Hi, I just found another section where some Sarmatian/Roxolani ambassadors have come to make peace with Trajan. Sarmatians on left with horses and North Pontic ambassadors on right. Forgive me if image looks a bit over sharpened as I was trying to bring out detail.
Quote:Unlike the representations of the battle-scenes, those of the trophies might wel be reliable, because they were carried to Rome and decorated an enormeous bier as shown in Connolly's book on the Roman army.
So It would be historical correct to copy one of these quivers for my Sarmatian warrior impression?
So It would be historical correct to copy one of these quivers for my Sarmatian warrior impression?
Assuming that my suspicion on the accuracy is correct, yes, but ... Is your Sarmatian warrior impression an impression of a foot-soldier or horseman? Because the Sarmatian horseman of this period attached the tube-like quiver to a bow-bag for an unstrung bow (Griegische etc), often, it seems, two tubes on a bow bag (perhaps one for light flight arrows and another for heavier arrows).
Dan Howard wrote:
It is unlikely that the sculptor was trying to depict segmented plates.
Well, I have never seen an ancient or medieval foot-archer carrying a bowbag or bowcase, so I think you have to limit yourself to the quiver.
Oh no, I am lying, I have seen ancient Egyptians carrying bow-bags, but it was not clear to me if they carried them into battle or that they were servants bringing them to a chariot-archer.
I think in this instance it seems more like an arming coat or quilted garment of some kind. It looks a lot like an eastern riding coat. But I don't think that it was intended to look like a segmented suit of plste... Not unless we're armoring a slinky...
Why yes, off course the design is impossible, but why could the artist not have been trying to depict a segmented armour construction?
It is not as if there are no types of contemporary armour that might have been the inspiration for this "artists impression". The Romans knew segmented armour, but it was also known outside of the empire, for instance in Hatra (Iraq Museum Bagdad, hopefully) and the Parthian cataphract in "double-faced" cuirass shown on the Tang-i-Sarvak relief. Some of the armours on the Orlat plaque have bands without vertical stripes, suggesting a mix of segmented and lamellar, or even a rigid construction as later appears in Korea and Japan in combination with segmented armour.
An arming coat or quilted garment would not need the row of large buckles, but we know armour that does have buckles for every segment, don't we?
So make something that looks like this and see if you can get it to work. That's the whole point of experimental archaeology. But I'm buggered if I can see a way to do it. I can think of a few ways to do a scale/lamellar construction that looks like that, but not segmented plates.
Hi Dan,
It has been made and tested!
I just remember that I have seen this before.
He used leather not metal.
It was a romanian group at the Natale di Roma 2010.
Let's see if I can find a picture.
That isn't armour; that is a costume. You can stab a pencil through leather that thin. At a minimum this stuff should be able to stop a knife or spear thrust. A winter tunic would provide the same protection as that costume so why bother with it? The three main problems I invisioned with assuming that it is a segmented plate construction were (1) the length of the armour - in the sculpture it looks like it is thigh-length, which will hamper the legs. (2) joining the sleeves to the torso so that it resembles the sculpture. (3) the wide plates won't provide much articulation. The maker of that costume has altered the design so that he doesn't have to deal with any of the those issues. He made the plates narrower than those in the sculpture so that it will articulate properly. He ignored the leg movement issues by not making it long enough. And he never bothered with a shoulder join - there is a pretty large gap at the shoulder, which isn't evident on the sculpture.
Dan, you are off course perfectly right about the costume, but it is fun though.
Seriously, about your objections:
1. Knightly armour from about the 14th century onwards had segmented hip protection, so why not the ancients?
2. I suspect the sleeves were not actualy connected to the torso, but were connected to each other with the collar, like the later Japanese tominaga gote. The northeast Asian "double-faced" cuirass left the shoulders exposed, they were protected by separate shoulder plates and/or sleeves. Something like that seems to be the case in this instance too (and also in the case of the Orlat plaques)
3. It always surprised me that the segments of the lorica segmentata, that seem to me rather wide, provide such excelent articulation. Do you think the segments on our trophy are wider?
However, you are also perfectly right about this al being speculation. Until someone builds such a suit and succeeds in climbing a horned saddle, we will not know if it worked.
Looks like lorica segmentata without shoulder protection (error, error!), and then manica. Also looks short, just short enough to get creamed in the balls. hock:
I'll take real metal, thank you. :whistle:
Alan J. Campbell
member of Legio III Cyrenaica and the Uncouth Barbarians
Author of:
The Demon's Door Bolt (2011)
Forging the Blade (2012)
"It's good to be king. Even when you're dead!"
Old Yuezhi/Pazyrk proverb
hock: 