Riveted together bascinet? (No, serious!)

[Kenwrec Wulfe]

Here is an excellent one after a very short search of the net -

[img]http://www.oakeshott.org/images/max.jpg[/img]

Shows the stake and working from the outside.

[Nim]

That may actually be the same one that's in TOMAR; in the book, he was pointing out the presence of the rivet spacer.

[Lorenz De Thornham]

Yes I know it well it is by Hans Burgkmair, and is over a hundreds years later than we were discussing, they probably had rolled iron sheets by then, and it is not a raising stake he is using it to flute.

[Lorenz De Thornham]

Yes it is the one in TOMAR where he is pointing out the rivet spacer, but it is not raising.

[Kenwrec Wulfe]

That may actually be the same one that's in TOMAR; in the book, he was pointing out the presence of the rivet spacer.

I believe you are correct. It is from a larger image in TOMAR where he is pointing out the "forked" device on the table that looks like it might have been used as a "spacer" between articulated plates.

[Kenwrec Wulfe]

Here is another from the same article, however, it appears he is working over an anvil instead.




Personally, I give this one a bit of artistic license, but it looks like he is working the metal over the anvil (as opposed to a stake) here as well.

[Lorenz De Thornham]

Again it is over a hundred years later than the period under discussion, and I agree, it does not make sense at all, the breastplate is already formed, he would not be raising at this point even if the breastplate were raised which I very much doubt.

[Lorenz De Thornham]

Here are two images of the inside of real armour, neither of these is raised as can be seen by the prominent hammer marks.

The sallet is also interesting, because if you look closely you can see possible evidence of what some people think should not be there.

These are later than the period under question, but were the easiest and quickest I could get to underline my point, please can you show some that prove your theory?

[belmtho]

Hi
This is a great thread and one that has been very interesting to se develope.

with regards to rasing stakes from teh period, didn't some one post a picture of a state that was supposibly for raising the tops of basinets?

Also would it be quicker to form a helmet using a large stake that was already the right shape that you wanted and just to beat it down rather than compress it up around the form, we know that armour was agressivly ground to make it smooth so the plates could have started alot thicker and streching the metal too thin wouldn't have been a problem.

I have no evidence for this other than a picture that someone may have posted and a little bit of speculation. But it does seem reasonable.

Tom

[Lorenz De Thornham]

Explain the the de-lamination and the snake like line of pits coming from it down to the visors edge on the Wallace Bascinet?

Explain the line you can see in the ridge that is quite evident at the ocularia and either side of the hole in the ridge, it has even split on the lower edge of the ocularia, why has it done that and why would there be a line there?

[Lorenz De Thornham]

I haven't yet seen any evidence of raising being used and am waiting for some one to present some, if you know of any, I would only be too delighted to see it?

[chef de chambre]

Lawrence - that isn't necessarily a "line of pits" - it is a pretty broad area of pitting. The very same pitting could occur from corrosion, and removal of same. Given the overall quality of Medieval iron and case hardened steel, delamination is hardly unsurprising in some circumstances - delamination is not automatically evidence of a weld.

I believe Dr. Allen Williams examined that piece, and saw no evidence for a weld - in point of fact, the RA bascinets were, I believe looked at for the evidence, which had been considered a valid theory for a while, but the conclusion after examination was there was a lack of evidence.

[chef de chambre]

I'm waiting for someone to prersent credible evidence for welding to have been usd on armour of this era.

[Lorenz De Thornham]

Well that is new to me, the Italians were case hardening bascinets in the 14th century, can you give me a reference for that.

Can you also give evidence for raising?

And what do you make of the interior of the sallet?

You have changed your mind, earlier in the thread you were asking for de-lamination and corrosion, but when it was presented you said nothing.Now you are saying that it does not count, can you explain what you would take as evidence?

Something constructive to this discussion would be appreciated.

[Alexander of Derlington]

Hi Nim
In answer to your question back on page 5.

It is (depending on your shop set up of course) normally cheaper and quicker to rivet stuff than to fire weld it, riveting can also be done by less skilled persons.

[Signo]

About the rivet question.
As I've read somewhere, there were other metalsmith allowed to produce some armour part under precise circumstances. They were limited in what they could do, I think mainly for a "protection" policy of the guilds more than a lack of skill to do the job. Now, (it is just a theory) it could be that riveted construction was imposed this way, and reserved to low end pieces made in times of need. Maybe someday we will find some spangen bascinets buried in some battlefield, otherwise I fear that such kind of piece were rapidly discarded and recycled as they had probably more value as raw material than as finished item.

[RandallMoffett]

I am not going to get into this fire welding debate as I know credible people who think it was possible but in the end it comes back to the issue of the helmets looked at closely no fire welds have been found. That does not mean they never made them in this manner but at this time I have no evidence showing they did. While possible I'd like to have some clearer indications of it being used at the time on armour.

As to why one would rivet over weld or raise. I have always thought it was related to where the iron/steel may have come from. It was an expensive starting cost to have a large blank of iron/steel to start with. Man power was cheap and if a blank to make a bascinet was worth smaller bits that could make 6-8 bascinets in halves I think the rivet method makes sense. You could be saving a great deal of money and labour was not an issue. Even if it took twice as long to shape then rivet helmet it might still be cheaper if the base cost was more for the one piece helmet. No real way to test this though as I know of no records detailing metal sold by exact dimensions and materials. It may be that as the bloomery forges continued they were cheaper and their use in segmented stuff remained a mainstay for munitions armour. In the end this is my best idea.

RPM

[Alexander of Derlington]

Hi Lawrence
Just curious, when you are fire welding 1-2mm plate how much overlap do you allow?

Alex

[Lorenz De Thornham]

5-10, but it is tricky.

All the best with it Alexander

[Lorenz De Thornham]

Hi, here is an example of what the riveting on a bascinet could have looked like, it is not difficult to see that if this was polished and new it would be hard to detect and someone doing a painting from any distance would not include details that he could not see.

Lawrence

[Alexander of Derlington]

continuing the overlap discussion

so if I allow 10mm overlap and then hammer it to the same thickness as the surrounding plate my join can then easily be 20mm wide which when I have finished pounding my 3-4mm thick blank to 1-2mm thickness and polishing it would be a significant area of join rather than a thin line that you would see from a mig weld (for example).

Now as I am not a machine there will be significant variations in my work so I am likely to end up with a zig zaggy scarf line if I am producing functional quality stuff or if I am good I will make it with no visible scarf.

I am now itching to go down to royal armouries at leeds to have a look at some hats and play spot the scarf .

Alex

[Lorenz De Thornham]

I'd do some trial runs with simple collars first, it at least will show you it can be easy, when you get onto the long welds, that is real interesting

Lawrence

[Signo]

Well, I think we should not assume that the (eventual) weld would be made on a blank of 1-2 mm thickness, it just depend at which stage of production it was put. I'm of the opinion that our medieval ancestors started with thicker blanks, maybe around 4-5 mm and used extensive sinking and drawing. If this could be the case, it is possible that the weld was put in a partially formed blank, maybe 3mm thick. Then all this metal could be drawn to form the skirt and give the helm it's final shape. In this way, a bascinet could be made almost entirely on the flat of an anvil and on a heavy T stake or the anvil's horn (if it was already a common feature). If this is the case, and Lawrence is right about the properties of charcoal iron, well, I don't think we will never see such kind of welds, probably because we are looking for a straight weld that has been poorly made and is cracked somewhere in time. If such kind of welds were made, A) they probably don't look how we suppose they look B)if the weld is made early in the production process, it had the chance to blend and smear during the following steps C) if during those steps the armourer noticed a separation he could have welded back any defective spot.

[Kenwrec Wulfe]

Here are two images of the inside of real armour, neither of these is raised as can be seen by the prominent hammer marks.

As opposed to fake armour? The "hammer" marks only indicate that in the final stages of shaping/planishing that something contacted the inside of the pieces leaving marks. The first image is not something that would be raised in the first place, so is irrelevant to the discussion.

The sallet is also interesting, because if you look closely you can see possible evidence of what some people think should not be there.

The marks inside the sallet could just as easily be marks from a ballstake over which the helm had been planished. They could also be marks from a hammer used to "reverse planish" the sallet. They could also be marks from a hammer that was used to clean up the helm after it had been roughed out. Can you give me proof that the helm you offered was not raised into the rough shape and later cleaned up, which is what left the marks on the inside?

These are later than the period under question, but were the easiest and quickest I could get to underline my point, please can you show some that prove your theory?

You can site pieces from 100 years after the discussion time, but berrate me for doing so?


First off - You seem to be trying to disprove raising to support your own theory, which quite frankly, does not work. Disproving one theory does not prove another.

Second - All of the "evidence" that you offer, I could just as easiler say that those hammer marks were left intentionally, to make it look like there was more work involved in making a helm. If you look at a thread that was started by Durasteel (Andrew), he deliberately put the hammer marks on the inside of his armour before shaping it. Who is to say that medieval armourers did not do the same thing? The secrets of armouring were closely guarded. That is why we have no guideline/rulebook/instruction manual on how it was all done.

Using your tactics... can you disprove the theory that the hammermarks were put there to make it look like the armour involved more work for them that it really did?

To clarify - I am not discounting the theory that forge-welding was done in the 14th century. I am just saying that there is no evidence of it.

As to proving that raising was done - I dont have to do so. It has been shown time and time and time again in many studies of armour. If you want proof, you get it.

Now - back to the original post -

This depiction is facinating:



Very clearly, they are rivets on the front of the basinets and just a single line, which seems to indicate an overlapping seam.

[Alexander of Derlington]

Signo
Good point.

I have to admit to being intrigued by the idea of multipart helms being fire welded together.

My question is what is the earliest evidence we have of fire welding helmets?

Chef has already pointed out that this practice was known in the 16th and 17th centuries.

Has anyone got any other actual examples with dates?

Alex

[Lorenz De Thornham]

Hi Signo,

I would think you would start with an ever thicker blank than that, some of the bascinets appear to be quite thick and this thickness would help with the fire weld, retaining heat for longer.

I am in total agreement about doing it on the flat of an anvil and more than likely as things developed into a former, but the bick was not a part of the anvil at that time as far as I am aware.

Lawrence

[Signo]

This depiction is facinating:



Very clearly, they are rivets on the front of the basinets and just a single line, which seems to indicate an overlapping seam.

Yes, and I think the drawing is "correct" I mean, the plate overlaps following the good armourer's laws: the left plate overlap the right, the left side is were you're supposed to need more protection.

[Lorenz De Thornham]

Your good Signo!

[Lorenz De Thornham]

I am of the opinion that forge welding was a very likely method, and I am searching for evidence of it, that is not to say it is the way they were done.

I am not substantiating the possible use of forge welds by saying raising did not exist.

There are many people on this forum who have opinions and in put to these discussions, there are also a few with a working knowledge of materials and the scholastic background to ask informed questions and draw interesting conclusions, that to me is what this debate is about, it has become a discussion about the possible methods of manufacture.

Lawrence

[Signo]

Wow, I was thinking about something similar, If I plan to join two pieces that look like
^^^^
^^^^

Instead of

_____
_____

I will have more length to weld, but for sure it will be stronger, in this way I could make a weld without overlaps, I think that when I compress the metal that form those kind of teeth, the lips are less likely to being pushed away, so the pressure is directed into the welding attempt.
This make sense to me, but I've no pratical experience in the field.

Lawrence are you suggesting that this kind of welds should be searched on the right side of bascinets and not on the back? Honestly this make sense to me, the example you posted could be almost everything,but is very intriguing. Sadly, even if in someway we could determine that this is a weld, I don't think we will be able to tell if it's a weld derived from the metal manufacture or from the armourer action.

[Lorenz De Thornham]

Just something to turn over in your mind

[Lorenz De Thornham]

Hi, Alexander,

There are a few pieces here, but you cannot see the welds; http://www.merctailor.com/originals.php?original_pk=84

[Lorenz De Thornham]

Signo,

I think the weld could be anywhere radiating from the top.

If it was thin material that they used, I would expect it to be at the back or the front.

Lawrence

[Lorenz De Thornham]

My question is what is the earliest evidence we have of fire welding helmets?

Chef has already pointed out that this practice was known in the 16th and 17th centuries.

Has anyone got any other actual examples with dates?

Alex

I think that it maybe that the only places we can expect to see it is on munition armours, as they were done for cheapness and would not have been to fussy about finish.

[Milos N.]

Tools, location and specialisation of the craftsmen could also have been a major factor.

Every smithy had an anvil of some kind. It is much easier to make a shallow worm on an anvil than a deep one. This implies riveted or welded construction could have been the method to go.

Mediterranean, Lombardian, Toscanian, N European cities etc. were more likely the ones that had detailed regulations regarding who was allowed to make what, so, keeping monopoly was likely to have been a reason to ban some production methods. In a rural setting, and in areas where armouring had not been regulated to such a degree, it could be possible that some part-time or "low"-tech armourers would have produced small amounts of welded or spangen bascinetes.

Also, if the shop had been located somewhere where "spangen-tradition" of some kind was prevalent AND no tools to raise such a helm were not available at the shop, AND there were no laws preventing him t o do so, he MIGHT have made some spangenbascinetes.

Now, all this is highly hypothetical, and it explains only one set of circumstances in which such helms could have been produced, so please use this more as food for thought than as a thing to tear apart for its scientific flimsiness.

The basic idea behind this concept is that production of spangenbascinets was more likely to take place in areas where deep helm raising was not a common practice. [/u]