RomanArmyTalk

Full Version: Kalkriese lorica
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
The Kalkriese breastplate ( http://www.mcbishop.co.uk/jrmes/j0601b.htm )
has brass edging (as shown in this rather impressive reconstruction http://www.larp.com/legioxx/kalkbp.jpg from the Legio XX page and also here http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/kalkriese

Mike Bishop has also posted a digital reconstruction at http://www.mcbishop.co.uk/loricaseg/kalkriese.htm

In the reconstructions, the only brass edging is shown on the breastplate- fair enough, other brass edged finds have not been made.

Three questions:-
-Is there a practical reason why the brass edging would not have been on the other plates of the lorica?
-What would have been the value of having brass edging (other than looking impressive!)?
-Would a Kalkriese recosntruction with all brass edges make sense?

Cheers

Caballo
Quote:The Kalkriese breastplate
In the reconstructions, the only brass edging is shown on the breastplate- fair enough, other brass edged finds have not been made.

Three questions:-
-Is there a practical reason why the brass edging would not have been on the other plates of the lorica?
-What would have been the value of having brass edging (other than looking impressive!)?
-Would a Kalkriese recosntruction with all brass edges make sense?
1.
On reconstruction only followed what was existing on archaeological artefacts.
Breastplate had evidence of edging all around except where under hinge.
Collar plate (Chichester & later find at Kalkriese) only possibly at neck edge.
Back plate (Chichester) again probably only neck edge.
2. Value of brass edging - protects wearer from nasty sharp edges - later found cheaper/easier alternative to turn over edge. Also would protect on front from wear on cross leathers.
3. All brass edges:-
i)would be a nuisance on edges where hinges are fixed.
ii)on girdle plates may possibly catch when plates concertina into each other.
iii)also on girdle plates would make the job of trimming length to fit more complicated.
Loricas may look like some features are only there for show, but if you think about it, everything there has a reason - if it has no reason it wouldnt be there.
Also, main rule on reconstruction has to be only to reproduce something for which there is evidence. Otherwise we are in danger of making it up just because we think it may be a better idea, & are then "improving" on reality.

On fastenings - I cant really go along with the buckeles - they appear on T's Column but these are much later & could just be artistic licence from a non-military artist. In practice when you drop the girdle plates & they concertina into each other, buckles would jam up.
That's why I chose to follow tie rings as those we do have evidence for & we know that they were used/they worked.

Hilary
I guess first you would have to know exactly how many actual pieces were found, versus what is conjecture....... before making one of these, or making decisions about this "artifact".
Can anyone say how many "plates" were found? I have photos of one "shoulder plate" from the musem at Kalkriese.
I still like the idea that this was part of a hybrid maille shirt with additional shoulder protection, even though that would really throw off the "proof" that "segmentata" was in use at the turn of the century.
Quote:Can anyone say how many "plates" were found? I have photos of one "shoulder plate" from the musem at Kalkriese.
I still like the idea that this was part of a hybrid maille shirt with additional shoulder protection, even though that would really throw off the "proof" that "segmentata" was in use at the turn of the century.

Kalkriese:
Breastplate
Collar plate (matches in shape Chichester plate - wider than "Corbridge" style)
Chichester:
Collar plate (see above, although made of double thickness plate & using lobate hinges, not "kalkriese"-style hinge)
Upper shoulder guard (one piece, double rows of rivets)
Back plate (deeper than Corbridge - suggests only 2 each side)

Quote:I still like the idea that this was part of a hybrid maille shirt with additional shoulder protection, even though that would really throw off the "proof" that "segmentata" was in use at the turn of the century.

hybrid hamata idea was utilising the Chichester Upper shoulder guard, not collar plate.
Consideration here on this interpretation:
would be the likelihood that is awkward to use - would not remain attatched for long.
Long rivets dont necessarily mean = not segmentata - in reconstruction, because of single piece USG, long rivets were necessity - discussion in Paper presented at Durham TRAC 2004.
Info also on website. Reconstruction is hypothetical as, unlike Corbridge, not all plates from one site, not all found together. Would love to hear that a full set had been found - everyones dream!

The other "hybrid hamata" under discussion is the set of 4 collar plates in other discussion thread - context/find site unknown - not as far as we know from Kalkriese - not proven conclusively to any time period Roman or otherwise (but interesting nevertheless). Nothing to suggest though that this was used with any "Kalkriese" type breastlplate & not evidence on these plates for hinge attachment of breastplates of any type.

Hilary
As far as I can see, then, only One or at most Two? plates dated to probably about AD9 has been found at Kalkriese? Sometimes I get easily confused, especially when I see these wonderful complete reconstructions.
Many thanks- especially Claudia's practical comments why buckles would not work.

Cheers

Caballo
Ave omnes,

here's a sketch of both parts together (referring to photgraphs in Carnuntum Jahrbuch 2005, pp 91)

[url:3nc12zrf]http://www.onlinepictures.de/2/?img=Kalkriesetwopartsmk257aca542jpg.jpg[/url]

(corrected V2)