Protection - Which Lorica was best?

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

And pteryges.

What do game-birds have to do with this?

[MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS]

True, the longer hamata would protect your thighs, but your scutum shouldhave them covered......

And pteryges.

I was under the impression Pteryges were just for show, not actual armoured protection?

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

I reckon they would give some protection, just as the cingulum added some protection too, on top of looking spiffy!

[MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS]

I reckon they would give some protection, just as the cingulum added some protection too, on top of looking spiffy!

These romans had double uses for everything didnt they!

Im still in doubt as to wether mail was better than scale, or even lamellar armour.

[Matthew Amt]

Too many variables! All forms of armor varied a lot in thickness, as well as (to some degree) in the area of coverage. A Newstead lorica covers pretty much the same area as a Corbridge and probably even a Kalkriese, but much depends on which particular plates are thicker or thinner. In any case, not a whole lot is going to go through the plates, and darn few people are going to TRY to get a weapon through any armor, so then we're back to area of coverage. For that, the longer hamatae and squamatae seem better. A musculata of the same thickness as a given lorica might offer marginally better protection against impact, but it doesn't cover the shoulders as well and generally isn't as long.

There is a recent thread on plumata in particular, actually more than one. And other older ones on this same general subject. Browse around, you'll find lots of good stuff!

...just as the cingulum added some protection too, on top of looking spiffy!

So, have you let anyone shove a spear at your groin, lately? *I* don't count the belt apron as protective! Sure, we hear the stories of a soldier's Bible stopping a bullet, but that ain't why he was carrying it, and he probably wasn't betting his life on that happening.

I do agree that pteryges could be protective, though!

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

...just as the cingulum added some protection too, on top of looking spiffy!

So, have you let anyone shove a spear at your groin, lately? *I* don't count the belt apron as protective! Sure, we hear the stories of a soldier's Bible stopping a bullet, but that ain't why he was carrying it, and he probably wasn't betting his life on that happening.

I do agree that pteryges could be protective, though!

And what part of 'some' did I not make clear? I also figure I could 'shove' a gladius up your groin too, even if you were wearing pturges, mail etc, not total protection, but it would be a modicum of extra protection, against a say an arrow clancing off your armour etc, not a full frontal assault! :wink: :lol:

[MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS]

Too many variables! All forms of armor varied a lot in thickness, as well as (to some degree) in the area of coverage. A Newstead lorica covers pretty much the same area as a Corbridge and probably even a Kalkriese, but much depends on which particular plates are thicker or thinner. In any case, not a whole lot is going to go through the plates, and darn few people are going to TRY to get a weapon through any armor, so then we're back to area of coverage. For that, the longer hamatae and squamatae seem better. A musculata of the same thickness as a given lorica might offer marginally better protection against impact, but it doesn't cover the shoulders as well and generally isn't as long.

There is a recent thread on plumata in particular, actually more than one. And other older ones on this same general subject. Browse around, you'll find lots of good stuff!

...just as the cingulum added some protection too, on top of looking spiffy!

So, have you let anyone shove a spear at your groin, lately? *I* don't count the belt apron as protective! Sure, we hear the stories of a soldier's Bible stopping a bullet, but that ain't why he was carrying it, and he probably wasn't betting his life on that happening.

I do agree that pteryges could be protective, though!

Its interesting to think an experiment of the sort would not be too expensive, a dpka corbridge lorica ($300) and a dpka gladius, roughly $80-$100. But again, when does one has 400 dollars to spend on something so frivolous?

Would be a nice sensation to hack a lorica with a gladius though, but the dpka gladius would probs fall apart after the first blow. Also, this does not take into account other forms of armour (scale, mail and lamellar) which are off course, much more expensive, and I think there will be few people willing to lend these for a slash or hack

[Tarbicus]

So, have you let anyone shove a spear at your groin, lately? *I* don't count the belt apron as protective!

Me neither. Note that as the tunic gets shorter the apron gets longer, and later when the tunic gets longer the apron gets shorter. Eventually, once femenalia and trousers are en vogue they disappear altogether.

They're to avoid embarrassment (for others) and to hide your knackers when you're sat down.

But again, only my opinion. :wink:

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

I doubt other peoples embarrassment was a top concern of the Romans! :roll:

[Tarbicus]

I doubt other peoples embarrassment was a top concern of the Romans! :roll:

Actually it was, in public. The shorter tunic was berated by moralists of the time, the 'mores' being very important. There is an account of a merchant or traveller sitting down in an inn in a way that revealed what was beneath his tunic and was utterly mortified to find out he did so. It was almost a public scandal in the fact it was logged and noted by an ancient 'Mary Whitehouse'.

My own theory (stress theory) was that the military tunic became shorter for fashion and/or practical reasons in the Rhineland, and the apron became longer to compensate for the unintended display it could cause.

[Marcus Julius]

Here's my opinion on ceremonial armour for legionaries up to centurions: A load of rubbish!

You can put cavalry into that category as well, including the masks.

While a bit of spit and polish may have been in order, I would have to agree. As to the face masks, if they're ceremonial, why were so many found on the frontier?

The only reference that I know of for common soldiers (if you can call the emperor's guard common) changing their appearance for a parade was the Batavian cavalry, and that was to look more like Romans when they came into the city.

Back onto the original subject of this thread, I'd have to agree that Hamata is probably the best overall protection.
1) Archeology has shown us that it was in use as combat armor for nearly two millenia! Tell me another metallic armor that has been found in use for that long of a time? Leather/hide has probably been in use longer, but I'm trying to stay within the original list.
2) It's still in use today! Shark suits and butcher's gloves are made of interlocked steel rings.
3) I have seen tests, though not an exact replication of combat, have shown to me that armor of interlocked rings over a decent undergarment to be more than sufficient.

[Matthew Amt]

As to the face masks, if they're ceremonial, why were so many found on the frontier?

Because that's where the soldiers were, eh? Though I certainly agree that they could have been for battle use.

Hey, Tarbicus, thanks for that information on the modesty issue. I had thought that theory was a load of rubbish when I first heard it, but now I'm prepared to reconsider! (Evidence, yes!)

Matthew

[Erik D. Schmid]

Would be a nice sensation to hack a lorica with a gladius though, but the dpka gladius would probs fall apart after the first blow. Also, this does not take into account other forms of armour (scale, mail and lamellar) which are off course, much more expensive, and I think there will be few people willing to lend these for a slash or hack

Oh, I wouldn't be too sure about that. In addition to the full size plumata I am working on, I will be making smaller pieces to be used in destructive testing.

One thing I would like to point out though, pertains to how a plumata acts. The closest armour it resembles would be a medieval brigandine. While it is true that the backing material is mail, the scales effectively lock the links in place to a certain degree. How this affects the armours defensive qualities remains to be seen. Time will tell.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

There is also a story about an emperor(Nero?)who tried to have a re-creation of the Olympic Games in Rome, but when the audience saw the nakeed contestants, their reaction forced him to build a special amphiteater in his palace so he could have the show out of the public eye!

But I doubt the soldiers on the line were so modest......

They weren't supposed to enter rome in arms anyway? Except during a triumph....so I would be a little sceptical transferring the modesty of the public in Rome to the soldiers.

[Tarbicus]

They wern't supposed to enter rome in arms anyway? Except during a triumph....so I would be a little sceptical transferring the modesty of the public in Rome to the soldiers.

Don't forget the recent post and counter-post some peeps made about there being no arms allowed even during a triumph - only ceremonial spears?