05-29-2009, 06:16 PM
Getting back to the plate armor thing: There is a matter that hasn't been addressed. When plate armor began to reappear in the European Middle Ages, knights had been wearing full mail for a couple of centuries. The coverage was sometimes so total that the whole body was covered with mail except for the palms of the hands, the soles of the feet, and an open strip for vision. So when plate began to show up, they were already accustomed to head-to-toe protection and they sought that from plate, too. The Romans never went in for full mail, either.
I'm with Matthew here. The Romans believed in armoring the places where a single blow or stab could kill a man and let the rest take its chances. They added supplemental pieces when there were a large number of limb wounds, such as the Dacian campaign. In fact, throughout history and across cultures, the vast majority of soldiers who wore armor had a cuirass of some kind to protect the torso and a helmet to protect the head, period. Assyrian warriors wore it, so do the soldiers fighting in that area now. Scale has given way to kevlar, but the mentality is the same. Protection where it's vital without compromising weight and mobility too much.
I'm with Matthew here. The Romans believed in armoring the places where a single blow or stab could kill a man and let the rest take its chances. They added supplemental pieces when there were a large number of limb wounds, such as the Dacian campaign. In fact, throughout history and across cultures, the vast majority of soldiers who wore armor had a cuirass of some kind to protect the torso and a helmet to protect the head, period. Assyrian warriors wore it, so do the soldiers fighting in that area now. Scale has given way to kevlar, but the mentality is the same. Protection where it's vital without compromising weight and mobility too much.
Pecunia non olet
