RomanArmyTalk

Full Version: Spolas? "Subarmalis"?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Here are a couple of images of garments. The first seems to be for fighting in. The second is clearly an undergarment for armor, based on the adjacent man putting a linothorax on over it.

Anonymous

I can't agree with you, Gioi, that sheepskin under armour would be unbearable. Remember that knights of the First Crusade wore a padded gambeson under their hauberks and later wore Great Helms. Sheepskin does, at least, breathe.

I wonder if the chap with the fluffy garment is going to put on a linothorax or a bronze cuirass - I don't think it's visible in the depiction. I don't need anything more than a chiton under my linothorax, but I might well want more protection from chafing from a cuirass. - And this provokes another thought; metal armour acquires heat and conducts it to the skin, so a sheepskin might also insulate against this.
I lined my I-G Type C with sheepskin and have worn it all day in the New Mexico sun with no discomfort. Of course, the polish of the metal probably reflects much of the heat away. A helmet with a dark finish might get much hotter. But the fleece itself doesn't make it unbearably warm.
Danno´s first image is the one that perhaps promted Mr Segunda to interpret spollas as felt armor but I do not agree with him.
The graments with the many spans are just crude depitctions of the Ionic chiton.
John´s experiment made me overcome my reservations on fleece in summer, but I still belive that the "sheepskin" of the imge is just Ionic chiton.

In my opinion the helmet presented by Hefestus to Athena has golden "royalty" laurel leaves like the ones found on the tomp of Philip.
Same might apply for the Thessalian gentleman geting armed by his squire.
Kind regards
Hi there the Sploas as such has been an area of much discussion already, the spolas only appears long after the linothorax had gone into decline. Most references to the spolas are from Xenophons 'anabasis' long after the depicted images were made.

I also feel that the "undergarments are just ionic chitons and not any special garment for wearing under armour.

Jason

Anonymous

I think you're right and the decorationon the brow of the helemets which you have shown is a repousse representation of hair, painted black in the case of the Orestes image. I'm alos inclined to garee that what looked like fleece in some illustrations may be the very crumpled-looking linen which we see in others, especially since one instance is shown in two ways, the first looking more like fleece and the second more like linen. A reservation that I have is that the skirt of the chiton in the "fleece-toppped" image looks very definitely like linen, so we haven't got a painter who "can't do" linen. This then makes me think that each painter painted from what he knew. One was accustomed to seeing people wearing fleeece with linen and one wasn't. A key question is; who copied whom?

Incidentally, the fabric supplier for the Festival can get that kind of very crumpled linen which looks like it has many pleats in. Beautiful, light stuff which is almost transparent.
Dan,

more curious is that last example. That figure on the left seems to have a linothorax that opens in the front instead of the side!

How curious.
Travis,
the thought is intersting but I belive it is artistic mistake not artistic licence.
Gioi,
your images prove my theory that decoration is a ingenious way of "up-armoring" and increasing protection. Plus it looks cool.

Kind regards
Quote:Travis,
the thought is intersting but I belive it is artistic mistake not artistic licence.

Well you can never tell from one example. If we had a few images like this, we might suggest otherwise, but without them I'm inclined to agree with you.

I find it interesting because many Roman re-enactors have their subarmalia open in front, which is practical, but there is no real evidence for it. I think that subarmalia are based on the linothorax, as they seem to share so many of their features, which is why I'm reconstructing mine with side openings.

Thanks again!

Travis

Anonymous

But the Lorica Segmentata from Corbridge opens in front, too. I wonder whether the front-opening linothorax would overlap when closed?
Quote:But the Lorica Segmentata from Corbridge opens in front, too.
Which could mean the subarmalis should be a solid front, rather than have two weak points in the whole panoply just where you don't want them?
Would that mean I SHOULD put the opening in front since a musculata opens at the sides?

Darn you Jim! I had this all figured out!! :evil:

let me go rethink this.
Quote:Would that mean I SHOULD put the opening in front since a musculata opens at the sides?

Darn you Jim! I had this all figured out!! Evil or Very Mad

let me go rethink this.
I don't think so. Nah. The only Roman garments I know of that closed at the front would be a seg, and a paenula (and variants of) kind of. I've probably missed something there, but by and large garments were pulled over the head. Stick with the norm I say, and keep it fastening at the sides.
If you collect enough images (i have gathered together around 600 images from just under 400 objects) you indeed do come to the conclusion that linothorax opened at the front, left and right side. I am currently in the process of writing a book/paper on this very subject, along with all the other construction processes and evolution of the linothorax.
And everyone's definite it's not foreshortening, showing the linothorax about to be closed over the front to the side?
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5