Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > Re-evaluating the houndscull Reply to topic
This is a standard topic  
Author Message
Anthony Clipsom




Location: YORKSHIRE, UK
Joined: 27 Jul 2009

Posts: 318

PostPosted: Wed 17 Apr, 2024 11:02 am    Post subject: Re-evaluating the houndscull         Reply with quote

A couple of months ago, I bought the second volume of Ralph Moffat sourcebook on Medieval Arms and Armour. Fascinating to me - others may not be so interested in the textual side of things. However, I was slightly startled to discover that the author rejected the idea that a Houndscull was the same as a pig-faced bascinet, which has been the common understanding until recently even among specialists. Intrigued, I had to follow this up.

What became clear is that the helmet identification is essentially antiquarian - there is no clear tie in to earlier helmet names. Ralph Moffat in the book and a more detailed article makes a clear case for the houndscull not being a helmet at all, but a mail hood. References led me to the work of Christopher Retsch, a German authority who came to the same conclusion. This led back a few years to Nowakowski Arms and Armour of the Medieval Teutonic Order's State in Prussia where the listing of houndsculls among the mail items in Teutonic arsenals leads to a similar conclusion. While it is certainly not entirely clear what sort of head armour a houndscull was, it is hard to see how it was taken to be a visored helmet.

It is tempting to blame British antiquarian arms and armour experts deriving the English name from "hound's skull" and deciding that snouted bascinets looked like dogs' skulls. The better English derivation is actually "hound's cowl", coming through Dutch from German Hundsgugel - hound's hood. I suspect this identification would not have been made if more non-French continental material had been available. Whether Moffat and Retsch are right (and it looks that way), it is an example of how we take things for granted and pass them on. I certainly had no idea that houndscull wasn't an attested medieval identification, so often does it appear in apparently authoritive sources.

Anthony Clipsom
View user's profile Send private message
Ryan S.




Location: Germany
Joined: 04 May 2012

Posts: 363

PostPosted: Thu 18 Apr, 2024 3:06 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Thanks for sharing that, it is interesting. I have read in a paper Ekdahl wrote about the crossbow, that the Order had Hundsgugels. Although he said that they weren’t helmets, I didn’t think that the Houndscull was a misnomer. I am not sure that the misunderstanding of the language is the problem. In modern German sources, Hundsgugel is used for the bascinet, despite the meaning of a dog cowl seems more intuitive.

There does seem to be some evidence for the bascinet as Hundsgugel though. The Guglers ([url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gugler[/url)] were depicted in art wearing bascinets, granted, the illustration is 100 years after the battle:
View user's profile Send private message
Anthony Clipsom




Location: YORKSHIRE, UK
Joined: 27 Jul 2009

Posts: 318

PostPosted: Thu 18 Apr, 2024 4:15 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Ryan S. wrote:
I didn’t think that the Houndscull was a misnomer. I am not sure that the misunderstanding of the language is the problem. In modern German sources, Hundsgugel is used for the bascinet, despite the meaning of a dog cowl seems more intuitive.

There does seem to be some evidence for the bascinet as Hundsgugel though. The Guglers ([url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gugler[/url)] were depicted in art wearing bascinets, granted, the illustration is 100 years after the battle:



On language, I was thinking of how an English reader might approach the Middle English terms Houndscull. Retsch would certainly hold that German armour writers are simply copying English and French practice, without actually looking at the extensive German evidence. For the French, it's a bit more baffling as the the French hausse-col was clearly a mail item worn under a helmet, such as a salade (usually seen as a gorget rather than hood, though).

As to the Guglers, I always thought they got their name from the hoods they wore against the weather, as they were campaigning in Switzerland in mid-winter.

For those who haven't already seen it, Recht's book Sprechendes Metall, in which he talks about the evidence for the Hundsgugel and much else besides, is available for download here

https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/20.500.12657/88144/1/irb-58518.pdf

It's in German but many here have better knowledge of that language than I and I could follow his argument.

Anthony Clipsom
View user's profile Send private message
Ryan S.




Location: Germany
Joined: 04 May 2012

Posts: 363

PostPosted: Sat 20 Apr, 2024 4:37 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Thanks, that is a great source.
View user's profile Send private message


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > Re-evaluating the houndscull
Page 1 of 1 Reply to topic
All times are GMT - 8 Hours

View previous topic :: View next topic
Jump to:  
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