Quote:"Armor is always a luxury, most warriors in the ancient period wore none, most warriors in the history of warfare in general wore none."
Care to back such claim with some details? i can give you multiple mentions from Greek historians about men being punished for wanting to fight naked.. and for others, there are other forms of armor that even poor could use.. multiple layers of cloth sawn together would be enough to prevent being wounded from occasional hits.. fighting naked was not because of lack of armors in Celtic society either.. it was a form of intimidation to enemy...
for example Plutarch in his work Ages,p34 mentions story of Isidas of Sparta during the second invasion of Sparta by Thebes in 362BC specifically because he went into battle naked and was later fined for being so foolhardy as to go into combat without wearing any armour. really doubt it would be something worth even mentioning if everybody fought naked..
Quote:"Polybius mentions the pectorales, so I don't know how you'd discount him while at the same time using him as a source for the triari being well armored."
- nope - i never made such claim, i made exactly the opposite claim - Triarii were as armored as others, they were nothing special, as they were selected from the same class citizens as Hastati and Principes.. Selection was made on age, and not on wealth.
Polybius actually wrote:
"Beside these arms, the soldiers in general place also upon their breasts a square plate of brass, of the measure of a span on either side, which is called the guard of the heart. But all those who are rated at more than ten thousand drachmae cover their breasts with a coat of mail."
you see - ALL THOSE WHO ARE RATED at more than ten thousand drachmae... no mention of hastati, principes or triarii... only mention is for weapons used:
"The principes and the triarii are armed in the same manner likewise as the hastati; except only that the triarii carry pikes instead of javelins."
so again - IN THE SAME MANNER... no difference in equipment between these men, except for a spear used by Triarii.. Its beyond me why everybody automatically expects Hastati to be equipped worse than Principes and Triarii, while there is no such mention anywhere, and only source everybody is using to back this claim actually doesnt say such thing at all... Yet, if there was some clear distinction between Hastati and Triarii in terms of armor, its quite safe to assume Polybius would mentioned it, same way as he did mention they differ by the spear that Triarii use..
http://www.shsu.edu/~his_ncp/Polyb1.html
and about pectorales - again, there are no Latin ones found, only ornamented ones in Samnite tombs.. If those things would be so commonly used, there would be hundreds of them in all places where Legions of Caesar fought.. yet, no such things were ever found outside of Italy, (except some pieces in Tunis, yet those were ornamented, which suggest they were most likely battle trophy)
And for cloth armor you never heard of/no proof of exists, i remember reading a passage from Pliny who was mentioning combination of "felt and vinegar being good for making armors":
"Moreover, wool of it selfe driven togither into a felt without spinning or weaving, serveth to make garments with: and if vinegre be used in the working therof, such felts are of good proofe to bere off the edge and point of the sword; yea and more than that, they will checke the force of the fire."
chapter. XLVIII.
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/holland/pliny8.html
its perfectly possible for Romans to actually use such felt vest as an armor, while felt/vinegar were both materials commonly available to average citizen eligible for service, as those were typically farmers..
Jaroslav Jakubov
