NORMAN HELMETS & CONTEXT! Viking, Anglo-Saxon & Frankish
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 18 ก.ย. 2024
- A look at Norman era (or late Anglo-Saxon, Viking and Frankish) helmets. Battle of Hastings era.
Helmets provided by The Knight Shop: www.theknights...
Support & extra content on Patreon: / scholagladiatoria
Support & extra content on Subscribestar: www.subscribes...
Facebook & Twitter updates, info and fun:
/ historicalfencing
/ scholagladiato1
Schola Gladiatoria HEMA - sword fighting classes in the UK:
www.swordfight...
Matt Easton's website and services:
www.matt-easto...
Easton Antique Arms:
www.antique-sw...
![เขามัทรี - เอ็กซ์ ศุภกฤต - จอนนี่มิวสิค [ Official MV ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/AS9ufKuQIVs/mqdefault.jpg)
I was thinking a nose guard is a stupid idea then your sword demo convinces me of its effectiveness. It's actually a really brilliant addition for such a small size.
“Might be hitting you in a squishy point” my favourite Matt Easton quote so far 🤣
I like the sheer variety that these helmets came in. There were round-topped, flat-topped (both completely flat and slightly domed), sugarloaf-shaped (like the one Matt's wearing) with the 'point' either in the middle or towards the rear, and my personal favourite, the Phrygian cap-style nasal helmet, which really does just look like a Phrygian cap made out of metal, with a nasal attached to it.
I love phyrigian helmets
Regarding cheek protection: someone's already mentioned that these types of helmets could be worn with a mail coif, which (depending on the design) would protect some or all of the face. This would actually offer better protection for the head and neck as a whole than helmet designs with cheek guards, which risk leaving the neck exposed. Some designs with cheek guards, like the (earlier) Coppergate Helmet feature a mail camail that protects the back of the neck, and some later helmet designs feature an aventail protecting the front, but in the context of the time period, the combination of a mail coif and a helmet with a nasal probably offered the best all-round protection available
You wouldn't turn a coif down, but a blow to the neck that would sever it without mail is still going to fuck you up with mail
7:46 "If you're repeatedly being hit in the head with axes or possibly maces..."
...then you may have to work on your people skills.
Especially the skill of hitting the other person first. ;)
@@leocomerford The most important of all people skills: the pre-emptive strike!
A great lesson addressing not only fascinating features of Norman armor, but also the basic principles of protective body armor in general.
Even though a blow to the head might not be damaging, it will still affect the recipient.
I remember an episode from when I was a soldier and we trained riot control. Getting hit several times on the shield and especially the helmet with simulated rocks (wooden cubes) was extremly annoying. Even though I consider myself a very calm person it just got me riled up so I acted way more emotional than was useful.
I imagine that losing it in that way is not conductive when fighting in a shield wall.
It's really not possible to eliminate the concussion risk with any helmet, particularly versus a battleaxe or long spear, let alone a polearm.
Which is why slingers were so effective :D
Talking about being hit in the face with your shield makes me wonder about the kind of scarring/injuries that veteran troops had, like how grapplers develop cauliflower ear over time.
Lots of broken teeth for sure
Shield smash in the nasal is broken nose regardless due to the leverage. It's simple physics. The nasal is only good for glancing cuts etc.
Ask Henry V of England- A ruddy great scar on his cheek from an arrow in the face.
@@2bingtim but that arrow was travelling upwards when hit him after bouncing off his armour.
i think another important point in the get up would also be the mail coif that might go underneath this kind of helmet and protect the lower face as well in a similar way to the check guards on other helmets.
Just like on the Bayeux Tapestry, Matt briefly removes his helmet in the middle of the video to reassure his followers he is fine to continue with his content.
So, if you are fond of thinking, don’t forget your brain-bucket.
There are some potential advantages to segmented helmets. With fairly elementary metallurgy, a solid one-piece helmet is more liable to shattering, as smaller elements can be made more homogenous than large one-piece skulls. Also the riveted joints can be viewed as giving extra deform-ability or elasticity to the whole. To my knowledge, this hasn't been investigated, but small 'spangens' could be more easily heat-treated than entire helmets, allowing the possibility that the individual elements of a spangenhelm might be harder/tougher than single-piece helmets. With more advanced smithing technology these possible advantages would disappear.
Easy manufacture is definitely a big advantage of the segmented construction.
About the heat-treatment. Early medieval helmets like spangenhelms weren't typically heat treated. Also, when you heat treat a segmented piece, you would do it after riveting it together, heat treating individual pieces and then riveting it together would be almost impossible because the metal would twist and riveting holes wouldn't align.
@@jakubchalupa8510 Why not heat treat then shape and drill? After all compositely treated armour - hardened layer on the outside with a more ductile layer on the inside - appeared in the Late Middle Ages - and these were often of parts riveted together. See:" On the Manufacture of Armor in Fifteenth-Century Italy, Illustrated by Six Helmets in the Metropolitan Museum of Art A. R. Williams, Metropolitan Museum Journal, Vol. 13 (1978), pp. 131-142". Even if hardened steel drill bits were unavailable, holes can and were drilled using abrasives, I can't see drilling a hole in a heat treated bit of steel being a particular problem.
@@M.M.83-U They can also just be better. Consider the replacement of the Roman Imperial Gallic and Italic helmets by Late Roman ridge helmets. The first type had a one-piece skull and neck guard, the second was of composite constriction with a multi-element skull. The older type had a reinforce to the front of the helmet from he start (the hinged half circle above the brow) and later many were given a cross-shaped reinforce riveted to the top of the skull. The Romans never found it necessary to reinforce ridge-helmets. The most obvious reason being that they were tougher and did not require it.
@@urseliusurgel4365 it's called "III century crisis" for a reason.
"So I'm not going to smack myself in the face. That would be stupid."
But funny!
Great video Matt. I find it interesting that the nasal fell into disuse in later helmets, only to sort of reappear in the 17th century lobster pot helms
glad to finally see someone mention the knight shop, i've seen it so many times in my travels around the internet but there's just something about it that always struck me as sketchy, at lest this vid shows they get their merchandise where it needs to go
They are not sketchy, they just sell mediocre stuff.
So what you've described is actually a bandhelm (which I classify as a subtype of spangenhelm but I digress). A spangenhelm has four spangs which meet in the middle and are secured at the top either by a finial (Gorodskoy, Leiden/Novae-Type, Nineveh-Type, or Baldenheim-Type), or a large central rivet (like on the 4th century Tarasovo Grave 1784 helmet). In a Bandhelmet, the nape-to-nose band always is one piece going all the way from the front to the rear rim, and the lateral band can either be one piece or two pieces. I'm working on refining the typology more accurately, but the Miks typology is presently the best published one.
@@F1ghteR41 Technically in my system Ridge helmets (Intercisa-type) are a subclassification of Bandhelmets which are a subclassification of Spangenhelmets.
Although I'm honestly tempted to switch it so Spangenhelmets are also a subclassification of the Bandhelmet, which makes logically more sense when classifying them by construction. The bandhelmet is fundamentally more simple in concept, form, and execution.
A guy in my town metal detected one of these From the Rus era (Russian Vikings basically) , and I got to hold it. Was so cool
Hey Matt, Do we have any idea why helmets that came after this, such as the early great helms, had flat tops when they clearly understood the value of having a conical/rounded top to helmets as these nasal helms do? Was it just a side effect of the manufacturing process in creating a helmet that fully enclosed the head?
Flat top great helm's where (to my understanding) used predominantly if not exclusively on horseback. Being on top of a horse in itself protects you from downward blows (to the head).
Underneath a greathelm one would still wear a skullcap and mail coif. The greathelm would be despensed with when it became a hindrance. (Mutch like the Italian stile of the 15th century)
From my own reading, the development of that flat-top to helmets, essentially taking one of these and raising the brow to the height of the crown, eventually turning into the early great helms (or "barrel-helms" as I've seen them called), seems to come from sieges in the Holy Land. From what I've been able to gather, Crusader armies laying siege found a bit of extra crumple-zone at the top was very useful against dropped stones and other ad-hoc missiles.
How true that actually is, I couldn't honestly say.
It wouldn't protect you from downwards blows from another horseman though.
Could it have been easier, and thus cheaper to produce perhaps?
I think that great Helems rested on the shoulders: shoulders being able to take the impact there was less worry about that than about where the weapon might be deflected to.
@@bruceelliott4433 no.
Good vid matt. I spent a lot of time learning how to use various weapons and one of the key skills that doesn't seem to be given the same amount of respect is knowing how to use your armour, which blows to allow through knowing they won't do anything giving you an opportunity to counter. Understanding which weapons do what damage ect.
Keep up the good work.
Might have missed it but should probably mention that part of the reason cheek plates went out of fashion in this period was the development of mail head defense in the form of coifs and of barbières (literally beard protection) for the face with some depictions of them covering up to the nose meaning only the eyes would be exposed, meaning that your face was well protected.
Run! It's the Superdry Norman!
As an SCA fighter I never forget having my shield smashed into my face
Interesting, I was just looking into some helmets of this era. Thanks!
About the shield hitting your nose. Yeah, I think everyone doing martial arts and training with various types of kicking pads can appreciate this.
As always perfect! And the best English language on the TH-cam!
Nice design, intimidating look. Makes the warrior seem eyeless and frightening. Even Matt's jovial face looks grim.
Steve Martin made a movie where he created a handle for taking off your glasses. It made everybody cross eyed and he got sued…. I wonder if whomever created these got in trouble😳
Of course I see this video just as I'm finishing making a recreation of the Battle of Hastings in a game
That's an authentic early medieval Superdry tunic handmade with English wool.
Nice vintage Nuggets shirt...I had no idea that Superdry bought that logo.
what many people fail to remember about these types of helms, is that you generally dont wear the helm over your bare head and go to war; you usually have a mail or gamberson coif under it, which protects the areas left exposed by the helm; also also, you might not die from a cut to the face, but you will die from a mace to the head, which is what helms in general were made to protect against: blunt trauma.
Great video on these types of equipment.
I never thought of that about the nasal being that protective before. That is so clever
I have been hoping you would do one of your fantastic videos on just this topic! Thank you!!
That was a nice, useful video, generally all around Thank you for sharing your discoveries.
One advantages of the sprangen helm I diden't hear you talk about is that the sprangen them selfs can be rather thick same as the rivits and are placed on top of the plates connected to the sprangen. Sure if you get hit on the plates them selfs that could potiontaly be caved in, but if you get hit on the sprangen that's a extra layer of thick metal they have to get true with a rather strong construction to it most likely catching more blunt force impact before denting or bieng caved in then a onepiece construction helm could. Just like the nazel sprangen could bassicly interfeer with hit's that might hit your plates and take most of the damages, sow it's a bit like having jackchains on. When there in the way 99% of the time you are going to tank that hit probleems only appear that 1% of the time when there not in the way.
The nose guard on this helm reminds me of many Spartan or Athenian illustrations on pottery from ancient times. The obvious differences of course being those appeared to be a two piece construction, meeting at a seam across the top, covered by a Mohawk crest at the top. Seen these illustrated so many places I can't remember where.
Regarding protection: I wonder why they had no neck guard on the helmets. Not necessary for protection against enemy weapons, but from rain and debris. Becuase that atyle of helmet will get you water down the spine fairly quick if the weather turns.
You'd probably protect the neck with a cloak or a scarf, a thick rough woven wool cloth would keep you neck relatively dry and keep debris out quite well also. we got remember that these were helmets from a time where good quality iron and steel wasn't that common so you wouldn't use more metal then needed for a helm.
@@SampoPaalanen yeah, you are probably right. Soliders today would revolt, though. Ju a small edge sticking out can do wonders for how the rain make you wet and cold.
The long nasal also protects you from the helmet bite - a really nasty occurence where if a heavy blow lands just so on your helmet, the rim of said helmet can break your nose. Kettle hats are especially prone to this if you wear them wrong, and short nasals can instead bite you into the mouth or beard with the nasal.
I also don't really agree with nasal helmets being there for all of 13th century. Looking at pictorial evidence, you see them pretty rarely even in 1250, and mostly in context of showing us old time-y warriors (e.g. Morgan bible), by 1275 they are almost completely gone (albeit you see some very rare examples even after 1400, usually as attempts to depict ancient greek helmets). Maybe they survived for a while as surplus items, battle of Gotland style, but even for the not so wealthy infantry, they seemed to be mostly replaced by the kettle hats. Knights, obviously, used crevelliere and great helm, or also kettle hats.
Effigies - which likely have the most recent stuff at the time of their creation on them - are even worse, the most recent nasal helmet on them that I know of is from 1210.
Fun fact: When such helmets were needed for the 1967 Czech film Marketa Lazarova , to avoid the cost of making real ones, the wing mirror housings of Tatra trucks were used instead :)
Amazing video as always! With norman helmets I always find myself drawn to the depictions of the "phrygian" variant and wonder whether they were just a stylistic fancy or there actualy was a pravtical advantage of the altered form.
Matt looks so badass!
3:56 It seems likely that it reduces your area of _binocular_ vision quite a lot, which would probably be a significant disadvantage in hand-to-hand combat.
Might have to get one!!
It should be noted that unless the blow by sword or ax strikes the casque perpendicularly or near on, the blow will be redirected toward the curve of the casque itself causing most blows to become glancing blows. It would require exceptional ability to use these weapons except at the rim. That is why one of the helmets shown has a reinforced rim.
After reading "The Memoires of Sergeant Bourgogne", you will definitely opt for cheek pieces....
Onto the nasal piece and the shield, I tend to tie the straps quite tight without strangling me. I've found that when I tense the muscles of me front neck the under side of my jaw swollen a bit... and that makes the helmet to not move at all, making the nasal stay where it is, without touching my nose and that spared the natural shape of my nose's bridge for over a decade xD
The eyebrows on that Wenceslaus thing make the wearer look like Denis Healy.
Thanks for sharing!
God og detaljert fremvisning. Tror denne karen vet hva han snakker om.
11:20 Similarly, I think 1 function (among others) of the tiny "crossguards" on Migration Era swords is to stop you from injuring your hand on shields.
I remain amazed that the Roman helmet type didn't remain popular or regain popularity in the Middle Ages.
Hey Matt, would this type of helmet sit higher up on your head if you wear wearing the coif appropriate for the period? I imagine visibility would be better if it sat a tad higher.
I was always curious how good the roman "typical" helmets (and armor in generel), would be compared to the armor and helmets of later periods. The "typical" Roman helmets looks so developed, the gladiator-stuff too, in compare to the early medieval helemts, but yeah, maybe they are just overengineered. Something like the kettle hats and the nasal helmets are plain good enugh and very comfortable for the everyday tasks of a soldier back in the days.
I have a late Roman helmet and a nasal helm.
The Nasal style helms actually look like they evolved out of late Roman helmets.
You have to remember that a nasal helm is intended to be worn with a maille coif, which gives the same and more complete protection of checkplates and neck plate without the compromise to vision and without gaps.
As for the earlier Roman helmets like in gladiator, they have no facial protection like a later Roman spangenhelm or a nasal. Functionally they are similar to late Roman helmets really but lack the nasal ridge, leaving the face more exposed.
I think the later Roman helmets are superior to the earlier ones for certain.
They really arnt too much different to the early medieval period helmets as most of the early medieval helmets are just evolutions of late Roman designs.
Learned something useful again - thanks Matt! I also thought it was a nose protection and it looked a bit flimsy.
I’m so early the comment section is lonely 😞
Welcome in.
don't worry,heavy,I'm here.😁
Hey thanks guys! And thank you Matt for the fantastic video!
I can’t believe that a blow to the head on a metal ‘bowl’ wouldn’t set your whole head ringing and make you dizzy.
A shined up helmet would have given me a 360 tour of your garage!
For goodness KEEP STILL !!
I love how in films set in the Robin Hood era you can punch a guard wearing one of these helmets full in the face and knock them out. There would be some with a glass chin, but the unprotected area, but not much.
Pas de casque, pas de tete, as the Normans used to say (loosely translated: "no helmet, no head")
I will say, having handled a few of the Marshal Historical helmets owned by other members of the Norman re-enactment group I'm in, yes they are very good (especially for the price), but their Olmutz style (the second one you showed) has a nasal slightly too long for most people (including myself and from the look of it, you, Matt). We found that if the nasal bar extends below your bottom lip, it's really easy for a shield slam or a blow to the head to drive the tip of the nasal into your chin (and if it extends past the point of your chin, it doesn't do that, but it looks really weird). Most of the people I know who bought that model wound up grinding off about half an inch from the tip of the nasal (or occasionally selling it on to newbies and buying a custom helm instead).
This exactly tallies with my opinions, yes. I fully intend to remove some of that nasal. But that's an easy job.
YAY! It's the return of 'CAPTAIN CONTEXT'!
Matt should try to get a sponsorship from Superdry, I think.
Thanks interesting video
Skalagrim, you need to test this on Bob
Fascinating insight, thank you.
BTW Superdry? Do they sponsor you, they should for sure. I would like to design for you a Superdry Martini sweatshirt!
Matt looks like he would fit right in fighting the vikings, FOR THE KING!
Always wondered why we never see any with smaller 'sideburn' guards.
The hinges may have been an issue. It's not so easy to make good hinges with ancient or medieval tech.
@@lastdingo I just mean un-articulated ones.
Literally just shorter versions of the nasal protection, slightly in front of where the chinstrap attaches, to help complete the face cage.
Edit: Actually thinking about it again there's really no point as the mail coif will do a good enough job for any cuts and the 'sideburn' piece would be useless for any thrusts.
@@lastdingo The late Romans did just that, either hinged or held on with leather straps.
@@2bingtim Yes, they also made door locks and multitools. I wrote "not so easy", not "impossible".
I suppose you get the three bar helmets later on (English civil war) that give you a similar open type protection with cheek guards.
Geez I can’t believe men marched into battle with those little helmets and swords n shields, I always thought a lot of them got drunk first, but alcohol drains ones energy quickly that much I know from experience
I find the lack of beard unsettling.
How about helmet with cheek-pieces that have beard decoration? :) external-preview.redd.it/4BBjuFvQ8euGCSMFO_7t-MReBb5N5qTTK5A27kuJSLY.jpg?auto=webp&s=4d765f572e7f6dff43ca529dc0da2babe1103681
werent Normans of the time often shaved?
Needs a Saxon-style moustache
All bald Englishmen need beards
I told my girlfriend the opposite.
Is called “Marshall” as in William Marshall? I always wondered why type of helmet he wore
Hey Mat. There are some good points in the video, but I have to disagree on one detail. In the case of integral or riveted helmets, I think the option is mainly due to aesthetics. I do not believe that in battle a revited helmet would give way easily. In order for that to occur the user should have suffered impacts of such severity that he would be easily unconscious, if not dead. So, wouldn't it be more plausible that the use of integral helmets is due to wealth?
Didn't they also have mail coifs underneath these helms? It certainly looks like it in the Bayeux tapestry.
“lets get norman” predates any morbin time
is there any evidence for special shoulder/neck protection of the period? something along the line of later padded coifs or realy thick scarfs? the form of the helmets seems excellent to allow blows to glance off, but aside from spears alot of the period weapons tend to be top heavy (more or less) and i expect them to be used alot with overhead blows (especialy in tight formations). so if you fail to raise your shield your collarbones and the matching arm are out of use...
it was used for such a long period of time, because it is simple and effective.
00:54 - I hear he was a good king.
Is it ever common to lead with the blade of the ax, but, if your blow is heading into armor, twist the ax and hit with the side or back of the ax?
If you only can afford one piece of armor, make it a helmet
I'm not kidding; there are 1066 likes on this video at the moment that I'm writing this.
I'm like WHAAAAAAA???
It seems like adding copies of the nasal guard to each side would give a big boost to the slash protection. The only downside I can see is a small reduction in hearing. So why did they not do this? Were there any helmets like this?
17th century lobster pot helmets do what i think you're suggesting.
images.app.goo.gl/K9B4SSaABdaDxT737
The Anglo-Saxon/Norman men had body armour in the form of multiple layers of thick clothing, similar to actual padded armour or gambeson.
Makes sense, and do you think the English would’ve used leather too for armor?
Hmm, I read up on it and clothed gambesons were much cheaper and offered better protection.
Looks like they figured out survivor bias at that time!
Was there any padding worn in combination with the helmet? Never mind the metal giving way I thing the skull could crack nonetheless, not to speak about neck injuries and concussions...
I'm curious. Were these helmets just a shiny steel? Or were they painted over in any way or covered up by any layer of leather or fabric? You know, why not look fabulous and have your helmet weather proof at the same time?
would the cheek pieces not be kind of replaced by the mail coif? So one affording a legionairy kind of helmet probably could buy a coif instead and those would probably give more vision, be somewhat more comfortable and merge your upper protection to one chain mail defense with the mail haulberk.
Mail is flexible, cheekpieces are rigid. Is a big difference.
Would a model like the Coppergate Helmet be present on the continant as well? or was this type of helmet solely found in Anglo-Saxon territories?
Hi Matt! We seem to always see symmetrical shields. Were asymmetrical shields a thing at all?
Kudos from France
I would feel better in a Sutton Hoo style "vendel" helmet.
Limits your vision, hearing & overheats quicker in hot weather c.f. the nasal helmet. But it's a good point that more protective helmets existed before the high medieval developments from the nasal helmet. Late Roman helmets were & even some early Viking helmets had "spectacle" eye guards beside the nasal, giving some cheek protection.
2bingtim yes but the mustache... 🙄 I’d rather die looking cool at least.
does the nasal protect the eyes? how deep could you cut with the nasal from the side?
you probably can have cheek guards on leather straps
While obviously effective - I imagine you would get a shocking headache from going crosseyed until you got used to the nasal
With you wearing a mail shirt instead of a sweater the presentation would be a lot more educational and entertaining. But rest assured the helmet and that shield look pretty damn cool on you.
I wonder why does the website description of st. Wenceslaus' helmet says/declares "Meanwhile its decoration is sometimes wrongly related to Odin it’s more probably that corresponds to a conventionalized Christian cross representation" when the figure on the nasal clearly wears armor and its yelling. Jesus interpretation is the classic and seems more reasonable to a contemporary person and it most likely was the interpretation of Wenceslaus himself but if we analyze the detail of the figure and the context of this helmet existence the iconography doesn't relate to any canonical Christian crucifixion scene but it does relate to Odin's crucifixion and the creation of runes and the helmet is a high-status nordic import
(the helmet itself features in one of the related legends where a duke/count/subregulus who is about to engage in a duel with the saint sees the golden cross of the Lord on the saint's forehead)
How diferent were the armor from the 12th century compared to 11th century?
How much protection does that type of helmet protect against concussive hits to the head, or rather how easy/hard would it be to knock someone out with say an axe hit to the head? You touch upon that topic but i wonder if any tests has been made?
I would say that it's about the same as other helmets up until fairly recently. You have to remember that all but the earliest types of helmets weren't just worn stuffed on the head. They had liners inside so that only a narrow band of you head actually made contact with the metal of the helmet. This basic style of liner continued throughout history up until fairly recently where the suspension liner has been replaced by a padding system.
@@Riceball01 gotcha, but I was more wondering if he (or anyone else) had any first hand experience in getting hit in a sparring context and therefore had some practical knowledge about it.
You don't need to stop the blow you are able to avoid by seeing it coming.
Matt, question. we hear a lot about how "real fights" last only a few seconds. 2-3 exchanges and someone gets through a defensive gap and hits the other guy. Both on your channel and elsewhere.
At the same time, we also hear a lot about how good armor really is, and getting hit with a sword or ax while properly armored means you... don't die, and keep fighting. Which is the point.
So would proper historical battlefield fights really have been short engagements, or would it be 2 guys hitting each other and landing blows that do nothing for 10 minutes before someone finally manages to get a lucky shot through an eyehole or armpit? Can you talk about how these two statements relate to each other, because in armored combat they seem to be contradictory. Seems like a video topic in the making.
(Unarmored combat of the 1700s and later, sure, fights are short, but it seems like historical fights would have been much longer.)
From my experience in re-enactment, people that aren't good at fighting will fight for a few seconds, and people that are very very good at fighting can sometimes fight for a couple minutes.
Id like to note that 6 completely untrained new guys that can form a decent shield wall and fight together will also wipe the floor with 6 highly trained 1v1 fighters that are too stubborn to do the same. Hilarious to watch.
A friend of mine still got a broken nose from his shield wall, despite having the nose guard.....
perhaps Norman helmets, like modern motorcycle helmets, are meant to prevent brain damage if your horse crashes and not death