Which helmet next Gallic G disscussion

[Dean Cunningham metalsmit]

I am trying to figure out which helmet I will make next for sale. I have made one Gallic G (worms) before, but I now believe it and all like it are wrong so I would like to make a corrected version. If you disagree please tell me why. Look closely at the available photos before answering. I have attached a photo of the original to illustrate what I mean. I see what appears to be an eyebrow divided into three parts instead of two. Is this an instance of copying a famous reproduction(HR Robinson) rather than the original?

[attachment=2097]WormsImpGallG-7neweye.jpg[/attachment]


My other choice is a Weisenau/Guttmann helmet originally in the Guttmann collection.
[attachment=2096]TypWeisenauEndfoto12a.jpg[/attachment]
I have never made this one beyond a proto-type that was way too big and the eye got over worked and I punched through with a chisel.

How far should a craftsman go in reproducing an original? The worms G has a crest hook clearly not centered but above one eyebrow. It also has 2 different types of rosette washer. One side cheek has one type and the other has 2 different types. Should a person reproduce the obvious slap dash construction? I try not to be perfect but that crest hook is hard to overlook. I mean it could get you a new name in the legion like old crooked crest.

Thanks in advance for any comments.

Dean

[Titus Marius Secundus]

judging by your profile picture you already have a similar Gallic helmet, so make the latter one, as it seems easier to make a "perfect to the original" example, and then make something more complexly done, with such confidence from the first. Whatever you do thought, it'll be a learning experience and us ratters, WELLLL ...ya know us ...always a helping hand

Best Regards, Sam

[Dean Cunningham metalsmit]

Sam That helmet was sold a few months ago. I have made quite a few gallic and italic styles as well as a few 10th century European helmets and a Rus helmet that have all been sold. Complexity doesn't really bother me much. The helmet I make will be for sale when done. I don't really need one myself as I have 3 different types for myself.

After looking at some other photos I'm convinced the eye brows on the HR Robinson and just about everyone's including the one I did years ago are wrong.


Here is the Rus helmet I made if anyone is interested.


[attachment=2098]100_0841.JPG[/attachment]

[Gaius Colletti]

I love the Imperial Gallic G, so I am a little impartial. As far as crookedness is concerned. I think you should correct it, Roman blacksmiths would ideally want the more centered and symmetrical helmet possible, that is a a human want. If the blacksmiths had more time, they'd make the helmet as perfect as possible.

The only reason I can think of to not correct it, is if you were making an identical copy of the Worms helmet, but no one wants to be called "Old crookedy" lol

[MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS]

I think it depends on what you want yourself Dean, I agree with your analysis that the ridge on the G type might well have been in three parts. The second helmet you posted is more rare so probably more interesting to some buyers. However it depends also on what you personally prefer. I think there is nothing wrong with making a helmet which has some kind of originality or personal artisan's impression to it. We have a lot of Roman helmets, but even more were lost forever. So if the overall shape and looks are correct, i.e. Neckplate, brows, bowl shape cheek plates etc, any other impression would be ok in my book.

M.VIB.M.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

What are the measurements on the Rus helmet Dean??

I have long been interested in a copy of the second helmet you posted!
Not to be too self serving, but I would say go for it!!
The points you make on the 'G' I think are valid.
Center the holder and do the three ridge eyebrows!

[markusaurelius]

Could that ridge guard have simply been fixed in the field after taking a strike? Why else would it be in three pieces, with a rivet. Making a whole one is much simpler, and there are many "ridge" examples alone that are clearly one piece.

On the other note, I'd make the Worms helmet. Something different and unique from the mainstream, everyone else has it helmet that seems to be out there now.

[Dean Cunningham metalsmit]

Whoops when I said if anyone is interested in the Rus helmet I meant in seeing it. That helmet has an owner!

I'm leaning toward the Gallic G from Worms. Although depending on how long it takes I may work concurrently on the Weisenau/Guttmann as well, I love them both.

I truly believe the Worms Gallic G has a trifurcated (is that the correct way to describe it?) eyebrow.

Thanks for everyones input.

[markusaurelius]

Edit to my post. I meant to say the Weisenau/Guttmann is the one you should make. That one is different than the ones that you see everyone else having! :oops:

[Doc]

Dean,

If you are going to make the Gallic G, I would make it exactly the way it was found. I think correcting it gives the impression that Roman helmets were perfect and symetrical. This is a modern human want not necessarily what they wanted or did. Even some of the more elaborate helmets were not perfect either. As far as the eyebrows, I think that it is three ridges as well, I would stay away from the two. Another thing is that the Romans would replace certain details on a helmet when damaged. The rosettes that you mention being different are probably due to some repair. In this instant do you make a helmet that portrays it in the original state when first manufactured (all uniform rosettes) OR do you make a helmet that represents what it was like after use (combination rosettes).

I have the Gallic D with what would have been the original cheekpiece decorations and the cheekpiece with the replacement decoration. I wear both depending on what I want to show. As a matter of fact, that is an option for the new owner of the helmet you make. You can make a set of cheekpieces with the mixed rosettes and one set with all uniform rosettes.

The other helmet I think would be better to reproduce because the G has been done to death albeit with certain inaccuracies. So the choices are, make something totally new that is not around OR improve an earlier reconstruction design.