"What were the Roman legionaries wearing?" Topic

Hello all,

Has the question been decided?

What did the Roman legionaries wear from the middle of the third century AD ?

A molded muscle cuirass of rawhide with attached pteruges or a iron mail corslet ?

Stay safe

Hardly anyone believes in the leather muscled cuirass any more; most people would suggest mail or scale. But "decided" is probably optimistic.

I understood that the Romans recycled a lot of gear, and some variation in what was worn is allowed.

My guess would be mail mostly – perhaps some scale

Mail armor for sure. Scale armor mainly in the eastern empire. But this is the time when legions were being moved in civil wars or in order to deal with military emergencies in the empire. So troops could have a variety of equipment.

"And next we have Antonius sporting the classic Augustian Line. Doesn't he look fabulous, folks? He really makes that lorica shine! And the petarges are to die for! Give us a little shimmy, Antony! Ooo, saucy! You can conquer our tribe anytime!"

:^))

See for instance the lad on the left at

for contemporary evidence of 4th-century mailed infantry.

No-one knows – the leather armour is an interpretation from various stele & tombs; whether that is an artistic work of fact or fiction is open to interpretation. Leather wouldn't normally survive after such a long time, whilst metal armour would be more evident. Mail & scale was obviously in use throughout the Imperial period. I'm guessing that naval marines would be more likely to wear leather than metal, but that's as far as I'm willing to go

So all the legionaries figurines in molded muscle cuirass of rawhide with attached pteruges are unusable …

Now please what was the % of lanciarii in the 4th and 5th centuries in the legions, if the legions and lanciarii still existed in the 5th century ?

So according to GurKhan, the molded muscle cuirass of rawhide with attached pteruges was worn. But if it had been chain mail, there would also have been under it and on the tunic, a piece of soft leather or textile with rows of hanging leather bands called pteruges on the shoulders and at the waist?

Paskal, you may find this discussion about the lanciarii on Luke and Keiko Ueda-Sarson's blog of interest,
link
link

Incidentally, my Late Roman army still includes some leather clad legionaries; after all it took me long enough to paint them back in the 80s

GurKhan did not say muscle cuirass was worn, he said the opposite and posted a couple of images showing legionaries with no armour.
The leather armour I believe is a Hollywood invention based on muscled cuirasses shown in various Roman era art Those cuirasses would have been metal. They were originally worn by officers but they're the sort of thing that elite units like bodyguards would have worn.
Hollywood also did leather segmentata which was easier for them at the time to make regardless if they believed the armour was metal or leather – most productions at the time were black and white so such differences wouldn't be that noticeable.
If leather armour was worn then it would have been lamellar, leather scales but one of the things Vegetius rails against is the lack of armour worn by the late Roman army compared to their predecessors.
Also the pteruges were not attached to the armour, they were attached to an undergarment which may have been padded or at least provided additional protection. The subarmalis is one such proposed garment.

From "Armies and Enemies of Imperial Rome" figures 7 and 8. Legionnaire of the late 2nd to early third century and Praetorian of the early 3rd to the early 4th century.

Regular legionnaire in a developed form of Lorica Segmentata (slightly different from the early imperial version with fewer bands), breaches, and carrying an oval shield. Praetorian in scale armor which was most likely bronze, breaches, and oval shield. Sword is on the left for both instead of the right of the early imperial legionnaire. Would help if Barker noted the sources for the figures in the description.

And the figures 9 page 66 of the " Armies and Enemies of Imperial Rome "?

Barker writes page 66:

"The great increase in the size of the army from Septimius Severus time onwards,plus the increased demand for cavalry armour,meant that a cheaper method of armouring infantry had to be found.

The solution apparently adopted was to use a moulded muscle cuirasse of rawhide with attached pteruges .

Rawhide is both strong and light,and any reduction in protection was made up by the larger shield introduced.

However is provide a rigid defence rather than the flexible one of earlier armour types,which may be why the gladius was replaced by the long Spatha,maintening the same weapons reach.

Alternative explanations of the copious monumentle evidence,that the armour is of iron mail over a undergarment or of iron or bronze plate,do not hold up .

Firstly,muscle shapes and navel are depicted,ruling out mail.

Secondly,plate corslets would have provided no more protection than Lorica Segmentata,been far less convenient to wear,and been far more difficult and expensive to produce.

Colour depictions show the corlet the same yellow-bronze -brown as the pteruges."

"The solution apparently adopted was to use a moulded muscle cuirasse of rawhide with attached pteruges ."

For those who don't have access to this book could you provide a picture which shows the above to be true rather than the author's theory.

Paskal,

Didn't you see the ‘copyright Phil Barker 1981' bit? I must have bought my copy when it first came out,

But I agree, it's a very useful reference for games set in the early Imperial Roman period, although it's been superseded by later work in some details

It's still in print and available POD.

link

Very poor form in posting a link to pirated copies.

Thanks for the link though an image of the pages would have satisfied those here concerned with copyright issues. Personally I feel something published 40 years ago and not well sourced is not going to be high on anyone's list of must have books given the research done since so it's unlikely such a link is going to affect sales.

I disagree with the author in his assertion that yellow brown equals leather. I've seen this colour on mosaics and it's also used for helmets suggesting it represents bronze.
Without the author making an in depth analysis of the subject it's difficult to know where he is coming from.

The section covering Gauls is largely rubbish with information based in many cases on earlier popular interpretations dating back to the Victorian era rather than actual research such as the Meyrick helmet being worn like a baseball cap on page 115.

My personal conclusion is that nobody knows and that we will certainly never know – On the other hand, I find that it takes enormous historical knowledge to criticize the work of the W.R.G.

Now I move to something else…

Thanks.

It seems that the academics currently choose to disbelieve the art and assume that legionaries wore mail corselets.

But if there are a few representations of mailed soldiers on foot, these could be dismounted cavalry.

I remember there was also a wood carving from Egypt showing Blemmye warriors fighting roman on foot both mailed and muscle-cuirassed.

Maybe there were both in the same unit?

In conclusion they wore both !