10-25-2012, 04:48 PM
Okay, there are a number of non-sequiturs hopping about like agitated fleas here. First, why does Dr D'Amato say the Praetorians wore copper-alloy segmental armour? There is no published archaeological evidence (in the form of finds of that armour in a Praetorian context) I am aware of to support that assertion. Second, there is nothing about that particular sculpture (or any other come to that) that dictates that the depicted armour is of copper alloy. The figure is quite clearly derivative (the rounded ends to plates and the chunky functionless rivets make that clear), probably based on Trajan's Column and its ilk. His assertion that copper-alloy armour is shown on the figure then derives from his statement that the Guard wore it (which as we have seen, is unproven).
There is no convincing evidence that those particular pieces of armour from Svishtov-Novae were body armour (so-called lorica segmentata) rather than armguard. There are plenty of examples of copper-alloy manica (the Till Steincheshof example being only the most recent) but no major indisputable components of segmentata made of copper-alloy plate. There are also plenty of examples of segmentata from Novae of the conventional type (copper-alloy fittings on steel plates).
Mike Bishop
There is no convincing evidence that those particular pieces of armour from Svishtov-Novae were body armour (so-called lorica segmentata) rather than armguard. There are plenty of examples of copper-alloy manica (the Till Steincheshof example being only the most recent) but no major indisputable components of segmentata made of copper-alloy plate. There are also plenty of examples of segmentata from Novae of the conventional type (copper-alloy fittings on steel plates).
Mike Bishop