Originally Posted by
wulfgar610
Yes, but the latin scholars have defined the word to mean either " leather corselets" or "cuirass". They see it as referring to an item itself.
VV- Please name and shame those 'latin scholars'! I know of no scholar who translates lorica as anything other than 'armour'. Have you read the numerous translations of Ammianus?
First we have repetitive monumental evidence of a paticular type of armor. Then have the ND quoting either something called a "leather corselets" or "cuirass" as a major item.
VV- Whilst I agree the copius amount of both monumental works and Late Roman art shows most troops in muscle cuirasses, they also show both infantry and cavalry in mail corselets or hauberks. Whilst the ND might have Fabricae designated as 'Loricaria', there are others called 'Catafractaria' and 'Clibanaria', explain them if you will!
Put the two together and you get the leather muscle cuirass as a major item of armor.
VV- Up to just a few years ago I would have totally agreed with you. However, the last fifteen years I have carried a lot more research and spent a serious amount of money on books, journals, magazines etc to carry out this research. I am not convinced all Late Roman infantry work leather cuirasses, probably a large proportion did, but where you have them shown wearing muscle cuirasses and helmets that are both light blue in colour then that means that at least some work iron muscle cuirasses. There are also a number of Late Roman manuscripts that show infantry and cavalry wearing very light brown'ish coloured muscle cuirasses, this has an alternative interpretation of Roman bronze, which was brass coloured.
My argument is the maile was no longer personally owned by the infantry. A suit cost about 12 solidi which equaled the annual wage of a full time laborer. In the era of the Julio-Claudians prime interest rates had fallen to 4% PA (the lowest the ancient saw). An Augustan trooper received his equipment on a loan that was gradually paid off over his service. A Constantinian gold solidi was worth 18 Augustan silver denari, so a suit was 216 denari (almost a years pay for a legionarie). At 4% interest he was paying 9 denari per annum money rent just on this one piece of equipment.
VV- There may be some truth in this. When I was in the armed forces I initially received all my items of kit 'free'. Any that needed replacing I had to purchase from stores. This is probably how Late Roman infantry were equiped, they were given a Helmet, body armour, shield, sword, spear, javelin, tunic, trousers, belts etc 'free' from State owned fabricae. If any of these items needed replacing and not just repairing I'd expect a charge to be made.
This was all good and well, but by 3rd century crisis the prime interest rates had risen to 12% pa and stayed there. At 12% interest now 27 Augustan denari was going out of his annual pay just on this one piece. A late infantryman typically received the equivalent of 90 Augustan denari as cash in hand with most of his equipment and food simply supplied.
The Augustan denari was about 4 grams and Constantine silver coin was 3 grams. (the denari having joined the train wreck currencies of history)
Actually years ago there was scholar who claimed only the catafracts and clibanari in the late army wore metal armor at all, all the other cavalry and infantry had to make do with leather. This really got up Phil Barkers nose who believed all late heavy cavalry wore maile or the equivalent.