10-07-2012, 07:48 PM
Hopefully someone can cure my ignorance. If there was more over-lap, wouldn't that offer more protection? It just makes sense to me that the Romans (as practical as they were) would have tried to make their squamata as well protected as possible (especially for centurions who, evidently, wore custom armor and ccould certainly afford it). I'm having trouble seeing why the Romans would want extremely flexible armor, as they weren't exactly doing gymnastics in battle.
On a side note: Was squamata more effective than hamata?
Regards,
Tyler
On a side note: Was squamata more effective than hamata?
Regards,
Tyler
Tyler
Undergrad student majoring in Social Studies Education with a specialty in world history.
"conare levissimus videri, hostes enimfortasse instrumentis indigeant"
(Try to look unimportant-the enemy might be low on ammunition).
Undergrad student majoring in Social Studies Education with a specialty in world history.
"conare levissimus videri, hostes enimfortasse instrumentis indigeant"
(Try to look unimportant-the enemy might be low on ammunition).