Login

**richsc** · 10-23-2002, 11:23 AM

Breaking this idea out from the other thread, Mike Bishop mentions that an 'authentic' segmentata would be very expensive, I would guess along the lines of an Eric Schmidt hamata? But (as I understand) with segmentata finds mostly piles of rust, what makes for an authentic segmentata? How is this different from all the reconstructions out there? Richard Campbell, Legio XX

Daniel S Peterson · 10-23-2002, 02:26 PM

Rich, 
I believe he means a segmentata made in the original manner, ie: hand-forged/hammered plates from iron ingots. Also plates of different thicknesses in different parts of the armor as per the originals. I know another problem Mike and I discussed was the tendency of many reenactors to make the hinges and other furniture heavier than it really was. Surely, in outward appearances alone, there are lots of "authentic looking" segmentatas out there, largely thanks to Mike's own report. 
 
Dan

mcbishop · 10-23-2002, 04:19 PM

Dan is quite right and I don't mean to undervalue all those re-enactors who use equipment that is, by Roman standards, over-specified (and usually better-made) given the general crumminess of the originals. Besides, most cuirasses look authentic to all but the ultimate nit-picker and how many of those are there? Far more important that re-enactors give an overall impression of what the armour looks like and how it functions. You can even make useful observations about the stuff from such re-enactor cuirasses (as you will see when the forthcoming volume has come forth... not long now ;-). 
 
But (and it is an immense, Colossus of Rhodes-sized but) to make statements about the technical performance of lorica seg you must make it (as Dan said) in the original manner, with as near authentic materials and techniques as possible, and (I hate to say this) as badly as the Romans did. It must be made authentically *and* used/tested authentically (ie over a padded arming doublet and something that passes as a substitute for the human frame). 
 
Mike Bishop

**richsc** · 10-23-2002, 04:30 PM

I knew David Sim wrote "Iron for the Eagles" for a reason. 
 
Summing up, a true segmentata would be hammered from iron ingots from reconstructed Roman forges, and hand hammered brass. Whew. Richard Campbell, Legio XX

11-12-2002, 01:49 AM

Mike, how do Roman helmets compare with loricae segmentatae quality-wise in your experience? What about officers' armour, and the other types in circulation, like lamellar and mail - are they similarly low standard? 
 
I never really tumbled to the 'crumminess' of the originals till you mentioned it. All those pretty sculptures...plus the mediaeval armour we have...plus our addiction to machine production combine to give us too rosy a picture I guess. But I suppose it stands to reason. Mediaeval ironworking was much advanced over Roman (wasn't it??) and a mediaeval shop usually wasn't trying to outfit/re-equip/repair for about 6,000 troops within its radius of distribution. 
 
When we moderns think 'crummy' I think the idea that comes to mind would be be something like the Russian T-34, which had pitted armour, you had to shift gears with a sledgehammer (standard in-factory option), and if the gunner wasn't careful pulling the firing lever the recoil would take his arm off (it was on the other side of the breech). There are other (notoriously) Russian examples...like the torpedoes on the Kursk...but that is almost all quality control in a machine production environment. Contemporary British armament specialists actually found nothing fundamentally wrong with the T-34, it just looked cruddy, was built inefficiently to an excellent general design and had a few. um, bugs. 
 
Must have been all that discipline, drill and dirty great shields that made the difference in the 'lorica gap' for the Romans! :-) 
 
E

mcbishop · 11-12-2002, 07:58 PM

>Mike, how do Roman helmets compare with loricae segmentatae quality-wise in your experience? What about officers' armour, and the other types in circulation, like lamellar and mail - are they similarly low standard? 
 
Sadly yes. A symmetrical Roman helmet is a rarity, although those that had been spun are better than the later types in this respect. Finish is generally ropey - the reason for all that piping on Imperial-Gallic helmets is as much to cover poorly-finished edges as it is for decoration (possibly even more). Some are better than others, and the IG 'D' was one of the finest I have seen pictures of (only a few fragments remain), but all such judgements are relative and subjective. 
 
The comparison with T34s is quite good to a point, but (regardless of finish) mass production ensured a consistency amongst them that Roman equipment could not match. The Roman world was capable of mass production and consistency, as the samian industry showed, but it was not practiced in military equipment to any great degree. Nevertheless, the differences between, say, individual cuirasses would be invisible from even a short distance and probably less noticeable than differences between types. 
 
From my limited knowledge, medieval armour could range from the equally crummy to the exquisite - the problem being that most armour that survives is post-medieval/early modern stuff that was made for show. 
 
By the way, the modern British analogy to the T34 is the Land Rover... particularly to those of us who have them and wonder why, after 55 years of mass production, they still can't make the doors fit or stop the leaks ;-) 
 
Mike Bishop

Daniel S Peterson · 11-12-2002, 08:21 PM

Spurius, 
If you want a good idea of how "crude" a typical issue Roman helmet really was, take a look at the photos of the original Imp Gallic G. from Mainz in Russell Robinson's AofIR. See how badly placed the bosses are and the lopside mounted crest holder. If the iron wasn't corroded, you would probably see loads of hammermarks as well. Russell Robinson made his reconstruction far better than the original, giving us a false impression of the original. This has generally been the trend of virtually all the replica Roman armor makers until the Indians came on the scene. They, like the Romans had the goal of making as many helmets they can as quickly as possible. 
 
Dan

11-20-2002, 03:58 AM

Hm, I hadn't been aware that the Indians were on the scene, but then I've never been near real reenactment except for meeting a Roman/mediaeval armourer from Vancouver at a craft show in Toronto a couple of years ago. Well, if they can turn the stuff out cheap and to Roman substandard, bless them! Where can I get me a centurion's helmet, cheap? 
 
I think I have Robinson's original book somewhere, and a slew of others...the helmet I love was the Niedermormter one, with flashy flares all over the place and brass appliquÃƒÆ’Ã‚Â© doodads galore...I have this pet theory that some poor beggar's wife gave it to him when he made Primi Ordines and he lost it overboard as soon as he possibly could... 
 
Mike, the Land Rover is NOTHING on the Russian Kozlik 'Baby Goat', their army jeep...they just gave up, it doesn't HAVE doors! but it can go places a fleet of Mercedes bog down, veni, vidi, submergi...! 
 
E

Login
Username:
Password:	Lost Password?
	Remember me