RomanArmyTalk

Part of my ongoing project of a (second half or even late) 5th century briton chieftain impression will be to get a new ridge helmet. I could have opted for the more continental, eastern-influenced fashions getting west in the late 5th century like Planig type spangenhelmes but I wish to go for a more conservative fashion, which although lacking solid evidence seems likely, seeing among other things the similarity in construction between late roman ridge helmets and anglo-saxon ones.

The only possible depictions of helmets in a 5th century context come from the Vergilius Vaticanus codex, if one agrees with the theory that it was made in late 5th century Britain rather than on the continent.


It shows here a stylised helmet, crested and decorated.

A lot of ridge helmets date from the early part of the 4th century and they seems to me to early to fit my project (Deurne, Berkasovo, etc.).

I have thought about two possible choices and I'd like advices about which one could be the best.

Burgh Castle

The Burgh Castle helmet is a fragmented exemple from one of the Litus Saxonicum forts. It was dated to the 4th century, not very precisely though, so may be a bit early for me.
It is undecorated and lacks cheek-guards, neck-guard and nasal so those elements would have to be figured out from other helmets.

Concesti

The Concesti helmet was found in an early 5th century hunnic grave. It was silvered and decorated, with a rather high bowl, and represents possibly the latest type of ridge helmets.


The Burgh Castle helmet would fit more or less the geographical context (Britain and northern Gaul), but is 4th century and I would need to figure out several parts and the decoration from other helmets.

The Concesti helmet would be closer to my timeframe (althought it could have been old when buried), more complete, it would also fit the status of my character but it was found in a rather different (hunnic) context.

Opinions?

There was another 5th century helmet found in Gaul, dated to the reign of Constantine III in 408-411. It was an Intercisa-IV variant (the reconstruction is crap, it was before they knew how these helmets were constructed, they put an Intercisa-IV crest on a banded helmet).

EDIT: It's the River Maas helmet. Found with a bunch of coins of Constantine III.

The Vergilius manuscript is an excellent basis, it's very likely an Intercisa-III or Intercisa-IV would have been represented in that picture. Rusty is reconstructing the boots from the manuscript, based on the ones Matthew Amt did.

I highly Recommend the Concesti or the Burgh Castle. But there is only one way to get a Concesti and that is to have it custom made, as the one Deepeeka Labels "Concesti" is their Burgh Castle Helmet without an Earhole. The Deepeeka Burgh Castle is okay, but if you have the money get one custom.

Koblenz dates to the Late 4th, Armamentaria sells a good Brass-plated Koblenz. I like it, I think it's made by Al-hamdd, so make sure you order through Armamentaria.

There are several others that date to the 4th century, and I can link you to helmet suppliers, etc. You should check out my Late Roman Handbook in my signature too, it has all the Late Roman stuff produced on the market or sold through vendors (a handful of Blacksmiths for custom goods too).

If you want to go super fancy, you could have a baldenheim reconstructed, but that's Late 5th Century and I don't think they were ever introduced to Britain.

PS: This Handbook actually needs a handful of more updates (little stuff, no big deal) but I cannot find my goddamn flashdrive again.

Thanks Evan. It will be of course for a custom made helmet anyway as I am far from satisfied by the Deepeeka 'heavy' helmets.

Before your edit I thought you may refer to the helmet from Poitiers, which I think is indeed of Intercisa type althought I haver never seen any correct reconstruction.
The Richborough helmet, in a very bad state, came also to my mind. One can ever says which helmet is actually represented on the iconography. Apart from coinage we see nothing like a Berkasovo or Concesti type, yet there are several finds from those types.

I thought the Koblenz to be rather early than late 4th century.

Spangenhelmes were known in Britain, but perhaps slightly later. The Shorwell helmet may be described as such and is 6th century, and the 7th century Benty Grange has a spangenhelme construction (despite beeing made from horn plates).

Quote:Spangenhelmes were known in Britain, but perhaps slightly later. The Shorwell helmet may be described as such and is 6th century, and the 7th century Benty Grange has a spangenhelme construction (despite beeing made from horn plates).

The helmet from Shorwell has two almost exact brothers from europe these come from Trivières in Belgium and less close but very similar from Bretzenheim bei Mainz in Germany both seem to be 5th-6th century.

Trivières Helmet 476- 525ad

Bretzenheim bei Mainz see number 5

Quite simple to make.

Best Regards

Quote:Thanks Evan. It will be of course for a custom made helmet anyway as I am far from satisfied by the Deepeeka 'heavy' helmets.

Before your edit I thought you may refer to the helmet from Poitiers, which I think is indeed of Intercisa type althought I haver never seen any correct reconstruction.
The Richborough helmet, in a very bad state, came also to my mind. One can ever says which helmet is actually represented on the iconography. Apart from coinage we see nothing like a Berkasovo or Concesti type, yet there are several finds from those types.

I thought the Koblenz to be rather early than late 4th century.

Spangenhelmes were known in Britain, but perhaps slightly later. The Shorwell helmet may be described as such and is 6th century, and the 7th century Benty Grange has a spangenhelme construction (despite beeing made from horn plates).

The Richborough dates froum around 275-325 AD. No truly accurate dating has been determined.

I have to google the Poitiers helmet, haven't seen that one yet.

Shorwell is a Banded helmet, spangenhelms were similar but in their own ways different. I can't remember what its called, but there is one really good Migration-era Spangenhelm that's not a baldenheim. Have to find the image.

http://royaloakarmoury.com/viking_armour...php?iden=9

From what I've seen of the Koblenz its Late 4th Century. I'm sure someone more certain on that will post (where's Vermaat?)

There was one helmet similar to the Berkasova 2/Deurne found in Egypt (or the levant), but I can't remember the name off the top of my head.

I still think your best bet is either the Concesti or a River Maas Helmet.

Not much has been found of the latter, so I'd go with the Armamentaria Intercisa-IV if you wanted to do that, or make your own.

Ridge helmets are stupidly easy to make. Just draw, cut, and dish a few pieces of 20-gauge sheet steel. You can probably get the steel for free, pull it off the back of a washing machine or something and sand the paint off it.

Guilding is pretty cheap too, if you know how to do it.

Quote: the helmet from Poitiers, which I think is indeed of Intercisa type althought I haver never seen any correct reconstruction.

The elusive Poitiers helmet is estimated to date from c.270 and is supposedly a 3rd-century Niederbieber type with Intercisa 'fin' crest. As explained in Jens Horskotte's post here. I've been eagerly awaiting more details on this one for two and a half years!

Christina Miks book on the Koblenz finds dates them to around the time of Magnentius and Valentinian I, so roughly 350-375 AD

However in terms of dating, other Ridge helmet have dates that push into the early 5th Century. Those include the
-Heteny helmet 375 to early 5th century.
- Iatrus helmet, Later 4th to mid 5th century.

Other helmets such as the Budapest helmet date the last 3rd of the 4th century.

The 5th century was such a period of transformation, breakdown and influx of barbarian troops/invasions that I really don't think you can classify a distinct "Roman" helmet for that period.

The Baldenheim helmet really only start dating to the late 5th and mainly 6th century.

IMO a cruder Berkasovo ridge helmet such as the Iatrus helmet or the Augsburg helmet both without a base ring would work for the early 5th century.

What's a base ring?

I still support the Intercisa for the dominant helmet of the 5th century. They just made so many of them, and as far as we know the Romans maintained control of all of the Gallic, Italic, and Dalmatian Fabricae until after the death of Aetius when the Franks overran north Gaul.

I understand there have been so few finds of the 5th century though, and I'd imagine it was because the Romans and friends re-used everything they could until it broke beyond repair, because money was tight in the west. We also have yet to uncover any decent 5th century archaeological sites. Chalons is still lost to time, and much of the fighting in the 5th century took place in farmland, so anything found would have been melted.scrappe din the middle ages.

FINALLY! I found my flashdrive. Now I can update so much stuff. Got all of my pictures and files back too.

The base ring is a band that went around the base of the helmet to mount the side plates too. It also extended the helmet in height and the cheek pieces attached to the base ring. Intercisa helmets generally had no base ring and the cheek pieces attached directly to the ridge side halves.

A few berkasovo helmet finds appear to merge the no base ring (also cheaper and easier to make) with the berkasovo elongated cheek pieces and nasal attachments.

Some later berkasovo helmets without base rings & nasal attachments to the ridge section:

[attachment=7971]iatrus9.jpg[/attachment]

[attachment=7972]Augsburg-7.JPG[/attachment]

[attachment=7973]berkasovoridgehelmet.jpg[/attachment]

[attachment=7974]berkasovoridgehelmet-1.jpg[/attachment]

[attachment=7975]berkasovoridgehelmet-2.jpg[/attachment]

Well on those examples only the guilding survived, so it would be hard to determine if there was or wasn't a base ring.

Thanks for the images, and the info!

There wasn't a base ring on those helmets I attached because the nasal was attached to the ridge halves (hence the curved cut outs and design change). A helmet with a base ring would have the nasal attached to the base ring itself.

Like this
[attachment=7976]berkasovo2-jarak-5.jpg[/attachment]

or this

[attachment=7977]Deurne-Lieden-12.jpg[/attachment]

Oh you're referring to the extra band of metal often put around the base of the two ridge halves, like on the Concesti Helmet. Yeah I understand what you're saying now. The Intercisa-III and the Worms helmet both had this (well the Worms had half of one in the back.)

Thanks for your very good answers.

I have explored quite a few possibilities so far as what types of helmets could have been used by a late 5th-early 6th century briton (possibily settled in western Armorica), several options that are beeing displayed in my group:
- the rather strict approach, that helmets became more rare and could be restricted to chieftains and their retinue
- simple helmets, mostly bandenhelmes like Trivières, Vid or Shorwell
- conjectural helmets with characteristics of both roman ridge helmets and later anglo-saxon types (like mine which you can see on my avatar)
- a conservative approach with late roman helmets still beeing used if not manufactured
- new types like the Baldenheim type beeing adopted, which would be quite logical for the 6th century Bretons under frankish influence.

Of the material culture of the sub- and post-roman Britons we don't know much, save for some bits of metalwork (penannular broochs of Fowler type F and G notably), a small corpus of weapons displaying both local and roman fashions, and mediterranean and continental imports (ceramics and glassware). A lot of our work (in my group Letavia) is hypothetical and have to be challenged with new intepretations from time to time. For helmets, all the previous approachs save the first one are based on conjecture, as we lack any find of helmet in a western british context (the Glastonbury 'helmeted' head and the Tintagel sketch of a 'warrior' can be dismissed as they clearly lack any form of precision), even if the written evidence (Gildas) is proof that helmets were known.

My approach is to portray a briton chieftain, settled on the continent, of the last decades of the 5th century, bearing a roman title of centenarius, and himself much part of a mixed culture, brittonic and roman. The element of roman conservatism was really strong in 5-6th century western Britain. Such a man could have been a follower of Riothamus or Ambrosius Aurelianus.

That's among the reasons I would need for my impression a roman styled helmet, and one fit for an officer status, even if on the continent new fashions (Baldenheim types) were introduced from the east.

Ah, so like an Armorican or Briton that would have followed Aetius to Chalons? These men were likely heavily Romanized, as they were people who wanted to continue the Roman lifestyle and remain a part of the Empire, after the empire had abandoned Britain.

For this I would Highly Reccomend using Roman Equipment, as Aetius had supplied most of who went to Chalons with Equipment and Provisions, thanks to the foresight of Tonatius Ferreolus (Sidonius Apollinaris Epistula 7, one of the passages in there, and also his Carmina).