Helping With Historical Accuracy: The Apulo-Corinthian Helmet

[Biggus Splenus]

I've noticed in the previews for the Roman faction that the Apulo-Corinthian Helmet will be used by the elites of the Roman Militia.

I started a thread about the use of this helmet, and how long it was actually in existence, in the College of History sub-forum (no reply yet though). So I thought I will just post what I had there, over here.

How long was the Apulo-Corinthian Helmet actually in use?

If I'm not correct, the latest finds of Apulo-Corinthian Helmets date to the end of the 4th Century BCE. Although, the helmet is represented in art well into the 1st Century BCE. What does this mean? Have we just not found any later-dating makes of this helmet and it actually did exist for as long as the artwork suggests, or was the item just used in art because of its stylish appearance even though it ceased to be in use by actual military men?

I also understand that there are a few unique views from some older historians; one saying that the helmet might have been produced in a single century or so, and then passed down the generations; another saying that these helmets were purely for parade purpose. Of course, these are just theories and almost nothing can be 100% proven.

I'm just asking for all of you guys opinions, and I'm hoping to get some semi-professional opinions on this mater.

I'm just wondering if the EB team has looked into this helmet much, because, like I said above, no finds of the helmet date to the 3rd Century BCE, yet it is included in the warriors equipment.

[Appius Pulcher]

Not in the EB team, and not a historian but personally I find it unlikely that militia units would have equipment solely for parade purposes. In a standing army, maybe, but not in a militia.

[Biggus Splenus]

I know, I was just pointing out a few of the theories that are really "out there". I don't agree with either of them to be honest.

[MagicCuboid]

Interesting Splenyi. For EB's purposes I am sure art contemporary with the period is weighted more heavily than in a scholarly document. After all the absence of archaeological evidence is not evidence of absence.

Have quantities of other roman helmet designs been found dating to the 3rd or 2nd century BCE?

[Biggus Splenus]

You make a good point.

But Apulo-Corinthian Helmets cannot be found dating to the 3rd Century BCE anywhere, not just in Roman lands, but where they originated from too. I find it likely that the helmet was still used through the 3rd, and maybe 2nd, C BCE, but I find it strange that there is no archaeological evidence for this

EDIT: I guess it's decided by either relying on archaeological finds so far, or the art.

[MagicCuboid]

It is indeed strange, given how much war the third century saw. But there are always possible excuses; the earth can be quite selective in what it chooses to preserve - something that is always the bane of an archaeologist's arguments. Perhaps the third century helmets were composed of a weaker alloy, giving less of a chance of preservation. Armor is often "grandfathered" to the next generation, so surviving soldiers may not have retired or cast their armor away. This leaves the armor of the fallen, and perhaps it began to be systematically looted, reused or melted down in this century, given how many soldiers there were to outfit in Rome's major wars. These are all just guesses though as I have not read any sources saying any of this to be true!