Private Collection helmet - photos

[Peroni]

These pictures were taken at a large art fair in the US in 2008. The helmet is privately owned. These pictures are from the internet - which were taken at the fair". It's in remarkable condition. Stylistically dated to probably late 2nd to mid 3rd C.

Very interestingly, Graham Sumner painted a reconstructed helmet from Ostrova of almost identical type recently! Note the intact scale 'aventail'

[PhilusEstilius]

The decoration is indeed Roman however the style of the helmet looks very much Persian, in fact what we might expect an eastern archer might have worn. I'm very sure that the left cheekplate will have a winged Victory on it, ie Mars and Victory being synonymous.

[Nathan Ross]

It's certainly an extraordinary piece! As Brian says, it looks like a hybrid of a 'Theilenhofen' style helmet and one of those conical 'eastern archer' helmets from Bosnia and the Danubian Limes (Bryastovets, Bumbesti, Intercisa and Dahova - although I don't think any of them still have the aventail in place). Not the prettiest of items though, or the most practical! That giant 'eagle' head (which resembles a big chicken) must have been forever catching on things...

Interesting to know if anyone has more information about it - where it was found, in particular, if such a thing can be known... :roll:

Thanks for posting this.

- Nathan

[arklore70]

It looks to be almost in too incredible condition. Is that metal wire of some sort holding the aventail together?

Great find, and I am sure while impractical to a small degree, that when it was polished up, it made the owner look quite distinguished.
R/

[Peroni]

It's actually almost identical to the Ostrova helmet - also featured in Raffael and Graham's book. They could have even been made in the same workshop they are so alike.

@ Mike - the 'wire' I think is nylon thread and is simply holding the aventail to the bowl for display purposes. It would probably have been organic like a leather thonging attached to the lining.

@ Brian - I have doubts about it being an archer's helmet as the decoration is almost exclusive to cavalry sports equipments of the period such as the pieces from Straubing etc.

[PhilusEstilius]

Adrian.

I think you may be right about the decoration when I come to think of it having made all the Straubing Chamfrons it is all familiar now.

[markusaurelius]

Very nice helmet with amazing preservation. Would be nice to know when exactly it was used.

[Nathan Ross]

I have doubts about it being an archer's helmet as the decoration is almost exclusive to cavalry sports equipments of the period such as the pieces from Straubing etc.

But maybe a mounted archer? Or an officer from a mounted archer unit - there were a number of these on the Danube, and later in Dacia, and judging from tombstone inscriptions they seem to have maintained their 'ethnic' roots far longer than other auxiliaries. There would seem to be an 'eastern' influence on this particular helmet . . . But that could have been widespread by the third century, I suppose.

- Nathan

[Peroni]

yes, that's definately a possibility. This is how Graham illustrated the piece - being worn by a mounted archer.

Do mounted archers have 'bow' legs? :wink:

[Nathan Ross]

Where is Graham's illustration to be found? Could anyone post a copy of it, perhaps?

As for bow legs - the population of certain areas in Syria (Ituraea, Emesa) seems to have been used as a recruiting ground for archers, mounted and otherwise, for generations, so I'm sure 'bow legs' could have become a genetic quirk of the region!

- Nathan

[Caballo]

Thanks Peronis- a major addition to helmets knowledge- though am still groaning at the bow legs joke...... I am unconvinced at the archer/ mounted archer argument though. As regards practicality, the eagle top would provide excellent protection to downward sword hits and is no higher than a crest or (from later periods ) Napoleonic helmets or bearskins.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

I have to admit I am attracted to the mounted archer theory....very nice helmet!

[jho]

Adrian,

laudes for great find!

The parallels to the Ostrova helmet are fascinating. They are so close, I hope that this does not indicate that the helmet may not be genuine.

On the archer issue:

This helmet and the Ostrova helmet share with the few true Roman "conical" helmets found to date the straight rim and the cheek pieces which neither have an "ear" like the Koblenz-Bubenheim and Niederbieber helmets nor an ear recess like the earlier infantry helmets.

With respect to the majority of conical helmets (Dahovo, Bosnia, Karaagach, Bulgaria, Breda, Netherlands, cheek piece in the Guttmann collection), I am not aware of a context which would indicate their specific use. However, the Intercisa conical helmet bears a turma inscription and may or may not be connected with coh. I mil. Hemesenorum sagitt. eq. c.R.. The helmet found in the Roman camp at Bumbesti is connected to cohors IV Cypria Civium Romanorum sagittariorum by the excavator (which was in Moesia in 107 AD in Bumbesti under Trajan and is later attested in Pantikapaion, Krech, Crimea) and therefore dated to 106-180 AD. However the association is made on the grounds of the „Oriental“ form of the helmet (as shown on Trajan's column) and therefore the association and precise dating are speculative. The camp at Bumbesti continued to exist during the 2nd and 3rd centuries and also housed Cohors I Aurelia Brittonum Milliaria and Cohors I Augusta Nervia Pacensis Brittonum milliaria at other times. The Ostrov helmet was found together with a masked helmet. Petculescu believed it to be a COMBAT helmet based on the fact that it was found together with a masked helmet and a similar pair of combat and masked helmet was found in Tell Oum Hauran. Therefore it may be speculated that it actually was a cavalry combat helmet.

Cheek pieces of this type were found in Linz and Wels in Austria. Wels was a municpium but Linz (which is the next fort from Linz) apparently housed Ala I Augusta Thracum, Cohors II Batavorum, and Ala I Pannoniorum Tampiana victrix at different times although the first two are not securely attested, so again we have a possible cavalry connection but not necessarily to archers (although we know that "normal" cavalry units also contained archers as evidenced by the famous Syrian-Batavian who swam the Danube). Another cheek piece of this type was found in Vetel, Hunedoara, Romania (Micia). The excavator believes that this cheek piece belonged to a conical helmet of an auxiliary archer, the fort a Micia was garrisoned by Ala I Hispanorum Campagonum, cohors II Flavia Commagenorum sagitt, numerus Maurorum Miciensium at different times.

Finally, I believe somebody on this forum has claimed from practical experience that a regular Roman helmet with a neck guard and deep cheek pieces makes aiming a bow difficult. It may or may not be easier with this slimmer type of cheek piece.

On balance, there are a few connections of this helmet type to units of mounted archers but not enough to draw firm conclusions.

[Graham Sumner]

Very interestingly, Graham Sumner painted a reconstructed helmet from Ostrova of almost identical type recently!

This is how Graham illustrated the piece - being worn by a mounted archer.

Not Guilty! If you mean the illustration figure 277 on page 191 of 'Arms and Armour of the Imperial Roman Soldier'. That was a privately commissioned work by Raffaele D'Amato and I had nothing to do with it. I can add no more than what was in the book.

Great pictures though Adrian.

Graham.

[Peroni]

Ah! but you did paint it based on the Ostrova helmet did you not Graham? Which is not as complete as this example - so you sort of pre-empted it by adding the scale in your painting rather than mail!