Lorica Segmentata versus Lorica Hamata

[Valentinian Victor]

Uhm, riveted mail was more used, albeit somewhat more expensive - it's lightyears ahead in protection.

Used by whom? Very few cultures had the technology to make riveted mail, and whilst butted mail's rings can come apart if hit hard, such as by a sword blow, it is also easier to repair by the wearer who only has to re-butt the rings together again. I'm not sure why you think riveted mail affords more protection than unriveted mail, an explaination would be helpful here with quotes from relevant publications etc.

[Diocle]

Actually, if you hire a blacksmith you can have it made historically accurarte. Our Praefectus Iulianus custom made his Attic Helmet, Musculata, Steel Musculata, Greaves, etc. himself in the way the romans made it. The metal is much thinner (reconstructions are about 1.1 mm, but historically it was about .7-.9 or even less (I think.6 is a good start) they believe with leather glued underneath the plate armor) and it's all based off of historical finds dating to that timeframe.

I was talking US Dollars which translates to about 550 Euros or 450 Pounds. BTW and a good suit of Rivited Roman Maile will run you easily 800 US DOllars.

This is a very interesting information, today a good suite of riveted mail costs much more money than a good LS, maybe this explain many things also for the Roman age!!

Sorry MMFA but about the Change Currency Euro/Dollar I used Google Converter, which today for 600 US DOLLAR gives me the valour of 445,52€, so for the US 800$ = 593,52€, maybe your information are better.
But I repeat: the interesting fact is, for me, that mail armor is not only lower in defensive performances but also more expensive, so .....

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

Riveted MAil doesn't come apart as easily. That's about all I can think of. Can take a stab wound more easily.

[wulfgar610]

Used by whom? Very few cultures had the technology to make riveted mail, and whilst butted mail's rings can come apart if hit hard, such as by a sword blow, it is also easier to repair by the wearer who only has to re-butt the rings together again. I'm not sure why you think riveted mail affords more protection than unriveted mail, an explaination would be helpful here with quotes from relevant publications etc.

You're trying to be funny? All the world is a stage and it's full of comedians!

[Valentinian Victor]

You're trying to be funny? All the world is a stage and it's full of comedians!

Not sure what on Earth your trying to say, its these kind of 'insighful' comments that puts serious people off posting on this forum.

What you post did show was that mail armour is much more resilliant than most people suspect and if you had struck a breast plate with that force it would have been both bent out of shape and been pierced, making it all but useless, unlike the mail that appears more than servicable. Rather counters your own argument Wulfgar!!!

[Diocle]

The interesting thing is the segmenta came into vogue in the two centuries when providing security for the Roman Empire was at its relative easiest. Certainly the segmenta looks magnificent and must been great for parades.

My guess is it was the continous German wars of Marcus Aurelius that showed up the strategic inadequacy of segmenta compared to maile. Maile simply proved easier to supply and maintain in hard fought campaigns.

Segmenta most likely provided superior protection initially, but the reliability of maile equipment proved the more important factor on the battlefield.

Excuse me if I carry the discussion one step back, but I consider it very interesting the point touched by Wulfgar in his intervention.
The point, for me, is not that we establish today which of the two types of armor was actually better for the Romans, because they used anyway the Lorica Segmentata for more than 250 years!
The interesting aspect here, like Wulfgar said, is that the Romans used the LS when the Empire was already built, and the Roman Army was concerned above all in operations that today might be called 'Peace Keeping' or 'Peace Enforcing', but its political role was greatly increased.
The magnificent appearance of the Lorica Segmentata shows the attention attributed by the Emperors to the needs of their soldiers that formed the basis of their personal power (similary Napoleon gave to French army that, even today, are considered the most beautiful uniforms in history).
When the political and military situation, including Civil Wars and Invasions, again became serious, the LS gave way to a type of armor easier to find and mantain.

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

The earliest find we have of Lorica is from Teutoburger Wald in 14, and They suspect it lasted until the 280s. The romans had been using Chainmail Hauberks since the 300s BC till the 1450s AD

[wulfgar610]

if you had struck a breast plate with that force it would have been both bent out of shape and been pierced, making it all but useless, unlike the mail that appears more than servicable. Rather counters your own argument Wulfgar!!!

We are referring to the segmenta not a regular light breast plate. The segmenta was the best answer for protection under ideal conditions for 10 kg's of weight.

Now you've plucked another plum out of thin air. Where did get this bizarre idea that the segmenta in good condition could be directly pieced by a regular period weapon in combat conditions? Have you tried it? Have you seen it? Maile could be pieced by a good spear thrust but I doubt the same could be directly done to segmenta. Where is your proof?

The point of the video is to demonstrate that riveted maile is not flimsy protection in case anyone has doubts!

It would require a specialized weapon to stand a chance of directly piecing the segmenta at all and the regular array of weapons couldn't. My argument is correct, initially a segmenta provides superior protection until it is rendered unserviceable. The flexture of segmenta would turn the force of a blow way better than maile can. In continuous campaigning maile proved easier to maintain and distribute and that is why it completely superseded the segmenta for foot soldiers.

Segmenta is something that worked better under ideal conditions in the arena and less well under the worst of real campaigns for various reasons.

[wulfgar610]

The magnificent appearance of the Lorica Segmentata shows the attention attributed by the Emperors to the needs of their soldiers that formed the basis of their personal power (similary Napoleon gave to French army that, even today, are considered the most beautiful uniforms in history).

I don't think it merely looked good. I assume the Romans tested it in the arena and it proved way superior protection to an equivalent 10 kg's of single maile.

But it did have pitfalls. More uncomfortable to wear for extended periods and much harder to maintain with stretched logistics. These weren't such a problem when the competition was less fierce.

[Blatta Optima Maxima]

Diocle, mail was used since 300BC till 1450AD as primary protection. Segmentata was used 9AD - 280 AD, and not at all very common. It was also used when keeping the borders was the easiest.

[Diocle]

Diocle, mail was used since 300BC till 1450AD as primary protection. Segmentata was used 9AD - 280 AD, and not at all very common. It was also used when keeping the borders was the easiest.

I was just trying to go beyond the simple clash between supporters of Lorica Segmentata and supporters of Lorica Hamata, I think is more interesting trying to understand why the Romans used the Lorica Segmentata per 280 years and then stopped, I think, in this sense, that Wulfgar advanced a very interesting suggestion.
As long as the emperors were able, they equip their soldiers with the best armor that the Fabricae could produce, this because the army was the basis of their power and therefore better meet their needs was a must for politicians who based their personal power on the army, so when the difficult times no longer allowed to produce the Lorica Segmentata in large quantities, they were obliged to abandon it.

Otherwise, we should be obliged to think that the Romans for 280 years have been affected by sudden madness or stupidity, continuing to produce for two century and half, a kind of armor useless, inefficeint and expensive!
But such a statement would be ungenerous for a people who dominated the known world for nearly a millenium!!

[First Citizen Gallienus]

Alot of people hated the M16 when it was first shown off during Vietnam, and yet here we are in the 21st Century, and nations across the world have adopted it. Not sure if this has anything to do with the LS, but I guess a comparison of technologies from different times.

[Blatta Optima Maxima]

Diocle, my opinion on the LS is that it was used as cheap, mass producable protection during a period or relative peace. Mail was still more common, and the LS is less practical as combat protection. Remember, IT WAS CHEAPER TO MAKE. The fact it was preceded and succeeded by riveted mail speaks volumes.


@AirAssault In your comparison we may see mail as the equivalent of M-16, and LS as one of the many attempts to replace it.

[Diocle]

I think exactly the opposite! but this is not a problem! Indeed, think how it would be boring talk with people who think all the same!

I might be agreeing with you that LS was cheaper to mass produce, and I might also be agreeing with you that LS was less practical in combat, but no! Lorica Segmentata offered better protection in combat compared to the Hamata; and, important aspect, Lorica Segmentata was much, much beautiful to see than Mail! Think: You have to recruit half a milion , and more, soldiers, promising what? You'll become rich in maybe twenty years (if still alive)? No!
What do you say them? Perhaps, if you'll survive, you could recive a little bit of land in some remote place of the Empire? Obviously Not!

You'll convince them saying: 'You are my dear children, you are my dear comrades! you are the basis on which rests our great Empire!
I will arm you with the best weapon in the world! I will train you so that no one can defeat you! and... and ...I'll make you shining and invulnerable because I'll give thee the BEST ARMORS which may be manufactured in the world! LORICA SEGMENTATA and you'll be invincible!

You could not say them : OK guys! take this crap and you! Is not the best armor, but is cheap! I'll arm you like that barbarians, all clad in mail, that you must kill for me! but understand me guys, mail is cheaper!
They immediatly would have killed you on the spot!!

[Blatta Optima Maxima]

But the problem with your argument is that LS IS NOT better than mail in protection. It is equal at best, and comes at the expense of flexibility and maintainace.

[Diocle]

But the problem with your argument is that LS IS NOT better than mail in protection. It is equal at best, and comes at the expense of flexibility and maintainace.

I might be agreeing with you about flexibility and maintainance!

But as regard the protection I think we will always desagree; but this isn't important, the point is to try to understand how the Romans judged the lorica segmentata.
The gladiator armor definitely exerted some influence on the methods of construction of the Lorica Segmentata and perhaps also on the judgements about its effectivness: Tacitus point out, for exemple, that some Gallic rebel gladiators, eqiupped with this kind of segmented armor, called 'crupellarii', were so well protected, that they had to be killed using pikaxes! (Annales,III46)
I think the Romans judged Lorica Segmentata a better type of armor than mail, but we would need tests with metals, production methods, chemical composition and place of production and extraction of the minerals, and we would need exact figures on the resistence of these ancient materials...and even so I don't know if we could ever get reliable results.

So, gentlemen, that the war continues!

[wulfgar610]

But the problem with your argument is that LS IS NOT better than mail in protection. It is equal at best, and comes at the expense of flexibility and maintainace.

I wouldn't agree with that. Even though the average blow could not piece either type of armor, the segmenta will also repel a lot more force via flexture of the segmented plate, preserving concussion. A good spear thrust will not piece segmenta. Another is heavy arrows from the more powerful bows of the period like the hunnic and germanic, these will piece single maile but not segmenta.

10 kg of single maile won't protect as well, although it caused less discomfort and fatigue to the wearer and is easy to repair. Such things as the latter become important when you're surrounded by Germans in a damp and dark forest for weeks on end. Segmenta restricts movement in a way that will chew up energy.

Over 20kg of double or even triple maile would be required to match the 10 kg segmenta in protective power.

[Blatta Optima Maxima]

Read the article I posted like 5 times. It effectively proves the LS was only better against blunt trauma to some extent.

[Diocle]

I read the article some time ago, but I'm not convinced!
Lorica Segmented was best not only against blunt trauma (the greatest part of the blows you can take in close combat in battle line) but also against every other type of blows!
If not, take some scientific evidence (Coefficients of resistence of ancient materials, exact figures about the thikness of the metal Roman Plate, with a scientific model which takes into account the result of changes in metal oxidation, laboratory stress tests with exact figures, some assured model of ancient mail of secure Roman origin, etc. etc....)!
......and explain why NATO today uses plate armors!!

[Blatta Optima Maxima]

And you have no evidence.

All plate is not equal - you can make armor out of glass plates, or cardboard ones as well. You have nothing to do in a serious discussion.