Possible Roman Lamellar Armour - Need Advice.

[Jori]

Oldest roman (or etruscan) lamellar armour, could it be the Mars of Todi?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_of_Todi

I wanted in the past to construct a roman lamellar armour, based essentially on the palmyrenean triad. I gave up, not enough evidence for my taste.

[Dan Howard]

Oldest roman (or etruscan) lamellar armour, could it be the Mars of Todi?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_of_Todi

I wanted in the past to construct a roman lamellar armour, based essentially on the palmyrenean triad. I gave up, not enough evidence for my taste.

Why isn't it scale armour? How do we know whether the plates are laced to a backing or not?

[Longovicium]

'Armour Never Wearies' mentions the Mars of Todi figure as wearing lamellar armour from my cursory reading.

It seems that lamellar in both its representation and as surviving pieces is very scarce in the Later Roman Empire until the Migration period brings it back into play, as it were. This may be more to do with Classical styles in carvings and paintings and also the fact that lamellar as an armour form may not survive as well in an archeological context. I had understood Lamellar to be mainly an eastern form of armour but find the Etruscan example interesting. This points to a mainland Italian tradition which Rome takes over but does not embody.

The thigh/horse guard examples (I am hedging my bets here, you notice!) are interesting in that they clearly derive from Sassanian models (regardless of what part of the man/horse they protect). The re-introduction of lamellar into the Late Roman Empire would seem to derive from both the Migration influences and also Sassanid influences with the adoption of heavily-armoured horse types.

The Palmyran carvings stand as an interesting mix of Oriental and Classical armour forms.

[Dan Howard]

[duplicate post]

[Dan Howard]

There is nothing to suggest that the Mars of Todi armour is lamellar rather than scale. It is impossible to tell because we don't know how it was constructed.

[Urselius]

The individual elements of the Etruscan armour are long and narrow, vertically, surely a scale of those dimensions would have been very vulnerable unless locked in place at its sides? It makes more functional sense as a lamellar armour than it does as a scale armour.

[Longovicium]

Page 68 of Timothy Dawson's 'Armour Never Wearies' specifically describes the armour as lamellar: ' . . .These statues show the familiar form of the Classical cuirass, with the greater scale of Mars of Todi affording exceptional additional details. His corselet opens on the left side with three pairs of studs placed at the top under the armpit and then on the third rows to secure straps and chest for further fastenings . . . Mar's shoulder straps are in a lamellar identical to the body at the front. The upper back panel to which the shoulder panels attach, in contrast, has lames of quite different proportions, with free-hanging projections to reinforce the ends of the junction between the body tube and the shoulder-piece . . .' And so on.

He describes the lamellar as being composed of long, usually narrow, plates apparently bound only at the end - a style corroborated by other smaller and less grand Etruscan sculptures.

[Dan Howard]

Nuzi scale armour was made from horizontal rows of scales - each row was called a kalkos. Each kalkos was then attached to a backing of goat skin. Why can't the Todi armour be made the same way?

[Longovicium]

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=mars+o...B618%3B900

Quite a good images close up here:

[Dan Howard]

I've seen plenty of images of the Mars of Todi. The method I described will create armour exactly as depicted on that statue - scale armour, not lamellar. That particular construction method was around a thousand years old by the time that statue was fashioned. It isn't the only way to achieve that appearance so it is impossible to claim whether the artist is depicting scale or lamellar. Dawson places way too much emphasis on iconographical evidence. It is useless for this type of work since it is always open to interpretation. You can interpret sculptures any way you want to fit a preconceived idea. In order to favor one interpretation over another you need something else - like physical scales dating to the right time period.

[daryush]

We have physical lamellae for the Palmyrean sculptures from Eastern Iran - Old Nisa (3rd / 2nd C BC) and Toglok Tepe (6th / 7th C AD). They are around 7 by 2 cm, with one hole on each end. The Old Nisa lamellae were fastened with metal wire whereas no fastening remains on the Toglok Tepe finds, indicating organic material.

I wanted in the past to construct a roman lamellar armour, based essentially on the palmyrenean triad. I gave up, not enough evidence for my taste.

The Palmyrean statues show a local style not indicative of the Roman area as a whole. The lamellar construction is Iranian but the T+Y layout is western. I do not know of any evidence of this type of armour in Europe except for Mars of Todi - but Dan Howard has pointed out problems with this particular example.

[Longovicium]

http://www.romanarmytalk.com/20-roman-re...=30#334745

This post also covers some of the same ground, it seems.

[Ammianus Marcellinus]

" I wanted in the past to construct a roman lamellar armour, based essentially on the palmyrenean triad."
Very Interesting project , Jori. Apparently we share the same goal, maybe, we could work together ?

Julien