The Armour Archive

This is far from finished- but I had an idea from a post last week that seemed like a good one.

A sheet or sheets of basic SCA helm types that newbies could look at to familiarize themselves with the most common styles of helm in SCA usage.
I'll declare the finished version free for general SCA use as a printout or handout.

Its rough- I still have to add the burgonet, close helmet and armet.
(I may need to change the sallet too...)



I might have to divide it into early and late period helms due to space considerations.


And now that I think on it, it also needs things like zishagge, lobster tail pots and likely kabutos and mongols.
And any other styles I am forgetting off the top of my head....


In any case, the idea was for a quick and dirty basic reference guide a new person could use to quickly pick out a style of helmet they like, and could use as the basis for building their kit.
Or as just a place to start, to demystify the process of learning the major styles.

Because its basic, there will only be one example of each- I'm not going to draw in 5 seperate types of bascinet for instance, because theres no need or room.

Feedback is encouraged, and I will likely finish this anyway even if a few folks decide they hate it because its SCA rather than "authentic" styles.....
I just figured there was a need, and I'm filling it.


The helms, left to right per line, are:

Basic round top spangenhelm.

Conical norman.

Grill faced bascinet.

Basic sugerloaf.

Topfhelm.

Von Prankh greathelm.

Mac bible greathelm.

Shovelface crusader.

Barbute.

Sallet.

Chapel de fer.


-Badger-

Awesome.

I dunno. The bascinet should just be sexier. Maybe bling it up w/ a coronet. That way the newbies know that if they want to go far in the SCA, the 14th Century Mafia is the way to go.



j/k - It looks awesome.

I like the kettle helm the best.

Ironbadger wrote:... Its rough- I still have to add the burgonet, close helmet and armet.
(I may need to change the sallet too...)

I might have to divide it into early and late period helms due to space considerations.

And now that I think on it, it also needs things like zishagge, lobster tail pots and likely kabutos and mongols.

You have most of the helmets I could think of adding right here.

Ironbadger wrote: In any case, the idea was for a quick and dirty basic reference guide a new person could use to quickly pick out a style of helmet they like, and could use as the basis for building their kit.
Or as just a place to start, to demystify the process of learning the major styles.

1) Write the helmet name and a date under each picture so the reader doesn't need a separate legend.
2) If you want to put in more effort, use photos instead of sketches and include the shoulders and upper chest of a good kit in the shot: mail with the spangenhelm, Wisby with the 1300's stuff, brigandine with the barbute, buff coat or jack of plates with the lobster tail pot, etc. Nothing that says you need to wear a certain chest with a certain helm, but something that gives at least one good option toward a full kit.

A couple of (hopefully constructive) suggestions:
Arrange the drawings in approximate chronological order- so spangenhats,topfhelm/crusader, greathelms, sugarloaf,bascinet...
Give each drawing a caption with its name(obviously), and approximate time and place where it would have been worn (so Topfhelm; western Europe, 1200-1230 CE. Mac greathelm; Western Europe, 1250-1300 CE. Kettle hat; Europe 1230-1500 CE ). Possibly even a note indicating what sort of person might wear it- kettles and greathelms coexist chronologically, but greathelms are "knightly" and kettles are not. This may help avoid problems of the newb who really, really wants "this" persona, but "that" (totally inappropriate, but cool) hat.
And a couple more styles for the list: Vendle, Valsgard (pre Viking scandinavia); Gjermundbu (Viking).

ETA:Sorry if I seem to be repeating what Thomas Mac Finn posted- we obviously thought the same thing at the same time, but he types faster...

I agree with all of the previous suggestions (in order by time, photos would be nice if possible, and a little top of the shoulder for a little context) and I have one more suggestion.

I would prefer that the goal be to illustrate basic types of helms and helmets "as they should be seen" on the field, not "as shipped from the armourer before you finish them".

For instance - the bascinet should have an anventail.
The early ones should have some sort of drape (mail or cloth or leather) covering the lower parts that shouldn't be there.

This would help people have a feeling for what they are really signing themselves up for when they choose a style and maybe, in a very small way, nudge people toward the easy ways to get the right appearance for things.

In the same vein, I know you don 't want to have 20 different styles of bascinet like Mac drew in his page, but one that includes a visor (round nose with a klapviser hinge seems to be the most common) would at least show them something that isn't a pure SCA-ism. I would change the salade the same way.

Wade

Maybe a bling SCA version (maille drape, visors and such) shown side by side with a SCAdian version like the sallet and bascinet you show there. In essence: Bare bones historical vs Higher attempt at historical.

Also, I commend you on your effort to help the new guys!

Swete wrote:Maybe a bling SCA version (maille drape, visors and such) shown side by side with a SCAdian version like the sallet and bascinet you show there. In essence: Bare bones historical vs Higher attempt at historical.

Also, I commend you on your effort to help the new guys!

This is just my opinion and feel free to ignore me.

No.

The "SCA" version of a bascinet without an aventail and with a grill really isn't a bascinet. That isn't what we should be teaching people.

Do we need to force people into thinking that the only acceptable thing is a full bascinet with a pignose and engraved/wiggle work brass borders? No. Should illustrations of styles of armour actually illustrate something that resembles things you might actually see if you look at real armour, an illustration, tapestry, brass or effigy? Yes.

Even in 1980 when we built a norman conical helmet with a nasal for the SCA for a guy who had very little armour it had a leather "hood" covering the bottom rear plate and half of the grill. It could have been cloth or mail. Cloth would have added what, $5 to the cost? If a couple of guys with no training in an unheated shop in Wisconsin and a guy who moved boxes in an assembly line could make an attempt to make it appear medieval, why can't we at least lead people that way in 2012?

Again, just my opinion.

Wade

I'd put the helms in chronological order.

Also, you have 1 bascinet, but 4 Greathelm types. I would add a clapvisor and pigface visor option to the bascinet.

I wouldn't even put grills on any of them, if your point is to provide a reference to historical types to be used in selecting something. The cruel truth of what the SCA tends to do to historical forms will inevitably follow.

And you didn't include a spun top...

I'd show a nasal on the Norman, especially as it's the "armor standard" in the rules in the places I've been. Perhaps some variants? Phrygian-style Norman?

Your drawing of a basinet doe not do justice to that type of helmet....

other than that it looks great!

Maybe a front AND profile view of each helmet? It would double the
number of images but it would give a brand newbie more info.

I see this and other attempts at newbie references. All the time thinking that each of these cheat sheets are not enough. They only scratch the surface of what we really need. A newbies to guide to appearing historically accurate with their first kit.

It should include a historical picture reference/index. This index would show a common portrayal; Scandinavian/Viking, pre 1300 crusader, 14th, 15th, 16th, Japanese, Roman/Greek... I'm sure I'm missing some. Once the newbie decides what they like, they would go to that section and see one way to recreate that look. The section should include what is historically accurate, plausible, and purely SCA. Along with Step by step instructions on how to make an SCA legal kit using relatively inexpensive materials. With a Goal of around $300 for a complete kit. I wouldn't include the prices since they tend to change.

A undertaking of this magnitude would be impossible to create as an individual. Luckily we have one of the best resources for such an undertaking in the internet, and specifically this Archive. If anybody would be willing to help I think WE could create something that could be used to greatly improve the aesthetic of our hobby.

I am completely serious about this and am willing to start a section if I can get support from some of the other members to help put this together. Any takers?


Rayner

Rayner wrote:I see this and other attempts at newbie references. All the time thinking that each of these cheat sheets are not enough. They only scratch the surface of what we really need. A newbies to guide to appearing historically accurate with their first kit.

It should include a historical picture reference/index. This index would show a common portrayal; Scandinavian/Viking, pre 1300 crusader, 14th, 15th, 16th, Japanese, Roman/Greek... I'm sure I'm missing some. Once the newbie decides what they like, they would go to that section and see one way to recreate that look. The section should include what is historically accurate, plausible, and purely SCA. Along with Step by step instructions on how to make an SCA legal kit using relatively inexpensive materials. With a Goal of around $300 for a complete kit. I wouldn't include the prices since they tend to change.

A undertaking of this magnitude would be impossible to create as an individual. Luckily we have one of the best resources for such an undertaking in the internet, and specifically this Archive. If anybody would be willing to help I think WE could create something that could be used to greatly improve the aesthetic of our hobby.

I am completely serious about this and am willing to start a section if I can get support from some of the other members to help put this together. Any takers?


Rayner

I will help as best I can. I can take pics of my hidden gear and other elements of my kit. mid 7th-8th century dark ages kit.

It looks very basic and from the discription thats what your going for I would leave out the Bar grills or have that as page two for the "Bar grill" version of each helm.

You could use this as an index with a few pages discribing cultures and aproximate time lines for each basic helm type as well as a more detailed sub types of each helm sort of a tree diagram.

If you wanted to get fancy add an apropriate full harnes diagram with a front and side profile.

Personally I'd like to see an open-license picture of an extant example or extant artwork shown alongside the SCA sketched version. Eventually it may be beneficial to include a 3rd column of good SCA legal interpretation.

InsaneIrish wrote:I'd put the helms in chronological order.

Also, you have 1 bascinet, but 4 Greathelm types. I would add a clapvisor and pigface visor option to the bascinet.

bascinet with grill & artwork showing the crucifiction with the fish-bone bar-grill.
bascinet with breach (nasal thing)
bascinet with clap-visor houndskull
bascinet with side-pivot pigface.

Salet with bevor
Venician sallet/archers sallet
bellow-visor sallet

Roman helms (technicly pre-period but you will see plenty of them on the field)

Armet
Close-helm
Burgenet
Morian (and what makes it different from a kettle helm)

I think you are doing a FANTASTIC job and it's easy for us to nit-pick when we aren't the ones doing the work. I hope you finish this up. It would be a useful tool for new fighters.

Sean

Sean Powell wrote:

InsaneIrish wrote:I'd put the helms in chronological order.

Also, you have 1 bascinet, but 4 Greathelm types. I would add a clapvisor and pigface visor option to the bascinet.

bascinet with grill & artwork showing the crucifiction with the fish-bone bar-grill.
bascinet with breach (nasal thing)
bascinet with clap-visor houndskull
bascinet with side-pivot pigface.

Salet with bevor
Venician sallet/archers sallet
bellow-visor sallet

Roman helms (technicly pre-period but you will see plenty of them on the field)

Armet
Close-helm
Burgenet
Morian (and what makes it different from a kettle helm)

I think you are doing a FANTASTIC job and it's easy for us to nit-pick when we aren't the ones doing the work. I hope you finish this up. It would be a useful tool for new fighters.

Sean

If your going to do all that then add these too...

Mongolian helms
Ottoman helms
Japanese
and Chinese...

I think that would take another 4 or 5 pages of art work.

Honestly though the original list is fine, granted I agree with the several great helms, although its nice to see someone point out the difference between a great helm (flat top) and the Topfhelm.

Thanks for the comments, guys.

Yes, the finished version will have names- though approximate dates are a good idea I had not thought of.

A few folks are kind if missing the point though, so I will clarify.
The sheet is a bare bones starting point.


As such, it is intended for people with no background in historical armor research to quickly familiarize themselves with what they see on a practice field when they show up.
I made a deliberate decision to show bar grills, because thats what a newbie will see.

More advanced information will come later....
Confusing a new person by presenting the ideal, but not showing them the reality is not a good idea in my opinion, and counterproductive.

Let them nudge their way in first....
Give them a taste of what we do, and don't drown them in too much information at the start.

Educate them along the way, in doses they can digest.

The initial sheet is more or less "brain diarreha".
I sketched as helm types popped into my head, with no attempt at organization or finished designs.

I agree, I could have done one type of greathelm- I just thought of several at once, and each type is rather differently shaped enough that I thought at the time that it was worth listing each.
I actually thought of putting in a spun top- but thats covered more or less by the hemispherical spangenhelm...And I figured it was covered.

I could add one to the final version- but honestly, the spang covers the basic shape without needing to add one more design.
(And I didn't feel like poking the stuffier members so blatantly.... )

In the end, this is intended to be ONE sheet of printed out paper....

Therefor several of the helms shown are likely to be deleted, just to make room for whats not there yet.
(They also need to be large enough on the sheet that someone reading it can pick them out without eyestrain...)

All helms were shown without drapes or aventails because not everyone uses those, and they usually need to be added later when you buy a helm.
I felt it was not productive to imply to a newbie that their first helm will automatically come with one already provided....(At least, that was my logic while sketching.)

Since this is for people just starting out, what armor they pick for the first kit will be what they manage to find, make or buy.
Don't try to force them into spending $2000 on full period gear before letting them on the field.
They need to decide first if they like fighting.
Once the bug hits...They'll go gear crazy.

I also chose basic helm patterns specifically because a lot of fighters make their persona choice based on the helm first.
Let them start out in whatever gear they can cobble together.
They can always cover it.

But the helm is the soul of a fighter's kit.
This is to give them a decent starting point that is neither intimidating, nor impossible to puzzle out because they do not have a frame of reference already.

It gives them the initial information to ask questions without feeling stupid.
Thats really important for a new person, and it gives more confidence to get involved.
All the rest comes later.

-Badger-

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hp ... 3950_n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hp ... 9413_n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hp ... 5245_n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hp ... 1558_n.jpg

Vladimir, whats the grid about in image 3950?

Vladimir-

These are close to what I have in mind for the final version- though the bottom one is incredibly "busy" with too many images, and I find it visually confusing.
(So many, theres no room for text.)

Obviously, I'm going to need to make a complete list of what exactly is going on the final version before I can really do the layouts.

I do want the helm images large enough for easy use, but I can also shrink the inked images down and paste it all together.

-Badger-

So, lets see.

The list should include some asian styles, turk and polish, and maybe one or two very late types like burgs and close helms.

If I assume that only one real greathelm is included for now, I think I can get 15 or so on the page with enough room for bare text descriptions.


This is a hard number limit, as the text and images must be large enough for easy reading without a magnifying glass.

So lets see...

1. Hemispherical Spangenhelm.

2. Conical Norman.

3. Bascinet.

4. Sugarloaf.

5. Greathelm.

6. Shovelface.

7. Barbute.

8. Sallet.

9. Chapel de fer.

10. Roman pot.

11. Kabuto? Or just lobster tailed asian?

12. Zishagge/whatever the Turkish one is called, since its nearly the same thing.

13. Bugronet.

14. Close helm/armet. (Not sure I can actually justify two different ones, since they are so similar.)

15. One last possible spot- Spun top?


I am not adding things like list legal morions or lobster tailed ECW pots, simply because they are so rare that a newbie can ask if he sees one and wants more info, now that he has this thumbnail sheet to work from.
I could actually put in a spun top...And add a small message that they are fighting legal in most kingdoms, but not historically authentic so that a new person finds this out at the very beginning.

Lets face it...A LOT of newbies start in old hand me down spun tops.
My first helm was a spun top...In 1991 or thereabouts.
Most helms on the field even now are some variation of the basic "bowl shaped bucket".

Whether or not to include one is a judgement call- It just might forestall a few questions that some fighters may not want to answer.

-Badger-

Tostig wrote:Vladimir, whats the grid about in image 3950?

Not entirely certain as many images are missing, but I think it is various forms of basinet as they evolve into barbutes towards the bottom.

Vladimir wrote:

Tostig wrote:Vladimir, whats the grid about in image 3950?

Not entirely certain as many images are missing, but I think it is various forms of basinet as they evolve into barbutes towards the bottom.

I believe that it's from Mac's topography of existing bascinets although some examples might be from artwork. They are aranged by shape not time period. Each one represents at least one specific piece or artwork but if a space is open that may simply mean that we haven't identified a piece that fills that evolutionary nitch. It could be that fashion changed quickly or that fashion passed that point during a fighting lull so there are fewer examples to work with or it could be that a technological fabrication leap caused a leap in fashion or something else.

If you want to build a bascinet for speculative reconstruction that fills one of the missing nitches then feel free but it would make it more difficult to document for LH purposes.

(I believe the heavy black lines were added after the fact. Mac's notebooks are typically all pencil sketches.)

Sean

Thanks Vladimir and Sea!. I'd be curious to know the chronology of the examples, but a classification system is pretty damn cool. It would certainly make it a lot easier to describe what you want to have made. I wonder if there's a pattern to the styles over time. Are Mac's notebooks online somewhere?

Yup, that's Mac's typology.
See this thread:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=96532&hilit=mac%27s ... t+typology
for the details.

Ironbadger wrote:As such, it is intended for people with no background in historical armor research to quickly familiarize themselves with what they see on a practice field when they show up.
I made a deliberate decision to show bar grills, because thats what a newbie will see.

More advanced information will come later....
Confusing a new person by presenting the ideal, but not showing them the reality is not a good idea in my opinion, and counterproductive.

Let them nudge their way in first....
Give them a taste of what we do, and don't drown them in too much information at the start.

Educate them along the way, in doses they can digest.

Well.... when I was new to the SCA, I already had two books on armor and I had three more within a year of starting going to events. And I wasn't anywhere as interested in armor back then.
I didn't know stuff like how the von Prankh helm is the same basic greathelm as the Pembridge, but I could tell a great helm from a sallet.

Young Schreibers who are just joining the SCA have had access to the internet since they were in diapers.

This is also just an opinion, but I think you should give them the benefit of the doubt as to how much information they can absorb.

Hey wait a minute, where's the freon helmet? Oh wait...

schreiber wrote:Young Schreibers who are just joining the SCA have had access to the internet since they were in diapers.

Quite true but at times more of a negative then a positive. They have had far more exposure to Diablo, Age of Empires, Xena, Knights Tale and a crap-load that is worse. It's easy to think that armor should have Anime shoulders and swords should be 100+ pounds. I think it's a great idea to have a simple identification chart.

Also, when all people see is bad reproductions then showing them good drawings may help inspire.

Sean

the more I think about it the more I believe that using just the helm as a
"do you want to do this?" starting point probably does not give enough info....

Take the basinet for example.... EVEN if there was just one basic style of kit
that was worn with the basinet ( instead of 100 years of variations ) The
basinet is a fairly boring helm. It is only with the extras ( at minimum an aventail )
does it start looking really interesting.

Now once you start to develop a 'eye' for armor you can see beyond the simplicity
of the basinet and picture it as it really is.

schreiber wrote:I didn't know stuff like how the von Prankh helm is the same basic greathelm as the Pembridge, but I could tell a great helm from a sallet.

Not that it was the same -- the deeper you look into both the Pembs and their three pieces, the more you notice just how different they were from a five-plate like the Prankh. And an overhead view should not be neglected: Pembs are surprisingly flattened side to side, deep front to back. The earlier barrels tended more circular.

The Pembridges have a certain elegant cleverness. A five-plate design like Prankh (minus frontal wrapper) and Bolzano (never had a wrapper) partook of certain of that refinement such as the arrangement of its seams so as to present no catch edges to incoming lances, in especial the interior-fitted top cap, but are more ad-hoc than the showy refined simplicity of the Pembs. Wonder if they might have gone to all-forgewelded construction at some future point -- hey, look at this! Ain't we marvels?

and this one

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hp ... 4934_n.jpg

Vladimir, thanks for that last share.

This is a great idea. It just seems a little lowest common denominator . I learned to build armour through trial and error. I thought my stuff looked like ass because I had the chance to hold work done by William Hurt of Age of Armour and had that to use as a benchmark for what armour is. Since this was before the sca; there was no scadian armour influence. I was also building my armour to joust in for the upcoming season- so I get it that it's for two completely games but.....
I was just talking to a new guy in our shire who wants to build his own 16th century english kit. I showed him examples of typical sca steel knees/elbows and pointed out articulation and dish depth. He also looked at a few different helms. The point I drove home to him was that if your capable enough to this (typical sca) then spend a few more hours and do it better/ more pleasing to the eye.
1/4" gaps in articulation can be fixed by dishing. And you don't even need a dish Helms shouldn't rely on padding to fit- if you can wrap a rectangle to fit the curve of your spun top, or any other top; then by god man you can shape to pieces to fit the underside of the back of your head, you know, like two trapezoids- or even dart the rectangle. AAAAAAARRRRRRRGGGGGHHHHHHHHH
If we show them the way early......
My rant is done.. I'm sorry, sort of.