I'm completely hooked to your channel. Compelling watching. And thank you for taking me back to my love of Latin. It has inspired me to re-read all Caesar and Cicero that I haven't touched in 20years..
There needs to be a world wide reenactment of thousands of men. To represent the legions of old lets do it I wanna see massive dust clouds with the marching of legions of men to represent the awesome history of the old republic and empire of Rome.
It probably was abandoned because of the noise it makes. Imagine town guards or soldiers in parliament making a very audible clanking sound whenever they moved like they're wearing a leotard made of saucepans. Although hearing thousands of legionnaires in lorica segmentata marching in unison would be a terrifying sound, I'd imagine.
I don't believe it would be too much of an annoyance in parliament, They would mostly be standing still so not much movement, but otherwise I completely agree.
Cingulum, that belt they had, was made for that purpose, to make noise! It's not for protection, it's just to make noise! So...draw your conclusion! And the lorica won't make a lot of noise! But the cingulum will!
Having made my own version of segmentata, I feel confident of weighing in on the metal/leather debate. I think it is highly unlikely that segmentata was made out of leather. I think this for 3 major reasons. First and foremost: It is very strong and surprisingly light and flexible., and if the wind is just right, marginally breathable too. Secondly it is because that making leather armor worth a damn, you have to hard boil it. Examples of this can be seen worn in allot of iconography of roman officers and also some Greek soldiers. Making an armor like that out of pieces would actually lessen it's protectiveness. Not to mention make it needlessly complicated to make. Far easier to just shape and "cure" the breastplate as a whole. Thirdly would be field usage. The roman empire is one of the first nations to have a real professional army. And along with that comes professional logistics. And a massive by word for any professional fighting force is part uniformity and field serviceability. It would be relatively easy for a competent field armorer to dismantle and repair segmentata provided he had the parts. (I disagree about the difficulty of repair. Repairing it like you would a normal set of plate, then yes.) I would put money on it that most roman soldiers were taught and could probably do it themselves with spare parts in the baggage train. I suspect it might have been expected of them. And with that in mind segmentata as about as good as it gets.
Still though, I would love to armorstack Skyrim Imperial Leather Armor with Skyrim Steel Imperial Armor over it. ... Might want to only do that in cold weather.
Awesome video as always! I loved the bit in Latin. I haven't studied it since High School, but I actually understood most of what you were saying, which was a pleasant surprise. So, was the segmentata an invention of the Romans, or was it adopted from another culture?
I am glad you liked hte part in Latin I am planning on speaking a bit of Latin in all my videos about Rome. I think it was an invention of the Romans but I'll have to check the Etruscans armours to be 100% sure.
Regarding repair: wouldn't it be possible that the blacksmith had some spare plates with him? So whenever a plate fails, you simply hand it over to the blacksmith and take a new, spare plate with you. The blacksmith repairs the broken part and puts it into storage untill they are needed. This way, the legionaire wouldn't have to wait untill the plate was fixed, he could just add the spare plate to his armour and he was ready. Because it is segmented, I figure you can disassemble and reassemble it quite easily.
+AudieHolland That is a possibility but the only problem is that the segmentata isn't a one size fits all type of armor, you'd have to stock a lot of different sizes of plates to accommodate different sizes of armor as well as different sizes of plate for different parts of the armor itself. On the other hand, with both hamata and squamata you just stock up on either tons of wire or rings for the mail or tons of scales for the squamata since the rings and scales would all be the same size no matter the size of the armor and where it sits on the armor.
it wouldnt make sense that the lorica segmentata would be made of leather, that would mean that auxiliaries would have better armour because they used mail.
A good rust preventer and remover is Frog Lube. Mostly used for guns can be used for any kind of metal. I use it for blades all the time and it is food grade.
Metatron I am so glad I came across your channel I am a big fan of Lindybeige and Skall. I had a question, or more of a video suggestion on Kardiophylax can you explain the different types, who wore them, and in the Roman Army who wore them in the Republican period such as the Hastati, Principes, Triarii, ect.
TheMexican1821 Hi there and thank you very much I am glad you like my channel ^^ Yes I have many other videos in mind about the Romans so hopefully I'll eventually cover taht topic too ^^ Thanks for the suggestion
I don't really see a reason such a design couldn't be made out of a range of materials and even with composite designs. Laquered linen, bronze, backed leather, maybe even a bit of wood in there. Good way to make heavy armor out of basically anything.
one of the things that strikes me is how if someone was to slam your sheild, the first things the shield hits is a big shoulder plate. a shoulder check from one of those would knock you on your ass
Great video, subscribed as a result :) One thought though: I think you should get a new set of Lorica Segmentata, one that fits a little better, I see a lot of gaps in the one you're wearing as opposed to others I've seen, such as this one which is probably custom fitted: upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d1/Lorica_segmentata.JPG AFAIK Roman armourers would mass produce metal strips in all sizes to make it easy to make suits that fit the individual soldier perfectly. Finally one of the most likely reasons this type of armour ran out of use was the high maintenance costs associated with it, something you rightly pointed out. An important piece of evidence to support this is that the armour started to gradually fall out of use at exactly the time at which the wealth & fortune of the Roman empire started to fade. In other words something cheaper was needed, esp. in order to sustain the many new more mobile auxilliary forces being generated due to the large influx of refugees from the east.
Megatron I have a question about the lorica Musculata does it really exists and was in use around the 3 the century.I would say that I really enjoy your videos that it I saw Jere in the south of Brazil. Ave !
Of course that it existed.What are your reasons to doubt it?Apart from several specimens being even recovered archeologically the only uknown is to what time they continued to be used.We have no specimen which could be dated specifically to AD era yet Roman(and not only Roman) art is full of it several centuries after 1 AD.
My feeling is that maybe early on there was a version made from hardened leather plates that was gradually phased out and replaced by the superior metal version, based on the same design, fairly early on in the Empires history. I don't have any evidence to back this up of course. I assume the reason the Newstead types replaced the earlier ones was because they were simpler to manufacture, and as the Roman Empire expanded they needed to equip more troops over greater distances and this stretched their logistics capacity.
Love your videos about ancient Rome, and your Latin. I agree with your trust of iconography. Nowadays people will dismiss iconography with the term "artistic license" but having studied art history I know that one must keep in mind that the artists of different time-periods and cultures had different purposes. Roman portraiture is known for its concern for accuracy so I would tend to trust the depictions on Roman columns etc. One question about the Lorica Segmentata: the lack of a Gorget, the lack of protection for the neck, seems like a glaring omission.
Thank you for showing, how to put it on. This clearly reveals another disadvantage: when your camp is under attack, what would you want to put on Lorica Segmenata or Hamata? Also, the blacksmith is useless in field, as he cannot take a furnace with him. I could be wrong, but I guess riveting can be done with cold steel. PS: regarding leather armor and glued linnen: I would still like it in scales/ lamellars, for better mobility and fit. Leather can be made extremly stiff, but becomes brittle. Such leather is better suited for scales, as it would still protect with several defects.. PPS: I guess the leather-Segmentata originates from the monomental hollywood movies.
Excuse me for my ignorance on this subject but is it possible for us to know how day to day conversation between citizens was in the Roman times? I mean, are there any historical writings about that? Awesome video! ROMA INVICTA!
Your point on the precision of the name of the armour would make more sense if it was 'Lorica laminae segmentata'. One thing that we can all agree with is that the Romans were precise and concise. Over time, it has been my observation, that users of any language shorten the terminology by either abbreviating words or dropping some words altogether. So perhaps both words were used in conjunction with each other and over time one was dropped because of the rhetorical implication of the subject matter.
in germany we have the word " lamellen " it also refers to individuall strips bound together , so i think the word lorica laminata is the right one to use :)
You mentioned the length of leather that was found and sad it would, if made into a suit of Lorica Segmentata would fit an eight year old, maybe that was what it was for, a child's one after all kids will try to copy their hero's.
Why was there was armor on the back? They way their formations were it seems they didn't need it. They could have saved on cost and metal. Not only that but it meant less weight and more ventilation for the soldiers. I've always wondered about this unless there's something I'm missing here?
You know the scene in Asterix the Legionary where Obelix try to use lorica segmentata and it is too small? Do you think that romans had different sizes of armour? And the second thing about fixing the armour. If one segment brokes wouldn't it be easy to change it. Need only replacement parts in baggage.
Moldova, the entire region, including the current region from Romania, and the republic of Moldova which was stolen by the russians, was actually left free during the Traian wars. Traian never crosses the Carpathian mountains successfully beyond current Transilvania. Later in time it absorbed naturally the cultural change in the rest of Dacia. And you're probably right on the period, cause there's still the word LORÍCĂ in modern romanian, which just means cuirass.(last A, is pronounced like the E in father) Also, i agree with you on the metal part. I've studied sculpture and also Traian's column, and artists during that time, they started with anatomical sketches for all the characters, then added details. Probably pupils of the master who worked on it, added the after details. So, doing organic anatomical bodies first, and that was the important part, they never represented metal or how it falls on the body, was more lines to show they had armor, not distort the beautiful lines of a body just to describe armor. Was less important. They probably abandoned it for financial reasons, when towards the end of the empire, less conquest and problems meant that they couldn't maintain the legion as it was during it's earlier period. As you said, a soldier could have fixed his own lorica hamata probably, without the need of a whole camp as backup.
Congratulations on your latin man! In spanish its a bit easier to learn since our language is much more directly derived (for example, lamine is lamina in spanish)
I **love** lorica segmentata! Nothing screams "Rome" to me more than imagining hundreds of legionaries marching along in this armour! It must have been a **great** sight to see! I agree that the Romans probably called it "laminata" .
This is was a great video, I've always been a fan of the legions myself although not nearly the historian you are. I even convinced my dad to help me make a set of lorica segmentata and its accompanying accoutrements so I could be a legionnaire for Halloween when I was about 11 or so. I still have it although obviously it doesn't fit anymore! So glad I stumbled upon your channel.
Salve Metatron. I will let you guess why the girths of the laminata were individually tied and not tied up like shown... :))Also : as far as I know, representation of laminatas on Constantine's arch are taken from reliefs dating back from Trajan Hadrian and Marcus Aurelius and re-used on that monument, probably for reasons of tight schedule.. The only armours shown on the arch that are actually contemporary of Constatine are the squamatas of the praetorians drowning in the Tiber at Pons Milvius.S.B.E.E.V.
It would be wonderful to learn more about the more ancient roman leather armours mentioned in the beginning. I heard so much about why leather was not used very commonly for armour and about its disadvantages as compared to gambesons of linnen that it would be very nice to hear more about a context in which leather as armour was more dominant, how it looked and why and it made sense then.
I am curious, did the romans not have any form of leather armor? not even for say Velites or such? I would imagine that a thick leather jacket with plated leather pauldrons in the style of your lorica would be very cheap and effective would it not??
About the argument that lorica segmentata are made from leather. They found intact in Britain from the legion garbage mound of leather hobnailed sandals. So if lorica made from leather ever existed, at least strips of it could have been found. I watched the Time Team specials where they found traces of roman water mill components deep in the mud, so it is not impossible for any trace of leather armour could be found. Until someone found a sample or armour made from leather.....anyway this is the first time I heard that lorica segmentata could be made from leather.
You forgot to mention that there are a few funerary monuments of Roman soldiers who had fought in Dacia, showing them wearing mostly scale armor, instead of lorica segmentata. I can also imagine a soldier being annoyed by all of the buckles and how many steps you have to take in order to put it on, instead of a simple shirt of mail.
+MrColuber i wouldnt think a soldier would be all that annoyed when putting it on because if hes going to put it on, its going to be on for a long time.. pointing through all the eyelets, yea, that would be a hassle but not annoying.. i dont see it as being all that more or less annoying them putting on mail.. then again.. most of my mail is fitted to my body so putting it on and off is like taking off a tight top you dont want to accidently damage.. so i might be biased..
+MrColuber Looking at the segmentata, I wonder if it is possible to keep most everything loosely or partially laced and simply put it on like a shirt? Just lift your arms up and slip it on over your head and then tighten everything on. It might be difficult to do by yourself but you could always get a buddy to help and since they had the equivalent to a modern day squad you had help right on hand.
+EVILBARBARIANIMPALER You've never been in the military have you? A Roman legionnaire isn't going to be given a lot of time to put on his armor, he's going to be having his Centurion yelling and screaming at him to hurry up and put his armor on as fast as possible. This is the way the military works, everything is done as quickly as possible, then you wait around for whatever's next. This would be especially true out in the field, you'd be putting your armor on as quick as possible because it's your turn to stand watch and the guy you're replacing is itching to go to bed, or in the morning you're going to need to break camp and get ready to march on and/or fight. In garrison, say manning a fort along the frontier or something similar, you'd probably be able to put your armor on in a more relaxed fashion most of the time but you're still probably not going to be allowed to put your armor in a nice slow manner. The guard duty thing would still apply though, your buddy is still not going to want to wait for you to take your time putting on your armor when he's dying to go off duty and go to bed or throw some dice, or go visit his girlfriend, etc.
Riceball01 no, im only 16, i cant join the military yet. and by that language id think you have been in the military.. your using the idea that the modern military work is like that of the roman military throughout its span.. which, while it does have merit, is something that isnt completely accurate. and by the way, i never said youd have ages to put on your armour, but, by the kind of tactics romans prefer to use, they would have time to prepare and be organised. and also, yea, its an age old thing of people typicaly prefering to wear their armour as opposed to carry it, plus from what i know, legions would not have too much of a baggage train for the individual soldiers to put their armour and stuff onto. i have some plate carriers and stuff [i like arms and armour, that includes some modern], and no, modern plate carriers are not like roman armours.. and dude.. im tired, and your not understanding what im saying so if i remember, ill give you a response tomorrow..
While it's true that you can't apply money military practices to the Roman Legion there are some things that would be the same and one of those is how much time your given to do things, esp when you're in the field on a campaign or even in garrison. Commanders always have a time table to follow and the lower ranking you are the less time for lollygagging there is. And like I said previously, if you're on earth (guard duty) and your shift is over, you're not going to be too happy if you're relief is late because they took their time putting on their armor. Something to also keep in mind, the Romans were notoriously strict disciplinarians, far stricter than any modern military. I can imagine that centurions were very strict about how long it took to put on your armor and get your kit ready. They were probably very free with their sticks if they saw somebody taking longer to get ready than they like. Remember, this is a time and an organization that believe in or hand out punishments like a bad mark in your record or even doing things like push ups out running laps, they believed in more physical punishments like being, lashes, and even summary executions. Does this sound like the kind of people who are going to allow you to get armed & armored at anything but as quickly as possible?
A dumb question that i have always wanted to ask. The romans were like IRON MAN compared to there enemies. Almost completely protected, even there legs. When they were defeated, how did this happen, Would there enemies knock them down? then overcome them with shear numbers? would they find a place that was not covered by armor, then target that area? eyes, legs? neck,? This issue is so problematic for the movie industry, that when they have battle recreations, they rarely show a Roman soldier actually being killed, they show a far shot, then the end of a battle/aftermath, in less well made movies, like CENTURIAN, They show the enemy targeting open areas of the armor, looked silly, Iv always suspected the reason rome was concerned with enemy calvery was because they could be knocked down, trampled by horse and rider, ancient artifacts, especially greek often show horses trampling enemies, something that hollywood would have trouble depicting. i know by the time rome fought the parthians, romes enemies had weapons, composite bows etc..that could penetrate armor, sheilds etc...in my opinion/imagination. iv always imagined ancient warfare as a cross between a soccor riot, and an NFL football game+primitive artillery, arrows, darts, spears, balista, .
+Tim Penfield The armour is not so heavy and immobile. Roman enemies in the east in particular employed mail/ scale and other similar plate armours. Roman soldiers I assume were mostly killed outside of formation where the weakness of not wearing greaves or armour on the arms could be more easily exploited. Remember a blow to the arm or leg could easily cause major damage and incapacitate. The Roman lack or greaves and gauntlet, etc was due to the use of such a large scutum covering those areas while in formation. The later 'Roman' armies barely of the Roman tradition but rather most often tribes of barbarians in the employ of Rome. Earlier Romans only lost the the Greek phalangites due to the never encountering elephants before and the formations being disrupted by such threats. Arrows would not be able to penetrate the plates of armour but unlike High middle-ages plate armour has many exposed areas. Ancient warfare particularly of the Romans/Greeks/Macedonians/Eastern Kingdoms was actually very highly structured, much more structured that combat in the middle ages where it devolved to a more individualistic form of combat. The Romans generally (from my limited knowledge) lost to heavy cavalry and eastern kingdoms who could employ similar levels of armour or through inexperienced leaders and newly raised legions against large forces. The Roman soldier was only surpassed by the use of mass cavalry. Also the Eastern Roman empire continued the use of heavy infantry disciplined infantry combined with equal numbers of heavy cavalry until its fall almost a 1000 years after the Western empires collapse.
Usually better tactics and ambush. But I think the power of the Legions is often overstated. The Romans relied hugely on the legionnaire. But when someone had a circumstance or tactic that allowed them to fuck up the precious formations or mess with their logistics they were utterly fucked. Hilly terrain was a nightmare to move formations across, for example. Yeah the less technologically sophisticated groups were usually outgunned, but the gulf wasn't that great. The armor mostly protects from slashes, and only in the chest/shoulders. Obviously better, but an upward thrust gets through Segmentata pretty reliably. Although they mostly used mail, so that's somewhat beside the point. Many of their enemies *did* have armor, as well. Their victories had as much to do with standardization and extreme discipline as it did actual hardware. The Gladius was taken from Celts in Hispania. Northern Gauls are the ones that introduced Mail to them. Which means that many of their "barbarian" enemies actually did have comparable armor. The big issue was that they lacked the same level of industry and organization to make sure everyone was equipped in a standard way that makes formations more reliable. Also, don't forget that Carthage gave them a strong run for their money. Don't forget that many of their greatest gains were at the cost of other empires in a state of weakness. Conquering spain happened in the wake of Carthage's destruction. Even then, it took them like 150 years from Hannibal to Augustus to completely take it. The Romans actually lost a lot. Another important factor is that culturally they had a huge advantage in that they would *never* settle for defeat. They always knew they'd come back knocking at the first opportunity. Other cultures didn't think in this way, with the long game in mind. They won, and they went home. The Romans lost, and prepared for next time. They won, and they built infrastructure, forts, roads, to ensure their holdings.
Hey Metatron, loving the videos! I'll try to spread them around as much as I can. Do you mind if I ask what your educational experience is? You don't have to say if you don't want to, I'm just curious what all you studied to gain all this knowledge :)
Thank you so much for liking my videos and for wanting to spread them :) Sure I have a university degree in oriental languages and I am currently teaching English and Japanese in high school (I am a young teacher xD) although my majour was languages I did some medieval and Roman history exams (like a minor) at university but in all honesty I am no proper historian ;) There are many people out there who are professionals I just like to think study and share my thoughts with you all and often learn from you and your comments. So I just like reading as many books as I can that's all ;) For the manuscripts I have the advantage of being able to read both ancient Italian/latin and Japanese so that helps as reading directly in the language is very profitable.
Latin language is really harmonic, rhythmically balanced, phonetically and syntactically beautiful. Must say, not a fan of roman military conquering, but certainly great admirer of Roman Law. After all, the first Codex written after the fall of Roman Empire was Statutorum Alemanum, written by Merowing dynasty at the beginning of 7th century (mentioning an earlier one from the end of 6th century, which is unfortunately not preserved). Maybe the videos about Roman Law, Roman architecture, Roman road building, crafts and agriculture in Roman times could be interesting topics?
The Vulgate Latin would have been pronounced like what became "Church Latin," from what I've read. And the elites and scholars would have spoke "classical" and been snobby about it. PS: Where can I buy a good quality set of the lorica segmentata? Plus helmet and accoutrements.
if it was me who chose the armor for the roman legion i would choose to wear the lorica harmata with lorica segmentata on top of that, they are both good and effective armors and combine together it seems that it would have been much better than one of them on their own but it might be just me who thinks this.
Gregory's Lets Plays not really, chain mail or lorica harmata is really light if its used with a belt to disburse the weigh and lorica segmetata isn't that heavy either so it wouldn't be so heavy that the roman legionaries couldn't move.
Andrew Htayreh all i said is that chainmail is lighter if its worn with a belt to disburse the weight but yes without a belt with only your shoulders to carry all the weight then its heavy
I knew Lorica Segmentata was not worn for the most part... but i thought it was from the first century B.C. so the soldiers of Caesar had worn them... No leather Lorica Segmentata??? Hollywood lied to me :P
In the beginning you made a "roman salute". shouldn't you know that this gesture is a hoax or at least highly controversial (low historical evidence for it; but mostly used by the fascists)?
My understanding is they found several manica in Britain and Germany that are dated before the big Dacian campaign, and I have seen people say it means they may have been more widespread and used earlier than Dacia. Do you have info, thoughts, or corrections to that?
What would have made this video perfect would have been a little mobility demonstration after you don the armor. For example, you crouching, and leaning over to one side.
I don't understand the system of connection in the Hamata, placing the leather stripes in the middle of the frontal part is not very smart, a sword hit couldn't cut the lacets and thus making the armor unusable, isn't that unpractical to palce the most vulnerable part (the lacets) in front?"
Please reconsider your position about metal lorica it was found in a cavalry barrack, legionairs used the leather one and the reason are obvious. We don't have evidence because is a perishable material, but if you look at the hiconographics evidence at colonna traiana you'll be surprise to see flexed loricae during the siege works. Arsdimicandi is an association that wrote a lot of book about Romans and we test all our claim on the field! thanks for the attention
You ponder who in the legions etc used it. iirc wasn't the issue armour for legionaries the maille variant and this payed for by the troops themselves if they wanted it and thus mainly in the hands of either veterans and/or mounted/officers? As the mounted where from the Equestrian class of society etc they had better finances to obviously afford the superior equipment. Also didn't they also have a hard linen lamellar armour used in the very hot middle east?
Latin words of Metatron's Latin Speech, interesting dictation :) : Ave omnibus quibus spectacula Metatron sequuntur. Ego Metatron sum. Legio est maxima unitas copiarum terrestrium Romanarum. Legiones florem militum imperii Romani formabant. Arma legionarii erant gladius, duo pila, scutum, lorica et galea. Lorica hamata, vel squamata vel segmentata. De lorica segmentata quarum annis milites utebantur cum vobis loqui volo. Ea pulcherrima est!
Metatron if you read this I just want you to know love the channel been binge watching your videos really loving the Roman stuff the Romans are my favorite historical figures so it's nice to find a channel that has the same enthusiasm about Rome as I do, though I can't speak Latin as good
I wonder if the word lorica can be traced back to the same origin is the word for skin. That would explain why it was previously used to refer to leather or otherwise hide garments. Words are weird like that so I wonder ...
They conclusively did.Apart from basic ordered equipment purchased from the state we have a lot of evidence for even a single soldiers actually upgrating their basic gear by buying other stuff.Roman soldiers loved to look impressive.
I am not sure if anyone said it already but here is an idea why they may have stopped using Lorica Segmentata, it probably costs too much to equiped an entire legion with it. Making Armor of that kind was probably expensive as hell, I mean shit even in later periods armor was still expensive and hard to get ahold of.
+Ham Burger Not after the Marian reforms. Only prior to the reforms with the citizen soldiers purchased their own armour. After the Reforms the army was professionalised where Rome paid for equipping the soldiers.
It's also not that great. It's light, sure. But there are lots of gaps to slide a stabbing implement through. During the increasing civil wars, it's actually *worse* protection against another legionnaire. An upward thrust would fuck you up. Yeah, you have shield formations, but you can't rely on that against other legions. It's easier to cover more of yourself in chain mail. Segmentata is complicated, expensive, less mobile, and pretty specialized. It gets hot, it's harder to wear. It's better vs blunt trauma and slashing, but swords progressively got more pointy in response to armor. So, if you need mail underneath anyway, why have the added cost and bother of plates? Also, Hamata makes an individual without support more self sufficient. You can clean rust by sticking it in a barrel or sack of sand and throwing it around. During the height of empire, having smiths on hand to help with maintenance and repairs was doable. But later on? The size of military forces shrank considerably as Europe advanced out of the classical period and you wanted to be spending as much of your money as your could on effective, fielded troops. Equipment that a soldier can fix on his own is way more valuable than something you need a specialist for(if you don't have many specialists). It's extra cost and bother for something that's not *clearly* better.
Mack Von Alfton my understanding is that altho soldiers were supplied their gear and rations, the cost was deducted from their pay. What's the difference of pre Marion when you bought your on armor or post Marion when the govt made you buy your armor thru payroll deduction? the only difference I can see is pre Marion you needed the money for armor up front rather than payroll deductions.
I'm getting into HEMA/ fencing/ whatever you want to call it. My friend and I have been sparring each other with shields and training weapons for a few months now, and we are now piecing together armor to so we can actually hit each other without injury... would this be good for that? I'm seriously considering it, and based on everything I've seen, it seems like one of the best deals out there, especially given how much protection you get out of it.
Wondering if the Gualic Legions added some chainmail on the shoulders joins and chest to reinforce the thing. Even a little chainmail addition would make that thing a beast, equal to any breast plate + mail. Mostly wondering this because it was the Gualic Legions what were historically known to win most of the civil war battles. We can grant advantages to thier size and general ferocicy of thier levies but still. Can't imagine Norther barbarians not mailing up thier segmentata.
I have a lorica segmentata of the same type as yours, but I can wear it easier than you, perhaps because I have bought an over-sized one. Its chest size is 44 to 52 inches, whereas my chest size is only 36 inches. It looks quite like a beer barrel around my torso.
Bu Commissar I think when the Marian Reforms are made, 107BC they standardise the equipment for the foot soldiers. But I think the career Centurion would still use their old tested armor.
i have a feeling that the most common modern reproduction lorica segmentata is a bit too cylindrical like a barrel, like in the example you said, people say that they are quite form fitting the body so it must be in leather or cloth [which i could see but it would be anarchronistic as far as i know], so, i wouldnt be surprised if, as the payment for armour was taken out of a soldiers pay at various parts of the timeline, the armour would be fitted to the soldier? would you agree that the armour would more then likely function better for the soldier if it were fitted? it only makes sense..
dear metatron you are always comparing lorica segmentata againts lorica hamata. But what about Roman bronze cuirass armor? In movies only generals wear that armor. Why?
I think its loose of time wondering about why are filmmakers the way they are doing them.They usually have near zero respect to history so their costume choices have nothing to do with real study of Roman army realia.Muscular armours are mainly recorded in Roman Imperial art on officers but in older times even common soldiers are shown in it.In greek armies also common soldiers certainly wore it.
