11-11-2019, 02:10 PM
(11-11-2019, 01:41 AM)Dan Howard Wrote: Solid bowl helmets... also require substantial more work and skill to create and they are much harder to repair... Enforcing standards and having strict quality control will result in a better multi-piece helmet than a single-bowl helmet that was made without those procedures in place.
That sounds about right.
Going back to Michael's 'Rolls Royce v. Ford' analogy, which is along the same lines, we might compare the old gallic/italic and the new ridge models in the same way:
Principiate: individually hand-made helmets, quality varies considerably, some parts (ie hinges) fiddly and easily broken, and hard to repair or replace. Bowl rather weak and requires cross bracing.
Dominate: factory-produced helmets. Production faster and more frequent. 'Fiddly bits' replaced by simpler straps and buckles. Some models have better facial protection (nasals) and larger cheek pieces. Two-part bowl possibly thicker metal, ridge possibly creates a weak point, but the amount of force needed to break the helmet would probably be fatal to the wearer anyway!
Result: some principiate helmets may have been of better quality overall than dominate models, but many were not. Most ridge helmets, on the other hand, were entirely effective and did what they needed to do, besides being available in far greater numbers. This is why they came to dominate later arms production for c.150 years.
Nathan Ross
