07-21-2009, 06:29 PM
Quote:The Romans used padded linen protection for Gladiator manica, and layered linen protection was known to the Greeks ... so the abilty to produce a padded "jack" type garment was there. There are illustrations showing such garments, possibly indicating their use without mail, meaning they may have been more than just a quilted fleece to make mail more comfy....What type of padding the Romans wore beneath their armor, if any at all, is another can of worms entirely. It's clear SOMETHING was worn beneath the segmentata, if only extra padding for the shoulders, and pteruges had to attach to something. What kind of padding it was is a real question however, and even when it was worn. Surviving Roman artwork tends to show armor over tunics, and (unlike medieval artwork) does not show a garment that could be interpreted as a padding beneath armor, though in many cases this may be because the sculptor was attempting to show a kind of heroic ideal. On the other hand, clearly non-heroic sculpture, like the so-called Altar of Domitius Ahenobarbus, shows soldiers in mail over tunics, with no indication at all of any padding worn between. If Roman soldiers were equipped with anything like a heavy medieval jack they'd look like Michelin men. Anything but the lightest gambeson would probably be noticeable in sculpture, and you'd think with all the surviving sculpture you'd be able to see the padded garment in at least some of them, as you can in many medieval sculptures. During the Republic at least it's possible soldiers didn't wear padding beneath their armor because they may have felt they didn't need it. They were protected by a very large, robust shield, and were wearing very effective mail with shoulder doubling. IIRC there's at least one Roman battle during the Republic (the civil wars?) where the soldiers were given padding to put over their armour to counter enemy archers. This would seem redundant if there was already padding of any substance beneath the armor. Perhaps more exposure to massed archery drove the development of padding under armor. I hear Graham Sumner's new book approaches the subject but I haven't got a copy yet.
Quote:You seemed pretty definate before, I assumed you had experience of arrow head production ... if I'd known it was speculative :roll: .... I may have been bold enough to challenge teh proposition.You're joking. Good lord Conal, most of what ANYONE says on this list is speculative! :lol: Challenge away! I've actually pounded out a couple of arrowheads before, one a replica of a tanged Mongol leaf blade I was very proud of. But I'm not a blacksmith and I'd never try to hammer out a more complex form, like a bodkin, or any socketed form for that matter.
Quote:What has suddenly fired your interest in the angon?The standard pilum shank is a long thin iron rod that ends in a square bokin tip. Based on what I know about arrowheads, I always assumed it would be much easier to forge a leaf blade tip rather than a bodkin point. According to Dan, Sim Says it only takes one minute longer. That makes me wonder why the Romans chose the bodkin head rather than the barbed leaf blade form, if production time between the two was negligable and a leafblade would do more damage to an enemy. It's tempting to think the reason is because the barbed head on an angon can't penetrate a shield as efficiently as a bodkin head, and a test would probably help prove it one way or another.
Gregg
