Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
How effective was Lorica Segmentata?
#16
Rivitted Mail can punched through by any weapon thin enough to get into the gaps. The reason why Late Medieval weapons like Estocs and Bodkin tips were used to defeat mail armor. At the Battle Cahrae, both Cassius Dio and Plutarch mention Parthian arrows penetrating Roman armor. However arrows penetrating chainmail were probably at close range and flat angles. Mail were probably perfect against indirect fire.

The biggest advantage Chainmail has is durablity and coverage. Segmentata was made of soft iron and can be dented easily. Battles often took for hours and blades can break though dents, and straps fall, needing repairs.(which is costly). This may explain the reason why Centurions never wore it due to them always being in the thick of the fight.

Also it was easier to transport, maintain, and put on. (and comfortable) Late Roman troops were often not fighting set piece battles, but raids and campaigns of attrition.

As for weight, according to Adrian Godsworthy the Hamata weighed 9-15kg while the Seg weighed 9 kg. The extra 6 kg from mail largely comes from the thighs and arms extra protection. Segmentata is still probably more bulky and weight centered around shoulders.
Reply
#17
There are no gaps in Roman mail large enough to admit anything larger than a needle without busting the links. In order to bust a link you need more than one hand - estocs were used in two hands. Rondels were specifically designed to enable the second hand to be employed on a stiletto. The idea was to knock down the fighter and fall on him with your weight behind the rondel. You can't get through the mail while he is standing.

A good case can be made that the bodkin was used on flight arrows while the compact broadhead was the armour-piercer. Consider the following:

1. Middle Eastern flight arrows have heads shaped like bodkins only they are very small and light.
2. Take two arrows of the same weight - one with a military broadhead and one with a military bodkin - and shoot them from the same bow. The bodkin consistently outranges the broadhead.
3. In order to have even a small chance of punching through metal armour, an arrow needs to be heavy, its head made of hardened steel, and it has to be shot at close range with a heavy bow.
4. Smythe recommends a fourth of each sheaf of longbow arrows to be flight arrows to "gall the enemy at range".
5. On the Mary Rose the ratio of compact broadheads to bodkins is about 4 to 1.
6. There are a couple of online tests that reckon that compact broadheads punch through armour just as well as a bodkin.
7. The only arrowheads so far analysed that were made of hardened steel are compact broadheads. Every bodkin has turned out to be unhardened wrought iron.

Conclusion: The bodkin was the flight arrow described by Smythe and the compact broadhead was the armour piercer. The former was a compromise between a true flight arrow that is useless in battle and a heavier arrow that can still do some damage at range.
Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen & Sword Books
Reply
#18
Quote:Romans never used butted mail. Every example that was initially claimed to be butted has turned out to be riveted on further analysis. Properly riveted mail of the Roman style can easily withstand the hardest one-handed thrust that a human can deliver - even with a spike that was optimised for the task. The only way to punch through it is to use a heavy bow or some kind of force multiplier like a warhammer (or perhaps the point of a falx).

Perhaps not quite true. A sample of mail armour from the Vicarage Garden excavation at Caerleon showed examples of both riveted and butted mail. Admittedly this mail sample was a combination of iron and copper alloy rings - but the iron component was definitely of butted form. We don't have very much mail armour from Caerleon (or Usk) in the museum and most of it is, as you say, of the riveted type - where this can be discerned as for the most part the remains are solid lumps of rust!

This is what I meant about someone doing a properly constructed experiment. Personally, I find it difficult to believe that a full thrust from a gladius type of sword would not penetrate a ring-mail armour, especially if it hit a weak point. It's the kind of thing that needs to be put to a proper test, however. I would be the first to hold up my hand and say that my gut feeling was wrong, if I could see some actual proof.

Mike Thomas
(Caratacus)
visne scire quod credam? credo orbes volantes exstare.
Reply
#19
Williams has already tested one variety of mail. It was a 15th century voider and a lot lighter than Roman mail. He also tested a similar reconstruction made by Erik. The amount of energy required to compromise them was greater than a person could deliver with a one-handed thrust - even with a hardened steel spike that was optimised for the job. A sword or lance tip required even more energy than the spike, and the heavier and denser varieties of Roman mail such as the Arbeia example would perform much better than Williams' test pieces. This is all covered in the MyArmoury essay. If you want to read the results yourself then they are in The Knight and the Blast Furnace, Chapter Nine. No way can a gladius punch through riveted mail. Why do you think they developed the estoc? It was a sword without an edge - just a long spike - and even then they needed two hands to get the job done.
Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen & Sword Books
Reply
#20
Isn't butted mail super rare? Butted mail can be stabbed through by a toy knife, it wasn't worth making. Most mail was rivitted, the reason they need estocs to penetrate.

The Roman Gladius doesn't need to penetrate mail. The Romans use fast stabbing techniques to attack the exposed areas of the body like the face and feet.
Reply
#21
Quote:Williams has already tested one variety of mail. It was a 15th century voider and a lot lighter than Roman mail.

How light was it and how heavy was Roman mail? I don't see any weight for the mail in Williams's book. The 26-layer quilted jack involved in the test was fairly heavy. Is there any evidence Romans wore such thick garments beneath their mail?

Quote:Why do you think they developed the estoc? It was a sword without an edge - just a long spike - and even then they needed two hands to get the job done.

My understanding is that the estoc was first and foremost a cavalry weapon and therefore typically used in one hand. Quijada de Reayo did instruct targeting the visor, belly, and armpits with it, so that suggests it was expected to pierce mail.
Reply
#22
Early estocs were used by cavalry. They were soon adapted for infantry use and grew longer for two-handed use.
Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen & Sword Books
Reply
#23
MODERATOR GREEN

Gentlemen - the topic under the title is lorica segmentata and although it is bound to be compared to mail, may I ask you to bear this in mind and curb the digressions (interesting though they may be).

Thank you.

(Of course, the OP can change the title of the topic if need be)
Moi Watson

Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, Merlot in one hand, Cigar in the other; body thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and screaming "WOO HOO, what a ride!
Reply
#24
Moi,

That's why I'm staying out of this thread. :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
Reply
#25
Quote:(Of course, the OP can change the title of the topic if need be)
Such a course of action would surely be a sign of mail chauvinism! ;-)

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
#26
This is all very interesting.

About the weaponry of the time was there anything that would reliably go through mail and segmentata besides artillery?
Dan
Reply
#27
Quote:...About the weaponry of the time ...

MODERATOR GREEN

May I please ask you to READ my post above and reduce the digressions - thank you.
Moi Watson

Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, Merlot in one hand, Cigar in the other; body thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and screaming "WOO HOO, what a ride!
Reply
#28
Quote:Such a course of action would surely be a sign of mail chauvinism!

Ouch!

Mike Thomas
(Caratacus)
visne scire quod credam? credo orbes volantes exstare.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  About the three types of armor Lorica Segmentata? Leoshenlong 2 603 04-21-2021, 07:52 PM
Last Post: Crispianus
  New find of lorica segmentata mcbishop 18 3,066 11-21-2020, 02:05 PM
Last Post: Simplex
  why lorica segmentata uses very thin hinges? Leoshenlong 3 644 10-27-2020, 05:31 PM
Last Post: Leoshenlong

Forum Jump: