Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Leather Cuirass Lorica Musculata, I used to think no way but
I never meant a caligatus would wear his armour when not necessary, and I'm sure he would take it off whenever he could.
TARBICvS/Jim Bowers
A A A DESEDO DESEDO!
Reply
Dan, the flak vests were next to useless. The stuff that was proven to work, or we purchased, we used in the field. The ballistic vest was a known lifesaver, and it was light and comfortable to wear for hour after hour.

The Fritz, though, we secured near us, even though we knew it was highly effective, unlike the M1 pot. Just too damn uncomfortable to wear unless we needed it.
Dane Donato
Legio III Cyrenaica
Reply
Quote:I never meant a caligatus would wear his armour when not necessary, and I'm sure he would take it off whenever he could.

Yup, we agree. Have a great night.

Dane
Dane Donato
Legio III Cyrenaica
Reply
Oddly enough, I have worn a suit of armour like Tarbicus' Gothic plate illustration for most of a day and found it relatively comfortable ( especially with the sallett tucked under arm! )...it belonged to a friend, so was not made for me and was not a good fit therefore, but nevertheless was eminently wearable. I have also been a soldier and can endorse Dane's comments.
'Uncomfortable' gear, like that Highlander's parade outfit, is usually inflicted on soldiers by those in Authority and quickly succumbs in the field to practicality...for example, British redcoats of the Napoleonic era were supposed to wear leather stocks to keep their heads facing front at all times (BTW so were U.S. Marines and British Marines of the same era - hence 'Leathernecks' and 'Bootnecks' as nicknames)...but the numerous peninsular diaries tell us how this and much else 'official' gear was junked in the field, to the point where units were unrecognisable......and take a look at photos of modern U.S. or British or Australian soldiers in Iraq/Afghanistan...they are supposedly'uniformly equipped' but no two individuals are alike......

As to protective efficiency, no doubt every mediaeval soldier wanted that Gothic suit in battle, but it was not practical to march day in and day out in one, so even if he captured one, he sold it and settled for a Jack etc....or Alexander's veterans marching to India and back over 11 years - but only fighting four or so major field battles in that time plus a few sieges, and various minor battles and skirmishes.....even with slaves and pack animals, you'd want to trade off protection ( on the few occasions you are going to need it) against practicality that encourages 'light'......
"dulce et decorum est pro patria mori " - Horace, ODES
(It is a sweet and proper thing to die for ones country)

"No son-of-a-bitch ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country" -GeorgeC Scott as General George S. Patton
Paullus Scipio/Paul McDonnell-Staff
Reply
Quote:Dan, the flak vests were next to useless. The stuff that was proven to work, or we purchased, we used in the field. The ballistic vest was a known lifesaver, and it was light and comfortable to wear for hour after hour.
You've just made my point about flexible leather armor. If a Roman was issued something that didn't actually offer any protection there is little chance that he would wear it so we would not see it in sculptural evidence. Therefore the sculptures cannot be depicting flexible leather armor.
It could be flexible leather triumphal regalia
It could be flexible leather parade gear.
It could be fleible leather halloween costume
It could be flexible leather bondage please whip me ooh more please...
It could not be flexible leather ARMOUR - it didn't exist.

Leather can be made serviceable for the battlefield. It was done so countless times by many cultures in many time periods. Not a single example was ever as flexible as the stuff allegedly depicted in the sculptures. It is physically impossible to get leather armour to look like the literal interpretations of these sculptures.
Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen & Sword Books
Reply
This is true, in that faulty or worthless equipment doesn't last long as issue after real world testing and use. Look at the new US Army ACU - the crotches rip out easily, apparently, and the new USAF combat uniform is supposed to be very hot, so airmen are ripping out the inner map pocket in the blouse and other modifications to make it servicable.

Lt. Custer didn't bring any gatling guns on his ill-fated Little Big Horn expedition, and I think these kinds of situations are universal as long as there have been armies.
Dane Donato
Legio III Cyrenaica
Reply
Actually, with a subarmalis on, my seg is very comfortable...and I can wear it all day. Not too sure about the hamata tho, maybe once I have it sorted...and a decent sub made for it too.
Visne partem mei capere? Comminus agamus! * Me semper rogo, Quid faceret Iulius Caesar? * Confidence is a good thing! Overconfidence is too much of a good thing.
[b]Legio XIIII GMV. (Q. Magivs)RMRS Remember Atuatuca! Vengence will be ours!
Titus Flavius Germanus
Batavian Coh I
Byron Angel
Reply
the quote about armor making the wearer think he is protected is from Warry's "Alexanders Campaigns"
Dennis Flynn
Reply
My, this is a lengthy thread. Some random, related thoughts on this topic, from one who currently has several musculatae.

Quote:Lastly, I wrote up a short essay on the possibility that Roman Officers wore chain maile under their leather cuirass when in battle. The logic being... infantry wore chain maile, the Centurions would wear maile but placed decorated leather straps over it, so then... logically, an officer would wear maile and place his leather muscle armor over it as well. -Anthony, 03/31
This is highly doubtful IMO. Both hamata and bronze musculata afford different advantages and disadvantages. In this case, the wonderful flexibility of the maille would be completely negated by the inflexibility of the solid cuirass strapped down over it.

Quote:First, roman emperor's didn't lead their troops into battle. They commanded from behind the front lines, and let their centurions do the dirty work. -Matt/Magnus, 03/31
[color=darkblue]Just to keep our history straight, some did. Valerian was captured by the Persians [where he was so ignominiously skinned afterward], and Valens was killed in action trying to throw the Visigoths back across the Danube. Constantine’s father (of the later-Roman “Augustusâ€
Reply
I think this post by Gioi is more than pertinent to this thread. It's apparently from Corfu, but it's Hellenistic. No matter how you look at it, it has all of the traits of the classic Roman musculata and is metal (iron most likely), including the shoulder doubling.

http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic. ... 561#141561

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y199/C ... uirass.jpg
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y199/Comerus/cuir.jpg
TARBICvS/Jim Bowers
A A A DESEDO DESEDO!
Reply
Quote:
Quote:First, roman emperor's didn't lead their troops into battle. They commanded from behind the front lines, and let their centurions do the dirty work. -Matt/Magnus, 03/31
Just to keep our history straight, some did. Valerian was captured by the Persians [where he was so ignominiously skinned afterward], and Valens was killed in action trying to throw the Visigoths back across the Danube. Constantine’s father (of the later-Roman “Augustusâ€
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
[Image: artgroepbutton.jpg]
Reply
I don't think this thread is even worth my time to respond to anymore...Gil, I suppose I owe you some kind of reply, but I don't see the point of matching opinion vs opinion. Your logic is as biased as anyone who has argued against the leather cuirass. And the only evidence you did present was dispelled by Vortigern, who presented one emperor out of how many who led from the front?
____________________________________________________________
Magnus/Matt
Du Courage Viens La Verité

Legion: TBD
Reply
Quote:This is highly doubtful IMO. Both hamata and bronze musculata afford different advantages and disadvantages. In this case, the wonderful flexibility of the maille would be completely negated by the inflexibility of the solid cuirass strapped down over it.
A steel cuirass over a mail haubergeon was a common combination in 14th-15th C Europe.

[quote]IMO, the term “a piece of filthy animal hideâ€
Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen & Sword Books
Reply
At least one form of flexible leather armour is relatively well documented, the buff leather coats of the 17th c. AD, used in a time of very spiky swords and nasty lead balls often without metal breast plates, although the debatable protection was well known.

Means nothing for the Romans but we should be careful with dogmatic opinions.

Also, I wonder why Paullus Scipio did not mention it :wink: , at least two ancient lexica tell about leather armour of the Greeks (which was probably of some flexibility).
Wolfgang Zeiler
Reply
Quote: A steel cuirass over a mail haubergeon was a common combination in 14th-15th C Europe.
Irrelevant for the time period being discussed. Every image of musculata (Greek, Roman, iron, bronze, leather) shows them worn tightly-fitted. Whey would there be a mail shirt under a musculata, confined to the exact shape of the cuirass, with no sleeve or neck protection (as with a haubereon)?

Quote:So where is the evidence of officers wearing it?
With all due respect, Dan, have you even read Travis' site? The evidence is all right there. Whether you choose to agree as to what it shows is certainly your choice. But to just keep repeating "where is the evidence", even after it's been presented to you, becomes tiresome. We get it: you don't agree they existed. I'm good with that.

Quote:Your logic is as biased as anyone who has argued against the leather cuirass. And the only evidence you did present was dispelled by Vortigern,
My "logic" comes from the evidence Travis presented, and from the personal experience of having worn several musculata, both on horse and afoot. "Experience" is not in same category as "bias". "Bias" is when someone who repeatedly interjects their comments on a thread specifically about a piece of equipment they've never made or even tried on themselves.

Quote:Decius and his son Herennius in 251 by the Goths, Regalianus in 260 against the Roxolani, Valentinian is almost killed in 368 against the Alamanni, but we know of none of these incidents that the emperor was anywhere near the front line.
Vortigern's answer was ambiguously worded, to put it politely. One could just as easily have stated, "We don't know for certain if they died in combat, but of course, they were on campaign at the time, so it's quite possible."

Regards,
Gil / Valerius
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  How to Build a Leather Musculata M. Demetrius 4 1,124 06-02-2013, 09:37 PM
Last Post: Agraes
  Major update by Travis Lee Clark Lorica Musculata Antonius Congianocus 6 3,672 01-06-2013, 02:27 PM
Last Post: Alexandr K
  Making a leather covered quilted linen cuirass Quintilianus 26 5,984 11-25-2011, 09:35 PM
Last Post: TDawson

Forum Jump: