Posts: 547
Threads: 108
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation:
14
Hello... I am new to this site and new to the vast Roman Empire. I have always wanted to put together a suit of Roman Armour circa. A.D. 1-99. I am curious about the Cuirass/front and back armour plate. I know that there are thouse that were made from Leather, Bronze, iron/steel... However, who would have worn a Cuirass during this time frame in the military? And does anyone have any pictures or drawings, artifact evidence?
WOuld a Centuitan ever wear this or an Optio? What ranks would have worn it? I have been searching the internet, purchased books etc. But I am not clear on "who" I would appreciate any help as a newbie to this world... Thanks. Pat
Posts: 137
Threads: 14
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation:
0
Well during that time frame there is one rank that definitely wore one, Emperor.
Augustus of Primus Porta
![[Image: musei_vaticani_021_augusto_di_prima_porta_20_ac.jpg]](http://www.settemuse.it/arte/foto_musei/musei_vaticani_021_augusto_di_prima_porta_20_ac.jpg)
Non mihi, non tibi, sed nobis
Joe Patt (Paruzynski)
Milton, FL, USA
Posts: 547
Threads: 108
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation:
14
The time frame would be the first century AD. I am trying to find out which ranks would have possibly worn the Cuirass Armour during that era. Are there any know among the fighting ranks? Would it be possible if a Centurian or an Optio to have worn this as apposed to the Hamata Chainmail? Was it reserved for just the Legate or the Tribune?
I am trying to research the soldiers that would have worn the Cuirass type armour... so honestly I am clueless at this point.
Thank you...
Posts: 626
Threads: 30
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation:
0
I am not very factual myself, but I've never heard of anyone up to the rank of a centurion wearing any cuirass. Including centurions. If you're wanting a cuirass, and you don't want to portray a general, emperor, or anyone with exceptionally high rank, stick with either nothing, a hamata, or a segmentata.
If portraying a centurion or standard carrier, go for a hamata. I've never seen any historical images with those individuals wearing a segmentata, but scale armor might be an option...Also even those in high ranks probably wouldn't have worn their fancy parade armor and gear into battle, so I wouldn't worry about portraying an Augustus lol...
I am sure we're all a little confused by what you are asking...hope my two cents helped a little...
Sam
Samuel J.
Posts: 547
Threads: 108
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation:
14
I think I am pretty good at this point of not only cunfusing everyone else... but maybe even myself.
I just want to understand who all would have worn a cuirass during that time frame?
Posts: 137
Threads: 14
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation:
0
Since we don't have a lot of examples of a first century roman cuirass (by a lot, I don't know of any), we can only go by artistic evidence or by what was written. I am woefully out of my depth as I have never studied musculata.
Non mihi, non tibi, sed nobis
Joe Patt (Paruzynski)
Milton, FL, USA
Posts: 4,223
Threads: 176
Joined: Mar 2003
Reputation:
171
The muscle cuirass, or musculata, has often been a topic of debate here - it appears quite a lot in Roman art, but no securely dated Roman examples have yet been found. A cuirass from a shipwreck off the coast of Spain has been tentatively redated to the Republic, but the jury's still out on this, I think. There was a thread about it a month or so back, if you do a search.
I've argued in the past that the musculata could have been worn by rank and file soldiers, particularly in the later empire (3rd century onward), but while there are depictions of its use during this period, for the first century we only see it worn by senior officers (tribunes and above) and emperors. Some people have suggested that the famous tombstone of centurion Marcus Caelius, who died in the Varus battle, shows a muscle cuirass, but it's very unclear and might more probably be a fitted mail shirt.
As for the cuirass itself - the topic of leather armour is one of those contentious issues. For many people, even the mention of it in a Roman context causes immediate vomiting and/or helpless laughter. Recently there have been efforts at a revision of this view - see the recent book Arms and Armour of the Imperial Roman Soldier, by Raffaele D'Amato, illustrated by Graham Sumner, which makes a case for Roman leather.
Without evidence we don't have any grounds for certainty, but it appears most likely that Roman-era muscle armour was made of metal (bronze, perhaps iron), and, for the first century at least, it's safest to assume that only officers wore it. When centurions are shown wearing armour, it usually appears to be mail or scale.
Nathan Ross
Posts: 547
Threads: 108
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation:
14
Thank you! Let me extend my question to those re-enactors that have a historical "Handbook" that they go by... what do your groups allow when it comes to the musculata, cuirass? Is anyone in your group allowed to wear it? I have scene "Photographs" of those that are labeled Centurian or Optio wearing a musculata. Do your groups allow this?
I am not trying to stir a beehive here. I am just trying to find a general consensus here.
I am a Master Woodcarver and am considering doing a Roman war scene. I, like many of you, desire to be as historically accurate as possible. However, also as a carver/sculptor, I understand what can and with great difficulty cannot be carved/sculpted from certain types of stone and wood. I understand that chainmail in many instances could appear to be amusculata... (All depending on the artist's interpretation and/or artistic ability... as well as small details that would have weathered off over time.)
I am also open to suggestions for a battle scene. I am not sure if I am allowed to put my website here and I am not one of those people who "Just Do IT" and ask for forgiveness later. SO, if you'd like to see the type of work I do... let me know if you can post a website here. Thanks
Posts: 1,667
Threads: 288
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation:
1
Nathan is correct about what generally is shown on tombstone with respect to centurions and higher officers. However, there are two depictions of a centurion wearing a musculata. Unfortunately, I do not have the pictures off hand. However, if you do a search here on RAT, you may find it. I remeber posting one of the photos in a thread about a year ago.
"You have to laugh at life or else what are you going to laugh at?" (Joseph Rosen)
Paolo
Posts: 137
Threads: 14
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation:
0
In a first century setting, Paolo?
Non mihi, non tibi, sed nobis
Joe Patt (Paruzynski)
Milton, FL, USA
Posts: 339
Threads: 13
Joined: Jun 2006
Reputation:
0
Quote:I am a Master Woodcarver and am considering doing a Roman war scene. I, like many of you, desire to be as historically accurate as possible. However, also as a carver/sculptor, I understand what can and with great difficulty cannot be carved/sculpted from certain types of stone and wood. I understand that chainmail in many instances could appear to be amusculata... (All depending on the artist's interpretation and/or artistic ability... as well as small details that would have weathered off over time.)
The answer would lie in what you actually intend as a final goal with your carving. Do you want to make a modern rendition of what an actual Roman battlefield would have looked like, or do you want to recreate the artwork style of that time period?
The musculata, as some have already said, enjoys a lot of artistic representation, but there is a lack of archeological evidence of it's actual existence in that time. My personal suspicion is that it was used mostly as ceremonial armor, being a representation of the classical images of the gods. This "classicism" and reflection of the Gods may also lead into some of it's use in art, especially when portraying emperors and some of the greater generals. If you intend to portray what a battlefield actually looked like, you could safely do it without musculata, and draw less criticism than you would by including it.
Artistically, I haven't looked as critically at some of the artwork as others may have. However, here are just a couple of my observations. Hamata, or mail, was often rendered in sculpture and carvings by simple wavy lines down the body, representing the alternating orientation of each row of rings. I have also seen some that appeared to just be dimpled (like the shell of a golf ball). Squamata, or scale/lamellar was often rendered in an exaggerated size, taking less than a dozen rows scales to cover the torso. Just my observations, as I said, others have looked them over more critically than I.
Marcus Julius Germanus
m.k.a. Brian Biesemeyer
S.P.Q.A.
Posts: 1,667
Threads: 288
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation:
1
Yes, in a first century setting. Otherwise, I would not be wearing the kit I have in my avatar.
"You have to laugh at life or else what are you going to laugh at?" (Joseph Rosen)
Paolo
Posts: 299
Threads: 29
Joined: Apr 2008
Reputation:
0
Ave Patrick. For further info on the Lorica Musculata, I recommend that you
google "Roman Musculata" and go through the pages until you come across "Update on Lorica Musculatas" by Travis L. Clark....It can be found on the listing for the "Way Back Machine" on one of the Google pages. Enjoy :-)
Salve Larry Mager....a.k.a. Vitruvius
Larry A. Mager
|
