Roman Helmet From Sivac

GRADSKI MUZEJ SOMBOR TOWN MUSEUM SOMBOR
RIMSKI LEM IZ SIVCA
ROMAN HELMET FROM SIVAC
Miroslav Vujovi
Glavni i odgovorni urednik Editor in Chief

Branimir Maulovi
Izdava
Gradski muzej Sombor
Publisher
Town Museum Sombor
Recenzenti Reviewers
prof. dr Aleksandar Jovanovi
dr. Velika Dautova-Ruevljan
Lektor Proof reading
Aleksandra Herceg
Prevod Translation
Milan Bogdanovi
Fotografije Photographs
Neboja Bori
SADRAJ
Uvod
13
Sivac u istoriji i arheologiji Sivac in History and Archaeology
Anelka Putica
Mesto i uslovi nalaza
Opis lema
Tehnika izrade
Grafiki dizajn i priprema za tampu Graphic design and prepress

J. M. Jofke
Rekonstrukcija lema
Circulation
1000 copies
ISBN 978-86-911883-3-7
Introduction
Pavle Velenrajter Biografija i bibliografija Pavle Velenrajter Biography and Bibliography

Anelka Putica
Tipologija i hronologija
Tira
1000 primeraka
07
09
3D rekonstrukcija i karte 3D reconstruction and maps

Branko Dragi
tampa Printed by
Simbol, Petrovaradin
CONTENTS
15
19
27
33
35
Location and Conditions of the Find

Description of the Helmet
Manufacturing Technique
Typology and Chronology
Reconstruction
43
Restauracija lema Restoration
Milan olovi
Natpis
Fiziko-hemijske analize materijala
Zakljuak
Bibliografija
45
49
55
58
Inscription
Physical Chemical Analysis
Conclusion
Bibliography
61
Registar
63
Index
Miroslav Vujovi
m
Sombor, 2008.
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Sl. 1
Roman Helmet from Sivac
Pl. 1
In the year of celebration of an important landmark, the 125th

anniversary of its establishing, the Sombor Town Museum decided
to dedicate a special publication to the Sivac helmet (Pl.1), one of
the most important museum exhibits from its antique collection, and
a unique example of a Roman helmet on the territory of Serbia. The
Town Museums jubilee luckily coincided both with the 50th anniversary
of the helmets discovery and the 30th anniversary of its publishing,
which was one of the reasons for the making of this monograph.
The Sivac helmet, however, was until now little known in broader
scientific circles even though it indeed represents an extraordinary
find and an important testimony about the presence of the Roman
army in one part of the barbarian territory north of the fortified
Danube limes of Lower Panonnia. Certainly, this is due to the fact
that the helmet was published back in 1978 in a local periodical in
Serbian language with a very poor English summary, and therefore
experts on Roman weaponry mostly did not have the chance to find
out more about it. Even in studies which published similar material,
only few remarks were dedicated to this indisputably valuable find.
With a new and complemented publishing of the Sivac helmet, in light
of new knowledge, with an integral English translation and quality
illustrations, we aimed to make this finding available to the broader
scientific public, as well as to regular visitors of the Museum. It
was also our intention to point out some of the helmets features
by a detailed analysis and to reconstruct its original appearance,
by comparing it with analogous specimens. Using a restoration
procedure and advantages of modern 3D technology, we attempted,
and hopefully succeeded, to give the Sivac helmet its old glow back.
By means of detailed observation and using modern physical and
chemical analyses, we also decided to answer certain questions which
had not been subject of previous researches, such as the technology
of the helmets manufacturing, the structure and characteristics of
the material and the degree and nature of its damages. Special
importance is given by the new interpretation of the inscription on the
helmet which reveals the name of the owner and his belonging to a
specific military unit, documenting the historical context of the find.
Upravo u godini proslave vanog jubileja, 125. godinjice osnivanja, u

Gradskom muzeju u Somboru odlueno je da se posebna publikacija
posveti lemu iz Sivca (sl. 1), jednom od najznaajnijih muzejskih
eksponata iz Antike zbirke, a na teritoriji Srbije jedinstvenom primeru
rimskog lema. Jubilej Gradskog muzeja sreno se poklopio sa 50
godina od otkria lema i 30 godina njegovog objavljivanja, to je i bio
jedan od povoda za izradu ove monografije. lem iz Sivca, meutim,
do danas je bio malo poznat u irim naunim krugovima, iako se zaista
radi o izuzetnom nalazu i vanom svedoanstvu o prisustvu rismke
vojske na jednom delu varvarske teritorije severno od utvrenog
dunavskog limesa u provinciji Donjoj Panoniji. Svakako, razlog tome je
injenica da je lem objavljen daleke 1978. godine u lokalnom asopisu
na srpskom jeziku, sa veoma turim engleskim rezimeom, pa strunjaci
za rimsko naoruanje uglavnom nisu imali priliku da o njemu saznaju
neto vie. ak i u studijama u kojima je detaljno publikovana slina
graa, ovom neosporno vrednom nalazu posveena je najee samo
poneka napomena. Novim i dopunjenim objavljivanjem lema iz Sivca,
i to u svetlosti novih saznanja, sa integralnim prevodom na engleski
i kvalitetnim ilustracijama, nastojali smo da ovaj nalaz uinimo
dostupnim iroj strunoj javnosti, kao i svakodnevnim posetiocima
muzeja. elja nam je bila i da detaljnom analizom ukaemo na neke
karakteristike lema i da, poreenjem sa analognim primercima, rekonstruiemo njegov prvobitni izgled. Restauratorskim postupkom i
korienjem pogodnosti koje prua moderna 3D tehnologija, pokuali
smo, a nadamo se i uspeli, da lemu iz Sivca vratimo stari sjaj.
Odluili smo i da detaljnom opservacijom i upotrebom savremenih fiziko-hemijskih analiza odgovorimo na pojedina pitanja koja nisu bila
predmet prethodnih istraivanja, kao to su tehnologija izrade lema,
sastav i karakteristike materijala, stepen oteenja i njihova priroda. Poseban znaaj ima i novo tumaenje natpisa na lemu, koji
razotkriva ime vlasnika, njegovu pripadnost odreenoj vojnoj jedinici i
upuuje na istorijski kontekst nalaza.
Izrada ove publikacije ne bi bila mogua bez razumevanja i svesrdne
pomoi kolega iz Gradskog muzeja u Somboru, a pre svega kustosa
Anelke Putice. Posebnu zahvalnost dugujem kolegi Branku Dri iz
Narodnog muzeja u Beogradu na uvek korisnim sugestijama i podrci.
Zahvaljujem se gospodinu Milou Bokorovu, saradniku Prirodnomatematikog fakulteta u Novom Sadu, koji je obavio fiziko-hemijske
analize uzoraka, kao i Duanu Vraariu, saradniku Vojno-tehnikog
instituta u Beogradu, koji ih je struno protumaio.
This publication would not be possible without the understanding

and cordial help of the colleagues from the Sombor Town Museum
and especially its Curator Anelka Putica. I owe my special gratitude
to my colleague Branko Dra from the National Museum in Belgrade
for his always useful suggestions and support. I would also like
to thank Milo Bokorov, associate of the Biology Departement at
the Faculty of Sciences in Novi Sad, who performed the physical
and chemical analyses of the samples, as well as Duan Vraari,
associate of the Military-Technical Institute in Belgrade who provided
expert interpretation of the samples.
07
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Roman helmet from Sivac
Anelka Putica
Sl. 2
Pl. 2
Pavle Velenrajter (19071971)

U razvoju muzejske delatnosti u Somboru posebno mesto pripada
jednom od prvih posleratnih arheologa Gradskog muzeja, Pavlu
Velenrajteru (sl. 2). On je dao veliki doprinos na polju ubiciranja
novih lokaliteta putem sistematskih rekognosciranja terena, koja je
spr-ovodio lino ili preko mree poverenika. Kao dugogodinji saradnik
Gradskog muzeja u Somboru, prikupio je veliki broj izuzetno vrednih
eksponata i objavio je rezultate svojih istraivanja ime je zaduio
arheologiju Bake.
In the development of museal activities in Sombor, a special place

belongs to one of the first post-WWII archaeologists of the Town
Museum, Pavle Velenrajter. He made a great contribution in the
locating of new sites by systematic field surveys, which he carried
out personally or via a network of confidants. As a long-standing
associate of the Sombor Town Museum, Velenrajter collected a great
number of highly important exhibits and published the results of his
research, thus greatly indebting the archaeology of Baka.
Pavle Velenrajter roen je 15. 04. 1907. godine u Somboru. Gimnazijsko

obrazovanje stekao je u Dravnoj realnoj gimnaziji u Somboru, gde je
maturirao 1925. godine. Od 1926. do 1930. godine bio je bogoslovac
i pitomac akovakog sjemenita. Nakon osam semestara studiranja
filozofije na Filozofskom fakultetu Univerziteta u Beogradu, 30. oktobra 1934. diplomirao je iz XVI grupe predmeta:
a) latinski i grki jezik sa knjievnostima; b) arheologija i istorija
starog veka; c) jugoslovenska knjievnost. Po okonanju studija, Velenrajter je radio kao profesor latinskog jezika u Novom Sadu, Senti
i Somboru.
Pavle Velenrajter was born on April 15th 1907 in Sombor. He received a

gymnasium education at the State Real-Gymnasium in Sombor, where
he graduated in 1925. In the period between 1926 and 1930 he was a
theologian and alumnus of the akovo Seminary. After eight semesters
of studying philosophy at the Belgrade Universitys Philosophical
Faculty, he graduated on October 30th 1934 in the courses group 16:
a) Latin and Greek language and literature; b) Archaeology and history
of the classical antiquity; c) Yugoslav literature. After completing his
studies, Velenrajter worked as a Latin professor in Novi Sad, Senta
and Sombor.
Struni ispit za nastavnika stenografije u srednjim i strunim kolama

poloio je pred Dravnom komisijom 01. 11. 1937. godine nakon ega je
zaposlen kao suplent Dravne realne gimnazije u Slavonskom Brodu i
Nikiu. Za profesora Dravne realne gimnazije u Somboru postavljen
je 27. 11. 1945. godine.
He passed the scientific exam before the State Commission on

November 1st 1937 to become stenography teacher in high schools
and vocational schools after which he was employed as a substitute
teacher at the State Real-Gymnasium in Slavonski Brod and Niki.
09
Rimski lem iz Sivca
He was appointed professor of the State Real-Gymnasium in Sombor

on November 27th 1945.
Kao saradnik Muzeja u Somboru radio je od 1931. godine, kao i posle

osloboenja, od 1946. godine. Odlukom Glavnog izvrnog odbora Skuptine Autonomne pokrajine Vojvodine 25.09.1948. godine, Velenrajter
je dobio stalno zaposlenje u Muzeju i mesec dana kasnije podneo
je molbu za zvanje kustosa-arheologa. Od tada pa do kraja ivota
profesionalno je bio vezan za Gradski muzej u Somboru.
Velenrajter worked as associate of the Sombor Museum since 1931, as

well as after the war, from 1946. By a decision of the Main Executive
Committee of the Autonomous Province of Vojvodina dated September
25th 1948, he was permanently employed at the Museum and one
month later he filed a request for the title of curator-archeologist.
From then on, he was professionally attached to the Sombor Town
Museum for the rest of his life.
Iako mu je arheologija bila glavna preokupacija, a posebno teme

lokalnog znaaja, poput izuavanja sarmatskih nekropola, rimskih
aneva i nalaza iz perioda Seobe naroda, zbog nedostatka strunog
kadra Velenrajter je rukovodio i Istorijskim odeljenjem Gradskog muzeja. Osim toga, dao je vaan doprinos radei na sreivanju velike
numizmatike zbirke iz legata dr Imre Freja. Uestvovao je u mnogim
arheolokim istraivanjima u bivoj Jugoslaviji i u Maarskoj. Ve 1947.
godine nadgledao je izgradnju kudeljare u neposrednoj blizini Sombora,
tokom koje je otkrivena jazika nekropola. U Plavnoj, zajedno sa poverenicima, pratio je radove na ciglani 1948. godine i obavio je prva
zatitna arheoloka iskopavanja1. Sledilo je istraivanje praistorijskog
nalazita Staro selo u Bakom Monotoru, a na lokalitetu Darva u
Apatinu obilazio je jaziku nekropolu, konstatujui tom prilikom i pokretni arheoloki materijal iz starijeg gvozdenog doba2. Tokom 1951.
godine Velenrajter je istraivao nekoliko nalazita u okolini Bogojeva,
gde su otkrivene sarmatske, slovenske i avarske nekropole.3 Naredne,
1952. godine zapoeti su radovi na lokalitetu erevi vinogradi, takoe
na podruju Bogojeva, a u neposrednoj blizini Vajske, Velenrajter je
istraivao humku Okruglik, gde su uoeni materijalni ostaci latenske
kulture.4 Tokom 19571959. godine radio je na zatitnom iskopavanju
srednjovekovne nekropole u Bogojevu i bronzanodobnog lokaliteta
Kalvarija u Somboru.5 Nedaleko od Srpskog Miletia, na lokalitetu
Mostogradnja, 1961. godine istraio je sarmatsku nekropolu, a 1965.
godine nekropolu iz perioda Seobe naroda u onoplji.6 U periodu od
1966. do 1968. godine, zaavi ve u sedmu deceniju, Velenrajter je
sproveo sistematska rekognosciranja terena, kao i sondana isko-pavanja praistorijskih, antikih i srednjovekovnih nalazita u Plavnoj i
Boanima.7
Although archaeology was his main preoccupation especially the

themes of local importance, such as the studying of Sarmatic
necropolises, Roman ditches and finds from the Migration Period due
to lack of expert staff members, Velenrajter was also Head of the
History Department of the Town Museum. Besides, he made a great
contribution working on the organization of the numismatic collection
from the bequest of Dr. Imre Frey. He took part in many archeological
researches in the then Yugoslavia and Hungary. In 1947 he oversaw
the building of a hemp mill nearby Sombor, during which an Iazygian
necropolis was discovered. In Plavna, along with his confidants, he
monitored the works on a brick plant in 1948 and conducted the
first protective archaeological excavations.1 This was followed by
the research of the prehistoric site Staro selo in Baki Monotor,
and at the Darva site in Apatin, he visited the Iazygian necropolis,
discovering movable archaeological material from the early Iron Age.2
During 1951, Velenrajter researched several sites near Bogojevo, where
Sarmatian, Slavic and Avarian necropolises were found.3 During the
following year, work began at the erevi vinogradi site, also in the
Bogojevo area, and nearby Vajska, Velenrajter examined the Okruglik
tumulus, where he discovered material remains of the La Tne culture.4
In the period between 1957 and 1959, he worked on the protective
excavation of the medieval necropolis in Bogojevo and the Bronze
Age site Kalvarija in Sombor.5 In the vicinity of Srpski Mileti, at the
Mostogradnja site, in 1961 he examined a Sarmatian necropolis, and a
necropolis from the Migration Period in onoplja6 in 1965. In the period
between 1966 and 1968, already in his sixties, Velenrajter conducted
system field surveys as well as trial excavations at prehistoric, Roman
and medieval sites in Plavna and Boani.7
Igrom sluaja, poslednji rad koji je Velenrajter napisao bio je o rimskom lemu iz Sivca. ivot ovog skromnog, ali izuzetno marljivog
oveka, potpuno posveenog arheologiji, zavren je iznenada, u saobraajnom udesu, 01. 11. 1971. godine, ime je Gradski muzej u
Somboru izgubio jednog od najvrednijih saradnika, a baka ravnica
neumornog istraivaa.
It happened so that the last article written by Velenrajter was the

one about the Roman helmet from Sivac. The life of this modest but
extremely valuable man, fully dedicated to archaeology, had suddenly
ended in a car accident on November 1st 1971, depraving the Sombor
Town Museum of one of its most valuable associates and the Baka
valley of a tireless researcher.
Muzejska dokumentacija: Izvetaj o terenskom radu 19451952. godine.

2
Muzejska dokumentacija: Izvetaj o terenskom radu 19451952. godine.
3
1952, 135145,
4
Muzejska dokumentacija: Izvetaj o obilasku terena Vajska, Karavukovo i
Kula, 911. marta 1953. godine.
Museum records: Field work report 19451952.

Museum records: Field work report 19451952.
3
1952, 135145,
4
Museum records: Report on the visit of the Vajska, Karavukovo and Kula
sites, March 9th11th 1953.
2
10
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Bibliografija Pavla Velenrajtera
Bibliography of Pavle Velenrajter
1950
, 1, 258266.
1952
VII-VIII , 1, 135145.
1955
, 10, 6567.
1958
Castellum Onagrinum, 7, 126132.
1959
Iskopavanje 1959. godine u Bogojevu, Arheoloki pregled 1, 162163.
1960
1952.
, 9, 176185.
Bogojevo Sombor, nekropola, A 2, 145.
1961
, .. XII, 283285.
Dosadanji rezultati istraivanja limesa u Bakoj, u: Limes u
Jugoslaviji I, Beograd, 5158.
Gradilite mostogradnje, Srpski Mileti Sarmatska nekropola,
Arheoloki pregled 3, 104-105.
1962
, 11, 148152.
1965
onoplja Sombor, avarska nekropola, Arheoloki pregled 7, 160161.
.1966
Terenska istraivanja Gradskog muzeja u Somboru, Arheoloki
pregled 8, 202204.
1968
Rekognosciranje terena u Banatu, okolina Odaka, Arheoloki pregled
10, 212215.
1969
Terenska istraivanja na podruju Gradskog muzeja u Somboru,
Arheoloki pregled 11, 262264.
1978
,
VIVII, 1720.
1950
Zlatan nalaz iz Koluta, Nauni zbornik Matice srpske 1, 258266.
1952
Slovenska nekropola iz VII-VIII veka u Bogojevu, Rad vojvoanskih
muzeja 1, 135145.
1955
Zlatne naunice iz Kule, Nauni zbornik Matice srpske 10, 6567.
1958
Castellum Onagrinum, Rad vojvoanskih muzeja 7, 126132.
1959
Iskopavanje 1959. godine u Bogojevu, Arheoloki pregled 1, 162163.
1960
Izvetaj o iskopavanju avarske nekropole u Bogojevu u 1952. godini,
Rad vojvoanskih muzeja 9, 176185.
Bogojevo Sombor, nekropola, Arheoloki pregled 2, 145.
1961
Bogojevo kestheljska nekropola, Starinar n.s. XII, 283285.
Dosadanji rezultati istraivanja limesa u Bakoj, u: Limes u Jugoslaviji I, Beograd, 5158.
Gradilite mostogradnje, Srpski Mileti Sarmatska nekropola,
Arheoloki pregled 3, 104-105.
1962
Bartan, Rad vojvoanskih muzeja 11, 148152.
1965
onoplja Sombor, avarska nekropola, Arheoloki pregled 7, 160161.
1966
Terenska istraivanja Gradskog muzeja u Somboru, Arheoloki pregled 8, 202204.
1968
Rekognosciranje terena u Banatu, okolina Odaka, Arheoloki pregled
10, 212215.
1969
Terenska istraivanja na podruju Gradskog muzeja u Somboru,
Arheoloki pregled 11, 262264.
1978
Rimski lem sa natpisom iz Sivca, Graa za prouavanje spomenika
kuture Vojvodine VIVII, 1720.
Velenrajter 1959, 162163; Velenrajter 1960, 145; 1961,

283285.
6
Velenrajter 1961, 104105; Velenrajter 1965, 160161; Velenrajter 1968,
214.
7
Velenrajter 1968, 213215.
Velenrajter 1959, 162163; Velenrajter 1960, 145; 1961,

283285.
6
Velenrajter 1961, 104105; Velenrajter 1965, 160161; Velenrajter 1968,
214.
7
11
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Karta 1
Map 1
Anelka Putica
Mesto Sivac (karta 1) lei uz lesnu visorovan Teleka, koja se uzdie
1530 m iznad prostrane junobake ravnice.8 Njegov severni deo
nalazi se na zaravni, dok se na jugu sputa ka ravnici. Atar sela
granii se sa Telekom, Starom Moravicom, Bajom, Crvenkom,
Kruiem, Staparom, Somborom i Kljajievom. Kroz juni deo atara
prolaze dva kanala: Veliki kanal i Mali baki kanal. Sivac pripada
starijim naseljima u ovom delu Bake i pominje se jo u XVI veku.9
U turskim defterima iz 1590. godine navodi se kao naselje Teleka,
sa 31 kuom, smeteno 4 km istono od dananjeg sela, to pokazuje
da su Srbi naselili Stari Telek pod kraj XVI veka. Pod nazivom Sovac
pominje se 1650. godine, kao naselje iji stanovnici plaaju porez od 7
forinti.10 U prvom popisu stanovnitva nakon povlaenja Turaka 1699.
godine, u selu su zabeleene 34 gazde, a 1715. godine u njemu je
bilo 28 poreskih obveznika, od kojih je est domaina nosilo prezime
Sivanin.11 Pretpostavlja se da je dananje selo Sivac nastalo u
vremenu izmeu poslednjeg turskog popisa i konanog odlaska Turaka
iz Bake.
The Sivac village (Map 1) lies along the Teleka loess plateau, rising
1530 m above the spacious Southern Baka plain.8 Its northern part
is on a terrace, whereas the southern part descends into a plain. The
village area borders Teleka, Stara Moravica, Baja, Crvenka, Krui,
Stapar, Sombor and Kljajievo. There are two canals passing through
the southern part of the village: the Big canal and the Small Baka
canal. Sivac belongs to older villages in this part of Baka as it was
first documented in the 16th century.9 In Turkish defters from 1590 it
is mentioned as the Teleka settlement, with 31 houses, located 4
km east from todays village, which shows that Serbs had inhabited
Stari Telek at the end of the 16th century. Sivac is mentioned in 1650
as a village whose inhabitants pay taxes in the amount of 7 forints.10
In the first population census after the retreat of the Turks in 1699,
34 landlords were registered in the village, and in 1715 it inhabited 28
tax payers, six of them with the family name Sivanin.11 It is assumed
that todays Sivac village was established in the period between the
last Turkish census and the final retreat of the Turks from Baka.
Ve 1744. godine u Sivcu je zabeleeno 875 stanovnika sa etiri

srpska popa, a 1785. godine kolonizovalo ga je 475 stanovnika iz
Nemake, koji su osnovali Novi Sivac.12 Godine 1768. Sivac se javlja
na kartama, i to na mestu gde se i danas nalazi. Po zavretku Drugog
svetskog rata, veliki broj nemakih porodica napustio je Sivac, a
naselili su ga kolonisti iz Crne Gore, sa priblino 760 porodica.
In 1744, 875 villagers were recorded in Sivac, including four Serbian

priests, and in 1785 the village was colonized by 475 inhabitants from
Germany who founded Novi Sivac (New Sivac). Sivac first appeared
in maps in 1768, in the place where it still is today. After World
War II, a great number of German families left Sivac and the village
was inhabited by colonists from Montenegro with approximately 760
families.
Prema dokumentaciji Gradskog muzeja u Somboru, na teritoriji koju

zauzima selo Sivac nisu vrena sistematska arheoloka iskopavanja.
Arheoloki materijal iz atara ovog sela dospevao je u Muzej iskljuivo
putem sluajnih nalaza. Najraniji podaci o istraivanju lokaliteta u
okolini Sivca potiu jo iz vremena delovanja Istorijskog drutva
Ba Bodoroke upanije, a vezani su za prouavanje trase rimskih
aneva. Traei liniju njihovog pruanja, . Ciraki, tadanji saradnik
Istorijskog drutva, uoio je takozvanu donju liniju aneva, zatim
i drugu koja se prostirala pravcem Svetozar Mileti onoplja,
Kljajievo Mali Stapar Crvenka i treu liniju, na trasi Srpski
Mileti Brestovac Sivac Krnjaja do Teleke.13
According to the records of the Sombor Town Museum, there were

no systematic archaeological excavations on the territory of the
Sivac village. Archaeological material from the village area arrived
to the Museum exclusively by chance finds. The earliest information
about the research of sites in the Sivac area is from the period of
activity of the Historical Society Ba Bodorog county, regarding the
research of the route of Roman ditches. Searching for the line of their
stretching, Gy. Ciraky, an associate of the Historical Society, spotted
the so-called lower ditch line, as well as another one, extending along
the Svetozar Mileti onoplja, Kljajievo Mali Stapar Crvenka
direction, and a third one on the Srpski Mileti Brestovac Sivac
Krnjaja to Teleka route.13
Popisom lokaliteta koji je sastavio . Duda, u Godinjaku Istorijskog

drutva Ba Bodoroke upanije iz 1897. godine, pod Szivac es
Uj- Szivac navodi se toponim Klisa (Klissza) oko Francovog kanala,
sa ostacima stare crkve.14 Potom, u popisu iz 1902. godine, L. Rediger
se u Godinjaku poziva na ranije podatke iz 1897. godine, takoe
navodei toponim Klisa.15 U popisu mesta koje je sainio I. Ivanji 1902.
godine, na lokalitetu Stari Sivac Pustara Salai i jugoistono od
Pustare pominju se ostaci crkve.16 U dokumentaciji Gradskog muzeja
A list of sites assembled by Gy. Duds in the Yearbook of the Historical

Society Ba Bodorog county in 1897, lists under Szivac es UjSzivac a toponym Klisa (Klissza) around Franzs canal, with remains
of an old church.14 Then, in the 1902 Yearbook list, L. Roediger quotes
earlier data from 1897, also citing the Klisa toponym.15 The list made
by I. Ivanyi in 1902 mentions the remains of a church at the Stari
13
Rimski lem iz Sivca
nalazi se beleka P. Velenrajtera, o grobnom nalazu iz 1960. godine,

kada je kod Vodice, na zemljitu Vujice Grujia, izoran kostur sa
posudom.
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Sivac Pustara Salai site and southeast from Pustara. The Town
Museum records contain a note by Pavle Velenrajter about a grave
finding from 1960 when a skeleton with a vessel was plowed up
near Vodice, at the property of Vujica Gruji.
16
Zavod za zatitu spomenika kulture u Novom Sadu sproveo je

2000. godine zatitna arheoloka istraivanja ugroenih lokaliteta
na trasi gasovoda RG 04 15 Gospoinci Sombor. Tom prilikom
obuhvaeni su i lokaliteti na teritoriji Sivca: Sivac 3, potes Klisa,
i Sivac 4, potes Mali Stapar.17 Na lokalitetu Sivac 3 konstatovana
su etiri srednjovekovna objekta sa keramikom, kotanim i metalnim
alatkama, datovanim u IX vek. Na lokalitetu Sivac 4 istraeni su
stambeni objekti sa pokretnim arheolokim materijalom sarmatske
provenijencije iz IVV veka, kao i sa nalazima iz srednjovekovne epohe
(XIXII vek).
In 2000, the Institute for the Protection of Cultural Monuments in Novi

Sad carried out protective archaeological researches of endangered
sites on the route of the gas pipeline RG 04 15 Gospoinci
Sombor. This research also included sites on the Sivac territory: Sivac
3, Klisa and Sivac direction 4, Mali Stapar direction.17 Four medieval
objects were documented on the Sivac 3 site, containing pottery,
bone and metal tools dated to the 9th century. At the Sivac 4 site,
there was research of housing facilities with movable archaeological
material of Sarmatic origin, from the period between the 4th and 5th
century, as well as findings of the medieval period (11th and 12th
century).
Miroslav Vujovi
Podaci o uslovima i kontekstu nalaza lema iz Sivca vrlo su oskudni.
Razlog tome lei u injenici da nije otkriven prilikom arheolokih
istraivanja ve sluajno, kao i da mesto nalaza nikada nije sistematski ispitano. lem je naen nedaleko od Teleke visoravni, krajem novembra 1958 godine, prilikom dubokog oranja na lokalitetu
priblino udaljenom 3 km od dananjeg Sivca, a severno od tadanje
zemljoradnike zadruge Voloa Kneevi, na putu SomborSivac.18
Nalaza je bio traktorista Milorad Rogi, koji je dogaaj prijavio upravi
pomenute zadruge, odakle je lem dostavljen nadlenom muzeju u
Somboru 6.12.1958. godine. Od trenutka nalaza lema do njegovog
objavljivanja protekle su pune dve decenije. Pavle Velenrajter, kustos Gradskog muzeja u Somboru, umro je 1971, sedam godina pre
nego to je njegov rad o lemu iz Sivca izaao iz tampe.19 Prema
njegovom navodu, u somborski muzej istom prilikom je dospeo i jedan
gvozdeni lem.20 U dopisu koji je 10. 12. 1958. uputio upravi zadruge
Velenrajter kae:
Data on the conditions and the context of the find of the Sivac helmet
are very deficient. This is due to the fact that it was not discovered
during archaeological researches but by chance, and that the location
of the find was never systematically examined. The helmet was
discovered near the Teleka plateau in late November 1958 during a
deep plowing at a site located approximately 3 km from todays Sivac,
north of the then Agricultural Cooperative Voloa Kneevi, at the
SomborSivac road.18 The finder was a tractor driver, Milorad Rogi,
who informed the Cooperatives Administration about it and from there,
the helmet was delivered to the competent museum in Sombor on
December 6th 1958. It took entire two decades from the moment when
the helmet was found to its publishing. Pavle Velenrajter, Curator of
the Town Museum in Sombor, died in 1971, seven years before the
study about the Sivac helmet was printed.19 According to him, an iron
helmet had arrived to the Sombor Museum on the same occasion.20
In a letter which he addressed to the Cooperatives Administration on
December 10th 1958, Velenrajter says:
Upravi SRZ Voloa Kneevi

Izvetavamo Vas, da smo primili poiljku, koju ste preko Vaeg
ofera Pavkovi Jovana (dodato rukopisom, prim. autora) dostavili
u na muzej. Mi se na tome Vama najtoplije zahvaljujemo, te Vas
ujedno molimo za sledee:
To the Administration of the Agricultural Cooperative Voloa Kneevi

We inform you of having received the shipment which you have
sent courtesy of your driver Jovan Pavkovi (added in handwriting
authors note) to our museum. We sincerely thank you and at
the same time ask of you the following:
1. Da i u budue uvek javite i dostavite nam sline nalaze, to

Vam je dunost po zakonu, a osim toga emo mi nalazae za to
uvek nagraditi.
1939, 4.
Ivanyi 1906, 108110.
10
Ivanyi 1906, 108110.
11
Ivanyi 1906, 108110.
12
Ivanyi 1906, 108110.
13
1978, 17
14
Dudas 1897, 126
15
Roediger 1902, 228
16
Ivanyi 1906, 108110
17
Istraivanjima su rukovodili D. Andjeli i I. Pai, arheolozi Pokrajinskog
zavoda za prouavanje spomenika kulture.
1939, 4.
Ivanyi 1906, 108110.
10
Ivanyi 1906, 108110.
11
Ivanyi 1906, 108110.
12
Ivanyi 1906, 108110.
13
1978, 17
14
Dudas 1897, 126
15
Roediger 1902, 228
16
Ivanyi 1906, 108110
17
The research was managed by D. Andjeli and I. Pai, archaeologists
of the Provincial Institute for the Protection of Cultural Monuments.
14
1. In future, to always notify us and deliver similar finds, which

is your duty by the law, and besides, we will always reward the
finders.
2. Da nas ispitivanjem traktoriste Rogia podrobnije informirate o

okolnostima nalaza. Naroito bi bilo vano, da znamo, koji je taj
lem, jer prema telefonskim razgovorima tu se radi o dva lema,
o jednom, koji je Rogi izorao oteeno, i jednom, koji je njegov
prijatelj, jedan ofer naao, a koji je itav. Da li su lem i dva
limena komada naeni zajedno, ili je lem onaj, koji nije Rogi
izorao, a dva limena komada smatrate za delove lema koje je
Rogi izorao. To nam je sve vano. jer bez tanih podataka ne
moemo nita ustanoviti. Ona dva lima mogu biti i titovi za
ramena, pa u tom sluaju probnim kopanjem na prolee mogli bi
traiti i ostale delove oklopa, s obzirom na to, da su na istom
mestu moda i delovi sablje izorani. Molili bi druga Rogia, da kad
bude imao vremena, na licu mesta traga i za delovima sablje, koji
su tamo razbaeni. I to nam treba znati, da li se nalo na istom
mestu sa lemom i sabljom kostur ili delovi ljudskog kostura.
to detaljnije opisivanje dobijemo, tim vie i tim tanije moemo
odrediti iz kojeg vremena su objekti i kome pripadali.
2.To inform us in a more detailed fashion about the circumstances

of the find by examining the tractor driver Rogi. It is particularly
important for us to know which helmet is this, since according to
the telephone conversations, there were two of them: one which
was found during plowing by Rogi in a damaged state and one
found by his friend, a driver, which was intact. Were the helmet
and the two sheet metal pieces found together, or is the helmet
the one which was not found by Rogi, and you consider the two
sheet metal pieces to be parts of the helmet found by Rogi. This
is all important for us, because without precise information we
cannot determine anything. Those two sheet metal pieces may be
shoulder-guards, and in that case we could look for the remaining
parts of an armor in a trial excavation in the spring, based on the
fact that parts of a saber were perhaps dug out during plowing
on the same spot. We ask Comrade Rogi, in his spare time, to
look for parts of the saber which are scattered on the site. We
also need to know whether a human skeleton or parts of it were
15
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Nakon Vaeg odgovora, poslaemo na adresu vae uprave novanu

nagradu, da je dodeli nalazau.
Rukovodilac arheolokog odeljenja
Pavle P. Velenrajter
kustos muzeja
found on the same site with the helmet and the saber. The more
detailed description we receive, with more certainty will we be
able to determine the period the objects originate from and whom
did they belong to.
After your reply, we will send a financial reward to your
Administration, for it to be given to the finder.
Head of the Archaeological Department
Pavle P. Velenrajter
Museum Curator
Iz dopisa sledi da gvozdeni lem nije bio deo istog nalaza i da je

u Gradski muzej samo dospeo istom prilikom kada i rimski lem iz
Sivca. Pregledom lema nainjenog od gvozdenog lima ustanovili smo
da zaista ne pripada rimskoj epohi ve kasnom srednjem veku.21
U dokumentaciji Gradskog muzeja u Somboru nalazi se i karton
koji daje oprean podatak da je lemove izorao uvel Voja 1959.
godine, te da sistematska iskopavanja nisu vrena, tako da se ne
zna da li se radi o grobovima ili depou. U radu iz 1978. godine, meutim, Velenrajter se dri prvobitnog navoda o identitetu nalazaa
i datumu otkria lema.22 Izvesno je samo da iz nepoznatih razloga
mesto nalaza rimskog lema arheoloki nikada nije ispitano. Imajui u
vidu da je lem u Muzej dospeo poetkom decembra, moemo samo
pretpostaviti da su nepovoljni klimatski uslovi spreili Velenrajtera,
inae neumornog i predanog istraivaa, da detaljnije istrai lokalitet.
Uvidom u dokumentaciju i depo Gradskog muzeja u Somboru nisu
otkriveni bilo kakvi drugi predmeti koji se mogu povezati sa lemom
iz Sivca.
This letter suggests that the iron helmet was not a part of the same
find and that it only came to the Town Museum on the same occasion
as the Roman helmet from Sivac. After an examination of the iron
sheet metal helmet, we determined that it indeed does not belong to
the Roman epoch, but to the late medieval period.21
The records of the Sombor Town Museum also contain a document
providing contradicting information that the Helmets were plowed up
by Voja uvel in 1959 and that there were no systematic excavations,
so it is unknown whether it was a grave site or a hoard. In an article
from 1978, however, Velenrajter is sticking to the original claims
about the identity of the finder and the date of the discovery of
the helmet.22 It only remains certain that, for unknown reasons, the
location of the finding of the Roman helmet was never archaeologically
examined. Bearing in mind that the helmet came to the museum
in early December, we can only assume that unfavorable weather
conditions prevented Velenrajter, who was otherwise a tireless and
dedicated researcher, to examine the site in a more detailed manner.
The insight in the records and the depot of the Sombor Town Museum
did not reveal any other objects that can be brought in connection
with the Sivac helmet.
Pretpostavka da se radi o grobnom nalazu, koju je Velenrajter

nagovestio u dopisu zemljoradnikoj zadruzi, nije izneta prilikom
objavljivanja lema. Pretpostavljamo da u moguem odgovoru, ako ga
je i bilo budui da nije zaveden u muzejskoj dokumentaciji, Velenrajter
nije naao potvrdu skeletne sahrane. Iz paljivijeg itanja dopisa
sledi da su na mestu nalaza lema otkriveni i delovi sablje koji
su tamo razbaeni i za kojima treba tragati. Isti podatak, medjutim,
navodi se i u Velenrajterovom lanku iz 1978. godine, gde on kae
da je sa lemom otkriven i: ...ma za koga se nije moglo ustanoviti
da li je od bronze ili gvoa, poto je uniten na terenu.23 Ovo
upuuje na zakljuak da su, osim kalote lema i dve paragnatide,
istom prilikom zateeni i drugi predmeti koji su nestrune nalazae
podsetili na delove sablje. Kako nedostaju detaljniji opis i vrsta
materijala od koga je ova sablja izraena, ostaje nedoumica o tome
ta je zapravo otkriveno zajedno sa lemom iz Sivca. Zanimljivo je,
meutim, da Velenrajter termin sablja koristi samo u prepisci sa
upravom zemljoradnike zadruge, dok u uvodnom delu svoga rada
pominje unitene ostatke maa, to je mnogo uobiajeniji termin
za deo rimskog naoruanja. Moemo da zakljuimo da su anahroni
termin sablja, kao najpribliniji opis otkrivenog predmeta, dali sami
nalazai, neupueni u arheoloku nomenklaturu. Arheolog Velenrajter
isti naziv koristi samo u pismu upuenom nalazaima, kako bi ih
uputio za ime treba dalje da tragaju. Da li se uopte radilo o oruju
ili o neemu to je nalazae samo podsealo na zakrivljeno seivo
sablje?
The assumption that this was a grave find, hinted by Velenrajter in

his letter to the Agricultural Cooperative, was not presented during
the publishing of the helmet. We assume that in a reply, if there in
fact was one, Velenrajter did not find the confirmation of a skeleton
funeral, since it was not filed in the museums records. A more
careful look at the letter indicates that parts of a saber were
found scattered around at the site where the helmet was found,
and that they should be searched for. However, this information is
also stated in Velenrajters article from 1978 where he says that
along with the helmet, a sword was discovered and that it was ...
impossible to determine whether it was made of bronze or iron, since
it was destroyed on the field.23 This leads us to the conclusion that,
besides the helmets bowl and two cheek-pieces, other objects were
found on the same occasion which could have reminded incompetent
finders of parts of a saber. Due to the lack of a more detailed
description and type of material this saber was made of, it remains
unclear what was actually found along with the Sivac helmet. It is
16
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Upotreba jednoseklog oruja zakrivljenog seiva koje izgledom

podsea na sablju, nije bila nepoznata u rimsko doba, a potvruju je
arheoloki nalazi, reprezentativni spomenici i istoriografija.24 Radi se
o dakom dvorunom mau poznatom pod nazivom falx, koji Frontonis
pominje zbog uasnih rana nastalih njegovim dejstvom.25 Nanie
povijeno seivo falksa, poput kose, za koju je korien isti latinski
naziv, uspeno je probijalo drvenu tablu tita i metalne lemove,
pa je u rimsko defanzivno naoruanje ak uveden i oklop posebnog
oblika namenjen dodatnoj zatiti ruke.26 Kako je upotreba ovog oruja
uglavnom ograniena na I i prve decenije II veka, mala je verovatnoa
da je bilo u kontekstu nalaza lema iz Sivca, koji pripada kasnijem
periodu.
interesting, though, that Velenrajter uses the term saber only in

his correspondence with the Agricultural Cooperative Administration,
whereas in the introduction of his article, he only mentions the
destroyed remains of a sword, which is a much more common
term for a part of Roman weaponry. We can conclude that the
anachronous term saber, as the closest description of the found
object, was given by the finders themselves, who were unfamiliar
with the archaeological nomenclature. Archaeologist Velenrajter uses
the same name only in the letter addressed to the finders in order to
direct them at what they are supposed to further look for. Was it in
fact a weapon or something that only reminded the finders of a curved
blade of a saber?
Prihvatljivija je mogunost da, su pored kalote i titnika za obraze,

na istom mestu naeni drugi delovi lema, oteenog prilikom obrade
zemlje. Tu, pre svega, mislimo na lune delove nakrsnice i eoni
titnik iji oblik je nedovoljno upuene nalazae moda podsetio na
zakrivljeno seivo sablje. Naalost, ovaj deo nalaza nikada nije dospeo
u somborski muzej i danas moemo samo da pretpostavljamo ta je
zaista ostalo zaboravljeno na njivi izoranoj hladnog novembarskog
dana.
The use of a single-bladed weapon with a curved blade, which by

its look reminds of a saber, was not unknown in Roman times: it is
documented by archaeological finds, representational monuments and
historiography.24 An example of this is a Dacian double-handed sword,
known as the falx, mentioned by Fronto for the horrible wounds it
causes.25 The blade of the falx, curved downwards like a scythe,
for which the same Latin term was used, successfully penetrated
through a wooden shield panel and metal helmets, and therefore a
special form of shield as additional arm protection was introduced
in the Roman defensive weaponry.26 As the use of this weapon was
mostly limited to the 1st and the early decades of the 2nd century, it
is unlikely to expect it in the context of the Sivac helmet find, which
belongs to a later period.
A more acceptable possibility is the one according to which, besides
the bowl and the cheek-pieces, other parts of the helmet, which were
damaged during the plowing, were found at the same location. This
primarily relates to the curved parts of the reinforcement and the
peak with a shape that perhaps reminded insufficiently knowledgeable
finders of a sabers curved blade. Unfortunately, this part of the find
never came to the Sombor Museum and today we can only assume
what it was that remained forgotten on the plowing field on that cold
November day.
18
The helmet could not have been buried deeper than 60 m under the
ground, based on the fact that it was discovered during deep plowing,
which prepares the ground for the forthcoming agricultural season.
19
1978, 1720.
20
1978, 17.
21
My access to the archaeological depot of the Sombor Town Museum was
enabled by curators Andjelka Putica and Dragan Radojevi and I use this
opportunity to once again cordially thank them for their help.
22
1978, 17.
23
1978, 17.
23
1978, 17.
24
Gamber 1964; Polito 1998, 192-198; Rustoiu 2007, 6782, Fig. 8, 9.
25
Princ. Hist. II, 240.
26
Bishop, Coulston 2006, 98.
18
lem se mogao nalaziti na dubini ne veoj od 60 cm ispod povrine

s obzirom na to da je otkriven prilikom dubokog oranja, kojim se
zemljite priprema za narednu poljoprivrednu sezonu.
19
1978, 1720.
20
1978, 17.
21
Uvid u arheoloki depo Gradskog muzeja u Somboru omoguili su mi
kustosi Andjelka Putica i Dragan Radojevi, kojima se i ovom prilikom
srdano zahvaljujem na pomoi.
22
1978, 17.
23
1978, 17.
24
Gamber 1964; Polito 1998, 192-198; Rustoiu 2007, 6782, Fig. 8, 9.
25
Princ. Hist. II, 240.
26
17
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Sl. 3
Pl. 3
Rimski lem iz Sivca
When it arrived to the museum, the helmet was already damaged

and incomplete (Pl. 3). It consists of three parts: the bowl and two
cheek-pieces. They are all made of reddish brown bronze sheet, 0.10.2 cm thick, and on their inner side there are very clear marks of
a hammering (Pl. 4). The surface of the helmet was roughened by
intensive effects of corrosion and only parts of it have retained the
original look which points out the possibility of a tin coating.27
Kada je dospeo u Muzej, lem je ve bio oteen i nepotpun (sl. 3).

Sastoji se od tri dela: kalote i dva titnika za obraze paragnatide.
Svi su izraeni od bronzanog lima crvenkastosmee boje, debljine
0.10.2 cm, a na njihovoj unutranjoj strani veoma jasno se uoavaju
tragovi obrade tehnikom iskucavanja (sl. 4). Povrina lema ogrubljena
je intenzivnim delovanjem korozije i samo na pojedinim mestima ouvan je originalni izgled, koji upuuje na mogunost da je imala kalajnu
prevlaku.27
Bowl
Kalota
The bowl of the helmet has an irregular hemispherical shape, with its
back extended in the shape of a high neck-guard. The inner lower edge
of the bowl has a near elliptic shape; its smaller diameter is 18.5 cm
and the larger one 23.0 cm. The height of the bowl, from the lower
edge to the top is 13.0 cm. On the sides of the bowl, ear-guards
(height: 11.5 cm, width: 5.5 cm) are raised from the basic mass of
the bronze sheet by 1.0 cm (height) formed around the semi-circular
ear opening. The shaping of the ear-guards starts at the lower edge
of the bowl, and following the ear opening, continues along the neckpiece to the shoulder-guard. The neck-piece, 8.5 cm high and 16.5 cm
wide, is additionally widened and curved downward in the lower part,
thus partially covering the upper part of the shoulders. The left side
of the shoulder extension is missing one end (Pl. 5) which was cut in
an arch-like manner probably during the manufacturing or a later repair
of the helmet.28 In the extension of this part of the shoulder-guard,
on the outside, in two rows an inscription was punched, which will be
elaborated in a separate chapter.
Kalota lema je nepravilnog poluloptastog oblika, sa zadnjom stranom

produenom u vidu visokog vratobrana. Unutranja donja ivica kalote
priblino je eliptinog oblika, sa manjim prenikom od 18.5 cm i
veim od 23.0 cm. Visina kalote, od ravni donjeg ruba do vrha, iznosi
13.0 cm. Na bonim stranama kalote, iz osnovne mase bronzanog
lima izdignuti su za 1.0 cm titnici za ui visine 11.5 cm i irine
5.5 cm, formirani oko polukruno opseenog otvora koji je vlasniku
lema omoguavao neophodan zvuni kontakt. Profilacija uhobrana
poinje od donje ivice kalote i, pratei sluni otvor, produava se niz
vratobran do ramenog titnika. Vratobran, visine 8.5 cm i irine 16.5
cm, u donjem delu dodatno je proiriren i luno savijen nanie, ime
je delimino pokrivao i gornji deo ramena. Na levoj strani ramenog
proirenja nedostaje jedan kraj (sl. 5), luno opseen najverovatnije
tokom same izrade ili kasnije popravke lema.28 U nastavku ovog dela
ramenog titnika, sa spoljanje strane, u dva reda punktiran je natpis,
o kome e biti vie rei u posebnom poglavlju.
Dejstvom korozije na kaloti su nastala oteenja u vidu sitnih
nepravilnih perforacija, naroito pri vrhu, gde je bronzani lim najvie
istanjen tokom izrade. Takoe su konstatovane naprsline do kojih
je dolo prilikom otkrivanja lema, kada ga je raonik pluga izbacio
na povrinu zemlje. Tada su nastale pukotine, naroito primetne na
desnoj bonoj strani lema (sl. 6, 22), ime su delimino narueni
prvobitni oblik i simetrija kalote.
Corrosion has caused damages on the bowl, in the form of small

irregular perforations, particularly at the top where the bronze sheet
was thinned the most during the production. Also, there are cracks,
which were caused during the find, when the plowshare pulled the
helmet out of the ground. This caused cracks, particularly noticeable
on the helmets right flank (Pl. 6, 22), somewhat disturbing the
original shape and symmetry of the bowl.
Na kaloti se uoavaju i perforacije izvedene alatkom otrog vrha, i

to od spoljanje ka unutranjoj strani. Na obe bone strane njihov
broj, oblik i poloaj su identini. Javljaju se po etiri proboja za
spajanje dodatnih delova lema koji, naalost, nisu sauvani. Na levoj
strani (sl. 7) konstatovane su dve perforacije, prenika 0.40.5 cm,
za nosa arnira paragnatide. Probijene su neposredno iznad ruba
kalote u istom nizu i na meusobnoj udaljenosti od 1.5 cm. Iznad
njih se nalazi perforacija kvadratnog oblika, dimenzija 0.3 x 0.3 cm,
kroz koju su prolazili zakivci eonog titnika. etvrta perforacija
18
Also, there are noticeable perforations on the bowl which were made
by a sharp-pointed tool, from the outer to the inner side. Their
number, shape and position are identical on both flanks. There were
also four holes each for attaching additional parts of the helmet,
which unfortunately were not preserved. On the left side (Pl. 7), there
are two perforations (0.40.5 cm in diameter), for the hinge-plate of
the cheek-piece. They were located right above the edge of the bowl
19
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Sl. 4
Pl. 4
probijena je na najvioj poziciji, odnosno na polovini visine kalote. U

njoj se jo uvek nalazio deo gvozdenog zakivka kojim je bio spojen
levi kraj bone nakrsnice. Priblino isti raspored imaju i otvori na
desnoj strani kalote, sa manjim devijacijama izazvanim mehanikim
oteenjima (sl. 8). I ovde su konstatovana dva kruna otvora za
arnir paragnatida, pre-nika 0.40.5 cm, a iznad njih je kvadratna
perforacija, dimenzija 0.3 x 0.3 cm, za spajanje desnog kraka eonog
titnika. Znatno proirena gornja perforacija dobila pravougaoni oblik,
dimenzija 2.0 x 0.8 cm, verovatno usled nasilnog izmetanja
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Sl. 5
Pl. 5
in the same row and 1.5 cm from each other. Above them there is a
square-shaped perforation (0.3 x 0.3 cm) for the rivets of the peak.
The fourth perforation was cut at the highest position, i.e. at the half
of the bowls height. It still contained the part of the iron rivet which
connected the left end of the side reinforcing bar. The openings on
the right side of the bowl have approximately the same disposition,
with smaller deviations caused by mechanical damages (Pl. 8). Here,
too, two circular openings for the hinge of the cheek-pieces were
found, 0.40.5 cm in diameter, and above them a square-shaped
perforation (0.3 x 0.3 cm) for the attaching of the right end of
20
21
Rimski lem iz Sivca

Sl. 6
Pl. 6
Rimski lem iz Sivca

Sl. 7
the peak. The significantly wider upper perforation has a rectangular

shape (2.0 x 0.8 cm), probably due to a violent displacement of the
reinforcing bars, which could also have happened when the object was
pulled out from the ground.
bonog kraka nakrsnice, do ega je takoe moglo da doe prilikom

izvlaenja iz zemlje.
Pl. 7
Na eonoj strani (sl. 9, 27), 3.2 cm iznad ruba kalote, vidljiv je otvor
nepravilnog oblika, dimenzija 1.4 x 0.5 cm. Budui da je pomeren
udesno u odnosu na centralnu osu lema, stie se utisak da je i on
nastao naknadnim proirenjem prvobitno manjeg otvora kojim je eoni
titnik na prednjoj strani bio fiksiran za kalotu. Na rastojanju od 1.6
cm iznad ovog otvora nalazi se kruna perforacija, prenika 0.5 cm.
Ona, i proboj pravougaonog oblika na vratobranu (sl. 10), dimenzija
0.8 x 0.4 cm, postavljeni su u podunoj osi kalote i predstavljaju
mesta spoja krajeva podunog dela nakrsnice. Na donjem, proirenom
delu vratobrana, 1.5 cm od ruba, nalazi se jo jedan kruni proboj,
prenika 0.5 cm, namenjen umetanju zakivka kojim je na unutranjoj
strani fiksirana alka za noenje lema (sl. 11).
Sl. 8
Pl. 8
On the front (Pl. 9, 27), 3.2 cm above the edge of the bowl, there is
an irregularly-shaped opening (1.4 x 0.5 cm). Since it is shifted to the
right from the central axis of the helmet, one gets the impression that
it, too, was created by a subsequent widening of an originally smaller
opening witch attached the peak to the bowl of the helmet on the
front side. The circular perforation (1.6 cm above this opening, 0.5 cm
in diameter), and a rectangular hole on the neck-guard (Pl. 10), sized
0.8 x 0.4 cm, are positioned in the longitudinal axis of the bowl, and
can be identified as the point where the ends of the longitudinal part
of the reinforcing bars connect. On the lower, widened, part of the
neck-guard, 1.5 cm from the edge, there is another circular hole, 0.5
cm in diameter, intended for the rivets which on the inner side attach
the ring for carrying of the helmet (Pl. 11).
Osim navedenih perforacija, na kaloti su uoeni i tragovi korozije u

vidu razliitog obojenja povrine, koji tano ukazuju na nekadanji
poloaj i dimenzije izgubljenih delova. Na temenom delu kalote vidljiv
je krstoliki trag bakarno crvene boje, koji se jasno izdvaja od ostale
povrine (sl. 12). Njegov dui deo prati podunu osu lema i poinje
od gornje perforacije na eonom delu, prelazi preko vrha kalote i
sputa se do pravougaonog otvora na vratobranu (sl. 10). Krai deo
ovog traga povezuje gornje perforacije na bonim stranama. Debljina
traga iznosi 0.6 cm, a na mestima oko navedenih perforacija se iri,
otkrivajui oblik ataa nakrsnice, irine 1.7 cm. Na prednjoj strani
nalazi se slian trag, koji poinje od sredinjih perforacija na bonim
stranama i prua se preko eonog dela kalote (sl. 9), na taj nain
definiui prvobitni poloaj eonog titnika.
Sl. 9
Besides the mentioned perforations, there are marks of corrosion on

the bowl, in the form of different coloring of the surface which
directly indicates the former position and dimensions of the lost parts.
On the top of the bowl there is a cross-shaped trace of copper-red
colour, clearly distinguished from the rest of the surface (Pl. 12). Its
longer part follows the longitudinal axis of the helmet and, starting
with the upper perforation on the frontal part, goes over the top of
the bowl and down to the rectangular opening on the neck-guard (Pl.
10). The shorter part of this mark connects the upper perforations on
the flanks. The thickness of the mark is 0.6 cm, and it widens around
the perforations, creating a form of appliqus of the reinforcing bars,
with a width of 1.7 cm. There is a similar mark on the front side,
beginning with the central perforations on the flanks and extends over
the frontal part of the bowl (Pl. 9), in that way defining the original
position of the peak.
Pl. 9
Sl. 10
22
23
Pl. 10
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Sl. 11
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Paragnatide
Cheek-pieces
Paragnatide (sl. 13, 14) su raene iskucavanjem u bronzanom limu,

ija debljina takoe varira od 0.1 do 0.2 cm.29 Obe paragnatide imaju
trapezoidni oblik, sa lunom profilacijom koja je prilagoena formi
glave, odnosno lica, i priblino su istih dimenzija (desna: irina 16.0
cm, visina 19.0 cm; leva: irina 15.0 cm, visina 20.0 cm). Njihova
gornja strana zaseena je pod tupim uglom, a aure za osovinu
arnira, prenika 0.30.4 cm, oblikovane su u vidu dve pravougaone
trake lima, savijene ka unutranjoj strani (sl. 15). irina prednje aure
je 3.0 cm, a zadnje 2.0 cm. Razmak izmeu aura arnira iznosi 3.0
cm. Ivica zadnjeg kraja paragnatida ravno je zaseena i bez profilacije.
Na donjem delu rub paragnatida luno je savijen ka spoljanjoj strani.
irina ove profilacije poveava se od 0.4 cm, ispod brade, do 1.7
cm, na vratnom delu. Prednja ivica titnika za obraze talasasto je
oblikovana, tako da u najveoj meri pokriva lice nosioca, ostavljajui
slobodan jedino prostor za usta, nos i oi.
The cheek-pieces (Pl. 13, 14) were hammered in bronze sheet, with a
thickness also varying between 0.1 and 0.2 cm.29 Both cheek-pieces
are in the form of a trapezium, with a curved shape adjusted to the
form of the head, i.e. the face, and they have roughly the same
dimensions (right one: width 16.0 cm, height 19.0 cm; left one: width
15.0 cm, height 20.0 cm). Their upper side is cut at an obtuse angle
and the bearings for the axis of the hinge (0.30.4 cm in diameter)
are shaped as two rectangular sheet metal strips, bent inward (Pl.
15). The frontal bearing is 3.0 cm wide, and the back is 2.0 cm. The
gap between the hinge bearing is 3.0 cm. The edge of the cheekpieces back is flatly cut, and without molding. On its lower part, the
edge of the cheek-piece is bent outwards creating a curve. The width
of this molding increases from 0.4 cm, below the chin, to 1.7 cm on
the neck part. The front edge of the cheek-piece is formed in a wavelike shape, so that it mostly covers the face of the person wearing it,
leaving free only the area of the mouth, nose and eyes.
Pl. 11
Sl. 12
Pl. 12
Na prednjoj ivici desne paragnatide, u visini onog otvora (sl. 16)

uoava se oteenje dugako 3.6 cm, naneto nekim seivom.30 Na
donjem delu paragnatida, koji je pokrivao bradu vlasnika, primetni su
otvori za postavljanje mehanizma za zakopavanje lema. Na desnom
titniku za obraz nalaze se dva proboja i to: gornji pravougaoni, dimenzija 1.9x0.7 cm, i donji, krune forme, prenika 0.3 cm. Levi titnik
ima dve perforacije krunog oblika, prenika 0.3 cm, postavljene jedna
iznad druge.
On the frontal edge of the right cheek-piece, at the eye level (Pl.
16), there is a 3.6 cm long damage caused by some sort of a blade.30
On the lower part of the cheek-piece, which covered the owners
chin, there are openings for a mechanism which fastens the helmet.
There are two holes on the right cheek-piece: an upper, rectangular
one, sized 1.9 x 0.7 cm, and a lower, circular one with a 0.3 cm
diameter. The left cheek-piece also has two perforations, with 0.3 cm
diameters, both with a circular shape and placed above each other.
27
We assumed that the helmet was coated with tin or a tin alloy,
which was confirmed by subsequent physical-chemical analyses of the
materials structure; see Chapter: Physical and chemical analyses, page
49-50.
28
Current width of the shoulder-guard is 21.0 cm.
29
The bronze sheet metal is thickest in the middle part, and least thick on
the edges of the cheek-pieces.
30
A detailed examination of this damage showed that the sheet metal
guard was cut, and not broken. The angle and force which caused the
damage point out that the blow came from above, practically from
the inside of the bowl and not from the outside, which could have
been expected during combat. This indicates that the damage was not
caused when the helmet was on the soldiers head, but that it came
about subsequently. Based on the circumstances of the finding of the
helmet, it seems more likely that damage was caused by the blade of
a plowshare.
27
Pretpostavili smo da je lem bio prevuen kalajem ili nekom njegovom

legurom, to je i potvreno naknadnim fiziko-hemijskim analizama
sastava materijala; vidi poglavlje: Fiziko-hemijske analize
materijala, st. 42-50
28
Sadanja irina ramenog titnika iznosi 21.0 cm.
29
Najvea debljina bronzanog lima je na sredinjem delu, a najmanja na
rubovima paragnatida.
30
Detaljnijim pregledom ovog oteenja ustanovljeno je da je lim titnika
zaseen, a ne prelomljen. Ugao i silina pod kojim je nastalo oteenje
ukazuju da je udarac nanet odozgo nanie, praktino iz unutranjosti
kalote, a ne sa spoljanje strane, to bi se moglo oekivati u toku
borbe. Ovo ukazuje da oteenje nije nastalo u momentu kada je lem
bio na glavi ratnika ve naknadno. S obzirom na to kako je lem
otkriven, ini se izvesnijim da ono potie od udarca seiva raonika
prilikom obrade zemlje.
24
25
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Sl. 13
Sl. 15
Pl. 13
Sl. 14
Pl. 15
Sl. 16
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Pl. 14
Pl. 16
The Sivac helmet had a composite construction, which implies

manufacturing in several phases, adjusted with the work organization
in military or state armories (officinae armorum, fabricae armorum).31
The bowl was made along with the neck-guard and the ear-guards,
of one piece of cast bronze plate, while the cheek-pieces were done
separately, also in bronze. When it comes to iron helmets of this
type, the manufacturing process was different, since the ear-guards
were produced separately, by shaping individual pieces of copper alloy
sheet which were then attached to the bowl with rivets. Compared
to the raising of the same form from the basic mass of a helmet in
specimens made of copper alloy, this process was simpler, enabling
an easier damage repair. The same goes for the reinforcing bars and
the peak, which were later added to the helmet.
lem iz Sivca bio je kompozitne konstrukcije, to podrazumeva

izradu u vie faza, usklaenih sa organizacijom rada u vojnim ili
dravnim oruarnicama (officinae armorum, fabricae armorum).31 Kalota
je napravljena zajedno sa vratobranom i titnicima za ui, iz jednog
komada livene bronzane ploe, dok su paragnatide raene zasebno,
takoe od bronze. Postupak izrade gvozdenih lemova ovog tipa
razlikovao se utoliko to su titnici za ui pravljeni posebno, i to
profilisanjem pojedinanih komada lima od bakarne legure, koji su
zatim sa kalotom spajani zakivicima na odgovarajuem mestu. U
odnosu na izdizanje iste forme iz osnovne mase lema kod primeraka
od bakarne legure, ovaj postupak je bio jednostavniji i omoguavao
je laku popravku u sluaju oteenja. Isto vai za nakrsnicu i eoni
titnik, koji su naknadno dodavani lemu.
The production of Roman helmets in copper alloys used the process

of hammering.32 Physical and chemical analyses of samples of the
Sivac helmet indicate an alloy of copper and tin, i.e. bronze. The alloy
contains a low percentage of tin (56 %), which is comon with bronze
used for the production of Roman helmets, shield bosses, metal dishes
and various parts of military equipment which was manufactured by
hammering.33 The hammering of copper alloy helmets was done by
workers known as aerarii or vascularii. Similar to the work of modern
age coppersmiths, these specially trained craftsmen hammered the
bronze or brass cast plates by alternate blows with an iron hammer
on an anvil. Usually, a hammer with a slightly curved surface, leaving
circular concave marks, was used for this process. The overlapping of
several rows of punches created a more or less symmetrical raster of
polygonal fields, which is noticeable on the Sivac helmet, too (Pl. 4).
This was followed by a planishing procedure. It demanded the use of a
hammer with a flat surface, on the opposite side of the sheet metal,
from the center to the rim of the object. The craftsmen special
skill was apparent in the precise hitting of the spots between the
previously hammered circular marks, which created the characteristic
hexagon-shaped marks. The hammer used for creating of the desired
form was somewhat differently shaped, i.e. it had a rectangular
surface which most often stood at a right angle to the handle. The
edges of the hammer were slightly grinded so that they would not
cut the sheet metal.
Prilikom izrade rimskih lemova od bakarnih legura korien je postupak iskivanja.32 Fiziko-hemijske analize uzoraka sa lema iz Sivca
pokazuju da se radi o leguri bakra i kalaja, odnosno o bronzi. Legura
sadri nizak procenat kalaja (56 %), uobiajen kod bronze koriene
za izradu rimskih lemova, umba za titove, metalnih posuda i raznih delova vojne opreme ija je izrada podrazumevala iskucavanje.33
Iskivanje lemova od bakarnih legura obavljali su radnici poznati pod
nazivom aerarii ili vasculari. Slino kao kazandije modernog doba,
ovi posebno obueni majstori raskivali su livenu plou od bronze
ili mesinga naizmeninim udarcima gvozdenog ekia na nakovnju.
Za iskivanje se obino koristio eki sa blago zakrivljenom radnom
povrinom, koji je ostavljao krune konkavne tragove. Preklapanjem
nekoliko redova udaraca dobijao se manje ili vie pravilan raster
poligonalnih polja, koji se moe primetiti i kod sivakog lema (sl. 4).
Zatim je primenjivan postupak ravnanja. On je zahtevao upotrebu
ekia sa pljosnatom radnom povrinom, kojim su udarci izvoeni na
suprotnoj strani metalnog lima, od centra ka obodu predmeta. Posebna
vetina zanatlija ogledala se u preciznom pogaanju mesta izmeu
prethodno iskucanih krunih tragova, ime je dobijan karakteristian
otisak estougaonog oblika. eki korien za izdizanje forme imao je
neto drugaiji oblik, odnosno pravougaonu radnu povrinu postavljenu
najee pod pravim uglom u odnosu na drku. Ivice ovog ekia bile
su blago izbruene kako ne bi zasecale lim.
In order to achieve curves, from the shape of the bowl to some

more complex details, such as the convex ear-guards (Pl. 17) or the
surface of the cheek-pieces, anvils were used. They were made in
hard wood, bronze or iron, with curved surfaces suitable for achieving
the desirable form. The corners were done with a chisel, the narrow
end of a hammer or on the sharp edges of an anvil suitable for such
strokes.
Da bi se postigle krivine, od oblika kalote do pojedinih sloenijih detalja,

poput ispupenih uhobrana (sl. 17) ili povrina na paragnatidama, korieni su nakovnji. Izraivani su od tvrdog drveta, bronze ili gvoa,
a imali su zakrivljene povrine na kojima je dobijana odgovarajua
forma. Uglovi su izvoeni udarcima dleta, ueg kraja ekia ili na
otrim ivicama nakovnja predvienim za takve poteze.
26
27
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Tokom iskucavanja lema dolazilo je do razbijanja unutranje strukture

legure, koja je postajala krta i podlona pucanju. Zbog toga je zanatlija povremeno morao da prekida postupak kovanja i da metalni
predmet na ognjitu zagreva do take usijanja, ime su leguri vraana
prvobitna svojstva i ceo proces mogao je ponovo da se nastavi.34
Rimski lem iz Sivca
During the hammering of the helmet, the inner structure of the alloy
sometimes breaks, due to fact that it becomes brittle and prone
to cracking. Therefore, the craftsman had to stop the process at
times and heat up the metal object on a hearth which gave the
alloy its original characteristics back and the whole process could be
continued.34
Nakon iskivanja rastanjenog lima do osnovnog oblika, konani izgled

kalote i titnika za obraze formiran je opsecanjem vikova, i to
pomou dleta, sekaa, kleta ili makaza. Osim otisaka ekia, na
lemu iz Sivca primetni su i tragovi korienja ovih specijalnih alatki.
Pravougaoni otvor na donjem delu desne paragnatide (sl. 18), kao
deo mehanizma za kopanje, bio je izveden upravo upotrebom ueg
i ireg dleta-sekaa.
After the hammering of the thinned sheet metal to the basic shape,
the final appearance of the bowl and the cheek-pieces was formed
by cutting of the surplus, with a chisel, cutter, pliers or scissors.
Besides the hammer marks, the Sivac helmet also bears marks of use
of those special tools. The rectangular opening on the lower part of
the right cheek-piece (Pl. 18), as part of the fastening mechanism,
was made with both a narrow and a wide chisel-cutter.
Sl. 19
Sl. 17
Pl. 17
Sl. 18
Po zavretku kovanja kalote i paragnatida probijani su otvori za

zakivke kojima su spajani ostali delovi lema. Za ovo su korieni
probojci etvorougaonog ili krunog preseka. Opsecanjem lima pomou
makaza ili kleta, na paragnatidama je izraivan arnir u vidu dve
trake, koje su zatim savijene u aure za osovinu arnira. Obe sredinje
aure arnira, koje danas nedostaju, takoe su izraene od komada
trakasto iseenog lima, koji je savijan po sredini dueg dela i pomou
dva zakivka fiksiran sa unutranje strane kalote kroz odgovarajue
proboje (sl. 19). Na veini lemova tipa Niderbiber, gornji deo arnira
za kalotu je spojen sa dva zakivka, kao to je sluaj i kod sivakog
nalaza. Sa leve strane lema, u perforaciji za fiksiranje bonih krakova
nakrsnice, ouvan je deo gvozdenog tela zakivka, to upuuje na to
da su korene gvozdene nitne.35
Pl. 18
After the hammering of the bowl and the cheek-pieces, openings

were drilled for the rivets which connected other parts of the helmet.
Rectangular or circularly cross-sectioned openings were used for this
purpose. By cutting the sheet metal with scissors or pliers, a hinge
was created on the cheek-pieces in the form of two strips which
were then bent into bearings for the axis of the hinge. Both central
bearings of the hinge, which today are missing, were also made of a
piece of sheet metal strip, which was bent in the middle of the longer
part and with two rivets attached on the inside of the bowl through
corresponding holes (Pl. 19). On most helmets of the Niederbieber
type, the upper part of the bowl hinge was fastened with two rivets,
which is the case with the Sivac finding, as well. On the left side of
the helmet, in the perforation for the attaching of the flanking bars
of the reinforcement, a part of an iron head was preserved, which
indicates the use of iron rivets.35
Neravna povrina iskucanog lima mogla je da bude uglaana i

ujednaena naknadnom obradom. Pri izradi rimskog metalnog posua, na primer, u tu svrhu korieno je bruenje ili poliranje peskom, mlevenim plovukom ili drugim abrazivom. Ovim postupkom
smanjivana je debljina lima, pa time i otpornost na udarce, to u
sluaju defanzivnog naoruanja nije bilo poeljno. Spoljanja povrina
lema iz Sivca nije pomnije doterivana bruenjem, kao to je to
The uneven surface of the hammered sheet metal could have been
polished and evened out by subsequent treatment. For example, during
the manufacturing of Roman metal vessels, grinding or polishing by
sand, pumice stone or other abrasives, was used for that purpose.
This procedure thinned the sheet metal and decreased its persistence
28
Pl. 19
to blows, which was not desirable in the case of defensive weaponry.
The outside surface of the Sivac helmet was not carefully finished
by grinding, as it was the case with some more luxurious specimens.
Traces of rough finish can be noticed by a detailed inspection of the
surface, but it remains unclear whether those are traces of usage or
a consequence of an aggressive conservatory procedure.
bio sluaj kod nekih luksuznijih primeraka. Tragovi sumarne dorade

mogu da se primete detaljnim pregledom povrine, ali nije izvesno da
li se tu radi o tragovima upotrebe ili o posledici agresivnijeg konzervatorskog postupka.
Nakrsnice lemova ovog tipa bile su izraivane od dva luno iskovana
kraka (sl. 20), pod pravim uglom spojena lebovima sa donje, odnosno
gornje strane. Zakrivljenom formom krakovi nakrsnice prate oblik
kalote, za koju su spojeni zakivicima. S obzirom na to da na lemu
iz Sivca zakivci nisu sauvani, nije izvesno od kog su materijala bili
napravljeni. Kod lema izvaenog iz Rajne kod Amerongena (crte 1)
i lema iz Kalkar-Henepela (crte 2), nakrsnica i eoni titnik su od
bakarne legure, dok primerak iz Fridberga ima gvozdenu nakrsnicu.36
Postoji mogunost da je i na naem lemu nakrsnica bila od gvoa,
ime moe da se objasni pojava tragova korozije na kaloti, koji sasvim
izvesno potiu od elektrohemijskih procesa nastalih inerakcijom
razliitih materijala u zemlji.
The reinforcing bars of helmets of this type were made from two
curved hammered strips (Pl. 20) connected at a right angle by a
groove on the lower, i.e. upper side. The curves of the reinforcing
bars follow the shape of the bowl, to which they are fastened with
rivets. Since the rivets were not preserved on the Sivac helmet, the
material they were made of is unknown. On the helmet found in the
Rhine at Amerongen (Fig. 1) and the one from Kalkar-Hnnepe (Fig.
2) l, the reinforcing bars and the peak were made of a copper alloy,
whereas the Friedberg specimen has iron reinforcing bars.36 There is a
possibility that the Sivac helmets reinforcing bars were made of iron,
too. This would explain the traces of corrosion on the bowl, most
certainly caused by electro-chemical processes which came about
through interaction of different materials under the ground.
Na vratobranu rimskih lemova esto se javljaju unutranje preice ili

spoljanje ruice za noenje. Taj dodatak omoguavao je da se lem
okai prilikom odlaganja opreme u garnizonskom skladitu ili da se
privee za lini prtljag. Tokom duih mareva, kada nije bilo potrebno
da se lemovi nose na glavi, rimski vojnici su ih kaili o rame, kao to
On the neck-guards of Roman helmets there are often buckles on the

inside or carrying handles on the outside. This addition enabled for
29
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Sl. 20
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Pl. 20
Nakon kompletiranja metalne konstrukcije lema iz Sivca, njegova

povrina bila je prevuena kalajem, to su potvrdile i fiziko-hemijske
analize uzoraka lima. Ovaj postupak i danas se koristi za zatitu
edge of the neck-guard (Pl. 11), the Sivac helmet used to have an
inside buckle in the form of a dual or single link on a strip-like hinge
attached with a rivet (Pl .21).
Sl. 21
Crte 1
Fig. 1
Crte 2
Pl. 21
Fig. 2
metalnih kazana i drugih posuda od bakarnih legura, pre svega zbog

toga to je bakar otrovan. Osim potrebe da se metalna povrina
lema, izloena atmosferskoj vlazi i znoju, zatiti od dejstva korozije,
kalajni premaz je srebrnkastim odsjajem davao luksuzniji izgled
vojnikoj opremi, to je bilo posebno vano pripadnicima konjikih
trupa. U tehnolokom smislu, postupak kalajisanja nije bio naroito
komplikovan. Najpre su sa predviene povrine odstranjene neistoa
i povrinska korozija, i to korienjem rastvora sumporne kiseline ili
sireta. Potom je rastopljeni kalaj razmazivan komadom tkanine i
hladjenjem u tankom sloju prijanjao za bronzani lim.
pokazuju pojedine scene sa Trajanovog stuba u Rimu.37 Koliko moe da

se presudi na osnovu jedne perforacije iznad ruba vratobrana (sl. 11),
lem iz Sivca imao je unutranju preicu u vidu dvojne ili pojedinane
karike na trakastom nosau, koja je fiksirana zakivkom (sl. 21).
the helmet to be hung when equipment was put aside in the garrison
warehouse or attached to personal luggage. During longer marches,
when it was unnecessary to wear helmets on their heads, Roman
soldiers carried them on their shoulders, as shown by scenes from
Trajans Column in Rome.37 As judged by one perforation on the very
30
After the metal construction of the Sivac helmet was completed, its
surface was tinned, as confirmed by physical and chemical analyses
of the sheet metal cross-sections. This procedure is still being used
today for the protection of metal kettles and other copper alloy
dishes, primarily due to the fact that copper is poisonous. Besides
the need to protect the helmets metal surface, which is exposed to
atmospheric humidity and sweat, from the effects of corrosion, the
tin coating with its silvery glow gave a more luxurious appearance to
military equipment, which was especially important to cavalry troops
members. In a technological sense, the tinning process was not very
complicated. Firstly, dirt, greace and corrosion were removed from
the surface by the use of sulfuric acid solution or vinegar and then
the melted tin was applied by a piece of cloth. The tin cooled down,
adhering to the bronze sheet in a thin layer.
Na lemu danas ne postoje nikakvi tragovi postave, niti su o tome

sauvani podaci u muzejskoj dokumentaciji. Sudei prema ustaljenoj
oruarskoj praksi, njegova unutranjost nekada je moda bila obloena
koom ili tkaninom zalepljenom za metalnu povrinu kalote ili paragnatida. Slino dananjim primercima ovog dela linog naoruanja,
pretpostavlja se da je na rimskim lemovima korien sistem konih
ili tkanih remenova, spojenih sa unutranje strane za kalotu lema.
There are no traces today on the Sivac helmet of a lining, nor was
there any data about it in the museum records. Judging by the usual
armory practices, the inside could have been coated with leather or
31
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Utezanjem ili poputanjem remenja, lem se prilagoavao razliitim

veliinama glave, amortizovao je udarce maa, koplja ili nekog drugog
oruja, ali i omoguavao i bolju cirkulaciju vazduha, to je bilo od
velikog znaaja pri duem noenju lema.38 Jednostavnije reenje,
koje se ini i najizvesnijim u sluaju lema iz Sivca, bilo je noenje
neke vrste potkape postavljene organskim materijalom, koja je imala
istu ulogu.39
a cloth glued to the metal surface of the bowl or the cheek-pieces.

Similarly to todays specimens of this part of personal weaponry, it is
assumed that a netlike system of leather or woven straps was used
on Roman helmets, connected on the inside to the helmets bowl. By
pulling or releasing the straps, the helmet adjusted to different head
sizes, absorbed the blows of a sword, spear or another weapon, but
also enabled better air circulation under the helmet, which was very
important during extensive wearing of the helmet.38 A more simple
solution, which presents itself as the most probable one in the case of
the Sivac helmet, was the wearing of some kind of a cap lined with
organic material, which had the same role.39
Rimski lem iz Sivca
The Roman helmet from Sivac belongs to the type which is mentioned
in scientific literature in two ways, as the Niederbieber and as the
type of auxiliary cavalry helmet. The first name originate from the
Niederbieber site in Germany, where in late 19th century, during
the exploration of a Roman fort, one of the first specimens of this
characteristic form was discovered.40 The basic features of those
helmets are a deep bowl with a vertical neck-guard and large cheekpieces. The bowl is enhanced with reinforcing bars and a peak. Both
iron helmets, as well as specimens made of brass or bronze, were
discovered. Some specimens were luxuriously manufactured, such as
the iron helmet from Heddernheim, Germany, which had a strip coat
made of a copper alloy on the front and on its flanks. The combination
of two different metals achieved a very decorative polychromous
effect and a more luxurious appearance of the helmet, which has
always been very important to members of the cavalry, who were
prone to dressing up.
Rimski lem iz Sivca pripada tipu koji se u strunoj literaturi pominje

kao tip Niderbiber ili auksilijarno-konjiki lem (Auxiliary cavalry
helmet). Prvi je naziv dobio po lokalitetu Niderbiber u Nemakoj, gde
je krajem XIX veka, prilikom istraivanja rimskog kastela, otkriven
jedan od prvih primeraka ove karakteristine forme.40 Osnovne odlike
ovih lemova su duboka kalota sa vertikalnim vratobranom, nakrsnica,
eoni titnik i veliki titnici za obraze. Otkriveni su kako gvozdeni
lemovi tako i oni od mesinga ili bronze. Pojedini primerci su luksuzniji,
kao to je gvozdeni lem iz Hedernhajma u Nemakoj, koji je na
eonoj i bonim stranama imao trakastu oplatu od bakarne legure.41
Kombinacijom dva razliita metala postizani su veoma dekorativan
polihromni efekat i luksuzniji izgled lema, to je konjanicima, oduvek
sklonim gizdanju, bilo veoma vano.
Najvei broj pripadnika konjikih i peadijskih kohorti imao je, meutim,
skromnije lemove, sa jednostavnom, ali praktinom konstrukcijom i
bez suvinih detalja. Takav je sluaj i sa lemom iz Sivca. Najsliniji
sivakom lemu je primerak iz Kalkar-Henepela, koji je kompletnije
ouvan, pa upuuje na raspored i izgled delova koji kod naeg lema
nedostaju.
31
It is more likely that these were garrison workshops since the work of
private armors could only partially cover the needs of the army, and
even in that case, it was under some kind of army, i.e. state supervision:
Bishop-Coulston 2006, 234.
32
Casting was not used due to technical and practical reasons since
cast objects are heavier and more likely to break, unlike those which are
gradually hammered.
33
A copper alloy suitable for cold processing was not allowed to have a
tin percentage higher than 13.2 %, because otherwise the metal would
be too brittle for hammering; Compare: Strong, Brown 1976, 25.
34
Strong, Brown 1976, 13.
35
Such a statement, however, has to remain in the realm of assumption,
since after possible repairs of the helmet, the copper alloy rivets could
have been replaced with iron ones, which are cheaper and easier to be
obtained.
36
Reinforcing bars made fully or partially of iron could have been added
during later weapon repairs.
37
Cichorius 1896, Taf. VIIVIII.
38
Robinson 1975, 144.
39
This practice is also documented by Ammianus Marcellinus who stated
that, in a situation of distress, the hat which was worn under the helmet
was used by him and his fellow soldiers to get water out of a well:
Marcellinus, XIX, VIII, 8.
31
Verovatnije je da se radilo o garnizonskim radionicama budui da je rad

privatnih oruara mogao samo delimino da zadovolji potrebe naoruavanja vojske, a i tada pod nekom vrstom vojnog, odnosno dravnog
nadzora: Bishop-Coulston 2006, 234.
32
Livenje se nije koristilo iz tehnikih i praktinih razloga jer su liveni
predmeti tei i skloniji lomljenju, za razliku od onih koji se postepeno
iskivaju; vidi: Robinson 1975, 13.
33
Legura bakra predviena za hladnu obradu nije smela da ima vie od
13.2 % kalaja jer bi sa veim procentom metal bio isuvie krt za iskivanje; uporedi: Strong, Brown 1976, 25.
34
Strong, Brown 1976, 13.
35
Ovakva konstatacija, meutim, mora ostati u domenu pretpostavke
budui da su, prilikom eventualnih popravki lema, nitne od bakarne
legure mogle biti zamenjene jeftinijim i lake dostupnim gvozdenim
primercima.
36
Nakrsnice izraene u celosti ili parcijalno od gvoa mogle su biti
dodate i u kasnijim popravkama naoruanja.
37
Cichorius 1896, Taf. VIIVIII.
38
Robinson 1975, 144.
39
O ovoj praksi posredno svedoi i Amijan Marcelin, koji navodi da je, u
nevolji, kapa noena ispod lema njemu i njegovim saborcima posluila
za vaenje vode iz bunara: Marcelinus, XIX, VIII, 8.
32
However, the majority of members of the cavalry and infantry cohorts

had modest helmets with a simple, but practical construction and
without excessive details. Such is the case with the Sivac helmet.
Most similar to the Sivac helmet is the specimen from Kalkar-Hnnepel
which is better preserved, therefore indicating the arrangement and
appearance of parts missing from our helmet.
Prema Robinsonovoj tipologiji, nalaz iz Sivca moe da se opredeli u

lemove koje je koristila auksilijarna konjica, odnosno u tip Auxiliary
Cavalry F.42 Osim pomenutog nalaza iz Kalkar-Henepela, ovom tipu
pripada i lem izvaen iz Rajne kod Amerongena, koje je Robinson
objasnio kao jeftiniju varijantu konjikog lema odomaenog meu
pripadnicima meovitih konjiko-peadijskih pomonih jedinica (cohortes
equitatae).43
According to Robinsons typology, the Sivac find can be classified

among helmets used by the auxiliary cavalry, i.e. Auxiliary Cavalry F
type. Besides the aforementioned Kalkar-Hnnepel find, this type also
includes the helmet found in the Rhine at Amerongen, which was
explained by Robinson as a cheaper version of the cavalry helmet,
accustomed among the members of the mixed auxiliary units cohortes
equitatae.
Sudei prema obliku, lemovi ovog tipa identifikovani su najpre kao

konjiki lemovi. Od II veka nadalje, njih karakteriu velike paragnatide
i izrazito dugaak vratobran proiren u donjem delu, koji pokrivaju
glavu, ramena i vrat jahaa, najee izloene povredama od maa,
koplja ili razliitih projektila.44 Postoji i miljenje, koje ne treba
zanemariti, da upotreba lema ove karakteristine forme nije bila
odomaena samo meu konjanicima ve i u peadijskim odredima
pomonih jedinica rimske vojske. Njegovi glavni argumenti su izmene
u naoruanju i nove tehnike borbe prilagoene sukobima sa razliitim
neprijateljima, protiv kojih je Rim ratovao u drugoj polovini II i u III
veku, pre svega sa germanskim narodima severno od Dunava i Paranima na istonom bojitu.45
Judging by their shape, the helmets which belong to this type were
first identified as cavalry helmets. Since the 2nd century, they are
featured by large cheek-pieces and an extremely long neck-guard
widened in its lower part, which cover the horsemans head, shoulders
and neck areas that are mostly exposed to injuries by a sword,
spear or various missiles. There is also an opinion, which should
not be disregarded, according to which the use of helmets of this
characteristic shape was not only accustomed among horsemen,
but also with Roman auxiliary infantry squads. The main arguments
supporting this theory are the changes in weaponry and new combat
techniques adjusted to confronting different enemies, against whom
Rome fought in late 2nd and the 3rd century, primarily the Germanic
U hronolokom pogledu lemovi tipa Niderbiber opredeljeni su uglavnom u period kraja II do sredine III veka. Zbog nedostatka kon33
Rimski lem iz Sivca
tribes north of the Danube and the Parthians on the eastern front.
kretnijih podataka o uslovima nalaza iz Sivca, to moe da bude

osnova i za njegovo datovanje. Najranije je opredeljen fragment
nakrsnice iz kastela Njusted u Engleskoj, koji je datovan u vreme
140-158. godine.46 Slini delovi lemova ovog tipa naeni su prilikom
istraivanja rimskih utvrenja na germanskom i britanskom limesu
(Zalburg, Pfunc, Korbrid), opredeljeni u kraj II i poetak III veka.47
Dodatni element za datovanje predstavljaju prikazi lemova ovog
prepoznatljivog oblika na freskama iz Dura Europosa i nadgrobnim
stelama iz Istanbula i Verije, koji potiu iz III veka.48
In a chronological sense, the Niederbieber type helmets are dated

mostly to the period between late 2nd and mid-3rd century which,
in lack of more concrete data about the circumstances of the Sivac
finding, can be a basis for its dating, as well. The earliest date
is provided by a fragment of reinforcing bars from the Roman fort
Newstead which is dated to the period 140-158. Similar parts of
helmets of this type were discovered during the research of Roman
fortifications in the Germanic and the Britanic limes (Saalburg, Pfunz,
Corbridge) which were dated to the late 2nd and early 3rd century.
An additional element for the dating is represented by descriptions
of helmets of this recognizable shape on frescoes from Dura Europos
and grave stelae from Istanbul and Veria, which were dated to the
3rd century.
40
40
41
41
Lipperheide 1896, 22830, No. 457459.

Donner von Richter 1894, 24, Taf. 7.
42
Robinson 1975, 99, Pl. 263265;Pl. 266268.
43
Robinson 1975, 99, Pl. 263268.
44
Dixon, Southern 1992, 35.
45
46
Curle 1911, 165, Fig. 35, 8.
47
Robinson 1975, 90.
48
Bishop, Coulston 2006, 173175, Fig. 111, 112.
Lipperheide 1896, 22830, No. 457459.

Donner von Richter 1894, 24, Taf. 7.
42
Robinson 1975, 99, Pl. 263265; Pl. 266268.
43
Robinson 1975, 99, Pl. 263268.
44
Dixon, Southern 1992, 35.
45
Bishop, Coulston 2006, 175; Stephenson 2001, 2526.
46
Curle 1911, 165, Fig. 35, 8.
47
Robinson 1975, 90.
48
Bishop, Coulston 2006, 173175, Fig. 111, 112.
Sl. 22
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Pl. 22
Sl. 23
lem iz Sivca spada u bolje ouvane primerke rimskih lemova. Izvesno je, meutim, da pojedini njegovi delovi nedostaju. To moe da
se utvrdi najpre uporeivanjem sa neposrednim analogijama, ali i
putem pojedinih naznaka i tragova koji se uoavaju na samom lemu.
U Gradski muzej u Somboru dospeli su samo kalota i paragnatide.
Da je lem bio oteen prilikom otkria pokazuju zasek na desnoj
paragnatidi i naprsline na bonoj strani kalote, nainjeni raonikom
kojim je lem izbaen na povrinu zemlje (sl. 6, 16). Tom prilikom
moda su razdvojeni delovi lema, koje su nalazai zanemarili i ostavili na njivi.
The Sivac helmet belongs to the better preserved specimens of Roman

helmets. It is certain, however, that some of its parts are missing.
This can be determined primarily by comparing it with direct analogies,
but also by certain indications and traces which can be noticed on
the helmet itself. Only the bowl and the cheek-pieces came to the
possession of the Town Museum of Sombor. The fact that the helmet
was damaged during its discovery is indicated primarily by the kerf on
the right cheek-piece, as well as by cracks on the side of the bowl,
caused by the plowshare which dug the helmet from the ground (Pl.
6, 16). On that occasion, parts of the helmet were perhaps separated
from it and disregarded by the finders, who left them at the site.
Elementi za rekonstrukciju
Pl. 23
Elements of the Reconstruction
lemovi tipa Niderbiber, kojima pripada i nalaz iz Sivca, imaju specifinu

konstrukciju koja je proistekla iz njihove namene i naina proizvodnje.
Njihova kalota, izradjena od gvozdenog, bronzanog ili mesinganog lima,
dodatno je ojaavana nakrsnicom i eonim titnikom. Paragnatide su
za kalotu bile spojene arnirom, a na vratobranu obino se nalazio
i nosa u vidu preice ili drke. Svi ovi delovi spajani su za kalotu
zakivcima od bakarne legure ili gvoa.
The Niederbieber type helmets, which the Sivac find belongs to, have
a specific construction which originate from their purpose and the
manner of production. Their bowl, made of iron, bronze or brass sheet,
was additionally enhanced by reinforcing bars and a peak. The cheekpieces were fastened to the bowl via a hinge, and the neck-guard
usually contained a carrier in the form of a ring or handle. All those
parts were fastened to the bowl with copper alloy or iron rivets.
Na kaloti naeg lema uoene su pravilne perforacije kvadratnog

i krunog oblika, predviene za spajanje pojedinih delova koji danas nedostaju, a to su: nakrsnica, eoni titnik, nosai arnira paragnatida i unutranja preica za noenje lema. Pravilan raspored
i broj perforacija upuuju na njihovu ulogu u konstrukciji lema,
predstavljajui odlinu osnovu za rekonstrukciju njegovog nekadanjeg
izgleda.
On the Sivac helmets bowl, we can notice symmetrical square- and

circular-shaped perforations for the attachment of certain parts which
are missing today; those are the reinforcing bars, peak, hinge-plates
of the cheek-pieces and the inside ring for carrying the helmet. The
symmetrical disposition and number of the perforations points out
their role in the helmets construction, representing an excellent basis
for the reconstruction of its former appearance.
O poloaju nakrsnice i eonog titnika svedoe i tragovi na kaloti

koji su nastali interakcijom metalnih povrina razliitog sastava
(sl. 10, 12). Primeuju se golim okom kao partije razliitog obojenja
na povrini kalote. Ti hromatski tragovi posledica su dejstva korozije,
koja se elektrohemijskom reakcijom intenzivnije razvijala na mestima
kontakta nakrsnice i eonog titnika sa kalotom. Zahvaljujui ovim
tragovima, koji u pravom smislu predstavljaju otisak izgubljenih
delova lema, bilo je mogue da se sa vie sigurnosti utvrde njihov
poloaj i dimenzije.
The position of the reinforcing bars and the peak are indicated by
the marks on the bowl which were created by interaction of metal
surfaces of different electronic potential (Pl. 10, 12). They are
visible as differently colored parts on the surface of the bowl. Those
chromatic marks are the consequence of the effects of corrosion
which, in an electro-chemical reaction, developed with more intensity
at the points of contact of the reinforcing bars and the peak with the
bowl. Based on these marks, which truly represent an imprint of the
helmets lost parts, it was possible to determine their position and
dimensions with more certainty.
Nakrsnica
Reinforcing Bars
Nakrsnica je bila sastavljena od dva luno iskovana kraka pravougaonog preseka, koji su na vrhu kalote bili spojeni lebovima (sl.
22). To je potvreno na nekoliko lemova istog tipa (Niderbiber,
34
The reinforcement was assembled from two curved hammered bars

with a rectangular cross-section, which were attached with grooves
35
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Fridberg, Hedernhajm, Saon-Merc, Kalkar-Henepel, Amerongen).

Boni krak nakrsnice bio je krai i sa kalotom spojen zakivcima
kroz odgovarajue perforacije iznad titnika za ui. Model lema sa
izduenim vratobranom uslovio je da zadnji krak nakrsnice bude dui
od ostalih (sl. 23). Tragovi korozije na kaloti lema iz Sivca ukazuju
da su krajevi nakrsnice imali atae u vidu romboidnih ili ovalnih
ploica irine oko 1.82.0 cm (sl. 10, 24, 27), u ijem centru se
nalazila perforacija za zakivak. Isti tragovi pokazuju da je debljina
nakrsnice iznosila oko 0.40.5 cm.
at the top of the bowl (Pl. 22). This was confirmed on several
helmets of the same type (Niederbieber, Friedberg, Heddernheim,
49
Sane-Mercey, Kalkar-Hnnepel, Rhine-Amerongen). The side bar was

shorter and attached to the bowl with rivets through perforations
positioned above the ear-guards. The helmet model with an extended
neck-guard demanded that the back bar is longer than the others (Pl.
23). Traces of corrosion on the Sivac helmets bowl indicate that the
ends of the reinforcing bars had appliqus in the form of rhomboid or
oval plates, 1.82.0 cm wide (Pl. 10, 24, 27), in the center of which
there was a perforation for a rivet. The same traces show that the
reinforcing bars were around 0.40.5 cm thick.
Moe se pretpostaviti da je i nakrsnica lema iz Sivca, poput njegove

kalote i paragnatida, takoe bila od bronze. Na lemu iz KalkarHenepela, koji je predstavlja najbolju analogiju sivakom nalazu,
nakrsnica je izraena od bakarne legure. Ne treba, meutim, odbaciti
ni mogunost da je, kao kod lemova iz Niderbibera i Hedernhajma,
nakrsnica bila gvozdena, to bi objasnilo intenzivne tragove elektrohemijske reakcije na kaloti.
It can be assumed that the reinforcing bars of the Sivac helmet,

like its bowl and cheek-pieces, were also made of bronze. On the
Kalkar-Hnnepel specimen, which serves as the best analogy to the
Sivac find, the reinforcing bars were made of a copper alloy. However,
we should not dismiss the possibility that, like the Niederbieber and
Heddernheim helmets, the reinforcing bars were made of iron, which
would explain the intensive traces of electro-chemical reaction on
the bowl.
Nosa arnira paragnatide
Sl. 24
Pl. 24
Sl. 25
Pl. 25
Neposredno iznad ruba kalote, na meusobnoj udaljenosti od 1.5 cm,

Sl. 25da su sluili za
probijena su dva kruna proboja. Sasvim je izvesno
privrivanje nosaa arnira kojim su paragnatide bile spojene za
kalotu. Sudei prema uobiajenoj oruarskoj praksi, nosa je bio izraen
u vidu savijene limene trake, koja je fiksirana pomou dva zakivka
na unutranjoj strani ruba kalote (sl. 25). Unutranji prenik tako
dobijene aure za ianu osovinu arnira morao je odgovarati preniku
aura na paragnatidama, koji iz-nosi 0.30.4 cm. irina nosaa, na
os-novu razmaka izmeu aura arnira na pa-ragnatidama, iznosila
je 3.0 cm.
Hinge-plates
Two circular holes were made right above the edge of the bowl, 1.5
cm apart from each other. It is quite certain that they had the purpose
of fastening the hinge-plate of the cheek-pieces which connected the
cheek-pieces to the bowl. Judging by the usual weaponry practices,
the plate was made in form of a curved sheet metal strip, which was
attached at the inner side of the edge of the bowl by two rivets (Pl.
25). The inside diameter of the bearing which was created in this
way for the wire axis of the hinge, had to suit the diameter of the
bearings on the cheek-pieces, which was 0.30.4 cm. The width of
the plate, based on the gap between the bearings of the hinge on the
cheek-pieces, was 3.0 cm.
Zakivci
Zakivci kojima su spajani pojedini delovi lema iz Sivca nisu
ouvani, tako da se njihov izgled i materijal od koga su bili izraeni
mogu samo pretpostaviti. Na lemovima iz Niderbibera, Fridberga
i Hedernhajma zakivci su imali ukrasne glave kupastog oblika, dok
su na lemu iz Kalkar-Henepela upotrebljeni zakivci sa loptastom
glavom. Njihove dimenzije nisu poznate, osim prenika tela koji je
morao odgovarati preniku proboja na kaloti (0.20.3 cm). Komad
tela gvozdenog zakivka (sl. 26), ouvan na levoj bonoj strani kalote
lema iz Sivca, upuuje na to da su nakrsnica i drugi delovi (eoni
titnik, preica za noenje) bili privreni zakivcima od gvoa, a
ne od bakarne legure. Zbog breg propadanja gvozdenih delova, to
moda ukazuje na to kako je dolo do odvajanja i gubljenja pomenutih
elemenata.50
36
Rivets
Rivets which connected individual parts of the Sivac helmet were
not preserved, therefore their appearance and the material they were
made of can only be assumed. Helmets from Niederbieber, Friedberg,
Heddernheim have rivets with cone-shaped decorative heads, whereas
on a Kalkar-Hnnepel specimen, they are round-headed. Their dimensions are unknown, apart from the diameter of the shaft which had to
fit the diameter of the hole on the bowl (0.20.3 cm). A piece of the
iron rivets shaft (Pl. 26), preserved on the left side of the Sivac
helmets bowl, indicates that the reinforcing bars and other parts of
the helmet (peak, carrying ring) were fastened with rivets made of
iron, and not of a copper alloy. This could, due to faster corrosion
of iron parts, maybe indicate why the aforementioned elements were
37
Rimski lem iz Sivca
separated and lost.
Rimski lem iz Sivca
eoni titnik
Peak
Osim nakrsnice, kao dodatnu zatitu prednje strane lem je imao

i eoni titnik. On je za kalotu takoe bio spojen zakivcima na tri
mesta: kroz dve perforacije na bonim stranama i jednom na prednjoj
strani. Na bonim stranama kalote perforacije su izvedene iznad
mesta na kome su fiksirani nosai arnira paragnatida (sl. 7). eoni
titnik je na prednjem delu kalote fiksiran kroz centralni proboj (sl.
27), ime je spreavano proklizavanje titnika po vertikali.51 Kod lema
iz Kalkar-Henepela, prednji krak nakrsnice i eoni titnik bili su spojeni
sa kalotom istim zakivkom, to je dodatno ojaavalo konstrukciju
lema. Kod sivakog lema izgleda nije bio takav sluaj. Prednji krak
nakrsnice je za gornju perforaciju bio spojen posebnim zakivkom, a
donja perforacija iskoriena je za fiksiranje eonog titnika. To jasno
potvruje i trag korozije na povrini prednjeg dela kalote, oko 3.0 cm
iznad donjeg ruba. Oblik eonog titnika verovatno je odgovarao onima
koji su ouvani na lemovima iz Hedernhajma ili Kalkar-Henepela. Radi
se o trokrako kovanim titnicima, sa uglasto profilisanom ivicom i
krajevima raskovanim u vidu ataa ili ugaonih profilacija na mestima
spoja sa kalotom (sl. 28).
Besides the reinforcing bars, the helmet had a peak as additional

frontal protection. It was also attached to the bowl with rivets at
three points: through two perforations on the flanks and on the front
side. On the flanks of the bowl, perforations were made above the
point where the cheek-pieces hinge-plates were attached (Pl. 7). The
peak is attached at the front of the bowl through a central hole (Pl.
27) which disabled its vertical sliding. On the Kalkar-Hnnepel helmet,
the front reinforcing bar and the peak were connected with the bowl
with the same rivet, additionally strengthening the construction of the
helmet. This seems not to have been the case with the Sivac helmet.
The front bar was attached to the upper perforation with a separate
rivet, and the lower one was used for the fastening of the peak. This
is clearly confirmed by the trace of corrosion on the surface of the
frontal part of the bowl, around 3.0 cm above the lower rim. The
shape of the peak was probably the same as the ones preserved on
helmets from Heddernheim or Kalkar-Hnnepel. Those are polygonal
hammered peaks, with an angled shaped edge and ends hammered in
the form of appliqus or corner moldings at the points where they
were attached to the bowl (Pl. 28).
50
Carrying Rings
Sl. 26
Pl. 26
Sl. 27
Pl. 27
Among the elements which once existed on the Sivac helmet, but
are missing today, we should also mention the rings on the inside
of the neck-guard. This is indicated by the circular perforation which
attached the carrier to the neck-guard. The fact that there is only
one perforation points out that the helmet was not being carried by
an omega handle, which are common on Roman helmets, but by a
buckle with one or several rings placed into the bronze strip carrier
(Pl. 29).
Sl. 28
Pl. 28
Nosa lema
Meu elementima koji su nekada takoe postojali na lemu iz Sivca, a
danas nedostaju, treba pomenuti i nosa lema na unutranjoj strani
vratobrana. O njemu svedoi kruna perforacija kojom je nosa bio
38
Sl. 29
39
Pl. 29
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Mechanism for Fastening of the Cheek-pieces
privren za vratobran. injenica da postoji samo jedna perforacija

upuuje na to da lem nije imao omega drku, kakve se esto
javljaju na rimskim lemovima, ve je noen pomou preice sa
jednom ili dve alke umetnute u trakasti nosa (sl. 29).
The issue of fastening of the cheek-piece on the front side is

particularly interesting since it bears some uncertainties. Namely, when
the helmet was being worn, the cheek-pieces were buckled under the
chin, thus keeping this important part of protective equipment on the
head during riding and combat activities. It is commonly thought that
the cheek-pieces overlapped with their lower ends one below the
other and then tied with leather bands. However, on the Sivac helmet,
there are two rows of perforations with a certain role in the buckling
of the helmet. The lower row consists of almost identical circular
perforations. Those in the upper row are different by size, as well
as by their shape. On the left cheek-piece, the upper perforation is
circular (Pl. 30); on the right one it is rectangular and much larger (Pl.
31). It seems most likely that the right cheek-piece was overlapped
over the left one. The fastening of the helmet could have been done
by a movable button or a hooked stud on the left cheek-piece which
was slid through the rectangular slot on the right one, buckling the
helmet by rotating around its own axis. This system enabled a quick
and efficient fastening. It remains to be determined what was the
function of the lower row of the circular holes on the cheek-pieces,
since it could have also enabled a quite simple buckling of the helmet
with two leather straps.
Mehanizam za zakopavanje paragnatida

Pitanje kopanja titnika za obraze sa prednje strane posebno je
interesantno budui da postoje izvesne nedoumice. Naime, prilikom
noenja lema paragnatide su prikopavane ispod brade, ime je ovaj
vaan deo zatitne opreme ostajao fiksiran na glavi tokom jahakih
i borbenih aktivnosti. Uobiajeno je miljenje da su paragnatide
preklapane donjim krajevima jedna ispod druge i potom vezivane
konim vrpcama. Kod lema iz Sivca, meutim, postoje dva reda
perforacija koje su imale odreenu ulogu u kopanju lema. Donji red
ine gotovo identine krune perforacije. Perforacije u gornjem redu
razlikuju se kako po veliini tako i po obliku. Na levoj paragnatidi
gornja perforacija je kruna (sl. 30), dok je na desnoj pravougaona i
znatno vea (sl. 31). ini se najverovatnijim da je desna paragnatida
preklapana preko leve. Kopanje lema moda je izvoeno pomou
pominog dugmeta ili rajbera na levoj paragnatidi koje je provlaeno
kroz pravougaoni otvor na desnoj i rotiranjem oko sopstevene ose,
zakopavalo lem.52 Ovaj sistem kopanja omoguavao je brzo i
jednostavno fiksiranje. Ostaje otvoreno pitanje emu je sluio donji red
krunih otvora na paragnatidama budui da je i on mogao da obezbedi
prilino jednostavno vezivanje lema pomou dva kona remena.
External Finish
Important information for the reconstruction of the Sivac helmet is
the fact that its surface was tinned, as was confirmed by physicalchemical analyses of samples of the bronze sheet metal. The tin
coating gave the helmet a much more luxurious appearance, at
the same time serving as very efficient protection from corrosion,
which was of great importance regarding daily maintenance. Besides
helmets, other parts of Roman weaponry and military equipment made
of copper alloys or iron, such as fittings and clasps on a soldiers belt,
sword and dagger scabbards, elements of parade armour and shield
bosses, were tinned.
Spoljanja obrada
Za rekonstrukciju lema iz Sivca znaajan podatak predstavlja injenica da je njegova povrina bila kalajisana, to su potvrdile i
fiziko-hemijske analize uzoraka bronzanog lima. Kalajna prevlaka
lemu je davala mnogo luksuzniji izgled, a ujedno je sluila i kao
veoma efikasna zatita od korozije, to je bilo od velikog znaaja za
svakodnevno odravanje. Osim lemova, kalajisanju su bili podvrgnuti
i drugi delovi rimskog naoruanja i vojne opreme izraeni od bakarnih
legura ili gvoa, poput okova i preica vojnikog pojasa, kanija
maeva i bodea, elemenata paradnog naoruanja i umba titova.
49
49
50
50
Robinson 1975, 9697, Pl. 256261, 263268.

Mogue je, meutim, i da su samo pojedine nitne bile od gvoa,
odnosno da su prvobitni zakivci od bakarne legure nakon oteenja
zamenjivani gvozdenim zakivcima.
51
eoni proboj proiren je udesno prilikom nasilne dislokacije titnika i
prvobitno je morao biti manjih dimenzija, prenika oko 0.5 cm.
52
Takav mehanizam ouvan je na paragnatidama iz Kenigshofena
(Knigshofen) datovanim u prvu treinu III veka; vidi: Forrer 1921,
39, Abb. 1; Robinson 1975, 92, Fig. 120.
Sl. 30
Pl. 30
Sl. 31
Pl. 31
Robinson 1975, 9697, Pl. 256261, 263268.

However, it is possible that only some rivets were made of iron, i.e.
that after being damaged, the original copper alloy rivets were replaced
by iron ones.
51
The hole on the front part of the bowl was extended to its right during
a violent dislocation of the guard; originally it had to have smaller
dimensions, about 0.5 cm in diameter.
52
Such a mechanism is preserved on the Knigshofen cheek-pieces, which
were dated to the early 3rd century and are being kept today in the
Strasbourg Museum; see: Forrer 1921, 39, Abb. 1; Robinson 1975, 92,
Fig. 120.
40
41
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Milan olovi
Sredinom 2008. godine kustos Gradskog muzeja Sombor, Anelka
Putica predloila mi je da uradim restauraciju lema iz Sivca. Predmet
sam preuzeo u septembru iste godine i zapoeo restauratorske radove. Za konsultanta i nadzor od strane Muzeja odreen je docent
dr Miroslav Vujovi, sa kojim sam i ranije imao zadovoljstvo da saraujem.
In mid-2008, Curator of the Sombor Town Museum Anelka Putica

suggested that I conduct a restoration of the Sivac helmet. I took over
the object in September 2008 and began the restoration procedure.
Assistant Professor Miroslav Vujovi, whom I had the opportunity
to work with in the past, to my satisfaction, was appointed as a
consultant and supervisor by the Museum.
1. Konzervatorska ispitivanja
1. Conservatory examination
Makroskopskim pregledom konstatovano je da je lem podvrgavan

konzervatorskom tretmanu i da se nalazi u stabilnom stanju. Na desnoj
strani kalote jasno se uoava vie pukotina i mehanikih oteenja, a
deo levog zavretka vratobrana nedostaje. Na paragnatidama takoe
je vidljivo nekoliko pukotina i mehanikih deformacija. Na poloaj nedostajuih elemenata lema jasno su upuivale perforacije za fiksiranje
na kalotu, kao i obrisi u vidu linija nastalih kao posledica kontakta
dva metalna dela sa razliitim elektronskim potencijalom. Pregledom
povrine kalote zapaene su zone koje se po tonu razlikuju od osnovnog
materijala od kojeg je lem napravljen. Sa leve paragnatide i levog
titnika za ui uzeti su uzorci metala radi fiziko-hemijskih ispitivanja,
a na Departmanu za biologiju Prirodno-matematikog fakulteta u
Novom Sadu uraena je SEM-EDX analiza.
A macroscopic examination determined that the helmet had been

subjected to conservatory treatment and that it is in a stable state.
On the right part of the bowl there are clearly visible several cracks and
mechanical damages, and a part of the left edge of the neck-guard is
missing. Also, there are several cracks and mechanical deformations on
the cheek-pieces. The position of the missing elements of the helmet
is clearly indicated by the perforations for their attaching to the bowl,
as well as by marks in the form of lines created as consequence of
contact between two metal parts with different electronic potentials.
An examination of the surface of the bowl discovered the zones
which differ by their tone from the basic material of the helmet.
Metal samples were taken from the left cheek-piece and the left
ear-guard for physical-chemical examining, and a SEM-EDX analysis
was conducted at the Biology Department of the Faculty of Sciences
in Novi Sad.
2. Restauracija lema
Sl. 32
Pl. 32
Kako su restauratorski radovi obuhvatali prvenstveno izradu dvodelne

nakrsnice i eonog titnika, napravljeni su njihovi modeli od penastog
kartona debljine 5 mm. abloni delova nakrsnice precrtani su na
klirit debljine 4 mm, a potom po linijama iseeni mikrimotorom sa
karborundum ploicama. Sve povrine prethodno su omirglane a potom
je nanet sloj smese epoksi-smole i sintera bronze. Na zavretcima
lukova delova nakrsnice dodani su ankeri od nerajue eline ice,
koji prema krajevima formiraju romboid. Preko njih fiksirana je mreica
od mesinga u istoj formi i, na kraju, sve je popunjeno smesom epoksi
-smole i sintera bronze. Istim postupkom uraen je i eoni titnik, s
tim to je njegovo jezgro nainjeno od fine mesingane mreice (sl.
32). To se pokazalo kao odlian metod za izradu delova koji imitiraju
forme od lima. Svi delovi mehaniki su doraeni i patinirani priblino
u tonu originala. Na romboidnim krajevima nakrsnice probuene su
rupe, a fiksiranje za kalotu izvreno je tako to su vijci, provueni sa
unutarnje strane kalote, zategnuti navrtkama sa spoljanje strane.
Navrtke su utopljene u iljke od epoksi-smole i patinirane. Na eonom
titniku probuene su rupe na odgovarajuim mestima, a zatim je
uraena montaa kao kod nakrsnice. Smesom epoksi-smole i sintera
2. Restoration of the helmet

As the restoration work included primarily the making of a two-part
reinforcement and a peak, models of those parts were made of 5 mm
thick foam board. Stencils of the reinforcement were drawn on a 4 mm
thick plexiglass sheet, and then cut along the lines with a micromotor
with carburundum cut-off wheels. All surfaces were previously sanded
and then a layer of epoxy resin and bronze sinter was applied. An
armature made of stainless steel wire was added on the ends of the
arches of the reinforcement, forming a rhomboid form towards the
edges. Brass netting with the same form was attached over that and,
finally, everything was filled out with a mixture of epoxy resin and
bronze sinter. The same procedure was used to restore the peak, but
its armature was made of a fine brass netting (Pl. 32). This proved to
be an excellent method for the manufacturing of parts which imitate
sheet metal forms. All parts were mechanically finished and patinated
close to the tone of the original. Holes were drilled on the rhomboid
edges of the reinforcement and it was attached to the bowl by means
of tightening the screws pulled through the inside of the bowl, with
43
Rimski lem iz Sivca
bronze koja je armirana mesinganom mreicom, izraen je i nosa

arnira, to je omoguilo spajanje paragnatida sa kalotom. Alka za
noenje lema na unutarnjoj strani vratobrana napravljena je od klirita
i patinirana. Mehanizam za zakopavanje paragnatida u vidu pominog
dugmeta izraen je od mesinga i epoksi-smole. Svi restaurisani elementi privreni su tako da se, u sluaju potrebe, mogu veoma lako
demontirati i ponovo montirati.
nuts on the outside. The nuts were merged in cone headed rivets
made of epoxy resin and patinated. On the peak, holes were drilled
in the adequate spots, followed by an assembly like the one of the
reinforcement. A mixture of epoxy resin and bronze sinter reinforced
by brass netting was used for the manufacturing of the hinge-plate,
as well, which enabled the attaching of the cheek-pieces to the
bowl. The carrying ring on the inside of the neck-guard was made
of plexiglass and patinated. The mechanism for the fastening of the
cheek-pieces in the form of a movable button was made of brass and
epoxy resin. All restored elements were attached in a manner which
allows them to be very easily de-installed and installed again.
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Miroslav Vujovi
Special significance for the studying of the Sivac helmet is provided
by the inscription punched between the damaged left end of the
neck-guard and the perforation for the rivet, which on the inner side
attaches the ring for the carrying of the helmet. (Pl. 33, Fig. 3). Similar
inscriptions are common on Roman weaponry and military equipment,
particularly on helmets.53 Those are very simple inscriptions, mostly
consisting of the owners name, name of the superior officer and the
unit in which the soldier served. Some specimens bear the names of
several soldiers who successively inherited the same helmet. Such
examples are the inscriptions on helmets from Sava, Alsace, Thames,
Mainz and Xanten based on which it was determined that certain
parts of personal weaponry changed owners by selling or returning of
the equipment.54 It is widely considered that these inscriptions were
written by the soldiers themselves, in order to mark their ownership
of the equipment which was not carried all the time, but stored in
garrison armories.
Za prouavanje lema iz Sivca posebno je znaajan natpis punktiran

izmeu oteenog levog kraja vratobrana i perforacije za nitnu kojom
je sa unutranje strane bila privrena preica za noenje lema
(sl. 33, crte 3). Slini natpisi na rimskom naoruanju i vojnoj
opremi su uobiajeni a posebno na lemovima.53 Radi se o vrlo jednostavnim natpisima koji se najee sastoje od imena vlasnika,
imena nadreenog oficira i vojne jedinice u kojoj je sluio. Na nekim
primercima zabeleeno je i po nekoliko imena vojnika koji su nasledjivali
isti lem. Primer za to su natpisi sa lemova iz Save, Alzasa, Temze,
Majnca i Ksantena, na osnovu kojih je zakljueno da su pojedini delovi
linog naoruanja menjali vlasnike preprodajom ili razduivanjem
opreme.54 Uglavnom se smatra da su ih ispisivali sami vojnici kako bi
oznaili vlasnitvo nad delovima naoruanja koje nisu stalno nosili sa
sobom, a koji su uvani u garnizonskim oruarnicama.
Natpis na vratobranu izveden je slovima latinske kapitale u dva reda.
Duina natpisa u gornjem redu iznosi 4.8 cm, a u donjem 5.2 cm.
Visina slova u gornjem redu je 0.60.7 cm, a u donjem 0.81.0 cm.
U gornjem redu izveden je prvi deo natpisa: C IIII IVL, dok je u
donjem redu natpis: M I EVC. Prilikom prvobitnog objavljivanja
lema, Velenrajter je dao svoje itanje teksta, koje glasi:
The inscription on the neck-guard of the Sivac helmet was made

in letters of the Latin majuscule in two rows. The length of the
inscription in the upper row is 4.8 cm and 5.2 cm in the lower one.
The size of the letters in the upper row is 6 - 7 mm and 8 - 10 mm in
the lower row. The upper row contains the first part of the inscription
which says: C IIII IVL; the lower row contains the second part: M
I EVC. When the helmet was first published, Velenrajter presented
his interpretation of the text:
C(ohors) quatra IVL(iana) / M(anipulus) primus LVC(ii).

Prema njegovom miljenju, neimenovani vlasnik lema sluio je pri
prvoj manipuli centuriona Lucija u etvrtoj kohorti Julijani. Takoe
C(ohors) quatra IVL(iana) / M(anipulus) primus LVC(ii).
Crte 3
Rimski lem iz Sivca restauracija
Roman helmet from Sivac restoration

44
Fig. 3
je pretpostavio da je lem pripadao legionaru iz Legio VI Herculiae,

iji su odredi inili posadu kastela Onagrinum kod Begea u junoj
Bakoj.55
According to his opinion, the unnamed owner of this helmet served

with the First Maniple of Centurion Lucius in the Fourth Cohort
of Iuliana. Velenrajter also assumed that the helmet belonged to a
45
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Rimski lem iz Sivca
In his reading of the second row, Velenrajter recognized in the beginning

letter M the abbreviation for manipulus, a military formation legions
were divided into in the pre-imperial period. We should emphasize
that the mentioning of a maniple on the Sivac helmet inscription
is anachronous since it belong to the period when the subdivision
to maniples was not used anymore. It is much more likely that the
lower part of the inscription states the personal name of the helmets
owner. The beginning letter M could stand for his prenomen (Marcus,
Manius), or even profession (miles), which is less likely. In such
an interpretation, the letter I would also be a part of the owners
personal name, marking the common nomen Iulius.
navodi lino ime vlasnika lema. Poetno slovo M oznaavalo bi

njegov prenomen (Marcus, Manius) ili ak profesiju (miles), to je
manje verovatno. U takvom tumaenju slovo I bi takoe bilo deo
linog imena vlasnika, oznaavajui uobiajeni nomen Julija (Iulius).
Stoga smo spremniji da prihvatimo dve mogunosti za itanje gornjeg
reda natpisa:
1. C(ohors) IIII IVL(iana);
2. C(enturia) IIII IVL(ii)
Prema prvom tumaenju, koje je predloio i Velenrajter, lem je
pripadao vojniku iz etvrte kohorte, koja je mogla biti deo legije,
ali i samostalne pomone jedinice. Kvalitet, konstrukcija i tehnika
izrade lema iz Sivca ukazuje najpre da se radi o delu naoruanja
auksilijarnih konjikih trupa, i to najverovatnije cohors equitata.
Sl. 33
Pl. 33
Takvo tumaenje natpisa sa lema iz Sivca pokazuje odreene

nedostatke na koje smo ve skrenuli panju.56 Najpre, poetno inverzno
slovo C se na natpisima sa lemova i ostalog rimskog naoruanja
uglavnom javlja kao skraenica za centuriju a ne kohortu.57 Centurije
su na naoruanju najee obeleavane imenom komandujueg oficira
u genitivu, kao to je sluaj na nekoliko rimskih lemova, pa i onih
otkrivenih u Srbiji.58 Redni broj IIII, koji je naveden posle eventualne
oznake za centuriju, odredio bi njen broj u sastavu vee jedinice,
legije ili kohorte, to predstavlja veoma retku, ali ne i nepoznatu
pojavu.59 Poslednji deo gornjeg reda, koji glasi IVL, odnosio bi se u
tom sluaju na lino ime centuriona u genitivu: IVL(ii). Pojava rednog
broja IIII posle C svakako je uputila Velenrajtera na zakljuak da se
zapravo radi o Cohors quarta Iuliana, dakle o etvrtoj kohorti iji je
naziv zabeleen na kraju prvog reda. Kohorta pod ovim rednim brojem
i nazivom do sada nije potvrena na kraju II i u III veku a posebno ne
na prostoru balkanskih pograninih provincija.
legionary from Legio VI Herculiae, whose detachments constituted the

crew of the Onagrinum fort near Bege in Southern Baka.55
Such an interpretation of the Sivac helmet inscription has certain
flaws to which we already pointed out.56 Firstly, the inverse letter C
appears in inscriptions on helmets and other Roman weaponry mostly
as an abbreviation for century, not a cohort.57 On weapons, centuries
were mostly marked by the name of the commanding officer in the
genitive case, as was confirmed on several Roman helmets, including
those found in Serbia.58 Ordinal number IIII, which was inscribed after
the mark for a century, would determine its number in the structure
of a larger unit, legion or cohort, which represents a very rare, but not
completely unknown occurrence.59 Last part of the upper row which
says IVL, would in that case relate to the personal name of the
centurion inscribed in the genitive case: IVL(ii). The ordinal number
IIII after C certainly urged Velenrajter to conclude that it was in
fact the Fourth Cohort, i.e. Cohors quatra Iuliana, whose cognomen is
noted at the end of the first row. A cohort under this ordinal number
and cognomen has not yet been confirmed between late 2nd and 3rd
century, especially not on the territory of the Balkan provinces of the
Roman Empire.
Pri itanju drugog reda, Velenrajter je u poetnom slovu M prepoznao

skraenicu za manipulus, vojnu formaciju u sastavu legija u predcarsko
doba. I ovom prilikom treba istai da je pomen manipule na lemu iz
Sivca anahron budui da potie iz epohe kada se podela na manipule
vie nije koristila.60 Mnogo je verovatnije da se u donjem delu natpisa
46
Therefore we are more prepared to accept two possibilities for the

reading of the upper row of the inscription:
1. C(ohors) IIII IVL(iana);
2. C(enturia) IIII IVL(ii)
Drugo itanje upuuje na to da je vlasnik lema sluio u peadiji,

odnosno u etvrtoj centuriji u okviru neimenovane cohors peditata ili
cohors equitata. Poput podele legijskih kohorti, i pomone peadijske
kohorte bile su podeljene na centurije, iji je broj varirao u zavisnosti
od potreba odnosno veliine same jedinice.61 U okviru cohors equitata,
meutim, osim konjikih postojale su i peadijske jedinice takoe razvrstane na centurije.
According to this interpretation, suggested by Velenrajter himself,

the helmet belonged to a soldier from the Fourth Cohort which could
have been a part of a legion, but also part of an independent auxiliary
unit. The quality, construction and technique of the Sivac helmets
manufacturing, suggest that it was a part of auxiliary cavalry
weaponry, most likely a cohors equitata.
Smatramo da donji deo natpisa predstavlja puno ime vojnika kome je

lem pripadao sa uobiajenim prenomenom Marcus i nomenom Iulius.62
Za razliku od Velenrajtera, poslednji deo natpisa itamo kao EVC a
ne LVC.63 Radi se skraenici treeg dela imena, odnosno kognomenu
najverovatnije grkog porekla koji je mogao da glasi: Eucarpus, Eucharis
ili Eucharistus.64
The second interpretation suggests that the helmets owner served

in the infantry, i.e. the fourth century as part of an unnamed cohors
peditata or cohors equitata. Like the subdivision of the legion cohorts,
the auxiliary infantry cohorts were also divided in centuries, whose
number varied depending on the needs, i.e. size of the unit itself.61
However, besides cavalry units, the cohors equitata included infantry,
too, which was also subdivided into centuries.
We consider the lower part of the inscription to be the full name of
the soldier who owned the helmet, with the popular prenomen Marcus
and nomen Iulius.62 Unlike Velenrajter, we interpret the last part of
the name as EVC, rather than LVC.63 This is an abbreviation of the
third part of the name, i.e. the cognomen of, most likely, Greek origin:
Eucarpus, Eucharis or Eucharistus.64
47
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Rimski lem iz Sivca
53
53
In an article dedicated to these inscriptions, MacMullen singled out as

many as 25 helmets among 49 pieces of different weapons signed by
the owners name; see: MacMullen 1960, 3336.
54
MacMullen 1960, 3336.
55
56
Dautova-Ruevljan, Vujovi 2006, 37.
57
MacMullen 1960, 33-36, no. 46, 8, 10, 13ab, 16, 18, 20, 32, 33,
3942, 47, 49.
58
59
AE 1968, 105.
60
The subdivision of legions to maniples was abandoned during the reforms
of Consul Gaius Maria in late 2nd century BC. Their last use was
documented in the Jugurthine war in Numidia; see: Sall. Jug.49. Julius
Caesar used exclusively cohorts in his conquest of Gaul; see: Parker
1992, 2829; Bellum Gall. ii, 25.
61
The quingernary infantry cohort (cohors quingenaria peditata) consisted
of 480 soldiers divided in six centuries. The milliary infantry cohorts
(cohors milliaria peditata) were larger, including 10 centuries with 80
soldiers each, amounting to a total of 800 soldiers. A similar ratio
was between mixed quingernary and milliary cavalry cohorts (cohortes
equitatae). Smaller cohorts consisted of 120 horsemen (5 turmae with
24 horsemen each) and 480 infantrymen (6 centuries with 80 soldiers
each), whereas larger ones had 240 horsemen (10 turmae with 24
horsemen each) and 760 infantrymen (10 centuries with 76 soldiers
each); cf.: Coello 1996, 5960; Keppie 1984, 166.
U radu posveenom ovim natpisima MacMullen je meu 49 komada

razliitog naoruanja, signirana imenom vlasnika, izdvojio ak 25
lemova; vidi: MacMullen 1960, 3336.
54
MacMullen 1960, 3336.
55
1978, 20.
56
57
MacMullen 1960, 3336, No. 46, 8, 10, 13ab, 16, 18, 20, 32, 33,
3942, 47, 49.
58
59
AE 1968, 105.
60
Podela legija na manipule zamenjena je reformama konzula Gaja
Marija krajem II veka p.n.e. Poslednje njihovo korienje zabeleeno
je u ratu protiv Jugurte u Numidiji (111105. g.p.n.e.); vidi: Sall. Jug.
49; prilikom osvajanja Galije, Cezar je iskljuivo koristio kohorte; vidi:
Parker 1992, 2829; Bellum Gall. ii, 25.
61
Kvinkvenarna peadijska kohorta (cohors quinquenaria peditata) brojala je 480 vojnika podeljennih u est centurija. Milijarne peadijske kohorte (cohors miliaria peditata) bile su mnogoljudnije, sa
10 centurija od po 80 vojnika, to daje ukupan zbir od 800 ratnika.
Slian odnos postojao je i izmeu kvinkvenarnih i milijarnih konjikih
kohorti meovitog sastava (cohortes equitatae). Manje kohorte imale
su 120 konjanika (5 turmi sa po 24 konjanika) i 480 peaka (6
centurija sa po 80 vojnika), a vee 240 konjanika (10 turmi sa po
24 konjanika) i 760 peaka (10 centurija sa po 76 vojnika); uporedi:
Coello 1996, 5960; Keppie 1984, 166.
62
Postoji mogunost da je slovo I bilo i inicijal nekog drugog genitilnog
imena, kao to su: Iunius, Ianuarius, ili Iucundus; vidi: OPEL II, 188
i dalje.
63
Da se radi o slovu E pokazuje jasno naglaena sredinja kao i gornja
poprena crta prvog slova.
64
Za razliite varijante imena sa poetnim slovima EVC vidi: OPEL
II, 124125.
62
There is a possibility that the letter I was the initial of another name
in the nomen, such as: Iunius, Ianuarius or Iucundus; see: OPEL II, 188
etc.
63
The clearly emphasized middle line, as well as the upper transversal line
of the first letter, shows that this is a letter E.
64
For different variants of names beginning with the letters EVC see:
OPEL II, 124125.
For a more comprehensive understanding of the manufacturing

technique and composition of the alloy which the parts of the Roman
helmet from Sivac were made of, four samples of the sheet metal
were subjected to an examination of their quantitative composition.65
The analyses were performed at the University Center for Electron
Microscopy at the Biology Department of the Faculty of Sciences
in Novi Sad on a scanning microscope (JEOL JSM 6460LV) with
an energy dispersive analyzer of chemical elements for quantitative
assessment (OxfordInca).
The analysis included:
Radi detaljnijeg sagledavanja tehnike izrade i sastava legure od koje su

izraeni delovi rimskog lema iz Sivca, etiri uzorka lima podvrgnuta
su ispitivanju kvantitativnog sastava.65 Analize su obavljene u
Univerzitetskom centru za elektronsku mikroskopiju pri departmanu
za biologiju na Prirodno-matematikom fakultetu u Novom Sadu na
skenirajuem mikroskopu (JEOL JSM 6460LV) sa energodisperzivnim
analizatorom hemijskih elemenata za kvantitativno odreivanje (OxfordInca). Analizirani su:
1. uzorci lima sa unutranjeg dela desne/leve paragnatide na mestu
prevoja arnira (1a, b);
2. uzorak lima desnog/levog uhobrana na kaloti lema (2);
3. uzorak prevlake srebrnkastog sjaja sa unutranje strane vratobrana (3);
1. sheet metal samples from the inside part of the left cheek-piece
at the point of the bend of the hinge (1a, b);
2. sheet metal sample of the left ear-guard on the bowl of the
helmet (2);
3.sample of the silvery film from the inside of the neck-guard (3);
Uzorci su najpre zaliveni u masu epoksi-smole, a zatim je poliranjem

pripremljena povrina poprenog preseka, predviena za fiziko-hemijsku analizu. Skeniranje je pokazalo sledee rezultate:
The samples were first coated in a mass of epoxy resin and then,
by means of polishing, a cross-sectioned surface was prepared for
the physical-chemical analysis. The scanning showed the following
results:
Uzorak 1a (sl. 34; tabela 1)

Napomena: Odnos bakra i kalaja iznosi priblino 94:5.5, dok se gvoe
u leguri javlja samo kao neistoa. Prilikom skeniranja povrinskog
sloja uoeno je prisustvo kiseonika i kalcijuma.
Sample 1a (Pl. 34 ; Table 1)

Remark: The copper to tin ratio is approximately 94:5.5, whereas iron
occurs in the alloy only as an impurity. During the surface scanning,
the presence of oxygen and calcium was noticed.
Uzorak 1b (sl. 35; tabela 2)

Napomena: Odnos bakra i kalaja iznosi priblino 94: 5.5, dok se
gvoe u leguri javlja samo kao neistoa.
Uzorak 2 (sl. 36, 37; tabele 3, 4), povrinski sloj (pretpostavljeno
kalajisanje)
Napomena: Odnos bakra i kalaja iznosi priblino 70: 30 dok se gvoe,
olovo i cink u leguri javljaju samo kao neistoa.
Sample 1b (Pl. 35; Table 2)

Remark: The copper to tin ratio is approximately 94: 5.5, whereas iron
occurs in the alloy only as an impurity.
Sample 2 (Pl. 36, 37; T 3, 4), surface layer (presumed tinning)
Uzorak 3 (sl. 38; tabela 5)
Remark: The copper to tin ratio is approximately 70: 30, whereas iron,
lead and zinc occur in the alloy only as an impurity.
Sample 3 (Pl. 38; Table 5 )
Napomena: Kod uzorka srebrnkaste prevlake sa kalote skeniranju je

podvrgnut povrinski sloj a ne popreni presek.
Remark: During the examining of the silvery coating sample from the
bowl, the surface layer, rather than the cross-section, was subject
of the scanning.
Skeniranje uzoraka pruilo je vane podatke o sastavu materijala od

koga je lem izraen i njegovom nekadanjem izgledu. Sudei prema
rezultatima kvantitativnih analiza, uzorci metalnog lima uzeti sa jedne
od paragnatida (1a, b) i kalote lema (2) pokazuju priblino jednak
odnos metala koji su ulazili u sastav legure. Najvie je prisutan bakar
Sl. 35
(9394%), koji je legiran kalajem u manjem procentu (5.56.0%).
Ostale primese (gvoe, cink i olovo) najverovatnije predstavljaju
48
The scanning of the samples gave important information about the

Pl. 35
composition
of the material the helmet was made of and its former
appearance. Judging by the results of the quantitative analyses, the
49
Rimski lem iz Sivca
neistoe u rudi ili nuspojave nastale tokom metalurkog postupka.

U povrinskim slojevima pojedinih uzoraka otkrivena je zanemarljiva
koliina kalcijuma i kiseonika, koja potie od korozije i sedimentacije.
U pitanju je bronza sa visokim procentom bakra i znatno niim
procentom kalaja, iji odnos (94:6) odgovara bronzi namenjenoj za
hladnu obradu, odnosno za iskivanje, to je bila tehnika koriena za
izradu rimskih lemova.
sheet metal samples from one of the cheek-pieces (1a, b) and the
bowl of the helmet (2) show a nearly equal ratio of the metals
composing the alloy. Copper (9394%) has the highest percentage,
and it was added tin in a smaller percentage (5.56.0%). Other
elements (iron, zinc and lead) most likely represent impurities in the
ore or side effects created during the metallurgical process. In the
surface layers of some of the samples, a negligible amount of calcium
and oxygen was discovered, as result of corrosion and sedimentation.
This is bronze with a high percentage of copper and a significantly
lower percentage of tin, with a ratio (94:6) that coincides with bronze
intended for cold processing, i.e. hammering, which indeed was the
technique used for the manufacturing of roman helmets.
Izuzetak predstavlja rezultat analize uzorka srebrnkaste prevlake uzete

sa vratobrana (uzorak 3). Osim bakra (Cu 55.9058.10%), ovde se u
znatno veem procentu javljaju kalaj (Sn 33.5834.01 %) i olovo (Pb
7.4610.52 %). Budui da je skeniranju podvrgnut povrinski sloj, a
ne popreni presek, prisustvo bakra najverovatnije potie od bronzane
podloge. Znatnija koncentracija kalaja i olova vrlo izvesno pokazuje
da je lem bio kalajisan. To konkretno potvruju rezultati skeniranja
povrinskih slojeva uzorka 2. Na poprenom preseku vizuelno se izdvajaju bronzana podloga u vidu tamnijeg sloja i svetliji povrinski
sloj kalajne prevlake (sl. 39). Osim bakra (Cu 53.29%), kvantitativna
analiza uzorka 2 potvruje znatniju koncentraciju kalaja (Sn 43.14%),
sa manjim primesama olova (Pb 0.90%), cinka (Zn 1.90%) i gvoa
(Fe 0.77%). Iz svega navedenog sledi da je u zavrnoj fazi izrade
bronzani lem iz Sivca sigurno bio prevuen tankim slojem kalaja, koji
ga je titio od korozije i ujedno mu davao luksuzniji izgled.
65
Rimski lem iz Sivca
An exception is represented by the result of the sample analysis of

the silvery coating from the neck-guard (sample 3). Besides from
copper (Cu 55.9058.10%), there is a much higher percentage of tin
(Sn 33.5834.01 %) and lead (Pb 7.4610.52 %). Given the fact
that the surface layer rather than the cross-section was subjected to
the scanning, the presence of copper most likely originates from the
bronze foundation. The higher tin and lead concentrations most likely
show that the helmet had been tinned. This is clearly confirmed by the
results of the scanning of surface layers of Sample 2. On the crosssection, there is a visual distinguishing of the bronze foundation as a
darker layer, and a lighter surface layer of the tin coating (Pl. 39).
Besides copper (Cu 53.29%), the quantitative analysis of Sample
2 confirms a higher concentration of tin (Sn 43.14%), with smaller
additions of lead (Pb 0.90%), zinc (Zn 1.90%) and iron (Fe 0.77%).
All of this suggests that during the final phase of its production, the
bronze helmet from Sivac must have been coated with a thin layer
of tin, which provided protection from corrosion and at the same time
gave the helmet an increasingly luxurious appearance.
65
Pripremu uzoraka obavili su Milan olovi i Milica Stojanovi,

konzervatori Narodnog muzeja u Beogradu, a skeniranje Milo Bokorov, saradnik Univerzitetskog centra za elektronsku mikroskopiju pri
departmanu za biologiju na Prirodno-matematikom fakultetu u Novom Sadu.
50
The sample preparation was carried out by Milan olovi and Milica
Stojanovi, conservationists at the National Museum in Belgrade; the
scanning was conducted by Milo Bokorov, associate of the University
Center for Electron Microscopy at the Biology Department of the Faculty
of Sciences in Novi Sad.
Sl. 34
Pl. 34
Tabela 1
Table 1
Processing option : All elements analysed (Normalised)

Spectrum
Spectrum 1
Spectrum 2
Spectrum 3
Spectrum 4
Max.
Min.
In stats.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Ca
11.28
11.28
0.00
0.46
0.46
0.00
Fe
0.64
0.57
0.63
0.48
0.64
0.48
All results in weight%
Sl.35
Pl. 35
51
Cu
93.49
94.06
93.84
77.96
94.06
77.96
Sn
5.87
5.37
5.53
9.81
9.81
5.37
Total
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Tabela 2
Tabela 4
Table 2

Spectrum
Spectrum 1
Spectrum 2
Spectrum 3
Mean
Std. deviation
Max.
Min.
In stats.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Fe
0.51
0.51
0.46
0.49
0.03
0.51
0.46
Cu
94.47
94.14
93.53
94.05
0.47
94.47
93.53
Sn
5.03
5.35
6.01
5.46
0.50
6.01
5.03
Table 4

Total
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
Spectrum
Spectrum 1
Spectrum 2
Spectrum 3
Max.
Min.
In stats.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Fe
0.58
0.62
0.27
0.62
0.27
Cu
93.69
93.78
70.42
93.78
70.42
Zn
0.38
0.44
Sn
5.35
5.16
29.31
29.31
5.16
0.44
0.00
Total
100.00
100.00
100.00
Sl. 36
Sl. 37
Pl. 36
Tabela 3
Pl. 37
Table 3
In stats.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Fe
0.48
0.77
0.77
0.00
Cu
69.95
53.29
75.06
75.06
53.29
Zn
1.90
1.90
0.00
Sn
29.56
43.14
24.94
43.14
24.94
Pl. 36
Tabela 5
Table 5

Spectrum
Spectrum 1
Spectrum 2
Spectrum 3
Max.
Min.
Sl. 36
Pb
0.90
0.90
0.00
Total
100.00
100.00
100.00
Spectrum
Spectrum 1
Mean
Std. deviation
Max.
Min.
In stats.
Yes
Cu
65.31
65.31
0.00
65.31
65.31
Sn
30.75
30.75
0.00
30.75
30.75

53
Pb
3.94
3.94
0.00
3.94
3.94
Total
100.00
100.00
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Tipoloke karakteristike lema iz Sivca i nain njegove izrade ukazuju

da se radi o lemu posebne konstrukcije koji moe da se pripie
naoruanju rimskih pomonih trupa. Na osnovu spoljanjeg izgleda
on ne pripada luksuznom naoruanju kakvo moe da se oekuje u
elitnim trupama rimske vojske, bilo da se radi o legijskoj peadiji ili
o konjikim trupama. lem iz Sivca raen je solidno ali tedljivo, bez
upotrebe suvinih detalja i skupih materijala, uz potovanje osnovne
potrebe da omogui zatitu i neophodnu udobnost. U tom smislu, on
ne predstavlja retkost. lemovi sline forme i konstrukcije korieni
su irom Rimskog carstva i nalaeni su uglavnom du limesa u
Britaniji, dolini Rajne i Podunavlju. Njihove odlike upuuju na to da
su masovno proizvoeni u specijalizovanim oruarnicama (fabricae
armorum), koje su radile pod kontrolom rimske vojske, a za potrebe
snabdevanja velikog broja vojnika regrutovanih u peadijske i konjike
auksilijarne jedinice koriene u ratnim i mirnodopskim okolnostima.
The typological characteristics of the Sivac helmet and the manner of

its manufacturing indicate that this is a helmet of special construction
which can be attributed to the Roman auxiliary troops weaponry.
Based on its external appearance, it certainly does not belong to
luxury equipment which could be expected in elite Roman army units,
such as the legion infantry or cavalry troops. The Sivac helmet
was manufactured solidly but thriftily, without the use of excessive
details and expensive material, observing the basic needs of providing
protection and necessary comfort. In that sense, it does not represent
a rare occurrence. Helmets with similar form and construction were
used across the Roman Empire, and were mostly discovered along the
Britannic limes, the Rhine and the Danube Valleys. Their features
point out that they were mass-produced in specialized armories
(fabricae armorum), working under the control of the Roman army, for
the needs of supplying a large number of soldiers recruited by infantry
and cavalry auxiliary units used both in war and peace.
Prema tipolokim karakteristikama, lem iz Sivca svrstava se u prvu

varijantu tipa Niderbiber (Unverzierte Helme mit Kalottenbgeln), koju
odlikuje jednostavna nakrsnica na vrhu kalote.66 Prema Robinsonovoj
tipologiji, on pripada tipu Auxiliary cavalry F, za koji se pretpostavlja
da je korien od druge polovine II do sredine III veka.67
On the basis of its typological characteristics, the Sivac helmet

belongs to the first variant of the Niederbieber type, which is featured
by a simple reinforcement on the top of the bowl.66 According to the
Robinson typology, it belongs to the Auxiliary cavalry F type, which is
assumed to having been used from late 2nd to mid-3rd century.67
U pogledu konstrukcije i osnovnog izgleda, lemovi ovog tipa jasno

se izdvajaju od rimskih lemova korienih tokom I i II veka. Dugaki
vratobran sa posebnim titnikom za ramena i duboke paragnatide
koje su potpuno pokrivale ne samo bone delove glave ve i bradu i
vrat vojnika, predstavljaju novinu u odnosu na hemisferine peadijske
lemove iz republikanske i ranocarske epohe. Iako postoje luksuznije
izraeni primerci, veinu lemova tipa Niderbiber odlikuje jednostavna
izrada, kojom su isticane funkcionalnost i sigurnost, a ne estetski
izgled. lemovi prve varijante tipa Niderbiber opredeljeni su kao
konjiki lemovi, korieni u meovitim pomonim trupama poznatim
pod nazivom cohors equitata. U poreenju sa alama koje su se isticale
naoitou jahaa, vrhunskim konjima, ali i raskonim paradnim
naoruanjem, pripadnici konjikih kohorti imali su upola nia primanja,
loije konje i mnogo skromniju opremu.68 Bili su nieg rasta od regruta
biranih u ale, a njihova vojna obuka nije podrazumevala ovladavanje
sloenim borbenim formacijama namenjenim dejstvu elitne konjice.
Uprkos tome, primena meovitih konjikih kohorti bila je univerzalnija,
a njihov broj uveliko je prevazilazio zastupljenost ala u vojsci Rima.69
U ratnim okolnostima cohortes equitatae dejstvovale su uporedo sa
legijskom peadijom i konjicom, a u vreme mira koriene su pre svega
za izvianje, patroliranje i odbranu granica Carstva, ali i za kontrolu
saobraajnica na provincijskoj teritoriji, pratnju brodova sa hranom,
obezbeivanje reda i mnoge druge aktivnosti.
When it comes to its construction and basic appearance, this type of

helmet is clearly distinguished from Roman helmets used during the
1st and the 2nd century. The long neck-guard with a special shoulderguard and deep cheek-pieces which fully covered not only the sides
of the head, but also the chin and neck, represent an innovation,
as opposed to the hemispherical infantry helmets of the republic
and early-imperial period. Although there are examples of luxuriously
manufactured specimens, the Niederbieber type is featured by a
simple workmanship which emphasized the functionality and safety of
the helmet, as opposed to its aesthetic appearance. Based on their
characteristics, helmets of the first variant of the Niederbieber type
were determined as cavalry helmets used in mixed auxiliary troops
known as cohortes equitatae. Compared to the alae which stood out by
the handsomeness of the cavalrymen, first-class horses and luxurious
parade weaponry, members of the cavalry cohorts had an income
twice lower, worse horses and modest equipment.68 Their recruits
were shorter than those who were picked for alae, and their military
training did not involve the mastering of complex combat formations,
as was the case with the elite cavalry. Nevertheless, the use of
mixed cavalry cohorts was more universal and their number largely
surpassed the number of alae in the Roman army.69 In war time, the
cohortes equitatae were active along with the legion infantry and the
55
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Navoenje centurije na natpisu sa lema iz Sivca upuuje, meutim,

da je najverovatnije pripadao vojniku koji je sluio u peadiji, a ne
konjici. Budui da naziv i karakter matine jedinice nisu navedeni,
pretpostavljamo da se radi o pomonoj peadijskoj kohorti (cohors
peditata) ili, moda pre, o konjikoj kohorti (cohors equitata) koja je u
svom sastavu imala i peadijske centurije.
cavalry, and in peace they were used primarily for reconnaissance,

patrolling and defending the borders of the Empire, but also for the
control of communication lines within provincial territories, escorting
food ships, securing order and many other activities.
The fact that a denotation for a century was included in the Sivac
helmets inscription, however, indicates that it probably belonged to
a soldier who served in the infantry, rather than the cavalry. Since
the name and denotation of the mother unit is not stated in the
inscription, we assume that this was an auxiliary infantry cohort
(cohors peditata) or, even more likely, a cavalry cohort (cohors equitata)
which included infantry centuries, as well.
Nain na koji je lem otkriven, kao i injenica da lokalitet nikada

nije arheoloki ispitan, naalost ne omoguavaju konkretniji uvid u
kontekst nalaza. Okolnosti pod kojima je ovaj karakteristian deo
rimskog defanzivnog naoruanja dospeo 35 km izvan zvanine teritorije Rimskog carstva mogu samo da se naslute imajui u vidu
istorijske injenice. Najverovatnijom se ini pretpostavka da je vlasnik
lema bio rimski vojnik iz pomone jedinice koja je u drugoj polovini
II i poetkom III veka obezbeivala desnu obalu Dunava i nadgledala
prostor Barbarikuma naseljen sarmatskim stanovnitvom u neposrednoj
blizini limesa (karta 2). Nalaz lema mogao bi se povezati sa vojnom
posadom stacioniranom u oblinjim rimskim utvrenjima kod Dalja
(Tevtoburgium), Sotina (Cornacvm) i Iloka (Cuccivm), u kojima je potvreno
prisustvo pomonih konjikih jedinica.70 U pograninim oblastima odvijali su se ivi trgovaki kontakti.71 Prema svedoenju Diona Kasija,
bili su odreeni posebni pijani dani i mesta za trnice na kojima je
razmenjivana roba pod kontrolom rimske vojske i u neposrednoj
blizini pograninih utvrenja.72 Istraivanja rimskog importa u Bakoj
pokazala su da nalazi keramikih posuda i novca na teritoriji naseljenoj
Sarmatima, imaju vezu najpre sa posebnom politikom Rimljana prema
lojalnom stanovnitvu ovih oblasti i potrebama rimskih garnizona na
limesu. Najintenzivniji import potie iz druge polovine II i sa poetka
III veka, a to je i period iz koga ima najvie nalaza rimskog novca na
teritoriji Barbarikuma.73
Unfortunately, the manner of the helmets discovery, as well as the

fact that the site of discovery was never archaeologically examined,
prevent a concrete insight in the context of the finding. We can only
speculate about the circumstances in which this characteristic part of
Roman defensive weaponry arrived 35 km outside the official territory
of the Roman Empire. Bearing in mind the geographical and historical
circumstances, it seems most likely that the helmets owner was a
Roman soldier from an auxiliary unit which in the second half of 2nd
century secured the left Danube bank and oversaw the territory of the
Barbaricum settled by Sarmatic population in the immediate proximity
of the limes. The finding of the helmet could be brought in connection
with the possibility of a Roman army crew having been stationed at
the surrounding Roman fortifications near Dalj (Tevtoburgium), Sotin
(Cornacvm) and Ilok (Cuccivm) in which the presence of auxiliary
cavalry units was documented.70 There were lively trading contacts in
the border areas.71 According to the testimony by Dio Cassius, special
market days were set and the markets were located nearby the border
fortifications. Research of the Roman import in Baka showed that
the findings of Roman pottery and coins on the territory inhabited by
Sarmatians are primarily related with the special policy of the Romans
towards the loyal population of this area and the needs of the Roman
garrison along the limes. The most intensive import was documented
in the second half of the 2nd and early 3rd century which is the period
that produced the most findings of Roman coins on the territory of
the Barbaricum.73
Rimski lem iz Sivca moe, takoe, da se dovede u vezu sa kaznenim

ekspedicijama i drugim borbenim aktivnostima preduzimanim tokom
ratova sa Jazigima 167171. i 177178. godine. Upravo tokom ovih
ratova ukazala se velika potreba za lakim konjikim jedinicama koje
su dobro poznavale taktiku borbe u ravniarskim oblastima, to
dokumentuje dolazak afrikih i sirijskih veksilacija na dunavski limes.74
Kognomen vlasnika lema iz Sivca ukazuje, izmeu ostalog, na osobu
helenskog porekla, koja je moda poticala iz istonih krajeva Carstva,
odakle su izmetane trupe za borbu protiv varvara na Dunavu.
Rimski lem iz Sivca
66
66
67
67
Waurick 1988, 338, Abb. 6.

Robinson 1975, 99.
68
Davies 1989, 148.
69
Keppie 1984, 166.
70
Klemenc 1961, 1920.
71
Strabon izvetava da su prekodunavska plemena najee trgovala
robovima, stokom i koama u zamenu za vino, maslinovo ulje, riblje
preradjevine druge rimske proizvode traene na trpezama varvara;
Strabo, v, I, 8.
72
Dio Cassius LXXI 16, I.
73
Brukner 1990, 203; Dautova-Ruevljan 1981; Dautova-Ruevljan
1978, 63.
74
Primer za to je prisustvo veksilacija iz Legio III Augusta, nekoliko
cohortes Maurorum, kao i Cohors I miliaria Hemesenorum civium
Romanorum, koja je stacionirana u Intercisi upravo u vreme
markomanskih ratova; vidi: Mocsy 1974, 194-195.
Waurick 1988, 338, Abb. 6.

Robinson 1975, 99.
68
Davies 1989, 148.
69
Keppie 1984, 166.
70
Klemenc 1961, 1920.
71
Strabo reports about the fact that the tribes across the Danube mostly
traded in slaves, cattle and leather in exchange for wine, olive oil, fish
products and other Roman products which were in high demand on the
barbarians dining tables; Strabo, v, I, 8.
72
Dio Cassius LXXI 16, I.
73
Brukner 1990, 203; Dautova-Ruevljan 1981; Dautova-Ruevljan 1978,
63.
74
An example is the presence of vexilations from Legio III Augusta, several
cohortes Maurorum, as well as a Cohors I miliaria Hemesenorum civium
Romanorum stationed in Intercisa at the time of the Marcommanic Wars;
see: Mocsy 1974, 194195.
The finding of the Roman helmet in Sivac can also be brought in

connection with the punitive expeditions and other combat activities
during the wars against the Iazyges 167-171 and 177-178. It was indeed
during these wars that a great need was felt for light cavalry units
that were well acquainted with combat tactics in plain areas, which
is documented by the arrival of African and Syrian vexilations to the
Danube limes.74 The cognomen of the Sivac helmets owner, among
other things, indicates a person of Hellenic background who, perhaps,
originated from the eastern parts of the Empire, where troops were
transferred from to fight against barbarians on the Danube
56
57
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Bibliografija:
Bibliography:
Bichop, Coulston 2006

M. C. Bishop, J.C.N. Coulston, Roman Military Equipment, from the
Punic Wars to the Fall of Rome, Oxford.
Bottini et al. 1988
A. Bottini et al., Antike Helme, Samlung Lipperheide und Bestnde des
Antikenmuseums Berlin, Mainz.
Brukner 1990
O. Brukner, Rimski nalazi u jugoslovenskom delu Barbarikuma,
Arheoloki vestnik 41, 199216.
Cichorius 1896
C. Cichorius, Die Reliefs der Traianssule, Berlin.
Coello 1996
T. Coello, Unit Sizes in the Late Roman Army, British Archaeological
Reports IS 645, Oxford.
Curle 1911
J. Curle, A Roman frontier post and its people. The fort of Newstead in the
Parish of Melrose, Glasgow.
Dautova-Ruevljan 1978
V. Dautova-Ruevljan, Rimski novac iz Gardinovaca, Rad vojvoanskih
muzeja 2324, 6366.
Dautova-Ruevljan 1981
V. Dautova-Ruevljan, Ostave varvarskog, rimskog i vizantijskog
novca iz Vojvodine, Numizmatiar 4, 6370.
Dautova-Ruevljan, Vujovi 2006
V. Dautova-Ruevljan, M. Vujovi, Rimska vojska u Sremu, Novi Sad.
Davies 1989
R. W. Davies, Service in the Roman Army, Edinburgh.
Dixon, Southern 1992
K. R. Dixon, P. Southern, The Roman Cavalry, from the First to the Third
Century AD, London.
Donner von Richter 1894
O. Donner von Richter, Die Heddernheimer Helm, Mittheilungen
ber Rmische Funde in Heddernheim I, Frankfurt am Main.
Dudas 1897
Gy. Duds, Rgi romok jegyzke, A Bcs-Bodrogh Vrmegyei Trtnelmi Trsulat vknyve, XIII evfolyam.III resz., Zombor, 123128
Forrer 1921
R. Forrer, Ein Fund rmischer Waffen in Knigshofen bei Strassburg, Zeitschrift fr Historische Waffenund Kostmkunde 9/ 2, 39-43.
Gamber 1964
O. Gamber, Dakische und sarmatische Wafen auf der Traianssule,
Jahrbuch der kunsthistorischen Sammlung in Wien 60, 734.
Ivanyi 1906
I. Ivanyi, Bcs-Bodrogh Vrmegye Fldrajzi s Trtnelmi Helynvtra III,
Szabatka, 108110.
Jovanovi 2005
A. Jovanovi, Archeological notes of the fortifications from
Pannonia Secunda, in: Rmische Stdte und Festungen an der Donau,
Beograd, 8387.
Keppie 1984
L. Keppie, The Making of the Roman Army, from the Republic to Empire,
London
Klemenc 1961
J. Klemenc, Limes u Donjoj Panoniji, u: Limes u Jugoslaviji I, Beograd, 549.
Klumbach 1974
H. Klumbach, Rmische Helme aus Niedergermanien, Bonn.
Lipperheide 1896
F. Freiherrn von Lipperheide, Antike Helme, Mnchen.
MacMullen 1960
R. MacMullen, Inscriptions on Armor and the Supply of Arms in
the Roman Empire, American Journal of Archaeology 64/1, 2340.
Mocsy 1974
A. Mocsy, Pannonia and Upper Moesia, London.
Parker 1992
H. M .D. Parker, The Roman Legions, Dorset.
58
Polito 1998
E. Polito, Fulgentibus Armis. Introduzione allo studio dei fregi darmi
antichi, Roma.
1939
. . (.), I,
, .
Robinson 1975
H. R. Robinson, The Armour of Imperial Rome, London.
Roediger 1902
L. Roediger, A Bcs-Bodrogh vrmegyebn lev, 1901. junius h
30. ig sszeirt romok, emlkszobrok, srgzti ptmnyek
s temethelyek, rgi falhelyek stb. Jegyzke, A Bcs-Bodrogh
Vrmegyei Trtnelmi Trsulat vknyve, XVII. evfolyam. IV. resz.,
Zombor, 225231.
Rustoiu 2007
A. Rustoiu, Thracian sica and Dacian falx. The history of a
national weapon, in: Dacia Felix, Studia Michaeli Brbulescu
oblata, Cluj-Napoca 2007, 6782.
Sekere 1986
L. Seker, Problem takozvanih Rimskih aneva u Bakoj, u:
Odbrambeni sistemi u praistoriji i antici na tlu Jugoslavije, Novi Sad,
144152.
Stephenson 2001
I. P. Stephenson, Roman Infantry Equipment, The Later Empire, Gloucestershire.
Strong, Brown 1976
D. Strong, D. Brown, Roman Crafts, London.
1952
. , VII-VIII , 1, 1952, 135145.
1958
. , Castelum Onagrinum, 7,
126132.
Velenrajter 1959
P. Velenrajter, Iskopavanje 1959. godine u Bogojevu, Arheoloki
pregled 1, 162163.
Velenrajter 1960
P. Velenrajter, Bogojevo Sombor, nekropola, Arheoloki pregled
2, 145.
Velenrajter 1961
P. Velenrajter, Dosadanji rezultati ispitivanja limesa u Bakoj, u:
Limes u Jugoslaviji I, Beograd, 5158.
1961a
. , ,
.. XII, 283285.
Velenrajter 1961b
P. Velenrajter, Gradilite mostogradnje, Srpski Mileti
Sarmatska nekropola, Arheoloki pregled 3, 104105.
Velenrajter 1965
P. Velenrajter, onoplja Sombor, avarska nekropola, Arheoloki
pregled 7, 160161.
Velenrajter 1966
P. Velenrajter, Terenska istraivanja Gradskog muzeja u Somboru,
A 8, 202204.
Velenrajter 1968
P. Velenrajter, Rekognosciranje terena u Banatu, okolina Odaka,
A 10, 212215.
1978
. , ,
VIVII, 1720.
1939
. , , : 1939, 6180.
Waurick 1988
G. Waurick, Rmische Helme, u: A.Bottini et al., Mainz.
59
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Registar
A
aerarii 27
ala 55
alka 40, 44
Alzas 45
Amerongen 29, 33, 37
Amijan Marcelin 32
auksilije (auxiliae) 33, 47
Auxiliary Cavalry, v.lem
B
Baka 9, 11, 13, 46, 56
Baki Monotor 10
Baja 13
Bakar 31, 49
Barbarikum 56, 58
Bege 45
Boani 10
Bogojevo 10,11
Brestovac 13
Bronza 16, 19, 25, 27, 31, 33, 35, 37, 39,
40, 43, 44
bruenje 28
C
centurija 48
centurion 46
Cezar 48
cink 49, 50
Ciraki, Dj. 13
cohors, v. kohorta
Cornacum, v.Sotin
Crvenka 13
Cuccium, v.Ilok
eki 27,28
onoplja 10,11,13
D
Daani 59
Dalj 56
Darva 10
Dion Kasije 56
Donja Panonija 7
Duda, Dj. 13, 14
dugme, pomino 40, 44

Dunav 33, 56
Dura Europos 34
E
elektrohemijski procesi 29
Engleska 34
epoksi-smola 43, 44, 49
Eucarpus 47
Eucharis 47
Eucharistus 47
F
fabricae armorum 27, 55
falks (falx) 17
Frej, Imre 10
fiziko-hemijske analize 27
Francov kanal 13
Fridberg 29, 37
Frontonis 17
G
Gaj Marije 48
Gospoinci 14
gvoe 27-29, 32, 33, 35-37, 40, 49, 50
H
Hedernhajm 33, 37, 39
I
Ianuarius 48
Ilok 56
import 56
27, 28, 32, 50
iskucavanje 19, 35, 27, 28
Istanbul 34
Istorijsko drutvo Ba-Bodoroke upanije 13
Iucundus 48
Iulius 47
Iunius 48
J
Jazigi 56
Jugurta 48
60
livenje 32
Lucije (Lucius) 45
K
kalaj 40, 49, 50
kalajisanje 31, 40, 49, 50
Kalkar-Henepel 29, 33, 37, 39
kalota 16, 17, 19, 20, 23, 25,
27-29, 31, 33, 35, 37, 39, 43, 44,
49, 55
Kalvarija 10
karika 30
kleta 28
Klisa 13,14
Kljajievo 13
kohorta
- cohors equitata 47, 55, 56
- Cohors I miliaria Hemesenorum
civium Romanorum 57
- cohors miliaria peditata 48
- cohors peditata 47, 48, 56
- Cohors quarta Iuliana 46
- cohors quinquenaria peditata 48
- kvinkvenarna 48
- Maurorum 57
- milijarna 48
- peadijska 56
konjanici 33, 48
konjica
- auksilijarna 33, 47, 55
konjiki lem, v.lem
koplje 32, 33
Korbrid 34
korozija 19, 23, 29, 31, 35, 37, 39, 40, 50
kovanje 28
Krnjaja 13
Krui 13
Ksanten 45
kvantitativne analize 49, 50
L
legija 46-48, 55
- Legio III Augusta 57
- Legio VI Herculia 45
legura, bakarna 27, 29, 31-33, 35, 37, 40
limes 56
- britanski 34, 55
- dunavski 7, 56
- germanski 34
M
ma 16, 17, 32, 33, 40
Majnc 45
makaze 28
Mali baki kanal 13
Mali Stapar 13, 14
manipula (manipulus) 45, 46, 48
Manius 47
Marcus 47
mesing 27, 33, 35, 43, 44
miles 47
N
nakovanj 27
nakrsnica 37, 39, 43, 55
naoruanje
- defanzivno 56
- paradno 40, 55
natpis 7 ,11, 19, 45-48, 56
Niderbiber
- v. lem
Njusted 34
nosa
- arnira 19, 35, 37, 39, 44
- lema 39, 40
novac 56, 58
Novi Sad 7, 9, 14, 43, 49, 50, 52
Novi Sivac 13
Numidija 48
O
officinae armorum 27
oklop 15, 17
Okruglik 10
olovo 49, 50
Onagrinum
oruarnice, v.radionice
oruje 16, 17, 32
P
paragnatide 16, 19, 20, 25, 27, 28, 31, 33,
35, 37, 39, 40, 43, 44, 49, 55
peadija 33, 47, 48, 55, 56
Pfunc 34
Plavna 10
poliranje 28, 49
postava 31
potkapa 32
preica 29, 30, 35, 37, 40, 45
projektili 33
punktiranje 19, 45
Pustara 13
R
radionice
v. officinae armorum, fabricae armorum
Rajna 29, 33, 55
ravnanje 27
restauracija 43
Rim 30, 33
Rimsko carstvo 55, 56
S
sablja 15-17
Salai 13
Saon-Merc 37
Sarmati 10,1 1,14, 56, 60
Sava 45
seivo 16, 17, 25
seka 28
Senta 9
Sivac 7, 10, 13-17, 27-35, 37, 39, 40, 43-47,
49, 50, 55, 56
Sombor 7, 9-11, 13-17, 35
Sotin 56
Sovac 13
Srpski Mileti 10, 11, 13
Stapar 13,14
Stara Moravica 13
Stari Telek 13
Staro Selo 10
Strabon 57
Svetozar Mileti, naselje 13
anevi, rimski 10, 13

arnir 19, 20, 25, 28, 35, 37, 39, 44, 49
lem
- konjiki 33, 55
- tip Niderbiber 33, 35,
- Auxiliary Cavalry typ 33, 55
tit 17, 27, 40
titnik
- eoni 19, 20, 23, 27, 29, 33, 35,
37, 39, 40, 43
61
- rameni 15, 19, 25, 55

- v. paragnatide, uhobran, vratobran
T
Teleka,
- selo 13
- visoravan 13, 15
Teleka 13
Temza 45
Teutoburgium, v. Dalj
Trajanov stub 30
U
uhobran, v. titnik za ui
umbo 27, 40
utvrenja 34, 56
V
varvari 7, 56, 57
vascularii 27
Velenrajter, Pavle 9 ,10, 14, 15, 16, 45-48
Veliki kanal 13
Verija 34
Vodica 14
vojska, rimska 58
vratobran 19, 23, 27, 29, 30, 33, 35, 37,
39, 40, 43-45, 49, 50, 55
Z
zakivci 19, 29, 35, 37, 39, 40,
Zalburg 34
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Rimski lem iz Sivca
Index
A
aerarii 27
ala 55
alloy, coper 29, 31-33, 35, 37, 40, 49, 50
Alsase 45
Amerongen 29, 33, 37
Amianus Marcelinus 32
anvil 27
appliqu 23, 37, 39
armories 27,45, 55
armor
- defensive 17, 29, 56
- parade 40, 55
army, Roman 55, 56, 58, 59
auxiliae 33, 47, 55
Auxiliary Cavalry, s. helmet
B
Baka 9, 11, 13, 45, 56, 59, 60

Baki Monotor 10
Baja 13
Barbaricum 56, 58
bearing 16, 25, 28, 37, 56
Bege 46
blade 17, 25
Boani 10
Bogojevo 10, 11, 60
bowl 16, 17, 19, 20, 23, 25-29, 32, 33, 35,
37, 39, 40, 43, 44, 49, 50, 55
brass 27, 33, 35, 43, 44
Brestovac 13
bronze 16, 19, 25, 27, 31, 33, 35, 37, 39,
40, 43, 44, 50
buckle 29, 31, 39, 40
button, movable 40, 44
C
Caesar, Iulius 48
cap 32
casting 32
cavalry
- helmet, s. helmet
cavalryman 55
centurion 46
century, unit 47
cheek-piece 19, 20, 25, 27, 28, 32, 33, 35,

37, 39, 40, 43, 44, 49, 50, 55
chisel 27, 28
Ciraky, Gy. 13
cohort
- auxiliary 33, 47, 55, 56
- cohors equitata 48, 55, 56
- Cohors I miliaria Hemesenorum
civium Romanorum 57
- cohors miliaria peditata 48
- cohors peditata 47, 48, 56
- Cohors quarta Iuliana 46
- cohors quinquenaria peditata 48
- infantry 48, 56
- Maurorum 57
- milliary 48
- quingenary 48
coins 56
combat 25, 33, 40, 55, 56
copper 27, 29, 31, 32, 33, 35, 37, 40,
49, 50
Corbridge 34
Cornacum, s. Sotin
corrosion 19, 23, 29, 31, 35, 37, 39, 40, 50
Crvenka 13
Cuccium, s. Ilok
cutter 28
onoplja 10, 11, 13, 60

D
Dalj 56
Danube 34, 56
Danube Valley 55
Darva 10
ditches, Roman 10, 13
Dio Cassius 56
Dudas, Gy. 13, 14, 58
Dura Europos 34
E
ear-guard 19, 27, 37, 43, 49

electro-chemical process 29
epoxy resin 43, 44, 49
62
Istanbul 34
Iucundus 48
Iulius 47
Iunius 48
Eucarpus 47
Eucharis 47
Eucharistus 47
F
fabricae armorum 27, 55

falx (falx) 17
fastening,
-mechanism 28
fitting 40
fortification 34, 56, 59
Franzs canal 13
Frey, Imre 10
Friedberg 29, 37
Fronto 17
G
Gaius Marius 48
Gaul 48
Gospoinci 14
grinding 28, 29
H
hammer 27-29, 32, 35, 39

hammering 28, 32, 50
handle 27, 29, 35, 39
Heddernheim 33, 37, 39, 58
helmet
- Auxiliary Cavalry typ 33, 55
- cavalry type 55
- Niederbieber type 28, 34, 35, 55
hinge
- plates 35, 37, 39, 44
Historical Society Ba Bodorog county 13
horseman 33, 48
I
Ianuarius 48
Iazyges 56
Ilok 56
import 56
infantry 33, 47, 48, 55, 56, 60
infantryman 48
inscription 45-48, 56, 59
iron 10, 15, 16, 20, 27-29, 32, 33, 35, 37,
40, 49, 50
Kalkar Hnnepel 29, 33, 37, 39

Kalvarija 10
Klisa (Klissza) 13, 14
Kljajievo 13
Krnjaja 13
Krui 13
L
lead 16, 49, 50
legion
- Legio III Augusta 57
- Legio VI Herculia 46
limes
- Britannic 34, 55
- Danubian 7, 56
- Germanic 34
lining 31
Lucius 45
Lower Pannonia 7
M
Mainz 48, 58, 60
Mali baki canal 13
Mali Stapar 13, 14
maniple (manipulus) 45, 47, 48
Manius 47
Marcus 47
miles 47
missiles 33
N
neck-guard 19, 23, 27, 29, 31, 33, 35, 37,
39, 43-45, 49, 50, 55
Newstead 34, 58
Niederbieber 28, 33-35, 37, 55
Novi Sad 7, 9, 14, 43, 49, 50, 58-60
Novi Sivac 13
Numidia 48
O
officinae armorum 27
Okruglik 10
Onagrinum 11, 46, 60
P
peak 17, 20, 23, 27, 29, 33, 35, 37, 39,
43, 44
Pfunz 34
physical-chemical, analyses 7, 25, 27, 31,
40, 49
planishing 27
Plavna 10
pliers 28
polishing 28, 49
punching 19, 27, 45
Pustara 13, 14
R
reinforcing bars 23, 27, 29, 32-35, 37, 39
restoration 7, 43
Rhine 29, 33, 37, 55
ring 23, 35, 37, 39, 44, 45
rivet 20, 23, 27-29, 31, 32, 35, 37-39, 40,
44, 45
Roman empire 46, 55, 56, 59
Rome 30, 33, 58, 59
S
Saalburg 34
saber 15-17
Salai 14
Sane-Mercey 37
Sarmatians 10, 14, 56, 58
Sava 45
scissors 28
scythe 17
Senta 9
shield
- boss 27, 40
shoulder-guard 15, 19, 25
Sivac 7, 9, 10, 13-17, 27-29, 31-35, 37, 39,
40, 43, 45-47, 49, 50, 55, 56
Sombor 7, 9, 10, 11, 13-17, 35, 60
Sotin 56
Sovac 13
spear 32, 33
squads 33
Srpski Mileti 10, 11, 13, 60
Stapar 13, 14
Stara Moravica 13
Stari Telek 13
Staro Selo 10
Strabo 57
63
stud
- hooked 40
Svetozar Mileti, settlement 13
sword
- Dacian, s. falx 17
T
Teleka
-village 13
-plateau 13, 15
Teleka 13
Thames 45
Teutoburgium, s. Dalj
tin 25, 27, 31, 32, 40, 49, 50
tinning 31, 49
Trajans Column 30
turma 48
V
vascularii 27
Velenrajter, Pavle 16, 17, 45-48, 60
Veliki canal 13
Veria 34
vexilations 56, 57
Vodica 14
war
- Jugurthine 48
- Marcommanic 57
weapon 7, 17, 29, 32, 33, 37, 40, 45-48,
55, 56, 59
workshops, s. officinae armorum,
fabricae armorum
X
Xanten 45
Z
zinc 49, 50
Rimski lem iz Sivca
64

Roman Helmet From Sivac

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Roman Helmet From Sivac

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

GRADSKI MUZEJ SOMBOR TOWN MUSEUM SOMBOR

RIMSKI LEM IZ SIVCA

ROMAN HELMET FROM SIVAC

Glavni i odgovorni urednik Editor in Chief

Grafiki dizajn i priprema za tampu Graphic design and prepress

Pavle Velenrajter Biografija i bibliografija Pavle Velenrajter Biography and Bibliography

3D rekonstrukcija i karte 3D reconstruction and maps

Location and Conditions of the Find

Rimski lem iz Sivca

Roman Helmet from Sivac

In the year of celebration of an important landmark, the 125th

Upravo u godini proslave vanog jubileja, 125. godinjice osnivanja, u

This publication would not be possible without the understanding

Rimski lem iz Sivca

Rimski lem iz Sivca

Roman Helmet from Sivac

Roman helmet from Sivac

Pavle Velenrajter (19071971)

In the development of museal activities in Sombor, a special place

Pavle Velenrajter roen je 15. 04. 1907. godine u Somboru. Gimnazijsko

Pavle Velenrajter was born on April 15th 1907 in Sombor. He received a

Struni ispit za nastavnika stenografije u srednjim i strunim kolama

He passed the scientific exam before the State Commission on

Rimski lem iz Sivca

Roman Helmet from Sivac

He was appointed professor of the State Real-Gymnasium in Sombor

Kao saradnik Muzeja u Somboru radio je od 1931. godine, kao i posle

Velenrajter worked as associate of the Sombor Museum since 1931, as

Iako mu je arheologija bila glavna preokupacija, a posebno teme

Although archaeology was his main preoccupation especially the

It happened so that the last article written by Velenrajter was the

Muzejska dokumentacija: Izvetaj o terenskom radu 19451952. godine.

Museum records: Field work report 19451952.

Rimski lem iz Sivca

Roman Helmet from Sivac

Bibliografija Pavla Velenrajtera

Bibliography of Pavle Velenrajter

Velenrajter 1959, 162163; Velenrajter 1960, 145; 1961,

Velenrajter 1959, 162163; Velenrajter 1960, 145; 1961,

Rimski lem iz Sivca

Roman Helmet from Sivac

Ve 1744. godine u Sivcu je zabeleeno 875 stanovnika sa etiri

In 1744, 875 villagers were recorded in Sivac, including four Serbian

Prema dokumentaciji Gradskog muzeja u Somboru, na teritoriji koju

According to the records of the Sombor Town Museum, there were

Popisom lokaliteta koji je sastavio . Duda, u Godinjaku Istorijskog

A list of sites assembled by Gy. Duds in the Yearbook of the Historical

Rimski lem iz Sivca

Roman Helmet from Sivac

nalazi se beleka P. Velenrajtera, o grobnom nalazu iz 1960. godine,

Rimski lem iz Sivca

Roman Helmet from Sivac

Zavod za zatitu spomenika kulture u Novom Sadu sproveo je

In 2000, the Institute for the Protection of Cultural Monuments in Novi

Upravi SRZ Voloa Kneevi

To the Administration of the Agricultural Cooperative Voloa Kneevi

1. Da i u budue uvek javite i dostavite nam sline nalaze, to

1. In future, to always notify us and deliver similar finds, which

2. Da nas ispitivanjem traktoriste Rogia podrobnije informirate o

2.To inform us in a more detailed fashion about the circumstances

Rimski lem iz Sivca

Roman Helmet from Sivac

Nakon Vaeg odgovora, poslaemo na adresu vae uprave novanu

Iz dopisa sledi da gvozdeni lem nije bio deo istog nalaza i da je