10-25-2012, 12:27 AM
Well, many of the well preserved originals weigh less than 1 kg. As I have quoted above. Here a series of pictures to further show what I am talking about, all based on minute scientific (as in natural sciences) research.
1. a series of helmets from Olympia was found as basically "new". Here is a detail-picture of one of these, so that one can see what I am talking about.
[attachment=5581]IMG_0974.jpg[/attachment]
2. some of these helmets were damaged due to pressure from above, here is an Xray from one of these. These helmets show how extremely thin these helmets were on the backside, while being more massive on the front. The whole helmet construction is a system of specially hardened and softer areas designed to hold against thrusts etc., supported by thicker and thinner areas. So different workshops could apparently be identified, which each had their own ways of making this, back then a sort of production secret (?). The aim in this process (evolution, if you will) was to get ever lighter helmets with ever better protective qualities.
[attachment=5582]IMG_0972.jpg[/attachment]
3. A search for tool marks etc. made it possible to find a production pattern which showed the use of larger and smaller hammers with specific form for different specific areas of the helmets. This is visible here in an X-Ray as well, see arrows.
[attachment=5583]IMG_0975.jpg[/attachment]
4. The investigation of all these details led to this sketch of middle and late Corinthian production scheme
[attachment=5584]IMG_0967.jpg[/attachment]
[attachment=5585]IMG_0968.jpg[/attachment]
5. This is in addition supported by iconographic evidence. Especially the second picture seems to show a pre-cast helmet and the necessary hammers for bringing it into form. However, the scientific analysis is enough on its own. Only some small details are not yet 100% sure, yet there is a lack of other possibilities.
[attachment=5586]IMG_0970.jpg[/attachment]
All this led me to come to my arguments above. Can you support your claims about the heavier weight of these helmets in any way other than simply stating "This is so-and-so" and "That has to be so-and-so"?
1. a series of helmets from Olympia was found as basically "new". Here is a detail-picture of one of these, so that one can see what I am talking about.
[attachment=5581]IMG_0974.jpg[/attachment]
2. some of these helmets were damaged due to pressure from above, here is an Xray from one of these. These helmets show how extremely thin these helmets were on the backside, while being more massive on the front. The whole helmet construction is a system of specially hardened and softer areas designed to hold against thrusts etc., supported by thicker and thinner areas. So different workshops could apparently be identified, which each had their own ways of making this, back then a sort of production secret (?). The aim in this process (evolution, if you will) was to get ever lighter helmets with ever better protective qualities.
[attachment=5582]IMG_0972.jpg[/attachment]
3. A search for tool marks etc. made it possible to find a production pattern which showed the use of larger and smaller hammers with specific form for different specific areas of the helmets. This is visible here in an X-Ray as well, see arrows.
[attachment=5583]IMG_0975.jpg[/attachment]
4. The investigation of all these details led to this sketch of middle and late Corinthian production scheme
[attachment=5584]IMG_0967.jpg[/attachment]
[attachment=5585]IMG_0968.jpg[/attachment]
5. This is in addition supported by iconographic evidence. Especially the second picture seems to show a pre-cast helmet and the necessary hammers for bringing it into form. However, the scientific analysis is enough on its own. Only some small details are not yet 100% sure, yet there is a lack of other possibilities.
[attachment=5586]IMG_0970.jpg[/attachment]
All this led me to come to my arguments above. Can you support your claims about the heavier weight of these helmets in any way other than simply stating "This is so-and-so" and "That has to be so-and-so"?
Christian K.
No reconstruendum => No reconstruction.
Ut desint vires, tamen est laudanda voluntas.
No reconstruendum => No reconstruction.
Ut desint vires, tamen est laudanda voluntas.
