"Romans in leather?" Topic

I've been reading "Arms and Armour of the Imperial Roman Soldier" by Graham Sumner & Raffaele D'Amato.

The period the book covers is from the Marian reforms through the early imperial period, and they make the case that there was a much more extensive use of leather armour by the legions than is commonly thought. So my question is this, do any manufacturers produce early imperial figures with leather armour (i.e. not lorica segmentata or chainmail)?

In OO-1/76 plastic there are the old Airfix Romans. They are based on the same sculpture that the illustrator apparently used for the books cover.

In 15mm and 25mm, the older Minifigs lines could be interpreted as leather.

Some other manufacturers might have older lines based on WRG and other references prior to H. Russell Robinson's 'Armour of Imperial Rome' which argued quite persuasively against the use of leather armor.

To quote one of the Master Builders reacting to Emmett's lame speech: "Rubbish!"

The greatest empire in antiquity wasn't sending its citizen troops into battle in leather armor.

Wasn't this idea put to bed a generation ago? There were traces of paint pigment found on the carvings that depicted the type of armor.

Just paint the Lorica non-metallic. If the Romans were using more leather armor why wouldn't they just use that pattern? It would certainly be easier to make then metal.

Maybe this is were more leather armor might come in. Quick or field expedients for unrepairable metal armor where the logistics were stretched.

I think the gay ones wore chaps ( pun included :)

Cheers

Vikingtim,
I'd be curious to know what evidence they found to support this….?

It was a misinterpretation of the armor on the statue. They assumed it was leather as it was smooth and the paint had worn off.

As stated above, much of the argument for leather armour comes from extant sculptures. However, as has been shown, ancient statues were painted, often quite garishly. Even the great Alexander Sarcophagus was painted.

On large works, like Trajan's column, painting on mail was a labor (and cost) saving move. The mail shirts or even scale was render by the sculptors as plain, smooth articles and the painters who followed them later just painted on the rings, scales, whatever was needed.

Over time the paint wore off. Occam's Razor and all that.

Non Metallic armour during the Roman Early Imperial Period is not a subject that is typically reviewed. The only armour types that could have easily been been replaced with a metal substitute are Lorica Segmentata (The "banded armour"), Scale Armour, and Cuirasses.
Lorica Segmentata is unlikely to have been made of anything but iron as it was worn by heavy infantry and likely introduced in large numbers. Bronze takes a longer time to make, and leather or raw hide are unlikely, as both are less protective than iron, and the early problems with broken fastenings in Lorica Segmentata could have been solved by integrated lacings as in lamellar armour.
Scale armour of the period is typically depicted as Bronze, and as it was used on second line troops generally, ie Auxilliaries and Cavalry, could perhaps have come from the lesser provinces of the empire where iron working was less advanced than in say Rome or Gaul. Interestingly Sarmatians were noted for using horn made from horse hoves and raw hide for the armour of their catafracts, so if your Army is supposed to have Sarmatian or Subject peoples as Allies or Auxilliaries they should wear these items of domestic kit.
Cuirasses in this period are depicted exclusively on Officers, and typically in the high command. These men would have bought their own kit, and presumably would purchase the best armour for themselves on the chance that someone should try to kill them. So iron, or bronze, heavily embossed or polished, or painted to individual taste, is much more likely than either leather or the much more likely rawhide. The one Exception could be the Roman marine corp as Augustus' Marines seem to have worn cuirasses of rawhide, though if they are Late Republican or Early Imperial is anyone's guess.

Some interesting points. Regarding the paint on statues side of things, were any substantial residues revealed that confirmed a ring mail pattern was painted on? How would they paint in a metallic colour also? If it was just gaudy, then that could represent painted leather as much as anything else.

I'm not saying that I am in D'Amato's camp, but I don't think I see it as clear cut as others. I presume that the cost of manufacture at one of the fabricae would have been lower for leather compared to metal, regardless of thickness/rigidity of the finished leather product. Given the many occasions that fast production of equipment to provide to newly formed legions was paramount, I can imagine leather being the pragmatic option. Just like in the later empire, laminate wood shields were replaced with simpler plank constructions.

Not sure about the Greeks, but the bulk of the recovered Roman helmets are iron. At least per H. Russell Robinson.

Again from Robinson, armor scales were cut from sheet stock rather than cast. With the bulk of the recovered armor being iron.

@Gattamala: I get the Bronze Scale armour thing from both the Osprey Rome Series and the hard work of Duncan Head and Phil Barker. I used the word depicted as some scale armour could be iron, as Herodotus says of the Persian Immortals several centuries before this period and Duncan Head suggests of the Carthaginian sacred band.

I referred to the auxiliaries as second line troops as I believe that is an accurate description of their activities. They were skirmishers, cavalry, archers, spearmen, and every other combat role that Roman Citizens could safely consider beneath them.

Auxiliaries could also be elite cavalry, crack shock troops (i.e. the Batavians) and sometimes even provided the Emperor's immediate bodyguard.

I don't think there is evidence for scale being inferior or worn by second rate troops. IIRC the scales in Roman armour were cut from sheet rather than cast. Scale is comfortable, and can be polished to be extremely blingy.

There is at least one leather thigh piece cited IIRC by Russell Robinson. On balance I would not belive in the thin leather jerkins that appear on statuary. Much more lijely that these are meant to be painted as mail. To be effective leather needs to be thick and making scales of thin leather would be next to useless.