Cornuti - or not?

[Nathan Ross]

It does not show evidence of cheek pieces and the sweeping brim and possible crest(?) remind me of the much later helmets

There are cheek pieces actually - here's a better picture of one of the other helmets in the same scene:

   

They are very interesting, and similar to a number of strange helmets known only from artistic representations - I've been periodically mentioning them (for example in this thread) in the hope that sooner or later somebody will find a real example of one...  

[Robert Vermaat]

Where does this idea about the Cornuti come from, and what evidence is there for it?

I'm not sure if there is more than circular reasoning here:
"There are troops with what seems to be horns on their helmet, THEREFORE these ARE the Cornuti".
"They are on the monument THEREFORE they must have played an important role in the campaigns".
"Constantine raise many units THEREFORE these units were Germanic. THEREFORE the Cornuti were Germanic".

I'm not certain which soldiers are Constantine's btw, we assume this and probably correct, but let's face it, there are no captions.

The earliest reference to the Cornuti therefore remains Ammianus Marcellinus (16.12.43), who mentions their presence at the battle of Argentorate in AD357. Anything before that is merely guesswork...

I fully agree. The shield design tells us nothing definitive, and horns were not really a part of Roman armour.

[Nathan Ross]

I'm not certain which soldiers are Constantine's btw

They're the ones who are winning :-D

Seriously though, I think it's easy to tell the sides apart - the siege is either Susa or Verona, and C's men are outside the walls, and the bridge is the Milvian, and Maxentius's guys are the ones going into the river...

But you're right that we should be wary about just assuming things, or believing what we're told by various 'authorities'... :|

[Robert Vermaat]

As a member of the US-based Cornuti Seniores, we kind of take pride in being the "Horny Old Men", but that's another discussion.

I'm going to suggest something really silly here - maybe 'Cornuti' were not named after 'horns', but after the 'cornu'? It would not be the only unit named after a certain piece of equipment rather than an actual function or physical aspect:
scutarorii - those with a scutum
brachiati - from brachium, 'arm'
lanciarii - those with a lance
balistarii - those with a ballista

etc.

[Robert Vermaat]

Also, Attic Helmets are generally believed to represent Intercisa-III and Intercisa-IV helmets after 280 AD (when the first Intercisa Type Helmet was discovered in... Richborough I think. Interesting enough it had an attachment for an attic-style browguard).

I'm not sure about those Attic helmets. They could be anything, even artistic attempts to show more of the face. To those who think there are a separate style of helmets I say - produce one! So far, all that turns up is ridge-style or spangenhelm, even in the larger hoards such as Koblenz. If monuments like this one really represent Constantinian forces I would expect such Attic helmets to have turned up at least in some spots. They haven't, so far.

The first Intercisa helmets were found in Intercisa, Hungary, hence the type-name. The Richborough helmets were found later I think.

[Flavivs Aetivs]

Well there's other context around that. Lanciarii were skirmishers aremd with light javelins called the Verrutum and Lancaea. Ballistarii were crossbowmen. Scutarii had a large shield.

The cornuti were a combat unit, could they have been trumpeters? Yes, maybe, but that's very debatable. Do we have any evidence tieing the Cornuti to the Cornu?

[Robert Vermaat]

There are cheek pieces actually - here's a better picture of one of the other helmets in the same scene:
[attachment=7949]Constantinehelmet2.jpg[/attachment]
They are very interesting, and similar to a number of strange helmets known only from artistic representations - I've been periodically mentioning them (for example in this thread) in the hope that sooner or later somebody will find a real example of one...

Actually, if you look at this detail you could say that it's not a helmet but a cover of sorts worn OVER the helmet. The cheek pieces seem strangely attached or not at all. I'm oddly reminded of 6th-century 'Byzantine' helmets with covers.

[M. Demetrius]

We would rather keep our nickname, but a cornu doesn't interfere with that. Heh.

[Robert Vermaat]

Well there's other context around that. Lanciarii were skirmishers aremd with light javelins called the Verrutum and Lancaea. Ballistarii were crossbowmen. Scutarii had a large shield.

I'm sure that what you read somewhere, but actually all of that is modern interpretation. Nowhere do we have any description that all lanciarii were skirmishers, or all balistarii were crossbowmen (you probaly mean they carried a small ballista, which is different), or that scutarii had different shields. Unfounded. The Roman army of course had specialist units such as slingers and archers, but by the Late Roman army we don't have these anymore (save perhaps specialist foreign units). Every infantry unit (according to Vegetius at least) had their own missile troops. So it make sno sense to have these specialists anymore.

The cornuti were a combat unit, could they have been trumpeters? Yes, maybe, but that's very debatable. Do we have any evidence tieing the Cornuti to the Cornu?

Well, the cornu is also named for a 'horn', so etymologically they are similar. But even if the unit was named after the instrument, it would tell us nothing more than we already know at present - I don't think the Cornuti were a musical band! :woot:

[Flavivs Aetivs]

Well, Ammianus records the Ballistarii as operating from horseback, and the reconstruction of the Xanten Manuballista needed a support like a Sniper rifle. The only logical thing is that they used crossbows (Arcuballistae), something Comitatus has successfully tested.

[Nathan Ross]

it's not a helmet but a cover of sorts worn OVER the helmet. The cheek pieces seem strangely attached or not at all.

Cover is an interesting suggestion. These helmets always did rather resemble a sou'wester!:



mile:

[ValentinianVictrix]

Well, Ammianus records the Ballistarii as operating from horseback, and the reconstruction of the Xanten Manuballista needed a support like a Sniper rifle. The only logical thing is that they used crossbows (Arcuballistae), something Comitatus has successfully tested.

Please quote the exact section in Ammianus where he mentions Ballistarii as 'operaring from horseback' as none of the translations I have mention this.

[ValentinianVictrix]

The problem I have with identifying infantry with horned helmets with the Cornuti is that there are other depictions of infantry with what appear to be 'horns' who are obviously not the Cornuti. I believe such a one appears in Dixon & Southern's book on the Late Roman army.

[Nathan Ross]

there are other depictions of infantry with what appear to be 'horns' who are obviously not the Cornuti. I believe such a one appears in Dixon & Southern's book on the Late Roman army.

I'd be interesting in seeing those, but I don't have D&S - can you find an image somewhere?

[Flavivs Aetivs]

Well, Ammianus records the Ballistarii as operating from horseback, and the reconstruction of the Xanten Manuballista needed a support like a Sniper rifle. The only logical thing is that they used crossbows (Arcuballistae), something Comitatus has successfully tested.

Please quote the exact section in Ammianus where he mentions Ballistarii as 'operaring from horseback' as none of the translations I have mention this.

On that note, looked it up and I think it was an inference, he mentions ballistarii and cataphractarii accompanying Julian (a very odd combination as Ballistarii would have moved very slow if armed with the cheiroballistra) and Comitatus extrapolated.