kalotaste kacige bronzano doba

8/9/2019 Kalotaste Kacige Bronzano Doba

1/28

152 Marianne Mödlinger, Bronze Age bell helmets: new aspects on typology, chronology and manufactureDOI 10.1515/pz-2013-0005 Praehistorische Zeitschrift 2013; 88(1–2): 152–179

I. Abhandlungen

Marianne Mödlinger

Bronze Age bell helmets: new aspects on typology,

chronology and manufacture

Abstract: Über einen Zeitraum von mehr als 150 Jahren

standen spätbronzezeitliche Glockenhelme nur selten im

Mittelpunkt der Forschung, zumeist wurden sie nur im Ge-

samtkontext bronzezeitlicher Helme diskutiert. Dieser Ar-

tikel beschreibt im Detail und zum ersten Mal alle bekann-

ten Glockenhelme sowie ein assoziiertes Fragment. Der

Beitrag wirft ein neues Licht auf die Entwicklung und Chro-

nologie jener einzigartigen Helme, deren Ursprung jedochunsicher bleibt. Glockenhelme datieren nach HaB1, sie

stammen zumeist aus Hortfunden des Karpatenbeckens.

Positiv zu vermerken ist eine steigende Zahl publizierter

Element- und Mikro-Strukturanalysen, deren Ergebnisse

miteinander verglichen und im Detail diskutiert werden.

Von den vierzehn bekannten Helmen stammen drei aus Pri-

vatsammlungen oder sind verloren gegangen, so dass diese

nicht für weitere Untersuchungen zur Verfügung stehen.

Die verbliebenen zehn sicheren Fundstücke werden im vor-

liegendem Beitrag analysiert und diskutiert. Ihre Fertigung

wird rekonstruiert, außerdem eine auf Basis neuer Analy-

sen erkannte Herstellungstechnik eingehend vorgestellt.

Keywords: Bronzezeit; Glockenhelme; Chronologie; Ost-

europa; SEM-EDXS

Abstract: Depuis plus de 150 ans de recherche sur les cas-

ques de l’âge du Bronze, les scientifiques n’ont que rare-

ment choisi les casques en forme de cloche comme thème

principal de leurs discussion. Cet article aborde pour la

première fois, et en profondeur, tous les casques en forme

de cloche connus, ainsi qu’un fragment associé, et veut je-

ter un nouvel éclairage sur l’évolution et la chronologie deces casques uniques du Bronze final. Ils datent du HaB1 et

se retrouvent généralement dans des dépôts du bassin des

Carpates, mais leur origine demeure inconnue. Grâce aux

analyses élémentaires et microstructurales, il a été possi-

ble de publier un nombre croissant d’analyses de casques

en forme de cloche, dont les résultats seront comparés et

discutés en détail. Malheureusement, trois des 14 casques

connus actuellement appartiennent à des collections pri-

vées ou ont disparu. Les dix exemplaires sûrs restants sont

analysés et font l’objet d’une discussion. On a restitué leur

mode de fabrication en décrivant de manière détaillée la

nouvelle technique de fabrication identifiée à travers les

analyses récentes.

Keywords: âge du Bronze; casques en forme de cloche;

chronologie; Europe orientale; SEM-EDXS

Abstract: Over more than 150 years of research, Late BronzeAge bell helmets have usually been included in discussions

about Bronze Age helmets in general, and are rarely the

main topic of discussion. This article discusses in detail and

for the first time all known bell helmets and one associated

fragment, and aims to shed new light on the development

and chronology of these unique Late Bronze Age helmets.

Their origin remains unclear and they date into HaB1, and

were mostly found in hoards in the Carpathian Basin. More-

over, the number of published analyses of bell helmets has

increased with elemental and micro-structural analyses

and the results will be compared and discussed in detail.

Unfortunately, of the 14 helmets known today, three are in

private collections or lost. The ten remaining secure finds

are analysed and discussed and their manufacture recon-

structed, with detailed description of a new manufacturing

technique that emerged through the new analyses.

Keywords: Bronze Age; bell helmets; chronology; Eastern

Europe; SEM-EDXS

Marianne Mödlinger: Dipartimento di Chimica e ChimicaIndustriale – DCCI, Universitá di Genova, Via Dodecaneso 31,

I-16146 Genoa. E-Mail: [email protected]

Introduction

Bronze Age European metal defensive armour is rare.

From the beginning of the Urnfield culture (ca. 1300 BC)

on, we know of around 120 helmets1, 90 shields (Uckel-

1 Mödlinger 2013d.

Bereitgestellt von | Università degli Studi di Genova

Angemeldet | marianne moedlinger@univie ac at Autorenexemplar

Heruntergeladen am | 14 05 14 08:39


2/28

Marianne Mödlinger, Bronze Age bell helmets: new aspects on typology, chronology and manufacture 153

mann 2012), over 60 greaves and 30 cuirasses2. The only

completely overlapping distribution area of all types of ar-

mour in Europe is the Carpathian Basin, including the

southern parts of Moravia and Slovakia. Focussing on

helmets, we can distinguish two main types according

to their principle of construction: in Western Europe, the

bi-valved, crested helmet is the leading type; in Centraland Eastern Europe, the cap of the helmet is made of one

single metal sheet only. A special type of crested helmet

(type Lueg) is distributed in the Austrian Alps, but will not

be discussed here3. The helmets in Central and Eastern Eu-

rope are usually classified due to their shape in conical

helmets, cap helmets (decorated and not decorated, with

or without (massive) socket or knob) and bell helmets.

Apart from some of the cap helmets, all helmets have a

knob or socket on the top, which usually also has a central

hole to attach a plume. Conical and cap helmets were

hammered out of a flat bronze disc to rather thin, delicateforms, while the bell helmets are clearly larger in diameter

and high as well as far more massive, with a particularly

thicker cross section of the calotte (Fig. 1–3).

Bell helmets were first described 1941 by G. von Merhart

as ‘Glockenhelme’, ‘Knaufhelme’ or ‘ungarische Helme’,

or as ‘glockenförmige Helme (type Hajdúböszörmény)’4.

H. Hencken called them in 1971 ‘rounded bell helmets’,

while C. Clausing named them in 2001 ‘Helme mit glocken-

förmiger Kalotte und durchlochtem Scheitelknauf’.

Though both H. Hencken and C. Clausing include Ita-

lian helmets in the bell helmet category5, such as the hel-

mets from Tarquinia, an Italian helmet now kept at the

museum in Karlsruhe, Germany6, and the helmet from

Populonia, Italy7, these helmets will not be considered

here. Since bell helmets are undecorated, high, and par-

ticularly massive, these Italian helmets are not that high

in proportion to their width, are closer to cap helmets in

their shape, have more flattened knobs on their sockets

and are decorated. H. Hencken also includes in his group

of bell helmets a fragment from Bonyhád, Hungary (catno.

15)8. The flat, c. 15 × 18 cm sized bronze sheet was folded

twice. On one side, rivet holes are visible as well as differ-

ing corrosion products parallel to the slightly strippededge, common to bronze helmets in general. Neverthe-

less, we have to consider that bell helmets (despite the two

2 Mödlinger 2013c.

3 See most recent e.g. Lippert 2011.

4 Mozsolics 1955, 38; von Merhart 1941, 11.

5 Hencken 1971 45; Clausing 2001, 199–225.

6 Hencken 1971, fig. 23–25.

7 Clausing 2001, 219.

8 Hencken 1971, 43; Fig. in Mozsolics 2000, pl. 40/14; see Catno. 14.

separate sockets and the only half preserved helmet from

Koàrk; catno. 8) are usually preserved (almost) completeand not placed in hoards as fragments only. In addition,

they are more massive on the rim/edge than the fragment

from Bonyhád. The association of the fragment with bell

helmets therefore remains unsecure.

Description

Bell helmets are, in proportion to their width, relatively

high. Their base diameter ranges from 19–23 cm, and their

height from 18–27.5 cm. In addition, the weight is similar:

the helmets weigh between 1032–1478 g (Tab. 2), differing

severely from the much lighter conical and cap helmets,

which never weigh more than 700 g9. This weight differ-

ence is due not only to their larger size, but mainly to their

massive cap. While conical and cap helmets, as well as theItalian helmets considered part of the bell helmets group

by H. Hencken and C. Clausing, have a maximum thick-

ness of less than 0.5 mm10. Bell helmets are up to 3 mm

thick, and even thicker around the rim; up to 5 mm. On the

helmets from the former Guttmann collection (catno. 11)

and the one from ‘Gorny and Mosch’ (catno. 12), 8–12 rivet

holes with a diameter from 3–10 mm are placed at a regu-

lar distance of about 5 cm apart. The so-called Ausschnitt

(cut out or opening) as noticed on the rim of the conical

helmets is not documented on bell helmets11.

The cap of bell helmets lacks ornamentation in everycase; only the central knob bears decoration on the shaft

in form of several horizontal lines12. The only exception is

the knob of the helmet from Endröd (catno. 7), which isdecorated with horizontal lines and chevrons with hatch-

ing (Fig. 4, above right), and the knob of the helmet from

Monte Altino (Catno. 14), which lacks any decoration. The

tubular hole usually passes through the whole knob.

C. Clausing notes that the knob on the ‘Gorny and Mosch’

helmet has a vertical hole, obviously closed with a cast-on

on the inside of the helmet13. Inside the upper end of the

knob, some organic filling seems to be visible. Likewise,

the tubular hole of the knob of the helmet from the former

9 Mödlinger 2013a; 2013b.

10 Hencken 1971, 32–47; Clausing 2001, 199–225.

11 Mödlinger 2013a.

12 Sehlsdorf (catno. 1), Åkocjan (catno. 3), Mezökövesd (catno. 6),Koàrk (catno. 8), former Zschille collection (catno. 10) or with addi-tional herringbone ornaments (Pikcolt (catno. 9), Slú}in (catno. 2),Mantova (catno. 4), helmets from the former Guttmann and Lipper-

heide collection, ‘Gorny and Mosch’ helmet.

13 Clausing 2005, 36.





3/28

154 Marianne Mödlinger, Bronze Age bell helmets: new aspects on typology, chronology and manufacture

Fig. 1: Bell helmets (scale: 1:2): 1 – Hungary (? ) (after Clausing 2005, fig. 6). 2 – Mezökövesd, Hungary. 3 – Hajdúböszörmény, Hungary.4 – Endröd (Gyomaendröd), Hungary





4/28


Fig. 2: Bell helmets (scale 1:2). 1 – Hungary (? ), former Guttmann collection (AG 1000). 2– Sehlsdorf, Germany. 3 – unknown; former Zschillecollection. 4 – unknown; former Lipperheide collection (today lost). (3 and 4 after Born/Hansen 1992, fig. 9 and 11)





5/28


Fig. 3: Bell helmets (scale 1:2). 1 – Koàrk, Romania (cross section after Hencken 1971, fig. 27). 2 – Pikcolt, Romania (detail: scale 1:1).3 – Mantova, Italy. 4 – Åkocjan, Slovenia (after Hencken 1971, fig. 26, a–b). 5 – Slu}ín, Czech Republic (after Salaå 2005, pl. 424/21).6 – Bonyhád, Hungary (after Mozsolics 1985, pl. 40/14)





6/28


Tab. 1: European, Bronze Age bell helmets

* see Krause 2003 ** see Born-Hansen 2001 *** see Born-Hansen 1992

Tab. 2: Weight and measurements of the helmets (* for helmets with supplementation applied during the restoration; the actual weight of thehelmets might have been higher)

Catno. findspot find

circumstances

museum inventory no. analyses

1 Sehlsdorf, Germany single find Museum für Ur- und Frühgeschichte Schwerin,Germany

unknown EDXRF*

2 Slu}ín, Czech Republic hoard Muzeum Prostëjov, Czech Republic 143668 –

3 Åkocjan, Slovenia votive deposit Naturhistorisches Museum Wien, Austria 47626 SEM-EDXS;metallography

4 Mantova, Italy (?) river (?) Antikenmuseum Berlin, Germany (formerLipperheide collection)

L 68 AAS ***

5 Hajdúböszörmény,Hungary

hoard Magyar Nemzeti Múzeum Budapest, Hungary 33/1858/3 AAS ***

6 Mezökövesd, Hungary hoard Magyar Nemzeti Múzeum Budapest, Hungary 60.2.2 AAS ***

7 Endröd, Hungary river Erkel Ferenc Múzeum Gyula, Hungary 60113,1 SEM-EDXS

8 Koàrk, Romania hoard Muzeul National Brukenthal Sibiu, Romania 11992 = A 4658 SEM-EDXS;metallography

9 Pikcolt, Romania hoard Muzeul Municipiului Carei, Romania 2290 SEM-EDXS10 unknown unknown Museum Berlin, Germany (Zschille collection) 13167 AAS ***

11 uncertain; Hungary ( ?) water ( ?) repository unknown (former Guttmanncollection)

AG 1000 AAS **

12 uncertain; Hungary (?) unknown repository unknown (Gorny & Mosch) no invno. –

13 unknown unknown lost; Königliche Museen Berlin, Germany(former Lipperheide collection)

no invno. –

14 Monte Altino, Italy unknown Museo Provinciale Sannitico, Campobasso,Italy

– –

15 Bonyhád (?), Hungary hoard Magyar Nemzeti Múzeum Budapest, Hungary 107/1889/167 –

helmet state high cap (cm) high knob (cm) dm (cm) thickness (mm) weight (g) rivetholes

Sehlsdorf complete 25,2 6,8 22.2 × 23.2 2.5 – 2.7 1455 11

Mantova complete 26,6 6,1 22.7 × 23.5 0.8 – 4.0 1478 ?

Hajdúböszörmény complete 25,5 5,8 20.5 × 23.5 3 1338 11

Mezökövesd complete* 23,5 6,2 22,5 2 – 3 1340 8

Endröd complete 26,1 6,2 19 × 23.2 5 (rim) 1032 8

Koàrk not complete 25 6,1 23 circa – 1524 > 4

Pikcolt complete* 18 – 22 – 1094 11

Zschille not complete 23,1 6,1 20.5 × 24.9 2–3 (rim); 0.5–1 (above) 1912 10

Guttmann AG 1000 complete 21,5 4,5 19.5 × 21.3 1.2 – 3.5 1150 11

Gorny and Mosch complete 24 – 21 circa 2.5 (rim) – 12

Lipperheide complete 25 circa – – – – > 7

Slu}ín only knob – 6,2 – – – –

Åkocjan only knob – 6,4 – – – –

Monte Altino complete 27.5 – 23.5 × 21 – – 6

Bonyhád fragment cap – – – – – > 3





7/28


Guttmann collection does not pass completely through

the knob. Sand found in the base of the socket, might sup-

port the hypothesis of water deposition. Furthermore, it

seems that some not yet properly identified organic resi-

dues remained inside the socket14.

On some helmets, traces of repairs and use-wear are

also visible. The helmet from Endröd shows several crackson the calotte, one of them mended during the Bronze Age

using a large, flat-headed rivet, which fastens a rectangu-

lar plate of bronze inside the helmet (Fig. 4, left). The caps

of the helmet from the former Guttmann collection and the

helmet from the former Zschille collection are covered

with pores, defects and vertical cracks. Horizontal traces

of hammering inside the helmet from Koàrk (Fig. 5) werealready noted in the inventory book of the museum in the

1830s and can be found on other bell helmets as well, in-

cluding the helmets from Sehlsdorf (also vertical traces of hammering), the former Zschille collection15, and those

from Mezökövesd, Pikcolt and Mantova. The Pikcolt hel-met has in the middle of the cap a decorated bronze sheet

like a ‘band-aid’ riveted on. On the inside of the helmet, it

is supported with a rectangular, undecorated additional

bronze sheet (Fig. 6). Most likely, it covers a hole or crack

in the cap, which was covered during the manufacturing

14 Ibid.

15 Born/Hansen 1992, 344.

process in this unusual way. The helmet from Hajdúbös-

zörmény (catno. 5), on the other hand, shows horizontal

traces of hammering only in the thicker area inside the

rim; inside the cap, almost no traces are visible. The hel-

mets from the former Guttmann collection, the one sold at

‘Gorny and Mosch’ and the helmet from the former Lipper-

heide collection could not be studied in detail.

Regarding the diameter, the rivet holes and the ‘com-

fort’ of wearing the helmets, it is clear that an organic inlay

or an organic cap was worn underneath the helmet. This is

also visible by different coloured corrosion products on

the outside of the helmets, usually reaching from the rim

to a few mm above the rivet holes. These normally darker

corrosion areas (Fig. 7) are the result of the organic inlay,

which was fixed with rivets inside the helmet. Similarly,

on the helmets from Mezökövesd, Hajdúböszörmény, the

former Guttmann collection16 and the helmet from ‘Gornyand Mosch’17, corrosion differs on the outside of the hel-

met from the rim up to a bit higher than the rivet holes, in-

dicating residues of a former organic lining, which was

bent outwards and fixed with rivets. P. Schauer also men-

tions dark residues on the inside and outside of the rim on

the helmet from Mantova18.

16 Born/Hansen 2001, 72, pl. XVI.

17 Clausing 2005, 35, fig. 6.

18 Schauer 1988, 447.

Fig. 4: Helmet from Endröd, Hungary. On the left, the outer (above) and inner (below) rimis visible – and a crack, most likely as a result of manufacture, which was covered with a rivetand an additional metal sheet. On the right, the unique decoration of the knob is visible (above),as the hammering traces of the base of the rim (below)





8/28


Distribution and DepositionThe main distribution area for bell helmets is the Carpa-

thian Basin, with five secure find spots (Hajdúböszörmény,

Mezökövesd, Endröd, Koàrk, Pikcolt) and the nearby find of Slu}ín, following the Danube and Morava upstream. Fourfinds might be considered as exports: the helmet from

Sehlsdorf in the North and the helmets from presumably

Mantova19 and Åkocjan to the west as well as the helmet

19 Mozsolics 1972, 373f. 393f.

from Monte Altino to the south (Fig. 8). For the four re-maining helmets (former Guttmann, Zschille and Lipper-

heide collection as well as the helmet from ‘Gorny and

Mosch’), we do not know anything about the location or

circumstances of their discovery. Nonetheless, accepting

a distribution centre in the Carpathian Basin, we might as-

sume a production centre for bell helmets in the same

area, as suggested by H. Hencken20. The helmet from

Sehlsdorf, along with other elite bronze sheet objects such

20 Hencken 1971, 9.

Fig. 5: Hammering traces on the inside of the helmet from Koàrk, Romania (above) and Pikcolt,Romania (below)





9/28


as Hajdúböszörmény-type vessels (i.e. from Siem/Aal-

borg or Granzin/Lübz) or bronze cups of the Jeniåovicetype, testifies to a constant exchange between the Carpa-

thian Basin and Northern Germany/West of the BalticSea. This is visible not only as an simple trade of objects,

but as a constant elite exchange of traditions, deposi-

tional practices and values, as already discussed in detail

by H. Born and S. Hansen21. Unfortunately, many bell hel-

mets do not have secure find spots or find circumstances.

The helmets from Sehlsdorf and Endröd are single finds;the helmets from presumably Mantova and from the

21 Born/Hansen 1992, 353f.

former Guttmann collection might be water finds (as the

helmet from Endröd certainly is). However, no find spot isknown for the helmet from the former Guttmann collec-

tion. For the four helmets from Monte Altino, the onefrom the former Zschille collection, the helmet from

‘Gorny and Mosch’ and the helmet from the Lipperheide

collection, we do not know anything about their find spot

or find circumstances. Massive copper carbonates in

cracks of the helmet from the former Zschille collection

might nevertheless indicate deposition in soil22. Most of

the helmets, including those from Slu}ín, Åkocjan, Koàrk,

22 Ibid. 341.

Fig. 6: Helmet from Pikcolt, Romania. Details of the riveted on decorated bronze on the outsideof the helmet (below). On the inside, another sheet was applied. The overlapping hammering tracesindicate that it was applied during the manufacture process





10/28


Pikcolt, Endröd, Hajdúböszörmény and Mezökövesd, werefound in hoards.

The composition of the hoards in which bell helmets

have been found varies. The hoard from Slu}ín consists of one ceramic vessel, in which 22 complete, destroyed or

only fragmented bronze objects were placed: 12 sickles lay

with the decorated side upside and seven socketed axeswith the blades all pointing north or northwest. Further

finds are a knob of a bell helmet, a tube/socket, and a frag-

ment of a sword blade. The composition of the metal finds

of the hoard is not at all typical for deposits of the Lausitzer

Urnfield culture due to the lack of jewellery. Finds like this

are more common to the southeast, in the Carpathian

Basin23. The chronological span from the votive place from

23 Salaå/Åmíd 1999, 33.

Åkocjan covers the entire Urnfield period. Valuable ob-jects, particularly arms and armour, including swords,

helmets, greaves, axes, spearheads, bronze vessels, were

thrown inside the cave or abyss. Many of these mainly

‘male’, warrior objects were deliberately damaged, being

burnt, melted, bent, broken or chopped up. In addition to

the helmet, the Hajdúböszörmény hoard contains oneHajdúböszörmény-type situla; two other situlae, of which

today only the handles are present; a bronze cup of the Je-

niåovice-Kirkendrup type; one smaller and one largerbronze bucket, both with cruciform handles24; at least 20

and perhaps 30 swords, including five Sprockhoff IIa type

swords, two Sprockhoff IIc type swords, four metal hilted

swords with flat pommel, two metal hilted swords with

24 Type B1 according to Patay 1990, 21–22.

Fig. 7: Helmets from Hajdúböszörmény (above left) and Mezökövesd (below left), both

Hungary, from the outside; no scale. Different corrosion products relating to the organicinlay attached with rivets to the helmet. On the helmet from Hajdúböszörmény thedrop-like traces of the removal of the corrosion during restoration (?) are still visible. Inthe small picture, one of the rivet holes from the helmet from Sehlsdorf, Germany(above right, © Landesamt für Kultur und Denkmalpflege Schwerin), is depicted





11/28


Fig. 8: Distribution map – Bronze Age bell helmets. The find spots of the helmets from the former Guttmann, Lipperheide and Zschillecollection and the auction from ‘Gorny and Mosch’ are unknown, and thus not depicted on the map





12/28


oval knob, six Schalenknauf-type swords and three sword

blade fragments which are now lost25. The bronze objects

of the hoard from Mezökövesd were placed inside eachother and then inside one big ceramic vessel. One bronze

vessel of the Hajdúböszörmény type contained the helmet,

in which two arm spirals with twisted ends were placed.

The ceramic vessel also contained fragments of two

bronze vessels type B126. The hoard from Bonyhád, which

contains a fragment possibly from a bell helmet, consists

of more than 200 objects, such as fragmented spearheads,

daggers, knife, sickles, chisel, arm rings, rings, pins, belt

buckles, spirals, fragments of a bronze cup, several bronze

sheet fragments (vessels?) as well as socketed and winged

axes27. The hoard from Pikcolt consists most likely only of the helmet and a bronze cup belonging to HaA28. It might

be possible that further finds belonging to the deposit

were not noted during the construction of the road, during

which the helmet and the cup were discovered.

Several authors have discussed the hoard of Koàrk,and the composition of the hoard varies from author to

author29 (see Tab. 3). G. F. Weber, the evangelic priest

from Koàrk who documented trade and find circum-

stances of the hoard, mentions more than 30 socketedaxes, two sickles, two spearheads and two helmets30. He

25 Patay 1990, 22; Moszolics 1984; Moszolics 2000, 46.

26 Patay 1969; 1990, 23.

27 Moszolics 2000, 102–104.


29 I.e. Ackner 1834, 222–285; Neigebaur 1851, 275; Goos 1876, 50; Moz-

solics 1955, 39; Petrescu-Dîmboviwa 1978, 144f.; Luca/Georgescu2008, 27–33.

30 Luca/Georgescu 2008, 27.

noted that just a small part of the deposit was sold to the

collection of J. M. Ackner (one helmet, a spearhead, a

sickle and one socketed axe)31. Weber donated four sock-

eted axes to the Brukenthal Museum in 1836. J. Neigebaur

mentions another different assemblage of the hoard –

three spearheads, one helmet and one fibula (probably

roman) – arriving at the Brukenthal Museum more or less

the same time32. C. Goos notes that the second helmet as

well as more than 30 socketed axes and the fibula (ob-

viously he was quoting the mistake of J. Neigebaur) went

to a private collection in Hannover33. Furthermore,

J. Hampel mentions a second hoard from Koàrk, alsofound by gypsies and containing a helmet as well34. Re-

putedly, it was passed to a private collector in Hannover.

A. Mozsolics states that other finds of the hoard were

found inside the helmets: in the now missing helmet,

30 axes were found. In the other hoard, two spearheads,

one mace head and a few sickles were deposited inside

the helmet35. It is the first time that a mace head is noted

within the context of the hoard, which most likely is due

to plate 1 in the Ackner publication, which depicts finds

from Koàrk but from different periods. M. Petrescu–Dîm-

boviwa depicts five axes, one spearhead, one sickle andthe helmet as well as a part of the second helmet as a part

of the hoard, mentioning briefly that more than 30 axes,

two spearheads and two sickles were found in two

31 Ackner 1834, 274, pl. I/1.

32 Neigebaur 1851, 275.

33 Goos 1876, 50; Luca/Georgescu 2008, 27.

34 Hampel 1886, 96.

35 Mozsolics 1955, 39.

Tab. 3: Composition of the hoard of Koàrk, Romania, according to different authors

Author Axes Helmets Spearheads sickles Varia

Luca – Georgescu 2008, citing Weber(who bought the hoard)

> 30 2 2 2

Ackner 1834: Weber sold to Ackner collection 1 1st helmet 1 1

Luca – Georgescu 2008, citing Weber: donation 1836to Brukenthal Museum

4

Neigebaur 1851 1 3 fibula (?)

Goos 1876: finds sold to private collection in Hannover > 30 2nd helmet fibula (?)

Mozsolics 1955 30 2 2 few mace head

Petrescu–Dîmboviwa 1978 21 and > 9(min. 3 Hannover)

2(1 Hannover)

2 2

Schauer 1988 21 2 2 few mace head





13/28


helmets36. From her depiction, 21 axes were deposited

in one helmet37. According M. Petrescu-Dîmboviwa, someof the finds – at least a helmet and three axes – seem

to be kept in a private collection in Hannover38. Today,

from the hoard of Koàrk only the first helmet, one spear-head (flat, rhombic blade type), one sickle (type Uioara 9,

HaA1–B1), two socketed axes (type Wanzek 2.b.7), onesocketed axe with Y-shaped decoration on one side (type

Wanzek 2.b.6.a or Boroffka-Ridiche 2.b.6.a.3–0/3), one

unique socketed axe with herringbone decoration and one

rather common axe with concave mouth are preserved39.

It is unclear whether one of the helmets of unknown

provenience might be the second helmet from Koàrk, if thehelmet is still preserved or if it is held in some unknown

repository today. The only thing we know for certain is

that a second helmet, most likely associated with the

known helmet from Koàrk, was sold to a private collection

to Hannover40

. H. Hencken has taken into account thepossibility that one of the lost helmets from the Lipper-

heide (denied by P. Schauer without any further expla-

nation) or Zschille collection might be the second helmet

from Koàrk41. Alternatively, the helmet from the formerGuttmann collection or the helmet from ‘Gorny and

Mosch’ might be the lost second helmet from Koàrk. How-ever, there are also speculations about a second helmet

from the deposit from Hajdúböszörmény, and we might

consider the possibility that one of the four helmets with

uncertain provenience might originally be from Hajdúbös-

zörmény. J. Hampel discusses one more helmet found at

Hajdúböszörmény, and shows two helmets on his plates42.

Nevertheless, there is a mistake in the plate; the second

helmet is the one from Endröd, as J. Hampel himself no-ticed one year later43.

Chronology and typology

Due to the wide time difference, it seems unlikely that the

bell helmets are directly connected to Greek depictions of

rounder boar tusk helmets, as H. Hencken suggests44. A

European evolution seems much more likely, though we

36 Petrescu-Dîmboviwa 1978, 144. 37 As copied also by Schauer 1988.

38 Petrescu-Dîmbovi wa 1978, 144f. 39 Luca/Georgescu 2008, 54 f.

40 Goos 1876, 50.

41 Hencken 1971, 50, fig. 28; 29. Schauer 1988.

42 Hampel 1876, pl. XII.

43 Hampel 1877, opposite pl. XIII.

44 Hencken 1971, 8.

cannot find any direct ancestor of this massive, heavy hel-

met type. However, not only typological differences, but

also differences in the manufacturing technique support

the hypothesis of a new, European invention most likely

in the Carpathian Basin. The helmets were made out of an

as-cast, flat disc as were the older conical and cap hel-

mets, and the decorated Italic helmets or the cap helmetswith massive knobs. Bell helmets have less intensive de-

formation applied compared to the construction of the

other, much thinner types of helmets.

G. von Merhart noted that bell helmets are younger

than conical helmets45, while P. Schauer noted that the

sockets of the older Urnfield bell helmets testify that they

were at least for some time contemporary with the conical

bell helmets (definition of conical bell helmets after P.

Schauer)46, and this partial contemporaneity was again

noted by H. Born and S. Hansen47. Today, however, the re-

lationship of conical helmets and bell helmets is clear.Chronological and typological aspects of conical helmets

were recently discussed in detail, suggesting a much ear-

lier date for conical helmets: BzC2 (14th cent. BC) for the

helmet from Biecz, BzC2/D (14th–13th cent. BC) for the hel-

mets from the BzD–HaA (c. 1300–1050 BC) hoards from

Brno-Qebkovice, Keresztéte, Nadap, Spiåská Belá and{aåkov. Meanwhile, the conical helmet found in the HaB1(c. 10th cent. BC) hoards (dated to HaB1 only due to the

vessel’s type Hajdúböszörmény) from Lúbky and Sîg areconsidered to be the oldest objects in the hoards48.

The bell helmets found in hoards, such as the helmets

from Slu}ín, Hajdúböszörmény, Mezökövesd, Koàrk andPikcolt, can be considered for the chronological evalu-ation of bell helmets. All hoards with bell helmets are uni-

formly dated to the 10th–9ht cent. BC, most of them to

HaB1. M. Salaå – M. Åmíd date the hoard of Slu}ín to theRohod-period based on the socketed axes, and from ce-

ramic vessels more specifically to HaA2/B1, tending more

to the beginning of HaB1 (deposit horizon Kqenûvky)49 orHaB150. The helmet from Hajdúböszörmény is generally

dated to HaB151; only J. Kossack placed it in HaA252. P. Patay

dates the helmet from Mezökövesd to HaB1, as indicated by

its similarity to the hoard from Hajdúböszörmény53. The

45 Merhart 1941, 4f. note 3.

46 Schauer 1988, 191.


48 Mödlinger 2013a.

49 Salaå/Åmíd 1999, 33. 50 Salaå 2005, 158. 51 Mozsolics 1955, 37f.: horizon Hajdúböszörmény, B Via; Müller-

Karpe 1959, 114; 139; 167; 204; Gimbutas 1965, 151–153; Patay 1969, 200.

52 Kossack 1954, 27f.

53 Patay 1969, 200f.





14/28

Tab. 4: Results of all analyses on the alloy composition carried out on bell helmets so far, including the new SEM-EDXS data achieved.

* see Krause 2003, attached CD; ** see Born/Hansen 2001; *** see Born/Hansen 1992, Tab. 1

Analyses findspot analyses Cu Sn Pb Sb As S Fe Zn Ni Ag Bi Co Au

1 EDXRF* Sehlsdorf cap 87,0 11,7 0,3 0,2 0,0 tr. tr. 0,1 0,1

1 EDXRF* Sehlsdorf knob 88,0 10,0 0,4 0,2 0,1 tr. tr. 0,1 0,1

3 SEM-EDXS Åkocjan knob 88,3 10,2 0,5 0,2 0,2 0,5 0,1 0,1 0,2

3 SEM-EDXS Åkocjan cap 89,8 9,0 0,1 n.d. tr. tr. tr. n.d. 0,1 0,1 n.d. 0,24 AAS *** Mantova cap 89,7 8,4 0,4

4 AAS *** Mantova knob 88,5 9,8 0,4

5 AAS *** Hajduböszörmény cap 10,4 1,6

5 AAS *** Hajduböszörmény knob 16,2 1,1

6 AAS *** Mezökövesd cap 11,6 0,8

6 AAS *** Mezökövesd knob 16,7 1,0

7 SEM-EDXS Endröd cap 91,0 7,0 1,4 0,3 0,2 0,1

7 SEM-EDXS Endröd knob 89,7 7,5 1,9 0,3 0,5 0,1 0,1

8 SEM-EDXS Koàrk cap 87,3 10,3 1,6 0,3 0,3 tr. 0,4 tr. 0,1 tr.

8 SEM-EDXS Koàrk knob 92,9 1,7 0,3 1,6 1,1 0,3 0,1 1,1 0,6

9 SEM-EDXS Pikcolt cap 84,6 11,0 3,1 0,3 0,3 0,4 0,1 0,1 0,2

9 SEM-EDXS Pikcolt knob 91,5 6,3 1,2 0,4 0,2 0,1 0,3

10 AAS *** Zschille cap 87,0 11–12 0,5

10 AAS *** Zschille knob 90,8 7,6 0,8

11 AAS ** unknown cap 89,93 8,26 1 ,21 0,09 0,20 0,04 0,02 0,13 0,06


15/28


helmet from Koàrk is dated to the Transylvanian BronzeAge IV, which is contemporary with HaB(1)54. S. A. Luka and

A. Georgescu date the hoard to HaB1 (Moigrad – Tàuteuperiod), as does M. Rusu55. I. Németi dates the helmet from

Pikcolt to HaB, while M. Rusu dates it to HaB156. Most partsof the votive place from Åkocjan belong to HaB, but there

are also finds from the Hallstatt Iron Age, as iron spear-heads, bronze axes and fragments of a so-called ‘Schüssel-

helm’. In addition, fragments of crested helmets were de-

posited in the cave57. C. F. C. Hawkes and M. A. Smith prefer

late HaB while G. von Merhart and G. Kossack are consider-

ing the deposit typical for HaB58. Nevertheless, we have to

consider that the votive place from Åkocjan contains findsfrom the 12th–8th cent. BC, therefore can not be used as

closed find and as a marker of the bell helmet chronology.

Due to the clear and uniform chronological classifi-

cation, the helmets with unknown find locations (Monte

Altino, ‘Mantova’, former Guttmann, Zschille and Lipper-heide collection as well as the helmet from ‘Gorny and

Mosch’) or single helmet finds (Sehlsdorf, Endröd) wereand are dated according to the chronological well-defined

hoards containing bell helmets. A. Mozsolics dated the

helmet from Endröd to HaB59, and J.-P. Schmidt placed thehelmet from Sehlsdorf in period IV/V (c. 1100–900 BC) 60.

Analyses

So far, elemental analyses of six bell helmets have beenpublished61. In order to present an overview of all analyses

of bell helmets, the previously published analyses with

AAS are presented together with the newly acquired SEM-

EDXS results in Tab. 4.

SEM-EDXS

The two new samples from the Koàrk and Åkocjan helmetswere mounted in epoxy resin for metallography and

polished with up to 0.25 mm diameter paste. The samples

54 Hencken 1971, 50, after Mozsolics 1955, 48.

55 Luka/Georgescu 2008, 33; 54; Rusu 1990, 70.

56 Németi 1972, 120; Rusu 1990, 77.

57 Hencken 1971, 120; Kossack 1954, 45; von Merhart 1941, 30; Szom-

bathy 1913, 151.

58 Hawkes/Smith 1957, 140; von Merhart 1952, 58.

59 Endröd 1955, 48.60 Mozsolics 1955, 48; Schmidt 2004, 195.

61 Born/Hansen 1992, 339–356; Born/Hansen 2001, 270; Krause 2003.

were not only studied with the SEM-EDXS, but also with

light optical microscope with bright field and dark field.

The alloy composition of drilling samples (finds from

Åkocjan, Endröd and Pikcolt) and two micro-samples(Koàrk, Škocjan) were characterized by Energy DispersiveX-Ray Spectroscopy (using a PENTAFET® EDXS detector

sensitive to light elements, Z>5) connected to a ScanningElectron Microscope (SEM) Evo40 Zeiss. The operating

conditions were an accelerating voltage of 20 kV, P


16/28


both cap and knob. Most likely, the cap was cast first. Once

the cap was finished, the remaining alloy from the cast of

the cap was melted again to be used for the cast-on of the

knob, which might be also the reason for the slightly

higher amount of lead in the knobs. For the helmet from

the former Guttmann collection, we can even assume that

the one rivet analysed was made of the same alloy as capand knob. Though the alloy composition is uniform for

each helmet, the results differ slightly from helmet to hel-

met, but are still in the range of uncertainty. The helmet

from Endröd consists of 7–7.5 wt % Sn and 1.4–1.9 wt% Pb,and the helmet from the Guttmann collection contains

about 8.1 wt% Sn and 1.3 wt% Pb while the helmet from

Åkocjan around 9–10.2 wt% Sn and 0.1–0.5 wt% Pb. Thehelmet from Mantova just shows slight differences in the

Sn-amount between cap (8.4 wt% Sn) and knob (9.8 wt%

Sn), but the same amount of Pb.

In contrast with the previously discussed helmets, thehelmets from Hajduböszörmény and Mezökövesd showsignificantly different Sn-amounts for both cap and knob,

though the amount of Pb is similar. Both helmets bear

a knob with over 16 wt% Sn, while the caps contain

10.4 wt% and 11.6 wt% Sn respectively. Furthermore, the

composition of both cap and knob differ widely in the hel-

met from Koàrk. This helmet also shows a significant col-our variation due to the difference in the alloy composi-

tion: the cap contains 10.3 wt% Sn and 1.6 wt% Pb, while

the knob 1.7 wt% Sn and only 0.3 wt% Pb. However, sig-

nificantly elevated levels, between 1–1.6 wt % of Sb, As

and Ni, have to be taken into account. Similar high quan-

tities of these elements are usually found in Fahlore.

Therefore, we might consider the possibility that the knob

was made out of Fahlore with (almost) no previous recyc-

ling process. The helmets from the former Zschille collec-

tion and the helmet from Pikcolt also show differentamounts of Sn and Pb for both cap and knob, as the knob

has c. 4–5 wt % less Sn than the cap. Both caps also show

significantly higher amounts of Pb than the knobs. In light

of this new analyses, we cannot agree with the assumption

of H. Born/S. Hansen that the different alloy composition

for the helmet from Zschille points to a different work-shop65. It rather fits with the helmets from Koàrk and Pik-colt, in the group of bell helmets with significantly higher

quantities of tin in the cap than in the knob.


Metallography

One micro-sample each could be taken from the helmet

from Koàrk and the helmet from Åkocjan: on the helmetfrom Koàrk in the middle of the cap, on the helmet fromÅkocjan close to the knob. Other helmets were not

sampled, since most of them are in perfect condition, werenot accessible or suffered some recent heat treatment dur-

ing restoration, as is the case with the helmet from the

former Zschille collection. The samples from the helmets

from Koàrk and Åkocjan were studied with an opticalmicroscope in bright field and dark field as well as the

SEM-EDXS for the elemental analyses. Due to the inter-

crystalline corrosion products on both samples, the ma-

trix is clearly visible and etching was not necessary. On

the helmet from Koàrk, Pb is regularly distributed in themetallic matrix in the form of fine, globular inclusions.

(Fig. 9). Polygonal grains with slipping bands and mech-anical twins crossing each other are clearly visible. These

are typical of recrystallization annealing after cold de-

formation, followed by another slight mechanical de-

formation as shown by mechanical twins. The cap of the

helmet from Åkocjan, Slovenia, was sampled very close tothe knob in order to document the potential change in the

microstructure during the cast-on of the knob. The micro-

structural features (such as shape factor of inclusions) of

the cap itself indicate an amount of total biaxial de-

formation of 40–45%. The last step of work was slight cold

hammering, indicated by annealing twins slip lines. The

rounded, undeformed shape of the grains (‘frozen’ during

grain growth) close to the surface indicates a local thermal

treatment at high temperature, as might have happened as

a consequence of the cast-on of the knob. On the outer sur-

face of the cap, above an interface of slight corrosion and

close to the knob, a less than 10mm layer of a+d eutectoid

is visible, destroyed in some areas due to crevice corrosion

(Fig. 10). The formation of the a+d eutectoid layer might be

connected to the interaction between cap and knob during

its cast-on66. Only the d-phase with its much higher resis-

tance to corrosion is still present. The Sn necessary to cre-

ate the thin layer of a+d eutectoid on the cap’s surface de-rives from the knob during the cast-on process, due to the

phenomenon of Sn-sweating, since intentional tinning,

i.e. with cassiterite on the bronze surface between knob

and cap, does not seem to be very likely. Furthermore, the

layer of a+d eutectoid is noted only in a small area of the

sample, where the cap was close to the knob. Tin sweat

requires shrinkage of the cooling metal away from the

66 Caumont et al. 2006.





17/28


Fig. 9: Helmet from Koàrk, Romania. SEM-picture of the micro-sample from the mid of the cap.The white dots are Pb-inclusions, the elongated, light grey areas are Cu2-xFexS-inclusionsindicating the total deformation of the cap of 80%





18/28


walls of the mould, which results in internal pressure, for-

cing the still molten, tin-rich bronze to move to the sur-

face, more precisely into the gap between mould and raw-

cast. Fast cooling and the release of dissolved gas during

the solidification process increase the hydrostatic press-

ure and enhance the occurrence of tin sweat67. In the case

of the knob cast on the helmet’s cap, the molten, tin-rich

bronze touches the bronze cap and forms, during the cool-ing process, a+d eutectoid and results furthermore in a Sn-

enrichment in the grains close to the surface (up to 15%).

However, the temperature achieved by the cap was not

high enough to melt it and then weld both parts together.

From the deformation of the Cu2-xFexS-inclusions68,

we can estimate the total biaxial deformation from the as-

67 Meeks 1986.

68 Mödlinger/Piccardo 2012; Pernot 2000.

cast to the finished cap at around 80% in the middle of the

cap for the helmet from Koàrk. In contrast, the top of thecap close to the knob of the helmet from Åkocjan is only40–45% deformed. This level of deformation is rather low

in comparison with the much thinner conical and (decor-

ated) cap helmets69 and supports the hypothesis that the

bell helmets were cast as flat discs and then die forged in

an open forging die, with additional deformation usingalso a so-called Treibfaust (rounded or convex stake

anvil). The higher deformation in the middle of the cap as

shown at the helmet from Koàrk results in a much thinnerbronze sheet than on the rim or the central top of the hel-

mets. The level of deformation allows calculating that the

as-cast thickness for both caps should be higher than

2 mm, which is the estimation from the percentage of de-

69 Mödlinger 2013a; 2013b.

Fig. 10: Helmet from Åkocjan, Slovenia. The bronze sheet of the cap is severely corroded and only light deformed (c. 45 %). Note the inter- andintra-crystalline corrosion following the metal structure and the remains of a+d eutectoid on the surface of the cap (on the picture above left:at the bottom of the sample; on the two SEM images on the right on the top of the sample the white layer)





19/28


Fig. 11: Reconstruction of the manufacturing process of the cap of a bell helmet, including the amount of deformation noted on the samplesfrom the helmets from Åkocjan andKoàrk. For the as-cast of the disc, three different possibilities are depicted; for the vertical cast, the spaceholders for the rivet holes additionally serve for the fixation of the two halves of the mould. The round bronze disc with the cast rivet holesthen was deformed via deep-drawing or die forging over a most likely wooden die, as also indicated by the direction, form and cross-sectionof the hammering traces (see also Fig. 4, below). Forming the cap lead to differing thickness of the cap (0.4–5mm). As a final step, the knobwas cast-on (Fig. 12)





20/28


formation and corresponding final thickness. This value

cannot take into account all material losses occurring dur-

ing shaping, such as flaking off of oxygen, polishing and

grinding as well as usage. The biaxial deformation is itself

an approximation of the real movement of matter during

die forging. The temperature of annealing for both hel-

mets was below the solidus curve of the alpha-phase inthe equilibrium diagram Cu-Sn, but was high enough to

homogenize the solid solution (according to the composi-

tion of the alloy usually between 550–600°C; a fire with

charcoal gives more stable temperatures). This effect is

not obtained in the course of a single heat treatment, but

results from several alternating cycles of annealing and

cold deformation. For both helmets, the last step of pro-

duction was cold deformation, rather than annealing,

most likely to increase the hardness of the cap.

Manufacture

For the helmets from Endröd, Åkocjan, the former Gutt-mann-collection and potentially the helmet from Mantova

(and maybe Sehlsdorf), we can assume a production of

both parts with the same alloy; it is even possible that they

came out of the same melt. The as-cast disc for the manu-

facture of the cap was first cast in a vertical or horizontal

bivalve mould or as an open cast; in the latter case, it is im-

portant to place charcoal on top of the molten metal once

cast in order to prevent oxidation and a rough surface. Themetal remaining from the cast (sprue, flashing) and metal

chiselled or chopped off during the production of the hel-

met might be collected and re-used for the casting of the

knob. For the helmet from the former Guttmann collec-

tion, it is even likely that the one rivet analysed was made

of the same alloy as cap and knob. Moreover, the assump-

tion that the helmet from the former Zschille collection

was produced in another workshop due to its different

alloy composition and less perfect finish, cannot be sup-

ported. Several arguments support the notion that bell

helmets were cast as flat discs and then open die forged

(edging), possibly on wooden forging die(s) (Fig. 11):

1. The shape and inside surface of rivet holes indicates

casting rather than punching as already noted by H. Born

regarding the bell helmet from the former Zschille collec-

tion70. No helmet shows regular, round holes: all are

slightly distorted to an oval shape, pointing from the rim


to the knob – as if they were stretched to the top of the hel-

met (Fig. 4, 5 and 7).

2. The inside of all bell helmets shows massive tangenti-

nal and radial traces, which bear a deeper impression to-

wards the top of the helmet – indication of a hammering

direction as indicated in Fig. 11.The thickness of the original as-cast was more than

2 mm; according to the thickness of the rim and hammer-

ing traces on the edge of the rim, which were broadening

and therefore also increasing the stability of the helmet,

we can assume an average thickness of the as-cast disc of

4–5 mm (i.e. Fig. 4, below right). A disc with a diameter of

ca. 30 cm (calculated from the average circumference of

all bell helmets and an additional allowance of 6 cm in

radius) could have been cast without any problems, es-

pecially when containing with the noted amounts of Pb,

which significantly increase the castability71

. The extraallowance serves for chiselling off cracks appearing due to

material tension before they reach the actual helmet, and

to provide gaps appearing during casting in the area for

the helmet.

3. Vertical cracks were noticed on the radiography of the

helmet from the former Zschille collection72. Further ver-

tical cracks due to material stress during die forging were

noted on the helmets of Hajduböszörmény, Koàrk andEndröd.

4. The total deformation of the caps (about 80% in the

middle of the cap of the helmet from Koàrk and about40–45% close to the knob of the helmet from Åkocjan) isgenerally lower than on decorated cap helmets with a uni-

form amount of deformation around 80–95% obtained

during sheet manufacturing and is in agreement with the

process of open die forging, where the rim and the centre

are less deformed, but the part in between severely (Fig.

13).

5. Differing thickness and bi-axial deformation as ob-

served indicate die forging. In a manufacturing style simi-lar to that noted by M. Pernot and P. Piccardo – M. Pernot

for the bronze cauldron of Estissac (Aube, France; 5th cent.

BC; the cauldron is just slightly wider than the helmets)73,

the helmets all have a thicker rim (which serves also for

stiffening the helmet) and the metal thickness decreases

71 Piccardo et al. 2009, 31–38.


73 Pernot 2000, fig. 1; Piccardo/Pernot 1997.





21/28


compared to the top of the cap, where it is again slightly

thicker. If the helmets would have been made out of a cir-

cular flange that was cut out of a previously made thin

sheet, and the flange was deformed by ‘raising’, there

would not have been such a high change in thickness.

6. The combination of weight, diameter and changing

thickness of the helmets also indicate die forging, if we as-

sume that the as-cast disc used was cast with the same

thickness as noted on the edge of the rim (4–5 mm). Since

the volume of the deformed metal sheet per se does not

change, the density of copper is 8.96 g/cm–3 (tin bronze is

slightly lighter) and the maximal diameter of the helmetaverages 22 cm, we can calculate the approximate weight

of the as-cast disc using the following formula V = p·r2·h.

The resultant weight prediction is 1.36 kg (corresponding

with the actual helmet’s weight, also taking into account

material loss during manufacture).

After casting, the bronze was open die forged to achieve

the bell-shaped form of the final cap. To achieve this de-

formation, several cycles of annealing and cold working

were applied, as indicated by the hammering traces (Fig. 5

and 11) and the metallographic structure. Since the

necessary cycles of annealing and deformation depend on

several factors as annealing temperature and duration,

quenching, strength of hammering, etc., the number of

cycles can not be calculated. Water quenching was most

likely used as well in order to avoid the precipitation of in-

termetallic phases (e.g. the brittle delta-phase). The last

step of production on both helmets was a slight de-

formation during final cold working.

A hand-turned lathe was most likely used to produce

the wax model of the knob. This is indicated both by the

perfect geometry of the knob and the horizontal decora-

tion of the shaft. As imprints and deformation on the dec-oration indicate, it was already applied on the wax model

and not after casting. The central stick used in the lathe or

another one, applied inside the hole left by the first, was

used to fix the wax model in axis once covered in clay. It

also served as an indication if the knob was placed cor-

rectly in axis to the cap. After the finish of the surface, the

cap was ready for the cast-on of the knob. For this, a hole

of approx. 1.5–2 cm diameter was punched through at the

top of the cap, most likely with a punch. Before placing the

mould for the knob on the helmet, the inside of the helmet

Fig. 12: Inside view of the cast-on knob of bell helmets. Note the untreated surface of the knob. From left to right. First row: Hajdúböszörmény,Mezökövesd, Sehlsdorf. second row: Endröd, Pikcolt, Koàrk. Third row: former Guttmann collection (after Born/Hansen 1991, fig. 203),Slu}ín, Åkocjan, former Zschille collection (after Born/Hansen 1992, fig. 8)





22/28


was filled with some drops of wax (Fig. 12), serving as the

inner ‘disc’ to fix the knob and then surrounded with clay.

Once the wax was hard, the clay mould of the knob with

the central wooden stick was placed on the cap, so that the

stick perforated the little wax disc inside the cap, resulting

in the ‘flashing’ around the hole, as seen on Fig. 12. Once

the mould was placed and fixed on the cap, the helmetwas turned and heated to remove the wax. To improve the

quality of ‘welding’ by cast-on, the cap was warmed before

casting and the clay baked, but not burnt. In this way, the

diffusion process of the liquid metal on the cap increases

and the fresh cast on bronze wets the cap. Thus, the cool-

ing rate is slower and micro-segregation in the as-cast is

reduced (this is also heavily influenced by the thickness of

the preheated clay mould). Any further traces of de-

formation in the microstructure in the part of the cap

around the knob were most likely applied after the knob

was cast on, as we see in the sample from the Åkocjan hel-met, with only a few slipping bands.

The knob was cast-on at the top of every helmet; only

in the case of the helmet from Mantova it is slightly de-

centred. The knob of the helmet from the former Zschille

collection can even be moved74, most likely because the

cap and the mould were not pre-heated before the cast-on.

Since the knobs on all examined helmets were cast on and

not welded or soldered on, it does not seem to be very

likely that the knob from the helmet from the former

Zschille collection was cast separately and then soldered

on, as was suggested by H. Born/S. Hansen75.

Conclusions

Today, archaeologists know of twelve complete bell hel-

mets, the knobs of two further helmets and one probable

helmet fragment. The distribution centre is in the Carpa-

thian basin with four further finds, one each in Northern

Germany (Sehlsdorf), Northern and Southern Italy (Man-

tua (?) and Monte Altino [fig. 14]) and Slovenia (Åkocjan),which were in all probability imports. All bell helmets date

to the rather short period of HaB1 (c. 10th cent. BC). How-

ever, their origin or evolution is still unclear. Due to their

unique physiognomy, a local invention, respectively de-

velopment from the production of cap helmets, most

likely in the Carpathian Basin, seems highly reasonable.

Owing to their size, weight and the lack of any decoration

on the massive cap, bell helmets are clearly distinguish-



able from the much thinner, lighter and older (decorated)

cap and conical helmets, the decorated Italian helmets

with massive knobs and the thin, light cap helmets with

massive knobs.

We must also note that the alloy composition of bell

helmets differs from those of conical and cap helmets,

with the amount of Pb being significantly higher than inthe older helmets. On three helmets (Endröd, former Gutt-mann collection and Åkocjan), the same alloy was used toproduce both cap and knob. The helmets from Sehlsdorf

and Mantova were produced with similar alloys. The hel-

mets from the former Zschille collection, Pikcolt and Koàrkdiffer in that they were produced with different alloys: the

knobs of the first two helmets contain 5 wt% less Sn,

while the knob of the helmet from Koàrk contains less than2 wt % Sn, but significantly high amounts of Sb, As and Ni

(over 1 wt % each). The knob of the helmets from Hajdu-

böszörmény and Mezökövesd instead were made with5 wt % Sn more than the cap. Weight, varying thickness

and surface documentation of the helmets, as well as the

microstructure of the caps from the Åkocjan and Koàrk hel-mets, supports the assumption that bell helmets were

made out of flat, 4–5 mm thick as-cast discs with cast rivet-

holes which then where die-forged. Once the calotte was

finished, the knob was cast-on using the lost wax tech-

nique.

By discussing bell helmets not only in chrono-typo-

logical terms but also in terms of their manufacture and

chemical composition, we can clearly distinguish them

from the older conical and (decorated) cap helmets, and

postulate a separate development of this helmet type in

the Carpathian Basin.

In comparison to the previous smaller, thinner decor-

ated cap helmets, the higher thickness, compactness and

bigger size of bell helmets, which also permitted the appli-

cation of a thicker, higher protective organic inlay, pro-

tected its owner much more. That bell helmets were used

in whatever kind of combat, is indicated by battle traces

e.g. on the helmet from Hajdúböszörmény.

Catalogue

Catno. 1 – Sehlsdorf

Sehlsdorf, Lkr. Parchim, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Ger-

many – single find (?) – complete helmet – height:

25.2 cm; 6.8 cm (knob); dm: 22.2–23.2 cm; thickness:

2.5–2.7 mm (rim); weight: 1455 g – Archäologisches Land-

esmuseum Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, invno. 315 – Fig-

ure 2 and 12 – Mörtz 2011a, 367; Clausing 2005, 36; Schmidt





23/28


2004, 87–95; 195, catno. 50, fig. on page 92; Hänsel 2003;

Born/Hansen 2001, 79; Clausing 2001, 219; Catalogue

1999b, 257, no. 154; Born/Hansen 1992, 344f.; Hundt 1997,

no. 132, pl. 39/2; Calzecchi-Onesti 1991, 77, no. 8; Albrecht

1991, 13–16; Schauer 1988, 188; Keiling 1987, 96, fig. 50;

Borchhardt 1972, 129, catno. 29, 5; Hencken 1971, 43 fig. 21,

g–h; Drescher 1958, 52; von Merhart 1941, 11; Sprockhoff 1956, 85; Sprockhoff 1930, 44; Beltz 1910, 253.

Find circumstances: The helmet was found during

peat cutting in 1836.

Catno. 2 – Slu}ínSlu}ín, Okr. Prostëjov, Czech Republic – hoard – onlyknob – height: 6.5 cm; dm base: 6.2 cm – Muzeum Prostë-jov, invno. 143.668 – Figure 3 and 12 – Clausing 2005, 36f.;

Salaå 2005, 502–514 pl. 424/21; Clausing 2001, 219; Salaå/Åmíd 1999, 19f. 31f. fig. 7,2; 10,21.

Find circumstances: In summer 1997 in the South of Slu}ín, at Zábrusky, approx. 270 m above sea level, 13 stor-age pits of the Lausitzer Urnfield culture were found. In

the northern half of one of the storage pits, just 30 cm

above the ground, a ceramic vessel, covered with the base

of another one with a hole – maybe a ‘Seelenloch’ – was

found. It contained 22 complete, destroyed or only frag-

mented bronze objects: 12 sickles, seven socketed axes,

one knob of a helmet, a cast tube or socket and a fragment

of a sword blade (Salaå/Åmíd 1999, 33).

Catno. 3 – ÅkocjanÅkocjan, Obalno-kraåka, Slovenia – long-term votiveplace – knob – high: 6.4 cm; weight: 248 g – Naturhisto-

risches Museum Wien, invno. 47.626 – Figure3, 10 and 12–

Clausing 2005, 36; Clausing 2001, 219; Borgna 1999, 158

fig. 5; Hencken 1971, 48 fig. 26,a–c; von Merhart 1941, 12 fig.

2,10 left; Szombathy 1913, 149 fig. 94.

Find circumstances: The long-term votive place from

Åkocjan contains over 600 metal objects and fragments(mainly fragmented and deliberately destroyed arms and

armour). First objects were discovered in 1909, which led

to first excavations by the Prähistorische Kommission,

k.k. Naturhistorisches Hofmuseum (today the Natural His-tory Museum Vienna).

Catno. 4 – Mantova (?)

‘Mantova’, prov. Mantua, Lombardia, Italy – find circum-

stances uncertain: ‘river find close to Mantova’ – complete

helmet – height: 26.6 cm; 6.1 cm (knob); dm: 22.7–23.5 cm;

6.2 cm (base of the knob); thickness: 0.8–4 mm; weight:

1478 g – Figure 3 and 12 – Antikenmuseum Berlin (former

Lipperheide collection), invno. L 68 – Clausing 2005, 36;

Iaia 2005, 46, fig. 4.2; Clausing 2001, 219 fig. 28; Born/

Hansen 2001, 79; 251 fig. 200; Born/Hansen 1992, 345f.;

Calzecchi-Onesti 1991, 80 no. 19; Egg/Waurick 1990, 41

Nr. 7.5 fig. 8,2; Pflug 1989, 65 no. 35; Schauer 1988, 182; 188,

447, fig. K 54a–c; Borchhardt 1972, 129 no. 29,11; Mozsolics

1972, 373f. 393f.; Hencken 1971, 50 fig. 28; von Merhart

1941, 12 no. 18, footnote 15; Szombathy 1913, 149 fig. 93;

Schröder 1912, 24 fig. 15; von Lipperheide 1896, 128 no.230b; von Wieser 1894, pl. 7/43; Catalogo della collezione

di antichitá fu Amilcare Ancona (1892) 3 no. 26.

Find circumstances: The helmet was purchased from

the collection Amilcare Ancona in Milan. Further in-

formation is unknown.

Catno. 5 – Hajdúböszörmény

Hajdúböszörmény, Hajdú-Bihar megye, Hungary –

hoard– complete helmet – height: 25.5cm (calotte), 5.8 cm

(socket); dm: 20.5 × 23.5 cm; thickness: 3 mm (rim);

weight: 1338 g (not 2335 g or 2355 g!) – Magyar Nemzeti Mú-zeum, invno. 33/1858/3 – Figure 1, 7 and 12 – Mörtz 2011a,

367; Vachta 2008, 123 list V.1.5. no. 1; Clausing 2005, 36f.;

Clausing 2001, 120. Mozsolics 2000, 45 no. 5 pl. 30/5; Soro-

ceanu 1995, 65; Kovács 1992, 45 fig. 29; Calzecchi-Onesti

1991, 77 no. 10; Patay 1990, 21 no. 7; Kemenczei 1988, 57;

Mozsolics 1984, 81–93; Borchhardt 1972, 129 catno. 29,2;

Hencken 1971, 44f. fig. 21,d–f; Patay 1969, 200; Gimbutas

1965, 151–153; Müller–Karpe 1959, 114; 139; 167; 204; Moz-

solics 1955, 37f. 48 fig. 4; Kossack 1954, 27 f. no. 1; von Mer-

hart 1952, 5; von Merhart 1941, 11 fig. 2,12; Hampel 1892,

49–58; Hampel 1886, 74 pl. XXXIII/2; Hampel 1876, pl. XII;

Graffenried 1860, 372–374 fig. 66–72.

Find circumstances: The hoard was found close to the

Csege-hill in 1858 and a portion reached the Magyar Nem-

zeti Múzeum; other objects of the same hoard came to the

museum later, and a few might have melted down right

after the discovery. Some finds from the deposit are

housed at the Reformed College at Debrecen (Moszolics

2000, 43f.).

Catno. 6 – MezökövesdMezökövesd, Borsod-Abaúj-Zemplén megye, Hungary –

hoard – complete helmet – height: 23.5 cm (calotte) or22 cm according to Patay 1969, 174; 6.2 cm (socket); dm:

22.5 cm (not 22–23 cm according to Patay 1969, 174); thick-

ness: 2–3 mm (rim); weight: 1340 g (not 2245 g!) – Magyar

Nemzeti Múzeum, invno. 60.2.2 – Figure 1, 7 and 12 –

Mörtz 2011a, 367; Vachta 2008, 123 list V.1.5. no. 8; Claus-

ing 2005, 36f.; Soroceanu 2005, 408; Clausing 2001, 219;

Mozsolics 2000, 55f. no. 5 pl. 52/3; Calzecchi-Onesti 1991,

77 no. 11; Patay 1990, 23 no. 19–20; Schauer 1988, 188; Ke-

menczei 1984, 149 no. 19; Hencken 1971, 44f. fig. 21,a–c;

Patay 1969, 173f. 190f. fig. 1–8 pl. 41–45.





24/28


Find circumstances: The hoard was found during le-

velling work in 1959 at 60–65 cm depth (Patay 1969, fig. 1).

Catno. 7 – EndrödEndröd (Gyomaendröd), Békés megye, Hungary – fromthe river Körös – complete helmet – height: 26.1 cm

(calotte), 6.2 cm (socket); dm: 19–23.2 cm; thickness: upto 5 mm (rim; according to Mozsolics 1955: 2–3mm! –

Erkel Ferenc Múzeum Gyula, invno. 60.113.1 – Figure 1, 4

and 12 – Clausing 2005, 36f.; Clausing 2001, 120; Calzec-

chi-Onesti 1991, 77 no. 99; Makkay 1989, 181f. pl. 28;

Schauer 1988, 188; Borchhardt 1972, 129 catno. 129,1;

Hencken 1971, 45 fig. 2; Mozsolics 1955, 38 fig. 5,1; von

Merhart 1941, 11 fig. 2,11; Sprockhoff 1930, 46; Hampel

1886, pl. XXXIII/1.

Find circumstances: The helmet was found in the bed

of the river Körösök in or before 1874.

Catno. 8 – KoàrkKoàrk (Sáros/Scharosch), jud. Brakov, Romania – hoard –half preserved – height: 25 cm (calotte), 6.1 cm (socket);

dm: not possible to measure, approx. 23 cm; weight:

524g – Muzeul National Brukenthal, Sibiu, invno. 11.992 =

A 4685 – Figure 3, 5, 9 and 12 – Ciugudean et al. 2006,

27–33; Luca/Georgescu 2008, 27–33; 51; 54f. pl. XI–XIII;

Vachta 2008, 123 list V.1.5. no. 13; Clausing 2005, 2005,

36f.; Hansen 2001, 80; Clausing 2001, 219; Born/Hansen

1992, 346 fig. I, 347 note 22, 348; Calzecchi-Onesti 1991, 77

no. 16; Rusu 1990, 69f. pl. V/1; Schauer 1988, 188; Moz-

solics 1985, 25 note 119; Bader 1983, 122 no. 421; Petrescu-

Dîmboviwa 1978, 144f. pl. 243/B9; Petrescu-Dîmboviwa 1977,135 pl. 324/8; Németi 1972, 115; Hencken 1971, 50f.

fig. 27,c–e; Mozsolics 1955, 39 fig. 5,2; von Merhart 1941, 11

fig. 2,7; Berichte 1851, 289; Goos 1876, 50; Neigebaur 1851,

275; Ackner 1834, 274 pl. I/1.

Find circumstances: The find circumstances of the

hoard, most likely found in the vicinity of Koàrk, are un-known. The hoard was purchased from Gypsies by

G. F. Weber, the evangelic priest from Koàrk, before 1834.

Catno. 9 – PikcoltPikcolt, jud. Satu Mare, Romania – hoard – complete hel-met – height: 18 cm; dm: 22 cm; weight: 1094 g – Muzeul

Municipal Carei (Nagykárolyi Városi Múzeum), invno.

2290 – Figure 3, 5, 6 and 12 – Németi 2009, 65–67; Soro-

ceanu 2008, 47 no. 10; Vachta 2008, 123 list V.1.5. no. 11;

Clausing 2005, 36f.; Clausing 2001, 219; Calzecchi-Onesti

1991, 80 no. 17; Rusu 1990, 77 pl. V/6; Schauer 1988, 188 fig.

7; Németi 1972, 113–117 fig. 1–2 pl. 26/1–2; 27/1–4.

Find circumstances: The helmet was found in 1969 at

via Veche ‘Livada’ Öregszölö, most likely together with a

bronze cup, when several trees had to be removed during

preparation for the construction of a road.

Catno. 10 – Unknown – former Zschille-collection

Unknown provenance– complete helmet – height: 23.1cm;

6.1 cm (knob); dm. 20.5–24.9 cm; weight unknown – Mu-

seum Berlin (formerly: Museum für Völkerkunde, Leipzig;Grossenhain, Saxony), Zschille Collection; invno. 13.167 –

Figure 2 and 12 – Clausing 2005, 36f.; Clausing 2001, 220;

Calzecchi-Onesti 1991, 80 no. 20; Born/Hansen 2001, 251

fig. 201; Born/Hansen 1992, 339–356; Albrecht 1991, 13;

Schauer 1988, 188; Hencken 1971, 50; 54 fig. 29,a–c; Patay

1969, 191; Hoffmann 1961, 98; Mozsolics 1955, 38 fig. 5,3;

von Merhart 1941, 12 fig. 2,7; Forrer 1896, no. 12.

Find circumstances: Though ‘Northern Germany’ is

usually named as the find spot, this is unlikely. The collec-

tion was purchased in New York before 1896 by R. Zschille.

The helmet had been repaired several times, riveting dif-ferent brass plates on the inside of the rim of the helmet,

covering also rivet holes (Born/Hansen 1992, 340).

Catno. 11 – Hungary (? ) – former Guttmann collection

Hungary (?) – complete helmet – height: 21.5 cm (cap);

dm: 21.3 × 19.5 cm; thickness of the edge: 1.2–3.5 mm;

socket: height: 4.5 cm; base dm: 3.9 cm; opening: 7 mm

deep; weight: 1150 g – present repository unknown;

former collection Guttmann, invno. AG 1000 – Figure 2

and 12 – Hermann Historica, Auction October 19, 2005, no.

179; Clausing 2005, 36f.; Christie’s London, Auction

April 28, 2004, no. 9; Clausing 2001, 219; Born/Hansen

2001, 72 pl. XVI; 245f. 250f. 175, 270, fig. 195–199; 202–203.

Find circumstances: The helmet was part of the

former Guttmann-collection and sold in 2004 at Christie’s

and 2005 at Hermann Historica; the current repository is

unknown. According to the attached sand/chips inside

the helmet it was most likely found in a water context

(Born/Hansen 1991, 245). Further details are unknown.

Catno. 12 – Unknown – sold at ‘Gorny and Mosch’

Unknown provenance – complete helmet – height: 24 cm;

dm. approx. 21 cm; thickness: 2.5 mm (rim); weight: un-known – sold at an auction of Gorny & Mosch in Munich

December 13, 2003; no. 12 – Clausing 2005, 36–38 fig. 6.

Find circumstances: The origin of the helmet is un-

known, as is the current location.

Catno. 13 – Unknown – former Lipperheide collection

Former Lipperheide collection – complete helmet – ap-

proximately 25 cm (total height) – Königliche Museen Ber-

lin, lost during World War II – Figure 2 – Hencken 1971, 50

fig. 28; von Merhart 1941, 12.





25/28


Find circumstances: The helmet was lent to the Königliche Museen zu Berlin in 1905, but after the World War II it

could not be found again (Hencken 1971, 50). One surviv-

ing picture published by Hencken shows that the helmet

belongs to the group of bell helmets.

Catno. 14 – Monte Altino

Monte Altino, prov. Campobasso, Italy – complete hel-

met – find circumstances unknown – high: 27.5 cm; dm:

23.5 × 21 cm – Museo Provinciale Sannitico, Campobasso,

invno. unknown – Clausing 2005, 36; Iaia 2005, 45–46,

catno. 1 fig. 4.1; Clausing 2001, 219; Calzecchi Onesti 1988,

68f. 80 no. 18; fig. 1–2).

Find circumstances and find date are unknown.

Catno. 15 – Bonyhád

Bonyhád, Tolna megye, Hungary – fragment – hoard –

ca. 15 × 18 cm – Magyar Nemzeti Múzeum, invno.

107/1889/167 – Figure 3 – Mozsolics 1985, 102–104 no. 75 pl.

40/14; Hencken 1971, 43f.; Hampel 1886, pl. CLI–CLIII;

Wosinsky 1896, 381–392.

The exact find spot of the hoard is unknown.

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank the Austrian Science Fund

(FWF) and the FP7/Marie Curie actions who were suppor-

ting the research with the Schrödinger-fellowship no. J

3109-G21. Special thanks to Paolo Piccardo from the DCCI,

Universitá degli Studi di Genova, for fruitful discussions

and to Roberto Spottorno, DCCI, for Fig. 13. The author is

very grateful to all curators of the museums concerned

who permitted documentation, analyses and sampling of

the helmets: Katalin Biró and Ildikó Szathmári (Magyar

Nemzeti Múzeum, Budapest, Hungary); Adrian Georgescu

and Dorin Barbu (Muzeul National Brukenthal); Detlef

Jantzen (Landesamt für Kultur und Denkmalpflege,

Schwerin) Anton Kern and Hans Reschreiter (Naturhisto-

risches Museum Wien, Austria); Liviu Marta (Muzeul Jude-

Fig. 13: Simulation of the deformation of the bronze sheet during dieforging. Note the maximum deformation in the middle part of the cap

Fig. 14: Bell helmet from Monte Altino, Italy. The photography wasprovided for free by the Soprintendenza per i Beni Archeologicidel Molise (Ministero dei Beni e delle Attività Culturali e del Turismo– Direzione regionale per i Beni Culturali e Paesaggistici delMolise).





26/28


wean Satu Mare); János Németi and Attila Nándor Hágó(Muzeul Municipal Carei); Milan Salaå (Moravské zemskémuzeum, Brno, Czech Republic).

AddendumRecently an interesting bell helmet was sold at the 65th

auction at Hermann Historica, Munich (Lot no. 419). The

origin of the helmet is unknown, as previous owner a ‘pri-

vate collection in Vienna from the 1960ies’ was named. Ac-

cording to Hermann Historica, the rim of the helmet in-

cluding the rivet holes was attached recently with brass

(observation by eye from Hermann Historica). Under the

corrosion, the traces of the file or rasp needed to achieve a

smooth surface of older helmet with the newly added sheet

are visible. No traces of soldering or riveting on the sheet

are visible. The 23 cm high helmet itself shows artificial, re-cent corrosion (rivets, knob and cap corroded significantly

different, but the same type of corrosion is visible on the

cap and the attached brass sheet – above the latter just

smoother and more turquoise). It is also important to note

that the decorated zone on the inside is much more cleaned

and smoothed. The bigger bosses were made using a ring

as a die; its impression can be seen on the outside of the

bosses. Between the bosses, sometimes also horizontal

traces of the file or rasp are visible – this indicates clearly,

that the bosses were made after the file or rasp was used

and the corrosion applied. The undecorated knob was ri-veted on with six flat rivets and bronze lining discs on the

inside. If ever there was a hole in the knob present, it was

closed recently and covered with artificial corrosion. On the

inside, no traces of a cast-on of the knob are visible; a layer

of resin or lacquer covers the central area. The manufactur-

ing traces inside the cap do not resemble at all the other

known, original helmets: only more or less vertical ham-

mering (?) traces of different length are visible. The only

hammering traces pointing to the top of the helmet were

applied recently, since they overlap with the attached brass

sheet. It is highly probable that not only the decoration, the

combination of knob and cap and the corrosion is a forgery,

but the whole helmet, if we do not want to assume that an

original helmet cap achieved a massive make over.

Bibliography

Ackner 1834: J. M. Ackner, Reise nach Várhely in antiquarischerHinsicht im Jahre 1832. Beitrag zur Altertumskunde vonSiebenbürgen (II. Teil). Benignis Transsilvania II/2, 1834,222–285.

Albrecht 1991: M. Albrecht, Der bronzezeitliche Helm von Szczecin-

Zdroje im Museum für Ur- und Frühgeschichte. Forsch. u. Ber.Staatl. Mus. Berlin 31, 1991, 9–16.

Ammanati et al. 2004: N. Ammanati/E. Martellucci/M. G. Ienco/P. Piccardo/S. Natali,Valutazione dei parametri cromatici deibronzi in funzione del tenore di stagno. 30 Convegno AIM 17–19novembre 2004, Vicenza (Milano 2004) CD Rom, mem 10.

Bader 1993: T. Bader. Die Fibeln in Rumänien. PBF XIV,6 (Stuttgart1993).

Berichte 1851: Berichte der Akademie der Wissenschaften VI (Wien1851).

Borchhardt 1972: J. Borchhardt, Homerische Helme. Helmformen derÄgäis in ihren Beziehungen zu orientalischen und europäischenHelmen in der Bronze- und frühen Eisenzeit (Mainz 1972).

Borgna 1999: E. Borgna, The North Adriatic Regions between theAegean World (12th–8th c.): Social Strategies and Symbols of Power in the Long-Distance Exchange. In: V. L. Aravantinos/J. A. Barceló/Chr. Bockisch-Bräuer (Eds), Eliten der Bronzezeit.Ergebnisse zweier Kolloquien in Mainz und Athen. Monogr.RGZM 43,1 (Mainz 1999), 151–183.

Born/Hansen 1992: H. Born/S. Hansen, Ein urnenfelderzeitlicherGlockenhelm aus der Sammlung Zschille. Acta Praehist. et Arch.24, 1992, 339–356.

–/– 2001: –/–, Helme und Waffen Alteuropas. Sammlung Axel Gutt-mann 9 (Mainz 2001).

Calzecchi-Onesti 1991: G. Calzecchi-Onesti, Connessione europee dialcuni elmi italiani. Ann. facolta di Lettere e Filosofia dell’ Univ.degli stud. Perugia 25, N.S. 11, 1987–1988 (1991), 65–111.

Campbell et al. 2000: J. L. Campbell/T. L. Hopman/J. A. Maxwell/Z. Nejedly, The Guelph PIXE software package III: alternativeproton database. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in PhysicsResearch Station B 170, 2000, 193–204.

Catalogue 1999: Catalogue. Götter und Helden der Bronzezeit.Europa im Zeitalter des Odysseus. Exhibition catalogue Bonn(Ostfildern 1999).

Caumont et al. 2006: O. Caumont/X. Margarit/B. Mille/P. Piccar-do/C. Rolley. Un bras d’empereur romain en bronze à Essegney(Vosges). Rev. arch. l’Est 55, 2006, 173–195.

Ciugudean et al. 2006: H. Ciugudean/A. Georgescu/ S. A. Luca,Depozitul de bronzuri de la Dip ¸ sa. Bibl. Brukenthal V (Alba-Iulia2006).

Clausing 2001: C. Clausing, Spätbronze- und eisenzeitliche Helmemit einteiliger Kalotte. Jahrb. RGZM 48/1, 2001, 199–225.– 2005: –, Zwei neue urnenfelderzeitliche Bronzehelme mit

Scheitelknauf. Arch. Korrbl. 35, 2005, 31–38.Drescher 1958: H. Drescher, Der Überfangguss (Mainz 1958).Egg/Waurick 1990: M. Egg/G. Waurick, Antike Helme. Katalog zur

Ausstellung Speyer (Mainz 1990).Forrer 1896: R. Forrer, Die Waffensammlung des Herrn Stadtrath

Rich. Zschille in Grossenhain (Sachsen 1896).Gimbutas 1965: M. Gimbutas, Bronze Age Cultures in Central and

Eastern Europe (The Hague 1965).Goos 1876: C. Goos, Chronik der archäologischen Funde Sieben-

bürgens. Archiv Verein Siebenbürg. Landeskde 13, 1876, 3–338.





27/28


Graffenried 1860: B. Graffenried, 1860. Archiv Kde österr. Gesch-quellen 24, 1860, 372–374.

Hampel 1876: J. Hampel, Antiquités préhistoriques de la Hongrie 1(Esztergom 1876).

– 1877: –, Antiquités préhistoriques de la Hongrie 2 (Esztergom1877).

– 1886: –, A bronzkor emlékei Magyarhonban I (Budapest 1886).

– 1892: –, A bronzkor emlékei Magyarhonban II (Budapest 1892).Hänsel 2003: B. Hänsel, Bronzene Glockenhelme. Bemerkungen

zu einem Altfund an der Neiße. In: U. Eckert/A. Zimmermann(ed.). Archäologische Perspektiven. Analysen und Interpreta-tionen im Wandel. Festschrift für Jens Lünning zum 65. Geburt-stag. Internat. Arch., Stud. Honoraria 20 (Rahden/Westf. 2003)77–84.

Hansen 2001: S. Hansen. Helme und Waffen der Bronzezeit in derSammlung Axel Guttmann, in: H. Born/H. Hansen, Helme undWaffen Alteuropas. Band IX. Sammlung Axel Guttmann (Mainz2001), 11–166.

Hawkes/Smith 1957: C. F. C. Hawkes/M. A. Smith, On Some Bucketsand Cauldrons of the Bronze and Early Iron Ages. Antiq. Journal

37, 1957, 131–198.Hencken 1971: H. He

kalotaste kacige bronzano doba

Documents