Who were the most heavily armored of Romes allies or enemies

[Sulla]

I am mainly interested in the first century but just being curios I do not mind hearing about other periods

[Paullus]

My guess'd be that Armenian cataphracts might rank pretty high on the armored scale of Roman allies of the time.

I'd have to say the same for opponents: Sarmatian or Parthian cataphracts 8)

[Sulla]

Ahh yes Parthian cataphracts. They were heavly armored. Did the armenians have the same kind of armor?

And a reference page if any one is interested on the parthian army. http://www.iranchamber.com/history/parthians/parthian_army.php

[Arthes]

The Roxolani.....!

[M. Demetrius]

The clibani? Segmented iron plate from head to toe.

One gladiator style is of that sort. Must have been murder to wear all that in the bright sun. Probably not first century though. Not sure on that part.

[cabralius]

I think the Carthaginian cavalry need to be better studied. Their Weapons and Armor are so little known.

[Robert Vermaat]

The clibani? Segmented iron plate from head to toe.

One gladiator style is of that sort. Must have been murder to wear all that in the bright sun. Probably not first century though. Not sure on that part.

Clibanarii? Segmented armour? Well, part of it, but no way all of it. The lorica segmentata was not used by cavalry - I've heard from re-enacators that the shoulder plates can severely injure your neck when you receive a shock. Imagine falling from your horse - it could break your neck!

Were Roxolani that much armoured?

Sassanid Persian cavalry would be the most armoured I guess.

[M. Demetrius]

Clibanarii? Segmented armour? Well, part of it, but no way all of it.

Wait a minute, are you telliing me that "Rome Total War" has it wrong? I'm crushed, really.

[Et tu brute]

Lol, you'll get over it

edit - Aren't the Clibinarii in Barbarian Ivasion?

[Roy]

Clibanarii? Segmented armour? Well, part of it, but no way all of it.

Wait a minute, are you telliing me that "Rome Total War" has it wrong? I'm crushed, really.

Actually, only the arm and leg protection of cataphracts & clibanarii in RTW is segmented armour :wink: Everything else is scale armour.

[Razor]

Gotta go with the Sassanid Persian Cavalry. However I think the Sarmatian and Parthian heavy cavalry will follow closely

[Arthes]

Description by Tacitus:
Men's minds were so intent on the civil war, that foreign affairs were disregarded.
This emboldened the Roxolani, a Sarmatian tribe, who had destroyed two cohorts in the previous winter, to invade Moesia with great hopes of success.
They had 9000 cavalry, flushed with victory and intent on plunder rather than on fighting.
They were dispersed and off their guard, when the third legion together with some auxiliaries attacked them.
The Romans had everything ready for battle, the Sarmatians were scattered, and in their eagerness for plunder had encumbered themselves with heavy baggage, while the superior speed of their horses was lost on the slippery roads. Thus they were cut down as if their hands were tied.
It is wonderful how entirely the courage of this people is, so to speak, external to themselves.
No troops could shew so little spirit when fighting on foot; when they charge in squadrons, hardly any line can stand against them. But as on this occasion the day was damp and the ice thawed, what with the continual slipping of their horses, and the weight of their coats of mail, they could make no use of their pikes or their swords, which being of an excessive length they wield with both hands. These coats are worn as defensive armour by the princes and most distinguished persons of the tribe. They are formed of plates of iron or very tough hides,
and though they are absolutely impenetrable to blows, yet they make it difficult for such as have been overthrown by the charge of the enemy to regain their feet. Besides, the Sarmatians were perpetually sinking in the deep and soft snow.
The Roman soldier, moving easily in his cuirass, continued to harass them with javelins and lances, and whenever the occasion required, closed with them with his short sword, and stabbed the defenceless enemy; for it is not their custom to defend themselves with a shield.
A few who survived the battle concealed themselves in the marshes.
There they perished from the inclemency of the season and the severity of their wounds.
When this success was known, Marcus Aponius, governor of Moesia, was rewarded with a triumphal statue, while Fulvius Aurelius, Julianus Titius, and Numisius Lupus, the legates of the legions, received the ensigns of consular rank. Otho was delighted, and claimed the glory for himself,
as if it were he that commanded success in war, and that had aggrandised the State by his generals and his armies.

That reminds me of another medieval battle, where knights in plate armour who fell, suffocated in the mud, as the weight of the armour dragged them down.

[lup_alb]

You can see Roxolani on Trajan's Column. They are the sarmatian cavalry dressed in scale armor from head to toe .... and their horses were also covered in scale armor. Maybe the depiction on the Trajan's Column is a bit exagerated but they were quite well armored those guys.

[Robert Vermaat]

Maybe the depiction on the Trajan's Column is a bit exagerated

A bit?
I am truly convinced that the artist never laid eyes on what he carved...

[Eleatic Guest]

cataphracts appeared long before the first century C.E. Putting aside remote ancestors of Sarmatian-style heavy cavalry such as Assyrian and Persian mailed warriors, Roman and Greek writers knew of cataphracts under the same name since the Hellenistic period (Rattenbury 1942; Rubin 1955; Eadie 1967; Khazanov 1968, p. 181). Romans often collided with them in the eastern wars: in 189 C.E., in the Battle of Magnesia with Antiochus III (Liv. XXXV. 3), in the battles of Luculus with Tigran the Great near Tigranokerte, 6 October 69 B.C.E. (Plut. Luc. pp. 26–28 ) and the Battle of Harran (Carrhae) between Crassus and Surena in 53 B.C.E. (Plut. Crass. 18–19; 21; 24–25). At the turn of our era, cataphracts with defensive armament for horses were considered typical of the national army for Armenians, Albanians, and Midians (Strab. XI. 4.4–5), p. 502; XI.14.9, p. 530).b In general these mounted warriors demonstrated poor skills in tactical maneuvers, against serried legions as well as against light cavalry (Plut. Luc. 28 ).

SOURCE: S.M. Perevalov, “The Sarmatian Lance and the Sarmatian Horse-Riding Postureâ€