Yeah, I'm talking about 1st/2nd century auxilia scutum (or LAte ROman 4th-5th Centuries)
I meant this scutum:
It is somewhat larger and heavier than this:
Last edited by Blatta Optima Maxima; November 22, 2011 at 10:24 AM.
I concur with AirAssault, for me the Auxiliary shield of the first or second century were smaller than the roman oval shields of the third century or later, and yes I think that the auxiliary shield of Roma Surrectum are beautiful but really too big!
Few images for a more serious documentation than only reenactment groups.
-From Dura Europos: Rectangular shield, round/ oval shield.
-From Leiden Holland leather shield cover I c. century, archeological drawings of leather shield covers,
-And a beautiful III c. legionary model very historical accurate:
Yawn. I fear its you who needs to broaden their horizon, because you clearly do not know the difference between battlefield plate and tournament armour that was only used for jousting in the lists.
Where are all the serious academics and historians who used to frequent this forum?
I think the cultural level of these forum is good also without 'serious historians', maybe they have better thing to do, we could speak between us.
I think the generalized use of the couched lance started after the battle of Hasings (in the Tapestry we can see Norman knights using trowing spears!), so after the 1066 ad.;
Said that, I think it is impossible to exclude the use of the couched lance tactic as one of the reasons for the adoption, already in the XIV c., of the first suites of iron plate armors;
And why should we exclude that the tureneys, so important in the military training of the medieval knight, may had played a role in the adoption of heavier models of knight armors?
Obviously the diffusion of lethal missile weapons like iron xbows and longbows also played its role.
One thing for sure! Firearms, expecially the prevalence of the use of the musket, ended the age of heavy iron plate armors in the midle of XVII c.!
Plate continued to be used well into the firearm age. Napoleon's cuirassiers are a good example.
The coat of plates appeared early in the 13th century and continue to the late 14th. Some time in the late 14th century armorers learned how to cast plates large enough for full breast plates.
The breast armor worn by the Black Price was still coat of plates.
Actually the opposite occured. Widespread use of the arquebus stimulated heavier "bullet-proof" armor. The hand-gunners replied with that heavy arquebus that rested on a stilt and fired a heavy steel ball to penetrate armor.One thing for sure! Firearms, expecially the prevalence of the use of the musket, ended the age of heavy iron plate armors in the midle of XVII c.!
You make all this up as you go along V V, I have no doubts now!!
I assume you've seen this one Diocle, but just in case. Peter Woodward makes an all too short referrence as to why the segmenta provided uttely superior protection to maile.
The lorica ISN'T utterly superior to maille. It wasn't medieval steel plate, it was made out of thin plates of soft iron. Mail, OTOH, could make use of more metal, since it didn't have to match specific requirements for forging large plates.
Well unless that Usama person was a horribly failed cavalryman that quote pretty much ends this thread.
Long live the Khan
Great choice Wulfgar i saw all the serie, is funny! +rep!
Mr Blatta: your statements are totally wrong!
Lorica Segmentata was way better than mail armour, this for sure!
The quality of the evidence you are carrying is so low that, at this point I offer to your attention this great video by a great guy of a Warhammer 40.000 forum, about the real reasons why an emperor equipped his men with the best form of body armor he could offer them, for me this video is a more serious evidence respect all the silly not-evidences you offered us to support your wrong statements: Read the tests, music is super, video is funny, take it like a pause in our little war but reflect well about the words:
"They shall be my finest worriors...In Great Armour Shall I Clad Them,...They Will Have Tactics Strategy and Machines,.... They Are The Defenders of Umanity,... They Are My Legions.....and... They Shall know No Fear!"
The advantage of the legions is that they worked as a team rather than focus on individual, personal combat. That's why when mr. celt was focused on fighting legionary 1 legionary 2 could stun celt 2 with his shield and stab celt 1 in the gut while he recoiled.
Diocle, you have nothing to do in a histoical discussion. Go to sleep.
Words like these are compliments, for me, if they come from an 'Historian' like this gentleman!
so yes I'll go to sleep happy this night! (only if the TV of my neighbors allows me, o.c.!)
To eliminate the insects, use DDT!
'Lices', 'fleas' and 'other insects' could be annoying for those who wear iron or Kevlar plate armor!
The effects of a 3/4 cuirassier armor infected by insects, are well described in the famous Simplicius Simplicissimus, a German XVII c. book, written by Hans Grimmelshausen, (chapter XXVIII, book II) which describes the adventures of a young man in the hell of the Thirty Years war. Read it, it is a funny and interesting reading!
Dude, for mothering god's sake, stop with your BS. If you don't provide a logical argument and cease with the pesticide BS I'll start reporting you and your utterly worthless, childish spam.
It is a sad moment for me, but I must admit: for me, Segmentata was worse for insects! I think especially 'lices' and 'fleas', in campaign conditions, can you imagine the pain, marching all the day without being able to scratch and those slimy insects all the time working!
Grimmelshausen said that when his commanding officer offered the poor Simplicius to wear his wonderful 3/4 steel plate cuirassier armor, during a long march, the ingenuous boy was enthusiast, do you think? that great noble offers you to wear his armor! the top!! after some time he discovered the reality: That magnificent armor was infected by insects and more important he could not scratch, no way even using stiks, the back and breast plate were too tight, the pouldrons closed the access to the vambraces which completely enclosed the arms! and the closed helm! and articulated cuissies! Moreover being mounted! A real agony! from the morning until evening!
Many were the reasons that led to abandon of heavy iron plate enclosed armors, but these practical and maybe prosaic reasons, for me must be taken into account!
For the gentleman who want report my post, I can only say that I judge my arguments quite logical, I studied a lot of mathematics, differential calculus, buildings science, physics, structural engineering to practice my current profession, and I think that I can judge with a certain degree of safety if my suggestions are logical or not, and in this case I think they are logical. About the childish spam, sometime (sometime not) I wish I were a child but that time is passed, if sometime I offer lighter arguments to your attention is to lighten a discussion that seem too busy.
P.S.: My English isn't adequate to clearly understand a certain type of expressions and I'm an atheist (yes we are few but there are some Italian atheists!) but the use of expressions like those I read in the post of the gentleman who want to report my posts, for me, is very, very, very close to blasphemy and I think someone (not me) could be offended, so before report someone post, it would be better for this gentleman to use a more appropriate language in his own posts.
Somewhat off-topic but I found this cool pic entitled scythian armor. Perhaps the tribes from the steppes/around Dacia influenced the legions enough for them to use those scale armor pads and coifs... Anti-arrow technology?
(edit): Okay, wiki says scale is effective against bludgeoning. And there was a Roman scale armor called lorica plumata.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)