Visored sugar loaf great helm

Fearghus Macildubh · Post by **Fearghus Macildubh** » Wed May 01, 2002 11:10 pm

Ok, since the Truehearth helm was a bust, what about Sinric's? http://www.eskimo.com/~cwn/sugar_loaf2.html
and if it's a good helm, what armour would go with it? Splinted arms, vambraces and greaves, gamboised cuisses, coat of plates? more plate, like the churburg harness?
thanks,
Fearghus

------------------
"How long will we fight? We will fight until hell freezes
over. Then we fight on the ice."
Fearghus's Homepage

SyrRhys · Post by **SyrRhys** » Wed May 01, 2002 11:59 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Fearghus:
Ok, since the Truehearth helm was a bust, what about Sinric's? http://www.eskimo.com/~cwn/sugar_loaf2.html
and if it's a good helm, what armour would go with it? Splinted arms, vambraces and greaves, gamboised cuisses, coat of plates? more plate, like the churburg harness? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If this helm was worn at all in the 14th Century it would have been very, very early. You'd have an hauberk, gamboissed cuisses with dependant poleyns (possibly cuir bolli), schynbaldes. Body armor is problematic; there's a picture of a late-12th century effigy showing a leather cuirass under the gown but over the hauberk, and there are some kind sof CoPs this early (although they tended to be more like crude brigs with smaller plates, althought there are exceptions like the sleeping guard in Magdeburg). Check out the effigy of Sir William fitzRalph.

I have to say that I think this helms *very* early, however, and certainly too early for most of the stuff you mentioned. The sugarloaf was replaced by the great helm very early in the century, at least to judge by the iconography, although there are rare exceptions.

------------------
Hugh Knight
"Welcome to the Church of the Open Field, let us 'prey': Hunt hard, kill swiftly, waste nothing, make no apologies"

Fearghus Macildubh · Post by **Fearghus Macildubh** » Thu May 02, 2002 12:09 am

Ok, thanks, Syr Rhys. So it wouldhave to be more like a Pembridge style great helm to go with transitional armour then?
slainte,
Fearghus

------------------
"How long will we fight? We will fight until hell freezes
over. Then we fight on the ice."
Fearghus's Homepage

Anradan MacEwan · Post by **Anradan MacEwan** » Thu May 02, 2002 9:26 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by SyrRhys:
 If this helm was worn at all in the 14th Century it would have been very, very early. You'd have an hauberk, gamboissed cuisses with dependant poleyns (possibly cuir bolli), schynbaldes. Body armor is problematic; there's a picture of a late-12th century effigy showing a leather cuirass under the gown but over the hauberk, and there are some kind sof CoPs this early (although they tended to be more like crude brigs with smaller plates, althought there are exceptions like the sleeping guard in Magdeburg). Check out the effigy of Sir William fitzRalph.

I have to say that I think this helms *very* early, however, and certainly too early for most of the stuff you mentioned. The sugarloaf was replaced by the great helm very early in the century, at least to judge by the iconography, although there are rare exceptions.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Rhys, someone asked this in another thread and I replied with much the same comment as "only very early". I was then asked where I got my documentation

I just remembered ... it was from you! The only work I have in paper at the moment is AAoMK and they really don't preclude the "sugarloaf" during the thirteenth century. Where did you find the reference's? (so I can back myself up!

)

------------------
I grow strong again!
Warcry of the clan Ewan
Ewan of Loch Fynne

SyrRhys · Post by **SyrRhys** » Thu May 02, 2002 10:42 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Fearghus:
Ok, thanks, Syr Rhys. So it wouldhave to be more like a Pembridge style great helm to go with transitional armour then?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, that's right... except the Pembridge great helm is fairly late (c.1375, and there's a similar helm from almost the end of the century, so call teh range 1370-1400)); for earlier in the century, however, you might want to consider one of the "flatter" great helms. Some can be seen here:
http://www.liebaart.yucom.be/helm/ (note the seal of John of Brabant with a *grill*!!!!)
About 2/3rds of the way down the page you can see a MS illumination from c. 1320 (actually, I'd date it about 1300, but perhaps I'm misremembering it) with visored sugarloaf helms.

Then there's an excellent article on great helms (but, sadly, in German) here:
http://www.tempus-vivit.net/tempus-vivit/bibliothek/ruestungen/topfhelm/index.html

Which shows some nice early great helms; I particularly like the helm from Kussnacht (fig. 'F' in this article) for earlier harnesses (c. 1345-1375).

In any case, the point is that the nature of the great helm changed a bit over the course of the century, so be careful to try to match your helm with the harness you're assembling.

------------------
Hugh Knight
"Welcome to the Church of the Open Field, let us 'prey': Hunt hard, kill swiftly, waste nothing, make no apologies"

SyrRhys · Post by **SyrRhys** » Thu May 02, 2002 10:49 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Anradan MacEwan:
Rhys, someone asked this in another thread and I replied with much the same comment as "only very early". I was then asked where I got my documentation I just remembered ... it was from you! The only work I have in paper at the moment is AAoMK and they really don't preclude the "sugarloaf" during the thirteenth century. Where did you find the reference's? (so I can back myself up! )<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL! I'm good, but I shouldn't be used as a reference source! Check out the first link I gave above. The thing is, it's difficult to show referential *proof* that a thing wasn't worn after a certain date; all you can really show is proof that it was. All I can say is that I've looked at a *lot* of the iconography of the transitional period, and the "negative" conclusion this gives me is that the sugarloaf helm was really a 13th-early 14th-century helmet.

Oh, and I don't "preclude" the sugarloaf in the 13th century... I think that was it's heyday. Perhaps you meant to write "14th century"?

Anyway, my conclusion is this: The sugarloaf helm was worn from the end of the 13th century into the beginning of the 14th (no later than 1320, give or take). Interestingly, when you see 14th-century sources in sugarloaf helms, they're invariably wearing less developed harnesses; i.e., hauberks, limited arm armor, etc. Take a look at the examples in the first link above.

------------------
Hugh Knight
"Welcome to the Church of the Open Field, let us 'prey': Hunt hard, kill swiftly, waste nothing, make no apologies"

Templar Bob/De Tyre · Thu May 02, 2002 11:30 am

This discussion brings up an interesting question:

What changes in technology caused the sugarloaf helm to fall into disuse?

------------------
Robert Coleman, Jr.

The Noble Companie and Order of St. Maurice
Those who beat their swords into plowshares end up plowing for those who don't.

Remember: In Living History/Reinactment, Real Life is the Great Leveler of Man.

Sinric · Post by **Sinric** » Thu May 02, 2002 11:32 am

There are a number of examples of period art showing a helmet like what I'm referring to as a visored sugar loaf from 1300-1350. Please keep in mind that the helmet in question represents what would have been a transitional step between a sugar loaf and a visored bascinet. I haven't seen any pre-1300 examples of this type of visored sugar loaf with a 1 piece bascinet type of top. I would think using it with a coat of plates and gutter or splinted arms would be ok around 1340-1350.

Examples of this type of helmet can be found in "Arms and Armour of the Crusading Era, 1050-1350: Western Europe and the Crusader States" by David Nicolle .

------------------
Craig Nadler
cwn@nh.ultranet.com
http://www.eskimo.com/~cwn/

Raymund · Post by **Raymund** » Thu May 02, 2002 11:34 am

I'd like to call Lord Lutrells helm a visored Sugerloaf, and thats about 1340... He also has some plate to go with that, couters, polyens, greaves and gauntlets. There is also that Italian relief from about 1330 with the scale gauntlets.
And if you look at some effigies from 1325-1340, Fitz Ralf, d'Abernon etc, you can see rudementary plate arm- and legharnesses.

So I can't see any truble with Fearghus idea, other than maybe the splints. And remember to add a lot of maille...

/R

SyrRhys · Post by **SyrRhys** » Thu May 02, 2002 2:54 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Raymund:
I'd like to call Lord Lutrells helm a visored Sugerloaf, and thats about 1340... He also has some plate to go with that, couters, polyens, greaves and gauntlets. There is also that Italian relief from about 1330 with the scale gauntlets.
And if you look at some effigies from 1325-1340, Fitz Ralf, d'Abernon etc, you can see rudementary plate arm- and legharnesses.

So I can't see any truble with Fearghus idea, other than maybe the splints. And remember to add a lot of maille...

/R <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry, but I don't agree that the Lutrell helm is a sugarloaf; it's weird, all right, but it's a round-top, not a pointed-top, and that's the definition of a suagarloaf. It may well represent some transition from a sugarloaf to a great helm, but it's definitely *not* a sugarloaf, and it's definitely not what the picture that started all of this is.

------------------
Hugh Knight
"Welcome to the Church of the Open Field, let us 'prey': Hunt hard, kill swiftly, waste nothing, make no apologies"

Anradan MacEwan · Post by **Anradan MacEwan** » Thu May 02, 2002 3:33 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by SyrRhys:

Oh, and I don't "preclude" the sugarloaf in the 13th century... I think that was it's heyday. Perhaps you meant to write "14th century"?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, I meant 14th Century.

------------------
I grow strong again!
Warcry of the clan Ewan
Ewan of Loch Fynne

Gaston de Clermont · Post by **Gaston de Clermont** » Thu May 02, 2002 4:38 pm

This site
http://www.liebaart.yucom.be/helm/ noted above shows sugar loaf helms worn up to at least 1330. So I'd date the decline of the helm to +/- 1330, rather than 1320. Armour wise, it's ten somewhat unremarkable years.

I wouldn't jump to use the term "grill" for John of Brabant's helm (same page). It's most likely punched holes like most of the other helms on the page rather than a multi pieced woven/riveted/welded construction we typically associate with the term "grill". The effect is similar, and it would be difficult to distinguish the two on a small seal.

As to why the sugar loaf helm died out, at some point armourers must have decided it was easier to raise the helm in one piece than to rivet the bottom skirt on, and the bascinet was born. This might have come about just because someone tried it sucessfully, or there was a shift in metal purity, or coal quality, or raising hammers. Maybe the rivet maker's union went on strike...

Another strange question: Did they call these sugar loaf helms at the time? Was sugar common enough, and molded in this shape that it would have been something they associated the helms with?
Gaston

SyrRhys · Post by **SyrRhys** » Thu May 02, 2002 6:53 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Clermont:
I wouldn't jump to use the term "grill" for John of Brabant's helm (same page). It's most likely punched holes like most of the other helms on the page rather than a multi pieced woven/riveted/welded construction we typically associate with the term "grill". The effect is similar, and it would be difficult to distinguish the two on a small seal.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You may call it whatever pleases you, but the simple truth is that it looks a lot like a grill, however it was made. Nor is this the only example of this; I have several other references showing similar constructions. They might be punched or chiselled or woven out of reeds for all we know (that was meant as humor, by the way... next thing you know I'll get a ten-page e-mail showing I'm an idiot for thinking reed would have been used on a grill), but however they were made they were functionally identical to SCA grills.

------------------
Hugh Knight
"Welcome to the Church of the Open Field, let us 'prey': Hunt hard, kill swiftly, waste nothing, make no apologies"

David deKunstenaar · Post by **David deKunstenaar** » Fri May 03, 2002 12:21 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by SyrRhys:
 They might be punched or chiselled or woven out of reeds for all we know

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hugh Knight - head of the reed weavers guild.

Arti

Gaston de Clermont · Post by **Gaston de Clermont** » Fri May 03, 2002 3:37 pm

agree that there's a strong functional similarity between the typical SCA grill made from welded round stock, and an open punch work face plate. There are functional similarities between a sieve and a colander, but they're terms I try to keep distinct for the sake of clarity. I was mostly concerned that based on the grill comment folks would jump to the conclusion that a welded rod bar grill would look perfectly authentic on a barrel helm.

There is a tournament helm in the Met- I'm guessing it's late 15th century, but my quick search for it didn't turn up an image or a date. Anyway, it's made of wood, cloth, and twisted wire that looks a lot like barbed wire. I think there's some plate under the cloth. It doesn't sound so far off the woven reed design. I'd love to see what kind of tournament this helm would have been used in.
Gaston

wcallen · Post by **wcallen** » Fri May 03, 2002 4:18 pm

As I remember, sugarloaf is another one of the 19th century terms we have all gotten used to using. No, they would not have called them that.

They would have used some local language equivalent of 'helm'and assumed everyone knew what they were talking about.

Most of the names we use are equally modern. Some have limited basis in historical use - but many were not very precisely used.

Example - a normal 17th century helmet was called a pot. If they were really particular something we would all assume is called a close helmet or armet (depending on the construction of the chin area) would have been a closed pot.

Pig faced bascinet - 19th cent. (they did use bascinet)
Frog mouthed helm - 19th cent.

We get used to terms, so we use them to converse. Some are similar to the words they used when the armour was in use, but not nearly all. Many of the records we have did not see the need to be overly precise. inventories needed to be clear enough for tax values (or whatever they were for), but no more. The same thing happens today. I know the inventory of our house taken when my father died would annoy any historian '1 set flatware', '1 tea service' - not 'Gorham Strasbourg Luncheon service for 12 in 4 piece place settings with various matching and non-matching serving pieces' or '4 piece hand made sterling tea service hallmarked London for the year XXXX, weight 65 oz - copied from 18th c. style'.

Wade

SyrRhys · Post by **SyrRhys** » Fri May 03, 2002 5:24 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Clermont:
agree that there's a strong functional similarity between the typical SCA grill made from welded round stock, and an open punch work face plate. There are functional similarities between a sieve and a colander, but they're terms I try to keep distinct for the sake of clarity. I was mostly concerned that based on the grill comment folks would jump to the conclusion that a welded rod bar grill would look perfectly authentic on a barrel helm.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Fair enough; I thought you were trying to imply it wasn't a grill.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>There is a tournament helm in the Met- I'm guessing it's late 15th century, but my quick search for it didn't turn up an image or a date. Anyway, it's made of wood, cloth, and twisted wire that looks a lot like barbed wire. I think there's some plate under the cloth. It doesn't sound so far off the woven reed design. I'd love to see what kind of tournament this helm would have been used in.
Gaston<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It was for late-period tournaments like the one described here:
http://www.princeton.edu/~ezb/rene/renehome.html

These type of tournaments used blunted and rebated weapons, so you didn't need as much protection. I honestly believe they were more pageant than tournament, although, of course, no one can really know that for sure.

------------------
Hugh Knight
"Welcome to the Church of the Open Field, let us 'prey': Hunt hard, kill swiftly, waste nothing, make no apologies"

Jonathon More · Post by **Jonathon More** » Sat May 04, 2002 11:11 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Raymund:
I'd like to call Lord Lutrells helm a visored Sugerloaf, and thats about 1340...

/R <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

IMHO, it would be hard to call the Lutrell helm anything but 'helm'. the miniature isn't exactly done in a realistic style, just look at the horses mouth to see what i mean. Just one man's opinion. I've had arguments about this particular miniature in the past, particularly with an individual who was trying to "document" the average size of a medieval warhorse from this single miniature.

------------------
Johnathon
pax, pax, est non mi pax

Gaston de Clermont · Post by **Gaston de Clermont** » Sun May 05, 2002 5:57 pm

Renee's tournament uses fairly stout looking clubs, and rebated steel. The helms he depicts look like fairly rugged steel construction, and I wouldn't mind fighting in one in his tournament rules. The helm in the Met looks relatively spindly. I have trouble not picturing the wood and wire face getting crushed by Renee's clubs.

It's quite possible the Met helm was used in tournaments similar to Renee's, and they may have dominated more by pageant than tests of prowess. The era is close. I'd just be hesitant to enter Renee's melee with anything as weak looking as the Met helm.
Gaston

Fearghus Macildubh · Post by **Fearghus Macildubh** » Wed May 08, 2002 11:44 pm

Time for my weekly posting fix ;-)

thanks for all the constructive input. I have the luxury of time to assemble this armour, so the whole process is evolving into an excuse to research ;-)

slainte,
Fearghus

------------------
"How long will we fight? We will fight until hell freezes
over. Then we fight on the ice."
Fearghus's Homepage