Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Greek Helmets. with or without crests.... ??
#31
Quote:
Ghostmojo post=305581 Wrote:I subscribe to the wooden crest holders as well. They are easy to form, lightweight, easy to paint/decorate and easy to drill to create the holes needed for the horsehair tufts be inserted...


Yes, wooden are much more logical choice. But it does not mean they actually used it, get it. What else is there to proove it other than our assumption. Written source? MAterial source? We can not write history on our assumtions...

Your responses come across in a patronising manner, and if you're going to go on the attack - then check your spelling, sunshine! :lol:

As to prove it - there is the logic of deduction. As others have said, although we think of bronze-clad warriors, often they didn't wear much bronze other than a helmet and greaves (and neither of them at times). Shields were wooden composites clad in bronze or leather skin. Spears were wooden with metal tips. And so on. Is it not natural to make something like that out of wood? Why make it more complex? Get it? :roll:
[size=75:2kpklzm3]Ghostmojo / Howard Johnston[/size]

[Image: A-TTLGAvatar-1-1.jpg]

[size=75:2kpklzm3]Xerxes - "What did the guy in the pass say?" ... Scout - "Μολὼν λαβέ my Lord - and he meant it!!!"[/size]
Reply
#32
Quote:Can one of the Greek members travel up to Olympia please and check EVERY single one of the complete helmets for crest mounts or remains thereof ?



M.VIB.M.


Where do I pick up my ticket, I'll go!! :mrgreen: (well, I'm half Greek.....)
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
Reply
#33
Quote:
Gulan post=305588 Wrote:
Ghostmojo post=305581 Wrote:I subscribe to the wooden crest holders as well. They are easy to form, lightweight, easy to paint/decorate and easy to drill to create the holes needed for the horsehair tufts be inserted...


Yes, wooden are much more logical choice. But it does not mean they actually used it, get it. What else is there to proove it other than our assumption. Written source? MAterial source? We can not write history on our assumtions...

Your responses come across in a patronising manner, and if you going to go on the attack - then check your spelling, sunshine! :lol:

As to prove it - there is the logic of deduction. As others have said, although we think of bronze-clad warriors, often they didn't wear much bronze other than a helmet and greaves (and neither of them at times). Shields were wooden composites clad in bronze or leather skin. Spears were wooden with metal tips. And so on. Is it not natural to make something like that out of wood? Why make it more complex? Get it? :roll:

It was not my intent for them to come across as that. Not even the ''get it'' part Big Grin it was just something I projected from my own language, and it is not used as an attack or patronising tool but I appreciate the comment, about typos especially :roll:

''often they didn't wear much bronze other than a helmet and greaves (and neither of them at times)'' - forgive me but this is an assumption. Which applies only to the lower class hoplites. What about Spartans for example? You don't think that they used full panoplia? Statues show enough consistency in depiction on full armor for me to conclude breastplate was standard item there at least until Peloponnesian wars.Although you are basically hoplite if you have an aspis and a spear...Bronze helmet, bronze curiass, bronze greaves..even thigh and arm guards make you pretty bronzed up,right?

I did not exclude wooden or any other crest boxes..I just defended the bronze ones from being called votive or ceremonial...because that damn piece just doesn't fit into present theory. Giannis K. gave very good answer. If you deny bronze boxes why do they exist, why didn't they follow the logical choice of wood? Or was it wood the cheaper solution to the metal...

You know, my little brother wanted a medieval sword as a child, we could not buy one of course..they are 150eur up even today with many reenactment groups...I made a wooden one instead. It served it's purpose..It was tough and could break bones, God forbid...but it wasn't as impressive as a real one of course.

''Is it not natural to make something like that out of wood? Why make it more complex?''


Hm. Quite modern way of thinking. If they had that logics we would have so little ancient material to admire today. Why decorate one whole part of the wall with bronze emboss when paint is much more natural and easier way? If we didn't find bronze sheets we would certainly conclude they didn't use it,it is just not common sense to conclude it..yes. And we would be wrong!

I saw war unfortunately, first hand...I saw men think of 1020 ways to use,reuse,fix and combine equipment and weapons. No cathalog or history book will ever mention numerous ways in which regular issued helmet was fastened,decorated or camuflaged...let alone the uniforms (and they were all military issued industrially made twins)..Almost no soldier looked alike,and many pieces of uniform served other purpose than one they were made for.

Don't try to fit the ancient soldiers into just few molds, just because it is easier for us modern people to grasp it,please.


Best regards,

Sunshine 8-)

PS: and yes..what about those horns then, 7th BC horns. No written evidence, no painted evidence, no logics, no reason for them to exist...yet they do. :twisted:

What does it say to us. That we know just too little about that period, and we constantly forget how little we know, and that is the worst part. Just because we moved from 0 - 40 step where 0 is total ignorance...does not mean 100 step is that close to us.
Nikolas Gulan
Reply
#34
Quote:''often they didn't wear much bronze other than a helmet and greaves (and neither of them at times)''

- forgive me but this is an assumption. Which applies only to the lower class hoplites. What about Spartans for example? You don't think that they used full panoplia? Statues show enough consistency in depiction on full armor for me to conclude breastplate was standard item there at least until Peloponnesian wars.Although you are basically hoplite if you have an aspis and a spear...Bronze helmet, bronze curiass, bronze greaves..even thigh and arm guards make you pretty bronzed up,right?

Well, forgive me for not responding to all your points but I will just deal with this one for the time being. Firstly, any statue is merely going depict the subject matter from which it was derived - and manifestly cannot cover all variations. We need a multiplicity of statues to do that, and it would appear some aspects of warrior mantles were more appealing to the sculptor. Having said that, we see plenty of carvings of warriors wearing no armour at all - merely an exomis and helmet. It also depends upon which time period we are considering, which region, and which types of troops. There is patently a large level of objectivity needing to be applied to such a wide-ranging area of enquiry. In fact, you emphasise this point yourself by pointing out this may have only applied until the Peloponnesian Wars.

We have plenty of examples and commentary discussing the wide variety of armour worn - especially torso protection. Linothoraxes may or may not have had bronze plates attached. Some would and some wouldn't. Leather may have been enough for certain troops. We have depictions of troops clearly wearing flexible (non-metallic) gear.

So of course there are plenty of depictions of 'bronzed-up' warriors wearing the works! Cuirass; greaves; arm and thigh guards; helmet. Nobody is disputing that. The point is that this was far from standard - certainly after the archaic period - and possibly even during it. My assumptions are based upon alternate evidence which is there for all to see. You sort of admit/accept this in your own comments - so I struggle to see the point you are making - sunshine :wink:

As for the Spartans - they were amongst the first to institute major changes in the panoply of their troops. As warfare became less static and more mobile, then the acoutrements of war changed. The Peloponnesian Wars amply demonstrate this as past certainties and practices gave way to new ones. Much, much later when phalanx warfare had become more static (Hellenistic times) again, we see the return to heavier armour - at least for the leading ranks - and when facing the more nimble legionaries for example, this may be considered something of an ossification of tactics and equipment.

Regards
[size=75:2kpklzm3]Ghostmojo / Howard Johnston[/size]

[Image: A-TTLGAvatar-1-1.jpg]

[size=75:2kpklzm3]Xerxes - "What did the guy in the pass say?" ... Scout - "Μολὼν λαβέ my Lord - and he meant it!!!"[/size]
Reply
#35
Quote:''Is it not natural to make something like that out of wood? Why make it more complex?''

Hm. Quite modern way of thinking. If they had that logics we would have so little ancient material to admire today. Why decorate one whole part of the wall with bronze emboss when paint is much more natural and easier way? If we didn't find bronze sheets we would certainly conclude they didn't use it,it is just not common sense to conclude it..yes. And we would be wrong!

It is not just a modern way of thinking at all. It is based upon practical and economic considerations. You need to distinguish perhaps between the necessary (i.e. essential) and the luxury (non-essential) elements of gear.

Think about it. Shields were essentially wooden with a brazen (or other) facing material. The metal finish was there to provide a slightly more impenetrable surface than the wood would itself - but the latter (being the bulk of the construction) was taking the full impact of any blow. The metal was also there because it could be polished and look very impressive; gleaming as it would. A solid metal shield would have been impossible to hold for very long and these nonsensical images we see from films like '300' (and even the 1962 The 300 Spartans) where the warriors have metal bin-lids as shields are of course totally absurd, and I don't believe anybody would subscribe to such an article - even though when it comes to shields we have found; it is only the metal facing that has survived the ages. The choice of other facing materials such as leather etc. might have been for economic reasons or because it was quite effective itself (many opponents of Greek hoplites only had light constructed shields of leather on basketwork) as a finish over the wood substrate. But in any event - basically a hoplite shield was wooden - sometimes coated in bronze etc.

Bronze was used for ceremonial reasons as well. The Spartans worshipped Athena Khalkioikos and her (6thC) temple was clad in part with decorative brazen (bronzed) panels. It was known as The Brazen House. This somewhat belies the myth that the Spartans shunned artistic endeavour in their pursuit of the ascetic lifestyle. However, even after the average Spartan had become devoted solely to war, they still had periokoi artisans to do the work required of such craftsmen. These non-Spartiate Lakonians would have been the fabricators of Spartan army shields (and other equipment) to order.

It is of course possible that crest holders might have been made of bronze, and for various reasons some possibly were, but it would seem unlikely that it was standard practice. Additional metal would add somewhat to the weight of a helmet (not a lot - but still perhaps noticeable) and why bother? These things appear to have been painted and decorated so the bronze would be pointless. It is possible a hollow bronze holder might be constructed and the horsehair bunched and glued into place of course - but it seems rather pointless bearing in mind all of the other considerations.

Regards
[size=75:2kpklzm3]Ghostmojo / Howard Johnston[/size]

[Image: A-TTLGAvatar-1-1.jpg]

[size=75:2kpklzm3]Xerxes - "What did the guy in the pass say?" ... Scout - "Μολὼν λαβέ my Lord - and he meant it!!!"[/size]
Reply
#36
THank you for taking time to answer...Well, there is not much here that I can answer to since I agree with the biggest part.

''It also depends upon which time period we are considering, which region, and which types of troops.''
This probably explains it all.

The point I was making, or two points are - we should not label all bronze items as ceremonial just because they were out of reach for the most (arguable). It all comes down to budget right. And to notions of what is luxury. And we can not know that. I don't think our modern logics would relate perfectly with theirs, because there would be many works we would consider unnecesarry, and they didn't. But that's just me.No need to argue on that.

And it brings us to my second point - it depends highly on what is considered a standard for you and what for me..Maybe standard was not the good choice of the word for me, especially with so many cities, classes, politics, aspirations, systems, pockets...For me the standard is something elite has, both in skill and arms - and others aspire to. And for you standard maybe what the majority is using.

I think in a sense we are all right, since probably all versions we all bring here were seen by the ancient battlefields. Maybe I follow a bit romanticized version of some elite heroes without money or blacksmith issues, while you support more down to earth theory, aka the majority of hoplites.
Nikolas Gulan
Reply
#37
All bronze items are not votive Gulan. But they can become votive. Remember that someone who has the money to have a fine and ornate bronze crest made can dedicate it at temple or.....the man that kills him can seize it and dedicate it.

The common wooden crest box would have had little votive value. The archeological record can be horribly skewed in this regard. Sometimes only showing us the finest or most ostentatious examples which in many instances cannot be viewed as the norm. The argument was not all such bronze items are votive but that examples you initially gave were not the norm you would likely see in the ranks.

Nothing wrong with aspiring to the very best that could be had in their time for a panoply, but tastes and economic ability dictate much more common sense choices were used in predominance. The few lovely examples are more the exception than the rule.
Reply
#38
Χαίρετε

Art indeed can be highly stylised but then we do keep seeing crests again and again through the centuries and through various succeeding Aegean cultures since early Mycenaean times during more than 1000 years period, crests in any kind of impressive form. We can thus propose more easily that even if we suggest that the main mass of soldiers would not wear a crest, certainly an visible % of them, most notably the aristocrats, the main clans, chieftains and warlords, then veteran troops and special units would probably wear them. Crests afterall had also their practical uses like easy-spotting of friendly troops and their orientation and - well yes indeed - even some minor increase to helmet protection.

Thus the whole argument is rather "Did 5% or 45% of hoplites wear crests?". It depends on the era and on the state and on the type of unit in concern. For example, large part of the Macedonian army wore helmets with short metal crests that played also a more pronounced protective role than other designs.

The information on the two techniques by Kyros and Giannis is extremely interesting since it is both attested by at least some first findings, but also it makes absolute sense in all matters so we have no point to propose that these findings would be one-off cases.

What I would like to point out is the fact that there is a strong possibility that the crest was not seen as an integral part of the helmet but an addition. Very probably, the helment, which was often produced by proper local industry or even imported, was bought naked and then the buyer would himself add the crest of his choice.

Among crested helmets, an important % would suffer during a battle even if the owner came out alive. Later they would be replaced. If the father gave the helment to the son, and if the son fought in a different unit wearing different crests or no crests, he would take out the old one. We should rather see crests as consumables rather than as integral parts of the helmet, consumables costing a price that actually most soldiers even poorer one could pay (you do not need to stick to horsehair, donkey hair or any other animal or plant available would do an equally impressive job).

Νικόλαος (Nikos)
Reply
#39
Gulan, please DO read your private messages and send a reply.
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
[Image: artgroepbutton.jpg]
Reply
#40
[attachment:2]Cor.png[/attachment]
http://www.thracians.net/index.php?optio...ail&id=194


Attached Files Thumbnail(s)
           
Lucius Campanius Verecundus Signifer Legio quarta Scythica
A.K.A. Yordan Kolchev
Reply
#41
Had never noticed those holes, thanks Jordan!
Giannis K. Hoplite
a.k.a.:Giannis Kadoglou
a.k.a.:Thorax
[Image: -side-1.gif]
Reply
#42
You are welcome Giannis!
Lucius Campanius Verecundus Signifer Legio quarta Scythica
A.K.A. Yordan Kolchev
Reply
#43
Thats another new one on me!
What is that band running from side to side? Reconstruction work?
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
Reply
#44
Explicit and nice pictures Jordan, thank you for the upload. I also ignored these specimens, though I had heard of specimens with crest-related holes. To make a guess these would hold the large high-up crests especially those based on metal. Low crests and those of organic materials (wood, leather, linen), could be as well glued as described above. Practical reasons imply that the latter should had been more common.

The band shown in the middle picture could be the result of a lateral crest - though the 4 holes are a bit off-center (they are off-center even for a straight crest too). Who knows what crest these held? If the crest was a metal one made out of an even slightly different metal to that of the helmet (something more probable than not), then there would be certainly a differential in rusting with the area touched presenting accelerated corrosion. Not sure 100% if this is the case here but it could as well be the result of that.

Nikos
Reply
#45
The bilateral line on this helmet is a repair. Many of these helmets received a tremendous amount of reconstructive work in the 19th-20th century when they were found. Being as a complete helmet was more desirable in a private or public collection. Some helmets, upon analysis, showed repair work so finely done that it had been undetected until now.

All of these helmet holes, whether for crests or for liners would appear to have been made by their owners and not the smiths who created them in my opinion. The holes in many cases like this, being uneven, out of alignment or done in a sloppy manner which a craftsman would have made much more perfect.

If I am not wrong, this style of helmet appears late in the period and would be incongruous with the archaic crests used on earlier helmets in an earlier time. The holes in the rear and at the top seem to indicate the full helmet crest here. The holes are large enough in this helmet for leather lacing here, in other helmets they are very small with 'eruption' indicating the force of a nail being applied.

Many helmets show no signs of a crest attachment, likely because Pitch was used. As with anything of this period there is wide variation due to personal tastes and fashions changing from Hoplite to Hoplite. But here we do see the chin-strap hole in the side as in others.
Michael
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Greek Helmet Crests Giannis K. Hoplite 48 18,139 04-29-2015, 08:31 PM
Last Post: urricjohnson1908
  Greek Helmets With Scales Iphitos 47 7,629 05-10-2014, 05:20 AM
Last Post: Feinman
  Greek helmets galore The Oracle 176 40,949 04-11-2010, 02:20 PM
Last Post: Gaius Julius Caesar

Forum Jump: