Why do some medieval knights’ tomb effigies show two helmets?

Two helmets and their possible roles

The Bavarian National Museum offers a useful comparison in the monument of Konrad VI von Bickenbach. He died in 1429 and the sandstone carving dates from around 1430. He wears a bascinet and a mail defence covers his neck and cheeks. The museum also identifies a large jousting helm topped by a galloping horse, which could be buckled to the breastplate.

The silhouettes help. A bascinet fits close to the head. On some examples you can see the line where the visor meets the body of the helmet. A German bascinet dating from around 1400 at the Metropolitan Museum of Art brings together helmet, visor and mail defence. On a Western European example dated between 1375 and 1400, the Met points out pierced studs around the rim for attaching the mail. It is a useful detail to look for in stone, where the boundary between metal and fabric can be hard to see.

A great helm usually has a more enclosed outline and a narrow opening for the eyes. The Royal Armouries records its use by cavalry at the start of the Hundred Years’ War and explains that as the bascinet became more common in combat, the great helm became associated with tournaments. That is the broad trend. Where the two pieces appear on a slab leaves open how their owner wore them.

Look for a third arrangement: a helm beneath the effigy’s head. Arms historian Guy Francis Laking drew attention to this position on fourteenth-century English effigies and compared them with the monument in Frankfurt to Günther von Schwarzburg, who died in 1349. He suggested that some tall helms could fit over a pointed bascinet. It is a technical hypothesis worth testing against the shape and position of the helm and a surviving comparable object.

What the end of a chain reveals

On Dietrich von Hohenberg’s grave slab, dated to around 1380, the museum identifies long chains connecting the breastplate to the helm, sword and dagger. The carving also preserves part of the lance. There is a good reason to follow each chain: another restrains the lion at his feet, which the museum interprets here as a symbol of evil. Armour fittings and a symbolic image appear on the same stone.

Bickenbach’s monument adds a distinction: the catalogue describes buckles for his helm. Identifying what is attached and how it is fastened tells us more than counting chains. If the end is missing, describe how far the carving survives. Seen at a distance, an incomplete chain can look like a cord on the garment.

Why the belt catches the eye

Hohenberg’s catalogue entry describes a low belt and a military garment fitted at the waist. The sculptor marked the garment’s rivets, which the museum reads as evidence of built-in iron plates. The silhouette has two levels: the narrowest part of the garment and the line of the belt. Following both makes clear why the belt seems so low.

A study of the Bad Doberan octagon published by the GWZO compares armoured figures with the tomb slab of Weikhard Frosch in Frankfurt. It points out that plate belts could be bulky and made from valuable materials in the second half of the fourteenth century. The author also suggests that their size on some figures emphasises the subject’s rank. For Homburg this opens up a possibility: a detail of dress can tell us about the person’s standing. Each monument merits a reading of its own.

What the stone shows and what to compare

Around 1400, mail and several kinds of plate defence were used alongside one another. In stone, rows of rings may be suggested by a repeated pattern. Rivets, by contrast, stand out as points across a smooth surface. Sometimes they are the clearest evidence of a defence hidden under a covering. Look at the edge of a garment or a joint to see where one texture ends and another begins.

An armour at the Met tests that reading. In the 1920s, the museum assembled components from the fortress of Chalcis on the Greek island of Euboea to show the appearance of an armour of around 1400. Its catalogue distinguishes medieval parts, restorations and modern velvet. An armour on display may itself combine pieces. The catalogue tells you how that has been done.

In a gallery, carvings and armours answer different questions. The object lets you inspect a rivet or hinge. The sculpture shows where the carver chose to emphasise it and how it relates to the rest of the figure. You can compare the shapes and surfaces of the modern reproductions featured here in Tienda Medieval’s historical helmets and medieval armour collections.

A helm could also identify a family

Dietrich von Hohenberg, who died in 1381, has another monument in the Bavarian catalogue. The epitaph shows the three lozenges of his family arms. Above the shield, a closed helm supports a crest with a bearded head, a tall hat and feathers. The museum links his family with Homburg in the Spessart and with the service of the prince-bishops of Würzburg. Here the helm above the shield is part of the heraldry.

A helmet can accompany the dead in another way. Herefordshire Archaeology records that the helm attributed to Sir Richard Pembridge was displayed alongside his tomb in Hereford Cathedral with a tabard and shield. The original is now held by the National Museum of Scotland. The English example shows that equipment could play a physical part in commemoration as well as being carved in stone.

Next time you see a knight carved in stone, start with the helmet he is wearing. Then trace the chest and see where the chains end. Leave the shield, crest and inscription until last. The first helmet may tell you how a knight protected his head. The second may tell you how he was meant to be remembered.