Quote Originally Posted by Intranetusa
Still, Roman arms/armor varied greatly in quality - and they never had steel.
This basically invalidates half the crap the history channel does on the lorica segementa... (I saw once they said the lorica segementa that tested <which for some reason they used modern high quality steel> could stop a scorpion/ballista bolt....which is really bullsh*t
Hehe - some of their representations leave much to be desired scientifically. I suppose they're aimed at a bunch of eager young minds in classrooms but even then I find it suspect at best.

One episode they showed the difference between the recurve nomadic bow and the western longbow. The replicas were both approximately (gotta love that) half the draw of what they think they were from the time period (anyone else see how once those 2 disclaimers are made - watching the rest is like reading a fantasy book?) Then, since the recurve had a bit more velocity on the arrow (no mention, btw, if the arrows in question were appropriate to the period and culture) hence the recurve was the better bow.

Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't but I'm pretty sure I didn't learn much from that demonstration.