11-22-2009, 07:26 PM
Argumentum ad personam is EXACTLY what you do with Scipio, hence my remarks.
That is the only reason why i react to your statement that way, i personally do not have any argument whatsoever with you.
furthermore, i am pointing out that your idea is flawed. while the site you adhere to is indeed a very interesting one, it by no means is an official and therefore ultimate and total classification.
The idea posed in the original posting is wether or not the brows on several Ico helmets were incorporated on the later Imperial-Gallic types.
To thoroughly investigate this one should not only take EVERY helmet ever found into account, but also use depictions of helmets in various art-forms from Etruscan and Latin periods and before.
Only then should one be able to either prove or disprove this theory by approximation, with arguments, biblipgraphy, pictography etc.
The idea of the original poster is not that dubious at all and is in the realms of the idea of some other scholars who state
cavalry helmets may not all have been cavalry helmets, but might also contain some higher officer class helmets.
The idea that Roman high officers must have continued to wear some form of attic/corinthian style helmets is also not that strange. That we do not find them that much in an archaeological context does not imply they were not used at all.
Helmets were used years in a row, and especially valuable helmets would probably not have survived or been offered to the gods.
M.VIB.M.
That is the only reason why i react to your statement that way, i personally do not have any argument whatsoever with you.
furthermore, i am pointing out that your idea is flawed. while the site you adhere to is indeed a very interesting one, it by no means is an official and therefore ultimate and total classification.
The idea posed in the original posting is wether or not the brows on several Ico helmets were incorporated on the later Imperial-Gallic types.
To thoroughly investigate this one should not only take EVERY helmet ever found into account, but also use depictions of helmets in various art-forms from Etruscan and Latin periods and before.
Only then should one be able to either prove or disprove this theory by approximation, with arguments, biblipgraphy, pictography etc.
The idea of the original poster is not that dubious at all and is in the realms of the idea of some other scholars who state
cavalry helmets may not all have been cavalry helmets, but might also contain some higher officer class helmets.
The idea that Roman high officers must have continued to wear some form of attic/corinthian style helmets is also not that strange. That we do not find them that much in an archaeological context does not imply they were not used at all.
Helmets were used years in a row, and especially valuable helmets would probably not have survived or been offered to the gods.
M.VIB.M.
Bushido wa watashi no shuukyou de gozaru.
Katte Kabuto no O wo shimeyo!
H.J.Vrielink.
Katte Kabuto no O wo shimeyo!
H.J.Vrielink.
