Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
How common lorica segmentata actually was?
#31
You have to remember though that in Germanic societies, like earlier Celtic societies, possession of equipment was a mark of status (as it had effectively been in Roman armies of the middle Republic, where troop classes were determined by how much equipment men could afford). Added to that, the evidence would suggest that German society was 'iron poor' with little native iron production and few smiths (the magical tale of Welland the Smith is probably a good indication of how strange the art of metalworking was to most Germans), meaning that much of the armour and weapons which did later find its way into Germanic hands would have been either in the form of expensive imports (and we know that there was a healthy arms trade by the third century AD) or taken from the bodies of fallen enemies (here we might recall a few very old tales where young men who had killed enemies then went to the fathers of those same enemies to request the swords and spears of the fallen men, as was their right under custom).

It is also worth remembering that during the migration period the armies were generally warbands, rather than huge armies. There were composed of the men at the top end of society for whom being a warrior was their primary identity. The peasants would not have been considered for anything more than trying to defend their own homes at most as they would have neither the training or the status to demand it. Warbands would probably mainly have fought on foot, although some may have continued to mix light cavalry with infantry as had happened in earlier times. This practice may have existed amongst the Franks, as they seem to have been the first to return to fighting on horseback.

Anyway, to the Germanic mind of the later Empire, migration period and early middle ages, armour and metal weapons were almost certainly seen as symbols of status. They were prized possessions and entitlement to bear them was inextricably linked to status and prowess in war (and here it in instructive to read through Beowulf to gain an understanding of society and this time and the need for almost constant warfare. Mail, without an industry, as had clearly existed in Roman times, to produce it was very costly and would for a long time have been the preserve of kings and other great men. Most other warriors would have trusted in their years of training in the art of combat to protect them.
However, as has already been stated above, mail can last just about forever and so it would inevitably have gradually become more common. By the tenth century it seems to have been common throughout the entire landowning (ie warrior) class and by the mid eleventh it appears to have been standard equipment for most warriors. Levied peasants, where used (and this would only be in extreme situations anyway) would naturally possess no equipment.
By the thirteenth century small amounts of plate were being added to mail and by the mid fourteenth century, the 'coat of plates' had been developed to protect the chest. Mail seems to have continued to constitute the bulk of armour though. It was not until well into the fifteenth century that plate armour of the Gothic and Milanese types that most people picture were developed and to begin with these would only gradually have replaced armours which wee still predominantly composed of mail. Even the new suits of plate still employed large amounts of mail to protect the groin, under the arms and on the insides of the legs and arms. This however was at the time when feudal systems had completely broken down and it was common for great men to have their own small private armies. These would be largely composed of foot soldiers from the yeomanry and upper peasant classes, who would not have been able to afford to equip themselves. However, the brigandine, which became common around this time for foot soldiers was fairly cheap and quite easy to produce, composed as it was of rows of small iron plates which any village blacksmith could produce easily, riveted into a padded jacket (or 'jack' as it was commonly known). Brigandine could be produced quickly and cheaply, unlike mail. Some foot soldiers were also equipped with cheap breastplates, sometimes worn over mail.

So mail did not disappear suddenly in the middle ages. Instead, it was always restricted to the landowning classes and as new forms of armour were developed it played an increasingly smaller role in those armours, until it disappeared completely (from the West at any rate) some time in the mid sixteenth century, by which time warfare was dominated by pikes and handguns. The lower classes probably never wore mail and when semi-profession soldiers did begin to appear they were generally equipped with a cheaper option in any case.

"specifically tailored to a knight who learned to move in it like it was his own skin."

I wonder, have you ever worn fifteenth or sixteenth century plate armour? It is hardly like a second skin and still requires substantial padding underneath. It was also made by professional armourers in centres which specialised in their craft, like Milan and presumably exported to agents who acted as dealers. Wealthy men ordered it but it is unlikely that anyone but kings and dukes would have had it made for their own size and shape. The other magnates and wealthier knights who bought it would have had their squires adjust it to fit them by tying or buckling the points to fit them, rather than the armour being specially made for their shape.

Sorry for this OT excursion.

Crispvs
Who is called \'\'Paul\'\' by no-one other than his wife, parents and brothers.  :!: <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_exclaim.gif" alt=":!:" title="Exclamation" />:!:

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.romanarmy.net">www.romanarmy.net
Reply
#32
In considering the slave/free labor question let's not forget the third part of the labor force - children. While it took strong men to do the hammering and wire drawing, cranking out, cutting and assembling millions of tiny iron rings is just the sort of repetitive, delicate work that children can do. The actual piercing of individual rings for the rivet may have called for a skilled workman unless the Romans had a tool easy enough for a child to use, but the assembly is dead simple, little more than knitting. And child labor is so cheap that even in modern times it took shame-inducing writers like Dickens and strict legislation to force industrialists to stop the practice. In much of the world child labor is still the rule and the Romans or any other ancient people would not have had the slightest compunction about exploiting it.
Reply
#33
Quote:In considering the slave/free labor question let's not forget the third part of the labor force - children. While it took strong men to do the hammering and wire drawing, cranking out, cutting and assembling millions of tiny iron rings is just the sort of repetitive, delicate work that children can do. The actual piercing of individual rings for the rivet may have called for a skilled workman unless the Romans had a tool easy enough for a child to use, but the assembly is dead simple, little more than knitting. And child labor is so cheap that even in modern times it took shame-inducing writers like Dickens and strict legislation to force industrialists to stop the practice. In much of the world child labor is still the rule and the Romans or any other ancient people would not have had the slightest compunction about exploiting it.
I remember reading an eyewitness account of exactly this process. I don't have the source to hand, but it was from the late 19th or early 20th century in Afghanistan and there was a line of kids making the rings and an old guy sitting at the end putting the whole thing together. Doesn't mean the Romans did it that way (unless you substitute semi-skilled legionaries for kids) but it certainly can be done. In fact, you could probably make any Roman armour that way ;-)

Mike Bishop
You know my method. It is founded upon the observance of trifles

Blogging, tweeting, and mapping Hadrian\'s Wall... because it\'s there
Reply
#34
I would just not rule out the fact that some were freemen crispus.
Talanted slaves were part of the lifeblood of the empire.
And many children were slaves 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
#35
I read somewhere that the Late Roman fabricae used not slaves, but free specialists. Or rather semi-free, because they were still tied to the state production centra.
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
Reply
#36
I don't think I ruled out freedmen at all - I just didn't mention them.

I think that it would be extremely likely for freedmen to be involved. If a craftsman/workshop owner freed his slaves, they would owe an obligation to him as his freedmen which might include working for him if he wished it, or for his son if they were freed as a condition of his will, as was common. Talented people are always a valuable resource and I cannot see someone getting rid of his most skilled workers purely due to their freedman status unless it was a matter of economic necessity.

Crispvs
Who is called \'\'Paul\'\' by no-one other than his wife, parents and brothers.  :!: <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_exclaim.gif" alt=":!:" title="Exclamation" />:!:

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.romanarmy.net">www.romanarmy.net
Reply
#37
Yes, but I never ruled out slaves, either. I just mentioned freemen.
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
#38
Quote:"specifically tailored to a knight who learned to move in it like it was his own skin."

I wonder, have you ever worn fifteenth or sixteenth century plate armour? It is hardly like a second skin and still requires substantial padding underneath. It was also made by professional armourers in centres which specialised in their craft, like Milan and presumably exported to agents who acted as dealers. Wealthy men ordered it but it is unlikely that anyone but kings and dukes would have had it made for their own size and shape. The other magnates and wealthier knights who bought it would have had their squires adjust it to fit them by tying or buckling the points to fit them, rather than the armour being specially made for their shape.

My fault, I was not more specific. In no way was or has metal armor ever been like a wearer's skin. What I meant was that these people had the armor tailored for them, and adjusted to their liking whether it be the manufacturer or an iron smith, for these reasons knights learned to wear the armor with relative comfort (at least the wealthier ones), and the armor would not incapacitate them should say, someone pushed them over. A knight learned to move with relative agility with his armor.

No I have not worn 15th century armor, but I have seen videos of how one can move it a set, especially if the set was made for someone their size/stature
Quintus Furius Collatinus

-Matt
Reply
#39
I'd be interested in seeing an experiment that tested the efficiency of mail vs metal plates. Which one provided the most protection relative to weight and whether one or the other reacted more favorably when combined with cloth or leather undergarments.
Henry O.
Reply
#40
There is more to test than just that Henry. Although there is always a debate on how heavy chainmail really was, I think it is generally accepted that LS was the overall armor for protection, however the chainmail, provides roughly similar protection but gives you much better mobility.

I find that while wearing my LS, that my arm motion is somewhat limited naturally, though apparently it was still suitable enough for legionaries to throw pila effectively.

If someone brings down a longsword on the segmentata while you are wearing it (ideally with a subarmalis), it will most likely dent the armor, possibly somewhat injuring the wearer. If the same is done with hamata, I imagine that the the effect would be much greater. Though I do not know for sure what force per square inch is necessary to break a shoulder or rib
Quintus Furius Collatinus

-Matt
Reply
#41
Since hamata was used both before and after the heyday of segmentata, it lends credence to the theory that during Augustan days, there was a need for a quick armor for many new troops, and segmentata can be made in just a day or two. Hamata takes considerably longer. That theory says Augustus began the armoring in his day may not really be true, but it's an explanation, anyway, of why that armor style came up and disappeared in just a couple of hundred years, more or less.
M. Demetrius Abicio
(David Wills)

Saepe veritas est dura.
Reply
#42
Regarding Augustus - when he was the sole one left standing, after the defeat of Cleopatra (and Antony), he had a very large number of legions to demobilize. Eventually of course, that number was pared down to 28 legions. In both the AD 6 and AD 9 crises, emergency troops were equipped, if I recall correctly, from armor stored in warehouses, with care being taken to arm (and armor?) freed slaves differently from free men. This argues that most of the equipment, including armor, from the end of the civil wars was turned back over to the state and was then stored in Italy (I presume).

Sometime between the beginning of Augustus' rule and AD 9, the Lorica Segmentata saw its first uses. They have found hinges, etc. now believed to be associated with the earliest, Kalkriese-type, at other Augustan sites that date ealier than AD 9.

The lorica hamata would transmit blunt force trauma through to the bones of the shoulder etc., though the mail links do spread the force somewhat and having two layers of mail, plus perhaps a full leathering of the doubler and maybe an extra layer of padding on the shoulder of the subarmalis would mitigate this some. My subarmalis, worn under my hamata, is fairly thin (I'm not big on excessive padding - and I wore it for years under my SCA armor with only light armoring of my shoulder area), but I do have two layers to it on my shoulders.
Quinton Johansen
Marcus Quintius Clavus, Optio Secundae Pili Prioris Legionis III Cyrenaicae
Reply
#43
It would take a great deal of force to transmit a blow through the seg and padding!
You feel nothing, in general!
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
#44
Quote: and segmentata can be made in just a day or two. Hamata takes considerably longer.
If you have the technology and production facilities, to mass-produce long thin sheets of metal then it is surely faster to make.
But clearly that is a "ability" that is lost and don't reappear again until after year 1300.
The facts that mail was used for more than 1500years speaks for it self.
For some reason it was the better armour of the two... (effectiveness, price, production time, durability. add more factors yourself)

When we get to the late medieval period munition (plate)armour was massproduced in both Italy and "Germany" and most soldiers making a living by the sword would have bin wearing armour.
Thomas Aagaard
Reply
#45
Quote:If you have the technology and production facilities, to mass-produce long thin sheets of metal then it is surely faster to make.
But clearly that is a "ability" that is lost and don't reappear again until after year 1300.
The facts that mail was used for more than 1500years speaks for it self.
For some reason it was the better armour of the two... (effectiveness, price, production time, durability. add more factors yourself)

A gross simplification, all armor was highly valued, and required good experienced craftsmen. Plate armor often needed to be custom made to the wearer, while chainmail could easily fit most people. Armor in general during the "Dark Ages" was significantly less common than during the Empire. Many other forms of armor became common at this time as well. Plate armor existed before mail, and it existed after mail armor.
Quintus Furius Collatinus

-Matt
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  About the three types of armor Lorica Segmentata? Leoshenlong 2 648 04-21-2021, 07:52 PM
Last Post: Crispianus
  New find of lorica segmentata mcbishop 18 3,344 11-21-2020, 02:05 PM
Last Post: Simplex
  why lorica segmentata uses very thin hinges? Leoshenlong 3 700 10-27-2020, 05:31 PM
Last Post: Leoshenlong

Forum Jump: