RomanArmyTalk

I am here going to venture into a realm where I confess to being ignorant, in the hope that our Late Roman enthusiasts can enlighten me.....
That such items (Bronze Musculata) were in use in the late roman army is shown on a Dura Europos wall painting where an officer is seen wearing one, whilst the rank and file have scale corselets.

** Was the wearing of bronze musculata more widespread, and were they worn by rank-and-file ?

The following factors suggest to me that this was at least a possibility:-

1.Rennaisance copies of monuments now lost (e.g. Column of Arcadius) clearly show rank-and-file wearing musculata - usually dismissed as 'artists error' by the renaissance copyist - but the rest seems accurate enough.

2.Among the fabrica listed is a "breastplate works at Mantua" ( A.H.M. Jones, "The later Roman Empire" p.834) ....I hasten to add that I don't have this ( though I'd like to!) and I'm quoting this second-hand. Jones seems to believe this factory may have only produced musculata for officers, since he also says" there were also factories for producing the bronze armour, adorned with silver and gold, worn by officers" . Quality control was evidently high, since we are told "Valentinian condemned to death the praepositus fabricae who produced a breastplate so highly burnished it had lost a little weight"
3. The workforce of a fabrica probaly numbered hundreds or more, because they are recorded as numerous enough to be prominent in riots on two occasions in separate towns, and another formed an important part of a locally-raised force ( I don't know the sources for this, I'm again quoting second-hand). Also, the workers were apparently classified as soldiers, equated to a regiment, and commanded by a Tribunus/Praepositus...which suggests a workforce of, say, 500-1000 men.
4. The only production figures are for Officers helmets, from Antioch in 374 AD when "each worker should in every thirty days make 6 bronze helmets with cheek-pieces, and in the same period decorate 8 with silver and gold" (A.H.M. Jones p.385). No doubt rank-and-file helmets were quicker to produce, but I'm going to 'guess' some production figures based on this.....

Assume that beating out a musculata cuirass took the same time as producing an officers helmet...(and I suspect it would be quicker) then 1,000 workers could produce something like 72,000 breastplates a year, ( for the Western army of 200,000 aprox), or 500 workers 36,000 breastplates per year so even at the lower figure, the entire Western army could be equipped with musculata in 3-6 years starting from scratch, or the 44 legiones listed in the Notitia ( assuming 1,000-1,200 men) in 1-2 years !

So, to our Late Romans out there, I know I have made a number of assumptions from a second-hand (well, third-hand actually) source but it certainly seems possible to me that our Renaissance Artist actually painted what he saw, and rank-and-file could be equipped with musculata..........or is this thought just too radical?

Hi Paul,

Welcome to the Wonderful World of Late Romans!

Quote: ** Was the wearing of bronze musculata more widespread, and were they worn by rank-and-file ?

That I cannot tell you. For a period where the body armour for the rank and file seems to become less rather than more, I would suspect it was not. But conclusions at the end, as they should be.

Quote: 1.Rennaisance copies of monuments now lost (e.g. Column of Arcadius) clearly show rank-and-file wearing musculata - usually dismissed as 'artists error' by the renaissance copyist - but the rest seems accurate enough.

Renaissance copies are to be mistrusted. That’s a fact. Yes, the could be correct, especially where an original is lost we are right to at least consider that possibility. But where originals exist the copies tend to be ‘modernised’. Take e.g. the Notitia Dignitatum, where helmets are drawn as if they were 14th-c. full helmets instead of anything looking like a Late Roman one. Therefore, when I see a renaissance detail that looks odd, I’m not going to dismiss it but I’m not going to treat it as a source either.

Quote: 2.Among the fabrica listed is a "breastplate works at Mantua" ( A.H.M. Jones, "The later Roman Empire" p.834) ....I hasten to add that I don't have this ( though I'd like to!) and I'm quoting this second-hand. Jones seems to believe this factory may have only produced musculata for officers, since he also says" there were also factories for producing the bronze armour, adorned with silver and gold, worn by officers" . Quality control was evidently high, since we are told "Valentinian condemned to death the praepositus fabricae who produced a breastplate so highly burnished it had lost a little weight"

It’s easy enough to check on the internet…
The text says “Manutuana loricariaâ€

Thank you for your welcome !! D
Robert wrote:-

Quote: But where originals exist the copies tend to be ‘modernised’. Take e.g. the Notitia Dignitatum, where helmets are drawn as if they were 14th-c. full helmets instead of anything looking like a Late Roman one. Therefore, when I see a renaissance detail that looks odd, I’m not going to dismiss it but I’m not going to treat it as a source either.

.......I'd have to agree with that, the drawings look remarkably like other (incorrect) Renaissance depictions of 'Roman/Classical' gear.....and may well have been influenced by what the artist 'thought' they ought to look like. But that could be a 'chicken and egg' question! Renaissance artists may have arrived at their reconstructions from looking at clear depictions on the 'lost' Columns ( which we can never know)......although, IIRC, don't some fragments from one or more of these 'lost' columns exist?.......That might help us determine how much the artist distorted what he saw?

Quote:It’s easy enough to check on the internet…

I take it you mean the Fairley translation of the Notitia ?........
[quote]The text says “Manutuana loricariaâ€

Considering they were making segs in the late 3rd-C in Spain, I'd say anything went and you would see a plethora of styles across the Empire. The Santa Maria Maggiore mosaics also show a large selection of types (and I still maintain that's a flippin' seg in those mosaics). :twisted:

Quote: Renaissance artists may have arrived at their reconstructions from looking at clear depictions on the 'lost' Columns ( which we can never know

Yes, but there we're strolling gently into the beautiful realm of Pure Speculation..

Quote: The later Dominate Fabricae were almost certainly larger institutions, but let us stick with this conservative estimate, and thus say 200-500 workers.

Let me clear on this, I’m not saying that smaller number would be the norm, for all I know there could indeed have been a 1000 present on a given day. My point is that we don’t have access to these details, and calculations based on such numbers would be next to useless. But having said that, if the system worked then, indeed, such high figures could be achieved.
And an odd 20.000 loricae would not be a luxury when the army to supply would number a 100.000.

But as far as the original question is concerned, I think we agree that there’s no supporting evidence for large-scale use of loricae musculata in the Late Roman army.
[/quote]

About the workers/loricae ratio don't forget that a consistent (the most?)part of the workers worked just for metal sheets beating and for fittings making. So just a part of the workers were "shapers".

Unless we have evidencies about the making of sheets and fittings was subcontracted outside of the main fabrica.

Valete,

IMO one of the arguments agisnt muscled armour in widespread use is that it is a classic "one size fits nobody" armour. Mail, on the other hand, is a "one size fits most" armour and, whilst a pain to make, is more easily repaired along the way by semi-skilled craftsmen.

Quote:IMO one of the arguments agisnt muscled armour in widespread use is that it is a classic "one size fits nobody" armour.

Huh? Why?

As seen in Milan:

Hey guys, seriously, we ought to call a doctor to visit ASAP the owner of the thorax that served as model for that "muscolata"...

Valete,

I thought it was Mithras, or athena with the many boobies.... hock:

The awesome work of Marcus Hispaniensis, one of our forumists @french forum:


We debated the topic here:
http://111935.aceboard.fr/111935-529-57 ... omaine.htm

That is a nice piece of work! I'll have one please!! :lol:

Wow...niiiice....how long did it take Hispaniensis to do that!? hock:

Marcus Hispaniensis work on an Late roman Officer...