RomanArmyTalk

Full Version: Help IDing helmet
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
In roman Republican art I sometimes see high ranking generals wearing what at first looks like an italo-corinthian helmet, but with no eye holes or nose piece decoration. In it's place is an outline of a very thin attic brow piece-like decoration. Sorry, but that's the only way I can explain the part. I have seen a reproduction of this exact helmet at Terry Nix's website and it is labeled as "Consul Helmet". I have also seen it in the Osprey book "Armies of the Carthaginian Wars" on the cover on the right hand figure. Does anybody know what this Helmet is called? Is it just a different form of Attic Helmet or Italo-Corinthian? How long was it in use and when, if it did, drop out of use in the Roman army?
It seems that Roman high-ranking officers prefered the "hellenistic look" in their armour until the 3rd Century AD - if we believe the works of artists which have been teached to show armour in an idealised, heroic way. And heroic in Roman art means hellenistic. Also the Greeks showed pieces of equipment - like the Corinthian helmet - still in their art after they had fallen out of use in reality, because it was regarded as heroic.
So the reliefs and sculptures have to be treated very carefully and cannot be taken as exact replicas of the real gear worn by Roman officers.
The helmets most often shown fall broadly in the categories "Apulo/Italo-Corinthian" or "Attic".
An Apulo-Corinthian-looking helmet for example is shown - on legionarie's heads - besides the Montefortino-type on the so-called Altar of Domitius Ahenobarbus, which is dated between the late 2nd to mid-1st century BC. For this time we have hundreds of Montefortinos found elsewhere (even when armour as grave-goods died out with Roman supremacy in Italy) but not one type which looks like the depicted . So we have no reason to believe that the Apulo-Corinthian type was worn into the Roman period. It was widely worn in South-Italy from the late 6th to 4th century BC. In the case of officers no wonders that there's no helmet found which can be identified as belonged to them regarding the ratio legionaries to officers.
The curious "parade" Apulo-Corinthian from Autun (dated to the 1st century) could also have belonged to a statue, but perhaps shows Roman officer's bad taste.
It is of course possible that one or another of the late hellenistic helmets which appeared on the marked without findplace and findcontext once belonged to a Roman officer.

Greets,

Decebalus/Andreas Gagelmann
i disagree with your bad-taste remark about the Autun helmet since it definetely is NOT an ugly helmet at all.

Furthermore since a lot of the higher officers in any one Legion didnt fight in the front ranks, helmets like these are not that often found, plust the fact that an officer's kit in general was highly expensive so not too many would have survived anyway.

M.VIB.M.
Quote:i disagree with your bad-taste remark about the Autun helmet since it definetely is NOT an ugly helmet at all.

Sorry, it is of course just a matter of personal taste :wink:

Quote:Furthermore since a lot of the higher officers in any one Legion didnt fight in the front ranks, helmets like these are not that often found, plust the fact that an officer's kit in general was highly expensive so not too many would have survived anyway.

M.VIB.M.

That's what I meant is the reason there have been (nearly) no Roman officer's helmets found.

When thinking of the highly decorated helmets for troopers I wonder which extraordinary pieces the officers would have worn... Confusedhock:
Perhaps the Autun-helmet actually gives us a glimpse of what was possible.

Greets,

Decebalus/Andreas Gagelmann
Quote:A magnificent beast!

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b242/ ... lmet-1.jpg

Well, it probably was.... :roll:
I gotta disagree, the autun helmet is one nasty ugly mother......I'll stop there but ughhh....
The mother of all helmets!

LOL

M.VIB.M.
How well is this helmet documented? I can`t help it but it looks like a helmet suited for a italian condottiere`s head in renaissance or even a baroque parade helmet....
Indeed, it looks like a piece of 'Roman' armor of 16-17th centuries.
It may well do, to you, but Robinson doesn't even question its authenticity, whatsoever. Can you explain more clearly why it's 16th-17th century, and not just the vague opinions you've left us with? :wink:

It's a Roman helmet from Autun. Prove me wrong.
Quote:It may well do, to you, but Robinson doesn't even question its authenticity, whatsoever. Can you explain more clearly why it's 16th-17th century, and not just the vague opinions you've left us with? :wink:

It's a Roman helmet from Autun. Prove me wrong.

I read Robinson's book. I didn't say it is, I just said it looks like/resembles a part of stylized 'Roman' parade armor, popular in Europe in 16th-17th centuries. I had no aim of proving anyone wrong. :wink: