Login

06-11-2004, 07:19 PM

beginning to look like SAMURAI armour!! 
 
greetss

Gregg · 06-11-2004, 11:46 PM

a 
 
<img src="http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v294/ZorchG/Palmyrene_warrior_god_1.jpg" style="border:0;"/>

Gregg · 06-12-2004, 01:19 AM

Sorry, still trying to get a handle on this photo posting thing... 
 
 
Anyway, here's a better version of the above, a 1st c. AD Palmyrene warrior god: 
 
 
<img src="http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v294/ZorchG/Palmyrene_warrior_god.jpg" style="border:0;"/> 
 
 
 
And another, same period: 
 
 
<img src="http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v294/ZorchG/Palmyrene_warrior_god_2.jpg" style="border:0;"/> 
 
 
 
And a close-up of the Todi Mars, probably dating to about the 8th c. BC: 
 
<img src="http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v294/ZorchG/Todi_Mars_detail.jpg" style="border:0;"/> 
 
 
Despite being some eight hundred years apart, the construction of these armors is probably essentially identical. The hatching on the lines between the plates on the Todi Mars represents the cords used to fasten the plates at top and bottom to the cuirass (according to Robinson, anyway). 
 
There is no standard definition of the various types of armor we are discussing, though technically any armor composed of small thin plates would be considered lamellar. This is far too general a definition, obviously, and a consensus would be helpful. There were obviously types and sub-types that have never been given independent labels by scholars (not yet, anyway). For now I tend to agree with Robinson's definition from "The Armour of Imperial Rome" that the Todi and Palmyrene cuirasses were lamellar, though he seems to differentiate this type from "true" lamellar. In fact, it's probably just a differnt type, as later central Asian art indicates, which continued to be used side-by-side with Robinson's "true" lamellar. Robinson's definition of "true" lamellar can probably be seen in the drawing in Vincula's post, which is actually late Mongol, surviving examples of which had been deposited in Tibetan shrines. The small plates on the bottom right of the illustration are indeed Roman "locking scale," which like standard Roman scale seems to have come in a number of different sizes and shapes, and which almost certainly evolved from Roman scale independently of Eastern lamellar types. 
 
Here are examples of Roman scale and "locking scale" from a Roman cavalry fort at Biriciana: 
 
 
<img src="http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v294/ZorchG/Scale_and_locking_scale.jpg" style="border:0;"/> 
 
 
 
Unlike scale armor, locking scale does not need to be attached to a backing garment, as each scale is independently wired to the scales above, below, and to both sides. Like scale, locking scale was constructed in a bifurcated pattern, like the scales on a fish. To put it a bit too simply, it might be helpful to differentiate the different types of lamellar from the different types of scale by how each metal plate is attached to its neighbors: If it's wired together, it's scale. If it's laced together, it's lamellar. 
 
Gregg

Gregg · 06-12-2004, 02:30 AM

A good picture of some surviving Roman scales: 
 
www.romanhideout.com/imag...uamata.jpg 
 
 
 
And a photo of a good sized sheet of surviving Roman locking scale: 
 
www.romanhideout.com/imag...uamata.jpg 
 
 
 
For an excellent description of Roman scale and locking scale armor, including drawings and photos, check out the Legio XX Lorica Squamata page: 
 
www.larp.com/legioxx/squamata.html 
 
 
Gregg

aitor iriarte · 06-12-2004, 08:12 AM

Gregg has expressed perfectly what I was trying to say: 
If it is laced, it is lamellar. I it is tied with wire, it is scale. Roma locking-scale armour was not laced and its components cannot be calle lamellae, even if they resemble lamellae very closely... 
 
BTW, Many thanks for the draco pics, Gregg! 
 
Aitor Edited by: <A HREF=http://p200.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=aitoririarte>Aitor Iriarte</A> at: 6/12/04 10:13 am

06-12-2004, 10:22 AM

IMHO, if it is linked horizontally, and not vertically, it's scale. If it's linked both vertically and horizontally, it's lamellar. 
That is fitting if the construction of the piece is considered, not the shape of the scales/lamellae, or whether they point up or down. 
I guess "locked scales" makes another distinction but it doesn't add anything to our understanding..

06-12-2004, 09:53 PM

Gregg has expressed perfectly what I was trying to say: 
If it is laced, it is lamellar. I it is tied with wire, it is scale. 
 
That is not a good way to define this armour. There are plenty of examples of eastern scale armour (usually leather or rawhide scale) in which the scales are laced to the backing rather than riveted or wired. They look and function exactly the same as typical western scale armour.

06-14-2004, 03:17 PM

And!!!! You even can swim with it!!!!! 
 
<img src="http://www.jwz.org/images/capt.sge.thp43.250803151427.photo00.default-300x356.jpg" style="border:0;"/> 
 
and for more info on really good scales and how to lace them..... 
 
goto: [url=http://www.sengokudaimyo.com/katchu/katchu.html" target="top]Samurai armour and how to make it[/url] "courtesy of Anthony J Bryant.... 
 
regds... 
 
M.VIB.M. 
V COH II 
LEGIO X GEMINA 
EX GER INF

Gregg · 06-15-2004, 03:59 AM

Hey, no problem Aitor! 
 
The illustration above from Bengt Thordeman's "ARMOUR FROM THE BATTLE OF WISBY" posted by Daniel is an excellent reference for different lamellar types (though the last Birka plate, #6, may be scale). However, in his book Thordeman also included an illustration of various types of scale armor: 
 
<img src="http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v294/ZorchG/wisby_p278_scale.jpg" style="border:0;"/> 
 
 
There are a few interesting variations, but most are pretty standard examples of scale. You may note that eight of the twenty-nine scales illustrated are ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã…â€œlocking scale;ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã‚Â

aitor iriarte · 06-15-2004, 05:01 AM

I was not talking about ANY kind of scales. I was talking about scales like nr 5 and 14 on the last pic posted by Gregg. They've been sometimes classified as 'lamellae' and, well, they have the same proportions displayed by true lamellae, though they are rather smallish. 
'Would-be' lamellae have to be laced to be real lamellae, if they are wire attached to their companions, they will be scale, locking-scale armour... 
 
Aitor

Login
Username:
Password:	Lost Password?
	Remember me

Possibly Related Threads…
Thread		Author	Replies	Views	Last Post
	Why banded armor (lorica segmentata)? Why not breastplates?	fretensis10	36	10,523	04-24-2006, 05:38 PM Last Post: Marius_Ursus