Subarmalis in the literary sources

[mcbishop]

Please folks, this thread it for the subarmalis and the sources - NOT for discussing the effect of high-speed missiles. We have another thread for that, this one we split off for a reason.

And does that not suggest that might be an artificial division?! Two sides of the same coin ;-)

Mike Bishop

[Robert Vermaat]

Please folks, this thread it for the subarmalis and the sources - NOT for discussing the effect of high-speed missiles. We have another thread for that, this one we split off for a reason.

And does that not suggest that might be an artificial division?! Two sides of the same coin ;-)

Sure, but two distinct sides nontheless. And worth separating. The thread was split on account of a request by several members, after all.

It's OK to discuss the nature of ancient armour and their various names, but videos about missiles hitting a reconstruction are for another thread, the original one: subarmalis designs (http://www.ancient-warfare.org/rat.html?...&id=305375). Please look up that one and continue there.

[mcbishop]

It's OK to discuss the nature of ancient armour and their various names, but videos about missiles hitting a reconstruction are for another thread, the original one: subarmalis designs (http://www.ancient-warfare.org/rat.html?...&id=305375). Please look up that one and continue there.

Experimental archaeology is a source (of no less varying quality than the literary/subliterary) so perhaps this thread needs renaming as 'Literary and Sub-literary sources only'. As for finding another thread and answering someone in this one by hopping across... yeah right, the interface on this is so helpful in that respect :-?

Spontaneity in discussion is worth the occasional drift off topic. Are we to stop all witticisms, asides, and the like? I hope not, because that will be the day it is no longer worth contributing.

Mike Bishop

[Renatus]

How about 'Subarmalis - Identification, Interpretation, Etymology and Usage'? That should cover all bases.

[Robert Vermaat]

Experimental archaeology is a source (of no less varying quality than the literary/subliterary) so perhaps this thread needs renaming as 'Literary and Sub-literary sources only'.

Actually a good idea.

As for finding another thread and answering someone in this one by hopping across... yeah right, the interface on this is so helpful in that respect :-?

C'mon Mike, the original thread 'Subarmalis designs', is still to be found on the very same page.

Spontaneity in discussion is worth the occasional drift off topic. Are we to stop all witticisms, asides, and the like? I hope not, because that will be the day it is no longer worth contributing.

Normally there's no problem with a little deviation from a subject, so I can reassure you Mike - no danger of stopping witticisms, asides, and the like.
However, as I already explained, this split was made for a very specific reason (and by request), to separate all modern experiments, theories and reconstuctions from discussion the literary sources specifically. Therefore, as I explained, it would not be a good idea to 'drift' back to that and NOT use the original topic.

Besides, while I don't mind drifting, occasionally topics are taken over.
To avoid doing that here too much, please send me any more suggestions by PM, not in the thread.

[Dan Howard]

However, as I already explained, this split was made for a very specific reason (and by request), to separate all modern experiments, theories and reconstuctions from discussion the literary sources specifically. Therefore, as I explained, it would not be a good idea to 'drift' back to that and NOT use the original topic.

It isn't possible to discuss one without the other as has been discovered several times already and I find it unreasonable to have to jump between two different threads when discussing the same subject.

[Sean Manning]

I have been ignoring the thread called "subarmalis designs" because I'm not interested in reconstructing one, and two threads is too much to follow. I had no idea which thread you were referring to.

Since none of the literary sources is clear on what a subarmalis is, beyond "some type of garment worn by men of a variety of ranks," our understanding of what types of garments the Romans used affects our interpretation of the literary sources.

[Dan Howard]

I have been ignoring the thread called "subarmalis designs" because I'm not interested in reconstructing one, and two threads is too much to follow. I had no idea which thread you were referring to.

Me too. I was offended when I discovered that my posts had apparently beeen deleted from this thread for no reason that I could see. That other thread seemed to be discussing modern costumes with little relevance to what we know from the sources. I have no interest in it and would prefer my posts moved back here where I originally put them.

[Robert Vermaat]

I aim to please but it's imposssible to please everyone all of the time.

Look guys, I never told everyone to stick to ONLY discussing sources, OK? I just drew the line at movies about missiles. Sheesh.