ISSN 0961-3684
("\,J
o
N
JOURNAL OF ROMAN
MILITARY EQUIPMENT
STUDIES
I VOLUME 8 1997 1
Montefortino-type and related helmets
in the Iberian Peninsula:
a study in archaeological context
1
Fernando Quesada Sanz
Over the past few years our knowledge of the 'jockeycap' helmets of Montefortino and related types in the Iberian
Peninsula has been greatly enhanced by the publication of
many catalogues 2 and the discovery of new pieces) An
attempt has also been made in some of the more detailed
works to produce classifications that try to deal with the
problems posed by some types and variants that seem specific to Iberia 4 and are not therefore adequately covered by
existing typologies.
Although much promising work remains to be done in
this 'typological' field, we believe that a parallel analysis of
archaeological and cultural contexts in which the helmets
have been discovered can throw much light, first, on those
very problems of classification, and then, on the much more
ゥューッイエセャョ
matters of cultural intel1Jretation. For example,
the most recent and up-to date attempt at typology (Garcfa
Maurino 1993) has failed to appreciate correctly the differences between knob-helmets of Etrusco-Italic origin and
the so called Buggenum type. This in turn has led to helmets
that are probably of very different date being classified as
the same type (although admittedly different variants). This
has been so partly because the artisanal, non-industrial nature of helmet productionS and the relatively small number of
complete available examples in Iberia, have obscured the
typologicaljinesse. However, the distinction has in this case
an important implication, as the Bugennum type is much
later and thus corresponds to a very different cultural and
historical setting (from the Hannibalic Wars and early
conquest of Hispania to the' Civil Wars).6
In the case of Iberia, also, the correct classification of helmets, taking into account not only the details of manufacture,? but also their archaeological context, is relevant to the
discussion of 'Celtic' or 'La Tene' influences in Iron Age
Spain, and also to the evaluation of the role of Punic armies
and Iberian mercenaries serving under the Carthaginians in
introducing many early examples of helmets in southern
Spain. 8
Thus we shall provide a very schematic layout of the
main existing classifications (Table 1) - we remit for details
to the works cited there, and a also very schematic catalogue
and distribution map (Table II and Figure I), in which helmets from the Balearic Islands or Southern France are not
included. Then we shall go on to discuss helmets and their
archaeological contexts in three different scenarios: the
'Celtic' problem in Spain; the finds of Etrusco-Italic -and
even Latin inscribed helmets- in clearly indigenous
contexts; and the geographical distribution of helmets dated
to the period of the Roman conquest (roughly the second
century BC from c. 195 to 133 BC) and the Civil Wars of the
Later Republic. We should however warn the reader that
many pieces were found in 'uncontrolled' digs many
decades ago, and that unfortunately only vague details about
their general context are known.
MONTEFORTINO HELMETS, RELATED TYPES AND
'CELTS' lN IBERIA
There is no doubt at all that during the Iron Age there
were many Indoeuropean-speaking peoples dwelling in the
Iberian Peninsula, mainly in the Ebro Valley, the Meseta (the
inland central plateau) and the Southwest,9 and we are not
trying to deny what is evident. It has also been long accepted that these Spanish Celts did not share the 'La Tene' cultural complex with Gauls and other European Celts, but that
some elements of La Tene type were imported into Spain,
mainly swords and fibulae; and that these elements were
duly copied, transformed and converted into 'local' types. It
is clear that some of these elements, such as some types of
La Tene fibulae, were adopted by the Iberian Culture. Quite
exceptionally, some burials in purely Iberian contexts also
contain Celtic weapons, such as the La Tene sword and
early iron helmet from grave 478 at El Cigarralejo (Murcia), dated to c. 375-350 BC.
We maintain, however (see Quesada 1997a,b forth.) that
JRMES 8, 1997, 151-66
152
Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies 8 1997
. " ...
'
セ
MGセ N L
.
セ
6
MONTEFORTINO AND RELATED TYPE HELMETS
IN THE IBERIAN PENINSULA
Fig. 1: General distribution of Montefortino-type and related helmets in the Iberian Peninsula. A non-informative map.
Site numbers refer to Table 11.
'true' La Tene weapons are rare in the Peninsula, even in the
Meseta, and truly exceptional in the Southeast and
Andalusia, the Iberian non-indoeuropean lands.
As it is widely known, research in France, Gennany and
Italy has reached the conclusion that the Montefortino-type
helmets with angled neck-guard and knob at the top are not
really 'Gaulish', but in fact 'Celto-Italic' or 'Italo-Celtic',
and the later versions even 'Etrusco-Italic' (Robinson 1975;
Adam 1986:22 ff.; Schaaffin Antike Helme, 1988; Feugere
1994a passim). However, for a long time nearly all the jockey-cap helmets found in Spain and Portugal, except those
which are obviously Roman, have been considered proof of
Celtic penetration, even in purely 'Iberian' areas, and this
idea still pervades certain circles today, including Gennan as
well as Spanish scholars.
This position was already explicit in the very title of one
of the first catalogues by J.M. B hlzquez (1959-60):
«Unpublished Celtic helmets». Nearly all of the pieces studied in that text are Montefortinos of Etrusco-Italic type, but
they are nevertheless considered proof of a 'Celtism' that -it
was thought-permeated all of Spain, including the Iberian
areas, during the Iron Age (Blazquez 1959-60:382-383).
This idea in turn comes from earlier scholars such as the
influential A. Schulten, the excavator of Num anti a (Schulten
1914,11:224), and H. Sandal'S (1913:73).
Thus, when Abasolo and Perez first published the helmet
from Gorrita in Valladolid (1980), found in a 'Celtic' region
but without precise archaeological context,IO they classified
it as 'Celtic' and postulated that it had been imported by
'continental European trade' (Abasolo, Perez 1980: 114).
However, in 1982 these scholars changed their minds, and in
a new paper the helmet was labelled 'Celto-Italic' (Abasolo,
Perez 1985), and the provenance changed to the Mediterranean world (ibidem, 48), perhaps connected with Carthagi-
Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies 8 /997
HELMETS IN INDIGENOUS CONTEXTS
(MOST IN CEMETERIES)
CELTIC TYPES
•
nian expeditions into the Meseta known from literary
sources. The history of this particular helmet does not end
here, however, because years later a new fragment of the
neck-guard was discovered, and it contained a faded Latin
inscription N.PAQVI (MartIn Valls, Esparza 1989:273).
This. discovery proves that the helmet was in fact Roman,
and should probably be dated to the latter decades of the 2nd
century BC or later, instead of the end of the 3rd.
The find from Alarcos poses a similar problem. P. Mena
and A. Ruiz (1985) still classified as 'Celtic' an EtruscoItalic helmet of type Maurifio la (see Table I for correspondences), found at Alarcos (Ciudad Real, Southern Meseta)
during agricultural work in an area that could be part of the
cemetery of the important settlement nearby (ibid., 635).
The lack of direct archaeological context, and the fact that
the digs at Alarcos have proved that this is a culturally
'Iberian' area (pottery, bronze figures, etc.) did not prevent
the authors publishing the helmet as 'elemento celta' and
considering it proof of strong Celtic influence in Iberian
areas (1985:638). They however tried to reach a -in our opinion- difficult compromise, by stating that «parece que nos
encontramos con una pieza que Ilega a traves de 10s cfrculos
comerciales meditemineos» (p. 639), but also that «la aparicion de este casco hay que ponerla en relacion con la presencia de soldados romanos durante la epoca republicana...
hacia la mitad del s. II a.c.».
The recent investigations mentioned above, and Gorrita's
cautionary tale, might have led other researchers to be less
MQNTEFORnNC
153
Fig. 2: Helmets in indigeIWitS, Iberian Iron Age
archaeological context.
inclined to rashly adscribe any new Montefortino helmet to
Celtic influence, but this has not been so, notably among
certain German scholars. P. Stary (1982 passim and still in
j 994:94-97 and 303 ff.) considers the Knopfhelme proof of
strong La Tene influence not only in Catalonia (where we
would readily agree that the panoply is more La Tene than
Iberian, see Quesada 1997a forth.) but also in the South-East
and other regions. Stary does not make any distinctions
among the different types of helmets with crest- knob (see
Stary j 994, II:4 and Karte 3), and seems to consider all of
them to be Celtic except those at Alcaracejos, Lanhoso and
Quintana Redonda (1982: 118 and 1994:95). As he believes
that Etruscans and Romans also adopted this type of helmet
from northern Celts (which may well be true), he envisages
a similar process of diffusion from North to South for both
Peninsulae, Italy and Spain, during the fourth century BC
(which is probably wrong). In fact, when we have some sort
of archaeological context for helmets found in Iberian areas,
it is always mid-3rd to mid- [st BC and not earlier.
As recent research by ourselves (Quesada 1989: II, j 620; 1992, 1996) and others (Garcfa Maurifio 1993) has
shown, most Montefortino helmets in the Iberian Peninsula
arrived in Spain from the Mediterranean during the Punic
Wars and during the Roman Conquest. Most of them have
been found in Southeastern Spain, and the concentration of
finds in the Northeast (Stary 1982: 1 j 8) no longer holds
true. lt
It is here that individual analysis pays. In our opinion,
154
Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies 8 1997
HセI
",
H IN ROMAN CONTEXTS
(MOST IN SETIlEMENTS)
MONTEFORTlNO b u g e n u セ
•
only three to six helmets can be considered 'Celtic' with any
certainity: those from Vallfogona de Balaguer in Lerida, Can
Miralles in Barcelona and Cigarralejo in Murcia (fig. 2).
Also, the three helmets from the cemetery of Les Corts at
Ampurias (Gerona, near the French border) might also be
considered 'Celtic' as they were found together with real la
Tene swords and scuta, but these burials have been dated to
the 2nd century BC or early 1st., and they might therefore
also be called 'Roman' (see Table 11 for references) and not
relevant to the discussion of the supposed 'Celtization' of
Iberia.
The helmets from Vallfogona and Can Miralles (see
Table 11 for details and fig. 7 for illustration) were found
associated with other objects of La Tene type, such as
swords with iron scabbards and suspension loops; Catalonia
is quite close to southern France -the Pyrenees not being a
real obstacle along the Mediterranean coast, and there was
certainly a close relationship with Southern Gaul in many
fields of material culture from the 6th century BC onwards.
Both helmets are forged in iron -which is very rare in Spain,
and show certain manufacturing and decorative details (such
as the independent and riveted neck-guard of Vallfogonas's
piece and the decorated cheek-guard of the one from Can
Miralles) that are completely absent in the rest of the
Peninsula. The Vallfogona helmet, as well as the long La
Tene I sword found with it, is probably earlier, dating to the
4th or early 3rd century BC. The helmet from Can Miralles,
found in grave pit 24, can be confidently dated to c, 225-175
BC, that is, during the Second Punic War or the great rebellion against Roman rule of 195 BC.
1
Fig. 3: Helmets in Roman
archaeological contexts.
The iron helmet found in grave 478 at El Cigarralejo is
another rare piece (Plate I). It has an hemispherical bowl,
incipient neck-guard, no cheek-pieces and 'no knob. Badly
preserved and heavily restored, it could be taken as an
example of a 'heavy' Coolus type of Caesarian date ...
(Feugere 1994:41 ft. for details) had it not been found in a
burial dated by other elements to the first half of the fourth
century BC. These materials among the grave goods include Attic black glaze pottery decorated with linked palmettes,
a 'ritual brazier' (bronze plate used for libations), bronze
situla, horse-bit, falcata, soliferreum, Iberian pottery, etc.,
all consistent with a 375-350 BC date. The buriai was excavated in well controlled conditions, With a maximum diameter of 22.5 cm, front to back, and 20,5 from side to side,
and a height of 15.5 cm" it is of normal size, but exceptionally heavy. As it has been very restored, it is possible that
it had a hole in the upper part of the bowl for an additional
piece, and that it can be classified with hemispherical helmets with incipient neck-guards of the early La Tene type
(Schaaff, 1988b:295 ss.; (see Tables I-U), and is probably
the only 'Celtic' helmet of such an early date in Iberia, Some
doubt still persists, however.
HELMETS IN IBERIAN 'INDIGENOUS' CONTEXTS
(fig. 2)
The pieces of head-armour described above have all been
found in 'Iberian' indigenous contexts, This is also the case
of about 30 helmets (or nearly 50% of the total) of EtruscoItalic type, that is, 'real Montefortino' helmets. Many of
Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies 8 1997
GALLAIC 'NPE.
セ
155
Fig. 4: Helmets of local
production, probably of
Augustan date.
セ
them do not have a precise archaeological context, coming
as they do from old archaeological excavations or casual
finds in Iberian sites, but there are enough that dO l2 to prove
that nearly all of them should be dated to the final decades
of the 3rd and the whole of the 2nd century BC. Only helmets from Galera in Granada could perhaps be earlier, but
the complete looting of the site by robbers during the early
years of this century left only meagre remains for the later
archaeologists. Thus the broad cultural setting is that of the
Hannibalic War and the early phases of the Roman
conquest.
It is significant that -except for the three helmets from
Les Corts in Ampurias- nearly all of these helmets come
from cemeteries in Alicante, Murcia, Albacete and Eastern
Andalusia, this is to say, the nuclei of the Iberian culture,
Contestania and Bastetania. No helmets in this category are
known from the Meseta, except for the dubious piece from
la Osera 201, a site that in any case has strong connections
with the Iberian South-East, as the finds from burial 350
have proved (Quesada 1989,II:22).
These above-mentioned regions, ruled from the 4th to
2nd centuries BC by monarchs and chiefs of different kinds
and strenghts, supported by strong warrior clientelae, have
yielded big cemeteries with up to 600 cremation graves
containing rich grave goods. About 30% of them -on average- contain weapons, a very high proportion. It should be
noted that the presence of helmets proves to be, in this
context, a very rare, almost exceptional occurrence. Some
sites, such as El Cigarralejo, have produced only two metallic helmets out of 600 graves, and the important site at
Cabezo Lucero, with 100 burials, has not produced a single
piece. Admittedly, these are early, 5th-4th century sites, but
cemeteries with a stronger representation of the later periods, such as Cabecico del Tesoro (fig. 7, Plates 6-7), present
the same pattern of about one metallic helmet for every 50
or so graves with weapons. This scarcity of head armour
means in turn two things: that other types of helmet made of
organic materials such as sinew and leather were far commoner (and this is confirmed by literary as well as iconographic sources); and that Montefortino-helmets were
imported and not locally produced.
It has been held (Garcfa Maurifio 1993: 139) that, given
their scarcity, Montefortino helmets must have been a status
and/or wealth symbol among Iberian warriors. This is however not completely supported by the available evidence.
True, some helmets have been found in very important
chamber tombs at Toya, Galera 0 Castellones de Ceal in
Andalucia; but they have also been discovered in modest
burials than cannot be counted among the richest in their
respective cemeteries; this is the case of the two pieces at
Cabecico del Tesoro (Quesada 1989), or of helmets from
Castellones de Ceal (Jaen) or Les Corts (Em porion, Gerona). At the same time, there are very rich graves with weapons that do not contain any bronze head-armour.
It seems that the occurrence of Montefortino helmets in
certain tombs has much to do with individual experiences.
Some of them might have been purchased in coastal sites
such as Los Nietos in MUl'cia, but it is quite probable that
most belonged to mercenaries or allies -officers as well as
common soldiers- fighting under Carthaginian standards. It
156
Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies 8 J997
a
c
d
b
Fig. 5: Montefortino-type helmets in Jberian pottery of the
_ late third/early second centuries BC a. San Miguel de
Lliria; b. Castillo del Rio.; c-d. La Alcudia de Elche.
may be significant in this context that Villaricos, a Punic
coastal site in Almerfa whose cemetery contains Semitic as
well as Iberian graves, and that was probably an important
recruiting centre for Punic generals (see Quesada
1994:204), has produced no less that six helmets (mostly
badly corroded fragments).
Other helmets are probably booty or weapons captured
from the Romans. We know, for example, that Hannibal reequippped some of his troops with Roman weapons after
Trasimene and Cannae (Polybius, 3,87,3; 3,114,1; 18,28,9;
Livy, 28,46,4),13 but the occasional acquisition of individual
pieces in oher operational theaters was surely also common.
It is perhaps in this context that we should interpret the
helmet from cremation F4/2 at Pozo Moro (fig. 6). This
grave contained some pottery bowls, an Attic black-glaze
kantharos well dated to c. 375-350 BC, an Iberian brooch of
the 'anular de timbal' type, and a complete set of weapons
including Iberian falcata, spearhead and butt, one or two
javelins, a big hand grip for a round shield, a bronze helmet,
a bent La Tene type sword without its scabbard, an element
of a La Tene bivalve umbo, and some other minor metal
objects. All these grave goods could be consistent with a 4th
century date, except for the helmet and probably the la Tene
sword. The absence of the scabbard deprives us of the best
chronological indicator; the sword itself is 72.5 cm. long.;
the blade is 62.5 cm. long with plain, rounded shoulders and
parallel edges and a short point, apparently rounded (it is
badly corroded); it has no midrib. The iron shield boss, also
fragmented and incomplete, forms part of a long bivalve
piece, usually dated to the 4th century BC (Rapin 1983-84)
but also found in much later, 2nd century contexts 14 In all,
this grave would appear to be the mid-4th century burial of
an Iberian warrior with a set of 'captured/traded Celtic weapons'. However, the helmet poses a particular problem
(Garcfa Maurino 1993: 116; de HOl 1994); in our opinion, it
is much later, ans chould be dated to the later stages of the
Second Punic War at the earliest.
The helmet belongs to G31Tia Maurino's type la, a version of Russell Robinson's B quite common in Spain, with
a lot of punched and incised decoration on the rim and neckguard. It has holes for cheek-guards, an iron ring at the back
for chin-straps and decorated knob. But it also has a punched Latin inscription which reads 'MVLUS' on the inner
part of the neck-guard, probably the property-mark of the
original owner of the helmet, an Italian. The inscription has
been recently studied by J. de Hoz, who accepts the 4th century date given by the Greek import and maintained by the
excavator, and strives hard to find 4th century parallels for
the -VS termination instead of the more common -OS,
dominant until the first years of the 2nd century BC (Hoz
1994:226): De Hoz finally concludes that the owner could
have been an Iberian mercenary fighting in Sicily during the
fourth century BC who obtained the helmet there (see
Quesada, 1994 for a detailed list of sources on Iberian mercenaries).
However, apart from the general late typology of the helmet, there is also another sign that this piece should probably be dated to the early decades of the second century BC.
On the neck-guard there is a punched decoration with waves
which fits neatly in the 'Wellenranke' decoration category in
U. Schaaff's scheme (Schaaff 1988:318 ff.), typical of the
2nd-1 st centuries BC. The absence of cheek-guards leaves
us without an interesting additional diagnostic element. It
must be noticed that no cheek-guards have been discovered
in helmets found in Iberian burials, just as if Iberian users
discarded them as inconvenient or useless.
In all, the ephigraphical difficulty described above, the
decoration and shape of the helmet, and the even more surprising appearance of a supposedly 4th century Italic helmet
in an Iberian burial even before the spread of this particular
rvpe of helmet in Jtaly, l.' demands an alternative explanation, although a mid-fourth century date could be just barely possible. This could be that the grave is in fact an early
Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies 8 /997
157
...sL
'!J':
Nセ
.
.... :;
','
MNセ
3
セN[M
セ セェ[ LQmB
2
2
Fig. 6: Helmets from Pozo Moro (left) and Quintana Redonda (right).
2nd century one in which an Iberian was buried with a set of
captured enemy weapons (helmet, shield and sword of perhaps a Roman auxilia) and his own (falcata, spearhead,
Iberian round shield). The presence of a much earlier Greek
vessel is not at all a rare occurence in Iberian burials; there
are some documented cases of 4th century Attic black-glaze
pottery found with 2nd century BC Campanian A ware in
closed contexts (Quesada, in prep.).
It may seem surprising that very few helmets in this 'indigenous' group have been found in sanctuaries (only the terminal knob from Collado de los Jardines belongs to this
category), but in fact very few Iberian weapons of any type
have been documented in temples or sanctuaries. It seems
that it was simply not an Iberian custom to deposit weapons
in these contexts, while about 30% of burials in cemeteries
do contain weapons. 16
Iconography also plays a part in this study. Iberian helmets are carved in Iberian sculptures from the beginning of
the Sth century BC onwards; these are helmets of Greek inspiration but local manufacture and tradition. During the 4th3th centuries BC helmets are as rare in art as they are in
burials, and most of them seem to have been leather helmets
sometimes reinforced and decorated with metal elements
and crests. such as the piece found in Grave 277 at
Cigarralejo (Cuadrado 1989). It is only during the late 3rd
and 2nd centuries BC that helmets were more frequently
depicted on decorated vases of the Liria style (fig. S), and
many of these are clearly Montefortino helmets, the same
types that the artisans could see in the Roman, Carthaginian
and Iberian armies that during these very years were marching up and down the Iberian coast, from Tarraco to
Carthago Nova. These helmets are also sometimes worn by
the horsemen represented in Iberian coins, usually dated to
the second century BC and laterl ?
HELMETS AND THE ROMAN ARMY (fig. 3)
The third group of helmets according to context and type
comprises those pieces whose context is not indigenous, as
in the previous two groups, but rather 'Roman'. In fact, they
can be divided into two sub-groups according to type (figs.
3 and 8). The first is that of 'Montefortino' helmets very
Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies 81997
158
B
A
セ
セ
Cabedco del Teso,o (Mu,da)
La Podrera (Vallfogona de Balaguer. L6rida)
Pozo Moro (Albacete)
Castallones de CNI (Ja6n)
Can Mlralles (Barcelona)
D
c
Castelo d. A1jezur (Algarve, Portugal)
A1caracejos (C6rdoba)
Quintana Redonda (Soria)
Vaiamonde (Alemlejo)
pNセ。ウ
E
Bartlad.. (CasteIl6n)
MONTEFORTINQ-TYPE AND RELATED
HELMETS IN IRON AGE IBERIA.
A SAMPLE OF TYPES AND CONTEXTS.
A. CELTIC TYPE HELMETS. IRON. CATALONIA
B. MONTEFORTINOS IN IBERIAN BURIALS.
C. ROMAN. LATE 3rd-EARLY 2nd. centuries BC
O. BUGGENUM. Mid·1st century BC.
E. GALICIAN LOCAL TYPE. August.an period.
After various authors
'-=-:to:
Lamoso (Braga, Portugal)
Ca.lelo de Neiva (Portugal)
Fig. 7: Some examples of helmets in the Iberian Peninsula.
Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies 8 1997
similar to the pieces found in Iberian burials and settlements; the second consists of helmets of the Buggenum type,
an evolution of the former but of much later, Caesarian date
(Waurick 1990). It is here that a detailed use of typology
becomes a great ally of context, because many of the later
helmets have often been incorrectly grouped with those of
the early group, thus blurring distribution patterns.
Montefortino helmets: Roman conquest and Sertorian Wars
There are around nine helmets in this group. None of
them, of course, have been found in burials, and none of
them comes from Eastern Andalucfa or the Southeast, where
most helmets of the previous group have been found. Most
come from the Meseta, in the battlegrounds of the Celtiberian Wars of the 2nd century BC; or from the Ebro valley,
where Sertorians fought and died during the first decades of
the 1st century BC. The already cited helmet from Pago de
Gorrita in Valladolid could be, with its Latin inscription
NPAQVI, a good example of the problems posed by these
helmets. In type, it is similar to many dated to late 3rd/early
2nd centuries BC, although there are some minor differences. It is not possible, however, to determine precisely if it is
of that date or much later. Perhaps the helmet from Alarcos
in Ciudad Real has the same origin, but as it was found near
a Iberian site, it is probably better to classify it as 'dubious'.
A couple of Montefortino helmets have been found in
good contexts. The first is the well-preserved helmet from
Quintanas de Gormaz in Soria (fig. 6); it was found around
1868 in a hoard together with two silver cups and over 1300
silver coins from the mint at Os ca in the Pyrenees. Fom its
type and decoration (waves on the neck-guard; scaled knob)
it could perfectly be an early 2nd century helmet. However,
the coins provide a close date in the first half of the first century BC, during the Sertorian Wars. In fact, the helmet may
well be a much earlier piece. It seems clear that Roman soldiers used old helmets until they became unserviceable (see
details and references in Quesada, 1992:68), so we can
expect to find a mixture of brand-new and quite battered
pieces of armour of different styles in military units. The
second well-dated helmet comes from a recent excavation at
Caminreal (Teruel), in the Ebro valley. A plain, rounded
knob of a late type was found with many other weapons and
even a catapult, in the Hellenistic-style house of an Iberian
Romanized notable called Likine The house and its contents
have been closely dated to c. 80-70 BC, during the Sertorian
wars (Vicente et al. 1991:passim and p. 116).
Another interesting group of three helmets was found
underwater at the ancient anchorage at Piedras Barbadas
(Benicarl6, Caste1l6n). Only one of the three helmets has
been published in detail (OliveI' 1987-88), but it seems to be
a Maurifio's Type la helmet (fig. 8), in association with a
probably later lb and another iron helmet. The place has also
yielded other Roman materials, such as anchors, amphorae
159
and a stone mill. Although it has been suggested that these
helmets might have been deposited as part of a ritual action
(OliveI' 1987-88 :211), it seems to us more likely that this
was probably a disembarkation point for Roman reinforcements during the last years of the Second Punic Wars and
later campaigns.
Buggenum-type helmets
As we mentioned in the opening paragraphs of this paper,
the Buggenum-type helmets have been often confused with
Montefortino types. In fact, as Feugere has remarked (1993,
1994), they are of Caesarian, mid-I st century BC date, derived from the earlier Etrusco-Celto-Italic types, but simplified in manufacture and decoration, which is scarce or nonexistent.
This type can be matched with type C -and some D's -in
Robinson's classification. All of Type II and some Ib's and
rc's in Garcfa Maurifio's typology belong to this group (see
Table I).18
All helmets of this type in the Iberian Peninsula have
been found in the Southwestern areas (Spanish Extremadura
and Southern Portugal) or in the Ebro Valley. In the first area
we can count the helmets from Castelo de Aljezur in
Algarve, Cabezo de Vaiamonde in Alemtejo,19 Lacimurga in
Badajoz, and perhaps also Mesas do Castelinho in Beja (see
fig. 8 for some examples, and Table II for details). In the
Ebro Valley the helmet from Piquete de la Atalaya (near
Botorrita in Zaragoza) also belongs to this type 20 The helmet from Alcaracejos, although apparently found in an odd
context (a mine shaft in Cordoba) during the last few years
of the 19th century, also belongs to this group on the basis
of its type.
Local productions of the (pre-)Augustan era in Galicia
and northern Portugal (fig. 4)
A total of five helmets (Type Garcfa Maurifio Ill) form
this group. They are undoubtedly indigenous, GalJaic or
Lusitanian productions based on Montefortino and/or
Buggenum models in the Roman army, and have long been
recognized as imitations (Garcfa Maurifio 1993 for references; also Feugere 1994:41). All of them were found in a
small area of northern Portugal and Gal icia; four of them in
castros and one while dredging river Mifi0 21 When there is
some associated material, it points to the second half of the
1st century BC. Typologically they are very distinctive, with
a long pointed and very decorated knob, conical bowl and
heavy cabled and incised decoration on the rim and neckguard (see fig. 7).
CONCLUSION (fig. 8)
Although there are many individual cases, the overall
pattern seems reasonably clear: there are four big groups of
160
Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies 8 1997
OALLAIC TYPE
セ
セ
HELMETS IN INDIGENOUS CONTEXTS.
(MOST IN CEMETERIES)
C:Fl:IC TYPES
(
Nセ
INSUFFICENT DATA
)
monMイefセョ
• ••
•
3+
Fig. 8: Geographical
distribution of helmets in the Iberian
Peninsula according
to type and context.
Montefortino-type and related helmets to be considered, and
a fifth 'we don't know' group:
1. A very small number (about 5%) of 'real' Celtic helmets, found mainly in Catalonia (Vallfogona, Can Miralles,
possibly Ampurias) but also in MUl'cia (Cigarralejo, grave
478); these are early, and date to the fourth and third centuries BC. All these helmets belong to different types, All of
them come from indigenous, Iberian graves. No comparable
specimens have been found in Celtiberian contexts, where
helmets of any type are very rare.
2. Helmets dated to the second half of the 3rd century BC
or to the first decades of the 2nd, and found in indigenous
contexts. This is by far the biggest group, with 30 pieces
(49%). Most helmets are of types la and lb in the classification by Garcia Maurifio (mostly B and some A in
Robinson's). Many of them come from the Southeast and
Eastern Andalucia, and have been found in cemeteries
(Galera, Cabecico del Tesoro, Hoya de Santa Ana, Pow
Pi. 1: Cigarralejo (Murcia). Grave 478. 4th century BC
Iron,
PI. 2: Helmet from Almaciles (Granada)
161
Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies 8 1997
---
-
----
- - - -
PI. 3: Almaciles (Granada). Detail of decoration on neckguard. Perhaps this is original decoration.
Moro, Villaricos, etc.), usually in warrior's graves. We
believe them to be helmets of Italic origin, used during the
Punic Wars by Roman and Carthaginian soldiers, and by
Romans and their allies during the early phases of the occupation of Iberia. This armour ended up in Iberian burials for
a number of reasons: booty (the helmet with latin inscription
from Pozo Moro in Albacete perhaps falls into this category), equipment distributed to Iberian soldiers under
Carthaginian flags or purchased by them ... , even perhaps
trade.
These elements of armour have been found in very
important tombs (such as the ashlar-built chamber tombs at
Toya and Castellones, or the rich grave 4F-2 at Pozo Moro),
but also in more modest graves (such as Cabecico del Tesoro
428).
3. The third group is that of helmets found in Roman
contexts. They can be dated from the early 2nd to mid-1st
PI. 5: Helmet from Castellones de Ceal, Jaen (1955 digs).
As most helmets in Iberian burials, it was deliberately
damaged during the burial rites.
PI. 4: Almaciles. Detail of incised linear decoration. Note
the low quality of workmanship.
•
.
'-"
PI. 6: Cabecico del Tesoro, Murcia. Grave 428.Neck-guard.
Intentionally damaged during burial. Notice crude and reused iron rings for chin-strap.
PI. 7: Detail of neck-guard decoration. Cabecico del Tesoro
sep.428.
162
Journal of Roman Milital)' Equipment Studies 8 1997
Garcfa
Mauriiio
(1993)
R. Robinson
(1975)
Abbolo y pセイ・ャ
(1980)
Lenerz de Wilde
(1991:179)
fオァセイ\
(1994a.b)
Cuadrado
Slary
(1989)
(1994)
Knopfbelme eehic type,
Only two definite ex.ampLes at VaUfogona de Balaguer and Can MiraUes.
A.Independent
neck·guard.
la
B
Variant of
Robinsoo's Type 8
B. Conical bowl,
crest knob. integral neck guard
and cheek-guards
Characteristics &. comments
Hemisphencal/bulboll.O; bowl..
with perforation for chio-straps.
Sloped 、イ。オァセォ」・d
Solid crest knob with hole for crest-pin. forged iD ODe wil.h the bowl and decorated wilb a
scale pattern..
Cheek-guards (often lost). Thick lower rim. decorated with a cabled paacen..
Rich incised and punched decoration in neck-guard and lower pan of the bowl. Waves are a
frequent motif on neck-guard.
This is by far the most commOn type in Iberia (at least 14 examples)
Etrusco-itatiques
Aboulon sommi·
lal.
Ib
A
Similar. Cresl knob usually plain. of spherical or hemispberieal shape. Simplified deco{"3tiOl
on neck-guard. Some ex.amples in lhis type may iD fact be of 'Buggenum' type. as any of
them have hollow knobs (Galcra. Lacimurga)
le
B
Crest knob in the shape of a truncated cone. No decoration. ex.cept simple cabled decoratioI
on lower rim.
Il
C-D
111
Varios
Buggennum
Conical bowl.
Neck-guard nearly al right angles with bowl.
Scarce or nO decoration.
Hollow crest-knob.
lmilalions
lwitanieones
Conical bowl.
Conical crest-knob, without perforation for crest.
Rich decoralion of distinctive pal1ern.
'Bits and pieces'.
C.Badly pr<ser·
ved.
'Cigarralejo'
In fact a La Tene I iron helmel. Hemispherical bowl wilh incipient neck guard and no check
guards & nO koob. Of Diimber2-Bockweiler type.
Table I: Correspondence of main typologies.
century BC, and can be further sub-divided into two groups
according to place of find (land or underwater) or according
to type and date. The second option is much to be preferred.
These helmets are usually later that those from group 2, but
there is a noticeable overlap in the 2nd century BC. From
the point of view of typology, it is not possible to differenciate them, as they have exactly the same origin.
3.a. Montefortino types (Garcia Mauriiio's la and some
Ib and le; Robinson's A and B). Dated from c. 220 to c,,70
BC. No clear-cut line of evolution is evident, as some heavily decorated types also appear in late contexts, such as the
helmet from Quintana Redonda (Sertorian Civil Wars, c. 80
BC), or the two knobs from Fosos de Bayona, dated to the
2nd. century BC by the excavators but perhaps from
Sertorian times. They are mostly found in settlements
(Gorrita) or directly in houses (La Caridad, type Ic, very
late, dated to c. 70 BC). A single piece (lost) was found in a
deposit, together with gladii hispanienses and scuta, perhaps with ritual significance (La Azucarera). A sub-group
within this category consists of the helmets from the anchorage at Piedras Barbadas in Benicarl6 (CasteII6n), a probable disembarkation point for Roman reinforcements
during the last years of the Second Punic War and later campaigns.
3.b. Buggenum or Robinson's C and D (Garcfa
Mauriiio's II and probably some Ib and le). Dated to
Caesarian times (mid- Ist century BC). Usually without pre-
cise archaeological contexts. Most in castros in Western
Spain and Portugal (Castelo de Aljezur in Algarve, Southern
Portugal; Vaiamonde, Alemtejo; probably also Lacimurga,
Badajoz and Mesas do Castelinho, Beja) or in the Ebro valley, scenario of many Caesarian actions (Piquete de la
Atalaya, Zaragoza). None of them were found in graves or
in the Southeast.
4. The fourth group is very compact in the appearance,
date and geographical distribution of its components. It
consists of five helmets found in Galicia and northern
Portugal (Briteiros, C. de Tuy, Castelo de Neiva (x2) and
Lanhoso). These pieces of armour belong to Garcia
Mauriiios' type Ill, and probably date to the second half of
the 1st century BC. Four of them were found in castros, and
one in the river Miiio, but there is only a good archaeologial
context for the Castelo de Neiva helmets, which can be
dated with some confidence to the early Augustan period.
5. As we have seen, some helmets of types Mauriiio la
and Ib have been found either in 'Iberian' or 'Roman'
contexts, with different cultural and sometimes also chronological implications. This is to say that any helmet of these
types without a context cannot be confidently placed in
either group 2 or 3, and must be placed in an 'Indetenninate'
category. This is the case of the pieces from Alarcos (Ciudad
Real), Cola de Zama (Albacete), Osca, and even perhaps
those from the sanctuary at Collado de los Jardines (Jaen).
163
Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies 8 i997
,IT[
GRAVE
210 Al.ARCOS
20 AlCARACEJOS
""(1.11
TVI'(
TYP[(G.H.lOA.T£
MUS. C!UDAD REAl
.ltJHHFORTINO A
I.
\/2 S. 1I A.C. ?
CAS!CIA 1\4IJW+o{J99J:99 Y FIG.2UIHIA.RUllll987>
lJ{SCOJ(J(;IOO
If.)!r(TUORl)SO C/8lXiG[:llti
11
11
SIN QATOS
IXTNgif SQY サsa oセ
"
SIN DAIOS
S. !) A.C.?
ArRIAN(l976:4}. F1G.2SF Y lNtnXIJJl
or
204 AlJElUR
HUS. REG.
438 AlHACIL[S
11U5. /'tJII.CIA
227 AlTO (flACON
HUS£O
.49 CABEC1CO DEL TESORO
42S
i.'?
i.?
I1IJS.MURCIA.146/1
VAA. /'(JIflEFGfl.T1HO
III
,'(lNTF:FQRT1NO
I.
J5 CAST[LlOItES OE CEA!..
21
7
3S CASlHLOHES OE CfAl
418
50 CIGARAALEJO
4 I COllAOO JARO' NE S
214 FOSOS OC IIAYOAA
88 LA SERRETA
J
AL(QY N
17.!i
19 セN
25.9
HUSEO OE COHlt'BRlGA
YAR. totDNTEFORTlND 8-C
t(JHT[Foo.TINO
III
212s. I a.c.
FERREJRA(l9BO).GAACIA KAURINO(\993:112 Y FIG.241
21.1
24.5
28.5
JA('
F[Il1WID[Z OHCAQ:RQ( 1956: 113) .GAACIA tlAUil:INo( 1993'105)
JA('
!'(lt4T[FOOTlMO B
le
IlP1os. s· I11 ?
5.111-11 d.e.
IWi
,I()NTEFOiHJHO?
,BOOO£ILER? NO I"ONTIFORlltiO
ss. v-lIt
-315/-350
INEOnO
CUADRAOO( 1989: 111.F IG.52)
2.1.5
20.5
15.5
I()NT[FORTINO a
s1n ddtos
GAAClA ッrャエ[uaセ
23.<
12
1.
178 LAS COOTS
17B LAS (ORTS
110
31
7
NI(IO( 19J9·40:l.J1.,29) .QI.£5.ADA( 198<1d: \IOl. 11 :2J6-2J8.245-ss.199)
A!lASCl.O.PEREl0980: 105) .GAACIA TsᄋjUZVXYャHセQ
COfl 8181...) 31
(I993:105LA8ASCAL. SANZ GAKl(l993:1i2)
QTIfORTlMO
"
1"O.IITEFOlHINO
I.
S. II A.C.
l'()NTEFOil.TINO
le
S. I A.C.?
Cl r. GRAS.MEItA. VELASCO( 1984 :53) .GARC1A ヲoセiNャjam
t()HT[FORTlNO
s.vI-II aC.
GAACIA KAURlNo(1993:106)
I'(lHT[FQRTIHO
ID
1b
I1JHlEFORll1lO
1b
s.vl·1! d.e.
I1JN1EFORT1NO
ID
s.vI·II a.C.
GAACIA HAlJl.lilo (1986:52)
s. VI-II o.e.
GAAC!A KAURIRO( 1986:99l.CA8RE Y セtosHャYRPZSQI
セjUOPWQY j
l'Hlv. 8AACElONA.
I1JNTHORTINO C
ALBAC(TE.2108
t()NT[FORlINO 8
ALIlAa:T[.2269
I'(lHT[FORTlNO ?
ALaACETE.2305
I()HlEFQRTlNO?
P(ROIOO
ohャtrohtセ
SIN
セota
Cl T. GRAS.HEIlA. VELASCO( 1964 :53) .GAACIA HAlRlllOf 1993: 106)
<t.e.
. . 1-11
I.
Ib
t«:IHT[flJRllNO
le
GA,QCIA KAURIRo0986: 102>.CA6R.E Y セtosHャYLZSI
HAlOOUER(987)
s. II d.C."'!
QセLャcivッNs
VldL/ld.L
8UUIQVEZ0986:16J7 y 949 95])
V!a.G./ld.C.
bセahqiォャH
s. I o.C.:
IRIAQ,TE [ l Al.<I996: 17" y182)
J IH. NャZSセQH
IX) .G' Hセjuah
1986: 15) ヲzHuoセaNiX
1990)
1986:965·969)
!IiEQ. CII. V!C[H11 ET At .(l'J91: U6>.GARCIA MAIJWlOCl993:1091
C.1SAC.
C.A8RLCMWE or t(JR-Vl(l9J3:4I. lAt'l. vJ).sm..lE(l969:l.120
_onitrofャtセjHG
MUS. L(RIOA L·8BO
SIMILAR AL
HJIS. AlCllI
,l{»>TEFORTlND
CGl. P.a..QTlaJlAA
K)HTUORTlHD C
Ib·11
VAA. K}Nf(FORTlNO 8·C
III
"S.
I'fJWITFORTINl) 8
I.
-200/·150
ID
s.II-1
WIOS. s. 11 d.e.
ALMAGR.O(lIf55.FJG.Z5Jl GAACJA IWJRUiO{l993:110 CCN BJBL.)
Ib
JJ
c.7550aC.'
F(RRElRA(l992:l) y 25).
HUS. ,6JolPURIAS
ItoO
irof{BIセ
l'\ONT[FQR1JI()
HUS. MPUR1AS
ttll{f[FORTlNO B
1fJS. N1PlJl.1AS
'37 /i:SAS 00 CASTElINl-O
SlXUtlNUi/f1JNIEfORTlNO
c·o ?
CELllCO
IV· IJJ A.C.?
JV-JlJ A.C. ?
"
1l1·ld.L
1I·ld.C.
I A.C. ?
l2)
SC!"Iji..E0969:Tdf.18a) PITA HERCE(l975:92l.
KAURln01l993:109 Y FIG:19)
ALKAGRO B.A.SOHI955.J.5<l).GARCIA MAIJl.IIlOCI993:111 CON BI8L.)
AlJV,GRO( 1955:FIG.?15.5) aicセNg
SIN OATQS
CJ I. POR GAACIA Hoセiruaゥ
'vARIOS'
s.II·ld.C.
ABASOLO. PfREZ( 1980.19851. VN.LS. ESPARl.M 1992: 273) .G'MAUR..IKo
136 PIEORAS BARB,01DAS
m...
t()Hl(FORTINO
s. III
136. PIEORAS BAABAOAS
136 P[EORAS BAABADAS
MUSEO DE BOUCARlO
MUSEO OE 8tNtCARlO
"
443 PIQUET[ DE LA ATAlAYA
11 POZO ",,"0
m
ZAAN1JZA.83/43/1
4F-2
QUINTANA RfOONOA
c.w.RA
48 vlllAAICOS
560,,1{)
48 VIllAAICOS
ACRDP.
I.
1993: 113)
OLlV[R<l987·88:106-9>.GAA.CIA ioZjY HoセirNjaQi
13
20.1
2&
22.&
OL IVER( 1987 -88: 209·2101.GAACJA MAUR IiK>( 1993: 101)
20.8
IJ
SIN OATOS
REAl ACA[lEHIA OE LA I1ISTORIA
onjtrohtセ
,.
500/+100
S. IA.C.
BRONCES RiJiANOS( 1990: 201 1.GAACIA Hoセiruaゥ
1993: 114)
GAIl.CIA y 8.Cl980:65l.GAACIA MAURINO<l986:11-131.ann994l
20 .•
I.
26.\
n.3
IU
19.3
18.8
IB.4
19
lB.5
17
tofTEFORTlNO 1.·8
Id-b
SIN DATOS
CAIlR( CAlAC[1TE?
o"OHT[FOIlTIHO
CrS.IIEROS( 1919)CABRE( 1925: la) .GARC lA
/"ONTEFORTINO
INOET.
'vARIOS'
s,. V·I! a.C.
I'\A,II COL. ROON PULlOO
ss. IV·II d.C.
CA8R.E(l925:27l.GAACIA YWZVX QHoセiruak
M. ETllOL. AlENf(JO
t1JNT(FORTlNO 0
1()NT[FORTltlO
JJ
S.II-IA.C.
VASCOtlL (1929: 183. FIG.53LGARC1A I1MJl.lnDn993: 120 '( FIG.JJ)
aセャ N uci YU Zョ
'A'
IWi ,
/iONTEFORllNO 8
I.
HAN.UlJA 2560
I"ONTEFORTINO
I.
ss. VI-IJa.C
GARCIA KAIJl.IRO(I986:43·44)
48 VILLAR1COS
48 VlllAAICOS
HA!!' . CAJA 2560
HAN.UlJA 2560
t()Nl(FCRTlIoiO
I()Hl[FCAT1NO
Ib
ss. VI-Il d.C
VI-1I4.C
GARCIA HAl"UNO( 1986:451
GA.Q,CIA tWJUilOH986:93>
IWl'
K)!'tTEFCiRTlNO
INDET.
1'1·11 d.C
サoセiNャj am
1986:94)
BD CDN BIBL.)
48 vILLAAlCOS
10&1.3
Y FIG.5)
GAACIA KAlR/No (1986:34 -36 CON 8IBL. ) .PASCI)AL< 1991: 181 ·182). 24.B
CABAllOS RLFIIKHt994l
22.9
Nセ
20.S
26
s.III·la.C.
1I·la.C
ss.vI·lld.C
48 \!llLAAICOS
28,,5
s.III·/d.C.
t()1HEFORTINO
C
10
2.
19.5
,l{)NI(FORTlNO
I•
IS
FOlZ.119BO:FG 3l.GARCIA MAUiUR00993: 101 LOL IVfR(l987 ·B5:('07 22
.C.II d.e.
.....
all. PARTlClLAR
442 S. JUA.II AlHAJ..FARAO£
la TOYA
28 TOYA
201 VAI#'(JNTE
IilNTEFORT INO 8
I"ONTEFORllNO
セ
IB.5
HAURINo(1993: lID CON BIBl.)
t()NT(FORTlNOAlB
PARTlCLtAR J. GREQJRI
17
AGUllAA SA[NI ET N.II{199J:J6>.GAACIA HAURINo(l993: 108)
GAACIA Y belャoサ|セVINgaci
HUSEO VALlAlXllIO
I()NTtFOIlllHO
22
INEOIIO
260 PAGl:) O£ GORRI TA
244 05CA
2J7
22.<
GAACIA HAlJtIRo 0993: IOn
SIN QATOS
Fjセ
1993: 106)
CAS.QE '( f'()TOS(l918:501>.GAACIA MAlRISlo(l99J:JOb·I07>
ss. 11'·111 d.L
"
U
CAlVO Y CA8.q( (1917'56). GAACIA MAlIl.1Ao <1986:105).
IW<
206lANl-()SO
178 lAS (ORTS
T FlG.6)
19
I1JHTEFORTIHO ?
434 lACll1URGA
ABASOlO.P£REl( 1981l: 107) .GAAC IA HAlRlIlOO9ra6:8A ·8S.CCH BIBl.1 25.2
CAROOlO(l95J:7151.GARCJA YPjZS YャHoniセaQ
2J
236
,'(lHT[FORTlNO
SUPF.
NIETOC 1939·40:FIG.12lQl.{S!o.OA(1989a:VCt.. I I :236·23B.245ss.155J
PUJOL.ROSflLO (1983:67-71).
T[RLU
0(
19
FERREIRA (I980l.GARCIA HAURlfl(J0993:112 Y FIG.231
27B
76
240 LA PEDRERA
20
SOtAA.C( 1914; 198). GAAClA KAUAlllo( 1993: 100)
PKfS£OO( 1982: 17) .GA.RCIA MAlJl.IAO( 1986:96)
2/2s. I a.C.
43 GAlERA
201
26
VII d·1I1 d.L
c. -400/·300
III
KAN
230 LA CAAIOAO
18
VAR. ,'(lNTEFORTlI\O
HMi 1979170/514
301 LA OSERA 1·11
19
21
,'ruSEO OE CONII'6RIGA
124?
'""
20.2
22S·175a.C.
124?
67 I{)YA OE S. NU.
21.4
2J.S
FIN II·PPIOS I A.L
4J GAlERA
46) LA AlUCARERA
ABASOLO. PfRfZ(l9BO: 106). GARC[A HAURJll(H 199J: 100)
QL.'rSADA(1992)
'VARlOS'
.43 GAlERA
0
32
39
16
14
43 GAlERA
67I{)YAOCS. AAA
671{)YA()[ S.
17.5
1986:64)(OM 8IBll<XlR.
III
FUHDACION ROORlGUEZ AaJSTA
43 GAl.ERA
24.S
.GAACIA Hセiau h
iTAJ..laJ. VAA. IOIITFoo.TlNO
1tIS. CU£NCA
43 GAlERA"'!
HEIGHT
VAR. t()HTEFORTlNO
TVV
214 FOSOS DE BAYOHA
4J GAlERA
111/1.0.
t(JNTEFOiHINO
0(
11US. MATARO. B039
HU.A.515O
AlBAC£T(,5197
72 au [)[ Ul9.
KAX.O.
S. fl-J A.C.?
·225/·l75
·415/ .:;.0
KUSEO Ol0Cf5AHO
S.2.4
205 CASTILO DE N[JVA
3S CASHllON(S O£ a:Al
iJOlITFORT /lrn
J(}!HEfQ.lHlt«l?
AliPU;UAS ?
SjXRTNaQcセNsjヲGッ
208 CAlO£L<S Q( TUY
1S4 CAN HIIW-lES
20S CASTno DE N[JVA
0(
セonitroヲュQIエGjゥ
42 Bill
1'6
I":lHTEFORTiHO A
.'1\jS. T(lI.lH
0.12
175 AliPlJt.IAS
207 BRITEIRQS
49 CAB[C1CO on TISORO
I"OST(Foo.TINOC?f8l.(;(lNLJ1
L.AroS
HAIII REFERENCES
22.7
Y 1lU'l.48.21.GARCIA i"AtJSIlilo<l986:91-92)
SIRElf 1906:lAM.6.42) .GAAC lA MAIJl.IRO( 1986: 22·23).
ASTRUC( 1951;lAM. Ii vャセ
.GAAC lA I1AURIR[){ 1986: 114)
• ..... TOtd1 .....
Table ll: Catalogue of Montefortino-type and related helmets in the Iberian Peninsula (the Balearic islands, a different
cultural context, are excluded).
NOTES
1.
2.
3.
This paper has been prepared wthin the framework of
Research Project PB94/0189 financed by DGICYT.
Notably, Barruol, Sauzade (1972:25 ff.); Abasolo,
Perez (1980); Stary (1982 and 1994,II.2-3), Quesada
(1992:72); Garcfa Maurifio (1993).
Five new entries must be made to the most recent catalogue (Garcfa Maurifio, 1993): A new Montefortino A-
B helmet found in the Iberian cemetery at Almaciles
(Granada) by clandestine diggers and now in the
Museum of Murcia (Quesada, 1992); a Montefortino
A-B helmet dredged from the Guadalquivir river
(Caballos Rufino, 1994); and a fragment -including
the solid knob- of another bronze Montefortino from
the surface layers of the Iberian cemetery at La Serreta
de Alcoy (Alicante): the cemetery is located near the
164
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies 8 1997
enceinte wall and can be dated to the 4th-early 2nd
centuries BC (unpublished, we are grateful to M.
Olcina for showing it to us). Also a knob from Mesas
do Castelinho in Portugal. dated to c. 70-50 BC. Last,
another helmet was found in Alfaro (La Rioja, ancient
Graccurris) in 1969 during a controlled excavation, in
a deposit together with scutum bosses and straight
swords of the gladius hispaniensis type (see Quesada,
1997b forth.). It is lost, and has been published only
recently.
The recent catalogues by Lenerz de Wilde (1991),
Stary (1994) and Feugere (1994a) are only lists, and
contain only a few hints in typological matters on a
non-systematic basis. The most useful attempt is
Garcia Maurino's, but his system is not free of problems (see Table I, type Ib).
No two helmets are exactly alike. So, any classification implies some degree of simplification and personal choice of significant variables in each piece.
As M. Feugere has correctly pointed out (Feugere,
1994a:79-80).
Such as the manufacturing technique of crest-knobs.
The detached ones, riveted to the bowl, are often of
Celtic origin, while those forged in one piece with it
are of Italic origin (see Schaaff, 1981 passim; 1988:
319; also Feugere, 1994:37).
The use of these helmets in Carthaginian armies has
been accepted since Robinson (1975: 13).
E.g. Almagro Gorbea, (1992, 1994); Almagro, Ruiz
(1993); Berrocal (1994), Celtas (1991); Lenerz (1991),
etc.
It was found during surface surveying at Pago de
Gorrita, together with Celtiberian wheel-made sherds
that can be dated from the third century BC down to
the Augustan Era.
M. Lenerz de Wilde has also criticized Stary's approach (notably in Lenerz, 1986.273). Stating that 'seul un
petit nombre [of these helmets] peut etre qualifie avec
certitude comme etant d'ongine celtique». She has
. however included a list of his type 'b' helmets (mixing
Montefortino, Buggenum and local productions together) in her Iberia Celtica (1991:180-181), which
might lead to confusion.
Notably, Castellones de Ceal, chamber tomb;
Cabecico del Tesoro grave 146; Hoya de Santa Ana,
grave '0': Les Corts, graves 7, 31,110. See Table II
for bibliographical references.
Polibyus twice specifies (3,87 and 114) that it was the
Africans who were re-equipped in this way, but this
should not be taken as absolute. Any enterprising individual could easily have equipped himself not only
after the big Roman disasters in Italy and in Spain, but
on many other different occasions.
14.
15.
J 6.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
A very similar piece was found, together with a La
Tene sword and spearhead, at El Hinojal (Arcos de la
Frontera, Cidiz), in a Late Period cemetery dated to
the second century BC (CorlO, 1983: 13; also Stary,
1994:II, 57)
Perhaps we should remember that the origin of this
type of helmet with crest-knob has been dated to c.
350 BC (Adam, 1986:22; Connolly, 1981: 120) or perhaps a bit earlier (Feugere, 1994:37).
The case of helmets from the Balearic Islands is different. Most finds there come from sanctuaries (Garcfa
Maurino, 1993 has collected the available evidence).
See Guadan, 1979:91 for examples. Also Lorrio
(1995) for weapons on Celtiberian coins.
For example, the helmet from Lacimurga and probably
that of Cola de Zama.
Identified personally as such by M. Feugere (pers.
comm.).
It was labelled as 'Montefortino' in its only publication, a plate without study in Los Bronces Romanos:
201.
There is a long tradition dating back to the Bronze Age
of underwater voti ve deposits containing weapons in
rivers throughout Western Spain, so perhaps this is a
votive object. Garcia Maurino is of the same opinion
( 1993: 139).
BIBLIOGRAPHY
ABASOLO, lA.; PEREZ, F. (1980) «El casco celtico de
GOlTita (Valladolid»). Boletfn del Seminario de Arte y
Arqueologfa de Vafladolid, 46, 93-119.
ABASOLO, lA.; PEREZ, F. (1985) «El casco celtoitalico
de Gorrita (Valladolid) y sus paralelos europeos».
COl11wlicaciones at ler Congreso de Historia Mifitar,
11. Zaragoza, 41-55.
ADAM, A.M. (1986) «Emprunts et echanges de certains
types d'armement entre l'Italie et le monde non mediterraneen aux Ve et lYe siecles avant J.-c.». In A.M.
Adam, A. Rouveret, Guerre et societes en ltalie...
Paris, 19-28.
ADAM, A.M.; ROUVERET, A. (1986) Guerre et societes
en ltafie (Ve-1Ve s. avant 1.-C Paris.
ALMAGRO GORBEA, M. (1992) «El origen de los celtas en
la Penfnsula Iberica. Protoceltas y Celtas». Polis 4,5-31.
ALMAGRO GORBEA, M. (1994) «Les mouvements celtiques dans la Peninsule Iberique, une revision critique». In L'Europe celtique du Ve au !fle siecle avant
1. -C, 13-25.
ALMAGRO GORBEA, M.; RUIZ ZAPATERO, G. (eds.)
(1993) Los Celtas: Hispania y Europa. Madrid.
ANTIKE HELME (1988) Antike helme. Handbuch mit
Journal of Roman Militarv Equipmel/t Studies 8 1997
Katalog. (Monogr. RGZM, 14). Mainz.
BARRUOL, G.; SAUZADE, G. (1972) «Une tombe de
guerrier a Saint-Laurent-des-Arbres (Gard). Contribution al' etude des sepu1tures du Ier siecle av. le. dans
la basse vallee du Rhone». Ommaggio a F Benoit, Riv.
Studi Liguri, 35.3, 15-89.
BERROCAL, L (1994) Los pueblos celticos del Suroeste de
la Peninsula Iberica. Madrid.
BLAZQUEZ, lM. (1959-60) «Cascos celtas ineditos. Notas
sobre los cascos hispanicos». Boletin de la Comisi6n
de monumentos de Orense, 20, 371-387.
CELTAS (1991) Los Celtas en la Peninsula Iberica. Revista
de Arqueologfa, numero monogratico. Madrid.
CONNOLLY, P. (1981) Greece and Rome at Wal: London.
CORZO, R. (1983) «Necr6polis iberica y visigoda de El
Hinojal (Arcos)>>. Cauilogo de la Exposici6n Bel/as
Artes 83. Cadiz, p. 13.
CUADRADO, E. (1989) La panoplia iberica de El
Cigarralejo (Mula, Murcia). Murcia.
FEUGERE, M. (1994a) Casques antiques. Les visages de la
guerre, de Myd:nes Cl lafin de I'Empire romain. Paris.
FEUGERE, M. (l994b) «L'equipement militaire d'epoque
republicaine en Gaule». e. van Driel-Murray (ed.),
Military Equipment in context. Proceedings of the
Ninth International Roman Military Equipment
Conference, Leiden, 1994. JRMES 5,3-23.
GARCIA MAURINO, J. (1993) «Los cascos de tipo
Montefortino en la Penfnsula Iberica. Aportaci6n al
estudio del armamento de la II" Edad del Hierro».
Complutum 4,95-146.
GUADAN, A.M. (1979) Las armas en la moneda iberica.
. Madrid.
LENERZ DE WILDE, M. (1986) «Art celtique et armes
iberiques». Revue Aquitania, Supplement 1, 273-280.
LENERZ DE WILDE, M. (1991) Iberia Celtica. Archiiologische zeugnisse Keltischer Kultur auf del' Pyrenaenhalbinsel. Stuttgart.
LORRIO, A. (1995) «El annamento de los Celtfberos a traves de la iconograffa monetal». La Moneda hispanica.
Ciudad y territorio. Anejos de Archivo Espaiiol de
ArqueologfaXIV, 75-80.
QUESADA, F. (1989) Armamento, Guerra y sociedad en la
necr6polis iberica de 'El Cabecico del Tesoro' (Murcia,
Espana). BAR International Series, 502. I-U. Oxford.
QUESADA, F. (1992) «El casco de Almaciles (Granada) y
la cueti6n de 10s caseos de tipo 'Montefortino' en la
Penfnsula Iberica». Verdolay 4, 65-73.
QUESADA. F. (l992b) Arma y simbolo: la falcata iberica.
Alicante.
QUESADA, F. (1994) «Vfas de contacto entre la Magna
Grecia e Iberia la cuesti6n del mercenariado»,
Arqueologfa de la Magna Grecia, Sicilia y la
Penfnsula Iberica, C6rdoba, 191-246.
165
QUESADA, F. (1997) El armamento Iberico. Estudio
tipol6gico, geografico. jill1cional, social i simb61ico de
las armas en la Cllltura Iberica (siglos VI-I a. C.).
Monogr. Instrumentum 3, Montagnac.
QUESADA, F. (1997 forth.) «Patterns of interaction:
'Celtic' and 'Iberian' weapons in Iron Age Spain». W.
Gillies, D. harding & 1. Ralston (eds.), Celtic Connections. Proceeedings of the 10th International Congress
of Celtic Studies, ILEdinburgh.
QUESADA, F. (1997b, forth.) «The gladills hispaniensis».
ROMECX.
RAPIN, A, (1983-84) «L' annement du guerrier celte au 2e
age du fen>. L 'art celtique en Gaule. Exposition 198384,69-79.
ROBINSON, H.R. (1975) The Armour of Imperial Rome.
London.
SANDARS, H. (1913) «The Weapons of the Iberians».
Archaeologia, XXV. Oxford.
SCHAAFF, U. (1974) «Keltische eisenhelme aus
Von"bmischer Zeit». JRGZM 21, 149-204.
SCHAAFF. U. (1981) «Zu den Konischen Helmen mit
Scheitelknauf in Italien». Archiiologisches Korrespondenzblatt 11, 217-221.
SCHAAFF. U. (1988a) «Etruskisch-Rbmische Helme», in
AI/tike Helme, 318-326.
SCHAAFF, U. (l988b) «Keltische Helme». in Antike
Helme.293-317.
SCHULTEN, A. (1914-31) Numantia: Die Ergebnisse der
Ausgrabungel/. I-IV. MLinchen.
STARY, P. (1982) «Keltische Waffen auf der Iberischen
Halbinsel». Madrider Mittteilungen 23, 114-144.
STARY. P. (1986) «Ital ische Helme des I Jahrtausends vor
Christus». 1. Swaddling (ed.), Italian Iron Age Artifacts il/ the British Museum. London, 25-30.
STARY. P. (1994) Zllr Eisenzeitlichen Bebawwnung und
Ka/1/pfesweise allf der 1berischen Halbinsel. I-IL
Berlin.
WAURICK, G. (1990) Helme in Caesars Heet: Mainz.
Individual helmets
ABASCAL. J.M.; SANZ, R (1992) Bronces antiguos del
Mllseo de Albacete. Albacete.
ABASOLO. J A; PEREZ, F. (1980) <<El casco celtico de
Gorrita (Valladolid)>>. Boletfn del Seminario de Arte 'i
Arqueologia de Valladolid, 46, 93-119.
ABASOLO. JA; PEREZ, F (1985) «El casco celtoitalico
de Gorrita (Valladolid) y sus paralelos europeos».
CO/1/unicaciones al 1er Cong reso de Historia Militar,
H. Zaragoza, 41-55.
AGUILAR, A; GUICHARD, P. (1992) «Lacimurga. La ciudad antigua y su entomo». Rev. de Arqueologia, 144,
32-38.
166
Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies 8 1997
ALMAGRO BASCH, M. (1955) Las necropolis de Ampurias 11. Necropolis romanas y necropolis indigenas.
Barcelona.
ALMEIDA, CA FERREIRA (1980) «Importantes objetos
em bronze de Castelo dre Neiva». Gallaecia 6, 245-255.
ASTRUC, M. (1951) La necropolis de Villaricos. Informes
y Memorias de la CGEA, 25. Madrid.
ATRIAN, P. (1976) El yacimiento iberico de 'El Alto
Chacon (Teruel)'. Excavaciones Arqueol6gicas en
Espana, 92. Madrid.
BLANQUEZ, 1. (1986) El proceso de lberizacion en el
Sureste de la Meseta. Madrid.
BLAZQUEZ, J.M. (1959-60) «Caseos celtas ineditos. Notas
sobre los cascos hispanicos». Boletin de la Comision
de monumentos de Orense, 20, 371-387
BRONCES ROMANOS (1990) Los Bronces Romanos en
Espafia. Catdlogo de la Exposicion. Madrid.
CABALLOS RUFINO, A. (1994) «Un casco Montefortino
hall ado en el Guadalquivir». Homenaje a 1. MO Bldzquez, 2, 109-124.
CAB RE, J. (1925) «Arquitectura Hispanica. El sepulcro de
Toya». Archivo Espafiol de Arte y Arqueologia, 73-103.
CABRE, 1.; CAB RE, M.E. (1933) «Datos para la cronologfa del punal de la cultura de 'Las Cogotas'».
Archivo Espafiol de Arqueologia 24,37-47.
CAB RE, J.; MOTOS, F. (1918) La necropolis iberica de
Tutugi (Galera, provincia de Granada). Memorias de
la Junta Superior de Excavaciones y Antigliedades, 25.
Madrid.
CALVO, 1.; CABRE, 1. (1917) Excavaciones en la cueva)'
collado de los Jardines (Santa Elena, Jaen).
Memorias de la Junta Superior de Excavaciones y
Antigliedades, 8. Madrid.
CARDOZO, M. (1953) ᆱeク」。カ セッ・ウ
na Citania de
Briteiros».Revista de Guimaraes, 83, 715 ft.
CISNEROS, DJ. (1919) «La necr6polis ibero-romana de
Peal de Becerro». Don Lope de Sosa, 308-312.
FERNANDEZ CHICARRO, C. (1956) «Prospecci6n arqueo16gica en los terminos de Hinojares y La Guardia
. (Jaen)>>. Boletin del lnstituto de Estudios Jiennenses,
7, 101- 120.
FERRElRA, CJ. (1992) ᆱeク」。カセッ・ウ
no povoado fortificado das Mesas do Castelinho (Almod6var»>. Vipasca,
1, 19-37.
FERNANDEZ, A. (1980) «Estudio de los restos arqueol6gicos submarinos en las costas de Caste1l6n». Cuadernos
de Prehistoria y Arqueologia Castellonense 7, 135-196.
GARCIA Y BELLIDO, A. (1946) «El casco de Lanhoso».Archivo Espaiiol de Arqueologia, 19, 356-358.
GARCIA Y BELLIDO, A. (1980) Arte lbirico en Espaiia. Madrid.
GRAS, R.; MENA, P; VELASCO, F. (1984) «La ciudad de fosos de Bayona (Cuenca)>>. Rev. de Arqueologia 36, 48-57.
HOZ, 1. de (1994) «Una probable inscripci6n latina en un
casco de Pow Moro». Archivo Espanol de Arqueologia, 67, 223-227.
IRIARTE, A. et al. (1996) «El dep6sito de armas de La Azucarera (Alfaro, la Rioja)>>. Cuadernos de Arqueologia
de la Universidad de Navarra, 4, 173-194.
MALUQUER, 1. (1987) «Un casco iberico probablemente
de la necr6polis de Galera (Granada) en ellnstituto de
Arqueologfa de la Universidad de Barcelona». Archivo
de Prehistoria Levantina, 17,257-260.
MARTIN VALLS, R.; ESPARZA, A.(1992) «Genesis y
evoluci6n de la cultura celtiberica». In M. Almagro, G.
Ruiz (eds.) Paleoetnologia de la Peninsula lberica,
Acts of the 1989 Symposium. Complutum, 2-3,259-279.
MENA MuNOZ, P.; RUIZ, A. (1985) «Elementos celtas del
oppidum de Alarcos (Ciudad Real)>>. XV111 Congreso
Nacional de Arq/!-eologia, Islas Canarias, 635-645.
NIETO, G. (1939-40) «Noticia de las excavaciones realizadas en la necr6polis hispanica del Cabecico del Tesoro,
Verdolay (Murcia)>>. Boletin del Seminario de Estudios
de Arte)' Arqueologia de Valladolid,6, 137-160.
OLIVER, A. (1987-88) «Tres yelmos de tipo Momefortino
hallados en Benicarl6 (Caste1l6n)>>. Cuadernos de
Prehistoria)' Arqueologia Castellonense, 13,205-212.
PASCUAL, A.C. (1991) Carta Arqueologica. Soria. Zona
Centra. Soria.
PRESEDO, F. (1982) La necropolis de Baz-a. Excavaciones
Arqueol6gicas en Espana, 119. Madrid.
PUJOL, 1.; GARCIA ROSELLO, 1. (19892-83) «El grup de
sitges de Can Miralles-Can Modolell». Laietania, 2-3,
46-146.
QUESADA, F. (1989) Armamento, Guerra)' sociedad en la
necropolis ibirica de 'El Cabecico del Tesoro'
(Murcia, Espaiia). BAR International Series, 502. I-U.
Oxford.
QUESADA, F. (1992) «El casco de Almaciles (Granada) y
la cueti6n de los cascos de tipo 'Montefoi"tino' en la
Penfnsula Iberica». Verdolay 4, 65-73.
SANCHEZ JIMENEZ, J. (1943) «Memoria de los trabajos
realizados por la Comisarfa General de Excavaciones
Arqueol6gicas de Albacete en 1941». lnformes )'
Memorias de la CGEA, 3. Madrid.
SCHAAF, U. (1974) «Keltische eisenhelme aus
Vorrbmischer Zeit». JRGZM 21, 149-204.
SCHULE, W. (1969) Die Meseta Kulturen der lberischen
Halbinsel. 1-11. Berlin.
SIRET, L. (1906) Villaricos y Herrerias. Madrid.
VASCONCELOS,1. (1929) «Antigliedades do A1emtejo X.
。セ・「 c
de Vaiamonte». 0 Arqueologo Portugues 28,
183-185.
VICENTE, 1. et alii (1991) «La Caridad (Caminreal,
Teruel)>>. La casa urbana hispanorramana. Zaragoza,
81-129.