- This is known as the horned helmet.
It's perhaps the most recognizable helmet in the world,
and certainly one of the most mysterious.
I'm Henry Yallop, the Keeper of Edge Weapons and Armour
at the Royal Armouries, and we're here at Leeds.
The helmet was made for King Henry VIII of England
by the court armorer
of the Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian I.
It's a ceremonial, diplomatic gift of really high status.
The form we're seeing now is really quite different
to how it probably was originally.
It would've been covered in
gold- and silver-pierced panels and velvet.
These spectacles, they're a common form
of spectacle in the 16th century.
It's kind of amazing that they've survived at all,
seeing as they can be detached.
The eyes themselves are very far apart,
and this has created another bit of controversy about it
in that they don't actually form within
to the normal human eye-to-eye sort of distance.
Its whole weirdness and bizarre appearance
is probably the reason it survived
because the body, the rest of the armor,
didn't get past 1649 probably.
Why someone would wear a helmet like this
is kind of the crux of the debate.
The face is obviously quite grotesque.
It's been suggested that it might be
modeled on Maximilian himself, the emperor.
But it'd be quite strange way to have himself portrayed,
you know, this snot-nosed, wrinkly, stubbly fellow.
I think the most convincing theory is the most recent one,
which has been put forward
by a former colleague, Graeme Rimer,
that it is the mask of a fool.
And there's a particular character called
the "Knave of Bells" from a work by Peter Flötner,
that looks very much like the face.
So he's got the hook nose, he's got the dripping snots,
he's got stubble, and the spectacles.
What he hasn't got is horns.
I mean, they're incredibly well-made,
like the helmet itself.
But they are slightly crudely attached.
So it might be that they were put on.
The problem with that is, why?
Amongst certainly common people,
the horns were associated with basically bad things,
from the devil, and particularly being a cuckold.
So neither are things you want to imply
from one monarch to another really.
The other theory is great men
don't need to worry about such things.
And, in fact, they kept the imagery of strength.
There's no documentary evidence of it being worn.
Unfortunately, you can't identify any of the armors
he had from the written records.
To the extent that they're saying it's unfit for a king,
yeah, because of the horns, because of the grotesque face.
Why would it be worn?
And well, if these are the signs of a cuckold or the devil,
then that can't be the case
because you wouldn't gift something like that.
Anyone can be foolish, you know,
from the most mighty to the lowest.
And we all need to be mindful of our foolishness
and act accordingly.
So you can, I think, justify the fool face,
and potentially the horns if you buy them
as an image of power, and nothing to do with cuckoldry.
So, because it's such an important piece
for the Royal Armouries, and has been so
integral to our history from Henry VIII,
and such a hot topic of scholarly debate,
as well as being the physical logo of the museum,
it's probably the most iconic
and potentially important piece in my personal care,
as Keeper of Edge Weapons and Armour
at the Royal Armouries.