Roman helm identification

[Macedon]

I want to "describe" these two types of Roman helms, depicting troops of the late 3rd century. However, I am not as well versed in such things as many of you gentlemen, so I need your help. How would you describe/identify them?

[attachment=7494]a1.jpg[/attachment]

[attachment=7495]a2.jpg[/attachment]

[markusaurelius]

The top one appears to be a spangenhelm, with a nasal piece and neck guard. I believe these helmets originated from the east (sasanian) and were the mainstay late roman helmet ( along with the ridge helmet) for the next few hundred years.

This example is believed to be from Eygpt, late 3rd early 4th century.


[attachment=7496]image.jpg[/attachment]

[Macedon]

Any other idea guys?

[Flavivs Aetivs]

Looks like a baldenheim with an aventail

[Macedon]

Would you guys agree that the other one looks like an intersica type helmet?

[Flavivs Aetivs]

Maybe an Intercisa, not an Augst or Worms type though, the cheekpieces would be displayed differently.

[Robert Vermaat]

Top one Deir el medineh (not a true spangenhelm, mind you). Bottom one can be Intercisa, but the çrest' can also be a plume I think.

[Macedon]

If you open the image in another tab you will see what I assume to be the same helmet from another angle. I also am not sure whether it is a plume or not... There is also this one that makes it look more like a plume from the same relief.


[attachment=7534]det.jpg[/attachment]

[Flavivs Aetivs]

I think it could be either on the top one:

Baldenheim:
[img width=200]http://static.mijnwebwinkel.nl/winkel/celticwebmerchant/full27053483.jpg[/img]

Deir El Medinah


The other is an Intercisa, I'd Imagine a II, longer cheekpieces on the 2. It looks like a plume, not a ridge, in my opinion.

[Nathan Ross]

Interestingly, the dating of the Deir el medineh 'spangenhelm' to the 3rd-4th century seems to rely in part on the similarity to these helmets shown on the Arch of Galerius - it's also been dated (based on the hinges, I think) to the 6th century... So we should be cautious, perhaps. The helmets on the arch are also rather similar to those on the Adamklisi metopes, which we 'know' to be Imperial Gallic/Italic types (but which could also be some sort of spangenhelm...).

Actually, I've often thought that these helmets rather resemble this one (particularly the bulbous top), but that's an Avar model from the 6th century...

The helmet on the left in the second picture looks a bit like those on the Aurelius Cervianus phalera - same brim or flange - which dates to the mid 3rd century. As with so many helmet types shown in later Roman art, I'm inclined to think that this might be something currently unknown in archaeology. Calling it an intercisa type might be convenient (after all, the intercisa looks fairly basic!), and we don't have much more to go on at present, but it's reductive even so.

The central helmet in the second picture could be something else again - I'm thinking of the Neiderbeiber type with an intercica style 'fin' crest found at Poitiers (as yet unpublished, I think) dating to c.270 - this is less than 30 years before the Persian campaign of Galerius, so these kinds of helmets could have still been in use.

Our knowledge of helmet types from this era is so patchy, and the conventions of Roman representational art so obscure, that we probably can't be any more exact about what we're seeing here.

EDIT - it may be useful to consider the identity of the troops on the first image. Might their distinctive helmets have been intended to represent a particular (e.g. Sarmatian?) origin?

Mailed Soldiers on the Arch of Galerius

(I think the suggestion that a mixed collection of soldiers from different units is intended is most persuasive, myself. But you never know...)

[Macedon]

Yes, the images are indeed from the arch of Galerius, I initially did not give that information in order to not bias future responses by setting a rigid timeframe. I share the opinion that the adlocutio relief is intended to show a mixed throng of soldiers rather than auxiliaries of a specific origin. The image with the men in lorica squamata is a detail from this relief, in which, interestingly enough, 4 vexilla and 4 dracones standards also appear.

With central figure you mean the one holding the elaborate thyreos? If so, I am fairly sure that this is a figure of a Persian.

Is there an image you can link here of the Aurelius Cervianus phalera?

[Nathan Ross]

Is there an image you can link here of the Aurelius Cervianus phalera?

There's a drawing of it in Birley's The People of Roman Britain (scroll down to the following page). It's very rough and primitive-looking, but the helmets resemble British 'world war' pattern, as far as I can see, similar to the Galerius arch.

By the 'central figure' I meant the one you pictured a bit later, the officer in the muscle cuirass with the possibly-plumed helmet. Sorry for the confusion!

[Macedon]

Aha.. Thanks for the link. I think that whatever reconstruction/identification of the said helmet should take into account all three figures in these images. The reliefs on the Arch of Galerius have a very distinctive uniformity (mostly) and most probably the helmet in question is supposed to be of the same type, looked upon from different angles.

[Robert Vermaat]

There's a drawing of it in Birley's The People of Roman Britain (scroll down to the following page). It's very rough and primitive-looking, but the helmets resemble British 'world war' pattern, as far as I can see, similar to the Galerius arch.

Oh, that's VERY primitive - I would not care to compare that to any helmet, it's too stylistic.

[Flavivs Aetivs]

Reviving this Thread, but I noticed this coin on Vcoins:

https://www.vcoins.com/en/stores/civitas...fault.aspx

That Helmet on the Reverse looks, IMO, a lot like a Deir-El-Medinah or a Berkasovo Helmet.