Sculpture from Volterra Museum

[Graham Sumner]

...yes, Graham, your disappointment is easy to understand! I too have got all excited at the prospect of a 'new' discovery, only to find that someone has been there before.)

I'am doing it as a job though, it just gets harder and harder to find new things for you folks!

Mind you someone has just asked on another thread for sizes and colours of cloaks, six years after Roman Military Clothing 1 was published! :wink:

it is hardly fair to (impliedly) criticise Reuben for publishing here something he and Duncan discovered with no knowledge of your and Rafele's work

I did not know I had, as they have every right to do so. I just painted my reconstruction over a year ago. It is not my fault it is not published yet and I am not getting paid until it does either!

Nor can knowledge be 'held back' because you have suffered publishing delays.

It should not but it does happen all the time and I too have been unable to get some images off other people to show to you for the same reasons.

In the light of the fact that you have 'access' to the latest knowledge, I am a little surprised that you illustrated the crest in the way you did,

The crest of the Spanish soldier was not based on the Entella relief. That reconstruction will appear in one of the 'Arms and Armour' series the first of which should be published this year by Frontline books. Just because the Entella source exists why does that make the other ancient sources wrong? Why can not both be right?

I doubt whether I have special 'access' to any of the latest knowledge, it's available to anyone and in many cases it certainly is not even new, its' just been lost or forgotten. It has just been my experience that you don't find much of it on the Internet or always in books on Romans. It involves a lot of research in libraries, looking in bookshops, traveling to museums, speaking to experts and attending conferences over many years. You probably know all that that yourself Paul.

I can only afford to do so much but I try my best.

Graham.

[jho]

I do not know much about Roman republican helmets but I have been looking through Junkelmann's publication of the Axel Guttmann helmets recently and noticed two Montefortino helmets with a heavily corroded iron ring around the central knob.

On one of the helmets the iron ring has two iron angled upright extensions which, as seen from the front, form a trident with the central bronze knob as the middle and an iron extension on each side (I hope this description makes sense). Junkelmann presumes that this was some sort of device to hold a crest or feather. In fact with one feather in the central knob and a feather in each of the iron extensions, the result would be somewhat similar to the Entella relief (they could, however, just as well serve to tie down a crest box).

Although the helmets in question are not from a documented Roman context, Junkelmann states that at least one helmet with a Roman inscription also was found with an iron ring around the knob.

I am not at all an expert in Italian helmets but this type of helmet adornment seems to me to be different from the transverse feather crests found on other Italian helmets.

The Entella relief is also interesting in that it clearly shows a Montefortino with cheek pieces in a Roman context whereas certain German scholars have claimed that the Romans may have worn their helmets without cheekpieces (or with leather cheek pieces) because most (or all?) helmets which can be identified with a degree of certainty as Roman) lack cheek pieces.

Also, I would like to draw your attention to the site:

http://www.antiquemilitaryhistory.com/romangallery.htm

where the Entella relief and other Roman and Hellenistic reliefs are published. A lot of the reliefs were new to me so they may also be of interest to other RATers.

[Tarbicus]

Graham kindly asked me to post his depiction of the helmet for all to see. So here he is:

[MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS]

Jho, Cheek pieces are easily interchangeable, discardable, and or repaireable/reuseable, so that there have been many helmets found in Roman context missing their cheek pieces doesnt strike me as odd at all!

M.VIB.M.

[Graham Sumner]

Graham kindly asked me to post his depiction of the helmet for all to see. So here he is:

Thanks Jim!

The helmet reconstruction was based on research material supplied to me by Raffaele D'Amato. It ties in well with the description by Junkelmann mentioned in the above post.

Graham.

[jho]

Whow! That is exactly the iron "fork" seen on the Axel Guttmann helmet.

Graham, I apologize if I have given something away you would have liked to reserve for the publication of your book. However, I am sure than everybody who subscribes to this forum will buy it on the day of publication anyway. I, at least, can hardly wait for its publication.

Will all three parts be published at the same time or one after the other? If so, do you know which one will be the first?

[Peroni]

The iron fitting is very interesting.

Any clues as to how was it fixed to the finial of the bowl? Bent to shape around the finial? Was it forged/welded around it? Could it be that it was applied before the finial was added?

[Graham Sumner]

Hi Jens

Will all three parts be published at the same time or one after the other? If so, do you know which one will be the first?

One after the other. The early Imperial will be published first, the Later Empire second and the Republican third.

Graham.

[Komanos]

Funny, Ruben, to see that site posted as reference for your picture...

Concerning the Polybian description, I've wondered for a while whether the three feathers might be in addition to the circle he describes, rather than a further description of the circle. While I can't think of any actual excavated examples for this, there are a couple of terracottas and reliefs which depict a helmet with upright feathers and, just in front of, or in place of, the centermost feather, a circlet of much smaller feathers.

edit: here's one such picture, i'm not sure where the terracotta I'm thinking of is. Pretty sure the relief is from Capua, and pretty sure its of Praetorians, its at the Pergamon Museum in Berlin.

[jho]

While I can't think of any actual excavated examples for this, there are a couple of terracottas and reliefs which depict a helmet with upright feathers and, just in front of, or in place of, the centermost feather, a circlet of much smaller feathers.

edit: here's one such picture, i'm not sure where the terracotta I'm thinking of is. Pretty sure the relief is from Capua, and pretty sure its of Praetorians, its at the Pergamon Museum in Berlin.

This "circlet" must be the same as the one shown on the Trajanic frieze of the arch of Constantin. On the arch there is a side view where the circlet actually appears to be more of a cylinder.

I hadn't noticed that the Berlin relief shows the same kind of helmet because I only have fairly small pictures of it. Would you be able to post more pictures of the frieze?

[Praefectusclassis]

Sure. Copyright Karwansaray BV though!

[jho]

Thank you!

[MeinPanzer]

Graham kindly asked me to post his depiction of the helmet for all to see. So here he is:

That's a very neat reconstruction, Graham. I look forward to reading your book.

Funny, Ruben, to see that site posted as reference for your picture...

Sorry, I'm a bit confused. What do you mean?

[marcii ulpi messala]

Yo no creo que el sistema de agarre de las correas del montefortino que dibuja el señor Graham sea el más correcto.
1º) las check piece que dibuja son curvas, adaptadas a la anatomía de la cara, en la realidad son siempre planas, poco apropiadas para la forma de sujeción que el señor Graham dibuja.
2º) de esta manera, las correas serían muy fácil de cortar por una espada, dejando el yelmo suelto, las correas debieron pasar cruzadas bajo la mandíbula, y aparecer bajo el botón en la check piece contraria, yo dibujé estos sistemas en un post anterior, de esa forma las correas no quedarían expuestas al corte de la espada.

I do not believe that the system of grasp of the straps of the montefortino that the gentleman Graham draws is the most correct. 1 º) the check piece that it draws are curved, adapted to the anatomy of the face, in the reality they are always flats little adapted for the form of subordination that the gentleman Graham draws.
2 º) hereby, the straps would be very easy to cut for a sword, leaving the free helmet, the straps should have spent crusades under the jaw, and appear under the button in the opposite check piece, I drew these systems in a previous post, of this form the straps would not remain exposed to the cut of the sword.

[Tarbicus]

The iron fitting is very interesting.

Any clues as to how was it fixed to the finial of the bowl? Bent to shape around the finial? Was it forged/welded around it? Could it be that it was applied before the finial was added?

Is that an iron bowl, but with bronze cheek pieces? Both colour and corrosion look different.

I'm also interested in how it was attached as a whole, so as not to rattle or bounce around when worn.