Leather Segmentata at Numantia?

[Lucius Aurelius Metellus]

Hi Guys,<br>
I was surfing the web some time back, and I ran across a site which showed what appeared to be a whole unit of Roman soldiers (reenactors) wearing leather segmentatas. They weren't even oiled to make them look darker, they were just light "buff" color... I wonder where these guys came up with the inspiration for that? I thought it was completely odd to see them on the field in those things. If I can find the link to that site, I'll post it here for you guys to take a look. They looked very similar to the men in the photos posted by Ebusitanus, although I don't think they are the same people. <p>Lucius Aurelius Metellus, draconarius, Secunda Brittanica</p><i></i>

[Anonymous]

That supposed find of "leather seggie" may very well be some sort of padding/subarmalis for the metal armor to go over. Just noone wants to admit it.<br>
<br>
From what I've been told/known, the Leather craze started perhaps as far back as the Renaissance, they came up with some rather interesting (I was gonna say ridiculous but we can't be biased now. ) "Romanesque" styled armor. Remember they were protraying regular soldier in rather ellaborate "musculata" - that Bronze muscled cuirass armor, a glorified version of Hoplite cuirass...sometimes complete with little Pterges strips along the shoulders and around the bottom.<br>
<br>
Part of the problem too is what remains of Trajan's Collumn. No paint apparently has survived. Supposedly they thought the armor depicted in the sculpture "looked" like leather.<br>
<br>
When Hollywood came along there just wasn't as much detailed information on the Romans as we have now, once they found the Corbridge find, you'd think everything would have changed. But you have to remember about Hollywood:<br>
<br>
1. Nothing changes in Hollywood. Don't dare trip tradition.<br>
2. If it worked to bring in gobs of audience and bucks the first time around, it's going to work the next dozen times around, and re-makes, or re-issues. Cause, the audience is so sheepish they'll base everything they saw on the first movie<br>
3. Hollywood is Cheapo Bastards. They'll cut corners wherever they can. This goes back to #2 - If it worked so well the first time, re-use it ad nausea.<br>
4. Leather armor I'm guessing weighs in around 10 pounds. You think hundreds of extras are gonna slog it out with 20-30 pounds in steel in the heat/cold/rain/snow/wind?<br>
5. The Big Star isn't going to get used to wearing 30 pounds of metal. He's too freakin spoiled and rich to have to suffer such pains for his "art", no matter how much he lies about "doing his research" or "finding the character" (cause afterall, his character has to look styling cause he's the Big Star ya know...Think "Troy")<br>
6. part of 5 - The costume department is going to look for the cheapest and fastest ways to kit up extras and stars. And it has to "Look Cool" - screw authenticity, cause, afterall, if it LOOKS like the stuff on Trajan's Column, regardless of what it's made out of, it *has* to be accurate, right? And hey, if they can re-use the already available crap from the storage shed, why bother spending the money to make new stuff?<br>
7. Cause that goes back to #1+2, If the crap drew tons of crowds before, that's what they're expecting to see in the New Flick, gotta give em what they want, right?<br>
<br>
Hollywood's looking to make boatloads of money off of us, they could give a care about accuracy. Need one more point? How about the marketing quote from "King Arthur": "Discover The Untold True Story That Made A Legend".<br>
<br>
<br>
Bitter? Yeah a little bit. Cause it'll take em like 30 minutes to call up area reenactors and academic experts to give them accuracy, cause accuracy totally cramps the style of...style...and "vision". <p>Titus Vulpius Dominicus ~ Your Friendly Neighborhood Roman Dude.<br>
<br>
Svaviter in Modo, Fortiter in Re (Soft in Manner, Strong in Deed)<br>
<br>
www.higgins.org <br>
www.higginssword.org </p><i></i>

[Tarbicus]

A lot of what you say is true. However,<br>
<br>
Quote:</em></strong><hr>The Big Star isn't going to get used to wearing 30 pounds of metal.<hr><br>
<br>
They did in Lord of the Rings, even the hardest lady in Middle Earth, Eowyn (Miranda Otto) There is also a very big factor which should be taken into account - insurance. Believe me, insurers could definitely raise an eyebrow at a horde of luvvies sporting that lovely, sharp, rattling segmentata. Especially in mud and rain And what film would want to find itself uninsured in one of the most litigious industries in the world?<br>
<br>
I'm not being an apologist, just pointing out some stuff. I HATE the leather look. It offends mine eyes, I must pluck them out!<br>
<br>
Oh, and the Costume Designer, Art Director, and Director may just like it. <p></p><i></i>

[Ebusitanus]

Ok, but the point here is that this group that cheers and promotes this Leather Segmentata are real reenactors and not some outfit made as to work as extras for movies (although they apparently do). If you check their video section I have really nothing but praise for them...They form up, charge, make testudos, march through snow, assault walls, do quite alot of living history events as it seems...well...Its not like a group of friends who made/bought that stuff on an amateurish way.<br>
<br>
That is what baffles me...How can an, apparently, serious reenactment group, that travels all across Europe for events, defend such an heretic an unlogic approach..I would really like to know. Because no Segmentatas have been found in Italy should not equate inmediatly that they were not used. Actually..They seem to have no problem wearing Braccae which everyone hails as equipment used on the northern frontiers, but on the same time wont accept Metal Segmentatas due to their souther region, forgetting conveniently that Segmentata remains have been found in the Middle East. They are fine with metal Hamatas and metal helmets...but not with Segmentatas...<br>
<br>
Hey, is it not just more logic to asume that armor in general has more chances to be found where it was actually used? That perhaps having 10 Legions on the Rhine and Danube makes the chances of finding pieces of their equipment just better than in Italy or...btw...Spain, which had been subdued by times of Augustus? That does not mean a Legionaire fighting in the civil wars in Italy would not wear Metal Segmentatas.<br>
<br>
It just does not make sense...I wish one of those guys would come here and explain the matter to us. <p></p><i></i>

[Tarbicus]

Quote:</em></strong><hr>but the point here is that this group that cheers and promotes this Leather Segmentata are real reenactors<hr><br>
<br>
Aye, fair enough - mine eyes are plucked It is pretty baffling. Maybe, really, they just don't want to wear the heavy stuff, it's as simple as that? <p></p><i></i>

[Gashford]

Hello folks<br>
<br>
While the link below is primarily about armour much later than our chosen period I think it goes to show a lot of evidence about the strength of leather in armour, it might be considerable stronger than most of us realise.<br>
<br>
I think it is worth a read, although it does not directly help in the leather segmentata argument it can help show that 'leather is rubbish as armour' may not be accurate.<br>
<br>
Hope this helps and is interesting:<br>
<br>
www.rdg.ac.uk/engin/home/...poster.jpg<br>
<br>
All the best <p>Graham Ashford<br>
<hr><br>
[url=http://www.ludus.org.uk" target="_new]Ludus Gladiatorius[/url]<br><br>
[url=http://pub156.ezboard.com/bromancombatsports" target="_new]Roman Combat Sports Forum[/url]<br><br>
[url=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk" target="_new]Roman Army Talk Forum[/url]<br><br>
[url=http://pub27.ezboard.com/bromancivtalk" target="_new]Roman Civilian Talk Forum[/url]<br><br>
</p><i></i>

[Tarbicus]

Quote:</em></strong><hr>'leather is rubbish as armour' may not be accurate.<hr><br>
<br>
That's true Graham.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
It <em><strong>looks </strong></em>rubbish though <p></p><i></i>

[LUCIUS ALFENUS AVITIANUS]

The reenactors with the leather segementatae are www.arsdimicandi.it . <p></p><i></i>

[Tarbicus]

Here's a bit translated through Babel Fish (not particularly good )<br>
<br>
In the last years the archaeological recoveries in the roman army camp have been important. In particular they have been finds numerous fragments to you of the so-called lorica segmentata in iron. No trace of that one instead in leather. From here the recent conviction that all the iconografiche figurations of armors to segments, were not in iron, but leather truth.<br>
Archaeology like sure attestation, becomes therefore orientatirice of the historical rocostruttori and the reenactors.<br>
But not all quadrant. First of all the test absence does not constitute a test, and of it is example the famous one and celebrated Greek Toromachos, macedone, epirota or Etruscan-italico in linen or leather (whose existence is undoubtedly sure), of which however not there is some archaeological trace.<br>
Moreover not only the Traiana column, but also the Aureliana, the reliefs of MarcoAurelio in the arc of costantino, the relief of Treviri and other anchor, insist with persistence on qualitative characteristics that bocciano the hypothesis of the iron, to favor of the leather. <p></p><i></i>

[Ebusitanus]

The issue is not weather leather can be considered "armour" as many a civilization has used them, but wether making Segmentatas out of it makes any sense at all. <p></p><i></i>

[Anonymous]

-------------------------<br>
<em>Hello folks<br>
<br>
While the link below is primarily about armour much later than our chosen period I think it goes to show a lot of evidence about the strength of leather in armour, it might be considerable stronger than most of us realise.<br>
<br>
I think it is worth a read, although it does not directly help in the leather segmentata argument it can help show that 'leather is rubbish as armour' may not be accurate.</em><br>
---------------------------<br>
<br>
The poster doesn't mention anything about leather except that it increases the energy needed for an arrow to penetrate mail to 150j.<br>
<br>
The info for that poster came from Williams' "The Knight and the Blast Furnace" Ch9.<br>
<br>
Williams (p942) reckons that it takes around 120j for an arrow to penetrate mail. This is greater than the maximum energy that one can expect from a longbow but not a crossbow (i.e. mail could not be penetrated by longbows but it is susceptible to crossbows). Page 943 says that only 30 J is required to penetrate buff leather. He lists the energy for a sword to cut cuir-bouilli (90 J) but not an arrow.<br>
<br>
One interesting point is that it only takes 30 J for a lance to penetrate cuir-bouilli but 50 J to penetrate padded cloth. Suggesting that a leather subarmalis might be less effective than one made from padded cloth.<br>
<br>
From William's data it seems that leather is lousy at resisting anything but sword cuts.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p200.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=danielraymondhoward>Daniel Raymond Howard</A> at: 2/10/05 5:14 am<br></i>

[derek forrest]

I refer you to John Waterer's book "Leather and the warrior"published by the Northampton museum of leathercraft in 1981. This has numerous instances of the use of leather as armour either in its tanned form or as cuir bouilli. Clearly our ancestors were quite happy to entrust themselves wholly or partially to leather protection. We should not close our minds to any possibility even the idea that Holywood was right in the first place. <p></p><i></i>

[Anonymous]

I agree that leather and rawhide were commonly used as body armour. Both in Europe and further east. I still question the Roman use of such material to make armour - especially segmentata. <p></p><i></i>

[John M McDermott]

What does 150j refer to? <p></p><i></i>

[Ebusitanus]

I would say he means "Joules" as an energy indicator needed to pierce that armor. <p></p><i></i>