The Production and Deposition of the Guisborough Helmet

In September 1878 the British Museum received a donation of a folded metal plate which had been embossed and gilded. Restoration of the object revealed that the folded plate was in fact the outer casing of a Roman copper alloy cavalry sports type helmet which dates to the late second or third century AD. The story of what became known as the Guisborough helmet began 14 years earlier in what was then the North Riding of Yorkshire when workers employed by the Cleveland Railway Company discovered a ‘very curious plate of metal’ during road construction. It appears that the helmet was deliberately prepared for deposition and buried at a depth of c30 cm close to a stream. Examination by the authors suggests that this was a high value item that had been repaired many times. Experimental evidence suggests that the decoration alone required approximately 16 h to fashion.     

The ‘Third’ US Offset Strategy and Europe’s ‘Anti-access’ Challenge

Over the last two decades, a number of countries (most notably China, Russia and Iran) have been developing so-called anti-access and area denial (A2/AD) capabilities, such as ballistic and cruise missiles, offensive cyber-weapons, electronic warfare, etc. The development of A2/AD capabilities by non-Western countries undermines the foundations of US power projection and global military-technological supremacy. In order to overcome, or at least mitigate, the impending A2/AD challenge, the US Department of Defense (DoD) began to roll out its so-called ‘third’ offset strategy in late 2014. The strategy aims to bring about innovative operational concepts and technologies and spur new doctrinal and organisational debates. This article assesses which of the operational concepts and capabilities informing current US discussions on offset may be relevant in the context of the A2/AD challenges Europeans face on their eastern ‘flank‘ and in their ‘extended southern neighbourhood‘, and which may not. Europeans must grapple with the same conceptual puzzle as the US: how to strike the right balance between defeating A2/AD capabilities and hedging against them, i.e. through alternative strategies that are less dependent on unhindered access and resort to asymmetric forms of warfare. However, they must take into account the geographical features of their eastern flank and extended southern neighbourhood, the level of technological maturity of their challengers, and their own military-technological prowess and political limitations. This suggests a somewhat different approach to offsetting A2/AD than that adopted by the US.     

Interpreting the Ribchester Helmet

In 1796 a 13-year-old boy playing on wasteland behind his father’s house in Ribchester, Lancashire discovered an assemblage of over 30 Roman artefacts, including a decorated brass helmet. Although partially corroded the Ribchester helmet is a fine example of a first-century AD cavalry sports helmet. This article considers how the interpretation of the helmet has evolved since its discovery. The multi-faceted iconography of the helmet with its mural crown diadem is that of an elite soldier and is paralleled in other examples of cavalry sports helmets of the Ribchester type. The long-neglected imagery on the helmet bowl is reinterpreted and seen not as a haphazard collection of randomly placed combatants but as a highly structured, symmetrical composition specifically designed to be viewed from different directions.     

Economic and environmental impacts of vertical and horizontal competition and integration

We explore the economic and environmental impacts of market structures (competition or integration at vertical and horizontal levels). We consider a bilateral duopoly consisting of two manufacturers and two retailers in which each manufacturer offers a wholesale price contract to the respective retailer. The manufacturers decide on wholesale prices and abatement efforts concerning pollution emissions related to manufacturing processes, whereas the retailers compete in quantities in the consumer market. To understand the comprehensive effects of market structures on economic competitiveness and environmental sustainability, we examine a measure of eco‐friendly social welfare, which is the ratio of social welfare and environmental pollution. Interestingly, we find that the market structures that have been believed to be more efficient are less efficient from a broader perspective: (1) double marginalization can generate higher eco‐friendly social welfare, and (2) horizontal competition between firms can result in lower eco‐friendly social welfare. Although vertical integration and horizontal competition yield greater social welfare by facilitating more production activities, these market structures often fail to induce sufficient abatement efforts to balance the polluting effect of the large volume, resulting in more significant environmental degradation. We also show that, despite the pollution‐curbing effect, higher emission penalties can result in less eco‐friendly social welfare. They can even curtail the abatement efforts of firms under particular circumstances. When products become more substitutable, the eco‐friendly social welfare can decrease depending upon the market structure.