Customizing Helmets and gear

[Crispvs]

Of course, in an economy where everything has to be handmade, no two items are ever going to be exactly the same even from the same craftsman. Differences would increase between different workshops and even further between different regions. Thus what for the Romans might have been the same basic pattern might seem to us like a multitude of similar patterns.

There is some possible evidence though for soldiers customising their equipment. An imperial Gallic type 'F' helmet from Sisak was fitted to take a transverse crest so was he property of a centurio. Its surface had been tinned but sometime later the tinning had evidently worn thin and it was tinned again. Later still it was covered with silver foil decorated with punched designs.

The belt plates from the Velsen burial had also been customised. Some had been shortened by having an end folded over and the worn tinning had been covered with a rather inept layer of silver foil.

A third item which might fit the criteria for a customised item would be a type 'B' front plate from a pugio sheath from Xanten. This had evidently been removed from its sheath after the next style of decoration was introduced and was turned over for a more up to date style of decoration to be applied before (presumably) being reattached to its sheath with the original decorated surface now forming the back of the plate.

An example of a probable repair which might also count as a customisation would be the Imperial Gallic type 'D' helmet which was destroyed in the Second World War. Some of the decorative washers appeared to have been replaced on one side of the neck guard and had been filled with red coral rather than the red enamel used on the other parts pf the helmet.

I hope that helps a little with your question.


Regarding punching versus scratching to mark names and units on equipment, both methods were used by Roman soldiers, often very untidily!

Crispvs