These helmets were found in the modern city of Augsburg in 1897 in the river Wertach, located on the site of the Roman city of Augusta Vindelicorum; one of Germany’s oldest cities, Augusta Vindelicorum was founded in 15BC and named in honour of Emperor Augustus. The city sits on a rather important military and economic river convergence between the Lech and Wertach and has direct access to the Alps and maintained important trade links through Europe well into the medieval period. 

A translation of the city's name would be “the Augustan city of the Vindelici”, a Celtic tribe inhabiting the nearby region during the time of the early Principate. In AD120, Augusta Vindelicorum became capital of the province of Raetia, making it a key settlement in the region. By the time of the late empire, the city was sadly sacked by the invading Huns of Attila (although the region had been dwindling for some time, as early as the 4th century AD). 

Context alone therefore cannot help us to identify an owner, but it seems most likely these ornate helmets were deposited during the 4th or very early 5th centuries during either the generally troubling times of the 4th century in the face of Germanic and Gothic troubles across the border, or perhaps as late as the Hunnic invasions of the 5th century - based on the shape, decorations, and style it seems safest to place the helmets into the middle of the 4th century AD. 

Pictured left: the Pustelak Brothers Art Workshop reconstruction of the Augsburg II. 

Miks classifies both the Augsburg I and II as Deurne/Berkasovo-II type ridge helmets (two halves of a bowl closed by a ridge); we can indeed see many similarities in decorative design of the Augsburgs to the second helmet featured in our post on the Berkasovo II, including the S-shaped reposse work running parallel to the central ridge, however there is some ground to dispute whether the Augsburg I particularly should fall into this category as will be discussed below. 

As with most Roman helmets, both helmets were made of an iron core and coated in gold-plated sheet silver. The Augsburg I was found without cheek-plates, and the II with a small fragment of cheek plate and no neck guard; there is also the unusual inclusion of what appears to be a fragment of and rivet for the eyebrow of a nasal piece, a feature typically absent on Intercissa-type helmets (it is unclear whether it belongs to either the Augsburg I, II or is from another helmet entirely). It is possible that either the Augsburg II did indeed have a base ring and the nasal belongs to this helmet, or in a break from traditional style the Augsburgs are Intercissa helmets with nasals.

Pictured to the right: Francis Hagan of The Barcarii sporting a reconstruction of the Augsburg I (also seen in the cover image above). 

The main reason for disputing Mik's classification given above is what differentiates the Intercissa and Berkasovo typologies (the main typologies of Late Roman Ridge helmets); ridge helmets are either found with or without a base ring running below the bowl to which the cheek plates, nasal bar and neck guard are attached or without one entirely, with the cheek plates and neck guard attacked directly to the bowl. The former is a more complex type of helmet, using hinges and rivets (the Berkasovo-type) and the latter is a little more simplistic, attaching via leather strip and rivet (the Intercissa-type). Further information on the Intercisa can be found in the article for that helmet type (link below), however suffice to say for now that the Augsburg I fits more with the Intercissa typology than the Berkasovo one. Given the state of the Augsburg II find it is difficult to say either way, although it seems it does not feature a base ring.

Interestingly, however, a nasal bar fragment was found in the same context. The original reconstructors have attributed this to the Augsburg I whilst the client commissioning the Pustelak Brothers' reconstruction of the Augsburg II has requested it be attached to his model instead. 

These helmets therefore seem to buck the trend of the typologies as we know them, perhaps indicating that such things are not nearly as cut-and-dry as we would like. 

Sadly little else can be said for these stunning pieces. Without further context, we can make no reasonable guess as to the original owners beyond them being members of the Roman military. The decoration and style are, despite being highly intricate, sadly rather commonplace for the period and bear no distinctive markings that can help us further. As such, we would tentatively suggest they belonged to a soldier in either a limitanei or comitatus unit stationed either in Augsburg itself or assigned to the province of Raetia, likely in the middle of the 4th century. This is of course no guarantee, and the truth may be something entirely different…