Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Material Used in 1st Cent. Helmet/Armor
#1
I was looking at photos of the Imperial Gallic G helmet that is located in Worms, Germany. Is this a steel helmet? And is the archaeological evidence for lorica segmentata from the first century consistently steel?

http://www.romanhideout.com/Armamentari ... Gall_G.asp

Thanks,
Randy Sampson
Reply
#2
No it was not typically steel as we know it. Wrought iron was the typical material used. Mild steel is the closest thing to wrought iron so it is used in reproductions even though mild steel rusts much more readily than wrought iron. I'm speaking generally as I'm not sure of the metallurgy of the Worms Gallic G. I'll leave that answer to someone with more book sources than I.
Derek D. Estabrook
Reply
#3
Quote:No it was not typically steel as we know it. Wrought iron was the typical material used. Mild steel is the closest thing to wrought iron so it is used in reproductions even though mild steel rusts much more readily than wrought iron. I'm speaking generally as I'm not sure of the metallurgy of the Worms Gallic G. I'll leave that answer to someone with more book sources than I.
If it is wrought iron, that would explain the dark color of the metal. I thought it could have been patina from the aging of the steel. But the reason I posted this thread is because of my lack of knowledge of the subject so I appreciate any responses. A second thought, if it is wrought iron then is it fair to say that the helmet would not have been shiny like our mild steel replicas? And would that be the case for first century segmented armor too? If the armor was made from wrought iron, the soldiers would have had a much different appearance from reenactors using mild steel armor.

Randy Sampson
Reply
#4
Most of the surviving ancient sorces specifically refer to shining, gleaming armour I believe.
Sulla Felix

AKA Barry Coomber
Moderator

COH I BATAVORVM MCRPF
Reply
#5
I wouldn't stereotype wrought iron into the rough, scaly appearance stuff you usually see. It is fully capable of having a well polished, smooth finish to it. I've seen wrought iron blades and they are as smooth and shiny as any of the other steel blades by the same smith. The color was a little more of a dull grey though.
Derek D. Estabrook
Reply
#6
Iron can be polished to look very "white" and shiny. And mild steel can be fire-blacked, so any stage in between is perfectly possible. It's more a matter of how much do you want to rub, and how much do you want to keep fighting rust, than whether iron/steel.

Both can be blacked, both can be polished, and both will rust. Steel seems a little more susceptible to rust, though, with what experience I've had. Don't really know why.
M. Demetrius Abicio
(David Wills)

Saepe veritas est dura.
Reply
#7
Much equipment was close to steel, even if only by accident. A lot was actually as good as much later Milanese plate armour according to some tests done.

Of course, much equipment wasn't so good :wink:
TARBICvS/Jim Bowers
A A A DESEDO DESEDO!
Reply
#8
I think there are a couple threads on this sort of topic. Yes, the Romans used iron and steel, but what usually shows up in their helmets and armor is either a low-grade steel or a high-carbon iron, apparently. There really wouldn't be much in the way of a color difference between the originals in their polished state and most of our modern mild steel reproductions. While the originals could certainly have been left black from the forge on the insides (partly to resist rust), the reason they are black today is from corrosion and restoration. Many artifacts you see in the cases are basically rust held together by epoxy resins. There is no evidence that the Romans ever left their armor or helmets black on the outside, and lots of evidence that it was shined up.

Valete,

Matthew
Matthew Amt (Quintus)
Legio XX, USA
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.larp.com/legioxx/">http://www.larp.com/legioxx/
Reply
#9
Wow! Thanks for all the information. It is definitely enlightening. It is correct that I was stereotyping the wrought iron comment, thinking it is dark and rough like in its modern form. I assumed incorrectly that iron would not be polished like modern steel. Now I know otherwise. It also appears to be indisputable that the Romans polished their armor, thus the modern shiny reenactment grade armor is an accurate historical reproduction.

The other information that helped was from Matthew Amt indicating that artifacts in museums "are basically rust held together by epoxy resins," which explains their dark appearance, such as the Imperial Gallic G helmet at Worms. This provides great insight as I look at photos of ancient artifacts.

Randy Sampson
Reply
#10
Rszebras I agree with the above comments ,I took part in shaft furnance experiments a few years ago ,and produced blooms which we forged from,. They is to much info to post here on our results but we produced steel Big Grin The Romans new of the various propertys of Iron ore,from geographical areas and used it for certain jobs . The helmet Iron has to be pure with no slag incurtions or the bowl will fail.The iron can be polished up to a mirror if need be,it is lovely material to work with, and the iron holds a far better edge,cuts in my hands bear witness .So I post pics of wrought Iron Plate Circa 1879 with milling scale on,the next is one of my knifes made from the last produced from a Pudling furnace Circa 1975 I hope you can see the difference.
Regards Brennivs Big Grin
[Image: scabbard017.jpg]
[Image: P8160469.jpg]
[Image: P8160470.jpg]
Woe Ye The Vanquished
                     Brennvs 390 BC
When you have all this why do you envy our mud huts
                     Caratacvs
Centvrio Princeps Brennivs COH I Dacorivm (Roma Antiqvia)
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  3rd cent greaves for 6th cent/Lorica Squamata shoulders? Thaddeus G. Moore 11 3,656 09-29-2005, 06:58 AM
Last Post: Robert Vermaat

Forum Jump: