Subarmalis in the literary sources

[mcbishop]

1 at Vindolanda which I don't have access too

Oh yes you do! Go here and look for Tablet 184 (their search results don't link).

Mike Bishop

[Sean Manning]

Thank you. I notice that some lines of the transcription contain Arabic numerals; do you know what the represents? The notes make it sound like it is the line numbers, but we already have those in bold cycling from 1 to 13.

Frustratingly, the note says that the editor is not sure whether any line has "subarmalis" but that it is his best guess.

[mcbishop]

Thank you. I notice that some lines of the transcription contain Arabic numerals; do you know what the represents? The notes make it sound like it is the line numbers, but we already have those in bold cycling from 1 to 13.

If you look at the pop-up notes pane you'll see that they refer to those numbers as an absolute location (35 and 40 are the obvious ones), but it does get a bit confusing with the translation where Arabic numbers represent... numbers! Can't find my TVII at the moment (still sorting my library after moving 4 months ago) so can't cross-check with the paper version. Unhelpful that the translation does not line up with the transliteration, but hey, better to have it than not.

Frustratingly, the note says that the editor is not sure whether any line has "subarmalis" but that it is his best guess.

Standard practice for any of the important discoveries in the TVs – Coria, which by now has passed into the stream of human knowledge as the name for Corbridge, is far less certain an association than might at first seem (and includes its occurrence in a peculiar case a non-Latinist like me was unaware of... geolocational or something ;-) ).

Mike Bishop

[D B Campbell]

Frustratingly, the note says that the editor is not sure whether any line has "subarmalis" but that it is his best guess.

Hats off to anyone who can read faded, abraded Roman handwriting!

Here's Tab. Vindol. 184, Leaf 3, Line 8:
[attachment=3189]TabVind184_3_Line8.jpg[/attachment]
Looks like subarmalo to me!

[mcbishop]

Looks like subarmalo to me!

Well there we go, proven beyond doubt (as Oolon Colluphid might say). Pity the bit saying what it actually did has broken off... :lol:

Mike Bishop

[M. CVRIVS ALEXANDER]

Frustratingly, the note says that the editor is not sure whether any line has "subarmalis" but that it is his best guess.

Hats off to anyone who can read faded, abraded Roman handwriting!

Here's Tab. Vindol. 184, Leaf 3, Line 8:
[attachment=3189]TabVind184_3_Line8.jpg[/attachment]
Looks like subarmalo to me!

Is not subarmalo a different word from subarmalis?

[Renatus]

How about armilla?

armillae, quae bracchialia vocantur? :wink:

Edit: Explanation probably required. This is Priscian's gloss on armillae, from his treatise On the Twelve Main Verses of the Aeneid, where he wrestles with the word arma (as in, "Of arms and the man, I sing, ...") and its derivatives. Needless to say, he derives armilla from arma.

Festus, however, more logically derives it from armus, "quod antiqui humeros cum brachiis armos vocabant."

Here's Tab. Vindol. 184, Leaf 3, Line 8:
[attachment=3189]TabVind184_3_Line8.jpg[/attachment]
Looks like subarmalo to me!

But in the Corrigenda the reading is amended to 'subarmal'.

EDIT I note that, in the translation, no attempt is made to translate subarmalo and no interpretation is offered in the Notes, other than to say that it does not seem to be a commodity.

[D B Campbell]

Festus, however, more logically derives it from armus ...

Worth remembering that there's no consensus, though?

But in the Corrigenda the reading is amended to 'subarmal'.

Meaning?

(Incidentally, I hope you realize that my :wink: was not meant to imply smugness, but rather that we are all at the mercy of the palaeographers.)

[Sean Manning]

Here's Tab. Vindol. 184, Leaf 3, Line 8:
[attachment=3189]TabVind184_3_Line8.jpg[/attachment]
Looks like subarmalo to me!

Is not subarmalo a different word from subarmalis?[/quote]
In theory it should be, but ordinary writers didn't always spell things the way that Cicero would have. One tendency is for 3rd declension -is, -is nouns to assimilate to 2nd declension -us, -i or -um, -i. If Renatus is right that the Carlisle document has gladia where Cicero would have gladios that is another example.

[mcbishop]

Festus, however, more logically derives it from armus

And hence, we appear to come full circle since arma is thought to come from armus! (NB I am not sure why I should believe Valpy any more than Festus or any other etymological speculator, since this whole word-juggling game does not appear to get us any further towards an answer to the 'what is a subarmale/is?' question). I don't think anybody has ever said categorically that it was an arming doublet (I have always tried to avoid so bold a speculation), just that it might be. The same is true of Ubl's identification of the fascia ventralis as the cummerbund shown on pre-Flavian tombstones. It could be, but it might not. There remains no doubt that an arming doublet had to be worn beneath armour and subarmalis remains a feasible (but certainly not proven) term for it, attested in the literary and sub-literary record. Why is this itch being scratched so vigorously? :neutral:

Mike Bishop

[Sean Manning]

There remains no doubt that an arming doublet had to be worn beneath armour and subarmalis remains a feasible (but certainly not proven) term for it, attested in the literary and sub-literary record. Why is this itch being scratched so vigorously? :neutral:

Mike Bishop

Hold on though. People who have worn lorica segmentata seem to feel that it is much more comfortable with an undergarment with padded shoulders, but you certainly don't need more than a heavy garment under mail. I don't, on the rare occasions I wear mail or scale. Its also possible that many mail shirts and plate cuirasses had integrated padding. There is no evidence for specialized arming garments in Latin Christendom or the Germanic world between De Rebus Bellicis and the early 12th century, and we have enough evidence towards the end of that period that this is unlikely to be an accident. The only pre-Roman evidence I know is the famous Gadal-Iama who wanted to be provided with a special garment as well as his armour, and the “thorakes kai spolades” passage in the Anabasis (if we read it as both to each; I don't).

I'm willing to accept subarmalis as a garment which was intended to be worn sub arma (or was descended from one such; the popularity of camoflage hats and BDU pants with those whose closest contact with nature and violence is the Discovery Channel is suggestive), but it isn't as certain as I thought it was. Then again, in this trade if we stick with what is certain we wouldn't have much to talk about ...

[Renatus]

But in the Corrigenda the reading is amended to 'subarmal'.

Meaning?

Search me! I only posted it as an update. It is obviously an abbreviation. Subarmalo would have been an ablative or dative singular (Sean Manning's pertinent post indicates that this is a linguistic development, not a grammatical error, as I had thought) but now we are not confined to seeing the word as such.

I don't think anybody has ever said categorically that it was an arming doublet (I have always tried to avoid so bold a speculation), just that it might be.

Speidel comes damned close: "They are, as their name suggests, doublets, worn under a cuirass."

I thought that that was what you meant here:

The heretical thought occurs to me: Is there any text that specifically identifies subarmalis as a garment worn under armour or is this a modern assumption based on its supposed etymology?

Guilty (cf Occam's Razor).

Sorry for the misunderstanding.

[richard robinson]

Dan I can only think of one account where a crusader had his hauberk lined in rabbit skin- it was recorded as a novelty. Apart from Arabic/Persian/Indian cultures can you cite us some intrinsic padded mail shirt??
regards
Richard

[Dan Howard]

To start with there are plenty of references to mail sandwiched between padding - jazerants (12th-13th C) and gestrons (14th-15th C). There are also surviving examples of mail AND plate with integrated liners dating to the Renaissance. It seems that some people preferred separate arming garments and others preferred integrated padding. IIRC John Smythe complained about soldiers relying on integrated padding instead of wearing proper arming garments at Tilbury in 1588.

There is no mention of any kind of padding before the 12th century. At that time we start seeing texts mentioning underarmour - a lot of them as Sean said. Does that mean that nobody wore padding before the 12th century or does it imply a shift from integrated padding to separate garments? Some Norman mail is depicted with what is assumed to be a leather edging - like Roman hamatas. IMO the most likely reason for this is to help attach a liner of some sort. The Dendra panoply has leather edging for the same reason - for the linen liner.

[Robert Vermaat]

Please folks, this thread it for the subarmalis and the sources - NOT for discussing the effect of high-speed missiles. We have another thread for that, this one we split off for a reason.