The Armour Archive

I often see people who in thier quest to be more period, choose a helmet style that was designed for mounted combat.

How do people feel about someone portraying an equestrian fighting on foot with equestrian equipment?

I'm torn... I appreciate the fact that they are trying to be more period, but honestly feel they should try to represent what they actually are (ground combattant) than what they want to portray (mounted warrior)...

Now, that doesnt mean knights never got off thier horses to fight, but it seems that when they went to fight on foot, they wore slightly different armour than when mounted.

Thoughts?

The English often dismounted to fight, but I don't think they would have done that if they were getting overrun by cavalry.

What periuod are we looking at here? Are you talking about a man on foot wearing (say) a barrel helm when toe grunts usually wore conicals, or something else?

(Trying to think. I'm pretty sure I can find contemporary pics of guys on foot in barrel helms, by the way)

Sir Angus,
I am unsure as to what you think these individuals are trying to represent.
Do you think that the equipment is representative of a mounted tourney/joust and that what should be presented would be for an unmounted tourney? Or is it that these individuals wear what a mounted combatant of the H.Y.W. would have had and that they should be wearing what "infantry" would have?
Thank you for the clarification.

I can't find anyone to make me a c.1460 great bascinet, though...

Sir Angus,

In my mind I am never bothered by it since a) we generally don't have any mounted combat but are portraying the knightly class, b) I think of the knights who may have been mounted at the beginning of the combat but through circumstances is now forced to fight afoot, c) I fight early period anyway <grin>, d) when knights fought afoot in a tourney, did they have different armor/helms or did they just fight in what they had?

Thorald

It is recorded often than men at amres in the HYW dismounted and fought on foot.

There are also numerous illustrations of men in visored helmets fighting dismounted. The one with all the guys in jupons on the bridge pops to mind.

Which is more correct, medieval equipment on foot?

or modern SCAdianisms on foot?

[img]http://www.imagesonline.bl.uk/britishlibrary-store/Components/124/12416_2.jpg[/img]

all on foot

most in visored bascinets

even climbing the ladders

Josh Warren wrote:I can't find anyone to make me a c.1460 great bascinet, though...

Patrick Thaden would surely make you one.... just a matter of time and money, yes?

[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v280/NJShooter/111.jpg[/img]

FOOT combat in HORSE COMBAT helmets??

These guys must be SCAdians or sumtin! Their doing it all wrong!!

There's a great one on ea bridge

all in bascinets and jupons

all on foot

a couple even have bucklers!!

To muddy the water further what type of foot combat? tournement, war, juducal duel? different considerations lead to different equipment. Lots of the targets described in historic manuals can't bee seen from behind a historic visor, suggesting removed or raised visors in these contexts.

PS Angus, your cuirass arrived last week.

In my mind I am never bothered by it since a) we generally don't have any mounted combat but are portraying the knightly class,

Are we? I thought we were all of the nobility, but not necessarily the knightly class.

Geoffrey of Blesedale wrote:

In my mind I am never bothered by it since a) we generally don't have any mounted combat but are portraying the knightly class,

Are we? I thought we were all of the nobility, but not necessarily the knightly class.

The knightly class (in which class I include squires since they did in period, too) was the absolute lowest level of nobility. In Germany, many knights were technically not even free men.

Yeah the germans have that wierd ranking system

Ritter, Masanager ect ect.

Kate knows it better than me she tried to explain it....but she ends up speaking so much German that my brain shuts off.

Many of those German knights simply moved to Italy to avoid all that crap.

Symon Fitz Gilbert wrote:[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v280/NJShooter/111.jpg[/img]

FOOT combat in HORSE COMBAT helmets??

These guys must be SCAdians or sumtin! Their doing it all wrong!!

Chicks dig it!

How likely would it have been for a combatant to have had two helmets?

Probly very likely.

The cerveille (sp?) worn commonly under the greathelm.

Even the lesser nobility "poor country knights" were preportionately richer than 85% of us.

How many of us have just one helment?

Murdock wrote:[img]http://www.imagesonline.bl.uk/britishlibrary-store/Components/124/12416_2.jpg[/img]

all on foot

most in visored bascinets

even climbing the ladders

Murdock, can you remove this picture please, it shows CA working along side us heavies.......

it shows a battle

a siege

we don't really do battles, we do grand melees (with wierd add ons)

ask Rhys



It also shows archers hiding outside and shooting at defenders whilest the men of cote armour go in to engange in honorable combat.

Here's another one

[img]http://www.gildedboar.com/images/gb_battle.jpg[/img]

Better that we wear barrel helms on foot than wear the monstrous "Barr Grill" I know that some people just look right past the bar grill face guards. But the mundanes see it right off. "Oh look! He's wearing a steel football helmet." When you wear the Close Face helm it looks right. Anyways I would love to look like the guys from the Manesse Manuscript illustrations.

BS

There are examples of bar grilled helms in period.