Monthly Lorica Segmentata thread

[Rodion Romanovich]

Yes, I know this forum is drowning in LS threads (thus the ironical title), but I think the historical questions I have below haven't been covered yet:
1. from what I heard, it was used primarily from some time before 100 AD to some time before 200 AD. Is this correct? Could the introduction of and removal of the LS be connected to any particular events, by studying advantages and disadvantages of the LS compared to the alternatives, and if so, what pros and cons would an LS have?
2. someone claimed the LS may not have existed at all, and that LS depictions on Trajan's column were in fact hellenistic Greek armor rather than accurate depictions, because the sculptor(s) was/were Greek. Someone else on the other hand claimed it was standard equipment around 100-200 AD and that it existed way back, and that there were findings of a few LS even at the Teutoburg forest battle site. What is the general consensus as to in which periods the LS existed in non-negligible numbers, and how many percent of the legionaries are expected to have used LS around 100 AD, for example? What did the others use? Also, what did the bulk of auxiliary infantry in that period use?
3. the armor of roman legionaries and auxilia were from what I've heard paid by the soldiers. How many month's wage did a full equipment cost? As for their production, were they made in standardized blacksmiths in mass-production fashion, or were there plenty of variety? For instance, I've heard statements implying mass-production from both the Republic and Empire periods. To how high degree would such standardization and standardized mass-production, have existed during the different centuries? Around 100 BC, 0, 100 AD, 200 AD, 300 AD?
4. there are plenty of sources speaking of armor improvements some time before 100 AD, after encountering the falx in Domitian's dacian war. What were these improvements? Did LS exist before these reforms? Would an LS do better against a falx than an LH?

[mcantu]

As for #4...reinforcing bars on the helmet and extra armor on the shoulders to better protect against overhead falx bows...

[pezhetairoi]

Also the introduction of cheires (that arm protection metal-ring thing the eastern Kataphraktoi wear in place of shields).

On #3, standardisation would probably have been very high since specifications were standardised. Perhaps the only differences would be in ornamentation (though LS weren't meant for ornamentation, I daresay).

FYI, there's no such thing as a year 0. :)

[cmacq]

Question 1, part 1: I believe the earliest indisputable physical evidence for Roman LS is from the Kalkriese site and has been dated to AD 9. The fragments suggest at this time it was fully developed, thus it was very likely in use some time in the 1st century BC. This also may answer question 2, part 1?

Please see...

http://www.larp.com/legioxx/kalklor.html

http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/kalkriese



Reconstructed replica of the Kalkriese Lorica Segmentata.

I think LS may have served the same function ceramic plates do in modern body armour? To reduce BFT, mostly resulting from massed high-velocity missile impacts? Mail would stop penetration but not BFT.

[Rodion Romanovich]

Thanks for all the replies!

But what does BFT mean?

[Mouzafphaerre]

.
Bullet Froop Trousers
.

[sanitarium]

Thanks for all the replies!

But what does BFT mean?

"Blunt force trauma" - damaged caused by the sheer force of an impact. With chain mail, you can stop cuts from swords, but it didn't do much to deter broken bones when getting whacked by heavy things.