MANICA Reconstruction

[Comerus Gallus]

HOT!!!

[Matt Lukes]

Wild- I have a picture of that and didn't even know it was the Newstead MANICA :lol: They have it rather strangely set in a 'U' shape...

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Looking at the original, it almost seems like the plates are long enough to wrap right around the arm....Like you see in the pics of catephracts...?

[Matt Lukes]

Well as I wrote, I made the length of the large uppermost lame the same as the Newstead's and that's only 28cm, so how far around it goes is dependent on one's arm circumference. The shortest lame is only 11cm long.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Wish i had a few more angles....Not knocking you work Matt, it was just that very thing, the U shape they have it in that got me wondering about it wrapping around..... I have pictures of it beside the segmentata, but not very good, so it is not ideal for a proportional check.

[Matt Lukes]

What does the shape they've displayed it in have to do with wrapping around the arm? That's simply a function of length and Curle's book has a photo of the fragments laid out flat with a scale so the size is clearly discernable...

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Even more out of focus I'm afraid but....

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Well, if it is curved and has 2 staight sides, it would have the ability to bend some more, as your own recreation has proven.....
I don't think it's too great a stretch of anyones imagination.....

[Matt Lukes]

hock: But Byron, the length is still the essential detail- if one's arm's circumference is 28cm or less, then yes, it'll wrap all the way around, if it's not, it won't. The thing you're forgetting about the display is the width of the 'U' can be deceptive- if it's very narrow, the ends will look longer and indeed if you bend them around they'll close a circle- but that circle will only be 28cm in circumference no matter what. And because the plates taper down to 11cm, the amount of wraparound decreases steadily throughout the length of the piece.

My bicep circumference (relaxed) is a very non-WWF 36cm LOL so it doesn't go all the way around my arm. Whether or not this is due to the guy for whom the Newstead MANICA was made for having smallish arms or the armor never being intended to go all the way around is difficult to say- I'd think the latter is rather more likely given that Roman soldiers were probably fairly well-developed fellows...

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

No, i agree, the perspective is more obvious when seen in the second picture, just got tunnel vision looking at the first one so often, as the second one is such poor quality....

unfortunately, I don't have the Curle book, and have a vivid imagination..... :roll:

[Matt Lukes]

LOL Well yes, I can see how the display can be deceptive :wink: The picture with the Newstead is helpful though because the breastplate is clearly visible- that's only about 18cm in length on its inside edge (the one with the slot hole), so the width of the 'U' of the manica display is quite small.

But then that display is a bit odd in that they have chosen to make the number of lesser shoulder guards 5 not the usual 4...

And I meant 26cm, not 28- in truth with the fragmentary nature of the largest lame means this could be shorter too- its laid out in the photo in Curle to maintain the upper edge hole interval which leaves some spaces between the fragments. So maybe 3cm of that 26 is not certain...

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Actually now that you mentioned that, the picture is beginning to confuse me, I thought I could see the plates that run over the shoulder, you know the one with the hinged plate in the middle, but now it is hard to see whether that is the brest plate or not.....I was too busy trying to get my camera to take a half decent picture and now can't recall what the hell i was looking at......hopefully there will be another pic of the brest plate that is a little clearer....sorry to go off here..

[Gaivs Antonivs Satvrninvs]

My bicep circumference (relaxed) is a very non-WWF 36cm LOL

Great work, guys and nice pics.
Matt, if one's bicep circumference IS approaching WWF size would it be incorrect to make it a little larger. My thinking is these were probably not made in "a one size fits" all mindset since they were for protection or am I wrong?

[Matt Lukes]

Unfortunately that's a question that'd be difficult to answer Andy- we have no idea what size the guy who wore the Newstead or any other manica was. Being Roman soldiers it's probably safe to expect they weren't little scrawny guys LOL But just how much of the arm the armor was intended to cover is up for debate. The thing that would help would to know what other maximum lame sizes there are out there- but so far I only have measurements for the one.

It may not be a mistake to expect some variation, but it is a pitfall to expect too much from armor of any sort- clearly every little possibility for injury was not taken into account in its design, so it's easy to over-imagine things. The lorica segmentata, for example, had a lot of open spaces, and yet was still used for probably on the order of 150 years before only some were 'closed'. In the case of a MANICA, it's supplementary defense- optional, not at all strictly necessary, so only doing a reasonable job of protecting the most vulnerable areas is perfectly logical. I think it's very important to always bear in mind that armor is a last line of defense and is never intended to be hit- the main protection is the shield and simply moving around, so armor doesn't need to be all-protecting and too much armor is definitely a liability as it affects movement, which IS a primary defense...

[Magnus]

True, but I think given the gravity of the situation the manica was used in, it would make sense to protect as much of the 3 sides as possible.