I want to share with you an interesting datum about loricae hamata weight, since is not easy to have such an information.
I had the chance to study this lorica hamata and I figured out that it is around the 30-35% of a whole one (I may be wrong, but not by much).
Its weight is 1080 gr. and thus the original weight would be +/- 3,5 kgs. If we add the shoulders covers, total weight may be attested around 4 kg, not more.
Very far from the supposed 8-12 kgs.
Having seen some of the originals, too, that does not suprise me, as the thickness of the rings in the originals is far smaller then those of modern "replica's".
You can't rely on extant examples to determine original weight or link size. Iron links increase in both volume and mass as they oxidise and, when dug up and "restored", a lot of material is removed. What is left usually has no bearing on the original item. We have to limit this kind of study to the few items we have that do not show signs of significant deterioration and restoration. In my experience the imported Indian riveted mail is generally lighter than Roman mail because they make the links way too thin. The other problem with modern replicas is that the links are too large. Mail resellers give the INSIDE diameter of their links but museum catalogues and archaeological reports give the OUTSIDE diameter. When you see mail for sale with a 6mm diameter it really has a diameter closer to 10 mm. None of the riveted mail on the market today even remotely resembles what was worn at the time.
Erik D Schmid made a pretty good reconstruction for John McDermott. That is probably the closest we have today to an original. John said it weighs "less than 20 lbs.", which seems about right to me. http://www.romanarmytalk.com/20-roman-re...hmidt.html
Regarding adding images, try using Internet Explorer. I've had problems adding images on RAT using Firefox and Chrome. I don't have problems on any other forum.
If I recall Jasper is working on a fix, but I honestly can't help you guys with this. Why not upload the images to a secondary free site like IMGUR and then use the [IMG] tags?
Finally it works, I charged the image in the starting post simply using a different pc
Btw, Dan, I know what you mean but I already considered that problem, adding the supposed missed material. Such a computation has been possible because several rings show the original surface and by that is possible to guess how much lacking material is on the average, more or less of course. Again, I don't think I was wrong very, may be within 10%.
On balance, 20 lbs is far too much, in my opinion, 10 -max 12- is closer to the truth
Quote:Its weight is 1080 gr. and thus the original weight would be +/- 3,5 kgs. If we add the shoulders covers, total weight may be attested around 4 kg, not more.
Very far from the supposed 8-12 kgs.
Quote:On balance, 20 lbs is far too much, in my opinion, 10 -max 12- is closer to the truth
These two statements don't seem to hang together.
Michael King Macdona
And do as adversaries do in law, -
Strive mightily, but eat and drink as friends.
(The Taming of the Shrew: Act 1, Scene 2)
Sure, a part from the weight, which is the most interesting feature in my opinion and which you already know, here informations about rings:
- assembled with 4 in 1 technique
- the "1" is rivetted, the "4" are solid rings
- diameter outer 6 mm., inner 4,5-5 mm
- thickness of the wire, 0.8-1.0 mm
- rivets to close rings very small, I guess they are +\\- 0.7 mm (thickness) but is hard to say. Rounded head.
Let me know if you want to know more.
