Lorica hamata / segmentata

[Tarbicus]

And it could be a lot more things than just those :wink:

[john m roberts]

The USN frigate constitution was nicknamed "Old Ironsides" even though it was made of wood.

[Caratacus]

A lot of (interesting) speculation here. Let's add a few facts.

(1) Lorica segmentata armour was in use from at least the last decade of the 1st century BC to the late 3rd century AD - a period of close on 300 years. Clearly, the stuff must have been doing something right!
(2) The armour has been found all over the Roman Empire, from Britain to the North African provinces. Over 100 sites are known - half of them in Britain. Where Roman military sites have been properly investigated, the stuff nearly always turns up.
(3) David Sim has performed experiments that suggest that lorica hamata armour suits would take one man between 12 and 15 months to make - and this assumes that the links were punched and butt-joined, not riveted. By contrast, an estimation of between 3 and 4 weeks has been made for a suit of plate armour.
(4) The armour appears to have been specifically designed to protect the shoulders, as this is where the overlapping plates are thickest.
(5) The curvature of the plates means that both slashing and thrusting blows would be deflected to one side. Mail armour would be a poor defense against thrusting blows.
(6) The soldier would have a large shield in front of him, affording much more protection.
(7) The use of plate armour seems to have been phased out at the same time that there were strategic changes as well as tactical ones in the threats that the Empire faced.

Caratcus
(Dr. Mike Thomas)

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

(1) Lorica segmentata armour was in use from at least the last decade of the 1st century BC to the late 3rd century AD - a period of close on 300 years. Clearly, the stuff must have been doing something right!

Which is why I postulate the possibility of it being used before, i.e. Caesars time...

[Robert Vermaat]

My own guesss about a seggie being less usable, apart from that cavalry seem to have shunned it from the start, is that the 3rd c. may have seeen circumstances that needed armour to be made as fast as possible, repaired in difficult circumstances (any smith would do) and that therefore only armour that could be made and repaired by anyone and worn by all the military would become the favorite. So yes, a seg would not have beeen unusable during the 4th c., but my guesss is that in most regions, production had stopped during the 3rd c. due to the factors above, and it never went into production again afterwards.
Call that fashion? OK, then that's fashion.

No, I'd say that's mostly economics and logistics, as has also been discussed a couple times before. Mail won out because it was easier to produce and maintain in centralized areas for an expanding army. So not fashion, here, necessarily.

It seeems we are in agreement here. Mail won due to the economic/military crisis of the 3rd. c., and somehow the seg was never taken into mass production again, afterwards.

PS: Hey, Zulu pikemen with Coolus helmets and katanas, would that work?

What, without any cow hide scutum? Nah, how would you be able to tell one impi apart from another? Wouldn't work. :wink:

[Tarbicus]

Couldn't agree less about the economic reasons guys, sorry. Mail was more expensive to make in the first place, and we have interpretations of evidence by the wise showing it was easy to modify spares to fit a seg as a repair. There are also numerous finds of seg with ad hoc repairs and holes that clearly had 'something' in them at some point. It was also still in use in Spain in the early 4th-C which is implicitly often ignored, so I'm saying it again - it was in use in Spain in the early 4th-C, where there may have not been a need to jump on a horse and dash to stop Johnny Foreigner making yet another incursion in the middle of nowhere.... far away from Spain.

I'll also ask here, again, if anyone knows the cultural roots of the Spanish legions at this time? I personally think you're missing a big clue to the puzzle in the form of an exception.

[markusaurelius]

Tarbicus,

What is your source for the Seg still being used in the 4th Century in Spain? (just out of curiosity).

I wonder if Seg's had the bad nack of not being as "durable" over the long run. The leather attachments (as well as the brass ones) quickly collected moisture which would have start the metal rusting even if well taken care of.

A Hamata could simply be put into some oil for storage and sit there for literally decades, to be pulled back out again and put to use. I would imagine that some hamata pieces had seen battle in more than one Century......

[Magnus]

Tarbicus,
I wonder if Seg's had the bad nack of not being as "durable" over the long run. The leather attachments (as well as the brass ones) quickly collected moisture which would have start the metal rusting even if well taken care of.

I don't think so...leather can be re-oiled and bronze can be tinned easily enough.

[Tarbicus]

Tarbicus,

What is your source for the Seg still being used in the 4th Century in Spain? (just out of curiosity).

http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic. ... 825#170825

[Erik D. Schmid]

Judging from the plate in Curle's book, the found pieces of the Newstead mail are not a "rusty mass."

No they're not. In fact they are in such good condition that it is not that difficult to see that they have a squarish section which indicates punching and not welding.

Do you happen to know of the study showing that Newstead rings were not welded? Could you please provide a reference?

My own examinations have proven to me they were punched. I have personally examined both the Newstead and the Carlingwark Loch examples in detail and have absolutely no doubts whatsoever that they were made by punching.

It has been my experience that the majority of researchers who write about these pieces have no practical knowledge of metalworking. All of the solid links used in plumata were made by punching without question. Every hamata piece I have examined had theirs made the same way. Dr. Sim has shown punching to have been a rather simple process.

The only links I know of that were proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to have been welded were the theta links found in Indian mail. This seems have been one of the only areas where mail was made to utilize this technique and it didn't come about until sometime around the 16th century.

Of course there is also the Coppergate mail, but I am still a bit skeptical about that yet.

A lot of (interesting) speculation here. Let's add a few facts.

(3) David Sim has performed experiments that suggest that lorica hamata armour suits would take one man between 12 and 15 months to make - and this assumes that the links were punched and butt-joined, not riveted. By contrast, an estimation of between 3 and 4 weeks has been made for a suit of plate armour.

Caratcus
(Dr. Mike Thomas)

His estimations are very inaccurate I'm sorry to say. If an armourer were to make a shirt using only butted links and punched links he could produce a hamata in only a few days. Were he to use riveted links in place of the butted ones the time of completion would be expanded to around a month or two depending on the size of the garment. This is assuming all he is doing from dawn to dusk is making mail mind you. The link size also plays into this a great deal as well.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Erik, did you by any chance get to study the hamata in St Albans?
The links in that are really tiny (to me anyway) It says the set is Celtic in origin.....

Is this also punched/riveted? I would be interested to know, if you happen to know, off hand?

[Erik D. Schmid]

Yes, I have also studied the piece at St. Albans. It is of alternating row construction, but it is impossible to say with certainty whether the solid links were made by welding or punching as there is no metal left, only hollow tubes. However, my personal opinion leans towards punching.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Thanks Erik. There I was thinking it was so well preserved too!

[Robert Vermaat]

Couldn't agree less about the economic reasons guys, sorry. Mail was more expensive to make in the first place, and we have interpretations of evidence by the wise showing it was easy to modify spares to fit a seg as a repair. There are also numerous finds of seg with ad hoc repairs and holes that clearly had 'something' in them at some point.

Sure, but my interpretation is that this only applies when you have a fully functional system of logistics in place. Smithies at forts, legions at forts, and maybe a backup sytem if a troop needs repairs along the march. But the point of the 'economics' reasons is the period when the segs seeems to have fallen out of general use (yes, I'm coming to Spain in a moment) was a long period of general upheaval, in which the traditional Roman military was under breaking pressure, and the seeds were sown for a major reorganisation along the whole sytem when times became calmer. It is my opinion that during this period, the backup system failed and the traditional manner in which the Roman military organised its suppies and repairs, changed forever. In a period of military chaos, which large amounts of units no longer concentrated in small areas along the border, but moving just about anywhere, it may have become difficult to find the necessary know-how to repair and make a seg. Yes yes, Spain, in a sec. It may be more expensive to make a mail coat, but it surely takes less expertise. My guess is therefore that mail was more readily available and therefore won out. Guesswork, I know.

It was also still in use in Spain in the early 4th-C which is implicitly often ignored, so I'm saying it again - it was in use in Spain in the early 4th-C, where there may have not been a need to jump on a horse and dash to stop Johnny Foreigner making yet another incursion in the middle of nowhere.... far away from Spain.

Well, it was mentioned in this discussion, but still, good to say it again. I would not be surprised, btw, if it turns out in future that the seg remained in use in other ares besides Spain.
Like you pointed out, it may be due to Spain being far from the areas of heavy conflict (especially during the 3rd c., I must add) that ensured the survival of this type of armour there.

However, I would be much more interested to know why the segmentata eventuall was dropped in spain, too!

I'll also ask here, again, if anyone knows the cultural roots of the Spanish legions at this time?

I would venture a guess that they were drawn from the province where they served, as seems to have been the standard recruiting practise at the time.

[Caratacus]

It was also still in use in Spain in the early 4th-C which is implicitly often ignored, so I'm saying it again - it was in use in Spain in the early 4th-C

Unless you know something I don't, Jim, the last known use for the armour that I am aware of was in the last quarter of the 3rd century AD - remains were found at Leon in Spain, where both Corbridge and Newstead fitments were found in the same hole. Prior to this, the last recorded 'use' was from Eining, where the stuff turned up in a temple (dated after 229 AD) whereas the Zugmantel find predates AD 259/60. (See Lorica Segmentata Monograph 1, p.49 for Eining/Zugmantel and JRMES 12/13, p.22 for the Leon dates).

Yes, I know there isn't much time difference between AD 275-300 and AD 300-325 - but humour me!

Caratacus/Mike Thomas