Imperial Gallic A Helmet

[Crispvs]

Yes, some equipment certainly saw several decades' service. However, it would not have been through the medium of being passed down the generations in the case of Imperial Gallic series helmets, although this would certainly have been the case with earlier helmet types such as the Italio-Corinthian and the Montifortino 'A' and 'B' types. By the time the Imperial series helmets were in service, the legions were standing formations wholly paid for by the state, through the agency of the universal 4% tax imposed by Augustus.
Whilst equipment could, and often was, bought privately, in all probability most was commissioned and bought by the military units themselves, in the same way we know units corporately ordered and bought large amounts of clothing. This was issued to recruits and the cost deducted as stoppages from their pay. At the end of their service, it appears to have been normal for the army to buy the equipment back for reissue, the payment for it going to the retiring soldier or his family if he had died. It is safe to assume that all forts would contain an armoury and this is presumably why there was a soldier designated 'custos armorum' (custodian of the armoury).

Evidence from surviving equipment often shows it to have been owned by a succession of soldiers with different family names. We might reasonably conclude that when a unit bought back used equipment, it was assessed for its condition and if judged serviceable it was reissued. If it was not judged serviceable it was treated as scrap to be recycled, which is what we may be seeing in the Carlisle manicae, the Corbridge hoard and the much later hoard of helmets from Intercissa.

Crispvs

[Agricola]

Thanks for setting the record straight Crispvs. A Gallic A helmet's use should therefore have a cut off point circa the Claudian Invasion of Britain, with only a few old & damaged (but still servicable) examples surviving beyond that point.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Not a cut off point, as it's clear anything would be reissued until unserviceable.
More a phasing out.

[ROMan]

Thanks for setting the record straight Crispvs. A Gallic A helmet's use should therefore have a cut off point circa the Claudian Invasion of Britain, with only a few old & damaged (but still servicable) examples surviving beyond that point.

Have you looked at the helmets found at Pompeii?

[Crispvs]

The only helmets I am aware of from Pompeii are the gladiator helmets. If you mean the two helmets designated Imperial Italic 'A' from Herculaneum, the only reliable date we have for them is the date they were deposited (assuming they were still in use at the time and not laid up in a temple). As to their manufacturing date we can only guess, as both examples of the type come from the same site and both were removed from their archaeological context in the eighteenth or early nineteenth century.
The idea that they were the earliest in the Imperial Italic series is an assumption on stylistic grounds and Connolly showed some years ago that Robinson's dating on stylistic grounds was flawed. It might be that both helmets were quite new - we just don't know. It is possible that they may not even be military as well. Connolly liked the idea that they might have been used by vigiles.

Moving back to the topic at hand though, helmets of particular styles would probably only have been manufactured for a limited number of years, before the style was superceded (not necessarily at the same time everywhere) by another style. Therefore, if you are planning to use a helmet such as an Imperial Gallic 'A' even for a mid first century AD impression, it should not look as if it is new, as helmets such as it would not have been made for fifty to sixty years by then. Therefore it should look old. There should be scratches, dents and probably replacement cheek guards (as have been found on a number of surviving helmets. Any tin plating should look very worn. Anything else and it would be a miracle of preservation. Old equipment might be perfectly serviceable, but it would still look old, even if well maintained.

Crispvs

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Tin plating can always be refreshed. I've had mine redone once now already. :-)

[Crispvs]

True, but an additional layer of tin over a helmet which is five years old is unlikely to look the same as an additional layer of tin over a helmet which is sixty years old. Under that tinning would be scratches and dents which would show through. It would even be possible that as a result of those scratches and dents the tinning would not be even all over.

Whatever the case, an old helmet would look old, even if it was well maintained, as I said above. If you are wearing an Imperial Gallic 'A' in a Neronian or Flavian context, then it would be an old helmet. It would not look new.

Crispvs

[Caratacus]

One piece of evidence for the longevity of use of helmets might include the fact that a number have multiple owners' names punched (usually) into the neck guard. There is one in the British Museum that has four such. If we make the assumption that each owner served for around 20 years, then this would make this helmet a minimum of 80 years in service. Of course, we have no means of knowing whether the soldiers actually served their full hitch but it does suggest that these things remained useful for a considerable period of time.
Mike Thomas
(Caratacus)

[Agricola]

Very interesting discussion. I doubt we will never be a 100% certain until a Imperial Gallic A type helmet turns up in a Neronian or Flavian context.

Personally, I've ditched the idea of getting an Imperial Gallic A, and have instead opted for an Imperial Gallic F helmet.