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.