Talk:Lorica squamata

Merge
It is proposed that Lorica Squamata be merged with this article. It was only when I had written Lorica squamata that I found the Lorica Squamata article existed! If the consensus is to merge, I will volenteer to do it. Gaius Cornelius 18:45, 1 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Done.

Upward thrusts
What is the basis for the claim:
 * Much has been written about scale armour’s supposed vulnerability to an upward thrust, but this is probably greatly exaggerated.

The "greatly exaggerated" idea seems to me to be obviously true; if the lorica in our photograph was mounted on cloth, it would clearly offer no protection whatsoever against upward thrusts since the only connection between rows which might hinder a blade from sliding between them, is the cloth backing. -- Securiger 03:34, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
 * You're right. If you'd move the tip of a sharp implement upwards with some speed, it would slip over a scale, then below the scale above, and through the fabric. Shinobu 15:37, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Not necessarily. If the scales were attached to a form of linothorax (multiple layers of linen acting as a composite armour) and/or felt, both of which were in use generally in the ancient world, then you have an incredibly effective armour even if a sword tip went under the scales. The subarmalis itself may have been a type of linothorax. You also seem to assume that the most common weapon that Roman armour would need to withstand was a sword, when the reality was it was spears, which by their very use would seldom penetrate from below. There is also the accepted typical Roman fighting posture - crouched low with the scutum as primary defence. The scales would act very well in that stance. Did the Romans worry about the lorica segmentata overlapping downwards? --Tarbicus.


 * All this about immunity to spear thrusts is all very well, but we were discussing whether or not it is vulnerable to upthrusts. As for Romans adopting a tactic to minimise that vulnerability: if that is correct, then it actually proves the point since they would not adopt the tactic unless the threat existed. As for linothorax: I don't believe there is any evidence the subarmalis was linothorax, which had generally gone out of use by around 400 BC; and was apparently quite stiff (completely obviating the advantages of flexible scale armour.) Further, it is difficult to suggest that a hypothetical subarmalis of linothorax would be "incredibly effective" when it remains a matter of considerable controversy as to exactly what linothorax was! Certainly, in the event that the linothorax was incredibly effective against a sword tip which had slipped past the scales, it is difficult then to see what point there was to adding the scales. Your last point -- did the Romans worry about it, i.e. are there preserved discussions in their writings -- is however a good one. Can we find any such writings, and if not, can we find the origin of this discussion? -- Securiger 19:44, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lorica squamata. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051224020452/http://www.gemina.nl/images/Rizisepics/Mainz_LandesMuseum_Loric.jpg to http://www.gemina.nl/images/Rizisepics/Mainz_LandesMuseum_Loric.jpg

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:27, 6 January 2018 (UTC)