Segmentata - with or without subarmalis?

[Dan Howard]

That is just as likely to be a gambeson; armour in its own right - worn by itself. Not something that is worn underneath armour. Pictorial evidence of a subarmalis would show it being worn underneath another type armour. The best illustrations show soldiers in the middle of donning their armour but there aren't many.

[Graham Sumner]

Dan Howard wrote:
That is just as likely to be a gambeson; armour in its own right - worn by itself.

You do realise though that in Roman military equipment circles that would be considered quite subversive! hock:

Graham.

[Dan Howard]

There are several sources descriibing Romans wearing linen armour. The only question is how prevalent it was. The problem is that the vast majority of sources simply say lorica and don't tell us the specific type of armour.

[Sextus Saturninus]

From which period are these Romans wearing linen armor? Are they from the early/mid republic time period?

[Crispvs]

I don't think it's subversive, Graham. I have been a proponent of the idea of Romans wearing standalone textile armour for some years now. The fact that Mars is seen so frequently in third century AD sculpture wearing what appears to be textile armour would suggest that standalone textile armour was both widespread and effective. Certainly, there have been many cultures which have made good use of quilted or padded textile armour and my own experience of playing cricket and facing fast bowling showed me just how effective purely textile cricket pads and gloves are at stopping blows.

Crispvs

[LUCIUS ALFENUS AVITIANUS]

Crispus,

what's standalone? :???:

[PhilusEstilius]

What I would like to know is just who coined this term subarmalis does the word come to us from Roman times, and where is there any evidence for it being worn under the modern name of a Segmentata.

[Graham Sumner]

The term itself Brian is Roman. It appears in the SHA Severus,6.11 where the emperor has the guard parade in them just before he disarms them. They are also mentioned in the Carlisle tablets and the Vindolnda tablets Tab Vind. II,184,iii,38

The interpretation that this refers to an under armour garment is however modern and has been argued by Bishop and Speidel.

In the Carlisle tablet the context is cavalry training and R.S.O Tomlin, the original translator thought the term referred to an underarm spear. On the other hand the context of the Carlisle document, the passage in the SHA and the Vindolanda letter where the term is amongst a list of clothes, would appear to make better sense if the subarmalis is a garment.

Much later we get the reference in De Rubis Bellicis to the Thoracomachus and the description that this is a garment made from thick cloth used to counter the weight and friction of armour.

Graham.

[Renatus]

This topic was discussed at some length here:

http://www.romanarmytalk.com/17-roman-mi...0&start=60

[Thomas V.]

Speidel about the subarmalis as a piece of stand-alone armour:

The weapons city-Roman soldiers would normally use within the city were the fustis-nightstick, a virga-rod, the butt of spears or the bladeless hastile, all of which were intended for non-lethal police duty. Only as a last resort were iron weapons used against civilians. Even issuing axes to the city-Roman soldiers for breaking into the houses of suspected criminals was seen as the decision of a tyrant emperor. While on duty within the city, the soldiers of these units normally wore the toga, a belted tunic or a subarmalis, the felt shirts originally designed to be worn underneath the cuirass. Whereas many reliefs show soldiers wearing belted tunics, images of soldiers wearing just the subarmalis do not appear to have been deemed worth recording for eternity. However, the fourth-century Anonymus, De Rebus Bellicis recommends to wear a leather shirt over the felt-made thoracomachus (his term to describe the subarmalis) in bad weather in order to protect it from getting wet and heavy in the rain. The subarmalis, therefore, must also have regularly been worn without cuirass. Thick felt was lighter than armour and would yet have offered some protection. A subarmalis was therefore an ideal garment for police duty (http://www.academia.edu/1481116/Dressed_...09_235-248, p. 241).

In regard to Speidel's conception of the subarmalis as a self-sufficent piece of armor, the "sub-" would express that the subarmalis is a "attenuated" type of armour. A similar use of "sub-" still exists today, just think of machine gun and submachine gun.

Much later we get the reference in De Rubis Bellicis to the Thoracomachus and the description that this is a garment made from thick cloth used to counter the weight and friction of armour.

One can use the thoracomachus to counter the weight and friction of the armour by wearing it under the armour or by wearing it instead of the armour . So the term "thoracomachus" might refer to a kind of stand-alone textile armour.

I do not necessarily deny that the Romans wore padding under (some kinds of) their armour—but maybe neither the term Subarmalis" nor the term "thoracomachus" refers to a padding worn under armour but to a type of armour.

[Renatus]

One can use the thoracomachus to counter the weight and friction of the armour by wearing it under the armour or by wearing it instead of the armour . So the term "thoracomachus" might refer to a kind of stand-alone textile armour.

I do not necessarily deny that the Romans wore padding under (some kinds of) their armour—but maybe neither the term Subarmalis" nor the term "thoracomachus" refers to a padding worn under armour but to a type of armour.

DRB 15 makes it perfectly clear that the principal purpose of the thoracomachus was as padding under armour:

'The ancients, among the many things which, in their forethought for posterity, they devised for use in war, prescribed also the thoracomachus to counteract the weight and friction of armour: it is amazingly useful for protecting the body. This type of garment is made of thick cloth to the measure and for the protection of the human frame; fearful apprehension, guided by cleverness, devised it, so that, after it has been put on first, the breastplate, or suit of armour, or something similar, cannot injure the frail body by its roughness and weight; and again, the limbs of the wearer, helped by this means of relief, will be able to do their work amidst the difficulties of warfare and cold weather. But in any case, so that the thoracomachus may not cause problems for the wearer with its increasing weight when it is soaked with rain, it will be advisable to put over on top a covering garment made of nicely-treated Libyan hide in the shape of the thoracomachus itself. So, when the thoracomachus has been put on as I have described - it derives its name through Greek nomenclature, from its protecting the body - and with pumps (footwear, that is) and steel greaves put on, a helmet on his head and a shield and sword slung by his side, snatching up his spears, the soldier will be completely armed, ready to go into an infantry engagement.' (Ireland's translation, adapted)

This does hold out the possibility of the thoracomachus being worn in cold weather when, presumably, a cloak would have been too much of an incumbrance but there is nothing to suggest that it might be worn as a form of armour in its own right.

[Graham Sumner]

Dan Howard wrote:

There are several sources descriibing Romans wearing linen armour.

I would really like to know which ones.

Graham.

[Dan Howard]

Suetonius wrote that Galba put on linen armour after a soothsayer warned him about assassins.

[Youngster]

That thread about linen muscle armor pulled up a few reputable sources showing linen armor was used at various times. The problem with all those sources is that they indicate that the armor was linen, but provide no clue about how it was constructed. Though a few did seem to indicate it was (at least sometimes) used as a standalone armor.

[Graham Sumner]

Dan Howard wrote:
Suetonius wrote that Galba put on linen armour after a soothsayer warned him about assassins.


Caracalla is supposed to have worn something like this under his clothes for the same reason. He also had a 16,000 strong phalanx equipped like those of Alexander the Great wearing, according to Dio, a cuirass of three ply linen. Dio, Epit.,LXXVIII

However I was thinking more in terms of regular Roman troops wearing linen armour. Nevertheless I would be interested to learn what you think Galba, Caracalla or his phalanx might actually have been wearing.

Graham.