Beautiful armor suits?

Tulius

Ad Honorem
May 2016
5,697
Portugal
#21
That's a 'frog mouth' tilting helmet designed purely for the joust. It's also the style most commonly represented in heraldry where it's usually referred to as an 'esquire's' helm.

Frog-mouth helm - Wikipedia
Indeed, but frog-mouth helmets could be used, and the user could see by the opening, this in particular seemed badly designed, since the user couldn’t see a thing, just metal. I mean, I never tested it, but that is at least that was the information that I have.
 
Jun 2019
67
Chicago Suburbs
#22
Indeed, but frog-mouth helmets could be used, and the user could see by the opening, this in particular seemed badly designed, since the user couldn’t see a thing, just metal. I mean, I never tested it, but that is at least that was the information that I have.
Maybe the user was a flathead?
 
Jan 2015
2,950
MD, USA
#24
Indeed, but frog-mouth helmets could be used, and the user could see by the opening, this in particular seemed badly designed, since the user couldn’t see a thing, just metal. I mean, I never tested it, but that is at least that was the information that I have.
You're looking right into the eye slit, in that photo--at that angle, it's as wide as any other helm. There was plenty of vision. As I understand it, the wearer would keep his head tilted slightly forward as he charged his opponent, and just before impact could tip his head back to prevent the lance or any splinters from coming through the slit. It works perfectly well for the joust, and there are dozens of surviving examples. They all look like that.

Matthew
 
Likes: Todd Feinman

Tulius

Ad Honorem
May 2016
5,697
Portugal
#25
You're looking right into the eye slit, in that photo--at that angle, it's as wide as any other helm. There was plenty of vision. As I understand it, the wearer would keep his head tilted slightly forward as he charged his opponent, and just before impact could tip his head back to prevent the lance or any splinters from coming through the slit. It works perfectly well for the joust, and there are dozens of surviving examples. They all look like that.

Matthew
Maybe.

I already saw several frog-mouth helmets. The Portuguese Military Museums has at least two in good conditions, both designated has “Elmo de Justa” / “joust helmet”.

This one is designated as “D. João I helmet” even if that designation can be incorrect. That seemed to be questioned by Gastão de Melo de Mattos in an article in 1962 in the Magazine “Broteria”, in the article “Falsas atribuições de armas em colecções portuguesas” / “False attributions of weapons in Portuguese collections”: Revista Brotéria (unfortunately only the index is online, not the article, and I never read it).

Anyway, this helmet really seems… different, and it is not a question of the photo. The photo that I showed was just one that I pick in the net, not a good one, I recognize. I and other colleagues had that idea when we saw it in the military museum. And it gives the idea that the user couldn’t use his eyes, whatever the position of the helmet was. The helmet was already showed in several expositions. The catalogue of the exposition “pera guerrear” that I have, has a small description, the helmets dimensions (38x37 cm) and weight (6520 g), but doesn’t mention the issue that I brought here. Even if it mentions that is “low”: “The upper part of the hull on the top of the head, being low and somewhat domed ...” (p.250, the translation from the Portuguese is mine).

There are not many images online, but here is another one (a copy):

https://chavesandaround.files.wordpress.com/2017/11/museu-militar_chaves-3.jpg

EDIT:

For perspective, let us compare with the one in the Wikipedia link that Dave posted:

Frog-mouth helm - Wikipedia
 
Last edited:
Feb 2019
345
California
#26
Not necessarily. Average height may have been a little less (not always!), but armor today is often displayed in a way that makes it look smaller than if it were being worn properly. Breastplates and cuirasses often look too small since they don't cover the whole torso, because the wearer needed to be able to move. Helmets are often smaller than modern replicas, simply because the amorers back then were MASTERS at making something fit very well, whereas we tend to make things too big and add a lot more padding to fill in!

Also, there seems to be some skewing in the artifact record, since armor pieces that fit many warriors would be re-used and handed down and modified and recycled and eventually disappeared. So at least some pieces that are still in museums today have survived simply because they were *too small* to fit anyone besides the original owner! Well, except for Henry VIII's stuff, that guy was huge. (Well, okay, he was also KING, so his armor didn't get reused as much!) It's like getting to a T-shirt sale late--all that's left are "smalls" and a few "Extra Large".

Matthew
Well in fairness, adding padding is about a bit more than just "filling in"......
 
Jun 2019
29
Southeast Asia
#27
Sogdian armor from Panjakent - 5th-8th century.

Armor Central Asia Sogdian 5th-8th century Panjakent mural 3 view 1 beast head upper arm guard...JPG

7th-8th century

Armor Central Asia Sogdian 7th-8th century soldier pair 2.jpg

Look like a fantasy lost desert civilization.

Earliest all plate armor - 1323-1326 France

Armor Europe 14th century 1323-1326 France BNF Latin 10483 Breviarium ad usum fratrum Predicat...jpg
Armor Europe 14th century 1323-1326 France BNF Latin 10483 Breviarium ad usum fratrum Predicat...jpg

Flemish armor from 1475-1500, a mix of Gothic and Italian armor foreshadowing the armor of the 16th century.

Armor Europe 15th century 1475-1500 Netherland Faits et gestes d’Alexandre Ms.fr.76 5 50v small.jpg

16th century French plate armor that cover all parts of the body in plate. The best example of plate I have seen. Unlike Henry 8 foot combat armor, it is actually completed and cover the armpit with plate, while Henry 8's armor did not.

Armor Europe 16th century complete armor without gap Paris Museum 20.jpg
 
Jan 2015
2,950
MD, USA
#28
Maybe.

I already saw several frog-mouth helmets. The Portuguese Military Museums has at least two in good conditions, both designated has “Elmo de Justa” / “joust helmet”.

This one is designated as “D. João I helmet” even if that designation can be incorrect. That seemed to be questioned by Gastão de Melo de Mattos in an article in 1962 in the Magazine “Broteria”, in the article “Falsas atribuições de armas em colecções portuguesas” / “False attributions of weapons in Portuguese collections”: Revista Brotéria (unfortunately only the index is online, not the article, and I never read it).

Anyway, this helmet really seems… different, and it is not a question of the photo. The photo that I showed was just one that I pick in the net, not a good one, I recognize. I and other colleagues had that idea when we saw it in the military museum. And it gives the idea that the user couldn’t use his eyes, whatever the position of the helmet was. The helmet was already showed in several expositions. The catalogue of the exposition “pera guerrear” that I have, has a small description, the helmets dimensions (38x37 cm) and weight (6520 g), but doesn’t mention the issue that I brought here. Even if it mentions that is “low”: “The upper part of the hull on the top of the head, being low and somewhat domed ...” (p.250, the translation from the Portuguese is mine).

There are not many images online, but here is another one (a copy):

https://chavesandaround.files.wordpress.com/2017/11/museu-militar_chaves-3.jpg

EDIT:

For perspective, let us compare with the one in the Wikipedia link that Dave posted:

Frog-mouth helm - Wikipedia
AH! Gotcha. Yeah, that one *is* a little strange! My guess is that it could be a 19th century reproduction, or maybe a victim of a bad restoration, etc. There doesn't seem to be any reason that an armorer would make a "ceremonial" helmet that couldn't be worn! Though I'd love to try it on and find out. Thanks for the clarification!

Matthew
 

Tulius

Ad Honorem
May 2016
5,697
Portugal
#29
AH! Gotcha. Yeah, that one *is* a little strange! My guess is that it could be a 19th century reproduction, or maybe a victim of a bad restoration, etc. There doesn't seem to be any reason that an armorer would make a "ceremonial" helmet that couldn't be worn! Though I'd love to try it on and find out. Thanks for the clarification!

Matthew
The original, not the copy in the second photo, is dated as late medieval, 15th or 16th century. The idea of a funeral helmet that I posted previously is not really mine, but from a professor of mine. It is not a theory; it was just an idea that came in a friendly conversation.

The idea of a bad restoration never had occurred to me. Don’t know if the helmet was restored.

An interesting issue that would need some research.
 
Feb 2017
227
Devon, UK
#30
The original, not the copy in the second photo, is dated as late medieval, 15th or 16th century. The idea of a funeral helmet that I posted previously is not really mine, but from a professor of mine. It is not a theory; it was just an idea that came in a friendly conversation.

The idea of a bad restoration never had occurred to me. Don’t know if the helmet was restored.

An interesting issue that would need some research.
I'd certainly agree that it shows signs of being mucked about with, whether as a result of 'restoration' or earlier repairs or 'improvements'. The front charnel plate is off centre for starters.

And I wouldn't discount its being used at some point as part of a funerary display, the Royal Armouries has an early 15th century helm that hung over the tomb of a 16th century knight Jousting helm From the tomb of Sir William Barendyne, St Peter's Church, Great Haseley, Oxfordshire. - Royal Armouries collections

I still think it most likely started life as the real thing. It seems stylistically to be a close relative of the 'Brocas helm', also in the Royal Armouries collection. Jousting helm The Brocas helm, for the Gestech with hinged charnel - Royal Armouries collections and it shares features that suggest it was made for use rather than display.

Somebody needs to find an arming cap and try it on for size.
 

Similar History Discussions