mödlinger oja 2013, 32.4 391-412

8/14/2019 Mdlinger OJA 2013, 32.4 391-412

1/22

MARIANNE MDLINGER

FROM GREEK BOARS-TUSK HELMETS TO THE FIRSTEUROPEAN METAL HELMETS: NEW APPROACHES ONDEVELOPMENT AND CHRONOLOGY

Summary. After more than a century of research into Bronze Age helmetsthroughout Europe, both the development and chronology of conical helmetswith spool-shaped sockets still remain unclear. The comprehensive studies andanalysis of the helmet from Biecz have not completely resolved the discussions.Other helmets, when not solitary finds, have been usually dated according totheir alleged associations in a hoard but have never been extensively discussedas a single helmet type of one date range. By introducing to the discussion aGreek bronze helmet with incised boars tusks as well as those boars-tuskhelmets with bronze cheek plates, more light is shed on the development andchronology of these very first European bronze helmets.

INTRODUCTION

Finds of European metal defensive armour, as opposed to those of weapons, are scarce.Omitting a few older finds, metal armour really first appears at the beginning of the Urnfieldculture (c.1300 BC). Approximately 95 shields, 120 helmets, 30 cuirasses and 40 greaves(sometimes found as pairs) are known. The best studied objects are shields (Uckelmann 2012)and helmets (v. Merhart 1941; Hencken 1971; Clausing 2001; 2005). The distribution areas of

the various classes differ significantly. For example, we do not have any secure finds of bronzehelmets or greaves from the United Kingdom and just two secure helmet finds from the IberianPeninsula, though depictions are known. Again, metal shields are lacking in France, the Alpineregion and Italy. The only regions where all types of armour are found together are theCarpathian Basin and Moravia/Slovakia.

Helmets are usually distinguished according to their construction technology as wellas their shape. In western Europe, two-piece, crested helmets are the main types; another typeof crested helmet, the Pass Lueg, is distributed throughout the Austrian Alps (for the mostrecent discussion, see Lippert 2011). In central and eastern Europe, conical helmets, caphelmets and bell helmets dominate. Apart from some cap helmets, all the above types have a

socket or knob on the top, which generally sports an opening in the middle so as to attach aplume.

OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 32(4) 391412 2013 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. 391

8/14/2019 Mdlinger OJA 2013, 32.4 391-412

2/22

Conical helmets with spool-shaped sockets have received many appellations: firstdescribed as Kegelhelme (cone-helmets; v. Merhart 1941), then as helmets of the Lcky type(Mozsolics 1955, 356), later as conical bell helmets (Hencken 1971), once more asKegelhelme (Borchhardt 1972), becoming helmets with spool-like socket (Mozsolics 1985,

24) and most recently Helme mit konischer Kalotte und Scheitelknauf (helmets with conicalcalotte and a crest-knob; Clausing 2001, 21718). In the following account, they will be calledconical helmets.

The oldest-made finds, namely the helmets from Oranienburg, Biecz and Lcky, werethen considered as part of v. Merharts group of Glockenhelme (bell-helmets) (1941, 5, fig. 2,46). Hencken (1971, 334) refined v. Merharts definition into conical bell helmets androunded bell helmets, placing the three oldest helmets in the first group. Furthermore, he addedto his group of conical bell helmets the examples from Knossos, Spisk Bel, akov andKeresztte. Borchhardt (1972, 1267) added to his Kegelhelmecorpus the helmets from Biecz,Oranienburg, Keresztte, Lcky and Csnge. The helmet from Csnge dates to Hallstatt

(hereafter Ha) C/D (800550 BC); in shape it does not resemble the other conical helmets. Thus,this helmet will not be discussed here. Thirty years and several new finds later, Clausing (2001,218) augmented Henckens group of conical bell helmets with the finds from Sg, Dunafldvrand Nadap. Today, one more piece can be added: a helmet with an unknown find-spot, comingfrom a private collection, was sold at Christies in New York on 18 December, 1998 (Buchholzet al. 2010).

While analysing a polished micro-section of this helmet at the Metropolitan Museum ofArt, R. Stone and K. Roth noted inter-granular corrosion in the metallic matrix. Furthermore,corrosion grew over the tool marks, respectively chasing lines. Both observations, which areusually found on antique bronzes (as on other conical helmets, see Mdlinger et al. 2013),

certainly eliminate any doubt as to the authenticity of the helmet.

DESCRIPTION

Almost all conical helmets are complete or missing just a few parts (Figs. 1 and 2),though only the spool-shaped sockets of the Slovakian finds from Spisk Bel and akov arepreserved today (Fig. 3). From the helmet from Keresztte only one fragment of the edge now

Figure 1Conical helmets with spool-shaped sockets (scale 1:4). 1 Oranienburg. 2 Dunafldvr.

FROM GREEK BOARS-TUSK HELMETS TO THE FIRST EUROPEAN METAL HELMETS

OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.392

8/14/2019 Mdlinger OJA 2013, 32.4 391-412

3/22

remains; however, a photograph published by Mozsolics (1985, pl. 150:9) shows a morecomplete object (Fig. 4). The helmets from Dendra and Knossos and that with boars-tuskdecoration and unknown find-spot (Buchholz et al. 2010), all related closely to the conicalhelmets, are almost whole (Fig. 5).

The conical helmets were usually worked into shape out of a flat, cast disc made oftin-bronze (Mdlingeret al. 2013). All are rather thin, as is also indicated by their light weight:this characteristic distinguishes them significantly from the later and more massive bell

helmets. In size and weight they closely resemble each other (Table 2). Once the conical capwas finished, the socket or knob was usually cast on. This last feature served to hold a crest orplume of some organic material, as we know from older depictions of boars-tusk helmets(Borchhardt 1972).

The caps (or bodies) of the conical helmets have rivet holes, regularly distributed,running all round and parallel to the lower edge. The helmet from Biecz alone has them only onthe broader sides: three rivet holes to attach each of the cheek plates, and on the neck threefurther (rivet) holes to attach a neck guard. Here the lack of further rivet holes probably indicatesthe presence of a separate cap made of organic materials over which the bronze helmet was worn.All the other helmets probably had such an organic cap or inner padding permanently attached

to the inside of the helmet by the rivets. The helmets from Biecz, Keresztte and Lcky show asmall alteration to the lower edge profile, either a shallow semicircular bite taken out or a gentler

Figure 2Conical helmets with spool-shaped sockets (scale 1:4). 1 Biecz (cross-section after Hencken 1971, fig. 13, d).

2 Nadap (cross-section after Makkay 2006, pl. 1). 3 Sg (after Soroeanu and Lak 1981, fig. 9.4). 4 Lcky(cross-section after Hencken 1971, fig. 13, b).

MARIANNE MDLINGER

OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. 393

8/14/2019 Mdlinger OJA 2013, 32.4 391-412

4/22

Figure 3Conical helmets with spool-shaped sockets (scale 1:1). 1 Spisk Bel (cross-section after Hencken 1971, 35,

fig. H). 2 akov (cross-section after Hencken 1971, 38, fig. 17, b).

Figure 4

Conical helmet with spool-shaped sockets (scale 1:4). Keresztte (after Mozsolics 1985, pl. 150:9).



8/14/2019 Mdlinger OJA 2013, 32.4 391-412

5/22

upward curve in its line; these are most likely to be positioned at the back of the helmet, to permitthe wearer easier head movements. However, on the helmet from Biecz the larger cut-out is in thefront of the helmet, while on the back the cut-out is much smaller. It might also have permitted

the placing of a neck guard, as an integral part of the internal organic padding. Other than thehelmets from Dunafldvr and Keresztte, where the upper part is missing and so with it anypotential socket, all the helmets have a spool-shaped attachment, small in size and cast on, whichcontains a central hole. The socket of the helmet from Knossos alone was held in place by sevenrivets. The knob of the helmet without a find-spot is unique in its nature neither cast nor rivetedon, but worked up directly out of the sheet of the helmet. Additionally, this specimen is decoratedwith abstract motifs: boars tusks and running spirals. The different manufacturing or joiningprocesses of helmet and knob seen in the Greek helmets mean that production sites separate fromthose of the European helmets must be considered for them (see below).

DISTRIBUTION AND DEPOSITION

Though the distribution area of conical helmets is rather wide it ranged from theHavelOder region in northern Germany to the Carpathian Basin and the Aegean, the similarityof the helmets as well as the fact that they do not resemble any other type of helmet shouldindicate a close connection. This belief is also supported by other imported Aegean finds thathave turned up in the HavelOder region, such as the spearhead from the hoard from Kyhna(Hnsel 2003, 82), as well as the fact that such elaborate sheet metalwork in bronze is scarce inthe Nordic Bronze Age work of this period. According to Hencken (1971, 9), the helmets wereproduced in the general region of Slovakia, whereas Buchholzet al. (2010, 201) assume for the

helmet with the unknown find-spot a production area north of the Gulf of Corinth or in thePeloponnese.

Figure 5Conical helmets with spool-shaped sockets (scale 1:4). 1 Knossos. 2 helmet with unknown findspot.

3 Dendra.

MARIANNE MDLINGER


8/14/2019 Mdlinger OJA 2013, 32.4 391-412

6/22

However, the production area might be even broader in accordance with theirdistribution pattern, if we rule out the idea that they were all exports from the Aegean (Fig. 6).

Different centres of production were suggested by Hood and de Jong (1952, 25960), whonoted that the Biecz helmet is of lighter calibre, the knob applied differently and the helmetgenerally of worse quality than the helmet from Knossos; the last exhibited, in their opinion(1952, 259, note 86), higher standards of workmanship than would be found at someprovincial centre. Hood and de Jong (1952, 258) pointed out that the conical helmets havetheir origin in the Aegean, if not specifically in the Minoan culture: a view which remainsprobable today, despite the fact that the quality of the more western helmets does not seem tobe inferior. This question of provenance, however, can be discussed only by means of detailedmaterial analyses of all the helmets (Mdlinger et al. 2013). However, it seems morereasonable to assume that the initial production centre was in the Aegean with some helmets

(i.e. Biecz) being exported and that later a second production area developed on the way in theCarpathian Basin.

Figure 6Distribution map of conical helmets with spool-shaped sockets.



8/14/2019 Mdlinger OJA 2013, 32.4 391-412

7/22

We should note that so far only complete caps of conical helmets and sockets fromconical helmets are known. Fragments coming only from the cap or from the rim with its rivetholes have not been identified yet, though there might exist pieces, as for example in the hoardat Jszkarajeno (Mozsolics 1985, pl. 251:26), that are worth further examination. However, since

the helmets found in hoards are all complete or represented by the knob only, perhaps sometradition prevented the placing of only a fragment of the cap in hoards.

Generally speaking, the circumstances under which the conical helmets have beenfound are not at all uniform and thus are not dictated by the type of helmet involved, but rathermore by the deposition practices operating in the region where they were found (Table 1).Regrettably for the unusual helmet with the unknown find-spot, no further information isavailable. The helmet from Knossos is from a grave, while the helmets from Dunafldvr andOranienburg are each a single find from a river. All other helmets were parts of hoards. Thehigh numbers and condition of those helmets deposited in hoards are highly surprising: thosefrom Nadap, Keresztte, Lcky, Biecz and Sg were more or less complete. This situation is

poles apart from, say, circumstances surrounding cap helmets with rib- and star-decoration,which date to HaA and overlap in their distribution area with the conical helmets. They areusually represented by just a single fragment in their hoards (Mdlinger 2013). In the sameway, only the spool-shaped sockets of the conical helmets were deposited in the hoards fromSpisk Bel and akov.

Further, the composition of the hoards differs. The helmet from Biecz was allegedlydeposited with two ingot torques and one triangular blade of an Early Bronze Age OderElbe-type dagger. The helmet from Nadap is part of one of the biggest Bronze Age hoards inEurope with, roughly, all the categories of known bronze objects being represented (Makkay2006); other defensive armour was present, namely two pairs of greaves, as well as shield and

decorated cap helmet fragments. According to Mozsolics (1985, 135), the hoard fromKeresztte consists of one fragmented bronze disc, one spearhead with a profiled socket, threefurther similar spearheads and another smaller example, one cauldron with both triangularhandles and a thick, round-sectioned wire which served for the cauldrons suspension-handle,a biconical jug of sheet bronze, 16 bracelets, some with round cross-sections and chevrondecoration, another one with rhomboid cross-section, one ring and the helmet. Thecomposition of the hoard from Lcky might be open to question, since the find circumstancesare not completely secure: the hoard was bought from an itinerant salesman and the corrosionon the allegedly companion objects a situla of Hajdbszrmny type and a cauldron withcross-shaped handles differs from that on the helmet. The hoard from Sg contains in

addition to the helmet a vessel of Hajdbszrmny type, further vessel fragments with cross-shaped handles, a handle of yet another vessel, five bronze cups of the Kirkendrup andFuchsstadt types, five bracelets, phalerae, one spearhead, sickle fragments, two socketed axeswith double V-ribs and a possible fragment of a saw. The hoard from Spisk Bel yielded,besides the spool-shaped socket of the helmet, three spearheads, four plain bracelets (threewith an oval cross-section, one with a rhomboid cross-section) and parts of two cups of theSpisk Bel type. Further recorded finds, namely four spearheads, four bracelets andthree socketed axes (two with Schnabeltlle, one with ribs parallel to the rim of the socket)and a round object, are now missing (Hencken 1971, 33). Lastly, the hoard from akovconsists of the spool-shaped socket of the helmet, alongside socketed axes, the hilt of a

Liptau-sword, rings and a bowl of Satteldorf type, pins, a socketed chisel, sickles, twospearheads and two ingots.

MARIANNE MDLINGER


8/14/2019 Mdlinger OJA 2013, 32.4 391-412

8/22

TABLE1

Findcircumstancesandalle

gedfindsmadewithconicalhelmets

Armrings

Metal

vessels

Spearheads

Axes

Sickles

Swords/

dagger

Metallurgical

objects

Phalerae

Othe

r

ornaments

Defensive

armour

Other

Totalno.ofobjects

inho

ard/grave

Nadap

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

>

700

ak

ov

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

43

Sg

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

50

SpiskBel

x

x

x

x

x

23

Kere

sztte

x

x

x

x

25

Biecz

x

x

4

Lck

y

(x)

3

Knossos

x

x

x

x

13

Unknownsite

unknownfindcircumstances

Oran

ienburg

singlefindfromtheRiverHavel

Dunafldvr

singlefindfromtheRiverDanube



8/14/2019 Mdlinger OJA 2013, 32.4 391-412

9/22

CHRONOLOGY AND TYPOLOGY

The course of the development from boars-tusk helmets to the oldest European metalhelmets so far is marked by three helmets: the helmet from Dendra (the only boars-tusk helmet

with metal cheek plates), the helmet from the unknown find-spot and the one from Knossos. Thelast is considered to be the oldest European metal helmet and so the oldest of the conical helmetswith spool-shaped sockets: it is dated to the fifteenth century BC (Mller-Karpe 1962, 271;Hencken 1971, 20).

The Dendra helmet, also dated to the first half of the fifteenth century BC (Verdelis1967, 7), is still a boars-tusk helmet but with bronze cheek plates added, thus testifying for thefirst time in Europe the adoption of metal in the construction of helmets. The helmet with theunknown find-spot is completely metal, but in its cap profile and also its incised decoration refersdirectly to the boars-tusk helmet with spool-shaped socket as exemplified by the ivory appliqusfrom Mycenae or further depictions from Mycenae and Delos (for further depictions see

Borchhardt 1972, catalogue 35, 9). Unfortunately, no cheek plates for this helmet are preserved.However, the cheek plates of Europes first completely metal helmet, that from Knossos, closelyresemble the cheek plates from the Dendra helmet (Hood and de Jong 1952, fig. 12; Borchhardt1972, 58, pl. 6:23). Both sets of cheek plates were defined as type IA by Borchhardt (1972, 72,fig. 6).

The similarity of the caps profile of the helmet from Knossos with that from theunknown find-spot is surely no coincidence. Of course, we have to take into account theheavily fragmented original state of the helmet from Knossos at the time of its discovery,deformed owing to the collapse of the tomb chamber. However, these similarities mightindicate that the adoption of metal in the construction of helmets happened rather fast. This in

turn would allow us to date the helmet with the unknown find-spot to around 1400 BC,probably holding some intermediary position between the helmets from Dendra and Knossos.Such a premise is consistent with dates in LH II and LM IIIA respectively, i.e. the middle ofthe fifteenth century BC, in accordance with the nature and manner of its decoration(Buchholzet al. 2010, 193, 201).

Further, the spool-shaped socket also places this unprovenanced helmet close to thehelmet from Knossos. The incised decoration of boars tusks, arranged in the same way as weknow from such helmets, makes this piece a perfect transitional type between the older boars-tusk helmets proper and the conical helmets, and would thus suggest a date for it prior to that ofthe helmet from Knossos. Even so, we have to bear in mind that later Aegean depictions of

boars-tusk helmets might be representing ones such as this and not always actual boars-tuskhelmets for example the yellow-coloured boars-tusk helmets with neck guards seen with thechariot riders in the Pylos fresco (Borchhardt 1972, pl. 5:1).

An indication for the contemporary appearance of boars-tusk helmets and bronzehelmets might be derived from thirteenth century BC frescos at Pylos. Here are to be seen whiteboars-tusk helmets, yellow helmets with several registers similar to boars-tusk helmets and yetother yellow helmets with bosses, nose guards and sockets (Borchhardt 1972, pl. 11:1). On theship-fresco from Thera-Akrotiri dated to the sixteenth century BC, both white boars-tuskhelmets and yellow bronze(?) helmets with knobs are visible. Both types hang from the shiptimbers, set over their owners. Another very probable bronze helmet with a knob (similar to the

European bell helmets, but not actually connected with them) is depicted on a fresco fromMycenae and dates to 1400 BC (Borchhardt 1972, pl. 37:3).

MARIANNE MDLINGER


8/14/2019 Mdlinger OJA 2013, 32.4 391-412

10/22

Searching further for early bronze conical helmets with spool-shaped knobs, we have totravel to the north-east of central Europe to Biecz, Poland. Hnsel (2003, 7784) convincinglyconcludes that the helmet from Biecz is part of the hoard with an netice dagger and ingottorques, so assigning a possible date to this helmet of already within the late Early Bronze Age

(around 1600 BC). Hnsel (2003, 7784) agrees with Hencken (1952), who first suggested thisdate in print and was criticized heavily for it (Sprockhoff 1956, 85; v. Merhart 19561957, 144;Hachmann 1957, 176; Gimbutas 1965, 58). If the dating of the hoard is correct and the helmetreally belongs to it, the helmet from Biecz would be even older than the helmet from Knossosand would thus become the oldest metal helmet in Europe (for the detailed discussion of findcircumstances of each helmet see Catalogue, pp. 4019). However, the appearance of the helmetwith the unknown find-spot mitigates against the helmet from Biecz being older than the helmetfrom Knossos, as Hnsel (2003, 7784) considered, since the helmet with the unknown find-spotproves a direct and later connection between boars-tusk helmets and conical helmets. To assumethat the hoard from Biecz was actually deposited in the late Middle Bronze Age (fourteenth

century BC), and its helmet is thus younger than the helmet from Knossos, seems therefore amore reasonable position (see Catalogue, p. 403). However, it would most likely still be theoldest bronze helmet from central and eastern Europe (assuming the helmets from Dunafldvrand Oranienburg were not placed in their rivers even earlier). All other conical helmets found inhoards are usually dated to Bronzezeit (hereafter Bz) DHaA12 (13001050 BC) or, accordingto the presence of vessels of alleged Hajdbszrmny type, at times as early as HaBl (i.e. thetenth century BC).

Since the helmets from Oranienburg and Dunafldvr were found in rivers, they have tobe dated according to their resemblance to the other conical helmets. This has already been done:Egg and Waurick (1990, 14) placed the helmet from Oranienburg in the twelfththirteenth

century BC; Szab (1994, 224) considered the helmet from Dunafldvr, which he dated,according to Mozsolics (1985, 24) for Keresztte and Petres (1982, 58) for Nadap, to HaAB.The hoards from Nadap (discussed most recently by Uckelmann 2012), Spisk Bel,

akov and Keresztte (Schauer 1988, 1834) are dated to BzDHaA1. Novotn (1964, 21)dates the hoards from akov and Spisk Bel generally to HaA. Mller-Karpe (1959, 158, note3) places the hoard from Keresztte in HaA2, as does v. Brunn (1968). Mozsolics (1985, 135)most recently dates it to the horizon Krd B Vb, resp. HaA1. According to the presence ofalleged fragments of vessels of Hajdbszrmny type in the hoards from Lcky and Sg, theseare to be dated to HaB1 (Soroeanu and Lak 1981, 156; Schauer 1988, 18491; Patay 1969,205). Mozsolics argues that helmets of the Knossos type therefore date to the Krd horizon/

HaA1 (1985, 24). However, it must be noted that it is not securely proven that the helmetfrom Lcky was found with this hoard or even that Lcky is the actual find-spot (see Catalogue,p. 406).

It seems that the most reasonable course is to assume the conical helmets are one of theoldest objects in all the hoards, and thus should date to BzD. Excluding the hoards from Lckyand Sg, most authors place the hoards in the time-span from BzD to HaA. Including these sametwo hoards extends the date down to HaB1 (thanks only to the presence of the Hajdbszrmnytype vases); the helmets can still thus be fitted within the shorter date range, if one accepts theyare one of the oldest objects within the two hoards.

As recent analyses have also demonstrated (Mdlinger et al. 2013), the alloy

composition of conical helmets is quite uniform. With the exception of the cap of the helmetfrom Spisk Bel with 8.6 wt% tin, the tin content of conical helmets is quite uniform in the



8/14/2019 Mdlinger OJA 2013, 32.4 391-412

11/22

rangec.1014 wt% tin. Lead is usually a trace element, as are silver, arsenic and nickel; sulphurand iron are also trace elements, but with higher amounts than the previously mentionedelements. The higher amounts of lead in the helmets from Dunafldvr and Keresztte might bedue to the non-invasive analytical methods used (PGAA, PIXE). The Biecz helmet was analysed

by qualitative XRF for the State Archaeological Museum, Warsaw in 1993, which showed thatthe cap was made of tin-bronze with traces of lead and nickel. The knob turned out to be madeof slightly leaded tin-bronze containing traces of nickel and silver (Cowell and Hyne, BritishMuseum, Department of Conservation and Scientific Research, internal file number 6427). Wehope that the recently undertaken quantitative XRF analysis on the cap of the Biecz helmet at theBritish Museum will be published by S. Hansen soon. At present, the helmet from Biecz fitsperfectly within the group of conical helmets, whose caps so far contain 10.314.4 wt% tin(Mdlingeret al. 2013).

CONCLUSIONS

Three helmets so far define the development from boars-tusk helmets to the oldestEuropean metal helmets: the boars-tusk helmet from Dendra with its bronze cheek plates,closely resembling those from the helmet from Knossos; the conical bronze helmet from theunknown find-spot, ornamented with incised or punched boars tusk as decoration and with aspool-shaped socket; and, last, the bronze helmet from Knossos with its bronze cheek plates,conical cap profile and spool-shaped socket. Ten further bronze helmets with the same profileand spool-shaped knob are known: they range across to the north-east of central Europe, with aprobable distribution centre in the northern Carpathian Bow. Paradoxically, the helmet fromBiecz, chronologically the closest and probably an Aegean export, is the furthest distant from the

Aegean. It is likely that this dates to BzC2 (fourteenth century BC). The helmets fromOranienburg and Dunafldvr were retrieved from rivers, thus not directly contributing tomatters chronological. Most hoards with similar helmets, namely those from Keresztte, Nadap,Spisk Bel and akov, are dated usually to BzDHaA, whilst those from Lcky and Sg runon down to HaB1. The helmets are almost certainly one of the oldest objects in these hoards, thusindicating a main period of usage for the conical helmet from the fifteenth century in Greecedown to the thirteenth century in eastern Europe.

CATALOGUE (Table 2)

Cat. no. 1. Greece (?) (Fig. 5, no. 2) find circumstances unknown complete height:17.8 cm; diameter: 19.5 x 21 cm; thickness: cap:

8/14/2019 Mdlinger OJA 2013, 32.4 391-412

12/22

TABLE2

Overviewandmaincharacteristicsoftheconicalhelmetsdiscussed

Cat.

no.

Find-spot

Findcircu

mstances

Weight

Diame

terbase

Height

Museum

Inv.no.

1

unknown

unkn

own

497gm

19.5x

21cm

17.8cm

reposito

ryunknown

noinv.no.

2

Knossos,Greece

grave

695gm

21x24cm

17cm

Herakli

onArchaeologicalMuseum

Herakli

on

3

Biecz,Poland

hoard(bog)

353gm

19.5x

21.5cm

18cm

British

Museum

London

1868-1228.248

4

Oranienburg,Germany

river

638gm

?x22.5cm

21cm

Heimatmuseum

Oranien

burg

5

akov,Slovakia

hoard

Slovensknrodnmzeum

Martin

3504

6

SpiskBel,Slovakia

hoard

PodtatranskMzeum

Poprad

882

7

Lcky,Slovakia

hoard

20x21cm

19.5cm

ArcheologickmzeumSNM

Bratisla

va

4518

8

Keresztte,Hungary

hoard

32gm

(notcomplete)

MagyarNemzetiMzeum

Budape

st

31/1941/1-25

9

Nadap,Hungary

hoard

notpossibleto

measure

18.5cm

SzentIstvnKirlyMzeum

Szkesfehrvr

noinv.no.

10

Dunafldvr,Hungary

river

488gm

(withoutknob)

21.1x

22.2cm

16.9cm

(withoutknob)

WosinskyMrMegyeiMzeum

Szekszrd

O.93.33.1

11

Sg,Romania

hoard

112gm

(notcomplete)

10cm

(notcomplete)

MuzeulJudeteandeIstoriesiArla-Zalau

Zalau

noinv.no.



8/14/2019 Mdlinger OJA 2013, 32.4 391-412

13/22

the helmet horizontal traces of hammering are still visible (Buchholz et al. 2010, fig. 57). Twoancient repairs can be seen: one 5.5 cm long crack was held together by a now lost bronze sheetpatch which was fixed on both sides of the crack by two rivets, again now missing. It is possiblethat the mend was carried out before the decoration was applied (Buchholz et al. 2010, 149).

Another crack below the knob was fixed with a bronze sheet patch and three rivets. Two furthercracks from the knob downwards were not fixed, though they are severe. The depressed knob andthe latter cracks might be the result of an impact during fighting.

At the knob, the bronze sheet is approximately double the thickness of the rest of the cap.According to Buchholzet al. (2010, 158, figs. 745), the knob is a skeuomorph: it reflects themethod of closing the top of a leather padding in earlier and contemporaryhelmets made of organicmaterials,suchasboarstusks(envisageabagclosedatitsneckwithaband,leavingtheupperpartof the bag still projecting above). Such an act results in a spool-shaped form, as we can see, forexample,ontheivoryplaquesfromMycenae.Depictionsofhelmetswithspool-shapedsocketsareknown until LH/LM IIIA (14001300 BC) from Crete and the Argolid (Borchhardt 1972).

The decoration on the helmet is punched; originally it was probably infilled to improveits visibility. However, the white pigmentation visible today was added to the decoration duringthe restoration process. The bronze helmet is decorated with registers of punched ornament: twobelow the finial and two above the bottom edge. The registers become broader from the top downto the rim of the helmet, as we also see in actual boars-tusk helmets (e.g. Vaphio, Delos orDendra). Each of the registers is filled with simplified boar-tusk motifs, each set facing in theopposite direction to its neighbour. The lowest register also bears four left-turning runningspirals. The lines making up the patterns are similar to those seen on the well-known CypriotWhiteslip Ware: they look like ladders. Similar decoration is known from LH III ceramics fromCrete, Kallithea or Tiryns, bronze vessels from Knossos or silver vessels and gold cups from

Mycenae and Dendra (Buchholzet al. 2010, 170).The middle register, the broadest, is left without any decoration. There is no indicationof gilding or silvering here (Buchholzet al. 2010, 156). Parallels for a blank register of this sizein combination with others filled with boars tusks are scarce. However, blank registersper seareknown: for example from the helmet depiction on the ceramic vase from Isopata, grave 5 or themarble engraving from Ayia Irini, Keos. If we do not want to consider a completely blank area and given that gilding or silvering has to be excluded, we might think of a perishable materialsuch as a ribbon, whose ends could be left loose to flutter in the wind, as we know from Syria.

Spiral decoration is usually not found on actual bronze or depicted helmets, thoughcircles are seen, as on the ivory miniature helmet from Knossos. However, as the vase from

Isopata shows, spirals and helmets are connected. Similar spirals as on our helmet, also withinner open end, can be found in Gournia, Crete on LM II ceramics and on a bronze pan fromIsopata, Crete. It must be noted that usually only precious goods or luxury objects bear this typeof spiral decoration (Buchholzet al. 2010, 180).

Cat. no. 2. Knossos, Crete, Greece (Fig. 5, no. 1) grave 5 complete HeraklionArchaeological Museum ( ), inv. no. unknown height:17 cm; diameter: 24 x 21 cm; knob height: 3.9 cm; diameter at the knobs base: 5 cm; thickness:11.5 mm; total weight helmet: 695 gm. Cheek plates: length: 16.5 cm; breadth: 9 cm; weightcheek plates together: 214 gm Clausing 2001, 218; Buchholz et al. 2010; Vasilakis 1999, 114,

fig. on the right; Hencken 1971, 20, fig. 3, eg; Schauer 1988, 183; Kilian-Dirlmeier 1985,1967, 199, table 1; Bouzek 1981, 213, fig. 1, 1; 3; Borchhardt 1972, 567, 60, cat. no. 11, I;

MARIANNE MDLINGER


8/14/2019 Mdlinger OJA 2013, 32.4 391-412

14/22

Mller-Karpe 1962, 2712; Schachermeyr 1960, 63, 66, fig. 54; Yalouris 1960, 55; Hachmann1957, 176; Matz 1956, 126; Ventris and Chadwick 1956, 377, fig. 26 A; Marinatos 1959, 113;Zervos 1956, fig. 719; Hencken 1953, 107; Hood and de Jong 1952, 25260, pls. 502:a.

The helmet was first published in 1952, after two years of excavation at Ayios Ioannis

and the new hospital site in Knossos. Grave V from the latter site contained the helmet: with itwere a rapier and a spearhead, as well as stone vases (three of alabaster and two of othermaterials). Close to the helmet, a lead disc 5.5 cm in diameter with a cover of bronze was found.Evidently it was part of the helmet, e.g. an extra weight attached to an organic neck guard, so thatit would not wave about. Unfortunately, the helmet had been smashed and crushed into over ahundred fragments when the tomb chamber collapsed. Nevertheless, it was possible toreconstruct it almost completely. Possible traces of usage or manufacture, however, were hard todetect. The helmet resembles the older boars-tusk helmets in profile and recalls the ivorycarvings from the House of Shields at Mycenae (Hencken 1971, 8).

The row of rivet holes parallel to the rim served to fix an organic padding, as well as

the cheek plates, thus connecting the helmet with the younger central European examples. Itis also possible that the holes in the rim held a neck guard, such as is shown on the ivoryheads of warriors equipped with boars-tusk helmets (Hencken 1971, 20). It is not clear if thecheek plates overlapped the bottom of the helmet or if they were fitted edge to edge. Theassumed internal padding of the helmet and cheek plates might have been of a piece. Thecheek plates each have 18 small rivet holes between 1.52 mm in diameter. The rivet holes onthe helmet are set about 1.6 cm apart and were punched through from the outside to the insideof the helmet.

The socket for the plume is attached to the calotte with seven rivets; it is pierced by a4 mm wide hole to hold the plume. The helmet from Knossos is the only conical helmet with

cheek plates preserved.

Cat. no. 3. Biecz (Beitzsch), woj. maopolskie, Poland(Fig. 2, no. 1) hoard (bog find) complete height: 16.2 cm (cap); 1.8 cm (socket); diameter: 19.5 x 21.5 cm; weight: 353 gm British Museum, reg. Num. 1868.1228.248 Buchholzet al. 2010, 201; Clausing 2005, 368;2001, 218; Hnsel 2003, 7784, fig. 2; Albrecht 1991; Calzecchi-Onesti 1991, 74, fig. 3; 76, no.4; Blajer 1990, 28, 33, 102; Egg and Waurick 1990, 14; Uenze 1990, 234, 41, no. 51, pl. 5.2;Schauer 1988, 185; Goetze 1984, 36; Bouzek 1981, 23, fig. 1, 2; 4; Jazdzewski 1981, 288; Otto1981, 60; Borchhardt 1972, 127, cat. no. 28, 1; Bukowski and Dabrowski 1972, 116; Hencken1971, 33, fig. 13, cd; 37; Patay 1969, 205, note 122; Hundt 1955, 105; Hencken 1952;

Sprockhoff 1956, 85; v. Merhart 19561957, 144; Hachmann 1957, 176; Gimbutas 1965, 58; v.Merhart 1941, 11, fig. 2, 6; Uenze 1938, 37, 83; British Museum Guide 1904, 97; Dahn 1881, 48;Genthe 1874, 1701; Klemm 1868; Kemble 1863, 52, 170, pl. 12:6; Lindenschmit 1858, pl. 1:1;Klemm 1854, 1578; 1851, 52, note 2; undated, V, 13.

The helmet was found below a pine trunk in a peat bog in 1847. From the samefind-spot, a small deposition is known, consisting of two ingot torques and one triangular bladeof a dagger of the OderElbe type. The hoard was purchased from Johannes Gustav Klemm(collection in Dresden) and is now stored at the British Museum, London. Analyses carried outat the British Museum in 1952 revealed that tin-bronze and leaded tin-bronze were used for themanufacture of the conical helmet. Since the X-ray analyses did not reveal traces of solder

between the knob and the cap of the helmet, the first was most likely cast on, as is the case withthe other conical helmets, excepting that from the unknown find-spot and the helmet from



8/14/2019 Mdlinger OJA 2013, 32.4 391-412

15/22

Knossos. Additionally, the notes on the analyses from the British Museum mention as well thepresence of small fragments of charred oak and plum wood inside the helmet. Unfortunately,these fragments are not preserved any more, as the recent study of the helmet revealed.

Though Hencken discussed in detail the find circumstances and the changing ownership

of the helmet (1952), doubts still remained about whether it was from a closed context. Greatefforts were expended in trying to explain the contradiction of Early Bronze Age objects foundtogether with an as assumed Urnfield-period helmet. Thus, attempts were made to prolongthe life span of the dagger (Goetze 1984, 36), while ignoring either the find context (Schauer1988, 185, note 37; Breddin 1969, 42) or the helmet (Billig 1963, 247). However, Hnsel (2003)has discussed the crux of the misgivings, namely the circumstances surrounding the finds andtheir first recording. The first report on the hoard leaves no room for any doubts about its unity(Hnsel 2003, 80). Even so, as is true in many other hoards, we have to consider the possibilityof ancient objects, not in use perhaps for several centuries, being deposited together with recentobjects. Such is the case, for example, with the Spindlersfelder hoard (BzB/CHaB1), that of

Muov (BzC1HaA) or generally with tongue sickles (Hnsel 1995).However, if we take into account a possible earlier date for the Middle Bronze Age in

the Carpathian Basin BzD to the fourteenth century BC (Della Casa and Fischer 1997), a longerduration of the netice culture in the Oder region and argue for a deposition history similar tothat of the Spindlersfeld hoard, and if we consider as well the composition of the Biecz hoard(which differs from Urnfield-period hoards) together with the fact that other Aegean objects(such as the spearhead in the hoard from Kyhna) were deposited in the same region (Hnsel2003, 82), it seems reasonable to propose that there were deposited in the hoard from Bieczbronzes collected over a long period of time, including a helmet heavily influenced by or evenimported from the Aegean. Hnsel therefore reinforces the case for dating the hoard and the

helmet to the Early Bronze Age, pointing out that there is a lack of convincing arguments for notdoing so (2003, 83) though he first argued for a deposition date between 2000 and thefourteenth century at the latest. Nonetheless, considering the arguments above, the closerelationship to the helmet from Knossos and the presence of Early Bronze Age finds in the Bieczhoard, it might be more reasonable to date the helmet and the deposition of the hoard at earliestto the later Middle BronzeAge/BzC2 (fourteenth century BC). This would make the helmet fromBiecz slightly later in date than that from Knossos.

Cat. no. 4. Oranienburg, Lkr. Oberhavel, Brandenburg, Germany(Fig. 1, no. 1) a solitaryfind from the River Havel complete height: 21 cm; diameter: approx. 22.5 cm; thickness:

0.33 mm; weight: 638 gm Heimatmuseum Oranienburg, inv. no. III/51 Lippert 2011, 31;Born 2009, figs. 212; Hnsel 2003, 823, fig. 1; Clausing 2001, 218; Albrecht 1991; Bouzek1981, 23, fig. 2, 3; Borchhardt 1972, 127, cat. no. 28, 2; Hencken 1971, 33, fig. 13, e; 378; v.Merhart 1941, 11, fig. 2, 4; Sprockhoff 1930, 44, pl. 9, a.

The helmet was found as a single find in the River Havel before the 1930s.The helmet has 20 rivet holes, placed approximately 2.5 cm above the thicker rim and

punched through from the outside to the inside of the helmet. On one side of the helmet a smallsection of the rim-line has been altered over a length of 8.5 cm it is raised by 0.6 cm: an actintended to improve the owners range of vision, or to permit more free space for movement atthe back of the neck and/or to leave room for the organic padding of a neck guard. The socket

is cast on; its hollow interior runs right through to the inside of the helmet. On one side of thehelmet, at least three severe sword impacts are visible.

MARIANNE MDLINGER


8/14/2019 Mdlinger OJA 2013, 32.4 391-412

16/22

Cat. no. 5. akov, okr. Doln Kubn, Slovakia(Fig. 3, no. 2) hoard knob height: 2.7 cm;diameter: 2.1 cm (above), 1 cm (shaft), 2.8 cm (base); weight unknown Slovensk nrodnmzeum Martin, inv. no. 3504 Mrtz 2011, 370; Furmnek and Novotn 2006, 38, nos. 1737;Clausing 2001, 218; Hansen 1994, 509, CS 731; Calzecchi-Onesti 1991, 75, fig. 4, b, no. 3;

Novotn 1991, 14, no. 5; 24, no. 18; Mozsolics 1985, 24; Schauer 1988, 183; Hencken 1971, 37,fig. 17, ac; Novotn 1970, 536; 1964, 21; Eisner 1933; Hampel 1892, 173.

The hoard from akov consists of the spool-shaped socket of the helmet, socketedaxes, the hilt of a Liptau-sword, rings and a bowl of Satteldorf type, pins, a socketed chisel,sickles, two spearheads and two ingots.

To the spool-shaped knob, which was cast on, fragments of the cap of the helmet arestill attached. Interestingly, the socket from the helmet from akov had been repaired: theupper part was cast onto the lower, thus resulting in the upper part being solid, with only thelower being spool-like in cross-section. From the inside of the helmet, a drop of metal fromthe upper and later repaired part of the socket can be seen inside the central hole, which once

did pass completely through the original socket. A potential fragment of the helmets cap iscited in the literature and depicted by Hencken (1971, fig. 17, c), but it could not be found atthe museum.

Cat. no. 6. Spisk Bel, okr. Kemarok, Slovakia(Fig. 3, no. 1) hoard I (1891) knob height: 2.2 cm; diameter: 2.2 cm (above), 1 cm (shaft), 3.2 cm (base); weight unknown Podtatransk Mzeum Poprad, inv. no. MK 882 Mrtz 2011, 370; Vachta 2008, 123, list V.1.5,no. 14; Clausing 2001, 218; Calzecchi-Onesti 1991, 76, no. 2; Novotn 1991, 22, nos. 1011, pl.19:A3; Schauer 1988, 184; Hencken 1971, 33; 35, fig. 15, fh; Novotn 1970, 536; 1964.

The hoard today consists of three spearheads, four plain bracelets, parts of two cups and

the spool-shaped socket of a helmet. Further finds, namely four spearheads, four bracelets, threesocketed axes and a round object, are now missing (Hencken 1971, 33). The knob of the helmetwas clearly cast on through a hole in the middle of the helmet.

Cat. no. 7. Lcky (?), okr. Ruomberok, Slovakia(Fig. 2, no. 4) hoard (?) complete height: 19.5 cm; diameter: 20 x 21 cm; weight unknown Archeologick mzeum SNM, 4518 Clausing 2001, 218; Novotn 1991, 47, no. 48; 589, no. 54; Calzecchi-Onesti 1991, 76, no.1; Bouzek 1981, 23, fig. 2, 1; Borchhardt 1972, 127, cat. no. 28, 4; Hencken 1971, 32, fig. 13,ab; Novotn 1970, 536; Mller-Karpe 1959, 11415, 204; Mozsolics 1955, 42; 44, fig. 9, 1; v.Merhart 1952, 63, 70; v. Merhart 1941, 11, fig. 2, 5.

Though the village of Lcky is always named as the find-spot, the actual find-spot isunknown. The helmet was bought from an itinerant salesman by the museum in Martin; he wasalso selling Hallstatt cups. Hencken notes that the patina of the helmet differs from that of thesitula of Hajdbszrmny type and of the cauldron with cross-shaped handles, which weresupposedly found together with the helmet (Hencken 1971, 323). Thus, the objects might nothave been really recovered together. However, the composition of the hoard is very similar to thatof Mezokvesd (Patay 1969, 211).

The helmet is partly broken and distorted; the rim is thicker than the upper part of thehelmet. The helmet bears eight rivet holes, punched through from the outside to the inside ofthe helmet. There is a slight upward curve to the rim at what was either the front or the back of

the helmet. The spool-shaped socket of the helmet was cast on perfectly. On the inside of thehelmet, traces of hammering in a horizontal zone are visible mainly the longer marks lie



8/14/2019 Mdlinger OJA 2013, 32.4 391-412

17/22

parallel to the rim for over 1.2 cm up towards the rivet holes, thus creating a little step or stagewith respect to the rest of the cap. In this area, several vertical cracks are visible.

Cat. no. 8. Keresztte, kom. Borsod-Abaj-Zempln, Hungary (Fig. 4) hoard two

fragments length: 12 cm; bent: 2.1 cm; breadth: 5.3 cm; weight: 32 gm Magyar NemzetiMzeum, inv. no. 31/1941/8 Mrtz 2011, 362; Vachta 2008, 123, list V.1.5, no. 4; Clausing2001, 218; Hansen 1994, 541, H 330; Patay 1990, 19, no. 3; Schauer 1988, 184; Mozsolics 1985,24, 135, 388, pl. 150:9; Kemenczei 1984, 149, no. 17; Hencken 1971, 39, fig. 18, a;Mller-Karpe 1959, 158; Mozsolics 1955, 412, fig. 7, 7.

The hoard, which was found during ploughing, consists of five spearheads, 16 braceletsand rings, a cauldron, a bronze boss (diameter 11.5 cm), a biconical jug of sheet bronze and thehelmet without its socket. It was found at the end of the 1930s in a field.

Today, only two fragments from the helmet soldered together during restorationremain. The rest of the helmet might have been lost during the Second World War. The

surviving rivet holes were punched through from the outside to the inside of the helmet. Asvisible on the photograph from Mozsolics (1985, pl. 150:9), the calotte displays the sameslight upward curve on part of the rim as, for example, on the helmets from Lcky, Biecz andOranienburg. The inner lining was fixed also on the outside of the helmet by the rivets, as isindicated by the differential corrosion up to 2 cm above the rim. On this helmet the socket wasmissing.

Cat. no. 9. Nadap, kom. Fejr, Hungary(Fig. 2, no. 2) hoard almost complete height(total): 18.5 cm; thickness (cap): 0.30.1 mm; height (socket): 1.8 cm; diameter (socket base):2.2 cm; weight: not possible to measure, since the helmet is permanently attached to a modern

bronze sheet Szent Istvn Kirly Mzeum, Szkesfehrvr, no inv. no. Uckelmann 2012,1819; Makkay 2006, 7, pl. I; Clausing 2001, 218; Jankovits 1999/2000, fig. 1, 2; 1998/1999,fig. 1, 2; Schauer 1988, 184; Hansen 1994, 546, H 451; Calzecchi-Onesti 1991, 77, no. 12;Schauer 1988, 184, fig. 4; Petres 1982, 578, fig. 1, ab.

Thirty-six years after its discovery, the hoard was finally published, for which I warmlythank Makkay (2006). The hoard was found at Jnoshegy (Johns hill) in spring 1970 after heavyploughing in the autumn of 1969. People from the area found during the following months morethan 350 bronze objects and several thousand sherds, in an area of dark earth approximately 25sq m in size (Makkay 2006, 4). Mozsolics (1985, 151) and Hansen (1994, 546) mention 713objects with approximately 80 fragments; Uckelmann 628 objects/fragments (2012, 1819);

Makkays total of 567 or 568 objects is very reasonable, as his is the most well-informed account(2006, 6). As well as the defensive armour a helmet, two pairs of greaves, a fragment of a shieldof Nyrtura type, probably nine further fragments from the edge of a shield and potentialfragments of a cuirass, the associated finds are: two hilts from Dreiwulst-type swords, fragmentsfrom daggers and spearheads, socketed hammers, chisels, punches, an anvil, socketed axes,winged axes, sickles, knives, a razor of the Ciumesti variant, two razors of the Gromugl type,and Mixnitz variant, one fragment of a razor of the Gromugl type, and Mesic variant, bronzevessels of type A, variant A2, a bronze cup of the Gusen type, a bronze cup of the Gusen/Blatnicatype, eight bronze cups of the Blatnica type (all fragments), another bronze cup and bowl, a sieve,fibulae, pins, neck rings, arm rings, pendants, a belt plate, pieces of bronze, casting flakes and

off-casts. The list of associated finds varies in different catalogues; the list as cited here is afterMozsolics (1985, 163).

MARIANNE MDLINGER


8/14/2019 Mdlinger OJA 2013, 32.4 391-412

18/22

The helmet today is heavily fragmented; less than a third of the cap remained. The caphas several cracks and missing parts and is heavily corroded. The spool-shaped socket was castonto the top of the conical helmet. Parallel to the edge of the cap, a row of rivet holes is visible.The seven complete preserved rivet holes differ in size from 5 to 8 mm in diameter. They were

punched through from the outside to the inside of the helmet. According to Petres, two furtherfragments from the hoard might belong to this helmet or another one (1982, fig. 10, ce; Makkay2006, pl. V:1011). From the profile, at least one of the two fragments might belong to a rib- orstar-decorated cap helmet (Mdlinger 2013).

Cat. no. 10. Dunafldvr, kom. Tolna, Hungary(Fig. 1, no. 2) single find complete height (without knob): 16.9 cm; diameter: 21.1 x 22.2 cm; thickness: 2 mm (rim); 0.4 mm(calotte); weight: 488 gm Adm Bri Balogh Museum Szekszrd, inv. no. O.93.33.1 Mrtz2011, 369; Clausing 2001, 218; Szab 1994, 21920, pl. 1.

The helmet was found in the Danube at Dunafldvr in 1986 and bought by the museum

from the private collection of Lajos Dn.The cap of the helmet is complete, just the formerly cast-on socket has broken off. It was

not recovered with the helmet. A row of 23 rivet holes runs parallel to the edge at a height of3 cm, with a distance of approximately 3 cm between each of them. Despite one (recent?) longercrack and a shorter one from the rim up to and slightly above one rivet hole, the cap does notshow any damage. The rivet holes were punched through from the outside to the inside of thehelmet.

Inside the helmet traces of hammering on a horizontal alignment are visible all over thecap. Around the rivet holes and down to the rim the corrosion looks slightly different from thaton the upper part of the cap. This indicates the presence of an original organic padding or lining,

fixed in place by the rivets on the inside of the helmet but also wrapped around to the outsidesurface: this influenced the corrosion process of the metal in the areas so covered (as also notedby Szab in 1994).

Interestingly, the helmet shows on the upper third, in one area, four more or less parallel,linear impressions 2.55 cm in length which might be the result of sword impacts. An axe-blowwould have passed straight through the thin helmet, as is the case even with the much later andmore massive helmets of the Negau type.

Cat. no. 11. Sg (Sg), Jud. Salaj, Romania(Fig. 2, no. 3) hoard almost complete height:10 cm (incomplete cap); 2.5 cm (knob); thickness: 0.1 mm (cap); 1.1 mm (rim); weight: 56 gm

(cap); 56 gm (knob) Muzeul Judetean de Istorie si Arla-Zalau, no inv. no. Mrtz 2011, 370;Soroeanu 2008, 58, nos. 1719; Vachta 2008, 123, list V.1.5, no. 12; Clausing 2001, 218; Rusu1990, 77; Schauer 1988, 1845, fig. 5, 8; Soroeanu and Lak 1981, fig. 9.4, 147, 1534;Petrescu-Dmbovita 1977, 134.

The hoard was found in 1972 in Sg (Salaj) at a depth of some 60 cm, when Lajos Kallaywas extracting clay for bricks close to the area called Coasta Piscilii, approximately 150 m westof the school building. It consists of a vessel of Hajdbszrmny type, further vessel fragmentswith cross-shaped handles, five bronze cups of the Kirkendrup and Fuchsstadt types, a handle ofa vessel, bracelets, phalerae, a spearhead, sickles, two socketed axes, a possible fragment of asaw and the helmet.

The heavily corroded fragments of the cap as well as the socket were sand blasted. Thus,they are in a rather delicate state today. The spool-shaped socket is rather massive; the hole at the



8/14/2019 Mdlinger OJA 2013, 32.4 391-412

19/22

centre of the top of the knob is only 3 mm deep and of not much practical use. The two preservedrivet holes differ in size from 5 to 10 mm in diameter.

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) and the FP7/Marie Curieactions that supported the research through the Schrdinger Fellowship no. J 3109-G21. Furthermore, thisresearch project has also been supported by the European Commission under the 7th FrameworkProgramme through the Key Action: Cultural Heritage Advanced Research Infrastructures: Synergy for aMultidisciplinary Approach to Conservation/Restoration (CHARISMA). Many thanks are due also toMalcolm Wiener (INSTAP), Richard Stone (Metropolitan Museum of Art), Barry Molloy (University ofSheffield) and Svend Hansen (Deutsches Archologisches Institut, Berlin), for fruitful discussions on thetopic. An especial debt of gratitude is owed to everyone who supported and helped me with informationabout and documentation of the helmets in the museums concerned: Juraj Bartk (Archeologick mzeumSNM, Bratislava), Ioan Bejinariu (Muzeul Judetean de Istorie si Arla-Zalau, Zalau), Magdalna Bekessov(Podtatransk Mzeum, Poprad; also for the assistance at the Tucianske mzeum Andreja Kmeta, Martin),

Katalin Bir, Ildik Szathmri and dm Szab (Magyar Nemzeti Mzeum, Budapest), Gabriella Nadorfi(Szent Istvn Kirly Mzeum, Szkesfehrvr), Mrta Vizi and Gza Szab (Wosinsky Mr MegyeiMzeum, Szekszrd) and Quanyu Wang (British Museum).

Dipartimento di Chimica e Chimica Industriale DCCIUniversit di Genova

Via Dodecaneso 31I 16146 Genoa

ITALYE-mail: [email protected]

REFERENCES

ALBRECHT, M. 1991: Der bronzezeitliche Helm von Szczecin-Zdroje im Museum fr Ur- undFrhgeschichte.Forschungen und Berichte Staatliche Museen zu Berlin31, 916.

BILLIG, G. 1963: Frhbronzezeitliche Funde der Niederlausitz und ihre Stellung innerhalb der UneticerKultur.Alt-Thringen6, 24673.

BLAJER, W. 1990: Skarby z wczesnej epoki brazu na ziemiach polskich (Wrocaw, Prace KomisjiArcheologicznej PAN Krakw 28).

BORN, H.2009:Die Helme des Hephaistos(Mnchen).BORCHHARDT,J.1972:Homerische Helme. Helmformen der gis in ihren Beziehungen zu orientalischen

und europischen Helmen in der Bronze- und frhen Eisenzeit(Mainz).BOUZEK,J.1981: Die Anfnge der blechernen Schutzwaffen im stlichen Mitteleuropa. InLORENZ,H.(ed.),Studien zur Bronzezeit. Festschrift fr W. A. v. Brunn(Mainz), 2138.BREDDIN, R. 1969: Der Uneticer Bronzehortfund von Bresinchen, Kr. Guben. Verffentlichungen des

Museums fr Ur- und Frhgeschichte Potsdam5, 1556.BRITISH MUSEUM GUIDE 1904:A Guide to the Antiquities of the Bronze Age in the Department of British and

Mediaeval Antiquities(London).BUCHHOLZ,H.-G.,MATTHUS,H.andWIENER,M.2010: Helmentwicklung und ein unbekannter altgischer

Bronzehelm. In BUCHHOLZ, H.-G. (ed.), Archaeologia Homerica 1, Kapitel E, Teil 3. Kriegswesen.Ergnzungen und Zusammenfassung(Gttingen), 135208.

BUKOWSKI, Z.and DABROWSKI, K.1972:Swit kultury europejskiej(Warszawa).CALZECCHI-ONESTI, G.1991: Connessioni europee di alcuni elmi italiani.Annali della facolta di Lettere e

Filosofia dellUniversita degli studi di Perugia25, NS 11 (19871988), 65111.

CLAUSING, C.2001: Sptbronze- und eisenzeitliche Helme mit einteiliger Kalotte. Jahrbuch des Rmisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums48.1, 199225.

MARIANNE MDLINGER


8/14/2019 Mdlinger OJA 2013, 32.4 391-412

20/22

CLAUSING, C. 2005: Zwei neue urnenfelderzeitliche Bronzehelme mit Scheitelknauf. ArchologischesKorrespondenzblatt35, 318.

DAHN, F.1881:Urgeschichte der germanischen und romanischen Vlker(Berlin, Allgemeine Geschichtein Einzeldarstellungen 2/2, Vol. 1).

DELLA CASA, P.and FISCHER, C. 1997: Neftenbach (CH), Velika Gruda (YU), Kastanas (GR) und Trindhj(DK): Argumente fr einen Beginn der Sptbronzezeit (Reinecke Bz D) im 14. Jahrhundert v. Chr.Prhistorische Zeitschrift72, 195233.

EGG, M.and WAURICK, G.1990:Antike Helme. Katalog zur Ausstellung Speyer(Mainz).EISNER, J.1933:Slovensko v praveku(Bratislava).FURMNEK,V.and NOVOTN,M.2006:Die Sicheln in der Slowakei(Stuttgart, Prhistorische Bronzefunde

XVIII, 6).GENTHE, H.1874:ber den etruskischen Tauschhandel nach dem Norden (Heilbronn).GIMBUTAS, M.1965:Bronze Age Cultures in Central and Eastern Europe (Den Haag).GOETZE,B.-R.1984: Die frhesten europischen Schutzwaffen.Bayerische Vorgeschichtsbltter49, 2553.HACHMANN, R. 1957: Die frhe Bronzezeit im westlichen Ostseegebiet und ihre mittel- und

sdosteuropischen Beziehungen. Chronologische Untersuchungen. 6. Beiheft zum Atlas derUrgeschichte(Hamburg).

HAMPEL, J.1892:A bronzkor emlkei Magyarhonban, II(Budapest).HNSEL, B.1995: Seit wann gibt es die Zungensicheln? In SCHMID-SIKIMIC, B.and DELLA CASA, P.(eds.),

Trans Europam. Beitrge zur Bronze- und Eisenzeit zwischen Atlantik und Altai. Festschrift frMargarethe Primas(Bonn), 1122.

HNSEL, B.2003: Bronzene Glockenhelme. Bemerkungen zu einem Altfund an der Neie. In ECKERT, U.andZIMMERMANN,A.(eds.),Archologische Perspektiven. Analysen und Interpretationen im Wandel.Festschrift fr Jens Lnning zum 65. Geburtstag(Rahden/Westf., Internationale Archologie, StudiaHonoraria 20), 7784.

HANSEN, S. 1994: Studien zu den Metalldeponierungen whrend der lteren Urnenfelderzeit zwischenRhnetal und Karpatenbecken(Bonn, Universittsforschungen zur prhistorischen Archologie 21).

HENCKEN, H.1952: Beitzsch and Knossos. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society18, 3646.HENCKEN, H.1953: Some early helmets.American Journal of Archaeology57, 107.HENCKEN, H.1971:The earliest European helmets. Bronze Age and Early Iron Age (Cambridge, Mass.,

American School of Prehistoric Research, Bulletin 28).HOOD,M.S.F.andDE JONG,P.1952: Late Minoan warrior graves from Ayios Ioajjis and the new hospital site

at Knossos.Annual of the British School at Athens47, 24377.HUNDT, H.J. 1955: Versuch zur Deutung der Depotfunde der nordischen jngeren Bronzezeit unter

besonderer Bercksichtigung Mecklenburgs. Jahrbuch des Rmisch-Germanischen ZentralmuseumMainz2, 95140.

JANKOVITS, K. 1998/1999: Studio delle lamine di bronzo del ripostiglio di Pila del Brancon, Nogara(Verona).Padusa3435, 85107.

JANKOVITS,K.1999/2000: Neue Angaben zu dem Depotfund von Pila del Brancon, Nogara (Verona).ActaArchaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae51, 189205.

JAZDZEWSKI, K.1981:Pradzieje Europy Srodkowej(Wrocaw, Warszawa, Krakw and Gdansk).

KEMBLE, J.M.1863:Horae Ferales or Studies in the Archaeology of the Northern Nations (London).KEMENCZEI, T.1984:Die Sptbronzezeit Nordostungarns(Budapest, Archaeologia Hungarica 51).KILIAN-DIRLMEIER, I.1985: Noch einmal zu den Kriegergrbern von Knossos. Jahrbuch des Rmisch-

Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz32, 196214.KLEMM,J.G.1851:Das christliche Westeuropa(Leipzig, Allgemeine Cultur-Geschichte der Menschheit 9).KLEMM,J.G.1854: Werkzeuge und Waffen, Allgemeine Culturwissenschaft. InDie materiellen Grundlagen

menschlicher Cultur(Leipzig), 1578.KLEMM,J.G.1868:Germanische Alterthmer, British Museum, London(unpublished manuscript), No. 429

(bei Pfrten).KLEMM, J.G. undated: Catalog der culturhistorischen Sammlung des verstorbenen Hofrath Dr. Gustav

Klemm in Dresden Knigsbrcker Strasse Nr. 84. Einleitung (Dresden).LINDENSCHMIT, L. 1858: Die Alterthmer unserer heidnischen Vorzeit. Nach den in ffentlichen und

Privatsammlung befindlichen Originalien zusammengestellt und herausgegeben von dem Rmisch-Germanischen Centralmuseum in Mainz, 1(Mainz).



8/14/2019 Mdlinger OJA 2013, 32.4 391-412

21/22

LIPPERT, A. 2011: Die zweischaligen ostalpinen Kammhelme und verwandte Helmformen der sptenBronze- und frhen Eisenzeit(Salzburg, Archologie in Salzburg 6).

MAKKAY,J.2006: The late Bronze Age hoard of Nadap.A Nyregyhzi Jsa Andrs Mzeum vknyve48,13584 [152].

MARINATOS, S.1959:Kreta und das mykenische Hellas(Mnchen).MATZ, F.1956:Kreta, Mykene, Troja. Die minoische und die homerische Welt(Stuttgart).MDLINGER,M.2013: Star ornamentation on Late Bronze Age helmets, cups and decorated discs in central

and south-eastern Europe.Arheoloki vestnik64, 5786.MDLINGER,M.,PICCARDO,P.,KASZTOVSZKY,Z.,KOVCS,I.,SZOKEFALVI-NAGY,Z.,KLI,G. and SZILGYI,

V. 2013: Archaeometallurgical characterization of the earliest European metal helmets. MaterialsCharacterization79, 2236 (DOI: 10.1016/j.matchar.2013.02.007).

MRTZ, T.2011: At the head of concealment. The deposition of Bronze Age helmets in the CarpathianBasin. InBERECKI,S.,NMETH,R.E.andREZI,B.(eds.),Bronze Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian

Basin. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Trgu Mures. 810 October 2010(TrguMures), 35776.

MOZSOLICS, A. 1955: Neue hallstattzeitliche Helmfunde aus Ungarn. Acta Archaeologica Hungarica 5,3554.

MOZSOLICS, A. 1985: Bronzefunde aus Ungarn. Depotfundhorizonte von Aranyos, Kurd und Gyermely(Budapest).

MLLER-KARPE, H.1959:Beitrge zur Chronologie der Urnenfelderzeit nrdlich und sdlich der Alpen(Berlin, Rmisch-Germanische Forschungen 22).

MLLER-KARPE, H. 1962: Zur sptbronzezeitlichen Bewaffnung in Mitteleuropa und Griechenland.Germania40, 25587.

NOVOTN, M. 1964: Bronzov kuulovit helmy a niektor typy bronzovch ndob v hromadnchnlezoch na Slovensku.Sbornk filosofikej fakulty Univerzity Komenskho15 (MusaiciaIV), 1943.

NOVOTN, M. 1970:Die Bronzehortfunde in der Slowakei(Bratislava, Archaeologica Slovaca Fontes IX).NOVOTN, M.1991:Die Bronzegefe in der Slowakei(Stuttgart, Prhistorische Bronzefunde II, 11).OTTO, K.H. 1981: Die historische Bedeutung der mittleren und jngeren Bronzezeit in Mitteleuropa. In

COBLENZ, W. and HORST, F. (eds.), Mitteleuropische Bronzezeit. Beitrge zur Archologie und

Geschichte(Berlin).PATAY, P.1969: Der Bronzefund von Mezokvesd.Acta Archaeologica Hungarica21, 167216.PATAY, P.1990:Die Bronzegefe in Ungarn(Mnchen, Prhistorische Bronzefunde II, 10).PETRES,.F.1982: Neue Angaben ber die Verbreitung der sptbronzezeitlichen Schutzwaffen.Savaria16,

5780.PETRESCU-DMBOVITA, M.1977:Depozitele de bronzuri din Romania(Bucuresti).RUSU, M.1990: Coifuri de bronz transilvanene din Hallstatt AB. Thraco-Dacia11, 6978.SCHACHERMEYR, F. 1960: Das Keftiu-Problem und die Frage des ersten Auftretens einer griechischen.

Herrenschicht im minoischen Kreta.Jahreshefte des sterreichischen Archologischen Institutes inWien45, 4468.

SCHAUER, P.1988: Die kegel- und glockenfrmigen Helme mit gegossenem Scheitelknauf der jngerenBronzezeit Alteuropas. In EGG, M.and WAURICK, G.(eds.),Antike Helme(Mainz, Monographien des

Rmisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums 14), 18194.SOROEANU, T. 2008: Vasele de metal prescitice de pe actualul teritoriu al Romniei. Descoperiri de

bronzuri din Romnia, III(Bistrita and Cluj-Napoca).SOROEANU, T. and LAK, E. 1981: Depozitul de bronzuri de la Sg (judetul Salaj). Acta Musei

PorolisenssisV, 14568.SPROCKHOFF, E.1930:Zur Handelsgeschichte der germanischen Bronzezeit(Berlin).SPROCKHOFF, E. 1956: Jungbronzezeitliche Hortfunde der Sdzone des nordischen Kreises. Periode V

(Mainz).SZAB,G.1994: A krpt-medencei ks bronzkori sisakok ksztsnek problmi egy jabb lelet alapjn.

InA kokortl a kzpkorig. Tanulmnyok Trogmayer Ott 60. szletsnapjra(Szeged), 21927.UCKELMANN, M. 2012: Die Schilde der Bronzezeit in Nord-, West- und Zentraleuropa (Stuttgart,

Prhistorische Bronzefunde III, 4).

UENZE,B. 1990:G.F. Klemm and his Collection in the British Museum (Unpublished thesis, University ofLondon).

MARIANNE MDLINGER


8/14/2019 Mdlinger OJA 2013, 32.4 391-412

22/22

U2ENZE, O. 1938: Die frhbronzezeitlichen triangulren Vollgriffdolche (Berlin, VorgeschichtlicheForschungen 11).

V. BRUNN, W.A.1968:Mitteldeutsche Hortfunde der jngeren Bronzezeit (Berlin, Rmisch-GermanischeForschungen 29).

V. MERHART, G. 1941: Zu den ersten Metallhelmen Europas. Bericht der Rmisch-GermanischenKommission30, 442.

V. MERHART, G. 1952: Studien ber einige Gattungen von Bronzegefen. Festschrift des Rmisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums in Mainz zum 100jhrigen Bestehen, 2 (Mainz), 171.

V. MERHART, G. 19561957: Geschnrte Schienen.Bericht der Rmisch-Germanischen Kommission 3738,91147.

VACHTA, T. 2008: Studien zu den bronzezeitlichen Hortfunden des oberen Theissgebietes (Bonn,Universittsforschungen zur Prhistorischen Archologie 159).

VASILAKIS, A.1999: Heraklion Archaeological Museum(Athens).VENTRIS, M.and CHADWICK, J.1956:Documents in Mycenaean Greek(Cambridge).VERDELIS, N.M. 1967: Neue Funde von Dendra. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archologischen Instituts,

Abteilung Athen 82, 153.YALOURIS, N. 1960: Mykenische Bronzeschutzwaffen. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archologischen

Instituts, Abteilung Athen75, 4267.ZERVOS, C.1956:LArt de la Crte nolithique et minoenne (Paris).

