Helmet Question

[laukkjd]

My preference would be for the 'H' for many of the reasons Aetius mentions, but also that I simply like the look of it more.

[Peroni]

The cheek guards are too short on the 'N' version of the Gallic H. The more accurate helmets would be the Gallic C, F, G, I. or the Italic C, D for this period.

[MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS]

Ssspeaking of which, can anybody tell me why there is a difference in helmets, such as Italic types and Gallic types? Why these different denominations?

Best Regards,
Yuri

[Gaius]

It is a nomenclatural distinction made by Robinson: Italic types do not have eyebrows, for example, and supposedly are simpler than Gallics, with few decorative items...I prefer to use the term Weisenau (that includes Gallics & Italics), i think is less rigid and more realistic.

Valete

[MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS]

It is a nomenclatural distinction made by Robinson: Italic types do not have eyebrows, for example, and supposedly are simpler than Gallics, with few decorative items...I prefer to use the term Weisenau (that includes Gallics & Italics), i think is less rigid and more realistic.

Valete

Thx maius. So other than the Weisenau, are there any other names to distinguish the types of helmets? Or is ''Weisenau'' just the name of where the object in question was found? Like the Corbridge lorica for example?

[Gaius]

You have Weisenau, Hagenau (for the Coolus), etc...these names are based on localities but define distinct helmet types. It is just a way to give a name to a line of artefacts united by common features that make them distinct from others. But there are several instances in which a particular item wears a particular name: the Teilenhofen helmet (see recent post by Peronis) is an example of this. It is a Weisenau type (also called Italic G) but has a particular name that comes from a locality (just like the Hebron helmet and so on...).

Best

[MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS]

You have Weisenau, Hagenau (for the Coolus), etc...these names are based on localities but define distinct helmet types. It is just a way to give a name to a line of artefacts united by common features that make them distinct from others. But there are several instances in which a particular item wears a particular name: the Teilenhofen helmet (see recent post by Peronis) is an example of this. It is a Weisenau type (also called Italic G) but has a particular name that comes from a locality (just like the Hebron helmet and so on...).

Best

I see. Thx Gaius.

[Cornelius Quintus]

Ave Yuri,

right, the 'continental' system is basing on the names of finding locations. The main types are Montefortino, Hagenau, Weisenau, Niederbieber and so on - just compare the list in this thread to the RA helmet database:

http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic. ... 47&start=0

[MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS]

Ahh, thx Heiko, that is proving very informative.

Just one question, what exactly is the ''Axel Guttman'' collection? And how come some of its items have ''Unknown Location'' on them? If they have been found how do we not know where?

[Cornelius Quintus]

Ave Yuri,

the late Axel Guttmann was a well known and wealthy collector. Christie's and others sold most items of his collection(s) a few years ago.

'Unknown' locations are often 'inofficial' finds, not dug out by official archaeologists, but bought by collectors or museums from (more or less serious) dealers, which didn't know facts about the true origin (or didn't want to tell the details :wink: ).

Some private collectors might also not ask too many questions about the very location and the identity of the person who found it. Axel Guttmann seems to have also bought from dubious sellers... (Like on eBay today, perhaps only the country or region will be named...)

Sometimes items are 'found' in the inventory of a museum and nobody remembers when and why it joined the collection...

[MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS]

How dubious :roll:

So an example would be somebody finds something in somebody else's land, but, knowing if he makes the find official he will not get a penny, decides to sell it himself and make a profit, but virtually destroys the archaelogical importance of the item?

[Peroni]

And how come some of its items have ''Unknown Location''

Because they were sold at auction to another private collector, so the present whereabouts of some of the AG collection is now unknown.

[Tarbicus]

Don't forget that at least the Mouse & Loaf has no provenance in terms of where it was found/dug up from. That always puts its authenticity in doubt to at least a minor degree.

[john m roberts]

Keep in mind also that many of the finds were made in the 18th-early 19th centuries when archaeology was in its infancy and consisted mainly of treasure-hunting. People generally didn't bother with things like provenance because the objects were prized for their intrinsic value, not for what they told us about history.