My photos of a templar historical reconstitution in my région Vienne/France

[Dalia]

To wear one of these heavy suits of armor and carry a broadsword, you had to be in very good physical condition. And to then fight in battle wearing all this. That is no small feet of conditioning, they had to be in incredible physical shape to do these things.

Not to mention schlepping it all on foot from Paris to Jerusalem. And, hopefully, back.

Welcome the new one to USMB, Do not hesitate to add your contribution to my trhead ^^

Merci! My undergraduate is in Medieval Europe so I am drawn to photos like this like a moth to flame. I particularly enjoyed your breakdown of helmets earlier.

You prefer one helmet more then the others ?

I can't imagine having gone into battle with a flat-topped helmet; it just seems like it would direct all of the force of an overhead strike to the wearer's chin and collarbone. Ouch. Their only advantage, I think, was that they were quicker and cheaper to make. Even worse would be to have a giant metal sculpture welded to the top; one *whack* to that and your head gets cranked sideways. Double ouch.

In my reenactment and swordfighting days, I wore a version of a spangenhelm with a face guard - it wasn't totally historically accurate but I had taken enough hits to the nose and eye socket that it was worth it, and it still allowed me to see (mostly) and hear. I feel sorry for the crusaders and soldiers who wore barbutes, bascinets, or sallets; the ones I wore always felt like I was wearing a soup pot, or a diving helmet, making it hard to hear orders and other combatants. Really I think I would have most preferred a simple mail coif; my ancestor William Marshal is often depicted (including in his effigy) just wearing a coif, although I imagine when it became Showtime! he would at least put on a simple round cereal bowl, again for deflection's sake.

Aesthetically, I do like the later armets and great bascinets, especially the ones with the rounded skulls. They're such beauties of engineering.

As for the shape of helmets let's say that it is the change of fashion evolution over time.
Those who have a finery on the helmet is more to scare the enemy

 

[IsaacNewton]

Not to mention schlepping it all on foot from Paris to Jerusalem. And, hopefully, back.

Welcome the new one to USMB, Do not hesitate to add your contribution to my trhead ^^

Merci! My undergraduate is in Medieval Europe so I am drawn to photos like this like a moth to flame. I particularly enjoyed your breakdown of helmets earlier.

You prefer one helmet more then the others ?

I can't imagine having gone into battle with a flat-topped helmet; it just seems like it would direct all of the force of an overhead strike to the wearer's chin and collarbone. Ouch. Their only advantage, I think, was that they were quicker and cheaper to make. Even worse would be to have a giant metal sculpture welded to the top; one *whack* to that and your head gets cranked sideways. Double ouch.

In my reenactment and swordfighting days, I wore a version of a spangenhelm with a face guard - it wasn't totally historically accurate but I had taken enough hits to the nose and eye socket that it was worth it, and it still allowed me to see (mostly) and hear. I feel sorry for the crusaders and soldiers who wore barbutes, bascinets, or sallets; the ones I wore always felt like I was wearing a soup pot, or a diving helmet, making it hard to hear orders and other combatants. Really I think I would have most preferred a simple mail coif; my ancestor William Marshal is often depicted (including in his effigy) just wearing a coif, although I imagine when it became Showtime! he would at least put on a simple round cereal bowl, again for deflection's sake.

Aesthetically, I do like the later armets and great bascinets, especially the ones with the rounded skulls. They're such beauties of engineering.

As for the shape of helmets let's say that it is the change of fashion evolution over time.
Those who have a finery on the helmet is more to scare the enemy

Some of these helmets don't even have a flip visor. Once they fell down it would have been hard to get up anyway, add in that if the helmet was off kilter at all they wouldn't be able to see out of it. Suits of armor look formidable but in a real battle with thousands of men hacking away at each other, pushing, shoving, they just look like they wouldn't be that practical. Were they more for show rather than for use in actual battle?

 

[Dalia]

Welcome the new one to USMB, Do not hesitate to add your contribution to my trhead ^^

Merci! My undergraduate is in Medieval Europe so I am drawn to photos like this like a moth to flame. I particularly enjoyed your breakdown of helmets earlier.

You prefer one helmet more then the others ?

I can't imagine having gone into battle with a flat-topped helmet; it just seems like it would direct all of the force of an overhead strike to the wearer's chin and collarbone. Ouch. Their only advantage, I think, was that they were quicker and cheaper to make. Even worse would be to have a giant metal sculpture welded to the top; one *whack* to that and your head gets cranked sideways. Double ouch.

In my reenactment and swordfighting days, I wore a version of a spangenhelm with a face guard - it wasn't totally historically accurate but I had taken enough hits to the nose and eye socket that it was worth it, and it still allowed me to see (mostly) and hear. I feel sorry for the crusaders and soldiers who wore barbutes, bascinets, or sallets; the ones I wore always felt like I was wearing a soup pot, or a diving helmet, making it hard to hear orders and other combatants. Really I think I would have most preferred a simple mail coif; my ancestor William Marshal is often depicted (including in his effigy) just wearing a coif, although I imagine when it became Showtime! he would at least put on a simple round cereal bowl, again for deflection's sake.

Aesthetically, I do like the later armets and great bascinets, especially the ones with the rounded skulls. They're such beauties of engineering.

As for the shape of helmets let's say that it is the change of fashion evolution over time.
Those who have a finery on the helmet is more to scare the enemy

Some of these helmets don't even have a flip visor. Once they fell down it would have been hard to get up anyway, add in that if the helmet was off kilter at all they wouldn't be able to see out of it. Suits of armor look formidable but in a real battle with thousands of men hacking away at each other, pushing, shoving, they just look like they wouldn't be that practical. Were they more for show rather than for use in actual battle?

There is not much documentary about the Templars after Philippe IV le Bel had abolish the Knights Templar.
But over a space of 200 years the templars and fashion evolved Yes, they wore their helmets on the battlefield

 

[IsaacNewton]

Merci! My undergraduate is in Medieval Europe so I am drawn to photos like this like a moth to flame. I particularly enjoyed your breakdown of helmets earlier.

You prefer one helmet more then the others ?

I can't imagine having gone into battle with a flat-topped helmet; it just seems like it would direct all of the force of an overhead strike to the wearer's chin and collarbone. Ouch. Their only advantage, I think, was that they were quicker and cheaper to make. Even worse would be to have a giant metal sculpture welded to the top; one *whack* to that and your head gets cranked sideways. Double ouch.

In my reenactment and swordfighting days, I wore a version of a spangenhelm with a face guard - it wasn't totally historically accurate but I had taken enough hits to the nose and eye socket that it was worth it, and it still allowed me to see (mostly) and hear. I feel sorry for the crusaders and soldiers who wore barbutes, bascinets, or sallets; the ones I wore always felt like I was wearing a soup pot, or a diving helmet, making it hard to hear orders and other combatants. Really I think I would have most preferred a simple mail coif; my ancestor William Marshal is often depicted (including in his effigy) just wearing a coif, although I imagine when it became Showtime! he would at least put on a simple round cereal bowl, again for deflection's sake.

Aesthetically, I do like the later armets and great bascinets, especially the ones with the rounded skulls. They're such beauties of engineering.

As for the shape of helmets let's say that it is the change of fashion evolution over time.
Those who have a finery on the helmet is more to scare the enemy

Some of these helmets don't even have a flip visor. Once they fell down it would have been hard to get up anyway, add in that if the helmet was off kilter at all they wouldn't be able to see out of it. Suits of armor look formidable but in a real battle with thousands of men hacking away at each other, pushing, shoving, they just look like they wouldn't be that practical. Were they more for show rather than for use in actual battle?

There is not much documentary about the Templars after Philippe IV le Bel had abolish the Knights Templar.
But over a space of 200 years the templars and fashion evolved Yes, they wore their helmets on the battlefield

I'm sure you're right that they did wear these entire suits of armor on the battlefield, I'm just wondering if they were involved in battle, were they just for intimidation as in worn by Nobles that didn't every actually fight face to face in battle but were more like Generals on horseback directing troops. And I plead ignorance on this whole thing, I just don't know but have always been fascinated by suits of armor and battle back then. And I of course can search it online for more in depth info later.

I do know armor of any kind back then was extremely expensive. You had to be wealthy to afford it.

 

[Dalia]

You prefer one helmet more then the others ?

I can't imagine having gone into battle with a flat-topped helmet; it just seems like it would direct all of the force of an overhead strike to the wearer's chin and collarbone. Ouch. Their only advantage, I think, was that they were quicker and cheaper to make. Even worse would be to have a giant metal sculpture welded to the top; one *whack* to that and your head gets cranked sideways. Double ouch.

In my reenactment and swordfighting days, I wore a version of a spangenhelm with a face guard - it wasn't totally historically accurate but I had taken enough hits to the nose and eye socket that it was worth it, and it still allowed me to see (mostly) and hear. I feel sorry for the crusaders and soldiers who wore barbutes, bascinets, or sallets; the ones I wore always felt like I was wearing a soup pot, or a diving helmet, making it hard to hear orders and other combatants. Really I think I would have most preferred a simple mail coif; my ancestor William Marshal is often depicted (including in his effigy) just wearing a coif, although I imagine when it became Showtime! he would at least put on a simple round cereal bowl, again for deflection's sake.

Aesthetically, I do like the later armets and great bascinets, especially the ones with the rounded skulls. They're such beauties of engineering.

As for the shape of helmets let's say that it is the change of fashion evolution over time.
Those who have a finery on the helmet is more to scare the enemy

Some of these helmets don't even have a flip visor. Once they fell down it would have been hard to get up anyway, add in that if the helmet was off kilter at all they wouldn't be able to see out of it. Suits of armor look formidable but in a real battle with thousands of men hacking away at each other, pushing, shoving, they just look like they wouldn't be that practical. Were they more for show rather than for use in actual battle?

There is not much documentary about the Templars after Philippe IV le Bel had abolish the Knights Templar.
But over a space of 200 years the templars and fashion evolved Yes, they wore their helmets on the battlefield

I'm sure you're right that they did wear these entire suits of armor on the battlefield, I'm just wondering if they were involved in battle, were they just for intimidation as in worn by Nobles that didn't every actually fight face to face in battle but were more like Generals on horseback directing troops. And I plead ignorance on this whole thing, I just don't know but have always been fascinated by suits of armor and battle back then. And I of course can search it online for more in depth info later.

I do know armor of any kind back then was extremely expensive. You had to be wealthy to afford it.

It's fascinating indeed and I give the most accurate information I can from French to English,
And on the battlefield he had a commander that gave the order of battle
the information that I can add about the Templars.
Chastity, poverty and obedience required

 

[Pellinore]

It wasn't until relatively modern times that a general or commander would lead from the rear; in medieval times it was a lot more common for them to be front and center. Richard III reportedly wore his crown over his helmet at Bosworth Field, for example, and got within sword blade length of Henry Tudor before being killed. They definitely wore their helmets on the battlefield, even those with enormous headpieces. Despite what modern movies might try to show, if a medieval soldier could only wear one piece of armor, it would be a helmet.

 

[zaangalewa]

Like your car designates your rank in society now

In a lot of cases that's true, but there are exceptions; one of the U.S.'s wealthiest men drove a four door Chevy and took a sack lunch to work every day for years, peanut butter sandwiches, H.L. Hunt, and his sons liked to hang out in a bowling alley. lol

I have an old set of books from the late 1960's of a RP game called Chivalry and Sorcery, by the Society for Creative Anachronisms, that has examples of some of those helmets and the ranks they designate, I just don't know enough to believe them or not, as I'm mostly into the economics of the ancient and medieval periods, mostly England's, due to the language and books available, so couldn't tell you a thing about France or the rest of Europe in those eras.

It's a big problem with many tasks - how to define, which clothes and armor could be on people, especially accourding to reconstruction. Did the people use something in principle at this time (like sugarloaf in 1307)? Did they use it in region? If the things were finded in different regions - how could they were gathered? (For example, imagine the knight of 12th century with indian tomahawk of 12th century - what's wrong? ))) And could _typical_ people use this thing, or it's just an exception?
Another questions - how thing was found? Do we have images of this thing, dated by our period? Where we found this thing and why? For example, a lot of armors in medieval castles small by size - is it mean, people were smaller in medieval times? Graves says - no, it's just a children armor, not used in battles, only in parade... If we find buried man in clothes - is it typical cloth, or special? (It would be interesting to see future reconstructors of our times by grave finds - in good parade suits and one-time slippers with it, like we dressing deadmen )) A chain-mail hoods from Wisby grave - why we have a lot of finds there? Because it were so popular? Or because soldiers no need more of them and leave them on dead people?
So, defining, how people were look in different times - it's a long process with a lot of questions, disputes, flames and trolls ))

P.S. Economics is also a good tool to investigate medieval times - Marks was right about importance of it, and about its association with society constructions

P.P.S. History - is an awesome topic for an enormous discussions

Beautiful photos, thanks.

Those look a lot like the armor used in "Kingdom Of Heaven".

Bonsoir, there are different Templiars ( Templiars Knights, Hospices Knights, Teutonics Knights )

initially for that time, we'll talk that over Helms helmets ....

Take into account also for these "styles" or "models" in order question..either Templars or Hospices Teutonic or even the order of Lazarus etc ...

Note also the grade of the holder of the helmet and of course of the years époque..clothes and protections evolved.

For example some names helmets or helmets (I do not currently have all the images to accompany the names).

=> Bascinet
=> Headphones salad
=> Headphones and haubert
=> Barbute
=> Conical helmet or helmet Sugarloaf
=> Headset / helmet and nasal Cervelière

en Français :

=> Bacinet
=> Casque salade
=> Casque et haubert
=> Barbute
=> Casque conique ou heaume pain de sucre
=> Casque/heaume cervelière et nasale

Most of this helmets, as I know, anachronism for Templars, because they exist till 1307 year. Bascinet - a helmet of XIV century (after 1320), Barbute and Salad - of XV century (Joan of Ark knew more about them l)))... Even Shugarloaf is a "high-tech" for Templars

I see a quantity of mistakes at this photo.... only because I took part at reconstruction of Templars here ))) Instead of all this moments, I very glad to see interest to historic reconstruction in all countries and hope to take part in any big event in future )))

Hello, the résumé that i give is from one of my members of my forum that participed at the reconstitution i know him and others that are a part of those reconstitution that happen every year in my région.
They are historical reconstructions with the objects and the clothes of the time of the Templars but I think that there is not much information on certain details about the Templars if I do not deceive?

First, send him a big greetings

Yes, we have a few information about Templars time, so it's a root problem of reconstruction. And also we need a lot of research, to analyse manuscripts, statues, finds and other, to reconstruct a typical view of people and define, what was at this time and what wasn't. I took part for a some years in a forum of 13th century reconstruction in Russia (it oriented to European style, because before 1240 Russia was a cultural part of Europe, then were a century of breakdown and then Russia had a big specific in culture). So, if your friends have interest, we can change our opinions and researched staff anywhere in forums. Now I'm not an active participant of live reconstruction, but still interesting of it ))

P.S. Here an example, what we have to use to reconstruct a people view of 13th century ))

Source: Rüstung – Wikipedia