historical question on the Roman Army

[Centurion Crastinus]

From what I understand, much of what we know about the appearence of an Imperial Legionairre in the late 1st Centuary comes from ancient works of art and through archeological work as well as ancient writers. Does ancient art like Trajan's Column make us think that Lorica Segmentata was used more abundantly than it really was? Was the use of Lorica Segmentata never completely univiversal throughout all of the legions? Were legions recruited in eastern provinces more likely to be equiped with Lorica Hamata or even Lorica Squamata ( excuse the spelling)?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

First century AD or BC?

[Zaknafien]

there are about a million posts talkinga bout lorica segmentata...

[Centurion Crastinus]

I am not asking why Lorica Segmentata isn't in the game. I just am asking historical questions. My question pertains to the 1st Century A.D.

[Maeran]

Although it's a bit of an unanswerable question.

Unless somewhere there's a 1st century letter home to the familia that goes:

"Doing well, thank you for the wine but the centurion drank it. I've joined my legion now, it's Legio VI. I was given my segmentata today and now I look like all the legionaries you see in the parades, but it is bothersome to look after on the march..."

Then we probably won't know if we can trust the artists.

If I were to take a stab at it, I would say that armour varied a lot depending on the unit and what was available at the time.

[Centurion Crastinus]

I see your point.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I am not asking why Lorica Segmentata isn't in the game. I just am asking historical questions. My question pertains to the 1st Century A.D.

Ah, well then the short answer is "No" we can and do reconstruct High Imperial Legionaries from archaeological finds almost exclusively. The archaeological record has thus-far produced 70 suits or pices of suits of SL across the Empire from all periods so we can say with reasonable confidence that it was not common.

[Maeran]

How many pieces of hamata or squamata have been found over the same period? If the answer is about the same, then segmentata is more typical. Also, segmentata cound have been easier to recycle (nice big chunks to pick up off the battlefield and melt down) so this could skew the archeological record.

Not that I'm arguing against the result, which I think is true, but where it's available, historical accounts need to support fickle preservation.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I don't know off hand how many finds of mail and scale there have been but I would say more than 70 instances each over a 200 year period.

[Magister Militum Titus Pullo]

In practice, hamata would have been regularly worn, even with the issue of segmenta. Lorica Segmenta was expensive to manufacture, and in the field, would be especially difficult to repair and even harder to replace. The reliefs on Trajan's Column and elsewhere, much like the official depictions of soldiers through the ages, would never exhibit their subjects wearing damaged or second-hand uniforms or equipment.

[Frostwulf]

I'm curious if you guys would agree with this quote.

Nigel Rodgers-" The Roman Army: Legions, Wars and Campaigns"-Equally flexible and protective was the lorica segmentata, the name given to a type of banded armour developed in the 1st century AD. The first full example of which was excavated at Corbridge. This had bands of soft untempered iron plates forming a corselet, or cuirass, which was buckled on. Such armor was brilliant at absorbing blows and not to heavy-it weighed about 20lb(9kg). This made it lighter then the cheaper, more easily maintained, main alternative, the lorica hamata, a mail coat worn by some legionairs and by the auxiliary infantry. The lorica hamata wa heavy weiging over 30lb(14kg)." pg.39

I'm also curiours if the lorica squamata was better protection then the segemata.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Well his weights are off a bit I think, more like 6 and 12kgs respectively and I have a friend who has spent extended time in both types of armour. He says that hamata weighs down on your shoulders more but once it's off you're fine where as Segmentata leaves you with nasty marks and other problems.

Ultimately Hamata is better protection but in a pure weight-protection ratio contest Segmenta wins hands down. The problem with that though is, in my opinion, that it's still too little protection. The exception here is with blunt trauma.

I would say Segmenta would be good for light-armed legionaries and artillery crews. Fact is though, something that works is worth far more on the battlefield than something that doesn't. No matter how clever the latter is.