Budapest Régiségei 30. (1993)

TÁRGYI EMLÉKEK ÉS LELETEK = DENKMÄLER UND FUNDE - Kocsis László: A recently identified cavalry sports helmet from Aquincum = Új lovassági sportsisak lelet Aquincumból 281-292

tern, a deep carving on the middle and a field without decoration complete the plate. 6/b (Plate 3-4, Fig. 61b.) Dimensions: Width: 41 mm Height: 19 mm Thickness: 0,5 mm It is a round-shaped plate decorated with scale or feather-like pattern on one side while the rim is decorated with a grooved rib. On the other side leaning grooves and remains of a line of dots follow the line of the above mentioned narrow rib. A wing can be reconstructed from the motif embossed to the plate. 6/c (Plate 3-4, Fig. 61c.) Dimensions: Width: 36 mm Height: 21 mm Thickness: 0,5 mm The majority of the surface is covered by a dense, tiny groove framed by an embossed arch. A flat surface is connected to this section. The groove can be explained as a stylised feather representation. This fragment is most likely an other piece of the feather pattern. 6/d (Plate 3-4, Fig. old.) Dimensions: Width: 24 mm Height: 35 mm Thickness: 0,4 mm A slightly embossed hair motif designed from narrow, parallel ribs can be identified on the flat plate. There is a similar pattern on fragment No. 3. Fragment No. 7, Inv. No. BTM Ro 64. 8. 15. (Plate 1-2, Fig. 7.) Dimensions: Width: 63 mm Height: 34 mm . Thickness: 0,9 m The plate is a fragment of the bottom rim of the helmet. On the upper part the same double line of dots in parallel positioning known already from fragment Nos. 1 and 2 can well be observed. On the bottom part the oblique-angled rim is highly fragmented and incomplete. The fragment can be located to the vicinity of fragment 1 because of its design. Fragment No. 8, Inv. No. BTM Ro 64. 8. 16. (Plate 1-2, Fig. 8.) Dimensions: Width: 21 mm Height: 30 mm Thickness: 1,4 mm Length: 51 mm This is a fragment from the left corner of the helmet and suitable for reconstruction of the left front and side rim in short distance. On the top the double line of dots known already from fragment Nos. 1,2 and 7 can be seen. There is a field without any decoration under this section. At the bottom the helmet rim can be observed in rectangular mounting with no decoration, showing a slightly thickened profiled edge. The original rim width could be measured on it which proved to be 21-22 mm. There is a rivet hole with a diameter of 5 mm on the bended rim. The plate is pierced up to downwards. The "Csúcshegy mansio" as archaeological site is cited in the inventory books in only one case when 151 items under a serial number 8 dated to 1964 representing a strongly selected group of findings, dated to the second half of 2nd century A. D. were taken to inventory. 1964 is the ante quern of the delivery of findings to museum, the post quern can not be identified. The exact place can not be determined by using data from the literature. The word mansio is also not a clue for identification of the site. The expression mansio means station, quarter in the Finály's Latin Dictionary and either the Csúcshegy Villa or the Roman ruins observed by G. Alföldy can be fit but most probably the watchtower unearthed by J. Szilágyi at the foot of Csúcshegy is the site. The word mansio is cited two times without the mention of any helmet finding in the literature and archives data. ' Nevertheless the archaeological evidences related to Csúcshegy site - dated back to the 2nd to 3rd century A. D. support the dating of the helmet fragments. The helmet rim fragment No. 8 has a great importance in the evaluation of the findings. The formation and decoration of the rim reduce the possible types to a group of cavalry helmets used in the late 2nd to early 3rd century A. D. The Robinson typology describes two groups of helmets applicable to this case: helmets of auxiliary cavalry and of cavalry sports. The fragment No. 8 rim piece can be alone related to more than one type of both main groups therefore other fragments should be involved for a more precise morphological and typological classification. However some facts disturb the preliminary conclusion: 1. The quality of fragment Nos. 8 and 5 contradicts to the quality of fragment Nos. 1 and 3. 2. How the hair curl motifs and face formed by high relief technique on fragment Nos. 5 and 6a can be attributed to one helmet? Therefore further evaluation is required to prove whether the bronze plate fragments belong to the same artefact or not. Especially the classification of fragment No. 5 turned to be very important. The Energy Dispersive X-ray Microanalysis performed on the surface of the plates supported strongly that the fragments belong to the same object . This assumption was then later confirmed by micro10 analysis of the cross-sections . The first objective can be explained by a detailed study of fragment No. 1. Techniques used for making simple rim and high quality helmet can simultaneously 282