Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Roman integrated padding/liners
#16
Personally I think that the Romans had a subarmalis for the segmentata. Scale and mail had integrated padding and were worn over regular clothing. Solid cuirasses were worn both ways - some with integrated padding and some with a separate arming garment.
Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen & Sword Books
Reply
#17
Quote:Well scale armour was attached to a backing material, and I remember reading somewhere online (perhaps here) that one has partially survived which was made of multiple layers of linen, would this count as armour with an integral padding? And since people were using scale armour before and during the time of mail armour, then it wouldn't be a huge leap of faith to say that mail may have had an integral padded element.
The scale armour found in Tut's tomb was attached to a liner made of six layers of linen and the innermost layer was made of fine leather.
Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen & Sword Books
Reply
#18
Quote:Personally I think that the Romans had a subarmalis for the segmentata. Scale and mail had integrated padding and were worn over regular clothing. Solid cuirasses were worn both ways - some with integrated padding and some with a separate arming garment.

What in your opinion a segmentata subarmalis could be like in terms of materials used in construction? Linen outer layer and leather inner layer? Or something different? I understand it is a complete conjecture, but from your knowledge of medieval arming garments what would have made sense? Or to ask this question differently, what would we expect to find in a medieval context for a comparable type of armor?
M. CVRIVS ALEXANDER
(Alexander Kyrychenko)
LEG XI CPF

quando omni flunkus, mortati
Reply
#19
Quote:
StephenCurtin post=322491 Wrote:Well scale armour was attached to a backing material, and I remember reading somewhere online (perhaps here) that one has partially survived which was made of multiple layers of linen, would this count as armour with an integral padding? And since people were using scale armour before and during the time of mail armour, then it wouldn't be a huge leap of faith to say that mail may have had an integral padded element.
The scale armour found in Tut's tomb was attached to a liner made of six layers of linen and the innermost layer was made of fine leather.
Reply
#20
Quote:No , actually I am thinking of several different sources, including that bloody book
The name of which is eludin me at the moment, the ivory plaques,
And also if you look at the pturgues on Octavians statuses, the way they
Poke out s the shoulders makes me believe they are a separate garment!
I'm not ruling ou the possibility on some being made to be part I armour, but
I doubt it would be the common theme!

Byron, do you mean Graham Sumner’s Roman Military Dress? I have this book, and I would be very appreciative if you can find/remember which depiction or reference you’re speaking of.

I absolutely used to believe, as you do, that the pteruges must be attached to one undergarment – the subarmalis. Personally, I very much like the idea of the subarmalis with pteruges attached. I am trying to do as much research as possible before I actually start working on a replica.
Some of the evidence that we have, soft as it is, suggests to me that perhaps the subarmalis was simply a padded shirt, likely made of quilted linen, felt, or wool, stuffed with wool, and possibly covered in a thin layer of leather (hence the “Libyan hide” reference in De Rebus Bellicus). I believe that this would have seen extensive usage with the segmentata. Now, obviously, it was not beyond the powers of Roman armorers or craftsmen to affix either one or two rows of pteruges to the bottom/sides of this garment. This I will not argue.

And thank you, Theo, for the many images. I am familiar with them, and many have affected my thinking on the subject.

For example, the cuirasses depicted exhibit a curious quality that I have noticed on many of the depictions of Republican (and some early imperial) statues and carvings – the pteruges look to me like they are all individual strips hanging from the bottom of the cuirass, almost as if they had been threaded through something inside the bottom of the cuirass, and then folded over into what would seem to be two rows. Previously, I had always explained this “ballooning out” of the top row of pteruges away in my mind as simply being a result of the very thick padding that the pteruges must have been made from. It is still possible, but you never receive the impression from looking at any statue wearing a cuirass that they have room for a large, padded garment underneath. Nor do you see any evidence of such a garment around the neck. Another statue, from the early imperial period I believe, that expressly depicts this phenomenon is attached. Does that not look like each and every strip of linen/leather has been threaded through the bottom of the cuirass? Add to that the fact that we know the Romans/Italians took the entire panoply of the cuirass + pteryges from the Greeks (who as far as I know, always depicted pteryges solidly attached to a cuirass, or as direct extensions of a thorax/spolas), and seem to be trying to depict themselves in similar fashion – it does not seem improbable to me that the majority of the pteruges displayed with cuirass were more or less permanently attached, particularly during the Republic and early empire. As we start to find evidence of Centurions wearing pteruges in early imperial period with hamata and squamata, it makes sense to me that they likely would have just created an internal liner (absolutely necessary with squamata) with pteruges as further extensions of what already is permanently attached inside.

Do you disagree with me? If so, I’d love to hear why. I myself have done no re-enacting to date, and have no personal experience with either hamata or squamata. Recreating a subarmalis is intended to be my first adventure into the world of historical recreation and experimentation. I chose this for my first project because, not to offend anyone, I have never seen any subarmalis that recreates the effects created by the imagery we do have. Would having permanently attached pteruges to the bottom of a hamata or squamata make it difficult to put on/take off, or care for?


Quote:Personally I think that the Romans had a subarmalis for the segmentata. Scale and mail had integrated padding and were worn over regular clothing. Solid cuirasses were worn both ways - some with integrated padding and some with a separate arming garment.

I think I agree with you in this. But that would mean that Severus’ Praetorians all wore either segmentata or musculata (not impossible, in my view), would it not?

Quote: I understand it is a complete conjecture, but from your knowledge of medieval arming garments what would have made sense? Or to ask this question differently, what would we expect to find in a medieval context for a comparable type of armor?

I too am interested in what would likely be found in a medieval context. Even more so, I would be very interested to see what kinds of undergarments, or evidence for pteryges, has been found in ancient Greek contexts (if any at all).

One last question to ask the esteemed members of the board – does anyone believe that the pteruges were simply attached to a belt worn at the waist? I’ve often seen this theory propagated in what I would consider “light history” books.


Attached Files Thumbnail(s)
   
Alexander
Reply
#21
This padding from Dura from a greave is clearly not integrated, and clearly had a leather edging. The scale armor does appear to have had a double layer of "burlap" thick material. Possibly enough to act as padding. But if it was me, I'd rather have some more padding, as a sword smack on the collar bone would not work out well, without some thick padding to less the hit.
[attachment=5483]Duras-shinguard.jpg[/attachment]


Attached Files Thumbnail(s)
   
Markus Aurelius Montanvs
What we do in life Echoes in Eternity

Roman Artifacts
[Image: websitepic.jpg]
Reply
#22
Quote:What in your opinion a segmentata subarmalis could be like in terms of materials used in construction? Linen outer layer and leather inner layer? Or something different? I understand it is a complete conjecture, but from your knowledge of medieval arming garments what would have made sense? Or to ask this question differently, what would we expect to find in a medieval context for a comparable type of armor?
I don't have the faintest idea. I lean in favour of a subarmalis for segmentata because those who know the most about this armour reckon that it doesn't function correctly without something underneath with pronounced shoulder padding. I would defer to their opinion.
Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen & Sword Books
Reply
#23
No not Grahams book, as good as it is...but an ancient documnet....

this is a version of the image I am refering to.


[attachment=5484]ad_1_i0005af.gif[/attachment]


Attached Files Thumbnail(s)
   
Visne partem mei capere? Comminus agamus! * Me semper rogo, Quid faceret Iulius Caesar? * Confidence is a good thing! Overconfidence is too much of a good thing.
[b]Legio XIIII GMV. (Q. Magivs)RMRS Remember Atuatuca! Vengence will be ours!
Titus Flavius Germanus
Batavian Coh I
Byron Angel
Reply
#24
Quote:
StephenCurtin post=322491 Wrote:padded element.
The scale armour found in Tut's tomb was attached to a liner made of six layers of linen and the innermost layer was made of fine leather.

Thanks for that info, food for thought.
Visne partem mei capere? Comminus agamus! * Me semper rogo, Quid faceret Iulius Caesar? * Confidence is a good thing! Overconfidence is too much of a good thing.
[b]Legio XIIII GMV. (Q. Magivs)RMRS Remember Atuatuca! Vengence will be ours!
Titus Flavius Germanus
Batavian Coh I
Byron Angel
Reply
#25
Quote:No not Grahams book, as good as it is...but an ancient documnet....
this is a version of the image I am refering to.
[attachment=5484]ad_1_i0005af.gif[/attachment]
That from the Anonymous' de Rebus Bellicis. The (Medieval copy of the original) image shows a helmet, greaves, shoes, a tunic and the enigmatic 'Libyan hide'.
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
Reply
#26
Despite the concerns about the intentions and accuracy of de Rebus Bellicis, I for one see no difference between the cut of the tunic and the 'Libyan hide' as displayed.
Alexander
Reply
#27
Which exactly is why this late copy is of hardly any use to us, unfortunately. Also, that's why the Libyan hide remains a bit of a mystery.
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
Reply
#28
I seem to recall an article about sponge divers where it was said that in ancient days the divers sold the sponges to legionairs for use under the lorica segmentata
Decimvs/Dick van Heusden
Reply


Forum Jump: