Login

03-29-2004, 07:41 PM

Hi Caius Ambrosius here. I was going through RAT and noticed a fellow by the name of Ambrosius giving Dan Petersen a Hard time so to speak about this type of helm. I have one as well and just love it. Its a great 2nd to third Century helm fits well on my head. While it is sometimes hard to breath in it, I find it overall a great helm . A 2 Thumbs up type of helm. As well I would like to take the time to Thank Mr. Dan Petersen (and others like him) for his hard work over the years to make Roman reeactment a reality which we all enjoy to this day. Sir my Humble thanks. Caius Ambrosius Some men dream others do it! Oh By the way I am a red tunic type of guy!

03-31-2004, 02:53 PM

Caius, about that type E: How does it works exactly? 
It seems there's a metal part linking the two cheek pieces, and the cheek pieces are unusual in shape. I was never able to get good close ups of that piece.

Daniel S Peterson · 03-31-2004, 03:21 PM

Caius, 
Thanks for the compliments. When I started all of this over 20 years ago there was only one other Roman group, very jealous of thier equipment sources and unwilling to help others because they wanted to be the only Roman group. My attitude has always been "the more the merrier" for what would Gettysburg and the other great U.S. reenactments be if there were only a few dozen guys blazing away at each other. We have now had over 150 Romans together at Ostia, most fighting. This would not have been possible if it were not for the inexpensive, yet reasonably authentic Roman gear i developed for Deepeeka. Who knows, in another five years we may have events with over 1000 authentic Romans! 
 
Antoninus, 
The curious 3 piece cheekpieces on the "E" are copied from the reconstruction of this helmet (made prior to its destruction in WWII), display in the RGZM Museum in Mainz. As everyone's head is slightly different, the chin plate can be reposiitoned. Ignorant people thing the upright brow reinforce is a mistake when it was reconstructed, but this is incorrect. This type of guard is seen on other helmets as well as art. 
 
Dan

03-31-2004, 09:46 PM

Yep, Dan. 
But was I was hinting at is that maybe someone could, like post a picture or two of the said weird cheekpieces, so I could make out the details of their fastening so I could eventually make a sketch of the thing... 
BTW, about strange helmets: I am working --more or less-- on a theory about what can be considered an officers helmet and what can not. 
Should be controversial enough for you to love it..

03-31-2004, 10:28 PM

Ummm... 
 
If this has'nt been brought up before... Where on Trajan's C or on Adamkalisi, or anywhere else for that matter do we see Centurion or any officer type helmets? The only evidence I knopw might be of anything is the base of T's C showing attic type helmets, which I have been assured don't really exist. 
So by 100, when crests seem to go out of favor, what do we know is happening? I see an Attic type helmet on what is refered to as a Centurion on third cent. figure of Severius Acceptus at Istanbul. 
 
Gaius Aquilius

04-01-2004, 10:18 AM

Good and still unresolved question.. 
The Guisborough type could be the answer. We know for certain the type was used by cavalry troopers though. 
Several scalloped cheek guards of attic type from the early and mid-imperial period have been found as well and they fit a Guyisborough type just as well as cheek-guards of the "cavalry" type do. 
I suspect more and more that with time, centurions earned more and more rights, like the right to wear a gold ring for example. 
It could be that they also, little by little earned the right to wear the superior officer's dress, i.e. muscled cuirass and sash. 
I didn't know Severius Acceptus was an centurion but if he was, the representation of his cuirass would be in line with my suspicions.

04-01-2004, 04:47 PM

Posted by mistake... silly me... 
See below... 
(emoticon of insuferable stupidity) 
 
Gaius Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=gaiusdeciusaquilius@romanarmytalk>Gaius Decius Aquilius</A> at: 4/1/04 7:18 pm

04-01-2004, 04:54 PM

What is the Guyisborough type? ...I havent run into that one yet I dont think? 
 
Severius Acceptus, from a source I cant think of, off the top of my head, is interpreted as a Centurion because of his greaves, cuirass and "attic" crested helmet in the totality of circumstance. 
 
I am still curious why on T's C which is stylised to represnt classes of soldiers, you see no transverse crests or anything to identify the Centurionate, a group that Trajan surely would not want to offend, even if by ommission. Also taken T'sC is mostly viewed by local Romans, it is still a tourist attraction, meant to impress any doubting Thomases. Out of towners would still have to be able to recognise the various Roman troop types from the C. Being able to pick the local Centurion out of a crowd before he could pick you is a typical survival trait of the age. 
 
Gaius

Sassanid · 04-01-2004, 09:44 PM

I was told by Holger Ratsdorf a few years back that the Pre WW II Mainz reconstuction was incorrectly interpreted, the 3 piece cheekpeice being basically wrong. And Deepeeka, the Lonely Mountain Forge and others were probably just copying theirs from pictures of the reconstruction, thus compounding the error. 
 
Unfortunatly as it has now been destroyed I dont suppose it can be proven, unless another turns up someday. The upright brow is correct on the Deepeeka helmet, but a little on the large size IMHO. 
 
Best regards, 
 
Sassanid Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=sassanid@romanarmytalk>Sassanid</A> at: 4/1/04 11:44 pm

04-01-2004, 10:49 PM

Gaius, the Theilenhofen helmet is a Guisborough type. 
The type is also sometimes described as "neo-attic" or "pseudo-attic". The Louvre pretorians wear Guisborough helmets. Most of them are not as ornate as the Teilehofen example and some are actually quite simple as far as ornaments go. They are always in bronze, began to appear in the second half of the Ist C. AD.. They were still in use under Marcus Aurelius --The Theilenhofen example-- and probably until the appearance of the romano-sassanian type. 
In other words, much longer than the Weiler type favored by reenactors. 
Sassanid, Thanks for Hodger Ratsforf's valued opinion. 
Did I stumble into a hotly contested debate about that helmet? 
Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=antoninuslucretius@romanarmytalk>Antoninus Lucretius</A> <IMG HEIGHT=10 WIDTH=10 SRC="http://lucretius.homestead.com/files/Cesar_triste.jpg" BORDER=0> at: 4/2/04 12:51 am

Uwe Bahr · 04-02-2004, 11:35 AM

Antoninus, 
 
I totally agree with Your conclusions to the Theilenhofen helmet and can add the information that it had been dated to about 230 AD (date of the Alamannic incursions). Your sketches were always a highlight on this forum. BTW, another debate about the Theilenhofen is on this thread about triple crested helmets: 
 
[url=http://pub45.ezboard.com/fromanarmytalkfrm1.showMessage?topicID=931.topic" target="top]pub45.ezboard.com/fromanarmytalkfrm1.showMessage?topicID=931.topic[/url] 
 
Caius Ambrosius, can You display photo(es) of Your Auxiliary E here or email it to me? 
 
Valete Uwe

Daniel S Peterson · 04-02-2004, 05:05 PM

Sassanid, 
Thought you'd be in Iran by now. (maybe you are posting this from there). Holger has some very curious ideas and all cannot be believed, like the non-existance of any flat roman shields or every piece of croman cupric alloy equipment was tin plated. As I said on my previous post, there is a very old reproduction of this helmet in mainz, made before the original was destroyed in WWII. Also there are several other original helmets with this type of upward pointed brow guard. 
 
Dan

Sassanid · 04-02-2004, 09:33 PM

Dan, 
 
I will take it from your previous two posts, that you agree that Holger may be on to something on 3 piece cheekpiece. On the brow, I am not one of your ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã…â€œignorant peopleÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã‚Â

Uwe Bahr · 04-03-2004, 05:05 AM

Antoninus, 
 
I oversaw Your remark about the Louvre helmets. You surely spoke about the so called praetorian relief. The last I heared about it was, that it should have been part of triumphal monument for emperor Claudius. But the Guisborough / Theilenhofen type came up much later... 
 
I read in Your personal information that You are living in Paris and therefor You are closest to the Louvre relief. Is it true that the heads of the three figures in front of the relief are lost in ancient times and have been restored in modern times? 
They would have modelled the helmets after the remaining helmets of the three figures in the background and these are clearly no Guisboroughs. 
 
Greets Uwe

04-03-2004, 10:15 AM

Uwe, 
Actually, according to FeugÃƒÆ’Ã‚Â¨re the Guisborough type appeared round Claudius' times. 
I think these helmets are Guisborough or "proto-Guisborough" types. If they aren't, then there is still a type of helmet that has not yet been found in the archaeological record, which I doubt. 
Remember that most of them were far simpler than the Theilehofen which is an extremely ornate specimen, from a later period (Hadrianus/Marcus Aurelius IMHO) known for its "baroque" taste. It may have been lost in the mid IIIrd C.AD, but it was made much earlier, I think. 
Yes the front figures were restored. The authentic ones are those in the background. You'll notice thus that the cheek guards of the guys on the back are larger and cover the chin, more like the real thing. 
About the date of that relief --as well as its interpretation--I've read a lot of things, including the possibility that the men depicted may not be pretorians. That sculpture has been variously attributed to Caligula, Claudius or Nero's reigns. I wouldn't go further than giving it a mid/late 1st C.AD date.. 
We won't be able to know until we figure out precisely to which building it belonged to and we don't, as far as I know. 
I may be wrong though.. Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=antoninuslucretius@romanarmytalk>Antoninus Lucretius</A> <IMG HEIGHT=10 WIDTH=10 SRC="http://lucretius.homestead.com/files/Cesar_triste.jpg" BORDER=0> at: 4/3/04 12:22 pm

Login
Username:
Password:	Lost Password?
	Remember me