10-01-2005, 03:55 PM
"Surely, they would not have worn a full mask in combat. That would have
severely restricted their field of view,and shortened their career! "
Ah- a huge area of debate. As long as the helmet is flush with the face (as these two are), vision is no more impeded than from a medieval helmet- and considerably better than some worn in that era!
Stone sculptures don't help- the paint that would have shown whether the face was iron or skin has by now worn away- although a Cirencester example does seem to show a masked cavalryman trampling a barbarian.
Also, don't underestimate the psychological effect of being charged by masked cavalry......
Re helmets, Terry Nix had this one in stock a while ago. Don't know if it is still available.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/ ... erial1.jpg
Cheers
Britannicus
severely restricted their field of view,and shortened their career! "
Ah- a huge area of debate. As long as the helmet is flush with the face (as these two are), vision is no more impeded than from a medieval helmet- and considerably better than some worn in that era!
Stone sculptures don't help- the paint that would have shown whether the face was iron or skin has by now worn away- although a Cirencester example does seem to show a masked cavalryman trampling a barbarian.
Also, don't underestimate the psychological effect of being charged by masked cavalry......
Re helmets, Terry Nix had this one in stock a while ago. Don't know if it is still available.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/ ... erial1.jpg
Cheers
Britannicus