RomanArmyTalk

Tarbicus wrote:

Quote:In there two images are pointed out that are claimed to be leather plates about the body, but quite frankly they seem to me to be examples of fascia ventralis bound around the tunic:
http://www.arsdimicandi.net/ad_1_i000051.jpg
http://www.arsdimicandi.net/ad_1_i0005a9.gif

_________________

I have seen the same pictures before described as dockworkers, I think they were Gallic, with supports around their waists so I too was under the impression this was evidence for the Fascia ventralis or ventralem. Therefore I was surprised to see them as evidence for leather armour or does the article say leather back support?

Graham.

I wouldn't like to attempt a translation of the original Italian article, Graham. But, in the Swodforum thread they are referred to as armour, so I'm only going by that for now :?

I will try, in case I make it wrong Dario, please correct me.

Quote:Fig.7: Rilievo di Treviri (I-II secolo d.C)
Miles con corsetto aderente in materiale organico, intento in lavori di sollevamento di carichi pesanti. Si noti la tripla fascia che cinge aderente il tronco e la tunica Caracalla.

Pic.7 Treviri relief (I-II cent. AD)
Miles with corset made with organic material, while on duty elevating heavy loads. Note the triple sticking girdle around the chest and the Caracalla tunic (type).

Quote:Fig.8: Rilievo di Treviri (I-II secolo d.C)
Dettaglio della chiusura sul fianco del fascione. Si nota come la forma e il piegamento del segmento indicano un materiale morbido, dunque organico.

Pic.8 Treviri relief (I-II cent. AD)
Detail of the girdle fasten. Note the shape and folding segment to indicate a soft material, therefore organic.

Thanks Luca!

I found the article on Coriis Tegimenta:
[url:1s19boa3]http://www.arsdimicandi.net/ad_1_0000c6.htm[/url]

Would I be right in thinking that this is proposed as being armour made of wool?
[url:1s19boa3]http://www.arsdimicandi.net/ad_1_i0005bf.gif[/url]
Fig.14: Rilievo di Marco Aurelio nella colonna di Costantino (II secolo d.C)

And 'Tegimenta' is being translated as 'armour'? I thought it meant 'covering' or 'clothing'?

Yes and no. Dario?

Anyway this is the translation for that pic.

Quote:Fig.14: Rilievo di Marco Aurelio nella colonna di Costantino (II secolo d.C)
Spessa trapunta di lana (cento) forse ricoperta da pelle. La sezione regolare della trapunta e delle singole aree di affrancatura, potrebbe suggerire che essa fosse colorata come una scacchiera bianca e nera, come il riferimento al [c]entuculum equestrae (sic) quoactile album sibe niger (p.122,52) Laugger = p. 152,52 Giacchero).

Pic.14: Marcus Aurelius relief in the Constantine Column (II cent. AD)
Thick wool quilt (cento) probably covered with leather. The regularity of the quilt section and of each sewing point (?), could suggest that it was colored as black-white chess-board, as reference to [c]entuculum equestrae (sic) quoactile album sibe niger (p.122,52) Laugger = p. 152,52 Giacchero).[/code]

Thanks again Luca.

Looks like hamata to me. There are other depictions on the column of Marcus Aurelius where the 'holes' are more random, but they are of a slightly different and more primitive style overall which would only suggest to me that they were sculpted by a less skilled artesan ([url:v09a1gz9]http://www.livius.org/a/italy/rome/col_marcus/column_marcus04.JPG[/url]). This one (Fig. 14) just looks like it was done by someone who worked a lot more neatly (note the more accurate scutum). I just don't get why these conclusions are being made.

I agree. It is an "artistic way" (aaargh :evil: ) to represent an hamata to me too. It is not the only way to depict an hamata in a bad way, there are lot of others.
We should also keep in mind that sometimes the holes were done on sculptures in order to fix some metallic additions such as tin, silver or gold.

Quote:Graham,

there are many points that I agree, but your thoughts were remembering me some calls I had with Dr. Raffaele D'Amato some months ago.
Raffaele is a big supporter of leather armours and I believe he's right, as you. As example we discussed about the Marcus Caelius tombstone and it is more than clear that who believes to see an hamata makes a mistake. This can be leather or metal, but none can say only "leather".
On RAT there are also good discussions about pteruges always based on organic "evidences" from reliefs and statues...
And I also think none in RAT can deny the existence of leather or organic armours, and of course I also agree with Dario about the existance of all those organic evidences of course.
The only question is: are there enough proofs to say that leather seg were used? The current clues make me think not.
But please use the correct topic for this discussion:
http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic. ... segmentata

Yep, that is the one that Dr D'Amato personally participated in. I'm not sure that resurrecting it is a good idea though.
http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic.php?t=5500
It does have the reference to Nicolle's book with the medieval leather segmented armour. FWIW this "segmented" leather armour is constructed a lot like the Dendra panoply, with leather ties holding the segmented hoops together and allowing for a little flexibliity. It only superficially resembles the Roman segmented lorica. Its construction is completely different. As has been said previously, if leather armour was constructed in the same manner as metal segmentata, then the leather segments are unlikely to articulate correctly unless the leather is so thin as to provide negligible protection.

Quote:For a true comparison it is necessary to wear and to work with the two armors. We have made it.

Made what? How thick is the leather you are using? How is it tanned? Is it hardened? How much does your leather segmentata weigh? Have you actually tried testing it against any of the most common threats on a battlefield - i.e. arrows and spears. Many of the leather segmentatas I've seen have used leather that is so light that I could stick a pencil through it.

Quote:Made what? How thick is the leather you are using? How is it tanned? Is it hardened? How much does your leather segmentata weigh? Have you actually tried testing it against any of the most common threats on a battlefield - i.e. arrows and spears. Many of the leather segmentatas I've seen have used leather that is so light that I could stick a pencil through it.

:lol: Good point Dan... :lol: Laus 4 U.

I would genuinely like answers to my questions. As was said, only through testing of both types of armour can any conclusions be drawn.

And i m still waiting for the sources

If there were any reliable sources they would have been produced long before now.

I would really also like to hear about the questions presented. One would think that after defending such a "remarkable" approach to the segmentatas that by now those replies would be easily handy. Its such a bad luck that although we have quite some roman leather gear like Caligae, cingulum pieces and even metal segmentata leather fittings, that nothing has shown up yet.

The leather that AD has used it is "leather crust" thick 5 millimeters. The segs. built from AD weigh around 4 kilos. We have experimented this segmentata both on the battleground (quite a lot times) both in the field jobs. A gladio hammered of point in any part of this cuirass has provoked a deep cut around 2 millimeters. The leather crust is seed-rigid and reduces well the hits.

I don't sincerely see the utility to strike arrows against the segmentata (in general) because the legionary had the shield as principal protection. With the shield it defended very well himself against the arrows or other (stones - missile acorns - javelins). When he fought in formation it always effected the denominated formation "testudo" and one of these weapons rarely reached his body (and the Romans always fought in shut formation.)

Excuse me fom my bad english.

Valete