I have recently come across a few little bits that might be taken as evidence for visors normally being raised for mounted hand to hand combat in the 15th C.

The first little bit is a negative evidence that I interpret to mean the author would normally fight with visor raised. It is from Le Chevalier Deliberé an allegorical poem by Olivier de la Marche written in 1483. I will write it out in the original middle French and then in English.

267. (stanza number)
Quant je viz la bataille oultree
De ceulx a qui subget je fuz,
J'ay toute crainte despitee
Sy ay ma visiere baissee,
Com cil qui ne veult vivre plus.
Sans craindre qui me courra sus,
A chascun en donnay le choix,
Ou a tous deux en une fois.

267. (translation)
When I saw the deadly combat
Of those whose subject I was,
I scorned all fear
And lowered my visor
Like someone who no longer cares to live.
Without fearing who would have at me,
To each I gave the choice
Or to both at the same time.

I also came across a reference in the Chapter in mounted combat with swords of "The Martial Arts in Renaissance Europe" by Sydney Anglo where a manuscript from 1509 recommended to fight with a raised visor in battle as your chances of being severly injured by a face shot were small compared to the advantages in vision. The writer (Monte) assumed the cavalryman would be wearing an armet or very similar helmet.

I hope this proves of interest. Perhaps those on the board with mounted combat experience (a plaisance) would care to comment.

If the visor on the helmet is *usually* worn up, why didn't they just remove it? Or is that why so many of the helmets don't have any sort of visor at all. If the visor is usually worn down under artillery fire, why are archer's helmets usually sans visor? Sounds to me like the archers should be wearing the helmets with visors and the cavalry the ones without.

Some early Armets were designed without visors, but having the visor gives the option to the mounted man to lower it when faced with a threat that warrents it (not to mention bodies of cavalrymen attract missle fire like magnets).

Many late 15th c. French manuscripts (early Italian wars) show French Gendarmes with complete harness, but with open faced sallets worn with bevors - a compromise between vision & saftey.

I have not done research of visual references on this subject, only extant armour, but my conclusion is that nearly all armets had visors. That's kinda what makes them the helmet they are; hinged cheeks plates and a visor. An armet isn't generally considered an 'open faced' helmet.

I agree that mounted men usually had visors and often lifted them for better visibility and air. I personally think it's a matter of personal preference. Barbuta's don't have visors, but they have very adequate ventilation and vision. Armets give the wearer the option of very good protection vs. lifting the lid to see and breath. Some sallets share the characteristics of armets, but have the disadvantage of restricted head movement and ventilation when worn with a bevor. Of course we know that sallets were often worn without bevors and/or that bevors were sometimes removed after a certain point in a battle.

Helmets for footmen are another matter that I will discuss later.