Plate-mail hybrid armor

[FlaviusCrispus]

Avete, amici!

(This is partly a cross-posting of a discussion that started under the heading Real Gear Pages Undergoing Revision on the Reenactment and Reconstruction forum. It elicited some very interesting discussion from Peroni and others, so I thought it deserved its own heading.)

I just posted some new images of what appears to be a totally unrecorded type of Roman body armor, namely a plate-mail hybrid in which an articulated plate shoulder section / neck guard is mated to a mail torso section. These pictures are on the Real Gear part of the Legio VI Victrix (CA) website:

http://www.legionsix.org/armorgroup2.jpg

http://www.legionsix.org/armorgroup1.jpg

http://www.legionsix.org/DSCN4940.JPG

http://www.legionsix.org/DSCN4941.JPG

http://www.legionsix.org/sideview.jpg

http://www.legionsix.org/backview.jpg

The above images were taken before the plates had been properly cleaned and conserved. The next image was taken after a year's worth of cleaning and conservation, showing an inscribed name, presumably the owner's-- OP. MAMILIO Q. L.:

http://www.legionsix.org/namecloseup1.jpg

The shoulder section of the mail-plate hybrid appeared in an antiquities dealer's inventory about six years ago. The pieces reportedly were found in the Balkans region. When I first looked them over, I naturally found them very puzzling, nothing quite like this having appeared in any publication before. They were obviously quite old, as the iron was not only corroded, but delaminated in spots, something almost impossible to fake. My only question was, how old-- 300-600 years (making it medieval), or maybe 1,200 years (Byzantine), or 1,700+ years (Roman). Similarities with some of the features on the Newstead and Corbridge cuirasses and other features (such as the little dome-headed studs or knobs, which appear on all kinds of Roman knicknacks), not to mention the inscribed name (Q. AEMILIO Q.L.) finally convinced me it was Roman, but I wasn't sure about the era.

One of my friends and clients, who is a very knowledgeable collector of Roman militaria whose pieces have appeared in many museum exhibits, finally acquired the pieces and has spent a year having them properly conserved. He believes the epigraphy dates these pieces to the late first century BC or early decades AD, making them of similar date to the Kalkriese cuirass, which is about 100-200 years earlier than I would have guessed, but I defer to his expertise. He translates the inscription as "Optius (or Opimius, Opelius) Mamilius, freedman of Quintus," possibly indicating the owner was an auxiliary, and that this is perhaps part fo a cavarlyman's armor. At least one relief appears to depict cavalry wearing a plate-mail hybrid armor; perhaps this is an alternate form.

Thanks to excellent conservation work, the method by which mail was fastened to the plate collar / shoulder section now stands clearly revealed: Individual mail rings are riveted to the lead and back edges of each shoulder / collar section by means of small holes along the plate edges. The mail rings themselves are "lentil-shaped" or a rather flat oval in cross-section and about 8-10 mm across; the rivets are dome-headed. This is a very clearly a Roman form of mail.

Another interesting thing that cleaning and conservation revealed is that the mail rivets on the inside surface have roves (or rectangular washers) underneath the peened end, which to me at least suggests there could have been a layer of leather and/or fabric affixed to the underside as well-- perhaps integral lining and/or padding?

A few other details: A detailed study of the pieces is underway by some top names in the field, including Tom Fisher of Cologne University. An article on the pieces, inlcuding a hypothetical reconstruction of the entire cuirass, is pending.

The good state of preservation of the iron is probably due to it having been in a fire around the time of burial.

My friend notes a strong similarity between the "mushroom-shaped" studs at the back side of each collar section, which would presumably be held together with a leather thong, and the similarly-shaped studs on the inside of the cheek pieces of helmets of the Imperial Gallic A type, which are Augustan in date. This may further solidify the dating of this hybrid armor type.

If anyone has thoughts about these pieces, including dating and how the original cuirass might have functioned, please feel free to post them! For example, Peroni has posted some interesting questions, including puzzlement as to why the pieces are hinged at all when they didn't need to be. It's hard to believe any armorer (and it must have been a fairly skilled one, as that compound curve from horizontal to verticle on the shoulder-neck sections would be rather difficult to pull off) would have made such a complex hinge if it served no useful purpose. Anyone have any thoughts on why they might have been hinged?

[Robert Vermaat]

Excellent pictures. Good work.

[Tarbicus]

Anyone have any thoughts on why they might have been hinged?

Just some thoughts - no flaming please.

Cost? Would it be more expensive to make a single piece for each side?

Or; Raising the arms could create a need for the extra bit of give, while the hinges would mean the mail hangs flush against the body when they are dropped down in the resting position.

What puzzles me is I can't see holes for the mail links to attach at the edges above the arm. Would they have self-linked under the plate's edges from front to back? Unless, the mail part finished and went down and under the armpit like a string vest. But it seems odd to add all of that protection to the upper shoulders, then leave the outer shoulders and top of the arms unprotected. [url:1ejs0d0k]http://www.legionsix.org/backview.jpg[/url]

An "out there" thought: Just wondering if it could be additional protection on top of an existing traditional hamata to give extra protection to the neck in particular, held in place by the mail links attached to the existing lorica hamata?

The revolts in Illyricum, is that what it's connected to?

[Peroni]

The previous discussion points are here..
http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic.php?t=9052

An "out there" thought: Just wondering if it could be additional protection on top of an existing traditional hamata to give extra protection to the neck in particular, held in place by the mail links attached to the existing lorica hamata?

Interesting Jim. Looking at the piece, the mail links are attached by rivets on the outside of the plates not the inside. This would suggest that the plates were either;

a) the top section of a mail vest that just extended from the bottom of both the front and back plate, upper arm protection possibly provided by pteryges,or

But it seems odd to add all of that protection to the upper shoulders, then leave the outer shoulders and top of the arms unprotected

b) an added layer of protection that went entirely underneath a regular shaped mail shirt. i.e. the mail shoulder sections passed over the plates.

Regards,

[Tarbicus]

Good points Adrian.

How about: It was a lorica hamata with plate for the shoulders instead of mail, then only the shoulder doubling was placed on top of the whole thing? Pretty much a normal hamata, but just with a different style of assembly and components, but with the added bonus of neck protection.

As the outer shoulders and very tops of the arms are so unprotected, I would suggest the cape type of doubling. Pure speculation.

The need for it is the interesting thing. Could it be the wearer was more vulnerable than usual and used a very small shield, or even had none at all, hence the need for that "something extra"? A signifer of some type?

As the hinges are on the underside they would have dug into the shoulders with the weight, especially with the mail hanging off it, hence the holes for the attachment of padding imho. I mean seriously uncomfortable if not debilitating after wearing it for a while.

[Peroni]

I see what you mean regarding the doubling. The standard bearer thought is a good speculation. The presence of the roves on the inner face seems to suggest, as TFC pointed out, that roves are generally used when a softer (leather?) backing is present. That may be the padding for the hinges. (For which I can see no real purpose) why not join the sections with rivets? far more comfortable.

The point regarding the hinges being on the inside and very uncomfortable is one that made in the other thread. You'd need a good half inch of felted wool or similar to stop those hinges digging in to the shoulders, especially if your suggestion of a doubling over the top is feasable. The added weight in that area would make it extremely uncomfortable.

I wondered if it could have been a 'native-made' piece of equipment, typical of the Balkan region horsemen at the time.

Putting it on must have been awkward too. Opening the hinged plates to allow the head/neck in before fastening the strap arrangement at the back of the neck. Which makes me wonder if the armour was put on like a straightjacket and the whole shirt fastened down the back by a series of buckles. Definately a two-man job!

Regards,

[Tarbicus]

Yup, just re-read the thread and of course, all of those points are there. :roll: (slaps self).

Putting it on must have been awkward too. Opening the hinged plates to allow the head/neck in before fastening the strap arrangement at the back of the neck. Which makes me wonder if the armour was put on like a straightjacket and the whole shirt fastened down the back by a series of buckles. Definately a two-man job!

Hmmm. The shoulder doublings on a hamata don't close across the front, so could it be a case of it was put on like them? closed at the back but open at the front, secured by ties at the neck? Looking at this image of TFC's: [url:p5g3t8ei]http://www.legionsix.org/armorgroup2.jpg[/url] , the throat was left very open, unless it should be worn the other way around? But that doesn't follow with the extra upper back protection from a standard hamata doubling, with it extending across the entire upper back.

Given that the collar and breast plates on a seg are three hinged parts each side, as are the USG's, there is a logical pattern in that they would follow such a form; made of three hinged parts.

Could it be a variant of the Arlon type (mail shirt, segmented shoulder guards)? Although, that could be a confusion on the part of the sculptor, as Mike Bishop points out in LS Vol.1, when he depicted hamata shoulder doubling.

Added:

Die Rieter Roms, Teil II has a relief sculpture of a cavalryman on horseback with segmental shoulder guards and mail or scale body, which I assume is the one reproduced by a member of Marcus Junkelmann's cavalry group. "Vonatorix, aus Bonn, Ecke Kolner Chausee und RosentalstraBe" (sorry, can't do the German text).

[Tarbicus]

And this is really way out there, so don't take it seriously:

What if, this
[url:g4l1rckv]http://www.legionsix.org/sideview.jpg[/url]

was attached to
[url:g4l1rckv]http://www.romancoins.info/milit-breastplate.JPG[/url] ?

Is there any connection? Dates are way out I think, although there may be a case for such plates being used over generations of soldiers (according to Romancoins), and I doubt there is evidence of mail attached to the Manching piece, for example.

[Peroni]

Interesting speculation.

Those breast plates with the key-style fastenings seem to be used (IIRC) exclusively on locking scale or lamellar plate armour, and if the dating of the inscription is correct, they are a much later period than the shoulder plates in question. (Late second and third centuries).

Regards,

[Tarbicus]

Interesting speculation.

Those breast plates with the Newstead-style pin/tube fastening seem to be used (IIRC) exclusively on locking scale or lamellar plate armour, and if the dating of the inscription is correct, they are a much later period than the shoulder plates in question. (Late second and third centuries).

Regards,

Yup.

This plate was made from a Relief from Arlon on the Belgium-Luxembourg border. 43 AD?
Can one of you make a reconstruction of F. Crispus? its worth to try!

Hmmm. The shoulder doublings on a hamata don't close across the front, so could it be a case of it was put on like them? closed at the back but open at the front, secured by ties at the neck? Looking at this image of TFC's: http://www.legionsix.org/armorgroup2.jpg , the throat was left very open, unless it should be worn the other way around? But that doesn't follow with the extra upper back protection from a standard hamata doubling, with it extending across the entire upper back

I think if you follow the shape design, its put correctly by the model, the part where the neck is protected & closet, its too flat to belong to the chest. ....

Maybe the opened part was meant to move the neck freely up & down, & to free him of much stress or injury during the galloping at horse.

PS: Remember at horse he has to look his enemies down, & push the body foward to strike the opnent, romans weren't stiff medieval knights, protection but free of movement romans loved!

Yup.

[Johnny Shumate]

Possible reconstruction:

[Peroni]

Great sketch!

That's what I initially had in my mind's eye when I first saw the pieces. However, the plates are short (looking at the photo on the mans shoulders) which, as Jim suggested would make the mail small enough to look like a string vest.

No upper arm protection though, which is why I then thought of the mail going over the top of the plates, which could have given the upper arms some protection. Alternatively it could also have been provided by a set of pteryges on a subarmalis(?)

Another angle on the hinges... Without them storage would be a bigger issue. With the hinge arrangement the cuirass could be folded and collapsed into a much smaller bundle for ease of transport when not in use.

Regards,

[Matthew Amt]

So, when have the Romans ever needed a *reason* to put hinges on something? Belts, for instance, or hinges on the shoulders of a lorica segmentata? "We could just make this plate bigger to fit that area, but heck, let's just use a couple smaller ones with a hinge, eh?" Proves it's Roman...

Could they be clasps, like the hinges at the sides of a muscle cuirass?

The lack of coverage doesn't bother me--a small piece of armor means that area is protected, not that the rest is more vulnerable than before. And of course there is a lot missing!

Wacky pieces, that's for sure!

Matthew

[FlaviusCrispus]

Avete TNArcher, Peroni, Tarbicus et al:

Yes, great sketch! In fact, very similar to the drawings I made when I first got ahold of these pieces and started studying them. Mine was more like this...



...with the chest and back plates added with turnkeys and locking pin, and pteruges at the shoulders. There is a hole on the back collar section which could be construed as being for a string to hold the locking pin; there is a small hole on the front collar section, right before the vertical bend and set somewhat back from the edge, that could serve a similar purpose.

Only problem is that chest plates and turnkeys are thought to be a second-century development, while my collector friend says the epigraphy of these pieces (and the mushroom studs at the back) make it more likely a century or more earlier.

So, either it didn't use the chest / turnkey system, or that system is a lot earlier than currently thought (perhaps, as Peroni suggested, our hybrid was made by a native Balkan armorer and the style was only later adopted by the Roman fabricae), or whomever inscribed his name on the plate used an antiquated form of epigraphy.

By the way, the model wearing the armor in the shots is a woman, Manya. She's rather broad-shouldered, but not exactly "strapping," so the original wearer must have either been a very small, gracile invidivdual, or had very narrow shoulders, or the armor was quite "gappy," which seems unlikely since so much effort was put into making the upper shoulder / neck protection.

Peroni-- very interesting thought about the hinges being primarily for ease of storage, rather than comfort or wearability. Might that not partially explain which Corbridge and Newstead shoulder sections were also hinged, though the utility of such hinges has long been questioned?

I like this-- lots of interesting points being raised! Please continue!

[Tarbicus]

The neckguard, that's the really baffling bit. Why would a Roman soldier need a neckguard? Is there a specialisation that could cause injury specifically to the neck? Rope burns through rapelling? Vampire hunting?

I've never seen any Roman armour with a neckguard, but that wouldn't be surprising. Has anyone?