\'Black\' armour

[Iagoba]

Just another detail on iberian "monte bernorio" daggers blackening:



Some of them have a iron core, then a fine layer of high-tin content bronze, and over this, a magnetite layer (Fe/ Sn Cu/ Fe3 O4). The magnetite prevents corrorion, and makes great 8) contrast with silver threadwork, wich it´s engraved an then heated over 900º:


Not Roman, but quite witty hock:

More info here (Only Spanish...or perverted latin sorry :wink: ):
[url:1b509zw0]http://armasmagnetita.wordpress.com/tecnologia/caracteristicas-fisico-quimicas-de-los-recubrimientos-de-magnetita-artificial/recubrimiento-doble-bronce-magnetita/[/url]

[Anonymous]

We no longer blue our segs, have a few in still use but I believe they'll be gone by end of May, being rebuilt for tinning.

In the past I postulated that segs could have been blued. We did have some that were oil blued and rust did appear. However, most were done very well and after being left in the rain and outside they showed little to no rust at all. I store all our old seg sections on my patio in open bins and they are subject to general air moisture. They have not rusted where as the bare steel bits if not seriously waxed or oiled have rusted. Like all surface treatments if not done properly the results will be unsatisfactory.

But that's all old hat an din the past. I hope some can learn from our experiments and mistakes and not repeat the mistakes! I haven't advocated bluing (oil bluing, forge bluing etc) for quite some time.

We tin now. Not a requirement but an option for members. Most opt for tinning. ...and if not done well rust can appear. However, the maintenance of a tinned seg is far simpler than for bare steel.



Hibernicus
LEG IX HSPA, USA

[Crispvs]

"but let us consider the only centurians helmet we can state which is the "Italic D" "

Actually, we don't know that at all. Robinson postulated that it might have been a centurion's helmet simply because it appeared to be of higher quality than other helmets. He may have been right. Then again he might not have been. He never saw the helmet himself and we have no record of there having been an inscription on it. There IS one helmet though which can confidently be said to have been a centurion's helmet. This is the Imperial Gallic type 'E' from Sizak, which was covered with decorated silvering, had been repeatedly tinned and which had rings riveted to its sides for the attachment of a transverse crest.

There was also the tinned Montefortino from Leiden? which, on the basis of the tinning, could have been a centurion's helmet.

Incidentally, whilst I am not suggesting for a moment that the Romans 'blued' their armour, the segmentata in the photo has been in use now for about four and a half years and I have not seen any degradation to the bluing in that time, despite what has been stated above. I am the soldier behind the man in the blued armour by the way, not the man in it, just in case any of you were wondering, and Caballo is the tall auxiliary next to me, with Celer marching next to me on the other side.

Crispvs

[A_Volpe]

I agree with what Matt Amt and others are trying to say, in that we just don't have enough physical evidence to say exactly what the finish of armor was

and I agree with what Matt has said (at an event) before, in that styles and fashions change constantly, and the Romans were no different. What was a common fashion, heck, even standard, in the early Empire was not the same 30, 50, 100 years later. And even that has a lot of grey area because we've only found so many surviving pieces that are in 'ok' condition to make whichever case.

in terms of the Pugio that's been mentioned, remember it could have been a unique exception, and from what I understand, pugiones were not 'standard issue' to troops, it appears they were customized by the soldier to their particular taste. The problem today is since we only have x number of pugio samples to work from, we have a lot of repeat pieces among our ranks, that's just the crumbs with the cookies.

now, who's to say how Romans finished or maintained their armor, it could also have been varied in each Region. Maybe (remember I said maybe), troops in Germany coated or polished their armor differently than soldiers in Egypt because of climate.

until we have 100%, undeniable proof of what Romans did, and if it was standard among the 30 someodd Legions over the centuries, we're just going to be stuck today with our own theories and interpretations. Go with what makes sense to you and what can be backed up with your own research and reconstruction/experiments.

[Crispvs]

"pugiones were not 'standard issue' to troops, it appears they were customized by the soldier to their particular taste."

This is OT in this thread, but whilst I agree that they don't seem to have been universally held, I do not believe that soldiers customised them in the the way you suggest. The decorative elements are generally far too standardised for that to have been the case. Part of the problem here is that there are very few dagger sheaths in use by re-enactors which are accurate. Most are debased attempts at reproductions of a couple of real examples and a lot are complete fantasy pieces. The limited edition silver inlaid pugio sheath Deepeeka produced is one of the few fairly accurate sheaths you will see around, along with anything which the wealthier amongst us might buy from Erik Koenig or Hans Bins.

Lets get back to discussing armour now.

Crispvs

[M. Demetrius]

Mod interruption: Hibernicus, are you still maintaining two separate identities/accounts on the Forum? If so, please email or PM Jasper and/or Matt Lukes and let them know why that is being done.

Thanks.

Now back to armor, sorry for the interruption. Waxing is one way to maintain steel, and it doesn't take enough heat to discolor the metal to be above the melting point of beeswax. About 160 degrees F (71C) will make the wax run thin, and it will make a coating over the metal. A little burnishing or polishing with a wool rag and it shines well, and doesn't rust so easily. Did they do this? I don't know, but it does work.

I usually use one of several modern oils, even petroleum jelly in a thin coat, as I've made a whole lot of work for myself by not keeping rust off of blades, helmets, etc. I just grow tired of maintaining, derusting and polishing metals unnecessarily, so I use what works for me, right or wrong, historically accurate or not. I don't wear armor every day, and it gets put away sometimes for quite a while, and I want it to look shiny, not dull brown, when I get it out of its hiding place. Sorry if that offends the purists among us.

[Doc]

Not to be OT but the Italic D was mentioned as a possible centurio helmet and the Gallic E was said to be a centurions helmet. Are we not forgetting the Gallic D gentlemen, whose rossettes are ALL silver and furthermore and most importantly, there is a complete absence of hooks or loops on the front and back of the helmet. We do not know if the Gallic D was silvered or tinned since there is no existing report that would suggest this. However, if one takes a look at the peak of the Gallic D and the fact that even the brass edge is decorative, it is obvious that lots of work went into making this helmet. If one compares the description by Lindenschmit and then reads the description of all the other Gallic helmets in the 1st century AD, it becomes obvious that the Gallic D is by far the finest helmet in the "series".

[Crispvs]

Paulo,

Thanks for your observation. I actually meant to say 'Gallic' rather than 'Italic' and I think that was what Brian intended to say as well. I certainly do not think that the Imperial Italic 'D' was a centurion's helmet but agree that the very finely finished Imperial Gallic 'D' could have been, using the same logic as Robinson. My point was simply that the Gallic 'E' from Sizak definitely was a centurion's helmet, whereas no other helmet can conclusively be shown to be.

Sorry to have kept this OT. Lets go back to armour again. For the record, I have been using pork fat to keep rust off my helmet for a number of years and have found that a very thin, almost invisible layer of fat will protect the helmet from rust for a couple of months with few problems and none of the smell that most people expect it would have. However, the same did not apply to my body armour, which is subject to much more rubbing against other things and when I tried treating it with fat it quickly rubbed off onto my cloak, sword pommel, tunic and arms, leaving the armour largely unprotected again. If beeswax did not rub off in the same way it might well be a good form of rust protection.

Crispvs

[Anonymous]

An easy way to apply beeswax to bare steel without heating the steel which can damage the leather strapping...

Rub the wax on cold then, using an old fashioned soldering wand or iron, melt the wax



Hibernicus
LEG IX HSPA,USA

[M. Demetrius]

In the summer, in Texas and the SoCal, Arizona, etc., just put the armor out in the sun for a while, and it will get plenty hot to melt wax!

Soldering irons like that are still used by plumbers to spread molten lead on some roof vents, etc., and are usually available at junk stores. Most folks have no idea what they're designed to do. Plus, they do a quick job on those giant cockroaches we have around these parts.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

But, surely if the armour is hot enough to melt wax for applying it, it is also hot enough to melt off the wax
that has already been applied?

I believe there is some evidence that the Kalkriese seg was tinned? CMIIW?

[john m roberts]

There was a means of preventing rust that nobody has mentioned here: make the soldiers keep their damned armor clean! I spent three years in the Army. My rifle never got rusty because I cleaned it every day. My brass stayed shiny (we had brass back then) because I polished it every day. We had sergeants (who were similar in many ways to centurions) who were not at all shy about telling us to clean and maintain our gear, and about the punishments we would suffer if we failed to. Legionaries had plenty of motivation to keep their metal spotless, with or without oil, wax or tin.

[Magnus]

I agree that is the most likely reason the Roman's armour stayed shiny! 8)

[PhilusEstilius]

Crispvs. I would say that having made what is The only true "Gallic D" that is in existance yes I would consider it to be a Centurians helmet and very much so as mentioned by Doc. I would also consider the "Italic D" to be a Centurians helmet, for having made five copies of this one and having studied it's "Crest holder" and the two peak studs it can only be such and as I mention earlier it may have been blued.

[Crispvs]

Brian,

As I said, I do agree with Robinson's reasoning over the Imperial Gallic 'D' but this still puts it into the 'highly probable' catagory rather than the 'definite' catagory that the Sisac 'E' falls into. As to the Imperial Italic 'D', you may well be right, but then again, the finish on the actual helmet is nothing like the quality found on the aformentioned Gallic 'D' and the decorative rivets attaching the peak, whilst they could be suitable for using as attachment points for a transverse crest, are also very similar to the decoratove rivets to be found on a number of later helmets and may be an early example of these. Alternatively, Robinson aluded to the idea that this helmet may have seen long service and may have had its appearance updated somewhat, later in its 'life'. It is clearly a mid first century AD helmet in overall form, but in terms of its decoration it has much in common with helmets of a century or more later.

Crispvs