Armor and movement

[Avatar]

How much does the segmentata and the muscled cuirass restrict upper body movement? Not so much the arms as the torso itself.

Many thanks!

[arklore70]

It really does not restrict.

I have done grass drills , pila and gladius demonstrations as well needle felt combat. Was never restricted in the torso or the shoulder region.

Now, if you go to sit down and have something to eat around the camp fire, you are a bit stiff in the torso when to eating and reaching around for stuff like your spoon and canteen.

The segmentata that I used to own was well made, so I did not even bust a buckle or strap amazingly enough.

Hope this sheds a tiny bit of light,
v/r
Mike

[Marcus Mummius]

Indeed, a seg isn't very restrictive in movement when walking around or fighting. Sittings down in it is quite annoying!

I think a musculata will have the same problems, perhaps even more so.

[Caballo]

"I think a musculata will have the same problems, perhaps even more so." I wore a musculata to a fancy dress party over Christmas- sitting, walking, dancing etc- no problem. My only issue was having to hold on to my gladius and pugio while pogoing to a favourite punk song......


Cheers

Caballo

[Marcus Mummius]

I'm having a musculata made so I'll know soon enough

It covers more or less the same area as a seg (perhaps it doesn't go down as low as a seg does) and it's made out of one piece instead of several plates, that's way I'd think it'd be a bit more annoying than a seg. :?

[Matthew Amt]

Actually, a muscled cuirass made for action was shorter than a segmentata, precisely to avoid restriction of movement. It ends at about where you bend! You have to ignore the embossed "anatomy" since that won't correspond to the wearer's body parts. Travis Clark is the person to ask about this, though--it's quite possible that many later cuirasses were a bit longer and more restrictive of bending, since they weren't really intended for front-line troops.

A solid cuirass is surprisingly narrow across the chest, too. Point both arms forward horizontally, and the space between them is what gets covered.

So being narrow and short, it's no wonder that surviving examples are always viewed as being "small" or "child-sized". They aren't, of course, they just don't cover as much as some folks expect. Because you have to be able to move!

Matthew

[Tarbicus]

So being narrow and short, it's no wonder that surviving examples are always viewed as being "small" or "child-sized". They aren't, of course, they just don't cover as much as some folks expect. Because you have to be able to move!

That one in the British Museum from Italy is mighty narrow in the waist, and the depth front to back is oh so very small. People were definitely tiny compared to today.