Ottoman Helmets from
the Medieval Fund of the National
Archaeological Institute
with Museum in Sofia
Archaeologia Bulgarica
ХХI, 2 (2017), 79-98
Deyan RABOVYANOV / Yavor MENKOV
Abstract: The subject of this study are three helmets from the Medieval fund of the
National Archaeological Institute with Museum (NAIM) at the Bulgarian Academy of
Sciences (BAS). They belong to the “shishak” type and have rich decoration; for example, one of them is made by using the “tombac” technique. Because of their form and
decoration, we can relate them to the Ottoman production centres from the second
half of the XVI century or the beginning of the XVII. This type of helmet was typical
for the senior Ottoman warriors’ armour from the period.
Key words: Ottoman armour, late medieval helmets, tombac shishak, parade armour.
Introduction
This study focuses on three helmets from NAIM’s Medieval fund. Due
to their form and decoration there is no doubt that they belong to the
Ottoman period, which still remains a poorly studied sphere of the
Bulgarian archaeology. Unfortunately, there is no certain data about
the archaeological environment of the three artefacts which deprive
researchers of important information. Their typical features and decorations, however, allow us to date them and attempt to find their origin, as well as to elaborate the idea of the noble warriors’ weapons during the heyday of the Ottoman Empire in the Bulgarian lands.
Description of the Artefacts
Gilded copper helmet, # 832 and 3469
The most impressive and the best preserved artefact is the gilded copper helmet of the “shishak” type (fig. 1). Unfortunately, like most of
the Ottoman period weapons, its origin is unknown. The helmet received two inventory numbers in NAIM’s Medieval fund. In 1909, N.
Lazov bought the articulated neck-guard in Dupnitsa and later it was
given the number 832. In 1946, along with other materials from the
Royal palace, the other part of the helmet received the number 3469.
The helmet is made of forged copper, while hammer marks can be
seen on its inner side. Currently, the helmet consists of four parts,
which are either articulated or attached to one another. Therefore,
they will be described one by one and the rich decoration will be presented at the end.
The calotte’s shape is elongated and conical, while its lower third
is like a cylinder, slightly opened in its upper part. It is forged out of
one seamless copper sheet and inside one can clearly see the hammer
marks. A thick pine cone-like part, called bud, is soldered to the hollow spire. It is 2.3 cm high and its maximum diametre is 1.6 cm. Its
cross section is polygonal at its lower part, and round at the upper
part. One of the bud’s sides is pierced, while the hole might have been
80
DEYAN RABOVYANOV / YAVOR MENKOV
intended to serve as a place for adding an ornament of organic material or a hanging hoop.
All over the helmet’s circumference, just 0.1 cm above the calotte’s
lower rim, there are 0.2 cm diameter holes, while an average distance
between them of 1.9 cm. The holes house copper rivets with 0.4 cm
diameter spherical heads. They were used for the attachment of the
leather padded lining to the calotte’s inner side. There are five additional holes – two on the right and three on the left, which are situated
between the regular holes and are probably a result of later repair work.
It is obvious that the helmet once had cheek plates which protected
the warrior’s cheeks and ears. The two pairs of large copper rivets with
flattened 0.8 cm diameter spherical heads are evidence of this. They are
fixed on both sides, 2.2 cm above the rim of the calotte, with a space
between them of 5.3 cm. Unlike the neck-guard, which was attached
with a hinge, the cheek plates were semi-articulated and attached to
the calotte with two thongs and rivets. At the back of the helmet there
are three holes with hoops, the ends of which are opened at the back.
They were intended for the metal hinges which hold the neck-guard.
There is a visor, made of a separate metal sheet, attached to the
top of the calotte. The element is a trapezium-shaped part with round
edges. The plate is bent at a right angle and its smaller part is used for
the attachment to the helmet. This rectangular element is 1.8-2 cm
high and it is attached to the helmet with six large copper rivets, identical to the rivets which once held the thongs to the cheek plates. One
of these rivets is missing. The visor’s protruding part is triangular; it is
20 cm wide and sticks 5.7 cm off the calotte. The inside of the whole
plate was once covered with leather which is still preserved in the place
between the plate and the wall of the helmet. It was attached with 27
rivets along the entire brim of the visor; the space between the rivets
is 1.9-2 cm long. They are identical to the rivets of the calotte and the
neck-guard.
In the middle part of the visor where it is attached to the calotte
there is a small rectangular hole, meant for the helmet’s nasal, which
consists of a massive metal strip, made of copper alloy 2.1 cm wide and
0.62 cm thick. It bends around the helmet’s profile. On the top of the
nasal there is an 8.5 cm high and 7 cm wide leaf-like enlargement. Its
base is separated from the strip with a 2.1 cm wide and 1.2 cm high
rectangular lip. There is another similar part at the base of the nasal
strip. The whole height of the nasal is 28 cm; it is attached to the calotte
with a wide bent П-like plate with decoratively cut rims. It is 2 cm high
and 2.5 cm wide and it is situated 4 cm above the helmet’s rim. This
little clip is attached to the calotte with two small parts.
Obviously, at first the nasal was articulate and the parts of the strip
did not allow it to go out of the П-like clip which held it. At some point
of the helmet’s working life, however, the nasal strip was pulled into an
uppermost position and locked still by an iron rivet with a rosette-like
head, which pierces the clip, the nasal strip and the calotte at the same
time. Another smaller iron rivet, which can be seen from the inside,
fixes the base of the nasal to the calotte sheet. It does not entirely pierce
the strip and cannot be seen from the outside part, near the lower lip of
the nasal. The two-point locking was previously functional but, after it
was fixed into the upper position the nasal could not be used properly
as it protrudes in front of the helmet’s calotte and it is almost lined
OTTOMAN HELMETS FROM THE MEDIEVAL FUND OF THE NATIONAL...
81
up with the bud on its apex. This way, the nasal became an additional
decorative element, an original metal “feather” in front of the helmet’s
brow.
The last preserved element of the helmet is its protector, meant for
the back of the head and the neck of the warrior. It is also made of one
forged copper plate which is highly bent to follow the back of the helmet while at the same time its cross axis is concave in height. Just like
the previously described visor, this trapezium-shaped plate has a sharp
top point which once improved the protection of the back side of the
neck. The neck-guard is 19.2 cm wide and 9.9 cm high. Like the other
elements of the helmet the plate is 0.12 cm thick, and like the calotte
and the visor it has padded leather lining, attached with 30 small copper rivets on its periphery.
Three metal hinges, each made of three parts, connect the neckguard and the back of the helmet. Just two 4.5 cm long parts of the middle one are preserved. One of the parts is a rectangular plate with flat
ears, situated perpendicular to its narrow sides; the other is the point
of the hinge with a hoop at the end. These two ends were attached to
the protector and the calotte by massive copper hoops with bent side
ends, which connect to the metal through round holes. Three of the
hoops are preserved – the middle one of the protector and the three of
the calotte. Two of the visible copper hooks on the hinge and the right
hole of the protector are clearly “modern” additions, used to connect
all parts of the helmet.
The craftsmanship of the helmet is elaborate, and so is the extremely impressive decoration (fig. 1). In fact, the helmet has ornaments on each and every side, while the decorative effect is astonishing
if we also consider the gild.
The decoration of the calotte consists of three bands. On its cylindrical lower part there is a calligraphic Arabic inscription, which is
confined by two bands by an “interlace” of rounded contours. Pairs of
incised lines separate these three ornaments and the rest of the helmet.
The decoration is incised with a gouge and the empty spaces are filled
with dots, made with a swage.
On the middle part of the calotte, above that band, there are shallow vertical flutings separated by low embossed gills. On the spire of
the helmet, below the bud, there is another decorative Arabic inscription, mixed with floral motives (tentacles). Typically, the tops of the
letters are joined together to form a zig-zag motive, which separates
the empty undecorated spaces below the top bud.
Only the flat protruded part of the visor, before the calotte, is decorated. The ornamented space is situated inside the leather lining rivets
and it is confined by a pair of incised lines. On both sides of the space
there are interlaced floral motives – rinceau – while most of its middle
part is occupied by a decorative cartouche with an Arabic inscription,
confined by a pair of incised lines. The ornamental technique is identical to the previous one – incised ornaments with spaces, filled with
dots, between them.
The decoration of the helmet’s nasal is similar. On the strip there is
a band of rinceau, confined by two pairs of incised lines. An identical
pair of lines on the leaf-like extension on the top confines the space,
separated in three parts. The Arabic inscription in the middle is situated between a space with rinceau and a more complex decorative floral
82
DEYAN RABOVYANOV / YAVOR MENKOV
Fig. 1. Helmet with # 832 and 3469
of shishak type, made in the technique
“tombac”, from the Medieval fund
of the National Archaeological Institute
with Museum at the Bulgarian Academy
of Sciences
motive. There are ornaments even on the protrusions which restrict
the nasal’s movement. On the upper protrusion there is an embossed
rhomb, while on the lower – an incised triangle with two dots.
The neck-guard is also ornate. The Arabic inscription, situated
in the middle in cartouche, is encircled by differently shaped spaces,
filled with rinceau. All of them are confined by pairs of incised lines.
Speaking of the helmet’s decoration, it should be noted that the
thick gild is well preserved and it covers all outer metal parts including the hoops, the hinges of the neck-guard, and the large rivets of the
visor, as well as the missing cheek plates. However, there is no gild on
the heads of the small rivets, meant for the leather lining, i.e. it was attached during its final assembling, after the gilding and the decorating
of the helmet occurred. The incised decorations and the swage ornaments which fill the space between them were also made after the gilding. This creates the specific dark effect of the ornament. As a result, it
stands out against the golden background.
The condition of the artefact is very good. There is no visible corrosion, and apart from the spire with the bud and the surface of the
visor, the gild is well preserved. Although, there is a little crack and a
OTTOMAN HELMETS FROM THE MEDIEVAL FUND OF THE NATIONAL...
83
slump on the metal sheet on the calotte’s left side. In the same place
and on the back of the helmet, the rim is also a little torn. However,
the only major damage is at the visor. The whole right part of the protruding horizontal plate is separated from the calotte by a sharp blade
which had made a wavy cut. The possessor of the helmet tried to fix
it partially by making two holes in front of one of the rivets, used for
the lining on the two sides. In one of the holes there is still a roughly
twisted copper hoop which joined the end of the cut plate. It seems
that the repair work is very late and maybe it has occurred in a modern
time, like the hooks of the neck-guard.
The helmet is 25.5 cm high, while the calotte is 21.7 cm long, if we
do not include its visor, and 21 cm wide. The weight of the helmet is
1450 g and we should add the neck-guard’s 207 g weight to it. Perhaps
the whole helmet, including the cheek plates and the leather lining,
weighed nearly 2 kg.
The Arabic inscriptions on the helmet were very important during
the period when it was used. The following section will present them
separately1.
The inscription on the neck-guard (fig. 2/1) Inventory # 832.
The text is taken from the Quran. It is a part of the 13th ayah of the
61 Surah: “As-Saf (The Row)” and it says: “…help from God and a
speedy victory. So give the Glad Tidings To the Believers” (The Holy
Qur‘an 1938, p.1542):
The inscription ends with the words: “Oh, Muhammad”.
The textbox is confined by a floral ornament in “rumi” style. The
exclamation with the name of the Prophet is added by the author and
it does not exist in the canonical text. The text is apotropaic and it is
commonly incised on insignias and armour elements. This inscription
is popular and between the XV and XIX century, it was usually incised
on the blades of swords and yataghans. On one artefact (Ottoman
shamshir) of the Moscow Historical Museum collection, the text is
engraved on the body of a snake, which is incised on the whole blade
of the sword (Аствацатурян 2004, 117-137). In the Metropolitan
Museum funds in New York, there is an Ottoman sword with a jade
hilt with Inventory # 36.25.1297; the same quote from the Quran is
written on its blade. The wedge is made during the reign of sultan
Suleiman I Kanuni (1520-1566) (Pyhrr 2013, 37).
The inscription on the spire of the helmet.
st
Authors are grateful of PhD Anka
Stoilova from National Library St. St.
Cyril and Methodius for translation of
Arab inscriptions.
1
The text is from the Quran and corresponds to 112th Surah “AlIkhlas (The Purifying)”.
Translation:
“Say [oh, Muhammad]: He is God The One and Only; God, the
Eternal, Absolute. He begetteth not, Nor is He begotten; And there is
none Like unto Him” (The Holy Qur‘an 1938, 1806).
The semantic content of the inscription corresponds to its vertical
projection on the helmet. Written on clothes or elements of the war-
84
DEYAN RABOVYANOV / YAVOR MENKOV
rior’s armour, the epithets of Allah function as apotropaic (Стоилова
2012, 86/95).
The inscription in the base of the calotte (fig. 2/2)
ْ ي
ْ لاُإِلاهاُإِلَُه اهو
ُ ُو
ُ لُه
ُضُ امنُذااُالَذِي يا ْشفا هعُ ِع ْنداههُإِلَُبِإِذْنِهُِيا ْعلا هم
ّ
َ لا ن ْاو ٌمُلَههُ اماُفِيُال
ِ ُِْو اماُفِيُاأار
ُالقايُو همُلاُت اأ ْ هخذهههُ ِسناةٌ ا
س ام ااوات ا
ُ ُال اح
ْ
ا
ه
اماُ ابيْنا ُأ ا ْيدِي ِه ُْم او اماُخ ْالفا هه ْمُ اولاُيهحِ ي ه
َ
ْ
ه
ا
ْن
ه
م
ه
ظ
ف
ُاُوه اهو
ُ
ه
د
هو
ؤ
ي
ُ
ل
ُو
ض
أ
ا
ُِو
ت
ا
او
م
س
هُال
ه
ي
س
ك
ُ
ع
س
ااءُو
ش
م
ُ
طونا ُ ِب ا
ا
م
ب
ُ
ل
إ
ُِ
ه
ِل
ع
ُ
ُ
ٍء
َ
ِح
ِ
ِ
ِم
ِ
ْا ا ر
ا رْ ا ا ا ه
ّ ش ْي
ِ ِا
ها ا
ا ا
ْ ي
…ُُالعاظِ ي هم
ُ ْالعا ِل
The inscription is an incomplete quote of the 255th ayah of 2nd
Surah: “Al-baqarah (The Cow)” and it says:
“God! There is no god But He, – the Ever Living, The Selfsubsisting, Eternal, No slumber can seize Him Nor sleep. His are all
things In the heavens and on earth. Who is there can intercede In His
presence except As He permitteth? He knoweth What (appeareth to
His creatures As) Before or After Or Behind them. Nor shall they compass Aught of His knowledge Except as He willeth. His Throne doth
extend Over the heavens And the earth, and He feeleth No fatigue in
guarding And preserving them For He is the Most High, The Supreme
(in glory)” (The Holy Qur‘an 1938, 102-103).
The inscription on the visor of the helmet (fig. 2/3)
The text is part of the 126th ayah of the 3rd Surah: “Al ‘Imran
(The family of Imran)”. It says: “There no help Except from God The
Exalent, the Wiese” (The Holy Qur‘an. 1938, 155).
The inscription on the leaf-like end of the nasal (fig. 2/4)
It says: “His men must be in great jihad in the name of Allah”.
The text is not from the Quran but it can be connected with ayah
190 from 2nd Surah: “Al-Baqara (The Caw)”:
Translation: “Fight in the cause of God” (The Holy Qur‘an 1938, 75).
The inscription is situated in a pointed cartouche and the redundant space is filled with ornaments: arabesque in “rumi” style with an
ornament of the ”tepelik rûmî” type (Birol / Derman 1995, 188).
Iron helmet (with a hole on the top) # 629
The information about this helmet is limited and the context location,
the area called Staridol, near Dupnitsa, is uncertain. The helmet is partially preserved and thus does not allow us to make certain notions
about its form because the whole apex is missing (fig. 3). However,
¾ of the calotte is preserved and we can assume that the helmet has a
sphere-conical shape with a visible protuberance in the middle part of
the walls.
In the front side of the helmet there are 16 rivets holes (fig. 3).
They were used for fixing of the visor, which protects the forehead
and the nose of the warrior. This element is widely spread among the
Ottoman helmets and it can also be seen in the previously described
gilded copper helmet (fig. 1). However, in contrast, the plate, used for
attaching the visor to the brow of the calotte, is higher and a trapezium-shaped.
Another element, which is missing today, was fixed to the front
OTTOMAN HELMETS FROM THE MEDIEVAL FUND OF THE NATIONAL...
85
Fig. 2. Graphic representation of Arab
inscriptions on helmet with # 832 and
3469: 1 inscription on neck-guard; 2
inscription on the base of calotte; 3
inscription on a triangular visor;
4 inscription on the leave-shaped end
of nasal bar
part of the helmet. There are two vertical rows of four rivets’ holes.
They were used for fixing the metal tube, situated on the right side of
the calotte’s brow and above the visor, where a decorative bundle of
feathers – “plumage” – was also added. This element is typical for the
imposing Ottoman helmets from the XVI–XVII century. The visor,
as well as the tube, were attached by large copper rivets with flattened
spherical heads. Only two in the left line of holes, used for the plumage, are preserved.
The position of the rivets and the piercing technique show that
the tube with the plumage and the visor covered the decoration of the
helmet, i.e. they were added later. An evidence of that notion is the
ornamentation, which forms a small empty rectangular space on the
helmet’s brow. The original visor was attached there with a fixing plate
that was smaller and rectangular, similar to the one of the gilded copper helmet.
On each side of the visor’s front part, on the whole brim of the
helmet, and 0.3 cm above the rim of the calotte, there are 68 carefully
pierced round holes with diametre 0.4 cm. The space between each of
them is 0.3-0.4 cm (fig. 3). Their edges were additionally smoothed by
using a file (fig. 4/1, 2). The traces of extrusion of the material showed
that the holes were made right side out. These openings aided the attachment of a protective chainmail skirt to the helmet. However, they
might have instead been used for fixing compound cheek plates, which
were attached with hoops, just like the chainmail skirt. This will be discussed later, when we will analyze the characteristics of the helmet.
Only two of the hoops are preserved (fig. 4/1). They are situated
on the right side of the calotte, side by side. The hoops have an elongated oval shape and their diameter is 1.2-1.4 cm. They are made of an
iron wire with a round cross section and a thickness of 0.23 cm. The
ends of the hoops are flattened at the cross point. The hoops are connected through a technique, called “na gvozd”, i.e. the rivet, connecting the ends of the wire, pierces them so that it could be seen on both
sides. The other protective elements of the helmet are not preserved
and we cannot determine whether the whole chainmail skirt was made
86
DEYAN RABOVYANOV / YAVOR MENKOV
Fig. 3. Iron helmet with # 629 of
shishak type from the Medieval
fund of the National Archaeological
Institute with Museum at the Bulgarian
Academy of Sciences
of such hoops, or if they were different. And, although the “na gvozd“
technique is more labour-consuming, it provides a better connection
to the ends of the hoop.
The last elements of the helmet are seven rivets, made of copper
alloy, with flat 0.4 cm diameter round heads. They form a row around
the entire calotte and are situated 2.7-3 cm above its rim (fig. 3, 4/1,
2). The space between them is 5.5 cm, while one of them is missing.
Although we have no evidence, it is obvious that these rivets were used
for attaching the leather or textile lining inside the calotte.
The helmet is ornate with an embossed and incised decoration
(fig. 3, 4). It is separated in two levels. The first occupies the lower
¼ of the calotte. It consists of a 5.5 cm high band, which begins 1 cm
above the rim and it is confined by pairs of incised lines. At this part,
the two outer sides are separated by a space with no ornaments. There
are incised decorative Arabic inscriptions on both sides. The spaces
between the letters are filled with densely situated dots, made with a
swage. The same technique is used for most of the decorations at the
base of the helmet, but instead of an inscription, there is an elaborate
incised weaved floral ornament.
This segment of the decoration is separated from the upper part
of the helmet by a shallow 0.2-0.3 cm wide groove. Above it, the decoration consists of alternating spaces, shaped like elongated isosceles
triangles. The first half of the triangles are decorated with nine broad
embossed ribs, made by hammering shallow side grooves. The ornaments of the other triangles consist of pairs of incised lines, and they
are filled with elaborate incised weaved floral motives (fig. 3, 4/1). Just
like the decoration of the lower level, the space between them is also
filled with dots, made with a swage.
The whole surface of the helmet was covered with incised and em-
OTTOMAN HELMETS FROM THE MEDIEVAL FUND OF THE NATIONAL...
87
Fig. 5. Graphic representation of Arab inscription on the brow side of calotte of iron
helmet with # 629
Fig. 4. Iron helmet with # 629, details:
1 detail from calotte’s periphery with
preserved iron rings; 2 detail from helmet’s periphery with preserved gild
bossed ornaments, which made it look exceptionally impressive. This
feeling was intensified by the gild, signs of which are still slightly visible in some areas (fig. 4).
Unfortunately, the artefact is heavily damaged. Its top is missing,
and in its place there is a hole with an irregular form and torn edges,
the size of which is 8.5 x 15 cm. The left side of the calotte is also
partially torn with a hole 1.5 x 4.5 cm large. The same side of the helmet is partially warped and bent. Except for the previously described
hoops, the protective elements of the warrior’s cheeks and the back of
the neck (the chainmail skirt and the cheek plates) are missing. The
metal itself is hale and has no visible signs of corrosion. There are no
signs that the damages were caused during a battle.
The helmet is 24.5 cm high, 18 cm wide and its preserved height is
15 cm. It is forged out of one metal sheet with a thickness of 0.23 cm.
It currently weighs 805 g.
There also is an Arabic inscription on the # 629 calotte. It is situated symmetrically on both sides of the missing nasal, in the space above
the missing visor (fig. 5). The name of the God “Allah” is repeated
symmetrically on both sides of the text space, separated by the nasal.
The transformation of the text fragments into ornaments is typical for
the Islamic art. It was believed that the repeatedly inscribed name of
God and his epithets have apotropaic functions; this is a commonly
spread motive, incised on the defence weapons’ elements. Recently,
the right part of the inscription was covered by the additionally fixed
plumage. Unfortunately, the inscription, situated on the back side of
the calotte, is damaged and we cannot read it surely.
Conical iron helmet, # 400
There is no information about the origin of the helmet, which has an
elongated sphere-conical shape (fig. 6). The lower 2/3 of the calotte are
curved and the conical spire with a visible bud is separated from them
with a 0.6-0.8 cm horizontal groove, 0.1‒0.15 cm deep. Since the top is
broken off, we cannot determine its end but the visible signs indicate
that there probably was a spherical or bulbous bud.
The helmet has no typical additional defence elements like chainmail skirt, visor, nasal or cheek plates. There are no signs of mechanisms for attaching the inner lining, since it was worn over a lined
hood on the head of the warrior.
At some point of the helmet’s working life, it was reconstructed
and thus its functions changed. On the entire circumference of the
calotte, 1 cm above the rim, there are 17 right side out rectangular
holes, 0.3 x 0.3 cm in size. The distance between them is 3.3 to 4.4 cm.
On one of the sides of the helmet, there is another hole 2.9 cm above
two of the holes. It is not meant for a wedge but for a П-like clip, which
88
DEYAN RABOVYANOV / YAVOR MENKOV
Fig. 6. Iron helmet with # 400 from
the Medieval fund of the National
Archaeological Institute with Museum
at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences
protrudes 1.4 cm before the calotte. These two clips, only one of which
is preserved, are separated by three holes, dedicated to wedges. The
patina on the wedges and the clip show that the intervention, which
led to the change in the helmet’s function, is probably modern. The
artefact might have been meant to be hung on some flat surface – a
wall – while the wedges were used to attach some kind of a material,
wrapped around its base. Having in mind the practice of storing weapons in the turbes, this might have occurred in this artefact’s case.
The additionally fixed iron wedges and clips might have destroyed
the signs of the original visor and other defence elements like the cheek
plates. There is one different hole which could be an evidence of this – it
is not square and has not roughly bent to the inside edges, but is round
with smooth walls. It is situated on the level of the wedges, which is also
the level of the visor, the cheek plates and the neck-guard, attached with
rivets, as it happens on some other helmets. This should be taken into
account later when we talk about the shape of the artefact.
The helmet is made of one metal sheet. The symmetrical forms
and the embossed decoration, made through hammering, are signs
of high craft skill. The decoration of the artefact is elaborate and it
is separated into two levels. The lower one is situated on the convex
semi-spherical part of the calotte. The ornaments consist of narrow
embossed ribs, which cover the whole space between the lower rim of
the helmet, and a shallow horizontal groove. The height of this band is
12 cm. Two rows of 8-like figures consisting of two connected spirals,
which look like the mathematical sign for eternity, are made on the
OTTOMAN HELMETS FROM THE MEDIEVAL FUND OF THE NATIONAL...
89
fluted band by inside out hammering and incision. Each pair of these
figures is confined by two thin embossed lines which are situated in
the grooves between the ribs.
The decoration of the upper level is similar in technique, but its ornaments are different. The conical spire is “wrapped” with 0.2 cm wide
embossed bands, spirally twisting around the neck under the broken
off bud. The relatively wide spaces between them are filled with chaotic low decorative protuberances. We can assume that some elements
of the helmet’s decoration, such as the 8-like figures, were gilded once.
Although there are no preserved signs of the gild, they are almost invisible because of their shallow relief, i.e. the decorative effect needed
additional exalting.
The condition of the helmet is comparatively good. The metal is
intact and it is covered with a dark brown patina. In some areas there
are little signs of corrosion, however, the calotte is not preserved well.
A large crack rips off the entire lower part of the artefact and there is
a missing piece 3.5 cm above the rim. In this part, the metal sheet is
deformed like in some other parts of the helmet. The opposite side the
rim of the artefact is affected by a second 6.5 cm high crack. The bud
on the top is broken off and there is also a 5.5 cm crack on the spire.
The only damage which could be the consequence of a blow during a
battle is the broken off bud.
The helmet is 22 cm long, 19.5 cm wide and its preserved height is
21.5 cm. The thickness of the metal sheet is 0.19 cm, and the artefact
weights 810 g.
Some Comments about the Dating of the Helmets
The characteristics and the decoration of the helmets, examined in
this paper, leave no doubt that they are a product of some Oriental
arms workshop of the XVI–XVII century. Our observations allow us
to make some more tangible conclusions about their origin and dating.
The badly preserved iron helmet # 629 and the gilded copper helmet belong to a large group of defence weapons known as „shishak”.
They are also called mamluk-turkish type and they have a typical
sphere-conical shape, an often relatively high calotte with a large visor
and a nasal-arrow, which goes through it, fixed with rivets. The good
protection is due to the cheek plates and neck-guard, differently fixed
to the helmet.
Scholars believed that this type of helmet was developed in Egypt
by the mamluks during the second half of the XV – the beginning of
the XVI century; common examples include: the sultan Barsbai’s helmet from the Louvre and the helmet of the Alepo’s governor Kharbak,
who handed Syria to sultan Selim at the beginning of the XVI century,
which is now exhibited in the Topkapi museum (fig. 7) (Mayer 1943,
7-8, figs. 8, 9; Stöcklein 1934, fig. 13). This type of helmet achieved its
greatest development during the XVI century when it got its classical
form from the Ottoman arms tradition (Аствацатурян 2002, 61-63;
Рассел Робинсон 2006, 81-82). The trend of the helmets, produced in
Turkey, spread all over Eastern Europe – Hungary, Poland and Russia.
Therefore, the first shishaks appeared in Poland under the Turkish influence in the middle of the XVI century, even before the marked orientalisation of the Polish arms during the reign of king Stefan Batory.
They have every characteristic of the Turkish arms; some of them are
90
DEYAN RABOVYANOV / YAVOR MENKOV
Fig. 7. Mamluk helmets from the beginning of XVI c. in the Topkapi museum in
Istanbul, after Stöcklein 1934, fig. 13/2
Fig. 8. Manuscript miniature with
Turkish sipahi from the end of XVI c. in
Codex Vindobonensis from 1595, after
Dziewulski 2007, picture 3
even made in German production centres (Dziewulski 2007, 9-10;
Žygulski 1984, # 93).
In Eastern Europe, these helmets became an almost compulsory
element of the defence armour of the heavy cavalry, like the sipahi
in the Ottoman empire and the hussars in Poland, and they usually
are ornate like the helmets analysed in this paper (fig. 8). In fact, the
“shishak” helmets were so popular that they were produced for export to the eastern German arm centres like Nuremberg (Dziewulski
2007, picture 11; Žygulski 1984, # 93). Moreover, they led to the appearance of some imitating forms, such as the hussar’s kapalin in
Poland (Шаменков 2014; Dziewulski 2007, 11), the “yerikhonka”
OTTOMAN HELMETS FROM THE MEDIEVAL FUND OF THE NATIONAL...
91
helmet in Russia, and the helmets with a protector, called “crab’s tail”
in Germany, the Netherlands and England (Blackmore 1990, 14-17),
popular till the middle of the XVII century (fig. 9).
The preserved condition of the gilded helmet and its rich decoration not only attract most of the attention, but they also give us enough
information to determine its origin and date. It has a lot of direct
parallels to the best Ottoman armour artefacts from the second half
of the XVI century, including some well dated helmets with inscriptions which provide the name of the owner or the servant, responsible
for the arsenal. We can give examples with the helmet of Ali pasha
date to approximately 1570, a trophy from the battle near Lepanto,
which is kept in Real Armeria de Madrid, # M19 (fig. 10/1) (The Art
of Power..., 2009, fig. 8); the helmet of Sokollu Mehmed vizier, dated to 1560 and now kept in the Vienna Kunsthistorisches Museum
(Аствацатурян 2002, 63); an undecorated helmet, # 3350 from the
Historical Museum in Moscow (Аствацатурян 2002, 62-63); and an
iron helmet once possessed by Robert Hales, which is covered with
incised floral motives that are similar to the style of the helmet from
NAIM, dated in the XVI century with the seal of the St. Irina’s arsenal
(Hales 2013, # 786).
There is a group of Ottoman helmets, owned by the Metropolitan
Museum in New York, which are direct analogies to the helmets discussed in this paper. These are the iron helmet with gilded decoration,
# 04.3.213, dated to 1550-1600 (fig. 10/2); another similar example is
# 04.3456a, dated to around 1560 (fig. 10/3); the helmet from the XVI
Fig. 9. European helmet imitations of
shishak, type: 1 shishak of Hungarian
type made in Nuremberg in 1561 from
Vavel museum, after Žygulski 1984,
# 93; 2 Husar capalin helmet from
the end of XVI c. from the Museum
of the Polish army in Warsaw, after
Dziewulski 2007, picture 12; 3 Russian
helmet “yerikhonka” from XVII c., from
Velikopolsky Military Museum after
Žygulski 1984, # 232; 4 German shishak
helmet from the beginning of XVII c.
in the Royal Armories in Leads, after
Blackmore 1990, fig. 11
92
DEYAN RABOVYANOV / YAVOR MENKOV
Fig. 10. Ottoman helmets of shishak
type from XVI c.: 1 helmet of Ali pasha
(circa 1570), a trophy from the battle of
Lepanto, Real Armeria, Madrid, # М19
after The Art of Power 2009, fig. 8; 2
iron helmet with # 04.3.213 (circa 15501600), Metropolitan Museum, New
York, after http://www.metmuseum.org/
art/collection/search/25379?sortBy=R
elevance&ao=on&ft=ottoma
n&offset=60&rpp=20&
pos=75; 3 iron helmet with # 04.3.456а
(circa 1560), Metropolitan Museum,
New York, after http://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/27936;
4 Iron helmet with № 36.25.100 (16 c),
Metropolitan Museum, New York, after
http://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/32046?sortBy=Relevance&a
mp;ao=on&ft=ottoman&offse
t=80&rpp=20&pos=85
century is # 36.25.100 (fig. 10/4); a gilded iron helmet, # 36.25.107,
has an inscription containing the name of Hasan vizier and the year
977 after the Hegira (1588-1589 AD) (fig. 11/1); another iron shishak
from the second half of XVI century has # 36.25.108 (fig. 11/2); a gilded copper helmet from the end of the XVI century has # 36.25.125 (fig.
11/3); an iron shishak, # 36.25.126, dates to the beginning of the XVI
century; and a copper shishak from the beginning of the XVII century
is # 1974.118 (fig. 11/5). The copper helmets, exhibited in Askeri museum in Istanbul, dated to the XVI–XVII century (fig. 12), are almost
identical to the helmets analysed in this paper (Özkan 2001, # 5-8, 1011, 13-16, 19-20, 22-23, 25-32). They have lots of common elements,
such as the form of the calotte and the elements connected with it. In
a miniature example from the Codex Vindobenensis, dated to 1595,
we can see a similar helmet on the head of a Turkish sipahi from the
end of the XVI (fig. 8). These numerous parallels combine with the
features of the artefact from NAIM. For instance when we talk about
the shape of the calotte, the shape and the fixing of the visor, the type
of the nasal and the bud on the shishak, the fixing of the cheek plates
and the shape and the hinge of the neck-guard.
A comparison of the helmets’ decoration with their analogies is
essential for the clarification of their origin and dating. The artefact
of NAIM is made through the “tombac” technique i.e. it is forged out
of copper alloy, covered with thick gild using the mercury amalgam
OTTOMAN HELMETS FROM THE MEDIEVAL FUND OF THE NATIONAL...
93
Fig. 11. Ottoman helmets from shishak
type from XVI c.: 1 iron helmet with
# 36.25.107, signed with the name
of vizier Hasan pasha (1588-1589),
Metropolitan Museum, New York, after
http://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/24021?sortBy=Relevance&a
mp;where=Turkey&ft=*&pg=
1&rpp=100&pos=190; 2 iron
helmet with # 36.25.108 (second half of
XVI c.), Metropolitan Museum, New
York, after http://www.metmuseum.
org/art/collection/search/32053?sortB
y=Relevance&ao=on&ft=o
ttoman&offset=60&rpp=20
&pos=73; 3 copper helmet with #
36.25.125 (end of XVI c.), Metropolitan
Museum, New York, after http://www.
metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/
24027?sortBy=Relevance&ao=on&
amp;ft=ottoman&offset=80&
rpp=20&pos=93; 4 copper helmet
with #1974.118 (beginning of XVII c.),
Metropolitan Museum, New York, after
http://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/452550?sortBy=Relevance&
amp;what=Arms&ft=helmet&
pg=1&rpp=20&pos=21
technique. The tombac was only produced in the Ottoman empire and
it was used for armour – helmets, shields and horse shamfrons, as well
as for some metal objects like candlesticks and vessels. Its purpose was
to make the illusion that the object was gilded. Scholars believe that
the tombac armours were for the purpose of parade, worn during the
sultan’s processions and pilgrimages to the holy cities of Mecca and
Medina. However, these armours belonged to high-rank officers or
sultan guardians and the units of the “kapi kulu” palace cavalry.
Not only is the helmet of NAIM made in the tombac technique, it
is also ornate with incised floral ornaments and an interlace of Arabic
inscriptions. As a parallel to this type of decoration we can point to an
iron helmet, # 36.25.100 from the Metropolitan Museum (fig. 10/4),
the calotte of which has the same embossed decoration. The floral
ornament on one tombac shishak, # 1974.118 from the Metropolitan
Museum, is also very similar to it (fig. 11/5). However, our helmet fully matches a tombac vessel, # 1974.41 from the Metropolitan Museum,
dated to the XVI century (fig. 11b). Its floral ornament, the interlace
and even the Arabic inscription, situated in cartouche, are exactly the
same as the helmet of NAIM. Two helmets, # 165 and # 2638, from the
collection of the Askeri museum, dated to the XVI century, have very
similar decoration, especially the form of the floral ornament (Özkan
2001, # 19, 29) (fig. 12 /3, 7).
The many parallels let us conclude that the fine artefact, kept in
NAIM, was probably made in an armour workshop in the capital of
the Ottoman empire, Istanbul. It reflects the artistic style during the
second half of the XVI century.
94
DEYAN RABOVYANOV / YAVOR MENKOV
Fig. 12. Ottoman helmets from shishak
type (XVI-XVII c.) made in the tombac technique from Askeri museum
in Istanbul: 1 helmet with # 165 after
Özkan 2001, # 19; 2 helmet with # 7950
after Özkan 2001, # 20; 3 helmet with #
7951 after Özkan 2001, # 26; 4 helmet
with # 1089 after Özkan 2001, # 27; 5
helmet with # 2638 after Özkan 2001,
# 29; 6 helmet with # 1092 after Özkan
2001, # 32
The second shishak, analysed in this paper – the iron helmet, # 629
(fig. 3) – has some different design features. Moreover, at some point
a tube for plumage of feathers was added, while its cheek plates and
the neck-guard were attached to the calotte with a row of iron hoops.
Although this kind of suspension was rarely used on some Ottoman
shishaks, their cheek plates are typically wider and they are made of
several plates, which are also attached to each other with hoops in the
style of the knitted chainmail and plate armour, typical for the epoch
and the particular area. We can give the steel gilded helmet, cited above
and dated to the 60’s of XVI century, as an example. It is kept under #
04.3.456а in the Metropolitan Museum (fig. 10/5).
Although the helmet, # 629 from NAIM, is badly preserved, its
workmanship and decoration leave no doubt that it was a war helmet
of some high-ranking officer. The style, the decoration technique, and
the ornaments are very important for the dating and the origin of the
helmet. They make it look similar to the previously analysed tombac
shishak, # 832 and # 3469; obviously, this artefact is synchronal to it. It
is also a product of an armoury workshop of the Ottoman capital dur-
OTTOMAN HELMETS FROM THE MEDIEVAL FUND OF THE NATIONAL...
95
Fig. 14. Iron helmet (XVII c.) with # 36.25.129 from
Metropolitan Museum, New York, after http://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/32066?sortBy=Relevanc
e&ao=on&ft=ottoman+helmets&offset=20
&rpp=20&pos=29
Fig. 13. Copper vessel made in the tombac technique
(XVI c.) with # 1975.41 from Metropolitan Museum, New
York, after http://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/sear
ch/452729?sortBy=Relevance&ao=on&ft=ottom
an&offset=40&rpp=20&pos=49
ing of the second half of XVI century.
Because of the damages, made during its secondary fixing for a
new function, the last helmet, # 759 (fig. 6), raises some issues. The
shape of the calotte and the embossed gilded decoration relate it to
the official Ottoman shishaks from the second half of the XVI–XVII
century. The absence of leather lining and the absence of additional
protection elements, like a visor, cheek plates and neck-guard at first
glance are surprising. The key element for the comprehension of this
artefact is the only preserved original hole – smaller and round, situated in one line with the wedges and clips, which pierced the calotte.
The hole might have been dedicated to a rivet, fixing some of the additional protection elements. The rest of the rivets’ holes were very likely
used for the easier fixing of the wedges and were destroyed by them.
We can suggest with a great certainty that this helmet is part of the
“shishak” type. Unlike the helmets discussed above, it has no inner lining but some smaller and simpler additional protection elements. This
fact relates it to the late period of the development of these helmets
in the frames of the XVII century. During that time, the significance
of the protective armour gradually diminished and, step by step, the
defence weapons lost their typical functionality. A typical example is
helmet # 36.25.129 from the Metropolitan Museum, dated between
96
DEYAN RABOVYANOV / YAVOR MENKOV
the XVI and XVII centuries (fig. 13). Not only are its calotte and spire
similarly shaped, but it also has no inner lining, while the size of its
additional protective elements is small. The holes along its periphery,
grouped by three, are evidence of this.
Additionally, although it has now completely lost its brilliance, the
helmet # 759 once had rich decoration, combined with gild, which
places it above the mass defence armour and potentially relates it to
high rank warriors.
Conclusion
The helmets from the Medieval fond of NAIM, presented in this paper,
are exceptional examples of the Ottoman arms art and they brilliantly
reflect the appearance of the high rank cavalrymen’s armour during
the most advanced period of the empire. This is particularly true for
the copper shishak, made in the tombac technique, which is one of
the best preserved and most ornate artefacts of its kind and it can be
paralleled with the best exhibits from the world museums. Although
the other two helmets are badly preserved, they are also fine pieces of
armour, products of the capital workshops in Istanbul.
With the presentation of these three helmets, the authors hope they
can enrich the information about the defence armour in the Bulgarian
lands during the Ottoman epoch. Unfortunately, this period is poorly
studied and sometimes it is mistakenly dated and interpreted in our
museums. By presenting this armour, we illustrate the final phase in
the development of the long arms tradition, which thrived during the
middle centuries in the Balkans and in Asia Minor.
Bibliography
Аствацатурян, Э. 2002. Турецкое
оружие. Санкт Петербург.
Рассел Робинсон, Х. 2006. Доспехи
народов Востока. Москва.
Стоилова, А. 2012. Заклинания,
свързани с арабски писмени
паметници. ‒ Български фолклор 3-4,
86-95.
Шаменков, С. 2014. Доспех русских
гусар времен царя Алексея
Михайловича: опыт реконструкции.
– История военного дела:
исследования и источники
5, 84-95. <http://www.milhist.
info/2014/06/16/shamenkov_7>(16.06.2014).
Шиндлер, О. 2016. Русские шлемы
XVI века. – История военного дела:
исследования и источники 8, 167-219.
<http://www.milhist.info/2016/05/10/
shindler_3>(10.05.2016).
Birol, I. / Derman, Ç. 1995. Motifs in
Turkish Decorative Arts. Istanbul.
Blackmore, D. 1990. Arms and Armour
of the English Civil Wars. London.
Dziewulsky, M. 2007. Oriental
Influences on Polish Arms. – Lecture
Presented on Etnographic Arms and
Armour Seminar in Trimonium, 17th
March 2007.
Hales, R. 2013. Islamic and Oriental
Arms and Armour. A Lifetime Passion.
Farnham Common.
The Holy Qur'an. Text, Translation and
Commentary by Abdullah Yusuf Ali.
(3rd ed.). Kashmiri Bazar, Lahore: Shaik
Muhammad Ashraf, 1938, 1862 p.
Mayer, L. 1943. Saracenic Arms and
Armour. – Ars islamica 10, 1-12.
Özkan, O. 2001. Askeri müze tombak
eserler kataloğu. Istanbul.
Pyhrr, S. 2013. Of Arms and Men. New
York.
Stöcklein, H. 1934. Die Waffenschätze
im Topkapu Sarayi müzesi zu Istanbul:
Ein Vorläufiger Bericht. – Ars Islamica
1, 2, 200-218.
Żygulski, Z. 1984. Stara broń w Polskich
zbiorach. Warszawa.
OTTOMAN HELMETS FROM THE MEDIEVAL FUND OF THE NATIONAL...
97
Османски шлемове
от Средновековния фонд
на НАИМ в София
Деян РАБОВЯНОВ / Явор МЕНКОВ
(резюме)
Предмет на изследването са три шлема от средновековния фонд
на НАИМ при БАН. За съжаление липсват информативни данни
за техния произход. Шлемът с # 832 и 3469 е изпълнен в техниката
“томбак” – от кована мед с покритие от амалгамна позлата. Той се
отличава с богатата си украса от флорални мотиви и религиозни
надписи на арабски език (фиг. 1, 2). По-лошо запазеният шлем с #
629 има сходна декорация, но е направен от желязо. Той е претърпял
преправка, засегнала челната му част (фиг. 3-5). Конусовидният
железен шлем с # 400 се отличава от другите с по-опростено
устройство (фиг. 6). За съжаление вторичната му обработка почти
е унищожила следите от допълнителните защитни елементи, които
са се прикрепяли към него.
Железният шлем с # 629 и позлатеният меден принадлежат
на типа “шишак”. Тези представителни паметници са били част
от защитното въоръжение на тежките кавалеристи от Източна
Европа и Близкия Изток в периода XVI-XVII в. (фиг. 8, 9).
Украсата и формата на двата шлема ги датират във втората
половина на XVI в., а изработката им ги свързва със столичните
оръжейни ателиета в Истанбул. Медният шлем, изпълнен в
техниката „томбак“, е част от парадни доспехи на високопоставен
офицер или член на личната охрана на султана от частите на
дворцовата кавалерия, т.нар. “капъ кулу”. Железният шлем с # 629
е принадлежал на високопоставен офицер.
Конусовидният железен шлем с # 759 (фиг. 6) може да се отнесе
към финала на развитие на типа шишак. Тогава, през XVII в., тези
шлемове започват да губят защитните си функции, а устройството
им се опростява. Богатата му украса го поставя над масовото
защитно въоръжение и го обвързва с военни над среден ранг.
Вторично повредилите го железни клинове вероятно са свързани с
излагането му в някое теке или друга религиозна институция.
С представянето на трите шлема авторите се надяват, че
обогатяват представата за защитното въоръжение по българските
земи през Османския период – материал, който все още е
слабо изследван и понякога получава погрешна датировка и
интерпретация. Тези образци онагледяват и финала в развитието
на една дълга оръжейна традиция, процъфтявала през
Средновековието на Балканите и в Мала Азия.
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Deyan Rabovyanov
National Archaeological Institute with Museum –
Branch Veliko Tyrnovo
98
29 Ivan Vazov St.
BG-5000 Veliko Tyrnovo
rabovyanov@gmail.com
Yavor Menkov
BG-1000 Sofia
kirholm@dir.bg
DEYAN RABOVYANOV / YAVOR MENKOV
Deyan Rabovyanov