Last updated 10th July 2024: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 May 2013
The article concerns a helmet of Corinthian type, of the seventh century BC, very plain and without a crest or decoration but with small holes round the rim for stitching in a lining. It belonged for many years to Charterhouse, until that school recently sold its Museum's contents. Manchester Museum acquired it thanks to a most generous bequest from the estate of the late Professor Robert Cook. Here the helmet's dimensions and state are given; it had suffered damage particularly to the cheek-guards and the nose-guard (which is now a modern replica). Details of its design are examined, some confirming its date, others illustrating its strengths and weaknesses as a helmet. The historical significance of helmets of this plain design is briefly discussed. Finally it is suggested, on the grounds of the damage to its cheek-guards and nose-guard, that it ended its career as a victory thank-offering in a sanctuary, possibly Olympia where many helmets so damaged have been found.
2 For this type and its associations with Corinth, where it may have originated, AAG 50–1. But it appears to have spread quickly and by c. 650 BC not all Corinthian helmets need have been made in Corinth; see n. 27 below.
3 I am extremely grateful for information on this and related points to Dr I. Mertling-Blake, MA, who served for many years as Curator of the school Museum at Charterhouse.
4 Jackson 1987 deals with a broadly comparable helmet, also dedicated at a temple, perhaps Olympia. Scientific discussions of our helmet include: Belle Dumé (2004) ‘Physicsweb; Physics meets archaeology in ancient Greece’, http://physicsweb.0rg/article/news/8/5/2 (accessed May 31st 2004); W. Kockelmann, A. Kirfel (Universität Bonn, Germany), R. Linke, M. Schreiner (Akademie der bildenden Künste Wien, Austria,), R. Traum (Kunsthistorisches Museum Wien, Austria), E. Pantos (Daresbury Laboratory), R. Garner and A.J. N. W. Prag (University of Manchester) (2003) ‘ISIS 2003 science highlights. Genuine or fake? Neutron diffraction for non-destructive testing of museum objects’, http://www.isis.rl.ac.uk/isis2003/pdf/H15.pdf (accessed May 31 st 2004). For a non-technical account of the helmet and of scientific investigation of it, Tim Radford, ‘Death, glory and particle physics’, The Guardian 27.05.04, Life p. 4.
5 The nose-guard can be seen to be a modern replica for these reasons: (i) scientific testing has shown that its metal is unlike that of the rest of the helmet (n. 4 above); (ii) its edges are not worn as those elsewhere on the helmet are; (iii) the edges of its lining holes are smooth on the inside, not rough as elsewhere; (iv) the shape of the tip is hard to parallel among other Corinthian helmets; (v) most surviving Corinthian helmets have shorter nose-guards.
6 EGAW 23; AH 69 fig. 3 (late 8th c. BC); Dörig, J., ‘Ein korinthischer Helm in Athener Privatbesitz’, Ol. Ber. x (1981), 109–10Google Scholar; pl. 12 (early 6th c. BC).
7 Early features namely steep brows, concave sides: Ol. Ber. iii (1938/1939)Google Scholar, pls. 38–9; AH 71 figs. 5–6. These and convex baseline, Ol. Ber. i (1936/1937)Google Scholar, pl. 8.
8 ‘Myros’ helmets: Ol. Ber. vii (1961), 77–116Google Scholar; pls. 21–55; EGAW 23–7 Group 3, pl. 13; AH 73–6, 395. Related helmets: Amandry pl. 22;Jackson 1987, 110 fig. 1. 4–5; AH 76–86. Later plainer helmets: AH 73–8, 396, 401–2.
9 These are seen in Van Wees 2000, 137 fig. 9; 141 figs. 10–11; Salmon 1977, 86 figs. 1–2; 88 fig. 3; Lorimer 81 fig. 2; 84 fig. 3; also Cook, R. M., Greek Painted Pottery (London, 1960)Google Scholar, pl. 9 c (Macmillan Aryballos); Boardman, J., Greek Art (London, 1973), 42–3Google Scholar, figs. 36–7 (Macmillan and Chigi Vases). A magnifying glass may be helpful in making out detail in some of these illustrations.
10 Salmon 1977, 88 fig. 3; Lorimer 102–4 fig. 10.
11 e.g. Salmon 1977, 86 fig. 1 and Lorimer 84 fig. 3.
12 Salmon 1977, 86 fig. 2 and Boardman Greek Art (n. 9 above), 43 fig. 37. In Boardman 1978, 42 fig. 41 the Boston Painter's aryballos of c. 650 BC seems, despite the worn paint, to show similar brows and nose-guards, but some helmets appear to have quite steep brows.
13 Earlier helmets: AH 69 fig. 3; Ol. Ber. iii (1938/1939)Google Scholar, pls. 38–9. Later: Ol. Ber. x (1981), 109–10Google Scholar; pl. 12. See also Jackson 1987, 109 n. 7. Mid-7th c. helmets: AH 398, 400.
14 Wider-set holes AH 396, 402.
15 Kegelhelms and early Illyrian helmets: EGAW 13–20; AH 11–22, 42–8. Glancing surfaces: ffoulkes 3–4, 73. Thickness: ‘Dimensions’ above.
16 Crest-grabbing: EGAW pl. 15 a–b = AAG fig. 26; Arias, P. E., Hirmer, M. and Shefton, B. B., A History of Greek Vase Painting (London, 1961), 293Google Scholar pl. 48 top right.
17 The stitching used was doubtless, as my wife informs me, not a simple running stitch but a firmer back stitch or saddle stitch. The lining might have been made of leather as is commonly thought but was probably of fabric, cf. Robinson, H. Russell, The Armour of Imperial Rome (New York, 1975), 144Google Scholar. For a pessimistic view of Greek linings, Hanson 1989, 73–4.
18 The fighting season: Hanson, V. D., Warfare and Agriculture in Classical Greece (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1998), 32–41Google Scholar. Helmets worn up before battle: EGAW 23.
19 Medieval European helmets e.g.: ffoulkes, pls. 7, 10, 12, 13, 29, 30; Ashdown, C. H., Armour and Weapons in the Middle Ages (London, 1975), 42–5, 60–3, 98–9Google Scholar; Contamine, P., War in the Middle Ages (Oxford, 1984)Google Scholar, figs. 12, 13, 15, 19, 23.
20 AAG figs. 30, 42, 43, 46; Van Wees 2000, 129 figs. 3 b and 4 b, 137 fig. 9, 141 figs. 10–11.
21 Hanson 1989, 71–5. Weight of helmets like ours cf. Jarva 134 n. 917; GH Kat. no. 33: 1.475 kg (AH 397, nose-guard lost); GH Kat. no. 91: 1.507 kg (AH, 398 nose-guard and left cheek-guard partly missing).
22 Ol. Ber. vii (1961), 110–11Google Scholar figs. 56–7; pls. 28–9, 30–1, 39.2, 48. Very acute cheek-guards: ibid., pl. 23. 3–4; 46.5.
23 Lighter helmets: Jarva 134 n. 917. 1. GH Kat no. 51: 1.335 kg (Athens Nat. Mus. 7630, Ol. Ber. vii (1961), 84, 106–7Google Scholar figs. 52–3); 2. GH Kat. no. 56: 1.224 kg (BM 2819, Ol. Ber. ibid., 85, 108–9 figs. 54–5). But the weight of GH Kat. no. 55 is 1.505 kg (BM 1904.10–10.2, Ol. Ber. ibid., 85, 110–11 figs. 56–7). I owe information on GH 55–6 to the courtesy of the Trustees of the British Museum.
24 Raking brows and nose-guards: Ol. Ber. vii (1961), 77–116Google Scholar, pls. 21–55; Amandry 438–40; pls. 2a, 24. On a similar principle many modern tanks have sloping frontal armour plate. Thicknesses: Ol. Ber. vii (1961), 78–84Google Scholar, e.g. no. 18; crown 0.1–0.15; rim of cheek-guard 0.3; nose-guard up to 0.7.
25 AH 398, 401–2; Dörig, J., Ol. Ber. X (1981), 109–10Google Scholar; pl. 12.
26 e.g. Ol. Ber. viii (1967), 87Google Scholar n. 7, 94. B 6081 pl. 32.
27 AH 100–4 with distribution map; North Greece: ‘Chronique des fouilles 1961’, BCH 86 (1962), 795Google Scholar fig. 1; Ionia: Walter, H.AM 72 (1957), 43Google Scholar Beil. 62, 1 (on the date Kunze, E., Ol. Ber. vii (1961), 76–7Google Scholar n. 27).
28 Prices: Connor, W. R., ‘Early Greek land warfare as symbolic expression’, Past and Present, 119 (1988), 10–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar n. 30; Jackson 1991, 229; Jarva 145–54 (Jarva probably overestimates the efficacy of leather as armour); Raaflaub 135–6 n. 30. In Aristophanes' Peace 1208–64 the mockery of arms-makers and -sellers depends partly on the costliness of their wares.
29 Jarva 148–57; Storch, R. H., ‘The Archaic Greek “phalanx”, 750–650 BC’, The Ancient History Bulletin, 12 (1998), 1–7Google Scholar; Raaflaub 135–6.
30 Among many important studies: Snodgrass 1965; Wheeler, E. L., ‘The general as hoplite’, in Hanson, V. D. (ed.), Hoplites: The Classical Battle Experience (London, 1991), 121–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Snodgrass, A. M., ‘The hoplite reform revisited’, DHA 19. 1 (1993), 47–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Van Wees 2000.
31 Illustrated e.g. Salmon 1977, 85–92; figs. 1–2; Van Wees 2000, 137–41; figs. 9–11.
32 Among the most important studies of this are Snodgrass 1965; Cartledge, P., ‘Hoplites and heroes’, JHS 97 (1977), 11–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Salmon 1977 esp. 93–101; Raaflaub 129–41.
33 Hdt ii. 152. 3–5.
34 Jeffery, LSAG 2 95, Boiotiano. 11; pl. 8 (script dated to c. 550–525 by Jeffery; near 525 by Ducat, J., BCH 97 (1973), 66)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
35 Gauer, W., Ol. Forsch. viii (1975), 14Google Scholar Brunnen 16 StN, B 4501, 230–1, 243, latest possible date late first quarter of 5th c. BC.
36 Jackson, A. H., ‘Some deliberate damage to Archaic Greek helmets dedicated at Olympia’, LCM 8. 2 (Feb. 1983), 22–7Google Scholar; Jackson 1987, 113–14; Jackson 1991, 246.
37 The pointed dent in the back of our helmet's crown may be from an abandoned effort to nail it to a display post from the inside outwards (above, ‘Preservation’); it is too narrow to be from a spear thrust. For a nail-hole made by punching through the back of the helmet from inside outwards cf. Ol. Ber. vii (1961), 81Google Scholar no. 23 (there wrongly described).
38 Victors' votive inscriptions. Ol. Ber. viii (1967), 91–106Google Scholar pls. 34–42, pls. 44–9. 2–3. Baitinger, H., Die Angriffswaffen aus Olympia (Ol. Forsch. 29; Berlin, 2001), 80–92, 239–46Google Scholar.
39 Helmets with bent cheeks, some with bent nose-guards e.g.: Ol. Ber. vii (1961)Google Scholar pls. 25; 26. 1; 28–9; 32. 3; 33; 37; 39; 44. 3; 45; 48–9; 51. 2. A helmet from Athens also has bent cheeks: Schröder, B., ‘Thrakische Helme’, Jdl 27 (1912), 340Google Scholar Beil. 16. 2. But bent cheeks and nose-guards are most commonly found at Olympia, on present evidence.
40 Bends cutting across votive inscriptions: in Ol. Ber. viii (1967)Google Scholar e.g. (i) 92–3, no. 2 B 4504 fig. 32. 3, pls. 35; 36. 2; (ii) 104 with n. 39 B 499 fig. 35. 2, pl. 40. 2; (iii) 104–5 with n. 41 B 4882 fig. 35. 3 pl. 42. 2.
41 See also Jackson 1991, 249 with n. 38 and Brunaux, J. L., The Celtic Gauls: Gods, Rites and Sanctuaries (London, 1988), 125–7Google Scholar.
42 Several helmets from the Alpheios have similar multiple dents in the crown, possibly from contact with stones in the river bed: Ol. Ber. vii (1961), 78–84Google Scholar e.g. nos. (7) pl. 26. 1; (12) pl. 32. 3; (23) pl. 39. 2; (36) pl. 48.
