Reconstructing a Montefortino E / Hagenau

[Matthew Amt]

Strictly speaking, the only finds that can be accurately dated are those found in stratified archeological contexts--or at least datable by coins, etc. River finds can only be dated stylistically, by comparing to dated finds. The problem is that we probably don't have firmly dated examples of every type, so other types just have to be shoe-horned in between, often arbitrarily, depending on modern typologies. And of course for even a firmly dated example we can only be sure that it was *deposited* in that context at that time, and often it's a "no earlier than" because a coin (for example) could be quite old when deposited. So we can't say for certain when a particular type of helmet first came into use, nor when the last one was last worn.

Personally, I have no problem with the early types of Coolus helmets being used at the end of the Caesarian period, since both Coolus and Port/Agen types were adopted from the Gauls! Pretty sure you wouldn't get much flak from wearing one for the Civil War era, either. On the other hand, some folks prefer to stick with what is more likely to be common, and in this case that means Montefortinos. That's "safe", though it does have the effect of reinforcing a stereotype...

Have I muddied the gray areas enough?

Matthew

[kevair464]

Haha you've made it a bit darker of a grey. Its my fault for picking a more obscure era to re-enact for our group, if i wanted this simple I could have done mid-first century AD like everyone else, which in retrospect sounds like a good idea equipment wise.

To this point my group has largely used varients of the Coolus C, which is more availible due to its production by Deepeeka (the Monte A by deepeeka is far to early of a varient, and seems head sized for very small people). For officer helmets (which the C cannot be, due to its lack of any crest support), I have been using a modified deepeeka new style E, which i have removed the later style cheek plates from and replaced them with cheek plates resembling more of the Coolus C/D, so it gives it an earlier look. A couple guys in the group with larger craniums have been using Gallic A's, again sorta era-relative, but also better fitting for the cranium challenged.

As the group "leader" I wanted something more a. well fitting, and b. not hoge-podged together like my E-ish helmet is now, so I was leaning at the moment towords the Hagenau Helmet made by Erik Konig, see picture below.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

That has been one of my choices if I ever go for that helmet type.

[jho]

Aren't the Xanten finds simply a collection of loose bowls, and a number of loose cheekpieces? I didn't think any of those helmets were found with cheekpieces still attached. The museum has simply put "associated" pieces together for their display, though I don't think they've done it wrong.

You are right, I overstated my case a bit, there is no way to be sure that these cheek pieces belonged to this specific helmet as the find included a number of helmets and cheek pieces.

With respect to the correct helmet for this period, I doubt that it will ever be possible to find THE correct helmet for this rather short and specific period:

Motnefortinos are attested before and after (e.g. Buggenum) this period so definitely fit the bill. Given their wide spread distribution (from Spain to Turkey), they are probably the most likely candidate as the standard helmet of the Civil Wars.

I believe the earliest datable Hagenau helmets come from early Augustan contexts such as Haltern and Magdalensberg. Interestling, the fully developed Imperial Gallic helmet also pops up at this time (apparently used by auxiliaries not legionaries).

Agen/Port type helmets were definitely around. The are traditionally regarded as Celtic but recentFrench scholarship stresses that they may have be connected with Roman auxiliaries rather than indigenous Gauls because the finds are limited to a very narrow time bracket and always connected to Roman activities (see e.g. POUX, M.: Sur les traces de César. Militaria tardo-républicains en contexte gaulois. Actes de la table ronde de Bibracte, 17 octobre 2002. Glux-en-Glenne : Centre archéologique européen du Mont Beuvray (Bibracte)). Many Roman monuments from this period show helmets which strongly resemble Agen/Port helmets.

Similar problems are encountered with the Mannheim (Coolus) type helmets. These have traditionally been regarded as Celtic (and there are definitely much earlier Celtic ancestors). However, continental scholarship (in particular Waurick's "Helme in Caesar's Heer") has preferred to identify them as the standard battle helmet of Caesar's troops in Gaul. Again the main reason for this is the relatively large number of similar helmets popping within a very narrow time frame. However, the large majority of finds has Celtic connections (e.g. the beautiful helmet from Trier-Olewig would fit your bill time-wise but is connected with the typical weaponry of a Celtic horseman). On the other hand there are also helmets of this type from definite Roman contexts (such as the ship wreck off Madrague de Giens).

In summary, I think choice of either a Montefortino, Agen/Port or Mannheim (Coolus) would be unassailable on historical grounds whereas with respect to Hagenau type helmets it is possible but not established that they were around this early.

[jho]

Good point about the dating. Montefortino helmets are the generally accepted Caesarian type. But it IS curious that the brow reinforce, which we tend to think of as being a response to Gallic cutting swords, seems to appear only AFTER the conquest of Gaul! Though I guess there are still "Celtic" areas such as Thrace, so the threat is not gone.

I am not sure that a well made Montefortino would have had so much need of a brow reinforce. The "Scipio Imperator" helmet mentioned above would probably have afforded reasonable protection against slashes due to the thickness of the material (up to 2.1 mmm) and the bulbous form. The brow reinforce may simply have been a reaction to the deteriorating quality of these helmets with thinner material and more shallow bowls being used, if it had technical reasons at all.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

This is a montefortino in the BM.
It looks pretty sturdy in construction.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

This is listed as a coolus from Verulaneum(St Albans) I have a hard time seeing the difference between they type you posted and these, apart from details.....

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

I doubt these are any use, but thought I would share them as a comparison anyway.
If you want to delete them please do.