Could the closed Greek helmet kill a warrior?

[Jens Nordlunde]

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?

[B.I]

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 :-)

[derek]

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.

[Jens Nordlunde]

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.

[Justin]

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.

[B.I]

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.

[wolviex]

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!

[Jens Nordlunde]

Hi Wolviex,

It is a wonder to me that the Greek helmets were in use for so long, although they were protective, they also made sure that the one who had the helmet on could not hear very well and could only look straight ahead besides it being a ‘heat collector’. The fact that it was used over a very long period tells me that I/we still have to learn a lot about warfare in ancient times. This does not, of course only counts for the Greeks, but for all the countries in an area where the climate is very hot during the ‘fighting season’ – Greek helmets or not.

Lets say you had 50’000 men out fighting a the enemy another army of 50’000 men – how many would lay on the battlefield with a heat stroke if the temperature was from 35 to 45 C within the first six hours?

[Lew]

Lets say you had 50’000 men out fighting a the enemy another army of 50’000 men – how many would lay on the battlefield with a heat stroke if the temperature was from 35 to 45 C within the first six hours?[/QUOTE]

Hi Guys

The history channel has a show called battlefield detectives and on one episode the talked about the battle of monmouth in my home town during the American revolution. I seems large numbers of British troops died from heat stroke due to their heavy wool uniforms and carrying heavy gear and lack of water. The Greeks wore very little clothes a tunic light body armor such as a breast plate shin guards and arm bands along with the helmet. I'm sure their were some number of warriors who died of heat stroke but that type of armor was worn by many armies over hundreds of years so if there was a big problem with men dying of heat stroke then why was that type of armor so popular and used for so long a time? I have read that celtic warriors fought completely nude with no armor that must have kept them cool but it is not a good idea to be running into battle with certain extremeties exposed when there are sharp swords being waved around you could end up singing a few octaves higher at the end of the day

Lew

[tom hyle]

An interesting counterinformation is that I have read and heard that the crusades helped promote the development of complex metal plate armour in Europe, as previously to invading the Middle East the (basically) Normans/Germans/etc. had popularly used cuirbolli for the hard plates in their body armour. The story told is that cuirbolli, being hide stiffened by being permeated by molten wax, is quite stiff and hard in Western Europe, but in the heat of Palestine, what are hard waxes in Europe are much softer, and more tend to lubricate a cut.....I have worn a large closed helm in recreation combat and sparring and it does get mightily hot in the Sun. Note that the familiar barbut style ancient Greek helmet (though they actually used many types, varying with individual, region, time, etc.) could evidently be pushed up to expose the face and take air in times when appropriate/safe. Of course, heat does kill, but then, so does a spear or club to the head......

[Aqtai]

Originally Posted by tom hyle

An interesting counterinformation is that I have read and heard that the crusades helped promote the development of complex metal plate armour in Europe, as previously to invading the Middle East the (basically) Normans/Germans/etc. had popularly used cuirbolli for the hard plates in their body armour. The story told is that cuirbolli, being hide stiffened by being permeated by molten wax, is quite stiff and hard in Western Europe, but in the heat of Palestine, what are hard waxes in Europe are much softer, and more tend to lubricate a cut.....I have worn a large closed helm in recreation combat and sparring and it does get mightily hot in the Sun. Note that the familiar barbut style ancient Greek helmet (though they actually used many types, varying with individual, region, time, etc.) could evidently be pushed up to expose the face and take air in times when appropriate/safe. Of course, heat does kill, but then, so does a spear or club to the head......

I think that the Crusades had an impact on European armours as a result of the Crusaders adopting Islamic armours and taking them back to Europe. By the late 11th century many types of armour had disappeared in Western Europe, the main types used by western Europeans were mail, leather armours and quilted fabric armours. Islamic Countries in addition to using these types were also using lamellar armour, both leather and iron, brigandines, kazaghands, mail camails attached to helmets, and possibly even 'mail-and-plate' armour and limb defences such as bazu-bands.

I think the basinets and 'pairs-of-plates' which appeared in 14th century Western Europe were directly infuenced by similar Islamic armours.

With regards to the Hellenic Corinthian helmet, I believe that the wearers might have suffered from heat stroke on exeptionally hot days, but this was a very rare occurance, otherwise it was a very practical helmet. After all it was used by the Greeks in one form or another from the middle of the 8th century BC up until the mid-5th century BC.

[Jens Nordlunde]

Hi Louieblades,

True the Greeks were normally not heavily dressed, and that would have helped of course. If they had a closed helmet on the head, this would mean that the ‘control centre’ of the body was in a ‘steam boiler’, heated by the sun from the outside and by the energy used by fighting at the inside, which must have been unbearable and could, I think, lead to false judgements when decisions had to be taken.

At the time when the British troops were fighting in America during the revolution, the soldiers were a valuable part of the army. In India in the old times, it was not quite like that, as many of the soldiers were recruited amongst poor people, armed and sent off to the battle field, to die one way or another, as the leaders regarded the soldiers as theirs to use as they pleased, which was quite another way of thinking than they did under the American revolution.

Hi Tom/Aqtai,

I have never had such a helmet on, so I can only guess how unbearable the heat must be, but I do remember how hot it was to get into cars, before they got air conditioned, when they had been standing in the sun on a very hot summer day – one of this helmets must have been far worse, not only be course of the sun, but also be course of the energy used in the battle – running forward at full speed, swinging the sword over the head yelling ‘CHARGE’ – maybe most even reached the enemy, before they dropped.

[Yannis]

Dear friends, I am back home after a long trip and I found this discusion very amusing.

As a Greek with some knowledge on the history of my land, I have never heard of someone dying of heatstroke during an ancient battle. But probably they were.

There is a very famous story about Fidipedes, the man that after the battle of Marathon run to Athens to bring the news of victory. He died from exhaustion, but not only from this running. Before few days he had run to Sparta to ask help and after that he was fighting in the battlefield. So Marathon running was born.

Also it was a tradition in ancient Greece, that it was alive till the greek revolution of 1821. The warriors used to wash their body and their hair before battle. Because of this thread, I am wondering now if this tradition was actually a way to keep their body temperature low.

Finally I sugest you, if you are interest about ancient greek fighting to read Persfield's novel "Gates of fire" about the spartan warriors and the battle of Thermopylae. If you like swords you will love this novel. It maked me understand how a man can stand all day choping and slashing other humans.

[Jens Nordlunde]

Hi Yannis,

Nice to hear you are amused. I could of course have chosen another helmet, but I chose the Greek helmet as I thought it would be easier for the other members to imagine the heat, as it is closed. When historians wrote about how many dead there were after a battle, I would be more than surprised if they had written how many died of heath stroke, so no wonder that you did not see any references to it anywhere – neither have I, but that is no reason not to wonder about it.

[Lew]

Jens

Check out this link.http://www.museumreplicas.com/websto...archPosition=9

Maybe one of us can one day buy this helmet and test out your theory


Lew

[Yannis]

Originally Posted by LOUIEBLADES

Maybe one of us can one day buy this helmet and test out your theory

I have test modern army helmet and I use to wear my motorcycle helmet in greek summer and they are both enough hot. Thank you

[Jens Nordlunde]

Hi Lew/Yannis,

Splendid idea. After having thought about it once more, I think I will keep Yannis company and stand by the ringside video filming you on the ‘battle field’, This will be a most important part of experimental archaeology – and I am sure, that would you write a book about the experiment, it might very well be a bestseller. BTW I don’t think the temperature should be under 35C.
Jens

[tom hyle]

I don't think I can summon up much belief that European plate armour is descended from Middle Eastern armours encountered in the crusades, both because the use of hard plates in armour in Europe predates this and seems to evolve fairly continuously, without "jumping" to an unrecognizable product; each is a relative of the last, and (more strikingly) because there seem to be significant differences in basic philosophy/design/layout between "Eastern"/Islamic armours and European ones. The shape of the plates is different (the Islamic ones are flatter and more angular/geometric; the European tend toward a more organnic/naturalistic/body-based shape), as is the way they join to each other or to the rest of the harness, as is the way that bodily joints, elbows and knees, are handled (the Islamic ones being markedly similar to only the earliest European ones; ones far predating the crusades.). It seems like two seperate/oposing streams, and if one came from the other directly It must have been very long ago (of course the first crusades were).....I think they are parrallel evolutions from distant common ancestors. BTW, AFAIK there is little or no Islamic equivalent to European full plate armour? Chainmail is said to be a Celtic invention. Is there a competing contention from/for the East?

[Aqtai]

I'm not suggesting Western European plate armour is descended from Islamic armours, however I do believe that Islamic armour had a strong influence on the development of European armour. I also believe that the brigandine or 'pair of plates' originated in the Near East and was taken back to Europe by the crusaders. I also think that the basinet with its mail camail is descended from 13th century Islamic helmets that had mail camails.

Although it has to be said that there is another contender for the ancestry of the bascinet. Early basinets have a more conical shape and the visor is attached by a single hinge in the middle of the forehead. This bears a resemblance to the "Kipchaq" helmets worn in Russia and Central Asia in the 10th-13th centuries. This is my own little theory, please feel free to totally disregard it.

With regards to mail, there is very little doubt that it was invented by the Celts, adopted by the Romans who in Turn passed it on the Iranians. However I believe it was the Iranians, specifically the Parthians, who added longer sleeves and skirts to mail shirts. I have also read, please don't ask me where because I can't remember, that it is possible that the Ancient Assyrians invented mail. As far as know there is no evidence for this beyond the fact that the Assyrians were making very fine Iron helmets in the 7th century, and reliefs from the palace of king Ashurbanipal, now in the British Museum, which show Assyrian soldiers wearing some kind of long armoured coat reaching to the knees or ankles with elbow length sleeves and a coif of some kind attached to the helmet. This armour is usually described as being scale or lamellar. But the 'cut' bears a striking resemblance to mail.

Please excuse the atrocious quality of these pictures:


Helmet no. 3 above is the type I'm referring to. You can't see it in the pic, but there is a hinge in the middle of the forehead connecting the visor to the skull.

I'm aware I've gone way off topic here, so I'll put in this pic:


Helmets of this type were the most popular helmet in ancient Greece for about 300 years. If they had been so dangerous, they would not have used. Another point, they were only worn in battle, when not fighting hoplites would push them up to the top of their heads.

[Yannis]

Originally Posted by Aqtai

Another point, they were only worn in battle, when not fighting hoplites would push them up to the top of their heads.

Exactly! Like Pericles in the photo. Although, the sources say that he was wearing it like this mostly because he had a bad form of the head! He was the builder of Athenian Golden Age and maybe his brain was too big

[Jim McDougall]

"...or art thou but a dagger of the mind, a false creation,
Proceeding from the heat oppressed brain?".
Macbeth II , i, 33, Shakespeare


The original question asked by Jens on this topic was incredibly interesting as
it is regarding a factor seldom, if ever, addressed in historical narratives or military assessments of physiology of the warrior in combat situations.
In particular, his question uses the enclosed Greek helmet as an example to analyze the physical effects of heat on the warrior in adverse weather or climate resulting from such protective armor. This same application would pertain equally to virtually all combat forces in all periods wearing similar protective gear, but in this case we wonder if not only could early warriors have been overcome with heatstroke, but could their effectiveness in combat have been reduced by this deadly combination of heat and armor.

In reading through much of the literature on the history of armor, there is of course considerable discussion on the development of various forms, and most historical data pertains to medieval armor, however there is next to nothing addressing the problem of wearing it in severe climates or seasons.
Apparantly some of the only observation or investigation into the effects of sunstroke in combat situations that are noted are from India concerning soldiers there where this factor proved a considerable item in sickness and mortality. This brings to mind of course the British troops of the Raj wearing kepi type hats with neck covering flaps, and the pith helmets created to provide protection from the deadly sun.

Returning to earlier times and armor, Brittanica (p.392) notes "...it is one of the mysteries in the history of armour how the crusaders could have fought under the scorching sun of the east in thick quilted garments covered with excessively heavy chain mail, for this equipment was so cumbersome to take off and on that it must have been worn frequently night and day, and the very nature of the fabric made it almost impossibleto move the sword arm with more than a wide swinging cut".

This entry notes how heavy and cumbersome the protection was, but only hints at the more insidious threat of the deadly heat. In "Brasseys Book of Body Armor" (Robert Woosnam-Savage, 2000, p.70) it is noted "...the real problem with armor was not its weight, but the way it trapped heat. Body heat resulting from battle exertion COULD PROVE FATAL. At the Battle of Agincourt (1415) the Duke of York seems to have died of a heart attack brought on by 'the heat of battle'".
In checking on this key event further, in John Keegans brilliant work "The Face of Battle", which is the only work I am familiar with that focuses on the psychological aspects of combat, the author notes, "...the Duke of York, who was pulled from under a heap of corpses, dead from either suffocation or a heart attack" (p.112).

It would seem that the use of the poignant phrase 'heat of battle' could have had more meaning than we have realized. It would seem quite possible that the combination of external heat, and the internal heat generated in the intense exertion of combat might well result in debilitating or even fatal situation athough no physical wounds are suffered.
Dr. F. Kottenkamp ("The History of Chivalry and Armor", 1850, p.89) states, "...the heat of summer made the armor insupportible and exposed the wearer to the dangers of suffocation and apoplexy, or produced at least, such a debility as to disable him from wielding his weapons".
* For we lay persons, the term apoplexy = a sudden, usually marked loss of bodily function due to rupture or occlusion of blood vessel , i.e.brain hemorrhage or stroke.

With these references it would seem that either severe heat from either external forces such as climate/sun or extended/dramatic exertion or especially combination of both could well fatally impact a warrior wearing heavy armor, especially closed helmet. Given that these factors were certainly present for those wearing Corinthian helmets as well, it would seem plausible that although not specifically recorded, it may well have occurred.

Regarding the warriors ability to function effectively in combat in severe heat situations in armor and heavy protective gear, it would seem that there may have been much more negative impact on these forces than mentioned in historic accounts.

Not only may combatants have become quickly spent or exhausted during battles, but mental faculties are quickly compromised by heat exhaustion or sunstroke if not exceeded by sickness or respiration difficulty and loss of consciousness.

Although I can claim no medical expertise and my notes on medical and historical comments concern later periods, I hope this might apply to perspective on similar effects that may apply to the Greek helmets.

Best regards,
Jim

[Jens Nordlunde]

Hi Jim,

Thank you for the article, as it can hardly be called a mail. It is very well researched as well as written, and the quotes you give are excellent – it must have taken you hours. I have yet to find quotes like that in my books. I am not surprised that finding quotes like that is far apart, as we must not forget, that it was one thing to be killed on a battle field fighting, but it was not a big honour to die of a heat stroke, even if it was on the battlefield, so not many of these stories ended up in the history books – or in any other books for that matter. To die on the battlefield due to the heat, dressed in mail shirt and a helmet or in plates, well oiled at the knees and elbows, and a helmet, was something which happened, no reason to take the honour from the man by talking too much about it – after all, he did show up at the right place to the right time.

Jens

[Rick]

With reference to Agincourt , IIRC it was fought after a prolonged period of rainy weather . In this case French knights when unhorsed would have had a horrible time regaining their footing due to the suction of the mud on their plate armor and many may well have suffocated in the mud along with a number of their similarly armored English foe .
The English archers unencumbered were able to fight much more effectively in muddy conditions and once a knight was down he was easy pickings .
I guess that not only heat could have been an enemy of the fully armored man .
I suspect the Duke of York drowned in the mud .

I do not think that any honor is taken from a man in the way he died on the field of battle , unless he was killed running away . York was there facing incredible odds along with the rest of the English and was most likely covered with the enemies of his king .

As you say ; showing up for the fray is what really counts .

[Jens Nordlunde]

Hi Rick,

You wrote: ‘I do not think that any honour is taken from a man in the way he died on the field of battle, unless he was killed running away’.

I quite agree with you, but if someone died in real battle it must have been a bigger honour, so why tell the family other than ‘he died fighting’, and so he did – in a way.

Now I am at it, were any orders given during fighting, other than ‘ATTACK’? Be course with a full helmet on, or one with mail it must have been hard/impossible to hear anything in the noise of the battle. Besides, the way some helmets, with or without mail ‘curtains’ were made, it must have been very difficult to look to the sides to see if your ‘neighbours’ had left already, leaving you ‘alone’ on the battle field. As the uniforms were only invented rather late in India, it could have been difficult to judge, if you were surrounded by friends or by not so friendly enemies.

[Jens Nordlunde]

Yesterday, on TV, I saw the Vienna marathon, and that made me think of water and overheated people. They did not have helmets on, and the did not have very much cloth on, but they were sprayed with water, got water to drink and fruit to eat, or many of them would never have made it.

I doubt very much, that there would be time to eat and drink during the fight, so here we have an overheated soldier, the ‘fuse’ almost burned over – and he is dehydrated as well. This must have shortened the time he was able to stand up.

[Rick]

Jens , I have a feeling that today's homo sapiens is a wimp compared to our ancestors .

Not to mention your runners were not facing death if they didn't finish .
The amount of adrenaline released during a battle must have been tremendous .

[Jens Nordlunde]

Rick, you may have a point there, which is often overlooked.
To be quit honest, I don't know, I only saw the runners which finished the maraton - but I do agree that it is most likely that nothing happend to the others - other a visit to the hospital for overheating.
When it comes to adrenaline, you may be right, only I don't know how much that matters, but I suppose it could matter. Any doctors around?

[Rivkin]

My reply is going to be controversial, but:

If you talk with people volunteering for war, you'll understand that a lot of them are looking for an adventure. Adventure can include a heroic death in the midst of battle, it does not include freezing to death while manning some supply post in the rear.

Therefore we are not interested in how many people died in Civil War from diceases and other non-combat related causes (majority of casualty suffered by parties were actually from diceases), we don't want to talk about the real reasons behind the union victory - we do want to invent the "heroic battle that decided everything". We could've picked Shiloh or some other engagement but for certain, sometimes quite arbitrary reasons we picked Gettysberg.

It's similar stories with heroes - we don't like an effective military machine to win the war. We don't like a new technology or superioty in numbers and supply to win the war. We like to have immortal heroes, let's say Patton, and to tell stories about some ingenious plans they devised.

Diseases where one of the main problems of mediaval warfare - but how many writers do write about it ? I remember only one author suggesting that one of the biggest problems with mamluk reqruitment was taking people from somewhat isolated areas, and deploying them 1000 miles to the south, resulting in huge numbers of them simply dying from diseases they had no immunity to.

The same with people dying from heat, exhastion, drawning in mud or in a human stampede on the battlefield - it's not "adventurous", and therefore largely left outside of the scope of debate.

[M ELEY]

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!).

[Jens Nordlunde]

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.