, maces, and faceguards! |
They had their illogical attachment to old things, too. Note their reluctance to adopt the crossbow on a large scale--it wouldn't have been useful for their horsemen, but it would have been quite handy for the infantry. The Chinese experience had proved by then that the combination of heavy horse archers and massed crossbow infantry was an utterly deadly one when handled correctly. |
Crossbows can most certainly be used on horseback, just depends on the spanning mechanism. You span a crossbow with cranquien mechanism on horseback and fire one handed with a latchel crossbow. So why would mounted crossbowmen definitely not be useful? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tW4lYh8Yg38 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjYQEyC4m10 I would images that crossbows would easier to maneuver around a horse because the bow is parallel to the body of the horse, thus maneuvering would be like maneuvering a tank turret, where maneuvering bow would be hard to do because firing a bow properly means the bow is perpendicular to the horse's body.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mart Shearer
|
| Posted: Wed 17 Aug, 2016 3:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Tudela Cathedral has a number of figures which have similar helmets.
 Attachment: 107.47 KB
Attachment: 105.08 KB
ferrum ferro acuitur et homo exacuit faciem amici sui
|
|
|
|
|
Iagoba Ferreira
|
| Posted: Thu 25 Aug, 2016 1:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| José-Manuel Benito wrote: | If we leave aside the helmet from L.A. Schollard Collection (supposedly Hispanic, non demonstrated), there is no known any exemplar of medieval helmet, neither in España, nor in Portugal, before the fourteenth century.
Again: is sad, but there is no known instance of a helmet, either in Spain or Portugal, for over a thousand and three hundred years between the Roman Gallic A, from cape Moro Boti, at Cabrera island (first century) and the typical basinet from the Cathedral of Burgos (fourteenth century).
Perhaps there are certain exceptions in some private collections, such as the named Scholard in Los Angeles, or the former collection of Axel Guttmann, but all of them are out of context and his location is not reliable.
We'll always have the artistic representations. ;-) |
There are two helmets found in old earth remotions in portuguese castles, one in Torres Novas (conical with attached nasal), and a "great bascinet" from Pinhel.
And at least there is a cervelliere from around 1200 found during archeological interventions in another castle in Guipuzcoa, dated around the Castilian conquer of the province from Navarre.
Sadly none of those have any uncommon or special facial features...and the photos are only avalaible in paper catalogues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lafayette C Curtis
|
| Posted: Mon 19 Sep, 2016 3:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Philip Dyer wrote: | | Lafayette C Curtis wrote: | | Connor Ruebusch wrote: | | Those damn Saracens just seemed to use what worked best, though. Bows, maces, and faceguards! |
They had their illogical attachment to old things, too. Note their reluctance to adopt the crossbow on a large scale--it wouldn't have been useful for their horsemen, but it would have been quite handy for the infantry. The Chinese experience had proved by then that the combination of heavy horse archers and massed crossbow infantry was an utterly deadly one when handled correctly. |
Crossbows can most certainly be used on horseback, just depends on the spanning mechanism. You span a crossbow with cranquien mechanism on horseback and fire one handed with a latchel crossbow. So why would mounted crossbowmen definitely not be useful? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tW4lYh8Yg38 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjYQEyC4m10 I would images that crossbows would easier to maneuver around a horse because the bow is parallel to the body of the horse, thus maneuvering would be like maneuvering a tank turret, where maneuvering bow would be hard to do because firing a bow properly means the bow is perpendicular to the horse's body. |
Because, for one thing, they already had both light and heavy horse-archers with well-developed tactical doctrines. It wouldn't have been easy to integrate the crossbow with its very different set of capabilities and limitations into this system. Integrating crossbows into the infantry would have been easier since the same fundamental doctrines used to handle archers would also work with them, with only a few small adaptations/modifications needed.
It's worth noting that European mounted crossbowmen didn't operate like horse archers. They were either mounted infantry who dismounted to fight, or they acted more like close-combat cavalry than missile cavalry, shooting only once before wading into hand-to-hand combat. On the other end of Eurasia, the Han Chinese failed in their attempt to use mounted crossbowmen as a countermeasure to Xiongnu horse archers (crossbow infantry worked much better) and afterwards their cavalry only carried crossbows as a back-up to the main weapon (usually a lance or a halberd-like polearm).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You 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 2003-2024 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum
|
This is a standard topic