RomanArmyTalk

Yes, it is vital. Tunics will get worn out more quickly under the mail.
also It not only protects the tunic from wear and tear but offers some blunt trauma protection
to the person inside the tunic, which is even more important!

What you say is surely, true, GJC. Many reenactors don't wear them because they think it's ok not to, and because there just isn't much info on how they should look. Some skip that because they rarely wear armor, and because they don't want to spend the money.

But they used them, you can be sure of that.

Quote:They are gods, Aglibol, Baalshamin and Malakbei, so they are represented as the military at the top of the social ladder: cavalrymen

In addition to being tailored, do you believe the armor is also split? The armor as it appears seems somewhat long for cavalrymen IMO.

One of the other Palmyrene god friezes shows the same armor but much shorter and more suitable for cavalrymen.

~ Theo

Blunt trauma is seriously over-rated. I've worn a heavy weave of mail (similar to a Roman hamata) that was lined with four layers of linen and tested it for impact. I was shot with blunt arrows (70 lb draw, 10m range), and hit with blunt spears, swords, and baseball bats. The blows were hard enough to knock me off balance. There were some welts on my skin but there was no bruising.

Some of the lighter weaves that re-enactors are importing from India are not so resistant to blunt trauma, but most Roman mail was heavier than the Indian stuff. Usually when you see lighter variants of mail it is layered with another defense such as a brigandine or padded jack.

One side benefit from this weekend of wackyness is that I now know how to catch arrows and thrown spears It is a neat party trick but I wouldn't recommend it in battle. It only works when you are 10m or more away, can see it coming, there is only one at a time, and you are ready for it.

It was not an issue of blunt trauma, but an issue of tunic trauma. :woot:

@ Eduard

Ah, here we go:

http://www.britishmuseum.org/explore/hig...page=18856

See, this armor looks more suitable for cavalrymen, IMO.
The shield he carries also suggests cavalry equipment.

Compare the armor with that shown on the Divine Triad.
The latter appears longer to me, less suitable for cavalry unless, of course, it has splits on either side. Do you think splits would have been featured on the Divine Triad's armor?

(Here is the full description: http://www.britishmuseum.org/explore/hig...drafa.aspx)

BTW, notice the pteruges are shown in more conventional fashion.

~Theo

Hi Theo,

I am convinced these long, oriental "centurion armours" were originally intended for cavalry. As I said to Daryush above, these long suits needed to be tailored, or else they look terrible. In Asia, there are plenty of depictions of horsemen in long, wide armour, without these splits. So, no split on the sides, but overlapping or clipped lamellae on the hips, to allow for a wide skirt (see the thread about Sarmatian armour).

Blunt trauma is what your linen lining protected you from, but under realistic battle, there is not,
holding back.

Quote:Blunt trauma is what your linen lining protected you from, but under realistic battle, there is not,
holding back.

If I only wore the 4 layers of linen I would have suffered far more than a few welts.

And if you had only worn your mail you would have definatly suffered more than a few welts.

Heavier mail is very good at distributing impact. The liner was mainly to stop chafing and scratching and to make the armour more comfortable.

What do you think this is?



Do you think the thing we see on Severius Acceptus stele on the right is a lamellar armour?

No, looks very like the padding seen under some musculata on a couple of ivory reliefs though.

I thought that I posted this link earlier as I thought it may add something to the present discussion.

http://www.academia.edu/2540786/The_Empi...ar_weapons

best
Ingvar

Jori: that is a very interesting idea. I had always accepted the prevailing view that the Severius Acceptus stele represents a thorcaomachus, but given the other armour pieces, that lack of any other body armour, and the patterning, perhaps you are onto something. The main objection would be the sleeves, which are unprecedented in ancient lamellar harnesses.