New discovery: loricas segmentatas Leon, Spain

[Robert Vermaat]

Hi Matt,

Just food for thought, but it would also seem likely that Rome's re-issuing of "older pattern" materials to the auxillia would explain a lot. Many colonial powers did that with their weapons and gear during the 19th and early 20th century, so it would seem quite possible that the ever efficient Romans would, too.

That's a modern concept. 'Older' vs. 'newer' patterns did not exist in Ancient times as they do today. We have so far not seen any evidence of this, nor of large-scale 'refitting' of troops with 'new' gear. If it worked it was used, if it was damaged it was repaired, if beyond repair it was replaced. It was not even the state that supplied all material during the Principate, soldiers apparently could and did buy their own gear, supplied by local metalsmiths.

Likewise, Auxillia in the 3rd or 4th centuries might have actually been issued 100 year old Lorica while the newer "Roman" legions were using the newer helnmets, mail etc.
Again, just a thought.

During the 4th c., the 'auxilia' does not exist anymore. The name goes to a few elite regiments, while the well-known differentiation in the army is changed to 'the army' (divided in comitatenses (mobile field army) and limitanei (border troops). Non-citizen troops are usually foederati, part-time hired barbarians.

[mcbishop]

I want a date. I want bits attributed to Corbridge A, B or Newstead ... or something new...

Tomorrow please!

Use your eyes, lad; the clues are all in the picture! Dearie me, I sometimes wonder why I bother... :lol:

And as for delayed publication: Corbridge Hoard found 1964 (50th anniversary coming up!), interim report published 1967, armour reconstruction (but not originals) published 1969-75, full report 1988, so 24 years start to finish. By the way, English Heritage will soon be launching their new Hoard display at Corbridge; more of that anon.

Mike Bishop

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

I can only see what could possibly be a brest plate, and possibly some back plates?
But they are all jumbled. :|
Are there any more photos?

[Doc]

I am sure that this is going to be an old tune but in response to the earlier comment about centurions and segmentatas, I agree that it appears that there is no connection. However, in the latest book by D'Amato on Roman Centurions from 31 BC- 500AD, he gives evidence of a fragmented statue/sculpture where the soldier is wearing an attic style helmet, a segmentata and his sword on the left side.

I am not saying that the author's conclusion is correct or incorrect but he seems to suggest that in lieu of the sword's position, it could be a rare instant in which a centurion is wearing a segmentata.

Again, this is in response to an earlier post commenting on what the article in Spanish stated about who would wear what armor.

[Paul Elliott]

I can only see what could possibly be a brest plate, and possibly some back plates?
But they are all jumbled

Yes, me too ...

[Texas Matt]

Okay, that explains a lot. About how long would a set of segmentata last In service, then?

[topdump]

Thank you.


gclub , sbobet , holiday


http://www.gclub-superbet.com/]gclub[/url
www.gclub-superbet.com

[Paul Elliott]

reported

[Caballo]

And spammer's post deleted. Thanks!

[Alexand96]

Forgive me for my ignorance, and if I am pulling the thread too far off topic...but without going into any excessive details, what are the general arguments against any particular military man (Centurions, Auxilia) not wearing any seggmentata?

As far as I understand the Roman fighting man, first priority was functionality (segmentata is functional), second was to look good. As we have all seen many modern re-enactors making the segmentata look very good, and we know they are functional, as well as the fact that we have very little evidence either way, at least as far as I understand, would it not be more prudent to simply state that it was possible, but unverified?

[Graham Sumner]

Alexand96 wrote:

Forgive me for my ignorance, and if I am pulling the thread too far off topic...but without going into any excessive details, what are the general arguments against any particular military man (Centurions, Auxilia) not wearing any seggmentata?

As far as I understand the Roman fighting man, first priority was functionality (segmentata is functional), second was to look good. As we have all seen many modern re-enactors making the segmentata look very good, and we know they are functional, as well as the fact that we have very little evidence either way, at least as far as I understand, would it not be more prudent to simply state that it was possible, but unverified?

Its a good question. Basically Trajan's Column has been very influential in our perception of the Roman Army. It appears to show the elite citizen soldiers as heavy infantry in lorica segmentata marching and building etc.. While the non citizen soldiers, cavalry and infantry are represented as light infantry in mail lorica hamata doing most of the fighting by the way.

While this may be perceived as being a nice stereotypical image, as Bishop and Coulston point out in their book 'Roman Military Equipment' the difference between legionary and auxiliary equipment also extends to literary accounts but more importantly to the provincial funeral monuments too. They are often believed to be a better reflection of military equipment as it is assumed they were produced by military or local sculptors who had a better understanding of military equipment than perhaps those who worked in the major cities who may never have seen a soldier close up. In the sculptures, centurions and in particular auxiliaries are not shown wearing lorica segmentata. As B&C say this is not evidence that they did not but neither is it evidence that they did.

Doc wrote:However, in the latest book by D'Amato on Roman Centurions from 31 BC- 500AD, he gives evidence of a fragmented statue/sculpture where the soldier is wearing an attic style helmet, a segmentata and his sword on the left side.
I am not saying that the author's conclusion is correct or incorrect but he seems to suggest that in lieu of the sword's position, it could be a rare instant in which a centurion is wearing a segmentata.

Even D'amato uses "perhaps" and "probably" in his description of this monument which is perhaps not surprising as it consists of three fragments and not of a whole figure. Is it even sure the bits come from the same figure, or could ordinary praetorians wear their swords on the left? Nevertheless after saying it may "probably be a centurion", "perhaps of the emperor Domitian's Praetorian Guard" this somehow translates into the painted reconstruction of a centurion ordinarius of Legio IV Flavia Felix in the colour Plate! I do not know why the reconstruction did not show a praetorian centurion instead?

Romans did not have the same taste as us. In fact I am surprised that the sets of lorica segmentata are not covered in bright paint with ghastly decorations as some medieval armour was. Who knows perhaps it was, we just do not have the evidence yet.

Maybe front-line troops thought lorica segmentata was crappy stuff, maybe it fell to bits all the time leaving hinges everywhere, so they kept trying to bury the suits of armour in underground pits or boxes hoping no one would find them...... Hang on a minute!

Graham.

[D B Campbell]

... the difference between legionary and auxiliary equipment also extends ... more importantly to the provincial funeral monuments too.

But -- just to be clear -- the 'lorica segmentata' is not depicted.

In the sculptures, centurions and in particular auxiliaries are not shown wearing lorica segmentata.

And neither are the legionaries. This is the frustrating thing! :?

[tiberius aemilius naso]

More about this! Remains of squamatas and hamatas have also been discovered.

http://www.diariodeleon.es/noticias/cult...91255.html

"It was much larger than previously thought. The store of Legio VII was one hundred x one hundred meters, occupying the space between the walls of Castle Gate to beyond the Ponce de Leon school. This data is part of the archaeological findings that the company Talactor has presented to the Territorial Service of Culture after the tasks in this area of ​​the site. According to sources consulted by Diario de León, the structure is a square building with a columned courtyard in the center.

On the other hand, if it appears that the most plausible theory is that it is indeed a warehouse, the fact of finding lots of armor in a small space has made archaeologists think of the existence of a number of units called fabricae within a much larger warehouse. These fabricae or workshops were not usually placed to the north, in favor of the prevailing winds, to avoid smoke filling the rest of the camp. 'However, there are exceptions. " Another option that is being discussed for these rooms is that they were an armamentarium, but it is early to confirm these hypotheses. "The pieces have yet to be restored, even if we can already glimpse the magnitude of the findings," they declare.

Two thousand years later

These armors were abandoned or cornered, and the destruction of the building where they were allowed their preservation to this day, including woody debris. The status of them is very delicate, so the restoration service at the León Museum is collaborating in its extraction and subsequent restoration. The remains are iron bands with small brass rivets forming the lorica known as segmentata. There have also been located other armors, as the formed by small scales (lorica squamata) and chain mail (lorica hamata), made by small rings linked together.

During the work made by the companies Talactor and Dacolesa, twenty pieces of armor of soldiers of the Legio VII have appeared. The municipal archaeologist, Victorino Garcia, stated that this area of the site is a real mine "by both the quantity and the quality of the armors that have appeared." And that although little has been excavated in a small part in this side of the building, so that new discoveries are not discarded in the next few days, that would make Victor de los Rios Casona in a site of exceptional value. So far, the excavation will continue after the Heritage Commission has voted to extend the work in the place that will settle the museum of Roman Leon."

[Graham Sumner]

Well just to confuse things further Duncan and before anyone else mentions it, because I did a drawing, Raffaele D'Amato mentions two cavalrymen wearing lorica segmentata in a relief from Alba Fucens.

'Arms and Amour of the Imperial Roman Soldier', page 192 plates 279 279b.

However I am not sure whether the 'cavalrymen' are riding horse(s) or standing alongside one, again the monument is fragmentary and very badly damaged.

D'Amato also argues that cavalrymen on the Portonaccio Sarcophagus are clearly wearing leather banded armour but I guess that belongs in another thread.

Graham.

[Iagoba]

Eduardo was faster than I... :roll:

It's clear that there is a lot of interest on the segmentatas (specially taking in account the high number of them), but who knows what have they found of hamatas and squamatas... :grin:

If I see something new on this I will let all of you know :wink: