11-10-2019, 12:19 PM
(11-10-2019, 10:23 AM)Renatus Wrote: This has the makings of a sterile argument. The issue, surely, is not 'quality' but 'adequacy for purpose'. With the technology of the time, the production of a monoblock helmet required time and skill, while (I would suggest) ridge helmets could be turned out of the state arms factories relatively quickly and cheaply with a lower level of skill. Much might depend upon the armament and tactics of the enemy. Neither would be likely to survive a full-blooded blow with a battleaxe but, if the most likely possibility was a glancing blow with a spear, the ridge helmet would probably be entirely adequate. In short, the ridge helmet lasted because it was 'good enough'. A Rolls Royce may be the epitome of motoring excellence but a production-line Ford will still get you about.Hello Renatus, honestly I appreciate and essentially I agree with your explanation, that is what I am trying to explain since long time. As a quality, as it is possible to define a quality concept for an helmet, an italic helmet was superior, but other factors have led to the adoption of an helmet that was 'good enough'.
