Did Roman cavalry wear face-masks in battle?

[jvrjenivs]

My personal view is that they may very well be battle helmets, and in my shows I do indeed describe them as such. This because I personally don't see much problems with vision.

What I do see however is that, as Christian already mentioned, most people do indeed include the vision into their argument, where most of these are based barely on assumptions. I think lots can be gained with proper research into this arillea, which does include loads of different area's of expertise. Before I'm even going to question if the vision is sufficient, I would need to tackle the question what 'sufficient vision' means. In a battle sitiuation, being on horseback, attacking a germanic tribesman whom is using different techniques, does all need different 'sufficient vision', IMHO.

Secondly one needs to get used to it. Let's compare it to driving a car. Do you need the mirror in the center of your car. If you learn to drive (in the Netherlands at least) you learn to use it a lot, so yes, you do need that one. I know people who don't like to drive with a load blocking their central mirrors view. But then again, when you start driving with a trailer (or caravan) behing your car, you need to obtain a different way of viewing what is happening behind your car, by using the two mirrors on the sides of the car more intensively. IMHO the same goes for vision with helmets, masks, etc.

This being said, there is a big argument, and this is just the start of it, looking from the viewpoint if a logical approach by vision-reduction can be used at all, not even going into detail on other aspects like context, material, construction etc.