|
24th May 2005, 03:27 PM | #1 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 2,718
|
Could the closed Greek helmet kill a warrior?
The closed Greek helmets must have been both a good protection and a curse, when fighting in a place where it was very hot and the sun was blasting down – fighting from morning till evening – would the worrier not get a heat stroke?
I think it would not only be the heat from the sun, which could ‘kill’ the warrior, but also all the energy he used during the fight, creating even more heat. Would a helmet made of plates kept together with rings not give, maybe a bit less protection, but still better ventilation, and therefore, a worrier who would last longer? How much heat can the human brain take, for a longer period, and still work logically? |
24th May 2005, 03:47 PM | #2 |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 485
|
hi jens,
completely out of my sphere with ancient greece, but the indian armour held both in its armoury (solid helmets and plate/mail). if you compare the two types, you would think that the plate/mail would give you more freedom and ventilation. however, its the nature of antiques, that the cloth liners dont survive the test of time, unlike the steel outer 'skin'. early accounts tell that the lining itself was the main protection, and the mail/plate just added to it. the 'sind' armour, although of a later manafacture clearly shows this and the few examples that survived, show a thick, quilted lining that cant have let in much air. not sure how much a human brain can take, but know mine cant take much, with or without a hat :-) |
24th May 2005, 03:53 PM | #3 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 215
|
Hi Jens,
Good question. I've read of crusading knights dying in their armor from the heat. It even happens to athletes occassionally. Rarely, but it happens, an american football player will die from heat stroke. The pads, the helmet, the expended energy, and the heat can be a dangerous combination. Years ago a young player here died after going too hard at two-a-day training camp. The body sheds %65 of its heat via radiation. A large part of that is through the head. Put a big metal cap on that and add in some heat and energy burning, and the body can quickly lose its ability to regulate its temperature. Once that happens, cell damage occurs quickly, and not just in the head. |
24th May 2005, 04:35 PM | #4 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 2,718
|
Hi B.I.
The reason why I chose a Green helmet is, be course it is closed, and I know it can be very warm in Greece during the summer. I could have chosen any kind of helmet used in a country where it is very hot in ‘the fighting season’ – the summer, and I have no doubt, that it can be at least as hot in India as in Greece during this period. A helmet can be a fine protection when someone bangs you on the head with a sword or a maze, but I guess it could be a curse as well in a very hot climate. Hi Derek, Yes the crusaders must have had a problem, and I have been wondering, how big a percentage of the dead soldiers could be expected to have die be course of the heat, not due to wounds. |
24th May 2005, 05:19 PM | #5 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 175
|
I would hate to think about fighting with armour on here in Florida ,I dont think the fight would last very long.
I think though,that it would be more common for people to faint/pass out from the heat before they would die ,but in a battle the two might end up being the same thing. |
24th May 2005, 06:01 PM | #6 |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 485
|
maybe thats why england had such a large empire, because its so cold that we could last longer in heavy armour.
also, a good solid helmet kept off the rain. maybe the decline of our empire, coincided with the invention of umbrellas. |
24th May 2005, 06:25 PM | #7 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Poland, Krakow
Posts: 418
|
Gentlemen!
From practical point of view, using of close helmets in hot climate might be surpised. But there is a question: if it was not practical or impossible to use in such places like Greece, then how these helmets survived there for a few hundreds years, and were still in development!? (I think about hoplite helmets). Beside in Greece were very popular hats and open helmets as well, so there were other choices in case if close helmets were useless. But of course plate armours were hard to handle during hot weather. There are many other examples, not only from crusades. In 1410, 15th July, at Grunwald (todays north Poland) were one of the biggest battles of medieval Europe, between Polish King and allies versus Teutonic knights and knights from the rest of the Europe (al in all ca. 60 000 people). The victory was Polish not only beacause of biggest army, but while king's army was hidden in the shadows of the forest, the Army of Teutonic Knights waited on the open field in the sun and heat of the middle summer. This caused great tiredness of the knighs. So there is something dangerous in armour itself for the warrior indeed! Regards! |
29th May 2005, 07:17 AM | #8 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NC, U.S.A.
Posts: 2,097
|
Heat stroke
fascinating thread. I had actually always wondered about armor and heat-related deaths in such circumstances. As a paramedic, I had to treat numerous victems of heat exhaustion, heat cramps and heat stroke at bike rallys, where helmets protected the head, but added to the heat. With heat stroke (where the body temp reaches over 104), unless rapid emergency cooling with cool water, fans, stripped clothing, icepacks to the armpits and groin(wooo!), the process is irreversible and 100% fatal. Seizures, respiratory arrest, and death follow as the brain literally fries. The point here is, can you imagine a Crusader in full battle armor trying to pull off his protection, piece by piece, and find a source of cool water. This just wasn't likely to happen. I have no doubt that this was a tremendous problem, but as already pointed out, not glorious enough to talk about. (Reminds my of the movie, "A Knight's Tale", where Heath Ledger's master dies in his armor...of dysentery!).
|
29th May 2005, 03:20 PM | #9 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 2,718
|
Rivkin, I don’t know where you read about the diseases, but it is true that it must have been a great problem for them. In ‘The Travels of Ibn Battuta AD 1325-1354’ he writes: “When the Sultan reached the land of Tiling on his way to engage the Sharif in the province of Ma’bar, he halted at the city of Badrakut, capital of the province of Tiling which is at a distance of three months march from the land of Ma’bar. At that moment a pestilence broke out in his army and the greater part of the perished; there died black slaves, the mamluks troopers, and great amirs such as malik Dawlat-Shah, whom the Sultan used to address by the name of uncle, and such as the amir ‘Abdallah al-Harawi, whose story has been related in the first voyage. When the Sultan saw what befallen the army he returned to Dawlat Abad.”
Sultan Muhammad Ibn Tughluq almost lost his Sultanate due to this pestilence, but this time, due to good fortune, he only lost Ma’bar. More about Ibn Battuta here http://www.silk-road.com/artl/ibn_battuta.shtml M Eley, you really sound as if you know the problems people are in when overheated, it must however be stressed, that the trained sportsmen you wrote about have been training for a long time before running a marathon or anything of that kind. Part of the armies in the old days were also trained, they were professional soldiers, but a very big part of the armies were not trained, they were taken from the coolness of the bazaars, where they had been sitting trading for years, dressed for war, and sent to the battle field – most were not trained to use weapons and they were not used to the heat. So the heat, dehydration and illnesses of different kinds might very well have taken a big part of the huge armies they had at the time. |
29th May 2005, 05:37 PM | #10 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 655
|
I'm sorry, I was a little bit too vicious in my attacks on historical biases, but they do exist.
|
29th May 2005, 06:38 PM | #11 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 9,945
|
Hi Jens,
Thank you very much for the kind words on what apparantly did evolve into more of an article! As I've always noted, Im hardly known for brevity and actually it did take quite a while to find the data I did find on this fascinating subject. What I like is the learning while Im doing it. I always hope that sharing what I find can be shared by others too, so I write...a lot!!! Rick, Thanks for the notes on the Agincourt battle, and in reviewing Professor Keegans account. he does note the rain and plowed fields, however his observations focus on the difficulty and slowness of movement of the forces through this. His descriptions and perspective on battles reflect the kind of study done at British military university at Sandhurst, naturally with attention to tactics, but Keegan has a more subjective and psychological approach which was what drew me to his work in the first place. The references elsewhere that noted the death of the Duke of York of other than wounds, suggesting heatstroke or heart attack seemed very much applicable here, and I hoped that Keegan might offer more detail. Actually he did, noting the Duke was pulled from beneath a significant number of corpses, and it was noted he died of either 'suffocation or heart attack'. Keegan is an incredibly detailed narrator had already mentioned the rainy, muddy conditions, yet does not suggest drowning, which is as you have suggested is more than entirely plausible. I think that the lack of attention that prevails in most military history and similar narratives to this less than valorious subject matter is much as has been noted, when documenting heroic events in the most dramatic and tragic circumstance in humanity..that of war...often is biased in degree. Human nature seeks comfort and hope as well as spirit in knowing that the lost lives of thier loved ones were not spent in vain. It is well noted that a life of a warrior lost in any conflict is profoundly significant regardless of the cause or means in which it occurred. All warriors are, as Rick has said, heroes unless running away. In all regard, it would seem that even in many of those circumstances, a number may be qualified by the less than attended subject we discuss here. The degrees of heat related and exhaustion problems physiologically related to extreme conditions may distort the judgement or ability of a combatant, and cause actions he would not normally consider. Mark Im really glad you came in on this as well as we needed some medical perspective here, and yours in handling situational and traumatic medical events is, uh , just what the doctor ordered!! Really though, it seems this very prevalent and insidious situation is little discussed, often even in general medical references. It seems that way back in my own ancient history, basic training which was unfortunately in southern Texas during the hot humid summer was extremely threatened with this problem of heatstroke. We were cautioned constantly to 'take our salt tablets' and warned of the consequences. Along the course one could see strategically placed ambulances, and I saw more than several unfortunates rushed away in them, presumably most fallen from the heat. Similarly I can recall standing at attention in direct sun for what seemed eternity...the guy on my right was so paranoid about the rest of us passing out. I suddenly realized an emptiness next to me and he was flat on the ground and completely unconscious. Another insidious element..anxiety. Im sure you are familiar with vaso-vagal syncope, where anxiety or fear however insidious or subliminal, can cause a persons heartbeat to diminish and often stop, sometimes fatally. Could this be another factor in one being overcome by heat or stress exhaustion? All best regards, Jim Last edited by Jim McDougall; 30th May 2005 at 06:19 PM. |
30th May 2005, 11:23 AM | #12 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NC, U.S.A.
Posts: 2,097
|
Good point!
Yes, a vasovagal response is very possible under these circumstances,Jim. Gets me to thinking about all of the other plague of problems that these Crusaders must have faced, from water supply (Think water from Mexico!), to food shortages, to the heat. Even something as mild as heat cramps would have proven to be quite debilitating. My question is, did these knights and warriors always go around dressed in armor, or did their pages, helpers, etc, just keep it readily availible prior to battle? I love the Crusades, but need to read up on them alittle more!
|
30th May 2005, 04:44 PM | #13 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 9,945
|
Hi Mark,
Thanks for confirming that, it seemed applicable here. I'm with you on the history of the crusades, as well as the armor of these times and ancient times. It seems my focus has always been on swords and edged weapons of course, but it is exciting to see how pertinant the study of related items such as armor is to our study of these weapons. I think Jens has been very astute in setting us on this course In looking at the crusades period it would seem to me the number of fully armored knights would have been relatively small, and those knights likely would have had squires and assistants to maintain and transport thier armor. The image of the medieval 'paladin' riding about in full armor seems more a product of illustrators of Victorian period that leaned toward romanticized notions of chivalry. Those monumentally decorated helms were actually for funerary purposes and not worn in battle, let alone any other time. Returning to the original topic, it would seem the Greeks were more universally equipped with these closed helmets, which was the most prominant item of armor. It is doubtful that they wore them except when battle was imminent. These were most restrictive for hearing and vision so I cannot image the warriors marching or otherwise walking around in them. Does anyone out there know of possibly these heavy helmets might have been carried in case of some kind possibly worn over the back? It also seems that virtually until the latter 19th century, battles were pretty much calculated and protocol oriented events. That is, opposing sides would position, organize and prepare for battle for hours in full view of each other. I am not certain what moment or instance would initiate the battle, but would the forces each wait for indefinite periods in armor waiting? We need our scholars of ancient warfare to address this. All the best, Jim Last edited by Jim McDougall; 30th May 2005 at 06:18 PM. |
2nd June 2005, 07:25 PM | #14 | |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Kansas City, MO USA
Posts: 312
|
A bit off the subject...
Quote:
Here is a site I found that backs up my bad memory... http://www.amsus.org/MilitaryMedicine/MMabstr.htm "History reveals a tremendous impact of respiratory pathogens on the U.S. military, dating back to the time of the Revolutionary and Civil Wars, during which 90% of casualties were for nonbattle injury, including several respiratory illnesses such as measles, whooping cough, and complicated pneumonia." Sometimes a military life is just no fun. |
|
2nd June 2005, 09:20 PM | #15 |
Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Merseyside, UK
Posts: 222
|
Please don't flame me on this, because I don't have my books available to make direct quotes.
With regards to disease first, In Egypt during the Mamluk period, 1250-1517 AD, the biggest single killer of mamluks was not battle but 'Ta'oon', the Plague. Goodness knows when the mamluks weren't fighting Crusaders or Mongols, they were busy fighting each other in the countless power struggles of the Emirs. So that was a lot of Ta'oon. The mamluks also tended to wear relatively heavy armour: mail, lamellar armour, mail-&-plate armour or brigandines and helmets with mail coifs. These were men originally from the Steppes of Central Asia, the Crimea and the Caucasus, having to fight in the Heat of Egypt, Palestine and Syria in heavy armour, yet I don't recall any referrences to men dying of heat stroke. However numerous Egyptian chroniclers like Ibn Iyas, El-Maqrizi and El-Ayni also pointed out that armour was not put on until the men were just about to go into battle. But in at least one battle fought against the Mongols in the early 14th century (it may have been Marg Es-Safar, correct me if I'm wrong) the mamluks remained in the saddle all night, fully armoured, and did not start fighting the Mongols till the morning. The same Egyptian historians are quick to point out when the Mongols and Cruasaders were collapsing from thirst and exhaustion. |
2nd June 2005, 09:58 PM | #16 | |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 655
|
Quote:
"I tell you that I witnessed from them something wonderful and extraordinary. I saw in one of Mamun's wars two lines of horsemen... The line on the right was of composed of 100 turks. The line on the left was composed of 100 other horsemen. All were arrayed in battle order (my comments - probably while wearing armor), awaiting the arrival of Mamun (comments - who was delayed). It was midday and the heat became intense. When Mamun reached the place he found all the turks sitting on their horses, with an exception of three of four, while the others where lying on the ground, with an exception of three of four. I said to a friend - see what happened ! I swear Mamun knew them better than we when he gathered and fostered them." |
|
|
|