September 2022

Ph. Martina Cammerata

As you may already know, we have on Res Bellica’s catalogue several pieces made on request, and we can also make custom made products, absent from our store.

Among these products, there are also shoes.

How to take the perfect measures for your custom made shoe, perfectly tailored and fitting your foot?

You will simply need to follow the instructions in the video here below – the video is in Italian, but you will see that it’s very intuitive.
In any case, you’ll also find written instructions below the video.

Follow these steps:

-draw the shape of your bare foot on a paper sheet. Be sure that the pen or pencil you’re using is held perpendicularly to the sheet.
-by using a tape measure, take the measure of the foot at the base of the fingers. Mark on the sheet the spot on which you’ve taken the measure.
-do the same with your foot’s neck
-finally, take the measure, on the sheet, from your heel to your big toe.

Now you have every measure you need to make a pair of tailored shoes!

The last thing to do is simply to send the sheet with your measures and the shoes you want to make to info@res-bellica.com, asking for your tailored shoes made on request by us!

If you’re a 4th century reenactor, particularly if you’re working a Roman infantryman impression, almost surely your first choice will be a light ridge helmet (put it simple, a type Intercisa).

However, maybe you’re looking for an alternative, and you spotted the spangenhelm type Leiden…but you’re not so sure you can use it.

Maybe you don’t know the history behind such a helmet, or maybe you’ve heard everything about this piece…

For instance, I’m sure that more than one person told really surely that a spangenhelm is unsuitable before 5th century AD.
But at the same time, you may have also heard that there are spangenhelme dated already at the beginning of the 4th century – even though you’ve discovered it’s the same helmet that shouldn’t be fit before the 5th century…

So: you’re experiencing a lot of confusion and uncertainty about the subject.

But the spangenhelm type Leiden, in the end, is usable for a 4th century impression?

Take your seat and prepare for a journey through the sources.
Let’s try to find the answer together.

Our customer Luciano wearing our replica of a spangenhelm type Leiden. Ph. Matteo di Francesco (detail)

Let’s start from the very beginning, answering this question: do we know for sure when the Romans came in contact with spangenhelm type helmets?
The answer is “yes”.

Even though they probably didn’t use them, the Romans knew quite well this type of helmet well before Late Antiquity: they were in fact used at least starting from the 2nd century AD both from their enemies and their auxiliaries.

The clearest evidence in this regard is for sure the Trajan Column, which sports representation of a number of segmented helmets (spangenhelme as well as other types), worn both by Roman auxiliares and by Dacians, Sarmatians and Roxolani.
These helmets are also represented among the captured military equipment, on the base of the Column.
At least one of the helmets of the Column (the one in center here below) shows striking similarities with the Leiden helmet.

Some of the 2nd century AD spangenhelme from the Trajan Column. The helmet in the center, in particular, shows a lof of similarities with the Leiden helmet.

Some scholars also believe that spangenhelm type helmets were already adopted this early by proper Roman legionaries.

In fact, at last one legionary represented on the Tropaeum Traiani (a source of utmost importance for the reconstruction of 2nd century AD legionaries) looks like he’s wearing a spangenhelm.
However, a comparison with other soldiers from the Tropaeum Traiani reveals that actually this legionary is wearing an Imperial Italic helmet (just crudely represented), with the reinforcing cross on the skull.

Detail of the metopa from the Tropaeum Traiani, with a soldier apparently wearing a spangenhelm. The comparison with other metopae reveals that most probably he’s actually wearing an Imperial italic type with the reinforcing cross on the skull.

Thsi of course doesn’t mean that at least contemporary auxiliaries, and particulary maybe the ones from over the Danube, couldn’t have worn them.
Also, we’re sure that in a non specified moment between the end of the 2nd century and the 3rd, proper Roman legionaries started to wear this kind of segmented helmets.
To find the first sure representations of Roman legionaries with segmented helmets, we have to move forward to the end of the 3rd century.

Are we going to finally meet our spangenhelm type Leiden?

At the end of the 3rd century, we find the first sure representations of proper Roman soldiers wearing segmented helmets: the soldiers on the arch of Galerius, built around 297 AD.

Scholars has attempted many times during the last decades to identify more precisely the helmets worn by these soldiers (going all the way from helmets type Deir el Medinah to lamellar helmets like the one from Kishpek).

Segmented helmets from the arch of Galerius. It’s possible to see some different typologies of helmets, even though to precisely identify them is really hard.

What we’re more interested in is of course to notice the segmented helmets of some kind were already used at least from the end of the 3rd century AD.

Where this new information locates our spangenhelm type Leiden?

Let’s finally see the informations we have about this particular helmet, coming from Egypt.

For a detailed article about our replica, read also Spangenhelm type Leiden (4th-6th century AD): our reconstruction

The spangenhelm type Leiden, from Egypt

As well as the spangenhelm from Deir el Medina (of which maybe we’ll talk about in the future), we miss many informations about the Leiden helmet. We don’t even know precisely the place of its provenance – ans its name comes from where is now held, in the Netherlands.

This lack of informations makes really difficult to date this helmet. Following the studies that were made during the last decades, the helmet was variably dated from the 3rd to the 6th-7th century AD.

Why such a wide time frame?

I’ll explain to you briefly.

In his 1973 Spätrömische Gardhelme, scholar Hans Klumbach tried to outline the evolution of Late Roman helmets. He concluded that ridge helmets were the most ancient types, from which the later spangenhelme then developed, dating the latter usually between the 6th and 7th centuries (also based on the spread of the helmets type Baldenheim in that particular period).

This theory was effectively challenged by Simon James in his 1986 Evidence from Dura Europos for the origins of late Roman helmets. James not only traced the different origin of ridge helmets (from the Sasanian East) and spangenhelme (from the Danubian region), but he also stated that the two groups actually coexisted, using as proof also the arch of Galerius. Leiden and Deir el Medina type were even dated to the period between the end of the 3rd and the beginning of the 4th century.

Even though these two works posed the foundation of the studies on the theme, during the last decades many scholars went on studying and adding new informations. Also, many new archaeological specimens of  has segmented helmets have been found.
The datation of the Leiden helmet was continuously discussed and challenged, but every proposal, even though convincing, is far from being certain or homogenuous.

Let’s see some example.

Many strong similarities were found between the Deir el Medina helmet and a 4th century ridge helmet known as “Christie’s helmet”.
Since the Deir el Medina and the Leiden helmet are usually pur in the same group, due to the similarity in their structure and construction, then also the helmet from Leiden may be dated to the 4th century.

Deir el Medina helmet (left) e il “Christie’s helmet” (right)

However, many archaeological specimens of completely iron spangenhelme were found, some of which surely dated to the 6th (Sinj, Novae) and 7th century (Jerusalem), and at least one specimen may be dated to the 5th century (St.Vid-Narona V).
Moreover, the Deir el Medina helmets has a skull composed by six segments: a feature that theoretically doesn’t emerge in other spangenhelme before the 6th century, like in many helmets of Baldenheim typology – which began to spread starting from the second half of the 5th century.

Iron spangenhelme, 5th to 7th centuries. 1. St.Vid-Narona V – 2. Sijn – 3. Novae – 4. Jerusalem

After all these informations, you’re probably even more confused, aren’t you? Don’t worry: it’s totally ok. If even scholars cannot reach a definitive answer, it’s not surprising.

But, with the due caution, and relying also on thoughts and studies like the ones by scholars by Mahand Vogt and Christian Miks, we may try to draw some concusion.

Helmets of spangenhelm type, even in shapes evidently near to Late Antique ones, were clearly known, if not used, by the Romans as early as the 2nd century AD, coming mainly (but not excusively) from the Transdanubian region.

Thanks to the arch of Galerius, we know that segmented helmets (even though we don’t know of which precise typology) were already used in the late 3rd century AD, alongside the first ridge helmets – the latter ones represented, for instance, on the arch of Constantine, dated 315 AD.

Leaving aside for a moment both the Leiden and the Deir el Medin helmets (since they cannot be dated with certainty), among the archaeological finds spangenhelme appeared in great numbers, both in iron and decorated, only during the 5th century AD, at the same time when ridge helmets seem to go almost out of use.

In the gap between the end of the 3rd century and the half of the 5th, it seems reasonable to hypothesize that spangenhelme did not fall out of use or disappeared, but that in fact coexisted with ridge helmets – also, any hypothesis of linear development of these helmets is not that sustainable.
We can also suppose, even though for still not know reasons, that the ridge helmet was simply more popular and was more used than the spangenhelm, which will be predominant only in a second time.

Concluding: is the helmet type Leiden suitable for a 4th century impression?

Even though with the due caution, our answer yes definitively yes.

Of course, this type of helmet is surely perfect for a reenactor who’s working on a 5th to 7th century impression…

…but we have no doubt that we could have seen this type of spangenhelm worn by Late Roman soldiers, maybe in fewer numbers, alongside ridge helmets, during the 4th century AD.

We hope to have helped you in your impression of a Late Roman infantryman with this article.

So, if you’re now interested in an alternative to a ridge helmet, you may want to take a look to our replica by clicking here.

Our replica of spangenhelm type Leiden.

Alla prossima!

The impression you’re going to read about was sent to us by our customer Thibault, from the project “Make Carthage Great Again“, which we thank a lot for sharing this text to be published in our blog.

Enjoy the reading!

“This impression shows how a libo-phoeniciean infantryman could have looked like just before the Second Punic war. It is quite hard to outline a precise idea of the full panoply of this type of unit. Libo-phoenicieans are known to have been recruited among the vassals’ cities of Carthage, and formed the backbone of the Army that left North Africa to Spain after the First Punic war and Carthage’s defeat at sea.

Libo-phoenician are often described as “lonchophoroï” (light troops) by Romans authors, and some consider that before their full reequipment with Roman gear taken at the Trasimene lake and Trebbia river, these troops were not able to sustain a Roman assault, and were not wearing “linothorax”.

However, it is hard to consider that these light troops dominated on the field ferocious Iberian and Celtiberian tribes, whit an armament of less quality and light protections – event though the conquest of Spain had been possible thanks to the help of other Iberian tribes and a smart use of combined units gathering light cavalry (Numidians) and war elephants.

Hence, the main philosophy behind this impression is that Carthaginian infantry may arrived in Spain lightly equipped but improved its equipment on the field, by adopting fantastic local forged blades and improving protections, and at least trying to adapt to geographic constraints and the type of warfare that prevented any type of heavy infantry.

Our infantryman is equipped with a large natural woolen tunic, no belt, leather sandals, and wears a Tanit pendant for God’s protection.

In terms of armament, he is mainly equipped with one or two short spears, and an impressive and lethal short Antennae-hilted Alcacer type sword (South of Iberia and Portugal; Andalucia).

As per his self-protection, he relies on a leather armor called spolas (leather is more likely than linen considering the area, being lighter, cheaper, and offering nonetheless a correct protection) the design of which has been inspired by the “Chemtou” linothorax.
He also carries a thyreos shield (oval plate shield reintroduced by the Celts in Italy and Mediterranean Sea area) with a wooden spina and no umbo (cheaper and lighter) and he wears a Montefortino helmet with a large bulb, (Coarelli type D, typical of the area 250/190 BC) the cheek pieces of which has been removed following a very common use in Iberian peninsula at that time, to improve lateral vision (essential in ambush warfare).

Eventually, this look leads to a thureophoros which may not be so different from a roman hastatus. And indeed opponents at that time had very similar gears, as shown by archeologic discoveries (e.g. Egades Islands 241 BC). So, we’re more than allowed to think that the 10 000 libo-phenicians that marched towards Alps & Italy in Spring 218 BC were looking a lot like our impression.

Warm regards to Res Bellica for the helmet and to Pier Paolo Siercovich for the fantastic and unique Alcacer sword.

Thibault Choquart from “Make Carthage Great Again”.

If you want a spolas or a linothorax, take a look here and here to know more.

Reconstructing the appearance of the Roman legionaries in the Middle Republican era is anything but simple and obvious, given that the iconographic sources of Roman origin of the period are decidedly scarce: tomb frescoes are very rare, almost non-existent other types of pictorial works useful for reconstructing their decorative and chromatic aspect.

However, it is not completely impossible to get a plausible idea of the appearance of these shields, using, in addition to the few Roman sources available, the critical comparison with contemporary sources of Hellenistic culture and the interpolation with immediately preceding or subsequent sources. This research originated for a museum reconstruction dating back to 225 BC. circa, which required precisely this diachronic approach for a reconstruction that had the greatest probability of approaching historical reality, with a methodology very similar to that adopted to reconstruct the appearance of a Roman consul at the time of the Second Punic War.

This brief research therefore circumscribes the field to the period included, roughly, between the First Punic War and the Augustan period, regarding the shields usually used by the legionaries, i.e. oblong shields, generally oval, flat or convex, in this later case similar to the famous find from Kasr El Harit (also known as from Fayum).

Fortunately, on an important point the available sources are very much in agreement: the background colour was almost always white or in any case very light in colour.

Samnite warrior from Tomb 16 from the necropolis of San Prisco, Capua (National Archaeological Museum of Naples). 4th-3rd century BC.

Fresco of the funerary stele of Sidon, Istanbul Archaeological Museum, 3rd century BC.

Probably a Gallic warrior from the “Arieti” tomb, Esquiline necropolis, Rome; 3rd century BC.

Detail of the frescoes in the tomb of T. Statilius Taurus, Rome, datable to the end of the 1st century. B.C. It depicts an episode from the epic of Aeneas, (battle scenes between Trojans and Rutuli) with archaic images: in addition to long shields, the warriors use Greek-type swords dating back at least two centuries earlier. National Roman Museum, Rome.

Most likely the reason for this omnipresence of the white background was due to the fact that the materials used to cover the outside of the shields were mainly of a very light natural colour. Hoplitic shields from tombs of the Hellenistic necropolis of Vergina, show two layers of linen glued with pitch and externally coated with a mixture of plaster, white clay and glue, which obtained the result of giving consistency and protection to the fabric covering. Both of these materials, linen and gypsum-based stucco, in nature have a very light colour and very close to white.

Even a possible covering in rawhide (we know for example that Polybius speaks of this material for the shields of the Roman cavalry) or in naturally tanned leather would have had an extremely pale colour (similar to parchment).

Furthermore, one reason to further whiten these materials was certainly the positive value attributed to the high visibility of the shields themselves. In fact, in the ancient type of war, based on pitched battles fought by specially deployed armies, camouflaging had no particular value, on the contrary, the ostentation of showy armaments had an important psychological effect.

Last but not least, in roman culture as in many contemporary others, the white colour had an important religious meaning.

Although many of the shields of which we have colour representations are completely plain and unadorned, we have some suggestions relating to the possible heraldry of the same from another source, unfortunately, however, achromatic: coinage.

The symbol of the thunderbolt, the weapon of the father of the gods so recurrent on the much more well-known shields of the high empire, is actually a symbol of Hellenistic origin, in use since the third century BC also in the Roman iconography.

Roman Aes Signatum from the first decades of the 3rd century BC with an eagle clutching the thunderbolt.

Triens, Aes grave, 280-276 B.C.

Aureus, 208 BC.

Victoriatus, 206-195 BC.

Denarius, 206-195 BC

Quincunx of Larinum. About 210-175 BC The shield is decorated with a thunderbolt, albeit not very legible due to the wear of the coin.

On its actual use as heraldry on shields, a relief from the stele with warrior and shield from Mysia Abbaitis in Phrygia, present-day Turkey, from the second half of the second century BC, testifies it. Despite the consumption, the wings and arrow-headed rays of lightnings can still be distinguished.

Detail of a stele from the Istanbul Museum of the second half of the 2nd century. B.C.

In the 2nd century BC some coins show us the use, for example, of radiated decorations which in all likelihood represent the symbol of the eight-pointed star (a very popular and widespread symbol during the Hellenistic period but also well attested previously), also known from the so-called sword of San Vittore, a Gallic-type sword forged in Rome between the 4th and 3rd centuries BC, and bearing a decoration depicting two eight-pointed stars and an inscription.

The sword of San Vittore, 4th-3rd century BC.

Denarius of T. Deidus (113-112 BC)

Denarius of Q. Minucius Thermus (103 BC.) 

The use of 8-pointed star decoration is also documented in Campania, in the 4th century. BC, it is therefore possible that this type of symbolism was already adopted at least from the third century BC also on the Roman shields.

Lucanian tomb fresco from Paestum, 4th century. BC.

Some coins from the early 1st century BC show a very simple decoration, which could perhaps be traced back to a very simplified representation of the winged thunderbolt. In fact, the representation shows us a divinity, Juno Sospita, one of the Roman divinities who was recognized the prerogative of hurling lightning: the religious symbolic role of the shield is evident, since it is depicted with the shape of the sacred ancile (the magical shield fallen from heaven at the time of Numa Pompilius).

Denarius of L. Procilius, 80 BC.

Denarius of L. Procilius, 80 BC.

This representation, however, immediately recalls one of the few coloured representations that we have, which has a similar decoration, very simple and not traceable to the thunderbolt. This is the depiction of a trophy with shields in the Nilotic-themed mosaic of the Antro delle Sorti, a natural cave near the forum of ancient Praeneste, attributable to Alexandrian artists who made it on site at the end of the second century BC. In view of the chronological proximity, it is very plausible that it was a similar symbol, if not the same.

The motif however shows an evident reference to the much more ancient depictions of the bundle of lightnings, represented on the already seen Roman-Campanian trients of the third century, of which it could ultimately constitute the final stylization.

Nilotic mosaic from Praeneste, late 2nd century. B.C.

Triens, Aes grave, 269-266 BC.

A very similar decorative motif is still used for a shield on one of the metopes of the Munatius Plancus mausoleum in Gaeta. The mausoleum can be dated to the passage between the Cesarian age and the Augustan age. In the Augustan age, beyond the temporal limits observed here, the decorative motifs will vary significantly following a general evolution of Roman figurative art.

As for the colours used for the decorations, being able to rely only on the information available here, we can hypothesize the use of blue and red, which in ancient times were considered the most prestigious and most recurring colours in decorations, since archaic times. In fact, we see in one of the very few depictions of shields decorated in fresco from Pompeii, which, although more recent than the period considered here, proposes shields again with a white background colour, with red and blue decorations; as well as blue are the decorations of the shield in the Nilotic mosaic from Palestrina. In the Pompeian fresco, the interior of one of the shields is also clearly painted blue, like, a couple of centuries later, one of the shields from Dura Europos: the only Roman shields that have survived.

Watercolour reproducing fragments of painting from the portico of the amphitheater and the gladiator armory in Pompeii, 1st cent. A., from Striy. Historic Clothing Studies, n.1 (2019)

Conclusions

In the current state of knowledge, the reconstruction of the appearance of the Roman oblong shields of the Middle Republican period, and of the Hellenistic counterparts, provides for a large prevalence of white or very light-coloured shields, completely plain with no decorations. It is likely that, although in a decidedly minority way, some type of decoration was also applied and, in this case, the most likely decorations would be the following:

• Stylized thunderbolt, with or without wings
• Eight (or more) pointed star (Argead star)
• Geometric rayed symbol
• Geometric symbol “ondulated X”, perhaps an extreme stylization of the thunderbolt.

The colours of the decorations were likely to have been blue and red.

For the inside of the shields, is presumed a light colour like the outside, similar to what is depicted on the Nilotic mosaic, or perhaps an intense blue, as depicted and actually used in later shields. 

Some reconstructive graphical hypotheses are proposed below according to what proposed above.

(and soon, some surprise about these on our website! Stay tuned on our social media pages and check out the “Shield” section of the shop).

Approfondimenti

G. Canestrelli,  A Roma da Cartagine. La spada e lo scudo del legionario repubblicano, 2021 [link al libro]

Jean-Luc Féraud, ‘The Mulis Marianis reenacted’, Ancient Warfare V.1, 2011.

E. Polito, Fulgentibus Armis. Introduzione allo studio dei fregi d’armi antichi, 1998.

Striy. Historic Clothing Studies, n.1 (2019) http://striy.org.ua/index.php/striy/announcement/view/2

http://www.reconstitution-romaine.com/bouclier%20republicain.html