This article is also available as a YouTube video at the link here.

This article cover the Worms helmet, an Intercisa type found in 1890 during sewer works in Worms, Germany. The helmet is currently stored in the City of Worms Museum. 

As we can see from the images, the X-Rays in particular, the Worms was originally a fragmented (and in the reconstructions here heavily supplemented) iron helmet in a bipartite bowl construction with an adjoining central ridge and an external base ring around the back half of the head. The assembly is completed by two cheek-pieces and a neck guard. 

Curiously, there appear to be no ear cut-outs in the bowl itself, only on the cheek pieces as we can see from the side-view (although there is a slight curvature in the right side which may be grounds to disagree), and the continuous band around the rear of the helmet (forming some type of external base ring) stops parallel either side of the head above the ears; notably, there are no rivet holes around the front to indicate this band completed its journey around the full bowl and the central ridge continues at the opposite end down to the very brow. This rear band seems to form the joint between the bowl, the neck-guard, and the cheek flaps, albeit only half of the cheek flap, leading to reconstructions depicting an elongated front attachment to each cheek flap in order to compensate for the disparity – we can draw a similarity of sorts to the Richborough helmets, as the bowl at first glance does not seemingly allow a “typical” Intercisa-style cheek piece to attach wholly naturally. See our article on the Richborough by clicking here.

In the case of the Worms, it seems more likely that the front of the cheek-piece was simply extended to meet the brow. Whilst it is possible the bowl has been depicted the wrong way around, as the speculative version of the Richborough suggests, that is not necessarily the case and the cheeks may simply have been more angular or, as is depicted in the reproduction by the Pustelak Brothers Art Workshop, elongated as suggested before. Note with this reproduction, a slight allowance has been made for ear-holes in the main helmet bowl as well as just the cheek-pieces. 

Another curiosity of the Worms’ construction is the pairing of horizontal double slits for the buckles and/or straps on the neck guard, instead of the traditional rivet-mount for a leather strap as we can see on other Intercisa-types. We can see again in the Pustelak reconstruction they have allowed space for a buckle to attach the neck-guard, in a similar manner to Berkasovo-types, whilst the original museum construction opted for a looped leather strap. 

Miks notes the rather plain-looking central ridge is adorned with a few remaining silver rivets, although regular drill-holes along the ridge suggest it likely had more. There are also silver rivets on the cheek flaps. The left cheek flap was found with remnants of sheet silver, and if we look closely at the edge of the neck guard (particularly in the X-Ray) we can see the remnants of not only silver rivets but also a gold-played silver sheet with repousse decoration. As is seemingly to be expected with these helmets found in a rougher context, there is some indication of this precious metal layer being forcibly removed. 

The repousse work and (likely) all-encompassing precious metal layer implies the whole helmet may well have borne a decorative layer similar to the reconstructed Intercisa by the Pustelak Brothers. Silver rivets and repousse-decorated precious metal sheeting are common finds in the late Roman helmet world, and there is no reason to suspect the Worms helmet is any exception to this trend. 

The external half-base ring around the rear half of the helmet is certainly an interesting curiosity; being absent on other Intercisa-types, the only major difference between the Worms and its fellows is to be found on the neck-guard, in the form of the two parallel pairs of slots for straps of some kind. The extra ring would not necessarily be required to make such an attachment work, however. It has been variously postulated it may be a reinforcement band either to repair some structural damage to the bowl and hold it in place or the bowl is, as suggested earlier, the wrong way around in these reconstructions and it is an extra reinforcement for the brow, although this remains speculative. 

Regardless, it remains a rather unique and intriguing example of Late Roman helmet craftsmanship, maintaining a rather simplistic but elegant shape and design, likely accentuated by detailed decorative repousse work in the precious metal sheeting.