Corbridge A Breastplates - to cross or not cross diagonally?

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

:lol: :lol: :lol: @ Tony!

Well, Brian has actually handled the Corbridge plates, and, aside from the double straps, he has made them pretty accurately! Although due to my short torso, he only put six bands on the girdle!

Hence my desire to supply you with a drawing wit hall my measurements Matt! I am faairly unusual in proportion! Not unpleasing to the eye, so the girls say when naked , but, still different from the average bear! 8) :lol: :lol:

Sorry, my mistake. It was the newstead!

[Matt Lukes]

Here's probably what should be the most compelling and irrefutable piece of evidence against the breastplates ever having been intended to sit vertically: the very minimal size of the curve for the neck opening- if you place the breastplates of all the Corbridge Hoard cuirasses with an identical mate, the openings are as follows:

cuirass 1: 6.2cm
cuirass 2: 3.8cm
cuirass 3: 7.85cm
cuirass 4: 4.4cm
cuirass 5: 5.8cm
cuirass 6: 5.4cm

You can see how I got this from these diagrams (cuirasses 6, 2 and 5)



The scales are posted so you can see that each neck opening if the plates are simply butted against one another are less than and barely more than just 5cm. Since the inner edge of the mid collar plates don't increase the size of the neck opening, there's no way to correct for this tiny opening. Only if the plates angle is the opening sufficient for a human neck...

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

I will admit there is logic to that! My neck opening is fairly tight!

But it is more like 8cm at the front where the plates meet the shoulder plates, and 13 cm where the back meet the shoulder plates. Could actually do with another cm or 2 at the front! 8)

[marsvigilia]

Aha!!!

The real reason that Rome fell. It wasn't helmets too tight. It was neck holes to small, cutting off the carotid artery.

Thanks Matt

We had all wonderred.

[Magnus]

I noticed no-one really brought up the subarmalis. Would this not affect how the plates sit...and without an accurate one historically, it'd be hard to show how an historical seg sat on a person right?

Though the only time my seggie breast plates sit verticle, are when they are on my armour stand, with a 90 degree cross bar of wood. There's no way my neck would fit into the hole between the plates. My plates also sit on an angle when i'm wearing them, and there aren't any undue stresses on my buckle hinges.

[sulla felix]

That is a good point Magnus, although the padding to the submaralis would have to be on the outer part of the shoulder only to negate the shape of the trap muscles. However AFIK the use of a submaralis is speculation only, but I stand to be corrected on that one!

Interesting point about your seg on a stand - I would say this backs up what Matt L is saying in his last post about the incredibly small size of the neck apertures on the actual Corbridge breastplates?

[Tarbicus]

That is a good point Magnus, although the padding to the submaralis would have to be on the outer part of the shoulder only to negate the shape of the trap muscles. However AFIK the use of a submaralis is speculation only, but I stand to be corrected on that one!

Discussed aplenty here

http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic. ... rces#60028

[sulla felix]

Thanks Tarbicvs!

[Matt Lukes]

I noticed no-one really brought up the subarmalis. Would this not affect how the plates sit...and without an accurate one historically, it'd be hard to show how an historical seg sat on a person right?

It was mentioned a couple of times actually in support of the vertical plate idea, and the real thing's exact nature really isn't a vital piece of information if the issue is as I suggest that the original artifacts simply cannot be anything but crossed and still close/ be wearable by anyone.

[marsvigilia]

Sure the sub-armolis affects how the plates sit on the shoulders, but if it causes the armor to cut off the blood supply to the head, then reenacting becomes progressively more difficult. Not even to mention dealing with unruly Celts and Gauls.

Unless you radically alter shapes and sizes there is no way I can conceive of fitting a neck between historically accurate plates when mounted vertically.

And unless the Romans were really pencil necked aliens, they couldn't either.

But angled, they work just fine.

[Hibernicus]

Before we built our first segmentata 1993 we used the "exploded view" of a segmentata from Robinson to create a pattern.We were not completelyhappy with what we came up with. We built several segs, used them in SCA combat, made adjustment to our pattern based on that experience. A few months later we acquired a copy of the Corbridge hoard report and patted ourselves soundly about the back and shoulders because some of our adjustments, intuitive and experiential, made them look more like the Corbridge finds.

What stumped us then was the tiny shape of the breastplates. We knew that edges were somewhat corroded but to what extent? .. if at all? However even assuming a 20% reduction in size due to corrosion the breastplates were still too small.

Examination of the lengths of the torso plates lead us to believe that the Corbridge seg sections were on the small side of sizing, at least compared to us, even leading us to the conclusion that the seg sections truly were from several segs as others had suggested.

Side note: After a few years of making segs and cannabalizing from damaged segs we had our own "San Diego hoard box". 80% of what's currently in that box are small shoulder sections becasue they fit the lowest percentage of guys in the group. In fact most of those small seg sections are from guys that grew out of them!

Our solution in 1993-4 was to scale up the breastplate.. and all plates to fit the guy the seg was being made for. The only times we were able to make a seg close to the Corbridge seg breastplate dimensions was for young small guys.. 16-17-18 years old... with chest sizes in the 28" - 32" range... and with pencil necks. I believe that our first seg was for a 50" chest.

For years we used segs with breastplates that crossed. Bishop's comment, some years back, about seg shoulders looking more like American footballers shoulders with the use of a subarmalis, how this brought the breastplates more in line with each other, sure solved a few problems for us. The breast plate closures.. buckle hinge and buckle strap, now lined up, started breaking or wearing out or stretching out at a much slower rate! The segs actually worked better!

In a prior post by Matt L a paper copy of cuirass 1 was used to illustrate how the breastplates had to cross. However, the paper copy in pic #1 overlaps the backplates by as much as 1/2"?

When we assemble a seg the left and right backplates abut each other and we put a horizontal curve in them to match the curve of the back achieving something like the paper depiction in pic #3. Torquing and twisting plates this way and that corrects the warpage problem illustrated in pic #4

In my opinion there is a problem with using the drawings in the Corbridge Hoard report to create actual shapes. These top view drawings of the several cuirasses are of curved plates, shown flat. What is missing in the drawings are the nuances of the actual curvatures and we still cannot assume that the curvatures of the pieces as found were as they were when used and worn.

Example: It appears to me that in Fig 27, page 27 of the Hoard report the perpsective view of the breastplate shows a slight inward warping of the upper half of the breastplate with a subsequent outward warping of the lower half of the breastplate. Damage from a rudis in practice? Crushing and deformation while being stored or buried? Poor perspective drawing? Me needing better glasses? Some torso section from the Hoard also show warping.

I believe that "ready to use" seg sections were not stashed away in that box. Was it junk.. not even worth toting away?

My solutions to the alignment question was to do what I could to make the plates work for the guys I was making segs for. Make the steel fit the body... assuming that straps and buckles should line up in order to reduce stresses.... by doing this we learned that the segs worked better, from our perspective.

Maybe our "works better" is not what "works better" for Romans back then. I'll concede that. But ,how can we know? What I know is that by adjusting the plate dimensions and by shaping the plates a segmentata can be made that lines up and works for the guy it's being made for

Matt L is correct. The seg shoulders in order to fit as illustrated in the Report must cross at a steep angle. I do not dispute or disagree with this finding. It is the same as mine

But, I do not trust the drawings to dictate the plate shapes and the finished shape of the shoulders. My experiences tell me otherwise.

I have a small sized seg on the bench right now.. 32" chest with breastplates much closer to the Corbridge finds than that of the seg I posted earlier. When it's complete I'll post pics.

[marsvigilia]

Our solution in 1993-4 was to scale up the breastplate.. and all plates to fit the guy the seg was being made for. The only times we were able to make a seg close to the Corbridge seg breastplate dimensions was for young small guys.. 16-17-18 years old... with chest sizes in the 28" - 32" range... and with pencil necks. I believe that our first seg was for a 50" chest.

This is not credible. A neck opening of 2in (5cm) wide will only fit a neck with a circumference of 6.2 in (15.7cm). This is too small for my 5 year old son who has a neck width of 3.25in (8.25cm) and a circumference of 10.25in (26cm). This is not a matter of these historical findings being for “smallâ€

[sulla felix]

If 150 segs and thousands of hours of SCA gets you this I think I will stick to the actual evidence if it's all the same to you Hibernicus hock:

[marsvigilia]

Sean,

Is that armor actually protecting your elbows?

[Hibernicus]

I never claimed we made segs that fit guys with small necks only that they came closer.

"20% reduction??? Are you kidding me? ".

A reduction of the size of the originals from corrosion. It was pure and obvious speculation and in my post I discounted it as unworkable.

"The back is irrelevant. Just look at the front"

I disagree.. the back is very relevant to form and fit

"They also work better if you make them out of stainless steel and mount them to heavy nylon web gear. "

No, they do not. I know that for a fact. I made some SCA guys years ago. They performed atrociously!

"Wait, didn’t you once suggest using stainless? "

No. I asked if stainless could be made to look like mild CR steel then why not use it Some folks use modern plywood to make shields look like scutums. Why not?

When I post pics I'll take them with a scale. But as I said it'll be closer.

And like I said I agree that as drawn and then as replicated the assembled sections must be crossed in order to fit.

Bend tweak an shape plates and the fit is better.

"You have the experience of making 150+ segmentatas."

Yes, I do

" I suspect the Romans had a few years more experience and made a few thousand more than you have."

...tens of thousands more, but we only have a tiny few seg pieces to view.

"Apparently the Romans felt that plates with these shapes worked fine."

We do not know that. Maybe they were in box because they didn't work?

"But hey what do the Romans know about segmentata?"

More than me

"They don’t have your wealth of experience in the SCA."

That's true. But my experiences and that of the members of Legio IX Hispana with segs is only in part from use in SCA simulated combat. We've done a great deal more since those days, a great deal more.