02-13-2012, 01:14 AM
Well I would never suggest you cancel your Manning order (cancel) 
After all who can't wait for 18 more months anyway, it'll go by quick.
Regarding the helmets, this could be a forum by itself! Let me start by setting some ground rules here as there is a tremendous amount of variation and a long time span covered by these helmets.
***The helmets I am making are of one type and have definitive characteristics and time frame in which they appear. They are the zenith of this helmet type, so my discussion as to their construction and metallurgy will be limited to this type***
All helmets show a wide variance both in their alloy and construction techniques so I hope I don't get mobbed and stoned to death here, as what I am giving up here is by no means inclusive of all artifact helmets. There are many types, and even helmets within a single group can display very different characteristics. They are only classed by their form and not so much by construction or metal type. Classification of the helmets into groups is generally the responsibility of Archaeologists, which I have extensively studied this for 30 years. The helmet's construction, the techniques used and alloy content is the responsibility of conservationists and metallurgical specialists; those are the people I am working with. Over several weeks the information I received about helmets and this type specifically has been fascinating and was either unpublished due to a perceived lack of public interest or was intentionally withheld. I'm not sure which, as I didn't ask whether this was super-secret information or not. So for the time being I'll discuss what I know I can divulge without pissing off any highly placed museum people in the process.
Ok, let's begin.........
A. Routinely we have been told that Corinthian helmets were beaten and formed out a single sheet of bronze.
True and False
While this is true for the earliest style up until about 530 BCE, the Greeks started to change the bronze they were using for their helmets making them stronger but also less and less malleable by hammer. Additionally, changes in the helmet's form, started to preclude the simple forming techniques of hammer-and-stake that had always been used. Myros and Lotus helmets are an example of simple hammer forming and these helmets were sometimes as thin as 1mm! But advances in weapons technology quickly showed these thinner helmets in the weaker bronze alloy and were of little protective value as warfare evolved.
B. Corinthian helmets were bronze, similar to Phosphor bronze today.
False
Greeks used a specific alloy of bronze for their helmets that is unique and not used for any other armor or weapons. We know this today because advances in technology have allowed us to now see and determine specific elements, trace elements and ratios of elements in these alloys. By the time the helmet type I am making had evolved, the alloy had reached its strongest. With a roughly translated (and I mean roughly, as bronze isn't measured by Rockwell) a Rockwell hardness of 57! That's as strong as the average steel sword! Incredible for a copper alloy!
C. Nasal pieces and cheek plates on Corinthians were brazed on.
False
No helmets in any period, of any type display any welding! With repairs in antiquity and restoration of some helmets in the 19th century being the exception along with a few curious anomalies.
D. Corinthians were restrictive of vision and hearing.
Probably no more so than any other helmet type. While helmets produced today tend to be on the 'bucket' side and the increased distance from the actual eye opening or ocular, to the wearer's eye can and will greatly diminish his visual field. In antiquity, helmets fit very closely with little distance between the eye and ocular opening. Likewise today's overly long helmets tend to cover down below the ear. Actual helmets either flare out or cover only to the jawline meaning that, while a little diminished, hearing would not have been greatly decreased.
The project involving these helmets is intended to give researchers a newly made helmet of the type and alloy used in the actual artifacts. In a sense, what I am doing is making the first real Corinthian helmet in some 2,000 years, even down to the metallurgy. The artifact helmets are too fragile and too precious to be smashed and the data gleaned from such destruction would be useless as in their present state, as they are nothing like they were originally.
The ability to the test this helmet for flexion, torsion and shear forces, as well as penetrative resistance, will be the first time anyone has been able to determine the true physical capabilities of these helmets. There was a reason the ancient Greeks devoted so much engineering and time to create such a helmet and a reason why the bronze used for them was special and used solely for helmets. The researchers as well as myself are extremely anxious to answer all these questions which have been beyond our reach until now.
After much correspondence, it seems they have no issue with allowing these helmets to be commercially sold as well as used in their research. Now it's a question of price!
I am happy to, and prefer to make these helmets out of the 'special recipe' bronze; however; the cost for a helmet made this way is looking to be somewhere between $1800-$2000. While some may easily afford this or save up for it, many cannot afford that. As mentioned earlier in this thread, is phosphor bronze is more accurate than silicon bronze?
Yes and no. While silicon bronze has almost no tin in it, it also does not have phosphor or much lead either. The silicon replaces the tin and lead and creates a stronger matrix within the copper. So while phosphor is a truer bronze, it's physical characteristics are less like the original helmet alloy than silicon is. So silicon isn't as accurate for research, but for color and physical strength, it is closer. If you are solely interested in a completely accurate and REAL Corinthian helmet, then start saving your pennies. If a very accurate and beautiful looking helmet which is strong and won't dent is mostly your interest, and the accuracy of the metallurgy is not as important, then a cheaper silicon bronze helmet is a better deal. Offering this helmet (if there is any interest) in silicon would price out somewhere around $800-$1000 - a much more affordable price point.
Once I am fully set up to make these, I'd anticipate the turn around from order to delivery would be between 3 weeks to at most 2 months. I can't (and won't) take orders that have you wait in limbo. It's rude.
*working on greaves too, just to throw that out there.
After all who can't wait for 18 more months anyway, it'll go by quick.
Regarding the helmets, this could be a forum by itself! Let me start by setting some ground rules here as there is a tremendous amount of variation and a long time span covered by these helmets.
***The helmets I am making are of one type and have definitive characteristics and time frame in which they appear. They are the zenith of this helmet type, so my discussion as to their construction and metallurgy will be limited to this type***
All helmets show a wide variance both in their alloy and construction techniques so I hope I don't get mobbed and stoned to death here, as what I am giving up here is by no means inclusive of all artifact helmets. There are many types, and even helmets within a single group can display very different characteristics. They are only classed by their form and not so much by construction or metal type. Classification of the helmets into groups is generally the responsibility of Archaeologists, which I have extensively studied this for 30 years. The helmet's construction, the techniques used and alloy content is the responsibility of conservationists and metallurgical specialists; those are the people I am working with. Over several weeks the information I received about helmets and this type specifically has been fascinating and was either unpublished due to a perceived lack of public interest or was intentionally withheld. I'm not sure which, as I didn't ask whether this was super-secret information or not. So for the time being I'll discuss what I know I can divulge without pissing off any highly placed museum people in the process.
Ok, let's begin.........
A. Routinely we have been told that Corinthian helmets were beaten and formed out a single sheet of bronze.
True and False
While this is true for the earliest style up until about 530 BCE, the Greeks started to change the bronze they were using for their helmets making them stronger but also less and less malleable by hammer. Additionally, changes in the helmet's form, started to preclude the simple forming techniques of hammer-and-stake that had always been used. Myros and Lotus helmets are an example of simple hammer forming and these helmets were sometimes as thin as 1mm! But advances in weapons technology quickly showed these thinner helmets in the weaker bronze alloy and were of little protective value as warfare evolved.
B. Corinthian helmets were bronze, similar to Phosphor bronze today.
False
Greeks used a specific alloy of bronze for their helmets that is unique and not used for any other armor or weapons. We know this today because advances in technology have allowed us to now see and determine specific elements, trace elements and ratios of elements in these alloys. By the time the helmet type I am making had evolved, the alloy had reached its strongest. With a roughly translated (and I mean roughly, as bronze isn't measured by Rockwell) a Rockwell hardness of 57! That's as strong as the average steel sword! Incredible for a copper alloy!
C. Nasal pieces and cheek plates on Corinthians were brazed on.
False
No helmets in any period, of any type display any welding! With repairs in antiquity and restoration of some helmets in the 19th century being the exception along with a few curious anomalies.
D. Corinthians were restrictive of vision and hearing.
Probably no more so than any other helmet type. While helmets produced today tend to be on the 'bucket' side and the increased distance from the actual eye opening or ocular, to the wearer's eye can and will greatly diminish his visual field. In antiquity, helmets fit very closely with little distance between the eye and ocular opening. Likewise today's overly long helmets tend to cover down below the ear. Actual helmets either flare out or cover only to the jawline meaning that, while a little diminished, hearing would not have been greatly decreased.
The project involving these helmets is intended to give researchers a newly made helmet of the type and alloy used in the actual artifacts. In a sense, what I am doing is making the first real Corinthian helmet in some 2,000 years, even down to the metallurgy. The artifact helmets are too fragile and too precious to be smashed and the data gleaned from such destruction would be useless as in their present state, as they are nothing like they were originally.
The ability to the test this helmet for flexion, torsion and shear forces, as well as penetrative resistance, will be the first time anyone has been able to determine the true physical capabilities of these helmets. There was a reason the ancient Greeks devoted so much engineering and time to create such a helmet and a reason why the bronze used for them was special and used solely for helmets. The researchers as well as myself are extremely anxious to answer all these questions which have been beyond our reach until now.
After much correspondence, it seems they have no issue with allowing these helmets to be commercially sold as well as used in their research. Now it's a question of price!
I am happy to, and prefer to make these helmets out of the 'special recipe' bronze; however; the cost for a helmet made this way is looking to be somewhere between $1800-$2000. While some may easily afford this or save up for it, many cannot afford that. As mentioned earlier in this thread, is phosphor bronze is more accurate than silicon bronze?
Yes and no. While silicon bronze has almost no tin in it, it also does not have phosphor or much lead either. The silicon replaces the tin and lead and creates a stronger matrix within the copper. So while phosphor is a truer bronze, it's physical characteristics are less like the original helmet alloy than silicon is. So silicon isn't as accurate for research, but for color and physical strength, it is closer. If you are solely interested in a completely accurate and REAL Corinthian helmet, then start saving your pennies. If a very accurate and beautiful looking helmet which is strong and won't dent is mostly your interest, and the accuracy of the metallurgy is not as important, then a cheaper silicon bronze helmet is a better deal. Offering this helmet (if there is any interest) in silicon would price out somewhere around $800-$1000 - a much more affordable price point.
Once I am fully set up to make these, I'd anticipate the turn around from order to delivery would be between 3 weeks to at most 2 months. I can't (and won't) take orders that have you wait in limbo. It's rude.
*working on greaves too, just to throw that out there.
Michael
