The Armour Archive

In Lochac, our KEM Duke Siridean has kindly provided a video clarifying the issue:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsJQOszmZCo

One will unfortunately encounter marshals who combine absolute certainty with astounding ignorance. Often this is the result of the marshals failure to update his knowledge of the armour and weapon standards. This failure is usually a joint effort on the part of the marshal, his kingdom training and standards program (if any), and the sometime tendency of past SEMs to alter the rules by fiat (like posting changes to the KEMs list without BoD approval). Sometimes a marshal employs the same "techniques" when inspecting gear that he was taught because he assumes that these address safety issues covered by the rules. The famous and erroneous "fist in helmet" is one such technique. When challenged on the "fist in helmet", the inspecting marshal can never cite the rule that justifies it, so he either falls back on his own safety prejudices or the cringeworthy old saw: "well, that's the way we've always done it".

That said, every marshal is a volunteer. Each is giving up his time to help others get on the field. If a marshal rejects armour or weapons in error, one should RESPECTFULLY ask for the marshal's name and then ask to whom on site an appeal of the decision may be made. When the appeal is made, one should have his copy of the SCA (and appropriate kingdom) rules available for consultation. This method should be employed without regard to the rank of the fighter being inspected or the marshal doing the inspecting. One should remember that there is no duke so powerful (or self-important) that his version of the rules can be allowed to supercede a written standard designed to be applied to all with an even hand.

If all of us take the time to really read and understand the rules and carry a copy with us to events, then together we can improve the quality of marshalling by holding everyone accountable.

While I don't employ the "fist in helmet" technique (I use a similar technique to what the KEM of Lochac had on his video), this can certainly be used to support it (emphasis mine):

Marshal's Handbook wrote:Neck Armor: The neck, including the larynx, cervical vertebrae, and first thoracic vertebra must be covered by one or a combination of the following and must stay covered during typical combat situations, including turning the head, lifting the chin, etc.

1. The helm,
2. A gorget of rigid material.
3. A mail or heavy leather camail or aventail that hangs or drapes to absorb the force of a blow. If the camail or aventail lays in contact with the larynx, cervical vertebrae, or first thoracic vertebra, that section must be padded with a minimum of .25in (6mm) of close cell foam or equivalent.
4. A collar of heavy leather lined with a minimum of .25in (6mm) of close cell foam or equivalent.

Now I am not a medical professional, but I found this on the internet:



Thoughts?

Jestyr wrote:

Marshal's Handbook wrote:Neck Armor: The neck, including the larynx, cervical vertebrae, and first thoracic vertebra must be covered by one or a combination of the following and must stay covered during typical combat situations, including turning the head, lifting the chin, etc.

1. The helm,
2. A gorget of rigid material.
3. A mail or heavy leather camail or aventail that hangs or drapes to absorb the force of a blow. If the camail or aventail lays in contact with the larynx, cervical vertebrae, or first thoracic vertebra, that section must be padded with a minimum of .25in (6mm) of close cell foam or equivalent.
4. A collar of heavy leather lined with a minimum of .25in (6mm) of close cell foam or equivalent.

Now I am not a medical professional, but I found this on the internet:



Thoughts?

About what, exactly? Not trying to be snarky, just wondering.

While it is definitely ensuring safety, the sword to jaw test used in that video doesn't actually reflect what the rules say. Once again, it says:

B. Helms
3. Face guards shall prevent a 1-inch (25.4mm) diameter dowel from entering into any of the face guard openings.
4. The face guard shall extend at least 1 inch (25.4mm) below the bottom of the chin and jaw line when the head is held erect.



The whole idea of leaning back and assuming awkward positions while a marshal tries to wedge something under your helm is ridiculous.

It also makes it impossible for someone who simply reads the rules and builds their armour exactly according to the ACTUAL rules, to pass armour inspection when he gets an overzealous marshal who has his own whacky interpretation of the rules. I'm not sure how hard it is to interpret "1 inch ".

Guy stands with head erect (straight up and down). Hold ruler to helmet. Measure one inch. Done.

Nice diagram. It simply shows that the larynx extends up into the skull inside the jawbone. So? If we keep going in and up at a forty five degree angle we will encounter all sorts of vital structures. None of them, including the larynx, have ever been crushed in SCA combat. If one wears a typical SCA helmet and a padded leather gorget (essentially a tube or ring of leather with padding behind it), and then tilts the head back to a position never employed while fighting, a marshal can tickle the bottom of the chin every time. That is not the rule. There really is nothing to debate. I could describe any number of hypothetical contortions that would cause most pieces of armor to fail our requirements. Unless everyone wears a barrel helmet that rests on the shoulders, a gorget with a shelf projecting from the top front, or a helmet with an aventail that drapes out on the shoulders, there is no way to pass under the interpretation of the rule you suggest. I wear a welded stainless aventail suspended from my bascinet, so I have no difficulties however one wants to read it. But I also have an early period kit that involves a byzantine helmet and a very scadian gorget -it is when I am wearing that that I am happy I have a copy of the rules nearby.

Cuan wrote:Nice diagram. It simply shows that the larynx extends up into the skull inside the jawbone. So? If we keep going in and up at a forty five degree angle we will encounter all sorts of vital structures. None of them, including the larynx, have ever been crushed in SCA combat. If one wears a typical SCA helmet and a padded leather gorget (essentially a tube or ring of leather with padding behind it), and then tilts the head back to a position never employed while fighting, a marshal can tickle the bottom of the chin every time. That is not the rule. There really is nothing to debate. I could describe any number of hypothetical contortions that would cause most pieces of armor to fail our requirements. Unless everyone wears a barrel helmet that rests on the shoulders, a gorget with a shelf projecting from the top front, or a helmet with an aventail that drapes out on the shoulders, there is no way to pass under the interpretation of the rule you suggest. I wear a welded stainless aventail suspended from my bascinet, so I have no difficulties however one wants to read it. But I also have an early period kit that involves a byzantine helmet and a very scadian gorget -it is when I am wearing that that I am happy I have a copy of the rules nearby.

Thanks Your Grace, That's what I've been trying to say, you just said it way better.

You know your Majesty, maybe a bunch of us should get together at the major wars and make a series of videos on marshalling. Those of us who have been around awhile have had the chance to see the very best and worst of it and perhaps we could come up with a good catalog of standard methods and examples that might catch on?

And I actually thought you said it better than I! If I had seen your response before I was composing mine, I might have left it alone. Sir Diglach (he's still Dylan to me) just raised another issue on a related thread concerning marshals shoving faces as hard as possible to check chin straps. There is probably a lot we could do.

Will Your Majesty be attending Gulf Wars?

without a mail drape, you can pretty much always get a LPTT to touch someone's chin if they lean their head back. You can sometimes get a fist up there. You can usually NOT get a 3" spear tip to touch them.

These are all legal helmets.

Every now and then someone will actually skip a thrust into someone's chin. We all go "oooooohhh". I think it would be *extremely* difficult to injure someone this way.

I know of one Knight in the West who stopped throwing an underhanded thrust to the chest because it tended to skip up in the neck/chin.

Cuan wrote:You know your Majesty, maybe a bunch of us should get together at the major wars and make a series of videos on marshalling. Those of us who have been around awhile have had the chance to see the very best and worst of it and perhaps we could come up with a good catalog of standard methods and examples that might catch on?

And I actually thought you said it better than I! If I had seen your response before I was composing mine, I might have left it alone. Sir Diglach (he's still Dylan to me) just raised another issue on a related thread concerning marshals shoving faces as hard as possible to check chin straps. There is probably a lot we could do.

Will Your Majesty be attending Gulf Wars?

I unfortunately won't be there as I have 2 Baronial Investitures that month and out Crown Tourney

But that is a great idea!!

Duke Phelan wrote:The whole idea of leaning back and assuming awkward positions while a marshal tries to wedge something under your helm is ridiculous.

I agree. 100%.

But the rules also state "including turning the head, lifting the chin, etc. ".

What is an appropriate test to ensure safety and adherence to the rules? It would seem to require more than the 1" test with the head erect, as the rules state more than that.

I'm really not trying to be argumentative here -- at all. I'm just trying to understand from those that know more than I do.

Columb wrote:In Lochac, our KEM Duke Siridean has kindly provided a video clarifying the issue:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsJQOszmZCo

at 1:11 of that video Sir Siridean demonstrates the lay the sword across the neck method. THIS is exactly how I perform a check on a helm/gorget that I feel is "borderline".

Jestyr wrote:
What is an appropriate test to ensure safety and adherence to the rules? It would seem to require more than the 1" test with the head erect, as the rules state more than that.

I'm really not trying to be argumentative here -- at all. I'm just trying to understand from those that know more than I do.

Look at minute 1:11 of the video posted of Siridean. I believe this to be a good way to test for safety and adherence to the rules. As has been stated many times. It is almost impossible to make a helm/gorget setup that denies a sword access via a thrusting tip.

InsaneIrish wrote:
Look at minute 1:11 of the video posted of Siridean. I believe this to be a good way to test for safety and adherence to the rules. As has been stated many times. It is almost impossible to make a helm/gorget setup that denies a sword access via a thrusting tip.

I agree, and this is what I've always done for something that appeared borderline, but (if I understand correctly) HRM Phelan and Duke Cuan disagree that any such test is appropriate.

Like I said, I am really not trying to be argumentative or pedantic. I just want to know what is correct.

By the written rule, my helm should not pass. The face armour does not extend 1" below my chin. It follows the contour of my chin all the way down to where it meets my neck protection. It extends approximately 1/2" plus metal thickness below my chin.

But it would be really stupid to bounce my helm, or any helm so constructed. Some close-helms and armets also aren't 1" below the chin, or some bevor variations.

And there's been times where I've been able to see my thrusting tip through the othey guy's ocular.

I guess how I work it is that I pass it if it fits the letter of the rules. I may pass it if it's obviously in the spirit.

Thank you all for the great discussion with references to the rules, pictures where available, and even video. Much appreciated.

The Helm rules only dictate a grill being 1" past the chin, but...
There are also rules dictating that the larynx (ie upper neck) is also protected.

There is no rule dictating that one must go into awkward positions, but...
There are rules dictating that certain areas need to be covered not just while standing, during typical combat manuevering.

The Chin is not the larynx, so that should not be an issue. And no one should have to lay down or do a back bend to see if something can get wedged into their helm.

But the rules require more than just standing still and measuring 1". There needs to be some determination as to what constitutes "typical combat situations".
If a thrusting tip can hit your upper throat (larynx), while your head is tipped back during a "typical combat situation", then your armor does not pass.
As I stated above, how far constitutes 'typical', is yet to be determined.

Cuan wrote: Sir Diglach (he's still Dylan to me)

Well damn... that explains a lot...
I didn't realize that was him.

Hello. (This is not Cunian. This is her husband, Gunnar posting.)


Oscad wrote "There are also rules dictating that the larynx (ie upper neck) is also protected."

The problem here is the definition of "larynx." "Larynx" does not mean "upper neck". The larynx is a particular structure in the throat, commonly known as the "voice box" or "adam's apple." This, together with the cervical vertebrae and the first thoracic vertebra, are what needs to be covered per the SCA heavy armour standards. As mentioned earlier in this thread, the rapier armour standards require that the entire throat be covered.

I have seen many cases of fighters with very large expanses of bare flesh visible between helm and gorget who were legally armoured.

My approach to this as a marshal would be to inform the fighter that the gap is there, remind him/her that the armour standards are minimums,and offer the personal advice that more coverage of this area would be safer. If the fighter's armour meets the rules, he passes. My personal advice is just that, to be considered or rejected out of hand as the individual chooses.

InsaneIrish wrote:

Jestyr wrote:
What is an appropriate test to ensure safety and adherence to the rules? It would seem to require more than the 1" test with the head erect, as the rules state more than that.

I'm really not trying to be argumentative here -- at all. I'm just trying to understand from those that know more than I do.

Look at minute 1:11 of the video posted of Siridean. I believe this to be a good way to test for safety and adherence to the rules. As has been stated many times. It is almost impossible to make a helm/gorget setup that denies a sword access via a thrusting tip.

The problem here is that repetition does not equal truth.

In point of fact, it's pretty simple. Any bascinet with an appropriate aventail, for example. All close helms or armets. Any sallet with bevor.

There's obviously a matter of degree involved in terms of what is, or is not, a safety issue.

For the record, gorgets are required because of an incident where someone tipped his head back in the course of a bout and his opponent came within a hair's breadth of hitting him in the trachea. It was close enough that the fellow just fell right over, considering the blows that had not even touched him to be quite good enough and the marshals damn near teleported to his fallen body to make sure he was all right. I knew with certainty that I had not touched anything with either sword, so he should be ok, but I also knew it had been much too close for comfort.

That helm normally sat with the low point of the face plate resting against the middle of his sternum.