11-23-2009, 08:43 AM
Quote:Well, I'm afraid that, according to the author of the article, you are all wrong:
Quote:Type 1 (Helmet 1) is a local variation of Chalcidicean (sic) type (end of the 4th century BC?).
Type 2: Two helmets fall into this category (Helmets 2 and 3). They bear the typical features of the Italic type helmets (1st century BC).
Type 3 (Helmet 4) is a Konos type helmet that has Celtic influences (2nd and 3rd century BC).
Now, I am by no means an expert on Roman or Byzantine arms and armour, but I recognized immediately that the first three helmets were late Roman or early Byzantine, and that the last was Near Eastern, and perhaps Achaemenid. Never have I seen the publisher of examples of arms or armour been so wrong in identifying them. How the author could think that the first helmet, for instance, dates to the 4th c. BC and looks anything at all like a Chalcidean type is beyond me. He cites Dintsis' Hellenistische Helme in the article, but somehow missed the fact that this helmet it is iron and the calotte is made in two pieces; has a separate nasal; and has canine-shaped cheek pieces, and yet not a single example of a Chalcidean helmet has been found ever possessing any of these characteristics.
Just goes to show that a forum like RAT and a flexible database like the Roman helmet one are better examples of scholarship than a lot of published work out there!
Hey, how am I wrong..... :o
Visne partem mei capere? Comminus agamus! * Me semper rogo, Quid faceret Iulius Caesar? * Confidence is a good thing! Overconfidence is too much of a good thing.
[b]Legio XIIII GMV. (Q. Magivs)RMRS Remember Atuatuca! Vengence will be ours!
Titus Flavius Germanus
Batavian Coh I
Byron Angel
[b]Legio XIIII GMV. (Q. Magivs)RMRS Remember Atuatuca! Vengence will be ours!
Titus Flavius Germanus
Batavian Coh I
Byron Angel
